I. First progress report (December 27, 2007):
Activities undertaken:
1. Capacity-building activities conducted for community leaders re:--
? Sustainable ecosystem management (spec: Kaeng Lawa Wetland)
? Achieving a sufficiency economy
2. Natural resource inventories compiled
3. Conservation and rehabilitation activities promoted via--
? Campaigns, community events, and traditional plays
? Demonstration of water quality monitoring, traditional irrigation techniques, and weeding of invasive species
? Testing for chemical residue (on members? bodies)

Results of activities:
1. 80% of community leaders have increased insight on ecosystem management, as evidenced by active participation in data gathering and formulation of conservation action plans
2. 400 community members advocated for project expansion; consequently, local authorities provided both cash and in-kind support
3. Populations of native water species increased; populations of alien species decreased
4. Water circulation in wetland improved

Project expense:: THB 198,500 out of first disbursement of THB 215,911.47

Issues with project implementation:
? Several field activities occurred during the election campaign; this affected the behavior of some stakeholders (i.e., those in public sector)
? Conflict arose between hog-raising groups and plantation groups
? Restructuring in major supporting agencies resulted in interruption of cash flow

II. Monitoring visit from NC and three NSC members (April 9, 2008):
On April 9th, 2008, the National Coordinator and three members of the National Steering Committee visited THA-06-17 to assess the project halfway through its two-year duration. After touring the wetland and speaking to community members and project leaders, the assessment team better understood the environmental concerns that had prompted the grantee to seek SGP assistance.

More specifically, the construction of a large water reservoir to supply the growing population of Ban Phai District (people and farm animals) had damaged local ecosystems and livelihoods. Related environmental issues included:
? Pollution from pig farms
? Land encroachment for farming
? Flooding during the rainy season, and severe drought during the dry season
? Decrease of endemic water species in wetland, and increase in alien species
Project members noted that their involvement with GEF SGP equipped them to better confront these issues.

In Baan Chee Kok Khor, (one of three participating villages), the assessment team witnessed the use of the Royal Initiative?s Stone Dumping Weir. In order to accumulate water for the dry summer months, a weir was constructed in the Chee River, with financial assistance from the Khon Kaen Provincial Administrative Organization. At another location, communities had secured support from the provincial authority to expand their flood mitigation practices.

Another community adaptation to environmental degradation was the harvest and sale of an alien reed species as packing material for protecting ceramic and tile while in transit. Native lilies, a source of income for many villagers, particularly benefited from reductions in the reed population. A 1,000-by-500-meter conservation zone had been completely cleared in order to encourage lily growth.

As 60% of project members depend on the wetland for their livelihood activities (and to buy rice for consumption!), the assessment team felt there was much to still be done, especially re: water quality and use.

III. Second progress report (July 24, 2008):
Activities undertaken:
1. Conducting capacity-building activities for community leaders on (1) Community-based Natural Resources and Environment Management and Alternative Energy Utilization (2) sufficiency economy and production of bio-fertilizer
2. Conducting resources , communities and ecosystems inventories
3. Promoting conservation and rehabilitation activities among local administrative organizations and community schools ( bio-fertilizer, garbage banks and youth camp)
4. Organizing forum to formulate plan for management of natural resources and ecology of the wetland
5. Promoting environmentally-friendly occupation ( making use of alien reek, application of bio-fertilizer and sustainable fishery)

Results of activities:
1. At least 60 project members gaining understanding about community rights to manage natural resources witnessed by relaying what had been learnt through community communication tools , establishment of a working group to mobilize resource, and formulated action plans, both for short and long term ( attached with the report)
2. At least two learnt activities being put into practice ( fish conservation zone and building high efficiency charcoal production kiln)
3. At least 500 target population gaining understanding about self-reliance , witnessed by community discourse, sharing experience on local communication tool, establishment of career groups with plan to mobilize resources
4. Reduced nutrient from 20 households which produced and applied environmentally-friendly kitchen staff (Shampoo, dish-washing solution, etc), and 75 households bio-fertilizer.
5. Compiled 91 plant species of Kaew Lawa Wetland ( attached with the report)
6. Emergence of one garbage bank
7. School management team demonstrating understanding and support by permitting students to participate in field activities
8. Evinced satisfaction of career groups depending upon natural resources of the wetland

Project communication:
1. Production of leaflet , communication with government agencies/ community leaders in and around project area
2. The ITV , a public television channel, aired the problems and status of Kaeng Lawa Wetland , on its programme ? Burdens of Community?

Experience and lessons leanrt:
1.The project learnt about one important issue on giving supports to communities. Any support must be consistent with community?s way of life. It has to be something on which communities possess skill to use. Starting with ? for daily need, not with ? for sales to generate income?. Required resources are available locally. In addition, ?reduction of expense? should come before ?increase of income?.
2. Only training communities in classroom, then leading them to field activities could ensure participation to a certain extent. But taking to see and learn with ?their own eyes? was producing much more fruitful result, since they would feel the ownership thus ensure sustainability.

Project expense:: THB 413,000 out of two disbursements of THB 421,745.83.

IV. Mid-course evaluation workdhop (March 20-21, 2009)
Findings and observation:
Together with representatives from other projects of the same grant cycle (from THA/06/13 to THA/06/28), and SGP country team, the project participate in the workshop to update progress , share experience and initiate a network. It was agreed that each project would keep on contacting one another and sharing experience. Contacting addresses were distributed with one project as the coordinating centre for future activities. An NSC member who represented the National Environment Fund was also committed to help in keeping the network.

V.Completion Report ( July 2 ,2009):

Date of Participatory Evaluation( June 11, 2009 with 29 participants)

Number of Beneficiaries/ Participating personnel:
Women: 1,150
Men: 1,200
Children: 200

Number of persons trained/ attending seminars, joining study tours:
Women: 300
Men: 200
Children: 170

Expense:

AAmount received from SGP (3 disbursements): Baht: 630,566
Total amount spent out of SGP budget: Baht: 711,500
Balance: Baht: (- 80,934)
Amount authorized for the final payment: US$: 2,073.48
Amount Received from others: THB: 353,000 (in cash)
THB: 432,500 (in kind)

Activities undertaken:
1. Conducting capacity-building activities for community leaders (on local ecosystems, sustainable use of natural resources, alternative energy, wetland management)
2. Resources , communities and ecosystems inventories
3. Promoting CBOs? role in rehabilitation and conservation ( youth group participating role & official community leaders)
4. Formulating plans and establishing mechanism for cooperation
5. Promoting conservation and rehabilitation activities ( promoting model communities, water management for agricultural practice, reforestation of community forest, environmentally-friendly occupation)

Results of activities:
1. At least 80 community representatives gaining insight on the subjects witnessed through capacity to present data & information, propose approaches for solution, establish mechanism, and together with over 400 members push integrated management of the ecosystems, and put into practice renewable energy
2. Emergence of knowledge products on history of project location, community livelihood, water use calendar, and inventories of endemic and threatened plant species
3. Emergence of one garbage bank in community school and a youth group for conservation
4. At least 320-ha area being re-vegetated and under maintenance with three plots allocated as community forests with clear expansion target
5. At least three conservation zones of water species
6. At least seven established learning centres for environmentally-friendly occupation, i.e. on alternative energy (biomass), chemical-free farming, value added resources and sufficiency economy
7. Reduced production cost on farming with evinced better yield

Project Communication:

Nothing in special.

Experience , Lessons Learnt , Problems and Issues:

1. There was a limit progress on environment study as there was no persistence to carry out required activities. Those who were to take lead were of mass-oriented spirit , in stead of student-oriented spirit.
2. External groups who learnt from the projects and reproduced products , especially ,knowledge product did not give enough credibility to the project.
3. Some surrounding communities were not very convinced about local knowledge and practices thus still applied chemical substances intensively.
4. Reduction of chemical substances in project location had to be accomplished soon, otherwise this wetland would meet the same fate as paddy fields in the central region.

Plans and Activities for Sustainability:

The project planned
1. to foster project leaders so that they would be able to mentor surrounding communities
2. to reach out to other communities that applied to participate in project activities
3. to firm up idea and plan to reverse the overwhelming chemical intensive agricultural practice and its capitals, through
- reducing use of unnecessary technology but introducing alternative methods available in the locality
- reducing use of chemical in agriculture but increasing the use of bio-fertilizer and compost