East Asian – Australasian Flyway Partnership
6th Meeting of Partners, Palembang, Indonesia
19-22 March 2012
AGENDA DOCUMENTS
VERSION 6
CHANGES SINCE VERSION 5

Doc 1.3
[Provisional Agenda for the 6th Meeting of Partners] was updated.

Agenda 4.5.4 and Agenda 5.3 were added.

Agenda 4.5.4 was renamed.
Minor change in [11. Review of matters arising from 5th Meeting of Partners]

Doc 2.1

Doc 4.2.2 Minor change in [7. Russian Shorebird ID Booklet]

Doc 5.3

Minor corrections of misspelled.
[Terms of Reference for CEPA Working Group] was added at the end of document.
NOTES ON STATUS OF DOCUMENTS
This is the first version of the Agenda Documents, circulated to Partners and to registered participants
for the 6th Meeting of Partners (MoP6) before the Meeting date. It is also available on the MoP6 web
page at http://www.eaaflyway.net/6th-meeting.php Additional material may be provided at registration
or during the Meeting.
The Draft Agenda and Program was circulated to Partners and to registered participants for the 6th
Meeting of Partners (MoP6) before the Meeting date. Subsequent changes possibly may have occurred
to the Agenda and these should be reflected in the present Agenda Document. The Agenda for MoP6 is
adopted at Item 1.3.
INSTRUCTIONS
In order to save paper and reduce impacts on our environment, the preparing a PRINTED copy of the
final agenda document for the MoP6 is responsibility of each Participant.
Only a limited number of printed copies of this document may be available before the start of the Meeting.
Please keep your documents well organised, so that little or no time is not lost due to issuing of lost
papers during the Meeting!
Page 1 of 62
1.1 Appointment of Meeting chairperson and rapporteurs
No agenda document required.
Document 1.2
1.2 Approval of Minutes of the previous (5th) Meeting of Partners
Explanatory notes:
The document Draft Report of the Fifth Meeting of Partners as provided on the website of the
EAAFP is the official record of proceedings (minutes) of the 5th Meeting.
Draft Report of the Fifth Meeting of Partners:
http://www.eaaflyway.net/documents/mop/mop5-report-draft.pdf
It comprises 23 pages, so to save paper, participants are requested to download and review the
file. A small number of printed copies may be made available at the 6th Meeting of Partners.
The Report of the Fifth Meeting of Partners remains as draft status until adopted by the 6th
Meeting of Partners (Agenda item 1.2).
Action required by Partners:
To adopt the Report of the Fifth Meeting of Partners as the final version of the minutes of
the 5th Meeting, incorporating any adjustments permitted by the chairperson of the present
(6th) Meeting.
Document 1.3
1.3 Provisional Agenda for the 6th Meeting of Partners
Explanatory notes:
This document remains as draft status until adopted by the 6th Meeting.
Action required by Partners:
To adopt the Agenda as shown below, and after any final modifications permitted by the
Meeting chairperson. Note that the full program including times of sessions, side meeting
sessions, break-out group sessions and other MoP activities has been provided in the
Agenda and Program document.
1. Introductory session
1.1
Appointment of Meeting chairperson and rapporteurs
1.2
Approval of Minutes of the 5th Meeting of Partners
1.3
Approval of the Provisional Agenda for the 6th Meeting of Partners
1.4
Welcome to Partners (existing and new) and Admittance of Observers
1.5
Presentation of new Partners’ plans and activities:
Mongolia, New Zealand, Rio Tinto
Page 2 of 62
Document 1.3
2. Overview reporting
2.1
Brief report from the Secretariat
2.2
Summary of Partner reports submitted to the Secretariat
2.3
Brief update from EAAFP Working Groups:
Avian Influenza, Seabird, Shorebird, Anatidae, Crane, CEPA
3. Building the Partnership
3.1
Introduction to new Implementation Strategy and CEPA Strategy
3.2
Developing engagement of new Partners (potential partners)
3.3
New Implementation Strategy 2012-2016: Wrap-up session
3.4
New CEPA Strategy 2012-2016: Wrap-up session
4. Moving forward on Flyway Partnership activities
4.1
Objective 1: Develop the Flyway Site Network
4.1.1
Current status of Flyway Site Network and recent nominations
4.1.2
Report on the assessment of EAAF Flyway Network Sites
4.2
Objective 2: Enhance communication, education and public awareness
4.2.1
Report on the Global Waterbird Flyways Workshop, Korea
4.2.2
E-newsletter and publications
4.2.3
Award system of the EAAF Partnership
4.3
Objective 3: Enhance flyway research and monitoring activities, knowledge and
information exchange
4.3.1
Report by Task Force 1: Monitoring of waterbirds and habitats
4.3.2
Report by Task Force 2: Coordination of waterbird colour marking
4.3.3
Report by Task Force 3: Yellow Sea; Yangtze floodplain; Amur-Heilong; DIPA (Dauria
International Protected Area in Russia, Mongolia, China)
4.3.4
Monitoring activities by Partners: opportunity for report and discussion
4.4
Objective 4: Build capacity to manage waterbirds and their habitats
4.4.1
AusAID project “Wetland Management Guidelines” with SFA, China
4.5
Objective 5: Develop flyway-wide approaches to enhance the conservation status
of migratory waterbirds
4.5.1
Report by Task Force 4: Activities of the Spoon-billed Sandpiper TF
4.5.2
Rio Tinto-BirdLife International-Wetlands International Flyway Project
4.5.3
IUCN World Conservation Congress in Jeju, Korea
4.5.4
Potential cooperation with the working group of Arctic Council - Conservation of Arctic
Flora and Fauna, Russia
4.6
Objective 1 through to Objective 5 (or alternative topics)
5. Flyway Partnership Administration
5.1
Secretariat’s Work Plan for 2012
5.2
Secretariat’s Budget for 2012
5.3
Terms of Reference for CEPA Working Group
6. Other Business
6.1
Matters that have arisen during the Meeting, preferably notified to the chairperson
in advance
7. Next Meeting
7.1
Announcement of MoP7 in Alaska, USA
8. Appointments
8.1
Next Chair and Vice-Chair of Partnership (from 12 June 2013)
9. Meeting Close
Page 3 of 62
Document 1.4
1.4 Welcome to Partners, record of apologies, admittance of observers
Explanatory notes:
A provisional attendance list may be provided to participants at the start of the Meeting based on
those who have registered with the EAAFP Secretariat before the Meeting. It should indicate
those who are seeking to be admitted to the Meeting as observers.
A final attendance list may be provided during the Meeting based on those who confirmed their
registration during the Meeting.
This final list will be included in the Report (Minutes) of the 6th Meeting of Partners.
If time permits, all or head of delegation of Partners (and observers) may briefly introduce
him/herself.
Record of Apologies
Notes provided by the EAAFP Secretariat
At the time of writing, apologies and best wishes has been received from the following Partner:
 Dr. Lew Young [Ramsar]
Action required by Partners:
To ask the Secretariat to follow-up with absent Partners by sending the draft Report of the
Meeting and offering to discuss any issues regarding ongoing involvement in EAAFP.
Page 4 of 62
Document 1.5
1.5 Presentation of new Partners
Explanatory notes:
Since MoP5 in Dec 2010, three new Partners have joined the EAAFP in 2011. The number of
Partners is now 27, an increase of seven new Partners since the Secretariat was established in
2009.
A Certificate of Participation will be presented to each of these Partners during the Opening
Ceremony (listed in order of joining EAAFP).
In this session, each Partner will introduce its own strategy or activities to conserve migratory
waterbirds and habitats (approx. 10 min per Partner).
Mongolia
Government Partner
17 January 2011
New Zealand
Government Partner
18 September 2011
Rio Tinto
Business Sector Partner
17 December 2011
Action required by Partners:
To witness and welcome the new Partners!
Page 5 of 62
Document 2.1
2.1 Overview reporting: Brief report from the Secretariat
Report prepared by the Secretariat.
Explanatory notes:
The following report is provided to inform Partners of the activity of the Secretariat in the reporting
period. It refers to the period from December 2010 until about end of February 2012, three weeks
before the scheduled date of the 6th Meeting.
Reporting Period: 1 January 2011 – 29 February 2012
1. Present Chair and Management Committee
As agreed in MoP5, the role of Chair (Korea) and Vice-Chair (Japan) transferred to current Chair
(Cambodia) and Vice-Chair (China) on 12 June 2011, for a period of two years (until June 2013).
The ongoing members of the Secretariat’s Management Committee are:

Partnership Chair: Cambodia

Vice-Chair: China

Host of Secretariat: Republic of Korea

Inter-governmental Organization: CMS

Additional Government Partner: Indonesia

NGO Partners (2) : International Crane Foundation & BirdLife International
2. Introduction to the Secretariat staff
Chief Executive:
Deputy Officer*:
Administration Officer*:
Finance Officer*:
Communication Officer:
Publication Officer:
Science Officer:
(vacant since Sep 2011)
Mr Kyoung-seog MIN (since March 2011)
(no secondment since May 2011)
Mr Seung-Joo HYUN (since Nov 2011)
Ms Yuna CHOI
(since Jan 2012)
Ms Min-seon KIM
(since Oct 2009)
(vacant from March 2012)
*seconded (dispatched) from Incheon City Government under the terms of the MoU.
The Secretariat staff are currently all of Korean nationality. Business is principally conducted in
English as that is the official language for EAAFP business but Korean language is essential for
communication with Korean government agencies, organisations and service providers.
All Secretariat officers will attend the MoP6: Deputy (Mr. Min), Finance (Mr. Hyun),
Communication (Ms. Choi), and Publication Officer (Ms. Kim).
Page 6 of 62
Document 2.1
3. Chief Executive Recruitment
Following the resignation of the former Chief Executive (Mr. Roger Jaensch) in order to attend to
urgent family matters in his home country, the recruitment process for a new Chief Executive
started in Oct 2011.






Job announcement: 25 Oct 2011
Deadline of application: 30 Nov 2011
Application Review: 13 Dec 2011
Reference Check: 20 Jan 2012
Interview with short-listed candidates: 16 Feb 2012
Negotiation started: 27 Feb 2012
4. Changes in Staff of the Secretariat
Mrs Mee-Hyang WOO, the former Administration Officer, returned to Incheon City Government
(ICG) as her 2-year term of dispatch ended in May 2011, and this position is still vacant. She is
working for watershed management in ICG.
Mr Hyeung-Mun KIM, the former Finance Officer, also returned to ICG in Nov 2011, and he
manages coastal environments in ICG. A new Finance Officer, Mr Seung-Joo HYUN, managed
coastal environments in ICG before joining the Secretariat.
Mr Eui-yeon LEE, the former Deputy Officer, returned to the Water Quality Control
and River Division in ICG. The new Deputy, Mr. Kyoung-seog MIN, was previously the chief of
River environmental team in the Water Quality Control and River Division, ICG.
At the end of her two-year term of contract, the former Communication Officer, Ms Aram LEE,
was not reappointed to the Secretariat. Aram (aram0124@gmail.com) will probably continue her
study in international relations. Through the recruiting process from November to December 2011,
Ms Yuna Choi was appointed as the New Communication Officer of the Secretariat. Ms. Choi
previously worked for UNEP-Korea as a team leader of the Communication Team from 2007 to
2011, and managed diverse international cooperation and CEPA activities. She also has working
experiences as a short-term intern in the WHO Regional Office for Europe in Denmark and the
UNESCO Office in Costa Rica.
Ms Min-seon KIM was reappointed as the Publication Officer, and continues her work such as
webpage management, development of printing materials and newsletters, and CEPA activities.
The contract of employment of the Science Officer, Dr Chang-Yong Choi, ended on 17 Feb 2012.
However, he temporally extended his contract for one month to prepare the MoP6, since a new
Chief Executive was not recruited by the end of his term. He (subbuteo@hanmail.net) will
temporally stay in a bird banding station continuing his study on migratory birds.
Page 7 of 62
Document 2.1
5. Relocation of the Secretariat Office
The current office of the Secretariat in Get-Pearl Tower has been used since 2009, but the
Secretariat office will be relocated to I-Tower (under construction), according to the urban
managing plan of the Host City (ICG). The Secretariat will use the 9th Floor of the building located
about 2.3km away from the current office.
The new building will be used as a complex for international organizations and IFEZ (Incheon
Free Economic Zone) Offices; along with the EAAFP Secretariat, UNAPCICT (UN Asian and the
Pacific training Center for Information and Communication Technology for Development),
UNESCAP SRO-ENEA (UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
Subregional Office for East and North-East Asia), NEASPEC (North-East Asian Subregional
Programme for Environmental Cooperation), UN ISDR (UN International Strategy for Disaster
Reduction Northeast Asia Office & Global Education and Training Institute), UN Depository
Library, AFOB (Asian Federation of Biotechnology), and UN Office for Sustainable Development
will move into the building.
The time for relocation of the office has not been confirmed, but the construction of I-Tower will
be possibly completed in November 2012. In Jan 2012, the Secretariat submitted a letter
requesting a space of 170 m2 (approx. 46% of the current office 370 m2) in the 3rd Floor to ICG.
Expected sizes of component rooms are as below;

Room for Chief Executive: 25 m2

Office room for other staff: 83 m2

Meeting room: 40 m2

Multipurpose (storage) room: 14 m2

Others: 8 m2
6. Important meetings and events
International Workshop on Waterbird Monitoring in Asia
- Hosted by BirdLife International and Wetland International
- Science Officer, Tokyo (Japan), 21-24 Feb 2011
The 4th OIE regional meeting and International Avian Influenza Workshop
- Role of the Secretariat: Observer and Invited Speaker
- Science Officer, Tokyo (Japan), 21-23 June 2011
Communication Strategy (CEPA WG) meeting
- hosted by Singapore National Parks Board at Sungei Buloh
- Communication & Publication Officers, 19-21 Sep 2011
Implementation Strategy TF meeting
- Role of the Secretariat: local organizer
- All staff, Secretariat Office, 14-15 Oct 2011
Global Waterbirds Flyway Workshop
- Role of the Secretariat: local organizer
- All staff, Seosan (Korea), 17-20 Oct 2011
- http://www.eaaflyway.net/global-flyway.php
International Symposium on Migratory Birds: Seabird Conservation in NE Asia
- Role of the Secretariat: local organizer
- Science Officer, Shinan (Korea), 12-15 Nov 2011
Preparation Meeting for Capacity Building on Migratory Bird Monitoring
- Hosted by BirdLife International
- Role of the Secretariat: local organizer
- Science Officer, Secretariat Office, 20-21 Feb 2012
Page 8 of 62
Document 2.1
7. Visit to Partners
- Malaysia: Chief Executive, 11-19 Feb 2011
- Bangladesh: Chief Executive, 26 Feb to 4 March 2011
- China: Chief Executive, 21-22 Mar 2011
- New Zealand: Chief Executive, 27-28 March 2011
- The Philippines & ASEAN center: Administration & Communication Officers, 28-31 March 2011
- China: Chief Executive, 21-22 May 2011 (World Biodiversity Day)
- Mongolia: Chief Executive and Science Officer, 31 May to 4 Jun 2011
- Alaska (USA): Chief Executive, 11-18 Jun 2011
- Thailand: Communication & Publication Officers, 22-25 Jun 2011
- Indonesia & Ramsar Asia Regional Meeting: Communication Officer, December 2011
8. Supporting Education/Scientific Activities in Korea
- Korea-China Seminar for the Restoration of Crested Ibis: Science Officer, 22 March 2011
- Workshop for National Network Development of FNS: All staff, 7-8 April 2011
- World Migratory Bird Day event for Education and Birdwatching: All staff, 5 May 2011
- Training Course for Tidal Flat Interpreter: Science Officer, 14 May 2011
- Flyway Network Site (Geum River Estuary) Certificate Delivery to Seocheon County: Chief
Executive and some staff, 4 May 2011
- International Symposium for the Conservation of Black-faced Spoonbills: All staff, 16 May 2011
- World Wetland Day ceremony: All staff, 11 May 2011
- World Biodiversity Day ceremony: Deputy Officer, 19 May 2011
- Training Course for Shorebird Trapping and Banding: Science Officer, 8-10 Oct 2011
- Flyway Network Site (Chilbaldo Islet) Certificate Delivery to Shinan County: Science Officer, 12
November 2011
- Workshop for Oystercatchers and Ecotourism in Yubu-do Flyway Network Site: Science Officer,
23 Dec 2011
- Workshop for Conservation and Management Protected Marine Wildlife: Science Officer, 23
Feb 2012
9. Other work and activities
- Ramsar Regional Initiative Report submission
To maintain the status of Ramsar Regional Initiative, the EAAFP Secretariat submitted
'Annual Summary Report for Year 2011 and Plan for Year 2012' to the Ramsar Secretariat
following the form (Annex I of DOC. SC41-13) on time (28 Feb 2012). Secretariat did not
request financial support from the Ramsar core budget for activities in 2012.
- CCR registration for MoP7
The Secretariat secured a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and NATO
Commercial and Governmental Entity (NCAGE) code in January to register in the USA
Central Contractor Registration (CCR). On 6 Feb 2012, the Secretariat submitted a proposal
through the US grant system (Grants.gov) with great support from Mr. Doug Alcorn. He is
developing a program and schedule for MoP7. Refer Agenda item 7.1 and Attachment 7.1.
- Supporting a documentary film making
: ‘Great Migration (KNN broadcasting company, on air in May 2012)’
: Guide to Australia (6-13 March 11) and Bangladesh (15-20 Mar 2011)
: Arrange trips to Mongolia and Alaska
- Supporting Flyway Network Site nominations by Bangladesh (5), Korea (2), and Indonesia (1)
- Supporting the meeting and communication for bilateral agreements on migratory bird
conservation
- Preparation for the 6th Meeting of Partners including liaison with the host, Indonesia
Page 9 of 62
Document 2.1
10. Financial situation









The Secretariat maintains accurate and detailed financial records that have been inspected
by an international auditor (BDO).
The Korean financial year ends December 31, 2011. The Secretariat had the balance of
2011 funds (KRW 171 million, approx. USD 152,832) at the end of last year and it will be
used for strengthening the EAAF Partnership.
Balance of 2011 Host City funds on 31 December 31: KRW 44.3 million (USD 39,460).
Funds received by the Secretariat in 2011 were:
1.
From the Host City as per the hosting MoU: KRW 509.0 million (ca. USD 460,000).
2.
From Partner R-o-Korea, a voluntary contribution including fund carried over: KRW 75
million (ca. USD 66,855).
3.
From Partner Japan as a voluntary contribution 2010-11: KRW 13.1 million (ca. USD
22,000).
4.
From Partner Australia for printing of shorebird ID guide (in Russian): KRW 5.8 million.
(carried forward from year 2010)
5.
From Seosan City for hosting Global Waterbird Flyways Workshop: KRW 47.5 million (ca.
USD 42,342)
6.
Interest from short-term investments: KRW 1.2 million to 31 December 2011.
7.
Miscellaneous Income mainly from refund: KRW 5.2 million
8.
From the budget which is carried forward from year 2010: KRW 39 million
The Host City fund is held in separate bank accounts to funds from the Partners.
Anticipated expenditure of 2012 Host City fund on operating the Secretariat and conducting
Partnership Activities for the year 2012, is expected to consume all. The Host City has
advised that any unspent 2011 balance may be retained for use in the next year.
Funds from Japan in 2010-11 were consumed for Secretariat travel and printing of brochure;
funds for 2011-12 are earmarked for CEPA material (posters, banners, brochures) production
and additional Secretariat travel including meeting with potential Partners.
The Shorebird ID guide (in Russian) is not ready for publication.
Assets Acquisition: no major equipment purchased by the Secretariat during 2011.
11. Review of matters arising from 5th Meeting of Partners
Matters arising from the 5th Meeting are distributed throughout the Draft Report of MoP5
(http://www.eaaflyway.net/documents/mop/mop5-report-draft.pdf). A table summarising the
agreed action is on pages 20-23.

Completed:
Action 4 (2.3.3): Member nomination for the Shorebird WG
Action 12 (3.2.2): Global waterbird flyways workshop
Action 13 (3.2.4): EAAFP e-newsletters – done and ongoing
Action 18 (3.3.2): Updating and uploading colour marking protocols and information sheet
Action 25 (3.5.2): Partnership endorsement of TOR for the Spoon-billed Sandpiper TF
Action 28 (3.6): Preparing Terms of Reference for the new CEPA Working Group
to obtain Partnership endorsement
Action 29 (4.1): Review of the EAAFP Implementation Strategy, reporting to occur at MoP6
Action 30 (4.1): Review of the EAAFP Communication Strategy, reporting to occur at MoP6
Action 31 (4.1): Workshops for new Implementation and Communication Strategies
Action 32 (6.1 to 6.5): Archiving adopted documents
Action 33 (6.6 and 6.7): 2011 work plan and budget endorsement by the Management Committee
Action 36 (8.1 and 8.2): Transition to the new Chair, Vice-Chair and Management Committee
Page 10 of 62
Document 2.1

Partly completed, in progress:
Action 3 (2.3.2): Seabird Working Group report anticipated at MoP6
Action 5 (3.1.1): Baseline assessment for criteria of the EAAFP’s Flyway Site Network
Action 6 (3.3.1): Input to the Fifth Edition of Waterbird Population Estimates
Action 16 (3.6): Baseline assessment of Waterbird Monitoring
Action 8 (3.1.2): Limited progress in securing Network Site Information Sheets (SISs) and maps
Action 9 (3.1.2): Limited progress in creating an SIS and boundary map
Action 10 (3.1.2): Limited progress in uploading SISs/maps to the EAAFP website
Action 11 (3.2.1): Explore the best way to provide a point of entry to the website, in all Partner
languages – attempted but met obstacles
Action 14 (3.3.1): Baseline assessment for the Flyway Site Network is at advanced stage
Action 17 (3.3.1 and 3.1.2): Adaptation of the Critical Site Network Tool to the EAA Flyway
has been discussed at global level
Actions 19 (3.3.3 and 3.6): Develop a work plan for the Yellow Sea Ecoregion - at early
stage of discussions with key stakeholders
Actions 20 (3.3.3 and 3.6): Develop a work plan for the Amur-Heilong Basin- at early stage
of discussions with key stakeholders
Action 23 (3.4.1): Developing national Partnerships was supported by Secretariat and NGO
Partners in some countries
Action 24 (3.4.3 and 3.6): Liaison occurred between WWF and Shorebird WG to develop strategy
for conservation of shorebirds with the new project funding of WWF
Action 26 (3.5.3): At early stage of discussions to develop and obtain Partnership endorsement
of Terms of Reference for the Scaly-sided Merganser Task Force
Action 27 (3.5.2 and 3.5.3): Report to CMS Scientific Council on two new EAAFP TFs for single
species action plans - presumably done at/before CMS CoP, 2011
Action 37 (9.1) – Plans for MoP7 in Alaska are highly advanced.

Not started:
Action 1 (no related agenda): Due to the time limits of MoP, shortage of Secretariat staff and high
working loads, unable to consider inclusion in MoP programs of presentations on
successful examples of integrated conservation and sustainable livelihoods at important
waterbird sites.
Action 15 (3.3.1): Awaits completion of Action 14 to prepare an overview of the status of Flyway
Network Sites on the basis of the 2011 data provided by Government Partners
Action 21 (3.3.3 and 3.6) – Strong interest not shown at MoP5 for further investigate the interest
of Partners in establishing a Task Force for the Yangtze Floodplain region.
Actions 34 (8.1): Investigated possibilities for synchronization of terms of the Partnership Chair
and Vice-Chair with periods between Meetings of Partners should be addressed by MC
over the next 15 mths
Actions 35 (8.2): Investigated possibilities for synchronization of terms of the Partnership Chair
and Vice-Chair with periods between Meetings of Partners should be addressed by MC
over the next 15 mths

Unknown status:
Action 2 (2.3.1): Undertake avian influenza (AI) surveillance at Network sites and provide other
Information
Action 7 (3.1.2): Review the Google Earth feature for locations of Network sites on the EAAFP
website and indicate changes to Secretariat
Action 22 (3.3.4): Contribute information on waterbirds and monitoring activities to the
Asianwaterbird Yahoo Group
Action required by Partners:
To review the summary and decide and schedule any action arising.
Page 11 of 62
Document 2.2
2.2 Summary of Partner Reports submitted to the Secretariat
Report prepared by the Secretariat
Explanatory notes:
Due to the insufficient responses, a general overview was not possible to produce. However, if
time permits, several key responses from Partners may be introduced to Partners at MoP6.
Reporting typically covers the 14 month period from January 2011 to February 2012.
Seven reports from the Partners were submitted to the Secretariat.
 Government Partners (4)
Australia
New Zealand
The Philippines
USA (USFWS)
 International NGO Partners (3)
BirdLife International Asia Division
International Crane Foundation
WWF Hong Kong
These reports will be used to develop future strategies (Implementation Strategy and CEPA
Strategy). The original reports from the Partners can be copied on request; please consult the
Secretariat.
Objectives of the
EAAFP
Partner
Important notes
Objective 1.
Develop the
Flyway Network
of sites of
international
importance for
the conservation
of migratory
waterbirds,
building on the
achievements of
the APMWCS
networks.
Australia
There were Australian Wetlands and Waterbird Taskforce meetings
during the reporting period.
USFWS
Assistant Secretary of the US Department of the Interior met with
officials in S. Korean government to discuss reclamation of waterbird
habitats on Yellow Sea to express concern to potential and
immediately noticeable impacts on shared migratory waterbirds.
New
Zealand
Officially joined the Partnership in September 2011. NZ government
will be preparing nominations for new Flyway Network Sites, to add to
the two already recognised (Firth of Thames and Farewell Spit).
The
Philippines
Site Information Sheets for two important waterbird habitats were
prepared by sites managers and are being reviewed by
PAWB_DENR for nomination to the Partnership FNS.
BirdLife
International
We have been encouraging Thailand, Malaysia, Myanmar and China
to consider additional FNS sites and also working to organise the
Seabird Working Group under the EAAFP.
WWF Hong
Kong
WWF Hong Kong assisted 2 wetland sites (Haifeng Wetlands in
Guangdong Province & Zhangjianko National Nature Reserve in
Fujian Province) in South China and continues to encourage both
sites to apply for Flyway Network Site status. Progress is slow, but
potentially they may join in 2012.
Page 12 of 62
Objective 2.
Enhance
communication,
education and
public
awareness of the
values of
migratory
waterbirds and
their habitats.
USFWS
(For a broad level of recognition) Notified senior staff of cabinet level
officials of the US Government of the EAAFP. Conservation message
taken to the highest levels in government.
New
Zealand
A number of resources are available in English and Chinese, and
New Zealand has worked with Yalu Jiang in China on translation of
material.
The
Philippine
The Philippine Bird Festival is celebrated annually where
conservation of birds and their habitat is highlighted for the whole
nation.
ICF
Working with PLNR, we prepared a 12-page color brochure (Chinese
and English versions) on waterbirds and wetlands of Poyang Lake;
we developed a project also involving the University of WisconsinMadison to develop a school curriculum about cranes and protection
and sustainable use of wetlands at Cao Hai NNR.
We held a teacher training course for Spoon-billed Sandpiper in
mainland China in 2011 for 70 teachers in Shanghai, Jiangsu,
Zhejiang and Fujian.
BirdLife
International
Objective 3.
Enhance flyway
research and
monitoring
activities, build
knowledge and
promote
exchange of
information on
waterbirds and
their habitats.
WWF Hong
Kong
Through the Asian Waterbird Conservation Fund, WWF-HK awarded
funds to 3 CEPA related projects at wetlands in Asia (2 in Inner
Mongolia, 1 in Indonesia).
Australia
A collaborative grant project being run by the University of
Queensland to assess all the data collected around Australia for
population trends.
USFWS
The US Fish and Wildlife Service collects long-term data and status
counts of Dunlin and other long-ranging shorebirds, and arctic
breeding waterfowl. Introduced biologists for Audubon Society of
Alaska to biologists in the Spoon-billed Sandpiper Task Force to
explore grant funding opportunities.
The February count in New Zealand is timed to coincide with the
Australian 2020 shorebird counts to assess the Flyway population.
The Ornithological Society of New Zealand (OSNZ) integrates their
census data nationally.
New
Zealand
The
Philippines
Biophysical and socio-economic studies were undertaken at Naujan
lake in October 2011 to update its environmental profile taken way
back in 1997. The study is in connection with the ongoing process of
updating the lake's management plan.
ICF
We relied on data from both Poyang Lake and Momoge NNR to
assess the size of the Siberian Crane population, reproductive
success, and impacts of the food shortage in winter 2010-11 at
Poyang Lake on Siberian Cranes.
BirdLife
International
With support from Japan, BirdLife hosted a workshop on site
monitoring in Tokyo in 2011 to combine the AWC and the IBA
monitoring tools, and convened a flyway experts meeting alongside
the veterinary experts from Ministries of agriculture a meeting on
HPAI in Tokyo last June 2011.
WWF Hong
Kong
Involved in some discussions on the use of flags in Hong Kong and
issues related to the Guangdong bird banders.
Page 13 of 62
Objective 4.
Build the habitat
and waterbird
management
capacity of
natural resource
managers,
decision makers
and local
stakeholders.
New
Zealand
Members of the Miranda Naturalists’ Trust have provided training in
bird identification, counting methods and flock estimation at stop-over
sites in China (especially at Yalu Jiang).
The
Philippines
The DENR currently implements a program "Integrated Coastal
Resource Management Program" to mainstream coastal resource
management in local governance and in community level resource
management planning.
WWF Hong
Kong
WWF Hong Kong trained 200 staff from wetlands in Mainland China
using the Mai Po Nature Reserve as a demonstration site and training
base. Also helped WWF-China establish a wetland training
programme at Chongming Island near Shanghai.
Objective 5.
Develop,
especially for
priority species
and habitats,
flyway wide
approaches to
enhance the
conservation
status of
migratory
waterbirds.
Australia
Supported Russian Field Guide development and Colour Marking
Taskforce
New
Zealand
The identification of Bohai Bay in China as the primary stopover point
for Red Knot provides new information that will assist with decisionmaking regarding the management of sites of import to the
population.
ICF
We coordinate activities under the Memorandum of Understanding
concerning Conservation Measures for the Siberian Crane (under
CMS, and involving all range states). We participated in and funded
travel of the Russian representative for the annual meeting of the
International Red-crowned Crane Network. We also supported a
coordinated survey of Sarus Cranes in Cambodia and Vietnam in
January 2012.
BirdLife has faciliated a meeting of UK support organisations for the
conservation of Spoon-billed sandpiper as part of BirdLife
International's lead role in the SBS Task Force.
BirdLife
International
WWF Hong
Kong
WWF Hong Kong project to develop a Migratory Shorebird
Conservation Plan for the EAAF.
Action required by Partners:
To review the summary, and decide and schedule any action arising, such as commonly
supported points raised by the Partners in their reports.
Page 14 of 62
Document 2.3
2.3 Brief update from EAAFP Working Groups
Explanatory notes:
The following report is provided to inform Partners of the activity of the EAAFP Working Groups
in the reporting period. It mainly refers to the period from the close of the 5th Meeting of Partners
in December 2010 until about the end of February 2012.
Action required by Partners:
To review the reports and define and schedule any action arising.
List of component papers (see following pages):
2.3.1
Avian Influenza Working Group
2.3.2
Seabird Working Group
2.3.3
Shorebird Working Group
2.3.4
Anatidae Working Group
2.3.5
Crane Working Group
2.3.6
CEPA Working Group
Page 15 of 62
Document 2.3.1
2.3.1 Avian Influenza Working Group
Briefing to be provided by Wetlands International
No report receive
Action required by Partners:
To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.
Document 2.3.2
2.3.2 Seabird Working Group
Briefing to be provided by BirdLife International
No report receive
Action required by Partners:
To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.
Page 16 of 62
Document 2.3.3
2.3.3 Shorebird Working Group
Notes provided by Australasian Wader Studies Group (Ken Gosbell, Chair)
Introduction
One of the outcomes of MoP6 was the formalization of the Shorebird Working Group. Partners
were subsequently requested to provide nominations for this Working group to the Secretariat. At
this stage 12 nominations have been received. The first meeting of this Group together with other
interested participants will be held on Day 1 of the MoP6. A more comprehensive report for
Partners will be provided following that meeting.
Informal Collaboration
Over the past year the nominated group together with other Shorebird experts around the EAA
Flyway have shared informal collaboration on a number of important activities such as:
 Training programs,
 Participating in workshops and conferences in China, Korea, Australia etc
 Participating in banding expeditions in North-west Australia
 Providing information and advice related to population monitoring based on Shorebirds 2020
experience (Australia), Monitoring 1000 (Japan) and AWC etc
 Liaising with WWF Hong Kong re the Shorebird Conservation Plan proposed at MoP5.
 Encouraging ongoing collaboration at important shorebird areas such as Yalu Jiang, Bohai
etc.
 Supporting management strategies for critically endangered species.
 Sharing information on new developments such as geolocators (Australia).
Recommendations
Specific Recommendations and Actions will be brought to MoP6 following the SWG Meeting on
Day 1.
Action required by Partners:
 To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.
 To consider the two recommendations in the report.
Page 17 of 62
Document 2.3.4
2.3.4 Anatidae Working Group
Briefing to be provided by BirdLife International (Nobuhiko Kishimoto, Asia office)
No report received.
Action required by Partners:
To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.
Document 2.3.5
2.3.5 Crane Working Group
Briefing to be provided by BirdLife International (Simba Chan, Asia office)
No report received.
Action required by Partners:
To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.
Document 2.3.6
2.3.6 CEPA Working Group
Briefing to be provided by Ramsar
No report received.
Action required by Partners:
To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.
Page 18 of 62
3. Building the Partnership
Explanatory note:
The Implementation Strategy and Communication Strategy of the EAAFP 2007-2011 adopted at
the 1st Meeting of Partners. As endorsed in the MoP5 (Action 29-30, Agenda 4.1), a review of the
EAAFP Implementation Strategy and Communication Strategy was conducted.
Separate explanatory notes and action points have been inserted in each component paper.
List of component papers (see following pages):
3.1
Introduction to new Implementation Strategy and CEPA Strategy
3.2
Developing engagement of new Partners (potential Partners)
Page 19 of 62
Document 3.1
3.1 Introduction to new Implementation Strategy and CEPA Strategy
Introduction to EAFFP MOP6 Documents concerning the Implementation Strategy
Note from the Implementation Strategy Task Force Chair, Douglas Hykle (CMS)
Three substantive papers have been prepared for EAAFP MOP6 in relation to the East Asian –
Australasian Flyway Partnership Implementation Strategy, all of them generated through the work
of the EEAFP Implementation Strategy Task Force1.
The synthesis of a ‘Review of the EAAFP Implementation Strategy 2007-2011 (Attachment
3.1.1)’ is an abbreviated version of a much longer report prepared for and reviewed by the IS
Task Force in October 2011. This document, prepared under consultancy by Nature
Management Services, has been circulated within the Task Force and has served to guide the
proposals for revision of the Implementation Strategy for the 2012-2016 period. There is not
expected to be much time to introduce and discuss the contents of this document at MOP6;
therefore all participants are encouraged to read it at their leisure.
The ‘Proposed Outcomes and Key Result Areas for the EAAFP Implementation Strategy
2012-2016 (Attachment 3.1.2)’ is the main document for consideration at MOP6. It takes
account of discussions and contributions made during the Implementation Strategy Workshop
held in October 2011. It has been circulated within the Task Force and has been benefitted from
feedback from a number of individuals. This final version is being presented to the wider
Partnership for the first time. While the document has been significantly refined and improved
through this iterative process, a number of points are still in need of clarification or completion.
(For instance, Outcome 9 concerning the potential role of waterbirds in disease transmission, has
not yet benefitted from inputs from the relevant working group.) Moreover, it is expected that
Partners seeing the document for the first time may have further contributions to make. Given
the limited time available at MOP6, it is requested that participants prepare their specific
proposals for changes/improvements, in writing, in advance. It is hoped that time will be made
available for a break-out group to meet and finalise the draft Implementation Strategy for
endorsement by the meeting.
The IS Task Force concluded that the revised Implementation Strategy would benefit from a
preamble that would, among other things, explain the roles and functions of various EAFFP
bodies. A third paper “Roles and Functions of EAAFP Bodies (Attachment 3.1.3)” could
serve this purpose, however it is somewhat longer than originally anticipated. This excellent
paper, also prepared by Nature Management Services, could rightly be presented as a standalone reference document. If the Meeting decides to use it as a preamble to the revised
Implementation Strategy, it is recommended that Annex 1 be deleted. Alternatively, if the paper
is retained as a stand-alone document, a brief introduction to the revised Implementation
Strategy should be prepared, for finalisation during the course of the Meeting.

The document package for review is available at:
http://www.eaaflyway.net/6th-meeting.php

The Implementation Strategy 2006-2011 is available at:
http://www.eaaflyway.net/implementation.php
1
Douglas Hykle, Convention on Migratory Species (Task Force Chair), Paul O'Neill (Australia), Agus Sutito
(Indonesia), Makiko Yanagiya (Japan), Carlo Custodio (Philippines), Sharon Chan (Singapore), Aree Wattana
Tummakird (Thailand), Cristi Nozawa (Birdlife International), Doug Watkins (Wetlands International), Lew Young
(Ramsar Convention)
Page 20 of 62
Document 3.1
Introduction to the new CEPA Strategy
Briefing notes to be provided by Ramsar

Review documents for CEPA Strategy is available at:
http://www.eaaflyway.net/documents/mop/Draft_CEPA_Strategy_120308-2.pdf

Communication Strategy 2006-2011 is available at:
http://www.eaaflyway.net/communication.php
Action required by Partners:

To review any reports and define and schedule any action arising.

To develop and endorse the Implementation Strategy 2012-2016 and CEPA Strategy
2012-2016.
Page 21 of 62
Document 3.2
3.2 Developing engagement of new Partners (potential Partners)
Briefing notes to be provided by the Secretariat and Wetlands International
According to the Partnership Document (http://www.eaaflyway.net/documents/key/Partnershipdocument-v10.pdf), the East Asian - Australasian Flyway encompasses 22 countries.
Appendix II indicates that countries within the Flyway are;











Australia
People’s Republic of Bangladesh
Brunei Darussalam
Cambodia
People’s Republic of China
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
Indonesia
Japan
Lao People's Democratic Republic
Malaysia
Mongolia











Union of Myanmar
New Zealand
Papua New Guinea
The Philippines
Republic of Korea
The Russian Federation
Republic of Singapore
Democratic Republic of East Timor
Kingdom of Thailand
United States of America
The Socialist Republic of Vietnam
Some countries that are not in the boundary may share migratory waterbirds that occur in EAA
Flyway. For example, India generally belongs to the Central Flyway, but may share same
migratory populations such as Black-necked Cranes which occur in the EAA Flyways.
Action required by Partners:

To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.

To update the countries’ information within the boundary of the EAA Flyway

To discuss and develop a guideline about the potential Partner outside the boundary
Page 22 of 62
4.1 Objective 1: Develop the Flyway Site Network
Explanatory note:
Separate explanatory notes and action points have been inserted in each component paper.
List of component papers (see following pages):
4.1.1
Current status of Flyway Site Network and recent nominations
4.1.2
Report on the assessment of EAAF Flyway Network Sites
Page 23 of 62
Document 4.1.1
4.1.1 Current status of Flyway Site Network and recent nominations
Briefing notes provided by the EAAFP Secretariat.
Present situation
The present number of sites in the Flyway Site Network is 108 (http://www.eaaflyway.net/list-ofsites.php). At least 700 sites are known to be internationally important for migratory waterbirds in
the Flyway.
The list of sites by country is as follows (as of Mar 2012):
* indicates transfer of some sites under consideration, or status unknown
Russian Federation *
Mongolia *
China
DPR of Korea
Rep of Korea
Japan
Bangladesh
Thailand
10
5
19
2
11
29
5
1
The Philippines
Malaysia *
Indonesia
Papua New Guinea
Singapore
Australia
New Zealand
2
1
2
1
1
17
2
Sites to be transferred from previous networks
Based on the letter received from the Mongolia on 10 June 2011, two of the five sites designated
under former networks (Ogii Nuur and Khurkh-Khuiten Valley) have been formally transferred to
the EAAFP Flyway Site Network. Significant changes have occurred in the other three sites as
the result of changes in climate. Mongolia is conducting ongoing review of its Network site
designations and some new nominations are being considered.
Malaysia is at an advanced stage of preparing to join the Partnership. As part of this process it is
also considering new Network site nominations and is reviewing its existing site (not yet
transferred from a former network). However, other new Network site nominations are being
considered in the context of discussions between the Secretariat and the Government about
Malaysia becoming a Partner of EAAFP.
New sites since MoP5
Korea, Bangladesh, and Indonesia will make introductory presentations on the recently
nominated sites (5-10 min each).
The following sites have been designated to the Flyway Site Network since the MoP5:


Yubu-do Tidal Flat, SOUTH KOREA
o Coastal habitat mainly for shorebirds
o More than 1% levels for 15 shorebird populations
Chilbaldo Islet, SOUTH KOREA
o Breeding sites of migratory storm petrels and shearwaters;
o Some exceeding 1% levels
Page 24 of 62
Document 4.1.1






Nijhum Dweep National Park, BANGLADESH
o Coastal habitats mainly for shorebirds, and some globally threatened species
o Supports > 1 % of the population of Spoon-billed Sandpipers
Sonadia, BANGLADESH
o Coastal habitat mainly for mainly shorebirds
o Extremely important site for at least three endangered shorebirds: Spoonbilled Sandpipers, Nordmann’s Greenshanks, and Great Knots
Hakaluki Haor, BANGLADESH
o Freshwater wetland mainly for shorebirds and Anatidae
o Supports endangered species, supports >20,000 waterbirds
Tanguar Haor, BANGLADESH
o Freshwater wetland mainly for shorebirds and Anatidae
o Supports 30,000-40,000 waterfowls, particularly the endangered Baer's
Pochard, vulnerable Baikal Teal, and near threatened Falcated Duck,
o Supports 1% of the individuals in 17 populations or species
Hail Haor, BANGLADESH
o Freshwater wetland mainly for Anatidae
o Supports > 1 % of the individuals in populations of three species,
Sembilang National Park, INDONESIA
o Mangrove habitat and tidal flats mainly for shorebirds and others
o Supports >1% of the three shorebird populations
o 80,000 – 100,000 migratory waterbirds recorded.
A flowchart illustrating the process for new nominations to the Network, to assist Partners, was
developed by the Secretariat and is available on the EAAFP website at
http://www.eaaflyway.net/nominating-a-site.php
Action required by Partners:
 To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.
 To guide the Secretariat in how it can most strategically and effectively continue its
support and encouragement for new nominations by Partner Governments
Page 25 of 62
Document 4.1.2
4.1.2 Report on the assessment of EAAF Flyway Network Sites
Briefing notes provided by the Wetlands International & BirdLife International.
Flyway Network Site assessment will be produced and circulated soon.
No report received.
Action required by Partners:

To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.

To assist WI & BI to complete the Flyway Network Site assessment.

To review the result of Flyway Network Site assessment which will be produced soon by
WI & BI.

Update or create an SIS and boundary map for each site where they do not exist.

Identify status and major threats of each FNS, and to use the assessment as baseline for
management and conservation
Page 26 of 62
4.2 Objective 2: Enhance communication, education and public awareness
Explanatory notes:
Separate explanatory notes and action points have been inserted in each component paper.
List of component papers (see following pages):
4.2.1
Report on the Global Waterbird Flyway Workshop, Korea
4.2.2
E-newsletter, Publication and Website
4.2.3
Award System of the EAAF Partnership
Page 27 of 62
Document 4.2.1
4.2.1 Report on the Global Waterbird Flyways Workshop on waterbird flyways
Briefing notes provided by the EAAFP Secretariat.
Separate explanatory notes will be given by Wetland Internal.
Background
At MoP4 (Agenda 3.2.3), Partners were introduced to a proposal by a consortium (Ramsar,
BirdLife International, Wetlands International) to conduct a workshop on global flyways, to collate
lessons learned and plan future directions in regard to flyway initiatives worldwide. The EAAFP
Secretariat through the Chief Executive has participated in the consortium’s planning committee.
Changwon City, Republic of Korea originally offered financial supports for the workshop in 2010,
but the workshop was postponed to 2011 due to the shortage of time for preparation.
Worshop in Oct 2011
In 2011, with the generous support of Seosan City in Korea, an international workshop to review
good practice in international initiatives for the conservation of migratory waterbirds and other
migratory bird taxa was convened by the Ramsar Convention, the Convention on Migratory
Species (CMS), BirdLife International, Wetlands International and the EAAFP Secretariat.
It was attended by 35 representatives and observers from 14 international organisations and
seven Korean organisations at Hanseo University, Seosan City. Representatives from the Arctic
Council/CAFF and the Global Flyways Network (GFN) were unable to participate owing to prior
commitments.
Workshop presentations and discussions were organised under a) the objectives, operations and
experiences of a range of statutory and voluntary flyway initiatives, and then b) examining seven
common and cross-cutting themes, with the conclusions and recommendations.
Results and Recommendations
Flyway-relevant initiatives examined during the Workshop were:
A. Statutory intergovernmental initiatives
 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) & its MOU
 African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement (AEWA)
 Ramsar Convention on Wetlands
B. Public/Private Sector Partnerships
 East Asian-Australasian Flyway Partnership
C. Voluntary Initiatives
 Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network (WHSRN) (Americas)
 Partners in Flight (North American landbirds)
 Western Hemisphere Migratory Species Initiative (WHMSI)
 Siberian Crane flyway initiatives (Asia)
 Raptor flyway initiatives
 BirdLife International’s Global Seabird Programme
 Wings Over Wetlands (WOW) partnership (Africa-Eurasia)
Page 28 of 62
Document 4.2.1
The seven cross-cutting themes for flyway conservation considered by the Workshop were:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
National engagement and implementation
Species conservation
Site/habitat conservation
Role of science
Innovative approaches
Developing capacity
Partnerships and stakeholder involvement
Accordingly the participants at the Workshop concluded, agreed, and recommended to:
1. Successful conservation of migratory birds – from global to flyway to local levels –
apparently depends on networks of key individuals with vision, passion, commitment and
drive and the networks they create, attracting others in with sufficient momentum that
subsequent generations of such people have extended and perpetuated the
implementation of the objectives and approaches of these networks through a more or
less formalised framework.
2. These frameworks vary substantially in their origins, ranging from intergovernmental to
voluntary; there is no one recipe for a successful framework for delivering flyway
conservation as long as it works.
3. There is much common ground in the approaches, challenges and opportunities for
implementation across all flyway initiatives discussed, regardless of their geographical
location or taxonomic coverage, but each initiative needs to continue to be responsive to
the national and regional specificities within its geographical scope for the focus of its
attention and approach.
4. Rather than treating the Workshop as a one-off event, there is great merit and value in the
establishment of an ongoing networking mechanism. Therefore, establish an open and
inclusive network of flyway-scale initiatives entitled the “Global Interflyway Network (GIN)”,
so as to facilitate future networking, collaboration and information-sharing between
initiatives and their personnel.
5. Make the capacity of the GIN partnership, resources permitting, available to support and
provide input to the work of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) addressing
flyway issues, including inter alia CMS (and any ongoing work requested of its Flyways
Working Group), AEWA and the Ramsar Convention; and to the future implementation of
partnership and voluntary flyway initiatives;
6. The main challenge now seems to be in securing the commitment to conservation
objectives of stakeholders beyond core flyway networks of like minded-people, who may
be involved in driving the pressures that conservationists seek to reverse.
7. Language presents a major barrier to flyway conservation work, and training should be
provided to those using the dominant language to speak to be understood by those for
whom the language is not their first, and to aid the flow of communication.
Page 29 of 62
Document 4.2.1
8. Flyway initiatives may have gaps in coverage in countries which are not fully part of the
international community for political reasons. More generally it should however be
remembered that a fundamental reason for political support for environmental treaties is
to foster communication between nations on issues where the political stakes are
considered by governments to be relatively low, in the interests of promoting peace and
trade. This factor should be emphasised in seeking political support for flyway initiatives.
9. Increasing human population density and the imperative for economic growth are probably
the main underlying threats to migratory birds. Climate change and even its mitigation
measures will undoubtedly impact migratory birds.
10. Funding applications may be more likely to be successful if they specify exactly what will be
achieved, in terms of population response or equivalent, for given, incremental, sums of
money.
A summary report of the workshop’s conclusions and recommendations was being prepared for
consideration by CMS Scientific Council in November 2011, and a full workshop report is in
preparation for publication as a joint Ramsar/CMS/AEWA Technical Report.
More detailed information, programs, and presentations are available online
(http://www.eaaflyway.net/global-flyway.php)
Action required by Partners:

To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.
Page 30 of 62
Document 4.2.2
4.2.2 E-newsletter, publications and website
Briefing notes provided by (Ms. Minseon Kim) the EAAFP Secretariat.
EAAFP’s five electronic newsletters produced since MoP5
1. The EAAFP Secretariat released five electronic newsletters (every 2-3 months) during 2011
following the first issue in December 2010. As the e-newsletter could be further
disseminated by Partners to their own networks of contacts, a PDF version of the latest
electronic newsletter was produced to distribute in November 2011 and is archived at
EAAFP website. Further e-newsletters will also be archived on the EAAFP website.
Volunteers, supervised by the Secretariat, translated the e-newsletters into Korean.
New publications since MoP5
2. EAA Flyway poster:
An EAA Flyway poster (in two versions) of the Partnership was produced to enhance
public awareness of the EAA Flyway with financial support from Korea MoE (host country)
and Incheon City (host city) in August 2011. The poster indicates migration routes of
migratory waterbirds and the message about importance of international cooperation in
the EAA Flyway.
3. 2012 EAAFP Information Brochure:
A 2012 version of the EAAFP Information Brochure was published in March 2012
incorporating mention of three new Partners and eight new FSN sites. The brochure
illustrates and explains the history, purpose, Partners, Flyway Site Network and
conservation activities of the East Asian – Australasian Flyway Partnership.
4. 2012 World Migratory Bird Day poster:
A 2012 World Migratory Bird Day poster for the EAAF region was reproduced to celebrate,
promote and raise awareness of migratory waterbirds and their habitats this year on 12th13th May with a great support from CMS and AEWA Secretariat. The World Migratory Bird
Day (WMBD) was initiated in 2006 and is coordinated by CMS and AEWA (the African –
Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement). As EAAFP is a partner of WMBD, EAAFP
Secretariat is encouraging Partners to promote waterbird watching & education activities
to raise public awareness regarding the importance of waterbirds and their habitats. This
year the theme is Migratory birds and people – together through time. The EAAFP
Secretariat will start to collect brief reports of Partners’ activities on WMBD after May and
Partners may contact Minseon Kim, Public Information Officer of the EAAFP Secretariat,
for further information.
5. Mongolian Birds of Khurkh-Khuiten River Valley:
Mongolia and EAAFP published the Mongolian Birds of Khurkh-Khuiten River Valley in
collaboration with Mongolian Ornithological Society and Mongolia National University.
This publication illustrates and explains information on features, breeding and nonbreeding sites of 80 bird species including waterbirds in Khurkh-Khuiten River Valley
region.
Page 31 of 62
Document 4.2.2
6. Design files of EAAFP publications:
Partners can request a small number of EAAFP publications to enhance public
awareness on migratory waterbirds and their habitats in the flyway. However, EAAFP
Secretariat encourages Partners to produce local, translated versions of the publications
to promote better understanding of migratory waterbirds and their habitats in the flyway
for Partners’ local people who are non-native English speakers. The design files (either on
CD or through YouSendIt or similar) will be provided by Minseon Kim, Public Information
Officer of the EAAFP Secretariat, upon request.
Plans for new publications
7. Russian Shorebird ID Booklet:
This Russian booklet, based on the Shorebird ID booklet by Australia and WWF in 2006,
is planned to be published in collaboration with Australia, Russia and EAAFP. It will
contain about 44 shorebird species for Russia region. While the funding Australia
provided for through EAAFP is secured and the Russian translation is ready, it is
struggling to secure the illustrations of new species from the original booklet. If necessary,
the Secretariat’s Science Officer may find a Korean Artist, but only for few species which
pass through South Korea. Publications Officer will continue to follow up this issue with
Australia and Russia.
8. Flyway Site Network leaflet:
This leaflet will illustrate and explain the EAA Flyway, criteria for inclusion in the Flyway
Site Network, the administrative process for nomination, current list of Network sites,
benefits to joining Network and successful Network sites. The FSN leaflet aims to help
national Partners nominate important sites for waterbirds in the EAAF region and to share
information and expertise among EAA Flyway site managers.
EAAFP Website
9. A PDF version of each EAAFP publication can be downloaded from the EAAFP website
page ‘Publications’.
10. EAAFP Logo Application:
As EAAFP logo is the most fundamental material to prepare EAAFP-related events like
National Partnership Workshop, EAA Flyway Site Network ceremony, World Wetland Day
and World Migratory Bird Day, Public Information Officer make it available for Partners to
download from EAAFP website page ‘Publications’. The EAAFP Secretariat encourages
good use of the logo for Partners own EAAFP-related event from an international or
national or local perspective.
11. Development and activation of EAAFP Spoon-billed Sandpiper Task Force web page:
In MoP4, the Spoon-billed Sandpiper Recovery Team (SBS RT) joined with the EAAFP
and in MoP5 was officially endorsed by the EAAFP as a species Task Force (SBS TF)
under the Shorebird Working Group. To better communicate among SBS TF members,
EAAFP’s Public Information Officer established a web page for the Task Force and kept
uploading news bulletins shown current conservation activities of the SBS TF to the web
page in collaboration with the SBS TF chair.
Page 32 of 62
Document 4.2.2
12. Development of EAAFP’s Facebook(Social Network Service):
As technology has been highly developed and most of people tend to have Web-capable
phones, many international organisations and our Partners like Ramsar Convention, FAO,
WWT, IUCN, WWF and UN organisations started to use social network services to inform
their various activities to public and to draw people’s attention. EAAFP’s Facebook is
currently developing and will be uploaded the Partnership news and activities by Public
Information Officer as soon as it is produced.
Action required by Partners:

To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.

To consider the proposal that the Secretariat continues its efforts to generate and
disseminate regular publications that draw attention to the work and achievements of
the Partnership.
Page 33 of 62
Document 4.2.3
4.2.3 Award system of the EAAF Partnership
Briefing notes provided by the EAAFP Secretariat and Wetland International.
Partners will be asked to endorse the development of a detailed paper on a Flyway Partnership
Award system. While the initial motivation is to be able to acknowledge outstanding lifetime
contributions to migratory waterbird conservation, the award system could be much broader. The
paper would review existing global and regional award systems and identify options and East
Asian – Australasian Flyway Partnership Award. This paper would be circulated for feedback and
then presented at MoP 7.
Action required by Partners:

To consider the endorsement of the preparation of a paper on an award system for the
Flyway Partnership.

To consider the proposal that the Secretariat will work with Partners to develop the paper
for consideration at MoP 7
Page 34 of 62
4.3 Objective 3: Enhance flyway research and monitoring activities, knowledge and
information exchange
Explanatory notes:
Separate explanatory notes and action points have been inserted in each component paper.
List of component papers (see following pages):
4.3.1
Report by Task Force 1: Monitoring of waterbirds and habitats
4.3.2
Report by Task Force 2: Coordination of waterbird colour marking
4.3.3
Report by Task Force 3: Yellow Sea, Yangtze floodplain, Amur-Heiling, DIPA (Dauria
International Protected Area in Russia, Mongolia, China)
4.3.4
Monitoring activities by Partners: opportunity for report and discussion
Page 35 of 62
Document 4.3.1
4.3.1 Report by Task Force 1: Monitoring of waterbirds and habitats
Briefing to be provided by Wetlands International (Doug Watkins)
No report received
Action required by Partners:

To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.
Document 4.3.2
4.3.2 Report by Task Force 2: Coordination of waterbird colour marking
Briefing notes provided by Australia (Paul O’Neill)
Background
At MoP5 the Colour-marking Task Force agreed on its scope of work and the outcomes it is was
seeking. Two broad components to this work were identified: coordination and communication.
These were expanded into a list of tasks:
Coordination
 Agree on a consistent way of illustrating the protocols (easily understood by a wide range
of users, look good on a website, easily updated); COMPLETED
 Bring colour-marking protocols up-to-date for various waterbird groups and make them
consistent (using the format agreed above); COMPLETED
 Identify an approval process for marking schemes proposed by researchers wanting to
start new projects. PARTLY COMPLETED, BUT NEEDS FURTHER DISCUSSION AT
MoP 6
Communication
 Identify the most appropriate website on which information about colour-marking protocols
can be published (much information is currently on the Wetlands International global
website, established/maintained by Taej Mundkur). The information could either be
updated and maintained where it is with a link from the EAAFP website, or moved wholly
on to the EAAFP website (with recognition of previous Wetlands International work).
COMPLETED
 Identify the most appropriate ways to manage collation and dissemination of resighting
data, for each waterbird group. NEEDS FURTHER DISCUSSION AT MoP6
 Summarise current knowledge of the migration strategies of waterbird species in the
Flyway, i.e. breeding areas, non-breeding areas, staging areas and migration routes, as
indicated by banding/colour-marking/tracking projects. NEEDS FURTHER DISCUSSION
AT MoP 6
The Science Officer with the Secretariat, Dr Chang-Yong CHOI, took on the task of updating and
improving the protocols. Currently one protocol (for shorebirds) and three information sheets (for
Anatidae, cranes, and other waterbird groups) are available on the EAAFP website. Work still
needs to be done to update these information sheets for all groups.
Page 36 of 62
Document 4.3.2
The role of the colour-marking protocol coordinator (guiding potential users of colour marking to
appropriate colour combinations for their geographical area, liaising with national banding offices,
and maintaining the protocols) now lies with the Science Officer at the Secretariat. The Task
Force needs to discuss whether this arrangement is satisfactory, and whether any operational
adjustments need to be made. If this ongoing role requires further support from Partners, it may
be beneficial to either create an on-going colour-marking working group or include a colourmarking workshop as a standing item for future MoPs.
These topics will be discussed at the Task Force meeting at MoP6, and outcomes reported to
Partners.
Recommendations
1. The Colour-marking Task Force meets at MoP6 to complete the discussions identified above,
and identify timeframes for completing outstanding tasks.
2. The meeting establishes dates to conclude the Task Force, working toward a final report to
MoP7.
Action required by Partners:

To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.
Page 37 of 62
Document 4.3.3
4.3.3 Report by Task Force 3: Yellow Sea, Yangtze floodplain, Amur-Heiling, DIPA
No reports received as of 12 March from Yellow Sea and Yangtze floodplain.
Report on Activities Related to the Proposed Task Force for the Amur-Heilong Basin
Prepared by James Harris, International Crane Foundation
In 2010, at MoP5 for the East Asian – Australasian Flyway Partnership (EAAFP), the Parties
approved formation of a Task Force for the Amur-Heilong Basin. ICF was not present at this
meeting, but was asked to take the lead in developing this Task Force. We therefore facilitated
early steps in preparing the Task Force.
As a first step, a summary of suggestions was developed by ICF and reviewed by Roger Jaensch,
Chief Executive of EAAFP, proposing the purposes and activities for the Task Force (see page 2
of this report). Consultations were then held with the three countries involved: China, Mongolia
and Russia.
The meeting with the State Forestry Administration of China occurred in April 2011, involving
Roger Jaensch, Wang Weisheng (Department of Wildlife Conservation and Nature Reserve
Management), and me. The Chinese have interest in such a Task Force, and encouraged us to
develop a Memorandum of Understanding. We were also advised that it would be difficult for
representatives from the national government to be directly and regularly involved, due to so
many international commitments. The recommendation was for this Task Force to involve
provincial representatives from within the Amur-Heilong Basin and relevant experts and NGOs,
and to meet within the three countries, rotating among them.
Roger Jaensch met Batbold Dorjgurkhem of the Mongolia Ministry of Nature and Environment in
June 2011. Mongolia also favors forming such a Task Force. The preference was to have
informal arrangements, although these could be expressed through an MoU, and to be sure to
integrate with and support appropriate existing initiatives and to involve those organizations
already active in the region, to avoid duplication of effort.
Jim Harris met with Vladimir Andronov (Far Eastern Branch of the Federal Service for Control
over Nature Use, under the Ministry of Natural Resources [MNR] of Russia) in August 2011. Dr.
Andronov also expressed interest in such a Task Force, agreed that an MoU would be useful,
and suggested that EAAFP approach MNR in Moscow at the appropriate time, asking for support
for participation of specialists from wetland protected areas in far eastern Russia.
At this stage, ICF had hoped that the EAAFP secretariat might assist in developing a draft MoU
that could then be reviewed by the three countries and other potential members of the Task
Force. Unfortunately, due to time constraints and other commitments, ICF was unable to carry
the process further. The MoU still needs to be drafted.
We recommend that the MoU, plans for an initial meeting of the Task Force, and a lead
organization be discussed at MoP6.
Page 38 of 62
Document 4.3.3
Suggestions on the proposed Amur-Heilong Task Force
Proposed at MoP5 in December 2010
Purpose: to enhance international exchange and flyway level activity related to the globally
important waterbird populations occurring in the Amur-Heilong Basin, including over two dozen
species that are threatened or have limited distributions.
Membership: the range countries (China, Mongolia, and Russia) together with other partners
actively working in the Amur-Heilong Basin
Potential objectives:
 Facilitate sharing of population numbers and other information on waterbirds occurring in
this transboundary basin.
 Promote communication and exchange among network sites in the basin.
 Disseminate lessons learned and best practice among network sites.
 Encourage designation of additional network sites.
 Assist with planning and implementing select joint activities such as coordinated counts,
joint surveys, and training events designed for protected areas staff.
 Produce public information materials emphasizing the regional significance of the
waterbirds and their habitats with the basin.
 Hold occasional meetings of protected areas staff and waterbird specialists for training or
scientific purposes.
Next steps:
Assess interest and priorities of the three range countries for this task force.
Hold a small meeting of representatives of the three countries, the Partnership secretariat, and
other partners active in the region -- total of 6-8 people --to develop TOR and plan for initial
activities of the Task Force.
Other task force meetings could happen in conjunction with Meetings of the Partners for EAAFP,
or within the Amur-Heilong Basin.
Action required by Partners:

To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.

To consider the proposal that the Secretariat further explore ways in which the EAAFP
could help the Amur-Heilong Task Force relevant to the EAAFP objectives.
Page 39 of 62
Document 4.3.3
Report on Activities Related to the DIPA (Dauria International Protected Area)
Briefing notes provided by EAAFP Secretariat
The Daurian steppes region, straddling three international borders, contains vitally important lake
and swamp habitats (such as Torey Lakes) for large numbers of waterbird species and is a vital
part of the inland migration path of EAAF for shorebirds, cranes, Anatidae and others. Based on
suggestions from MoP5, the Secretariat supported a small training program in the DIPA area
from July to October 2011, via a small grant.
Senior trainer was Dr. Oleg Goroshko (Deputy Director for research work in Daursky NR, Russia),
and the trainer-assistant was Svetlana Balzhimayeva. Four young research staff of the DIPA, 3
university students and 4 rangers interesting watching waterbirds and helping in monitoring of
waterbirds in DIPA joined the field training.
Dr. Oleg organized 3 field trainings for DIPA research staff:
1. In Dalai Lake NR (China) during 21-28 July.
Participants: Svetlana Balzhimayeva, Liu Songtao, Bao Ler, Urtnasan, Sergey Motorin,
Oleg Goroshko.
2. In Mongol-daguur NR (Mongolia) during 19-29 August.
Participants: Svetlana Balzhimayeva, Urtnasan, Bator Rigzinov, Oleg Goroshko.
3. In Daursky NR (Russia) during 5-13 September.
Participants: Svetlana Balzhimayeva, Sergey Motorin, Bator Rigzinov, Sergey Sharkov,
Oleg Goroshko.
He also organized 3 field trainings for all 3 students of the Transbaikal University and one special
training for Artiom Komarov:
1. During 2-12 August (for all 3 students);
2. During 15-24 September (for all 3 students);
3. From 27 September to 8 October (for all 3 students);
4. During 10-28 October (special training for Artiom Komarov).
Full report from Dr. Oleg Goroshko (Attachment 4.3.3) is available at the MoP6 page:
http://www.eaaflyway.net/6th-meeting.php
Action required by Partners:
1. To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.
2. To consider the proposal that the Secretariat further explore ways in which the EAAFP could
help meet needs of the Dauria International Protected Area relevant to the EAAFP objectives.
Page 40 of 62
Document 4.3.4
4.3.4 Monitoring activities by Partners: opportunity for report and discussion
Briefing notes provided by EAAFP Secretariat
This agenda item provides an opportunity for Partners to report on their own monitoring activities.
Partners are asked to focus on activities that have flyway-wide or regional implications. Time
allocated to this item will be at the discretion of the Meeting chairperson.
Action required by Partners:

To review any reports and define and schedule any action arising.
Page 41 of 62
4.4 Objective 4: Build capacity to manage waterbirds and their habitats
Explanatory notes:
Separate explanatory notes and action points have been inserted in each component paper.
List of component papers (see following pages):
4.4.1
AusAID project “Wetland Management Guidelines” with SFA, China
Page 42 of 62
Document 4.4.1
4.4.1 AusAID project “Wetland Management Guidelines” with SFA, China
Briefing to be provided by Wetlands International (Doug Watkins)
Action required by Partners:

To review any reports and define and schedule any action arising.
Page 43 of 62
4.5 Objective 5: Develop flyway-wide approaches to enhance the conservation status of
migratory waterbirds
Explanatory notes:
Separate explanatory notes and action points have been inserted in each component paper.
List of component papers (see following pages):
4.5.1
Report by Task Force 4: Activities of the Spoon-billed Sandpiper Task Force
4.5.2
Rio Tinto-BirdLife International-Wetland International Flyway Project
4.5.3
IUCN World Conservation Congress in Jeju, Korea
Page 44 of 62
Document 4.5.1
4.5.1 Report by Task Force 4. Activities of the Spoon-billed Sandpiper Task Force
Task force report presented by Christoph Zöckler & Evgeny Syroechkovskiy
Although last year’s five summer expeditions in Chukotka and Kamchatka found one new
breeding site with at least three territories of Spoon-billed sandpipers and the first analyses from
the core breeding area seem to indicate that the population in Meinopyl’gino has not further
declined, there is still huge concern over the lack of any breeding confirmation from the entire
Northern breeding range in 2011 (for more details see SBS Task Force newsletter No.6, 2011).
At present we can only account for less than 40 breeding territories, but hope that there are still
100 breeding pairs in total. Yet, the situation is still extremely fragile and the population with little
recruitment in recent years is ageing and could crash any moment. These prospects were crucial
in deciding to start the conservation breeding programme already in 2011. The initiative is a joint
effort by WWT, RSPB, BTO, Birds Russia, ArcCona and the SBS Task Force. After a long and
cumbersome period of organising permits and logistics a team of WWT and Birds Russia
scientists travelled to Meinopyl’gino in the core breeding area in Chukotka to collect at least 20
eggs from the wild and 18 chicks hatched successfully in captivity. At least in one case a pair
relayed a second clutch and chicks have been observed later in July nearby. The chicks were
reared in outdoor aviaries in Anadyr and 13 birds survived the summer and quarantine in
Moscow. In November they were transported to Slimbridge in the UK for their final destination.
This is the first cohort for rearing a backup population in captivity for later release in case all our
efforts to save the wild birds might fail (see also SBS newsletter No 7, 2012).
At the moment, and thanks to the huge support from donations all over Europe, but in particular
from Sweden and Germany, it looks like we have made huge progress in addressing some of the
most acute conservation problems for the species, the hunting and trapping. In addition BirdLife
International’s Champion Programme generated support for our Burmese partner BANCA to
augment crucial actions on the ground. Mitigation work has been carried out in Myanmar and
Bangladesh. Both countries together host more than 80% of the total wintering population and it
is crucial to stop any hunting activities with immediate effect. Fortunately, in Myanmar our partner
BANCA met an unexpected willingness to comply with the demands to stop the hunting in the
Gulf of Martaban and address conservation needs. Local hunters in all visited villages signed
agreements and accepted various forms of livelihood support offered by BANCA in exchange. In
addition the entire community was involved, so longer term sustainable solutions can be
achieved. A BBC Wildlife Fund is helping to build on first efforts and sustain the mitigation work
and ultimately protect the entire area as a hunting free zone and develop the Gulf of Martaban to
become potentially Myanmar’s second Ramsar site. Although the situation in Bangladesh is more
severe and difficult with much more active hunters and fewer willing to collaborate, our partner
Bangladesh Bird Club with support of many donations from primarily private donors, managed to
have the first 14 hunters to sign agreements in Sonadia island at the east coast in presence of
the Sub-district Executive Officer, other local leaders, shorebird hunters and Coordinator of
Bangladesh SbS Conservation Project. The SbS Conservation project, a partnership of several
NGOs active in conservation in the country also established Village Conservation Groups (VCG),
who will oversee the progress made, identify problems and monitor the success of the mitigation
process. A grant from the US Fish and Wildlife Service will be able to build on these activities in
the coming year.
All these initiatives might just come in time for the species, but huge development projects in
Sonadia, Bangladesh and most disturbingly reclamation projects to develop the Chinese and
Korean coastline at a massive scale continue to threaten the species fragile web of stepping
stones along its flyway path from its Siberian breeding grounds to wintering areas in Myanmar,
Bangladesh, Thailand and southern China.
Page 45 of 62
Document 4.5.1
In December 2010 the Spoon-billed sandpiper Recovery Team, established in 2004 from
members of the range countries formed a Task Force (SBS TF) under the East Asian
Australasian Flyway Partnership (EAAFP).They all provide substantial and most welcome
support to help saving the species from immanent extinction.
Hope from the non-breeding grounds
News from spring 2011 in Nan Thar, one of the most important wintering areas in Myanmar, has
raised new hope. Our local partner, reported the discovery of two birds in breeding plumage on
April 27. The birds were in a group of 12 Spoon-billed Sandpiper, along with other waders. This is
certainly the first observation of breeding plumaged birds in Myanmar and usually adult birds
should have left by this time. But much more special about this observation is the fact that there
were apparently still ten birds in the non-breeding plumage, most likely immature birds from last
year! It suggests that is has been a successful breeding season in 2010, somewhere still
unknown. This winter we observed with 25 a slight increase of SBS again on Nan Thar and
together with good numbers in the main wintering areas in the Gulf of Martaban and higher
fiugres for Ahlat at the Salween River mouth, we might see already the positive effects of the
hunting mitigation. Hopefully the juvenile birds will survive their first summer and hopefully return
in the second summer to replenish the diminishing breeding population. But where have these
birds bred? Are there more breeding sites to discover in Northern Kamchatka?
Very encouraging news came also this autumn from autumn stop over sites in China. Our
partners from the Shanghai Birdwatching Society reported maximum numbers of 103 birds at two
distinct high tide roosts in Rudong District along the Chinese coast north of Shanghai. One of
which was newly discovered, while surveying for new areas using a grant from the EAAFP. Large
flocks in double figure numbers were observed throughout late August until November pointing to
the significance of the crucial stop over sites. A photo analysis of moulting birds might reveal the
age and turnover rate and the total number of the population migrating through. The threats of
further reclamations are looming over these sites and urgent action is needed to protect these
precious sites along the flyway.
Acknowledgements
There have been very many supporters and donors and we are very grateful to all of them. In
particular we like to thank BirdLife International for their continued support through its Preventing
Extinction Programm, the RSPB , who stepped up to support mainly the Russian partner Birds
Russia in coordinating the Task Force and the conservation breeding programme, WWT who
takes care and huge risks in the conservation breeding programme, the Zoological Society for
species and population protection (ZGAP), the Packard Foundation, the Lighthouse Foundation,
the German Manfred-Hermsen-Stiftung and last not least the EAAFP for its continuous
commitment to the protection of Spoon-billed sandpiper, and many others
For more info, see http://www.eaaflyway.net/spoon-billed-sandpiper.php
Action required by Partners:

To review the report and define and schedule any action arising.

To consider how the Partners and Secretariat support the task force for the Spoonbilled Sandpiper.
Page 46 of 62
Document 4.5.2
4.5.2 Rio Tinto - BirdLife International - Wetlands International Flyway Project
Report back from Session C presented by Rio Tinto, BI, and WI
Action required by Partners:
For information.
Document 4.5.3
4.5.3 IUCN World Conservation Congress in Jeju, Korea
Briefing notes from R.O.Korea (Jin-han Kim, National Institute for Biological Resources)
Motion Title: International Cooperation for Migratory Birds Census
This motion will be submitted to IUCN World Conservation Congress, Jeju 2012 as one of
resolutions.
Develop and strengthen the International Cooperation for Migratory Birds Census to promote
public participation to monitor the distribution and populations of waterbirds and status of
wetlands.
The motion covers all the flyways, at global scale. Information from the migratory birds
census contributes to the identification and monitoring of wetlands of international and
national importance.
It also assists decision-makers in designating wetlands to the Convention on Wetlands
(Ramsar, Iran 1971), protecting threatened species and assessing values of wetlands.




1.
-
Schedule
Motions must be submitted by 9 May 2012 by sending an email with the motion attached.
Consultants and review panels are invited to the development of draft.
Prior to submission, draft motion will be discussed at MOP 5 or other relevant meetings.
-
Workshop during WCC
Proposal of holding workshop was accepted by IUCN
Detailed program needs to be developed.
2.
3.
Synergy
- ESABII, AP-BON, EAAFP
- Participants (During WCC, At workshop)
4.
-
Post WCC
The platform of AWC/Migratory Birds Census
Action required by Partners:
To support the motion which will be submitted in May.
Page 47 of 62
Document 4.6
4.6 Moving forward on Flyway Partnership activities: Reports from break-out sessions
Explanatory notes:
These reports will be provided to the Meeting after the small group (break-out) sessions have
concluded.
It is important that digital versions of each report be provided to the Secretariat.
Action required by Partners:

To review the reports and define and schedule any actions arising.
Page 48 of 62
Document 5.1
5.1 Secretariat’s Work Plan for 2012
Report provided by the EAAFP Secretariat
The Secretariat is not a funding source for conservational activities nor an independent
organization for project managements; it mainly supports and encourages the international
cooperation BASED ON ACTIONS raised during the meeting of Partners. Unless special funds
are contributed by Partners or other donors, the Secretariat in 2012 expects to have only a
modest budget (about USD 86,000 per year: see below) for conducting Partnership Activities.
This includes the cost of international travels, and available budgets for activities are limited.
Partners are encouraged to contribute additional resources for priority EAAFP activities.
Since the Chief Executive is not recruited until the MoP6, the basic work plan of the Secretariat
follows the previous year’s one which focuses on Actions raised during MoP5 [see Doc 2.1]. The
detailed work plans will be updated and guided by a new Chief Executive after his/her recruitment.
Action required by Partners:

To review the report and adopt the proposal and/or define and schedule any other
action arising.
Document 5.2
5.2 Secretariat’s Budget for 2012
Report provided by the Finance Officer (Seung-joo Hyun) of the EAAFP Secretariat
Under the Memorandum of Understanding between the EAAF Partnership and the Ministry of
Environment of the Republic of Korea, for hosting of the EAAFP Secretariat (signed in May 2009),
the host country and host city (Incheon) committed to providing financial support for the
Secretariat from May 2009 to May 2014 (5 years). Specifically, Incheon City Government
committed to provide KRW 509 million each year for operational costs and Partnership activities
as well as to cover the costs of providing an apartment for the Chief Executive and securing an
office.
The only budgetary details specified in the MoU are totals for six broad categories of expenditure.
Based on its early experience and anticipated activities in 2012, and recognising that far less was
needed for equipment and related establishment costs after 2010, the Secretariat presented
a revised breakdown between these six categories to MoP4. This was approved by the Partners
including the host country.
Although the Secretariat should return the un-used funds (203 million) to ICG in 2009, the
Secretariat is no more expected to return it’s un-used fund to ICG since 2010.
A new budget for 2012 calendar/financial year is presented here to the Partners for approval,
keeping within the same total of KRW 509 million. It takes into account:
Page 49 of 62
Document 5.2








further operating experience and actual costs during 2011.
anticipated increases in personnel costs paid to the government, in office rental (15%)
and vehicle rental and other operating costs
purchase of a new laptop computer (depends on a new Chief Executive); update
operating systems for office computers (Windows 7), network attached storage for backup,
word processing program for local administrative communication on online and Office
2010 suite for all Secretariat computers.
purchase of a vehicle (second-handed?) for office to save the cost of rental
preparation of expected meetings in 2012
saving budgets for MoP7 which may cost more than usual MoPs in Asian countries do
payments to staff retirement (termination) funds
Increase in personnel expenditure due to relocation cost of new Chief Executive of the
Secretariat
MoU category
A
B
C
D
KRW 1000
KRW 1000
KRW 1000
KRW 1000
Original MoU
Approved
for 2011
Expenditures
in 2011
Proposed
for 2012
Personnel
(including associated costs)
250,000
259,000
201,837
Office equipment
(including vehicle rental)
50,000
40,000
23,143
Operational expenses of
the Secretariat (domestic)
50,000
34,000
29,519
Partnership Activities
(including overseas travel)
100,000
100,000
139,974
Securing Office Space
(rental fee plus associated
costs)
59,000
73,000
70,260
Totals
509,000
509,000
464,733
266,000
(USD 236,634)
39,000
(USD 34,694)
33,000
(USD 29,357)
100,000
(USD 88,960)
71,000
(USD 63,162)
509,000
(USD 452,807)
Note that domestic travel costs are included under “Operational expenses for the
Secretariat” and international travel costs are included under “Partnership Activities”.
Also the proposed 2012 budget assumes that provisions of the MoU are fully met.
Conversion to US Dollars was at the internet (OANDA) rate dated March 7, 2012.
Action required by Partners:

To consider and adopt the proposed budget for Secretariat operation for the fiscal
year 2012.

To request the host country to officially communicate this result to the host city.
Page 50 of 62
Document 7.1
7.1 Announcement of MoP7 in Alaska, USA
Briefing notes provided by the USFWS (Doug Alcorn)
Refer the Attachment 7.1 at the end of this agenda document.
[Host Letter from US Department of the Interior (Fish and Wildlife Service)]
Attachment 7.1 is also available at http://www.eaaflyway.net/6th-meeting.php
Action required by Partners:

To read the report – for information only.
Page 51 of 62
Document 8.1
8.1 Next Chair and Vice-Chair of Partnership (from June 2013)
Briefing notes provided by the EAAFP Secretariat
The Partnership operates with a Chair and a Vice-Chair and their terms are to be two years
(Partnership Document, Paragraph 9: http://www.eaaflyway.net/partnershipdocument.php).
As adopted at MoP5 in December 2010, the current Chair and Vice-Chair started terms on 12
June 2011. The next meeting of Partners (MoP7) will be held in June 2013 in Alaska.
Therefore, the Partners should consider whether to appoint the next Chair and Vice-Chair at
MoP6 to prepare the transfer in advance or at MoP7 (June 2013) to avoid vacuum of leadership.
The history of appointments is as follows:

At the 1st Meeting of Partners in November 2006, Australia was appointed as Chair
and Republic of Korea as Vice-Chair (MoP1 report item 7:
http://www.eaaflyway.net/1stmeeting.php).

No nominations were received for these positions at the 3rd Meeting of Partners in
November 2008 and nominations were to be sought inter-sessionally (MoP3 report
items 106-109: http://www.eaaflyway.net/3rd-meeting.php).

Nominations were sought by the Chair in January 2009 and the Interim Secretariat
advised the Partners on 11 June 2009 that Republic of Korea had been appointed as
Chair and Japan as Vice Chair.

Cambodia was appointed as Chair and China as Vice-Chair at MoP5.
Two other aspects should be considered:

Though not specified in the Partnership Document, the Partners agreed at MoP1 (report
item 6) that the Partnership should be chaired by a Government Partner.

It was agreed (in the same item) that replacement of the Vice-Chair would not coincide
with replacement of the Chair, presumably to provide some continuity of oversight.
However, this has not been achieved to date because replacements and terms have
coincided. (Note also that the first pair of appointments lasted 2.5 years).
Action required by Partners:

To acknowledge the contributions to date of the present Chair and Vice-Chair.

To define the timing of decisions about appointing the next Chair and Vice-Chair and in
doing this decide how to manage the replacements so they do not coincide.

To conduct an election of next Chair and Vice-Chair if that shall occur at MoP6 and
clarify the dates and process for handover from the incumbents.
Page 52 of 62
Document 8.1
Intervals between MoPs and Terms of Service of Management Committee
At the 1st meeting of Partners, Partners agreed to hold Meetings of the Partners annually, at least
for the first five years of the Partnership (http://www.eaaflyway.net/1stmeeting.php).
The agenda document for the MoP5 in 2010 indicated;




Meetings of Partners give invigoration to the Partnership’s work and thus should be held
relatively often rather than rarely.
New Partners are being gained and may wish to participate in a Meeting not too long
after joining EAAFP.
Some potential new Partners have expressed concern about their financial and
administrative burden if they are requested to attend Meetings near-annually.
While recognising the impetus given to the Partnership by holding two Meetings in 2010,
this has placed a significant burden on the Secretariat. (Note that no meeting was held in
2009.)
Though the spacing of about 15 months between MoPs might be convenient, but there was no
further discussion about the spacing (http://www.eaaflyway.net/documents/mop/mop5-reportdraft.pdf).
Along with the Chair’s term, the ‘Terms of Reference for the Secretariat’s Management
Committee for the Flyway Partnership’ adopted at MoP5 indicates;

Members will normally serve for two MoP cycles, noting that the interval between MoPs
is not necessarily regular and is not necessarily one year.
Since the term of service of MC is not Two years, there is no need to appoint new MC members
unlike Chair and Vice-Chair in MoP6. However, this means that the MC members should serve
more than 30 months (in case of 15 months spacing between MoP).
Action required by Partners:

To read the report – for information only.

To discuss and determine the optimal guideline for spacing the Meeting of Partners of
EAAFP.
Page 53 of 62
Page 54 of 62
Page 55 of 62
Page 56 of 62
Page 57 of 62
Page 58 of 62
Additional documents provided after the first posting
Document 4.5.4
4.5.4 Potential cooperation with the working group of Arctic Council - Conservation of Arctic
Flora and Fauna, Russia
To be presented by Russia
Action required by Partners:

To review the report and adopt the proposal and/or define and schedule any other
action arising.
Document 5.3
5.3 Terms of Reference for CEPA Working Group
TOR prepared by CEPA Working Group
According to the Action 28 raised during MoP5 (Agenda 3.6), the CEPA Working Group prepared
a draft of Terms of Reference for CEPA Working Group. This draft of TOR needs to be endorsed
by the Partners.
East Asian – Australasian Flyway Partnership
Communication, Education, Participation and Awareness Working Group
Terms of Reference
Background
At the 1st Meeting of Partners (MOP) to the East Asian-Australasian Flyway Partnership (EAAFP) in
2006, the importance of Communication, Education, Participation and Awareness (CEPA) was
recognized and a proposal was put forward to establish a CEPA Working Group to implement Objective
2 of the Implementation Strategy (See MoP1 Report item 109). However, the formation of this WG was
postponed because of the need to first develop a Terms of Reference for the WG and to consider their
resource needs. In the interim, a special task force was formed to develop a Communication Strategy for
the Partnership (http://www.eaaflyway.net/documents/Communication-Strategy.pdf) which was
disbanded at MOP2 (2007) after the Communication Strategy was completed.
Page 59 of 62
Document 5.3
During the EAAFP MOP5 in Siem Reap, Cambodia (2010), there was renewed interest to form a
CEPA WG (See MoP5 Report item 102). Discussions were held on how such a group would support the
EAAFP Partners and Secretariat to raise greater awareness of the aims and activities of the EAAFP and
its Partners, to a broad audience that would include decision makers, the private sector, general public,
local communities living in and around wetland sites, and students. The WG would also:
 Make available wetland CEPA resource material, especially those relating to migratory waterbirds and
their habitats;
 Promote greater awareness of the EAAFP and its work;
 Improve communication within the EAAF Partnership, and;
 Share expertise in the EAAF Partnership.
Aim
To assist the EAAF Partnership in achieving Objective 2 of the EAAF Implementation Strategy to
‘Enhance communication, education and public awareness of the values of migratory waterbirds and
their habitats’.
Alignment with the EAAF Implementation Strategy
The CEPA Working Group will work to support the EAAFP Partners and Secretariat to carry out activities
to achieve Objective 2 of the EAAF Implementation Strategy 2007-11. Under this Objective are two
‘Outcomes’, each with a number of strategic projects identified to achieve the Outcomes. These
Outcomes and sub-outcomes are:
Outcome 5: There is a high level of awareness and recognition of the ecological, social and economic
values of migratory waterbirds and Network sites.
 5.1. A Flyway -wide Community Awareness and Education program is developed and provides
ongoing guidance to the awareness and communication activities of the Flyway Partnership.
 5.2. A review of communication and awareness resources is conducted.
 5.3. National Partnerships are encouraged to develop CEPA Plans that complement the
Flyway partnership-wide CEPA Plan.
 5.4. A range of awareness and communication activities are implemented which are consistent
with the Communication and Public Awareness Plan.
Outcome 6: There is a broad level of recognition of the activities and achievements of the Flyway
Partnership.
 6.1. Activities promoting the Partnership are implemented which are consistent with the
Communication and Public Awareness Plan.
Page 60 of 62
Document 5.3
Alignment with the work of the EAAF Secretariat
The CEPA Working Group should align its work with that of the EAAFP Secretariat in the context that the
Secretariat follows a work plan based on the Partnership’s Implementation Strategy and decisions of the
Meetings of Partners, including CEPA-related actions.
Coordination
The Working Group will look for synergies and cooperate with wetland CEPA networks, groups, centres
and experts within and beyond the EAAF. This would help the Working Group make more efficient use of
scarce resources and to build on experience and tools already that are already available. Such
collaborators would include:
 Network of Ramsar CEPA Government and NGO Focal Points;
http://www.ramsar.org/cda/en/ramsar-activities-cepa/main/ramsar/1-63-69_4000_0__
 Wetland Link International – Asia network;
http://www.wli-asia.org/ and http://www.wwt.org.uk/wli
 Visitor centres at important wetland sites across the EAAF which are carrying out CEPA programs
targeting the local or regional communities.
Through cross-referencing to these collaborators, the Working Group shall endeavour to maintain focus
on the conservation of migratory waterbirds and the sustainable management of their key habitats
through cooperation with the local community. This is so as to ensure the Partnership is adding value to
and not duplicating work on wetlands and nature being conducted by other organisations.
Geographic Scope
The activities of the CEPA Working Group will cover the East Asian – Australasian Flyway geographic
region but where appropriate, will seek opportunities for cooperation with relevant organizations and
individuals in other regions.
Membership
The membership is open to representatives of the EAAF Partnership, interested government agencies,
international organisations, relevant experts in the EAAF and staff of the EAAFP Secretariat who are
responsible for CEPA-related tasks.
Administrative arrangements
The CEPA Working Group will have a Chair designated by the members of the Working Group. The term
of the Chair shall be 2-years with the possibility of extension for a second term if supported by the
Working Group. The Working Group will report to the Partnership, through the Chair and/or the
Secretariat’s Chief Executive (whichever is appropriate in each case).
Page 61 of 62
Document 5.3
Communication and Meetings
The Working Group will conduct its business mainly by electronic means, such as by email. In-person
meetings will be open but only be held when funding is available.
 The Chair in consultation with representatives will determine the timing and location of meetings.
 The EAAFP Secretariat is responsible for arranging logistical support for face-to face meetings and
hosting by an EAAFP Partner will be encouraged.
Expenses
The majority of the activities of the Working Group will be carried out voluntarily by its members. In
selected cases where funding is needed, then sponsors will have to be found to cover the cost of the
work. In most cases, Working Group members will be expected to cover their own costs to attend
meetings. The Chair of the CEPA Working Group will keep the EAAFP Secretariat updated about its
financial affairs.
Action required by Partners:

To consider and adopt the proposal and/or define and schedule any other action arising.
Page 62 of 62