Report On Water Availability

TA No.
4756-CAM
TONLE SAP LOWLAND STABILIZATION PROJECT
CAMBODIA
Report on Water Availability
Receiver:
Asian Development Bank
September 2006
In cooperation with:
CONTENTS
GLOSSARY IV
0 SUMMARY 1
1 INTRODUCTION 6
2 OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION 6
3 RIVER FLOW INFORMATION IN THE PROJECT AREA 7
3.1 Sources of data and data analysis 7

3.2 Long-term trends in river flow 13
3.3 Seasonal patterns in river flow 13
3.4 Volumetric water availability 15
3.5 Specific discharges 17
3.6 Flood flows 22
4 INUNDATION AROUND GREAT LAKE 25
4.1 Significance for water availability 25

4.2 Sources of data on lake levels 25
4.3 Long-term pattern of lake level 26
4.4 Seasonal pattern of lake level 26
5 RAINFALL INFORMATION IN THE PROJECT AREA 27
5.1 Sources of data and data analysis 27

5.2 Long-term trends in Rainfall 33
5.3 Geographical patterns in rainfall 35
5.4 Seasonal rainfall distribution 42
5.5 Number of raindays 43
5.6 Annual maximum one-day rainfall 45
6 EVAPORATION 45
6.1 Significance for water availability 45

6.2 Seasonal variations in evaporation 46
6.3 Relationship between evaporation and rainfall 48
7 ONSET OF RAIN AND LENGTH OF DRY SPELLS 51
8 GROUNDWATER 55
9 WATER USE 58
10 OVERVIEW OF WATER AVAILABILITY 59
ANNEX 1. TOTAL MONTHLY VOLUMETRIC DISCHARGES 62
ii
ANNEX 2. SPECIFIC MONTHLY VOLUMETRIC DISCHARGES 80
ANNEX 3. ANNUAL MAXIMUM DAILY DISCHARGES 100
ANNEX 4. MEAN MONTHLY AND ANNUAL RAINFALLS 104
ANNEX 5. MEAN MONTHLY AND ANNUAL RAINDAYS 108
ANNEX 6. ANNUAL MAXIMUM ONE-DAY RAINFALLS 112
ANNEX 7. EVAPORATION ESTIMATES 116
ANNEX 8. SELECTED INFORMATION SOURCES 122
ANNEX 9. RIVER BASIN MAPS 126
iii
GLOSSARY
ADB Asian Development Bank

AEI Annual Exceedance Interval
ARI Annual Recurrence Interval
BCM Billion cubic metres
DoH&RW Department of Hydrology and River Works, MOWRAM
DoM Department of Meteorology, MOWRAM
HYMOS Database management system in use at DoH&RW
MAF Mean annual flood
MCM Million cubic metres
MOWRAM Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology
MRC Mekong River Commission
TSLS (P) Tonle Sap Lowland Stabilisation (Project)
iv
0 SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to summarise the available information on

water resources in the sub-basins of the Tonle Sap basin. It considers:
River flows – totals, specific discharges, and annual maxima

Lake levels, Tonle Sap Great Lake
Rainfall – totals, raindays, annual maxima, onset of rain at the start
of the wet season, incidence of dry spells
Evapotranspiration and related meteorological variables
Sources of information
The principal source of data has been the HYMOS database maintained by
the Department of Hydrology & River Works (DoH&RW), MOWRAM. This
database contains daily water level observations for over forty monitoring
stations around the Great Lake, and daily rainfall observations for over
eighty raingauges. An initial step in the work was to prepare two
complementary MOWRAM data reports: River flow monitoring stations,
Tonle Sap basin and Rainfall monitoring stations, Tonle Sap basin.
Other relevant reports have been surveyed. The Northwest Irrigation Sector
Project already has provided valuable compilations, and the four river basin
and water use studies that are ongoing (September 2006) will provide a
sound basis for project selection and design in the basins concerned. The
MRC project “Consolidation of hydro-meteorological data and multi-
functional roles of Tonle Sap Lake and its vicinities, Phase III” and
associated MRC projects also are of relevance, although they provide
basin-scale information that is not directly applicable to sub-project design.
River flows
Hydrological data for 23 river monitoring stations from the DoH&RW
database have been analysed. The stations tend to be on the largest rivers,
and the data are representative of the distinctive hydrological conditions in
the river basins concerned. The data should be of particular relevance to
any sub-projects that would draw water from those rivers, but may not be
readily extended to other sub-basins.
Long-term observations at two stations reveal no significant trends in mean

annual flows, but do indicate very substantial variation about the long-term
mean – almost a five-fold range for the Stung Sangke at Battambang.
Flows are highly seasonal, with low or even zero flows during the dry
season (December to May), rising quickly to a peak in the wet season, in
September-October. In any one month, there is generally a wide range in
mean monthly flow from year to year – from 0.8 m3/s to 44 m3/s during June
in Stung Mongkol Borey, for example. The data show graphically that run-
of-river flows in Cambodia are quite unreliable, as a basis for confident and
economical resource development.
Computations of volumetric water availability (in million cubic metres per

month or year) show the large volumes of water that flow to the Tonle Sap
Great Lake, but again there is great inter-annual variability. Most of the
“four years out of five” annual flow volumes are 60-80% of the mean annual
volumes for each station. However, flow volumes at the beginning of the
1
wet season, when reliable access to water is most important for farmers,
are a small proportion of the annual total (flow volume in June generally is
around 5% of total annual volume) and more variable (the “four year out of
five” volume in June is in the range of 5-70% of the average for June).
Again, then, run-of-river flows do not provide a reliable basis for agriculture,
particularly at the start of the wet season.
Specific discharges (discharge per unit area of river basin) have been
calculated, to remove the effect of drainage area and make data for rivers
more comparable. Nevertheless, there are large differences among rivers,
because their basins differ in many other respects – geology and soils,
vegetation cover, rainfall gradients associated with elevation and proximity
to the sea, basin slope, etc. In principal, such factors can be considered in
a statistical analysis, but this would be a significant research project that is
difficult to justify for present purposes. For project selection and design, the
specific discharge data can best be used by transferring data from nearby
basins and/or basins that are judged to have similar characteristics.
Data for flood flows have been extracted from the HYMOS database,
principally in the form of maximum annual flood peaks. Unfortunately, many
rating curves are not sufficiently reliable to estimate flood peaks with
confidence. For most stations, particularly those with contributing drainage
areas greater than 4,000 km2, the discharge-frequency plots indicate that
flood peaks with an Annual Recurrence Interval greater than about 2 years
are under-estimated. Estimates of Mean Annual Flood indicate that the
“Halcrow” equations are crudely acceptable for basin areas <3,000 km2, but
the Halcrow Report’s insistence that design work must be based on
supplementary local information is strongly supported.
Inundation around the Great Lake

Seasonal inundation around the Tonle Sap Great Lake is significant for
possible sub-projects that would involve temporary storage of flood waters
for subsequent release for supplementary irrigation of recession rice. The
long-term record of lake levels at Kompong Luong shows that the maximum
lake level reached each year is highly variable – a range of almost three
meters, with the average maximum level of 11.66 m above sea level.
Rainfall
Rainfall data are available for over 80 stations, but many have records of
less than a handful of years, and less than ten stations have more than 30
years of record (in all cases very discontinuous, with many gaps). Mean
annual rainfalls are generally in the range 1,000mm to 1,700 mm. There is
a clear pattern of declining rainfall towards the northwest. Stations
northwest of the lake have annual totals less than 1,200 mm, declining to
below 1,000 mm at the Thai border. To the west and southwest of the lake,
towards Pailin, annual totals are in the range 1,200-1,350 mm. Annual
totals around the eastern end of the lake are in the range 1,250-1,700 mm,
and then appear to decline again further towards the southeast. Northeast
of the lake, annual totals are in the range 1,350-1,550 mm. Isohyets have
not been drawn because the variability in the data is considered to be too
great. In practice, a rainfall estimate at a particular location would best be
obtained by inspection of the data for the nearest stations, rather than by
reference to an isohyetal map.
2
The “reliable“ annual rainfall that is received at least four in five years on
average also has been calculated for each station. Totals are, of course,
less than the mean annual totals, and the geographical pattern is
somewhat different. Westwards from the lake, “four in five year“ totals
decline from about 1,200 mm to around 1,000 mm at Pailin and 900 mm
towards the Thai border. At the eastern end of the lake there is a zone with
totals of 1,200-1,400 mm; elsewhere, totals are in the range 1,000-1,200
mm, with a possible rain-shadow area to the southwest of Pursat. Again, it
is unrealistic to draw isohyets, and anyone needing data for design at a
particular location should consult the data for nearby stations.
The seasonal rainfall distribution is broadly similar for all stations in the
Project area. There is negligible rainfall in December to February, with a
rapid increase in March to May. Monthly totals during the core of the wet
season, June to October, vary widely, presumably in response to the
convectional rainfall that brings unpredictable heavy downpours that cover
small areas. For example, June totals at Battambang range from 42 mm to
276 mm – a very unreliable basis for confident agriculture.
The number of raindays in each month also shows substantial variability

from year to year, particularly during June to October. The largest number
of raindays is a very respectable 163 days per year, at Taing Krasaing
(Kompong Thom). Mean annual maximum daily rainfalls are in the range
75-100 mm; the “one in ten year” maximum daily rainfall is in the range
110-180 mm; and the “100 year” maximum daily rainfall is approximately
230 mm (estimated for Kompong Chhnang station).
Evapotranspiration
Evaporation data (measured pan evaporation and estimates of evaporation
using the Penman equation) are available for several stations in the Project
area. Once again, there is an obvious seasonal cycle, with the highest
mean monthly evaporation rates measured in March (averaging 150-220
mm at the various stations), as temperatures are increasing but cloud cover
and rainfall have not yet started to increase with the onset of the wet
season. The lowest rates are observed in September-October, in the range
50-140 mm per month). Once again, there is substantial year-to-year
variability in evaporation rates – at Battambang the mean daily evaporation
rate during May ranged from 2.5 mm/day to 6.5 mm/day, for example.
Combining the seasonal cycles of rainfall and evaporation, evaporation in

general exceeds rainfall during December to April/May. Because of the
great inter-annual variability of both rainfall and evaporation, the exact time
at which rainfall starts to exceed evaporation at the beginning of the wet
season is also highly variable, again introducing great uncertainty for
farmers wishing to prepare the ground and plant crops.
Onset of rain and length of dry spells

The date of the first significant rain (>5 mm) of the wet season generally is
in the second half of March, but can be as late as mid-May. However, this
date can range, from year to year, over a period of 2 ½ months. The
incidence of dry spells (periods with no daily rainfall >0.5 mm) within the
wet season also is very variable. Median values generally are 10-15 days,
but can be as high as 64 days (at Kompong Chhnang). The “five year dry
spell” is about three weeks, except at Siem Reap, where it is five weeks.
3
Once again, this aspect of the Project area’s hydrology shows the great
uncertainty that farmers have with regard to water availability at the
beginning of the wet season.
Groundwater
There is limited information on groundwater availability in the TSLSP area,
with substantive information principally available for Kompong Chhnang
province. The survey of Kompong Chhnang concluded, overall, that
“Alluvial and Pleistocene aquifers yield small amounts and inferior water
quality, high in iron and salinity. Arsenic is locally contained. Basement rock
aquifer has greater yield and good water quality. Exploration is difficult.”
The NWISP hydrogeologist was more positive in his assessment of
groundwater potential, although he also commented that “deep
groundwater is of widespread availability but only occasionally of sufficient
yield to be useful for agriculture.” He emphasizes (as did the Kompong
Chhnang study) the need for a substantial survey of groundwater
availability before development proceeds. For TSLSP purposes, it may be
concluded that the available information is not sufficient to establish
whether the groundwater resource at a particular location would be
sufficient to support agricultural development. In these circumstances,
reliance on groundwater for sub-projects (other than for household
purposes or water-efficient irrigation of high value crops) would be risky.
Water use
Consumptive water use is an important component of the water balance in
a river basin/aquifer, particularly during critical times of year (i.e. the
beginning of the wet season) when demand is greatest and availability is
most unpredictable. There are no data on water use in the TSLSP area, but
this will be remedied when the four river basin studies being carried out
under the NWISP are completed, by the end of 2006. A recent inventory of
irrigation systems on the southern side of the Great Lake (to be released in
late 2006) also should provide an indication of agricultural use. It will
provide information on locations and command areas, and estimation of
water use should be possible if estimates of crop water use and seepage
are made. It is understood that the inventory will be extended to other sub-
basins in the Tonle Sap basin.
Overview of water availability

The final section of the report draws eight main conclusions that summarise
preceding analysis. The underlying emphasis is on the variability and
unpredictability of the climate and hydrology of the Tonle Sap basin, as a
basis for confident and cost-effective project design. An important
conclusion is that, because of this inherent variability, long records of high
quality data are required to estimate hydro-meteorological statistics. Few
stations presently have adequate lengths of record, and the quality of
existing data generally is poor. A sustained programme of hydro-
meteorological data collection, to international standards, is essential.
The analysis shows that water availability is not a factor that controls
whether or not a potential sub-project can be considered, but does
influence what type of project is possible. A variety of approaches to water
management can be used, in addition to supplementary irrigation using run-
of-river abstraction, to make the most effective use of the available water in
the Project area.
4
5
1 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report is to summarise the available information on
water resources in the sub-basins of the Tonle Sap basin. The focus is on
those elements of the hydrological cycle that are of particular relevance to
planning and designing water management for agriculture, as a component
of the Tonle Sap Lowland Stabilisation Project. In particular, it considers:
River flows – totals, specific discharges, and annual maxima

Lake levels, Tonle Sap Great Lake
Rainfall – totals, raindays, annual maxima, onset of rain at the start
of the wet season, incidence of dry spells
Evapotranspiration and related meteorological variables
The principal source of data has been the HYMOS database maintained by
the Department of Hydrology & River Works (DoH&RW), MOWRAM. This
database contains daily water level observations for over forty monitoring
stations around the Great Lake, and daily rainfall observations for over
eighty raingauges. This source was chosen because it contains by far the
most comprehensive and easily used archive that is available.
An initial step in the work was to prepare two complementary data reports,
which synthesise and present available data in tabular and graphical form,
as appropriate. They have been released as MOWRAM reports:
River flow monitoring stations, Tonle Sap basin. Department of

Hydrology & River Works, MOWRAM (August 2006), and
Rainfall monitoring stations, Tonle Sap basin. Department of
Meteorology, MOWRAM (August, 2006).
Data processing was carried out principally by the TSLS Water Resources
Planner and Mr Preap Sameng of DoH&RW. Data presentation and
subsequent analysis were largely the responsibility of the Water Resources
Planner. The active support of the Director of DoH&RW and the very
effective engagement of his staff are gratefully acknowledged. Rainfall
records were checked and supplemented by staff of the Department of
Meteorology, and the assistance of the Director of Meteorology and her
staff is gratefully acknowledged.
2 OTHER SOURCES OF
INFORMATION
Data extracted from the DoH&RW database were supplemented by data
extracted from consultancy reports, particularly for meteorological
variables. A number of projects have assembled information of relevance to
the Tonle Sap Lowland Stabilisation Project, and/or present the results of
some hydrological analyses, particularly of flood flows. Some key reports
are listed and briefly described in Annex 8.
The Northwest Irrigation Sector Project already has provided valuable

compilations of hydro-meteorological data (NWISP, 2003, 2006c). Its
current (2006) phase will add substantially to information on the water
resources of the Tonle Sap basin, via the river basin and water use studies
6
being carried out in the Dauntry-Svay Donkeo, Boribo-Thlea Maam-Srang,
Mongkol Borei, and Svay Chek river basins (NWISP, 2006a and 2006b). It
is anticipated that the outputs from these four studies, which will be
available by December 2006, will provide a sound basis for project
selection and design in the basins concerned and, to some extent, in
neighbouring basins.
The e-Atlas compiled under ADB TA 4427-CAM (Establishment of Tonle

Sap Basin Management Organisation) deserves particular mention. It
provides a fine overview of the hydrology of the Tonle Sap basin,
presenting a variety of maps (including a map of the locations of irrigation
systems), as well as river discharge hydrographs and simple hydrological
statistics. It provides a broad overview of the basin, so the e-Atlas does not
provide data usable for sub-project design, but it is valuable for orientation.
The hydrographs presented by the e-Atlas were computed for 1998-2003 in

the main sub-basins of the Tonle Sap, as part of the Mekong River
Commission (MRC) project “Consolidation of hydro-meteorological data
and multi-functional roles of Tonle Sap Lake and its vicinities, Phase III”
(MRC, 2004). The project used the same data contained in the DoH&RW
HYMOS database, and the Final Report comments on rating curves and
data quality, as well as presenting five-year hydrographs (reproduced in the
e-Atlas). The project is expressly a “basin-wide” study, and its outputs are
not directly usable for TSLS Project sub-project selection and design.
Further analysis is required to provide data that are more directly applicable
for selection and design purposes. An associated major study of the
Mekong-Tonle Sap system that also presents basin-scale information
(including annual water balances for the Tonle Sap basin) is the MRC-
WUP-JICA (2004) “study on hydro-meteorological monitoring for water
quantity rules in Mekong River basin”.
3 RIVER FLOW INFORMATION IN

THE PROJECT AREA
3.1 Sources of data and data

analysis
MOWRAM and its predecessors have collected information on lake levels

and river flows since at least 1924. However, no monitoring stations have
operated continuously, and a basin-wide monitoring programme has been
established only since about 1994. The original data, mostly in the form of
daily observations, are held on the HYMOS database that is managed by
the Department of Hydrology & River Works (DoH&RW).
Hydrological data for the project area have been assembled by a number of
consultancies (Annex 8), notably the “Halcrow Report“ (Halcrow, 1994) and
the Final Report of the Northwest Irrigation Sector Project (NWISP, 2003).
However, they are of restricted value for present purposes, because they
use short or incomplete records, or do not present the data in a usable
form. The decision was made to thoroughly process the data held on the
7
HYMOS database, taking advantage of the considerable amount of data
that have been archived in recent years. The Director of H&RW has given
free access to the database, and his staff have worked closely with the
TSLSP consultant. A MOWRAM report, River flow monitoring stations,
Tonle Sap Basin, has been prepared as a companion to this one, and is a
joint output of MOWRAM and the TSLSP. It provides the “raw material“ that
is analysed and reported upon herein.
River flow data for twenty three stations have been analysed (Table 1;
stations in bold type). These include the stations for which discharge data
have been filed on the HYMOS database, or for which stage-discharge
rating curves 1 are available. These enable discharges to be calculated from
water level observations. There are other monitoring stations in the basin,
for which water level observations have been made, but rating curves have
not been filed on the HYMOS database, and therefore discharge cannot be
calculated. It should be emphasised that only limited checking of data
quality was possible, and there are many possible sources of inaccuracy.
This is particularly the case with regard to rating curves, which have not
been maintained continuously. The MOWRAM Report presents data
primarily in the form of monthly summaries, which should minimise the
effects of data inaccuracy at high and low discharges. However, it is
probable that computed discharges, particularly in wet-season months, are
under-estimates. A future task for the DoH&RW is to carry out a full quality
appraisal of the database, and make corrections where possible.
River basin boundaries have been digitized by the Project’s GIS Specialist
(Annex 9). This has enabled basin areas to be up-dated in Table 1.
The river flow stations, particularly those with the longest and most reliable
records, tend to be on the largest rivers, for the obvious reason that these
provide the greatest potential for development of the water resource. These
data for large rivers are representative of the rivers themselves, and of the
more or less distinctive hydrological characteristics of their drainage
basins 2 . They should be of particular assistance for planning sub-projects
that would draw water from those rivers, but may be of less relevance to
sub-projects away from the main rivers. Data for smaller rivers that are
located wholly on the lowland area are concentrated in the Pursat basin.
Again, therefore, the data might not be readily extended to other basins, for
predictive purposes.
Discharges at many of the monitoring stations, particularly in the lower

reaches of the rivers towards the Great Lake, are affected by abstraction of
water further upstream. Measured discharges therefore are less than those
that would naturally occur. This effect is greatest when natural flows are
lowest, during December through to June. To “normalise“ flows to account
for this is a major exercise which is beyond the resources of the Project.
1 A stage-discharge rating curve is a relationship between a series of measurements of

water level (or stage) and discharge (or flow). It is usually presented in the form of a
graph, with a mathematical equation calculated to best fit the data. HYMOS provides
various options for calculating curves, and applying the curves to a set of water level
observations.
2 The major tributaries of the Tonle Sap Great Lake rise in the mountain ranges encircling
the Tonle Sap basin, where rainfall may be three or four times greater (but is not
measured), and vegetation cover, geology and land surface topography are completely
different from the lowlands.
8
9
Table 1. Water level and discharge measurement stations. (Stations used in this report are in bold-face).
Period of record Area (km2) Location

ID Name River Water level Discharge (MRC) (TSLSP) ID Lat Long Coor_X Coor_Y
20103 Kampong Chhnang Tonle Sap 24-72, 81-86, 88, 94-02 Lake level 20103 12.268 104.682 465810 1355934
20108 Snoc Trou Tonle Sap 62-63 Lake level 20108 12.522 104.448 440434 1383975
201107 Bac Prea Tributary Great Lake 62-63, 99-00 Lake level 201107 13.313 103.403 327465 1472023
520101 Mongkol Borey Mongkol Borey 62-63, 97-04 62-63, 97-04 4,170 4,324 520101 13.544 103.019 286072 1497802
530101 Sisophon Sisophon 62-63, 97-04 62-63, 97-04 4,310 530101 13.583 102.979 281734 1502235
540101 Kralanh Sreng 62-63, 98-05 62-63, 98-05 8,175 7,127 540101 13.544 103.543 342760 1497446
550101 Treng Sangker 63-72, 99-03 63-72, 99-03 2,135 2,225 550101 12.872 103.135 298075 1423398
550102 Battambang Sangker 62-3, 72-3, 81-8, 97-05 62-3, 72-3, 81-8, 97-05 3,230 3,194 550102 13.102 103.200 305290 1448764
550103 Sre Ponleu Sangker 64-6 64-6 566 550103 12.735 102.773 258582 1408534
551101 Mong Russey Dauntry 01-03 01-03 833 1,214 551101 12.768 103.453 332454 1411688
560101 Bot Chhvear/UNTAC Siem Reap 99-04 99-04 670 701 560101 13.366 103.862 377241 1477580
560102 Prasat Keo Siem Reap 99-04 99-04 178 560102 13.449 103.970 388938 1486707
570101 Kompong Kdei Chikreng 62-3, 97-05 62-3, 97-05 1,920 1,901 570101 13.127 104.339 428778 1450955
580101 Pursat Pursat 62-3, 72-4 62-3 4,480 4,495 580101 12.523 103.914 382449 1384336
580102 Taing Leach Pursat 65-9 65-9 2,080 2,011 580102 12.290 103.605 348668 1358715
580103 Bac Trakoun Pursat 95-97, 01-05 95-97, 01-05 4,245 580103 12.380 103.756 365176 1368532
580104 Khum Viel Pursat 95-7, 99-03 95-7, 99-03 4,596 580104 12.561 103.935 384709 1388489
580105 Lo Lok Sar Pursat 94-7, 02 387 580105 12.508 103.908 381808 1382666
580106 Phum Kos Pursat 94-7 580106 12.217 103.760 365503 1350513
580110 Kbal Hong (up) Pursat 94-7, 02 580110 12.548 103.921 383195 1387043
580120 Kbal Hong (down) Pursat 95, 99-02 580120 12.550 103.923 383367 1387307
580201 Peam Tributary of Pursat 01-05 01-05 243 580201 12.154 103.698 358720 1343659
580301 Prey Klong (down) Tributary of Pursat 94-7, 01-05 94-7, 01-05 421 580301 12.074 103.859 376266 1334706
580302 Prey Klong (up) Pursat 94-7 580302 11.987 103.988 390281 1324947
580310 Sanlong (up) Pursat 95-7 580310 12.758 103.813 371572 1410350
580320 Sanlong (down) Pursat 95-7 580320 12.721 103.816 371915 1406206
580330 Svay At Pursat 94-7 580330 12.675 103.823 372569 1401123
581101 Campang Dauntry 95-7 581101 12.666 103.870 377762 1400147
10
Period of record Area (km2) Location
ID Name River Water level Discharge (MRC) (TSLSP) ID Lat Long Coor_X Coor_Y
581102 Svay Don Keo Tributary of Pursat 62-3, 65-97, 01-05 62-3, 65-97, 01-05 805 581102 12.673 103.640 352788 1401028
581210 Kroch Seuch (up) Dauntry 94-6 581210 12.716 103.900 381043 1405619
581220 Kroch Seuch (down) Dauntry 95-7 581220 12.732 103.932 384512 1407407
581310 Wat Liep (down) Pursat 95-7 581310 12.698 103.749 364558 1403730
581410 Wat Liep (up) Pursat 95-7 581410 12.688 103.737 363311 1402609
583010 Tlea Maam (1) Pursat 94-7 583010 12.571 104.208 414372 1389452
583020 Tlea Maam (up) Tributary of Pursat 94-6 94-6 322 583020 12.526 103.994 391083 1384565
583101 Banteay Krang Krakor 94-7 138 583101 12.502 104.207 414213 1381888
590101 Boribo Boribo 98-05 98-05 869 803 590101 12.348 104.380 433016 1364795
600101 Kompong Chen Staung 62-3, 97-05 62-3, 97-05 1,895 2,096 600101 12.937 104.583 455190 1429887
610101 Kompong Thom Sen 61-70, 81-03 61-70, 81-03 13,670 13,278 610101 12.715 104.886 488039 1405265
610102 Kompong Putrea Sen 65-9, 99-04 65-9, 99-04 9,080 11,137 610102 13.217 105.261 528731 1460817
610103 Panha Chi Sen 00-02 610103 12.718 104.971 497292 1405656
620101 Kompong Thmar Chinit 62-3, 97-03 62-3, 97-03 4,130 4,393 620101 12.501 105.131 514655 1381639
640104 Srok Sandan Sen 02 2,053 640104 12.858 105.068 507797 1421146
Note: Two figures are given for drainage basin area: that listed on the Mekong River Commission web-site (MRC), and an area calculated from drainage basin boundaries
digitized in August 2006 by the GIS Specialist of Tonle Sap Lowland Stabilisation Project (TSLSP). The latter is considered to be more accurate.
Note: the location coordinates listed have been calculated by the GIS Specialist of Tonle Sap Lowland Stabilisation Project (TSLSP), in consultation with the Director of
DoH&RW to identify the correct position of the stations. Many of the coordinates listed on the Mekong River Commission web-site are incorrect.
11
12
3.2 Long-term trends in river flow
Two stations, Battambang and Kompong Thom, have records long enough
to reveal long-term trends in river flows (Figure 1, Figure 2). In both cases,
there appears to be a tendency for mean annual discharge to increase, but
in neither case is the regression coefficient significantly different from zero.
Perhaps more important is the substantial scatter of mean annual
discharges around the long-term average – almost a five-fold range in the
case of the Sangke at Battambang. This demonstrates what is widely
recognised, that river flows in Cambodia are highly variable from year to
year, and quite unreliable as a basis for confident and economical resource
development. The data are not adequate to judge whether variability has
increased over the years, as is sometimes suggested to have happened as
a result of land use change or climate change.
3.3 Seasonal patterns in river flow
The data for all the rivers that have been analysed show the same pattern
of highly seasonal flows, with low or even zero flows during the dry season,
December through to May, and a rapid rise to a peak in the wet season, in
September-October. The hydrograph for Peam station on a tributary of the
Stung Pursat typifies this pattern for small rivers (Figure 3).
Actually, the flow regime at Peam is neater than most, with a sharply
defined peak in most years (Figure 4). Other rivers have a common
tendency for particular months to have flows that are unusually high or low
for the time of year, and to have a much wider range of flows from year to
year. Thus, in Stung Mongkol Borey, there is a wide range from the lowest
to highest mean monthly flow in all the months when there is significant
flow – May to November (Figure 5). For example, mean monthly discharge
in June varied from 0.8 m3/sec to 44 m3/sec during the eight years of
record, with an average of 14 m3/sec and a “4 in 5 year“ value of 22 m3/sec.
The overall consequence of such variability is that rivers, particularly small
rivers, in the Tonle Sap basin provide an unreliable basis for water
management and use that rely on run-of-river flows (i.e. has no artificial
storage capacity).
13
Figure 1. Mean annual discharge, Stung Sangke at Battambang.
Stung Sangke at Battambang

200
y = 0.2888x + 109.69
180
R2 = 0.0098
Mean monthly discharge, Aug-Nov (m

160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Year from 1961
Figure 2. Mean annual discharge, Stung Sen at Kompong Thom.
Sen at Kompong Thom, mean annual discharge

350
y = 0.913x + 172.45
R2 = 0.0673
300
250
Discharge (m3/se
200
150
100
50
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Years from 1961
Figure 3. Hydrograph for Peam station (tributary of Stung Pursat).
14
Figure 4. Mean monthly discharges, Peam station, 2001-2005.
Tributary of Pursat River at Peam

120
2001
2002
2003
100
2004
Mean monthly discharge (m3/s) 2005
MEAN
80
60
40
20
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Figure 5. Monthly flow regime for Stung Mongkol Borey.
Mongkol Borey at Mongkol Borey

90
MAX
MIN
80
20 PERCENTILE
80 PERCENTILE
70
MEAN
60
Mean monthly discharge (m3/s)
50
40
30
20
10
0
3.4 Volumetric water availability
The study by Carbonnel and Guiscafré (1963?), Grand Lac du Cambodge,

Sedimentologie et Hydrologie 1962-63, presented data on total inflows into
the Great Lake during a single water year. A total of over 24 BCM (billion
cubic metres) was estimated, 85% entering the lake during the four months
July-October 1962 (Figure 6). This study is significant because it measured
inflows from all major tributaries to the lake. However, it used data for only
one year, so it cannot be relied upon to give more than a picture of the
hydrologic regime of the Tonle Sap Great Lake.
15
Figure 6. Inflows into Tonle Sap Great Lake, 1962-63. (data from
Carbonnel and Guiscafré, 1963?)
7,000
6,000
Total monthly runoff (M 5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
r
r
ry
y
er
be
be
ch
st
be
ne
ril
ly
ay
ar
ua
ob
gu
Ap
Ju
m
em
ar
m
Ju
M
nu
br
Au
ve
M
ct
ce
Ja
pt
Fe
O
No
De
Se
The NWISP Final Report presented a provisional, “very approximate“ water

balance for the Tonle Sap basin (Table 2). All river flow estimates are
subject to considerable error because of the unreliability of rating curves,
particularly on the Tonle Sap river itself. The MRC-WUP-JICA (2004) study
has also presented estimates of water balances in the basin.
Table 2. Provisional Tonle Sap Great Lake mean annual water balance.
(All figures in MCM, except for lake area)
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN

2
Lake area (km ) 3800 3200 3070 3000 3000 3070
Lake rainfall 15 28 106 211 428 441
Tonle Sap inflow (-) (-) (-) (-) (-) 898
Tonle Sap outflow 3147 1150 484 404 282 (-)
Other tributaries 135 65 50 64 171 584
Evaporation 444 390 470 454 426 392
JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR

2
Lake area (km ) 3300 4450 6250 8400 6250 4850
Lake rainfall 499 754 1366 1817 631 70 6400
Tonle Sap inflow 3501 6148 4011 (-) (-) (-) 14558
Tonle Sap outflow (-) (-) (-) 5752 7128 5544 23891
Other tributaries 1398 2584 3960 3711 1259 382 14363
Evaporation 398 507 658 815 600 492 6050
Total apparent imbalance (by difference) 5380
Source: Table 7.3 of NWISP Final Report, Volume 2, Annex A (March
2003). “Other tributary” flows are estimates in the MRC/UNDP Natural
resources based development strategy for the Tonle Sap area,
Cambodia (May 1998)
The modern discharge records compiled in the DoH&RW Report on River

flow monitoring stations are readily converted from instantaneous discharge
in cubic metres per second (m3/s) to give volumetric discharge over a
16
month or a year, in million cubic metres (MCM). Summary statistics for
annual volumetric discharge are presented in Table 3, and the monthly
calculations are presented in Annex 1 3 . The MEAN values (Table 3) show
the large volumes of water that on average flow to the Tonle Sap Great
Lake each year, and in principle would be available for filling storage.
However, the MAX and MIN values confirm that there is great inter-annual
variability. Most of the 20 PERCENTILE values (the annual volumetric
discharge exceeded 4 years in 5 on average) are in the range 60-80% of
the MEAN values for each station.
The volume and reliability of water available at the beginning of the wet
season, when many farmers are establishing their crops, is of greater
significance than annual volume (Table 4). Volumetric discharges in June
are only about 5% of the total annual volumes. Further, June discharges
are even more variable than annual discharges; 20 PERCENTILE values
are in the range 5-70% of the MEAN values. In other words, the volume of
water that is available in June, at the beginning of the planting season, is
both comparatively small and highly variable from year to year.
3.5 Specific discharges
Specific discharge – discharge per unit area, commonly presented in

litres/second per square kilometre (l/s/km2) – is an important hydrological
parameter because it removes the effect of drainage area on river flow and
makes data from different rivers more comparable. The 1962-3 data of
Carbonnel and Guiscafré indicate a basin-wide average annual specific
discharge of 11.4 l/s/km2, with figures of 12-20 l/s/km2 for the large rivers
flowing from the high-rainfall mountains encircling the Tonle Sap basin.
Again, the monthly pattern is of more practical significance than annual

figures (Table 5, Figure 7). The modern discharge records show the
marked seasonal differences in specific discharge that would be expected
from the earlier discussion. They also show substantial differences between
rivers. Most obvious is the high specific discharges of the Stung Sangke,
with its headwaters in the Cardamom Mountains receiving heavy rainfall
during the Southwest Monsoon. On the other hand, Stung Chikreng and
Stung Sreng, draining from the lower country to the north of the Great Lake,
have rather low specific discharges year-round.
A seeming anomaly is Stung Mongkol Borey, next to the Sangke but with
mean monthly specific discharges only a tenth as great. The presence of
limestone in the headwaters, the lower topography, and the more inland
location of the basin, in a low-rainfall area, are explanations. On the other
hand, the Peam tributary of Stung Pursat has unusually high specific
discharges. This river drains from an area of forested hill country in the
higher rainfall part of Pursat province. Overall, Figure 7 indicates some
difficulty in using even specific discharges to extrapolate from rivers for
which there are data to others for which there are not. There are large
differences in hydrologic regime, and even though these can be explained
qualitatively by differences in drainage basin characteristics, there are
insufficient data to permit an analysis that could be confidently applied.
3 It is probable that, owing to the unreliability of rating curves at high stages, the discharges
presented in the Annex and in Table 3 and Table 4 are under-estimates.
17
Figure 7. Specific discharges in sub-basins of the Great Lake (l/s/km2).
80
Rivers, northeastern side of Great Lake
Mean monthly specific discharge (l/s/km2)

70
570101
60 590101
600101
50 610101
610102
40
30
20
10
0
300
Rivers, southern side of Great Lake
250
580101
580102
200 580103
580104
580201
150 580301
100
50
0
120
520101
Rivers, western end of Great Lake
540101
100 550101
550102
550103
80 551101
560102
60
40
20
0
18
Table 3. Summary statistics for annual volumetric discharges (MCM)
Mongkol Sisophon Sreng Sangke Sangke Sangke Siem Siem Chikreng Pursat
Borey Reap Reap
520101 530101 540101 550101 550102 550103 560101 560102 570101 580102
MEAN 577.96 460.32 1033.88 2288.2 1859.43 755.71 202.46 175.97 145.57 983.67
MAX 960.90 1470.21 3227.1 2632.63 245.03 221.70 1561.98
MIN 211.61 611.17 1275.9 1241.26 63.70 44.47 602.65
20 PERCENTILE 435.51 803.41 1485.0 1505.65 139.89 68.43 680.11
80 PERCENTILE 787.01 1262.83 2995.0 2153.22 244.28 213.88 1202.22
Pursat Pursat Pursat Pursat Pursat Boribo Staung Sen Sen Chinit
tributary tributary tributary
580103 580104 580201 580301 581102 590101 600101 610101 610102 620101
MEAN 2218.95 3076.02 383.08 447.13 300.93 640.05 401.98 6094.2 5250.4 1838.97
MAX 3757.20 4621.60 635.45 956.49 362.98 889.00 568.59 9476.9 7859.7 2338.71
MIN 1155.48 1951.13 206.88 234.63 215.08 438.35 306.21 3258.9 3219.2 1438.04
20 PERCENTILE 1647.63 2133.54 242.07 262.06 475.06 316.18 4763.5 3851.2 1558.89
80 PERCENTILE 2695.32 3934.37 508.86 432.67 819.49 473.61 7190.5 6961.6 2099.29
19
Table 4. Summary statistics for June volumetric discharges (MCM)
Mongkol Sisophon Sreng Sangke Sangke Sangke Siem Siem Chikreng Pursat Dauntry
Borey Reap Reap
520101 530101 540101 550101 550102 550103 560101 560102 570101 580102 551101
MEAN 36.38 16.98 63.64 147.4 99.96 83.28 11.44 10.11 6.05 68.12 2.02
MAX 114.23 58.01 246.58 424.3 287.38 21.00 26.41 24.24 153.01
MIN 2.05 1.37 2.05 17.2 15.71 3.16 1.92 0.16 18.53
20 PERCENTILE 3.43 1.45 3.30 62.7 33.03 7.52 3.89 0.33 29.71
80 PERCENTILE 57.34 30.27 121.70 249.2 143.07 14.84 18.48 10.56 109.36
Pursat Pursat Pursat Pursat Pursat Boribo Staung Sen Sen Chinit Pursat
tributary tributary tributary tributary
580103 580104 580201 580301 581102 590101 600101 610101 610102 620101 583020
MEAN 87.52 159.50 9.55 14.63 26.10 39.72 35.03 243.2 448.5 129.33 7.37
MAX 313.24 317.21 13.71 52.88 59.10 125.53 135.17 720.9 1156.0 314.72
MIN 25.17 30.12 3.03 3.89 1.48 8.63 0.52 39.4 98.3 19.31
20 PERCENTILE 26.80 44.72 6.60 7.12 8.02 17.94 4.73 88.3 183.3 67.52
80 PERCENTILE 101.19 276.20 12.34 12.63 52.55 46.12 43.53 396.1 668.4 211.75
20
Table 5. Mean monthly specific discharges (l/s/km2)
Area
Station (km2) JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
520101 Mongkol Borey 4,324 0.36 0.18 0.23 0.58 2.11 3.25 5.27 8.09 9.63 12.89 8.18 2.01
540101 Sreng 7,127 0.34 0.17 0.13 0.18 0.99 3.44 4.80 8.70 15.98 19.10 8.45 1.43
550101 Sangke 2,225 7.63 6.66 5.49 6.46 11.87 24.66 55.37 97.86 86.82 75.11 23.99 21.29
550102 Sangke 3,194 1.50 0.69 0.85 1.38 4.04 12.59 21.16 39.48 39.81 45.78 28.03 7.83
550103 Sangke 566 4.61 3.55 2.84 2.73 26.54 56.77 73.78 118.76 125.64 58.86 22.78 9.06
551101 Dauntry 1,214 0.22 1.38 1.24 2.08 3.38 0.64 0.63 2.31 1.73 7.24 7.20 1.48
560102 Siem Reap 178 11.82 8.74 7.05 7.81 9.68 21.70 25.51 60.02 65.96 92.25 53.43 21.36
570101 Chikreng 1,901 0.92 0.40 0.18 0.07 0.38 1.23 4.98 5.19 16.26 15.43 5.38 1.56
580101 Pursat 4,495 2.35 1.14 0.70 4.45 5.25 9.30 14.88 19.08 33.25 44.93 33.29 14.88
580102 Pursat 2,011 0.94 0.51 0.85 4.84 11.61 13.07 21.83 25.93 37.64 52.37 13.15 3.22
580103 Pursat 4,245 3.02 1.94 2.95 1.91 3.78 7.87 17.54 26.60 38.32 68.91 25.37 8.55
580104 Pursat 4,596 2.58 1.54 1.62 3.90 8.33 12.35 19.61 24.01 30.56 56.86 27.23 8.71
580201 Peam tributary 243 7.99 2.81 6.61 4.93 15.42 17.84 41.47 42.69 108.11 259.40 45.53 13.60
580301 Prey Klong tributary 421 9.73 4.92 5.17 4.27 6.60 13.41 20.27 28.70 66.87 114.24 49.41 45.80
590101 Boribo 803 10.00 8.33 7.44 9.84 13.49 19.08 23.49 27.88 62.78 68.22 34.39 13.96
600101 Staung 2,096 0.19 0.11 0.10 1.48 5.22 6.45 16.80 24.66 43.32 33.17 6.00 0.87
610101 Sen 13,278 2.10 0.75 0.46 0.73 2.11 7.06 16.95 32.24 48.99 45.65 17.08 5.96
610102 Sen 11,137 4.05 0.93 0.25 3.38 6.76 15.54 28.33 46.52 60.59 34.27 13.12 6.93
620101 Chinit 4,393 5.33 2.88 2.83 2.89 5.59 11.36 18.84 25.81 34.48 44.05 16.55 7.54
21
3.6 Flood flows
Flood flows are principally of concern when structures are being designed
that have a high capital cost or whose failure could adversely affect
downstream populations and/or assets. There have been several efforts to
estimate flood flows in sub-basins of the Tonle Sap, notably Stung Chinit.
The procedure for estimating flood flows that was developed for the
Irrigation Rehabilitation Study in Cambodia (Halcrow, 1994) has been
widely quoted and used. It is summarised by a set of equations which relate
mean annual flood (MAF, that is, the average of the series of annual
maximum flows at a station) to basin area (AREA), and relate the 10-year
and 100-year floods Q10 and Q100 to the MAF:
MAF = AREA0.9; Q10 = 1.53.MAF; Q100 = 2.2.MAF
The Halcrow report emphasises that this approach, which relies on minimal
Cambodian data and relationships for river basins in Thailand and
Malaysia, provides only a rough estimate of flood flows. It must be
supported by local records or memories of flood water levels to obtain
estimates suitable for design purposes.
The streamflow data compiled in the DoH&RW Report on River flow

monitoring stations are not sufficiently reliable, even now, to make
confident estimates of flood flows. Many rating curves do not extend to high
stages and discharges, and significant extrapolation beyond the measured
range is necessary. Several stations show signs of being affected by loss of
flow to distributaries or overbank (annual high water levels tend to be about
the same, suggesting that water is overflowing from the channel).
Furthermore, particularly for stations in the lower reaches of the rivers, the
water level measurement stations are affected by backwater from the Great
Lake, so that discharge calculations are inaccurate 4 .
Subject to the preceding qualifications, annual maximum daily discharges

have been extracted from the hydrographs presented in the DoH&RW
Report (Annex 3). The annual series for each station has been plotted also
as an annual exceedance series (Figure 8, Figure 9). The nearly flat curves
of several stations above an ARI of about 2 years indicate the effects of
truncation of peak flows by HYMOS at stage heights greater than the range
of the rating curve, overbank or distributary flow, or backwater effects. Few
of the stations appear to be usable for analysis of extreme events, without a
great deal of work on the rating curves, additional research into historical
flood levels, estimation of overbank and distributary flows, etc.
4 The studies reported in Mekong River Commission (2004) and MRC-WUP-JICA (2004)
use the same data archived in the DoH&RW HYMOS database to develop rating curves
and compute discharges. The present writer considers that some of the extrapolations
and assumptions required are questionable, given the nature of the original data.
Estimates of high flows can be quite inaccurate, as a result of extrapolation of rating
curves beyond the measured range.
22
Figure 8. Annual exceedance series for river flow stations with 9 or
more years of record.
1800 Sangke, Battambang

Treng, 1963-73
1600 Kompong K'dei
Kompong Putrea
1400
Kompong Chen
Annual maximum discharge (m3/s)
1200 KumViel
Sen, Kompong Thom
1000
800
600
400
200
0
1 10 100
Recurrence interval in years
Figure 9. Annual exceedance series for river flow stations with 8 or

less years of record.
1400
Kompong Thmar
.
Kralanh
1200 Mongkol Borey
Boribo
1000 Baktrakoun
Annual maximum discharge (m3/s)
Peam
Taing Leach
800
600
400
200
0
1 10
23
The Mean Annual Flood (Q2.33, with an ARI = 2.33 years) has been
extracted from the tables in Annex 3, to compare with the Halcrow (1994)
equation mentioned above (Table 6, Figure 10). Some of the points scatter
around the “Halcrow“ line MAF = Area0.9, but those for stations with basin
areas >4,000 km2 lie well off to the right. This is indicative of the problems
mentioned above with regard to rating curves, overbank flow, backwater
effects etc. Of course, there are at least two “populations“ of stations in the
Tonle Sap basin, the principal ones being the large sub-basins that drain
from the encircling mountains, and the smaller sub-basins that drain mainly
from the lowlands around the lake. These populations of basins can be
expected to have quite different hydrological characteristics.
Table 6. Estimates of Mean Annual Flood from Annex 3.
ID Name River Area Area MAF

(km2) (km2) (m3/s)
from
GIS
520101 Mongkol Borey Mongkol Borey 4,170 4,324 84
530101 Sisophon Sisophon 4,310
540101 Kralanh Sreng 8,175 7,127 190
550101 Treng Sangker 2,135 2,225 980
550102 Battambang Sangker 3,230 3,194 550
550103 Sre Ponleu Sangker 566
551101 Mong Russey Dauntry 833 1,214
560101 Bot Siem Reap 670 701
Chhvear/UNTAC
560102 Prasat Keo Siem Reap 178 55
570101 Kompong Kdei Chikreng 1,920 1,901 103
580101 Pursat Pursat 4,480 4,495
580102 Taing Leach Pursat 2,080 2,011 485
580103 Bac Trakoun Pursat 4,245 850
580104 Khum Viel Pursat 4,596 500
580201 Peam Tributary of Pursat 243 177
580301 Prey Klong (down) Tributary of Pursat 421 137
581102 Svay Don Keo Tributary of Pursat 805
583020 Tlea Maam (up) Tributary of Pursat 322
590101 Boribo Boribo 869 803 160
600101 Kompong Chen Staung 1,895 2,096 166
610101 Kompong Thom Sen 13,670 13,278 850
610102 Kompong Putrea Sen 9,080 11,137 1,050
620101 Kompong Thmar Chinit 4,130 4,393 275
Note: the basin areas computed by the TSLSP GIS specialist have been used in subsequent
analysis.
24
Figure 10. Mean annual floods (Q2.33) as a function of basin area. The
Halcrow (1994) equation is marked.
1400
1200
Mean annual flood (m3/s) 1000
800
600
400
200
0
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000
Basin area (km2) .
4 INUNDATION AROUND GREAT

LAKE
4.1 Significance for water availability
Many communities on the Mekong-Tonle Sap floodplain use the “recession

rice cultivation” method, in which they progressively plant rice as flood
waters recede. Supplementary irrigation is enabled by the construction of
barrages which are submerged during the annual flood, and which impound
water as river/lake water levels fall. This impounded water then can be
used as required to supply additional water to crops planted downslope
from the barrage.
The opportunity to use this approach reliably is controlled by the frequency

with which flood waters reach particular elevations and locations around the
Great Lake. Local communities undoubtedly know the areas that have been
inundated in the past, but may not be able to quantify the frequency with
which inundation occurs. To justify, for example, the construction or
rehabilitation of a barrage for the purpose of supplementary irrigation of
recession crops, some confidence is needed that the barrage will be refilled
with an acceptable frequency.
4.2 Sources of data on lake levels
Several stations provide data on water levels in the Tonle Sap Great Lake,
but Kompong Luong, near Kompong Chhnang, provides the longest record,
spanning the period 1924-2005. The dataset retrieved from the DoH&RW
HYMOS database indicates that there was a step change in datum in 1961,
with average water level since 1961 being 2.47 m below that before 1961.
To use the full record, post-1961 values have been increased by 2.47 m.
25
4.3 Long-term pattern of lake level
In spite of the adjustment for a change in datum noted above, there

appears to be a weak long-term downward trend in lake level. This is
particularly so for annual maximum level, for which there is a statistically
significant decline of 16.5 mm/year, principally since the 1950s (Figure 11).
If this apparent trend is real, it presumably would reflect reduced inflow to
the lake from the Mekong and/or the Tonle Sap drainage basin, resulting
from lower Mekong and/or Tonle Sap tributary flows, constriction of the
Tonle Sap channel/delta, reduced overbank flows across the inundated
areas between the Mekong and Tonle Sap, or changes to the local base
level set by the river level at Chaktomuk. The maximum lake level cannot
decline indefinitely, because it is ultimately fixed by the seasonal rise and
fall of river level at Chaktomuk, and there is no reason to expect that
maximum levels there will decline in the future.
4.4 Seasonal pattern of lake level
Tonle Sap Great Lake has a regular annual cycle, in response to seasonal
variations in inflow from the Tonle Sap river basin itself and from the
Mekong River. There is a great deal of variation from year to year, and
water level on a particular day of the year may differ by as much as 4 m
between years (Figure 12). For present purposes, maximum lake level in
each year is of greatest interest. On average, maximum lake level reaches
11.66 m above sea level, but has ranged from 10.05 m to 12.99 m (Table
7). The 80 percentile maximum level (reached 4 years in 5) is 11.13 m. This
means that there is 80% confidence that lake level will reach the 11.13 m
contour in a given year. A barrage to retain flood waters would need to
have a crest level below this (less a few centimetres for water to flow over
the barrage), to ensure that it is inundated with acceptable frequency
(assumed here to be four years in five).
Figure 11. Long-term trend in water level, Kompong Luong.
14 Kompong Loung (post-1962 data adjusted by 2.48 m for datum change)
12 MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
2
R = 0.1344 AVERAGE
10
Water level (m a.s
2
R = 0.0929
6
4
2
R = 0.0727
2
0
1925
1927
1929
1931
1933
1935
1937
1939
1941
1943
1945
1947
1949
1951
1953
1955
1957
1959
1961
1963
1965
1997
1999
2001
2003
Year
26
Figure 12. Seasonal pattern of water level, Kompong Luong.
Water levels, Kompong Luong, Tonle Sap Great Lake

16
Maxima
(1 in 5 wet year)
14
Mean
Water level (metres above sea le

(1 in 5 dry year)
12 Minima
10
III
III
III
III
II
III
II
II
II
I
I
II
II
I
I
I
lI
rI
v
lI
n
ar
p
ay
c
g
n
b
v
Ju
ct
n
p
ay
No
ar
Ja
Ap
Se
Ju
De
Au
Ju
Fe
No
M
Ja
Se
O
M
M
M
Decade during year
Table 7. Statistics for lake levels, Kompong Luong.
MINIMUM MAXIMUM AVERAGE

MEAN 3.51 11.66 6.95
MIN 3.02 10.05 6.12
MAX 4.15 12.99 7.64
10 PERCENTILE 3.10 10.89 6.39
20 PERCENTILE 3.26 11.13 6.57
80 PERCENTILE 3.74 12.23 7.36
90 PERCENTILE 3.92 12.39 7.48
5 RAINFALL INFORMATION IN THE

PROJECT AREA
5.1 Sources of data and data analysis
MOWRAM and its predecessors have been collecting information on

rainfall and other meteorological variables since as early as 1912.
However, no monitoring stations have been operated continuously for such
a long period, and many stations have data for less than five years. The
original rainfall data, mostly in the form of daily observations, are held by
the Department of Meteorology (DoM), and data are being archived in an
Excel database. A copy of the rainfall data also is held on the HYMOS
database that is managed by the Department of Hydrology & River Works
(DoH&RW).
Rainfall data for the project area have been assembled by a number of
consultancies, notably the “Halcrow Report“ (June 1994) and the Final
Report of the Northwest Irrigation Sector Project (March 2003). However,
they are of limited value for present purposes, because they use short or
incomplete records, or do not present the data in a usable form. The
27
decision was made to thoroughly process the data held on the HYMOS
database, taking advantage of the additional data that have been archived
in recent years. The Director of H&RW has given free access to the
database, and his staff have worked closely with the GFA consultant. A
Department of Meteorology Report, Rainfall monitoring stations, Tonle Sap
Basin, has been prepared as a companion to this one, and is a joint output
of MOWRAM and the TSLSP. It provides the “raw material“ that is analysed
and reported upon herein.
Data for more than eighty stations have been analysed (Table 8, location
map on following page). The data have been retrieved from the HYMOS
database, updated for 2003-4 with data supplied by the DoM to the Mekong
River Commission. Additional data for some stations were taken from
spreadsheets contained in the project completion report of the Northwest
Irrigation Sector Project (Final Report, Volume 2, Annex A: Climate,
hydrology, hydrogeology and hydrochemistry). These data originally were
sourced from the Headquarters and Provincial offices of the DoM. As
discussed in the MOWRAM Report, the quality and reliability of rainfall data
are suspect, particularly as a result of uncertainties with regard to “zero
rainfall observed“ and “no observations made“. In preparing the MOWRAM
Report, many adjustments were made to the archived data to amend
months in which archived “zero rainfall observed“ was judged to be
improbable, and “no observations made“ more likely.
Rainfall in Cambodia varies greatly from year to year. Under these

circumstances, meteorologists and hydrologists usually consider that
periods of observation should be greater than 20 or even 30 years to
provide confidence that data truly represent long-term conditions. Less than
ten stations in the Project area have such long periods of record.
28
Table 8. Rainfall measurement stations.
SITE NO NAME PROVINCE LAT LONG COOR_X COOR_Y

130320 Angkor Chum Siem Reap 13.6853 103.6592 355422.72 1513003.88
130310 Angkor Watt Siem Reap 13.4994 103.8517 376145.94 1492334.50
120406 Bamnak Pursat 12.3167 104.1667 409814.97 1361396.25
130301 Banan Battambang 12.9614 103.1536 300135.72 1433271.88
130322 Banteay Srey Siem Reap 13.5981 103.9653 388488.03 1503196.50
120503 Baray Kampong Thom 12.4039 105.0894 510138.91 1370900.00
120410 Baribo Kampong Chhnang 12.45 104.4667 442464.78 1376054.13
130305 Battambang Battambang 13.1 103.2 305278.44 1448569.88
120320 Beoung Kantuot Pursat 12.5167 104.0869 401212.88 1383543.00
120426 Beoung Khnar Pursat 12.6353 103.7506 364731.91 1396810.25
110429 Boeung Leach Kampong Chhnang 11.8936 104.6881 466455.72 1314489.50
120411 Boeung Por Kampong Chhnang 12.0428 104.7 467768.94 1330986.25
130318 Boeung Raing Battambang 13.0569 103.1594 300841.28 1443833.13
130208 Bovel Battambang 13.2522 102.8769 270379.53 1465683.50
120205 Chamlong Kuoy Battambang 12.7133 102.9597 278877.56 1405980.38
120311 Cheang Meanchey Battambang 12.8769 103.1044 294727.66 1423961.88
130309 Chong Kal Oddar Meanchey 13.95 103.5833 347385.56 1542332.25
130404 Damdek Siem Reap 13.2556 104.125 405631.19 1465248.25
120304 Dap Bat Pursat 12.3425 103.7869 368526.56 1364407.13
120414 Doun Pean Kampong Chhnang 12.0878 104.8144 480224.09 1335951.25
130312 Kauk Patry Siem Reap 13.3667 103.9833 390329.31 1477594.38
130323 Khum Lvear Siem Reap 13.4636 103.7103 360819.50 1488450.50
130211 Komping Pouy Battambang 13.0803 102.9908 282573.44 1446561.13
120401 Kompong Chhnang Kampong Chhnang 12.2411 104.6667 464171.91 1352918.38
130405 Kompong Kdei Siem Reap 13.13 104.3475 429700.41 1451284.13
120415 Kompong Leang Kampong Chhnang 12.2667 104.7333 471417.88 1355741.13
120404 Kompong Thom Kampong Thom 12.6861 104.9 489564.28 1402106.38
110405 Kompong Tralach Kampong Chhnang 11.9 104.7667 475015.75 1315188.75
130210 Komrieng Battambang 13.0844 102.4617 225179.95 1447530.63
120424 Kondal Chrass Kampong Thom 12.9761 104.7144 469448.16 1434190.88
120403 Krakor Pursat 12.5322 104.2172 415376.22 1385211.75
130307 Kralanh Siem Reap 13.6042 103.5231 340646.94 1504118.00
29
120419 Krang Tamoung Kampong Chhnang 12.1261 104.5739 454058.38 1340215.63
120312 Kravanh Pursat 12.6747 103.6475 353555.16 1401224.00
120306 Leach Pursat 12.35 103.7667 366333.53 1365246.75
120303 Maung Russey Battambang 12.7706 103.45 332167.38 1411951.63
130315 Mongkol Borey Banteay Meanchey 13.5367 103.0231 286478.34 1497032.75
130209 O Chrov Banteay Meanchey 13.6428 102.5839 239040.67 1509202.63
130304 O Taky Battambang 13.1542 103.1172 296344.41 1454632.00
120202 Pailin Pailin 12.8586 102.6181 241915.36 1422376.00
120313 Peam Pursat 12.2864 103.7222 361460.94 1358234.88
130403 Phnom Koulen Siem Reap 13.58 104.1169 404881.69 1501130.13
130324 Phnom Krom Siem Reap 13.2939 103.8172 372302.94 1469621.88
130308 Phnom Srok Banteay Meanchey 13.75 103.35 322025.63 1520368.25
120418 Pong Ro Kampong Chhnang 12.2744 104.5925 456106.94 1356611.75
120417 Ponley Kampong Chhnang 12.4431 104.4711 442941.69 1375290.25
130316 Pranet Preah Banteay Meanchey 13.6167 103.1833 303886.19 1505749.63
130321 Prasat Bakong Siem Reap 13.3544 103.9908 391135.94 1476230.63
120422 Prasat Balang Kampong Thom 12.9808 104.9586 495932.16 1434693.63
120516 Prasat Sambo Kampong Thom 12.8856 105.0764 508710.28 1424166.88
120425 Prey Pros Kampong Thom 12.7983 104.8289 481852.94 1414517.75
120302 Pursat Pursat 12.55 103.9 380919.69 1387303.38
120305 Raing Kesey Battambang 12.9667 103.25 310599.34 1433784.50
120213 Rattanak Mondol Pailin 12.8167 102.6167 241720.06 1417740.38
120416 Rolear Phear Kampong Chhnang 12.2175 104.6744 465006.03 1350307.63
130212 Roung Chrey Battambang 13.2683 102.9706 280550.13 1467380.63
130503 Rovieng Preah Vihear 13.35 105.1167 513058.53 1475524.75
130505 Sadan Kampong Thom 13.1 105.25 527520.81 1447888.50
110430 Samaki Meanchey Kampong Chhnang 11.882 104.612 458166.13 1313217.13
130215 Samlot Battambang 12.6294 102.8633 268329.25 1396780.75
130311 Sasar Sdam Siem Reap 13.5061 103.6169 350734.41 1493206.63
120407 Sdoc Ach Romeas Kampong Chhnang 12.0667 104.5333 449629.91 1333654.38
130325 Siem Reap Siem Reap 13.3667 103.85 375893.34 1477657.50
130306 Siem Reap airport Siem Reap 13.4181 103.8075 371318.50 1483364.63
130202 Sisophon Banteay Meanchey 13.6144 102.9703 280833.31 1505677.25
130326 Srey Snam Siem Reap 13.8431 103.5231 340808.56 1530546.00
120402 Staung Kampong Thom 12.9481 104.5719 453988.28 1431116.00
30
120423 Stung Chinit Kampong Thom 12.51 105.1464 516327.88 1382635.25
130205 Svay Chek Banteay Meanchey 13.8033 102.9722 281214.28 1526577.88
581102 Svay Donkeo Pursat 12.6747 103.6475 353555.16 1401224.00
130327 Svay Leu Banteay Meanchey 13.5667 103.25 311064.72 1500164.88
120517 Taing Kok Kampong Thom 12.2519 105.1294 514494.81 1354093.63
120518 Taing Krasng Kampong Thom 12.5708 105.0569 506602.28 1389354.88
120309 Talo Pursat 12.5186 103.6589 354704.94 1383951.63
130406 Tbeng (Sdau) Battambang 12.8981 102.9772 280938.78 1426412.88
130319 Thmar Kol Battambang 13.2689 103.0303 287021.03 1467395.13
130317 Thmar Pouk Banteay Meanchey 13.9492 103.0514 289910.69 1542650.75
120206 Treng Battambang 12.8403 102.9203 274710.72 1420066.63
120420 Tuk Phos Kampong Chhnang 12.0547 104.5283 449082.94 1332328.38
110414 Tuol Khpos Kampong Chhnang 11.95 104.3833 433275.53 1320781.63
120301 Tuol Krous Kampong Chhnang 12.3608 104.5261 448902.97 1366177.88
130313 Tuol Samraung Battambang 13.3853 103.0303 287123.13 1480274.38
130328 Varin Siem Reap 13.7833 103.75 365299.47 1523791.63
31
32
5.2 Long-term trends in Rainfall
Eight stations in the Project area have rainfall records back to the 1920s
and 1930s. There are many gaps in the records, but the data are sufficient
to reveal any long-term trends in annual precipitation (Figure 13).
Figure 13. Total annual rainfall at long-record stations.
2000
1800
1600
Total annual rainfall (mm)
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
y = -1.3814x + 1422.4
200
R2 = 0.0267
Battambang
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500 y = -2.2298x + 1822.4

R2 = 0.0275 Kompong Chhnang
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
2500
2000
1500
1000
500 y = -1.4126x + 1553.5

R2 = 0.0212
Kompong Thom
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
y = -3.229x + 1725.3
R2 = 0.0994 Krakor
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
33
2500
2000

1500
1000
500
y = 3.1402x + 940.46
R2 = 0.0577 Maung Russey
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
2500
2000
1500
1000
500 y = 1.2919x + 1238.1

R2 = 0.0139
Pursat
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
y = 1.0377x + 1273.3
200 R2 = 0.0091 Siem Reap
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
y = -0.5359x + 1248.4
R2 = 0.0015 Sisophon
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
The trend lines in Figure 13 show both increasing and decreasing trends,
with no obvious geographical pattern. The regression coefficients for the
trend lines are not significantly different from zero, so there is no reason to
believe that there are any “real“ trends in the total annual rainfalls. The
graphs show little tendency for there to be runs of wetter-than-average or
drier-than-average years, although the data have so many gaps that any
periodicity would be difficult to discern, even if it existed.
34
5.3 Geographical patterns in rainfall
A number of more or less different maps of rainfall distribution in Cambodia

have been prepared over the years. The dataset that is now available
provides a more reliable basis for considering rainfall distribution in the
Tonle Sap basin, although the short records and non-standard periods of
record prevent computation of rainfall “normals“ for a common period.
As would be expected, the correlations between annual totals at the eight

long-record stations declines with their distance apart (Table 9). The short
and commonly non-overlapping records of most stations in the Tonle Sap
basin hinder a comprehensive analysis of all stations. “Normalisation“ to a
common period does not appear to be warranted, given the weak
correlations evident in Table 9.
Mean annual rainfalls for all the stations in the Tonle Sap basin have been
computed (Table 10); monthly data are presented in full in the Department
of Meteorology report. Table 10 also shows the period of record for each
station. It re-emphasises the point that most stations have lengths of record
shorter than is required to estimate reliable rainfall statistics, in a climate
characterised by considerable year-to-year variability (see Figure 13).
In Figure 14, which shows the basin-wide distribution of mean annual

rainfalls, there is a clear pattern of declining rainfall towards the northwest.
Stations northwest of the lake have annual totals less than 1,200 mm,
declining to below 1,000 mm at the Thai border. To the west and southwest
of the lake, towards Pailin, annual totals are in the range 1,200-1,350 mm.
Annual totals around the eastern end of the lake are in the range 1,250-
1,700 mm, and then appear to decline again further towards the southeast.
Northeast of the lake, annual totals are in the range 1,350-1,550 mm.
Isohyets have not been drawn on Figure 14, because the variability in the
data is considered to be too great. Furthermore, rainfall monitoring stations
are concentrated around the lake, and data are not available to define
(rather than guess) the presumed rainfall gradients towards the Dangrek
and Cardamom mountains to the north and south. In practice, a rainfall
estimate at a particular location would best be obtained by inspection of the
data for the nearest stations, rather than by reference to an isohyetal map.
The “reliable“ annual rainfall that is received at leat four in five years on
average has been calculated for each station, using the MS-Excel
Function-PERCENTILE capability (Figure 15). Totals are, of course, less
than the mean annual totals (Figure 14), and the geographical pattern has
changed somewhat. Westwards from the lake, “four in five year“ totals
decline from about 1,200 mm to around 1,000 mm at Pailin and 900 mm
towards the Thai border. At the eastern end of the lake there is a zone with
totals of 1,200-1,400 mm; elsewhere, totals are in the range 1,000-1,200
mm, with a possible rain-shadow area to the southwest of Pursat. Again, it
is unrealistic to draw isohyets on Figure 15, and anyone needing data for
design at a particular location should consult the data for nearby stations.
35
Table 9. Correlations between long-record stations. (Correlation coefficients >0.5 are highlighted)
Battam Kampong Kompong Krakor Maung Pursat Siem Sisophon

bang Chhnang Thom Russey Reap
Battambang 1.00
Kampong
Chhnang 0.14 1.00
Kompong Thom 0.33 0.23 1.00
Krakor 0.40 0.72 0.06 1.00
Maung Russey 0.40 0.19 0.47 0.29 1.00
Pursat 0.25 0.07 0.33 0.36 0.60 1.00
Siem Reap 0.05 0.35 -0.09 0.54 -0.10 0.26 1.00
Sisophon 0.72 0.32 0.41 0.48 0.09 0.01 0.27 1.00
36
Table 10. Mean and 20-percentile ("4 in 5 year") annual total rainfalls.
ID Name Province Period of record Annual 20

mean percentile
110405 Kompong Tralach Kompong Chhnang 20-25, 27-28, 30, 61-64, 94, 96-02 1356 1152
110414 Tuol Khpos Kompong Chhnang 00-01
110429 Boeung Leach Kompong Chhnang 00-04 1298
110430 Samaki Meanchey Kompong Chhnang 96-04 1310 1113
120202 Pailin Battambang 60-74, 00-02 1239 1004
120205 Chamlong Kuoy Battambang 61-65, 00-02 1350 1183
120206 Treng Battambang 61-64, 66, 00-01 1261 1196
120213 Rattanak Mondol Battambang 00-02 1285
120301 Tuol Krous Kompong Chhnang 61-65, 01-02 1411 1326
120302 Pursat Pursat 12-23, 26, 28, 30, 34-5, 39-42, 52-64, 73, 81-04 1268 1133
120303 Maung Russey Battambang 35-40, 51-3, 61-4, 93-02, 04 1141 914
120304 Dap Bat Pursat 52-68, 00-02 1325 1122
120305 Raing Kesey Battambang 39-40, 60-70 1207 1014
120306 Leach Pursat 40-2, 61, 63-4
120309 Talo Pursat 62-64, 99-04 1182 910
120311 Cheang Meanchey Battambang 00-02 1227
120312 Kravanh-Leach Pursat 40-42, 61, 63-64, 66, 69, 94-6, 98-04 1568 1234
120313 Peam Pursat 00-02 1279
120320 Boeung Kantout Pursat 94-6, 99-04 1434 1193
120401 Kompong Chhnang Kompong Chhnang 20, 22-5, 27, 29-39, 52-3, 61-74, 82-94, 96-04 1703 1389
120402 Staung Kompong Thom 25, 39-41, 61-4, 97-02 1445 1210
120403 Krakor Pursat 30, 39-43, 46-53, 60-72, 94-6, 99-04 1516 1295
120404 Kompong Thom Kompong Thom 20, 23-5, 27-43, 54-6, 60-7, 69-70, 81-04 1462 1180
120406 Bamnak Pursat 39-42, 61-4, 93, 99-04 1394 1079
120407 Sdoc Ach Romeas Kompong Chhnang 61-64 1483
120410 Boribo Kompong Chhnang 61-64, 03-04 1564
120411 Boeung Por Kompong Chhnang 00-04 1265
120414 Doun Pean Kompong Chhnang 00-02 936
120415 Kompong Leang Kompong Chhnang 94, 96-04 1401 1279
37
mean percentile
120416 Rolear Phear Kompong Chhnang 94, 96-04 1321 1199
120417 Ponley Kompong Chhnang 30, 94, 96-8, 01-04 1490 1328
120418 Pong Ro Kompong Chhnang 00-04 1300
120419 Kraing Tamoung Kompong Chhnang 00-03 1613
120420 Tuk Phos Kompong Chhnang 94, 96-04 1466 1236
120422 Prasat Balaing Kompong Thom 00-02 1697
120423 Stung Chinit Kompong Thom 97-04 1554 1464
120424 Kondal Chrass Kompong Thom 00-04 1458
120425 Prey Prous Kompong Thom 97-04 1307 1191
120426 Boeung Khnar Pursat 94-6, 01-04 1287 1197
120503 Baray Kompong Thom 20, 22, 24-42, 52, 62-4, 97-04 1437 1100
120516 Prasat Sambo Kompong Thom 00-02,04 1411
120517 Taing Kok Kompong Thom 97-04 1298 903
120518 Taing Krasaing Kompong Thom 99-04 1462 1334
130202 Sisophon Banteay Meanchey 32-38, 54, 61-72, 87-96, 00-03 1195 985
130205 Svay Chek Banteay Meanchey 61-70, 88-04 1181 908
130208 Bovel Battambang 66, 00-02 1032
130209 O Chrov Banteay Meanchey 01-03 1026
130210 Komrieng Battambang 00-02 1198
130211 Komping Pouy Battambang 00-02 1220
130212 Roung Chrey Battambang 00-02 926
130215 Samlot Battambang 00-02 2001
130301 Banan Battambang 62, 81-84, 00-02 1095 954
130304 O Taky Battambang 60-64, 00-02 1208 1027
130305 Battambang Battambang 20, 22-40, 51-6, 58, 60-74, 81-95, 00-02, 04 1354 1118
130306 Siem Reap Airport Siem Reap 01
130307 Kralanh Siem Reap 20, 22, 24-5, 27-8, 39, 61-4, 96-04 1181 982
130308 Phnom Srok Banteay Meanchey 38-40, 61-4, 67-68, 99-04 1157 965
130309 Chong Kal Siem Reap 98, 00 1478
130310 Angkor Wat Siem Reap 63-69, 01-02 1414 1237
130311 Sasar Sdam Siem Reap 66-68, 01-02 1110 991
130312 Kauk Patry Siem Reap 81-87, 89-99 1370 1187
38
mean percentile
130313 Tuol Samraung Battambang 34, 36-40, 65-72, 00-02 1285 893
130314 Bac Prea Battambang 33-40 1084 798
130315 Mongkol Borey Banteay Meanchey 39-40, 90-92, 01-04 1085 1036
130316 Pranet Preah Banteay Meanchey 88-92, 01-04 1120 1044
130317 Thmar Pouk Banteay Meanchey 01-04 669
130318 Boeung Raing Battambang 00-02 924
130319 Thmar Kol Battambang 94-6, 98-02 1175 923
130320 Angkor Chum Siem Reap 97-8, 01-04 1203 1016
130321 Prasat Bakong Siem Reap 979, 01-03 1358 1203
130322 Banteay Srey Siem Reap 98, 01-04 712 651
130323 Khum Lvear Siem Reap 01-02 1597
130324 Phnom Krom Siem Reap 01-02 1185
130325 Siem Reap Siem Reap 20, 22-5, 27-8, 30, 39, 50-7, 61-4, 69, 81-99 1312 1190
Koktatry
130326 Srey Snam Siem Reap 01-02, 04 1098
130327 Svay Leu Siem Reap 01-02 1811
130328 Varin Siem Reap 01-04 1289
130329 Srok Pouk Siem Reap 98-99, 04 1351
130403 Phnom Koulen Siem Reap 01-02 1739
130404 Damdek Siem Reap 90-2, 97-9, 01-02 1199 1075
130405 Kompong Kdei Siem Reap 61-70, 92, 96-9, 01-02 1376 1236
130406 Tbeng (Sdau) Battambang 02 2634
130503 Rovieng Preah Vihear 61-62, 69 1414
130505 Sandan Kompong Thom 97-02, 04 1343 1355
581102 Svay Donkeo Pursat 99-04 1051 927
620101 Kompong Thmar Kompong Thom 97-01 1706 1547
Next and following pages:
Figure 14. Mean annual rainfall, Tonle Sap basin.
Figure 15. "Four in five year" annual total rainfall, Tonle Sap basin.
39
40
41
5.4 Seasonal rainfall distribution
The climate of the Tonle Sap basin is strongly seasonal. There is a

pronounced wet season during the southwest monsoon of May-October,
when moisture-laden winds blow in from the Gulf of Thailand, and a cooler
dry season during the northeast monsoon of November-April, when winds
are blowing from the continental interior. Rainfall during the wet season
tends to be convectional, as heating of the ground surface during the day
causes strong up-currents of air, the build-up of cumulo-nimbus clouds, and
intense downpours of rain from these convectional cells. Rainfall during the
wet season also can be associated with large scale weather systems, such
as those that brought widespread heavy rainfall during August 2006.
The seasonal distribution of rainfall is broadly similar for all the stations in
the Tonle Sap basin (Figure 16). There is negligible rain in December to
February, then a rapid increase in March through to May. It is noteworthy
that monthly totals during the core of the wet season, June to October,
appear to vary much more among stations than during the lower rainfall
months of November to May. This, presumably, reflects the unpredictability
of convectional rainfall, and the need for very long periods of record to
“dampen out“ the effects of year-to-year variations in the occurrence of
heavy rainfall events.
Figure 16. Mean monthly rainfall totals for stations with >15 years
record.
350 Bamnak rainfall

(120406)
Dap Bat rainfall
(120304)
300 Kralanh rainfall
(130302)
Kompong Tralach
250 rainfall (110405)
Mean monthly rainfall (mm)
Maung Russey rainfall

(120303)
200 Baray rainfall (120503)
Sisophon rainfall
(130202)
150 Krakor rainfall (120403)
SiemReap Koktatry
100 rainfall (130325)
Kompong Chhnang
rainfall (120401)
50 Kompong Thomrainfall
(120404)
Pursat rainfall (120302)
0 Battambang rainfall
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC (130305)
The year-to-year variability in rainfall in a given month is typified by the data

for Kompong Chhnang (Figure 17). In each month on the graph in Figure
17, the monthly totals for all the years are shown in sequence from 1953 to
2004. The variation in the month of July is particularly notable – from 89
mm in 2001 to 808 mm in 1991.
Perhaps more significant than the year-to-year variability of total rainfall is

that at critical times of the year, particularly in June when land preparation,
production of rice seedlings and initial broadcasting is in full swing. The
42
record of total rainfalls in June at Battambang typifies the unpredictability
and unreliability of rainfall in this month (Figure 18). The monthly totals
range from 42 mm to 276 mm, with an average of 142 mm. There is a
declining, but not statistically significant, trend in June totals over the
period. Other stations can show even more marked variabilty, particularly in
the drier areas around the lake. For the purpose of project design at a
particular location, data for nearby stations should be consulted, in the
MOWRAM Report Rainfall monitoring stations, Tonle Sap Basin.
Figure 17. Total monthly rainfalls at Kompong Chhnang (years during

1953-2004 with continuous records)
900
Kompong Chhnang
800
700
Total monthly rainfall (mm)
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Figure 18. Total June rainfalls, Battambang. Linear trend line

(equation at top right) is shown.
300 y = -0.5294x + 150.13

R2 = 0.0372
250
Total June rainfall (mm)
200
150
100
50
0
1920
1924
1928
1932
1936
1940
1944
1948
1952
1956
1960
1964
1968
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
2000
2004
5.5 Number of raindays
There is a strong correlation between the number of raindays in each

month and the total rainfall in each month, as a comparison of Figure 19
and Figure 13 shows (the complete dataset is in Annex 5). As with monthly
43
total rainfalls, the differences between stations are greatest during the wet
season – perhaps even more so. Of the long-record stations, Battambang
and Kompong Chhnang have the greatest number of raindays during the
wet season, Maung Russey and Kralanh the smallest. Of all stations,
Komrieng (on the Thai border) has the smallest number, an average 43
raindays per year (but only 2.5 years record); Taing Krasaing (Kompong
Thom) has the largest, 163 raindays per year (with 6 years of record).
Again, there is considerable variability in any one month at each station –

from 4 to 24 raindays in May at Kompong Chhnang, for example (Figure
20; zero raindays are shown in May 1920, but this seems questionable and
may be a case of “no observations made“).
Figure 19. Mean monthly raindays for stations with >15 years record.
20 Bamnak rainfall
(120406)
Dap Bat rainfall
18
(120304)
Kralanh rainfall
16 (130302)
Kompong Tralach
14 rainfall (110405)
Maung Russey rainfall
(120303)
Mean monthly raindays
12
Baray rainfall (120503)
10 Sisophon rainfall
(130202)
8 Krakor rainfall (120403)
SiemReap Koktatry
6 rainfall (130325)
Kompong Chhnang
4 rainfall (120401)
Kompong Thomrainfall
(120404)
2
Pursat rainfall (120302)
0 Battambang rainfall
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC (130305)
Figure 20. Total monthly raindays at Kompong Chhnang (years during

1953-2004 with continuous records).
30
Kompong Chhnang
25
Mean annual rainfall (mm)
20
15
10
0
44
5.6 Annual maximum one-day rainfall
Stations with more than 20 complete years of record have been used to
calculate probabilities of occurrence of heavy rainfall (Annex 6). The single
annual maximum (the annual exceedance series) is presented, although, of
course, a given year may have several very heavy rainfall events.
The mean annual maximum daily rainfall (recurrence interval of 2.33 years)
is in the range 75-100 mm (Figure 21). The maximum one-day rainfall
which would occur on average once every ten years is in the range 110-
180 mm, and the 100-year one-day rainfall at Kompong Chhnang can be
estimated (with a little extrapolation) to be approximately 230 mm. Of the
eight stations, Krakor tends to experience the heaviest one-day rainfalls for
a given recurrence interval.
Figure 21. Exceedance intervals of maximum daily rainfalls at long-

record stations.
250
Baray
Battambang
SiemReap
200
Sisophon
Kompong
maximum daily rainfall (mm)
Chhnang
Krakor
150 Maung Russey
Pursat
100
50
0
1 10 100
Exceedance interval in years
6 EVAPORATION
6.1 Significance for water availability
Evaporation is a crtical component of the water balance, because it

reduces the net rainfall that is actually available for crop growth,
groundwater recharge, and streamflow generation. Evaporation records
45
exist for several stations in the Tonle Sap basin; apart from Battambang
and Krakor, records generally are short and/or discontinuous, but provide a
useful basis for estimating evaporation at different places in the basin.
Fortunately, evaporation is a relatively conservative meteorological
measurement, and estimates provided by short periods of observation are
more reliable than rainfall totals estimated from short periods of record.
The evaporation data presented herein have been taken from a number of
consultancy reports (Annex 7; the most thorough study has been that
presented in NWISP Final Report Volume 2 Annex A (March 2003).
6.2 Seasonal variations in evaporation
There is a consistent annual cycle of evaporation throughout the Tonle Sap

basin, with highest monthly values in March-April, as air temperatures are
increasing and insolation remains high, under clear skies (Table 11, Figure
22). As the southwest monsoon establishes, with increasing cloud cover,
more frequent rainfall, and increasing relative humidity, evaporation rates
decline, reaching their lowest values in October/November, at the height of
the wet season.
Table 11. Mean monthly total evaporation (mm), Tonle Sap basin.
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN

Battambang, monthly
evaporation 130 134 158 159 146 132
Battambang, monthly Eto 120 125 161 154 151 131
Siem Reap, monthly Eto 133 129 158 162 158 144
Siem Reap, monthly
evaporation 127 125 159 153 159 142
Stung Chinit, monthly Eto 130 126 155 153 143 123
Krakor, monthly evaporation 105 131 152 132 99 93
Pochentong, monthly Eto 162 174 216 206 191 167
Pochentong, monthly
evaporation 120 129 152 155 129 126
Pursat monthly evaporation 147 159 185 210 179 127
JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR

Battambang, monthly
evaporation 124 115 96 96 96 115 1501
Battambang, monthly Eto 140 124 117 122 113 111 1569
Siem Reap, monthly Eto 140 136 120 124 120 124 1648
Siem Reap, monthly
evaporation 148 144 129 123 113 129 1651
Stung Chinit, monthly Eto 124 124 111 118 114 124 1545
Krakor, monthly evaporation 84 71 54 62 69 81 1133
Pochentong, monthly Eto 153 159 140 133 146 156 2003
Pochentong, monthly
evaporation 134 114 112 112 120 121 1522
Pursat monthly evaporation 125 127 90.8 83 101 123 1657
Source: Nippon Koei (March 2002); NWISP (October, 2002); NWISP (July, 2006); Cargill
Technical Services (December 1997); BRL/Action Nord-Sud/GRET (March 2002); OADA
(March 2005)
46
Of course, there are considerable year-to-year variations in the
meteorological conditions that influence evaporation, so the mean values in
Table 11 and Figure 22 hide variations in evaporation itself. The record of
evaporation measurements at Battambang is sufficiently long, twelve years,
to indicate year-to-year variability at a single station (Figure 23, Table 12).
The at-a-station (year-to-year) variability evident in Figure 23 approaches
the between-station (place-to-place) variability in Figure 22.
Figure 22. Mean monthly total evaporation, Tonle Sap basin.
250
Battambang, monthly evaporation
Battambang, monthly Eto
SiemReap, monthly Eto
Stung Chinit, monthly Eto
Krakor, monthly evaporation
Mean monthly evaporation/ETo (mm)
Pochentong, monthly Eto

200 Pursat monthly evaporation
Pochentong, monthly evaporation
SiemReap, monthly evaporation
150
100
50
0
Figure 23. Mean monthly evaporation, Battambang (data from OADA,

2005).
9 1982 1983
1984 1985
8 1986 1987
1988 1989
1990 1991
Monthly mean evaporation (mm/day)
7 1992 1993
1995 1996
6 1997 1998
1999 MEAN
5
0
47
Table 12. Decadal (10-day) evaporation, Battambang.
Decade Mean evaporation (mm/day) Effective evapo-

ration (mm/day)
20 mean 80 mean 80
percentile percentile percentile
Jan I 4 4.98 6 3.48 4.2
Jan II 4.48 5.37 6 3.76 4.2
Jan III 5 5.75 6.5 4.03 4.55
Feb I 5 6.05 7 4.23 4.9
Feb II 5 6.12 7 4.28 4.9
Feb III 5.5 6.54 7.76 4.58 5.43
Mar I 6 6.65 7.9 4.65 5.53
Mar II 5.28 6.52 7.72 4.56 5.4
Mar III 6 6.76 8 4.73 5.6
Apr I 5.78 7.36 9 5.15 6.3
Apr II 5.7 7.23 8.94 5.06 6.26
Apr III 5.4 7.04 8.54 4.93 5.98
May I 4.66 6.06 7.82 4.24 5.47
May II 4.68 6.22 8 4.35 5.6
May III 4.1 5.77 7.7 4.04 5.39
Jun I 4.66 6.17 7.34 4.32 5.14
Jun II 4.38 6.04 7.6 4.23 5.32
Jun III 4.6 6.03 7 4.22 4.9
Jul I 4 5.77 7.3 4.04 5.11
Jul II 4 5.53 7 3.87 4.9
Jul III 3.9 5.47 6.76 3.83 4.73
Aug I 3.48 5.2 7 3.64 4.9
Aug II 3.44 4.96 6.52 3.47 4.56
Aug III 3.14 5.01 6.5 3.51 4.55
Sep I 3.68 5.41 7 3.79 4.9
Sep II 3.4 4.82 6 3.37 4.2
Sep III 3.16 4.81 6 3.37 4.2
Oct I 3 4.55 5.8 3.19 4.06
Oct II 3 4.36 5.62 3.05 3.93
Oct III 3.3 4.5 5.46 3.15 3.82
Nov I 3.6 4.76 5.8 3.33 4.06
Nov II 3.68 4.46 5.2 3.12 3.64
Nov III 3.38 4.49 5.5 3.15 3.85
Dec I 4 4.67 5.74 3.27 4.02
Dec II 3.5 4.62 6 3.23 4.2
Dec III 4 4.74 5.7 3.32 3.99
Source: Table 5.3, NWISP Final Report, Vol 2, Annex A
6.3 Relationship between evaporation

and rainfall
In general, evaporation in the Tonle Sap basin exceeds rainfall during

December to April/May (Figure 24). (At Pochentong, 40 km southeast of the
Project boundary, evaporation exceeds rainfall in November through to
June). Bearing in mind the year-to-year variability in both rainfall and
evaporation at a given station, the graphs in Figure 24 indicate that there
48
will be considerable uncertainty in any given year regarding exactly when
rainfall will start to exceed evaporation, thus enabling soil moisture to
increase, ground preparation to start, and nurseries to be established.
Figure 24. Mean monthly evaporation and rainfall, Tonle Sap basin.
300
Mean monthly rainfall and evaporation (mm)
Battambang
Mean monthly evaporation (mm)
250 Monthly Eto (mm)
200
150
100
50
0
300
Mean monthly rainfall (mm) West Baray, SiemReap
Mean monthly rainfall and evaporation (mm)
Monthly Eto (mm)

250 Mean monthly evaporation (mm)
200
150
100
50
0
49
Figure 24. Mean monthly evaporation and rainfall, Tonle Sap basin.
(continued).
300
Stung Chinit
Meanmonthlyrainfall andevaporation(mm)
250
200
150
100

50 Mean monthly pan evaporation (mm)
Monthly Eto (mm)
Mean monthly evaporation (mm- factor 0.7)
0
300
Meanmonthlyrainfall andevaporation(mm)
Krakor
Mean monthly evaporation (mm)
250
200
150
100
50
0
250
Meanmonthly rainfall andevaporation(mm)
Pochentong
200
150
100
50 Mean monthly rainfall (mm)

Monthly Eto (mm)
Mean monthly evaporation (mm/day)
0
50
7 ONSET OF RAIN AND LENGTH OF
DRY SPELLS
The onset of rain at the beginning of the wet season is of great significance
to farmers. So too is the (possibly disastrous) occurrence of dry spells at
the beginning of the season, when seedlings do not have a sufficiently well-
developed rooting system to survive if soil moisture declines. The
meteorological stations with the longest records provide a good database
with which to review these two aspects of water availability.
The date of the first rainfall greater than 5 5 mm has been extracted from
the record of daily rainfalls for Battambang, Kompong Chhnang, Krakor,
Pursat, Siem Reap and Kompong Thom (Figure 25). The beginning of the
year was taken to be 1 March; in some years there is significant rain before
then, but farmers will not be able or willing to start farming operations.
There are striking variations at each station in the date of first significant
rainfall, with a range at each station of two to two and a half months. The
median (50 percentile) date is generally in the second half of March, and in
the second week of April at Kompong Chhnang (Table 13). However, the
first significant rain can be as late as mid-May at all stations except
Battambang.
It is difficult to select a useful index of the incidence of dry spells that might
affect farmers, because the impact depends on duration, stage of crop
development, antecedent rainfall, and other weather conditions. A simple
index is the total duration of a period during which daily rainfall is less than
0.5 mm. The median values are 10-15 days, with Siem Reap as high as 19,
but dry spells can last as long as 64 days at Kompong Chhnang (this value
may be spurious – durations that include a complete calendar month of no
rain are suspect, because of the “zero rainfall“ – “no recording made“
uncertainty). The “five-year dry spell“ is about three weeks, except at Siem
Reap, where it is closer to five weeks (Figure 26).
As with other attributes of rainfall, the data on onset of first rain and length
of dry spells emphasise, above all, the substantial variability with which
farmers in the Project area must cope. With regard to spatial differences,
the most obvious one is that Siem Reap tends to have longer dry spells
than the other four stations.
5 Rainfall greater than 5 mm is selected because that is approximately the daily evaporation
rate.
51
Table 13. Summary statistics for date of first rain and dry spell
duration.
Date of First Longest

Siem Reap first rain rainfall dry
>5 mm (mm) spell
(days)
MIN 1-Mar 5
20%ILE 12-Mar 7.1 13
MEDIAN 22-Mar 12.9 19
80%ILE 17-Apr 21.4 32
MAX 11-May 62.0 41
Pursat
MIN 2-Mar 5
20%ILE 11-Mar 8.4 10
80%ILE 6-Apr 28.2 20
MAX 10-May 84.5 29
Kompong Thom
MIN 2-Mar 4
20%ILE 16-Mar 9.7 10
80%ILE 13-Apr 49.9 20
MAX 17-May 295.0 49
Kompong
Chhnang
MIN 5-Mar 5
20%ILE 23-Mar 8.5 8
MEDIAN 10-Apr 15.9 11
80%ILE 22-Apr 36.4 22
MAX 14-May 103.0 64
Battam bang
MIN 1-Mar 6
20%ILE 6-Mar 7.7 10
80%ILE 28-Mar 26.8 22
MAX 1-May 52.2 51
Krakor
MIN 3-Mar 4
20%ILE 15-Mar 6.3 8
80%ILE 17-Apr 32.5 18.2
MAX 10-May 86.9 33
52
Figure 25. Date of first rain >5 mm, long-record stations.
30-May
Battambang
20-May
10-May
Date of first rain >5 mm

30-Apr
20-Apr
10-Apr
31-Mar
21-Mar
11-Mar
1-Mar
1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
30-May
Kompong Chhnang
20-May
10-May
30-Apr
20-Apr
10-Apr
31-Mar
21-Mar
11-Mar
1-Mar
1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
30-May
Kompong Thom
20-May
10-May
30-Apr
20-Apr
10-Apr
31-Mar
21-Mar
11-Mar
1-Mar
1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
53
30-May
20-May
Pursat
10-May

30-Apr
20-Apr
10-Apr
31-Mar
21-Mar
11-Mar
1-Mar
1913 1923 1933 1943 1953 1963 1973 1983 1993 2003
30-May
SiemReap
20-May
10-May
30-Apr
20-Apr
10-Apr
31-Mar
21-Mar
11-Mar
1-Mar
1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990
30-May
20-May
Krakor
10-May
30-Apr
20-Apr
10-Apr
31-Mar
21-Mar
11-Mar
1-Mar
1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
54
Figure 26. Frequency of the durations of longest dry spells.
70
SiemReap
Pursat
60 Kompong Thom
Kompong Chhnang
Duration of longest dry spell (days)

Battambang
50 Krakor
40
.
30
20
10
0
1 10 100
8 GROUNDWATER
MOWRAM has a substantial database of groundwater wells, but it does not
contain information on water availability – well yields, etc. The Ministry of
Rural Development, Department of Rural Water Supply, also has a
substantial database of water wells; the information that it contains on
water levels and well yields has not been updated in recent years (personal
communication from Dr Mao Saray, Director of DoRWS). The ongoing
Tonle Sap Rural Water Supply Project has a component to survey
groundwater availability in the provinces around the Great Lake; this
component should be implemented during 2007. However, it is expected to
include the drilling of only two deep wells per province, so will not provide
comprehensive information on water availability.
Otherwise, the only authoritative information on groundwater availability in

the TSLSP area is for Kompong Chhnang province alone, by the JICA-
supported Study on groundwater development in Central Cambodia
(Kokusai Kogyo Co. Ltd., February 2002). It concluded:
... groundwater potential is low and the water quality is inferior in the alluvial
lowland along the Mekong River and Tonle Sap river of Kg. Cham and Kg.
Chhnang provinces. In the basement rocks of Kg. Chhnang province,
groundwater potential varies from place to place. It is necessary to conduct
a detailed geological and geophysical surveys to evaluate groundwater
potential of the target village.
It summarised groundwater potential as follows (Table 7.1, Kokusai Kogyo

Co. Ltd., February 2002)
55
Region Geology Main aquifer Groundwater potential
Kompong Hill, gentle slope Fissures and Alluvial and Pleistocene
Chhnang and lowland weathered zone aquifers yield small
province composed of of the basement amounts and inferior water
basement rocks, rocks. quality, high in iron and
Pleistocene and salinity. Arsenic is locally
alluvial sediments contained. Basement rock
aquifer has greater yield
and good water quality.
Exploration is difficult.
The report indicates that to explore and develop groundwater,

comprehensive surveys, including drilling and pumping tests, are needed.
The NWISP Final Report Volume 2 Annex A provided a comprehensive

review of geology, hydrogeology, and groundwater availability in much of
the area around Tonle Sap Great Lake (NWISP, 2003, section 8). Of the
TSLSP area, only the eastern part of Kompong Thom province is not
included. There is little purpose in repeating the NWISP hydrogeologist’s
analysis, which was rather clear in its conclusions. As far as TSLSP
requirements are concerned, his appraisal can be summarised in the
following quotations:
There are no reports of artesian aquifers within the project area, but there
have been so few deep wells drilled that there is a distinct possibility of
significant alluvial artesian aquifers still to be discovered. Yields from
existing near-surface wells and boreholes within the project area are most
typically between 0.3 and 0.6 litres per second (one to two cubic metres per
hour). The average failure rate, that is the incidence of dry wells, is about
20%, whilst only about 1% of wells have yields in the order of 10 m3 per
hour, as shown in the distribution nomogram of the Figure below. This
distribution is based upon a combined sample of 368 wells from
Battambang and Siem Reap provinces.
Having been swayed by similar data, the consensus of opinion from several
reports is that deep groundwater is of widespread availability but only
occasionally of sufficient yield to be useful for agriculture. However, the
same sources also admit to this conclusion being provisional pending more
comprehensive investigation. Most available groundwater data is from
boreholes close to the main roads north and south of the Tonle Sap. This
area is sufficiently far ‘downstream’ for sediments to be dominated by clay-
rich lithologies of poor aquifer potential, and hence some hydro-geological
conclusions based upon their results may be unduly pessimistic.
... it is certainly premature to dismiss the groundwater potential over large

parts of the agricultural areas. In fact, the lower aquifer material of this
projects’ test drilling, the geological distribution of older alluvium, and the
possibility of karstic hard rock aquifers in the west of the project area, all
present quite favourable targets for further hydrogeological investigations.
Of all the factors influencing the long-term sustainable use of groundwater,
the ratio of recharge to extraction is the most critical. No recharge
measurements, and few theoretical estimates of recharge are available...
56
30
25
20
Percent
15
10
0
ro
00
00
00
00
0
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
ze
10
00
10
20
30
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7
-8
-9
1-
-1
1
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
1-
1-
1-
01
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
00
00
00
90
10
11
12
Yield Range (litres per hour)
In summary, the chloride mass balance indicates mean annual

groundwater recharge in the order of 100 to 150 mm, whilst the water
balance indicates recharge in the order of 315 to 650 mm. These could be
regarded as lower and upper estimates, but caution is required in their
interpretation in that the water balance indicates recharge down to the
water table, whereas the chloride mass balance is based upon recharge to
deeper levels within the aquifer. Thus both estimates could be
approximately correct, with the proportion of recharge decreasing with
depth. The degree of hydraulic continuity between shallow and deep
aquifers is unknown.
Overall, there is certainly a potential for the existence of deep aquifers with
active recharge, and perhaps even of high yielding artesian aquifers, but
until and unless geophysical and drilling exploration proceeds it is
impossible to make much further progress in assessing groundwater
resources in the northwest provinces.
Neither shallow nor deep aquifers can be assessed adequately from
surface features alone. For example, the distribution of successful and
failed wells in Koah Kralor, ..., follows no discernable pattern of drainage,
vegetation or topographic control. Subsurface geological conditions alone
seem to be the controlling variable.
Following the above comments, the NWISP hydrogeologist discusses the

information required to support groundwater exploitation. Essentially, he
considers that there is little usable information on aquifer dimensions and
properties, and minimal capacity to obtain it – thus:
The necessary data does not yet exist, nor will it become available until and
unless the necessary hydrogeological infrastructure has successfully
operated for a minimum of several years. Large quantities of data, which
are currently being collected and entered into MOWRAM’s groundwater
database, may have application in other directions, but are superficial, and
irrelevant to both computer modeling and hydro-geological resource
57
assessment. There is a prevailing expectation that this database
information, as it currently stands, forms the basis for overall groundwater
assessment and management. This is not the case. Rather, it will require
considerable sustained effort and a committed ground-water investigation
program over several years to provide the hard data necessary for anything
more than a superficial groundwater assessment.
In summary, for TSLSP purposes, the available information is not sufficient

to establish whether the groundwater resource at a particular location
would be sufficient to support agricultural development. The NWISP
hydrogeologist emphasised that to obtain sufficient data on groundwater for
project planning and design purposes would require a sustained, long-term
effort. Even when the groundwater survey planned for the Tonle Sap Rural
Water Supply Project is completed, the potential for groundwater use will
need to be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
Given this level of uncertainty, it appears that any reliance on groundwater

use for agricultural purposes 6 would be unwise. Many other countries have
over-exploited groundwater resources with severe consequences, and a
conservative approach is advisable in the Tonle Sap lowlands, until there is
adequate information on actual groundwater availability.
9 WATER USE
An important component of the water balance in a river basin is water
abstraction for consumptive use. There are no data to quantify the total
volume that is abstracted from the rivers and aquifers of the Tonle Sap
basin. The National Water Sector Profile estimated that 700 MCM of water
are used for irrigated agriculture each year, nation-wide, a small fraction of
the estimated 500 BCM of water available. However, such “global” figures
are of little value for sub-project selection and planning. The key issue is
whether there is sufficient water in a particular sub-basin/aquifer system to
meet existing plus proposed demands at critical times of year, without
harming other uses of the water resource. The critical times are, of course,
not the periods during the wet season when there is abundant water, but
times during the farming calendar, particularly at the beginning of the wet
season, when access to water is essential for crop growth but water
availability is most unreliable.
Recent and planned future work, supported by Mekong River Commission,

to provide a comprehensive inventory of irrigation systems provides
information on the locations and command areas of irrigation systems on
the southern side of the Tonle Sap Great Lake (personal communication
from the Director of the Department of Water Resources Management and
Conservation). Several river basins included in the TSLSP area are
included. The inventory will not, when it is published, provide information on
the actual quantities of water abstracted (or returned) by these systems
(many of which are not fully functional). However, command areas could,
with some assumptions on rates of seepage and evapotranspiration, be
used to estimate likely consumptive use. At the stage of assessing sub-
6 Groundwater use for domestic purposes, including cultivation of vegetables and high value
crops using water-efficient technology such as drip irrigation, is a different matter.
58
project feasibility and carrying out design, this inventory may prove helpful
in deciding whether competition for water with existing users may present
difficulties for a proposed sub-project.
The four basin studies being carried out under the Northwest Irrigation
Sector Project (see Section 2) will provide the first authoritative information
on water use and basin water balance in Cambodia. The results will be
available by December 2006, and should be of great value to the TSLSP.
10 OVERVIEW OF WATER
AVAILABILITY
It is commonly stated that Cambodia is a “water wealthy“ country, and at
the national scale, year-round, this may be true. However, even along the
Mekong River, water is abundant only for part of the year, during the wet
season. For a significant portion of the year, however, many parts of
Cambodia are water-short, and even the small volumes needed for
domestic water supply are difficult to supply. This is, of course, the reason
for a Project in the Tonle Sap basin that aims inter alia to enhance water
management for agricultural purposes.
The analysis in this report leads to several basic conclusions:
1. Mean annual rainfall in the project area is generally in the range

1,000-1,700 mm, but with considerable year-to-year variability.
Rainfall tends to be greatest at the eastern end of the Great Lake
and to decline towards the northwest. Rainfall is highly seasonal in
nature, with negligible rain in December to February, a rapid
increase in March through to May, and the bulk of rainfall during
June to October. Again, there is substantial variability from year-to-
year at a given location, largely because rain tends to fall from
convectional cells that cover only small areas. The date of the first
significant rain in the farming year tends to be in the second half of
March, but in can be at any time during March through to mid-May.
For a given project location, reference to neighbouring rainfall
stations should provide the most reliable indication of the rainfall
regime.
2. Evaporation generally exceeds rainfall during December to
April/May. As with rainfall, there is considerable year-to-year
variability at a given station, in response to variations in cloudiness,
temperature, etc. The considerable variability in rainfall and
evaporation, taken together, mean that there is great uncertainty
regarding the exact time at which rainfall starts to exceed
evaporation, at the beginning of the wet season. Evaporation data
are available at several locations around the Great Lake, and
provide a basis for estimating evaporation at a given location.
Meteorological data are in principle available from the Department
of Meteorology, and might be obtainable from there if calculation of
potential evapotranspiration is required.
3. River flows similarly are highly seasonal, with a peak generally in
September-October. They show a great deal of variability from year
to year, particularly at the beginning of the wet season, where
average monthly flow during June can range over two orders of
59
magnitude. Such variability or unpredictability means that rivers in
the project area provide a very poor basis for agricultural water
management that depends on run-of-river flows (i.e. without
storage).
4. Even when the effect of drainage area is factored out, flow volumes
vary widely between rivers, as a result of differences in drainage
basin characteristics and catchment rainfall. In principle, a model to
account for these differences could be developed, but this would
require a significant research effort. In the meantime, it is difficult to
provide an objective means of estimating flows in basins for which
there are no discharge observations, and extrapolation on the basis
of judgement will be necessary.
5. Peak flow measurements are suspect above the level of,
approximately, the mean annual flood, particularly for basins with
drainage areas greater than 3,000 to 4,000 km2. The Halcrow
(1994) report equations for estimating mean annual flood and less
frequent floods are broadly consistent with the data presented here-
in. Any requirement for estimating peak flows should draw on data
from nearby or similar stations, and reference to estimates made for
other projects such as Stung Chinit.
6. There is little information available on groundwater availability, but
the indications are that there is insufficient groundwater to support
agricultural use (except for water-efficient irrigation of household or
high value crops). Because of the great uncertainty about
groundwater availability, and the risk of over-extraction, reliance on
groundwater would be unwise until more information has been
assembled.
7. There is even less information available on consumptive water use,
a significant component of the river basin/aquifer water balance.
This situation will be remedied in part by the river basin studies
being carried out by NWISP, and recent and planned inventories of
irrigation systems in the Tonle Sap basin should provide a basis for
estimating current and potential water demand.
A further conclusion is of a somewhat different nature to the others, but

of crucial importance to water resources development and management
in the future.
8. The natural variability of the climate and hydrology of the Tonle Sap
basin is such that long (at least 20 year) records of weather, rainfall
and river flows are necessary to provide confidently usable
estimates of hydrological statistics. Very few stations have such
lengths of record, and the reliability of data is generally low. Little
can be done to remedy past difficulties with data collection, or to
improve the quality of observations that already have been made.
However, to provide a basis for future analysis and cost-efficient
planning and design of water management, it is essential that the
RGC sustains into the future a programme of hydrometeorological
data collection, to international standards of data quality.
Finally, the analysis demonstrates that there is, indeed, abundant water in
the Tonle Sap basin – after all, a mean annual rainfall of more than 1,000
mm is much greater than many parts of the world receive. However, water
frequently is not available when and where it is required. Consequently, it is
60
considered that water availability is not a factor that controls whether
or not a potential sub-project can be considered, but does influence
what type of project is possible. Some points to consider include:
Commonly, water management for agriculture is assumed, in

Cambodia, to mean the abstraction of water from a river to provide
supplementary irrigation of nearby paddy fields, on a run-of-river
basis. However, the variability – and unreliability – of river flows
indicates that reliance on run-of-river abstraction provides a very
uncertain basis for agriculture. River hydrographs show numerous
peaks throughout the wet season, in response to rainfall events. An
abstraction system that included a temporary storage area between
the off-take and the command area would provide the capacity to
harvest such peak flows, for subsequent use. The storage capacity
would need to be sufficient only to hold water from one peak flow to
the next – that is, it would not need to be large.
The analysis emphasizes how variable – and unreliable – is the
rainfall (and river flows) at the beginning of the wet season, when
farmers are establishing crops. A key aim of water management
should be to reduce the uncertainty and risk of crop loss due to
delays in significant rainfall or the incidence of dry spells just when
crops are established. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that water
storage is needed, if farmers are to have confidence that crops,
once planted, will grow to maturity. The volume of water need not
be great – just sufficient to enable continued crop growth through
such adverse events.
Rainfall in the Tonle Sap basin is, in total and on average, more
than sufficient for productive rain-fed agriculture. Again, however,
variability and unpredictability are a severe hindrance to farmers,
particularly because the bulk of rain tends to fall in intense
downpours and runs off rather than entering the soil. There is great
scope for harvesting and storing runoff, and for slowing the rate of
runoff so that the water can soak into the soil or recharge aquifers.
Simple, appropriate technology apparently has been in common use
in Cambodia’s history, and is in widespread use in other countries.
Groundwater does not appear to be available in the quantities
required for even supplementary irrigation of rice, but it may well be
available in sufficient quantities for irrigation of household or high
value crops (vegetables, fruit trees, etc.), using water-efficient
techniques such as drip lines. The technology for this is available in
Cambodia, and would be suited to the TSLSP area.
The above points are not comprehensive, but emphasise that a variety of
approaches to agricultural water management are possible. A combination
of approaches, different from place to place depending on local conditions,
has the potential to make effective use of the available water in the Project
area.
61
ANNEX 1. TOTAL MONTHLY
VOLUMETRIC DISCHARGES
(Based on data presented in Department of Hydrology & River Works

Report, River Flow monitoring stations, Tonle Sap Basin, August 2006,
MOWRAM)
62
Stung Pursat at Bac Trakoun (580103) - Total monthly discharge (MCM)
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Annual
1994 369.80 375.16 79.47 21.45
1995 4.71 2.56 2.52 9.38 10.04 30.02 130.55 527.32 768.48 949.39 392.84 40.23 2868.20
1996 35.52 24.60 17.76 22.45 98.83 313.24 444.19 367.13 792.45 1499.40 784.42 377.49 4789.06
1997 80.35 33.63
2001 52.50 14.78 147.37 27.60 41.46 101.19 179.91 213.92 242.33 768.38 159.28 38.73 1987.40
2002 17.68 5.88 2.17 14.41 31.15 27.71 42.00 155.51 223.51 278.04 172.47 60.51 1030.91
2003 15.32 38.80 31.18 37.07 59.30 26.80 293.58 244.65 294.27 1116.17 86.68 45.08 2321.05
2005 0.19 15.24 17.06 20.58 106.47 306.17 260.29 497.59
Data 186 169 151 163 173 180 186 186 194 217 180 186 2171
Months 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 6 6
MEAN 34.35 20.04 33.53 21.03 42.97 86.59 199.45 302.45 421.59 783.45 279.19 97.25 2599.32
MAX 80.35 38.80 147.37 37.07 98.83 313.24 444.19 527.32 792.45 1499.40 784.42 377.49 4789.06
MIN 4.71 2.56 0.19 9.38 10.04 20.58 42.00 155.51 223.51 278.04 79.47 21.45 1030.91
20 PERCENTILE 15.32 5.88 2.17 14.41 17.06 26.80 106.47 213.92 245.92 399.65 86.68 38.73 1796.10
80 PERCENTILE 52.50 33.63 31.18 27.60 59.30 101.19 293.58 367.13 688.74 1082.81 392.84 60.51 3252.37
63
Stung Sangke at Battambang (550102) - Total monthly discharge (MCM)
Year JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Annual
1962 9.54 35.25 135.90 362.55 497.06 355.18 238.65 193.10 82.23
1963 12.48 6.46 9.16
1972 20.17 7.26 36.62 100.90 279.76 342.22 346.69 343.93 140.48
1973 2.92 2.72 8.44 170.99 213.15 317.69 208.50 481.02
1981 110.75 208.24 138.18 328.21 341.63 260.50 174.91
1982 8.90 12.53 14.49 14.06 38.93 155.45 294.70 255.99 269.85 144.79 39.93
1983 9.70 6.12 5.54 4.41 6.32 21.10 66.77 384.08 265.06 743.63 402.69 83.49 1924.01
1984 20.33 7.55 6.13 7.67 9.32 153.84 91.65 330.38 364.23 425.92 172.55 47.01 1631.67
1985 9.08 4.98 5.09 8.74 27.08 287.38 209.75 326.74 329.52 496.98 176.41 48.21 1928.43
1986 13.47 6.51 320.20 397.28 317.28 133.62 33.56
1987 4.50 1.50 2.20 2.31 2.71 31.18 241.00 235.64 159.04 247.43 79.63
1988 4.45 2.00 1.96 2.10 28.63 73.25 56.25
1997 7.18 9.56 17.95 75.63 429.11 480.02 417.57 430.31 217.24 44.06
1998 11.41 5.18 4.45 4.20 5.95 15.71 33.91 50.92 183.85 161.21 44.74
1999 6.45 3.99 4.47 40.25 141.63 276.80 225.98 331.93 209.12 381.99 401.19 103.31 2117.64
2000 27.08 8.44 7.29 39.50 73.39 83.88 337.75 302.20 613.16 728.52 357.18 109.47 2763.18
2001 26.28 6.80 30.05 9.56 53.27 113.40 284.58 455.44 436.23 558.53 299.87 89.35 2363.31
2002 20.54 5.15 4.90 10.26 38.03 39.53 100.52 325.13 490.07 495.26 209.95 60.24 1799.44
2003 13.39 4.69 11.78 8.74 18.70 34.27 196.11 426.67 313.17 335.23 84.24 24.75 1469.26
2004 8.57 4.54 4.21 6.04 52.76 162.88 76.84 308.47 239.66 308.77 92.79 18.45 1280.36
2005 4.63 2.71 3.11 5.42 4.37 20.79 179.48 417.19 263.45
Data 465 452 484 532 583 550 526 552 561 517 516 440 6178
Months 15 16 17 18 19 19 18 19 19 17 18 15
MEAN 12.82 5.35 7.23 11.43 34.52 104.23 181.05 337.78 329.55 391.67 232.09 66.94 1919.70
MAX 27.08 8.90 30.05 40.25 141.63 287.38 429.11 497.06 613.16 743.63 481.02 140.48 2763.18
MIN 4.45 1.50 1.96 2.10 2.71 15.71 33.91 50.92 183.85 159.04 44.74 18.45 1280.36
20 PERCENTILE 6.09 3.99 3.33 4.28 6.88 33.03 82.77 299.20 238.05 262.37 138.09 38.66 1566.71
80 PERCENTILE 20.37 6.80 8.79 12.80 52.97 166.13 261.14 420.98 405.39 496.63 351.88 92.14 2215.91
64
Stung Boribo at Boribo (590101) - Total monthly discharges (MCM)
1962 1.43 10.04 20.55 39.32 56.76 147.90 161.51 42.04 15.88
1963 5.17 1.23 2.01
1998 8.63 18.21 51.56 145.26 112.36 104.35
1999 11.60 16.06 5.65 9.41 122.62 125.53 77.91 56.76 154.48 146.91 172.58 74.73 974.15
2000 21.16 16.34 6.86 15.94 14.89 66.15 143.99 133.52 83.33 231.31 87.30 21.16 839.49
2001 25.79 9.63 18.72 14.77 7.53 32.76 21.29 59.97 162.75 146.32 53.16 12.88 565.76
2002 17.78 29.95 30.24 21.07 30.11 27.79 25.15 70.01 148.13 115.76 59.23 18.72 594.14
2003 34.36 33.41 37.34 32.69 12.56 14.02 27.27 17.97 79.99 134.88 33.51 39.61 497.64
2004 36.61 10.62 14.09 15.94 12.51 31.34 33.94 64.55 123.53 124.81 20.45 27.19 514.04
2005 19.55 13.16 13.12 52.64 21.94 30.69 67.55 28.50
Data 248 226 248 240 247 270 277 277 229 235 233 217 2947
Months 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 8 8 8 8
MEAN 21.50 16.30 16.00 20.49 29.02 39.72 50.51 59.95 130.67 146.73 71.58 30.02 664.20
MAX 36.61 33.41 37.34 52.64 122.62 125.53 143.99 133.52 162.75 231.31 172.58 74.73 974.15
MIN 5.17 1.23 2.01 1.43 7.53 8.63 18.21 17.97 79.99 112.36 20.45 12.88 497.64
20 PERCENTILE 14.07 10.03 6.13 11.56 11.03 17.94 23.61 42.33 99.41 119.38 36.93 16.45 514.04
80 PERCENTILE 30.94 24.50 25.63 28.04 26.84 46.12 71.70 66.74 151.94 155.67 97.53 37.13 839.49
65
Stung Pursat at Khum Viel (580104) - Total monthly discharge (MCM)
1995 19.74 37.38 100.55 464.81 688.72 835.07 335.43 101.32
1996 43.18 16.71 14.84 29.50 99.88 287.19 413.25 381.62 636.39 1052.24 661.50 327.25 3952.72
1997 47.78 28.74
1998
1999 28.10 16.50 14.12 107.54 453.27 327.65 319.40 331.91 488.83 872.46 711.40 205.59 3886.81
2000 40.20 20.47 32.11 139.89 197.26 232.09 514.82 402.11 381.05 938.43 403.57 112.41 3404.94
2001 42.27 18.26 41.43 29.83 37.07 67.55 154.68 210.90 227.27 751.93 169.62 36.08 1786.83
2002 17.70 12.63 11.44 19.98 24.61 27.42 44.09 142.41 200.34 260.69 173.59 58.42 993.38
2003 36.59 20.88 24.56 18.01 41.03 143.21 361.26 220.73 248.37 866.38 109.72 35.38 2126.16
2004 13.61 9.10 8.68 8.19 11.38 169.49 183.58 246.14 211.30 323.68 88.93 44.78 1315.68
2005 16.34 11.90 12.08 18.30 38.84 32.45 81.24 259.62 194.17 398.25 265.27 43.85 1372.45
Data 279 254 248 240 279 270 279 279 270 279 270 279 3226
Months 9 9 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
MEAN 31.75 17.24 19.91 46.41 102.56 147.16 241.43 295.58 364.05 699.90 324.34 107.23 2354.87
MAX 47.78 28.74 41.43 139.89 453.27 327.65 514.82 464.81 688.72 1052.24 711.40 327.25 3952.72
MIN 13.61 9.10 8.68 8.19 11.38 27.42 44.09 142.41 194.17 260.69 88.93 35.38 993.38
20 PERCENTILE 17.16 12.34 11.69 18.13 22.66 35.41 92.82 216.80 206.91 368.42 145.66 40.74 1338.39
80 PERCENTILE 42.63 20.63 29.09 76.46 138.83 254.13 382.06 389.81 547.85 898.85 506.75 149.69 3694.06
66
Stung Staung at Kompong Chen (600101) - Total monthly discharges
(MCM)
1962 1.6 10.2 41.8 222.7 147.9 241.8 159.3 23.5 10.0
1963 2.9 1.1 0.8
1997 19.3 9.1 33.2 71.4 126.1 144.9 222.9 50.1 4.8
1998 1.9 1.0 0.5 0.5 3.2 5.1 9.2 244.6 233.9 284.4 19.1
1999 0.6 0.3 40.7 204.8 135.2 289.7 307.2 470.0
2000 187.0 155.3 194.1 282.7 88.8 8.5
2001 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.4 2.9 4.5 4.6 83.5 232.3 220.1 44.0 5.3 648.4
2002 0.7 0.7 0.5 1.0 3.4 15.3 2.8 187.2 344.1 166.4 25.9 4.0 752.1
2003 0.3 0.2 0.2 19.2 17.4 202.9 68.4 4.1 0.7
2004 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.6 0.7 44.7 21.9 102.9 54.0 85.5 5.4 0.7 317.3
2005 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.5 114.7 12.4
Data 248 202 211 232 248 227 277 277 210 230 231 217 2810
Months 8 8 7 8 8 8 10 10 9 8 8 7
MEAN 1.0 0.6 0.6 8.1 29.3 35.0 94.3 138.4 235.3 186.2 32.6 4.9 572.6
MAX 2.9 1.1 0.9 40.7 204.8 135.2 289.7 307.2 470.0 284.4 88.8 10.0
MIN 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.5 2.8 12.4 54.0 68.4 4.1 0.7
20 PERCENTILE 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.5 1.6 4.7 8.2 70.3 174.4 115.0 10.9 1.4
80 PERCENTILE 1.5 0.8 0.8 12.2 9.7 43.5 194.2 198.7 282.7 258.8 47.7 7.9
67
Stung Chikreng at Kompong K'dei (570101) - Total monthly discharges (MCM)
1962 0.3 2.1 24.2 199.5 129.3 321.8 196.3 50.0 10.4
1963 2.2 0.9 1.6
1997 20.0 15.5 43.1 31.9 81.1 15.2 7.4
1998 4.6 1.6 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.2 1.1 2.1 28.1 44.1 7.3
1999 5.6 2.7 3.0 1.1 19.8 64.0 102.2 7.3
2000 5.4 2.4 0.3 0.2 11.5 4.3 7.4 30.7 89.4 121.3 15.1
2001 6.8 3.4 1.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 15.1 58.7 101.3 27.0 7.8 221.7
2002 5.5 1.6 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 10.7 154.3 80.2 17.9 8.5 211.9
2003 5.8 1.8 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 4.9 15.2 8.4 5.9 44.5
2004 1.8 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.5 5.0 20.1 28.5 8.3 6.6 74.4
2005 4.4 2.2 0.4 0.7 1.3 2.6 1.4 72.1 53.9 13.8 9.6
Data 275 254 248 256 248 270 275 276 282 294 298 248 3224
Months 9 9 8 9 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 8
MEAN 4.7 1.9 0.9 0.3 1.9 6.1 25.3 26.4 80.1 78.6 26.5 7.9 138.1
MAX 6.8 3.4 3.0 1.1 11.5 24.2 199.5 129.3 321.8 196.3 102.2 10.4
MIN 1.8 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.4 4.9 15.2 7.3 5.9
20 PERCENTILE 3.5 1.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 1.8 20.1 41.0 8.4 6.9
80 PERCENTILE 5.7 2.5 1.5 0.4 1.5 10.6 10.6 35.7 102.4 105.3 31.6 9.1
68
Stung Sen at Kompong Putrea (610102) - total monthly discharge (MCM)
1965 5.9 3.7 3.1 4.7 77.6 187.0 432.2 585.8 1326.0 561.3 22.4 9.8 3219.2
1966 7.3 4.9 27.3 40.1 372.0 98.3 1063.8 3185.0 2531.2 465.1 44.8 19.8 7859.7
1967 13.2 6.4 5.0 255.8 101.5 219.3 169.1 1053.0 1839.2 862.6 30.7 10.2 4565.8
1968 6.8 4.7 3.6 3.8 53.4 168.4 215.0 1055.0 1564.9 760.4 16.8 8.8 3851.2
1969 6.1 4.3 3.2 19.5 28.0 302.4 867.6 589.9 1611.8 1406.0 199.4 6.6 5044.8
1999 211.9 500.3 1156.0 472.2 552.8 796.8 1383.0 704.3 119.5
2000 2.8 1.4 371.6 544.9 1053.5 2327.7 1790.1 2031.0 1312.6 1194.2 905.5
2001 670.7 6.9 162.8 572.1 1312.5 2237.1
2002 65.7 0.8 13.7 128.9 409.4 560.6 1485.3 2499.3 1454.6 458.5 208.0
2003 30.4 11.9 2.7 46.8 45.9 318.6 1029.4 1343.6 1540.5 995.0 738.8 572.1 6961.6
2004 399.1 194.2
Data 306 214 182 246 299 300 304 301 249 274 270 279 3224
Months 10 9 6 10 10 10 10 10 9 9 9 9
MEAN 120.8 25.8 7.5 97.5 201.5 448.5 845.0 1387.8 1749.0 1022.3 378.9 206.7 5250.4
MAX 670.7 194.2 27.3 371.6 544.9 1156.0 2327.7 3185.0 2531.2 1454.6 1194.2 905.5 7859.7
MIN 2.8 0.8 2.7 3.8 28.0 98.3 169.1 552.8 796.8 465.1 16.8 6.6 3219.2
20 PERCENTILE 6.1 2.7 3.1 6.4 51.9 183.3 388.7 589.1 1454.7 680.7 27.4 9.4 3851.2
80 PERCENTILE 132.4 8.6 5.0 220.7 397.7 668.4 1113.6 1879.5 2218.3 1392.2 718.1 353.6 6961.6
69
Stung Chinit at Kompong Thmar (620101) - Total monthly discharges
(MCM)
1962 10.7 24.7 77.1 348.4 372.9 517.2 649.5 143.7 75.1
1963 44.4 22.3 13.7
1997 41.5 36.3 61.1 139.3 373.9 328.5 419.8 140.1 61.3
1998 36.0 20.8 14.1 11.0 17.4 19.3 48.8 104.9 184.3 481.2 179.6
1999 50.8 23.6 16.1 40.8 186.0 280.0 234.2 380.4 331.3 505.6
2000 113.4 45.9 63.6 111.3 314.7 558.5 559.4 615.1 627.2 293.1 144.8
2001 83.6 48.6 80.2 45.7 79.6 91.8 199.2 211.9 413.9 667.3 295.9 120.7 2338.7
2002 66.3 41.5 29.6 24.7 30.7 109.4 107.5 188.9 433.8 448.7 168.5 80.1 1740.2
2003 44.1 26.9 33.5 25.3 40.6 81.2 137.1 237.0 316.5 347.0 98.5 50.2 1438.0
Data 213 168 215 236 248 240 248 248 240 248 210 186 2700
Months 7 6 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 6
MEAN 62.7 30.6 33.3 32.9 65.8 129.3 221.6 303.7 392.6 518.3 188.5 88.7 1839.0
MAX 113.4 48.6 80.2 63.6 186.0 314.7 558.5 559.4 615.1 667.3 295.9 144.8 2338.7
MIN 36.0 20.8 13.7 10.7 17.4 19.3 48.8 104.9 184.3 347.0 98.5 50.2 1438.0
20 PERCENTILE 44.2 22.3 14.5 16.5 27.1 67.5 119.3 198.1 321.3 431.4 140.8 61.3 1558.9
80 PERCENTILE 80.2 41.5 43.4 44.0 98.6 211.7 302.8 377.8 483.8 640.5 270.4 120.7 2099.3
70
Sen River at Kompong Thom (610101) - Total monthly discharges (MCM)
1961 210.4 544.8 1232.3 1882.6 2117.8 1730.9 351.5 103.4
1962 44.7 20.4 19.7 16.8 88.6 720.9 1526.6 1848.2 1503.2 1819.7 188.0 110.1 7906.7
1963 62.4 22.4 9.9 15.7 17.9 80.9 478.3 1159.6 1824.2 1125.7 139.0 77.7 5013.6
1964 37.7 17.6 13.7 13.3 222.7 524.8 466.7 1021.2 1158.1 289.1 163.0 85.9 3258.9
1965 44.1 18.9 13.9 13.1 51.5 225.7 707.5 1023.2 1667.7 653.0 100.6 59.6 4579.0
1966 18.9 18.5 28.1 49.0 416.4 165.4 895.4 2219.1 2175.4 1009.2 101.7 28.6 7125.6
1967 13.5 18.5 18.1 190.0 161.5 306.0 354.0 1028.2 1884.6 1310.6 77.2 14.2 5376.3
1968 20.7 20.6 17.7 17.0 74.9 350.4 373.9 1219.8 1663.1 857.9 39.7 22.1 4665.1
1969 22.3 16.3 15.9 13.8 65.2 311.6 1031.8 997.2 1471.8 1751.4 215.0 36.4 5948.6
1970 48.0 20.0 15.3 14.2
1981 32.4 256.4 414.9 1106.4 1321.5 1515.1 650.8 264.3
1982 85.2 21.3 12.6 74.3 29.6 100.9 1076.6 555.1 2013.6 1756.5 604.5 246.1 6576.5
1983 68.2 21.4 15.7 11.7 15.6 89.4 922.8 1626.4 1449.9 2189.7 1177.8 401.0 7989.6
1984 128.0 34.3 16.8 14.5 62.8 397.0 303.3 953.6 2152.3 1952.6 799.0 264.8 7059.6
1985 81.3 21.3 14.4 17.4 180.2 398.7 505.9 1059.0 1293.8 1464.0 584.7 248.2 5868.8
1986 84.9 21.3 13.0 10.8 29.6 245.0 442.5 1494.2 2081.5 1796.2 570.1 233.3 7022.4
1987 63.4 18.2 13.8 12.0 17.7 55.7 259.6 131.3 1622.7 1436.7 497.9 182.3 4317.3
1988 51.6 15.5 10.5 21.4 26.1 183.0 283.2 778.3 650.8 1782.0 599.4 132.2 4706.4
1989 35.5 13.5 12.5 12.5 25.6 49.7 267.5 933.8 1673.1 1380.9 428.1 158.8 4991.8
1990 42.8 15.2 18.7 15.0 15.3 518.8 384.6 1657.0 1754.7 2050.6 955.3 331.9 7779.6
1991 103.1 26.9 15.0 12.5 12.1 104.4 146.4 696.5 1918.5 2148.4 893.1 303.3 6393.0
1992 97.1 28.5 17.3 14.4 21.7 92.9 58.3 971.9 2022.8 1479.8 303.7 109.7 5203.8
1993 32.5 15.3 16.2 17.6 25.7 147.6 1150.0 626.0 1353.2 1288.1 400.9 146.5 5233.4
1994 43.0 16.1 15.4 19.9 28.5 182.1 492.9 826.9 1942.6 1869.4 648.5 231.1 6316.7
1995 72.5 19.6 13.3 12.0 16.6 39.4 101.2 732.6 1795.4 2182.1 967.2 344.1 6296.2
1996 110.3 28.8 12.8 11.9 94.9 395.5 199.3 731.9 1326.1 2110.2 1787.9 641.1 7430.5
1997 224.2 65.4 21.8 18.5 25.2 86.5 594.4 1818.3 1661.9 2171.6 640.2 229.5 7205.0
1998 68.4 19.0 13.0 10.8 15.5
1999 32.3 13.7 12.5 44.5 248.5 409.1 1026.0
2000 163.0 45.5 1980.8 1960.5 2223.4 2294.9 1345.1 483.4
2001 164.9 46.4 29.8 19.8 41.0 218.3 1285.4 1798.6 2098.6 2120.1 1233.3 420.7 9476.9
2002 142.0 40.4 19.6 16.0 28.4 191.5 247.0 1181.3 2066.9 2069.7 807.6 321.9 7132.2
71
2003 110.6 31.3 18.6 19.1 18.9 68.0 99.3 357.4 1354.1 1096.8 364.3 131.6 3670.2
Data 960 875 922 892 939 870 960 930 905 913 900 929 10995
Months 31 31 30 30 31 29 31 30 31 30 30 30
MEAN 74.8 24.3 16.2 25.0 74.9 243.2 603.0 1146.5 1686.1 1623.4 587.8 212.1 6094.2
MAX 224.2 65.4 29.8 190.0 416.4 720.9 1980.8 2219.1 2223.4 2294.9 1787.9 641.1 9476.9
MIN 13.5 13.5 9.9 10.8 12.1 39.4 58.3 131.3 650.8 289.1 39.7 14.2 3258.9
20 PERCENTILE 35.5 16.3 12.9 12.4 17.9 88.3 259.6 732.4 1353.2 1255.7 183.0 84.3 4763.5
80 PERCENTILE 110.3 28.8 18.6 19.8 94.9 396.1 1031.8 1685.3 2066.9 2112.2 905.5 323.9 7190.5
Stung Sreng at Kralanh (540101) - Mean monthly discharge (MCM)

1962 2.3 7.7 23.4 106.6 220.5 369.7 524.6 86.1 20.9
1963 10.3 5.0 1.9
1998 3.3 2.3 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.0 19.1 54.6 80.1 207.7 80.4
1999 3.7 2.3 2.3 4.1 110.8 246.6
2000 2.2 8.9 34.8 226.4 422.3 397.0 438.0 463.6 237.5 41.1
2001 9.6 3.0 2.8 2.7 3.3 3.0 39.5 191.9 361.3 431.4 383.5 38.3 1470.2
2002 7.2 2.7 2.7 2.4 3.6 10.5 58.8 68.8 420.7 414.6 166.2 52.7 1211.0
2003 7.9 2.4 2.8 3.1 3.1 3.5 6.6 7.1 102.9 357.2 101.6 13.1 611.2
2004 3.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.5 51.9 34.1 309.7 363.0 207.1 34.0 16.4 1025.6
2005 6.3 3.3 2.7 2.2 2.3 5.4 46.3 78.9 225.5 310.2 160.0 8.5 851.5
Data 248 225 272 270 279 270 248 246 240 248 240 217 3003
Months 8 8 9 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 7
MEAN 6.4 2.9 2.4 3.3 18.9 63.6 91.6 166.1 295.1 364.6 156.1 27.3 1033.9
MAX 10.3 5.0 2.8 8.9 110.8 246.6 422.3 397.0 438.0 524.6 383.5 52.7 1470.2
MIN 3.1 2.1 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0 6.6 7.1 80.1 207.1 34.0 8.5 611.2
20 PERCENTILE 3.5 2.3 2.1 2.2 2.4 3.3 25.1 60.3 151.9 248.7 82.7 13.8 803.4
80 PERCENTILE 8.9 3.2 2.7 3.5 18.5 121.7 87.4 274.0 400.3 450.7 209.0 40.5 1262.8
72
Stung Dauntry at Mong Russey (551101) - Total monthly discharge
(MCM)
2001 1.1 3.0 2.0 5.0 35.3 19.8 3.1
2002 0.7 4.1 4.0 6.5 11.0 2.9 1.1 13.0 5.9 11.7 25.5 6.5 93.3
Data 31 9 31 30 29 53 51 38 59 43 60 62 496
Months 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
MEAN 0.7 4.1 4.0 6.5 11.0 2.0 2.0 7.5 5.5 23.5 22.7 4.8
MAX
MIN
20 PERCENTILE
80 PERCENTILE
Mongkol Borey River at Mongkol Borey (520101) - Total monthly discharge (MCM)
1962 2.8 9.9 46.6 101.9 149.2 221.9 174.4 45.6 20.1
1963 7.1 3.5 2.2
1997 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.9 2.4 2.0 32.5 105.1 103.8 165.7 31.4 5.3 451.9
1998 2.4 1.3 1.4 1.2 1.3 2.7 6.4 14.9 25.4 86.1 50.3 211.6
1999 2.8 1.5 1.6 5.1 100.7 114.2 109.2 129.0 124.4 142.8 178.2 51.2 960.9
2000 8.3 2.8 2.2 33.5 50.4 64.5 113.6 78.2 142.4 182.3 124.2 24.3 824.4
2001 5.1 2.2 9.9 4.6 14.8 35.3 79.2 79.7 94.2 134.9 143.7 34.1 637.7
2002 4.5 1.4 1.7 4.9 26.5 21.2 29.3 65.1 98.1 116.3 57.7 13.2 431.4
2003 3.1 1.5 2.3 3.2 6.5 4.5 16.0 128.4 53.2 192.0 102.7 14.7 527.9
2004 3.5 1.7 1.4 2.0 7.2
Data 279 254 279 270 279 240 248 248 236 248 240 217 3038
Months 9 9 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 7
MEAN 4.2 1.9 2.6 6.5 24.4 36.4 61.0 93.7 107.9 149.3 91.7 23.3 578.0
MAX 8.3 3.5 9.9 33.5 100.7 114.2 113.6 149.2 221.9 192.0 178.2 51.2 960.9
MIN 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.3 2.0 6.4 14.9 25.4 86.1 31.4 5.3 211.6
20 PERCENTILE 2.6 1.4 1.4 1.7 4.8 3.4 21.3 70.3 69.6 123.7 47.5 13.5 435.5
80 PERCENTILE 5.9 2.4 2.2 5.0 36.1 57.3 106.2 128.8 135.2 179.2 135.9 32.2 787.0
73
Tributary of Pursat River at Peam (580201) - Total monthly discharge
(MCM)
2001 15.6 5.6 12.3 6.6 6.0 13.8 14.4 32.2 87.2 222.7 32.9 8.0 457.3
2002 2.6 0.6 0.7 2.1 3.1 9.1 2.9 19.2 53.3 93.7 50.3 20.0 257.6
2003 3.4 0.3 6.5 4.0 29.5 13.3 95.5 43.7 84.7 302.9 25.4 6.5 615.9
2004 4.2 1.7 1.8 1.9 4.2 15.4 16.8 23.1 50.2 69.6 6.1 0.9 195.5
2005 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.9 7.3 4.5 5.3 20.8 65.1 155.2
Data 118 74 98 106 146 150 152 154 150 152 120 104 1524
Months 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4
MEAN 5.2 1.7 4.3 3.1 10.0 11.2 27.0 27.8 68.1 168.8 28.7 8.9 381.6
MAX 15.6 5.6 12.3 6.6 29.5 15.4 95.5 43.7 87.2 302.9 50.3 20.0 615.9
MIN 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.9 3.1 4.5 2.9 19.2 50.2 69.6 6.1 0.9 195.5
20 PERCENTILE 2.1 0.3 0.6 1.7 4.0 8.2 4.8 20.5 52.7 88.9 17.7 4.3 232.8
80 PERCENTILE 6.4 2.4 7.6 4.5 11.7 14.1 32.6 34.5 85.2 238.8 39.9 12.8 520.7
Siem Reap River at Prasaat Keo (560102) - Total monthly discharge

(MCM)
1999 3.2 2.5 2.8 3.3 9.0 25.2 18.5 30.1 22.0 52.6 51.9 15.1 239.7
2000 9.5 5.6 4.3 6.8 4.6 18.4 28.8 31.9 48.7 59.5 25.0 12.6 250.1
2001 6.5 4.5 4.8 3.6 6.1 5.9 12.2 18.2 15.3 56.5 20.3 9.1 163.0
2002 5.7 3.7 2.5 2.9 2.9 1.9 2.9 8.5 60.1 44.2 18.3 10.3 162.4
2003 5.9 3.9 3.7 3.2 3.1 4.6 5.9 7.6 6.0 7.1 7.8 3.8 62.4
2004 3.0 2.4 2.1 1.9 2.0 4.1 4.6 75.5
Data 180 168 163 165 161 167 183 179 144 149 150 155 1964
Months 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5
MEAN 5.6 3.8 3.4 3.6 4.6 10.0 12.2 28.6 30.4 44.0 24.6 10.2 175.5
MAX 9.5 5.6 4.8 6.8 9.0 25.2 28.8 75.5 60.1 59.5 51.9 15.1 250.1
MIN 3.0 2.4 2.1 1.9 2.0 1.9 2.9 7.6 6.0 7.1 7.8 3.8 62.4
20 PERCENTILE 3.2 2.5 2.5 2.9 2.9 4.1 4.6 8.5 13.5 36.8 16.2 8.0 142.4
80 PERCENTILE 6.5 4.5 4.3 3.6 6.1 18.4 18.5 31.9 51.0 57.1 30.4 13.1 241.8
74
Tributary of Pursat River at Prek Klong (downstream: 580301) - Total monthly discharge
(MCM)
1994 1.9 4.0 3.9 2.7 23.9 66.7 65.1 16.4 4.9
1995 1.8 1.1 0.6 1.1 2.1 6.6 16.0 66.8 118.3 178.8 54.2 17.5 432.7
1996 9.5 2.8 1.4 3.7 11.8 52.9 96.3 60.2 117.6 200.0 203.2 259.0 956.5
1997 26.9 7.3
2001 14.2 8.7 17.8 11.4 11.2 11.2 10.3 48.6 87.2 139.5 37.1 14.1 411.2
2002 10.0 5.5 3.3 3.2 6.7 10.7 12.5 17.9 55.5 60.9 23.5 52.3 262.1
2003 16.4 8.4 10.2 10.4 13.0 13.6 27.1 17.1 46.6 191.5 33.1 8.4 385.7
2004 6.5 4.9 5.9 3.9 4.4 10.4 9.1 14.1 36.1 124.8 9.7 5.3 234.6
2005 2.5 1.3 1.7 1.8 6.3 7.9 8.9 10.3 55.7 69.9
Data 248 226 217 240 248 240 248 248 240 228 210 214 2807
Months 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 7
MEAN 11.0 5.0 5.8 4.7 7.4 14.6 22.9 32.4 73.0 128.8 53.9 51.6 447.1
MAX 26.9 8.7 17.8 11.4 13.0 52.9 96.3 66.8 118.3 200.0 203.2 259.0 956.5
MIN 1.8 1.1 0.6 1.1 2.1 3.9 2.7 10.3 36.1 60.9 9.7 4.9 234.6
20 PERCENTILE 4.1 1.9 1.5 1.8 4.2 7.1 9.0 15.3 50.2 67.0 17.8 5.9 262.1
80 PERCENTILE 15.5 8.0 9.3 7.8 11.5 12.6 22.7 55.6 105.4 186.4 50.8 45.3 432.7
Stung Pursat at Pursat station (580101) - Total monthly discharge (MCM)

1962 17.2 48.6 74.4 253.5 273.1 394.6 631.0 84.8 18.1
1963 3.6 0.4 5.0
1972 129.9 70.2 119.8 111.9 106.5 324.2 470.4 582.2 411.1
1973 43.2 17.3 6.3 8.3 71.0 130.8 172.0 309.5 443.3 521.5 496.7 108.1 2193.6
1974 38.1 19.5 14.0
Data 93 84 71 90 93 90 93 93 88 90 82 93 1060
Months 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
MEAN 28.3 12.4 8.4 51.8 63.2 108.3 179.1 229.7 387.3 541.0 387.9 179.1
MAX 43.2 19.5 14.0 129.9 71.0 130.8 253.5 309.5 443.3 631.0 582.2 411.1
MIN 3.6 0.4 5.0 8.3 48.6 74.4 111.9 106.5 324.2 470.4 84.8 18.1
20 PERCENTILE 17.4 7.2 5.5 11.9 57.2 92.5 135.9 173.2 352.3 490.9 249.6 54.1
80 PERCENTILE 41.2 18.6 10.9 84.8 70.7 126.4 220.9 294.9 423.8 587.2 548.0 289.9
75
Sisophon River at Sisophon (530101) - Total monthly discharge (MCM)
1962 5.0 5.2 137.9 102.6 619.4 388.4 22.5 7.1
1963 2.5 0.9 0.4
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Data 31 28 31 30 31 31 31 30 31 30 31 335
Months 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11
MEAN
Stung Sangke at Sre Ponleu (550103) - Total monthly discharge (MCM)

1964 7.2 4.4 3.5 4.0 46.6 39.1 72.0 211.4 144.1 96.3 44.3 14.8 685.9
1965 7.7 5.7 5.5 3.9 43.1 173.6 130.3 130.1 184.7 105.6 24.8 10.9 825.9
1966 6.1 4.5 3.9 4.1 31.0 37.2 133.2 198.6 224.2 65.8 31.2 15.5 755.3
Data 93 85 93 90 93 90 93 93 90 93 90 93 1096
Months 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
MEAN 7.0 4.9 4.3 4.0 40.2 83.3 111.8 180.0 184.3 89.2 33.4 13.7 755.7
MAX
MIN
20 PERCENTILE
80 PERCENTILE
76
Tributary of Pursat River at Svay Donkeo (581102) - Total monthly discharge (MCM)
1962 2.1 9.1 1.5 5.6 8.5 18.6 20.0 9.5 0.9
1963 0.5 0.1 1.4
1995 0.1 0.1 10.0 30.0 70.2 93.2 121.8 111.5 63.0
1996 30.2 15.5 9.5 4.9 44.9 59.1 48.7 30.3 50.5 113.5 171.8 118.7 695.7
1997 38.8 17.1
2001 26.0 13.1 16.0 15.2 11.8 14.5 10.5 15.2 66.2 93.8 68.7 17.0 368.0
2002 7.5 4.6 3.0 3.6 30.9 12.8 8.6 6.5 54.9 90.7 73.2 36.2 332.4
2003 7.0 2.8 1.7 1.1 13.3 6.7 14.2 42.9 12.4 99.6 59.7 14.7 276.3
2004 8.1 2.1 1.4 1.7 18.7 49.9 55.2 35.2 65.5 97.2 49.0 25.4 408.4
2005 9.3 3.8 3.0 6.1 25.1 54.3 68.9 44.0 74.7 118.0
Data 248 226 217 233 248 240 247 248 211 102 144 196 2560
Months 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 5 7
MEAN 15.9 7.4 5.1 4.3 19.3 26.1 30.2 31.6 54.5 94.3 77.6 39.4 416.1
MAX 38.8 17.1 16.0 15.2 44.9 59.1 68.9 70.2 93.2 121.8 171.8 118.7 695.7
MIN 0.5 0.1 1.4 0.1 0.1 1.5 5.6 6.5 12.4 20.0 9.5 0.9 276.3
20 PERCENTILE 7.2 2.4 1.5 1.3 10.2 8.0 9.4 11.2 31.4 91.9 51.2 15.2 321.2
80 PERCENTILE 28.5 14.6 8.2 5.6 28.5 52.5 52.6 43.5 71.3 116.2 103.9 57.6 465.8
Stung Pursat at Taing Leach station (580102) - Total monthly discharge (MCM)
1965 7.4 2.9 10.1 34.4 81.2 153.0 59.5 84.4 222.2 386.9 55.1 14.9 1112.3
1966 4.4 3.4 4.3 10.8 45.6 32.5 146.5 91.5 84.8 201.4 48.9 25.4 699.5
1967 8.6 2.8 2.5 26.0 103.4 98.4 78.7 205.2 55.1 323.7 28.4 9.2 942.0
1968 2.9 2.0 2.1 45.6 45.2 18.5 65.1 180.2 82.0 139.9 15.6 5.0 602.7
1969 2.1 1.4 3.9 9.3 37.1 38.1 238.1 137.0 537.0 358.6 194.6 32.3 1562.0
Data 155 141 155 150 155 150 155 155 149 146 144 135 1790
Months 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
MEAN 5.1 2.5 4.6 25.2 62.5 68.1 117.6 139.7 196.2 282.1 68.5 17.3 983.7
MAX 8.6 3.4 10.1 45.6 103.4 153.0 238.1 205.2 537.0 386.9 194.6 32.3 1562.0
MIN 2.1 1.4 2.1 9.3 37.1 18.5 59.5 84.4 55.1 139.9 15.6 5.0 602.7
20 PERCENTILE 2.8 1.9 2.4 10.5 43.6 29.7 64.0 90.1 76.6 189.1 25.8 8.3 680.1
80 PERCENTILE 7.7 3.0 5.4 36.6 85.7 109.4 164.8 185.2 285.2 364.3 83.0 26.7 1202.2
77
Tributary of Stung Pursat at Thlea Maam (downstream: 583020) - Total monthly discharge
(MCM)
1994 0.93 1.18 2.05 1.34 6.37 57.02 39.56 3.84 0.80
1995 0.88 0.60 0.19 0.21 0.29 0.75 8.79 15.94 49.27 105.66 27.27 1.26 211.29
1996 0.21 0.23 0.11 0.57 9.21 19.31 39.77 31.39 46.29 111.90 54.82 10.63 323.56
Data 62 57 62 90 93 90 93 93 90 93 90 93 1006
Months 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
MEAN 0.55 0.42 0.15 0.57 3.56 7.37 16.63 17.90 50.86 85.71 28.64 4.23
MAX
MIN
20 PERCENTILE
80 PERCENTILE
Siem Reap River at UNTAC bridge (560101) - Total monthly discharge (MCM)
1998
1999
Discharges are not calculated because ratings are not
2000 adequate
2001
2002
2004
Data
Months
MEAN
MAX
MIN
20 PERCENTILE
80 PERCENTILE
78
Sangke River at Treng (550101) - Total monthly discharge
(MCM)
1963 27.1 22.4 24.5 22.7 24.5 35.5 156.3 264.1 285.1 269.1 81.5 36.2 1249.1
1964 29.3 22.6 21.6 21.7 128.7 56.7 99.5 386.6 254.1 214.4 145.2 42.3 1378.1
1965 32.7 26.9 27.1 27.5 78.2 297.1 260.5 253.0 337.3 322.1 63.9 36.4 1737.0
1966 27.7 23.5 24.6 32.0 67.4 63.2 242.3 270.9 387.7 174.7 55.9 44.7 1414.4
1967 29.1 23.6 23.2 41.7 43.4 81.0 227.7 1242.8 365.9 531.7 57.2 39.7 2707.1
1968 41.2 31.9 23.9 47.2 38.0 30.5 204.9 917.5 410.0 457.8 54.7 42.3 2298.7
1969 31.9 26.9 26.7 28.0 31.4 90.5 650.5 649.6 991.8 363.2 57.5 37.4 2985.5
1970 31.9 26.9 26.7 32.1 35.1 135.3 398.6 423.6 491.3 217.2 190.0 559.2 2568.0
1971 186.6 66.2 29.8 30.0 40.4 264.3 428.7 280.7 323.4 342.2 56.4 48.5 2097.1
1972 37.8 49.6 39.0 65.4 51.9 120.2 99.1 404.3 581.4 346.0 672.1 569.3 3027.8
1999 96.9 60.8 72.7 90.6 134.8 525.3
2000 424.3 563.9 688.2 210.4 1181.7
2001 56.4 175.7 99.8 450.5 392.5 1509.9 1354.4
2002 34.6 38.0 62.0 40.8 112.8 227.0 572.1 1407.4 211.8 378.4 191.5 33.2 3227.1
2003 37.8 63.3 63.5 39.1 92.4 65.9 265.2 649.9 114.0 34.7 33.2
Data 403 367 372 390 403 415 429 401 417 413 349 391 4750
Months 13 13 12 13 13 14 14 13 14 14 12 13
MEAN 45.6 39.9 34.9 37.3 70.9 138.8 317.0 579.0 500.7 447.6 138.4 126.9 2244.5
MAX 186.6 96.9 63.5 65.4 175.7 424.3 650.5 1407.4 1509.9 1354.4 672.1 569.3 3227.1
MIN 27.1 22.4 21.6 21.7 24.5 30.5 99.1 253.0 210.4 114.0 34.7 33.2 1249.1
20 PERCENTILE 29.1 23.5 24.1 27.7 36.8 61.9 152.0 276.8 272.7 216.1 56.0 36.3 1414.4
80 PERCENTILE 37.8 57.8 52.1 45.0 100.6 234.5 473.2 779.9 608.8 487.4 181.1 47.7 2985.5
79
ANNEX 2. SPECIFIC MONTHLY
VOLUMETRIC DISCHARGES

Report, River Flow monitoring stations, Tonle Sap Basin, August 2006,
MOWRAM)
80
Pursat River at Bac Trakoun (580103) - Specific mean monthly discharge (l/s/km2) Catchment area = 4,245 sq km
1994 33.6 33.0 7.2 1.9
1995 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.9 0.9 2.7 11.5 46.4 69.8 83.5 35.7 3.5 21.4
1996 3.1 2.3 1.6 2.0 8.7 28.5 39.1 32.3 72.0 131.9 71.3 33.2 35.8
1997 7.1 3.3
2001 4.6 1.4 13.0 2.5 3.6 9.2 15.8 18.8 22.0 67.6 14.5 3.4 14.8
2002 1.6 0.6 0.2 1.3 2.7 2.5 3.7 13.7 20.3 24.5 15.7 5.3 7.7
2003 1.3 3.8 2.7 3.4 5.2 2.4 25.8 21.5 26.7 98.2 7.9 4.0 17.3
2005 0.0 1.4 1.5 1.9 9.4 26.9 23.7 43.8
Data 186 169 151 163 173 180 186 186 194 217 180 186 2171
Months 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 6 6
MEAN 3.02 1.94 2.95 1.91 3.78 7.87 17.54 26.60 38.32 68.91 25.37 8.55
MAX 7.07 3.78 12.96 3.37 8.69 28.47 39.07 46.38 72.02 131.88 71.29 33.20
MIN 0.41 0.25 0.02 0.85 0.88 1.87 3.69 13.68 20.31 24.45 7.22 1.89
20 PERCENTILE 1.35 0.57 0.19 1.31 1.50 2.44 9.36 18.82 22.35 35.15 7.88 3.41
80 PERCENTILE 4.62 3.27 2.74 2.51 5.22 9.20 25.82 32.29 62.60 95.24 35.70 5.32
conversion from m3/s to l/s/km2

0.235571
81
Stung Sangke at Battambang (550102) - Specific mean monthly discharge
(l/sec/km2) Catchment area = 3,194 sq km
1962 1.2 4.1 16.4 42.4 58.1 42.9 27.9 23.3 9.6
1963 1.5 0.8 1.1
1972 2.4 0.8 4.4 11.8 32.7 41.3 40.5 41.5 16.4
1973 0.3 0.3 1.0 20.7 24.9 37.1 25.2 58.1
1981 12.9 25.2 16.2 38.4 41.3 30.5 21.1
1982 1.2 1.5 1.8 1.6 4.7 18.2 34.4 30.9 31.5 17.5 4.7
1983 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.7 2.5 7.8 44.9 32.0 86.9 48.6 9.8 19.1
1984 2.4 1.0 0.7 0.9 1.1 18.6 10.7 38.6 44.0 49.8 20.8 5.5 16.2
1985 1.1 0.6 0.6 1.1 3.2 34.7 24.5 38.2 39.8 58.1 21.3 5.6 19.1
1986 1.6 0.8 37.4 48.0 37.1 16.1 3.9
1987 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 3.8 28.2 28.5 18.6 29.9 9.3
1988 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.3 3.3 8.8 6.6
1997 0.8 1.2 2.1 9.1 50.2 56.1 50.4 50.3 26.2 5.2
1998 1.3 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.9 4.0 6.0 22.2 18.8 5.4
1999 0.8 0.5 0.5 4.9 16.6 33.4 26.4 38.8 25.3 44.7 48.5 12.1 21.0
2000 3.2 1.1 0.9 4.8 8.6 10.1 39.5 35.3 74.1 85.2 43.1 12.8 27.4
2001 3.1 0.9 3.5 1.2 6.2 13.7 33.3 53.2 52.7 65.3 36.2 10.4 23.5
2002 2.4 0.7 0.6 1.2 4.4 4.8 11.8 38.0 59.2 57.9 25.4 7.0 17.9
2003 1.6 0.6 1.4 1.1 2.2 4.1 22.9 49.9 37.8 39.2 10.2 2.9 14.6
2004 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.7 6.2 19.7 9.0 36.1 28.9 36.1 11.2 2.2 12.7
2005 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.7 0.5 2.5 21.0 48.8 31.8
Data 465 452 484 532 583 552 530 568 564 519 525 440 6214
Months 15 16 17 18 19 19 18 19 19 17 18 15
MEAN 1.50 0.69 0.85 1.38 4.04 12.59 21.16 39.48 39.81 45.78 28.03 7.83 19.06
MAX 3.17 1.15 3.51 4.86 16.56 34.71 50.16 58.10 74.06 86.93 58.10 16.42 27.43
MIN 0.52 0.19 0.23 0.25 0.32 1.90 3.96 5.95 22.21 18.59 5.40 2.16 12.71
20 PERCENTILE 0.71 0.52 0.39 0.52 0.80 3.99 9.68 34.97 28.75 30.67 16.68 4.52 15.55
80 PERCENTILE 2.38 0.88 1.03 1.55 6.19 20.07 30.53 49.21 48.97 58.05 42.50 10.77 22.00

0.313087
82
Stung Boribo at Boribo (590101) - Mean monthly discharges (l/sec/km2) Drainage area = 803 sq km
1962 0.7 4.7 9.9 18.3 26.4 71.1 75.1 20.2 7.4
1963 2.4 0.6 0.9
1998 4.1 8.5 24.0 69.8 52.2 50.1
1999 5.4 8.3 2.6 4.5 57.0 60.3 36.2 26.4 74.2 68.3 82.9 34.7 38.5
2000 9.8 8.1 3.2 7.7 6.9 31.8 66.9 62.1 40.0 107.5 41.9 9.8 33.2
2001 12.0 5.0 8.7 7.1 3.5 15.7 9.9 27.9 78.2 68.0 25.5 6.0 22.3
2002 8.3 15.4 14.1 10.1 14.0 13.3 11.7 32.6 71.2 53.8 28.5 8.7 23.5
2003 16.0 17.2 17.4 15.7 5.8 6.7 12.7 8.4 38.4 62.7 16.1 18.4 19.7
2004 17.0 5.3 6.6 7.7 5.8 15.1 15.8 30.0 59.4 58.0 9.8 12.6 20.3
2005 9.1 6.8 6.1 25.3 10.2 14.7 31.4 13.3
Data 248 226 248 240 247 270 277 277 229 235 233 217 2947
Months 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 8 8 8 8
MEAN 10.00 8.33 7.44 9.84 13.49 19.08 23.49 27.88 62.78 68.22 34.39 13.96
MAX 17.02 17.20 17.36 25.29 57.01 60.31 66.95 62.08 78.19 107.55 82.91 34.74
MIN 2.40 0.64 0.93 0.68 3.50 4.15 8.47 8.36 38.43 52.24 9.83 5.99
20 PERCENTILE 6.54 5.09 2.85 5.55 5.13 8.62 10.98 19.68 47.76 55.51 17.74 7.65
80 PERCENTILE 14.38 12.56 11.92 13.47 12.48 22.16 33.33 31.03 73.00 72.38 46.86 17.26

1.24533
83
Pursat River at Khum Viel (580104) - Specific mean monthly discharge (l/s/km2) Catchment area = 4,596 sq km
1995 1.6 3.1 8.2 37.8 57.8 67.8 28.2 8.2
1996 3.5 1.5 1.2 2.5 8.1 24.1 33.6 31.0 53.4 85.5 55.5 26.6 27.3
1997 3.9 2.6
1998
1999 2.3 1.5 1.1 9.0 36.8 27.5 25.9 27.0 41.0 70.9 59.7 16.7 26.8
2000 3.3 1.8 2.6 11.7 16.0 19.5 41.8 32.7 32.0 76.2 33.9 9.1 23.5
2001 3.4 1.6 3.4 2.5 3.0 5.7 12.6 17.1 19.1 61.1 14.2 2.9 12.3
2002 1.4 1.1 0.9 1.7 2.0 2.3 3.6 11.6 16.8 21.2 14.6 4.7 6.9
2003 3.0 1.9 2.0 1.5 3.3 12.0 29.3 17.9 20.8 70.4 9.2 2.9 14.7
2004 1.1 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.9 14.2 14.9 20.0 17.7 26.3 7.5 3.6 9.1
2005 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.5 3.2 2.7 6.6 21.1 16.3 32.4 22.3 3.6 9.5
Data 279 254 248 240 279 270 279 279 270 279 270 279 3226
Months 9 9 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
MEAN 2.6 1.5 1.6 3.9 8.3 12.4 19.6 24.0 30.6 56.9 27.2 8.7 16.2
MAX 3.9 2.6 3.4 11.7 36.8 27.5 41.8 37.8 57.8 85.5 59.7 26.6 27.3
MIN 1.1 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.9 2.3 3.6 11.6 16.3 21.2 7.5 2.9 6.9
20 PERCENTILE 1.4 1.1 0.9 1.5 1.8 3.0 7.5 17.6 17.4 29.9 12.2 3.3 9.2
80 PERCENTILE 3.5 1.8 2.4 6.4 11.3 21.3 31.0 31.7 46.0 73.0 42.5 12.2 25.5

0.217581
84
Stung Staung at Kompong Chen (600101) - Mean monthly discharges (l/sec/km2) Catchment area = 2,096 sq km
1962 0.29 1.81 7.70 39.68 26.35 44.50 28.38 4.32 1.78
1963 0.52 0.22 0.15
1997 3.56 1.62 6.11 12.72 22.46 26.67 39.71 9.22 0.86
1998 0.34 0.19 0.10 0.10 0.57 0.94 1.63 43.58 43.04 50.66 3.51
1999 0.10 0.06 7.50 36.48 24.88 51.61 54.71 86.51
2000 33.31 27.66 35.73 50.36 16.35 1.51
2001 0.16 0.09 0.10 0.08 0.51 0.82 0.81 14.88 42.76 39.21 8.10 0.94 9.81
2002 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.19 0.61 2.81 0.49 33.35 63.34 29.64 4.77 0.72 11.38
2003 0.06 0.04 0.03 3.43 3.10 37.35 12.19 0.76 0.13
2004 0.06 0.07 0.16 0.12 0.13 8.22 3.89 18.33 9.95 15.23 1.00 0.13 4.80
2005 0.10 0.08 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.10 20.43 2.20
Data 217 174 180 202 217 197 260 266 222 217 204 186 2542
Months 7 7 6 7 7 7 9 9 8 7 7 6
MEAN 0.19 0.11 0.10 1.48 5.22 6.45 16.80 24.66 43.32 33.17 6.00 0.87
MAX 0.52 0.22 0.16 7.50 36.48 24.88 51.61 54.71 86.51 50.66 16.35 1.78
MIN 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.10 0.49 2.20 9.95 12.19 0.76 0.13
20 PERCENTILE 0.08 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.28 0.87 1.47 12.52 32.11 20.49 2.01 0.25
80 PERCENTILE 0.27 0.17 0.14 2.25 1.74 8.01 34.58 35.40 52.04 46.10 8.77 1.40

0.477099
85
Stung Chikreng at Kompong K'dei (570101) - Mean monthly discharges (l/s/km2) catchment area = 1,901 sq km
1962 0.06 0.42 4.92 39.18 25.39 65.32 38.55 10.15 2.05
1963 0.44 0.19 0.31
1997 4.07 3.05 8.47 6.48 15.92 3.09 1.45
1998 0.91 0.34 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.22 0.42 5.70 8.66 1.48
1999 1.10 0.58 0.58 0.22 4.02 12.57 20.73 1.43
2000 1.06 0.49 0.07 0.04 2.25 0.86 1.45 6.04 18.14 23.82 3.06
2001 1.34 0.74 0.26 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 2.97 11.90 19.89 5.49 1.53 3.70
2002 1.08 0.34 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 2.10 31.32 15.76 3.63 1.67 3.53
2003 1.13 0.39 0.11 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.09 0.08 0.99 2.98 1.71 1.17 0.74
2004 0.36 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.09 0.98 4.09 5.60 1.69 1.30 1.24
2005 0.87 0.48 0.09 0.13 0.26 0.52 0.27 14.63 10.58 2.80 1.88
Data 275 254 248 256 248 270 275 276 282 294 298 248 3224
Months 9 9 8 9 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 8
MEAN 0.92 0.40 0.18 0.07 0.38 1.23 4.98 5.19 16.26 15.43 5.38 1.56
MAX 1.34 0.74 0.58 0.22 2.25 4.92 39.18 25.39 65.32 38.55 20.73 2.05
MIN 0.36 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.08 0.08 0.99 2.98 1.48 1.17
20 PERCENTILE 0.70 0.28 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.07 0.09 0.36 4.07 8.05 1.71 1.36
80 PERCENTILE 1.12 0.53 0.29 0.08 0.30 2.14 2.09 7.01 20.77 20.68 6.42 1.80

0.526039
86
Stung Sen at Kompong Putrea (610102) - Specific mean monthly discharge
1965 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 2.6 6.5 14.5 19.6 45.9 18.8 0.8 0.3 9.2
1966 0.2 0.2 0.9 1.4 12.5 3.4 35.7 106.8 87.7 15.6 1.6 0.7 22.4
1967 0.4 0.2 0.2 8.9 3.4 7.6 5.7 35.3 63.7 28.9 1.1 0.3 13.0
1968 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 1.8 5.8 7.2 35.4 54.2 25.5 0.6 0.3 11.0
1969 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.7 0.9 10.5 29.1 19.8 55.8 47.1 6.9 0.2 14.4
1999 7.3 16.8 40.0 15.8 18.5 27.6 46.4 24.4 4.0
2000 0.1 0.0 12.9 18.3 36.5 78.0 60.0 70.4 44.0 41.4 30.4
2001 22.5 0.2 5.5 19.8 44.0 75.0
2002 2.2 0.0 0.5 4.3 14.2 18.8 49.8 86.6 48.8 15.9 7.0
2003 1.0 0.4 0.1 1.6 1.5 11.0 34.5 45.0 53.4 33.4 25.6 19.2 19.8
2004 13.4 7.0
Data 306 214 182 246 299 300 310 307 270 279 270 279 3262
Months 10 9 6 10 10 10 10 10 9 9 9 9
MEAN 4.0 0.9 0.2 3.4 6.8 15.5 28.3 46.5 60.6 34.3 13.1 6.9
MAX 22.5 7.0 0.9 12.9 18.3 40.0 78.0 106.8 87.7 48.8 41.4 30.4
MIN 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.9 3.4 5.7 18.5 27.6 15.6 0.6 0.2
20 PERCENTILE 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 1.7 6.3 13.0 19.7 50.4 22.8 0.9 0.3
80 PERCENTILE 4.4 0.3 0.2 7.6 13.3 23.2 37.3 63.0 76.8 46.7 24.9 11.9

0.089791
87
Stung Chinit at Kompong Thmar (620101) - Mean monthly discharges
(l/s/km2) Catchment area = 4,393 sq km
1962 0.94 2.10 6.77 29.61 31.69 45.42 55.20 12.62 6.38
1963 3.77 2.09 1.17
1997 3.64 3.08 5.37 11.83 31.78 28.85 35.68 12.30 5.21
1998 3.06 1.96 1.20 0.97 1.48 1.70 4.15 8.91 16.19 40.90 15.77
1999 4.32 2.22 1.37 3.58 15.81 24.59 19.91 32.33 29.10 42.97
2000 9.64 3.90 5.59 9.46 27.64 47.47 47.54 54.02 53.30 25.74 12.31
2001 7.11 4.58 6.82 4.02 6.76 8.06 16.93 18.01 36.35 56.71 25.99 10.26 16.88
2002 5.64 3.90 2.51 2.17 2.61 9.61 9.13 16.06 38.09 38.13 14.79 6.81 12.56
2003 3.75 2.53 2.85 2.22 3.45 7.13 11.65 20.15 27.80 29.49 8.65 4.27 10.38
Data 213 168 215 236 248 240 248 248 240 248 210 186 2700
Months 7 6 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 6
MEAN 5.33 2.88 2.83 2.89 5.59 11.36 18.84 25.81 34.48 44.05 16.55 7.54
MAX 9.64 4.58 6.82 5.59 15.81 27.64 47.47 47.54 54.02 56.71 25.99 12.31
MIN 3.06 1.96 1.17 0.94 1.48 1.70 4.15 8.91 16.19 29.49 8.65 4.27
20 PERCENTILE 3.75 2.09 1.23 1.45 2.30 5.93 10.14 16.84 28.22 36.66 12.37 5.21
80 PERCENTILE 6.81 3.90 3.69 3.87 8.38 18.60 25.73 32.11 42.49 54.44 23.75 10.26

0.227635
88
Sen River at Kompong Thom (610101) - Mean monthly discharges
1961 5.9 15.8 34.7 52.9 61.5 48.7 10.2 2.9
1962 1.3 0.6 0.6 0.5 2.5 20.9 42.9 52.0 43.7 51.2 5.5 3.1 18.9
1963 1.8 0.7 0.3 0.5 0.5 2.4 13.4 32.6 53.0 31.7 4.0 2.2 12.0
1964 1.1 0.5 0.4 0.4 6.3 15.2 13.1 28.7 33.6 8.1 4.7 2.4 7.8
1965 1.2 0.6 0.4 0.4 1.4 6.6 19.9 28.8 48.5 18.4 2.9 1.7 10.9
1966 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.4 11.7 4.8 25.2 62.4 63.2 28.4 3.0 0.8 17.0
1967 0.4 0.6 0.5 5.5 4.5 8.9 10.0 28.9 54.8 36.9 2.2 0.4 12.8
1968 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 2.1 10.2 10.5 34.3 48.3 24.1 1.2 0.6 11.1
1969 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 1.8 9.1 29.0 28.0 42.8 49.2 6.2 1.0 14.2
1970 1.3 0.6 0.4 0.4
1981 0.9 7.4 11.7 31.1 38.4 42.6 18.9 7.4
1982 2.4 0.7 0.4 2.2 0.8 2.9 30.3 15.6 58.5 49.4 17.6 6.9 15.7
1983 1.9 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.4 2.6 25.9 45.7 42.1 61.6 34.2 11.3 19.1
1984 3.6 1.0 0.5 0.4 1.8 11.5 8.5 26.8 62.5 54.9 23.2 7.4 16.9
1985 2.3 0.7 0.4 0.5 5.1 11.6 14.2 29.8 37.6 41.2 17.0 7.0 14.0
1986 2.4 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.8 7.1 12.4 42.0 60.5 50.5 16.6 6.6 16.8
1987 1.8 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.5 1.6 7.3 3.7 47.1 40.4 14.5 5.1 10.3
1988 1.5 0.5 0.3 0.6 0.7 5.3 8.0 21.9 18.9 50.1 17.4 3.7 11.2
1989 1.0 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.7 1.4 7.5 26.3 48.6 38.8 12.4 4.5 11.9
1990 1.2 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 15.1 10.8 46.6 51.0 57.7 27.8 9.3 18.6
1991 2.9 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.3 3.0 4.1 19.6 55.7 60.4 25.9 8.5 15.3
1992 2.7 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.6 2.7 1.6 27.3 58.8 41.6 8.8 3.1 12.4
1993 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.7 4.3 32.3 17.6 39.3 36.2 11.6 4.1 12.5
1994 1.2 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.8 5.3 13.9 23.3 56.4 52.6 18.8 6.5 15.1
1995 2.0 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.5 1.1 2.8 20.6 52.2 61.4 28.1 9.7 15.0
1996 3.1 0.9 0.4 0.3 2.7 11.5 5.6 20.6 38.5 59.3 51.9 18.0 17.7
1997 6.3 2.0 0.6 0.5 0.7 2.5 16.7 51.1 48.3 61.1 18.6 6.5 17.2
1998 1.9 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.4
1999 0.9 0.4 0.4 1.3 7.0 11.5 29.8
2000 4.6 1.4 55.7 55.1 64.6 64.5 39.1 13.6
2001 4.6 1.4 0.8 0.6 1.2 6.3 36.1 50.6 61.0 59.6 35.8 11.8 22.6
2002 4.0 1.3 0.6 0.5 0.8 5.6 6.9 33.2 60.1 58.2 23.5 9.1 17.0
89
2003 3.1 1.0 0.5 0.6 0.5 2.0 2.8 10.0 39.3 30.8 10.6 3.7 8.8
Data 960 875 922 892 939 870 960 930 905 913 900 929 10995
Months 31 31 30 30 31 29 31 30 31 30 30 30
MEAN 2.1 0.7 0.5 0.7 2.1 7.1 17.0 32.2 49.0 45.6 17.1 6.0
MAX 6.3 2.0 0.8 5.5 11.7 20.9 55.7 62.4 64.6 64.5 51.9 18.0
MIN 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 1.1 1.6 3.7 18.9 8.1 1.2 0.4
20 PERCENTILE 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.5 2.6 7.3 20.6 39.3 35.3 5.3 2.4
80 PERCENTILE 1.3 0.6 0.5 0.9 6.1 15.5 31.3 52.4 57.5 48.9 5.8 2.6

0.075313
90
Stung Sreng at Kralanh (540101) - Mean monthly discharge
1962 0.12 0.40 1.27 5.58 11.55 20.01 27.48 4.66 1.09
1963 0.54 0.29 0.10
1998 0.17 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.11 1.00 2.86 4.34 10.88 4.35
1999 0.19 0.13 0.12 0.22 5.80 13.35
2000 0.12 0.48 1.82 12.25 22.12 20.80 23.71 24.28 12.86 2.15
2001 0.50 0.17 0.15 0.15 0.17 0.16 2.07 10.05 19.56 22.60 20.76 2.01 6.54
2002 0.38 0.16 0.14 0.13 0.19 0.57 3.08 3.61 22.77 21.72 9.00 2.76 5.39
2003 0.42 0.14 0.15 0.17 0.16 0.19 0.35 0.37 5.57 18.71 5.50 0.69 2.72
2004 0.16 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.13 2.81 1.78 16.22 19.65 10.85 1.84 0.86 4.56
2005 0.33 0.19 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.29 2.42 4.13 12.21 16.25 8.66 0.44 3.79
Data 248 225 272 270 279 270 248 246 240 248 240 217 3003
Months 8 8 9 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 7
MEAN 0.34 0.17 0.13 0.18 0.99 3.44 4.80 8.70 15.98 19.10 8.45 1.43
MAX 0.54 0.29 0.15 0.48 5.80 13.35 22.12 20.80 23.71 27.48 20.76 2.76
MIN 0.16 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.35 0.37 4.34 10.85 1.84 0.44
20 PERCENTILE 0.18 0.13 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.18 1.31 3.16 8.22 13.03 4.48 0.72
80 PERCENTILE 0.47 0.19 0.14 0.19 0.97 6.59 4.58 14.35 21.67 23.61 11.31 2.12

0.140311
91
Mongkol Borey River at Mongkol Borey (520101) - Mean monthly discharge (l/s/km2) Catchment area = 4,324 sq km
1962 0.25 0.86 4.16 8.80 12.88 19.80 15.06 4.07 1.73
1963 0.61 0.33 0.19
1997 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.20 0.18 2.81 9.08 9.26 14.31 2.80 0.46 3.31
1998 0.20 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.25 0.56 1.28 2.27 7.43 4.49
1999 0.25 0.15 0.14 0.46 8.70 10.19 9.43 11.14 11.10 12.33 15.90 4.42 7.05
2000 0.71 0.27 0.19 2.99 4.35 5.75 9.81 6.75 12.70 15.74 11.08 2.10 6.05
2001 0.44 0.21 0.86 0.41 1.27 3.15 6.84 6.88 8.41 11.65 12.82 2.95 4.68
2002 0.39 0.13 0.15 0.44 2.29 1.89 2.53 5.62 8.76 10.04 5.15 1.14 3.16
2003 0.26 0.14 0.20 0.29 0.56 0.40 1.39 11.09 4.75 16.57 9.16 1.27 3.87
2004 0.30 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.62
Data 279 254 279 270 279 240 248 248 236 248 240 217 3038
Months 9 9 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 7
MEAN 0.36 0.18 0.23 0.58 2.11 3.25 5.27 8.09 9.63 12.89 8.18 2.01
MAX 0.71 0.33 0.86 2.99 8.70 10.19 9.81 12.88 19.80 16.57 15.90 4.42
MIN 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.11 0.18 0.56 1.28 2.27 7.43 2.80 0.46
20 PERCENTILE 0.23 0.13 0.12 0.15 0.42 0.31 1.84 6.07 6.21 10.68 4.24 1.16
80 PERCENTILE 0.51 0.23 0.19 0.45 3.11 5.12 9.17 11.12 12.06 15.47 12.12 2.78

0.231267
92
Stung Dauntry at Mong Russey (551101) - Mean monthly discharge (l/s/km2) Catchment area = 1,214 sq km
2001 0.35 0.93 0.62 1.60 10.86 6.29 0.96
2002 0.22 1.38 1.24 2.08 3.38 0.93 0.33 4.00 1.87 3.61 8.11 1.99 2.44
Data 31 9 31 30 29 53 51 38 59 43 60 62 496
Months 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
MEAN 0.22 1.38 1.24 2.08 3.38 0.64 0.63 2.31 1.73 7.24 7.20 1.48
MAX
MIN
20 PERCENTILE
80 PERCENTILE

0.823723
Tributary of Pursat River at Peam (580201) - Specific mean monthly discharge

(l/sec/km2) Catchment area = 243 sq km
2001 24.0 9.5 18.9 10.4 9.2 21.9 22.1 49.4 138.4 342.2 52.3 12.3 59.7
2002 4.0 0.9 1.1 3.4 4.8 14.5 4.4 29.5 84.7 144.0 79.8 30.7 33.6
2003 5.2 0.5 9.9 6.4 45.4 21.1 146.7 67.1 134.4 465.3 40.4 10.0 80.4
2004 6.4 2.7 2.8 3.0 6.5 24.5 25.9 35.5 79.7 107.0 9.7 1.4 25.5
2005 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.4 11.2 7.2 8.1 31.9 103.3 238.5
Data 155 141 155 150 155 150 155 155 150 155 120 124 1765
Months 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4
MEAN 7.99 2.81 6.61 4.93 15.42 17.84 41.47 42.69 108.11 259.40 45.53 13.60
MAX 24.03 9.51 18.89 10.41 45.39 24.53 146.75 67.12 138.40 465.35 79.84 30.70
MIN 0.37 0.37 0.37 1.44 4.81 7.16 4.40 29.47 79.67 106.95 9.67 1.36
20 PERCENTILE 3.23 0.47 0.93 2.69 6.13 13.02 7.40 31.44 83.69 136.58 28.09 6.54
80 PERCENTILE 9.91 4.07 11.71 7.22 18.03 22.42 50.06 52.96 135.23 366.85 63.29 19.69

4.115226
93
Siem Reap River at Prasaat Keo (560102) - Specific mean monthly discharge
(l/s/km2) Catchment area = 178 sq km
1999 6.8 5.8 5.8 7.2 18.9 54.7 38.9 63.1 47.7 110.3 112.4 31.6 42.7
2000 19.9 13.1 8.9 14.7 9.6 39.8 60.5 66.9 105.6 124.8 54.2 26.5 44.6
2001 13.5 10.3 10.2 7.8 12.7 12.8 25.6 38.1 33.3 118.5 44.0 19.0 29.0
2002 12.0 8.6 5.2 6.2 6.2 4.1 6.0 17.8 130.3 92.8 39.7 21.7 28.9
2003 12.5 9.0 7.7 6.9 6.6 9.9 12.4 16.0 12.9 14.9 16.8 8.0 11.1
2004 6.2 5.6 4.5 4.1 4.2 9.0 9.7 158.3
Data 180 170 186 180 186 180 186 185 149 151 150 155 2058
Months 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 6
MEAN 11.82 8.74 7.05 7.81 9.68 21.70 25.51 60.02 65.96 92.25 53.43 21.36
MAX 19.89 13.09 10.17 14.66 18.88 54.72 60.51 158.26 130.28 124.83 112.42 31.63
MIN 6.24 5.56 4.49 4.10 4.21 4.10 6.01 16.01 12.92 14.89 16.80 7.98
20 PERCENTILE 6.80 5.79 5.17 6.24 6.18 8.99 9.66 17.75 29.19 77.18 35.09 16.79
80 PERCENTILE 13.54 10.34 8.93 7.75 12.70 39.78 38.88 66.85 110.55 119.75 65.85 27.54

5.617978
94
Tributary of Pursat River at Prek Klong (downstream: 580301) - Specific mean monthly discharge
1994 1.7 3.6 3.6 2.4 21.2 61.1 57.7 15.0 4.3 18.9
1995 1.6 1.1 0.6 1.0 1.9 6.1 14.2 59.2 108.4 158.6 49.7 15.5 32.6
1996 8.4 2.8 1.3 3.4 10.4 48.5 85.4 53.4 107.8 177.4 186.2 229.7 72.0
1997 23.8 7.2 15.9
1998
1999
2000
2001 12.6 8.5 15.7 10.4 10.0 10.2 9.1 43.1 79.9 123.7 34.0 12.5 31.0
2002 8.9 5.4 2.9 2.9 6.0 9.8 11.1 15.9 50.9 54.0 21.6 46.4 19.7
2003 14.5 8.3 9.0 9.5 11.5 12.5 24.1 15.2 42.7 169.9 30.4 7.5 29.0
2004 5.7 4.8 5.2 3.6 3.9 9.5 8.0 12.5 33.1 110.7 8.9 4.7 17.7
2005 2.2 1.3 1.5 1.6 5.6 7.2 7.9 9.1 51.1 61.9 15.0
Data 248 226 217 240 248 240 248 248 240 228 210 214 2807
Months 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 7
MEAN 9.73 4.92 5.17 4.27 6.60 13.41 20.27 28.70 66.87 114.24 49.41 45.80
MAX 23.85 8.50 15.75 10.40 11.50 48.46 85.42 59.22 108.41 177.41 186.22 229.71
MIN 1.62 1.09 0.57 1.00 1.85 3.56 2.35 9.12 33.09 54.01 8.93 4.32
20 PERCENTILE 3.62 1.90 1.30 1.68 3.72 6.52 7.96 13.59 45.98 59.40 16.34 5.25
80 PERCENTILE 13.76 7.84 8.27 7.15 10.24 11.58 20.10 49.27 96.61 165.33 46.56 40.21

2.375297
95
Stung Pursat at Pursat station (580101) - Specific mean monthly discharge
1962 1.5 4.0 6.4 21.1 22.7 33.9 52.4 7.3 1.5 16.8
1963 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.2
1972 11.2 5.8 10.3 9.3 8.8 27.8 39.1 50.0 34.1 21.8
1973 3.6 1.6 0.5 0.7 5.9 11.2 14.3 25.7 38.0 43.3 42.6 9.0 15.5
1974 3.2 1.8 1.2 2.0
Data 93 84 71 90 93 90 93 93 88 90 82 93 1060
Months 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
MEAN 2.4 1.1 0.7 4.4 5.3 9.3 14.9 19.1 33.2 44.9 33.3 14.9
MAX 3.6 1.8 1.2 11.2 5.9 11.2 21.1 25.7 38.0 52.4 50.0 34.1
MIN 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.7 4.0 6.4 9.3 8.8 27.8 39.1 7.3 1.5
20 PERCENTILE 1.4 0.7 0.5 1.0 4.8 7.9 11.3 14.4 30.2 40.8 21.4 4.5
80 PERCENTILE 3.4 1.7 0.9 7.3 5.9 10.8 18.3 24.5 36.4 48.8 47.0 24.1

0.222469
Stung Sangke at Sre Ponleu (550103) - Specific mean monthly discharge

1964 4.7 3.2 2.3 2.7 30.7 26.6 47.5 139.5 98.2 63.6 30.2 9.8 38.4
1965 5.1 4.2 3.6 2.6 28.4 118.3 86.0 85.8 125.9 69.6 16.9 7.2 46.3
1966 4.0 3.3 2.6 2.8 20.5 25.4 87.8 131.0 152.8 43.4 21.3 10.2 42.3
Data 93 85 93 90 93 90 93 93 90 93 90 93 1096
Months 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
MEAN 4.6 3.5 2.8 2.7 26.5 56.8 73.8 118.8 125.6 58.9 22.8 9.1
MAX
MIN
20 PERCENTILE
80 PERCENTILE

1.766784
96
Stung Pursat at Taing Leach station (580102) - Specific mean monthly discharge
1965 1.4 0.6 1.9 6.6 15.1 29.4 11.1 15.7 42.6 71.8 10.6 2.8 17.5
1966 0.8 0.7 0.8 2.1 8.5 6.2 27.2 17.0 16.3 37.4 9.4 4.7 11.0
1967 1.6 0.6 0.5 5.0 19.2 18.9 14.6 38.1 10.6 60.1 5.4 1.7 14.9
1968 0.5 0.4 0.4 8.8 8.4 3.6 12.1 33.5 15.7 26.0 3.0 0.9 9.5
1969 0.4 0.3 0.7 1.8 6.9 7.3 44.2 25.4 103.0 66.6 37.3 6.0 24.6
Data 155 141 155 150 155 150 155 155 149 146 144 135 1790
Months 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
MEAN 0.94 0.51 0.85 4.84 11.61 13.07 21.83 25.93 37.64 52.37 13.15 3.22
MAX 1.60 0.69 1.87 8.76 19.20 29.35 44.21 38.10 103.03 71.84 37.33 5.99
MIN 0.39 0.29 0.38 1.79 6.90 3.56 11.05 15.68 10.56 25.97 3.00 0.92
20 PERCENTILE 0.51 0.38 0.45 2.01 8.09 5.70 11.87 16.73 14.70 35.11 4.96 1.55
80 PERCENTILE 1.43 0.61 1.01 7.03 15.90 20.98 30.59 34.38 54.71 67.63 15.92 4.97

0.497265
97
Sangke River at Treng (550101) - Mean monthly discharge
1963 4.55 4.16 4.11 3.93 4.10 6.16 26.23 44.32 49.43 45.16 14.14 6.08 17.80
1964 4.91 4.06 3.62 3.76 21.60 9.84 16.69 64.88 44.07 35.97 25.17 7.11 19.64
1965 5.48 5.01 4.55 4.76 13.12 51.51 43.71 42.45 58.48 54.05 11.07 6.11 24.76
1966 4.65 4.36 4.13 5.54 11.30 10.96 40.66 45.46 67.23 29.31 9.69 7.50 20.16
1967 4.88 4.39 3.89 7.22 7.29 14.04 38.21 208.55 63.45 89.23 9.91 6.67 38.58
1968 6.91 5.72 4.00 8.18 6.38 5.29 34.39 153.96 71.08 76.81 9.49 7.10 32.76
1969 5.35 5.01 4.48 4.86 5.26 15.70 109.15 109.01 171.96 60.95 9.97 6.27 42.55
1970 5.35 5.01 4.48 5.57 5.89 23.47 66.89 71.09 85.19 36.44 32.95 93.83 36.60
1971 31.30 12.30 5.00 5.20 6.78 45.83 71.94 47.10 56.08 57.42 9.78 8.13 29.89
1972 6.34 8.89 6.55 11.34 8.70 20.84 16.62 67.84 100.81 58.06 116.53 95.52 43.15
1999 73.57 94.62 115.48 36.48 198.29
2000 9.78 29.48 17.30 75.60 65.86 261.82 227.27
2001 5.81 7.06 10.41 7.08 18.93 39.37 96.00 236.17 36.73 63.50 33.21 5.56 45.99
2002 6.35 11.76 10.66 6.79 15.51 11.43 44.49 112.69 19.13 6.02 5.57
2003 7.30 8.79
Data 403 367 372 390 403 415 429 401 417 413 349 391 4750
Months 13 13 12 13 13 14 14 13 14 14 12 13
MEAN 7.6 6.7 5.5 6.5 11.9 24.7 55.4 97.9 86.8 75.1 24.0 21.3
MAX 31.3 12.3 10.7 11.3 29.5 73.6 109.2 236.2 261.8 227.3 116.5 95.5
MIN 4.5 4.1 3.6 3.8 4.1 5.3 16.6 42.5 36.5 19.1 6.0 5.6
20 PERCENTILE 4.9 4.4 4.0 4.8 6.1 10.5 31.1 46.1 47.3 36.3 9.7 6.1
80 PERCENTILE 6.7 8.9 6.2 7.8 17.6 42.0 83.2 138.6 105.6 81.8 31.4 8.0

0.449438
98
99
ANNEX 3. ANNUAL MAXIMUM DAILY
DISCHARGES

Report, River flow monitoring stations, Tonle Sap Basin, August 2006,
MOWRAM). Note: stations with the discharges shaded in the tables are
considered to be affected by backwater, overbank flow, and unreliable
rating curves, and annual maximum discharges with an AEI greater than
about 2 years therefore are regarded as under-estimates.
100
610101 550102 550101
Rank Sen, % AEI Sangke, P AEI Treng, % AEI
Kompong Battam 1963-
Thom bang 73
1 940 2.3 43.4 800 4.0 24.9 1390 6.1 16.3

2 930 5.6 17.9 600 9.8 10.2 1220 14.9 6.71
3 910 8.9 11.3 590 15.5 6.44 1150 23.7 4.22
4 900 12.2 8.22 580 21.3 4.70 1120 32.5 3.08
5 900 15.5 6.47 575 27.0 3.70 1030 41.2 2.43
6 900 18.8 5.33 570 32.8 3.05 800 50.0 2.00
7 895 22.0 4.54 565 38.5 2.60 750 58.8 1.70
8 870 25.3 3.95 560 44.3 2.26 660 67.5 1.48
9 860 28.6 3.49 550 50.0 2.00 650 76.3 1.31
10 855 31.9 3.13 545 55.7 1.79 590 85.1 1.18
11 850 35.2 2.84 510 61.5 1.63 540 93.9 1.07
12 850 38.5 2.60 510 67.2 1.49 11
13 850 41.8 2.39 495 73.0 1.37
14 850 45.1 2.22 400 78.7 1.27 peak
15 845 48.4 2.07 390 84.5 1.18 flows
16 840 51.6 1.94 330 90.2 1.11 truncated
17 835 54.9 1.82 175 96.0 1.04
18 835 58.2 1.72 17
19 820 61.5 1.63
20 800 64.8 1.54 peak
21 800 68.1 1.47 flows
22 760 71.4 1.40 truncated
23 750 74.7 1.34
24 750 78.0 1.28
25 740 81.3 1.23
26 720 84.5 1.18
27 710 87.8 1.14
28 650 91.1 1.10
29 570 94.4 1.06
30 560 97.7 1.02
30
probable
over-
bank
flow at
high stage
101
570101 610102 600101
Rank Kompong % AEI Kompong % AEI Kompong % AEI
K'dei Putrea Chen
1 185 6.7 14.9 1640 6.7 14.9 200 7.4 13.4
2 106 16.3 6.12 1260 16.3 6.12 195 18.1 5.53
3 105 26.0 3.85 1200 26.0 3.85 175 28.7 3.48
4 103 35.6 2.81 1080 35.6 2.81 175 39.4 2.54
5 103 45.2 2.21 1050 45.2 2.21 153 50.0 2.00
6 96 54.8 1.82 1000 54.8 1.82 150 60.6 1.65
7 88 64.4 1.55 860 64.4 1.55 140 71.3 1.40
8 70 74.0 1.35 820 74.0 1.35 138 81.9 1.22
9 16 83.7 1.20 815 83.7 1.20 136 92.6 1.08
10 15 93.3 1.07 650 93.3 1.07 9
10 10
peak
peak flows
flows truncated
truncated
580104 620101 540101

Rank Kum % AEI Kompong % AEI Kralanh % AEI
Viel Thmar
1 520 7.4 13.4 330 8.3 12.0 245 8.3 12.0
2 500 18.1 5.53 295 20.2 4.94 200 20.2 4.94
3 500 28.7 3.48 280 32.1 3.11 195 32.1 3.11
4 500 39.4 2.54 275 44.0 2.27 190 44.0 2.27
5 500 50.0 2.00 245 56.0 1.79 170 56.0 1.79
6 480 60.6 1.65 240 67.9 1.47 155 67.9 1.47
7 445 71.3 1.40 200 79.8 1.25 140 79.8 1.25
8 425 81.9 1.22 200 91.7 1.09 107 91.7 1.09
9 340 92.6 1.08 8 8
9
102
520101 580301 590101
Rank Mongkol % AEI Prey Klong % AEI Boribo % AEI
Borey (downstream)
1 150 8.3 12.0 190 8.3 12.0 186 9.5 10.6
2 90 20.2 4.94 160 20.2 4.94 185 23.0 4.35
3 85 32.1 3.11 160 32.1 3.11 178 36.5 2.74
4 84 44.0 2.27 135 44.0 2.27 138 50.0 2.00
5 82 56.0 1.79 125 56.0 1.79 136 63.5 1.57
6 72 67.9 1.47 95 67.9 1.47 136 77.0 1.30
7 68 79.8 1.25 80 79.8 1.25 108 90.5 1.10
8 42 91.7 1.09 55 91.7 1.09 7
8 8
peak
flows
truncated
580103 560102 580201

Rank Baktrakoun % AEI Prasat % AEI Peam % AEI
Keo
1 1180 10.9 9.1 58 10.9 9.1 235 13.0 7.7
2 930 26.6 3.76 57 26.6 3.76 210 31.5 3.18
3 870 42.2 2.37 55 42.2 2.37 165 50.0 2.00
4 540 57.8 1.73 53 57.8 1.73 140 68.5 1.46
5 500 73.4 1.36 45 73.4 1.36 115 87.0 1.15
6 220 89.1 1.12 7 89.1 1.12 5
6 6
peak
flows
truncated
580102
Rank Taing % AEI
Leach
1 720 13.0 7.7
2 510 31.5 3.18
3 470 50.0 2.00
4 320 68.5 1.46
5 260 87.0 1.15
5
103
ANNEX 4. MEAN MONTHLY AND
ANNUAL RAINFALLS
(Based on data presented in Department of Meteorology Report, Rainfall

monitoring stations, Tonle Sap Basin, August 2006, MOWRAM)
104
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR #
complete
years
Angkor Chum rainfall (130320) 6.3 1.8 22.1 92.8 95.8 198.8 132.7 216.3 207.9 134.6 72.8 20.8 1202.7 5
Angkor Wat rainfall (130310) 4.6 4.3 19.3 29.9 170.9 242.3 196.3 245.8 205.7 245.4 41.4 8.6 1414.5 7
Bac Preah rainfall (130314) 0.3 17.7 21.1 54.6 145.0 106.8 156.6 156.6 233.4 113.1 64.8 14.2 1084.1 6
Bamnak rainfall (120406) 5.9 17.0 37.3 85.3 136.4 141.4 172.6 242.9 213.6 221.2 104.6 15.7 1394.0 15
Banan rainfall (130301) 3.7 15.5 44.2 83.3 111.7 76.7 116.6 148.2 207.2 209.1 78.4 0.6 1095.3 7
Banteay Srey rainfall (130322) 0.4 2.5 13.5 51.2 117.9 126.7 71.7 109.5 125.3 82.7 7.9 2.5 711.6 4
Baray rainfall (120503) 4.5 12.7 34.0 77.2 172.2 202.6 191.5 208.6 257.8 193.1 57.6 25.6 1437.3 23
Battambang rainfall (130305) 4.6 17.4 45.1 90.2 161.2 142.1 166.0 172.7 238.2 209.6 88.9 14.2 1350.0 53
Boeung Kantout rainfall (120320) 0.1 1.6 55.6 101.4 155.4 177.9 163.8 170.4 233.5 237.4 115.1 21.7 1433.9 7
Boeung Khnar rainfall (120426) 0.3 3.2 59.8 137.1 108.6 117.2 135.2 159.5 205.0 282.7 68.5 9.6 1286.6 5
Boeung Leach rainfall (110429) 23.9 0.0 31.5 32.3 149.4 153.7 172.5 210.6 275.7 185.1 45.5 18.1 1298.3 4
Boeung Por rainfall (120411) 36.1 0.0 48.6 40.5 117.2 158.9 129.7 287.6 218.8 177.4 28.2 21.8 1264.8 3
Boeung Raing rainfall (130318) 3.0 7.3 44.5 74.5 97.5 147.3 78.2 106.5 93.8 230.7 31.0 9.3 923.7 3
Boribo rainfall (120410) 1.1 0.0 21.4 65.3 191.6 184.7 235.1 312.2 250.1 197.1 86.0 19.3 1563.7 2
Bovel rainfall (130208) 9.0 10.4 59.9 54.9 44.8 88.1 116.1 243.1 216.5 171.2 18.1 0.0 1032.2 3
Chamlong Kuoy rainfall (120205) 5.2 23.7 76.2 84.8 175.1 109.5 106.3 233.5 237.7 213.9 78.8 5.5 1350.2 7
Cheang Meanchey rainfall (120311) 3.1 6.7 117.3 105.1 96.4 61.3 36.1 194.5 248.8 275.5 80.4 2.6 1227.5 2
Chong Kal rainfall (130309) 17.3 20.5 5.6 133.9 147.2 202.8 98.7 449.0 184.1 144.2 70.9 4.2 1478.2 1
Damdek rainfall (130404) 1.2 0.0 23.2 72.4 95.9 170.0 127.3 206.7 229.6 185.3 74.3 13.3 1199.2 5
Dap Bat rainfall (120304) 1.6 10.2 53.9 79.5 130.5 132.1 119.3 192.8 278.7 230.0 88.2 8.7 1325.5 17
Doun Pean rainfall (120414) 10.2 1.7 34.4 38.4 68.9 137.2 67.0 170.8 105.6 179.0 110.6 12.3 935.8 2
Kauk Patry rainfall (130312) 4.8 3.2 19.5 52.1 118.3 214.5 177.8 200.6 302.9 206.2 66.0 4.6 1370.4 14
Khum Lvear rainfall (130323) 0.0 20.0 55.7 33.8 99.4 107.4 135.5 210.7 370.9 346.2 191.8 25.5 1596.6 2
Komping Puoy rainfall (130211) 0.0 10.1 73.2 32.2 106.8 105.7 49.1 233.8 245.0 250.9 98.0 14.9 1219.6 2
Kompong Chhnang rainfall (120401) 5.1 21.1 31.9 76.4 170.7 224.7 268.2 260.6 269.9 247.4 104.2 22.6 1702.9 40
Kompong K'dei rainfall (130405) 5.6 6.9 30.6 83.4 155.3 130.4 173.0 200.8 259.3 208.9 109.3 11.9 1375.5 11
Kompong Leang rainfall (120415) 3.7 15.8 60.1 69.9 139.9 187.7 180.2 193.8 231.8 242.1 65.5 10.2 1400.8 9
Kompong Thmar rainfall (620101) 2.5 12.3 59.0 155.4 179.3 164.4 238.7 267.3 229.2 256.5 126.0 15.7 1706.2 4
Kompong Thom rainfall (120404) 1.2 11.0 48.4 65.0 163.6 218.6 211.1 172.1 306.8 184.2 66.0 14.5 1462.4 47
Kompong Tralach rainfall (110405) 8.5 10.9 41.5 65.7 143.4 157.4 150.6 183.0 260.7 209.5 95.0 30.1 1356.3 19
Komrieng rainfall (130210) 4.4 0.0 118.8 13.3 27.3 66.2 54.7 121.4 246.8 261.4 283.6 0.0 1197.8 2
Kondal Chrass rainfall (120424) 30.1 0.0 63.1 89.3 105.4 212.2 177.6 207.7 195.8 325.1 50.8 0.7 1457.6 3
Kraing Tamoung rainfall (120419) 24.2 0.0 74.9 65.6 180.5 215.7 202.7 297.4 322.2 168.1 38.2 23.7 1613.0 3
105
complete
years
Krakor rainfall (120403) 6.9 7.6 31.0 67.2 190.2 188.3 184.1 205.7 233.5 275.3 101.6 24.1 1515.6 33
Kralanh rainfall (130302) 3.5 4.0 31.5 101.8 129.5 145.8 142.3 158.5 232.9 165.1 59.1 6.8 1180.8 17
Kravanh-Leach rainfall (120306) 7.6 28.1 62.5 120.5 156.7 145.0 153.6 186.6 235.5 321.5 113.2 37.5 1568.3 13
Maung Russey rainfall (120303) 2.2 8.8 44.0 87.7 132.6 114.4 118.2 101.6 180.5 216.2 123.3 11.2 1140.7 20
Mongkol Borey rainfall (130315) 2.4 15.2 58.2 60.5 123.4 125.9 123.8 178.6 157.5 197.1 39.7 2.5 1084.8 7
O Chrov rainfall (130209) 1.3 21.5 45.9 26.8 128.2 79.6 148.2 191.8 188.1 176.8 17.6 0.0 1025.9 2
O Taky rainfall (130304) 26.2 3.9 43.9 57.1 134.1 185.6 119.7 197.2 192.7 156.3 91.0 0.6 1208.0 5
Pailin rainfall (120202) 15.2 28.1 88.7 105.6 147.7 94.3 127.9 137.2 203.1 183.3 84.3 24.1 1239.5 10
Peam rainfall (120313) 14.5 0.0 98.1 45.5 209.0 57.0 75.2 166.9 186.2 343.0 59.9 23.7 1278.9 2
Phnom Koulen rainfall (130403) 8.5 4.6 34.3 135.3 177.4 235.1 224.4 309.4 443.3 151.3 12.9 2.3 1738.9 3
Phnom Krom rainfall (130324) 0.0 0.0 63.4 22.9 166.4 180.5 97.8 307.3 178.3 138.4 15.6 14.3 1184.7 2
Phnom Srok rainfall (130308) 4.0 5.0 25.5 56.8 144.9 143.0 123.4 173.5 255.8 174.7 42.8 8.0 1157.3 12
Pong Ros rainfall (120418) 3.4 0.2 71.2 46.9 101.5 154.3 191.1 228.2 284.2 152.4 59.3 7.2 1299.7 4
Ponley rainfall (120417) 0.0 5.3 44.8 33.8 183.0 261.9 174.3 270.2 243.1 190.5 72.3 10.4 1489.6 8
Pranet Preah rainfall (130316) 3.5 10.8 34.5 55.6 153.6 153.7 103.0 171.9 215.4 185.8 20.7 11.9 1120.3 6
Prasat Bakong rainfall (130321) 0.0 0.0 43.7 27.9 143.9 149.0 208.2 241.6 228.1 204.2 95.2 15.9 1357.6 5
Prasat Balaing rainfall (120422) 0.0 0.0 75.8 193.9 235.6 256.5 238.8 209.2 308.1 165.5 13.7 0.0 1697.0 2
Prasat Sambo rainfall (120516) 0.0 0.0 71.1 75.4 114.2 272.0 191.7 273.6 239.7 161.3 12.2 0.0 1411.2 3
Prey Prous rainfall (120425) 3.6 1.6 44.6 101.1 141.4 160.0 147.8 171.9 274.7 149.3 99.3 12.1 1307.3 7
Pursat rainfall (120302) 2.4 5.6 35.4 77.5 146.3 130.1 127.4 172.6 240.4 214.5 101.9 23.5 1277.6 48
Raing Kesey rainfall (120305) 5.6 7.7 39.0 75.9 142.4 124.4 145.2 172.7 242.4 151.7 83.8 16.4 1207.2 12
Rattanak Mondol rainfall (120213) 4.0 25.5 86.6 120.7 112.4 36.8 17.9 271.2 296.2 234.4 52.6 26.5 1284.7 2
Rolear Phear rainfall (120416) 10.6 5.0 42.4 57.7 144.7 170.3 211.4 227.4 198.6 192.1 50.0 10.4 1320.5 7
Roung Chrey rainfall (130212) 0.0 14.6 45.6 44.4 133.4 51.6 66.3 173.7 184.1 181.6 28.0 2.8 926.0 2
Rovieng rainfall (130503) 0.0 0.0 26.4 70.3 191.6 166.7 354.9 233.7 302.7 39.9 25.6 2.1 1413.9 2
Samaki Meanchey rainfall (110430) 13.9 0.0 37.8 63.4 127.8 146.2 121.0 217.7 265.4 224.6 75.2 16.8 1309.7 7
Samlot rainfall (130215) 10.8 4.3 183.9 176.3 173.8 114.4 209.2 386.9 305.1 295.8 125.6 15.3 2001.3 2
Sandan rainfall (130505) 1.3 0.3 39.9 97.9 187.2 180.2 243.9 206.4 204.7 94.8 71.3 15.4 1343.1 5
Sasar Sdam rainfall (130311) 1.1 4.5 30.1 50.1 102.8 118.4 122.3 156.6 253.1 199.2 50.6 21.5 1110.2 5
Sdoc Ach Romeas rainfall (120407) 2.4 0.7 16.9 38.8 186.8 138.2 219.2 228.3 348.4 203.9 84.9 14.4 1483.0 3
Siem Reap Koktatry rainfall (130325) 4.6 3.6 25.1 53.3 120.8 176.0 175.0 196.0 272.1 216.5 81.1 4.3 1328.2 36
Sisophon rainfall (130202) 3.7 12.8 34.7 57.3 155.6 141.0 144.3 161.7 256.8 172.3 38.6 16.0 1194.7 25
Srey Snam rainfall (130326) 0.0 14.5 18.6 41.1 159.7 135.3 118.0 212.3 223.7 157.6 12.8 4.4 1098.1 3
106
complete
years
Srok Pouk rainfall (130329) 7.1 1.4 17.5 63.6 156.1 231.6 185.1 214.6 213.8 147.7 112.4 0.0 1350.8 3
Staung rainfall station (120402) 6.9 7.0 39.5 68.1 137.3 140.0 183.7 201.7 331.5 213.3 97.1 18.7 1444.7 4
Stung Chinit rainfall (120423) 1.6 11.8 54.6 133.1 160.1 190.1 214.3 230.5 249.3 215.1 82.6 10.7 1553.8 8
Svay Chek rainfall (130205) 1.6 22.0 28.0 55.5 168.6 113.6 140.1 163.5 270.3 167.1 44.6 5.9 1181.0 13
Svay Donkeo rainfall (581102) 0.0 0.7 52.1 68.2 117.3 93.7 130.8 106.0 118.8 269.1 81.9 12.1 1050.6 5
Svay Leu rainfall (130327) 7.3 7.8 77.1 141.8 162.7 189.0 240.4 375.1 253.8 301.1 20.1 34.8 1810.8 2
Taing Kok rainfall (120517) 6.2 0.0 47.4 138.8 140.7 195.4 175.4 163.3 175.6 175.7 66.0 13.2 1297.7 7
Taing Krasaing rainfall (120518) 0.5 3.9 60.4 148.5 172.7 178.8 176.7 188.0 274.9 180.2 62.7 15.0 1462.1 6
Talo rainfall (120309) 6.5 14.0 45.3 76.9 127.1 128.1 141.8 170.3 193.3 190.7 80.2 7.5 1181.6 8
Tbeng rainfall (130406) 0.0 30.7 57.0 93.8 142.5 78.5 23.9 1008.5 518.5 391.0 267.0 22.9 2634.3 1
Thmar Kol rainfall (130319) 1.6 21.3 73.3 92.8 136.7 115.8 133.2 146.1 175.0 209.0 64.7 5.6 1175.0 8
Thmar Pouk rainfall (130317) 4.5 8.2 10.3 66.8 84.3 64.3 60.2 92.3 117.6 154.1 5.1 1.2 668.8 4
Treng rainfall (120206) 1.5 46.5 92.4 84.8 153.7 85.5 111.1 190.2 203.1 205.6 81.4 4.8 1260.6 5
Tuk Phos rainfall (120420) 8.6 8.4 37.5 70.5 160.9 137.8 155.7 233.6 324.4 192.9 89.2 46.6 1466.1 8
Tuol Khpos rainfall (110414) 2.4 0.3 185.1 242.4 345.2 212.1 448.2 291.7 300.8 9.3 6.1 0
Tuol Krous rainfall (120301) 3.5 23.1 82.4 60.7 192.7 139.3 166.4 215.9 231.6 195.4 77.0 23.5 1411.3 6
Tuol Samraung rainfall (130313) 2.7 15.9 56.7 75.1 156.4 150.3 114.7 180.7 255.5 180.5 83.7 12.7 1284.8 10
Varin rainfall (130328) 2.2 4.0 32.7 118.9 176.0 117.3 122.5 200.6 338.8 143.7 25.5 7.2 1289.1 4
107
ANNEX 5. MEAN MONTHLY AND
ANNUAL RAINDAYS

108
complete
years
Angkor Chum rainfall (130320) 0.4 0.6 1.6 3.8 6.8 9.0 7.5 10.0 11.3 8.3 4.3 0.8 64.6 5
Angkor Wat rainfall (130310) 0.5 1.5 5.0 5.5 13.5 17.5 15.5 15.0 20.5 24.0 11.0 4.5 134.0 7
Bac Preah rainfall (130314) 0.1 1.4 1.4 4.7 10.7 11.4 13.3 11.0 11.7 8.6 3.1 1.1 78.7 6
Bamnak rainfall (120406) 0.8 1.1 3.8 5.3 10.6 11.6 13.0 13.7 16.1 14.3 9.3 1.4 101.0 15
Banan rainfall (130301) 0.5 1.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 3.0 6.0 9.7 8.7 8.0 2.7 0.3 52.8 7
Banteay Srey rainfall (130322) 0.3 0.3 2.0 4.0 8.2 12.8 8.0 11.8 13.0 9.4 1.3 0.3 71.2 4
Baray rainfall (120503) 0.3 1.0 2.3 4.8 9.6 11.4 13.6 12.8 13.8 11.5 4.2 1.2 86.4 23
Battambang rainfall (130305) 0.8 2.0 4.2 7.5 12.8 14.3 17.2 17.4 18.1 14.5 6.9 2.2 117.8 53
Boeung Kantout rainfall (120320) 0.1 0.3 2.7 4.4 9.1 9.1 11.3 11.3 12.9 11.2 6.3 1.4 80.2 7
Boeung Khnar rainfall (120426) 0.7 0.7 4.3 6.1 9.6 10.9 13.5 15.0 16.7 15.3 7.0 1.8 101.6 5
Boeung Leach rainfall (110429) 1.5 0.0 1.8 3.5 9.3 9.0 8.4 12.4 14.0 10.2 2.8 1.4 74.2 4
Boeung Por rainfall (120411) 2.0 0.0 2.3 2.7 7.0 12.0 9.0 17.8 14.3 10.0 3.3 1.5 81.8 3
Boeung Raing rainfall (130318) 0.7 1.0 3.7 5.0 6.0 5.7 8.0 8.0 6.7 8.7 4.0 1.0 58.3 3
Boribo rainfall (120410) 1.0 0.0 2.0 3.8 11.4 11.2 14.0 17.8 16.8 13.7 5.2 1.2 98.0 2
Bovel rainfall (130208) 1.0 1.5 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.7 13.0 10.3 8.7 1.3 0.0 61.5 3
Chamlong Kuoy rainfall (120205) 1.5 2.0 3.5 7.0 7.0 6.5 5.0 12.3 12.7 12.3 5.7 0.7 76.2 7
Cheang Meanchey rainfall (120311) 1.0 1.5 6.5 5.5 7.0 5.5 4.7 10.0 9.7 12.0 5.0 0.3 68.7 2
Chong Kal rainfall (130309) 0.5 2.5 0.5 4.5 6.5 9.5 10.5 11.0 10.0 10.0 4.0 1.0 70.5 1
Damdek rainfall (130404) 0.3 0.0 2.1 3.6 5.1 9.0 9.4 10.8 11.7 10.5 5.2 2.0 69.7 5
Dap Bat rainfall (120304) 0.4 0.7 3.6 5.3 10.3 8.8 11.2 13.9 17.4 13.9 6.4 1.8 93.4 17
Doun Pean rainfall (120414) 1.5 0.5 5.0 3.0 5.0 7.0 3.5 11.3 6.0 8.3 5.3 1.0 57.5 2
Kauk Patry rainfall (130312) 0.5 0.7 2.4 4.3 10.8 16.4 15.6 15.7 17.9 14.8 6.7 1.1 106.9 14
Khum Lvear rainfall (130323) 0.0 2.0 5.0 3.5 7.0 9.0 10.0 9.5 15.5 18.0 10.0 1.0 90.5 2
Komping Puoy rainfall (130211) 0.0 1.5 7.0 4.5 14.5 13.5 7.3 14.3 14.0 15.7 5.3 1.0 98.7 2
Kompong Chhnang rainfall (120401) 0.6 1.4 1.6 4.4 13.4 15.7 18.5 17.6 18.7 16.2 7.1 2.3 117.3 40
Kompong K'dei rainfall (130405) 0.6 1.0 2.2 5.2 10.5 10.7 12.7 13.0 15.1 14.1 5.3 1.6 92.1 11
Kompong Leang rainfall (120415) 0.4 0.6 2.7 4.3 10.3 11.9 12.9 14.3 12.6 12.0 4.7 0.7 87.4 9
Kompong Thmar rainfall (620101) 0.8 2.4 4.4 8.2 12.4 13.5 15.6 16.8 14.2 16.6 8.2 1.8 114.9 4
Kompong Thom rainfall (120404) 0.3 0.8 2.5 5.1 11.9 15.0 14.2 12.8 16.6 13.0 5.6 1.5 99.2 46
Kompong Tralach rainfall (110405) 0.6 0.8 1.6 4.4 9.2 10.7 11.0 12.4 15.5 13.7 6.0 1.8 87.4 19
Komrieng rainfall (130210) 1.0 0.0 5.0 2.0 4.0 3.5 2.3 4.0 8.3 6.3 6.3 0.0 42.8 2
109
complete
years
Kondal Chrass rainfall (120424) 2.5 0.0 3.3 4.0 5.5 7.8 10.6 12.6 9.3 12.5 3.3 1.0 72.3 3
Kraing Tamoung rainfall (120419) 1.0 0.0 4.7 4.3 13.7 14.7 14.8 20.0 18.5 12.0 4.3 1.8 109.6 3
Krakor rainfall (120403) 0.9 0.7 1.8 5.5 13.4 15.6 15.6 16.7 16.8 14.8 7.7 2.6 112.1 33
Kralanh rainfall (130302) 0.1 0.7 2.3 4.3 8.6 8.4 8.9 9.7 11.5 8.8 3.9 0.6 67.8 17
Kravanh-Leach rainfall (120306) 0.8 1.4 3.2 5.3 8.9 9.1 7.6 9.9 10.8 11.9 6.8 1.9 77.6 13
Maung Russey rainfall (120303) 0.3 0.6 3.0 4.4 7.3 6.5 7.0 7.2 10.0 9.7 6.1 1.0 63.0 20
Mongkol Borey rainfall (130315) 0.3 1.3 6.8 5.5 10.7 10.7 14.2 13.3 14.7 10.5 2.8 0.7 91.5 7
O Chrov rainfall (130209) 0.3 2.0 3.7 3.0 8.7 5.3 9.7 12.0 11.0 11.3 3.0 0.0 70.0 2
O Taky rainfall (130304) 1.0 0.5 3.0 3.5 5.0 6.0 5.3 8.3 7.3 7.0 2.7 0.0 49.7 5
Pailin rainfall (120202) 1.7 3.6 8.4 9.8 15.4 12.9 14.6 14.9 16.7 13.5 8.1 2.4 122.0 10
Peam rainfall (120313) 2.5 0.0 9.0 5.5 11.5 8.0 9.3 15.0 12.0 18.0 5.7 2.7 99.2 2
Phnom Koulen rainfall (130403) 2.0 2.0 5.5 8.0 14.0 15.0 15.0 17.0 19.0 14.5 2.5 0.5 115.0 3
Phnom Krom rainfall (130324) 0.0 0.0 3.5 2.5 10.0 16.5 15.5 17.5 14.0 10.0 4.0 2.0 95.5 2
Phnom Srok rainfall (130308) 0.1 0.6 1.8 2.2 7.3 6.9 7.5 8.6 11.2 8.5 3.8 0.5 59.0 12
Pong Ros rainfall (120418) 0.8 0.3 3.5 2.5 8.5 8.8 11.4 15.4 14.0 9.6 4.0 1.0 79.7 4
Ponley rainfall (120417) 0.0 0.5 1.8 2.0 8.4 11.1 9.9 13.6 12.3 10.0 4.6 0.8 74.8 8
Pranet Preah rainfall (130316) 0.3 0.8 3.3 4.8 7.3 8.3 7.5 8.8 10.5 10.5 1.3 0.8 63.8 6
Prasat Bakong rainfall (130321) 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.7 8.8 11.5 14.2 13.0 15.6 10.2 7.2 1.2 88.3 5
Prasat Balaing rainfall (120422) 0.0 0.0 5.0 4.5 9.5 10.5 10.7 13.3 11.7 9.7 1.3 0.0 76.2 2
Prasat Sambo rainfall (120516) 0.0 0.0 3.3 4.0 7.7 14.7 11.8 14.0 12.5 9.0 1.0 0.0 77.9 3
Prey Prous rainfall (120425) 1.1 0.5 2.5 5.4 8.4 10.3 11.1 13.3 13.1 10.4 5.3 1.4 82.7 7
Pursat rainfall (120302) 0.4 0.8 3.1 5.9 11.1 9.8 10.2 13.0 15.3 11.9 7.5 2.5 91.3 50
Raing Kesey rainfall (120305) 0.4 0.6 3.1 3.9 11.4 9.4 12.0 12.4 16.3 8.6 6.6 0.4 85.1 12
Rattanak Mondol rainfall (120213) 0.5 1.5 4.0 6.5 8.0 4.0 2.0 9.7 14.0 12.7 4.3 1.3 68.5 2
Rolear Phear rainfall (120416) 0.3 0.4 2.4 4.3 10.3 12.1 13.4 13.9 13.4 12.7 3.4 0.8 87.5 7
Roung Chrey rainfall (130212) 0.0 1.5 3.5 2.0 9.0 4.0 5.0 13.3 10.0 8.7 2.0 0.3 59.3 2
Rovieng rainfall (130503) 0.0 0.0 2.7 4.3 11.7 10.0 12.0 13.5 15.0 3.0 1.0 0.5 73.7 2
Samaki Meanchey rainfall (110430) 0.6 0.0 1.8 2.8 6.8 7.4 6.1 9.1 10.6 10.5 3.1 0.8 59.4 7
Samlot rainfall (130215) 0.5 0.5 7.0 8.5 13.0 12.0 12.3 17.3 11.7 15.7 4.7 1.0 104.2 2
Sandan rainfall (130505) 0.3 0.2 3.0 4.8 11.8 10.2 13.5 14.3 14.2 9.2 4.0 0.8 86.3 5
Sasar Sdam rainfall (130311) 0.5 0.0 4.0 3.0 11.0 8.5 7.5 11.5 16.0 11.5 5.5 2.5 81.5 5
Sdoc Ach Romeas rainfall (120407) 0.7 0.3 1.0 4.0 12.7 11.0 12.7 17.0 19.5 15.3 7.5 0.8 102.3 3
Siem Reap Koktatry rainfall (130325) 0.6 0.6 2.3 4.5 10.0 14.7 15.8 16.0 18.1 15.1 7.2 0.8 105.7 34
110
complete
years
Sisophon rainfall (130202) 0.4 1.6 3.0 5.6 13.5 11.9 15.1 15.0 16.7 12.7 4.5 1.8 101.5 25
Srey Snam rainfall (130326) 0.0 0.3 0.7 2.3 5.7 5.7 5.0 12.7 10.3 6.0 1.3 0.3 50.3 3
Srok Pouk rainfall (130329) 1.0 0.3 1.0 5.0 8.3 11.0 12.3 12.3 15.3 9.3 6.7 0.0 82.7 3
Staung rainfall station (120402) 1.0 1.6 3.7 4.4 9.0 9.7 11.2 13.1 14.9 11.7 7.8 3.6 91.6 4
Stung Chinit rainfall (120423) 1.5 1.6 3.8 7.6 11.9 12.0 14.8 15.6 14.3 13.6 5.9 1.6 104.1 8
Svay Chek rainfall (130205) 0.0 0.8 3.3 3.8 6.0 5.8 9.6 9.8 11.8 7.4 1.4 0.5 60.0 13
Svay Donkeo rainfall (581102) 0.0 0.2 4.4 5.2 8.8 8.8 12.8 10.5 9.8 12.0 7.2 1.7 81.4 5
Svay Leu rainfall (130327) 1.5 1.5 6.0 6.0 8.0 12.0 11.0 12.5 11.5 10.5 4.5 4.5 89.5 2
Taing Kok rainfall (120517) 1.1 0.1 2.4 6.3 8.3 11.0 12.5 13.1 10.3 11.1 4.5 1.4 82.2 7
Taing Krasaing rainfall station
(120518) 0.8 1.2 5.7 10.0 22.5 23.5 22.5 26.7 23.7 17.8 7.0 1.3 162.7 6
Talo rainfall (120309) 0.0 0.4 4.2 3.0 6.0 9.0 10.5 10.0 11.0 11.5 4.3 0.8 70.8 8
Tbeng rainfall (130406) 0.0 1.0 3.0 8.0 8.0 7.0 4.0 13.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 2.0 70.0 1
Thmar Kol rainfall (130319) 0.1 1.1 2.9 4.3 6.8 6.9 8.5 8.5 9.6 7.5 2.5 0.6 59.3 8
Thmar Pouk rainfall (130317) 0.5 1.5 1.8 4.0 4.8 5.0 4.5 6.5 10.3 8.3 0.8 0.3 48.0 4
Treng rainfall (120206) 0.0 2.5 8.0 6.5 12.5 8.5 11.3 15.0 18.8 18.3 9.8 2.3 113.3 5
Tuk Phos rainfall (120420) 1.6 0.6 2.3 3.6 8.8 7.9 9.3 11.6 12.4 10.2 3.8 2.2 74.2 8
Tuol Khpos rainfall (110414) 3.0 1.0 10.0 16.0 17.0 16.5 20.0 19.5 18.5 3.5 0.5 0
Tuol Krous rainfall (120301) 1.8 2.2 5.3 6.0 16.2 13.9 16.4 19.0 20.9 18.7 9.9 2.0 132.2 6
Tuol Samraung rainfall (130313) 0.7 1.8 5.8 6.7 14.0 13.8 14.8 16.0 16.7 9.7 5.5 1.6 107.1 10
Varin rainfall (130328) 0.5 1.0 3.0 4.8 8.5 5.8 6.8 10.0 10.8 6.8 2.8 1.0 61.5 4
111
ANNEX 6. ANNUAL MAXIMUM ONE-DAY
RAINFALLS

112
rank Battam % AEI Pursat % AEI Kompong % AEI
bang Chhnang
1 200.80 1.31 76.29 209.90 1.39 72.00 226.00 1.17 85.57
2 149.80 3.18 31.41 177.70 3.37 29.65 178.00 2.84 35.24
3 144.00 5.06 19.78 163.70 5.36 18.67 170.00 4.51 22.19
4 138.20 6.93 14.43 134.80 7.34 13.62 151.00 6.18 16.19
5 133.40 8.80 11.36 129.40 9.33 10.72 144.50 7.85 12.74
6 132.70 10.67 9.37 128.50 11.31 8.84 139.00 9.52 10.51
7 123.70 12.55 7.97 125.30 13.29 7.52 130.00 11.19 8.94
8 121.20 14.42 6.94 123.00 15.28 6.55 130.00 12.85 7.78
9 109.50 16.29 6.14 121.00 17.26 5.79 110.00 14.52 6.89
10 109.00 18.16 5.51 120.00 19.25 5.20 107.50 16.19 6.18
11 108.70 20.04 4.99 119.30 21.23 4.71 98.80 17.86 5.60
12 108.60 21.91 4.56 112.60 23.21 4.31 96.70 19.53 5.12
13 104.20 23.78 4.20 109.80 25.20 3.97 96.70 21.20 4.72
14 104.10 25.66 3.90 101.40 27.18 3.68 93.00 22.87 4.37
15 100.00 27.53 3.63 99.50 29.17 3.43 91.10 24.54 4.07
16 99.60 29.40 3.40 96.00 31.15 3.21 87.90 26.21 3.82
17 95.50 31.27 3.20 92.30 33.13 3.02 87.70 27.88 3.59
18 94.10 33.15 3.02 92.10 35.12 2.85 84.50 29.55 3.38
19 91.80 35.02 2.86 90.90 37.10 2.70 84.20 31.22 3.20
20 89.70 36.89 2.71 90.00 39.09 2.56 83.20 32.89 3.04
21 88.80 38.76 2.58 84.50 41.07 2.43 83.00 34.56 2.89
22 88.60 40.64 2.46 83.60 43.06 2.32 81.70 36.23 2.76
23 87.50 42.51 2.35 82.70 45.04 2.22 81.50 37.90 2.64
24 85.60 44.38 2.25 81.50 47.02 2.13 79.70 39.57 2.53
25 85.60 46.25 2.16 81.10 49.01 2.04 79.20 41.24 2.43
26 84.30 48.13 2.08 81.00 50.99 1.96 78.00 42.90 2.33
27 83.00 50.00 2.00 78.60 52.98 1.89 75.20 44.57 2.24
28 82.70 51.87 1.93 78.30 54.96 1.82 74.60 46.24 2.16
29 80.70 53.75 1.86 77.00 56.94 1.76 73.50 47.91 2.09
30 80.40 55.62 1.80 77.00 58.93 1.70 72.10 49.58 2.02
31 79.00 57.49 1.74 75.00 60.91 1.64 69.00 51.25 1.95
32 78.50 59.36 1.68 73.90 62.90 1.59 66.00 52.92 1.89
33 78.40 61.24 1.63 73.50 64.88 1.54 65.20 54.59 1.83
34 73.90 63.11 1.58 72.80 66.87 1.50 64.70 56.26 1.78
35 72.00 64.98 1.54 71.00 68.85 1.45 64.30 57.93 1.73
36 72.00 66.85 1.50 70.50 70.83 1.41 64.20 59.60 1.68
37 70.20 68.73 1.46 68.00 72.82 1.37 63.50 61.27 1.63
38 70.20 70.60 1.42 66.00 74.80 1.34 61.00 62.94 1.59
39 67.10 72.47 1.38 65.80 76.79 1.30 60.30 64.61 1.55
40 66.70 74.34 1.35 65.20 78.77 1.27 59.50 66.28 1.51
41 65.80 76.22 1.31 63.20 80.75 1.24 59.10 67.95 1.47
42 65.30 78.09 1.28 62.50 82.74 1.21 22.50 69.62 1.44
43 63.60 79.96 1.25 62.20 84.72 1.18 42.00
44 62.50 81.84 1.22 58.90 86.71 1.15
45 60.90 83.71 1.19 58.60 88.69 1.13
46 59.00 85.58 1.17 57.70 90.67 1.10
47 59.00 87.45 1.14 56.30 92.66 1.08
48 58.20 89.33 1.12 53.20 94.64 1.06
49 53.70 91.20 1.10 49.50 96.63 1.03
50 50.00 93.07 1.07 39.50 98.61 1.01
113
rank Battam % AEI Pursat % AEI Kompong % AEI
bang Chhnang
51 49.80 94.94 1.05 50.00
52 49.30 96.82 1.03
53 41.70 98.69 1.01
53.00
rank Maung % AEI Sisophon % AEI

Russey
1 195.10 3.43 29.14 139.90 3.27 30.57
2 163.00 8.33 12.00 127.70 7.94 12.59
3 157.90 13.24 7.56 119.20 12.62 7.93
4 136.80 18.14 5.51 106.40 17.29 5.78
5 99.40 23.04 4.34 104.20 21.96 4.55
6 95.00 27.94 3.58 102.90 26.64 3.75
7 94.40 32.84 3.04 100.00 31.31 3.19
8 92.80 37.75 2.65 96.00 35.98 2.78
9 87.10 42.65 2.34 94.40 40.65 2.46
10 83.70 47.55 2.10 87.70 45.33 2.21
11 83.00 52.45 1.91 81.30 50.00 2.00
12 79.30 57.35 1.74 79.00 54.67 1.83
13 73.30 62.25 1.61 78.00 59.35 1.69
14 60.50 67.16 1.49 77.20 64.02 1.56
15 54.00 72.06 1.39 71.00 68.69 1.46
16 53.00 76.96 1.30 68.20 73.36 1.36
17 52.50 81.86 1.22 65.50 78.04 1.28
18 51.50 86.76 1.15 55.50 82.71 1.21
19 49.30 91.67 1.09 45.00 87.38 1.14
20 35.20 96.57 1.04 39.40 92.06 1.09
21 20.00 33.00 96.73 1.03
21.00
114
rank Baray P AEI Siem % AEI Krakor % AEI
Reap
1 162.00 2.16 46.29 160.40 2.03 49.14 210.00 2.10 47.71
2 126.00 5.25 19.06 156.50 4.94 20.24 202.90 5.09 19.65
3 115.50 8.33 12.00 139.00 7.85 12.74 183.00 8.08 12.37
4 114.00 11.42 8.76 135.50 10.76 9.30 175.50 11.08 9.03
5 108.00 14.51 6.89 130.50 13.66 7.32 159.40 14.07 7.11
6 107.70 17.59 5.68 123.00 16.57 6.04 143.30 17.07 5.86
7 107.00 20.68 4.84 118.30 19.48 5.13 125.50 20.06 4.99
8 104.00 23.77 4.21 109.40 22.38 4.47 124.40 23.05 4.34
9 102.70 26.85 3.72 106.50 25.29 3.95 124.00 26.05 3.84
10 101.00 29.94 3.34 100.60 28.20 3.55 120.00 29.04 3.44
11 100.10 33.02 3.03 99.10 31.10 3.21 113.00 32.04 3.12
12 95.20 36.11 2.77 99.00 34.01 2.94 109.20 35.03 2.85
13 94.00 39.20 2.55 98.90 36.92 2.71 89.20 38.02 2.63
14 90.20 42.28 2.36 97.80 39.83 2.51 88.40 41.02 2.44
15 88.50 45.37 2.20 96.00 42.73 2.34 88.10 44.01 2.27
16 84.20 48.46 2.06 94.60 45.64 2.19 86.20 47.01 2.13
17 84.00 51.54 1.94 90.80 48.55 2.06 80.60 50.00 2.00
18 79.50 54.63 1.83 90.70 51.45 1.94 79.10 52.99 1.89
19 79.00 57.72 1.73 88.60 54.36 1.84 74.00 55.99 1.79
20 78.00 60.80 1.64 87.50 57.27 1.75 70.30 58.98 1.70
21 78.00 63.89 1.57 85.60 60.17 1.66 67.00 61.98 1.61
22 78.00 66.98 1.49 85.20 63.08 1.59 66.40 64.97 1.54
23 75.50 70.06 1.43 82.50 65.99 1.52 65.50 67.96 1.47
24 71.90 73.15 1.37 80.60 68.90 1.45 59.80 70.96 1.41
25 70.30 76.23 1.31 73.40 71.80 1.39 54.00 73.95 1.35
26 69.20 79.32 1.26 72.80 74.71 1.34 49.00 76.95 1.30
27 65.50 82.41 1.21 68.60 77.62 1.29 47.20 79.94 1.25
28 65.20 85.49 1.17 68.20 80.52 1.24 43.60 82.93 1.21
29 62.10 88.58 1.13 67.00 83.43 1.20 42.10 85.93 1.16
30 60.00 91.67 1.09 60.00 86.34 1.16 38.20 88.92 1.12
31 52.10 94.75 1.06 54.10 89.24 1.12 38.10 91.92 1.09
32 51.60 97.84 1.02 52.50 92.15 1.09 37.10 94.91 1.05
33 32.00 40.90 95.06 1.05 35.30 97.90 1.02
29.20 97.97 1.02 33.00
34.00
115
ANNEX 7. EVAPORATION ESTIMATES
116
Pochentong, Kandal
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total/Ave Record
Mean monthly rainfall (mm) 5.8 3.8 16.6 78.8 109.2 112.1 132.9 155.8 187.9 208.5 123.6 35.4 1170.4 91-00
Mean monthly evaporation (mm/day) 91-00
Mean monthly relative humidity (%) 72.9 70.5 70.6 71.4 76.4 78.8 82.3 82.9 85.5 86 79.6 75.2 78 91-00
Mean monthly temperature (°C) 26.3 27.6 29.3 30.1 29.9 28.9 28.2 28.2 27.9 27.2 26.5 25.9 28.0 91-00
Mean monthly maximum temperature
(°C) 31.1 32.7 34.5 34.9 34.3 33 31.9 31.9 31.7 30.8 30.6 30.4 91-00
Mean monthly minimum temperature
(°C) 21.4 22.5 24.1 25.3 25.4 24.8 24.6 24.6 24 23.7 22.4 21.4 91-00
Monthly mean wind velocity (m/sec) 3.1 3.9 4.1 3.8 4.1 4.6 3.9 5 4.3 2.7 3.6 3.7 3.9 91-00
Mean monthly sunshine hours (h/day) 8.7 8.6 8.6 8.3 7.3 6.1 5.8 5.9 5.6 5.8 7.4 8.4 7.2 91-00
Monthly Eto (mm) 162 174 216 206 191 167 153 159 140 133 146 156 2003
Source: Table B-1, The study on the rehabilitation and reconstruction of agricultural production systm in the Slakou River Basin, Kingdom of Cambodia.
Nippon Koei (March 2002). Original data from MOWRAM.
Eto calculated using modified Penman method (FAO Irrigation & Drainage Paper 24)
West Baray, Siem Reap

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total/Ave
Mean monthly rainfall (mm) 4.7 3.7 25.4 51.0 115.5 168.6 174.6 196.0 272.1 218.4 77.7 4.3 1311.9
Mean monthly evaporation (mm/day)
Mean monthly relative humidity (%) 68.8 67 65 67.2 74 77.5 78.8 79 82.2 80.8 75.3 73 74.0
Mean monthly temperature (°C)
Mean monthly maximum temperature (°C) 32.3 33.8 35 35.7 34.9 33.6 33.1 32.2 31.8 31.6 31.1 30.7 33.0
Mean monthly minimum temperature (°C) 20.7 23 24 25.4 25.4 25 24.9 25.1 24.5 24.1 22.4 20.7 23.8
Monthly mean wind velocity (m/sec) 1.83 1.75 1.67 2.07 2.17 2.38 2.00 2.33 2.00 2.00 1.83 2.17 2.01
Mean monthly sunshine hours (h/day) 7.5 7.1 6.6 6.4 5.9 5.8 5.7 5 4.7 5.7 6.9 6.8 6.2
Monthly Eto (mm) 133 129 158 162 158 144 140 136 120 124 120 124 1648
Source: Table 4.8, Rehabilitation of West Baray Irrigation Project in Siem Reap Province, Cambodia, Draft Project Report (October 2004).
Mean monthly rainfall totals from DoM (August 2006)
117
Battambang (Bek Chan)
Mean monthly rainfall (mm) 4.6 17.4 45.1 90.2 161.2 142.1 166.0 172.7 238.2 209.6 88.9 14.2 1350.0 1920-2004
Mean monthly evaporation 4.2 4.8 5.1 5.3 4.7 4.4 4.0 3.7 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.7 4.1 82-8, 90-3, 95-8
(mm/day)
Mean monthly evaporation 130.2 134.4 158.1 159.0 145.7 132.0 124.0 114.7 96.0 96.1 96.0 114.7 1500.9
(mm)
Mean monthly relative 74 70 70 72 77 80 81 83 85 86 82 78 78 82-93, 95-8
humidity (%)
Mean monthly temperature 25.1 27.2 29.5 30.2 29.8 29.3 28.7 28.1 27.6 27.2 26.2 24.8 27.8 82-7, 92-3, 95-03
(°C)
Mean monthly maximum 31.2 33.4 35.6 35.9 34.8 33.8 33.1 32.3 31.3 30.7 30 30 82-7, 90-3, 95-8,
temperature (°C) 00-02
Mean monthly minimum 18.9 20.9 23.4 24.6 24.9 24.7 24.4 23.9 24 23.7 22.4 19.6 82-7, 92-3, 95-8,
temperature (°C) 00-02
Monthly mean wind velocity 1.31 1.37 1.58 1.5 1.63 1.98 1.92 1.75 1.36 1.21 1.2 1.29 1.51 82-93, 95-8, 00-
(m/sec) 02
Mean monthly sunshine 9.7 9 8.8 7.7 7.3 5.6 6.4 5 5.5 6.6 7.4 8.5 7.3 82-6
hours (h/day)
Monthly Eto (mm) 120 125 161 154 151 131 140 124 117 122 113 111 1569
Source: Table 4.2.1, Study report on irrigation development projects of Mongkol Borey River in the Kingdom of Cambodia. OADA (March 2005). Original
data from PDOWRAM, Battambang.
Eto calculated using modified Penman method (FAO Irrigation & Drainage Paper 24)
Mean monthly rainfall from DoM (August 2006)
118
Battambang
1982 4.5 5.2 5.6 5.6 6.4 5.1 4.5 3.8 3.9 4 3.3 4.7
1983 4.5 5.5 5 8.2 4.8 5.1 4.4 3.9 4.1 3.6 3.6
1984 3.4 4.4 4.7 4.8 5 4 4.6 4.2 3.4 3.8 3.5 3.5
1985 3 3.7 3.8 4.3 2.5 3.2 2.8 3 2.3 2 2 2.3
1986 4 4.9 4.3 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.2 3.3 2.2 2 2.2
1987 4.5 5.3 6.2 5.4 3.1 4.6 5.3 3.1 2.2 2 1.9
1988 2.7 2.5 2.1 3.3 2.1
1989 4.4
1990 3.5 4.4 4.3 5.3 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.5 2.9 2.1 2.3 3.1
1991 4.1 4.7 5.4 3.6 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.3 2.1 1.8 2.7 3.7
1992 3.3 3.9 4.6 5.9 4 3.1 2.3 2.2 3 2.5 3.6 3.7
1993 4.3 5.3 5 5.5 4.7 4 3.7 3.6 2.4 2.1
1995 5 5.5 5.9 6.3 5.6 5.2 4.5 4.7 4.1 4.7 4.1 4.7
1996 4.4 4.9 5.6 4.3 5.5 4.7 4 4.4 3.5 4.9 4 3.8
1997 4.3 4.1 5.6 5.5 6.6 5.7 5.4 4.8 4.5 4.8 4.8 4.8
1998 5.2 5.2 5.7 5.6 5.7 5.5 5.1 4.7 4.7 3.7 3.8 4.3
1999 4.7 4.7 4.9
MEAN 4.2 4.8 5.1 5.3 4.7 4.4 4.0 3.7 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.7
Data from Table 4.2.2, OADA (March 2005)
119
Stung Chinit, Kompong Thom
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total/Ave
Mean monthly rainfall (mm) 4.5 12.7 34.0 77.2 172.2 202.6 191.5 208.6 257.8 193.1 57.6 25.6 1437
Mean monthly pan evaporation (mm) 197.0 209.0 254.0 222.0 187.0 174.0 168.0 166.0 139.0 145.0 161.0 184.0 2206
Mean monthly evaporation (mm - factor 0.7) 137.9 146.3 177.8 155.4 130.9 121.8 117.6 116.2 97.3 101.5 112.7 128.8 1544
Mean monthly relative humidity (%) 70 70 66 72 78 82 82 82 84 82 77 71 76
Mean monthly maximum temperature (°C) 31.6 32.9 34 34.6 33.4 32.2 31.4 31.5 31.2 31 30.9 30.7 32.1
Mean monthly minimum temperature (°C) 21 21.9 25.5 24.9 24.7 24.1 23.9 24 23.8 23.6 22.8 21.6 23.5
Monthly mean wind velocity (m/sec) 1.20 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.69 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.69 1.00 1.20 0.95
Mean monthly sunshine hours (h/day) 9.1 9.1 8.5 8.2 7.2 6.4 5.8 5.7 5.2 6.5 7.7 8.6 7.3
Monthly Eto (mm) 130 126 155 153 143 123 124 124 111 118 114 124 1545
Source: Table 2.1, Stung Chinit Water Resources Development Project Final Report, Volume I: Main Report (Cargill Technical Services, December 1997)
Mean monthly rainfall from Baray station (from DoM, August 2006)
Thlea Maam, Battambang

Mean monthly rainfall (mm) 6.9 7.6 31.0 67.2 190.2 188.3 184.1 205.7 233.5 275.3 101.6 24.1 1516 (Krakor)
Effective mean monthly evaporation
(mm/day) 3.8 4.4 4.7 5.1 4.2 4.3 3.9 3.5 3.5 3.1 3.2 3.3 1425 (Battambang)
Mean monthly relative humidity (%) 75 70 70 71 74 76 82 83 84 83 83 80 78 (Battambang)
Mean monthly maximum temperature (°C) 31.2 33.5 35.4 35.4 35.1 33.8 33 32.6 31.7 30.3 29.7 29.4 (Pursat)
Mean monthly minimum temperature (°C) 20.8 22.5 23.6 25.3 25.7 25.2 24.9 24.7 24.6 24 23.1 21.5 (Pursat)
Monthly mean wind velocity (m/sec) 0.27 0.24 0.27 0.23 0.22 0.27 0.26 0.27 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.22 (Sisophon)
Mean monthly sunshine hours (h/day) 8.4 8.8 8.6 7.8 6.9 6.3 5.7 5.3 5.2 6.5 7.9 8.5 (Krakor)
Monthly Eto (mm)
Source: Table 3.1, Northwest Irrigation Sector Project, Phase II: Feasibility Report, Annex A: Thlea Maom Sub-project (October 2002)
Mean monthly rainfall from DoM (August 2006)
120
121
ANNEX 8. SELECTED INFORMATION
SOURCES
A number of consultancy reports have compiled hydrometeorological

information and have derived estimates of various parameters, for design
purposes. This Annex summarises the most useful of these.
Asian Development Bank, 2005. e-ATLAS of Tonle Sap Basin. ADB

Technical Assistance Project TA 4427-CAM: Establishment of Tonle
Sap Basin Management Organisation.
This „e-ATLAS“, available in CD-ROM format, presents maps of the key
characteristics (land use, topography, drainage systems, etc.) of the major
sub-basins around the Tonle Sap Great Lake. It also provides summary
hydrological information in the form of five-year hydrographs and simple
statistics for the major sub-basins.
BRL-Action Nord-Sud-GRET, undated. Project de rehabilitation du

perimetre irrigue de Stung Chi Kraeng. Phase 1.
Among other things, the report provides information on the climate and
hydrology of the project area, using data from Kompong K’dei, Siem Reap
and other stations. It attempts to synthesize a lengthened record, estimates
water requirements and specific discharges, and also makes estimates of
extreme rainfall events and floods in Stung Chikreng.
Carbonnel, J. P., and Guiscafre, J., 1963?. Grand Lac du Cambodge,

sedimentologie et hydrologie, 1962-1963. Ministry of Foregn Affairs,
France.
This scientific report presents a wealth of information on the surface water
hydrology of the Great Lake, for the 1962-3 water year. The study was
responsible for the highest quality data available for the Tonle Sap basin,
unfortunately for only a single year which was not necessarily
representative. The report presents, inter alia, data on lake inflows and
water balance, as well as data on sediment loads etc.
Cargill Technical Services Ltd, December 1997. Stung Chinit Water

resources development project (TA 2592-CAM) Final Report, Volume
1: Main Report and report Hydrology Consultancy, Asian
Development Bank.
The Main Report summarises climate and hydrology, and the engineering
analysis of hydrology and flood routing, for design of structures. The
Hydrology Consultancy report provides full details of the analysis of
maximum rainfall events and flood flows, as well as reviewing seven earlier
studies considered to be useful.
Halcrow, June 1994. Irrigation rehabilitation study in Cambodia. Final

Report, Annex A – Hydrology. Mekong Secretariat/UNDP.
The report is one of a set that comprehensively considers opportunities for
rehabilitating irrigation systems. It compiles the climate, rainfall,
evapotranspiration, and river level/flow data that were available in 1994,
and presents recommendations for estimating hydrological parameters,
particularly with regard to design floods.
122
JICA, February 2002. The study on groundwater development in
Central Cambodia. Draft Final Report. Summary report. Kokusai
Kogyo Co. Ltd.
The report includes reference to extensive groundwater investigations in
Kompong Chhnang, although with an orientation towards groundwater for
rural water supply rather than for agriculture. It reviews hydrogeological
conditions, test well drilling and yields, groundwater levels, and
groundwater quality. Overall, it concludes that potential is low in Kompong
Chhnang province.
Le Van Sanh, June 2002. Mission report: Analyses of hydrological

data at stations around the Great Lake and on Mekong, Bassac Rivers
in 1960’s and from 1998 to 2001. No publisher: presumed to be
Mekong River Commission.
The report provides an excellent compilation of information on gauging
stations, with an emphasis on rating curves and station descriptions.
Levesque, Paul, August 1995. Water resources development in the

Province of Pursat: A watershed-based study (3 volumes).
The annexes present hydro-meteorological data for the Pursat river basin;
the data are now available from the DoH&RW archive.
Mekong River Commission, August 2001. Water Utilization Program –

modelling of the flow regime and water quality of the Tonle Sap. Data
report. Mekong River Commission Secretariat.
The report reviews data availability in the Tonle Sap basin, for rainfall,
evaporation, synoptic meteorological observations, water levels and flows.
It presents inter alia estimates for mean flow 1962-1996, although how
these were computed is not mentioned. Data are also presented on
suspended sediment and water quality.
Mekong River Commission, May 2004. Final Report: Consolidation of

hydro-meteorological data and multi-functional hydrologic roles of
Tonle Sap Lake and its vicinities. Phase III (Basinwide). CTI
Engineering International and DHI Water and Environment.
The report describes the process and results of a comprehensive analysis,
including extensive hydrologic-hydraulic modelling, of the Tonle Sap
system. In particular, it includes commentary and analysis of hydrological
data for the major sub-basins of the Tonle Sap.
Mekong River Commission and Cambodia National Mekong

Committee, July 2002. Stueng Siem Reap Basin: case study and
project ideas. Mekong River Commission and Cambodia National
Mekong Committee.
This brief report presents simple information on water resources (rainfall
and river flow) and irrigated areas.
MOWRAM, January 2004. Project proposal: rehabilitation of the Takoy

Reservoir sub-project, Kampong Chhnang Province. Cambodia Flood
Emergency Rehabilitation Project, MOWRAM/World Bank.
This is a typical FERP sub-project proposal/report, which includes a
hydrological analysis of Takoy reservoir – flood estimation and hydraulic
design – for a supplementary irrigation system in the seasonally flooded
area around Tonle Sap Great Lake.
123
MRC-WUP-JICA, March 2004. The study on hydro-meteorological
monitoring for water quantity rules in Mekong River basin. Final
report, Volume 1. Main report. CTI Engineering International and
Nippon Koei.
The study reports a comprehensive modeling analysis of flows and water
balance in the Mekong-Tonle Sap system. It includes, inter alia, details on
river flows from sub-basins of the Tonle Sap Great Lake and water
balances for wet and dry years in the Tonle Sap basin.
Nippon Koei, March 2002. The study on the rehabilitation and

reconstruction of agricultural production system in the Slakou River
basin, the Kingdom of Cambodia. MOWRAM.
Appendix B provides extensive detail on rainfall and runoff the the Slakou
River system (Kompong Speu province), including extensive analysis to
estimate runoff, flood discharges, irrigation water requirements, and water
balance. There are extensive data tabulations.
NWISP (Northwest Irrigation Sector Project), October 2002. Phase II:

Feasibility Report, Annex A: Thlea Maom sub-project. Asian
Development Bank/MOWRAM.
This is one of several sub-project feasibility reports. Among other things, it
presents information on climate, hydrology, water requirements/availability,
and detailed computations of crop water requirements for various
production scenarios.
NWISP (Northwest Irrigation Sector Project), March 2003. Final Report,

Volume 2, Annex A: climate, hydrology, hydrogeology and
hydrochemistry. Asian Development Bank/MOWRAM.
Annex A presents an extensive review of meteorology, rainfall, evaporation,
and surface water hydrology (including Tonle Sap Great Lake) in the
northwestern provinces. It provides thorough analysis and commentary on
data quality, and presents extensive tabulations and graphs of rating
curves, stage and discharge hydrographs, etc. Rainfall information is
available in spreadsheet form, although it has now been superseded by the
DoM August 2006 report. The Annex provides a strong coverage of
groundwater resources.
NWISP (Northwest Irrigation Sector Project), June 2006a. Inception

Report, River basin and water use studies: Mongkol Borei river basin
and Svay Chek river basin (Package 1). CADTIS-Consultant Co. Ltd.
NWISP (Northwest Irrigation Sector Project), August 2006b. Inception

Report, River basin and water use studies, Package 2: Daun Try-Svay
Don Keo and Boribo-Thlea Maam-Srang sub-basins. PRD Water and
Environment and DHI Water and Environment.
The above two reports present the outline of the four river basin studies
being carried out under NWISP. They present a certain amount of
hydrological information – rainfall, evaporation, river flow – of relevance to
TSLS Project, but as inception reports do not provide comprehensive
results.
NWISP (Northwest Irrigation Sector Project), July 2006c. River basin

and water use studies, Package 2: Daun Try-Svay Don Keo and
124
Boribo-Thlea Maam-Srang sub-basins. Working paper: hydro-
meteorological data collection. PRD Water and Environment and DHI
Water and Environment.
This report provides a valuable summary of hydro-meteorological data in
the two sub-basins.
OADA (Overseas Agricultural Development Association), March 2005.

Study report on irrigation development projects of Mongkol Borey
River in the Kingdom of Cambodia.
The report presents data on meteorology and hydrology of the project area
(drawing largely on Battambang station data, which are tabulated
comprehensively), including estimates of the water balance of Komping
Puoy reservoir and irrigable area. River discharge data for Stung Mongkol
Borey are generated for half-month intervals during the period 1981-2002,
using the Tank model.
OADA (Overseas Agricultural Development Association), March 2003.

Study report on Komping Pouy irrigation scheme rehabilitation and
upgrading project in Battambang Province, the Kingdom of Cambodia.
The report summarises climate data appropriate for the project area
(Battambang, Bek Chan station), including maximum daily and 3-day
rainfall, as well as discharges at Stung Mongkol Borei. Observed water
levels and rating curves for Stung Mongkol Borey are presented.
Water and Power Consultancy Services (India) Ltd and MOWRAM,

October 2004. Rehabilitation of West Baray Irrigation Project in Siem
Reap Province, Cambodia.
The report includes material on evapotranspiration and crop water
requirements, irrigation scheduling, and hydrologic modeling. Inflows into
West Baray are simulated using a rainfall-runoff model; simulated flows at
Prasat Keo are tabulated. Irrigation demand is simulated, based on a full
crop water balance.
125
ANNEX 9. RIVER BASIN MAPS
The river basin boundaries presented herein were digitized by the GIS
Specialist of the Tonle Sap Lowland Stabilisation Project during August
2006.
126

Report On Water Availability

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Report On Water Availability

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

TA No.

Report on Water Availability

Asian Development Bank

2 OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION 6

3 RIVER FLOW INFORMATION IN THE PROJECT AREA 7

3.1 Sources of data and data analysis 7

4.1 Significance for water availability 25

5.1 Sources of data and data analysis 27

6.1 Significance for water availability 45

10 OVERVIEW OF WATER AVAILABILITY 59

ANNEX 1. TOTAL MONTHLY VOLUMETRIC DISCHARGES 62

ANNEX 3. ANNUAL MAXIMUM DAILY DISCHARGES 100

ANNEX 4. MEAN MONTHLY AND ANNUAL RAINFALLS 104

ANNEX 5. MEAN MONTHLY AND ANNUAL RAINDAYS 108

ANNEX 6. ANNUAL MAXIMUM ONE-DAY RAINFALLS 112

ANNEX 7. EVAPORATION ESTIMATES 116

ANNEX 8. SELECTED INFORMATION SOURCES 122

ANNEX 9. RIVER BASIN MAPS 126

ADB Asian Development Bank

The purpose of this report is to summarise the available information on

 River flows – totals, specific discharges, and annual maxima

Long-term observations at two stations reveal no significant trends in mean

Computations of volumetric water availability (in million cubic metres per

Inundation around the Great Lake

The number of raindays in each month also shows substantial variability

Combining the seasonal cycles of rainfall and evaporation, evaporation in

Onset of rain and length of dry spells

Overview of water availability

 River flows – totals, specific discharges, and annual maxima

 River flow monitoring stations, Tonle Sap basin. Department of

The Northwest Irrigation Sector Project already has provided valuable

The e-Atlas compiled under ADB TA 4427-CAM (Establishment of Tonle

The hydrographs presented by the e-Atlas were computed for 1998-2003 in

3 RIVER FLOW INFORMATION IN

3.1 Sources of data and data

MOWRAM and its predecessors have collected information on lake levels

Discharges at many of the monitoring stations, particularly in the lower

1 A stage-discharge rating curve is a relationship between a series of measurements of

Period of record Area (km2) Location

3.3 Seasonal patterns in river flow

Stung Sangke at Battambang

Mean monthly discharge, Aug-Nov (m

Figure 2. Mean annual discharge, Stung Sen at Kompong Thom.

Sen at Kompong Thom, mean annual discharge

Figure 3. Hydrograph for Peam station (tributary of Stung Pursat).

Tributary of Pursat River at Peam

Figure 5. Monthly flow regime for Stung Mongkol Borey.

Mongkol Borey at Mongkol Borey

3.4 Volumetric water availability

The study by Carbonnel and Guiscafré (1963?), Grand Lac du Cambodge,

Total monthly runoff (M 5,000

The NWISP Final Report presented a provisional, “very approximate“ water

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN

JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR

The modern discharge records compiled in the DoH&RW Report on River

3.5 Specific discharges

Specific discharge – discharge per unit area, commonly presented in

Again, the monthly pattern is of more practical significance than annual

Mean monthly specific discharge (l/s/km2)

MAF = AREA0.9; Q10 = 1.53.MAF; Q100 = 2.2.MAF

The streamflow data compiled in the DoH&RW Report on River flow

Subject to the preceding qualifications, annual maximum daily discharges

River flows – totals, specific discharges, and annual maxima

River flows – totals, specific discharges, and annual maxima

River flow monitoring stations, Tonle Sap basin. Department of