I. The project participated in the mid-course evaluation workshop of Thailand-Year-6 GEF/SGP , organized on 25-27 January 2006 . It was one of 27 projects sending project leaders or representatives to report to the workshop on progress of activities, immediate outputs/results that could be witnessed or observed, problems / issues and solution.

With only a few exception, majority of projects concisely reported progress and summarized immediate outputs and results. The report format included from power point to photos to dissemination materials, and to verbal presentation. There was one project bringing product of chemical-free vegetable for sale and show at the venue.

All presentations mentioned about problems and issues, with varying degree, but they had been corrected or rectified. Or at least, the project possessed idea or approach to do so. However, there were a few projects that presented problems and hot issues on environment soliciting further discussion and advice from participants.

On the final day, participants spent half-an-hour sharing idea on forging future networking of the year-6 projects and submitted approach for sustainability. Majority of participants agreed to be tied by natural network, without any regulation or commitment, but hearts and minds. There were two members pledging their times and skill to help others according to their availability.

As a reminder and incentives to ensure most effective implementation of remaining activities, the NC proposed the idea of strategic project where successful SGP projects could gather together so that community actions affecting global benefits would be clearer.

The workshop had seen substantial sharing of experience, especially on related issues of project activities. Somehow, it was felt that the remaining activities would be carried out to their completion. Another evidence, a natural network of environment was formed with a lot of participants winning one another hearts.

II. On February 16 , 2006 , the project was visited by the NC and four members of NSC and a few other major stakeholders. The findings and observation can be summarized as follows:

At one of the five participating villages, Baan Thungphra, the visiting team met with project members, mostly women and was briefed about general situation and progress of activities. The project location was a lowland situated in the vicinity of Phu Khieo-Namnao Terrestrial Complex, with official classified areas, such as national park, wildlife sanctuary and forest industrial area . Poor planning of official land classification and successive promulgation rendered community members losing their original cultivated land. The average cultivated land for community member was about one and-a-half acre per families- one of the vulnerable groups. Nearly all depend upon the provisions of forest and agro-ecosystems for daily living. However, the provisions of the ecosystems are not free for them like years before, they are at the discretion of the responsible officers. The village was said to have existed for five hundred years but the traditional knowledge and practice on biological use started losing its significant only about 30 years ago.

One noted progress of activity and immediate output appeared to be a capacity-building. Target group had launched a study tour to one of back GEF/SGP projects , learnt about collecting seeds of various species important to agro-ecosystems and put into practice. The visiting team was shown various native rice species, cottons and other edible ones.

Spending about one hour wandering in project location, the visiting team witnessed prevalent areas of mono-crops for quick money with chemicals being applied ? a result of existing conventional patterns and policies of economic and agricultural development and the provisions of the Sern River in term of water for agriculture and fished for consumption.

The visiting team witnessed increased capacity of target population and sensed their determination to follow proposed activities and to achieve the goals within a few years. It is of special interest to follow and learn from them, as the underlying causes of degradation are complex ? increasing population and food demand, current mono-cash crop (sugar cane) promotion , water and land use conflict and weak capacity to understand and adjust to globalization.

III. The progress report was received on 12 September 2006, with following details:

Activities carried out :

1.Launching capacity building such as seminars , workshops and study tours on the management of soil, water and forest
2. Launching integrated farming system

Results and indicators:

1.Demonstrated increased capacity of community members through ability to analyze problems and issues and to initiate solution
2. Emergence of three models for natural resources management with about 160 ha
3. Twenty model farmers for others to learn from


Project Communication:

Communication activities were focused at community level with initiated effort at district level ? making GEF SGP visible and understand