Nussbaumer Master Thesis

Development of an information system on the state
of the river flow and river water abstractions for

improved water resource management along the
Naro Moru River in Kenya
Masterarbeit der Philosophisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der

Universität Bern
vorgelegt von
Roger Nussbaumer
2015
Leiter der Arbeit:

Prof. Dr. H. Hurni, Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), Bern
Co-Leiter der Arbeit:
Dr. H-P. Liniger, Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), Bern
Development of an information system on the state
of the river flow and river water abstractions for
improved water resource management along the
Naro Moru River in Kenya
Master Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Science of the University of Bern

By Roger Nussbaumer, 2015
Supervisor:
Prof. Dr. H. Hurni, Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), Bern
Co-Supervisor:
Dr. H-P. Liniger, Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), Bern
Copyright © 2015 by Roger Nussbaumer, Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), In-
stitute of Geography, University of Bern.
Layout and print: Roger Nussbaumer
Pictures on front page: Left: A herd of cows from a pastoralist is drinking water at the
discharge gauging station A3.
Middle: Two of the endangered white-rhinos graze in front of Mt.
Kenya. Picture was taken in the Ol Pejeta Conservancy, sit-
uated in very close distance to the city of Nanyuki.
Right: An irrigated field of cabbage from a small commercial farm
along the Naro Moru River in the semi-arid savannah zone.
All pictures were taken by Roger Nussbaumer
Preface & Acknowledgements v
Preface & Acknowledgements
During the preparation for the field course to Kenya in fall 2013 organized by CDE, Hanspeter Linig-
er, one of the course’s organizers, was still eagerly looking for students in search for a master thesis.
From the various subjects I was offered to choose from, it was relatively easy for me to make a deci-
sion. First of all, I was interested in a master thesis that deals mainly with a hydrological topic, but
nevertheless is directly linked to a socio-economic matter. Further, I looked for a topic which in-
cludes fieldwork that contributes its part to an ongoing project. The aspect that people depend on my
work was crucial to help me to come up with the necessary focus and motivation for a long-lasting
project like this master thesis. Last but not least, I had a desire to choose a destination for the field
work in Africa for various reasons. Having travelled and worked in different northern and southern
African countries before, I fell in love with this continent and its landscapes, wildlife and different
way of life found here. Getting to know a further African country and its culture through a working
experience was a chance I did not want to miss, even though knowing that the commitment to do such
a project in Africa will bring some difficulties I would not experience while doing the fieldwork in
Switzerland. So, having the offer to do hydrological work that has a direct and immediate impact on
communities in an East-African country where I do not have to deal with a language barrier seemed
to be quite perfect. Due to very limited time before my field work and not yet exactly knowing which
tasks will await me in Kenya, preparation for the field work was marginal. This was not an issue since
once in Kenya, Hanspeter Liniger and I realized that due to misunderstandings between CDE and
CETRAD, my once primary fieldwork, the calibration measurements of the four gauging stations in
the Naro Moru subchatchment, was almost completed by Phillip Kungu and Milton M. Muriungi
from CETRAD. This brings me to the part where I would like to thank all the people that helped me
realizing this master thesis:
A special thank goes to Hanspeter Liniger, who not only gave me the chance to work on a very inter-
esting and relevant topic, but also helped me, due to his presence in Kenya during the first two weeks
into my fieldwork, to settle in the new working environment and adjusting my fieldwork to the
changed circumstances. Additional help from the CDE staff was received from Gudrun Schwilch,
who gave advice regarding the NRM3 database, and also Matthias Fries and Vincent Roth, who
helped me solving the problems I encountered when trying to set up the automatic data transmission.
Further, I would like to thank the staff of CETRAD in Nanyuki. Namely big thanks go to Dr. B.
Kiteme for keeping his confidence in me even during the harder times of my fieldwork, Jacinta W.
Muchugu for having enough patience to deal with my numerous, last-minute requests for receiving a
vi Abstract
car and driver for the field, the four drivers (Ben, Mercy, Dennis and Edward) for driving me around
on bumpy roads for countless hours, Phillip Kungu for sharing his extensive knowledge about the
gauging stations and for having his company during some of the field work, Elizah K. Peter for help-
ing me out with ARC GIS matters, Peter A. Mugala for his help with IT-related matters and last, but
not least to Milton M. Muriungi who not only accompanied me during nearly all of my trips to the
Naro Moru River, but who was also a sincere and trusted friend outside the office hours. A special
thank-you goes to Mike Thomas, Tom Traexler and John Njenga from Rural Focus Ltd in Nanyuki
who not only shared their knowledge regarding automatic data transmission, but also provided a few
of their prototype antennas to this project for no charge. I also want to give thanks to the Naro Moru
Water Resource User Association (WRUA) whom I worked with closely throughout my presence in
Kenya. Without their approval and support for this project, it would have been very difficult to ac-
complish the fieldwork. I especially appreciate the great amount of help received from Martin M.
Karuri – a member of the Naro Moru WRUA committee, farmer and also graduate with a bachelor
degree in water engineering and project management – who accompanied Milton and me during the
three week abstraction survey. Due to his extensive knowledge of the Naro Moru catchment he
proved to be a very important person for the success of this campaign. I further appreciated all the
farmers along the Naro Moru River that showed understanding in my project. To my surprise it was
not once an issue to a farmer when our team crossed one of the fences to their properties unan-
nounced in order to collect information for the campaign. Also, questions regarding their water con-
sumption were always answered without hesitation and presumably truthfully.
Spending four months in Kenya doing fieldwork for this master thesis has been by far the best and
most memorable time during my five years of studying. I did not only learn new skills in the fields of
sustainable development and hydrology, but I also gained knowledge about working in a challenging
environment of a less-development country with different cultural conventions, where many things
work differently than planned. Committing myself to do a thesis outside of Switzerland has taught me
many lessons I would not have learned otherwise. Therefore, I also like to thank the university of
Bern and CDE for having provided this opportunity to do fieldwork in Kenya.
Abstract
The precipitation-rich slopes of Mt. Kenya play a crucial role in providing water resources to over
seven million people living in the surrounding semi-arid to arid areas. Africa’s second highest moun-
tain serves as a perennial contributor to the runoff of Ewaso Ng’iro North – a river that acts as a life-
line to the pastoralists, small-scale farmers and wildlife of a vast region ranging from the semi-arid
Abstract vii
Laikipia plateau in Central Kenya to the semi-permanent Lorian Swamps in the arid north-eastern
Kenya. The highland-lowland system of the Ewaso-Ng’iro North Basin is a good example of the
world’s rising conflict potential originating from arbitrary allocation of essential water resources.
Being one of three tributaries draining the water of Mt. Kenya into Ewaso Ng’iro, the actions in the
Naro Moru catchment not only affect people, livestock and wildlife depending on water resources
inside the catchment, but also the river water users living in the surrounding areas. Previous studies
showed that over-abstraction of river water led the Naro Moru River often and persistently to dry up
during the driest periods of the last few years. Further, it was found that low flows of Ewaso Ng’iro
decreased significantly in the lowlands since the 1960s. Two of the four main objectives of this thesis
were the assessment of river water abstractions along the Naro Moru River and the analysis of river
flows. Results show that in regard of over-abstractions and river water scarcity, especially during the
dry period, the situation in the Naro Moru catchment has not changed since the 1990s and early
2000s. However, there are indications that abstractions slightly decreased in the past few years, even
though the amount of abstraction points increased from 29 in 1983 to 311 in 2013. More efficient
abstraction methods, awareness creation campaigns regarding scarce water resources and better water
management initiated by community-based water user associations seem to have a positive impact on
abstraction rates. Since ongoing population growth and year-round high abstraction rates for irriga-
tion purposes raises the potential for water-related conflicts, the sustainable management and equita-
ble distribution of the scarce water resources has a high priority in the catchment. Supplying water
management institutions with data regarding the actual availability of water and the catchment’s cur-
rent state is one of the most important aspects for strengthening their management capabilities. This
thesis tries to contribute its part to the improvement of the management of scarce water resources in
the catchment. Besides providing knowledge of human impacts on the river flow, the thesis main goal
is the development of a river gauging data collection and sharing system. To achieve this goal, the
creation of new stage-discharge relationships for four discharge gauging stations along the Naro
Moru River was necessary as a first step. Second, an automatic data transmission was implemented.
This thesis documents the development of a collection system and provides various concepts for im-
plementing a sharing system.
viii Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Preface & Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... v
Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................vi
Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... viii
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. xiii
List of Tables.............................................................................................................................. xvii
List of Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................xix
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Problem Statement .................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Objectives of the Study and Research Questions .................................................................... 3
1.3 Institutional Framework .......................................................................................................... 6
2 Description of the Study Area .................................................................................................. 7
2.1 Location and zonal Differentiation of the Basins and Catchments ......................................... 7
2.1.1 Location and Characteristics of the Ewaso Ng’iro North Basin ..................................... 7
2.1.2 Location of the Upper Ewaso Ng’iro Basin and Naro Moru River catchment ............... 9
2.2 The Naro Moru Catchment ..................................................................................................... 9
2.3 Gauging Station Network in the Naro Moru Catchment ...................................................... 11
2.3.1 Precipitation and Evaporation Measuring Stations ....................................................... 11
2.3.2 River Gauging Stations (RGS) ...................................................................................... 12
2.4 Ecological Zones: Dominating Vegetation, Soil Types and Land Use ................................. 14
2.4.1 Alpine Zone (> 4000 m a.s.l.)........................................................................................ 14
2.4.2 Moorland Zone (3200-4000 m a.s.l.)............................................................................. 15
2.4.3 Forest Zone (2300-3200 m a.s.l.) .................................................................................. 16
2.4.4 Footzone (2000-2300 m a.s.l.) ....................................................................................... 17
2.4.5 Savannah Zone (1800-2000 m a.s.l.) ............................................................................. 18
2.5 Mt. Kenya as the Basin’s Water Tower ................................................................................ 19

Table of Contents ix
2.5.1 Climate .......................................................................................................................... 19
2.5.2 Surface Water and Groundwater Availability ............................................................... 23
2.6 Socio-economic Settings ....................................................................................................... 24
2.6.1 Population Growth......................................................................................................... 24
2.6.2 Change in Land Use and its Influence on Water Demand ............................................ 25
2.6.3 Water Scarcity and associated Conflicts ....................................................................... 26
2.7 Water Management ............................................................................................................... 27
2.7.1 Structure of basin-wide Water Management ................................................................. 27
2.7.2 Community-based Management: Naro Moru WRUA................................................... 27
3 Calibration of Gauging Stations ............................................................................................. 30
3.1 Methods ................................................................................................................................. 30
3.1.1 Gaugings used for the Rating Equations ....................................................................... 30
3.1.2 Current Meter Method ................................................................................................... 31
3.1.3 Salt Dilution Method ..................................................................................................... 32
3.1.4 Float Method ................................................................................................................. 35
3.1.5 Development of the Stage-Discharge Relationship ....................................................... 35
3.2 Results ................................................................................................................................... 38
3.2.1 RGS A3 ......................................................................................................................... 38
3.2.2 RGS A4 ......................................................................................................................... 41
3.2.3 RGS A5 ......................................................................................................................... 46
3.2.4 RGS A6 ......................................................................................................................... 49
3.3 Summary and Discussion ...................................................................................................... 52
4 Abstraction Campaign ............................................................................................................ 54
4.1 Introduction to the Abstraction Campaign of 2013 ............................................................... 54
4.2 Previous Abstraction Campaigns in the Naro Moru Catchment ........................................... 54
4.3 Methodology of Abstraction Campaigns .............................................................................. 56
4.3.1 General Proceeding ....................................................................................................... 56

x Table of Contents
4.3.2 Approach for the Matanya Furrow ................................................................................ 58
4.3.3 Approach for pump at AAA Grower’s Chestnut Farm in Naro Moru .......................... 60
4.3.4 Approach for Water Pumps ........................................................................................... 60
4.3.5 Demand-based Approach .............................................................................................. 61
4.3.6 Inapplicable Approaches for Gravity Pipes ................................................................... 64
4.3.7 Approach for KWS Intake (Gravity Pipe) ..................................................................... 66
4.3.8 Approach for Kihoto and Gitwe Water Project (Gravity Pipes) ................................... 66
4.3.9 Approach for Kigama Water Project (Gravity Pipe) ..................................................... 68
4.3.10 Approach for Water Projects between RGS A3/ A4 and A5 (Gravity Pipes) ............... 69
4.3.11 Approach for Consumption by Livestock ..................................................................... 70
4.4 Results and Discussion of the Abstraction Campaign 2013 ................................................. 71
4.4.1 Overview and Location of Abstraction Points .............................................................. 71
4.4.2 Monthly Abstraction rate by Matanya Furrow .............................................................. 74
4.4.3 Monthly Abstraction by AAA Growers’ Chestnut Farm .............................................. 78
4.4.4 Monthly Abstraction rate by Water Pumps ................................................................... 80
4.4.5 Abstraction by Water Projects (Gravity Pipes) ............................................................. 87
4.4.6 Water Demand of Livestock .......................................................................................... 89
4.4.7 Monthly Abstraction Rate per River Section and Type ................................................ 90
4.4.8 Comparison of Abstraction Rate regarding the Irrigation Method................................ 93
4.4.9 Legal State of Abstractions ........................................................................................... 95
4.5 Development of Abstraction Quantities from 1983 to 2013 ................................................. 99
5 Analysis of the River Flow .................................................................................................... 103
5.1 Methodology and Data ........................................................................................................ 103
5.1.1 Investigated Period ...................................................................................................... 103
5.1.2 Naturalization of the River Flow (Qnat) ....................................................................... 104
5.1.3 Critical Water Levels ................................................................................................... 104
5.1.4 Flow Duration Curves (FDC) – Estimating Q50, Q80 and Q95 ................................. 105
Table of Contents xi
5.2 Results an Discussion.......................................................................................................... 105
5.2.1 Validation of the estimated Abstraction Rate .............................................................. 105
5.2.2 Critical Water Levels ................................................................................................... 110
5.2.3 Impact of WRUA ........................................................................................................ 111
5.2.4 Estimation of Q80 and Q95 for RGS A5 and A6 ........................................................ 112
5.2.5 Change of Flow between 1960 and 2014 .................................................................... 115
6 Data Collection and Sharing System ................................................................................... 118
6.1 OTT ecoLog 500 ................................................................................................................. 118
6.1.1 General Information .................................................................................................... 118
6.1.2 Working with the OTT ecoLog 500 ............................................................................ 119
6.1.3 Software used to operate the ecoLog 500 and to analyze its Data .............................. 121
6.2 Development of a Discharge Data Collection System ........................................................ 122
6.2.1 Installment of Antennas ............................................................................................... 122
6.2.2 Transmission via GPRS to a FTP Server .................................................................... 124
6.2.3 Transmission via GSM to a GSM Modem .................................................................. 129
6.3 Recommendations for maintaining a sound Discharge Collection System ........................ 134
6.4 Development of an Alarm Management, and Data Collection and Sharing System .......... 135
6.4.1 Goal and requests by WRUA ...................................................................................... 135
6.4.2 Automatic alarm management ..................................................................................... 136
6.4.3 Data collection and sharing system ............................................................................. 136
6.4.4 State of the data collection and sharing system as of January 2015 ............................ 138
7 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 139
Literature .................................................................................................................................... 143
Appendices .................................................................................................................................. 149
Appendix 1: Old rating equations (from Aeschbacher 2003) ........................................................ 149
Appendix 2: Annual total precipitation per rainfall gauging station .............................................. 150
Appendix 3: List of all gaugings used for the stage-discharge relationships ................................. 151
xii Table of Contents
Appendix 3: Water Rationing Plan (January and February 2014) ................................................. 154
Appendix 4: Estimation of daily abstraction rate of Kihoto and Gitwe water project ................... 155
Appendix 5: Estimation of loss through evaporation per river section during January ................. 156
Appendix 6: Abstraction campaign 2013: Water pumps ............................................................... 157
Appendix 7: CETRAD station protocol ......................................................................................... 166
Declaration (Erklärung) ............................................................................................................ 167

List of Figures xiii
List of Figures
Figure 2-1: Kenya’s six drainage basins and the location of the Upper ENN Basin (Source:
NWMP (2012), adjustments made by author) ........................................................................... 8
Figure 2-2: Location and main subbasins of the Upper ENN basin (Source: Ngigi et al. (2007)) .................. 9
Figure 2-3: Location of the Naro Moru catchment, its ecological zones and gauging stations
(Source: Notter et al. (2007), adjustments made by Steiner (2014)) ....................................... 10
Figure 2-4: Automatic gauging meter R16 OTT type at RGS A8 in the neighboring Burguret
catchment, where this device is still used (Pictures by R. Nussbaumer, 2013) ........................ 13
Figure 2-5: Alpine Zone on the east side of Mt. Kenya. Tussock grass and giant groundsels in
front. Nelion, Batian and Point Lenana in the background. (Picture by R.
Nussbaumer, September 2013) ................................................................................................ 15
Figure 2-6: Moorland at 3900 m a.s.l in the Burguret catchment (Picture by R. Nussbaumer,
August 2014) ............................................................................................................................. 16
Figure 2-7: Left: Bamboo forest on Burguret route. Right: Large deforested area for potato
cultivation (Pictures by R. Nussbaumer, August 2014)............................................................. 16
Figure 2-8: Left: Subsistence farming in the footzone with an agroforestry system. Right: Mixed
land use in the savannah zone (Pictures by R. Nussbaumer, October 2013) ........................... 17
Figure 2-9: Average monthly precipitation of the period 1992-2012 for the four rainfall gauging
stations in the Naro Moru catchment and Archers Post (Source: NRM3 2013)....................... 20
Figure 2-10: Total annual precipitation (mm) of six rainfall gauging stations and total annual
evaporation (mm) of four stations in the Naro Moru catchment and of Archers Post
for the period from 1992 till 2012 (Source: Data of Archers Post, Matanya,
Munyaka, NM Gate (Naro Moru National Park-Gate) and Met Station are from the
NRM3 database (NRM3 2013); Data from Teleki Camp and Austrian Hut are from
Hastenrath (2005)) .................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 2-11: Annual water balance. Note that Archers Post is located in the semi-arid Samburu
Plains. (Source: Wiesmann et al. (2000)) .................................................................................. 22
Figure 3-1: Left: RGS A5; Right: RGS A6 (Pictures by R. Nussbaumer, January 2014)................................. 34
Figure 3-2: RGS A3 during low flows in January 2014, looking downstream (Picture by R.
Nussbaumer) ............................................................................................................................. 38
Figure 3-3: Cross section of RGS A3 (looking upstream) ............................................................................. 38
Figure 3-4: Stage-discharge relationship of RGS A3 .................................................................................... 39
xiv List of Figures
Figure 3-5: Rating curve of RGS A3 in log-log scale..................................................................................... 40

Figure 3-6: RGS A4 during low flows in September 2013, looking upstream (Picture by R.
Nussbaumer) ............................................................................................................................. 41
Figure 3-7: New temporary “bridge” just above RGS A4 in January 2014 (Picture by R.
Nussbaumer) ............................................................................................................................. 42
Figure 3-8: RGS A4 during low flows in August 2014 (Picture by R. Nussbaumer) ..................................... 42
Figure 3-9: Cross section of RGS A4 (looking upstream) ............................................................................. 43
Figure 3-10: Stage-discharge relationship of RGS A4 .................................................................................. 44
Figure 3-11: Rating curves of RGS A4 in log-log scale ................................................................................. 44
Figure 3-12: RGS A5 during low flows in January 2014, looking downstream (Picture by R.
Nussbaumer) ............................................................................................................................. 46
Figure 3-13: Cross section of RGS A5 (looking downstream) ...................................................................... 46
Figure 3-16: RGS A6 during low flows in August 2014 (Picture by R. Nussbaumer) ................................... 49
Figure 3-17: Cross section of RGS A6 (looking upstream) ........................................................................... 49
Figure 4-1: Left: Kihoto Water Project, Right: Matanya furrow (Pictures by R. Nussbaumer,
2013) ......................................................................................................................................... 56
Figure 4-2: Left: Pump site with removable water pump, Right: Common petrol pump setup
(Pictures by R. Nussbaumer, 2013) ........................................................................................... 56
Figure 4-3: Discharge at RGS A4 between January 10th and February 11th, 2013 before (top) and
during (bottom) implementing the rationing program ............................................................ 67
Figure 4-4: Number of abstraction points per type in percent ................................................................... 71
Figure 4-5: Location of all abstraction points along the Naro Moru River (Assisted by E. Peter
from CETRAD) ........................................................................................................................... 72
Figure 4-6: Correlation between monthly furrow abstraction and monthly precipitation
(Matanya & catchment), respectively discharge at RGS A5 (Data: Monthly sums for
rainfall and average monthly discharge, respectively abstraction, during the period
11.1990 - 12.1991 and 01.1994 - 07.1997 (NRM3 2003)) ........................................................ 74
List of Figures xv
Figure 4-7: Relation between abstraction by Matanya furrow and discharge at RGS A5 (Data:
Average monthly discharge and abstraction in l/s during the period 11.1990 -
12.1991 and 01.1994 - 07.1997 (NRM3 2003)) ........................................................................ 74
Figure 4-8: Monthly abstraction rate of Matanya furrow and discharge at RGS A5 between
03.2012 - 02.2014 ..................................................................................................................... 75
Figure 4-9: Monthly abstraction rate from AAA Growers’ pump in 2013 .................................................. 79
Figure 4-10: Monthly water demand and water source of crops ............................................................... 83
Figure 4-11: Monthly abstraction rate of pump users, Naro Moru River, Kenya ....................................... 85
Figure 4-12: Discharge of RGS A3, A4 and A5 during a low flow period between January 24th and
28th, 2014 .................................................................................................................................. 87
Figure 4-13: Monthly mean abstraction rate per type from 03.2012 to 02.2014, Naro Moru
River .......................................................................................................................................... 91
Figure 4-14: Monthly mean abstraction rate per river section from 03.2012 to 02.2014, Naro
Moru River ................................................................................................................................ 91
Figure 4-15: Mean abstraction rate in percentage per type (left) and per river section (right) in
2013 .......................................................................................................................................... 92
Figure 4-16: Purpose of water abstraction (left) and method used for irrigation (right) in 2013 .............. 92
Figure 4-17: Number of abstraction points along Naro Moru per type and year....................................... 99
Figure 4-18: Development of the abstraction rate between 1983 and 2013 ........................................... 100
Figure 4-19: River water abstraction along Naro Moru per abstraction type in 1991 (left) and
2002 (right). ............................................................................................................................ 102
Figure 5-1: Comparison of the mean naturalized discharge (MQnat) on the left and naturalized
extreme low flow (Qnat95) on the right of the four River Gauging Stations (RGS)
along Naro Moru River. The sum of the blue and green pillar equals Qnat (naturalized
discharge). ............................................................................................................................... 106
Figure 5-2: Actual and naturalized discharge of the Naro Moru River at RGS A3+A4, and
abstraction rate below RGS A3/ A4 ........................................................................................ 107
Figure 5-3: Actual and naturalized discharge of the Naro Moru River at River Gauging Station
(RGS) A5, and abstraction rate below RGS A5. (Qnat80: Naturalized low flow, Qnat95:
Naturalized extreme low flow) ............................................................................................... 108
Figure 5-4: Actual and naturalized discharge of the Naro Moru River at River Gauging Station
(RGS) A6, and abstraction rate below RGS A6. (Qnat80: Naturalized low flow, Qnat95:
Naturalized extreme low flow) ............................................................................................... 109
xvi List of Figures
Figure 5-5: Fluctuations of discharge of the Naro Moru River at River Gauging Station (RGS) A5
and A6 between 26.01 and 14.02.2014 due to restricting abstractions to 18:00 -
06:00. There was no rainfall occurring during this period. ..................................................... 111
Figure 5-6: Flow duration curve of (actual) discharge and naturalized discharge of the Moru
River at River Gauging Station (RGS) A5 and A6 for period March 2012 to February
2014. ....................................................................................................................................... 113
Figure 5-7: Change of flow at RGS A5 between 1960 and 2014 (Estimates of 1960-84 and 1985-
2002 are from Aeschbacher et al. (2005) ............................................................................... 115
Figure 5-8: Total annual precipitation and trend lines of four rain gauging stations in the Naro
Moru catchment and of Archers Post for the period of 1992 to 2013 (Source: NRM3
2013) ....................................................................................................................................... 116
Figure 6-1: OTT ecoLog 500 (Source: OTT 2014) ....................................................................................... 118
Figure 6-2: Left: RGS A5, Right: Muddy pressure probe (Pictures by R. Nussbaumer, 2013 &
2014) ....................................................................................................................................... 119
Figure 6-3: Ruler at A5............................................................................................................................... 120
Figure 6-4: Displaying and evaluating discharge data in OTT HYDRAS 3. ................................................. 122
Figure 6-5: Antenna at River Gauging Station A5 (Picture by R. Nussbaumer, 2013)............................... 124
Figure 6-6: Screenshot of the SMS data tab in the communication interface of the OTT Water
Logger Operating Program...................................................................................................... 130
Figure 6-7: OTT HYDRAS 3 RX .................................................................................................................... 132
Figure 6-8: HCP HIT 55 USB Quad-band .................................................................................................... 132
List of Tables xvii
List of Tables
Table 2-1: Precipitation gauging stations in the Naro Moru catchment and Archers Post ........................ 11
Table 2-2: River gauging stations in the Naro Moru catchment ................................................................. 12
Table 3-1: Gaugings used for the rating equations ..................................................................................... 30
Table 3-2: Rating equation for RGS A3 ........................................................................................................ 40
Table 3-3: Rating equations for RGS A4 ...................................................................................................... 44
Table 3-6: Rating equations of each RGS .................................................................................................... 52
Table 4-1: Estimated population growth in the Matanya sublocation between 1995 and 2014 ............... 58
Table 4-2: Typical composition of crops grown by a small-scale farmer and their share........................... 62
Table 4-3: The total growing period per crop and its water need (Brouwer & Heibloem 1986)................ 63
Table 4-4: Rough estimates of average ETo (mm/day) per climatic zone (Brouwer & Heibloem
1986) ......................................................................................................................................... 63
Table 4-5: Irrigation type and field application efficiency (Efficiency values by Brouwer et al.
1989) ......................................................................................................................................... 64
Table 4-6: Estimated population growth in the Kambura-Ini sublocation between 1995 and
2014 .......................................................................................................................................... 68
Table 4-7: Overview of furrows and water projects that use gravity pipes................................................ 73
Table 4-8: Monthly average abstraction rate by Matanya furrow (supply-based approach) .................... 76
Table 4-9: Monthly average abstraction rate by Matanya furrow (demand-based approach).................. 77
Table 4-10: Monthly abstraction rate of AAA Growers’ pump based on meter readings of 2013 ............. 78
Table 4-11: Average continuous abstraction rate in October 2013 per river section ................................ 82
Table 4-12: Average daily water demand per type of crop ........................................................................ 83
Table 4-13: Monthly abstraction rate of pump users, Naro Moru River, Kenya ........................................ 85
Table 4-14: Estimated river water abstraction of water projects between RGS A3/ A4 and A5 ................ 88
Table 4-15: Estimated average abstraction rate of piped water projects during low flows....................... 88
Table 4-16: Water demand of livestock per river section and type of livestock in the Naro Moru
catchment ................................................................................................................................. 90
Table 4-17: Efficiency of the different irrigation methods and comparison to demand-based
estimates................................................................................................................................... 93
xviii List of Tables
Table 4-18: Permitted abstraction quantity during flood flows (Q80-Q0), respectively normal
flows (Q95-Q80) ........................................................................................................................ 98
Table 5-1: Estimated discharge values for period 28.03.13-28.02.14 at the four River ........................... 106
Table 5-2: Rules for water abstraction restrictions according to the Water Allocation Plan (WAP
2013) ....................................................................................................................................... 112
Table 5-3: Actual and naturalized MQ, Q50, Q80 and Q95 values of the ............................................... 112
Table 6-1: Evaluation of testing period 12.12.2013-24.01.2014 .............................................................. 126
List of Abbreviations xix
List of Abbreviations
CAAC Catchment Area Advisory Committee

CDE Centre for Development and Environment (Switzerland)
CETRAD Centre for Training and Integrated Research in ASAL (Arid and semi-arid
lands) Development (Nanyuki, Kenya, former LRP)
DEZA Direktion für Entwicklung und Zusammenarbeit (English: SDC)
ENN Ewaso Ng’iro North
ETo Evapotranspiration of a reference crop (grass)
GPRS General Packet Radio Service
GSM Global System for Mobile Communications
ITCZ Inter Tropical Convergence Zone
KWS Kenya Wildlife Service
LRP Laikipia Research Programme
M2M Machine to Machine
MQ Mean discharge
3
NRM Natural Resources Monitoring, Modelling and Management
NRMT Natural Resource Management Trust
Q Discharge
Q5 Flood flow (flows that are exceeded at 5% of days per year
Q20 High flows (flows that are exceeded at 20% of days per year)
Q50 Median discharge (flows that are exceeded at 50% of days per year)
Q80 Low flow (flows that are exceeded at 80% of days per year)
Q95 Extreme low flows (flows that are exceeded at 95% of days per year)
RGS River Gauging Station
WRUA Water Resource User Association, sometimes WUA (Water User Association)
or RWUA (River Water User Association) is used, but all refer to the same.
SDC Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (German: DEZA)
WL Water Level
WLRC Water and Land Resource Centre
WP Water Project
WRMA Water Resource Management Authority
WSRB Water Services Regulatory Board
Introduction 1
1 Introduction
1.1 Problem Statement
The humid upper slopes of Mt. Kenya with its high precipitation rates, low evapotranspiration and
high water retention capacity play a crucial role in providing water resources to over seven million
people living in the surrounding semi-arid to arid areas. The volcanic peak of Africa’s second highest
mountain with its glaciers, moorland zone and tropical rainforest belt serves together with the Aber-
dare range as a perennial contributor to the runoff of Ewaso Ng’iro North – a river that acts as a life-
line to the pastoralists, small-scale farmers and wildlife of a vast region ranging from the semi-arid
Laikipia plateau in Central Kenya to the semi-permanent Lorian Swamps in the arid north-eastern
Kenya. Especially during dry season, surrounding areas highly depend on the contribution of river
water from Mt. Kenya. The highland-lowland system of the Ewaso-Ng’iro North (ENN) Basin is
unfortunately a good example of the world’s rising conflict potential originating from arbitrary allo-
cation of essential water resources. Being one of three tributaries draining the water of Mt. Kenya into
Ewaso Ng’iro, the actions in the Naro Moru catchment not only affect people, livestock and wildlife
depending on water resources inside the catchment, but also the river water users living along Ewaso
Ng’iro on the Laikipia plateau and in the semi-arid to arid lowlands (Wiesmann et al. 2000; Kiteme et
al. 2008; Ericksen et al. 2011; Gichuki 2002).
Having awareness of this highland-lowland conflict potential, the scientific collaboration since the
mid-1970s between the University of Berne and Nairobi has led to an increasing amount of studies
regarding not only water resources, but also soils, geology, climatology, geology, land use dynamics
and sociology. The Naro Moru catchment has been targeted for investigation by many studies for
various reasons. First, and probably most importantly, the catchment provides a well accessible gaug-
ing network with long-term datasets of discharge-, precipitation- and evaporation-measurements. A
network with a density that is quite unique to be found in any catchment of a sub-Saharan country.
Second, all ecological zones from the alpine zone down to the savannah zone are represented by the
catchment. Third, a relatively high population density along the river with all relevant stakeholders
exists. Therefore, the catchment acts as a prime example for highland-lowland conflicts found in oth-
er catchments in the ENN Basin (Aeschbacher 2003).
2 Introduction
A water abstraction campaign in 2002 revealed that about 30% of annual discharge and 80 to 100%
of low flow1 discharge is abstracted from the Naro Moru River before its confluence with Ewaso
Ng’iro. 97% of the abstracted water is estimated to be used for irrigation purposes. It is assumed that
around 98% of abstractions during low flows were illegal at that time (Aeschbacher et al. 2005;
NRM3 2003; Aeschbacher 2003). Similar results were found for other catchments. Wiesmann et al.
(2000) state that 60-95% of the natural discharge is abstracted in the upper reaches of the Upper ENN
Basin during dry seasons, with up to 90% unauthorized. Comparing the findings of 2002 with earlier
water abstraction surveys from 1983 (Brunner 1983) and 1991 (Gathenya 1992), a significant in-
crease of abstraction points and amount of abstracted river water can be assessed. Over-abstraction of
river water led the Naro Moru River often and persistently to dry up during the driest periods of the
last few years. Mainly between mid-January and mid-March and under extreme conditions from June
to September, the river was sometimes running dry not far below the main tarmac road that connects
Nanyuki with Nairobi, leaving only a very small supply for the basic needs of the downstream river
water users (Aeschbacher 2003). According to Wiesmann et al. (2000) low flows of Ewaso Ng’iro
decreased significantly in the lowlands since the 1960s, which implied that the river dried up in cli-
matically critical years, as it was the case in 1984, 1986, 1991, 1994, 1997 and early 2002. This virtu-
al loss of a key natural resource heavily affects population in the lowlands, as well as its wildlife and
related tourism.
Due to ongoing immigration of mainly agropastoralists to the slopes of Mt. Kenya and continuing
land use change from grazing to cultivated land, the pressure on the water resources is kept high
(Kiteme et al. 2008; KNBS 2013). Since population growth and increasing abstractions for irrigation
purposes raises the potential for water-related conflicts, the sustainable management and equitable
distribution of the scarce water resources has a high priority in the catchment.
In the early 1990s, a series of intensive water awareness campaigns initiated by research facilities and
government ministries in the Upper Ewaso Ng’iro Basin led to the emergence of Water Resource
User Associations (WRUA). These voluntary community-based organizations grew rapidly through-
out the Upper ENN Basin and evolved to effective and successful grassroots structures for sorting out
water-related conflicts among different stakeholders in a catchment. A recent study concerning water
conflicts and the influence of WRUAs in the Upper ENN Basin concluded that more conflicts over
water resources existed in 2012 compared to ten years earlier. However, according to the author,
without WRUAs, there would probably even be more conflicts. The communities and experts agree
1
With an exception to chapter 4.4.9 and 5.2.4, certain thresholds of flows in this thesis are defined as follows
(Liniger et al. 2005): Flood flows: Q5 (flows that are exceeded at 5% of days per year); High flows: Q20; Normal
flow: Q20-Q80; Median flow: Q50; low flow: Q80; Extreme low flows: Q95
Introduction 3
that in general WRUAs do a good job in not only resolving and preventing conflicts, but also in en-
hancing cooperation between the stakeholders (Aarts 2012).
Liniger et al. (2005: 169) also emphasizes the importance of the WRUAs for river water management
and conflict resolution among water users and adds the following: “Long-term monitoring has re-
vealed the great importance of sound, long-term data and information as the basis for developing
path-ways to more sustainable water management in the region. These pathways require adequate
institutions for monitoring and transfer of information, especially as a basis for conflict resolution at
the level of actual water users.” Notter (2003) and Aeschbacher (2003) state that supplying WRUAs
with data regarding the actual availability of water and the catchment’s current state is the most im-
portant aspect for strengthening their management capabilities. Thus, well-founded knowledge of the
human and natural environments, monitoring of river discharge and human impacts (e.g. river water
abstractions), and the development of decision-making support tools which provide easy access to
this data is required (Wiesmann et al. 2000).
1.2 Objectives of the Study and Research Questions
The main goal of the thesis is the development of an information system on the state of the river flow
and river water abstractions for decision making and management of scarce water resources along the
Naro Moru River in Kenya. To reach this goal, the following four specific objectives were pursued:
1. Generating new rating equations for four river gauging stations along the Naro
Moru River
As mentioned in the previous chapter, in order to strengthen the management capabilities, it is es-
sential to monitor river discharge. Knowing the actual discharge at a certain river gauging station
(RGS) and given time is an important aspect of an information system used for decision-making.
To achieve this, continuous measured water-levels need to be translated into discharge with a
stage-discharge relationship. Well calibrated discharge gauging stations at various points of a riv-
er further help to define the amounts of abstracted water during low flows. This objective includes
the documentation of the applied methods and their performance in the field. The state of each of
the four cross sections and its influence on the accuracy of the stage-discharge relationship are
further examined. The following research questions were of interest:
4 Introduction
 What is the stage-discharge relationship for RGS A3, A4, A5 and A6?
 How well are extreme low and high flows represented by the stage-discharge relation-
ship?
 What is the state of each of the four cross sections and how does it influence the accuracy
of the stage-discharge relationships?
2. Follow-up abstraction campaign and development from 1983 to 2013
Having well-founded knowledge of the human impacts on the river flow is essential for an institu-
tion that manages water resources. This objective mainly deals with the question of which quanti-
ty of water is abstracted between the source and the confluence with Ewaso Ng’iro. Further, a
comparison between the newly assessed data and findings of previous abstraction surveys
(Brunner (1983), Gathenya (1992) and Aeschbacher (2003)) is carried out in order to evaluate the
development of river water abstraction over the last 30 years. The following research questions
were mainly of interest:
 Which abstraction type has the highest monthly abstraction rate in the Naro Moru catchment?
 Which river section has the highest monthly abstraction rate in the Naro Moru catchment?
 What is the most efficient method to abstract river water?
 What is the legal state of the abstractions?
 How did the river water abstractions develop in the past 30 years?
3. Analysis of the Naro Moru River Flow
A first aim of this objective is the validation of the estimated abstraction rates on the basis of dis-
charge data from the four gauging stations. A further aim is the definition of certain discharge
thresholds of the river (Q80 and Q95) and critical water levels for RGS A5. This thesis defines
critical water levels as the gauge height of a certain RGS that should be maintained at any time in
order to ensure that a residual flow reaches the confluence with Ewaso Ng’iro. Together with the
naturalized discharge (the river discharge without human impact), critical water levels and Q80-,
respectively Q95-thresholds are important values for management purposes. This third objective
includes an analysis of measures implemented by the Naro Moru WRUA during dry spells and
Introduction 5
their impact on the river discharge. Eventually, the river discharge between 1960 and 2014 are
analyzed. The following research questions were of interest:
 Do the river flows at the four river gauging stations coincide with the estimated abstraction
rates?
 What are the critical water levels at RGS A5 that ensure a minimal residual flow for the
downstream water users?
 What is the impact of the Naro Moru WRUA during dry spells?
 What are the Q80- and Q95-thresholds at RGS A5 and A6?
 How has discharge of the Naro Moru River developed since the 1960?
4. Development of a new river gauging data collection and sharing system
To achieve this objective, an automatic transmission of discharge data from the gauging stations
to a processing unit has to be set up first. Providing current discharge data is essential for an in-
formation system used for management. The Naro Moru WRUA is the most influential body for
managing water resources in the Naro Moru catchment, it is important that real time discharge da-
ta is not only received by research institutions (e.g. CETRAD or CDE), but also the WRUA.
Therefore, the goal is to introduce a concept for a data collection and sharing which enables the
Naro Moru WRUA to have access to the latest river discharge information. The objective is to
find a method that enables the presentation of the actual discharge compared to long-term river
flow records. The following research questions were of interest:
 What is the best technical solution to introduce a reliable daily transmittance of river dis-
charge data?
 Which aspects need to be considered for maintaining a sound discharge collection system?
 Which data is needed and/or requested by the Naro Moru WRUA for decision making on wa-
ter management?
 How can the Naro Moru WRUA and individual water users be best informed on actual water
flow, respectively critical water levels?
 Which technical solutions exist on the market for the development of a data collection and
sharing system?
6 Introduction
1.3 Institutional Framework
This master thesis contributed to Phase I of the Water and Land Resource Centre (WLRC) project
that is initiated by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC; in German: DEZA).
Most of the support was received by the Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), an inter-
disciplinary research centre of the University of Bern in Switzerland, which also happens to be the
main partner of the WLRC project. During the fieldwork the main support came from the staff of the
Centre for Training and Integrated Research in ASAL (arid and semi-arid lands) Development
(CETRAD), which acts as the projects local partner in Kenya. Further, the fieldwork was carried out
in close collaboration with the WRUA of the Naro Moru catchment.
The overall goal of the WLRC project is to improve water and land governance/ management and to
minimize related conflicts on a basin level with the people living in the Eastern Nile and the Ewaso-
Ng’iro North (ENN) basins – particularly land users, smallholders, and the rural poor – as the main
beneficiaries.
The first of two phases of the WLRC project running between 2011 and 2013 had the intention “to
establish two Land and Water Resource Centres in Ethiopia and Kenya (as well as a satellite centre
in Tanzania) that will generate knowledge and tools on behalf of policy and practice for sustainable
development.” (SDC 2013). A further goal of the project was to provide “user-friendly access to reli-
able data, information, and knowledge on water, land, and socio-economic conditions.” (CDE 2013).
In Kenya, institutional collaboration with the Water Resource Management Authority (WRMA) was
strengthened in Phase I. In addition, the monitoring network in Kenya was revitalized and five river
gauging stations and two meteorology stations were rehabilitated. Further, knowledge products were
launched that include model cases (learning watersheds and water-user associations), a watershed
model delineation tool, a sub-catchment directory and an abstraction survey. Also, the WRUA Forum
for the ENN basin was institutionalized. The forum serves as a basin-wide platform for water distri-
bution negotiation and conflict resolution (SDC 2013).
Phase II of the project that runs till 2016 has activities planned to “consolidate the centres and scale
up corresponding approaches and tools to the national and regional/transboundary level (SDC
2013).”
Description of the Study Area 7
2 Description of the Study Area
2.1 Location and zonal Differentiation of the Basins and Catchments
2.1.1 Location and Characteristics of the Ewaso Ng’iro North Basin
The Ewaso-Ng’iro North (ENN) Basin is one of Kenya’s six major drainage basins (Figure 2-1), with
Lake Victoria North, Lake Victoria South, the Rift Valley and the Athi River being the other five.
Covering an area of 210’226 km2, respectively 36.4% of Kenya, it is the largest of these six drainage
basins, but at the same time the least populated with a population density of 18 people per km2. Ac-
cording to the 2009 population census, the catchment’s population is 3.87 million, which is approxi-
mately 10% of Kenya’s total population (NWMP 2012). The low population is mainly due to the fact
that 70% of the entire catchment area is semi-arid (WRMA 2013). The basin area includes the Man-
dera and Wajir counties, most part of Marsabit, Samburu, Isiolo and Laikipia counties, and a part of
Nyandarua, Nyeri, Meru and Garissa counties. The drainage area of Ewaso Ng’iro North River is
81’749 km2, which account for about 39% of the ENN Catchment (NWMP 2012).
The Ewaso Ng’iro North River originates in the Central Kenyan Highlands and ends as an ephemeral
river in a large, semi-permanent wetland, called Lorian Swamp, located in the arid north-eastern
Kenya (De Leeuw et al. 2012). While the ephemeral surface flow of the river disappears into the Lo-
rian Swamp, its subsurface flow, called Lagh Dera, continues eastwards to recharge rivers inside So-
malia, which drain into the Jubba river – a river that eventually flows into the Indian Ocean (Ericksen
et al. 2011). Within the Lorian Swamps an extensive freshwater aquifer, called Merti Aquifer, origi-
nates and covers an area between the town Habaswein and the Kenya-Somalia border, a distance of
about 200 km (Kuria & Kamunge 2014).
In the ENN Basin the surface water only accounts for about 9%, whereas the groundwater for 91% of
the total water resources. The yearly renewable water resources per capita is more than five times
higher than the global benchmark of 1000 m3, meaning that the basin falls in the category of areas
with ‘moderate problems’. The ENN Basin is therefore an area where occasional water supply and
water quality problems occur which have adverse effects on people and wildlife mainly during dry
spells. Regarding surface water the area remains water scarce (WRMA 2013).
Legend
Basin boundary
Upper ENN Basin boundary
Ewaso Ng’iro
Drainage Basins:
1: Ewaso Ng’iro North
2: Tana River
3: Athi River
4: Rift Valley
5: Lake Victoria South
6: Lake Victoria North
Figure 2-1: Kenya’s six drainage basins and the location of the Upper ENN Basin (Source: NWMP (2012),
adjustments made by author)
2.1.2 Location of the Upper Ewaso Ng’iro Basin and Naro Moru River catchment
The Upper Ewaso Ng’iro Basin covers the upper part of the ENN catchment and reaches down to
Archer’s Post (Figure 2-2). The basin covers an area of 15’200 km2. Its location is north and west of
Mt. Kenya between longitudes 36°30’ and 37°45’ east and latitudes 0°15’ south and 1°00’ north
(Gichuki et al. 1998a).
The Upper ENN Basin can again be subdivided into three main subbasins (Figure 2-2): The Ewaso
Narok subcatchment which drains the western part of the Aberdare range and Laikipia Plateau; the
Ewaso Ng’iro - Mt. Kenya subbasin, which has its tributaries in the Nyambene hills in the east and
the slopes of Mt. Kenya in the south-eastern corner of the basin; and the Ewaso Ng’iro Lowland sub-
basin as a third subcatchment which drains the Mathews range to the basin’s north and the Rift valley
escarpment to the west. The confluence between Ewaso Narok and Ewaso Ng’iro serves as a common
point of the three subbasins (Mutiga et al. 2010; Notter 2003; Gichuki et al. 1998a).
The Ewaso Ng’iro - Mt. Kenya subbasin is the most important and reliable subcatchment in terms of
water quantity. Its three tributaries are the Burguret, Nanyuki and the southernmost, the Naro Moru
catchment, which the study will focus on.
Figure 2-2: Location and main subbasins of the Upper ENN basin (Source:
Ngigi et al. (2007))
2.2 The Naro Moru Catchment
The Naro Moru catchment covers an area of 173.44 km2 and shows a very elongated shape with an
average width between just three to five kilometers (Aeschbacher et al. 2005). The upper part of the
Naro Moru River is composed of the northern and southern river branches. The Northern Naro Moru
River has a drainage area of 47.4 km2 and is directly fed by Mt. Kenya’s slowly diminishing Tyndall
and Darwin Lewis glaciers, as well as temporary snowfields. Further sources are the small Lewis and
Tyndall tarns (lakes) and the slightly bigger Teleki and Hut tarns, which all lie above 4500 m a.s.l.
The Southern Naro Moru River with a drainage area of 28.2 km2 has its source in the moorland zone
with an altitude of maximal 4000 m a.sl. Due to their sources, their amount and reliability over the
course of their year differ. In average the northern branch has a higher discharge, whereas the south-
ern branch’s flow is more regular over the course of the day and year (Decurtins 1992).
The two river branches unite at an altitude of 2136 m a.s.l. and continue for around 50 km as the Naro
Moru River till the confluence with the Ewaso Ng’iro River at 1790 m a.s.l. A third tributary, the
Mwichuiri River with its source at around 2250 m a.s.l would join the main river right below the tar-
mac road that connects Nanyuki with Nairobi, if it had not been dammed in 1998 by the horticultural
farm Vitacress (AAA Growers’ Chestnut farm since 2005).
The Naro Moru catchment falls administratively between the Nyeri district (Central Province) and the
Laikipia district (Rift Valley Province). The area east of the railway line, which accounts for 64% of
the total catchment area, belongs to the Nyeri district; the catchment’s lower parts, respectively west
of the railroad, belong to the Laikipia district (WRUA 2009).
Figure 2-3: Location of the Naro Moru catchment, its ecological zones and gauging stations (Source: Notter et
al. (2007), adjustments made by Steiner (2014))
2.3 Gauging Station Network in the Naro Moru Catchment
2.3.1 Precipitation and Evaporation Measuring Stations
The following table shows the precipitation gauging stations in the Naro Moru catchment. Although
Archers Post is not located inside the study area, but at the outlet of the Upper ENN catchment, rain-
Table 2-1: Precipitation gauging stations in the Naro Moru catchment and Archers Post
Coordinates3 Alt.2 Ecological Period of

ID Station Name2 Type
Long. Lat. m a.s.l. Zone Gauging2
semi-arid Manual & automatic
1 Archers Post 37.66750 0.63754 839 1957 - to date
lowlands since 23.02.20124
44 Matanya (NRM) 36.95316 -0.17829 1840 Savannah Manual & automatic 1986 - to date
4
since 23.02.2009
53 Munyaka 37.05615 -0.17829 2070 Footzone Manual 1991 - to date
Naro Moru
61 37.14830 -0.17444 2420 Forest Manual 1968 - 2012
Gate Station5
Naro Moru Manual & automatic

62 37.21350 -0.17043 3050 Forest 1978 - to date
Met Station since 17.04.20144
Teleki Ranger 1978-19966

37.29779 -0.16632 4200 Alpine Manual
Camp 2010 - to date7
1978-19966
Austrian hut8 37.31410 -0.15944 4800 Alpine Manual
2010 - to date7
2
ID, Station Name, altitude and period of gauging (except Austrian hut and Teleki Ranger camp stations) are from
the NRM3-Hydrodatabase (NRM3 2013)
3
From the NRM3-Hydrodatabase (NRM3 2013) (Matanya, Munyaka) and Schmocker (2013) (Archers Post, NM
Gate Station, NM Met Station) and Google Earth (Teleki Ranger camp and Austrian hut)
4
The data from the manual stations in Archers Post, Matanya and Met station are stored in the NRM3-hydrodatabase,
the automatic stations are owned by Syngenta, but data is shared with CETRAD. The data of the automatic stations is
available on a website via a secured entry. The rain gauge, data transmission solution and interface are from the
company ADCON Telemetry. For this study, the data of the manual stations has been used.
5
As of 2014, according to CETRAD and CDE, there are plans of installing an automatic rain gauge station here.
6
Data has been used in Hastenrath (2005)
7
Data is yet unpublished. Data is collected by KWS Rangers and mountain guides. Rain gauges are run by the Insti-
tute of Meteorology and Geophysics, University of Innsbruck.
8
At the Austrian hut, an automatic meteorology station is run by the Institute of Meteorology and Geophysics, Uni-
versity of Innsbruck since 2009. Temperature, humidity, wind speed, pressure and radiation are measured. The data
is not automatically transmitted. Precipitation is measured manually.
fall and discharge of the Naro Moru catchment have a big influence on semi-arid areas downstream.
Therefore, the precipitation, evaporation and discharge gauging station in Archers Post is used in this
thesis to present the meteorological and hydrological situation in the semi-arid parts of the Upper
ENN catchment and to illustrate the big differences between the basin’s high- and lowlands.
The manually operated NRM3 stations operate with rain gauges of the type Casella London, which
catch the water in a bucket and then it is collected through a funnel into a simple canister or bottle.
The water is collected once a day (Schmocker 2013). All of the NRM3 stations in the Naro Moru
catchment are equipped with a manually operated evaporation pan.
According to Rainer Prinz from the Institute of Meteorology and Geophysics, University of Innsbruck
and Sevruk (1983), the precipitation data of the Teleki Ranger camp and Austrian hut have to be used
with caution since measuring precipitation in the mountains is a difficult task due to various reasons.
Some of the precipitation is not captured because of high winds, and for estimating the correct precip-
itation resulting from rainfall, the correct density of snow has to be assessed.
2.3.2 River Gauging Stations (RGS)
Table 2-2: River gauging stations in the Naro Moru catchment

Coordinates9 Altitude9 Area10 Start of End of
Code Station Name
Long. Lat. m a.s.l. km2 Gauging11 Gauging11
A1 Naro Moru Alpine 37.293421 -0.168802 4168 4.95 01.01.1985 21.12.1999
A2 Naro Moru Moorland 37.239481 -0.161581 3540 8.38 01.01.1985 21.12.1999

A3 Naro Moru Forest (North) 37.131627 -0.164842 2313 40.13 01.01.1985 to date
A4 Naro Moru Forest (South) 37.111773 -0.179096 2220 23.06 01.01.1985 to date
A5 Naro Moru Footzone 37.020672 -0.161073 1965 86.86 09.01.1985 to date
A6 Naro Moru Savannah12 36.914623 -0.053971 1801 173.44 01.01.1985 20.12.2011
A6 Naro Moru Savannah12 36.93694 -0.06402 1820 n.a. 15.03.2012 to date
A7 Naro Moru Mwichuiri13 37.022022 -0.159256 1970 17.2 18.03.1991 28.02.1999
9
Coordinates and altitudes were ascertained with Google Earth. To locate station A1 and A2, the hydrological map
of Mt. Kenya from Leibundgut et al. (1986) was used. The altitudes and especially the coordinates presented here do
not correspond with the data found in the NRM3 database (NRM3 2013), Aeschbacher (2003) and Notter (2003).
10
Calculated with the NRM3 Streamflow Model by Notter (2003). Data for Mwichuiri Station found in NRM3
(2013)
11
From the Hydro-Database NRM3 (2013). In the literature, various different dates regarding the stations’ start of
gauging can be found. E.g. according to Aeschbacher (2003) and Notter (2003), A5 started gauging on 01.01.1960.
MacMillan (1997) states 20.04.1948 as the starting point.
12
Station A6 was moved approximately 6.5 km upstream in March 2012.
13
Located right before confluence with A5. Coordinates given in Aeschbacher (2003) and NRM3 (2013) are wrong.
Table 2-2 provides an overview of all seven river gauging stations that have once existed in the Naro
Moru catchment. To date four of these stations, A3-A6, are still running and have been used in this
study. The location of the stations still in use can be seen in Figure 4-5 (page 72). Due to financial
reasons, stations A1 and A2 in the alpine, respectively moorland zone, have been closed in 1999
(Aeschbacher 2003). A7 was gauging Mwichuiri River which flows into Naro Moru River right be-
low station A5. A7 was abandoned in 1999 after the big horticultural company Vitacress built a dam
just above the tarmac road in 1998. The dam has since been storing most of this tributary’s discharge
which makes gauging redundant. Only during flood flows the Mwichuiri River still reaches the con-
fluence with the Naro Moru River. This thesis intended to use the discharge data of A7 to determine
the water consumption of AAA Growers’ Chestnut farm, which is the current owner of the land and
also dam. Unfortunately, no calibration formulas of A7 seem to exist anymore, which makes the
available data of eight years of gauge heights useless.
The river gauging stations are also used to define the boundaries of the river’s subcatchments:
 Source - A3: The subcatchment of the Naro Moru North River

 Source - A4: The subcatchment of the Naro Moru South River
 A3/A4 - A5: The subcatchment between RGS A3, A4 and A5
 A5 - A6: The subcatchment between RGS A5 and A6
Until 2012, all stations were equipped with an automatic gauging meter of the type R16 OTT (Figure
2-4) that operated with floaters. The device was mounted on top of four inch galvanized iron pipes
supported by iron clamps. The instruments worked with monthly clocks that had a resolution of 0.5
Figure 2-4: Automatic gauging meter R16 OTT type at RGS A8 in the neighboring Burguret catchment,
where this device is still used (Pictures by R. Nussbaumer, 2013)
mm per hour (Decurtins 1992). Once a month the clock’s paper was removed, taken to the office and
the gauge height values of each day’s peaks and troughs were typed into the NRM3 hydrodatabase
manually. This meant a lot of work and the temporal resolution of the data was relatively small with
between one to approximately six daily gauge heights saved in the database.
In 2012 and 2013, RGS A3-A6 were replaced by a new generation of gauge instruments named
ecoLog 500 (Figure 6-1 on page 118) from the German company OTT. During Phase I of the
WLRC-project all four RGS were rehabilitated, respectively revitalized. Besides updating the meas-
uring equipment, new cross section were built at all four stations and A6 was moved upstream by
around 6.5 km. Changes of the riverbed at the old site of A6 did not allow building a new cross sec-
tion that guarantees accurate discharge gauging. The new devices were put into service at the follow-
ing dates:
 RGS A3: Data available from 25.02.2013

 RGS A6: 15.03.2012. Continuous, reliable data available from 23.03.2012
Due to building new cross sections, respectively moving the location of one station, the rating equa-
tions used for the old cross section were no longer valid. Therefore, new rating equations for each of
the four gauging stations had to be introduced. The calibration work for these new rating curves is
presented in chapter 3. The rating equations previously used are found in the appendix on page 149.
More information about the OTT ecoLog 500 is found in chapter 6.
2.4 Ecological Zones: Dominating Vegetation, Soil Types and Land Use
As seen in Figure 2-3 (page 10), there are five different ecological zones in the catchment:
2.4.1 Alpine Zone (> 4000 m a.s.l.)
The alpine zone is characterized by the central plug of the volcano that forms the two highest peaks of
Mt. Kenya – Batian (5199 m a.s.l.) and Nelion (5188 m a.s.l.). The area is mostly covered by glaciers,
snow or rocks and vegetation mainly occurs in the lower part of the zone. According to Liniger et al.
(1998) the predominant soil type are Regosols. This type of soil occurs in humid to very humid cli-
mate, has a low water storage capacity and low fertility, is shallow, poorly developed, easily erodible
and suitable for sparse natural vegetation. Besides the dominating tussock grass, giant groundsels,
thistles and lobelias grow in the better drained valleys below 4400 m a.s.l (Decurtins 1992).
Figure 2-5: Alpine Zone on the east side of Mt. Kenya. Tussock grass and giant groundsels in front. Nelion,
Batian and Point Lenana in the background. (Picture by R. Nussbaumer, September 2013)
2.4.2 Moorland Zone (3200-4000 m a.s.l.)
The main characteristic in the upper part of this zone is the wide U-shaped glacially formed Teleki
Valley. The lower part is characterized by steeper slopes and deep gorges. This zone is dominated by
fluvial forms and access is difficult during rainy season. The permeability of the soils in the upper
part is good and allows groundwater formation, whereas the moorland soils (e.g. Histosol) in the low-
er part are poorly drained. The upper parts of the moorland zone features the same vegetation as the
alpine zone, whereas the lower parts is characterized by swamps and wetlands, which is dominated by
heather vegetation, mostly Erica and Philippia (Decurtins 1992).
The alpine and moorland zone belongs to the Mt. Kenya National Park. Thus, there are only a few
people living in the mountain huts more or less permanently and the zone is mainly used for recrea-
tional purposes and touristic activities (e.g. game watching, trekking, climbing).
Figure 2-6: Moorland at 3900 m a.s.l in the Burguret catchment (Picture by R. Nussbaumer, August 2014)
2.4.3 Forest Zone (2300-3200 m a.s.l.)
The upper part of the zone is dominated by moderately well to well-drained humic Andosols, which
is an ashy soil with high organic matter content, black topsoil and clay. Below 2550 m a.s.l. the An-
dosols are replaced by well-drained humic Acrisols. The upper part of this zone is characterized by
dense bamboo forests mixed with huge specimens of cedar and podocarpus trees. Around 2600 m
a.s.l. the bamboo forest changes to less dense and wet, evergreen mountain forest (Decurtins 1992).
Figure 2-7: Left: Bamboo forest on Burguret route. Right: Large deforested area for potato cultivation (Pic-
tures by R. Nussbaumer, August 2014)
Most of the area still belongs to the National Park, however, first human impacts on the vegetation
can be noticed right below the National Park border at around 2400 m a.s.l. Areas of natural forest are
logged, mainly for cultivating potatoes. In deforested areas used for cultivation, there is a considera-
ble threat of reduced water infiltration capacity and water storage capacity. As a consequence, in-
creased surface runoff, soil erosion and ultimately a decline in land productivity must be expected.
Changing natural vegetation to cropland on these loose volcanic soils on the moderately to steep
slopes of Mt. Kenya require conservation measures (Liniger et al. 1998). Reforestation projects are
indeed practiced here.
2.4.4 Footzone (2000-2300 m a.s.l.)
The area between RGS A3/A4 and A5 mainly belongs to the footzone. The uppermost part is still
characterized by steep slopes and narrow valleys. It quickly changes to less steep and more undulat-
ing forms. In most areas indigenous forests are only found along the river above the confluence of the
Northern and Southern Naro Moru Rivers. Human influence is strong, clearly evident and increases
the lower one goes in the footzone. According to Liniger et al. (1998), the dominating soils are Ac-
risols and ferric Luvisols. These types of soils occur in semi-humid to semi-arid climate. They consist
of clay in the B-horizon and the soil profile is washed through. The two soils have a high water stor-
age capacity, are deep, well-developed, fertile, erodible and very suitable for rainfed crop production,
grazing and forests. The footzone is dominated by small-scale farming with cultivation of potatoes
and vegetables. Some reforestations of eucalyptus and pines can be noticed in the upper parts of the
zone. These fast-growing trees are mainly planted for making rapid profits from the sale of timber
(Aeschbacher 2003).
Figure 2-8: Left: Subsistence farming in the footzone with an agroforestry system. Right: Mixed land use in
the savannah zone (Pictures by R. Nussbaumer, October 2013)
2.4.5 Savannah Zone (1800-2000 m a.s.l.)
This zone’s relief is flat to undulating plains with at times a deeply incised river. The typical vegeta-
tion cover is open grassland alternating with bush land (mainly acacia species). These forests have
become increasingly endangered due to deforestation for cultivation purposes and the production of
charcoal. At many places along the river, the vegetation has already been completely destroyed (Aes-
chbacher 2003).
According to Liniger et al. (1998), the dominating soil types in the upper third of this zone are still
Acrisols and ferric14 Luvisols. The lower two thirds of the zone (e.g. the Matanya area) consist of
luvic15 (to verto16-luvic) Phaeozem on convex elevations, whereas on concave depressions and flat
areas the dominating soils are vertic15 Luvisol/ Phaeozem and Vertisol. These soils have a high water
storage capacity and availability of nutrients in common and are both highly fertile and erodible if not
covered. Their workability is restricted due to stickiness when wet and hardness when dry. If soil
cover is reduced, these red soils are highly vulnerable to surface crusting and sealing. During rainy
season the soils create management challenges regarding tillage and accessibility. Even though these
soils are generally slightly less suitable for agriculture than the ones in the footzone, if the right con-
servation measures are applied, the soil characteristics are still favorable for cultivation.
The land use has experienced big changes since the 1960ies as discussed more detailed in chapter
2.6.2 (page 25) and is now dominated by small-scale farming. The main crops cultivated are maize,
beans, potatoes and to a lesser degree peas. Further, easily marketable horticultural products like to-
matoes, cabbages, green pepper or French peas are grown. Similar to the footzone, a mixed system of
crop and livestock production with a strong subsistence orientation is found in the savannah zone
(Künzi et al. 1998). However, according to Künzi et al. (1998), land use slightly differs between the
two zones. In the semi-arid savannah zone less cropland and more livestock is held compared to the
footzone. This is mainly due to soils and the climatic condition in the semi-humid footzone that are
more suitable for cultivating crops. In addition, the zonal difference in herd sizes is also based on the
availability of grazing land. The savannah zone is populated less dense and therefore provides more
free access to grazing land.
14
Ferric refers to a soil with iron concretions (Liniger et al. 1998)
15
Luvic refers to a soil that contains an argic horizon in the upper 100 cm of the soil profile. An argic horizon is a
subsurface horizon which has a distinctly higher clay content compared to the overlying horizon (ISRIC 2014)
16
Verto refers to a soil that has a vertic horizon in the upper 100cm of the soil profile. A vertic horizon is clayey
subsurface horizon that is of very hard consistence when dry. It further shows cracks. When wet it is highly slippery.
The soil has very high shrink-swell potential (ISRIC 2014).
2.5 Mt. Kenya as the Basin’s Water Tower
2.5.1 Climate
The climate in the Upper Ewaso Ng’iro Basin results from the interaction between topography and
atmospheric circulation caused by the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ).
Inter Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ)

The position of the ITCZ is the relevant factor for the typical yearly recurring pattern of four distinc-
tive seasons in the study area. The ITCZ can be seen as the earth’s meteorological equator where the
air masses of the northern and southern hemispheres come together and where the highest amount of
radiation is received. Due to the inclination of the earth’s axis and its movement around the sun, the
ITCZ’s position moves up to around 20° degrees north and south of the equator in Eastern Africa.
Generally the position is determined by the maximum solar radiation, but also by surface characteris-
tics. The high amount of radiation in this zone causes high-reaching convection of up to 16 km in
altitude and is responsible for the equatorial trough. Air temperature is decreasing with increasing
altitude due to pressure reduction. In the course clouds and precipitation are formed as a result of an
increase in relative humidity. This process explains the equatorial rains, respectively the two rainy
seasons occurring in the study area. In the lower atmosphere, the convecting air is constantly replaced
by north-eastern and south-eastern winds called “trade winds”, which originate in the subtropical
high-pressure areas and whose lateral direction is altered by the Coriolis force towards the west. In
the upper troposphere, the south-western and north-western winds transport energy away from the
equator towards the two poles. Since these winds run in opposite direction to the trade winds and
further have a tendency to sink, trade winds are prevented from rising. This process causes an inver-
sion, which results in relatively dry climate north and south of the ITCZ. This resulting atmospheric
circulation on both sides of the meteorological equator is known as the “Hadley Cell” (Sturm 2002;
Notter 2003; Aeschbacher 2003; Decurtins 1992).
The four climatic seasons

The atmospheric circulation results in the following four distinguishable three-month seasons in the
study area (Notter 2003; Gichuki et al. 1998b):
 Dry Season (mid-December to mid-March): The ITCZ is situated south of the equator, over
the southern Rift Valley and Madagascar. The north-eastern trade winds that cross the arid re-
gions of Somalia and Northern Kenya are very dry which results in very little precipitation in
the study area.
 Long Rains (mid-March to June): The ITCZ is crossing the equator northwards during this
time span, resulting in intensive convection-induced rainfalls.
 Continental Rains (July to mid-October): During this period, the ITCZ is located over
Southern Arabia. The south-eastern trade winds originate in the Indian Ocean and as a conse-
quence are less dry than the northerly trade winds during the dry season. According to Sturm
(2002), the Upper ENN Basin’s eastern part receives less rainfall than the western part which
might be caused by a second convergence zone on the 700 hPa level over Lake Victoria.
 Short Rains (mid-October to mid-December): Again the ITCZ traverses the study area
southwards, bringing convective rainfalls.
The four seasons can also be easily distinguished in Figure 2-9, which shows the average monthly
precipitation of the period 1992 to 2012 for the four rainfall gauging stations in the Naro Moru
catchment and Archers Post. It must be noted that the described seasonal pattern is the most common,
but the actual timing regarding the start and end of the seasons can vary considerably, mainly due to
large-scale climatic phenomena like the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) which can cause ex-
tremely dry or wet years (Aeschbacher 2003).
Average monthly rainfall in the Naro Moru catchment and Archers Post
200
Precipitation (mm)
150 Archer's Post
Matanya
100
Munyaka
NM Gate
50
Met Station
Figure 2-9: Average monthly precipitation of the period 1992-2012 for the four rainfall gauging stations in the
Naro Moru catchment and Archers Post (Source: NRM3 2013)
Influence of the topography

Topography is mainly responsible for the very unequally distributed precipitation rates in the Upper
ENN Basin. Figure 2-9 illustrates very well that the higher up a rainfall station is situated in the study
area, the more rainfall can be expected. Mt. Kenya and the Aberdare mountains act as a barrier that
causes trade winds to rise, cool down and release moisture in the process. This explains that even
during the dry season, precipitation is occurring much more regularly on the mountain slopes than on
the plateau. The maximum precipitation of around 1500 to 1600 mm/year appears at an altitude of
around 3000-3500 m a.s.l. since the sinking air from the upper troposphere prevents the trade winds
from rising up to the peaks. The annual amount of precipitation in the peak region decreases to less
than 1000 mm as seen in Figure 2-10. The exposition is a further aspect that influences the amount of
rainfall. Mt. Kenya’s eastern and southern slopes are significantly wetter than the western and north-
ern slopes, since the south-eastern trade winds originating over the Indian Ocean during the continen-
tal rainy season carry more moisture than the north-eastern trade winds crossing the arid areas of So-
malia and Northern Kenya during the dry season. During the dry season, the western and northern
slopes act as the barrier’s windward side, whereas during the wetter continental rainy season these
slopes are on the lee side, thus receiving less precipitation over the course of the year (Aeschbacher
2003; Notter 2003). Gichuki et al. (1998b) state that daily rainfall data shows a significant difference
in the character of rainfall between highland and lowland regions. In areas with low annual precipita-
tion rates, the ten greatest daily rainfall events contribute to 70% of the annual rainfall which reflects
the episodic nature of rainfall interspersed by long dry spells.
Potential evapotranspiration and annual water balance

Figure 2-10 illustrates that the annual precipitation rate in the Upper Ewaso Ng’iro Basin decreases
with increasing distance from Mt. Kenya, respectively decreasing altitude, whereas the potential
evapotranspiration does the opposite. Of the available data, the potential evapotranspiration is lowest
in the humid forest zone with an annual rate of 635 mm, whereas the highest rates can be expected in
the semi-arid savannah zone. However, there is a considerable difference in the semi-arid areas: The
Matanya station situated on the Laikipia Plateau measured an annual evaporation of 2042 mm in the
period 1992 to 2012, whereas the Archers Post station located in the lowlands recorded 3130
mm/year. Unfortunately, there is no station that measures the rate of evaporation above 3050 m a.s.l.,
however, according to Wiesmann et al. (2000), it can be assumed that the evapotranspiration rate is
further decreasing between the forest zone and the alpine zone. Figure 2-10 shows that the recorded
evaporation exceeds the precipitation only at the two gauging stations in the forest zone. This implies
that a surplus in the annual water balance only occurs in the forest, moorland and alpine zone, respec-
tively above an elevation of around 2500 m a.s.l. The footzone and semi-arid savannah zone experi-
ences a deficit in the annual water a balance as illustrated in Figure 2-11. Mt. Kenya can therefore be
seen as the water tower of the Ewaso Ng’iro Basin: Its upper slopes that receive high amounts of pre-
cipitation are the source of perennial rivers which, during dry season, are the only source of surface
freshwater in the footzone, semi-arid Laikipia plateau and the lowlands (Notter et al. 2007).
Average total annual precipitation and evaporation in the Naro Moru

catchment and Archers Post
3000
Precipitation Evaporation
2500
2000
mm per year
3130
1500
2042
1787
1000
1508
no data
no data
1061
1031
500
870
707
707
665
635
377
0
Archers Post Matanya Munyaka NM Gate Met Station Teleki Camp Austrian Hut
839 m a.s.l. 1840 m a.s.l. 2070 m a.s.l. 2471 m a.s.l. 3048 m a.s.l. 4200 m a.s.l. 4800 m a.s.l.
Gauging Station
Figure 2-10: Total annual precipitation (mm) of six rainfall gauging stations and total annual evaporation (mm)
of four stations in the Naro Moru catchment and of Archers Post for the period from 1992 till 2012 (Source: Data
of Archers Post, Matanya, Munyaka, NM Gate (Naro Moru National Park-Gate) and Met Station are from the
NRM3 database (NRM3 2013); Data from Teleki Camp and Austrian Hut are from Hastenrath (2005))
Figure 2-11: Annual water balance. Note that Archers Post is located in the semi-arid Samburu
Plains. (Source: Wiesmann et al. (2000))
2.5.2 Surface Water and Groundwater Availability
Surface Water
In conformity with the area’s climate, the discharge regime is bimodal with highest flows during
April/ May and November. The rainfall rich lower moorland and upper forest zone contribute most to
the discharge. Kiteme et al. (2008) state that these two zones provided 65% of dry season flow be-
tween 1985 and 1999, whereas the alpine zone with its meltwater from glaciers contributed another
8%. Thus, regarding water supply, the disappearance of Mt. Kenya’s glaciers will have an almost
negligible impact. According to Notter (2003), two main zones regarding water supply can be distin-
guished in the catchment: The zone between the peak and the tarmac road (respectively the lower end
of the footzone) which has a high water supply, and the zone between RGS A5 and the confluence
with Ewaso Ng’iro which is characterized by low river density and less surface water. This implies
that the Laikipia Plateau and the lowlands heavily depend on the water contribution from Mt. Kenya.
Gichuki et al. (1998b) state that there is a decreasing trend in the lowest dry season flows of the
Ewaso Ng’iro at Archers Post between the 1960’s and 1990’s, whereas no such trend can be found
regarding precipitation. The median decade river flow in February was reported to have dropped from
9 m3/s in the 1960’s, to 4.5 m3/s in the 1970’s, 1.2 m3/s in the 1980’s, to 0.9 m3/s in the 1990’s and to
0.58 m3/s in the 2000’s (UNEP 2014). Discharge during the short rains also shows signs of decline.
The authors attribute this trend to increasing abstraction, particularly from the upper and lower slopes
of Mt. Kenya as further discussed in the next chapter. The development of river flow in the Naro
Moru catchment between 1960 and 2014 will be analyzed in detail in chapter five.
Groundwater
Schotterer & Mueller (1985) in Gichuki et al. (1998b) and Aeschbacher (2003) identified local
groundwater systems in the lower forest zone, where stored groundwater surfaces as springs. Its re-
charge area is located in the high permeable soils of the upper forest zone and has been dated to be
only a few years old in the Naro Moru catchment. Groundwater levels in the forest zone are in the
range of 18 to over 200 m in depth, which constraints its abstraction due to high costs of drilling
boreholes and water pumping (Gichuki et al. 1998b). Decurtins (1991) and Gathenya (1992) agree
that the local groundwater system is recharged in the upper forest and moorland zone and that most of
it is discharged in the lower forest- and also footzone. However, Notter (2003: 65) states that
“groundwater contributions in the footzone do not seem to consist of significant amounts of ground-
water with long residence times.” According to Liniger (1995) in Gichuki et al. (1998b: 23), there is
limited possibilities for ground water recharge in the footzone, savannah zone and the semi-arid low-
lands, since its “groundwater is part of a larger regional system whose recharge is thought to have
occurred thousands of years ago, thus deeming the aquifers to be fossil.” The fact that this groundwa-
ter is not renewed under current climatic conditions, the high costs of harvesting and the groundwa-
ter’s too high content of mineral salts make this groundwater reservoir unsuitable for exploitation and
is therefore no solution to reducing water scarcity in this areas (Schotterer & Mueller 1985; in Notter
2003). However, Liniger (1995) in Gichuki et al. (1998b) states that groundwater is indeed being
abstracted from these fossil aquifers in the semi-arid plains and if such abstractions would intensify, it
may lower water tables and threaten the sustainability of existing boreholes.
Notter (2003: 65) further found that “water lost to bank storage and seepage in the savannah zone
seems to stay well-confined within the alluvial sediments of the riverbed and remains visible in pools
or reappears, like at the small spring near Matanya.”
2.6 Socio-economic Settings
2.6.1 Population Growth
Up to the first decade of the 20th century, the Upper Ewaso Ng’iro Basin was inhabited by pastoral-
ists, mainly the Massai and Samburu tribes. During the colonial period starting in the end of the 19th
century, most parts of the Laikipia Plateau and Mt. Kenya’s footzone were incorporated into the so-
called “White Highlands”. The area was mainly occupied by white settlers who owned large ranches
and farms. Following Kenya’s independence in 1963, many of these large-scale properties of the
“White Highlands” were sold and subsequently subdivided into small plots for agropastoralists. This
process entailed a large influx of farmers, who mainly immigrated from high-potential, but overpopu-
lated Central Kenya (Kiteme et al. 2008) . According to Wiesmann et al. (2000), the population in the
Upper ENN increased from about 50’000 in 1960 to around 500’000 in 1999, exceeding annual
growth rates of 8%. The national average for the same period was a rate of 3.3% per year (Kiteme et
al. 2008). Since 1999, the population growth seemed to have continued, although less rapidly. The
population density in the Naro Moru catchment increased from 19817 in 1999 to 24317 inhabitants per
km2 in 2009, which corresponds to an annual growth rate of 1.9%17. The highest growth rate was ex-
perienced in the Naro Moru sublocation, which mainly consists of the Naro Moru town. The popula-
tion of the catchment’s largest sublocation – Matanya – which lies between RGS A5 and the conflu-
ence to Ewaso Ng’iro remained nearly stagnant17.
17
Figures are calculated by the author based on data from the Kenyan Population and Housing Census from 1999,
respectively 2009.
2.6.2 Change in Land Use and its Influence on Water Demand
Change and transition resulting from immigration after the end of the colonial period have been fun-
damental and far-reaching especially in the Laikipia Plateau and Mt. Kenya’s footzone (Kiteme et al.
2008). Before the colonial time, when the area was inhabited by pastoralists, the resource use was
well adapted to the region’s high variability of rainfall as the pastoralists’ movements followed rain-
fall patterns (Wiesmann et al. 2000). With the immigration of agropastoralists after 1963, forest and
savannah vegetation has increasingly been replaced by small-scale farming. According to Notter et al.
(2007) cultivation has traditionally been most intensive in the footzone, but has increased and ex-
panded into other zones in the past decades. The expansion into the forest zone has been weakened by
a national policy requiring landless squatters to settle outside protected forest areas. Since 1998,
small-scale cultivation increasingly expanded downstream along the river into the semi-arid Laikipia
Plateau, where rain-fed agriculture is not possible anymore. This implies that river water has to be
used for irrigation purposes (WRUA 2009). Fischer (2014) found that the forest cover along the river
in the catchment’s foot and savanna zone has decreased significantly in the last 50 years due to land
use change. Grazing & bush land near the river were mostly converted to cropland, thus putting pres-
sure on the remaining riparian forests in these zones.
In the early 1980s large-scale irrigation horticultural companies started to establish their farms on Mt.
Kenya’s upper savannah and footzone. Between 1991 and 2003, 24 large horticultural farms with a
total area of 1085 ha were founded. Most of their produced vegetables are exported to international
markets, mainly Europe. The horticulture sector has established itself as the most important generator
of employment and income in the north-western rural areas of Mt. Kenya. The large horticulture
farms are further responsible for the establishment of “outgrowers” in the region. According to
(Schuler 2004: 62), outgrowers are “farmers from smallholders up to large-scale companies supply-
ing the raw material on contract to an exporting business partner. This is a widespread way of busi-
ness co-operation, applied all over Kenya and is also popular in the study area. The exporting com-
pany provides the market to the outgrowers and the outgrowers help the exporters to meet the de-
mand of their markets.” Due to horticulture sector’s intensive irrigation practice, it has become a ma-
jor competitor for water resources, even though advanced technologies such as drip irrigation are
used by these farms (Kiteme et al. 2008). Since market demand in Europe is highest during their win-
tertime (mainly October to May), the highest production and water use of the Kenyan horticulture
sector is between June and March. This implies, that the pressure on river water resources is high
during the generally water scarce months of the continental rainy season and also the dry season
(Schuler 2004).
Water intakes high up on the mountain of Ewaso Ng’iro’s tributaries provide water for urban centers,
agropastoralists settlements and horticulture farms in the footzone, whereas in the savannah zone
mostly individual system are used by small-scale farmers to abstract water. According to Aesch-
bacher (2003), 97% of abstracted river water in the Naro Moru catchment is used for irrigation. Most
of the water supply systems have insufficient storage capacities to bridge dry spells. According to
Wiesmann et al. (2000), 60-95% of the natural available river water in the tributaries of Ewaso Ng’iro
is abstracted during the dry season, nearly all of it illegally.
Due to the increasingly densely settled foot and savannah zone, pastoralists have been constrained to
the edge of the Laikipia Plateau and the dry lowlands – areas which are also used by large cattle
ranches, game parks and tourist resorts that attract clientele around the world. Mainly the pastoralists
and wildlife heavily depend on the flow of the Ewaso Ng’iro for their survival during the dry season
(Wiesmann et al. 2000). The total livestock population, which mainly consists of cattle, sheep, goats,
camels and donkeys is estimated to be around 521’000, whereas the total wildlife population of the
lowlands is around 121’000, mainly consisting of buffalo, eland, elephant, gazelles, impala, gerenuk
and giraffes (Muchoki 1998 in Gichuki et al. 1998b). With such an abundance of wildlife, tourism has
become a major source of income in the lower part of the Upper ENN.
2.6.3 Water Scarcity and associated Conflicts
Summarizing the previous two sub-chapters, it can be stated that population growth, transition from
large-scale ranching and pastoralist land use to small- and large-scale horticulture farming, and the
resulting intensification of irrigation in the foot and savannah zone have increased water demand
dramatically in the last few decades. This led to a significant decrease in low flows in the lowlands as
discussed in chapter 2.5.2, and to drying up of Ewaso Ng’iro’s tributaries with increasing frequency
and increasingly closer to the mountain. The issue of scarce river water has increasingly led to com-
petition and conflicts between different groups of upstream and downstream water users (Notter et al.
2007; Kiteme et al. 2008; Liniger et al. 2005).
The river water users in the lowlands and on the Laikipia Plateau are affected heaviest by dwindling
flows during the dry season. The existence of pastoral communities is threatened by this trend of de-
creasing flows. Also, the future of tourism is critically linked to rivers. If wildlife that depends heavi-
ly on river water is decreasing, tourism will do so too. According to Kiteme et al. (2008), wildlife has
already increasingly moved closer to the mountains looking for water. This movement is causing con-
flicts between humans and wildlife since, especially elephants, frequently destroy cultivated crops
and sometimes even kill people.
However, according to Wiesmann et al. (2000), these water-related issues are not expressed in major
conflicts over water resources between different river water users as one might expect. Due to eco-
nomic and political dependency of small-scale farmers on large-scale horticulture farms, potential
conflicts between these two actors in Mt. Kenya’s footzone are rarely expressed. Conflicts in the Up-
per ENN are occurring between single agropastoral communities as well as among the different so-
cio-economic classes within the communities. Further, potential conflicts have developed into ethnic
tensions, in which cultural differences and land-related discrepancies are possible to erupt in the form
of violent clashes
2.7 Water Management
2.7.1 Structure of basin-wide Water Management
The Kenyan Water Act of 2002 defines one autonomous public agency – the Water Resource Man-
agement Authority (WRMA) – to regulate the management of water resources and a second one – the
Water Services Regulatory Board (WSRB) – to regulate the provision of water and sewerage ser-
vices. WSRB was established to mandate the licensing of all water and sewerage services that provide
more than 20 households (Mumma 2007). WRMA on the other hand is responsible for the allocation
of water resources through a permit system and for implementing a catchment management strategy
for the development, management, use, protection and control of water resources within a catchment
(Watson 2007). The Naro Moru subcatchment falls in the Ewaso Ng’iro Catchment Area, with a re-
gional office in Nanyuki. However, local management is undertaken by the Upper Ewaso Ng’iro Sub-
regional Office, also located in Nanyuki. Stakeholder representation and inclusion in water resource
management is reflected in the Catchment Area Advisory Committee (CAAC) on catchment-wide
issues and the Water Resource User Associations (WRUA) at the sub-catchment level. The CAAC is
a statutory body whereas the WRUA is a voluntary body (WAP 2013).
2.7.2 Community-based Management: Naro Moru WRUA
Emergence of WRUAs
The establishment of WRUAs emerged in the first half of the 1990s as a follow-up to recommenda-
tions developed during a water awareness campaign among water-related stakeholders in the Upper
ENN Basin in the early 1990s. The campaign was conducted by CETRAD, NRMT and six govern-
ment ministries and focused on the challenges of sustainable and equitable water use (Kiteme &
Gikonyo 2002). The first WRUA was formed in early 1997 and was based on a former self-help
group. The WRUAs have emerged to effective grassroots structures for sorting out conflicts among
water users in a catchment. In 2007, the number of associations in the basin increased to 32 (Kiteme
et al. 2008), and meanwhile, nearly every subcatchment in the Upper Ewaso Ng’iro Basin has an own
WRUA (Fischer 2014).
Establishment of the Naro Moru WRUA

The first informal meetings of river water users in the Naro Moru subcatchment were held in 1999,
when the region was severely affected by a dry spell. While the river was drying up around Naro
Moru town, the people living in the lower river stretch blamed the upstream river water users for their
extensive irrigation activities, whereas they did not even have enough water to satisfy their basic
needs. The Naro Moru WRUA was registered at WRMA in 2003 and mainly pursued capacity build-
ing and awareness creation among the water users till 2006. In 2007, it was registered with the Attor-
ney General’s chamber. After 2008, regular meetings were held in order to discuss conservation
measures.
Organization of a WRUA and support

The WRUA includes small and large-scale farmers/ abstractors, riparian land owners and other stake-
holders, like local authorities, water project chairmen and the Naro Moru town council (WRUA
2009). Generally, large-scale horticultural farms are members of these associations, sometimes even
played a major role in their formation. In some cases, the heavy involvement of such farms was moti-
vated by the company’s urge to maintain access to river water without facing conflicts with other
stakeholders (Liniger et al. 2005). The WRUA organizes regular meetings, so-called barazzas, which
is attended by the WRUA’s chairman, secretary and treasurer, elected representatives of the various
administrative zones and further stakeholders (Fischer 2014). The association’s membership is volun-
tary. Without providing financial incentives to a member, the intention is to only draw members that
are really committed to cooperatively share, manage and conserve the catchment’s water resources.
The WRUA collects fees from members and other stakeholders in form of registration and subscrip-
tion fees. Further, they receive external financial support, e.g. from WRMA, Water Services Trust
Fund, Community Development Trust Fund and NGOs. WRMA also supports the WRUAs with vari-
ous activities that may include planning workshops, riparian demarcation, catchment protection, ca-
pacity building activities and development of infrastructure (e.g. dams and flood protection) (Aarts
2012). In addition, research facilities (e.g. CETRAD and CDE) provide research data to WRUAs
which supports them in decision making and water management processes.
Main goals and tasks of WRUAs

The main goal of a WRUA is the sustainable management of water resources. Their tasks consists of
establishing an equitable distribution of water resources (especially during dry spells), protecting and
afforesting the riparian zone, rehabilitating riverbanks, preventing pollution of surface water and
groundwater, promoting water conservation practices (e.g. drip irrigation, agroforestry, rooftop har-
vesting, river water storage), raising public awareness of water-related issues, and working towards
the reduction of conflicts between different water users (Fischer 2014). The main weakness of a
WRUA is their inability to impose any sanction to water users in case they violate a law or agreement
(e.g. water abstraction without permit or over-abstraction during dry spells). The WRUA can only
advise to follow the law or report water users to WRMA which is the institution that can penalize
them. Further, a case study of Fischer (2014: 70) showed that “WRUA members are well informed
about the activities of their neighbors and in this way some kind of social control is possible”. The
WRUA’s regular meetings also serve as an institution for discussion and early conflict resolution.
Regarding the resolution of conflicts, WRUAs proved to be a successful institution. According to
Liniger et al. (2005), 48 out of 52 cases of water-related conflicts in the Upper ENN Basin between
1997 and 2003 were resolved by WRUAs, and only four had to be referred to law courts.
30 Calibration of Gauging Stations
3.1 Methods
3.1.1 Gaugings used for the Rating Equations
Between April and September 2013 the gaugings at the four river stations were mainly conducted by
P. Kungu from CETRAD and I. Karimi from WRMA. Most of these measurements captured flows
between Q80 and Q20, only a few high flows (Q20) and low flows (Q80) and no extreme low flows
(Q95) and flood flows (Q5).
Table 3-1 shows that most (66) measurements were collected by using the current meter, only for a
few (11) gaugings during high flows the float method was used. In November 2013 and January/ Feb-
ruary 2014 more discharge measurements were conducted by the author and M. Muriungi from
CETRAD. 14 of these total 22 gaugings were done during low flows in the end of January and the
beginning of February 2014, whereas the other six during flows between Q80 and Q50. For RGS A3,
A4 and A5 the salt dilution method was also applied besides the current meter method. For the pur-
pose of managing river water, having precise discharge data during low flows is most important.
Therefore, a special focus was set on creating rating curves that show a high accuracy for the river’s
lowest flows. A detailed list of all the gaugings conducted is found in the appendix on page 151.
Table 3-1: Gaugings used for the rating equations

Number of gaugings per period and method*
April - September 2013 November 2013 - February 2014
Current Current Salt Total of
RGS Float Total Total
Meter Meter Dilution both periods
A3 12 (1) 4 16 (1) 2 (2) 1 (1) 3 (3) 19 (4)
A4 16 (0) 1 17 (0) 4 (1) 3 (1) 7 (2) 24 (2)
A5 17 (0) 5 22 (0) 6 (4) 2 (2) 8 (6) 30 (6)
A6 21 (0) 1 22 (0) 4 (3) 0 4 (3) 26 (3)
Total 66 (1) 11 77 (1) 16 (10) 6 (4) 22 (14) 99 (15)
* The figures in brackets stand for the gaugings conducted during low flows (Q95-Q80)
Calibration of Gauging Stations 31
3.1.2 Current Meter Method
Current meters are mechanical devices with a horizontal axis propeller to measure the velocity of a
stream in open channels. An equation or rating table is used to convert the propeller’s rotation per
unit of time into velocity. The stream’s velocity can vary both horizontally and vertically. To account
for these variations, measurements at different positions within a cross section are needed (Suter
2014). For the gaugings conducted by CETRAD and WRMA, one measurement per vertical was tak-
en. In most cases, the surface flow was measured by keeping half of the propeller’s diameter above
the water surface. The measured velocity was then corrected by the factor of 0.8. However, no such
proceeding regarding the one-point measurement method can be found in any literature known to the
author. Bosshart (1996) states that the propeller should be completely submerged. The uncertainty of
the subsurface measuring method is assumed to be quite high, even if executed correctly. Herschy
(2009) states that applying this method yields an uncertainty of 15%. A few measurements from
CETRAD and WRMA were collected using the 0.6 method as described in Bosshart (1996) and
Herschy (2009): One measurement is taken at each vertical by exposing the current-meter at 60% of
the water total depth, which is then considered as the vertical’s mean velocity. The uncertainty of the
0.6 method decreases to 7.5% (Herschy 2009).
During the gauging period of November 2013 to February 2014, most gaugings were conducted using
two-point (per vertical) measurements. The velocity is measured at 20% and 80% of the total water
depth and the average of the two readings is taken as the mean. However, the depth of the water dur-
ing low flows, especially at RGS A5 and A6, was too low for two measurements. Due to more meas-
urements per vertical, the uncertainty of this method decreases to 3.5% (Herschy 2009).
The number of verticals per gauging was defined in order to measure a maximum of 10% of gross
discharge per vertical measurement (Bosshart 1996). The duration of one measurement was 30 sec-
onds, which is lower than the suggested 40-60 seconds by Bosshart (1996). However, under the con-
ditions of low flows, no significant natural pulsation of the velocity was observed in the field and thus
a shorter cycle is assumed to provide accurate results.
For the gaugings two different current meters from the company OTT Hydromet GmbH were used:
 OTT C31 with the propeller Nr. 1: This device was used during all flows with a water depth
above 15 cm. Equipped with this propeller, it has a measuring range of 0.025 to 5 m/s. The pro-
peller has a diameter of 125 mm, which makes the C31 unsuitable for very low water depths
(OTT-C31 2014).
 OTT C2 with propeller Nr. 3: This device was used during all flows with a water depth below 15
cm. Equipped with this propeller, it has a measuring range of 0.035 to 4 m/s (OTT-C2 2014).
The discharge was calculated from single current meter measurements according to Dyck (1980, in
Suter 2014):
𝑛
𝑄 = ∑ 𝑣𝑖 ∗ 𝑑𝑖 ∗ ∆𝑤𝑖
𝑖=1
Notation:
𝑄 Discharge [m3/s]
𝑣𝑖 Average stream flow velocity [m/s]
𝑑𝑖 Depth [m]
∆𝑤𝑖 Width [m]
After having defined the number of revolutions of the propeller per second ni, the following formulas
were applied to calculate the average stream flow velocity vi (OTT-C31 2014; OTT-C2 2014):
 For OTT C31 with propeller Nr. 1: 𝑛𝑖 ≤ 0.77 vi = 0.2390 ∗ ni + 0.018

0.77 ≤ 𝑛𝑖 ≥ 9.71 vi = 0.2572 ∗ ni + 0.004
 For OTT C2 with propeller Nr. 3: 𝑛𝑖 ≤ 0.59 vi = 0.2171 ∗ ni + 0.034

0.59 ≤ 𝑛𝑖 ≥ 1.08 vi = 0.2408 ∗ ni + 0.020
𝑛𝑖 > 1.08 vi = 0.2528 ∗ ni + 0.007
For the two-point measurement method, the average of the velocity calculated for the points at 20%
and 80% of the total water depth was taken to receive the average stream flow velocity vi.
3.1.3 Salt Dilution Method
To measure discharge during low flows, slug injections of salt solutions as described in Moore (2003)
and Moore (2005) were used. The proceeding is as follows: At a given location of the river, a salt
solution is injected as an instantaneous slug. While travelling downstream, the solution mixes
throughout the depth and across the stream. At one specific point further downstream at which the
salt solution is completely mixed with the river water across the stream, the electric conductivity (EC)
is measured.
The salt solution induces a sharp increase of the EC compared to the river’s basic EC. After the EC’s
peak value is reached, it decreases slowly back to the basic EC. The time the salt cloud needs to pass
depends on the longitudinal dispersion of the salt dilution within the river and normally takes only a
few minutes (Moore 2003 and Bosshart 1996 in Suter 2014). For this gauging campaign, a handheld
manual conductivity meter was used. Its recorded EC values were written down in a five second in-
terval. For calculating the discharge, the following equation was used (Moore 2003):
𝑉
𝑄=
𝑘 ∗ ∆𝑡 ∗ ∑𝑛[𝐸𝐶(𝑡) − 𝐸𝐶𝑏𝑔 ]
Notation:
Q Discharge [m3/s]
V Volume of injected salt solution [m3]
k Calibration constant [μS/sec]
n Number of measurements during the passage of the salt wave [-]
Δt Time interval of measurements [sec]
EC Electric conductivity [μS/sec]
ECbg Background conductivity [μS/sec]
Due to choosing to inject a certain volume of salt solution instead of an exact amount of salt, the cali-
bration constant k had to be determined for every measurement, which was a time consuming task. A
detailed description for determining this constant is found in Moore (2004). Regarding the amount of
salt, Moore (2005) suggests that increasing EC by 100–200% of ECbg is adequate for streams with
low background EC of about less than 50 μS /cm, which was the case for the Naro Moru River during
the time of measuring. The intended increase of the EC was reached by taking between 0.15 and 0.3
kg salt per 0.1 m3/s, which is also in the range of the suggestions by Moore (2005) and Bosshart
(1996). To ensure that all the salt in the injection solution is mixed well, a minimum amount of river
water must be added to the salt. Given the low temperatures of river water, the maximum concentra-
tion that will dissolve readily is around 20%, or 0.1 kg of salt per one liter of river water. This guide-
line by Moore (2005) was successfully followed in the field.
Compared to the current meter gaugings, the advantages of the salt dilution method are the following:
First, the time needed for a single measurement is much shorter, thus the risk of a change in discharge
during the measurement decreases. Second, especially during low flows, less equipment has to be
carried to the field. Third, the method is safer since no wading is required. And last but not least, a
higher accuracy of the results can be expected. According to Herschy (2009), the uncertainty is ± 5%
at a 95% confidence interval. However, to reach such a high accuracy, certain pre-conditions must be
fulfilled (WMO 2009; Moore 2003): Homogenous mixing of the injection solution within the stream,
constant stream flow and ECbg, and no decomposition of the added salt by the stream environment.
Homogenous mixing is assured by choosing a river section with high turbulence and few ponds. In
addition, a sufficient mixing distance between injection and sampling point is important. To estimate
the mixing distance, the Hull-Formula was used (Bosshart 1996 in Suter 2014):
𝐿 = 𝑎 ∗ 𝑄 1⁄3
Notation:
L Mixing distance [m]
a Parameter [s1/3]; a = 50 if the salt is injected in the middle of the stream
Q Discharge [m3/s]
Applying this formula during low flow conditions resulted in a mixing distance between 40 m at RGS
A5 and 60 m at RGS A3. At station A3 and A4, river sections fulfilling the above mentioned pre-
conditions were relatively easy to find, although small areas where ponding occurred were present
due to very low flows. The suitability of the method at RGS A5 decreased. Turbulence was minor and
Figure 3-1: Left: RGS A5; Right: RGS A6 (Pictures by R. Nussbaumer, January 2014)
stagnant water presented an issue as seen on the left in Figure 3-1. Therefore, at the only suitable river
section remaining, the mixing distance was quite short with around 30 meters. At RGS A6, turbulence
was even lower than at RGS A5 and sections of stagnant water were prevalent as seen in Figure 3-1.
Thus, the salt dilution method could not be applied here under these conditions.
3.1.4 Float Method
The float method measures the flow velocity by determining the travelling time of a raft floating on
the stream surface for a certain distance. Discharge is then calculated by multiplying the mean veloci-
ty by the wetted area and a certain factor (WMO 2009 in Suter 2014). This method is mainly used due
to following reasons (WMO 2009):
 When a current meter is impossible to use due to unsuitable velocities or depths, or when large
amount of material is present in the stream which makes wading unsafe.
 When discharge is high, the salt dilution method is not very suitable due to the very high amount
of salt needed for the injection solution.
 When a discharge measurement must be made in a very short time.
However, the main drawback of this method is the rather high uncertainty of ± 10-20% at a 95% con-
fidence interval (Herschy 2009). Therefore, the CETRAD staff used this method only to capture
flows above Q50 (4-14 m3/s depending on the RGS) in April 2013. The exact proceeding and formu-
las used for calculating discharge are unknown since only the final results of these gaugings were
available to the author.
3.1.5 Development of the Stage-Discharge Relationship
Definition of a stage-discharge relationship

A stage-discharge relationship is considered to be the best estimate of the relation between a stage
(water level) and discharge at a certain place of a river. Every stage is linked to a corresponding dis-
charge value by this relationship. The rating equation expresses such a relationship mathematically,
whereas the rating curve describes the relation between stage and discharge graphically. To define the
rating curve, the measured discharge, displayed on the y-axis, is plotted against the corresponding
stage on the x-axis (WMO 2010 and Bosshart 1996 in Suter 2014).
Choice of function
According to WMO (2010) and Bosshart (2010), the relation of stage and discharge can generally be
best described as a power function in the form of:
𝑄 = 𝐶 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)𝛽
Notation:
Q Discharge [m3/s]
h Gauge height [m]
e Gauge height of zero flow [m]
𝛽 Exponent [-]
C Coefficient [-]
The coefficient C and exponent 𝛽 of the equation were determined by using Microsoft Office Excel.
Datum correction of the water level

The measured, respectively recorded, water level is defined as the gauge height h. The gauge height is
based on a gauge ruler that is located at the RGS. In most cases, the gauge height is not equal to the
actual water level h-e which makes a correction of the datum necessary before the discharge can be
calculated (Kennedy 1984). The actual zero flow at each RGS could not be measured exactly, only
estimated based on personal observation of the cross sections’ designs. However, the cross sections of
all RGS are subject to change due to sedimentation or erosion. Further, the stations’ cross sections do
not show an equal gap between the river bed surface and the water level across the whole width of the
river. These two aspects make it possible that even at the estimated gauge height of zero flow, a small
amount of water (e.g. 5-10 l/s) is flowing.
Rating curve segments

Due to non-regular channel geometry and bed surface structures, a stream’s flow condition can vary
with changing water levels (Bosshart 1996). According to Suter (2014), there are three methods to
inspect the cross section for possible rating curve segmentation: Field observations, analysis of the
log/log stage-discharge relationship (WMO 2010; Kennedy 1984) and using software to apply Bayes-
ian methods for estimating multi-segment discharge rating curves. This thesis concentrated mainly on
the first method. Each cross section was analyzed for abrupt changes in channel geometry. A segment
was determined for each considerable change in geometry and then checked for plausibility by using
the log/log stage-discharge relationship. According to Kennedy (1984), a segmentation of the stage-
discharge relation is most likely if the logarithmic relation is best described by multiple straight lines.
Accuracy of the stage-discharge relationship

The accuracy of the stage-discharge relationship depends on the amount and distribution of discharge
measurements, the error of the single discharge measurements, the method to derive the stage-
discharge relationship and the accuracy of recording the corresponding gauge heights (Bosshart
1996).
Regarding the number of measurements, Bosshart (1996) suggests the following: (1) At least one
measurement should be carried out per one tenth of the stage-discharge relation’s total range. (2) At
least five measurements should be taken for each segment of the stage-discharge relation. (3) At least
20 measurements for each segment are required in order to analyze the accuracy of a stage-discharge
relationship. The first recommendation was implemented successfully, with exception regarding the
highest flows. The second suggestion was also accounted for. However, less than 20 measurements
per segment of each station’s stage-discharge relationship were carried out, thus violating recommen-
dation three. Due to this violation, the accuracy of the stage discharge relationship was not assessed.
Besides, Le Coz (2011) states that “the methodology for assessing the uncertainty associated with a
given stage-discharge relation, over a given period of time and for given hydraulic conditions, still
appears to be an open scientific issue.” Suter (2014) used three different methods to assess the rela-
tionship’s relative uncertainty at a 95% confidence interval. However, the differences between the
three methods used were up to 38 percentage points. This seems to make the curve’s uncertainty
mainly depending on the method used for estimating it.
3.2 Results
3.2.1 RGS A3
Description and state of the cross section
Figure 3-2: RGS A3 during low flows in January 2014, looking downstream (Picture by R. Nussbaumer)
Figure 3-3: Cross section of RGS A3 (looking upstream)

Figure 3-2 shows the cross section of RGS A3 during low flows. The ecoLog 500 device is placed in
the concrete structure on the orographic left side. Approximately half of the cross section is enforced
by a small concrete structure as seen in Figure 3-3. At the time of building the RGS, it was thought
that during low flows, the stream will only flow through the river section where the concrete structure
was placed. However, the river bed changed very quickly in the course of only one year and the sec-
tion next to the concrete was eroded by more than 0.4 meters. Most probably, this change does not
affect the accuracy of the gauge height reading much, since during low flows the whole cross section
(even the concrete part) is fully covered with water by at least 0.10 meters. Nevertheless, it shows that
the cross section is not ideally built, and that further changes of the river bed in the near future can be
expected. A structural reinforcement over the whole width of the river bed would have increased the
durability and accuracy of the measurements over time. New gaugings to account for these rapid
changes of the cross section are essential in the near future to ensure sound records.
In the course of the whole fieldwork, the cross section did not change noticeably. Issues of sedimenta-
tion do not seem to occur. However, during rainy season, large rocks can accumulate right at and after
the cross section which changes the capacity of the pond, which in turn can have an influence on rec-
orded gauge heights.
Stage-discharge relationship
16
14
12
Float
Discharge [m3/s]
10
Current Meter
8
Salt Dilution
6
Rating Curve
4
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Water level [m]
Figure 3-4: Stage-discharge relationship of RGS A3

100.000
10.000
log discharge [m3/s]
1.000
Float
Current Meter
0.100 Salt Dilution
Rating Curve
0.010
0.001
0.01 0.1 1 10
log water level [m]
Figure 3-5: Rating curve of RGS A3 in log-log scale
Table 3-2: Rating equation for RGS A3

Gauge heights Water levels Zero flow
Rating Equation R2
(h) (h-e) (e)
> 0.00 m > 0.00 m 0.00 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 8.6946 ∗ ℎ2.3992 0.99
The rating curve of RGS A3 is shown in Figure 3-4. It can be seen that the higher the flows are, the
less gaugings were conducted. Further, the accuracy of the methods used decreases with increasing
gauge height. The uncertainty of the float method of ± 10-20% (Herschy 2009) (Figure 3-4 displays
15%) is considerable. Therefore, the overall accuracy for high flow estimations is most probably not
very high. Nevertheless, the measurement values on the log-log scale show only small deviations to
the rating curve through the whole range of gauge heights as seen in Figure 3-5.
The measurements covered most of the recorded range of water levels. The highest gauged water
level was 1.25 m. The highest recorded level was 2.39 m in June 2013. However, during the period of
March 2013 to March 2014, the recorded levels were above 1.25 m only during 8.5 hours, which is
around 0.1% of the whole period recorded. Unfortunately, no gauging was conducted during the low-
est recorded water levels, which was 0.13 m in March 2014. The lowest gauged height was 0.2 m.
Since the cross section shows a uniform profile, the rating curve was not segmented. The assumption
of a uniform profile must be explained since Figure 3-3 is deceiving. Looking at Figure 3-3, it seems
that water levels could drop below the concrete part of the cross section, which is at the same time
gauging height of 0.00 m. However, the whole cross section is situated in a pond. Even if there would
be no discharge, the pond would contain water and show a gauge height of above 0.00 m. Therefore,
for water levels between 0.00 m and 1.4 m, which is at the sharp bend in the concrete structure seen
in Figure 3-2, a uniform cross section can be assumed. The rating curve’s high R 2 and linearity if dis-
played in the log-log scale partly confirm that no segmentation is needed.
Comparing the measured discharge of the two methods used for low flows – salt dilution and current
meter – a substantial difference between the two was observed. For the water level of 0.2 m, the result
of the current meter measurement is 22% lower in average. Most probably the current meter underes-
timates the discharge, since the velocity during low flows is too low to accurately measure it with this
method. According to Bosshart (1996), the velocity of a stream should be at least 0.1 to 0.15 m/s to
ensure sound current meter measurements. The mean velocity measured was 0.09 m/s and going as
low as 0.035 m/s. According to OTT, the velocities that can be measured with their meters ranges
between 0.025 to 5 m/s. However, during the gaugings, the meter stopped turning even if there was
still an obvious flow present. The author assumes that the lower end of the company’s specification
cannot be reached because the suggested service interval (e.g. replacement of oil) of the current meter
was not met.
3.2.2 RGS A4
Figure 3-6: RGS A4 during low flows in September 2013, looking upstream (Picture by R. Nussbaumer)
Figure 3-7: New temporary “bridge” just above RGS A4 in January 2014 (Picture by R. Nussbaumer)
Figure 3-8: RGS A4 during low flows in August 2014 (Picture by R. Nussbaumer)
RGS A4 is situated right under a bridge as seen in Figure 3-6. On the orographic left side the ecoLog
500 device is placed in the concrete structure. The housing of the former measuring device can also
be seen. To save money, similar to RGS A3, less than half of the cross section has been reinforced
with concrete as shown in Figure 3-9. However, contrary to RGS A3, that is the section where most
of the stream’s discharge is flowing during low flows. Nevertheless, reinforcing the entire width of
the river bed would have been a good idea, as it is the case at RGS A3.
The river section just above the bridge experienced dramatic change in January 2014. As seen in Fig-
ure 3-7, a new temporary river crossing was built by using a shipping container and a mixture of
gravel and mud. The new bridge was constructed for transferring elephants from the nearby Mt. Ken-
ya National Park into another wildlife reserve. The bridge where RGS A4 is situated would not have
been suitable for such heavy loads. The dirt used for the construction caused a lot of sedimentation
right at and after RGS A4 (Figure 3-8). Since this new installment, removing large amounts of sedi-
ments at and also a few meters downstream the cross section is essential to ensure accurate gauge
height readings. In January 2014, the concrete part of the cross section was covered by around 10-15
cm of dirt. After removing these sediments, gauge heights dropped by 5 cm. In August 2014, a lot of
the temporary bridge’s gravel and mud was already washed away. However, since there has been no
plan to remove the entire construction, the problem of substantial sedimentation of the cross section
will remain for months, maybe even years. Most of the boulders next to the concrete section of the
river bed have been remaining stationary during the course of the fieldwork. However, high flows
could have certainly changed the amount and location of these boulders.
5.0
Float
4.5
4.0 Current Meter
3.5
3.0 Salt Dilution
Discharge [m3/s]
2.5
Rating Curve
2.0 WL < 0.175
1.5 Rating Curve
1.0 WL 0.175 - 0.59
0.5 Rating Curve
WL > 0.59 m
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Water level [m]
10.000
Float
1.000 Current Meter

Salt Dilution
0.100
Rating Curve
WL < 0.175
Rating Curve
0.010
WL 0.175 - 0.59
Rating Curve
WL > 0.59 m
0.001
0.01 0.10 1.00
log water level [m]
Figure 3-11: Rating curves of RGS A4 in log-log scale
Table 3-3: Rating equations for RGS A4

Rating Equation R2
(h) (h-e) (e)
0 – 0.2049 m 0 – 0.1749 m 0.03 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 3.0327 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)1.6885 0.82
0.205 – 0.6249 m 0.175 – 0.5949 m 0.03 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 2.9730 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)1.2892 0.90
> 0. 625 m > 0.595 m 0.03 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 5.1923 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)2.0160 0.92
The building of the temporary bridge discussed above also influenced the development and accuracy
of the rating equation. All measurements for gauge heights above 0.2 m were conducted before the
construction of the new bridge, whereas measurements for flows below 0.2 m afterwards. The change
of the cross section most probably affected gauge heights above Q50 only slightly. If gaugings for
water levels below 0.2 m conducted before January 2014 are compared with the ones of January and
February 2014, no noticeable difference is observed. Therefore, it can be assumed that the cross sec-
tion before and after the installment of the bridge featured a very similar profile, assuming the sedi-
ments have been constantly removed.
The cross section does not show a uniform profile across the whole width of the stream, as seen in
Figure 3-9. The three segments were established according to field observations (Figure 3-9) and the
analysis of the log/log stage-discharge relationship (Figure 3-11). Surprisingly, the average R2 of the
three rating curves is lower (R2 = 0.88) than if a curve is chosen without segmentation (R2 = 0.97).
However, the low flows are represented more precisely with a segmented curve than without. Since
the focus was laid on an accurate representation of low flows, the curve with segmentation was final-
ly chosen. In addition, the methods used for measuring low flows (salt dilution and the two-point
current meter method) have a lower uncertainty than the one-point current meter and float method
chosen for flows above Q50 (error of ± 5-7.5% vs ± 10-20%). If no segmentation is established, the
measurements which have a high uncertainty would have a negative effect on the overall accuracy of
the rating equation.
The measurements covered a decent amount of the recorded range of water levels, but less than in the
case of RGS A3. The highest gauged water level was 0.86 meter. The highest recorded level was 1.34
m in June 2013. For water levels above 0.595 m, the cross section’s profile is rectangular. Knowing
this, the rating curve established for water levels above 0.595 can most probably also be used for lev-
els above 0.86 m with an acceptable accuracy. Unfortunately, no gauging was conducted during the
lowest recorded water levels (0.08 m in February 2014). The lowest gauged height was 0.135 m.
However, the cross section does show a uniform, more or less rectangular profile for water levels
below 0.175 m. Thus, the equation for levels below 0.175 most probably estimates the discharge for
the lowest flows quite well. A further indication that the extreme low flows are estimated well by the
rating curve is given if the stage-discharge relation is displayed in a log-log scale. The extrapolation
of the linear curve in Figure 3-11 cuts the y-axis just above 0.001 m3/s (1 l/s), which corresponds to a
water level of 1 cm.
Comparing the measured discharge of the two methods used for low flows – salt dilution and current
meter – no difference between the two was observed. Due to a slightly steeper terrain and a narrower
river bed at RGS A4 compared to RGS A3, the velocity during the low flow measurements was con-
siderably higher with an average of 0.2 m/s compared to RGS A3 with an average of 0.09 m/s, which
affirms the above stated assumption that the current meter underestimates the discharge when the
stream’s velocity is very low (< 0.1 m/s).
3.2.3 RGS A5
Figure 3-12: RGS A5 during low flows in January 2014, looking downstream (Picture by R. Nussbaumer)
Figure 3-13: Cross section of RGS A5 (looking downstream)

Figure 3-12 shows the cross section of RGS A5 a water level of around 0.37 m. Approximately two
third of the cross section is enforced by a small concrete structure as it can also be seen in Figure
3-13. Towards the cross sections orographic right side, the amount of accumulated pebbles increases
and partly covers the concrete structure. The structure is already eroded at some places. Considering
the construction is only around two years old, its durability does not seem to be very promising.
However, of all the four gauging stations, A5 seems to have the most stable cross section with the
most precise long-term gauge height records. Throughout the field work, only slight changes of the
river bed were noticeable. Sedimentation consisting of mainly pebbles and cobbles occurs to a small
degree since the slope is steeper a few meters above and again around 20 meters below the cross sec-
tion. Similar to RGS A3, the station is situated right at the beginning of a river section that is nearly
stagnant during low flows. A removal of sediments after high flows seems to be sufficient to ensure
accurate gauge height readings. Again, a structural reinforcement with concrete across the whole
width of the cross section would have been wise for the following reasons: First, current meter gaug-
ings could be done quicker and more accurate with a solid, uniform ground. Second, a change of the
cross section, which at RGS A5 is mainly accumulation of pebbles and cobbles during high flows,
would be observed much easier. Third, the amount of sediments that need to be removed after a peri-
od of high flows in order to restore the cross section’s previous condition can be assessed better.
12
11
10
9 Float
8
Current Meter
Discharge [m3/s]
7
6 Salt Dilution
5
4 Rating Curve
WL < 0.51 m
3
Rating Curve
2
WL > 0.51 m
1
0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Water level [m]
100.000
10.000
Float
Current Meter
1.000
Salt Dilution
0.100
Rating Curve
WL < 0.51 m
0.010 Rating Curve
WL > 0.51 m
0.001
0.01 0.10 1.00
log water level [m]

Rating Equation R2
(h) (h-e) (e)
< 0.72 m < 0.51 m 0.21 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 8.2283 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)2.4931 0.97
> 0.72 m > 0.51 m 0.21 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 13.602 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)3.0977 0.99
Similar to the stations discussed before, not the whole range of recorded stages could be measured
with gaugings. The highest water level gauged was 0.93 m, the lowest 0.15 m. The highest gauge
height recorded was 1.83 m in June 2013, which equals a water level of 1.62 m. The lowest one was
0.3 m (water level of 0.09 m) in February 2014. The cross section at A5 shows a more or less rectan-
gular profile up to a water level of 0.51 m. Above this level, the cross section is slightly wider. There-
fore, at this point a segmentation of the curve was chosen. The difference of the two rating curves is
very small as seen in Figure 3-14 and Figure 3-15. However, the low flows are better represented
with a segmented curve. At a water level of 1.31 m, the profile gets wider again, which would justify
a further segmentation. It was decided against this for the following reasons: Water levels above 1.31
m are very rare, the highest gauging conducted was only at 0.93 m and accounting for the slightly
wider profile is not of high importance since the estimation of the discharge of such high water levels
has a high uncertainty anyway. The curve’s extrapolation of the extreme low flows seems to be quite
accurate. The log-log scale of the extended rating curve (Figure 3-15) shows 1 l/s for a water level
slightly below 2 cm. This estimation is close to the assumed gauge height of zero flow.
3.2.4 RGS A6
Figure 3-16: RGS A6 during low flows in August 2014 (Picture by R. Nussbaumer)

RGS A6 is located right under a bridge as seen in Figure 3-16. On the orographic left side, the
ecoLog 500 device is placed in the concrete structure. Similar to the other three stations, only half of
the stream’s width is enforced by a small concrete structure. RGS A6 experiences quite an amount of
siltation, mainly during low flows. During high and flood flows, erosion of the river banks was ob-
served. Most probably the river bed erodes as well, thus, some of the silt accumulated during low
flow periods disappears again. All this processes makes the cross section prone to constant changes.
Regular removal of sediments is essential for a sound recording of gauge heights. Siltation is further
an issue for the precise working of the ecoLog 500, as further discussed in chapter 6. During the
fieldwork, flows below a water level of 0.21 m (gauge height: 0.27 m) were channeled on the right
side of the bridge’s pier due to a lot of accumulated silt a few meters above the cross section on the
left side of the pier. Thus, the width of the cross section varies greatly depending on the water level.
However, this situation can change quickly with the erosion, respectively accumulation of silt. The
ever-changing cross section also makes it difficult to determine a gauge height of zero flow. The es-
timated stage of zero flow is based on the situation encountered during conducting low flow gaugings
in January and February 2014.
10.0
9.0
8.0
Float
7.0
Discharge [m3/s]
6.0 Current Meter
5.0 Rating Cure WL <

0.215 m
4.0 Rating Curve WL
0.215 - 0.3649 m
3.0
Rating Curve WL >
2.0 0.3649 m
1.0
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
Water Level [m]

100.000
10.000
Float
1.000 Current Meter
Rating Cure WL <

0.215 m
0.100 Rating Curve WL
0.215 - 0.3649 m
Rating Curve WL >
0.010 0.3649 m
0.001
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00
log water Level [m]

Rating Equation R2
(h) (h-e) (e)
0 – 0.2749 m 0 – 0.2149 m 0.06 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 3.2128 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)1.8223 0.97
0.275 – 0.4249 m 0.215 – 0.3649 m 0.06 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 14.740 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)2.5620 0.95
> 0. 425 m > 0.365 m 0.06 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 5.7681 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)1.4806 0.96
Again, not the whole range of recorded stages could be measured with gaugings. The highest water
level gauged was 1.28 m, the lowest 0.07 m. The highest gauge height recorded was 2.79 m (water
level (WL) 2.73) in June 2013, whereas the lowest one was 0.06 m (WL 0.01 m) in February 2014.
The curve’s lowest segment was established based on field observations. As mentioned above, water
levels below 0.215 meters only flow on the right side of the pier, greatly minimizing the width of the
channel and therefore requiring a separate rating equation. The second segmentation is based on the
analysis of the stage-discharge relationship in log-log scale (Figure 3-19). Since the cross section is
rectangular and uniform above 0.7 m, the rating equation is assumed to estimate flows above the
highest gauged water level quite accurately. The extrapolation of the curve for the extreme low flows
(Q95) is most probably quite precise too. As seen in Figure 3-19, a water level of around 0.01 m
equals a flow of 1 l/s. The two lowest points seen in the plot seem to lie quite far off the rating curve
for water levels below 0.215 m. An explanation for this could be the low velocities that were experi-
enced during the current meter measurements. As discussed in chapter 3.2.1 and 3.2.2, the current
meter seems to underestimate the discharge during conditions with velocities below 0.1 m/s. The es-
timation of low flows has to be taken with caution. The issue of siltation causes a constant change of
the cross section, which mainly affects the accuracy of the low flows. In addition, the ecoLog 500
experienced issues measuring low flows accurately. This issue is further discussed in chapter 6.
3.3 Summary and Discussion

Table 3-6: Rating equations of each RGS
Gauge heights Water levels Zero

RGS Rating Equation R2
(h) (h-e) flow (e)
A3 > 0.00 m > 0.00 m 0.00 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 8.6946 ∗ ℎ2.3992 0.99
A4 0-0.2049 m 0-0.1749 m 0.03 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 3.0327 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)1.6885 0.82
A4 0.205-0.6249 m 0.175-0.5949 m 0.03 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 2.9730 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)1.2892 0.90
A4 > 0. 625 m > 0.595 m 0.03 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 5.1923 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)2.0160 0.92
A5 < 0.72 m < 0.51 m 0.21 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 8.2283 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)2.4931 0.97
A5 > 0.72 m > 0.51 m 0.21 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 13.602 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)3.0977 0.99
A6 0-0.2749 m 0-0.2149 m 0.06 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 3.2128 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)1.8223 0.97
A6 0.275-0.4249 m 0.215-0.3649 m 0.06 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 14.740 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)2.5620 0.95
A6 > 0. 425 m > 0.365 m 0.06 m 𝑄 [𝑚3 ⁄𝑠] = 5.7681 ∗ (ℎ − 𝑒)1.4806 0.96
The field observations over the course of nearly one year revealed that the overall state of the cross
sections is not very good, but also depends heavily on the RGS. RGS A5 seems to be the most stable
and best placed station, thus providing the most accurate long-term gauge-height records. It is fol-
lowed by RGS A3 and A6. The latter mainly experiences accumulation of silt during low flow peri-
ods and erosion during high flows which in the end mainly affects the accuracy of gauge height rec-
ords of low flows negatively. RGS A4 is the most critical station due to the construction of a tempo-
rary bridge that causes ongoing sedimentation. All four cross sections were initially planned to have a
small weir across the whole profile. Yet, due to funding constraints, the investments into the construc-
tions were reduced, resulting in a weak structure and not entirely covering the whole width of the
cross sections. A more durable structural enforcement across the whole width of the river bed would
have ensured better quality of gauge height records during low flows and due to higher durability, the
maintenance cost in the long-term would most probably have been less.
The issue of unstable cross sections also affected the development of the stage-discharge rating equa-
tions negatively. Especially at RGS A4 and A6, issues of sedimentation, respectively siltation, make
it difficult to determine the gauge height where zero flow can be expected in the long-term. The fol-
lowing aspects are further responsible for increasing the error of the stage-discharge relationship:
 Most current meter measurements conducted above Q50, and a few below Q50, used the surface
velocity method which literature discourages to use due to the high uncertainty of ± 15%.
 Some current meter measurements were performed incorrectly. Instead of keeping the whole cur-
rent meter below the water surface, half of the propeller’s diameter was kept above the stream’s
surface. The error that occurred due to incorrect application is not known.
 Only a few gaugings were taken during high flows. In addition, for most of these measurements,
the float method was used, which has a high uncertainty of ± 10-20%. Therefore, the error of the
curve regarding the high flows is assumed to be high.
 Gaugings could not be conducted for the whole range of the recorded gauge heights. To estimate
discharge for the extreme low and flood flows, an extrapolation of the curve is used. Due to rec-
tangular or uniform cross sections, these extrapolations are probably quite precise in estimating
discharge, especially in case of the extreme low flows. A more detailed analysis regarding this is-
sue is provided in the result section.
 If stream velocities are below 0.1 m/s, the current meter seems to underestimate discharge. This
was an issue during low flow measurements at RGS A3 and eventually A6. At RGS A3, due to
ideal conditions, the salt dilution method could be used instead of the current meter to measure
the low flows. At RGS A6, the salt dilution method was not suitable due to many stagnant river
sections and lack of turbulence.
The uncertainty at the lower end of the rating curves is assumed to be much lower than at the upper
end. The salt dilution and two point current meter method used to gauge the low flows have a low
uncertainty of ± 5%, respectively ± 3.5%. At RGS A4 and A5, practically no deviation between the
two methods could be observed. The relatively high deviation of 22% at RGS A3 can be explained by
the unsuitable conditions for applying the current meter method.
In the future, regular observation of the cross sections and, if necessary, removal of sediments is es-
sential for preserving a stable stage-discharge relationship. In addition, WMO (2010) recommends a
minimum of ten discharge gaugings per year to detect changes of the cross section that affects the
stability of the stage-discharge relationship. A stable cross section is needed to ensure sound gauge-
height and discharge records of the Naro Moru catchment.
54 Abstraction Campaign
4.1 Introduction to the Abstraction Campaign of 2013
This survey intended to assess all abstraction points along the Naro Moru River from its source to the
confluence of the Ewaso Ng’iro. The main fieldwork for the abstraction survey was completed be-
tween October 7th and 22nd, 2013. Bringing together all of the details, further trips to the field were
necessary in November and December 2013 and also in January/ February 2014. The main fieldwork
was always carried out with the help of Milton M. Muriungi from CETRAD and Martin M. Karuri
from the Naro Moru WRUA.
The main goal of this survey was to quantify the amount of water abstracted from the river, defining
the naturalized river flow and critical water levels for minimum flows at RGS A5. In case such a crit-
ical water level is undercut, the river would have a high chance of drying up before reaching the con-
fluence with Ewaso Ng’iro. Together with providing access to live discharge data, defining such criti-
cal water levels helps the Naro Moru WRUA to implement actions during droughts early enough in
order to prevent the catchment from running into a severe water crisis. Therefore, this thesis pursued
a high accuracy of results regarding the abstracted quantity during low flows, rather than mid- and
high flows. Further, the survey’s results are compared with findings of previous abstraction cam-
paigns to evaluate the development of river water abstractions in the catchment over the last three
decades.
The findings regarding the naturalized river flow and critical water levels are presented and discussed
in chapter five.
4.2 Previous Abstraction Campaigns in the Naro Moru Catchment
During the last 30 years, five noteworthy studies regarding water abstractions along the Naro Moru
River – four of them with the involvement of the University of Berne – have been conducted.
The first study that looked into water abstractions in the Mt. Kenya area was Brunner (1983). It pro-
vides a hydrological overview of all the subcatchments in the Ewaso Ng’iro-Mt. Kenya subbasin and
contains a thorough list of all abstraction points of each catchment with information about the exact
Abstraction Campaign 55
location, owner, type of abstraction and its condition, intended use, and possible storage capacities.
Further, precise information regarding each catchment’s water supply is provided, which includes
data about dams, bore holes and irrigated land. The survey of 1983 found six open furrows, two
gravity pipe lines and 21 pumps (Widder water pump (hydraulic ram), diesel/ petrol and electric
pumps) between the source and the confluence with Ewaso Ng’iro. The estimated irrigated area of the
Naro Moru catchment accounted for between 470 and 530 ha. However, there is no quantitative as-
sessment of the amount of abstracted river water.
Gathenya (1992) concentrated on the water balance of the Naro Moru catchment. It includes the re-
sults of a one-year field research campaign where daily discharge data for three existing furrows were
gathered. Further, the thesis contains a quantitative assessed abstraction rate for the Naro Moru River.
The data was conducted in September/ December 1990 and January 1991 and stored in the NRM 3
hydrodatabase. His discharge measurements of the Matanya furrow, which is the only remaining fur-
row still used in the whole catchment, are used in this thesis. His findings are compared with the re-
sults of the abstraction survey conducted for this thesis.
Between 1994 and 1997, John Gikonyo collected information regarding water allocation, water scar-
city and water abstraction quantities in the Upper ENN Basin for his yet unpublished PhD thesis. His
draft of the thesis could not be accessed. However, some of his findings are presented in Aeschbacher
(2003) and also used in this thesis. Further, his data of discharge measurements from 1994 to 1997 of
the Matanya furrow are stored in the NRM3 hydrodatabase and used for this study.
The fourth abstraction campaign was conducted by Aeschbacher (2003) in July and August 2002 with
the help of B. Notter and two NRM3 researchers. This Master thesis looked into the development of
water use and water shortage in the Naro Moru catchment. The results of this study are also compared
to the findings of the abstraction campaign of 2013 presented here.
In 2011, an abstraction survey was undertaken by M’Mukindia (2011) and compiled for the Naro
Moru WRUA. The data regarding the legal water projects (WP) was assessed very thoroughly. How-
ever, this is not the case for the pump users. Various sections along the rivers were left out for no
apparent reason. The study assessed nine piped water project, two furrows, and 171 pump users. Re-
garding the water projects, only some of the names changed between 2011 and 2013. Further, one
project – Mwiremia WP – emerged during the same period. Therefore, some of the data, e.g. infor-
mation regarding the permit numbers and designs, were taken from this report. Besides providing
some vague values for the abstracted amount of some water projects, the report does not contain any
quantified findings. Hence, together with the fact that the survey is incomplete, the results of this re-
port are not discussed any further in this thesis.
4.3 Methodology of Abstraction Campaigns
4.3.1 General Proceeding
The team started the campaign by visiting the intakes of the piped water projects above RGS A5.The
locations were known by the accompanying members from the WRUA and were therefore accessed
by car. The visits to these intakes were mainly done to record their coordinates and altitude, measure
the pipe diameter and observe the state of the weir and pipes. Information regarding the project’s
primary use, water storage capacity, number of served households, area used for irrigation, master
meter readings, permit number and design (defining the maximum capacity of a project during Q90
and Q80) were provided by the projects’ chairman, M’Mukindia (2011), and/ or official documents
from the projects which are found in the WRMA office in Nanyuki.
Figure 4-1: Left: Kihoto Water Project, Right: Matanya furrow (Pictures by R. Nussbaumer, 2013)
Figure 4-2: Left: Pump site with removable water pump, Right: Common petrol pump setup (Pictures by R.
Nussbaumer, 2013)
To assess the legal and illegal open furrows and all of the hidden locations where portable petrol
pumps are sometimes operated, it was necessary to walk along both sides of the entire length of the
river between Mwichuiri bridge (located halfway between RGS A4 and A5) and the confluence with
Ewaso Ng’iro – a one-way distance of about 38 km. Walking along the riverside can be a strenuous
task at times due to fences made of thorn bushes or barbed wire that separate individual plots. Sur-
prisingly, no farmer was reacting annoyed when our team crossed a fence to cross their cultivated
fields. On each plot, signs of a pumping site were tried to be found. Possible sites were usually rela-
tively easy to detect. Tubes, empty petrol canisters and a graded platform were usually clear signs of
ongoing pumping activity. Also, having a look at their cultivated crops was evidence enough to know
if a plot is irrigated or not. Pumps were usually not found. In order to reduce the risk of theft, farmers
store the pumps in their houses once they have irrigated their fields. In addition, most farmers with
small plots only irrigate once a week for a few hours. If there was enough evidence of ongoing prac-
tice of irrigation, the coordinates and altitude of the pumping site was recorded. Generally, our team
tried to find the owner or farmer that cultivates the plot to conduct a short interview. In the beginning
of an interview, it was explained to them, what the data will be used for. Since all farmers are well
aware of the importance of a well-functioning WRUA, they answered the questions without any hesi-
tation and seemingly truthfully. The following information was acquired:
 Landowner or farmer’s name

 Total acreage of plot and the average percentage of irrigated land
 Average number of hours per week used for irrigation
In about ¾ of cases, no interview was conducted due to time constraints and absence of the farmer.
Often their housing was outside of their cultivated plot or simply far away from the river. After a few
days of work and conducting some interviews, it was very easy to guess the size of a plot by sight
since the boundaries between to different plots are usually well pronounced. The irrigated area was
usually around half of the total plot area, since they mostly practice shifting cultivation, thus, leaving
half of their land fallow. Also, the average number of hours per week used for irrigating their land
was very predictable after questioning some farmers. Most of them need eight hours per irrigated acre
(0.4 hectare). Usually, the interview was also used to gather the missing names of neighboring farm-
ers which we could not talk to personally. Many names were also given by WRUA committee mem-
bers, which represent the farmers of a certain stretch along the river. They mostly knew the area and
its farmers very well. However, full names of the farmers or land owners were not always obtained,
since most people are known by their neighbors and representing WRUA committee members by
only one single name, which could be the English first, their African middle or last name.
After having collected all abstraction points, several double meter gaugings at water project intakes
and estimations of discharge in the Matanya furrow were conducted. However, during the evaluation
it turned out that most of these measurements were completely useless due to reasons discussed in the
following subchapters.
4.3.2 Approach for the Matanya Furrow
The discharge of the Matanya furrow, which is the only relevant furrow still in use in the catchment,
was measured using an OTT current meter. At the divergence from the main river, the furrow is
equipped with a sluice gate that allows regulating the maximum inflow into the furrow (seen on the
right in Figure 4-1 on page 56). After being informed by M. Karuri from the WRUA, that the position
of the sluice gate is changed regularly, and sometimes even closed during dry spells, a different ap-
proach had to be found.
In the NRM3 database, discharge data of the Matanya furrow conducted by Gathenya (1992) for the
period November 1990 till December 1991, and J. Gikonyo for the period January 1994 till July 1997
is stored. First, it had to be ascertained that this data is still relevant for the year 2013. For this, the
population census data of 1989, 1999 and 2009, which was received from E. Peter at CETRAD, was
analyzed to determine if the population changed significantly in the Matanya sublocation. Since the
borders of some sublocations inside the Naro Moru catchment changed, a comparison between the
three censuses was difficult. The census data of 1989 could not be used, since the sublocation’s area
of that time was 421 km2, compared to 134 km2 in 1999 and 121 km2 in 2009. Since there is no point
data available, and the area of the Matanya sublocation of the years 1999 and 2009 slightly different
in size, the population per km2 was calculated and compared. The population growth rates between
1999 and 2009 were used to extrapolate the data till 1995, respectively 2014 as presented in Table
4-1. It shows, that the population per km2 only increased by 2.5% between 1995 and 2014.
Table 4-1: Estimated population growth in the Matanya sublocation between 1995 and 2014
Year Method, Data Area (km2) Households (Hh) Hh per km2 Population Pop. per km2
1995 Extrapolation 134 4035 29 16696 120
1999 Census data 134 4052 30 16168 121
2009 Census data 121 4095 34 14848 123
2014 Extrapolation 121 4117 36 14188 124
Change 1995 till 2014: -10.7% 1.6% 15.2% -14.0% 2.5%
On one hand, according to M. Karuri, a WRUA member farming along the Matanya furrow, the
number of households served by the Matanya furrow decreased during the last 20 years to about 440
in 2013. However, no information could be found if this also implies in a decreased area of irrigated
land. On the other hand, Gathenya (1992) states that 300 households were served by the canal in
1991. This stands in a slight contradiction to M. Karuri’s statement. After having considered all these
aspects, it was decided that the old measurements could still be used.
Supply-based approach
As a next step, a correlation between the furrow discharge and discharge at RGS A5, respectively
rainfall at various gauging stations in the catchment was tried to be found. The following data from
the NRM3 database was used and compared to the monthly mean furrow discharge of 11.1990 -
12.1991 and 01.1994 - 07.1997:
 Average monthly sum (mm/month) of precipitation of the rainfall gauging stations Matanya,
Munyaka, Naro Moru Gate Station and Naro Moru Met Station for the above mentioned period.
 Average monthly mean discharge (l/s) of RGS A5 for the above mentioned period.
Since the highest correlation occurred between the furrow discharge and discharge at RGS A5, a rela-
tion between the two datasets was developed. The resulting formulas with discharge at RGS A5 as the
depending variable were then applied to calculate the monthly discharge of the Matanya furrow for
the year 2012 onwards.
Demand-based approach
In order to verify the supply-based approach, a second estimation of the furrow’s monthly discharge
was made using a demand-based approach. This method mainly accounts for the monthly varying
water demand for irrigation. The demand for livestock is treated separately and the domestic demand
is assumed to be steady throughout the year. The same approach was used to verify the findings of the
AAA growers’ abstraction rate and to extrapolate the abstraction rate of pump users. The method is
explained in detail in chapter 4.3.5 (page 61). However, to apply this method, it is crucial to know
how much land is cultivated, respectively irrigated along the furrow. It was estimated using two dif-
ferent methods:
1. Irrigated farm land can be detected quite easily if the Google Earth satellite image of a dry pe-
riod (e.g. March 2014) is analyzed. Irrigated land has much lusher vegetation with a color that
appears much greener than dry, respectively bare land.
2. Along the furrow, approximately 440 households are situated. Per household, 1.44 acres of
cropland can be expected. This figure is based on the estimated average farming land per
pump user along the Naro Moru River. Künzi et al. (1998) consents with this finding, estimat-
ing an average cropland of around 1.5 acres per household in semi-arid areas of the Upper
ENN Basin and also in the Matanya area.
4.3.3 Approach for pump at AAA Grower’s Chestnut Farm in Naro Moru
From the management of the Chestnut Farm owned by the AAA Growers company, our team re-
ceived monthly master meter readings of their pump for the period January to October 2013. To esti-
mate the abstraction rate during November and December the monthly averages of the months Sep-
tember, October and January were used. Further, the goal was to assess the farm’s total water con-
sumption since besides having a pump, they also use a dam to block and store the whole discharge of
the Mwichuiri River, a small tributary to the Naro Moru River, during low and medium flows. An
inquiry per e-mail to the company’s manager regarding their total water consumption was not replied
unfortunately. Gauge height measurements of the Mwichuiri River (RGS A7) from the period
03.1991 to 02.1999 that are stored in the NRM3 hydrodatabase would have been ideal to estimate the
inflow to the farm’s artificial lake. However, no rating equations for RGS A7 were available and
therefore, the recorded gauge heights could not be used. An approximate figure for the farm’s total
water consumption could be estimated based on results presented in the master thesis of Lanari
(2014). This thesis’ results also showed that the master meter readings our team received from the
management of the Chestnut Farm are most probably accurate and can be used for further calcula-
tions.
4.3.4 Approach for Water Pumps
Method based on pumping hours

For each pump that was found during the campaign, the associated irrigated area was assessed. With
the help of short interviews with farmers the average weekly pumping hours for irrigating one acre of
cultivated land was evaluated. To estimate the average discharge of a pump, Aeschbacher (2003)
suggests using the performance curves of an average pump used by the farmers. During this campaign
Aeschbacher’s (2003) approach turned out to be neither suitable nor very accurate, as it is briefly
discussed in the result section. For this thesis, three farmers that were using an average portable pump
helped our team to determine the average discharge of a pump. The chosen farmers were told to run
their pump the way they normally do. The time was then stopped several times while a 100 liter
bucket was filled.
Therefore, the following formula was applied:
Prc = Ia ∗ Pw ∗ Pd
Prc = Continuous pumping rate [l/s]

Ia = Irrigated area per pump site [acre]
Pw = Average number of pumping hours per week per acre [h/per acre]
Pc = Average pumping capacity [l/s]
To estimate the monthly abstraction rates, the calculated rate for October 2013 was extrapolated by
using a demand-based approach which is explained in detail in the following chapter.
4.3.5 Demand-based Approach
This method mainly aims to estimate the varying monthly abstraction rate of water pump users by
evaluating the changing demand for water to irrigate cultivated land over the course of the year. In
addition, since the acreage of farmed land of all water pump users is approximately known, this
method was used besides the approach based on pumping hours to calculate the abstraction rate. Fur-
ther, for some water projects (Kihoto & Gitwe WP), the farmed acreage is known, which makes this
approach suitable to estimate the abstraction rate of these projects. It was proceeded as follows:
1. First, an average composition of crops grown by a small-scale farmer was defined as seen in Ta-
ble 4-2. The composition and each crops share of the total farmed land is not a result of a quanti-
tative survey, but mainly an assumption based on observations during the field campaign. Künzi
et al. (1998) state that a complex of maize intercropped with beans and to a lesser degree with
peas and potatoes are predominately cultivated. M. Karuri affirms this statement, saying that
beans, maize and potatoes are the main subsistence crops. Further, subsistence farmers in the Mt.
Kenya area have a habit to add a component of cash crops, mainly easy marketable horticultural
products like tomatoes, cabbages, green pepper or French beans. In October 2013, cabbages
seemed to be the most popular cash crops among subsistence and small-scale commercial water
farmers.
Table 4-2: Typical composition of crops grown by a small-scale farmer and their share
Crop Share Crop Share Crop Share
Cabbage 20% Bean 20% Maize 20%
Pepper 5% Tomato 5% Pea 5%
Onion 5% Potato 15% Sugar Cane 5%
2. As a second step, the daily water need of each crop was determined. A crop’s water demand de-
pends on its type, growth stage and the climate. Brouwer & Heibloem (1986) provides approxi-
mate values for a crop’s duration of the total growing season and water demand during its grow-
ing season, both depending on the climate, as seen in Table 4-3. The hotter, sunnier, drier and
windier a climate, the higher is the crop’s water demand. The climate’s influence on the water
demands is given by the reference crop (grass) evapotranspiration (ETo) and is expressed in mil-
limeters per unit of time. As Table 4-4 shows, the ETo ranges from 1-2 mm/day in cold and hu-
mid climate to 9-10 mm/day in hot and arid climate. The total annual rainfall for the catchment
below RGS A3 and A4 ranges between 665 mm/year in Matanya and 1061 mm/year at the Naro
Moru Gate Station. Hence, all cultivated land can be attributed to the sub-humid zone if the clas-
sification of Brouwer & Heibloem (1986) is applied. Throughout the year, the area below RGS
A3/ A4 experiences average night temperatures of below 10 degrees and average maximum day-
time temperatures of 25 degrees. Considering this, the ETo for the area below RGS A3/A4 falls
into the middle of the range of ETo as presented in Table 4-4. Hence, for further calculations the
average of each crop’s presented total growing period and crop water need per total growing peri-
od as shown in Table 4-3 was used.
The third aspect determining the crop’s water demand – the growth stage – was not explicably ac-
counted for in this calculation for the following reason: Mt. Kenya’s equatorial position implies
year-round possibility to produce the crops mentioned in Table 4-2, since the variation in daily
temperatures is bigger than the temperature fluctuation during the course of a year (Schuler
2004). Therefore, it is assumed that most crops are not planted during a specific season, but year-
round and timely shifted to ensure a more or less steady supply of each crop the entire year.
Hence, at a given time, various growth stages of a crop can be found on a farmer’s cultivated land
and therefore, the water demands are varying. This implies that the average daily water demand
of a crop at any given time can be defined as the total crop water need per growing period divided
by the total growing period in days. Of course, this assumption can only be made in equatorial re-
gions where water sources other than rainfall are available for irrigation. In areas where farmers
practice rainfed irrigation, the planting season and hence the crop’s growth stages and water de-
mand are directly depending on the seasonal rainfalls.
Table 4-3: The total growing period per crop and its water need (Brouwer & Heibloem 1986)
Total grow- Crop water Total grow- Crop water

ing period need ing period need
Crop type Crop type
mm/total mm/total
days days
growing period growing period
Onion 150-210 350-550 Pepper 120-210 600-900
Bean 95-110 300-500 Maize 125-180 500-800
Cabbage 120-140 350-500 Potato 105-145 500-700
Carrot 100-150 350-500 Sugarcane 270-365 1500-2500
Pea 90-100 350-500 Tomato 135-180 400-800
Table 4-4: Rough estimates of average ETo (mm/day) per climatic zone (Brouwer & Heibloem 1986)
Mean daily temperature
Climatic zone (precipitation)
low (<15°C) medium (15-25°C) high (> 25°C)
Desert/arid (> 400 mm/year) 4-6 7-8 9-10
Semi-arid (400 - 600 mm/year) 4-5 6-7 8-9
Sub-humid (600 - 1200 mm/year) 3-4 5-6 7-8
Humid (>1200 mm/year) 1-2 4-5 6-7
3. Next, it was estimated, how much of the crop’s daily water need is covered by precipitation. For
this, the effective daily rainfall was calculated. This calculation is based on the average total
monthly precipitation for the years 1992-2012 at the Munyaka station. The term effective rainfall
is defined as the total rainfall minus runoff, evaporation and deep percolation, since plants can on-
ly use the water retained in the root zone. In other words, the effective part of the rainfall is the
fraction of the total amount of rainwater useful for meeting the crop’s water demand (Brouwer &
Heibloem 1986). Two simple formulas to estimate the effective rainfall were used:
 Effective rainfall = 0.6 ∗ Rainfall - 10 if rainfall < 75mm/month

 Effective rainfall = 0.8 ∗ Rainfall - 25 if rainfall > 75mm/month
Note that these formulas should only be applied if a maximum slope gradient of 4-5% is prevail-
ing. Further, the formulas do not account for the soil’s specific characteristics (Brouwer &
Heibloem 1986).
4. In the second last step, the daily demand for irrigation is calculated by subtracting the effective
daily rainfall from the crop’s daily water demand. However, this value does not yet account for
the loss caused by the field application efficiency. As Table 4-5 shows, this loss is between 35%
for the surface irrigation method practiced by most water pump abstractors, and 10% for drip irri-
gation which is mainly practiced by the AAA Growers farm. Efficiency losses are mainly due to
surface runoff, evaporation and deep percolation to soil layers below the root zone (Brouwer et al.
1989).
Table 4-5: Irrigation type and field application efficiency (Efficiency values by Brouwer et al. 1989)
Abstraction type Main irrigation method Field application efficiency

Water pump users Surface irrigation (e.g. furrow) 65%
Water projects (Gravity pipes) Sprinkler irrigation 75%
AAA Growers Farm Drip irrigation 90%
5. In the last step, the month with the highest demand for river water irrigation was defined as the
100% value. Afterwards, monthly percentage values regarding the lower need for irrigation com-
pared to the month with the highest irrigation need were calculated.
The water consumption by livestock was calculated separately since it is assumed that especially be-
low RGS A5 most livestock directly drinks from the river. Thus, it does not affect the abstraction rate
of water pump users. Like the consumption by livestock, the domestic water use is constant over the
course of the year and does not affect the monthly percentage values. For the domestic use, a daily
water need of 40 liters and an average of five people per household is assumed.
4.3.6 Inapplicable Approaches for Gravity Pipes
Master meter readings

The Water Act of 2002 requires that every river water abstractor who applies for a permit must have
an installment for measuring the amount of abstraction. The holder of the permit is charged after
these measured amounts. Therefore, seven of the ten water projects using a gravity pipe are equipped
with a master meter that measures the flow inside the pipe. One of the three projects that do not pro-
vide master meter readings is Kihoto WP above RGS A4, whose master meter was vandalized. An-
other project is the small KWS intake in the Mt. Kenya National Park which only abstracts an insig-
nificant amount of water. The third, Mwiremia WP, is a very new project and is therefore not yet
equipped with such a device. An evaluation of all available master meter readings and comparison
with figures of previous campaigns revealed a doubtfully low total abstraction rate measured by the
meters. The findings are presented in the result section. Since these master meter readings could not
be trusted, another method had to be chosen.
Double current meter gauging

There are two options to estimate the abstraction by conducting river discharge measurements: First,
one measurement can be done before the intake, whereas the second one is taken after the intake. The
difference between the two measurements is the abstraction quantity. This has the drawback that two
different cross sections for the current meter gauging have to be used. However, the error that possi-
ble results by having two different gauging sites can be reduced when applying the salt dilution meth-
od. Second, the current meter gauging can be done after the intake, once with the pipe closed and
once with an open intake. This option is very time consuming since for each of the ten intakes, an
appointment with the responsible person, which has the authority to open and close the pipe, has to be
made.
To do such a double current meter gauging for the Kihoto and Mwiremia WP, the first option was
chosen. In practice, doing such measurements is not an easy task. Good cross sections were hard to
find, and salt dilution measurements were not suitable due to many ponds in those river sections. A
further uncertainty with this method is given by having a possible error of ± 15% in each measure-
ment, which is a realistic value for a current meter gauging performed with only one vertical meas-
urement. This can create an error of 45 l/s on a low flow discharge of 300 l/s and can add up to 90 l/s
for an estimation that uses two gaugings. Compared to the abstraction quantity of a gravity pipe
which is between 3 and 50 l/s, this can cause considerable mistakes. Hence, after a few measurements
and some of them even suggesting an inflow instead of an abstraction, it was decided that this method
is not applicable.
For some water projects (e.g. Naro Moru Water and Sanitation Co., Kihoto-, Ndiriti-Aguthi- and
Mwiremia WP) no data concerning each water project’s number of households and/ or estimated land
used for agriculture was available, even after inquiring at the WRMA office and/ or directly asking
the project’s chairman. In the case of other projects (e.g. Kigama-, Kabunda- and Naro Moru Scheme
WP), the total acreage of agricultural land served by a project’s pipe seems to be doubtfully low if
compared to the average farmed land per household of water pump users (1.42 acre below RGS A5)
or compared to figures regarding average farm land per household in the sub-humid zone around Mt.
Kenya provided by Künzi et al. (1998). For example the farm land served by the Naro Moru Scheme
supposedly only accounts for 15.6 acre, although the project’s number of households is said to be 250
(see Table 4-7). To estimate the abstraction rate by using a demand-based approach, it is crucial to
have accurate data regarding the number of households and especially the amount of agricultural land
per project. Since this is not the case, the approach could not be used to assess the total abstraction
rate of gravity pipes.
4.3.7 Approach for KWS Intake (Gravity Pipe)
The Kenyan Wildlife Service (KWS) intake serves only for domestic water use of the people and
sometimes tourists living in the small village just after the National Park entry gate. According to
George Ombuki from KWS, the intake serves in average 30 people that use 40 liters of water per per-
son and day. The value of 40 liters has been assessed through interviews with farmers living in the
lower catchment.
4.3.8 Approach for Kihoto and Gitwe Water Project (Gravity Pipes)
Towards the end of January 2014 the Naro Moru River started to dry up before RGS A6. The WRUA
came up with a rationing program (Appendix page 151) to ensure that the river reaches the conflu-
ence again. The intakes of the water projects were allowed to be open from 18:00 till 06:00 at certain
days that were specified in the rationing plan. Knowing which water project was running at which
day, the goal was to measure the difference between the discharge at RGS A4 during open and closed
intakes. Figure 4-3 (bottom graph) clearly shows the influence of the rationing program when com-
pared to a period in January (top graph) shortly before implementing the program. During both peri-
ods showed in Figure 4-3 no rainfall occurred. Figure 4-3 shows that every morning between 09:30
and 11:00, discharge sharply increased, which indicates that the water projects kept to the program’s
instruction to only open the pipe during the evenings and nights. Although, it seems that instead of
the allowed 12 hours, they had their pipes running for an average of 15.75 hours. Unfortunately, the
water projects did not follow the program’s rule regarding the closure of the intake for more than 12
hours at certain days. For example on February, 7th, 8th and 9th both water projects were not allowed
to abstract, but looking at the discharge during these days, there are very strong indications that they
indeed had the pipes open. During the rest of the period, only one of the projects was allowed to open
the pipe per day. Looking at the pattern in Figure 4-3, it seems that every day both projects abstracted
for half a day. Therefore, it is assumed that the average difference between the highest and lowest
daily discharge (l/s) between February 2nd and 12th, 2014 accounts for the abstracted liters per second
of Gitwe and Kihoto WP. This value is most probably overestimated, due to the circumstance that the
projects tried to abstract at a higher rate in order to reach about the same daily abstracted quantity as
if they had the intake open for 24 instead of the estimated 15.75 hours. To account for this assumption
the estimated abstracted quantity (l/s) was adjusted by the factor 15.75/24.
Since this approach is based on the gauge height/ discharge rating curve of RGS A4, possible errors
of the current meter and salt dilution measurements were taken into account. Current meter gaugings
with one vertical measurements have an error of ± 7.5% whereas salt dilution measurements have ±
5% (Herschy 2009). Therefore, every gauge height used for estimating the discharge at RGS A4, a
minimum (- 5%) and a maximum (+ 5%) discharge value was also calculated and used for defining a
minimum and maximum quantity of abstracted water by the Gitwe and Kihoto WP. The detailed cal-
culation can be found in the Appendix on page 155.
Discharge (m3/s)
Date (Month/ Day)

Figure 4-3: Discharge at RGS A4 between January 10th and February 11th, 2013 before (top) and during
(bottom) implementing the rationing program
4.3.9 Approach for Kigama Water Project (Gravity Pipe)
To estimate the quantity abstracted by the Kigama WP the same approach as for Gitwe and Kihoto
WP was chosen. Unfortunately, during the implementation of the rationing program in February
2014, no daily fluctuation of gauge heights at RGS A3 could be observed. Most probably this was
due to the violation of the program’s instruction stating that during day time and certain days the in-
take must be closed. There are two other methods to approximate the abstracted quantity:
1. To assess the abstraction of the Kigama intake double current meter gaugings were conducted by
J. Gikonyo between 1994 and 1997, which are stored in the NRM3 hydrodatabase. Since it is ex-
pected that the population and number of households increased between 1994 (respectively 1997)
till 2014, the population growth rates between 1999 and 2009 in the sublocation Kamburaini were
used to extrapolate the data till 1995, respectively 2014. The increase of households seems to be
the more relevant value, since the amount of irrigated farm land depends on the number of house-
holds and not on single persons. As seen in Table 4-6, the increase of households is 34.5%. The
average discharge measured in the period between 1994 and 1997 was adjusted by 34.5% to ac-
count for the population growth.
Table 4-6: Estimated population growth in the Kambura-Ini sublocation between 1995 and 2014
Year Method, Data Area (km2) Households Hh per km2 Population Pop. per km2
1995 Extrapolation 43 1306 30 4959 115
1999 Census Data 43 1451 34 5375 125
2009 Census Data 43 1813 42 6414 149
2014 Extrapolation 43 1994 46 6934 161
Change 1995 till 2014: 0.0% 34.5% 34.5% 28.5% 28.5%
2. As a second approach, the cultivated land per water project was compared. According to
M’Mukindia (2011), Gitwe and Kihoto WP provide water for around 250 acres of farming land.
Kigama WP supplies a fifth of this. Since the main share of abstracted water is used for irrigation
of land, the quantity calculated for Gitwe and Kihoto WP was divided by the factor five to have
an estimate for Kigama WP.
Both methods lead to similar values. For the final estimation, the average of the two approaches was
used.
4.3.10 Approach for Water Projects between RGS A3/ A4 and A5 (Gravity Pipes)
Between RGS A3, respectively A4, an RGS A5, the following six water projects are located:
 Kabendera-, Kabunda- and Ndiriti-Aguthi WP along the Northern Naro Moru River
 Naro Moru Scheme WP along the Southern Naro Moru River
 Naro Moru Water & Sanitation- and Mwiremia WP along the main river
To assess the abstracted quantity of these six water projects, the difference between the discharge
during a low flow period in January 2014 at RGS A5 and the sum of discharge at RGS A3 and A4
was calculated. From this value the estimated abstracted quantity by pump users and the loss of river
water through evaporation was subtracted. The following aspects led to the decision to choose the
period between January 24th and 29th, 2014 for the calculation:
 According to M. Karuri, after January 26th, 2014, the river dried up between RGS A5 and A6.
On January 29th, 2014 only a very small and possible only a local flow between two ponds
was noticed at RGS A6. Since assessing the abstracted amount during a dry spell is the main
goal of this abstraction campaign, this period turned out to be ideal.
 The lower the discharge is, the more accurate the estimated quantity of abstraction. First, the
calibration curve for each RGS is supposedly the most accurate for low flows, since a higher
number of gaugings were carried out and also more than one gauging method was used during
low discharge gaugings. Second, the error of the calibration curve has less impact on the cal-
culated quantity during low flows.
 During this period, there was no rain occurring in the catchment that could have distorted the
estimations.
 During January 23rd and February 12th, the gauging stations were visited between five and ten
times, depending on the RGS, to work on the automatic data transmission and to do low flow
calibration measurements. Therefore, during this period, the recording of the proper gauge
heights was surveilled closely and the cross sections were regularly checked for sedimenta-
tion.
 Towards the end of January and throughout February and March 2014, the rationing program
was implemented by the WRUA. During this time, the water projects were not abstracting ac-
cording to their usual pattern.
 Before January 23rd, 2014 there is an uncertainty regarding the correct recording of gauge
height of RGS A4 due to considerable amounts of sedimentation. Between the January 1st and
16th 2014, a second bridge just above RGS A4 was built as mentioned and illustrated in chap-
ter 3.2.2 (page 41). This was accompanied by heavy sedimentation of this river section which
distorted the recorded gauge heights, respectively estimated discharge. On February 12th,
2014, a stretch of around 15 meters was fully cleaned from sediments which resulted in a drop
of the gauge height by 5 cm. Thus, the gauge height data between January 17 th and February
5th was adjusted by 5 cm.
Estimating the loss through evaporation

To evaluate the loss trough evaporation between RGS A3/ A4 and A5, the average daily evaporation
rate (mm/day) per month for the Matanya-, Munyaka-, Naro Moru Gate- and Naro Moru Met Station
from the years between 1992 and 2006 was first calculated. It was followed by assessing the distance
of the river between RGS A3, respectively A4, and RGS A5. This value was multiplied by the aver-
age width of the river, which was estimated to be around four meters, to receive the total area covered
by river water between the aforementioned stations. Before the area was multiplied by the average
evaporation rate, the daily average (mm/day) had to be converted into l/s per m 2 and adjusted by a
discount factor that accounts for the lower evaporation rate in shaded areas. According to Webster &
Day (1993) and Wallace et al. (1999) a forest canopy reduces the evaporation rate by around 35%.
Since not the whole river stretch is covered by trees, a reduction factor of 25% was taken for the cal-
culation. The detailed calculation can be found in the appendix on page 156.
4.3.11 Approach for Consumption by Livestock
Since no data regarding the number of livestock living in the catchment could be found, the data from
the Laikipia East Constituency, which has an area of 1262 km2 and belongs to the Laikipia District,
was used for the calculations (IEBC 2009). For this area, open source data regarding all livestock for
the year 2009 is available from the Kenyan government (Kenya-Open-Data 2014). The data was bro-
ken down to livestock per km2 and then multiplied by the catchment’s area of 173.44 km2. Estimates
from Markwick (2007) were used to determine the consumption per day, respectively liter per second,
of cattle, sheep and goats, which are the three types of livestock that mostly drink directly from the
river.
4.4 Results and Discussion of the Abstraction Campaign 2013
4.4.1 Overview and Location of Abstraction Points
The abstraction survey in 2013 revealed a total of 311 abstraction points between the source and the
confluence with Ewaso Ng’iro. Figure 4-4 shows that 95.5% or a total of 297 abstraction points are
water pumps from subsistence or small-scale commercial farms. As Figure 4-5 illustrates, most of
these small farms which have an average size of 1.42 acres are located between RGS A5 and the con-
fluence. 69% of all pumps lie between RGS A5 and A6, another 21% between RGS A6 and the con-
fluence. The 298th pump in the catchment provides water to a large horticulture farm called AAA
0.3% 3.2%
1.0%
10 Water Projects (Gravity Pipes)

3 Open furrows
95.5% 297 Water pumps for small scale farming
1 Pump for horticulture farming
Figure 4-4: Number of abstraction points per type in percent
Growers’ Chestnut Farm (ID: P 28). Due to AAA Growers’ large amount of abstraction and different
farming method/ purpose compared to the other abstractions done by pumps, it was treated as a sepa-
rate abstraction type in this survey. In the appendix on page 157, all locations of pumps are listed with
additional information, e.g. the owner of the pump or farm land, acreage per farm and coordinates.
The only relevant open furrow during low flow periods is situated between RGS A5 and A6 and is
called Matanya furrow (F 3). The Thome furrow (F 2) which is located right next to the Matanya fur-
row was dry during the campaign. According to the WRUA, it is only used during high flows. The
third furrow is illegally constructed above RGS A5 on farming land of the Rware Estate Farm (F 1).
While visiting the furrow in October, the water was stagnant and the way it is built, the river water
not used for irrigation will flow back into the river after around 100 meters, which means its impact is
relatively small. Above RGS A5 the river water abstraction is mainly influenced by the presence of
gravity pipes from water projects. Along the Northern Naro Moru River, between the source and RGS
A3, the KWS intake (WP 1) and Kigama WP (WP 2) is located. Along the Southern Naro Moru Riv-
er, Kihoto (WP 3) and Gitwe WP (WP 4) are situated above RGS A3. The six remaining gravity pipes
lie between RGS A3, respectively A4, and RGS A5, with only Naro Moru WP Sanitation and Co.
(WP 9) and Mwiremia WP (WP 10) located after the confluence of the two river branches.
Confluence
RGS A6
F2 & F3
RGS A3
P 28 WP 5
RGS A5 F1 WP 6
WP 10 WP 2
WP 7
WP 9 RGS A4 WP 3
WP 8 WP 4
WP 1
Figure 4-5: Location of all abstraction points along the Naro Moru River (Assisted by E. Peter from CETRAD)
Table 4-7: Overview of furrows and water projects that use gravity pipes
Pipe House- Farmed Meter

ID Water Project Name Water storage Use Coordinates Alt. County Sub-location
size holds Acrage* Permit
inch X Y m a.s.l
Water Projects (Gravity Pipes)
Kenya Wildlife Closed steel No Meter
WP 1 2 30 ppl. 3
Domestic 37.1942 -0.1757 2814 Nyeri Kambura-Ini
Service (KWS) tank (6m ) No permit
Closed masonry Domestic, Meter
WP 2 Kigama WP 10 384 48 37.1513 -0.1724 2448 Nyeri Kambura-Ini
tank livestock, irrigation Permit
Closed masonry Domestic, No Meter
WP 3 Kihoto WP 6 160 37.1364 -0.1759 2335 Nyeri Kambura-Ini
tank (50m3) livestock, irrigation Permit
WP 4 Gitwe WP 10 340 170 3 37.1212 -0.1791 2248 Nyeri Kambura-Ini
tank (225m ) livestock, irrigation Permit
WP 5 Kabendera WP 12 300 300 37.1249 -0.1640 2273 Nyeri Kambura-Ini
WP 6 Kabunda WP 10 450 112.5 37.1017 -0.1677 2192 Nyeri Kambura-Ini
tank livestock, irrigation Permit
WP 7 Ndiriti Aguthi WP 12 400 37.0823 -0.1768 2114 Nyeri Kambura-Ini
WP 8 Naro Moru Scheme WP 6 250 15.6 37.0874 -0.1801 2148 Nyeri Kambura-Ini
tank (145 m3) livestock, irrigation Permit
Naro Moru WP and Closed masonry Meter
WP 9 6 3
Domestic 37.0557 -0.1768 2065 Nyeri Kambura-Ini
Sanitation Co. tank (84m ) Permit
Closed masonry Domestic, No Meter
WP 10 Mwiremia SHG WP 12 37.0470 -0.1726 2037 Nyeri Naro Moru
Open Furrows
No Meter
F1 On Rware Farm land Dimension: 80 (depth)*70 cm Irrigation 37.03838 -0.16782 2010 Nyeri Naro Moru
No Permit
No meter
F2 Thome Water Canal Dimension: 40 (depth)*70 cm Mainly domestic 36.95549 -0.08987 1856 Laikipia Matanya
Authorized
Domestic, No meter
F3 Matanya Water Canal Dimension: 70 (depth)*100 cm 36.95538 -0.0885 1850 Laikipia Matanya
livestock, irrigation Authorized
* Data from M’Mukindia (2011)
4.4.2 Monthly Abstraction rate by Matanya Furrow
Supply-based approach
Correlation between monthly abstraction by the Matanya furrow and monthly

precipitation (Matanya & catchment), respectively discharge at RGS A5
Abstraction (l/s) & Precipitation (mm/month)
600 3.500
500 3.000
Discharge (m3/s)
Abstraction
2.500
400
2.000 Rainfall Matanya
300 Correlation: 0.317
1.500 Rainfall catchment
200 Correlation: 0.551
1.000
Discharge RGS A5
100 0.500 Correlation: 0.768
0 0.000
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Figure 4-6: Correlation between monthly furrow abstraction and monthly precipitation (Matanya & catch-
ment), respectively discharge at RGS A5 (Data: Monthly sums for rainfall and average monthly discharge,
respectively abstraction, during the period 11.1990 - 12.1991 and 01.1994 - 07.1997 (NRM3 2003))
Relation between abstraction by Matanya furrow and discharge at RGS A5

300
250
Abstraction (l/s)
200
150
100
50
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
Discharge RGS A5 (l/s)
Gaugings 1990-97 (Q at A5 < 1 m3/s) Gaugings 1990-97 (Q at A5 > 1 m3/s)
Gauging 15.10.13 Sluice gate fully open
Log. (Gaugings 1990-97 (Q at A5 < 1 m3/s)) Log. (Gaugings 1990-97 (Q at A5 > 1 m3/s))
Figure 4-7: Relation between abstraction by Matanya furrow and discharge at RGS A5 (Data: Average month-
ly discharge and abstraction in l/s during the period 11.1990 - 12.1991 and 01.1994 - 07.1997 (NRM3 2003))
Figure 4-6 shows that the abstraction rate of the Matanya furrow correlates best with discharge at
RGS A5. Of the three tested variables it shows the highest correlation with a factor of 0.768. In Fig-
ure 4-8, the relation between discharge at A5 and the abstraction rate of the Matanya furrow was in-
vestigated in detail. It shows that the abstraction rate increases quite sharply up to around Q50 of
RGS A5. Once the discharge at RGS A5 is above 1000 l/s, the abstraction rate is slowly decreasing.
During high flows, the furrow abstracts again a similar amount as during low and medium flows. This
makes sense for two reasons: First, during high flows there is also more precipitation occurring which
decreases the need for irrigation. Second, the capacity of the furrow is limited. Even if the sluice gate
is fully open during high flows, the discharge into the furrow is limited. Third, according to M. Ka-
ruri, the sluice gate is sometimes fully closed by the furrow chairman during high flows, since no
water for irrigation is demanded and farmers do not want to have their land flooded.
For the further calculations, the following formulas were used:
 Discharge at RGS A5 (x) between 0 and 1000 l/s: Abstraction (l/s) = 50.218*ln(x) - 212.14
 Discharge at RGS A5 (x) above 1000 l/s: Abstraction (l/s) = -68.21*ln(x) + 636.41
Monthly abstraction rate of Matanya furrow for period 03.2012 - 02.2014

140 3500
120 3000
Discharge RGS A5 (l/s)

100 2500
Abstraction (l/s)
80 2000
60 1500
40 1000
20 500
0 0
Mrz 2012
Dec 2012
Apr 2012
Aug 2012
Mrz 2013
Jun 2012
Apr 2013
Aug 2013
Nov 2013
Dec 2013
Jun 2013
Oct 2012
Nov 2012
Jan 2013
Oct 2013
Jan 2014
Jul 2012
Sep 2012
Feb 2013
Jul 2013
Sep 2013
Feb 2014
May 2012
May 2013
Abstraction Discharge RGS A5
Figure 4-8: Monthly abstraction rate of Matanya furrow and discharge of the Naro Moru River at RGS A5
between 03.2012 - 02.2014
Table 4-8: Monthly average abstraction rate by Matanya furrow (supply-based approach)
Jan Feb Mrz Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Mean
2012 18 62 104 110 107 120 121 113 112 117 98
2013 99 40 45 101 98 85 83 80 95 80 99 107 84
2014 31 10 21
Mean 65 25 31 82 101 98 95 100 108 97 105 112 68
Figure 4-8 indicates that during the months January to March which normally have the lowest aver-
age monthly flows during the course of the year, the abstractions are low. In the rainy season starting
in April, the abstraction rate increases and instead of decreasing again during months of medium
flow, it plateaus at a high level till the end of the year. This finding corresponds with M. Karuri’s
assumption that during the dry months of January to March, abstractions are below average. Farmers
know that generally these months are dry and the water levels low. Therefore, farmers learned to not
rely on river water for irrigation purposes during this period of year. Instead they plan to plant crops
and vegetables that have a smaller demand of water. The fact that people living in the savannah zone
adapted their habits to the low water levels during this period leads directly to a critic of this approach
chosen to calculate and extrapolate the abstraction rate of the furrow: The method fails to capture the
actual demand of the people living in this area. If flows would be higher during January to March,
farmers would abstract more water and cultivate their land without sacrificing crops with high water
demand. During this period, the chairman of the furrow is sometimes instructed to entirely close the
sluice gate, as it was witnessed by the author in the end of January and February 2014, to leave a
slight flow for domestic use to people living further downstream. In addition, water can be so scarce
that abstraction rates of 10 or 31 l/s in January and February 2014, as displayed in Table 4-8, are not
even possible anymore, although the demand would almost certainly be at least as high as 31 l/s.
Hence, the real demand is more likely to be approximately the mean value of the other nine months of
the year, which is 99.7 l/s. This value is similar to Gathenya’s (1992) finding of 125 l/s and Aesch-
bacher (2003) with an estimated average abstraction rate between 83 and 143 l/s.
In October 15th, during the field campaign, two current meter gaugings of the Matanya furrow’s dis-
charge have been conducted. The measurements are included in Figure 4-7 as an orange, respectively
red dot. One gauging was conducted with the sluice gate at the position as the team found it when
they got there and the second one with the sluice gate fully open. This resulted in an abstraction rate
of 16.4 l/s for the partially, and 161 l/s for the fully open sluice gate. Considering an error of ± 15%
for a current meter gauging where the method of measuring the surface velocity is applied, this results
in a maximum possible furrow discharge of between 137 and 185 l/s. While having the sluice gate
fully open, the furrow could hardly retain all the water, especially a few hundred meters further
downstream. As Figure 4-7 shows, quite a few discharge measurements were above 185 l/s. There are
mainly two reasons for the high discharge measured: The furrow has changed between 1991 and 2013
or the measurements were not very accurate. Indifferent of the reason, the estimation of the abstrac-
tion rate by the furrow might therefore be overestimated. Gathenya (1992) stated in his thesis that the
cutthroat flumes used for the gauging did not capture high flows very accurately.
Demand-based estimation
Table 4-9: Monthly average abstraction rate by Matanya furrow (demand-based approach)
Jan Feb Mrz Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Mean
2012 88 74 84 96 96 75 85 85 80 83 85
2013 93 96 54 64 96 95 89 96 87 85 59 79 80
2014 91 76 84
Mean 92 86 71 69 90 96 93 86 86 85 70 81 84
Based on the analysis of Google Earth images, the whole farmed area which assumingly uses water
for irrigation from the furrow is estimated to be around 250 ha (617 acres) of which many small
spots, respectively parts of plots, do not show green vegetation cover. Based on field observations
along the Naro Moru River, in average around 60% of a plot, respectively farmed area is used for
irrigation. Hence, around 150 ha (370 acres) are irrigated. Applying the second method, 380 acres of
irrigated land was estimated. Assuming an average of 150 ha of irrigated land, the demand-based
approach estimates a furrow discharge of 84.7 l/s in October 2013 which exceeds the result calculated
with the correlation formula by only 4.7 l/s. The demand-based monthly average of 83.6 l/s for the
period from February, 2012 to February, 2014 is considerably higher than the estimate of the supply
based approach (68 l/s as shown in Table 4-8). The main difference between the two approaches dur-
ing the months January to March, where the supply-based approach shows 51% lower values than the
demand-based method. A more detailed analysis of the demand-based approach is provided in chapter
4.4.4.
Destination of excess water

The highest monthly value of the demand-based estimates as seen in Table 4-9 is 96 l/s, whereas the
highest monthly value of the supply-based approach has its highest value at 121 l/s. The highest gaug-
ings show a furrow discharge as high as 250 l/s as seen in Figure 4-7. Considering this, the question
emerges, why there are such a high abstraction rates, if there is not even sufficient demand for it. And
further, if the supply-based and measured values are correct, where does the excess water flow? The
explanation of the high gauging values is relatively simple. River flows can change relatively quickly
and the sluice gate cannot be adjusted as swiftly and/ or with every change in river discharge, since it
is a time consuming task. According to M. Karuri, the decision to close the sluice gate during high
flows happens at the latest when excess water threatens to damage any property due to reaching the
maximum capacity of the furrow. The question regarding the whereabouts of excess water at the end
of the furrow remains. Gathenya (1992) states that excess water flows into dams and is used for stock
watering. According to latest Google Earth satellite images, such dams still exist to date. Their capac-
ity has not been assessed. However, it can be expected, that during medium and high flows, the fur-
row discharge is above the estimated demand for irrigation since furrow water is also used to fill up
small artificial lakes. Once they are full, the sluice gate is lowered. This hypothesis also serves as a
further explanation for Figure 4-7, which shows an increasing furrow abstraction rate up to a certain
level, followed by a slow decrease as discharge at RGS A5 increases. However, to prove this assump-
tion, further field work along the Matanya furrow is needed.
4.4.3 Monthly Abstraction by AAA Growers’ Chestnut Farm
Monthly abstraction rate based on meter readings and information of daily water consumption
Table 4-10: Monthly abstraction rate of AAA Growers’ pump based on meter readings of 2013
Jan Feb Mrz Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec ø
Abstraction
996 377 0 195 788 1324 550 591 699 1025 907 907 697
[m3/day]
Abstraction rate
11.5 4.4 0.0 2.3 9.1 15.3 6.4 6.8 8.1 11.9 10.5 10.5 8.1
[l/s]
Table 4-10 and Figure 4-9 show the monthly abstraction rate of the water pump from the AAA
Growers’ Chestnut Farm. It can be seen that there is a big difference between the lowest and highest
monthly rate. Following, a short explanation for this fluctuation is given. The AAA Growers being a
large, export-oriented horticulture company mainly produces vegetables, e.g. runner and French
beans, garden and snow peas, onions, carrots and leaf salads, for the export to Europe. The European
demand for exported vegetables is highest during their winter period from October to April. Depend-
ing on the location and type of vegetable planted, a crop season (from planting to finish harvesting)
takes around 16 weeks (Schuler 2004). Hence, the first crop season starts around May or June in or-
der to be harvested and shipped to Europe. This means that the farm has its highest water consump-
tion from June to March which can explain the sharply increasing abstraction in May and June, but
not the decreasing rate the following months.
Monthly abstraction rate of the Chestnut Farm

16.0
14.0
Abstraction (l/s)
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
Jan Feb Mrz Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Figure 4-9: Monthly abstraction rate from AAA Growers’ pump in 2013
The key to understand this drop in July are the other water sources the farm has. The company owns
an artificial lake which is fed by the Mwichuiri River that would otherwise flow into the Naro Moru
River just after the dam. According to Schuler (2004) this reservoir can store around 200’000 m3 of
water which helps the farm to overcome the irrigation-intensive dry periods. The whole water con-
sumption of the farm is estimated to be around 3000 m3 per day during the dry period of which
around one quarter is coming directly from the Naro Moru River through pumping (Schuler 2004;
Lanari 2014). The mean abstraction rate during dry months (July, September, October, January, Feb-
ruary18) in 2013 was 643 m3 per day, which is slightly below a quarter of 3000 m3 per day. Assuming
this daily water consumption, the water stored in the reservoir would last the company nearly 70
days19, even if no water from the Naro Moru River was abstracted and no water from the Mwichuiri
River would flow into the lake. Looking at gauge heights of the Mwichuiri River during the years
1991 to 1997, the river hardly ever completely dries out, meaning that the reservoir is even filled dur-
ing water scarce months. Hence, this explains how the river water abstractions of AAA Growers’
pump can be very low (February) or even zero (March) during a period where the company actually
experiences a high water consumption due to the high demand for vegetables from Europe. It also
explains the decreased abstraction rate from July to September. To meet the demand for irrigation,
18
The second half of December and the first half of March would also belong to the dry period, but are not consid-
ered for the estimation of this mean value.
19
The Water Act 2002 requires a water abstraction permit holder to have a water storage capacity of 90 days of the
daily quantity the permit holder is allowed to abstract during flows higher than Q80.
more water is taken from the dam instead of using the scarce resources of Naro Moru River during
this period of year. During the rainy season (approximately mid-March to mid-May) the area under
cultivation is reduced by about 60%. Due to a lot of rain, a higher percentage of vegetable suffers
from black spot and quality issues and therefore the rejection rate by European importers is higher
(Schuler 2004). This aspect makes production uneconomical and is the main reason for the low ab-
straction rate during the rainy season. During the two rainy seasons the reservoir is recharged by the
Mwichuiri River in order to fulfill the company’s high demands for irrigation during water scarce
months.
Demand-based estimation
If the demand based approach is applied, the estimated monthly mean abstraction rate is 15.5 l/s or
1336 m3/day. This value is slightly lower than the value of 1665 m3/day which was estimated by
Schuler (2004) and is based on the author’s interviews and field observations. This indicates that the
demand-based approach delivers quite accurate results for the AAA Growers Farm water consump-
tion.
Actual impact of Chestnut Farm

The fact that the dam hinders the Mwichuiri tributary to reach the Naro Moru River makes the ab-
straction rates of the AAA Growers’ pump as showed above misleading figures. The actual impact of
this horticulture farm on the river section below RGS A5 is bigger than the presented abstraction rates
makes one believe. During rainy season, it does not impact anybody negatively that the water from
this small tributary does not reach the main river. During dry season it definitely does, the question
remains how much since the discharge of the Mwichuiri River is not assessed. To evaluate the real
impact of the Chestnut Farm during dry season, gaugings of this tributary would be necessary.
4.4.4 Monthly Abstraction rate by Water Pumps
As described in chapter 4.3.3 (page 60) the following formula was used to estimate the mean abstrac-
tion rate of pump users:
Prc = Continuous pumping rate [l/s]

Ia = Irrigated area per pump site [acre]
Prc = Ia ∗ Pw ∗ Pd
Pw = Average number of pumping hours per week per acre [h/per acre]
Pc = Average pumping capacity [l/s]
Irrigated area per pump site

The mean annual area under irrigation is assumed to be around 50% to 66% of the whole farm size. In
most cases, some of the farm land is used as grazing area for livestock. Some parts are planted with
crops, vegetables or fruits that do not need any irrigation. Further, some of the land is usually left bare
a certain time so the soils can recover and do not deplete of nutrients. Generally, the closer a farm is
located to Ewaso Ng’iro, the larger is its non-irrigated area. Farmers in the lower catchment justify
the higher crop diversity and cultivation of less water demanding crops with a higher food security
during dry spells.
Average number of pumping hours per week per acre

Interviews with farmers revealed that an average of eight hours of pumping per week is used to irri-
gate one acre (0.4 ha). Due to the time-consuming task of installing the portable pump, they try to use
it during as few days as possible, but prefer to leave it running for many hours per day. Some farmers
with very small plots only use the pump a few hours every second week.
Average discharge of pump

At 96% of the assessed pump abstractions points, farmers use portable petrol pumps of between 3.5
and 5.5 horsepower (average of 4.6 Hp M’Mukindia (2011)) that have a maximum possible discharge
of 600 to a 1000 l/min. The maximum pumping capacity decreases with the total head of a pump. The
head of a pump depends on elevation change from the pump’s intake to the outlet. During this cam-
paign, our team observed that farmers reduce the maximum capacity of the pump by decreasing the
outlet right after the pump from a three to a two inch pipe and also do not run the pump on full throt-
tle. If the farmers are irrigating close to the river with a small head of pump, the pump is throttled a
lot, whereas if they are further away, or the head of pump is large, they throttle the pump less. Three
measurements revealed that the continuous pumping rate is in the range between 2.2 and 3.1 l/s. The
average rate is estimated to be 2.6 l/s or 9.39 m3 per hour. M’Mukindia (2011) reported a very similar
rate of 9.44 m3 per hour.
Besides the AAA Growers Farm which uses an electric pump with an unknown capacity, there are
three farms with an above average irrigated area that use fix installed diesel pumps instead of portable
petrol pumps. Two farmers (P 37 and P 55) use an 11 Hp, respectively 13 Hp diesel pump. Their dis-
charge at the outlet is assumed to be equal to the one of petrol pumps, since a higher pump discharge
would not have any benefit for a farmer unless a storage tank would be filled. The third diesel pump
is owned by Iment farm which irrigates 20 acres (8 ha) of their total 30 acres.
Average continuous abstraction rate in October 2013 (approach based on pumping hours)
Table 4-11 provides an overview of all the water pump abstraction points, except the intake of the
AAA Growers farm, between RGS A3/A4 and the confluence with Ewaso Ng’iro. Only a small num-
ber of pumps are located above RGS A5 since most farm land in that part of the catchment is served
with water from gravity pipes. The table further shows that the total continuous abstraction rate of all
water pumps during the field campaign in October 2013 is estimated to be 30.6 l/s, of which 28.6 l/s
or 93.4% accounts for the river section between RGS A5 and the confluence with Ewaso Ng’iro.
Table 4-11: Average continuous abstraction rate in October 2013 per river section
Number Farm land Irrigated land Daily abstr. Abstr. Rate
River Section of
[acre] [ha] [acre] [ha] [m3/day] [l/s]
pumps
RGS A3/A4 to A5 28 34 14 16 7 174 2.0
RGS A5 to A6 205 305 124 183 74 1966 22.8
RGS A6 to Ewaso Ng'iro 64 94 38 47 19 503 5.8
Total 297 433 175 246 100 2643 30.6
RGS A5 to Ewaso Ng'iro 269 399 161 230 93 2469 28.6
Percentage of abstracted water used for domestic purposes

Most of the abstracted water is used for irrigation. Most farmers keep a very small number of live-
stock, e.g. cattle, goats and chicken, for subsistence purposes. Most of the livestock drinks directly
from the river, therefore a separate calculation of the abstractions by livestock was performed (results
in chapter 4.4.6 on page 89). The relevance of the water abstracted for domestic purposes is rather
insignificant and illustrated by the following example: Farmer P. Muthukia lives in an average house-
hold of five people. His 4000 liter storage tank needs to be refilled every three weeks. This results in
an approximate daily water consumption of 40 liters per person. To fill up the tank, the petrol pump
will run around 26 minutes. To irrigate the average of 0.75 acre of cultivated land per household for
three weeks, the pump has to operate approximately 18 hours, abstracting nearly 170’000 liters in
total. Hence, domestic consumption accounts for only 2.4% of the abstracted water by pumps.
Results of the demand-based approach

Table 4-12 shows the average composition of crops grown by a subsistence farmer as discussed in the
methodology part. Further, it shows the average daily water demand per type of crop. The value of
4.1 mm/day is the estimated water demand at any given day of the year for the crops planted by an
average small-scale farm.
Table 4-12: Average daily water demand per type of crop
growing Share per total

Water demand of crop Water demand of crop
period cultivated area
Crop type
mm/growing
days mm/day % mm/day
period
Cabbage 130 425 3.27 20% 0.65
Peppers 165 750 4.55 5% 0.23
Onion 180 450 2.50 5% 0.13
Bean 103 400 3.88 20% 0.78
Tomato 155 600 3.87 5% 0.19
Potato 125 600 4.80 15% 0.72
Maize 150 650 4.33 20% 0.87
Pea 95 425 4.47 5% 0.22
Sugar Cane 315 2000 6.35 5% 0.32
Total 100% 4.10
Monthly water demand and water source of crops

6 ø water need
of crop [mm/day]
5
Irrigation [mm/day]
4 (65% Field Application
mm/day
Efficiency)
3 Irrigation [mm/day]
(100% Field Application
2 Efficiency)
Rainfall Munyaka
1 [mm/day]
Effective rainfall
0
[mm/day]
Jan Feb Mrz Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Figure 4-10: Monthly water demand and water source of crops
Figure 4-10 shows the monthly water demand of the crops planted by a small-scale farmer. The need
for irrigation is the difference between the water need of a crop and the effective rainfall after consid-
ering the field application efficiency loss. Thus, the orange curve shows the need of water for irriga-
tion by a farmer using a portable pump. Surprisingly, even during the rainy seasons, river water is
required to fulfill the crop’s demand. It has to be mentioned that the Munyaka station recorded an
average total amount of rainfall of only 497 mm/year during the years 2012-2014, compared to 707
mm/year during the period 1992-2012. The reasons for this are not known. Interestingly, the Matanya
rainfall station nearby does not show any decrease in rainfall in the same period.
If the demand-based approach is applied, the abstraction rate for October 2013 is estimated to be 56.7
l/s for all water pump users. Of this, around 0.7 l/s or 1% accounts for domestic water use. Compared
to the method based on pumping hours, the demand-based approach results in an 84% higher abstrac-
tion rate. There are various possible reasons, why there is such a high discrepancy between the two
approaches. For the demand-based approach many assumptions had to be made and only rough esti-
mates were used for the calculations. For example, the field application efficiency and the formulas
used for calculating the effective rainfall consider a soil with average characteristics regarding water
storage capacity and availability to plants, fertility and vulnerability to erosion. As described in chap-
ter 2.4.5 (page18), Mt. Kenya’s Savannah zone with its dominant soil types of (verto-) luvic phaeno-
zems and luvisols is very favorable for growing crops. The soils have an above average fertility, wa-
ter storage capacities and availability of nutrients to plants (Decurtins 1992; Liniger et al. 1998). In
addition, good land and soil management has a positive influence on water storage and availability to
plants, runoff, erosion, water loss by evaporation, and fertility (Liniger et al. 1998). Low infiltration
rates, respectively high runoff and evaporation rates of vertic soils found in the Savannah zone can be
partly prevented by soil and water conservancy methods, like mulching and agroforestry. Such
measures were indeed observed during the field campaign. They can not only increase the effective
rainfall, but also the field application efficiency. Considering that soils have an above average suita-
bility for crop growing and that farmers apply soil and water conservation methods, it can be assumed
that the effective rainfall and the field application efficiency is underestimated and hence the overall
need for irrigation is overestimated by this demand-based approach. A further aspect not considered
in the calculation is the capillary water supply from groundwater (WMO 2009). If such a supply is
available, it would be another aspect contributing to an overestimation by the demand-based ap-
proach.
Since fewer assumptions in case of the approach based on pumping hours had to be made, and also
Gathenya (1992) and Aeschbacher (2003) already concluded that a demand-based approach overes-
timates abstraction rates, the results of the approach based on pumping hours shown in Table 4-11 are
assumed to represent the actual abstraction rate best. Therefore, the rate based on pumping hours was
used as the base value for estimating the monthly abstraction rate discussed below.
Monthly abstraction rate
Monthly abstraction rate of pump users

40.0
35.0
30.0
Abstraction rate (l/s)
RGS A3/A4 to A5
25.0
RGS A5 to A6
20.0
15.0 A6 to confluence
10.0 Total
5.0 A5 to confluence
0.0
Jul 12
Sep 12
Feb 13
Jul 13
Sep 13
Feb 14
Apr 12
May 12
Oct 12
Dec 12
Apr 13
May 13
Dec 13
Jun 13
Oct 13
Aug 12
Mrz 12
Jan 13
Aug 13
Mrz 13
Jan 14
Jun 12
Nov 12
Nov 13
Figure 4-11: Monthly abstraction rate of pump users, Naro Moru River, Kenya
Table 4-13: Monthly abstraction rate of pump users, Naro Moru River, Kenya
River Section Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Mean
RGS A3/A4 to A5 2.1 2.5 2.0 1.5 2.3 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.0 1.0 2.1 2.2
RGS A5 to A6 24 28 23 17 26 31 31 29 30 23 11 23 24.6
A6 to confluence 6.2 7.2 5.9 4.3 6.6 7.9 7.9 7.5 7.7 5.8 2.8 5.9 6.3
Total 32 38 31 22 35 41 41 39 40 31 15 31 33.1
A5 to confluence 30 35 29 21 32 39 39 37 38 29 14 29 30.9
Figure 4-11 and Table 4-13 show the monthly abstraction rates by pump users per river section. It can
be seen that during the field work in October 2013 nearly the highest monthly abstraction rate was
captured. The lowest rates are experienced during and just after the rainy seasons in March, April and
November. To estimate these monthly rates, unlike for the estimation of the Matanya furrow’s month-
ly abstraction rates, a demand based approach was chosen. The monthly abstraction rate depends
mainly on the availability of river water, precipitation and general demand for irrigation. It is plausi-
ble that during rainy season the abstraction rate is the lowest. The question arises if during the driest
periods, January and February, the availability of water meets the demand for irrigation, or if the rate
for these months is overestimated.
According to M. Karuri, subsistence crops (mainly maize, beans and potatoes) are planted twice dur-
ing a year in compliance with the following schedule and water demand:
 In March the crops are planted.

 During April and May, the irrigation is highest due to the growth stadium the crop is in.
 July/ August is harvest time.
 August is also the start of second planting season.
 September/ October is again season of the crop’s highest water demand.
 December/ early January is the second harvest time.
 In January/ February no subsistence crops are planted/ respectively growing.
This planting schedule does no coincide very closely with the abstraction rate displayed in Figure
4-10. Especially the high rate during January and February seem to be overestimated.
However, farmers not only plant subsistence crops, but also vegetables. Above and also a few kilome-
ters below RGS A5, some small scale farmers produce for the European market as outgrowers. An
outgrower is a small- or large scale farmer/ company supplying crops on contract to an exporting
business partner. Outgrowers help these partners to meet the demand of their markets and in turn, the
exporter provides the market to the outgrowers (Schuler 2004). Their water consumption for irriga-
tion purposes is highest during June to March because the market demand in Europe is highest during
this time as discussed in chapter 4.4.3. Unfortunately, the number of small-scale outgrowers along the
Naro Moru was not assessed and thus their influence on the abstraction rate during the dry months
cannot be estimated.
Besides the small-scale outgrowers, most subsistence farmers also produce cash crops for the Kenyan
market. It can be expected that farmers try to sell some of these crops all year round to earn a constant
income. Further, they try to have the highest output during periods with the highest market prices. In
many places in Kenya, farmers depend heavily on the seasonal rainfalls since no other source can be
used for irrigation. Therefore, the planting season for all crops are adjusted to the rainy season as
showed above for subsistence crops. The main harvest time in the country is January/ February and
July/ August. That is also when market prices are lowest due to the high supply. Farmers along the
Naro Moru River have the advantage of being able to rely on the river for irrigation. Thus, they can
produce anticyclical and have the highest output during the months where the Kenyan-wide supply of
crops is rather low. This hypothesis would mean a high water demand during dry periods. To which
degree farmers adjust the planting season of their cash crops to market prices was unfortunately not
assessed during the fieldwork.
Aeschbacher et al. (2005) state that pumps are only operated when rainwater does not meet the crop’s
water demand, which is mainly during the dry seasons. The comparison of river discharge and the
abstraction rate of pump systems were able to support this statement, revealing a correlation coeffi-
cient of -0.78 and a stability index of 0.60 on a level of significance of 95%. Analyzing data of J.
Gikonyo, Aeschbacher (2003) found a relatively weak correlation between rainfall and the abstraction
rate of pump users of -0.49 for the A5-catchment and -0.29 for the A6-catchment. These two findings
indicate a reciprocal proportionality between discharge, respectively rainfall, and the abstraction rate
of pump users. During the abstraction campaign in 1991, Gathenya (1992) found that irrigation is
mainly done during dry season. Although it is not specified on which data, observation or assumption
this statement is based on.
Considering all aspects mentioned above, it can be assumed that the abstraction rate indeed correlates
negatively to rainfall, implying a high water demand for irrigation during the dry season. However,
there are many uncertainties regarding this matter. Therefore, this assumption remains a hypothesis
and further information from the field, especially regarding the planting seasons, are needed to make
a safer statement about the behavior of the monthly abstraction rate.
4.4.5 Abstraction by Water Projects (Gravity Pipes)
Estimation of abstraction rate during low flows
Discharge of RGS A3, A4 and A5 during low flow period
24.01.2014 25.01.2014 26.01.2014 27.01.2014 28.01.2014

0.40
0.35
0.30
RGS A3+A4
Discharge (m3/s)
0.25 RGS A3+A4-A5

0.20 RGS A3
0.15 RGS A4
0.10 RGS A5
0.05
0.00
Figure 4-12: Discharge of RGS A3, A4 and A5 during a low flow period between January 24th and 28th, 2014
Table 4-14: Estimated river water abstraction of water projects between RGS A3/ A4 and A5
m3/s m3/day l/s mean l/s min l/s max

Discharge
Discharge at A3 0.160 13863 160.5 148 172
Discharge at A4 0.094 8095 93.7 87 101
Discharge A3+A4 0.254 21958 254.1 235 273
Discharge A5 0.061 5261 60.9 56 65
A3+A4-A5 0.193 16697 193.3 179 208
Other Abstractions and Evaporation loss
AAA Farmers 0.012 996 11.5 11.5 11.5
Pump Users 0.002 185 2.1 2.1 2.1
Evaporation Loss 0.004 357 4.1 4.1 4.1
Estimated Abstraction 0.175 15160 175.5 161.0 190.0
Figure 4-12 displays the discharge of RGS A3, A4, A5, the sum of A3 and A4, and also the differ-
ence between A5 and the sum of A3 and A4 during a low flow period between January 24th and 28th,
2014. Note that a decrease or increase in discharge at RGS A3 and A4 does not show an immediate
effect at RGS A5, but only at least a half a day later. To calculate the period’s mean discharge values
as seen in Table 4-14, it was accounted for this delayed reaction. Table 4-14 also shows the effect on
the abstraction rate between RGS A3/ A4 and A5 from the other water users. Further, for calculating
the mean abstraction rate, the water loss through evaporation in this river section was considered. The
estimated mean abstraction from the NM Scheme, NM WP & Sanitation Co, Ndiriti-Aguthi, Kabun-
da, Kabendera and Mwiremia water projects is 175.5 l/s as shown in Table 4-14 and Table 4-15. The
latter table also shows the estimated mean, minimum and maximum abstraction rate for the KWS
intake and Kigama, Kihoto and Gitwe WP during low flows.
Table 4-15: Estimated average abstraction rate of piped water projects during low flows
Water Projects Mean [l/s] Min [l/s] Max [l/s]

Kihoto & Gitwe WP 38.8 35.9 41.8
Kigama WP 7.0 7.0 7.0
Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) intake 0.01 0.01 0.01
NM Scheme, NM WP & Sanitation Co, Ndiriti- 175.5 161.0 190.0
Aguthi, Kabunda, Kabendera and Mwiremia WP
Total 221.4 204.0 238.8
Temporal extrapolation of abstraction rates of gravity pipes

Based on the design of gravity pipes and the assessment of previous campaigns, it was decided
against a temporal extrapolation of the abstraction rates estimated for January 2014.
Water abstractions by gravity pipes consist of a weir that diverts a constant amount of river water into
a pipe. The opening of a pipe at the intake can be regulated, respectively entirely closed. However,
such flow regulations are much less regularly done as it is the case at the Matanya furrow, since it is a
time-consuming and in case of some projects even a difficult task to reach the intake. Most farming
land that receives water from gravity pipes are located several kilometers away from the pipe’s in-
take. Each water project is equipped with one or more water storage tanks ranging in size from 50 to
225 m3. From the water tanks, water is then distributed to the project members by smaller pipes (0.5
to 2 inch in diameter). The storage tank serves as a reservoir accounting for fluctuations regarding the
demand for water. Due to the small size of these tanks, only minor fluctuations, e.g. the lower de-
mand during night time, can be compensated for. For example, if no water is used, a 225 m 3/s tank is
filled up in only 2.5 hours, assuming a continuous abstraction rate of 25 l/s. The question arises why
Gathenya (1992) and Aeschbacher (2003) concluded that the abstraction rates of gravity pipes are
more or less stable across the course of the year. According to Aeschbacher (2003), the analysis of
the double meter gaugings conducted by J. Gikonyo between 1994 and 1997 show small monthly
fluctuation, but no pattern could be observed. However, as stated in chapter 4.3.6 (page 64), using
double meter gaugings to determine the abstraction rate of gravity pipes is seen as not being suitable.
Thus, a high uncertainty remains regarding the double meter measurements of J. Gikonyo and its
analysis by Aeschbacher (2003).
Regarding the monthly fluctuation of the abstraction rate, a research gap remains. Due to the projects’
small storage capacities, the author raises doubts that a constant rate can be expected throughout the
course of a year. It is more likely to assume that during months of low water demand, the abstraction
rate is lower for the following reason: Given the situation where the storage tank is completely filled
up and project members do not use any water, the whole system is full, which means, no water will
flow inside the pipe at the intake. In order to find definite answers to this hypothesis, additional field
visits to farm land that receive water from projects and interviews with project chairmen and project
members would be necessary.
4.4.6 Water Demand of Livestock
Table 4-16 shows the findings regarding the water demand of livestock per river section and type. In
the Naro Moru catchment, around 164 units per km2 of Kenya’s three most widely used types of live-
stock – cattle, sheep and goat – can be expected. In 2009, an estimated 28500 units of these three
types of livestock were living in the whole Naro Moru catchment area. This estimate is slightly lower
than the figure of 33862 units calculated by Aeschbacher (2003). However, these are only rough es-
timates based on the livestock count conducted for the whole Laikipia East constituency which is
more than seven time as big as the Naro Moru catchment. It must be assumed that the livestock is not
equally distributed in the whole constituency. The water demand of 2.3 l/s between RGS A3/A4 and
A5 is most probably overestimated for the following reasons: First, based on field observations, com-
pared to the river stretches below RGS A5, not many pastoralists are assumed to live in this river sec-
tion. Therefore, relatively few herds directly drink from the river. Second, most small-scale farmers in
this rivers section are usually served by piped water from water projects. Thus, the water for their
livestock is also mostly directly coming from gravity pipes and is therefore already accounted for in
the abstraction rate of the water projects.
Table 4-16: Water demand of livestock per river section and type of livestock in the Naro Moru catchment
Count in Laikipia per Demand Demand Demand Demand

Livestock Total
East Constituency km2 [km2/s] RGS A3/A4-A5 RGS A5-A6 A5 to A6
Cattle 55695 44 0.031 2.693 l/s 2.01 l/s 0.61 l/s 5.32 l/s
Sheep 105048 83 0.004 0.339 l/s 0.25 l/s 0.08 l/s 0.67 l/s
Goat 46454 37 0.002 0.150 l/s 0.11 l/s 0.03 l/s 0.30 l/s
Total 207197 164 0.036 2.332 l/s 2.37 l/s 0.72 l/s 5.43 l/s
4.4.7 Monthly Abstraction Rate per River Section and Type
Figure 4-13 shows the monthly mean abstraction rate per type in the period from 03.2012 to 02.2014.
The rate fluctuates between 269 l/s in February 2014 and 387 l/s in June and September 2012. The
mean abstraction rate during this period is 350 l/s. Even though the gravity pipes only make up 3.2%
of all abstraction points, as discussed in chapter 4.1 (page 54), they are responsible for 63.3% of the
entire amount of abstractions as shown in Figure 4-15 (left). For each month, a constant amount of
abstraction was assumed for gravity pipes. The reasons for this assumption were discussed in chapter
4.4.5 (page 87). The Matanya furrow is the only legal furrow still working throughout the year. For
the period March 2013 to February 2014, the furrow is responsible for 24.2% of the total abstraction
rate. The Matanya furrow is the abstraction type that contributes most to the monthly fluctuation of
the abstraction rate. It ranges from 10 l/s in February 2014 up to 121 l/s in September 2012, with a
mean of 85 l/s. However, its low values during the dry season are mainly due to water scarcity and
not decrease in water demand for irrigation as discussed in chapter 4.4.2 (page 74). Although having
a share of 95.5% of the total abstraction points, the small-scale farmers using portable water pumps
only contribute 8.6% to the total abstraction rate. Its mean abstraction rate is 30.2 l/s with a minimum
of 19.6 l/s in March 2013 and a maximum of 34.8 l/s in June and July 2012.
Monthly mean abstraction rate per type from 03.2012 to 02.2014

450
400 Gravity Pipes
350
Matanya
Abstraction (l/s)
300
Furrow
250 Water Pumps
200
150 AAA Growers
100
Livestock
50
0
Jul 12
Jul 13
Sep 12
Feb 13
Sep 13
Feb 14
Apr 12
May 12
Dec 12
Apr 13
May 13
Dec 13
Aug 12
Oct 12
Mrz 12
Jan 13
Aug 13
Oct 13
Mrz 13
Jan 14
Jun 12
Jun 13
Nov 12
Nov 13
Figure 4-13: Monthly mean abstraction rate per type from 03.2012 to 02.2014, Naro Moru River
Figure 4-14 illustrates the monthly mean abstraction rate per river section for the period March 2012
to February 2014. Most water is abstracted above RGS A5 since all water projects are located in this
river section. Since mainly gravity pipes abstract water in this river stretch, the monthly fluctuation is
Monthly mean abstraction rate per river section from 03.2012 to 02.2014
450
400
Source to
350 RGS A3
Abstraction (l/s)
300 Source to
250 RGS A4
RGS A3/A4
200 to A5
150 RGS A5 to A6
100
RGS A6 to
50
confluence
0
Sep 13
Jul 12
Sep 12
Feb 13
Jul 13
Feb 14
Dec 12
Dec 13
Apr 12
May 12
Oct 12
Apr 13
May 13
Oct 13
Aug 12
Nov 12
Mrz 12
Jan 13
Aug 13
Mrz 13
Jan 14
Jun 12
Jun 13
Nov 13
Figure 4-14: Monthly mean abstraction rate per river section from 03.2012 to 02.2014, Naro Moru River
nearly zero. The mean abstraction rate between the source and RGS A5 is 233 l/s, with a minimum of
225 l/s and a maximum of 241 l/s. The main abstraction point responsible for a monthly fluctuation
above RGS A5 is the AAA Growers’ intake. The four abstraction points between the source and RGS
A3/ A4 only account for 13% of the total abstraction rate as shown in Figure 4-15, whereas the whole
amount above RGS A5 is responsible for 67%. The monthly fluctuation seen in Figure 4-14 is again
mainly triggered by the Matanya furrow that is situated below RGS A5. Even though still 63 portable
pump users lie below RGS A6, their abstraction rate only accounts for 2% of the total. Between RGS
A5 and the confluence a mean of 117 l/s are abstracted, with a minimum of 39 l/s in February 2014
and 153 l/s in September 2012.
2% 2%
1.6% Water Projects
11% Source to
(Gravity Pipes)
RGS A3
Water Pump for Source to
24.2% Horticulture Farm
31% RGS A4
Water pumps for RGS A3/A4
smale scale farming to A5
8.6% 63.3% Open Furrows RGS A5 to A6
2.3% 54%
Livestock RGS A6 to
confluence
Figure 4-15: Mean abstraction rate in percentage per type (left) and per river section (right) in 2013
It is estimated that 97% of all abstracted water is used for irrigation (Figure 4-15 left). Exactly the
same value was already found during the abstraction campaign in 2002 (Aeschbacher 2003). The
remaining 3% are equally distributed to livestock and domestic use.
Regarding the method used for irrigation, sprinklers are responsible for 64% of all water abstracted
for irrigational purposes as illustrated in Figure 4-16 (right). Sprinklers are the main method used by
1.50% 1.50% 3%
Livestock Drip (1)

33%
Domestic Use Flood (300)
64%
Irrigation Sprinkler (9)
97%
Figure 4-16: Purpose of water abstraction (left) and method used for irrigation (right) in 2013
farmers that receive water from gravity pipes. Users of portable pumps and farmers along the Matan-
ya furrow mainly use flood irrigation to irrigate their fields. Even though they maintain the highest
share of abstraction points along the river, flood irrigation only contributes to 33% of all abstracted
water used for irrigational purposes. Drip irrigation is mainly used by the AAA Growers’ horticulture
farm. However, there is a small amount of small-scale farmers that use this method as well. In the
following chapter the efficiency of these three methods is analyzed.
4.4.8 Comparison of Abstraction Rate regarding the Irrigation Method
Table 4-17: Efficiency of the different irrigation methods and comparison to demand-based estimates
Irrigation method Irrigated ø abstraction Abstraction Demand Demand

(Abstraction point) land [ha] rate [l/s] [l/s per ha] [l/s] [l/s per ha]
Drip irrigation 34 19.3/ *34.7 0.57/*1.02 15.5 0.46
(AAA Growers)
Sprinkler irrigation 61 38.8 0.64 31.5 0.52
(Gitwe & Kihoto WP)
Flood irrigation 100 30.6 0.31 55.8 0.56
(Pump users)
Flood irrigation 150 68.0 0.45 84.0 0.56
(Matanya furrow)
* Estimate of Lanari (2014) for the farm’s consumption during dry season (including water from artificial lake)
The first column of Table 4-17 lists the three methods used for irrigation. Since the total area of farm-
ing land is only known for Gitwe and Kihoto WP, the rest of the water projects were not considered
for this comparison. Column five shows the abstraction rate if the demand-based approach is applied,
whereas the last column illustrates the demand-based abstraction rate per hectare. It can be seen, that
the drip irrigation used by the AAA Growers Farm has the lowest water demand per hectare. Due to
the drip irrigation’s high field efficiency of 90%, it is the most efficient way to irrigate (Brouwer et al.
1989). Chapter 4.3.5 discusses the reasons for this in more detail. The efficiency is followed by sprin-
klers (0.52 l/s per ha) and flood irrigation (0.56 l/s per ha). However, if other approaches than the
demand-based are used to estimate the abstraction rate, the irrigation efficiency, respectively abstrac-
tion rate per hectare as shown in column four, the contrary can be observed. The AAA growers
monthly mean abstraction rate per hectare is substantially higher than the demand-based rate (0.57 vs
0.46 l/s per ha). During the dry season, where the farm produces most, the difference is even much
higher (1.02 vs 0.46 l/s per ha). The water projects using sprinklers also surpass the demand-based
abstraction rate by a lot (0.64 vs 0.52 l/s per ha). The farmers using portable pumps on the other hand
have a much lower rate (0.31 l/s per ha) not just compared to the demand-based estimate, but also to
the drip irrigation and sprinkler method. It is further lower than the flood irrigation method used by
farmers along the Matanya furrow. However, it would now be a mistake to just conclude that these
findings can be explained with flood irrigation being the most efficient irrigation method – contrary
to what literature states. Since these calculations were not made until after the field work, no data in
the field could be gathered to explain these findings. Therefore, the following attempts at an explana-
tion are mainly based on hypotheses.
Regarding the high abstraction rate per hectare of the drip irrigation method, it must be assumed that
the horticulture farm needs a higher input of water to ensure the high quality of their vegetables in
order to meet the desired expectation of the European market. According to M. Karuri, many small-
scale outgrowers had to stop producing for the export market since they were not able to meet the
high standards. Most small-scale farmers produce subsistence crops and vegetables for local farms
where quality standards are less high and thus a constant, high input of water is less crucial. In addi-
tion, small-scale farmers below RGS A5 are aware of the water scarcity, thus adapting their farming
methods to this constraint. For example, they might plant crops that are less water demanding or they
try to avoid planting during dry season.
Regarding the Gitwe and Kihoto WP, the question arises, why the demand-based abstraction rate is so
much lower than the actual estimated rate. The reason could be a considerable leakage somewhere in
the system of pipes, as it was observed on various occasions during the field work. A further possibil-
ity could simply be an overestimation, respectively underestimation by either method used for esti-
mating the abstraction rate.
The higher abstraction rate per hectare of the farmers along the Matanya furrow compared to the
pump users can probably be explained by the influence of conveyance efficiency. Besides the field
application efficiency previously explained, the conveyance efficiency adds to the scheme irrigation
efficiency, which expresses the percentage of irrigation water that is pumped or diverted through the
scheme inlet and is then used effectively by a plant. The conveyance efficiency mainly depends on
the length and condition of the canals, the type of soil and permeability of the canal banks (Brouwer
et al. 1989). Farmers taking water from the Matanya furrow for irrigational purposes use various
methods. However, all of them fall into the category of flood irrigation, which has a field application
efficiency of only 60% for reasons discussed in chapter 4.3.5. Some use portable pumps, others only
buckets, but most use small furrows that divert the water from the main furrow onto their fields. The
conveyance efficiency of the pump users is nearly 100% since no canals are used. Farmers that use
small furrows are affected by the conveyance efficiency. Depending on the soil type and length of
canal, this efficiency ranges between 60 and 90% (Brouwer et al. 1989). Thus, the overall irrigation
efficiency of irrigating by diverting water through small furrows is assumed to be substantially lower
than if flood irrigation is done by portable pumps. This might explain the higher abstraction rate per
hectare for the Matanya furrow compared to the users of portable pumps.
4.4.9 Legal State of Abstractions
Rules regarding water use activities that need authorization

The Water Act 2002 and Water Resource Management (WRM) Rules 2007 are the two legislative
frameworks that provide guidelines regarding water use activities that need authorization. The stated
rules in the two documents do not entirely comply with each other and also leave room for interpreta-
tion.
The relevant section of the Water Act 2002 states the following:
25. (1) A permit shall be required for any of the following purposes:
(a) any use of water from a water resource, except as provided by section 26;
(… )
26. Permit not required for certain activities.
(1) Except as provided by subsection (2) a permit is not required:
(a) for the abstraction or use of water, without the employment of works, from or in any wa-
ter resource for domestic purposes by any person having lawful access thereto;
(… )
The WRM Rules 2007 state the following relevant rules:
16. (1) Any person intending to or currently undertaking any of the water use activities defined in the
Act including the activities listed in the Sixth Schedule shall obtain approval from the Author-
ity to undertake the activity.
(… )
24. (1) Any person who proposes to use water on a scale falling into Category B, C or D is required
to apply for a water use permit using Form WRMA 001 as in the Thirteenth Schedule.
(… )
Sixth Schedule (Rules 16, 22, 24, 42, 77): Water use and permit details:
(1) Water use activities that require approval by authority:
(a) Temporary abstraction for construction;
(b) Diversion of water from a water course;
(c) Abstraction from surface water;
(d) Diversion of a water course
(…)
(2) Category Description:
A: Water use activity deemed by virtue of its scale to have a low risk of impacting the water re-
source. Applications in this category will be determined by Regional Offices.
B: Water use activity deemed by virtue of its scale to have the potential to make a significant
impact on the water resource. Permit applications in this category will be determined by Re-
gional Offices.
C: Water use activity deemed by virtue of its scale to have a significant impact on the water re-
source. Permit applications in this category will be determined by Regional Offices in consul-
tation with the Catchment Area Advisory Committees.
D: Water use activity which involves either two different catchment areas, or is of a large scale
or complexity and which is deemed by virtue of its scale to have a measurable impact on the
water resource. Permit applications in this category will be determined by Regional Offices
in consultation with the Catchment Area Advisory Committees and approval by Authority
Headquarters.
In the Water Act 2002, the expression "works" is defined as “any structure, apparatus, contrivance,
device or thing for carrying”. Therefore, if articles 25. (1) (a) and 26. (1) (a) are applied, the entire
amount of the estimated abstraction rate supposedly requires a permit. According to these articles, it
would not even be legal to take water from the river with a bucket. Regarding the abstraction by grav-
ity pipes and furrows, there is not much debate about the need of authorization. These type of abstrac-
tions not only fall under the activities that use approval by authority (Sixth schedule article one (b, c,
d), but also under category B, C or even D as described in the sixth schedule article two, which need
to apply for a permit according to Article 24. (1).
However, there is an uncertainty about the abstractions by small-scale and subsistence farmers that
use portable pumps. On one hand, according to the Water Act 2002, and article 16 (1) and the sixth
schedule article one, portable pumps would require a permit. On the other hand, M. Karuri from the
Naro Moru WRUA states that users of portable pumps are seen as having a low risk of impacting the
water resource and therefore fall under category A of sixth schedule article two, which do not need to
apply for a permit according to article 24 (1). However, the expression “low risk of impacting the
water resource” is a rather vague term and the threshold between low and high is defined by the Re-
gional Office (WRMA) on guidelines unknown to the author. Assuming that all users of portable
pumps have a low impact on water resources is a bit delicate, since there is certainly a big difference
between the water consumption of a small-scale commercial farmer that irrigates four acres and a
subsistence farmer that only irrigates half an acre. If a user of a portable pump falls into category A or
B (or higher), which would imply the need for a permit, should be decided from case to case. Alt-
hough, it must be assumed that most portable pumps are not even on the radar of the WRMA, since
for various possible reasons their users never applied for a permit. Summarized, it must be stated that
the legal state of portable pump users is unclear.
Difference of permitted amount regarding the reserve quantity, normal and flood flows
A water use permit is provided by WRMA. It is a document that confers rights to a specified quantity
of water use, for a specified period of time and purpose, and spells out conditions to be observed by
the permit-holder as stated in the Water Act 2002 and WRM Rules 2007. The Water Act 2002 first
prioritizes the reserve (quantity and quality required to satisfy basic human needs and protection of
aquatic ecosystems) and second domestic use ahead of all the other water uses.
Under the WRM Rules 2007, the following guidelines have been defined regarding surface water:
 The reserve quantity should not be less than the discharge value that is exceeded 95% of the time
(Q95) as measured by a naturalized flow duration curve at any point along the river.
 Normal flow is defined as the flow between the Q80 and Q95. During normal flow, water abstrac-
tion for irrigation purposes is not permitted, unless there are clearly sufficient resources. This
threshold provides a safeguard of resources for domestic supplies and livestock.
 Flood flow is defined as the flow above Q80. During flood flows, abstractions for all kinds of
purposes are allowed.
These thresholds are used to provide a framework for water allocation decisions. Since permit holders
are not allowed to use water for irrigation below Q80, they are required to have a 90 day storage facil-
ity. This storage is filled during flood flows and can then be used during dry season. Every permit is
issued with a permitted abstraction amount valid for normal and one for flood flows.
Legal state of abstraction points

Besides the KWS intake, all of the water projects have a permit. Some of them (e.g. Kihoto and
Mwiremia WP) do not have a master meter which would be a requirement for an abstraction point
that uses a gravity pipe. The rest of the master meters most probably underestimate the actual ab-
stracted amount of river water by quite a lot as discussed in chapter 4.3.6 (page 64). Most permitted
abstraction amounts seem to date back many years and have not been updated to changed circum-
stances (e.g. increase of households or irrigated land per water project). In February 2014, WRMA –
the authority responsible for all matters regarding water use permits – was not even able to find some
of the water project’s documents that hold the relevant information regarding the issued permits and
designs of the intakes. Others were incomplete or were not updated.
The Matanya furrow does hold some sort of a permit, but is only authorized and not permitted to full
extent. According to WRMA, in the case of this abstraction point, this means that they have to change
from a furrow to a gravity pipe ‘in the near future’. The Thome furrow also only held the state of au-
thorization, but in 2009, it was shut down by WRMA. Since then, according to M. Karuri, it is only
used during flood flows, most probably illegally. Since operating it during high flows does not disturb
other water users, it is still tolerated by WRMA.
According to the Naro Moru WRUA, nearly all water pump users do not hold any permit. As stated
above, some of them are not even legally required to have an authorization since they have low im-
pact on water resources. The AAA Growers horticulture farm and the Iment farm are authorized.
Permitted abstraction quantity and development of legal state since 1991
Table 4-18: Permitted abstraction quantity during flood flows (Q80-Q0), respectively normal flows (Q95-Q80)
Flood Flow
Normal flow
(April, May, November)
Average Total Abstraction 358 l/s 347 l/s
Permitted Abstraction Quantity 110 - 144 l/s 44 - 83 l/s
Permitted Abstraction Quantity [% of total] 31 - 40% 13 - 24%
Gathenya (1992) estimated that during the dry season in 1991 only 8% of abstractions were legal.
This estimate included farmers with expired permits. During wet season, around 30% of water ab-
stractions were legal, which is a similar figure than obtained for 2013.
Aeschbacher (2003) concluded that only 2.7% of abstraction during normal flow (Q95-Q80) and
20.3% during flood flows (Q80-Q0) were permitted. Comparing it to the estimate of 2013, one could
make the conclusion that the legal state of abstractions improved since 2003. However, the abstrac-
tion rate estimated by Aeschbacher (2003) was considerably higher as discussed in the next chapter,
which makes a comparison of these results not very informative.
4.5 Development of Abstraction Quantities from 1983 to 2013
Number of Abstraction points per type and year

350
311
298
300
250
200 Gravity Pipes

Count
Open Furrows
150
98 Water Pumps
100 85
Total
50 21 29 17 26 10 3
2 6 6 3 7 6
0
1983 1991 2002 2013
Year of Abstraction Survey
Figure 4-17: Number of abstraction points along the Naro Moru River per type and year
As Figure 4-17 illustrates, between the first abstraction campaign conducted by Brunner (1983) and
latest, a dramatic increase from 29 to 311 abstraction points along the Naro Moru River can be ob-
served. The number of water pumps experienced the highest growth, whereas the amount of gravity
pipes increased from two to ten and the number of furrows decreased from six to three. Two out of
these three are not even relevant anymore during medium and low flows. The Thome, Matanya and
Rware Estate Farm furrow were already in use in 2002, whereas three small furrows above RGS A5
do not exist anymore. The Aguthi furrow, the most relevant furrow since 1983 besides Thome and
Matanya, changed to a gravity pipe after 2003. The gravity pipe of the Naro Moru WP and Sanitation
Co. emerged after 2002 and replaced a few portable and fixed pumps (e.g. the one for the Naro Moru
River Lodge and Naro Moru Town Water Supply). After 2002, two more water projects with gravity
pipes were constructed – namely the Naro Moru Scheme and the Mwiremia WP. Note that the Kihoto
and Kigama WP only changed their names twice between 1991 and 2013, their location and size
stayed the same.
Abstraction rate per year

600
504
500
Abstraction rate (l/s)
387
400 350
334
290 286 Monthly
300 257 modelled Mean
values Low Flow
200
Demand based (February)
approach
100
0
1983 1991 2002 2013
Year of abstraction Survey
Figure 4-18: Development of river water abstractions from the Naro Moru River between 1983 and 2013
Even though the catchment experienced a very considerable increase in abstraction points, the esti-
mated abstraction rate decreased considerably after 2002 as illustrated in Figure 4-18. In order to ana-
lyze the development of the abstraction rate between 1983 and 2013, several aspects need to be con-
sidered:
 During the abstraction survey of 1983, only the abstraction points were assessed. Aesch-
bacher (2003) used a demand-based approach to estimate the abstracted quantity. According
to Gathenya (1992) and Aeschbacher (2003), this approach overestimates the actual abstrac-
tion rate.
 The duration of the campaigns greatly varied. It ranges from three weeks in 2003 to more than
one year in the case of Gathenya (1992). In order to estimate the monthly abstraction rates
many assumptions with rather high uncertainties were made. The shorter the duration of a
survey was, the more assumptions had to be made. Therefore, it can be assumed that the cam-
paign in 1991 is the most accurate.
 Every campaign used different estimation and gauging methods which makes a comparison
between the four surveys more difficult.
 There are some indications that the modelled abstraction rate estimated for 2002 is overesti-
mated. Aeschbacher (2003) also applied the model to estimate the rate for the year 1991. Aes-
chbacher (2003) estimated 427 l/s for 1991, which is 93 l/s (28%) higher than the estimate by
Gathenya (1991). Due to the long duration of the campaign in 1991 and many measurements
conducted in the field over several months, Gathenya’s (1992) results are assumed to repre-
sent the actual abstraction rate better than the modelled rate of Aeschbacher (2003). Thus,
there is a possibility that the results of 2002 are also overestimated.
 Regarding the monthly mean abstraction rate of farmers using portable pumps, there is a very
high discrepancy between the estimates of Gathenya (1992), Aeschbacher (2003) and this the-
sis. Gathenya (1991) estimated 2.4 l/s for the 15 private pumps that existed in 1991, whereas
Aeschbacher (2003) estimated 45 l/s for the 76 portable (and private) pumps found in 2002
(not including the one for the horticulture farm Vitacress). The estimate for 2013 is 33.1 l/s
for the 298 portable observed during the campaign. If these results are compared, the abstrac-
tion rate for pump users in 2002 seems to be overestimated, whereas it is possible that for
2013 they are slightly underestimated, considering that the demand-based approach would
generate a considerably higher rate (as discussed in chapter 4.4.4 (page 80).
If all these aspects are taken into account, it can be inferred that each of the estimated abstraction rate
is subject to a relative high uncertainty. Thus, concluding that the abstraction rate decreased substan-
tially since 2002 is a bit precarious, especially since there are some indications that the rate of 2002 is
overestimated. However, there are indeed three reasons speaking for a decreasing or at least a stag-
nating abstraction rate since 2002:
 The Thome furrow was shut down by WRMA in 2009. As field observations showed, this
furrow is indeed not used anymore at least during the dry season. Thus, the quantity abstract-
ed by Thome was taken as zero. In 2002, Aeschbacher (2003) estimated a mean abstraction
rate of 82 l/s. If it was not shut down, the total abstraction rate in 2013 would be 432 l/s.
 As mentioned, the Aguthi furrow was closed after 2002 and replaced by a gravity pipe. In
2002, an abstraction rate of 135 l/s was estimated. This made the Aguthi furrow the abstrac-
tion point in the catchment that contributed most to the total abstraction rate.
 Between 1991 and 2013 the share of abstracted water by open furrows decreased from 84.7%
in 1991 to 24.2% as Figure 4-19 and Figure 4-15 (left, page 92). Instead the share of abstract-
ed water by gravity pipes increased from 13.8% in 1991 to 63.3% in 2013. As discussed in
chapter 4.4.8 (page 93), the overall irrigation efficiency of farmers that are served by gravity
pipes and are able to irrigate with sprinklers is much higher than flood irrigation performed by
farmers along furrows. Hence, the overall water demand for irrigation purposes must have de-
creased with the widespread change from furrows to gravity pipes in the last years. This also
the reason why the above discussed abstraction rate by the Ndiriti-Aguthi WP is assumed to
be much lower than during times when the furrow was still in place.
1.5%
13.8% Water Projects
22% (Gravity Pipes)
Gravity Pipes
Water Pump for
5% Horticulture Farm
Open Furrows
64% Water pumps for
9%
84.7% Water Pumps smale scale farming
Open Furrows
Figure 4-19: River water abstraction along the Naro Moru River per abstraction type in 1991 (left) and 2002
(right).
Analysis of the River Flow 103
5 Analysis of the River Flow
5.1 Methodology and Data
5.1.1 Investigated Period
If not stated otherwise, the investigated time frame is from March 2012 to February 2014. The same
period was already used for most calculations and illustrations in chapter four. The reasons for choos-
ing this period are the following:
 In March 2012, the operation of the new automatic gauging stations (RGS A5 and A6) was
started. RGS A4 followed in April 2012, whereas RGS A3 in February 2013. Thus, where
RGS A3 and A4 were considered, the investigated time frame had to be adjusted.
 In 2002, Aeschbacher (2003) conducted a few gaugings to validate the accuracy of the rating
equations. The deviation between the measured and calculated discharge during low flows
ranged between - 70% (RGS A4) and + 145% (RGS A3). RGS A5 showed the least deviation
(+16%) of the four stations. The last reference gaugings were conducted in 1995, which does
not meet the recommendation of the minimum of ten discharge gaugings per year to detect
changes of the cross section that affects the stability of the stage-discharge relationship
(WMO 2010). Aeschbacher (2003: 26f) concluded that a “gauging campaign and the calcula-
tion of a new rating equation based on those gaugings is absolutely necessary.” And further
that “the continuation of the river discharge gaugings would only make sense if the rating
equations were to be recalculated in the near future. Without these discharge gauging cam-
paigns, the use of further data collection is questionable, as the data quality at the moment is
only scientifically useable under certain reservations and probably does not justify the ex-
penses of keeping up this monitoring network.” Unfortunately, neither the suggested gauging
campaign, nor more reference gaugings were conducted since 2002. Therefore, the uncertain-
ty of the discharge data of all stations is high and the use and interpretation of the data re-
quires caution. Because of the high uncertainty of data (mainly RGS A3 and A4) and also the
considerable data gaps of RGS A6, only the long-term discharge (1960-2014) of RGS A5 is
analyzed.
5.1.2 Naturalization of the River Flow (Qnat)
The term defines the actual available amount of river water if there would be no direct human impact
on the river discharge, i.e. no change of the water flow by dams, abstractions or diversion of water in
or out of the native catchment area. The human impact of land use change and its effect on runoff and
ground water storage is not considered. To calculate the naturalized river flow for a certain RGS, the
monthly abstraction rate [m3/s] above this RGS as presented in chapter 4.4.7 (Figure 4-14, page 91)
was added to the measured daily discharge [m3/s]. Knowing the naturalized river discharge is an es-
sential factor for water resource management as it is shown in chapter 5.2.4 (page 112). The natural-
ized river flow was further used to validate the estimated abstraction rate.
The investigated time frame is between March 2012 and February 2014 as discussed above. Besides
the reasons stated in the previous subchapter, the naturalized discharge was not investigated further
back in time because it would entail an increasing uncertainty since the estimated abstraction rate is
based on the situation observed during October 2013. For validating the results of the abstraction
campaign for the whole stretch between RGS A3/ A4 and RGS A6, only the gauge height records of
the period between March 28th, 2013 and February 28th, 2014 could be used. RGS A3 was not in-
stalled before February 2013 and during the first few weeks of operation its recorded gauge heights
seem to be underestimated if compared to the discharge of the other three stations.
5.1.3 Critical Water Levels
In this thesis, critical water levels are defined as the gauge height of a certain RGS that should be
maintained by the river flow at any time in order to ensure that it reaches the confluence with Ewaso
Ng’iro. If the river flow undercuts such a critical gauge height and the water users will continue to
abstract the usual amount of water, the river will dry up before reaching the confluence in a matter of
a few days. Knowledge about these critical levels is important for management purposes. At the latest
when such a critical water level is reached, the WRUA has to be warned, so the people responsible
for the water management can plan and implement the necessary measures to prevent the river from
drying up. Such measures can for example be the implementation of a rationing program that prohib-
its water users to abstract water during certain hours (or even days) as it was the case in the end of
January and February 2014. The ecoLog 500 devices at the gauging stations can be programmed that
once such a critical gauge height is reached, a message via SMS is automatically sent to a cell phone
of specified recipients. These technical aspects are discussed more detailed in chapter 6.4 (page135).
Since RGS A6 sometimes recorded the gauge heights inaccurately during extreme low or zero flows,
it was not possible to rely on its data to observe periods where the river had dried up. However, due to
information by M. Karuri, who lives in the Matanya region, an area prone to water scarcity, and own
field observations, two periods where the river did not reach the confluence could be defined and
analyzed. One of these periods was between August 25th and around September 1st, 2013, and the
other between January 25th and the beginning of February 2014.
5.1.4 Flow Duration Curves (FDC) – Estimating Q50, Q80 and Q95
The FDC is a graph that shows the percentage of time during which the discharge of a stream at a
certain river gauging station is likely to equal or exceed some specified discharge. It is generated by
plotting daily mean discharge values, ranked from highest to lowest, against the percentage of days
where these flows were exceeded (rank divided by number of days) (Aeschbacher 2003). The FDC
can be used to show the discharge that occurs or is exceeded at a certain percentage of time (e.g. 50%,
80% or 95% of time). The median flow (Q50) is the flow available on 50% of days per year (or peri-
od of interest), whereas the value Q95 represents the discharge of a stream that is exceeded during
95% of days per year or another specified period. Together with the naturalized discharge, the Q80
and Q95 thresholds are important values for management purposes as it was discussed in chapter
4.4.9 (page 95).
5.2 Results an Discussion
5.2.1 Validation of the estimated Abstraction Rate
To validate the estimated abstraction rate from chapter four, two different approaches were chosen.
First, the sum of the naturalized flow at RGS A3 and A4 was compared to the discharge at A5 and
A6. In theory, the sum of the naturalized flow at RGS A3 and A4 should be equally high as the natu-
ralized flow at RGS A5, respectively A6. As it can be seen in Table 5-1 and Figure 5-1, the natural-
ized mean discharge (MQnat) at RGS A3+A4 is 8% higher than at RGS A5 and 3% in the case of RGS
A6. The same can be observed for the naturalized median flow and Qnat80. Surprisingly, Qnat95 shows
a small increase in the upper part of the river. The comparison of the Qnat50-values indicates that dur-
ing high flows the abstraction rate below RGS A3/ A4 is underestimated. The findings of the first
approach would imply that between RGS A3/ A4 and RGS A5, the abstraction rate is underestimated
by around 8%, except during low flows. However, making such a conclusion is delicate since there
can be multiple reasons for this deviation. First, the abstraction rate above RGS A3 and/ or A4 could
be overestimated. Second, the deviation could occur due to the uncertainty of the rating equations.
Especially the cross section at RGS A4 experienced a great change in January 2014, and probably
already before. Also, during high flows the stage-discharge relationships underlie a relative high un-
certainty for reasons discussed in chapter 3.3 (page 52). Considering this, a definite statement about
the validity of the estimated abstraction rate during high flows cannot be made.
Table 5-1: Estimated discharge values for period 28.03.13-28.02.14 at the four River
Gauging Stations (RGS) along Naro Moru River (MQ: Mean discharge, Qnat: Natur-
alized discharge, Q50: Median flow, Q80: Low flow, Q95: Extreme low flow)
m3/s RGS A3 RGS A4 RGS A3+A4 RGS A5 RGS A6
MQ 1.02 0.58 1.60 1.26 1.25
MQnat 1.02 0.62 1.64 1.50 1.59
Q50 0.51 0.52 0.98 0.54 0.50
Qnat50 0.52 0.56 1.02 0.78 0.85
Q80 0.24 0.11 0.38 0.15 0.09
Qnat80 0.25 0.15 0.43 0.38 0.43
Q95 0.12 0.07 0.21 0.07 0.03
Qnat95 0.15 0.11 0.26 0.31 0.31
Comparison of MQnat Comparison of Qnat95

1.80 0.35
1.60 0.05
0.30
1.40 0.24 0.29
0.25
1.20 0.05
1.00 0.20
m3/s
m3/s
0.24
0.80 1.60 0.28
0.15
0.60 1.26 1.25
0.10 0.21
0.40
0.20 0.05
0.07
0.00 0.00 0.03
RGS A3+A4 RGS A5 RGS A6 RGS A3+A4 RGS A5 RGS A6
Mean Discharge Abstraction above RGS Q95 Abstraction above RGS
Figure 5-1: Comparison of the mean naturalized discharge (MQnat) on the left and naturalized extreme low
flow (Qnat95) on the right of the four River Gauging Stations (RGS) along Naro Moru River. The sum of the
blue and green pillar equals Qnat (naturalized discharge).
Actual and naturalized flow at RGS A3+A4 and abstraction rate below A3+A4
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
m3/s
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Abstraction + Evaporation below RGS A3+A4 Naturalized Discharge RGS A3+A4

Discharge RGS A3+A4
Figure 5-2: Actual and naturalized discharge of the Naro Moru River at RGS A3+A4, and abstraction rate
below RGS A3/ A4
As a second approach, the actual and naturalized daily mean discharge at RGS A3/ A4, A5, A6 as
well as the monthly mean abstraction rate below these gauging stations was analyzed graphically as
illustrated in Figure 5-2, Figure 5-3 and Figure 5-4. The three figures show that there would be no
risk of the river drying up till the conference with Ewaso Ng’iro, even during dry spells from January
through March if there would be no human impact. It further illustrates that a water crisis cannot only
occur during the dry season from mid-January to mid-March – a period known for water scarcity –
but also nearly throughout the rest of the year. During the dry season water users are aware of the
issue of water scarcity and try to act accordingly, e.g. by avoiding to irrigate less as discussed in the
chapter four. However, the very long-lasting absence of precipitation make this time of year very
prone to water crisis even if farmers reduce their demand for irrigation. During months where medi-
um or high flows can be expected, farmers count on sufficient discharge to meet their high demand
for irrigation. If during such a period, the weather, respectively the discharge, does not behave ac-
cording the farmers’ expectation, a water scarcity is occurring very quickly. According to M. Karuri,
there are mainly three phenomena which can contribute to the river drying up outside the January-
March period. All of them can be observed in the three figures above: First, if the rainy season in
April/ May is shorter or the total amount of rainfall is less than average, a dry spell can occur in June.
Second, in case precipitation is low during the continental rains between June and October, water
scarcity can occur anytime, as it was the case in August 2013. Third, if the small rainy season runs
late, as it was the case in 2013, water scarcity can even emerge during November.
Actual and naturalized flow at RGS A5 and abstraction rate below RGS A5
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
m3/s
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Abstraction+Evaporation below RGS A5 Naturalized Discharge RGS A5

Discharge RGS A5 Qnat80
Qnat95
Figure 5-3: Actual and naturalized discharge of the Naro Moru River at River Gauging Station (RGS) A5, and
abstraction rate below RGS A5. (Qnat80: Naturalized low flow, Qnat95: Naturalized extreme low flow)
Figure 5-2 and Figure 5-3 indicate that during the end of August 2013 and January 2014, the flows
are too low to satisfy the water demand of the users below RGS A5. Figure 5-4 shows that the river
was indeed running nearly dry at RGS A6 in the end of August. Considering that there are more ab-
stractions occurring after the gauging station, the findings coincide with reports stating that the river
dried up between RGS A6 and the confluence. In January and February 2014, the river dried up be-
fore RGS A6 a few times, which also corresponds with reports from the WRUA. In June and Novem-
ber 2013, very low flows at RGS A3, A4 and A5 occurred as well, but there were no reports that the
river did not reach the confluence. In fact, during these two occasions, RGS A6 did record sufficient
discharge to meet the demand of the water users that live between the station and the confluence. The
reason the river did not dry up could be due to an overestimation of the abstraction rate or, as the au-
thor suspects, because the period of low flows was only lasting a very short time. This graphical anal-
ysis shows that the estimated abstraction rate is quite accurate during low (Q80) and extreme low
flows (Q95). However, the approach is not applicable to make any conclusion regarding the validity
of the estimated abstraction rate during flows above Q80.
Actual and naturalized flow at RGS A6 and abstraction rate below A6

3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
m3/s
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Abstraction+Evaporation below RGS A6 Naturalized Discharge RGS A6

Discharge RGS A6 Qnat80
Qnat95
Figure 5-4: Actual and naturalized discharge of the Naro Moru River at River Gauging Station (RGS) A6, and
abstraction rate below RGS A6. (Qnat80: Naturalized low flow, Qnat95: Naturalized extreme low flow)
5.2.2 Critical Water Levels
During the period of August 25th and around September 1st, 2013, where the river reportedly dried up
just below RGS A6, the mean gauge height at RGS A5 was 0.385 m which is equivalent to an esti-
mated mean flow of 0.1079 m3/s. Between January 26th and 31st, 2014, the second investigated period
where the river dried up, the mean gauge height at RGS A5 was 0.36 m, which is equivalent to an
estimated mean discharge of 0.0737 m3/s. For both periods, the exact duration during which the river
did not reach the confluence is not known. The same applies for the exact location where the river
supposedly dried up. There are different reasons why these estimated mean gauge heights differ be-
tween the August 2013 and January 2014: First, the dry spell starting in January was slightly more
severe and especially longer lasting. Second, the abstraction rate is assumed to be higher during Au-
gust as seen in Figure 5-3.
The duration of a low flow period is certainly another factor that determines if the river dries up or
not. In the beginning of November 2013, the flows at RGS A5were below 0.1 m3/s for two days. This
was not long enough for the river to dry up. However, the seven days of flows at around 0.1 m3/s in
August 2013 led the river to dry up.
A further aspect that needs to be considered for this analysis is the existence of a few springs below
RGS A5. In January 2014, it was reported that the river dried up a few kilometers before RGS A6.
However, when visiting the gauging station, a slight flow of around 5-10 l/s could be observed. This
also corresponded with the recorded gauge heights. Together with M. Karuri, three springs could be
located a few hundred meters upstream of RGS A6. Their contribution is very difficult to estimate,
but it is assumed to be in the range of 5-10 l/s.
For the Naro Moru WRUA, it can be recommended that the necessary measures to prevent the river
from drying up are planned and implement, if the gauge height at RGS A5 remains below 0.39 m for
more than two days and no rain is to be expected in the near future. A level of 0.39 m equals an esti-
mated discharge of 0.1144 m3/s. This value is close to the estimated monthly mean abstraction rate
below RGS A5 of 0.1165 m3/s. This flow should be maintained to meet the long-term water demand
of users below RGS A5. In case the river does not reach the gauge height of 0.39 for a few days, the
risk that humans and livestock below RGS A5 cannot even satisfy their very basic needs is greatly
increased.
5.2.3 Impact of WRUA
When towards the end of January 2014 the Naro Moru River started to dry up before reaching RGS
A6, the WRUA came up with a rationing program (Appendix page 151) to ensure that the river
reaches the confluence again. The intakes of the water projects were allowed to be open from 18:00
till 06:00 at certain days that were specified in the rationing plan.
Discharge at RGS A5 and A6 between 26.01. and 14.02.2014

0.2
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.1
m3/s
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
Discharge RGS A5 Discharge RGS A6
Figure 5-5: Fluctuations of discharge of the Naro Moru River at the River Gauging Stations (RGS) A5 and A6
between 26.01 and 14.02.2014 due to restricting abstractions to 18:00 - 06:00. There was no rainfall occurring
during this period.
As it can be seen in Figure 5-5, the program started to be implemented around January 29th, but it did
not reach the full extent before February 1st. The rationing plan was followed throughout February.
Between January 26th and 31st, 2014 – the period where the river was dry before reaching RGS A6 –
the mean daily discharge at RGS A5 was 0.0737 m3/s. On the contrary, between February 1st and 14th,
a period where the program was implemented and no rainfall occurred, the mean daily flow at RGS
A5 was 0.0707 m3/s. Even though the average flow at RGS A5 was slightly lower during the imple-
mentation of the rationing program, RGS A6 recorded a mean daily discharge of 0.045 m 3/s. The
river only dried up during short periods as it is shown in Figure 5-5.
It can be concluded that during the water crisis in January/ February 2014, the impact of the WRUA
was substantial and very positive. The rationing plan helped to prevent the river from drying up for a
longer period of time and was able to safeguard a residual water flow that satisfied the basic water
needs of the people relying on river water below RGS A5.
5.2.4 Estimation of Q80 and Q95 for RGS A5 and A6
According to the WRM Rules 2007, the Qnat80 and Qnat95 values are relevant for management pur-
poses as described in detail in chapter 4.4.9. The restrictions are based on the traffic lights concept
(green, yellow and red) representing different conditions of resource availability. The rules are again
summarized in Table 5-2.
Since RGS A3 did not have gauge height data of an entire year, only Q nat80 and Qnat95 of RGS A5
and A6 for the period 03.2012-02.2014 were calculated. In theory, the Qnat values should not differ
much between the gauging stations as discussed already in chapter 5.2.1. As Table 5-3 shows, this is
indeed the case for the analyzed data. The difference between RGS A5 and A6 regarding all calculat-
ed naturalized values is marginal. The analysis of the two gauging stations’ actual and naturalized
flow duration curves (Figure 5-6) corresponds with this finding.
Table 5-2: Rules for water abstraction restrictions according to the Water Allocation Plan (WAP 2013)
COLOUR CODING ZONES Flow Status
Higher than Qnat80
Green i.e. Satisfactory Flood flow
Abstractions allowed up to permit limits.
Between Qnat80 and Qnat95
Abstractions allowed for:
Yellow i.e. Stress Normal flow 1. Domestic water use.
2. Irrigation ceases to abstract from river and
revert to their 90 day storage.
Environmental Below Qnat95
Red i.e. Scarcity
Reserve (Low flow) No abstraction from the river.
Table 5-3: Actual and naturalized MQ, Q50, Q80 and Q95 values of the
Naro Moru River at RGS A5 and A6 for period 03.2012 till 02.2012
RGS A5 RGS A6
[m3/s]
Q Qnat Q Qnat
Mean Discharge (MQ) 1.18 1.41 1.04 1.38
Median Discharge (Q50) 0.61 0.84 0.47 0.81
Normal flow (Q80) 0.18 0.41 0.09 0.44
Low flow (Q95) 0.084 0.320 0.020 0.307
Flow duration curve RGS A5

14
Discharge at RGS A5
12
10 Naturalized Discharge
at RGS A5
8
m3/s
0
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Flow duration curve RGS A6

14
Discharge at RGS A6
12
10 Naturalized Discharge
at RGS A6
8
m3/s
0
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Figure 5-6: Flow duration curve of (actual) discharge and naturalized discharge of the Moru River at the River
Gauging Stations (RGS) A5 and A6 for period March 2012 to February 2014.
The two plots of Figure 5-6 illustrate that the shape of their naturalized flow duration curves are near-
ly identical. In case of the actual flow duration curve, the difference between the two stations is big-
ger due to the higher amount of abstracted water before RGS A6 compared to A5. The abstraction
rate’s relative impact on the actual discharge rises as the flow decreases. The median flow at RGS A5
is 23% higher than at RGS A6, whereas the normal flow (Q80-Q95) 50% and during low flows (Q95)
a staggering difference of 77% can be observed.
During the investigated period, the actual discharge at RGS A5 was below Q nat80 during 37% of
days, whereas 49% of days at RGS A6. Qnat95 was undercut during 32% of days at RGS A5 and 41%
at A6. Even though the actual discharge at RGS A5 and A6 reached or undercut the Qnat80 and Qnat95
thresholds, abstraction for irrigational purposes were still carried out on a large scale as it is very well
illustrated by Figure 5-3 (page 108) and Figure 5-4 (page 109). Abstracting water for irrigational
purposes during normal und low flows does not comply with the WRM Rules 2007. Below Qnat95,
not even abstractions for domestic purposes are allowed. Even though the WRM Rules 2007 are con-
stantly violated, no actions from WRMA and/ or the WRUA are taken. There are several reasons
why:
1. First, the Qnat80 and Qnat95 are not exactly known by WRMA and the Naro Moru WRUA.
2. The authorities that could take action do not have direct access to (live) discharge data. If they
want to have any data, they first have to contact CETRAD. Before the automatic data trans-
mission to CETRAD was implemented by this thesis, CETRAD usually did not have very re-
cent data, since it was downloaded from the ecoLogs only in a monthly interval. Once this da-
ta was gathered, there were no rating equations to calculate the discharge, at least not after
March 2012. This thesis finally provides both, data and methodology equipment.
3. It can be questioned if there is any motivation of the WRUA to have the regulations enforced
by WRMA. The WRUA represents the river water users of the Naro Moru catchment and are
concerned with their well-being. The main goal is to provide sufficient water to all of their
water users. It is not their main concern that a certain residual amount reaches the confluence
since the Naro Moru WRUA does not represent the river water users along Ewaso Ng’iro.
Even though this third aspect is a hypothesis, the observations during the field work indicate
that there is some truth behind it. In January 2014, actions to solve the water crisis were only
taken once the river did not reach the confluence anymore.
4. WRMA collaborates with the Naro Moru WRUA. A lot of information regarding the situation
of water abstractions is coming directly from the WRUA. If the above mentioned hypothesis
is correct, WRMA might not even always be fully aware of the ongoing over-abstraction of
river water. Thus, due to misinformation, WRMA does not take any measures to halt the
over-abstractions even if they had the intention to do so.
This list shows, that even if the WRMA and WRUA had the intention to enforce the rules regarding
abstraction restrictions, the lack of data makes it impossible to know at which point a Qnat80 or Qnat95
threshold is reached or undercut by the river. Therefore, as long as authorities do not have access to
sound live discharge data and up to date knowledge regarding ongoing river water abstractions, the
rules stated in Table 5-2 (page 107) are obsolete.
5.2.5 Change of Flow between 1960 and 2014
Change of flow at RGS A5 between 1960 and 2014

1.8 1.63
1.6
1.4 1.18 1.18
1.12
Discharge [m3/s]
1.2 1.00
1.0
0.74
0.8 0.61
0.51
0.6
0.29
0.4 0.15
0.11 0.08
0.2
0.0
1960-1984 1985-2002 2003-2011 03.2012-02.2014
Mean discharge (MQ) Median discharge (Q50) Extreme low flow (Q95)
Figure 5-7: Change of flow at RGS A5 between 1960 and 2014 (Estimates of 1960-84 and
1985-2002 are from Aeschbacher et al. (2005)
Aeschbacher et al. (2005) found that the long-term average discharge at RGS A5 is more or less stag-
nant between 1.12 m3/s (1960-1984) and 1.18 m3/s (1985-2002), whereas the median flow and partic-
ularly the extreme low flow discharge decreased in the meantime as illustrated in Figure 5-7. Aesch-
bacher (2003) states that the data series of 1960-1984 seems to have fewer flood flow events than the
data series of 1985-2002, most probably because of the change in the measurement method from two
daily manual gaugings to continuous automatic measurements. Since flood flows often occur by
night, it is likely that they were often not covered by the two daily measurements (Aeschbacher
2003).
For the period 2003 to 2011 the average discharge and the median flow show a dramatic increase of
46%, respectively 96%, to 1.63 m3/s, 1.00 m3/s respectively. For the period March 2012 to February
2014 the MQ and Q50 are back to similar levels than during the two earlier periods. However, Q95 is
considerably lower than during previous years. There are various indications that the mean and medi-
an flows are substantially overestimated for the period 2003 to 2011. First, as already mentioned in
chapter 5.1.1 (page 103), Aeschbacher (2003) found that the rating equations dating back to 1995 are
not very accurate anymore due to changes in the cross section. Since rating equations established in
1995 were used to estimate the discharge between 2002 and 2011 and no information is available
about how the cross section evolved since 2002, the accuracy of the results for this period are highly
questionable. On the contrary, the estimated values for the latest period are assumed to be quite accu-
rate, since new rating equations were developed during the process of this master thesis.
Total annual precipation 1992-2013

Met Station
3048 m a.s.l.
2000 NM Gate
2471 m a.s.l.
Matanya
1840 m a.s.l.
1500 Munyaka
Precipitation in mm
2070 m a.s.l.
Archer's Post
839 m a.s.l.
1000 Trend Met
Station
Trend NM
Gate
500 Trend
Matanya
Trend
Munyaka
0 Trend Archer's
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013 Post
Figure 5-8: Total annual precipitation and trend lines of four rainfall gauging stations in the Naro Moru catch-
ment and of Archers Post for the period of 1992 to 2013 (Source: NRM3 2013)
Second, all four rainfall gauging station in the Naro Moru catchment show a decreasing trend for pre-
cipitation during the period of 1992 to 2013 as illustrated in Figure 5-8. Since discharge mainly de-
pends on rainfall, it is very unlikely that the discharge is increasing while rainfall is decreasing. For
these two reasons, it can be assumed that the estimated values for the period 2003-2011 are most like-
ly overestimated. Therefore, it can be concluded that there was not a significant change since 1960
regarding the development of the long-term mean and median discharge. This is a surprising result
considering that the abstraction rate must have increased substantially since 1960. It would imply that
the naturalized flow increased, which would contradict the decreasing trend of rainfall in the catch-
ment. Further, there are indications that the low flows (Q95) decreased over time. This could be ex-
plained by the increasing abstraction rate which has a big impact on the low flows. However, analyz-
ing these estimates very detailed and drawing conclusion from it must be done with caution. As men-
tioned above, the change in the measuring method over time has unknown implications on the esti-
mated values. Further, the rating equations most likely have a relatively high uncertainty regarding
high and low flows which again influence the estimated discharge.
118 Data Collection and Sharing System
6.1 OTT ecoLog 500
6.1.1 General Information
As described in chapter 2.3.2 (page 12), in 2012 (2013 in case of RGS A3) the old measuring devices
of the type OTT R16 were replaced by OTT ecoLog 500. The new gauge device as seen in Figure 6-1
is a great improvement in every aspect compared to the former OTT R16. “The OTT ecoLog 500 is a
complete system for water level and temperature measurement. Designed for full deployment inside
groundwater wells as well as surface water applications, the OTT ecoLog 500 offers data and alarm
message transmission options via SMS, HTTP, FTP and e-mail, giving users flexible remote data
access from their office.” (OTT 2014)
Antenna
Infrared communication interface

Pressure probe
Figure 6-1: OTT ecoLog 500 (Source: OTT 2014)
The ecoLog 500 is set to save a gauge height value every 15 minutes, which means an immense up-
grade of the temporal resolution compared to the older device OTT R16. Before implementing the
automatic data transfer to the CETRAD office, the staff of CETRAD went to each RGS once a month
to download the data via USB to a field laptop. Once on the laptop, the data can be processed quickly
in order to upload it to the NRM3 hydrodatabase. Hence, gathering and processing data is much more
time efficient with the new gauge device compared to the OTT R16.
Data Collection and Sharing System 119
As seen on the left in Figure 6-2, the ecoLog 500 is placed in a four inch galvanized pipe that leads
into the water. The top of the whole installation is made of concrete for the main reason of preventing
the pipe and ecoLog from being vandalized and stolen. The pressure probe is located at the bottom of
the pipe and is connected by a cable to the ecoLog device. At least the tip of the probe has to be in the
water in order to measure the pressure which varies with the different water levels. The pipe’s bottom
is closed with a screwable lid that contains small holes. The purpose of this lid with holes is to have
the probe resting on this lid, and still let water, but no sediments, in and out of the pipe.
Location of
ecoLog 500
Location of
pressure probe Iron pipe
Cross section
Figure 6-2: Left: RGS A5, Right: Muddy pressure probe (Pictures by R. Nussbaumer, 2013 & 2014)
6.1.2 Working with the OTT ecoLog 500
Working for a few months with this particular setup of the four river gauging stations, it showed that
the ecoLog 500 is a very accurate measuring device, but only if the people using it are well trained
and know the few flaws of this setup. A small mistake can destroy a few weeks of data very easily.
While analyzing the stations’ gauge height data, quite a few sudden, unexplainable drops of the water
levels could be detected. Most of them were relatively easy to correct, due to keeping important in-
formation of the visits to the stations in field notes. There are mainly four reasons for this occurrence,
of which the first of the three is very easy to avoid:
1. When downloading the data from the ecoLog 500 manually with a laptop, the recorded gauge
height is first verified, and if needed, adjusted to the value seen on the station’s gauge ruler. If set-
tings on the device are adjusted, the ecoLog is set again to the value seen on the gauge ruler.
Downloading data and adjusting settings can take some time. If during checking the gauge height
on the ruler and setting the new value in the ecoLog, the water levels change without the staff no-
ticing it, the ecoLog is set wrong. So, it is crucial, that every time the gauge height of the ecoLog
is adjusted, it needs to be the very actual – not even from five minutes ago – value from the
gauge’s ruler. Sounds very logical, but gets forgotten by a not well trained staff very easily.
2. The gauge rulers can be difficult to read correctly in certain situations.
Especially the type of ruler used at A5 (Figure 6-3) is difficult to read the
correct way for a non-hydrologist who is not used to these standardized
rulers. More than once, a longer period of recorded gauge height had to
be corrected by exactly five centimeters, which most probably happened
due to a misinterpretation. Concerning all stations during times of high
water levels, it proved to be next to impossible to get a close enough
view to the ruler in order to read the value correctly. Figure 6-3: Ruler at A5
3. Since the pipe is partly open at the bottom, sediments are deposited on top of the lid that closes
the pipe’s bottom. Hence, the pressure probe can be stuck in these muddy sediments (Figure 6-2).
Surprisingly, it showed that a probe surrounded by mud does not directly affect the measured
gauge heights. The issue starts when the cable that connects the probe with the main ecoLog de-
vice is moved during downloading data, or worse, when the probe is (partly) taken out of the
pipe. It can happen that after moving the probe, it will stay on top of the mud inside the pipe. Af-
ter the ecoLog’s gauge height is adjusted, the probe can sink lower into the mud and the recorded
values are false afterwards. Therefore, it is essential to avoid taking out the pressure probe from
the pipe and to avoid pulling on the cable that connects the ecoLog and the probe. Further, the
pipe should be cleaned out as often as possible. This is easier said than done, since the rusty lids
are very difficult to open. Also, sediments surrounding the lid have to be removed in order to cre-
ate enough space for the special tool that is needed to open the lid. Also, opening the lid is only
possible during low flows. Since the staff that supports the RGS is aware of this particular issue
of the setup, the ecoLog and probe is handled more carefully, and actions are taken to ensure that
the probe is not resting on top of sediments while setting the gauge height of the ecoLog. Never-
theless, a better solution for keeping sediments away from the probe should be found.
6.1.3 Software used to operate the ecoLog 500 and to analyze its Data
For all of the three programs discussed here, a detailed manual can be accessed on the website of
OTT Hydromet GmbH. Thus, the programs are only briefly introduced here and some of the features
are discussed more detailed later on.
OTT Water Logger Operating Program

The OTT Water Logger Operating Program is used to access and if necessary change all the parame-
ters of the ecoLog 500 device and to manually download the gauge height data. It is further used to
establish an automatic data transmission. All configurations discussed in chapter 6.2.2 and 6.2.3 are
set in this program.
OTT HYDRAS 3 RX
The OTT Hydras 3 Rx software is used to receive and decode gauge height data that was sent auto-
matically from the ecoLog 500. The decoded data is then saved in a configurable directory as a text
file, from where they can be imported into external applications (e.g. OTT HYDRAS 3).
OTT HYDRAS 3
HYDRAS 3 is a convenient solution for professional transfer, processing and management of meas-
urement data in the areas of hydrometry, meteorology and environmental protection. Three different
versions of this software exist. At CETRAD only the most basic version – HYDRAS 3 Basic – was
available. The main purpose of the basic version is to automatically import and display data that was
received, decoded and saved by HYDRAS 3 RX in a directory on the computer. The software then
provides a tool to automatically calculate and display discharge. Figure 6-4 shows the software’s
window for evaluating discharge data. Data can also be manually imported and exported. Further, it
allows the remote control of devices in the field if additional technical equipment is available and
installed. The more advanced version provides data editing tools, network capabilities, the execution
of script jobs and an alarm center, that allows automatic messaging of SMS, Fax and E-mail (e.g.
when certain gauge height threshold are reached). The most advanced version – HYDRAS 3 Pro – is
suitable for the programming of script jobs including graphical user interfaces and it provides an inte-
grated web server.
Figure 6-4: Displaying and evaluating discharge data in OTT HYDRAS 3.
6.2 Development of a Discharge Data Collection System
6.2.1 Installment of Antennas
Shortly after the new gauging stations were built in 2012, with the support of CDE, CETRAD
launched a first attempt to implement an automatic data transmission. The goal was to transmit the
gauge height data onto their FTP server in order to have live records at the CETRAD office in
Nanyuki. The server was ready to use and the antennas were installed. However, while the staff was
driving back from the field to the office to test if the data transmission is working, all the installed
antennas, respectively the cable connecting the antenna to the ecoLog 500, were vandalized or com-
pletely removed. Since the antennas were destroyed so quickly, it could never be tested, if the system
would have worked. The whole incident was a major setback for this project. Since no financially
feasible solution against the issue of vandalism could be found at the time, the implementation of the
automatic data transmission was suspended.
Before launching a second attempt, the first step was to analyze what went wrong during the first
attempt in order not to experience a similar incident again. According to P. Kungu from CETRAD,
the antennas were not placed exactly at the concrete structure where the ecoLog 500 is located. To
improve the signal strength, they were placed slightly higher up. Even though the team tried to hide
the antenna, it left them quite exposed. In addition, the antennas used were relatively big (50 cm in
length) and looked like something that could generate some money if it was sold. A further issue was
the cable that connects the antenna to the ecoLog. Even though it was hidden under dirt or under the
bark of tree in case of RGS A3, it was relatively easy to find for curious people. Also, for a poor
farmer, not only an antenna is valuable, but also a piece of cable can be used for many things. Thus,
an antenna, respectively its placement needs to fulfill the following criteria:
 The antenna needs to look worthless and inconspicuous. It should not arouse any incentive to
steal or destroy.
 The antenna has to be able to send data under weak network coverage. Besides RGS A5, all
stations lie relatively far away from densely populated areas. Hence, reception is quite low.
 The antenna needs to be placed right at the concrete structure where the ecoLog is situated in
order to avoid having any unprotected cable that could be cut. Further, it draws less attention
if the antenna is not located somewhere separate.
The antennas used during the second attempt were provided by Rural Focus Ltd. which uses the same
type of antenna for transmitting data from water pumps situated in rural areas. The casing of antenna
is custom-built and made of plastic. All the inscriptions were then grinded off to make the antenna
look worthless and old. As a next step, a network analyzer was used to test the ideal location for the
antenna and the best network provider at each RGS. In the meantime, the WRUA informed its river
water users about the project and the importance for having live discharge data for management pur-
poses. The goal was to create awareness which would in turn have a positive effect on diminishing
the potential for vandalism of the gauging stations.
All of the antennas were directly attached to the existing concrete structures as seen in Figure 6-5,
except in the case of RGS A3. The signal strength was very low at this station. Unless a three meter
high concrete structure was built, a successful transmission would not be possible. Before finally at-
taching the antennas, a hole had to be drilled through the concrete and the iron pipe inside the struc-
ture. The hole was used to connect the antenna cable with the ecoLog inside the iron pipe. The anten-
na was then placed across this hole by using three screws that were first dipped into silicon sealant.
The silicon has a very sticky and bonding characteristic, which makes the removal of the screws later
on practically impossible. More silicon was used underneath the antenna in order to bond the antenna
to the concrete. In the end, silicon was again used to seal the top of the screws and also along the edg-
es of the plastic. The result was a compact, very robust and unspectacular looking construction.
The experience with this particular construction and type of antenna has been very positive so far.
During the first week after construction, an unsuccessful attempt to remove the antenna took place at
RGS A4. However, only a small part of silicon was damaged, which could be patched up easily.
Since this event, no other act of vandalism occurred till the end of 2014.
Figure 6-5: Antenna at River Gauging Station A5 (Picture by R. Nussbaumer, 2013)
6.2.2 Transmission via GPRS to a FTP Server
Definition of GSM and GRPS technology

The ecoLog 500 can be set to send data either via the GSM or GPRS network. The acronym GSM
stands for Global System for Mobile Communications. It is a standard developed in the late 1980s by
the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) and describes protocols for second-
generation (2G) digital cellular networks used by mobile phones. As of 2014, it serves as the default
global standard for mobile communications. GSM was designed principally for voice telephony, but
allows circuit-switched data connections, e.g. web browsing and SMS, at up to 9600 bits/s. GPRS is
an acronym for General Packet Radio Service. Instead of a circuit-switched data connection as it is
used in the GSM technology, GPRS uses a packet-switched data technology that allows GSM opera-
tors to launch wireless data services, e.g. e-mail and internet access. GPRS builds on the GSM net-
work platform and was first launched in 2000. GPRS is the predecessor of the EDGE technology that
provides enhanced data rates and is still widely used in areas where 3G or 4G is not available yet
(ETSI 2014). In the course of this project, the difference between the two data connection technolo-
gies – circuit-switched (GSM) and packet-switched (GPRS) – was found to play a key role when im-
plementing a reliable communication (e.g. data transmission) from machine to machine (M2M). The
difference between the two technologies is explained later.
Between mid-November 2013 and mid-January 2014, the data transmission was tested using the
GRPS technology.
EcoLog settings
Once it was chosen between GSM and GPRS, there are more essentials parameters that have to be
defined in the OTT Water Logger Operating Program under “Modem settings”. The most important
ones are explained below:
 Data format: If data is transmitted via GPRS, it can be chosen between the OTT MIS and OTT
binary data formats. The OTT MIS format can be read with a program like Microsoft Excel or
something similar, whereas the OTT binary format must be received by the program HYDRAS 3
RX which can convert the data into the MIS format. The ability to read the data without relying
on HYDRAS 3 RX is the main advantage of the MIS format, whereas the binary file has the ad-
vantage of having a much smaller size, thus using less credit to send data. Both formats were test-
ed between mid-November 2013 and mid-January 2014.
 Type of protocol: Regarding the protocol type it can be chosen between SMTP (Simple Mail
Transfer Protocol) which is used to send data to an e-mail address; HTTP, a setting that transmit
data directly to a website; or FTP (File Transfer Protocol), which is used if data needs to be sent
to a server. Till mid-January 2014, only the FTP setting was used.
 Operator: For an automatic data transmission, the ecoLog500 needs to be equipped with a SIM
card. Before inserting the SIM card, it is important to check if the SIM card can be accessed with-
out a security code. If not, it needs to be removed manually with the help of a cell phone. In the
water logger operating program, the necessary information regarding the SIM card’s provider
have to be set. This information can be easily found if “internet+settings+provider+Kenya” is
searched on Google. The GPRS settings are subject to change.
 FTP: Here, the user name, password, server name and port of the server, where data should be
sent to, are required. This essential information is obtained from the person that set up and/ or
maintains the server.
Receiving and processing of transferred data

If data is sent in MIS format, an open source FTP-client, e.g. Filezilla, can be used to download data
manually from a server to a computer, from where it can be automatically imported to OTT HY-
DRAS 3. If the whole process of receiving, downloading, processing and displaying data has to be
fully automated, a program has to be written.
In case data is sent in the more compact OTT binary format, OTT HYDRAS 3 RX is used to down-
load and decode data. HYDRAS 3 RX first needs to be connected to the server. Further, a directory
for the decoded data has to be defined. Setting this up is a simple task, especially if the manual is
followed. Once data is saved in a directory, it can again be imported to HYDRAS 3. Once the com-
puter and HYDRAS 3 RX is started, the whole process runs fully automatic.
Performance
From the beginning of the tests, the performance of the data transmission was not satisfying. Various
possible settings and providers were tested. Sometimes the transmission was working with a test-
ecoLog in the office without issues for several days; however, once the exact same settings and pro-
vider was tested in the field, it did not work anymore. At first, in most cases no explanation could be
found for this behavior. Once the best parameters and providers for each station were found, their
settings were left untouched for around six weeks to see how the data transmission behaves in the
long run.
Table 6-1: Evaluation of the testing period from 12.12.2013 to 24.01.2014

(Additional settings were as follows: 24 hours cycle, binary XL format and FTP as the protocol type)
RGS A4 RGS A5 RGS A6
Provider Safaricom, YU YU Airtel
Signal Strength (dB) 11-14 20-28 17
Percentage of files transmitted 0% 100% 85%
Days (%) without incoming data 0% 52% 21%
Longest stretch (days) without incoming data 43 9 6
Longest stretch (days) with incoming data 0 7 35
As Table 6-1 shows, the data transmission at RGS A4 showed by far the worst performance during
the testing period, which was most probably caused by the low signal strength. The signal strength of
the ecoLog modem can be between 0 and 31 dB, whereas any value below 10 is too low for a reliable
data transmission. An inquiry at OTT Hydromet GmbH showed that their customers experienced
well-working data transmission if the signal strength was above 15 dB. RGS A4 only showed be-
tween 11 and 14 dB, depending on the provider used. RGS A5 and A6 were well above 15 dB, while
A5 usually showed above 20 dB and A6 an average of 16 dB. It was further observed, that the more
times data was sent per day, the higher the chance was the transmission worked. For example RGS
A4 sent reliably if it was set on a 15 minute cycle (every 15 minute data is sent); however, once set on
an hourly cycle, it stopped sending completely. Sending data more than a few times per day is not
feasible in reality since every time the ecoLog’s modem is used to send data, a lot of battery power is
used. Having data sent in a 15 minute cycle would mean that the rather expensive battery needs to be
changed every few weeks. In a 24 hours cycle, it can last up to two years. RGS A5 showed the best
performance, since all the data files were sent to the server. However, the transmission did not work
reliable at all. As Table 6-1 illustrates, only about every second day the data file was sent by the
ecoLog and/ or received by the server. The longest stretch without any data received was nine days.
In the case of RGS A6, not all of the data was received by the server, although the first 35 days of the
testing period, the station sent very successfully. Summarized, it can be concluded that the perfor-
mance and reliability of the data transmission during the test period did not reach the expectations.
The project’s intention was to implement a data transmission in order to have live data. If no data is
received for several days, this objective is not reached. Therefore, it was decided in January together
with other WLRC project members at CDE that a further field trip is needed to find the exact reasons
of this poor behavior and to find a different approach to finally establish a satisfying automatic data
transmission.
Packet-switched technology – definition, disadvantages and implication on this project

After doing research regarding the technologies behind GPRS respectively GSM and after having
discussions with people that have expertise in the field of mobile technology, the issue concerning the
low reliability of the data transmission experienced during the test phase could finally be found. The
packet-switching technology used by GPRS works by dividing a message into smaller packets which
are then sent to the destination. Each packet is sent individually and does not necessarily take the
same route to the destination. A moderate-speed data transfer is provided by using unused time divi-
sion multiple access channels in the GSM network. When arrived, packets are reassembled in the
correct sequence to create the initial message. GPRS is a best-effort service which means that there
are no guarantees in terms of delivery of packets or maximum delays. Depending on the amount of
other users sharing the service concurrently, latency can be very high and throughput of data variable.
The technology is efficient and robust for communication such as e-mail messages and accessing web
pages, where transmission delays are not much of a concern (Copeland 2000; Molinero-Fernandez
2003).
If the data transmission is set to a 24 hours cycle, the ecoLog device sends the data file once every 24
hours. If at the time the device’s modem tries to send and traffic on a network is high, it is possible
that all or some of the data packets are not send. In case the attempt to send the file fails, the device
will wait 24 hours to make another attempt. For the purpose of saving battery life, the device does not
keep on trying to send a data file, but waits 24 hours. At this point the data transmission of the
ecoLog differs from other devices that use GPRS to access or send data. For example if a cell phone
or computer is used to access a web page and traffic is high, the device will keep on trying until the
web page is finally loaded. Instead of aborting the user’s request, the implication is only a slower
connection. However, the implication of the best-effort service characteristic of GPRS in the case of
sending data from the ecoLog to a server can be seen in the overall poor performance. It explains that
during some days no data was sent, but a few days later, gauge height data from several days was
received by the server. It can further explain that some of the data was lost and that signal strength
and the size of a data file matters too. There are ways to slightly improve the reliability of the data
transmission. For example sending the data during night when traffic is low, the transmission would
be less interrupted by other users. Tests showed that this measure does not improve the reliability
significantly. A further measure could be the reduction of the cycle from 24 hours to one hour or
even less, however as explained above, the battery life would decrease drastically. Increasing the sig-
nal strength with a different antenna or another construction was first thought to solve the issue.
However, once the signal strength reaches a certain level, the performance seems not to be influenced
by this parameter anymore. Even though RGS A5 has very high signal strength, its performance is not
better than the one of A6. To a certain degree, the reliability depends also on the provider. Even
though Safaricom showed very high signal strength at RGS A5, it performed much worse than YU,
Airtel or Orange. The low reliability of Safaricom could be explained by the high traffic on the Sa-
faricom network since it is the most used provider in Kenya.
It can be concluded that even if the overall performance of the data transmission might be slightly
improved by fine tuning some of the settings, the chance is very low that each station reaches a satis-
fying level of reliability in the long run. Therefore, it was decided to test the implementation of a data
transmission that uses the GSM network which is based on the circuit- instead of packet-switched
technology.
6.2.3 Transmission via GSM to a GSM Modem
Circuit-switched technology – definition, advantages and implication on this project

The circuit-switching technology used by GSM is based upon two network nodes (e.g. sender and
receiver) establishing a dedicated communication channel (circuit) through the network before the
nodes may communicate. The circuit then guarantees the channel’s full bandwidth and remains con-
nected for the duration of the communication. Circuit-switching is mainly used for voice communica-
tion, but can also be used for transferring data, e.g. SMS. No circuit can be interrupted by competing
users since it is protected from use by other callers until the circuit is released and a new connection
is set up. Even if no actual communication is taking place, the channel remains reserved and protected
from competing users. This implies that contrary to the packet-switched technology, a perfect quality
of service is guaranteed during the connection in terms of delay jitter and bandwidth guarantees. For
its purpose, the circuit-switched technology is highly reliable. Once the circuit is set up, the commu-
nication is fast and generally error free (Copeland 2000; Molinero-Fernandez 2003).
For this project, the theory behind this technology regarding a guaranteed quality of service would
imply that once high enough signal strength is achieved, 100% of sent data is expected to reach the
receiver modem.
EcoLog settings
Setting the essential parameters is best done through the “Advanced operation” in the OTT Water
Logger Operating Program. To access this, it first has to be activated by going to Files  Options 
General and putting a check in the field “Advanced operation”. Afterwards, a button appears in the
bottom left corner of the program window where the user can change between advanced and basic
operation. The essential settings can then be accessed by clicking on “Communication interface” and
choosing the tabs “Modem/ ITC” and “SMS data”. How to set the parameters is explained below:
 Modem/ ITC: In the field “Dial no. (Station)” the phone number of the SIM card used in the
station’s ecoLog has to be inserted. In the field “SMS-C - phone no.” the SMS-C number of the
SIM card’s provider has to be inserted. In 2014 the SMS-C numbers were as follows:
 Safaricom: +254722500029
 Airtel: +254733000810
 Orange: +254770000040
 YU: +254750000040
The rest of the fields can be left blank. As stated in the previous chapter, it has to be paid attention
that before inserting the SIM card in the ecoLog, it has to be checked if the card can be accessed
without security code (SIM PIN). If not it needs to be removed manually with the help of a cell
phone, otherwise the code needs to be inserted in the field “SIM PIN”.
 SMS data: Figure 6-6 shows the SMS data tab in the communication interface. Most importantly,
the field “SMS data transmittance active” has to be checked first. Next the transmission interval
of the stored data has to be set. The fewer times data is sent, the less battery is used. For this pro-
ject a cycle of 12 hours was chosen, for reasons discussed below.
Figure 6-6: Screenshot of the SMS data tab in the communication interface of the OTT Water Logger Operat-
ing Program
Next, the time offset is chosen. According to the software manual, any time between 00:00 and
23:59 should be possible to set. However, for unknown reasons when any setting between 12:01
and 23:59 was chosen, no data was able to be transmitted. This software bug has to be kept in
mind by the staff when choosing the desired offset time.
As a next step, the phone number of the SIM card used in the receiver unit which must be a GSM
modem of some sort is inserted. If data is sent to two different modems, a second number can be
inserted.
The maximum number of additional SMS per transmission can be set to zero, respectively one.
This implies that each time data is transferred, the ecoLog sends one, respectively two SMS. This
parameter hinges on the size of the data package that has to be sent each time. The size not only
depends on the storage and transmission interval, but also on the amount of transmitted channels.
In this project, the channel 0010 which contains gauge height data in a 15 minute resolution and
channel 0090 which contains the battery voltage in a 12 hour resolution were transmitted. Further,
channel 0020 (water temperature) and 0007 (modem supply) could be transmitted. Since with the
chosen settings the amount of data did not fit in one SMS, two messages were transmitted every
12 hours.
Battery voltage
Having high enough battery voltage is essential for a reliable data transmission. It was experienced
several times that the ecoLog has no issue to record gauge heights, whereas data transmission did not
work anymore due to low battery voltage. OTT Hydromet GmbH states that a voltage of 3.3 is criti-
cal. However, sometimes issues were already experienced with values below 3.5 V. A new battery
has around 3.55 V. The actual voltage can be checked when the ecoLog 500 is connected to a com-
puter and in the operating program the interface “Modem Status/ Test SMS/ GPRS” under the tab
“OTT ecoLog 500” is opened. Since the battery voltage is an important parameter to surveil, it is wise
to automatically transmit one value per day to the office.
Topping up of SIM cards

There are two ways to put new credit on prepaid SIM cards. The station can be visited, the SIM card
removed from the ecoLog and inserted to a cell phone. Then the SIM card is charged with a code
from a Prepaid scratch card that was previously bought. The SIM card can also be topped up indirect-
ly. This means that from any cell phone that is equipped with a Kenyan SIM card, a specified amount
of credit can be sent to another cell phone. For example topping up YU SIM cards works as follows:
*140*amount of credit*phone number of the SIM card that needs to be topped up#. This second op-
tion is much more convenient since the stations do not have to be visited. Two things have to be con-
sidered though: First, the SIM card that has to be charged should have the PIN code removed. Sec-
ond, not too much credit should be sent at once. Sending SMS in Kenya does not use much credit,
although depending highly on the provider, and unused credit on a SIM card can expire after a few
months (1-3 months, also depending on the provider).
Receiving and processing of transferred data

Data is sent to a GSM modem which is equipped with a SIM card and small antenna. For this project
a HCP HIT 55 USB Quad-band GSM/ GPRS-modem as seen in Figure 6-8 was used.
Figure 6-8: HCP HIT 55 USB Quad-band Figure 6-7: OTT HYDRAS 3 RX
GSM / GPRS-modem (Source: Autronic (2014))
The modem is connected to a computer with an USB cable. The modem is easily installed by follow-
ing the operation manual. If data is transmitted via SMS, only the OTT binary format can be chosen.
To receive and decode this format, HYDRAS 3 RX has to be used. If the modem is installed correctly
and the port in HYDRAS 3 RX is set accordingly, the software will recognize the modem automati-
cally. The software can be set to poll the GSM modem at a specified time and interval. Once data is
received by the GSM modem and stored on the SIM card, the program will download it the next time
HYDRAS 3 RX is opened, respectively when the polling time was set. The software decodes data and
saves it at a specified directory. From there it can again be imported to HYDRAS 3 for display pur-
poses, or it can be used in other ways.
Sending test messages and testing modem and signal strength

The proper functioning of the modem and actual signal strength can be checked in the field when the
ecoLog 500 is connected to a computer and in the operating program the interface “Modem Status/
Test SMS/ GPRS” under the tab “OTT ecoLog 500” is opened. Further, a test message can be sent to
a SIM card, e.g. the one used in the cell phone that is carried in the field. With this function it can be
tested if all parameters are set correctly and if signal strength is high enough for an automatic data
transmission. The experience during the field work showed that if the test messages were received on
the cell phone, the automatic data transmission always worked later on.
Performance
In the beginning of tests in January 2014, mainly lack of knowledge made a satisfying performance
impossible. After a phase of trial and error and generating skills of how to set all parameters correct-
ly, the performance was very good after all. Since mid-February 2014, RGS A4, A5 and A6 are
transmitting data without any major issues. As of September 2014, only minor, quickly solvable prob-
lems have prevented data from being transmitted. A few times the credit of the SIM cards were
topped up too late and once the battery voltage was too low. These few issues showed that the staff
maintaining the gauging stations and data transmission has to surveil the incoming data on regular
basis to detect irregularities as soon as possible. This includes keeping track on how much credit each
station is using in order to top up the SIM cards at an appropriate time.
After the disappointment with transmitting data via the GPRS network, the overall performance of
this test period was above expectations. Even RGS A4 which has low signal strength of between 11
and 14 dB has not shown any issues so far. Tests at RGS A3 showed that even at this very remote
station with signal strength only slightly above the critical threshold of 10 dB, a data transmission can
most probably be implemented without a considerable financial input (e.g. for building a small con-
crete structure). All of the ten test messages sent at slightly different positions around RGS A3 were
received with the cell phone. Experience with the three other stations showed, that once a test mes-
sage can be sent and received, nothing stands in the way of implementing a long-term reliable auto-
matic data transmission.
6.3 Recommendations for maintaining a sound Discharge Collection

System
Before and during the field work the stations were visited on a monthly basis to download data and
check if the stations record properly. Several times something got forgotten to check during the field
visit and was only remembered once the staff was back in the office. In order to consider every neces-
sary step during the station visits, a protocol was implemented (see appendix on page 166). Once
back in the CETRAD office, the protocol is typed into an Excel file which is saved on the CETRAD
server. This file has the purpose of keeping track of all station visits and serving as a database that
contains descriptions of all work and changes done on a RGS or cross section, special incidents, is-
sues and irregularities between the observed water level at the gauge ruler and the recorded gauge
height by the ecoLog. Various irregularities in the gauge height records in the past were not able to be
explained due to non-existent field reports. The development of such a database would make it easier
to trace back, explain and adjust such irregularities.
A few months of working in the field and maintaining the four gauging stations showed that several
aspects have to be considered to uphold a sound discharge collection system in the long run. The fol-
lowing recommendations for maintaining such a system can be given:
 Maintaining the cross section: Every time a station is visited, the cross section should be
checked for any changes, e.g. sedimentation or erosion. If sediments are present, they should be
removed. A stable cross section is essential for preserving an accurate stage-discharge relation-
ship. Any changes or work done at a cross section should be noted in the station protocol.
 Updating the rating equations: If the cross section underwent visible changes, the rating equa-
tion will most probably not be accurate anymore, especially for estimating low flows. In this case
discharge gaugings should be conducted to detect possible changes of the cross section and if
necessary the rating equation has to be adjusted. WMO (2010) recommends ten measurements per
year to monitor the accuracy of the stage-discharge relationship.
 Discrepancy between recorded and measured gauge height: The ecoLog‘s recorded water
level can be looked up in the water logger operating program if the “Instantaneous values”-
window under “OTT ecoLog 500” is opened. This instant water level needs to be compared to the
actual water level the gauge’s ruler is showing. As discussed in chapter 6.1.2, it is possible that
the recorded gauge height by the ecoLog device deviates from the actual gauge height. If there is
a difference between the recorded and actual height of more than 0.5 cm, the value in the “instan-
taneous values” window needs to be changed and saved to the ecoLog. Such deviations also have
to be noted in the protocol. Further, the reason for the deviation should be found, and if possible
fixed. Reasons for deviations are discussed in chapter 6.1.2.
 SIM card credit: Every time a station is visited the credit on the SIM card should be checked,
the balance noted and if necessary topped up. After some time, it can be estimated how much
credit a station is using per month. Knowing this, the SIM cards can be topped up with another
cell phone before the cards run out of credit.
 Data Transmission: At CETRAD, it should be checked on a regular basis – preferably each day
– if data is received by the modem. In case no data is coming in, the staff is able to respond quick-
ly and hopefully fix the issue. The two most common problems were SIM cards that ran out of
credit and ecoLog batteries with a voltage of below 3.5 V, which is too low to send SMS in most
cases.
6.4 Development of an Alarm Management, and Data Collection and

Sharing System
6.4.1 Goal and requests by WRUA
Although the data transmission to the office of CETRAD has been successfully implemented, the
institution that would benefit the most by receiving live discharge data – the Naro Moru WRUA –
does not yet have access to it. To find the best solution for providing live data to the WRUA, their
needs had first to be determined. Short interviews with some of the committee members revealed, that
they would like to have an automatic alarm system which would inform them once the water levels
would go below a certain threshold at a given station. If a threshold (e.g. Qnat95 or a critical level as
defined in chapter 5.2.2 (page 110) is reached they could implement certain measures to prevent the
river from drying up. Further, the WRUA would like to be able to compare the actual discharge to
long-term records. For the second request, the development of a data collection and sharing system is
necessary.
The Water Allocation Plan for the Naro Moru catchment (WAP 2013: 34) agrees with these requests
and states the following:
“In order to provide water users with adequate information, the following action is required:
 Adequate monitoring network installed strategically on the river to monitor water levels by
WRMA and the WRUA.
 WRUA to monitor the water levels and provide its members and other water users with infor-
mation regarding
i. the current state of the resource (i.e. which restriction zone applies) and
ii. The likely onset of any change in the restriction zone (i.e. a forecast of future resource condi-
tions). This information may be provided through:
 Email /develop website
 Public billboards and barazzas
 Local mass media
 SMS technology”
6.4.2 Automatic alarm management
Once an automatic data transmission is implemented, only a few simple steps are needed to setup an
alarm system. First, the ecoLog 500 has to be accessed with the Logger Operation program. Under
the tab “Alarm Management” and “Limit / threshold” in the program’s advanced operations, all nec-
essary parameters can be set. Since setting the correct parameter is mostly self-explaining and the
manual is describing the procedure very well, no detailed description is given here. Once the alarm
system is established, the ecoLog 500 is supposed to send a message via e-Mail or SMS to all prede-
termined recipients in case a certain gauge height threshold is reached, respectively undercut for a
certain amount of time.
It must be noted that this alarm system has not been implemented at the time of writing this thesis
since while doing field work, neither the rating equations nor any threshold (e.g. Q nat values or critical
water levels) were yet calculated, respectively defined.
6.4.3 Data collection and sharing system
There are several options to develop a data collection and sharing system. They are explained as fol-
lows:
 OTT HYDRAS 3 / RX: In December 2013, the two programs OTT HYDRAS 3 and HYDRAS 3
RX were installed on a computer that belongs to the Naro Moru WRUA. HYDRAS 3 RX was
used to download data from the CETRAD server and HYDRAS 3 to display data. This is the only
option that was implemented and partly functioning during the field work. Since data was no
longer sent to a server via GPRS, this method would need to be slightly adjusted. Instead of
downloading data from the server, a second GSM modem could be connected to the WRUA
computer. The ecoLog 500 can be set to send to two different receivers. Instead of only sending
to the GSM modem at the CETRAD office, the stations would also send to the modem at the
WRUA office. Decoding, processing and displaying of data would work as described in chapter
6.2.3. The advantage of this method is the relative quick set up and the low financial input since
only a second GSM modem with antenna is needed. Further, it would meet all the requests of the
WRUA. However, this method has a major drawback in the long-term: Every time an issue with a
program or modem occurs, the chance is high that a person from CETRAD or even CDE is need-
ed since the WRUA person that was introduced to the program only has very basic knowledge of
how to operate the program. Therefore, it is better to develop a sharing system that can be main-
tained from the CDE office in Switzerland. Further, accessing and using data should be self-
explaining after a short introduction. The user should not have to be introduced to a relatively
complex program like HYDRAS 3 where many settings and parameters can be adjusted.
 Website via OTT HYDRAS 3 Pro: The Pro version of the OTT HYDRAS 3 software includes
an integrated web server for web publication of data. Thus, data could be received and decoded
by HYDRAS 3 RX and HYDRAS 3 Pro could be used to publish data on a website. However, for
the last step, knowledge of programming and creating of websites is needed.
 OTT NetView: NetView is a complete data collection and sharing solution from OTT Hydromet
GmbH. With this solution, data is again received by the OTT HYDRAS 3 RX software. The same
program is then used to automatically send the decoded data to the OTT NetView server, where it
is saved in a database. The measured data can be accessed easily and quickly on the NetView
website via login identification. All values can be graphically displayed and also downloaded, as-
suming the required access rights. There are many advantages of this solution: No additional pro-
gram is needed. Having a normal web browser and the access rights to the website is sufficient to
access, graphically display and download all data at any place around the world. The server and
database administration and maintenance is carried out by OTT Hydromet GmbH. Thus, high da-
ta availability is reached with minimal effort and definable costs.
More detailed information about NetView can be found on the website of OTT Hydromet GmbH.
A demo version of OTT NetView can be accessed under http://netview.ott.com/demo/.
6.4.4 State of the data collection and sharing system as of January 2015
In a meeting with a few other members of the WLRC project, it was decided that none of the three
above mentioned solutions to implement a data collection and sharing system would be considered.
The HYDRAS 3 / RX solution was seen as being unsuitable in the long run for the intended purpose,
in which the author agrees with. The two other options were seen as being too expensive, although
the costs of the OTT NetView solution were not even assessed. Instead, it was decided that a com-
pletely new solution would be developed. The idea was that HYDRAS 3 RX is used to receive and
save the decoded data on a server. Next, a website would be created that can access and graphically
display the data stored on the server, thus functioning very similar to OTT NetView. The goal was to
have the new website finished in April 2014. Much to the regret of the author, no such website has
been developed as of January 2015.
The author’s idea was the implementation of the above mentioned OTT HYDRAS 3 / RX solution
until a better option would have been developed. This would have entailed costs of only 150 $ for a
second GSM modem and a few hours of installing it. It could have been in use since March 2014.
Further, instead of having a completely new solution created, the author would have liked to imple-
ment the OTT NetView solution. One could have profited by a ready to use solution and from many
years of experience in this field by OTT Hydromet GmbH. The costs of developing a new system that
works as well as OTT NetView most probably surpasses many years of membership costs of OTT
NetView. The developing costs of a new system were probably not evaluated well enough before
finally deciding against a solution that has been tested for years by other hydrological projects.
Conclusion 139
7 Conclusion
This last chapter presents the key findings of each objective, discusses the applicability of some
methods and further addresses research gaps.
Calibration of gauging stations

One of the thesis’ main objectives was the development of new stage-discharge relationships for four
river gauging stations along the Naro Moru River. Since quite a few gaugings during medium and
high flows were already conducted from the staff of CETRAD, this field campaign concentrated on
capturing low flows by applying the current meter and salt dilution method. It showed that both
methods have their advantages and disadvantages, which mainly depend on the flow velocity and
turbulence. The salt dilution method proved to be unsuitable during low flows at RGS A6 due to
many stagnant river sections and lack of turbulence. The current meter seemed to underestimate dis-
charge if stream velocities were below 0.1 m/s. The new rating equations are assumed to estimate
discharge quite accurately between Q80 and Q20. For flows above Q20 and below Q95, no measure-
ments have been conducted, thus the equation’s accuracy for these flows could only be estimated
based on the design of the cross section and field observations. The calibration campaign showed that
especially the estimation of low flows is heavily affected by changes in the cross section, respectively
by sedimentation and erosion of the river bed. Field observations over the course of nearly a year
revealed that the overall state of the cross sections is not very stable, but also depends heavily on the
RGS. In the future, regular observation of the cross sections and, if necessary, removal of sediments
is essential for preserving a stable stage-discharge relationship. In addition, as recommended by
WMO (2010) a minimum of ten discharge gaugings per year should be conducted to detect changes
of the cross section that affects the stability of the stage-discharge relationship. A stable cross section
is needed to ensure sound gauge-height and discharge records of the Naro Moru catchment.
Abstraction Campaign
A second main objective was the assessment of all abstraction points along the Naro Moru River and
the estimation of monthly abstraction rates per river section and type. Further, the legal state of the
abstractions and the development of abstraction quantities from 1983 to 2013 were of interest. Espe-
140 Conclusion
cially the estimation of the abstraction rate of water projects (gravity pipes) and the estimation of
monthly varying rates proved to be a difficult task. During fieldwork, it turned out that some of the
applied methods are not applicable. Especially regarding the monthly fluctuation of the abstraction
rate of water projects, a research gap remains. Further, uncertainties remain regarding the planting
schedule of small-scale farmers – an aspect that has a considerable impact on water demand for irri-
gation purposes.
The mean monthly abstraction rate for the period between March 2012 and February 2014 is estimat-
ed to be 350 l/s. The rates fluctuate between 269 l/s in February 2014 and 387 l/s in June and Sep-
tember 2012. 97% of abstracted water is used for irrigation purposes, the rest for livestock and do-
mestic use. Most water is abstracted by gravity pipes of water projects between RGS A3/ A4 and
RGS A5. Even though most abstraction points are located between RGS A5 and the confluence with
Ewaso Ng’iro, the impact of these small-scale commercial and subsistence farmers that use portable
pumps is relatively small. Furthermore, the irrigation efficiency of these small-scale farmers is rather
high compared to the two other irrigation methods – drip irrigation and sprinklers – used along the
river. The permitted amount of abstracted river water is in the range of only 13 to 40%, depending on
the amount of discharge. However, some uncertainties regarding the requirement of permits in the
case of small-scale farmers that use portable pumps remain.
The number of abstraction points increased dramatically from 29 in 1983 to 311 in 2013. Surprising-
ly, the abstraction rate decreased from 504 l/s in 2002 to 350 l/s in 2013, which is only a slightly
higher rate than estimated for the year 1991 by Gathenya (1992). An analysis of the methods used for
the previous three abstraction campaigns revealed that each of the estimated abstraction rates is sub-
ject to a relative high uncertainty, including the one in 2013. However, there are strong indications
that abstractions indeed decreased in the past few years, mainly due to actions taken by WRMA and
the Naro Moru WRUA. The shutdown of the Thome furrow in the Matanya area and the replacement
of the Aguthi-Ndiriti furrow by a more efficient gravity pipe, both actions initiated by WRMA, as
well as awareness creation campaigns regarding scarce water resources and better water management
(e.g. rationing programs) by the WRUA during dry spells, seem to have a positive impact on abstrac-
tion rates.
Analysis of the river flow

The validation of the calculated abstraction rates from chapter four revealed that the estimated rates
most probably represent the actual abstraction quantities quite well during low flows. With the ap-
Conclusion 141
plied methods, no statement about the validity of the estimated abstraction rate during medium and
high flows can be made.
A detailed analysis of the river flows for the period March 2012 to February 2014 showed that over-
abstractions of river water not only lead to severe water scarcity in the savannah zone during the dry
period of mid-December to mid-March, but also during the continental rainy season when precipita-
tion is below average, as it was the case in August 2013, or during the short rainy season in Novem-
ber, in case the rains run late. The occurrence of water scarcity and dried up river sections below RGS
A5 was already reported extensively in literature (e.g. Gathenya 1992; Aeschbacher 2003; Notter
2003; Aeschbacher et al. 2005). Hence, it can be stated that in regard of over-abstractions and river
water scarcity, especially during the dry period, the situation in the Naro Moru catchment has not
changed since the 1990s and early 2000s.
The analysis of two periods where the river dried up between RGS A5 and the confluence, revealed
that in case the river does not reach the gauge height of 0.39 (discharge of 0.11 m3/s) at RGS A5 for a
few days, the risk that humans and livestock in the savannah zone cannot even satisfy their very basic
needs is greatly increased. Considering that 97% of abstracted water is used for irrigation, implement-
ing measures against such abstractions during dry spells could significantly reduce the water stress of
people living in the lower river stretches. A reduction of water abstractions used for irrigation by only
1.5% would double the available water for domestic use. During the water crisis in January/ February
2014, the implementation of a water rationing program by the Naro Moru WRUA indeed helped to
prevent the river from drying up for a longer period of time and was able to safeguard a residual wa-
ter flow that satisfied the basic water needs of the people relying on river water below RGS A5.
Hence, it can also be stated that the impact of the WRUA was substantial and very positive.
Findings also show that even though abstracting water for irrigational purposes during flows below
Qnat80 are not allowed according to the WRM Rules 2007, the actual discharge at RGS A5 was below
this threshold during 37% of days, meaning that abstractions for irrigational purposes were still car-
ried out on a large scale, hence the law was constantly violated. However, neither WRMA nor the
Naro Moru WRUA showed intentions to enforce the WRM Rules 2007. The exact reason why the
law is not enforced is not completely clear, but it can be assumed that the missing access to live dis-
charge data and lack of knowledge regarding the naturalized river flow plays a substantial role. Find-
ings of this thesis and the implementation of a live discharge collection and sharing system might
contribute its part that the two institutions are better informed and that laws regarding water abstrac-
tion can be enforced better in the near future.
142 Conclusion
Data collection and sharing system

In the beginning of developing a data transmission from the discharge gauging stations to the
CETRAD office, constant setbacks were experienced. It turned out that using the GPRS technology to
send data to a FTP server is not a reliable solution. After having changed to the GSM technology,
which sends binary data files via SMS to a GSM-modem, the data transmission of RGS A4, A5 and
A6 has been working very reliably and without major issues between March 2014 and January 2015.
Tests at RGS A3 showed that a reliable data transmission is possible if a small concrete structure is
built.
Much to the regret of the author, the sharing system which would have enabled access to live dis-
charge data for the Naro Moru WRUA has not been implemented as of January 2015. Solutions were
developed and ready to be implemented. However, it was decided in a WLRC project meeting, that a
website will be developed by CDE, where live discharge data can be accessed. Providing access to
this discharge data could greatly improve the management capacities of the Naro Moru WRUA, and
therefore, the author hopes, that such a website will be developed in the near future.
Literature 143
Literature
Aarts, J., 2012. Will Community-based Water Management Solve Africa’s Water Problems ?
Master Thesis. Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Aeschbacher, J., 2003. Development of Water Use and Water-Shortage in the Naro Moru
Catchment (Upper Ewaso Ng’iro Basin, Kenya). Master Thesis. University of Berne,
Switzerland.
Aeschbacher, J., Liniger, H. & Weingartner, R., 2005. River Water Shortage in a Highland –
Lowland System. Mountain Research and Development, 25(2), pp.155–162.
Autronic, 2014. HCP HIT 55 USB Modem. Available at:

http://m2m.autronic.ch/de/produkte/terminals/hit55usb.php [Accessed December 12, 2014].
Bosshart, U., 1996. Measurement of River Discharge for the SCRP Catchments. Soil
Conservation Research Programme, Research Report 31.
Brouwer, C. & Heibloem, M., 1986. Irrigation Water Management: Irrigation Water Needs.
Irrigation Water Management Training manual No. 3. Available at:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/S2022E/s2022e00.htm [Accessed November 4, 2014].
Brouwer, C., Heibloem, M. & Prins, K., 1989. Irrigation Water Management: Irrigation
Scheduling. Irrigation Water Management Training manual No. 4. Available at:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/T7202E/T7202E00.htm.
Brunner, R., 1983. Die rurale Wasserversorgung an der Nordwestflanke des Mount Kenia in
Vergangenheit und Gegenwart. University of Berne, Switzerland.
CDE, 2013. The Water and Land Resource Centre Project. Available at:
http://www.cde.unibe.ch/Pages/Project/6/43/The-Water-and-Land-Resource-Centre-
Project.aspx [Accessed October 9, 2014].
Copeland, L., 2000. Packet-Switched vs. Circuit-Switched Networks. Available at:

http://www.computerworld.com/article/2593382/networking/packet-switched-vs--circuit-
switched-networks.html [Accessed December 4, 2014].
Le Coz, J., 2011. A literature review of methods for estimating the uncertainty associated with
stage-discharge relations. Geneva.
Decurtins, S., 1992. Hydrogeographical investigations in the Mount Kenya subcatchment of the
Ewaso Ng’iro river. African Studies Series, A10.
Ericksen, P., Said, M., Leeuw, J. De, Silvestri, S., Zaibet, L., Kifugo, S., Sijmons, K., Kinoti, J.,
Ng, L. & Landsberg, F., 2011. Mapping and valuing ecosystem services in the Ewaso Ng’iro
Watershed,
144 Literature
ETSI, 2014. Mobile Communication Technologies. Available at:

http://www.etsi.org/technologies-clusters/technologies/mobile [Accessed December 13,
2014].
Fischer, M., 2014. Productive Protection of Riparian Zones - Good Individual and Community
Practices around Mt. Kenya. Master Thesis. University of Berne.
Gathenya, J.M., 1992. Water balance of sections of Naro Moru River. Master Thesis. University
of Nairobi, Kenya.
Gichuki, F.N., 2002. Water Scarcity and Conflicts : A Case Study of the Upper Ewaso Ng’iro
North Basin. In The Changing Face of Irrigation in Kenya: Opportunities for Anticipating
Change in Eastern and Southern Africa. pp. 113–134.
Gichuki, F.N., Liniger, H., MacMillan, L., Schwilch, G. & Gikonyo, J., 1998. Scarce Water:
Exploring Resource Availability, Use and Improved Management. Eastern and Southern
Africa Geographical Journal, 8, pp.15–27.
Gichuki, F.N., Liniger, H. & Schwilch, G., 1998. Knowledge about Highland - Lowland
Interactions: The Role of a Natural Resource Information System. Eastern and Southern
Africa Geographical Journal, 8, pp.5–14.
Hastenrath, S., 2005. Glaciological studies on Mt. Kenya 1971-2005. University of Wisconsin,
Madison.
Herschy, R., 2009. Streamflow Measurement. Third Edition, Abingdon, Canada: Taylor &
Francis.
IEBC, 2009. Laikipia East Constituency. Available at:

http://www.infotrackea.co.ke/services/leadership/constituencyinfo.php?cinf=wards&t=164
[Accessed November 6, 2014].
ISRIC, 2014. Formative elements for naming soil units. Available at:
http://www.isric.org/isric/webdocs/docs/major_soils_of_the_world/annexes/qualifie.pdf
[Accessed October 3, 2014].
Kennedy, E.J., 1984. Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations of the United States

Geological Survey. In W. P. Peck & L. D. Clark, eds. Application of Hydraulics.
Washington: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office.
Kenya-Open-Data, 2014. Cattle in Kenya. Available at:

https://www.opendata.go.ke/Agriculture/Cattle-in-Kenya/rjbr-jgyh [Accessed November 3,
2014].
Kiteme, B.P. & Gikonyo, J., 2002. Preventing and resolving water us conflicts in the Mount
Kenya highland-lowland system through water users’ associations. Mountain Research and
Development, 22(4), pp.332–337.
Literature 145
Kiteme, B.P., Liniger, H., Notter, B., Wiesmann, U. & Kohler, T., 2008. Mountainous Regions :
Laboratories for Adaptation. Dimensions of global change in African mountains: The
example of Mount Kenya. Magazine of the International Human Dimensions Programme on
Global Environmental Change, (2), pp.1–80.
KNBS, 2013. 2009 Kenya Population and Housing Census. Available at:
http://www.knbs.or.ke/index.php?option=com_phocadownload&view=category&id=100:po
pulation-and-housing-census&Itemid=1176 [Accessed December 5, 2014].
Künzi, E., Droz, Y., Maina, F. & Wiesmann, U., 1998. Patterns of Peasant Livelihood Strategies:
Local Actors and Sustainable Resource Use. Eastern and Southern Africa Geographical
Journal, 8, pp.55–64.
Kuria, D.N. & Kamunge, H.N., 2014. Merti Aquifer Recharge zones determination using
geospatial technologies. In First International Conference on Natural Resources. pp. 1–13.
Lanari, N., 2014. Follow-up Study: Development of the Commercial Large-Scale Horticulture
Sector North-West of Mt. Kenya from 2003-2013. Master Thesis, University of Berne.
De Leeuw, J., Said, M., Kifugo, S., Musyimi, Z., Mutiga, J. & Peden, D., 2012. Benefits of
Riverine Water Discharge into the Lorian Swamp, Kenya. Water, 4, pp.1009–1024.
Available at: http://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/4/4/1009/ [Accessed October 14, 2014].
Leibundgut, C., Berger, P., Brodbeck, A., Brunner, R., Decurtins, S., Kohler, T., Moeri, T.,
Müller, I., Schotterer, U. & Winiger, M., 1986. Hydrogeographical map of Mount Kenya
Area. African Studies Series, A3.
Liniger, H., 1995. Endangered Water - A global Overview of Degradation, Conflicts and
Strategies for Improvement. Development and Environmental Reports No. 12, Centre for
Development and Environment, Lang Druck AG, Bern.
Liniger, H., Gichuki, F.N., Kironchi, G. & Njeru, L., 1998. Pressure on the Land: The Search for
Sustainable Use in a Highly Diverse Environment. Eastern and Southern Africa
Geographical Journal, 8, pp.28–44.
Liniger, H., Gikonyo, J., Kiteme, B. & Wiesman, U., 2005. Assessing and Managing Scarce
Tropical Mountain Water Resources. Mountain Research and Development, 25(2), pp.163–
173.
M’Mukindia, M.S., 2011. Abstraction Survey Report for Naro Moru WRUA. Nkubiri W.R.M
consultants, Isiolo, Kenya.
MacMillan, L., 1997. LRP (NRM3) Rating Equations: Version 2a. Unpublished.
Markwick, G., 2007. Water requirements for sheep and cattle. Primefacts 326, NSW Department
of Primary Industries 2007.
146 Literature
Molinero-Fernandez, P., 2003. Circuit and Packet Switching. Available at:

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.6.4763&rep=rep1&type=pdf
[Accessed October 5, 2014].
Moore, R.D.D., 2003. Introduction to Salt Dilution Gauging for Streamflow Measurement : Part
1. Streamline Watershed Management Bulletin, 7(4).
Moore, R.D.D., 2004. Introduction to Salt Dilution Gauging for Streamflow Measurement Part 2:
Constant-rate Injection. Streamline Watershed Management Bulletin, 8(1).
Moore, R.D.D., 2005. Introduction to Salt Dilution Gauging for Streamflow Measurement Part
III: Slug Injection Using Salt in Solution. Streamline Wathershed Management Bulletin,
8(2).
Mumma, A., 2007. Kenya’s new water law: An Analysis of the implications of Kenya’s water
act, 2002, for the rural poor. In CAB International 2007. Community-based Water Law and
Water Resource Management Reforms in Developing Countries. pp. 158–172.
Mutiga, J.K., Mavengano, S.T., Zhongbo, S., Woldai, T. & Becht, R., 2010. Water Allocation as
a Planning Tool to Minimise Water Use Conflicts in the Upper Ewaso Ng’iro North Basin,
Kenya. Water Resources Management, 24(14), pp.3939–3959.
Ngigi, S.N., Savenije, H.H.G. & Gichuki, F.N., 2007. Land use changes and hydrological impacts
related to up-scaling of rainwater harvesting and management in upper Ewaso Ng’iro river
basin, Kenya. Land Use Policy, 24(1), pp.129–140.
Notter, B., 2003. Rainfall-Runoff Modelling of Meso- Scale Catchments in the Upper Ewaso
Ng’iro Basin , Kenya. Master Thesis. University of Berne, Switzerland.
Notter, B., MacMillan, L., Viviroli, D., Weingartner, R. & Liniger, H.-P., 2007. Impacts of
environmental change on water resources in the Mt. Kenya region. Journal of Hydrology,
343(3-4), pp.266–278. Available at:
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022169407003836 [Accessed June 18, 2013].
NRM3, 2003. Database of NRM3 (Natural Resource Monitoring, Modelling and Management).
Universities of Berne and Nairobi.
NRM3, 2013. Database of NRM3 (Natural Resource Monitoring, Modelling and Management).
Universities of Nairobi and Berne.
NWMP, 2012. The Project on the Development of the National Water Master Plan (NWMP)
2030. Republic of Kenya, WRMA, Ministry of Water an Irrigation.
OTT, 2014. OTT ecoLog 500. Available at: http://www.ott.com/products/water-level/ott-ecolog-

500/ [Accessed January 4, 2015].
Literature 147
OTT-C2, 2014. OTT C2 small Current Meter. Available at: http://www.ott.com/products/water-

flow/ott-c2-1/ [Accessed January 2, 2015].
OTT-C31, 2014. OTT C31 Universal Current Meter. Available at:

http://www.ott.com/products/water-flow/ott-c31/ [Accessed January 5, 2015].
Schmocker, J., 2013. Long-term precipitation trends and rainy season performance in view of
climate change in the Mt. Kenya region. Master Thesis. University of Berne, Switzerland.
Schotterer, U. & Mueller, I., 1985. The Use of Isotopes, Hydrochemistry and Geophysics in
Groundwater Research in Laikipia District, Kenya. Laikipia Reports 4. Institute of
Geography, University of Berne.
Schuler, R., 2004. Commerical Horticulture North-West of Mt. Kenya. Master Thesis. University
of Berne.
SDC, 2013. Water and Land Resource Centres (WLRC) Project – phase II. Global Water
Initiatives Programme.
Sevruk, B., 1983. Correction of Measured Precipitation in the Alps Using the Water Equivalent
of New Snow. Nordic Hydrology, pp.49–58.
Steiner, A., 2014. Analysis of river flow and correlation between rainfall and discharge during
low-flow periods in the Naro Moru Catchment (Upper Ewaso Ng’iro Basin, Kenya).
Bachelor Thesis. University of Berne.
Sturm, B., 2002. Development and use of long-and short term precipitation interpolation models
in the Ewaso Ng’iro Basin. University of Berne.
Suter, H., 2014. Hydrological Studies in a Meso-Scale Ethiopian Catchment. Master Thesis.
University of Berne.
Wallace, J.S., Jackson, N.A. & Ong, C.K., 1999. Modelling soil evaporation in an agroforestry
system in Kenya. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 94(3-4), pp.189–202.
WAP, 2013. Water Allocation Plan for Naromoru River Sub Catchment. Penka Consultants,
Nairobi.
Watson, R., 2007. Water resource users associations around mount Kenya – Establishment,
Operation and Potential for conflict prevention. Available at:
http://www.disputeresolutionkenya.org/pdf/Establishment Operation and Potential for
Conflict Prevention.pdf.
Webster, I. & Day, C., 1993. The impacts of shade on evaporation rates and temperatures in stock
watering troughs. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 44(2), pp.287–298.
148 Literature
Wiesmann, U., Gichuki, F.N., Kiteme, B.P. & Liniger, H., 2000. Mitigating Conflicts Over
Scarce Water Resources in the Highland-Lowland System of Mount Kenya. Mountain
Research and Development, 20(1), pp.10–15.
WMO, 2009. Guide to Hydrological Practices. Sixth Edition Chairperson Puplication Board, ed.,
Geneva: World Meteorological Organization (WMO).
WRMA, 2013. Ewaso Ng’iro Catchment Status. Available at:

http://www.wrma.or.ke/index.php/wrma-regional-offices/ewaso-nyiro.html [Accessed
October 13, 2014].
WRUA, 2009. Naro Moru RWUA Managment plan. Prepared by Naro Moru WRUA and Rural
Focuas LTD, Nanyuki.
Appendices 149
Appendices
Appendix 1: Old rating equations (from Aeschbacher 2003)
(yellow = rating equations in use till the building of the new cross sections in 2012, respectively 2013
in case of RGS A3)
150 Appendices
Appendix 2: Annual total precipitation per rainfall gauging station

Archer's Post Matanya Munyaka NM Gate Met Station Teleki Camp Austrian Hut
Year
839 m a.s.l. 1840 m a.s.l. 2070 m a.s.l. 2471 m a.s.l. 3048 m a.s.l. 4200 m a.s.l. 4800 m a.s.l.
* ** ***
1969 392 1081
1970 193 1135
1971 287 1033
1972 349 1219
1973 276 987
1974 189 989
1975 147 1015
1976 151 1041
1977 404 1360
1978 1389 1571 729 1011
1979 264 1146 1274 848 691
1980 226 781 941 586 739
1981 306 1378 2030 986 1295
1982 482 1222 1620 919 990
1983 196 965 1501 924 659
1984 223 881 1100 680 495
1985 272 1062 1522 1139 786
1986 319 820 1372 956 530
1987 304 764 786 1297 624 640
1988 392 1086 1067 1892 1186 1276
1989 391 837 1136 1749 734 706
1990 579 715 1302 1560 588 1265
1991 259 675 756 1104 637 764
1992 283 684 544 1105 1673 591 636
1993 239 823 577 1252 1626 560 952
1994 339 787 514 1215 1595 953 1113
1995 346 924 938 1269 1526 725 778
1996 179 764 646 889 1470
1997 824 1005 1125 1126 1837
1998 441 944 946 1367 1995
1999 275 568 479 1056 1253
2000 142 458 382 610 939
2001 282 769 781 1142 1781
2002 641 786 913 1131 1556
2003 382 936 819 1340 1860
2004 486 648 641 949 1430
2005 215 808 628 992 1363
2006 463 896 1138 1709
2007 338 603 1104 1415
2008 416 550 975 1376
2009 264 534 916 1355
2010 365 719 712 1391 1926
2011 403 831 653 859 1464
2012 376 737 440 1733
2013 283 759 511 1481
Average 331 784 674 1078 1525 798 851

Average (92-13) 363 775 674 1091 1562 707 870
*Archerspost has data since 1957 ** Too many days of missing data between 2006 and 2009 to calculate accurate annual averages
*** The NM Gate station has been abondoned in 2012. It is planned to install an automatic gauging station soon.
Appendices 151
Appendix 3: List of all gaugings used for the stage-discharge relationships
Abbreviations:
CM Current meter method
SV Current meter measurement of surface velocity
2 Pt CM two point method (measurement at 20% and 80% of the river's depth)
0.6 One current meter measurement per vertical at 60% of the river's depth
RGS A3
Gauge Water Error of
Date Time Q [m³/s] Method
Height [m] level [m] measurement
28.01.2014 12:30 0.20 0.20 0.171 CM, SV & 2 Pt 7.5
24.01.2014 15:00 0.20 0.20 0.228 Salt 5
28.01.2014 11:30 0.20 0.20 0.207 Salt 5
13.08.2013 13:50 0.22 0.22 0.195 CM, SV 15
10.06.2013 13:00 0.27 0.27 0.398 CM, SV 15
14.08.2013 13:35 0.33 0.33 0.613 CM, SV 15
14.08.2013 11:50 0.35 0.35 0.713 CM, SV 15
01.08.2013 12:18 0.37 0.37 0.776 CM, SV 15
01.08.2013 09:56 0.38 0.38 0.834 CM, SV 15
31.07.2013 11:26 0.40 0.40 0.940 CM, SV 15
15.08.2013 11:15 0.41 0.41 1.109 CM, SV 15
11.04.2013 11:11 0.51 0.51 1.469 CM, 0.6 7.5
18.04.2013 09:30 0.56 0.56 1.728 CM, SV & 0.6 7.5
10.04.2013 16:35 0.62 0.62 2.258 CM, 0.6 7.5
16.04.2013 09:15 0.64 0.64 2.470 CM, SV & 0.6 7.5
12.04.2013 11:01 0.76 0.76 5.390 Float 15
17.04.2013 10:40 0.80 0.80 6.050 Float 15
13.04.2013 12:45 0.93 0.93 9.940 Float 15
15.04.2013 16:30 1.25 1.25 13.725 Float 15
RGS A4
29.01.2014 11:30 0.135 0.105 0.068 Salt 5
29.01.2014 11:25 0.14 0.11 0.071 CM, 2 Pt 7.5
05.02.2014 11:40 0.17 0.14 0.104 CM, 2 Pt 7.5
23.01.2014 11:00 0.17 0.14 0.102 Salt 5
05.02.2014 12:00 0.17 0.14 0.115 Salt 5
13.08.2013 13:10 0.17 0.14 0.105 CM, SV 15
23.01.2014 11:00 0.17 0.14 0.138 CM, SV 7.5
152 Appendices
04.09.2013 11:35 0.18 0.15 0.114 CM, SV 15

30.07.2013 15:30 0.21 0.18 0.289 CM, SV 15
27.11.2013 11:07 0.28 0.25 0.366 CM, SV 7.5
14.08.2013 11:15 0.28 0.25 0.533 CM, SV 15
15.08.2013 10:40 0.30 0.27 0.620 CM, SV 15
01.08.2013 11:37 0.30 0.27 0.684 CM, SV 15
31.07.2013 12:03 0.32 0.29 0.604 CM, SV 15
01.08.2013 09:10 0.32 0.29 0.690 CM, SV 15
11.04.2013 11:59 0.48 0.45 0.814 CM, SV 15
10.04.2013 15:30 0.49 0.46 0.748 CM, SV 15
16.04.2013 09:49 0.56 0.53 1.143 CM, SV 15
15.04.2013 16:10 0.62 0.59 1.536 CM, SV 15
17.04.2013 11:10 0.65 0.62 2.055 CM, 0.6 7.5
17.04.2013 09:45 0.67 0.64 2.170 CM, SV 15
12.04.2013 12:15 0.72 0.69 2.320 CM, SV 15
13.04.2013 11:40 0.80 0.77 2.785 CM, SV 15
16.04.2013 17:25 0.86 0.83 3.900 Float 15
RGS A5
05.02.2014 16:15 0.36 0.15 0.062 CM, SV 7.5
23.01.2014 12:00 0.37 0.16 0.098 CM, SV 7.5
29.01.2014 13:30 0.37 0.16 0.083 Salt 5
23.01.2014 14:00 0.37 0.16 0.109 Salt 5
29.01.2014 13:10 0.38 0.17 0.085 CM, SV 7.5
04.02.2014 10:45 0.38 0.17 0.095 CM, SV 7.5
13.08.2013 11:25 0.42 0.21 0.152 CM, SV 15
27.11.2013 12:50 0.62 0.41 1.008 CM, SV 15
27.11.2013 13:20 0.62 0.41 1.128 CM, SV & 0.6 7.5
30.07.2013 12:05 0.66 0.45 1.082 CM, SV 15
14.08.2013 14:35 0.67 0.46 1.042 CM, SV 15
01.08.2013 14:07 0.70 0.49 1.275 CM, SV 15
14.08.2013 09:55 0.72 0.51 1.481 CM, SV 15
11.04.2013 15:27 0.73 0.52 1.931 CM, 0.6 7.5
10.04.2013 17:45 0.74 0.53 1.913 CM, 0.6 7.5
19.04.2013 09:10 0.75 0.54 2.140 CM, 0.6 7.5
31.07.2013 13:16 0.76 0.55 1.788 CM, SV 15
15.08.2013 12:15 0.76 0.55 1.846 CM, SV 15
11.04.2013 07:40 0.77 0.56 2.722 CM, SV 15
15.08.2013 09:30 0.78 0.57 1.979 CM, SV 15
Appendices 153
18.04.2013 12:50 0.80 0.59 3.022 CM, 0.6 7.5

18.04.2013 07:40 0.82 0.61 3.174 CM, 0.6 7.5
15.04.2013 15:20 0.89 0.68 3.644 CM, SV 15
17.04.2013 07:50 0.89 0.68 4.173 CM, 0.6 7.5
16.04.2013 07:50 0.93 0.72 4.755 CM, SV 15
12.04.2013 16:24 0.98 0.77 7.040 Float 15
12.04.2013 14:10 1.02 0.81 7.710 Float 15
12.04.2013 07:30 1.11 0.90 9.490 Float 15
13.04.2013 14:00 1.14 0.93 10.380 Float 15
12.04.2013 09:25 1.14 0.93 10.470 Float 15
RGS A6
04.02.2014 14:00 0.13 0.07 0.016 CM, SV 7.5
04.02.2014 14:30 0.13 0.07 0.019 CM, SV 7.5
11.02.2014 12:50 0.16 0.10 0.038 CM, SV 7.5
23.01.2014 16:30 0.18 0.12 0.058 CM, SV 7.5
07.06.2013 11:15 0.21 0.15 0.139 CM, SV 15
03.09.2013 10:50 0.23 0.17 0.138 CM, SV 15
30.07.2013 10:30 0.27 0.21 0.287 CM, SV 15
10.06.2013 14:35 0.36 0.30 0.618 CM, SV 15
30.07.2013 17:05 0.39 0.33 0.977 CM, SV 15
14.08.2013 16:15 0.47 0.41 1.429 CM, SV 15
01.08.2013 15:05 0.48 0.42 1.613 CM, SV 15
14.08.2013 08:30 0.55 0.49 2.309 CM, SV 15
31.07.2013 15:33 0.57 0.51 2.257 CM, SV 15
11.04.2013 16:20 0.58 0.52 2.041 CM, 0.6 7.5
14.08.2913 09:01 0.58 0.52 2.484 CM, SV 15
15.08.2013 14:10 0.61 0.55 2.200 CM, SV 15
19.04.2013 10:10 0.63 0.57 2.332 CM, SV 15
11.04.2013 09:07 0.68 0.62 2.738 CM, 0.6 7.5
15.08.2013 08:30 0.69 0.63 2.829 CM, SV 15
31.07.2013 09:47 0.72 0.66 2.867 CM, SV 15
31.07.2013 09:08 0.75 0.69 3.121 CM, SV 15
18.04.2013 11:22 0.76 0.70 3.266 CM, 0.6 7.5
17.04.2013 13:40 0.86 0.80 4.538 CM, SV 15
15.04.2013 14:20 0.99 0.93 5.520 CM, SV 15
16.04.2013 12:40 1.00 0.94 5.123 CM, SV 15
12.04.2013 14:50 1.34 1.28 8.530 Float 15
154 Appendices
Appendix 3: Water Rationing Plan (January and February 2014)

Appendices 155
Appendix 4: Estimation of daily abstraction rate of Kihoto and Gitwe water project
Method: Estimations are based on analysis of fluctuations at station A4

during the implementation of the rationing plan.
Estimated discharge based on Master meter readings

(Gitwe) and estimations (Kihoto):
Kihoto: 100 m3/day 1.16 l/s

Gitwe: 285 m3/day 3.30 l/s
Total: 385 m3/day 4.46 l/s
Water level Difference in

Estimated difference Discharge
Project Estimated time of between low between low
Date Weekday allowed peak open intake and peak flow and peak flow
Min Max
02.02.2014 Sunday none none 16.00 4 cm (12 vs 16 cm) 44.8 l/s 41.4 48.1
03.02.2014 Monday Kihoto 08:30 15.00 4 cm (12 vs 16 cm) 44.6 l/s 44.0 51.1
04.02.2014 Tuesday Gitwe 07:00 15.75 4 cm (12 vs 16 cm) 44.6 l/s 46.5 54.0
05.02.2014 Wednesday Kihoto 08:30 15.50 5 cm (12 vs 17 cm) 57.7 l/s 53.3 62.0
06.02.2014 Thursday Gitwe 07:00 16.00 5 cm (12 vs 17 cm) 58.3 l/s 56.5 65.7
07.02.2014 Friday none none 16.50 6 cm (12 vs 18 cm) 71.2 l/s 65.9 76.5
08.02.2014 Saturday none none 15.50 5 cm (14 vs 19 cm) 64.4 l/s 59.6 69.2
09.02.2014 Sunday none none 15.00 5 cm (14 vs 19 cm) 68.3 l/s 63.2 73.5
10.02.2014 Monday Kihoto 08:30 16.00 5 cm (13 vs 18 cm) 61.1 l/s 56.5 65.7
11.02.2014 Tuesday Gitwe 07:00 15.00 5 cm (13 vs 18 cm) 63.3 l/s 58.5 68.0
12.02.2014 Wednesday Kihoto 08:30 17.00 6 cm (12 vs 18 cm) 72.9 l/s 67.5 67.5
Mean 15.75 5 cm 59.2 l/s 54.8 63.6
38.8 l/s * 35.9 41.8
3
3356.2 m /day 3104.5 3608.0
59.2 l/s / 24 * 15.75 --> Adjustment since the amount abstracted is overestimated
*
due to the short period (15.75 h) of abstraction.
Estimated discharge at station A4:

Mean Min Max
Discharge at 12 cm: 0.052 m3/s 0.048 0.056
156 Appendices
Appendix 5: Estimation of loss through evaporation per river section during January
*Mean dry
Station Mean Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Months
Matanya 4.98 5.43 4.84 6.02 5.20 4.22 4.80 5.01 5.17 5.64 6.32 4.92 3.54 4.08
Munyaka 3.73 4.12 3.56 4.18 3.63 3.29 3.46 3.79 4.00 4.49 4.74 3.68 2.72 3.16
NM NP Gate 2.73 3.20 3.01 3.66 3.06 2.33 2.56 2.62 2.69 3.14 3.13 2.37 1.98 2.43
Met Station 1.72 2.04 2.04 2.60 2.18 1.63 1.64 1.53 1.46 1.73 1.63 1.41 1.24 1.51
* January, February, March, August
1) Distances between stations (m) 2) Area (Width*distance, m2)
RGS A5 A6 Confluence RGS A5 A6 Confluence

A3 16700 40700 48600 A3 66800
A4 13900 37900 45800 A4 55600
A3+A4 28900 76900 92700 A3+A4 115600
A5 0 24000 31900 A5 0 96000 127600
A6 24000 0 7900 A6 96000 0 31600
Confluence 31900 7900 0 Confluence 127600 31600 0
3) Evaporation rates (l/day per m2) 4) Corrected evaporation rates (l/day per m2)*
* Forest canopy reduces evaporation by 35%
A3 4.12 A3 3.09 Rate reduced by 75%
A4 4.12 A4 3.09 Rate reduced by 75%
A3+A4 4.12 A3+A4 3.09 Rate reduced by 75%
A5 4.12 5.43 5.43 A5 3.09 4.53 4.53 **
A6 5.43 5.43 5.43 A6 4.53 4.53 4.53 **
Confluence 5.43 5.43 5.43 Confluence 4.53 4.53 4.53 **
** Reduced by 83.5%, since forest cover is limited
5) Evaporation rates (l/s per m2) 6) Evaporation per section (l/s)

A3 0.000036 A3 2.39
A4 0.000036 A4 1.99
A3+A4 0.000036 A3+A4 4.13
A5 0.000036 0.000052 0.000052 A5 0.00 5.04 6.70
A6 0.000052 0.000052 0.000052 A6 5.04 0.00 1.66
Confluence 0.000052 0.000052 0.000052 Confluence 6.70 1.66 0.00
Appendices 157
Appendix 6: Abstraction campaign 2013: Water pumps
Irrig. Daily Abst. Sub-

ID Farmer/ Owner Size Coordinates County
land abst. rate location
3
m/
Acre Acre l/s X-Coord. Y-Coord.
day
Pump Users between Mwichuiri bridge (2063m) and RGS A5
Kambura-
P1 Unknown 1 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 37.04015 -0.16878 Nyeri
Ini
Kambura-
P2 Unknown 2 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 37.04038 -0.16966 Nyeri
Ini
P3 Mary Muthoni 2 1 10.7 0.12 37.04145 -0.16949 Nyeri Ndiriti
P4 Mama Lucy 3 1.5 16.1 0.19 37.04201 -0.17053 Nyeri Ndiriti
P5 Unknown 3 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 37.04442 -0.17149 Nyeri Ndiriti
P6 Unknown 4 0.5 0.25 2.7 0.03 37.04716 -0.17412 Nyeri Ndiriti
P7 Mutahi Mwangi 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 37.0495 -0.17398 Nyeri Ndiriti
Peter Githi
P8 1 0.25 2.7 0.03 37.05097 -0.17472 Nyeri Ndiriti
Kumunya
P9 Jackson Kairange 0.5 0.25 2.7 0.03 37.05396 -0.17644 Nyeri Ndiriti
P 10 Samuel Mbiru 1.5 0.75 8.0 0.09 37.05333 -0.17589 Nyeri Ndiriti
P 11 Maina Miriri 0.5 0.25 2.7 0.03 37.05055 -0.17434 Nyeri Ndiriti
Moses Kimani
P 12 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 37.04995 -0.17391 Nyeri Ndiriti
Njoroge
P 13 Muthigani 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 37.04995 -0.17391 Nyeri Ndiriti
P 14 Njunguna 2 1 10.7 0.12 37.04803 -0.17416 Nyeri Ndiriti
P 15 Joseph Nguthi 0.5 0.25 2.7 0.03 37.04744 -0.17452 Nyeri Ndiriti
P 16 Unknown 5 1.5 0.75 8.0 0.09 37.04574 -0.1726 Nyeri Ndiriti
P 17 Harrison Githinji 1 0.75 8.0 0.09 37.4436 -0.17222 Nyeri Naro Moru
P 18 Joseph 2 1 10.7 0.12 37.04367 -0.17106 Nyeri Naro Moru
P 19 Rware Estate Farm 1.5 0.75 8.0 0.09 37.04034 -0.16978 Nyeri Naro Moru
P 20 Rware Estate Farm 2 1 10.7 0.12 37.03899 -0.16816 Nyeri Naro Moru
P 21 Rware Estate Farm 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 37.03527 -0.16801 Nyeri Naro Moru
P 27 Rware Estate Farm 2.5 0.5 5.4 0.06 37.026 -0.16474 Nyeri Naro Moru
P 28 AAA Growers 132 84 697 8.00 37.03443 -0.1742 Nyeri Naro Moru
P 29 Daniel Tigiti ? 50 cattle 0.03 37.03089 -0.1675 Nyeri Naro Moru
Pump Users between RGS A5 and RGS A6
P 30 Kariuki 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 37.01089 -0.14745 Nyeri Githima
P 31 Evan Wambugu 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 37.01081 -0.14698 Nyeri Githima
158 Appendices
P 32 Arnest Gathiaka 0.25 0.15 1.6 0.02 37.01004 -0.14615 Nyeri Githima
P 33 Gathara 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 37.00827 -0.14629 Nyeri Githima
P 34 Luka Mbogo 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 37.00797 -0.14605 Nyeri Githima
P 35 Kariuki 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 37.00785 -0.1454 Nyeri Githima
P 36 Karare 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 37.00746 -0.14509 Nyeri Githima
P 37 Francis Githinji 10 6 64.4 0.75 37.0058 -0.14544 Nyeri Githima
P 38 Nderitu 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 37.00425 -0.14395 Nyeri Githima
Ngunjiri
P 39 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 37.00367 -0.14395 Nyeri Githima
(Mundu Muiru)
P 40 Peter Mahinda 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 37.00263 -0.14268 Nyeri Githima
P 41 Peter Gichuku 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 37.00152 -0.14191 Nyeri Githima
P 42 Peter Gichuku 4 2.4 25.8 0.30 37.0015 -0.14135 Nyeri Githima
P 43 James Muriuki 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 37.00153 -0.14108 Nyeri Githima
P 44 Wahome 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 37.00113 -0.14035 Nyeri Githima
P 45 Patrick Weru 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 37.00033 -0.13955 Nyeri Githima
P 46 Muthee wa Nguku 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.99926 -0.13933 Nyeri Githima
P 47 Muthee wa Nguku 1.5 0.9 9.7 0.11 36.99889 -0.13909 Nyeri Githima
P 48 Gakui Kingori 1.5 0.9 9.7 0.11 36.99863 -0.13794 Nyeri Githima
P 49 Meja 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.99722 -0.13848 Nyeri Githima
P 50 Ngunye Gatonye 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.99684 -0.13796 Nyeri Githima
P 51 Richard Kariuki 0.25 0.15 1.6 0.02 36.99427 -0.13859 Nyeri Githima
Christopher
P 52 0.25 0.15 1.6 0.02 36.99361 -0.13783 Nyeri Githima
Mathenge
P 53 Stephen Gachanja 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.99308 -0.13712 Nyeri Githima
Mwaniki
P 54 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.99086 -0.1357 Nyeri Githima
Wangombe
P 55 Maina Warugara 3.5 2.1 22.5 0.26 36.98954 -0.13469 Nyeri Githima
P 56 Phalis Kariuki 1.5 0.9 9.7 0.11 36.98806 -0.13442 Nyeri Githima
P 57 Githi Mwangi 1.25 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.98721 -0.1346 Nyeri Githima
P 58 Muchoki Mwangi 1.25 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.98698 -0.13363 Nyeri Githima
P 59 Mary Njema 1.25 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.98632 -0.13323 Nyeri Githima
P 60 Patrick Muthukia 4 2.4 25.8 0.30 36.98256 -0.12886 Laikipia Lamuria
P 61 George Njoroge 1.5 0.9 9.7 0.11 36.98225 -0.12931 Laikipia Lamuria
P 62 Wachira Mutero 4 2.4 25.8 0.30 36.98234 -0.12961 Laikipia Lamuria
P 63 Makara 2.5 1.5 16.1 0.19 36.9822 -0.13084 Laikipia Lamuria
P 64 Fredrick Muchoki 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.98221 -0.13091 Laikipia Lamuria
P 65 Muya 1.25 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.98252 -0.13135 Laikipia Lamuria
P 66 Mary Njema 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.9834 -0.1318 Laikipia Lamuria
P 67 Michael Njama 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.98337 -0.13253 Laikipia Lamuria
P 68 Macharia 3 1.8 19.3 0.22 36.98225 -0.12747 Laikipia Lamuria
P 69 Peter Wachira 3 1.8 19.3 0.22 36.98217 -0.12717 Laikipia Lamuria
P 70 Wachuka Priscila 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.98214 -0.12733 Laikipia Lamuria
Appendices 159
P 71 Samson Mbogoro 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.98201 -0.12661 Laikipia Lamuria

P 72 Margret Wanyii 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.9822 -0.12621 Laikipia Lamuria
P 73 Kinyma Wamugethi 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.98233 -0.1254 Laikipia Lamuria
P 74 Githinji 3 1.8 19.3 0.22 36.98233 -0.1254 Laikipia Lamuria
P 75 Joseph Gichuki 4 2.4 25.8 0.30 36.98185 -0.12495 Laikipia Lamuria
P 76 Mwathi Ngugi 1.25 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.9806 -0.12411 Laikipia Lamuria
P 77 Martin Thairu 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.97939 -0.12336 Laikipia Lamuria
P 78 Rose Kagendo 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.97927 -0.12245 Laikipia Lamuria
P 79 Kingori 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.97903 -0.1223 Laikipia Lamuria
P 80 John Joel 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.97903 -0.1223 Laikipia Lamuria
P 81 John Wanyeki 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.9776 -0.12198 Laikipia Lamuria
P 82 Rukwaro 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.9975 -0.1215 Laikipia Lamuria
P 83 Ibrahim Mwangi 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.97739 -0.1213 Laikipia Lamuria
P 84 Njigira 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.97637 -0.1205 Laikipia Lamuria
P 85 Peter Kirichu 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.97673 -0.1877 Laikipia Lamuria
P 86 Kabuga 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.97668 -0.11688 Laikipia Lamuria
P 87 Ibrahim Macharia 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.98465 -0.13369 Laikipia Lamuria
P 88 Kameri Kanyua 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.98366 -0.13344 Laikipia Lamuria
P 89 Gakono 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.98366 -0.13344 Laikipia Lamuria
P 90 Samuel Ndegwa 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.9832 -0.13343 Laikipia Lamuria
P 91 Macharia Mugethi 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.98293 -0.13291 Laikipia Lamuria
P 92 Kameri Kinyua 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.98293 -0.13291 Laikipia Lamuria
P 93 Ndungu 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.98223 -0.13113 Laikipia Lamuria
P 94 Ngure 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.98222 -0.13005 Laikipia Lamuria
P 95 Mwaniki Muthoga 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.98238 -0.12847 Laikipia Lamuria
P 96 Silas Gichangi 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.98218 -0.1277 Laikipia Lamuria
P 97 Mururi 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.98203 -0.12739 Laikipia Lamuria
P 98 Gathua 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.98189 -0.12566 Laikipia Lamuria
Relative of
P 99 1.5 0.9 9.7 0.11 36.97735 -0.12202 Laikipia Lamuria
Iment owner
P 100 Iment Farm 30 18 193 2.24 36.97658 -0.12173 Laikipia Lamuria
P 101 Ndema tea factory 10 6 64.4 0.75 36.97589 -0.12114 Laikipia Lamuria
P 102 Ngatia Warugongo 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.97605 -0.1207 Laikipia Lamuria
P 103 Michael Kariuki 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.97588 -0.11915 Laikipia Lamuria
P 104 Wanjii 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.97588 -0.11915 Laikipia Lamuria
P 105 Mbuthia 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.97588 -0.11915 Laikipia Lamuria
P 106 Warugongo 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.97588 -0.11915 Laikipia Lamuria
P 107 Wamai 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.97588 -0.11915 Laikipia Lamuria
P 108 Grace Wanjiku 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.97588 -0.11915 Laikipia Lamuria
P 109 M. Kariuki 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.9745 -0.11596 Laikipia Lamuria
P 110 Karuga 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.9745 -0.11596 Laikipia Lamuria
P 111 Caleb 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.9745 -0.11596 Laikipia Lamuria
160 Appendices
P 112 Ngatia 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.9745 -0.11596 Laikipia Lamuria

P 113 Christopher Nderi 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.97519 -0.11289 Laikipia Lamuria
P 114 Machira Gichuki 1.25 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.97231 -0.109825 Laikipia Matanya
Jackson Wambugu
P 115 1.5 0.9 9.7 0.11 36.96943 -0.10676 Laikipia Matanya
Githae
P 116 Kimondo Githae 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.96838 -0.10453 Laikipia Matanya
P 117 Ephraim Kahenya 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.96736 -0.10425 Laikipia Matanya
P 118 Grace Nyaguthi 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.9659 -0.10319 Laikipia Matanya
P 119 Konui 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.9659 -0.10319 Laikipia Matanya
P 120 Michael Thairu 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.96494 -0.10207 Laikipia Matanya
P 121 Michael Kibuchi 0.75 0.45 4.8 0.06 36.96455 -0.10179 Laikipia Matanya
P 122 Edward Kibugi 0.75 0.45 4.8 0.06 36.96455 -0.10179 Laikipia Matanya
P 123 George Nganga 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.96405 -0.10154 Laikipia Matanya
P 124 Wangombe 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.96309 -0.10124 Laikipia Matanya
P 125 Samuel Githinji 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.96308 -0.10104 Laikipia Matanya
P 126 John Mburu 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.96285 -0.10021 Laikipia Matanya
P 127 George Nganga 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.96261 -0.09986 Laikipia Matanya
P 128 Edward Kibugi 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.96108 -0.09893 Laikipia Matanya
P 129 Chiuri 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95985 -0.09864 Laikipia Matanya
P 130 Mwangi Nene 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95985 -0.09864 Laikipia Matanya
P 131 Gaita 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.96083 -0.09772 Laikipia Matanya
P 132 George Theuri 1.25 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.96083 -0.09772 Laikipia Matanya
P 133 Gichamba 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.96036 -0.09731 Laikipia Matanya
P 134 Wagura 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.9601 -0.0966 Laikipia Matanya
P 135 Mama Wangondu 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.95971 -0.09623 Laikipia Matanya
P 136 Warui 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.95945 -0.09572 Laikipia Matanya
P 137 Kariuki Warui 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.95851 -0.09514 Laikipia Matanya
P 138 Unknown 6 1.25 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.95832 -0.095 Laikipia Matanya
P 139 Kamunya 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.96916 -0.10775 Laikipia Matanya
P 140 Veronica Wambui 1.25 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.96848 -0.10605 Laikipia Matanya
P 141 Eric Njiri 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.96821 -0.10461 Laikipia Matanya
P 142 Michael Njama 4 2.4 25.8 0.30 36.96982 -0.10825 Laikipia Matanya
P 143 Kenya Red Cross 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.96384 -0.10171 Laikipia Matanya
James Theuri/
Njoroge
P 145 Mary Gathigia 0.25 0.15 1.6 0.02 36.9629 -0.10102 Laikipia Matanya
P 146 Mwatha 1.25 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.96217 -0.0998 Laikipia Matanya
P 147 Benson 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.96164 -0.0993 Laikipia Matanya
P 148 Hannah Wanjiru 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.96032 -0.09951 Laikipia Matanya
P 149 Wa Kabande 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.9598 -0.09923 Laikipia Matanya
P 150 Male 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.95967 -0.09873 Laikipia Matanya
P 151 Charles Mathenge 2.5 1.5 16.1 0.19 36.96 -0.09778 Laikipia Matanya
Appendices 161
P 152 Peter Gatu 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.95964 -0.09677 Laikipia Matanya
P 153 John Gachure 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.95844 -0.09584 Laikipia Matanya
P 154 Elijah Kibe 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95779 -0.09423 Laikipia Matanya
P 155 Charles Kibiru 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.95739 -0.09407 Laikipia Matanya
P 156 Ndungu Gatu 1.25 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.9562 -0.09368 Laikipia Matanya
P 157 Mbeu 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95638 -0.09354 Laikipia Matanya
P 158 Kamonye 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.95663 -0.09297 Laikipia Matanya
P 159 Charles Mbogo 3 1.8 19.3 0.22 36.95674 -0.09274 Laikipia Matanya
P 160 Kahiga 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95672 -0.09158 Laikipia Matanya
P 161 Samuel Githinji 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.95607 -0.09081 Laikipia Matanya
P 162 Mathenge 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.95561 -0.09001 Laikipia Matanya
P 163 Maiya Munene 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95595 -0.08901 Laikipia Matanya
P 164 Samuel Kiige 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95359 -0.08714 Laikipia Matanya
P 165 Njuguna 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.95348 -0.08667 Laikipia Matanya
John Mbuchi
Gatima
P 167 Mama Eunice 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95293 -0.08347 Laikipia Matanya
Peter Ngugi
P 168 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95195 -0.08246 Laikipia Matanya
Wainaina
P 169 Jeremia Kang'oyo 1.5 0.9 9.7 0.11 36.95192 -0.08208 Laikipia Matanya
P 170 Dominic Mukui 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.94992 -0.08018 Laikipia Matanya
P 171 Njuguna George 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95003 -0.07986 Laikipia Matanya
P 172 Erastus Wachira 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94953 -0.07881 Laikipia Matanya
P 173 Miriam Kamwene 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.94934 -0.0784 Laikipia Matanya
P 174 Hiram Kamau 4 2.4 25.8 0.30 36.94878 -0.07687 Laikipia Matanya
P 175 Michael Thairu 3 1.8 19.3 0.22 36.94844 -0.07657 Laikipia Matanya
P 176 John Wahome 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94656 -0.0738 Laikipia Matanya
P 177 Stephen Muhuri 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.94631 -0.07356 Laikipia Matanya
P 178 Gachanja Muriuki 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.94526 -0.07367 Laikipia Matanya
P 179 Samuel 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.94505 -0.7378 Laikipia Matanya
P 180 Ndegwa 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.94505 -0.7378 Laikipia Matanya
P 181 Mama Wambui 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.94467 -0.07375 Laikipia Matanya
P 182 J.B. Mwangi 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.9445 -0.07249 Laikipia Matanya
P 183 Felix Ndirangu 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.94473 -0.07238 Laikipia Matanya
P 184 Kumbura Muriithi 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.94437 -0.07283 Laikipia Matanya
P 185 Boniface Nyuguto 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.94439 -0.07348 Laikipia Matanya
P 186 Ngatia 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.94373 -0.07189 Laikipia Matanya
P 187 Nderitu 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94373 -0.07242 Laikipia Matanya
P 188 Felix Ndirangu 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94321 -0.07209 Laikipia Matanya
P 189 Maina Muchiri 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94286 -0.07207 Laikipia Matanya
P 190 Nderitu Wahome 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94265 -0.07195 Laikipia Matanya
P 191 J.B. Mwangi 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94131 -0.07179 Laikipia Matanya
P 192 Mwangi Mrefu 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94111 -0.0716 Laikipia Matanya
162 Appendices
P 193 Nderito Muhara 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94119 -0.07038 Laikipia Matanya
P 194 Kamoche 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.94042 -0.0696 Laikipia Matanya
P 195 Stephen Kimani 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.93869 -0.06846 Laikipia Matanya
P 196 Wambichi 0.25 0.15 1.6 0.02 36.93828 -0.06788 Laikipia Matanya
P 197 Jumo Muchiri 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.93693 -0.06522 Laikipia Matanya
P 198 Wambugu Kabue 1.5 0.9 9.7 0.11 36.93706 -0.06473 Laikipia Matanya
P 199 Ndegwa Wangemi 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95538 -0.0885 Laikipia Matanya
P 200 Materu 0.5 0.3 3.2 0.04 36.95377 -0.08695 Laikipia Matanya
P 201 Bascilio 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95332 -0.0849 Laikipia Matanya
Ruth Wambui
Mathai
Priscilla Njuki
Kioria
P 204 Samson Karau 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.95233 -0.08077 Laikipia Matanya
P 205 Benson Muthamo 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95052 -0.08073 Laikipia Matanya
P 206 Daniel Oweri 1.5 0.9 9.7 0.11 36.95058 -0.07963 Laikipia Matanya
P 207 Wambichi 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.95035 -0.07837 Laikipia Matanya
Duncan Mwai
Kibue
P 209 Kaguru 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94962 -0.07716 Laikipia Matanya
P 210 Wanduba 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.9493 -0.07673 Laikipia Matanya
P 211 Ruth Ngengio 2.5 1.5 16.1 0.19 36.94868 -0.07588 Laikipia Matanya
P 212 Sammy Weru 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.9488 -0.07495 Laikipia Matanya
P 213 Nancy Kangata 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94845 -0.0741 Laikipia Matanya
P 214 Virginia Gathoni 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94675 -0.07292 Laikipia Matanya
P 215 Stephen Muhuri 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.94594 -0.07244 Laikipia Matanya
P 216 Daniel Mithamo 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.9451 -0.07174 Laikipia Matanya
P 217 Simon Gakiri 1.5 0.9 9.7 0.11 36.94477 -0.07168 Laikipia Matanya
P 218 Stephen Muriithi 1.5 0.9 9.7 0.11 36.94477 -0.07168 Laikipia Matanya
P 219 James Irungu 0.75 0.45 4.8 0.06 36.94404 -0.07141 Laikipia Matanya
Evantus Mwangi
Muriuki
Ann Mugure
Muraga
P 222 Kagumba 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94225 -0.0711 Laikipia Matanya
P 223 Muchangi Ritho 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.94199 -0.07085 Laikipia Matanya
P 224 Anastacia Kiiru 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.9417 -0.07059 Laikipia Matanya
P 225 Frederick Nderitu 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94146 -0.07005 Laikipia Matanya
P 226 Joseph Muchina 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.94149 -0.06948 Laikipia Matanya
P 227 Bernard Gachara 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.94099 -0.06897 Laikipia Matanya
P 228 Teresa Thumari 0.75 0.45 4.8 0.06 36.94029 -0.06901 Laikipia Matanya
Mary Wambui
Wachira
Appendices 163
P 230 Unknown 7 1 0.6 6.4 0.07 36.93955 -0.06786 Laikipia Matanya

P 231 Robert Wahome 3 1.8 19.3 0.22 36.93863 -0.06762 Laikipia Matanya
Peter Gikundi
Gaturu
P 233 Gikaria 1.25 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.93774 -0.06552 Laikipia Matanya
P 234 Kimani Ndegwa 2 1.2 12.9 0.15 36.93741 -0.064877 Laikipia Matanya
Pump Users between RGS A6 and Confluence with Ewaso Ng'iro
P 235 Francis Wainhina 4 2 21.5 0.25 36.92356 -0.05588 Laikipia Matanya
P 236 Muriuki Weru 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.92379 -0.0559 Laikipia Matanya
P 237 Muchina 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.92446 -0.05594 Laikipia Matanya
P 238 Wanjiku 0.5 0.25 2.7 0.03 36.92446 -0.05594 Laikipia Matanya
P 239 Francis Wainhina 2 1 10.7 0.12 36.92475 -0.5515 Laikipia Matanya
P 240 Wamuhia 0.5 0.25 2.7 0.03 36.92571 -0.0557 Laikipia Matanya
Joseph & Maina
Githingi
P 242 Kihara Githingi 1.5 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.92824 -0.05742 Laikipia Matanya
James Warui
Charai
Agnes Withaya
Charai
P 245 Maina Gichuki 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.93211 -0.05793 Laikipia Matanya
P 246 Ann Wanjiku 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.93208 -0.05835 Laikipia Matanya
Patrick Murimi 0.37
P 247 0.75 4.0 0.05 36.93252 -0.05919 Laikipia Matanya
Macharia 5
Susan Muthoni
Itero
Lawrence
Kamande
Joseph Mwangi
Kabiru
Benson Mwangi
Nganga
P 252 Kinyua Kamamia 1.5 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.93566 -0.06194 Laikipia Matanya
Patrick Koogi
Mainda
P 254 Virgina Nyawira 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.93714 -0.06293 Laikipia Matanya
P 255 Nicholas Maina 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.93666 -0.06392 Laikipia Matanya
P 256 Mary Nguiti 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.9116 -0.05337 Laikipia Matanya
P 257 Muraya Ngetha 2.5 1.25 13.4 0.16 36.91304 -0.05326 Laikipia Matanya
P 258 Joseph Mburu 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.91325 -0.05375 Laikipia Matanya
P 259 Kinyua Keguri 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.91411 -0.054054 Laikipia Matanya
P 260 Ngunjiri Gachagua 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.91525 -0.05353 Laikipia Matanya
P 261 Ndururi Kimotho 2 1 10.7 0.12 36.91552 -0.05253 Laikipia Matanya
164 Appendices
P 262 Unknown 8 2 1 10.7 0.12 36.91613 -0.0525 Laikipia Matanya

P 263 Regina Njeri 2 1 10.7 0.12 36.9169 -0.05297 Laikipia Matanya
P 264 James Muiruri 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.91758 -0.05313 Laikipia Matanya
P 265 Wa Ndoria 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.91895 -0.05346 Laikipia Matanya
P 266 Muthamo 3 1.5 16.1 0.19 36.91984 -0.05319 Laikipia Matanya
P 267 Mirichu 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.92119 -0.05356 Laikipia Matanya
P 268 Muriithi Ndungu 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.92169 -0.05383 Laikipia Matanya
P 269 Kezia Wanjeru 2.5 1.25 13.4 0.16 36.92275 -0.05425 Laikipia Matanya
P 270 Daniel Ndegwa 1.5 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.92356 -0.05498 Laikipia Matanya
P 271 Murage Ngure 2 1 10.7 0.12 36.91130 -0.053022 Laikipia Matanya
P 272 Duncan Koori 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.91130 -0.053022 Laikipia Matanya
P 273 Anastacia Gathoni 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.91279 -0.052362 Laikipia Matanya
Richard Kigotho
P 274 2 1 10.7 0.12 36.91366 -0.05279 Laikipia Matanya
Kaburia
P 275 Mwangi Kagunda 1.5 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.9147 -0.0537 Laikipia Matanya
P 276 Simon Wangombe 1.5 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.91486 -0.05177 Laikipia Matanya
P 277 Maina 0.5 0.25 2.7 0.03 36.91562 -0.05141 Laikipia Matanya
P 278 Muriithi Nderi 2 1 10.7 0.12 36.91573 -0.05186 Laikipia Matanya
P 279 Eunice Wangui 1.5 0.75 8.0 0.09 36.91684 -0.05248 Laikipia Matanya
P 280 Munyiri 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.91853 -0.05261 Laikipia Matanya
Joseph Nduku
P 281 2 1 10.7 0.12 36.92336 -0.05364 Laikipia Matanya
Chege
P 282 Wangai Muchuiri 2.5 1.25 13.4 0.16 36.92391 -0.05313 Laikipia Matanya
P 283 Irungu Wachiuri 0.5 0.25 2.7 0.03 36.92443 -0.053322 Laikipia Matanya
Peter Kiama
Kabue
0.12
P 285 Wachira Ndua 0.25 1.3 0.02 36.92386 -0.05569 Laikipia Matanya
5
John Gicheru
Waitiki
P 287 Muriithi Maina 2 1 10.7 0.12 36.92738 -0.055023 Laikipia Matanya
Wambugu Gathim-
ba
P 289 Mwangi Gikandi 4 2 21.5 0.25 36.92939 -0.05692 Laikipia Matanya
P 290 Munyua Waigina 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.93222 -0.03784 Laikipia Matanya
Henry Ndegwa
Ndirangu
P 292 Mbuthia Gathu 0.5 0.25 2.7 0.03 36.93408 -0.05846 Laikipia Matanya
P 293 Simon Gaturuku 3 1.5 16.1 0.19 36.9351 -0.05846 Laikipia Matanya
P 294 Wambugu Kimina 1 0.5 5.4 0.06 36.93579 -0.06119 Laikipia Matanya
John Kamau
Ngatia
P 296 Konja 0.5 0.25 2.7 0.03 36.93696 -0.06176 Laikipia Matanya
Appendices 165
P 297 Unkown 8 0.5 0.25 2.7 0.03 36.93719 -0.0623 Laikipia Matanya
Gilbert Waiguru
Mithamo
166 Appendices
Appendix 7: CETRAD station protocol
CETRAD station protocol Observer’s Name: ……………………………….
Date of Fieldwork: ………………………………
Procedure: Every time a station is visited, observations and changes need to be recorded on this
sheet. The data should be copied to the Excel file “CETRAD Station protocol.xlsx” upon return to
headquarters and saved on the server under “shares on server (X) --> hydrology”.
Water levels: The EcoLog‘s recorded water level can be looked up in the water logger operating
program if the “Instantaneous values”-window under “OTT EcoLog 500” is opened. This instant wa-
ter level needs to be compared to the actual water level the gauge’s ruler is showing. If there is a dif-
ference between the two of more than 0.5 cm, the value in the “instantaneous values” window needs
to be changed and saved to the EcoLog.
Altering settings: Before altering any settings on the EcoLog, please download all the data from the
logger and save it on the laptop, as changes in settings might delete all stored data on the EcoLog.
After manipulating the settings, make sure to reconnect the EcoLog and to check if the changed set-
tings have been saved on the EcoLog and also check if the corrected water level value has been cor-
rectly saved. Make sure to write down any changes in this station protocol.
Gauge Water level Adjusted Sedi- SIM top up?

Station Change of settings?
Time ruler level EcoLog Water ment Current
name EcoLog reset?
[cm] [cm] level [cm] cleaned Amount?
Remarks (e.g. change of riverbed or cross section):

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Declaration (Erklärung) 167
Declaration (Erklärung)
Gemäss Art. 28 Abs. 2 RSL 05
Name/ Vorname: Nussbaumer Roger

Matrikelnummer: 09-125-741
Studiengang: Geographie
Bachelor □ Master ■ Dissertation □
Titel der Arbeit: Development of an information system on the state of the river
flow and river water abstractions for improved water resource man-
agement along the Naro Moru River in Kenya
Leiter der Arbeit: Prof. Dr. Hans Hurni
Co-Leiter der Arbeit: Dr. H-P. Liniger
Ich erkläre hiermit, dass ich diese Arbeit selbständig verfasst und keine anderen als die angegebenen
Quellen benutzt habe. Alle Stellen, die wörtlich oder sinngemäss aus Quellen entnommen wurden,
habe ich als solche gekennzeichnet. Mir ist bekannt, dass andernfalls der Senat gemäss Artikel 36
Absatz 1 Buchstabe r des Gesetztes vom 5. September 1996 über die Universität zum Entzug des auf
Grund dieser Arbeit verliehenen Titels berechtig ist.
Bern, 28.05.2015

Nussbaumer Master Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Nussbaumer Master Thesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nussbaumer Master Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Development of an information system on the state

of the river flow and river water abstractions for

Masterarbeit der Philosophisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der

Leiter der Arbeit:

Master Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Science of the University of Bern

Preface & Acknowledgements

Preface & Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... v

Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... viii

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. xiii

List of Tables.............................................................................................................................. xvii

List of Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................xix

1.1 Problem Statement .................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Objectives of the Study and Research Questions .................................................................... 3

1.3 Institutional Framework .......................................................................................................... 6

2 Description of the Study Area .................................................................................................. 7

2.2 The Naro Moru Catchment ..................................................................................................... 9

2.3 Gauging Station Network in the Naro Moru Catchment ...................................................... 11

2.3.1 Precipitation and Evaporation Measuring Stations ....................................................... 11

2.3.2 River Gauging Stations (RGS) ...................................................................................... 12

2.4.1 Alpine Zone (> 4000 m a.s.l.)........................................................................................ 14

2.4.2 Moorland Zone (3200-4000 m a.s.l.)............................................................................. 15

2.4.3 Forest Zone (2300-3200 m a.s.l.) .................................................................................. 16

2.4.4 Footzone (2000-2300 m a.s.l.) ....................................................................................... 17

2.4.5 Savannah Zone (1800-2000 m a.s.l.) ............................................................................. 18

2.5 Mt. Kenya as the Basin’s Water Tower ................................................................................ 19

2.5.1 Climate .......................................................................................................................... 19

2.5.2 Surface Water and Groundwater Availability ............................................................... 23

2.6 Socio-economic Settings ....................................................................................................... 24

2.6.1 Population Growth......................................................................................................... 24

2.6.3 Water Scarcity and associated Conflicts ....................................................................... 26

2.7 Water Management ............................................................................................................... 27

2.7.1 Structure of basin-wide Water Management ................................................................. 27

2.7.2 Community-based Management: Naro Moru WRUA................................................... 27

3 Calibration of Gauging Stations ............................................................................................. 30

3.1 Methods ................................................................................................................................. 30

3.1.1 Gaugings used for the Rating Equations ....................................................................... 30

3.1.2 Current Meter Method ................................................................................................... 31

3.1.3 Salt Dilution Method ..................................................................................................... 32

3.1.4 Float Method ................................................................................................................. 35

3.1.5 Development of the Stage-Discharge Relationship ....................................................... 35

3.2 Results ................................................................................................................................... 38

3.2.1 RGS A3 ......................................................................................................................... 38

3.2.2 RGS A4 ......................................................................................................................... 41

3.2.3 RGS A5 ......................................................................................................................... 46

3.2.4 RGS A6 ......................................................................................................................... 49

3.3 Summary and Discussion ...................................................................................................... 52

4 Abstraction Campaign ............................................................................................................ 54

4.1 Introduction to the Abstraction Campaign of 2013 ............................................................... 54

4.2 Previous Abstraction Campaigns in the Naro Moru Catchment ........................................... 54

4.3 Methodology of Abstraction Campaigns .............................................................................. 56

4.3.1 General Proceeding ....................................................................................................... 56

4.3.2 Approach for the Matanya Furrow ................................................................................ 58

4.3.4 Approach for Water Pumps ........................................................................................... 60

4.3.5 Demand-based Approach .............................................................................................. 61

4.3.6 Inapplicable Approaches for Gravity Pipes ................................................................... 64

4.3.7 Approach for KWS Intake (Gravity Pipe) ..................................................................... 66

4.3.9 Approach for Kigama Water Project (Gravity Pipe) ..................................................... 68

4.3.11 Approach for Consumption by Livestock ..................................................................... 70

4.4 Results and Discussion of the Abstraction Campaign 2013 ................................................. 71