Download - Project Kep 2014 Report
1
Project Kep 2014: Expedition Report Contents 1. Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Personal Profiles Project Partners Project Kep Team Members 4. Aims of Expedition Cambodia: Project Kep 4. Pre-expedition Planning 5. Itinerary 6. Project Diary 11. Research Findings Koh Rong Samloem
- 11. Lepidoptera Kep Islands
- 14. Lepidoptera - 19. Orchids - 20. Birds - 24. Herpetology
27. Conclusion 28. Bibliography 29. Appendices Acknowledgements Fundraising Insurance Expenditure
Abstract Project Kep 2014 was a multidisciplinary project that conducted terrestrial surveys of the flora and
fauna of a few Cambodian islands. This included, Koh Rong Samloem and islands of the Kep Province,
namely Koh Seh and briefly Koh Ankrang. The team consisted of 13 students from the University of
Exeter (UK) and the Royal University of Agriculture (Cambodia), who conducted surveys on a range
of terrestrial taxa, focusing on the islands butterflies, birds, reptiles, amphibians and orchids. The UK
team worked closely with the Khmer students, who helped us to gain a better understanding of local
attitudes towards conservation through their own work. This expedition has provided a basis of
knowledge on these taxa in a location where very little research has been previously performed. It
also provided the foundations for further research on these islands and posed questions that will
encourage future work.
Introduction
In the summer of 2013, seven students from the University of Exeter and Falmouth University ventured out to Koh Rong Samloem, a small island about 20km from the Cambodian coast line. Here the team aimed to complete the first thorough surveys of the islands flora and fauna, in order to inform future conservation and sustainability efforts on the island. Expedition Samloem was highly successful as the team were able to significantly extend the bird list compiled by Fauna and Flora International and discovered some possible range extensions of some species such as the plain sunbird.
2
We set out on July 8th 2014, with six students from the University of Exeter to carry out Expedition Cambodia: Project Kep. Project Kep wanted to build on Expedition Samloem by exploring more of the islands off of the Cambodian coast, through basing ourselves in Kep. Little is known about many of the Kep islands and many have been left untouched except for fishing. The core objectives of our project were to conduct broad ecological surveys in areas of Cambodia that have not received very much, if any attention in the past. Our studies were focused on butterflies, orchids and pitcher plants, birds, reptiles and amphibians. We were able to refresh links with local institutes made during last year’s expedition. We were able to work with students from The Royal University of Agriculture (Cambodia) which was a great way for us to find out more about their culture and they also had a much better understanding of the terrain and wildlife there. It was also a great experience for them and allowed them to further their studies too. They worked by studying the intertidal fauna, and contacting the inhabitants of Samloem about their lives and fishing habits. We were able to work very closely with Paul Ferber, the founder of Marine Conservation Cambodia, who has a high position of influence with the provincial government in Kep. We are hoping to be able to continue this expedition in future years, with the aim of identifying more of the flora and fauna that is found in Kep. This information can be used to further Paul Ferber’s work establishing a marine reserve.
Personal Profiles
Project partners Paul Ferber Paul is the founder and CEO of Marine Conservation Cambodia and owns The Kep Oceanarium. He recently moved from Koh Rong Samloem to Kep and is currently working to stop trawling around the Kep Islands and is hoping to set up a marine reserve there. Marine Conservation Cambodia currently works conducting seahorse research with divers on Koh Rong Samloem, and Paul Ferber will be moving this project to Kep once he has established his personal base there fully. Paul also has contact with the Royal Agricultural University Fisheries Department and works to enhance and restore the environment for the future of the Cambodian people and for their industry. Rasmey Moul Rasmey is an MSc student at the Fisheries Department of the Royal University of Agriculture in Phnom Penh, in the capital of Cambodia. He conducts and partakes in research with other students at his university in Cambodia with a purpose to helping the industry and community. After his work with us he moved on to a project in the Mekong Basin in Cambodia studying the biodiversity. On our expedition, he proved a great help with organising transport to and from Kep and acted as a guide for us on Koh Rong Samloem. We were able to work with him and five other students from the university who were also doing research.
Project Kep team members Alex Millington Team Leader Botany Alex is currently in his second year of BSc Conservation Biology and Ecology at the University of Exeter. Having always had a huge passion for travel he had experience in travelling through South East Asia on a budget. Working as a kayak guide in Canada has provided Alex with strong leadership qualities and taught him to be resourceful in the outdoors.
3
A natural interest in the environment was propagated through these experiences and eventually lead him back to study at the grand old age of 26. Initially planning on joining existing projects through established companies he decided to instead join FXpeditions and plan something more independently. This lead to him being offered to carry on from Ben Toulson's project Expedition Samloem – Exploring Koh Rong’s Hidden Treasures. Peter Salter Health and Safety Avifauna Peter is now a second year BSc Zoology at the University of Exeter with an enthusiasm for wildlife
photography. He has previous photography experience, getting involved with society photography
competitions and other opportunities such as volunteering with wildlife organisations. His work has
also been used in university media such as calendars and the Life Magazine.
Being interested in photography and specifically wildlife photography, Peter has the experience and
skills to document the expedition in photos. He focuses not only on wildlife but all other aspects of
life and the expedition, including research, anthropology, location and culture.
Peter also has surveying experience working with The National Trusts on butterflies (particularly
important as butterflies were a big focus of our invertebrate studies in Cambodia) and other species.
Jo Clarke Camp Manager Herpetology Joanna Clarke is currently a second year student of BSc Zoology at the University of Exeter. She has a passion for wildlife and conservation and has had previous volunteering experience with Surrey Wildlife Trust and Looe Monkey Sanctuary. This gave her experience in the world of conservation and in landscape management and habitat surveys. She also loves hiking and has completed her Gold Duke of Edinburgh Expedition in Snowdonia where she learnt some valuable camp skills that were useful in the expedition when setting up camp. D of E also gave her some first aid experience and enabled her to improve her team work and problem solving skills and coping with being in a remote environment. Sally Sinclair Media Herpetology Sally Sinclair is now a second year Zoology student at the University of Exeter. She has a keen
interest in herpetology, in particular reptiles, and has previous experience volunteering in an exotic
pet store. Previous experience snorkelling and diving abroad meant she also had a natural interest in
the marine conservation work underway by Marine Conservation Cambodia. Also, having a Duke of
Edinburgh silver award meant she had some camping and first aid experience.
Sam McNeil Scientific Director Lepidoptera Sam McNeil is currently in his second year of a BSc Zoology degree with the University of Exeter. He is fascinated in entomology and has experience volunteering at a nature reserve, giving him
4
knowledge of conservation and wildlife management. He also enjoys macro photography of insects giving him the skills to photograph Lepidoptera for this purpose. Having attended a leadership conference in Malaysia Sam has experience of South East Asia and has an appreciation of the area. This also has given him experience of teamwork and of planning and organisation. Calvert Mason Logistics Lepidoptera Calvert Mason is in his second year of a BSc Conservation Biology and Ecology degree with the University of Exeter. He has a keen interest in marine fauna, and terrestrial and marine ecology. He has experience working in a lab and has taken part in an array of field work to develop his surveying skills. Previously he had been part of a conservation programme with Foundation Jatun Sacha, on San Cristobal, Galapagos. This involved native flora conservation and the removal of invasive species. It helped to develop his experience in working in the rainforest and identifying species. He has also had some previous experience of travelling in Asia.
Aims of Expedition Cambodia: Project Kep
1. Perform various techniques to asses biodiversity on both mainland and island biota We planned to use simple and effective techniques, requiring minimal equipment and delivering minimal impacts on the environment. Camera traps, temperature, humidity and pH probes and point and shoot cameras made up the bulk of our surveying equipment. We used repeated transects and point-counts for documenting the species of flora and fauna we found.
2. Document biodiversity on different islands
These techniques were to be implemented on the island of Koh Rong Samloem, as well as Koh Seh and Koh Ankrang. From this we hoped to see the effects of the development Koh Rong Samloem compared with the less developed Kep islands.
3. Make further links between our Universities and local institutes
The previous expedition was associated with The Royal University of Agriculture and we wished to strengthen this link by including their students in our expedition and integrating their ideas into the study.
4. Engage local community in the project and promote an interest in sustainability The students from The Royal University of Agriculture planned to use surveys and questionnaires to gauge the interests of the community on Koh Rong Samloem on sustainable fishing and ecological work.
Pre-expedition planning
The first stages of planning were done with the help of Ben Toulson who was the expedition leader
of Expedition Samloem 2013. He helped us to get into contact with Paul Ferber the founder and CEO
of Marine Conservation Cambodia and Rasmey Moul from the University of Agriculture in Phnom
Penh. Paul was keen for us to complete conservation work in Kep to support the marine
conservation work he was already completing there. Ben also helped us with the logistics and
general preparation, using his experience to give us advice on the whole endeavour. We decided to
5
fly out to Bangkok to save money on flights, and here the website Seat 61 was very useful in working
out how we would make our way from Bangkok to Phnom Penh. The lonely planet Cambodia travel
guide and Gov.uk also helped with travel advice for South East Asia and information on the Khmer
culture.
To prepare for our trip we all had to complete a basic first aid training course which was run by St
Johns Ambulance. On this course we learnt how to deal with emergency situations, how to treat
minor injuries and how to help prevent emergency situations arising in the first place. Some of us
also completed an outdoor survival course led by an ex-army officer John Davy where we learnt
some basic survival skills. The course included knowing what vital equipment to pack, how to make a
fire from limited resources, effective water purification techniques, how to set up a camp, how to
look out for conning and how to keep yourself and possessions safe.
We all provided personal contributions towards the trip but a large proportion of our money came
from fundraising. Most of our fundraising money came from two fundraiser parties we organised at
Gylly Beach Café in Falmouth. These were ticketed events and were open to students from the
university and people living in the local area. This was also a great way to increase the awareness of
the expedition. We were also sponsored by The Les Halpin Expedition Fund and University of Exeter
Scientific Expedition Fund and Gilchrist Educational Trust. Steve Backshall agreed to continue being
our patron and we were able to meet up with him and ask him questions. He gave us some very
valuable advice on how make our expedition run smoothly. Kew Gardens have also helped us with
identifying plant species that we found out there.
During the lead-up to the expedition we had a few team members drop out for various reasons, but
we were able to share out the roles well and find new people to join the team. We were worried this
would reduce the chances of being able to achieve our objectives and that we wouldn’t be able to
finish planning and fundraising in time. We managed to pull through however, and complete a
successful expedition.
Itinerary
Tuesday July 8th – Alex Millington’s flight departs LHR
Wednesday July 9th – Alex Millington arrives in BKK
Thursday July 10th – Calvert Mason, Sam McNeil, Sally Sinclair, Peter Salter and Jo Clarke fly from LHR
Friday July 11th – Team arrive in BKK
Sunday July 13th – Cross border into Cambodia at Poipet and travel to Phnom Penh
Monday July 14th – Meeting with Rasmey Moul of the Royal Agricultural University, Phnom Penh
Tuesday July 15th – Team travel to Sihanoukville with Rasmey Moul and his team of Khmer students
Wednesday July 16th – Arrival on Koh Rong Samloem
July 16th – 21st – Team conduct terrestrial wildlife surveys on Koh Rong Samloem
Monday July 21st – Travel to Sihanoukville
Tuesday July 22nd – Travel to Phnom Penh
Thursday July 24th – Team, with Rasmey Moul and assistant travel to Kep Province and on to Koh Seh
Island to meet with Paul Ferber of Marine Conservation Cambodia
July 24th – July 30th – Team conducts surveys on Koh Seh
Wednesday July 30th – Travel to Kep town
Thursday July 31st – Hike to and sightings taken in Kep National Park
Friday August 1st – Travel to Koh Seh
August 1st – August 5th – Surveys taken on Koh Seh and Koh Ankrong islands
6
August 6th – Travel to Kep town and Phnom Bokor National Park
August 6th – August 10th – Travel to Bangkok
August 13th – Alex Millington’s flight departs BKK
August 15th – Rest of team’s flights depart BKK
August 15th – All team members back in UK
Expedition diary
8th July – 11th July
Alex arrived in Bangkok, Thailand a couple of days before the rest of the team. He spent
these two days visiting tourist sites in Bangkok and purchasing some of the last pieces of equipment.
Calvert, Sally, Jo, Peter, and Sam arrived on July 11th.
13th July – 15th July
After a 5am start in Bangkok, the team travelled by train from the Hualamphong Train
Station in central Bangkok to Aranyaprathet Station on the Cambodian border. We crossed into
Cambodia at Poipet, and travelled on by public bus to Phnom Penh, arriving around 1:30am on the
14th July.
We spent our first night in Phnom Penh in Spring Guest House. The morning of the 14th July
the team headed into Phnom Penh to the Russian Market, to collect very last minute supplies, and
bits of equipment that had been overlooked previously. We purchased food, in the form of hiking
snacks and noodles, a hand saw, and invertebrate collection pots. That evening the team met with
Rasmey Moul, team leader for the RUA project they had collaborated with, to discuss his proposal
and the itinerary of the trip.
The morning of the 15th July, Rasmey arrived at Spring Guest house with the prepared travel,
a private minibus, to take us to Sihanoukville where we transited to Koh Rong Samloem. On route,
the minibus picked up the members of Rasmey’s team from RUA. His team consisted of two female
students and three other male students as well as Rasmey himself, all of whom study Industrial
Fisheries at the Agricultural University. After 8 hours on the bus, the team all arrived in Sihanoukville
and booked into hostels for the night.
16th July
The team travelled, by ferry, from Sihanoukville to Koh Rong Samloem in the morning of the
16th July, arriving around midday. They were divided into four bungalows along the beachfront on
the North side of the island, so that the Cambodian male students shared, the four male students
from Project Kep had a bungalow, and the two groups of female students had their own bungalows.
The first afternoon on the island was spent exploring the small community in the village of
M’Pay Bay, and the immediate surrounding area. The team took a walk through the village to a
nearby beach to snorkel and undergo some team building with the Cambodian students, who were
far more educated on the marine life in the Gulf of Thailand. The first evening was used to survey
the inhabited part of the North beachfront, which yielded some spectacularly large geckos, which
were regular visitors to the bungalows thereafter, frogs, moths, and millipedes.
17th July
A 4 hour hike was undertaken, starting in the morning of the 17th July, to familiarise
ourselves with the island, its people, animals, and its habitats. This hike took the team through the
village, and beach, to a pass through the rainforest to the Northern most of the two Eastern bays of
the island. From here they headed across the marsh flats at low tide, and back into the forest, where
7
they hiked at higher altitudes up the main body of the island. After finding the waterfall landmark,
the team used their maps and compass to bear toward the ocean again, and came out at Saracen
Bay on the Eastern side of the island. Here we waited for the water taxi to travel back to M’Pay Bay.
18th July
On the morning of the 18th July we set out early to establish transects to undertake for the
surveys on Samloem. The day began with a hike away from the village to a forest edge on the North
East tip of the island. Here we found a suitable site for four members of the team to camp and Alex
and Jo set up the camping equipment for the evening. The other members of the team used the
beach edge as a transect line, stopping at intervals along the edge to survey for butterflies, moths,
and other species of interest. Many of the butterfly species the team found were first documented
on this transect. Alex, Jo, Sally and Peter camped at the site on the night of the 18th whilst Sam and
Calvert returned to the bungalows, which had been reduced in number due to team members
camping.
The Cambodian students joined in transecting on the beach and performed their own
studies on the intertidal fauna of the island, whilst also contacting the locals with questionnaires on
the fishing and living habits of the islanders. The students set up their own lunch on the beach with a
pan and foraged mussels and crabs.
19th July
The members of the team that camped, had a morning to recuperate at the bungalows
whilst Calvert and Sam established another transect across the village. The transect began at the
bungalows in which they were staying, and followed the path through the town to beyond the
Marine Conservation Cambodia project site on the far end of the village. This transect was followed
twice to survey specifically for butterflies and moths, and data on location and soil pH was taken
where animals were seen. The other team members used their afternoon to hike up stream of the
village to look for species of interest. Calvert and Sam camped with students from the Cambodian
team.
20th July
The same was repeated as per the previous day, Sam and Calvert had time off from
surveying for a short period in the morning and the other team members repeated their hike
upstream from the village. Transects were repeated with the Cambodian students and night time
data was also taken at the bungalows on moths and reptiles.
The team and the Cambodian students collaborated on dinner and shared some local Super
Whisky, a mixture of cola, red bull and a local whisky and also shared a medley of sea food and rice
and noodle dishes freshly caught by the islanders.
21st July
The teams both spent the morning finalising data collected on Koh Rong Samloem, and
spent time packing away the equipment and personal belongings to travel back to Sihanoukville that
afternoon. On arrival in Sihanoukville, after a sad farewell to the island, the team booked into a
hostel and planned travel back to Phnom Penh for the following day.
After settling in, the team finalised some of the documents to send back to the University,
for the funding applications to further the expedition. The teams then spent the final evening
together on the beach at a tourist bar and restaurant, sharing beers and another sea food medley.
8
22nd July – 24th July
The morning of the 22nd the team boarded the minibus for the journey back to Phnom Penh.
Upon arrival in the capital, the team said farewell to the Cambodian students, besides Rasmey. Two
days were spent in the capital, organising further travel in country and recuperating.
On the 24th the team arrived in Kep Province to meet with Paul Ferber and his team of
Marine Conservation Cambodia employees, where they went to the island of Koh Seh. The first night
on Koh Seh, the team left the camp-site and walked along the forest and beach edge to get a bearing
of the island and the moths and reptiles that can be surveyed at night. The first sighting of a snake
was here, where a small black/grey and yellow patterned snake was seen in the rocks. The same kind
of snake was seen again and photographed later on in the expedition.
25th July
The 25th was spent familiarising the team with the island, only a small island at a few
kilometres long with an even smaller width. It was easy for the team to cover a lot of the island in
the short span of a day, to find areas likely to be species rich in terms of their focus groups. The team
started by following a trail through the forest, to the opposite coast of the island, and then follow
the coast back around to the east where the bungalows were. After this, a hike to the highest point
on the island where an old Khmer Rouge bunker is a perfect habitat for reptiles sheltering from
storms is situated. They then followed the jungle path down to the opposite coast again, following it
west this time to the other tip of the island.
Many of the members of Paul Ferber’s staff and friends on the island were key to the
success of these hikes, showing the team nesting birds in trees, easy paths to follow and talking a bit
about some of the reptile and bird species they had encountered on the islands.
Rasmey also travelled with us to Koh Seh, to finish some of the research he had planned and
to meet with Paul for himself. Rasmey only stayed for a few days with us here, before returning with
his assistant to Kep and making his own way back to Phnom Penh. Rasmey proved an invaluable
asset to the team in this time, whilst being able to organise a lot of the logistics for the team and
communicating with locals for us he was also able to help with work and help us learn a lot about
the culture and history of the country in which we were working.
26th July – 30th July
During this time we accustomed ourselves to early mornings and long days. We had
organised, with Paul, a meal schedule which started with a 7am breakfast. The team prepared
themselves daily on Koh Seh to be at breakfast for this time, and then to be working by 8am. Starting
work any later than this meant risking starting the day in 30C°+ heat, which proved to slow a
morning’s work when it did happen.
We split ourselves into three pairs for the majority of the surveying on Koh Seh. Calvert and
Sam, Alex and Peter, Sally and Jo all worked together most of the time, though this was mixed up a
bit depending on the work that was being done. Calvert and Sam spent the majority of their time
identifying and photographing Lepidoptera found at popular sites on the island. Peter often spent
hours recording and photographing birds that could be seen all over the island and on the shore,
using prime sites such as high, clear ground and shelters. Alex documented the flora that was of
interest on the island, and had discussions with Paul Ferber and the team he brought from Koh Rong
Samloem about the possible introduction of several native orchid species to the island. Sally and Jo,
as it was difficult to find and document many herpetological species, aided in the recording of the
species of interest to other team members, and used similar sites at regular intervals to record birds,
butterflies and moths. The team also split when the sun set in early evenings, some members used
9
the clearings around the built areas to bird watch, and Sally and Jo regularly went on night time
hikes in the hopes of finding moths, snakes, lizards and recording other species of interest.
Between the 26th and 30th July we made a rough map of the island, labelled with areas that
were popular sites for birds or butterflies. This also involved taking pH readings along transects up
the island from the lower ground, near the shore, to the higher ground. Temperature and humidity
readings were also taken on some days, these readings were regularly similar and we were given the
impression that, during the wet season, these conditions do not fluctuate hugely. We were also
given a fairly good impression of the island biota; being a small island we were able to document
similar species daily, so we can assume that the species we recorded give a representative but by no
means exhaustive view of Koh Seh.
We had a few distant sightings of a large fruit bat whilst on Koh Seh, by different team
members in different locations leading us to believe there may be a small foraging population as the
trees are green year round and fruit regularly on the islands. Perhaps the most interesting and
definitely too close for comfort animal encounter was of a small species of snake, the same as we
saw on our first night on the island, finding its way into the sheltered hall we used for living and
eating in and under the table to Peter’s leg. We managed to get some photographs of the snake
once it had been removed from the eating area, though none of these are of impressive quality.
Snorkelling also became a regular way to spend the few hours of the day in which it was too
hot to work, around midday to 2pm. The encounters we had snorkelling rivalled those of the
terrestrial wildlife for some team members as we saw snails that weren’t even comparable in size to
the gastropod species found at home, huge schools of brightly coloured tropical fish, venomous
rabbitfish and huge beds of corals. We did not collect data here as we focused on the terrestrial
biota for our expedition, but it was a good way to relax that wasn’t completely unrelated to the
biodiversity studies we were taking.
On the 30th July we took a few hours to collect all of our data together, photo numbers,
recordings and took time to write up many scraps of paper and scribbles notes from our surveys. In
the afternoon we took a boat back to Kep, where we met Paul again, who had been away from the
island on business. In Kep we spent a night at the Bamboo Club hostel with a family Paul knew well.
We took a short trip into the tourist part of the town, but this was small with a very limited number
of places to visit, as Kep tends to be a mid-point for visiting the more tourist friendly islands, like the
largest: Rabbit Island.
31st July
As we were only spending one full day in Kep before returning to Koh Seh to continue our
work and extend to other islands, we took the day to hike up to Kep National Park, only a short walk
from the hostel we were staying at. For a small entry fee we were able to hike up into the National
Park, which is a large area of protected rainforest, home to Howler Monkeys, hornbills and many
examples of interesting and exotic wildlife, with tourist paths which descend into rocky, wet banks
and waterfalls in the rainy season.
This hike was filled to the brim with amazing wildlife that we hadn’t encountered offshore.
Sightings of monkeys stopped us in our tracks and butterflies of sizes we hadn’t imagined, both small
and large, were found in every square foot of forest. The trek was interesting, the paths had been
worn away by rain and we found ourselves following what could only be described as a small, fast
flowing stream, created by rain water, down the side of the mountain to the outer trails. Along these
outer trails we came to a destination we had planned to visit later in the day, which was Kep
Butterfly Farm.
The farm had been affected by the rainy season as much as one could expect, some of the
folders and equipment had been waterlogged in the heavy rain. Despite the fact it wasn’t busy, and
10
was a little worse for wear, the farm proved invaluable to the expedition. We were able to identify
and photograph many species we had seen in our surveys that we had not been able to identify by
the sheets we took with us or hadn’t managed to capture an identifiable photograph of. The number
of species found in Kep Park massively exceeded the number we had found on our studies, which we
expected on the mainland. After this, most of the team hiked further into the park, reaching the
highest peak at the top of a waterfall.
We returned to our hostel and ate our first meal out in a long while, at Kampot that night.
Kampot is a large town close to Kep, which is easy to access via road by car or bus. However it
turned out that by tuk tuk, it was more of an interesting journey, though this experience helped to
boost team morale to return to the recluse of the islands. The morning of the 1st we returned to Koh
Seh, where we spent the day planning the logistics of the final few days of surveys.
2nd August – 5th August
Prior to the 2nd August we had organised a longboat to take us from the small fishing
community on Koh Seh, to take us to the closest neighbouring island to extend our research. In the
morning we gathered the relevant equipment and took the boat across to the west of Koh Ankrang.
On Koh Ankrang, Bok, a member of Paul Ferber’s team, took us to hike through the jungle, creating a
clear path for us to use for work. Very early on we split into two groups, Alex, Sally and Jo remaining
with Bok and the others staying behind to document any sightings. We had decided that one large
group would create too much disturbance and we wouldn’t find anything of interest, much as the
first hike on Samloem.
We established several easy to access areas and paths which created minimal disturbance to
the flora as well as not scaring away animals and followed these in the morning and the afternoon to
document any species we found. The group with Alex found a snake amongst the equipment we had
brought with us and left in the more developed part of the island, which was a shock to Bok and a
wonder to the team who took the opportunity to take as many photos of it eating a small gecko as
possible. We also found a skeleton belonging to a small cetacean on the island, which we brought
back to Paul on Koh Seh, due to his interest and work on the marine environment of Cambodia. Late
afternoon we headed back to Koh Seh for the night, and spent the evening having a few drinks with
the team from MCC for Bok’s birthday.
We repeated the surveys on Koh Ankrang from the previous day on the 3rd and found much
the same as before, whilst trying to photograph an elusive and large kingfisher species we had seen
regularly along the coast. On the 4th we finalised our data for Koh Seh by taking most of the team,
besides an ill Calvert, on a final hike to circle the island and visit all of the popular sites. Another
snake, the same as we had seen twice before, made its way into the eating hall that evening, and
had situated itself in a crevice by the outer edge of the hall. This was a great end to the amazing
wildlife encounters we had had on Koh Seh. On the 5th August we took the boat back to Kep, spent
the night here again and left for Phnom Penh on a public bus on the afternoon of the 6th.
6th August
After leaving the island, saying goodbye to Paul, his friends and family, we spent the night in
Kep and then woke up early on the 6th to prepare for more travelling. We used the 6th to buy more
supplies in Kep for travelling home and to visit the Kep Oceanarium, run by Paul, on the pier. The
aquarium is the first one established in Cambodia, and it was a fantastic place to visit to gauge more
about the work that is carried out by Marine Conservation Cambodia in the Gulf of Thailand.
We travelled back to Phnom Penh that afternoon, on a public bus, which took 5/6 hours and
was positively pleasant compared to our previous encounters with the Cambodian public transport:
referring to our border crossing day. In Phnom Penh we met Rasmey again, and organised a dinner
11
out with the students we worked with on Samloem, for the following day. We booked ourselves
back in to Spring Guest House, our residency every time we visited the capital. Although dismayed
by the noise pollution of the city, and the lack of interesting wildlife and beaches, we were all
relieved to forego mosquito nets and sleep with an air temperature below 30C°.
7th August - Home
We spent a long morning in our hostel, relieved that we didn’t have to follow a schedule
again, starting at 7am. Spending some of the day collecting all of our research together, so as not to
forget anything that hadn’t been officially documented, and checking finances, we completed the
work part of the expedition and began tourist mode. We visited the Killing Fields and S21 in Phnom
Penh that day, to familiarise ourselves with some of the cultural background of the people and
places we had encountered on our expedition. With the exception of Alex, who had been before, the
majority of the day was spent at these sites, and though draining and emotional it helped to open
our eyes to the atrocities that have prolonged the establishment of order in this country.
As mentioned, we went for dinner with Rasmey and co. that evening, and reverted to our
Samloem way of life, with shared seafood and rice dishes, complimented with beer we had been
lacking for a while. Discussing our future plans, and his, with Rasmey was a great end to our time
working with them and helped to strengthen not only our ties with the university but the friendships
we had built with the students.
After this day we travelled for a few days around Cambodia, visiting the Angkor Wat temple
complex at Siem Reap, and made our way back across the border to Bangkok, Thailand. Exploring
more of the countries’ histories and cultures and enjoying a calm come down from the work we had
spent weeks undertaking. On the 12th Alex flew home from Bangkok and the following day the rest
of the team joined him in returning to London.
Research Findings
Butterflies of Koh Rong Samloem
Due to the incredible abundance and diversity of species across all groups on Koh Rong Samloem we
decided to narrow our research to butterflies for Koh Rong Samloem. We decided to focus on this
group because last years expedition, Expedition Samloem, found Lepidoptera to be their most
numerous insect order. Butterflies as a group have been studied quite extensively over much of the
world, with the surrounding countries to Cambodia; Thailand and Vietnam being much researched.
However Cambodia itself has received relatively little research in this area. Particularly Koh Seh
which has had no scientific research on butterfly populations, so we continued our focus on
butterflies for this region.
Lepidoptera
We decided to focus our efforts on the Papilionoidea of the island, as Lepidoptera proved most
extensive in Expedition Samloem’s invertebrate research, and this specificity would result in a very
detailed dataset. Also on arrival to the island, this group was clearly extremely numerous. This
allowed us to analyse any changes in diversity in comparison to last year’s research and develop our
experience in conducting research in an environment which was new to all of us. This was made a lot
easier with the help of the students of the Royal University for Agriculture Phnom Penh.
12
Methods
Our methods were extremely simple in order to maximise the number of individuals that could be
recorded by allowing us to be versatile. We would travel through sites, taking note of temperature
and humidity readings, pH measurements, GPS coordinates and time and date. We would stop at
sites along the path or travel to specific clearings to wait and see what appeared. When we saw
butterflies we would photograph them, take note of their physical description and count how many
individuals we have seen of that group on that particular research outing. Therefore we required
very little equipment, as follows:
Camera and Macro Lens set-up
Waterproof Camera with GPS function
Notebook
Temperature/Humidity meter
pH meter and probe
At the end of a day of data collection we would input our data into an excel document on a tablet
device and try to identify the species we had seen using our identification guide.
We divided our research across multiple areas in the northern region of the island, focusing on the
town of M’Pai Bai and the nearby beach Saracen Bay while also travelling deeper into the jungle
from the bay. The intention of this was to get a decent dataset from which we could create
comparisons between areas that are developing and areas that are much less disturbed, the forest
edge and the forest itself. Research would be undertaken throughout the day to ensure for as
complete coverage of all butterfly species as we could possibly provide.
Results
In total 21 species were observed on Koh Rong Samloem. We managed to identify 16 of those down
to the species or genus level. Definite differences were observed between the two largest research
areas, Moi Pay Bay village and Saracen bay. Higher diversity was observed in the village, with many
species found here not found in the less disturbed jungle habitat. All species identified on Saracen
bay were found in Moi Pay Bay village, while nine were seen only in Moi Pay Bay village. This
included some species which were extremely common in the village, such as the grey count. Most
notable though was the lime, which was the most frequently, observed species on Koh Rong
Samloem by a large degree, which was only observed in the town, particularly in the more arid
conditions surrounding the bungalows on the north side of the island.
Nymphalidae was the most diverse butterfly group, with 8 species identified. Papilionidae was next,
followed by Lycaenidae and then one species of Pieridae. However, when observing the number of
individuals observed Papilionidae overtakes Nymphalidae, due to the high frequencies we observed
the Papilionidae species at, most numerously the lime butterfly.
Discussion
Carrying on from Expedition Samloem we have shown a clear diversity in the butterfly species of Koh
Rong Samloem. The distinguishable differences between Moi Pay Bay village and Saracen bay shows
the possible changes that could occur in the butterfly population of the island as development
continues. While suggesting an increase in biodiversity is related to development, this would not
necessarily mean an improvement for all butterfly species of the area. A mixture of clearings/
developed areas and dense forest may provide an optimal habitat for more butterfly species.
13
We found our basic method of simply photographing butterflies we came across and tallying the
number of individuals highly effective. We wanted to avoid an intrusive method while also having an
ability to identify as many of the species we could. This was something we were able to do. The main
constraint was when we couldn’t get a sufficient photograph of an individual for identification. Of
course if this is the case then we would not be able to capture the butterfly either. The best
alternative would be for us to be able to identify the individuals on the wing. The problem here is
that we did not know what butterflies we expected to find as so little research has been undertaken
in Cambodia pertaining butterfly species. As such we feel that we have completed further important
research upon that of Expedition Samloem, focusing down to butterflies in particular to get a more
detailed understanding of the butterfly community structure on Koh Rong Samleom, while also
providing a basis and point of comparison for our research on Koh Seh.
Future expedition teams will have the advantage of our species identifications to build upon and
improve the understanding of. To improve upon our research we would look at smaller areas to give
more precise findings, but spread out over a larger area. We did not have sufficient time to complete
this amount of research on Koh Rong Samloem. However we feel that while future expeditions
following on from Project Kep should concentrate their time in Kep for the maximum amount of
possible expansion in scope, we still feel that there is a great need for further research to be
undertaken on Koh Rong Samloem to assess the effects of the development occurring there.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Papilionidae Nymphalidae Lycaenidae Pieridae
Number of Species
Figure 1. A comparison of the species diversity across the four
Papilionoidea we observed on Koh Rong Samloem, measured as number
of species we observed for each group.
14
Kep Islands
Lepidoptera
Introduction
After conducting our first stage of research into butterfly diversity in south Cambodia on Koh Rong
Samloem we then travelled to our main site of research, Kep Province. Butterflies were no longer
our only point of research but they remained our only research into the invertebrate species that
populated this area. The diversity we saw was once again astounding and fascinating to observe, but
the species we saw were not necessarily also found on Koh Rong Samloem and not all the species we
found on Koh Rong Samloem were also present here. Comparing between the different islands we
can try and see why these differences occur.
Methods
Our methods were similar to on Koh Rong Samloem but had to be adapted for the far smaller islands
of Kep. We would no longer survey butterflies along a specific route but at a specific site to allow us
to spot the maximum number of species in a small area. The landscape of these islands was also
different to our survey area on Koh Rong Samloem as here there was no town or long beaches to
survey through. Instead the majority of the survey area was rainforest, so travelling to clearings
would allow us to view the butterflies clearly enough for identification and photography.
We used the same equipment here too, but for the fact that the pH probe we were using on Koh
Rong Samloem broke so we could not take any pH readings on any Kep Island.
We surveyed two islands; Koh Seh, where we conducted the majority of our Kep island research, and
Koh Angkrang, which was a site of additional research to give our data more scope. As both islands
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Papilionidae Nymphalidae Lycaenidae Pieridae
Number of Individuals
Figure 2. A comparison of the abundance of the four Papilionoidea
families we observed on Koh Rong Samloem, measured as the number of
individuals we counted of each family.
15
1
3
2
N
were so small in size we could cover both islands quite conclusively by having sites of Lepidoptera
research across them which could be visited and revisited numerous times.
1 – The Beach: This was a primary site for research due to its accessibility
and the number of species that were attracted to the area by the small
gardens that the Marine Conservation Cambodia team had created.
2 – The Centre Clearing: Located near the centre of the whole of Koh Seh
this clearing gave us an important view of the butterflies that would be most
common in the forest while being clear enough for us to photograph them.
3 – The Slope: A large clearing on a north facing slope that caught a lot of
sunlight and as such exhibited a large diversity in local flowering plants that
the butterflies would frequent. The Advantage of this sight was the distance
from which we could see the butterflies, allowing many to be spotted here.
Across these three main sites, as well as stopping at various places in the
forest and along the coastline, we have managed to create very
comprehensive species list for the butterflies of the island, as each
site represents a different habitat. The sites are also scattered across
much of the island, providing us with excellent coverage.
As Koh Angkrang was our secondary island we did not have specific survey
sites here, but took an approach of finding as many different places to observe Lepidoptera as we
could and surveying these sites.
Results
On Koh Seh the most common butterfly species proved to be the common India crow we also saw
numerous examples of both the common and the great mormon alongside the common birdwing,
making up the Papilionidae family of the butterfly species. Papilionidae were particularly abundant
on these small islands, although we also saw numerous Lycaenidae and Nymphalidae of various
species, with Nymphalidae showing the highest diversity of species. Of particular interest, the
bicolour cupid (Shijimia mooeri), a critically endangered species of Lycaenidae. Of the Nymphalidae
we saw many individuals of the dark blue tiger on both Koh Seh and Koh Angkrang.
Comparing Kep to Koh Rong Samloem we can see a great difference in the butterflies identified
between the two areas of research. Only four species were found in both, the Yamfly, Common India
Crow, Common Bush Brown and the Dark Blue Tiger. That is just 17% of the total number of species
observed in Kep and 8% of the species observed on Koh Rong Samloem (including species which we
did not identify and as such are not listed in the comparison table, of those it is 33% and 18% of the
species identified in Kep and on Koh Rong Samloem respectively). Koh Rong Samloem exhibited
more species, unsurprising considering its far greater size than the either Koh Seh or Koh Angkrang.
Also, in Kep there was a larger proportion of Papilionidae individuals in comparison to the other
groups and a larger proportion of Nymphalidae species in comparison to other groups.
Discussion
We can clearly see the diversity of butterfly species on the islands of Kep Province. As such this is a
very viable area for further research to take place. It is often within butterfly species that general
biodiversity and ecology are assessed and so we propose that this should be continued on these
islands in future research projects. Of particular interest are the relative frequencies of each of the
Figure 3. Map of
Koh Seh with
labelled sites of
research.
16
family within Papilionoidea: Papilionidae, Nymphalidae and Lycaenidae. Papilionidae individuals
proved to be quite common. As well as this a lot of the species observed in general appeared to be
larger than many we observed on the mainland. There could be a link between the distance of the
islands or possibly the size of the islands and the size of the butterflies found on them, helping to
understand why different butterflies are found on each island. We did witness large butterflies
travelling across water, suggesting a possibility of individuals migrating between islands. This would
be of relevance to butterfly conservation in the area, where each island has to be taken into
consideration.
One possible interpretation is that the larger Papilionidae are most frequent in terms of individuals
on these islands because they are most able to cross the short stretches of ocean between the
islands and so are able spread out more so they can survive at higher frequencies. While
Nymphalidae populations possibly don’t travel between islands and as such are more diverse on the
islands but less frequently found. We did observe individuals of larger species quite far from the
coast.
Also possibly important is the frequency of what we have identified as Shijimia moorei, as this
butterfly is most often thought to be seen in Japan, Southern China and India. Finding individuals
here, in quite high numbers may prove useful for the conservation of this species and may be of
relevance for the preservation of the area. However we are not entirely sure of our identification, so
it would be extremely useful for a second team to try and obtain a more definite identification of the
species we observed. Many of the other species observed are quite common species.
It must be taken into consideration the difficulty in identifying all of the species we observed and the
uncertainty of some of our identifications. Again, the future teams could collect more information to
make identification more complete and help with the understanding of the butterfly diversity of
these islands. A major example is listed as the common crow. We did not take any photographs of
this butterfly, due to its skittish nature, despite its abundance. Therefore we cannot conclusively
identify this species as the common crow rather than being one of the mimics of the common crow.
For example on Koh Rong Samloem we observed common eggflies, the females of which are mimic
of the common crow. There is also a possibility that we were observing similarly patterned closely
related species.
Should set out this way, apply to all tables
Location Family Species Size Tally
(Alphabetical) (Alphabetical)
Location Species descriptions
~Size ID Tally Butterfly (Papillionoidea) Family
Bungalow surroundings and east facing slope/clearing
Brown with white spots low, pointed wings
L Common Crow
8 Nymphalidae
large black, blue patches
L Great Mormon
2 Papilionidae
Table 1. Species list of butterflies found on Koh Seh and where they were found. Some of the
species were not identified and so we have listed them as their brief description.
17
dusty white, unsettling
S Bicolour Cupid
5 Lycaenidae
yellow with lime green fringe
S Unidentified 1
Grey fore wing, swallow tail with white and orange markings
L Common Mormon
3 Papilionidae
black with long blue lines and spots, browner hind wing
M Dark Blue Tiger
2 Nymphalidae
Small yellow S 1 Nymphalidae
Small orange M 1 Nymphalidae
Common Birdwing
L Common Birdwing
1 Papilionidae
Forest clearing/ East facing slope
brown/ yellow M Some sort of Mormon
4 Papilionidae
brown/ white M Some sort of mormon
5 Papilionidae
black/ blue M Dark Blue Tiger
3 Nymphalidae
orange, square S Common Yamfly
1 Lycaenidae
common mormon
L Common mormon
4 Papilionidae
Small yellow S 1
orange, white band
M 1
great mormon, black/blue
L Great mormon
3 Papilionidae
brown, black and yellow spots
M Chinese Bush Brown
1 Nymphalidae
Brown, 4 black and yellow eyespots
S Lemon Pansy 1 Nymphalidae
brown, white patches with black spot on hind wings
VS 1 Nymphalidae
North facing slope brown/ yellow M Some sort of Mormon
4 Papilionidae
brown/ white M Some sort of mormon
3 Papilionidae
black/ blue M Dark Blue Tiger
1 Nymphalidae
great mormon L Great mormon
2 Papilionidae
common mormon
L Common mormon
1 Papilionidae
18
Small yellow S 3
dusty white, small
VS 5
blue with stripy legs
S 1 Lycaenidae
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Papilionidae Nymphalidae Lycaenidae
Number of Species
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Papilionidae Nymphalidae Lycaenidae
Nu
mb
er o
f Sp
ecie
s
Butterfly Family
Number of Individuals
Figure 4. A comparison of the diversity of the four Papilionoidea groups we observed on Koh Seh
and on Koh Ankrang, measured as the number of species we observed for each group.
Figure 5. A comparison of the abundance of the four Papilionoidea family we observed on Koh Seh and
on Koh Ankrang, measured as the number of individuals we counted of each family.
19
Species Koh Rong Samloem Koh Seh & Koh Angkrang
Common Eggfly x
Banded swallowtail butterfly x
Bicolour Cupid
x
Blue Baron x
Blue crow x
Chinese Bush Brown x x
Common Birdwing
x
Common Eggfly x
Common India Crow Butterfly x x
Common Mormon
x
Dark Blue Tiger x x
Great Mormon
x
Grey count x
Grey pansy butterfly x
Large White x
Lemon Pansy x
Lime butterfly x
Red lady x
Silverline x
The Knight x
Yamfly x x
Ypthima spp. x
Table 2. A comparison of the species we observed between Koh Rong
Samloem and on Koh Seh and Koh Angkrang
20
Orchids
Orchids of this region are incredibly diverse and thrive in the rich rainforests that cover the interior
of the mainland and of some of the larger islands. It takes a very keen eye to spot them amongst the
scrambling undergrowth especially if they are not in flower and more often than not it was our
Khmer friends that spotted them first.
Orchids here don’t benefit from any statutory protection and their collection for commercial sale is a
big threat. (Hinsley 2011) On Koh Rong Samloem however, they are collected for a different reason.
Sal Ferber has been building a wild orchid garden here for ten years and undoubtedly has an
example of every species the island has to offer.
As their project has moved further down the coast into the province of Kep however, the garden has
quickly succumbed to the grasp of the jungle. Koh Rong Samloem has been sold and with
construction imminent, Sal’s orchids need to be transferred to their new home. One of following
expedition objectives will be to uncover this area and help relocate them to the quieter islands of
Kep.
Throughout the trip orchids seemed to elude us, we hiked to the highest points of the islands and up
rivers but come back empty handed. It wasn’t until the final week that we had some luck. After a
long drive in the back of a pick-up truck we stopped near the top of Phnom Bokor Mountain on the
mainland. At the top of a huge water fall were several epiphytic species of orchid clinging to the
rocks and trees which were soaked with the nutrient rich haze produced by the falls. Both
Trichotosia pulvinata and Podochilus microphyllus were found there.
References:
Hinsley, A., 2011. Notes on the trade of orchids in the Cardamom Mountains, Pursat and Koh Kong
Provinces. Cambodian Journal of Natural History, (1), pp.11 – 13.
21
Birds
Introduction
On the small island of Koh Seh a surprising wealth of birds can been seen. Out of all the animal
groups we surveyed and studied on the island, avifauna was one of the most abundant groups. This
gives an impression of how diverse and rich these islands are. Species ranged from a flock of oriental
white eyes to the white-bellied sea eagles. This is an important study, because even though birds are
one of the most researched groups on the planet, Cambodia’s avifauna is one of the least studied,
especially in South East Asia (Duckworth & Hedges, 1998). This study helps to gain a better
understanding of the biodiversity in Cambodia. This is particularly important for these islands,
because there has been little, if any scientific research, providing the potential for finding new
species.
Methods
Firstly, to investigate the avifauna on the island, transects were conducted along the coast, because
prioritising open habitats seemed like the best approach. This allowed easier spotting and
identification of birds. However, due to the nature of the island, navigating across it was no easy
task; the rainforest was dense, and the coast was rocky. Consequently, doing transects across the
whole island was not possible, and focusing on the coast alone would not have been comprehensive
enough. Another issue with conducting transects was our movement through the jungle, which
disturbed the birds, thus reducing the chances of spotting and recording the island species. In-field
research on the island was beneficial to our experience, enabling us to adapt our technique, and
remedy these issues. Initially, the island was explored to gather bearings, and to find potential
hotspots. This was possible because of the small size of the island itself, concluding that several
decent sites would give an extensive idea of the avifauna that are present on the island. These sites
were open habitats, such as a clearing in the rainforest or a slope with low-lying vegetation. It was
ensured that a variety of habitats were studied, guaranteeing that the potential of recorded species
was not stunted. To identify birds, the Bird Guide of South East Asia by Craig Robson was used.
Surveys were conducted between 7:00 -10:00am and 4:00-7:00pm every day, focusing on a specific
spot per day and rotating between these.
Results
On Koh Seh, a total of 21 species were recorded over the two-week sampling period. The bird
species recorded were mainly terrestrial and passerine. This was expected from a rainforest habitat;
although, the island could be considered as a coastal habitat due to its small size.
A comparison of the birds recorded by FFI and Expedition Samloem to the ones recorded on Koh Seh
by Project Kep shows that only 11 (16%) of the 68 species of bird were sighted on both islands, Koh
Seh and Koh Rong Samloem. The majority of the birds sighted were from the island of Koh Rong
Samloem, as a result, the shared 11 species on the two islands are 52% of the total amount of Koh
Seh bird species. This indicates how diverse and different the Avifauna is on these islands.
22
Common Name Koh Rong Samloem Koh Rong Samloem Koh Seh
(FFI) (Expedition Samloem 2013)
(Project Kep 2014)
Little Heron x Great-billed heron x Javan-pond heron x Crested serpent eagle x x
Common tern x Nicobar pigeon x Green imperial pigeon x Mountain imperial pigeon x Pink - necked green- pigeon x
x
Spotted dove x Asian palm swift x
x
Dollarbird x Oriental pied hornbill x x
Greater flameback x Ashy drongo x Brown shrike x x
Purple sunbird x
x
Fire-breasted flowerpecker x Scarlet-backed flowerpecker x x
Asian fairy-bluebird x x Common myna x x x
Common hill- myna x x x
Oriental magpie- robin x
x
Malaysian pied fantail
x
White-rumped shama x x x
Stripe throated bulbul x x Yellow- vented bulbul x x x
Barn Swallow x x White- throated needletail
x
Pacific reef egret (dark morph) x x x
Pacific swallow x x x
Little ringed plover x White- bellied sea eagle x x x
Lesser frigatebird x Brown- throated sunbird x x
Black- headed bulbul x x Mugimaki flycatcher
x
Grey- capped pygmy woodpecker x x
Orange- breasted green pigeon x
Table 1. A comparison of the species of birds seen by Fauna and Flora international and Expedition
Samloem 2013 on Koh Rong Samloem and Project Kep 2014 on Koh Seh
23
Chestnut- headed bee eater x Large-tailed nightjar x Great crested tern x x
Stork- billed kingfisher
x Common Kingfisher
x
Collared Kingfisher
x
Yellow wagtail
x Purple- throated sun bird
x
Olive- backed sunbird
x Plain sunbird
x
Ruby- cheeked sunbird
x Little spiderhunter
x
Blacked- naped monarch
x Common woodshrike
x
White vented myna
x White - shouldered starling
x
Crimson sunbird
x Small prantincole
x
Harrier spp
x
Oriole spp x Crake spp x Sunbird spp
x
Warbler spp x x Flycatcher spp
x
Black-naped tern x x Tern spp.
x
Fork- tailed swift x Germain's swiflet x Sandpiper spp x
Discussion
The expedition performed has provided an insight into the biodiversity and individual value of this
island. When comparing our findings on Koh Seh to the recordings produced by FFI and last year’s
expedition to Koh Rong Samloem, there have been many overlapped sightings. However, in this
year’s expedition to Koh Seh, there have been many clear differences. An example of this is the
distinct lack of sunbirds, except for a couple of individuals, on Koh Seh compared to Koh Rong
Samloem. This could be due to factors such as the island size. The smaller island, Koh Seh, may not
be able to sustain the populations of sunbirds like Koh Rong Samleom, because of factors like food
sources. This could be due to terrain differences; for example, Koh Rong Samloem has fresh water
sources, while Koh Seh does not. This could be a potential cause for the sunbirds food sources (the
nectar from flowers) for not being present, however another study is needed because the presence
of these flowers were not part of our focus. Further investigation in the number of sunbirds present
24
on Koh Seh would be an interesting area to explore, providing more data on this could prove that a
greater number of sunbirds do actually exist on this island, and contradicting my suggestions.
On the expedition, the team concluded that there was a clear pattern of bird distribution. There
were several sites where there was an increased potential of recording new species. These areas,
known as hotspots, varied in structure from a clearing rainforest canopy to the small gardens
created by Marine Conservation Cambodia.
All the bird species found on this year’s Koh Seh expedition have been categorised as least concern
on the ICUN red list, thus not threatened. However, the local populations seen are potentially under
threat from development. This has been seen on Koh Rong Samloem, where construction is
imminent due to the island being sold. Each island our projects have explored has shown that they
are unique, and hold their own value. In respect to avifauna on Koh Seh, the island had their own
species, such as the mugimaki flycatcher. This gives strong support for protecting as many islands in
the area of the south coast of Cambodia as possible.
A limitation of this expedition is the duration of scientific research; this is a universal issue when
balancing between time and money for the potential benefits. A longer surveying period and/or
repeated visits will help to get an extensive idea of the avifauna on the islands; this has been
demonstrated by FFI and last year’s expeditions work, as new species of birds have been continually
recorded on Koh Rong Samloem. Also, surveying over a longer period will help account for factors
such as seasonal migration. Further studies will help distinguish which birds are resident, if any. For
example, the blue collared kingfisher was seen circling the island on a daily basis, and therefore may
be resident to Koh Seh alone. Also, the team managed to locate a few nests of a variety of species,
one that fits the description of a white-bellied eagle, and these birds have been seen hunting around
the islands. Yet, it is more likely that many of the birds use the string of islands for resources, but
further data is needed to confirm this.
There are many more islands south of Kep in the vicinity of Koh Seh, which provide exciting potential
for recordings of species in future expeditions. Exploring these island may also help investigate and
clarify whether birds are resident to a single island or migrate between them. Another benefit of
further research is to confirm an identification of an unusual sounding bird. This was heard on most
days, and its call was similar to that of a howler monkey. This was more of a personal curiosity, as
the bird continued to elude our team and the identification is still unknown.
There are many exciting areas to focus on in future expeditions, which I have discussed. I also
recommend further research for longer periods to account for factors, such as migration, and to
allow studies of more Kep islands. This will increase the likelihood of resolving these questions and
the potential of new discoveries.
References:
Duckworth, J. & Hedges, S. (1998). Bird records from Cambodia in 1997, including records of sixteen
species new for the country. Forktail, 29—36.
25
Herpetology
Introduction
Reptiles and amphibians are some of the least studied groups of animals on these remote islands off
Cambodia; as the previous expedition Expedition Samloem outlined, herpetologists have seemed to
give Cambodia least attention of all the Indochinese nations (Ohler et al 2002). Although not the
most abundant group to be found in our research, a small variety of herpetofauna was widespread
among the islands. This may indicate a wider variety of these animals on and around these islands,
as our research focus on this group was more limited than on other taxa.
Methods
Amphibians
Some frog surveys were carried out on Koh Rong Samloem. As the Kep islands we visited were
particularly small (both of which, the entire circumference of the island could be easily walked in a
few hours), we assumed amphibian presence would be minimal or non-existent, so focused our
research on more abundant taxa. On Samloem, however, the island was large enough and had
plentiful fresh water sourced to provide ample habitat for amphibians. We conducted two types of
amphibian searches on this island, night surveys: using torches to search for eye reflections of
amphibians, and fresh water surveys: walking upstream along a running water source to look for any
signs of amphibians.
Reptiles
Visual encounter surveys were used to search for reptiles, as this is the most cost effective and non-
invasive way to search for these animals. This reduces stress to the animal and possibility of injury to
the researcher, as some species may have been dangerous. These were conducted both in the
evenings (later than 8pm) and during the day, avoiding the hottest part of the day when reptiles
would seek shelter. Less dense forest areas, near our accommodation for safety reasons, were
searched during the evenings using torches and trying to be discrete so not to disturb any reptiles
which may cause them to flee the area. We also tried a night hike further from our accommodation
to look for reptiles, but having to cut back vegetation and difficult manoeuvrability meant this was
not conducted again as we predicted a low success rate for this method.
Day (morning and afternoon) surveys were conducted mainly to look for lizards. This involved
looking for small openings where sunlight hit basking areas such as rocks and logs. Hikes around the
islands were conducted to search for suitable reptile habitat, looking out for suitable basking areas
and also sheltered areas such as the bunkers.
Corrugated metal basking traps were places to attract reptiles. This involved placing sheets of
corrugated metal over some vegetation in an area struck by sunlight for some hours of the day. Our
efforts in this method however, proved unsuccessful.
Where possible, many photos were taken of each species found for identification purposes. Thy
Neang from FFI helped us identify species we found from our photos. As we were unable to
photograph every specimen, more cryptic species we may have assumed we already had photos of
may not have been accounted for.
Results
Table 1. Comparison of herpetological species found in Expedition Samloem 2013 and Project Kep
2014. Project Kep data does not separate species found on mainland, Koh Rong Samloem or Kep.
26
Scientific Name Common Name Expedition Samloem 2013
Project Kep 2014
Draco maculatus Spotted Flying Dragon X
Physignathus cocincinus
Chinese Water Dragon X
Eutropis multifasciata Many Lined Sun Skink X X
Eutropis macularia Bronze Grass Skink X
Sphenomorphus maculatus
Spotted Forest Skink X
Hemidactylus frenatus House Gecko X
Hemidactylus platyurus
Flat Tailed House Gecko
X
Gekko gecko Tokay Gecko X X
Calotes versicolor Variable Crested Lizard X
Varanus bengalensis Bengal Monitor X
Chrysopelea ornata Golden Tree Snake X
Cryptelytrops albolabris
Green Pit Viper X
Ahaetulla prasina Asian Vine Snake X
Boiga cyanae Green Cat Snake X
Ptyas korros Indochinese Rat Snake X
Xenochrophis flavipunctatus
Yellow Spotted Keel Back
X
Lycodon capucinus Common Wolf Snake X
Limnonectes kohchangae
Koh Change Frog X
Kaloula pulchra Banded Bullfrog X
Fejervarya cancrivora Crab-Eating Frog X
Chiromantis nongkhorensis
Nongkhor Asian Tree Frog
X
Polypedates leucomystax
Common Tree Frog X
Bufo Melanostictus Black-Spined Toad X
27
Frogs: Only two amphibians were found during our expedition, both on Koh Rong Samloem. These
were found using night torch surveys, and were found very close to our accommodation. Also, a
small standing pool of water was found that contained tadpoles. Although we could not identify
what family these tadpoles belong to, this does show the presence of a breeding population of
amphibians.
Lizards: The most abundant lizard found on the Kep islands was the many lined sun skink. This
species was observed to be particularly common on Koh Ankrang, for reasons unknown. The
common house gecko was also common on these islands, particularly in more sheltered areas. Visual
encounter surveys were successful for finding lizards, and many were seen just by hiking around the
islands during the day, looking for typical reptile basking and resting areas.
Snakes: We most frequently sighted the common wolf snake on this expedition, which seemed to
have an affiliation for areas of higher human activity. Only one other species of snake was found, the
golden tree snake. We are unsure whether a breeding population persists on this island, as only one
was seen and is regularly seen by the local people. Night surveys were found to be most effective for
finding snakes, as all but one sighting was made after dark. This one day sighting was due to
acquiring local knowledge of where the specific snake could be found; the tree snake that is a
resident in the village on Koh Ankrang.
Conclusion
Many of these species found were encountered by learning the organisms’ general behaviour and
habitat type. Over the course of the expedition, we found that we were more able to predict what
we would find where, and how to look for it. For example, it was soon realised that house geckos
preferred the protection of the bunkers on the islands, whereas the sun skink was easily found in
basking areas in the day. All the snake encounters were relatively close to areas with higher human
activity, suggesting snakes may alter their behaviour depending on human presence, perhaps to
exploit food sources associated with human presence e.g. the introduction of mice and rats with
food sources. This base knowledge is useful to future research efforts, who will be able to fine tune
survey strategies more quickly in light of this knowledge.
The table in the previous section shows how different the herpetofauna found is between the two
expeditions, with only two species being sighted on both expeditions. This shows the difference in
suitable habitat types on these different islands, as Samloem, focused on by Expedition Samloem, is
significantly larger and contains a larger variety of niches than the small Kep islands. Finding species
in both areas, however, gives a clear indication of how cosmopolitan that species likely is. Further
research into which species segregate onto either the larger or smaller islands may give valuable
insight into each species’ preferred habitat. This could be important for conservation purposes,
particularly to the threated species to see which areas to protect, or may just show some species are
more cosmopolitan so divert conservation efforts away from habitat protection.
The presence of breeding amphibians on Samloem shows the importance of the quality of the fresh
water source habitats on this island. These animals could be threatened by the increase in
anthropogenic activity on the island, which may affect water quality if less sustainable waste
activities are practiced here. Further studies on which amphibians are present and improving local
understanding of the ecosystem is therefore crucial to further understanding of the diversity of
amphibians and consequently conserving any species that need protection. Local attitudes towards
protecting its native species was found to be generally positive. This was especially highlighted by
28
the fact that the small fishing village on Koh Ankrang abandoned one of their huts for a snake to take
residence.
In future, we found it may be useful to gain information about species known to be on the islands’
preferred food source. This would make finding particular species easier, as food source often gives
an indication of which habitat to find them, and may also be useful in setting more successful traps.
Further utilising local knowledge about when and where to find certain species, especially those
rarer species, may make herpetology surveys more successful in future, as in the absence of a
substantial amount of published information on herpetofauna in these regions, the local
community’s knowledge and experience of these animals’ behaviour and habitats could prove very
insightful.
References:
Ohler, S. R. Swann and J. C. Daltry (2002). A Recent Survey of the Amphibian Fauna of the Cardamom
Mountains of Southwest Cambodia with Descriptions of Three New Species. Raffles Bulletin of
Zoology. 465-481.
Conclusion
Project Kep continued to build on the hard work of the team from the FXU Expedition Society:
Expedition Samloem in 2013. The 2013 team’s expedition created an infrastructure within the
Expedition Society, the FXpeditions. In 2014 the first two FXpedition trips went to different areas of
the world thanks to the work of the 2013 team. The team of Project Kep lacked some experience in
planning and undertaking expeditions, but this inexperience did not discourage the team from
putting in the time and effort needed to make the expedition a success. This is the beauty of this
kind of project, it gives the opportunity for committed students to gain valuable experience in
scientific research and allows them to make a difference, which benefits conservation and local
communities in the world outside their university career.
The findings from the expedition, as well as the connections made and strengthened, provided a
strong base level of knowledge across a range of taxa of the Cambodian islands. The species lists we
created and the comparisons we made will be invaluable to future research efforts made in this part
of the world. Paul Ferber who helped make the expedition a success also plans to use the
information we found from the first terrestrial surveys on Koh Seh and Koh Ankrang in his efforts to
protect the wildlife of Cambodia.
The continued collaboration with the students from Cambodia is a highlight of the successes of the
expedition. We believe this close association has benefited us all, producing a much stronger team
who have different backgrounds and experiences that are not only beneficial to the scientific
research, but for introducing us to their culture, building friendships and making our experience
much more enjoyable. Collaboration with the Khmer students will definitely be a continued theme in
future expeditions as we believe they are invaluable and play a key role in the success of the
expedition.
The links we have made with MCC will continue to strengthen as we maintain contact and work with
them for future research and to help with findings all year round. We believe we have a great
relationship with MCC, working together with a close association to Paul Ferber who has an
inspirational amount of determination for a common aim. Paul and our team believe that together
we can make the islands of Kep Province a marine nature reserve. Whilst MCC maintain a voluntary
29
programme to work on marine research and our university continues to work on terrestrial research,
this does look indeed promising.
Future expeditions would hopefully learn from valuable information we have shared in this report.
We would recommend further research into capturing and identification methods for target species
in all future ventures by our society. Though few, our team did encounter some limitations in what
we were working towards, mostly due to a lack of available information on our research area. This
was anticipated and did not detract from our successes.
Despite the limitations of our expedition, we believe our project aims were addresses successfully,
particularly for a team of eager first year students who had the work from their respective
undergraduate courses during the planning stages also. The perseverance and willingness of our
team to ensure the expedition was carried out to our highest capabilities was important, but the
many other organisations and people we share the credit with, who all had supporting roles and
positive attitudes towards our project, were key to its success. Without this support the expedition
could not have gone ahead. We hope our work will inspire students to continue this legacy; as we
illustrated that if you have enough drive, you can execute a successful expedition regardless of the
sizeable amount of work needed.
Bibliography
Bloom G, Ray N. Lonely Planet: Cambodia. Oakland, CA: Lonely Planet; 2012.
Palmer B, Melville C. The rough guide to Cambodia. London: Rough Guides Ltd; 2011.
Seat61.com. Train & bus travel in Cambodia | Bangkok to Angkor Wat & Phnom Penh, HCMC to
Phnom Penh [Internet]. Available from: http://www.seat61.com/Cambodia.htm#Siem Reap
Appendices
Acknowledgements
The team would like to thank Ben Toulson for his dedicated involvement in the planning and
dissemination of this project. The work Expedition Samloem carried out in 2013 provided an
essential foundation for our project to launch from. Any future success of the ongoing efforts to
protect this regions biodiversity will always be attributed to this initial work. We will be forever in
debt to our good friend Rasmey Moul for his tireless effort in organising our travels in Cambodia and
introducing us to the Royal University of Agriculture and its students. He was an indispensable asset
as well as a constant source of entertainment. We would also like to extend our gratitude to Paul
Ferber, CEO of Marine Conservation Cambodia for his support in the planning stages but also his
limitless hospitality in Kep. Berry and Thy, from Fauna and Flora International are owed thanks for
their help in herpetology identification. Kew gardens are also due thanks for their help in identifying
orchid species found in Phnom Bokor.
Thank you to The Halpin Trust, the University of Exeter Annual Fund and the Gilchrist Educational
Trust for providing us with financial support for the expedition. We would all like to acknowledge the
University of Exeter for providing us with the support and encouragement to carry out such an
30
endeavour. A huge thanks to the kind folks at Gylly Beach Café in Falmouth for helping us to
fundraise enough to make this expedition possible.
Fundraising
The total amount raised for the expedition was £8743.24. £500 of this total was withheld by the
University of Exeter grant funding body, to be refunded upon submission of the final expedition
report in 2015. The areas from which this total was raised are summarised in the below pie chart.
We were funded by two expedition grant funding bodies, and raised a large proportion of the total
through fundraising events which also raised awareness of the expedition and research we were
undertaking.
31
Insurance
32
33
34
35
36
Expenditure
37
Month Day Type Description / Location of withdrawal
Amount in currency used
Amount in GBP
Receipt Notes
July 02 VISA ONLINE Temp/humidity probe
£29.99 £29.99 Yes
02 VISA ONLINE Temp/humidity probe
£29.99 £29.99 Yes
02 VISA ONLINE pH Probe & spare probe
£66.00 £66.00 Yes
08 VISA Batteries for equipment
£11.92 £11.92 Yes
12 CASH Taxi from airport to hostel x3 @ 400 per car
1200 THB £22.59 No XE20/08/14
12 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Bangkok 500 THB £9.10 Yes
ATM CHARGE 180 THB £3.28 Yes
Non-sterling transaction fee
£0.34 £0.34 Bank statement
Non-sterling cash fee
£1.75 £1.75 Bank statement
12 CASH Ropes for camping
480 THB £9.02 No XE 20/08/14
13 CASH Taxi from hostel to train station x2 @ 400 THB per car
800 THB 15.06 No XE 20/08/14
13 CASH Train tickets x6 @ 40 THB pp
240 THB £4.53 No XE 20/08/14
13 CASH Tuk tuk from station to boarder x2
800 THB £15.09 No XE 20/08/14
13 CASH Visa charge x6 @ 20 USD pp + 200 THB pp
120 USD 12,00 THB
£72.22 £22.59
No XE 20/08/14
13 CASH Bus from boarder to Phnom Penh x6 @ 20 USD pp
120 USD £72.22 No XE 20/08/14
14 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Phnom Penh 200 USD £116.92 Yes
Non-sterling transaction fee
£3.21 £3.21 Bank statement
14 CASH Tuk tuk to market rtn x2
40 USD £24.09 No XE 20/08/14
14 CASH Breakfast 12.24 USD £7.37 No XE 20/08/14
14 CASH SIM card and top up x2
10 USD £6.01 Yes XE 20/08/14
14 CASH Mobile phone x2 35 USD £21.02 No XE 20/08/14
38
14 CASH Wood saw and 30m tape
10 USD £6.01 No XE 20/08/14
14 CASH Specimen pots 1 USD £0.60 No XE 20/08/14
14 CASH Dried mango for camping
6 USD £3.60 No XE 20/08/14
14 CASH Chop sticks and spoons for camping
4 USD £2.40 No XE 20/08/14
14 CASH Washing up liquid and toilet roll for camping
1 USD £0.60 No XE 20/08/14
14 CASH Washing powder 0.5 USD £0.30 No XE 20/08/14
14 CASH Tuk tuk 8 USD £4.80 No XE 20/08/14
14 CASH Tuk tuk 16 USD £9.60 No XE 20/08/14
14 CASH Welcome dinner with Rasmey and students
24.50 USD £14.72 Yes XE 20/08/14
14 CASH Soap for Rasmey’s survey
46.30 USD £27.81 Yes XE 20/08/14
15 CASH Breakfast 10.60 USD £6.38 No XE 20/08/14
15 CASH Photocopying for Rasmey’s survey
15 USD £9.01 Yes XE 20/08/14
15 CASH Accommodation Spring Guest House Phnom Penh
42 USD £25.23 Yes XE 20/08/14
15 CASH Private bus from Phnom Penh to Sihanoukville
180 USD £108.11 Yes XE 20/08/14
15 CASH Lunch during bus journey
60.75 USD £36.49 Yes XE 20/08/14
15 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Sihanoukville 500 USD £292.89 Yes
Non-sterling transaction fee
£8.05 £8.05 Bank statement
Non-sterling cash fee
£4.39 £4.39 Bank statement
15 CASH Tuk tuk to find fax machine for online banking
10 USD £6.03 No XE 21/08/14
15 CASH Charge for using fax machine
2 USD £1.21 No XE 21/08/14
16 CASH Meal contribution 18 USD £10.85 Yes XE 21/08/14
16 CASH Tuk tuk to pier 8 USD £4.82 No XE 21/08/14
16 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Sihanoukville 500 USD £293.13 Yes
39
Non-sterling transaction fee
£8.06 £8.06 Bank statement
Non-sterling cash fee
£4.39 £4.39 Bank statement
16 CASH Return ferry to Koh Rong Samloem (20 USD pp, 12 persons)
240 USD £144.65 Yes XE 21/08/14
21 CASH Accommodation on Koh Rong Samloem
470 USD £283.42 Yes XE 21/08/14
21 CASH Group laundry 26.76 USD £16.10 No XE 21/08/14
21 CASH Meal contributions on KRS: 15 per meal 2 meal a day 5 days
150 USD £90.28 No XE 21/08/14
21 CASH Bottled water @ 1.5 USD per bottle, 1 bottle per person per day, 5 days
90 USD £54.16 No XE 21/08/14
22 CASH Meal contribution 38.25 USD £23.06 Yes XE 21/08/14
22 VISA Accommodation in Sihanoukville (At Home guest house)
48 USD £28.20 Yes
Non-sterling transaction fee
£0.77 £0.77 Bank statement
22 CASH Bus from Sihanoukville to Phnom Penh
105 USD £63.30 Yes XE 21/08/14
22 CASH Tuk tuk to river side
5 USD £3.01 No XE 21/08/14
22 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Phnom Penh 500 USD £293.32 Yes
ATM charge 6 USD £3.52 Yes
Non-sterling cash fee
£4.45 £4.45 Bank statement
Non-sterling transaction fee
£8.16 £8.16 Bank statement
23 CASH Meal contribution 21 USD £12.66 Yes XE 21/08/14
23 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Phnom Penh 500 USD £293.32 Yes
ATM charge 5 USD £2.92 Yes
Non-sterling transaction fee
£8.14 £8.14 Bank statement
Non-sterling cash £4.44 £4.44 Bank
40
fee statement
24 CASH Meal contribution 21 USD £12.66 Yes XE 21/08/14
24 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Phnom Penh 500 USD £293.79 Yes
ATM charge 6 USD £3.51 Yes
Non-sterling transaction fee
£8.17 £8.17 Bank statement
Non-sterling cash fee
£4.45 £4.45 Bank statement
24 CASH Rasmey reimbursed for student island costs
34.50 USD £20.79 Yes XE 21/08/14
30 CASH Lunch in Kep 35.60 USD £21.48 Yes
30 Telephone banking
Transfer £890.63 £890.63 Bank statement
Locked PIN – transfer to Alex
30 CASH Dinner in Kampot 34 USD £20.52 Yes
31 CASH Accommodation in Kep
146.50 USD £88.40 Yes
August 01 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Kampot 500 USD £295.86 Yes From Alex
ATM charge 6 USD £3.55 Yes From Alex
Non-sterling transaction fee
£8.25 £8.25 Bank statement
From Alex
Non-sterling cash fee
£5.00 £5.00 Bank statement
From Alex
02 CASH Water taxi to/from Koh Angkrang
20 USD £12.07 No XE 28/08/14
03 CASH Water taxi to/from Koh Angkrang
20 USD £12.07 No XE 28/08/14
05 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Thansur Bokor 500 USD £297.42 Yes From Alex
Non-sterling transaction fee
£8.17 £8.17 Bank statement
From Alex
Non-sterling cash fee
£5.00 £5.00 Bank statement
From Alex
06 ONLINE BACS TRANSFER
Paid to Sam McNeil in repayment for lending the project 200 USD
£118.51 £118.51 Bank statement
Sam preferred this debt to be repaid in sterling
06 CASH Accommodation on Koh Seh paid to Paul Ferber
1320 USD £795.89 XE 29/08/14
41
06 Telephone banking
Transfer £1500 £1500 Bank statement
Locked PIN – transfer to Alex
06 CASH Lunch in Kep 38.85 USD £23.43 Yes XE 28/08/14
06 CASH Bus from Kep to Phnom Penh
36 USD £21.71 Yes XE 28/08/14
06 CASH Tuk tuk to riverside
12 USD £7.03 No XE 28/08/14
06 CASH Dinner 58.45 USD £35.26 Yes XE 28/08/14
07 CASH Lunch 43 USD £25.94 Yes XE 28/08/14
07 CASH Phone top up 5 USD £3.02 Yes XE 28/08/14
07 CASH Tuk tuk to dinner x 12 persons
50 USD £30.17 No XE 28/08/14
07 CASH Leaving dinner with students
56.75 USD £34.24 Yes XE 28/08/14
07 CASH Donation to SMILE Foundation
10 USD £6.03 No XE 29/08/14
07 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Phnom Penh 400 USD £238.10
Yes From Alex 500 USD withdrawn, -100 for Alex personal money.
Non-sterling transaction fee
£8.17 £8.17 Bank statement
From Alex
Non-sterling cash fee
£5.00 £5.00 Bank statement
From Alex
08 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Phnom Penh (ATM8807)
500 USD £294.12 Yes From Alex
08 Non-sterling transaction fee
£8.17 £8.17 Bank statement
From Alex
Non-sterling cash fee
£5.00 £5.00 Bank statement
From Alex
08 CASH Spring guest house accommodation
72 USD £43.45 Yes XE 28/08/14
08 CASH Breakfast 43.93 USD £26.50 Yes XE 28/08/14
08 CASH Tuk tuk to bus depot
24 USD £14.48 No XE 28/08/14
08 CASH Reimbursement for Rasmey expenditure
80 USD £48.24 Yes XE 29/08/14
08 CASH Private bus from PP to SR to PT
360 USD £216.92 XE 29/08/14
09 CASH Lunch 26.50 USD £15.96 Yes XE 29.08.14
09 CASH Dinner 37.25 USD £22.43 Yes XE 29/08/14
09 CASH Siem Reap (Art 400 USD £238.10 Yes From Alex
42
WITHDRAWAL center)
ATM charge 5 USD £2.97 Yes From Alex
Non-sterling transaction fee
£1.11 £1.11 Bank statement
From Alex
Non-sterling cash fee
£1.75 £1.75 Bank statement
From Alex
10 CASH Breakfast 37 USD £22.28 Yes XE 29/08/14
10 CASH Accommodation in Siem Reap
168 USD £101.15 Yes XE 29/08/14
10 CASH Tuk tuk from boarder to train station
80 USD £48.17 No XE 29/08/14
10 CASH Lunch 380 THB £7.17 Yes XE 29/08/14
10 CASH Medicine for Sam 93 THB £1.75 Yes XE 29/08/14
10 CASH Train tickets x6 @ 40 THB pp
240 THB £4.53 No XE 29/08/14
10 CASH Taxi from train station to hostel x2 @ 400 THB per car
800 THB 15.06 No XE 20/08/14
10 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Bangkok 2000 THB £37.13 Yes From Alex
ATM charge 180 THB £3.34 Yes From Alex
Non-sterling transaction fee
£1.11 £1.11 Bank statement
From Alex
Non-sterling cash fee
£1.75 £1.75 Bank statement
From Alex
10 CASH Dinner 2,230 THB £42.09 Yes XE 29/08/14
11 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Bangkok 5000 THB £92.82 Yes From Alex
ATM charge 180 THB £3.34 Yes From Alex
Non-sterling transaction fee
£2.64 £2.64 Bank statement
From Alex
Non-sterling cash fee
£1.92 £1.92 Bank statement
From Alex
11 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Bangkok 5000 THB £93.05 Yes From Alex
ATM charge 180 THB 3.35 Yes From Alex
Non-sterling transaction fee
£2.65 £2.65 Bank statement
From Alex
Non-sterling cash fee
£1.92 £1.92 Bank statement
From Alex
11 CASH Breakfast 695 THB £13.12 Yes XE 29/08/14
11 CASH Lunch 550 THB £10.39 Yes XE 29/08/14
12 CASH WITHDRAWAL
Bangkok 15000 THB £279.53 Yes From Alex
43
ATM charge 180 THB £3.35 Yes From Alex
Non-sterling transaction fee
£7.77 £7.77 Bank statement
From Alex
Non-sterling cash fee
£5.00 £5.00 Bank statement
From Alex
12 CASH Dinner 595 THB £11.24 Yes XE 29/08/14
12 CASH Accommodation in Bangkok. (Before room change.)
3000 THB £56.65 Yes XE 29/08/14 Deposit + 3 rooms, 1st night
12 CASH Accommodation Bangkok
4000 THB £75.52 Yes XE 29/08/14
12 CASH Taxi from hostel to airportl x3 @ 400 per car
1200 THB £22.59 No XE 29/08/14
12 CASH Breakfast, just Alex before taxi
210 THB £3.98 No XE 29/08/14
13 CASH Breakfast 1120 THB £ Yes
13 CASH Street lunch 266 THB £ No
13 CASH Dinner 1065 THB £ Yes
14 CASH Street breakfast 192 THB £ No
14 CASH Lunch 1065 THB £ Yes
14 CASH Street dinner 355 THB £ No
14 CASH Dinner 470 THB £ Yes
15 CASH Taxi 1 315 THB £ No
15 CASH Taxi 2 315 THB £ No
15 CASH Breakfast 1253 THB £ Yes