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