1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Through the ages, bodies of water such as rivers have been used as sources for fresh

water to sustain life. Rivers play not only a very important role in the hydrologic cycle but

as well as a vital part in the ecosystem. Rivers carry water and nutrients to areas all around

the earth, act as natural drainage channels for surface waters, and provide excellent habitat

and food for many of the earth’s organisms (Barrow, 2013). People found it practical and

convenient to live along rivers given that these channels provide easy accessibility for

human consumption, industry and agriculture.

However, due to the effects of change in climate and human interference, flow in

rivers are fluctuating and becoming more unstable according to some hydrologists. This is

because discharge in rivers is affected by the varying amount of precipitation and

evapotranspiration brought by climate change. In countries like the Philippines where

rivers are of major use for water drainage system and irrigation in urban and rural areas,

this imposes a threat since it provides vulnerability to floods and can damage

establishments and crop harvest as well as compromise people.

Davao City is susceptible to these risks as it consists of multiple connections of

rivers and streams whole throughout the region. The Talomo River, one of the city’s

primary water source and principal river channel, is situated wherein 15 barangays

surrounds the river and if potential flooding occurs due to excessive amount of water

discharge, it can damage properties and as well as affect agricultural commodities.

 2

It is with this endeavour that the researchers want to compare using streamflow

hydrographs and analyse the trend of stream discharge in Talomo River. This study will

determine the potential trend of streamflow based on previous records for the past years

and describe the increment or decrement of water discharge that will be a valuable source

of information.

Significance of the Study

The researchers were able to come up with the idea of comparing and analysing the

trend of stream discharge using streamflow hydrographs in Talomo River in order to assess

the trend of discharge in the aforementioned river. This study also aims to determine

whether an increase or decrease in the monthly stream discharge is occurring in Talomo

River.

Findings in this study can also be used to predict future stream flow in Talomo

River for forecasting. Moreover, this study can be of significance as future reference for

studies in flood control, emergency response infrastructure, zoning regulations and early

warning systems.

Statement of the Problem

This study is aimed to answer the following questions:

1. What is the streamflow trend in Talomo River over the last 17 years?
 3

2. Is there an increase or decrease in the trend of monthly stream discharge for the

past 17 years?

Scope and Limitations of the Study

This study only focuses on evaluating the trend of stream discharge of Talomo

River from January 2001 to December 2017. Data used were taken from the gauge located

near Angalan II Bridge, Los Amigos, Tugbok, Davao City. A descriptive-analytical

research design was employed as research approach in the trend analysis of the streamflow

in Talomo River and stream discharge hydrographs were used to compare the monthly

mean discharge.

Hypotheses

Based on the foregoing problems, the proponents are able to formulate the

following hypotheses:

Null Hypothesis

Ho: There is no increase in the trend of stream discharge in Talomo River.

Alternative Hypothesis

Ha: There is an increase in the trend of stream discharge in Talomo River.

 4

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

To understand and clarify the terms used in the study, the following

terminologies are hereby defined:

Streamflow - Streamflow is the volumetric discharge expressed in volume per unit time

and is a major element in the water cycle which represents the flow of water in streams,

rivers and other channels moving downslope at a given time

Hydrograph – is a graph of time versus discharge which helps understand water patterns

and forecast future conditions

Hydrologic Variables - Hydrologic variables are indicators important in climate change

analysis. These variables reflect the current change in the climate and can help understand

the relationships between hydrology and climate

Trend Analysis – investigation in the patterns of a single or multiple variables; can be

used to determine whether or not the observed collection of time series for a hydrologic

variable exhibits a number of trends that is greater than the number that is expected to occur

by chance
 5

Related Studies

Hydrological Trend Analysis in the Yellow River Basin Using a Distributed

Hydrological Model

Zhentao Cong et al. (2009) conducted an analysis of the hydrological trends that

occurred in past decades in Yellow River in order to understand past changes and to predict

future trends. To simulate the natural runoff without consideration of artificial water intake,

they utilized a distributed hydrological model that is incorporated with historical

geographic information related to the conditions of the landscape. This study found out that

the simulated natural runoff follows a similar trend as the precipitation in the entire area

being studied during the last half century, and implied that changes in natural runoff are

mainly controlled by the climate change rather than land use change.

Results also showed that the difference between the annual observed runoff and the

simulated runoff indicated a minimal artificial water consumption upstream of the Lanzhou

gauge, but the artificial water consumption became larger downstream of the Lanzhou

gauge. Hence, the artificial water consumption showed a significantly increasing trend

during the past 50 years and is the main cause of the drying up of the said river.
 6

Urban Hydrologic Trend Analysis Based on Rainfall and Runoff Data Analysis and

Conceptual Model Calibration: Hydrologic Trend Analysis in Urban Catchments

In 2016, Siao Sun et al. conducted a study addressing urban hydrological trend

analysis by examining trends in variables that characterize hydrologic processes. The

original and modified Mann-Kendall methods were applied to trend detection in two

French catchments based on approximately one decade of data from local monitoring

programs. Results showed that there were no trend found in the major hydrological process

driver whereas increasing trends were detected in run-off flow rates in both catchments.

The runoff coefficient also tend to increase during the study period due to growing

imperviousness with the local urbanization process.

Trend Analysis of River Discharge in Hamedan Province During the Last Decades

and its Relationship with Meteorological Parameters Variations and North Atlantic

Oscillation

Hirad Abghari et al. (2013) conducted a study about the trend in annual, seasonal

and monthly river discharge by using the Mann-Kendall, Sen, Kendall and Spearman non-

parametric test at 12 hydrometric stations in Hamedan Province during recent decades.

Results showed significant decreasing trends in annual discharge at five observed stations.

Meanwhile, the greatest numbers of stations with significant river discharge trends

occurred in October and November, accounting for seven and six stations, respectively.

Data also revealed a strong relationship between river discharge and rainfall at the annual

time-scale.
 7

A Statistical Analysis of the Daily Streamflow Hydrograph

In 1983, M.L. Kavvas et al. conducted a study to gain some new insight into the

stochastic structure which describes the daily streamflow processes by performing a

periodic statistical analysis of daily streamflow data in Indiana, USA. This analysis was

performed by the time and peak discharge-dependent recession limb of the daily

streamflow hydrograph. The study showed the persistence properties of daily flows depend

on the storage state of the basin at the specified time origin of the flow process and the

daily streamflow process is time irreversible.

 8

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

Site Selection

The gauge situated in Angalan II Bridge, Los Amigos, Tugbok, Davao City was

selected for the study of the comparison and trend analysis of stream discharge in Talomo

River. The selected gauge measures the streamflow of the Talomo River. Talomo River

was selected as site for this study as it is one of the major rivers in Davao City.

Site Description

Figure 1. The Talomo River (Google Earth, 2019)

The Talomo River is one of Davao City’s principal rivers and the main stream that

comprises the Talomo Watershed which is one of the city’s primary source of drinking
 9

water. This river is a stream which commences from Mt. Talomo and connecting Apo

Range situated in the eastern part of Davao City and flows in an east-southerly direction

towards Talomo Bay. The Talomo River is generally characterized by a semi-rough

toporgraphy with gradient from gradual steep to steep slope and consists of several creeks

such as Tagakpan Creek in Barangay Tagakpan, Wangan Creek at Barangay Wangan and

other creeks at Barangays Baguio and Malagos, Davao City (CCBPI-Davao, 2013).

Data Collection

After the site was selected, the next step was to proceed with data collection. The

data were gathered by the proponents by asking previous stream discharge from the

Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Region-XI Office and through the

office’s official public website. Data gathered were monthly and annual mean discharge of

Talomo River from January 2001 to December 2017.

Data Analysis

Data for both monthly and annual intervals were compared using a stream flow

hydrograph and further organized in a tabular form and performed statistical data analysis

using an Excel spreadsheet. In the interpretation of the gathered data, population standard

deviation was used as the statistical tool in order to determine the dispersion of mean stream

discharge from the true mean or expected value. Low standard deviation means that most

of the numbers are very close to the average. High standard deviation means that the

numbers are spread out.

 10

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

This chapter presents details of the analysis and findings of the study. Figures I to

XVII show the mean stream discharge hydrograph of Talomo River from 2001 to 2017.

The main factor that affects the shape of the hydrograph and the corresponding streamflow

per month is the climatic factor in the presence of rainfall. This is because the more the

gauge situated in Talomo River is experiencing precipitation with higher intensity of

rainfall and longer duration, the more the results vary in terms of stream discharge. The

flow of each month is also compared based on the Climate Map of the Philippines

established using Modified Coronas Classification. Davao City belonged to Type IV which

is characterized by more or less evenly distributed rainfall throughout the year expecting

no dry season with a very pronounced maximum rain period from December to February

and there is not a single dry month. Minimum monthly rainfall occurs during the period

from March to May.

 11

12
10.36
9.59 9.32
10 8.83 8.84
8.42 8.43 8.57 8.39
7.81
Mean Discharge (cms) 8 7.29
6.93

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time (Months)

Figure I. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2001

The graph above demonstrates the stream flow hydrograph for the year 2001. The

highest mean discharge was observed in November with a mean discharge of 10.36 m3/s.

The lowest mean discharge can be observed in September with a mean discharge of 6.93

m3/s. Based on the climate map, an increase in the first three months is expected as this is

the maximum rain period. High amounts of stream discharge can be observed in the months

of March, October, and November which indicates frequent rainfall in these months, while

relatively moderate amounts of stream discharge can be observed in January, February,

around May to August, and in December. The least amounts of discharge in April and in

September indicates less rainfall experienced in this two months.

 12

16
14.33
14
12.38
12 11.11
Mean Discharge (cms) 10.41 10.66 10.36
9.4 9.36 9.04
10 8.59
8.43 8.17
8

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time (Months)

Figure II. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2002

The graph shown above illustrates the stream discharge hydrograph for the year

2002. For this year, it conforms to the climate map as an increase in rainfall for the first

few months and in December can be observed. In this year, the observed highest mean

discharge is seen in December with a mean discharge of 14.33 m3/s, indicating significantly

high amounts of rainfall in this month. It can be observed that a relatively significant

increase of stream discharge occurred in a short period from November to December. This

implies that massive amount/s of rainfall occurred within this period that caused the

significant increase of stream discharge. The lowest amounts of stream discharge can be

observed in the months April and June, which indicates less rainfall during these months.
 13

14
12.56

12
9.99 9.88
10 8.9
Mean Discharge (cms)
8.74 8.55 8.25 8.34
7.89
8 6.95 6.81
6.51

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time (Months)

Figure III. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2003

The graph designated above shows the stream flow hydrograph for the year 2003.

Comparing the hydrograph, it did not conform to the climate map given since there is a

significant increase in discharge from April to May as opposed to the standards given by

the climate map. The highest mean discharge in this year occurred in May, with a

significant increase from 6.95 m3/s from April to 12.56 m3/s, signifying massive amount/s

of rainfall during this period, causing a relatively large escalation in the stream discharge

hydrograph. Low amounts of rainfall may have occurred in April, August, and October, as

signified by low amounts in the stream flow hydrograph.

 14

12

9.68 9.72
10
8.76
8.09 8.38
7.79 7.86 8.01 7.92
7.64
Mean Discharge (cms)
8 7.34 7.35

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time (Months)

Figure IV. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2004

The graph shows the streamflow hydrograph for the year 2004. As expected,

discharge is higher for both January and December of the same year due to the pronounced

maximum rainfall based on the climate map. The highest mean discharge in this year

occurred in January and December with a mean discharge 9.68 m3/s and 9.72 m3/s,

respectively. This signifies that for these months, frequent rainfall can be observed. The

remaining months show an increase but steady value in terms of mean discharge which

indicates fair weather with almost the same mean velocity.

 15

12

9.68 9.72
10
8.76 8.55
8.09 8.38
Mean Discharge (cms) 7.79 7.7 8.01 7.92
8 7.34 7.38

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time (Months)

Figure V. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2005

The graph shown above illustrates the streamflow hydrograph for the year 2005.

Still, highest discharge conformed to the climate map given which suggests maximum

rainfall for January and December of the same year. Comparing the hydrograph from the

previous year, the highest mean discharge is still observed in the months of January and

December with values of 9.68 m3/s and 9.72 m3/s, respectively. For this year, the

hydrograph shows a nearly similar pattern to the previous year signifying that both years

have possibly experienced the same intensities of rainfall.

 16

18
15.63
16

14
11.52
Mean Discharge (cms)

12 10.66 10.48
10 8.96

8 6.88 7.04
6.11 6.06
5.55 5.63
6 5.05

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time (Months)

Figure VI. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2006

The graph above shows the streamflow hydrograph for the year 2006. The

hydrograph shows a significant increase in mean discharge for the period from January to

March as rainfall is pronounced in this period and significant decrease of mean discharge

from March to May based from the climate map but exhibited a lesser discharge during

December. The month of March has the highest mean discharge of 15.63 m3/s followed by

June and October with mean discharges of 11.52 m3/s and 10.48 m3/s, respectively.

Comparing the previous hydrographs, an inconsistent trend can be deduced since the graph

is fluctuating. Talomo River also experienced its least mean discharge of 5.05 m3/s for the

last 5 years.
 17

12.00
9.83
10.00 9.16

Mean Discharge (cms) 7.67 7.66

8.00 7.17 7.06
6.75
6.34 6.34
5.89 6.09 5.68
6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time (Months)

Figure VII. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2007

The graph above demonstrates the streamflow hydrograph for the year 2007. As

opposed to the rainfall suggested by the climate map, minimum discharge is shown by the

hydrograph in January to February and in December off the same year. The highest mean

discharge was observed in June with a mean discharge of 9.83 m3/s. The lowest mean

discharge can be observed in March with a mean discharge of 6.93 m3/s. Low amounts of

stream discharge can be observed in the months February, March, and April which implies

less rainfall within these months. However, a significant increase in discharge from May

to June can be seen in the hydrograph from which progressively decreases to December of

the same year.

 18

14.00 12.90

12.00
9.89 9.76
Mean Discharge (cms) 10.00 8.82
8.21
7.78 8.12
7.37 7.55 7.00
8.00 6.69

6.00 4.75

4.00

2.00

0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time (Months)

Figure VIII. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2008

Figure VIII illustrates the streamflow hydrograph for the year 2008. The

hydrograph shows a lower values of discharge for the period from January to February and

in December of the same year as opposed to the suggested rainfall period of the climate

map. Corresponding to the graph shown, the peak flow was said to be 12.90 m3/s on the

month of June whereas November has the lowest mean discharge having a value of 4.75

m3/s. It can also be observed that the hydrograph falls significantly in the months of

October and November having discharges of 7.0 m3/s and 4.75 m3/s. Contradicting to this,

the months of May and June rises considerably ranging from 8.21 m3/s to 12.90 m3/s.
 19

14.00

11.33 11.40
12.00
9.91 9.98 9.64 9.71
Mean Discharge (cms) 10.00 8.83
8.27 8.14 8.09 8.35
8.00 7.30

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time (Months)

Figure IX. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2009

Figure IX illustrates the streamflow hydrograph for the year 2009. The mean

discharge is expectedly increasing for January to February as this is the pronounced

maximum rain period based on the climate map. According to the graph above, both

February and November has the highest average discharge with 11.33 m3/s and 11.40 m3/s

while the lowest mean discharge was observed during the month of September. Moreover,

the months of January, June, July and December has comparatively the same discharges of

9.91 m3/s, 9.98 m3/s, 9.64 m3/s and 9.71 m3/s respectively.
 20

16.00 14.68

14.00
11.57 11.93
Mean Discharge (cms) 12.00
9.66 9.46
10.00 8.40 8.73 8.63 8.96
7.88 7.66
8.00 7.06

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time (Months)

Figure X. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2010

Figure X illustrates the streamflow hydrograph for the year 2010. There is a

decrease in discharge from January to February of the same year which did not conform to

the expected maximum rainfall period proposed by the climate map. However, minimum

monthly rainfall occurred during the period March to May which explains the mean

discharge of Talomo River for this year as indicated in the climate map. As per indicated

in the graph above, it can be seen that the highest mean discharge was observed during the

eight month of the year (August), accumulating a 14.68 m3/s mean discharge. Meanwhile,

the month of February has an average discharge of 7.06 m3/s which was the least. The

months of March, October, November and December has relatively the same mean

discharge which were 8.40 m3/s, 8.73 m3/s, 8.63 m3/s and 8.96 m3/s respectively.
 21

12 10.78510.489
9.886
10 9.2 9.338
8.326 8.223 8.518 8.344
Mean Discharge (cms)
8 7.06
6.539 6.362

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time (Months)

Figure XI. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2011

Figure XI shows the streamflow hydrograph for the year 2011. January and

December for this year showed a high amount of mean discharge due to pronounced

rainfall based on the climate map while maintaining a consistent value during the period

from April to May. For this year, the river experienced the highest mean discharge of

10.785 m3/s in the month of September followed by a decrease in mean discharge from the

month of October to December. This declining mean discharge from September to

December may have been caused by the gradual decrease of rainfall during that period.

The lowest discharge is observed in March of the same year with a mean discharge of 6.362

m3/s.
 22

20 18.24
18
16

Mean Discharge (cms)

12.976
14 11.956
12 10.173 9.722 10.32510.007 10.132 9.743
9.398
10 8.591
7.234
8
6
4
2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time (Months)

Figure XII. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2012

Figure XII shows the streamflow hydrograph for the year 2012. Discharge from

January to February for this year can be caused by the maximum rainfall and showed a

fluctuating discharge in the period from March to May as suggested by the climate map.

The highest mean discharge was experienced in the month of February with a mean

discharge of 18.24 m3/s and the lowest mean discharge in October with a value of 7.234

m3/s. This hydrograph suggests that weather could have been almost constant during the

period from May to August and rainfall more or less may have been evenly distributed

because of the small range mean discharge whole throughout the year except in February.
 23

18
15.998
16
14
Mean Discharge (cms) 11.931
12
9.31 9.585
9.004
10 8.464 8.72
8 6.903

4
2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Time (Months)

Figure XIII. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2013

Figure XIII shows the streamflow hydrograph for the year 2013. Data as provide bt

DPWH did not contain the necessary information from March to June due to some

obstructions in the gauge. This can be seen in the hydrograph as data is lacking in the said

months. However, the mean discharge from January and February conformed to the climate

map as pronounced rainfall occurred during this period and is significantly larger compared

to other present values. The graph starts in the month of January with a high amount of

stream flow discharge which is 15.998 m3/s. The remaining stream flow discharge data

exhibits a decreasing trend.

 24

35
29.112
30

Mean Discharge (cms)

25

20

15 11.547
9.533 10.2610.1279.297 9.818
8.774
10 7.385
6.083 6.91 7.029
5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Time (Months)

Figure XIV. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2014

Figure XIV shows the streamflow hydrograph for the year 2014. The hydrograph

started at January with a moderately high value of discharge and showed an abrupt increase

in December which coincides to the maximum rain period as proposed by the climate map.

The mean stream discharge trend for this corresponding year exhibited a relatively adjacent

trend except for the last month of the same year where a comparatively large increase is

observed. The month of December had a mean stream flow of 29.112 m3/s which is one of

the highest stream discharge recorded in Talomo River since 2001.

 25

35 32.516

30

Mean Discharge (cms)

25
19.036
20
16.203

15
10.146 10.941
8.4 8.52 8.374 8.911 8.778
10 7.096 7.114

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Month

Figure XV. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2015

Figure XV illustrates the Streamflow Hydrograph for the year 2015. The

accumulated mean discharge value from January to February indicates that potential

rainfall could have caused the rise in reference to the pronounced maximum rain period

from the climate map. The highest accumulated mean discharge ever recorded occurred

during this year with a mean discharge value of 32.516 m3/s on the month of April and it

can be noted that this was also the highest among the discharges starting from 2001-2017.

The months of August, September, October and November has comparatively the same

mean discharges which signifies a rather constant rainfall distribution for this period. The

lowest mean discharge for this year happened on March with a value of 7.096 m3/s.
 26

14
12.028
12
9.907 9.794
Mean Discharge (cms) 9.487 9.411
10 8.54 8.519 8.228
7.591
8 6.924 6.746
6.077
6

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Month

Figure XVI. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2016

Figure XVI illustrates the Streamflow Hydrograph for the year 2016. Mean

discharge in the period from January to February and in December of the same year is

relatively low contradicting to the expected maximum rainfall as suggested by the climate

map. As per indicated in the graph above, the peak discharge recorded for this year was on

the month of June with a mean discharge value of 12.028 m3/s. On the other hand, the

lowest mean discharge recorded for this corresponding year is on April with a value of

6.077 m3/s. There is also an evident rise in the graph starting from April to June for this

year.
 27

18 16.785

16
13.35
14 12.23 12.31
11.815
Mean Discharge (cms)

12 10.966 11.02 10.871 10.76111.218

10 8.375 8.42
8
6

4
2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Month

Figure XVII. Mean Streamflow Hydrograph of Talomo River for the Year 2017

Figure XVII illustrates the Streamflow Hydrograph for the year 2017. The

hydrograph shows a relatively high value of mean discharge from January to February and

in December of the same year which could have been caused by the pronounced maximum

rainfall experienced during these months based on the climate map. The month of February

has the mean discharge of 16.75 m3/s which is also the maximum for this year. Similarly,

it can be observed that the values were indeed high in value compared to the previous years.

The least value were 8.375 m3/s and 8.42 m3/s in the months of March and September.
 28

YEAR STANDARD DEVIATION VALUE

2001 0.91
2002 1.72
2003 1.59
2004 0.77
2005 0.76
2006 3.08
2007 1.23
2008 1.93
2009 1.24
2010 2.08
2011 1.38
2012 2.66
2013 2.62
2014 5.83
2015 7.06
2016 1.58
2017 2.11

Table I. Computed Values using Population Standard Deviation for the Mean
Stream Discharge per Year in Talomo River

The table shows the computed values using Population Standard Deviation for the

mean stream discharge per year in Talomo River. It can be observed from the table that

higher standard deviation values were computed for the years 2006, 2014, and 2015 with

exact values of 3.08, 5.83, and 7.06, respectively. This indicates a higher variability or

dispersion from the mean which implies that the mean discharge per month for these years

vary considerably from the actual values of its mean. Hence, mean discharge and monthly

rainfall amount for the said years are inconsistent.

The strong typhoons and such natural weather disturbances can affect the flow of

water in Talomo River. Although, the river is not directly affected by the typhoons, affected
 29

subsequent areas that connects through creeks to the Talomo River can cause the sudden

increase in the discharge of the river. In 2006, the wide spans of Typhoon Chebi, Durian,

Milenyo and Paeng may have cause rainfall to nearby locations in Mindanao which can be

connected through creeks and streams to the Talomo River. Typhoon Pablo, in 2012,

directly affected Southern Mindanao and its subsequent regions as it passes its track

resulting to a larger discharge for Talomo River in November and December of the same

year. The tropical cyclone, Typhoon Hagupit with its national name known as Ruby, also

affected the areas of Visayas and Mindanao in December 2014 which may have caused the

sudden rise in stream discharge in Talomo River as well as Tropical Strom Amang in 2015.

The following graphs also show the trend of stream discharge for the corresponding

months of each year from 2001 to 2017. The trend shown is linear and achieved through

the use of Excel spreadsheet.

18.00
16.00
16.00

14.00
11.82
Mean Discharge (cms)

12.00 10.15
9.689.68 9.919.66 9.53
9.40 8.96 9.209.40
10.00 8.74
7.81 7.677.78 7.59
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00

0.00
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year

Figure XVIII. The Trend of Discharge for the Months of January in a span of 17
years
 30

The figure shows the trend of discharge for the months of January in a span of 17

years. The graph shows increasing linear trend throughout the years from year 2001 to

2017. The stream flow discharge unpredentedly rose from 9.40 m3/s to 16.00 m3/s in the

year 2013, and a depression in the graph is observed in the year 2016, with just 7.59 m 3/s

stream flow discharge, the lowest discharge in the past two decades, despite the increasing

linear trend.

20.00 19.04
18.24
18.00 16.79

16.00
Mean Discharge (cms)

14.00 12.38 11.93

11.33
12.00 10.66

10.00 8.83 8.55 8.12

7.347.34 7.066.54 6.92
8.00 6.08
5.89
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year

Figure XIX. The Trend of Discharge for the Months of February in a span of 17
Years
The trend of stream flow discharge for the month of February in the past two

decades shows a distorted graph, going up and down, changing its pattern from year to year.

The variation of the stream flow discharge in February suddenly increases and decreases

with increasing limits. The highest amounts of stream flow discharge in the month of

February occurred in the years 2012, 2015, and 2017, which alternates with its lowest

amounts of stream flow discharge in the years 2011, 2010, and 2016. Despite the up and

down trend of the stream flow discharge, its linear trend still follows an increasing pattern.
 31

18.00
15.63
16.00

14.00
11.96

Mean Discharge (cms)

12.00 11.11
9.59 9.89
10.00 8.90
8.278.40 8.38
7.357.38 6.917.10
8.00 6.36 6.75
6.09
6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year

Figure XX. The Trend of Discharge for the Months of March in a span of 17
Years

As seen in the graph, the linear trend for the month of March, unlike the first two

months, exhibits a downward trend. The highest amount of stream flow discharge for the

month of March occurred in 2006, with 15.63 m3/s, but it was trailed the following year by

its lowest amount of stream flow discharge in the past two decades with 6.09 m3/s. There

is no data in the year 2013.

 32

35.00 32.52

30.00

25.00
Mean Discharge (cms)

20.00

15.00 12.98
10.97
8.43 8.83
7.888.33
10.00 7.29 6.957.797.79 7.37 7.03
6.08
5.555.68
5.00

0.00
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year

Figure XXI. The Trend of Discharge for the Months of April in a span of 17
Years

The figure shows the trend of discharge for the months of April in a span of 17

years. The amounts of stream flow discharge for the month of April are relatively close

except for the year 2015, with an unprecedentedly high stream flow discharge of 32.52

m3/s. There is no stream flow discharge data in the year 2013.

 33

14.00
12.56 12.23
12.00
10.41 10.17
9.49
10.00
Mean Discharge (cms)
8.42 8.14 8.22 8.40
7.647.70 7.55 7.66 7.39
8.00 6.88
6.34
6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year

Figure XXII. The Trend of Discharge for the Months of May in a span of 17
Years

The trend of discharge for the months of May in a span of 17 years is shown in the

graph. The linear trend for the stream flow discharge for the month of May exhibits a near-

straight line. The individual data for the month of May shows an increase in years 2001 to

2003, but is below its linear trend in the following years, and again shows a gradual increase

starting in the year 2014. There is no data in the year 2013.

 34

14.00 12.90
12.31
12.03
11.52
12.00 10.94
9.99 9.98 10.26
9.83 9.72
9.46
10.00
Mean Discharge (cms)
8.438.17 8.768.76 8.52

8.00

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year

Figure XXIII. The Trend of Discharge for the Months of June in a span of 17
Years

The graph shows the trend of discharge for the months of June within the span of

17 years. The graph illustrates that the year 2003, 2006, 2008 and 2017 were year with high

mean discharge as the hydrograph rises noticeably, whereas the year 2002 was the lowest.

It can also be noted that both 2004 and 2005 have the same average discharge of 8.76 m3/s.

There is no data in the year 2013. The discharge trend is increasing.

 35

18.00 16.20
16.00
14.00
Mean Discharge (cms) 11.57
12.00 10.66 11.02
9.88 10.33 10.13
9.16 9.64 9.31
10.00 8.57 8.55 8.21 8.54
7.86
8.00 7.06

6.00 5.05

4.00
2.00
0.00
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year

Figure XXIV. The Trend of Discharge for the Months of July in a span of 17
Years

The graph shows the trend of stream discharge in Talomo River for the months of

July within the span of 17 years. It can be observed in the graph above that it falls

significantly in the year 2006 which is also as the lowest point having a 5.05 m3/s mean

discharge but drastically rises in the year 2007 having a discharge of 9.16 m3/s. The highest

recorded data was in the year 2015. The discharge trend is increasing.
 36

16.00 14.68

14.00

12.00 10.87
10.36
Mean Discharge (cms) 10.01
9.30
10.00 8.84 8.82 8.46 8.528.52
8.018.01 8.09 8.34
8.00 7.17
6.51
5.63
6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year

Figure XXV. The Trend of Discharge for the Months of August in a span of 17
Years

The trend of stream discharge for the month of August in a span of 17 years is

shown. As per the month of August, the highest accumulated discharge was in the year

2010 with 14.68 m3/s value. The least was said to be 5.63 m3/s in the year 2006. It can also

be seen that the year 2004 and 2005 has an equal amount of discharge which is 8.01 m3/s.

The discharge trend is increasing.

 37

14.00
11.93
12.00 10.79
9.76 9.82
9.36 9.41
10.00 8.598.72 8.37 8.42
7.898.098.09
8.00 6.93 7.047.06 7.30
Mean Discharge (cms)

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year

Figure XXVI. The Trend of Discharge for the Months of September in a span of 17
Years

The graph shows the trend of mean stream discharge for the months of August in a

span of 17 years. The highest discharge in the month of September was in the year 2010

which is 11.93 m3/s followed by the year 2011 having a 10.79 m3/s. While year 2002,

2008, 2014 and 2016 have a relatively the same discharges with 9.36 m3/s and 9.76 m3/s

value. While the lowest were the year 2001, 2006 and 2007 having 6.93 m3/s, 7.04 m3/s

and 7.06 m3/s average discharge. The discharge trend is increasing.

 38

16.00
13.35
14.00

Mean Discharge (cms) 12.00 10.48 10.49

9.59 9.91
9.329.04
10.00 8.388.38 8.358.73 8.778.91
7.23
8.00 6.81 6.757.00

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year

Figure XXVII. The Trend of Discharge for the Months of October in a span of 17
Years

The graph shows the trend of mean stream discharge for the months of October in

a span of 17 years. The graph shows that the highest discharge recorded was 13.35 m3/s in

the year 2017 and the lowest were said to be 7.0 m3/s, 6.81 m3/s and 6.75 m3/s in the year

2003, 2007 and 2008, respectively. All the rest of the year experienced fair amounts of

mean stream discharge. The discharge trend is increasing.

 39

14.00
11.40 11.55
12.00 10.76
10.36
9.8910.13 9.79
Mean Discharge (cms) 10.00 9.00 8.78
8.598.25 8.63
7.927.92 7.66
8.00
6.11
6.00 4.75

4.00

2.00

0.00
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year

Figure XXVIII. The Trend of Discharge for the Months of November in a span of 17
Years

The figure shows the trend of mean stream discharge for the months of November

in a span of 17 years. As for the month of November, the peak discharge was recorded in

the year 2009 and 2014 with 11.40 m3/s and 11.55 m3/s mean discharge followed by the

year 2017 and 2001 having a 10.76 m3/s and 10.36 m3/s value, respectively. The rest of the

year have a reasonable value except for the year 2006 and 2008 having an average

discharge of 6.11 m3/s and 4.75 m3/s. The discharge trend is increasing.
 40

35.00
29.11
30.00

Mean Discharge (cms) 25.00

20.00
14.33
15.00
11.22
9.729.72 9.718.969.349.74
8.39 8.34 8.23
10.00 6.69 6.90 7.11
6.066.34
5.00

0.00
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Year

Figure XXIX. The Trend of Discharge for the Months of December in a span of 17
Years

The trend of mean stream discharge for the months of December in a span of 17

years is shown in the graph. The highest discharge recorded in the month of December was

in the year 2014 having 29.11 m3/s mean discharge, while the lowest were in the year of

2006-2009 having a relatively the same discharges of 6.06 m3/s, 6.34 m3/s and 6.69 m3/s

respectively. Still, linear trend for the month shows that the mean stream discharge is

increasing.
 41

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

The necessary data were gathered and obtained from the Department of Public

Works and Highways (DPWH) Region-XI Office and through the office’s official public

website. The mean stream discharges were presented through the use of hydrographs. Data

were correlated with rainfall based on the Climate Map of the Philippines since rainfall is

a climatic factor which affects the shape of hydrograph and also affects mean stream

discharge. Comparing the hydrographs from the period 2001 to 2017, all of which exhibited

a fluctuating behaviour with regards to its mean discharge. However, the years 2004 and

2005 showed a similar curve as portrayed by their hydrographs. The lowest mean discharge

recorded for Talomo River from 2001 to 2017 was 4.75 m3/s in November 2008 and 32.516

m3/s for the highest mean stream discharge in April 2015.

Population Standard Deviation was employed for the analysis of mean stream

discharge per year in Talomo River. Results showed a higher standard deviation values for

the years 2006, 2014, and 2015 which implies higher variability to the actual mean.

Therefore, the mean discharge per month for the said years vary considerably due to the

possible effects of rainfall, typhoons, climate and other weather constraints.

The trend of mean streamflow for each month from the considered period were also

presented and applied with linear trending to identify the increasing or decreasing
 42

inclination of stream discharge. All of the months showed an escalating trend from 2001

to 2017 except for the month of March.

Conclusions

Based on the data and graphs presented, it can be concluded that the mean stream

discharge from the years 2001 to 2017 did not have a certain pattern whatsoever as can be

further verified by the fluctuating behaviour of the hydrographs. The change in climate

over the years continue to affect the weather influencing the mean stream discharge

recorded. For some years, data conformed to the rainfall period as suggested by the Climate

Map which dealt higher and lower values, correspondingly. However, the continuing

effects of climate change continue to disrupt this behaviour.

The trend of the mean stream discharge for all of the months except March from

2001 to 2017 is increasing. Therefore, the mean stream flow will likely continue to increase

for the next few years. March, on the other hand, will produce a decreasing value of mean

stream discharge as showed by its declining trend.

Recommendations

The researchers recommend to study and further improve on the following:

1. The incorporation of mean rainfall data in Talomo River to further prove the

correlational analysis of rainfall and stream discharge

 43

2. A longer duration is suggested to be incorporated for the study in order to acquire

consistency and identify the behaviour of previous and later years

3. Cooperation with the respective sectors especially the local government near

Talomo River in order for them to be informed on the possible outputs of this

study
 44

REFERENCES

Barrow, M. (2013). Why are Rivers Important? Retrieved from

http://www.primaryhomeworkhelp.co.uk/rivers/importance.html.

Cong, Z., et. al. (2009). Hydrological Trend Analysis in the Yellow River Basin using a

Distributed Hydrological Model Retrieved from

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2008WR006852

Sun, S., et. al. (2016). Urban Hydrologic Trend Analysis based on Rainfall and Runoff

Data Analysis and Conceptual Model Calibration: Hydrologic Trend Analysis in

Urban Catchments Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311691013_Urban_hydrologic_trend_a

nalysis_based_on_rainfall_and_runoff_data_analysis_and_conceptual_model_cali

bration_Hydrologic_trend_analysis_in_urban_catchments

Abghari, H., et. al. (2013). Trend Analysis of River Discharge in Hamedan Province

during the last decades and its Relationship with Meteorological Parameters

Variations and North Atlantic Oscillation Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269517302_Trend_analysis_of_river_di

scharge_in_Hamedan_province_during_the_last_decades_and_its_relationship_w

ith_meteorological_parameters_variations_and_North_Atlantic_Oscillation

Kavvas, M.L., et. al. (1983). A Statistical Analysis of the Daily Streamflow Hydrograph

from htttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022169484901008
 45

APPENDIX

Mean Stream Discharge Tabulation and Population Standard Deviation Values