1. A tool for assessing the feasibility and impact potential of Rare project plans BRAVO: Barrier Removal Assessment and Viability Overview Chuuk Lagoon Campaign Ringnet & Purseine Alternative Fishing Method Economics Technical Cultural/PoliticalImpact & Metrics

2. BRAVO Scores BRAVO: Executive Summary What:A pilot project by OFCF Japan will be done to train dynamite fishermen, which from interview last April shows that dynamite fishermen use dynamite because the have not nets and or other sustainable fishing methods to use. Who: President of the Federated States of Micronesia requested Japan to do something for the sake of the dynamite, keeping in mind that the dynamites used are taken from the Japanese WWII wrecks. When:Pilot project will start next year January. (I still need to find out more from the Oversea Fisheries Cooperative Foundation) How:From previous interview with a few dynamite fishermen. The OFCF representative has decided to do a pilot project where they will gather dynamite fishermen and train them on how to use ringnet and purseine to fish the pelagic species (this are the fish species that fishermen usually dynamite). This will be monitored by the Department of Marine Resources. Feasibility Score: Impact Score:

3. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 3 Criteria ExplanationScore Costs Preliminary projected costs –Need to know more about the budget from the OFCF office. Estimated total cost (I am not aware of the fund) Predictability of cost burden 1 = Costs are ambiguous and unpredictable 4 = Costs are predictable and manageable Need to get more information from Naomichy Suzuki who is incharge of the pilot project. 1 Average Score 1 Serena BRAVO Detail Economics (1 of 2)

4. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 4 CriteriaExplanation Score Revenues Description of revenue patched reefs Percentage of total cost available 1: 0 – 25% 2: 25 – 50% 3: 50 – 75% 4: 75 – 100% (need to find out if there available fund for the pilot project) 1 Likelihood of fundraising success 1 = Very low likelihood of raising the necessary funds; 4 = Likelihood of raising necessary funds almost a certainty (Funding will be approved most likely) 1 Fundraising timing (Funding will probably be available by January of next year 2010.) Funding Alignment 1 = Funding timeline is not aligned with project timeline; 4 = Funding timeline is well-aligned with project timeline (need to know more detail about the funding alignment) 1 Sustainable Funding 1 = Unsustainable funding source; 4 = Very sustainable funding source (information about funding needs to be taken from OFCF) 1 Average Score 1 Serena BRAVO Detail Economics (2 of 2)

5. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 5 Criteria Explanation Score Technology Attainability & Availability 1 = Technology and/or required assistance needed is unavailable; 4 = Technology is attainable and third-party assistance, if required, is available Training will be provided by OFCF representative Mr. Naomichy Suzuki who had already done some research in Chuuk earlier this year, and is targeting the dynamite fishermen. 2 Technology assistance 1 = Technology assistance is required, yet not available; 4 = Technology assistance is significant and available (need to find out from OFCF) 1 Appropriate for circumstances 1 = Available technology is not appropriate for circumstances; 4 = Acquirable technology is suited for circumstances Technologies are possibly set before the pilot project. 3 Average Score 2 Serena BRAVO Detail Technical (1 of 2)

6. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 6 Criteria Explanation Score Capacity / Organizational Ability Barrier Removal Partner support 1 = BR Partner does not exist or is not willing to support the project; 4 = There exists a willing Barrier Removal Partner The Barrier Removal partner are Japanese OFCF & JICA representative working hand in hand with the department of marine resources. 4 Barrier Removal Partner’s ability to drive change 1 = BR Partner lacks a track record of driving behavior; 4 = BR partner has a proven track record of driving behavior The pilot project will be able to tell us, if the replacement of dynamite fishing to (ringnet and purseine) will work for the dynamite fishermen. 3 Budget planning and cost efficient execution 1 = BR Partner has not demonstrated sufficient budget planning skills and cost efficient execution of plans; 4 = BR For this pilot project, OFCF is partering with the Department of Marine Resources. 1 Average Score 2.6 Other Partners Other critical partners 1 = Other partners do not exist or will not be impactful 4 = Other partners are available and capable of assistance No information has been gathered about other partners for this project. 2 Average Score 2 Serena BRAVO Detail Technical (2 of 2)

7. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 7 Criteria ExplanationScore Community Leadership Leaders and influencers in the community 1 = Dearth of strong leaders and influencers in the community; 4 = Visible leaders with clout to drive behavior According to experience from previous meetings and other activities which the Chuuk Conservation Society is involve in, I could say that community leaders did what they could bringing messages to and from their community especially the resource owners. They have worked with CCS to involve more of their resource owners influencing them to apply for grants and set Marine Protected Areas aligning it to the LMMA set up. 4 Leadership willingness to endorse 1 = Unwilling to get on board with project; 4 = Firm commitment from leadership to help drive change efforts Many leaders have come visiting CCS office to follow up on their community projects proposals and to ask questions on what the next step is. They have also shown interest during stakeholder meetings, inviting CCS to do educational awareness at their sites. 3 Average Score 3.5 Serena BRAVO Detail Cultural/Political (1 of 2)

8. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 8 Criteria Explanation Score Political Environment Current legislative and legal landscape 1 = Legislative and legal restrictions will hamper efforts; 4 = Legislative and legal framework will aid program I have been told that there is a law that banns dynamite fishing and also for uncertified divers not to do any diving activity. These laws are not being enforced and they need to be announced on the radio to inform people about it because others do not know what are the law s in Chuuk. 2 Ability to drive legislative change 1 = Lack of knowledge regarding political environment and unclear timeframe for advocacy; 4 = Depth of political knowledge and ability to push for appropriate changes within a given timeframe (uncertain) Average Score un Values and Norms Assessment of norms 1 = Plan is unconcerned with political and cultural norms 4 = Plan assesses and takes into account the values and norms governing the political and cultural environment Campaign considered cultural norms as part of conducting and implementing the campaign. 4 Ability to address normative obstacles 1 = Normative obstacles are too formidable to be overcome; 4 = Obstacles are manageable and a clear tack to address them is employed 4 Average Score 4 Serena BRAVO Detail Cultural/Political (2 of 2)

9. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 9 Criteria Explanation Score Conservation Impact Likelihood of conservation impact 1 = Conservation impact is unlikely to be achieved; 4 = Conservation impact is very likely to be realized From interviews with Marine Resources members I have found out that OFCF did a research and they have interviewed a few dynamite fishermen who said that the reason why they use dynamite to fish is because of the lack of equipment. They don’t have the certain types of nets that catches the certain type of fish. The OFCF realized that that was the top reason that dynamite fishermen told him, so he also asked them if OFCF provided the nets should they stop from using dynamite? The agreed too. In words I can say yes, there will be an impact. 2 Impact sustainability 1 = The conservation impact goal is unlikely to be sustained in the long-term; 4 = The impact goal should be viable in the long-term The pilot project will be implemented for a year, 3 Average Score 2.5 Serena BRAVO Detail Impact and Metrics (1 of 2)

10. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 10 Criteria Explanation Score Tipping Points 1 st Tipping Point 1 = Tipping point unlikely to be achieved; 4 = Tipping point likely to be reached The first tipping point depends on OFCF to sent over an expert to train the fishermen and the people of Marine Resources on the alternative fishing methods. 4 2 nd Tipping Point 1 = Tipping point unlikely to be achieved; 4 = Tipping point likely to be reached Second tipping point depends on who will provide the fishing methods, which OFCF have agreed to provide. 4 3 rd Tipping Point 1 = Tipping point unlikely to be achieved; 4 = Tipping point likely to be reached The third tipping point is to provide fishermen the fishing method, and have the department of marine resources do monitoring. 4 Average Score 4 Metrics Measurable outcomes 1 = The program lacks clear metrics or are difficult to measure; 4 = The program has established clear, measureable metrics Campaign will be measured by the pre-survey compared to post campaign survey, and the number of reported dynamiting activity. 4 Average Score 4 Serena BRAVO Detail Impact and Metrics (2 of 2)

11. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 11 CategorySubcategoryScore Average Category Score Feasibility Economics Costs 1 Un Revenues 1 Income Substitution Un Technical Technology 2 2.2 Capacity / Organizational Ability 2.6 Other Partners 2 Cultural / Political Community Leadership 3.5 Un Political Environment Un Cultural Norms 2.5 Un Impact Impact and Metrics Conservation Impact 4 4 Tipping Points 4 Metrics 4 Impact Score 4 Barrier Removal Assessment and Viability Overview (BRAVO) Composite Score

12. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 12 Serena BRAVO Detail Risk Factors Risk FactorsConsequenceMitigation Strategies OFCF said that the Department of Marine Resources will take the initiative to continue with the project implementation. They have not communicate with each other. (There is a lack of information about this project) No communications between these Fisheries departments can result in delay of this project. Department of Marine Resources stated that the OFCF representative interviewed a few dynamite fishermen. (Getting all the dynamite fishermen will be hard, so if they give only a few dynamite fishermen the alternative fishing method and leave the rest dynamite fishing will still continue. Fishermen might refuse to come to meetings and training, thinking that they will be turned in to the Police Department. Dynamite fishing will not stop if only few of the dynamite fishermen are given the new nets to fish. AG office never deal with reported dynamite fishing cases. If this doesn’t work, and it is not being enforced from the AG office. (Law should be enforced by the government). Dynamite fishermen can be very violent when they are being dealt with.

13. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 13 Serena BRAVO Detail Authors and approvals Dalina NeroChuuk Conservation Society, Campaign Manager Wisney NakayamaChuuk Conservation Society, Executive Director