Industrial pollution in the Komsomolsky, Solnechny, and Amursky regions, and in the city of Khabarovsk and its Table 3.1 suburbs, is excessive. Atmospheric pollution has been increas- Protected areas in Khabarovsk Krai ing for decades, with large quantities of methyl mercaptan in Amursk, formaldehyde, sulfur dioxide, phenols, lead, and Type and name Size (ha) Raion Established benzopyrene in Khabarovsk and Komsomolsk-on-Amur, and Zapovedniks dust prevalent in Solnechny, Urgal, Chegdomyn, Komso- molsk-on-Amur, and Khabarovsk. Dzhugdzhursky 860,000 Ayano-Maysky 1990 Between 1990 and 1999, industries in Komsomolsky and Bureinsky 359,000 Verkhne-Bureinsky 1987 Amursky Raions were the worst polluters of the Amur River. Botchinsky 267,400 Sovetsko-Gavansky 1994 High concentrations of heavy metals, copper (38–49 mpc), Bolonsky 103,600 Amursky, Nanaisky 1997 KHABAROVSK zinc (22 mpc), and chloroprene (2 mpc) were found. Indus- trial and agricultural facilities that treat 40 percent or less of Komsomolsky 61,200 Komsomolsky 1963 their wastewater (some treat none) create a water defi cit for Bolshekhekhtsirsky 44,900 Khabarovsky 1963 people and industry, despite the seeming abundance of water. The problem is exacerbated because of: Federal Zakazniks Ⅲ Pollution and low water levels in smaller rivers, particular- Badzhalsky 275,000 Solnechny 1973 ly near industrial centers (e.g., Solnechny and the Silinka River, where heavy metal levels exceed 130 mpc). Oldzhikhansky 159,700 Poliny Osipenko 1969 Ⅲ A loss of soil fertility. Tumninsky 143,100 Vaninsky 1967 Ⅲ Fires and logging, which impair the forests. Udylsky 100,400 Ulchsky 1988 Ⅲ Intensive development and quarrying of mineral resourc- Khekhtsirsky 56,000 Khabarovsky 1959 es, primarily construction materials. Ⅲ A lack of or inadequate buffer zones. Regional Zakazniks Kava 566,000 Okhotsky 1988 Protected area system Shantarsky 515,500 Tuguro-Chumikansky 1997 s. shlotgauer, a. antonov, m. kryukova, s. kramnaya, Kharpinsky 326,700 Solnechny 1979 b. voronov, v. sapaev—Protected areas (PAs) in Khabarovsk Krai are distributed quite unevenly. In the most Ulya 240,000 Okhotsky 1986 developed southern half there is a well-developed network; in Dublikansky 131,500 Verkhne-Bureinsky 1984 the northern part, where ecosystems are extremely fragile and Vana 105,000 Tuguro-Chumikansky 1989 sensitive to disturbance, PA coverage is inadequate. This is Bobrovy 89,000 1969 particularly true in the remote Okhotsky and Ayano-Maisky Raions. The krai’s protected areas, as of January 1, 1999, are Simminsky 80,000 Amursky, Nanaisky 1976 listed in table 3.1. The krai has also ratifi ed fi fty-two krai- Birsky 53,600 Vyazemsky 1981 status natural monuments. The overall portion of protected Ozyorny 37,500 Okhotsky 1988 lands in the krai should reach 9.4 percent by 2005, up from Orlik 3,800 Nikolaevsky 1974 the present 5.8 percent. But the work of organizing, operat- ing, and forming protected areas needs to be accelerated Source: Khabarovsk Committee on Environmental Protection, 1999. because important ecosystems continue to be destroyed at an alarming rate. Current environmental protection efforts to ensure full or even partial conservation of valuable territorial systems are inadequate. Biodiversity indicators and the presence of typical zonal occasionally. Most of these populations are at the peripheries and regional communities were considered when most of the of their ranges and are seldom in their optimal habitat. One existing preserves were established, ensuring a fairly good can conclude, therefore, that the existing regional PAs do not representation at the species level. Nonetheless, 55 percent ensure the preservation of the entire gene pool of rare species. of the 212 rare species of vascular plants (iucn categories I, Many of the existing PAs have been poorly planned. II, and III) are not included in the existing PA system. Of Several lack buffer zones, ecological corridors, and water- fi fty species of vertebrate land animals listed in the iucn, protection zones that would link them together to provide ussr, and Russian Red Data Books, only thirty-two are long-term ecological viability. For example, Botchinsky included in the protected areas of the krai, although some of Zapovednik on the coast of the Tatar Strait has no outlet to the remaining eighteen species (or 36 percent) can be found the sea. The small size of the zapovedniks and the proximity Khabarovsk Krai Ⅲ 155 Newell, J. 2004. The Russian Far East: A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. McKinleyville, CA: Daniel & Daniel. 466 pages of some of them to large industrial centers make them par- wolverine, and Eurasian lynx in the Sikhote-Alin region. ticularly vulnerable to fi res, poaching, and pollution. The With its preserved ecosystems of spruce-fi r forests and mixed practice of residual fi nancing, which had gained a foothold forests with Korean pine and broadleaved species, and a large during the economic crisis, has resulted in the absence of staff variety of animal and plant species sporadically distributed scientists and enforcement services in some of the reserves and living on the fringes of their habitat, this territory is (Dzhugdzhursky, Botchinsky, Bolonsky). This has also led to biogeographically interesting. The area is susceptible to fi res, the breakdown in ecosystem monitoring. so the most important immediate objectives should include a fi re prevention and response system and continuous moni- Zapovedniks. There are six zapovedniks (strict nature reserves) toring of the ecosystems. The insuffi cient staff, absence of in the krai, four of which are described here. scientifi c researchers, and inadequate fi nancing make these Bolonsky. This zapovednik, situated in the lower reaches goals unattainable at present. KHABAROVSK of the Kharpi, Selgon, and Simmi Rivers in the Bolon Lake Bureinsky. This zapovednik has 479 species of vascular basin, is on the boundary of two administrative raions, the plants, many of them rare. Among rare animals are the goral Amur and the Nanai. The reserve also includes the south- (Nemorhaedus goral ) and peregrine falcon. In existence for western part of the lake. The preserve is remarkable because more than a decade, Bureinsky Zapovednik has fully justifi ed it includes Bolon Lake, which has the largest concentration of its creation and has proven the validity of its selection. Situat- marsh and meadow habitat in the Amur region. This habitat ed in a bend formed by the Ezop, Dusse-Alin, and Bureinsky provides extensive nesting grounds for aquatic and wetland ranges, the reserve incorporates ecological characteristics of birds and feeding grounds for fi sh of the Amur ichthyologi- each, uniting them territorially and highlighting their genetic cal complex. In summer, Amur moose (Alces alces cameloides) commonality. The zapovednik acts as a landscape-ecological and Manchurian wapiti (Cervus elaphus xanthopygus) frequent nucleus, linking the Selemdzha, Amgun, and Bureya River the area. Because the lake is on a major fl yway, the diversity basins while preserving its own natural characteristics. From of bird species is very high. a biogeographical viewpoint, the zapovednik protects cor- The most promising scientifi c research activity in the ridors that permit gene fl ow among the animal populations. preserve is the study of wetland ecosystems, the adaptation of The territory ought to be recommended as a biosphere pre- animals and plants to the environmental conditions, and the serve. The zapovednik is currently staffed with enforcement anthropogenic effects on the natural complexes. Rare and en- personnel and a minimal number of scientifi c employees. dangered species of plants and animals should be monitored Dzhugdzhursky. There are more than four hundred spe- and strategic measures developed to protect them. Specifi c cies of vascular plants in this zapovednik, of which twenty endangered species to be studied and protected include plants are rare or endangered and have been listed in Red Data such as Japanese snake-mouth orchid (Pogonia japonica), tall Books at various levels. Biodiversity is high because of the devil’s club (Oplopanax elatus), species of iris (Iris), water highly diverse climate and complex relief. Before the reserve chestnut (Trapa natans ), and various nesting birds, such as was established, the area was mined, hunted on, fi shed, and Oriental white stork, black stork (Ciconia nigra), whooper logged so the entire region was damaged and the ecosystem swan (Cygnus cygnus), mandarin duck (Aix galericulata), disrupted because of the extreme fragility of the landscape. osprey (Pandion haliaeetus), Oriental honey-buzzard (Pernis The natural structure and function of the territory, and its ptilorhynchus), golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), peregrine genetic interconnections and integrity have been altered. To falcon (Falco peregrinus), red-crowned crane (Grus japonen- a great extent, the old-growth forests have been destroyed. sis), and hooded crane (G. monacha). The success of the The zapovednik has no staff, no scientists, and no funds to zapovednik depends primarily on establishing an ornithologi- construct an offi ce or living quarters. Currently the reserve cal station to research this still poorly explored territory. At cannot ensure the preservation of the gene pool of the locally present, staffi ng is inadequate, and scientifi c studies so far are rare species of plants and animals. on hold. Botchinsky. This zapovednik, situated on the very south- Protected area needs. Protected areas