IUCN entered into the Dhamra port project because of concern about the port harming Olive Ridley turtles. As IUCN dug into the problems, however, it learned that the mortality rate of the turtles had already increased dramatically. A report prepared by the Wildlife Institute of India indicated that turtle mortality had increased from a few thousand a year in the early 1980s to more than 10,000 by the mid 1990s. Mechanized trawl fishing and gill net fishing were seen to be responsible for the mortalities.

Local community awareness regarding the value of the turtles was low. To address this, the IUCN team engaged in community sensitizing activities, including creative educational programs, as well as traditional outreach. DPCL also established a community training centre so that local villagers could develop new skills.

IUCN also identified that the use of Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) could be helpful in reducing turtle mortality due to trawl fishing, one of the biggest problems in the areas. The devices weren’t new to fishers in the Dhamra area – Indian NGOs and scientists had tested them with the fishers in the past – but they weren’t being used. The IUCN DPCL team consulted extensively with local fishing cooperative officers and communities to better understand the issues.

Dredging, recognized as a serious threat to the marine turtles, was identified by IUCN as a priority.  IUCN, with experts from the Species Survival Commission’s Marine Turtle Specialist Group designed and developed a dredging protocol to be followed during port operations. These included installing turtle deflectors on all dredger drag-heads to help ensure turtles were not pulled into the dredger. Trained observers were assigned to all dredgers to monitor this process. These observers would check screens on inflow and overflow pipes on a 24/7 basis. These measures (deflectors, screens, and human observers) were put in place to ensure that the dredging was “turtle friendly”. Such measures were the first to have been put in place in the history of dredging activities in India.

Lighting was the second major threat identified because excess glare is known to distract turtle hatchlings as they instinctively move towards brightly lit areas and away from the sea. For this, the IUCN Commission experts provided specific guidelines for the port’s lighting plan, which was adopted by the port authorities. IUCN further supported Tata Steel in identifying the right design for these lights. Today, Dhamra Port is the first and only port in India to have installed “turtle friendly” lighting.

In order to develop innovate financing tools for the proposed protected sites, it was important to thoroughly understand the profiles of the islands’ clientele , and to develop mechanisms that would not be seen as extorting more money from clients who were already paying hefty sums for their holidays on these private islands.

Extensive discussions about various funding options needed to be held at different management levels. e.g. the islands owners, the hotel managers, and marketing personnel in order to gauge an understanding of what products could be developed for the clients of these resorts. The resorts offer different holiday packages – from a five-star all-inclusive holiday package to a four-star sustainable island concept. 

Therefore, options were trialed for adoption or adaption, or for dismissal. One such example was the tree planting activity allowing guests to commemorate important life events, thereby becoming involved in the protection of the environment. 

The idea proved to be a popular and in-demand finance option on Denis Island, and it was assumed to also work well on North Island. However the scheme did not get approval, because North Island offers all-inclusive holiday packages, and so tree planting could not be charged.

Nominating Temporal Protected Areas erupted after the continuous collection of data on the nesting beaches, which highlighted specific beaches as the main nesting grounds for the Hawksbill turtles on the main island of Mahe. 

For over 15 years, patrols were conducted year round, with the frequency depending on the peak and off-peak nesting season for the turtles. The procedure includes physically walking the full length of the beaches to identify sea turtle activities. Alternatively, drones are used to fly over the area of patrol, to facilitate the task. The data generated from the patrols are the number of tracks/emergences on the beaches, one set of the up and down track per turtle. Each set is then linked with an emergence, which states if the turtle successfully nested or not. Successful nests are marked, geo-located and monitored throughout the incubation until successful hatching is observed. Whenever encounters with turtles occur, patrol officers see through the whole nesting process to provide extra protection, and to ensure the nesting females return safely to the sea.

The purpose of this building block is to work with the affected community to identify the major problems and underlying causes using participatory tools. In Sanzara, the process started with a vulnerability impact assessment that combined both scientific and participatory tools to identify potential climate impacts, rate of ecosystem services depletion, risks, and current adaptation measures. A community map of the most degraded areas in the catchment was developed; based on this, a problem/solution matrix was prepared that provided details about the main climate challenges and impacts, how these affected different categories of people, and a suite of possible restoration and adaptation interventions. This process culminated in a 10-year vision map and a strategy for achieving this vision. Deliberate effort was put into ensuring that mobilization, timing, and organization of meetings encouraged all categories of community members (women, youth, elderly etc.) to actively participate. The process put the community members at the center, thereby promoting ownership of the ensuing vision and strategy. This ownership contributed to a collaborative effort to sustain these interventions with clear action plans and a community-driven monitoring framework.

Based on an assessment and inventory of biodiversity in and adjacent to the Machakhela National Park (MNP), it was determined that some valuable areas hadn't been included into the territory of the MNP for various practical/social reasons, in particular riverine areas along the Machakhela river itself.

Considering this, the project has conducted a specific investigation into the management options for the Machakhela National Park Support Zone, aiming at identification of the most pragmatic and sustainable options for improving the protection of key biodiversity components and ecological functions outside of the MNP.

Based on analysis and extensive stakeholder consultation, the Protected Landscape (PL), IUCN category 5, has been defined as the most relevant management option. The proposed PL will ensure conservation of areas left outside of the MNP with significant ecological, biological, cultural and scenic values as well as development of eco-tourism and sustainable land use practices.

The project has prepared the detailed situation analysis report and draft law on establishment and management of Machakheli PL and forwarded to the Government of Achara Autonomous Republic. Currently the government is in the process of initiation of the law in the Parliament of Georgia.

Establishment of the National park had some specific impact on the communities living in the valley, such as limitation of access to the fuelwood and aggravation of human-wildlife conflict.

The classic approach used by the PA system to address both scenarios would be based on control and penalization of illegal activities. However, the project approach was to try to address the root cause of the issues and thus reduce the basis for conflict between the MNP and local communities.

In the fuelwood case, the project has initiated activities that try to reduce overall demand though increased efficiency of use and fuelwood alternatives. In close consultation with local households, the project assessed potential alternatives, practically tested and demonstrated the chosen options with households, and on that basis disseminated results and encouraged replication.

Likewise, in the case of human/wildlife conflict issue, the project approach was to test methods to mitigate the problem by assessing the situation and testing approaches that are selected after an evaluation of practicality and feasibility.

In both cases, a key aspect was the direct involvement of the MNP Administration so that they can become seen as part of the solution to local households problems, rather than a cause.

At the project inception, neither Mtirala or Machakhela National Parks were supported by any locally-based NGO’s or support groups. However, such an organization could play an important role in: promoting the PAs, building local community and PA collaboration, and addressing their development priorities.

Based on an assessment of the international and national experience and particularly the existing experience of other PA’s in Georgia, the project supported the establishment and functional capacity building of the Mtirala and Machakhela PAs Friends Association (FA).

The major risk identified was that many such organizations are heavily supported by donors and once such support ceases, they face problems to remain financially viable. Thus, a major focus of support was on building capacity of the FA to be financially sustainable in the long run via a strategy that ensures long-term core funding from reliable sources.

The Mtirala and Machakhela FA was established in 2016 and has been undertaking a variety of activities to build PA/Local Community relationships and collaboration, ranging from Junior and Community Ranger Programs, organization of ecological visits by schools, tourism promotion and application/implementation of local development projects with donor funds.

Appropriate tourism development is an important means and opportunity for Protected areas (PA) and communities located adjacent to them to meet their aims and needs.

In the case of the Protected Areas, the aims are:

- to provide a recreational service to visitors

- to increase public awareness and understanding of the importance of conservation

- to generate incomes that enhance management and strengthen sustainable financing for that purpose.

In the case of local communities, the aim is to increase sustainable incomes, improve and diversify livelihoods.

In both cases, the emphasis is on “appropriate” tourism, i.e. tourism that does not overwhelm or degrade the fundamental tourism attraction (i.e. the pristine nature and cultural landscape). In the PA’s case, there is also an emphasis on educational and awareness aims. This requires that tourism development is carefully planned and focuses on maximizing overall longterm benefits, rather than short term financial benefits.

In this context, project's support concentrated initially on developing a sound strategic vision for the Ajara PA system as a whole and individual colchic forest PAs in particular. On this basis, appropriate tourism development was supported on the ground both in the new Machakhela NP and generally in the valley.

When the project started in 2014, there was a significant level of misunderstanding, mistrust and opposition by local residents to the establishment of the MNP and to any actions in the valley that were perceived as restricting existing land use and livelihoods.

To respond to this, the project has:

a) Initiated immediate actions such as the PA staff trainings and community meetings organized in each village, involving newly trained MNP staff, to improve:

- the effectiveness and understanding of newly recruited staff about the NP objectives and how to communicate with local communities and

- the understanding of local communities on the real impact of the NP and its potential benefits

b) Ensured that the boundary and demarcation activities for the MNP were carried out with the full consultation and involvement of local communities and that the final boundaries were consensually agreed with them

c) Worked actively with the local communities to build their capacity to organize and benefit from the opportunities the establishment of the NP could bring

d) Initiated activities, with involvement of the MNP administration, to address priority issues for local communities related to forest resources and wildlife (i.e. fuel wood alternatives, human / wildlife conflict).