DOCSLIB.ORG

GLOBAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM World Wildlife Fund

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

GLOBAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM 1st Semi-Annual Progress Report October 1, 1999 – May 31, 2000 for World Wildlife Fund TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Summary of Activity Status and Progress Page # Introduction-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Highlights---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Table of Activity Status Project Management------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Bering Sea Ecoregion------------------------------------------------------------ 2 Southwestern Amazon Ecoregion---------------------------------------------- 3 Atlantic Forest Ecoregion------------------------------------------------------- 3-4 Forests of the Lower Mekong Ecoregion------------------------------------- 4-5 Sulu-Sulawesi Marine Ecoregion---------------------------------------------- 5 II. Detailed description of site progress Project Management---------------------------------------------------------------------- 6-9 Summary-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 Activity Description------------------------------------------------------------- 6-9 Table of Progress----------------------------------------------------------------- 9 Bering Sea Ecoregion--------------------------------------------------------------------- 10-19 Objectives------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10 Collaborators/Partners----------------------------------------------------------- 10 Summary-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10 Activity Description------------------------------------------------------------- 11-18 Table of Progress----------------------------------------------------------------- 19 Southwestern Amazon Ecoregion------------------------------------------------------- 20 Objectives------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20 Collaborators/Partners----------------------------------------------------------- 20 Summary-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20-21 Activity Description------------------------------------------------------------- 21-23 Table of Progress----------------------------------------------------------------- 23 Atlantic Forest Ecoregion---------------------------------------------------------------- 24-37 Objectives------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24 Collaborators/Partners----------------------------------------------------------- 24 Summary-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24-25 Activity Description------------------------------------------------------------- 25-36 Table of Progress----------------------------------------------------------------- 36-37 Forests of the Lower Mekong Ecoregion---------------------------------------------- 38-43 Objectives------------------------------------------------------------------------- 38 Collaborators/Partners----------------------------------------------------------- 38 Summary-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 38 Activity Description------------------------------------------------------------- 38-42 Table of Progress----------------------------------------------------------------- 42-43 Sulu-Sulawesi Marine Ecoregion------------------------------------------------------- 44-56 Objectives------------------------------------------------------------------------- 44 Collaborators/Partners----------------------------------------------------------- 44 Summary-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 44-45 Activity Description------------------------------------------------------------- 45-55 Table of Progress----------------------------------------------------------------- 55 Challenges and Lessons Learnt------------------------------------------------- 55-56 III. APPENDIX A. Ecoregion Based Conservation Unit Workshop Summary & EAI Job Description B. Bering Sea Biodiversity Report C. Atlantic Forest Tri-national Biological Vision Workshop Report Global Conservation Program Progress report for WWF Global Conservation Program Activity Report For World Wildlife Fund 1. Summary of Activity Status and Progress INTRODUCTION To pave the way in achieving WWF’s global goal of conserving biodiversity in the Global 200, the ECOSNature Project seeks to conserve the full extent of biodiversity in the Southwest Amazon, Atlantic Forests, Forests of the Lower Mekong, Sulu-Suluwesi Seas and Bering Sea ecoregions. These provide testing grounds to strengthen the tool of Ecoregion- based Conservation (ERBC) and its broad application globally by assessing its implementation in these locations and analyzing and communicating lessons learned. The first six months of the ECOSNature Project reflect the rapid progress being made across the WWF Network in rolling out ERBC as a core conservation strategy. These efforts are well under way to addressing key threats that are local, ecoregional and global in nature. HIGHLIGHTS · Highly qualified coordination team established. · Ecoregional Biodiversity Vision for the Bering Sea completed. · Ecoregional Biodiversity Vision for Southwestern Amazon, Atlantic Forest, Lower Mekong drafted with key experts. For all three of these ecoregions it was an unprecedented opportunity to gather expertise and knowledge from across the borders. · In preparation for the Ecoregional Biodiversity Vision for Sula-Sulawesi, a biological assessment in Northern Sulawesi and Eastern Kalimantan was completed. · Combating toxics in the Bering Sea: ð Initiated a community-monitoring program at pilot villages. ð Supported an Arctic Environmental Atlas in the Russian language that demonstrates the flow of contaminants in the Bering Sea. 1 Global Conservation Program Progress report for WWF TABLE OF ACTIVITY STATUS Activity Page Activity Title Status* Number number 1. Project Management 1.1 Establish coordination team Completed 7 1.2 Facilitate key activities and communication as On-Track 7-8 opportunities for exchange and learning to advance ERBC implementation 1.3 Facilitate innovative grants On-Track 8-9 1.4 Establish a conservation foundation in Bolivia Mixed 10 2. Bering Sea 2.1 Establishment of Marine Zone for Nalychevo Nature On-Track 12 Park 2.2 Sociological survey in the Karaginsky Bay On-Track 12-13 2.3 Joint venture survey of sea otter population in On-Track 13 Kommandorsky Zapovednik (Nature Reserve) 2.4 Supporting multiple strategy activities for a On-Track 13-14 comprehensive ERBC approach, such as education, professional development for educators, and addressing a variety of threats, particularly fisheries management 2.5 Other Activities On-Track 14-19 2.5.1 ð Improving Fisheries Management in Russian 15 Waters 2.5.2 ð Developing priorities for Biodiversity 15-16 conservation in the Bering Sea 2.5.3 ð Creating Economic Incentives for a Sustainable 16 Fishery 2.5.4 ð Engaging Local Communities 17 2.5.5 ð Promoting conservation in the ecoregion through 17-19 education and media outreach 2.5.6 ð Providing Technical Support to Russian 19 Protected Areas 2 Global Conservation Program Progress report for WWF 3. Southwestern Amazon 3.1 Consolidation of an ecological conservation corridor 22 (Amboro-Madidi) 3.1.1 ð SWA coordinator (WWF) and SERNAP advisor Delayed 22 coordinate and facilitate the initiation of a collaborative structure for defining and managing the corridor 3.1.2 ð Gather information (field-based and from On-Track 22-23 databases) to establish a complete and updated biological and sociological database for the corridor 3.1.3 ð Conduct analysis of biological and socio- Mixed 23 economic data, and designed Biodiversity Performance Monitoring and Evaluation System 3.1.4 ð Initiate development of Ecological Corridor Delayed 23-24 Conservation Plan and Biodiversity Monitoring and Evaluation System 3.1.5 ð Initiate development of Biodiversity Monitoring Delayed 24 and Evaluation System with the ECWG 4. Atlantic Forest 4.1 Mobilize conservation action on an Ecoregional scale: 4.1.1 ð Establish the institutional relationships and On-Track 27-28 develop a mechanism for coordination of Atlantic Forest activities in Paraguay and Paraguayan participation in Ecoregion-wide activities. 4.1.2 ð Establishment and implementation of Internal On-Track 28-29 organization and action plan for Tri-national Forest Corridor network. 4.1.3 ð Strengthening of Atlantic Forest network On-Track 29 organizations and integration with WWF strategies. 4.1.4 ð Biological vision for Interior Atlantic Forest and On-Track 30 Araucaria Ecoregions. 3 Global Conservation Program Progress report for WWF 4.2 Protect key sites and Wildlife populations 4.2.1 ð Policy framework established for improved On-Track 30 protection and management of existing protected areas 4.2.2 ð Continued implementation of integrated On-Track 30 conservation and development projects to protect 3 key sites: Poço das Antas; Una; and the Misiones Tri-National Forest Corridor a. Poço das Antas region (Rio de Janeiro, On-Track 30 Brazil, coastal forest) forest fragments supporting a minimum viable population of golden lion tamarins b. Minimum viable contiguous forest conserved On-Track 31-32 to assure conservation of a viable population of golden-headed lion tamarins - Una region (Southern Bahia state, coastal forest, Brazil) c. Misiones Tri-National Green Corridor On-Track 32 recognized and made viable ð New protected
Recommended publications
  • A Dangling Slab, Amplified Arc Volcanism, Mantle Flow and Seismic Anisotropy in the Kamchatka Plate Corner

    A Dangling Slab, Amplified Arc Volcanism, Mantle Flow and Seismic Anisotropy in the Kamchatka Plate Corner

    AGU Geodynamics Series Volume 30, PLATE BOUNDARY ZONES Edited by Seth Stein and Jeffrey T. Freymueller, p. 295-324 1 A Dangling Slab, Amplified Arc Volcanism, Mantle Flow and Seismic Anisotropy in the Kamchatka Plate Corner Jeffrey Park,1 Yadim Levin,1 Mark Brandon,1 Jonathan Lees,2 Valerie Peyton,3 Evgenii Gordeev ) 4 Alexei Ozerov ,4 Book chapter in press with "Plate Boundary Zones," edited by Seth Stein and Jeffrey Freymuller Abstract The Kamchatka peninsula in Russian East Asia lies at the junction of a transcurrent plate boundary, aligned with the western Aleutian Islands, and a steeply-dipping subduction zone with near-normal convergence. Seismicity patterns and P-wave tomography argue that subducting Pacific lithosphere terminates at the Aleutian junction, and that the downdip extension (>150km depth) of the slab edge is missing. Seismic observables of elastic anisotropy (SKS splitting and Love-Rayleigh scattering) are consistent \Vith asthenospheric strain that rotates from trench-parallel beneath the descending slab to trench-normal beyond its edge. Present-day arc volcanism is concentrated near the slab edge, in the Klyuchevskoy and Sheveluch eruptive centers. Loss of the downdip slab edge, whether from thermo-convective or ductile instability, and subsequent "slab-window" mantle return flow is indicated by widespread Quaternary volcanism in the Sredinny Range inland of Klyuchevskoy and Sheveluch, as well as the inferred Quaternary uplift of the central Kamchatka depression. The slab beneath Klyuchevskoy has shallower dip (35°) than the subduction zone farther south (55°) suggesting a transient lofting of the slab edge, either from asthenospheric flow or the loss of downdip load.
  • The Potential for Integration of the Transport Complex of the East of Russia Into the International Market of Transport Services

    The Potential for Integration of the Transport Complex of the East of Russia Into the International Market of Transport Services

    BRANCH-WISE ECONOMY DOI: 10.15838/esc.2019.6.66.8 UDC 332.1+339.924, LBC 65.049(2) © Bardal’ A.B. The Potential for Integration of the Transport Complex of the East of Russia into the International Market of Transport Services Anna B. Bardal’ Economic Research Institute, Far Eastern Branch of RAS Khabarovsk, Russian Federation, 153,Tikhookeanskaya Street, 680042 E-mail: [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0002-9944-4714; ResearcherID: V-7615-2017 Abstract. The eastern regions of Russia are the convenient zone in which Russia cooperates with the actively developing Asian region. The key states of North-East Asia such as China, Japan, and the Republic of Korea are the largest participants in world trade at the present stage. The servicing of large- scale commodity flows with the European Union and the U.S. is provided by the market of transport services, by means of which the most effective schemes of delivery are built. Under these conditions, the transport system of the East of Russia has objective prerequisites for integration into the international transport system. The goal of our present study is to assess the potential of integration of the transport system of the Far East in the market of transport services in North-East Asia. At the same time, we assess integration opportunities with the help of dividing the territory of the East of Russia into districts based on the results of cluster analysis. Considering the achievement of the research goal, this approach is a new one. The need for division is due to the fact that the Far East is quite a large region, extremely heterogeneous in its internal composition, economic-geographical and socio-economic characteristics.
  • Botanica Pacifica

    Botanica Pacifica

    Russian Academy of Sciences, Far Eastern Branch Botanical Garden-Institute botanica pacifica A journal of plant science and conservation Volume 9, No. 1 2020 VLADIVOSTOK 2020 Botanica Pacifica. A journal of plant science and conservation. 2020. 9(1): 3–52 DOI: 10.17581/bp.2020.09113 Revision of the genus Viola L. (Violaceae) in the Russian Far East with notes on adjacent territories Marc Espeut Marc Espeut ABSTRACT e-mail: [email protected] This study proposes a revision of the genus Viola L. (Violaceae) in the Russian 34, rue de l'Agriculture, 66500 Prades, Far East and adjacent regions. It is based on the taxonomic work that Becker con- France ducted on the Asian Viola (1915–1928), but also on Clausen's cytotaxonomic stud- ies (1926–1964) that laid the foundations of the genus' phylogeny. Chromosome counts, as well as phylogenetic analyses, have allowed to specify the infrageneric taxonomy and establish relationships between some taxa of American or Asian ad- Manuscript received: 09.03.2020 jacent territories. A systematic treatment based on the Biological Species Concept, Review completed: 22.04.2020 associated with genetic, cytotaxonomic, and biogeographic data, allowed many sys- Accepted for publication: 02.05.2020 tematic and nomenclatural changes, at different levels: infrageneric, specific and Published online: 07.05.2020 infraspecific. This study shows the remarkable role of the Russian Far East for the conservation and differentiation of the genus Viola species, and probably for the whole flora of the Holarctic Kingdom. Keywords: Violaceae, Viola, Russian Far East, typifications, taxonomic novelties, no- TABLE OF CONTENTS menclatural novelties Introduction ..........................................................
  • List 2014/08/18 of Approved Russian Establishments and Vessels

    List 2014/08/18 of Approved Russian Establishments and Vessels

    List 2014/08/18 of approved Russian establishments and vessels-suppliers of fish and fishery products, including frozen adible fish by-products, to the Republic of Korea № Рег. номер Establishment Vessels Fishery products Adress District 1 RK-1-003 JSC "Kurilskiy rybak" Frozen fish v. Kitovyy, Kuril'skiy district Sakhalinskaya Oblast’ Yasnyy (fish plant) Frozen fish fillet Frozen fish mince Frozen fish by-products Frozen roe Frozen milt Frozen fish liver Fish meal 2 RK-1-004 Primorye's Fishering Company, Co., LTD Yasnyy Frozen fish 71, Chekhov str., Sakhalinskaya Oblast’ Frozen fish by-products Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk Frozen roe Frozen milt Frozen fish liver Вoiled-frozen сrab and extremities of crab Fresh-frozen сrab and extremities of crab 3 RK-1-005 Primorye's Fishering Company, Co., LTD Tor Frozen fish 71, Chekhov str., Sakhalinskaya Oblast’ Frozen fish by-products Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk Frozen roe Frozen milt Frozen fish liver Вoiled-frozen сrab and extremities of crab Fresh-frozen сrab and extremities of crab 4 RK-1-011 JSC "Tralflot" Vasilyevskiy ostrov Frozen fish 17, Znamenshchikova str. Khabarovskiy Kray Frozen fish liver Khabarovsk Frozen roe Frozen milt Frozen fish fillet Frozen fish mince 5 RK-1-024 FGUP "TINRO-Centre" Professor Levanidov Frozen fish 4, Shevchenko p., Primorskiy Kray Frozen roe Vladivostok 6 RK-1-025 FGUP "TINRO-Centre" Professor Kizevetter Frozen fish 4, Shevchenko p., Primorskiy Kray Frozen roe Vladivostok 7 RK-1-029 JSC HC "Dalmoreproduct " Pеtr Zhitnikov Frozen fish 53, Pologaya str., Primorskiy Kray Frozen fish by-products Vladivostok Frozen roe Frozen milt Fish meal 8 RK-1-032 JSC "Fishery Kolkhoz "Primorets" Ekarma-3 Frozen fish 12, Zelenaya str., Primorskiy Kray Frozen fish by-products Podyapolsk, Frozen roe Shkotovskiy district Frozen milt Frozen fish liver Frozen squid 9 RK-1-035 "Polluks" Co., Ltd.
  • Ifrc.Org Conclusion

    Ifrc.Org Conclusion

    CHUKOTKA, KAMCHATKA AND 26 August 1999 MAGADAN (FAR NORTH-EASTERN RUSSIA): CRITICALLY ISOLATED COMMUNITIES appeal no. 05/99; 5 Month programme extension until October 15, 1999 situation report no. 5 period covered: 20 July - 25 August 1999 The Russian Far Northeast programme, launched on 8 February to assist 82,000 beneficiaries in the rural regions of Chukotka, Kamchatka, including Koryak okrug and Magadan, is in the final stages of implementation. The intended quantity of family food parcels was produced in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and Magadan, and distribution is ongoing in all four regions covered by the Appeal. Hygiene kits have also been procured for all the regions and have already been sent to Magadan for distribution. Adverse weather conditions are making air transport difficult and causing logistical constraints. The context The steady erosion of living standards and rise in unemployment associated with a decade of diffi- cult market transition and poor harvests in Russia has taken a high toll in terms of living conditions and brought with it economic inequality and heightened social instability which has been particu- larly devastating for the population of the Far North-eastern remote regions of Chukotka, Kamchatka, including Koryak okrug, and Magadan. Geographic isolation (air transport and dog sleds are the only ways to reach some remote polar areas for many months of the year) combbined with a harsh climate (with temperatures reaching -50 C during long winter months and +40 C in summer), poor infrastructure, a lack of economic diver- sity, the high cost of transport, the over-dependance on imports, and the loss of subsidies have all compounded the regions’ problems.
  • Western Bering Sea Pacific Cod and Pacific Halibut Longline

    Western Bering Sea Pacific Cod and Pacific Halibut Longline

    MSC Sustainable Fisheries Certification Western Bering Sea Pacific cod and Pacific halibut longline Public Consultation Draft Report – August 2019 Longline Fishery Association Assessment Team: Dmitry Lajus, Daria Safronova, Aleksei Orlov, Rob Blyth-Skyrme Document: MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template V2.0 page 1 Date of issue: 8 October 2014 © Marine Stewardship Council, 2014 Contents Table of Tables ..................................................................................................................... 5 Table of Figures .................................................................................................................... 7 Glossary.............................................................................................................................. 10 1 Executive Summary ..................................................................................................... 12 2 Authorship and Peer Reviewers ................................................................................... 14 2.1 Use of the Risk-Based Framework (RBF): ............................................................ 15 2.2 Peer Reviewers .................................................................................................... 15 3 Description of the Fishery ............................................................................................ 16 3.1 Unit(s) of Assessment (UoA) and Scope of Certification Sought ........................... 16 3.1.1 UoA and Proposed Unit of Certification (UoC) ..............................................
  • Tymlat-Karaginsky Bay Salmon Fishery

    Tymlat-Karaginsky Bay Salmon Fishery

    8950 Martin Luther King Jr. Street N. #202 St. Petersburg, FL 33702 USA Tel: (727) 563-9070 Fax: (727) 563-0207 Email: [email protected] President: Andrew A. Rosenberg, Ph.D. Tymlat-Karaginsky Bay Salmon Fishery MSC Certificate No: MSC-F-30023 1st Surveillance Report Conformity Assessment Body (CAB) MRAG Americas, Inc. Assessment team R Beamesderfer & D. Lajus Tymlatsky Rybokombinat Ltd. Fishery client 30 Naberezhnaya str., v.Tymlat, Karaginskiy District, Kamchatsky Krai, 688710, Russian Federation Assessment type 1st Surveillance Author name R Beamesderfer & D. Lajus Date December 14, 2020 Contents 1 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................3 2 Report Details......................................................................................................................4 2.1 Surveillance Information ...............................................................................................4 2.2 Background ...................................................................................................................7 2.3 Version Details ..............................................................................................................7 3 Results .................................................................................................................................8 3.1 Surveillance Results Overview .......................................................................................8 3.1.1 Summary of Assessment
  • Kamchatka Free

    Kamchatka Free

    FREE KAMCHATKA PDF Marcelo Figueras,Frank Wynne | 312 pages | 19 May 2011 | Grove Press / Atlantic Monthly Press | 9780802170873 | English | New York, United States Kamchatka Krai - Wikipedia It is geographically located in the Far East region of the country, and it is administratively part of the Far Eastern Kamchatka District. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky is the largest city and capital of Kamchatka Krai, and home to over half of Kamchatka krai's population. The okrug Kamchatka the status of a special administrative division of the krai, Kamchatka the name of Koryak Okrug. The remainder is formed by a minor Kamchatka mainland Kamchatka, Karaginsky Island and the Commander Islands in the Bering Sea. It is bordered by Magadan Oblast to the west and Chukotka to the north. Kamchatka Krai is an active volcanic zone Kamchatka is home to Kluchevskayathe Kamchatka volcano in Eurasiaand the Decade Volcanoes of Avachinsky and Koryaksky. Kamchatka Krai occupies the territory of the Kamchatka Peninsulathe adjacent part of the mainland, the island Karaginsky and Commander Islands. Kamchatka belongs to the zone of volcanic activity, there are about large and medium-sized volcanoes, 29 of them are active. With the volcanic activity associated with the formation of many minerals, as well as a manifestation of hydro geo thermal activity: education fumaroles, geysers, hot Kamchatka, etc. Despite Kamchatka lying at similar latitudes to Scotlandit is mostly subarcticmore continental in the hinterland and more maritime and prone to monsoons on the coast. Most of the peninsula is covered with forests of stone birchwhile alder and cedar elfin are commonly found at higher altitudes.
  • Ecoregion-Based Conservation in the Bering Sea

    Ecoregion-Based Conservation in the Bering Sea

    Ecoregion-Based Conservation in the Bering Sea Identifying Important Areas for Biodiversity Conservation Contents Page# PART ONE: INTRODUCTION 3 1.2 Why conduct…. 3 1.3 Description… 4 1.4 Biolog Signif… 4 1.5 Changes…. 4 1.6 Conservation opps.. 5 PART TWO: WORKSHOP REPORT 8 2.1 Methodology: Assessing Biodiversity 8 2.2 Experts Workshop 10 2.3 Selecting Conservation Priorities:The Approach 10 Subregions: Bering Strait Bering Sea Shelf Kamchatka Shelf and Coast Aleutian Islands Aleutian Basin Taxa Birds Mammals Fish Invertebrates 2.4 Threat Assessment Summary 13 2.5 Additional Issues of Concern 16 PART THREE: BEYOND MAPS, TOWARD CONSERVATION 19 3.1 Lessons from Girdwood Workshop 19 3.2 Next Steps 21 Edited by: David Banks, Margaret 3.3 The Nature Conservancy and the Bering Sea 22 Williams John Pearce, Alan Springer, 3.4 WWF and the Bering Sea 22 Randy Hagenstein, and David Olson APPENDIX A: MAPS 2-9 A1 Publication design by Eric Cline 2 Subregions of the Bering Sea A2 3 Priority Bird Areas A3 Maps and GIS Data by: Emma BIRD TABLE A4 Underwood, Jennifer D’Amico, 4 Priority Mammal Areas A5 Carrie Wolfe, and Julie Maier MAMMAL TABLE A6 5 Priority Fish Areas A7 A collaborative effort by the FISH TABLE A8 World Wildlife Fund, 6 Priority Invertebrate Areas A9 The Nature Conservancy of Alaska, INVERT TABLE A10 and Participants in the 7 Overlapping Priority Areas for all Taxa A11 Girdwood Bering Sea Experts 8 Priority Areas for Bering Sea Biodiversity A12 Workshop March 20-23, 1999 9 Existing Protected Areas of the Bering Sea A13 Cover photo of walruses by Kevin APPENDIX B: PRIORITY AREA DESCRIPTIONS B1 Schafer, provided courtesy of the photographer APPENDIX C: LITERATURE CITED IN APP.
  • De Grave & Fransen. Carideorum Catalogus

    De Grave & Fransen. Carideorum Catalogus

    De Grave & Fransen. Carideorum catalogus (Crustacea: Decapoda). Zool. Med. Leiden 85 (2011) 407 Fig. 48. Synalpheus hemphilli Coutière, 1909. Photo by Arthur Anker. Synalpheus iphinoe De Man, 1909a = Synalpheus Iphinoë De Man, 1909a: 116. [8°23'.5S 119°4'.6E, Sapeh-strait, 70 m; Madura-bay and other localities in the southern part of Molo-strait, 54-90 m; Banda-anchorage, 9-36 m; Rumah-ku- da-bay, Roma-island, 36 m] Synalpheus iocasta De Man, 1909a = Synalpheus Iocasta De Man, 1909a: 119. [Makassar and surroundings, up to 32 m; 0°58'.5N 122°42'.5E, west of Kwadang-bay-entrance, 72 m; Anchorage north of Salomakiëe (Damar) is- land, 45 m; 1°42'.5S 130°47'.5E, 32 m; 4°20'S 122°58'E, between islands of Wowoni and Buton, northern entrance of Buton-strait, 75-94 m; Banda-anchorage, 9-36 m; Anchorage off Pulu Jedan, east coast of Aru-islands (Pearl-banks), 13 m; 5°28'.2S 134°53'.9E, 57 m; 8°25'.2S 127°18'.4E, an- chorage between Nusa Besi and the N.E. point of Timor, 27-54 m; 8°39'.1 127°4'.4E, anchorage south coast of Timor, 34 m; Mid-channel in Solor-strait off Kampong Menanga, 113 m; 8°30'S 119°7'.5E, 73 m] Synalpheus irie MacDonald, Hultgren & Duffy, 2009: 25; Figs 11-16; Plate 3C-D. [fore-reef (near M1 chan- nel marker), 18°28.083'N 77°23.289'W, from canals of Auletta cf. sycinularia] Synalpheus jedanensis De Man, 1909a: 117. [Anchorage off Pulu Jedan, east coast of Aru-islands (Pearl- banks), 13 m] Synalpheus kensleyi (Ríos & Duffy, 2007) = Zuzalpheus kensleyi Ríos & Duffy, 2007: 41; Figs 18-22; Plate 3.
  • Bearded Seal (Erignathus Barbatus), and Spotted Seal (Phoca Largha)

    Bearded Seal (Erignathus Barbatus), and Spotted Seal (Phoca Largha)

    BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF COMMERCE PETITION TO LIST THREE SEAL SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: RINGED SEAL (PUSA HISPIDA), BEARDED SEAL (ERIGNATHUS BARBATUS), AND SPOTTED SEAL (PHOCA LARGHA) © David S. Isenberg CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY MAY 28, 2008 Notice of Petition____________________________________________________ Carlos M. Gutierrez Secretary of Commerce U.S. Department of Commerce 1401 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room 5516 Washington, D.C. 20230 James Balsiger, Acting Director NOAA Fisheries National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration 1315 East-West Highway Silver Springs, MD 20910 PETITIONER The Center for Biological Diversity 1095 Market Street, Suite 511 San Francisco, CA 94103 ph: (415) 436-9682 ext 301 fax: (415) 436-9683 __________________________ Date: this 28 day of May, 2008 Shaye Wolf, Ph.D. Brendan Cummings Kassie Siegel Center for Biological Diversity Pursuant to Section 4(b) of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §1533(b), Section 553(3) of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 553(e), and 50 C.F.R. §424.14(a), the Center for Biological Diversity (“Petitioner”) hereby petitions the Secretary of Commerce, through the National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”), to list the ringed seal (Pusa hispida), bearded seal (Erignathus barbatus), and spotted seal (Phoca largha) as threatened or endangered species and to designate critical habitat to ensure their survival and recovery. The Center for Biological Diversity (“Center”) is a non-profit, public interest environmental organization dedicated to the protection of native species and their habitats through science, policy, and environmental law. The Center has over 40,000 members in Alaska and throughout the United States.
  • Annual Report 2008 Russia a Nnual Report 2 0 0 8 Russia Raiffeisenbank

    Annual Report 2008 Russia a Nnual Report 2 0 0 8 Russia Raiffeisenbank

    Annual Report 2008 Report Annual Russia Annual report 2008 Russia Raiffeisenbank Survey of Key Data ZAO Raiffeisenbank 2008 2007 Change Monetary values are in RUR mln Consolidated Income Statement Net interest income after provision for loan impairment 22 014 15 622 40.9% Net commission income 5 483 4 915 11.5% Trading profit 5 385 918 486.5% Administrative and other operating expenses –17 197 –13 063 31.6% Profit before tax 15 670 8 869 76.7% Profit 11 198 6 697 67.2% Balance Sheet Due from other banks 7 426 3 681 101.7% Loans and advances to customers 364 540 294 825 23.6% Due to other banks 60 275 45 643 32.1% Customer accounts 259 402 204 547 26.8% Total assets 619 320 444 232 39.4% Capital adequacy in accordance with the Central Bank of Russian Federation requirements Capital 63 519 42 919 48.0% Actual capital adequacy ratio 13.4% 11.2% 19.8% Required minimum capital adequacy ratio 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% Performance Return on average equity (ROE) before tax 25.6% 21.1% 21.4% Return on equity (ROE) after tax 18.3% 15.9% 14.9% Cost/income ratio 43.3% 50.1% –13.5% Return on assets (ROA) before tax 3.0% 2.4% 24.0% Resources Number of staff as at 31 December 10 731 9 217 16.4% Business outlets as at 31 December 233 237 –1.7% We remain confident in the high potential of the Russian economy. The Raiffeisen Group has always adhered to its chosen strategy in Russia and has proved its readiness to support the development of ZAO Raiffeisenbank, the largest and the most successful subsidiary bank in the Raiffeisen International Group.