THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
MINISTRY OF WATER
WAMI/RUVU BASIN WATER BOARD
2012/2013 ANNUAL BASIN HYDROLOGICAL REPORT
WAMI/RUVU BASIN WATER BOARD
P.O.BOX 826 MOROGORO
TANZANIA
December 2013
i
Table of Contents
Pages
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1
2.5
Background ................................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Location of the Basin .................................................................................................... 1
1.3
Physiography................................................................................................................. 2
1.4
Objectives of this report ................................................................................................ 6
1.5
Scope and Outline of this report ................................................................................... 7
2. HYDROLOGICAL DATA ........................................................................................... 8
3
2.1
Temporal and spatial coverage of climatic data ........................................................... 8
2.2
River Discharge and Sediment Data ............................................................................. 9
2.4
Reservoirs/Lakes Information ..................................................................................... 12
2.6
Groundwater Data ....................................................................................................... 12
HYDROLOGY OF THE BASIN FOR THE YEAR 2012/2013 .................... 14
3.1
Rainfall ........................................................................................................................ 14
3.2
River discharges and Water levels .............................................................................. 21
3.3
Water Storage in Mindu Dam ..................................................................................... 26
3.4
Groundwater levels for selected monitoring stations.................................................. 28
3.5
Water quality status..................................................................................................... 29
4.0 GENERAL REMARKS AND WAY FORWARD .............................................. 33
4.1
Challenges and interventions ...................................................................................... 33
5.0 ANNEXES ......................................................................................................................... 35
5.1
Status of Rainfall StationWami/Ruvu Basin............................................................... 35
5.2
Total monthly Rainfall 2012/2013 for Representative stations .................................. 38
5.3
Status of Gauging Station Wami/Ruvu Basin ............................................................. 41
5.4
Discharge Monthly Average (m3/s) 2012/2013 ........................................................ 43
5.5
Water quality summary ............................................................................................... 44
5.6
Daily Water level in Mindu Dam................................................................................ 46
ii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1 Nine River and Lake Basins in Tanzania andLocation of Wami Ruvu Basin. ........... 2
Figure 1-2 Major rivers in Wami/Ruvu Basin ............................................................................... 3
Figure 1-3 Major soil groups in Wami/Ruvu Basin ....................................................................... 4
Figure 1-4 Geological types in Wami/Ruvu Basin ........................................................................ 6
Figure 2-1 Map showing distributions of rainfall and weather stations ........................................ 8
Figure 2-2 Map showing distribution of river gauging stations in Wami/Ruvu catchment .......... 9
Figure 2-3 Water quality monitoring stations in the Wami/Ruvu Basin ..................................... 10
Figure 2-4 Groundwater quality distribution map for Wami/Ruvu Basin .................................. 12
Figure 2-5 Groundwater monitoring stations in the Wami/Ruvu Basin ...................................... 13
Figure 3-1 Rainfall distribution in Kinyasugwe, Mkondoa and Wami sub-catchments. ............. 15
Figure 3-2 Rainfall distribution in Ngerengere and Upper sub-catchments. ............................... 16
Figure 3-4 Rainfall distribution in Coastal rivers catchment ....................................................... 19
Figure 3-5 Comparison of Annual Rainfall and MAP for representative stations in Coast
Catchment ..................................................................................................................................... 20
Figure 3-6 Daily flow regime in Wami River as recorded at Wami at Dakawa (1G1) and Wami
at Mandera (1G2). ......................................................................................................................... 21
Figure 3-7 Comparison of Average discharge and Long-term Average for representative......... 22
Figure 3-8 Daily flow regime in Ruvu River as recorded at Ruvu Kibungo and Ruvu Morogoro
Road Bridge .................................................................................................................................. 24
Figure 3-9 Comparison of Average discharge and Long-term Average for representative stations
in Ruvu River, ............................................................................................................................... 25
Figure 3-10 Daily water level fluctuation in the Mindu covering the period of November 2012 to
October 2013. ................................................................................................................................ 26
Figure 3-11 Comparison of Water Levels in Mindu Dam and Rainfall characteristics at one
station within Mindu catchment.................................................................................................... 27
Figure 3-12 Groundwater levels fluctuations in 5 monitoring boreholes of Makutupora basin .. 28
Figure 3-13 Dissolved Oxygen Map - Water Quality Survey August 2013 ................................ 29
Figure 3-14 EC Map - Water Quality Survey August 2013 ........................................................ 30
Figure 3-15 Turbidity Map - Water Quality Survey August 2013 .............................................. 31
Figure 3-16 Water Quality "Heat" Map ....................................................................................... 32
iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 Existing water quality Monitoring stations .................................................................. 10
Table 3-1
Comparison of Annual Rainfall and MAP for representative stations in Wami
Catchment ..................................................................................................................................... 15
Table 3-2 Rainfall distribution in Ngerengere sub-catchment (on the left) and Upper subcatchment (on the right) covering the period of November 2012 to October 2013.Table 3-2
Comparison of Annual Rainfall and MAP for representative stations in Ruvu Catchment ......... 16
Table 3-3 Comparison of Annual Rainfall and MAP for representative stations in Coast
Catchment ..................................................................................................................................... 20
Table 3-4 Comparison of Average flows for each month and LTAR for representative stations in
Wami River ................................................................................................................................... 22
Table 3-5 Characteristics of Mindu Dam ..................................................................................... 26
Table 3-6 Water quality standards of a typical River (TBS)........................................................ 31
iv
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Wami/Ruvu Basin is one of the nine Rivers and Lakes Basins of Tanzania. The basin was
established in 2002, and it operates under the Wami/Ruvu Water Board and the overall in charge
is the Water Officer who is also the secretary of the Board. Wami/Ruvu Basin Water Board has
the mandate to manage water resources in the basin.
1.2 Location of the Basin
Wami/Ruvu Basin is located to the Eastern side of Tanzania (Figure 0-1), which lies between
Longitudes 350 30’ 00” to 400 00’ 00” E and Latitudes 050 00’ 00” to 070 30’ 00”. The Basin
covers an area of about 66,820 km2 covering the six regions, Dar es Salaam, parts of Coast,
Morogoro, Dodoma, Tanga and Manyara. It has two major Rivers of Wami and Ruvu covering
an area of 43,946 and 18,078 km2 respectively. The Coastal sub basin which consist Mpiji,
Sinza, Mlalakuwa, Msimbazi, Mbezi, Mzinga and Kizinga rivers covers an area of 4,796 km2.
shows the locaton of Wami Ruvu Basin.
1|Page
Figure 0-1 Nine River and Lake Basins in Tanzania andLocation of Wami Ruvu Basin.
1.3 Physiography
1.3.1 Topography
The basin is covered by low lying and mountainous landscapes as follows;
Mountainous landscapes

Uluguru mountains located south east, the source of Ruvu River (altitude 400 to 2500 m.a.s.l)

Nguru Mountains located west of Kilosa (altitude 400 to 2000 m.a.s.l)

Rubeho Mountains located west of Kilosa (altitude 500 to 1000 m.a.s.l)

Ukaguru Mountains located South west of Wami River (altitude 400 to 1000 m.a.s.l)

Nguu Mountains located western part of Wami River (altitude 400 to 2000 m.a.s.l)
Low lying land

Mkata plains (Altitude 400-800 m.a.m.s.l)
2

Lower Wami (Altitude 200-400 m.a.m.s.l)

Kisaki located south east of Uluguru mountain (altitude 140 – 200 m.a.m.s.l)

Kimbiji and Mbezi located to the southern coastal area of Dar es Salaam (altitude 50 –
100 m.a.s.l)
1.3.2 Drainage Pattern
The Basin is sub divided into three Catchments (Ruvu, Wami and Coast) in which seven sub
catchments (Kinyasungwe, Mkondoa, Wami, Upper Ruvu, Ngerengere, Lower Ruvu and Coast)
are found. Many rivers in Wami catchment originate from Chenene, Nguru, Nguu and Rubeho
Mountains and flows eastward towards the Indian Ocean. Most rivers in Wami basin are
seasonal while few are perennial. Originally, some of Ruvu river tributaries were perennial
originating from Uluguru Mountains and flow eastward towards the Indian Ocean. Figure 0-2
shows the major rivers in the Wami/Ruvu Basin.
Figure 0-2 Major rivers in Wami/Ruvu Basin
3
1.3.3 Soils
Generally, the catchment is characterized by 12 main types of soils namely: Cambisols,
Ferralsols, Acrisols, Fluvisols, Luvisols, Lixisols, Arenosols, Leptosols, Nitisols, Vertisols,
Planosols and Haplic Phaeozems. The dominant soils are Cambisols which covers parts of
Bagamoyo, Kisarawe, Mkuranga, Morogoro Rural, Dodoma Urban, Bahi and Chamwino. The
map below shows the distribution (Figure 0-3).
Figure 0-3 Major soil groups in Wami/Ruvu Basin
4
1.3.4 Geology
The geology of the catchment is mainly dominated by:Precambian: Mostly occur in the Chenene Hills (Dodoma), Kiborian Hills (Mpwapwa) and
rolling hills of Ikowa, Mlima wa Nyoka in Dodoma Kongwa and Uluguru Mountains and in the
western part of the Ngerengere sub-basin. These rocks are mainly granitoid, gneisses, granulites
and crystalline limestone meta-sediments and meta-igneous rocks with synorogenic granite,
schist and gneiss and gneisses, granulites and crystalline limestone.
Usagaran:- Occupy Rubeho Mountains in Kilosa area and Ukaguru Mountains, Wota Mountains
and area around Lumuma. In the north they occupy Nguru Mountains. They consist of biotitic
muscovite gneiss and schist, metadorerite and metagabro, Migmatitic biotite gneiss and
hornblende.
Jurassic rocks occur in the eastern margin of the Uluguru Mountains and elevated rolling hills
between the Ruvu and Wami rivers. They consist of course sandstone, mudstone, and oolitic
limestone deposited under the marine environment (Kapilima, 1988)
The Karoo rocks occupy south-eastern area of the Uluguru Mountains. The rocks consist mainly
of sandstone, and shale deposited in the shallow fresh to brackish water. Their ages may vary
from Permian to Triassic (Kent at al,1971).
Cretaceous rocks lie on the elevated rolling hills. They consist of clay, shale, calcareous`
sandstone, sandy limestone and mudstone.
Tertiary and Quaternary (youngest strata in the basin): occur in the catchment area of the
Ngerengere River near Morogoro Municipality, and in the elevated rolling hills and floodplains
along the Ruvu River, Kibaha, Bagamoyo and extend up to Dar es Salaam. Pleistocene to recent
sediments exists in the area developing as alluvial deposits all detrital deposits resulting from the
operations of modern rivers, colluvial deposits alluvium in part but also containing angular
fragments of original rocks such as talus and cliff debris, and coastal deposits. Mbugas
depression fills and beach deposits.
Neogene Rocks: These are found in floodplains of Mkata, Mpwapwa, Kongwa, Dodoma and
along Wami, Mkondoa, Kinyasungwe Rivers and along Saadan and Bagamoyo to Indian Ocean.
5
The deposit consists of calcareous crust, red-brown soils, alluvium, fluvial and sandy clay, and
clayey sand with minor lenses of pure sand/clay, gravel and silt. In coastal areas inter bedded
sandy clays and clayey sands with minor lenses of pure sand or clay are found. Figure 0-4 shows
the distribution of different geology within the basin.
Figure 0-4 Geological types in Wami/Ruvu Basin
1.4 Objectives of this report
The main objective of this report is to give an overview of water status for 2012/2013
hydrological year (November 2012 to October 2013). Specifically the report aims to address the
following areas:
a) Characteristics of the Wami/Ruvu Basin
b) Existing networks and their status and interventions
6
c) Hydrology of the Wami/Ruvu Basin for the year 2012/2013
1.5 Scope and Outline of this report
Chapter one presents the general basin characteristics and objectives of this report. The rest of
the report is organized into the following Chapters:
 Chapter 2 presents the existing network and hydrological data
 Chapter 3 describes the hydrology of Wami/Ruvu Basin for the year 2012/2013 starting
from November 2012 to October 2013.
 Chapter 4 identifies the challenges and success based on hydrology
7
2. HYDROLOGICAL DATA
Most of the hydrometric network stations were established in the early 1950s and records exist
since that time. In the past there were 40 hydrometric stations, 9 weather stations and 33 rainfall
stations. However, there is a serious shortage of usable hydrometric records from 1990s to 2005,
as most of the stations were vandalised or were non-operational during that period. Since 2006,
most of the network has been rehabilitated and improved. Others were rehabilitated during the
IWRM&D study in the Basin by JICA study team in collaboration with the Basin Staff.
2.1 Temporal and spatial coverage of climatic data
Wami/Ruvu Basin is currently collecting rainfall and other climatic data from a total of 56
stations where by 33 stations are only manual rain gauges, 17 stations are automatic rain gauges
and 6 are Met stations (Figure 2-1). From existing meteorological stations data are collected on
daily basis and available data are on rainfall, temperature, radiation, wind speed and relative
humidity.
Figure 2-1 Map showing distributions of rainfall and weather stations
8
2.2 River Discharge and Sediment Data
2.2.1 Temporal and Spatial Coverage of Measuring Stations
The stations are distributed evenly to the Basin in which major rivers are gauged. The
mountainous regions have higher network of rivers than the flat lands. Efforts are being made to
evenly locate the gauging stations wherever it is necessary (Figure 2-2). Annex 5.3 showing
status of gauging Station and annex 5.3 showing monthly average discharge data some of station
in Wami/Ruvu
Figure 2-2 Map showing distribution of river gauging stations in Wami/Ruvu catchment
9
2.3 Water quality data
Total number of 76 water quality monitoring stations was established in the Wami/Ruvu Basin as
indicated in Table 2-1 and
Figure 2-3 is a sketch map showing water quality monitoring stations.
Table 2-1 Existing water quality Monitoring stations
S/No
TYPE OF MONITORING
TOTAL SAMPLING POINTS
1
GROUNDWATER
14
2
SURFACE WATER
30
3
WASTE WATER
32
TOTAL
76
10
Figure 2-3 Water quality monitoring stations in the Wami/Ruvu Basin
The basin water board water quality sampling program collects information on the following
parameters. The table below shows the list of parameters and their priority.
Category Parameters to be Analyzed
Temperature, pH, Turbidity (NTU), Electric conductivity/EC
1
High Priority
(us/cm),TDS (mg/l), Suspended solids/SS (mg/l), BOD (mg/l),
Dissolved oxygen/DO (mg/l)
COD (mg/l), Nitrate (mg/l), Ammonium (mg/l),
2
Low Priority
Chloride (Cl-) (mg/l), Total coliform (count/100ml),
Fecal coliform (count/100ml)
Sample processing routinely occurs in the field for pH, temperature, and electrical conductivity
(total dissolved solids). Dissolved oxygen, phosphates, nitrates, sulphates, and ammonia are all
11
analyzed at the water quality office in Morogoro. BOD and COD are analyzed at the head water
quality laboratory in Dar es Salaam.
For the case of surface water two types of sample sites are routinely sampled from during the
water quality surveys; industry and river. Industry sites are typically effluent discharge canals
that have just entered the main river. River sites are typically surface water sites with no
apparent industry nearby. While for the case of groundwater quality Electrical conductivity is
very important. The areas of high electric conductivity (EC) are observed in several areas. The
high value is probably caused by long residence time, and dissolved composition of geology
(Figure 2-4). However the Mkata plains shows a low levels in EC which is speculated to be due
to the direct recharge from Kinyasungwe River.
Figure 2-4 Groundwater quality distribution map for Wami/Ruvu Basin
2.4 Reservoirs/Lakes Information
The basin have 9 construction dams in the basin and about 150 reservoirs which collect water
from rivers, groundwater and other are rain fed only. Daily monitoring of water levels is done
only at the Mindu Dam which is supplying water to Morogoro Municipality.
12
2.5 Groundwater Data
2.5.1 Temporal and Spatial Coverage of Groundwater Monitoring Stations
Groundwater monitoring in the basin is currently monitored manually and automatically,
although the station are not sufficient and lack long-term data. Only one sub catchment,
Makutupora has been monitored for so long since 1960’s. Basically Makutupora sub catchment
has twelve monitoring boreholes in which only five monitoring wells are operating. Water level
data have been collected by gauge readers from existing five monitoring wells in the Makutupora
well field namely BH No. 86/78, BH No. 122/75, BH No. 234/75, BH No. 89/75 and BH No.
103/78. Apart from 5 monitoring borehole in Makutupora, The basin has constructed and
installed a total of 19 monitoring boreholes during IWRMA & D project 2010/2011 which gives
the picture and behaviour of all aquifer types present (Figure 2-5).
Figure 2-5 Groundwater monitoring stations in the Wami/Ruvu Basin
13
14
3 HYDROLOGY OF THE BASIN FOR THE YEAR 2012/2013
3.1 Rainfall
Wami/Ruvu basin has both unimodal and bimodal types of rainfall patterns. The unimodal type
is found in the central part of Tanzania in the main Wami Catchment (Kinyasugwe sub
catchment) while bimodal type is received in the part of Wami (Mkondoa and Wami sub
catchments) Ruvu and Coastal Rivers catchments. In the unimodal type only one rainfall is
experienced during the months of January, February and March while in the bimodal type, there
are two rainy seasons, short rains (Vuli rains) in October to December and heavy rains (Masika
rains) which is received from March to May while short.
Rainfall behaviour of the year 2012/2013 is discussed per catchment and compared the Mean
Average Precipitation (MAP) which covered from 1960-2010. Therefore only rainfall stations
which have long-term data were selected to represent the situation in each catchment.
Wami River Catchment
Wami River catchment has both unimodal and bimodal rainfall patterns. Unimodal pattern is
usually observed in Kinyasungwe subcatchment (Figure 3-1) and bimodal pattern is observed in
Mkondoa and Wami subcatchments.
In the hydrological year 2012/2013, high rainfall was recorded at Zanka station of an annual
precipitation of about 843.1mm followed by Wami Railway of about 619.8mm. Compared to the
MAP most of the stations in Wami catchment the rainfall recorded for the hydrological year
2012/2013 showed to be below average (below 75% of MAP) except of Dodoma Maji Stations
where by the percentage was within average (88%) and Zanka station rainfall recorded was
above average i.e exceeded 100% (Table 3-1).
15
Figure 3-1 Rainfall distribution in Kinyasugwe sub-catchment (on the left), Mkondoa and
Wami sub-catchments (on the right) covering the period of November 2012 to October
2013.
Table 3-1 Comparison of Annual Rainfall and MAP for representative stations in Wami
Catchment
Station
Station Name
No.
Mean Annual Nov 2012-Oct 2013
Precipitation
(MAP) 19602010 [mm]
Annual Rainfall in
%
Description
Average
2012/2013 [mm]
9635012
Dodoma Maji
565.4
558
88
9636020
Kinyasugwe
518.2
329.9
63.7
Below average
Itegrated
9535006
Zanka
559.2
843.1
150.8
Above average
9637056
Wami/Prison
1044.3
580.1
55.6
Below average
9638035
Wami/Railway
912.2
619.8
67.9
Below average
16
Ruvu River Catchment
Ruvu River catchment experiences a typical bimodal rainfall pattern. However in Ngerengere
sub catchment the pattern is weaker than in Upper Ruvu sub catchment (Figure 3-2). Usually
Upper Ruvu Catchment receives much rainfall compared to other sub catchments in the Basin.
This is due to the presence of mountains and forests (Eastern Arc Mountains) within the sub
catchment.
In Ngerengere sub catchment the mountainous stations at an altitude above 900m (Mondo,
Mongwe, Ruhungo and Morning Side) observed to have high amount of annual rainfall which is
above 1000m (Table 3-2) compared to Lowland stations (Mlali, Morogoro Maji and Mindu).
In comparison to Mean Annual Precipitation, Rainfall in Ruvu catchment varied between sub
catchments. In Upper Ruvu sub catchments all the stations recorded rainfall above the average,
this speculates that the sub catchments have received rainfall above average (Table 3-2, Figure
3-3). In Ngerengere sub catchment most of the station recorded rainfall within average range
except for Ruhungo station which was above average while Mondo and Morning Side was below
average (Table 3-2, Figure 3-3).
Figure 3-2 Rainfall distribution in Ngerengere sub-catchment (on the left) and Upper subcatchment (on the right) covering the period of November 2012 to October 2013.
17
Table 3-2 Comparison of Annual Rainfall and MAP for representative stations in Ruvu
Catchment
Station
Station Name
No.
Mean Annual Nov 2012-Oct 2013
Precipitation
(MAP) 1960-
Annual Rainfall
%
Description
in 2012/2013
2010 [mm]
[mm]
9637045
Mondo
2531.2
1454.7
57.5
Below average
9637046
Morning Side
2298.1
1135
49.4
Below average
9637048
Ruhungo
858.7
895
104.2
Above average
9637051
Mlali
793.6
768
96.8
Average
9637052
Morogoro Maji
750.6
644.6
85.9
Average
9637049
Mongwe
1250.0
1211.7
96.9
Average
9737006
Matombo Mission
1569.4
3122.1
198.9
Above average
9737026
Ruvu Kibungo
1605.7
1827.6
113.8
Above average
9737024
Kibungo Juu
2556.3
2571.2
100.6
Above average
18
Annual Precipitation (mm)
6000
5000
4000
3000
1569.4
2531.2
2000
1000
1605.7
2298.1
1250.0
858.7
1454.7
0
Mondo
1135
2556.3
895
Morning Ruhungo
Side
793.6
750.6
644.6
768
Mlali
1211.7
3122.1
1827.6
Morogoro Mongwe Matombo Ruvu
Maji
Mission Kibungo
Ngerengere sub catchmet
Annual Precipitation (Nov 2012- Oct 2013)
2571.2
Kibungo
Juu
Upper Ruvu sub catchment
Mean Annual Precipitation (1960-2010)
Figure 3-3 Comparison of Annual Rainfall and MAP for representative stations in Ruvu
Catchment
19
Coastal Rivers Catchment
Coastal Rivers catchment have bimodal rainfall pattern, and have only three rainfall monitoring
stations (Figure 3-4). During the hydrological year of 2012/2013 (Nov 2012 – Oct 2013)
Kisarawe FDC station observed to have the highest annual rainfall amount followed by Kisarawe
Boma and Ubungo Maji which was 685.8mm, 679.4mm and 656.6mm respectively (Table 3-3).
In comparison to Mean Annual Precipitation, The catchment has received rainfall below the
average (Table 3-3, Figure 3-5).
Figure 3-4 Rainfall distribution in Coastal rivers catchment covering the period of
November 2012 to October 2013
20
Table 3-3 Comparison of Annual Rainfall and MAP for representative stations in Coast
Catchment
Station
Station Name
No.
Mean Annual Nov 2012-Oct 2013
Precipitation
(MAP) 1960-
%
Description
2012/2013 [mm]
2010 [mm]
9636048
Annual Rainfall in
Ubungo Maji
1003.2
656.6
65.5
Below average
Kisarawe FDC
1111.6
685.8
61.7
Below average
Kisarawe Boma
1111.6
679.4
61.1
Below average
Figure 3-5 Comparison of Annual Rainfall and MAP for representative stations in Coast
Catchment
21
3.2 River discharges and Water levels
Wami Catchment
The upper part of Wami basin (Kinyasungwe River) is characterised by intermittent river flows
since the rainfall pattern is unimodal rainfall characteristics also could be explained by soil
characteristics which suggests groundwater recharge. Therefore Most of the rainfall is converted
to groundwater due supposedly high infiltration rates of the soils.
The middle part Mkondoa sub catchment represented by Wami at Dakawa station and Wami sub
catchment represented by Wami at Mandera station are characterised by perennial flow which is
attributed to high rainfall and good aquifers which favour river recharge during the dry season.
Figure 3-6 shows the hydrograph pattern at two stations along the Wami River, the hydrograph
starts to rise from March- April which is during heavy rains (Masika) and begin to cease from
May and September/October. The graph rises again from December/November to
Jauary/February before heavy rains begins in March.
Figure 3-6 Daily flow regime in Wami River as recorded at Wami at Dakawa (1G1) and
Wami at Mandera (1G2).
Generally water quantity (flows) in Wami River is in stressing conditions. The monthly average
flows recorded in the hydrological year 2012/2013 at both stations (1G1 and 1G2) were below
half of long term average flow for all months i.e. only 30% of the long-term average (Figure 3-7,
22
Table 3-4 Comparison of Average flows for each month and LTAR for representative
stations in Wami RiverTable 3-4). This is speculated to be caused by the following reasons (i)
High number of water users for irrigation (ii) Inefficiency methods of irrigation thus a lot of
water is abstracted (iii) Destruction of water sources and (iv) Climate change and climate
variability.
Figure 3-7 Comparison of Average discharge and Long-term Average for representative
Stations in Wami River, on the left is Wami at Dakawa (1G1) and the right is Wami at
Mandera (1G2)
Table 3-4 Comparison of Average flows for each month and LTAR for representative
stations in Wami River
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
Annual Average
Flow
1G1 (m3/s)
2.18
2.68
2.95
5.04
8.44
50.81
15.86
2.95
1.69
1.67
0.45
1.79
LTA (1960-2010)
36.42
26.34
29.92
67.50
50.24
21.68
11.15
9.29
7.17
6.04
7.95
23.44
8.04
24.76
23
1G2 (m3/s) LTA (1960-2010
66.96
4.90
52.88
10.10
68.19
4.60
202.95
31.18
128.57
99.97
46.13
35.77
26.72
6.20
21.50
2.28
16.70
2.69
16.18
0.51
34.42
7.44
55.21
18.69
61.37
% of LTA
32.48205
30.46413
Note: LTA = Long – term Average
24
Ruvu River Catchment
Figure 3-8, represents the flow regime at the upstream station (1H5) and a downstream station
(1H8) of Ruvu River. Where by a downstream stations shows a more stable flow regime
compared to an upstream station.
The upstream of Ruvu River is characterized by mountainous slopes with annual rainfall over
2500 mm with many streams/rivers. The flow regime this area is very responsive to the bimodal
nature of the rainfall variability. Highest water levels occur between April and June. Lower Ruvu
sub catchment (Figure 3-8) is characterized by a stable flow regime.
In comparison with the annual average flow generally at both stations in Ruvu River the annual
average flow of 2012/2013 hydrological year recorded to be below the Long-term average.
However when analysis were done seasonally it was observed that during the rainy season
(March – May) the flow was recorded above average which means the rainfall received were
above normal (Figure 3-9, Table below). A similar trend was also observed in rainfall
distribution in chapter 3.1.
Figure 3-8 On the left, daily flow regime in Ruvu River as recorded at Ruvu Kibungo
(Upstream) and Ruvu Morogoro Road Bridge (Downstream). On the right represent the
relationship of Flow and Rainfall at Ruvu Kibungo (1H5) station.
25
Figure 3-9 Comparison of Average discharge and Long-term Average for representative
stations in Ruvu River, on the left is Ruvu at Kibungo (1H5) and the right is Ruvu at
Morogoro Rd Bridge(1H8)
LTA for
Months 1H8
Nov
48.85
Dec
63.17
Jan
59.28
Feb
37.71
Mar
52.99
Apr
145.92
May
149.31
Jun
58.33
Jul
27.78
Aug
18.66
Sep
15.55
Oct
14.29
Annual
57.65
% of
1H8(2012/2013) LTA
8.86
18.13
17.66
27.96
14.29
24.11
12.29
32.59
38.96
73.52
156.73
107.41
105.36
70.57
25.42
43.58
11.71
42.17
9.23
49.47
6.10
39.22
27.93
195.43
36.21
62.81
26
LTA for
1H5(2012/2013) 1H5
7.50
18.92
10.61
20.10
7.54
17.73
5.30
13.96
17.45
19.14
27.27
40.60
21.65
34.51
10.78
17.78
6.96
11.75
6.50
8.75
4.04
8.40
18.24
10.47
11.99
18.51
% of
LTA
39.63
52.78
42.53
37.98
91.17
67.16
62.73
60.64
59.23
74.31
48.01
174.21
67.53
3.3 Water Storage in Mindu Dam
Daily water level fluctuation in Mindu dam is represented by the graph below (Figure 3-10)
while the general characteristics of the dam showing its storage, Dam crest and Dead storage is
shown in Table 3-5 below.
Generally the water level fluctuations in the Mindu dam is highly correlated to the rainfall
pattern in the catchment, where by highest levels of about 507 masl were recorded in March –
April 2013 (Figure 3-11) which is equivalent to the storage of 16.6 Million cubic meters.
Table 3-5 Characteristics of Mindu Dam
Dam
Storage
(Mil. Max. WL
m3)
(2012/2013)
(masl)
Mindu
1900
507.26
Min. WL
Dam
crest Dead storage
(2012/2013)
Level(masl)
level(masl)
512
501
(masl)
505.02
Figure 3-10 Daily water level fluctuation in the Mindu covering the period of November
2012 to October 2013.
27
18
508.00
507.50
507.00
506.50
506.00
505.50
505.00
504.50
504.00
503.50
503.00
502.50
Volume (10^6 m^3)
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
Figure 3-11 Comparison of Water Levels and volume in Mindu Dam.
28
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
8
Water level (masl)
Volume and Water level fluctuation in Mindu Dam
3.4 Groundwater levels for selected monitoring stations.
Groundwater level monitored at 5 boreholes in Makutupora basin, showing a more stable trend
for the past two hydrological years (2011/2012 and 2012/2013) where by the slope of the trend
lines in all five bar graphs ranging from 0.01 to 0.07 (Figure 3-12).
Sep
Aug
Jul
Jun
May
Apr
Mar
Feb
Jan
Dec
Nov
Oct
Sep
Aug
2012/2013
Jul
Jun
May
Apr
Mar
Feb
Jan
Dec
Nov
2011/2012
0
5
B/H103/78
10
B/H234/75
15
B/H86/78
20
B/H89/75
25
B/H122/75
30
35
40
45
Figure 3-12 Groundwater levels fluctuations in 5 monitoring boreholes of Makutupora
basin
Looking on monthly wise December and January 2011/2012 the water levels in Borehole
B/H103/78 were very low 24.87 and 25.22 respectively compared to the same months in
2010/2011 41.33 and 42.70 while in 2012/2013 was 35.86 and 37.10, this is could be the effect
of pumpage. It was observed that some of the monitoring wells/boreholes are close to production
wells.
29
3.5 Water quality status
During the hydrological year of 2012/2013 water quality survey was conducted once in Ruvu
River only with the purpose of understanding the quality of the River. The field campaign was
done in August 2013 where by the river is experiencing minimal flow thus lack of dilution.
Due to limited of information on past trends the discussion is based on this particular sampling.
Dissolved Oxygen
Figure 3-13 dissolved oxygen levels are presented as a gradient from red to blue; red sites
exhibiting the lowest dissolved oxygen values and blue sites exhibiting the highest values.
The lowest dissolved oxygen values were recorded near Morogoro Town, on tributaries flowing
into the Ngerengere River Kikundi, Morogoro Industrial Area and Kingolwira. By the time the
water reaches at Mgude (1HA15), the dissolved oxygen has recovered slightly. Dissolved
oxygen was unusually low at Mgeta Duthumi, given its position in the upper catchment of the
Mgeta.
Figure 3-13 Dissolved Oxygen Map - Water Quality Survey August 2013
30
Electrical Conductivity (EC)
Figure 3-14, electrical conductivity is presented as a gradient from blue to red; blue sites have
the lowest electrical conductivity and red sites have the highest electrical conductivity.
Electrical Conductivity was highest in the estuary, which is unsurprising given the ocean salinity.
Within the fresh water reaches of the basin, electrical conductivity was highest in Morogoro
town and on the Ngerengere River at Mgude. The headwaters of the Mgeta and Upper Ruvu had
very low electrical conductivity.
Figure 3-14 EC Map - Water Quality Survey August 2013
Turbidity
Figure 3-15, turbidity is presented as a gradient from blue to red; blue sites have the lowest
turbidity and red sites have the highest turbidity.
31
The lowest turbidity values were recorded near Morogoro town. Turbidity was highest at Mgeta
Duthumi, which is highly connected to human activities in the upper catchment e.g. Agriculture
activities
Figure 3-15 Turbidity Map - Water Quality Survey August 2013
Status of the Water quality based on TBS standards
Tanzania Bureau of Standards has announced the water quality standards for a typical river
system as shown in the Table 3-6 below
Table 3-6 Water quality standards of a typical River (TBS)
Class
Description
DO %Sat mg/l
BOD mg/l
NH3-N mg/l
1
Very good
80
2.5
0.2
2
Good
70
4.0
0.6
3
Fair
60
6.0
1.3
32
4
Poor
60
8.0
2.5
5
Very poor
20
15.0
9.0
6
Bad
<20
Thus the sampled stations along Ruvu River are presented in the heat map on a gradient of bad
water quality to good water quality (Figure 3-16). Bad water quality sites are at the top of the
map, good water quality sites are at the bottom.
The heat map identifies the Morogoro Industrial Area as the worst site in the basin (Figure
3-16). The Ruvu Estuary is identified as having the second worst water quality in the basin.
This is not an appropriate finding since that site is heavily influence by the ocean and because of
that, it is naturally very different than all the other sites.
The Ngerengere sites below Morogoro town all have very poor water quality compared to the
rest of the basin.
Mgeta River at Mgeta has the best water quality, followed by Morogoro River at Morogoro.
Morogoro Industrial Area
Ruvu Estuary
1HA15 Ngerengere at Mgude
Bwawani Ngerengere
Local MgD, Mgeta at Duthumi
1H8A Ruvu at Morogoro Rd. Bridge
value
4
1HA3 Ngerengere at Kingolwira
Ruvu at Kongo
X1
1H3 Ruvu at Kidunda
2
Kikundi M/Mpya
1HC2A Mvuha at
Mlali/Mzumbe
0
1H5 Ruvu at Kibungo
Kinole Intake
Mindu
Mzinga/ Bridge
Mzinga/ Luhungo
1HA8A Morogoro at Morogoro
Ch
l
or
id
BO e
D
Am CO
m D
o
Sa nia
lin
ity
TC
Ni FC
tra
te
Su T s
lp DS
ha
te
s
TS
S
Tu E
rb C
id
Te ity
m
p
1HB2 Mgeta at Mgeta
X2
Figure 3-16 Water Quality "Heat" Map
33
4.0 GENERAL REMARKS AND WAY FORWARD
4.1 Challenges and interventions
In collecting water resources data (rainfall. surface and ground water levels. ratings. water
quality and weather) WRBWO faced some challenges as follows.
 Rainfall data: (i) some gauge readers are not faithful. They do not go to the sites on
time or even do not go at all. They just guess the numbers and write. (ii) Quality control
system is weak, data obtained is not reliable. In offices, there is still some inadequate
strength in quality control. To address this challenge, a more robust system has been
designed where every station is allocated to a person who takes care of all issues (data
compilation, screening and quality control).
(i) Water levels and flows: (i) the same problem of unfaithfulness is also encountered here
with the gauge readers and the same measures are taken as for rainfall stations. (ii) The
basin has only 11 rating curves (which also require updating) out of 46 available stations.
The problem is the availability of funds.
(ii) Water Quality: The problem here is first the unclear stations of the network. One station
contains several points and several parameters are monitored for each point. Another
problem is the inadequacy in funds which has caused difficulties in implementing the
programme. A process in underway to revise the network so that few stations are chosen
which can fairly give information of the different parameters of interest.
(iii) Gauge readers allowances is very low and not paid timely. This is makes the gauge
readers not motivated and not to go to record the data.
Key interventions include the following:
 Installation of new hydrometric stations: Five new hydrometric stations have been
installed.
 Installation of automatic weather station and rain gauges: one automatic weather station
has been installed in Ruvu basin and 3 automatic rain gauges have been installed in the
same basin.
34
 Water quantity monitoring: Water quantity monitoring was carried out in Ruvu sub basin
as presented in this report.
With regard to the monitoring network the following interventions have been implemented:
 Improving existing network by installing new stations with automatic systems backed by
manual systems.
 Checking old rating curves and developing new rating curves. It was done at 6 stations in
Ruvu basin.
 Database management using Nile Basin Decision Supporting System (NBDSS) and GIS.
 Training personnel in database management.
 Training gauge readers to read manual gages, record ground water levels, to identify any
equipment problems; provide security and to perform minor station maintenance.
 Improved monitoring through frequent visits to the stations.
35
5.0 ANNEXES
5.1Status of Rainfall StationWami/Ruvu Basin
S/N
o
Station Name
Remarks
1
Berega Mission Hospital
Automatic Rainfall
2
Buigiri Primary School
3
Lat.
Long
Elevation (m)
-6.18030
37.14683
832
Operational
-6.13
36.03
1066
Chamkoroma Primary School
Operational
-6.33
36.67
4
Chihanga Primary School
Operational
-5.969
35.953
5
Chilonwa Primary School
Operational
-6.03
36.13
6
Dabalo Primary School
Operational
-5.78
36.13
1524
7
Dodoma Maji
Operational
-6.18782
35.75320
1141
8
9
10
Available
Missing
MAP
Data
data
(mm)
565.4
1954-
Hobwe
Operational
-6.98
37.57
740
2012
1011.99
1964Hombolo Primary School
Operational
-5.88
35.92
Ibwaga Primary School
Operational
-6.295
36.557
36 | P a g e
1097
2010
1978-2009
182.14
5.1Status of Rainfall StationWami/Ruvu Basin
S/N
o
Station Name
Remarks
11
Ikowa (Azimio Primary School)
Operational
-6.18
36.23
12
Itiso Primary school
Operational
-5.63
36.03
13
Lat.
Long
Elevation (m)
Kibungo
Operational
-7.02
37.80
14
Kikombo Primary School
Operational
-6.220
35.990
15
Kimango Farm
Operational
-6.75025
37.75513
16
Kisarawe Agr
Operational
17
Kisarawe Boma
Operational
18
19
20
21
project)
-6.91139
39.07583
-6.84057
38.17123
Matombo p/s
Operational
-7.08
37.77
Mayamaya Primary school
Operational
-5.844
35.839
(ICRAF project)
MAP
Data
data
(mm)
1219
270
19612013
1475.48
468
278
1111.6
172
390
M/Auto Operational
Mlali
Missing
1111.6
Auto Operational (ICRAF
Lukose
Available
19712013
1569.4
1961-6.9662
37
37.53602
588
2013
793.6
5.1Status of Rainfall StationWami/Ruvu Basin
S/N
o
Station Name
22
23
24
29
31
32
Remarks
Mondo
Operational
Mongwe
Operational
Morning site juu
Operational
-6.95
Elevation (m)
37.63
1120
Missing
MAP
Data
data
(mm)
19542013
1961
2531.24
1250.0
-6.90
37.67
Operational
-6.81755
37.66040
Ruhungo
Operational
-6.92
37.63
1450
513
19612013
2298.1
19612013
750.6
880
858.7
1967-
Manual
33
Utari Village
35
Wami at Mandera
37
Long
Morogoro Maji
Ubungo Maji
36
Lat.
Available
-6.78
39.20
Operational
-6.99209
38.29058
91
Automatic Rainfall
-6.24638
38.38732
85
2013
Wami Prison Farm
Automatic Rainfall
-6.39649
37.46294
399
Wami Rail Stn Met
Operational
-6.23155
38.70923
37
38
1003.2
1971-
1972and
2013
1973
1044.3
912.2
5.1Status of Rainfall StationWami/Ruvu Basin
S/N
o
38
Station Name
Remarks
Lat.
Zanka Primary School
Operational
Long
-5.88
Elevation (m)
35.75
Available
Missing
MAP
Data
data
(mm)
1133
559.2
5.2 Total monthly Rainfall 2012/2013 for Representative stations
2012
2013
STATION
NO
NAME/MONTH
01.
Dodoma Maji
02.
Kinyasungwe Integrated
03.
Pandambili
04.
Wami/Prison
05.
Berega Mission
06.
Chihanga Pr/School
07.
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
0
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
TOTAL
0
0
0
0
0
491
0
0
0
0
0
329.9
32
138.4
93.5
87.8
53.8
85.5
0
94.2
111.3
44.4
36.7
43.3
0
63.8
93.5
116
59.4
55.4
3.6
0
0
0
0
0
391.7
18.7
0
63.2
144
101.1
198.3
52.3
0
0
0
2.5
0
580.1
87.6
65.8
56
134.8
67
83.4
49.6
1
1.6
8.8
0
17.6
115.9
123.2
79.7
85.3
108.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
530.2
37
292.5
78.9
86.4
187.7
160.6
0
0
0
0
0
0
843.1
-
555.6
Zanka Pr/School
39
5.2 Total monthly Rainfall 2012/2013 for Representative stations
2012
2013
STATION
NO
NAME/MONTH
08.
Buigiri Pr/School
09.
Wami/Railway
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
TOTAL
0
111.1
121
113.8
144.7
80.9
0
0
0
0
0
0
571.5
46.8
158.4
61.2
0
135.6
158.8
57.6
0
0
0
0
1.4
619.8
Mondo
245.6
0
83.3
112
413.4
253.2
292.6
0
1
37.1
16.5
Morning Side
113.3
0
62
90.5
233
217.1
151.4
14
23.7
34.4
18.1
Ruhungo
101.0
0.0
155.0
82.0
264.0
221.0
63.0
0.0
5.0
4.0
0.0
Mlali
30.5
41.2
101.5
90.7
250.7
127.3
85.6
0
1.5
2
0
37
768
Morogoro Maji
42.1
23.2
125.3
108.3
115.9
111.0
51.5
1.0
2.6
3.3
0.0
60.4
644.6
96.5
23
501
397.5
91.4
0
0
0
0
102.3
1211.7
10.
1454.7
11.
177.5
1135
12.
895
13.
14.
15.
Mongwe
-
-
16.
Matombo Mission
116.9
0
165.1
112.1
876.4
896.4
54
54
51
157.8
0
638.4
3122.1
Ruvu Kibungo
214.3
0
113.2
76.9
376.4
373.4
222.6
2.4
26.5
64.2
38.5
319.2
1827.6
Kibungo juu
447.8
180.8
271.6
81
590.6
248.2
129.2
16.8
25.2
73
114
393
2571.2
2.9
13
121.3
0
357.6
48.1
27.6
0.3
0
3.7
0
82.1
656.6
17.
18.
19.
Ubungo Maji
40
5.2 Total monthly Rainfall 2012/2013 for Representative stations
2012
2013
STATION
NO
NAME/MONTH
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
TOTAL
20.
Kisarawe FDC
0
68.5
92.1
1.8
119.5
221.7
83.9
1.2
2.9
6.8
0.5
86.9
685.8
86.9
88.1
76.1
1
96
150
70
0
1.3
10
0
100
679.4
21.
Kisarawe Boma
41
5.3 Status of Gauging Station Wami/Ruvu Basin
Sn.
Station Name
Status of AWL
Status of Staff
Gauge
Gauge
Latitude
Longitude
Elevation
(m.a.s.l)
1
Diwale at Ngomeni
Not Functional
Functional
-6.13764
37.59020
2
Great Kinyasungwe at Ikombo
Functional
Functional
-5.7160
36.0849
3
Kinyasungwe at Godegode
Not Functional
Not Functional
-6.541
36.574
4
Kinyasungwe at Itiso
Not Installed
Functional
-5.59
36.00
5
Kinyasungwe at Kongwa/Dodoma
Not Functional
Functional
-6.21775
36.32700
855
6
Kisangata at Mvumi
Not Functional
Not Functional
-6.58897
37.17288
436
7
Kizinga at Buza
Not Installed
Functional
8
Little Kinyasungwe at Chihanga
Vandalised
Functional
-5.9047
35.8439
9
Little Kinyasungwe at Mayamaya
Functional
Functional
-5.81948
35.80410
1153
10
Lukigura at Kimamba Rd. Br.
Functional
Functional
-5.81396
37.80101
512
11
Lumuma at Kilimalulu
Not Functional
Not Functional
-6.68
36.67
12
Masena at Ibumila
Not Functional
Not Functional
-5.903
36.390
13
Mdukwe at Mdukwe
Not Functional
Not Functional
-6.795
36.930
14
Mfizigo at Kibangile
Functional
Functional
-7.02970
37.80005
42
387
207
Available data
OCT 1964-1989
15
Mfizigo at Lanzi
Functional
Functional
-7.08922
37.68515
898
16
Mgeta at Duthumi
Not Functional
Functional
-7.41009
37.77803
138
17
Mgeta at Mgeta
Functional
Functional
-7.03
37.57
975
18
Miyombo at Kivungu
Not Functional
Functional
-6.90987
37.02422
477
19
Mkata at Mkata
Not Functional
Functional
-6.75907
37.36130
399
20
Mkindo at Mkindo
Not Installed
Functional
-6.24762
37.55250
21
Mkondoa at Kilosa
Functional
Functional
-6.83173
36.97824
22
Mkondoa at Mbarahwe
Not Functional
Not Functional
-6.60
36.78
23
Mkondoa at Railway Bridge
Not Functional
Not Functional
-6.762
36.933
24
Morogoro at Morogoro
Vandalised
Functional
-6.84562
37.67247
547
25
Mvuha at Ngagama
Vandalised
Functional
-7.19999
37.83795
138
26
Mvuha at Tulo School
Not Functional
Functional
-7.24065
37.91766
27
Mziha at Mziha-Kimamba
Functional
Functional
-5.89588
37.78001
443
28
Mzinga at Majimatitu
Not Installed
Functional
29
Ngerengere at Kingolwira
Functional
Functional
-6.75177
37.75762
425
30
Ngerengere at Konga
Functional
Functional
-6.90653
37.59944
531
31
Ngerengere at Lukwambe
Not Functional
Functional
-6.59937
37.99728
332
32
Ngerengere at Mgude
Functional
Functional
-6.76507
38.14570
180
33
Ngerengere at Utari Bridge
Vandalised
Not Functional
-7.01806
38.32478
101
43
495
AUG 1951-1992
34
Ruvu at Kibungo
Functional
Functional
-7.02370
37.80948
203
1952-1992
35
Ruvu at Kidunda
Functional
Functional
-7.26395
38.24558
86
36
Ruvu at Mikula
Not Functional
Functional
-7.27967
38.11447
80
1967-2008
37
Ruvu at Morogoro Rd. Br.
Functional
Functional
-6.69080
38.69427
24
1958-JUNE 2010
38
Tami at Msowero
Functional
Functional
-6.53173
37.21375
440
39
Wami at Dakawa
Functional
Functional
-6.44783
37.53343
361
1954-2010
40
Wami at Mandera
Functional
Functional
-6.24638
38.38732
87
1952-2010
5.4 Discharge Monthly Average (m3/s) 2012/2013
2012
NO STATION NAME/MONTH
NOV DEC
2013
JAN
FEB
MAR APR
MAY
Average
JUN
JUL
AUG SEP
OCT
1 Wami at Dakawa 1G1
2.18
2.68
2.95
5.04
8.44
50.81
15.86
2.95
1.69
1.67
0.45
1.79
8.04
4.90 10.10
4.60
31.18
99.97
35.77
6.20
2.28
2.69
0.51
7.44
18.69
5.30
17.45
27.27
21.65 10.78
6.96
6.50
4.04 18.24
11.99
52.99 145.92 149.31 58.33 27.78 18.66 15.55 14.29
57.65
2 Wami at Mandera 1G2
3. Ruvu at Kibungo 1H5
7.50 10.61
7.54
4. Ruvu at Morogoro Rd Bridge 1H8
48.85 63.17 59.28 37.71
44
5.5 Water quality summary
Elevati
Temp.
o
TC
FC
EC
TDS
DO
NH3-N
Turbidity
TSS
(CFU/
(CFU/1
BOD
Source
on (m)
( C)
pH
(µS/cm)
(mg/l)
(mg/l)
(mg/l)
(NTU)
(mg/l)
100ml)
00ml)
(mg/l)
Duthumi
River
153.00
28.50
7.94
181.00
117.00
6.89
0.57
170.00
30.00
4280
1040
0.87
1HC2A Mvuha at
River
120.00
28.20
7.71
33.00
21.00
7.98
0.04
42.30
10.00
7400
2000
0.50
Kibungo
River
242.00
24.02
7.67
69.00
44.00
9.80
0.00
12.00
10.00
4700
2600
4.00
Kinole Intake
River
450.00
23.80
7.68
33.00
21.00
7.20
0.00
3.80
10.00
3200
1920
16.30
Mgeta
River
1014.0
18.30
7.80
32.00
20.00
9.03
0.00
7.10
10.00
760
60
13.19
Mlali/Mzumbe
River
603.00
24.60
7.63
597.00
388.00
3.08
0.19
11.00
20.00
3120
450
27.20
Mindu
Dam
105.00
26.70
7.90
139.00
92.00
7.00
0.46
31.30
0.00
110
40
16.20
Luhungo
River
674.00
21.90
7.44
32.00
20.00
8.10
0.00
6.70
10.00
1000
320
0.40
Mzinga/ Bridge
River
535.00
25.50
7.29
56.00
36.00
6.81
0.04
0.00
20.00
620
200
0.70
River
569.00
21.10
7.69
75.00
40.00
7.80
0.06
5.60
10.00
80
25
0.80
Site
Local
MgD.
Mgeta
at
1H5
Ruvu
at
1HB2 Mgeta at
Mzinga/
1HA8A
45
Morogoro
at
Morogoro
Kikundi M/Mpya
River
514.00
23.00
7.00
433.00
280.00
1.23
0.94
24.30
70.00
100
75
82.00
River
445.00
24.10
7.56
1881.00
1223.0
1.20
1.83
9.00
10.00
75
40
88.40
River
472.00
30.60
9.56
6315.00
4109.0
0.02
20.40
112.00
40.00
0
0
600.00
River
253.00
26.30
7.64
1288.00
826.00
2.69
0.00
59.70
10.00
14400
6880
56.00
River
198.00
37.40
7.97
1614.00
1048.0
4.14
0.49
59.40
50.00
15200
8000
34.00
River
91.00
30.80
7.71
98.00
64.00
7.76
0.19
40.20
20.00
4960
1600
4.60
Bridge
River
69.00
28.90
7.69
109.00
70.00
6.99
0.22
80.90
10.00
5230
2900
9.20
Ruvu at Kongo
River
28.60
29.00
7.51
126.00
81.00
7.12
0.36
99.00
20.00
2500
900
7.60
Ruvu Estuary
River
19.00
29.90
7.60
8933.00
5008.0
6.18
0.37
77.80
140.00
3400
1000
12.80
1HA3
Ngerengere
at
Kingolwira
Morogoro
Industrial Area
Bwawani
Ngerengere
1HA15
Ngerengere
at
Mgude
1H3
Ruvu
at
Kidunda
1H8A Ruvu at
Morogoro
Rd.
46
5.6 Daily Water level in Mindu Dam
2012
2013
D
A
T
Nov
Dec
Jan.E
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep.
Oct.
505.72
505.58
505.46
505.17
505.30
507.19
507.26
507.05
506.97
506.71
506.35
m
505.7
505.62
505.44
505.40
505.26
507.13
507.24
507.04
506.94
506.70
506.34
m
505.69
505.64
505.42
505.47
505.27
507.12
507.19
507.04
506.94
506.69
506.32
m
505.67
505.65
505.40
505.48
505.25
507.11
507.19
507.04
506.94
506.68
506.32
506.01
505.64
505.66
505.40
505.48
505.24
507.10
507.20
507.04
506.94
506.68
506.29
506.25
505.62
505.67
505.38
505.47
505.22
507.11
507.18
507.03
506.94
506.68
506.27
506.34
505.6
505.65
505.38
505.46
505.21
507.15
507.16
507.03
506.94
506.67
506.25
506.40
505.58
505.65
505.37
505.45
505.20
507.17
507.14
507.03
506.94
506.65
506.23
506.44
505.57
505.63
505.35
505.45
505.20
507.15
507.12
507.03
506.94
506.63
506.21
506.44
505.56
505.62
505.34
505.44
505.18
507.13
507.12
507.02
506.92
506.62
506.20
506.46
505.56
505.69
505.33
505.42
505.29
507.13
507.11
507.02
506.92
506.61
506.15
506.47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
47
12
505.56
505.67
505.32
505.40
505.42
507.14
507.10
507.02
506.92
506.60
506.16
506.49
505.55
505.66
505.32
505.38
505.57
507.14
507.10
507.02
506.92
506.59
506.13
506.50
505.54
505.66
505.30
505.36
505.63
507.13
507.10
507.01
506.92
506.58
506.12
506.49
505.52
505.65
505.26
505.34
505.64
507.12
507.09
507.01
506.9
506.57
506.12
506.51
505.5
505.64
505.27
505.32
505.66
507.11
507.09
507.01
506.88
506.56
506.11
506.52
505.5
505.63
505.25
505.33
505.68
507.10
507.09
507.01
506.86
506.55
506.10
506.53
505.5
505.62
505.23
505.32
505.72
507.08
507.09
507.01
506.84
506.53
506.00
506.53
505.5
505.62
505.21
505.31
505.76
507.10
507.09
507.01
506.84
506.52
506.00
506.50
505.48
505.61
505.20
505.31
505.93
507.10
507.08
507.01
506.83
506.51
505.99
506.50
505.47
505.6
505.18
505.29
506.11
507.10
507.06
507.01
506.83
506.50
505.97
506.50
505.45
505.59
505.15
505.30
506.40
507.10
507.06
507.01
506.82
506.49
505.95
506.52
505.44
505.58
505.14
505.33
506.63
507.09
507.06
507.01
506.8
506.48
505.93
506.50
505.42
505.57
505.13
505.34
506.87
507.08
507.06
507.01
506.78
506.47
505.91
506.50
505.41
505.56
505.11
505.33
507.00
507.12
507.06
507.01
506.77
506.46
505.90
506.46
505.4
505.54
505.09
505.32
507.12
507.10
507.06
507.01
506.76
506.44
505.88
506.49
505.39
505.52
505.07
505.32
507.11
507.08
507.06
507.01
506.76
506.43
505.87
506.48
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
48
28
505.38
505.51
505.04
505.37
505.5
505.41
505.31
507.15
507.07
507.06
507
506.75
506.42
505.86
506.47
505.02
507.14
507.09
507.05
507
506.75
506.40
505.85
506.46
505.49
505.05
507.12
507.08
507.05
506.99
506.74
506.38
505.83
506.45
505.48
505.07
507.15
507.05
506.98
506.72
506.36
505.52
505.61
505.25
505.37
505.95
507.11
507.11
507.02
506.87
506.55
506.09
506.45
505.7
505.7
505.5
505.5
507.2
507.2
507.3
507.1
1.4
506.7
506.4
506.5
505.4
505.5
505.0
505.2
505.2
507.1
507.1
507.0
1.4
506.4
505.8
506.0
29
30
31
506.43
Mean
Maximum
Minimum
49
50 | P a g e