A tool for assessing the feasibility and impact potential of Rare project plans BRAVO: Barrier Removal Assessment and Viability Overview Econoics Technical Cultural/PoliticalImpact & Metrics Assessment of costs, funding/revenue sources and potential income substitution factors related to the specific Barrier Removal Solution Assessment of technology availability, training required, and the effectiveness of organizational partners involved with the Barrier Removal Solution Assessment of Barrier Removal Solution drivers and barriers that arise from cultural norms and political landscape Assessment of the overall impact of the Barrier Removal Solution and the viability of current metrics to measure that impact Law enforcement inspection on restaurant Running wildlife business Hunchun Siberia Tiger protection Pride Campaign, China

BRAVO: Executive Summary What: In order to estimate the poaching threat to Siberia tiger, Hunchun Reserve will cooperate with Hunchun Forestry police station, Industrial and commercial bureau, Forestry bureau to carry out regular enforcement inspection on restaurant running wildlife business. In order to break the sales channel and stop poaching. Who: Implementation agency include: Hunchun National Nature Reserve,Hunchun Forestry police station, Hunchun Industrial and commercial bureau. When: Law enforcement inspection on restaurant running wildlife business will start at Dec2009, and it will be formed as regular activities. How: Hunchun Reserve will cooperate with Hunchun Forestry police station, Industrial and commercial bureau begin regular check between Dec2009-Feb2010 (1-2times per month), restaurant who run the wildlife business will be punished. The check will be carried out each winter and will extend the checking time. BRAVO Scores Feasibility Score: 4 Impact Score: 3.8

Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 3 Criteria ExplanationScore Costs Preliminary projected costs 1.Regular checking fund: 9000CNY(barrier removal fund),Including 6000CNY transportation and 3000 CNY food. 2. Investigation reward: 20000CNY 3. Budget detail see Excel - Total budget :4100$(Barrier removal fund) 4 Predictability of cost burden 1 = Costs are ambiguous and unpredictable; 4 = Costs are predictable and manageable The budget is according to Hunchun and WCS working experience, cost has clear time planning. Part of the expense will be clear when the activities carried out. 4 Average Score 4 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Economics (1 of 2)

Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 4 CriteriaExplanation Score Revenues Description of revenue streams Fundraising total: $ 4100 Sources: Barrier removal fund Earned income total: $ 4100 Sources: WCS (Give $ figures in US dollars). The capital and recurrent costs listed in the previous slide may be sourced from grants or loans or perhaps from earned income (i.e. the sale of stoves). List existing and potential sources of funding including amount and source. 4 Percentage of total cost available 1: 0 – 25% 2: 25 – 50% 3: 50 – 75% 4: 75 – 100% Make sure WCS will contribute 4100$, take part in 100% 4 Likelihood of fundraising success 1 = Very low likelihood of raising the necessary funds; 4 = Likelihood of raising necessary funds almost a certainty We already get fund from WCS 4 Fundraising timing We can use the fund right now 4 Funding Alignment 1 = Funding timeline is not aligned with project timeline; 4 = Funding timeline is well-aligned with project timeline (Use 1-4 scale) If unknown, write unknown. WCS’s support make sure the activities can be carried out on time 4 Sustainable Funding 1 = Unsustainable funding source; 4 = Very sustainable funding source WCS set up an office in Hunchun, and establish good relationship with Hunchun Reserve, the regular checking and fund support will be continued after Rare’s project. 4 Profit/(Loss) Difference between Revenues and Costs What is your Total Revenue minus Total Costs? Describe how you will handle the difference: We don’t have the problem of Difference between Revenues and Costs Average Score 4 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Economics (2 of 2)

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 The staff of Hunchun Reserve,Forestry police station, Industrial and commercial bureau are familiar with the knowledge on Law enforcement inspection on restaurant Running wildlife business, they are quite qualified for the work 4 Technology assistance 1 = Technology assistance is required, yet not available; 4 = Technology assistance is significant and available Law enforcement inspection on restaurant Running wildlife business don’t need technology assistance 4 Appropriate for circumstances 1 = Available technology is not appropriate for circumstances; 4 = Acquirable technology is suited for circumstances The staffs are appropriate for circumstances 4 Average Score 4 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Technical (1 of 2)

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 Director of Forestry police station willing to give support, Hunchun Reserve and Industrial and commercial bureau already carried out enforcement inspection together. 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 Forestry police station, Industrial and commercial bureau has experience on Law enforcement inspection on restaurant Running wildlife business, if we enhance cooperation and regulation, will stop the business 4 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 project didn’t involve in BR partner budget planning. 4 Average Score 4 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 Director of Hunchun Forestry bureau willing to support the project, they will assistance on investigating restaurant owners. 4 Average Score 4 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Technical (2 of 2)

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 (Use 1-4 scale) In the narrative list any critical groups or individuals who might be brought to bear to facilitate the adoption of the barrier Removal strategy. (These will likely have been identified during the Pride Planning Process) The list can be refined in the quantitative survey that follows the BRAVO. If unknown, write unknown. Community leaders are not involved in the Law enforcement inspection on restaurant Running wildlife business. From the house visiting we learned that the villagers are quit support on carry out regular Law enforcement inspection on restaurant Running wildlife business to break the sales channel. Leadership willingness to endorse 1 = Unwilling to get on board with project; 4 = Firm commitment from leadership to help drive change efforts (Use 1-4 scale) Where such leaders exist, what evidence (if any) currently exists to show that they may be willing to endorse BR adoption? If reticence is known to exist, why is this? If unknown, write unknown. Average Score BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Cultural/Political (1 of 2)

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 Legislative and legal framework will aid our project, 2007, Jilin Province carried out “wildlife result in personal and property damage compensation methods “, enhance the illegal poaching and trapping. 2008, Hunchun city been awarded as “Hometown of Siberia Tiger”, the government pay more and more attention on Siberia Tiger protection. 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 The project don’t need to push legislative change 4 Average Score 4 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 Campaign manager evaluated the political and cultural norms through qualitative research, the project proposal concern about the local communities value and will improve the occasion. Wildlife and communities will live in a harmonious society. 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 We don’t have to address normative obstacles 4 Average Score 4 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Cultural/Political (2 of 2)

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 According to Poaching factor chain, people’s willing to eat wildlife leads to the market, and the restaurant provide the merchandising location. Thus, if we carry out regular Law enforcement inspection on restaurant Running wildlife business, it will break the sales channel and crack down poaching, which will protect Siberia Tiger and its food. 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 In the long-term, if we stop restaurant Running wildlife business, it will crack down poaching and provide Siberia Tiger a pleasant ecological environment. 4 Average Score 4 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Impact and Metrics (1 of 2)

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 st tipping point is sign MOU among Rare, WCS and Hunchun National Nature Reserve, Measure metrics: MOU signed. 2 nd tipping point is Hunchun National Nature Reserve, Forestry police station, Industrial and commercial bureau carry out Law enforcement inspection on restaurant Running wildlife business together. Measure metrics: Checking times on Law enforcement inspection, and inspection results. 3 rd tipping point is there’s no restaurant running wildlife business in the campaign site. Measure metrics: There’s no restaurant running wildlife business in the campaign site. 4 2 nd Tipping Point 3 3 rd Tipping Point 3 Average Score 3.3 Metrics Measurable outcomes 1 = The program lacks clear metrics or are difficult to measure; 4 = The program has established clear, measureable metrics (Use 1-4 scale) In the narrative describe how the Conservation Result will be measured, who will measure it, when it will be measured and any pre-requisites that will be required. Be specific. If unknown, write unknown. The program has established clear measurable metrics, the measurable metric is there’s no restaurant running wildlife business in the campaign site, we need to combine regular law enforcement inspection and secret inspection together. It will provide sustainable protection to Siberia Tiger. 4 Average Score 4 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Impact and Metrics (2 of 2)

Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 11 CategorySubcategoryScore Average Category Score Feasibility Economics Costs 4 4 Revenues 4 Income Substitution 4 Technical Technology 4 4 Capacity / Organizational Ability 4 Other Partners 4 Cultural / Political Community Leadership 4 4 Political Environment 4 Cultural Norms 4 Feasibility Score 4 Impact Impact and Metrics Conservation Impact Tipping Points 3.3 Metrics 4 Impact Score 3.8 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.

Confidential Copyright © 2008 Monitor Company Group, L.P. — Confidential — XXXCAS-COD-Prez-Date-CTL 12 BRAVO Drafting Guidelines Risk Factors Risk FactorsConsequenceMitigation Strategies Market demand leads to restaurant running wildlife business out of control. Hard to reduce threat on poaching Carry out regular law enforcement inspection Enhance punishment on restaurant running wildlife business List any risk factors, consequences and mitigation strategies that may need to be adopted.

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 Jianmin LangHunchun National Natural Reserve Education center, Director/ Campaign Manager Haitang LiangWCS Administrative Director 吉林珲春东北虎 国家级保护区