UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
UNDP/GEF – Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project (CIWP)
Mission Report to UNDP and National Project Director 16 February – 1 March 2007
Wim Giesen, Wetland Biodiversity Expert (WBE) [email protected] or [email protected]
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This mission report is on the first mission of the WBE on the CIWP, which was from 16th February to 1st March 2007. Focus was on developing a strong CIWP team of national and international consultants and DOE staff, familiarisation with the project, and field visits to the two pilot sites: Lake Parishan in Fars province, and Lake Uromiyeh (and its satellite wetlands) in West and East Azerbaijan provinces. A preliminary assessment was made of availability of wetland biodiversity baseline information, provincial DOE monitoring programmes and DOE capacity to carry out baseline studies and monitoring. A highly successful 2-day management planning workshop was held on in Shiraz (capital of Fars province), on management of Lake Parishan. The management planning workshop for Lake Uromiyeh had to be postponed due to lack of preparation, and instead, bilateral discussions were held with DOE and stakeholder agencies in West and East Azerbaijan.
Highlights: Successful field visits to Lake Parishan (plus Lake Arjan) and Lake Uromiyeh (plus satellite wetlands). High level of initiative and degree of ownership by DOE Fars Province shown in all aspects of the project. A highly successful management planning workshop for Lake Parishan that was well attended, and very well organised by DOE Fars Province. This lead to cementing of relationships, especially between national consultants, DOE and local experts. It also confirmed that DOE Fars is well positioned and capable of taking the management planning process further on its own, without requiring significant support from CIWP. Significant support by DOE Tehran on matters discussed re wetland biodiversity (with biodiversity focal point and Director of College of Environment). Formation of an excellent team of national and international consultants and DOE staff for the CIWP, all with an excellent rapport.
Lowlights: Cancellation of the Lake Uromiyeh management planning workshop due to lack of preparation by DOE Uromiyeh, and apparent lack of ownership of the project. Lack of NPM and resignation of Deputy NPM during the mission.
DRAFT-1 3rd March 2007
1 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
1. SCHEDULE
Date (2007) Location Activity Fri 16 Feb Travel 12:30 Travel home to Amsterdam Schiphol Airport (car, train) 18:15 Flight Amsterdam – Tehran (KLM) Sat 17 Feb. Tehran 0210 Arrive Tehran, stay Taj Mahal Hotel 1000 Working in PCO with project team 1100 Meeting with PD, Dr Najafi, UNDP staff 1500 Interview candidate national consultants 1900 Hotel Sun 18 Feb Shiraz & 05:00 Leave for Tehran airport Kazeroun 06:30 Flight to Shiraz 08:30 Arrive at DOE office n Shiraz, meet with Deputy head Mr. Zohrabi and biodiversity-related staff 12:30 Lunch at Fars International Hotel, meeting with Water Authority (Ahmad Reza Issaee) and Department of Fisheries (Majid Moshtagian) 15:00 By vehicle through Arjan & Parishan NP; visit Lake Arjan 18:00 Arrive at DOE Lake Parishan Environmental Station; meeting with Islamic Council members and members of local environmental NGOs 20:30 Leave for Kazeroun, check into hotel, dinner with Mr. Abasi (DOE Kazeroun) Mon 19 Feb Kazeroun & 09:00 Reconnaissance visit to Lake Parishan, together with Lake Parishan DOE staff (Mr. Amini) and local NGO members. 13:00 Tour around Lake Parishan in DOE vehicle, together with DOE staff (Mr Amini); interview fishermen. 18:00 Arrive back in Kazeroun Tue 20 Feb Kazeroun, Lake 09:00 Visit Kazeroun bazaar to see local handicrafts from Parishan around Lake Parishan. & Shiraz 10:30 Quick tour around Lake Parishan, together with national counterpart consultant, Lisa Pourlak 12:00 Discussion with DOE staff at the Environmental Station about awareness programmes and an environmental centre. Lunch at Kazeroun. 15:00 Leave for Shiraz, stop at Shapur archaeological site 25 km from Kazeroun. Arrive at Fars International Hotel in Shiraz at 18:45. 19:30 Team meeting, followed by dinner. Work on finalising presentation for workshop. Wed 21 Feb Shiraz 08:30 Workshop on Lake Parishan MP 18:00 Closing of day one of workshop 20:00 Meeting and team dinner Thu 22 Feb Shiraz 09:00 Workshop on Lake Parishan MP, day two 17:00 Closure of day two of workshop, followed by photo sessions 20:00 Team meeting, followed by dinner Fri 23 Feb Shiraz-Tehran 08:00 Reading of project reports 11:00 Leave for airport 12:40 Flight to Tehran 15:30 Arrive at Taj Mahal Hotel 17:30 Team meeting; read reports in evening
2 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Sat 24 Feb Tehran- 05:00 Leave for airport Uromiyeh 06:30 Flight to Uromiyeh, 08:15 Arrive in Uromiyeh, meet Ali Reza and Mr. Henareh (site coordinator), check in at Morvarid Inn Hotel 09:15 Leave for the field. Visit lake Uromiyeh and four satellite wetlands: Shur Gol, Yadegalu, Solduz and Doregh Sangi. 17:00 Arrive back at Hotel, work on draft report and notes Sun 25 Feb Uromiyeh- 08:45 Other team members arrive at Moravid Inn, Uromiyeh Tabriz 10:00 Leave for DOE office; meeting with Deputy head DOE, Natural Environment, Mr Ranaghad. 11:00 Meeting with Mr. Salmanzadeh (wildlife & fisheries expert DOE) and Mr. Said Shahan (entomologist/plant protection specialist DOE), together with Lisa Pourlak. 13:30 Meeting with Dr Naser Agh, director of the Artemia and Aquatic Animals research institute in Uromiyeh. 15:00 Lunch + meeting with two NGO staff: Ms Mastafapourshad of the Women’s Society Against Environmental Pollution and Mr. Ashor. 16:00 Discuss & draft TOR with Lisa Pourlak. 17:30 Leave for Tabriz by car. 20:30 Arrive at Gostaresh International Hotel. 21:30 Dinner Mon 26 Feb Tabriz 08:15 Leave for DOE office. Meeting with Dr Hossein, head of DOE East Azerbaijan. 10:00 Meeting with DOE biodiversity specialist and head of the wildlife unit, Mr. Reza Massoud, together with Lisa Pourlak. 11:30 Plenary meeting with all team members and their DOE counterparts, to present findings of each group. 13:00 Lunch. 14:30 Field visit to Gori Gol Ramsar Site and non-hunting area, together with CIWP team and DOE counterparts, including the head of the DOE. 17:30 Return to Tabriz, Gostaresh International Hotel, work on action points for 2007-2008 work plan. 19:00 Team meeting on prioritisation of action points. 21:30 Leave for team dinner. Tue 27 Feb Tabriz-Tehran 06:45 Check out, leave for airport 07:55 Flight to Tehran, arrive 09:45. 11:15 Arrive at Azadi Grand Hotel, work on reports, work plan and ToR. 15:00 Meeting with Lisa Pourlak re TOR and work plan 17:30 Drafting of mission report 20:00 Team dinner at Taj Mahal restaurant Wed 28 Feb Tehran 08:00 Leave for DOE office, via Taj Mahal Hotel 09:30 Meeting with focal point for biodiversity at DOE, Ms Ashrafizadeh, and colleagues Mr. Harghgoo and Mr. Husseini. 11:00 Meeting with Dr. A.M. Fazal, head of the College for Environmental Training, and his colleagues Dr. Javaheri (DG and head of the IT/GIS Division) and Dr. Yousefi (DG and head of Training and Public Participation. 13:30 Return to Taj Mahal Hotel, work on mission report and annexes. Thu 1 Mar Travel 04:00 Leave for airport; fly Tehran – Amsterdam - on KLM 10:30 Arrive in Amsterdam, take train, car. 13:30 Arrive Home
3 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
2. INTRODUCTION
This was the first mission on the CIWP undertaken by the international Wetland Biodiversity Expert (WBE), together with the national WBE, Senior International Project Advisor (SIPA), Local Communities and Socio-economics Specialists (LCSE; national and int’l) and Protected Area Management & Institutional Specialists (PAMI; national and int’l).
This mission aimed at introducing the new national and international team members to the project and each other, establishing work plans for national consultants for year-1, and holding management planning workshops at Lake Parishan (LP) and Lake Uromiyeh (LU). At the same time, assessments were to be made of baseline data on wetland biodiversity, and priorities for monitoring.
The mission involved visits to the three provinces: Fars (capital = Shiraz), West Azerbaijan (Uromiyeh) and East Azerbaijan (Tabriz), and field visits to Lake Parishan, Lake Uromiyeh, some of the most important satellite wetlands of LU (Shur Gol, Yadegalu, Soluduz and Dorgeh Sangi) and the Gori Gol wetland near Tabriz. Intensive meetings were held with DOE biodiversity staff in Tehran, Shiraz, Uromiyeh and Tabriz, and with staff of key stakeholder agencies (Artemia & Aquatic Animal Research Centre, Uromiyeh; Department of Fisheries, Shiraz; Water Authority, Shiraz; environmental NGOs, Uromiyeh & Fars).
The mission largely proceeded according to plan, except that the management planning workshop in Uromiyeh had to be postponed, as there were delays in preparations. Instead, the focus in East and West Azerbaijan was on discussions with DOE and stakeholders, and a first CIWP MP workshop for LU is now planned for June 2007.
NPM and UNDP are thanked for efficiently arranging all logistics including visa invitation, pick- up from Tehran airport, accommodation and all meetings. Dr Delavar Najafi (NPD), Mr Ali Aghili (Deputy NPM), Saber Masoomi (Technical Assistant), Sara Koochaki (Project Office Assistant) and all the project team are warmly thanked for their hospitality and strong and efficient support.
3. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THIS MISSION
The objectives of this mission were as follows: 1. Familiarisation project documents, project objectives and project approach. 2. Meet project staff, national consultants and key representatives from DOE and other agencies and facilitate a constructive teamwork approach, bringing to the project your experiences and lessons learned from other projects. 3. Work throughout the mission with “paired” national consultant (and relevant project staff), in order to build his/her capacity to undertake the necessary work, and to develop a detailed work plan for the next 12 months. 4. Interview staff of relevant national and provincial agencies in order to (set a process to) gather baseline information and understand the project context. 5. Review and develop detailed plans for gathering existing baseline information and identify priorities for collecting new baseline data. 6. Determine priorities for actions and approaches that will enhance the management of Iran’s wetland protected areas, for inclusion in the project work plan, and particularly the demonstration site management plans. 7. Determine monitoring needs and (collectively) facilitate preparation of a prioritised monitoring action plan for each demonstration site. 8. Contribute to the management planning workshops by facilitating group sessions and contributing case studies, as per the workshop programme.
4 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
9. Visit the project demonstration sites with local experts to understand the project context and identify issues to be addressed. 10. Mission report for UNDP and NPD according to the standard format (provided by SIPA), by 15 March 2007; this is to include, as annexes, the following outputs: a. 12 month work plan for the “paired” national consultant b. Short preliminary report on baseline information and gaps c. Prioritised Monitoring Action Plan
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The following section summarises the achievements against each TOR objective.
TOR 1. Familiarisation project documents, project objectives and project approach. Project documents were received from SIPA and/or downloaded from the project internet site, and read either before the mission or while travelling to Tehran. Briefings by SIPA and subsequent discussion assisted the understanding of the project objectives and approach.
TOR 2. Meet project staff, national consultants and key representatives from DOE and other agencies and facilitate a constructive teamwork approach, bringing to the project your experiences and lessons learned from other projects. The WBE met with and interacted closely with all project staff and national consultants, and met with/held discussions with key representatives from DOE and other agencies. International and national team members have had lengthy discussions, and have formed a close team during this two week input. Lengthy discussions were held with DOE biodiversity related staff from Fars, East Azerbaijan and West Azerbaijan provinces, and with the DOE CIWP focal point for biodiversity. Discussions were also held with staff of key stakeholder agencies, such as the Artemia and Aquatic Animal Research Centre (Uromiyeh), Department of Fisheries (Shiraz), Fars Water Authority (Shiraz) and environmental NGOs (Fars and West Azerbaijan). Experience from other areas was shared during these many discussions, and illustrated with the case study presentation on Lake Tonle Sap, Cambodia, at the Lake Parishan Management Planning workshop in Shiraz (Annex 5).
TOR 3. Work throughout the mission with “paired” national consultant (and relevant project staff), in order to build his/her capacity to undertake the necessary work, and to develop a detailed work plan for the next 12 months. The WBE worked closely with the National WBE during the 2-week mission, and jointly formulated her work plan over the course of the assignment. The TOR and work plan for the NWBE is attached in Annex 1.
TOR 4. Interview staff of relevant national and provincial agencies in order to (set a process to) gather baseline information and understand the project context. Meetings were held with DOE biodiversity staff in Tehran, Shiraz, Uromiyeh and Tabriz, and with staff of key stakeholder agencies (Artemia & Aquatic Animal Research Centre, Uromiyeh; Department of Fisheries, Shiraz; Water Authority, Shiraz; environmental NGOs, Uromiyeh & Fars). At the DOE offices, the focus of the discussions were on: i) DOE institutional arrangements and capacity for wetland biodiversity assessment and management; ii) existing wetland biodiversity data gathering and monitoring programmes; iii) data and information management and storage; and iv) wetland biodiversity reporting arrangements and procedures. A list of persons met – and their contact details – is attached in Annex 4.
TOR 5. Review and develop detailed plans for gathering existing baseline information and identify priorities for collecting new baseline data. An assessment of existing baseline data and an identification of existing gaps is provided in Annex 2 - Short preliminary report on baseline information and gaps. Detailed plans cannot
5 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
be provided at this stage as during the coming three months DOE and the national WBE will focus on expanding the baseline as much as possible based on existing secondary data. What is presented in annex 2 is a preliminary assessment of what is known (and where the obvious gaps are) at this point in time.
TOR 6. Priorities for actions and approaches that will enhance the management of Iran’s wetland protected areas, for inclusion in the project work plan, and particularly the demonstration site management plans. Annex 7 – “Priorities for actions and approaches at the two pilot sites” incorporates ideas and suggestions that emerged from discussions with DOE staff and other major stakeholders at the pilot sites. These have not been prioritised, as this should occur at the next MP workshop where DOE and other stakeholders may or may not agree to possible inclusion.
TOR 7. Determine monitoring needs and (collectively) facilitate preparation of a prioritised monitoring action plan for each demonstration site. A draft Prioritised Monitoring Action Plan for Wetland Biodiversity is attached in Annex 3. It should be noted that this cannot be finalised until full baseline data is available, as at present it remains uncertain as to which priority (indicator, rare, endangered, protected and/or endemic) species occur at the pilot sites.
TOR 8. Contribute to the management planning workshops by facilitating group sessions and contributing case studies, as per the workshop programme. Served as facilitator in the breakout sessions on environmental values, and goal and conservation objectives on day-1, and threats on day-2. Presented a case study on Lake Tonle Sap, Cambodia, on day-2 (Annex 5).
TOR 9. Visit the project demonstration sites with local experts to understand the project context and identify issues to be addressed. Lake Parishan was visited with DOE, project staff and CIWP team members on 19 and 20 February 2007, Lake Uromiyeh and its satellite wetlands were visited on 24 February and Gori Gol wetland near Tabriz was visited on 26 February. A brief report was produced on observations at Lake Parishan (Annex 6), as this wetland is not yet described in baseline reports or management plan.
TOR 10. Mission report for UNDP and NPD according to the standard format (provided by SIPA), by 15 March 2007; this is to include, as annexes, the following outputs: a) 12 month work plan for the “paired” national consultant; b) Short preliminary report on baseline information and gaps; and c) Prioritised Monitoring Action Plan. This is covered by the present report.
5. RECOMMENDATIONS
Identify modules for the training workshop on the monitoring cycle as soon as possible, and persons who are able to provide these in June 2007. Regular meetings between wetland biodiversity focal point at DOE and the national consultant Wetland Biodiversity, to discuss progress and possible issues. Organigrammes of CIWP and counterparts in DOE, along with contact details, to assist communication. In addition to the project website, which is accessible to all, CIWP should consider establishing a site on an FTP server (accessible only to those with a password) for the exchange of large documents. Establishing linkages, where possible, between managers and experts in DOE, main stakeholders at the pilot sites, and experts in home countries of the international consultants.
6 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
6. ACTION POINTS
ACTION POINTS By By A When Who 1 Complete and submit mission report 8 Mar Wim Giesen 2 Identify links with CIWP in Netherlands, including possible Mid- Wim Giesen cooperating agencies (studies, surveys) April Provide feedback on draft ‘priorities for monitoring’ section 8 Mar Lisa Pourlak & int’l team members 3 Finalise draft mission report 10 Mar Wim Giesen 4 Translate curriculum of wetland training planned at College of 8 Mar Lisa Pourlak Environment (CoE) and circulate to team members 5 Draft 1-page concept on wetland biodiversity & monitoring cycle 8 Mar Wim Giesen 6 Submit monitoring training concept to NPD with request to 15 Mar Mike Moser submit this to CoE with request for cooperation 7 Approval of monitoring workshop 31 Mar NPD 8 Sending of invitations for monitoring workshop 30 April CoE 9 Contact Luis Costa re input to monitoring workshop 15 Mar Mike Moser 10 Draft potential study outlines (1 paragraph each) for study of fish 15 Mar Wim Giesen and fisheries in Lake Parishan, and send to Dr Esmaili; would form part of Student Challenge Fund applications 11 Submit 1st Quarter 2007 invoice 31 Mar Wim Giesen
List of Annexes
1. 12 month work plan & ToR for the “paired” national consultant 2. Short preliminary report on baseline information and gaps 3. Draft Prioritised Monitoring Action Plan 4. Persons met & contact details 5. Case study on Tonle Sap, Cambodia 6. Observations at Lake Parishan 7. Priorities for actions and approaches at the two pilot sites
7 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Annex 1. 12 month work plan & ToR for the “paired” national consultant
8 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project TOR for National Consultant Wetland Biodiversity Lisa POURLAK
National consultants have been recruited to provide technical support to the UNDP-GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project (CIWP), mirroring and working together with the international core consultants who have already been recruited. They are to directly report to the CIWP National Project Manager (NPM).
The National Wetland Biodiversity Expert (NWBE) will be responsible for coordinating CIWP wetland biodiversity activities, together with the core International Wetland Biodiversity Expert (WBE). The NWBE will work closely with the other National Consultant team members, who as a team are coordinated by the Integrated Wetland Management Planning Consultant (IWMPC). The NWBE will also closely cooperate and coordinate with Department of Environment (DOE) staff appointed as CIWP focal point for Wetland Biodiversity. DOE are directly responsible for managing wetland biodiversity in wetland Protected Areas, collecting baseline information and monitoring wetland biodiversity.
The framework Terms of Reference for this position are as follows:
Participate in the first visit of the international consultant team in February 2007, partake in the discussions, field visits to Fars, West and East Azerbaijan provinces, and partake in the Lake Parishan management planning workshop Support the international consultant on wetland biodiversity during his visits, and maintain contact between visits Help to embed the project activities within DOE through the appointed focal points at national and provincial level Support the collection and collation of baseline information (national and demonstration sites) Participate in and support workshops Liaise with relevant stakeholders Contribute to training / capacity building (particularly of the DOE) Provide quarterly reports to the Project Central Office Prepare reports as requested by the NPM, IWMPC and WBE. Undertaking other tasks as requested by the NPM, IWMPC and WBE.
Specific tasks (work plan) for February 2007 – March 2008 are as follows:
1. Full team field visits & management planning workshop LP
Familiarise with project documents, project objectives and project approach. Participate in the first visit of the international consultant team in February 2007, partake in the discussions, field visits to Fars, West and East Azerbaijan provinces. Together with the international WBE, interview staff of relevant national and provincial agencies in order to (set a process to) gather baseline information and understand the project context. Actively participate in the Lake Parishan management planning workshop. Total input = 14 days
2. Baseline Studies for Lake Parishan Existing baseline information will be collected, summarised and prepared into report format by provincial DOE staff, advised by the national consultants. The specific tasks for this NWB consultant will be: Assist with the design of the format and content list of the baseline report with DOE and other consultants (2 days)
9 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Participate in meetings in Shiraz every 6 weeks from April – September 2007 with DOE and other national consultants to review progress and provide advice (provide brief progress report to NPM after each mission) (12 days) Provide English versions of the draft biodiversity reports for comment/approval by the international consultant (translation to be organised by NPM) (4 day) Participate in / facilitate a workshop in August 2007 (to be organised by DOE-Fars) to review the draft results and identify and prioritise existing data gaps (6 days) Total input = 24 days
3. Baseline studies for Lake Uromiyeh
Baseline studies for Lake Uromiyeh were undertaken from 1999-2002 (Yekom 2002) and again for several satellite wetlands 2004-2005 (W. Azerbaijan Water Authority & Pandam Consulting, 2005). These will be improved and updated by DOE (WA and EA), as necessary to provide an adequate baseline diagnostic study for this project. The specific task for the NWB consultant will be: Review the Yekom report, Pandam reports and identify existing data gaps (1 day) Meeting with national team members to discuss baseline reports and gaps (1 day) Meetings with DOE East and West Azerbaijan to discuss the data gaps and prepare a plan for collection/collation by DOE of further secondary data/ information (3 days) Participate in / facilitate and write report of a 2 day workshop in April 2007 (to be organised by DOE EA (Tabriz), with support of the other national consultants and DOE (WA and EA) to review the Yekom 2002 report and identify and prioritise gaps (new information or changes to the situation, or improvements needed). Also prepare and agree a contents list and author responsibilities for a new synthesised baseline report (5 days) Participate in meetings in Uromiyeh or Tabriz every 6 weeks from June – September 2007 with DOE and other national consultants to review progress and provide advice (provide brief progress report to NPM after each mission) (12 days) Provide English versions of the draft biodiversity reports for comment/approval by the international wetland biodiversity consultant (translation to be organised by NPM) (4 days) Total input = 26 days
4. Management Planning workshops Lake Parishan, L. Uromiyeh & Shadegan
Assist the planning of, and participate in the management planning workshop originally scheduled for February 2007, but postponed due to delays in preparations. This will now be held in Uromiyeh in June 2007. (4 days) Assist the planning of, participate in, and assist with drafting of reports for the second management planning workshops for Lake Parishan (to be held in Shiraz) and Lake Uromiyeh (to be held in Tabriz) (September/October 2007) (8 days) Assist the planning of, participate in, and assist with the reporting of the first management planning workshops for Shadegan wetland replication site (March 2008) (5 days) Total input: 17 days
5. National vision event
Assist the planning of, participate in, and assist with the reporting of the National Vision workshop event (February 2008) (5 days) Total input: 5 days
10 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
6. Monitoring cycle training workshop
A 2-day training workshop will be held in Tehran at the DOE Training Centre, on the monitoring cycle. This will include aspects such as establishing information needs, baseline data collection, developing and carrying out monitoring programmes, data and information handling and storage (including databases, Medwet), and reporting. This will be for mid-level management staff of DOE in Fars, East Azerbaijan and West Azerbaijan provinces and be given together with the WBE and a database expert. Assist the planning of, provide lectures for, and be responsible for the report of the monitoring cycle training workshop. (June 2008) (8 days) Total input: 8 days
7. Inputs to Quarterly Reports
The consultant is expected to provide input to the CIWP Quarterly Reports at the end of each quarter. (4 days) Total input: 4 days
Grand total of days required from February 2007-March 2008 inclusive = 93 days
The national consultants will be contracted by the project and will report to the National Project Manager and their paired international consultant. The international consultants will provide technical supervision. Payments will be made on a quarterly basis against quarterly reports (end June, end September, end December, end March) showing satisfactory progress.
Contracts will be offered for a maximum number of days over one year, with the possibility of renewal subject to satisfactory performance. Changes to the TOR or schedule will be mutually agreed with the NPM/international consultant. Milestones for the work are shown in the table below.
11 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Lisa POURLAK Work Plan: 2007-08 – MILESTONES 2007 2008
Activity Feb- Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Days Mar 1. Full team field visits & management X 14 planning workshop LP
2. Baseline studies Lake Parishan 24 Hold review meetings in Shiraz X X X X Write/edit sections of biodiversity report X X X X Workshop to review draft report X Finalise report X
3. Baseline Studies Lake Uromiyeh 26 Hold small workshop in Tabriz to X review baseline reports (Yekom, etc…) Hold review meetings X X Write/edit sections of biodiversity report X X X X Finalise report X
4. Management Planning workshops 17 Contribute to LU workshop 1 X Contribute LP workshop 2 X Contribute LU workshop 2 X Contribute to Shadegan workshop X
5. National vision event X 5
6. Monitoring cycle training workshop 8 Organising and holding workshop X
7. Quarterly Reports X X X X 4
Grand total 98
12 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Annex 2. Short preliminary report on baseline information and gaps
Lake Parishan:
Baseline data The MP Arjan and Parishan Protected Area consists of four large volumes (not seen), reportedly with very little information about Lake Parishan. According to DOE staff, national consultants that produced this MP went to the area for 1-2 days and 1-2 times, and most of the data in the MP reports is not new, but 10-20 year-old secondary data that has been reworked. Bird data. The annual mid-winter Waterfowl Census coordinated by Wetlands International has been carried out at LP for more than 10 years. During the last survey (January 2007) they were helped by two Dutch experts. In addition to the AWC, a bird checklist is filled out four times per year, once during each season. DOE have also conducted some bird ringing (no biometrics) in May-June over the past few years of fledglings at Parishan, mainly of Dalmatian pelican, grebe, little egret, common cormorant, slender billed gull and spoonbill. In 2006 only a few were ringed, as the season was unusual (only 20 ringed at LP). In addition to bird data there is data on large mammals at Lake Parishan, as monthly reports on (large) wildlife observations are submitted by DOE Kazeroun to DOE Shiraz. DoE uses several reporting forms for field staff to report on, e.g. one on wildlife observations, and a second on incidents (e.g. poaching). Fish and fisheries are monitored by the Department of Fisheries at LP; each month 1 staff member (BSc Fisheries biology) visits LP to check with fishers which species are caught, numbers/weight, size of each species, trends, and problems. At present DOF have 7 years of 1 day/month data, which shows trends of decline in size of fish and amount (in kg) caught. DOF focus on commercial species, and not on smaller species, including some of the endemics. DOF have introduced four fish species to LP (common carp, grass carp, mirror carp, Gambusia) and little is known about the effects on the indigenous species. There is no information about reptiles (including turtles), amphibians, molluscs, crustaceans, aquatic insects and plants, other than very general observations recorded in the Ramsar fact sheets. A staff gauge has been placed by the Fars Water Authority at the landing site of the DOE Environmental Station at LP. Reportedly, FWA have 10 years of daily depth records. Water quality is not measured in any detail, other than basic cations and anions (including N and P). It is not known if lake sediments have been analysed.
Institutional capacity Out of a total of 110 staff at DOE headquarters in Shiraz, 13 persons are responsible for biodiversity and biology. There is no wetland unit and there are no specific wetland experts at DOE, but three staff members work in wetland areas. Staff biodiversity expertise is limited. There is a qualified ornithologist, one has some botanical expertise, one can identify small mammals and most can identify large mammals. There is no expertise in fish, reptiles or amphibians. When surveying areas, a DoE team is formed as required. If certain specialists are required that are not at DOE, standard practice is to recruit consultants (private or from a local university). One ranger based at LP has been trained in identification of amphibians, but has never used this skill.
13 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Gaps Establish a baseline on the occurrence of pesticides. The easiest way to establish a reliable baseline on pesticides is assessing their presence in lake sediments, as their detection in waters depends very much on timing, and concentrations in sediments can be much higher and easier to detect. As molluscs are scarce in sediments of LP, there is little bioturbation (movement of sediment by organisms). Baseline surveys of small mammals, reptiles (including at least 2 species of turtle), amphibians, molluscs, crustaceans and plants (including macroscopic algae) at LP. This should include an assessment of populations, status (Iran & global) and conservation requirements. Surveyors should also train (on-the-job) local DOE staff in carrying out these assessments so that they can perform future monitoring. An assessment of fish populations to determine the population of introduced species and their effects on the environment and on populations of indigenous fish species.
Lake Uromiyeh:
Baseline Yekom (2002) - Lake Uromiyeh Environmental Management Project. Report 1: The Natural Environment of the Lake Uromiyeh Ecosystem. Irrigation Improvement Project (IBRD Loan 3570 IRN), 145 pages + annexes. o This report provides a reasonable baseline on climate, hydrology, soils, geology and geomorphology, although it does not analyse the data to any great extent. o In terms of biological data, however, it is weak to extremely weak. Lists of birds are provided, but population figures are not given, and trends are provided in general descriptions for a few species only. For other wildlife species (mammals, reptiles, amphibians) either total number of species or lists of species are based on listing in field guides. Primary data has not been collected or accessed for any of these groups. o Plants and vegetation. The report includes lists of species for a few satellite wetlands, along with a very general assessment of the regional flora (general number of species, major plant families). It also includes a 1:2,000,000 scale vegetation/land use map with very broad habitat types that are not described. The section on phytoplankton is very poor and generally uninformative. Pandam Consulting Engineers produced a series of reports in 2005 as part of the Integrated Water Resources Management for the Lake Uromiyeh Basin project. This was funded by the Netherlands Partners for Water programme, Module 3. Water for Ecosystems. Two general reports (summary on pilot wetlands and a basin-wide report) and six reports on individual satellite wetlands (termed ‘ pilot wetlands’ in the IWRM project) were produced: o Dorgeh Sangi, o Gerdah gheet-Mamyand, o Goppy Baba Ali, o Kanibrazen, o Shur Gol and o Soldouz. These satellite wetland reports by Pandam (2005) are generally good to very good in terms of providing a baseline on climate, hydrology, soils, vegetation, flora and fauna. However, in the case of Soldouz wetland – which is a constructed wetland – there already seem to have been significant changes in vegetation structure and type. Information on Artemia uromia (the endemic brine shrimp of lake Uromiyeh) is available at the Artemia and Aquatic Animal Research Institute at Uromiyeh. This includes information on densities in the lake. DOE – WA have participated in the AWC for at least the past 6 years, and this data is available at Uromiyeh. DOE – WA mammal surveys focus on three species only: Persian yellow deer, wild sheep and Armenian sheep.
14 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Fish data is obtained from the West Azerbaijan Department of Fisheries, with whom DOE have good relations. Little or no data is collected by DOE – WA on reptiles, amphibians and plants. DOE – EA surveys focus on birds (AWC), and IUCN Red Data listed species, including wild sheep and wild goat.
Institutional capacity Out of a total of 60 DOE staff based at Uromiyeh, five are located in the Natural Environment department; one is the head of the division, one is a wildlife expert and the remaining three are habitat experts. In addition DOE have a few experts based in the field: one on large mammals and one on plants. The January 2007 AWC was carried out by two experts from Uromiyeh DOE, assisted by two Dutch experts, and together they covered 30 wetlands over a course of 14 days. For surveys on reptiles and amphibians, DOE – WA recruits experts from Uromiyeh University. Out of a total of 60-70 staff based at DOE – EA in Tabriz, only three are based in the wildlife section of the Natural Environment department; of these two are wildlife experts. In addition, the department includes a botanist (in the habitat section) and staff experienced in EIA, GIS and geography. For surveys in other areas, DOE wildlife staff recruit friends from local universities.
Gaps West Azerbaijan: o Baseline data on water quality, reptiles, amphibians and plants for Lake Uromiyeh and satellite wetlands other than the six satellite wetlands targeted by the IWRM study in 2005. o Reliable bird counts during AWC (e.g. by means of aerial surveys), as large areas need to be covered in a short period (and not spanning a period of two weeks, as birds will have moved). East Azerbaijan: o Plant and mammal baseline surveys of satellite wetlands other than Gori Gol and Ghoregeshlaq. o Update on key indicator species such as trout Salmo trutta and Eurasian otter Lutra lutra.
15 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Annex 3. Draft Prioritised Monitoring Action Plan for Wetland Biodiversity
A monitoring programme is a tool for providing information on the status of the environment, and in the case of CIWP it should be designed to provide PA managers useful information about the status of wetlands. A monitoring programme for CIWP should include the physical environment, biological parameters and socio-economic parameters. It will need to be specifically tailored to individual pilot wetland areas and be flexible so that it can incorporate and respond to new information. In order to develop a monitoring programme, a baseline must first be established of information on essential parameters which serves as a benchmark for future comparison, but also serves to identify key elements for the monitoring programme (e.g. rare species, or known pollutants). Programmes must also be efficient and not over- designed, as they may end up being costly and uninformative, Flexibility of design may mean that some parameters are no longer measured after a few rounds of monitoring if they prove to be unchanging, while newly emerging evidence (e.g. an introduced exotic) may mean that a monitoring programme is expanded to target the new element.
A monitoring programme should identify the following: i) What is to be monitored? (which parameter); ii) Who is to monitor? (usually an agency responsible for a particular task); iii) When should monitoring occur? (timing plus frequency); and iv) How should the monitoring be carried out? (methodology). In the following a first draft is provided for monitoring of wetland biodiversity at the two pilot sites: Lake Parishan and Lake Uromiyeh. Water quality elements have also been included, but for a full monitoring programme this should be expanded with a socio-economic monitoring programme.
Lake Parishan. The monitoring programme for Lake Parishan should include water quality and depth, erosion, pesticides, plants and vegetation, molluscs, fish, amphibians, aquatic reptiles, birds and breeding colonies, and mammals (see Table 1 below). Some parameters should be measured very regularly (e.g. water depths on a daily basis, fish stocks monthly), while others will need to be assessed only once every 2-3 years or more (e.g. erosion, pesticides, plants/vegetation, molluscs).
Lake Uromiyeh Monitoring at Lake Uromiyeh (LU) is a lot simpler than that of Lake Parishan, as the system is poorer in species and simpler. It should include water quality and depth, erosion (in basin), pesticides, shore-lining plants/vegetation, Artemia (brine shrimp), birds and colonies. Some parameters should be measured very regularly (e.g. water depths on a daily basis, Artemia on a quarterly basis), while others will need to be assessed only once every 2-3 years or more (e.g. erosion, pesticides, vegetation). The monitoring programme should be designed to assess differences between the two water bodies (north and south Lake Uromiyeh) that have been created by the construction of the Kalantary highway causeway. See Table 2, below.
Satellite wetlands LU Satellite wetlands to monitor include Dorgeh Sangi, Gerdah gheet-Mamyand, Ghoregeshlaq, Goppy and. Baba Ali, Gori Gol, Kanibrazen, Shur Gol and Soldouz. Monitoring of the satellite wetlands of Lake Uromiyeh will need to be more extensive than at LU and should include molluscs, fish, amphibians and reptiles. However, it does not need to be as extensive as at Lake Parishan, as some of the sampling frequencies can be significantly lower (e.g. water depth and quality, fish stocks). A draft programme is included in Table 3, below.
16 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Table 1. Lake Parishan Parameter Responsible agency Starting date Frequency Methodology
Water depth Water Authority & DOE Ongoing daily staff gauge N, P, main cations & anions, pH, conductivity, temperature (surface & 1m Water quality Water Authority & DOE mid-2007 2x per year depth); at least 3 (preferably 5-6) sampling points in lake. baseline + once Sediment (top, undisturbed) + water column + mollusc + fish tissue sample Pesticides DOE mid-2007 every 2-3 years (liver); identify main pesticides in use, & target these in analysis baseline + once Mapping of occurrence and location of erosion and eroding areas (bare Erosion DOE 2007 every 4-5 years soil, alluvial fans, incidence of gully erosion) Mapping of vegetation (1:10,000 or 20,000); sampling along several transects at right angle to shoreline; several permanent plots, fixed, to be baseline + once resampled. Assessments should at least include emergent shore Plants DOE & local university mid-2007 every 2-3 years vegetation, floating vegetation, and submerged ve Assesment of population density at number of fixed points, to be Molluscs DOE & local university mid-2007 every 2-3 years resampled. monthly (fish stocks & size); baseline & ongoing (DOF) + annually DOF is to continue with its monthly assessment of stocks & size; university Fish DOF & local university mid-2007 (univ.) (population) to assist with assessment of populations of non-commercial species.
Focus on turtles and semi-aquatic snakes; baseline in 2007, annual Reptiles DOE & local university mid-2007 annual estimate of population size, based on frequency of occurrence in transects Baseline in 2007; annual estimate of population size based on frequency Amphibians DOE & local university mid-2007 annual of occurrence in transects Birds DOE Ongoing quarterly total count Bird colonies DOE Ongoing breeding season total count & ringing of fledglings Continue with incidental records on monthly basis (ranger reports); add Mammals DOE Ongoing monthly night patrols 2-3 times per year
17 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Table 2. Lake Uromiyeh
Parameter Responsible agency Starting date Frequency Methodology
Staff gauges - at least one in each water body separated by the Kalantary Water depth Water Authority & DOE Ongoing daily highway causeway. Water quality Water Authority & DOE mid-2007 6x per year Salt concentration/ electroconductivity baseline + once In water column and in precipitated salt layers; baseline should include salt Pesticides DOE mid-2007 every 2-3 years samples taken at several depths. baseline + once Mapping of occurrence and location of erosion and eroding areas (bare Erosion DOE 2007 every 4-5 years soil, alluvial fans, incidence of gully erosion) Mapping of vegetation (1:10,000 or 20,000); sampling along several baseline + once transects at right angle to shoreline; several permanent plots, fixed, to be Plants DOE & local university mid-2007 every 2-3 years resampled. Artemia Aquatic Animal Artemia concentrations (number/litre). Locations to include near mouths of Research Institute & incoming streams, and in both northern and southern water body Artemia DOF Ongoing Four times per year (separated by causeway). AWC and summer Birds DOE Ongoing count Total count Bird colonies DOE Ongoing Breeding season Total count & ringing of fledglings
18 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Table 3. Satellite wetlands Lake Uromiyeh
Parameter Responsible agency Starting date Frequency Methodology
Water depth Water Authority & DOE Ongoing weekly staff gauge N, P, main cations & anions, pH, conductivity, temperature (surface & 1m Water quality Water Authority & DOE mid-2007 annual depth); at least 3 (preferably 5-6) sampling points in lake. baseline + once Sediment (top, undisturbed) + water column + mollusc + fish tissue sample Pesticides DOE mid-2007 every 2-3 years (liver); identify main pesticides in use, & target these in analysis baseline + once Mapping of occurrence and location of erosion and eroding areas (bare Erosion DOE 2007 every 4-5 years soil, alluvial fans, incidence of gully erosion) Mapping of vegetation (1:10,000 or 20,000); sampling along several transects at right angle to shoreline; several permanent plots, fixed, to be once every 2-3 resampled. Assessments should at least include emergent shore Plants DOE & local university mid-2007 years vegetation, floating vegetation, and submerged ve Assesment of population density at number of fixed points, to be Molluscs DOE & local university mid-2007 every 2-3 years resampled.
ongoing (DOF) + DOF is to continue with its monthly assessment of stocks & size; university Fish DOF & local university mid-2007 (univ.) annual to assist with assessment of populations of non-commercial species.
Focus on turtles and semi-aquatic snakes; baseline in 2007, annual Reptiles DOE & local university mid-2007 annual estimate of population size, based on frequency of occurrence in transects Baseline in 2007; annual estimate of population size based on frequency Amphibians DOE & local university mid-2007 annual of occurrence in transects Birds DOE Ongoing quarterly total count Bird colonies DOE Ongoing breeding season total count & ringing of fledglings Continue with incidental records on monthly basis (ranger reports); add Mammals DOE Ongoing monthly night patrols 2-3 times per year
19 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
20 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Annex 4. Persons met & contact details
Person met Institution & position Contact details
Dr Naser Agh Director of Artemia & Aquatic +98.914.3451696 Animal Research Institute, +98.441.3440295 Uromiyeh +98.441.3467097 [email protected] Ms Arezou DOE focal point biodiversity, +98.912.3581474 Ashrafizadeh Wetland Unit Tehran [email protected] Mohammad DOE Fars province, expert natural [email protected] Balouch resources. agricultural sciences & ornithology Dr. H.R. Esmaeili Ichthyologist, Department of Tel: +98.711.2280916 Biology, College of Sciences, [email protected] Shiraz University, Shiraz 71454 [email protected] Dr. A.M. Fazal Director of College of Environment, [email protected] DOE Tehran [email protected] [email protected] Ali Reza Ghoreishi DOE Uromiyeh +98.91444.03872 [email protected] Golam Ali DOE Tehran, Wetland Specialist, Harghgoo ex-manager Miankaleh NP Ali Henareh Site Coordinator CIWP, Uromiyeh +98.914.441.8364 +98.441.3829710 [email protected] Ali Reza Husseini DOE Tehran Wetland Specialist and fish expert Ahmad Reza Fars Water Authority, head of water [email protected] Issaee quality control section Dr. Javaheri DG of IT/GIS Division of DOE, Tehran Leila Joolaee DOE Fars province, expert natural [email protected] resources (botany) Mr. Kazemi Hamandishan Jaran (environ. www.hamand.org NGO) Reza Kohan Hamandishan Jaran (environ. www.hamand.org NGO) Reza Massoud Head of Wildlife Unit, DOE West [email protected] Azerbaijan, Tabriz (one ‘s’ in masoud) Ms Head of NGO at Uromiyeh involved www.wasep.com Mastafapourshad in wetland restoration: Women’s [email protected] Society Against Environmental Pollution Siovash DOE Fars province; expert natural [email protected] Mohammadi geography Majid Department of Fisheries, Fars [email protected] Moshtaghian province (director) Ali Najafi Site Coordinator CIWP, Tabriz Mr Sadeghi Site Coordinator CIWP - LP 0917-7037973 R. A. DOE Uromiyeh, head of wildlife unit [email protected] Salmanzadeh Hasan Shafiee Hamandishan Jaran (environ. [email protected] NGO) Said Shahand DOE Uromiyeh, Wildlife unit; plant [email protected] pathology/entomology Mohammad Mahdi DOE Fars province, expert natural [email protected] Shariati resources, mgr. LP
21 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Person met Institution & position Contact details
Dr. Yousefi DG Training and Public Participation, DOE Tehran Mehrdad PhD student, working on [email protected] Zamanpoore amphipods in springs (Vienna and Shiraz Universities) Hamid Zohrabi Deputy Head of DOE Fars [email protected] province, Natural Environment
22 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Annex 5. Case study on Tonle Sap, Cambodia
Note: the case study is presented here without the illustrations, graphs and photographs
23 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
24 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
25 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
26 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
27 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
28 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
29 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
30 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Annex 6. Observations at Lake Parishan
Based on field work carried out on 19 & 20 February 2007. Visit lake together with two DOE rangers (head: Mr. Ardeshir Armini, and Mr. Hamid Abasi), four members of the environmental NGO Hamandishan Jaran (Reza Khazeh, Hassan Shafiee, Mr. Kazemi, Reza Kohan) and an interpreter (Leili Allahgholi).
DOE rangers & Kazeroun The head ranger has been on site for four years, but has not seen a data entry form for wildlife observation data. What happens is that they call to DOE Kazeroun (Ms Vasiri) to report their findings and she fills out a form for DOE Shiraz. 6 rangers based at LP, of which 1 (head) works 6 days, has 1 day off; some (who live further away, and don’t go home on a daily basis) work 10 days, then have 5 days off. Two are local, the other 4 are from further away. All have high school education, plus some extra training. The head range has had 1 year of training – this was when training was provided by a project. Training included identification of birds, mammals, frogs, and some basics on plants, shooting, basic law (and how to arrest). Although the head ranger has been trained in amphibian ID, there is no list of frogs for the park, nor has he carried out any surveys on frog species (has not been asked to do so). LP DOE staff fill out forms to report illegal activities they have observed. If immediate action is required, they call Kazeroun DoE. Environmental station; apart from transportation (cars motorcycle and boats) all rangers have a pair of binoculars each, and between them they have one bird ID guide. They do not have a GPS, but there is one at DOE Kazeroun. There are 11 staff officially based at Kazeroun, which includes 6 based at LP and five full time at Kazeroun DoE. This is headed by Mr. Abassi.
Parishan legend There was once a beautiful princess called Pari who lived near the lake. One day she became very ill and her parents were afraid she would die, so the king went to a local holy man to seek help. The holy man was able to cure her, but in return the king had to give the lake to the local people. Pari’s mother, the queen was so happy that her daughter was well again that she introduced the zadeh fish to the lake, for the people to enjoy.
Habitat conversion. Lake edges and lower slopes of hills are converted to agriculture. Sloping areas with orange groves and plastic culture (tomatoes, cucumbers, aubergines). Hind parts of reedbeds are all converted, being cut back, and in places burnt. In some areas a bund has been put in place, such as SE part of the lake, where a bund of >10km length (1.5m tall) was constructed <5 months ago (using bulldozers).
31 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Agrochemicals used around the lake: Roundup, gramoxone, paraquat (same as Roundup?), 2,4-D. Lots of fertilizer being applied everywhere, with storage sheds in most villages.
Vegetation types/species. The most obvious vegetation are the reedbeds that occur around most of the lake, although it is interrupted in some parts. These reedbeds are dominated by common reed Phragmites australis (Farsi: ney; local language: parpishal), along with some pockets of bulrush Typha ?angustifolia. These reedbeds are tall, dense, and in some areas senescent, with many indications of past burning. Recent burning has also occurred, but this is isolated and at a small scale (<1%). The reedbeds provide shelter for birds, and are where most of the waterfowl congregate. Submerged vegetation – extends over much of the lake bottom. According to the DoF (18/2), the main species was Najas minor; however, although we kept an eye out for floating specimens, the only ones found was a thorny Characeae (called ‘chormohid’).
Wildlife Bird numbers appear good – lots of pelican, coot, cormorant (great, pygmy), egrets (little, great), gull, duck (gargany, etc.), heron (grey, purple). In south also geese and flamingo in small numbers 30+ and 17, respectively). Also lots of raptors (mainly marsh harrier, but also short-toed eagle, imperial eagle). However, numbers of certain species are declining according to DOE and the NGO; these include marbled teal, cranes (this year only 3 cranes, in past >10,000) and ruddy shelduck. Fish. Information from local fisherman, Mr. Nadere Mirzadeh. Three fish species were introduced to the lake by the Fisheries Department (shilat) about 12 years: kapur (common carp Cyprinus carpio), amur (mirror carp) and fytfag (grass carp). These have modified the vegetation of the lake, having affected submerged plants, and affected the stock of zadeh (Barbus luteus), as they also consumed the fry of this species. A fourth fish species – gambusia – was introduced some time ago by shilat to consume mosquito larvae. Of these, only kapur (and perhaps gambusia?) breeds – the other two species are no longer caught in gillnets as they are too large – they are sometimes speared. According to the veterinarian of the NGO, fish in Lake Parishan are infected with an intestinal parasite (worm species). No bivalves in the lake; only 1 gastropod species (not seen); the latter are not harvested.
Fisheries Fishermen are mainly from three villages: Sherenjan (the village or Mr. Nadere Mirzadeh, with 30 fishermen), Zawolhi and Fomur / Nagezar the latter has two names). All fishermen are also farmers, cultivating fields during the day, and fishing at night. They are not organized in a cooperative. Fishing is mainly by means of gillnet that are placed near / in reedbeds at night, using by team of 2-3 fishermen. Fishing occurs all around the lake, there are no particular areas they concentrate on. All have fibreglass boats equipped with outboard engines (seen were 40-60 hp engines).
32 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Fish are sold to traders who arrive in the villages to purchase the fish from the fishermen. They are paid Rl. 10,000/kg for kapur, and Rl. 6,000.-/kg for zadeh. Fisheries Dept. had a breeding station in the northwestern part of the lake, near the junction of the road leading to the DOE Environmental Station. Reportedly this was closed down 8 years ago when the spring that provided water for the ponds dried out. Zadeh = Barbus luteus = parishani; not endemic to the lake, but a native species found in the region. Older specimens turn yellow, hence the names (zadeh and luteus both mean yellow).
Water & wells Wells are used for obtaining irrigation water, as lake water is too brackish. These are stone-lined ,open shaft wells, with a pipe lowered into it; all seen are equipped with a diesel pump, often housed in a small shed. These are reportedly all individually owned and operated. The depth of the wells seen was 7-8 m further from the lake (>300m), and 3-5 m closer to the lake. Water levels fluctuate – the deepest parts are 6-6.5 metres, and the annual fluctuation is usually about 2 m. They have a gauge at DoE’s LP Environmental station. The present level is about 0.5-0.7 m below last year’s maximum level (marks can be seen on the rocks). Later in the day we visited the southern part of the lake where Arabon hill is located – this hill lies adjacent the lake, but apparently 8 years ago water levels were so high that it became an island. At the southern end of the lake locals from three nearby villages a canal (Juiblor Canal) was constructed about 10 years ago. This reportedly succeeded in draining 80% of the lake’s water, until DOE put an end to it and partly filled it in. The main am was to expand agriculture, but it was also a one-off massive fishing activity. The canal is a winding affair, hastily constructed with simple machinery – but effective!
Hunting This is mainly recreational, both by persons from outside the 16 riparian villages and the villagers themselves. Species taken: mainly duck, coot and geese. Shooting only, nets are not used.
Ecotourism 90% of the visitors to the lake are from Kazeroun, the rest mainly from Shiraz. During holidays such as Id, these can number about 1000-1500 per day. Most picnic and those that can rent a boat (there are only a limited number of fishing boats) do so as well
Agriculture Plastic covered agriculture was introduced about 12 years ago, and all of this requires irrigation as rainwater does not penetrate. The advantage is that crops can be grown all year round, and they can get 3-4 harvests a year.
33 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Burning. Recent burning has occurred on a small scale in the reedbeds (<<1% of all reeds), reportedly sometimes out of carelessness, but more usually for expanding agricultural fields. There are many signs of much more extensive past fires, with large clumps of partly burnt and senescent reed standing like tree stumps in the water. Reportedly there was a major fire about 10 years ago that affected vast areas of reedbed.
Uses. Common reed is used as fuel, and collected by local villagers for this purpose. Fishing: mainly zadeh (Barbus luteus) and kapur (Cyprinus carpio) Hunting: mainly duck, geese, coot, reportedly also flamingo Tourism: visitors are taken by speedboat to tour the lake and see the birds (esp. pelican)
34 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
Annex 7. Priorities for actions and approaches at the two pilot sites
This annex lists ideas and suggestions that emerged from discussions with DOE staff and other major stakeholders at the pilot sites. These have not been prioritised, as this should occur at the next MP workshop where DOE and other stakeholders may or may not agree to possible inclusion.
Lake Parishan: Baseline surveys of reptiles, amphibians and plants (including macroscopic algae) in and adjacent the lake ecosystem. These surveys are to focus on establishing reliable baselines for reptiles, amphibians and plants that do not only indicate presence, but also provide an estimate of population size at LP, status (e.g. rare, vulnerable, endangered, protected by Iranian law, etc..), species habitat requirements and conservation needs for this species (at LP).
West Azerbaijan: Brief study of Yadegalu (former) wetland, to assess possibilities for restoration, and develop a restoration plan together with DoE and the four NGOs already active in this area. Aerial bird surveys (mid-winter & summer), to complement the AWC bird counts
35 UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project
East Azerbaijan: Ghoregeshlagh wetland in southern part of province. Baseline studies have been carried out, but what is required is addressing the threats, developing some kind of management for the area.
National: Training: baseline studies, monitoring, databases and reporting cycle. Challenge fund for students.
36 UNDP/GEF – Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project (CIWP)
Mission Report to UNDP and National Project Director 7-15 November 2007
Wim Giesen, Wetland Biodiversity Expert (WBE) [email protected] or [email protected]
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This mission report is on the second mission of the WBE on the CIWP, which was from 7-15 November 2007. The focus was on running two Biodiversity Working Group meetings, one in Uromiyeh, the second in Shiraz, and on actively participating in the Lake Parishan Management Planning Workshop at Kazeroun on 12-13 November. In addition, the WBE provided feedback on draft biodiversity baseline reports produced for both LP and LU, and assisted with preparing a training needs assessment questionnaire for biodiversity management at both sites.
Highlights: A highly successful BDWG meeting at Uromiyeh, which included participants from West and East Azerbaijan, and which was attended and opened by the DOE-WA director, Mr. Kalantary. Field visit to Lake Uromiyeh salt harvesting site & Artemia Research Centre (of Shilat WA). Very successful biodiversity group discussions in identifying key biodiversity values, indicators and activities as part of the two day workshop on Lake Parishan Management Planning (Kazeroun, 12-13 Oct. 2007), which was attended by 10-15 people from various stakeholder groups (out of 60+ participants overall). Successful one day meeting of the Lake Parishan Biodiversity Working Group, established during the previous days at the LPMP workshop, held in Shiraz at the DoE headquarters. The national project team is now back at full strength and is performing well under the guidance of the new NPM.
Lowlights: Lack of significant progress on the biodiversity baseline reports for both Lake Uromiyeh and Lake Parishan. Very little time available for field visits
Final 17th December 2007
1
1. SCHEDULE
Date (2007) Location Activity
Wed 7 Nov Travel 13:30 Travel from home to Amsterdam Schiphol Airport (shared airport taxi service) 18:15 Flight Amsterdam – Tehran (KLM) Thu 8 Nov. Tehran 02:00 Arrive Tehran (IKA), stay Taj Mahal Hotel 14:00 Meet with National WBE, Lisa Pourlak until 18:00 19:00 Work on project documents (biodiversity baseline, gaps analysis) until 22:00. Fri 9 Nov Tehran & 09:00 Work on project documents & presentations (training Uromiyeh questionnaire, 2 presentations for Uromiyeh BDWG meeting) until 17:00. 17:00 Meeting with National WBE until 19:30 19:30 Leave for Tehran airport 20:50 Flight to Uromiyeh 22:10 Arrive at Uromiyeh, stay at Oromieh Tourist Inn Sat 10 Nov Uromiyeh & 08:30 Meet local project coordinator, Mr Henari, at hotel Tehran 09:00 Meet with staff of DOE at DOE WA office 10:00 First BDWG meeting starts, with participants from both East and West Azerbaijan, and opening by director of DOE WA, Mr Kalantary. Closure at 16:00. 16:30 Visit Lake Uromiyeh salt collection site and Artemia Research Centre of the WA Fisheries Department (Shilat), until 19:00. 19:00 Leave for Uromiyeh airport. 22:00 (delayed) Flight to Tehran. 00:20 Arrive at Taj Mahal hotel. Sun 11 Nov Teheran-Shiraz- 07:45 Breakfast meeting with Mike Moser until 08:30. Kazeroun 08:30 Work on notes & draft report. 10:30 Leave for project office 11:00 Meet at CIWP office with Dr. Lotfi, Mike Moser, Ali Nazaridoust until 13:00 13:00 Leave for Mehrabad airport. 14:30 Flight to Shiraz, Iranian Airlines 16:00 Arrive in Shiraz, head for DoE office to meet with DoE staff and jointly leave for Kazeroun at 17:00 20:00 Arrive in Kazeroun; dinner 21:00 Meeting with CIWP team members until 22:00 Mon 12 Nov Kazeroun 08:30 Start of Lake Parishan Management Planning workshop; last activity of break out group (Wetland Biodiversity) ends at 18:00 18:00 With Lisa Pourlak and Mike Moser, finalise adapting the Uromiyeh training questionnaire for LP; assist with the notes taken during the afternoon sessions until 19:30. 20:30 Dinner 21:15 Meeting with CIWP team to discuss day’s progress, until 22:30. Tue 13 Nov Kazeroun- 08:30 Second day of the Lake Parishan Management Shiraz Planning workshop, mainly in the wetland biodiversity break out group. Workshop runs until 16:30. 17:30 Leave for Shiraz by vehicles 20:30 Arrive in Shiraz, stay at Pars Hotel. Prepare presentation for LP BDWG meeting at DoE next day.
2 Wed 14 Shiraz-Tehran 09:00 Meeting of the LP BDWG at the DoE office. Discussion Nov is on the TOR, composition of the BDWG, and developing a proposal out of one of the priority biodiversity areas for the LPMP (selected for this purpose was fish biodiversity). Meeting lasts until 14:30; followed by team lunch, after which the WBEs head for Shiraz Airport. 18:10 Flight from Shiraz to Tehran. 19:30 Arrive in Tehran; take taxi to Taj Mahal Hotel, arrive 20:30. 20:30 Dinner at Taj Mahal Hotel with SIPA and the NPM until 22:30 Thu 15 Nov Travel 03:30 Leave for airport; fly Tehran – Amsterdam - with KLM 09:30 Arrive in Amsterdam, take shared airport taxi service 13:00 Arrive at home base.
2. INTRODUCTION
This was the second mission on the CIWP undertaken by the international Wetland Biodiversity Expert (WBE), together with the national WBE and partly overlapping with the mission of the Senior International Project Advisor (SIPA).
This mission was a brief one, aimed at assessing the outputs of the national WBE, and providing inputs to the Wetland Biodiversity Working Groups (BDWGs) for Lake Parishan and Lake Uromiyeh, and input to the Lake Parishan Management Planning Workshop.
The mission involved visits to Lake Uromiyeh and Uromiyeh city, the capital of West Azerbaijan province, Kazeroun and Shiraz, the capital of Fars province. Apart from a brief visit to Lake Uromiyeh and the Artemia Research Centre of the provincial Fisheries Department, the input was too brief to further include field visits.
The mission proceeded according to plan, with two days of workshop and two one-day meetings being held over the course of a one week input.
NPM and UNDP are thanked for efficiently arranging all logistics including visa invitation, pick- up from Tehran airport, accommodation and all meetings. Dr Delavar Najafi (NPD), Dr Ali Nazaridoust (NPM), Saber Masoomi (Technical Assistant), Sara Koochaki (Project Office Assistant) and all the project team are warmly thanked for their hospitality and strong and efficient support.
3. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THIS MISSION
The objectives of this mission were as follows: 1. Provide feedback on the draft biodiversity baselines for Lake Uromiyeh and Lake Parishan. 2. Provide input to two Biodiversity Working Group meetings, one for Lake Parishan, one for Lake Uromiyeh. 3. Contribute to the 2-day Lake Parishan Management Planning workshop in Kazeroun by facilitating group sessions, as per the workshop programme. 4. Assess the performance of the national WBE based on the biodiversity baseline reports, the BDWG meetings and the LPMP workshop. 5. Mission report for UNDP and NPD according to the standard format (provided by SIPA), by the end of November 2007.
3
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The following section summarises the achievements against each TOR objective.
TOR 1. Provide feedback on the draft biodiversity baselines for Lake Uromiyeh and Lake Parishan. Lake Uromiyeh baseline. The WBE had received the first draft Biodiversity Baseline Report for Lake Uromiyeh just prior to his departure for Iran. The document was reviewed during the journey and comments provided (in track changes mode, and verbally explained) to the national WBE. Overall, the draft Lake Uromiyeh baseline report summarises the reports produced in 2002 by Yekom, which were deemed weak to very weak as far as biodiversity data is concerned (see WBE Mission Report of March 2007). Litle, if any, additional data has been added, which is disappointing, as additional data is available in the Partners for Water IWRM reports for the various satellite wetlands, produced by Pandam (2005), and on the internet. This result reflects a weakness in the approach taken – i.e. with the national WBE facilitating the production of the biodiversity baseline by DoE. The current product has been produced by the national WBE, although this is not part of her TOR. In order to increase DoE and other stakeholder participation in the process the draft has been presented to the BDWG members as a draft product of the LU BDWG, for them to further expand upon (see TOR2, below). A list of data gaps for the LU biodiversity baseline was produced (see Annex 1) and discussed at the first BDWG meeting in Uromiyeh (see TOR 2). Lake Parishan baseline. The WBE has not received the draft Biodiversity Baseline Report for Lake Parishan, as this had not been produced in English prior to the current mission, and has not become available to date. As this could not be based on existing reports, the general impression from discussions with the national WBE is that this will have even more substantial gaps than the LU biodiversity baseline. However, as with the LU baseline, it is essentially up to DoE (and the BDWG) to produce the document, and it is the national WBE’s task to facilitate this. One may conclude that the national WBE has not been highly successful in motivating DoE to work on the document, but given the lack of direct leverage until recently (funds have recently been provided to DoE for baseline studies) this is understandable.
TOR 2. Provide input to two Biodiversity Working Group meetings, one for Lake Parishan, one for Lake Uromiyeh. Lake Uromiyeh. The LU BDWG meeting was held at the DoE office of West Azerbaijan in Uromiyeh on Saturday 10 November. The meeting was well attended, with representatives from both East and West Azerbaijan present. A list of invited participants in included in Annex 2, along with the agenda for the meeting in Annex 3. A final list of participants will be included in the BDWG meeting report that will be produced by the national WBE. The meeting started late due to the late arrival of the participants from Tabriz, but lasted from 09:30-16:30. The meeting was opened by the director of the West Azerbaijan DoE office, Mr. Kalantary, who gave a rousing 30 minute speech and stayed for the first hour of the meeting – a sign of good support by DoE West Azerbaijan. The WBE gave a presentation on the objectives of the meeting, and this was followed by introductions by Mr. Ranaghadr (DoE Deputy for Natural Env. West Azerbaijan), the head of LU National Park, and the national WBE. The draft TOR for the LU BDWG was discussed and comments received. The composition of the BDWG was discussed and considered by the participants to be sufficient and adequate. The key gaps in the biodiversity baseline were discussed, and each participant indicated where their agency could possibly help in obtaining data. Where available, they agreed to provide this to the national WBE within the next two weeks; where gaps remain, the participants would propose to the BDWG how this could be covered, for example, by additional study. A draft training needs questionnaire developed by the WBEs (Annex 4) was filled out during the lunch break; this will be reported on in a separate report by the national WBE. A presentation was provided by the WBE on a threats analysis for Lake Tonle Sap, Cambodia, as this provides insight on indicators and targets for management (see Annex 5). Lastly, the participants agreed to hold the next BDWG meeting in Tabriz, in one month’s time. Lake Parishan. The LP BDWG meeting was held at the DoE office of Fars province in Shiraz, on 14 November, from 08:30 to 14:30. This meeting was less formal than the first BSWG
4 meeting for LU, as most of the participants had already met at the LP Management Planning workshop in Kazeroun held during the two preceding days (see TOR 3). After a brief introduction, the WBE gave a presentation on the objectives of the first LP BDWG meeting, after which there was a discussion on the LP BDWG TOR, and on the composition of the WG. Other members were proposed, and it was agreed that the national WBE would email all the translated version of the TOR as soon as possible, as only the English language version was available on 14 November. The group discussed the key gaps in the biodiversity baseline (available in Farsi only and presented by the national WBE) and how these could be covered by existing data or by additional survey/studies. In the last session, the BDWG discussed one of the key biodiversity objectives of LP and attempted to produce a brief project description based on the outline developed by the WBE and SIPA (Annex 6). For this exercise – which is to serve as an example for other proposals to be developed by the BDWG – fish biodiversity was chosen. The discussion did not move much beyond activities and outputs, but this was regarded as the most essential part, as the rest could easily be added by the lead agency. It was decided that the lead agency together with the national WBE should draft a proposal brief for each of the six biodiversity objectives identified at the LPMP workshop, and that this would then be discussed at the next BDWG meeting. It was decided that this would follow in about two week’s time, to maintain momentum.
TOR 3. Contribute to the 2-day Lake Parishan Management Planning workshop in Kazeroun by facilitating group sessions, as per the workshop programme. The 2-day Management Planning workshop for Lake Parishan was held in Kazeroun on 12-13 November and was attended by 60+ participants from all main stakeholder groups including local communities. The WBEs were responsible for running the wetland biodiversity breakout group, that convened to identify how the wetland biodiversity objective (To Protect, Restore and Conserve Biodiversity of Lake Parishan) could be met. This involved identifying which key biodiversity features are to be addressed by management actions, assessing targets and indicators, formulating actions required, and identifying responsible and partner agencies. The list of participants of the breakout group plus the resulting output (in table format) is included in Annex 7. The participants of the wetland biodiversity breakout group were mainly from NGOs and DoE, and many also participated in the BDWG meeting held in Shiraz on 14 November.
TOR 4. Assess the performance of the national WBE based on the biodiversity baseline reports, the BDWG meetings, LPMP workshop & communications. The performance of the national WBE, Ms Lisa Pourlak, was assessed at various levels: a) written outputs; b) performance in meetings and workshops, and c) communication. Written outputs. Regarding the written outputs, the international WBE finds the performance somewhat disappointing. It has taken a long time for English-language drafts to materialise – the LU biodiversity baseline report has been produced in draft form, but the one for LP has yet to be produced in English. Surprisingly, only Yekom data was incorporated in the draft LU biodiversity baseline report although other sources are also available (Pandam, 2005; internet). As a result, the quality of the LU biodiversity baseline report does not exceed that of the 2002 Yekom report, which was deemed questionable (see WBE Mission Report of March 2007). However, one needs to bear in mind that it is not primarily the national WBE’s task to produce the drafts – she is to facilitate DoE (and now the BDWGs) production of the baselines, and is responsible for the English language translation. Obviously, there scope for improvement in this area, but mainly in the facilitation process and not the actual writing, unless her TOR is changed. A schedule for completion of the two biodiversity baseline reports is attached in Annex 8. Completion of the tasks in this schedule is included in the action points (see part 6, below). Meetings & workshops. In meetings and workshops, the national WBE performs well, being good in facilitating discussions, asking the right questions and being able to move the discussion in a way that outputs are achieved. In this way she comes across well, and is not pushy or demanding. She has a good rapport with the various participants in the working groups and breakout groups and is able to work well with them.
5 Communication. On the whole, the national WBE communicates fairly regularly and well with the international WBE, and the communications are clear and adequate. However, it may be better to receive more regular updates, and it may be best to receive a monthly update that covers a fixed set of issues (e.g. progress on biodiversity baseline reports, baseline studies, meetings and workshops held, etc…). It would not need to be lengthy, as a half page report or one page at most would be sufficient.
TOR 5. Mission report for UNDP and NPD according to the standard format (provided by SIPA), by the end of November 2007.
This is covered by the present report.
5. RECOMMENDATIONS
Complete the two draft biodiversity baseline reports for lakes Parishan and Uromiyeh, involving the BDWGs as much as possible, but having them perceive the final document as a product of the BDWG and not a product of the project or a national consultant. Brief monthly update reports (0.5 – 1.0 page) from the national WBE to the international WBE, to keep the latter abreast of developments and more involved in project execution. Regular meetings between wetland biodiversity focal point at DOE headquarters and the national WBE, to discuss progress and possible issues.
6. ACTION POINTS
ACTION POINTS By By When Who 1 Complete and submit draft mission report 30 Nov Wim Giesen
2 Finalise mission report 10 Dec Wim Giesen
3 Report on first LU BDWG meeting of 10 November drafted and 3 Dec Lisa Pourlak circulated 4 Set date and agenda for second LU BDWG meeting early (2nd 15 Dec Lisa Pourlak or 3rd week of) December 5 Translated TOR sent to LP BDWG members 10 Dec Lisa Pourlak 6 Brief report on training needs assessment LU BDWG based on 15 Dec Lisa Pourlak questionnaire circulated and filled out on 10 Nov 7 Report on first LP BDWG meeting of 14 November drafted and 8 Dec Lisa Pourlak circulated 8 Set date and agenda for second LP BDWG meeting early (first 3 Dec Lisa Pourlak week of) December 9 Translate results (table) of the wetland biodiversity breakout 30 Dec Lisa Pourlak group 10 Finalise the two biodiversity baseline reports for lakes Parishan 10 Dec; Lisa Pourlak and Uromiyeh, as indicated in the schedule (Annex 8) see annex 8 11 Submit 4th Quarter 2007 invoice 5 Dec Wim Giesen
6 7. LIST OF ANNEXES
1. Key gaps in Lake Uromiyeh biodiversity baseline 2. List of participants invited to the first DWG meeting in Uromiyeh on 10th November 2007 3. Agenda for the 1st Meeting of the Lake Uromiyeh Biodiversity Working Group 4. Training needs questionnaire for LU BDWG 5. Case study on Tonle Sap 6. Outline project description 7. List of participants & table of outputs of Wetland Biodiversity breakout group, Lake Parishan Management Planning Workshop 12-13 November 2007 8. Schedule for finalisation of the draft biodiversity baseline reports for Lake Parishan and Lake Uromiyeh
7 Annex 1. Key gaps in Lake Uromiyeh biodiversity baseline
1. Data on water quality and quantity of Lake Uromiyeh itself (salinity levels in time), N, P, conductivity, suspended solids, turbidity, levels, pH… 2. Drought conditions since 2001? 3. List of macro-algae at LU, and indication of endemism. 4. Rare, endangered, restricted range or endemic vascular plant species at LU or in the LU Ecological Zone. 5. Which habitats and/or plant groups listed are the most threatened at LUEZ? 6. Bird population numbers and counts of breeding pairs since 2001? Total bird numbers: does LU and/or satellite wetlands still meet Ramsar criteria based on bird numbers? 7. Number of Persian Deer Dama mesopotamica at LU? (number released and when, population in 2000, present population…). 8. Number of Armenian Wild Sheep Ovis orientalis gmelini at LU? (number released in 1920, population in 2000, present population…). 9. Indicate if mammal species listed for LU are rare, relatively common, common or very common, and if the populations of these species are increasing, stable or decreasing. 10. List of amphibian species occurring at LUEZ other than the (very) common and widespread occurring species listed by Yekom (2002), especially endemics/restricted range and rare/endangered species. Indication of habitats, abundance and population trends. 11. List of endemics/restricted range and rare/endangered reptile species occurring at LUEZ. Indication of habitats, abundance and population trends. 12. Status, abundance and trend of the endemic/restricted range fish species found at LUEZ. Do the introduced fish species breed in the LUEZ, or are their populations dependent on escapes from fish farms? 13. Artemia uromia concentrations at LU over the past decade, and during various seasons, to assess trends and critical levels. 14. Hunting permits issued at LUEZ wetland areas (e.g. satellite wetlands): how many permits (to how many people), for which species, and what is actually taken? Are quota established? On which basis?
8 Annex 2. List of participants invited to the first BDWG meeting in Uromiyeh on 10th November 2007.
No. Name Organization Position Approved* 1 Mr. Ramin DoE West Az. Wildlife Yes Salmanzadeh Officer 2 Mr. Massoud DoE East Az. Wildlife Yes Officer 3 Mr. Amerifard DoE Kurdestan Habitat Expert Yes 4 Mr. Riazifar MoAJ West Az. – Yes Natural Resources Office 5 Mr. Nikpiran MoAJ East Az. – Yes Natural Resources Office 6 Mr. Shilat West Az. Officer in Yes Mohammadbagher Charge of Ghoreishi Planning 7 Mr. Samadzadeh Shilat East Az. Yes 8 Dr. Asadpour Shilat Artemia Head Yes Research Centre 9 Dr. Nasser Agh Urmieh Univ. – Head Yes Artemia Research Centre 10 Mr. Aghapoori Regional Water Yes Org. West Az. 11 Ms. Mowlavi NGO East Az. Yes To invite to join the BD WG Meeting: 12 Dr. Khorshidoust Tabriz Univ. – Geography Depart. 13 Ms. Pourshad/Mr. NGO West Az. Entekhabi (Sattelite Wetlands) Facilitators: 14 Wim Giesen CIWP Int. WBE Yes 15 Lisa Pourlak CIWP National WBE Yes Honorary Guests: 16 Mr. Ranaghadr DoE Deputy for Natural Env.- W.A. 17 Senior level expert DoE East Azerbaijan
9
Annex 3. Agenda for the 1st Meeting of the Lake Uromiyeh Biodiversity Working Group
Date: Saturday 10/11/2007 Location: DoE Provincial Office, Uromiyeh
Meeting Agenda
09:30-9:45 Welcome Notes Mr. Ranaghadr (Deputy Head of DoE – W. A.)
9:45-10:00 Objectives of the Meeting Wim Giesen (International Consultant for BD)
10:00-10:30 State of Biodiversity: Information Gaps and Management Priorities? Lisa Pourlak (National Consultant for BD)
10:30-11:00 Group Discussion (1): Data gaps in Baseline Biodiversity report
11:00-11:30 Case Study for identifying BD Management Indicators & targets Wim Giesen (International Consultant for BD)
11:30-12:30 Group Discussion (2): Indicators and targets for short, medium & long-term
12:30-13:30 Lunch
13:30-14:30 Group Discussion (3): Priority BD Management Objectives and Actions
14:30-15:30 Group Discussion (4): Setting priorities for 2008 work plan
15:30-16:00 Meeting Conclusion
10 Annex 4. Training needs questionnaire for LU BDWG
Filling out this questionnaire will help the CIWP assess the need for training in order to sustainably manage wetland resources at Lake Uromiyeh, and facilitate planning for such training sessions. Your time in filling out this questionnaire is much appreciated.
Name
Agency or group you represent
Q1 – Who should be ‘trained’ to ensure better management of Lake Uromiyeh’s wetland ecosystems?
Please tick in the boxes below: + = important, ++ = very important
Awareness Education On-the-job Formal training raising training programmes Local communities NGOs
Government offices (experts) Government offices (decision- makers) University staff (ToT) School staff (ToT) Field officers/ personnel
Are there other or specific groups not listed above that should receive training? If so, please list: ………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………
11 Q2- What kind of training would be helpful to enable your agency (or the group you represent) to successfully manage wetland resources at Lake Uromiyeh ?
Not Slightly Important Very important important Important 1. Physical and/or chemical 1.1 Pollution control: Criteria and standards Sampling techniques 1.2. Monitoring of water quality 1.3 EIA/SIA 2. Biological 2.1 Identification/monitoring of: Birds Fish Mammals Other wildlife (crustaceans, insects, reptiles, amphibians…) Plants/vegetation 2.2 Management of : Birds Fish Mammals Other wildlife (crustaceans, insects, reptiles, amphibians…) Vegetation / habitats 2.3 Ecological aspects: General wildlife management (population mgt, quota’s, interactions, wildlife corridors) Dryland habitat restoration Wetland restoration 3. Socio-economics 3.1 Economic aspects: Environmental economics Sustainable livelihoods Ecotourism Sustainable harvesting techniques
12
3.2 Social aspects: Public participation techniques PRAs Rural development 4. Legal aspects 4.1 International treaties, conventions and their implementation. 4.2 Law enforcement: Patrolling Reporting. & follow-up 5. Project Monitoring and Management
Others: ……………………………….. ……………………………….. ……………………………….. ………………………………..
Out of the above, please list YOUR top three training priorities: 1. ………………………………………… 2. ………………………………………… 3. …………………………………………
Q3- If training was available, how many days should be the training for?
Please tick a box, for yourself and your colleagues.
One day Three days One Week Regular intervals (phases) Yourself Your colleagues
Please note that any additional comments and suggestions may be added on the back of this page
13 Annex 5. Case study on Tonle Sap
1st BDWG meeting Lake Uromiyeh 10 November 2007, Uromiyeh Case study Biodiversity Management Indicators & Targets: Case study on Biodiversity Lake Tonle Sap Cambodia Management Indicators & Targets: Introduction Tonle Sap, Cambodia Threats to biodiversity UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project (CIWP) Identifying biodiversity management indicators & targets Presentation by Wim Giesen
1. Introduction (1) 1. Introduction (2)
Biodiversity value: 1-2 m in dry season Plants: >200 species, including endemics 8-10 m in wet season Fish: 200+ species, including 7 species of global significance 250,000-300,000 ha Reptiles: 42 species, 1 endemic & 19 species of global significance in dry season Birds: 225 species; 24 of global significance 1-1.6 million ha Mammals: 15 species; 10 of global significance in wet season
1. Introduction (3) 1. Introduction (4):
Socio-economic value: Status population: 1.7 million in 160 villages 1997: Biosphere Reserve under UNESCO’s cultivated area: 350,000ha (mainly rice) MAB program fisheries: 230,000 tons/yr, >$100 million/yr 1999: three areas designated as Ramsar sites
14
2. Threats to biodiversity: 2. Threats to biodiversity:
Carried out a threats analysis: Core problem: Loss of biodiversity in the Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve
Issues related to: CORE UNDERLYING & ROOT IMMEDIATE THREATS MANAGEMENT ACTIONS PROBLEM CAUSES Flooded forests Fish & fisheries Birds & other wildlife Introduced species
2. Threats: Flooded forests 2. Threats: flooded forest
Issue: Loss and degradation of ecologically CORE UNDERLYING & ROOT vital flooded forests MANAGEMENT ACTIONS PROBLEM IMMEDIATE THREATS CAUSES Main threat: Encroachment and land clearance - Weak policies & laws on land - Capacity building to improve Loss of Encroachment & land tenure policies & legislation biodiversity clearance - Weak enforcement - Capacity building of PA staff in TSBR - Boundaries unclear - Demarcation of protected areas
2. Threats: fish CORE DIRECT IMMEDIATE UNDERLYING FACTORS ROOT CAUSES INTERVENTIONS Issue: decreases in fisheries resources and PROBLEM IMPACTS THREATS fish diversity Loss and Over-exploitation Cutting for fuelwood, construction materials, fishing Decline of gears degradation of of forest High domestic and industrial demand for cheap, Strenthening of NRM habitat integrity flooded forest locally available fuel wood and charcoal Increasing resource needs of an increasing human coordination & resources No alternative fuel supply Develop & plant population planning in TSBR & other Weak policies and laws on land use rights and tenure sustainable land diversity (Output 1.1) habitats Perception of low values and open rights over 'common' use practices & resources Few examples and incentives for establishing and demarcate 2. Threats: wildlife managing resources sustainably - lack of alternative boundaries Coordination framework occupations and demonstrations of buffer zone (Output 1.2) for Community- Increasing demands for agricultural land - management based NRM in TSBR Encroachment & conversion pressures Dry season burning: accidental and for hunting (Output 2.1) land clearance Large-scale seasonal movements by migrants into Issue: decreases in wildlife populations system Loss of Empowerment of communities biodiversity Increasing resource needs of human population to manage resources Weak regulatory framework for fisheries management - in TSBR poor security over tenure to fishing areas and resources, (Output 2.2) Decrease in Intensive fishing pressures - 'virtual' fish sanctuaries weak judicial system, no monitoring systems, low levels Support to only, high levels of poaching, use of illegal methods, fisheries Over-exploitation of awareness, high levels of conflict community-based easy access Poor enforcement of fisheries laws and policies - low resources & of fish resources Fishing lot system promotes maximum harvest fisheries & NRM Support and development transparency, corruption, under-capacity rated (Output 1.3) fish diversity Few examples and incentives for establishing and of sustainable livelihoods 2. Threats: introduced species managing fisheries resources sustainably - lack of in TSBR (Output 2.3) alternative options
Enhancement of capacity Issue: introduced species impacting on Exotic species Lack of awareness of need to control and manage all Program for for biodiversity management Loss of fauna exotic species Accidental release / escape of exotic fauna control & in core areas of TSBR impacting on High economics returns from farming of exotic wildlife species Uncontrolled spread of exotic flora (eg. Mimosa management of (Output 3.1) species (eg. fish, crocodiles) - no incentives to stop native flora & pigra) native flora and fauna diversity No eradication procedures or management programs for exotic species fauna any exotic species (Activity 3.2.3) Development of systems Decline of for monitoring & managing other wildlife biodiversity (Output 3.2) Regional poverty and lack of food security - few resources, alternative food sources and cultural norms especially Economic incentives and high demands in foreign Alternative Promotion of biodiversity birds, reptiles Over-exploitation markets for some wildlife species (for medicine and other livelihoods in/ Uncontrolled hunting and collection of wildlife for uses) around TSBR core conservation awareness, & mammals of wildlife food and trade. Lack of wildlife protection regulations: Nationally (e.g. areas (Activity education & outreach resources Wildlife Protection Law in draft stage) and internationally (Output 3.3) (e.g. CITES not ratified) 3.2.5) Low levels of awareness regarding need for biodiversity conservation, low literacy rates
15 3. Management indicators, targets & monitoring: 3. Management indicators & targets?
Threat Indicator Management Monitoring target CORE UNDERLYING & ROOT MANAGEMENT ACTIONS PROBLEM IMMEDIATE THREATS CAUSES Encroachment & land Land clearance & Stabilise land use at Mapping of PA & land clearance encroachment halted or present levels (10,000 ha use cover reversed natural vegetation)
Decline in fish species Fish species & fisheries Dai fisheries remain Fisheries production - Demarcation of protected areas & numbers remain stable stable at 100,000 ton/yr figures Loss of Encroachment & land Weak policies & laws on land - Capacity building to improve biodiversity (average) clearance tenure policies & legislation in TSBR - Capacity building of PA staff Decline of key wildlife Key wildlife populations Colonies of pelicans & Pelican breeding species remain stable or increase great egret remain stable numbers (1200 & 2000 pairs, resp.) or increase
Management indicator: Land clearance & encroachment halted or reversed Competition with Introduced species do not Introduced species stable Mapping of introduced species increase to levels that or reduced from 2001 waterhyacinth & Mimosa Management target: stabilisation of land use at present level impact flora and fauna levels (150 ha for Mimosa pigra pigra, 500 ha for (10,000 ha natural habitat in the 3 PAs) waterhyacinth)
3. Lesson: how to define management indicators & targets? 3. Possible management targets L.Uromiyeh?
Indicators related to key biodiversity values Key biodiversity values, e.g.: loss of forest Area of habitat loss of bird species Artemia concentrations etc… Flamingos population/breeding Targets need to be quantifiable Pelicans population/breeding Area of forest (e.g. 10,000 ha) Migratory waterbirds Number of birds (e.g. 23,000) Persian deer etc… Need to be quantifiable & practical: Monitoring needs to be practical: Example 1: “Summer density of Artemia exceeds xx individuals per litre each year” Mapping of forest (remote sensing) Example 2: “Pelican breeding population at LU Key bird species or breeding colonies, not all birds (e.g. of at least 300 breeding pairs” 2000 breeding pairs of great egret), ……..
3. Management targets according to PDF-B:
Target Level (Based Level as of June Indicator Baseline Level on PDF-B) 30, 2007
Population of flamingos and breeding pairs in Lake Uromiyeh by the completion of the project and their Population of Flamingos sustained presence at comparable TBD by the end of (>10,000), breeding 86, no breeding pairs levels thereafter June 2008 pairs >2,500 annually
Population of breeding pairs of white pelicans to Lake Uromiyeh by the completion of the project and their sustained presence at comparable levels thereafter 110 Pairs (>200 pairs annually) 336 Pairs
Population of globally threatened species visiting restored wetlands within the Lake Uroumiyeh Ecological TBD by the end of TBD by the end of June Zone (LUEZ) June 2008 2008
16 Annex 6. Outline project description
1. Project Title:
2. Lead Agency:
3. Focal point & contact details
4. Partners:
5. Budget (total): 6. Duration (yrs):
7. Brief description of project:
8. 25-year target
9. 5-year target
10. Indicators
17 11. Tasks/activities: Activity-1 Output-1
Activity-2 Output-2
Activity-3 Output-3 etc…. 12. Training needs
13. Communications
14. Monitoring & review
15. Budget (breakdown of cost estimate): Activity-1: Activity-2: Activity-3: 16. Schedule yr 1 yr2 yr3 yr4 yr5 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Activity- 1 Activity- 2 Activity- 3 etc…
18 Annex 7. List of participants & table of outputs of Wetland Biodiversity breakout group, Lake Parishan Management Planning Workshop 12-13 November 2007
(see next page)
OBJECTIVE 1: To Protect, Restore and Conserve Biodiversity of Lake Parishan
19 Valuable biodiversity Targets and Indicators* Actions required Responsible agency (R) features to be Partners agencies (P) addressed 1- Globally important Short-term (5 yrs): 1-1 Zoning of the wetland in terms of breeding R: DoE bird species with Habitat Protection (especially habitats P: priority given to: breeding and feeding 1-2 Protecting the breeding habitats (ensure that NGOs, local communities Dalmatian pelican, grounds) to prevent any they are safe) (esp. hunters), marbled teal, white- further decrease 1-3 Prevent illegal shooting universities and research headed duck, pygmy 1-4 Reduce the pressure from motor boats centers, tourists (& tour cormorant Long-term (25 yrs): 1-5 Increase enforcement operators), Tourism Population increase to levels 1-6 Enhance monitoring (waterfowl counts) and Organization (& National as 30 years ago ringing programmes Committee for Nature- 1-7 Consider developing Ecotourism based Tourism), media, 1-8 Awareness raising for local communities (esp. Judiciary system hunters) 1-9 Identify further threats and reduce them 1-10 Study and prepare habitat maps 2- Endemic fish Short-term (5 yrs): 2-1 Assess stock of endemic fish (especially ….) R: DoE species especially Population increase to levels 2-2 Reduce fishing pressure especially in breeding P: those in decline with as in 10 years ago season Shilat (Fisheries priority given to: 2-3 Prevent introduction of exotic fish species into Organization & Shilat ….. Long-term (25 yrs): the lake Research Centre), local Habitat protection (especially 2-4 Restore the population of endemic fish if communities (esp. breeding and feeding needed by artificial reproduction fishermen), Water grounds) not to decrease any 2-5 Negotiate with the local community the Authority, universities and further possibility of holding on fish harvest for a few research centers, years in order to allow the population to restore Judiciary system (Gorog) 2-6 Provide additional livelihoods to reduce the pressure on fish stock from over-harvesting 2-7 Study various methods of fishing, promote “Selective Fishing” 2-8 Establish a “Gene Bank” 2-9 Establish a “Data Bank” 2-10 Raise awareness (esp. fishermen)
20 Valuable biodiversity Targets and Indicators* Actions required Responsible agency (R) features to be Partners agencies (P) addressed 2-11 Study the biology of endemic and non- endemic fish and the ecology of their inter- relationships 2-12 Identify further threats (water pollution, water reduction, motorboats, overfishing, etc.) and reduce them 3- Protect and restore Short-term (5 yrs): 3-1 Define natural wetland boundaries R: DoE the reedbeds with Increase in the area of 3-2 Assess the present status of reedbeds and P: priority given to Typha reedbeds to levels similar to prepare a map (1:10000) Natural Resources Office community 10 years ago 3-3 Raise awareness of local community and (MoAJ), Deputy for visitors (to prevent burning and over-harvest) livestock (MoAJ), local Long-term (25 yrs): 3-4 Study water levels and its impact on reedbed communities, tourists, Restoration of the natural establishment Water Authority, NGOs, Typha population to levels 3-5 Better enforcement Handicrafts Organization, similar to 30 years ago 3-6 Restoration measures Hellal Ahmar, Judiciary 3-7 Provide additional livelihoods to reduce system pressure from over-harvesting 3-8 Prevent over-grazing by cattle 4- Protect Otter Short-term (5 yrs): 4-1 Study the present status of the population (use R: DoE population from further Habitat protection not to local knowledge) P: decline decrease any further 4-2 Identify threats and reduce them NGOs, local communities, 4-3 Raise awareness (especially for local universities and research Long-term (25 yrs): communities) centres, Shilat, schools, Restoration of the population 4-4 Prevent trapping in fishing nets media, Judiciary system to levels similar to 30 years 4-5 Enhance enforcement ago 4-6 Promote research
21
Valuable biodiversity Targets and Indicators* Actions required Responsible agency (R) features to be Partners agencies (P) addressed 5- Protect the Short-term (5 yrs): 5-1 Prevent changes in land-use R: DoE Landscape value Not to be undermined any 5-2 Control and supervise new infrastructure P: further that the present level development projects (should be in harmony with Governor’s Office, nature) Tourism Organization (& Long-term (25 yrs): 5-3 Better management of waste and sewage Committee for Nature Not to be undermined any 5-4 Promote Ecotourism culture Tourism), Road and further that the present level 5-5 Restoration of forest habitats around the Transportation Ministry, (with improvements in waste wetland (especially on the northern slopes) with Health Organization, and sewage management endemic species Natural Resources Office and development of a 5-6 Control the agriculture under plastic (MoAJ), Hellal Ahmar, minimum level of eco-friendly Judiciary system, infrastructure) Housing Foundation
22 Cross-cutting Issues:
- Awareness raising: One the main target groups seems to be the local community (especially fishermen, hunters, etc.) who uses Parishan Lake’s natural resources directly. There are also visitors and school children that have been mentioned as the next target groups for this activity. Media could also have an important role in this regard.
- Enforcement enhancement: Close collaboration of DoE and the Judiciary system seems to be much required to ensure better enforcement. To properly implement this activity, more staff and equipment is also required.
- Ecotourism development: This has been mentioned as an activity that could also bring some additional income to the local communities to reduce pressure on Lake Parishan’s natural resources. However, there needs to be a close supervision and control over development of infrastructure and the overall quality of tour operations.
- Research: More research is required in all the biodiversity-related fields in order to achieve the above objectives. First and most important thing is the mapping exercise, threats analysis, restoration studies, …
- Local community knowledge of biodiversity: Because of the close inter-relationship between the local communities and the Lake, it seems that information about the local knowledge on biodiversity (especially the ecological background of the area) and traditional management systems would be of much value to properly determine the targets and indicators for reaching the above objectives.
* Notes: - The group had some problems in determining targets and indicators. This part has been developed later on. - Although it was not fully discussed in our meeting but it seems that Contingency planning needs to take into consideration events such as drought, birdflu and their immediate impacts on biodiversity of the Lake.
List of Participants in the Biodiversity Working Group:
Facilitators: - Wim Giesen - Lisa Pourlak
Participants:
1- Dr. Esmaili, Shiraz University (Rapporteur) 2- Ms. Pezeshkian, CIWP Kazeroon? (Note taker) 3- Mr. Shariati, DoE Fars 4- Leila Joulayee, DoE Fars (helped in preparing tables) 5- Ms. Aliakbari, DoE Fars 6- Mr. Eslamloo, DoE Fars 7- Ms. Vaziri, DoE Kazeroon 8- Dr. Mortazavi, MoAJ (Fars) 9- Ms. Moazen, NGO (Kazeroon) (helped in preparing tables) 10- Mrs. Zamanibakhsh, NGO Kazeroon 11- Mr. Kazeneini, NGO Kazeroon 12- Ms. Neinavaz, NGO Teheran 13- Mrs. Anjavi, NGO Shiraz 14- Mr. Gorbani, Local community
23 Annex 8. Schedule for finalisation of the biodiversity baseline reports for Lake Parishan and Lake Uromiyeh
Milestone Responsibility Date produced & available Finalize Farsi version of draft biodiversity Lisa Pourlak 15 December 2007 baseline report for LP including comments by NPM and Mr. Lotfi Finalize Farsi version of draft biodiversity Lisa Pourlak 10 December 2007 baseline report LU (summary of Yekom report in Farsi which needs to be re- typed) English-language version of draft Lisa Pourlak 30 December 2007 biodiversity baseline report for LP Upgraded English-language version of Lisa Pourlak 30 December 2007 draft biodiversity baseline report for LU, incorporating data from 2005 Pandam reports
24 UNDP/GEF – Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project (CIWP)
Mission Report to UNDP and National Project Director 27 April – 7 May 2008
Wim Giesen, Wetland Biodiversity Expert (WBE) [email protected] or [email protected]
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This mission report is on the third mission of the WBE on the CIWP, which was from 27 April to 7 May 2008. The focus was on running two Wetland Monitoring Training Workshops, one lasting 3 days in Uromiyeh, the second lasting two days in Shiraz. The workshop outputs were provision of training in wetland monitoring programmes, an assessment of ongoing monitoring programmes, and establishing monitoring protocols for key indicators. Protocols were completed in draft form for most indicators, including hydrology, biodiversity and socio- economic indicators. These will be finalised by the hydrology, biodiversity and socio-economic working groups over the coming weeks, in anticipation of the zoning workshops that are to be held at the end of May 2008.
Highlights: The national project team is performing well and has been doing well since the arrival of the new NPM in the second half of 2007. Both Wetland Monitoring Workshops were well received and well participated in, with 40+ participants in each, coming from a wide range of organisations. At both workshops, protocols were prepared in draft form for most of the indicators/parameters identified in the fields of hydrology, biodiversity and socio-economics. Plans were made to finalise these within several weeks within the hydrology, biodiversity and socio-economic working groups. In Uromiyeh, the workshop was particularly well attended, by participants from both East and West Azerbaijan. DoE West Azerbaijan was represented (among others) by the director and vice director throughout the workshop, and the director of East Azerbaijan attended one of the sessions and gave a presentation. The Vice Governor of West Azerbaijan, Mr. Daryani, invited the project team and workshop participants to present the project to him at the Governor’s office in the evening of 30 April. About 15 workshop participants including DoE staff, team members and other stakeholders joined in this unscheduled meeting, which was highly cordial and allowed an exchange of views and ideas. Visits to Lake Uromiyeh port and the Artemia & Aquatic Animals Research Institute of Uromiyeh University. In Shiraz, the workshop was well attended throughout by DoE staff and a wide range of stakeholders from Kazeroun, Shiraz and Tehran.
Lowlights: Lack of a field visit to Lake Parishan, which was not possible as the workshop was held in Shiraz and time was limited.
1
1. SCHEDULE
Date (2007) Location Activity
Sun 27 Apr Travel 13:30 Travel from home to Amsterdam Schiphol Airport (shared airport taxi service) 18:15 Flight Amsterdam – Tehran (KLM) Mon 28 Apr Tehran 03:00 Arrive Tehran (IKA), stay Taj Mahal Hotel 10:30 Meet with National WBE, Lisa Pourlak & NPM Ali Nazaridoust until 16:00 16:00 Work on preparations for workshop until 21:00. Tue 29 Apr Tehran & 05:00 Leave for Mehrabad Airport Uromiyeh 06:40 Flight to Uromiyeh, check in at Tourist Hotel 09:00 Opening of Wetland Monitoring Training Workshop 18:00 Closure of first day of Wetland Monitoring Training Workshop. Wed 30 Apr Uromiyeh 08:30 Second day of Wetland Monitoring Training Workshop. 17:00 Closure of second day of workshop. 17:30 Meeting with the Vice Governor, Mr Daryani, until 18:45. Thu 1 May Uromiyeh - 08:30 Third day of Wetland Monitoring Training Workshop. Tehran 11:00 Closure of workshop. 11:00 Meeting of the Biodiversity Working Group until 13:00. 13:00 Lunch 14:30 Visit to the Artemia & Aquatic Animal research Institute of Uromiyeh University until 15:30; visit to a port used by DoE and Shilat, on western shore of LU. 16:30 Leave for Uromiyeh Airport. 19:10 Flight to Tehran, stay at Taj Mahal Hotel (arriving 22:00). Fri 2 May Tehran - Shiraz 08:30 Work on presentations for Wetland Monitoring Training Workshop in Shiraz. 17:00 Leave for Mehrabad Airport 18:30 Flight to Shiraz; arrive 20:00, stay at Pars Hotel 21:00 Pre-dinner meeting with team, until 22:00 Sat 3 May Shiraz 09:00 Opening of the Wetland Monitoring Training Workshop in Shiraz, held at Pars Hotel. 18:00 Closure of first day of Wetland Monitoring Training Workshop. 20:00 Work on presentations until dinner at 21:30 Sun 4 May Shiraz 09:00 Second and final day of Wetland Monitoring Training Workshop. 18:30 Closure of the workshop. Mon 5 May Shiraz -Tehran 09:00 Meeting of the Biodiversity Working Group on identifying key biodiversity locations at LP; until 11:30. 12:30 Leave for Persepolis; spend two hours at Persepolis and leave for Airport at 16:00. 18:25 Flight to Tehran, arrive 20:00, stay at Taj Mahal Hotel Tue 6 May Tehran 08:30 Work on draft workshop reports until 10:00 10:00 Leave for CIWP project office at DoE headquarters; work on reports and have meetings with national WBE and NPM until 17:30. 18:00 Work on draft workshop reports until 20:00. Wed 7 May Tehran - 03:15 Leave for Emam Khomeini International Airport Amsterdam 06:40 Flight to Amsterdam (KLM) 10:00 Arrive in Amsterdam, take shared airport taxi service 13:00 Arrive at home base.
2 2. INTRODUCTION
This was the third mission on the CIWP undertaken by the international Wetland Biodiversity Expert (WBE), together with the national WBE; there was no overlap with other international team members on CIWP.
This mission aimed at holding two wetland monitoring training workshops, one for Lake Parishan (held at Shiraz) and one for Lake Uromiyeh (held at Uromiyeh). The monitoring was for all key indicators/parameters, and accordingly, inputs were provided by national team members on hydrology, biodiversity and socio-economics.
The mission involved visits to Lake Uromiyeh and Uromiyeh city, the capital of West Azerbaijan province, and Shiraz, the capital of Fars province. Apart from a brief visit to Lake Uromiyeh and the Artemia & Aquatic Animal Research Institute of Uromiyeh University, the input was too brief to include a field visit to Lake Parishan.
The mission proceeded according to plan, with 4.5 workshop days (2.5 at Uromiyeh, 2 at Shiraz), and extra time being used for previously unscheduled meetings of the Biodiversity Working Groups.
NPM and UNDP are thanked for efficiently arranging all logistics including visa invitation, pick- up from Tehran airport, accommodation and all meetings. Dr Delavar Najafi (NPD), Dr Ali Nazaridoust (NPM), Saber Masoomi (Technical Assistant), Sara Koochaki (Project Office Assistant) and all the national project team members are warmly thanked for their hospitality and strong and efficient support.
3. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THIS MISSION
The objectives of this mission were as follows:
TOR1: Lead the design and delivery of a training course on wetland monitoring for staff and stakeholders from the project demonstration sites, with a particular focus on the development of site monitoring protocols (one course to be held jointly for LP and LU). TOR2: Mission report for UNDP and NPD according to the standard format (provided by SIPA), by the end of May 2008.
These workshops were originally planned to be organised jointly with Andy Brown (PAs and Institutional Expert), but this idea had to be abandoned due to conflicting schedules. The outputs of the workshops were identified as follows: Active participation of 40 participants in preparing a monitoring programme for both LP/LU. Assessment of the existing monitoring programme at LP / LU. Preparation of monitoring protocols for the main parameters at LP / LU.
3 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The following section summarises the achievements against each TOR objective.
TOR 1. Lead the design and delivery of a training course on wetland monitoring for staff and stakeholders from the project demonstration sites, with a particular focus on the development of site monitoring protocols (one course to be held jointly for LP and LU).
The outputs of the workshops were identified as follows: Active participation of 40 participants in preparing a monitoring programme for both LP/LU. Assessment of the existing monitoring programme at LP / LU. Preparation of monitoring protocols for the main parameters at LP / LU.
Add 1: Active participation of 40 participants. Via active participation, the participants are expected to gain experience in establishing/drafting of monitoring programmes. Participants of various agencies are to be included in the workshop, which is to focus on producing a comprehensive monitoring programme for LP / LU that covers all the key parameters.
More than 40 participants actively participated in each of the workshops at LP and LU; at these, presentations were provided by the international WBE on: - introduction to monitoring - monitoring cycle - local communities & monitoring - monitoring protocols Please refer to separate workshop reports for LU and LP for the workshop programmes, PowerPoint presentations and lists of participants.
Add. 2: Existing monitoring programme. Monitoring of various parameters has occurred in the past and is ongoing in some cases. These are to be presented to the participants, discussed and (briefly) evaluated.
National consultants and their counterparts (from DoE, Shilat, Water Authority, NGOs) gave presentations on past and ongoing monitoring for both LP and LU. These were followed by discussions and brief evaluations. Please refer to separate workshop reports for LU and LP for the results of these discussions.
Add. 3: Preparation of protocols. The preparation of protocols for monitoring of the main parameters / indicators at LP / LU will form the main output of the workshop. These protocols together will comprise the monitoring programme, which in turn will form an integral part of the Management Plan.
The process of drafting protocols for the main parameters / key indicators made significant strides, and most protocols were largely (80%) completed in draft form. Only a few protocols still need to be drafted, and it has been agreed that these will be completed by the three working groups over the coming weeks, in time for the zoning workshop planned at the end of the month. Please refer to separate workshop reports for LU and LP for details as to which protocols have been completed and which remain to be covered.
TOR 2. Mission report for UNDP and NPD according to the standard format (provided by SIPA), by the end of May 2008.
This is covered by the present report.
4 5. RECOMMENDATIONS
Complete the protocols for hydrology, biodiversity and socio-economics as soon as possible, as other activities such as the zoning workshop will take up everyone’s time by the end of the month. Focus on achieving concrete outputs in addition to soft outputs (such as training, workshops, etc..), both at LP and LU, as many stakeholders fret that the project is not achieving things on the ground (i.e. visible outputs). A notable exception is the Parishan Festival, of course, but more concrete activities would be welcomed by many. More regular update reports (0.5 – 1.0 page) from the national WBE to the international WBE, to keep the latter abreast of developments and more involved in project execution. Regular meetings between wetland biodiversity focal point at DOE headquarters and the national WBE, to discuss progress and possible issues.
6. ACTION POINTS
ACTION POINTS By By When Who 1 Complete and submit draft mission report 11 May Wim Giesen
2 Finalise mission report 24 May Wim Giesen
3 Finalise draft workshop reports for LP and LU (as drafted by 20 May Lisa Pourlak, WBE on 6 May) Sara Koochaki, Mona Karnanian, Ahmad Lotfi 4 Draft protocols for otters (LP) and satellite wetland habitats (LU) 15 May Lisa Pourlak and circulate to Biodiversity WGs 5 Biodiversity WG meetings for finalising draft protocols at 21 May Lisa Pourlak Uromiyeh and Shiraz 6 Finalise draft protocols for Lake Uromiyeh and Lake Parishan 24 May Lisa Pourlak 7 Finalise the two biodiversity baseline reports for lakes Parishan 30 June Lisa Pourlak and Uromiyeh 8 Submit 2nd Quarter 2008 invoice 30 June Wim Giesen
Annexes:
1. Report on the Wetland Monitoring Workshop for Lake Uromiyeh, Uromiyeh, 29 April – 1 May 2008
2. Report on the Wetland Monitoring Workshop for Lake Parishan, Shiraz, 3-4 May 2008
5 UNDP/GEF – Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project (CIWP)
Mission Report to UNDP and National Project Director 10-11 October 2008
Wim Giesen, Wetland Biodiversity Expert (WBE) [email protected] or [email protected]
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This mission input consisted of only two (2) days input. The WBE was in Iran on assignment for the Siberian Crane project, and was requested by the CIWP Project Manager to extend his stay by 2 days to provide a brief input. This consisted of discussions, meetings and editing of project outputs.
1. SCHEDULE
Date (2007) Location Activity
Fri 10 Oct Raamtin Hotel Meeting from 10:30 – 19:30 with the National Biodiversity Tehran expert to discuss a range of outstanding issues on the project. Sat 11 Oct CIWP project Meetings and discussions at CIWP project office, with National office at DoE Biodiversity expert and the National Project Manager, from Tehran 09:00 to 17:00. Editing of draft biodiversity monitoring protocols & Plans, from 18:30-21:00. Sun 12 Oct. Return to the Netherlands
2. INTRODUCTION
Previously planned inputs were delayed, hence the request for two days input to assist the National Biodoversity expert with a range of outstanding issues.
3. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THIS MISSION
The objectives of this mission were as follows: 1. Meetings with National Project Manager to discuss progress on the biodiversity programme. 2. Meetings and discussion with the National Biodoversity Expert. 3. Editing of 14 Biodiversity Monitoring Protocols and 2 Monitoring Plans.
1 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Meetings and discussions were held as planned, and the 14 Monitoring Protocols and 2 Monitoring Plans were edited and provided to the National Project Manager and the National Biodiversity Expert.
5. RECOMMENDATIONS
• Translate and circulate the revised drafts of the Monitoring Protocols and Plans. • Develop grazing exclusion programme at LP, as discussed • Hold fisheries workshop, as discussed.
6. ACTION POINTS
ACTION POINTS By By When Who 1 Complete and submit draft mission report Feb 09 Wim Giesen 2 Translate and circulate the revised drafts of the Monitoring Feb 09 Lisa Pourlak Protocols and Plans. 3 Finalise program for grazing exclusion Jan 09 Lisa Pourlak 4 Organise fisheries workshop Mar 09 Lisa Pourlak
2 UNDP/GEF – Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project (CIWP)
Mission Report to UNDP and National Project Director 11-24 April 2009
Wim Giesen, Wetland Biodiversity Expert (WBE) [email protected] or [email protected]
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This mission report is on the fifth mission of the WBE on the CIWP, which was from 11-24 April 2007. The focus was on three Biodiversity Working Group (BDWG) meetings, one in Uromiyeh, a second in Shiraz and a third at Ahwaz, active participation in two workshops at Lake Parishan (Fisheries, Wetland Biodiversity Monitoring Training), visits to/discussions at satellite wetlands around Lake Uromiyeh/LU (Gorigol, Quaragheshlagh, Kanibrazan) and participation in a “Sharing Lessons Learned” workshop at DoE HQ in Tehran. Presentations were given at the workshops.
Highlights: A highly successful Fisheries Workshop at Kazeroun attended by 60+ fishermen from the local communities, representatives from DoE and Shilat (Fisheries Department). Enthusiastic response (from villagers and NGO members) at LP during the Biodiversity Monitoring workshop, and during the subsequent field visit. Enthusiastic support for Lake Gorigol conservation by local member of parliament. Successful establishment of a BDWG at Ahwaz for the Shadegan wetland, and very positive role of DoE Khouzestan. Field visits to LU satellite wetlands (Gorigol, Quaragheshlagh, Kanibrazan), Lake Parishan and Shadegan. Meeting with the enthusiastic and highly capable Deputy NPM, who has recently joined the CIWP team.
Lowlights: Lack of significant progress on biodiversity monitoring in the LP and LU BDWGs. Drought and wetland desiccation impacts on LU, LP and Shadegan. The announcement that the National Wetland Biodiversity Expert (NWBE) may be leaving CIWP.
1st DRAFT 24th April 2009
1
1. SCHEDULE
Date (2009) Location Activity
Sat. 11 April International 10:30 Travel from home to Amsterdam Schiphol Airport, care travel + by rail from Doetinchem. 15:35 Flight Amsterdam – Tehran (KLM) Sun. 12 Tehran 23:00 Arrive Tehran (IKA), stay Taj Mahal Hotel April Day off in Tehran, as agreed with CIWP.
Mon. 13 Tehran & Shiraz 08:00 CIWP office at DoE. Meetings with NPM, Deputy NPM, April National WBE and other CIWP team members; until 17:00. 17:00 Departure for Mehrabad airport. 19:30 Flight to Shiraz 21:00 Arrive at Shiraz Tues. 14 Shiraz & 09:00 Meeting at DoE office Shiraz April Kazeroun 10:00 BDWG meeting at DoE office until 13:30 14:30 Departure by vehicle for Kazeroun 18:00 Arrival at Kazeroun Wed. 15 Kazeroun 09:00 Fisheries workshop at the Jihad Building in April Nargesszar, Lake Parishan, until 17:30 Thur. 16 Kazeroun, 09:00 Biodiversity Monitoring Training workshop, held at the April Shiraz & Tehran DoE guard station (Lake Parishan), until 14:30. 14:30 Field visit for monitoring workshop: wetlands near Arab Famour village at the far eastern corner of LP. 18:00 Return to Shiraz by vehicle 22:40 Flight from Shiraz to Tehran 24:00 Arrive in Tehran Fri. 17 April Tehran 08:30 Work at Taj Mahal Hotel on presentations for the upcoming workshops (DoE HQ and BDWG LU). Sat. 18 April Tehran, Tabriz 05:30 Leave for Tehran Mehrabad airport & Mahabad 07:30 Flight from Tehran to Tabriz. 09:00 Meeting at DoE office in Tabriz with DoE officials, including head and deputy head. 10:00 Leave for Lake Gorigol, arrive at 10:30 for meeting with local member of parliament, reporters and DoE (including head, deputy head and staff). 11:30 Leave for Mahabad, stopping at Quaragheshlagh and Kanibrazan wetlands along the way; meeting with local community members at Kanibrazan. 21:30 Arrive at hotel in Mahabad. Sun. 19 Mahabad, 07:00 Leave for Uromiyeh by vehicle April Uromiyeh & 09:30 BDWG meeting at DoE office, with opening speeches Tehran by Mr Kalantary and Mr. Ranagarh; meeting until 15:30 16:30 Leave for Uromiyeh airport 18:15 Flight from Uromiyeh to Tehran. Mon. 20 Tehran 09:00 DoE workshop: sharing lessons learned from CIWP, April with DoE HQ staff involved in biodiversity, along with key provincial staff from Fars, East and West Azerbaijan and Khouzestan. Until 14:30.
2 Tues. 21 Tehran, Ahwaz 04:00 Depart for Mehrabad airport April & Tehran 05:20 Flight from Tehran to Ahwaz 06:30 Arrive in Ahwaz; DoE mess 09:00 Meeting at DoE office, establishing of the BDWG; meeting until 12:00. 13:00 Lunch in Ahwaz 14:00 Leave for Shadegan wetland; arrive at 15:00; boat trip on wetland 16:30 Leave for Abadan; arrive 17:30; visit wetland centre 19:30 Depart for Ahwaz; arrive at DoE office at 21:00; meeting with head of DoE Khouzestan 22:00 Depart for airport 22:50 Flight Ahwaz – Tehran 24:00 Arrive in Tehran Wed. 22 Tehran 09:30 Meet at CIWP office, DoE HQ April 10:15 Leave for UNDP office; meet with Mr. Saeid Ferdowsi & Ms Karineh Dror 11:30 Return to CIWP office 12:00 Meeting with NPM and Deputy NPM for debriefing and to discuss and evaluate the mission; until 13:00. 13:30 Lunch 14:00 Discussion with NPM, DNPM and the National WBE. 15:00 Reporting, until office closure at 16:00. 17:00 Return to hotel, work on report. Thur. 23 Tehran 08:00 Reporting. April 22:00 Head to Imam Khomeini Airport Fri. 24 April International 02:05 Flight from IKA, Tehran to Schiphol Airport Travel Amsterdam, with KLM flight. 05:20 Arrival at Schiphol airport 06:30 Train from Amsterdam to Doetinchem; arrive at 09:30 10:00 Arrival at home base.
2. INTRODUCTION
This was the fifth mission on the CIWP undertaken by the international Wetland Biodiversity Expert (WBE), together with the national WBE. Although this was the fifth mission, it must be pointed out that the fourth input consisted of two days input in October 2008 (i.e. 2 days for CIWP appended to a mission in Iran for the Siberian Crane project). Originally, the mission was planned for December 2008, but due to delays in visa application this was postponed until April as the International WBE was unavailable during the first quarter of 2009.
As only a limited number of days were available under the current contract and as there was no flight on 12 April, the International WBE agreed to accept an unpaid day off on 12 April (this is reflected in the schedule, above).
The mission involved a busy schedule, with lots of in-country travel, and little time for preparation. As no additional days were available, preparation of presentations was deferred until the mission. The mission involved travel to Tehran, Shiraz and Kazeroun (Fars Province), Tabriz (East Azerbaijan), Mahabad and Uromiyeh (West Azerbaijan), Ahwaz and Abadan (Khouzestan Province). Field visits proceeded as scheduled, to Lake Parishan, Gorigol Lake, Quaragheshlagh, Kanibrazan and Shadegan wetlands. BDWG meetings were held for LP, LU and Shadegan, and workshops were held on fisheries and biodiversity monitoring (at LP) and sharing lessons learned (DoE HQ). The mission proceeded according to plan, and as agreed with DoE, CIWP and UNDP.
3 NPM, UNDP and CIWP are thanked for efficiently arranging all logistics including visa invitation, accommodation and meetings. Dr Delavar Najafi (NPD), Dr Ali Nazaridoust (NPM), Mohsen Soleymani (Deputy NPM), Saber Masoomi (Technical Assistant), Sara Koochaki (Project Office Assistant), and Mehri Asna-ashari (Communications officer) are warmly thanked for their hospitality and strong and efficient support.A special thanks goes to the National WBE, Ms Lisa Pourlak, for all her good efforts during the project and on this current mission.
3. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THIS MISSION
The objectives of this mission were as follows: 1. Brief DoE Headquarters about biodiversity work 2007-2009 2. Share Monitoring/Baseline Reports 2008 for LP and LU (meeting in Teheran with DoE provinces + HQ) 3. Introduce Monitoring protocols for 2009 to relevant stakeholders (meeting in Teheran and provincial level – BDWG meetings) 4. Finalize Biodiversity Action Plan Portfolios in consultation with BDWGs for LU and LP. 5. Initiate action points on biodiversity monitoring with local communities in LP (through Training Workshop in LP) with field focus on: a. Typha b. Otter c. Endemic fish 6. Hold workshop on Fisheries (in collaboration with Shilat Fars and local fishermen) 7. Initiate Shadegan Biodiversity Working Group + identify Action Points for Shadegan Management Plan
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The following section summarises the achievements against each TOR objective.
TOR 1. Brief DoE Headquarters about biodiversity work 2007-2009. A workshop was held at DoE Headquarters on ‘Sharing Lessons Learned with DoE HQ’ on 20 April (programme is included as Annex 1). Presentations were given about the overall CIWP by the NPM and on activities of the BDWGs and biodiversity work under the CIWP by the National WBE and by DoE representatives of the BDWGs for LU and LP. The International WBE gave a presentation on “New global approaches to biodiversity conservation in Wetlands”, whereby (at CIWP’s request) the focus was on “the new approach to conservation in the world which emphasizes on local communities as opposed to only government policing.” The presentations from DoE Fars and DoE West Azerbaijan were excellent, as it illustrated the level of involvement on the project. DoE HQ staff were pleased to receive an update about CIWP, but stated that they would have liked to have received more information earlier1. The NPM and Deputy NPM coordinated an activity whereby DoE staff were requested to list the strengths and weaknesses of CIWP, pick the main weakness and strength, and identifying how the main weakness could best be addressed.
1 They receive CIWP Bulletins and are invited to meetings, but the problem is perhaps that there is limited continuity in this (not all people can attend all meetings), and not all people read the bulletins.
4 The presentation by the International WBE did not quite meet the expectations of DoE, as they had expected a (technical) presentation on biodiversity rather than one on involving local communities in biodiversity conservation. However, it generated discussion, and given that at least some DoE staff are firm believers in strong policing and keeping people out of protected areas at all cost, this approach was perhaps just what was required rather than a technical presentation.
TOR 2. Share Monitoring/Baseline Reports 2008 for LP and LU (meeting in Teheran with DoE provinces + HQ). Baseline reports for Lake Parishan were discussed at length during the LP BDWG meeting at DoE Shiraz on 14 April. Two reports have been commissioned by DoE Fars, one that compiles existing information, and a second that was also based on some additional studies carried out during the past months. The first report, by xxxxx (Lisa, pls provide name) University, was found to be very descriptive and lengthy, with few overview tables, little or no analysis, and many mistakes (e.g. including species that do not occur in Iran. The main author, who was present at the meeting, defended his report by stating that people had not been very forthcoming with data and information, and that they were not in a position to assess if the data was correct, but had simply assumed this was correct and compiled it. The International WBE did not find the arguments convincing, as they had been contracted to provide a review of existing data, and this should include synthesis, analysis and weeding out of inconsistent or incorrect data. Now the experts on the BDWG feel they have been left out, and are requested to edit and improve a report produced by outsiders with no previous involvement at LP. The author was requested to send his report as a *.pdf file to all BDWG members, and they were requested to provide detailed feedback on the sections relevant to their area of expertise. The second report was deemed to be better, but it was considered necessary to combine the two into one baseline report. It is unfortunate that these studies had been contracted out to two parties for two separate outputs. Better would have been to contract this work to various experts (e.g. on birds, fish, plants) and have someone compile these sections into one coherent report. The Baseline report for LU has been passed on to the BDWG members by the National WBE, but during the BDWG meeting at Uromiyeh, there was no time to discuss this as the agenda was already too full.
TOR 3. Introduce Monitoring protocols for 2009 to relevant stakeholders (meeting in Tehran and provincial level – BDWG meetings). Monitoring protocols and plans had been finalised in October and circulated to the BDWG members by the National WBE in the last quarter of 2008. The process of production of the monitoring protocols was explained by the International WBE at the DoE HQ workshop in Tehran: i) identification of indicators during management planning workshop, ii) monitoring workshop, iii) process of filling out protocols for key biodiversity indicators, and iv) how together with the Monitoring Plan they are appended to and become an integral part of the Management Plan.
TOR 4. Finalize Biodiversity Action Plan Portfolios in consultation with BDWGs for LU and LP. The Biodiversity Action Plan portfolios were discussed at the BDWG meetings in Shiraz and Uromiyeh, but still remain to be finalised. At the Shiraz BDWG meeting, lengthy discussions focussed on the baseline reports, leaving little time to discuss, let alone complete the portfolios. This is at least partly due to lack of firm chairing at the meeting (see recommendations), but also due to DoE Fars staff not being involved throughout they meeting (they are regularly called out of the meeting). At the LU BDWG meeting in Uromiyeh, members discussed the remaining portfolios in smaller groups for several hours, and these ware largely finalized. What remains, however, are the financial sections, which all parties find difficult to complete on their own. At both meetings it was pointed out that the portfolios need to be completed soon, so that they could be finalised before the upcoming mission of SIPA in May.
5
TOR 5. Initiate action points on biodiversity monitoring with local communities in LP (through Training Workshop in LP) with field focus on Typha , Otter and Endemic fish. A training workshop on Biodiversity Monitoring at Lake Parishan was held at the DoE Guard Station at LP, Kazeroun, on 16 April. DoE staff, local community members and (mainly) members of the NGO Tabiat va Salamat (PLan4Land) were invited – a programme is attached in Annex 2. Due to a miscommunication, local community and Plan4Land members did not arrive until 10:30, delaying the programme by 1.5 hours. Five 10-minute presentations were planned for the morning session, on: introduction to biodiversity value (Dr Esmaeili, Shiraz University), Plants & vegetation (Wim Giesen, CIWP), Otter (Mona Hamzehpour, Plan4Land), Fishes, reptiles & amphibians (Dr Esmaeili), and Birds (Laila Joolaie, DoE Fars). However, apart from the International WBE, all presentations lasted 30-60 minutes, which meant that the original morning programme had to be rescheduled. However, there was a lot of interest in the presentations and many questions were asked. In the end, the field programme began at 14:30, which is a delay of only 30 minutes. During the morning session, Mr Bahram Zehzad (ret. botanist) rallied for compiling ethnobotanical information on plants around Lake Parishan ‘before this dies out’. There was a lot of interested in this, and during the meeting several agreed they would be interested in participating.
During the field visit to LP, involvement of local community members in the monitoring of otters and in the Typha angustifolia grazing exclusion programme was discussed. This had been prepared beforehand as Typha is limited to a few areas around the lake, and Arab Famour village was found to be interested in both grazing exclusion and otter monitoring. How grazing (mainly by buffalo and cattle) is to be prevented in the grazing exclusion area has yet to be determined. Local community members did not think that fencing would be required, but this seems unlikely, as cattle/buffalo are free ranging and are not accompanied by herders throughout. Mr Zehzad is interested in following the Typha recovery programme up with the local community, and both he and the International WBE need to provide ideas about what kind fencing would be appropriate and effective (green-fencing, barbed wire, wooden, etc...). Interesting is that Typha stems (produced during flowering) are harvested and sold by the local community – they are durable and apparently used for producing window blinds. Ms Hamzehpour gave an outline of what would be required for otter monitoring in the field, and local community members expressed interest in participation. The monitoring of endemic fish was not further discussed, as Dr Esmaeili had to return to Shiraz after the morning session.
TOR 6. Hold workshop on Fisheries (in collaboration with Shilat Fars and local fishermen) A Fisheries workshop was held in the Agriculture Jihad Building at Nargesszar village (eastern part of LP) on 15 April (the workshop agenda is included in Annex 3). The workshop was attended by 60 fishermen (a large % of total, which is <100), two senor staff of Shilat Fars and three from DoE (Fars & Kazeroun). Issues were identified in active working sessions in two breakout groups, and solutions and actions required suggested. In the end, an agreement for cooperation signed by representatives from the fishing community, Shilat and DoE, which is a major achievement.
Local fishermen agreed to form an association or cooperative, to facilitate future fisheries activities (as actions can rarely target individuals), and representatives were selected for each village. Shilat agreed that exotics would not be restocked in Lake Parishan (LP); and DoE stated that it was exploring options for legalisation of fishing by local community members at LP. Prior to the meeting (in Shiraz on 14 April), the International and National WBEs had a discussion with DoE and Shilat regarding a joint approach. DoE agreed that it would not focus on illegality of fishing at LP, but state that it was exploring how this could be legalised (there are legal loopholes, mentioned by Mr Zorabi of DoE Fars). At the same time, Shilat agreed that they would refrain from restocking LP with exotic species. Both positions were maintained during the workshop.
6
TOR 7. 7. Initiate Shadegan Biodiversity Working Group + identify Action Points for Shadegan Management Plan. A meeting was held at the DoE office of Khouzestan province in Ahwaz on 21 April, from 09:30 to 12:30. This meeting was attended by 17 persons other than CIWP team members and included 8 DoE staff, 3 university experts, 1 from Habitat Bureau, 2 from Shilat, 1 from Aquatic Research Centre MOJA, and 2 from the Water Authority (including the head of their environmental unit). Community representatives were invited but did not participate.
After introduction of each participant (they were requested to explain their involvement at Shadegan/wetlands in general), the NPM gave a general presentation on CIWP, the International WBE gave a presentation on a proposed TOR for a BDWG and proposed membership, while the National WBE gave a presentation on the experience with the BDWGs for LP and LU. The participants generally agreed with the TOR, and the main focus of discussions was on the required membership. It was agreed that the BDWG was required, and those present agreed that the next meeting should be held before long (within 1-2 months). In the meantime, the National WBE is to send the proposed members of the BDWG examples of BDWG outputs from LP and LU.
5. RECOMMENDATIONS
The BDWG meetings need to: o Be more focused and better chaired, as discussions tend to drag on and the National WBE is too lenient in letting everyone have their say, even if this is irrelevant. o Be more informal, especially at LU, where all the official introductions can be dispensed with, as this does not contribute to the outputs and leaves outsiders frustrated about the amount of time they feel is wasted. o In Fars, the BDWG meetings could alternately be hosted by Shilat, which would mean that DoE attendance throughout the meeting is more likely. The importance of awareness and education was stressed time and again during the mission, among others, by the GEF coordinator at DoE HQ, Dr. Fazali. It is recommended that CIWP contact the Pakistan Wetlands Programme as they have a very strong awareness and education programme (see action point xxx) and CIWP could benefit from adopting similar approaches. The issue of dealing with drought (and how this was affecting biodiversity) was a major theme during the mission, and was again emphasized by Saeid Ferdowsi at UNDP. It is recommended that options for a study tour to the Murray-Darling region in south- eastern Australia be explored, as this is an area: i) that has had to cope with prolonged drought; ii) where water abstraction, mainly for agriculture, has aggravated the problem; iii) wetlands have suffered as a result; iv) decisions have been taken to reallocate water from agriculture to wetlands; and v) follow-up actions for implementation of water reallocation and wetland restoration have taken place. It is recommended that an exchange visit be organised with the Pakistan Wetlands Programme (www.pakistanwetlands.org). The International WBE carried out a review of the PWP for the Netherlands Embassy in February 2009. PWP is at present halfway it’s seven year programme, and has many parallels. However, there are also major differences, and both stand to learn from each other. PWP is being implemented by WWF Pakistan, is very technical and tangible output oriented, but not well embedded in government. CIWP is more process oriented and well embedded, but suffers from the perception that little tangible is being carried out (see action point 5).
7
6. ACTION POINTS
ACTION POINTS By By When Who 1 Complete and submit draft mission report 24 April Wim Giesen
2 Finalise mission report 5 May Wim Giesen
3 Establish contact with Pakistan Wetlands Programme’s 5 May Wim Giesen Awareness and Education component and link with CIWP’s communications officer. 4 Road map for biodiversity component follow-up in the next phase 5 May Wim Giesen of CIWP, focusing on actions with tangible outputs. 5 Contact to be established between PWP and CIWP, for a 5 May Wim Giesen possible exchange between the two programmes. (initial) & Mike Moser (follow-up) 6 Provide feedback on exclosure fencing requirements for Typha 5 May Wim Giesen recovery 7 Report on Fisheries meeting at LP of 15 April drafted and 6 May Lisa Pourlak & circulated. Mona Karnaninan 8 Report on first Shadegan BDWG meeting of 21 April drafted and 6 May Lisa Pourlak circulated, along with proposed date for next meeting 9 Report on Biodiversity monitoring training workshop held at 15 May Lisa Pourlak Kazeroun on 16 April, drafted and circulated. 10 The National WBE is to send the proposed members of the 6 May Lisa Pourlak Shadegan BDWG examples of BDWG outputs from LP and LU 11 Report on Lessons learned workshop at DoE HQ on 20 April 10 May Lisa Pourlak drafted and circulated. 12 Ensure that the Biodiversity baseline reports for LP are circulated 1 May Lisa Pourlak among BDWG members, and that DoE Fars is compiling comments. 13 Remind DoE LU and LP that final versions of the biodiversity 1 May Lisa Pourlak monitoring portfolios are due before arrival of SIPA. 14 Assist LP fishermen in establishing a fishermen association or May- Mona cooperative June Karnaninan & Mike Ounsted 15 Establish a Typha recovery plot near Arab Famour village May- Lisa Pourlak & June Mr B. Zehzad
8 7. LIST OF ANNEXES
1. Workshop Programme Sharing Lessons Learned with DoE HQ 2. Biodiversity Monitoring Training Workshop Programme 3. Fisheries Workshop Programme Training
9 Annex 1. Workshop Programme Sharing Lessons Learned with DoE HQ
Location: Pardisan Park Date: Monday, April 20th, 2009 Participants: DoE HQ experts (Max.40)
Hours Actions 8.30 Registration of participants 8.30-9.15 Welcome notes (Dr. Najafi + Dr. Nazaridoust – NPD + NPM of CIWP) 9.15-9.30 Presentation on new global approaches to biodiversity conservation in Wetlands (Wim Giesen – International Biodiversity Consultant) 9.30-10 CIWP Progress Report based on Ecosystem Approach (Dr. Nazaridoust – NPM) 10-10.30 CIWP from DoE perspective (provincial and HQ) - Mr. Zohrabi (DoE Fars) representing the provincial group - Mr. Karimi (DoE HQ), Officer in charge of Wetlands 10.30-11 Break 11-11.30 Plenary discussion on CIWP (Strengthen and Weaknesses) – Facilitated by Mohsen Soleymani 11.30-12 Plenary discussion on how developing CIWP experiences and achievements within DoE – Facilitated by NPM 12-12.30 Report on Biodiversity work with emphasis on BDWGs – Lisa Pourlak 12.30-13 Question to participants: Assess possibilities of forming HQ BDWG – Wim Giesen 13-14 Lunch 14-14.15 Monitoring Workshops, Monitoring Plans and Protocols and Implementation measures (Wim Giesen) 14.15-15 Implementation measures (Feedback on Implementation Measures by DoE) – Faciliated by Mohsen Soleymani + Lisa Pourlak 15-15.15 Community Monitoring (Lisa Pourlak) 15-15.30 Wrap up – Wim Giesen
10 Annex 2. Biodiversity Monitoring Training Workshop Programme
Location: DoE Guard Station (Lake Parishan) Date: Thursday, April 16th, 2009 Participants: Mainly « Tabiat va Salamat » NGO members (Max.40)
Hours Actions 8-9 Gathering of all participants 9-9.30 Explain objectives of the meeting (Lisa Pourlak) 9.30-9.45 Welcome notes from DoE representative (Ms. Vaziri) 9.45-10 Lessons learned from other projects/ Community Monitoring (Bijan Darehshouri - Plan4Land NGO) 10-11 Presentation about Biodiversity values of Lake Paishan (10 min. each) 1. Biodiversity values of LP from a global perspective (Wim Giesen) 2. Key bird species of LP (Ms. Joolaie, DoE Fars) 3. Fishes + reptiles + amphibians of LP (Mr. Yagubalipour) 4. Plants of LP (Mr. Bahram Zehzad) 5. Otter (Ms. Mona Hamzehpour) 6. Typha (Wim Giesen) 11-11.30 Question and Answer (Facilitated by Lisa Pourlak) 11.30-12.30 Quiz by Plan4Land NGO (Ms. Mona Hamzehpour) 12.30-13.30 Lunch (Evaluation of Quiz results by Plan4Land NGO + CIWP) 13.30-14 Two break out groups based on Quiz results + personal interest of participants: (1) Field monitoring + (2) Environmental education - Facilitated by Plan4Land NGO (based on a list of criteria) 14-17 Field work with Group (1) - Demonstration on “Typha” monitoring in Arab Famour Village – By Wim Giesen* - Demonstration on “Otter” monitoring – By Mona Hamzehpour - Demonstration on “Bird” monitoring – By Ms. Joolaie 15-17 Prepare Awareness Programme (List of Actions) with Group (2) By Mehri Asna Ashari + Ms. Vaziri 17.30 Departure to Shiraz from DoE Guard Station
11 Annex 3. Fisheries Workshop Programme
Location: Nargesszar, Jihad Building Date: Wednesday, April 15th, 2009 Participants: Fishermen from active fishing villages around Lake Parishan (Max.35)
Hours Actions 8-9 Gathering of all participants 9-9.30 Explain objectives of the meeting - Wim Giesen (International Biodiversity Consultant) 9.30-9.45 Welcome notes from DoE representative (DoE Fars/ Kazeroon) 10-11 Past trends in fishing and current trends (using a map + table) – Facilitated by Ms. Mona Kananian and Lisa Pourlak (2 break out groups) 11-12 Root causes of threats (problem tree) – Facilitated by Ms. Mona Kananian and Lisa Pourlak (2 break out groups) 12-13 Lunch 13-13.30 Reporting of break out group results by each group representative (15 min. each group) 13.30-14.30 Main objectives of fisheries (based on problem tree) (30 min.) – Facilitated by Ms. Mona Kananian and Lisa Pourlak (project Log-frame format) 14.30-15.30 Identify Actions to reach Objectives - Facilitated by Mr. Yagubalipour 15.30-16 Wrap up notes - Wim Giesen
12 UNDP/GEF – Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project (CIWP)
Mission Report to UNDP and National Project Director 21 May – 1 June 2011
Wim Giesen, Wetland Biodiversity Expert (WBE) [email protected] or [email protected]
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This mission report is on the sixth mission of the WBE on the CIWP, which was from 21 May - 1 June 2011, the last mission of WBE dating back to April 2009. The focus was on three Biodiversity Working Group (BDWG) meetings, one in Uromiyeh, a second in Shiraz and a third at Ahwaz, holding of a seminar on “Biodiversity Restoration and Management” at the Environmental University in Karaj, and the holding of three 1-day training workshops on “Managing and Restoring Wetlands for Biodiversity” for each of the sites. In addition, there were field visits at the two demonstration sites (LP and LU) and at the replication site (Shadegan). Prior to coming to Iran, the WBE had prepared a 60-page background document on “Managing and Restoring Wetlands for Biodiversity”, and had prepared slide presentations for workshops and seminar (to allow timely translation into Farsi).
Highlights: The mission was fully supported by the Provincial DoE Offices, and BDWG meetings were officially welcomed by the Head of the Provincial DoE offices in West Azerbaijan and Khuzestan, whereas in Fars, as the meeting was held in Kazeroun, the Deputy Head of Fars DoE Office attended the meeting CIWP was welcomed in the Environment University and the seminar was well-attended (with presence of the Head of the University), and followed up by a meeting with the Head of the University. The BDWG for LU now has the formal status of working group under the Regional Council for Lake Uromiyeh, which gives it formal responsibilities and will help ensure continuity. A well-attended and participatory BDWG meeting was held at Uromiyeh chaired by DOE West Azerbaijan, as the Secretariat for the Regional Council for Lake Uromiyeh, whereby the BDWG was updated on the state of the biodiversity in LU and top ten priority actions were listed for LU to help protect the biodiversity in difficult drought conditions. Also, the BDWG agreed on the frequency of BDWG meetings and the date and agenda for the next meeting. A well-attended and participatory training workshop was held at DOE in Uromiyeh, with technical presentations by the WBE on various aspects of wetland management and restoration. At the end of each session there was a question and answer session, as well as a working group session on wetland restoration. The seminar was well received with active participation and enthusiastic questions from the participants. One of the recently restored satellite wetlands (southern part of Hassanlou, which is now called Agh Qala wetand) was visited with good participation from the local community of Hassanlou wetland, and with DOE support. A similarly successful BDWG meeting was held in Ahwaz, on schedule and covering all items on the rather full agenda. Very interesting field visit to the Shadegan wetlands, including attending a boat race by the local community at Sarakhieh village (on the occasion of the Week for Biodiversity). A similarly successful training workshop was held at DOE in Ahwaz, in spite of the high temperatures in the city. A successful BDWG meeting was held at the Governor’s office in Kazeroun.. Interesting field visit to the emergency pond established at LP by NGO and local community, and to the Typha restoration trial area.
Revised – 11th June 2011 1 Very successful training workshop at the government guesthouse in Kazeroun, actively attended by all BDWG members as well as other interested members from the community, academia, government, etc., and receiving enthusiastic responses. Successful meeting with the CIWP NPD and senior staff at DOE hq in Tehran, for a briefing about the findings of the mission.
Lowlights: Drought and wetland desiccation continues to impact biodiversity in LU, LP and Shadegan, and tends to dominate all discussions about the wetlands. As a result of the continued drought and water scarcity, many actions focus on taking emergency measures to conserve (dwindling) remaining biodiversity, rather than increasing numbers or consolidating biodiversity and meeting biodiversity targets set in the Project Brief and Management Plans. BDWG meetings despite being well-attended and participatory tend to be holding mainly through CIWP support, however it is hoped that Provincial DoE offices will take charge of holding these meeting regularly.
1. SCHEDULE
Date (2011) Location Activity
Sat. 21 May International 10:30 Travel from home to Amsterdam Schiphol Airport, car travel + by rail from Doetinchem. 14:35 Flight Amsterdam – Tehran (KLM flight KL433) Sun. 22 Tehran 23:00 Arrive Tehran (IKA); arrive at Taj Mahal Hotel at 01:30 May 10:00 Meetings at CIWP office at DoE, with NPM, Deputy NPM, National WBE & other CIWP team members; until 15:30, leave for UNDP 16:00 Security briefing by Mr Solhjoo, UNDSS-LSA at UNDP 17:45 Leave for Taj Mahal hotel Mon. 23 Tehran, Karaj & 08:30 CIWP office at DoE. Meetings with NPM, Deputy NPM, May Uromiyeh National WBE and other CIWP team members. 11:00 Leave for Karaj, Environmental University, arrive 12:00 meet with Dr Fazel, director of ESDRC and university dean. 13:00 Seminar on Biodiversity Restoration and Management; hold 1-hour presentation, following presentations by the DTL and national WBE; brief tour of the university. 17:00 Departure for Mehrabad airport. 19:30 Flight to Uromiyeh 20:50 Arrive at Uromiyeh, stay at Park International Hotel. Tues. 24 Uromiyeh 09:00 Attend BDWG meeting at DoE office May 13:30 Lunch 14:30 Field visit to Lake Uromiyeh & Hassanlou wetland (Agh Qala) 20:00 Return to Park Hotel, Uromiyeh Wed. 25 Uromiyeh & 09:00 Training workshop at DOE office Uromiyeh on May Tehran ‘Management of Wetland Biodiversity’. 18:15 Flight to Tehran, stay at Taj Mahal Hotel
Revised – 11th June 2011 2 Thur. 26 Tehran & 05:30 Flight to Ahwaz, stay at Sugarcane Guesthouse May Ahwaz 08:30 Meeting with DoE DG, Mr Hemmati, & head of natural resources, Mr Molla 09:30 BDWG meeting with stakeholders 13:30 Lunch 17:00 Excursion to Choqazanbil & Shush 22:00 Arrive back in Ahwaz, stay at Sugarcane guesthouse Fri. 27 May Ahwaz 08:30 Visit fishing competition organised by DoE as part of Environment week 10:30 Visit boating competition at Sarakhieh village, Shadegan wetlands, organised by DoE as part of Environment week 11:00 Visit Shadegan wetlands. 18:00 Arrive back in Ahwaz, stay at Sugarcane guesthouse Sat. 28 May Ahwaz & Shiraz 09:30 Training workshop at DOE office Ahwaz on ‘Management of Wetland Biodiversity’. 17:30 Leave for Ahwaz airport 18:25 Flight to Shiraz 19:45 Arrive in Shiraz, stay at Aryo Barzan Hotel. Sun. 29 Shiraz & 07:00 Leave for Kazeroun by DoE Fars vehicle May Kazeroun 09:30 Arrive at Governor’s office in Kazeroun 10:00 BDWG meeting at Governor’s office. 13:30 Check in at Government Guesthouse, have lunch 17:00 Field visit to Emergency restoration pond near Sharenjan village, and Typha restoration trial area in southeastern part on LP. 21:00 Return to Kazeroun, stay at Government guesthouse, Farhangian Inn Mon. 30 Kazeroun, 09:00 Training workshop at Government guesthouse on May Shiraz & Tehran ‘Management of Wetland Biodiversity’. 18:15 Leave for Shiraz by vehicle 23:30 Flight to Tehran 01:30 Arrive at Taj Mahal hotel Tues. 31 Tehran & int’l 09:30 Depart for CIWP office at DoE May travel 10:00 Meetings with NPM and D-NPM 13:00 Briefing meeting with senior DoE staff (DGs and deputy DGs) and the CIWP NPD. 15:15 Work on reports and transfer of information 19:00 Depart from CIWP office for IKA airport 23:40 Flight KL 434 to Amsterdam (via Athens) Wed. 1 The 05:55 Arrive in Amsterdam June Netherlands 09:30 Arrive at home base in Ulft
2. INTRODUCTION
This was the sixth mission on the CIWP undertaken by the international Wetland Biodiversity Expert (WBE), together with the national WBE, and the first mission again since April 2009. The main reason for the delayed input was the absence of a national WBE during this period, as Ms Pourlak did not renew her contract due to personal reasons after the fifth mission and CIWP was unable to locate a suitable candidate to replace her. In the end, she was again temporarily contracted by CIWP so that the international WBE would have a local counterpart.
The international WBE was requested to prepare slide presentations for the training workshop, and a background document for the training that could also serve as a basic guideline on management of wetland biodiversity and form part of the CIWP toolkit being
Revised – 11th June 2011 3 compiled. A 60+ page document was provided in draft (17 April) and revised draft forms (2 and again 13 May), and 5 slide presentations were sent to CIWP for translation on 9-14 May. A sixth slide presentation was prepared for the ½ day seminar at the Environmental University at Karaj, and sent to CIWP on 16 May.
The mission involved a busy schedule, with lots of in-country travel, including travel to Tehran and Karaj, Shiraz and Kazeroun (Fars Province), Naghadeh and Uromiyeh (West Azerbaijan), Ahwaz and Abadan (Khuzestan Province). Field visits proceeded as scheduled, to Lake Uromiyeh, Hassanlu (Agh Qala) wetland, Lake Parishan, and the Shadegan wetlands. BDWG meetings were held for LP, LU and Shadegan, and 1-day training workshops were held on “Managing and Restoring Wetland Biodiversity” for members of the three BDWGs as well as other members from the community, academia, NGOs, government agencies at Uromiyeh, Ahwaz and Kazeroun. A half day seminar was held at the Environmental University at Karaj, where the international WBE gave a presentation on ‘Wetland Management and Restoration’. Prior to leaving Tehran, a security briefing was provided by UNDP’s UNDSS-LSA, and a debriefing presentation was provided at the end of the mission to DoE DGs and the CIWP NPD in Tehran mainly discussing the mission findings and recommendation on exit strategy. The mission was successfully proceeded according to the plan, and as agreed with DoE, CIWP and UNDP.
NPM, UNDP and CIWP are thanked for efficiently arranging all logistics including visa invitation, accommodation and meetings. Dr Sadough (NPD), Dr Ali Nazaridoust (NPM), Mohsen Soleymani (Deputy NPM), Farhad Arabpour (Project Technical Assistant; for LU), Ali Arvahi (Project Technical Assistant; for LP and Shadegan), Sara Koochaki (Project Office Assistant), Yasaman Akhbarzadeh (Project Technical Assistant) and Mehri Asna-ashari (Communications Officer) are warmly thanked for their hospitality and strong and efficient support. A special thanks goes to the National WBE, Ms Lisa Pourlak, for all her good efforts during the project and on this current mission.
3. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THIS MISSION
The objectives of this mission were as follows: 1. Prepare in the Netherlands a series of slide presentations for a 1-day training workshop on “Managing Wetlands for Biodiversity” for members of the BDWG of each of the demonstration wetlands. 2. Draft a background document for the training course (mentioned in 1), to be used as resource material and serve as a basis for “Guidelines for Managing Wetland Biodiversity”, that will form part of the CIWP toolkit. 3. Run the 1-day training workshop on “Managing Wetlands for Biodiversity” for members of the BDWG of each of the demonstration wetlands, i.e. in Uromiyeh, Ahwaz and Kazeroun. 4. Prepare a CD-ROM with background reading material for participants of the 1-day training course. 5. Participate in the ½ day seminar at the Environmental University in Karaj, and present a slide presentation on “Wetland Biodiversity Management and Restoration”. 6. Participate in the BDWG meetings to be held at each of the three demonstration wetland sites. 7. Conduct field trips to key locations within the three demonstration sites. 8. Revise the Monitoring protocol for the Typha restoration trial programme at Lake Parishan.
Revised – 11th June 2011 4 9. Briefing of the CIWP NPD and senior DoE staff members (DGs and Deputy DGs) on the major biodiversity findings during the mission, recommendations on Exit Strategy of CIWP, and preparation of a slide presentation for this purpose. 10. Based on the aforementioned, draft action points for CIWP for inclusion in the CIWP Annual Work Plan(s).
Revised – 11th June 2011 5 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The following section summarises the achievements against each TOR objective.
TOR 1. Prepare slide presentation for 1-day course on “Managing Wetlands for Biodiversity” A series of five slide presentations were prepared and sent to CIWP between 9-14 May for translation into Farsi. These slide presentations were on: 1. Introduction to wetland biodiversity management. 2. Managing wetland habitats 3. Managing wetland species 4. Managing utilisation of wetlands 5. Wetland restoration and reintroduction of species The slide presentations were included (in *.PPS format) on the CD-ROM provided to the participants of the training workshop.
TOR 2. Prepare background document on “Managing Wetlands for Biodiversity” This background document was prepared in various stages, the contents of which follow the same five chapters as the slide presentations mentioned under bullet 1). A first draft was prepared on 17 April and sent to SIPA and the CIWP office. Feedback was provided by SIPA and along with insertion of additional material, this resulted in a second draft prepared and circulated on 2 May. Some final additions and corrections resulted in a third draft, which was sent to the CIWP project office on 13 May. The background document was provided on CD- ROM in this revised draft form (in English) to the participants of the training workshop.
In a final revision (to be completed after finalisation of this mission report), the background document will be upgraded to “Guidelines for Managing Wetland Biodiversity”, which will form part of the CIWP toolkit.
TOR 3. 1-day training workshop on “Managing Wetlands for Biodiversity”.
The 1-day training workshop on “Managing and Restoring Wetlands for Biodiversity” was run for members of the BDWG and other interested parties at demonstration wetlands, i.e. in Uromiyeh (25 May) , Ahwaz (28 May) and Kazeroun (30 May). A programme for one of the 1- day training workshops is provided in Annex 1. As the experience at each site was different, these are discussed separately below.
Uromiyeh. The BDWG (now established under the Regional Council) for LU consists of officially designated representatives of a stakeholder organizations from three provinces (West and East Azerbaijan) and one representative from Kurdestan (DoE Provincial Office). These stakeholder organizations included NGO and CBO members, Provincial DoE, Department of Fisheries, NRM Department, Water and Energy Department, Universities and so on. The training workshop was therefore also quite lively, with lots of questions and discussion and very active participation. The general impression was that participants (about 25-30) were enthusiastic about the workshop and its contents.
A follow-up discussion in the afternoon (in 2 smaller groups - one on satellite wetlands and the other on LU) focused on ideas for restoration/rehabilitation to enhance biodiversity aspects of these wetlands. These ideas will be further developed into proposals with support from CIWP.
Ahwaz. The workshop participants in Ahwaz were more homogenous than at LU, and included members of BDWG, academia, NGOs, and various government organizations. The DG of DoE, Mr Hemmati, was very supportive, being present at the opening and closing
Revised – 11th June 2011 6 ceremonies, but also joining in midway. The head of DoE NRM, Mr Molla, was also very supportive and present throughout. However, participation itself was a bit disappointing, with half the participants (13 of the 27) leaving after the lunch break. Mr Hemmati mentioned his displeasure at this during his closing remarks. The impression was that those who stayed were enthusiastic, while those that left were either too busy or thought they already knew the subject matter. It is worth mentioning that the weather temperatures in Ahwaz were unusually high (+ 48 degrees ºC).
Kazeroun. The BDWG for LP, which used to consist of members from academia and provincial offices, is now mixed with representatives from the local offices. Participants of the workshop (25-30 people) included members of BDWG as well as members of NGOs, CBOs, universities and various government agencies. Participation was very active throughout the day, with lots of questions and discussion, and no-one leaving. The programme even lasted an hour longer than the planned 17:00 because of extra questions and discussion. The overall impression was that the participants were very enthusiastic.
A follow-up discussion in the afternoon (in 2 smaller groups - one on the Typha project and the other on the newly established pond) focused on ideas for restoration/rehabilitation to enhance biodiversity aspects of LP. These ideas will be further developed into proposals with support from CIWP.
TOR 4. Prepare a CD-ROM with background reading material for participants of the 1- day training course. A CD-ROM with background reading material/literature was prepared and distributed to the participants of the 1-day training course on “Managing and Restoring Wetlands for Biodiversity”. Papers were collected in digital format, relevant for each of the five chapters of the background document and each of the five sessions of the training workshop. In addition to the five specialist fields, extra documents that would be useful to wetland managers were collated and added to the CD-ROM; these include the Ramsar Wise Use manuals, Ramsar Information Packs, Directory of Wetlands of the Middle East, National Wetland Policies, Wetland Management Plans (examples world-wide), wetland valuation studies, and so on. It may be useful to translate some of the key documents with CIWP support and make it available on CD-ROM (in Farsi)..
TOR 5. Participate in the ½ day seminar at the Environmental University in Karaj, and present a slide presentation on “Wetland Biodiversity Management and Restoration. A slide presentation on “Wetland Biodiversity Management and Restoration” was prepared prior to the seminar and sent to the CIWP office for translation on 15 May. The ½ day seminar was held on Monday 24 May at the Environmental University at Karaj, from 13:00 – 16:00. At the seminar, the Deputy NPM, Mr. Mohsen Soleymani, presented a general presentation on CIWP and the ecosystem approach, while Ms Pourlak, the National WBE, gave a presentation on the state of biodiversity in the three demonstration sites, followed by the international WBE’s presentation. After the formal part of the seminar, a brief tour was made of the university. In addition, a side-meeting was held with the Head of the University, who also attended the seminar.
It seems that the University has a strong group on “Economic Valuation”, from which CIWP could benefit from with respect to “wetland valuation”.
Revised – 11th June 2011 7 TOR 6. Participate in the BDWG meetings to be held at each of the three demonstration wetland sites.
The international WBE participated in the ½ day BDWG meetings at Uromiyeh (for LU, on 24 May), at Ahwaz (for Shadegan, on 26 May) and at Kazeroun (for LP, on 29 May). An example programme for the BDWG meeting is attached in Annex 2. The BDWG meetings had the following objectives: Update of biodiversity status at the demonstration wetland. Review of action points included in the MP, to assess which are of direct importance to the BDWG. Assessment which action points from the MP have been (partly) addressed to date by the various stakeholders. Identify priority action points Discussion in two breakout groups: one focusing on priorities in the current drought situation, and one for priorities in a post-drought situation. Review of the draft ToR for the BDWG. Assessing of mechanism for continuation of the BDWG, including setting a date of the next meeting and frequency of future meetings.
In general, participation in the BDWGs was very good. These meetings were last held two years ago, but fortunately participation in the meetings was high and the BDWG members had not changed significantly so they were already familiar with CIWP, MPs and action points.
Uromiyeh. At LU, because DoE WA is from now on Head of the Regional Council and also the Secretariat for holding the BDWG meetings for one year, the agenda of the meeting was slightly modified giving more room to presentations in the beginning, also considering the server drought situation, action points were discussed only in drought situation and no break out groups were formed. As this was the first BDWG meeting after 2 years gap, and the session was chaired by the Deputy Head of DoE, which was a bit chaotic, but by the end of the meeting all agenda items were covered and points agreed to. Given that DoE is in the driving seat, this was a good exercise for continuity of the BDWG beyond CIWP
Ahwaz. The meeting of the BDWG for Shadegan was only the second one, after the first one held in April 2009, when the international WBE last visited DoE Ahwaz. Participation here was also good, and the inputs of high level DoE staff (DG and deputy head) was appreciated. However, the meeting was still largely managed by the CIWP site manager, which is to be expected given that it is only the second BDWG meeting. However, there is still 18 months in which to wean the BDWG away from steering by CIWP.
Kazeroun. The meeting of the BDWG for LP was somewhat intermediate between those for the LU and Shadegan BDWGs, being largely run by DoE, but also with significant steering by the CIWP site manager. As with Shadegan, the focus in the coming 18 months will be on promoting elf regulation of the BDWG. However, more training is needed for DoE Kazeroun to be able to conduct participatory meetings.
TOR 7. Conduct field trips to key locations within the three demonstration sites. Field trips were conducted to LU, Shadegan and LP, and each of these is briefly described below.
Lake Uromiyeh. A field trip was carried out to Lake Uromiyeh and one of the satellite wetlands, Hassanlou, the southern part of which has been restored and named Agh Qala) on the afternoon and early evening of 24 May. LU is largely dry and open water can only be seen in the distance, except at the mouths of incoming streams where meanderings of freshwater enter the hypersaline environment. Most of the lake appears brownish in colour, apparently due to a change in metabolism of one of the dominant algae in LU (and food source of Artemia urmiana), Donaliella salina when salinities are extremely high. Southern part of
Revised – 11th June 2011 8 Hassanlou wetland (or Agh Qala) was recently restored by the local community at Hassanlou village, with DoE support. During the field visit the local Urumieyh television interviewed Mr Ranagarh (Deputy Head of DoE WA) and the international WBE about the importance of wetlands and of Hassanlou. The local community asked for support for awareness activities at their wetland – they asked for help with brochures on the wetland, but the WBE considered that notice boards with map, information on important biodiversity and history of the site, would be longer lasting and perhaps more appropriate.
Considering various outside pressures on satellite wetlands (e.g. Kanibrazan Gori Gol, Qara Qeshlagh, and now Agh Qala), and active local community and NGO presence, there is high potential for awareness raising activities at these sites (such as boards, brochures, films, campaigns/events) with CIWP support.
Shadegan. A field trip to various parts of the Shadegan wetlands was undertaken on 27 May. As part of the environment week programme, DoE Khuzestan had organised a fishing competition on a 2 km stretch of the Karun River, which runs through Ahwaz, and a boat race between local community members at Sarakhieh village at Shadegan. These were both included in the field visit itinerary. Much of the Shadegan wetland was visited, including freshwater wetlands, brackish wetlands and marine environments. The international WBE was struck by the fact that much of the wilderness value has been lost at Shadegan. Almost everywhere one can see encroaching industrial development such as high tension power lines, pipelines, roads and factories. Construction of various new developments is underway, including a new port facility (with new access roads), a steel mill, and a petrochemical factory. It is worth mentioning that the visit was also organized in a way to show the threats and various industrial developments in and around Shadegan.
Shadegan would have largely been dry if not for drainage waters from the sugarcane areas that are discharged into it. The flows are significant in terms of volume: the discharge canal crossed by the Ahwaz-Abadan highway had an estimated flow of >10 m³/s during the field trip. This flow is controversial, for two reasons: i) it is polluted by agrochemicals (a few dead fish were observed in the canal), and ii) this water is from another river basin and is therefore a case of interbasin water transfer. Considering the industrial development at this site, as well as water inputs from the sugarcane fields, pollution levels need to be monitored and regulated to maintain a healthy ecosystem in Shadegan.
It is worth noting that at present Shadegan has the highest biodiversity value among all three demonstration sites despite the continuing drought. For example, a large breeding colony of crab plover Dromas ardeola has been discovered on one of the islands in southern Shadegan. However, several hunters were apprehended by DoE guards while poaching there with nets just a few days before the mission and about 70 birds had been caught and killed. As Shadegan wetland is no longer a replicate site but is now one of the three project demonstration sites, much can be done to create safe havens for the valuable biodiversity of Shadegan Wetland, namely by protecting the core zones and upgrading the status of these areas from Wildlife Refuge to Protected Area or National Park.
Lake Parishan. A brief late afternoon field trip was carried out to LP on 29 May. The lake itself is completely dry, except for a small artificial pond established at the Gap spring, near Shahrenjan village. This pond was recently created by concerted action of Plan4Land NGO (active in biodiversity conservation) and the local community at Shahrenjan, with support from local and Provincial DoEs as well as CIWP. The pond measures about one hectare, is shallow (about 30 cm deep on average), and consists of a mosaic of common reed Phragmites communis and open water, with some Typha. Turtles trapped in the drying out lake have been collected and brought here by villagers, and in addition small fish and fish fry occur in the pond. The WBE observed five turtles, but many more are likely to be hidden among the reeds and less accessible parts of the pond. Recently (a week before the field visit), an otter Lutra lutra has been seen for the first time in >1 year; photos were taken of scats and prints, and casts taken of the prints. The pond has been constructed using (woven plastic) bags filled with earth to erect a low bund, and the inside of the bund has been lined
Revised – 11th June 2011 9 with thick plastic. Excess water from the spring runs over a small ‘spillway’ at one end. During the winter, when water levels were low in the pond, a local farmer had pumped water into it at his own expense. During the visit one could see groundwater being pumped at farms all around the lake; groundwater is not scarce, but farmers report having deepened the level from which they are pumping to about 8-10 metres. The Typha restoration trial area, in the south-eastern part of LP, was also visited later in the evening.
TOR 8. Revise the Monitoring protocol for the Typha restoration trial programme at Lake Parishan. The Typha restoration trial area, in the south-eastern part of LP, was also visited later in the evening during the field visit on 29 May. The area consists of a bed of a small canal, which has been fenced off along a length of about 220 metres; the canal (2.5-3m wide) plus 3 m on either side have been fenced, using metal poles and strands of barbed wire. About 4-5 months ago, some metal poles were stolen and these were then replaced with wooden poles. The channel is now dry, but a reasonable amount of Typha is present, including flowering heads. According to the head of the local NGO involved (13th of Farvardin), Mr, Kazemeini, sheep occasionally get into the fenced off area; the channel is much lower than the banks, leaving a gap under the lowest wires. In spite of being exposed to some grazing, the aboveground biomass of Typha is at least 10x that in the adjacent, unfenced canals, where Typha has been grazed almost to the ground. Unfortunately, monitoring has not occurred since the plot was established almost a year ago, and there is no baseline data. Some photos have been taken, but this has not been done systematically. The monitoring plan drafted by CIWP has not been used. It was agreed with CIWP and Mr. Kazemeini (who will be in charge of the monitoring) that this would be revisited and redrafted by the WBE during this mission, now that the actual Typha restoration area had been visited. A revised Monitoring Protocol for Typha restoration is attached in Annex 3 (note that this needs to be shared with the representative of the local NGO, Mr. Kazemeini).
TOR 9. Briefing of the CIWP NPD and senior DoE staff members (DGs and Deputy DGs) on the major biodiversity findings during the mission. On 31st May, the WBE briefed the NPD (Dr. Sadough) and five senior DoE staff (DGs and Deputy DGs of Habitat and Wildlife Sections of DoE HQ) on the key findings and suggestions during the current mission. This meeting was also attended by the NPM, Deputy NPM, national WBE and Yasaman Akbarzadeh (Technical Assistant). A slide presentation was prepared for this meeting but presented in hard copy (included in Annex 4)
The meeting was 2 hours long and started by a presentation by the international WBE of the mission and its findings, as well as recommendations. The presentation was well received and was followed up by questions and answers. Dr. Nazaridoust (NPM) also had a chance to explain again about the need for integration of CIWP work into the main body of DoE, which has occurred mainly at provincial level at the three demonstration sites, but now needs to be expanded further to other provinces through DoE HQ. He welcomed participation of DoE HQ experts in mission activities, and also any other suggestions that were to come from DoE HQ to facilitate the Exit Strategy by end of 2012.
TOR 10. Based on the aforementioned, draft action points for CIWP and assess where these would need to be inserted in the Annual Work Plan(s). These are identified and inserted in the recommendations (under 5) and action points (under 6). CIWP should incorporate these into the Annual Work Plans, where appropriate. Note: In the final wrap up meeting with NPM, international WBE was asked to also provide inputs to the Drought report that is being prepared for UNDP as well as the National Strategy document, mainly on biodiversity sections. These are outside the scope of the present mission and are hence not reported here, but will be prepared by the WBE as additional inputs to CIWP.
Revised – 11th June 2011 10 5. RECOMMENDATIONS
University Cooperation 1. CIWP has linked up with the Environmental University at Karaj, which is developing a wetland management course. This programme should be strengthened as it can form a valuable part of the CIWP. 2. Cooperation with research institutes and universities (e.g. Environmental University) via student studies, but also research programmes by scientific staff, could help establish long-term programmes and interest in Iranian wetlands, and form part of the CIWP exit strategy. 3. Environmental economics can be an excellent tool for convincing decision makers about the benefits of allocating water for wetlands (e.g. Gwydir basin case study). CIWP should assess with DoE if environmental economic studies that have been commissioned have borne fruit; if not, such studies should be initiated by CIWP. A promising location is Shadegan, where multiple benefits such as fishing, grazing, potable water and hunting are being forgone for (limited) agricultural benefits (e.g. date palm).
Lake Uromiyeh 4. CIWP should consider offering direct assistance with awareness programmes, especially at locations where local communities have been active and have requested assistance (e.g. at Hassanlou / Agh Qala, and other satellite wetlands). 5. Actions formulated in the LU MP regarding Artemia need to be combined in a species management and rehabilitation plan (in this case an Artemia Management & Rehabilitation Plan) so that actions can be coordinated and incorporated into management. At present, the actions are stand-alone and will not lead to long-term safeguarding of this important endemic species at LU. 6. The need for species management (& rehabilitation) plans for other species needs to be assessed, for example, for pelican and yellow deer. 7. An assessment should be made if actions at the mouths of incoming rivers at LU could be beneficial for conserving biodiversity, for example, by constructing ‘lagoons’ (e.g. with low bunds to maintain a less saline environment). This could be particularly of interest for in- situ Artemia hatching and also as refuel for waterbirds, with possible livelihood options for local communities who have affected by the drought.
Shadegan wetlands 8. CIWP should assist DoE with a proposed boundary revision (and consolidation) to exclude areas that have lost biodiversity value (e.g. due to industrial encroachment), and prepare for upgrading of the current protection status (now Wildlife Refuge) especially in core and highly sensitive areas 9. CIWP to assist determine the ecological (fresh-) water needs of the Shadegan wetlands as accurately as possible (e.g. volumes, timing, location), so that discussions with other stakeholders can be as concrete as possible. This can also be used, for example, in discussions with the sugarcane industry, who should be lobbied to improve water quality of their effluents, maybe through constructed wetlands. 10. An environmental economic study should be carried out in the Shadegan wetlands, comparing water for multiple use wetland (grazing, fishing, hunting, wildlife viewing, potable water) versus single use agriculture (e.g. date palm).
Revised – 11th June 2011 11 Lake Parishan 11. CIWP should provide advice about the upgrading of the current emergency pond established at Gap springs, for example regarding the construction of a second pond beyond the spill-over (size? depth?), maintaining a balance between Phragmites reedbeds and open water, and to enhance it for breeding of endemic fish with collaboration of Shilat and the local community. Local community shall be in charge of guarding and monitoring of the pond with assistance from DoE Kazeroun. 12. DoE Kazeroun needs to be strengthened in terms of expertise and laboratory (equipment has already been purchased but stays unused as there is no expertise). 13. CIWP in collaboration with Shilat Fars and Shiraz University should encourage the ex situ breeding of endemic fish as soon as possible; this has been discussed for more than two years already and action is now required rather than further discussion. 14. CIWP should assess if action is required for protection of important biodiversity in canals linked with LP, as it seems that these canals are being used as a refuge by endemic fish. The community needs to be trained by Shilat to take necessary actions for trapped fish. 15. CIWP to ensure that monitoring of the Typha restoration programme is undertaken as soon as possible in collaboration with local NGO and local communities.
General recommendations 16. The crisis at the three demonstration wetlands brought about by the combination of drought and over-use of water is being tackled with emergency measures to safeguard biodiversity; CIWP should assist DoE in learning from the current emergency measures and ensure that these are more broadly understood (e.g. for use at other wetlands) and sustained. 17. CIWP should assist DoE with the formulation of Drought Emergency Plans per demonstration site especially to save the biodiversity. 18. Given that 7 (6?) out of 24 Ramsar sites in Iran are listed on the Montreux record, CIWP and DoE should assess what kind of concerted action is required to reverse the trend, and get the necessary technical support from the international organizations such as Ramsar Bureau or IUCN expert groups (Species Survival Commission). 19. CIWP to assist DoW with the mainstreaming of the CIWP/ecosystem approach within DOE hq, so that approaches are more widely understood, appreciated and replicated in other wetlands and provinces. 20. CIWP to assist with establishing further regional and international linkages that may last beyond the life of the project and form part of the Exit Strategy. For example, in Pakistan good wetland projects are being run on awareness raising and sustainable livelihoods. There should be possibility of exchange between the two projects (both are funded by GEF).
Revised – 11th June 2011 12 6. ACTION POINTS
ACTION POINTS By By When Who 1 Complete and submit draft mission report 5 June Wim Giesen
2 Finalise mission report 15 June Wim Giesen
3 Re-assess the linkage with universities (eg. the Environmental 31 July NPM & D-NPM University at Kara)j in the development of the wetland In possible management course (see also the training workshop slides and support from manual) and see how this can be strengthened as it can form a national WBE valuable part of the CIWP. 4 Assess possibilities for cooperation with research institutes and 31 July NPM & D-NPM universities (e.g. Environmental University) via student studies, With possible and research programmes (namely on MP objectives and action support from points), to establish long-term programmes & create interest in national WBE Iranian wetlands, as part of the CIWP exit strategy. 5 CIWP to assist with awareness programmes at LU, especially at 31 CIWP locations where local communities have been active and have August communications requested assistance mainly in satellite wetlands (e.g. at officer With Hassanlu / Agh Qala, Gori Gol, Qara Qeshlagh, Kanibrazan). possible support from national WBE
6 Assist the LU BDWG in formulating an Artemia Management and Sep- CIWP LU Project Rehabilitation Plan, so that actions can be coordinated and tember Technical incorporated into management. Species Recovery and Assistant; DoE Management Plans may be available through the IUCN website hq staff, (Species Survival Commission) international and national WBE 7 Assess the need for species management and rehabilitation Sep- CIWP LU Project plans for other species at LU, for example, for pelican, yellow tember Technical deer, etc. Species Recovery and Management Plans may be Assistant; DoE available through the IUCN website (Species Survival hq staff Commission) international and national WBE 8 An assessment if actions at the mouths of incoming rivers at LU Sep- CIWP hydrologist could be beneficial for conserving biodiversity, for example, by tember & national WBE, constructing ‘lagoons’ (e.g. with low bunds to maintain a less 2011 in collaboration saline environment). with Shilat and Artemia Res- earch centers 9 Assist DoE Khuzestan with a proposed boundary revision (and October NPM, D-NPM & consolidation) of the Shadegan wetlands to exclude areas that 2011 Shadegan have lost biodiversity value (e.g. due to industrial encroachment), Project Technical and prepare for upgrading of the current protection status (now Assistant, DoE Wildlife Refuge) especially in core and sensitive areas Hq 10 Assist DoE Khuzestan with determining the (fresh-) water needs October CIWP of the Shadegan wetlands as accurately as possible (e.g. 2011 hydrologists, volumes, timing, location) to maintain its ecological functions, so national and that discussions with other stakeholders can be as concrete as international possible. This is also valid for other wetlands sites. WBE (for ecological functions)
Revised – 11th June 2011 13 11 Contract an environmental economic study on the Shadegan August NPM & D-NPM wetlands, comparing water for multiple use wetland (grazing, 2011 to draft ToR with fishing, hunting, wildlife viewing, potable water) versus single use possible support agriculture (e.g. date palm). This could be first done on a smaller from national and wetland such as one of the satellite wetlands (for example Agh international Qala vs Hassanlou) WBE 12 Advise DoE Fars on the upgrading of the current emergency 31 July D-NPM & CIWP pond established at Gap springs, for example regarding the 2011 hydrologists with construction of a second pond beyond the spill-over (size? possible support depth?), maintaining the small population of endemic fish and a Shilat Fars and balance between Phragmites reedbeds and open water, local guarding and monitoring of the pond communities and NGOs 13 Support the ex situ breeding of endemic fish at LP as soon as 30 Sep- CIWP LP Project possible. tember Technical 2011 Assistant with possible support Shilat Fars and Shiraz University 14 Assess if action is required for protection of important 30 Sep- CIWP LP Project biodiversity in canals linked with LP. tember Technical 2011 Assistant with possible support Shilat Fars and Shiraz University and the local communities 15 CIWP to ensure that monitoring of the Typha restoration 30 June CIWP LP Project programme is undertaken as soon as possible. 2011 Technical Assistant in collaboration with Mr. Kazemeini (NGO) and local communities 16 Assist DoE in learning from the current emergency measures October NPM, D-NPM, and ensure that these are more broadly understood (e.g. for use 2011 national at other wetlands). hydrologist & SIPA 17 Assist DoE with the formulation of Drought Emergency Plans per 30 NPM, D-NPM, demonstration site, and assessing what kind of concerted action Septem national & int’l is required to reverse the trend in Iranian wetlands., especially to ber hydrologists with save the biodiversity at risk. 2011 possible support from international and national WBE 18 Assist DoE with the mainstreaming of the CIWP Decem- NPM, D-NPM, /ecosystem approach within DOE hq, so that approaches ber Communications are more widely understood, appreciated and replicated. 2011 officer, with There is possibility to work with the CaspEco project to possible support expand the ecosystem approach experience to the three from national northern coastal provinces. WBE 19 Assist DoE with establishing further regional and international Decem- All international linkages that may last beyond the life of the project and form part ber experts of the exit strategy. 2012
Revised – 11th June 2011 14 7. LIST OF ANNEXES
1. Programme 1-day training workshop “Biodiversity Management and Restoration in Wetland Ecosystems” 2. Agenda Meeting of the Biodiversity Working Group 3. Additional notes on Typha monitoring at Lake Parishan 4. Slides for debriefing meeting with DoE & NPD on 31st May 2011
Revised – 11th June 2011 15 Annex 1. Programme 1-day training workshop “Biodiversity Management and Restoration in Wetland Ecosystems” (Estimated time: 8.30am to 4.30pm)
• Registration (15 min) – CIWP + DoE
• Versus of Holy Quran (5 min)
• Welcome Notes (10 min) – Deputy of Provincial DoE
Session 1: Introduction (30 min) – Wim Giesen 1.1 Why is biodiversity important? 1.2 Importance of wetlands in Iran and the region 1.3 Importance of Iranian wetlands for biodiversity 1.4 Why do we need to manage wetlands for biodiversity? 1.5 Set-up of this training course 1.6 Linkage with management planning process
• Feedback on Session 1 (15 min)
Session 2: Managing Wetland Habitats (30 min) 2.1 Managing wetlands 2.2 Water quality & quantity 2.2.1 Water quantity 2.2.2 Water quality 2.2.2.1 Salinity 2.2.2.2 Nutrients 2.2.2.3 Toxins 2.2.2.4 Managing water quantity & quality 2.3 Substrate & vegetation 2.3.1 Substrate & wetland soils 2.3.2 Wetland vegetation 2.3.2.1 Specific roles of wetland vegetation 2.3.2.2 Lessons regarding managing substrate & vegetation
• Feedback on Session 2 (15 min)
• LUNCH Break + Prayers (1 hour)
Session 3: Managing Wetland Species (30 min) 3.1 Maximizing or optimizing diversity 3.2 Habitat changes and diversity 3.3 Exotics 3.4 Special requirements for maintaining wildlife biodiversity 3.5 Protection of breeding sites 3.6 Amphibians and chytrid fungii 3.7 Migratory species 3.7.1 Local migrants 3.7.2 Regional/international migrants 3.7.3 Lessons regarding the managing of species
• Feedback on Session 3 (15 min)
Revised – 11th June 2011 16 Session 4: Managing Wetland Utilisation (30 min) 4.1 Wetland utilisation 4.2 Managing access 4.3 Use of wetlands & wetland products 4.3.1 Water 4.3.2 Harvesting wetland vegetation & plant products 4.3.3 Grazing 4.3.4 Fishing 4.3.5 Hunting & harvesting wildlife products 4.3.6 Lessons regarding wetland utilisation
• Feedback on Session 4 (15 min)
Session 5: Assisted Recovery of Degraded Wetlands & Wetland Species (30 min)
5.1 Habitat restoration 5.1.1 Lagoon restoration 5.1.2 Coastal systems: mangroves 5.1.3 Seagrass beds 5.1.4 Streams and rivers 5.1.5 Freshwater lakes 5.1.6 Riparian- and swamp forests 5.2 Restoring wetland hydrology 5.3 Wildlife species reintroduction 5.4 Lessons on restoration and reintroduction
• Feedback on Session 5 (15 min)
• Concluding Remarks (15 min) – Wim Giesen and DoE Deputy for Natural Environment
Notes: 1- Training Manual to be distributed on CD + Powerpoint presentations (hard copy) 2- Tea Breaks will be combined with group discussions to save time 3- Groups will be formed by numbering the participants (3-4 groups in total) 4- Only one group will get a chance to report back in each session (based on the progress made on the proposed question) 5- At the end Course Certificates to be issued + Group picture taken (CIWP + DoE) 7- List of participants along with summary workshop report will be prepared by CIWP and sent back to the Provincial DoE for distribution to the participants (if requested)
Selected Questions: (from the list originally proposed by Wim Giesen)
Revised – 11th June 2011 17 Annex 2. Agenda Meeting of the Biodiversity Working Group
1. Welcome Notes (10 min) a. Deputy Head of the Provincial DoE Bureau
2. Explanation of Meeting Agenda (10 min) a. Wim Giesen (International Consultant for BD)
3. Latest State of Biodiversity for Site X (20 min) a. Presentation by local DoE office
4. Quick review of Management Plan tasks + Assess level of Action taken by various organizations including national/provincial budgets allocated a. Group discussion facilitated by CIWP (60 min)
5. Identify Priority Actions to implement Management Plan + Develop Actions Plans with Roles and Responsibilities (+ timelines) for each Group discussion facilitated by CIWP (60 min): a. Divide participants to 2 groups b. Each group identifies 3 priority actions on two main topics namely a) emergency actions during the current drought, and b) actions in readiness for when the drought ends. c. Each group develops action plans, roles, responsibilities and timeline for the first priority action in each topic..
6. Decide upon a working mechanism for BDWG (45 min) a. Group discussion facilitated by CIWP
7. Wrap up of the Meeting (30 min) b. Wim Giesen + DoE Deputy of the Head
Revised – 11th June 2011 18 Annex 3. Additional notes on Typha monitoring at Lake Parishan
1. The previous monitoring programme referred to Typha on the flats, but in the trial area we have Typha in the canals only, so we need to focus on these instead. 2. The fenced trial area measures about 220 metres length and is about 10 metres wide. Typha in this fenced area is growing well compared to Typha in the adjacent canals. However, this is relative, as due to lack of water and some grazing (sheep get in under the fencing at times) the Typha is still sub-optimal. However, aboveground Typa biomass is about 10x that in the adjacent canals. 3. Unfortunately, no baseline was established when the fence was erected about a year ago. The canal at the far end (away from the sign board), located at right angles to the fenced trial site, seems a suitable control area, as this was previously the same as the trial site. Control plots could be established here for comparison with development in the trial plots. Action: establish control plots in the far ditch, located at right angles to the trial ditch. 4. Some grazing by sheep has occurred as the fencing is not sufficient where it crosses the channel. The fencing was re-done early in the year, as locals had taken some of the fencing material (metal poles are valuable). Action: repair fencing where this crosses the canals so that sheep cannot enter, and monitor (and repair when required) this regularly. 5. It was suggested that the trial area be watered to encourage Typha growth, but this would not be useful for the experiment, as this is to determine the effect of protection against (over-)grazing. Provision of water would encourage growth, but make it impossible to determine the effect of protection alone. Action: no watering! 6. Plots should be established as follows: 3 trial plots measuring 2x2 metres, located in the ditch of the trial area, and 3 control plots also measuring 2x2 metres in the ditch at the far end of the trial area (see bullet 3). Action: establish 3 trial plots and 3 control plots, each measuring 2x2 metres. 7. These plots should be coded, control-1 to control-3 (i.e. C1, C2 & C3) and Trial-1 to Trial-3 (i.e. T1, T2, T3). Plots need to be demarcated, so that they can be photographed and revisted for monitoring over time. Action: The 2x2 plots should be indicated with small coloured stakes, one at each corner. At the same time, GPS coordinates should be taken and noted.
Revised – 11th June 2011 19 8. Monitoring should include the following during each visit: a. Photograph of each plot C1, C2, C3, T1, T2 & T3. b. Fill out the form below:
Date: Person doing monitoring:
Plot Number of stems in No. of Water Other plant & 2x2 m plot with height: seed depth animal species heads occurring in plot <0.5m 0.5- >1m 1m T1 T2 T3 C1 C2 C3
Note: A single seed head is the entire fruiting body, i.e. the brown ‘sausage-like’ body at the end of the flowering/fruiting stem:
They do not need to count individual seeds, as this is unncessary!
Revised – 11th June 2011 20 Annex 4. Slides for debriefing meeting with DoE & NPD on 31st May 2011
UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project (CIWP)
Wrap-up meeting with DoE headquarters & NPD
Tehran, 31st May 2011
Programme of the mission of International Wetland Biodiversity Expert:
Karaj: ½ day seminar at Environmental University on “Wetland biodiversity restoration and management” Uromiyeh: Participate in meeting of BDWG of Regional Council ½ day field visit to LU and Hasanlu satellite wetland Run a 1-day training workshop on “Managing Wetlands for Biodiversity” Ahwaz: Participate in 2nd meeting of BDWG 1-day field trip to Shadegan wetlands Run a 1-day training workshop on “Managing Wetlands for Biodiversity” Kazeroun: Participate in meeting of BDWG for LP ½ day field trip to LP emergency ponds & Typha trial area Run a 1-day training workshop on “Managing Wetlands for Biodiversity”
Revised – 11th June 2011 21 Environmental University seminar:
Wetland course being developed at Environmental University; CIWP has linked up with this & is providing inputs (e.g. training material, ppts, background documents, etc,,,) as part of exit strategy. Cooperation with Environmental University, e.g. via studies in field by students, could help establish long-term programmes & interest in Iranian wetlands, & form part of CIWP exit strategy. Environmental economics = excellent tool for convincing decision makers re allocation of water for wetlands (e.g. Gwydir basin case study). Environmental economics group being developed at Karaj, tap into this if studies commissioned by DoE have not borne fruit. Cooperation with other universities/institutes
Case: Cost of environmental flows in Gwydir catchment, Australia
Provision of environmental flows & allocations for wetlands (e.g. via buy-back programmes): often regarded as burden to economy Environmental flow under Gwydir Water Sharing Plan aims at improving wetland & aquatic ecosystems’ health. Opportunity cost of foregone agricultural profit in Gwydir was A$15 million. Economic value of 4 ecosystem services (waterbird- breeding events, habitat provision, improved wetlands grazing and biodiversity benefits) totalled A$94 million. ► > 6x the value of irrigation water !
Revised – 11th June 2011 22 Lake Uromiyeh
Main issue/threat Drought, worsened by over-use of water What is being done re biodiversity Focus on biodiversity in satellite wetlands (e.g. upgrading & restoration of Agh Qala, Sirangoli,... Provision of water to yellow deer & wild sheep Ex situ breeding of Artemia urmiana Possible additional solutions Assistance re awareness (e.g. Agh Qala) Artemia (& other species) Management (& Recovery) Plan(s) Actions at mouths of incoming rivers at LU to conserve biodiversity
Shadegan wetlands
Main issues/threats Drought, worsened by over-use of water Conversion of wetlands (índustrial use) What is being done re biodiversity Conversion & encroachment by industry being challenged by DoE Awareness raising & education Patrolling Baseline biodiversity study Using of drainage water from sugercane areas Possible additional solutions Upgrading of status (now: Wildlife Refuge) Determine water needs as accurately as possible (volume, timing, location) Environmental economic study; compare water for multiple use wetland (grazing, fishing, hunting, wildlife viewing, potable water) versus single use agriculture (e.g. date palm). Discuss with sugarcane industry to improve water quality Boundary revision/consolidation?
Revised – 11th June 2011 23 Lake Parishan
Main issues/threats Drought, worsened by over-use of ground water What is being done re biodiversity (often with local community) Turtles freed that were trapped in mud Pond excavated at Gap spring (for fish, turtles) Typha restoration trial Sustainable farming (via FFS) Awareness raising Ex situ conservation of 2 endemic fish planned with Shilat in cooperation with Shiraz University Possible additional solutions Upgrading of pond (deeper/larger, maintain Phragmites balance, guarding) Ex situ fish breeding for endemics to be done quickly, as this has been discussed >2 yrs already Protection of important biodiversity in LP-linked canals
General observations
Good cooperation with regional DoE offices on CIWP at the demonstration sites Drought / over-use of water is being tackled with emergency measures to safeguard biodiversity; need to learn from current emergency measures & ensure that these are more broadly understood. Better use of biodiversity data: current crash of biodiversity, & taking account of this in site management Ecosystem / holistic approach (for biodiversity management) under CIWP involves all stakeholders, which is appreciated & successful Wetland restoration & emergency works have all been successful because of close cooperation with local communities/NGOs More involvement of biodiversity experts from DoE hq would be positive for the project & for continuity beyond Dec. 2012 7 (6?) out of 24 Ramsar sites are listed on Montreux record; concerted action may be required to reverse the trend
Revised – 11th June 2011 24 Recommendations for CIWP exit strategy
Further cooperation with academic institutes such as Environmental University to promote programmes in wetlands that will last beyond 12/2012 Mainstreaming of CIWP/ecosystem approach within DOE hq Additional active support of experts from DOE hq for wetland programmes / events in the region (organized by CIWP) Publication of toolkit/guidelines (e.g. ecosystem approach, managing wetlands for biodiversity, etc...) Assisting with establishing further regional / international linkages
Revised – 11th June 2011 25