Hcv) Summary Existing Plantations Atlántida S.A

HIGH CONSERVATION VALUE ASSESSMENT (HCV) SUMMARY EXISTING PLANTATIONS ATLÁNTIDA S.A.

M.Sc. Darién Zúñiga Leitón LICENSED ASSESSOR

High Conservation Value Assessment - HCV Existing Farms

Prepared for:

ATLANTIDA S.A.

Location:

Municipalities: Ayutla, Pajapita, Coatepeque, Malacatan and Retalhuleu. Departments: San Marcos, Quetzaltenango and Retalhuleu. Country: Guatemala

Prepared by:

Name of the Assessor:

M.Sc. DARIÉN ZÚÑIGA LEITÓN

Delivery date:

November 2018

PUBLIC SUMMARY

DATE November 2018

NAME OF THE HCV DARIÉN ZÚÑIGA LEITÓN ASSESSOR Empresa Soluciones Ambientales Bio Terra S.A. Guadalupe, San José - Costa Rica CONTACT INFORMATION [email protected] (506) 8847-1336

CONSULTANT'S LICENSE ALS14005DZ

TYPE OF LICENSE Permanent

COMPANY REQUESTING Atlántida S.A Fritz George Versluys Martinez THE ASSESSMENT [email protected] Department: San Marcos Municipalities: Ayutla, Pajapita and Malacatan LOCATION OF THE Department: Quetzaltenango ASSESSMENT Municipality: Coatepeque Department: Retalhuleu Municipality: Retalhuleu

ASSESSMENT DATE January 2015 - November 2018

EXTENSION OF THE Total Area: 6327.79 ha EVALUATION AREA Planted Area: 6214.23 NUMBER OF HECTARES 510.86 ha of HCV management areas DESIGNATED AS HCV 80.3 Linear km (water bodies) MANAGEMENT AREAS The properties in this region are located entirely on land with agricultural use. The adjoining farms also have land uses such as: CURRENT LAND USE other oil palm crops, pastures, sugarcane crops, agricultural plots and scrubland.

CERTIFICATION METHOD RSPO

Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...... 6 1.1. Dates of the assessment procedure ...... 6 1.2. Reference documents used ...... 7 1.3. Project Status ...... 7 1.4. Company Information ...... 8 1.5. Description of the assessment area ...... 8 1.6. Technical team that participated in the Assessment...... 11 2. Methodology ...... 12 2.1. General Methodology (Organization chart) ...... 15 2.2. Methodology for identifying High Conservation Values (HCVs) ...... 16 3. Results ...... 18 3.1. Regional context ...... 18 3.2. Landscape context ...... 19 3.2.1. GEOLOGY ...... 19 3.2.2. SOILS ...... 19 3.2.3. HISTORICAL LAND USE ...... 19 3.2.4. CLIMATE ...... 20 3.2.5. HYDROLOGY ...... 20 3.2.6. EROSION RISK ...... 21 3.2.7. BIOLOGY...... 21 3.2.8. PROTECTED AREAS, WETLANDS OR SITES OF CONSERVATION INTEREST ...... 22 3.2.9. POPULATION ...... 23 3.2.10. ECONOMIC AND PRODUCTIVE ACTIVITIES ...... 25 3.2.11. CULTURAL AND SOCIAL VALUES ...... 25 3.3. HCV Results ...... 26 3.4. Public consultation ...... 31 3.4.1. ANALYSIS OF HCVS FROM WORK WITH STAKEHOLDERS ...... 33 4. HCV Management and Monitoring ...... 37 4.1. Threat Assessment ...... 38 4.2. Management and Monitoring ...... 43 5. References ...... 63 6. Internal responsibility ...... 68

LIST OF ACRONYMS

ACRONYM MEANING AICA Important Bird Areas ANP Natural Protected Area HCV High Conservation Value CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora COG Coordinator of Guatemalan Communities for the Defense of Mangroves and Life Mangrove CONAP National Council of Protected Areas CONRED National Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction DD Insufficient Data EER Rapid Ecological Assessment FSC Forest Stewardship Council GPS Global Positioning System HCV High Conservation Value IARNA Institute of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment IBA Important Birds Areas ICC Private Institute for Climate Change INAB National Forest Institute INSIVUMEH National Institute of Seismology, Volcanology, Meteorology and Hydrology LC Least Concern LEA List of Endangered Species MAGA Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food MARN Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources MINEDUC Ministry of Education MIDES Ministry of Social Development NA Not Applicable NPP New Planting Procedure ONG Non-Governmental Organization PE Endangered PLAMAR Risk Master Plan PN National Park PNP New Planting Procedure PP Precautionary Principle RAP Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species REA Rapid Ecological Assessment RENAP National Registry of Persons RSPO Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil SA Public Limited Company SEGEPLAN Secretariat of Planning and Programming of the Presidency SI Smithsonian Institute SIG Geographic Information System SPG Global Positioning System UM Management Unit UICN International Union for Conservation of Nature UNESCO The United Nations Educational and Cultural Organization VES Visual Encounter Surveys WWF World Wildlife Fund

1. INTRODUCTION

The details of the dates on which this HCV assessment was carried out are presented below.

1.1. DATES OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE

TABLE 1. DATES OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE. AGENDA OF ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT JANUARY 2015 • Initial contact is established between the Company and Bio Terra, and negotiations begin to perform an HCV assessment of their farms. • The requested offer is sent to the company. • The Company sends first information on its farms and operations. APRIL 2015 • The negotiation of the Project resumes, the contract is reviewed by both parties and is signed. • Bio Terra provides guidelines for the work required for performing the Rapid Ecological Assessment (REA) by the counterpart in Guatemala.

MAY 2015 • Coordination for performing REA field work with the consultant begins in Guatemala. • The Company begins by sending the information of the farms under study, and of the stakeholders of the area of influence. • Field work coordination begins by Bio Terra. • Bio Terra carries out an analysis of the location of the Project at a regional and local level. • Bio Terra sends the company the control points that will be checked in the field.

JUNE 2015 • The field work for the REA is carried out by the consultant in Guatemala. • The draft work schedule is created by Bio Terra. • The field work is carried out by Bio Terra: ❖ General study area recognition by Bio Terra. ❖ Review of the company's documentation. ❖ Meetings with stakeholders. JULY 2015 - DECEMBER 2015 • Bio Terra requests the requiered information from the Company to carry out the HCV Assessment. • The Company begins by sending the requested information. • Bio Terra reviews the information provided by the Company. • A bibliographic review of existing information for the area is carried out. • The HCV Assessment creation begins. • Creation of HCV Assessment maps begins. YEARS 2016 -2017 • The HCV Assessment was stopped for lack of information on behalf of the Company because of internal issues.

JANUARY 2018 • The HCV Assessment is resumed • The Company sends part of the information necessary for Bio Terra to continue with the HCV Assessment. • The HCV Assessment creation continues. • Creation of HCV Assessment maps continues. FEBRUARY 2018 • A new fieldwork is being carried out by Bio Terra to update data, validate information that had been generated, and carry outh the final consulting with stakeholders on the HCVs identified and the proposed management and monitoring measures. • The HCV Assessment creation continues. • Creation of HCV Assessment maps continues. MARCH - SEPTEMBER 2018 • The HCV Assessment creation continues. • The HCV maps are refined, based on the contributions of the stakeholders in the last field work carried out. OCTOBER 2018 • The Company sends the final information required. • The first draft of the HCV assessment is completed. • The first drafts of the HCV maps are completed. NOVEMBER 2018 • The final HCV Assessment is delivered.

1.2. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS USED

Below are the main reference documents used for preparing this HCV assessment: a) HCV Assessment Manual (HCV Resource Network, September 2014) b) HCV Assessment Report Template (HCV Resource Network, June 2015) c) Template for Public Summaries of HCV Assessment Reports (HCV Resource Network, June 2015) d) Common Guidance for HCV Identification (HCV Resource Network, September 2017). e) Common Guidance for HCV Management and Monitoring (HCV Resource Network, April 2018).

1.3. PROJECT STATUS

The project in question pertains to existing palm oil plantations which belong to Atlántida S.A., located in predominantly agricultural areas.

The scope of the evaluated area includes 7 plantations covering a total area of 6327.79 ha, of which the planted area is 6214.23 ha.

1.4. COMPANY INFORMATION

Atlántida S.A. is a company dedicated to the production of crude palm oil -CPO-, located at kilometer 260.5 on the road to the municipality of Ocos, San Marcos. It was established in 1989, and its production has been mainly destined to satisfy the needs of the domestic and international markets, supplying raw materials to refineries for producing fats and oils. It consists of 7 administrative blocks located between the departments of San Marcos and Quetzaltenango.

The land use in the different blocks prior to the establishment of palm crops was agricultural, such as cotton, sugarcane, basic grains, and livestock, among others.

The Company's annual productivity is 207,904 MT of fresh oil palm fruit bunches. They work with their own production and that of independent producers (Inversiones Tropicales de Guatemala: El Retiro, La Palmita, El Naranjo III, Vegas Alamo farms) with a total of 1595.6 hectares.

In terms of employees, the Company has 1,750 employees in the field and 150 in plant.

In relation to the management of good environmental practices, the Company has the following guidelines: reforestation programs, responsible waste management, prohibition of hunting and fishing, and generation of clean energy through the use of by-products from the extraction plant, among others.

The Company is also Rainforest Alliance certified for its plantations and HACCP certified for its processing and is in the process of becoming RSPO certified.

Atlantica's growth expectation is relatively low, and they are focused on maintaining the plantations that have been established so far and improving production rates per unit area, per year.

Below is the Company's contact information:

TABLE 2. COMPANY CONTACT INFORMATION NAME OF THE COMPANY: Atlántida S.A. PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR Fritz George Versluys Martinez CERTIFICATION EMAIL ADDRESS [email protected] TELEPHONE NUMBER 24295555 Ext 1450

1.5. DESCRIPTION OF THE ASSESSMENT AREA

The farms under study are located in the departments of San Marcos, Quetzaltenango and Retalhuleu, within the municipalities of Ayutla, Pajapita, Coatepeque, Retalhuleu and Malacatan, in Guatemala.

The table below shows the farms assessed, their total area, planted area, location, planting date and status:

TABLE 3. LOCATION AND AREA OF THE FARMS. Condition Total Planted No. Farm Sowing date Municipality Department Area Area (owned or leased) 1988, 1989, 2006, 2010, Company 1 Atlántida 68.35 68.35 2011 Ayutla San Marcos owned Renewals 2010 and 2011 Owned 2004, 2005, 2 El Prado 1,996.17 1,952.16 Pajapita San Marcos and 2010, 2011 leased 1990, 1991, Company 3 Chaparral 1,189.31 1,161.79 1996, 2010, Ayutla San Marcos owned 2011, 2013 1992, 1996 Company 4 El Rocio 1,088.81 1,070.71 and renewals Ayutla San Marcos owned 1992, 1996 Owned 5 El Jardín 819,02 807,79 2003, 2005 Ayutla San Marcos and leased Owned 6 Pitaya 329,67 319,33 1997, 1998 Coatepeque Quetzaltenango and leased Company 7 Poza Rica 188,01 186,52 1994 Retalhuleu Retalhuleu owned El 2003, 2009, 8 648,45 647,39 Malacatán San Marcos Leased Colorado 2011 TOTAL 6327.79 6214.23

The proposed Project is considered to be of low scale and intensity, if we take into account that the plantations cover 6214,23 ha distributed in 7 blocks, located in 5 Municipalities and 3 Departments.

In terms of sites or ecosystems, the studied areas do not contain ecosystems or habitats representative of this region, since most of them are areas completely occupied by oil palm.

The study area is located in a rural area, where agriculture and livestock are the driving force of the local economy.

FIGURE 1. FARM LOCATION MAP.

1.6. TECHNICAL TEAM THAT PARTICIPATED IN THE ASSESSMENT

The technical team that participated in the development of this HCV Assessment is presented below:

TABLE 4. TECHNICAL TEAM THAT PARTICIPATED IN THE ASSESSMENT. NAME LICENSE INSTITUTION POSITION SPECIALTY Biologist specialized on sustainable development ecology, Master in Audits and Environmental Management specialized in integral water management and contaminated soil MSC. Bio Terra Head ALS14005DZ recovery. Experience in flora and fauna DARIÉN Environmental Consultant Complete taxonomy Extensive experience in ZÚÑIGA L. Consultants Biologist ecological assessments and analysis of water bodies using biological indicators. Participated in over 35 HCV studies throughout Central America and Mexico. Professional in Biological Sciences with emphasis in ecology in sustainable development, Master in Audits and Environmental Management with MSC. Bio Terra specialization in management and MARISOL ALS14004MZ Environmental HCV Biologist conservation of natural areas and ZUMBADO Complete Consultants marine pollution. Specialist in B. Environmental Management Studies and Plans. Extensive experience in HCV studies with over 35 studies conducted in Central America and Mexico. Geographical sciences specialized in Land Management. Knowledge in LIC. Environmental Management and Audits Bio Terra JONATHAN Geographer - in Environmental Engineering and NA Environmental ARIAS GIS Technology. Experience in Urban Consultants GARRO Ecology and Interurban Biological Corridors. Extensive performance in thematic mapping and spatial analysis. Master's Degree in Housing and Social MSC. Bio Terra Equipment. Specialist in design, CYNTHIA NA Environmental Sociologist organization and implementation of ROSALES Consultants participative processes for diverse study CALVO designs. Doctor in Environmental Law. More than 30 years of professional practice. PH.D ROSA Bio Terra Director of the Talamanca Caribe Environmental BUSTILLOS NA Environmental Biological Corridor for 20 years, Law L. Consultants consultant for the National Forestry Financing Fund (FONAFIFO) for 10 years, and Environmental Consultant

NAME LICENSE INSTITUTION POSITION SPECIALTY for Conservation and Natural Resource Management Projects. Biologist in Biologist with extensive experience in JOSÉ LUIS charge of the REA, and HCV assessments. LÓPEZ REA

2. METHODOLOGY

This report was developed following a series of methodological procedures, which allowed to produce the data that reflect the current status most accurately.

Rapid Ecological Assessment (EER)

The methodological process involved carrying out a Rapid Ecological Assessment (REA), which is a systematic and articulated methodology that quickly provides the information needed for decision making related to the conservation of biodiversity (Sayre et al., 2000). It is also used to quickly determine the structure of the landscape, community and habitat and to integrate multiple levels of information, where the most outstanding is the field work, focused on groups of organisms that allow us to obtain some knowledge of the biological diversity of the area (Sobrevilla & Bath, 1992).

Precisely, in order to know the diversity of the sampling area, a process was followed to obtain data, which was based on the main groups of flora and fauna (mammals, reptiles and birds). For this purpose, we had the support of biologist José Luis López, who was the counterpart for this project in Guatemala and who made the preliminary visit. In addition to collecting all environmental information, the consulting company Bio Terra, also conducted a field visit to the farms, in order to verify the data obtained from a random sampling and feedback the data obtained. For more detail on this methodology see annexes 11.1.1, 11.1.2 and 11.1.3. of the complete assessment.

Social consultation

On this subject, it should be clarified that we worked with all the communities present within the broader landscape analyzed on the Guatemalan side, which is where the farms are located, and which had been previously identified (María Linda, Las Margaritas, Montañita Ayutla, Zanjón el Tiesto, El Triunfo, Tecún Umán, Independencia, Finca Monte Cristo, Pueblo Nuevo, Valle Lirio and Chiquirines).

Likewise, a process of consultation and gathering information was carried out within the communities and with key stakeholders, to reinforce information on the absence or presence of HCVs in the area, hand in hand with existing information. This consultation and interview process was carried out by a professional team with experience in the social field. In this process, focus groups were mainly used, and some structured and semi-structured interviews were used.

The field work in general, was carried out in 3 stages:

TABLE 5. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION PROCESS. Date Detail Observation Preliminary visit made by The first approach was made with the Company and June the team's biologist communities to carry out the REA. 2015 counterpart in Guatemala. The field work was carried out by visiting the farms under June analysis and their areas of influence. Visit by the Bio Terra team. 2015 The consultation with stakeholders was carried out. Thirteen people participated. Some sites are visited again to corroborate and validate certain information. A new consultation is carried out with stakeholders where February Visit by the Bio Terra team. the information initially collected is updated, and the final 2018 consultation is carried out regarding the HCVs identified, and the management and monitoring measures proposed. Eighteen persons participated.

During the first visit, primary research was conducted, preliminary tours of the study area, a first approach with stakeholders, and the collection and verification of information from the Company. It is also used as an opportunity to carry out the EER.

Subsequently, during the field work, as part of the social consultation through focus groups, participatory workshops are held in which space and materials (maps, among others) are provided so that the same stakeholders can contribute to the location and identification of the HCVs present in the ADI, protected areas, communities, etc.

For this social consultation we worked with various focus groups, which correspond to the stakeholders of the different sectors of analysis. For both the focus group consultation and the individual interviews that were conducted, the templates included in Annex 11.1.8 were used as a basis. of the complete assessment.

It is important to mention that as part of the stakeholder consultation process, participatory mapping is also carried out, where the stakeholder focus group being worked with is sub-divided into smaller groups, so that each sub-group is made up of people from the same sector. The objective is that each sub-group creates a sketch or map on large flip chart paper, where they identify the main environmental and social elements of their communities, and then each group presents its results, and these results are analyzed and discussed by the entire group. Evidence of this process is presented in Annex 11.4. of the complete assessment.

Participatory mapping is done at the board level and not on the field, because logistical and legal factors (such as access to private property, among others) make it impossible to tour the wider landscape with stakeholders.

The isolated interviews mentioned above, correspond to some interviews that are conducted in the field during the visits and sampling on the farms, with strategic people that the team meets during the tour, in order to complement the information generated in the work with the focus groups.

It is important to mention that Bio Terra has already conducted other HCV assessments in the area, so they have a good knowledge of the area and the HCVs there. This information is complemented

with geospatial analysis, aerial photos, satellite images, coverage interpretation, etc., in order to generate preliminary HCV maps. These preliminary HCV maps are generated before the field work is carried out, and with them part of the work with the stakeholders is developed as indicated in advance. Similarly, the issue is handled with management and monitoring measures, where first the stakeholders present their concerns and recommendations, and then these are discussed based on the information previously generated by Bio Terra. The above, as part of the Final Consultation performed.

With the information gathered during this social consultation process, the advisory team carries out a qualitative analysis, and complements it with research carried out through a bibliographic review and information available in different public institutions such as The National Council for Protected Areas (CONAP), National Council for Disaster Reduction (CONRED), Institute of Anthropology and History of Guatemala (IDAEH), National Institute of Forests (INAB), Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (MARN), Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food (MAGA), Secretariat of Planning and Programming of the Presidency of the Republic of Guatemala (SEGEPLAN).

Bibliographic Review

Complementarily, a bibliographic review was carried out on the existing information on the area under study, both at the level of formal scientific studies, and through informal consultation to gather local knowledge, which would enrich the information obtained directly through the field research process.

Annex 1 of the complete assessment includes specific details of the methodologies used for developing this study. The detail of the sampling points is also included.

The latter were selected based on representativeness criteria of forest cover, ecosystems of interest and natural elements that may be important for conservation. Due to the characteristics of the southern coast and its history with the different extensive crops that began in the 1960s, forest cover is very scarce. Currently these remnants hardly have connectivity with other natural areas or form part of a representative forest mass for the life zone or the region. However, the criteria for selecting the sampling points were maintained in order to corroborate and characterize the study area. Some farms are completely occupied by oil palm, so the data collection was carried out in sites bordering areas of interest (communities, drainage canals, rivers and other crops). Other criteria include ecologically strategic sites that may be subject to impact from the palm oil production cycle activities. Several farms border permanent or intermittent rivers, which can be considered protection or conservation elements. (López, 2015).

Explanatory note: It is important to mention that the field work was carried out mainly in the sector of the larger landscape located in Guatemala, and the information related to the larger landscape located on the Mexican side was obtained through information collected at the council level, using official information from the State of Chiapas and INEGI. This was due to internal logistic and security issues that prevented them from crossing into Mexico (this border is an important route for migrants and drug trafficking, which makes it a very dangerous border). This issue is identified as a limitation of this evaluation.

Below is the map with the sampling sites for the assessment, and the map of the communities consulted.

2.1. GENERAL METHODOLOGY (ORGANIZATION CHART)

METHODOLOGY

METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS

Exchange of information with the Company.

Board Design and Planning • Analysis of aerial photos and satellite images • Preliminary consultation of information with government institutions.

Board Design and Planning / • The counterpart biologist makes the Preliminary Visit preliminary visit and EER.

• Selection of sampling points. SIG Preliminary • Preliminary HCV maps are Digitalizing generated.

Field testing and

consultation with • Information verification field work stakeholders (2015 and is carried out in the pre-selected 2018) sampling sites. • Group work is carried out. Focus groups and interviews with stakeholders are carried out. This field work is being carried out in Consultation and Review of two points in time 2015 and 2018 (Final Consultation). Existing Scientific Information • and the Ecological Assessment conducted for this HCV Assessment

Final Product Identification of HCVs - Management and Monitoring

2.2. METHODOLOGY FOR IDENTIFYING HIGH CONSERVATION VALUES (HCVS)

TABLE 6. METHODOLOGY FOR IDENTIFYING HCVS. HIGH CONSERVATION VALUES METHODOLOGICAL PROCESS -SIG information ❖ Satellite and aerial image analysis. ❖ ASP maps, land use, etc. ❖ GFW analysis.

HCV1: Species diversity -Secondary information ❖ Review of management plans of the ASP. ❖ Listings of NGOs. ❖ General bibliographic review. ❖ RAMSAR sites Guatemala. ❖ Important Bird Areas, America-Guatemala.

-Review of lists of species from national and international agreements -HCV2: Ecosystems and mosaics at a ❖ CITES. landscape scale ❖ UICN. ❖ Guatemalan regulations. ❖ Others.

Rapid Ecological Assessment (REA)

-Collection of field information / Field sampling ❖ Daytime terrestrial fauna. -HCV3: Rare, threatened or ❖ Daytime flying fauna. endangered ecosystems and habitats ❖ Flora

-Consulting stakeholders through focus groups and/or individual interviews. -SIG information ❖ Soil and vegetation maps. -HCV4: Ecosystem services ❖ Hydrological maps ❖ ASP Maps ❖ Cartographic sheets. ❖ Satellite and aerial image analysis.

-HCV5: Community needs -Secondary information ❖ Review of management plans of the ASP. ❖ Analysis of government databases. ❖ General bibliographic review.

-Consulting stakeholders through focus groups and/or individual -HCV6: Cultural Values interviews.

UNESCO

TABLE 7. CHRONOLOGY CARRIED OUT DURING THE EVALUATION. Fieldwork by Bio Coordination to Fieldwork by Analysis of the Outreach visit is Terra and Generation of the Date develop the HCV counterpart in Board Work information made consultation with HCV Assessment Assessment. Guatemala (EER) collected stakeholders Jan - May

Jun 15

Jul - Dec

2016 / Evaluation stopped for 2 years by internal issues within the Company 2017

Jan 18

Feb 18

Mar - Aug

Sep - Nov

3. RESULTS

3.1. REGIONAL CONTEXT

The project is located in Region VI of Guatemala, the southwestern region, with a land area of approximately 12,230.00 Km2, equivalent to 11% of the total national territory. Of these 1,951 km2 belong to Quetzaltenango; 1,856 km2 to Retalhuleu; 3,791 km2 to San Marcos. Access to region VI is via paved roads in good condition. To the north is Departmental Highway 1, to the west and south is the CA-2 highway and from Guatemala City the Interamerican CA-1 highway (REDFIA, 2003). Its departments have future development plans.

This region has mostly rural population. According to their ethnic-linguistic characteristics, the majority of the population is Mayan, although there is also a mestizo (ladino) population, especially in urban areas and in the south of the region. The Mayan linguistic communities are: Mam, Sipakapense, K'iche', Kaqchikel, and Tz'utujil (REDFIA, 2003).

Guatemala is a mountainous country, with a main mountain range that crosses the country from northwest to southeast and extends throughout the Mexican state of Chiapas. In this mountain range vast plateaus are formed to the northeast which form the highlands of Guatemala. Its highest altitude is reached in the Sierra Madre.

Chuvieco (2002) indicates that Guatemala's biogeographic position (between the Nearctic and Neotropical regions) and inter-oceanic position (between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans) make it one of the most biodiverse countries in the world. Also, it is located within one of the priority conservation areas, and according to Conservation International (CI) Mesoamerica is one of the largest biodiversity hotspots in the world. The term hotspots refer to areas of high biodiversity characterized by exceptional levels of endemism, and the region is also an important corridor for several species of neotropical migratory birds.

As mentioned above, the region has warm subtropical humid forest and warm subtropical very humid forest life zones. The first is 10 to 22 km wide, stretching from El Salvador to Mexico on the Southern Coast. It also includes the northern part of the Department of El Petén which borders from east to west with a line that goes from the north of Melchor de Mencos through El Remate, then heads south until it reaches the border with Mexico. The total area of this life zone is 27,000 km2, which represents 24.81%, occupying the second place in extension of the total area of the country.

The second life zone is the largest in Guatemala, covering a strip of 40 to 50 km wide on the South Coast from Mexico to Oratorio and Santa Maria Ixtahuatan (both municipalities in the department of Santa Rosa). In the northern part of the country, it covers the departments of Izabal, northern Alta Verapaz, Quiché and a part of Huehuetenango, as well as the southern part of Petén. The total area is 40,700 km2, which represents 37.41% of the country's surface.

The region is home to the Manchón Guaumuchal Special Protection Area, which is the largest coastal marine wetland on the Pacific Coast of Guatemala (CONAP, 2019). It is characterized by a combination of different plant communities, including coastal dune flora, dry forest, mangrove forest, palm forest, aquatic macrophytes, willow forests, freshwater and brackish water lagoons, marsh areas and freshwater wetlands and areas with secondary vegetation. They are influenced by tides and river floods, with a water level variation of no more than 2 meters.

The system is separated from the sea by three sand bars about 100 m wide. It has dry subtropical forest to the south and warm subtropical rainforest to the north. The swamp zone is characterized by areas of emergent vegetation dominated by grasses and sedges, with some trees and shrubs on high promontories. The coastal lagoons present have depths between 1 and 3 meters. The wetland may be one of the last sites in Guatemala for migratory birds and for important breeding grounds for marine invertebrates and fish, many of which are commercially important. Human activities include shrimp farming, agriculture and livestock. The floodable area covers a total of over 25,000 hectares, of which 7,650 hectares are covered by mangroves. The proposed protected area is 13,942 hectares, of which 1,242 hectares are part of a private nature reserve designated in 1998 for conservation, ecotourism, and recovery. The area is surrounded by private farms.

On the other hand, it is important to mention that part of the larger landscape of the farms is located in the state of Chiapas in Mexico. According to the Chiapas State Development Plan (2019-2024), the state has an area of 74,415 km2which corresponds to 3.8% of the national territory. It is bordered to the east and south by the Republic of Guatemala, through a 658.5 km border strip that is equivalent to 57.3% of the country's southern border and includes 18 municipalities and approximately 22,417 towns, mostly rural. There are at least 32,868 Guatemalan temporary immigrants that work for the agricultural industry in this state.

3.2. LANDSCAPE CONTEXT

3.2.1. GEOLOGY

The main geological unit present in the wider landscape are alluvium or recent sedimentary deposits, product of weathering and subsequent transportation by the different surface drainage networks that exist within or on the periphery of the farms, so there is debris of different sizes and eventually some boulders associated with the main drainages that cut the farms under study. The main deposits identified consist of boulders and gravels, sand and gravel and silty-clay floodplain sediments.

The geological conformation in both the Guatemalan and Mexican sectors is described as Quaternary sedimentary rock, formed by the dragging of sediments from the volcanic belt of the country by means of runoff through the hydrographic network that covers the southern coast.

3.2.2. SOILS

A large portion is formed by the following types of soils: sea beach area, Bacul (formed by marine or alluvial deposits and the height of these soils ranges from 0 meters to 90 meters above sea level). According to the official databases from INEGI for Mexico and IGN for Guatemala, the predominant soils in the broader landscape can also be classified as Cambisols, Fluviosols, Phaeozem+Cambisols, Entisols, Alfisols, Mollisols and Vertisols.

3.2.3. HISTORICAL LAND USE

The extensive use that has been made of the lands where the farms are located, as well as in the greater part of the southern coast of Guatemala, was the result of the agrarian reform or better known as Decree 900, which sought, among other things, to eradicate feudal property and to force

the transfer of farms or unused lands to the peasants so that they could be worked. (Kwei, 2018). In the 50's and 60's there was a cotton cultivation boom in the region, and consequently there was a land conversion from forests to this crop. Years later, other monocultures such as sugar cane, oil palm, bananas, among others, were planted. Currently the main use of soil is residential, sugar cane plantations, agroforestry systems and palm, banana and plantain plantations.

The properties are located on agricultural land, where several annual and perennial crops are grown, as well as pastures for livestock and rangeland. It was determined that there are very few forest remnants, which are not representative. The predominant crops in this area are rubber, plantain, banana and oil palm.

In the current development plans (2011-2025) of the municipalities in the wider landscape, it is stated that the main problem is deficient management and regulation of land use, so it is proposed to take actions at the municipal level to achieve adequate environmental management and achieving sustainable development of these municipalities.

The above is very similar to the broader landscape located in Mexico, after an analysis of the land use maps available in INEGI dated 1984, 1997, 2003, 2010 and 2013, since 1984 the predominant land use was already agricultural and livestock, with remaining sectors of grasslands, which over time have also changed to agricultural and livestock uses.

3.2.4. CLIMATE

The study area is located in the Pacific Coastal Plain, a warm zone with an average temperature of 26.9°C and an average precipitation of 1684.71mm between the years 2000 and 2016. Below is the average climate behavior of the area:

• Room temperature 25.5 - 28 C • Pressure 1000 - 1015 mBar • Relative humidity 67 - 75% • Precipitation 800 - 1900 mm • Evapotranspiration 1800 - 2200 mm • Wind speed 22 - 24 Km/h

3.2.5. HYDROLOGY

The farms are located within the Suchiate, Naranjo and Ocosito river basins. El Colorado farms are located within the Suchiate river basin. The rivers that flow through the AP are the Suchiate, Ixben and El Zapote creek. Like the previous farm, the El Jardín is within the Suchiate River basin, which is crossed by the Cabuz River, Tecomate, Zanjón El Marinbeado, Zanjón El Mico.

The Suchiate River in this sector is the border between Guatemala and Mexico; within the broader landscape located on Mexican soil, there are no records of primary rivers or important tributaries to the Suchiate River.

The El Rocío farm is located within the Navarro river basin, which is crossed by the tributaries of the Zanjón El Tieso, Zanjón San Lorenzo, La Burra creek and some small unnamed streams.

The Chaparral farm is located between the Suchiate watershed to the northwest and the rest on the Naranjo river basin. The bodies of water that cross the farm are the Suchiate river, Cabuz river, some tributaries of the Zanjón El Marinbeado river, Zanjón El Mico river, the Motas creek and some minor streams.

El Prado farm is located within the Ocosito watershed to the southeast and the Naranjo watershed to the west and is affected by three bodies of water: the Chisna, Meléndrez and Zanjón El Tieso rivers.

The Pitaya farms are located within the Ocosito watershed, and the northernmost farm is bordered to the north by the Zanjón Pacaya.

Finally, the Atlántida farms are located within the Suchiate watershed and are not affected by any of the above bodies of water.

3.2.6. EROSION RISK

The main causes of erosion of the area are related to deforestation, inadequate practices of annual crops, non-implementation of soil conservation techniques, erosion potential of some soil types, and lack of protection of riverbanks.

However, its proximity to the sea and flat topography creates a rather low hydraulic gradient that indirectly reduces the risk of erosion.

3.2.7. BIOLOGY

Life Zones

Palm plantations are located in life zones defined as warm subtropical very humid forest (bmh-Sc) and warm subtropical humid forest (Bh-Sc).

The bh-S(c) life zone is a segment of the humid subtropical. It is located in the lower zone which, to differentiate it from the upper zone, is designated by the letter "c" where the biotemperature is above 30°C. The natural vegetation indicator in this area consists mainly of nance (Byrsonimacrassifolia), chaparro (Curatella americana), malagueta (Xylopia frutescens), poppy (Bombax ellipticum), black chechen (Metopium brownei) and oak (Quercus oleamides).

Depending on the life zone system, in bmh-S(c) the average annual biotemperature ranges from 21 to 25 degrees Celsius (°C). The natural vegetation consists mainly of the species: Scheelea preussii, Terminalia oblonga, Enterolobium cyclocarpum, Sickingia salvadorensis, Triplaris melaenodendrum, Cybistax donnell-smithii, Andira inermis (De la Cruz 1982).

Biological Overview

As mentioned, the southern coast of the country was highly impacted by extensive crop and livestock activities in the 20th century, including the use of agrochemicals, which was a factor in the degradation of soils and especially the environment. Thus, extensive forests or natural systems that are significant for biodiversity are rare.

To the south of the farms on the coast is the mangrove forest, which is one of the most important natural resources of the Pacific coast of Guatemala for multiple ecological, economic and social reasons. Ecologically, the mangrove fulfills functions such as protecting the coastal strip by serving as a natural barrier to mitigate the action of waves and as a sediment fixer; it is also a recycler of organic matter; it helps to reduce evaporation due to the shade it provides and offers shelter to wildlife both on land and at sea.

The farms are located within the Humid Forest Eco-region of the Sierra Madre de Chiapas. The ecoregion includes broadleaf, humid, tropical and subtropical forests in volcanic highlands, Pacific coastal plain lands, and volcanic piedmont lands. It is considered one of the most biodiverse ecoregions on Earth. This ecoregion in Guatemala covers an area of 5,680 km² (FIPA-USAID 2002).

According to Villar's biome classification, the area is located in the Humid Tropical Savanna biome. This biome ranges from 0 to 500 meters above sea level. Until the beginning of the 20th century it was a closed jungle, apparently of Amazonian influence like that of the Caribbean Lowlands, but due to the replacement of the original forests by agrosystems, the ecological complex was transformed into a typical savannah. The fundamental ecosystems present in this biome are: savannas, grasslands, medium deciduous forests, sublittoral thorny forests, sub evergreen forests, riparian forests, reedbeds, estuaries, mangroves and coastal dunes. The predominant landscape in this biome is composed of exotic grasses and trees such as palo blanco (Cybistaxdonell-smithii), conacaste (Enterolobium cyclocarpum), pito (Erythrina standleyana), ceiba (Ceiba pentandra), guayacán (Guaiacum sanctum), palo de hormigo (Platymiscium dimorphandrum) and corozo palm (Orbignya cohune), among others. (Villar 1994; 1997; 2008).

3.2.8. PROTECTED AREAS, WETLANDS OR SITES OF CONSERVATION INTEREST

Protected Areas

According to the Guatemalan System of Protected Areas (SIGAP), the wider landscape is not located within any protected area or special protection area, nor is there any connection thereof.

However, just 5.6 km from Block G (Poza Rica) is the Manchón Guamuchal Special Protection Area (APEMG), declared under Legislative Decree No. 4-89 (internally registered as La Chorrera-Manchón Guamuchal Private Natural Reserve by CONAP Resolution 107/98) (RedParques, 2012).

On the Mexican side, no nearby protected areas have been identified.

RAMSAR Sites

Within the greater landscape there are no RAMSAR sites. However, the Manchón Guamuchal Special Protection Area (APEMG), which is located near the Project area, was included in the List of Wetlands of International Importance, registered as Ramsar Site No. 725 in 1993.

This ecosystem is of great importance as a migratory corridor and for species restricted to specific biomes and ranges in the area. However, it is located 5.6 km from Block G (Poza Rica) as indicated above. It is mentioned here because part of the broader landscape of this block affects ecosystems associated with Manchón Guamuchal.

Important Bird Areas (IBA)

Within the wider landscape there are no AICA sites. However, according to Bird Life Organization databases, nearby is Manchón Guamuchal, which is considered an AICA site (IBA GT025) and is also categorized as a special protection area.

3.2.9. POPULATION

The following information on the population within the broader landscape is official information obtained through the National Census XII conducted by INE. It is presented at the municipal level since there was no access to official information at the community level; however, it is considered to be representative of what was observed during the field work. The municipalities of Coatepeque, Retalhuleu, Pajapita, Malacatán and Ayutla have development plans prepared with SEGEPLAN for 2010 and 2025.

The municipality of Retalhuleu has 90,505 inhabitants, of which 48% are men and 52% are women; 100% live in urban areas. 2.7% of the population is from the Mayan community, the predominant linguistic community is K'iche'.

There are 21293 homes, 69% of which are homeowners and 17% rent; 46% have an internal pipeline with a connection to the public service and 48% have a drilled well; the remaining percentage obtains water from other sources. Ninety-five percent have electricity for lighting, 50% cook with propane gas and 48% with firewood.

The municipality of Coatepeque has 105,415 inhabitants, of which 48% are men and 52% are women, 65% live in rural areas and 35% in urban areas. 2.25% of the population is from the Mayan community, the predominant linguistic community is K'iche'.

There are 23422 homes, 73% of which are homeowners and 16% rent; 65% have an internal pipeline with a connection to the public service and 38% have a drilled well; the remaining percentage obtains water from other sources. Ninety-four percent have electricity for lighting, 46% cook with propane gas and 53% with firewood.

The municipality of Pajapita has 21,725 inhabitants of which 48% are men and 52% are women, 46% live in rural areas and 54% in urban areas. The 0.6% of the population is from the Mayan community. The predominant linguistic communities are Chalchiteka and K'iche'.

There are 4723 homes, of which 75% are homeowners, 14% borrow, and 10% rent; 55% have an internal pipeline with connection to the public service and 33% have a drilled well; the remaining percentage obtains water from other sources. Ninety-four percent have electricity for lighting, 40% cook with propane gas and 59% with firewood.

The municipality of Malacatán has 92,816 inhabitants of which 49% are men and 51% are women, 91% live in rural areas and 9% in urban areas. 4.5% of the population is from the Mayan community, the predominant linguistic community is the Mam.

There are 18,307 homes, of which 91% are homeowners, 4% borrow and 5% rent; 39% have internal piping with connection to the public service and 40% have a drilled well; the remaining percentage obtains water from other sources. Ninety-five percent have electricity for lighting, 25% cook with propane gas and 74% with firewood.

The municipality of Ayutla has 37,049 inhabitants of which 49% are men and 51% are women, 36% live in rural areas and 64% in urban areas. 1.77% of the population is from the Mayan community, the predominant linguistic community is K'iche'.

There are 8,685 homes, of which 74% are homeowners, 10% borrowed or rented and 15% rent; 52% have an internal pipeline with connection to the public service and 43% have a drilled well; the remaining percentage obtains water from other sources. Ninety-eight percent have electricity for lighting, 63% cook with propane gas and 36% with firewood.

The municipality of Ocós has 10,841 inhabitants of which 49% are men and 51% are women, 59% live in rural areas and 41% in urban areas. 0.7% of the population is from the Mayan community, the predominant linguistic community is K'iche'.

There are 2573 homes, 83% of which are homeowners, 10% borrow and 8% rent; 28% have internal or external piping with connection to the public service and 43% have a drilled well; the remaining percentage obtains water from other sources. Ninety-eight percent have electricity for lighting, 44% cook with propane gas and 54% with firewood.

The main communities in the broader Guatemalan landscape are: Maria Linda, Las Margaritas, Montañita Ayutla, Zanjón el Tiesto, El Triunfo, Tecún Umán, Independencia, Finca Monte Cristo, Pueblo Nuevo, Valle Lirio and Chiquirines.

Chiapas The following information on the population within the broader landscape is official information obtained through the Sociodemographic Panorama of Chiapas by INEGI, 49% of its population is urban and 51% rural. It is presented at the municipal level since there was no access to official information at the community level; these municipalities are part of the state of Chiapas located in the south of the country.

The municipality of Suchiate has 38,797 inhabitants, of which 48.8% are men and 51.2% are women. There are 9,891 homes, of which 57% own their homes, 17% borrow and 19% rent; 42% have internal or external piping with connection to public services and 97% have electricity.

The municipality of Suchiapa has 24,049 inhabitants, of which 49.7% are men and 50.3% are women; it has 5,632 homes, of which 74.7% own their own home, 7.4% borrow and 16.5% rent; 32.1% have internal or external piping with connection to public services and 98.7% have electricity.

The municipality of Tuxtla Chico has 38,797 inhabitants, of which 48.3% are men and 51.7% are women; it has 10,319 homes, of which 76.3% own their homes, 14.4% borrow and 6.3% rent; 55.7% have internal or external piping with connection to public services and 98.4% have electricity.

The municipality of Metapa has 5,743 inhabitants, of which 48.1% are men and 51.9% are women. There are 5,743 homes, of which 71.1% own their homes, 15.3% borrowed or rented and 9.2% rent; 57.4% have internal or external piping with connection to public services and 98.7% have electricity.

The municipality of Frontera Hidalgo has 14,416 inhabitants, of which 48.5% are men and 51.5% are women. There are 3,541 households, of which 76.3% own their homes, 12% borrow and 6.8% rent; 44.8% have internal or external piping with connection to the public service and 97.5% have electricity.

The main communities of the broader Mexican landscape are: Metapa, Frontera Hidalgo, Ignacio Zaragoza, Ciudad Hidalgo, Jesus, Ignacio Lopez Rayon.

3.2.10. ECONOMIC AND PRODUCTIVE ACTIVITIES

The economy of the broader Mexican and Guatemalan landscape is based primarily on agricultural production. Its main crops include cotton, sugar cane, rubber and oil palm.

Due to the existence of good land and the abundance of varieties of pasture, there is also a great variety of cattle breeds, and therefore also companies that process good quality dairy products.

Among its industries are also sugar mills, coffee mills, ice and liquor factories, cement products, and essential oil factories, etc.

3.2.11. CULTURAL AND SOCIAL VALUES

Guatemala is a country with ethnic, cultural and linguistic diversity. According to official data, 41 percent of the population identifies itself as indigenous, from the National Population Census XI and VI on housing of 2002 of the National Institute of Statistics -INE. In the state of Chiapas in Mexico, 26% of the population has indigenous origin.

The following ethnic groups are present in the area: Tzeltales, Tzotzijes, Tojolabales, Poqomames and K'iche'. However, the predominant language is Spanish, although some native communities still speak K'iche'.

Notwithstanding the above, no important ceremonial or sacred sites were identified in the landscape analyzed, nor were there any significant historical or archaeological vestiges identified as such by UNESCO. However, there are some archaeological remains, such as those found in a greater part of Guatemala, which need to be studied to determine their level of importance.

Below is a map of the farms, highlighting the main communities in their vicinity.

3.3. HCV RESULTS

TABLE 8. HCV DETAILS IN THE MANAGEMENT UNIT. Precautionary Present Absent HCV DESCRIPTION OF THE HCV Principle Remarks

HCV 1 is identified within the Manchón Guamuchal wetland and other mangroves, lagoons and lagoons along the coast. The Concentrations of biological diversity presence of this HCV within the farms under study is ruled out. containing endemic or rare species,

1 threatened or endangered species, and which X This site concentrates a great biological diversity of rare, have significant importance on a global, threatened and endangered species, and is also a biological regional or national scale. corridor for endemic and migratory species and is also an AICA site. HCV 2 is identified in the Manchón Guamuchal wetland but is excluded from the farms under study. This is the largest coastal Large ecosystems and ecosystem mosaics on marine wetland on the southern Pacific coast of Guatemala and a landscape scale and important on a global, is one of the last that still retains these proportions. This regional or national scale, and that contain 2 X ecosystem has 25,000 hectares of floodable area, of which 7,650 viable populations of the vast majority of hectares are covered by mangroves, and the proposed protected naturally occurring species under natural area is 13,942 hectares. This extension is considered patterns of distribution and abundance. representative for the region and preserves viable populations of the species present there. HCV 3 is identified in the Manchon Guamuchal wetland, and other mangroves, lagoons and lagoons on the coast, and others at the continental level. Manchón Guamuchal is one of the last remaining large coastal marine wetlands on the South Pacific Rare, threatened or endangered ecosystems, 3 X coast of Guatemala, and is currently a highly threatened and habitats or refuges vulnerable area, along with other mangrove ecosystems, lagoons and ponds on the coast and inland, due to the lack of a strong legal protection designation. Notwithstanding the above, this HCV is excluded from the farms under study.

Precautionary Present Absent HCV DESCRIPTION OF THE HCV Principle Remarks

HCV 4 is identified in the Manchón Guamuchal wetland and other mangrove ecosystems, lagoons and ponds along the coast. The presence of this HCV within the farms under study is ruled out.

Basic ecosystem services in critical situations, The critical ecosystem services identified are: 4 such as protection of watersheds and erosion X

control of vulnerable soils and slopes, etc. 1. Areas that provide shelter to communities during extreme weather events. 2. Important ecosystems such as fish nurseries, which are also fundamental for the subsistence of the communities that make a living from fishing. HCV 5 is identified in the Manchón Guamuchal wetland, and other mangroves, lagoons and lagoons on the coast, and others at the continental level.

The HCV 5 identified are as follows:

1. In the rivers and ditches of the area: water for human supply of the communities and their crops. (Under the Sites and resources critical to meeting the precautionary principle). basic needs of local communities, indigenous X (water 2. Mangroves, lagoons and ponds: Fishing as a means of 5 groups (for livelihood, health, nutrition, X supply) subsistence, both through direct consumption and trade. water, etc.), identified through dialogue with 3. Machón Guamuchal: Navigation as a means of said communities or indigenous people. transportation for the communities located inside Manchón.

HCV5 in the area's water bodies is identified under the precautionary principle, due to the absence of specific technical and scientific information on the amount of water withdrawn from the water bodies, as well as the demand from crops and communities.

Precautionary Present Absent HCV DESCRIPTION OF THE HCV Principle Remarks

HCV 6 was identified under the precautionary principle. This Sites, resources, habitats and landscapes that HCV is identified in all of the Company's farms. There is evidence are culturally, historically or archeologically in the area of "cerritos" (mounds of archaeological and cultural significant on a global or national scale, or of remains), and according to experts the entire Guatemalan Pacific 6 cultural, ecological, economic, religious or X coast corresponds to areas of indigenous occupation, so it is sacred importance critical to the traditional possible to see focal points. The farms do not have culture of local communities or indigenous archaeological studies to be able to rule out the presence of this peoples. HCV.

FIGURE 2. HCV ASSESSMENT MAP OF EL COLORADO, EL JARDÍN, EL ROCÍO, CHAPARRAL, EL PRADO AND ATLÁNTIDA FARMS.

FIGURE 3. HCV ASSESSMENT MAP OF PITAYA AND POZA RICA FARMS.

3.4. PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Professionals from Bio Terra, Darién Zúñiga, Jonathan Arias and Cynthia Rosales were in charge of the interviews and public consultations through focus groups with the different stakeholders, with the objective of not only knowing the local perception of the communities and institutions in regard to the Project, but also to carry out the public consultation to confirm or discard the presence of HCVs.

During the social consultations, the professionals consulted 13 people (all men) in 2015 and 18 people (2 men and 16 women) in 2018, corresponding to a diverse sample of communities including: María Linda, Las Margaritas, Montañita Ayutla, Zanjón el Tiesto, El Triunfo, Tecún Umán, Independencia, Finca Monte Cristo, Pueblo Nuevo, Valle Lirio and Chiquirines. The consultation also included the communities of El Reparo, La Blanca and Almendrales, although these are outside of the broader landscape. Regarding the communities consulted, it should be noted that due to logistical and safety issues, it was not possible to cross to Mexico to consult the communities within the broader landscape present in that country, so this issue is identified as a limitation of the study. This is due to the fact that this border is an important route for migrants and drug trafficking, which makes it a very dangerous border.

For the same business group, an HCV Assessment was carried out on the same dates, in a contiguous sector, and the following communities were interviewed: La Gomera multicultural community, La Flor community, Nueva San Sebastian, Arizona agrarian community, La Ayuda hamlet, La Blanquita Village, El Troje hamlet, micro plot Buenos Aires/San Andres, San Jose Campo Libre hamlet, and Villa Flores hamlet.

Likewise, during 2015 and 2016, Bio Terra also consulted the following communities: Los Encuentros village, Valle Lirio agrarian community, Los Angeles village, Tilapa La Blanca hamlet, Salinas I La Blanca, San Luis hamlet, Morenas hamlet, San Marcos coast, among others, for HCV Assessments that were conducted for another company, exactly in the same area.

Members of different Community Development Councils (COCODES) and the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (MARN) participated in the consultation.

For the HCV Assessment conducted for the same business group in the same area during the same dates (always within the area of influence of Manchón Guamuchal), members of ADIGE (Communal Agricultural Development Association), CUC (Farmers Unity Committe), other COCODES, Education Commission, Environmental Youth Organization, National Forest Institute (INAB), National Council of Protected Areas (CONAP), Guatemalan Communities for the Defense of Mangroves and Life (COG Manglar), and Fishermen's Association, among others.

Likewise, in previous Assessments conducted by Bio Terra in the same area (2015 and 2016), officials from the Ministry of Social Development (MIDES), the Ministry of Education (MINEDUC), and the National Registry of Persons (RENAP), among others, were also consulted.

Work with experts, included supporting studies, such as the Rapid Ecological Evaluation (REE) carried out on the study farms by biologist José Luis López, the Environmental Diagnoses carried out for the farms, among others. Archaeologist Paulino Morales was also consulted. Finally, we

consulted the digital and other available information of the following institutions, plans and/or state policies:

• National Institute of Seismology, Volcanology, Meteorology and Hydrology (INSIVUMEH) • Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food (MAGA) • National Forest Institute (INAB) • Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (MARN) • National Council of Protected Areas (CONAP) • Institute of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment (IARNA) • National Coordinator for Disaster Reduction (CONRED) • Secretariat of Planning and Programming of the Presidency (SEGEPLAN) • Risk Master Plan (PLAMAR) • National Water Policy

The consultation process with the different stakeholders for this Evaluation was carried out in 3 stages:

TABLE 9. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION PROCESS. Date Detail Observation Preliminary visit made by the June The first approach was made with the Company team's biologist counterpart in 2015 and communities to carry out the REA. Guatemala. June Visit by the Bio Terra team. Initial stage of research and gathering of 2015 information. Validation and update of the information collected in the previous visit. February Visit by the Bio Terra team. 2018 Validation, final consultation and analysis of preliminary HCV maps, and management and monitoring measures.

The concerns and recommendations of the stakeholders were analyzed in conjunction with the results obtained in the field work, literature review and other methodologies used in this assessment, to finally determine or rule out the presence of HCVs in the UM.

The following is a summary of the most important aspects of the interviews conducted with stakeholders in the area of study, to complement the HCV analysis. For this work, survey templates were available, which were strategically designed to cover all the variables of interest for the different HCVs. The questions were written so that each question would lead to the elaboration of other topics, and thus allow the stakeholders to express all their concerns, comments, worries, and even recommendations fluently.

To incorporate the results from this process, a qualitative analysis was carried out.

For further reference, see section 11.1.6. in Annexes for the complete assessment, templets for the questions used in the work with stakeholders are presented.

3.4.1. ANALYSIS OF HCVS FROM WORK WITH STAKEHOLDERS

The following table summarizes the results obtained from this analysis:

TABLE 10. SUMMARY OF THE INFORMATION OBTAINED IN REGARD TO THE ANALYSIS OF THE HCVS. HCV Topics Problems identified during Problems identified during the Improvement Proposals the first visit second visit • No formally protected • People recognize the ➢ Generate institutional areas of the Guatemalan mangrove area called alliances that include System of Protected Zanjón El Chico and Reserva the communities. Areas (SIGAP) were Natural Privada La Chorrera- ➢ The company should identified. Machón Guamuchal. carry out an awareness • National Council of • The main problems plan with the Protected Areas (CONAP) mangrove forest clearing communities. • Several large mangrove and the reduction of the ➢ Identify high-risk areas. Topic I: Wildlife areas are recognized river's water flow. ➢ Reforestation protected areas near the coasts. • Since it is a private area, throughout the basin • Pampas (wetland) near people say it is impossible to and including the plantations were collaborate to save the participation of the recognized. mangrove. communities. • The area known as Zajón ➢ Coordinate with El Chico is recognized. municipalities to • La Chorrera- Machón protect rivers and Guamuchal Private ensure compliance Natural Reserve. with the law. Invaded Areas: The main land use is agriculture ➢ Training programs. • They are not identified in and livestock. The main ➢ Alliances between Topic II: Land areas near the farms. agricultural products are: large and small tenure and use The main uses of the land are: • Bamboo producers. ➢ • Agriculture • Oil palm Deliver copies of environmental studies • Banana carried out. Mangrove areas are Existence of mangrove and ➢ Provide follow-up on identified. estuary areas. agreements between The main problems identified the company and the are: communities. Deforestation. Law of 25 meters Topic III: ➢ Exchange experiences or 70 meters is not observed. Ecosystems between communities An ecological flow rate of 2% to and the company. 5% is defined. ➢ That the company has a

close relationship with People report seeing pumas in all communities. Zajón. ➢ That employment be Fauna Oil palm and banana plantations generated for all • Birds have reduced the number of people. • species. Parrots ➢ Ensure that the welfare • Iguana • Fish of all employees. • Birds ➢ Help with medications • Coyotes and medical programs. Topic IV: Flora • Rabbits ➢ Conduct a study on and fauna • Armadillos water recharge and Tree species: share the results. • Mahogany ➢ That upstream • Palo blanco communities be • Oak considered. • Willow ➢ Awareness program. Fish species:

HCV Topics Problems identified during Problems identified during the Improvement Proposals the first visit second visit • Mojarra ➢ That all riverbanks be • Trout reforested. • Snook • Catfish • River shrimp • The most important river Rivers identified: is the Ocosito, it is not • Naranjo River used as a transportation • Pacaya River route. • Melendrez River • It overflows every year in • Suchiate River winter. • Rosario River • Ocosito River Drying rivers: • Naranjo River • Pacaya River • Ocosito River Topic V. Flood, • Suchiate River fire, erosion and In winter they flood. vulnerable slope

control There are no fires.

The main problems are: • The motors that extract water. • Deforestation. • Garbage and contamination by chemicals. • Loss of fish. • The wells dry up. • Trees are not cared for. Water catchment sources for They source water for their drinking water: needs from: The main problem is the lack • Individual wells of water for consumption. • Communal wells Most people use individual • Water is purchased for wells that dry up. consumption. The following problems are present: • Extraction of water from rivers. Topic VI: • Individual wells have rusty Protection of water and have been drying water catchment up, forcing them to areas purchase water. • The rivers have been polluted with garbage and their flow has decreased. • In winter they dry out. • They prefer to purchase water for consumption. • Not all communities have communal wells. • People consider that water is used irrationally.

HCV Topics Problems identified during Problems identified during the Improvement Proposals the first visit second visit • The main economic Before, about 5 years ago, activity is agriculture. people lived off fishing, but there are virtually no fish in the rivers • The main sources of work anymore. are sugarcane and palm. The economic activity changes, • People cook with people are now dedicated to firewood, obtained from agriculture, the main plantations logging the surrounding are: land or from the • Corn mangroves. • Plantains • Sesame • Hunting is practiced for • Sweet potato personal consumption or • Herbs subsistence, mainly • Chili peppers Iguanas. • Beans • Rice • Watermelon • Yucca • Tobacco Topic VII: Resources for Poaching is practiced, but it is meeting basic more for survival. needs Many families have small plots of land on which they plant. They cook with firewood and gas, Firewood is mostly obtained from the river and some nearby plots, and sometimes purchased. People report social problems such as unemployment. The main problem of the communities is the lack of water and the motors that extract water and dry up the rivers. Some communities run out of water. Some people hunt animals for food, mainly iguanas. They breed animals for consumption: chickens, pigs, hens, turkeys, ducks and cows. Topic VIII: Not identified in the area People say that there were Cultural and indigenous remains on the farm historical called La Blanca. resources Source: Cynthia Rosales, Consultores Ambientales Bio Terra team, with information collected in community workshops.

In terms of concerns and/or recommendations from stakeholders, the following table highlights the details. The names, identity numbers, and signatures of each of the stakeholders are included in the Annexes of the complete assessment.

TABLE 11. CONCERNS AND/OR RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAKEHOLDERS. Recommendations - Name Title / Role Organization Problems identified Recommendations advisory team Vocal San José • La Chorrera- Machón • Generate • Adequate Adolfo Cocode hamlet Guamuchal Private institutional management of Chair of San José Natural Reserve is private alliances that existing water bodies Hernán Cocode hamlet and has been logged for include the on the farms and Chair of La Ayuda agriculture. different those that supply Carlos Cocode hamlet • In the mangrove area and communities. water for irrigation Auxiliary Campo Libre the estuary, the main • The company as established by Oscar Mayor hamlet problems identified are: should carry out an Guatemalan law and Vocal La Ayuda deforestation, the awareness plan the RSPO. Beatriz Cocode hamlet setbacks stated by law are with the • Keep the Vocal La Ayuda not observed. communities. communities Isaac Cocode hamlet • Decrease of the river • Identify high-risk informed of this Vocal Villa Flores channel. areas. management Eugenia Cocode hamlet • An ecological flow rate of • Reforestation through continuous Cocode Villa Flores 2% to 5% is defined. throughout the communication. Carla treasury hamlet • There has been a decrease basin and including • Establish Chair of El Troje in fauna due to the participation of the coordinated, Jurgen Cocode hamlet increase in agriculture, communities. systematic and Vocal El Troje mainly oil palm and • Coordinate with planned a teamwork Silvio Cocode hamlet banana crops. municipalities to strategy, between Chair of La Blanquita • In summer the rivers dry protect rivers and the company and the Steven Cocode hamlet up and in winter there are ensure compliance communities. Secretary of La Blanquita floods. The behavior of with the law. • Carry out Allan Cocode hamlet the rivers has changed in • Training programs. reforestation Arizona the last 10 years, the flow • Alliances between campaigns starting Paul Chair Community has decreased large and small with oil palm farms, as established by law Arizona significantly and with it, producers. Esteban Vocal along the riverbanks. Community the fish. People state that • Deliver copies of • Create an action plan Fishermen's Almendrales it is due to climate change environmental Gustavo to implement the Association Community and deforestation, but studies carried out. also to water withdrawals recommendations Marco Maria Linda • Provide follow-up (with water pumps) made on agreements proposed by the Benito Maria Linda by large companies for between the workshop Bolton Chair Maria Linda agriculture. Additionally, company and the participants. Suan Independence there is contamination communities. • Actively participate Andrea Auxiliary Independence with garbage and • Exchange in the preservation Mauricio INAB Coatepeque chemicals, loss of fish, and experiences of water sources. violation of the protection • Reach agreements Álvaro INAB Coatepeque between zones. communities and with communities so Chair of Cristiano Valle Lirio • Rivers that dry up are: the company. that they can have Cocode Naranjo River, Pacaya • That the company access to water Chair of Julio Chiguirines River, Ocosito River, has a close sources. Cocode Suchiate River. relationship with • Propose public- MARN-Tecún Gastón Delegate • The drought mainly all communities. private partnerships Umán affects the Mopa and • That employment for the preservation MARN-Tecún Abel Technical Ocosito rivers. be generated for all of the La Chorrera- Umán • Cane Fires. people. Machón Guamuchal Chair of La Noria Fabián • They source water for • Ensure that the Private Natural Cocode Village their needs from: welfare of all Reserve. Chair of El Triunfo Leandro - Individual wells employees. Cocode Village - Communal wells Secretary of Pueblo Nuevo Víctor Cocode La Blanca

Chair of Pueblo Nuevo Water is purchased • Help with Danilo - Cocode La Blanca for consumption medications and Mariano Cocode Monte Cristo • Individual wells have rusty medical programs. Tadeo Fonadero Monte Cristo water and have been • Conduct a study on drying up, forcing them to water recharge and purchase water. share the results. • Not all communities have • That upstream communal wells. communities be • With the decrease in river considered. flow, economic activity • Awareness has changed. program. • • Before, around 5 years People have seen pumas in Zajón, so ago, people lived off fishing, but there are it is proposed that this area be virtually no fish in the rivers anymore. reforested. • Reforest 25 m of • Shortage of water to the riverbank. maintain the orchards. • That the 25 meters • They cook with firewood, established by law which they obtain from be respected. the surrounding land, cut • The company down trees or purchase it. should provide • Some families cook with small plots of land gas that they purchase. so that the • People report social communities can problems such as work them and unemployment. plant subsistence • Some people hunt animals crops. for food, mainly iguanas. • The company • The company hires some should have a plan people and not others. to care for nature • The hiring method of the and the company is not well environment. known, people consider it • Establish a medical is personal. services center. • Arizona is among the most • Assistance for vulnerable communities. communal land. • People say that there • Prohibit littering. were indigenous remains • Avoid using on the farm called La chemicals for Blanca. fumigation. • Employment support. Source: Cynthia Rosales with the table established by the HCV Resource Network *All names used in this table are pseudonyms of the people who participated in the focus groups or were interviewed for personal integrity.

In the final stage of the consultation process, the stakeholders consulted agreed with the HCV and management maps presented.

4. HCV MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING

In this section it is very important to note that most HCVs were identified outside the farms, although in some particular cases, such as in water bodies designated as HCV 5 under the

precautionary principle, they are found within some of the farms. The same is true for the HCV6 under the precautionary principle identified.

For VCAs identified in the areas of influence, the threats would be largely indirect and potential, that is, they would occur only when bad agricultural and environmental practices are carried out within the farms. Likewise, it is important to clarify that, as it has been stated in the present Assessment, this is an agricultural area so these potential effects on the HCV identified may be caused by different sources, so impacts are not necessarily attributable to the Company.

4.1. THREAT ASSESSMENT

Next, each of the potential impacts or threats is assessed using the Environmental Impact Importance Matrix (MIIA) tool, which is widely used in Costa Rica and was established by Executive Decree # 32966-MINAE.

TABLE 12. IMPORTANCE MATRIX OF POTENTIAL IMPACT AND/OR THREATS TO THE IDENTIFIED HCVS.

# Description of the Impact

Sign Intensity Extension Momentum Persistence Reversibility Recoverability Synergy Accumulation Effect Periodicity Importance +,- 1-12 1-4 1-4 1-4 1-4 1-8 1-4 1-4 1-4 1-4 13-100 1 Removal of vegetation -1 8 4 4 4 4 4 2 1 4 1 -56

2 Poaching -1 4 4 4 3 2 4 2 1 4 4 -44

3 Extraction and/or disturbance of fauna -1 4 4 4 3 2 4 2 1 4 4 -44

4 Solid waste mishandling -1 8 4 4 3 2 4 2 2 4 4 -57

5 Agrichemical mishandling -1 8 4 4 3 2 4 2 2 4 4 -57

6 Erosive and sedimentation phenomena -1 8 4 4 4 2 4 2 1 4 4 -57

7 Poor wastewater management -1 8 4 4 4 2 4 2 1 4 4 -57

8 Over exploitation of water -1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 2 -30

9 Intentional fires -1 8 4 4 4 4 4 2 1 4 1 -56

The following is a more extensive description of each of the potential threats, for each of the HCVs identified for the study area. It should be noted that these threats apply to each of the HCVs in the same way, since all the HCVs identified are related to the same ecosystems.

TABLE 13. MAIN THREATS TO THE HCVS IN THE STUDY AREA.

HCV Brief description of the present HCV Main threats

3. Intentional fires to clear and prepare the land for the development of agricultural activities that eliminate the forest cover. HCV 1 4. Possible impact on the bodies of water associated with the farms that ultimately drain towards the coastal ecosystems, which would generate changes in the physical and chemical conditions of the bodies of water in the area. Such impact could eventually have negative repercussions on the protected areas that were declared HCV's, where many of these bodies of water eventually drain, causing a detriment to the populations of the fauna species associated with these ecosystems. The impact scale will depend on the potential impact. This type of contamination could be caused by: • Solid waste mishandling. • Agrichemical mishandling • Bad agricultural practices, causing erosion and sedimentation phenomena. • Poor wastewater management

HCV 2 is identified in the Manchón Guamuchal 1. Potential elimination of remaining forest cover wetland but is excluded from the farms under (mainly along riverbanks) and mangroves as a study. HCV result of the expansion of agricultural frontiers

2 into the forest and mangrove cover. This would This is the largest coastal marine wetland on the further promote the already existing southern Pacific coast of Guatemala and is one fragmentation of the landscape. of the last that still retains these proportions.

This ecosystem has 25,000 hectares of floodable

area, of which 7,650 hectares are covered by 2. Intentional fires to clear and prepare the land mangroves, and the proposed protected area is for the development of agricultural activities 13,942 hectares. This extension is considered that eliminate the forest cover. representative for the region and preserves viable populations of the species present there. 3. Possible impact on the bodies of water associated with the farms that ultimately drain towards the coastal ecosystems, which would generate changes in the physical and chemical conditions of the bodies of water in the area. Such impact could eventually have negative repercussions on areas declared as HCV's, where many of these bodies of water eventually drain, causing a detriment to the populations of the fauna species associated with these ecosystems. The impact scale will depend on the potential impact. This type of contamination could be caused by: 4. Solid waste mishandling. 5. Agrichemical mishandling 6. Bad agricultural practices, causing erosion and sedimentation phenomena. 7. Poor wastewater management

Present at the broader landscape level. 1. Potential elimination of remaining forest cover Corresponds to the Manchón Guaumuchal (mainly along riverbanks) and mangroves as a wetland, mangroves, swamps, lagoons and result of the expansion of agricultural frontiers ponds. into the forest and mangrove cover. This would further promote the already existing Manchón Guamuchal is one of the last remaining fragmentation of the landscape. large coastal marine wetlands on the South Pacific coast of Guatemala, and is currently a 2. Intentional fires to clear and prepare the land highly threatened and vulnerable area, along for the development of agricultural activities with other mangrove ecosystems, lagoons and that eliminate the forest cover. ponds on the coast and inland, due to the lack of a strong legal protection designation. 1. Possible impact on the bodies of water Notwithstanding the above, this HCV is excluded associated with the farms that ultimately drain HCV from the farms under study. towards the coastal ecosystems, which would 3 generate changes in the physical and chemical conditions of the bodies of water in the area. Such impact could eventually have negative repercussions on areas declared as HCV's, where many of these bodies of water eventually drain, causing a detriment to the populations of the fauna species associated with these ecosystems. The impact scale will depend on the potential impact. This type of contamination could be caused by: • Solid waste mishandling. • Agrichemical mishandling • Bad agricultural practices, causing erosion and sedimentation phenomena. • Poor wastewater management

Present at the broader landscape level. 1. Potential elimination of forest coverage Identified in the Manchón Guamuchal wetland (mainly along riverbanks) or mangroves on and other mangrove ecosystems, lagoons and some of the farms, and their areas of influence, ponds along the coast. The presence of this HCV as a result of the expansion of agricultural within the farms under study is ruled out. frontiers. This would further promote the already existing fragmentation of the The critical ecosystem services identified are: landscape, which would undoubtedly affect water regulation, and its buffering capacity, 1. Areas that provide shelter to communities and to function as an ichthyofauna shelter. during extreme weather events. 2. Intentional fires to clear and prepare the land 2. Important ecosystems as fish nurseries that for the development of agricultural activities are critical for subsistence of the communities that eliminate the forest cover. that live off fishing. 3. Possible impact on the bodies of water HCV associated with the farms that ultimately drain 4 towards the coastal ecosystems, which would generate changes in the physical and chemical conditions of the bodies of water in the area. Such impact could eventually have negative repercussions on areas declared as HCV's, where many of these bodies of water eventually drain, causing a detriment to the populations of the fauna species associated with these ecosystems. The impact scale will depend on the potential impact. This type of contamination could be caused by: • Solid waste mishandling. • Agrichemical mishandling • Bad agricultural practices, causing erosion and sedimentation phenomena. • Poor wastewater management

Present at the broader landscape level: 1. Potential elimination of remaining forest cover 1. In the rivers and ditches of the area: water (mainly along riverbanks) and mangroves as a for human supply of the communities and result of the expansion of agricultural frontiers their crops. (Under the precautionary into the forest and mangrove cover. This would principle). further promote the already existing fragmentation of the landscape, which 2. Manchón Guamuchal, and other undoubtedly affects water regulation of the mangroves, lagoons and lagoons on the basin and water quality, and consequently HCV coast and others on the mainland: Fishing as impacts its capacity to host ichthyofauna. 5 a means of subsistence, both through direct consumption and trade. 2. Intentional fires to clear and prepare the land for the development of agricultural activities 3. Machón Guamuchal: Navigation as a means that eliminate the forest cover. of transportation for the communities located inside Manchón. 3. Potential impact on water bodies associated to the farms, which would cause changes in the HCV5 in the area's water bodies is identified physical-chemical conditions of the water under the precautionary principle, due to the bodies in the area. Such impact could

absence of specific technical and scientific eventually have negative repercussions on information on the amount of water withdrawn areas declared as HCV's, where many of these from the water bodies, as well as the demand bodies of water eventually drain, causing a from crops and communities. detriment to the populations of the species associated with these ecosystems. The impact scale will depend on the potential impact. This type of contamination could be caused by: 4. Solid waste mishandling. 5. Agrichemical mishandling 6. Bad agricultural practices, causing erosion and sedimentation phenomena. 7. Poor wastewater management

In relation to rivers and ditches in the area:

• Potential contamination of water bodies due to poor management of solid waste, wastewater and/or agricultural products, etc.

• Sedimentation of water bodies due to potential erosion caused by poor farm management.

• Potential river diversions.

• Massive and uncontrolled extraction of water from these water bodies.

• Potential elimination of the few forest covers associated with water bodies.

HCV 6 was identified under the precautionary principle. This HCV is identified in all of the Company's farms. There is evidence in the area of "cerritos" (mounds of archaeological and The possible mechanization of the ground can HCV cultural remains), and according to experts the cause destruction of buried archaeological sites or 6 entire Guatemalan Pacific coast corresponds to remains. areas of indigenous occupation, so it is possible to see focal points. The farms do not have archaeological studies to be able to rule out the presence of this HCV.

4.2. MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING

The following are recommendations for managing and monitoring the identified HCVs. Because most of the identified HCVs are not actually on the farms, the Company can only ensure that its activities are not detrimental to them.

As mentioned above, poor on-farm agricultural management could eventually impact the HCVs identified at landscape level. This is due to the fact that part of the project is located within the same watershed (Ocosito River) of the Manchón Guamuchal, so its waters drain directly into it, and other farms, most in fact, that are in the Naranjo River basin, which it also feeds, and has direct influence on this ecosystem (Manchón Guamuchal).

It is important to mention, that some of the measures mainly related to bodies of water, were designed according to the Guatemalan legislation that establishes the following: "It is strictly forbidden to cut down trees on riverbanks, lakes, lagoons and water sources, up to 25 meters from their banks". The Guatemalan national interpretation of the RSPO standard, which establishes protection zones of 30 m, was also taken into account.

For HCV1, no specific measures are presented to protect particular species, but rather measures that seek to protect the ecosystem as a whole, and thus all the wildlife it harbors, including RAP, endemic, and migratory species.

The established management areas are shown in the table below. They are not shown by HCV, as most HCVs correspond to the same ecosystems, so the management areas are the same as for virtually all HCVs, with the exception of HCV6 where management is different. The same is true for the management maps, where management areas were not generated separately for each HCV as it did not apply in this case.

TABLE 14. MANAGEMENT AREAS FOR THE IDENTIFIED HCVS. Rivers River protection areas and remnant vegetation Farm (linear km) (ha) Blocks A and B 17,22 110,73

Block C, D and E 51,75 309,04

Block F and G 1,24 24,77

Block H 10,08 66,32 Total 80,3 510,86 general

It is important to note that the following management recommendations apply to all farms under study. The following areas were designated as HCV management areas:

• For water bodies and their protection zones, 30 m are established as a buffer zone along the banks, based on national legislation and the Guatemalan national interpretation of the RSPO standard. These were designated as management areas to guarantee non-

contamination and impact on the HCVs, since the water bodies that drain the farms under study, flow into the mangroves. Also, the protection zones of the water bodies work as linear biological corridors, which allow the transit of species and somehow maintain the heterogeneity of the landscape acting as buffers for the mangrove ecosystems identified as HCVs.

After the table, the corresponding management maps are presented, which show in detail the above-mentioned HCV management areas for each of the farms under study.

TABLE 15. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MANAGING AND MONITORING HCVS. HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures Identify potential corridors or transit routes within the farms for RAP endemic and migratory species and encourage connectivity by considering isolated sites Annual monitoring will be carried out using that can be connected by water bodies and/or areas satellite images, where the areas destined for that are not suitable for planting with forest remnants connectivity are analyzed, to determine if the or other off-farm ecosystems. The above, allocating implemented measures are having a positive Potential elimination of remaining areas for regeneration, or implementing reforestation effect. plans. Maps should be generated highlighting the areas forest cover (mainly along chosen to promote connectivity. riverbanks) and mangroves as a The water bodies and protection zones of each All protection zones for bodies of water must be result of the expansion of agricultural farm must be monitored through satellite delimited, proceeding in accordance with Guatemalan frontiers into the forest and images in order to verify their condition and legislation. These areas must remain intact, meaning mangrove cover. This would further ensure that the protection zones of these water they may not be invaded in any way. bodies are being respected. HCV 1 encourage the already existing fragmentation of the landscape, An annual monitoring will be carried out A review will be made of those areas within each farm through satellite images, where the areas further reducing the area of free that are in disuse or that will not be subjected to destined to the reforestation processes are transit of species that depend on planting processes, so that they can be included in analyzed, to verify that these processes are these ecosystems. reforestation plans. A map will be generated indicating indeed being carried out, and that they also which areas will be used for these processes. make sense at a landscape level to promote connectivity with other areas. Implement landscape management tools (biological Annual monitoring will be carried out through corridors, living fences, forest fragments or patches, satellite images, where compliance and enrichment and protection of water bodies) that potential benefits of the implementation of guarantee diversity and configuration of the natural these tools will be verified. landscape. Possible poaching forest patches Ban poaching within the farms and establish internal Monitoring will be done by reviewing the (mainly along the riverbanks) by regulations to sanction any employee who disregards results of the annual census of RAP, endemic Company employees, or by third this prohibition. and migratory species.

HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures parties, causing greater pressure Monitoring will be done by reviewing the and disturbance to the wildlife in Place signage inside the farms that indicates the results of the annual census of RAP, endemic the area. prohibition of hunting, and the extraction of wild and migratory species. Also, employees should species. be interviewed annually to determine whether the signage is having the desired effect. Place signage indicating rare, endemic, threatened or endangered species that have been identified within The previous point is reiterated. the farms, and which should be protected to raise awareness of their ecological value. Hire a biologist to conduct annual surveys of RAP, endemic and migratory species populations within the Based on the results of each annual census, the farms, mainly those identified in the Rapid Ecological next steps to be implemented should be Assessment. The above is to evaluate the condition of determined. these species over time. Having a template with images of RAP, endemic and migratory species so that those in charge of each farm The results of these templates will complement can note each sighting of these species. This is because the previous point. maintaining wildlife in these areas has a positive impact on the maintenance of HCVs. If burrows, shelters, or nests of any species of wild fauna within the farms are identified that require If this occurs, a written and photographic record relocation, relevant state agencies must be notified in should be kept of each of these findings, and of order to relocate them, thus avoiding killing the the relocation process carried out. species. Intentional fires to clear and prepare Promote and implement a community training and Evidence of the implementation of this awareness program (if possible, hand in hand with the program, and the results obtained from it, will the land for the development of Municipality so that it has more reach) that educates be reviewed annually to assess whether the agricultural activities that eliminate about the importance of not causing fires intentionally. program is indeed creating any positive impact the forest cover. The program should emphasize the enormous negative on awareness of the issue, or whether efforts consequences of this practice. should be redirected. Potential effect on water bodies Place signage indicating the prohibition of littering, or Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the due to poor solid waste contamination of water bodies, within the farms. Also, water bodies associated with the farms every management, which would cause awareness of the issue should be addressed in six months.

HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures changes in the physical-chemical environmental workshops that should be held at least conditions of the associated water twice a year. bodies or near farms. This could eventually affect the fauna population associated with these bodies of water. Annual monitoring will be carried out through Potential effect on water bodies A 30m buffer zone should be left on neighboring water satellite images, to assess if the buffer zone is due to agrichemical bodies or of direct influence. being respected. mismanagement, which would Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the cause changes in the physical- water bodies associated with the farms every chemical conditions of the six months. associated water bodies or near Ensure that water bodies associated to farms are not

farms. This could eventually affect contaminated by farming products. Also sampling of benthic macro-invertebrates the fauna population associated (biological indicators) should be done on water with these bodies of water. bodies annually. Identify internal issues at the company related to farm A quarterly visit to these areas should be carried management that may eventually affect areas of out to verify that the Company is carrying out ecological importance within the farms or near them, Potential effect on water bodies environmentally friendly agricultural practices, such as the invasion of protected areas, or poor due to poor agricultural practices, and in complete compliance with Guatemalan maintenance of drainage channels among others, and creating erosive phenomena and environmental legislation. correct them immediately. sedimentation, which would cause Maintain strict erosion and sedimentation control Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the changes in the physical-chemical practices, mainly regarding surface runoff water water bodies associated with the farms every conditions of the water bodies draining into farm-associated water bodies. six months. associated to the area or near the Ensure that there is no invasion of the protected zone Water bodies and protection zones of each farms. This could eventually affect of the water bodies associated with the farms. farm must be monitored through satellite the fauna population associated Correctly delimit said protection zones, and label images in order to verify their condition and with these bodies of water. indicating the prohibition to invade these zones. Also, ensure that the protection zones of these water vegetation recovery plans should be promoted in bodies are being respected, and that vegetation protected areas of the associated water bodies. recovery plans are having a positive effect.

HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures Potential effect on water bodies due to wastewater mismanagement, which would Periodic physical and chemical sampling of the cause changes in the physical- effluents from the treatment plants will be Ensure that the Company's wastewater treatment chemical conditions of the carried out to ensure that they comply with the plants are working properly. associated water bodies or near parameters established by current legislation in farms. This could eventually affect Guatemala. the fauna population associated with these bodies of water. Identify potential corridors or transit routes within the farms for RAP endemic and migratory species and encourage connectivity by considering isolated sites Annual monitoring will be carried out using that can be connected by water bodies and/or areas satellite images, where the areas destined for that are not suitable for planting with forest remnants connectivity are analyzed, to determine if the or other off-farm ecosystems. The above, allocating implemented measures are having an positive areas for regeneration, or implementing reforestation effect. Potential elimination of remaining plans. Maps should be generated highlighting the areas forest cover (mainly along chosen to promote connectivity. The water bodies and protection zones of each riverbanks) and mangroves as a All protection zones for bodies of water must be farm must be monitored through satellite result of the expansion of agricultural delimited, proceeding in accordance with Honduran HCV 2 images in order to verify their condition and legislation. These areas must remain intact, meaning frontiers into the forest and ensure that the protection zones of these water they may not be invaded in any way. mangrove cover. This would further bodies are being respected. promote the already existing An annual monitoring will be carried out fragmentation of the landscape. A review will be made of those areas within each farm through satellite images, where the areas that are in disuse or that will not be subjected to destined to the reforestation processes are planting processes, so that they can be included in analyzed, to verify that these processes are reforestation plans. A map will be generated indicating indeed being carried out, and that they also which areas will be used for these processes. make sense at a landscape level to promote connectivity with other areas. Implement landscape management tools (biological Annual monitoring will be carried out through corridors, living fences, forest fragments or patches, satellite images, where compliance and enrichment and protection of water bodies) that potential benefits of the implementation of

HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures guarantee diversity and configuration of the natural these tools will be verified. landscape. Promote and implement a community training and Evidence of the implementation of this Intentional fires to clear and awareness program (if possible, hand in hand with the program, and the results obtained from it, will prepare the land for the Municipality so that it has more reach) that educates be reviewed annually to assess whether the development of agricultural about the importance of not causing fires intentionally. program is indeed creating any positive impact activities that eliminate the forest The program should emphasize the enormous negative on awareness of the issue, or whether efforts cover. consequences of this practice. should be redirected. Potential effect on water bodies due to poor solid waste management, which would cause Place signage indicating the prohibition of littering, or changes in the physical-chemical contamination of water bodies, within the farms. Also, Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the conditions of the associated water awareness of the issue should be addressed in water bodies associated with the farms every bodies or near farms. This could environmental workshops that should be held at least six months. eventually impact these ecosystems twice a year. as a whole, where many of these bodies of water eventually discharge. The protection zones along the watercourses identified Potential effect on water bodies Annual monitoring will be carried out through in the Management Area maps must be respected due to agrichemical satellite images, to assess if the buffer zone is according to the provisions of Honduran legislation, as mismanagement, which would being respected. it is essential to protect the HCVs in which they drain. cause changes in the physical- Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the chemical conditions of the water bodies associated with the farms every six associated water bodies or near months. farms. This could eventually impact Ensure that water bodies associated to farms are not

these ecosystems as a whole, where contaminated by farming products. Also sampling of benthic macro-invertebrates many of these bodies of water (biological indicators) should be done on water eventually discharge. bodies annually. Potential effect on water bodies Identify internal issues at the company related to farm A quarterly visit to these areas should be carried due to poor agricultural practices, management that may eventually affect areas of out to verify that the Company is carrying out creating erosive phenomena and ecological importance within the farms or near them, environmentally friendly agricultural practices, sedimentation, which would cause such as the invasion of protected areas, or poor and in complete compliance with the current

HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures changes in the physical-chemical maintenance of drainage channels among others, and environmental legislation. conditions of the water bodies correct them immediately. associated to the area or near the Maintain strict erosion and sedimentation control Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the farms. This could eventually impact practices, mainly regarding surface runoff water water bodies associated with the farms every these ecosystems as a whole, where draining into farm-associated water bodies. six months. many of these bodies of water Ensure that there is no invasion of the protected zone Water bodies and protection zones of each eventually discharge. of the water bodies associated with the farms. farm must be monitored through satellite Correctly delimit said protection zones, and label images in order to verify their condition and indicating the prohibition to invade these zones. Also, ensure that the protection zones of these water vegetation recovery plans should be promoted in bodies are being respected, and that vegetation protected areas of the associated water bodies. recovery plans are having a positive effect. Potential effect on water bodies due to wastewater mismanagement, which would Periodic physical and chemical sampling of the cause changes in the physical- effluents from the treatment plants will be chemical conditions of the Ensure that the Company's wastewater treatment carried out to ensure that they comply with the associated water bodies or near plants are working properly. parameters established by current legislation in farms. This could eventually impact Guatemala. these ecosystems as a whole, where many of these bodies of water eventually discharge. Encourage connectivity of isolated sites that can be Potential elimination of remaining connected through bodies of water and/or areas that Annual monitoring will be carried out using forest cover (mainly along are not suitable for planting with forest remnants or satellite images, where the areas destined for riverbanks) and mangroves as a other ecosystems outside the farms. The above, connectivity are analyzed, to determine if the allocating areas for regeneration, or implementing implemented measures are having an positive result of the expansion of agricultural HCV 3 reforestation plans. Maps should be generated effect. frontiers into the forest and highlighting the areas chosen to promote connectivity. mangrove cover. This would further The water bodies and protection zones of each All protection zones for bodies of water must be promote the already existing farm must be monitored through satellite delimited, proceeding in accordance with Guatemalan fragmentation of the landscape. images in order to verify their condition and legislation. These areas must remain intact, meaning ensure that the protection zones of these water they may not be invaded in any way. bodies are being respected.

HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures An annual monitoring will be carried out A review will be made of those areas within each farm through satellite images, where the areas that are in disuse or that will not be subjected to destined to the reforestation processes are planting processes, so that they can be included in analyzed, to verify that these processes are reforestation plans. A map will be generated indicating indeed being carried out, and that they also which areas will be used for these processes. make sense at a landscape level to promote connectivity with other areas. Implement landscape management tools (biological Annual monitoring will be carried out through corridors, living fences, forest fragments or patches, satellite images, where compliance and enrichment and protection of water bodies) that potential benefits of the implementation of guarantee diversity and configuration of the natural these tools will be verified. landscape. Intentional fires to clear and prepare Promote and implement a community training and Evidence of the implementation of this awareness program (if possible, hand in hand with the program, and the results obtained from it, will the land for the development of Municipality so that it has more reach) that educates be reviewed annually to assess whether the agricultural activities that eliminate about the importance of not causing fires intentionally. program is indeed creating any positive impact the forest cover. The program should emphasize the enormous negative on awareness of the issue, or whether efforts consequences of this practice. should be redirected. Potential effect on water bodies due to poor solid waste management, which would cause Place signage indicating the prohibition of littering, or changes in the physical-chemical contamination of water bodies, within the farms. Also, Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the conditions of the associated water awareness of the issue should be addressed in water bodies associated with the farms every bodies or near farms. This could environmental workshops that should be held at least six months. eventually impact these ecosystems twice a year. as a whole, where many of these bodies of water eventually discharge. Potential effect on water bodies Annual monitoring will be carried out through A 30m buffer zone should be left on neighboring water due to agrichemical satellite images, to assess if the buffer zone is bodies or of direct influence. mismanagement, which would being respected. cause changes in the physical- Ensure that water bodies associated to farms are not Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the chemical conditions of the contaminated by farming products. water bodies associated with the farms every

HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures associated water bodies or near six months. farms. This could eventually impact these ecosystems as a whole, where Also sampling of benthic macro-invertebrates many of these bodies of water (biological indicators) should be done on water eventually discharge. bodies annually. Identify internal issues at the company related to farm A quarterly visit to these areas should be carried management that may eventually affect areas of out to verify that the Company is carrying out Potential effect on water bodies ecological importance within the farms or near them, environmentally friendly agricultural practices, due to poor agricultural practices, such as the invasion of protected areas, or poor and in complete compliance with Guatemalan creating erosive phenomena and maintenance of drainage channels among others, and environmental legislation. sedimentation, which would cause correct them immediately. changes in the physical-chemical Maintain strict erosion and sedimentation control Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the conditions of the water bodies practices, mainly regarding surface runoff water water bodies associated with the farms every associated to the area or near the draining into farm-associated water bodies. six months. farms. This could eventually impact Ensure that there is no invasion of the protected zone Water bodies and protection zones of each these ecosystems as a whole, where of the water bodies associated with the farms. farm must be monitored through satellite many of these bodies of water Correctly delimit said protection zones, and label images in order to verify their condition and eventually discharge. indicating the prohibition to invade these zones. Also, ensure that the protection zones of these water vegetation recovery plans should be promoted in bodies are being respected, and that vegetation protected areas of the associated water bodies. recovery plans are having a positive effect. Potential effect on water bodies due to wastewater mismanagement, which would Periodic physical and chemical sampling of the cause changes in the physical- effluents from the treatment plants will be chemical conditions of the Ensure that the Company's wastewater treatment carried out to ensure that they comply with the associated water bodies or near plants are working properly. parameters established by current legislation in farms. This could eventually impact Guatemala. these ecosystems as a whole, where many of these bodies of water eventually discharge.

HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures Encourage connectivity of isolated sites that can be connected through bodies of water and/or areas that Annual monitoring will be carried out using are not suitable for planting with forest remnants or satellite images, where the areas destined for other ecosystems outside the farms. The above, connectivity are analyzed, to determine if the allocating areas for regeneration, or implementing implemented measures are having an positive reforestation plans. Maps should be generated effect. Potential elimination of forest highlighting the areas chosen to promote connectivity. coverage or mangroves on some of The water bodies and protection zones of each All protection zones for bodies of water must be the farms, and their areas of farm must be monitored through satellite delimited, proceeding in accordance with Guatemalan influence, as a result of the images in order to verify their condition and legislation. These areas must remain intact, meaning expansion of agricultural frontiers. ensure that the protection zones of these water they may not be invaded in any way. This would further promote the bodies are being respected. already existing fragmentation of An annual monitoring will be carried out the landscape, which would A review will be made of those areas within each farm through satellite images, where the areas HCV 4 undoubtedly affect water that are in disuse or that will not be subjected to destined to the reforestation processes are regulation, and its buffering planting processes, so that they can be included in analyzed, to verify that these processes are capacity, and to function as an reforestation plans. A map will be generated indicating indeed being carried out, and that they also ichthyofauna shelter. which areas will be used for these processes. make sense at a landscape level to promote connectivity with other areas. Implement landscape management tools (biological Annual monitoring will be carried out through corridors, living fences, forest fragments or patches, satellite images, where compliance and enrichment and protection of water bodies) that potential benefits of the implementation of guarantee diversity and configuration of the natural these tools will be verified. landscape. Intentional fires to clear and prepare Promote and implement a community training and Evidence of the implementation of this awareness program (if possible, hand in hand with the program, and the results obtained from it, will the land for the development of Municipality so that it has more reach) that educates be reviewed annually to assess whether the agricultural activities that eliminate about the importance of not causing fires intentionally. program is indeed creating any positive impact the forest cover. The program should emphasize the enormous negative on awareness of the issue, or whether efforts consequences of this practice. should be redirected.

HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures Potential effect on water bodies due to poor solid waste management, which would cause Place signage indicating the prohibition of littering, or changes in the physical-chemical contamination of water bodies, within the farms. Also, Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the conditions of the associated water awareness of the issue should be addressed in water bodies associated with the farms every bodies or near farms. This could environmental workshops that should be held at least six months. eventually impact these ecosystems twice a year. as a whole, where many of these bodies of water eventually discharge. Potential effect on water bodies Annual monitoring will be carried out through A 30m buffer zone should be left on neighboring water due to agrichemical satellite images, to assess if the buffer zone is bodies or of direct influence. mismanagement, which would being respected. cause changes in the physical- Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the chemical conditions of the water bodies associated with the farms every associated water bodies or near six months. Ensure that water bodies associated to farms are not farms. This could eventually impact contaminated by farming products. these ecosystems as a whole, where Also sampling of benthic macro-invertebrates many of these bodies of water (biological indicators) should be done on water eventually discharge. bodies annually. Identify internal issues at the company related to farm A quarterly visit to these areas should be carried Potential effect on water bodies management that may eventually affect areas of out to verify that the Company is carrying out due to poor agricultural practices, ecological importance within the farms or near them, environmentally friendly agricultural practices, creating erosive phenomena and such as the invasion of protected areas, or poor and in complete compliance with Guatemalan sedimentation, which would cause maintenance of drainage channels among others, and environmental legislation. changes in the physical-chemical correct them immediately. conditions of the water bodies Maintain strict erosion and sedimentation control Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the associated to the area or near the practices, mainly regarding surface runoff water water bodies associated with the farms every farms. This could eventually impact draining into farm-associated water bodies. six months. these ecosystems as a whole, where Ensure that there is no invasion of the protected zone Water bodies and protection zones of each many of these bodies of water of the water bodies associated with the farms. farm must be monitored through satellite eventually discharge. Correctly delimit said protection zones, and label images in order to verify their condition and indicating the prohibition to invade these zones. Also, ensure that the protection zones of these water

HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures vegetation recovery plans should be promoted in bodies are being respected, and that vegetation protected areas of the associated water bodies. recovery plans are having a positive effect. Potential effect on water bodies due to wastewater mismanagement, which would Periodic physical and chemical sampling of the cause changes in the physical- effluents from the treatment plants will be chemical conditions of the Ensure that the Company's wastewater treatment carried out to ensure that they comply with the associated water bodies or near plants are working properly. parameters established by current legislation in farms. This could eventually impact Guatemala. these ecosystems as a whole, where many of these bodies of water eventually discharge. Encourage connectivity of isolated sites that can be connected through bodies of water and/or areas that Annual monitoring will be carried out using are not suitable for planting with forest remnants or satellite images, where the areas destined for other ecosystems outside the farms. The above, connectivity are analyzed, to determine if the allocating areas for regeneration, or implementing implemented measures are having an positive Potential elimination of forest reforestation plans. Maps should be generated effect. coverage or mangroves on some of highlighting the areas chosen to promote connectivity. the farms, and their areas of The water bodies and protection zones of each All protection zones for bodies of water must be influence, as a result of the farm must be monitored through satellite delimited, proceeding in accordance with Guatemalan expansion of agricultural frontiers. images in order to verify their condition and legislation. These areas must remain intact, meaning HCV 5 This would further promote the ensure that the protection zones of these water they may not be invaded in any way. already existing fragmentation of bodies are being respected. the landscape, which undoubtedly An annual monitoring will be carried out affects water regulation of the basin A review will be made of those areas within each farm through satellite images, where the areas and water quality, and that are in disuse or that will not be subjected to destined to the reforestation processes are consequently impacts its capacity to planting processes, so that they can be included in analyzed, to verify that these processes are host ichthyofauna. reforestation plans. A map will be generated indicating indeed being carried out, and that they also which areas will be used for these processes. make sense at a landscape level to promote connectivity with other areas. Implement landscape management tools (biological Annual monitoring will be carried out through corridors, living fences, forest fragments or patches, satellite images, where compliance and

HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures enrichment and protection of water bodies) that potential benefits of the implementation of guarantee diversity and configuration of the natural these tools will be verified. landscape. Promote and implement a community training and Evidence of the implementation of this Intentional fires to clear and awareness program (if possible, hand in hand with the program, and the results obtained from it, will prepare the land for the Municipality so that it has more reach) that educates be reviewed annually to assess whether the development of agricultural about the importance of not causing fires intentionally. program is indeed creating any positive impact activities that eliminate the forest The program should emphasize the enormous negative on awareness of the issue, or whether efforts cover. consequences of this practice. should be redirected. Potential effect on water bodies due to poor solid waste management, which would cause Place signage indicating the prohibition of littering, or changes in the physical-chemical contamination of water bodies, within the farms. Also, Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the conditions of the associated water awareness of the issue should be addressed in water bodies associated with the farms every bodies or near farms. This could environmental workshops that should be held at least six months. eventually impact these ecosystems twice a year. as a whole, where many of these bodies of water eventually discharge. Potential effect on water bodies Annual monitoring will be carried out through A 30m buffer zone should be left on neighboring water due to agrichemical satellite images, to assess if the buffer zone is bodies or of direct influence. mismanagement, which would being respected. cause changes in the physical- Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the chemical conditions of the water bodies associated with the farms every associated water bodies or near six months. Ensure that water bodies associated to farms are not farms. This could eventually impact contaminated by farming products. these ecosystems as a whole, where Also sampling of benthic macro-invertebrates many of these bodies of water (biological indicators) should be done on water eventually discharge. bodies annually. Potential effect on water bodies Identify internal issues at the company related to farm A quarterly visit to these areas should be carried due to poor agricultural practices, management that may eventually affect areas of out to verify that the Company is carrying out creating erosive phenomena and ecological importance within the farms or near them, environmentally friendly agricultural practices, sedimentation, which would cause such as the invasion of protected areas, or poor and in complete compliance with Guatemalan

HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures changes in the physical-chemical maintenance of drainage channels among others, and environmental legislation. conditions of the water bodies correct them immediately. associated to the area or near the Maintain strict erosion and sedimentation control Monitor the physical-chemical conditions of the farms. This could eventually impact practices, mainly regarding surface runoff water water bodies associated with the farms every these ecosystems as a whole, where draining into farm-associated water bodies. six months. many of these bodies of water Ensure that there is no invasion of the protected zone Water bodies and protection zones of each eventually discharge. of the water bodies associated with the farms. farm must be monitored through satellite Correctly delimit said protection zones, and label images in order to verify their condition and indicating the prohibition to invade these zones. Also, ensure that the protection zones of these water vegetation recovery plans should be promoted in bodies are being respected, and that vegetation protected areas of the associated water bodies. recovery plans are having a positive effect. Potential effect on water bodies due to wastewater mismanagement, which would Periodic physical and chemical sampling of the cause changes in the physical- effluents from the treatment plants will be chemical conditions of the Ensure that the Company's wastewater treatment carried out to ensure that they comply with the associated water bodies or near plants are working properly. parameters established by current legislation in farms. This could eventually impact Guatemala. these ecosystems as a whole, where many of these bodies of water eventually discharge. Monitor the extraction flow with flow meters Massive and uncontrolled Ensure compliance with the extraction flow granted by installed at each extraction point and keep a log extraction of water from water the entity in charge of water concessions, to guarantee to monitor compliance with the above. bodies. that local water levels are not affected. Carry out campaigns to measure and monitor water levels in wells. Ensure that rivers bordering or crossing the Annual monitoring will be carried out through Potential river diversions. management units are not diverted either for planting satellite images and/or visit to the management purposes or to meet irrigation needs. units, where compliance will be verified. The possible mechanization of the Carry out a detailed Archaeological Assessment on Once these archaeological assessments are in HCV 6 ground can cause destruction of each farm, to finally confirm or rule out the presence of place, it can be determined whether the buried archaeological sites or the HCV6 that was identified under the precautionary precautionary principle is eliminated, or remains. principle. If this HCV is confirmed, these sites should be whether the presence of the HCV6 is confirmed,

HCV Main threats Management Measures Monitoring Measures marked and must be fully respected. and if so, this HCV should be mapped to be certain in which farms it is present and which locations specifically.

FIGURE 4. HCV MANAGEMENT MAP FOR BLOCK H.

FIGURE 5. HCV MANAGEMENT MAP FOR BLOCKS C, D AND E.

FIGURE 6. HCV MANAGEMENT MAP FOR BLOCKS A AND B.

FIGURE 7. HCV MANAGEMENT MAP FOR BLOCKS F AND G.

5. REFERENCES

Andrén, H. 1994. Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review, Oikos 71: 355-366. Beier, P. and R. F. Noss. 1998. Do Habitat Corridors Provide Connectivity, Conservation Biology 12 (6): 1241-1252. Bennett, A. F. 1990. Habitats corridors and the conservation of smalls mammals in fragmented forest. Lanscape Ecology 4:109-122. Bennett, A. F.. 1999. Linkages in the landscape: The role of Corridors and Connectivity in Wildlife Conservation. IUCN, Gland. Bennett, A. F.; K. Henein & G. Merriam. 1994. Corridor use and the elements of corridor quality: chipmunks and fencerows in a farmland mosaic. Biological Conservation 68: 155-165. Bennett, A. F. 2004. Enlazando el paisaje. El papel de los corredores y la conectividad en la conservación de la vida silvestre. World Conservation Union (IUCN). San José, Costa Rica. Brooker, M. 1983. Conservation of wildlife in river corridors. Nature in Wales 2: 11-20. Brosi. J. B., Ming, S. T., y Billadello, L. N. (2008) Polinización Biótica y Cambios en el uso de la tierra en paisajes dominados por humanos. En Harvey, C. A., y J. M., Sáenz. 2008. Evaluación y conservación de biodiversidad en paisajes fragmentados de Mesoamérica. –1ª Ed. – Santo Domingo de Heredia, Costa Rica: Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, INBio. Page - 581. Campbell, J. and J. Vannini. 1989. Distribution of amphibians and reptiles in Guatemala and Belize. Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology. Los Angeles, California. Castañeda, A. 2017. Análisis de cambio de uso del suelo (LUCA) para fincas establecidas sin Evaluación previa de AVC de la Empresa Agroservicios Atlántida S.A. CATHALACY SIA –MARN. 2012. Clasificación de la cobertura actual del mangle de las costas del Pacífico y Atlántico de Guatemala, a través de técnicas de percepción remota. Chupina, A., 2015. Susceptibilidad a la Licuefacción en la Planicie Costera del Pacífico de Guatemala. Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala. pages 156 Comisión Centroamericana de Ambiente y Desarrollo (CCAD) 2010. Listados Actualizados de las Especies de Fauna y Flora incluidas en los apéndices de la CITES, distribuidas en Centroamérica y República Dominicana. Centroamérica. 61p. Chuvieco, E. 2002. Environmental Remote Sensing: Earth Observation from Space Ariel Ciencia. Barcelona, Spain. ISBN: 84-344-8047-6. 596 pp CONAP. 2001. Lista Oficial de Especies CITES de Fauna y Flora para Guatemala. Resolución ALC/043- 99 y Decreto legislativo no. 63-79. Consejo Nacional de Áreas Protegidas, Guatemala. Daily, G. C. 2001. Ecological forecast. Nature 411:245. De La Cruz, J. (1982). Clasificación de zonas de vida de Guatemala a nivel de reconocimiento. Guatemala: Ministerio de Agricultura, Ganadería y Alimentación. Desarrollos Bahtun S.A. 2018. Diagnóstico Ambiental. Plantación de Palma de Aceite, Bloque El Colorado. Desarrollos Bahtun S.A. 2019. Diagnóstico Ambiental. Plantación de Palma de Aceite, Bloque El Prado. Desarrollos Bahtun S.A. 2019. Plan de Gestión Ambiental. Plantación de Palma de Aceite, Finca Poza Rica. Desarrollos Bahtun S.A. 2019. Plan de Gestión Ambiental. Plantación de Palma de Aceite, Finca Pitaya. Diamond, J.M., 1984.Normal extinctions of isolated population. Pp. 191-246 in Extinctions.(Ed. M.H. Nitecki). (University of Chicago Press: Chicago).

Dobson, A. y A. Leslye. 1989. The populations dynamics and conservation or primate populations. Conservation Biology 3:362-380 Eisermann, K. y C. Avendaño. 2007. Lista comentada de las aves de Guatemala. Lynx Edicions. Barcelona. 175 pp. Emerton, L., &Bos, E. 2004. Value. Counting ecosystems as water infrastructure. IUCN, Gland (Switzerland) and Cambridge (UK), 88 pp. Emmerich, J.M. and Vohs, P.A., 1982. Comparative use of four woodland habitats by birds. Journal of Wildlife Management 46: 43-49. Evaluación de los Ecosistemas del Milenio-EEM. 2005. Servicios de los Ecosistemas y Bienestar Humano: Síntesis de Humedales y Agua. World Resources Institute, Washington DC. Espinoza, F. 2011. Determinación de la dinámica del bosque de manglar del departamento de Retalhuleu y el municipio de Ocos en San Marcos, periodo 1974-2010. Faanes, C.A., 1984. Wooded islands in a sea of prairie. American Birds 38: 3-6.n. Western Birds 18: 77-83. Fedepalma. 2012. Available at http://www.fedepalma.org Fisher, J.; D. B. Lindenmayer& A.D. Manning. 2005. Biodiversity, ecosystem function and resilience: ten guiding principles for commodity production landscapes. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 4:80-86 Forman, R. T. T. & J. Baudry. 1984. Hedgerows and hedgerow Networks in landscape ecology. Environmental Management 8:495-510. Forman, R. T. T. 1995. Land mosaics: the ecology of landscapes and regions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Fowler, N.E. and Howe, R.W., 1987.Birds of remmant riparian forest in northeastern Wisconsin. Hanski, I. & Gilpin, M. E. 1997. Metapopulation Biology: Ecology, Genetics, and Evolution(Academic, San Diego. Harvey, C. A.; Villanueva; J. Villacís; M. M. Chacón; D. Muñoz; M. López; M. Ibrahim; R. Taylor; J. L. Martínez; A. Navas; J. C. Sáenz; D. Sánchez; A. Medina; S. Vílchez; B. Hernández; A. Pérez; F. Ruiz; F. López; I. Lang; S. Kunth y F. L. Sinclair. 2005ª.Contributio or live fences to the ecological integrity of agricultural landscapes in Central America.Agriculture, Ecosystems and Envirnment. 111:200-230 Harvey, C. A.; F. Alpízar; M. Chacón y R. Madrigal. 2005b. Assessing linkages between Agriculture and Biodiversity in Central America: Historical overview and Future perspectives. Mesoamerican y Caribbean Region, Coonservation Science Program.The Nature Conservancy (TNC), San José, Costa Rica. Harvey, C. A.; C. Villanueva; M. Ibrahim; R. Gómez; M. López; S. Kunth y F. L. Sinclair. 2005 c. Productores, árboles y producción ganadera en paisajes de América Central: Implicaciones para la conservación de la biodiversidad. Harvey, C. A.; A. Medina; D. Sánchez; S. Vílchez; B. Hernández; J.C. Sáenz; J. M. Maes; F. Casanoves y F. L. Sinclair. 2006. Patters of animal diversity associated with different forms of tree cover retained in agricultural landscapes. Ecological Aplications 16: 1986-1999. Harvey, C. A., y J. M., Sáenz. 2008. Evaluación y conservación de biodiversidad en paisajes fragmentados de Mesoamérica. –1ª Ed. – Santo Domingo de Heredia, Costa Rica: Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, INBio. Page - 581. Harvey, A.C., Villanueva, C., Ibrahim, M., Gómez, R., López, M., Kunt, S., y Sinclair, L. F. 2008. Productores, árboles y producción ganadera en paisajes de América Central: Implicaciones para la conservación de la biodiversidad. En Harvey, C. A., y J. M., Sáenz. 2008. Evaluación y conservación de biodiversidad en paisajes fragmentados de Mesoamérica. –1ª Ed. – Santo Domingo de Heredia, Costa Rica: Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, INBio. Page - 581.

Howell, S. y Webb, S. 1995. A guide to the birds of Mexico and Northern Central America. Oxford, Inglaterra: Oxford University Press. HCV Resource Network. 2013. Available at http://www.fedepalma.org Jennings, Steve., R, Nussbaum.; N, Judd & T, Evans. 2003. PROFOREST. Herramientas prácticas para Bosque con Altos Valores de Conservación. First Edition. Kappelle, M. 2008. Diccionario de la biodiversidad. 1st edition. INBio. Kattan, G. H. 2002. Fragmentación: patrones y mecanismos de extinción de especies. Pages 561- 590 in M. R. Guariguata y G. H. Kattan, editores. Ecología y conservación de bosque neotropicales. Libro Universitario Regional, Cartago, Costa Rica. Kauffer, E, F. 2010. La cuenca del río Suciate: Entre inundaciones y movilidad de Frontera México- Guatemala. En Las cuencas hidrográficas de México. Diagnóstico y priorización, H. Cotler (coord.) Exima/Instituto Nacional de Ecología y Cambio Climático, México, pp- 198-200, en https://micrositios.inecc.gob.mx/cuenca/diagnostico/37-rio-suchiate.pdf Kauffer Michel, Edith F., 2012a, «Conflictos y cooperación en cuencas transfronterizas del sur de México y de Centro América: dinámicas históricas y realidades contemporáneas», proyecto presentado en el taller temático México-Francia Cuencas transfronterizas en la encrucijada de la cooperación y los conflictos: miradas cruzadas en el tiempo y el espacio (México, Francia y Centroamérica), del 16 a 18 de enero, París. At: https://micrositios.inecc.gob.mx/cuenca/diagnostico/37-rio-suchiate.pdf Kwei, I., 2018. Historia de la Revolución Quetzalteca de 1837. Tomado de https://aprende.guatemala.com/historia/epocas-historicas/historia-revolucion- quetzalteca-de-1897/. López. J. 2015. Evaluación Biológica y Ecosistémica Rápida. ATLANTIDA S.A. MAGA. 2001. Mapa fisiográfico-geomorfológico de la República de Guatemala. Memoria técnica. Guatemala: MAGA. Marsh, C.; A. Johns y J. Ayres. 1987. Effects of habitat disturbance on rain forest primates. Pages 83-107 in C. Marsh y R. Mittermeier, editiores. Primate Conservation in the Tropical Rain Forest. Alan R. Liss, INC., New York. Mendoza, J. E., Jiménez, E., Lozano-Zombrano, F. H., Caycedo-Rosales, P., y Renjifo, L. M. (2008). Identificación de elementos del paisaje prioritarios para la conservación de biodiversidad en paisajes rurales de los Ándes Centrales de Colombia. En Harvey, C. A., y J. M., Sáenz. 2008. Evaluación y conservación de biodiversidad en paisajes fragmentados de Mesoamérica. –1ª Ed. – Santo Domingo de Heredia, Costa Rica: Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, INBio. Page - 581. Ministerio de Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (MARN). (2013). Informe técnico: Estudio de la cobertura de mangle en la República de Guatemala. Guatemala: MARN. vi + 54 p. Muchoney, D.M., S. Iremonger, & R. Wright. 1994. A Rapid Ecological Assessment of the Blue and John Crow Mountains National Park, Jamaica, Unpublished report. The Nature Conservancy. Arlington, Virginia. Pp 90. National Geographic. 1999. Field guide to birds of North America. Washington D.C.: National Geographic. Noss, R. 1987. From plants communities to landscape in conservation inventories: a look at the nature conservancy (USA). Biological Conservation 41(1):11-37. Laurence, W.F., 1990. Compatative responses of five arboreal marsupials to tropical forest fragmentation. Journal of Mammalogy 71: 641-53. Laurance, W. F. & R. O. Bierregaard, editors.1997. Tropical forest remmants: ecology Management and conservation of fragments communities. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Opdam, P. 1990. Understanding the ecology of populations in fragmentes landscapes. Pages 373- 380 in S. Myrberget, editor.Transantions of the 19th IUGB Congress.NINA, Trondheim. Palacios-Silva, R., y Mandujano, S. 2008. Chapter 17. Análisis de la conectividad del hábitat del mono aullador en un paisaje altamente perturbado de México. En Harvey, C. A., y J. M., Sáenz. 2008. Evaluación y conservación de biodiversidad en paisajes fragmentados de Mesoamérica. –1ª Ed. – Santo Domingo de Heredia, Costa Rica: Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, INBio. Page - 581. Peterson, R. T. y Chalif, E. L. 1973. A field Mexican Birds. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. Proforest. 2013. Disponible en sitio web http://www.proforest.net. Ranganathan, J., y Daily, C. G. 2008. Chapter 1. La biogeografía del paisaje rural: oportunidades de conservación para paisajes de Mesoamérica manejados por humanos. En Harvey, C. A., y J. M., Sáenz. 2008. Evaluación y conservación de biodiversidad en paisajes fragmentados de Mesoamérica. –1ª Ed. – Santo Domingo de Heredia, Costa Rica: Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, INBio. Page - 581. Ralph, J., G. R. Geupel, P. Pyle, T.E. Martin, D. F. DeSante y B. Milá. 1996. Manual de Métodos de Campo para el Monitoreo de Aves Terrestres. Pacific Southwest Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. General Technical Report. Pp 59. Recher, H.F., Shields, J., Kavanagh, R. and Webb, G., 1987. Retaining remnant mature forest for nature conservation ad Eden, New South Wales: a review an theory and practice. Pp. 177- 94 in Nature Conservation: The Role of Remnants of Native Vegetation. (Eds. D.A. Saunders, G.W. Arnold, A.A. Burbidge and A.J.M. Hopkins). (Surrey Beatty & Sons: Chipping Norton, New South Wales). Reid, F. 1997. A field guide to the Mammals of Central America and Southeast Mexico. New York: Oxford University Press. Redfia, 2003. Perfil socioambiental de la Región Sur Occidente, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala. Guatemala. Romero, D. 2001, La agroindustria de Veracruz ante la globalización. Problemas y perspectivas, Arana Editores, México, 270 pp. Rosales, C.C. 2015. Caracterización de los impactos sociales que genera la actividad de cultivo y procesamiento industrial del Aceite de Palma RSPO (Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil). 2013. Principios y Criterios – RSPO para la producción sostenible de aceite de Palma. Documento Guía. Stattersfield, A. J., Crosby, M. J., Long, A. J. & Wege, D. C. (1998) Endemic Bird Areas of the World - Priorities for Conservation. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International. Saunders, D.A., 1989. Changes of the avifauna of a region, district and remnant as a result of fragmentation of native vegetation: the wheatbelt of Western Australia. A case study. Biological Conservation 50: 99-135. Sayre, R., E. Roca, G. Sedaghatkish, B. Young, S. Keel, R. Roca & S. Sheppard. 2000. Nature in Focus: Rapid Ecological Assessment. The Nature Conservancy (TNT)- Island Press. Washington DC. Pp 182. SEGEPLAN 2010. Plan de Desarrollo Coatepeque, Quetzaltenango. Guatemala. SEGEPLAN 2011. Plan de Desarrollo Retalhuleu, Retalhuleu. Guatemala. SEGEPLAN 2010. Plan de Desarrollo Malacatán, San Marcos. Guatemala. SEGEPLAN 2010. Plan de Desarrollo Pajapita, San Marcos. Guatemala. SEGEPLAN 2011. Plan de Desarrollo Ayutla, San Marcos. Guatemala. Sobrevilla, C. & P. Bath. 1992. Evaluación Ecológica Rápida (EER). Un manual para usuarios de América Latina y el Caribe. Programa de Ciencias para América latina. Arlington. Pp.

Soto, R. & V. Jiménez. 1992. Evaluación Ecológica Rápida, Península de Osa, Costa Rica. Programa BOSCOSA. Fundación Neotrópica – WWF. Pp 252. Soulé, M.E., Bolger, D.T., Alberts, A.C., Wright, J., Sorice, M. and Hills, S., 1998. Reconstructed dynamics of rapid extinctions of chaparral requiring birds in urban habitat islands. Conservation Biology 2: 75-92. Stotz D., J. Fitzpatrick, T. Parker & D. Moskovitz. 1996. Neotropical birds: ecology an conservation. Universidad de Chicago. Estados Unidos. Terborgh, J. and Winter, B., 1980. Some causes of extinction. Pp. 119-133 in Conservation Biology: An Evolutionary-Ecological Perspective. (Eds. M.E. Soule and B.A. Wilcox). (Sinauer Associates: Souderland, Massachesetts). UICN. 2013. Red list of threartered species version 3.1. Accessed: December 03, 2013 online at: http: //www.iucnredlist.org/. Valdés, O. 2003. La educación ambiental para el desarrollo sostenible en el proceso docente educativo en las escuelas de las ciudades de Cuba. Instituto Central de Ciencias Pedagógicas. Ministerio de Educación. Villar-Anleu, L. 1997. Geografía ecológica de Guatemala. Doc. Técnico no publicado. Centro de Estudios Conservacionistas. Guatemala: Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala. Vílchez, S.; C. A. Harvey; D. Sanchéz; A. Medina y B. Hernández. 2004. Diversidad de aves en un paisaje fragmentado de bosque seco en Rivas, Nicaragua. Encuentro 36:60-75. WWF. World Wide Fundfor Nature. 2007. Bosques con Alto Valor de Conservación – El Concepto en la Teoría y Práctica. Pp 7

6. INTERNAL RESPONSIBILITY

I hereby assume full responsibility for the content of this document.

Sincerely,

______Biol. Darién Zúñiga Leitón, MSc Environmental Consultant and HCV Assessor Bio Terra Consultores Ambientales

Likewise, the Company accepts responsibility for the HCV Assessment carried out on the farms under study, and for the implementation of the measures proposed for HCV Management and Monitoring.

______Ing. Fritz Versluys M. Certification Manager Atlántida S.A.

DATE DECEMBER 21, 2020