1. A tool for assessing the feasibility and impact potential of Rare project plans BRAVO: Barrier Removal Assessment and Viability Overview Bahia Loreto National Park Economics Technical Cultural/PoliticalImpact & Metrics

2. BRAVO: Executive Summary What: To eliminate the threat that fishing poses on the Bahia de Loreto National Park (PNBL) fishing resources must be given in concession to the local economic unities. To achieve this goal, authorities must design and implement a concession model to be adopted as part of fishing management. Fishermen must also be trained in management, organization and technical and management capabilities. Who: Bahia de Loreto National Park will promote sustainable use of marine resources and will also support and provide follow-up for the management processes regarding the implementation of concessions that will fall under CONAPESCA responsibility. At the same time, the Fishermen Advisory Program will provide technical assistance to the economic unities to strengthen their management, organization, technical and administrative capabilities. When: The agenda will be defined within the framework to review the PNBL Management Program, to take place during May, 2009, with the participation of CONAPESCA, NGO’s and fishermen to design and implement a concession adoption model. Fishing advisors will simultaneously give technical assistance on the topic to the interested economic unities. How: We will give lectures in the communities about the importance of the management of fishing resources, concessions, no-fishing zones and the participation of fishermen throughout the management processes. We will conduct a fishing diagnosis in Loreto, including an assessment of fishing resources that are being used and the potential ones, the fishermen, boats, fishing arts census and the situation of the current effort. Fishing advisors will be working with each economic unity, organizing and updating their legal paperwork and in the most important aspects regarding internal management, as well as in management abilities to apply for and manage fishing concessions. BRAVO Scores Feasibility Score: 3.25 Impact Score: 3.20

3. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 3 Criteria ExplanationScore Costs Preliminary projected costs  Payroll and benefits for a fishing advisor, office supplies and field visits (transportation, food). These costs regarding the advisor will be set apart in a special fund of approximately $528,000. Rare's Fishing Advisors Program will provide these funding.  Costs related to the design and implement the campaign of approximately $250,000.  Costs to support fishermen with training and management could possibly come from Procodes. To be estimated. Approximate Total Cost: $778,000 Predictability of cost burden 1 = Costs are ambiguous and unpredictable; 4 = Costs are predictable and manageable Costs are determined based on the logistics required for meeting, the price of fuel and food required for field visits, as well as the monthly payroll. Other costs are approximations because other activities and materials for the implementation phase are not taken into consideration. However, they will be subjected to the availability of resources and many of them can be done with existing resources, if there are no funds to be professionally produced. 3.5 Average Score 3.5 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Economics (1 of 3)

4. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 4 CriteriaExplanation Score Revenues Description of revenue streams Fundraising total: $ $778,000 Sources: Pride Seed funds, Fishing Advisors Program Funds Earned income total: $ Sources: Percentage of total cost available 1: 0 – 25% 2: 25 – 50% 3: 50 – 75% 4: 75 – 100% We have a $20,000 Rare seed fund which will be used to cover part of the implementation phase and materials. Although funding for the Fishing Advisory Program are still in negotiation, it is highly likely that they will be available when required. 2.5 Likelihood of fundraising success 1 = Very low likelihood of raising the necessary funds; 4 = Likelihood of raising necessary funds almost a certainty It is highly likely that local businesses and stores can provide funding (for example: El Pescador, Mercado Juarez, Agua Purificadora Las Parras) 3 Fundraising timing Resources will be available by the time they are needed. Funding Alignment 1 = Funding timeline is not aligned with project timeline; 4 = Funding timeline is well-aligned with project timeline Because the campaign depends upon the relatively independent resources of CONANP, the development of materials can be speeded. 3 Sustainable Funding 1 = Unsustainable funding source; 4 = Very sustainable funding source Regarding materials, sustainability will depend upon how the campaign develops. There will be a defined budget for the Advisor 3 Difference between Revenue/costs N/A Average Score 2.8 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines 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 N/A Technology assistance 1 = Technology assistance is required, yet not available; 4 = Technology assistance is significant and available The participation of the Fishing Advisory Program will be very important to strengthen the organization and updating of paperwork of the economic unities, as well as their technical abilities to assess resources and management abilities to apply for and manage fishing concessions. 3.5 Appropriate for circumstances 1 = Available technology is not appropriate for circumstances; 4 = Acquirable technology is suited for circumstances. N/A Average Score 3.5 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines 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 CONAPESCA is very important to implement fishing concessions within the framework of fisheries management. CONAPESCA mentioned in a meeting held during last march that they were interested in giving fishing concessions to local fishermen and that Loreto would be an ideal place to start such process. 3 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. CONAPESCA expressed their interest and willingness to promote and support fishing concessions and highlighted that it is important to start as soon as possible. 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 Partner has proven proficiency in budget planning and cost efficient execution of past plans The barrier removal partner is competent in resource management and is willing to incorporate resources to the fishing management and resource assessment process. 2.5 Average Score 2.83 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 Asesores pesqueros is an important partner for the management of economic unities and strengthening of their organizational and management abilities. The support of other organizations like COBI, NIPARAJA, ECO-ALIANZA are important for the process. 3.5 Average Score 3.5 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines 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 We have identified community leaders that will promote the importance of the management within the fishing sector and the importance of being organized to achieve fishing concessions. 3.0 Leadership willingness to endorse 1 = Unwilling to get on board with project; 4 = Firm commitment from leadership to help drive change efforts Local leaders are interested and willing to promote the management of fishing resources through fishing concessions for local economic unities. 3.0 Average Score 3.0 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines 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 legislators that have oversight over these legislative instruments. If none, write none. If unknown, write unknown. The current legal context and Fishing and Sustainable Aquiculture Act are in place to promote the fishing concessions to local economic unities, as part of the fishing management of Loreto. 4 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 We need to design a fishing concession model for local economic unities within the framework of the Fishing and Sustainable Aquiculture Act. 3 Average Score 3.5 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 The fishing advisory program identified through a diagnosis done throughout the work of advisors that fishermen organizations are not organized.. 3 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 Fishermen are used to investing the least possible effort in fishing regulations, which translates in poor organization and management within their organizations, however, it is possible, according to the fishing advisory program, to promote behavioral change regarding the adoption of organization and management tools. 3 Average Score 3 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines 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 The likelihood of having a conservation impact in fishing resources is HIGH giving that the joint management of resources between authorities, fishermen and NGOs, with the authorization of exclusive rights of access to resources (concessions), will allow fishermen to assume benefits and responsibilities of resources use in the long term (sustainable). 1-4 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 It is very likely to achieve sustainable conservation impact given that the benefits the fishermen will perceive by adopting and supporting the management of fishing resources will increase with time. The sense of being the owners of resources gives them certainty and can motivate them to take part of monitoring, surveillance and assessment activities. 1-4 Average Score 1-4 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines 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 is that CONAPESCA starts the design and implementation process of a concession adoption model of fishing resources for local economic unities withing the fishing management framework. Second tipping point is that authorities carry out a diagnosis of the fishing activity in Loreto that includes the assessment of used and potential fishing resources, the fishermen, boat, fishing arts census and current fishing effort. The third tipping point consists on the interest of fishermen and their willingness to participate in the implementation of concessions as part of the management of fisheries The fourth tipping point is that CONAPESCA gives the fishing concessions to local economic unities 3 2 nd Tipping Point 3 3 rd Tipping Point 3.5 2 Average Score 2.87 Metrics Measurable outcomes 1 = The program lacks clear metrics or are difficult to measure; 4 = The program has established clear, measureable metrics Planning meetings with authorities, NGOs and fishermen about the concession of resources as part of the management of fisheries. The changes in numbers of regulated economic unities Number of concession requests Number of fishermen trained to assess and monitor fishing resources 3.5 Average Score 3.5 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines 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 3.5 3.15 Revenues 2.8 Income Substitution Technical Technology 3.5 3.27 Capacity / Organizational Ability 2.83 Other Partners 3.5 Cultural / Political Community Leadership 3.0 3.33 Political Environment 3.5 Cultural Norms 3.0 Feasibility Score 3.25 Impact Impact and Metrics Conservation Impact 3 3.20 Tipping Points 2.87 Metrics 3.5 Impact Score 3.20 Barrier Removal Assessment and Viability Overview (BRAVO) Composite Score Enter average scores in the right hand column. Then take the feasibility score and enter it into Miradi and the Impact score and enter it into Miradi. Where either score is below X for either feasibly or impact, consider the strategy to be inappropriate and assess the need to conduct a second BRAVO that reviews a different strategy.

12. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 12 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Risk Factors Risk FactorsConsequenceMitigation Strategies CONAPESCA does not complete the design and implementation process of fishing concessions as part of the management of fisheries The concessions are not interesting enough for fishermen, who opt to continue with illegal fishing practices. Fishermen are in no condition to apply for and manage a fishing concession (they do not have the management, organizational and technical skills). Economic unities will not have the necessary incentive to develop good fishing practices. Some of the applications will not be approved and illegal practices will be performed by the rejected. Could generate social conflict among fishermen. Support the fishing permit processes for potential fishing resources and of interest to economic unities. Fishing advisors and PNBL invest extra effort so groups can reach the conditions to apply. List any risk factors, consequences and mitigation strategies that may need to be adopted.

13. Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 13 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Authors and approvals List BRAVO authors and their affiliation Perla Lozano AnguloPride Campaign Manager PNBL Everardo Mariano M.Director of Bahia Loreto National Park Oswaldo Contreras.Pride Campaign Coordinator