DOCSLIB.ORG

Implementation of the Idea of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia As a System of Protected Areas in the European North

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Implementation of the Idea of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia As a System of Protected Areas in the European North Transactions of the Karelian Research Centre of the Труды Карельского научного центра РАН Russian Academy of Sciences № 7. 2021. С. 6–15 No. 7. 2021. P. 6–15 DOI: 10.17076/them1471 УДК 502 (1–751.1) (470.1/.2) IMPLEMENTATION OF THE IDEA OF THE GREEN BELT OF FENNOSCANDIA AS A SYSTEM OF PROTECTED AREAS IN THE EUROPEAN NORTH O. N. Bakhmet1, A. M. Kryshen1, E. A. Borovichev2, A. N. Gromtsev1, A. V. Kravchenko1, O. L. Kuznetsov1, A. F. Titov1, O. V. Petrova2, V. A. Masloboev2 1 Karelian Research Centre, Russian Academy of Sciences, Petrozavodsk, Russia 2 Kola Science Centre, Russian Academy of Sciences, Apatity, Russia The Green Belt of Fennoscandia (GBF) is the Russian-Finnish-Norwegian border region with forest areas and mire massifs almost unaffected by human activity. In the early 1990s, the concept of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia was put forward as a result of joint work of researchers and experts in Fennoscandia and discussion of sustainable development principles for border regions. Its main aim was to have public interests united in the fields of economic development and nature conservation. The cores of the GBF are protec- ted areas (PAs), of federal and regional status, and ecologically connected with the Pan- European Ecological Network (Natura 2000) as well as with Norwegian PAs. K e y w o r d s: Fennoscandia; Green Belt; protected areas; border regions; cooperation; convergence of research approaches; PA network. O. Н. Бахмет, A. M. Крышень, E. A. Боровичев, A. Н. Громцев, A. В. Кравченко, O. Л. Кузнецов, A. Ф. Титов, O. В. Петрова, В. A. ­Маслобоев. РАЗВИТИЕ КОНЦЕПЦИИ ЗЕЛЕНОГО ПОЯСА ФЕННОСКАНДИИ – СИСТЕМЫ ОХРАНЯЕМЫХ ПРИРОДНЫХ ТЕРРИТОРИЙ НА ЕВРОПЕЙСКОМ СЕВЕРЕ Зеленый пояс Фенноскандии (ЗПФ) – российско-финляндско-норвежская пригра- ничная территория с фрагментами лесных и болотных массивов, мало затронутых антропогенной деятельностью. В начале 1990-х годов с расширением междуна- родного сотрудничества ученых и специалистов и обсуждения принципов устой- чивого развития приграничных территорий возникла концепция Зеленого пояса Фенноскандии, основная идея которой – сочетание интересов общества в эконо- мическом развитии и сохранение природы. Ключевыми участками ЗПФ являются особо охраняемые природные территории (ООПТ) как федерального, так и регио- нального подчинения, экологически связанные с Пан-Европейской экологической сетью (Natura 2000) и с ООПТ Норвегии. К л ю ч е в ы е с л о в а: Фенноскандия; Зеленый пояс; особо охраняемые природ- ные территории; приграничные территории; сотрудничество; гармонизация науч- но-исследовательских подходов; сеть ООПТ. 6 The Green Belt of Fennoscandia (GBF) stretch- and protection regimes were defined with regard es along the borders between the Russian Fede- to their specific landscapes and environment. ration, Finland and Norway. Unlike adjacent wide Besides, special attention was given to the con- areas heavily transformed by human activities, sistency of the planned parks and reserves with the region boasts relatively intact forest and mire the PAs network on the Finnish side. The work massifs (Fig. 1–2). done can, in fact, be said to be unparalleled, at least in what concerns forest regions in Russia. Establishment of the PA Network Moreover, all the significant research results have been promptly published [Inventory…, 1998–2001; In the 1990s, Russian and Finnish researchers Biotic…, 2003]. noticed than the territory along the national border During the first stage, thirty individual nature remained almost intact, which could be explained objects (many of them with no official protection by the region’s poor accessibility and, partly, by status) were outlined in Russia in the GBF territory. the strict border regime. The idea was put forward They stretched as a narrow strip (20–30 km on ave- to establish a number of large-scale protected rage) along the Russian-Norwegian and Russian- areas (PAs) in close proximity to the border, not Finnish borders. These forest and mire areas were only expanding the Russian PA network but also marked out as being well preserved, owing not connecting it to Finnish parks [Titov et al., 1995]. only to the strict border zone regime in the Soviet As a result, the GBF was created. Unlike the then times but, mainly, to the lack of roads and large discussed politicized idea of the European Green settlements. By 1998, the number of the pro- Belt, the GBF concept was mainly aimed at na- posed areas was reduced to twenty. The number ture conservation. Its main goal was to establish included only existing and planned PAs of fede- and develop the PAs network along the border, ral and regional status. Later on, by 2003, based ensure more efficient management of natural re- on the experience obtained when preparing other sources to preserve the unique natural heritage nominations for PAs, the number of areas suggest- and maintain environmental sustainability. ed for inclusion in GBF on the Russian side was cut The GBF idea has been moving progressively by down to eight. Five of them already had a federal taking concrete steps towards the fulfillment of its PA status (4 strict nature reserves (SNR), 1 na- mission. Since the mid-1990s, a number of re- tional park (NP)), and three had claims for the NP search programmes and projects have been imple- status. Some of them were integrated with Finnish mented. They received support from the European and Norwegian PAs to form several transbound- Union and Finland. With participation of research- ary complexes (Pasvik – Vatsari, Laplandsky Les – ers from KarRC RAS, more than 20 projects for na- Jonn-Nyugoaiv – Urho Kekkonen, Kutsa – Paana- ture inventories and feasibility studies for planned jarvi – Oulanka, Kalevalsky Complex, “Friendship” PAs in the Republic of Karelia were accomplished Park, Ladoga Skerries – Saimaa and Pielinen). in the framework of the Russian-Finnish “Develop- ment Programme on Sustainable Forest Manage- The role of GBF in the development ment and Conservation of Biodiversity in North- of cooperation in border regions West Russia”. Among them: “Biodiversity inventory and study in the Republic of Karelia” (1997–2002); The GBF runs along national borders, which do “Feasibility study and inventory of the Kalevalsky not coincide with ethnic boundaries. It comprises National Park territory” (1997–1998); “Feasibi- areas rich in indigenous peoples’ traditions (suf- lity study and inventory of the Tulos National Park fice it to mention runic traditions and the “Kaleva- territory” (1997–1998); “Feasibility study and in- la” epic). Thus, another priority alongside nature ventory of the Koitajoki National Park territory” conservation, is the identification of ethno-cultural (1997–1998). Simultaneously, studies were carried cores and substantiation of measures to preserve out to develop the network of Karelian PAs within local traditions and languages, as well as historical the TACIS programme. They were also aimed at and cultural monuments. This goal is essential not environmental education and ecotourism deve- only for maintaining the cultural identity, but also for lopment [Antonova et al., 2005; Gromtsev et al., establishing the prerequisites for sustainable eco- 2014, etc.]. nomic development of border regions [Morozova The inventory of biodiversity along the 700-km et al., 2001; Morozova, 2005; Druzhinin, 2006]. As border line between Karelia and Finland, has been said, people are coming to the under- and in an over 400-km border stretch between standing that nature conservation can be economi- the Murmansk Region and Finland and Nor- cally beneficial. National parks and nature reserves way proved the feasibility of establishing several (zakazniks) are to turn into centres of ecotourism large PAs there. Their spatial scope, boundaries, and sources of economic growth in their neighbou- 7 Fig. 1. Green Belt of Fennoscandia along the borders of the Murmansk Region of Russia with Finland and Norway 8 Fig. 2. Green Belt of Fennoscandia along the border between the Republic of Karelia and Finland 9 hoods. Implementation by researchers from KarRC b) intact ecosystems of exceptional nature con- RAS of the international project “IntellGreenBelt” servation value (key areas) were identified; (“Intellectually driven management of natural re- c) the conditions for the survival and disper- sources of the Green Belt of Fennoscandia”) under sal of rare species were studied, and measures the ENPI Cross-border Cooperation programme for their protection were developed [Kravchen- 2012–2014 has contributed to the development ko et al., 2000; Gromtsev, 2001; Biotic…, 2003; of transboundary solutions both for the conserva- Kurhinen et al., 2006; The Red…, 2007; Fedorets tion and reproduction of natural resources and for et al., 2009 etc.]. Besides, the economic potential the invigoration of socio-economic activities of some border areas was studied and the main on both sides of the border (including learning tou- ways for their development were outlined; key ob- rism). Border regions are a potential platform for jects of historical and cultural value were deter- working out and promoting social, humanitarian, mined [Management…, 2008]. One of the essen- environmental projects and technologies on both tial outputs of federal and international projects has sides of the border, thus demonstrating a novel been the formation of research networks, which aspect of a socially oriented innovative scenario can comprehensively (based on the multidisci- of regional and local development. plinary approach) study a specific area
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Late Glacial and Holocene Palaeovegetation And
    theINNISH F ENVIRONmENT 4 | 2010 PALAEOGEOGRAPHYLATE GLACIAL OF EASTERN AND HOLOCENE FENNOSCANDIA PALAEOVEGETATION AND This volume contains a comprehensive synthesis of mire research concerning the NATURE palaeoecology and palaeogeography of Eastern Fennoscandia, i.e. Karelian republic Late Glacial and Holocene and Murmansk region (Kola Peninsula), done during the last 60 years in the Karelian Research Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Petrozavodsk. palaeovegetation and The main aim of publishing the book in English was to bring the knowledge, palaeogeography previously available mainly in Russian only, to the international specialist and scientific community in Nordic countries, in Central Europe, in North America and of Eastern Fennoscandia also elsewhere. The writers of the foreword have had over 20 years of Finnish-Russian cooperation in mire research, giving a good basis for the publishing. The information is important Galina A. Elina, Anatoly D. Lukashov and for the understanding of the present state of boreal and subarctic mires, as well Tatyana K. Yurkovskaya as the impacts of climatic change on nature. This information is needed also in the guidelines of responsible wise use of peat and peatlands. The book also gives a sound basis for the estimation of carbon storages deposited in mires. Hopefully the book will stimulate international cooperation in the studies of mires and climatic change in the whole boreal zone. One important task of this book is increase the understanding that we have to give a chance to mires to continue their role in their palaeoecological task. T E FINNISH ENVIRON H Order Service: Edita Publishing Ltd. P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • KAROL PIASECKI Szczecin the WHITE SEA POMORYE and ITS
    Studia Maritima, vol. XXII (2009) ISSN 0137-3587 KAROL PIASECKI Szczecin THE WHITE SEA POMORYE AND ITS INHABITANTS 1. The White Sea Pomorye owes its name to a group of Slavic settlers1 living mainly on the so-called Pomor Coast, i.e. a fragment of the White Sea coast be- tween the River Kem and Onega (Fig. 1). The present name of the White Sea became widespread at the beginning of the 17th century. Before that, the Slavic inhabitants of its coasts used a name Студеное Море, which means the Cold Sea, whereas on western maps, since the times of the reissue in 1568 of Claudius Ptole- my’s Geography, it appeared as Sinus Grandvicus (Granvicus, Grandvich). The name was taken from Norwegian sailors, for whom initially it probably meant the Western end of the Murmansk Coast.2 1 The term Pomors appeared for the first time in written sources in 1526, when: Поморцы с моря Океана из Кондолакской гyбы лросили вмесmе с лоплянамва yсmройства церкви. It functions quite commonly in the 16th century, both as a name of the inhabitants of the Pomor Coast, as well in the function of a proper name – I. Ul’janov: Strana Pomorja, 1984. From the second half of the 17th century, mainly because of Vasiliy Tatishchev, the author of the monumental Russian History, Pomorye was understood in three meanings: as 1) a territory of the White Sea coast from the Onega to the Kem, 2) the territory of the whole White Sea Coast, 3) the territory of the whole Russian North, including the provinces of Archangelsk, Vologda and Olonets.
    [Show full text]
  • 2Nd Project Group Minutes 15Th-16Th December 2011, Kevo Finland
    MINUTES 15th -16th December 2011 – PROJECT GROUP MEETING Place: Kevo Research Station, Utsjoki Finland Participants: Sergey Prusov and Elena Samoylova – PINRO, Eero Niemelä – FGFRI, Juha-Pekka Vähä and Mikhail Ozerov – UTU-Kevo, Martin Svenning – NINA, Vidar Wennevik – IMR, Bente Christiansen (chair) and Tiia Kalske (referent) – FMFi 1. Open and welcome The chair welcomed the participants and opened the meeting at 8:45, 15.12.2011. 2. Adoption of the agenda Agenda was adopted without changes. 3. Project work plan – short report on implemented actions so far 3.1 Sampling of adult salmon (coastal and estuarine) and juveniles (rivers): status and numbers Coastal, fjord and estuary - sampling of adults in 2011 Russian coastal and estuarine sampling 2011 Sergey Prusov reported on the actions implemented in Russia. Adult fish sampling was conducted from commercial catches in the Terskiy Bereg of Murmansk oblast and in the Zimniy Bereg of Archangelsk oblast. Samples were also collected from fish taken in the research fishery on the Rybachiy Peninsula (early July). Estuarine areas in 2011: adult fish sampling was conducted from commercial catches in the Pechora River and Severnaya Dvina River (August– September). Samples were also collected from fish taken in the research fishery in the Varzuga River. Number of samples: Terskiy Bereg – 500, Zimniy Bereg – 60, River estuaries – 240, Rybachiy – 50. In total: 850 samples. The commercial fishery starts in the White Sea for a couple of weeks period in June, and they resume fishing in late August in Kola Peninsula area of the White Sea. In Archangelsk region fishing at the Zimniy Bereg and Letnjj Bereg is conducted.
    [Show full text]
  • Atlas of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversity of the Russian Arctic
    ATLAS OF MARINE AND COASTAL BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY OF THE RUSSIAN ARCTIC Edited by V.A. Spiridonov, M.V. Gavrilo, E.D. Krasnova and N.G. Nikolaeva Москва 2011 Authors: Belikov S.E., AllRussian Research Institute for Nature Protection (VNIIPriroda) Gavrilo M.V., Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute (AARI) Gorin S.L., Russian Research Institute of Fishery and Oceanography (VNIRO) Ivanov A.N., Geographical Faculty of the M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University (MSU) Krasnova E.D., N.A. Pertsov, White Sea Biological Station of the Moscow State University (WSBS MSU) Editors: Vassily A. Spiridonov, Maria V. Gavrilo, Elena D. Krasnova and Natalia G. Nikolaeva Krasnov Yu.V., Murmansk Marine Biological Institute (MMBI) of the Kola Scientific Centre of Russian Academy of Sciences (MMBI RAS) Kulangiev A.O., КЕ – Association, St. Petersburg Copy editor: E.D. Krasnova Lashmanov F.I., Interdepartmental Ichthyological Commission Makarov A.V., WSBS MSU and P.P. Shirshov Institute of Oceanology of RAS Nikolaeva N.G., Russian Bird Conservation Union (RBCU) Popov A.V., AARI А92 Atlas of marine and coastal biological diversity of the Russian Arctic. — Moscow: WWF Russia, Sergienko L.A., Petrozavodsk State University 2011. — 64 pp. Shroeders M.A., Petrozavodsk State University Spiridonov V.A., WWF Russia and P.P. Shirshov Institute of Oceanology of RAS ISBN 9785990278622 Map compilation counseling: Geographical Faculty of the M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University. Licence of the Federal Agency of Geodesy and Cartography, the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian In this era of climate change and increasing economic activity in the Arctic, this publication, prepared Federation No.
    [Show full text]
  • Pomors' Fishing Activities: History and Up-To-Dateness
    IGNATENKO V.V. “POMORS’ FISHING ACTIVITIES: HISTORY AND UP-TO-DATENESS ON EXAMPLE OF THE KERET RIVER” Karelian Regional Public Organization for support of sustainable development and environment protection “Basin Council of the North Karelian Sea Coast” 2015 All-Russian Public Organization RUSSIAN GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY Founded in 1845 Collection of materials, expeditions and preparation for publishing was done under the support of the All-Russian Public Organization “Russian Geographical Society” on the grant «Golden Coast of Pomors: Peculiarities of Culture of the Population and Natural Environment of the Karelian and Pomor coasts of the White Sea”. http://www.rgo.ru Research and Practice Conference “The White Sea Heritage” 18-20 July 2014 “Basin Council of the North Karelian Coast” Published on the own multiplying equipment of the Karelian Regional Public Organization for support of sustainable development and environment protection “Basin Council of the North Karelian Sea Coast” http://www.kareliacoast.org 186670, Karelia, Loukhsky District, Urban communities Chupa, 7-a Korguev Str. Tel. Fax +7 81439 41144 [email protected] Fund for Seas and Oceans LIGHTHOUSE-FOUNDATION has supported activities of the KRPO “Basin Council” in purchasing of equipment for materials’ publication http://www.lighthouse-foundation.org The following experts worked over the essay “POMORS’ FISHING ACTIVITIES. HISTORY AND UP-TO- DATENESS ON EXAMPLE OF THE KERET RIVER”: The author of the assay Ignatenko V.V., ichthyologist-pisciculturist, Vygsky Fish Hatchery, Chupa Consultant Makhrov A.A., Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution Problems of RAS, Moscow Consultant Kosmenko M.G., Institute for Language, Literature and History, KarSC RAS, Petrozavodsk Consultant Lobanova N.V., Institute for Language, Literature and History, KarSC RAS, Petrozavodsk Design and makeup of Diordiyev D.E., Babusko O.V., Information Center of KRPO “Basin Council”, Chupa Layout and Introduction of Rybakov Yu.N., Information Center of KRPO “Basin Council”, Chupa Photo of Georgiyevsky I.V., Solovey I.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Joint Research on Gyrodactylus Salaris in the Northern Region of Norway and Russia
    009 Reporton thejoint research onGyrodactylussalaris in the northernregion of Norwayand Russia BjørnOve Johnsen EvgeniyP. leshko AndrejKarasev ArneJ. Jensen I. Schurov NINA. NIKU Foundationfor Nature Research and Cultural Heritage Research Reporton thejoint research onGyrodactylussalaris in the northernregion of Norwayand Russia BjørnOve Johnsen EvgeniyP. leshko AndrejKarasev ArneJ. Jensen I. Schurov Foundationfor Nature Research and Cultural Heritage Research nina.niku Project Report 009 Johnsen, B.O., leshko, E.P., Karasev, A., Jensen, A.J & Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA) and Schurov, I. 1999. Report on joint research on Gyrodactylus Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research salaris in the northern region of Norway and Russia. - (NIKU) issue the following publication in English: NINA-NIKU Project Report 009: 1-20. Trondheim, april 1999 NINA-NIKU Project Report This series presents the results of both institutes' projects ISSN 0807-3082 when the results are to be made available in English. The ISBN 82-426-1039-8 series may include reports on original research, literature reviews, analysis of particular problems or subjects, etc. Management field: The number of copies printed will depend on demand. Environmental monitoring In addition to this report series published in English, N1NA- Copyright (C): NIKU publish the following series in Norwegian: Foundation for Nature Research and Cultural Heritage Research (NINA•NIKU) NINA Fagrapport (Scientific Report) NIKU Fagrapport (Scientific Report) The report may be quoted
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on Dolichopodidae (Diptera) from the White Sea Coast and Islands (Russian North)
    Altai State University www.asu.ru ISSN 2412-1908 Acta Biologica Sibirica, 2018, 4(4), 19–24 RESEARCH ARTICLE UDC 595.772 Notes on Dolichopodidae (Diptera) from the White Sea coast and islands (Russian North) I.Ya. Grichanov, E.I. Ovsyannikova All-Russian Institute of Plant Protection, Podbelskogo 3, St.Petersburg, Pushkin, 196608 Russia E-mail: [email protected] Original data on Dolichopodidae from the Belomorsk district of Karelia and Bolshoi Solovetskii Island (Arkhangelsk Region, Primorskii district) resulted from the short-term visit (2018) are presented. All ten collected species and the genus Medetera are firstly recorded for the Solovetskiye Islands. Dolichopus discifer Stannius, 1831, Dolichopus ungulatus (Linnaeus, 1758), Rhaphium laticorne (Fallén, 1823), Sympycnus pulicarius (Fallén) and Syntormon tarsatus (Fallén, 1823) are new species for the Arkhangelsk Region. Photographs of habitats of dolichopodid species are included. Key words: Diptera; Dolichopodidae; Palearctic Region; Arkhangelsk Region, Russian Karelia; new record; fauna Introduction The former Arkhangelsk Governorate (Russian: Архангельская губерния, Arkhangelskaya guberniya), later Northern Krai (Russian: Северный край, Severnyi Krai) occupied in the 19th and the first half of 20th century a huge territory along the Arctic Ocean between Finland and North Ural, being currently divided between the Republic of Karelia, Murmansk, Arkhangelsk, Vologda, Kostroma, and Kirov Regions, the Nenets Autonomous Okrug, and the Komi Republic, with the informal name Russian North (Gundakova et al., 1997). The White Sea is an indentation in the coast of Russian North, and surrounded by four regions, i.e. Murmansk and Arkhangelsk Regions, Karelia and Nenetsia. It is 590 km long and has an area of 90,000 sq km.
    [Show full text]
  • Benthic Fauna and Communities of the Lagoon Water Bodies of the White Sea by the Example of Lake Kislo-Sladkoe
    Ukrainian Journal of Ecology Ukrainian Journal of Ecology, 2017, 7(4), 655–658, doi: 10.15421/2017_176 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Benthic fauna and communities of the lagoon water bodies of the White Sea by the example of Lake Kislo-Sladkoe M.V. Chertoprud1, E.S. Chertoprud1, D.M. Palatov1,2, A.A. Novichkova1 1Moscow State University, Biological Faculty, Leninskie Gory 1/12, Moscow, 119992, Russia 2Altai State University, Lenina 61, Barnaul, 656049, Russia E-mail: [email protected] (corresponding author) Submitted: 12.09.2017. Accepted: 26.11.2017 In the present research the investigation of the lake Kislo-Sladkoe, a small brackish lagoon on the coast of Kandalakshsky Gulf of the White Sea, was conducted. In total 21 species of macrobenthic invertebrates identified and seven types of macrobenthic communities, derived from marine, estuarial and freshwater types, descried. Also, six meiobenthic species of the order Harpacticoida were found. The ecological peculiarities of the macro and meiobenthic taxa and the comparison with the biota of other brackish waters of the White Sea coast are described. Key words: macrobenthos; meiobenthos; communities; Harpacticoida; White Sea; environmental factors Introduction The specific communities of the brackish waterbodies, in particular across the White Sea region, has repeatedly claimed the researcher's attention (Azovsky et al., 1998; M.Chertoprud et al., 2004), but are still poorly described. Of many types of water bodies, greater effort has been invested in researching the river estuaries – running systems with sharp time and spatial salinity gradients. Apart from that, the number of more or less closed or low flow coastal water bodies with the transitional salinity separated from the White Sea (Krasnova et al., 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • L.) Used to Be Quite Widespread in Rivers of NE North America and Western Europe (Reviews: Ziuganov Et Al., 1994; Geist, 2005
    CONSERVATION OF FRESHWATER PEARL MUSSEL MARGARITIFERA MARGARITIFERA POPULATIONS IN NORTHERN EUROPE DISTRIBUTION OF THE FRESHWATER PEARL MUSSEL IN RUSSIA A.A. Makhrov Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution, Russian Academy of Science, Moscow; e-mail: [email protected] The review provides information about pearl harvesting (16th–20th cent.) and distribution of the freshwater pearl mussel Margaritifera margaritifera (L.) in North-West Russia; special focus is on the Kola Peninsula. In the Russian Federation at large, 157 rivers and streams are either known to have had pearl harvesting or/and reported to harbour pearl mussel (species affiliation of the mussels in 65 of them was confirmed by experts). The number of pearl mussel streams is strongly underestimated since both pearl harvesting and pearl mussel distribution have been insufficiently studied. State-of-the-art of pearl mussel populations is also poorly known, but it is safe to say there now (21st cent.) exist at least 24 populations. Freshwater pearl mussel abundance in Russia is higher than elsewhere in the world. Key words: pearl mussel, nature protection, distribution, Kola Peninsula INTRODUCTION Freshwater pearl mussel Margaritifera margaritifera (L.) used to be quite widespread in rivers of NE North America and western Europe (reviews: Ziuganov et al., 1994; Geist, 2005). It is present is countries bordering Russia in the west. Large pearl mussel populations have survived in Norway and Finland (Oulasvirta, 2006, 2008; Larsen, this volume). In Estonia and Latvia, this mussel is rather scant (Timm, 1994; Rudzīte, 2004). In Lithuania, Byelorussia and Poland, the pearl mussel used to occur, but has apparently gone extinct (Dutkiewicz, 1960; Jankevičius, 1981; Kozlov, 1981).
    [Show full text]
  • The Saami, 1200–1700 (Source Materials and Commentary)
    No.1 FORUM FOR ANTHROPOLOGY AND CULTURE 304 Aleksei Zhukov The Saami, 1200–1700 (Source Materials and Commentary) 13 November 1681 26 April 1682: Notebooks 1 of Father Aleksei Simonov, priest at the Kola Fortress*1 cathedral, with an account of his visit by royal command to the townlands of the Lopar- ites* in order to stamp out paganism among the people, and convert them to the Orthodox faith.2 15 ff. Aleksei Zhukov Institute of Language, Literature (Source: Russian State Archive of Ancient and History, Karelian Section, Russian Academy of Sciences, Documents (RGADA) fond 137, Boyarskie i Petrozavodsk gorodovye knigi, opis 1, delo 114, ll. 115. Original document.) f. 1 on the twenty-sixth d[ay]3 of April 190 copy extracts from these notebooks for use in the report4 1 Terms marked with* are explained in the Glossary below. Insertions made in the translation for the purpose of clarity are contained in curly brackets {}[Editor]. 2 Title assigned by an archivist. 3 The text inside square brackets restore omissions made in the scribe’s cursive [skoropis]. 4 Written by a secretary {in the chancellery in Moscow} on the reverse side of the sheet — the comment refers to the preparation {of the notebooks} for a report to tsar Fedor Alekseevich. [The gap before the word ‘report’ reproduces a gap in the Russian original.] [Editor]. 305 ARCHIVE f. 21 em asked about the beliefs and customs of the Loparites, were they baptised, the Loparites, in the name of the Father and the S[o]n and the H[o]ly Gh[o]st, and do they know the h[o]ly Gospels, and do they follow any unholy customs, and do they do honour to the waters and make sacrifices to and idolatrously worship fire, bushes, rocks, and trees, and perform other acts of sorcery hostile {to religion} do they eat dead flesh and drink the blood of those {creatures} they throttle in their snares, or killed by beasts and birds, and other foul and unclean things, and those sacrificed to idols.
    [Show full text]
  • Revision of Gyrodactylus Salaris Phylogeny Inspired by New Evidence for Eemian Crossing Between Lineages Living on Grayling in Baltic and White Sea Basins
    Revision of Gyrodactylus salaris phylogeny inspired by new evidence for Eemian crossing between lineages living on grayling in Baltic and White sea basins Agata Mieszkowska, Marcin Górniak, Agata Jurczak-Kurek and Marek S. Zi¦tara Department of Molecular Evolution, Faculty of Biology, University of Gda«sk, Gda«sk, Poland ABSTRACT In this research, grayling-specific Gyrodactylus salaris Malmberg, 1957 isolates from Baltic Sea basin were collected in Sweden for the first time. Samples were obtained in three drainage systems: Kalixälven (River Kaitum), Ljungan (River Sölvbacka strömmar), and Umeälven (River Juktån). Three molecular markers were analysed: nuclear ITS rDNA (Internal Transcribed Spacer) and ADNAM1 (Anonymous DNA Marker 1), and mitochondrial cox1 gene. As a result, four new mitochondrial haplotypes were identified (III-C1tt, III-C1ttht, IX-A1tt and X-A1tt). The ADNAM1 analyses resulted in revealing two new alleles (WS4 and BS9) and two new genotypes (T6 and T7). T7 seems to be an indicator of ancient crossing between Baltic and White Sea lineages of the parasite which happened during a first 3000-year period of Eemian interglacial about 130,000 years ago in the connection between Baltic and White Sea. Molecular clock estimates were adjusted, revealing the mean substitution rate and the divergence rate among branches of 3.6% (95% HPD: 2.2%–5.2%) and 7.2% per million years, respectively. As a result, cox1 phylogeny rooted with the introgressed haplotypes has been revised and altered in accordance to new data, revealing fourteen equidistant Submitted 5 March 2018 lineages five of which have been excluded from the study. Based on the new phylogenetic Accepted 13 June 2018 approach, including the molecular clock, this work suggests an overall revision of G.
    [Show full text]