Mitigating the Threats of Invasive Alien Species in the Insular Caribbean: Full Size Project (FSP)

End Stage Report – Stage: KS2, KS3 and K4 up to June 2011)Project Executive: Lindsey Norgrove

Project Manager: Bob Ramnanan

Date:28 July, 2011

Project Finance Code: VM10076A

ESR Version: October 2009

Progress to this Stage: KS2

Stage: KS2 Stakeholder consultations & data collection (Q4, Y2)

Project To Date

-Planned

Project To Date

- Actual

Data collection for National

Invasive Species Strategies

(NISS)

•Collate national and regional information

on status of IAS and existing policies

and plans.

•Risk assessment

•National stakeholder consultation

•Produce draft NISS

• All countries capacity enhanced in use

of legal tools to manage IAS. .

•Draft NISS ahead of schedule and

within budget

Regional consultations on

marine, terrestrial & fresh

water IAS

•Host Terrestrial, Fresh Water and

Marine IAS consultation

•Establish working groups

•Prepare draft Regional IAS strategy

•Third regional consultations held in

Bahamas in March 2011

• Final Draft RISS circulated

•National and regional working groups

functional and serving as a coordinating

mechanism.

Critical Situation Analysis

(CSA) for each country

produced & disseminated

• Prepare CSA for each country

•Distribute CSAs (Y2Q1)

• St. Lucia's circulated. Others to be

circulated by end of 2011.

Project website functional &

linked to existing databases

• Establish Website (Y2Q4) •CIASNET.ORG launched and was

adopted as official site for CPHDF and

CISWIG

Initial levels of public

awareness of IAS assessed at

pilot sites

•Baseline surveys completed

•Distribute reports (Y2Q1)

• St. Lucia’s report circulated

•Reports for Bahamas and Jamaica

being finalized

• DR and TT completing surveys.

Progress to this Stage: KS3

Stage: KS3 Implementation of pilot projects

Project To Date

-Planned

Project To Date

- Actual

Maria Island, St Lucia: continuous monitoring plan in place.

•Recruit and train staff

•Map boundaries of project area

•Detail activity plan

•Implement continuous monitoring plan (Y2Q4)

•Maria island marine reserve mapped.

•Reef check conducted.

• Lionfish taskforce and emergency plan in place

•Offshore islands kept IAS free through baiting and surveillance operations.

Prevention of Frosty Pod Rot, •Baseline survey to • Trained staff engaged in surveillance. Prevention of Frosty Pod Rot,

Trinidad & Tobago: Continuous

monitoring in place; emergency

action plan developed.

•Baseline survey to determine if present

•Field and lab identification training

•Establish hotline

•Develop emergency plan

• Trained staff engaged in surveillance.

•National stakeholders sensitized to risk

•Pathways analysis 60% completed.

•PA for FPR initiated

Caulerpa in Trinidad & Tobago:

eradication programme completed. •Pilot replaced with pilot to promote Public Awareness of Aquatic IAS

•PA plan completed. Poster and flier on Lionfish distributed

Alto Velo & Cabritos, Dominican

Republic: eradication of invasive

vertebrates and 1 plant

completed.

•Complete baseline survey

•Devise best eradication strategies•Eradicate target species (Y2, Q1)

•Neem eradication started.

•Plan for invasive mammals being finalized.

•Feasibility study completed with IC.

Progress to this Stage: KS3

Stage: KS3 implementation of pilot

projects

Project To Date

-Planned

Project To Date

- Actual

Endemic Iguanas Jamaica: eradication of predators implemented

•Pre-eradication baseline survey of

goat island

•Removal of target species

•Train rangers and other stakeholders

•Prepare adaptive management plan

•Baseline survey completed and report

is being finalized.

•Predator trapping has lead to the most

significant increase in nests since 1991.

Invasive alien iguanas St. Lucia: Eradicated.

•Train field staff

•Train dogs and dog handlers

•Demonstrated feasibility of Canines to

locate nests and live invasive iguanas. Lucia: Eradicated. •Train dogs and dog handlers

•Develop detail eradication plan

•Implement line trapping grid.

locate nests and live invasive iguanas.

•Plans being put in place to establish a

local canine team. .

Lionfish control, Bahamas: research into reproductive biology and invasion ecology conducted

•Conduct research into reproductive

biology and invasive ecology

•Population control experiment

initiated

•Policy and regulatory reform to aid

management

•Experiments started on 12 sites.

•Fish surveys and quarterly removals

ongoing

•Stakeholders trained al level 4 Reef

fish identification.

Lionfish Control

Jamaica: management

programme instituted

•Conduct baseline survey

•Institute surveillance and monitoring

plan

•Prepare regulatory impact

assessment

•Research commenced on 5 pilot sites

around the island.

•Database now has 371 detailed

datasets. Gut content done for 358

specimens giving data on prey

preference.

Progress to this Stage KS3 Cont’d

Stage KS3

Implementation of pilot projects

Project To Date

- Planned

Project To Date

- Actual

Green mussel control,

Trinidad & Tobago:

environmental and

economic impact

assessment

•Baseline survey of Perna virdis

distribution

•Ecological assessment of Perna

virdis

•Economic impact assessment

•Ecological assessment of Pernaviridis has shown drastic declines in populations compared to initial invasion..

•Taxonomic identification of specimens collected during the extensive survey ongoing. •Training in management extensive survey ongoing.

Lower Black River

Morass, Jamaica: IAS

mapping & removal of

target species

•Ecosystem evaluation

•IAS Mapping

•Determine effective IAS control

strategies

•Adaptive Management plan

•Equipment (ATVs) purchased and there is agreement among all parties to begin research on the control strategies.

Nariva Swamp, Trinidad &

Tobago: development of

eradication/control

methods for Red Palm

Mite and Coconut Moth on

native plant species

•Baseline survey of invasive palm

pests and indicator palm species

•Surveillance and monitoring of

invasive palm pests

•Determine most effective control

strategies for invasive palm pests

•Baseline survey shows high degree of susceptibility by native Moriche palm that is main source of food for the endangered blue and gold macaw.

•Greenhouse studies initiated.

• Economic impact inititated.

Progress to this Stage KS4

Key Stage 4: Dissemination of findings & recommendations (Y4, Q4)

Project To Date

- Planned

Project To Date

- Actual

NISS for Dominican Republic, Jamaica, St Lucia & Trinidad & Tobago

•Disseminate draft National Invasive Species Strategies in year 3 Q4

•Draft disseminated for St. Lucia via the

CIASNET.ORG ahead of schedule.

CRISIS documents for marine, terrestrial & aquatic IAS

•Disseminate CRISIS document in Y4 Q4

•Final regional IAS strategy and action

plan for Fresh Water; Marine and

Terrestrial ecosystems circulated.

Best Practice Guidelines (based on Critical Situation Analyses)

•Disseminate Best Practices Guidelines

•25 papers submitted for inclusion in first

Best Practices guideline magazine. To be

circulated in September

Roll out use of CABI IAS Compendium

•Ensure project data is included in Compendium

•Roll out Compendium in participating countries

•Carded for years three and four

Dissemination of pilot project findings & recommendations

•Disseminate via website

•Final Conference

•Carded for years three and four

Post-intervention levels of public awareness of IAS assessed at pilot sites

•Conduct post implementation survey

•Carded for year four

Progress to this Stage- Financials

(£)

Report Stage

- Planned

Report Stage

- Actual

Original Full Project

- Planned

Project To Date

- Planned

Project To Date

- Actual

Full Project – Current Projection

Costs Billed to Project Donor

Gross Revenue:397,007 268,293 2,092,432 1,205,822 582,7402,092,432

Collaborator Costs:342,593 239,937 1,857,206 1,088,685 494,9331,882,951

Collaborator Costs:342,593 239,937 1,857,206 1,088,685 494,9331,882,951

Net Revenue:54,414 28,356 235,226 117,137 87,807209,481

CABI Implementation Costs

CABI Staff Costs: 35,892 26,093 126,063 73,014 76,876 126,063

Direct Costs:(other direct costs, for example

travel etc)

18,521 2,263 63,612 44,123 10,931 63,612

Net Profit/Loss:(‘Project Contribution’)

0 0 45,551 0 0 19,806

Net Project Contribution (%):

0 0 19% 0 0 9%

Dissemination of Results to Date

Dissemination and

Measures of Results

– Planned

Dissemination and

Measures of Results -

Actual

Effectiveness Key

Success?

(tick)

National Public

Awareness campaigns

(print and electronic) for

all the IAS in the five

participating countries.

•Participating countries have had good press coverage in national press. In particular Bahamas, Jamaica, and Saint Lucia.

Increasing press coverage is leading to a greater awareness of the issue which should encourage policy makers to take it more seriously.

�

more seriously.

Posting Reports and

other outputs on the

Website CIASNET.ORG

•Some newspaper articles on the site.

•All publications produced by the project will be posted to the site

Paper on the site accepted for publication in the 47th

proceedings of the CFCS meeting. .

Dissemination of Special

Publications and Project

Reports

•National Critical Situation Analyses

•Baseline reports

•Feasibility studies for IAS eradication

•PA publication “Invasion of the Aliens”

CSA and NISS for Saint Lucia disseminated via website. Others to be circulated by years end.

Feasibility study circulated via website

Best practices manual to be distributed in September

�

Impact of Project to Date

Planned Impact Actual Impact Comments Key

Success?

(tick)

Scientific/Technical:

•Increased national capacity to address potential risks posed to biodiversity of global significance from IAS

•Participating countries participated in regional workshop on “Legal tools for combating IAS in the Caribbean”

•Five post graduate students of UWI conducting research on

•44 Participants (including legal experts) benefitted from the regional training in collaboration with the Environmental Law Institute.

•The results would contribute to fill an indentified gap in IAS

�

�UWI conducting research on economic impact of IAS in the Caribbean.

to fill an indentified gap in IAS knowledge in the Caribbean.

�

•Increased prevention of new IAS introductions impacting global biodiversity

The project is building capacity and providing guidance in strengthening regulatory framework for managing IAS

Training workshops and pilot implementation is building capacity at all levels.

�

Impact of Project to Date cont’d

Planned Impact Actual Impact Comments Key

Success?

(tick)

Commercial:

•Access to data and best practice established, and public awareness of IAS strengthened

•Established baseline data for IAS in pilot sites

•Updated critical situation analysis by five countries

•Public and Private domain CIASNET.ORG established.

•Completed reports on the CIASNET.ORG site

•Printed Best Practices manual to be circulated by September 2011 and via the web

•Adopted by CISWIG and �

CIASNET.ORG established. •Adopted by CISWIG and CPHDF as their official website

Social:

•Increased regional

cooperation to reduce risk

posed to biodiversity of global

significance

•New regional and international organizations providing in kind funding and support.

•Countries actively cooperating to develop regional strategy through the three regional working groups: Fresh Water; Marine and Terrestrial Working Groups.

•International Conservation (IC); Caribbean Regional Agriculture Policy Network (CaRAPAN); ICRI and NOAA providing support on Lionfish

•Project invited to collaborate on training on IAS in Plant Quarantine course organized by UWI and USDA/APHIS

�

Impact of Project to Date cont’d

Planned Impact Actual Impact Comments Key

Success?

(tick)

Environmental

•Increased capacity to eradicate, and improve control and management of IAS impacting global biodiversity

•To date Saint Lucia has prevented the invasive iguana from affecting the endemic one and is actively pursuing a surveillance of new marine IAS in the Maria island nature reserve.

•Tracker dogs demonstrated effectiveness in detecting invasive iguana.

�

reserve.

•Dominican Republic completed feasibility study with assistance of IC for IAS on Alto Velo and Cabrito Islands and with assistance from TNC Catalina Island

•Jamaica and Bahamas actively researching means of reducing the impact of Lionfish. Project participating with ICRI and other stakeholders to develop a regional Lionfish strategy.

•Eradication to begin in November to avoid nesting of endemic iguana. Keen interest from surrounding communities has cause a rethink of methodologies for eradication.

•The project work on Lionfish in the Bahamas and Jamaica is contributing to the understanding of management of this marine invasive. international partners NOOA, ICRI and REEF are partnering in these efforts.

�

�

Additional Project Outcomes

● Key Successes (other than those identified as Impact on Project or Dissemination of

Results)

● The implementation of the project by the five countries to date and exposure gained via national and regionally press and attendance at regional and international meetings has consolidated CABI CLA’s leadership position on IAS issues in the wider Caribbean. This is reflected by the offers of collaboration from organisations such as International Conservation (IC); Caribbean Agricultural Policy Network (CaRAPN) among others that were not among the original project collaborators. SPAW.

● Benefits Achieved● Benefits Achieved● The project continues to leverage additional funds both in cash and in kind.

● The work done in this project and the recognition of CABI by organisations and countries in the region will make introducing programmes like plant wise easier for CABI. .

Has there been increased Scope for CABI than originally

planned? (If so, provide comments)

● Greater project management demands are being made of CABI but we are getting less in terms of anticipated consultancies and income.

Lessons Learned

What … Comments

went Well: 1. Adaptive

management employed

to make the project more

sound.

2. Leveraging of funds

3. Proactive approach of

1. The project only envisaged measuring impact of Perna

virdis this was expanded following the workshop held in

June 2010. With a team of students doing economic

impact assessments of IAS.

2.Attendance at international and regional meetings and

CABI’s leadership has assisted in the leveraging of funds. 3. Proactive approach of

UNEP’s Task Manager

(TM)

CABI’s leadership has assisted in the leveraging of funds.

3.The TM has been proactive in managing risks on the

project especially those of a political nature.

went Badly: Lack of

capacity and high level of

bureaucracy and new

personnel contributed to

slow start of project.

This is reflected in lengthy delays in revising work plans

and budget and getting required approvals prior to

implementation. Poor understanding by NEAs and

Collaborators on CABI’s role of oversight in technical

matters.

was Lacking: Involvement

of Arne Witt in the review

of pilot projects prior to

submission of the project.

Arne Witt who is providing technical backstopping to the

project has a problem with in all the pilot projects. As the

methodologies and budgeted amounts are inadequate to

generate the expected results.

Lessons Learned cont’d

What … Comments

would you do

Differently Next

Time: 1. Wider

Consultation with

CABI’s technical

experts.

2. Choose pilot

1. Arne Witt who had the experience in managing a similar

project was not consulted prior to the submission of the FSP

to GEF his prior involvement could have helped improve

technical soundness and speedier implementation of pilots.

2. It was known prior to submission of the project that the

eradication of Caulerpa taxifolia pilot in Trinidad and Tobago

was no longer feasible. This pilot was supposed to have 2. Choose pilot

projects carefully

3. Document Roles

and Responsibilities

clearer.

4. Adopt best

practices for IAS

management into

account in project

development

was no longer feasible. This pilot was supposed to have

been funded up to 2/3 by co-financing. It is difficult for the

replacement to co-finance to the same value since a large

amount of the co-finance was in kind.

3. Although the PCAs that we signed spoke to roles and

responsibilities in project implementation this should have

been communicated clearer during the preparation phase.

4. Doing a feasibility study prior to eradication of any IAS is

considered a best practice. This was not incorporated in the

project design.

Any Other

Comments

No.

Commentary on Variations from Plan● Outputs: Outputs for components 1 (national strategies); 2

(Regional Strategies) and 3 (Information) are ahead of target Components 4&5 (pilot projects) are behind target.

● Schedule: components 1; 2 and 3 are ahead of schedule. Components 4&5 are more than 6 months behind schedule in some instances.

● Financials: The total project only expended 26% of its total ● Financials: The total project only expended 26% of its total budget to date or 48% of its planned expenditure to date.

● Events Affecting Performance: Late singing of PCA in TT; General bureaucracy and low capacity at the national level. Weather affected implementation in St. Lucia and Trinidad.

● Input / Effect of Donor, Partners, End-Users etc: UNEP and all NEAs are proactive in managing risks.

● Current Assessment of Business Case: measures being adopted to minimize variance in time and budget.

Key Risks – Project( ) = Previous Rating

Risk Owner Likelihood

(L)

(1=Low;

3=High)

Impact

(I)

(1=Low;

3=High)

Total

(L x I)

(1=Low; 9=High)

Management Strategy

(Choose from Prevention,

Reduction, Contingency,

Transference, Acceptance,

and give brief description)

Update

One or more partners fails to meet UNEP/GEF’s acceptance criteria

Project Manager

M H H Reduction: Take all possible steps to support & assist partners

Transference: Ensure that CABI is not

Low.

All have been

accepted by

UNEP/GEF. This was

overstated in the PID.

UNEP has assured criteria that CABI is not

contractually liable for shortcomings by partners

UNEP has assured

that CABI will not be

held accountable for

partner shortcoming.

Governments commitment to regional collaboration is reduced due to changes in the

political environment

Project Manager

L M L Reduction: The existence of the CISWG provides the basis for regional collaboration and the FSP should be able to feed into this working group. The PSC will also have members from each country’s NEA, allowing greater regional collaboration.

Low.

Participating Countries

have given

undertaking at the last

IPSC meeting to

advancing the regional

IAS agenda at the

appropriate regional

fora such as CISWIG

and COTED.

Key Risks – Project( ) = Previous Rating

Risk Owner Likelihood

(L)

(1=Low;

3=High)

Impact

(I)

(1=Low;

3=High)

Total

(L x I)

(1=Low; 9=High)

Management Strategy

(Choose from Prevention,

Reduction, Contingency,

Transference, Acceptance,

and give brief description)

Update

Lack of cross-sectoral

communication and

coordination

Project Manager

M H H Reduction: The establishment of an inclusive, multi-sectoral NSC in each country will provide a forum for

Medium.

The management

strategy has been

effective as there is a

wide cross section of

public and NGOs on

the NSC. Private between agencies

forum for communication between agencies and different sectors.

the NSC. Private

sector involvement

has been limited.

Key stakeholders do not agree to national strategies or participate in these strategies

Project Manager

L M L Reduction: Stakeholder workshops, liaison and networking will be undertaken to ensure they are fully engaged and able to contribute to the development of the national strategies.

Low.

No need for change in

proposed strategy at

this time.

Key Risks – Project( ) = Previous Rating

Risk Owner Likelihood

(L)

(1=Low;

3=High)

Impact

(I)

(1=Low;

3=High)

Total

(L x I)

(1=Low; 9=High)

Management Strategy

(Choose from Prevention,

Reduction, Contingency,

Transference, Acceptance,

and give brief description)

Update

Public not receptive to environmental information and

display no interest in IAS

Team Leaders

L L L Reduction: A multi-media public awareness campaign will be implemented, including a focus on the potential benefits

Low.

With apparent climate

change and other

natural disasters

public interest in the

environment is

increasing. interest in IAS control.

the potential benefits of IAS control and the use of school groups,

which may present a more receptive audience.

increasing.

Enforcement of regulations may

be difficult due to a lack of awareness of IAS issues at both the institutional and public level.

Project Manager

M M M Reduction: The public awareness campaign should enable stronger enforcement of regulations to be undertaken, as the public will become aware of the regulations, as well as general IAS issues.

High.

This is higher due to

the capacity/HR

issues at the national

levels. Requested

assistance of the

Project Directors and

NSCs. Also getting

high profile champions

will be pursued in each

country.

Key Risks – Project

Risk Owner Likelihood

(L)

(1=Low;

3=High)

Impact

(I)

(1=Low;

3=High)

Total

(L x I)

(1=Low; 9=High)

Management Strategy

(Choose from Prevention,

Reduction, Contingency,

Transference, Acceptance, and

give brief description)

Update

Key personnel lost from key institutions and stakeholder groups

Project Manager

M M M Reduction: A full time national co-ordinator, funded by the project, will be appointed in each country. Robust, well-documented

Low.

Full involvement

of NSCs and

Project Directors

is helping to

reduce this risk. documented management systems will be established which are not dependant on individuals

Biodiversity is threatened by other pressures on the habitat and ecosystems

Team Leaders

H L M Acceptance: All five countries have a NBSAP describing threats to biodiversity and strategies to reduce these threats. All five countries also have designated protected areas, and two of the pilot sites (Jamaica and St. Lucia) are in protected areas.

Medium

Project will benefit

from other

initiatives such as

those be pursued

by UNEP-CEP

and the SPAW

Protocol under the

CATAHENA

Convention.

Key Risks – Project

Risk Owner Likelihood

(L)

(1=Low;

3=High)

Impact

(I)

(1=Low;

3=High)

Total

(L x I)

(1=Low; 9=High)

Management Strategy

(Choose from Prevention, Reduction,

Contingency, Transference,

Acceptance, and give brief

description)

Update

Changes in IAS status affected by climatic variability, changing the impact of

Project Manager

M M M Reduction: Best practice guidelines for “Climate Change & Invasives; and Early Warning Systems”, from the ‘Toolkit for Best Prevention and Management Practices of

Medium.

Task manager is

looking into

getting support

from US experts

to do training

workshop. impact of project interventions

Management Practices of Invasive Alien Species’ will be integrated into IAS management strategies and methodologies for pilot activities.

Unforeseen financial pressure

due to current economic climate

Executive

M H H Acceptance: All financing has been agreed and committed with all partners providing a detailed breakdown of their project contributions. However the value of local co-financing relative to GEF funding will be unavoidably affected by exchange rate fluctuations.

Medium

Some

International

Collaborators

such as

USDA/APHIS and

IICA have

contributed more

than plan. Also

leveraging new

sources.

Commentary on Projection of Project

● Events Affecting Future Performance: Hurricane Thomas could delay implementation of pilot activities in Saint Lucia.

● Risks

● Previous Risk Total: 38

● Current Risk Total: 31

● Comments: Proactive nature of UNEP;CLA RD and NSC is assisting in managing the risks.

● Overall – Likely Impact on Next Stage: Time variance of approximately six months

● Overall - Likely Impact on Project: Could lead to delay of more three to six months. Increase activities in the area of PA should utilize unspent funds once approved by UNEP.

Project Name

End Stage Report – Sign-off

Project Executive ……………………………………………

Date …………………………………………………………..

PMG Sign-off (Level 1 Projects) …………………………………………..

Date ………………………………………………………………………….

PMG Comments and/or Follow-on Actions: