I. Progress report (July 16, 2013):
Activities undertaken:
1.Launching capacity building through meetings, training and conducting resources inventory using focus group by local fishers and youth group
2. Launching dissemination of project results through traditional and public events
3. Launching participatory evaluation to analyze and sensitize the resource

Results of activities:
1. Compilation of history and background of local fishery practice , ecosystem status and fish species ,both remaining and extinct , and types of habitat
2. Community members including youth group (150 members) in community showing interest in the project and being able to draw pictures of extinct species
3. Core leaders of the project, local leaders, youth groups and monks (60 in number) participating in analysis of the compiled data & information and initiating conservation zone and community regulations to cope with fishery

Project Visibility and Communication by other organizations/individuals:
None during the period.

Experience ,lessons learnt, problems and issues:
Problems & issues:
The project referred to a high water level in the would-be conservation zone as a factor to slightly delay planned activities
Approaches for solutions:
Project committee agreed to an option ,in case the situation became worst, where 3 other locations connected to the Mekong would be selected as the conservation zones, instead.

Experiences:
The project had provided a great opportunity for communities to collectively learn and work as a team. Knowledge on local fishery had been increased. Youth groups, especially, seemed to be very proud about the result of their participation i.e. to change conservation-livelihood mentality of some community members. In addition, local government agencies had participated by giving advices making the implementation more holistic. In conclusion, the project had made communities more concern about their homeland.
Project expense:
The project reported the expense of THB: 296,404 out of the first disbursement of THB:306,899.13.

II. Monitoring Visit (October 29, 2013):
Findings & observation:
The interaction focusing on progress of activities and some evinced results happened in a dinner meeting where about 10 project leaders and 20 project youth group members shared undertaken activities and some evinced results. Major activities that had been shared were capacity-building of project leaders and youth group which resulted in initiating community network of CBOs? along Mekong River, demarcation of fish-conservation zones through a participatory process,and ,notably, a compiled resources inventories about local livelihood & fishery and biological diversity in project location.

To witness fish conservation zones, the visiting team were led into an area of several connected wetlands that were an ecological portion of the Mekong River. During a year and depending on a season, the water from these wetlands circulated back and forth with the river,and the fishes migrated between these two types of habitats. One swamp of about 150 ha ,called ?Nong Fai Yai? was a targeted location for fish conservation, i.e. about 8-ha area in the swamp was demarcated as a no-fishing zone under sectorial participation.

In expanding conservation zone to cover wider area, the project had cooperated with another project of the same grant cycle - THA-SGP-OP5-Y2-STAR-BD-12-02/ Developing CBO Network for Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in 7 Provinces in Mekong Basin ? to initiate 4 other swamps with similar condition and criteria to be fish conservation zones in Tambol Hor Kham and Khaisri. Three of these would be in the wetland area, while one in the Mekong River itself, at its deepest spot, locally called ?the navel of Mekong River, in front of Wat (temple) Arhong, which was quite famous for its scenery and religious practice. In the initiate, all responsible local authorities had agreed on the locations and sizes of the zones. The remaining job of the project was said to be the process of public hearing, where other communities in the vicinities of the two Tambols would be included in the process.

The project appeared to progress satisfactorily. So far, technical and institutional capacity and enthusiasm of project members and youth group were fairly notable.

III. Completion report (August 18, 2014):
Date of Participatory Evaluation(June 30 2014 ):

Number of Beneficiaries/ Participating personnel:
Women: 30
Men: 80
Children: 30

Number of persons trained/ attending seminars, joining study tours:
Women: 25
Men: 40
Children: 30

Expense:
Amount received from SGP (2 disbursements): THB: 557,466.58
Total amount spent out of SGP budget: THB: 615,000
Balance: THB: (- 57,533.42)
Amount authorized for the final payment: US$: 2,003.26
Amount Received from others: THB: 0 (in cash)
THB: 1,144,000 (in kind)

Activities undertaken:
1.Launching capacity building
2. Launching demonstration of conservation activities through community regulations and demarcating conservation zone
3. Launching dissemination of project results
4. Launching participatory evaluation

Results and indicators:
1. Compiled knowledge on relation between community livelihood and ecological function from the past to present
2. Proclaimed community regulations on fishing resulting in evinced public observation with additional community activities resulting in more harmony
3. Four established no fishing zones with total area about 20 ha as fish habitat for 11 threatened fish species.
4. Continued campaign on rehabilitation and conservation of fish species and their habitats

Project Communication:
The project did not mention any.

Problems and Issues:
The project did not specify anything in particular, except relating in experiences and lessons learnt.

Experience , Lessons Learnt :
Experiences and lessons learnt was reflected in community reactions and recommendation to current change of Mekong River as follows:

1. Community leaders permitted construction contractors to excavate sand in the river to be used in big construction projects. The money gained from the permission were used in renovation/maintenance of religious building and community infrastructure development. Several fishers were worried that unusual noise of sand excavating equipment would have adversely effects on fish livelihoods, thus biodiversity.
2. Fluctuation of water in Mekong River as a result of damming several tributaries, including big ones in Mekong itself would affect fish regeneration thus biodiversity.
3. Several fish species disappeared without any clear causes. Fishers in two areas, however, managed to establish fishing regulations prohibiting fishing once the water color became red, i.e. during September-October-egg laying season. Another established regulation concerned fishing time arrangement. Daily during 06.00 ? 18.00, fishing queuing was practiced. In addition, fishing zone between the two communities on both sides of the river was clearly demarcated.
4. Targeted fishers would like to recommend that concerned government agencies see the necessity for setting up a fund to purchase missing fishing equipment for communities. Besides, the agencies should disclose to communities relevant data & information.

Plans and Activities for Sustainability:

The project planned to sustain the project to continuous campaigns on conservation of fish species and their habitats in project location and surrounding area.