Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 31

Accepted Manuscript

Assessment of water availability for competing uses using SWAT and WEAP in South Phuthiatsana catchment, Lesotho

Motlatsi Maliehe, Deogratias M.M. Mulungu

PII:

S1474-7065(16)30045-6

DOI:

Reference:

JPCE 2582

To appear in:

Physics and Chemistry of the Earth

Received Date: 13 May 2016

Revised Date:

Accepted Date: 17 February 2017

24 November 2016

Date: Accepted Date: 17 February 2017 24 November 2016 Please cite this article as: Maliehe, M.,

Please cite this article as: Maliehe, M., Mulungu, D.M.M., Assessment of water availability for competing uses using SWAT and WEAP in South Phuthiatsana catchment, Lesotho, Physics and Chemistry of the Earth (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.pce.2017.02.014.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Assessment of water availability for competing uses using SWAT and WEAP in South Phuthiatsana catchment, Lesotho

Motlatsi Maliehe and Deogratias M.M. Mulungu*

University of Dar es Salaam, College of Engineering and Technology Department of Water Resources Engineering

P.O. Box 35131 Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

*Corresponding Author email: dmulungu@udsm.ac.tz; deorgm@yahoo.co.uk

Abstract

The study assessed the quantity of surface water in the South Phuthiatsana catchment,

estimated flows in ungauged catchments using Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) and

allocated the resources in the catchment using Water Evaluation And Planning (WEAP)

model. SWAT model was calibrated from 1979 to 2001, the p-factor was 65%, r_factor 0.58,

NS 0.59 and R 2 0.59 for calibration and for validation from 2002 to 2013, the p-factor was

57%, the r_factor was 1.34, the NS was 0.52, and R

balance as: 26% of precipitation form streamflow, 41% of the total flow comes from

baseflow, while surface runoff accounts for 59%, 14% of precipitation percolates to shallow

aquifer, 1% percolates to deep aquifer and 68% of precipitation is lost through

evapotranspiration. The WEAP model was calibrated using CG024 and CG084 stations and

historical demands. For CG024 calibration (1972 – 2002) NS was 0.72 and R

for validation (2003 – 2014) the NS was 0.73 and R

2 was 0.74. For CG084 calibration (2007

2 was 0.84 and

2 was 0.66. The results show the water

– 2011) NS and R 2 were 0.55 and 0.64 and for validation (2012 – 2014) the NS and R

0.63 and 0.89 respectively. Two scenarios were evaluated. First for the reference scenario, the

Metolong industrial demands of 1.46 Mm

3 were

2 were

3 and environmental demands of 2.29 Mm

both not met. Secondly, for the irrigation expansion scenario, increasing irrigation land by

3 demands were not met (irrigation accounts for 65.65% of the

unmet). Therefore, the study recommends an irrigation plan for the catchment. The irrigation

plan has to include: irrigation systems designed for the site, meteorological stations and an

irrigator’s association with experts forming part of the board.

12.3%, a total of 4.44 Mm

Keywords: South Phuthiatsana catchment; SWAT model; Uncertainty; Water availability;

Water demands; WEAP model

Page 1 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1. Introduction

Integrated water resources management (IWRM) is an approach, which promotes

development of water, land and related resources in order to maximize the resultant economic and social welfare equitably without compromising the sustainability of the environment (Global Water Partnership, 2002). IWRM recognises that there are competing water uses that

are often connected and interrelated. The problems that arise from social aspects typically

affect water resources and the environment is always at the receiving end.

Lesotho has abundant water resources (5.23 km /year) exceeding the country’s requirements

(2 km 3 /year) but seasonality affects water availability to users (LMS, 2013). The water

availability is affected because of rainfall seasonality that there is wet (rainy) and dry seasons.

The rainy season of the country starts from October to February and after this period, the

surface water resources availability slowly declines. During winter, the precipitation is in the

form of snow and mostly in the mountainous areas. As a result, water is predominantly in the

highlands and yet most people prefer to live in the less water abundant western areas –

lowlands (TAMS, 1996). The competing users for water resources in Lesotho are:

hydroelectricity, agriculture, domestic, industrial and environment (which was recognised

recently following the Lesotho Water Act of 2008).

3

In the capital city, Maseru, the growth of textile industries as well as peri-urban population

has been of great concern in recent times. The population living in urban areas is expected to

increase by 20% for the next ten years and this will lead to an increase in domestic water

demands (GoL, 2012). This has led to the construction of the Metolong Dam through the

Lesotho Lowlands Water Supply Scheme. The dam was constructed in May 2012

(ORASECOM, 2013) and the first impoundment was completed in February 2014 (WASCO,

3 with a supply capacity of 63.5 M/day until 2020 and

105 M/day by 2035 (available yield period for the dam). The dam catchment is about 20%

of the South Phuthiatsana Catchment. It a major water supplier to Maseru and other areas

outside the South Phuthiatsana Catchment (WASCO, 2015).

2015). The dam capacity is 53 Mm

The South Phuthiatsana catchment used to support irrigation schemes but most of these

schemes have collapsed due to fragmented institutional arrangements. On the same note, the

performances of these schemes were very low and this led to low crop production. Inadequate

knowledge of the hydrology of the catchment has led to failure in understanding of the water

supply which meets the irrigation water demand. Moreover, water for the environment is also

of concern. The socio-economic and environmental conditions have to be maintained

downstream. Thus, assessment of surface water resources can help understand the supply of

water resources particularly during dry seasons, and allocation and management strategies of

the same. The basin scale assessments provide vital information since water management

decisions are very often determined by the river basin management authorities (Gain and

Giuppopni, 2015). Prediction of water availability and impact assessment of water supply and

demand sites is required for appropriate decision-making processes for water resource

development (Hishinuma et al. 2014). In order to assess the spatial and seasonal impact of water demand and allocation of water in a river basin, distributed models are appropriate. Watershed models are standard tools used to generate continuous estimates of streamflow and other hydrological variables. However, most of the watershed models lack built-in scenario tools, which are attractive for planning and management of water allocation.

Page 2 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Scenario testing is a larger aspect for planning and management, and for competing water uses, this can be done well by planning models such as Water Evaluation And Planning System (WEAP), which freely available. The technical details on the WEAP model can be obtained from Yates et al. (2005). WEAP model is an effective tool to advice on water resources development and management alternatives (Skaggs et al., 2012). WEAP has been used widely and successfully in the world and in Africa, e.g., Mulungu and Taipe, 2012;

Rodriques et al., 2005; van Loon and Droogers, 2006; Arranz and McCartney, 2007; Haji,

2011; Droogers et al., 2014. It can be applied from community to catchment and to basin

level (Yates et al., 2005; Sieber et al., 2005). Accordingly, WEAP model was selected in this

study for the South Phuthiatsana catchment as a decision support tool for water resources

management at catchment level in Lesotho.

However, in many developing countries, availability of hydrological data is a challenge and

as such, WEAP model may not be applied directly and it needs assumptions and input data

from other models. This is the case with Lesotho and the South Phuthiatsana catchment in

particular, where most of the river sub-catchments are ungauged. In South Phuthiatsana

catchment, observed river flow data was only available at the downstream point or river outlet

while WEAP model requires water flows at the river tributaries or sections known as head

flows. Accordingly, in WEAP set-up there was a need to get water supply data from another

model. Therefore, the approach of the study was first to quantify the water resources

especially for the ungauged catchments using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT)

hydrological model and then allocate water resources to different water demands using the

WEAP model. In this case, the sub-basin structure and river network obtained during SWAT

model set-up were adopted in the WEAP model set-up. SWAT model can be downloaded

freely at the website (http://swat.tamu.edu/) and there are different and current versions of the

SWAT model, which are documented and distributed. The model has been used successfully

in the African region (e.g. Mulungu and Munishi, 2007; Ndomba et al., 2008; Githui et al.,

2009; Sood et al., 2013) and also coupled with WEAP model (e.g. McCartney and Girma

2012; Chinnasamy at al., 2015). Essentially, SWAT model was used in this study to estimate

the catchment hydrology on daily time step and in ungauged (nested) catchments upstream of

a gauged river outlet. Therefore, the study aimed at assessing the quantity of surface water in

South Phuthiatsana catchment and allocate it for current and for the year 2035, which is the

period for available yield of the dam. The study attempted to determine whether the new

development (Metolong Dam) will meet the South Phuthiatsana catchment demands, which

were expected to be changing with time. The varying water demands were determined for

each sector in the catchment and evaluated with the water supply using the scenario approach

built-in the WEAP model. However, following data scarcity in the study area and other

limitations in hydrological modeling in the southern Africa region as indicated by Hughes

(2008), the SWAT model application in this study was a challenge and there was need to

combine observed and reanalysis input datasets.

2. Methods

2.1 SWAT Model Description SWAT is a physically based and semi-distributed model developed by Agricultural Research Services of United States Department of Agriculture (Fadil et al., 2011). It is a large scale model used to simulate: the hydrology of a catchment, water quality, climate change, crop growth, sediment yield, nutrient transfer, impacts of land management practices (Setegn et al., 2008; Mulungu and Munishi, 2007; Fadil et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2007). In SWAT, a

Page 3 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

watershed is divided into sub-basins and the sub-basins are further divided into Hydrologic Response Units (HRUs). The HRUs are units with similar land use, slope and soil type (Mulungu and Munishi, 2007). The model calculates the water balance for each HRU. SWAT uses GIS interface (ArcSWAT) which makes it user friendly.

The model use water balance equation (Eq. 1) to simulate the catchment hydrology in daily

time step:

Where:

= + ∑

(1)

SW t is the final soil water content (mm)

SW 0 is the initial soil water content (mm)

R day is precipitation in day i (mm)

Q surf is the amount of surface runoff in day i (mm)

W seep is the amount of water entering the vadose zone from soil profile in day i (mm)

Q qw is the amount of return flow in day i (mm)

E a is the amount of evapotranspiration in day i (mm)

t is the time in days

In the South Phuthiatsana catchment, the SCS curve number method was used to estimate

runoff and the Penman-Monteith method was used to estimate potential evapotranspiration

(Arnold et al., 1998). Channel flood routing was estimated using the Muskingum method

(Zhang et al., 2007). The data input for SWAT are: Digital elevation model (DEM), land use

map, soil type map, meteorological data and streamflow data. All the maps were projected to

UTM projection. The SWAT model efficiency and reliability has been reported in several

places around the world, and in Africa and South Africa (Fadil et al., 2011).

2.2 WEAP Model Description

The Water Evaluation And Planning (WEAP) model is designed to assist policy makers to

evaluate water supply policies and suitable water resources plans (Hatcher, 1995). WEAP

was originally developed by Stockholm Environment Institute at Boston, USA (Van Loon

and Droogers, 2006).

WEAP uses scenario approach (answering “what if” questions) to evaluate water demands,

associated priorities and water supply - for current and future periods (Rodrigues et al., 2005).

WEAP functions are (Sieber et al., 2004):

Catchment hydrology simulation, (i.e., surface runoff, evaporation and infiltration)

and assess water availability.

Simulation of interactions of socio-economic activities with water resources and their

allocation as well.

WEAP operates on a monthly time step water balance accounting: total inflows equal total

outflows, net of any change in storage (in reservoirs and aquifers). A linear programming is used to maximize the satisfaction of demand site and user-specified instream flow requirements, subject to demand priorities, supply preferences, mass balance and other constraints. The mass balance equation constraint in the linear programming is shown as Eq.

2:

Page 4 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

=

(2)

The data required for the model are (Levite et al., 2003): water use (demand site); reservoir

location, capacity and operation rules; flow gauging station (flow requirements and ecological reserves) and river head flows. It also overcomes data shortages by using data from public domains and satellite information (Droogers et al., 2014). WEAP also allows the user to

determine the level of details for a given study - the user can lump similar demand sites

together or can present them as they appear from different sub-basins.

During the model set up, the current accounts, key assumptions and scenarios were defined.

Current accounts are viewed as calibration step and provide insights of actual demands,

pollution loads, resources and supply within the catchment. Key assumptions may be built in

current accounts to represent policies, costs and factors affecting demands pollution, supply

and hydrology. Scenarios built on current accounts allow one to explore the impacts of

alternative assumptions (Van Loo and Doorgers, 2006). The scenario in which the data is

available is called the reference scenario (Van Loo and Doorgers, 2006).

Essentially calibration is done by estimating historical water demand patterns and simulating

resultant flow (McCartney et al., 2005). The WEAP streamflows can also be calibrated

manually by altering the system demand historical patterns to have the best fit between the

simulated and observed flow (Mulungu and Taipe, 2012). This was the approach adopted by

the study. The Nash Sutcliff and coefficient of determination were used to measure the

efficiency of the model.

2.3 Study Area

The South Phuthiatsana catchment (Figure 1), is found between the latitudes 29°1250to

29°3750and longitudes 27°255to 28°25with an elevation between 1469 m.a.s.l and

2987 m.a.s.l. The catchment has area of 1,116 Km 2 with an elongated shape. It is located in

the capital city of Lesotho, between Maseru district (covers 20.89% of Maseru district) and

Berea district (covers 16.74% of Berea district). The South Phuthiatsana River flows from

Thaba-Nt’sonyane south-westerly to Mohokare River. Figure 1 shows the South Phuthiatsana

catchment with streamflow, SWAT meteorological stations and rainfall gauges.

Insert Figure 1: Map of the study area

2.4 Meteorological Data Preparation

2.4.1 Rainfall

The rainfall and temperature data were acquired from the Lesotho Meteorological Services.

The collected rainfall data is presented in Table 1 and it includes those stations outside the

catchment as well. It also shows the: location, elevation, available data period, percentage of

missing data and the station identity number of the eleven collected rainfall stations. It is

observed that for stations within the catchment, the gaps are very significant. The gaps range

from 7% to 48.3%.

Table 1: Rainfall data description.

Station ID

Lat

Lon

Elevation

Period

%Missing

LESMAS25

-29,380

27,750

1775

1985-2013

26.6

LESMAS24

-29,444

27,725

1690

1979-2013

16.7

LESMAS27

-29,449

27,560

1628

1985-2013

7.3

Page 5 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

LESBER04

-29,250

27,920

1700

1979-2013

16.5

LESMAS35

-29,327

27,789

1829

2000-2013

48.3

LESMAS06 *

-29,337

27,528

1575

1979-2012

8.4

LESBER06 *

-29,107

27,974

1725

1984-2012

17.3

LESMAS29

-29,394

27,554

1600

1998-2005

9.5

LESMAS20

-29,420

27,630

1690

1979-2005

16.5

LESBER07 *

-29,137

27,766

1690

1993-2013

12

LESMAS22 *

-29,606

27,736

1775

1979-2000

12.2

* Stations outside the catchment

2.4.2 Temperature

The temperature data (Table 2) for the stations include maximum and minimum variables

indicated with a prefix -max and -min respectively. The stations had a lot of gaps and their

data lengths were not corresponding. The maximum and minimum temperature data at the

same station had different data periods. LESMAS 25-min has the highest percentage (31.8%)

of missing data followed by LESMAS 27-max (28.1%). The SWAT stations presented the

reanalysis data from SWAT website (globalweather.tamu.edu/), which was obtained to

supplement the observation data following data gaps or missing variables. The South

Phuthiatsana catchment had no solar radiation and relative humidity data. The available

reanalysis data were: minimum and maximum temperature, solar radiation, wind speed,

rainfall and relative humidity.

Table 2: Temperature data of South Phuthiatsana catchment

Station ID

Lat

Lon

Elevation

Period

%Missing

LESMAS25-max

-29,380

27,750

1775

2007-2013

18

LESMAS25-min

-29,380

27,750

1690

1980-2013

31.8

LESMAS27-max

-29,449

27,560

1628

2003-2013

28.1

LESMAS27-min

-29,449

27,560

1700

1985-2013

7.5

LESBER07-max

-29,137

27,766

1829

2003-2013

12.8

LESBER07-min

-29,137

27,766

1575

1993-2013

13.1

LESMAS35-max

-29,327

27,789

1725

2008-2012

0.5

LESMAS35-min

-29,327

27,789

1600

2008-2013

0.2

LESMAS29-max

-29,394

27,554

1690

No data

No data

LESMAS29-min

-29,394

27,554

1690

1998-2005

11.6

LESBER06-max *

-29,337

27,528

1775

No data

No data

LESBER06-min *

-29,337

27,528

1715

1984-2013

10.1

292278-max * "

-29,193

27,813

1889

1979-2013

0.1

292278-min * "

-29,193

27,813

1715

1979-2013

0.1

292281-max * "

-29,193

28,125

1889

1979-2013

0.1

292281-min * "

-29,193

28,125

1889

1979-2013

0.1

298275-max * "

-29,818

27,500

1821

1979-2013

0.1

298275-min * "

-29,818

27,500

1821

1979-2013

0.1

298278-max * " 298278-min * "

-29,818

27,813

2890

1979-2013

0.1

-29,818

27,813

2890

1979-2013

0.1

* Stations outside the catchment " SWAT stations

2.4.3 Wind

Page 6 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

The Metolong Authority measure: rainfall, temperature, wind direction and wind speed on a

daily basis within the vicinity of Metolong dam. The station does not have a code so, it was referred to as MDC in the study (from the name – Metolong Dam City). The MDC station has records from 2012 to 2015. The variable used from this station was wind speed and 7.4% of the data was missing. The largest gap was on the 1 st February 2014 to 2 nd March 2014 from there the other gaps were at least ten days. The available period of the reanalysis data was

1979 to 2014 and was used to: fill the missing data and extend the observed data of other

meteorological variables except rainfall.

2.4.4 Correlation between stations' data

The coefficient of correlation weighted method (CCWM) proposed by Teegavarapu and

Chandramouli in 2005 was used for data infiling (Teegavarapu and Chandramouli, 2005).

The method quantifies the strength of spatial autocorrelation, and the correlation coefficient is

the weighting factor (Marteau et al., 2011). CCWM is a conceptually superior method for

infilling missing precipitation data and can be better a deterministic surface estimation

method and data-sensitive in any climate.

According to Teegavarapu and Chandramouli (2005), four stations with the highest

correlation coefficient are considered. The correlation of a minimum of 730 concurrent days

is required (TWINLATIN, 2009). Kajornrit (2012) compared coefficient of correlation

weighted method and inverse distance weighted method and found that coefficient of

correlation weighted method provides better accuracy but is not much better than inverse

distance weighted method.

In the current study, the Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated on daily basis and

the maximum coefficient was 0.76 and the minimum used was 0.50. The method was then

used to simulate the rainfall of a certain period with known values at random and the

simulated and observed rainfall’s R

2 ranged from 0.9869 to 1.

2.5 Streamflow Data

The catchment has five stream gauges with records between 1972 and 2014. Table 3 shows

the data period and location of these gauging stations. The data gap analysis shows that

CG024 had no gaps and had the longest record. Generally, the data had few gaps except for

CG075, which stopped working in 2009.

Table 3: South Phuthiatsana streamflow gauging stations

Stations ID

Stations Name

Lat

Lon

Period

% Missing

CG024

Masianokeng

-29,40

27,56

1972-2013

0.00

CG060

Khoshane at Toll gate

-29,42

27,82

1989-2014

0.58

CG075

S/Phuthiatsana at Pulane

-29,38

27,76

1990-2009

10.09

CG84A

S/Phuthiatsana at Metolong Mohlakakuta at Ha Ntsi

-29,25

27,92

2007-2014

1.42

CG061

-29,33

27,79

2008-2014

0.12

2.6 SWAT Model Setup

2.6.1 Spatial data preparation

Page 7 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

A 30 x 30 m resolution ASTERGDEM was used for delineating the watershed, creating sub-

basins, stream network and generating longest reaches, calculating terrain slope and channel slope. The DEM shows that the Eastern side of the catchment has the highest elevation of 2987 m.a.s.l and the western has the lowest elevation of 1469 m.a.s.l (Figure 2a). SWAT uses

the land use map as either a shapefile or a raster file. The land use map was acquired from the Ministry of Forestry and Land Reclamation of Lesotho. The land uses in the catchment are:

agriculture (48.08%), bare soil (25.07%), grasses (13.71%), bushes (9.49%), forest (0.36%),

urban (3.28%) and water bodies (0.01%). These were respectively reclassified and coded in

SWAT as: urban-URBN agriculture-AGRR, barren - BARR, forest - FRSD, bushes-RNGB,

grassland-RNGE and water-WATR (Figure 2b) during Land use/soil/slope definition.

The catchment had ten soil series when using the Lesotho soil association classification.

However, the soil properties (chemical and physical) required by SWAT were not available

for these soil series. The Harmonized World Soil Database (FAO/IIASA/ISRIC/ISS-

CAS/JRC., 2009) was therefore used. The database had two soil types for the whole country

and thus for the study area and for the study area as well. These were: EutricPlanosols (We –

FAO 74 classification) and Lithosols (I- FAO 74 classification) (Figure 2c). The databases

did not have some of the physical properties such as: saturated hydraulic conductive constant,

soil albedo, K USLE and soil hydrologic group classification. These were calculated according

to Gies and Merwade (2013) tutorial. To calculate the albedo, the soil colour was taken from

the World Inventory of Soil Emission Potential database (Batjes, 2008).

The slopes were classified into three categories: 0% – 15%, 15% – 30% and 30% – 9999%.

These slopes were calculated using ArcGIS and the catchment had the highest distribution at

15% (Figure 2d). The threshold percentages for the HRU definition were: 20% land use, 10%

soil and 20% slope. These are default thresholds suggested by SWAT manual.

Insert Figure 2: Map of South Phuthiatsana set up in SWAT: (a) DEM (b) Land

use/land cover (c) Soils (d) Slope classes

2.6.2 Model sensitivity analysis, calibration and validation

Sensitivity analysis, calibration, validation and uncertainty analysis for SWAT 2012 were

done outside the ArcSWAT interface using SWAT-CUP - SUFI-2 optimization algorithm.

The model warm up period was two years and the calibration period was from 1981 to 2001

at CG 024 station, which is the outlet of the catchment. The validation was done from 2002 to

2013. Twenty two flow parameters (Table 4) were then run in the model and the sensitive

parameters were determined afterwards. The Nash Sutcliffe (NS) function was used as the

optimization function during calibration and validation periods with a minimum threshold for

the behavioral solution at 0.5. In SUFI-2, the uncertainties are quantified by the p-factor,

which is the percentage of data bracketed by the 95% prediction uncertainty (95PPU). The

95PPU is calculated at the 2.5% and 97.5% levels of the cumulative distribution of an output

variable (Abbaspour et al., 2007). Another factor used to quantify the uncertainty is the r-

factor, which is the average thickness of p-factor divided by the standard deviation of the

observed data. Ideally, the p-factor should be close to one and the r-factor close to zero.

Table 4: SWAT parameters for sensitivity analysis

Lower

Upper

Parameter

Description

limit

limit

CN2

Initial SCS CN II value

35

98

Page 8 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

SLSUBBSN.hru

SURLAG

EPCO

ESCO

CANMX

ALPHA_BF

GW_DELAY

GWQMN

GW_REVAP

REVAPMN

RCHRG_DP

SOL_Z

SOL_AWC

SOL_K

HRU_SLP

OV_N

LAT_TTIME

CH_K2

CH_S2

CH_L2

CH_N2

Average slope length. Surface runoff lag time (days) Plant uptake compensation factor

Soil evaporation compensation factor Maximum canopy storage (mm) Baseflow alpha factor (days)

Groundwater delay (days)

Threshold water depth in the shallow aquifer for flow

(mm)

Groundwater "revap" coefficient

Threshold depth of water in the shallow aquifer for

"revap" to occur (mm).

Deep aquifer percolation fraction

Depth from soil surface to bottom of layer.

Available water capacity (mm H20/mm soil)

Saturated hydraulic conductivity (mm/hr)

Average slope steepness

Manning's "n" value for overland flow.

Lateral flow travel time

Channel erodibility factor

Average slope of main channel

Length of main channel

Manning's "n" value for the main channel.

0

400

0

24

0

1

0

1

0

100

0

1

1

450

0

2

-0.02

0.2

0

500

0

1

-0.8

0.8

0

1

0

100

-0.4

0.4

0

12

0

180

-0.01

500

-0.001

10

-0.05

500

0

0.3

There are two sub-basins ((Koro-koro and Thupa-kubu ), which are ungauged (Figure 3).

Their sizes are respectively 312.65 km

of the whole catchment respectively. The land cover/use are: agriculture, barren land, bushes,

forest, grassland and urban while soils are: EutricPlanosols (We – FAO 74 classification) and

Lithosols (I - FAO 74 classification). The land cover/use in these accounts: 33.76%

(agriculture), 37.63% (barren land), 37.09% (bushes), 79.02% (forest), 42.60% (grassland)

and 28.90% (urban) of the corresponding land cover in the whole catchment.

These ungauged catchments are inside the South Phuthiatsana catchment and have: similar

soils, similar land use, similar climate and they are geographically close to each other. Since

the ungauged catchments are nested within the larger South Phuthiatsana catchment, which

was calibrated at the outlet (CG 024), it was assumed that the processes in the catchment

(ungauged and gauged) were captured. This comparison warrants the use of the approach

adopted in this study.

2

2

and 90.04 km , and representing 27.98% and 8.06%

Accordingly, the calibrated SWAT model parameters (spatially varying) at the outlet of the

catchment (CG 024) were applied to the ungauged catchments. However, Heuvelmans et al.

(2004) indicated that transfer of parameters within a catchment and to neighbouring

catchment results in small decrease in the model performance than transfers to catchments at

greater distance.

Insert Figure 3: The ungauged South Phuthiatsana catchment

2.7 WEAP Model set-up for South Phuthiatsana

Page 9 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

For the WEAP model for the South Phuthiatsana, the water system was characterised by:

water demand sites, reservoir (location, operation rules, water balance from SWAT model and dam capacity), flow gauging station (streamflow – including flows generated from SWAT model and ecological reserves), river head flows. The study area boundaries were used to describe the spatial location of the water system. The demand site, wastewater

treatment plant, reservoir were represented with nodes. These nodes were linked to the river

through transmission links and return flow links. The demand site nodes were created in the

schematic view at relative positions. The demands were then named accordingly and demand

priority set according to GoL (2008) – domestic 1 and environment 2. However the Act does

not provide priority for industry and irrigation rather a communication with the Department

of Water Affairs personnel gave a rough priority of irrigation 3 and industry 4. The supply

sources were then connected to the demand sites using transmission links and waste from

demand sites was returned using return flow links. A period where all or most the data is

available is termed current accounts and this is the period where simulation begins. For South

Phuthiatsana the year 2010 had more data and thus was set as current accounts. The last year

of scenario was 2035. This is the planning horizon of the Metolong Dam. The Metolong dam

was set to be active in the year 2014 as that was the year for completion of impoundment.

The SWAT sub-basin map and South Phuthiatsana River shapefiles were then added into the

WEAP study area and the project was saved. The SWAT model provided the streamflow data

for the sub-basins, which was calculated for the catchment including the ungauged areas.

These data provided the water supply sources for the WEAP model. The hydrology (water

supply) was not simulated within WEAP but with SWAT. Therefore, the SWAT model

generated flows that were used to determine river head flows in WEAP model.

2.7.1 Defining catchment water demands

In the study, there were three identified domestic demands: Metolong dam domestic

demands, Roma domestic demands and catchment domestic demands. The Metolong

domestic demands are those that were supplied directly by the Metolong dam (Parkman,

2005). The Roma domestic demands are the demands in the Roma valley supplied from the

Liphiring River by Water and Sewage Company (WASCO). The majority of people use

groundwater for domestic purposes, but due to the limitations of the study, this consumption

was not dealt with fully. A small portion (10%) of catchment domestic demands were

supplied from the main river. This comes from the understanding that people still depend on

the river for such things as: bathing, laundry, and to a small degree, drinking purposes. These

demands were given the name – catchment domestic demands. The demands were calculated

first by estimating the catchment population from the national village census data (2006

census) and then multiply the population with the water consumption per capita. The census

provided population for constituents and councils. However, there were instances where the

councils in the same constituents were not inside the study area. The councils were then

located using the GeoWikia platform (Driskell, 2008). According to BoS (2007), the

population growth rates for Berea district and Maseru district, between 1996 census and 2006

census, were 0.06 and 0.09, respectively. These growth rates were used to project the future

demands for the respective districts.

In Metolong domestic water demands calculations, the population growth rates catered for HIV/AIDS pandemic as it reduces the population (Parkman, 2005). The high income populations were given 100 liters per day per person and low income settlements were given 30 liters per day per persons. The losses were assumed to be 30% based on WASCO water

Page 10 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

losses (Parkman, 2005). In the Roma valley, the population supplied by WASCO was 1200, and WASCO supplies about 1.3 M/day.

Monthly water irrigation requirements were calculated using CROPWAT. The model requires the meteorological data. LESMAS 25, a meteorological station was used as it is within the

area. Firstly, the evapotranspiration was calculated using Penman-Monteith method built in

the model. In Lesotho, infiltration is about 4% of precipitation and 25% forms runoff

(Bonney, 1975). The effective rainfall was calculated using the fixed percentage of 75%. The

crops used were maize and wheat and accounted for 60% and 40% area coverage (Ntai,

2011). The planting date was taken to be 01 October. This month is seen to provide the best

yield in Lesotho for both wheat (Tolmay et al., 2000) and maize (Bruns and Ryan, 2012).

The livestock census for the two districts of Maseru and Berea was collected from the Bureau

of Statistics. The average unit livestock water consumptions were adapted from (TAMS,

1996). The livestock population growth rate between 1999/2000 and 2009/2010 was -0.4%

(Central Bank of Lesotho, 2011). The population in the catchment was calculated with Eq. 3;

= ×

/

(3)

Where; P cat is the population of livestock in the catchment

P dist is the district livestock census

A cat is the catchment area

A dist is the district area

The only industry withdrawing water directly from the river is Tikoe Crushers and it abstracts

500 /sec. The industry’s life span is unknown because it is limited by the unknown amount

of quarry to be mined. The study therefore expects no growth and the current consumption is

not expected to change.

The Metolong industrial demands (addition of institutions and industries together) are

supplied with potable water through WASCO pipelines from Metolong dam in this set-up.

The environmental flow requirements were calculated using Downstream Response to

Imposed Flow Transformations (DRIFT) method (GoL, 2009). The DRIFT method

recommended 21% (10 - 11 MCM per annum) of mean annual runoff at Metolong IFR site

and had four flood classes. The floods are set to flush the stream so as to mimic the natural

stream floods. The IFR site is 20 km downstream of the dam wall (GoL, 2009). The low

flows were summed with flood flows when they existed in a given month. This represented

the total amount of water allocated to the environment in that particular month. The

applicable flood classes (1-3) and are released for 3 days. Flood class 1 (1.6 m 3 /s) are

expected to be released from October to November then from April to June. Flood class 2

3

(3.73 m /s) are to be released from December through out March. Lastly, the class 3 floods

(7.12 m /s) are to be released in October and from December to February. The class 4 floods

are not applicable (GoL, 2009). There are catch dams in the catchment but there is no data on these dams: the levels, location and capacity.

3

The demands are presented in Table 5. The WEAP model can project water demands when given the time step, annual activity level, growth rate and annual water use rate per unit.

Table 5: Calculated South Phuthiatsana Demands for 2010

Page 11 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

 

Demands

Demands

Growth

Sectors

(M

3 /annum)

(M

3 /unit/annum)

rate (%)

Agriculture

Crop

 

18

6459.80

 

7 411.00

0.90

Livestock

 

59

8297.30

 

5.05

-0.40

Metolong

Domestic

17

033

455.00

 

27.14

2.80

Industry

12

100

480.00

 

-

2.70

Environment

17

442

432.00

 

-

0.00

Industry

 

182.50

 

0.18

0.00

Roma Domestic Demands

 

50 370.00

 

41.98

0.00

Catchment Domestic Demands

 

268

953.90

 

10.95

0.08

2.7.2 Supply

The rivers are made up of nodes connected by river reaches which have to be drawn. A river

node was made at the mouth of each sub-basin and on tributaries. The SWAT model output

generated flows for the ungauged catchments, which were used in nested catchments with no

observed streamflow data. The SWAT text output file was converted to the csv format and

used in WEAP model.

Arcus Gibb and Jeffares and Green consulting companies undertook a study in 2010 to

determine the impact of climate change on the Metolong long-term yield. The study

concluded that the long-term yields will not be affected by climate change and this estimation

was for 30 to 50 years within the planning horizon of the dam (Jeffares and Green, 2010). The

research was based on the general circulation models (GCM) and the A2 greenhouse-gas

(GHG) emission scenario. Therefore, the hydrology of the catchment is not expected to be

affected by climate significantly within this period. The current streamflow variation was

mirrored to the future (2035) period. The future flows were modelled in WEAP using the

Cycle Method within the ReadFromFile procedure. When cycles are selected, WEAP will

wraparound from the end of the file back to the beginning. These are done for every ten years

of the available data. This method was adopted in the study.

2.7.3 WEAP calibration and validation

The WEAP model was calibrated at the upstream using station CG 084 and downstream

using CG 024 (Figure 1). The CG 084 calibration period was from 2007 to 2011 and the

validation period was from 2012 to 2014. The downstream station , CG 024 was calibrated

from 1972 to 2002 and the validation period was from 2003 to 2014. These different time

periods were related to streamflow data availability (Table 3). The model was calibrated

manually by altering the demand supply priorities and return flows. This was to maximise the

fit between the observed and simulated flow.

2.7.4 Scenarios evaluated

Reference scenario (2010 – 2035) This was the “business as usual” scenario which used the actual data and represented the

prevailing current situation

It was used to understand the future situations in case the

Page 12 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

prevailing situation does not change in future. It uses current trends of the water system studied. The reference scenario includes the domestic water supply by Metolong dam from 2014 to 2035. The Metolong Dam was activated in 2014 and its water uses begun in this year because of the completed impoundment.

Possible irrigation expansion

The contribution of agriculture to the country’s GDP has been decreasing from 20% in 1983

to about 14% in 1999 and 7% in 2011. The crop-agricultural declines were due to a lot of

causes and to mention a few: climatic variability (drought and erratic rainfalls), collapsing

institutional arrangements and low profits (Ntai, 2011). The Government of Lesotho and

irrigation donors have realised that the previous policies have failed but so far there is no

comprehensive alternative (FAO, 2015). However, one of the objectives of the National

Strategic Development Plan of 2012/2013 - 2016/16 is to promote sustainable

commercialisation and diversification in agriculture. The government intends to develop

water harvesting infrastructure and increase the irrigation capacity (GoL, 2012). If this

happens, the Metolong Dam would have to cater for this irrigation schemes. The catchment

demands are envisaged to increase in dry periods and irrigation water requirements would be

expected to increase as well.

The total irrigated area in the South Phuthiatsana catchment is 27.03 ha (Ntai, 2011). The

normal irrigation expansion rate from 2000 provided by FAO was 0.9% and was used in the

current accounts to get 2010 irrigated area. FAO projected an increase in irrigated area for

Southern Africa for the period of 2020-2030 as 12.3% (FAO, 2008). Therefore, the study

adopted for the 12.3% (that result in an area of 491.3 ha by 2035 from 27.03 ha in 2010) as a

possible future irrigation expansion scenario.

3. Results and Discussions

3.1: SWAT Modelling Results

The sensitivity analysis was done for the entire study period using previously mentioned

parameters (Table 4) for 500 simulations. Table 6 shows the parameters sensitivity analysis

using global sensitivity analysis. The t-stat and p-value were used to rank the sensitivity of

the parameters. The highest absolute value of t-stat gives the most sensitive parameter and the

smallest p-value gives the most sensitive parameter. The six most sensitive parameters

obtained for calibration period were: CN2, SOL_AWC, CH_L2, SURLAG, SOL_Z and

CH_S2 (Table 6). This indicates that the streamflow depends mostly on runoff parameters,

soil parameters and channel parameters. van Griensven et al. (2006) gave ranks 1-6 as

significantly very important parameters. Accordingly, the six parameters were considered for

model calibration and also served for model parsimony (Table 7).

Table 6: Sensitivity analysis of SWAT parameters

Parameter Name

t-Stat

p-Value

Ranking

1:R

CN2.mgt

-30.97

0.00

1

16:R

SOL_AWC( ).sol

15.73

0.00

2

22:R

CH_L2.rte

15.48

0.00

3

5:R

SURLAG.bsn

-9.95

0.00

4

11:R

SOL_Z( ).sol

8.95

0.00

5

Page 13 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Parameter Name

t-Stat

p-Value

Ranking

21:R

CH_S2.rte

-7.67

0.00

6

12:R

CH_N2.rte

5.84

0.00

7

13:R

SLSUBBSN.hru

4.47

0.00

8

19:V

GW_DELAY.gw

4.35

0.00

9

14:R

HRU_SLP.hru

-3.70

0.00

10

7:R

SOL_K( ).sol

-2.91

0.00

11

2:V

ALPHA_BF.gw

-2.23

0.03

12

18:R

OV_N.hru

1.49

0.14

13

17:R

CANMX.hru

1.36

0.17

14

4:R

ESCO.bsn

-1.34

0.18

15

20:R

CH_K2.rte

1.24

0.22

16

8:R

RCHRG_DP.gw

-1.06

0.29

17

3:V

GWQMN.gw

-0.99

0.32

18

9:R

GW_REVAP.gw

0.88

0.38

19

15:R

EPCO.bsn

0.72

0.47

20

10:R

LAT_TTIME.hru

0.43

0.67

21

6:R

REVAPMN.gw

-0.27

0.79

22

The fitted model parameters are presented in Table 7, which were found to give better

simulated streamflow for South Phuthiatsana catchment.

Table 7: Calibration parameters and calibration values

Fitted value

Parameter

Description

 

after

Min

Max

name

calibration

 

SCS curve number for moisture condition

 

CN2

II

35

-25

65

Available

water

capacity

(mm

H 2 o/mm

SOL_AWC

soil)

0.13

-2

2

CH_L2

Length of main channel (km)

 

7.215

0

10

SURLAG

Surface runoff lag coefficient

4.2

0

24

SOL_Z

Soil depth (mm)

 

0.1

-0.8

0.8

CH_S2

Average slope of main channel (m/m)

0.131

-3

3

The simulated streamflow showed a good match of the observed flow with exception of some

peak flows during calibration and validation periods (Figure 4 & 5). The calibration

hydrograph (Figure 4) showed p-factor = 65%, r_factor= 0.58, NS= 0.59 and R 2 = 0.59. For

the validation period (Figure 5) it showed p-factor = 57%, r_factor = 1.34, NS = 0.52, and R 2

= 0.66. The p-factors showed that there were uncertainties in the SWAT modelling. Only 65% of the measured data could be bracketed in calibration period and only 57% in validation period. This could be due to uncertainties inherent in: input data, non-uniqueness of parameters or some processes that were not captured by the SWAT model.

The SWAT model did not capture extreme events in both calibration and validation. During the model set-up, the model used a rainfall station LESMAS 25, which was near the centroid

Page 14 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

of the South Phuthiatsana catchment. The station does not capture the spatial variability of rainfall in the catchment, which could be influenced by the ruggedness nature of the catchment. The covariance at the rainfall station showed that the minimum covariance was 0.22 and the highest was 0.32. The higher covariance showed that the catchment experience

extreme events. This is the case for arid and semi-arid areas. Another cause could be from the uniqueness of the parameters. The parameters which provided the best results did not capture

all processes in the basin.

Insert

Figure

4:

SWAT

calibration

flow

series

and

uncertainty

in

South

Phuthiatsana

 

Insert

Figure

5:

SWAT

validation

flow

series

and

uncertainty

in

South

Phuthiatsana

3.1.1 South Phuthiatsana water balance

The calibrated SWAT model was then used to estimate the water balance in the catchment for

1981 to 2001. The annual average hydrological processes are presented in Table 8.

Table 8: Average annual hydrological processes for South Phuthiatsana

Units

 

Hydrological balance components

 

P

ET

SW

PERC

SURQ

GW_Q

WYLD

LAT Q

Tlosses

(mm)

759.5

518.1

26.8

106.0

115.6

62.1

201.4

18.5

0.0

(%)

100.0

68.2

3.5

14.0

15.2

8.2

26.5

2.4

0.0

Note: P=precipitation, ET = evapotranspiration, SW = soil water, PERC = percolation

below root zone, SURQ = surface runoff, GW_Q = groundwater contribution to

 

streamflow, WYLD = SURQ + LATQ + GW_Q - TLOSSES, LATQ = lateral flow into

stream, Tlosses = transmission losses

 

The water balances ratios (Table 9) were obtained from SWAT CHECK (White et al., 2012),

which is a program that checks whether the produced results are within typical ranges

(Arnold et al., 2012). The SWAT-CHECK also prompts the user when they are out of typical

ranges. The obtained water balance ratios were within acceptable ranges.

Table 9: Annual water balance ratios

Ratios

Ratio values

Streamflow/ Precipitation

0.26

Baseflow/Total Flow

0.41

Surface Runoff/Total Flow

0.59

Percolation/ Precipitation

0.14

Deep Recharge/ Precipitation

0.01

ET/Precipitation

0.68

From Table 9, it can be interpreted that on account of surface water supply, the surface depression storage loss or infiltration is about 6% of precipitation. These results agrees well

Page 15 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

with previous studies in Lesotho, whereby Bonney (1975) indicated that infiltration and runoff were about 4% and 25% of precipitation respectively. The ratios (Table 9) showed the partition of the precipitation in the catchment. The extreme values of the ratios can be of interest for intervention or management measures or decisions by river basin managers.

3.2 WEAP Results

3.2.1 Calibration and Validation

The model calibration NS and R 2 for CG024 were 0.72 and 0.84 respectively. The validation

NS and R 2 were: 0.73 and 0.74 respectively. The CG084 gauging station calibration NS and

R 2 were: 0.55 and 0.64 respectively. The CG084 validation NS and R

2 were: 0.63 and 0.89

respectively.

3.2.2 Water Supply

The water supply of South Phuthiatsana is shown in Figure 6 where the volumes are long

term monthly averages of the respective rivers. The graph show that the month of February

has the highest water supply and July up to September are dry months.

Insert Figure 6: South Phuthiatsana Water Supply

3.2.3 Reference Scenario

This is the ‘business as usual scenario’ which predicts the likelihood of events in the future if

the current trends continue. From WEAP modelling results, the most significant water

demands in the scenario are the: Metolong domestic water demands, Metolong industrial

water demands and catchment domestic water demands. The Metolong domestic demands

contribute 58%, the Metolong industrial demands contribute 34%, livestock contributes 1%

and the catchment domestic demands contribute 7% to the total demands (977.61 Mm 3 ).

However, Metolong industrial demands of 1.46 Mm 3 were not met. In addition, the

environmental demands of 2.29 Mm

3 were not met. For monthly environmental unmet

demands of 1.2 Mm 3 but for July, August and

demands, October had the highest unmet

September, they were fully met.

3.2.4 Possible Irrigation Expansion Scenario

This scenario analysed an increase of irrigated area by 12.3%, in the South Phuthiatsana

catchment. From WEAP modelling , the 12.3% increase would make a total of 491.3 ha by

2035 from 27.03 ha in 2010. In this scenario, some demands were not met, mostly after 2024.

The total unmet demand were 4.44 Mm , whereby the Metolong industrial demands

accounted for 33.05%, irrigation 65.56% and livestock 1.39%. The unmet environmental

demands had not changed in this scenario.

3

4. Conclusions and recommendations

This was the first attempt to use SWAT and WEAP models in the South Phuthiatsana

catchment. Regardless of data unavailability, the two models can be used in the catchment. The results from two models showed that the models can be supported with open sources data

from reliable websites and measured data.

It can be concluded that, the South Phuthiatsana SWAT model depends on soil, runoff and channel parameters. The model was successfully calibrated at CG 024 with: p-factor of 65%, r_factor of 0.58, NS of 0.59 and R 2 of 0.59 and for validation period p-factor was 57%,

Page 16 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

r_factor was 1.34, NS was 0.52, and R 2 was 0.66. The study had provided the water balance of South Phuthiatsana catchment and the following can be concluded: 26% of rainfall form streamflow, 41% of the total flow comes from baseflow while surface runoff accounts for 59%, 14% of precipitation percolates to shallow aquifer, 1% percolates to deep aquifer and 68% of precipitation is lost through evapotranspiration.

The WEAP model was calibrated using CG024 and CG084 stations. For calibration at

CG024, NS was 0.72 and R 2 was 0.84 and for validation period, NS was 0.73 and R

2 was

0.74. The calibration at CG084, NS and R 2 were 0.55 and 0.64 respectively and for validation

period, NS and R 2 were 0.63 and 0.89 respectively.

In the reference scenario, 1.46 Mm 3 of Metolong industrial demands were not met and 2.29

Mm 3 of environmental demands were not met. In the irrigation expansion scenario, the

environmental demands were still not met with October having the highest month with unmet

demands. Excluding the environmental unmet demands, the unmet demands were 4.44 Mm 3

and irrigation accounts for 65.65% of this amount. Beyond the 12.3% increase of irrigation

area, the amount of unmet demands will increase in future.

The following recommendations can be drawn from this study:

Following data scarcity in the catchment, the Lesotho Meteorological Services should

improve and update the meteorological database on regular bases.

Assess the SWAT model performance using only available reanalysis data so as to

fully understand the potential of these data in the catchment.

Since SWAT model did not capture most of the peaks, it is recommended to use

alternative data inputs or other hydrological models.

Irrigation in the catchment should be carried out through a detailed irrigation plan and

this should include: Meteorological stations, irrigation systems designed for the site

and an irrigator’s association with experts forming part of the board. This can

contribute towards IWRM.

As part of a demand management strategy, improvement from sprinklers used in the

study to drip irrigation. Sprinklers are used for irrigation in the catchment.

The unmet demands in the industrial sector can be managed through demand

management strategies like: recycling and reusing of water.

A further study on the level of uncertainties in the use of coupled SWAT and WEAP

models.

Acknowledgements

Sincere gratitude is extended to the SADC's WaterNet for providing a study scholarship to the

first author for the Master of Integrated Water Resources Management.

Page 17 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

5. References

Abbaspour, K. C., Vejdani, M. and Haghighat, S. 2007. SWAT-CUP calibration and

Uncertainity programs for SWAT. The fourth International SWAT conference. Delft:

Netherlands, 1596-1602.

Arnold, J. G., Moriasi, D. N., Gassman, P. W., Abbaspour, K. C., White, M. J., Srinivasan,

R., Harmel, R. D., van Griensven, A., van Liew, M. W., Kannan, N. and Jha, M. K.

2012. SWAT: Model use, Calibration and validation. Trans. ASABE (55)4, 1491-1508.

Arnold, J. G., Srinivasan, R., Muttiah, S., and Williams, J. R. 1998. Large area hydrologic

modelling and assessment part 1: model development. Journal of the American Water

Resources Association 34, 73-89.

Arranz, R., and McCartney, M. 2007. Application of the Water Evaluation And Planning

(WEAP) model to assess future water demands and resources in the Olifants catchment,

South Africa, Colombo, Sri Lanka. IWMI working paper 116. International Water

Management Institue.

Batjes, N. H. 2008. ISRIC-WISE Harmonized Global Soil Profile Dataset (ver. 3.1), Report

2008/02, Wageningen, http://www.isric.org/isric/Webdocs/Docs/ISIRIC Report 02.pdf.

Bonney, G. 1975. Groundwater exploration and borehole sitting. Department of Mines and

Geology, Report MG GB5. Maseru.

Bruns, and Ryan, M. 2012. Optimizing Maize Planting Date, Plant Population, and Fertilizer

Application for Lesotho Subsistence Farmers. Tennessee: Master's Thesis, University of

Tennessee.

Bureau of Statistics. 2007. 2006 Lesotho census of population ans housing preliminary results

report. Maseru.

Central Bank of Lesotho. 2011. Annual Report, Maseru.

Chinnasamy, P., Bharati, L., Bhattarai, U., Khadka, A., Dahal, V. and Wahid, S. 2015. Impact

of planned water resource development on current and future water demand in the

Koshi River basin, Nepal, Water International, 40(7), 1004-1020, DOI:

10.1080/02508060.2015.1099192

Driskell, S. 2008. GeoWikia. Available at: https://sites.google.com/site/geowikia/projects/

lesotho-community -councils. [Accessed on 02 nd June 2015].

Droogers, P., de Boer, F., and Terink, W. 2014. Water Allocation Models for the Umbeluzi

River Basin, Mozambique. Wetter skip Frystan and ARA-Sul report future water:

132, The Netherlands.

Fadil, A., Rhinane, H., Kaoukaya, A., Kharchaf, Y., and Bachir, O. A. 2011. Hydrologic

modeling of the Bouregreg Watershed (Morocco) Using GIS and SWAT Model.

Journal of Geographic Information System 3, 279-289.

FAO. 2008. The challenges of climate change. Ministerial conference on water for agriculture

and energy in Africa. Sirte/08/INF/5. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Libya. FAO/IIASA/ISRIC/ISS-CAS/JRC. 2009. Harmonized World Soil Database (Version 1.1). FAO. Rome and IIASA, Laxenburg. Gain, A.K. and Giupponi, C. 2015. A dynamic assessment of water scarcity risk in the Lower Brahmaputra River Basin: an integrated approach. Ecological Indicators, 48, 120-131. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.07.34

Page 18 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Gies, L., and Merwade, V. 2013. Creating soil database using FAO soil and terrain database of East Africa. Available at: http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~vmerwade/tutorial.html. [Accessed on 06 th April 2015].

Githui, F., Mutua, F. and Bauwens,W., 2009. Estimating the impacts of land-cover change on runoff using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT): case study of Nzoia catchment, Kenya.Hydrological Sciences Journal, 54 (5), 899–908.

Government of Lesotho. 2012. Metolong Dam ESIA. Final executive summary, Report E

1925-1. Maseru.

Government of Lesotho. 2009. Environmental Impact Assessment for Lesotho Lowlands

Bulk Water Supply Scheme- Central Region, Project No. 9 ACP LSO 005. Maseru.

Government of Lesotho. 2008. Water Act 2008. Maseru.

Haji, H. T. 2011. Impact of cliamte change on surface water availability in the Upper Vaal

River Basin. Masters Dissertation, Tshwane University of Technology.

Hatcher, K. J. 1995. WEAP: A comprehensive and integrated model of supply and demand.

Preceding of the 1995 Georgia water resources conference. Athens, Georgia.

Heuvelmans, G., Muys, B., and Feven, J. 2004. Analysis of the spatial and variation in the

paramters of the SWAT model with application in Flanders, Norhtern Belgium.

Hydrology and Earth Systems Science 8(5), 931-939.

Hishinuma, S., Takeuchi, K. and Magome, J. 2014. Challenges of hydrological analysis for

water resource development in semi-arid mountainous regions: case study in Iran,

Hydrological Sciences Journal 59(9-10), 1718-1737.

Hughes, D.A. 2008. Modelling semi-arid and arid hydrology and water resources: the

southern Africa experience. In H.S. Wheater, S. Sorooshian and K.D. Sharma, eds.

Hydrological modeling in arid and semi-arid areas. New York: Cambridge University

Press, 1-20.

Jeffares and Green (Consultancy). 2010. Climate change unlikely to decrease Metolong dam

yields: Engineering News. Available at: http://www.jgi.co.za/news/item/climate-

change-unlikely-to-decrease-metolong-dam-yields-engineering-news. [Accessed on 18 th

May 2015].

Kajornrit, J., Wong, K., and Fung, C. C. 2012. A comparative analysis of the soft computing

techniques used to estimate missing precipitation records. In. International

telecommunications society 19th Biennial conference. Bangkok Thailand.

Levite, H., Sally, H., and Cour, J. 2003. Testing water demands management scenarios in a

water-stressed basin in South Africa: Application of WEAP model. Physics and

Chemistry of the Earth 28, 779-786.

Marteau, R., Sultan, B., Moron, V., Alhassane, A., Christian, B., & Traore, B. S. 2011. The

onset of the rainy season and farmers' sowing strategy for pearl millet cultivation in

South-West Niger. Agriculture and Forest Meteorology 151, 1356-1369.

McCartney M.P. and Girma, M.M. 2012. Evaluating the downstream implications of planned

water resource development in the Ethiopian portion of the Blue Nile River, Water

International, 37(4), 362-379, DOI: 10.1080/02508060.2012.706384

McCartney, M. P., Yawson, D. K. and Huber-Lee, A. 2005. Simulating water resources

development in the Olifants catchment, South Africa. IWMI Theme 1. Working Paper

(Draft). Mulungu, D. M. and Munishi, S. E. 2007. Simiyu River catchment parameterization using SWAT model. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 32, 1032-1039. Mulungu, D. M. and Taipe, C. I. 2012. Water evaluation and planning in Wami River - Basin:

Application of the WEAP model. In E. Beall (Editor), Bioenergy and Food Security - The BEFS Analysis for Tanzania FAO 54, 47-69.

Page 19 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Ndomba, P., Mtalo, F. and Killingtveit, A., 2008. SWAT model application in a data scarce tropical complex catchment in Tanzania. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 33 (8– 13), 626–632.

Ntai, P. J. 2011. Critical factors determining successful irrigation farming in Lesotho. Masters dissertation, University of Pretoria. Parkman, M. 2005. Lesotho Lowlands Water Supply Feasibility Study. Funded by the EU

EDF, Maseru.

Rodrigues, L., Asamoah, I., Andah, W., Kempt-Benedict, E., Sieber, J., and Huber-Lee, A.

2005. Water Evaluation And Planning (WEAP), Small reservoir tool kit. Somerville.

Global Water Partnership. 2002. Integrated Water Resources Management in Mediterranean.

GWP-Med and MIO-ECSDE, Athens.

Setegn, S. G., Srinivasan, R., and Dargahi, B. 2008. Hydrological modelling in the Lake Tana

Basin, Ethiopia Using SWAT model. The Open Hydrology Journal 2, 49-62.

Sieber, J., Swartz, C. and Huber-Lee. D. 2005. WEAP Water Evaluation and Planning system

user guide for WEAP21. Boston: Stockholm, Environment Institute.

Sieber, J., Yates, D., Purkey, D. and Huber-Lee, A. 2004. WEAP: A demand, priority and

preference driven water planning model: Part 1: Model characteristics. Submitted to

Water International.

Skaggs, R., Janetos, T. C., Hibbard, K. A., and Rice, J. S. 2012. Climate and Energy-Water-

Land systems interactions. Washington United States of America.

TAMS Consultants and Associates. 1996. Water Resources Management: Policy and

Strategies Study, Executive Summary. Final Report. Maseru, 1-6.

Teegavarapu, R. S., and Chandramouli, V. 2005. Improved weighting methods, deterministic

and stochastic data-driven models for estimation of missing precipitation records.

Journal of Hydrology 312, 191-206.

Tolmay, J., Rosenblum, M. L., Moletsane, M., Makula, M., and Pederson, T. 2000. The

introduction of disease and pest resistant wheat cultivars to small-scale farming systems

in the highlands of Lesotho. The Eleventh Regional Wheat Workshop for Eastern,

Central and Southern Africa . Addis Ababa Ethiopia, 336-340.

TWINLATIN. 2009. Cocibolca lake basin (Nicaragua). WP3: Hydrological modelling and

extremes, 69-114.

van Griensven, A., T. Meixner, S. Grunwald, T., Bishop, Di Luzio, M. and Srinivasan, R.

(2006). A global sensitivity analysis tool for the parameters of multi-variable catchment

models. Journal of Hydrology 324(1-4), 10-23.

Van Loon, A., and Doogers, P. 2006. Water evaluation and planning system, Kitui-Kenya-

Report no 2. Kenya.

White, M. J., Harmel, D. R., Arnold, G. J. and Williams, R. J. 2012. SWAT CHECK: A

screening tool to assist users in the identification of potential modle application

problems. Journal of Environmental Quality. Available at:

http://swatmodel.tamu.edu/softwares/ swat-check.

Yates, D., Sieber, J. and Huber-Lee, A. 2005. WEAP21: A Demand-, Priority-, and

Preference-Driven Water Planning Model: Part 1: Model Characteristics. Water

International 30(4), 487-500.

Zhang, X., Srinivasan, R., and Hao, F. 2007. Predicting hydrologic response to climate change in the Luohe River basin using the SWAT model. American society of

agriculture and biological engineers 50(3), 901-910.

Page 20 of 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

A CCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

A CCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

A CCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

A CCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

A CCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

A CCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

A CCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

A CCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

A CCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlights

SWAT showed that out of the precipitation: 26% is streamflow and 68% is evaporation

WEAP calibration and validation at two stations was satisfactory: R 2 = 0.64 - 0.89

Reference scenario indicated that industrial and environmental demands were not met

Irrigation expansion scenario accounted for 65.65% of the unmet demands

Following unmet demands, it is recommended to have an integrated irrigation plan