RaptorsConservation ISSN 1814–0076 ПЕРНАТЫЕХИЩНИКИИИХОХРАНА 2010№19

Ðàáî÷èé áþëëåòåíü î ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêàõ Âîñòî÷íîé Åâðîïû è Ñåâåðíîé Àçèè The Newsletter of the raptors of the East Europe and North Asia Ñâèäåòåëüñòâî î ðåãèñòðàöèè ÑÌÈ ÏÈ ¹ÔÑ77-38809 îò 08.02.2010 ã. Áþëëåòåíü «Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà» The Raptors Conservation Newsletter has been ó÷ðåæä¸í ìåæðåãèîíàëüíîé áëàãîòâîðèòåëüíîé founded by the non-governmental organisations îáùåñòâåííîé îðãàíèçàöèåé «Ñèáèðñêèé ýêî- Siberian Environmental Center (Novosibirsk) and ëîãè÷åñêèé öåíòð» (Íîâîñèáèðñê) è íàó÷íî-èñ- Center of Field Studies (Nizhniy Novgorod). ñëåäîâàòåëüñêîé îáùåñòâåííîé îðãàíèçàöèåé «Öåíòð ïîëåâûõ èññëåäîâàíèé» (Í. Íîâãîðîä).

Ðåäàêòîðû íîìåðà: Ýëüâèðà Íèêîëåíêî (Ñèá- Editors: Elvira Nikolenko (Siberian Environmental ýêîöåíòð, Íîâîñèáèðñê) è Èãîðü Êàðÿêèí (Öåíòð Center, Novosibirsk) and Igor Karyakin (Center of ïîëåâûõ èññëåäîâàíèé, Í. Íîâãîðîä) Field Studies, N. Novgorod)

Ôîòîãðàôèÿ íà ëèöåâîé ñòîðîíå îáëîæêè: Photo on the front cover: Female of the Saker Fal- Ñàìêà áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug) íàä ñâîèì ãíåç- con (Falco cherrug) near the nest in the Uvs-Nuur äîì â Óáñó-Íóðñêîé êîòëîâèíå. Àëþìèíèåâîå Depression. The bird was ringed early when was êîëüöî íà ïðàâîé ëàïå óêàçûâàåò íà òî, ÷òî a chick in this territory. Republic of Tyva, Russia, ýòà ïòèöà áûëà îêîëüöîâàíà ïòåíöîì íà ýòîé 7 June 2010. Photo by I. Karyakin. òåððèòîðèè â ïðîøëûå ãîäû. Ðåñïóáëèêà Òûâà, Ðîññèÿ, 7 èþíÿ 2010 ã. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà.

 èëëþñòðàöèè çàäíåé ñòîðîíû îáëîæêè èñïîëü- Photos on the back cover by I. Karyakin and çîâàíû ôîòîãðàôèè È. Êàðÿêèíà è Ñ. Âàæîâà. S. Vazhov.

Äèçàéí: Ä. Ñåíîòðóñîâ, À. Êëåù¸â Design by D. Senotrusov, A. Kleschev ¸ðñòêà: Ä. Êàòóíîâ Page-proofs by D. Katunov Êîððåêòóðà: À. Êàþìîâ Proof-reader by A. Kajumov Ïåðåâîä: A. Øåñòàêîâà, Ä. Òåðïèëîâñêàÿ, Ä. Ñîô- Translation by A. Shestakova, D. Terpilovskaya, ðîíîâ, Ð. Êîóë D. Sofronov, R. Cole

Ðåäàêöèîííàÿ êîëëåãèÿ: Àäðåñ ðåäàêöèè: Ñ.Â. Áàêêà, ê.á.í., ÑÎÏÐ, Í. Íîâãîðîä, Ðîññèÿ; [email protected] 630090 Ðîññèÿ, Ò.Î. Áàðàáàøèí, ê.á.í., ÐÃÏÓ, Ðîñòîâ-íà-Äîíó, Ðîññèÿ; [email protected] Íîâîñèáèðñê, à/ÿ 547 Ñ.À. Áóêðååâ, ñ.í.ñ., ê.á.í., ÈÏÝÝ ÐÀÍ, Ìîñêâà, Ðîññèÿ; [email protected] Â.Ì. Ãàëóøèí, àêàä. ÐÀÅÍ, ïðîô., ä.á.í., ÌÏÃÓ, Ìîñêâà, Ðîññèÿ; Editorial adress: [email protected] P.O. Box 547, Novosibirsk, Í.Þ. Êèñåë¸âà, äîö., ê.ïåä.í., ÍÃÏÓ, Í. Íîâãîðîä, Ðîññèÿ; [email protected] Ð.Ä. Ëàïøèí, äîö., ê.á.í., ÍÃÏÓ, Í. Íîâãîðîä, Ðîññèÿ; [email protected] Russia, 630090 À.Ñ. Ëåâèí, äîö., ê.á.í., Èíñòèòóò çîîëîãèè ÌÎèÍ, Àëìàòû, Êàçàõñòàí; [email protected] Tel./Fax: +7 (383) 363 00 59 Î.Â. Ìèòðîïîëüñêèé, ïðîô., ä.á.í., Íàöèîíàëüíûé óíèâåðñèòåò, Òàøêåíò, Óçáåêèñòàí; [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] À.Ñ. Ïàæåíêîâ, ê.á.í., ÖÑ «ÂÓÝÑ», Ñàìàðà, Ðîññèÿ; [email protected] [email protected] Ì.Â. Ïåñòîâ, ê.á.í., Ýêîöåíòð «Äðîíò», Í. Íîâãîðîä, Ðîññèÿ; [email protected] [email protected] Å.Ð. Ïîòàïîâ, Ph.D., Áðèí Àôèíñêèé Êîëëåäæ, Ïåíñèëüâàíèÿ, ÑØÀ; http://www.sibecocenter.ru/raptors.htm [email protected] Þ.Ñ. Ðàâêèí, ïðîô., ä.á.í., ÈÑèÝË ÑÎ ÐÀÍ, Íîâîñèáèðñê, Ðîññèÿ; Ýëåêòðîííàÿ âåðñèÿ/RC online [email protected] http://www.sibecocenter.ru/RC.htm È.Ý. Ñìåëÿíñêèé, Ñèáýêîöåíòð, Íîâîñèáèðñê, Ðîññèÿ; [email protected] À.À. Øåñòàêîâà, ê.á.í., ÍÍÃÓ, Í. Íîâãîðîä, Ðîññèÿ; [email protected] Ïðàâèëà äëÿ àâòîðîâ äîñòóïíû íà ñàéòå: T. Katzner, Ph.D., Conservation and Field Research National Aviary, USA; http://www.sibecocenter.ru/guidelines_rus.htm [email protected] Guidelines for Contributors available on website: M.J. McGrady, Ph.D., Natural Research, UK; [email protected] http://www.sibecocenter.ru/guidelines_en.htm Events Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 3

Events СОБЫТИЯ

(1) Contact Âòîðàÿ Êîíôåðåíöèÿ «Ìèãðàöèè Second Conference “Bird Migration and Gonzalo Muñoz Arroyo ïòèö è ãëîáàëüíûå èçìåíåíèÿ ñðåäû: Global Change: Movement ecology and Scientific Coordinator Fundación Migres ìèãðàöèîííàÿ ýêîëîãèÿ è ñòðàòåãèè conservation strategies” was held in Al- Complejo Huerta îõðàíû ìèãðàíòîâ» áûëà ïðîâåäåíà â geciras (Spain), Strait of Gibraltar, on 17 Grande, Ctra. ã. Àëüõåñèðàñ íà Ãèáðàëòàðñêîì ïðî- to 20 March 20101. N 340 Km. 96.7 11390 ëèâå (Èñïàíèÿ) 17–20 ìàðòà 2010 ã.1 The BMGC 2010 Conference was aimed Pelayo, Algeciras (Cádiz) Îñíîâíîé öåëüþ êîíôåðåíöèè áûë to update our understanding of the Glo- tel.: +34 956 67 9857 îáìåí íîâåéøåé èíôîðìàöèåé î ãëî- bal climate change and its consequence fax: +34 956 67 9126 áàëüíîì èçìåíåíèè êëèìàòà è åãî ïî- on the migratorinness of bird species, the gonzalo.munoz@ ñëåäñòâèÿõ äëÿ ìèãðèðóþùèõ âèäîâ ïòèö, processes driving the changes and their fundacionmigres.org î ïðîöåññàõ, âåäóùèõ ê èçìåíåíèÿì è èõ consequences on the conservation of bi- Virginia González- ïîñëåäñòâèÿõ äëÿ ñîõðàíåíèÿ áèîðàçíîî- odiversity, in order to (1) effectively ad- Alorda áðàçèÿ, ÷òîáû â äàëüíåéøåì: (1) ýôôåê- dressing likely scenarios; (2) providing a Conference Secretar òèâíî óïðàâëÿòü âåðîÿòíûìè ñöåíàðèÿ- firm basis for adaptive management; and secretariat2010@ fundacionmigres.org ìè; (2) îáåñïå÷èòü óñòîé÷èâóþ áàçó äëÿ (3) developing effective conservation àäàïòèâíîãî óïðàâëåíèÿ è (3) ðàçâèâàòü strategies for managing rapidly changing ýôôåêòèâíûå ñòðàòåãèè îõðàíû ñ öåëüþ animal populations. êîíòðîëÿ çà áûñòðî ìåíÿþùèìèñÿ ïîïó- More than 200 delegates participated at ëÿöèÿìè æèâîòíûõ. the Conference, from all the continents, to Áîëåå 200 äåëåãàòîâ ñî âñåõ êîíòèíåí- share their experiences and knowledge. òîâ ïðèíÿëè ó÷àñòèå â êîíôåðåíöèè è All of this was happened in one of the ïîäåëèëèñü ñâîèìè çíàíèÿìè ñ êîëëåãà- most suitable geographical framework, ìè. Êîíôåðåíöèÿ áûëà îðãàíèçîâàíà â the Strait of Gibraltar. This is undoubt- îäíîì èç ñàìûõ ïîäõîäÿùèõ ê å¸ òåìà- edly among the better places in Europe, òèêå ìåñò – Ãèáðàëòàðñêîì ïðîëèâå. Ýòî, and one of the best in the world, for the íåñîìíåííî, ëó÷øåå ìåñòî â Åâðîïå è study of bird migration. Most of the birds îäíî èç ëó÷øèõ â ìèðå äëÿ èññëåäîâàíèÿ that breed in Western Europe and winter ìèãðèðóþùèõ ïòèö. Áîëüøèíñòâî ïòèö, in Africa migrate through this region eve- ðàçìíîæàþùèõñÿ â Çàïàäíîé Åâðîïå è ry spring and autumn, and many others çèìóþùèõ â Àôðèêå, ìèãðèðóåò ÷åðåç from northern Europe spend the winter Ãèáðàëòàð êàæäóþ âåñíó è îñåíü, è ìíî- here. The area has long been famous for ãèå âèäû Ñåâåðíîé Åâðîïû ïðîâîäÿò òóò the migration of birds of prey which fun- çèìó. Òåððèòîðèÿ óæå äëèòåëüíîå âðåìÿ nel through to take advantage of the short èçâåñòíà ìèãðàöèåé õèùíûõ ïòèö, êîòî- sea-crossing to Africa, but millions of ðûå ñòåêàþòñÿ ñþäà, ÷òîáû ïî íàèáîëåå other, smaller land-birds follow the same êîðîòêîìó ïóòè ïåðåñå÷ü route, as do many seabirds just offshore. Ñðåäèçåìíîå ìîðå, ñòðå- It is a wonderful place for basic research, ìÿñü ê àôðèêàíñêèì çèìîâ- and for measuring the changes in bird mi- êàì. Òàêæå ìèëëèîíû äðóãèõ gration patterns that are already occurring ïòèö, îáèòàòåëåé ñóøè, ñëå- in response to global climate change, and äóþò ýòèì æå ìàðøðóòîì, à to monitor the birds for signs of any new ìîðñêèå ïòèöû ìèãðèðóþò and emerging diseases. ïàðàëëåëüíî íà íåêîòîðîì Following reports on the birds of prey ðàññòîÿíèè îò áåðåãà. Ýòî were sounded: çàìå÷àòåëüíîå ìåñòî äëÿ - Mellone U., Lopez Lopez P., Liminana R. ôóíäàìåíòàëüíûõ èññëåäî- & Urios V. Linking environment character- âàíèé è äëÿ òîãî, ÷òîáû îöå- istics with migration behaviour: the case of Çìååÿä (Circaetus gallicus). íèòü èçìåíåíèÿ â ìèãðàöèè Eleonora’s Falcons. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. ïòèö, êîòîðûå óæå ïðîèñ- - Ghasabyan M., Gavashelishvili A., Chav- Short-Toed Eagle (Circaetus gallicus). õîäÿò â îòâåò íà ãëîáàëüíîå chavadze I., McGrady M. and Bildstein K.L. Photo by I. Karyakin. èçìåíåíèå êëèìàòà, äëÿ êîí- Movement ecology of young Cinereous

1 http://www.fundacionmigres.org/congresos/globalchange/Programme.html 4 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ñîáûòèÿ

òðîëÿ ïîïóëÿöèé ïòèö, äëÿ èäåíòèôèêà- öèè ëþáûõ íîâûõ ýïèçîîòèé. Ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì áûëè ñäåëàíû ñëå- äóþùèå äîêëàäû: - Ñâÿçü îñîáåííîñòåé îêðóæàþùåé ñðåäû ñ ìèãðàöèîííûì ïîâåäåíèåì íà ïðèìåðå ñîêîëîâ Ýëåîíîðû. Mellone U., Lopez Lopez P., Liminana R. & Urios V. - Ýêîëîãèÿ ïåðåìåùåíèÿ ìîëîäûõ ãðè- ôîâ, ïîìå÷åííûõ ïòåíöàìè íà Êàâêàçå. Ghasabyan M., Gavashelishvili A., Chavcha- vadze I., McGrady M. and Bildstein K.L. Ïòåíåö ãðèôà (Aegypius monachus) â ãíåçäå. - Ãåîëîêàòîðû îòêðûâàþò àôðèêàíñêèå Ôîòî Ý. Íèêîëåíêî. çèìîâêè ñòåïíûõ ïóñòåëüã, ðàçìíîæàþ- Chick of the Cinereous Vultures (Aegypius monachus) ùèõñÿ â Èñïàíèè. Negro J.J., Rodriguez A., in the nest. Photo by E. Nikolenko. Bustamante J., Fox J.W. and Afanasyev V. - Èñïîëüçîâàíèå äàííûõ òåëåìåòðèè, ïîëó÷åííûõ ñ ïîìîùüþ âûñîêî÷àñòîòíûõ Vultures tagged as nestlings in the Cauca- GPS-GSM-ïåðåäàò÷èêîâ, äëÿ èçó÷åíèÿ sus Region. ñòðàòåãèè ïîëåòà ìèãðèðóþùèõ ïòèö íà - Negro J.J., Rodriguez A., Bustamante J., ïðèìåðå áåðêóòà. Anderson T., Halverson Fox J.W. and Afanasyev V. Geolocators re- C., Katzner T., Lanzone M. & Miller T. veal the African wintering grounds of Lesser - Âîçäåéñòâèå èçìåíåíèÿ êëèìàòà íà Kestrels breeding in Spain. ðàçëè÷èÿ â ìèãðàöèè ïåðíàòûõ õèùíè- - Anderson T., Halverson C., Katzner T., êîâ. Áåëîãîðëûé êàíþê (Buteo albigula): Lanzone M. & Miller T. High frequency ïåðâûé òðàíñýêâàòîðèàëüíûé ìèãðèðóþ- GPS-GSM telemetry data to delineate flight ùèé õèùíèê èç Þæíîé Àìåðèêè. Filippi strategies of migratory birds: an example Codaccioni, O.; Jean-Pierre, M., Urcun, J.P. with Golden Eagles. and Jiguet F. - Filippi Codaccioni O., Jean-Pierre M., - Î ôîðìèðîâàíèè ïîïóëÿöèé çìååÿäà Urcun J.P. and Jiguet F. Impact of climate â Åâðîïå. Bechard, M. Yanez, B. Munoz change on the differential migration of A.R. & Ferrer M. raptors. - Âëèÿíèå îëåäåíåíèÿ íà ïîñòîÿí- Bechard M. White-Throated Hawk (Buteo ñòâî ìèãðàöèîííûõ ïóòåé ÿñòðåáèíûõ albigula): The first transequatorial raptor mi- (Accipitridae) ÷åðåç Àäðèàòè÷åñêîå ìîðå. grant from South America. Pandolfi M. and Ferrer, M. - Yanez B. Munoz A.R. & Ferrer M. Is - ×òî ìû çíàåì â íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ î Short-Toed Eagle about becoming resident ìèãðàöèè ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ â Þæíîé in Europe. Àìåðèêå? Juhant, M. - Pandolfi M. and Ferrer M. Permanence - Âëèÿíèå âåòðîãåíåðàòîðîâ íà ìè- of a glacial route in migrating raptors (Ac- ãðèðóþùèõ ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ â Þãî- cipitridae) through the Adriatic sea. Çàïàäíîé Ïîðòóãàëèè. Tomé R., Canário F., - Juhant M. What do we know up to now Leitao A., Pires N., Cardoso P., Teixeira do about raptor migration in South America? Rosario I., Repas M. - Tomé R., Canário F., Leitao A., Pires N., - Ñîáûòèÿ èñòîðèè æèçíè ïåðåïåëÿòíèêà Cardoso P., Teixeira do Rosario I., Repas M. â èçìåíÿþùåìñÿ êëèìàòå. Lehikoinen A., Impacts of wind farms on migrant raptors in Saurola P., Byholm P., Linden A., Valkama J. Southwestern Portugal. Íà ïîñòåðíîé ñåññèè áûëè ïðåäñòàâëå- - Lehikoinen A., Saurola P., Byholm P., íû ñëåäóþùèå ðàáîòû: Linden A., Valkama J. Life history events of - Èñïîëüçîâàíèå óñòîé÷èâûõ èçîòîïîâ the Eurasian Sparrowhawk in a changing cli- äëÿ îïðåäåëåíèÿ ìåñòà ïðîèñõîæäåíèÿ mate. çèìóþùèõ â Åâðîïå ìèãðèðóþùèõ ïåð- Following posters were presented: íàòûõ õèùíèêîâ íà ïðèìåðå áîëîòíîãî - Cardador Laura, Navarro Joan, Manosa ëóíÿ Circus aeruginosus. Cardador Laura, Santi. Utility of stable isotopes to delineate Navarro Joan, Manosa Santi. the origins of wintering European migra- - Ìèãðàöèè è çèìîâêè âçðîñëûõ ñòåð- tory raptors; the Marsh Harrier Circus aeru- âÿòíèêîâ Neophron percnopterus. García ginosus. Ripolles Clara, Lopez Lopez Pascual, Urios - García Ripolles Clara, Lopez Lopez Pas- Moliner Vicente. cual, Urios Moliner Vicente. Migration and Events Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 5

- Ïîñëåäíèå äàííûå î çèìîâêàõ áåëîãî- wintering of adult Egyptian Vultures Neo- ëîâûõ ñèïîâ â Àíäàëóñèè, þæíàÿ Èñïàíèÿ. phron percnopterus. Moleon Marcos, García Diego, Garrido Jose - Moleon Marcos, García Diego, Garrido R., Arenas González Rafael. Jose R., Arenas González Rafael. Recent pat- - Ó÷¸ò ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ Áàòóìè: èñ- terns in the wintering of European Griffon ñëåäîâàíèå ñàìîãî êðóïíîãî «áóòûëî÷íîãî Vultures in Andalusia, southern Spain. ãîðëûøêà» Ïàëåàðêòèêè â ïåðèîä îñåííåé - Verhelst Brecht, Jansen Johannes, Vans- ìèãðàöèè õèùíûõ ïòèö. Verhelst Brecht, teelant Wouter. The Batumi Raptor Count: Jansen Johannes, Vansteelant Wouter. exploring the Palearctic’s biggest bottle-  ñóááîòó 20 ìàðòà 2010 ã. â ðàìêàõ neck for autumn raptor migration. êîíôåðåíöèè ïðîø¸ë ñåìèíàð ïîëüçîâà- ARGOS user workshop took place on Sa- òåëåé ARGOS. turday, March, 20th 2010. Ïîìèìî ARGOS-CLS2 â êîíôåðåíöèè Besides ARGOS-CLS2 following compa- ïðèíÿëè ó÷àñòèå ïðåäñòàâèòåëè êîìïàíèé nies participated it the Conference: BIO- BIOTRACK-LOTEK WIRELESS3 (ýòà êîìïà- TRACK-LOTEK WIRELESS3 (this partner- íèÿ ïðåäëàãàåò èññëåäîâàòåëÿì, çàíèìàþ- ship offers telemetry researchers a broader ùèìñÿ òåëåìåòðèåé, øèðîêèé ñïåêòð óñëóã array of products and services to assist è ïðîäóêòîâ äëÿ ïðîñëåæèâàíèÿ æèâîòíûõ) in the monitoring of wildlife around the è CELLULAR TRACKING TECHNOLOGIES4 world) and CELLULAR TRACKING TECH- (èííîâàöèîííûå ðåøåíèÿ â ïðîñëåæèâà- NOLOGIES4 (innovative animal tracking íèè æèâîòíûõ). solutions). Êîíòàêò (1). Contact (1).

(2) Êîíòàêò XIII Ìåæäóíàðîäíàÿ îðíèòîëîãè÷å- XIII International ornithological confer- Àíàòîëèé Â. Äàâûãîðà ñêàÿ êîíôåðåíöèÿ Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè ence on Northern Eurasia was held at the Çàìåñòèòåëü ñîñòîÿëàñü 30 àïðåëÿ – 6 ìàÿ 2010 ã. Orenburg State Pedagogical University ïðåäñåäàòåëÿ îðãêîìèòåòà â ã. Îðåíáóðã (Ðîññèÿ) íà áàçå Îðåí- (Orenburg, Russia) on 30 April – 6 May êîíôåðåíöèè áóðãñêîãî ãîñóäàðñòâåííîãî ïåäàãîãè- 20105. òåë.: +7 3532 776 654 ÷åñêîãî óíèâåðñèòåòà5. The organizers of the conference were ìîá.: +7 922 625 6710 Îðãàíèçàòîðû êîíôåðåíöèè: Îðåí- the Orenburg State Pedagogical Uni- [email protected] [email protected] áóðãñêèé ãîñóäàðñòâåííûé ïåäàãîãè÷åñêèé versity, Menzbir Ornithological Society, óíèâåðñèòåò, Ìåíçáèðîâñêîå îðíèòîëî- A.A. Borisyak Paleontological Institute of ãè÷åñêîå îáùåñòâî, Ïàëåîíòîëîãè÷åñêèé RAS, A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology (2) Contact èíñòèòóò èì. À.À. Áîðèñÿêà ÐÀÍ, Èíñòè- and Evolution of RAS, Zoological Muse- Anatoliy V. Davygora Vice-chairman of òóò ïðîáëåì ýêîëîãèè è ýâîëþöèè èìåíè um of the Moscow State University, Rus- Organizing Committee À.Í. Ñåâåðöîâà ÐÀÍ, Çîîëîãè÷åñêèé ìó- sian Bird Conservation Union, Ministry of of the Conference çåé ÌÃÓ, Ñîþç îõðàíû ïòèö Ðîññèè, Ìè- Education of the Orenburg district, Min- tel.: +7 3532 776 654 íèñòåðñòâî îáðàçîâàíèÿ Îðåíáóðãñêîé istry of Nature Resources, Environment mob.: +7 922 625 6710 [email protected] îáëàñòè, Ìèíèñòåðñòâî ïðèðîäíûõ ðåñóð- and Privity of the Orenburg district. [email protected] ñîâ, ýêîëîãèè è èìóùåñòâåííûõ îòíîøå- The Conference gathered 245 ornitholo- íèé Îðåíáóðãñêîé îáëàñòè. gists from 114 organizations from Russia,  êîíôåðåíöèè ïðèíÿëè ó÷àñòèå 245 îðíèòîëîãîâ èç 114 âóçîâ è äðóãèõ ó÷ðåæ- äåíèé Ðîññèè, Êàçàõñòàíà, Óêðàèíû, Áåëî- ðóññèè, Ëàòâèè, Ýñòîíèè, Óçáåêèñòàíà, Òóðêìåíèñòàíà, Âåëèêîáðèòàíèè è Ïîëü- øè. Íà 4-õ ïëåíàðíûõ ñåññèÿõ è 22-õ ñèì- ïîçèóìàõ áûëî çàñëóøàíî áîëåå 120 äî- êëàäîâ. Ïðîâåäåíû äèñêóññèè íà 9 êðó- ãëûõ ñòîëàõ è äâå ïîñòåðíûå ñåññèè (32 ñîîáùåíèÿ). Ê íà÷àëó ðàáîòû êîíôåðåíöèè áûë èç- äàí ñáîðíèê, ñîäåðæàùèé áîëåå 400 òå- XIII Ìåæäóíàðîäíàÿ îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêàÿ êîíôåðåíöèÿ Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè. 2 http://www.argos-system.org Ôîòî Ò. Àòåìàñîâîé. 3 http://www.biotrack.co.uk 4 http://www.celltracktech.com XIII International ornithological conference 5 http://zmmu.msu.ru/menzbir/action/conf/index.htm on Northern Eurasia. Photo by T. Atemasova. 6 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ñîáûòèÿ

çèñîâ äîêëàäîâ: Îðíèòîëîãèÿ â Ñåâåðíîé Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Åâðàçèè. Ìàòåðèàëû XIII Ìåæäóíàðîäíîé Turkmenistan, Latvia, Estonia, UK, Poland. îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîé êîíôåðåíöèè Ñåâåð- At conference more than 120 oral pres- íîé Åâðàçèè. Òåç. äîêëàäîâ / Îòâ. ðåä. entations at 4 plenary sessions and 22 Å.Í. Êóðî÷êèí, À.Â. Äàâûãîðà. Îðåíáóðã: symposiums are presented. Discussions Èçä-âî ÎÃÏÓ, ÈÏÊ ÃÎÓ ÎÃÓ, 2010. 362 ñ. have been on 9 workshops. Participants of Ñ îãëàâëåíèåì ñáîðíèêà ìîæíî îçíàêî- Conference have presented 32 posters on ìèòüñÿ íà ñàéòàõ Ïòèöû Ñðåäíåãî Ïîâîë- 2 poster sessions. æüÿ6 è Óêðàèíñêîãî öåíòðà èññëåäîâàíèé By the start of the conference the pro- õèùíûõ ïòèö7. ceedings have been published, containing Êðàòêèé îáçîð äîêëàäîâ î õèùíûõ ïòè- over 400 abstracts: Ornithology of North öàõ è ñîâàõ, ïîäãîòîâëåííûé Ì.Í. Ãàâðè- Eurasia. Proceedings of the 13th Interna- ëþêîì, îïóáëèêîâàí íà ñòð. 29. tional Ornithological Conference of North  äíè ðàáîòû êîíôåðåíöèè ïðîâåä¸í Eurasia. Abstracts / Edited by E.N. Kuro- ñúåçä Ìåíçáèðîâñêîãî îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîãî chkin, A.V. Davygora. Orenburg: Publ. îáùåñòâà, ðàáî÷èå âñòðå÷è êîëëåêòèâîâ, House of Orenburg State Pedagogical Uni- çàíèìàþùèõñÿ ïîäãîòîâêîé òîìîâ â ñåðèè versity, IPK GOU OGU, 2010. 362 pp. «Ïòèöû Ðîññèè è ñîïðåäåëüíûõ ðåãèîíîâ», The table of contents is available on web- ôîòîêîíêóðñ è ôîòîâûñòàâêà. Ó÷àñòíèêè site “Birds of Middle Volga Region”6 and êîíôåðåíöèè 5–6 ìàÿ ïîçíàêîìèëèñü ñ website of the Ukrainian Birds of Prey Re- ïðèðîäîé Îðåíáóðæüÿ íà òð¸õ ïîëåâûõ search Centre7. ýêñêóðñèÿõ. Ðàáîòó êîíôåðåíöèè îñâå- Short review of the reports about birds of ùàë ïðåññ-öåíòð óíèâåðñèòåòà, âûïóñêàâ- prey and owls created by M.N. Gavrilyuk øèé åæåäíåâíûå ñòåíãàçåòó «Ýíäåìèê» è has been published on p. 29. âèäåîìàòåðèàëû, î êîíôåðåíöèè ïðîøëà The IV meeting of the Menzbir Ornitholog- èíôîðìàöèÿ ïî òåëåêàíàëó «Ðîññèÿ 1» ical Society, working meetings of the collec- (Îðåíáóðã) è ïî «Ðàäèî Ðîññèè». tives of authors of volumes “Birds of Russia Ðåçîëþöèÿ êîíôåðåíöèè îïóáëèêîâàíà and adjacent regions”, photo-competition íà ñòð. 17. and photo-exhibition took place during the Êîíòàêò (2). conference. Also to get acquainted with na- ture of the Orenburg region three field ex- cursions were organized for participants of (3) Êîíòàêò  ðàìêàõ ðàáîòû XIII Ìåæäóíàðîä- the Conference on 5–6 May. Press-Center Âèêòîð Ï. Áåëèê íîé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîé êîíôåðåíöèè of the university reported about the Con- Ðîñòîâñêèé ãîñóäàðñòâåííûé Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè 2 ìàÿ 2010 ã. ñî- ference issuing the daily wall newspaper ïåäàãîãè÷åñêèé ñòîÿëîñü çàñåäàíèå Ðàáî÷åé ãðóïïû “Endemic” and video reports. Also a TV- óíèâåðñèòåò ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè, channel “Russia 1” (Orenburg) and “Radio [email protected] ïðåäñåäàòåëåì êîòîðîé ÿâëÿåòñÿ Âëà- Russia” reported about the Conference. äèìèð Ìèõàéëîâè÷ Ãàëóøèí. Resolution of the Conference has been (3) Contact Íà çàñåäàíèè áûëî ðàññìîòðåíî íå- published on p. 17. Viktor P. Belik ñêîëüêî âîïðîñîâ: Contact (2). Rostov State 1. Î ïðîâåäåíèè VI Êîíôåðåíöèè ïî Pedagogical University [email protected] õèùíûì ïòèöàì Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè, êîòî- ðóþ áûëî ðåøåíî ïðîâåñòè â ã. Êðèâîé Within the XIII International ornithological Ðîã (Óêðàèíà) â îêòÿáðå 2012 ã. conference on Northern Eurasia a work- 2. Î õîäå ïîäãîòîâêè î÷åðêîâ â òîì ïî shop of the Working Group on Raptors õèùíûì ïòèöàì ñâîäêè «Ïòèöû Ðîññèè è and Owls of Northern Eurasia chaired by ñîïðåäåëüíûõ ðåãèîíîâ». Vladimir Galushin was held on May, 2nd Ðàáîòà íàä òîìîì ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì 2010. ñâîäêè «Ïòèöû Ðîññèè è ñîïðåäåëüíûõ It considered several issues. ðåãèîíîâ» áûëà íà÷àòà â 2008 ã. ïîñëå V 1) About the 4th Conference on birds of prey Êîíôåðåíöèè ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì, ïðî- in North Eurasia, which was agreed to hold in õîäèâøåé â ã. Èâàíîâî. Çà êàæäûì âèäîì Kryvyi Rih (Ukraine) in October 2012. õèùíûõ ïòèö áûëî çàêðåïëåíî ïî 2–3 àâ- 2) About the preparation of essays in the òîðà. Äî 2010 ã. ïëàíèðîâàëîñü íàïèñàòü volume on birds of prey “Birds of Russia and ðàçäåëû, ïîñâÿù¸ííûå ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèþ adjacent regions”. è ÷èñëåííîñòè âñåõ âèäîâ. Ñîñòîÿíèå äåë Works on volume on birds of prey “Birds

6 http://volgabirds.ru/user_files/ikar/Orenburg_Contents.pdf 7 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenburg_Contents.pdf Events Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 7

íà êîíåö àïðåëÿ 2010 ã.: ïîëíîñòüþ ãî- òîâû î÷åðêè ïî 15 âèäàì (èç 56). Îò íå- êîòîðûõ àâòîðîâ, äàâøèõ ñîãëàñèå íà ïîäãîòîâêó âèäîâûõ î÷åðêîâ, ñâåäåíèÿ î ñîñòîÿíèè èõ ðàáîòû äî ñèõ ïîð íå ïîñòó- ïèëè (äûì÷àòûé êîðøóí Elanus caeruleus, ÷¸ðíûé êîðøóí Milvus migrans, ïîëå- âîé ëóíü Circus cyaneus, ëóãîâîé ëóíü C. pygargus, áîëîòíûé ëóíü C. aeruginosus, çèìíÿê Buteo lagopus, ÿñòðåáèíûé îð¸ë Hieraaetus fasciatus, ñíåæíûé ãðèô Gyps himalayensis, áåíãàëüñêèé ãðèô Gyps bengalensis, êðå÷åò Falco rusticolus, ñàï- ñàí Falco peregrinus, ñîêîë Ýëåîíîðû Çàñåäàíèå Ðàáî÷åé ãðóïïû ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì è ñîâàì Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè. Ôîòî Ì. Ãàâðèëþêà. Falco eleonorae, îáûêíîâåííàÿ ïóñòåëüãà Falco tinnunculus, âîðîáüèíàÿ ïóñòåëüãà Workshop of the Working Group on Raptors and Owls of Northern Eurasia. Photo by M. Gavrilyuk. Falco sparverius). Áûëî ïðèíÿòî ðåøåíèå çàìåíÿòü àâòîðîâ î÷åðêîâ â ñëó÷àå íåâû- ïîëíåíèÿ èìè ïîñòàâëåííûõ ñðîêîâ. Êî- of Russia and adjacent regions” was started îðäèíèðóåò ðàáîòû ïî íàïèñàíèþ äàííîé in 2008 after the 5th Conference on Birds of ìîíîãðàôèè Â.Ï. Áåëèê, ê êîòîðîìó ìîæ- Prey, held in Ivanovo. For each species of íî îáðàùàòüñÿ ñî âñåìè âîïðîñàìè íà ýòó bird of prey 2–3 authors were appointed. By òåìó. 2010 it had been planned to write chapters Êîíòàêò (3). on distribution and abundance of all species. The progress at the end of April 2010: com- pletely prepared essays of 15 species (out of (4) Êîíòàêò  Îðåíáóðãå (Ðîññèÿ) 4 ìàÿ 2010 ã. â 56). Some of the authors who had agreed to Ìåíçáèðîâñêîå ðàìêàõ ðàáîòû XIII Ìåæäóíàðîäíîé write essays didn’t submit yet the informa- îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîå îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîé êîíôåðåíöèè Ñå- tion on the progress of their work (the Black- îáùåñòâî 125009, Ðîññèÿ, âåðíîé Åâðàçèè ñîñòîÿëñÿ IV Ñúåçä Winged Kite Elanus caeruleus, Black Kite Ìîñêâà, Ìåíçáèðîâñêîãî îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîãî Milvus migrans, Hen Harrier Circus cyaneus, óë. Á. Íèêèòñêàÿ, ä. 6, îáùåñòâà (ÌÎÎ)8. Montagu’s Harrier C. pygargus, Marsh Har- Çîîëîãè÷åñêèé ìóçåé  ðàáîòå ñúåçäà ïðèíÿëè ó÷àñòèå 69 rier C. aeruginosus, Rough-Legged Buzzard ÌÃÓ, Îòäåë îðíèòîëîãèè ÷ëåíîâ ÌÎÎ ñ ïðàâîì ðåøàþùåãî ãîëîñà. Buteo lagopus, Bonelli’s Eagle Hieraaetus òåë.: +7 495 629 4474 Áûë çàñëóøàí îò÷¸òíûé äîêëàä Ïðåçèäåí- fasciatus, Hymalayan Griffon Vulture Gyps ôàêñ: +7 495 629 4825 òà ÌÎÎ Åâãåíèÿ Íèêîëàåâè÷à Êóðî÷êè- himalayensis, White-Rumped Vultire Gyps [email protected] íà è åãî ïðåäëîæåíèå î ïðèñîåäèíåíèè bengalensis, Gyrfalcon Falco rusticolus, Ele- ÌÎÎ ê ó÷ðåæä¸ííîìó 20 ìàÿ 2009 ã. Ðóñ- onora’s Falcon Falco eleonora, Common (4) Contact ñêîìó îáùåñòâó ñîõðàíåíèÿ è èçó÷åíèÿ Kestrel Falco tinnunculus, American Kestrel Menzbir Ornithological ïòèö (ÐÎÑÈÏ). Ñúåçä íå ïîääåðæàë èäåþ Falco sparverius). It was decided to replace Society ïîäîáíîãî ñëèÿíèÿ è Ìåíçáèðîâñêîå îð- the authors of essays if they failure to meet Bolshaya Nikitskaya Str. 6, Moscow, Russia, íèòîëîãè÷åñêîå îáùåñòâî îñòàëîñü ñàìî- the deadline. The coordinator of the work on 125009, ñòîÿòåëüíîé îáùåñòâåííîé îðãàíèçàöèåé. writing this monograph is V.P. Belik, which Moscow Lomono- Ñîñòîÿëèñü âûáîðû ðóêîâîäñòâà ÌÎÎ. can be addressed on all relevant questions. sov State University, Ïðåçèäåíòîì èçáðàí Àíàòîëèé Ôåäîðîâè÷ Contact (3). Zoological Museum, Department Êîâøàðü (Êàçàõñòàí), âèöå-ïðåçèäåíòàìè of ornithology – Âèêòîð Ïàâëîâè÷ Áåëèê (Ðîññèÿ), Ãàäæè- tel.: +7 495 629 4474 áåê Ñåôèáåêîâè÷ Äæàìèðçîåâ (Ðîññèÿ) è Within the XIII International ornithologi- fax: +7 495 629 4825 Ìèõàèë Âëàäèìèðîâè÷ Êàëÿêèí (Ðîññèÿ). cal conference on Northern Eurasia the [email protected] Èçáðàí Öåíòðàëüíûé Ñîâåò ÌÎÎ â ñî- IV meeting of the Menzbir Ornithologi- ñòàâå: Ñåðãåé Âèòàëüåâè÷ Áàêêà, Âëàäèìèð cal Society (MOS) was held on May, 4th Ìèõàéëîâè÷ Ãàëóøèí, Âèêòîð Àíàòîëüå- 20108. âè÷ Çóáàêèí, Þðèé Âëàäèìèðîâè÷ Êðàñ- Entitled to vote 69 members of MOS par- íîâ, Íàòàëüÿ Âèêòîðîâíà Ëåáåäåâà, Èâàí ticipated in the meeting. The report of the Ñåðãååâè÷ Ìèòÿé, Ñåðãåé Ñòåïàíîâè÷ president of MOS Evgenie Kurochkin was Ìîñêâèòèí, Àëåêñàíäð Äìèòðèåâè÷ Íóìå- sounded. He offered to unit with the Russian ðîâ, Âëàäèìèð Àëåêñàíäðîâè÷ Ïàåâñêèé, Society of Bird Conservation and Research es-

8 http://zmmu.msu.ru/menzbir/action/conf/res.htm 8 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ñîáûòèÿ

Âàäèì Êîíñòàíòèíîâè÷ Ðÿáèöåâ, Ëåîíèä tablished on May, 20th 2009. Members of the Âèêòîðîâè÷ Ñîêîëîâ, Ïàâåë Ñòàíèñëàâî- meeting had not supported the idea of such âè÷ Òîìêîâè÷, Åâãåíèé Ýäóàðäîâè÷ Øåð- consolidation, and the Menzbir Ornithological ãàëèí. Ïî ïðåäëîæåíèþ Â.Ì. Ãàëóøèíà Society remains the independent NGO. Ñúåçä èçáðàë Å.Í. Êóðî÷êèíà ïî÷¸òíûì Administration of MOS was elected: presi- ïðåçèäåíòîì ÌÎÎ. dent – Anatoliy Kovshar (Kazakhstan), vice- Îáðàùåíèå ïðåçèäåíòà ÌÎÎ À.Ô. Êîâ- presidents – Victor Belik (Russia), Gajibek øàðÿ äîñòóïíî íà ñàéòå ÌÎÎ9. Jamirzoev (Russia) and Michael Kaljakin Êîíòàêò (4). (Russia). As members of the Central Coun- cil of MOS following persons were elected: Sergey Bakka, Vladimir Galushin, Victor Zu- (5) Êîíòàêò  ñòîëèöå Ìîíãîëèè ã. Óëàí-Áàòîð, 23– bakin, Jury Krasnov, Natalia Lebedeva, Ivan Ýëüâèðà Íèêîëåíêî 27 èþíÿ 2010 ã. ïðîø¸ë 6-îé Ìåæäóíà- Mitjaj, Sergey Moskvitin, Alexander Numer- ÌÁÎÎ «Ñèáèðñêèé ðîäíûé Ñèìïîçèóì ïî ïåðíàòûì õèù- ov, Vladimir Paevsky, Vadim Konstantinovich ýêîëîãè÷åñêèé öåíòð» 630090, Ðîññèÿ, íèêàì Àçèè. Rjabitsev, Leonid Sokolov, Pavel Tomkovich, Íîâîñèáèðñê, à/ÿ 547 Òàêèå êîíôåðåíöèè ïðîâîäÿòñÿ ðåãó- Evgenie Shergalin. Under V.M. Galushin’s of- òåë./ôàêñ: ëÿðíî êàæäûå äâà ãîäà Àçèàòñêîé ñåòüþ fer the meeting has elected E.N. Kurochkin +7 383 3630059 èçó÷åíèÿ è îõðàíû ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ as the honorable president of MOS. [email protected] (ARRCN) (ïîäðîáíåå î äåÿòåëüíîñòè ýòîé The reference of president of MOS A.F. Èãîðü Ôåôåëîâ îðãàíèçàöèè ìîæíî óçíàòü èç îáçîðà Kovshar is available on website of MOS9. Íàó÷íî- Åâãåíèÿ Øåðãàëèíà, îïóáëèêîâàííîãî â Contact (4). èññëåäîâàòåëüñêèé ¹16 æóðíàëà «Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ èíñòèòóò áèîëîãèè 10 ïðè Èðêóòñêîì îõðàíà» ). ãîñóäàðñòâåííîì Ïðèíèìàþùåé îðãàíèçàöèåé 6-ãî Ñèì- 6th International Conference on Asian óíèâåðñèòåòå, ïîçèóìà ñòàëî Ìîíãîëüñêîå îðíèòîëî- Raptors took place in the capital of Mon- 664003, Ðîññèÿ, ãè÷åñêîå îáùåñòâî (Ïðåçèäåíò Äð. Ãîì- golia Ulaanbaatar on 23–27 June, 2010. Èðêóòñê, óë. Ëåíèíà, 3, à/ÿ 24 áîáààòàð Ñóíäåâ), ÷àñòü ìåðîïðèÿòèé Such conferences are held on a regular ba- òåë.: +7 3952 243077 ïðîõîäèëà â ïðèðîäíîì ïàðêå «Õóñòàé sis by Asian Raptor Research and Conserva- [email protected] Íóðó».  Ñèìïîçèóìå ïðèíÿëî ó÷àñòèå tion Network (ARRCN) every two years (de- áîëåå 130 ÷åëîâåê èç 20 ñòðàí ìèðà (ßïî- tails of their activity can be seen in the review (5) Contact íèÿ, Ìîíãîëèÿ, Êèòàé, Ðåñïóáëèêà Êîðåÿ, of Eugeniy Shergalin, published in the News- Elvira Nikolenko Òàèëàíä, Èíäîíåçèÿ, Èíäèÿ, Ìàëàéçèÿ, letter Raptors Conservation Issue 1610). NGO Siberia Enviro- Ñèíãàïóð, Òàéâàíü, Âüåòíàì, Íèäåðëàí- The 6th International Conference was held mental Center äû, Àâñòðèÿ, Áåëüãèÿ, Ãåðìàíèÿ, Èçðàèëü, by the Mongolian Ornithological Society P.O. Box 547, Novosibirsk, ÎÀÝ, ÑØÀ, Âåëèêîáðèòàíèÿ, Ðîññèÿ). (President Dr. Gombobaatar Sundev), sev- Russia, 630090 Áûëî ïðåäñòàâëåíî îêîëî 40 óñòíûõ äî- eral sessions and workshops took place in tel./fax: êëàäîâ è 25 ïîñòåðîâ. Ñàìûå ìíîãî÷èñ- the “Hustai Nuruu” National Park. More +7 383 3630059 ëåííûå äåëåãàöèè ïðèáûëè èç ßïîíèè than 130 specialists from 20 countries (Ja- [email protected] (26 ó÷àñòíèêîâ), Ìîíãîëèè (20 ó÷àñòíè- pan, Mongolia, China, Republic Korea, Thai- Igor Fefelov êîâ, ïîìèìî îðãàíèçàòîðîâ), Òàéâàíÿ (13 land, Indonesia, India, Malaysia, Singapore, Scientific Research ó÷àñòíèêîâ), ÑØÀ (13 ó÷àñòíèêîâ), Èíäî- Taiwan, Vietnam, the Netherlands, Aus- Institute of Biology at íåçèè (11 ó÷àñòíèêîâ). Íà êîíôåðåíöèè tria, Belgium, Germany, Israel, UAE, USA, Irkutsk State University, Lenina str. 3, ïðèñóòñòâîâàëè òàêèå èçâåñòíûå ó÷¸íûå è UK, Russia) participated at the conference. P.O. Box 24, äåÿòåëè îõðàíû ïðèðîäû êàê Éåí Íüþòîí Irkutsk, Russia, 664003 (Âåëèêîáðèòàíèÿ), Áåðíä Ìåéáóðã (Ãåð- tel.: +7 3952 243077 ìàíèÿ), Ðóâåí Éîçåô (Èçðàèëü), Íèê Ôîêñ [email protected] (Âåëèêîáðèòàíèÿ), Àíèòà Ãàìàóô (Àâ- ñòðèÿ), Òîää Êàöíåð (ÑØÀ), Ëëîéä Êèôô (ÑØÀ), Ìèõàýëü Øòóááå (Ãåðìàíèÿ), Ðèê Âàòñîí (ÑØÀ) è äð. Ðîññèþ ïðåäñòàâëÿëè òðè ãðóïïû èññëå- äîâàòåëåé: Èãîðü Ôåôåëîâ è Àëåêñàíäð Ïîâàðèíöåâ (Èðêóòñê, Ðîññèÿ) ñ äîêëà- äàìè î ïðîë¸òå õèùíûõ ïòèö íà Þæíî- Áàéêàëüñêîì ïðîë¸òíîì ïóòè, Åâãåíèé Ïîòàïîâ (Ïåíñèëüâàíèÿ, ÑØÀ) è Èðèíà Ó÷àñòíèêè 6-ãî Ñèìïîçèóìà ARRCN íà ýêñêóðñèè â Óòåõèíà (Ìàãàäàí, Ðîññèÿ) ñ äîêëàäîì î ïðèðîäíîì ïàðêå «Õóñòàé-Íóðó». Ôîòî È. Óòåõèíîé. Participants of the 6th Conference of ARRCN on an 9 http://zmmu.msu.ru/menzbir/action/conf/pres.htm excursion in the “Hustai Nuruu” National Park. 10 http://docs.sibecocenter.ru/programs/raptors/RC16/RC16_22_24_Shergalin.pdf Photo by I. Utechina. Events Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 9

Ó÷àñòíèêè Ñèìïîçèóìà About 40 oral reports and 25 posters were ARRCN (ñëåâà presented. The most numerous delegations íàïðàâî): Èãîðü Êàðÿêèí, Ýëüâèðà were from Japan (26 participants), Mongolia Íèêîëåíêî è Áåðíä (20 participants, besides organizers), Taiwan Ìåéáóðã. (13 participants), the USA (13 participants), Ôîòî Ð. Ëàïøèíà. Indonesia (11 participants). Many known Participants of the Con- scientists and wildlife conservationists par- ference of ARRCN (from ticipated at the conference: Ian Newton left to right): Igor Kar- yakin, Elvira Nikolenko (UK), Bernd-U. Meyburg (Germany), Reuven and Bernd-U. Meyburg. Yosef (Israel), Nick Fox (UK), Anita Gamauf Photo by R. Lapshin. (Austria), Todd Katzner (USA), Lloyd F. Kiff (ÑØÀ), Michael Stubbe (Germany), Rick Watson (USA) and others. Russia were presented by three groups of áåëîãîëîâîì îðëàíå (Haliaeetus pelagicus) researchers: Igor Fefelov and Alexander Po- â ñåâåðíîé ÷àñòè Îõîòñêîãî ìîðÿ, Èãîðü varintsev (Irkutsk, Russia) with reports about Êàðÿêèí (Íèæíèé Íîâãîðîä, Ðîññèÿ) è Ýëü- reptor migration in the South Baikal migra- âèðà Íèêîëåíêî (Íîâîñèáèðñê, Ðîññèÿ) – ñ tory pass, Eugene Potapov (Pennsylvania, äîêëàäàìè î áåðêóòå (Aquila chrysaetos) è USA) and Irina Utekhina (Magadan, Russia) áàëîáàíå (Falco cherrug) â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì with the report about the Steller’s Sea Eagle ðåãèîíå. Íàäî ñêàçàòü, ÷òî ýòî ñàìàÿ áîëü- (Haliaeetus pelagicus) in the northern part øàÿ ðîññèéñêàÿ äåëåãàöèÿ çà îäèííàäöàòè- of the Sea of Okhotsk, Igor Karyakin (Nizh- ëåòíþþ èñòîðèþ Ñèìïîçèóìîâ ARRCN. niy Novgorod, Russia) and Elvira Nikolenko Äîêëàäû, ïðåäñòàâëåííûå íà Ñèìïîçèó- (Novosibirsk, Russia) with reports about the ìå, áûëè ïîñâÿùåíû ðàçëè÷íûì àñïåêòàì Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and the èçó÷åíèÿ è îõðàíû ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ â Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) in the Altai- ñòðàíàõ Àçèè: ïîïóëÿöèîííîé ýêîëîãèè, Sayan region. It should be noted, it was the òàêñîíîìèè, ãíåçäîâîé áèîëîãèè, ðàñ- largest Russian delegation for eleven-year ïðîñòðàíåíèþ è ÷èñëåííîñòè âèäîâ, èç- history of conferences of ARRCN. ó÷åíèþ ìèãðàöèé, óãðîçàì è ïðîáëåìàì Reports presented at the Conference were îõðàíû. Òàêæå áûëî ïðîâåäåíî íåñêîëüêî about different aspects of raptor research ðàáî÷èõ ñåêöèé: ïî èçó÷åíèþ ïîïóëÿöè- and conservation in Asian countries: breed- îííîé ýêîëîãèè, ìåòîäàì ó÷¸òà è ðàñ÷¸òà ing biology, taxonomy, status, and distri- ÷èñëåííîñòè ïîïóëÿöèé, ïî èçó÷åíèþ çà- bution of species, movements and migra- áîëåâàíèé è ãèáåëè ïòèö, à òàêæå ïî ìå- tions population threats and conservation. òîäàì ìå÷åíèÿ. Also several workshops were held on raptor Ñïèñîê ó÷àñòíèêîâ Ñèìïîçèóìà äîñòó- population ecology and data management, ïåí íà ñàéòå Ìîíãîëüñêîãî îðíèòîëîãè÷å- raptor counts and population, raptor mor- ñêîãî îáùåñòâà11. Òåçèñû äîêëàäîâ äîñòóï- tality and conservation, raptor field surveys: íû íà ñàéòå Ñèáýêîöåíòðà12. trapping and marking. Êîíòàêò (5). The list of participants is available on web- site of the Mongolian Ornithological Soci- ety11. Conference proceedings are available (6) Contact  îôèñå äèðåêöèè Íàöèîíàëüíîãî ïàð- on website of the Siberian Environmental Mátyás Prommer êà «Áüþê» (Ýãåð, Âåíãðèÿ) 16–18 ñåíòÿ- Center12. Bükk National Park áðÿ 2010 ã. ïðîøëà èòîãîâàÿ êîíôåðåí- Contact (5). Directorate, 3304 Eger, Sánc u. 6. öèÿ âåíãåðñêî-ñëîâàöêîé ïðîãðàììû HUNGARY LIFE06 NAT/H/000096 ïî îõðàíå áàëî- saker.conference@ áàíà â Êàðïàòñêîì áàññåéíå: «Îõðàíà Conference on Presenting the Results gmail.com áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug) â Åâðîïå». of the Hungarian-Slovak LIFE06 NAT/  ðàìêàõ äàííîé ïðîãðàììû îñóùåñò- H/000096 Programme: Conservation of âëÿëñÿ ìîíèòîðèíã èçâåñòíûõ ãíåçäîâèé the Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) in Europe áàëîáàíîâ, ìåðîïðèÿòèÿ ïî óñòàíîâêå was held in Bükk National Park Directorate èñêóññòâåííûõ ãíåçäîâèé, çàùèòå ïòèö íà (Eger, Hungary) in 16–18 September 2010. ëèíèÿõ ýëåêòðîïåðåäà÷è, ðåèíòðîäóêöèÿ Monitoring the known nests of the Saker ñóñëèêîâ íà ìîäåëüíûõ òåððèòîðèÿõ, à Falcon, erecting the artificial nests, protect- òàêæå ìàñøòàáíàÿ àêöèÿ ïî ïðîñëåæèâà- ing birds against electrocution, reintroduc-

11 http://www.mos.mn/arrcn/participants.html 12 http://www.sibecocenter.ru/var/fck/File/Asian_raptors_6th_symposium_text-Mongolia.pdf 10 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ñîáûòèÿ

íèþ 37-ìè ìîëîäûõ è 3-õ âçðîñëûõ áàëî- tion of sousliks at the model territories and áàíîâ, ïîìå÷åííûõ ñïóòíèêîâûìè ïåðå- tracking of 37 young and 3 adult sakers with äàò÷èêàìè. Âñÿ èíôîðìàöèÿ îá ýòîé è satellite transmitters were carried out under äðóãîé äåÿòåëüíîñòè ìîæåò áûòü íàéäåíà the program. All information about these â àííîòàöèÿõ äîêëàäîâ, ïðîçâó÷àâøèõ íà and other activities may be seen in the Con- êîíôåðåíöèè, êîòîðûå äîñòóïíû äëÿ ñêà- ference proceedings which are available on ÷èâàíèÿ íà ñàéòå ïðîåêòà13. website of the project13. Êîíòàêò (6). Contact (6).

(7) Êîíòàêò  êîíöå ñåíòÿáðÿ 2010 ã. êîàëèöèåé The coalition of NGOs engaging in the Ýëüâèðà Íèêîëåíêî îáùåñòâåííûõ îðãàíèçàöèé, âåäóùèõ projects on research and conservation of ÌÁÎÎ «Ñèáèðñêèé ïðîåêòû ïî èçó÷åíèþ è îõðàíå ïåð- raptors in the Volga region, Ural Moun- ýêîëîãè÷åñêèé öåíòð» 630090, Ðîññèÿ, íàòûõ õèùíèêîâ â Ïîâîëæüå, íà Óðàëå tains and Siberia has established the Íîâîñèáèðñê, à/ÿ 547 è â Ñèáèðè, ó÷ðåæäåíà îáùåñòâåííàÿ “Russian Raptor Research and Conserva- òåë./ôàêñ: îðãàíèçàöèÿ «Ðîññèéñêàÿ ñåòü èçó÷å- tion Network” (RRRCN) at the end of Sep- +7 383 3630059 íèÿ è îõðàíû ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ». tember, 2010. [email protected]  ñåòü âîøëè òàêèå èçâåñòíûå ìåæðå- The network has included such known in- ãèîíàëüíûå îáùåñòâåííûå îðãàíèçàöèè ter-regional NGOs of Russia as the Ecologi- (7) Contact Ðîññèè, êàê Ýêîëîãè÷åñêèé öåíòð «Äðîíò» cal Center “Dront” (Nizhni Novgorod), the Elvira Nikolenko (Íèæíèé Íîâãîðîä), Öåíòð ïîëåâûõ èñ- Center for Field Studies (Nizhniy Novgorod), NGO Siberia Enviro- mental Center ñëåäîâàíèé (Íèæíèé Íîâãîðîä), Öåíòð ñî- the Volga-Ural ECONET Assistance Center P.O. Box 547, äåéñòâèÿ «Âîëãî-Óðàëüñêîé ýêîëîãè÷åñêîé (Samara), the Siberian Environmental Cent- Novosibirsk, ñåòè» (Ñàìàðà), Ñèáèðñêèé ýêîëîãè÷åñêèé er (Novosibirsk) and a number of leading Russia, 630090 öåíòð (Íîâîñèáèðñê), à òàêæå ðÿä âåäóùèõ experts on birds of prey from the Republic tel./fax: +7 383 3630059 ñïåöèàëèñòîâ ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì èç Ðåñïó- of Tatarstan, Kurgan district, Altai Kray and [email protected] áëèêè Òàòàðñòàí, Êóðãàíñêîé îáëàñòè, Àë- other regions. òàéñêîãî êðàÿ è äðóãèõ ðåãèîíîâ. The general aims of the new network will Îñíîâíîé öåëüþ ñîçäàíèÿ ñåòè ÿâëÿåòñÿ be coordinating the activity of initiative êîîðäèíàöèÿ äåÿòåëüíîñòè èíèöèàòèâíûõ groups engaging in raptor research, devel- ãðóïï, èçó÷àþùèõ õèùíûõ ïòèö, âåäåíèå oping the database on the monitoring of åäèíîé áàçû äàííûõ ìîíèòîðèíãà ïåðíà- raptors and realizing the projects on raptor òûõ õèùíèêîâ è îïåðàòèâíàÿ ðåàëèçàöèÿ conservation. ïðîåêòîâ, íàïðàâëåííûõ íà èõ îõðàíó. Contact (7). Êîíòàêò (7).

(8) Contact  ìàå 2010 ã. ñòàðòîâàë ïÿòèëåòíèé The five-year Research Networking Pro- Guy Duke ïðîåêò Åâðîïåéñêîãî íàó÷íîãî ôîí- gramme “Research and Monitoring for and Chair of the Steering äà (ECF) «Èññëåäîâàíèÿ è ìîíèòîðèíã with Raptors in Europe” (EURAPMON)14 Committee of EURAPMON äëÿ õèùíûõ ïòèö è ñ õèùíûìè ïòèöà- of the European Science Foundation [email protected] ìè â Åâðîïå» (EURAPMON)14. Ââîäíûé (ESF) started in May, 2010. The inaugural ñåìèíàð ïðîåêòà ïðîø¸ë 7–9 îêòÿáðÿ workshop of the EURAPMON was held in 2010 ã. íà Ñèöèëèè (Èòàëèÿ) â Ïðèðîä- Riserva Naturale Orientate dello Zingaro, íîì çàïîâåäíèêå «Çèíãàðî». Sicily, Italy, 7–9 October 2010. EURAPMON ôèíàíñèðóåòñÿ 15 åâðîïåé- EURAPMON is funded by a 15 Europe- ñêèìè èññëåäîâàòåëüñêèìè àêàäåìèÿìè, an research academies, governments and ïðàâèòåëüñòâàìè è íåïðàâèòåëüñòâåííûìè NGOs. îðãàíèçàöèÿìè. The wider aim of EURAPMON is to Ãëîáàëüíîé öåëüþ EURAPMON ÿâëÿåò- strengthen the contribution of research ñÿ óêðåïëåíèå âêëàäà íàó÷íûõ èññëåäî- and monitoring for and with raptors in âàíèé è ìîíèòîðèíãà äëÿ õèùíûõ ïòèö è Europe to delivery of biodiversity, envi- ñ õèùíûìè ïòèöàìè â Åâðîïå äëÿ ñîõðà- ronmental and human health benefits, íåíèÿ áèîðàçíîîáðàçèÿ, îõðàíû îêðó- including maintenance and recovery of æàþùåé ñðåäû è çäîðîâüÿ ëþäåé, â òîì raptor populations and their habitats, and ÷èñëå ïîääåðæàíèå è âîññòàíîâëåíèå reduced chemicals threats to ecosystem ïîïóëÿöèé õèùíèêîâ è ìåñò èõ îáèòà- and human health.

13 http://www.sakerlife.mme.hu/uploads/File/Saker_Conference_Abstracts.pdf 14 http://www.esf.org/index.php?id=6979 Events Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 11

íèÿ, è ñíèæåíèå óãðîçû îòðàâëåíèÿ õè- ìè÷åñêèìè âåùåñòâàìè äëÿ ýêîñèñòåì è çäîðîâüÿ ëþäåé. Çàäà÷è EURAPMON: (1) ñîçäàòü óñòîé- ÷èâîå è ýôôåêòèâíîå èñïîëüçîâàíèå ðåñóðñîâ îáùååâðîïåéñêîé ñåòè äëÿ ìî- íèòîðèíãà õèùíûõ ïòèö; (2) óñòàíîâèòü êîíñåíñóñ îáùååâðîïåéñêèõ ïðèîðèòåòîâ ìîíèòîðèíãà äëÿ õèùíûõ ïòèö è ñ õèùíû- ìè ïòèöàìè íà îñíîâå ïîëíîé èíâåíòàðè- çàöèè ñóùåñòâóþùèõ ñèñòåì ìîíèòîðèíãà ׸ðíûå êîðøóíû (Milvus migrans). è ïîòðåáíîñòåé êëþ÷åâûõ ïîëüçîâàòåëåé Ôîòî Ì. Êîñòèíà. (ïîëèòèêîâ, ÷èíîâíèêîâ îõðàíû ïðèðî- Black Kites (Milvus migrans). Photo by M. Kostin. äû, ðàöèîíàëüíîãî ïðèðîäîïîëüçîâàíèÿ); (3) ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå ïåðåäîâîãî îïûòà è The objectives of EURAPMON are (1) to ñîçäàíèå â Åâðîïå ïîòåíöèàëà äëÿ ñîãëà- establish a sustainable and resource-effi- ñîâàííîãî ìîíèòîðèíãà õèùíûõ ïòèö; (4) cient Europe-wide network for monitoring ñîçäàíèå â Èíòåðíåò áàçû äàííûõ, ñîäåð- for and with raptors, linked to internation- æàùåé ñâåäåíèÿ î òðåíäå åâðîïåéñêèõ al networks; (2) to establish consensus on ïîïóëÿöèé õèùíûõ ïòèö è óãðîçàõ, ñó- Europe-wide priorities for monitoring for ùåñòâóþùèõ äëÿ õèùíûõ ïòèö â Åâðîïå, à and with raptors, based on comprehen- òàêæå äëÿ ñáîðà â ìàñøòàáå âñåé Åâðîïû sive inventory of existing monitoring, and è ñòðàí-ó÷àñòíèö ÅÑ àíàëèòè÷åñêèõ ìàòå- of needs of key users (policy makers, risk ðèàëîâ, êîòîðûå îòâå÷àþò ïðèîðèòåòíûì assessors, environmental managers); (3) ïîòðåáíîñòÿì ïîëüçîâàòåëåé. to spread best practices and build capaci- Èäåÿ Ïðîãðàììû EURAPMON áûëà ðàç- ties in Europe for harmonized monitoring ðàáîòàíà íà ðàáî÷åì ñîâåùàíèè, ñîñòî- for and with raptors; (4) to build a web- ÿâøåìñÿ â çàïîâåäíèêå «Çèíãàðî» â îêòÿ- based database, populated with interop- áðå 2006 ã., ìàòåðèàëû êîòîðîãî áûëè erable data on European raptor popula- îïóáëèêîâàíû â ñïåöèàëüíîì âûïóñêå tion trends and pressures on raptors in Ambio â 2008 ã. Europe, and to produce European- and Ó÷àñòíèêè Ïðîãðàììû EURAPMON – EU- scale analytical outputs which meet ïðåäñòàâèòåëè áîëüøèíñòâà ñòðàí-÷ëåíîâ priority needs of users. Îáëîæêà ïðîãðàììû ESF è êëþ÷åâûõ ìåæäóíàðîäíûõ îðãàíè- EURAPMON builds on a workshop held ñåìèíàðà ñ ïîäïèñÿìè çàöèé, â òîì ÷èñëå Ñåêðåòàðèàòà UNEP/ at the Zingaro Reserve in October 2006, âñåõ ó÷àñòíèêîâ. CMS, BirdLife International, MEROS è proceedings of which were published in a Êîïèÿ ïðåäîñòàâëåíà Raptor Research Foundation. Special Issue of Ambio in 2008. ß. Ñèëèöêèì. Ñåìèíàð â îêòÿáðå 2010 ã. áûë ïî- EURAPMON participants are drawn from Cover of the workshop ñâÿù¸í ñòðàòåãè÷åñêîìó ïëàíèðîâàíèþ program with signa- most ESF member countries and from key tures of all participants. ðàáîòû Ïðîãðàììû EURAPMON, ñîç- international organisations, including the Copy from J. Sielicki. äàíèþ ïîíèìàíèÿ è îñîçíàíèÿ ðàáîòû UNEP/CMS Secretariat, BirdLife Interna- Ïðîãðàììû ó âîâëå÷¸ííûõ tional, MEROS and the Raptor Research ó÷àñòíèêîâ.  ñåìèíàðå Foundation. EURAPMON has access to ïðèíÿëî ó÷àñòèå îêîëî 50 a significant proportion of leading and ñïåöèàëèñòîâ – èññëåäîâà- emerging expertise and facilities for such òåëåé õèùíûõ ïòèö Åâðî- work in Europe. ïû. Ó÷àñòíèêè ðàññìîòðåëè The objectives of this inaugural workshop íàó÷íî-òåõíè÷åñêèå ñîîá- are to build understanding and awareness ðàæåíèÿ â îòíîøåíèè øåñòè of EURAPMON and engage participants in èç âîñüìè ðàáî÷èõ ïàêåòîâ EURAPMON programme planning. About Ïðîãðàììû EURAPMON: 50 raptologists from Europe were partici- - ïîëíàÿ èíâåíòàðèçàöèÿ pated in the workshop. Participants of the ñóùåñòâóþùèõ ìåðîïðèÿòèé workshop addressed scientific and technical ïî ìîíèòîðèíãó; considerations in relation to six of the eight - âûÿâëåíèå ïîòðåáíî- work packages of EURAPMON: ñòåé ïîëüçîâàòåëåé; - comprehensive inventory of existing - ïðèîðèòåçàöèÿ; monitoring activities; - îïðåäåëåíèå íàèëó÷øèõ - identification of user needs; ìåòîäèê; - prioritisation; 12 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ñîáûòèÿ

Ó÷àñòíèêè ñåìèíàðà EURAPMON â Ïðèðîäíîì çàïîâåäíèêå «Çèíãàðî». Ôîòî ß. Ñåëèöêîãî. EURAPMON inaugural workshop participants in the Zingaro Reserve. Photo by J. Sielicki.

- ñîçäàíèå ïîòåíöèàëà; - setting best practice; - ñîçäàíèå âåá-áàçû äàííûõ, îò÷¸òíîñòè - capacity-building; è àíàëèçà. - establishing a web-based database, re- Òåêóùóþ äåÿòåëüíîñòü EURAPMON êóðè- porting and analysis. ðóåò ñïåöèàëüíî ñîçäàííûé óïðàâëÿþùèé Specially created the Steering Committee êîìèòåò, â êîòîðûé âîøëè âåäóùèå ñïå- supervising the current activity of EURAP- öèàëèñòû â îáëàñòè èññëåäîâàíèÿ è ìîíè- MON consists of the leading raptologists òîðèíãà õèùíûõ ïòèö èç ñòðàí-÷ëåíîâ Åâ- from ESF member countries: Dr. Alessandro ðîïåéñêîãî íàó÷íîãî ôîíäà: Àëåññàíäðî Andreotti (Italy), Mr. Gilles Biver (Luxem- Àíäðåîòòè (Èòàëèÿ), Ãèëëåñ Áèâåð (Ëþêñåì- bourg), Dr. Szilárd Daróczi (Romania), Prof. áóðã), Ñçèëàðä Äàðî÷è (Ðóìûíèÿ), ïðîô. Antonio J. García-Fernández (Spain), Dr. Àíòîíèî Ãàðñèà-Ôåðíàíäåç (Èñïàíèÿ), Björn Helander (Sweden), Dr. Dorte Herzke Áü¸ðí Õåëàíäåð (Øâåöèÿ), Äîðîòå Õåðö- (Norway), Dr. Andras Kovacs (Hungary), Dr. êå (Íîðâåãèÿ), Àíäðàñ Êîâà÷ (Âåíãðèÿ), Luís Palma (Portugal), Prof. Pertti Saurola Ëóèñ Ïàëìà (Ïîðòóãàëèÿ), Ïåðòòè Ñàóðî- (Finland), Mr. Janusz Sielicki (Poland), Dr. ëà (Ôèíëÿíäèÿ), ßíóø Ñèëèöêèé (Ïîëüøà), Christian Sonne (Denmark), Dr. Ülo Väli (Es- Õðèñòèàí Ñîííå (Äàíèÿ), Þëî Âÿëè (Ýñòî- tonia), Dr. Bert van Hattum (Netherlands), íèÿ), Áåðò Âàí Õàòòóì (Íèäåðëàíäû), Àë Dr. Al Vrezec (Slovenia). Âðåæåê (Ñëîâåíèÿ). Òàêæå ê ðàáîòå êîìè- Advisory Experts: òåòà ïðèâëåêàþòñÿ ýêñïåðòû ßí Áàðôèëä Dr. Ian Burfield (BirdLife International, UK), (BirdLife International, Âåëèêîáðèòàíèÿ), Mr. Ubbo Mammen (Germany), Prof. Rich- Óááî Ìàììåí (Ãåðìàíèÿ), ïðîô. Ðè÷àðä ard Shore (UK), Dr. Chris Wernham (UK). Øîðå (Âåëèêîáðèòàíèÿ) è Êðèñ Âåðíõàì Chair of the Steering Committee – Mr. (Âåëèêîáðèòàíèÿ). Ïðåäñåäàòåëü êîìèòåòà Guy Duke (UK). – Ãàé Äüþê (Âåëèêîáðèòàíèÿ). Countries of CIS at the inaugural workshop Ñòðàíû ÑÍà íà ââîäíîì ñåìèíàðå ïðåä- were presented by Prof. Vladimir Galushin, ñòàâëÿëè ïðîô. Âëàäèìèð Ãàëóøèí (Ðîñ- (Russia), Alexander Abuladze (Georgia), ñèÿ), Àëåêñàíäð Àáóëàäçå (Ãðóçèÿ), Âàëå- Valeriy Dombrovskiy (Belarus) and Elvira ðèé Äîìáðîâñêèé (Áåëàðóñü) è Ýëüâèðà Nikolenko (Russia). During the workshop Íèêîëåíêî (Ðîññèÿ). Íà ñåìèíàðå áûëî Janusz Sielicki has been decided to present ðåøåíî è îáúÿâëåíî ñîáðàâøèìñÿ, ÷òî interests of these countries at the Steering ïðåäñòàâëÿòü èíòåðåñû ýòèõ ñòðàí â óïðàâ- Committee. ëÿþùåì êîìèòåòå áóäåò ßíóø Ñèëèöêèé. Poster of the Russian Raptor Research Ïîñòåð Ðîññèéñêîé ñåòè èçó÷åíèÿ è and Conservation Network presented on îõðàíû ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ, ïðåäñòàâëåí- the EURAPMON workshop is available íûé íà ñåìèíàðå EURAPMON, äîñòóïåí on website of the Siberian Environmental äëÿ ñêà÷èâàíèÿ íà ñàéòå Ñèáýêîöåíòðà15. Center15. Êîíòàêò (8). Contact (8).

15 http://docs.sibecocenter.ru/programs/raptors/Publ/01_Poster_monitoring_um.jpg Events Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 13

Îïóáëèêîâàí íîâûé Êðàñíûé ñïèñîê The new IUCN Red List (version 2010.3)16 ÌÑÎÏ (âåðñèÿ 2010.3)16, â êîòîðîì ïå- has been published which status of 39 ðåñìîòðåí ñòàòóñ 39-òè âèäîâ ïòèö17, bird species17 including two raptor spe- â òîì ÷èñëå äâóõ âèäîâ õèùíûõ ïòèö: cies – Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug)18 and áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug)18 è òðàóðíîãî Black-and-Chestnut Eagle (Spizaetus îðëà (Spizaetus [Oroaetus] isidori)19. [Oroaetus] isidori)19 was revised in. Ñòàòóñ òðàóðíîãî îðëà ïîâûøåí: èç êà- Status of the Black-and-Chestnut Eagle òåãîðèè âèäîâ íèçêîãî ðèñêà (òàêñîíû, has been increased from “Near Threatened” áëèçêèå ê ïåðåõîäó â ãðóïïó óãðîæàåìûõ (NT) to “Vulnerable” (VU). Status of the Sak- – NT) âèä ïåðåíåñ¸í â êàòåãîðèþ óÿçâè- er Falcon has been decreased from “Endan- ìûõ (VU). Ñòàòóñ áàëîáàíà ïîíèæåí: èç gered” (EN) to “Vulnerable” (VU). The offi- êàòåãîðèè âèäîâ, íàõîäÿùèõñÿ ïîä óãðî- cial reason of such status change is the new çîé èñ÷åçíîâåíèÿ (EN), âèä ïåðåíåñ¸í â information about species and improved êàòåãîðèþ óÿçâèìûõ (VU). Îôèöèàëüíàÿ knowledge of the criteria. Comments about ïðè÷èíà èçìåíåíèÿ ñòàòóñîâ – ïîëó÷åíèå changing the Saker Falcon status have been íîâûõ ñâåäåíèé î âèäàõ. Êîììåíòàðèè îò- published on pp. 21 and 37. íîñèòåëüíî èçìåíåíèÿ ñòàòóñà áàëîáàíà îïóáëèêîâàíû íà ñòð. 21 è 37.

ContrabandofFalcons КОНТРАБАНДА СОКОЛОВ

Çàäåðæàííûé ñ äâóìÿ êðå÷åòàìè (Falco Detained with two Gyrfalcons (Falco rusticolus) çèìîé 2009 ã. â àýðîïîðòó rusticolus) in the airport of the Ossor ïîñ. Îññîðà Êàì÷àòñêîãî êðàÿ (Ðîññèÿ), town (Kamchatka Kray, Russia) in win- ãðàæäàíèí À. Áåëîç¸ðîâ ïîí¸ñ íàêàçà- ter 2009 Mr. A. Belozerov was fined 60 íèå â âèäå øòðàôà â ðàçìåðå 60 òûñ. thousands rubles and assessed 542500 ðóá. è âîçìåùåíèÿ óùåðáà æèâîòíîìó rubles as a compensation of damage to ìèðó â ðàçìåðå 542,5 òûñ. ðóá.20 wildlife20. Ïðè ïîïûòêå âûâåçòè ïòèö çà ïðåäåëû Mr. A. Belozerov tried to bring two Gyrs Êàðàãèíñêîãî ðàéîíà Êàì÷àòñêîãî êðàÿ, â out of the Karaginskiy region of the Kam- àýðîïîðòó Îññîðû, ïðè ïðåäïîë¸òíîì äî- chatka Kray which were found during lug- ñìîòðå áàãàæà, ó ãðàæäàíèíà À. Áåëîç¸- gage inspection in the airport of Ossor. ðîâà áûëè îáíàðóæåíû 2 êðå÷åòà. Ïòèöû Birds were confiscated and after veteri- áûëè èçúÿòû è ïåðåäàíû íà âðåìåííîå ñî- nary examination were released back into äåðæàíèå ñïåöèàëèñòó àãåíòñòâà ïî îõðà- the wild. íå îõîòíè÷üèõ æèâîòíûõ. Ïîñëå îñìîòðà A criminal action was brought against âåòåðèíàðîì ïòèöû áûëè âûïóùåíû â Mr. A. Belozerov on article 258 of the åñòåñòâåííóþ ñðåäó îáèòàíèÿ. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation  îòíîøåíèè ãðàæäàíèíà À. Áåëîç¸ðîâà (illegal hunting for birds and animals, áûëî âîçáóæäåíî óãîëîâíîå äåëî ïî ï. «â» which hunting is forbidden completely ÷. 1 ñò. 258 ÓÊ ÐÔ (íåçàêîííàÿ îõîòà íà on). The Karaginskiy regional court has ïòèö è çâåðåé, îõîòà íà êîòîðûõ ïîëíîñòüþ sentenced A. Belozerov to a fee at 60 çàïðåùåíà). Ïî ïðèãîâîðó ñóäà Êàðàãèí- thousands roubles. ñêîãî ðàéîíà À. Áåëîç¸ðîâ áûë ïðèçíàí According to the Federal Low of the âèíîâíûì â ñîâåðøåííîì ïðåñòóïëåíèè. Russian Federation “On Wildlife” the ad- Åìó íàçíà÷åíî íàêàçàíèå â âèäå øòðàôà â ministration of the Karaginskiy region ðàçìåðå 60 òûñÿ÷ ðóáëåé. have brought an action against A. Beloz- Ó÷èòûâàÿ, ÷òî â ñîîòâåòñòâèè ñ ÔÇ ÐÔ «Î erov to fine him for 542500 rbl. which has æèâîòíîì ìèðå» ãðàæäàíå, ïðè÷èíèâøèå been recognized by court as proved and âðåä îáúåêòàì æèâîòíîãî ìèðà è ñðåäå satisfied in full. îáèòàíèÿ, âîçìåùàþò íàíåñ¸ííûé óùåðá

16 http://www.iucnredlist.org 17 http://www.iucnredlist.org/documents/summarystatistics/2010_3RL_Stats_Table_7.pdf 18 http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/144578/0 19 http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/144521/0 20 http://www.kamkrai.com/index.php?newsid=2901 14 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ñîáûòèÿ

â ñîîòâåòñòâèè ñ ìåòîäèêàìè èñ÷èñëåíèÿ Syrians with a caught Saker Falcon (Falco óùåðáà æèâîòíîìó ìèðó, àäìèíèñòðàöèåé cherrug) were arrested in the Republic Êàðàãèíñêîãî ìóíèöèïàëüíîãî ðàéîíà À. of Khakassia (Russia) in June 201021 (see Áåëîç¸ðîâó áûë çàÿâëåí ãðàæäàíñêèé èñê also news on 1 TV-Channel)22. íà ñóììó 542500 ðóá., êîòîðûé ñóäîì áûë Officers of the department of militia on ïðèçíàí îáîñíîâàííûì è óäîâëåòâîð¸í â struggle against the illegal trade in biore- ïîëíîì îáú¸ìå. sources of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Khakassia detained the car with two persons in a steppe area near the  èþëå 2010 ã. â Õàêàñèè áûëè çàäåðæà- Girim settlement. In the car they found the íû ãðàæäàíå Ñèðèè, ó êîòîðûõ áûë èçú- special equipment for trapping birds, 12 ÿò îòëîâëåííûé áàëîáàí (Falco cherrug)21 alive pigeons which were a bait, and one (ñì. òàêæå íîâîñòü íà 1 êàíàëå)22. caught saker falcon. Ñîòðóäíèêàìè îòäåëåíèÿ ìèëèöèè ïî During investigation it has been revealed áîðüáå ñ ïðàâîíàðóøåíèÿìè â ñôåðå that both arrested persons were Syrians. îáîðîòà áèîðåñóðñîâ ÌÂÄ ïî Ðåñïóáëè- The caught falcon was brought to the êå Õàêàñèÿ, â ñòåïíîì ìàññèâå â îêðåñò- Abakan Zoo and later was released into the íîñòÿõ áûâøåé äåðåâíè Òåðåãåø, â 6 êì nature. îò ïîñ. Äæèðèì áûë çàäåðæàí àâòîìî- áèëü ñ äâóìÿ ãðàæäàíàìè.  àâòîìîáèëå áûëè îáíàðóæåíû ïðèñïîñîáëåíèÿ äëÿ A Syrian trying to catch the Saker Falcon ëîâëè ïòèö, 12 æèâûõ ãîëóáåé, êîòîðûå (Falco cherrug) was detained in the East ÿâëÿëèñü ïðèìàíêîé è îäèí ïîéìàííûé Kazakhstan district (Kazakhstan) on Au- ñîêîë-áàëîáàí. gust, 9th 2010.23  õîäå ðàçáèðàòåëüñòâà áûëî âûÿâëåíî, On the site “Krasnaya Glinka” in the Kur- ÷òî îáà çàäåðæàííûõ – ãðàæäàíå Ñèðèè. chum region of the East Kazakhstan district, Ïîéìàííûé ñîêîë áûë ïåðåäàí â àáàêàí- the veterinary police together with the op- ñêèé çîîïàðê è ïîçæå âûïóùåí íà âîëþ. erative group on protection of wildlife has Íà÷àëüíèê îòäåëåíèÿ ìèëèöèè ïî áîðü- detained two poachers – trappers of Sakers, áå ñ ïðàâîíàðóøåíèÿìè â ñôåðå îáîðîòà one of them was the Syrian. áèîðåñóðñîâ ÌÂÄ ïî Ðåñïóáëèêå Õàêàñèÿ The Syrian 36 years old and the Kazakh 35 Ñåðãåé Âðóáëåâñêèé îòìå÷àåò, ÷òî Øè- years old from the Zhambyl district carried ðèíñêèé ðàéîí Õàêàñèè óæå äîëãîå âðåìÿ in the boot of their car the accessories for íàõîäèòñÿ ïîä îñîáûì êîíòðîëåì ìèëèöè- the falcon catching – harness traps, rufter- îíåðîâ, òàê êàê èìåííî çäåñü óæå íå ðàç hoods, leather gloves. çà ïîñëåäíèå ãîäû çàäåðæèâàëèñü ëèöà, ïûòàâøèåñÿ ïîéìàòü ñîêîëîâ.

Ãðàæäàíèíà Ñèðèè çàäåðæàëè çà ïî- ïûòêó îòëîâà áàëîáàíîâ (Falco cherrug) â Âîñòî÷íî-Êàçàõñòàíñêîé îáëàñòè (Êà- çàõñòàí) 9 àâãóñòà 2010 ã.23 Íà ó÷àñòêå «Êðàñíàÿ Ãëèíêà» â Êóð÷óì- ñêîì ðàéîíå ÂÊÎ âåòåðèíàðíàÿ ïîëèöèÿ, ñîâìåñòíî ñ îïåðàòèâíûì îòðÿäîì ïî îõðàíå ðàñòèòåëüíîñòè è æèâîòíîãî ìèðà çàäåðæàëà äâîèõ áðàêîíüåðîâ (ëîâöîâ áà- ëîáàíîâ), îäèí èç êîòîðûõ îêàçàëñÿ ãðàæ- äàíèíîì Ñèðèè. Ïî èíôîðìàöèè íà÷àëüíèêà ÎÏ è ÂÏ ÄÂÄ ÂÊÎ Áàòûðõàíà Ñóëåéìåíîâà, 36- ëåòíèé ñèðèåö è 35-ëåòíèé óðîæåíåö Æàìáûëüñêîé îáëàñòè Êàçàõñòàíà âåçëè â áàãàæíèêå èíîìàðêè ïðèíàäëåæíîñòè, ïðåäíàçíà÷åííûå äëÿ ëîâëè ñîêîëîâ – ñèë- Êîíôèñêîâàííûé áàëîáàí (Falco cherrug). Ôîòî ñ íîâîñòíîãî ñàéòà www.yk.kz. 21 http://www.mvd.ru/news/45070/ 22 http://www.1tv.ru/news/social/158199 Saker Falcon confiscated (Falco cherrug). 23 http://.kz/blog/sokol_baloban/2010-08-10-2877 Photo from news-website www.yk.kz. Events Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 15

êè, êëîáó÷êè, êîæàíûå ïåð÷àòêè. Policemen intercepted the attempted Òåì ñàìûì, ïîëèöåéñêèìè áûëà ïðå- crime provided by article 290 of the Crimi- ñå÷åíà ïîïûòêà ñîâåðøåíèÿ ïðåñòóïëå- nal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan íèÿ, ïðåäóñìîòðåííîãî ñòàòüåé 290 ÓÊ about the illegal trade of rare and endan- ÐÊ – íåçàêîííîå îáðàùåíèå ñ ðåäêèìè è gered wildlife species. íàõîäÿùèìèñÿ ïîä óãðîçîé èñ÷åçíîâåíèÿ âèäàìè æèâîòíûõ è ðàñòåíèé. «Ñîêîë-áàëîáàí çàíåñ¸í â Êðàñíóþ êíè- Syrians with two falcons were detained in ãó Êàçàõñòàíà êàê èñ÷åçàþùèé âèä, óùåðá the Ust-Abakan region of the Republic of ãîñóäàðñòâó îöåíèâàåòñÿ â 986100 òåíãå», Khakassia (Russia) on August, 25th 201024. – ðàññêàçàë Á. Ñóëåéìåíîâ. Officers of the militia department on struggle against the illegal trade in biore- sources of the Ministry of Internal Affairs  Óñòü-Àáàêàíñêîì ðàéîíå Ðåñïóáëèêè of the Republic of Khakassia detained three Õàêàñèÿ (Ðîññèÿ) 25 àâãóñòà 2010 ã. áûëè Syrians at 9 km from the Kurgannoe village çàäåðæàíû ãðàæäàíå Ñèðèè ñ äâóìÿ ñî- of the Ust-Abakan region in the evening êîëàìè24. on August, 25th. Syrians were catching fal- Îêîëî 8-ìè ÷àñîâ âå÷åðà 25 àâãóñòà ñî- cons illegally, they were found with special òðóäíèêàìè îòäåëåíèÿ ìèëèöèè ïî áîðüáå equipment for trapping, 11 pigeons which ñ ïðàâîíàðóøåíèÿìè â ñôåðå îáîðîòà used as a bait and 2 falcons that had been áèîðåñóðñîâ ÌÂÄ ïî Ðåñïóáëèêå Õàêà- caught already . ñèÿ â 9 êèëîìåòðàõ îò ñ. Êóðãàííîå Óñòü- The poached birds were brought into Àáàêàíñêîãî ðàéîíà áûëè çàäåðæàíû òðè the Abakan Zoo. According to the expert ãðàæäàíèíà Ñèðèè, êîòîðûå çàíèìàëèñü conclusion one bird is the Saker Falcon íåçàêîííîé äîáû÷åé ñîêîëîâ. Ó ñèðèé- (Falco cherrug), another is the Peregrine öåâ â àðñåíàëå áûëè ïðèñïîñîáëåíèÿ äëÿ Falcon (F. peregrinus). ëîâëè ïòèö, 11 ãîëóáåé, ÿâëÿâøèõñÿ ïðè- ìàíêîé, è 2 ñîêîëà, êîòîðûõ óæå óñïåëè ïîéìàòü. Seven infringers have been detained Ïîéìàííûå áðàêîíüåðàìè ïòèöû áûëè in the Kurchum region of the East Ka- ïåðåäàíû â àáàêàíñêèé çîîïàðê. Ïî çà- zakhstan district (Kazakhstan) on Sep- êëþ÷åíèþ ýêñïåðòîâ, îäíà ïîéìàííàÿ tember, 7th 2010. They were confiscated ïòèöà ÿâëÿåòñÿ áàëîáàíîì (Falco cherrug), 7 Sakers (Falco cherrug) and 10 Pallas’s à âòîðàÿ – ñàïñàíîì (F. peregrinus). Sandgrouses (Syrrhaptes paradoxus) as Äëÿ Õàêàñèè íåçàêîííàÿ îõîòà íà ñîêî- well as pigeons and harness traps25. ëîâ íå èñêëþ÷åíèå èç ïðàâèë. Ïî ñòàòèñòè- According to the East Kazakhstan re- êå ñîâåðøàåìûõ ïðàâîíàðóøåíèé, íàèáî- gional territorial inspection carrying out ëåå óÿçâèìûìè ÿâëÿþòñÿ Óñòü-Àáàêàíñêèé, the operative spot-check on protection of Áîãðàäñêèé, Øèðèíñêèé è Àñêèçñêèé ðàé- wildlife in the Kurchum regions inspectors îíû. Ïî ñëîâàì íà÷àëüíèêà ýêîëîãè÷åñêîé of the governmental organization “Ohot- ìèëèöèè ÌÂÄ ïî Ðåñïóáëèêå Õàêàñèÿ Ñåð- zooprom” have detained four Syrians and ãåÿ Âðóáëåâñêîãî, âñå îíè íàõîäÿòñÿ ïîä three citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan ïðèñòàëüíûì âíèìàíèåì ìèëèöèîíåðîâ. who were engaged in illegal trapping birds

 Êóð÷óìñêîì ðàéîíå Âîñòî÷íî- Êàçàõñòàíñêîé îáëàñòè (Êàçàõñòàí) 7 ñåíòÿáðÿ 2010 ã. áûëî çàäåðæàíî ñåìü íàðóøèòåëåé, ó êîòîðûõ èçúÿòû ñåìü áàëîáàíîâ (Falco cherrug) è äåñÿòü ñàäæ (Syrrhaptes paradoxus), à òàêæå ãîëóáè è ñíàñòè äëÿ ëîâëè ñîêîëîâ25. Ïî èíôîðìàöèè Âîñòî÷íî-Êàçàõñòàíñêîé îáëàñòíîé òåððèòîðèàëüíîé èíñïåêöèè âî âðåìÿ ïðîâåäåíèÿ îïåðàòèâíîãî ðåéäà ïî îõðàíå æèâîòíîãî ìèðà â Êóð÷óìñêîì Âûïóñê èçúÿòûõ áàëîáàíîâ (Falco cherrug) íà âîëþ. Ôîòî ñ íîâîñòíîãî ñàéòà www.yk.kz. 24 http://www.mvd.ru/news/46654/ Saker Falcons (Falco cherrug) released. 25 http://www.akimvko.gov.kz/ru/news.htm?id=10543 Photo from news-website www.yk.kz. 16 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ñîáûòèÿ

ðàéîíå èíñïåêòîðàìè ÐÃÊÏ ÏÎ «Îõîò- in the “Buyrek” foothills. çîîïðîì» íà ó÷àñòêå ïðåäãîðüÿ «Áóéðåê» During examination of the car 7 alive sak- çàäåðæàíû ÷åòâåðî ãðàæäàí Ñèðèéñêîé ers and 10 Pallas’s Sangrouses (one of them Àðàáñêîé Ðåñïóáëèêè è òðîå ãðàæäàí Ðå- was alive, 8 dead and one dismembered) ñïóáëèêè Êàçàõñòàí, êîòîðûå çàíèìàëèñü listed in the Red Data Book of the Repub- íåçàêîííîé äîáû÷åé ïòèö. lic of Kazakhstan have been found. Also  õîäå îñìîòðà àâòîìîáèëÿ ìàðêè inspectors have been found 18 carcasses «Pajero» áûëè îáíàðóæåíû è èçúÿòû 7 of pigeons and the equipment for catching æèâûõ áàëîáàíîâ è 10 ñàäæ (èç íèõ îäíà birds (harness traps, rufter-hoods, etc.). æèâàÿ, 8 ì¸ðòâûõ è 1 ðàñ÷ëåí¸ííàÿ), çà- The confiscated sakers were released back íåñ¸ííûõ â Êðàñíóþ êíèãó Ðåñïóáëèêè into the wild in a week. Êàçàõñòàí. Çäåñü æå áûëè îáíàðóæåíû All data and material evidences are 18 òóøåê ãîëóáåé è îðóäèÿ ëîâëè ïòèö (10 brought to the Kurchum regional militia ñèëêîâ ïî 10 øò., 13 êëîáó÷êîâ, 2 ñà÷êà, department. A criminal action has been êàïðîíîâûå íèòè – 3 ìîòêà, ÷åõîë). brought on article 290 of the Criminale ×åðåç íåäåëþ èçúÿòûå áàëîáàíû áûëè Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. âûïóùåíû íà âîëþ ñîòðóäíèêàìè èíñïåê- öèè ëåñíîãî è îõîòíè÷üåãî õîçÿéñòâà. Ìàòåðèàëû è âåùåñòâåííûå äîêàçàòåëü- During check of accommodation of for- ñòâà ïåðåäàíû â Êóð÷óìñêèé ÐÎÂÄ, ïî ñò. eign citizens in the Chernogorsk town of 290 ÓÊ ÐÊ âîçáóæäåíî óãîëîâíîå äåëî. the Republic of Khakassia (Russia) a Sak- Ìàòåðèàëû äåëà ãîòîâÿòñÿ äëÿ ïåðåäà÷è â er (Falco cherrug), pigeons and traps for ñóä ÷åðåç ïðîêóðàòó (Ïèñüìî ÎÒÈ ¹03- falcons have been found at four Syrians 11/821 îò 20.09.10 ã.). on October, 13th, 201026. In the morning on October, 13th, officers of Federal Security Service, Federal Migra-  õîäå ïðîâåðêè æèëüÿ èíîñòðàííûõ tion Service and Customs Service inspected ãðàæäàí 13 îêòÿáðÿ 2010 ã. â ã. ×åðíî- accommodation of foreign citizens. Officers ãîðñê Ðåñïóáëèêè Õàêàñèÿ (Ðîññèÿ) ó have found four Syrians in one of apartments ÷åòâåðûõ ãðàæäàí Ñèðèè áûë îáíàðó- in Chernogorsk. At the further examination æåí áàëîáàí (Falco cherrug), à òàêæå ãî- of the apartment they were convinced that ëóáè è ñíàñòè äëÿ ëîâëè ñîêîëîâ26. men were engaged in poaching in the ter- Óòðîì 13 îêòÿáðÿ ñîòðóäíèêè ÓÔÑÁ, ritory of Khakassia: traps, loops, pigeons ÓÔÌÑ è Òàìîæåííîé ñëóæáû â ðàìêàõ which were generally used as a bait in trap- ïðîâåäåíèÿ âòîðîãî ýòàïà àêöèè «Íåëåãàë- ping falcons and also the caught Saker were 2010», äåéñòâóþùåé íà òåððèòîðèè Õàêà- found in the apartment. ñèè, ïðîâîäèëè ïðîâåðêó æèëüÿ èíîñòðàí- The Saker has been brought into the íûõ ãðàæäàí.  îäíîé èç êâàðòèð ïî óë. Abakan Zoo. Áîãðàäà â ×åðíîãîðñêå ñèëîâèêè îáíàðó- The facts of occurrence of foreign citi- æèëè ÷åòâåðûõ ãðàæäàí Ñèðèè. Ïðè äàëü- zens with the purpose of illegal catch- íåéøåì îñìîòðå êâàðòèðû ñòàëî î÷åâèäíî, ÷òî ìóæ÷èíû çàíèìàþòñÿ áðàêîíüåðñòâîì íà òåððèòîðèè Õàêàñèè: â êâàðòèðå íàõî- äèëèñü ñèëêè, ïåòëè, êàïêàíû, ãîëóáè, êî- òîðûå, êàê èçâåñòíî, ÿâëÿþòñÿ ïðèìàíêîé â îõîòå íà ñîêîëîâ, à òàêæå ïîéìàííûé ñîêîë-áàëîáàí. Íà âîïðîñ, ãäå èìåííî áûëà ïîéìàíà ïòèöà, çàäåðæàííûå âíÿòíî îòâåòèòü íå ñìîãëè, ññûëàÿñü íà íåçíàíèå ðóññêîãî ÿçûêà. Áàëîáàí áûë ïåðåäàí â àáàêàíñêèé çîî- ïàðê, ãäå áûë îñìîòðåí ñïåöèàëèñòàìè. Åãî çäîðîâüþ íè÷åãî íå óãðîæàåò. Ôàêòû, ïîäòâåðæäàþùèå ïîÿâëåíèå íà òåððèòîðèè ðåñïóáëèêè èíîñòðàííûõ ãðàæäàí ñ öåëüþ íåçàêîííîé äîáû÷è ñî- Áàëîáàí (Falco cherrug). Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. 26 http://www.mvd-khakasia.ru/content/view/2557/1/ Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug). Photo by I. Karyakin. Events Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 17

êîëîâ, âûÿâëÿþòñÿ ñîòðóäíèêàìè ýêîëî- ing of falcons in the territory of Republic ãè÷åñêîé ìèëèöèè ñ 2006 ã.  2010 ã. çà are recorded by employees of ecological ñîâåðøåíèå àíàëîãè÷íûõ ïðåñòóïëåíèé militia since 2006. For committing simi- áûëî âîçáóæäåíî 2 óãîëîâíûõ äåëà ïî ñòà- lar crimes two criminal actions have been òüå 258 ÓÊ ÐÔ, ñîñòàâëåíî 4 àäìèíèñòðà- brought and 4 administrative reports have òèâíûõ ïðîòîêîëà. been made in 2010.

XIIIInternationalOrnithologicalConferenceofNorthEurasia. 30April–6May,2010,Orenburg,Russia.Resolution РЕЗОЛЮЦИЯ XIII МЕЖДУНАРОДНОЙ ОРНИТОЛОГИЧЕСКОЙ КОНФЕРЕНЦИИ СЕВЕРНОЙ ЕВРАЗИИ. 30 АПРЕЛЯ – 6 МАЯ 2010 ГОДА, ОРЕНБУРГ, РОССИЯ

Êîíôåðåíöèÿ ïîäâåëà èòîãè îðíèòîëîãè- The Conference has summarized the orni- ÷åñêèõ èññëåäîâàíèé â Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè thological surveys in North Eurasia during çà ïåðèîä ïîñëå Ñòàâðîïîëüñêîé êîíôå- the period after the Stavropol Conference ðåíöèè (2006 ã.) ïî øèðîêîìó êðóãó âî- (2006) on a wide range of study questions ïðîñîâ èçó÷åíèÿ (ôàóíèñòèêà, ñèñòåìà- (faunistics, systematics, morphology, ecol- òèêà, ìîðôîëîãèÿ, ýêîëîãèÿ, ïîâåäåíèå ogy, bird behavior, oology, new survey ïòèö, îîëîãèÿ, íîâûå ìåòîäû èññëåäîâà- methods, urban ornithology, paleoornithol- íèé, ãîðîäñêàÿ îðíèòîëîãèÿ, ïàëåîîðíè- ogy, etc.) and bird conservation. òîëîãèÿ è äð.) è îõðàíû ïòèö. The Conference has shown that orni- Êîíôåðåíöèÿ ïîêàçàëà, ÷òî îðíèòîëîãèÿ thology is still making progress; however, ïðîäîëæàåò ðàçâèâàòüñÿ, íî óñëîâèÿ äëÿ å¸ the conditions for its advance, primarily ðàçâèòèÿ, â ïåðâóþ î÷åðåäü ôèíàíñîâûå, financial, leave much to be desired. Par- îñòàâëÿþò æåëàòü ëó÷øåãî, â ÷àñòíîñòè, ticularly, it concerns the use of the novel â èñïîëüçîâàíèè íîâåéøèõ òåõíè÷åñêèõ technologies and financing field surveys. ñðåäñòâ è â ôèíàíñèðîâàíèè ïîëåâûõ èñ- Ornithologists were noted to be active ñëåäîâàíèé. Îòìå÷åíà âûñîêàÿ àêòèâíîñòü in publishing different types of journals, îðíèòîëîãîâ ïî èçäàíèþ ðàçëè÷íîãî ðîäà monographs, and other published stud- æóðíàëîâ, ìîíîãðàôèé è äðóãèõ ïå÷àòíûõ ies; strengthening international collabora- ðàáîò, ðàçâèòèþ ìåæäóíàðîäíîé êîîïå- tion in surveys, among those, using the ðàöèè â èññëåäîâàíèÿõ, â òîì ÷èñëå ñ èñ- novel engineering developments (telem- ïîëüçîâàíèåì íîâåéøèõ òåõíè÷åñêèõ ðàç- etry, etc.); involving young people into ðàáîòîê (òåëåìåòðèÿ è äð.), âîâëå÷åíèþ scientific research. ìîëîäåæè â íàó÷íûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ. The continuation of fundamental and ap- Äëÿ ñîâðåìåííîãî ýòàïà ðàçâèòèÿ îðíè- plied research, vigorous activity in bird con- òîëîãèè â Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè õàðàêòåðíî servation, and involvement of bird-fanciers ïðîäîëæåíèå ôóíäàìåíòàëüíûõ è ïðè- into ornithological surveys is characteristic êëàäíûõ èññëåäîâàíèé, àêòèâíàÿ äåÿòåëü- of the modern stage of development of or- íîñòü ïî îõðàíå ïòèö, à òàêæå âîâëå÷åíèå nithology in North Eurasia. â èññëåäîâàíèÿ ëþáèòåëåé ïòèö. The Conference resolves: Êîíôåðåíöèÿ ïîñòàíîâëÿåò: Stating the progress of scientific surveys Êîíñòàòèðóÿ óñïåõè íàó÷íûõ èññëåäî- and intensification of the efforts on the pri- âàíèé è àêòèâèçàöèþ ðàáîò ïî ïðèîðè- ority issues of the modern ornithology, to òåòíûì òåìàì ñîâðåìåííîé îðíèòîëîãèè, support their further development, paying ïîääåðæàòü èõ äàëüíåéøåå ðàçâèòèå, óäå- a special attention to the fundamental sci- ëÿÿ îñîáîå âíèìàíèå ôóíäàìåíòàëüíûì entific disciplines, and to participation of íàó÷íûì äèñöèïëèíàì, à òàêæå ó÷àñòèþ ornithologists in the interdisciplinary stud- îðíèòîëîãîâ â ìåæäèñöèïëèíàðíûõ èññëå- ies and in solving practical environmental äîâàíèÿõ è â ðåøåíèè ïðàêòè÷åñêèõ ïðè- problems. ðîäîîõðàííûõ çàäà÷. To intensify the efforts on publishing vol- Àêòèâèçèðîâàòü ðàáîòû ïî èçäàíèþ òî- umes within the series “Birds of Russia and ìîâ â ñåðèè «Ïòèöû Ðîññèè è ñîïðåäåëü- Adjacent Regions”, regional reports, atlas- 18 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ñîáûòèÿ

íûõ ðåãèîíîâ», ðåãèîíàëüíûõ ñâîäîê, àòëàñîâ, îïðå- es, identification guide, and monographs on bird fauna äåëèòåëåé è ìîíîãðàôèé ïî ôàóíå ïòèö ãîðîäîâ. of urban environments. Ïîääåðæàòü ïðîâåäåíèå ðåãèîíàëüíûõ è ïðîáëåì- To support holding of the regional and problem con- íûõ êîíôåðåíöèé è ñîâåùàíèé. ferences and meetings. Ïîääåðæàòü äåÿòåëüíîñòü ðàáî÷èõ ãðóïï ïî èçó÷å- To support the activity of working teams on studying íèþ ðàçëè÷íûõ ýêîëîãè÷åñêèõ è ñèñòåìàòè÷åñêèõ different ecological and systematic bird groups, and ãðóïï ïòèö, à òàêæå Ôàóíèñòè÷åñêîé êîìèññèè, äåé- the Faunistic Commission operating in Russia, and to ñòâóþùåé â Ðîññèè, è ïðèâåòñòâîâàòü ñîçäàíèå ðåãèî- encourage the setting up of regional faunistic commis- íàëüíûõ ôàóíèñòè÷åñêèõ êîìèññèé. sions. Ïðîäîëæàòü ðàáîòó ïî îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîìó îáðàçî- To continue work on ornithological educating: to de- âàíèþ: ðàçâèâàòü è ïîääåðæèâàòü ìåòîäè÷åñêóþ áàçó velop and support the procedural framework of opera- ðàáîòû ó÷èòåëåé è ðàáîòíèêîâ äîïîëíèòåëüíîãî îá- tion of the teachers and additional education personnel ðàçîâàíèÿ ïóòåì ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèÿ ìåòîäè÷åñêèõ ïó- by distributing procedural publications and electronic áëèêàöèé è ýëåêòðîííûõ ìàòåðèàëîâ, ñ÷èòàòü íåäîïó- materials; to regard the current cutting financing of the ñòèìûì ïðîèñõîäÿùåå ñîêðàùåíèå ôèíàíñèðîâàíèÿ additional education unacceptable. äîïîëíèòåëüíîãî îáðàçîâàíèÿ. To worldwide support the activity in bird conserva- Âñåìåðíî ïîääåðæàòü ðàáîòó ïî îõðàíå ïòèö ñ èñ- tion using scientific groundwork; to regard the practice ïîëüçîâàíèåì íàó÷íûõ íàðàáîòîê, ñ÷èòàòü ïîëîæè- of involvement of the public and bird-fanciers into the òåëüíîé ïðàêòèêó âîâëå÷åíèÿ íàñåëåíèÿ, ëþáèòåëåé practical activity on conservation and study of birds in ïòèö â ïðàêòè÷åñêóþ äåÿòåëüíîñòü ïî ñîõðàíåíèþ è nature reserves, national and regional nature parks, and èçó÷åíèþ ïòèö â çàïîâåäíèêàõ, íàöèîíàëüíûõ è ðå- other protected areas. ãèîíàëüíûõ ïðèðîäíûõ ïàðêàõ è äðóãèõ ÎÎÏÒ. The Conference urges the ornithologists to partici- Êîíôåðåíöèÿ ïðèçûâàåò îðíèòîëîãîâ àêòèâíåå pate more vigorously in organization and execution of ó÷àñòâîâàòü â îðãàíèçàöèè è ïðîâåäåíèè ïðîñâåòè- educational activity among the population, including òåëüñêîé ðàáîòû ñðåäè íàñåëåíèÿ, â òîì ÷èñëå â îá- the sphere of conservation, studying, and monitoring ëàñòè îõðàíû, èçó÷åíèÿ è ìîíèòîðèíãà ïòèö, øèðå of birds; to wider involve the bird-fanciers into collec- âîâëåêàòü ëþáèòåëåé ïòèö â ñáîð ïåðâè÷íîãî íàó÷- tion of primary scientific materials. íîãî ìàòåðèàëà. Ñïîñîáñòâîâàòü àêòèâíîìó âçàèìî- To facilitate active collaboration between the envi- äåéñòâèþ ìåæäó ïðèðîäîîõðàííûìè îðãàíèçàöèÿìè ronmental organizations of Russia, Commonwealth of Ðîññèè, ñòðàí ÑÍà è Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè. Independent States countries, and North Eurasia. Ïðèçíàòü íåîáõîäèìîñòü áîëåå ãëóáîêîãî âçàèìî- To recognize necessity of the deeper collaboration äåéñòâèÿ ìåæäó ãîñóäàðñòâåííûìè è îáùåñòâåííûìè between the state and public structures of the hunting ñòðóêòóðàìè îõîòíè÷üåãî õîçÿéñòâà Ðîññèè ñ îðíè- sector of the Russian Federation with ornithologists and òîëîãàìè è îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèìè îðãàíèçàöèÿìè â âî- ornithological organizations on questions of studying, ïðîñàõ èçó÷åíèÿ, óñòîé÷èâîãî èñïîëüçîâàíèÿ ðåñóð- sustainable utilization of resources, ecological educa- ñîâ, ýêîëîãè÷åñêîãî ïðîñâåùåíèÿ è ñîõðàíåíèÿ ïòèö. tion, and bird conservation. Îáðàòèòüñÿ ê Ìèíïðèðîäå Ðîññèè è ðóêîâîäèòåëÿì To address to the Ministry of Natural Resources of ñóáúåêòîâ Ôåäåðàöèè ñ ïðîñüáîé ó÷åñòü îñòðóþ íå- the Russian Federation and the Heads of the subordi- îáõîäèìîñòü óâåëè÷åíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè èíñïåêòîð- nate entities of the Federation with the request to take ñêîãî ñîñòàâà íà ìåñòàõ ïðè ôîðìèðîâàíèè íîâûõ into consideration the acute necessity of increasing ñòðóêòóð ãîñóäàðñòâåííîãî îõîòíè÷üåãî êîíòðîëÿ è the number of inspectors at the local level when form- íàäçîðà, äëÿ îãðàíè÷åíèÿ ðàçâèâàþùåãîñÿ ìàñøòàá- ing new structures of state hunting control and sur- íîãî áðàêîíüåðñòâà âî ìíîãèõ ðåãèîíàõ Ðîññèè. Ó÷¸- veillance in order to restrain the increasing wide-scale íûå òàêæå îñîçíàþò ñòåïåíü îòâåòñòâåííîñòè, êîòîðàÿ poaching in many regions of Russia. The researchers ëåæèò íà íèõ â âîïðîñå ïðîñâåùåíèÿ îõîòíèêîâ, êàê also are aware of the extent of responsibility which îñíîâíûõ ïîëüçîâàòåëåé äàííîãî ïðèðîäíîãî ðåñóð- lies upon them in the issue of education of hunters as ñà, ïî âîïðîñàì âèäîâîãî ñîñòàâà, ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèè the main users of this natural resource, on questions è áèîëîãèè ïòèö. of the species composition, distribution, and biology Àêòèâèçèðîâàòü ñîòðóäíè÷åñòâî ñ ìåæäóíàðîäíûìè of the birds. è çàðóáåæíûìè îðãàíèçàöèÿìè, â òîì ÷èñëå â öåëÿõ To intensify the collaboration with international and ìîíèòîðèíãà ïîïóëÿöèé ïòèö, îõðàíû ìèãðèðóþùèõ foreign organizations, in purposes that include the è çèìóþùèõ ïòèö, äàëüíåéøåãî ðàñøèðåíèÿ âûñîêî- monitoring of bird populations and conservation of èíôîðìàòèâíûõ ìåòîäîâ èññëåäîâàíèÿ ïòèö ñ ïîìî- migratory and winter birds, the further broadening of ùüþ ñïóòíèêîâîé òåëåìåòðèè è äðóãèõ ïðè¸ìîâ äèñ- highly informative methods for bird surveying using the òàíöèîííîãî ñëåæåíèÿ. satellite telemetry and other distant tracing methods. Øèðå èñïîëüçîâàòü ùàäÿùèå ìåòîäû òîëåðàíòíîé To wider employ the sparing methods of tolerant îðíèòîëîãèè äëÿ ìèíèìèçàöèè èññëåäîâàòåëüñêîãî ornithology in order to minimize the research stress, ïðåññà, ïðåæäå âñåãî ïðè èçó÷åíèè ðåäêèõ è óÿçâè- primarily, when studying rare and vulnerable bird ìûõ âèäîâ ïòèö. species. Events Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 19

Âûðàçèòü ãëóáîêóþ áëàãîäàðíîñòü ðåêòîðó Îðåí- To express deep gratitude to the Chancellor of the áóðãñêîãî ãîñóäàðñòâåííîãî ïåäàãîãè÷åñêîãî óíè- Orenburg State Pedagogical University (OSPU), Pro- âåðñèòåòà ïðîôåññîðó Â.Ñ. Áîëîäóðèíó, ïðîðåêòîðó fessor V.S. Bolodurin, Vice-Chancellor of OSPU for ÎÃÏÓ ïî ÍÈÐ À.Ã. Èâàíîâîé, çàâåäóþùåìó êàôåäðîé research scientific work A.G. Ivanova, Head of the çîîëîãèè, ýêîëîãèè è àíàòîìèè À.Â. Äàâûãîðå, âñåìó Subdepartment of Zoology, Ecology, and Anatomy êîëëåêòèâó óíèâåðñèòåòà, îáåñïå÷èâøèì ïðåêðàñíîå A.V. Davygora, and the entire collective body of the ïðîâåäåíèå êîíôåðåíöèè. university who provided the excellent hosting of the Âûðàçèòü ïðèçíàòåëüíîñòü Ìèíèñòåðñòâó îáðàçîâà- Conference. íèÿ è Ìèíèñòåðñòâó ïðèðîäíûõ ðåñóðñîâ, ýêîëîãèè To acknowledge the Ministry of Education and the è èìóùåñòâåííûõ îòíîøåíèé Îðåíáóðãñêîé îáëàñòè, Ministry of Natural Resources, Land and Ownership Re- à òàêæå Ðîññèéñêîìó ôîíäó ôóíäàìåíòàëüíûõ èñ- lations of Orenburg District, and to the Russian Founda- ñëåäîâàíèé çà ôèíàíñîâóþ è îðãàíèçàöèîííóþ ïîä- tion for Basic Research for financial and organizational äåðæêó êîíôåðåíöèè. support of the Conference. Ïðèíÿòü ïðåäëîæåíèå î ïðîâåäåíèè â 2015 ã. î÷å- To adopt the proposal on holding the next XIV Inter- ðåäíîé XIV Ìåæäóíàðîäíîé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîé êîí- national Ornithological Conference of North Eurasia in ôåðåíöèè Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè â ã. Ïåíçå. 2015 in Penza.

ÏÐÈËÎÆÅÍÈÅ Ê ÐÅÇÎËÞÖÈÈ RESOLUTION ADDENDUM  êà÷åñòâå Ïðèëîæåíèÿ ê Ðåçîëþöèè êîíôåðåíöèÿ Several specific environment-oriented propositions îäîáðèëà òàêæå íåñêîëüêî êîíêðåòíûõ ïðåäëîæåíèé were approved as the Resolution Addendum in the ïðèðîäîîõðàííîé íàïðàâëåííîñòè. Conference. Ó÷èòûâàÿ, ÷òî ïëàíèðóåìûé ïîäú¸ì óðîâíÿ ×åáîê- Taking into consideration that the planned rise of level ñàðñêîãî âîäîõðàíèëèùà äî 68-é îòìåòêè ïðèâåä¸ò of the Cheboksary reservoir to the 68th mark will result ê êàòàñòðîôè÷åñêèì ýêîëîãè÷åñêèì è ñîöèàëüíûì in catastrophic ecological and social consequences for ïîñëåäñòâèÿì äëÿ Ðåñïóáëèêè Ìàðèé Ýë è Íèæå- the Mari El Republic and Nizhniy Novgorod District: to ãîðîäñêîé îáëàñòè, ê äåãðàäàöèè ïî êðàéíåé ìåðå degradation of at least 5 key ornithological territories of 5 êëþ÷åâûõ îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèõ òåððèòîðèé Ðîññèè, the Russian Federation that are of international impor- èìåþùèõ ìåæäóíàðîäíîå çíà÷åíèå, â òîì ÷èñëå tance, among them the only in the Volga federal district åäèíñòâåííîãî â Ïðèâîëæñêîì ôåäåðàëüíîì îêðó- Ramsar wetlands, the Conference solicits the President ãå Ðàìñàðñêîãî âîäíî-áîëîòíîãî óãîäüÿ, êîíôåðåí- of the Russian Federation D.A. Medvedev for prevent- öèÿ õîäàòàéñòâóåò ïåðåä Ïðåçèäåíòîì Ðîññèéñêîé ing the rise of level of Cheboksary reservoir, which will Ôåäåðàöèè Ä.À. Ìåäâåäåâûì íå äîïóñòèòü ïîäú¸ìà lead to serious ecological and social destructions and óðîâíÿ ×åáîêñàðñêîãî âîäîõðàíèëèùà, êîòîðîå sabotage the realization of international liabilities of the ïðèâåä¸ò ê ñåðü¸çíûì ýêîëîãè÷åñêèì è ñîöèàëüíûì Russian Federation concerning the Ramsar Convention ðàçðóøåíèÿì è ñîðâ¸ò âûïîëíåíèå ìåæäóíàðîäíûõ on Wetlands. îáÿçàòåëüñòâ Ðîññèéñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè ïî Ðàìñàðñêîé To direct the attention of the Federal Agency for êîíâåíöèè î âîäíî-áîëîòíûõ óãîäüÿõ. Fishery of the Russian Federation on inadmissibility of Îáðàòèòü âíèìàíèå Ôåäåðàëüíîãî àãåíòñòâà ïî ðû- mass kill of marine birds, including those registered áîëîâñòâó Ðîññèéñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè íà íåäîïóñòèìîñòü in the Red Book of the Russian Federation, of fishing ìàññîâîé ãèáåëè ìîðñêèõ ïòèö, â òîì ÷èñëå çàíåñ¸í- gears in salmon drift-netting by Japan and Russia at íûõ â Êðàñíóþ êíèãó Ðîññèéñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè, â îðó- the Far East fishing basin and in longline fishing for äèÿõ ëîâà íà ÿïîíñêîì è ðîññèéñêîì äðèôòåðíîì bottom-dwelling fish in the seas of the Russian Fed- ïðîìûñëå ëîñîñåé â äàëüíåâîñòî÷íîì ðûáîõîçÿé- eration. ñòâåííîì áàññåéíå è íà ÿðóñíîì ïðîìûñëå äîííûõ To recommend to the Russian Federal Fisheries ðûá â ìîðÿõ Ðîññèéñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè. Ðåêîìåíäîâàòü Agency to recommence the science grounded moni- Ðîñðûáîëîâñòâó: âîçîáíîâèòü íàó÷íî-îáîñíîâàííûé toring of the incidental catch of marine birds at salmon ìîíèòîðèíã ïðèëîâà ìîðñêèõ ïòèö íà äðèôòåðíîì drift-netting in the exclusive economic zone of the Rus- ïðîìûñëå ëîñîñåé â èñêëþ÷èòåëüíîé ýêîíîìè÷åñêîé sian Federation; to implement the existing devices and çîíå Ðîññèéñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè; âíåäðÿòü â ïðàêòèêó methods for reduction of the incidental catch of birds äåÿòåëüíîñòè ïîëüçîâàòåëåé âîäíûõ áèîðåñóðñîâ ñó- into practice of activity of users of aquatic bioresources ùåñòâóþùèå ïðèñïîñîáëåíèÿ è ìåòîäû ñîêðàùåíèÿ in order to conserve the populations thereof and of ma- ïðèëîâà ïòèö äëÿ ñîõðàíåíèÿ èõ ïîïóëÿöèé è ìîð- rine ecosystems in general. ñêèõ ýêîñèñòåì â öåëîì. The Conference appeals to the Ministry of Natural Re- Êîíôåðåíöèÿ îáðàùàåòñÿ ê Ìèíïðèðîäû Ðîññèé- sources of the Russian Federation against the introduc- ñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè ñ ïðîòåñòîì ïðîòèâ ââåäåíèÿ íà tion in Russia of new periods for spring hunting with the òåððèòîðèè Ðîññèè íîâûõ ñðîêîâ âåñåííåé îõîòû duration of 16 days and the opportunity for the regions ïðîäîëæèòåëüíîñòüþ â 16 äíåé ñ âîçìîæíîñòüþ ðå- to independently start it in different parts of the region ãèîíîâ ñàìîñòîÿòåëüíî îòêðûâàòü å¸ â ðàçíûõ ÷àñòÿõ for different periods, due to which the total duration ðåãèîíà â ðàçíûå ñðîêè, â ðåçóëüòàòå ÷åãî îáùàÿ ïðî- of hunting in the region may be up to 30 days. The 20 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ñîáûòèÿ

äîëæèòåëüíîñòü îõîòû â ðåãèîíå ìîæåò ñîñòàâëÿòü äî Conference points to the unbalanced large-scale and in 30 äíåé. Êîíôåðåíöèÿ óêàçûâàåò íà íåñáàëàíñèðî- general rather long-term usage of swimming birds as âàííîå, øèðîêîìàñøòàáíîå è â öåëîì âåñüìà ïðîäîë- a hunting object in hunting areas of the North Eurasia æèòåëüíîå èñïîëüçîâàíèå âîäîïëàâàþùèõ ïòèö â êà- countries, on whose territory all stages of the life cycle ÷åñòâå îáúåêòà îõîòû â îõîòóãîäüÿõ ñòðàí Ñåâåðíîé of these birds occur. Åâðàçèè, íà òåððèòîðèè êîòîðûõ ïðîõîäÿò âñå ýòàïû In order to distribute the positive experience of bird æèçíåííîãî öèêëà ýòèõ ïòèö. conservation from mass kill on transmission lines that Äëÿ ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèÿ ïîëîæèòåëüíîãî îïûòà çà- was successfully implemented in a number of regions: ùèòû ïòèö îò ìàññîâîé ãèáåëè íà ëèíèÿõ ýëåêòðî- to inspect the efficient protection devices on transmis- ïåðåäà÷è, óñïåøíî âíåäð¸ííîãî â ðÿäå îáëàñòåé: sion lines in the Orenburg District; to request the Min- ïðîâåñòè íà òåððèòîðèè Îðåíáóðãñêîé îáëàñòè ðå- istry of Natural Resources, Land and Ownership Rela- âèçèþ ýôôåêòèâíûõ çàùèòíûõ óñòðîéñòâ ó÷àñòêîâ tions of Orenburg District to bring the equipment with ËÝÏ, ïðîñèòü Ìèíèñòåðñòâî ïðèðîäíûõ ðåñóðñîâ, bird protected devices in accordance with the current ýêîëîãèè è èìóùåñòâåííûõ îòíîøåíèé Îðåíáóðãñêîé legislation of the Russian Federation, approved for us- îáëàñòè ïðèâåñòè â ñîîòâåòñòâèå ñ äåéñòâóþùèì çà- ing the model of existing in the region and projected êîíîäàòåëüñòâîì Ðîññèéñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè îñíàùåíèå 6–10 kV power lines. ïòèöåçàùèòíûìè óñòðîéñòâàìè óòâåðæä¸ííîãî ê èñ- In connection with the profound concern with the ïîëüçîâàíèþ îáðàçöà èìåþùèõñÿ â îáëàñòè è ïðîåê- mass kill of migratory birds of Siberia and Far East in òèðóåìûõ ËÝÏ 6–10 êÂ. wintering areas in Southeastern Asia and with the  ñâÿçè ñ ãëóáîêîé îçàáî÷åííîñòüþ ìàññîâûì èñ- anthropogenic transformation of the areas that are òðåáëåíèåì ìèãðèðóþùèõ ñèáèðñêèõ è äàëüíåâî- important for wintering birds we consider it neces- ñòî÷íûõ ïòèö íà çèìîâêàõ â Þãî-Âîñòî÷íîé Àçèè è sary to intensify contacting with ornithological and àíòðîïîãåííûì ïðåîáðàçîâàíèåì âàæíûõ äëÿ çè- public environmental organizations in China, Thai- ìóþùèõ ïòèö òåððèòîðèé, ñ÷èòàåì íåîáõîäèìûì èí- land, and other Asian countries, to make efforts in òåíñèôèöèðîâàòü êîíòàêòû ñ îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèìè è concluding bilateral conventions with Vietnam, Thai- îáùåñòâåííûìè ïðèðîäîîõðàííûìè îðãàíèçàöèÿìè land, Myanmar and Indonesia on conservation of mi- Êèòàÿ, Òàèëàíäà è äðóãèõ àçèàòñêèõ ñòðàí, ïðåäïðè- gratory birds. íÿòü óñèëèÿ ïî çàêëþ÷åíèþ äâóõñòîðîííèõ êîíâåí- The Conference acknowledges the crucial signifi- öèé ïî îõðàíå ïåðåë¸òíûõ ïòèö ñ Âüåòíàìîì, Òàèëàí- cance of nature reserves and national parks for conser- äîì, Ìüÿíìîé, Èíäîíåçèåé. vation of rare and endangered bird species, execution Êîíôåðåíöèÿ ïîäòâåðæäàåò âàæíåéøåå çíà÷åíèå of scientific research directed at the development of çàïîâåäíèêîâ è íàöèîíàëüíûõ ïàðêîâ äëÿ ñîõðàíå- scientific grounds for preservation of Russia’s nature, íèÿ ðåäêèõ è èñ÷åçàþùèõ âèäîâ ïòèö, äëÿ ïðîâåäå- execution of the permanent monitoring of the situa- íèÿ íàó÷íûõ èññëåäîâàíèé, íàïðàâëåííûõ íà ðàçðà- tion with biodiversity in the Russian Federation. áîòêó íàó÷íûõ îñíîâ ñîõðàíåíèÿ ïðèðîäû Ðîññèè. The Conference recommends that the long-term sur- Êîíôåðåíöèÿ ðåêîìåíäóåò ïðîäîëæàòü è âñåìåð- vey series in protected areas are continued and sup- íî ïîääåðæèâàòü äîëãîâðåìåííûå ðÿäû íàáëþäå- ported in every possible way, these surveys are ana- íèé íà ÎÎÏÒ, ïðîâîäèòü àíàëèç ýòèõ íàáëþäåíèé, lyzed, and the possibilities for long-terms surveys in èñïîëüçîâàòü âîçìîæíîñòè äîëãîâðåìåííûõ èññëå- protected areas are used for monitoring and studying äîâàíèé íà ÎÎÏÒ äëÿ ìîíèòîðèíãà è èçó÷åíèÿ ãëî- the global phenomena, including the climatic changes áàëüíûõ ÿâëåíèé, â òîì ÷èñëå êëèìàòè÷åñêèõ èçìå- and the consequences thereof. íåíèé è èõ ïîñëåäñòâèé. The Conference deems it necessary to render State Êîíôåðåíöèÿ ñ÷èòàåò íåîáõîäèìûì îêàçàíèå ãî- support to the development of biodiversity monitor- ñóäàðñòâåííîé ïîääåðæêè ðàçâèòèþ ìîíèòîðèíãà ing on the basis of nature reserves and national parks in áèîðàçíîîáðàçèÿ íà áàçå çàïîâåäíèêîâ è íàöïàðêîâ Russia and to include the monitoring data into the State Ðîññèè, à òàêæå âêëþ÷åíèå äàííûõ ìîíèòîðèíãà â ãî- report on situation and conservation of the environment ñóäàðñòâåííûé äîêëàä î ñîñòîÿíèè è îõðàíå îêðóæà- in the Russian Federation. The Conference considers it þùåé ñðåäû â Ðîññèéñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè. Êîíôåðåíöèÿ inadmissible to execute ecotourism in State nature re- ñ÷èòàåò íåäîïóñòèìûì îñóùåñòâëåíèå ýêîëîãè÷åñêîãî serves. The Conference appeals to the A.N. Severtsov òóðèçìà íà òåððèòîðèè çàïîâåäíèêîâ. Institute of Problems of Ecology and Evolution, Russian Êîíôåðåíöèÿ îáðàùàåòñÿ ê Èíñòèòóòó ïðîáëåì ýêî- Academy of Sciences with the request to start compiling ëîãèè è ýâîëþöèè ÐÀÍ èì. À.Í. Ñåâåðöîâà ñ ïðîñü- the guide to rare birds of the Red Book of Russia based áîé íà÷àòü ïîäãîòîâêó êàòàëîãà ðåäêèõ ïòèö Êðàñíîé on IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature êíèãè Ðîññèè íà îñíîâå êðèòåðèåâ ÌÑÎÏ. and Natural Resources) criteria. Problem of Number Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 21

ProblemofNumber ПРОБЛЕМА НОМЕРА

HowtoSavetheSakerFalconfromExtinction? КАК СПАСТИ БАЛОБАНА ОТ ПОЛНОГО УНИЧТОЖЕНИЯ?

BelyalovO.V.(BirdConservationUnionofKazakhstan,Almaty,Kazakhstan) Белялов О.В. (Союз охраны птиц Казахстана, Алматы, Казахстан)

Êîíòàêò: Êàòàñòðîôè÷åñêîå ñíèæåíèå ÷èñëåííî- Îëåã Áåëÿëîâ ñòè áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug) â Êàçàõñòàíå Âèöå-ïðåçèäåíò, Ñîþç îõðàíû ïòèö íàñòîëüêî î÷åâèäíî, ÷òî ëþáûå ïîïûòêè Êàçàõñòàíà, ïðåäñòàâèòü ñèòóàöèþ â èíîì ñâåòå âû- 050016, Êàçàõñòàí, ãëÿäÿò ëèáî êàê íåäîðàçóìåíèå, ëèáî êàê Àëìàòû, ôàëüñèôèêàöèÿ. Êîíå÷íî, äëÿ òîãî ÷òîáû óë. ×îêàíà Âàëèõàíîâà, 25–5 ïîíÿòü, íàñêîëüêî ñèëüíî èçìåíèëàñü ñè- òåë.: +7 727 234 79 15 òóàöèÿ, íóæåí ìíîãîëåòíèé îïûò ðàáîòû [email protected] â ìåñòàõ îáèòàíèÿ áàëîáàíà. Ïîçâîëþ âû- ñêàçàòü ìíåíèå, îñíîâûâàÿñü íà ñâîèõ íà- Contact: áëþäåíèÿõ ñ íà÷àëà 80-õ ãîäîâ ïðîøëîãî Oleg Belyalov âåêà.  ïîäõîäÿùèõ ìåñòàõ îáèòàíèÿ 20–30 A catastrophic decline of the number of Vice-president ëåò íàçàä çà äíåâíóþ ýêñêóðñèþ ìîæíî the Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) in Kaza- Bird Conservation Union áûëî óâèäåòü íåñêîëüêî ïòèö, à ïðè öåëå- khstan has now become so obvious that of Kazakhstan Chokana Valikhanova íàïðàâëåííûõ ïîèñêàõ ìîæíî áûëî íàéòè any attempts of representing the situation str., 25–5 è íåñêîëüêî ãí¸çä.  îñåííå-çèìíèé ïåðè- in a different light look like misunderstand- Almaty, Kazakhstan, îä, êîãäà ê ìåñòíûì ïðèáàâëÿëèñü è çèìóþ- ing or falsification. No doubt a long-term 050016 ùèå ïòèöû ñåâåðíûõ ïîïóëÿöèé, â äîëèíàõ work experience in Saker Falcon habitats is tel.: +7 727 234 79 15 [email protected] ñ âûñîêîé ÷èñëåííîñòüþ áîëüøîé ïåñ÷àíêè necessary to understand the gravity of the (Rhombomus opimus) âñòðå÷à ñ áàëîáàíîì changes. Let me share my opinion on the áûëà îáû÷íûì äåëîì, è çà äíåâíóþ ýêñêóð- problem based on my observations since ñèþ ó÷èòûâàëîñü äî äåñÿòêà ïòèö. Ñèòóà- the beginning of the 1980-s. About 20–30 öèÿ ðåçêî èçìåíèëàñü ñ íà÷àëà 90-õ ãîäîâ, years ago during a day’s excursion through êîãäà â Êàçàõñòàíå ïîÿâèëèñü àðàáñêèå ñî- the Saker Falcon habitats it was possible to êîëüíèêè. Íà÷àëîñü ìàññîâîå èçúÿòèå ïòèö see several birds, and in the case of a pur- èç ïðèðîäû. Èç ãí¸çä çàáèðàëèñü ÿéöà è poseful search one could even find some ïòåíöû, îòëàâëèâàëèñü âçðîñëûå ïòèöû. Çà nests. In the autumn-winter period, when íåñêîëüêî ëåò ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà ðåçêî together with local birds there were also the ñîêðàòèëàñü è ïðîäîëæàåò ïàäàòü. Áàëî- wintering birds of northern populations, it áàíû ïîëíîñòüþ èñ÷åçëè èç öåëûõ ãîðíûõ was quite normal to come across a Saker ìàññèâîâ, ãäå ðàíüøå îáèòàëî ïî íåñêîëü- Falcon, especially in the valleys inhabited by êî ïàð – ïðîøëè ìíîãèå ãîäû ñ òåõ ïîð, êàê a great number of the Great Gerbil (Rhom- èõ ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè îïóñòåëè, è íàäåæäû bomus opimus). So, one could record up íà âîçâðàùåíèå ñþäà ïòèö ñòàíîâèòñÿ âñ¸ to ten birds in a day’s expedition. Since ìåíüøå.  ïîñëåäíåå äåñÿòèëåòèå, ïðîåõàâ the beginning of 1990-s the situation has òûñÿ÷è êèëîìåòðîâ çà ñåçîí, íå âñåãäà óäà- changed dramatically, which is connected ¸òñÿ îòìåòèòü è äåñÿòîê áàëîáàíîâ. Ðå÷ü with the coming of Arabian falconers. They èä¸ò î êàòàñòðîôè÷åñêîì ïàäåíèè ÷èñ- started mass withdrawal of the birds from ëåííîñòè è äàæå íå íà îäèí ïîðÿäîê. Ýòî their natural habitats, taking eggs and nest- áðîñàåòñÿ â ãëàçà è áåç ïðèìåíåíèÿ íîâûõ lings from their nests and trapping adult êîìïüþòåðíûõ òåõíîëîãèé. nesting birds, sometimes in their nests.  ñâÿçè ñ ýòèì ïîðàæàåò ðåøåíèå ÌÑÎÏ During several years the population of the î ïåðåíîñå áàëîáàíà â 2010 ã. èç ñïèñêà Saker Falcon has dramatically reduced and âèäîâ, íàõîäÿùèõñÿ ïîä óãðîçîé èñ÷åçíî- is still declining. Saker Falcons have abso- 22 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ïðîáëåìà íîìåðà

lutely disappeared from massifs which used to be home for several pairs. Many years have passed since their nesting sites have been abandoned, and there is still less hope for the return of the birds. In the last decade one can hardly record ten Saker Falcons, having covered thousands kilometers a sea- son. One can register a catastrophic decline in their number by more than an order of magnitude. It stands out a mile even with- out applying new computer technologies. In this connection the decision of the IUCN of 2010 to change the category of Saker Fal- cons from endangered (EN) to vulnerable (VU) is really shocking, as it should testify to the improvement of the situation and the growth of their number. The ways of getting âåíèÿ (EN), â êàòåãîðèþ óÿçâèìûõ (VU), information about the number of the birds, ÷òî äîëæíî ñâèäåòåëüñòâîâàòü îá óëó÷øå- on which the Bird Life International experts’ íèè ñèòóàöèè è ðîñòå ÷èñëåííîñòè. Êàêèì results concerning the changing the Saker îáðàçîì ïîëó÷åíà îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè, Falcon status are based, remain obscure. êîòîðîé ïîëüçîâàëèñü ýêñïåðòû BirdLife If we consider the present number of International, ïîäãîòîâèâøèå ìàòåðèàëû the Saker Falcon of 2–3 thousand breeding äëÿ ñíèæåíèÿ ñòàòóñà áàëîáàíà, ñîâåð- pairs to be true, the 1990 number of 2–5 øåííî íå ÿñíî. thousand taken from the same report will Åñëè ïðèíÿòü çà èñòèííóþ îöåíêó ÷èñëåí- be obviously wrong. Any ornithologist un- íîñòè áàëîáàíà â Êàçàõñòàíå íà ñåãîäíÿø- derstanding the situation in Kazakhstan can íèé äåíü â 2–3 òûñ. ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ïàð (IUCN confirm that the number of the Saker Falcon 2010), òî ïðèâåä¸ííîå â ýòîì æå îáçîðå êî- has dramatically reduced, and it is not just ëè÷åñòâî íà 1990 ã. – 2–5 òûñ. ïàð – âûãëÿäèò because of different approaches to its evalu- ÿâíîé îøèáêîé. Ëþáîé îðíèòîëîã, ïðåäñòàâ- ation. May be the report of the 1990 was ëÿþùèé ñèòóàöèþ â Êàçàõñòàíå, ïîäòâåðäèò erroneous, but in this case we have to ad- – ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà ðåçêî ñíèçèëàñü, è mit, that tens of thousands were breeding in ðå÷ü ìîæåò èäòè òîëüêî î ðàçíûõ ïîäõîäàõ Kazakhstan that time. ê å¸ îöåíêå. Âîçìîæíî, îøèáêà çàêðàëàñü I don’t doubt the fact that the number of â îöåíêó äâàäöàòèëåòíåé äàâíîñòè, íî òîãäà Saker Falcons in Kazakhstan has not only íàäî ïðèçíàòü, ÷òî â Êàçàõñòàíå â òå ãîäû been undermined, but has become critically ãíåçäèëèñü äåñÿòêè òûñÿ÷ ïàð. low. The aims of the IUCN decision will soon Ó ìåíÿ íåò ñîìíåíèÿ, ÷òî ÷èñëåííîñòü become clear. Apparently, the new status áàëîáàíà â Êàçàõñòàíå íå òîëüêî ñèëüíî of Saker Falcon is expected to provide new ïîäîðâàíà, íî óæå ïîäîøëà ê êðèòè÷å- opportunities for some legal activities which ñêîé ÷åðòå. Ðåøåíèå, ïðèíÿòîå ÌÑÎÏ, â had been unavailable with an endangered áëèæàéøåå âðåìÿ âûñâåòèò öåëü, è ñòàíåò species. It seems, nature protection has be- ÿñíî, äëÿ ÷åãî ýòî áûëî ñäåëàíî. Âèäèìî, come a new branch of economy, and many íîâûé ñòàòóñ áàëîáàíà äîëæåí äàòü âîç- researchers and officials have got used to ìîæíîñòü ñîâåðøàòü êàêèå-òî ëåãàëüíûå profiting by exploring the problems in this äåéñòâèÿ, êîòîðûå áûëè íåäîñòóïíû äëÿ sphere. The species is disappearing, and the âèäà, íàõîäÿùåãîñÿ ïîä óãðîçîé óíè- researcher monitors the process under the ÷òîæåíèÿ. Îõðàíà ïðèðîäû ñòàëà íîâîé official’s supervision. The reports are writ- îòðàñëüþ ýêîíîìèêè, è ìíîãèå èññëåäî- ten in accordance with the interests of some âàòåëè è ÷èíîâíèêè ïðèñïîñîáèëèñü íå- important people. When the rescue of the ïëîõî ñóùåñòâîâàòü, èçó÷àÿ ïðîáëåìû, species that is dying out is required, the âîçíèêàþùèå â ýòîé îáëàñòè. Æèâîòíîå same people will tackle this problem, now èñ÷åçàåò íà ãëàçàõ, à èññëåäîâàòåëü âåä¸ò that quite decent money is allocated for this ìîíèòîðèíã ýòîãî ïðîöåññà ïîä ïðèñìî- purpose. I’m sure, a new branch in protect- òðîì ÷èíîâíèêà. Îò÷¸òû ïèøóòñÿ, ñîãëà- ing the Saker Falcon will soon appear, and ñóÿñü ñ êàêèìè-òî âàæíûìè èíòåðåñàìè. steps for increasing its population will be Êîãäà ïîíàäîáèòñÿ ñïàñàòü óæå âûìèðà- made. Such attempts have already taken þùèé âèä, ýòè æå ëþäè çàéìóòñÿ è ýòîé place in the recent years. The birds raised Problem of Number Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 23

ïðîáëåìîé – áëàãî ñðåäñòâà âûäåëÿþòñÿ, in the breeding stations (mostly males, not è íåìàëûå. Óâåðåí, ÷òî ñêîðî âîçíèêíåò popular with falconers) and large numbers íîâîå íàïðàâëåíèå â îõðàíå áàëîáàíà è of falcons kept in captivity and participat- áóäóò ïðèíÿòû ìåðû ïî èñêóññòâåííîìó ing in hunting have been allowed to release óâåëè÷åíèþ åãî ïîïóëÿöèé. Òàêèå ïîïûò- into the wild. In the latter cases the origin of êè óæå íà÷àëè îñóùåñòâëÿòüñÿ â ïîñëåäíèå falcons was not always clear. Among them ãîäû.  ïðèðîäó âûïóñêàëèñü êàê ïòèöû, there could be hybrids and other large spe- âûðàùåííûå â ïèòîìíèêàõ (ýòî áûëè ñàì- cies. Besides, as there was no veterinary ex- öû, íå ïðåäñòàâëÿþùèå äëÿ ñîêîëüíèêîâ amination of falcons before letting them go áîëüøîãî èíòåðåñà), òàê è áîëüøèå ïàðòèè some new infection could spread in nature. ñîêîëîâ, ñîäåðæàâøèõñÿ â íåâîëå è ó÷à- There is another quite instructive exam- ñòâîâàâøèõ â îõîòàõ.  ïîñëåäíåì ñëó÷àå ple in Kazakhstan connected with one more íå âñåãäà áûëî ÿñíî ïðîèñõîæäåíèå ñîêî- animal – the Saiga Antelope (Saiga tatarica). ëîâ. Âîçìîæíî, ñðåäè íèõ áûëè ãèáðèäû è Twenty years ago it has become almost to- ïðåäñòàâèòåëè äðóãèõ êðóïíûõ âèäîâ. tally extinct because of the feverish demand  Êàçàõñòàíå óæå åñòü îäèí ïîó÷èòåëüíûé for its horns, used in Oriental medicine, but ïðèìåð ñ äðóãèì æèâîòíûì – ñàéãîé (Saiga zoologists continued overrating the number tatarica). Êîãäà äâàäöàòü ëåò íàçàä íà÷àëîñü of its population, which made it possible to å¸ òîòàëüíîå óíè÷òîæåíèå èç-çà àæèîòàæ- continue official hunting. The most popu- íîãî ñïðîñà íà ðîãà, èñïîëüçóåìûå â âîñ- lous ungulate couldn’t stand such a massive òî÷íîé ìåäèöèíå, è ïàäåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè attack of poachers and industrial hunters, ïðîèñõîäèëî áóêâàëüíî íà ãëàçàõ, çîîëîãè and soon only a couple of tens of thousands ïðîäîëæàëè äàâàòü çàâûøåííóþ ÷èñëåí- species was left out of a million’s livestock íîñòü ïîïóëÿöèè, è ýòî ïîçâîëÿëî ïðîäîë- population. At present the same people are æàòü âåñòè îôèöèàëüíûé ïðîìûñåë. Ñàìîå in charge of protection and recording the ìíîãî÷èñëåííîå êîïûòíîå æèâîòíîå íå remaining living Saiga Antelopes. âûäåðæàëî òàêîãî ìàññèðîâàííîãî íàòè- Speaking about Saker Falcons, I can’t but ñêà áðàêîíüåðîâ è îõîòíèêîâ ïðîìõîçîâ è mention another bird, also quite popular èç ìèëëèîííîãî ïîãîëîâüÿ îñòàëîñü òîëüêî with Arabian falconers. It’s the Houbara íåñêîëüêî äåñÿòêîâ òûñÿ÷. Òåïåðü âñ¸ òå Bustard (Chlamydotis undulata macquee- æå ñïåöèàëèñòû çàíÿòû îõðàíîé è ó÷¸òîì nii). The number of these bustards has also îñòàâøèõñÿ â æèâûõ ñàéãàêîâ. dramatically declined in the recent years. In Ãîâîðÿ î ïðîáëåìå áàëîáàíà íåëüçÿ order to record their population in nature, íå óïîìÿíóòü åù¸ îá îäíîé ïòèöå, òàê- a breeding station was built, and hundreds æå ïîïóëÿðíîé ó àðàáñêèõ ñîêîëüíèêîâ. of clutches were withdrawn from nature. In Ðå÷ü èäåò î äæåêå (Chlamydotis undulatus the Western Betpak-Dala desert where this macqueenii). ×èñëåííîñòü ýòîé äðîôû çà action took place, the Houbara Bustard has ïîñëåäíèå ãîäû òàêæå ðåçêî ñíèçèëàñü. become rare and its population will prob- ×òîáû ïîäíÿòü å¸ ÷èñëåííîñòü â ïðèðî- ably have to be restored with the help of äå, áûë ïîñòðîåí ïèòîìíèê è èç ïðèðîäû birds bred in captivity. In Kazakhstan there èçúÿòû ñîòíè êëàäîê.  Çàïàäíîé Áåòïàê- is a lack of specialists of recording Houbara Äàëå, ãäå áûëà ïðîâåäåíà ýòà àêöèÿ, äæåê Bustards and collecting their eggs, that’s ñòàë ðåäîê è òåïåðü óæå, âèäèìî, ïðè- why specialists from other countries (the ä¸òñÿ âîññòàíàâëèâàòü åãî ÷èñëåííîñòü ñ near and far abroad) are being involved. ïîìîùüþ ðàçâåä¸ííûõ â ïèòîìíèêå ïòèö. They help comb vast desert territories and Ïîñêîëüêó â Êàçàõñòàíå íå õâàòàåò ñïå- look really competent in doing it, as the öèàëèñòîâ äëÿ ó÷¸òà äæåêà è ñáîðà åãî population of the Houbara Bustard, which is ÿèö, ïðèâëåêàþòñÿ ñïåöèàëèñòû èç áëèæ- included in the Kazakhstan Red Data Book, íåãî è äàëüíåãî çàðóáåæüÿ è èõ óñèëèÿìè is obviously fading. For the visiting hunters ïðî÷åñûâàþòñÿ îãðîìíûå ïóñòûííûå ïðî- to feel free to satisfy their passion four state ñòðàíñòâà. Ðàáîòà âûïîëíÿåòñÿ íàñòîëüêî reserves have been organized and the fifth êâàëèôèöèðîâàííî, ÷òî ÷èñëåííîñòü çà- is being established. They have covered al- íåñ¸ííîãî â Êðàñíóþ êíèãó Êàçàõñòàíà most all the territory suitable for the habita- âèäà ñîêðàùàåòñÿ íà ãëàçàõ. ×òîáû íèêòî tion of the Houbara Bustard; besides, in the íå ìåøàë çàåçæèì îõîòíèêàì ïðåäàâàòüñÿ autumn hunting period Arabian falconers ñâîåé ñòðàñòè, ñîçäàíû ÷åòûðå ãîñóäàð- are welcome there as well. ñòâåííûå çàïîâåäíûå òåððèòîðèè è ãîòî- To me, Iceland represents the most im- âèòñÿ ïÿòàÿ. Èìè îõâà÷åíà ïðàêòè÷åñêè pressive example of governmental action in âñÿ òåððèòîðèÿ, ïðèãîäíàÿ äëÿ îáèòàíèÿ favour of birds, not money. Iceland is inhab- 24 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ïðîáëåìà íîìåðà

äæåêà, è ñþäà â ïåðèîä îñåííèõ îõîò ïðè- ited by Gyrfalcons (Falco rusticolus), and its åçæàþò íà îõîòó àðàáñêèå ñîêîëüíèêè. Parliament once considered an opportunity Äëÿ ìåíÿ ñàìûì âïå÷àòëÿþùèì ïðèìå- of replenishing the budget of this not very ðîì ãîñóäàðñòâåííîãî ðåøåíèÿ â ïîëüçó rich country by exporting the Falcons. The ïòèö, à íå äåíåã, ÿâëÿåòñÿ ïðèìåð Èñëàí- MPs were almost ready to make this step äèè. Òàì æèâóò ïîïóëÿðíûå ó ñîêîëüíè- but for one worthy citizen who suggested êîâ ñîêîëà-êðå÷åòû (Falco rusticolus). È â also selling young blondes to Oriental har- Ïàðëàìåíòå ñòîÿë âîïðîñ î âîçìîæíîñòè ems. This persuaded the Parliament to vote ïîïîëíèòü áþäæåò íå î÷åíü áîãàòîé ñòðà- down the Falcon project. íû çà ñ÷¸ò ïðîäàæè ñîêîëîâ. È ïàðëàìåí- Asking myself how to save Saker Falcon òàðèè áûëè ãîòîâû ïîéòè íà ýòîò øàã. Íî from complete destruction, I see only one íàø¸ëñÿ äîñòîéíûé ãðàæäàíèí ñâîåé ñòðà- way out – to prohibit hunting Houbara Bus- íû, êîòîðûé ïðåäëîæèë çàîäíî ïðîäàâàòü tard in Kazakhstan completely. Hunting è þíûõ áëîíäèíîê, ïîïóëÿðíûõ â âîñ- Houbara Bustards using Saker Falcons has òî÷íûõ ãàðåìàõ. Ïàðëàìåíò åäèíîãëàñíî been popular in the East for centuries. Tra- ïðîãîëîñîâàë ïðîòèâ ïðîäàæè ñîêîëîâ. ditionally it took place far from Kazakhstan, Çàäàâàÿ ñåáå âîïðîñ, êàê ìîæíî ñïàñòè in Pakistan and in the Middle East – tradi- áàëîáàíà îò ïîëíîãî óíè÷òîæåíèÿ, ÿ íàõî- tional wintering places of both the species. æó òîëüêî îäèí îòâåò – ïîëíîñòüþ çàïðå- For hundreds of years this tradition hasn’t òèòü îõîòó íà äæåêà â Êàçàõñòàíå. Îõîòà ñ caused so much damage to our nature than áàëîáàíîì íà äæåêà ïîïóëÿðíà íà Âîñòîêå it did during the last two decades. Capturing ìíîãèå âåêà. Òðàäèöèîííî îíà ïðîõîäèëà the falcons and hunting Houbara Bustards in â ìåñòàõ çèìîâêè îáîèõ âèäîâ, íà òåððè- their nesting sites, the falconers do irrepa- òîðèÿõ, ëåæàùèõ îò Êàçàõñòàíà íà ìíîãèå rable harm to nature. And I won’t accept ñîòíè êèëîìåòðîâ þæíåå. Çà ñîòíè ëåò ýòà any reasoning about their taking care of our òðàäèöèÿ íå íàíåñëà íàøåé ïðèðîäå òàêî- environment simultaneously with hunting. ãî îùóòèìîãî óðîíà, êàê çà ïîñëåäíèå äâà Traditions can’t be lost as they are the heart äåñÿòêà ëåò. Îòëàâëèâàÿ ñîêîëîâ è îõîòÿñü and soul of every nation. But the oil coun- íà äæåêà íà òåððèòîðèè èõ ãíåçäîâàíèÿ, tries rich enough to travel so far for hunting ñîêîëüíèêè íàíîñÿò íåïîïðàâèìûé óùåðá. could organize their own breeding centers È íèêàêèå äîâîäû, ÷òî îíè, êðîìå îõîòû, and breed their own Falcons and Houbara åù¸ è çàáîòÿòñÿ îá îõðàíå íàøåé ïðèðî- Bustards, and hunt in their own deserts. äû, ìåíÿ íå óáåäÿò. Òðàäèöèè íåëüçÿ òåðÿòü The breeding centers situated on the birds’ – ýòî äóøà êàæäîãî íàðîäà. Ðàç â ýòèõ áî- nesting sites are constantly tempted to take ãàòûõ íåôòüþ ñòðàíàõ åñòü òàêîé ìîùíûé clutches and nestlings from nature. This ïîòåíöèàë, ÷òî îíè ìîãóò ïîçâîëèòü ñåáå process is hard to control. I think our nature äàëüíèå îõîòíè÷üè âîÿæè, òî íàäî èì ñîç- should be left alone. When there are no for- äàâàòü ïèòîìíèêè ïî ðàçâîäåíèþ áàëîáà- eign hunters, there won’t be any demand íîâ è äæåêîâ íà ñâîåé òåððèòîðèè, è îõî- for our birds. The nests won’t be destroyed, òèòüñÿ â ñâîèõ ïóñòûíÿõ. À íàøó ïðèðîäó the birds will return to their former nesting íàäî îñòàâèòü â ïîêîå. Ïðè ñîâðåìåííîì sites, and everything will be back to normal. ïîäõîäå ê îõðàíå ïðèðîäû â Êàçàõñòàíå, There is little hope for governmental action êîãäà îôèöèàëüíî ðàçðåøàåòñÿ îõîòà íà in favour of the endangered birds, not fal- êðàñíîêíèæíûå âèäû, îðãàíèçîâàòü êîí- coners, in Kazakhstan, as the country is so òðîëü çà èçúÿòèåì ÿèö è ïòåíöîâ êàçàõ- badly corrupt that it has become a state ñòàíñêèõ ïîïóëÿöèé áàëîáàíà è äæåêà äëÿ problem to cope with it. The birds have no íóæä ìåñòíûõ ïèòîìíèêîâ íåâîçìîæíî. money to pay for themselves. Ïîñêîëüêó êîððóïöèÿ ñðåäè êàçàõñòàíñêèõ The problem of saving the Saker Falcon ÷èíîâíèêîâ äîñòèãëà îãðîìíîãî ðàçìåðà è can only now be solved on the international áîðüáà ñ íåé îáúÿâëåíà ïåðâîî÷åðåäíîé level. That is why the changing of its status ãîñóäàðñòâåííîé çàäà÷åé, íàäåæäû íà ïî- from endangered to vulnerable seems to be ëîæèòåëüíûé èñõîä â ðåøåíèè âîïðîñîâ â untimely and is a very dangerous mistake ïîëüçó èñ÷åçàþùèõ ïòèö ïîêà íåò. fraught with serious consequences. Ñåé÷àñ ðåøèòü ïðîáëåìó ñïàñåíèÿ áà- ëîáàíà ìîæíî òîëüêî íà ìåæäóíàðîäíîì Collages by Dmitry Denisov and Albert óðîâíå, ïîýòîìó ðåøåíèå î ïðèäàíèè èñ- Muratov. ÷åçàþùåìó âèäó ñòàòóñà óÿçâèìîãî ïðåä- ñòàâëÿåòñÿ íåñâîåâðåìåííîé è î÷åíü Àâòîðû êîëëàæåé Äìèòðèé Äåíèñîâ è îïàñíîé îøèáêîé. Àëüáåðò Ìóðàòîâ. Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 25

ReviewsandComments ОБЗОРЫ И КОММЕНТАРИИ

LeslieBrownandDeanAmadon–CoauthorsoftheFirstWorldReview ontheBirdsofPrey ЛЕСЛИ БРАУН И ДИН АМАДОН – АВТОРЫ ПЕРВОЙ МИРОВОЙ СВОДКИ ПО ХИЩНЫМ ПТИЦАМ ShergalinJ.E.(WorkingGrouponRaptorsandOwlsofNorthernEurasia,Russia) Шергалин Е.Э. (Рабочая группа по хищным птицам Северной Евразии, Россия)

Contact: Â 1968 ãîäó â àíãëèéñêîì èçäàòåëüñòâå In 1968 British Publisher Hamlyn produced Jevgeni Shergalin «Õàìëèí» âûøëà ïåðâàÿ ìèðîâàÿ ñâîäêà ïî the first world review on the birds of prey Flat 3, Soroptimist House, Greenhill Close, õèùíûì ïòèöàì, êîòîðóþ íàïèñàëè áðèòà- written by British Leslie Brown (1917–1980) Carmarthen, SA31 1DR, íåö Ëåñëè Áðàóí (1917–1980) è àìåðèêà- and American Dean Amadon (1912–2003). Wales, UK íåö Äèí Àìàäîí (1912–2003). Êíèãà èìåëà The book was widely known and frequently [email protected] øèðîêóþ èçâåñòíîñòü ñðåäè ñïåöèàëèñòîâ cited by raptor experts during almost 40 [email protected] ïî÷òè 40 ëåò. years.

Äâóõòîìíèê ñâîäêè ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì «Îðëû, ÿñòðåáû è ñîêîëû ìèðà» Ë. Áðàóíà è Ä. Àìàäîíà (Braun, Amadon, 1968) âêëþ÷àåò 945 ñòðàíèö òåêñòà è èëëþñòðàöèé ñî ñêâîçíîé íóìåðàöèåé. Òîìà óïàêîâàíû â êàðòîííóþ êîðîáêó, êàê ïðèíÿòî äëÿ êðóïíîôîðìàòíûõ òÿæ¸ëûõ èçäàíèé. Ïåðâûé òîì íà÷èíàåòñÿ äâàä- öàòüþ ãëàâàìè ñ îáùèì îïèñàíèåì áèîëîãèè õèùíèêîâ, äàëåå ñëåäóåò ñèñòåìàòè÷åñêàÿ ÷àñòü, êîòîðàÿ çàêàí÷èâàåòñÿ íà ñòð. 856, ïîñëå ÷åãî èäóò 94 êàðòû ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèÿ – êàê ïðàâèëî, àðåàëû íåñêîëüêèõ âèäîâ äàíû íà îäíîé ñîâìåù¸ííîé êàðòå. Çàâåðøàåò âòîðîé òîì äîïîëíèòåëüíàÿ áèáëèîãðàôèÿ íà 6-òè ñòðàíèöàõ è îòäåëüíûå óêàçàòåëè ê êàæäîìó òîìó íà 13 ñòðàíèöàõ. Èíôîðìàöèÿ î êàæäîì âèäå âêëþ÷àåò: ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå, îïèñàíèå âíåøíåãî âèäà, ãîëîñà, îáùèõ ïî- âàäîê, îñíîâíûõ îáúåêòîâ ïèòàíèÿ, îñîáåííîñòè ðàçìíîæåíèÿ, à òàêæå ïîëåâûå ïðèçíàêè. Èçîáðàæåíèÿ ïòèö äàíû íà 125 öâåòíûõ è 40 ÷¸ðíî-áåëûõ âêëåéêàõ, êîòîðûå áûëè âûïîëíåíû 11 õóäîæíèêàìè. Ïðèìå- ðû òàáëèö ñ èëëþñòðàöèÿìè ïî âîðîáüèíîé ïóñòåëüãå (Falco sparverius) è áåëîïëå÷åìó îðëàíó (Haliaeetus pelagicus) äîñòóïíû íà ñàéòàõ Ñòýíôîðäñêîãî óíèâåðñèòåòà27 è Birdnet Optics Ltd.28 A 2-volume review on raptors “Eagles, Hawks and Falcons of the World” by L. Brown and D. Amadon (1968) includes 945 pages of the text and illustrations. The first volume begins with 20 chapters with general de- scriptions of the biology of raptors, further the systematical part goes that finishes on p. 856, and then follow 94 distribution maps – as a rule, the ranges of several species are given on one combined map. The second volume is completed by an additional bibliography on 6 pages and separate indices to each volume on 13 pages. Information on each species includes: distribution, outer look, voice, habits, main food objects and field signs. Illustrations of the birds are given on 125 color and 40 b&w insertions, done by 11 bird artists. Examples of pictures on American Kestrel (Falco sparverius) and Steller’s Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus pelagicus) are available from the web-site of Stanford University27 and Birdnet Optics Ltd.28

Ëåñëè Áðàóí Leslie Brown Ëåñëè Áðàóí áûë ãëàâíûì â ìèðå ýêñ- Still during his life Leslie has acquired a ïåðòîì ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì. Íàèáîëåå glory of the world leading expert on raptors. çíà÷èìóþ íàãðàäó çà ñâîè äîñòèæåíèÿ – He received Union Medal of BOU in 1970. ìåäàëü Áðèòàíñêîãî îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîãî Leslie has published about a dozen mono- ñîþçà îí ïîëó÷èë â 1970 ãîäó.  ÷åñòü graphs on wildlife and in co-authorship with ýòîãî ñîáûòèÿ â îäíîì èç ñàìûõ ïðå- friends – books on the Golden Eagle (Aquila ñòèæíûõ æóðíàëîâ «Èáèñ» î í¸ì áûëà crysaetos) and owls of Europe. During the îïóáëèêîâàíà ñïåöèàëüíàÿ ñòàòüÿ (Union 1970’s he has published about 30 articles

27 http://www.stanford.edu/group/stanfordbirds/other/gallery/American_Kestrel.html 28 http://www.birdnet.co.uk/collectables.html 26 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

Medal…, 1970). Îäíàêî, in “Ibis” only. In 1970 Collins has issued âìåñòî ïî÷èâàíèÿ íà ëàâ- his book on birds of prey of Africa (Brown, ðàõ, ïîñëåäíåå äåñÿòèëåòèå 1970) in 1976 – book on British birds of prey ñâîåé æèçíè Ëåñëè òðóäèëñÿ (Brown, 1976). His nearest friend and col- ïóùå ïðåæíåãî, íåñìîòðÿ league Dr. Dean Amadon especially praised íà ñâî¸ çàìåòíî ïîøàòíóâ- his first book on eagles written in 1955 øååñÿ çäîðîâüå. (Brown, 1955). L. Brown wrote the volume Ëåñëè îïóáëèêîâàë îêîëî on Africa with a general description of this äþæèíû ìîíîãðàôèé î æè- continent and could find time to write a book âîòíîì ìèðå, à òàêæå, â ñîàâ- on coral fishes near his house in Kenya. Al- òîðñòâå ñ äðóãèìè àâòîðàìè, ready after his death the first volume on the – êíèãè ïî áåðêóòó (Aquila birds of Africa was published written by him crysaetos) è ñîâàì Åâðîïû. in co-authorship (Brown et al., 1982). Íå ñ÷åñòü åãî ïóáëèêàöèé â ïåðèîäè÷åñêèõ èçäàíèÿõ. Dean Amadon Òîëüêî â 1970-õ ãîäàõ æóðíàë Another coauthor of the world review on Ëåñëè Áðàóí. «Èáèñ» íàïå÷àòàë îêîëî 30 åãî ñòàòåé. raptors under consideration was Dean Ama- Ôîòî âçÿòî èç êíèãè  1970 ãîäó â áðèòàíñêîì èçäàòåëüñòâå don. Together with Leslie they compiled a «Õèùíûå ïòèöû: èõ áèîëîãèÿ è ýêîëîãèÿ» «Êîëëèíç» âûøëà êíèãà Ëåñëè, ïîñâÿù¸í- wonderful tandem. Dean, who was adored (Brown, 1976) íàÿ õèùíûì ïòèöàì Àôðèêè (Brown, by his students, was elected as a life-long ñ ðàçðåøåíèÿ èçäàòåëü- 1970), à â 1976 ãîäó – àíàëîãè÷íàÿ ïî member of the Raptor Research Foundation, ñòâà. õèùíûì ïòèöàì Áðèòàíèè (Brown, 1976). being also the President of American Orni- Leslie Braun. Photo is Îäíàêî, åãî áëèæàéøèé äðóã è êîëëåãà thological Union and, for almost a quarter taken with permission äîêòîð Äèí Àìàäîí áîëåå âñåãî öåíèë of century, the Chairman of Ornithological from “Birds of Prey their biology and ïåðâóþ êíèãó Ë. Áðàóíà «Îðëû», íàïèñàí- Department at American Museum of Natu- ecology”, published by íóþ â 1955 ã. (Brown, 1955). ral History. Hamlyn (Brown, 1976). Íî òðóäû Ëåñëè íå îãðàíè÷èëèñü ëèøü Amadon spent many field seasons in Aus- õèùíûìè ïòèöàìè. Îí íàïèñàë òîì ïî tralia, East Africa, South America, and also Àôðèêå â ñåðèè «Êîíòèíåíòû, íà êîòî- in North America and on Hawaii. His first ðûõ ìû æèâ¸ì», âåðîÿòíî, íàèëó÷øèé publication on Ospreys (Pandion haliaetus) èç ìíîãèõ ïîäîáíûõ (âñÿ ñåðèÿ ïåðå- of New Caledonia reconsidered where their âåäåíà íà ðóññêèé ÿçûê è äîñòóïíà äëÿ subspecies belonged. After joint work with ïðèîáðåòåíèÿ íà âåáñàéòå OZON29), è L. Brown on a world review Dean continued äàæå íàø¸ë âðåìÿ äëÿ êíèãè î êîðàëëî- to collect material on raptors and their sys- âûõ ðûáàõ. tematics. He has published jointly in 1988 Óæå ïîñëå åãî ñìåðòè âûøåë ïåðâûé “Hawks and owls of the world: distributional òîì ñâîäêè «Ïòèöû Àôðèêè», íàïèñàííûé and taxonomic list”. Working together with èì â ñîàâòîðñòâå (Brown et al., 1982). Lester Short he developed new and old con- Ëåñëè Áðàóí áûë íå òîëüêî âíåøíå ceptions in bird speciation. His other project áîëüøèì øîòëàíäöåì ñ ðûæèìè âîëîñàìè was a compilation of annotated world bib-

Ëåñëè Áðàóí ðîäèëñÿ â Èíäèè â 1917 ã. â ñåìüå âûõîäöåâ èç Øîòëàíäèè.  1946 ã. îí ïåðååõàë â Àôðèêó (Íèãåðèÿ, Êåíèÿ), ãäå ïðîâ¸ë áîëüøóþ ÷àñòü ñâîåé æèçíè. Ëåñëè ïîëó÷èë îáðàçîâàíèå â øêîëå Óíäåë, óíè- âåðñèòåòå Ñâ. Ýíäðþñà, èçó÷àë ñåëüñêîå õîçÿéñòâî òðîïèêîâ â Êåìáðèäæå è Òðèíèäàäå.  1940 ã. ïîñòó- ïèë íà êîëîíèàëüíóþ ñåëüñêîõîçÿéñòâåííóþ ñëóæáó, ñ 1956 ã. áûë çàìåñòèòåëåì äèðåêòîðà äåïàðòàìåíòà ñåëüñêîãî õîçÿéñòâà, à çàòåì ãëàâíûì ñåëüñêîõîçÿéñòâåííûì ýêñïåðòîì Êåíèè, âûéäÿ íà ïåíñèþ â 1963 ã. è ïîëó÷èâ çà çàñëóãè Îðäåí Áðèòàíñêîé Èìïåðèè. Çàòåì îí ðàáîòàë ñåëüñêîõîçÿéñòâåííûì ñîâåòíèêîì Ìèðîâîãî Áàíêà è äðóãèõ ãóìàíèòàðíûõ è áëàãîòâîðèòåëüíûõ îðãàíèçàöèé. È ïàðàëëåëüíî ïî-ïðåæíåìó èçó÷àë ïòèö, îòäàâàÿ ïðåäïî÷òåíèå ïåëèêàíàì, ôëàìèíãî è îðëàì. Ñòåïåíü äîêòîðà ôèëîñîôèè åìó ïðè- ñâîèë óíèâåðñèòåò Ñâ. Ýíäðþñà â 1973 ã., êîãäà Áðàóí èìåë óæå ìèðîâóþ èçâåñòíîñòü.

Leslie Brown was born in India in 1917 in the family of Scottish descent. In 1946 he moved to Africa (Nigeria, Kenya) where he spent a major part of his life. He studied at Undel school then graduated from St. Andrews University, learned agriculture of tropics in Cambridge and Trinidad. Since 1940 he enrolled on colonial agricul- tural service, since 1956 he became Director Deputy on Agriculture, and then the main agricultural expert of Kenya, retiring in 1963 with an Orden of British Empire. Then he served by agricultural expert of the World Bank and other humanitarian and charitable organizations. All his life he studied birds with a preference for pelicans, flamingos and eagles. He received an honorable PhD in zoology in 1973 from St. Andrews University.

29 http://www.ozon.ru/context/detail/id/3735908/ Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 27

è ùåòèíèñòîé áîðîäîé – òèïàæ, íàïîìèíà- liography on raptors in collaboration with þùèé âèêèíãîâ, íî è ïî íàòóðå áóíòàð¸ì- Richard Olendorff and Saul Frank. Amadon’s ýêñïåðèìåíòàòîðîì. Åãî þíîøåñêèå ýêñ- extensive library on raptors was probably the ïåðèìåíòû ïî íåçàêîííîìó ëîâó ëîñîñÿ è biggest one in the world. He has published óòîê â øîòëàíäñêèõ ïîìåñòüÿõ çàñòàâëÿëè also a popular book entitled “Birds around âîëîñû âñòàâàòü äûáîì ó åãî äðóçåé, íå ãî- the world…” (Amadon, 1966) and scientific âîðÿ ïðî áëþñòèòåëåé çàêîíà. Ëåñëè ÷àñòî review on Curossows and related birds to- ðèñîâàë ìàëåíüêóþ ôèãóðó êîáðû, ðàç- gether with Jean Delacour (Delacour, Ama- äóâàâøóþ ñâîé êàïþøîí, ðÿäîì ño ñâîåé don, 2004) available via NHBS30. ïîäïèñüþ íà ïèñüìàõ.  ôèíàíñîâûõ äå- ëàõ, îäíàêî, îí áûë òèïè÷íûì êîíñåðâà- òèâíûì æèòåëåì áðèòàíñêèõ îñòðîâîâ. Îäèí èç åãî äðóçåé – Ïèòåð Ñòåéí, ìíî- ãî çíàâøèé î æèçíè Ëåñëè â Øîòëàíäèè, ïèñàë, ÷òî ïîðîé òîò â¸ë ñåáÿ êàê çàêîí- ÷åííûé áðàêîíüåð, íî äåëàë ýòî òîëüêî äëÿ òîãî, ÷òîáû äîáàâèòü îñòðåíüêîãî ê ïðåñëåäîâàíèþ äè÷è. Ëþáîïûòíî óçíàòü, ñêîëüêî ëþäåé ñïîñîáíû äîáûòü ñàìöà ôàçàíà èç ðîãàòêè? Îí ëþáèë åäó, äîáû- òóþ ñâîèìè ðóêàìè, à òàêæå õîðîøî ðàç- áèðàëñÿ â âèíàõ. Ó íåãî áûë äàð ê èçó÷å- íèþ ÿçûêîâ, è óæå â ïîçäíèå ãîäû Ïèòåð âñïîìèíàë ðàçäðàæåíèå Ëåñëè, êîãäà Ïè- òåð íå ìîã ïðî÷èòàòü ñòàòüþ, íàïèñàííóþ ïî-èñïàíñêè: «Ïî÷åìó òû íå ó÷èøü åãî? ß âûó÷èë». Åìó íðàâèëàñü êëàññè÷åñêàÿ ìó- çûêà. Ïî ýðóäèöèè Ëåñëè çàìåòíî ïðåâîñ- Äâóõòîìíèê ñâîäêè ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì õîäèë âñåõ, êîãî Ïèòåð çíàë. Ìàëî ëþäåé (Braun, Amadon, 1968). íà ñâåòå ìîãóò ïèñàòü ñðàçó íà÷èñòî, áåç A 2-volume review on raptors by L. Brown and D. Amadon (1968). èçìåíåíèé è ïðàâîê. Îí ìîã. Ýòà åãî îñî- áåííîñòü ïîðàæàëà ìíîãèõ âîêðóã. íàïèñàë ïîëíûé òåêñò íåáîëüøîé î÷àðî- Ìíîãî÷èñëåííûå íåäóãè Ë. Áðàóíà íå âàòåëüíîé êíèæêè, ïîçæå îïóáëèêîâàííîé òîëüêî íå çàìåäëÿëè òåìïà åãî æèçíè, ñêî- è ïîñâÿù¸ííîé íåîáû÷íîìó îïûòó Ëåñëè ðåå íàîáîðîò, – îí î÷åíü ñïåøèë. Îí íà- â îáùåíèè ñ ðàçëè÷íûìè æèâîòíûìè, îò õîäèë âðåìÿ äëÿ êîíñóëüòàöèîííîé ðàáîòû øèìïàíçå äî êèòîâîé àêóëû, âî âðåìÿ åãî äëÿ ÞÍÅÑÊÎ è äðóãèõ àãåíñòâ. Äèí Àìà- ïëàâàíèÿ íà ìàëþñåíüêîé ëîäî÷êå íåäàëå- äîí ÷àñòî âñïîìèíàë îäèí èç ýïèçîäîâ, êî îò êåíèéñêîãî ïîáåðåæüÿ. ñëó÷èâøèõñÿ ñ Ëåñëè â Ýôèîïèè è õîðîøî ðàñêðûâàþùèé îñîáåííîñòè åãî õàðàêòå- Äèí Àìàäîí ðà.  êîìïàíèè íåñêîëüêèõ øâåäîâ Ëåñëè Âòîðûì ñîàâòîðîì ñâîäêè ïî õèùíûì îñóùåñòâëÿë âîçäóøíîå ýêîëîãè÷åñêîå îá- ïòèöàì ñòàë àìåðèêàíåö Äèí Àìàäîí. ñëåäîâàíèå, êîãäà íåêîìïåòåíòíûé ïèëîò Âìåñòå ñ Ëåñëè îíè ñîñòàâèëè áëèñòàòåëü- ïîòåðÿë îðèåíòàöèþ è ñàìîë¸ò îêàçàë- íûé òàíäåì, îòëè÷íî äîïîëíÿÿ äðóã äðó- ñÿ íàä òåððèòîðèåé Ñîìàëè, ñ êîòîðîé ó ãà. Äàëåêî íå òîëüêî çà ýòó ðàáîòó Ôîíä Ýôèîïèè íà òîò ìîìåíò øëà âîéíà. Êîãäà èçó÷åíèÿ õèùíûõ ïòèö (Raptor Research òîïëèâî áûëà íà ñàìîì èñõîäå, îíè óâè- Foundation) èçáðàë Äèíà Àìàäîíà ñâîèì äåëè âçë¸òíî-ïîñàäî÷íóþ ïîëîñó ðÿäîì ñ ïîæèçíåííûì ÷ëåíîì. Òàêæå Äèí Àìàäîí äåðåâíåé è ïðèçåìëèëèñü. Àðåñò ïðîèçî- áûë â ñâî¸ âðåìÿ Ïðåçèäåíòîì Àìåðèêàí- øåë íåìåäëåííî. Äðóãèå ÷ëåíû ãðóïïû ñêîãî îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîãî ñîþçà è ïî÷òè ÷óâñòâîâàëè ñåáÿ íåâàæíî, â òî âðåìÿ êàê ÷åòâåðòü âåêà – ïðåäñåäàòåëåì Îðíèòîëî- áðèòàíåö Ëåñëè, èìåâøèé áîëüøå âñåãî ãè÷åñêîãî îòäåëåíèÿ â Àìåðèêàíñêîì ìó- îñíîâàíèé âîëíîâàòüñÿ çà ñâîþ ñóäüáó, çåå åñòåñòâåííîé èñòîðèè. âûøåë íàâñòðå÷ó ñâîèì çàõâàò÷èêàì è ýô- Ñâîþ ïåðâóþ ñòàòüþ î ïòèöàõ äëÿ øêîëü- ôåêòíî ïðîèçíåñ: «Åñëè âû ñîáèðàåòåñü íîé ãàçåòû Àìàäîí íàïèñàë â âîçðàñòå 13 ðàññòðåëÿòü ìåíÿ, òî ñäåëàéòå ýòî ñåé÷àñ, ëåò. Åù¸ ñîâñåì ìîëîäûì, àáñîëþòíî áåç åñëè æå íåò, òî äàéòå áóìàãó è êàðàíäàøè!» ñðåäñòâ, Äèí äîáèðàëñÿ íà 50-e þáèëåéíîå Îí äîáèëñÿ ñâîåãî è ê ìîìåíòó îñâîáîæ- ñîâåùàíèå Àìåðèêàíñêîãî îðíèòîëîãè÷å- äåíèÿ, íàñòóïèâøåãî ÷åðåç ïÿòü íåäåëü, ñêîãî ñîþçà àâòîñòîïîì, à ïðè âîçâðàùåíèè 28 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

ñ íåãî ðàñïëàòèëñÿ ñ âîäèòå-  1973 ã., âìåñòå ñî çíàìåíèòûì ôðàí- ëåì ÷ó÷åëîì ôàçàíà, ñäåëàí- öóçñêèì îðíèòîëîãîì è ñåëåêöèîíåðîì íûì ñâîèìè ðóêàìè. Ïî ôè- Æ. Äåëàêóðîì, îí îïóáëèêîâàë êíèãó ïî íàíñîâûì ïðè÷èíàì Äèí íå ãîêêî, êðàêñàì è ðîäñòâåííûì èì âèäàì ñìîã ïîëó÷èòü ñðàçó âûñøåå ïòèö, èçäàíèå 2004 ã. êîòîðîé (Delacour, îáðàçîâàíèå è åìó ïðèøëîñü Amadon, 2004) ìîæíî ïðèîáðåñòè ÷åðåç äâèãàòüñÿ âïåð¸ä ïîýòàïíî. âåáñàéò NHBS30. Ïðåæäå ÷åì âçÿòüñÿ çà äâóõ- òîìíèê ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì Ëèòåðàòóðà Ä. Àìàäîí ïðîâ¸ë ìíîãî ïî- Áðàóí Ë. Àôðèêà. Ñåðèÿ: Êîíòèíåíòû, íà êî- ëåâûõ ñåçîíîâ â Àâñòðàëèè, òîðûõ ìû æèâ¸ì / ðåä. è ïîñëåñë. À.Ã. Áàííèêî- Âîñòî÷íîé Àôðèêå, Þæíîé âà; ïåð. ñ àíãë. Ì.À. Áîãóñëàâñêîé è Ë.Ë. Æäàíî- Àìåðèêå, à òàêæå â Ñåâåð- âà. Ìîñêâà: Ïðîãðåññ, 1976. 286 c. íîé Àìåðèêå è íà Ãàâàÿõ. Amadon D. Birds around the world; a geo- graphical look at evolution and birds. Garden Åãî ïåðâàÿ æå ïóáëèêàöèÿ City, N.Y.: Natural History Press, 1966. 175 p. Äèí Àìàäîí. ïî ñèñòåìàòèêå õèùíûõ ïòèö ïîçâîëèëà Amadon D., Bull J. Hawks and owls of the Ôîòî âçÿòî èç óòî÷íèòü è èñïðàâèòü ïîäâèäîâîé ðàíã, world. A distributional and taxonomic list. // íåêðîëîãà â æóðíàëå ïðèñâàèâàåìûé ñêîïàì (Pandion haliaetus) «The Auk» (Short, 2003) Proc West Found Vert Zool 1988, 3: Ð. 295–357. ñ ðàçðåøåíèÿ îñòðîâà Íîâàÿ Êàëåäîíèÿ. Brown L. African birds of prey. London: Col- Àìåðèêàíñêîãî Ãëàâíûì åãî òðóäîì, áåçóñëîâíî, ñòàëà lins, 1970. 320 p. îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîãî ñâîäêà ïî õèùíèêàì, íàïèñàííàÿ ñîâìåñò- Brown L. Birds of Prey: Their Biology and Ecol- ñîþçà. íî ñ Ëåñëè. Îäíàêî è ïîñëå âûõîäà ýòîãî ogy. London: Hamlyn, 1976. 256 p. Dean Amadon. ìîíóìåíòàëüíîãî òðóäà, Äèí ïðîäîëæèë Brown L. The British birds of prey. London: Photo is taken with ñîáèðàòü ìàòåðèàë è ïèñàòü î õèùíèêàõ è Collins, 1976. 400 p. permission of the Brown L. Eagles. London: Michael Joseph, èõ ñèñòåìàòèêå. Îí ÿâëÿåòñÿ àâòîðîì êíè- American 1955. 273 p. Ornithologists' Union ãè «Õèùíûå ïòèöû è ñîâû ìèðà: ðàñïðî- Brown L., Amadon D. Eagles, Hawks and Fal- from “The Auk” ñòðàíåíèå è òàêñîíîìè÷åñêèé ñïèñîê». (Short, 2003). cons of the world. 2 Vols. London: Country Life Ðàáîòàÿ âìåñòå ñ Ë. Øîðòîì, îí ðàñ- Books, 1968. 945 p. ñìîòðåë êîíöåïöèè â âèäîîáðàçîâàíèè. Brown L.H., Urban E.K., Newman K. The Birds Äðóãèì åãî çíà÷èòåëüíûì ïðîåêòîì ñòà- of Africa. Vol. 1. Academic Press, London & New ëî ñîñòàâëåíèå àííîòèðîâàííîé áèáëèî- York, 1982. 521 p. ãðàôèè ïî âñåì îñíîâíûì ðàáîòàì ïî Delacour J. and Amadon D. Curassows and Re- ñîêîëîîáðàçíûì è ñîâîîáðàçíûì â ñî- lated Birds. Lynx Edicions, 2004. 476 p. òðóäíè÷åñòâå ñ Ð. Îëåíäîðôîì. Îáøèð- Olendorff R.R., Amadon D. and Frank S. (eds.). íàÿ êîëëåêöèÿ êíèã Àìàäîíà ïî õèùíûì Books on Hawks and Owls; An Annotated Bib- liography. Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zo- ïòèöàì, âåðîÿòíî, ñàìàÿ áîëüøàÿ ïî ýòîé ology. 1995. 89 p. ãðóïïå ïòèö â ìèðå, ñëóæèëà íåîöåíè- Short L.L. In memoriam: Den Amadon, 1912– ìûì ðåñóðñîì äëÿ âñåõ ýòèõ ïðîåêòîâ. 2003. – The Auk. 2003. 120(4). P. 1195–1198.  1966 ã. Äèí èçäàë ïîïóëÿðíóþ êíèãó Union Medal: Citation. – Ibis. 1970. Vol. 112. «Ïòèöû âî âñ¸ì ìèðå» (Amadon, 1966). Issue 3. P. 427–428.

Äèí Àìàäîí ðîäèëñÿ â 1912 ã. â Ìèëóîêè. Ñ ñàìîãî äåòñòâà Äèí ïðîÿâëÿë ñèëüíûé èíòåðåñ ê æèâîé ïðè- ðîäå. Ôèíàíñîâîå ïîëîæåíèå ñåìüè áûëî òÿæ¸ëûì, äëÿ äîïîëíèòåëüíîãî äîõîäà Àìàäîíû çàíèìàëèñü äî- áû÷åé ïóøíèíû. Äèí Àìàäîí ïîñòóïèë â Õîáàðò-êîëëåäæ, ðóêîâîäèìûé Å. Èòîíîì (E.H. Eaton) – àâòîðîì êëàññè÷åñêîé ðàáîòû ïî ïòèöàì øòàòà Íüþ-Éîðê.  1937 ã. Àìàäîí ïîñòóïèë íà ñëóæáó â Àìåðèêàíñêèé ìóçåé åñòåñòâåííîé èñòîðèè, êóäà åãî ïðèãëàñèë çíàìåíèòûé àìåðèêàíñêèé îðíèòîëîã Ôðåíê ×àïìàí, ãäå ïðîðàáîòàë ïðàêòè÷åñêè âñþ ñâîþ æèçíü.  1947 ã. îí ïîëó÷èë ó÷¸íóþ ñòåïåíü îò Êîðíåëüñêîãî óíèâåð- ñèòåòà, ãäå ðàáîòàë ïîä íà÷àëîì Àðòóðà Àëëåíà – ïåðâîãî ïðîôåññîðà îðíèòîëîãèè â ÑØÀ. Äèññåðòàöèÿ Àìàäîíà áûëà ïîñâÿùåíà ñèñòåìàòèêå è ýâîëþöèè ãàâàéñêèõ ìåäîóêàç÷èêîâ. Dean Amadon was born in 1912 in Milwaukee. Since his childhood he was interested in wildlife writing his first article for a school newspaper at the age of 13 years. Heavy financial situation of family forced Dean to become a fur-trapper when he was a boy. He studied at Hobart College under the supervision of E.H. Eaton – author of the classic work on the birds of New York State. In 1937 he began his life-long affiliation with American Museum of Natural History being invited there by Frank Chapman. In 1947 he received a PhD from Cornell University where he worked under the supervision of Arthur Allen, the first Professor of Ornithology in the States. Amadon’s dissertation was dedicated to Hawaiian honeycreepers.

30 http://www.nhbs.com/curassows_and_related_birds_tefno_124737.html Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 29

ShortReviewoftheReportsaboutBirdsofPreyandOwls onthe13thInternationalOrnithologicalConferenceofNorth Eurasia(30April–6May2010,Orenburg,Russia) КРАТКИЙ ОБЗОР ДОКЛАДОВ О ХИЩНЫХ ПТИЦАХ И СОВАХ, ОЗВУЧЕННЫХ НА XIII МЕЖДУНАРОДНОЙ ОРНИТОЛОГИЧЕСКОЙ КОНФЕРЕНЦИИ СЕВЕРНОЙ ЕВРАЗИИ (30 АПРЕЛЯ – 6 МАЯ 2010, ОРЕНБУРГ, РОССИЯ) GavrilyukM.(UkrainianBirdsofPreyResearchCentre,Cherkasy,Ukraine) Гаврилюк М. (Украинский центр исследований хищных птиц, Черкассы, Украина)

Êîíòàêò: Ñ 30 àïðåëÿ ïî 6 ìàÿ 2010 ã. â ã. Îðåí- From 30 April to 6 May, 2010 in Orenburg Ìàêñèì Ãàâðèëþê áóðã (Ðîññèÿ) ñîñòîÿëàñü XIII Ìåæäóíà- (Russia) it was the held the 13th International Óêðàèíñêèé öåíòð èññëåäîâàíèé õèùíûõ ðîäíàÿ îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêàÿ êîíôåðåíöèÿ Ornithological Conference of North Eurasia. ïòèö Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè. Ðàíåå òàêèå êîíôå- Formerly, meetings of such kind were called [email protected] ðåíöèè íàçûâàëèñü Âñåñîþçíûìè, îäíàêî the All-Union Conferences, but regardless www.raptors.org.ua íåçàâèñèìî îò íàçâàíèé èõ ïðîâåäåíèå of the name it is always a great event in the âñåãäà ÿâëÿåòñÿ áîëüøèì ñîáûòèåì â îð- ornithological world. Contact: íèòîëîãè÷åñêîì ìèðå. This time the border between Europe and Maxim Gavrilyuk  ýòîò ðàç íà ãðàíèöå Åâðîïû è Àçèè ñî- Asia gathered more than 200 ornithologists Ukrainian Birds of Prey áðàëèñü áîëåå 200 îðíèòîëîãîâ èç ñòðàí from the CIS countries. Compared with pre- Research Centre [email protected] ÑÍÃ. Ïî ñðàâíåíèþ ñ ïðåäûäóùèìè ïî- vious similar conferences in Kazan and Stav- www.raptors.org.ua äîáíûìè êîíôåðåíöèÿìè â Êàçàíè è Ñòàâ- ropol, it was participated by less number of ðîïîëå, â íåé ïðèíÿëî ó÷àñòèå ìåíüøå ornithologists, as the meeting was held in îðíèòîëîãîâ, ÷òî áûëî ñâÿçàíî ñ ïðîâåäå- the middle of the field season and Orenburg íèåì ýòîé âñòðå÷è â ðàçãàð ïîëåâîãî ñå- is a rather distant place to reach for most çîíà, à òàêæå ñ áîëüøåé óäàë¸ííîñòüþ îò ornithologists. Nevertheless, it is nice to ìåñò ïðîæèâàíèÿ áîëüøèíñòâà îðíèòîëî- note that this international conference was ãîâ. Òåì íå ìåíåå, ïðèÿòíî îòìåòèòü, ÷òî attended by ornithologists from Ukraine, â ðàáîòå ýòîé Ìåæäóíàðîäíîé êîíôåðåí- Belarus, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmeni- öèè ïðèíÿëè ó÷àñòèå íå òîëüêî ðîññèéñêèå stan and other countries. îðíèòîëîãè, íî è îðíèòîëîãè èç Óêðàèíû, As for the conference structure, each Áåëàðóñè, Êàçàõñòàíà, Óçáåêèñòàíà, Òóð- day began with a plenary reports, and êìåíèñòàíà è íåêîòîðûõ äðóãèõ ñòðàí. then it was held parallel work of sev- Ðàáîòà êîíôåðåíöèè áûëà ïîñòðîåíà òà- eral sections. Reports were heard on 15 êèì îáðàçîì, ÷òî êàæäûé äåíü íà÷èíàëñÿ ñ sections, and, in addition, some reports ïëåíàðíûõ äîêëàäîâ, ïîñëå ÷åãî ïàðàëëåëüíî ïðîõîäèëà ðàáîòà íåñêîëüêèõ ñåêöèé. Äîêëàäû áûëè çàñëóøàíû íà 15 ñåêöèÿõ, êðîìå òîãî, ÷àñòü äîêëàäîâ áûëà ïðåäñòàâëåíà â âèäå ïîñòåðîâ. Áûë îðãà- íèçîâàí òàêæå ðÿä äèñêóññèé çà êðóãëûì ñòîëîì. Ïðîâåñòè òàêóþ ìàñøòàáíóþ êîíôå- ðåíöèþ – ýòî îãðîìíûé òðóä, çà êîòîðûé õî÷åòñÿ ïîáëàãî- äàðèòü âñåõ îðãàíèçàòîðîâ, è, ïðåæäå âñåãî, èçâåñòíîãî ñïå-

Â.Ì. Ãàëóøèí è Þ.Â. Ìèëîáîã – âåäóùèå ñåêöèè ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì. Ôîòî Ì. Ãàâðèëþêà. Conveners of the first part section of birds of prey: V.M. Galushin and Yu.V. Milobog. Photo by M. Gavrilyuk. 30 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

öèàëèñòà ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì were presented as posters. It was also a Àíàòîëèÿ Âàñèëüåâè÷à Äàâû- series of round-table discussions. To or- ãîðó. Ñðåäè ïðî÷èõ ïîçèòèâ- ganize such a large-scale conference is a íûõ ìîìåíòîâ îðãàíèçàöèè big job, and we would like to thank all the êîíôåðåíöèè õîòåëîñü áû organizers, and above all a well-known îòìåòèòü ðàçìåùåíèå âñåé birds of prey expert Anatoly Davygora. èíôîðìàöèè î íåé íà ñàéòå Among other positive aspects of the Ìåíçáèðîâñêîãî îðíèòîëî- conference organization we would like ãè÷åñêîãî îáùåñòâà. Îðèãè- to mention that all the information was íàëüíîé áûëà èäåÿ åæåäíåâ- placed at the website of Menzbir Orni- íîãî îñâåùåíèÿ õîäà ðàáîòû thological Society. The original idea was êîíôåðåíöèè ñòóäåíòàìè- daily broadcasting of the proceedings æóðíàëèñòàìè, ãîòîâèâøèìè by students journalists, who prepared çàìå÷àòåëüíûå ìóëüòèìåäèé- wonderful multimedia presentations and íûå ïðåçåíòàöèè è äåìîí- demonstrate them in-between sessions. ñòðèðîâàâøèå èõ â ïåðåðû- Very convenient for the participants was âàõ çàñåäàíèé. Óäîáíîé äëÿ the organization of daily sightseeing ó÷àñòíèêîâ êîíôåðåíöèè tours. And a special appeal of Orenburg áûëà îðãàíèçàöèÿ åæåäíåâ- were field trips offered in several variants Â.Ì. Ãàëóøèí âûñòóïàåò íûõ ýêñêóðñèé ïî ãîðîäó. Íåñîìíåííîé and enjoyed by many participants. ñ äîêëàäîì. èçþìèíêîé êîíôåðåíöèè ñòàëè ïîëåâûå Below we would like to pay a particular Ôîòî Ì. Ãàâðèëþêà. ýêñêóðñèè, ïðåäëîæåííûå â íåñêîëüêèõ âà- attention to presentations on the birds of Oral presentation by ðèàíòàõ, êîòîðûìè âîñïîëüçîâàëèñü ìíîãèå prey. V.M. Galushin. ó÷àñòíèêè. Among the plenary sessions it should Photo by M. Gavrilyuk. Íèæå õîòåëîñü áû óäåëèòü îñîáîå âíè- be noted a report of V.M. Galushin in co- ìàíèå âûñòóïëåíèÿì, ïîñâÿù¸ííûì õèù- authorship with A.B. Kostin (Moscow, Rus- íûì ïòèöàì. sia) about tolerant ornithology (Galushin Ñðåäè ïëåíàðíûõ äîêëàäîâ ñëåäóåò îòìå- V.M., Kostin A.B. Tolerant Ornithology)31. òèòü âûñòóïëåíèå Â.Ì. Ãàëóøèíà â ñîàâòîð- This definition the authors understand as to ñòâå ñ À.Á. Êîñòèíûì (Ìîñêâà, Ðîññèÿ) ïðî study of birds by methods, minimizing the òîëåðàíòíóþ îðíèòîëîãèþ (Ãàëóøèí Â.Ì., “investigation press” on their populations Êîñòèí À.Á. Òîëåðàíòíàÿ îðíèòîëîãèÿ)31. and communities. This aspect is of particu- Ïîä ýòèì òåðìèíîì àâòîðû ïîíèìàþò èç- lar relevance for the study of birds of prey, ó÷åíèå ïòèö ìåòîäàìè, îáåñïå÷èâàþùèìè which are sensitive to the research impact. ìèíèìèçàöèþ «èññëåäîâàòåëüñêîãî ïðåññà» The work of the section on birds of prey íà èõ ïîïóëÿöèè è ñîîáùåñòâà. Îñîáóþ àê- took place on 2 May. Conveners of the òóàëüíîñòü äàííàÿ òåìà èìååò ïðè èçó÷åíèè first part were V.M. Galushin and Yu.V. Mi- õèùíûõ ïòèö, êîòîðûå äîñòàòî÷íî ÷óâñòâè- lobog, second part – E.A. Rustamov and òåëüíû ê èññëåäîâàòåëüñêîìó âëèÿíèþ. A.V. Kuznetsov. Ðàáîòà ñåêöèè ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì ïðî- In the first, morning part, the following re- õîäèëà 2 ìàÿ. Âåäóùèìè ïåðâîé å¸ ÷àñòè ports were presented. áûëè Â.Ì. Ãàëóøèí è Þ.Â. Ìèëîáîã, âòî- A.V. Sharikov (Moscow, Russia) gave a ðîé – Ý.À. Ðóñòàìîâ è À.Â. Êóçíåöîâ. presentation on the peculiarities of popu-  ïåðâîé, óòðåííåé ÷àñòè áûëè ïðåä- lation dynamics of birds of prey and small ñòàâëåíû ñëåäóþùèå äîêëàäû. mammals in the northern and southern sub- À.Â. Øàðèêîâ (Ìîñêâà, Ðîññèÿ) âû- urbs of Moscow (Sharikov A.V., Volkov S.V., ñòóïèë ñ ñîîáùåíèåì, ïîñâÿù¸ííûì Basova V.B., Grinchenko O.S., Ivanov M.N., îñîáåííîñòÿì äèíàìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè Makarov A.V., Sviridova T.V. Peculiarities of õèùíûõ ïòèö è ìåëêèõ ìëåêîïèòàþùèõ the number dynamics of birds of prey and â ñåâåðíîì è þæíîì Ïîäìîñêîâüå (Øà- small mammals in the northern and south- ðèêîâ À.Â., Âîëêîâ Ñ.Â., Áàñîâà Â.Á., ern suburbs of Moscow)32. On the basis of Ãðèí÷åíêî Î.Ñ., Èâàíîâ Ì.Í., Ìàêàðîâ nine years studies on two permanent plots À.Â., Ñâèðèäîâà Ò.Â. Îñîáåííîñòè äèíà- it was analyzed the relationship of dynam- ìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè õèùíûõ ïòèö è ìåëêèõ ics of Falconiformes and Strigiformes with ìëåêîïèòàþùèõ â ñåâåðíîì è þæíîì abundance of small mammals. Among Ïîäìîñêîâüå)32. Íà îñíîâå äåâÿòèëåòíèõ other things, it was found that:

31 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Galushin-Kostin.pps 32 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Sharikov-et-al.pps Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 31

èññëåäîâàíèé íà äâóõ ñòàöèîíàðàõ áûëà ïðîàíàëèçèðîâàíà âçàèìîñâÿçü äèíàìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè ñîêîëîîáðàçíûõ è ñîâîîá- ðàçíûõ ñ îáèëèåì ìåëêèõ ìëåêîïèòàþùèõ. Ñðåäè ïðî÷åãî áûëî óñòàíîâëåíî, ÷òî: - èçìåíåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè ðàçëè÷íûõ âè- äîâ ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ õèùíûõ ïòèö íà äâóõ ñòà- öèîíàðàõ ïðîõîäèëî íå ñèíõðîííî; - äèíàìèêà ÷èñëåííîñòè õèùíûõ ïòèö âî ìíîãîì îïðåäåëÿåòñÿ îñîáåííîñòÿìè êîíêðåòíûõ óñëîâèé ìåñòîîáèòàíèé, à íå òîëüêî îáèëèåì ìåëêèõ ìëåêîïèòàþùèõ â êîíêðåòíûé ãîä; - ÷¸òêîé âçàèìîñâÿçè ìåæäó èçìåíåíèÿ- ìè ÷èñëåííîñòè õèùíèêîâ è ìåëêèõ ìëå- êîïèòàþùèõ (êàê â öåëîì, òàê è ïî îòäåëü- íûì âèäàì) íå âûÿâëåíî, çà èñêëþ÷åíèåì óøàñòîé è áîëîòíîé ñîâ; - óñòîé÷èâàÿ ñâÿçü äèíàìèêè ÷èñëåííî- ñòè õèùíûõ ïòèö ïðîñëåæèâàåòñÿ òîëüêî Ìîãèëüíèê (Aquila heliaca). ñ êîëåáàíèÿìè îáèëèÿ ñðàçó íåñêîëüêèõ Ôîòî èç ïðåçåíòàöèè Å. Áðàãèíà ñ ñîàâòîðàìè. îñíîâíûõ âèäîâ æåðòâ. Imperial Eagle (Aquila heliaca). Âåñüìà èíòåðåñíûå ðåçóëüòàòû èçó÷åíèÿ Photo from the presentation by Bragin et al. ëåòíèõ ñêîïëåíèé êðóïíûõ ïåðíàòûõ õèù- íèêîâ â Êàçàõñòàíå ïðåäñòàâèë Å.À. Áðà- - changes in the number of different spe- ãèí (Íàóðçóìñêèé çàïîâåäíèê, Êàçàõñòàí) cies of breeding birds of prey at two perma- â ñâî¸ì äîêëàäå (Áðàãèí Å.À., Êàòöíåð Ò., nent plots didn’t go synchronously; Áðàãèí À.Å. Ëåòíèå ñêîïëåíèÿ êðóïíûõ - number dynamics of birds of prey is ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ è ïðîáëåìà îöåíêè èõ largely determined by peculiarities of spe- ÷èñëåííîñòè)33. Èññëåäîâàòåëÿì óäàëîñü cific conditions of a habitat, not just by the ñîâìåñòèòü âèçóàëüíûå ìåòîäû îöåíêè abundance of small mammals in a particular ÷èñëåííîñòè òàêèõ ñêîïëåíèé ñ àíàëèçîì year; ãåíåòè÷åñêîãî ìàòåðèàëà, ïîëó÷åííîãî èç - clear correlation between changes in the ëèííûõ ïåðüåâ ïòèö.  ëåòíèõ ñêîïëåíèÿõ number of birds of prey and small mammals â Íàóðçóìñêîì áîðó óäàâàëîñü îäíîâðå- (as a whole and for individual species) was ìåííî íàáëþäàòü äî 50–60 ìîãèëüíèêîâ not detected, except for the Long-Eared Ìîëîäîé ìîãèëüíèê, (Aquila heliaca), òîãäà êàê àíàëèç ïåðüåâ and Short-Eared Owls; ïîìå÷åííûé êðûëîìåò- ïîêàçàë, ÷òî â òå÷åíèè îäíîãî ñåçîíà äàí- - stable relationship of number dynamics êîé. Ôîòî èç ïðå- íóþ òåððèòîðèþ ïîñåòèëî 287 îñîáåé of birds of prey is traced only if at once take çåíòàöèè Å. Áðàãèíà ñ ýòîãî âèäà. Ýòîò ôàêò êîñâåííî ïîäòâåðæ- ñîàâòîðàìè. into account fluctuations of abundance for äàåò øèðîêèå êî÷¸âêè íåïîëîâîçðåëûõ several main prey species. Young Imperial Eagle ïòèö â ïðåäåëàõ àðåàëà â ïîèñêàõ ïèùè. with wingtag. Photo E.A. Bragin (Naurzum Reserve, Kaza- from the presentation  áëàãîïðèÿòíûõ ìåñòàõ ìîãèëüíèêè ìîãóò khstan) presented very interesting results by Bragin et al. çàäåðæèâàòüñÿ íà äëèòåëüíîå âðåìÿ, îáðà- of the study of summer concentrations of large raptors in Kazakhstan (Bragin E.A., Katzner T., Bragin A.E. Summer concentra- tions of large birds of prey and a problem of estimating their numbers)33. Researchers have managed to combine visual meth- ods of number estimation of such concen- trations with analysis of genetic material derived from molting feathers of birds. In summer concentrations in Naurzum forest were simultaneously observe up to 50–60 Imperial Eagles (Aquila heliaca), while the analysis of feathers has shown that in a single season this territory was visited by 287 individuals of this species. This fact 33 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Bragin-Katcner-Bragin.pps 32 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

çóÿ êîíöåíòðàöèè. Íà ñåãîäíÿ ýòî ÿâëåíèå indirectly confirms extensive migrations of îñòà¸òñÿ ñëàáî èçó÷åííûì ïî îòíîøåíèþ immature birds within the area in search- êî âñåì õèùíûì ïòèöàì. ing for food. In favourable sites the Impe- Ðåçóëüòàòû èññëåäîâàíèé Ñ.À. Êîðêèíîé rial Eagles can stay for a long time, forming (Ïåíçà, Ðîññèÿ) ïîêàçàëè, ÷òî ñîçäàíèå Ñóð- a concentration. Today, this phenomenon ñêîãî âîäîõðàíèëèùà, ðàñïîëîæåííîãî â remains poorly studied in relation to all ëåñîñòåïíîé çîíå (Ïåíçåíñêàÿ îáëàñòü), ñî birds of prey. âðåìåíåì ïðèâåëî ê óâåëè÷åíèþ âèäîâî- Studies of S.A. Korkinà (Penza, Rus- ãî ðàçíîîáðàçèÿ è óâåëè÷åíèþ ïëîòíîñòè sia) have showed that the construction of ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ õèùíûõ ïòèö. Èíàÿ ñèòóàöèÿ Surskoye Reservoir, located in the forest- ñêëàäûâàåòñÿ â ïðåäåëàõ èíòðàçîíàëüíûõ steppe zone, eventually led to increase ó÷àñòêîâ ëåñíûõ òåððèòîðèé – ïðè âûñîêèõ in species diversity and density of breed- ïîêàçàòåëÿõ âèäîâîãî ðàçíîîáðàçèÿ ïëîò- ing birds of prey. The situation is differ- íîñòü íàñåëåíèÿ â äâà ðàçà ìåíüøå, ÷åì â ent within intrazonal sites of forest areas ëåñîñòåïè. Íåñîìíåííûé èíòåðåñ âûçâàëî – with high rates of species diversity, ñîîáùåíèå î íàõîäêå â îäíîì ãíåçäå îðëàíà- population density is twice less than in the áåëîõâîñòà (Haliaeetus albicilla) 4-õ ïòåíöîâ forest-steppe. An undoubted interest was âî âòîðîì ïóõîâîì íàðÿäå.  ïðåçåíòàöèè caused by the news of finding four chicks ïîêàçàíî ôîòî ýòîãî âûâîäêà (Êîðêèíà Ñ.À. in the second downy plumage in one nest Ôîðìèðîâàíèå íàñåëåíèÿ õèùíûõ ïòèö èí- of the White-Tailed Eagle (Haliaeetus al- òðàçîíàëüíûõ ëàíäøàôòîâ)34. bicilla). The presentation has photos of Ò.Â. Ìàêàðîâà (Ìîñêâà, Ðîññèÿ) ïðåäñòà- this brood (Korkina S.A. Formation of the âèëà ðåçóëüòàòû èññëåäîâàíèé çèìîâî÷íûõ population of birds of prey in intrazonal ñêîïëåíèé óøàñòûõ ñîâ (Asio otus) â Ìî- landscapes)34. ñêâå è íåêîòîðûõ äðóãèõ ðåãèîíàõ Ðîññèè T.V. Makarova (Moscow, Russia) present- (Ìàêàðîâà Ò.Â., Øàðèêîâ À.Â. Åâðîïåéñêèé ed results of wintering concentrations of the ïðîåêò ïî ìîíèòîðèíãó çèìîâîê óøàñòîé Long-Eared Owls (Asio otus) in Moscow Çèìóþùèå óøàñòûå ñîâû (Asio otus) – ñëåâà ñîâû è íåêîòîðûå ðåçóëüòàòû å¸ èçó÷åíèÿ and some other regions of Russia (Makaro- è áîëîòíàÿ ñîâà (Asio â Ìîñêâå)35. Çèìîé 2009–2010 ãã. áûëà va T.V., Sharikov A.V. European project for flammeus) – ñïðàâà. ïðåäïðèíÿòà ïåðâàÿ ïîïûòêà êîîðäèíàöèè monitoring of wintering Long-Eared Owls Ôîòî èç ïðåçåíòàöèè ó÷¸òîâ ýòèõ ñîâ ñîâìåñòíî ñ êîëëåãàìè èç and some results of this species study in Ò. Ìàêàðîâîé è 35 À. Øàðèêîâà. äðóãèõ ñòðàí. Èíèöèàòîðàìè äàííûõ ðàáîò Moscow) . In the winter of 2009–2010 it ÿâëÿþòñÿ îðíèòîëîãè èç Ñåðáèè, êîòîðûå was made the first attempt to coordinate Wintering Long-Eared Owls (Asio otus) – at ðàçðàáîòàëè àíêåòó äëÿ ïðîâåäåíèÿ ó÷¸- the counts of these owls in cooperation with the left, and Short-Eared òîâ. Àíêåòà áûëà ïåðåâåäåíà íà ðóññêèé colleagues from other countries. The initia- Owl (Asio flammeus) ÿçûê è àäàïòèðîâàíà ê óñëîâèÿì Ðîññèè. tors of these works are ornithologists from – at the right. Photos Óêàçàííûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ ïåðåêëèêàþòñÿ ñ Serbia, which developed a questionnaire to from the presentation by T. Makarova and îáçîðîì ïî çèìîâêàì óøàñòûõ ñîâ, ñäåëàí- conduct censuses. The questionnaire was A. Sharikov. íûì íåäàâíî óêðàèíñêèìè îðíèòîëîãàìè36. translated into Russian and adapted to the conditions of Russia. These studies overlap with the review of wintering Long-Eared Owls, which Ukrainian ornithologists made recently37. We would like to express hope that from next year this project will involve Ukrainian ornithologists as well. Conference participants were interested in facts, men- tioned in this report, of wintering of Short- Eared Owls on trees together with Long- Eared Owls. S.G. Viter (Kharkov, Ukraine), made a presentation on breeding success and productivity of the Imperial Eagle in the Seversky Donets river basin (Viter S.G. Breeding success and productivity of the

34 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Korkina.pps 35 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Makarova-Sharikov.pps 36 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/150 37 http://raptors.org.ua/en/2010/01/wintering-of-the-long-eared-owls-in-ukraine/ Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 33

Õî÷åòñÿ âûñêàçàòü íàäåæäó, ÷òî ñî ñëåäóþ- Imperial Eagle in the Seversky Donets ùåãî ãîäà ê äàííîìó ïðîåêòó ïîäêëþ÷àòñÿ basin)38. During the years 2003–2009 è óêðàèíñêèå îðíèòîëîãè. Ó ó÷àñòíèêîâ eight pairs were under observation, êîíôåðåíöèè âûçâàëî èíòåðåñ óïîìèíà- breeding in forests of the Seversky Donets íèå â äàííîì äîêëàäå î çèìîâêå áîëîòíûõ valley and 5 pairs of species in agricultural ñîâ ñîâìåñòíî ñ óøàñòûìè íà äåðåâüÿõ. landscapes. The small sample size did not Ñ.Ã. Âèòåð (Õàðüêîâ, Óêðàèíà) âûñòóïèë ñ allow reliable conclusions, but found that äîêëàäîì, ïîñâÿù¸ííûì óñïåøíîñòè ãíåç- breeding productivity was fairly stable, a äîâàíèÿ è ïðîäóêòèâíîñòè ðàçìíîæåíèÿ slight increase of breeding success was ìîãèëüíèêà â áàññåéíå Ñåâåðñêîãî Äîíöà registered. For birds in agricultural land- (Âèòåð Ñ.Ã. Óñïåøíîñòü ãíåçäîâàíèÿ è ïðî- scapes, it was observed a strong variation äóêòèâíîñòü ðàçìíîæåíèÿ îðëà-ìîãèëüíè- of the productivity of reproduction and êà â áàññåéíå Ñåâåðñêîãî Äîíöà)38. Íà breeding success. ïðîòÿæåíèè 2003–2009 ãã. ïîä íàáëþäå- V.P. Belik (Rostov-on-Don, Russia) in col- íèåì íàõîäèëèñü 8 ïàð, ãíåçäèâøèõñÿ â laboration with an amateur ornithologist, ëåñàõ â äîëèíå Ñåâåðñêîãî Äîíöà, è 5 ïàð, V.N. Pimenov (Volgograd, Russia), made îáèòàþùèõ â àãðîëàíäøàôòàõ. Íåáîëü- an interesting and colorful presentation on øîé îáú¸ì âûáîðêè íå ïîçâîëÿåò ñäåëàòü the Long-Legged Buzzard (Buteo rufinus) íàä¸æíûõ âûâîäîâ, îäíàêî óñòàíîâëåíî, in the vicinity of Volgograd in Transvolga ÷òî ïðîäóêòèâíîñòü ðàçìíîæåíèÿ áûëà äî- area (Pimenov V.N., Belik V.P. Long-Leg- ñòàòî÷íî ñòàáèëüíîé, îòìå÷åí íåáîëüøîé ged Buzzard in the vicinity of Volgograd in ðîñò óñïåøíîñòè ãíåçäîâàíèÿ. Äëÿ ïòèö, Transvolga area)39. Amount of material col- îáèòàþùèõ â àãðîëàíäøàôòàõ, îòìå÷åíî lected by V.N. Pimenov is amazing. For 5 ñèëüíîå âàðüèðîâàíèå ïðîäóêòèâíîñòè years it was surveyed approx. 3,000 km2, ðàçìíîæåíèÿ è óñïåøíîñòè ãíåçäîâàíèÿ. found 115 breeding sites, tracked 330 cases Â.Ï. Áåëèê (Ðîñòîâ-íà-Äîíó, Ðîññèÿ) â of breeding. This is despite the fact that most ñîàâòîðñòâå ñ îðíèòîëîãîì-ëþáèòåëåì of the movements in hot arid deserts were Â.Í. Ïèìåíîâûì (Âîëãîãðàä, Ðîññèÿ) carried by bicycle. Undoubted interest was âûñòóïèë ñ èíòåðåñíûì è êðàñî÷íî caused by a picture the Long-Legged Buz- îôîðìëåííûì äîêëàäîì, ïîñâÿù¸í- zard’s nests with 12 eggs. In recent years it íûì êóðãàííèêó (Buteo rufinus) â Âîë- had been found the Buzzard’s nests on the ãîãðàäñêîì Çàâîëæüå (Ïèìåíîâ Â.Í., ground, which we saw ourselves during an Áåëèê Â.Ï. Êóðãàííèê â Âîëãîãðàäñêîì expedition to Elton area after the Orenburg Çàâîëæüå)39. Ïîðàæàåò îáú¸ì ìàòåðèà- conference. In general, in the 2000s, despite ëà, ñîáðàííîãî Â.Í. Ïèìåíîâûì. Èì çà the disappearance of sousliks and deteriora- 5 ëåò áûëà îáñëåäîâàíà ïëîùàäü îêî- tion of breeding conditions in the Transvolga ëî 3000 êì2, îáíàðóæåíî 115 ãíåçäî- area, the Long-Legged Buzzard continued âûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, ïðîñëåæåíî 330 ñëó÷àåâ distribution and growth of population. It be- ãíåçäîâàíèÿ. Ýòî ïðè òîì, ÷òî áîëüøàÿ gan actively colonizing grown forest belts, ÷àñòü ïåðåäâèæåíèé â óñëîâè- ÿõ æàðêîé áåçâîäíîé ïîëóïó- ñòûíè îñóùåñòâëÿëàñü íà âåëî- ñèïåäå. Íåñîìíåííûé èíòåðåñ âûçâàëà ôîòîãðàôèÿ ãíåçäà êóðãàííèêà ñ 12 ÿéöàìè.  ïî- ñëåäíèå ãîäû áûëè âûÿâëåíû ãí¸çäà êóðãàííèêà íà çåìëå, ñ êîòîðûìè ìû ïîçíàêîìèëèñü ñàìè âî âðåìÿ ýêñïåäèöèè ïî Ïðèýëüòîíüþ ïîñëå îðåíáóðã- ñêîé êîíôåðåíöèè.  öåëîì â 2000-å ãîäû, íåñìîòðÿ íà èñ- ÷åçíîâåíèå ñóñëèêîâ è óõóä- øåíèå ãíåçäîâûõ óñëîâèé â Çàâîëæüå, êóðãàííèê ïðîäîë- æèë ñâî¸ ðàññåëåíèå è ðîñò Êëàäêà êóðãàííèêà (Buteo rufinus) èç 12 ÿèö. Ôîòî èç ïðåçåíòàöèè Â. Ïèìåíîâà è Â. Áåëèêà. Clutch of the Long-Legged Buzzard (Buteo rufinus) 38 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Viter.pps with 12 eggs. Photo from the presentation 39 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Pimenov-Belik.pps by V. Pimenov and V. Belik. 34 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

÷èñëåííîñòè. Íà÷àëîñü àêòèâíîå çàñåëå- íèå ïîäðîñøèõ ëåñîïîëîñ, à òàêæå çà- áðîøåííûõ êîøàð, ñàäîâ è äàæå æèëûõ õóòîðîâ. Âî âòîðîé, âå÷åðíåé ÷àñòè ñåêöèè ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì áûëî ïðåäñòàâëåíî ïÿòü äîêëàäîâ. Âåñüìà èíòåðåñíûì êàê ïî ðåçóëüòàòàì, òàê è ïî ýìîöèîíàëüíîñòè, áûëî âûñòóïëå- íèå À.À. Ñîêîëîâà (Ëàáûòíàíãè, Ðîññèÿ) ïðî ñïóòíèêîâîå îòñëåæèâàíèå ñàïñàíîâ, ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ íà ßìàëå (Ñîêîëîâ À.À., Äèê- ñîí Ý., Ñîêîëîâ Â.À. Ñîêîë-ñàïñàí Falco peregrinus calidus íà þãî-çàïàäíîì ßìà- ëå: ðåçóëüòàòû ñïóòíèêîâîãî ñëåæåíèÿ). Ãíåçäî ñàïñàíà (Falco peregrinus) â ñòàðîé ïîñòðîéêå âîðîíà (Corvus corax). Îêàçàëîñü, ÷òî ñàïñàíû, ãíåçäÿùèåñÿ â Ôîòî èç ïðåçåíòàöèè Ï. Òèëüáû è Ð. Ìíàöåêàíîâà. áåçëþäíîé òóíäðå, ìîãóò çèìîâàòü â âåñü- Nest of the Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) in old ìà îæèâë¸ííûõ ìåñòàõ. Îäèí ñàìåö ïðî- nest of the Raven (Corvus corax). Photo from â¸ë âñþ çèìó íà äîñòàòî÷íî îãðàíè÷åííîé the presentation by P. Tilba and R. Mnatsekanov. òåððèòîðèè â ã. Áàãäàä (Èðàê). Ñàìêà ïðî- âåëà çèìó â îäíîì èç êóðîðòíûõ ãîðîäîâ as well as abandoned sheepyards, gardens â Ïîðòóãàëèè. Äðóãàÿ ñàìêà ñîâåðøèëà and even residential villages. ñàìóþ ïðîäîëæèòåëüíóþ ïî ðàññòîÿíèþ In the second, evening part of sections ìèãðàöèþ – îíà çèìîâàëà â Àôðèêå â Ñó- on birds of prey, there were presented five äàíå. Îêàçàëîñü, ÷òî äàëüíîñòü ìèãðàöèè reports. ñàïñàíîâ íå çàâèñèò îò ïðîäîëæèòåëüíî- The report of A.A. Sokolov (Labytnangi, ñòè ìèãðàöèè âî âðåìåíè. Russia) was impressive in respect to re- Ï.À. Òèëüáà (Ñî÷è, Ðîññèÿ) ïðåäñòàâèë sults and emotionality. He told about satel- ðåçóëüòàòû ìíîãîëåòíèõ èññëåäîâàíèé äè- lite tracking of Peregrines breeding on the íàìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè è ýêîëîãèè ñàïñàíà íà Yamal Peninsula (Sokolov A.A., Dixon A., Ñåâåðíîì Êàâêàçå (Òèëüáà Ï.À., Ìíàöåêà- Sokolov V.A. Peregrine Falcon Falco peregri- íîâ Ð.À. Ñàïñàí Falco peregrinus brookei íà nus calidus on the South-Western Yamal Pe- Ñåâåðíîì Êàâêàçå)40. Ñîâðåìåííîå ñîñòî- ninsula: results of satellite tracking). It turned ÿíèå ïîïóëÿöèè ýòîãî õèùíèêà â ðåãèîíå out that the Peregrines breeding in unpopu- Ï.À. Òèëüáà âûñòóïàåò ñ äîêëàäîì î ñàïñà- îöåíèâàåòñÿ êàê ñòàáèëüíîå.  ïîñëåäíèå lated tundra, may spend the winter in a very íå (Falco peregrinus ãîäû íàáëþäàåòñÿ ðîñò ÷èñëåííîñòè, ïðî- crowded places. One male spent the winter brookei). ñëåæèâàåòñÿ òåíäåíöèÿ óâåëè÷åíèÿ ðå- at a rather limited area in the city of Baghdad Ôîòî Ì. Ãàâðèëþêà. ïðîäóêòèâíîãî ïîòåíöèàëà. (Iraq). A female spent the winter in a resort P.A. Tilba reports about ßøèí Àòàäæàíîâ (Òóðêìåíèñòàí) ïðåä- town in Portugal. Another female flew the the Peregrine Falcon longest distance of migration – she wintered (Falco peregrinus ñòàâèë äîêëàä íà òåìó: «Ñîâðåìåííîå ñî- brookei). ñòîÿíèå õèùíûõ ïòèö Êàïëàíêûðñêîãî in Africa in the Sudan. It turned out that the Photo by M. Gavrilyuk. çàïîâåäíèêà (Òóðêìåíèñòàí)». Áûë îõà- migration distance of this falcon does not de- pend on the time duration of migration. P.A. Tilba (Sochi, Russia) presented the results of long-term studies of number dy- namics and ecology of Peregrine Falcons in the North Caucasus (Tilba P.A., Mnatsekanov R.A. Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus brookei in the North Caucasus)40. Current status of the population of this raptor in the region is estimated as stable. In recent years, the population growth and tendency to in- crease reproductive capacity is observed. Yashin Atadzhanov (Turkmenistan) present- ed a report on the theme: “Current state of birds of prey in Kaplankyr Reserve (Turkmeni- stan). It was described the species composi- tion, status and number of birds of prey in the

40 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Tilba-Mnacekanov.pps Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 35

ðàêòåðèçîâàí âèäîâîé ñîñòàâ, ñòàòóñ è ÷èñëåííîñòü õèùíûõ ïòèö èññëåäóåìîãî ðåãèîíà. Âûñòóïëåíèå ßøèíà áûëî åãî äåáþòîì íà íàó÷íûõ êîíôå- ðåíöèÿõ è áûëî òåïëî ïîä- äåðæàíî âñåìè ïðèñóòñòâóþ- ùèìè. Â.Ì. Ìóçàåâ (Ýëèñòà, Ðîñ- ñèÿ) âûñòóïèë ñ äîêëàäîì, ïîñâÿù¸ííûì ñîñòîÿíèþ ïî- ïóëÿöèé ñòåïíîé ïóñòåëüãè (Falco naumanni) è îðëàíà- áåëîõâîñòà â Êàëìûêèè (Ìó- çàåâ Â.Ì., Ýðäíåíîâ Ã.È., Ïîñòåðíàÿ ñåññèÿ. Ôîòî Ì. Ãàâðèëþêà. Áîðöîâ Ã.Å. Ñòåïíàÿ ïó- Poster session. Photo by M. Gavrilyuk. ñòåëüãà è îðëàí-áåëîõâîñò â Êàëìûêèè)41. ×èñëåííîñòü ñòåïíîé ïó- investigated region. The report of Yashin was ñòåëüãè îñòà¸òñÿ íèçêîé, íî ñòàáèëüíîé. his debut at scientific conferences and warmly Àâòîðàìè áûëî âûÿâëåíî 5 å¸ êîëîíèé supported by all present participants. îáùåé ÷èñëåííîñòüþ îêîëî 160 ïàð. ×å- V.M. Muzaev (Elista, Russia), made a pres- òûðå èç íèõ áûëè ðàñïîëîæåíû â êîøàðàõ, entation on the status of populations of the îäíà (íåáîëüøàÿ) – â çäàíèè ðàçðóøåííî- Lesser Kestrel (Falco naumanni) and White- ãî ìÿñîêîìáèíàòà. ×èñëåííîñòü îðëàíà- Tailed Eagle in Kalmykia (Muzaev V.M., Erd- áåëîõâîñòà íà ãíåçäîâàíèè íåâûñîêàÿ, íà- nenov G.I., Bortsov G.E. The Lesser Kestrel áëþäàåòñÿ òåíäåíöèÿ å¸ óâåëè÷åíèÿ. and White-Tailed Eagle in Kalmykia)41. The Â.Ï. Áåëèê (Ðîñòîâ-íà-Äîíó, Ðîññèÿ) âû- number of the Lesser Kestrel is low, but sta- ñòóïèë ñ õîðîøî èëëþñòðèðîâàííûì ñî- ble. The authors found five colonies of the first îáùåíèåì î ìîãèëüíèêå â Âîëãîãðàäñêîé species, totally about 160 pairs. Four of them îáëàñòè (Áåëèê Â.Ï., Ãóãóåâà Å.Â., Áàáêèí were located in sheepyards, one (small) in È.Ã., Ìàõìóòîâ Ð.Ø., Ìàçèíà Î.Â. Îð¸ë- a destroyed building of the meat plant. The ìîãèëüíèê, èëè êàðàãóø â Âîëãîãðàäñêîé number of breeding White-Tailed Eagle is îáëàñòè)42. Ìàòåðèàë, ñîáðàííûé êîëëåê- low, the increasing trend is observed. òèâîì àâòîðîâ íà ïðîòÿæåíèè áîëåå 10 V.P. Belik (Rostov-on-Don, Russia) gave a ëåò, ïðîäåìîíñòðèðîâàë ñîâåðøåííî äðó- well-illustrated presentation on the Imperial ãóþ êàðòèíó ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèÿ è ÷èñëåí- Eagle in Volgograd Region (Belik V.P., Gu- íîñòè âèäà, ÷åì ýòî áûëî èçâåñòíî ðàíåå. guyeva E.V., Babkin I.G., Mahmutov R.Sh., Ñîâðåìåííàÿ ÷èñëåííîñòü ìîãèëüíèêà â Mazin O.V. The Imperial Eagle in Volgograd Âîëãîãðàäñêîé îáëàñòè ñîñòàâëÿåò 75–95 region)42. The data collected by a working ïàð. Íåñìîòðÿ íà óõóäøåíèå êîðìîâûõ group for over 10 years, showed a very dif- óñëîâèé (ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè ìàëîãî ferent picture of the distribution and abun- ñóñëèêà), ïðîäîëæàåòñÿ ðîñò ïîïóëÿöèé dance of species than was previously known. ìîãèëüíèêà. Âàæíåéøèìè àäàïòàöèÿìè, The current number of the Imperial Eagle in ïîçâîëèâøèìè ýòîìó îðëó óäåðæèâàòüñÿ Volgograd region is 75–95 pairs. Despite the è ðàññåëÿòüñÿ â àíòðîïîãåííûõ ìåñòî- deterioration of feeding conditions (reduc- îáèòàíèÿõ, ñòàëè èçìåíåíèÿ â ýêîëîãèè è tion of sousliks), the Imperial Eagle popula- ïîâåäåíèè: tion continues to grow. The most important - ïåðåñåëåíèå ê äîðîãàì è ñ¸ëàì, ãäå adaptations, which allowed this eagle to stay áîëüøå ñêîòà è ñóñëèêîâ; and settle in anthropogenic habitats, were - îñâîåíèå äëÿ ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ëåñîïîëîñ è changes in its ecology and behavior: âûñîêîâîëüòíûõ ËÝÏ. - relocation to roads and villages, with Âàæíîå çíà÷åíèå èìåþò òàêæå èçìå- more cattle and sousliks; íåíèÿ â îòíîøåíèè ìåñòíîãî íàñåëåíèÿ ê - occupation of forest belts and power õèùíûì ïòèöàì, ïîâûøåíèå åãî òîëåðàíò- lines for nesting. íîñòè ê îðëàì, óæå ïðèìåëüêàâøèìñÿ íà Also essential changes were in the attitude ïàñòáèùàõ è ó ñ¸ë è íå âûçûâàþùèì ó ëþ- of local population to birds of prey, increased äåé ïîâûøåííîãî ëþáîïûòñòâà. tolerance to the eagles, which become famil-

41 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Muzaev.pps 42 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Belik-et-al.pps 36 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

Ó÷àñòíèêè XIII Ìåæäó- Â.Â. Âåòðîâ (Ëóãàíñê, Óêðàèíà) ïðåä- iar in pastures and villages and do not cause íàðîäíîé îðíèòîëîãè- ñòàâèë äîêëàä î ñîâðåìåííîì ñîñòîÿíèè now high of curiosity of people. ÷åñêîé êîíôåðåíöèè Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè. ìîãèëüíèêà íà âîñòîêå Óêðàèíû (Âåòðîâ V.V. Vetrov (Luhansk, Ukraine) presented Ôîòî Í. Áàëàöêîãî. Â.Â., Ìèëîáîã Þ.Â., Âåòðîâà Å.Í. Ìîãèëü- a report on the current state of the Imperial Participants of the íèê â ìåæäóðå÷üå Äíåïðà è Ñåâåðñêîãî Eagle in Eastern Ukraine (Vetrov V.V., Milo- 13th International Äîíöà)43.  ïîñëåäíèå äåñÿòèëåòèÿ â ñòåï- bog Yu.V., Vetrova E.N. The Imperial Eagle Ornithological íîì ìåæäóðå÷üå Ñåâåðñêîãî Äîíöà è Äíå- in the interfluve of the Dnieper and the Sev- Conference ïðà îòìå÷åíî áûñòðîå óâåëè÷åíèå ÷èñ- ersky Donets)43. In recent decades, in the of North Eurasia. Photo by N. Balatskiy. ëåííîñòè ýòîãî îðëà çà ñ÷¸ò çàñåëåíèÿ èì steppe between the rivers Seversky Donets íîâîãî áèîòîïà – ïîëåçàùèòíûõ ëåñîïî- and Dnieper it was noted a rapid increase in ëîñ, äîñòèãøèõ ñïåëîãî âîçðàñòà, à òàêæå the numbers of this eagle at the expense of îäèíî÷íûõ äåðåâüåâ è íåáîëüøèõ ðîù ïî occupying a new habitat – shelter forest belts ñòåïíûì áàëêàì. ×èñëåííîñòü ìîãèëüíèêà that have reached a ripe age, as well as single â âîñòî÷íîé ÷àñòè Óêðàèíû îöåíèâàåòñÿ trees or small groves in steppe gullies. The ñåé÷àñ íå ìåíåå ÷åì â 70 ïàð è ïðîäîë- number of the Imperial Eagle in the eastern æàåò âîçðàñòàòü. part of Ukraine is currently estimated at not Íåêîòîðûå äîêëàäû, ñâÿçàííûå ñ èçó÷å- less than 70 pairs, and continues to grow. íèåì õèùíûõ ïòèö, áûëè ïðåäñòàâëåíû íà Several reports related to the study of birds äðóãèõ ñåêöèÿõ: of prey were presented in other sections: Ñàïåëüíèêîâ Ñ.Ô. Ðàñïðåäåëåíèå õèù- Sapelnikov S.F. Distribution of birds of íûõ ïòèö è âîðîíà â Êàìåííîé ñòåïè44. prey and ravens in Kamennaya Steppe44. Ïîêðîâñêèé È.Ã. Ìåòîä àíàëèçà ñòàáèëü- Pokrovsky I.G. The method of analysis of íûõ èçîòîïîâ óãëåðîäà è àçîòà â îïðåäåëå- stable isotopes of carbon and nitrogen in íèè äèåòû õèùíûõ ïòèö45. determining the diets of birds of prey45. Áðàãèí Å.À. Ðåïðîäóêòèâíàÿ ýôôåêòèâ- Bragin E.A. Reproductive efficiency of íîñòü êëàäîê ðàçíîé âåëè÷èíû ó õèùíûõ clutches of different size of birds of prey of ïòèö ñåìåéñòâà Falconidae46. the family Falconidae46. Êàê è êàæäàÿ áîëüøàÿ âñòðå÷à, îðåí- Like every big meeting, the Orenburg áóðãñêàÿ êîíôåðåíöèÿ áûëà íàñûùåíà conference was full of discussions, com- äèñêóññèÿìè, îáùåíèåì ñ äðóçüÿìè è êîë- munication with friends and colleagues. ëåãàìè. Íåñîìíåííî, âñåì ó÷àñòíèêàì Undoubtedly, all participants remembered çàïîìíèëñÿ áàíêåò, îðãàíèçîâàííûé ïîä a banquet organized at the end of the con- çàíàâåñ êîíôåðåíöèè â íàöèîíàëüíîé äå- ference in the national village. All of us will ðåâíå. Ìû âñå åù¸ äîëãî áóäåì âñïîìè- remember for a long time the most interest- íàòü íàèáîëåå ÿðêèå ìîìåíòû ýòîé âñòðå- ing moments of this conference and expect ÷è è îæèäàòü ñëåäóþùåé. Ïðåäâàðèòåëüíî next meeting as well. As a preliminary deci- XIV Ìåæäóíàðîäíóþ îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêóþ sion, it was approved to hold the 14th Inter- êîíôåðåíöèþ Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè çàïëà- national Ornithological Conference of North íèðîâàíî ïðîâåñòè â 2015 ã. â ã. Ïåíçà. Eurasia in 2015 in Penza ñity.

43 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Vetrov-Milobog-Vetrova.pps 44 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Sapelnikov.pps 45 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Pokrovski.pps 46 http://raptors.org.ua/ru/wp-content/files/Orenb2010-Bragin.pps Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 37

IsThereAnyScientificBasisforDecreasingtheConservation StatusoftheSakerFalcon? ОБОСНОВАНО ЛИ НАУЧНО СНИЖЕНИЕ ПРИРОДООХРАННОГО СТАТУСА БАЛОБАНА? MoshkinA.V.(CenterforFieldStudies,Kurgan,Russia) Мошкин А.В. (Центр полевых исследований, Курган, Россия)

Êîíòàíê: Àáñòðàêò Àëåêñàíäð Ìîøêèí Ëèòåðàòóðíûé îáçîð î ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèè è ÷èñëåííîñòè ñîêîëà-áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug) â Ðîññèè, Êàçàõñòàíå, 641130, Ðîññèÿ Êèòàå è Ìîíãîëèè ïîäãîòîâëåí àâòîðîì íà îñíîâàíèè àíàëèçà áîëåå 280 ïóáëèêàöèé, 113 èç êîòîðûõ ïðî- Êóðãàíñêàÿ îáëàñòü öèòèðîâàíû. Öåëü îáçîðà – ïîëó÷èòü îáúåêòèâíóþ èíôîðìàöèþ îá îöåíêàõ ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà è òðåíäàõ ñ. Àëüìåíåâî â ðàññìîòðåííûõ ñòðàíàõ, ñîäåðæàùèõ îñíîâíîé çàïàñ âèäà, ÷òîáû îöåíèòü ïðàâîìî÷íîñòü ñíèæåíèÿ ñòàòóñà óë. Ëåíèíà, 59 áàëîáàíà â Êðàñíîì ñïèñêå ÌÑÎÏ 2010 ã. Íà îñíîâàíèè àíàëèçà ëèòåðàòóðû îáùàÿ ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà â [email protected] Ðîññèè, Êàçàõñòàíå, Êèòàå è Ìîíãîëèè îöåíåíà â 6736–11721, â ñðåäíåì 9228 ïàð ïðè ñîêðàùåíèè ÷èñëåí- íîñòè çà ïîñëåäíèå 20 ëåò íà 53,6%. Òàêîå ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè ñîîòâåòñòâóåò êàòåãîðèè «óãðîæàåìûé» â Êðàñíîì ñïèñêå ÌÑÎÏ, â ðåçóëüòàòå ÷åãî ìîæíî ñäåëàòü âûâîä, ÷òî áàëîáàí ïåðåâåä¸í â êàòåãîðèþ «óÿçâè- Contact: ìûé» íåîáîñíîâàííî. Êëþ÷åâûå ñëîâà: õèùíûå ïòèöû, ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè, áàëîáàí, Falco cherrug, ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå, ÷èñëåííîñòü. Alex Moshkin Lenina str., 59 Abstract Almenevo A review of publications concerning the distribution and numbers of the Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) in Russia, Ka- Kurgan district zakhstan, China and Mongolia has been based on analysis of more than 280 articles, 113 of which have been cited. Russia, 641130 The aim of the review is the collection of objective information concerning estimated numbers of the Saker Falcon [email protected] and the trends in the range countries which the species generally inhabits, and estimation of the competency of the decision to decrease the status of the Saker Falcon in the IUCN’s Red List in 2010. According to this analysis of publications, the total numbers of Saker Falcons in Russia, Kazakhstan, China and Mongolia has been estimated as 6,736–11,721 pairs, averaging 9,228, with a 53.6% decrease for the last 20 years. Such a decline in numbers corresponds to the “endangered” category in the IUCN’s Red List, causing the author to conclude that there are no reasons to recognise the Saker Falcon as “vulnerable”. Keywords: birds of prey, raptors, Saker Falcon, Falco cherrug, distribution, population status.

Ââåäåíèå Introduction  2010 ã. îïóáëèêîâàí íîâûé Êðàñíûé In 2010 the IUCN published a new Red List ñïèñîê ÌÑÎÏ (IUCN 2010) â êîòîðîì in which the status of the Saker Falcon (Falco ñíèæåí ñòàòóñ áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug) cherrug) was lowered from that of an endan- – èç êàòåãîðèè âèäîâ, íàõîäÿùèõñÿ ïîä gered (EN) to the vulnerable (VU) category. óãðîçîé èñ÷åçíîâåíèÿ (EN), áàëîáàí As is generally known, Birdlife prepares the îïðåäåë¸í â êàòåãîðèþ óÿçâèìûõ (VU). materials concerning birds for the IUCN, or- Êàê èçâåñòíî, ìàòåðèàëû ïî ïòèöàì äëÿ ganising discussions for specialists before- ÌÑÎÏ ãîòîâèò BirdLife International, ïðåä- hand. New estimates of the numbers of Saker Áàëîáàí (Falco âàðèòåëüíî îðãàíèçóÿ äèñêóññèþ â ñðåäå Falcons were presented to the Birdlife forum cherrug). Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. ñïåöèàëèñòîâ. Íà ôîðóìå BirdLife áûëè (Birdlife..., 2010), based primarily upon the Saker Falcon (Falco ðàçìåùåíû íîâûå îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè publications of Dixon (Dixon, 2007: 2009). cherrug). áàëîáàíà (BirdLife…, 2010), áàçèðóþùè- From the tables presented by Birdlife for Photo by I. Karyakin. åñÿ â îñíîâíîì íà ïóáëèêàöèÿõ Ý. Äèê- examination (tables 1, 3) it is obvious that, ñîíà (Dixon, 2007; 2009). compared with the 2003 report data (table Èç òàáëèö, ïðåäñòàâëåííûõ 2) (ERWDA, 2003), the estimated numbers BirdLife äëÿ ðàññìîòðåíèÿ of Saker Falcons in the countries supporting (òàáë. 1, 3), î÷åâèäíî, ÷òî ïî the basic populations of this falcon appears ñðàâíåíèþ ñ äàííûìè äîêëà- to increase. Implicit was the question posed äà 2003 ã. (òàáë. 2) (ERWDA, by Birdlife: how to interpret the new popula- 2003) â 2009 ã. ñóùåñòâåííî tion estimates? I also set this question, which èçìåíèëèñü îöåíêè ÷èñëåí- was posed in the current survey. íîñòè áàëîáàíà ïî ñòðàíàì, â êîòîðûõ îáèòàþò îñíîâ- Survey and analysis of publications íûå ïîïóëÿöèè ýòîãî ñîêîëà, The following is written in the entry in the ïðè÷¸ì â ñòîðîíó óâåëè÷å- IUCN Red List (IUCN 2010): “The historical íèÿ. Ïîíÿòåí è âîïðîñ, êî- global population size remains subject to 38 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

Òàáë. 1. ×èñëåííîñòü ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ïàð áàëîáàíîâ (Falco cherrug) â êëþ÷åâûõ ñòðàíàõ àðåàëà çà òðè ïåðèîäà â ïðîøåäøèå 20 ëåò. Äàííûå ERWDA (2003) è Ý. Äèêñîíà (Dixon 2007, 2009). Table 1. Numbers of pairs of Saker Falcons (Falco cherrug) in key range states in three periods in the past 20 years. Data are from ERWDA (2003) and A. Dixon (2007, 2009).

Ñòðàíà / Country 1990 ã. 2003 ã. 2007–2009 ãã. Àôãàíèñòàí, Èðàí, Èðàê, Ïàêèñòàí, Òóðêìåíèñòàí Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkmenistan 220 210 120–450 Êèòàé / China 1000–1200 1000–1200 3000–5000 Êàçàõñòàí / Kazakhstan 1000–3000 200 2000–3000 Êèðãèçèÿ / Kyrgyzstan 500–600 150–200 100–120 Ìîíãîëèÿ / Mongolia 2668 1000–1200 2000–5000 Ðîññèÿ / Russia 1780–2301 550–700 1500–3000 Òóðöèÿ / Turkey 10–100 10–100 5–70 Óêðàèíà / Ukraine 120–140 120–140 270–345 Óçáåêèñòàí / Uzbekistan 1000–1500 100–150 100–150 Âñåãî / Total 8298–11729 3340–4100 9095–17135

òîðûì çàäà¸òñÿ BirdLife: êàê èíòåðïðåòè- some uncertainty, however a recent analysis ðîâàòü íîâûå ïîïóëÿöèîííûå îöåíêè? ß of available data resulted in a revised glo- òîæå çàäàëñÿ ýòèì âîïðîñîì, ÷òî âûëèëîñü bal population estimate of 13,000–27,000 â íàñòîÿùèé îáçîð. breeding pairs in 1990, with the majority in China (4,000–6,000 pairs), Kazakhstan Îáçîð è àíàëèç ïóáëèêàöèé (2,000–5,000), Mongolia (3,000–5,000)  î÷åðêå î áàëîáàíå â Êðàñíîì ñïèñêå and Russia (3,000–9,000); and a total popu- ÌÑÎÏ (IUCN 2010) óêàçàíî: «Èñòîðè- lation of 9,500–17,000 pairs in 2010 (China ÷åñêèé ðàçìåð ïîïóëÿöèè ýòîãî ñîêîëà 3,000–5,000, Kazakhstan 2,000–3,000, îñòà¸òñÿ ïëîõî îöåíèâàåìûì, îäíàêî íå- Mongolia 2,000–5,000 and Russia 1,854– äàâíèé àíàëèç äîñòóïíûõ äàííûõ, ïðèâ¸ë 2,542). Assuming a generation length of 6.4 ê ïåðåñìîòðó îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè âèäà â years and that the decline of the Saker had ïðîøëîì. ×èñëåííîñòü ìèðîâîé ïîïóëÿ- already begun (at least in some areas) prior öèè áàëîáàíà â 1990 ã. îöåíåíà â 13–27 to the 1990s (consumption of Sakers in the òûñ. ðàçìíîæàþùèõñÿ ïàð, ñ ìàêñèìàëü- Middle East was heavy by mid-1980s), the íîé ÷èñëåííîñòüþ â Êèòàå (4–6 òûñ. ïàð), declines over the 19 year period 1991–2010 Êàçàõñòàíå (2–5 òûñ. ïàð), Ìîíãîëèè equate to 32% (based on median estimates), (3–5 òûñ. ïàð) è Ðîññèè (3–9 òûñ. ïàð), with a minimum-maximum of 29–62%”. à ïîëíîå íàñåëåíèå â 2010 ã. îöåíåíî Birdlife changed the estimates of the popu- â 9,5–17 òûñ. ïàð: Êèòàé – 3–5 òûñ. ïàð, lation numbers of the Saker Falcon. New data Êàçàõñòàí – 2–3 òûñ. ïàð, Ìîíãîëèÿ – had become available, which was not in the 2–5 òûñ. ïàð è Ðîññèÿ – 1854–2542 ïàð. ERWDA essay and in the review by Dixon Ïðèíèìàÿ âî âíèìàíèå ïðîäîëæèòåëü- (2009). Thus, the number of Sakers in Russia íîñòü æèçíè 6,4 ãîäà è ÷òî ñíèæåíèå was determined as 3–9 pairs. I found only áàëîáàíà óæå íà÷àëîñü (ïî êðàéíåé two sources of historical estimates: Galushin ìåðå â íåêîòîðûõ îáëàñòÿõ) äî 1990-õ (2004) for the period of the 1920s–50s esti- ãã. ÕÕ ñòîëåòèÿ (ïîòðåáëåíèå áàëîáàíà mates a population of 10,000 pairs, of which íà Áëèæíåì Âîñòîêå áûëî áîëüøèì óæå about 1,000 pairs bred in the European part ê ñåðåäèíå 1980-õ ãã.), ñíèæåíèå çà 19- of Russia; for the 1970s–90s – 4,000 pairs, of ëåòíèé ïåðèîä 1991–2010 ã. ïðèðàâíè- which about 100-50 pairs were in European âàåòñÿ ê 32% (29–62%)». Russia; and for 2000–2003, 2,000–3,000 BirdLife èçìåíèë îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè pairs, of which from 25 to 30–50 pairs were in ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà â ïðîøëîì. Ïîÿâè- the European part of Russia. Karyakin (2008) ëèñü íîâûå äàííûå, êîòîðûõ íåò â îò÷å- for the period of the 1970s estimates the òå ERWDA è â îáçîðå Ý. Äèêñîíà (2009). minimum number in Russia at 9,000 pairs, Òàê, ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà â Ðîññèè of which about 3,500 pairs nested in the Eu- îïðåäåëåíà â 3–9 òûñ. ïàð. ß îáíàðóæèë ropean part of Russia; for 2003, 2,117–2,683 ëèøü äâà èñòî÷íèêà èñòîðè÷åñêèõ îöå- pairs, of which 30–58 pairs were in European íîê: Â.Ì. Ãàëóøèí (Galushin, 2004) äëÿ Russia; for 2007, 1854–2542 pairs, of which Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 39

ïåðèîäà 20–50-õ ãã. îöåíèâàåò ÷èñëåí- there were 3–13 pairs, giving for the last four íîñòü â 10 òûñ. ïàð, èç êîòîðûõ îêîëî 1 years of analysis a reduction of 11%. The òûñ. ïàð ãíåçäèëîñü â Åâðîïåéñêîé ÷àñòè data of Galushin (2004) and Karyakin (2008) Ðîññèè, äëÿ 70–90-õ ãã. – 4 òûñ. ïàð, èç are comparable only for the recent period, êîòîðûõ îêîëî 100–150 ïàð – â Åâðîïåé- when regular work on monitoring of the Sak- ñêîé ÷àñòè Ðîññèè è äëÿ 2000–2003 ãã. – ers had begun: it is practically impossible to 2–3 òûñ. ïàð, èç êîòîðûõ îò 25 äî 30–50 compare the historical data, in that they are ïàð – â Åâðîïåéñêîé ÷àñòè Ðîññèè. È.Â. based upon different methods of approach Êàðÿêèí (2008) äëÿ ïåðèîäà 70-õ ãã. îöå- and were given for different periods. The íèâàåò ÷èñëåííîñòü â Ðîññèè ìèíèìóì 9 data of Galushin (2004) and Karyakin (2008) òûñ. ïàð, èç êîòîðûõ â Åâðîïåéñêîé ÷àñòè can only be compared in the recent period, Ðîññèè ãíåçäèëîñü îêîëî 3,5 òûñ. ïàð, äëÿ when regular monitoring of the falcons had 2003 ã. – 2117–2683 ïàð, èç êîòîðûõ â started: the previous historical estimations åâðîïåéñêîé ÷àñòè Ðîññèè – 30–58 ïàð, cannot be compared because they are based äëÿ 2007 ã. – 1854–2542 ïàð, èç êîòî- on different methods and made for different ðûõ â åâðîïåéñêîé ÷àñòè Ðîññèè – 3–13 periods. However, the monitoring of nesting ïàð, ïðè ýòîì çà ïîñëåäíèå ÷åòûðå àíà- locations can be more objective, since the ëèçèðóåìûå ãîäà ïðîèçîøëî ñîêðàùåíèå known data from these can be used when íà 11%. Äàííûå Â.Ì. Ãàëóøèíà (2004) è predicting changes in the estimated popu- È.Â. Êàðÿêèíà (2008) ñðàâíèìû ëèøü ïî lation numbers, extrapolating forwards or ñîâðåìåííîìó ïåðèîäó, êîãäà íà÷àëèñü backwards in time. This is why I decided to ðåãóëÿðíûå ðàáîòû ïî ìîíèòîðèíãó áà- extrapolate from such data in order to esti- ëîáàíà, èñòîðè÷åñêèå æå îöåíêè ñðàâ- mate how many falcons lived in the Euro- íèâàòü ïðàêòè÷åñêè íåâîçìîæíî, òàê êàê pean part of Russia in the past.

Òàáë. 2. Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè ïîïóëÿöèé áàëîáàíà è òåíäåíöèé ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà 2002–2003 ãã. (ERWDA, 2003). Table 2. Population estimates and trend data of Saker Falcon in 2002–2003 (ERWDA, 2003).

Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè Èñòî÷íèê äàííûõ Ñòðàíà / Country Population Estimate Source of data Ðîññèÿ / Russia 550–700 Galushin et al. 2001; Ryabtsev, 2001; Galushin, Moseikin, Sanin, Vetrov, Karyakin, 2000. Internal report to FRI Âåíãðèÿ / Hungary 40 Becsy and Keve, 1977 150 Bagyura et al., 1994 113–145 Bagyura et al., 2003 Ñëîâàêèÿ / Slovakia 10–30 late 1960s (Hudec and Cerny, 1977); now 10–30 pairs (Sládek, 1977) Ðóìûíèÿ / Romania 20 Pusçariu and Filipasçu, 1977 Áûâøàÿ Þãîñëàâèÿ / Former Yugoslavia 10–15 Baumgart, 1977, 1991 Áîëãàðèÿ / Bulgaria 30–50 Baumgart, 1977, 1991 40–50 Stoyanov&Kouzmanov, 1998 Óêðàèíà / Ukraine 120–140 Galushin et al., 2001; Vetrov et al., 2001 Êàçàõñòàí / Kazakhstan 200 Levin, 2001; Sklyarenko, 1998 Òóðöèÿ / Turkey 10–100 BWP 1980 Ïàêèñòàí / Pakistan 10 W. Clarke pers com Èðàí / Iran 50 Estimate Èðàê / Iraq 60 Estimate Àôãàíèñòàí / Afghanistan 40 Estimate Óçáåêèñòàí / Uzbekistan 100–150 Kreuzberg-Mukhina et al., 2001 Òóðêìåíèñòàí / Turkmenistan 50 Estimate Êèðãèçèÿ / Kyrghistan 150–200 Shukurov & Davlyabekov, 2001; Turganbaev, 2001 Êèòàé / China 300 Ye Xiaodi & Fox, 2002, Ye Xiaodi et al., 2001., Ziming W., 2001 1000–1200 Ma Ming and Potapov in press Ìîíãîëèÿ / Mongolia 2200–3000 Shagdarsuren et al., 2001; Badam, 2001 1000–1200 Potapov in prep. in 2003 Âñåãî / TOTAL 3900–5250 In 2002 3602–4260 In 2003 40 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

Òàáë. 3. Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè ïîïóëÿöèé áàëîáàíà è òåíäåíöèé ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà 2009 ã. (BirdLife…, 2010). Table 3. Population estimates and trend data of Saker Falcon in 2009 (BirdLife…, 2010).

Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè Ãîä Population Date Òðåíä çà 10 ëåò Èñòî÷íèê äàííûõ Ñòðàíà / Country Estimate of Estimate Trend 10 year Source of data Àâñòðèÿ / Austria 15–20 2002 stable Birdlife International. Birdlife conserva- tion series no.12. 2004 Áîëãàðèÿ / Bulgaria 0–9 2009 ? BSPB BirdLife Bulgaria, Dr. Petar Iankov and Dimitar Gradinarov, written notice; Dimitar Ragyov pers. comm. Õîðâàòèÿ / Croatia 2–5 2009 stable Darko Grlica pers.comm http://saker.pd-drava.hr/ ×åõèÿ 16 2009 increasing Czech Republic Vaclav Beran & David Horal, pers. comm. Ãðóçèÿ / Georgia 3–5 2000–2003 ? Nagy & Demeter, 2006: 3 known territories Ãåðìàíèÿ / Germany 0–1 2006 stable Falco 2007 no. 29 Âåíãðèÿ / Hungary 214–230 2009 increasing Annual Report of Saker Life program 2009 Ìîëäàâèÿ / Moldova 8–15 2005 ? Falco 2007 no. 29: 5 known pairs from 2007 Falco 2007 no. 30. Nikolai Zubkov and Andrei Munteanu Ðóìûíèÿ / Romania 2–12 2006 ? 2007 3 known breeding pairs Falco 2007 no. 30. Robert Zeitz and Zoltan Domahidi Ðîññèÿ (Åâðîïåéñêàÿ ÷àñòü) 45 2007/2008 decreasing Raptor Conservation 2008 no. 12. Russia (European part) Igor Karyakin Ñåðáèÿ è ×åðíîãîðèÿ 55 2007 increasing Falco 2007 autumn Issue no. 30 Serbia & Montenegro Slobodan Puzovich Ñëîâàêèÿ / Slovakia 31–32 2007 increasing RPS Lucia Deutschová written notice Òóðöèÿ / Turkey 50 2007 ? Dixon et al., in press; Ragyov et al. 2008 Óêðàèíà / Ukraine 270–310 2009 increasing Report with Maxim Gavrilyuk in 2009 by Markus Jais at 05.12.2009 Âñåãî â Åâðîïå

Åâðîïà / Europe Total of Europe 720–808 Àôãàíèñòàí 10–100 NA ? Falco 2009 no. 33 Andrew Dixon Afganistan Êèòàé / China 3000–5000 2008 decreasing Falco 2009 no. 33 Andrew Dixon Èíäèÿ / India 0–10 2006 ? Falco 2009 no. 33 Andrew Dixon Èðàí / Iran 10–100 NA ? Falco 2009 no. 33 Andrew Dixon Èðàê / Iraq 0–50 NA ? Falco 2009 no. 33 Andrew Dixon Êàçàõñòàí / Kazahstan 2000–3000 2008 stable/decreasing Falco 2009 no. 33 Andrew Dixon Êèðãèçèÿ / Kyrgyzstan 100–120 2001 decreasing Falco 2009 no. 33 Andrew Dixon Ìîíãîëèÿ / Mongolia 2000–5000 2008 stable Falco 2009 no. 33 Andrew Dixon Ïàêèñòàí / Pakistan 0–50 NA decreasing Falco 2009 no. 33 Andrew Dixon Ðîññèÿ (Àçèàòñêàÿ ÷àñòü) 1809–2497 2007/2008 ? Raptor Conservation 2008 no. 12. Russia (Asian part) Igor Karyakin Òàäæèêèñòàí / Tajikistan 10–100 NA ? Falco 2009 no. 33 Andrew Dixon Òóðêìåíèñòàí 100–150 NA ? Falco 2009 no. 33 Andrew Dixon Turkmenistan Óçáåêèñòàí / Uzbekistan 100–150 2000 decreasing Falco 2009 no. 33 Andrew Dixon Âñåãî â Àçèè

Àçèÿ / Asia Total of Asia 9139–16327 Âñåãî â ìèðå World Total 9859–17135 Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 41

îíè áàçèðóþòñÿ íà ðàçíîì ïîäõîäå è ñäå- There is a table in the work of Galushin et al. ëàíû äëÿ ðàçíûõ ïåðèîäîâ. (2001) which shows a catastrophic decline in Îäíàêî, îïèðàÿñü íà îáúåêòèâíûå äàí- the numbers of these falcons in the European íûå ìîíèòîðèíãà èçâåñòíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ part of Russia. There were 22 pairs in 1997, ó÷àñòêîâ â ïîñëåäíèå 10 ëåò, ïðîñòîé falling to 5 pairs in 2000, i.e. falling by 77% ëèíåéíîé àïïðîêñèìàöèåé ìîæíî ïðè- in 3 years. We can find the same data in the êèíóòü ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà â 70-õ ãã. table of Karyakin (2008) for the European part ïðîøëîãî âåêà, ïðåäïîëîæèâ, ÷òî òåìïû of Russia: 74% decline in 4 years. Using the ñîêðàùåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè çà ïîñëåäíèå 40 data of both these tables we can assert that ëåò áûëè ïîñòîÿííû. Â.Ì. Ãàëóøèí ñ ñî- the number of falcons in the European part of àâòîðàìè (Galushin et al., 2001) óêàçûâàåò Russia was reduced in the period 1997–2000 ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â åâ- by 4.4 times, and in the period 2003–2007 ðîïåéñêîé ÷àñòè Ðîññèè ñ 22 ïàð â 1997 ã. by 3.8 times, and probably for the period äî 5 ïàð â 2000 ã. ò.å. íà 77% èëè â 4,4 2000–2003 not less than 4 times, because ðàçà çà òðè ãîäà. È.Â. Êàðÿêèí (2008) äëÿ for the Saker this period was no different from ïÿòè ñóáúåêòîâ Ðîññèè â åâðîïåéñêîé ÷à- the other two periods described. We can see ñòè àðåàëà – ñ 46 ïàð â 2003 ã. äî 12 ïàð that in the last 10 years there was a 12-fold â 2007 ã., ò.å. íà 74% èëè â 3,8 ðàçà çà decline if we take as our basis that there were ÷åòûðå ãîäà. Ìîæíî ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî â 110 pairs of the falcon in 2000 (Galushin et al., ïåðèîä ñ 2000 ã. ïî 2003 ã. ïîïóëÿöèÿ ñî- 2001): we can assume that in 1990 in the Eu- êðàòèëàñü òàêæå íå ìåíåå ÷åì â 4 ðàçà, ropean part of Russia there were 1,300 pairs òàê êàê ýòîò ïåðèîä äëÿ áàëîáàíà íè÷åì íå of falcons, and in 1970 there would have been îòëè÷àëñÿ îò ïðåäûäóùåãî è ïîñëåäóþùå- 3,960 pairs, which is even more than had ãî. Òàêèì îáðàçîì, çà 10 ëåò íàáëþäàåòñÿ been estimated by Karyakin. Thus we could 12-òè êðàòíîå ñîêðàùåíèå, è, âçÿâ çà òî÷- think that both Galushin and Karyakin were êó îòñ÷¸òà 2000 ã. ñ îöåíêîé ÷èñëåííîñòè right, Galushin by supposing that there were áàëîáàíà â 110 ïàð (Galushin et al., 2001), 1000 pairs of the falcons in European Russia in ìîæíî ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ the 1990s, and Karyakin who estimated the íà 1990 ã. â Åâðîïåéñêîé ÷àñòè Ðîññèè number of Sakers in this territory in the 1970s ãíåçäèëîñü îêîëî 1300 ïàð áàëîáàíîâ, à to be 3,500 pairs. ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà 1970-é ãîä – 3960 ïàð It also follows to establish the number of áàëîáàíîâ. Ýòîò ïðîñòîé ðàñ÷¸ò åù¸ ðàç these falcons in the Asian part of Russia in the ïîäòâåðæäàåò ýêñïåðòíûå îöåíêè è Â.Ì. past. According to the data of Karyakin (2008) Ãàëóøèíà, ïðåäïîëîæèâøåãî ÷èñëåííîñòü for the period 2003–2007, the number of Sak- áàëîáàíà â Åâðîïåéñêîé ÷àñòè Ðîññèè â ers in Siberia was reduced by 10% in the pe- 90-õ ãã. â 1 òûñ. ïàð, è È.Â. Êàðÿêèíà, îöå- riod 2003–2005, but in the main enclave of íèâøåãî ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà íà ýòîé æå the Asian population, in the Altai-Sayan re- òåððèòîðèè â 70-õ ãã. â 3,5 òûñ. ïàð. gion, it fell by 18% in the period 2003–2008 Ñëåäóåò ðàçîáðàòüñÿ è ñ ÷èñëåííîñòüþ (Karyakin, Nikolenko, 2008). Taking into ac- áàëîáàíà â ïðîøëîì â àçèàòñêîé ÷àñòè count that 75% of the total Russian popula- Ðîññèè. Ïî äàííûì È.Â. Êàðÿêèíà (2008) tion of these falcons breed in the Altai-Sayan çà ïåðèîä ñ 2003 ã. ïî 2007 ã. ÷èñëåííîñòü region, and because the decline is observed áàëîáàíà â Ñèáèðè ñîêðàòèëàñü íà 10%, by everyone where there are larger or smaller à â îñíîâíîì àíêëàâå àçèàòñêîé ïîïóëÿ- breeding groups (Karyakin, 2008), we can öèè, â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå, ñ 2003 ã. assume that a negative trend of 18% for the ïî 2008 ã. – íà 18% (Êàðÿêèí, Íèêîëåíêî, whole of the Asian part of Russia for the five 2008). Ó÷èòûâàÿ òî, ÷òî â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì years is realistic, which corresponds to a de- ðåãèîíå ãíåçäèòñÿ 75% îò âñåé ðîññèé- cline in numbers by 1.2 times for 10 years. ñêîé ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà, à ñîêðàùåíèå Working backwards from an estimated popu- ÷èñëåííîñòè íàáëþäàåòñÿ âåçäå, ãäå åñòü lation of 1,841–2,518 pairs (Karyakin, 2008), áîëåå èëè ìåíåå êðóïíûå ãíåçäîâûå ãðóï- we can suppose the number of pairs in 1990 ïèðîâêè (Êàðÿêèí, 2008), ìîæíî ñ÷èòàòü to have been in the range 4,400–6,000 (aver- äëÿ âñåé àçèàòñêîé ÷àñòè Ðîññèè íåãàòèâ- age 5,200), and in the 1970s 10,600–14,500 íûé òðåíä â 18% çà 5 ëåò àêòóàëüíûì, ÷òî pairs, which is higher than the number esti- ñîîòâåòñòâóåò ñîêðàùåíèþ ÷èñëåííîñòè mated by Karyakin and Galushin. In opinion of çà 10 ëåò â 1,2 ðàçà. Âåäÿ îáðàòíûé îòñ÷¸ò Karyakin (2001), the decline in the numbers of îò äîñòóïíûõ ïî àçèàòñêîé ÷àñòè Ðîññèè these falcons in Siberia had started later than îöåíîê ÷èñëåííîñòè â 1841–2518 ïàð in European part of Russia and it had been (Êàðÿêèí, 2008), ïîëó÷àåì ïðåäïîëàãàå- slower, which is why the estimated numbers 42 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

ìóþ ÷èñëåííîñòü íà 1990 ã. of 6–7 thousands pairs for the Asian part of ïðèìåðíî 4,4–6,0 òûñ. ïàð, Russia seems realistic. â ñðåäíåì 5,2 òûñ. ïàð, à The analysis in Birdlife estimated that the íà 1970 ã. – 10,6–14,5 òûñ. number of falcons for Russia in 1990 was ïàð, ÷òî âûøå îöåíîê ÷èñ- 3,000–9,000 pairs, but the estimate of a ëåííîñòè È.Â. Êàðÿêèíà è population of 5,700–7,300 pairs, average Â.Ì. Ãàëóøèíà. Ïî ìíåíèþ 6,500, is realistic, given the trends in the È.Â. Êàðÿêèíà (2008) ñî- European and Asian parts of the country, êðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè áà- demonstrated by Galushin et al. (2001) and ëîáàíà â Ñèáèðè íà÷àëîñü Karyakin (2008). Consequently, the estimat- ïîçæå, ÷åì â åâðîïåéñêîé ed rate of decline in numbers of the Saker ÷àñòè Ðîññèè è øëî áîëåå Falcon in Russia, according to the Birdlife ìåäëåííûìè òåìïàìè, ïîý- data of 2.8 times in 20 years (IUCN 2010), Áàëîáàí. òîìó îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè â 6–7 òûñ. ïàð is very close to the estimates of Russian re- Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. äëÿ àçèàòñêîé ÷àñòè Ðîññèè â 70-õ ãã. âè- searchers (up to 3 times in 20 years). Saker Falcon. äèòñÿ àäåêâàòíîé âåëè÷èíîé. Modern estimates of the numbers of Photo by I. Karyakin. Àíàëèòèêè BirdLife îöåíèëè ÷èñëåí- these falcons in Russia are different from the íîñòü áàëîáàíà äëÿ Ðîññèè â 1990 ã. â estimation in other countries because there 3–9 òûñ. ïàð, íî îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè â are no round numbers. The Birdlife analysts 5,7–7,3 òûñ. ïàð, â ñðåäíåì 6,5 òûñ. ïàð used the estimated numbers of Saker Falcons âèäèòñÿ âïîëíå ðåàëüíîé öèôðîé, ëåãêî in Kazakhstan, Mongolia and China based âîñïðîèçâîäèìîé èç äàííûõ ïî òðåíäàì on the survey of A. Dixon (Dixon, 2009), â åâðîïåéñêîé è àçèàòñêîé ÷àñòÿõ ñòðàíû, but the numbers for Russia of 1,500–3,000 îïóáëèêîâàííûõ Â.Ì. Ãàëóøèíûì ñ ñîàâ- pairs were not satisfactory for them, so for òîðàìè (2001) è È.Â. Êàðÿêèíûì (2008). the IUCN Red List they used the numbers Ñëåäîâàòåëüíî, îöåíêà òåìïîâ ñîêðàùå- published by I. Karyakin in 2008, which is íèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Ðîññèè, ïî one year earlier than A. Dixon. I do not want äàííûì BirdLife â 2,8 ðàç çà 20 ëåò (IUCN to analyse the estimated numbers obtained 2010) áëèçêà ê îöåíêå ðîññèéñêèõ èññëå- by I. Karyakin, because they have been ana- äîâàòåëåé (â 3 ðàçà çà 20 ëåò). lysed in many other publications. But what Ñîâðåìåííàÿ îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áà- are Dixon’s numbers based upon? I have not ëîáàíà â Ðîññèè îòëè÷àåòñÿ îò îöåíêè found any other publication about this matter ÷èñëåííîñòè â äðóãèõ ñòðàíàõ îòñóòñòâèåì apart from a survey in Falco. Why did Birdlife «êðóãëûõ» öèôð. Ïðè ýòîì åñëè îöåíêè use these estimated numbers by A. Dixon for ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Êàçàõñòàíå, Ìîí- Kazakhstan, Mongolia and especially China, ãîëèè è Êèòàå âçÿòû èç îáçîðà Ý. Äèêñîíà even though in his survey for China there are (Dixon, 2009), òî ïî Ðîññèè ïðèâåä¸ííàÿ no references to publications of local orni- èì öèôðà â 1500–3000 ïàð íå óäîâëåò- thologists and previous works of other col- âîðèëà àíàëèòèêîâ èç BirdLife, ïîýòîìó â leagues of the ERWDA project? Êðàñíûé ñïèñîê ÌÑÎÏ ïîïàëè öèôðû, In order to find alternative estimated îïóáëèêîâàííûå È.Â. Êàðÿêèíûì (2008) numbers for the falcon in Kazakhstan, ãîäîì ðàíåå. ß íå áóäó çäåñü îñòàíàâëè- Mongolia and China I have looked at many âàòüñÿ íà îöåíêå ÷èñëåííîñòè, ïîëó÷åí- other publications for these regions, which íîé È.Â. Êàðÿêèíûì, òàê êàê å¸ ðàñ÷¸ò I present below. ïðèâåä¸í âî ìíîãèõ ïóáëèêàöèÿõ ñ ïðè- âåäåíèåì êîíêðåòíûõ ó÷¸òíûõ äàííûõ. À Kazakhstan âîò íà ÷¸ì îñíîâàíû îöåíêè Ý. Äèêñîíà? There are practically no data on the Saker Êðîìå îáçîðà â «Falco» ÿ òàê è íå îáíà- population in Kazakhstan before the 80’s. ðóæèë íèêàêèõ èíûõ ïóáëèêàöèé íà ýòó Dementiev (1951) says that the Sakers are òåìó. Ïî÷åìó æå BirdLife èñïîëüçîâàë positively numerous during the breeding îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè, ñäåëàííûå Ý. Äèêñî- period in the Ural river valley, and in the for- íîì ïî Êàçàõñòàíó, Ìîíãîëèè è â îñîáåí- ests of Naurzum, Tersek and Sypsyn in the íîñòè Êèòàþ, õîòÿ â åãî îáçîðå ïî Êèòàþ north-west of Kazakhstan, with some nest- íåò äàæå ññûëîê íà ïóáëèêàöèè ìåñòíûõ ing sites in the Mugodzhary. Korelov (1962) îðíèòîëîãîâ è ïðåæíèå ðàáîòû êîëëåã ïî says that the Saker is an absolutely common ïðîåêòó ERWDA? bird inhabiting all mountain ridges, plateaus,  ïîèñêàõ àëüòåðíàòèâíûõ îöåíîê ÷èñ- cliff-faces and forests of Kazakhstan. ëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Êàçàõñòàíå, Ìîí- The USSR Red Data Book (1984) states ãîëèè è Êèòàå, ÿ ïåðåñìîòðåë äîâîëüíî that the Saker population in Kazakhstan is Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 43

áîëüøîå êîëè÷åñòâî ïóáëèêàöèé ïî ýòèì 2,000 pairs. Levin (2000) says that before ðåãèîíàì, î ÷¸ì ïîâåñòâóåòñÿ íèæå. 1985 the Saker population of Kazakhstan was 2,000–5,000 pairs, but in the following Êàçàõñòàí 15 years the Saker population fell dramati- Îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà äëÿ Êà- cally to 300–400 pairs. In later papers A. çàõñòàíà äî 80-õ ãã. ôàêòè÷åñêè îòñóòñòâó- Levin (Levin, 2001; Levin, 2001), based on þò. Ã.Ï. Äåìåíòüåâ (1951) óïîìèíàåò, ÷òî research in 2000 in the east of Kazakhstan, áàëàáàíû ïîëîæèòåëüíî ìíîãî÷èñëåííû â estimates the Kazakhstan population as ãíåçäîâîå âðåìÿ â äîëèíå ð. Óðàë è â ëå- 100–150 pairs out of which no more than ñàõ Íàóðçóì, Òåðñåê è Ñûïñûí â Ñåâåðî- 50 pairs nest in the south-east; in addition, Çàïàäíîì Êàçàõñòàíå, à òàêæå ãíåçäÿòñÿ â he says that in the south-east of the country Ìóãîäæàðàõ. Ì.Í. Êîðåëîâ (1962) ñ÷èòàåò the population fell 10 times over 5 years. áàëîáàíà îáû÷íîé ïòèöåé, íàñåëÿþùåé We must note that in his paper in English ïðàêòè÷åñêè âñå ãîðíûå õðåáòû, ÷èíêè (Levin, 2001), A. Levin gives a historic esti- ïëàòî è ëåñíûå ìàññèâû Êàçàõñòàíà. mate of the Saker population in Kazakhstan  Êðàñíîé êíèãå ÑÑÑÐ (1984) ÷èñëåííîñòü as 1,000–3,000 pairs, while in the Russian áàëîáàíà â Êàçàõñòàíå îöåíèâàåòñÿ â 2 òûñ. one the numbers are 2,000–5,000 pairs ïàð. À.Ñ. Ëåâèí (Levin, 2000) îòìå÷àåò, ÷òî (Levin, 2001). Evidently, this is a mistake. äî 1985 ã. ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà â Êàçàõ- Data published at practically the same time ñòàíå ñîñòàâëÿëà 2–5 òûñ. ïàð, íî çà ïî- by Sklyarenko (2001) has it that in 1992 the ñëåäóþùèå 15 ëåò áàëîáàí ðåçêî ñîêðàòèë Saker population in Kazakhstan was at least ñâîþ ÷èñëåííîñòü äî 300–400 ïàð.  áîëåå 2,000 pairs, or even 4,000 pairs by some ïîçäíèõ ïóáëèêàöèÿõ À.Ñ. Ëåâèí (Ëåâèí, estimates, in 1998 the numbers dropped to 2001; Levin, 2001) ïî ìàòåðèàëàì èññëåäî- 400–500 pairs, in 1999 to about 300 pairs, âàíèé 2000 ã. íà âîñòîêå Êàçàõñòàíà îöåíè- and in 2000 to approximately 200 pairs. âàåò ÷èñëåííîñòü âñåé ïîïóëÿöèè â Êàçàõ- Evidently, all these estimates are based on ñòàíå â 100–150 ïàð, èç êîòîðûõ íå áîëåå the Saker monitoring in the south-east and 50-òè ãíåçäèòüñÿ íà þãî-âîñòîêå, ïðè ýòîì east of Kazakhstan and in the ultimate south ñîîáùàåò, ÷òî íà þãî-âîñòîêå ñòðàíû ÷èñ- east of Central Kazakhstan (Eastern Betpak- ëåííîñòü ñíèçèëàñü çà 5 ëåò â 10 ðàç. Ñëåäó- Dala, vicinity of Almaty and mountains in åò çàìåòèòü, ÷òî â àíãëîÿçû÷íîé ïóáëèêàöèè East Kazakhstan) and it is not clear whether À.Ñ. Ëåâèí (Levin, 2001) äà¸ò èñòîðè÷åñêóþ these data include the information on the îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Êàçàõñòàíå Saker in the Naurzum forests, where the â 1–3 òûñ. ïàð, â òî âðåìÿ êàê â ðóññêîÿçû÷- Saker monitoring had been carried out for íîé – 2–5 òûñ. ïàð (Ëåâèí, 2001). Âèäèìî some time. Apart from East Kazakhstan and çäåñü ìîæíî âåñòè ðå÷ü ëèøü îá îøèáêå. the Naurzum forests, specific Saker studies Ôàêòè÷åñêè â ýòîò æå ïåðèîä ïîÿâëÿåòñÿ had been not carried out before 2003, which ïóáëèêàöèÿ Ñ. Ñêëÿðåíêî (2001) èç êîòîðîé is why the experts evidently thought that ei- ñëåäóåò, ÷òî â 1992 ã. ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà ther there were no Sakers in these territories Ïòåíöû áàëîáàíà â â Êàçàõñòàíå îöåíèâàëàñü íå ìåíåå 2-õ òûñ. or the Saker population there was very low ãíåçäå. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. ïàð, à ïî íåêîòîðûì îöåíêàì äî 4-õ òûñ. and could not influence the total estimate Chicks of the Saker ïàð, â 1998 ã. – óæå ïîðÿäêà 400–500 ïàð, significantly. Starting from 2003, within the Falcon in the nest. â 1999 ã. – îêîëî 300 ïàð, â 2000 ã. – ïðè- course of work done by the Field Research Photo by I. Karyakin. ìåðíî 200 ïàð. Center (under the direction of I. Karyakin) and the Siberian Environmental Center (un- der the direction of I. Smelansky), practically the whole of Kazakhstan was covered by ex- peditions studying the Saker; consequently, the estimates of the population went up significantly, although all authors reported a worsening of the situation with the Saker. In the international bird conference “I.A. Dol- gushin and the development of ornithology in Kazakhstan and Central Asia” which took place in March 2008, A. Levin presented a review of the situation with the Saker in Kazakhstan, subsequently published in the Kazakhstan zoo- logical annals “Selevinia” (Levin, 2008b); for the present it is the most complete review of 44 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

Èç óêàçàííûõ ïóáëèêàöèé the Saker situation in Kazakhstan. When quot- ñëåäóåò, ÷òî ýòè îöåíêè áàçè- ing different publications, I will adhere to this ðóþòñÿ íà äàííûõ ìîíèòîðèí- report, adding some more publications not ãà áàëîáàíà íà þãî-âîñòîêå found among those quoted by A. Levin. è âîñòîêå Êàçàõñòàíà è íà ñà- ìîì þãî-âîñòîêå Öåíòðàëü- Western Kazakhstan íîãî Êàçàõñòàíà (Âîñòî÷íàÿ For the forest-steppe zone of Western Ka- Áåòïàê-Äàëà, îêðåñòíîñòè zakhstan, there were no other data on the Àëìà-Àòû è ãîðû Âîñòî÷íîãî Saker breeding apart from those in the Ural Êàçõàñòàíà), îäíàêî îñòà¸òñÿ river valley and Naurzum Reserve until lately, íå ñîâñåì ÿñíî, âêëþ÷åíà ëè and no details on the distribution and pop- â ýòè îöåíêè èíôîðìàöèÿ î ulation of the Saker in the Ural valley have Áàëîáàí. áàëîáàíå â Íàóðçóìñêèõ áîðàõ, ãäå òàê- been known (possibly, these can be found Ôîòî À. Ìîøêèíà. æå âûïîëíÿåòñÿ ðåãóëÿðíûé ìîíèòîðèíã. in Korelov’s diaries which are not yet pub- Saker Falcon. Êðîìå Âîñòî÷íîãî Êàçàõñòàíà è Íàóðçóì- lished). It is known that the breeding Sakers Photo by A. Moshkin. ñêèõ áîðîâ öåëåâîå èçó÷åíèå áàëîáàíà totally disappeared there by the end of the äî 2003 ã. íèãäå áîëåå íå ïðîâîäèëîñü, 70’s. In West Kazakhstan, breeding Sakers ïîýòîìó âñÿ îñòàëüíàÿ òåððèòîðèÿ ñòðàíû were not to be found during the most recent âûïàëà èç ýêñïåðòíûõ îöåíîê ÷èñëåííî- research, neither in the flood-plain forests of ñòè ýòîãî ñîêîëà. Ñ 2003 ã. â õîäå ðàáîòû the Ural, nor in the Emba river valley where Öåíòðà ïîëåâûõ èññëåäîâàíèé (ðóê. È.Â. they used to nest (Karyakin et al., 2004a; Êàðÿêèí) è Ñèáèðñêîãî ýêîëîãè÷åñêîãî Karyakin, 2004a). The only mention of an en- öåíòðà (ðóê. È.Ý. Ñìåëÿíñêèé) ýêñïåäè- counter with a Saker during the breeding pe- öèÿìè ñ öåëüþ èçó÷åíèÿ áàëîáàíà áûë riod in Western Kazakhstan that I could find îõâà÷åí ïðàêòè÷åñêè âåñü Êàçàõñòàí, â was in the Kazakhstan Ornithological Bulle- ðåçóëüòàòå ÷åãî îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè ñóùå- tin: on April 23, 2007, one bird was spotted ñòâåííî âûðîñëà, íî ïðè ýòîì âñå àâòîðû (Bidashko et al., 2008). In the north of West ïðîäîëæàëè êîíñòàòèðîâàòü óõóäøåíèå Kazakhstan it is established that Sakers nest ñèòóàöèè ñ âèäîì. in the forest-steppe zone and on the steppe  ìàðòå 2008 ã. íà ìåæäóíàðîäíîé îð- low hills apart from the long-known nesting íèòîëîãè÷åñêîé êîíôåðåíöèè «È.À. Äîë- group in Naurzum forests and in the separat- ãóøèí è ðàçâèòèå îðíèòîëîãèè â Êàçàõ- ed forest stands and on the rocks in the basin ñòàíå è Ñðåäíåé Àçèè» À.Ñ. Ëåâèí ñäåëàë of the Or’ (Karyakin, 2004a). 21 eyries of the îáçîðíûé äîêëàä î ñèòóàöèè ñ áàëîáàíîì Saker were counted in Naurzum Reserve in â Êàçàõñòàíå, êîòîðûé áûë îïóáëèêîâàí â 1938, but it is possible that the actual number Êàçàõñòàíñêîì çîîëîãè÷åñêîì åæåãîäíèêå of the Sakers was higher (Dementiev, 1951). «Selevinia» (Ëåâèí, 2008á), è â íàñòîÿùåå E. Bragin (Bragin, 2001) thought that the âðåìÿ ÿâëÿåòñÿ íàèáîëåå ïîëíîé ñâîäêîé breeding group of the Sakers in the Naurzum îá ýòîì ñîêîëå â Êàçàõñòàíå. ß áóäó ïðè- forests was the most stable in Kazakhstan, its äåðæèâàòüñÿ ýòîãî äîêëàäà â öèòèðîâàíèè population being estimated as 14 to 22 pairs ïóáëèêàöèé, äîáàâëÿÿ ê óæå ðàññìîòðåí- starting from 1978. In all the Kustanai forests íûì À.Ñ. Ëåâèíûì òå, êîòîðûå íå îáíàðó- in 1999 29 breeding territories were found, æèë â åãî îáçîðå. with the population estimated as being 40 pairs and stable up to the present time. Çàïàäíûé Êàçàõñòàí Starting from 2001, the Naurzum breeding Äëÿ ëåñîñòåïíîé çîíû Çàïàäíîãî Êàçàõ- group population showed negative trends: ñòàíà äî XXI âåêà èìåëèñü äàííûå î ãíåçäî- in 2001–2004 the population fluctuated âàíèè áàëîáàíà òîëüêî â äîëèíå ð. Óðàë è â from 17 to 20 pairs, in 2005 15 pairs were Íàóðçóìñêîì çàïîâåäíèêå, ïðè÷¸ì äåòà- counted, and in 2006–2008 14 pairs (Bragin, ëè ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèÿ è ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëî- Bragin, 2009). Karyakin (2004a) estimated áàíà â äîëèíå ð. Óðàë äî ñèõ ïîð îñòàþòñÿ the Kustanai forests breeding group as 60 íåèçâåñòíûìè (âîçìîæíî, îíè èìåþòñÿ â pairs for the end of the 90’s, while accord- äíåâíèêàõ Ì.Í. Êîðåëîâà, êîòîðûå äî ñèõ ing to E. Bragin and A. Bragin (2009) the ïîð íå îïóáëèêîâàíû), à ñ êîíöà 70-õ ãã. population was 45–50 pairs. Karyakin (2004) óïîìèíàíèÿ î âñòðå÷àõ áàëîáàíà íà ýòîé also supposed that 20–30 pairs bred in the òåððèòîðèè èñ÷åçëè èç ïóáëèêàöèé.  Kustanai district in the non-forested land. In Çàïàäíîì Êàçàõñòàíå â ñîâðåìåííûé ïå- the Or’ river basin (Guberlya low hills and ðèîä èññëåäîâàíèé áàëîáàí òàêæå íå îò- Mugodzhary mountains) the Saker popula- ìå÷àëñÿ íà ãíåçäîâàíèè íè â ïîéìåííûõ tion was estimated as 70 pairs for the end of Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 45

ëåñàõ Óðàëà, íè â äîëèíå Ýìáû (Karyakin the 90’s, and 20 more pairs were supposed et al., 2004à; Êàðÿêèí, 2004à), ãäå ðàíåå to nest between the Or’ and Kustanai forests ãíåçäèëñÿ (Äåìåíòüåâ, 1951; Êîðåëîâ, (Karyakin, 2004a), but later on the Saker was 1962). Åäèíñòâåííîå çà ïîñëåäíèå 30 ëåò not found breeding in Mugodzhary (Karyakin óïîìèíàíèå î âñòðå÷å áàëîáàíà â ãíåçäî- et al., 2005d; Pazhenkov et al., 2005), while âîé ïåðèîä â Çàïàäíî-Êàçàõñòàíñêîé îá- the population in the Guberlya low hills had ëàñòè ìíå óäàëîñü íàéòè â Êàçàõñòàíñêîì reduced and the population in the Or’ river îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîì áþëëåòåíå: 23 àïðåëÿ basin was 10 pairs (possibly, down from 90 2007 ã. âñòðå÷åíà 1 ïòèöà (Áèäàøêî è äð., pairs at the end of the 90’s), and as for the 2008). entire northern area of Western Kazakhstan Íà ñåâåðå Çàïàäíîãî Êàçàõñòàíà ãíåçäî- there were 145–165 pairs (Karyakin et al., âàíèå áàëîáàíà óñòàíîâëåíî â ëåñîñòåïíîé 2005d). As for the latter, it should possibly çîíå è â ñòåïíûõ ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêàõ – ïîìè- be reducd by those 10–15 pairs by which ìî äàâíî èçâåñòíîé ãíåçäîâîé ãðóïïèðîâêè the forest breeding groups were reduced â Íàóðçóìñêèõ áîðàõ âûÿâëåíî ãíåçäîâà- in accordance with E. Bragin and A. Bragin. íèå ñîêîëîâ â êîëêîâûõ ëåñàõ è íà ñêàëàõ â Later the Saker was eventually found breed- áàññåéíå Îðè (Êàðÿêèí, 2004à). ing in the Mugodzhary mountains and its Íàèáîëåå èçó÷åí â ýòîì ðåãèîíå Íà- population here was estimated as 6–8 pairs óðçóìñêèé çàïîâåäíèê, ãäå â 1938 ã. áûë (Karyakin et al., 2007), and also south of the ó÷ò¸í 21 âûâîäîê áàëàáàíà (Äåìåíòüåâ, Naurzum forests in the Turgay river basin 1951), íî êàê ïèøåò ñàì àâòîð «íà ñàìîì with a density of 1.8–2.0 pairs/1,000 km2 äåëå ñîêîëîâ òàì áûëî, ïî-âèäèìîìó, (Bragin, Bragin, 2009), where the population áîëüøå». Å.À. Áðàãèí (Bragin, 2001) ñ÷è- can be approximately estimated as 10–15 òàë ãíåçäîâóþ ãðóïïèðîâêó áàëîáàíà pairs. Considering all these reference sourc- â Íàóðçóìñêèõ áîðàõ íàèáîëåå óñòîé- es, we may estimate the Saker population in ÷èâîé â Êàçàõñòàíå, å¸ ÷èñëåííîñòü ñ the north of Western Kazakhstan as 151–178 1978 ã. îöåíèâàëàñü èì â 14–22 ïàðû. pairs, with the forest breeding groups (which Âî âñåõ áîðàõ Êóñòàíàéñêîé îáëàñòè contain 28-30% or the entire population in â 1999 ã. áûëî èçâåñòíî 29 ãíåçäîâûõ this region) reduced by 26% (Bragin, Bragin, ó÷àñòêîâ ñîêîëîâ, à ÷èñëåííîñòü îöåíå- 2009), and groups in the Or’ river basin by íà â 40 ïàð, êîòîðàÿ îñòàâàëàñü ñòàáèëü- 81% (Karyakin et al., 2005d). íîé âïëîòü äî ïîñëåäíåãî âðåìåíè (Áðà- In the south of Western Kazakhstan, be- ãèí, Áðàãèí, 2009). «Íà÷èíàÿ ñ 2001 ã. tween the Caspian and Aral Seas, in 2003 a â èçìåíåíèè ÷èñëåííîñòè Íàóðçóìñêîé large Saker population was found containing ãíåçäîâîé ãðóïïèðîâêè áàëîáàíà ñòàëà by a forward estimate 685 pairs for cliff-faces çàìåòíî ïðîÿâëÿòüñÿ íåãàòèâíàÿ òåíäåí- of the plateaus and 11 pairs on the electric öèÿ: â 2001–2004 ãã. ÷èñëåííîñòü êîëå- power line in the sands of Bolshie Barsuki áàëàñü îò 17 äî 20 ïàð, â 2005 ã. – îò- (Karyakin, 2004b). Additional investigations ìå÷åíî 15 ïàð, à â 2006–2008 ã. – 14 of 2004 refined the numbers for cliff-faces of ïàð» (Áðàãèí, Áðàãèí, 2009). È.Â. Êàðÿêèí the plateaus as 1,021–1,216, average 1,119 Íàóðçóìñêèå áîðû (2004à) íà êîíåö 1990-õ ãã. îöåíèâàåò ÷èñ- pairs, for residual mountains and crags 29–34 – ìåñòà ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ëåííîñòü ýòîé ãíåçäîâîé ãðóïïèðîâêè â 60 pairs, for the electric power line in the sands of áàëîáàíà. ïàð, à ïî ïîñëåäíåé îöåíêå Å.À. è À.Å. Áðà- Bolshie Barsuki 10–12 pairs and for the entire Ôîòî À. Êîâàëåíêî. ãèíûõ (2009) çäåñü ãíåçäèòñÿ 45–50 ïàð. south of Western Kazakhstan 1,060–1,262, Naurzum pine-forests – breeding habitats of the È.Â. Êàðÿêèí (2004) òàêæå ïðåäïîëàãàë average 1,161 pairs (Karyakin et al., 2004b; Saker Falcons. ãíåçäîâàíèå 20–30 ïàð â Êóñòàíàéñêîé îá- Karyakin et al., 2005d). Levin (2008b) gives Photo by A. Kovalenko. ëàñòè âíå áîðîâûõ ìàññèâîâ.  áàññåéíå a rounded estimation of 1,300–1,400 pairs on the grounds that on the Usturt plateau the Saker can be found breeding not only on the crags but incidentally in any place with some unevenness of relief (one nest was found under a small ledge on practically the flat). Thus, to Karyakin’s (2005) estimates can be added 138–240 more pairs, based almost entirely upon calculations of pairs inhabiting cliff-faces, as seen on maps and in images, based on data received in the researches of 2003–2004. The Aral expedition of 2005 yielded a 46 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

Îðè, à èìåííî â Ãóáåðëèíñêîì ìåëêîñî- population estimate of 130–245, average ïî÷íèêå è Ìóãîäàæðàõ, â êîíöå 90-õ ãã. 197 pairs (Karyakin et al., 2005b). Add- ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà îöåíåíà â 70 ïàð è ing this estimate to the old estimate of ïðåäïîëàãàëîñü ãíåçäîâàíèå 20 ïàð ìåæ- the Saker population throughout Western äó Îðüþ è Íàóðçóìñêèìè áîðàìè (Êàðÿ- Kazakhstan, the authors arrived at 1,306– êèí, 2004à). Ïîçæå áàëîáàí âîîáùå íå 1,638 pairs, average 1,482 pairs. Subtract- áûë íàéäåí íà ãíåçäîâàíèè â Ìóãîäæàðàõ ing the population of the north of West (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2005d; Ïàæåíêîâ è äð., Kazakhstan, we get 1,162–1,473 pairs, 2005), ÷èñëåííîñòü â Ãóáåðëèíñêîì ìåëêî- average 1,327 pairs for the south part of ñîïî÷íèêå ñîêðàòèëàñü, â ðåçóëüòàòå îöåí- Western Kazakhstan (thus for surveyed ter- êà ÷èñëåííîñòè äëÿ áàññåéíà Îðè ñîñòàâè- ritories not overlapping with other investi- ëà 10 ïàð (ñîêðàùåíèå ñ 90 ïàð â êîíöå gated areas the number of Sakers was as- 90-õ ãã.), à äëÿ âñåãî ñåâåðà Çàïàäíîãî sessed as 102–211 pairs). Pazhenkov and Êàçàõñòàíà – 145–165 ïàð (Êàðÿêèí è äð., Korzhev (2006), researching the Shagyray 2005d). Äëÿ ñîâðåìåííîé îöåíêè ÷èñëåí- Plateau, did not add any data to recalcu- íîñòè áàëîáàíà íà ñåâåðå Çàïàäíîãî Êà- late the population number – they discov- çàõñòàíà, âèäèìî, èìåííî èç ýòîé îöåíêè ered 4 nests of the Saker and estimated ÷èñëåííîñòè â 145–165 ïàð ñëåäóåò âû÷è- its number as 6–8 pairs for 150 km2 of òàòü òå 10–15 ïàð, íà êîòîðûå îöåíèâàþò ravines, while Karyakin et al. (2005d) as- ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè áîðîâûõ ãíåçäî- sessed the number as 29 pairs per 377.15 âûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê Å.À. è À.Å. Áðàãèíû çà km of cliff-faces. Recently, separate breed- ïåðèîä ñ êîíöà 90-õ ãã. äî 2009 ã. Ïîçæå ing pairs of Sakers were discovered on chalk áàëîáàí áûë âñ¸ æå íàéäåí íà ãíåçäîâà- precipices of the Emba river basin (Pestov, íèè â Ìóãîäæàðàõ è åãî ÷èñëåííîñòü çäåñü Saraev, 2009; Saraev, 2009; map on p. 90 îöåíåíà â 6–8 ïàð (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2007). in the paper: Karyakin, Pfeffer, 2009), that Òàêæå áàëîáàí íàéäåí íà ãíåçäîâàíèè þæ- are similar to cliff-faces of the Ustyurt pla- íåå Íàóðçóìñêèõ áîðîâ â áàññåéíå Òóðãàÿ teau, but with some lower, extending up to ñ ïëîòíîñòüþ 1,8–2,0 ïàð/1000 êì2 (Áðà- chalk precipices of the Ural-Ilek plateau. It is ãèí, Áðàãèí, 2009), ãäå ÷èñëåííîñòü ìîæíî unlikely that the number of Sakers is more ïðèìåðíî îöåíèòü â 10–15 ïàð. than ten pairs: probably its breeding there is Ó÷èòûâàÿ âñå ýòè ïóáëèêàöèè ìîæíî an unspecific phenomenon. îöåíèòü ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà íà ñåâåðå Thus a total of 1,418–1,629 pairs, average Çàïàäíîãî Êàçàõñòàíà â 151–178 ïàð, ïðè 1,523 pairs, are estimated to breed in West- ñîêðàùåíèè ÷èñëåííîñòè áîðîâûõ ãðóï- ern Kazakhstan, and it is the final estimation ïèðîâîê (ýòî 28–30% ñîâðåìåííîé ÷èñ- for 2009. ëåííîñòè âèäà â ðàññìàòðèâàåìîì ðåãèî- The population trend has been unclear íå) ïðèìåðíî íà 26% (ñðåäíÿÿ îöåíêà ïî for certain, though there are some publi- Áðàãèí, Áðàãèí, 2009 è Êàðÿêèí, 2005d) cations containing data about no observa- Ïòåíöû áàëîáàíà â è ãðóïïèðîâîê áàññåéíà Îðè íà 81% (ïî tions of birds nesting on cliff-faces in those ãíåçäå. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2005d). areas where oil extracting is conducted, and Íà þãå Çàïàäíîãî Êàçàõñòàíà ìåæäó Êà- power lines hazardous for birds are wide- Chicks of the Saker Falcon in the nest. ñïèéñêèì è Àðàëüñêèì ìîðÿìè â 2003 ã. spread (Karyakin et al., 2005d). According Photo by I. Karyakin. áûëà âûÿâëåíà êðóïíàÿ ïîïóëÿöèÿ áàëî- to the opinion of authors who had carried out surveys in Usturt as a result of active road construction, the region has became more accessible to poachers since 2006, while the intensification of oil extracting has caused the power line system to be developed. Falcons are killed through elec- trocution, and this negative impact on the Saker population is intensified by the glo- bal decrease in numbers of the Great Gerbil (Rhombomys opimus) in Usturt during the last 3 years: it was the main reason for more than half of the falcons not breeding. As a result, there is an undoubted tendency of decline in groups of Sakers breeding along the road to Aktau and in areas of intensive oil extraction (A. Pazhenkov, I. Karyakin, Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 47

pers. comm.). So probably in the nearest fu- ture we can expect information concerning a negative trend of the Usturt population of Sakers too, which hitherto has been consid- ered as the most successful in Kazakhstan. The final estimation of the Saker number in Western Kazakhstan is 1,569–1,807 pairs, av- erage 1,688 pairs, with the decline in numbers of forest breeding groups by 26%, groups of the Or’ river basin by 81% and groups of Usty- urt and adjoining territories by X% (decrease is obvious, but its rates are unknown). Ìåñòà ãíåçäîâàíèÿ áàíà, ÷èñëåííîñòü êîòîðîé ïðåäâàðèòåëü- áàëîáàíà íà Óñòþðòå – íî îöåíåíà â 685 ïàð äëÿ ÷èíêîâ ïëàòî Northern Kazakhstan ÷èíêè. Levin (2008b) did not mention Northern Ôîòî À. Ïàæåíêîâà. ðåãèîíà è 11 ïàð äëÿ ËÝÏ â ïåñêàõ Áîëü- øèå Áàðñóêè (Êàðÿêèí, 2004á). Äîïîëíè- Kazakhstan in his review because there had Cliff-faces this is not been any publication about the Saker in breeding habitats of òåëüíûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ â 2004 ã. ïîçâîëè- the Saker Falcon in the ëè ñêîððåêòèðîâàòü îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè the region. Gubin and Vilkov (2008) also did Usturt Plateau. äëÿ ÷èíêîâ ïëàòî â 1021–1216, â ñðåäíåì not mention the Saker in their revision of Photo by A. Pazhenkov. 1119 ïàð, äëÿ îñòàíöåâ è îáðûâîâ – 29–34 fauna of Northern Kazakhstan. There is only ïàð, äëÿ ËÝÏ â ïåñêàõ Áîëüøèå Áàðñóêè – publication about a Saker encounter during 10–12 ïàð è äëÿ âñåé þæíîé ÷àñòè Çàïàä- the breeding season in a town, but not in íîãî Êàçàõñòàíà – 1060–1262, â ñðåäíåì nature: in Petropavlovsk on May, 24, 2008 1161 ïàð (Karyakin et al., 2004b; Êàðÿêèí è (Gubin et al., 2009). However, there is no äð., 2005d). À.Ñ. Ëåâèí (2008á) îêðóãëÿåò doubt that Sakers breed in Northern Kaza- ýòó îöåíêó äî 1300–1400 ïàð, ìîòèâèðóÿ khstan (I know about two nests and at least ýòî òåì, ÷òî áàëîáàí ãíåçäèòñÿ íà ïëàòî another two nests were found by my col- Óñòþðò íå òîëüêî íà îáðûâàõ, íî è ñïî- leagues), but at an extremely low density. ðàäè÷íî â ëþáîé ìåñòíîñòè ñ ïåðåñå÷¸í- Unfortunately, my data and the data of my íûì ðåëüåôîì (îäíî ãíåçäî áûëî íàéäåíî colleagues have not been published, and I ïîä íåáîëüøèì êàðíèçîì ïðàêòè÷åñêè íà did not consider this territory when calculat- ðîâíîì ìåñòå). Òàêèì îáðàçîì, ê îöåíêå ing the species number in the country. È.Â. Êàðÿêèíà ñ ñîàâòîðàìè (2005), îñíî- âàííîé íà ðàñ÷¸òå ÷èñëåííîñòè ïàð ïðàê- Central Kazakhstan òè÷åñêè èñêëþ÷èòåëüíî íà ÷èíêè, âèäèìûå There was almost no information about íà êàðòàõ è ñíèìêàõ, îí äîáàâëÿåò åù¸ the Saker in Central Kazakhstan until the 138–240 ïàð, áàçèðóÿñü íà äàííûõ èññëå- beginning of the twenty-first century. Only äîâàíèé 2003–2004 ãã. the Betpak-Dala desert was known as be- Ýêñïåäèöèÿ â Ïðèàðàëüå â 2005 ã. ïî- ing inhabited by Sakers (Pfeffer, 1983), who çâîëèëà îöåíèòü çäåñü ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëî- had found 7 active nests there in 1981–82. áàíà â 130–245, â ñðåäíåì 197 ïàð (Êàðÿ- Sakers were encountered in 7 places in the êèí è äð., 2005á). Ñóììèðîâàâ ýòó îöåíêó Betpak-Dala desert in 1983, and two nests ñ ïðåæíåé äëÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà âî were found on geodetic triangles in 1984 âñ¸ì Çàïàäíîì Êàçàõñòàíå, àâòîðû ïîëó÷è- (Kovshar et al., 2004). Another 5 nests were ëè 1306–1638 ïàð, â ñðåäíåì 1482 ïàðû. discovered there in 1994. Regular monitor- Èñêëþ÷èâ îòñþäà îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè â ing of the Saker was started in the Betpak- ñåâåðíîé ÷àñòè Çàïàäíîãî Êàçàõñòàíà, ïî- Dala desert in 1995, and the density was ëó÷àåì äëÿ þæíîé ÷àñòè Çàïàäíîãî Êàçàõ- 1.21 pairs/100 km2 at that time (Levin, Kar- ñòàíà 1162–1473 ïàð, â ñðåäíåì 1327 ïàð pov, 2005). However, by 1999 all 7 known (ñëåäîâàòåëüíî, äëÿ íåïåðåêðûâàþùèõñÿ nests there had already been ravaged, and ñ ïðåæíèìè èññëåäîâàíèÿìè òåððèòîðèé the monitoring was ceased due to the total ïîëó÷åíà îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â absence of Sakers (Levin, 2001; Levin, Kar- 102–211 ïàð). À.Ñ. Ïàæåíêîâ è Ä.À. Êîð- pov, 2005). In 2005, I. Karyakin with his col- æåâ (2006), îáñëåäîâàâøèå ïëàòî Øàãûðàé, leagues carried out surveys of power lines íå äîáàâèëè äàííûõ ê ïåðåñìîòðó îöåíêè crossing Western Betpak-Dala and did not ÷èñëåííîñòè – îíè îáíàðóæèëè 4 ãíåçäà find any Sakers under electric poles among áàëîáàíîâ è îöåíèëè åãî ÷èñëåííîñòü â the numerous birds of prey killed through 6–8 ïàð äëÿ 150 êì2 îâðàæíî-áàëî÷íîé electrocution (Karyakin, Barabashin, 2005). ñåòè, â òî âðåìÿ êàê îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè However, in the latest publication there is 48 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

È.Â. Êàðÿêèíà ñ ñîàâòîðàìè (2005d) ñî- some information about two territories, dis- ñòàâëÿåò 29 ïàð äëÿ 377,15 êì îáðûâîâ.  covered in Western Betpak-Dala – an occu- ïîñëåäíåå âðåìÿ îòäåëüíûå ãíåçäÿùèåñÿ pied nest on an electric pole and an adult ïàðû áàëîáàíîâ îáíàðóæåíû íà ìåëîâûõ bird encountered on the northern cliff-face îáíàæåíèÿõ áàññåéíà Ýìáû (Ïåñòîâ, Ñà- of Betpak-Dala; based on these records, the ðàåâ, 2009; Ñàðàåâ, 2009; êàðòà íà ñòð. 90 number of Sakers was estimated as 3–5 pairs â ñòàòüå: Êàðÿêèí, Ïôåôôåð, 2009), ÿâ- for the entire Western Betpak-Dala (Karyakin ëÿþùèìèñÿ àíàëîãàìè ÷èíêîâ Óñòþðòà, íî et al., 2008). Meanwhile, Sakers breeding on áîëåå íèçêèìè, ïðîòÿíóâøèìèñÿ âïëîòü äî electric poles were rather common in East- ìåëîâ Ïîäóðàëüñêîãî ïëàòî. Âðÿä ëè ÷èñ- ern Betpak-Dala and the Balkhash Lake re- ëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà çäåñü ïðåâûøàåò äåñÿ- gion (2005): 16 active nests and 6 occupied òîê ïàð, è ñêîðåå âñåãî åãî ãíåçäîâàíèå breeding territories were discovered on one çäåñü ÿâëÿåòñÿ íåõàðàêòåðíûì ÿâëåíèåì. of the power lines (Levin, Karpov, 2005). The Òàêèì îáðàçîì, îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè same authors also surveyed areas that had áàëîáàíà äëÿ þãà Çàïàäíîãî Êàçàõñòàíà been inhabited by Sakers formerly in Eastern â 1418–1629 ïàð, â ñðåäíåì 1523 ïàð Betpak-Dala, where the species nested on ìîæíî ñ÷èòàòü èòîãîâîé ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà rocks. However only one of all the earlier- 2009 ã. known nests was active; nests on one of two Äèíàìèêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà ýòîé discovered nesting sites where breeding was ïîïóëÿöèè äîïîäëèííî íåèçâåñòíà, õîòÿ unsuccessful had been netted. A total of 50 â ëèòåðàòóðå èìåþòñÿ äàííûå îá îòñóò- pairs were estimated to breed in Eastern Bet- ñòâèè ïòèö íà ãíåçäîâàíèè íà ÷èíêàõ, ãäå pak-Dala and the Balkhash Lake region (Lev- âåä¸òñÿ íåôòåäîáû÷à è ðàñïðîñòðàíåíû in, Karpov, 2005), and the authors supposed ËÝÏ, îïàñíûå äëÿ ñîêîëîâ (Êàðÿêèí è äð., that as a result of pressure from poachers the 2005d). Îïðîñ àâòîðîâ, ðàáîòàâøèõ íà species used electric poles to breed, with Óñòþðòå, ïîêàçàë, ÷òî ñ 2006 ã. â ðåçóëü- the rock-nesting falcons being unsuccessful òàòå àêòèâíîãî äîðîæíîãî ñòðîèòåëüñòâà on account of the continued trapping. An ðåãèîí ñòàë áîëåå äîñòóïíûì äëÿ ëîâöîâ, increase in the Saker number could be an- à èíòåíñèôèêàöèÿ íåôòåäîáû÷è ïðèâåëà ticipated on account of falcons moving to ê ðàçðàñòàíèþ ñåòè ËÝÏ, íà êîòîðûõ óáè- nest on electric poles in Betpak-Dala and the âàþòñÿ ñîêîëû. Òàêæå â ïîñëåäíèå òðè ãîäà Balkhash Lake region, although the moni- (2006–2009) èññëåäîâàòåëè îòìå÷àþò íà toring results did not confirm this fact. The Óñòþðòå ãëîáàëüíóþ äåïðåññèþ ïåñ÷àíêè, repeated investigation of the Betpak-Dala ïî ïðè÷èíå êîòîðîé áîëåå ïîëîâèíû ñî- power line in 2006 (where 16 living nests Ëþäìèëà Íîâèêîâà è êîëîâ íå ðàçìíîæàåòñÿ.  ðåçóëüòàòå âñåõ were discovered) revealed only one living Àíàòîëèé Ëåâèí ó ãíåç- äà áàëîáàíà ñ ïòåíöà- ýòèõ ôàêòîðîâ òåíäåíöèÿ ñîêðàùåíèÿ nest of Sakers; 14 living and 3 empty nests ìè. Óñòþðò, 2004. ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê áàëîáàíà âäîëü were found on electric poles of another sur- Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. òðàññû íà Àêòàó è â ðàéîíàõ èíòåíñèâíîé veyed power line: only the male was noted Ludmila Novikova and íåôòåäîáû÷è áîëåå ÷åì î÷åâèäíà (À.Ñ. near one of nests (Levin, 2008b). Barashkova Anatoliy Levin near the Ïàæåíêîâ, È.Â. Êàðÿêèí, À.Ñ. Ëåâèí, ëè÷- et al. (2009) confirms the data of A. Levin nest of the Saker Falcon with chicks. Usturt íîå ñîîáùåíèå). Ê ñîæàëåíèþ, ýòè ñâå- and F. Karpov (2005) about Sakers breeding Plateau, 2004. äåíèÿ î íåãàòèâíîì òðåíäå óñòþðòñêîé mainly on electric poles and nesting sparsely Photo by I. Karyakin. ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíîâ, êîòîðàÿ ïîêà ñ÷è- in granite massifs in the Northern Balkhash Lake. However, it is unclear whether these data increase the previous number given for Eastern Betpak-Dala and the Balkhash Lake region or not (perhaps these data are included in the estimated number of Levin and Karpov). The Saker was not found breeding in the Sarysu river basin in a 200 km zone be- tween Betpak-Dala and the Kazakh upland (Karyakin et al., 2008). Based on records of birds in granite massifs and along power lines, the Saker was pro- jected to breed in the Kazakh upland (Lev- in, Karpov, 2005). In particular signs of the Saker’s presence were noted in rocks of the Karkaralinsk granite massif on June 13th–15th, Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 49

òàåòñÿ ñàìîé áëàãîïîëó÷íîé â Êàçàõñòàíå, îñòàþòñÿ íå îïóáëèêîâàííûìè. Èòîãîâàÿ îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Çàïàäíîì Êàçàõñòàíå ñîñòàâëÿåò 1569– 1807 ïàð, â ñðåäíåì 1688 ïàð, à ñîêðàùå- íèå ÷èñëåííîñòè ìîæíî ñ òî÷íîñòüþ óêà- çàòü äëÿ áîðîâûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê – íà 26% è ãðóïïèðîâîê áàññåéíà ð. Îðü – íà 81%, òàêæå èçâåñòåí ôàêò ñîêðàùåíèÿ ãðóïïèðîâîê íà Óñòþðòå è ïðèëåãàþùèõ òåððèòîðèé, íî òåìïû åãî íåèçâåñòíû.

Ñåâåðíûé Êàçàõñòàí À.Ñ. Ëåâèí (2008á) â ñâî¸ì îáçîðå Ñåâåð- íûé Êàçàõñòàí â ðàñ÷¸ò íå áåð¸ò ïî ïðè÷èíå Áàëîáàí. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. îòñóòñòâèÿ êàêèõ-ëèáî ïóáëèêàöèé î áàëî- áàíå çäåñü. Ñ.Â. Ãóáèí è Â.Ñ. Âèëêîâ (2008) â Saker Falcon. Photo by I. Karyakin. ñâîåé ðåâèçèè ôàóíû Ñåâåðíîãî Êàçàõñòàíà î áàëîáàíå íå óïîìèíàþò. Èìååòñÿ åäèí- ñòâåííàÿ ïóáëèêàöèÿ î âñòðå÷å áàëîáàíà â 2002 (Levin, 2005), also a Saker was encoun- ãíåçäîâîé ïåðèîä, íî íå â ïðèðîäå, à â ãîðî- tered in Bektauata on April 27th–20th, 2005 äå: â 20-ì ìèêðîðàéîíå ã. Ïåòðîïàâëîâñêà (Karpov, Levin, 2006). More recent sur- 24 ìàÿ 2008 ã. âñòðå÷åí áàëîáàí (Ãóáèí è veys make it possible to estimate the Saker äð., 2009).  Ñåâåðíîì Êàçàõñòàíå áàëîáàí number in the Ulutau mountains as 28–38 îïðåäåë¸ííî ãíåçäèòüñÿ (ïàðà ãí¸çä çäåñü pairs (Karyakin, Barabashin, 2006), in the èçâåñòíà ìíå è åù¸ êàê ìèíèìóì 2 ãíåçäà granite mountains of the Kazakh upland as çíàþò ìîè áëèæàéøèå êîëëåãè), íî âèäèìî 35–45 pairs (Karyakin et al., 2008), in the low ñ êðàéíå íèçêîé ïëîòíîñòüþ. Òàê êàê óêàçàí- hills of the Sarysu river basin – 12–23 pairs íûå äàííûå ïî ýòîé òåððèòîðèè íå îïóáëè- (Karyakin et al., 2008). Summarizing all the êîâàíû, ÿ íå ñòàë âêëþ÷àòü ýòó òåððèòîðèþ â estimated numbers, a total of 75–106 pairs ðàñ÷¸ò ÷èñëåííîñòè âèäà. of the Saker are believed to breed in the Ka- zakh upland. The population trend in the Ka- Öåíòðàëüíûé Êàçàõñòàí zakh upland is unknown. However, A. Levin Äî íà÷àëà XÕI ñòîëåòèÿ èíôîðìàöèÿ notes incidents of falcon trapping for several ïî áàëîáàíó â Öåíòðàëüíîì Êàçàõñòàíå power lines and abandoned nests including ïðàêòè÷åñêè îòñóòñòâóåò, ëèøü ïóñòûíÿ some with remains of harness traps (Levin, Áåòïàê-Äàëà âûäåëÿëàñü èç ýòîãî áåëîãî Karpov, 2005). Accordingly, the trend of this ïÿòíà. Î òîì, ÷òî áàëîáàí ãíåçäèòüñÿ â population seems be negative. Áåòïàê-Äàëå ñòàëî èçâåñòíî â ðåçóëüòàòå Despite regular surveys by professional èññëåäîâàíèé Ð.Ã. Ïôåôôåðà (1983), ornithologists and birdwatchers the Saker êîòîðûé íàø¸ë çäåñü 7 æèëûõ ãí¸çä â was not found breeding in the Tengiz-Kura- 1981–82 ãã.  1983 ã. â Áåòïàê-Äàëå áà- galdjino region. Only single Sakers were en- ëîáàí áûë âñòðå÷åí â 7 òî÷êàõ, â 1984 ã. countered there, mainly at the end of sum- äâà ãíåçäà íàéäåíû íà ãåîäåçè÷åñêèõ mer (Koshkin, 2004, 2006; 2007à; 2007b, âûøêàõ (Êîâøàðü è äð., 2004).  1994 ã. Kovshar, 2009). çäåñü áûëè íàéäåíû åù¸ 5 ãí¸çä, à ñ 1995 ã. According to available data the number â Áåòïàê-Äàëå íà÷àëñÿ ðåãóëÿðíûé ìî- of Sakers in Central Kazakhstan is estimated íèòîðèíã áàëîáàíîâ, ïëîòíîñòü êîòîðîãî as 128–161 pairs, while the number has de- çäåñü ñîñòàâëÿëà 1,21 ïàð/100 êì2 (Ëå- creased dramatically in the Western and Cen- âèí, Êàðïîâ, 2005). Îäíàêî óæå ê 1999 ã. tral Betpak-Dala desert (decreasing by 85.7% âñå èçâåñòíûå çäåñü 7 ãí¸çä áûëè ðàçî- for 20 years), and it probably declined slowly ðåíû, è â ñâÿçè ñ ïîëíûì îòñóòñòâèåì in the Western Betpak-Dala and Kazakh up- áàëîáàíîâ ðàáîòû çäåñü áûëè ïðåêðàùå- land (falcons spreading on power lines partly íû (Levin, 2001; Ëåâèí, Êàðïîâ, 2005). offset a loss due to catching).  2005 ã. ÷åðåç Çàïàäíóþ Áåòïàê-Äàëó ïðîø¸ë ìàðøðóò ãðóïïû È.Â. Êàðÿêèíà, North-Eastern Kazakhstan ãðóïïà îáñëåäîâàëà ËÝÏ, ïåðåñåêàþùóþ The first nest in the pine forests of North- ïóñòûíþ, è ñðåäè ìíîæåñòâà íàéäåííûõ Eastern Kazakhstan was discovered in 1989, ïîä ýòîé ËÝÏ ïîãèáøèõ õèùíûõ ïòèö although there were no estimations of a pop- 50 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

ðàçíûõ âèäîâ áàëîáàíà íå îáíàðóæèëà ulation number for that territory (Kovshar, (Êàðÿêèí, Áàðàáàøèí, 2005). Îäíàêî â Khrokov, 1993). As a result of target surveys áîëåå ïîçäíåé ïóáëèêàöèè åñòü èíôîðìà- 19 breeding territories of the Saker were öèÿ î äâóõ ó÷àñòêàõ, âûÿâëåííûõ â Çàïàä- found and the known territory was checked, íîé Áåòïàê-Äàëå – æèëîå ãíåçäî íà ËÝÏ è when the number was estimated as 39–42 âñòðå÷à ïòèöû íà ñåâåðíîì ÷èíêå Áåòïàê- pairs (Karyakin et al., 2005c). Two of the Äàëû; íà èõ îñíîâàíèè ÷èñëåííîñòü äëÿ nests found in 2005 were checked in 2006: âñåé Çàïàäíîé Áåòïàê-Äàëû îöåíåíà â 3–5 one of them was empty, another was sawn ïàð (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2008).  ýòî æå âðåìÿ off by fellers; also 13 new nests were discov- äëÿ Âîñòî÷íîé Áåòïàê-Äàëû è Ïðèáàëõà- ered. Probably one nest was located in the øüÿ (2005 ã.) óñòàíîâëåíî âïîëíå íîðìàëü- earlier-known territory (Levin et al., 2007). íîå ãíåçäîâàíèå áàëîáàíà íà ËÝÏ: çäåñü Based on new data, a total of 40–45 pairs of íà îäíîé ëèíèè âûÿâëåíî 16 æèëûõ ãí¸çä Sakers are estimated to breed in pine forests è 6 çàíÿòûõ òåððèòîðèé (Ëåâèí, Êàðïîâ, of the East-Kazakhstan and Pavlodar districts. 2005). Ýòè æå àâòîðû îáñëåäîâàëè è ïðåæ- No doubt the number of Sakers in pine for- íèå ðàéîíû ãíåçäîâàíèÿ áàëîáàíà â Âîñ- ests has decreased on account of a decline in òî÷íîé Áåòïàê-Äàëå, ãäå îí ãíåçäèëñÿ íà the forested area. About 24% of forests had ñêàëàõ, îäíàêî èç ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ ãí¸çä already been burnt between 1991 and 2005, æèëûì îêàçàëîñü ëèøü îäíî, à íà îäíîì èç with local fires observed in 2005 (Karyakin äâóõ íàéäåííûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ñ áåçóñïåøíûì et al., 2005c) and 2006 (Levin et al., 2007). ðàçìíîæåíèåì ãí¸çäà áûëè îïóòàíû ñåòÿ- Based on this information, Levin (2008b) ìè äëÿ îòëîâà âçðîñëûõ ïòèö. Äëÿ Âîñòî÷- presumed that the number of Sakers in pine íîé Áåòïàê-Äàëû è Ïðèáàëõàøüÿ ÷èñëåí- forest had decreased over 15 years from 100 íîñòü áàëîáàíà îöåíåíà â 50 ïàð (Ëåâèí, pairs to 40–45 by 2008 (Levin, 2008a). Un- Êàðïîâ, 2005) è âûñêàçàíî ïðåäïîëîæå- fortunately, the most devastating fires, cov- íèå, ÷òî â ðåçóëüòàòå èíòåíñèâíîãî ïðåññà ering a huge area of forest (up to 30% of the ýòîò ñîêîë ñòàë îñâàèâàòü ËÝÏ, à ïîïûò- remaining forest at that moment), were in êè âîçâðàùåíèÿ íà ãíåçäîâàíèå íà ñêàëû 2010. Obviously, those fires had a negative ïîêà â áîëüøèíñòâå ñëó÷àåâ áåçóñïåøíû impact in the breeding population of Sakers, èç-çà ïðîäîëæàþùåãîñÿ îòëîâà. Êàçàëîñü but the particular trend figures have been un- áû, ìîæíî ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî â ðåçóëü- clear as of yet. They will become clearer after òàòå ïåðåñåëåíèÿ íà ËÝÏ ÷èñëåííîñòü special research in the remaining forests. áàëîáàíà â Áåòïàê-Äàëå è Ïðèáàëõàøüå âûðîñëà, îäíàêî ïðÿìûìè ìîíèòîðèíãî- Eastern Kazakhstan âûìè íàáëþäåíèÿìè ýòî íå ïîäòâåðæäåíî. Eastern Kazakhstan, along with South- Ïîâòîðíûé îñìîòð áåòïàêäàëèíñêîé ëè- Eastern Kazakhstan, is the most researched íèè â 2006 ã. (òà ëèíèÿ, íà êîòîðîé áûëî territory concerning the Saker Falcon. The íàéäåíî 16 æèëûõ ãí¸çä) ïîçâîëèë íàé- first experience of falcon surveys in East- òè ëèøü îäíî æèëîå ãíåçäî áàëîáàíà, íà ern Kazakhstan was in 1997: the first nests äðóãîé âíîâü îáñëåäîâàííîé ëèíèè áûëî of Sakers were discovered in the Jungarian îáíàðóæåíî 14 æèëûõ ãí¸çä è 3 ïóñòóþ- Alatau, Tarbagatay and Monrak mountains Ïòåíöû áàëîáàíà â ùèõ, ó îäíîãî èç êîòîðûõ äåðæàëñÿ îäèíî- that year (Watson, 1997). The area of re- ãíåçäå íà ËÝÏ. Ôîòî È. Ñìåëÿíñêîãî. êèé ñàìåö (Ëåâèí, 2008á). Èññëåäîâàíèÿ search was extended in 1999. The greater À.Í. Áàðàøêîâîé ñ ñîàâòîðàìè (2009) â part of the Tarbagatay mountains (especially Chicks of the Saker Falcon in the nest on Ñåâåðíîì Ïðèáàëõàøüå, ïîäòâåðæäàþò north and south foothills), Saur, Kalbinskiy the electric pole. äàííûå À. Ëåâèíà è Ô. Êàðïîâà (2005) î Altai, Kurchum and Narym mountain rang- Photo by I. Smelansky. ãíåçäîâàíèè îñíîâíîé ÷àñòè áàëîáàíîâ íà es were surveyed; however observations in the Jungarian Alatau, Kurchum and Narym mountain ranges were ended in 2000 due to all nests known there having been rav- aged (Levin, 2008b). The comprehensive monitoring of the East Kazakhstan popula- tion of Sakers started in 2000 after the total crash of the species population in the south- eastern part of the country (Levin, 2008b). The monitoring data show that the num- bers of Saker in all the mountain ranges of Eastern Kazakhstan under investigation had decreased: only 16 (24%) of 66 monitored Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 51

ËÝÏ è ñïîðàäè÷íîì ãíåçäîâàíèè îòäåëüíûõ ïàð â ãðàíèòíûõ ìàññèâàõ, îäíàêî íå ÿñíî íàñêîëüêî îíè óâåëè÷èâàþò ÷èñëåííîñòü, îöåíêà êîòîðîé äàíà ðàíåå äëÿ Âîñòî÷íîé Áåòïàê-Äàëû è Ïðèáàëõàøüÿ (âîçìîæíî, ÷òî ýòè äàííûå óêëàäûâàþòñÿ â îöåíêó À. Ëåâè- íà è Ô. Êàðïîâà).  áàññåéíå Ñàðûñó â 200-êèëîìåòðîâîé ïîëîñå ìåæäó Áåòïàê-Äàëîé è Êàçàõñêèì ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêîì áàëîáàí íà ãíåçäîâàíèè íå îáíàðóæåí (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2008).  Êàçàõñêîì ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêå ãíåçäîâà- íèå áàëîáàíà ïðåäïîëàãàëîñü íà îñíîâà- íèè âñòðå÷ íà ËÝÏ è â ãðàíèòíûõ ìàññèâàõ (Ëåâèí, Êàðïîâ, 2005).  ÷àñòíîñòè, 13–15 èþíÿ 2002 ã. ñëåäû ïðåáûâàíèÿ áàëîáà- íà îòìå÷åíû íà ñêàëàõ Êàðêàðàëèíñêîãî ãðàíèòíîãî ìàññèâà (Ëåâèí, 2005), â Áåê- òàóàòå áàëîáàí íàáëþäàëñÿ 27–20 àïðåëÿ 2005 ã. (Êàðïîâ, Ëåâèí, 2006). Èññëåäîâà- íèÿ ïîñëåäíèõ ëåò ïîçâîëèëè îöåíèòü ÷èñ- ëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà â Óëóòàó â 28–38 ïàð (Êàðÿêèí, Áàðàáàøèí, 2006), â ãðàíèòíûõ ãðóïïàõ þãà ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêà – 35–45 ïàð (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2008), â ïîëîãî-óâàëèñòûõ Ïòåíöû áàëîáàíà â ãíåçäå íà ËÝÏ. ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêàõ áàññåéíà Ñàðûñó – Ôîòî È. Ñìåëÿíñêîãî. 12–23 ïàð (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2008). Ñóììà Chicks of the Saker Falcon in the nest îöåíîê äëÿ Êàçàõñêîãî ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêà on the electric pole. ïðåäïîëàãàåò çäåñü ãíåçäîâàíèå 75–106 Photo by I. Smelansky. ïàð áàëîáàíîâ. Òåíäåíöèè ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Êàçàõñêîì ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêå íå nests were being occupied by 2008. Fol- èçâåñòíû, îäíàêî À.Ñ. Ëåâèí äëÿ íåñêîëü- lowing expert estimations, the population êèõ ËÝÏ óêàçûâàåò ôàêòû îòëîâà ñîêîëîâ number there decreased from 200–250 pairs è íàëè÷èå ïóñòóþùèõ ãí¸çä, â òîì ÷èñëå è to several tens of pairs: numbers of breed- ñ îñòàòêàìè ñèëêîâ (Ëåâèí, Êàðïîâ, 2005), ing pairs in the majority of mountain ranges ÷òî ïîçâîëÿåò ïðåäïîëîæèòü òàêæå íåãà- declined by 2–3 times (Levin, 2008b). òèâíûé òðåíä ýòîé ãðóïïèðîâêè. Levin’s monitoring data were published al-  Òåíãèç-Êóðãàëüäæèíñêîì ðåãèîíå most every year, showing the disappointing ãíåçäîâàíèå áàëîáàíà íå óñòàíîâëåíî, íå- results of a decrease in numbers of the Saker ñìîòðÿ íà ðåãóëÿðíóþ ðàáîòó íà äàííîé in Eastern Kazakhstan (Levin, 2008à; 2008b; òåððèòîðèè êàê ïðîôåññèîíàëüíûõ îðíè- 2008ñ; Levin, 2000; 2001; Levin, Dixon, òîëîãîâ, òàê è ëþáèòåëåé. Çäåñü îòìå÷àþò- 2008). Some increase in the Saker number ñÿ ëèøü ðåäêèå âñòðå÷è áàëîáàíîâ, ïðåè- in Eastern Kazakhstan was recorded only in ìóùåñòâåííî â êîíöå ëåòà (Êîøêèí, 2004, 2002 (when 23 new occupied nests were 2006; 2007à; 2007b, Êîâøàðü, 2009). found) (Levin, 2003). However, the steady Òàêèì îáðàçîì, ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà â decline had already resumed since 2003 Öåíòðàëüíîì Êàçàõñòàíå ïî èìåþùèìñÿ (Levin, 2008a; 2008b). Although the total îöåíêàì ñîñòàâëÿåò 128–161 ïàð, ñ êðó- number of discovered nests increased from øåíèåì ÷èñëåííîñòè â Çàïàäíîé è Öåí- 10 in 2000 to 86 in 2008, the total number of òðàëüíîé Áåòïàê-Äàëå (ñîêðàùåíèå íà occupied breeding territories declined from 85,7% çà 20 ëåò) è, âåðîÿòíî, ìåäëåííûì 70 to 24% for that period (Levin, 2008b). ñîêðàùåíèåì â Âîñòî÷íîé Áåòïàê-Äàëå è Only 19 out of 101 known breeding territo- Êàçàõñêîì ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêå, ãäå ìîæíî ries in the Tarbagatay, Manrak, Arkaly, Kara- íàäåÿòüñÿ, ÷òî îò÷àñòè îòëîâ êîìïåíñèðó- bas, Jungarian Alatau, Arganaty, Arkhaly and åòñÿ ðàññåëåíèåì ñîêîëîâ ïî ËÝÏ. Kyskash mountains were inhabited by Sak- ers by 2008, and the number had decreased Ñåâåðî-Âîñòî÷íûé Êàçàõñòàí from 131 pairs to 24 pairs (Levin, 2008c).  áîðàõ Ñåâåðî-Âîñòî÷íîãî Êàçàõñòàíà Based on the results of surveys in the Ka- ïåðâîå ãíåçäî áàëîáàíà áûëî îáíàðóæå- lbinskiy Altai in 2006, a total of 20–30 pairs of 52 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

íî â 1989 ã., îäíàêî òîãäà íèêàêèõ îöåíîê Sakers were estimated to inhabit that region ÷èñëåííîñòè äëÿ äàííîé òåððèòîðèè íå ñäå- (Smelansky et al., 2006). 8 breeding territo- ëàíî (Êîâøàðü, Õðîêîâ, 1993).  2005 ã. â ries were found in the low hills of the East- ðåçóëüòàòå öåëåâîãî îáñëåäîâàíèÿ áîðîâ Kazakhstan district in 2007; 6–7 of them were âûÿâëåíî 19 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áàëîáà- occupied, but breeding was recorded in only íîâ è ïðîâåðåí 1 ðàíåå èçâåñòíûé, ÷èñ- 4 territories (Smelansky et al., 2008). Accord- ëåííîñòü îöåíåíà â 39–42 ïàðû (Êàðÿêèí ing to these data, at least 20 additional pairs è äð., 2005c).  2006 ã. èç îáíàðóæåííûõ are projected to breed in the low hills of the â 2005 ã. ïðîâåðåíû 2 ãíåçäà, îäíî èç East-Kazakhstan district. However, there are êîòîðûõ îêàçàëîñü ïóñòûì, à äðóãîå ñïè- no Sakers to the south of the village of Geor- ëåíî ëåñîðóáàìè, â äîïîëíåíèè ê ýòîìó gievka – a single breeding territory was found íàéäåíî 13 íîâûõ ãí¸çä (ïî-âèäèìîìó, here in 2009 (Barashkova et al., 2009). îäíî íà ðàíåå èçâåñòíîì ó÷àñòêå) (Ëåâèí The Saker certainly breeds in the Kazakh è äð., 2007), íà îñíîâàíèè íîâûõ äàííûõ Altai and in the Zaysan depression. Howev- ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà â áîðàõ Âîñòî÷íî- er, if the numbers were high, the information Êàçàõñòàíñêîé è Ïàâëîäàðñêîé îáëàñòåé concerning this would be available, since so îöåíåíà â 40–45 ïàð. ×èñëåííîñòü áàëî- many ornithologists surveyed that region. áàíà â áîðàõ, íåñîìíåííî, ñîêðàùàåòñÿ, For more than 7 years during which Kaza- êàê ìèíèìóì ïî ïðîñòîé ïðè÷èíå ñîêðà- khstan ornithologists published the results of ùåíèÿ ïëîùàäè áîðîâ â ñâÿçè ñ ïîæàðà- their surveys in the Kazakhstan Ornithologi- ìè è ðóáêàìè.  ïåðèîä ñ 1991 ïî 2005 ã. cal Bulletin, only 5 out of 47 papers about ñãîðåëî îêîëî 24% áîðîâ (Êàðÿêèí è äð., the eastern region were concerned with the 2005c), ëîêàëüíûå ïîæàðû íàáëþäàëèñü Zaysan depression and Altai, and only two è â 2006 ã. (Ëåâèí è äð., 2007). Îïèðàÿñü contained information about nest findings: 1 íà ýòó èíôîðìàöèþ, À.Ñ. Ëåâèí (2008b) and 2 birds were observed consecutively on ïðåäïîëîæèë, ÷òî ê 2008 ã. ÷èñëåííîñòü Lake Zaysan on June 17th and July 22nd, 2001, áàëîáàíîâ â áîðàõ çà 15 ëåò ñîêðàòèëàñü and 2 birds on July 22nd, 2002 (Kolbintsev, ñî 100 ïàð äî 40–45 (Ëåâèí, 2008a). Ïðè 2002); an adult Saker was encountered on ýòîì íàèáîëåå ðàçðóøèòåëüíûå ïîæàðû, the Koktuma – Ucharal road near the Zhaypak çàòðîíóâøèå îãðîìíûå ïëîùàäè áîðîâ (äî settlement on May 22nd, 2002, also an adult 30% ñîõðàíèâøåãîñÿ ê ýòîìó âðåìåíè æè- Saker (altaicus) was observed on the Zaysan âîãî ëåñà), ïðîøëè â 2010 ã. Ñîâåðøåííî – Kurchum road near the Kalzhyr settlement î÷åâèäíî, ÷òî ýòè ïîæàðû ñêàçàëèñü íåãà- on May 24th (Annenkova, Ashbi, 2002); a òèâíî íà ãíåçäîâîé ãðóïïèðîâêå áàëîáà- nest left by juvenile Sakers was discovered in íà, íî êîëè÷åñòâåííàÿ îöåíêà ñîêðàùåíèÿ the Yarki clay outliers on the western slope of ñòàíåò èçâåñòíà ëèøü ïîñëå ïðîâåäåíèÿ Chakelmes mountain on the northern bank ñîîòâåòñòâóþùèõ èññëåäîâàíèé. of Lake Zaysan on July 14th, 2007 (Scherba- kov, 2008); broods of Sakers were recorded Âîñòî÷íûé Êàçàõñòàí in rocks in the vicinities of the Tarasy nature Âîñòî÷íûé Êàçàõñòàí, íàðÿäó ñ Þãî- boundary (Bukhtarma river) over many years, Âîñòî÷íûì Êàçàõñòàíîì, ÿâëÿåòñÿ íàèáîëåå although only one bird was observed near èçó÷åííîé òåððèòîðèåé â ïëàíå ðàñïðî- ñòðàíåíèÿ è äèíàìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëî- áàíà. Ïåðâûå ïîïûòêè èçó÷åíèÿ ñîêîëîâ íà âîñòîêå Êàçàõñòàíà áûëè îñóùåñòâëåíû â 1997 ã. – â ýòîò ãîä áûëè íàéäåíû ïåðâûå ãí¸çäà áàëîáàíà â Äæóíãàðñêîì Àëàòàó, Òàðáàãàòàå è Ìîíðàêå (Watson, 1997). C 1999 ã. ðàéîí ðàáîò áûë ðàñøèðåí, îñìî- òðåíà çíà÷èòåëüíàÿ ÷àñòü Òàðáàãàòàÿ, åãî þæíûå è ñåâåðíûå ïðåäãîðüÿ, Ñàóð, Êàë- áèíñêèé Àëòàé, Êóð÷óìñêèé è Íàðûìñêèé õðåáòû; îäíàêî îò ðàáîòû â Äæóíãàðñêîì Àëàòàó, Êóð÷óìñêîì è Íàðûìñêîì õðåá- òàõ ïðèøëîñü îòêàçàòüñÿ, òàê êàê â 2000 ã. âñå èçâåñòíûå çäåñü ãí¸çäà áàëîáàíà áûëè ðàçîðåíû (Ëåâèí, 2008b). Ïîëíîöåí- Ìîëîäîé áàëîáàí. Çàéñàí. Ôîòî À. Êîâàëåíêî. íûé ìîíèòîðèíã âîñòî÷íî-êàçàõñòàíñêîé Young Saker Falcon. Zaysan Lake. ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà íà÷àëñÿ ñ 2000 ã., Photo by A. Kovalenko. Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 53

ïîñëå ïîëíîãî êðàõà ïîïóëÿöèé âèäà â þãî-âîñòî÷íîì ðåãèîíå ê 2000 ã. (Ëåâèí, 2008b). Äàííûå ìîíèòîðèíãà ñâèäåòåëü- ñòâóþò î òîì, ÷òî ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà âî âñåõ êîíòðîëèðóåìûõ õðåáòàõ Âîñ- òî÷íîãî Êàçàõñòàíà ñíèæàëàñü, è èç 66-òè ïîñòîÿííî íàõîäÿùèõñÿ ïîä íàáëþäåíèåì ãí¸çä çàíÿòûìè ê 2008 ã. îêàçàëèñü ëèøü 16 (24%); ïî ýêñïåðòíûì îöåíêàì ÷èñëåí- íîñòü ýòîé ïîïóëÿöèè ñîêðàòèëàñü ñ 200– 250 ïàð â 2000 ã. äî íåñêîëüêèõ äåñÿòêîâ ïàð â 2008 ã., â áîëüøèíñòâå èç îáñëåäî- âàííûõ ãîðíûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê êîëè÷åñòâî ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ïàð óìåíüøèëîñü â 2–3 ðàçà (Ëåâèí, 2008b). Áàëîáàí. Ôîòî À. Êîâàëåíêî. Ðåçóëüòàòû ìîíèòîðèíãà À.Ñ. Ëåâèíûì Saker Falcon. Photo by A. Kovalenko. ïðàêòè÷åñêè åæåãîäíî ïóáëèêîâàëèñü, îòðàæàÿ íåóòåøèòåëüíûå ðåçóëüòàòû ñî- êðàùåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Âîñ- an old nest in 2004 (Starikov, 2005); a Saker òî÷íîì Êàçàõñòàíå (Ëåâèí, 2008à; 2008b; was encountered near Bukhtarminskoe Lake 2008ñ; Levin, 2000; 2001; Levin, Dixon, during July 7–10th, 2005 (Starikov, 2006). 2008), ëèøü â 2002 ã. â Âîñòî÷íîì Êàçàõ- The number of Sakers in this territory seemed ñòàíå íàáëþäàëîñü íåêîòîðîå óâåëè÷åíèå to be so little, that it could be estimated only ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà (áûëî íàéäåíî 23 in terms of single breeding pairs. íîâûõ çàíÿòûõ ãíåçäà) (Levin, 2003), îä- Summarizing all the available data, includ- íàêî óæå ñ 2003 ã. îïÿòü íà÷àëîñü óñòîé- ing on Altai and Tarbagatai, A. Levin (2008a) ÷èâîå å¸ ïàäåíèå (Ëåâèí, 2008a; 2008b). reports the number of Sakers has decreased Íåñìîòðÿ íà òî, ÷òî îáùåå êîëè÷åñòâî there from 300–350 pairs to 80–100 pairs èçâåñòíûõ ãí¸çä áàëîáàíà â ðåãèîíå âîç- over 15 years, and from 400–450 to 120– ðîñëî ñ 10 â 2000 ã. äî 86 â 2008 ã., äîëÿ 145 pairs throughout the east and north-east çàíÿòûõ ãíåçäîâûõ òåððèòîðèé ñíèçèëàñü (including pine forests) of the region. ñ 70% äî 24% (Ëåâèí, 2008b). Äëÿ ãîðíûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê Òàðáàãàòàÿ, Ìàíðàêà, Àðêà- South-Eastern Kazakhstan ëû, Êàðàáàñà, Äæóíãàðñêîãî Àëàòàó, Àð- The Saker has been monitored regularly in ãàíàòû, Àðõàëû, Êûñêàø èç 101 èçâåñòíî- South-Eastern Kazakhstan since 1984. Ac- ãî ãíåçäîâîãî ó÷àñòêà ê 2008 ã. îñòàëîñü cording to R. Pfeffer, who had researched the ëèøü 19, íà êîòîðûõ çàðåãèñòðèðîâàíî breeding biology of Sakers in south-east Ka- ðàçìíîæåíèå áàëîáàíà, à îöåíêà ÷èñëåí- zakhstan over 10 years, 22 living nests were íîñòè ñî 131 ïàðû ñíèçèëàñü äî 24 ïàð located in the vicinity of Almaty, within a (Ëåâèí, 2008c). radius of 200 km – in the Anarchay, Serek- Îáñëåäîâàíèå Êàëáèíñêîãî Àëòàÿ â tas, Malay-Sary, Boguty and Turaygyr moun- 2006 ã. ïîçâîëèëî îöåíèòü ÷èñëåííîñòü tain ridges (Levin, 2008b). The monitoring áàëîáàíà íà åãî òåððèòîðèè â 20–30 ïàð of Saker breeding territories has shown that (Ñìåëÿíñêèé è äð., 2006).  2007 ã. â ìåë- initially they vanished in the mountains of êîñîïî÷íèêàõ Âîñòî÷íî-Êàçàõñòàíñêîé South-Eastern Kazakhstan. The first publica- îáëàñòè îáíàðóæåíî 8 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ tions about the collapse of the south-eastern áàëîáàíà, èç êîòîðûõ çàíÿòûìè îêàçàëèñü populations of the Saker were in 2000: the 6–7 ó÷àñòêîâ, à ðàçìíîæåíèå èìåëî ìå- decrease in numbers of breeding pairs had ñòî íà 4-õ (Ñìåëÿíñêèé è äð., 2008). Ïî- been evident already by 1997. The Saker ñëåäíåå ïðåäïîëàãàåò ãíåçäîâàíèå åù¸ êàê number had declined from 24 in 1993 to ìèíèìóì 2-õ äåñÿòêîâ ïàð â ìåëêîñîïî÷- fewer than 5 pairs in 1997; as a result of the íèêàõ Âîñòî÷íî-Êàçàõñòàíñêîé îáëàñòè. trapping of birds and chicks, the breeding Îäíàêî óæå þæíåå Ãåîðãèåâêè áàëîáàí success of Sakers in Kazakhstan had fallen ïðîïàäàåò – çäåñü âûÿâëåí åäèíñòâåííûé down to its lowest level by 1998. (Levin et ãíåçäîâîé ó÷àñòîê â 2009 ã. (Áàðàøêîâà è al., 2000). Breeding was registered only in 2 äð., 2009). out of 22 nests known in the vicinity of Al- Îïðåäåë¸ííî áàëîáàí ãíåçäèòüñÿ íà Êà- maty in 2000 (Levin, 2001). It was remark- çàõñêîì Àëòàå è â Çàéñàíñêîé êîòëîâèíå, îä- able, that females on both of the remaining íàêî åñëè áû åãî ÷èñëåííîñòü çäåñü áûëà âû- nests in the Syugatinskaya depression were 54 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

ñîêîé, òî èíôîðìàöèÿ îá ýòîì íåìèíóåìî young, and one of them was wearing jess- ñòàëà áû äîñòîÿíèåì íàó÷íîé îáùåñòâåííî- es (Levin, 2008a). Only 5 out of 30 Sakers’ ñòè, òàê êàê â äàííîì ðåãèîíå ðàáîòàåò äî- nests known since 1993 remained in the ñòàòî÷íî ìíîãî îðíèòîëîãîâ. Çà áîëåå ÷åì Kendyktas, Anarchay, Serektas, Malay-Sary, 7 ëåòíþþ èñòîðèþ ðåãóëÿðíîé ïóáëèêàöèè Boguty and Turaygyr mountain ridges by ñâîèõ íàáëþäåíèé êàçàõñòàíñêèìè îðíèòî- 2005 (Levin, 2008b). In 2009, those moun- ëîãàìè â Êàçàõñòàíñêîì îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîì tain ridges were surveyed repeatedly, and áþëëåòåíå èç 47 ïóáëèêàöèé ïî âîñòî÷íî- only 2 out of 28 nests that had been moni- ìó ðåãèîíó, â êîòîðûõ óïîìèíàåòñÿ áàëî- tored, were being occupied (7.1%), while áàí, ëèøü 5 èìåþò îòíîøåíèå ê Çàéñàíñêîé one territory was occupied by young birds, êîòëîâèíå è Àëòàþ, ïðè÷¸ì ðå÷ü î íàõîä- and the female wore jesses; only 4 living êàõ ãí¸çä èä¸ò ëèøü â äâóõ ñëó÷àÿõ: íà îçå- nests were found in the entire Syugatinskaya ðå Çàéñàí 17 èþíÿ è 22 èþëÿ 2001 ã. íà- depression and an occupied territory in the áëþäàëèñü 1 è 2 ïòèöû ñîîòâåòñòâåííî, 22 region, that had not been surveyed earlier èþëÿ 2002 ã. – 2 ïòèöû (Êîëáèíöåâ, 2002), (Levin et al., 2010). Thus, we can confirm íà òðàññå Êîêòóìà – Ó÷àðàë áëèç ñ. Æàéïàê the decrease in the Saker numbers for South- 22 ìàÿ 2002 ã. íàáëþäàëè îäèíî÷íîãî áà- Eastern Kazakhstan by 92.8%, while the ëîáàíà, 24 ìàÿ ïî òðàññå Çàéñàí – Êóð÷óì population number is not more than 50 pairs îêîëî ñ. Êàëæûð íàáëþäàëè òàêæå îäèíî÷- (Levin, 2008b; Levin et al., 2010). Áàëîáàí. íîãî áàëîáàíà ôîðìû altaicus (Àííåíêîâà, Ôîòî À. Êîâàëåíêî. Àøáè, 2002), îñòàâëåííîå ìîëîäûìè ãíåç- Southern Kazakhstan Saker Falcon. äî áàëîáàíà îáíàðóæåíî 14 èþëÿ 2007 ã. â Southern Kazakhstan was not very well in- Photo by A. Kovalenko. îñòàíöîâûõ ãëèíàõ ßðêè ó çàïàäíîãî ñêëîíà vestigated until recently as the Saker popula- ãîðû ×àêåëüìåñ íà ñåâåðíîì tion was thought to be absolutely extinct, due áåðåãó îç. Çàéñàí (Ùåðáà- to the extensive concentration of bird catch- êîâ, 2008), â ñêàëàõ áëèç óð. ers in the Chimkent district. However, nest- Òàðàñó (Áóõòàðìà) â òå÷åíèå ing Sakers were encountered here as early as ìíîãèõ ëåò íàáëþäàëèñü âû- the mid-90’s: in 1994, Denisov (1995) found âîäêè áàëîáàíà, íî â 2004 ã. two inhabited nests in the south of the Chim- ó ñòàðîé ïîñòðîéêè âñòðå÷åíà kent district north of Chardarin Dam Lake; ëèøü îäèíîêàÿ ïòèöà (Ñòàðè- moreover, they supposed that the Saker was êîâ, 2005), áàëîáàí íàáëþäàë- nesting in the Karatau Mountains. ñÿ ó îç. Áóõòàðìèíñêîãî 7–10 In 2005, in the north-west of Karatau èþíÿ 2005 ã. (Ñòàðèêîâ, 2006). they found three breeding territories and Ïî-âèäèìîìó ÷èñëåííîñòü áà- the population was estimated by way of ëîáàíà íà äàííîé òåððèòîðèè extrapolation over the ridge area as 40–50 íàñòîëüêî íèçêà, ÷òî îãðàíè- pairs; however, the authors thought this es- ÷èâàåòñÿ åäèíèöàìè ãíåçäÿ- timate was overrated, and considering that ùèõñÿ ïàð. the Sakers occupied only the front crags Ñóììèðóÿ èìåþùèåñÿ äàííûå, â òîì of Karatau they estimated the population ÷èñëå ïî Àëòàþ è Òàðáàãàòàþ, À.Ñ. Ëå- as 15–16 pairs (Karyakin et al., 2008). This âèí (2008a) ïèøåò, ÷òî çà 15 ëåò ÷èñëåí- seems to be the only available estimate of íîñòü áàëîáàíà ñîêðàòèëàñü â ýòèõ ãîðàõ ñ the South Kazakhstan population. 300–350 ïàð, äî 80–100 ïàð, à â öåëîì íà Kovalenko (2005; 2006) reports find- âîñòîêå è ñåâåðî-âîñòîêå (âêëþ÷àÿ áîðû) ing 2 nests on the electric power line near ñ 400–450 äî 120–145 ïàð. Baikonur in 2005, while Karyakin et al. (2005b) emphasize that they did not find Þãî-Âîñòî÷íûé Êàçàõñòàí Saker nests on the power line from Chelkar Ðåãóëÿðíûå íàáëþäåíèÿ çà áàëîáàíàìè to Baikonur. Possibly, the Sakers nest from â Þãî-Âîñòî÷íîì Êàçàõñòàíå ïðîâîäÿòñÿ time to time on the power line along the ñ 1984 ã. Ïî ñâåäåíèÿì Ð.Ã. Ïôåôôåðà, Syr-Darya river; however, only a few pairs èçó÷àâøåãî áèîëîãèþ áàëîáàíà íà þãî- must breed here as only 2 backbone power âîñòîêå Êàçàõñòàíà â òå÷åíèå 10 ëåò, â lines go along the road to Kyzyl-Orda. ðàäèóñå 200 êì îò Àëìà-Àòû ðàñïîëàãà- ëîñü 22 æèëûõ ãíåçäà â õðåáòàõ Àíàðõàé, Kazakhstan as a whole Ñåðåêòàñ, Ìàëàé-Ñàðû, Áîãóòû, Òóðàéãûð At present, we may state that an almost (Ëåâèí, 2008b). Ìîíèòîðèíã ãíåçäîâûõ complete overview of the Saker breeding in òåððèòîðèé áàëîáàíîâ ïîêàçàë, ÷òî îíè Kazakhstan territory has been accomplished èñ÷åçëè â ïåðâóþ î÷åðåäü â ãîðàõ Þãî- (fig. 1). We may suppose that South Ka- Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 55

Âîñòî÷íîãî Êàçàõñòàíà. Ïåðâûå ïóáëèêà- öèè, â êîòîðûõ îçâó÷åí êîëëàïñ ïîïóëÿöèé áàëîáàíà â Þãî-Âîñòî÷íîì Êàçàõñòàíå, ïîÿâèëèñü â 2000 ã.: ïàäåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ïàð îòìå÷åíî ñ 24-õ â 1993 ã. äî ìåíåå ÷åì 5 ïàð â 1997 ã.; à â ðåçóëüòàòå èçúÿòèÿ ïòèö è ïòåíöîâ óñïåõ ðàçìíîæå- íèÿ áàëîáàíîâ â Êàçàõñòàíå äîñòèã íåáûâà- ëî íèçêîãî óðîâíÿ ê 1998 ã. (Levin et al., 2000). Èç 22-õ ãí¸çä, èçâåñòíûõ â ðàéîíå Àëìà-Àòû â 2000 ã., ðàçìíîæåíèå áûëî çà- ðåãèñòðèðîâàíî ëèøü â 2-õ ãí¸çäàõ (Levin, 2001). Ïðèìå÷àòåëüíî òî, ÷òî â 2-õ îñòàâ- øèõñÿ ãí¸çäàõ â Ñþãàòèíñêîé äîëèíå ñàìêè Ìîëîäîé áàëîáàí. Àëàêîëü. Ôîòî À. Êîâàëåíêî. áûëè ìîëîäûå, ïðè÷¸ì ó îäíîé íà ëàïàõ áûëè ïóòöû (Ëåâèí, 2008a). Èç 30 èçâåñò- Young Saker Falcon. Alakol Lake. Photo by A. Kovalenko. íûõ äî 1993 ã. ãí¸çä áàëîáàíà â ãîðàõ Êåí- äûêòàñ, Àíàðõàé, Ñåðåêòàñ, Ìàëàé-Ñàðû, Áîãóòû è Òóðàéãûð ê 2005 ã. îñòàëîñü ëèøü zakhstan houses no more than a hundred 5 (Ëåâèí, 2008b).  2009 ã. ýòè ãîðíûå ìàñ- pairs and North Kazakhstan may house no ñèâû áûëè ïîâòîðíî îáñëåäîâàíû è èç 28 more than a few dozens in territories not ïîñòîÿííî êîíòðîëèðóåìûõ ãí¸çä, æèëûìè yet investigated. That is why Dixon’s opin- îêàçàëèñü ëèøü 2 (7,1%), ïðè÷¸ì íà îäíîì ion (2009) that the country has a lot of lo- ó÷àñòêå, çàíÿòîì ìîëîäûìè ïòèöàìè, ñàìêà cations uninvestigated but suitable for the áûëà ñ ïóòöàìè; âî âñåé Ñþãàòèíñêîé äî- Saker nesting is far from realistic, although ëèíå óäàëîñü íàéòè ëèøü 4 æèëûõ ãíåçäà he is absolutely right in saying that the es- è 1 çàíÿòûé ãíåçäîâîé ó÷àñòîê â ðàéîíå, timated Saker populations presented in the êîòîðûé ðàíåå íå ïîñåùàëñÿ (Ëåâèí è äð., ERWDA report (2003) were true neither for 2010). Òàêèì îáðàçîì, äëÿ Þãî-Âîñòî÷íîãî 1990 nor for 2003. Summing up all present- Êàçàõñòàíà â íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ ìîæíî ãîâî- day estimates gives a suggested number of ðèòü î ñîêðàùåíèè ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà 1,882–2,179 pairs for Kazakhstan. Estimat- íà 92,8% ïðè îöåíêå ÷èñëåííîñòè âñåé ing trends is more difficult. For the south ïîïóëÿöèè íå áîëåå ÷åì â 50 ïàð (Ëåâèí, of West Kazakhstan, it would be sensible 2008b; Ëåâèí è äð., 2010). to grant 5% as the bottom threshold of the population fall over the last 20 years, since Þæíûé Êàçàõñòàí we cannot judge about the dynamics in gen- Þæíûé Êàçàõñòàí äî ïîñëåäíåãî âðå- eral but are aware of local falls in population. ìåíè áûë ïëîõî îáñëåäîâàí â îñíîâíîì Granting a 26% fall for the forest and 81% ïî òîé ïðè÷èíå, ÷òî çäåñü ïðåäïîëàãàëîñü fall for steppe-forest and steppe low hills ïðàêòè÷åñêè ïîëíîå èñòðåáëåíèå ïîïóëÿ- populations yields an average negative trend öèè áàëîáàíà ïî ïðè÷èíå ñîñðåäîòî÷åíèÿ for the north of West Kazakhstan of 53.5%. òóò ëîâöîâ (îñîáåííî â ×èìêåíòñêîé îá- Granting a 10% fall as the bottom threshold ëàñòè). Îäíàêî ãíåçäîâàíèå áàëîáàíà çäåñü for the Kazakh upland, Eastern Betpak-Dala áûëî èçâåñòíî ñ 50-õ ãã.: áàëîáàí áûë íå- and the Balkhash Lake region over 20 years, ðåäîê â Êàðàòàó (Êîðåëîâ, 1962), â 1994 ã. and knowing the objective figure of 85.7% È.À. Äåíèñîâ (1995) îáíàðóæèë äâà æèëûõ for Western and Central Betpak-Dala, we get ãíåçäà íà þãå ×èìêåíòñêîé îáëàñòè ê ñåâå- the average negative trend for Central Kaza- ðó îò ×àðäàðèíñêîãî âîäîõðàíèëèùà. khstan of 47.8%. Considering a drop in the  2005 ã. â ñåâåðî-çàïàäíîé ÷àñòè Êàðà- Saker population over 15 years in the forests òàó áûëî îáíàðóæåíî 3 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà in the north-east of Kazakhstan by 57%, and áàëîáàíîâ, à ÷èñëåííîñòü åãî ïóò¸ì ýêñ- in the mountains in the east of Kazakhstan òðàïîëÿöèè ó÷¸òíûõ äàííûõ íà âñþ ïëî- by 72%, we get a population drop by 76.0% ùàäü õðåáòà îïðåäåëåíà â 40–50 ïàð, îä- and 96.4% respectively over 20 years. The íàêî àâòîðû ïîñ÷èòàëè å¸ çàâûøåííîé è, 92.8% fall in the south-east of Kazakhstan ñîñëàâøèñü íà òî, ÷òî áàëîáàí ïðèóðî÷åí seems a plausible figure also for the south òîëüêî ê ïåðåäîâîìó ñêëîíó Êàðàòó, îöå- of Kazakhstan, since the history of the Saker íèëè åãî ÷èñëåííîñòü çäåñü â 15–16 ïàð experience on both these territories is very (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2008). Ïîæàëóé, ýòî åäèí- similar. The result for the entire Kazakhstan ñòâåííàÿ äîñòóïíàÿ îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè territory in 1990 is 4,808–5,628 breeding 56 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

âèäà â Þæíîì Êàçõàñòàíå. pairs, with the average negative trend of Î íàõîäêå 2-õ ãí¸çä íà ËÝÏ â ðàéîíå 61% over 20 years (table 4). The dynamics Áàéêîíóðà â 2005 ã. ñîîáùàåò À.Â. Êîâà- are similar to those of Russia and there are ëåíêî (2005; 2006), â òî âðåìÿ êàê È.Â. no reasons to suppose that the figures for Êàðÿêèí ñ ñîàâòîðàìè (2005á) ñïåöèàëüíî the rate of decline contain a large error (it is àêöåíòèðóþò âíèìàíèå íà òîì, ÷òî èìè íà more likely that these figures are lower than ËÝÏ îò ×åëêàðà äî Áàéêîíóðà áàëîáàí íå the real figures than otherwise). Analysis of âñòðå÷åí. Âèäèìî íåðåãóëÿðíîå ãíåçäîâà- the references shows that the Saker popu- íèå áàëîáàíà èìååò ìåñòî íà ËÝÏ âäîëü lation estimates for Kazakhstan prepared for Ñûðäàðüè, îäíàêî çäåñü, ñêîðåå âñåãî, the IUCN Red List do not allow for the data ãíåçäèòñÿ íåñêîëüêî ïàð, òàê êàê âñåãî 2 published by a lot of Saker experts who have ìàãèñòðàëüíûå ËÝÏ ïðîõîäÿò âäîëü òðàññû been working in the country. That is why the íà Êûçûë-Îðäó. trend indicated by BirdLife and the realistic trend revealed by long-term monitoring in Âåñü Êàçàõñòàí several regions is so very different.  íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ ìîæíî ãîâîðèòü î ïðàêòè÷åñêè ïîëíîé îáñëåäîâàííîñòè òåð- China ðèòîðèè Êàçàõñòàíà íà ïðåäìåò îáèòàíèÿ The first preliminary estimate of the Saker áàëîáàíà (ðèñ. 1). Ìîæíî ïðåäïîëàãàòü population in China based on data of the ãíåçäîâàíèå íå áîëåå ñîòíè ïàð â Þæíîì 1920’s–70’s was published by Baumgart Êàçàõñòàíå è íå áîëåå íåñêîëüêèõ äåñÿòêîâ (Baumgart, 1978): 15,000–20,000 pairs, ïàð â Ñåâåðíîì Êàçàõñòàíå íà òåððèòîðè- with the key population in Tibet. A later es- Ðèñ. 1. Ðàñïðîñòðàíå- íèå áàëîáàíà (Falco ÿõ, êîòîðûå äî ñèõ ïîð íå îáñëåäîâàíû. timate of the Saker population based largely cherrug) â Êàçàõñòàíå Ïîýòîìó ìíåíèå, âûñêàçàííîå Ý. Äèêñî- on the expert evaluations of the 1980’s was â 2010 ã. Öèôðàìè íà íîì (2009) î òîì, ÷òî «â ñòðàíå èìååòñÿ 64,000–102,000 birds for the whole of Chi- êàðòå ïîêàçàíà ÷èñëåí- åù¸ ìíîãî ìåñò, ãäå áàëîáàí ìîæåò îáè- na (Ye et al., 2001), with the core popula- íîñòü ïîïóëÿöèé, â ñêîáêàõ – èõ òðåíä çà òàòü, íî åãî îáèòàíèå òàì íå èçâåñòíî», íå tion in Xinjiang (30,000–50,000 birds) (Ma, 20 ëåò. ñîîòâåòñòâóåò äåéñòâèòåëüíîñòè. Õîòÿ îí 1999). It is not at all clear how many birds of Fig. 1. Distribution of àáñîëþòíî ïðàâ â òîì, ÷òî îöåíêè ÷èñëåí- this population constitute a breeding popu- the Saker Falcon (Falco íîñòè áàëîáàíà, êîòîðûå áûëè ïðåäñòàâ- lation, but, given that China houses a lot of cherrug) in Kazakhstan ëåíû â îò÷¸òå ERWDA (2003), íå ñîîòâåò- wintering birds from Russia and Mongolia in 2010. By figures on a ñòâîâàëè äåéñòâèòåëüíîñòè íè çà 1990 ã., (Potapov et al., 2002), we may suppose map is shown number of populations and in íè çà 2003 ã. Ñóììèðîâàíèå ñîâðåìåííûõ that at least 10,000 birds of this number brackets is shown their îöåíîê ïðåäïîëàãàåò ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáà- were migrants and the breeding popula- trend for 20 years. íà â Êàçàõñòàíå 1882–2179 ïàð. Ãîðàçäî tion may be estimated as 7,900–13,500 pairs, with 3.4 chicks per nest on average. However, towards the end of the 1990’s the Saker population estimates became much less optimistic. Based on the finding of 22 Saker breeding territories with 9 inhabited nests in Xinjiang and 10 territories in Altai in 2001 (no Sakers were found in Tien Shan), for Xinjiang the population was estimated as 350 pairs; in Inner Mongolia no Sakers were found; as a result, the entire China popula- tion was estimated as no more than 500 pairs (Ye, Ma, 2002). Possibly, this estimate does not include the Tibetan Saker popula- tion. In 2002, field studies were carried out for the major part of North China along the Mongolian border, which confirmed earlier inferences of 2001 that the Saker popula- tion was really low. For 2002, only 6 nests were found, of which only 3 showed signs of breeding behaviour, and only one nest had chicks (Ye, Fox, 2003). In nesting habitats in Inner Mongolia (440,000 km2) the Saker population was estimated as 143 birds or 14 breeding pairs, producing 43 chicks annually Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 57

Òàáë. 4. Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè ïîïóëÿöèé áàëîáàíà è äèíàìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè â Êàçàõñòàíå ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà 2010 ã. Table 4. Population estimates and trend data of Saker Falcon in Kazakhstan in 2010.

Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè â 2010 ã. Òðåíä Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè â 1990 ã. Estimated number in 2010 çà 20 ëåò (%) Estimated number in 1990 Trend Ðåãèîí / Region Ìèí / Min Ìàêñ / Max for 20 years (%) Ìèí / Min Ìàêñ / Max Çàïàäíûé Êàçàõñòàí (ñåâåð) Western Kazakhstan (N) 151 178 -53.5 325 383 Çàïàäíûé Êàçàõñòàí (þã) Western Kazakhstan (S) 1418 1629 -5.0 1493 1715 Öåíòðàëüíûé Êàçàõñòàí Central Kazakhstan 128 161 -47.85 245 309 Ñåâåðî-Âîñòî÷íûé Êàçàõñòàí North-Eastern Kazakhstan 40 45 -76.0 167 188 Âîñòî÷íûé Êàçàõñòàí Eastern Kazakhstan 80 100 -96.4 2000 2500 Þãî-Âîñòî÷íûé Êàçàõñòàí South-Eastern Kazakhstan 50 50 -92.8 694 694 Þæíûé Êàçàõñòàí Southern Kazakhstan 15 16 -92.8 208 222 Êàçàõñòàí âñåãî Kazakhstan (all regions) 1882 2179 -61 4808 5628

ñëîæíåå îáñòîèò ñèòóàöèÿ ñ òðåíäàìè. Äëÿ (Ye, Fox, 2003). However, as the authors þãà Çàïàäíîãî Êàçàõñòàíà èìååò ñìûñë themselves state, this estimate is very unre- ïðèíÿòü ìèíèìàëüíûé ïîðîã ñîêðàùåíèÿ liable and further research is needed to es- ÷èñëåííîñòè çà ïîñëåäíèå 20 ëåò – 5%, òàê timate the entire Saker population in China. êàê ìû íå çíàåì òî÷íîãî òðåíäà, íî çíàåì, Judging by the data available we may sup- ÷òî èìåëî ìåñòî ëîêàëüíîå ñîêðàùåíèå pose that the entire Saker population for the ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà. Ïðè ñîêðàùåíèè country is only 200 breeding pairs (Ye, Fox, ÷èñëåííîñòè áîðîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê íà 2003), meaning only possibly-successful 26%, à ãðóïïèðîâîê ëåñîñòåïíûõ è ñòåï- breeding pairs. In the ERWDA report (2003) íûõ ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêîâ – íà 81%, ïîëó÷àåì two estimates for the country are given, of ñðåäíèé íåãàòèâíûé òðåíä ïî ñåâåðó Çà- 300 and 1,000–1,200 pairs (table 2). The ïàäíîãî Êàçàõñòàíà 53,5%. Åñëè ïðåäïî- latter, referring to Ma Ming and E. Potapov ëîæèòü äëÿ Êàçàõñêîãî ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêà, (in print), possibly contains the Tibetan re- Âîñòî÷íîé Áåòïàê-Äàëû è Ïðèáàëõàøüÿ search. Results of the 2003 Tibetan expe- ìèíèìàëüíóþ íåãàòèâíóþ äèíàìèêó â 10% dition were published in Falco ¹23: they çà 20 ëåò, à äëÿ Çàïàäíîé è Öåíòðàëüíîé give a preliminary estimate of the Tibetan Áåòïàê-Äàëû îïåðåòüñÿ íà îáúåêòèâíîå Saker population on the basis of calculations ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè â 85,7%, ïîëó- using GIS-software. Areas of nesting habi- ÷àåì ñðåäíèé íåãàòèâíûé òðåíä ïî Öåí- tats (at a height of 3,900–5,300 m above òðàëüíîìó Êàçàõñòàíó – 47,8%. Ó÷èòûâàÿ sea level, with slopes of less than 45°) cover ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà çà 15 1,070,955 km2; granting that only one third ëåò íà ñåâåðî-âîñòîêå Êàçàõñòàíà â áî- of these areas is suitable habitat for pikas ðîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâêàõ íà 57%, íà âîñòîêå (Ochotona sp.), and therefore, the Saker, Êàçàõñòàíà â ãîðàõ – íà 72%, ïîëó÷àåì ñî- and that the presumed Saker density in the êðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè çà 20 ëåò íà 76,0 accounted territory is 2.3 birds/1,000 km2, è 96,4% ñîîòâåòñòâåííî. Íà þãî-âîñòîêå of which 2/5 birds breed, the Saker popula- Êàçàõñòàíà ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëî- tion in Tibet can be estimated as about 985 áàíà â 92,8% èìååò ñìûñë ïðèíÿòü è äëÿ breeding pairs (Potapov, Ma, 2004). How- þãà Êàçàõñòàíà, òàê êàê òåððèòîðèè èìå- ever, as the authors themselves state, this þò îáùóþ èñòîðèþ îñâîåíèÿ ðåñóðñà ñî- evaluation is only a provisional one as it is êîëîâ.  ðåçóëüòàòå ïîëó÷àåì îöåíêó ÷èñ- based only on a single region’s data and ëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà äëÿ âñåãî Êàçàõñòàíà â there is no information about the Saker dis- 1990 ã. – 4808–5628 ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ïàð ïðè tribution and biology in the remote areas of ñðåäíåì íåãàòèâíîì òðåíäå 61% çà 20 ëåò the Plateau of Tibet. A report on the Saker 58 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

population, its dynamics and the poacher threat in China prepared by the Xinjiang Con- servation Fund gives the number of 1,000– 2,000 pairs for 2007, while the population dropped within the period 1990–2004 by 48–70%; also, they state that in 1990–1995 massive poaching took place (with more than 600 cases of arrests of Saker smug- glers), with the number of smuggling cases having dropped to a hundred by 1999 (Xin- jiang Conservation Fund, 2008). Thus, the only expert evaluations for the Saker population in China we have are evalu- ations for the 1920’s–70’s of 15,000–20,000 Òåìïû äåãðàäàöèè ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà íà þãî-âîñòîêå Êàçàõñòàíà pairs (Baumgart, 1978), and for the 1980’s– (Ëåâèí è äð., 2010). 90’s some 7,900–13,500 pairs (Ye et al., Changing of the Saker Falcon number in South-Eastern Kazakhstan 2001), as well as the estimates based on field (Levin et al., 2010). studies of 2001–3 of 1,000–1,200 pairs (the total for Xinjiang, Tibet and Inner Mongolia) (òàáë. 4). Äèíàìèêà ÷èñëåííîñòè ïîëó÷à- (Ye, Ma, 2002; Ye, Fox, 2003; Potapov, Ma, åòñÿ ñðàâíèìîé ñ òàêîâîé â Ðîññèè, è íåò 2004), and for 2007 of 1,000–2,000 pairs îñíîâàíèé ïðåäïîëàãàòü, ÷òî òðåíä ñèëüíî (Xinjiang Conservation Fund, 2008). Dixon’s îøèáî÷åí (ñêîðåå âñåãî, îí çàíèæåí, ÷åì report (Dixon, 2009) gives a present-day çàâûøåí). Àíàëèç ëèòåðàòóðû ïîêàçûâàåò, Saker population estimate for China of 3,000– ÷òî îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Êàçàõ- 5,000 pairs (table 3), which is neither sup- ñòàíå â ïðîøëîì, ïîäãîòîâëåííàÿ BirdLife ported by any calculations nor quotes any äëÿ Êðàñíîãî ëèñòà ÌÑÎÏ, íå ó÷èòûâàåò references, but, nevertheless, was straight- äàííûå, îïóáëèêîâàííûå ìíîãèìè ñïåöè- away accepted by BirdLife. Moreover, the àëèñòàìè, ðàáîòàâøèìè â ñòðàíå, îòñþäà estimate of 4,000–6,000 pairs received by íåñîîòâåòñòâèå ðåàëüíîãî òðåíäà, óñòà- BirdLife analysts for 1990 seems to ignore íîâëåííîãî ìíîãîëåòíèì ìîíèòîðèíãîì â the data obtained by Baumgart (Baumgart, íåñêîëüêèõ ðåãèîíàõ, ñ òðåíäîì, ïðåäëà- 1978) and Ye (Ye et al., 2001). ãàåìîì BirdLife. It is evident that the Saker population in China is going down due to a combination Êèòàé of negative factors, as is seen from the pa- Ïåðâàÿ ïðåäâàðèòåëüíàÿ îöåíêà ÷èñ- pers by Chinese ornithologists and their Eu- ëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Êèòàå, áàçèðóþùàÿ- ropean colleagues participating in ERWDA ñÿ íà äàííûõ 20–70-õ ãã., îïóáëèêîâàíà projects (Ma et al., 2006; Wu et al., 2007; Â. Áàóìãàðòîì (Baumgart, 1978), – 15–20 Ma, 1999; 2004; Ma, Ying, 2007; Ye et al., òûñ. ïàð ñ êëþ÷åâîé ïîïóëÿöèåé â Òèáåòå. 2001; Ye, Ma, 2002; Ye, Fox, 2003; Yu et Áîëåå ïîçäíÿÿ îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëî- al., 2008; Wan, 2001). It is certain that most áàíà, áàçèðóþùàÿñÿ íà äàííûõ ýêñïåðòîâ papers lack generalizing estimates of the â îñíîâíîì çà ïåðèîä 80-õ ãã., äëÿ âñåãî drop in the Chinese Saker population, but Êèòàÿ ñîñòàâèëà 64–102 òûñ. îñîáåé (Ye et the volumes of smuggling are comparable al., 2001) ñ îñíîâíûì íàñåëåíèåì (30–50 to those in Russia and Kazakhstan, or even òûñ. îñîáåé) â Ñèíüöçÿíå (Ma, 1999). Íå exceeded them in the 90’s (Xinjiang Con- ñîâñåì ÿñíî, êàêàÿ ÷àñòü ïòèö èç ýòîé ÷èñ- servation Fund, 2008). Therefore, we may ëåííîñòè îòíîñèòñÿ ê ãíåçäÿùèìñÿ, íî òàê suppose that the population dynamic here êàê â Êèòàå çèìóåò äîñòàòî÷íî ìíîãî ñîêî- has a more distinct negative trend as China ëîâ èç Ðîññèè è Ìîíãîëèè (Potapov et al., shows more of such negative factors as kill- 2002), òî ìîæíî ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî êàê ings of birds on the power lines, poisonings ìèíèìóì 10 òûñ. ïòèö èç ýòîé îöåíêè îò- and hunting of the birds for food. However, íîñèòñÿ ê ìèãðàíòàì, à ÷èñëåííîñòü ãíåç- BirdLife analysts defined the rate of popula- äÿùåéñÿ ïîïóëÿöèè ïðè ñðåäíåì âûâîäêå tion decline as 20% over 20 years for China, â 3,4 ïòåíöà ìîæåò áûòü îöåíåíà â 7,9– as the population estimates of 2010 and of 13,5 òûñ. ïàð. Îäíàêî, óæå â êîíöå 90-õ 1990 only differ by 1.2. The same rates of de- ãã. îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Êèòàå cline are shown in the Altai and Sayan areas ñòàëè íå ñòîëü ðàäóæíûìè, êàê áûëè ðà- over 5 years; these areas are least exploit- íåå. Íà îñíîâàíèè îáíàðóæåíèÿ â ñåçîí ed by bird catchers (Karyakin, Nikolenko, Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 59

2001 ã. 22-õ ãíåçäîâûõ òåððèòîðèé áàëî- 2008). The main reason for the population áàíîâ ñ 9 æèëûìè ãí¸çäàìè â Ñèíöçÿíå è decline in these areas is not bird-catching in 10 ãíåçäîâûõ òåððèòîðèé â ãîðàõ Àëòàÿ (â the territories themselves, but the catching Òÿíü-Øàíå áàëîáàíà ãðóïïå îáíàðóæèòü and killing of the birds outside them (Niko- íå óäàëîñü) ÷èñëåííîñòü äëÿ Ñèíöçÿíÿ îöå- lenko, 2007), namely, in China and Mongo- íåíà â 350 ïàð; âî Âíóòðåííåé Ìîíãîëèè lia, catching in China possibly contributing a áàëîáàí òàêæå íå áûë îáíàðóæåí, â ðå- larger number, judging by the bird satellite çóëüòàòå ÷åãî äëÿ âñåãî Êèòàÿ ÷èñëåííîñòü telemetry (Karyakin et al., 2005e). áàëîáàíà îöåíåíà íå áîëåå ÷åì â 500 ïàð For China, a drop in population by 3.0– (Ye, Ma, 2002). Âèäèìî â ýòó îöåíêó íå âî- 3.5 times seems a more plausible number, øëà îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè íàñåëåíèÿ áàëî- that is, the number is closer to the average áàíà â Òèáåòå.  2002 ã. áûëè ïðîâåäåíû rate in Russia and Kazakhstan. Granting ïîëåâûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ íà áîëüøåé ÷àñòè this number and also the population esti- Ñåâåðíîãî Êèòàÿ ïî ãðàíèöå ñ Ìîíãîëèåé mate as 1,000–2,000 pairs, we may sup- è ïîäòâåðæäåíû çàêëþ÷åíèÿ, ñäåëàííûå â pose that for 1990 the Saker population in 2001 ã. î êðàéíå íèçêîé ÷èñëåííîñòè áà- China was about 3,000–7,000 pairs. Even ëîáàíà. Òàê, â ñåçîí 2002 ã. áûëî îáíàðó- if we suppose that Dixon’s (2009) evalua- æåíî âñåãî 6 ãí¸çä áàëîáàíà, â 3-õ èç íèõ tion was based on still unpublished materi- íàáëþäàëèñü ïîïûòêè ðàçìíîæåíèÿ è ëèøü als, the Saker population in China must be îäíî îêàçàëîñü óñïåøíûì (Ye, Fox. 2003). evaluated as at least 9,000–17,500 birds for  ïîäõîäÿùèõ äëÿ ãíåçäîâàíèÿ áàëîáàíà 1990 which is higher than Ye’s evaluation (Ye ìåñòîîáèòàíèÿõ Âíóòðåííåé Ìîíãîëèè et al., 2001), made mostly for the 80’s and (440000 êì2) åãî ÷èñëåííîñòü îöåíåíà â then rejected by the authors as erroneous. 143 îñîáè èëè 14 ðàçìíîæàþùèõñÿ ïàð, Therefore, the Saker population estimates for ïðîèçâîäÿùèõ 43 ïòåíöà åæåãîäíî (Ye, China both for the past and the present pre- Fox. 2003). Îäíàêî, êàê îòìå÷àþò ñàìè pared by BirdLife for the IUCN Red List were àâòîðû, ýòî îöåíêà î÷åíü íåíàäåæíà è íå- not based on available calculations and seem îáõîäèìû äàëüíåéøèå èññëåäîâàíèÿ äëÿ to be ignoring a number of publications. îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè âñåãî êèòàéñêîãî íà- ñåëåíèÿ áàëîáàíîâ. Ïî èìåþùèìñÿ äàí- Mongolia íûì ìîæíî ïðåäïîëàãàòü, ÷òî ÷èñëåííîñòü Almost all the researchers in Mongolia â ñòðàíå ñîñòàâëÿåò ëèøü 200 ðàçìíîæàþ- note the Saker Falcon to be a common spe- ùèõñÿ ïàð (Ye, Fox. 2003).  äàííîì ñëó- cies in this country. Sushkin (1938) noted the ÷àå èìåþòñÿ ââèäó âåðîÿòíî óñïåøíûå abundance of the Saker Falcon in West Mon- ïàðû.  îò÷¸òå ERWDA (2003) ïðèâîäÿòñÿ golia, Kozlova (1930) and Tarasov (1952) äâå îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè äëÿ ñòðàíû – 300 noted the high population of the Saker Fal- è 1–1,2 òûñ. ïàð (òàáë. 2). Ïîñëåäíÿÿ ñî con in the south and southwest Khangai ññûëêîé íà Ìà Ìèíà è Ïîòàïîâà (â ïå÷àòè), Mountains; however, for the Mongolian Al- âèäèìî, ÿâëÿåòñÿ ðåçóëüòàòîì èññëåäîâàíèé tai Tarasov (1965) already does not provide â Òèáåòå. Ðåçóëüòàòû ýêñïåäèöèè 2003 ã. â Òè- high population values of the Saker Falcon. áåòå îïóáëèêîâàíû â «Falco» ¹23: îçâó÷åíà Mongolian ornithologists (Shagdarsuren et ïðåäâàðèòåëüíàÿ îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëî- al., 2001) started performing counts of the áàíà â Òèáåòå, íà îñíîâàíèè ðàñ÷¸òîâ â ÃÈÑ. Saker Falcon in Mongolia in the 1960s. On Òåððèòîðèÿ, çàíÿòàÿ ëàíäøàôòîì, ïðèãîä- the basis of the review of publications made íûì äëÿ ãíåçäîâàíèÿ áàëîáàíà (íà âûñîòàõ in the 1920–60s, Baumgart (1991) estimat- 3900–5300 ì íàä óðîâíåì ìîðÿ ñ íàêëîíîì ed the number of the Mongolian population ìåíüøå 45°) ñîñòàâëÿåò 1070955 êì2; ïðè of the Saker Falcon as 5,000 pairs, assum- óñëîâèè, ÷òî òîëüêî îäíà òðåòü ëàíäøàôòà ing it to be stable during this period. During çàíÿòà áèîòîïàìè, ïðèãîäíûìè äëÿ îáèòà- 1998–2000, within the framework of the íèÿ ïèùóõ (Ochotona sp.), à ñëåäîâàòåëüíî joint project of the Environmental Protection è áàëîáàíà, à ïðåäïîëàãàåìàÿ ïëîòíîñòü Agency of Mongolia and the Environmental áàëîáàíà ïî ó÷¸òó íà ïëîùàäêå ñîñòàâëÿåò Research and Wildlife Development Agen- 2,3 îñîáè/1000 êì2, èç êîòîðûõ 2/5 ðàç- cy (ERWDA), detailed surveys were carried ìíîæàþòñÿ, îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà out aimed at determining the total number â Òèáåòå ïîëó÷àåòñÿ îêîëî 985 ðàçìíîæà- of the Saker Falcon in Mongolia and evalu- þùèõñÿ ïàð (Potapov, Ma, 2004). Îäíàêî, ating the breeding success; survey teams êàê óêàçûâàþò ñàìè àâòîðû, ýòà îöåíêà established 5 control territories in different ïðåäâàðèòåëüíàÿ, ïîñêîëüêó îíà îñíîâà- regions of the country with the total area of íà òîëüêî íà îäíîé îáëàñòè èññëåäîâàíèÿ 16,947 km2 (1.1% of Mongolia’s territory, 60 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

è íåò íèêàêîé èíôîðìàöèè îòíîñèòåëüíî and 1.6% of Mongolia’s territory suitable for ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ è áèîëîãèè áàëîáàíà â ñà- the breeding of Sakers): in 1998, the aver- ìûõ îòäàë¸ííûõ ÷àñòÿõ Òèáåòñêîãî ïëàòî. age density was 2.5 pairs/1000 km2 and 6.1 Îáçîð ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà, å¸ äèíàìè- juveniles/1000 km2 per year, which gives êè è óðîâíÿ áðàêîíüåðñòâà â Êèòàå, ñäåëàí- the estimated number of Saker Falcons of íûé ïðèðîäîîõðàííûì ôîíäîì Ñèíöçÿíÿ, 2,823 pairs, producing 6,382 juveniles per ïðåäïîëàãàåò îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáà- year; in 1999, due to the increased number íà â Êèòàå ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà 2007 ã. â 1000– of breeding pairs on the plots, the number 2000 ïàð, ïðè ñîêðàùåíèè ÷èñëåííîñòè çà was estimated as 2,961 pairs of Saker Fal- ïåðèîä ñ 1990 ïî 2004 ã. íà 48–70%; ïðè cons, producing 9,834 juveniles per year; in ýòîì óêàçûâàåòñÿ, ÷òî â 1990–1995 ãã. èìå- 2000, a decrease in the breeding success of ëî ìåñòî ìàññîâîå áðàêîíüåðñòâî (áîëåå the Saker Falcons nesting in artificial struc- 600 çàäåðæàíèé êîíòðàáàíäû áàëîáàíîâ), tures was observed, while the breeding ñíèçèâøååñÿ ê 1999 ã. äî ñîòíè çàäåðæà- success of those Saker Falcons nesting on íèé (Xinjiang Conservation Fund, 2008). natural sites remained stable, which yielded Òàêèì îáðàçîì, ìû èìååì ëèøü ýêñïåðò- a total 15% decrease in breeding success of íûå îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Êèòàå the Saker Falcon in Mongolia (Shagdarsuren ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà 20–70 ãã. ÕÕ ñòîëåòèÿ – et al., 2001). Absolutely the same data were 15–20 òûñ. ïàð (Baumgart, 1978) è ïî ñî- presented in the publication of Shijirmaa et ñòîÿíèþ íà 80–90 ãã. – 7,9–13,5 òûñ. ïàð al. (2000) and Barton (2001). This estima- (Ye et al., 2001), à òàêæå îöåíêè, áàçèðóþ- tion was severely criticized by Ellis (2003) ùèåñÿ íà ïîëåâûõ èññëåäîâàíèÿõ â 2001– in his article which probably has not been 2003 ãã. – 1000–1200 ïàð (ñóììà îöåíîê published but is available online. The author ïî Ñèíöçÿíþ, Òèáåòó è Âíóòðåííåé Ìîíãî- considered the number of Saker Falcons ëèè) (Ye, Ma, 2002; Ye, Fox. 2003; Potapov, to be strongly overestimated by the team Ma, 2004) è â 2007 ã. – 1000–2000 ïàð working within the ERWDA project and (Xinjiang Conservation Fund, 2008). supposed that it was accounted for by the  îáçîðå, ñäåëàííîì Ý. Äèêñîíîì necessity to support a high capture quota (Dixon, 2009), ïîÿâëÿåòñÿ ñîâðåìåííàÿ for Saker Falcons; however, no estimation îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè äëÿ Êèòàÿ â 3–5 òûñ. at all has been made by him. In a series ïàð (òàáë. 3) íå ïîäêðåïë¸ííàÿ íèêàêèìè of publications by Potapov et al. (2002a; ðàñ÷¸òàìè, íå èìåþùàÿ çà ñîáîé êàêèõ- 2002b), a fully reasoned estimation of the ëèáî ïóáëèêàöèé, íî ñðàçó æå ïðèíÿòàÿ number of Saker Falcons is given. In particu- BirdLife. Ïðè ýòîì îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áà- lar, the following information is presented in ëîáàíà â Êèòàå äëÿ 1990 ã. â 4–6 òûñ. ïàð, Falco: during 1998–2001, 56% of the nests ïîëó÷åííàÿ â ðåçóëüòàòå ðàáîòû àíàëèòè- of Saker Falcons in Mongolia were found êîâ BirdLife, ñîâåðøåííî èãíîðèðóåò äàí- to be located in artificial constructions, and íûå Â. Áàóìãàðòà (Baumgart, 1978) è Éå 44% in natural sites; with the length of pow- Çèîäè ñ ñîàâòîðàìè (Ye et al., 2001). er lines in Mongolia being 32,000 km, the Òî, ÷òî ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà â Êèòàå ñîêðàùàåòñÿ ïî ïðè÷èíå âëèÿíèÿ öåëîé ñîâîêóïíîñòè íåãàòèâíûõ ôàêòîðîâ, î÷å- âèäíî èç ïóáëèêàöèé êèòàéñêèõ îðíèòîëî- ãîâ è èõ åâðîïåéñêèõ êîëëåã, ó÷óâñòâîâàâ- øèõ â ðàáîòàõ ïî ïðîåêòàì ERWDA (Ìà è äð., 2006; Âó è äð., 2007; Ma, 1999; 2004; Ma, Ying, 2007; Ye et al., 2001; Ye, Ma, 2002; Ye, Fox. 2003; Yu et al., 2008; Wan, 2001). Êîíå÷íî æå, â áîëüøèíñòâå ïóáëèêàöèé îòñóòñòâóþò îáîáùàþùèå îöåíêè äåãðàäàöèè êèòàéñêèõ ïîïóëÿöèé áàëîáàíà, îäíàêî ìàñøòàáû êîíòðàáàíäû ñðàâíèìû ñ ìàñøòàáàìè â Ðîññèè è â Êà- çàõñòàíå, à â 90-õ ãã. äàæå ïðåâûøàþò èõ (Xinjiang Conservation Fund, 2008). Ñëåäî- âàòåëüíî, ìîæíî ïðåäïîëàãàòü, ÷òî äèíà- ìèêà ÷èñëåííîñòè çäåñü áîëåå íåãàòèâíà, Ñàìêà áàëîáàíà íà ãíåçäå. Òèáåò. Ôîòî Å. Ïîòàïîâà. ïîñêîëüêó â Êèòàå íåñîèçìåðèìî âûøå Female of the Saker Falcon in the nest. Tibet. âëèÿíèå òàêèõ ôàêòîðîâ, êàê ãèáåëü ñîêî- Photo by E. Potapov. Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 61

ëîâ íà ËÝÏ, îòðàâëåíèå è óíè÷òîæåíèå â ãàñòðîíîìè÷åñêèõ öåëÿõ. Îäíàêî àíàëèòè- êè BirdLife îïðåäåëèëè òåìïû ñîêðàùåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Êèòàå â 20% çà 20 ëåò, òàê êàê ÷èñëåííîñòü â 2010 ã. îòëè÷à- åòñÿ îò ÷èñëåííîñòè â 1990 ã. âñåãî ëèøü â 1,2 ðàçà. Òàêàÿ æå âåëè÷èíà ñîêðàùå- íèÿ íàáëþäàëàñü â íàèìåíåå îñâîåííîì ëîâöàìè Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå Ðîññèè âñåãî çà 5 ëåò (Êàðÿêèí, Íèêîëåíêî, 2008), ãäå îñíîâíàÿ ïðè÷èíà ñîêðàùåíèÿ ÷èñëåí- íîñòè íå îòëîâ ñîêîëîâ â ðåãèîíå, à îòëîâ è ãèáåëü ñîêîëîâ çà åãî ïðåäåëàìè (Íèêî- ëåíêî, 2007), êàê ðàç â Êèòàå è Ìîíãîëèè (âèäèìî â áîëüøåé ñòåïåíè â Êèòàå, ñóäÿ ïî äàííûì òåëåìåòðèè ïòèö, ïîìå÷åííûõ Ñàìêà áàëîáàíà íà ãíåçäå. Òèáåò. Ôîòî Å. Ïîòàïîâà. ñïóòíèêîâûìè ïåðåäàò÷èêàìè, Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2005e). Female of the Saker Falcon in the nest. Tibet. Photo by E. Potapov. Äëÿ Êèòàÿ áîëåå ïðèåìëåìîé âèäèòñÿ îöåíêà ñîêðàùåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáà- íà â 3,0–3,5 ðàçà çà 20 ëåò, ò.å. áëèçêàÿ number of Saker Falcons nesting on them ê ñðåäíåé ïî Ðîññèè è Êàçàõñòàíó. Ó÷è- can be estimated as 1,100 pairs, producing òûâàÿ å¸, à òàêæå îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè â 3,520 nestlings per year; 20 adult and 200 1000–2000 ïàð ìîæíî ïðåäïîëàãàòü, ÷òî young individuals annually are electrocuted â Êèòàå â 1990 ã. ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà on power lines (Potapov et al., 2002b). In ñîñòàâëÿëà îêîëî 3,0–7,0 òûñ. ïàð. Åñëè another publication, an estimation of the äàæå ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî îöåíêà ÷èñëåí- possible number of breeding Saker Falcons íîñòè, ïðèâåä¸ííàÿ Ý. Äèêñîíîì (2009), in the Alpine belt of the Mongolian Altai áàçèðóåòñÿ íà ïîêà åù¸ íåîïóáëèêîâàí- Mountains is given: the area of the Alpine íûõ ìàòåðèàëàõ, òî ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáà- zone of the Mongolian Altai Mountains be- íà â Êèòàå äîëæíà îöåíèâàòüñÿ íà ïåðèîä ing 125,000 km2 (and only 62,660 km2 in 1990 ã. íèêàê íå ìåíåå ÷åì â 9–17,5 òûñ. Mongolia), it can accommodate no more ïàð, ÷òî ïðåâûøàåò îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè that 228 falcon pairs, with the density typi- Éå Çèîäè ñ ñîàâòîðàìè (Ye et al., 2001), cal of the steppe zone of Mongolia (2.1–2.8 ñäåëàííóþ ïðåèìóùåñòâåííî äëÿ 80-õ ãã., pairs/1,000 km2), although the actual den- à ïîçæå îòâåðãíóòóþ ñàìèìè æå àâòîðà- sity here is lower (Potapov et al., 2002a). ìè êàê îøèáî÷íóþ. Îòñþäà ñëåäóåò, ÷òî Gombobaatar (2006), in his dissertation on îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Êèòàå, the Saker Falcon, avoids an estimation of êàê â ïðîøëîì, òàê è â íàñòîÿùåì, ïîä- the number of the species in Mongolia, al- ãîòîâëåííàÿ BirdLife äëÿ Êðàñíîãî ëè- though reports on the fact that the GIS anal- ñòà ÌÑÎÏ, íå áàçèðóåòñÿ íà äîñòóïíûõ ysis of the territory was carried out and the îöåíêàõ ÷èñëåííîñòè âèäà è èãíîðèðóåò densities for the main habitats were deter- ðÿä ïóáëèêàöèé. mined. As follows from the map on p. 11 of his dissertation abstract, the main source of Ìîíãîëèÿ the Saker Falcon is concentrated in the Cen- Íà îáû÷íîñòü áàëîáàíà â Ìîíãîëèè óêà- tral and East Mongolia, where the author çûâàþò ïðàêòè÷åñêè âñå èññëåäîâàòåëè carried out the main surveys. Gombobaatar ýòîé ñòðàíû. Ï.Ï. Ñóøêèí (1938) óïîìèíàë (2006) refers to Potapov (2002), mentioning îá îáû÷íîñòè áàëîáàíà â Çàïàäíîé Ìîí- that in 1998–2004 the number of the world ãîëèè, Å.Â. Êîçëîâà (1930) è Ï.Ï. Òàðàñîâ population of the Saker Falcon was estimated (1952) îòìå÷àþò âûñîêóþ ÷èñëåííîñòü as 5,874–7,126 breeding pairs, of which 38% áàëîáàíà â Þæíîì è Þãî-Çàïàäíîì Õàí- inhabited Mongolia. Gombobaatar does not ãàå, îäíàêî äëÿ Ìîíãîëüñêîãî Àëòàÿ Ï.Ï. mention at all the decrease in the number of Òàðàñîâ (1965) óæå íå ïðèâîäèò âûñîêèõ Saker Falcons in Mongolia in 2003; however, ïîêàçàòåëåé ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà. Ñ 60-õ in the report made by the ERWDA (2003) ãã. ó÷¸òàìè áàëîáàíà â Ìîíãîëèè íà÷èíà- for 2003, the estimated that the number of þò çàíèìàòüñÿ Ìîíãîëüñêèå îðíèòîëîãè Saker Falcons in Mongolia was 1,000–2,000 (Shagdarsuren et al., 2001). Â. Áàóìãàðò pairs, compared with 2,668 pairs in 1990 (Baumgart, 1991) íà îñíîâàíèè îáçîðà (ERWDA, 2003) and 2,823–2,961 pairs in 62 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

ïóáëèêàöèé 20–80-õ ãã. îöåíèë ÷èñëåí- 1998–99 (Shijirmaa et al., 2000; Shagdar- íîñòü ìîíãîëüñêîé ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà â suren et al., 2001). 5 òûñ. ïàð, ïðåäïîëàãàÿ å¸ ñòàáèëüíîñòü â There are almost no publications about a ýòîò ïåðèîä.  1998–2000 ã. â ðàìêàõ ñî- decrease in numbers of the Saker in 2003 âìåñòíîãî ïðîåêòà Àãåíòñòâà ïî îõðàíå and the actions of the Mongolian Ministry îêðóæàþùåé ñðåäû Ìîíãîëèè è ERWDA of Agriculture in its struggle against the áûëè ïðîâåäåíû äåòàëüíûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ Brandt’s Vole (Microtus brandtii); available ñ öåëüþ îïðåäåëåíèÿ îáùåé ÷èñëåííîñòè papers contain contradictory data, and most áàëîáàíà â Ìîíãîëèè è îöåíêè óñïåõà ðàç- researchers pass that period over in silence. ìíîæåíèÿ; ïîëåâûå îòðÿäû çàëîæèëè 5 êîí- As is shown in Karyakin’s report (2010), òðîëüíûõ òåððèòîðèé â ðàçëè÷íûõ ðàéîíàõ against the Brandt’s Vole populations the ñòðàíû îáùåé ïëîùàäüþ 16947 êì2 (1,1% Ministry of Agriculture used a second-gen- òåððèòîðèè Ìîíãîëèè è 1,6% ãíåçäîïðè- eration anticoagulant – bromadiolone as a ãîäíîé äëÿ áàëîáàíà òåððèòîðèè Ìîíãî- rodenticide in 2001–2003. The grain treat- ëèè): â 1998 ã. ñðåäíÿÿ ïëîòíîñòü ñîñòà- ed with 0.5 % solution of bromadiolone was âèëà 2,5 ïàð/1000 êì2 è 6,1 ñë¸òêîâ/1000 spread from vehicles and planes, and also êì2 â ãîä, ÷òî äà¸ò îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè â handed out to local people. In the territories 2823 ïàð áàëîáàíîâ, ïðîèçâîäÿùèõ 6382 treated by mechanized means, the dosage ñë¸òêà â ãîä; â 1999 ã. çà ñ÷¸ò óâåëè÷åíèÿ was 3 kg/ha when spread from planes and êîëè÷åñòâà ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ïàð íà ïëîùàäêàõ, 2.5 kg/ha at when spread from vehicles. ÷èñëåííîñòü áûëà îöåíåíà â 2961 ïàð áà- The rodenticide was used on 511,000 hec- ëîáàíîâ, ïðîèçâîäÿùèõ 9834 ñë¸òêà â ãîä; tares in 2002, including more than 290,000 â 2000 ã. íàáëþäàëîñü ñíèæåíèå óñïåõà hectares from planes and 204,000 hectares ðàçìíîæåíèÿ áàëîáàíîâ, ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ íà from vehicles. In those territories, treated èñêóññòâåííûõ ñóáñòðàòàõ, â òî âðåìÿ êàê by the local people the scale and rate at óñïåõ ðàçìíîæåíèÿ ñîêîëîâ, ãíåçäÿùèõ- which the treatment was given is beyond ñÿ íà åñòåñòâåííûõ ñóáñòðàòàõ, îñòàâàëñÿ the scope of the control. In total, 36 somons ñòàáèëüíûì, ÷òî â îáùåì ïðèâåëî ê 15% in 7 aimaks were treated in April. The grain ñîêðàùåíèþ óñïåõà ðàçìíîæåíèÿ áà- treated with rodenticide was also spread in ëîáàíà â Ìîíãîëèè (Shagdarsuren et al., both the spring and the autumn of 2001, but 2001). Àáñîëþòíî ýòè æå äàííûå îçâó- data on the scale of the action are absent. ÷åíû â ïóáëèêàöèè Øèæèðìû Ä. ñ ñîàâ- As a result of the persecution, the numbers òîðàìè (Shijirmaa et al., 2000) è â áîëåå of Brand’s Vole were reduced only locally âîëüíîé èíòåðïðåòàöèè – Í. Áàðòîíîì in some areas, while many animals, includ- (Barton, 2001). Ýòà îöåíêà ïîäâåðãëàñü ing rare ones, were lost in extensive areas ðåçêîé êðèòèêå Ä. Ýëëèñà (Ellis, 2003) â of Mongolia. As the actions were carried åãî âåðîÿòíî íå èçäàííîé, íî äîñòóïíîé out mainly in the spring and autumn, they â Èíòåðíåò ñòàòüå. Àâòîð ïîñ÷èòàë îöåí- have dramatically damaged the populations êó ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà, ñäåëàííóþ êî- of migrating birds – both granivorous and ìàíäîé, ðàáîòàþùåé ïî ïðîåêòó ERWDA, dependent raptor species died, the latter as ñèëüíî çàâûøåííîé è ïðåäïîëàãàë, ÷òî å¸ a result of scavenging corpses of voles and ïîÿâëåíèå âûçâàíî íåîáõîäèìîñòüþ îáî- ñíîâàíèÿ âûñîêèõ êâîò íà îòëîâ áàëîáàíà, îäíàêî ñàì êàêîé-ëèáî îöåíêè ÷èñëåííî- ñòè âîîáùå íå ïðèâîäèò.  ðÿäå ïóáëèêà- öèé Å. Ïîòàïîâà ñ ñîàâòîðàìè (Potapov et al., 2002a; 2002b) äà¸òñÿ âïîëíå ìîòèâè- ðîâàííàÿ îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà.  ÷àñòíîñòè â «Falco» ïðèâîäèòñÿ ñëåäóþ- ùàÿ èíôîðìàöèÿ: â 1998–2001 ãã. 56% ãí¸çä áàëîáàíîâ â Ìîíãîëèè âûÿâëåíî íà èñêóññòâåííûõ ñóáñòðàòàõ è 44% – íà åñòåñòâåííûõ; ïðè ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòè ËÝÏ â Ìîíãîëèè â 32 òûñ. êì îöåíêà ÷èñëåííî- ñòè ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ íà íèõ áàëîáàíîâ ìîæåò ñîñòàâëÿòü 1100 ïàð, ïðîèçâîäÿùèõ 3520 Ñàìêà áàëîáàíà â ãíåçäå íà çåìëå. Ìîíãîëèÿ. ïòåíöîâ â ãîä, ïðè ýòîì 20 âçðîñëûõ è 200 Ôîòî Ãîìáîáààòàðà Ñ. ìîëîäûõ ñîêîëîâ åæåãîäíî ïîãèáàþò íà Female of the Saker Falcon in the nest on the ground. ËÝÏ (Potapov et al., 2002b).  äðóãîé ïó- Mongolia. Photo by Gombobaatar S. Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 63

áëèêàöèè îáñóæäàåòñÿ âîçìîæíàÿ îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ áàëîáàíîâ â àëü- ïèéñêîì ïîÿñå Ìîíãîëüñêîãî Àëòàÿ: ïðè ïëîùàäè àëüïèéñêîé çîíû Ìîíãîëüñêîãî Àëòàÿ 125000 êì2 (ïðè ýòîì â Ìîíãîëèè âñåãî 62660 êì2) îíà ìîæåò âìåñòèòü íå áîëåå 228 ïàð ñîêîëîâ, ïðè ïëîòíîñòè, õàðàêòåðíîé äëÿ ñòåïíîé çîíû Ìîíãîëèè (2,1–2,8 ïàð/1000 êì2), õîòÿ ïî ôàêòó çäåñü ïëîòíîñòü ìåíüøå (Potapov et al., 2002a). Ãîìáîáààòàð Ñ. (2006) â ñâîåé äèññåðòàöèè ïî áàëîáàíó îáõîäèò ñòîðî- íîé îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè âèäà â Ìîíãîëèè, õîòÿ ñîîáùàåò î òîì, ÷òî áûë ñäåëàí ÃÈÑ- àíàëèç òåððèòîðèè è îïðåäåëåíû ïëîòíî- Áàëîáàí. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. ñòè äëÿ îñíîâíûõ ìåñòîîáèòàíèé. Êàê ñëå- Saker Falcon. Photo by I. Karyakin. äóåò èç êàðòû íà ñòð. 11 àâòîðåôåðàòà åãî äèññåðòàöèè, îñíîâíîé ðåñóðñ áàëîáàíà ñîñðåäîòî÷åí â Öåíòðàëüíîé è Âîñòî÷íîé granivorous birds that had died as a result Ìîíãîëèè, ãäå ñîáñòâåííî è âåëèñü îñíîâ- of the bromadiolone poisoning. The infor- íûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ àâòîðà. Ãîìáîáààòàð Ñ. mation on mass deaths of birds including (2006) òàêæå ñî ññûëêîé íà Å. Ïîòàïîâà the Saker in Mongolia during that period (2002) îòìå÷àåò, ÷òî â 1998–2004 ã. ÷èñëåí- as a result of the bromadiolone poisoning íîñòü ìèðîâîé ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà îöå- was published only twice (Batdelger, 2002; íåíà â 5874–7126 ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ïàð, 38% Tseveenmyadag, Nyambayar, 2002). It is èç êîòîðûõ îáèòàåò â Ìîíãîëèè. Ãîìáîáà- necessary to note, that D. Batdelger died àòàð Ñ. íèêàê íå óïîìèíàåò î ñîêðàùåíèè in some months after the publication (ac- ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â 2003 ã., ïðè ýòîì cording to the official version, from a heart óæå â îò÷¸òå ERWDA (2003) ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ attack), Falco ¹22 (Editors, 2003) report- íà 2003 ã. ôèãóðèðóåò îöåíêà ÷èñëåííî- ing about it in the editors’ column. That ñòè áàëîáàíà â Ìîíãîëèè â 1000–1200 editors’ report also contained information ïàð ïî ñðàâíåíèþ ñ îöåíêîé â 2668 ïàð about the populations of Sakers in Mongo- â 1990 ã. (ERWDA, 2003) è â 2823–2961 lia and Southern Siberia suffering severely ïàð â 1998–99 ãã. (Shijirmaa et al., 2000; as a result of the use of bromadiolone in Shagdarsuren et al., 2001). Mongolia, with probably only 10% of their Ïî àíàëèçó ëèòåðàòóðíûõ èñòî÷íèêîâ former numbers remaining. A more careful ìíå óäàëîñü âñ¸ æå ñäåëàòü çàêëþ÷åíèå, estimation of the decline in numbers of Sak- ÷òî â 2003 ã. ïàäåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëî- er Falcons in Mongolia – by about 70% in áàíà èìåëî ìåñòî â Ìîíãîëèè è íà ïðè- 2003 – is given by Fox et al. (2003). Moni- ëåãàþùèõ òåððèòîðèÿõ â ðåçóëüòàòå êàì- toring of Saker Falcon numbers in Southern ïàíèè Ìèíèñòåðñòâà ñåëüñêîãî õîçÿéñòâà Siberia demonstrated an obvious and sharp Ìîíãîëèè ïî áîðüáå ñ ïîë¸âêîé Áðàíä- decline in breeding success in 2003, on ac- òà (Microtus brandtii). Ïóáëèêàöèé íà ýòó count of the total rejuvenation of partners òåìó êðàéíå ìàëî, â íåêîòîðûõ èìåþòñÿ in the breeding pairs, in the view of the au- ïðîòèâîðå÷èâûå ñâåäåíèÿ, à áîëüøèíñòâî thor connected with the poisoning falcons èññëåäîâàòåëåé âîîáùå óìàë÷èâàþò îá in Mongolia during the migration period of ýòîì ïåðèîäå. Êàê ñëåäóåò èç ñîîáùåíèÿ 2002–2003 (Karyakin, Nikolenko, 2008). È.Â. Êàðÿêèíà (2010), äëÿ ðåãóëèðîâà- This assumption is confirming by the fact íèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè ïîëåâêè Áðàíäòà Ìèíè- that in the same period in Southern Siberia ñòåðñòâî ñåëüñêîãî õîçÿéñòâà Ìîíãîëèè there was a sharp decline in the numbers of â 2001–2003 ãã. èñïîëüçîâàëî â êà÷åñòâå Steppe Eagle (Aquila nipalensis), Cinereus ðîäåíòèöèäà àíòèêîàãóëÿíò 2-ãî ïîêîëå- Vulture (Aegypius monachus) and Demoi- íèÿ – áðîìàäèîëîí. Çåðíî, îáðàáîòàííîå selle Crane (Grus virgo), with a subsequent 0,5% ðàñòâîðîì áðîìàäèîëîíà, ðàñïûëÿ- restoration of their populations going on ëîñü ñ àâòîìàøèí è ñ ñàìîë¸òîâ, à òàêæå subsequently (Karyakin, 2010). Gomboba- âûäàâàëîñü íà ðóêè ìåñòíûì æèòåëÿì. atar et al. (2004) soon after 2003 reports Ïðè ìåõàíèçèðîâàííîé îáðàáîòêå òåð- the fact of the sharp decline in number as ðèòîðèé äîçèðîâêà ñîñòàâëÿëà 3 êã/ãà ïðè a result of mortality due to poisoning, al- îáðàáîòêå ñ ñàìîë¸òîâ è 2,5 êã/ãà ïðè îá- though in a certain period of time informs 64 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

ðàáîòêå ñ àâòîòðàíñïîðòà.  2002 ã. ïðå- that despite the trend towards decline, the ïàðàò èñïîëüçîâàëñÿ íà 511000 ãà, âêëþ- number of breeding pairs of Saker Falcons ÷àÿ îáðàáîòêó ñ ñàìîë¸òà áîëåå ÷åì íà on the count plots in 1998–2005 remains 290000 ãà è îáðàáîòêó ñ àâòîòðàíñïîðòà stable (Gombobaatar et al., 2007). – 204000 ãà. Òåððèòîðèè, ïîäâåðãøèåñÿ The answer to the question of what is go- îáðàáîòêå ìåñòíûìè æèòåëÿìè, êàê è ing on can be found in the Saker monitor- ìàñøòàáû ýòîé îáðàáîòêè, íå ïîääàþòñÿ ing data in both Mongolia and Siberia. As êîíòðîëþ.  îáùåé ñëîæíîñòè â àïðåëå a result of the Mongolian Ministry of Ag- 2002 ã. 36 ñîìîíîâ â 7 àéìàêàõ áûëè riculture’s action in seeking to exterminate îõâà÷åíû îáðàáîòêîé.  2001 ã. çåðíî, the Brandt’s Voles, very many Saker Falcons îáðàáîòàííîå ðîäåíòèöèäîì, òàêæå ðàñ- were poisoned in those sites that were af- ïûëÿëîñü êàê âåñíîé, òàê è îñåíüþ, íî äàí- fected by the poisoning (although not in íûå ïî ìàñøòàáàì îáðàáîòêè îòñóòñòâó- all!). In the year 2003, precisely the second þò.  ðåçóëüòàòå äåðàòèçàöèè ÷èñëåííîñòü year after the beginning of the mass broma- ïîë¸âêè Áðàíäòà óìåíüøèëàñü ëîêàëüíî diolone campaign (this year was probably ëèøü â íåêîòîðûõ îáëàñòÿõ, â òî âðåìÿ êàê the final year, after the raised noise in the ìíîæåñòâî æèâîòíûõ, â òîì ÷èñëå è ðåä- press), the drop in Saker Falcon numbers êèõ, ïîãèáëî íà îáøèðíûõ ïðîñòðàíñòâàõ was noticed by ornithologists. For example, Ìîíãîëèè. Òàê êàê îáðàáîòêè ïðîâîäè- in Mongolia the number of breeding pairs ëèñü ïðåèìóùåñòâåííî âåñíîé è îñåíüþ, was reduced from 0.97/100 km2 in 2002 ñåðü¸çíûé óäàð áûë íàíåñ¸í ïî ïîïó- to 0.13/100 km2 in 2003 (Gombobaatar et ëÿöèÿì ìèãðèðóþùèõ ïòèö, ïðè÷¸ì êàê al., 2007), while in the Altai-Sayan region çåðíîÿäíûõ, òàê è õèùíûõ, êîòîðûå óìè- of Russia, whose Saker Falcon populations ðàëè, ïîåäàÿ òðóïû ïîë¸âîê è çåðíîÿä- are closely connected with Mongolia, the íûõ ïòèö, îòðàâèâøèõñÿ áðîìàäèàëîíîì. number of successful nests on the plots was Èíôîðìàöèÿ î ìàññîâîé ãèáåëè ïòèö, â reduced from 44.12% in 2002 to 25.97% òîì ÷èñëå è áàëîáàíîâ â Ìîíãîëèè â ýòîò in 2003, with the number of nests left by ïåðèîä â ðåçóëüòàòå îòðàâëåíèÿ áðîìàäè- chicks reaching the highest number for the îëîíîì îïóáëèêîâàíà ëèøü â 2-õ èñòî÷- period of studies from 1999 to 2006 – 42% íèêàõ (Batdelger, 2002; Tseveenmyadag, (Karyakin, 2008; Karyakin et al., 2004a). Nyambayar, 2002). Ê ñîæàëåíèþ, Ä. Áàò- Then why, already in 2004, was the number äåëüãåð ÷åðåç íåñêîëüêî ìåñÿöåâ ïîñëå quickly restored (in Mongolia practically ïóáëèêàöèè ñêîí÷àëñÿ, î ÷¸ì áûëî ñîîá- completely, in Altai-Sayan by a half)? Here ùåíî âî âñòóïèòåëüíîì ñëîâå ðåäàêòîðîâ it is worth seeking an answer in the number â «Falco» ¹22 âìåñòå ñ èíôîðìàöèåé î of free individuals, who wander within the òîì, ÷òî â ðåçóëüòàòå ïðèìåíåíèÿ áðîìà- territory and do not participate in breeding. äèîëîíà â Ìîíãîëèè ñèëüíî ïîñòðàäàëè Just on this basis, that these free individuals ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà â Ìîíãîëèè è Þæ- begin to occupy the artificial nests erected in íîé Ñèáèðè è âîçìîæíî, ÷òî òîëüêî 10% the flat steppes, where the Saker Falcon nor- îò èõ ïðåæíåé ÷èñëåííîñòè ñîõðàíèëîñü mally has no opportunity to breed, A. Dixon (Editors, 2003). Áîëåå îñòîðîæíàÿ îöåíêà ïàäåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Ìîíãî- ëèè – ïðèìåðíî íà 70% â 2003 ã. äà¸òñÿ Í. Ôîêñîì ñ ñîàâòîðàìè (2003). Ìîíè- òîðèíã ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Þæíîé Ñèáèðè ïîêàçûâàåò î÷åâèäíîå è ðåçêîå ïàäåíèå óñïåõà ðàçìíîæåíèÿ áàëîáàíà â 2003 ã. èç-çà òîòàëüíîãî îìîëîæåíèÿ ïàðòí¸ðîâ â ðàçìíîæàþùèõñÿ ïàðàõ, ÷òî àâòîðû ñâÿçûâàþò ñ îòðàâëåíèåì ñîêîëîâ â Ìîíãîëèè â ïåðèîä ìèãðàöèè 2002– 2003 ãã. (Êàðÿêèí, Íèêîëåíêî, 2008). Ýòî ïðåäïîëîæåíèå ïîäêðåïëÿåòñÿ è òåì, ÷òî â ýòîò æå ïåðèîä â Þæíîé Ñèáèðè ïðîèñõîäèò ðåçêîå ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåí- íîñòè ñòåïíîãî îðëà (Aquila nipalensis), ãðèôà (Aegypius monachus) è æóðàâëÿ- êðàñàâêè (Grus virgo) c âîññòàíîâëåíèåì Áàëîáàí. Ìîíãîëèÿ. Ôîòî Ãîìáîáààòàðà Ñ. èõ ïîïóëÿöèé â òå÷åíèå ïîñëåäóþùèõ 7 Saker Falcon. Mongolia. Photo by Gombobaatar S. Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 65

ëåò (Êàðÿêèí, 2010). Ãîìáîáààòàð Ñ. ñ ñî- àâòîðàìè (2004) â 2003 ã. êîíñòàòèðóþò ôàêò áûñòðîãî ñíèæåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â ðåçóëüòàòå ñìåðòíîñòè îò îò- ðàâëåíèÿ, îäíàêî ÷åðåç íåêîòîðîå âðåìÿ ñîîáùàþò, ÷òî, íåñìîòðÿ íà òåíäåíöèþ ê ñîêðàùåíèþ, ÷èñëåííîñòü ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ïàð áàëîáàíîâ íà ó÷¸òíûõ ïëîùàäêàõ â 1998–2005 ãã. îñòà¸òñÿ ñòàáèëüíîé (Ãîì- áîáààòàð è äð., 2007). Îòâåò íà âîïðîñ: ÷òî æå ïðîèñõîäèò? – âûòåêàåò èç äàííûõ ìîíèòîðèíãà ïîïóëÿöèé áàëîáàíà è â Ìîíãîëèè è â Ñèáèðè.  ðåçóëüòàòå àêöèè Áàëîáàí. Ôîòî Î. Áåëÿëîâà. Ìèíèñòåðñòâà ñåëüñêîãî õîçÿéñòâà Ìîí- Saker Falcon. Photo by O. Belyalov. ãîëèè ïî óíè÷òîæåíèþ ïîë¸âêè Áðàíä- òà, îòðàâèëîñü î÷åíü ìíîãî áàëîáàíîâ â òåõ ðàéîíàõ, ãäå åãî òðàâèëè (íî íå âî and his co-authors (Dixon et al., 2008) give âñåõ!).  2003 ã., êàê ðàç íà âòîðîé ãîä reasons for the wealth of the Saker Falcon ïîñëå íà÷àëà ìàññîâîé áðîìàäèîëîíî- situation in Mongolia: “This evidence, that âîé êàìïàíèè (îí æå âèäèìî ñòàë è çà- there is a surplus non-breeding population âåðøàþùèì, ïîñëå ïîäíÿâøåéñÿ øóìèõè of Saker Falcons in the central Mongolian â ïðåññå), ïàäåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà steppe, indicates that the breeding popu- áûëî çàìå÷åíî îðíèòîëîãàìè. Íàïðè- lation of this region is not in decline”. We ìåð, â Ìîíãîëèè ÷èñëî ðàçìíîæàþùèõñÿ may agree with that, but only for Central ïàð ñîêðàòèëîñü ñ 0,97/100 êì2 â 2002 ã. Mongolia, because from other territories äî 0,13/100 êì2 â 2003 ã. (Ãîìáîáààòàð there is no evidence of such a wealth. Tak- è äð., 2007), â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå ing into account that Central Mongolia is Ðîññèè, ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíîâ êîòîðîãî situated at the centre of the migration route òåñíî ñâÿçàíû ñ Ìîíãîëèåé, ÷èñëî óñïåø- for Siberian birds, it can attract such free in- íûõ ãí¸çä íà ïëîùàäêàõ ñîêðàòèëîñü ñ dividuals, albeit at the expense of periph- 44,12% â 2002 ã. äî 25,97% â 2003 ã., à eral populations: the negative processes in ÷èñëî ïîêèíóòûõ ïòèöàìè ãí¸çä ñîñòàâèëî the population of the Central-Mongolian ñàìîå áîëüøîå êîëè÷åñòâî çà ïåðèîä èñ- Saker Falcons will be seen only when the ñëåäîâàíèé ñ 1999 ïî 2006 ãã. – 42% (Êà- fortunes of the peripheral populations have ðÿêèí, 2008; Karyakin et al., 2004a). Òîãäà been demonstrated. Summarizing what has ïî÷åìó óæå â 2004 ã. ÷èñëåííîñòü áûñòðî been said above, it should be noted that the âîññòàíîâèëàñü (â Ìîíãîëèè ïðàêòè÷åñêè decline in Saker Falcon numbers in Mongo- ïîëíîñòüþ, â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíàõ íà ïîëîâèíó)? lia happened in 2003, and at the least the Çäåñü îòâåò ñòîèò èñêàòü â êîëè÷åñòâå ñâî- population in Central Mongolia was quickly áîäíûõ îñîáåé, êîòîðûå êî÷óþò ïî òåð- restored. ðèòîðèè è íå ó÷àñòâóþò â ðàçìíîæåíèè. The estimation of the Saker Falcon num- Èìåííî íà òîì îñíîâàíèè, ÷òî ýòèìè bers in Mongolia declared by ERWDA ñâîáîäíûìè îñîáÿìè íà÷èíàþò çàíèìàòü- (2003) just coincided with the period of the ñÿ ãíåçäîâûå ïëàòôîðìû, óñòðîåííûå â mass loss of falcons. This estimation (1,000– ðîâíûõ ñòåïÿõ, ãäå áàëîáàí â íîðìå íå 1,200 pairs) was simply accepted for Mon- èìååò âîçìîæíîñòè ãíåçäèòüñÿ. Ý. Äèêñîí golia as “official” and probably was not re- ñ ñîàâòîðàìè (Dixon et al., 2008) ìîòèâè- considered any more (Sukhchuluun, 2008). ðóþò áëàãîïîëó÷èå ñèòóàöèè ñ áàëîáàíîì It is abundantly clear that it should be recon- â Ìîíãîëèè: «ýòî ñâèäåòåëüñòâî òîãî, ÷òî sidered from the point of view of increase, åñòü èçëèøåê íåðàçìíîæàþùèõñÿ îñîáåé but by how much, it is completely unclear. áàëîáàíîâ â öåíòðàëüíîé ìîíãîëüñêîé Dixon (2009) on the basis of data of densi- ñòåïè, óêàçûâàþùèé íà òî, ÷òî ïîïóëÿöèÿ ty extrapolation for the steppe, forest-steppe â ýòîé îáëàñòè íå â ñîñòîÿíèè óïàäêà». and desert zones of Mongolia has estimated Ìîæíî ñ ýòèì ñîãëàñèòüñÿ, íî òîëüêî äëÿ the Saker Falcon number at 1,400–4,100 Öåíòðàëüíîé Ìîíãîëèè, òàê êàê ïî äðó- pairs, in the course of which he calculated ãèì òåððèòîðèÿì íåò ñâèäåòåëüñòâ òàêîãî the number for power lines separately at áëàãîïîëó÷èÿ. Ó÷èòûâàÿ, ÷òî Öåíòðàëüíàÿ 400–500 pairs, extrapolating from the count Ìîíãîëèÿ íàõîäèòñÿ â öåíòðå ïðîë¸òíî- data, received for Central Mongolia. As a ãî ïóòè ñèáèðñêèõ ïòèö, îíà ìîæåò îòòÿ- result he has received an overall estimation 66 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

ãèâàòü íà ñåáÿ ÷àñòü ñâîáîäíûõ îñîáåé, of the Saker Falcon number in Mongolia, ïîýòîìó ïðè äåãðàäàöèè ïåðèôåðèéíûõ which was rounded by him to 2–5 thousand ïîïóëÿöèé, íåãàòèâíûå ïðîöåññû â ïî- pairs. The great deviation in this estimation ïóëÿöèè öåíòðàëüíîìîíãîëüñêèõ áàëî- is confusing, which levels its advantages in áàíîâ ñòàíóò çàìåòíû ëèøü òîãäà, êîãäà comparison with the estimation of numbers íà ïåðèôåðèè ïîïóëÿöèè ïîäîéäóò ê published earlier (Shijirmaa et al., 2000; ïîñëåäíåé ÷åðòå. Ðåçþìèðóÿ âûøåñêà- Shagdarsuren et al., 2001). But even if we çàííîå, ñëåäóåò çàìåòèòü, ÷òî ñîêðàùå- take this into account, completely forgetting íèå ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Ìîíãîëèè that the situation for the species in Central èìåëî ìåñòî â 2003 ã. è êàê ìèíèìóì íà- Mongolia is different from that pertaining in ñåëåíèå Öåíòðàëüíîé Ìîíãîëèè áûñòðî the western or eastern regions, how could we âîññòàíîâèëîñü. determine the trend of the whole population Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Ìîí- of Saker Falcons in Mongolia? As in the case ãîëèè, îçâó÷åííàÿ ERWDA (2003) êàê ðàç of Kazakhstan, the differentiated approach ïðèøëàñü íà ïåðèîä ìàññîâîé ãèáåëè ñî- should be adopted here, but for a such one êîëîâ. Èìåííî ýòà îöåíêà (1000–1200 for Mongolia there are not enough data, be- ïàð) áûëà ïðèíÿòà äëÿ Ìîíãîëèè â êà÷å- cause long-term observations by Mongolian ñòâå «îôèöèàëüíîé» è âèäèìî áîëüøå íå ornithologists have been conducted only in ïåðåñìàòðèâàëàñü (Ñóõ÷óëóóí, 2008). Ñî- Central Mongolia, and emerging information âåðøåííî î÷åâèäíî, ÷òî îíà äîëæíà áûòü on the Saker Falcons from other regions, in- ïåðåñìîòðåíà â ñòîðîíó óâåëè÷åíèÿ, íî cluding the discovery of quite large breeding íàñêîëüêî, ñîâåðøåííî íåÿñíî. groups (see, for example, information about Ý. Äèêñîí (2009) íà îñíîâàíèè äàííûõ the Saker Falcon in the Gobi in the article by ýêñòðàïîëÿöèè ïëîòíîñòè äëÿ ñòåïíîé, Nyambayar et al., 2009), is not being con- ëåñîñòåïíîé è ïóñòûííîé çîí Ìîíãîëèè firmed by further monitoring. ïîëó÷èë îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â The facts exist, that on the border with 1,4–4,1 òûñ. ïàð, ïðè ýòîì îòäåëüíî ðàñ- Mongolia in the Altai and Tyva republics the ñ÷èòàë ÷èñëåííîñòü äëÿ ËÝÏ â 400–500 situation with the Saker Falcon is unfavoura- ïàð, ýêñòðàïîëèðóÿ ó÷¸òíûå äàííûå, ïî- ble, and annual decline of the species during ëó÷åííûå â Öåíòðàëüíîé Ìîíãîëèè.  the period 2003–8, estimated at 15% and èòîãå èì áûëà ïîëó÷åíà èòîãîâàÿ îöåíêà 17% respectively, has taken place (Karyakin, ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà âî âñåé Ìîíãîëèè, Nikolenko, 2008). Since here all the main êîòîðóþ îí îêðóãëèë äî 2–5 òûñ. ïàð.  groups of the Saker Falcon are concentrated ýòîé îöåíêå ñìóùàåò áîëüøàÿ îøèáêà, on the border with Mongolia, as reflected on êîòîðàÿ íèâåëèðóåò å¸ ïðåèìóùåñòâà the map given by the authors on page 66, it ïåðåä îöåíêàìè ÷èñëåííîñòè, îïóáëèêî- would be reasonable to suggest that this is âàííûìè ðàíåå Øèæèðìîé Ä. ñ ñîàâòî- a general overall trend with North-Western ðàìè (Shijirmaa et al., 2000) è Øàãäàðñó- Mongolia, because from one side of the hol- ðåíîì Î. ñ ñîàâòîðàìè (Shagdarsuren et low to the other the situation is hardly very al., 2001). Íî äàæå åñëè ïðèíÿòü å¸ âî different, or on the Russian side of the moun- âíèìàíèå, ñîâåðøåííî çàáûâ î òîì, ÷òî tain range is it considerably worse than on ñèòóàöèÿ ñ âèäîì â Öåíòðàëüíîé Ìîíãî- the Mongolian side. Taking the above-men- ëèè èíàÿ, ÷åì â Çàïàäíîé è Âîñòî÷íîé, tioned into account, for at least 30% of the òî êàê îïðåäåëèòü òðåíä âñåé ïîïóëÿöèè assessed Saker Falcon population in Mongo- áàëîáàíà â Ìîíãîëèè? Êàê è â ñëó÷àå lia it is worth indicating a negative trend, as ñ Êàçàõñòàíîì çäåñü äîëæåí áûòü äèô- established for the groups breeding in Altai- ôåðåíöèðîâàííûé ïîäõîä, íî äëÿ íåãî Sayan region on the border with Mongolia, ïî Ìîíãîëèè ïðîñòî íå õâàòàåò ôàêòè- which for 20 years can be estimated at 32%. ÷åñêèõ äàííûõ, òàê êàê ìíîãîëåòíèå íà- Taking into account the initial estimation of áëþäåíèÿ ìîíãîëüñêèõ îðíèòîëîãîâ âå- the Saker Falcon number in Mongolia, sup- äóòñÿ òîëüêî â Öåíòðàëüíîé Ìîíãîëèè, à posed by Dixon (2009) at 2,000–5,000 pairs ïîÿâëÿþùàÿñÿ èíôîðìàöèÿ î áàëîáàíàõ for the year 2010, it is possible to suppose èç äðóãèõ ðàéîíîâ, â òîì ÷èñëå è î íà- the stable number for 1,400–3,500 pairs and õîæäåíèè äîâîëüíî êðóïíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ negative trend at 32% since the 1990’s for ãðóïïèðîâîê (ñì. íàïðèìåð ïðî áàëî- 600–1,500 pairs. All of that makes it possible áàíà â Ãîáè â ñòàòüå Nyambayar et al., to estimate the Saker Falcon number in Mon- 2009), íå ïîäêðåïëÿåòñÿ äàëüíåéøèì golia in 1990 at 2,792–6,980 pairs, average ìîíèòîðèíãîì. 3,884 pairs, with a decline in number for 20 Èìåþòñÿ ôàêòû òîãî, ÷òî ïî ãðàíèöå ñ years by 9.9%. Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 67

Ìîíãîëèåé â ðåñïóáëèêàõ Àëòàé è Òóâà ñèòóàöèÿ ñ áàëîáàíîì íåáëàãîïîëó÷íà è íàáëþäàåòñÿ åæåãîäíîå ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñ- ëåííîñòè âèäà, êîòîðîå çà ïåðèîä ñ 2003 ïî 2008 ãã. ñîñòàâèëî 15% è 17% ñîîò- âåòñòâåííî (Êàðÿêèí, Íèêîëåíêî, 2008). Òàê êàê çäåñü âñå îñíîâíûå ãðóïïèðîâ- êè áàëîáàíà ñîñðåäîòî÷åíû ïî ãðàíèöå ñ Ìîíãîëèåé, ÷òî îòðàæåíî íà êàðòå, ïðèâî- äèìîé àâòîðàìè íà ñòð. 66, áûëî áû ðàçó- ìíûì ïðåäïîëàãàòü, ÷òî ýòî îáùèé òðåíä ñ Ñåâåðî-Çàïàäíîé Ìîíãîëèåé, òàê êàê âðÿä ëè ñ îäíîé ñòîðîíû êîòëîâèíû ñèòóàöèÿ êàðäèíàëüíî îòëè÷àåòñÿ îò òàêîâîé ñ äðó- Áàëîáàí. Ôîòî À. Êîâàëåíêî. ãîé, èëè íà ðîññèéñêîé ñòîðîíå õðåáòà îíà Saker Falcon. Photo by A. Kovalenko. íà ïîðÿäîê õóæå, ÷åì íà ìîíãîëüñêîé. Ó÷è- òûâàÿ ýòî, ñëåäóåò, êàê ìèíèìóì äëÿ 30% îöåíî÷íîé ÷èñëåííîñòè ïîïóëÿöèè áàëî- Discussion áàíà â Ìîíãîëèè äàâàòü íåãàòèâíûé òðåíä, The above review and the publications óñòàíîâëåííûé äëÿ ãðóïïèðîâîê, ãíåçäÿ- analysis can hardly be called exhaustive as ùèõñÿ â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå ïî ãðàíè- the bulk of information was not thoroughly öå ñ Ìîíãîëèåé, êîòîðûé çà 20 ëåò ìîæåò analyzed. The only thorough analysis was áûòü îöåíåí â 32%. Ïðèíÿâ âî âíèìàíèå done for the great number of Kazakhstan îòïðàâíóþ îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà papers to understand the borders of the re- â Ìîíãîëèè, ïðåäëîæåííóþ Ý. Äèêñîíîì gions and areas under consideration of vari- (2009), â 2–5 òûñ. ïàð äëÿ 2010 ã. ìîæíî ous authors and how their estimates over- ïðåäïîëàãàòü ñòàáèëüíóþ ÷èñëåííîñòü äëÿ lap. However, even such superficial review 1400–3500 òûñ. ïàð è íåãàòèâíûé òðåíä â and analysis of the publications seem to be 32% ñ 90-õ ãã. äëÿ 600–1500 ïàð. Âñ¸ ýòî sufficient to show incongruity of the BirdLife ïîçâîëÿåò îöåíèòü ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà International in estimates of the Saker key â Ìîíãîëèè â 1990 ã. â 2792–6980 ïàð, â population’s current state and dynamics. ñðåäíåì 3884 ïàð ïðè ñîêðàùåíèè ÷èñ- Perhaps, as regards Mongolia alone, these ëåííîñòè çà 20 ëåò íà 9,9%. Ðåàëåí ëè ýòîò estimates as represented in the IUCN Red òðåíä ÿ íå çíàþ, íî íà ôîíå îêðóæàþùèõ List (IUCN 2010) can be found plausible Ìîíãîëèþ ñòðàí îí ñìîòðèòñÿ ñëèøêîì both for the past and the future. îïòèìèñòè÷íûì. As a result, we saw that in the table un- der the title of Saker Rate of Decline, Sec- Îáñóæäåíèå ond Revision47, posted for public access on Äàííûé îáçîð è àíàëèç ïóáëèêàöèé ñëîæ- BirdLife International Forum by the BirdLife íî íàçâàòü ñêðóïóë¸çíûì. Ìàòåðèàë, êîòî- analysts to give grounds for a change in the ðûé ïðèøëîñü ïðîàíàëèçèðîâàòü, ñëèøêîì Saker protection status, the Saker popula- ðàçðîçíåííûé è ðàçíîïëàíîâûé, ÷òî ñèëü- tion trend could be estimated as on average íî çàòðóäíÿëî ðàáîòó. Òàê, â ñòàòüÿõ ïî Êà- a 32% fall over the last 19 years (three gen- çàõñòàíó ïðèøëîñü ïðåäìåòíî ðàçáèðàòüñÿ, erations; this meant that by IUCN criteria ÷òîáû ïîíÿòü ãðàíèöû ðàññìàòðèâàåìûõ the species must be considered Vulnerable), ðåãèîíîâ è ðàéîíîâ ðàáîò ðàçíûõ àâòî- while for the case of the worst estimation ðîâ è òî, êàê è íàñêîëüêî íàêëàäûâàþòñÿ èõ possible (a fall by 62%) the conservation îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè. Òåì íå ìåíåå, äàæå status must be Endangered (as it used to ýòîò áåãëûé îáçîð è àíàëèç ëèòåðàòóðû be), and the best estimation possible (a fall ïîçâîëèë âûÿâèòü íåêîððåêòíîñòü ïîäõî- by 29%) corresponded to Near Threatened. äà àíàëèòèêîâ BirdLife International ê ïðî- This wide range of possible estimates shows áëåìå îöåíêè òåêóùåãî ñòàòóñà è äèíàìèêè a high degree of uncertainty expressed by ÷èñëåííîñòè ìíîãèõ êëþ÷åâûõ ïîïóëÿöèé. the BirdLife analysts as to what the Saker  èòîãå, â îðèãèíàëüíîé òàáëèöå, êîòî- global protection status should be, and ðàÿ ïîä íàçâàíèåì «Saker rate of decline they respectively called for the expert ad- second revision» (Óðîâåíü ñíèæåíèÿ ÷èñ- vice. This outcome could be predicted from ëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà, âòîðàÿ ðåâèçèÿ)47 the start, as the population and dynamics

47 http://www.birdlifeforums.org/ WebX?233@@.2cba6d3d/22!enclosure=.2cba6fde 68 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

Áàëîáàí. ranges taken for analysis were widened by Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Dixon (2009) by moving greatly both up Saker Falcon. and down, and in a number of cases did not Photo by I. Karyakin. allow for the data on dynamics and popula- tion of key breeding groups. We must do justice to the BirdLife analysts that they strove for agreement and common understanding as far as the Saker status was concerned, and therefore suggested that anyone who had a word to say should com- ment on the new estimates until a final de- cision could be wrought. But, however sur- prising, this suggestion was moved on April 11, at the time when all practicing ornitholo- gists are normally out in the field, and those working with the Saker are out there in the first turn. Evidently, no-one could have their say for the defence of the Saker; at least all experts from Russia, Kazakhstan, China and Mongolia were out in the field. The logical culmination of my analysis was the creation of the table reflecting key Saker populations in different countries (ta- ble 5). The table demonstrates the de facto áûëà âûâåøåíà äëÿ îáùåãî äîñòóïà íà current Saker status in accordance with the ôîðóìå BirdLife International àíàëèòèêà- IUCN criteria, as well as fallaciousness of the ìè, ãîòîâÿùèìè èçìåíåíèå ñòàòóñà áàëî- BirdLife International’s decision to lower its áàíà, íîâûå îöåíêè ïðèâîäèëè ê ñíèæå- conservation status. íèþ ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà çà ïðîøëûå 19 ëåò (òðè ïîêîëåíèÿ) â ñðåäíåì íà Conclusion 32%, ÷òî îçíà÷àåò, ÷òî âèä èíòåðïðå- It is evident that the Saker global popula- òèðóåòñÿ ïî êðèòåðèÿì ÌÑÎÏ êàê Óÿç- tion estimates available for 1994–2008, or âèìûé (Vulnerable), ïðè õóäøåì ñöåíà- up to the present time, for that matter, are ðèè ñîêðàùåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè íà 62% expert evaluations for most habitats. It also (ñîîòâåòñòâóåò êðèòåðèþ Óãðîæàåìûé is evident that whenever new territories are Endangered, ñòàòóñó êîòîðûé è áûë ó áà- explored and new habitats are found, the ëîáàíà) è ëó÷øåì – íà 29% (ñîîòâåòñòâó- population estimates tend to grow. Howev- åò êðèòåðèþ Áëèçêèé ê ïåðåõîäó â ãðóï- er, we need to distinguish between objec- ïó óãðîæàåìûõ Near Threatened). Ýòîò tive population trends and growth of the es- äèàïàçîí âîçìîæíûõ îöåíîê ïðîèëëþ- timates due to new findings. Unfortunately, ñòðèðîâàë âûñîêóþ ñòåïåíü íåóâåðåí- the BirdLife analysts somehow did not take íîñòè àíàëèòèêîâ BirdLife â ãëîáàëüíîì into consideration this problem. BirdLife ñòàòóñå áàëîáàíà, êàê áûëî îáúÿâëåíî International in its official data on several â îáðàùåíèè ê ýêñïåðòàì. Ýòî ìîæíî countries does not consider estimations of áûëî áû ïðåäïîëîæèòü èçíà÷àëüíî, òàê national researchers and are based on the êàê çà îñíîâó áûëè âçÿòû ïîðîãè ÷èñëåí- opinion of one expert. It is unclear whether íîñòè, ðàñøèðåííûå Ý. Äèêñîíîì (2009) it is the result of difficulty in the analysis of â îáå ñòîðîíû, êîòîðûå ïî ðÿäó ñòðàí íå national publications, or conceals some par- îïèðàëèñü íà äàííûå äèíàìèêè ÷èñëåí- ticular aim. But the result is obvious – the íîñòè êëþ÷åâûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê. Saker Falcon has been excluded from the list Ïîæàëóé, ìîæíî ñîãëàñèòüñÿ ñ îöåíêàìè of endangered species of IUCN. ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â ïðîøëîì è íà- As follows from the first IUCN Red List, ñòîÿùåì, èç ïðåäñòàâëåííûõ â Êðàñíîì for 1988 the Saker situation was defined as ñïèñêå ÌÑÎÏ (IUCN 2010), òîëüêî â Ðîñ- Near Threatened. However, in 1994 its sta- ñèè (îñíîâàíû íà äàííûõ È.Â. Êàðÿêèíà) tus was lowered to the possible minimum è â Ìîíãîëèè (ïðåäñòàâëåíû Ý. Äèêñî- of Lower Risk/least concern. This status was íîì). Ïî îñòàëüíûì æå ñòðàíàì îñíîâ- maintained in the 2000 IUCN Red List, al- íîãî àðåàëà îáèòàíèÿ âèäà ÷èñëåííîñòü though by the end of the 1990’s the fall in ÿâíî çàâûøåíà, à òðåíä íå ñîîòâåòñòâóåò the Saker population became more than Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 69

ðåàëüíîìó, îòðàæ¸ííîìó â ïóáëèêàöèÿõ evident, both in Russia and in Kazakhstan. íàöèîíàëüíûõ èññëåäîâàòåëåé. Íàäî ñêà- As a result, by the end of the 20th century çàòü, ÷òî ëèøü ðîññèéñêèì îðíèòîëîãàì the Saker populations of Russia and Kaza- óäàëîñü îòñòîÿòü ñâîè äàííûå, íåñìîòðÿ khstan practically ceased to be (Karyakin, íà òî, ÷òî îíè ÿâíî ïîäâåðãàëèñü ïåðå- 1998; Galushin et al., 2001), the Baikal re- ñìîòðó, ïîýòîìó îíè òåïåðü òàê ðåæóò gion population having dropped really low ãëàç â î÷åðêå î âèäå â Êðàñíîì ñïèñêå (Ryabtsev, 2001), with the same situation ÌÑÎÏ â îêðóæåíèè ïðî÷èõ «îêðóãë¸í- for East Kazakhstan (Levin, 2001; Levin, íûõ» îöåíîê. 2001; Levin et al., 2000) and China (Ye, Íàäî îòäàòü äîëæíîå àíàëèòèêàì Ma, 2002; Ye, Fox, 2003). Such apparent BirdLife, ÷òî èç-çà æåëàíèÿ äîñòè÷ü ñîãëà- degradation of the species over vast terri- ñèÿ è ïîíèìàíèÿ ñòàòóñà áàëîáàíà, âñåì tories was quite impossible to ignore, and æåëàþùèì áûëî ïðåäëîæåíî â òå÷åíèå when the IUCN Red List was under revision íåäåëè âíåñòè äàëüíåéøèå êîììåíòàðèè in 2004, the Saker was classed as Endan- îòíîñèòåëüíî íîâîé îöåíêè, äî ïðèíÿòèÿ gered (EN) on the basis of the ERWDA re- çàêëþ÷èòåëüíîãî ðåøåíèÿ. Íî ñäåëàíî ýòî port (2003) and preserved this status even áûëî 11 àïðåëÿ, êîãäà ó îðíèòîëîãîâ, ðà- in the 2008 revised List. áîòàþùèõ ñ áàëîáàíîì, óæå íà÷àëñÿ ïî- As soon as the Saker was identified as ëåâîé ñåçîí. Âèäèìî ïîýòîìó íèêòî èç Endangered, it was only too reasonable îñíîâíûõ ýêñïåðòîâ Ðîññèè, Êàçàõñòàíà, to discuss if the Saker must be included in Êèòàÿ è Ìîíãîëèè è íå âûñêàçàëñÿ çàùèòó Appendices I to the Bonn Convention and áàëîáàíà. CITES. Firstly, there was a discrepancy be- Èòîãîì ìîåãî àíàëèçà ÿâèëîñü çàïîë- tween the Saker status in the IUCN Red List íåíèå äàííûõ ïî ñòðàíàì, ñîäåðæàùèì and in the above Conventions lists. Sec- îñíîâíûå ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà, ðåçóëüòàòû ondly, the Saker status in the CITES list is êîòîðîãî îòðàæåíû â òàáë. 5 (ñì. ñòð. 70). unreasonably low if compared to the status Îíà íàãëÿäíî äåìîíñòðèðóåò òåêóùèé ñòà- of other large falcons. Both the Gyrfalcon òóñ áàëîáàíà â ñîîòâåòñòâèè ñ êðèòåðèÿìè (Falco rusticolus) and the Peregrine (Falco ÌÑÎÏ è îøèáî÷íîñòü ðåøåíèÿ BirdLife peregrinus) are included into Appendix I International î ñíèæåíèè åãî ñòàòóñà. to CITES, but the Saker global population is lower even if we consider the latest evalu- Çàêëþ÷åíèå ations where populations of some coun- Î÷åâèäíî, ÷òî îöåíêè ìèðîâîé ïîïó- tries are evidently overestimated (Dixon, ëÿöèè áàëîáàíà â 1994–2008 ãã., êàê, â 2009). At the same time, the rate of the ïðî÷åì, è â íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ, ïî áîëü- Saker population decline is rather high over at least a half of its habitat (Galushin, Ïòåíöû áàëîáàíà â 2004; Karyakin et al., 2004a; 2005à, 2008; ãíåçäå. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Karyakin, Nikolenko, 2008; Levin, 2001; 2008; 2008à; 2008b; Levin et al., 2000; Chicks of the Saker Falcon in the nest. Nikolenko, Karyakin, 2010), while the Gyr- Photo by I. Karyakin. falcon population is stable throughout more than a half of the habitat or falling rather slowly, mostly in Kamchatka (by 2–3 times over 40 years) (Lobkov, 2006; Potapov, Sale, 2005), and the Peregrine population is growing throughout more than a half of the habitat (Bekmansurov, 2009; Karyakin, Nikolenko, 2009; Moshkin, 2009; Tilba, Mnatsekanov, 2010). These discrepan- cies made people insist on the inclusion of the Saker into the Appendices I to the Bonn Convention and CITES; this wish was sounded at different conferences by par- ticipants from Croatia and Saudi Arabia. At that stage, if the Saker status had become officially recognized as Endangered, this could have led to an official ban imposed on trading in the birds. However, the Saker population is still drop- 70 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

Òàáë. 5. Àíàëèç óðîâíÿ ñíèæåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà: îôèöèàëüíàÿ âåðñèÿ BirdLife International è âåðñèÿ àâòîðà, ñäåëàííàÿ íà îñíî- âàíèè äàííîãî îáçîðà. Table 5. Analysis of Saker Falcon rate of decline. Official version from BirdLife International and version from author as a result of review and analysis of publications.

Îôèöèàëüíàÿ âåðñèÿ BirdLife International Official version from BirdLife International Ðåãèîí Ïîïóëÿöèÿ íà Ïîïóëÿöèÿ â Subpopulation Ïîïóëÿöèÿ â Ïîïóëÿöèÿ âî 3 ïîêîëåíèÿ ñîâðåìåííûé name Ïåðâûé ïåðâûé ãîä Âòîðîé âòîðîé ãîä íàçàä ïåðèîä Èçìåíåíèå çà ãîä Population ãîä Population in Population 3 Population 3 ïîêîëåíèÿ Year 1 in year 1 Year 2 year 2 gen ago current 3-gen change Êèòàé / China 1990 5000 2010 4000 4956 4000 -19.3% Êàçàõñòàí Kazakhstan 1990 3500 2010 2500 3453 2500 -27.6% Ìîíãîëèÿ Mongolia 1990 4000 2010 3500 3979 3500 -12.0% Ðîññèÿ / Russia 1990 6000 2010 2198 5764 2198 -61.9% Âñåãî / Total 18151 12198 -32.8% Êðèòåðèé À2: Criterion A2: VU <-30% Âåðñèÿ àâòîðà, ïîëó÷åííàÿ â ðåçóëüòàòå îáçîðà è àíàëèçà ïóáëèêàöèé Unofficial version from author as a result of review and analysis of publications Ðåãèîí Ïîïóëÿöèÿ íà Ïîïóëÿöèÿ â Subpopulation Ïîïóëÿöèÿ â Ïîïóëÿöèÿ âî 3 ïîêîëåíèÿ ñîâðåìåííûé name Ïåðâûé ïåðâûé ãîä Âòîðîé âòîðîé ãîä íàçàä ïåðèîä Èçìåíåíèå çà ãîä Population ãîä Population in Population 3 Population 3 ïîêîëåíèÿ Year 1 in year 1 Year 2 year 2 gen ago current 3-gen change Êèòàé / China 1990 5000 2010 1500 4765 1500 -68.5% Êàçàõñòàí Kazakhstan 1990 5218 2010 2030 5025 2030 -59.6% Ìîíãîëèÿ Mongolia 1990 3884 2010 3500 3868 3500 -9.5% Ðîññèÿ / Russia 1990 6500 2010 2198 6224 2198 -64.7% Âñåãî / Total 19882 9228 -53.6% Êðèòåðèé À2: Criterion A2: EN <-50%

øåé ÷àñòè òåððèòîðèè àðåàëà ýêñïåðò- ping, and a lot of estimations for the territories íûå. Î÷åâèäíî è òî, ÷òî ñ îáñëåäîâàíèåì where the monitoring is continuous (Karyakin, íîâûõ òåððèòîðèé è ïîÿâëåíèåì íîâûõ 2008; Karyakin, Nikolenko, 2008; Levin et al., äàííûõ îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè êîððåêòèðó- 2010) testify to the trend of Variant C (fig. 2) þòñÿ è ÷àñòî â ñòîðîíó óâåëè÷åíèÿ. Îäíà- as in the model suggested by N. Barton as êî ñëåäóåò ðàçäåëÿòü îáúåêòèâíûé òðåíä early as 2002 (Barton, 2002). This model was ÷èñëåííîñòè âèäà è óâåëè÷åíèå îöåíîê described in the ERWDA report (2003). ïî ïðè÷èíå ëó÷øåé åãî èçó÷åííîñòè, So far, BirdLife International decided upon îñîáåííî ïðè òàêîì âàæíîì àíàëèçå ãëî- a compromise and lowered the Saker status áàëüíîé ñèòóàöèè ñ âèäîì, êàêîé òðåáî- to Vulnerable (VU) – what next, when the âàëñÿ äëÿ ïåðåñìîòðà ñòàòóñà áàëîáàíà. Saker population is at the brink of extinc- Îôèöèàëüíûå äàííûå BirdLife, êàê áûëî tion, and even now the birds are not found ïîêàçàíî âûøå, ïî ÷àñòè ñòðàí íå ó÷è- breeding throughout more than half of the òûâàþò îöåíêè íàöèîíàëüíûõ èññëåäîâà- range? We only have to hope that the fal- òåëåé è îñíîâûâàþòñÿ íà ìíåíèè îäíîãî conry will eventually become outdated or ýêñïåðòà. Áûëî ëè ýòî âûçâàíî ñëîæíî- that the countries of the Middle East will run ñòüþ àíàëèçà íàöèîíàëüíîé ëèòåðàòóðû out of oil – hopefully, before the Saker be- èëè çà ýòèì êðîåòñÿ äîñòèæåíèå êàêîé-òî comes extinct. Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 71

Áàëîáàí. êîòîðîé áûë ñîõðàí¸í è ïðè ïåðåñìîòðå Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. ñïèñêà â 2008 ã. Saker Falcon. Ïîñëå âêëþ÷åíèÿ áàëîáàíà â ñïèñîê Photo by I. Karyakin. âèäîâ, íàõîäÿùèõñÿ ïîä óãðîçîé èñ÷åç- íîâåíèÿ, ëîãè÷íî áûë ïîäíÿò âîïðîñ î âêëþ÷åíèè áàëîáàíà â Ïðèëîæåíèÿ I Áîííñêîé Êîíâåíöèè è Êîíâåíöèè ÑÈ- ÒÅÑ. Âî-ïåðâûõ, ñòàëî î÷åâèäíûì íåñî- îòâåòñòâèå ñòàòóñà âèäà â Êðàñíîì ñïèñêå ÌÑÎÏ è â ñïèñêàõ Êîíâåíöèé. Âî-âòîðûõ, íåñîîòâåòñòâèå ñòàòóñà áàëîáàíà â ñïè- ñêå ÑÈÒÅÑ, îòíîñèòåëüíî ñòàòóñà äðóãèõ êðóïíûõ ñîêîëîâ.  îòëè÷èå îò êðå÷å- òà (Falco rusticolus) è òåì áîëåå ñàïñàíà (Falco peregrinus) (îáà â Ïðèëîæåíèè I ÑÈÒÅÑ), ÷èñëåííîñòü ìèðîâîé ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà çíà÷èòåëüíî íèæå äàæå ñ ó÷¸- òîì ïîñëåäíèõ îöåíîê, êîòîðûå ïî ðÿäó Ðèñ. 2. Òðè ñöåíàðèÿ ìîäåëèðîâàíèÿ, èñïîëüçóþùèõ ìîäåëü è ýôôåêòû ðàç- ëè÷íûõ âàðèàíòîâ èçúÿòèÿ ïòèö èç ïðèðîäíûõ ïîïóëÿöèé ñ ïðåäïîëàãàåìûì ñòðàí ÿâíî çàâûøåíû, (Dixon, 2009), ñî- ìèðîâûì íàñåëåíèåì 5000 ðàçìíîæàþùèõñÿ ïàð áàëîáàíîâ (äàííûå E. Ïî- êðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà èä¸ò äî- òàïîâà ïî Barton, 2002). Óñëîâíûå îáîçíà÷åíèÿ: 1 – ÷èñëåííîñòü ïîïóëÿöèè, ñòàòî÷íî áûñòðûìè òåìïàìè êàê ìèíèìóì 2 – èçúÿòèå 1000 ìîëîäûõ ñàìîê, 3 – èçúÿòèå 300 âçðîñëûõ ñàìîê è 2000 íà ïîëîâèíå àðåàëà âèäà (Êàðÿêèí è äð., ìîëîäûõ, 4 – èçúÿòèå 1000 âçðîñëûõ ñàìîê è 4000 ìîëîäûõ ñàìîê, 5 – ìèíè- ìóì, 6 – ìàêñèìóì, 7 – ñðåäíåå. 2005à; Êàðÿêèí, 2008; Êàðÿêèí, Íèêî- ëåíêî, 2008; Ëåâèí, 2001; 2008à; 2008b; Fig. 2. A three modeling scenarios using the model and the effects of the various harvesting scenarios with estimated world population of 5000 breeding pairs of Galushin, 2004; Karyakin et al., 2004a; Sakers (by E. Potapov in: Barton, 2002). Nikolenko, Karyakin, 2010; Levin, Dixon, 2008; Levin et al., 2000), â òî âðåìÿ êàê ÷èñëåííîñòü êðå÷åòà îñòà¸òñÿ ñòàáèëüíîé êîíêðåòíîé öåëè, íåÿñíî? Íî ðåçóëüòàò íà áîëåå ÷åì ïîëîâèíå àðåàëà, ëèáî ìåä- î÷åâèäåí – áàëîáàí âûâåäåí èç ñïèñêà ëåííî ñîêðàùàåòñÿ, ïðåèìóùåñòâåííî íà óãðîæàåìûõ âèäîâ ÌÑÎÏ. Êàì÷àòêå (â 2–3 ðàçà çà 40 ëåò) (Potapov,  çàêëþ÷åíèè õî÷ó ðàññìîòðåòü âîïðîñ, Sale, 2005; Ëîáêîâ, 2006), à ÷èñëåííîñòü êîìó è äëÿ ÷åãî ýòî ìîãëî ïîíàäîáèòüñÿ? ñàïñàíà íà áîëåå ÷åì ïîëîâèíå àðåàëà Ðàññìîòðèì èñòîðèþ áàëîáàíà â Êðàñ- ðàñò¸ò (Áåêìàíñóðîâ, 2009; Êàðÿêèí, Íè- íîì ñïèñêå ÌÑÎÏ.  ïåðâîì Êðàñíîì êîëåíêî, 2009; Ìîøêèí, 2009; Òèëüáà, ñïèñêå ÌÑÎÏ 1988 ã. ñòàòóñ áàëîáàíà Ìíàöåêàíîâ, 2010). Ýòè íåñîîòâåòñòâèÿ îïðåäåë¸í êàê òàêñîí, áëèçêèé ê ïåðåõîäó ïîáóäèëè îáùåñòâåííîñòü äîáèâàòü- â ãðóïïó óãðîæàåìûõ (Near Threatened), ñÿ âêëþ÷åíèÿ áàëîáàíà â Ïðèëîæåíèÿ I îäíàêî ïðè ïåðåñìîòðå ñïèñêà â 1994 ã. Áîííñêîé Êîíâåíöèè è Êîíâåíöèè ÑÈ- åãî ñòàòóñ ñíèæåí äî òàêñîíà ìèíèìàëüíî- ÒÅÑ, íà ðàçíûõ êîíôåðåíöèÿõ îá ýòîì ãî ðèñêà (Lower Risk/least concern). Ñ òà- ñòàëè çàÿâëÿòü, â ÷àñòíîñòè, ïðåäñòàâèòåëè êèì æå ñòàòóñîì áàëîáàí âîø¸ë â èçäàíèå Õîðâàòèè è Ñàóäîâñêîé Àðàâèè. È âîò íà Êðàñíîãî ñïèñêà ÌÑÎÏ 2000 ã. ýòîì ýòàïå ñòàòóñ áàëîáàíà, îôèöèàëüíî Ïðè ýòîì óæå â êîíöå 90-õ ãã. ÕÕ ñòî- ïðèçíàííîãî íàõîäÿùèìñÿ ïîä óãðîçîé ëåòèÿ ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà â Åâðîïåéñêîé èñ÷åçíîâåíèÿ, ìîã ïðèâåñòè ê îôèöèàëü- ÷àñòè Ðîññèè è Çàïàäíîì Êàçàõñòàíå ïðàê- íîìó çàïðåòó íà òîðãîâëþ ýòèì âèäîì, òè÷åñêè ïðåêðàòèëè ñâî¸ ñóùåñòâîâàíèå, ÷òî ÿâíî ñîçäàëî áû ñåðü¸çíûå òðóäíîñòè îêàçàëàñü ðåçêî ïîäîðâàíà ÷èñëåííîñòü äëÿ äàëüíåéøåãî ðàçâèòèÿ ñîêîëèíîé îõî- áàëîáàíà â Ïðèáàéêàëüå (Ryabtsev, 2001), òû â ñòðàíàõ Ïåðñèäñêîãî çàëèâà. Âèäèìî Âîñòî÷íîì Êàçàõñòàíå è Êèòàå, ÷òî áûëî ýòî è ñòàëî îñíîâíîé ïðè÷èíîé ñíèæåíèÿ îòðàæåíî âî ìíîãèõ ïóáëèêàöèÿõ, êîòî- ñòàòóñà áàëîáàíà. ðûå óïîìèíàëèñü â äàííîì îáçîðå. Èãíî- Îäíàêî, ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà ïðîäîë- ðèðîâàòü ñòîëü ÿâíóþ äåãðàäàöèþ ïîïóëÿ- æàåò ñîêðàùàòüñÿ, ìíîãèå îöåíêè òðåíäà öèé âèäà íà îãðîìíûõ òåððèòîðèÿõ áûëî íà òåððèòîðèÿõ, ñ ïîñòîÿííî âåäóùèìñÿ íåâîçìîæíî è ïðè î÷åðåäíîì ïåðåñìî- ìîíèòîðèíãîì (Êàðÿêèí, 2008; Êàðÿêèí, òðå Êðàñíîãî ñïèñêà ÌÑÎÏ â 2004 ã. íà Íèêîëåíêî, 2008; Ëåâèí è äð., 2010), ñâèäå- îñíîâàíèè äîêëàäà ERWDA (2003) áàëî- òåëüñòâóþò î òîì, ÷òî äåãðàäàöèÿ ïîïóëÿöèé áàí îïðåäåë¸í â êàòåãîðèþ âèäîâ, íàõî- áàëîáàíà ðàçâèâàåòñÿ ïî ñöåíàðèþ Ñ (ðèñ. äÿùèõñÿ ïîä óãðîçîé èñ÷åçíîâåíèÿ (EN), â 2) èç ìîäåëè, îïóáëèêîâàííîé Í. Áàðòîíîì 72 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

åù¸ â 2002 ã. (Barton, 2002), ïàðàìåòðû êîòîðîé òàêæå Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Áàëîáàí â Âîëãî-Óðàëüñêîì ðåãèîíå è íà ñîäåðæàòñÿ â îò÷åòå ERWDA (2003). ïðèëåãàþùèõ òåððèòîðèÿõ. – Ñòåïíîé áþëëåòåíü. 2004à. Ïîêà BirdLife International ïîø¸ë íà êîìïðîìèññ ¹5. Ñ. 32–39. è ïîíèçèë ñòàòóñ áàëîáàíà äî óÿçâèìîãî (VU). À ÷òî Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Áàëîáàí íà ïëàòî Óñòþðò: êðàòêèå ðåçóëü- òàòû ýêñïåäèöèè 2003 ã. – Ñòåïíîé áþëëåòåíü. 2004á. ¹5. áóäåò äàëüøå? Êîãäà áàëîáàí ïîäîéä¸ò ê òîé ÷åðòå, Ñ. 40–41. çà êîòîðîé ñëåäóåò «óãðîçà èñ÷åçíîâåíèÿ» åñëè ñåé- Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Áàëîáàí â Ðîññèè. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è ÷àñ óæå î÷åâèäíî, ÷òî íà áîëåå ÷åì ïîëîâèíå àðåàëà èõ îõðàíà. 2008. ¹12. C. 28–47. âèäà ýòîò ñîêîë óæå íå ãíåçäèòñÿ? Âèäèìî òîãäà, êîãäà Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Êàòàñòðîôè÷åñêèå ïîñëåäñòâèÿ äåðàòèçà- òðàäèöèÿ îõîòû ñ áàëîáàíîì â àðàáñêèõ ñòðàíàõ ïå- öèè ñ èñïîëüçîâàíèåì áðîìàäèîëîíà â Ìîíãîëèè â 2001– ðåñòàíåò áûòü ìîäíîé èëè íà Áëèæíåì Âîñòîêå êîí- 2003 ãã. – Ïåñò-ìåíåäæìåíò. 2010. ¹1. Ñ. 20–26. ÷èòñÿ íåôòü. Îñòà¸òñÿ íàäåÿòüñÿ, ÷òî íåôòü êîí÷èòñÿ Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Áàêêà Ñ.Â., Ãðàáîâñêèé Ì.À., Êîíîâà- ðàíüøå, ÷åì áàëîáàíû. ëîâ Ë.È., Ìîøêèí À.Â., Ïàæåíêîâ À.Ñ. Ñìåëÿíñêèé È.Ý., Ðûáåíêî À.Â. Áàëîáàí (Falco cherrug) â Ðîññèè. – Èíâåí- òàðèçàöèÿ, ìîíèòîðèíã è îõðàíà êëþ÷åâûõ îðíèòîëîãè- Ëèòåðàòóðà ÷åñêèõ òåððèòîðèé Ðîññèè. Â.5. Îòâ. ðåä. Ñ.À. Áóêðååâ. Àííåíêîâà Ñ.Þ., Àøáè Â. Áàëîáàí Falco cherrug. – Êà- Ì.: Ñîþç îõðàíû ïòèö Ðîññèè. 2005à. Ñ. 48–66. çàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2002. Àëìàòû, Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Áàðàáàøèí Ò.Î. ׸ðíûå äûðû â ïîïóëÿ- 2002. Ñ. 69. öèÿõ õèùíûõ ïòèö (ãèáåëü õèùíûõ ïòèö íà ËÝÏ â Çàïàäíîé Áàðàøêîâà À.Í., Ñìåëÿíñêèé È.Ý., Òîìèëåíêî À.À., Àêåí- Áåòïàê-Äàëå), Êàçàõñòàí. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. òüåâ À.Ã. Íåêîòîðûå íàõîäêè ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ íà Âîñ- 2005. ¹4. Ñ. 29–32. òîêå Êàçàõñòàíà. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2009. Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Áàðàáàøèí Ò.Î. Õèùíûå ïòèöû è ñîâû ¹17. Ñ. 131–144. Óëóòàó. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2006. ¹5. Áåêìàíñóðîâ Ð.Õ. Ðîñò ÷èñëåííîñòè ñàïñàíà íà Íèæíåé Ñ. 37–49 Êàìå ïðîäîëæàåòñÿ, Ðîññèÿ. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Áàðàáàøèí Ò.Î., Ìîøêèí À.Â. Áàëîáàí â îõðàíà. 2009. ¹16. Ñ. 164–166. Ïðèàðàëüå. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2005á. ¹4. Áèäàøêî Ô.Ã., Ïàðô¸íîâ À.Â., Ìàòþõèí À.Â. Î íåêî- Ñ. 44–49. òîðûõ ïòèöàõ Çàïàäíî-Êàçàõñòàíñêîé îáëàñòè. – Êàçàõ- Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Áàðàáàøèí Ò.Î., Ëåâèí À.Ñ., Êàðïîâ Ô.Ô. ñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2007. Àëìàòû, Ðåçóëüòàòû èññëåäîâàíèé 2005 ã. â ñòåïíûõ áîðàõ íà 2008. Ñ. 25–28. ñåâåðî-âîñòîêå Êàçàõñòàíà. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ Áðàãèí Å.À., Áðàãèí À.Å. Ìíîãîëåòíèé ìîíèòîðèíã ïîïó- îõðàíà. 2005c. ¹4. Ñ. 34–43. ëÿöèè áàëîáàíà â íàóðçóìñêîì çàïîâåäíèêå è íà ñîïðåäåëü- Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Êîâàëåíêî À.Â., Áàðàáàøèí Ò.Î., Êî- íûõ òåððèòîðèÿõ. – Ýêîëîãèÿ, ýâîëþöèÿ è ñèñòåìàòèêà æè- ðåïîâ Ì.Â. Êðóïíûå õèùíûå ïòèöû áàññåéíà Ñàðûñó. – âîòíûõ: Ìàòåðèàëû Âñåðîññèéñêîé íàó÷íî-ïðàêòè÷åñêîé Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2008. ¹13. C. 48–87. êîíôåðåíöèè ñ ìåæäóíàðîäíûì ó÷àñòèåì. Ðÿçàíü, 2009. Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Ëåâèí À.Ñ., Íîâèêîâà Ë.Ì., Ïàæåíêîâ À.Ñ. Ñ. 189–190. Áàëîáàí â Çàïàäíîì Êàçàõñòàíå: ðåçóëüòàòû èññëåäîâàíèé Âó É.-Ê., Ma M., Ê.Ô. Ëåé, M. Òÿí-Ëåé. Ñòàòóñ áàëîáàíà 2003–2004 ãã. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2005d. íà âîñòî÷íîé îêðàèíå Äæóíãàðèè, Êèòàé. – Ïåðíàòûå õèù- ¹2. Ñ. 42–55. íèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2007. ¹8. Ñ. 42–47. Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã. Ðåçóëüòàòû ìîíèòîðèíãà ïî- Ãîìáîáààòàð Ñ. Áèîëîãèÿ, ýêîëîãèÿ è îõðàíà ñîêîëà áà- ïóëÿöèé áàëîáàíà â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå â 2008 ã, Ðîñ- ëîáàíà (Falco cherrug milvipes Jerdon, 1987) â Öåíòðàëüíîé ñèÿ. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2008. ¹14. C. 63–84. Ìîíãîëèè. Àâòîðåôåðàò äèññ. íà ñîèñêàíèå ó÷. ñòåïåíè Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã. Ñàïñàí â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì äîêòîðà áèîë. íàóê. Óëààíáààòàðá 2006. 37 ñ. Çàêà÷àíà 17 îêòÿáðÿ 2010 ã. Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã., Ïîòàïîâ Å.Ð., Ôîêñ Í. Ãîìáîáààòàð Ñ., Ñóìúÿà Ä., Ïîòàïîâ Å., Ìóíõçàÿà Á., Îä- Ïðåäâàðèòåëüíûå ðåçóëüòàòû ïðîåêòà ïî èçó÷åíèþ ìèãðà- õóó Á. Áèîëîãèÿ ðàçìíîæåíèÿ ñîêîëà áàëîáàíà â Ìîíãîëèè. öèè áàëîáàíà â Ðîññèè. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2007. ¹9. Ñ. 17–26. 2005e. ¹2. Ñ. 56–59. Ãóáèí Ñ.Â., Âèëêîâ Â.Ñ. Ðåçóëüòàòû èíâåíòàðèçàöèè îð- Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Ïàæåíêîâ À.Ñ., Êîâàëåíêî À.Â., Êîð- íèòîôàóíû Ñåâåðî-Êàçàõñòàíñêîé îáëàñòè. – Êàçàõñòàí- æåâ Ä.À., Íîâèêîâà Ë.Ì. Êðóïíûå ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè ñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2007. Àëìàòû, 2008. Ìóãîäæàð, Êàçàõñòàí. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðà- Ñ. 174–176. íà. 2007. ¹8. C. 53–65. Ãóáèí Ñ.Â., Âèëêîâ Â.Ñ., Çóáàíü È.À., Êðàñíèêîâ À.Â., Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Ïôåôôåð Ð. Ê âîïðîñó î ïîäâèäîâîé Ãàéäèí Ñ.Â. Âñòðå÷è õèùíûõ ïòèö â Ñåâåðî-Êàçàõñòàíñêîé ïðèíàäëåæíîñòè è íàó÷íîì íàçâàíèè áàëîáàíîâ, íàñåëÿþ- îáëàñòè. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëåòåíü ùèõ ñåâåðî-çàïàä Ñðåäíåé Àçèè. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ 2008. Àëìàòû, 2009. Ñ. 238–240. îõðàíà. 2009. ¹17. C. 89–92. Äåìåíòüåâ Ã.Ï. Îòðÿä õèùíûå ïòèöû. – Ïòèöû Ñîâåòñêîãî Êîâàëåíêî À.Â. Îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèå íàáëþäåíèÿ â ðàéîíå Ñîþçà. Ò. 1. Ì., 1951. Ñ. 70–341. êîñìîäðîìà Áàéêîíóð. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé Äåíèñîâ È.À. Íàõîäêè ãí¸çä áàëîáàíà íà þãå ×èìêåíò- áþëëåòåíü 2004. Àëìàòû, 2005. Ñ. 45–49. ñêîé îáëàñòè. – Selevinia, 1995. ¹1. Ñ. 75. Êîâàëåíêî À.Â. Îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèå èññëåäîâàíèÿ â äîëè- Êàðïîâ Ô.Ô., Ëåâèí À.Ñ. Ðåçóëüòàòû ïîåçäêè â Êàçàõñêèé íå íèæíåé Ñûðäàðüè è íåêîòîðûõ ïðèëåãàþùèõ òåððèòî- ìåëêîñîïî÷íèê â 2005 ã. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷å- ðèÿõ â 2005 ã. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëå- ñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2005. Àëìàòû, 2006. Ñ. 54–56. òåíü 2005. Àëìàòû, 2006. Ñ. 59–69. Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè Óðàëüñêîãî ðåãèîíà. Ñî- Êîâøàðü À.Ô., Ëåâèí À.Ñ., Áåëÿëîâ Î.Â. Ïòèöû ïóñòûíè êîëîîáðàçíûå (Falconiformes), Ñîâîîáðàçíûå (Strigiformes). Áåòïàê-Äàëà. – Òðóäû Èíñòèòóòà çîîëîãèè. Ò. 48. Îðíèòîëî- Ïåðìü, 1998. 483 ñ. ãèÿ. Àëìàòû, 2004. Ñ. 85–126. Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 73

Êîâøàðü À.Ô., Õðîêîâ Â.Â. Ê ôàóíå ïòèö Ïàâëîäàðñêîãî Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2005. ¹4. Ñ. 58–60. Çàèðòûøüÿ. – Ôàóíà è áèîëîãèÿ ïòèö Êàçàõñòàíà. Àëìàòû, Ïåñòîâ Ì.Â., Ñàðàåâ Ô.À. Íàõîäêè ãí¸çä íåêîòîðûõ ïåð- 1993. Ñ. 133–144. íàòûõ õèùíèêîâ íà ìåëîâîì ïëàòî Àêêåðåãåøèí, Àòûðàó- Êîâøàðü Â.À. Îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèå íàáëþäåíèÿ íà Òåíãèç- ñêàÿ îáëàñòü, Êàçàõñòàí. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. Êóðãàëüäæèíñêîé ïðîåêòíîé òåððèòîðèè â 2008 ã. – Êà- 2009. ¹15. Ñ. 132–133. çàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2008. Àëìàòû, Ïôåôôåð Ð.Ã. Î ãíåçäîâàíèè áàëîáàíà â Áåòïàê-Äàëå. – 2009à. Ñ. 63–67. Îõðàíà õèùíûõ ïòèö. Ì., 1983. Ñ. 153–154. Êîçëîâà Å.Â. Ïòèöû þãî-çàïàäíîãî Çàáàéêàëüÿ, Ñåâåðíîé Ñàðàåâ Ô.À. Íàáëþäåíèÿ çà ïòèöàìè â Ñåâåðî-Âîñòî÷íîì Ìîíãîëèè è Öåíòðàëüíîé Ãîáè. Èçä. ÀÍ ÑÑÑÐ. Ëåíèíãðàä, Ïðèêàñïèè âåñíîé 2008 ã. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷å- 1930. 397 ñ. ñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2008. Àëìàòû, 2009. Ñ. 19–24. Êîëáèíöåâ Â.Ã. Áàëîáàí Falco cherrug. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé Ñêëÿðåíêî Ñ. Ïðîäàòü, ÷òîáû ñïàñòè. – Îõðàíà äèêîé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2002. Àëìàòû, 2002. Ñ. 69. ïðèðîäû. 2001. ¹3 (22). Ñ. 25–27. Êîðåëîâ Ì.Í. Îòðÿä Õèùíûå ïòèöû. – Ïòèöû Êàçàõñòàíà. Ñìåëÿíñêèé È.Ý., Áàðàøêîâà À.Í., Òîìèëåíêî À.À., Áå- Ò. 2. Àëìà-Àòà, 1962. Ñ. 488–707. ð¸çîâèêîâ Í.Í. Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè ïðåäãîðèé Êàëáèíñêîãî Êîøêèí À.Â. Îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèå íàáëþäåíèÿ â Êóðãàëü- Àëòàÿ, Êàçàõñòàí. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2006. äæèíñêîì çàïîâåäíèêå â 2003 ã. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòî- ¹7. Ñ. 46–55. ëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2003. Àëìàòû, 2004. Ñ. 54–56. Ñìåëÿíñêèé È.Ý., Áàðàøêîâà À.Í., Òîìèëåíêî À.À. Íå- Êîøêèí À.Â. Îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèå íàáëþäåíèÿ íà òåððèòî- êîòîðûå íàõîäêè ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ â ñòåïÿõ Âîñòî÷íîãî ðèè Òåíãèçñêîãî ðåãèîíà â 2005 ã. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòî- Êàçàõñòàíà â 2007. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2008. ëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2005. Àëìàòû, 2006. Ñ. 35–38. ¹12. Ñ. 69–78. Êîøêèí À.Â. Îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèå íàáëþäåíèÿ â Òåíãèç- Ñòàðèêîâ Ñ.Â. Ïîçäíåâåñåííèå íàáëþäåíèÿ ïòèö â ïîéìå ñêîì ðåãèîíå â 2006 ãîäó. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷å- ð. Áóõòàðìà â 2004 ã. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé ñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2006. Àëìàòû, 2007à. Ñ. 41–44. áþëëåòåíü 2004. Àëìàòû, 2005. Ñ. 95–98. Êîøêèí À.Â. Îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèå íàáëþäåíèÿ â Êóðãàëü- Ñòàðèêîâ Ñ.Â. Îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèå èññëåäîâàíèÿ â Áóõòàð- äæèíñêîì çàïîâåäíèêå â 2004 ã. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòî- ìèíñêîé äîëèíå è íà ïðèëåãàþùèõ õðåáòàõ êàçàõñòàíñêîãî ëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2006. Àëìàòû, 2007b. Ñ. 262–265. Àëòàÿ â 2005 ã. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëå- Êðàñíàÿ êíèãà ÑÑÑÐ. Ò. 1. Ì., 1984. 391 ñ. òåíü 2005. Àëìàòû, 2006. Ñ. 111–137. Ëåâèí À.Ñ. Òðàãåäèÿ áàëîáàíà â Êàçàõñòàíå. – Àêòóàëü- Ñóõ÷óëóóí Ã. Ïðèðîäîîõðàííû ñòàòóñ è òðàíñãðàíè÷íûé íûå ïðîáëåìû èçó÷åíèÿ è îõðàíû ïòèö Âîñòî÷íîé Åâðî- îáîðîò áàëîáàíà â Ìîíãîëèè. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ ïû è Ñåâåðíîé Àçèè. Ìàòåðèàëû Ìåæäóíàðîäíîé êîí- îõðàíà. 2008. ¹12. Ñ. 56–58. ôåðåíöèè (XI Îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêàÿ êîíôåðåíöèÿ). Êàçàíü, Òàðàñîâ Ï.Ï. Ýëåìåíòû òà¸æíîé ôàóíû þæíîãî Õàíãàÿ. 2001. Ñ. 374–376. – Áþëë. ÌÎÈÏ. îòä. áèîëîãèè. 1952. Ò. 57. ¹5. 29–32. Ëåâèí À.Ñ. Ó÷¸ò ÷èñëåííîñòè õèùíûõ ïòèö â Áåòïàê-Äàëå Òàðàñîâ Ì.Ï. Îðíèòîãåîãðàôè÷åñêèé î÷åðê Ìîíãîëü- è Êàçàõñêîì ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêå. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëî- ñêîãî Àëòàÿ. – Íîâîñòè îðíèòîëîãèè. Íàóêà Êàç.ÑÑÐ. Àëìà- ãè÷åñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2004. Àëìàòû, 2005. Ñ. 35–38. Àòà. 1965. Ñ. 376–378. Ëåâèí À.Ñ. Ïðîáëåìû îõðàíû áàëîáàíà â Êàçàõñòàíå. – Òèëüáà Ï.À., Ìíàöåêàíîâ Ð.À. Ñàïñàí (Falco peregrinus Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2008à. ¹12. Ñ. 48–55. brookei) íà Ñåâåðíîì Êàâêàçå. – Îðíèòîëîãèÿ â Ñåâåðíîé Ëåâèí À.Ñ. Áàëîáàí â Êàçàõñòàíå: ñîâðåìåííîå ñîñòîÿ- Åâðàçèè. Ìàòåðèàëû XIII Ìåæäóíàðîäíîé îðíèòîëîãè÷å- íèå ïîïóëÿöèé. – Selevinia, 2008á. Ñ. 211–222. ñêîé êîíôåðåíöèè Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè. Òåçèñô äîêëàäîâ. Ëåâèí À.Ñ. Áàëîáàí íà âîñòîêå Êàçàõñòàíà. – Ïåðíàòûå Îðåíáóðã, 2010. Ñ. 304. õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2008ñ. ¹14. Ñ. 85–95. Ôîêñ Í., Áàðòîí Í., Ïîòàïîâ Å. Îõðàíà ñîêîëà-áàëîáàíà è Ëåâèí À., Êàðïîâ Ô. Î ãíåçäîâàíèè áàëîáàíà â Öåíòðàëü- ñîêîëèíàÿ îõîòà – Ñòåïíîé áþëëåòåíü. 2003. ¹14. Ñ. 28–33. íîì Êàçàõñòàíå. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2005. Ùåðáàêîâ Á.Â. Çàìåòêè î âñòðå÷àõ õèùíûõ ïòèö íà âîñ- ¹4. Ñ. 52–57. òîêå Êàçàõñòàíà. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé áþë- Ëåâèí À.C., Êîâàëåíêî À.Â., Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Äèíàìèêà ÷èñ- ëåòåíü 2007. Àëìàòû, 2008. Ñ. 172. ëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà íà þãî-âîñòîêå Êàçàõñòàíà. – Ïåðíàòûå Barton N.W.H. Recent data on Saker trapping pressure. – õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2010. ¹18. C. 167–174. Falco. 2002. ¹20. P. 5–8. Ëåâèí À., Øìûãàë¸â Ñ., Äèêñîí À., Êóíêà Ò. Áàëîáàí â Baumgart W. Der Sakerfalke. Die Neue Brehm-Bucherei, A. áîðàõ ñåâåðî-âîñòî÷íîãî Êàçàõñòàíà. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè Ziemsen Verlag, Wittenberg Luterstadt, 1978. 160 s. è èõ îõðàíà. 2007. ¹8. Ñ. 48–52. Baumgart W. Der Sakerfalke. Second edition. Wittenberg Ëîáêîâ Å.Ã. Êðå÷åò Falco rusticolus Linnaeus, 1758 – Lutherstadt, 1991. 159 p. Êðàñíàÿ êíèãà Êàì÷àòêè. Ò. 1. Æèâîòíûå. Ïåòðîïàâëîâñê- Barton N. Second international conference of the Middle Êàì÷àòñêèé, 2006. Ñ. 153–156. East Falcon Research Group, Ulan Baatar, Mongolia. Falco. Ma M., Ìåé Þ., Ò. Ëåéëåé, É.-Ê. Âó, ×. Éèíã, K. Ôåíã. 2001. ¹17. P. 3–4. Áàëîáàí â ïóñòûíå Ñåâåðíîãî Ñèíöçÿíÿ, Êèòàé. – Ïåðíàòûå Bragin E.A. Recent status and studies of the Saker Falcon in õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2006. ¹6. Ñ. 58–64. the northern Kazakhstan. –Saker Falcon in Mongolia: research Ìîøêèí À.Â. Êëåïòîïàðàçèòèçì – îäèí èç ðàñïðîñòðà- and conservation (Proceedings of II International Conference í¸ííûõ ñïîñîáîâ äîáû÷è ïðîïèòàíèÿ ñàïñàíàìè â óñëîâè- on Saker Falcon and Houbara Bustard, Ulaanbaatar, Mongo- ÿõ ðîñòà èõ ÷èñëåííîñòè íà Þæíîì Óðàëå, Ðîññèÿ. – Ïåð- lia, 1–4 July 2000) / E. Potapov, S. Banzragch, N. Fox & N. íàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2009. ¹17. Ñ. 93–97. Barton, eds. Ulaanbaatar, 2001. P. 110–115. Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã. Ðåçóëüòàòû ïðîåêòà ïî èçó÷åíèþ íåëå- BirdLife International 2010. Saker Falcon (Falco cher- ãàëüíîãî ñîêîëèíîãî áèçíåñà â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå rug): how to interpret new population estimates? – Globally â 2000–2006 ãã. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2007. Threatened Bird Forums. 2010. . Downloaded on 13 October 2010. Ïàæåíêîâ À.Ñ., Êîðæåâ Ä.À., Õîõëîâà Í.À. Íîâûå ñâå- Dixon A. Saker Falcon breeding population estimates. Part äåíèÿ î êðóïíûõ õèùíûõ ïòèöàõ Ìóãîäæàð, Êàçàõñòàí. – 1: Europe. Falco. 2007. 29 P. 4–12. 74 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

Dixon A. Saker Falcon breeding population estimates. Part Nikolenko E., Karyakin I. The Saker Falcon in the Russian 2: Asia. – Falco. 2009. 33. P. 4–10. Part of Altai-Sayan Region: study results of population status. Dixon A., Nyambayar B., M. Etheridge, Gankhuyag P.-O., – Asian Raptors: Science and Conservation for Present and Gombobaatar S. Development of the Artificial Nest Project in Future. The proceedings of the 6th International Conference Mongolia. – Falco. ¹32. P. 8–10. on Asian Raptors, 23–27 June, 2010, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. Editors. Editorial. – Falco. 2003. ¹22. P. 2. Ulaanbaatar, 2010. P. 39 Ellis D.H. The History of Saker Falcon Research and Conser- Nyambayar B., Bayarjargal B., J. Stacey, A. Bräunlich. Hou- vation in Mongolia: A Case Study in the Subversion of Sci- bara Bustard and Saker Falcon surveys in Galba Gobi IBA, south- ence. – Savethefalcons. 2003. . Downloaded on 17 October 2010. and BirdLife International). Ulaanbaatar, 2009. 41 p. . Downloaded on 18 August 2003. Environmental Research and Wildlife Devel- October 2010. opment Agency, Abu Dhabi, 2003. . Downloaded on 13 Octo- N.W.H. Mongolian Altai Survey 2001. – Falco. 2002. ¹19. ber 2010. P. 7–8. IUCN 2010. Falco cherrug. – IUCN Red List of Threatened Potapov E., D. Sumya, S. Gombobaatar, Fox N.C. Nest site Species. Version 2010.3. . Download- selection in Mongolian Sakers. – Falco. 2002. ¹19. P. 9–10. ed on 13 October 2010. Potapov E., Fox N.C., D. Sumya and S. Gombobaatar. Galushin V.M. Status of the Saker in Russia and Eastern Eu- Migration studies of the Saker Falcon. – Falco. 2002. ¹19. rope. – Falco. 2004. ¹24. P. 3–8. P. 3–4. Galushin V., Moseikin V. & Sanin N. Saker Falcon breeding Potapov E. and Ma M. The highlander: the highest breed- range and populations in European Russia. – Saker Falcon ing Saker in the world. – Falco. 2004. ¹23. P. 10–12. in Mongolia: research and conservation (Proceedings of II Potapov E. and Sale R. The Gyrfalcon. Yale University Press, International Conference on Saker Falcon and Houbara Bus- 2005. 288 p. tard, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, 1–4 July 2000) / E. Potapov, Ryabtsev V.V. Saker Falcon in the Baikal region. – Saker S. Banzragch, N. Fox & N. Barton, eds. Ulaanbaatar, 2001. Falcon in Mongolia: research and conservation (Proceedings P. 34–43. of II International Conference on Saker Falcon and Houbara Gombobaatar S., Sumiya D., Shagdarsuren O., Potapov E. Bustard, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, 1–4 July 2000) / E. Potapov, & Fox N. Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug milvipes Jerdon) mortal- S. Banzragch, N. Fox & N. Barton, eds. Ulaanbaatar, 2001. ity in central Mongolia and population threats. – Mongolian J. P. 58–63. Biol. Sci. 2004. ¹2(2). P. 13–21. Shijirmaa D., Potapov E., Banzragch S. & Fox N.C. The Karyakin I., Konovalov L., Moshkin A., Pazhenkov A., Saker Falcon Falco cherrug in Mongolia. – Raptors at risk. Smelyanskiy I., Rybenko A. Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) in / R. D. Chancellor & B.-U. Meyburg, eds. World Working Russia. – Falco. 2004à. ¹23. P. 3–9. Group on Birds of Prey and Owls, & Hancock House, Surrey, Karyakin I., Levin A., Novikova L., Pazhenkov A. Saker in British Columbia, 2000. P. 263–268. the North-Western Kazakhstan: results of the 2003–2004 sur- Tseveenmyadag N., Nyambayar B. The Impacts of Roden- veys. – Falco. 2004b. ¹24. P. 11–13. ticide Used to Control Rodents on Demoiselle other Animals Levin A.S. Problems of Saker Falcon conservation in Kaza- in Mongolia. A short Report to the International Crane Work- khstan. – Falco. 2000. ¹16. P. 8–9. shop, Beijing, China, August 9–10, 2002. Levin A.S. On the critical state of the Saker Falcon popula- Wan Ziming. Conservation and management of Saker Fal- tion in Kazakhstan. – Saker Falcon in Mongolia: research and con in China. – Saker Falcon in Mongolia: research and con- conservation (Proceedings of II International Conference on servation (Proceedings of II International Conference on Saker Saker Falcon and Houbara Bustard, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, Falcon and Houbara Bustard, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, 1–4 July 1–4 July 2000) / E. Potapov, S. Banzragch, N. Fox & N. Bar- 2000) / E. Potapov, S. Banzragch, N. Fox & N. Barton, eds. ton, eds. Ulaanbaatar, 2001. P. 64–79. Ulaanbaatar, 2001. P. 196–201. Levin A. Sakers in Kazakhstan 2002. – Falco. 2003. ¹21. Watson M. Saker Falcon ecology and conservation in north- P. 8–9. east Kazakhstan. Report Darrel Institute of Conservation and Levin A.S., Dixon A. Long-term monitoring of breeding Ecology. 1997. 66 p. Saker Falcons in Eastern Kazakhstan. – Falco. 2008. ¹32. Xinjiang Conservation Fund. Summary Version of Report on P. 11–14. Illegal Poaching and Trade of Saker Falcon in Xinjiang. 2008. Levin A., Watson M., Macdonald H., Fox N.C. The Saker 6 p. Falcon Falco cherrug in Kazakstan. – Raptors at risk. / R. D. Downloaded on 13 October 2010. Chancellor & B.-U. Meyburg, eds. World Working Group on Ye Xiaodi and Ma Ming. China 2001. – Falco. 2002. ¹19. Birds of Prey and Owls, Hancock House, Surrey, British Co- P. 5–6. lumbia, 2000. P. 259–262. Ye Xiaodi, Wan Ziming & Bai Yanxia. The Saker Falcon in Ma M. The status of Saker Falcon in Xijiang. – Newsletter of China is fighting for survival. – Saker Falcon in Mongolia: re- China Ornithological Society. 1999. ¹8 (1). P. 13–14. search and conservation (Proceedings of II International Con- Ma M. Saker smugglers target western China. – Oriental ference on Saker Falcon and Houbara Bustard, Ulaanbaatar, Bird Club Bulletin. 1999. ¹29. P. 17. Mongolia, 1–4 July 2000) / E. Potapov, S. Banzragch, N. Fox Ma M. Recent data on saker smuggling in China. – Falco. & N. Barton, eds. Ulaanbaatar, 2001. P. 80–94. 2004. ¹23. P. 17–18. Yu M., M. Ma, A. Dixon, B.-W. Hu. [Investigation on raptor Ma M. and C. Ying. Saker Falcon trade and smuggling in of electrocution along power lines in the western China]. – China. – Falco. 2007. ¹30. P. 11–14. Chinese Journal of Zoology. 2008. ¹43. P. 114–117. Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 75

BreedingEcologyandSurvivalStatusoftheGoldenEagleinChina ГНЕЗДОВАЯ БИОЛОГИЯ И СТАТУС БЕРКУТА В КИТАЕ MaMing&PengDing(KeyLaboratoryofBiogeography&BioresourceinAridLand, XinjiangInstituteofEcologyandGeography,ChineseAcademyofSciences, Urumqi,China) WeidongLi(XinjiangInstituteofEnvironmentProtection,Urumqi,China) YingChen&BaowenHu(XinjiangInstituteofEcologyandGeography,Urumqi,China) Ма Минг, Динг Пенг (Ключевая лаборатория биогеографии и биоресурсов аридных территорий, Синцзяньский институт экологии и географии, Китайская Академия Наук, Урумчи, Китай) Ли Вейдонг (Синцзяньский институт охраны окружающей среды, Урумчи, Китай) Чен Юинг, Ху Баоуэн (Синцзяньский институт экологии и географии, Урумчи, Китай)

Contact: Àáñòðàêò Ma Ming Áåðêóò (Aquila chrysaetos) ðàñïðîñòðàí¸í ãëàâíûì îáðàçîì íà ñåâåðî-çàïàäå, ñåâåðî-âîñòîêå è þãî-çàïàäå Xinjiang Institute of Êèòàÿ. Ïòèöû íàáëþäàëèñü â 60–70% âîñüìèäåñÿòè îêðóãîâ Ñèíöçÿíÿ (çàïàä Êèòàÿ). Îðëû ãíåçäÿòñÿ â ãîðàõ Ecology and Geography, Êóíüëóíü, Êàðàêîðóì, Ïàìèð, Òÿíü-Øàíü, Êàðàìàé, Áàéòûê è íà Àëòàå, âûñîòà íàä óðîâíåì ìîðÿ êîòîðûõ Chinese Academy of êîëåáëåòñÿ îò 500 ì äî 5500 ì. Áûëî óñòàíîâëåíî, ÷òî îñíîâíûìè îáúåêòàìè äîáû÷è áåðêóòà ÿâëÿþòñÿ âîñåìü Sciences, No 40 Beijing âèäîâ ïòèö è øåñòü âèäîâ ìëåêîïèòàþùèõ. Çàíÿòîñòü ñîñòàâèëà ïðèìåðíî 7–9 ãí¸çä íà 5400 êì2, òàêèì îáðà- Road, Urumqi 830011, çîì ÷èñëåííîñòü ïîïóëÿöèè áåðêóòà è å¸ ïëîòíîñòü î÷åíü íèçêè. Ïëîòíîñòü ñîñòàâèëà 1,30–1,67 ïàð íà 1000 2 Xinjiang, P R China êì â ãíåçäîâîé ñåçîí. Ïðèíèìàÿ âî âíèìàíèå òàêèå çíà÷åíèÿ ïëîòíîñòè, ÷èñëåííîñòü áåðêóòà â Ñèíöçÿíå tel.: +86 991 7885 363, ìîæíî îöåíèòü â 4000–5000 ïòèö. Òàêèå îöåíêè âåñüìà îïòèìèñòè÷íû, òàê êàê âñÿ ïîïóëÿöèÿ áåðêóòà â Êèòàå +86 991 3840 369 îöåíèâàåòñÿ ïðèáëèçèòåëüíî â 10000 ïòèö, ãëàâíûì îáðàçîì íàñåëÿþùèõ çàïàä ñòðàíû.  Ñèíöçÿíå ñóùåñòâó- þò òûñÿ÷è äèíàñòèé ñîêîëüíèêîâ, è ïðèáëèçèòåëüíî 1100–1500 áåðêóòîâ ñîäåðæàòñÿ â íåâîëå, ÷òî ñîñòàâëÿåò fax: +86 991 7885 320 ïî÷òè 22–30% ïðèðîäíîé ïîïóëÿöèè. [email protected] Êëþ÷åâûå ñëîâà: ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè, õèùíûå ïòèöû, áåðêóò, Aquila chrysaetos, ÷èñëåííîñòü ïîïóëÿöèè, ôå- maming3211@ ñòèâàëü ñîêîëèíîé îõîòû, ñîäåðæàíèå ïòèö â íåâîëå, Ñèíöçÿíü. yahoo.com Abstract Golden Eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) mainly distribute in the northwest, northeast and southwest of China. There were some records of the eagle in 60–70% of the eighties counties in Xinjiang, the west of China. The eagles breed in the mountains, such as Kunlun Mts., Karakorum Mts., Pamirs, Tianshan Mts., Karamay, Baytik Mts. and Altai Mts., which elevation is from 500 m to 5500 m. And we found that the eagle’s prey included 8 avian species and 6 mammal species. About 7–9 nests were occupied on the area of 5400 km2, so their population size and density is very low, it is about 1.30–1.67 pair per 1000 km2 in breeding season. Calculated by this density, their popula- tion in Xinjiang was 4000–5000 individuals. Optimistically, their population size in China was about 10000, mainly distributed in the west. There are thousands of falconry families in Xinjiang and about 1100–1500 Golden Eagles are captured in jails, nearly 22–30% of nature population. Keywords: birds of prey, raptors, Golden Eagle, Aquila chrysaetos, population size, falconry festival, capture, Xinjiang.

Áåðêóò (Aquila chrysaetos) – â Êèòàå åãî Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), alternate òàêæå íàçûâàþò ÷èñòûé (öåëîìóäðåííûé) name in China is the undefiled eagle, red- îð¸ë, ðûæåãîëîâûé îð¸ë, ÷åðíîêðûëûé headed eagle, black-winged eagle and so îð¸ë è ò. ä. «Diao» – òàê íàçûâàþò áåðêóòà on. It was called “Diao” in Chinese ancient â êèòàéñêèõ äðåâíèõ êíèãàõ, íàïðèìåð â books e.g. “The Book of Songs” (c. B.C. «Êíèãå ïåñåí» (1100 ã. äî í.ý.), «Ñâÿùåííîé 1100), “Bird Scripture” (before A.D. 1000) êíèãå ïòèö» (1000 ã. äî í.ý.) è «Compendium and “Compendium of Materia Medica” of Materia Medica» (1596 ã.). Ìåñòíûå êàçà- (A.D. 1596). Local Kazakhs people called õè íàçâàëè åãî «áóðêåò», ìîíãîëû – «êóðåí it “Burket”, Mongolic is “Kuren Burgot”, áóðãîò», êèðãèçû – «áóðêþò», à óéãóðû – Kirghiz called it “Burkit”, and Uygur called «ñåðèê áóðêóò». it “Serik Bürküt”.

Ââåäåíèå Introduction  ïîñëåäíèå ãîäû, èç-çà óíè÷òîæåíèÿ Recent years, due to habitat destruc- ñðåäû îáèòàíèÿ, áðàêîíüåðñòâà, îòðàâëå- tion, poaching, pesticide and chemical íèÿ ïåñòèöèäàìè è õèìèêàòàìè, ïîïóëÿ- poison pollution, the population of Golden öèÿ áåðêóòà â Êèòàå ðåçêî ñîêðàòèëàñü. Eagles rapidly decreased in China. With 76 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

Ïòåíöû áåðêóòà (Aquila shrinking habitat and food shortage arising chrysaetos) â ãíåçäå. from human’s large-scale exploitation, the Ñèíöçÿíü, èþíü 2005 ã. Ôîòî Ìà Ìèíãà. Golden Eagle loses their survival founda- tion. Besides, local hunting and capturing Nestlings of the Golden Eagle (Aquila does pose a threat to them. The custom chrysaetos) in the nest. teaching the raptor how to prey originate Xinjiang, June 2005. 3000–4000 years ago or much earlier Photo by Ma Ming. (Wang, 1984; Xu, 1995; Gao, 2002; Ye et al., 2002), it’s not only retained in the mountain or pasturing areas of the Central Asia and West China like Xinjiang, Gan- su, Qinghai and Inner Mongolia, but also found in the ancient “cave pictures” and “rock paintings” or “totem” recording do- mestication and falconry from remote cul- ture (Ma and Yang, 1992). As a world-endangered large raptor, the Golden Eagle belongs to the genus Aquila, Accipitridae and Falconiformes, for the sparse population, they were listed on the Appen- Ñîêðàùåíèå ïëîùàäè ãíåçäîïðèãîäíûõ dix II of CITES and level I by Chinese Wildlife áèîòîïîâ è íåõâàòêà êîðìîâ â ðåçóëüòàòå Protection Law (Zheng & Wang, 1998). Their êðóïíîìàñøòàáíîé èõ ýêñïëóàòàöèè ÷å- fierce temper gained them the title “the Rap- ëîâåêîì ïîäðûâàåò îñíîâó áëàãîïîëó÷- tors’ King” or “King in the Sky”. íîãî ñóùåñòâîâàíèÿ áåðêóòà. Êðîìå òîãî, They once wildly distributed throughout ìåñòíàÿ îõîòà è èçúÿòèå ïòèö èç ïðèðîäû North America, Europe, the Middle East, ñòàâÿò ïîä óãðîçó åãî ñóùåñòâîâàíèå. Òðà- E and W Asia, and N Africa, and mainly in äèöèè îõîòû ñ õèùíûìè ïòèöàìè âîçíèêëè mountainous region. They breed in NE and 3000–4000 ëåò íàçàä èëè íàìíîãî ðàíåå NW China, such as Kunlun Mts., Karakorum (Wang, 1984; Xu, 1995; Gao, 2002; Ye et Mts., Pamirs, Tianshan Mts., Karamay, Bay- al., 2002), îíè ñîõðàíèëèñü íå òîëüêî â ãî- tik Mts. and Altai Mts. In the Junggar Basin ðàõ èëè ñêîòîâîä÷åñêèõ îáëàñòÿõ Ñðåäíåé they appear at elevation of 500–1500 m Àçèè è Çàïàäíîãî Êèòàÿ, òàêèõ êàê Ñèíö- and in Tibet and Kunlun Mts. at elevation çÿíü, Ãàíüñó, Öèíõàé è Âíóòðåííÿÿ Ìîí- of 5500 m. Divided into 5–6 subspecies in ãîëèÿ, îá ýòîì ñâèäåòåëüñòâóþò íàéäåííûå the world, two of them inhabit China, e.g. äðåâíèå ïåùåðíûå ðèñóíêè è íàñêàëüíàÿ namely northeast subspecies A. c. canaden- æèâîïèñü èëè òîòåìû, íà êîòîðûõ èçî- sis and western subspecies A. c. daphanea áðàæåíû ïðèðó÷åíèå ïòèö è ñîêîëèíàÿ (Su, 1998). îõîòà, ñóùåñòâîâàâøèå â äàë¸êîé êóëüòóðå (Ma and Yang, 1992). Identification Áåðêóò ïðèíàäëåæèò ðîäó Aquila The Golden Eagle is a dark brown eagle (Accipitridae, Falconiformes) – ýòî âñåìèð- with golden crest and huge bill, body length íî óãðîæàåìûé êðóïíûé õèùíèê, òàê êàê is 80–90 cm, weight is 4.1–6.7 kg and wing ïîïóëÿöèè åãî ðàçðîçíåíû. Áåðêóò âíå- span is 1.8–2.3 m (Lu, 2000). It is differ from ñ¸í â Ïðèëîæåíèå II ÑÈÒÅÑ è îòíåñ¸í ê Imperial Eagle (Aquila heliacais) absence of óãðîæàåìûì âèäàì Êèòàéñêîãî çàêîíà îá white spots on its shoulder. The Golden Ea- îõðàíå äèêîé ïðèðîäû (Zheng & Wang, gle juveniles have large white patches un- 1998). Áëàãîäàðÿ ñâèðåïîìó õàðàêòåðó der wings and black trailing band with white åãî ïî ïðàâó íàçûâàþò «Êîðîëü Õèùíèêîâ» base in the tail. They have brown irises, gray èëè «Êîðîëü Íåáà». bill, yellow feet, and rather silent in field. Áåðêóòû êîãäà-òî áûëè øèðîêî ðàñïðî- The western subspecies A. c. daphanea’s ñòðàíåíû ïî âñåé Ñåâåðíîé Àìåðèêå, body color is lighter, upperparts are chest- Åâðîïå, Áëèæíåìó Âîñòîêó, Âîñòî÷íîé nut brown. And the northeastern subspe- è Çàïàäíîé Àçèè è Ñåâåðíîé Àôðèêå, è cies A. c. canadensis’ body is comparatively ãëàâíûì îáðàçîì â ãîðíûõ ðåãèîíàõ. Îíè darker, upperparts are black brown. ãíåçäÿòñÿ íà ñåâåðî-âîñòîêå è ñåâåðî- çàïàäå Êèòàÿ, â ÷àñòíîñòè, â ãîðàõ Êóíü- Habit ëóíü, Êàðàêîðóì, Ïàìèð, Òÿíü-Øàíü, The eagles breed on drought plains, Êàðàìàé, Áàéòûê è íà Àëòàå.  Äæóíãàð- mountains with rock cliffs or open fields, Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 77

ñêîì áàññåéíå îíè îòìå÷àþòñÿ íà âûñî- they particularly like to nest in shallow òå 500–1500 ì íàä óðîâíåì ìîðÿ, â Òè- caves or depressions on the middle or up- áåòå è Êóíüëóíå – íà âûñîòå 5500 ì. Èç per cliff-ledge, sometimes also on big trees. 5–6 ïîäâèäîâ âûäåëÿåìûõ â ìèðå, äâà èç Adults mostly are separate and sedentary, íèõ îáèòàþò â Êèòàå, à èìåííî – ñåâåðî- whereas juveniles disperse various distanc- âîñòî÷íûé ïîäâèä A. c. canadensis è çà- es. As a First Class of national protection ïàäíûé ïîäâèä A. c. daphanea (Su, 1998). wild bird, it is not suitable to dissect their stomachs for food analysis, but through pel- Èäåíòèôèêàöèÿ lets and remains in nests, sometimes from Áåðêóò – ò¸ìíî-êîðè÷íåâûé îð¸ë ñ çî- field observation. Based on these analyses ëîòûìè çàòûëêîì è âåðõíåé ñòîðîíîé in the Junggar Basin, we found that they live øåè, à òàêæå ñ îãðîìíûì êëþâîì, äëèíà on 8 avian species and 6 mammal species òåëà 80–90 ñì, âåñ 4,1–6,7 êã è ðàçìàõ including young Goitred Gazelle (Gazella êðûëüåâ 1,8–2,3 ì (Lu, 2000). Îòëè÷àåòñÿ subgutturosa) and Mongolian Hare (Lepus îò ìîãèëüíèêà (Aquila heliaca) îòñóòñòâèåì capensis) in major, and Ground-Jay (Podoc- áåëûõ ïÿòåí íà ïëå÷àõ. Ìîëîäûå áåðêóòû es panderi), Fox (Vulpes sp.), young Argali îòëè÷àþòñÿ áîëüøèìè áåëûìè ïÿòíàìè íà (Ovis ammon) etc. We ever detected hun- íèæíåé ñòîðîíå êðûëüåâ è áåëûì â îñíî- dreds of hare legs in one nest (Ma Ming et âàíèè õâîñòîì ñ ÷¸ðíîé ïîëîñîé íà êîí- al., 2006). öå. Ó íèõ êîðè÷íåâàÿ ðàäóæíàÿ îáîëî÷êà ãëàçà, ñåðûé êëþâ, æ¸ëòûå íîãè; â ïðèðîäå Breeding Ecology îíè äîâîëüíî ìîë÷àëèâûå. Çàïàäíûé ïîä- Take A. c. daphanea as an example, âèä A. c. daphanea èìååò áîëåå ñâåòëóþ the pairing season begins in February and îêðàñêó òåëà, êðàñíîâàòî-êîðè÷íåâûé March, once matching, they would build âåðõ. Ñåâåðî-âîñòî÷íûé ïîäâèä A. c. one or several nests on the cliff, spacing canadensis ñðàâíèòåëüíî áîëåå ò¸ìíûé, varied. Females take charge of nest build- âåðõ ÷¸ðíî-êîðè÷íåâûé. ing or repairing, and re-use if pair is undis- turbed. The nest external diameter is 130– Áèîëîãèÿ 160 cm, thickness 20–40 cm, it is made Îðëû ãíåçäÿòñÿ íà çàñóøëèâûõ ðàâíè- of dried branches, and with a few fur or íàõ, â ãîðàõ ñ îòâåñíûìè ñêàëàìè èëè îò- feather inside. When the nest is ready and êðûòûìè òåððèòîðèÿìè, îíè îñîáåííî weather is warm, the pairs copulate. Laying ïðåäïî÷èòàþò ãíåçäèòüñÿ â íåãëóáîêèõ ïå- the eggs is usually recorded in April, the ùåðàõ èëè íèøàõ íà ñðåäíåì èëè âåðõíåì clutch contains one to two eggs laid with âûñòóïå ñêàëû, èíîãäà òàêæå íà áîëüøèõ an interval of 3–4 days. The egg sizes are äåðåâüÿõ. Âçðîñëûå ïî áîëüøåé ÷àñòè æè- 80×60 mm or 78×61 mm, shell is white or âóò îáîñîáëåííî è îñ¸äëî, òîãäà êàê ìî- with thin spots, the weight is 130–148 g. ëîäûå øèðîêî êî÷óþò.  ñèëó òîãî, ÷òî âèä Females incubate them for 41–45 days. The îòíîñèòñÿ ê ïåðâîìó êëàññó íàöèîíàëüíîé brood-rearing lasts for 65–81 days. During îõðàíû, ïðîâåäåíèå àíàëèçà ñîäåðæèìîãî the years of food shortage, cannibalism is æåëóäêîâ íåâîçìîæíî, ïîýòîìó ïèòàíèå noted among nestlings and only one usu- èçó÷àëîñü ïî ïîãàäêàì è îñòàíêàì æåðòâ ally survives with low fertility. Resident in â ãí¸çäàõ, à òàêæå â õîäå ïîëåâûõ íàáëþ- äåíèé.  ðåçóëüòàòå ïðîâåä¸ííûõ èññëå- äîâàíèé â Äæóíãàðñêîì áàññåéíå, ìû âû- ÿâèëè, ÷òî îñíîâíûìè îáúåêòàìè ïèòàíèÿ ÿâëÿþòñÿ âîñåìü âèäîâ ïòèö è øåñòü âèäîâ ìëåêîïèòàþùèõ: â îñíîâíîì êàïñêèé çàÿö (Lepus capensis), à òàêæå ìîëîäûå äæåé- ðàíû (Gazella subgutturosa), ñàêñàóëüíûå ñîéêè (Podoces panderi), ëèñû (Vulpes sp.), ìîëîäûå àðãàëè (Ovis ammon) è ò.ä. Ìû íàõîäèëè ñîòíè ëàï çàéöåâ â îäíîì ãíåçäå (Ma Ming et al., 2006).

Ãíåçäîâàÿ ýêîëîãèÿ Áåðêóòû â íàñêàëüíîé æèâîïèñè. Âîçüì¸ì â êà÷åñòâå ïðèìåðà A. c. Ôîòî ïðåäîñòàâëåíî Ìà Ìèíãîì. daphanea. Ñåçîí èõ ðàçìíîæåíèÿ íà÷èíà- Golden Eagles in the rock painting. åòñÿ â ôåâðàëå – ìàðòå, òîêóÿ îäèí ðàç, Photo from Ma Ming. 78 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

Îñòàíêè çàéöåâ â the most part of W China, they are noted ãíåçäå áåðêóòà ñ äâóìÿ migrating vertically to low mountains or îïåðåííûìè ïòåíöàìè. Ôîòî Ìà Ìèíãà. plains for food in winter, mainly from No- vember to February. Hare legs in the nest of the Golden Eagle with two chicks. Distribution in China Photo by Ma Ming. In China, Golden Eagles mainly dis- tribute in the northwestern, northeastern and southwestern. The northeastern spe- cies A. c. canadensisis narrowly breeds in Boketu and Balin of Hulunbeir League. And the western subspecies A. c. dapha- nea spreads more widely, like Altai, Tian- shan and Kunlun Mountains in W Xinjiang, E Qinghai, Tibet, NW Gansu, SW and NE China, Hebei, Shanxi, Shaanxi, Hubei, Si- chuan, Yunnan, Guizhou and Himalayan Region. Its breeding grounds include Ti- bet, Qinghai, Xinjiang, and Shanxi etc. (fig. 1). The subspecies was recorded in îíè ìîãóò ïîñòðîèòü îäíî èëè íåñêîëüêî 60–70% of the eighties counties in Xin- ãí¸çä íà ñêàëàõ â ðàçíûõ ìåñòàõ. Ñàìêè jiang (Ma Ming, 2001). áåðóò íà ñåáÿ îòâåòñòâåííîñòü ïî ñòðîè- òåëüñòâó èëè âîññòàíîâëåíèþ ãí¸çä, è èõ Population Size Estimate ïîâòîðíîå èñïîëüçîâàíèå, åñëè ïàðó íå Currently, partially because the Golden áåñïîêîÿò. Ãí¸çäà ñòðîÿòñÿ èç ñóõèõ âå- Eagle mainly distributes in the desert or òîê ñ íåáîëüøèì êîëè÷åñòâîì ìåõà èëè high mountainous region, inhabits the cliffs ïåðüåâ â ëîòêå. Âíåøíèé äèàìåòð ãíåçäà that is very hard to reach and research, – 130–160 ñì, òîëùèíà 20–40 ñì. Ïîñëå the basic population survey and dynamic ïîñòðîéêè ãíåçäà, êîãäà ñòîèò ò¸ïëàÿ ïî- monitoring is still lag behind, and very few ãîäà, ïàðû êîïóëèðóþò. Îòêëàäêà ÿèö ïðî- domestic literatures could be consulted. èñõîäèò îáû÷íî â àïðåëå, êëàäêà ñîñòîèò So the population size was overestimated èç îäíîãî – äâóõ ÿèö, îòëîæåííûõ ñ èí- before (table 1). From 2005 to 2010, we òåðâàëîì â 3–4 äíÿ. Ðàçìåðû ÿèö – 80×60 surveyed the Karamay Nature Reserve in N ìì èëè 78×61 ìì, ñêîðëóïà áåëàÿ èëè ñ Xinjiang and pointed 248 raptorial nests, ìåëêèìè ïÿòíàìè, âåñ – 130–148 ã. Ñàì- 75 of them (30.2%) belonged to Golden Ea- êè íàñèæèâàþò èõ â òå÷åíèå 41–45 äíåé. gles. About 7–9 nests were occupied eve- Ïòåíöû íàõîäÿòñÿ â ãíåçäå 65–81 äåíü. ry year. The area under investigation was  òå ñåçîíû, êîãäà êîðìîâ íåäîñòàòî÷íî, 5400 km2, so their population size and den- ñðåäè ïòåíöîâ îòìå÷àåòñÿ êàííèáàëèçì, è sity is very low, about 1.30–1.67 pair (nest) âûæèâàåò òîëüêî îäèí ïòåíåö. Îñ¸äëûå íà per 1000 km2. The density is lower than áîëüøåé ÷àñòè Çàïàäíîãî Êèòàÿ, áåðêóòû those in neighboring countries (Karyakin et îñóùåñòâëÿþò âåðòèêàëüíûå ìèãðàöèè â al., 2010). Calculated by this density, their ïðåäãîðüÿ èëè íà ðàâíèíû â ïîèñêàõ ïèùè çèìîé, ãëàâíûì îáðàçîì â ïåðèîä ñ íîÿ- áðÿ äî ôåâðàëÿ.

Ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå â Êèòàå  Êèòàå áåðêóòû ãëàâíûì îáðàçîì ðàñ- ïðîñòðàíåíû íà ñåâåðî-çàïàäå, ñåâåðî- âîñòîêå è þãî-çàïàäå ñòðàíû. Ñåâåðî- âîñòî÷íûé ïîäâèä A. c. canadensisis ãíåçäèòñÿ óçêîé ïîëîñîé â Áîêåòó è Áà- ëèíü, Ëèãè, Õóëóíáåéð. À çàïàäíûé ïîä- âèä A. c. daphanea ðàñïðîñòðàí¸í áîëåå øèðîêî è íàñåëÿåò Àëòàé, Òÿíü-Øàíü è Êóíüëóíü â Çàïàäíîì Ñèíöçÿíå, âîñòî÷íûé Öèíõàé, Òèáåò, Ñåâåðî-Çàïàäíûé Ãàíüñó, Êëàäêà áåðêóòà. Ôîòî Ìà Ìèíãà. Þãî-Çàïàäíûé è Ñåâåðî-Çàïàäíûé Êèòàé, Clutch of the Golden Eagle. Photo by Ma Ming. Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 79

population in Xinjiang was 4000–5000 in- dividuals. Optimistically, their population size in China was about 10000, mainly in the west. Some statistics are from the re- ports of National Forestry Bureau (2009), they are not far away from what is normal (table 1).

Capture and Local Utilization Brave and magnificent, the Golden Ea- gle was all along regarded as the symbol of conqueror and power. There are many ethnic minorities in China have falconry custom such as Manchu, Hui, Uyghur, Kirghiz, Kazakhs, Naxi and Yi peoples. They domesticate different species, some like training eagles, some like hawks but few like Saker (Falco cherrug) and Per- egrine (Falco peregrinus) Falcons as in Arabia countries and Europe (table 2). Ðèñ. 1. Ãíåçäîâîé Õýáýé, Øàíüñè, Øýíüñè, Õóáýé, Ñû÷óàíü, With unique skills and experience, their àðåàë áåðêóòà (Aquila Þíüíàíü, Ãóé÷æîó è Ãèìàëàéñêóþ ïðîâèí- characteristic falconry has created brilliant chrysaetos) â Êèòàå: 1 – çàïàäíûé ïîäâèä A. c. öèþ. Åãî ãíåçäîâîé àðåàë âêëþ÷àåò Òèáåò, history and splendid culture. daphanea; 2 – ñåâåðî- Öèíõàé, Ñèíöçÿíü, Øàíüñè è ò. ä. (ðèñ. 1). Kirghiz is an ancient people who have en- âîñòî÷íûé ïîäâèä A. c. Áåðêóòû íàáëþäàëèñü íà 60–70% òåððèòî- gaged in and been very good at the falconry canadensisis. Øòðèõîâ- ðèè âîñüìèäåñÿòè îêðóãîâ Ñèíöçÿíÿ (Ma for thousand years. There is a village called êîé îáîçíà÷åí ãíåç- äîâîé àðåàë áåðêóòà, Ming, 2001). Sumtax dwelling 432 households in the òðåóãîëüíèêàìè – ìåñòà Akqi County (E78°20’, N41°00’), the south ãíåçäîâàíèÿ. Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè ïîïóëÿöèè of Xinjiang, which is famous for falconry that Fig. 1. The Golden Eagle  íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ, ÷àñòè÷íî èç-çà òîãî, every households raise and train eagles. In (Aquila chrysaetos) ÷òî áåðêóò ãëàâíûì îáðàçîì ðàñïðîñòðà- early winter, hundreds of eagles gather here breeding grounds í¸í â ïóñòûíå èëè âûñîêîãîðíûõ ðåãèî- to participate at the falconry match and fes- in China: 1 – western subspecies íàõ è ãíåçäèòñÿ íà ñêàëàõ, äî íåãî î÷åíü tival lasting for several days, and the scene A. c. daphanea; òðóäíî äîáðàòüñÿ è èññëåäîâàòü. Ýëåìåí- is spectacular. 2 – northeastern species òàðíîå èçó÷åíèå ïîïóëÿöèè è äèíàìè÷å- When the famous British falconer Mr. An- A. c. canadensisis. ñêèé ìîíèòîðèíã âñ¸ åù¸ íåäîñòàòî÷íû, drew Mandy came to investigate local fal- ñóùåñòâóåò î÷åíü íåìíîãî ìåñòíûõ ëèòå- conry skills of the Akqi County in 1991, he ðàòóðíûõ èñòî÷íèêîâ. Ïîýòîìó îöåíêà said, Falconry’s Hometown is in China and ïîïóëÿöèè ïðåæäå áûëà ñëèøêîì çàâû- Sumtax has the falconry wonder. Local fal- øåíà (òàáë. 1). Ñ 2005 ïî 2010 ãã. ìû èñ- conry includes three steps as follow: captur- ñëåäîâàëè çàïîâåäíèê Êàðàìýé íà ñåâåðå ing, training and hunting. Firstly, there are Ñèíöçÿíÿ è âûÿâèëè 248 ãí¸çä õèùíûõ two ways to capture the eagle, trapping ïòèö, ñðåäè êîòîðûõ ïðèìåðíî 75 ãí¸çä or catching in nest. Trapping is spreading ïðèíàäëåæèò áåðêóòó (30,2%). Ïðèìåðíî a horsetail net in the vale forest gap and 7–9 ãí¸çä èç íèõ çàíèìàþòñÿ åæåãîäíî. putting a hare as bait inside waiting for Ïëîùàäü îáñëåäîâàííîé òåððèòîðèè ñî- young eagle to rise to the bait. Comparably, ñòàâèëà 5400 êì2, òàêèì îáðàçîì, ÷èñ- nest catching in an aerie would give a lot ëåííîñòü è ïëîòíîñòü áåðêóòà îêàçàëèñü of care. Hunters should be fasten by them- î÷åíü íèçêèìè – ïðèìåðíî 1,30–1,67 ïàð selves on the peak, slowly come down to /1000 êì2. Ýòà ïëîòíîñòü ãîðàçäî íèæå, the nest, catch the eagle and come back, ÷åì â ñîñåäíèõ ñòðàíàõ (Karyakin et al., that is very dangerous. 2010). Ïðèíèìàÿ âî âíèìàíèå òàêèå çíà- Secondly, training the young eagle is ÷åíèÿ ïëîòíîñòè, âñþ ïîïóëÿöèþ â Ñèí- chaste by hunger and fatigue to lose its öçÿíå ìîæíî îöåíèòü â 4000–5000 ïòèö. overfull body fat and make it more light- Ýòî îïòèìèñòè÷íî, òàê êàê âñÿ ïîïóëÿöèÿ some and intimate with master. Then ea- áåðêóòà â Êèòàå íàñ÷èòûâàåò 10000 ïòèö, gles are lured to hunt by food. Finally, the ïðåèìóùåñòâåííî íà çàïàäå ñòðàíû. Íå- falconry begins in late autumn and early êîòîðûå ñòàòèñòè÷åñêèå äàííûå èç îò÷¸- winter. òîâ Íàöèîíàëüíîãî Áþðî ëåñíîãî õîçÿé- Te Second Falconry Festival was held in 80 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

Òàáë. 1. Ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå è ÷èñëåííîñòü ïîïóëÿöèè áåðêóòà (Aquila chrysaetos) â Êèòàå (Íàöèîíàëüíîå Áþðî ëåñíîãî õîçÿéñòâà, 2009). Table 1. Distribution and population size of the Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) in China (National Forestry Bureau, 2009).

Ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå (Ïðîâèíöèè) Ïëîùàäü (êì2) Ïëîòíîñòü Ðàçìåð ïîïóëÿöèè (îñîáè) Distribution (Provinces) Survey areas (km2) (îñîáåé/êì2) Population size (individuals) Densities 2 ëåòîì çèìîé (eagles/km ) in summer in winter Ïåêèí / Beijing – – 20 Õýáýé / Hebei – 0.0074 1395 Âíóòðåííÿÿ Ìîíãîëèÿ / Inner Mongolia 300000 0.0048 1441 Ëÿîíèí / Liaoning – 0.042 518 Öçèëèíü / Jilin 73190 0.0003 22 169 Õýéëóíöçÿí / Heilongjiang – – 367 Àíüõîé / Anhui Íåò íàáëþäåíèé / No find Õýíàíü / Henan – 0.0086–0.01 819 1603 Õóáýé / Hubei 29079 0.0034 100 Õóíàíü / Hunan – 5.45 36 Ãóàíäóí / Guangdong – 0.002–0.005 200 Ãóàíñè / Guangxi – – 2 ×óíöèí / Chongqing 3657 0.002–0.008 20 Ñû÷óàíü / Sichuan – 0.001–0.004 600 (ìèãðàíòû / migration) Þííàíü / Yunnan 22300 0.0043 150 Òèáåò / Tibet – 0.0039 1957 Øåíüñè / Shaanxi 102900 – 5205 Øàíüñè / Shanxi – 0.19–0.25 ? Ãàíñó / Gansu 19823 0.00027–0.109 7239 Íèíñÿ / Ningxia 21300 0.077–0.265 2327 Ñèíöçÿíü / Xinjiang 1197174 0.0047 5610 Ôóöçÿíü / Fujian – – 5 (ìèãðàíòû / migration) Âñåãî / Total 27000 2200

ñòâà, ïðèâåä¸ííûå â òàáëèöå 1, äàëåêè îò the Akqi County on March, 21st 2009, hun- ðåàëüíûõ. dreds of Kirgiz falconers carried their eagles to compete. From 2007 to 2010 we inves- Ñîäåðæàíèå â íåâîëå è ìåñòíîå èñ- tigated some hundred families, including ïîëüçîâàíèå 12–15 falconry families from the Kulansarik Õðàáðûé è âåëèêîëåïíûé, áåðêóò äîë- Village, 16 from the Akqi Village, about 50 ãîå âðåìÿ ðàñöåíèâàëñÿ êàê ñèìâîë çàâî- from the Sumtax Village, 7 from the Halaqi åâàòåëÿ è âëàñòè. Ìíîæåñòâî ýòíè÷åñêèõ Village, 15 from the Spabay Village, 3–5 ìåíüøèíñòâ â Êèòàå, òàêèå êàê ìàíü÷æóðû, from the Halabulak Village, and 20–30 from õóýé, óéãóðû, êèðãèçû, êàçàõè, íàñè, è, à the Wuqu Village. The main domesticated òàêæå äðóãèå, ñîõðàíÿþò òðàäèöèè ðàç- species is the Golden Eagle, and the next âåäåíèÿ è ïîäãîòîâêè ëîâ÷èõ ïòèö. Îíè is the Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gen- îäîìàøíèâàþò ðàçíûå âèäû: îäíè ïðåä- tilis). In the Third Falconry Festival in Akqi ïî÷èòàþò îáó÷àòü îðëîâ, äðóãèå – ÿñòðå- on March, 19th 2010, we knew that 60 fal- áîâ, è î÷åíü íåìíîãèå – áàëîáàíîâ (Falco conry families obtained monthly income of cherrug) è ñàïñàíîâ (Falco peregrinus), â 380–500 Yuan for rewards or allowances by îòëè÷èå îò íàðîäîâ àðàáñêèõ ñòðàí è Åâ- the local government from 2008 to now. ðîïû (òàáë. 2). Õàðàêòåðíàÿ îõîòà ñ ëîâ- Local people said there were a total of 200 ÷èìè ïòèöàìè, ñ óíèêàëüíûìè íàâûêàìè families for the falconry in the small border è îïûòîì, ñîçäàëà â Êèòàå çàìå÷àòåëüíóþ county. èñòîðèþ è ðîñêîøíóþ êóëüòóðó. It’s astonished that we didn’t find any Êèðãèçû – äðåâíèé íàðîä, êîòîðûé íà nest or wild individual evidence of Gold- Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 81

ïðîòÿæåíèè òûñÿ÷è ëåò óñïåøíî çàíè- ìàëñÿ îõîòîé ñ ëîâ÷èìè ïòèöàìè. Òàê, íà- ñ÷èòûâàþùàÿ 432 äîìà äåðåâíÿ Ñóìòàêñ, â îêðóãå Àêñó (N41°00' E78°20'), íà þãå Ñèíöçÿíÿ, èçâåñòíà ñâîèìè òðàäèöèÿìè îõîòû ñ ëîâ÷èìè ïòèöàìè è èõ ïîäãîòîâ- êè, çäåñü â êàæäîì äâîðå âîñïèòûâàþò è îáó÷àþò îðëîâ.  íà÷àëå çèìû ñîòíè îð- ëîâ ñîáèðàþòñÿ çäåñü, ÷òîáû ó÷àñòâîâàòü â ñîñòÿçàíèè è ôåñòèâàëå ñîêîëüíèêîâ, êîòîðûé äëèòñÿ íåñêîëüêî äíåé, è âñ¸ ìå- ðîïðèÿòèå î÷åíü âïå÷àòëÿþùåå. Êîãäà èçâåñòíûé áðèòàíñêèé ñîêîëüíèê Ýíäðþ Ìýíäè ïðèåõàë, ÷òîáû èññëåäîâàòü ìåñòíûå íàâûêè ðàçâåäåíèÿ è ïîäãîòîâêè ëîâ÷èõ ïòèö, â îêðóã Àêñó â 1991 ã., îí ñêàçàë, ÷òî ðîäíîé ãîðîä îõîòû ñ ëîâ÷è- ìè ïòèöàìè íàõîäèòñÿ â Êèòàå, è Ñóìòàêñ óäèâëÿåò ñâîèìè òðàäèöèÿìè ðàçâåäåíèÿ è ïîäãîòîâêè ëîâ÷èõ ïòèö. Ìåñòíîå ðàçâåäåíèå è ïîäãîòîâêà ïòèö Áåðêóò÷è ñ ëîâ÷èì áåðêóòîì. 20.03.2010. âêëþ÷àåò òðè øàãà: îòëîâ, îáó÷åíèå è Ôîòî Ìà Ìèíãà. îõîòà. Berkutchi with hunting Golden Eagle. 20/03/2010. Åñòü äâà ñïîñîáà îòëîâà îðëîâ: ñ ïîìî- Photo by Ma Ming. ùüþ ñïåöèàëüíîé ëîâóøêè èëè íà ãíåçäå. Ñ ïîìîùüþ ëîâóøêè ëîâÿò ñëåäóþùèì îá- en Eagles in the Akqi County (the S Tian- ðàçîì: íà îòêðûòîì ó÷àñòêå â ëåñó ðàññòè- shan Mts.) which was known as “Falcon- ëàþò ñåòü èç êîíñêîãî âîëîñà, â êà÷åñòâå ry’s Hometown” in 2007–2010. Have the ïðèìàíêè ïîìåùàþò çàéöà è æäóò, êîãäà wild population been extinct in the border ìîëîäîé îð¸ë ïðèáëèçèòñÿ ê ïðèìàíêå. county? We think some of the eagles they Ëîâëÿ íà îðëèíîì ãíåçäå òðåáóåò áîëüøåé caught are from neighboring countries, îñòîðîæíîñòè. Îõîòíèêè äîëæíû çàêðå- e.g. Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan. Under dif- ïèòü ñåáÿ íà ïèêå, ìåäëåííî ñïóñòèòüñÿ ferent religions, beliefs and customs, the ê ãíåçäó, ïîéìàòü îðëà è ïîäíÿòüñÿ íàçàä, attitude to the raptor differs. The peoples ÷òî ìîæåò áûòü î÷åíü îïàñíî. who believe in Buddhism awe the raptor, Îáó÷åíèå ñîñòîèò â òîì, ÷òîáû âûäåð- such as Mongolia, Tibetan and Han people, æàòü ìîëîäîãî îðëà â ãîëîäíîì è óñòà- for example the sky burial or celestial burial ëîì ñîñòîÿíèè: òåðÿÿ ñâîé ïîäêîæíûé (by which bodies are exposed to birds of

Òàáë. 2. Îõîòíè÷üè âèäû ïòèö ó ðàçëè÷íûõ íàöèîíàëüíûõ ìåíüøèíñòâ Êèòàÿ. Table 2. Falconry species for different ethnic minorities in China.

Íàöèîíàëüíîñòü Ðåãèîí Âèäû, èñïîëüçóþùèåñÿ â ñîêîëèíîé îõîòå / Species of falconry Nations Region Áåðêóò Òåòåðåâÿòíèê Ïåðåïåëÿòíèê Ëóíü Øàõèí Áàëîáàí Golden Goshawk Sparrowhawk ïîëåâîé Barbary Saker Eagle Hen Falcon Falcon Harrier Óéãóðû Çàïàäíûé Êèòàé +++ ? ? Uygur West of China Êèðãèçû Çàïàäíûé Êèòàé ++ + + + Kirghiz West of China Êàçàõè Ñåâåðíûé Êèòàé ++ Kazakhs North of China Ìàíü÷æóðû Ñåâåðî-Âîñòî÷íûé Êèòàé ++ ? Manchu North-East of China Õóýé, Áàîàíü è äð. Ñåâåðíûé Êèòàé ++ Hui, Baoan etc. North of China Íàñè, È è äð. Þæíûé Êèòàé ++ Naxi, Yi etc. South of China 82 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

æèð, ïòèöà ñòàíîâèòñÿ áîëåå prey in Tibet, Qinghai, Xinjiang and Inner ñìèðíîé, ïîêîðíîé âëàäåëü- Mongolia), they seldom capture, trade or öó. Òîãäà å¸ ïðèó÷àþò îõî- employ them. òèòüñÿ çà åäó. However, falconry originated in the East Íàêîíåö, îõîòà ñ ëîâ÷èìè at least 4000 years ago and there are many ïòèöàìè íà÷èíàåòñÿ â êîíöå relative records in the Chinese ancient îñåíè – íà÷àëå çèìû. books (Wang, 1984). And it was introduced Âòîðîé ôåñòèâàëü áåð- into Europe for only 600 years. In ancient, êóò÷è ñîñòîÿëñÿ 21 ìàðòà the valiant Kazakhs have domesticated 2009 ã. â îêðóãå Àêñó, òîã- Golden Eagles. Amazed by the inherent äà ñîòíè êèðãèçîâ-áåðêóò÷è and invincible hunting abilities, Kazakhs ïðèâåçëè ñâîèõ îðëîâ, ÷òî- adored the Golden Eagle as their totem. áû ó÷àñòâîâàòü â ñîðåâíî- In the thirteenth century, Mr. Marco Polo âàíèè. Ñ 2007 ã. äî 2010 ã. had witnessed the scene that a herdsman ìû èçó÷àëè íåñêîëüêî ñîòåí used a Golden Eagle to catch a fierce wolf in ñåìåé, âêëþ÷àÿ 12–15 ñå- field. In his book it is said that more than ten ìåé îõîòíèêîâ èç äåðåâíè thousand falconers with army while the king Êóëàíñûðèê, 16 èç äåðåâíè was going hunting. Nowadays, the falconry Ëîâ÷èé áåðêóò â ðàáî- Àêñó, îêîëî 50 èç äåðåâíè Ñóìòàêñ, 7 èç custom still preserved among Kazakhs and òå. Ôîòî Ìà Ìèíãà. äåðåâíè Õàëàêñó, 15 èç äåðåâíè Ñïàáàé, Kirgiz nomads in the Tianshan and Altai Re- Hunting Golden Eagle. 3–5 èç äåðåâíè Õàëàáóëàê, è 20–30 èç gions, the West of China, Kyrgyzstan and Photo by Ma Ming. äåðåâíè Âóêñþ. Íà ïåðâîì ìåñòå ñðåäè Kazakhstan. îäîìàøíåííûõ âèäîâ – áåðêóò, íà âòîðîì In fall, 2006, Jing Jun a journalist of Xin- – ÿñòðåá-òåòåðåâÿòíèê (Accipiter gentilis). jiang Pictorial saw a Golden Eagle fed by Íà òðåòüåì ôåñòèâàëå áåðêóò÷è 19 ìàðòà a Kazakhs shepherd. The eagle stood on 2010 ã. â Àêñó ìû óçíàëè, ÷òî, íà÷èíàÿ ñ wooden shelves, awe-inspiring, no fear or 2008 ã. è ïî ñåé äåíü, 60 ñåìåé îõîòíèêîâ escape from human, sparkling, having a åæåìåñÿ÷íî ïîëó÷àþò 380–500 þàíåé majestic demeanor. Another report from the â êà÷åñòâå íàãðàä èëè ïîñîáèé îò ìåñò- Xinhua Channel was that Kazakhs herdsmen íûõ îðãàíîâ âëàñòè. Ïî ñëîâàì ìåñòíûõ Mr. Tuomu Park and Mr. Hadelibiek Mae- æèòåëåé, â ýòîì ìàëåíüêîì ïîãðàíè÷íîì rdan had domesticated their own Golden îêðóãå æèâóò îêîëî 200 ñåìåé îõîòíèêîâ Eagle in the Fuyun County at the northern ñ ëîâ÷èìè ïòèöàìè. Xinjiang, which inherited the old falconry Ïðèìå÷àòåëüíî, ÷òî â 2007–2010 ãã. custom. At the beginning of winter, many ìû íå íàøëè íè îäíîãî æèëîãî ãíåçäà falconers ride a horse, left hand holding the èëè ñëåäîâ ïðèñóòñòâèÿ äèêèõ áåðêóòîâ rein, and right hand on the sheepskin arm- â îêðóãå Àêñó (Þæíûé Òÿíü-Øàíü), êîòî- shield standing a Golden Eagle, bold, brave, ðûé èçâåñòåí êàê «Ðîäíîé ãîðîä ñîêîëü- and with incisive sight. Once found a prey, Ôåñòèâàëü ñîêîëüíèêîâ íèêîâ». Âûìåðëà ëè äèêàÿ ïîïóëÿöèÿ â it will dive down to hunt. There are thou- 2010 ã. ýòîì ïîãðàíè÷íîì îêðóãå? Ìû äóìàåì, sands of falconry families in Xinjiang and Ôîòî Ìà Ìèíãà. ÷òî íåêîòîðûå èç îðëîâ, êîòîðûõ îíè îò- about 1100–1500 Golden Eagles are cap- Falconry Festival 2010. ëàâëèâàþò, ïðîèñõîäÿò èç ñîñåäíèõ ñòðàí, tured in jails, it is nearly 22–30% of the wild Photo by Ma Ming. íàïðèìåð, Êûðãûçñòàíà, Êàçàõñòàíà. population. Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 83

Îòêðûòèå òðåòüåãî ôåñòèâàëÿ ñîêîëüíèêîâ 19 ìàðòà 2010 ã. â Àêñó. Ôîòî Ìà Ìèíãà. Opening the Third Falconry Festival on March, 19th 2010 in Akqi. Photo by Ma Ming.

Ïðè ðàçëè÷íûõ ðåëèãèÿõ, âåðîâàíèÿõ è Not only hunting, the training Golden îáû÷àÿõ îòíîøåíèå ê õèùíèêàì ðàçëè÷à- Eagle of Kazakhs also can protect the sheep åòñÿ. Ó íàðîäîâ, èñïîâåäóþùèõ áóääèçì, from the attack of wolves. The specimen of òàêèõ êàê ìîíãîëû, òèáåòöû, õàíü, õèù- Golden Eagle, spreading huge wings and íèêè âíóøàþò ñòðàõ, è âñòðå÷àþòñÿ òàêèå fiery eyes staring frontward, sturdy and îáðÿäû, êàê, íàïðèìåð, «ïîõîðîíû íåáà» powerful, attracts attention of collectors. No èëè «àñòðîíîìè÷åñêèå ïîõîðîíû» (íà êî- wonder so many people were driven by the òîðûõ òåëà óìåðøèõ îñòàâëÿþòñÿ õèùíûì high profit to poach, make them into speci- ïòèöàì) â Òèáåòå, Öèíõàå, Ñèíöçÿíå è men and then sell, which had brought great Âíóòðåííåé Ìîíãîëèè. Ýòè íàðîäû ðåäêî disaster to the Golden Eagles. ëîâÿò, òîðãóþò èëè èñïîëüçóþò ïòèö. Îäíàêî, îõîòà ñ ëîâ÷èìè ïòèöàìè âîç- Threats and Causes íèêëà íà Âîñòîêå ïî êðàéíåé ìåðå 4000 Realizing the Golden Eagle as “the king ëåò íàçàä, î ÷¸ì åñòü ìíîãî çàïèñåé â êè- of the sky”, unfortunately people don’t òàéñêèõ äðåâíèõ êíèãàõ (Wang, 1984).  know the real survival status of the spe- Åâðîïó îíà áûëî ïðèíåñåíà òîëüêî 600 cies in China. Nowadays in China catch- ëåò íàçàä.  äðåâíîñòè îòâàæíûå êàçàõè ing eagles was very rampant, even the ïðèðó÷èëè áåðêóòà. Ïîðàæ¸ííûå âðîæ- government acquiesced and encouraged ä¸ííûìè è íåóêðîòèìûìè îõîòíè÷üèìè this crime. Using the chemical pesticides ñïîñîáíîñòÿìè, êàçàõè îáîæàëè áåðêó- and poison causes sterility, dystopia even òà êàê ñâîé òîòåì.  XIII ñòîëåòèè Ìàðêî death to them. If no protective measures Ïîëî áûë ñâèäåòåëåì ñöåíû, êàê ïàñòóõ are timely taken, their population will èñïîëüçîâàë áåðêóòà, ÷òîáû ïîéìàòü æå- sharply descend and that is a fatal threat to ñòîêîãî âîëêà â ïîëå.  åãî êíèãå ãîâî- these eagles. ðèòñÿ, ÷òî êîãäà êîðîëü ñîáèðàëñÿ íà îõîòó, â åãî àðìèè áûëî áîëåå äåñÿòè òû- 1. Illegal Capture and Domestication ñÿ÷ áåðêóò÷è.  íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ, òðàäè- The main reasons for the declining popu- öèè áåðêóò÷è âñ¸ åù¸ ñîõðàíÿþòñÿ ñðåäè lation of Golden Eagles are folk domestica- êàçàõîâ è êî÷åâíèêîâ-êèðãèçîâ íà Òÿíü- tion, illegal capture and commercial trans- Øàíå, Àëòàå, çàïàäå Êèòàÿ, Êûðãûçñòàíå actions. In 2007, the Southern Weekend è Êàçàõñòàíå. reported that according to the survey of Îñåíüþ 2006 ã. æóðíàëèñò «Ñèíöçÿíü wildlife smuggling in the Guangdong Prov- Ïèêòîðèàë» Þóíã Äæóí âèäåë áåðêóòà, êî- ince, every year millions of wild animals òîðîãî êîðìèë ïàñòóõ-êàçàõ. Îð¸ë ñèäåë were ate, including shelling Golden Eagles. íà äåðåâÿííûõ ïîëêàõ, íèêîãî íå áîÿëñÿ It said that the trade price of a Golden Eagle è íå ïûòàëñÿ óëåòåòü îò ÷åëîâåêà, èìåë was 500–600 Yuan, selling to Guangzhou èñêðåííå âåëè÷åñòâåííûé âèä. Äðóãîå ñî- restaurants more than 10000 Yuan, and the îáùåíèå Êàíàëà Öèíüõóà áûëî î òîì, ÷òî price of one specimen in Xinjiang or Qing- ïàñòóõè êàçàõè Òóîìó Ïàðê è Õåéäëèáèê hai was 5000–6000 Yuan, and high up to Ìàåðäàí ïðèðó÷èëè áåðêóòà â óåçäå Ôó- 250000 Yuan in Beijing and Guangzhou. þíü, íà ñåâåðå Ñèíöçÿíÿ, êîòîðûå óíàñëå- Thousand times profits lure these poach- 84 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

äîâàëè ñòàðóþ òðàäèöèþ ðàç- âåäåíèÿ è ïîäãîòîâêè ëîâ÷èõ ïòèö.  íà÷àëå çèìû ìíîãèå áåðêóò÷è åçäÿò âåðõîì, ëåâîé ðóêîé äåðæà ïîâîä, à íà ïðà- âîé ðóêå, íà îâ÷èííîé ïåð- ÷àòêå ñèäèò áåðêóò, ñìåëûé, õðàáðûé è ñ îñòðûì âçãëÿ- äîì. Ïîñëå îáíàðóæåíèÿ äîáû÷è ïòèöà ñëåòàåò ñ ðóêè îõîòèòüñÿ.  Ñèíöçÿíå èçâåñò- íû òûñÿ÷è ñåìåé áåðêóò÷è, è ïðèáëèçèòåëüíî 1100–1500 áåðêóòîâ ñîäåðæàòñÿ â íåâî- ëå, à ýòî ïî÷òè 22–30% âñåé Áåðêóò÷è c ëîâ÷èìè áåðêóòàìè. Ôîòî Ìà Ìèíãà. äèêîé ïîïóëÿöèè. Berkutchi with hunting Golden Eagles. Photo by Ma Ming. Íå òîëüêî äëÿ îõîòû, íî òàê- æå äëÿ çàùèòû îâåö îò íàïàäåíèÿ âîëêîâ ers to sacrifice this sacred bird as a stuffing ìîæíî èñïîëüçîâàòü îáó÷åííûõ êàçàõñêèõ specimen and a dish. áåðêóòîâ. ×ó÷åëî áåðêóòà ñ ðàñïðàâëåí- For other examples, the police inter- íûìè îãðîìíûìè êðûëüÿìè è ïëàìåííû- cepted 20 eagles which were transported ìè ãëàçàìè, ñìîòðÿùèìè âïåð¸ä, ÿâëÿåòñÿ to a restaurant in Guangzhou railway sta- æåëàííûì äëÿ êîëëåêöèîíåðîâ. Íåóäèâè- tion in November, 4th, 2002; destined for òåëüíî, ÷òî î÷åíü ìíîãî ëþäåé çàñòàâëÿ- a restaurant six eagles were confiscated in ëà çàíèìàòüñÿ áðàêîíüåðñòâîì âûñîêàÿ No. 209 national road, Guangxi Province ïðèáûëü îò ïðîäàæè ÷ó÷åë, ÷òî ïðèíåñëî on March, 2003; two eagles smuggled áîëüøîé âðåä ïîïóëÿöèè áåðêóòà. from the Gansu Province to Guangzhou were seized in the Henan Province in No- Óãðîçû è ïðè÷èíû ñîêðàùåíèÿ vember, 2004. ÷èñëåííîñòè Similar cases occurred repeatedly and had Íàçûâàÿ áåðêóòà «êîðîë¸ì íåáà», ëþäè done a lot of harm to the Golden Eagle. Ex- â Êèòàå íå çíàþò åãî ðåàëüíîãî ñòàòóñà. cept eating their meat or making them into Äî íàñòîÿùåãî âðåìåíè â Êèòàå îòëîâ îð- specimen, some people considered ea- ëîâ áûë î÷åíü íåîáóçäàííûì, äàæå ïðàâè- gles also as officinal. It was said that one òåëüñòâî ïîïóñòèòåëüñòâîâàëî è ïîîùðÿëî eagle stomach filled with poison could ýòî ïðåñòóïëåíèå. Ïåñòèöèäû è èñïîëüçî- cure stomach trouble and its price was âàíèå ÿäîâ âûçâàëè áåñïëîäèå, äèñòîïèþ about ten thousands Yuan. Besides, their è äàæå ãèáåëü ïòèö. Åñëè íèêàêèõ çàùèò- feathers were sailed as ornaments (see íûõ ìåð ñâîåâðåìåííî íå ïðåäïðèíÿòü, the South Weekend: About the death of òî ïîïóëÿöèÿ áåðêóòà â Êèòàå ðåçêî ñî- sacred bird Golden Eagle on the snow êðàòèòñÿ, ÷òî ôàòàëüíî äëÿ ýòèõ îðëîâ. plateaus). Threat is coming, protection should be hurry up! 1. Íåëåãàëüíûé îòëîâ è ïðèðó÷åíèå Ãëàâíûìè ïðè÷èíàìè ñíèæåíèÿ ÷èñ- 2. Habitat Destruction and Loss ëåííîñòè ïîïóëÿöèè áåðêóòà ÿâëÿþòñÿ The main indirect impact on the Golden íàöèîíàëüíûå òðàäèöèè â ïðèðó÷åíèè, Eagle is their polluted habitats and forag- íåçàêîííûé îòëîâ è êîììåð÷åñêèå ñäåë- ing grounds. Not only severely damaged êè.  2007 ã. «Þæíûé Óèêýíä» ñîîáùàë, the natural resources, artificial exploita- ÷òî, ñîãëàñíî èññëåäîâàíèþ êîíòðàáàíäû tion especially like over-logging and over- îáúåêòîâ äèêîé ïðèðîäû â ïðîâèíöèè Ãó- grazing also force raptors to leave their àíäóí, êàæäûé ãîä ñúåäàþòñÿ ìèëëèîíû habitats (Ma Ming et al., 2006). Heavy äèêèõ æèâîòíûõ, âêëþ÷àÿ îòñòðåëÿííûõ metals vented by factories and chemical áåðêóòîâ. Ñîîáùàëîñü, ÷òî ðûíî÷íàÿ öåíà pesticides cause eagles to lay “soft eggs”, áåðêóòà áûëà 500–600 þàíåé, ïðè ïðîäà- reduced their reproduction rate, which æå ðåñòîðàíàì Ãóàí÷æîó öåíà äîñòèãàëà press heavily on their survival and species áîëåå 10000 þàíåé, öåíà îäíîãî ÷ó÷åëà multiplication. In addition, sodium cya- â Ñèíöçÿíå èëè Öèíõàå áûëà 5000–6000 nide used to refine gold ore could pollute þàíåé, âîçðàñòàÿ äî 250000 þàíåé â Ïå- nearby waters poison small animals and êèíå è Ãóàí÷æîó. Ïðèáûëü â òûñÿ÷ó ðàç influence them. Some Golden Eagle ever Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 85

ñîáëàçíÿåò áðàêîíüåðîâ æåðòâîâàòü ýòîé met had abandoned its nest for the open ñâÿùåííîé ïòèöåé íà ÷ó÷åëà è áëþäà. coal mine. Äðóãèå ïðèìåðû: 4 íîÿáðÿ 2002 ã. íà æåëåçíîäîðîæíîé ñòàíöèè Ãóàí÷æîó 3. Lack of Food ïîëèöèÿ çàäåðæàëà 20 îðëîâ, êîòîðûå In the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomy Region, òðàíñïîðòèðîâàëèñü â ðåñòîðàí; â ìàðòå the activities of extinguishing pasture ro- 2003 ã. øåñòü îðëîâ, ïðåäíàçíà÷àâøèõñÿ dents have lasted for many years. So short äëÿ ðåñòîðàíà, áûëè êîíôèñêîâàíû íà of food let the raptor population sharply de- íàöèîíàëüíîé òðàññå ¹209 ïðîâèíöèè creased. Ãóàíñè; â íîÿáðå 2004 ã. äâà îðëà, ïðîâîç- èìûå êîíòðàáàíäîé èç ïðîâèíöèè Ãàíüñó 4. Other Reasons â Ãóàí÷æîó, áûëè çàäåðæàíû â ïðîâèíöèè On the top of the trophic pyramid, rap- Õýíàíü. tors have been a victim of accumulated Ïîäîáíûå ñëó÷àè îòìå÷àþòñÿ íåîäíî- toxicants. Like the large-scale exterminat- êðàòíî, âñ¸ ýòî íàíîñèò îãðîìíûé óðîí ing rodents, which was a real ecological dis- ïîïóëÿöèÿì áåðêóòà. Êðîìå óïîòðåáëå- aster, the rodenticide accumulated through íèÿ â ïèùó ìÿñà ïòèö èëè ïðîèçâîäñòâà the food chain had brought the second- ÷ó÷åë, ñ÷èòàåòñÿ òàêæå, ÷òî îíè îáëàäàþò toxicosis for the Golden Eagle, making their ëå÷åáíûìè ñâîéñòâàìè. Ãîâîðÿò, ÷òî îäèí population sharply decreased and breed- æåëóäîê îðëà, çàïîëíåííûé ÿäîì, ìîæåò ing grounds transited. The other more di- âûëå÷èòü áîëåçíè æåëóäêà è îöåíèâàåòñÿ rect dead causes included electrocution on â 10000 þàíåé. Êðîìå òîãî, ïåðüÿ áåðêó- electric poles (Mei et al., 2008), poisoning òà ïðîäàþòñÿ êàê óêðàøåíèÿ (ñì. «Þæíûé by some toxic food or bait, eagles hit the Óèêýíä»: «Î ñìåðòè ñâÿùåííîé ïòèöû áåð- windows of buildings when flying low, are êóòà íà ñíåæíîì ïëàòî»). Óãðîçà ïðèáëè- mistaken having eaten something indigest- æàåòñÿ, è çàùèòà äîëæíà ïîòîðîïèòüñÿ! ible and so like. There are a lot of death records of rap- 2. Óíè÷òîæåíèå ñðåäû îáèòàíèÿ tors as below, one eagle died of uncertain è ïîòåðÿ ìåñòîîáèòàíèé reason in breeding season in April 2006. A Îñíîâíîå êîñâåííîå âîçäåéñòâèå íà female Barbary Falcon (Falco pelegrinoides) áåðêóòà – ýòî çàãðÿçíåíèå èõ ñðåäû îáè- was electrocuted or struck near a power òàíèÿ è îõîòíè÷üèõ áèîòîïîâ. Íå òîëüêî pole in Qitai County on September 23rd ñèëüíî ïîäîðâàííûå ïðèðîäíûå ðåñóð- 2005. In June–July 2005, two Golden Eagle’s ñû, íî è àíòðîïîãåííàÿ òðàíñôîðìàöèÿ, nests were destroyed, and several fledg- îñîáåííî òàêàÿ, êàê ñâåðõçàãîòîâêà ëåñà lings were missing. On June 26th 2006, the è ñáîé ïàñòáèù, òàêæå çàñòàâëÿþò õèùíè- nests of Golden Eagle and their neighbors êîâ ïîêèäàòü èõ ìåñòîîáèòàíèÿ (Ma Ming Saker were both robbed, and the fledglings et al., 2006). Îòðàâëåíèå òÿæ¸ëûìè ìå- were missing. On May, 30th 2006, a Golden òàëëàìè, âûáðàñûâàåìûìè ôàáðèêàìè, è Eagle’s nest was abandoned because two ïåñòèöèäàìè ïðèâîäèò ê òîìó, ÷òî îðëû herder tents were located too close (10–30 îòêëàäûâàþò ÿéöà ñ òîíêîé è íåïðî÷íîé m), and the eggs were cold. On April 24th, ñêîðëóïîé, ÷òî ñîêðàùàåò òåìïû èõ âîñ- 2006, a Golden Eagle’s nest was disturbed ïðîèçâîäñòâà, êîòîðûå îêàçûâàþò áîëü- by hundreds of people digging the silicified øîå íåãàòèâíîå âîçäåéñòâèå íà âûæèâà- woods nearby. On April 17th 2007, Golden íèå è ðàçìíîæåíèå âèäà. Êðîìå òîãî, öèàíèä íàòðèÿ, èñïîëüçóþùèéñÿ îáû÷íî äëÿ î÷èùåíèÿ çîëîòîé ðóäû, çàãðÿçíÿåò ñîñåäíèå âîäî¸ìû, îòðàâëÿÿ ìåëêèõ æè- âîòíûõ è âëèÿåò íà áåðêóòîâ îïîñðåäîâà- íî. Íåêîòîðûå áåðêóòû áðîñàþò ãí¸çäà â îêðåñòíîñòÿõ îòêðûòûõ êàðüåðîâ ïî äî- áû÷å êàìåííîãî óãëÿ.

3. Íåõâàòêà ïèùè  Ñèíöçÿí-Óéãóðñêîì àâòîíîìíîì îêðó- ãå íà ïðîòÿæåíèè ìíîãèõ ëåò ïðîâîäèëèñü Áåðêóòû â ðåñòîðàíå. ìåðîïðèÿòèÿ ïî äåðàòèçàöèè, èç-çà ÷åãî Ôîòî ïðåäîñòàâëåíî Ìà Ìèíãîì. íåäîñòàòîê ïèùè ñïîñîáñòâîâàë ðåçêîìó The Golden Eagles in a restaurant. ñîêðàùåíèþ ÷èñëåííîñòè õèùíèêîâ. Photo from Ma Ming. 86 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè

4. Äðóãèå ïðè÷èíû Eagle’s nest No. 8 was empty, and dozens Íà âåðøèíå òðîôè÷åñêîé ïèðàìèäû of locals were seeking for medicinal herb Da õèùíèêè ñòàíîâÿòñÿ æåðòâàìè àêêóìó- Yun (Cistanche deserticola) nearby. ëèðóþùèõñÿ òîêñèíîâ. Ïðè êðóïíîìàñ- øòàáíîì èñòðåáëåíèè ãðûçóíîâ, êîòîðîå Advices for Conservation and Manage- ÿâëÿåòñÿ ðåàëüíûì ýêîëîãè÷åñêèì áåä- ment ñòâèåì, ðîäåíòèöèäû, íàêàïëèâàþùèåñÿ - Strengthening the construction of legal ÷åðåç ïèùåâûå öåïè, âûçûâàþò âòîðè÷- system, enhancing the power of law execu- íûé òîêñèêîç ó áåðêóòà, è, ñëåäîâàòåëüíî, tion, make sure protect the Golden Eagle ðåçêîå ñíèæåíèå èõ ÷èñëåííîñòè è èçìå- under the law. In their breeding grounds íåíèå èõ ãíåçäîâîãî àðåàëà. Äðóãèå, áî- and habitat, we should prolong patrol and ëåå ïðÿìûå, ïðè÷èíû ñìåðòíîñòè âêëþ÷à- chastise the poach and capture. þò ïîðàæåíèå ýëåêòðîòîêîì íà ËÝÏ (Mei - Reinforce the construction and monitor- et al., 2008), îòðàâëåíèå ÿäîâèòîé ïèùåé ing function of nature reserves. èëè ïðèìàíêîé. Èíîãäà áåðêóòû áüþòñÿ î - Establish new reserves in the Golden ñò¸êëà øêîë, çäàíèé, ïî îøèáêå ñúåäàþò Eagle breeding grounds and habitats and ÷òî-òî íåñúåäîáíîå è òðóäíî ïåðåâàðè- apply to relevant departments for poach âàåìîå, ÷òî ìîæåò ñëóæèòü ïðè÷èíîé èõ prohibition. When they meet with hard en- ñìåðòè è ò. ä. vironment, like food shortage, deliver food Áûëî çàðåãèñòðèðîâàíî ìíîãî ñëó÷àåâ helping them to survive. ñìåðòè ðàçíûõ õèùíèêîâ: â àïðåëå 2006 ã. - Boost up scientific research and interna- â ãíåçäîâîé ñåçîí îäèí îð¸ë óìåð ïî íå- tional communication. In China, research èçâåñòíîé ïðè÷èíå, 23 ñåíòÿáðÿ 2005 ã. and protection management of Golden â îêðóãå Öèòàé îäíà ñàìêà øàõèíà (Falco Eagles is lag behind, their distribution, pelegrinoides) ïîãèáëà íà ËÝÏ, â èþíå – population, fertility and so like is unclear, so èþëå 2005 ã. ãí¸çäà äâóõ áåðêóòîâ áûëè further scientific research is necessary. As ðàçðóøåíû è íåñêîëüêî ñë¸òêîâ ïðîïàëè. a widely distributed and cross-border spe- 26 èþíÿ 2006 ã. ãí¸çäà áåðêóòà è ñîñåä- cies, international academic exchange and íèå ãí¸çäà áàëîáàíîâ áûëè ðàçãðàáëåíû, cooperation, especially with neighboring ñë¸òêè èñ÷åçëè. 30 ìàÿ 2006 ã. ãíåçäî countries (such as Mongolia, Russia, Kaza- áåðêóòà, ðàñïîëàãàâøååñÿ ñëèøêîì áëèç- khstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, êî (10–30 ì) îò äâóõ ïàëàòîê ïàñòóõîâ, Pakistan, India, etc.), is required. Inducing áûëî îñòàâëåíî ïòèöàìè, êëàäêà ïîãèáëà, advanced experience and management ðàçìíîæåíèå áûëî íåóäà÷íûì, 24 àïðåëÿ pattern to provide more scientific and rea- 2006 ã. ãíåçäî áåðêóòà áûëî ðàçðóøåíî â sonable reference for the conservation of õîäå ðàáîò ñîòåí ëþäåé ïî îòêàïûâàíèþ Golden Eagles. ïîáëèçîñòè îêàìåíåâøåãî ëåñà, 17 àïðåëÿ - Intensify the propaganda and education. 2007 ã. ãíåçäî áåðêóòà ïóñòîâàëî èç-çà òîãî, As an endangered species, people know lit- ÷òî ìíîæåñòâî ìåñòíûõ æèòåëåé èñêàëî ïî- tle about them, which it is disadvantageous áëèçîñòè ëåêàðñòâåííûå ðàñòåíèÿ Äà Þóí for their conservation. The common prob- (öèñòàíõà ïóñòûííàÿ Cistanche deserticola). lem for present, which have held similar activities in neighboring Mongolia, Kaza- Ñîâåòû ïî îõðàíå è êîíòðîëþ khstan, Kyrgyzstan, is how to guide the folk - Óêðåïëåíèå ñòðóêòóðû çà- êîíîäàòåëüíîé ñèñòåìû äëÿ óâåëè÷åíèÿ ñèëû âûïîëíåíèÿ çàêîíîâ ïîçâîëèò çàùèòèòü áåðêóòà. Íà òåððèòîðèè åãî ãíåçäîâîãî àðåàëà è ãíåç- äîâûõ áèîòîïîâ ìû äîëæíû óñèëèòü ïàòðóëèðîâàíèå è ïðåñåêàòü áðàêîíüåðñòâî è èçúÿòèå ïòåíöîâ. - Óêðåïèòü ñòðóêòóðó è ôóíêöèè ìîíèòîðèíãà â çà-

Ìà Ìèíã ñ ïóõîâûì ïòåíöîì áåðêóòà. Ôîòî Þíã Âó. Ma Ming with a nestling of the Golden Eagle. Photo by Yiqun Wu. Reviews and Comments Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 87

ïîâåäíèêàõ. domestication and falconry and spread this - Îðãàíèçîâàòü íîâûå çàïîâåäíèêè â custom in reason. Intensifying propaganda ïðåäåëàõ ãíåçäîâîãî àðåàëà è ãíåçäîâûõ and education, arousing civil protection áèîòîïîâ áåðêóòîâ è îáðàòèòüñÿ ê ñîîò- consciousness, our protection work would âåòñòâóþùèì äåïàðòàìåíòàì äëÿ ïðåñå- be easier. ÷åíèÿ áðàêîíüåðñòâà. Íåîáõîäèìî ñìÿã- ÷åíèå íåãàòèâíîãî âîçäåéñòâèÿ íåõâàòêè Acknowledgements ïèùè, äëÿ ÷åãî òðåáóåòñÿ ïðîâîäèòü ïîä- The research is supported by the Science êîðìêó îðëîâ. Supporting Project of National Ministry of - Ïîâûñèòü óðîâåíü íàó÷íûõ èññëåäîâà- Science and Technology (2008BAC39B04), íèé è ìåæäóíàðîäíûõ ñâÿçåé.  Êèòàå ìå- the National Natural Science Foundation ðîïðèÿòèÿ ïî èçó÷åíèþ è çàùèòå áåðêóòà of China (30470262, 30970340), Interna- çíà÷èòåëüíî îòñòàþò, ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå, tional Wildlife Consultants UK Ltd and the ÷èñëåííîñòü, ïðîäóêòèâíîñòü ïîïóëÿöèé Environment Agency of Abu Dhabi, United áåðêóòà äî ñèõ ïîð îñòàþòñÿ íåèçó÷åííû- Arab Emirates. Sincere thanks to all partici- ìè, òàêèì îáðàçîì, íåîáõîäèìû äàëüíåé- pants especially to Cai Dai, Mei Yu, Andrew øèå íàó÷íûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ. Äëÿ èçó÷åíèÿ Dixon, Nicholas C. Fox, Xu Feng, Wu Yiqun, òàêîãî âèäà ñ òàêèì øèðîêèì àðåàëîì, Eugene Potapov, Igor Karyakin, Tian Leilei, îõâàòûâàþùèì òåððèòîðèè ìíîãèõ ñòðàí, Istvan Balazs, Altai, Kedeerhan, Dimitar íåîáõîäèì ìåæäóíàðîäíûé àêàäåìè÷å- Ragyov and Ivailo Angelov etc. ñêèé îáìåí è ñîòðóäíè÷åñòâî, îñîáåííî ñ ñîñåäíèìè ñòðàíàìè (òàêèìè, êàê Ìîí- References ãîëèÿ, Ðîññèÿ, Êàçàõñòàí, Êûðãûçñòàí, Òàä- Gao W. Ecology of Falcon Order in China. – æèêèñòàí, Àôãàíèñòàí, Ïàêèñòàí, Èíäèÿ è Beijing: Science Press. 2002. ò. ä.). Âíåäðåíèå ïåðåäîâîãî îïûòà è ìî- Jing J. The hunter is Golden Eagle. – Xinjiang äåëåé óïðàâëåíèÿ äëÿ âûðàáîòêè íàó÷íî- Pictorial, 2009. (9). P. 23–24. Karyakin I.V., Nikolenko E.G., Barashkova A.N., îáîñíîâàííûõ è ðàçóìíûõ ðåêîìåíäàöèé Smelansky I.E., Konovalov L.I., Grabovskiy M.A., ïî îõðàíå áåðêóòîâ. Vazhov S.V., Bekmansurov R.H. Golden Eagle in - Óñèëèòü ïðîïàãàíäó è îáðàçîâàíèå. the Altai-Sayan Region, Russia. – Raptors Con- Ëþäè ìàëî çíàþò î áåðêóòå êàê î âûìè- servation. 2010. 18. P. 82–152. ðàþùåì âèäå, ÷òî êðàéíå íåâûãîäíî äëÿ Liu H.J., Su H.L., Shen S.Y. The geographical åãî îõðàíû. Îáùàÿ ïðîáëåìà íà ñåãîäíÿ, distribution of Golden Eagle in Shanxi Province. – êîòîðàÿ èìååòñÿ è â ñîñåäíèõ Ìîíãîëèè, Natural Resources Studies, 1986. (3). P. 36–40. Êàçàõñòàíå, Êûðãûçñòàíå, ýòî êàê êîíòðî- Lu T.C. The king of the raptor – Golden Eagle. – ëèðîâàòü íàðîäíûå îáû÷àè ïî ïðèðó÷å- Man and the Biosphere. 2000. (2). P. 10–13. Ma Ming. A checklist of the birds in Xinjiang, íèþ è ñîêîëüíè÷åñòâó è íàïðàâëÿòü èõ â China. – Arid Zone Research. 2001. 18 (Suppl.). ðàçóìíîå ðóñëî. Ïðè óñëîâèè ïðîâåäåíèÿ P. 10–16. ìåðîïðèÿòèé, íàïðàâëåííûõ íà óñèëåíèå Ma Ming, Yang X.M. Animals of rock paintings ïðîïàãàíäû è îáðàçîâàíèÿ, ïðîáóæäåíèÿ in Xinjiang. – China Nature. 1992. (2). P. 12–13. ãðàæäàíñêîãî ñîçíàíèÿ, íàøà ðàáîòà ïî Ma Ming, Mei Y., Potapov E. et al. Saker Fal- çàùèòå áûëà áû ëåã÷å. con in the desert of north Xinjiang, China. – Rap- tors Conservation. 2006. 6. P. 58–64. Áëàãîäàðíîñòè MeiYu, Ma Ming, Dixon A. et al. Investigation Èññëåäîâàíèå ïîääåðæàíî ïðîåêòîì ïî on raptor of electrocution along power lines in ïîääåðæêå íàóêè Íàöèîíàëüíîãî Ìèíè- the western China. – Chinese Journal of Zoology. 2008. 43(4). P. 114–117. ñòåðñòâà íàóêè è òåõíèêè (2008BAC39B04), National Forestry Bureau. Resource survey on Íàöèîíàëüíûì ôîíäîì åñòåñòâåííûõ íàóê the key animals in China. Beijing: China Forestry Êèòàÿ (30470262, 30970340), Ìåæäóíà- Publishing House, 2009. P. 160–161. ðîäíûì êîíñóëüòàöèîííûì àãåíòñòâîì Su H.L. Aquila chrysaetos L. – An endangered ïî äèêîé ïðèðîäå (International Wildlife big raptorial bird. – Chinese Journal of Zoology. Consultants UK Ltd) è Àãåíòñòâîì ïî îõðà- 1988. 23(5). P. 36–40. íå îêðóæàþùåé ñðåäû Àáó-Äàáè, ÎÀÝ. Wang J. Raptor of World. Shanghai Science Ìû èñêðåííå áëàãîäàðèì âñåõ ó÷àñòíè- and Technology Publishing House. 1984. êîâ, îñîáåííî Êàé Äàé, Ìåé Þ, Ýíäðþ Xu W. Raptors of China. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House, 1995. Äèêñîíà, Íèêîëàñà Ê. Ôîêñà, Êñó Ôåíã, Zhang T. The eagle hunting culture of Kirghiz. – Âó Þöèí, Åâãåíèÿ Ïîòàïîâà, Èãîðÿ Êàðÿ- Western Regions Studies. 2002. (2). P. 99–102. êèíà, Òÿí Ëåéëåé, Èøòâàíà Áàëàñà, Àëòàé Zheng G.M., Wang Q.S. China red data book Êåäååðõàí, Äèìèòàðà Ðàãîâà, Èâýéëî Àí- of endangered animals – Aves. Beijing: Science ãåëîâà è äð. Press, 1998. 88 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îõðàíà ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

RaptorConservation ОХРАНА ПЕРНАТЫХ ХИЩНИКОВ

ResultsofAttractingtheUralOwlintoNestboxesinVicinities ofBiyskin2010,AltaiKray,Russia РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ ПРИВЛЕЧЕНИЯ ДЛИННОХВОСТОЙ НЕЯСЫТИ В ИСКУССТВЕННЫЕ ГНЕЗДОВЬЯ В ОКРЕСТНОСТЯХ БИЙСКА В 2010 ГОДУ, АЛТАЙСКИЙ КРАЙ, РОССИЯ VazhovS.V.,BachtinR.F.,MakarovA.V.(AltaiStateUniversity,Barnaul,Russia) Важов С.В., Бахтин Р.Ф., Макаров А.В. (Алтайский государственный университет, Барнаул, Россия)

Êîíòàêò: Àáñòðàêò Ñåðãåé Âàæîâ Ñ 16 ôåâðàëÿ ïî 9 ìàðòà 2010 ã. â îêðåñòíîñòÿõ ã. Áèéñê óñòàíîâëåíî 18 èñêóññòâåííûõ ãíåçäîâèé äëÿ äëèí- 659300, Ðîññèÿ, íîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè (Strix uralensis), ïÿòü èç êîòîðûõ â 2010 ã. áûëè çàíÿòû ïòèöàìè (27,8%). Êîëè÷åñòâî ïòåí- Àëòàéñêèé êðàé, öîâ â èçâåñòíûõ âûâîäêàõ 2–4. Äëÿ èçó÷åíèÿ óñïåõà ðàçìíîæåíèÿ è äèíàìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè äëèííîõâîñòîé ã. Áèéñê, à/ÿ 25 íåÿñûòè îòíîñèòåëüíî äèíàìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè å¸ æåðòâ â îõîòíè÷üèõ áèîòîïàõ ýòîé ñîâû ïðîâåäåíû ó÷¸òû òåë.: +7 3854 47 45 40 ìåëêèõ ìëåêîïèòàþùèõ. ìîá.: +7 963 534 81 07 Êëþ÷åâûå ñëîâà: ñîâû, äëèííîõâîñòàÿ íåÿñûòü, Strix uralensis, áèîòåõíè÷åñêèå ìåðîïðèÿòèÿ, èñêóññòâåííûå [email protected] ãíåçäîâüÿ, ãíåçäîâûå ÿùèêè, ãíåçäîâàÿ áèîëîãèÿ.

Ðîìàí Áàõòèí Abstract From the 16th of February to the 9th of March 2010 in the vicinities of Biysk 18 nestboxes for Ural Owl (Strix uralen- [email protected] sis) were installed, 5 (27.8%) of them were occupied in 2010. The number of owl chicks in the known broods ranges from 2 to 4. In order to study the Ural Owl breeding effect as well as the population dynamics per dynamics Àëåêñàíäð Ìàêàðîâ of victims in the owl hunting habitats the abundance of small mammals was counted. t_makarova1959@ Keywords: Owls, Ural Owl, Strix uralensis, nestboxes, breeding biology. mail.ru

Contact: Ââåäåíèå The Ural Owl (Strix uralensis) is a common Sergey Vazhov Äëèííîõâîñòàÿ íåÿñûòü (Strix uralensis) breeding owl species in the woods of Altai P.O. Box 25 – îáû÷íàÿ ãíåçäÿùàÿñÿ ñîâà ëåñîâ Àë- Kray. Most of its known nests in the Biya Biysk, Altai Kray, Russia, 659300 òàéñêîãî êðàÿ. Áèéñêèå áîðû ÿâëÿþòñÿ pine forests are located in open old nests of tel.: +7 3854 47 45 40 óäîáíîé òåððèòîðèåé äëÿ èçó÷åíèÿ ýòî- raptors (Black Kite Milvus migrans and Com- mob.: +7 963 534 81 07 ãî âèäà. Âî-ïåðâûõ, îíè ïðèëåãàþò íå- mon Buzzard Buteo buteo), which means [email protected] ïîñðåäñòâåííî ê ãîðîäó, è ðåãóëÿðíîå the absence of such a limiting factor as the Roman Bachtin èõ ïîñåùåíèå íå ñîñòàâëÿåò òðóäà. Âî- lack of nesting sites. In addition to study- [email protected] âòîðûõ, çäåñü ñîñðåäîòî÷åíà äîñòàòî÷íî ing the breeding effect a well as the Ural ïëîòíàÿ ãðóïïè- Alexander Makarov ðîâêà âèäà, â êî- t_makarova1959@ mail.ru òîðîé ïàðû ãíåç- äÿòñÿ â 1,4–2,0 êì äðóã îò äðóãà (Âà- æîâ è äð., 2009).  Áèéñêèõ áîðàõ èç-çà íåêîíòðîëè-

Åñòåñòâåííûå ãí¸çäà äëèííîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè (Strix uralensis) â áèéñêèõ áîðàõ: â ïîñòðîéêå êàíþêà (Buteo buteo) (ñëåâà) è â ïîëóäóïëå íà ñëîìå ñîñíû (ñïðàâà). Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. Natural nests of the Ural Owl (Strix uralensis) in the Biya pine forest: in old nest of the Common Buzzard (Buteo buteo) (at the left) and at the top of broken pine (at the right). Photos by S. Vazhov. Raptor Conservation Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 89

Owl population dynamics per dynamics of small rodents population, attracting the owl into nestboxes with further monitoring will answer some important questions: what are the owl preferences while choosing be- tween an open nest and a nestbox; how will the main rates of breeding change (date, breeding success, etc.)? In winter 2009/2010, according with our targets we set up the study plot, which we were started up to install the nestboxes in. The nestboxes were made of planks accord- ing to the scheme proposed by I.V. Karyakin and A.P. Levashkin (2009): the height – 620–650 mm, the bottom – 350×350 mm, entrance – 300×300 mm. The bottom layer of sawdust was filled to about 10 cm. Out- side the boxes were covered with varnish. From the 16th of February to 9th of March 2010 18 nestboxes were installed. The nestboxes were disposed at the known owl breeding territories as well as outside them – according to the scheme of potential ter- ritories distribution. All nestboxes were set on the pines (Pinus sylvestris) at the height of 5–8 m. To ensure owl free approaching to the nestbox the branches hindering from it were cut down. To study the breeding effect and the Ural Owl population dynamics per its prey dy- namics at the sites in three hunting habitats of owls (pine forest, birch forest and a mot- ley grass meadow at the edge of forests) this season we counted the abundance of small mammals, with use of 50-meter- Ðèñ. 1. Ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè äëèííîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè (Strix uralensis), èçâåñòíûå â hunting grooves (Livanov, Ravkin, 2001) áèéñêèõ áîðàõ äî óñòàíîâêè ñîâÿòíèêîâ (ââåðõó), è ðåçóëüòàòû ïðîâåðêè ñî- with five cones (one in each habitat). During âÿòíèêîâ â 2010 ã. (âíèçó). May and June 2010, 600 cone/days were Fig. 1. Breeding territories of the Ural Owl (Strix uralensis) known in the Biya pine worked out. The index of small mammal forests before 2010 (upper) and the results of checking the nestboxes occupied by owls in 2010 (bottom). number, calculated per 100 cone/days was evaluated for 1 km2 of habitat area (Malkov, Shitov, 2004). ðóåìûõ ðóáîê ïðàêòè÷åñêè îòñóòñòâóþò In 2010, five (27.8%) of 18 installed nest- ñòàðûå äåðåâüÿ ñ äîñòàòî÷íî áîëüøèìè boxes were occupied, one of them was äëÿ äëèííîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè äóïëàìè, è within a known breeding territory, where ëèøü îäíî èç íàéäåííûõ åñòåñòâåííûõ earlier the owls bred in the Common Buz- ãí¸çä íàõîäèëîñü â ïîëóäóïëå íà ñëî- zard’s nest. Other nestboxes were installed ìå ñîñíû. Áîëüøèíñòâî èçâåñòíûõ ãí¸çä at the potential breeding territories where ýòîé ñîâû ðàñïîëàãàþòñÿ îòêðûòî â ïî- the owls had not been observed. It should ñòðîéêàõ ÿñòðåáèíûõ (÷¸ðíîãî êîðøóíà be said that all known natural owl nests at Milvus migrans è êàíþêà Buteo buteo), the plot were empty. Perhaps this is due to ÷òî ïðåäïîëàãàåò îòñóòñòâèå òàêîãî ëè- the low population number of small rodents ìèòèðóþùåãî ôàêòîðà, êàê íåäîñòàòîê as the main preys. ãíåçäîâîãî ôîíäà. Ïîñëåäíåå ÿâèëîñü In one of occupied nestboxes during in- ðåøàþùèì ôàêòîðîì âûáîðà ìîäåëüíîé spections on the 29th of April and the 22nd ïëîùàäêè äëÿ èçó÷åíèÿ äëèííîõâîñòîé of May, the owl female did not leave its íåÿñûòè èìåííî â áèéñêèõ áîðàõ ïóò¸ì nest, that is why it was impossible to fix the å¸ ïðèâëå÷åíèÿ â èñêóññòâåííûå ãíåçäî- course of nesting. âüÿ. Ïîìèìî èçó÷åíèÿ çàâèñèìîñòè óñïå- There were 4 eggs in another nestbox on 90 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îõðàíà ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

õà ðàçìíîæåíèÿ è äèíàìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè the 27th of April, while being photographed äëèííîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè îòíîñèòåëüíî äè- the female flew out of the nest and attacked íàìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè ìåëêèõ ãðûçóíîâ, å¸ having struck its claws a hand, the hatching ïðèâëå÷åíèå â èñêóññòâåííûå ãíåçäîâüÿ was observed on the 22nd of May, as a result ñ äàëüíåéøèì èõ ìîíèòîðèíãîì ïîçâî- we noted three chicks and the egg. ëèò îòâåòèòü íà íåñêîëüêî âàæíûõ âîïðî- As for the third nestbox, during the in- ñîâ: êàêîâû áóäóò ïðåäïî÷òåíèÿ âèäà ïðè spection on the 27th of April, the female âîçìîæíîñòè âûáîðà ìåæäó îòêðûòûì did not leave the nest, however the chicks ãíåçäîâàíèåì è èñïîëüçîâàíèåì ãíåçäî- seemed to be in the nest on the 22nd of May, âûõ ÿùèêîâ; èçìåíÿòñÿ ëè è êàê èìåííî but it was impossible to count their number îñíîâíûå ïàðàìåòðû ãíåçäîâàíèÿ (ñðîêè, because of extremely aggressive behavior ýôôåêòèâíîñòü è ïð.) è ïîâåäåíèå? of adults: when we were trying to climb the tree the female and the male were attacking Ìåòîäèêà us by striking their claws the head. Çèìîé 2009–10 ãã. â Áèéñêîì áîðó, ãäå Inspecting the fourth nestbox on the 29th ðàíåå ïðîâîäèëñÿ ó÷¸ò äëèííîõâîñòîé íå- of April and 22nd of May we discovered the ÿñûòè (Âàæîâ è äð., 2009), áûëà çàëîæåíà female did not leave it, but four chicks were ìîäåëüíàÿ ïëîùàäêà. Äëÿ óñòàíîâêè ãíåç- observed under the female on 22nd of May. äîâûõ ÿùèêîâ íà íåé áûë âûäåëåí ó÷àñòîê, This box was checked on the 7th of June: the ãäå â íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ èçâåñòåí ìàêñèìóì large chick was sitting on the edge of the ðàâíîìåðíî ðàñïðåäåë¸ííûõ ãí¸çä ñîâ â nest, others were not visible. ïîñòðîéêàõ ÿñòðåáèíûõ (ðèñ. 1). Ýòà ÷àñòü In the fifth nestbox there were two chicks ïëîùàäêè óæå ëåòîì 2010 ã. äîëæíà áûëà on the 1st of May; climbing on the nesting ïîêàçàòü, áóäåò ëè íàáëþäàòüñÿ ó íåÿñûòè tree, we noted the female having flown off ïðåäïî÷òåíèå ãíåçäîâûõ ÿùèêîâ â ãðóï- the nest; there were two big chicks which ïèðîâêå, ãäå äîìèíèðîâàë îòêðûòûé òèï were visible from the ground on the 22nd ãíåçäîâàíèÿ. of May. Ãíåçäîâûå ÿùèêè (ñîâÿòíèêè) èçãîòàâ- Thus, the owls in the breeding group, ëèâàëè èç äîñîê ïî ñõåìå, ïðåäëîæåí- which was characterized by the prefer- íîé È.Â. Êàðÿêèíûì è À.Ï. Ëåâàøêè- ence of open nests, began to occupy the íûì (2009): âûñîòà – 620–650 ìì, äíî nestboxes quickly. Owl nestboxes installed – 350×350 ìì, ëåòîê – 300×300 ìì, íà from the 27th February to the 7th of March, äíî íàñûïàëè ñëîé îïèëîê îêîëî 10 ñì. had been already occupied in April. At one Ñíàðóæè ÿùèêè ïîêðûâàëè îëèôîé. Ñ 16 of the previously known breeding territory ôåâðàëÿ ïî 9 ìàðòà 2010 ã. óñòàíîâëåíî the owls changed the open nests for the 18 èñêóññòâåííûõ ãíåçäîâèé. ßùèêè ðàñ- nestboxes; all other known open nests are ïîëàãàëè òî÷å÷íî ïî èçâåñòíûì ãíåçäî- empty, not occupied nestboxes installed in their vicinity as well. However, 4 nestbox- Óñòàíîâêà ãíåçäîâîãî es became occupied where the owls were ÿùèêà. Ôîòî À. Êîðîáêî. not previously observed and where the Installing of the nestboxes were installed according to the nestbox. scheme of potential owl breeding territory Photo by A. Korobko. distribution. It is not excluded that these are the owls moving from the known breeding territories due to poor feeding conditions. This year the total abundance of small mam- mals in hunting habitats of the Ural Owl was 7.3 individuals per 100 cone/days (1,058.5 individuals/km2) in May, and 14.4 individu- als per 100 cone/days (2088 individuals/ km2) in June. These facts allow us to assume that the absence of hollows caused owl to adapt for breeding in raptor’s nests. In the future we are going to continue the installation of nestboxes in other parts of the study plot with subsequent monitoring and studying the breeding effect as well as the Ural Owl population dynamics per small rodents population dynamics. Raptor Conservation Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 91

Ñàìêà è ïòåíåö äëèí- íîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè â ãíåçäîâûõ ÿùèêàõ. Ôîòî Ð. Áàõòèíà. Female and a nestling of the Ural Owl in nestboxes. Photos by R. Bachtin.

âûì ó÷àñòêàì íåÿñûòè, à çà èõ ïðåäåëàìè Îñòàëüíûå çàíÿòûå ÿùèêè áûëè óñòàíîâ- – ïî ñõåìå ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëü- ëåíû íà ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêàõ, ãäå ñîâû íûõ ó÷àñòêîâ. Âñå ÿùèêè óñòàíîâëåíû íà ðàíüøå íå íàáëþäàëèñü. Ñëåäóåò ñêàçàòü, ñîñíàõ (Pinus sylvestris) íà âûñîòå 5–8 ì. ÷òî âñå èçâåñòíûå åñòåñòâåííûå ãí¸çäà Äëÿ îáåñïå÷åíèÿ ñâîáîäíîãî ïîäë¸òà ìå- íåÿñûòè íà ýòîé ïëîùàäêå ïóñòîâàëè. Âîç- øàþùèå âåòêè áûëè ñïèëåíû. ìîæíî, ýòî ñâÿçàíî ñ íèçêîé ÷èñëåííîñòüþ Äëÿ èçó÷åíèÿ çàâèñèìîñòè óñïåõà ðàç- ìåëêèõ ãðûçóíîâ, êàê ãëàâíîãî ïèùåâîãî ìíîæåíèÿ è äèíàìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè äëèí- ðåñóðñà.  ýòîì ãîäó èõ ñóììàðíîå îáè- íîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè îòíîñèòåëüíî äèíàìè- ëèå â òð¸õ îõîòíè÷üèõ áèîòîïàõ äëèííîõ- êè ÷èñëåííîñòè å¸ æåðòâ íà ìîäåëüíîé âîñòîé íåÿñûòè ñîñòàâèëî â ìàå 7,3 îñîáè ïëîùàäêå â òð¸õ îõîòíè÷üèõ áèîòîïàõ (îñ.) íà 100 ê/ñ (1058,5 îñ./êì2), à â èþíå ýòîé ñîâû (ñîñíîâûé áîð, ó÷àñòîê áåð¸çî- 14,4 îñ. íà 100 ê/ñ (2088 îñ./êì2). Äëÿ âîãî ëåñà ñðåäè áîðà è ðàçíîòðàâíûé ëóã ñðàâíåíèÿ ìîæíî ïðèâåñòè äàííûå ó÷¸òîâ íà îïóøêå) ïðîâåäåíû ó÷¸òû îáèëèÿ ìåë- ïðîøëîãî ãîäà â ýòèõ æå áèîòîïàõ. Îòíî- êèõ ìëåêîïèòàþùèõ 50-ìåòðîâûìè ëîâ÷è- ìè êàíàâêàìè (Ëèâàíîâ, Ðàâêèí, 2001) (ïî îäíîé â êàæäîì áèîòîïå) ñ ïÿòüþ êîíóñà- Äëèííîõâîñòàÿ íåÿñûòü. Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. ìè. Êîíóñû íà ÷åòâåðòü âûñîòû çàëèâàëèñü Ural Owl. Photo by S. Vazhov. 4%-íûì ðàñòâîðîì ôîðìàëüäåãèäà. Çà ìàé è èþíü 2010 ã. áûëî îòðàáîòàíî 600 êîíóñî-ñóòîê (ê/ñ). Ïîêàçàòåëü ÷èñëåííî- ñòè ìåëêèõ ìëåêîïèòàþùèõ, ðàññ÷èòàí- íûé íà 100 ê/ñ, ïåðåâîäèëñÿ íà åäèíèöó ïëîùàäè áèîòîïà, ðàâíóþ 1 êì2 (Ìàëêîâ, Øèòîâ, 2004). Ïåðâàÿ ïðîâåðêà ãíåçäîâûõ ÿùèêîâ îñóùåñòâëÿëàñü 27 àïðåëÿ – 1 ìàÿ, âòî- ðàÿ – 22 ìàÿ 2010 ã. Îäèí èç ÿùèêîâ áûë ïðîâåðåí òðåòèé ðàç – 7 èþíÿ 2010 ã.  õîäå ïðîâåðêè îïðåäåëÿëè çàíÿòîñòü ñî- âàìè ÿùèêîâ, ïî âîçìîæíîñòè ñ÷èòàëè êîëè÷åñòâî ÿèö â êëàäêàõ è ïòåíöîâ â âû- âîäêàõ, îòìå÷àëè îñîáåííîñòè ïîâåäåíèÿ âçðîñëûõ ïòèö.

Ðåçóëüòàòû è èõ îáñóæäåíèå Èç 18 óñòàíîâëåííûõ èñêóññòâåííûõ ãíåçäîâèé â 2010 ã. ïÿòü îêàçàëèñü çàíÿòû- ìè (27,8%), èç íèõ îäíî íàõîäèëîñü íà èç- âåñòíîì ãíåçäîâîì ó÷àñòêå, ãäå ðàíåå íå- ÿñûòü ðàçìíîæàëàñü â ïîñòðîéêå êàíþêà. 92 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Îõðàíà ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Êëàäêà äëèííîõâîñòîé òîðûõ áûëî âèäíî ñ çåìëè, íà ãíåçäîâîå íåÿñûòè â ãíåçäîâîì äåðåâî íå ïîäíèìàëèñü, âçðîñëûõ ïòèö íå ÿùèêå. Ôîòî Ð. Áàõòèíà. íàáëþäàëè.  òð¸õ ñëó÷àÿõ ïðè ïåðâîé è â îäíîì Clutch of the Ural Owl in a nestbox. – ïðè âòîðîé ïðîâåðêå ãí¸çä ñàìöû íà- Photo by R. Bachtin. õîäèëèñü íåïîäàëåêó è èçäàâàëè òîêîâûå ñèãíàëû. Âûëåòåâøèå èç ÿùèêîâ ñàìêè «ëàÿëè» ëèáî èçäàâàëè çâóêè, íàïîìèíàþ- ùèå òîêîâûå ñèãíàëû ñàìöà, òîëüêî áîëåå õðèïëûå. Òàêèì îáðàçîì, íåÿñûòè â ãðóïïè- ðîâêå, ãäå äîìèíèðóåò òèï îòêðûòîãî ãíåçäîâàíèÿ, äîñòàòî÷íî áûñòðî íà÷àëè îñâàèâàòü ãíåçäîâûå ÿùèêè. Ñîâÿòíèêè, óñòàíîâëåííûå 27 ôåâðàëÿ – 7 ìàð- òà, óæå â àïðåëå îêàçàëèñü çàíÿòû. Íà îäíîì èç ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ñîâû ïåðåñåëè èç îòêðûòîãî ãíåçäà â ÿùèê, âñå îñòàëüíûå èçâåñòíûå îòêðûòûå ãí¸ç- ñèòåëüíîå îáèëèå ìåëêèõ ìëåêîïèòàþùèõ äà ïóñòîâàëè, íå çàíÿòû òàêæå îñòàëèñü è ëåòîì 2009 ã. â ñîñíîâîì áîðó ñîñòàâëÿëî ãíåçäîâûå ÿùèêè, óñòàíîâëåííûå âáëèçè 26,6 îñ. íà 100 ê/ñ, â áåð¸çîâîì ëåñó – íèõ. Îäíàêî îêàçàëèñü çàíÿòû 4 ñîâÿòíè- 27,8 îñ. íà 100 ê/ñ, íà ðàçíîòðàâíîì ëóãó êà, êîòîðûå áûëè óñòàíîâëåíû ïî ñõåìå – 27,1 îñ. íà 100 ê/ñ, à íà ãîðîäñêîé ñâàë- ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ êå – 118,1 îñ. íà 100 ê/ñ (Ìàêàðîâ, Øà- òàì, ãäå ðàíåå ñîâû íå íàáëþäàëèñü. Íå ïåòüêî, 2009). èñêëþ÷åíî, ÷òî ýòî ñîâû, ïåðåìåñòèâ- Îäíî èç çàíÿòûõ ãí¸çä ïðè åãî äâóêðàò- øèåñÿ ñ èçâåñòíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ èç-çà ïëî- íîì îñìîòðå 29 àïðåëÿ è 22 ìàÿ ñàìêà íå õèõ êîðìîâûõ óñëîâèé. Ñëåäîâàòåëüíî, ïîêèäàëà, ïîýòîìó óñòàíîâèòü õîä ðàçìíî- ìîæíî ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî ãíåçäîâàíèå æåíèÿ â í¸ì íå ïðåäñòàâèëîñü âîçìîæ- íåÿñûòè â ïîñòðîéêàõ ÿñòðåáèíûõ, ñêî- íûì. ðåå âñåãî, – âûíóæäåííàÿ àäàïòàöèÿ ïðè  äðóãîì ãíåçäå 27 àïðåëÿ áûëî 4 ÿéöà, îòñóòñòâèè äóïåë. ñàìêà âûëåòåëà èç íåãî ïðè ïîïûòêå å¸ Îáðàùàåò íà ñåáÿ âíèìàíèå èçìåíåíèå ñôîòîãðàôèðîâàòü è àòàêîâàëà, óäàðèâ óðîâíÿ àãðåññèâíîñòè ñîâ äàííîé ãðóï- êîãòÿìè ïî ðóêå; 22 ìàÿ øëî âûëóïëåíèå, ïèðîâêè. Åñëè ðàíåå íåÿñûòè, ãíåçäÿùè- è â ãíåçäå áûëî òðè ïóõîâûõ ïòåíöà è åñÿ îòêðûòî â ãí¸çäàõ ÿñòðåáèíûõ, ïðî- ÿéöî, ñàìêà íåñêîëüêî ðàç àòàêîâàëà, óäà- ðÿÿ êîãòÿìè â ãîëîâó. Òðåòèé ÿùèê ïðè îñìîòðå 27 àïðåëÿ Ñàìêà äëèííîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè ñ ïòåíöàìè â ãíåçäî- âîì ÿùèêå. Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. ñàìêà íå ïîêèíóëà, à 22 ìàÿ â í¸ì å¸ íå Female of the Ural Owl with nestlings in a nestbox. áûëî, òàì íàõîäèëèñü ïòåíöû, êîëè÷å- Photo by S. Vazhov. ñòâî êîòîðûõ óñòàíîâèòü íå óäàëîñü èç-çà êðàéíå àãðåññèâíîãî ïîâåäåíèÿ âçðîñëûõ: ïðè ïîïûòêå ïîäíÿòüñÿ íà äåðåâî ñàìêà è ñàìåö ïîñòîÿííî ïîî÷åðåäíî àòàêîâàëè, óäàðÿÿ êîãòÿìè â ãîëîâó. ×åòâ¸ðòîå ãíåçäî ïðè åãî îñìîòðå 29 àïðåëÿ è 22 ìàÿ ñàìêà íå ïîêèäàëà, íî 22 ìàÿ ïîä íåé áûëî âèäíî ÷åòûðå ïóõîâûõ ïòåíöà. Ýòîò ÿùèê áûë ïðîâåðåí òàêæå 7 èþíÿ: êðóïíûé îïåðÿþùèéñÿ ïòåíåö ñèäåë íà êðàþ ëåòêà, îñòàëüíûõ íå áûëî âèäíî. Âåðîÿòíî, îíè ïîêèíóëè ãíåçäî è äåðæà- ëèñü ãäå-òî ïîáëèçîñòè, ÷òî ñâîéñòâåííî äàííîìó âèäó.  ïÿòîì ÿùèêå 1 ìàÿ áûëî äâà ïóõîâûõ ïòåíöà, ñàìêà âûëåòåëà èç íåãî ïðè çàëå- çàíèè íà ãíåçäîâîå äåðåâî; 22 ìàÿ â í¸ì áûëî äâà êðóïíûõ ïóõîâûõ ïòåíöà, êî- Raptor Conservation Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 93

Äëèííîõâîñòûå ïðåäåëàõ íîðìû äëÿ âèäà (Êàðÿêèí, 2004), íåÿñûòè íà êëàäêàõ â íåñìîòðÿ íà íèçêóþ ÷èñëåííîñòü îñíîâ- ãíåçäîâûõ ÿùèêàõ. 27, 29.04.2010. íûõ êîðìîâûõ îáúåêòîâ â ýòîì ãîäó. Ôîòî Ð. Áàõòèíà.  äàëüíåéøåì ïëàíèðóåòñÿ ïðîäîëæèòü Ural Owls on clutches óñòàíîâêó èñêóññòâåííûõ ãíåçäîâèé íà in the nestboxes. 27, äðóãèõ ÷àñòÿõ ìîäåëüíîé ïëîùàäêè ñ ïî- 29/04/2010. ñëåäóþùèì èçó÷åíèåì óñïåõà ðàçìíî- Photos by R. Bachtin. æåíèÿ è äèíàìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè äëèííîõ- âîñòîé íåÿñûòè îòíîñèòåëüíî äèíàìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè ìåëêèõ ãðûçóíîâ.

Áëàãîäàðíîñòè Àâòîðû âûðàæàþò èñêðåííþþ ïðèçíà- òåëüíîñòü È.Â. Êàðÿêèíó, ïîäàâøåìó èäåþ ïðèâëå÷åíèÿ ñîâ â èñêóññòâåííûå ãí¸çäà â Áèéñêèõ áîðàõ è ðàçðàáîòàâøåìó ñõåìó ðàçâåñêè ñîâÿòíèêîâ; ðåêòîðó Àëòàéñêîé ãîñóäàðñòâåííîé àêàäåìèè îáðàçîâàíèÿ èì. Â.Ì. Øóêøèíà Â.Ï. Íèêèøàåâîé, îêà- çàâøåé ôèíàíñîâóþ ïîääåðæêó, à òàêæå Àíòîíó Êîðîáêî è Åâãåíèþ Êëþåâó çà ïî- ìîùü ïðè óñòàíîâêå è ïðîâåðêå ãíåçäîâûõ ÿùèêîâ.

Ëèòåðàòóðà Âàæîâ Ñ.Â., Áàõòèí Ð.Ô., Ìàêàðîâ À.Â. Íå- êîòîðûå ñâåäåíèÿ ïî ãíåçäîâîé áèîëîãèè äëèí- íîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè â îêðåñòíîñòÿõ Áèéñêà, Àë- òàéñêèé êðàé, Ðîññèÿ. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2009. ¹17. Ñ. 87–88. Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè (ìåòîäè- ÷åñêèå ðåêîìåíäàöèè ïî èçó÷åíèþ ñîêîëîî- áðàçíûõ è ñîâîîáðàçíûõ). Íèæíèé Íîâãîðîä. 2004. 351 ñ. Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Ëåâàøêèí À.Ï. Ñòðîèì äî- ìèêè äëÿ ñîâ è ìåëêèõ ñîêîëîâ. – Ìàòåðèàëû ñàéòà Ñèáèðñêîãî ýêîëîãè÷åñêîãî öåíòðà. 2009 http://www.sibecocenter.ru/Nestboxing2.htm. Çàêà÷àíî 1 ôåâðàëÿ 2010 ã. Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Ëåâàøêèí À.Ï., Ïàæåíêîâ À.Ñ., Êîðæåâ Ä.À. Ðåçóëüòàòû ïðèâëå÷åíèÿ íåÿñûòåé ÿâëÿëè àãðåññèâíîñòü íå âñåãäà (33% àòàê â èñêóññòâåííûå ãí¸çäà â Ñàìàðñêîé îáëàñòè, îò ÷èñëà ïîñåù¸ííûõ ãí¸çä ñ âûëåòåâøè- Ðîññèÿ. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2009. ìè èç íèõ ñàìêàìè) è ëèøü èìèòèðîâàëè ¹16. C. 25–41. àòàêè, íå íàíîñÿ óäàðîâ, òî íåÿñûòè, çà- Ëèâàíîâ Ñ.Ã., Ðàâêèí Þ.Ñ. Ìîíèòîðèíã ðàçíî- íèìàþùèå ãíåçäîâûå ÿùèêè, àòàêîâàëè îáðàçèÿ íàçåìíûõ ïîçâîíî÷íûõ ãîñóäàðñòâåí- íîãî áèîñôåðíîãî çàïîâåäíèêà «Êàòóíñêèé» íàáëþäàòåëåé â 3 ðàçà ÷àùå (100% àòàê (êîíöåïöèÿ, ìåòîäû è âàðèàíò ðåàëèçàöèè). – îò ÷èñëà ïîñåù¸ííûõ ãí¸çä ñ âûëåòåâøè- Òðóäû ãîñóäàðñòâåííîãî ïðèðîäíîãî áèîñôåð- ìè èç íèõ ñàìêàìè) è ÷àñòî íàíîñèëè óäà- íîãî çàïîâåäíèêà «Êàòóíñêèé». Âûï. 1. Áàðíà- ðû. Èìåííî äëÿ äëèííîõâîñòûõ íåÿñûòåé, óë. 2001. Ñ. 55–110. ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ â ñîâÿòíèêå, â Áèéñêèõ áî- Ìàêàðîâ À.Â., Øàïåòüêî Å.Â. Ëåòíÿÿ ôàóíà ðàõ âïåðâûå áûëà îòìå÷åíà ïàðíàÿ àòàêà è íàñåëåíèå ìåëêèõ ìëåêîïèòàþùèõ â îêðåñò- íàáëþäàòåëåé ñàìöîì è ñàìêîé. Îïèñà- íîñòÿõ ãîðîäà Áèéñêà (Àëòàéñêèé êðàé). – Àë- íèÿ òàêèõ ñëó÷àåâ êðàéíå ðåäêè è èçâåñò- òàéñêèé çîîëîãè÷åñêèé æóðíàë. 2009. Âûï. 3. íû äëÿ òåððèòîðèè Óêðàèíû (Ìàëûøîê, Ñ. 84–89. Ìàëêîâ Þ.Ï., Øèòîâ À.Â. Òåðèîãåîãðàôè÷å- Êíûø, 2001) è Ïîâîëæüÿ (Êàðÿêèí è äð., ñêèé àòëàñ Þãî-Âîñòî÷íîé Àëòàéñêîé ëàíäøàôò- 2009), ïðè÷¸ì, â ïîñëåäíåì ñëó÷àå, ïàð- íîé ïðîâèíöèè. Ãîðíî-Àëòàéñê. 2004. 95 ñ. íàÿ àòàêà íàáëþäàëàñü â ðåãèîíå âïåðâûå Ìàëûøîê Â.Ì., Êíûø Í.Ï. Î ãíåçäîâàíèè è òîæå ó ïàðû, çàíèìàâøåé ñîâÿòíèê. äëèííîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè íà ãðàíèöå Áðÿíñêîé Êîëè÷åñòâî ïòåíöîâ â èçâåñòíûõ âûâîä- è Ñóìñêîé îáëàñòåé. – Áåðêóò. 2001. ¹10. êàõ 2–4, â ñðåäíåì 3,33±0,89, ÷òî ëåæèò â Âûï. 2. Ñ. 243–245. 94 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 18 Îõðàíà ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

ContinuationoftheProjectonAttractionoftheUralOwlinto NestboxesinaVicinityofAkademgorodok,Novosibirsk,Russia ПРОДОЛЖЕНИЕ ПРОЕКТА ПО ПРИВЛЕЧЕНИЮ ДЛИННОХВОСТЫХ НЕЯСЫТЕЙ НА ГНЕЗДОВАНИЕ В ОКРЕСТНОСТИ НОВОСИБИРСКОГО АКАДЕМГОРОДКА, РОССИЯ AndreenkovO.V.,AndreenkovaN.G.,ZhimulevI.F.(TheInstituteofChemicalBiology andFundamentalMedicine,SiberianBranchofRAS,Novosibirsk,Russia) Андреенков О.В., Андреенкова Н.Г., Жимулёв И.Ф. (Институт химической биологии и фундаментальной медицины СО РАН, Новосибирск, Россия)

Êîíòàêò: Àáñòðàêò Îëåã Àíäðååíêîâ Ìîíèòîðèíã èñêóññòâåííûõ ãíåçäîâèé äëÿ äëèííîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè (Strix uralensis), óñòàíîâëåííûõ â 2007– Èíñòèòóò õèìè÷åñêîé 2008 ãã., â 2010 ã. ïîêàçàë èõ çàíÿòîñòü ïÿòüþ ïàðàìè ñîâ. Íè îäèí èç ãíåçäîâûõ ÿùèêîâ, çàíèìàâøèõñÿ â áèîëîãèè è 2008 ã., íå áûë çàíÿò â 2010 ã., õîòÿ êîëè÷åñòâî ïàð, çàíèìàþùèõ èõ, óâåëè÷èëîñü íà îäíó, ïî ñðàâíåíèþ ôóíäàìåíòàëüíîé ñ 2008 ã. ìåäèöèíû ÑÎ ÐÀÍ, Êëþ÷åâûå ñëîâà: ñîâû, äëèííîõâîñòàÿ íåÿñûòü, Strix uralensis, áèîòåõíè÷åñêèå ìåðîïðèÿòèÿ, èñêóññòâåí- 630055, Ðîññèÿ, íûå ãíåçäîâüÿ, ãíåçäîâûå ÿùèêè, ãíåçäîâàÿ áèîëîãèÿ. Íîâîñèáèðñê, óë. Ìóñû Äæàëèëÿ, 6–4 Abstract oleg_andreenkov@ Monitoring the artificial nests for the Ural Owl (Strix uralensis), installed in 2007–2008 has revealed their occupancy by 5 pairs of owls in 2010. The nestboxes being occupied in 2008 was not used in 2010; however a number of pairs mail.ru breeding in nestboxes has increased on a pair comparing with 2008. Keywords: owls, Ural Owl, Strix uralensis, nestboxes, breeding biology. Contact: Oleg Andreenkov The Institute of  ïåðèîä ñ èþëÿ ïî îêòÿáðü 2007 ã. íà Eight nestboxes for the Ural Owl (Strix Chemical Biology and òåððèòîðèè Íîâîñèáèðñêîãî Àêàäåìãî- uralensis) were installed in the territory of Fundamental Medicine ðîäêà è Öåíòðàëüíîãî ñèáèðñêîãî áîòà- Akademgorodok and the Botanical Garden for Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of íè÷åñêîãî ñàäà (ÖÑÁÑ) áûëî óñòàíîâëåíî (Novosibirsk) in July-October 2007. A half of Sciences, 8 èñêóññòâåííûõ ãíåçäîâèé äëÿ äëèííîõ- nestboxes had been already occupied by Ural Musy Dzhalilya str., 6–4, âîñòîé íåÿñûòè (Strix uralensis) (äàëåå Owls in 2008 (Andreenkov et al., 2008). Novosibirsk, – ñîâÿòíèêè). Óæå â 2008 ã. ïîëîâèíà As a result of successful occupancy of nes- Russia, 630055, oleg_andreenkov@ ñîâÿòíèêîâ îêàçàëàñü çàíÿòîé äëèííîõ- mail.ru âîñòûìè íåÿñûòÿìè (Àíäðååíêîâ è äð., 2008).  ñâÿçè ñ óñïåøíûì çàñåëåíèåì, îñåíüþ 2008 ã. áûëî äîïîëíèòåëüíî óñòàíîâëåíî 4 ñîâÿòíèêà è ïðîâåäåíà ÷èñòêà çàñåëÿâøèõ- ñÿ ñîâÿòíèêîâ ñ çàìåíîé âûñòèëêè. Åù¸ 3 ñîâÿòíèêà óñòàíîâëåíî â ñåíòÿáðå 2010 ã. (ðèñ. 1, òàáë. 1). Ðåçóëüòàòû çàñåëåíèÿ ñîâÿòíèêîâ â 2009 ã. áûëè êðàéíå íåóäà÷íûìè. Ïðè îñìîòðå ñîâÿòíèêîâ 2 ìàÿ 2009 ã. òîëüêî â ñîâÿò- íèêå ¹10 áûëà îáíàðóæåíà íàñèæèâàþ- ùàÿ ñàìêà. ×åðåç ìåñÿö, ïðè ïîâòîðíîì îñìîòðå 31 ìàÿ, â ýòîì ñîâÿòíèêå áûëà îáíàðóæåíà áðîøåííàÿ êëàäêà èç äâóõ ÿèö. Îñòàëüíûå ñîâÿòíèêè íå çàñåëÿëèñü.  2010 ã. îñìîòð ñîâÿòíèêîâ ïðîâîäèë- ñÿ îäíîêðàòíî, 1 ìàÿ 2010 ã. Ïðîâåðêà ïîêàçàëà çàñåëåíèå ñîâÿòíèêîâ óæå 5-þ ïàðàìè äëèííîõâîñòûõ íåÿñûòåé, îäíàêî â èõ ðàçìåùåíèè ïî òåððèòîðèè ïðîè- Ñàìêà äëèííîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè (Strix uralensis) íà çîøëè îïðåäåë¸ííûå èçìåíåíèÿ, â ðå- êëàäêå â ñîâÿòíèêå ¹7. Ôîòî Î. Àíäðååíêîâà. çóëüòàòå êîòîðûõ íè îäèí èç ñîâÿòíèêîâ, Female of the Ural Owl (Strix uralensis) on the clutch çàñåë¸ííûõ â 2008 ã., íå áûë çàñåë¸í ïî- in the nestbox ¹7. Photo by O. Andreenkov. Raptor Conservation Raptors Conservation 2010, 18 95

boxes another 4 nestboxes were installed in autumn 2008. Occupied earlier nestboxes were cleaned. And 3 nestboxes were else installed in September 2010 (fig. 1, table 1). Unfortunately the results of the nestbox monitoring in 2009 were unsuccessful. Only in the nestbox ¹10 an incubating female was observed on May, 2 2009. We found a dead clutch consisted of 2 eggs in that nest- box at repeated survey in a month on May, 31st. The others were not occupied at all. In 2010, we surveyed nesboxes only on May, 1st, 2010. We have found 5 pairs of owls breeding in nestboxes, however the nestboxes occupied in 2008 has not been used repeatedly in 2010. Only the nestbox which had been nested by owl unsuccess- fully in 2009, was repeatedly occupied A female incubating the clutch consisted of 3 eggs was noted in the box ¹2, at at- tempt to make a picture she has taken off from the nests and attacked a human hav- ing struck claws in a hand and in a neck at a repeated attack. The male was not far at this time. A female in the box ¹7 was incubating eggs and has not flied at the check. Thus, it was impossible to know the size of a clutch. The male was absent. A female in the box ¹8 also was incubat- ing 5 eggs. She has flied, the male was not Ðèñ. 1. Êàðòà èññëåäóåìîé òåððèòîðèè. Óñëîâíûå îáîçíà÷åíèÿ: observed. A (ïóíêòèðíàÿ ëèíèÿ) – ãðàíèöà Íîâîñèáèðñêîãî Àêàäåìãîðîäêà,  (ñïëîøíàÿ ëèíèÿ) – ãðàíèöà ïðèëåãàþùåé ê Àêàäåìãîðîäêó òåððè- A female in the box ¹12 was incubat- òîðèè ÖÑÁÑ, Ñ – çàíÿòûå â 2008 ã. ñîâÿòíèêè, D – çàíÿòûå â 2010 ã. ing eggs too, she has not left her nest. Thus ñîâÿòíèêè, Å – ñîâÿòíèêè, óñòàíîâëåííûå â 2007 ã., F – ñîâÿòíèêè, the clutch size has remained unknown. The óñòàíîâëåííûå â 2008 ã., G – ñîâÿòíèêè, óñòàíîâëåííûå â 2010 ã. male was attacking a human during survey. Fig. 1. Map of the surveyed area. Labels: A – border of Novosibirsk It is necessary to notice, that events of attack Akademgorodok,  – border of the Botanical Garden, C – nestboxes of observers by the male of the Ural Owl, at occupied by Ural Owsl in 2008, D – nestboxes occupied by Ural Owls in 2010, E – nestboxes installed in 2007, F – nestboxes installed in the female incubating eggs in the nesbox, 2008, G – nestboxes installed in 2010. have not described in available publications. Probably it is the first registered time of such behaviour of the male. âòîðíî â 2010 ã. The nestbox ¹10 was not surveyed on  ñîâÿòíèêå ¹2 ñàìêà íàñèæèâàëà êëàä- May, 1st. But in some days the approached êó èç òð¸õ ÿèö, ïðè ïîïûòêå ñôîòîãðàôè- observer attempting to rise on a tree was ðîâàòü âûëåòåëà èç ãíåçäà è äâàæäû àòà- attacked by birds, it confirmed the nestbox êîâàëà ïðîâåðÿþùåãî, óäàðèâ êîãòÿìè â occupancy. ðóêó ïðè âûëåòå èç ñîâÿòíèêà è â øåþ ïðè The distance between occupied nest- ïîâòîðíîì íàïàäåíèè. Ñàìåö â ýòî âðåìÿ boxes in 2008 was 0.79–1.41 km, at aver- íàõîäèëñÿ íåïîäàë¸êó. age 1.00±0.36 km, in 2010 – 1.04–1.48  ñîâÿòíèêå ¹7 ñàìêà ñèäåëà íà êëàä- km, at average – 1.2±0.2 km. The distance êå è íå ñëåòåëà ïðè ôîòîãðàôèðîâàíèè, between nestboxes occupied in 2008 and óñòàíîâèòü ðàçìåð êëàäêè íå óäàëîñü. Ñà- the nearest nesboxes occupied in 2010 was ìåö íå ïîÿâëÿëñÿ. 0.67–1.39 km, at average 1.02±0.3 km.  ñîâÿòíèêå ¹8 ñàìêà íàñèæèâàëà êëàä- Probably, in this case birds have moved in- êó èç ïÿòè ÿèö, ñ êëàäêè ñëåòåëà, ñàìåö íå side their breeding territories searching the ïîÿâëÿëñÿ. optimal food conditions. The further moni-  ñîâÿòíèêå ¹12 ñàìêà êëàäêó íå ïîêè- toring will allow to understand the changes íóëà, ðàçìåð êëàäêè îñòàëñÿ íåèçâåñòíûì, of occupancy of nestboxes by Ural Owls. 96 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 18 Îõðàíà ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Òàáë. 1. Ïàðàìåòðû óñòàíîâêè è çàñåëåíèÿ ñîâÿòíèêîâ. Table 1. Parameters of location and occupancy of nestboxes. Íîìåð ñîâÿòíèêà Íîìåð ñîâÿòíèêà Number of nestbox Äåðåâî Tree äåðåâà (ì) Âûñîòà Height of tree (m) (ì) óñòàíîâêè Âûñîòà Height to nestbox (m) ëåòêà Ýêñïîçèöèÿ Hole exposition óñòàíîâêè Äàòà Data of installing óñòàíîâêè Ìåñòî Place of installing â 2008 ã. Çàñåëåíèå Use in 2008 â 2010 ã. Çàñåëåíèå Use in 2010 1 Ñîñíà / Pine 16 7–8 Þ / SE 21.07.2007 ÖÑÁÑ / Botanical garden 3 ïòåíöà Ïóñòî / Empty 3 nestlings 2 Ñîñíà / Pine 18 7–8 Þ / S 21.07.2007 ÖÑÁÑ / Botanical garden Ïóñòî / Empty 3 ÿéöà / 3 eggs 3 Ñîñíà / Pine 20 10 ÞÇ / SW 30.07.2007 ÖÑÁÑ / Botanical garden 3 ïòåíöà Ïóñòî / Empty 3 nestlings 4 Áåð¸çà / Birch 22 6 Þ / S 30.07.2007 ÖÑÁÑ / Botanical garden 2 ïòåíöà Ïóñòî / Empty 2 nestlings 5 Áåð¸çà / Birch 18 7 Þ / S 30.07.2007 ÖÑÁÑ / Botanical garden Ïóñòî / Empty Ïóñòî / Empty 6 Ñîñíà / Pine 18 9 Þ / S 01.09.2007 Àêàäåìãîðîäîê 5 ïòåíöîâ Ïóñòî / Empty Akademgorodok 5 nestlings 7 Ñîñíà / Pine 16 8 Þ / SE 01.09.2007 ÖÑÁÑ / Botanical garden Ïóñòî / Empty Êëàäêà / Clutch 8 Ñîñíà / Pine 18 6 Þ / SE 27.10.2007 ÖÑÁÑ / Botanical garden Ïóñòî / Empty 5 ÿèö / 5 eggs 9 Ñîñíà / ine 20 10 ÞÇ / SW 03.08.2008 Àêàäåìãîðîäîê Ïóñòî / Empty Akademgorodok 10 Ñîñíà / Pine 18 9  / E 05.07.2008 ÖÑÁÑ / otanical garden Êëàäêà / Clutch 11 Ñîñíà / Pine 18 9 ÞÇ / SW 05.07.2008 Àêàäåìãîðîäîê Ïóñòî / Empty Akademgorodok 12 Ñîñíà / Pine 16 8 Ç / W 03.08.2008 Àêàäåìãîðîäîê Êëàäêà / Clutch Akademgorodok 13 Ñîñíà / Pine 18 10 Þ / S 26.09.2010 ÖÑÁÑ / Botanical garden 14 Ñîñíà / Pine 18 8 Ñ / N 26.09.2010 ÖÑÁÑ / Botanical garden 15 Ñîñíà / Pine 15 8 Þ / SE 26.09.2010 ÖÑÁÑ / Botanical garden

ñàìåö íàïàäàë íà ïðîâåðÿþùåãî. Ñëåäóåò òåëü, íå äåëàâøèé ïîïûòêè ïîäíÿòüñÿ íà çàìåòèòü, ÷òî ñëó÷àåâ àòàêè íàáëþäàòå- äåðåâî, áûë àòàêîâàí ñîâîé ïðÿìî íà çåì- ëåé ñàìöîì äëèííîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè, ïðè ëå, ÷òî ãîâîðèò î åãî çàñåëåíèè. Êëàäêà äëèííîõâîñòîé ñèäÿùåé â ñîâÿòíèêå ñàìêå, â äîñòóïíîé Ðàññòîÿíèå ìåæäó çàíÿòûìè ñîâÿòíèêà- íåÿñûòè â ñîâÿòíèêå ëèòåðàòóðå íàì îáíàðóæèòü íå óäàëîñü. ìè â 2008 ã. ñîñòàâèëî 0,79–1,41 êì, â ¹8. Âîçìîæíî ýòî âïåðâûå çàðåãèñòðèðîâàí- ñðåäíåì 1,00±0,36 êì, â 2010 ã. – 1,04– Ôîòî Î. Àíäðååíêîâà. íîå òàêîå ïîâåäåíèå ñàìöà. 1,48 êì, â ñðåäíåì – 1,2±0,2 êì. Ðàñ- Clutch of the Ural Owl in the nestbox ¹8. Ñîâÿòíèê ¹10 ïðè îñìîòðå 1 ìàÿ íå ñòîÿíèå ìåæäó ñîâÿòíèêàìè, çàíÿòûìè Photo by ïðîâåðÿëñÿ. ×åðåç íåñêîëüêî äíåé ïîä â 2008 ã., è áëèæàéøèìè ê íèì ñîâÿò- O. Andreenkov. ýòèì ñîâÿòíèêîì ïîäîøåäøèé íàáëþäà- íèêàìè, çàíÿòûìè â 2010 ã., ñîñòàâèëî 0,67–1,39 êì, â ñðåäíåì 1,02±0,3 êì. Âîçìîæíî, â äàííîì ñëó÷àå èìååò ìåñòî ïåðåìåùåíèå ïòèö âíóòðè ñâîèõ ãíåç- äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ â öåëÿõ íàèáîëåå îïòè- ìàëüíîãî îñâîåíèÿ êîðìîâîãî ðåñóðñà. Äàëüíåéøèé ìîíèòîðèíã ïîçâîëèò ïðî- ëèòü ñâåò íà äèíàìèêó èñïîëüçîâàíèÿ íåÿñûòÿìè ãíåçäîâûõ ÿùèêîâ.

Ëèòåðàòóðà Àíäðååíêîâ Î.Â., Àíäðååíêîâà Í.Ã., Æèìó- ë¸â È.Ô. Ïðèâëå÷åíèå äëèííîõâîñòûõ íåÿñûòåé íà ãíåçäîâàíèå â îêðåñòíîñòè Íîâîñèáèðñêîãî Àêàäåìãîðîäêà, Ðîññèÿ – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2008. ¹14. Ñ. 39–42. Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 97

TechniquesandMethods МЕТОДЫ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЙ

UsingGIS-SoftwareforEstimationofNumberandForecasting theDistributionofBreedingRaptors:ApprobationofMethods forExamplesofAnalysisofDistributionoftheImperialEagleand GoldenEagleintheVolga-UralRegion,Russia О ВОЗМОЖНОСТЯХ ГИС В ОЦЕНКЕ ЧИСЛЕННОСТИ И ПРОГНОЗИРОВАНИИ РАЗМЕЩЕНИЯ ГНЕЗДЯЩИХСЯ ХИЩНЫХ ПТИЦ: АПРОБАЦИЯ МЕТОДИК НА ПРИМЕРЕ АНАЛИЗА ПРОСТРАНСТВЕННОГО РАСПРЕДЕЛЕНИЯ МОГИЛЬНИКА И БЕРКУТА В ВОЛГО-УРАЛЬСКОМ РЕГИОНЕ, РОССИЯ KaryakinI.V.(CenterofFieldStudies,N.Novgorod,Russia) Карякин И.В. (Центр полевых исследований, Н. Новгород, Россия)

Êîíòàêò: Àáñòðàêò Èãîðü Êàðÿêèí  ñòàòüå îïèñàíà ìåòîäèêà ïîñòðîåíèÿ ñõåìû ðàçìåùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ õèùíûõ ïòèö ñ èñ- Öåíòð ïîëåâûõ ïîëüçîâàíèåì èíñòðóìåíòàðèÿ ãåîèíôîðìàöèîííûõ ñèñòåì.  êà÷åñòâå ÃÈÑ-ïðîãðàììû èñïîëüçîâàíà ArcView èññëåäîâàíèé GIS 3x ESRI. Ìåòîäèêà àïðîáèðîâàíà íà ïðèìåðå äâóõ âèäîâ îðëîâ – ìîãèëüíèêå (Aquila heliaca) è áåðêóòå 603000, Ðîññèÿ, (Aquila chrysaetos) â ëåñîñòåïíîé è þæíî-òà¸æíîé çîíàõ Âîëãî-Óðàëüñêîãî ðåãèîíà. Äëÿ ìîãèëüíèêà íà îñíîâà- Íèæíèé Íîâãîðîä, íèè îáíàðóæåííûõ 15 ãí¸çä íà 2-õ ïëîùàäêàõ ïîñòðîåíà ñõåìà ðàçìåùåíèÿ èç 222-õ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ óë. Êîðîëåíêî, 17a–17 ó÷àñòêîâ. Ïðîâåðêà ïîêàçàëà, ÷òî â öåëîì ñõåìà ÿâëÿåòñÿ ðàáî÷åé. Ãíåçäîâàíèå ìîãèëüíèêà óñòàíîâëåíî íà òåë.: +7 831 433 38 47 102-õ ó÷àñòêàõ, ÷òî ñîñòàâëÿåò 85,71% îò ÷èñëà ïðîâåðåííûõ. Ïðè ýòîì ïðè ïðîâåðêå 119 ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñò- [email protected] êîâ áûëî âûÿâëåíî 120 ðåàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ. Çà ïðåäåëàìè ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ îáíàðóæåíî 8 ãí¸çä ìîãèëüíèêîâ, ïðè÷¸ì ðîâíî ïîëîâèíà èç íèõ íàõîäèòñÿ â íåïîñðåäñòâåííîé áëèçîñòè îò ãðàíèö ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ. Ðàçìåùåíèå ðåàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêîâ îòêëîíèëîñü îò ñõåìû íà 14,29%, íî ïðè ýòîì ÷èñëåííîñòü ìîãèëüíèêà íà ãíåçäîâàíèè íà îáñëåäîâàííûõ òåððèòîðèÿõ ïðåâûñèëà ðàñ÷¸òíóþ âñåãî íà 0,84%. Contact: Äëÿ áåðêóòà íà îñíîâàíèè ïàðàìåòðîâ ðàçìåùåíèÿ ãí¸çä â Âåðõíåêàìñêîé ãíåçäîâîé ãðóïïèðîâêå îò îäíîãî Igor Karyakin èçâåñòíîãî ãíåçäà áûëà ïîñòðîåíà ñõåìà, ñîäåðæàùàÿ 26 ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ íà ïëîùàäè 3,1 òûñ. Center of Field Studies êì2. Ïðîâåðêà ïîçâîëèëà íà âñåõ 26 ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêàõ ñ òîé èëè èíîé ñòåïåíüþ äîñòîâåðíîñòè Korolenko str., 17a–17 çàðåãèñòðèðîâàòü ïðèñóòñòâèå áåðêóòîâ: äëÿ 11 ó÷àñòêîâ óñòàíîâëåíî ãíåçäîâàíèå îðëîâ, äëÿ 7 – îíî âåñüìà âå- Nizhniy Novgorod, ðîÿòíî, äëÿ 3-õ ó÷àñòêîâ ãíåçäîâàíèå áåðêóòà âîçìîæíî è ñòàòóñ 5 ó÷àñòêîâ íå ÿñåí, òàê êàê îíè íå îáñëåäîâàíû, Russia, 603000, íî î ïðèñóòñòâèè áåðêóòà íà íèõ ñâèäåòåëüñòâóþò îïðîñíûå äàííûå. Èç ñõåìû âûáèëñÿ òîëüêî îäèí ãíåçäîâîé tel.: +7 831 433 38 47 ó÷àñòîê áåðêóòîâ. Ïðîâåðêà ñõåì ðàçìåùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ îðëîâ ïîêàçàëà, ÷òî ìåòîäèêà [email protected] ðàáîòàåò è å¸ ìîæíî ðåêîìåíäîâàòü äëÿ âûÿâëåíèÿ îñîáåííîñòåé ðàçìåùåíèÿ â ïðîñòðàíñòâå òåððèòîðèàëüíûõ ïàð ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ è îöåíêè èõ ÷èñëåííîñòè íà ãíåçäîâàíèè. Êëþ÷åâûå ñëîâà: õèùíûå ïòèöû, ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè, áåðêóò, Aquila chrysaetos, ìîãèëüíèê, Aquila heliaca, ÃÈÑ, ïðîñòðàíñòâåííûé àíàëèç, ArcView.

Abstract This article describes the procedure of constructing the distribution model of potential breeding territories of rap- tors by means of geo-information systems. ArcView GIS 3x ESRI was used as the GIS software. The procedure was tested by the example of two eagle species – Imperial Eagle (Aquila heliaca) and Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) in forest-steppe and south taiga zones of the Volga-Ural Region. Based on 15 nests revealed on 2 sites, the distribu- tion model comprising 222 potential breeding territories plotted for Imperial Eagle. The verification has proved this model in general to be valid. The nesting of Imperial Eagle was ascertained at 102 territories, which is 85.71% of the number of territories inspected. During the inspection of 119 potential territories, 120 real breeding territories were found. Outside the potential territories, 8 nests of the Imperial Eagle were found, half of them being located in direct proximity of boundaries of the potential sites. The distribution of the real breeding territories of the Imperial Eagle has deviated from the model by 14.29%; however, the population of the breeding Golden Eagle on the inspected ter- ritories surpassed the calculated value by only 0.84%. For Golden Eagle, based on the parameters of nest distribution in the Upper Kama breeding group relative to one nest, the model that comprised 26 potential breeding territories on the area of 3,100 km2 was plotted. Now all 26 potential breeding territories are known as inhabited by Golgen Eagles with a particular measure of confidence: the breeding is confirmed for 11 territories, the breeding is quite probable for 7 territories, for 3 territories, nesting of the Golden Eagle is possible; the status of 5 sites is unclear since they have not been inspected, however, the questionnaire data attest to the presence of the Golden Eagle on them. The only breeding territory of Golden Eagle stood apart from the model. The verification of the distribution models of potential breeding territories of eagles has shown that the procedure works and it can be recommended for revealing the features of spatial distribution of territory pairs of birds of prey and estimating their breeding population. Keywords: birds of prey, raptors, Golden Eagle, Aquila chrysaetos, Imperial Eagle, Aquila heliaca, GIS, spatial analysis, ArcView. 98 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

×ÀÑÒÜ ÏÅÐÂÀß, ÂÑÒÓÏÈÒÅËÜÍÀß Introduction or Ïðåäèñëîâèå, èëè What can GIS do to make Ãäå íà÷èíàåòñÿ «òî÷íàÿ íàóêà» the population estimations â ó÷¸òàõ æèâîòíûõ? more exact? Äëÿ ðåøåíèÿ ìíîãèõ íàó÷íî- GIS allows switching from extrapolation ïðàêòè÷åñêèõ çàäà÷ â îáëàñòè çîîëîãèè of density onto the area to the modeling of (çîîãåîãðàôè÷åñêèå è áèîãåîöåíîëîãè- distribution of the counted objects on the ÷åñêèå èññëåäîâàíèÿ, ýêîëîãè÷åñêàÿ ýêñ- basis of the parameters of their position ïåðòèçà õîçÿéñòâåííûõ ïðîåêòîâ, áèî- relative to other animate and inanimate ob- ìîíèòîðèíã è ïðîãíîç, âåäåíèå êàäàñòðà jects that were determined empirically. æèâîòíîãî ìèðà è ò.ï.) íåîáõîäèìû ñâåäå- GIS provides possibilities for: íèÿ î ÷èñëåííîñòè è ðàñïðåäåëåíèè èçó- - adjusting the point distribution using fil- ÷àåìûõ îáúåêòîâ íà èíòåðåñóþùåé òåððè- tration of the erroneous values and visual òîðèè. Êàê áû íè õîòåëîñü èññëåäîâàòåëþ detecting the regularities in the normal dis- óçíàòü ÷èñëåííîñòü òîãî èëè èíîãî âèäà íà tribution; îïðåäåë¸ííîé òåððèòîðèè, áåç êîëè÷å- - determining the actual extrapolation ñòâåííîãî ó÷¸òà ýòèõ îáúåêòîâ äàííûå ïî zone based on the results of analyzing èõ ÷èñëåííîñòè ïðîñòî íåâîçìîæíî ïî- points that are normally distributed not in ëó÷èòü. À çíà÷èò, íàäî õîäèòü (èëè åçäèòü, the overall area, but relative to certain ob- ïëàâàòü, ëåòàòü), ñìîòðåòü, ñëóøàòü, ñ÷èòàòü jects or each other in visible clusters; è çàïèñûâàòü, ïðè÷¸ì æåëàòåëüíî ñëåäóÿ - extrapolating different density indices îïðåäåë¸ííûì ïðàâèëàì ïðè ïîñòðîåíèè onto the same biotypes located in different ìàðøðóòîâ è âåäåíèè çàïèñåé. areas. Ëþáîé ó÷¸ò ñâîäèòñÿ ê îïðåäåëåíèþ ïà- To illustrate, let us give a simple example ðàìåòðîâ ðàçìåùåíèÿ ó÷èòûâàåìîãî âèäà in fig. 1. Figure 1-A: regularities of distribu- â ïðîñòðàíñòâå. Óïðîñòèâ ýòî ïîíÿòèå äî tion of the points are not clear until they ìèíèìóìà, ìîæíî êîíñòàòèðîâàòü îáÿçà- are transferred from the paper into GIS. We òåëüíîå îïðåäåëåíèå äâóõ îñíîâíûõ õà- construct convex polygons and have an- ðàêòåðèñòèê ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ: other look at the pattern of distribution of 1. Ïðèóðî÷åííîñòü âèäà ê îïðåäåë¸ííî- the points. Figure 1-B: distribution of the ìó ãåîáîòàíè÷åñêîìó èëè ëàíäøàôòíîìó points is scattered-grouped; the groups are âûäåëó. randomly arranged. However, even a sim- 2. Ïëîòíîñòü ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ âèäà â äàí- ple visual comparison of the position of the íîì âûäåëå. points with any landscape parameters may  ýïîõó äî ãåîãðàôè÷åñêèõ èíôîðìà- reveal certain regularities. Then, we connect öèîííûõ ñèñòåì (ÃÈÑ) âñå êîëè÷åñòâåí- the hydrogrid layer and observe the obvious íûå ó÷¸òû æèâîòíûõ ñâîäèëèñü ê îïðåäå- result. Figure 1-C: the points are concen- ëåíèþ èõ ïëîòíîñòè, òî åñòü êîëè÷åñòâà trated in the riverbeds that are remote from îáúåêòîâ (îñîáåé, ïàð, ñëåäîâ, ãí¸çä, ëî- the river head by a certain distance. Figure ãîâ è ò.ï.) íà åäèíèöó ïëîùàäè (íàïðèìåð, 1-D: analysis of the distances between all îñîáåé/1 êì2). Äàëåå ïëîòíîñòü ýêñòðàïî- neighbors attests to the normal distribution ëèðîâàëàñü íà îïðåäåë¸ííóþ ïëîùàäü äëÿ of points along the riverbeds. ïîëó÷åíèÿ êîëè÷åñòâåííîé îöåíêè ÷èñ- The main adjusting and specifying points ëåííîñòè îáúåêòîâ òîãî èëè èíîãî âèäà of modeling is the conversion of the points (èíà÷å ãîâîðÿ, çàïàñà). into polygonal objects, though conditional, Êàçàëîñü áû, âñ¸ äîñòàòî÷íî ïðîñòî, îä- but still the individual sites that can be used íàêî â äàííîì àëãîðèòìå èìååòñÿ ìàññà not only to restrict the count area, but also ïîäâîäíûõ êàìíåé, êîòîðûå ÿâëÿþòñÿ öå- to plot the model of site distribution (both ëîé ñêàëîé ïðåòêíîâåíèÿ â îöåíêå ïîëó- real and potential) for any given territory ÷àåìîãî ðåçóëüòàòà è âûçûâàþò ìàññó íà- and to visualize all its drawbacks that can- ó÷íûõ è íåíàó÷íûõ äèñêóññèé. Ñóùåñòâóåò, not be revealed when using other methods êàê ìèíèìóì, ïÿòü îñíîâíûõ ïðè÷èí, of data processing. âñëåäñòâèå êîòîðûõ èòîãîâûé ðåçóëüòàò Next, let us consider the application of the âñåõ ó÷¸òîâ – îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè – áóäåò algorithm of population calculation via “dis- ðàçíûì. tance analysis” in solving particular academ- Ïðè÷èíà 1.  íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ èìååòñÿ ic and research problems that are related to ðÿä ìåòîäîâ ó÷¸òà æèâîòíûõ. Îäíàêî ìíî- large raptors. ArcView GIS 3x (ArcView…, ãèå èç íèõ èìåþò òîò îáùèé íåäîñòàòîê, 1999b) was used as the GIS software, since ÷òî ïðåòåíäóþò íà íåêîòîðóþ óíèâåðñàëü- it is the most available of all major licensed Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 99

íîñòü è çà÷àñòóþ ïðèìåíÿþòñÿ äëÿ îäíî- GIS products. In addition to the basic shell, âðåìåííîãî èçó÷åíèÿ âñåõ âèäîâ. Ïðè we will require units Spatial Analyst and Im- ýòîì äîïóñêàåòñÿ îøèáî÷íîå ïîëîæåíèå, age Analysis (ArcView…, 1999à, 1999ñ), ÷òî âñå âèäû èëè ýêîëîãè÷åñêèå ãðóïïû extensions Image Warp (McVay, 1999), âèäîâ ìîãóò áûòü ó÷òåíû ñ îäèíàêîâîé ShapeWarp (McVay, 1998), Edit Tools ñòåïåíüþ òî÷íîñòè.  äåéñòâèòåëüíîñòè, (Tchoukanski, 2004), X-Tools (DeLaune, ïðè èñïîëüçîâàíèè îäíîãî «óíèâåðñàëü- 2000), Repeating Shapes (Jenness, 2005), íîãî» ìåòîäà, îøèáêà â îòíîøåíèè íåêî- Nearest Features (Jenness, 2004), and TRLe- òîðûõ âèäîâ ïîëó÷àåòñÿ ÷ðåçìåðíî áîëü- gend (Dubinin, 2009). We use PHOTOMOD øîé. Ïîýòîìó íåîáõîäèìà ñïåöèàëèçàöèÿ GeoCalculator software for coordinate recal- ìåòîäîâ ó÷¸òà â çàâèñèìîñòè îò áèîëîãè- culation, Adobe Photoshop CS2 – for image ÷åñêèõ îñîáåííîñòåé äàííîé ãðóïïû, õà- processing, and Statistica 5.0 – for statistical ðàêòåðà ñòàöèé è ñåçîíà. processing of the material. Òàêèì îáðàçîì, äëÿ êàæäîãî âèäà òðåáóåòñÿ àäàïòèðîâàííàÿ ìåòîäèêà The First Example, or ó÷¸òà. Wherever an Imperial Eagle’s nest is, Ïðè÷èíà 2. Êëþ÷åâîé îñíîâîé âñåõ we will see it in the GIS ìåòîäèê ÿâëÿåòñÿ âèçóàëüíîå èëè àêóñòè- ÷åñêîå âûÿâëåíèå è îïðåäåëåíèå âèäîâîé Introduction ïðèíàäëåæíîñòè æèâîòíûõ, ëèáî èõ ñëå- The example of approbation of the tech- äîâ æèçíåäåÿòåëüíîñòè, ãí¸çä èëè ëîãîâ, nique was carried out in the High Trans- çàðåãèñòðèðîâàííûõ âî âðåìÿ ó÷¸òà. Ïî- Volga Region and the Cis-Ural region in the ýòîìó ñâåäåíèÿ ó÷¸ò÷èêîâ ñ ðàçíûìè ôè- border zone of five constituent entities of çèîëîãè÷åñêèìè äàííûìè (çðåíèå, ñëóõ, the Russian Federation – the Samara, the ñêîðîñòü ðåàêöèè), ïðîøåäøèõ ïî îäíîìó Ulyanovsk, and the Orenburg districts and è òîìó æå ìàðøðóòó è ïîñ÷èòàâøèõ âèä Tatarstan and Bashkortostan Republics. ïî îäíîé è òîé æå ìåòîäèêå, áóäóò ñóùå- Why was it the Imperial Eagle that was ñòâåííî ðàçëè÷àòüñÿ. Ñîáñòâåííî, íà ýòîì selected? The first reason is that it is an en- çàêàí÷èâàåòñÿ íàóêà è íà÷èíàåòñÿ èñêóñ- dangered species that is listed in the Red list ñòâî. Îäèí èññëåäîâàòåëü íèêîãäà íå â ñî- of IUCN, and the Red Data Book of Russia ñòîÿíèè â òî÷íîñòè ïîâòîðèòü ðåçóëüòàò, (BirdLife International, 2008; IUCN, 2010; ïîëó÷åííûé äðóãèì èññëåäîâàòåëåì, îñî- Galushin, 2001b) and the Red Data Books áåííî ïî èñòå÷åíèè íåêîòîðîãî âðåìåíè, of all constituent entities of the Russian Fed- òàê êàê, ïîìèìî ôèçèîëîãè÷åñêèõ êà÷åñòâ eration, in which the breeding range of this èññëåäîâàòåëÿ, íà êà÷åñòâî ó÷¸òà âëèÿåò è eagle is located (Prisyazhnyuk et al., 2004). ìàññà ñîâåðøåííî ðåàëüíûõ ìàòåðèàëü- Another reason is that a large breeding íûõ ïðè÷èí, ìåíÿþùèõñÿ ñ òå÷åíèåì âðå- group of the Imperial Eagle with the mixed ìåíè (íàïðèìåð, ïîãîäíûå óñëîâèÿ). pattern of nesting is conserved on the spec- Òàêèì îáðàçîì, ðåçóëüòàòû ó÷¸- ified area on coniferous and deciduous trees òà âñåãäà ñóáúåêòèâíû è ñ ýòèì ïðè- along the uplands and deciduous trees in õîäèòñÿ ïðîñòî ìèðèòüñÿ, ïîêà êòî- the lowered relief elements; this group is íèáóäü íå èçîáðåòåò ðîáîòîâ-ó÷¸ò÷èêîâ appreciably successfully assimilating in the ñ èäåàëüíîé ñïîñîáíîñòüþ ôèêñèðîâàòü forest-steppe landscapes that were strongly âñ¸ æèâîå â îïðåäåë¸ííîé ïîëîñå ó÷¸òà. Ïðè÷èíà 3. Ðåçóëüòàòîì ëþáîãî ó÷¸òà ÿâëÿåòñÿ ðàñ÷¸ò ïëîòíîñòè, êîòîðûé ìîæåò îñóùåñòâëÿòüñÿ ðàçíûìè ñïî- ñîáàìè, â îñíîâå êîòîðîãî âñåãäà ëåæèò ãëàâíàÿ ïðîáëå- ìà – îïðåäåëèòü ïëîùàäü ó÷¸- òà (èëè øèðèíó ó÷¸òíîé ïî-

Ó÷¸ò ìîãèëüíèêà (Aquila heliaca) íà áîðîâîé îïóøêå. Ôîòî Ý. Íèêîëåíêî. Account of the Imperial Eagle (Aquila heliaca) on edge of pine-forest. Photo by E. Nikolenko. 100 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

ëîñû). Åäèíîãî ìíåíèÿ, êàê îïðåäåëèòü disturbed by human (Borodin, 2008; Kar- ýòîò ïàðàìåòð, íå ñóùåñòâóåò. Êàçàëîñü yakin, 1998, 1999; Karyakin, Pazhenkov, áû, âàðèàíò ôèêñèðîâàííîé ó÷¸òíîé 1999; Karyakin et al., 2008). The non-uni- ïëîùàäè ðåøàåò ïðîáëåìó, â îòëè÷èå formity of distribution of the Imperial Ea- îò âàðèàíòîâ îïðåäåëåíèÿ øèðèíû gle in the assimilated landscape results in ó÷¸òíîé ïîëîñû íà îñíîâàíèè ñðåäíåé obvious impediments when estimating its àðèôìåòè÷åñêîé èëè ñðåäíåé ãàðìîíè- population; therefore, the solution to the ÷åñêîé, â îäíó èëè îáå ñòîðîíû îò îñè problem will perfectly illustrate the poten- ó÷¸òà è ò.ä. Íî îí òàêæå èìååò íåäîñòà- tial of GIS tools. òîê – èíäèâèäóàëüíûå ó÷àñòêè æèâîòíûõ íå èìåþò êàêóþ-ëèáî ôèêñèðîâàííóþ Statement of the problem ôîðìó è ïëîùàäü è çàâèñÿò êàê îò ôè- Construction of the distribution model for çè÷åñêèõ êà÷åñòâ æèâîòíîãî, òàê è îò brreding territories of the Imperial Eagle (Aq- ëàíäøàôòíûõ õàðàêòåðèñòèê ìåñòíîñòè, uila heliaca) on the key area of the forest- â ðàçíûõ óñëîâèÿõ ðàçíûå îñîáè âûäåð- steppe zone of the High Trans-Volga Region æèâàþò ðàçíóþ äèñòàíöèþ äî ïðèáëè- and the Cis-Ural region in order to estimate æàþùåãîñÿ íàáëþäàòåëÿ è ò.ï. Ïîýòîìó its population and determine the potential ôèêñèðîâàííàÿ ó÷¸òíàÿ ïëîùàäü ìîæåò breeding territories with the purpose of the ñîêðàùàòü ðåàëüíóþ ïëîùàäü, çàíèìàå- inspection thereof. ìóþ èíäèâèäóàëüíûìè ó÷àñòêàìè, ëèáî óâåëè÷èâàòü å¸. Surveys Òàêèì îáðàçîì, äëÿ êàæäîãî ñëó÷àÿ During the season 1998, 2 plots were (ó÷¸òà) òðåáóåòñÿ àäàïòàöèÿ âûáîðà inspected in order to find the Imperial ðàñ÷¸òà ó÷¸òíîé ïëîùàäè. Eagle (fig. 2). The first plot (with the area Ïðè÷èíà 4. Èòîãîì ó÷¸òíûõ ðàáîò ÿâ- of 1101.1 km2) was set up in forest-steppe ëÿåòñÿ îïðåäåëåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè, òî åñòü, of the High Trans-Volga Region (the extreme ýêñòðàïîëÿöèÿ ïëîòíîñòè íà îïðåäåë¸í- northeast of the Samara district bordering íóþ ïëîùàäü. Ñðàçó æå âîçíèêàåò äâà âî- with Tatarstan Republic and the Orenburg ïðîñà: district) and is a hilly forest-steppe with the - Êàêèå äàííûå ìîæíî ýêñòðàïîëèðî- fragments of pine-broadleaved forests pre- âàòü, à êàêèå íåëüçÿ? served along high terraces of small rivers and - Íà êàêóþ òåððèòîðèþ ýêñòðàïîëèðî- separated stands of parvifoliate forests along âàòü ýòè äàííûå? the watersheds. The second plot (with the Åäèíîãî ìíåíèÿ, êàê âûáèðàòü äàííûå area of 191.7 km2) was set up in forest-steppe è ïëîùàäü äëÿ ýêñòðàïîëÿöèè, íå ñóùå- of the left bank of the Volga (northwest of the ñòâóåò. Áîëüøèíñòâî èññëåäîâàòåëåé Samara district bordering with the Ulyanovsk ïðèäåðæèâàåòñÿ ìíåíèÿ, ÷òî äëÿ ïîëíî- district) and is a weakly hilled forest steppe öåííîé ýêñòðàïîëÿöèè ó÷¸òíàÿ ïëîùàäü with the fragments of pine-broadleaved for- â ïðåäåëàõ áèîòîïà (ëàíäøàôòà) äîëæíà ests preserved along the sloping terraces of áûòü ïðîïîðöèîíàëüíà ïëîùàäè áèîòîïà small rivers with watersheds totally occupied (ëàíäøàôòà), íà êîòîðóþ îñóùåñòâëÿ- with agricultural lands. åòñÿ ýêñòðàïîëÿöèÿ, à äàííûå äîëæíû 15 nests were found during the inspection èìåòü íîðìàëüíîå ðàñïðåäåëåíèå. Îä- of these plots during the vehicle traverse íàêî íà ïðàêòèêå ýòî íèêîã- äà íå ñîáëþäàåòñÿ, òàê êàê â áîëüøèíñòâå ñëó÷àåâ ó÷¸òû îñóùåñòâëÿþòñÿ íå òàì, ãäå íàäî ó÷èòûâàòü, à òàì, ãäå ýòî ëåã÷å.  èòîãå, ïðè ó÷¸- òå íà áîëüøèõ ïëîùàäÿõ ðàç- íûõ âèäîâ, ìàòåìàòè÷åñêîå ðàñïðåäåëåíèå äàííûõ äëÿ áîëüøèíñòâà íå ìàññîâûõ âè- äîâ äàëåêî îò íîðìàëüíîãî è ñòðåìèòñÿ ê êîíòàãèîçíîìó.

Ó÷¸ò õèùíûõ ïòèö íà òî÷êå. Ôîòî À. Ëåâèíà. Point account of raptors. Photo by A. Levin. Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 101

Òàêèì îáðàçîì, äëÿ êàæäîãî âèäà â focused on searching for the typical nests êàæäîì îòäåëüíîì ñëó÷àå òðåáóåòñÿ of the Imperial Eagle, (fig. 3). The nests àäàïòàöèÿ âûáîðà ìåòîäà ýêñòðàïîëÿ- were found in completely different types of öèè. habitats – the regions of needle-leaved and Ïðè÷èíà 5. Äëÿ òîãî, ÷òîáû íà÷àòü ýêñ- broad-leaved forest with the occurrence òðàïîëÿöèþ, íåîáõîäèìî èìåòü äëÿ ýòîãî or predominance of pine in the first story êàðòîãðàôè÷åñêóþ îñíîâó: ãåîáîòàíè÷å- bordering with fields and floodplains, flood ñêóþ èëè ëàíäøàôòíóþ êàðòó.  íàñòîÿ- plain forest bordering with pasture grounds ùåå âðåìÿ íåò âûðàáîòàííûõ êðèòåðèåâ and fields, and birch groves among the fields îïðåäåëåíèÿ òèïè÷íûõ ìåñòîîáèòàíèé and steppe pasture grounds. 9 of 15 nests äàæå ïî ãðóïïàì âèäîâ. Ãåîáîòàíè÷åñêàÿ were revealed in the near marginal parts of êàðòà äîñòàòî÷íî óñëîâíà, è, íàïðèìåð, â needle-leaved and broad-leaved forest re- ñîñíÿêå-áåëîìîøíèêå íà ðå÷íîé òåððàñå gions and were constructed on pine trees è â ñîñíÿêå-áåëîìîøíèêå íà âîäîðàçäåëå (Pinus sylvestris), 3 – in aspen-birch forest âèä áóäåò èìåòü ñîâåðøåííî ðàçíóþ ïëîò- stands and were constructed on birch trees íîñòü. Ëàíäøàôòíûõ êàðò íå ñóùåñòâóåò (Betula pendula); 2 – in the floodplain of the äàæå íà áîëüøóþ ÷àñòü ÎÎÏÒ, íå ãîâîðÿ river; and 1 – in the forest belt among de- óæå î òåððèòîðèè îáëàñòåé, è òåì áîëåå posits and was constructed on poplar trees âñåé ñòðàíû. (Populus sp.). 9 nests were found on plot Òàêèì îáðàçîì, äëÿ êàæäîãî âèäà â ¹1; 3 of those were constructed on birch êàæäîì îòäåëüíîì ñëó÷àå òðåáóåòñÿ trees, 3 – on poplar trees; on plot ¹2, 6 àäàïòàöèÿ îïðåäåëåíèÿ çîíû äëÿ ýêñ- nests were found, all of them on pine trees. òðàïîëÿöèè ó÷¸òíûõ äàííûõ. The key territory with its contour plotted Ó÷èòûâàÿ âñ¸ âûøåñêàçàííîå, îöåíêà appreciably subjectively through the terri- ÷èñëåííîñòè æèâîòíîãî íà êàêîé-ëèáî tory that was planned to be surveyed in the òåððèòîðèè – ýòî ÷åòûð¸õêðàòíàÿ àäàï- 1998–2008 occupies 31,244.9 km2 (fig. 2). òàöèÿ ñóáúåêòèâíûõ äàííûõ, îñóùåñò- The simple calculation of density accord- âë¸ííàÿ èññëåäîâàòåëåì èñõîäÿ èç êàêèõ- ing to the method of plot counts provides òî åãî îïðåäåë¸ííûõ çíàíèé îáúåêòà the average value of 1.16 pairs/100 km2 of èññëåäîâàíèé è ìåñòíîñòè, êîòîðûå ìîãóò the total area (0.82–3.13 pairs/100 km2 of áûòü òîæå ñóáúåêòèâíûìè. the total area). Extrapolation of these data Âîçíèêàåò äâà âîïðîñà: onto the area of the key territory allows as- - Ãäå æå íà÷èíàåòñÿ «òî÷íàÿ íàóêà» â suming that 113–612 pairs are breeding in ó÷¸òàõ æèâîòíûõ? this territory, 363 pairs on average in the - Äëÿ ÷åãî æå íóæíà ñòàíäàðòèçàöèÿ key territory. The estimation is characterized ìåòîäîâ ó÷¸òà è ó÷¸ò ðàçíûõ âèäîâ îäíîé by a large error and is obviously inconsist- ìåòîäèêîé, õîòÿ äîïîäëèííî èçâåñòíî, ÷òî ent. The visual analysis of the map assumes äëÿ áîëüøèíñòâà âèäîâ ðåçóëüòàò áóäåò overestimation, since the extrapolation was èìåòü áîëåå ÷åì 50% îøèáêó? carried out onto the territory with large Îòâåòû î÷åíü ïðîñòû. habitat areas that are not optimal for the Ðåïðåçåíòàòèâíîñòü è äîñòîâåðíàÿ ïî- Imperial Eagle, on one of them the density âòîðÿåìîñòü ðåçóëüòàòà íà îñíîâå âûÿâ- of the Imperial Eagle explicitly being the ëåííîé çàêîíîìåðíîñòè âîçìîæíà ëèøü â maximum for the species (plot ¹2, den- òîì ñëó÷àå, êîãäà íà ýòî âëèÿåò ìèíèìóì sity of 3.13 pairs/100 km2 of the total area). ñóáúåêòèâíûõ ïðè÷èí, ëèáî ýòè ñóáúåêòèâ- Abstracting from the plot contours and cal- íûå ïðè÷èíû âñåãäà îäèíàêîâû è âëèÿþò culating the density on the count transects îäèíàêîâûì îáðàçîì âî âðåìåíè è ïðî- (Karyakin, 2004), their length on plots 1 and ñòðàíñòâå. Ñëåäîâàòåëüíî, «òî÷íàÿ íàóêà» 2 being 66.0 and 244.15 km, respectively, íà÷èíàåòñÿ òàì, ãäå íà÷èíàåòñÿ ðàñ÷¸ò at the average distance of the occurrence of ÷èñëåííîñòè èëè, èíà÷å ãîâîðÿ, ïðåîá- nests of the Imperial Eagle of 1.18 km (the ðàçîâàíèå ó÷¸òíûõ äàííûõ â îöåíêó ÷èñ- width of the count transect of 2.36 km), the ëåííîñòè äëÿ êàêîé-òî áîëåå êðóïíîé òåð- density will be 2.05 pairs/100 km2 of near ðèòîðèè. À ñòàíäàðòèçàöèÿ ìåòîäîâ ó÷¸òà marginal forest zone (1.54–4.13 pairs/100 íåîáõîäèìà äëÿ òîãî, ÷òîáû îäèí è òîò æå km2 of near marginal forest zone). However, èññëåäîâàòåëü ïî îäíîé è òîé æå òåððèòî- these parameters can be extrapolated only ðèè ìîã ñðàâíèâàòü ñâîè (è íå áîëåå) ðå- onto the near marginal zone, it being ap- çóëüòàòû äëÿ îòñëåæèâàíèÿ äèíàìèêè ÷èñ- preciably complicated to calculate its area ëåííîñòè èçó÷àåìûõ èì îáúåêòîâ. Âî âñåõ without using GIS-software. îñòàëüíûõ ñëó÷àÿõ «çàïàñ» – ýòî íåêàÿ àá- So what can be done to update the es- 102 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

ñòðàêöèÿ, íåîáõîäèìàÿ äëÿ òîãî, ÷òîáû ïî- timation of the population, having these íÿòü, íàñêîëüêî äàëåêà ÷èñëåííîñòü âèäà íà count data? There are several variants. The äàííîé òåððèòîðèè îò îïòèìàëüíîãî (èëè first variant comprises calculation of the area äàæå âîçìîæíîãî) ìàêñèìóìà èëè áëèçêà of near marginal forest zones and extrapo- ê êðèòè÷åñêîìó ìèíèìóìó. Ìåæäó ýòèìè late the density parameters obtained during êðàéíîñòÿìè îöåíêà ìîæåò ëåæàòü êàê â the transect counts; the second variant is to ïðåäåëàõ ±3SD, òàê è â áîëüøåì äèàïàçî- translate the density in nesting habitats on íå. Èíà÷å ãîâîðÿ, îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè â the plots into the nesting habitats of the key 100–600 ïàð, ïîñòðîåííàÿ íà îñíîâàíèè territory; and finally, the third variant is to ó÷¸òà 10 ïàð, ìîæåò ñ÷èòàòüñÿ äîïóñòè- construct the model of distribution of the ìîé. Âîò òàêàÿ âîò çîîìàòåìàòèêà! potential breeding territories on the basis of the specific characteristics of nest loca- Ââåäåíèå, èëè tion. In all three cases, we will have to use ×òî æå ìîæåò ñäåëàòü ÃÈÑ GIS-software; however, with almost equal äëÿ óòî÷íåíèÿ îöåíîê ÷èñëåííîñòè? efforts, the construction of the distribution ÃÈÑ ïîçâîëÿåò óéòè îò ýêñòðàïîëÿöèè model will provide much more precise es- ïëîòíîñòè íà ïëîùàäü ê ìîäåëèðîâàíèþ timation of the population and simultane- ðàçìåùåíèÿ îáúåêòîâ ó÷¸òà íà îñíîâàíèè ously solve another problem – detection of ïàðàìåòðîâ èõ ïîëîæåíèÿ ïî îòíîøåíèþ potential breeding territories of the Imperial ê äðóãèì îáúåêòàì æèâîé è íåæèâîé ïðè- Eagle for their validation. ðîäû, óñòàíîâëåííûõ ýìïèðè÷åñêè. Below is the minute consideration of the  ÃÈÑ ìîæíî: data processing using the third variant. - íàñòðàèâàòü ðàñïðåäåëåíèå òî÷åê, èñ- ïîëüçóÿ ôèëüòðàöèþ îøèáî÷íûõ çíà÷å- Data processing íèé è âèçóàëüíî âûÿâëÿòü çàêîíîìåðíîñòè In our case with the Imperial Eagle, data íîðìàëüíîãî ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ; processing is an appreciably complicated - îïðåäåëÿòü ôàêòè÷åñêóþ çîíó ýêñòðà- task using GIS-software, which should ïîëÿöèè, èñõîäÿ èç ðåçóëüòàòîâ àíàëèçà comprise several steps. The first step – òî÷åê, èìåþùèõ íîðìàëüíîå ðàñïðåäå- preparation of topographical maps. We ëåíèå íå â îáùåì ïðîñòðàíñòâå, à ïî îò- will use it to determine the regularities of íîøåíèþ ê êàêèì-íèáóäü îáúåêòàì èëè spatial distribution of nests of the Imperial äðóã ïî îòíîøåíèþ ê äðóãó â î÷åâèäíûõ Eagle and create of habitat maps of the Im- Ðèñ. 1. Ïðèìåð àíàëè- êëàñòåðàõ; perial Eagle in the region – it is the sec- çà ðàçìåùåíèÿ ãíåçäî- âûõ ó÷àñòêîâ â ÃÈÑ. - ýêñòðàïîëèðîâàòü ðàçíûå ïîêàçàòåëè ond step. The third step is not connected ïëîòíîñòè íà îäíè è òå æå áèîòîïû, ðàñ- with GIS; however, it is equally important. Fig. 1. Example of analysis of breeding ïîëîæåííûå íà ðàçíûõ òåððèòîðèÿõ. It is necessary to determine the difference territory distribution Äëÿ èëëþñòðàöèè ïðèâåä¸ì ïðîñòåé- in the distribution of the Imperial Eagles within GIS-software. øèé ïðèìåð (ðèñ. 1). Ðèñóíîê 1–À: çà- breeding on pine trees in pine forest, on birch and poplar trees in the forest-field landscape, and floodplains; as well as the probability for their separation over differ- ent breeding groups with the specific pat- tern of nesting. Discriminant analysis will help us here. The fourth step – preparation of the topographical maps of the Imperial Eagle differentiated with respect to differ- ent breeding groups. The fifth – the final step – generating the model of potential breeding territories of Imperial Eagles for the key territories.

Step-by-step algorithm of data processing in ArcView 3.õ. Stage 1. Preparing the topographical maps for the analysis within GIS-sofware. 1. Create a raster map for the key ter- ritories based on topographical maps (scale 1:200 000). Topographical maps are scanned, converted in raster data TIFF for- Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 103

êîíîìåðíîñòè ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ òî÷åê íå mat and registered in ArcView in projection ñîâñåì ÿñíû, ïîêà îíè ëåæàò íà áóìàãå, UTM-83, zone 38 (datum WGS-84). à íå â ÃÈÑ. Ïîñòðîèì êîíâåêñíûå ïîëèãî- 1.1. Merge and index maps in the graphic íû è âçãëÿíåì íà êàðòèíó ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ editor Adobe Photoshop CS2, as a result the òî÷åê åù¸ ðàç. Ðèñóíîê 1–B: ðàñïðåäåëå- raster in TIFF format indexing in color should íèå òî÷åê ðàññåÿíî-ãðóïïîâîå è ãðóïïû be created for each sheet. ðàñïîëàãàþòñÿ â ñëó÷àéíîì ïîðÿäêå. Îä- 1.2. Coordinates of angular points of top- íàêî, äàæå ïðîñòåéøåå âèçóàëüíîå ñîïî- ographical maps are recalculated from ÑÊ- ñòàâëåíèå ðàñïîëîæåíèÿ òî÷åê ñ ëþáûìè 42 in WGS-84 the program PHOTOMOD ëàíäøàôòíûìè õàðàêòåðèñòèêàìè ìîæåò GeoCalculator. âûÿâèòü îïðåäåë¸ííûå çàêîíîìåðíîñòè. 1.3. Calculated coordinates are exported Ïîäêëþ÷àåì ñëîé ãèäðîñåòè è íàáëþäàåì to *.txt format. î÷åâèäíûé ðåçóëüòàò. Ðèñóíîê 1–Ñ: òî÷êè 1.4. The *.txt file with coordinates for ref- òÿãîòåþò ê ðóñëàì ðåê, óäàë¸ííûì îò èñ- erence points is imported in ArcView, thus òîêà íà îïðåäåë¸ííîå ðàññòîÿíèå. Ðèñó- using option Add Event Theme it is trans- íîê 1–D: àíàëèç äèñòàíöèé ìåæäó âñåìè formed to a shapefile. ñîñåäÿìè ñâèäåòåëüñòâóåò î íîðìàëüíîì 1.5. Using Image Warp extension topo- ðàñïðåäåëåíèè òî÷åê âäîëü ðóñåë ðåê. graphical maps are registered in projection Îñíîâíîé êîððåêòèðóþùèé è óòî÷íÿþ- UTM-83, zone 38. ùèé ìîìåíò ìîäåëèðîâàíèÿ – ïðåîáðà- 1.6. Using Transparent Legend exten- çîâàíèå òî÷åê â ïîëèãîíàëüíûå îáúåêòû, sion maps are visually merged in the united ïóñòü è óñëîâíûå, íî âñ¸ æå èíäèâèäóàëü- layer. íûå ó÷àñòêè, ïî êîòîðûì ìîæíî íå òîëüêî 2. On the basis of satellite image Landsat îãðàíè÷èòü ó÷¸òíóþ ïëîùàäü, íî è ïîñòðî- ETM + 2000 (by default we consider it to be èòü ñõåìó ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ó÷àñòêîâ (êàê already registered in the coordinate system ðåàëüíûõ, òàê è ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ) äëÿ ëþáîé that is used) with the assistance of propri- çàäàííîé òåððèòîðèè, âèçóàëèçèðîâàâ âñå etary materials, we prepare thematic maps: å¸ èçúÿíû, êîòîðûå íå âèäíû â èíûõ ñëó- the vegetation map, which we isolate the ÷àÿõ îáðàáîòêè äàííûõ. layers of forest, open habitats, hydrographic Åñëè, â ñëó÷àå ñ «áóìàæíîé» îáðàáîòêîé network, settlements, and farms from. ó÷¸òíûõ äàííûõ, «ïëîòíîñòü» – ýòî íåêèé 2.1. Using Image Analysis Extension, we ïîêàçàòåëü, íåîáõîäèìûé äëÿ ðàñ÷¸òà ÷èñ- classify the satellite image into 16 classes ëåííîñòè, òî, â ñëó÷àå ñ îáðàáîòêîé äàí- (option Categorize) and generalize them íûõ â ÃÈÑ, – ýòî íåêèé ðåçóëüòàò «âèçóàëè- (option Smooth). çàöèè ÷èñëåííîñòè». 2.2. The classified image is converted into Ïðè îáðàáîòêå ó÷¸òíûõ äàííûõ â the vector format (shapefile), the polygons ÃÈÑ ðåøàþùåå çíà÷åíèå èìååò íå êî- with the lengths of the borders with the ëè÷åñòâî îáúåêòîâ íà åäèíèöå ó÷¸òíîé larger ones being smaller than 0.05 km2 are ïëîùàäè, à äèñòàíöèè ìåæäó âñåìè eliminated using Edit Tools extension (op- èëè áëèæàéøèìè ñîñåäÿìè, îáúåêòàìè tion Eliminate). æèâîé è íåæèâîé ïðèðîäû è àíòðîïî- 2.3. On the basis of the system of refer- ãåííîé èíôðàñòðóêòóðû. ence points, we construct the legend of cor- respondence of the classes to vegetation Âåðí¸ìñÿ åù¸ ðàç ê ìåòîäèêàì. types. Different vegetation types that were Äëÿ ïîëó÷åíèÿ èíôîðìàöèè î ïëîòíî- placed into one class with regard to their ñòè æèâîòíûõ, äëÿ îïðåäåëåíèÿ èõ îòíî- spectral characteristics (e.g., bushy meadow ñèòåëüíîé è/èëè àáñîëþòíîé ÷èñëåííîñòè and young larch tree forest) or, vice versa, ïðèìåíÿþò ñëåäóþùèå îñíîâíûå ãðóïïû the same types that spectrally differ at the ìåòîäèê êîëè÷åñòâåííîãî ó÷¸òà (Áèá- present time point (undisturbed steppe and áè è äð., 2000; Êàðÿêèí, 2004; Íàóìîâ, steppe subjected to fire of the same year as 1963; Ðàâêèí, 1967; Ðàâêèí, ×åëèíöåâ, that of the survey) are classified manually 1990; ×åëèíöåâ, 1985; 1989; Blondel et on the basis of the analysis of geometrical al., 1977; Hayne, 1949; Palmgren, 1930; structure of the objects and their confin- Recher, 1981; Sutherland et al., 2004): edness to landscape elements (command - ìåòîäèêè ïëîùàäî÷íûõ ó÷¸òîâ, [field].substitute (“Class x”, “Class xx”) of - ìåòîäèêè ìàðøðóòíûõ ó÷¸òîâ, the calculator of column values). - ìåòîäèêè òî÷å÷íûõ ó÷¸òîâ. 2.4. Classes 2–5 are isolated into an indi- Ìåòîäèêè ïëîùàäî÷íîãî ó÷¸òà äîâîëüíî vidual thematic layer as forest habitats (de- òðóäî¸ìêè, è ïðè ðàáîòå ñ ðåäêèìè âè- ciduous, mixed, and coniferous forests). The 104 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

äàìè òðåáóþò îãðîìíûõ óñèëèé, ïîýòîìó map is simplified by the filtration of objects ïðèìåíÿþòñÿ ðåäêî. Ìåòîäèêè ìàðøðóò- with area less than 0.1 km2, linear objects íûõ è òî÷å÷íûõ ó÷¸òîâ â ýòîì ïëàíå áîëåå with width less than 0.1 km and by smooth- ïåðñïåêòèâíû, ïîýòîìó èñïîëüçóþòñÿ èñ- ing the polygon orders (option of elimina- ñëåäîâàòåëÿìè íàèáîëåå ÷àñòî. Ìåòîäèêè tion of excess vertices). òî÷å÷íîãî ó÷¸òà ðàçëè÷àþòñÿ ñïîñîáîì 2.5. The classes corresponding to ðàñ÷¸òà ó÷¸òíîé ïîëîñû è âðåìåíåì ïðî- steppe habitats are isolated into an in- âåäåíèÿ ó÷¸òà (Áèááè è äð., 2000; Êàðÿ- dividual thematic layer from the layer of êèí, 2004; ×åëèíöåâ, 1989; Blondel et al., open habitats. The objects correspond- 1977; Recher, 1981). Ìåòîäèêè ìàðøðóò- ing to the deposits, which are detected íîãî ó÷¸òà ðàçëè÷àþòñÿ ñïîñîáîì ðàñ÷¸òà on the basis of their geometry (regular- ó÷¸òíîé ïîëîñû. Íåêîòîðûå îðèåíòèðî- shaped contours, alien natural units) are âàíû íà ó÷¸ò æèâîòíûõ íà ôèêñèðîâàííîé eliminated manually. ïîëîñå (Íàóìîâ, 1963; Ïðèåäíèåêñ è äð., 1986; Jarvinen, Vaisanen, 1977), íî áîëü- Stage 2. Creation of habitat map. øèíñòâî îðèåíòèðîâàíû íà îïðåäåëåíèå 2. The key parameters of the distribution of äèñòàíöèé îò ó÷¸ò÷èêà äî âñòðå÷åííîãî the known nests are determined according îáúåêòà, ïðè÷¸ì ðàçíûå ìåòîäèêè òðåáó- to the survey descriptions and in ArcView þò ðàçíîãî ïîäõîäà ê îïðåäåëåíèþ ýòèõ 3x using thematic maps: äèñòàíöèé è ðàñ÷¸òà øèðèíû ó÷¸òíîé ïî- 3.1. nesting tree species ëîñû. Ðàñ÷¸ò ó÷¸òíîé ïîëîñû íà ìàðøðó- 3.2. forest type òàõ áàçèðóåòñÿ íà îïðåäåëåíèè øèðèíû 3.3. forest age ó÷¸òíîé ïîëîñû ïî ïåðïåíäèêóëÿðíûì 3.4. elevation change (in km/km) äèñòàíöèÿì îò ó÷¸ò÷èêà äî îáúåêòà (×å- 3.5. direction of slope* ëèíöåâ, 1985; Dixon, 1977; Sutherland et 3.6. orientation of the nesting tree rela- al., 2004), ïî ðàäèàëüíûì äèñòàíöèÿì ñ tive to the forest margin and/or the slope ðàçäåëüíîãðóïïîâûì ïåðåñ÷¸òîì (Ðàâêèí, 3.7. distance to an open space (margin) 1967), ïî ðàäèàëüíûì äèñòàíöèÿì ñ ðàñ- 3.8. distance to a forest* ÷¸òîì óäâîåííîé ñðåäíåàðèôìåòè÷åñêîé 3.9. distance to a river (Hayne, 1949; Ðàâêèí, Äîáðîõîòîâ, 1963; 3.10. distance to a field Êàðÿêèí, 2004), ïî ðàäèàëüíîé äèñòàíöèè 3.11. distance to a pasture ground è óãëó îáíàðóæåíèÿ (Áèááè è äð., 2000; 3.12. distance to a standing water body ×åëèíöåâ, 1988; Buckland et al., 1993). 3.13. distance to a settlement Ïîñëåäíèé âàðèàíò ìåòîäèêè èíòåãðèðî- 3.14. distance to a farm âàí â ïðîãðàììíûé êîìïëåêñ Distance, øè- * – parameters determined in those cases ðîêî èñïîëüçóþùèéñÿ çà ðóáåæîì (Áèááè when there their determination is feasi- è äð., 2000) è èìåþùèé ìîùíûé âñòðîåí- ble, for example, there is an explicitly pro- íûé ñòàòèñòè÷åñêèé àïïàðàò íà îñíîâå èí- nounced relief or a nest is located in the ôîðìàöèîííîãî êðèòåðèÿ Àêàèêå (Akaike open space. Information Criterion, AIC) (Buckland et al., 4. The parameters for each nest are listed 1993), ÷åì íå ìîãóò ïîõâàñòàòüñÿ ðîññèé- in the attributive table in the vector layer. ñêèå ìåòîäèêè. 5. Descriptive statistics M±SD is obtained Âî âñåõ ñëó÷àÿõ ðàçíûé ïîäõîä ê âû÷èñ- for each parameter. ëåíèþ ó÷¸òíîé ïëîùàäè âåä¸ò ê ïîëó÷åíèþ 6. Functioning parameters are selected; àáñîëþòíî ðàçíûõ ïîêàçàòåëåé ïëîòíîñòè the criterion of this is the normal distribu- æèâîòíûõ íà åäèíèöó ïëîùàäè, íåñìîòðÿ tion and deviation from mean no higher íà èñïîëüçîâàíèå îäíèõ è òåõ æå äàííûõ. than 30%. Êîãäà æå ïðèõîäèòñÿ âåñòè ðå÷ü îá ó÷¸òå 7. In ArcView 3x, using the standard func- ãí¸çä ïòèö, îñîáåííî êðóïíûõ õèùíèêîâ, tion for buffer construction on the basis of òî ïðè èñïîëüçîâàíèè ëþáîé ìåòîäèêè thematic maps, the buffer zones are con- ðàñ÷¸òà ó÷¸òíîé ïîëîñû âîçíèêíóò èñ- structed for each parameter step-by-step by êàæåíèÿ, ñâÿçàííûå ñ ïðèðàâíèâàíèåì using the mean value. ãí¸çä ê âñòðå÷àì. Çäåñü âñòà¸ò òàêæå âî- 8. The buffer zones are merged into the ïðîñ î íåîäíîçíà÷íîñòè òîãî, êàê ðàññ÷è- single layer. òûâàòü ðàäèàëüíóþ äèñòàíöèþ îò ó÷¸ò÷èêà 9. Using X-Tools extension, the vegeta- äî ãíåçäà, òàê êàê, âî ìíîãèõ ñëó÷àÿõ, ñ ëè- tion map is cropped at the contour of the íèè ìàðøðóòà ïðèõîäèòñÿ ïåðåäâèãàòüñÿ â buffer zone layer – thus, we obtain the ñòîðîíó ãíåçäîâîãî áèîòîïà, óâèäåâ ïòèö, map of nesting habitats of the Imperial ëèáî óæå ïðåäïîëàãàÿ òàì íàëè÷èå ãíåç- Eagle. Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 105

Òàáë. 1. Ðàçíèöà â àëãîðèòìàõ ðàñ÷¸òà ÷èñëåííîñòè ñòàíäàðòíûìè ìåòîäàìè è ìåòîäàìè ÃÈÑ (êóðñèâîì âûäåëåíû äåéñòâèÿ, â êîòîðûå ñóùåñòâåííî âìåøèâàåòñÿ ñóáúåêòèâíûé ôàêòîð). Table 1. Difference between algorithms of number calculation with use of standard methods and GIS- software (italic font marks the operations that depend on the subjective factor very much).

Àëãîðèòì ðàñ÷¸òà ÷èñëåííîñòè «ïî àíàëèçó äèñòàíöèé» Àëãîðèòì ðàñ÷¸òà ÷èñëåííîñòè «ñòàíäàðòíûé» The algorithm of number calculation «on analysis of The «standard» algorithm of number calculation distances» Ïîñòðîåíèå ó÷¸òíîé ïëîùàäè èñõîäÿ èç êàêèõ-òî Îïðåäåëåíèå äèñòàíöèè ìåæäó âñåìè è/èëè áëèæàéøèìè ôèêñèðîâàííûõ ïàðàìåòðîâ, îïðåäåë¸ííûõ ïî êàðòå, ëèáî ñîñåäÿìè íåïîñðåäñòâåííî â õîäå ó÷¸òà Calculating the distances between all and/or nearest neigh- Generating a study plot on the basis of some fixed param- bors eters estimated with use of a map, or calculated during the account Ðàñ÷¸ò ïëîòíîñòè / Calculation of density Îïðåäåëåíèå äèñòàíöèé ìåæäó òî÷êàìè âñòðå÷ îáúåêòîâ Âûáîð çîíû äëÿ ýêñòðàïîëÿöèè ó÷¸òà è çàäàííûìè îáúåêòàìè äðóãèõ âåêòîðíûõ òåì Selecting the zone for extrapolation è ïîñòðîåíèå çîíû äëÿ ýêñòðàïîëÿöèè íà îñíîâàíèè ïîëó÷åííûõ äàííûõ ÃÈÑ-àíàëèçà Calculating the distances between records of target objects of other vector themes and generating the zone for extrapo- lation on the basis of data obtained with use of GIS-analysis Îöåíêà ìàòåìàòè÷åñêîãî ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ äàííûõ Îöåíêà ìàòåìàòè÷åñêîãî ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ äàííûõ Estimation of mathematical distribution of data Estimation of mathematical distribution of data Ýêñòðàïîëÿöèÿ íà âûáðàííóþ çîíó èñõîäÿ èç ïàðàìåòðîâ Ïîñòðîåíèå ñõåìû ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ èñõîäÿ èç ìàòåìàòè÷åñêîãî ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ äàííûõ ïàðàìåòðîâ ìàòåìàòè÷åñêîãî ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ äàííûõ Extrapolation on the selected zone on the basis of param- Generating the model of potential areas on the basis of pa- eters of mathematical distribution of data rameters of mathematical distribution of data

äà. ×àñòî äâèæåíèå îñóùåñòâëÿåòñÿ âäîëü Stage 3. Searching for the parameters, ëèíèè ãíåçäîïðèãîäíîãî áèîòîïà, ãäå ñ âå- on the basis of which the map of breed- ðîÿòíîñòüþ äî 90% ðàñïîëàãàþòñÿ ãí¸çäà ing clusters is constructed ó÷èòûâàåìîãî âèäà, ïðè÷¸ì äàæå ãí¸çäà 10. Parameters of the nest distribution are êðóïíûõ âèäîâ, â ýòîì ñëó÷àå, ìîãóò âûÿâ- exported to Statistica 5.0 software, and Dis- ëÿòüñÿ ñ äèñòàíöèé âñåãî ëèøü â íåñêîëüêî criminant analysis of the data is carried out: ìåòðîâ. 10.1. The following parameters are se- Âñ¸ âûøåñêàçàííîå ñòàíîâèòñÿ íåâàæ- lected: íûì, êîãäà äàííûå ýêñïîðòèðóþòñÿ â ÃÈÑ. 10.1.1. nesting tree species Çäåñü âèä ìåòîäèêè ó÷¸òà óæå íå èìååò 10.1.2. forest type òàêîãî îïðåäåëÿþùåãî çíà÷åíèÿ, êàê ïðè 10.1.3. forest age îáðàáîòêå «íà áóìàãå» èëè â ïðîãðàììå 10.1.4. forest area Distance, òàê êàê óïðîùàåòñÿ äî ïðîðèñîâ- 10.1.5 elevation change (in m/km) êè òðåêà è ðàññòàíîâêè òî÷åê. Ïî êîíôè- 10.1.6. distance to an open space (margin) ãóðàöèè òðåêà è ãðàíèöàì èíäèâèäóàëüíûõ 10.1.7. distance to a pasture ground ó÷àñòêîâ ðàçíûõ âèäîâ îïðåäåëÿåòñÿ ó÷¸ò- 10.1.8. distance to a settlement íàÿ ïëîùàäü. 10.1.9 distance to a farm Òàêèì îáðàçîì, ïðè ó÷¸òå íà ìàðøðóòå 10.2. The variables are grouped with re- èëè òî÷êå ó÷¸òíàÿ ïîëîñà ìîæåò íå èìåòü gard to the nesting tree species using the ôèêñèðîâàííîé øèðèíû ïî ñðåäíåé äàëü- Forward stepwise method. íîñòè èëè îêðóæíîñòè îáíàðóæåíèÿ, à èç- 10.3. After looking at the result on the ìåíÿåòñÿ ïî ìåðå ïðîäâèæåíèÿ ó÷¸ò÷èêà scattering plot of canonical scores, the vari- è ðåãèñòðàöèè îáúåêòîâ, íà êîòîðûõ íà- ant of variable grouping that provides the ïðàâëåí ó÷¸ò. Àíàëîãîì ïëîòíîñòè ÿâëÿ- most adequate division of the scores into þòñÿ äèñòàíöèè ìåæäó âñåìè èëè áëèæàé- groups is chosen. øèìè ñîñåäÿìè, íà îñíîâàíèè êîòîðûõ è 10.4. The ordination parameter with the ñòðîèòñÿ ðàñ÷¸ò (òàáë. 1) è ïðîâåðÿþòñÿ maximum loading for creation of the map îøèáêè ó÷¸òà. Ïðè ýòîì ñîõðàíÿåòñÿ âîç- of breeding groups is chosen. ìîæíîñòü ïåðåñ÷èòàòü äàííûå ïî ëþáîé ñòàíäàðòíîé ìåòîäèêå, èñïîëüçóþùåé òà- Stage 4. Creation of the map of nesting êèå ïàðàìåòðû êàê ôèêñèðîâàííàÿ ïîëî- clusters ñà ó÷¸òà, ïåðïåíäèêóëÿðíàÿ è ðàäèàëüíàÿ 11. Using the thematic maps on the ba- 106 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

äèñòàíöèÿ äî îáúåêòà è íà- sis of the chosen ordination parameter from ïðàâëåíèå (óãîë) íà âñòðå- the attributive table Thiessen polygons are ÷åííûé îáúåêò â ìîìåíò åãî constructed in ArcView 3x using Edit Tools ïåðâîé ðåãèñòðàöèè, åñëè extension. âî âðåìÿ ó÷¸òà ôèêñèðîâàòü 12. On the basis of Thiessen polygons, the â ïîëåâîì äíåâíèêå äèñòàí- working vector layer of breeding groups is öèè äî êàæäîãî âñòðå÷åííî- formed by isolating the overlapping zones ãî îáúåêòà è àçèìóò ñ òî÷êè between the clusters, if those are obvious, íàõîæäåíèÿ ó÷¸ò÷èêà íà into individual polygons. îáúåêò â ìîìåíò åãî îáíàðó- 13. Using X-Tools extension, the identifi- æåíèÿ. cation of the habitat map on the basis of the Äàëåå ìû ðàññìîòðèì ïðè- working vector layer of breeding groups is ìåíåíèå àëãîðèòìà ðàñ÷¸òà carried out; the corresponding attributes are Ìîãèëüíèê ÷èñëåííîñòè «ïî àíàëèçó äèñòàíöèé» â ðå- listed into the attributive table. (Aquila heliaca). øåíèè êîíêðåòíûõ íàó÷íî-ïðàêòè÷åñêèõ 14. On the basis of the type of the pre- Ôîòî Ý. Íèêîëåíêî. çàäà÷, ñâÿçàííûõ ñ êðóïíûìè ïåðíàòûìè dominant habitats, the polygons of the Imperial Eagle õèùíèêàìè.  êà÷åñòâå ÃÈÑ-ïðîãðàììû habitat map that remained beyond the layer (Aquila heliaca). èñïîëüçóåì ArcView GIS 3õ (ArcView…, of breeding groups are attributed to a par- Photo by E. Nikolenko. 1999á), êàê íàèáîëåå äîñòóïíóþ èç ïîë- ticular type. íîöåííûõ ëèöåíçèðóåìûõ ÃÈÑ ïðîäóêòîâ 15. The final habitat map divided into the (ñ îòêðûòûìè íàñòîëüíûìè ÃÈÑ, èìåþùè- breeding groups with the recorded attribu- ìè ìíîãèå ôóíêöèè, äîñòóïíûå â ArcView, tive information is converted into the final ìîæíî ïîçíàêîìèòüñÿ â ïóáëèêàöèè Ì.Þ. vector layer. Äóáèíèíà è Ä.À. Ðûêîâà, 2010). Ïîìè- ìî îñíîâíîé îáîëî÷êè íàì ïîòðåáóþòñÿ Stage 5. Creation of the map of poten- ìîäóëè Spatial Analyst è Image Analysis tial breeding territories (ArcView…, 1999à, 1999ñ), ðàñøèðåíèÿ 16. Using the Nearest Features extension Image Warp (McVay, 1999), ShapeWarp in ArcView 3x, the distances between the (McVay, 1998), Edit Tools (Tchoukanski, nearest neighbors are determined, and the 2004), X-Tools (DeLaune, 2000), Repeating distance map is created. Shapes (Jenness, 2005), Nearest Features 17. Using the Edit Tools extension from (Jenness, 2004) è TRLegend (Äóáèíèí, the distance map, geometrical duplicates of 2009). Äëÿ ïåðåñ÷¸òà êîîðäèíàò èñïîëüçó- distance lines between two nearest neigh- åì ïðîãðàììó PHOTOMOD GeoCalculator, bors are eliminated. äëÿ îáðàáîòêè èçîáðàæåíèé – Adobe 18. The average distance and the standard Photoshop CS2, äëÿ ñòàò-îáðàáîòêè ìàòå- deviation are determined for each breeding ðèàëà – Statistica 5.0. group. 19. The layer of circles or hexagons imitat- ×ÀÑÒÜ ÂÒÎÐÀß, ÃÈÑÎÂÀß ing the distribution model of the potential Ïðèìåð ïåðâûé, èëè breeding territories of the Imperial Eagle is Ãäå áû ìîãèëüíèê íè ãíåçäèëñÿ, constructed using Repeating Shapes exten- â ÃÈÑ ó÷àñòîê çàñâåòèëñÿ! sion for each contour of breeding group on the basis of the average nearest neighbor Ââåäåíèå distance determined for this contour. Ïðèìåð îòðàáîòêè ìåòîäèêè ðåàëèçî- 20. On the basis of the reference point âàí íà òåððèòîðèè Âûñîêîãî Çàâîëæüÿ that are the known nests of Imperial Eagles, è Ïðåäóðàëüÿ â ïîãðàíè÷íîé îáëàñòè 5 the preliminary vector layer of the potential ñóáúåêòîâ ÐÔ – Ñàìàðñêîé, Óëüÿíîâñêîé breeding territories of the Imperial Eagle is è Îðåíáóðãñêîé îáëàñòåé è ðåñïóáëèê corrected using ShapeWarp extension by Òàòàðñòàí è Áàøêîðòîñòàí. pulling the territory centers to the known Ïî÷åìó âûáîð ïàë èìåííî íà ìîãèëüíè- points. êà? Ïîòîìó ÷òî ýòî óãðîæàåìûé âèä, âíå- 21. On the basis of the corrected prelimi- ñ¸ííûé â Êðàñíûé ñïèñîê ÌÑÎÏ, Êðàñíóþ nary layer of potential breeding territories êíèãó Ðîññèè (BirdLife International, 2008; of the Imperial Eagle, the centroid layer is IUCN, 2010; Ãàëóøèí, 2001á) è Êðàñíûå obtained using X-Tools extension. êíèãè âñåõ ñóáúåêòîâ ÐÔ, â êîòîðûõ ëå- 22. The final layer of potential breeding æèò ãíåçäîâîé àðåàë ýòîãî îðëà (Ïðèñÿæ- territories of the Imperial Eagle is construct- íþê è äð., 2004). Ïîòîìó ÷òî íà îáîçíà- ed on the basis of the centroid layer using ÷åííîé òåððèòîðèè ñîõðàíÿåòñÿ êðóïíàÿ the standard function of buffer construction, Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 107

ãíåçäîâàÿ ãðóïïèðîâêà ìîãèëüíèêà, èìåþ- having specified the required distance for ùàÿ ñìåøàííûé ñòåðåîòèï ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íà circle construction. õâîéíûõ è ëèñòâåííûõ äåðåâüÿõ ïî âîç- âûøåííîñòÿì è íà ëèñòâåííûõ äåðåâüÿõ â Estimation of the result ïîíèæåííûõ ýëåìåíòàõ ðåëüåôà, äîñòà- Let us start discussing the results start- òî÷íî óñïåøíî îñâàèâàþùàÿ ñèëüíî íàðó- ing with the third stage. So, we obtained øåííûå ÷åëîâåêîì ëåñîñòåïíûå ëàíäøàô- the working parameters of the distribution òû (Áîðîäèí, 2008; Êàðÿêèí, 1998, 1999; of nests of the Imperial Eagle on plots (ta- Êàðÿêèí, Ïàæåíêîâ, 1999; Êàðÿêèí è äð., ble 2). The first fact to stand out is that the 2008). Íåðàâíîìåðíîñòü ðàçìåùåíèÿ ìî- area of the forest in which a nest is located ãèëüíèêà â îñâîåííîì ëàíäøàôòå ïðèâî- strongly varies (from 0.1 to 311 km2); how- äèò ê î÷åâèäíûì çàòðóäíåíèÿì ïðè îöåíêå ever, the pairs breeding on pine trees build åãî ÷èñëåííîñòè, ïîýòîìó ðåøåíèå ýòîé nests in appreciably large forest territories. çàäà÷è îòëè÷íî ïðîèëëþñòðèðóåò âîçìîæ- The minimum dispersion is characteristic of íîñòè èíñòðóìåíòàðèÿ ÃÈÑ. such parameters as the nest–farm distance – 0.1–5 km, on average 1.81±1.52 km, nest– Ôîðìóëèðîâêà çàäà÷è settlement distance – 0.1–5 km, on aver- Ïîñòðîåíèå ìîäåëè ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ãíåç- age, 1.62±1.53 km, and elevation change äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêà (Aquila heliaca) – 0–0.6 km/km, on average, 0.02±0.02 íà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè ëåñîñòåïíîé km/km. The Discriminant analysis of the pa- çîíû Âûñîêîãî Çàâîëæüÿ è Ïðåäóðàëüÿ äëÿ rameters of nest location on the plots with îöåíêè åãî ÷èñëåííîñòè è îïðåäåëåíèÿ respect to the parameters included in the ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ìåñò ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ñ öåëüþ model, such as the nest–settlement distance èõ îáñëåäîâàíèÿ. and elevation change, has demonstrated explicit distinctions between the patterns Ïîëåâûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ of the Imperial Eagle nesting on pine, birch,  ñåçîí 1998 ã. ïðîâåäåíî îáñëåäîâà- and poplar trees (table 3, fig. 4). The classi- íèå äâóõ ïëîùàäîê íà ïðåäìåò âûÿâëåíèÿ fication functions are shown in table 4. What ìîãèëüíèêà (ðèñ. 2). Ïåðâàÿ ïëîùàäêà does it suggest? It tells that we can boldly (ïëîùàäü 1101,1 êì2) çàëîæåíà â ëåñîñòå- divide the habitat of the Imperial Eagle in

Òèïè÷íûå ãí¸çäà ìîãèëüíèêà íà ñîñíàõ íà Áóãóëüìèíñêî- Áåëåáååâñêîé âîçâû- øåííîñòè. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Typical nests of the Imperial Eagle on the pines in the Bugulminsko- Belebeevskaya upland. Photos by I. Karyakin. 108 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

our key territory into three types that cor- respond to patterns of the Imperial Eagle of breeding on pine, poplar, and birch trees. The simplest approach is to use for division of habitats the parameters included into the model of Discriminant analysis. How- ever, the division will be more accurate if a series of other landscape characteristics that are visible in GIS are used, which have not been represented in the model, since they have no explicit connection to the pa- rameters of nest distribution (such as the forest ratio on the breeding territory from its total area, the field/pasture ground ratio on the breeding territory, etc.). The next stage is the determination of dis- tances between the nests of different pairs. This stage is important due to the fact that it is the mean distance between the nests that Ðèñ. 2. Êëþ÷åâàÿ ïè Âûñîêîãî Çàâîëæüÿ (êðàéíèé ñåâåðî- will be used as a parameter on the basis of òåððèòîðèÿ è ïëîùàäêè âîñòîê Ñàìàðñêîé îáëàñòè íà ãðàíèöå which the layer of circles imitating the sys- (íóìåðàöèÿ ïëîùàäîê ðåñïóáëèêè Òàòàðñòàí è Îðåíáóðãñêîé ñîîòâåòñòâóåò íóìåðà- tem of breeding territories will be construct- öèè â òåêñòå). îáëàñòè) è ïðåäñòàâëÿåò ñîáîé âñõîëìë¸í- ed. Here, the question arises – whether to íóþ ëåñîñòåïü ñ ôðàãìåíòàìè ñîõðàíèâ- Fig. 2. Key territory and use the distance between all neighbors, or study plots (numbers øèõñÿ ñîñíîâî-øèðîêîëèñòâåííûõ ëåñîâ between the nearest ones? If there is no ob- of plots are similar with íà âûñîêèõ òåððàñàõ ìàëûõ ðåê è êîëêàìè vious dependence of linear arrangement of the same in the text). ìåëêîëèñòâåííûõ ëåñîâ ïî âîäîðàçäåëàì. the breeding territories along certain objects Âòîðàÿ ïëîùàäêà (ïëîùàäü 191,7 êì2) çà- that can be seen in the image (a margin of a ëîæåíà â ëåñîñòåïè ëåâîáåðåæüÿ Âîëãè solid extended massif, a river, etc.), it is bet- (ñåâåðî-çàïàä Ñàìàðñêîé îáëàñòè íà ãðà- ter to consider the distances between the íèöå ñ Óëüÿíîâñêîé îáëàñòüþ) è ïðåäñòàâ- nearest neighbors. In our case, the distance ëÿåò ñîáîé ñëàáî âñõîëìë¸ííóþ ëåñîñòåïü for the nests located on pine trees is (n=8) ñ ôðàãìåíòàìè ñîõðàíèâøèõñÿ ñîñíîâî- 2.39–11.73, on average, 5.93±3.22 km; øèðîêîëèñòâåííûõ ëåñîâ íà ïîëîãèõ òåð- for the nests located on birch trees – (n=2) ðàñàõ ìàëûõ ðåê ñ âîäîðàçäåëàìè, ïîëíî- 14.54–15.23, on average, 14.89 km; and ñòüþ çàíÿòûìè ïàøíÿìè. for the nests located on poplar trees – (n=2)  õîäå îáñëåäîâàíèÿ ýòèõ ïëîùàäîê 17.23–24.12, on average, 20.68±4.87 km. íà àâòîìîáèëüíûõ ìàðøðóòàõ, îðèåíòè- The model of potential breeding territories ðîâàííûõ íà ïîèñê òèïè÷íûõ ãí¸çä ìî- inside the contour of the key territory con-

Òèïè÷íûå ãí¸çäà ìîãèëüíèêà íà áåð¸çàõ (ñëåâà) è íà òîïîëÿõ (ñïðàâà). Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Typical nests of the Imperial Eagle on the birches (at the left) and on the poplars (at the right). Photos by I. Karyakin. Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 109

structed on the basis of these parameters is given in fig. 5. It consists of 222 objects (130 objects corresponding to the potential territories on which the breeding of the Im- perial Eagle is supposed according to the pattern of breeding on pine trees, 67 – on birch trees, and 25 – on poplar trees). Let us concentrate on the breeding pat- tern. By this term we understand the ar- rangement of a nest by the Imperial Eagle in the landscape so that with respect of the complex of parameters, it matched a certain typical variant that is characteristic of a number of eagle pairs in this region. The isolated patterns of breeding on pine, birch, and poplar trees have characteris- tics as follows. The nest corresponding to the pattern of breeding on a pine tree Ðèñ. 3. Ãí¸çäà ìîãèëü- ãèëüíèêà, îáíàðóæåíî 15 ãí¸çä (ðèñ. is located on an elevated terrace territory íèêà (Aquila heliaca) íà 3). Ãí¸çäà íàéäåíû â ñîâåðøåííî ðàçíûõ (a watershed ridge or a bold mountain), ïëîùàäêàõ (íóìåðàöèÿ òèïàõ ìåñòîîáèòàíèé – ó÷àñòêè õâîéíî- mainly in the upper part of the slope or on ïëîùàäîê ñîîòâåòñòâóåò íóìåðàöèè â òåêñòå). øèðîêîëèñòâåííîãî ëåñà ñ ïðèñóòñòâèåì its peak, usually in a large forest massif, al- Fig. 3. Nests of the èëè äîìèíèðîâàíèåì ñîñíû â ïåðâîì ÿðóñå, ways facing a pasture ground and a farm Imperial Eagle (Aquila ãðàíè÷àùèå ñ ïîëÿìè è ðå÷íûìè ïîéìàìè, and/or a settlement. The nest is predomi- heliaca) on study plots ïîéìåííûé ëåñ, ãðàíè÷àùèé ñ ïàñòáèùàìè nantly constructed on a pine tree, on its (numbers of plots are è ïîëÿìè è áåð¸çîâûå ïåðåëåñêè ñðåäè ïî- top; however, there may be different vari- similar with the same in the text). Labels: ëåé è ñòåïíûõ ïàñòáèù. Èç 15 ãí¸çä 9 âûÿâ- ants of nest construction on oaks, rarely 1 – pine-type of nesting ëåíû â õâîéíî-øèðîêîëèñòâåííûõ ó÷àñòêàõ on birch trees, usually in the same habi- habit, 2 – birch-type of ëåñà, â èõ ïðèîïóøå÷íîé ÷àñòè, è óñòðîåíû tats, where the pine forest is replaced by nesting habit, íà ñîñíàõ (Pinus sylvestris), 3 – â îñèíîâî- secondary broad-leaved or small-leaved 3 – poplar-type of nesting habit. áåð¸çîâûõ êîëêàõ è óñòðîåíû íà áåð¸çàõ forest. The nest corresponding to the pat- (Betula pendula), 2 – â ïîéìå ðåêè è 1 – â tern of breeding on a birch tree is located ëåñîïîëîñå, ñðåäè çàëåæåé, óñòðîåííûå íà in the wavy, usually watershed landscape, òîïîëÿõ (Populus sp.). Íà ïëîùàäêå ¹1 îá- in the lower part of a slope or in its base, íàðóæåíî 9 ãí¸çä, èç êîòîðûõ 3 óñòðîåíû in a separated forest stand or a group of íà ñîñíàõ, 3 – íà áåð¸çàõ, 3 – íà òîïîëÿõ; trees, among pasture grounds; however, íà ïëîùàäêå ¹2 – 6 ãí¸çä, âñå íà ñîñíàõ. commonly beyond sight from the farm or Êëþ÷åâàÿ òåððèòîðèÿ, êîíòóð êîòîðîé the settlement. The nest is predominantly ïðîâåä¸í äîñòàòî÷íî ñóáúåêòèâíî ÷åðåç constructed on a birch tree, more rarely, on òåððèòîðèþ, ïëàíèðîâàâøóþñÿ ê îáñëåäî- an oak or aspen trees, in the mid-crown. âàíèþ â 1998–2008 ãã., çàíèìàåò ïëîùàäü The nest corresponding to the pattern of 31244,9 êì2 (ðèñ. 2). nesting on a poplar tree is located in a flat- Ïðîñòîé ðàñ÷¸ò ïëîòíîñòè ïî ìåòîäè- tened, typically floodplain landscape, with êå ïëîùàäî÷íûõ ó÷¸òîâ äà¸ò ïîêàçàòåëü â the minimum elevation change, on the ter- ñðåäíåì 1,16 ïàð/100 êì2 îáùåé ïëîùàäè ritory with the minimum forest coverage, (0,82–3,13 ïàð/100 êì2 îáùåé ïëîùàäè). within the sight from a pasture ground, but Ýêñòðàïîëÿöèÿ ýòèõ äàííûõ íà ïëîùàäü beyond the sight from a farm or a settle- êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè ïîçâîëÿåò ïðåäïî- ment. The nest is predominantly construct- ëîæèòü ãíåçäîâàíèå 168–784 ïàð, â ñðåä- ed on a poplar tree, more rarely, on an elm íåì 363 ïàð, ìîãèëüíèêîâ íà êëþ÷åâîé or a birch tree, in the upper crown. òåððèòîðèè. Îöåíêà èìååò î÷åíü áîëüøóþ Now let us minutely consider the resultant îøèáêó è î÷åâèäíî, ÷òî îíà íå êîððåêòíà. model. Three clusters of potential territories Âèçóàëüíûé àíàëèç êàðòû ïðåäïîëàãàåò çà- corresponding to the type of breeding of âûøåíèå îöåíêè, òàê êàê ýêñòðàïîëÿöèÿ the Imperial Eagle on pine trees are isolated îñóùåñòâëåíà íà òåððèòîðèþ, èìåþùóþ in this model, since precisely in these ter- áîëüøèå ïëîùàäè ìåñòîîáèòàíèé, íå ÿâ- ritories the pine broad-leaved forests occur. ëÿþùèõñÿ îïòèìàëüíûìè äëÿ ìîãèëüíèêà, The entire central part of the key territory â òî âðåìÿ êàê îáå ïëîùàäêè çàëîæåíû â is occupied by the potential territories cor- îïòèìàëüíûõ ìåñòîîáèòàíèÿõ, à íà îäíîé responding to the type of breeding on the 110 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

Òèïè÷íûå ãí¸çäà ìîãèëüíèêà íà ñîñíàõ â Ïðèâîëæñêèõ áîðàõ: íà îïóøêå òåððàñ- íîãî áîðà (ââåðõó) è ñðåäè íàãîðíîãî ëåñà â óäàëåíèè îò îïóøêè (âíèçó). Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Typical nests of the Imperial Eagle on the pines in the Privolzhskie pine-forests: upper – on edge of pine-forest, bottom – in the upland forest. Photos by I. Karyakin.

èç ïëîùàäîê, ê òîìó æå, ïëîòíîñòü ìîãèëü- birch tree, even in those territories where íèêà áûëà ÿâíî ìàêñèìàëüíîé äëÿ âèäà the nests in open landscapes on poplar (ïëîùàäêà ¹2, ïëîòíîñòü 3,13 ïàð/100 êì2 trees are known on the plots. It is connect- îáùåé ïëîùàäè). Åñëè îòâëå÷üñÿ îò êîí- ed with the fact that the open territories òóðîâ ïëîùàäêè è ïîñ÷èòàòü ïëîòíîñòü íà with the nests on poplar trees within the ìàðøðóòàõ (ñì. Êàðÿêèí, 2004), ïðîòÿ- plot were isolated, and there was no pos- æ¸ííîñòü êîòîðûõ íà ïëîùàäêàõ 1 è 2 ñî- sibility of constructing a layer from several ñòàâèëà 66,0 è 244,15 êì, ñîîòâåòñòâåííî, neighboring territories with the diameter of òî, ïðè ñðåäíåé äèñòàíöèè îáíàðóæåíèÿ 20.68 km. ãí¸çä ìîãèëüíèêà 1,18 êì (øèðèíà ó÷¸òíîé The main question is how reliable is the ïîëîñû 2,36 êì), ïëîòíîñòü ñîñòàâèò 2,05 model of 222 potential breeding territories ïàð/100 êì2 ïðèîïóøå÷íîé çîíû ëåñîâ of the Imperial Eagle constructed on the ba- (1,56–3,85 ïàð/100 êì2 ïðèîïóøå÷íîé sis of 15 nests (6.76% of the known nests of çîíû ëåñîâ). Íî ýòè ïîêàçàòåëè ìîæíî the estimated number of the species in the ýêñòðàïîëèðîâàòü òîëüêî íà ïðèîïóøå÷- key territory)? Right now we will analyze íóþ çîíó, ïëîùàäü êîòîðîé áåç ÃÈÑ äî- the reliability. âîëüíî ñëîæíî ïîñ÷èòàòü. There is not to say that the entire territory ×òî æå ìîæíî ñäåëàòü äëÿ êîððåêòèðîâ- has been studied to the present moment; êè îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè, èìåÿ íàñòîÿùèå however, it has been annually, up to 2010 ó÷¸òíûå äàííûå? Åñòü íåñêîëüêî âàðèàí- inclusive, visited by different ornithologists òîâ. Ïåðâûé âàðèàíò – ïîñ÷èòàòü ïëîùàäü and bird-fanciers, the database on breed- ïðèîïóøå÷íîé çîíû ëåñîâ è ýêñòðàïîëè- ing territories of the Imperial Eagle being ðîâàòü ïîêàçàòåëè ïëîòíîñòè, ïîëó÷åííûå annually appended. By now, 119 potential íà ìàðøðóòíûõ ó÷¸òàõ, âòîðîé âàðèàíò – breeding territories were inspected, which ïåðåñ÷èòàòü ïëîòíîñòü â ãíåçäîïðèãîäíûõ makes up 53.6% of the total number of those áèîòîïàõ íà ïëîùàäêàõ íà ãíåçäîïðèãîä- estimated in the model (table 5, fig. 6). íûå áèîòîïû êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè è, íà- Inspection of the territories has shown êîíåö, òðåòèé âàðèàíò – ïîñòðîèòü ñõåìó that in general the model is working. Breed- Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 111

ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ing of the Imperial Eagle was found in 102 ó÷àñòêîâ èñõîäÿ èç ñïåöèôè÷åñêèõ õàðàê- territories, which is 85.71% of the number òåðèñòèê ðàçìåùåíèÿ ãí¸çä. È â òîì, è â of inspected territories. During the inspec- äðóãîì, è â òðåòüåì ñëó÷àå ïðèä¸òñÿ èñ- tion of 119 potential territories, 120 actual ïîëüçîâàòü ÃÈÑ, îäíàêî, ïðè ôàêòè÷åñêè breeding territories were revealed (fig. 7). 8 îäèíàêîâûõ òðóäîçàòðàòàõ, ïîñòðîåíèå nests of the Imperial Eagle were found be- ñõåìû ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ íàìíîãî òî÷íåå yond the potential territories, exactly half of ïîçâîëèò ïîäîéòè ê îöåíêå ÷èñëåííîñòè, those being located in immediate proxim- îäíîâðåìåííî ðåøèâ åù¸ îäíó çàäà÷ó ity from the borders of the potential territo- – âûÿâëåíèå ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ries (3 – in the 500 m wide buffer zone, 1 ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêà äëÿ èõ ïðîâåðêè. – 1.5 km away from the edge of a potential Íèæå ìû ðàññìîòðèì ïîäðîáíî êàìå- territory), while the other 4 were found in ðàëüíóþ ðàáîòó ïî òðåòüåìó âàðèàíòó. non-typical nesting habitats (either far away from the margin inside a terrace pinewood Êàìåðàëüíàÿ îáðàáîòêà äàííûõ or in larch forests inside the clusters with Êàìåðàëüíàÿ ðàáîòà â íàøåì ñëó÷àå ñ the pattern of breeding on pine trees). 2–3 ìîãèëüíèêîì – ýòî äîâîëüíî ñåðü¸çíàÿ actual breeding territories were located in ðàáîòà â ÃÈÑ, êîòîðàÿ äîëæíà ïðîõîäèòü 8 potential breeding territories, only in 2 â íåñêîëüêî ýòàïîâ. Ïåðâûé ýòàï – ïîä- cases incorrect assignment of these territo- ãîòîâêà êàðòîãðàôè÷åñêîé îñíîâû. Ñ íåé ries into the habitat group with a different ìû áóäåì ðàáîòàòü, îïðåäåëÿÿ çàêîíîìåð- type of breeding of the Imperial Eagle being íîñòè ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ãí¸çä ìîãèëüíèêà â the reason for that, while in the remaining ïðîñòðàíñòâå, íà å¸ îñíîâå ñòðîèòü êàðòó case it is a case of surpassing the optimal ìåñòîîáèòàíèé ìîãèëüíèêà â ðåãèîíå – density due to good feeding and/or nesting ýòî âòîðîé ýòàï. Òðåòèé ýòàï, îòâëå÷¸ííûé conditions. îò ÃÈÑ, íî íå ìåíåå âàæíûé – íåîáõîäè- Thus, the location of actual breeding ter- ìî ïîíÿòü, íàñêîëüêî ñèëüíî îòëè÷àåòñÿ ritories of the Imperial Eagle diverged from ðàñïðåäåëåíèå ìîãèëüíèêîâ, ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ the model by 14.29%; however, the number íà ñîñíàõ â áîðó, íà áåð¸çàõ è òîïîëÿõ of breeding Imperial Eagles at the inspected â ëåñî-ïîëåâîì ëàíäøàôòå è ïîéìàõ, è territories was higher than the calculated êàêîâà âåðîÿòíîñòü èõ ðàçíåñåíèÿ ïî ðàç- number by only 0.84%. íûì ãíåçäîâûì ãðóïïèðîâêàì ñî ñïåöè- Validation of the model of potential ôè÷åñêèìè ñòåðåîòèïàìè ãíåçäîâàíèÿ. breeding territories of the Imperial Eagle Çäåñü íàì ïîìîæåò äèñêðèìèíàíòíûé àíà- has demonstrated that although there are ëèç. ×åòâ¸ðòûé ýòàï – ïîäãîòîâêà êàðòû certain drawbacks, the modeling with group ìåñòîîáèòàíèé ìîãèëüíèêà, äèôôåðåí- öèðîâàííîé ïî ðàçíûì ãíåçäîâûì ãðóïïè- ðîâêàì. Ïÿòûé ýòàï – çàêëþ÷èòåëüíûé ýòàï ðàáîòû – ïîñòðîåíèå ñõåìû ïîòåíöèàëü- íûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêîâ äëÿ êëþ÷åâûõ òåððèòîðèé.

Ïîøàãîâûé àëãîðèòì îáðàáîòêè äàí- íûõ â ArcView 3.õ. Ýòàï. 1. Ïîäãîòîâêà êàðòîãðàôè÷å- ñêîé îñíîâû äëÿ ÃÈÑ-àíàëèçà. 1. Íà òåððèòîðèþ êëþ÷åâûõ òåððèòîðèé ñîçäà¸ì ðàñòðîâóþ ïîäëîæêó èç òîïîãðà- ôè÷åñêèõ êàðò Ì 1:200 000. Òîïîãðàôè- ÷åñêèå êàðòû ñêàíèðóåì, ïåðåâîäèì â ðàñòðîâûé ôîðìàò TIFF è ðåãèñòðèðóåì â ArcView â ïðîåêöèè UTM-83, çîíà 38 (äà- òóì WGS-84). 1.1.  ãðàôè÷åñêîì ðåäàêòîðå Adobe Photoshop CS2 ñêëåèâàåì è èíäåêñèðóåì êàðòû, â èòîãå äëÿ êàæäîãî ëèñòà ïîëó÷àåì öâåòîäåë¸ííûé ðàñòð â ôîðìàòå TIFF. 1.2.  ïðîãðàììå PHOTOMOD GeoCal- Ãíåçäî ìîãèëüíèêà. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. culator ïåðåñ÷èòûâàåì êîîðäèíàòû óãëî- The nest of the Imperial Eagle. Photo by I. Karyakin. 112 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

âûõ òî÷åê òîïîãðàôè÷åñêèõ êàðò èç ÑÊ-42 separation on the basis of the breeding pat- â WGS-84. terns allows determining the spatial loca- 1.3. Ïåðåñ÷èòàííûå çíà÷åíèÿ ýêñïîðòè- tion of breeding territories of the Imperial ðóåì â òåêñòîâûé ôîðìàò. Eagle with more than 80% accuracy (5–10% 1.4. Òåêñòîâûé ôàéë ñ êîîðäèíàòàìè of the known breeding territories from their îïîðíûõ òî÷åê èìïîðòèðóåì â ArcView, estimated number). The estimation of the ãäå ïðåîáðàçîâûâàåì â øåéï-ôàéë ñ ïî- number of 222 breeding territories for the ìîùüþ îïöèè Add Event Theme. key territory with the area of 31,244.9 km2 1.5. Ñ ïîìîùüþ ìîäóëÿ Image Warp may be considered reliable, with the deter- îñóùåñòâëÿåì ïðèâÿçêó òîïîãðàôè÷åñêèõ mined error less than 1%. The comparison êàðò â ïðîåêöèþ UTM-83, çîíà 38. with the estimates obtained by other meth- 1.6. Äàëåå êàðòû âèçóàëüíî ñëèâàåì â ods (see table 6) demonstrate the great ad- åäèíîå ïîêðûòèå ñ ïîìîùüþ ðàñøèðåíèÿ vantage of the method described above. Transparent Legend. For the typical landscape that includes 2. Íà îñíîâå êîñìîñíèìêà Landsat ETM+ the most characteristic nesting and hunting 2000 ã. (ïî óìîë÷àíèþ ñ÷èòàåì, ÷òî îí habitats of the Imperial Eagle, the minimum óæå êîððåêòíî ïðèâÿçàí ê èñïîëüçóåìîé threshold at which the use of the model of íàìè ñèñòåìå êîîðäèíàò), ñ ïðèâëå÷åíèåì construction of the potential territories is rea- âåäîìñòâåííûõ ìàòåðèàëîâ, ãîòîâèì òå- sonable will be 3 neighboring breeding ter- ìàòè÷åñêèå êàðòû: êàðòó ðàñòèòåëüíîñòè, ritories, if the model is constructed around èç êîòîðîé âûäåëÿåì ñëîè ëåñà, îòêðûòûõ them for the area less than 10,000 km2; or áèîòîïîâ, ãèäðîñåòè, íàñåë¸ííûõ ïóíêòîâ, 6 breeding territories in two groups (each ôåðì. consisting of 3 territories that are remote 2.1. Ñ ïîìîùüþ ìîäóëÿ Image Analysis from each other by the distance no more êîñìîñíèìîê êëàññèôèöèðóåì íà 16 than 200 km), if the model is constructed êëàññîâ (îïöèÿ Categorize…) è ãåíåðàëè- between the groups for the area less than çóåì (îïöèÿ Smooth). 10,000 km2. It should be taken into con- 2.2. Êëàññèôèöèðîâàííîå èçîáðàæåíèå sideration that the less the number of the êîíâåðòèðóåì â âåêòîðíûé ôîðìàò (øåéï- model breeding territories, the higher the ôàéë), îñóùåñòâëÿåì ýëèìèíàöèþ ïîëèãî- final inaccuracy of the “model” construction íîâ ìåíåå 0,05 êì2 ïî ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòè ãðà- and calculation of the number. íèö ñ áîëüøèìè ïî ïëîùàäè ïîëèãîíàìè c ïîìîùüþ Edit Tools (îïöèÿ Eliminate). The Second Example or 2.3. Íà îñíîâå ñèñòåìû ðåïåðíûõ òî÷åê In GIS-software I‘ll input my figures to ñîñòàâëÿåì ëåãåíäó ñîîòâåòñòâèÿ êëàññîâ find in woods the Golden Eagles! òèïàì ðàñòèòåëüíîñòè. Ïîïàâøèå â îäèí êëàññ ïî ñâîèì ñïåêòðàëüíûì õàðàêòåðè- Introduction ñòèêàì ðàçíûå òèïû ðàñòèòåëüíîñòè (íà- The example of approbation of the tech- ïðèìåð, çàêóñòàðåííûé ëóã è ìîëîäîé nique is realized in the territory of Nizhe- ëèñòâåííûé ëåñ) ëèáî, íàîáîðîò, îäèíàêî- gorodskoe Zavolzhye (Nizhniy Novgorod âûå òèïû, èìåþùèå ñïåêòðàëüíóþ ðàçíèöó Trans-Volga region) bordering with the Re- â äàííûé ìîìåíò âðåìåíè (íåíàðóøåííàÿ public of Mary El. ñòåïü è ñòåïü, ïðîéäåííàÿ ïîæàðîì òåêó- In this case the Golden Eagle (Aquila ùåãî ãîäà ñú¸ìêè) ðàçäåëÿåì âðó÷íóþ íà chrysaetos) has been chosen as a raptor îñíîâå àíàëèçà ãåîìåòðè÷åñêîé ñòðóêòóðû having the largest breeding territory and îáúåêòîâ è èõ ïðèóðî÷åííîñòè ê ýëåìåí- inhabiting the least populates areas. Under òàì ëàíäøàôòà (êîìàíäà [field].substitute conditions of forest and wetland landscapes («Class õ», «Class õõ») êàëüêóëÿòîðà çíà÷å- of Nizhegorodskoe Zavolzhye there are íèé ñòîëáöà). many difficulties to make a success in the 2.4.  êà÷åñòâå ëåñíûõ ìåñòîîáèòàíèé species research. The Golden Eagle is listed (ëèñòâåííûå, ñìåøàííûå è õâîéíûå ëåñà) in the Red Data Book of Russian Federation â îòäåëüíûé òåìàòè÷åñêèé ñëîé âûäåëÿ- (Galushin, 2001à) and in the Red book of åì êëàññû 2–5. Êàðòó îáëåã÷àåì çà ñ÷¸ò the Nizhniy Novgorod district (Bakka, 2003) ôèëüòðàöèè îáúåêòîâ ïëîùàäüþ ìåíüøå and is a priority species in the regional pro- 0,1 êì2, ëèíåéíûõ îáúåêòîâ øèðèíîé ìå- gram of actions on recovering the number íåå 0,1 êì è ïóò¸ì ñãëàæèâàíèÿ ãðàíèö by developing the system artificial nests ïîëèãîíîâ (îïöèÿ óäàëåíèÿ èçáûòî÷íûõ (Bakka et al., 1999; 2001; 2003; 2010; âåðøèí). Bakka, Novikova, 2005, 2006; Novikova, 2.5. Èç ñëîÿ îòêðûòûõ ìåñòîîáèòàíèé 2003). Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 113

By the end of 1990’, 3–5 pairs of the Golden Eagle had been estimated to breed in the Nizhniy Novgorod district (Bakka, Bakka, 1997), 1–2 pairs had been believed to inhabit the Kamsko-Bakaldinskie wet- lands. The program on installation of artifi- cial nests for rare species of birds of prey, including for Golden Eagle started in 1998– 2000. Golden Eagles began to use one of artificial nest as a perch in 1999, and built the nest and tried to breed in 2000 (Bakka et al., 2001). Occurrence of a breeding ter- ritory of eagles in the Kamsko-Bakaldinskie wetland has allowed to plan actions on re- covering the number of the species on the basis of GIS-software.

Statement of the problem The model of the Golden Eagle’s breeding territory distribution has created for the ter- Îòîáðàæåíèå ãíåçäî- â îòäåëüíûé òåìàòè÷åñêèé ñëîé âûäåëÿ- ritory of Biosphere Nature Reserve “Nizhe- âîãî ó÷àñòêà ìîãèëüíè- åì êëàññû, ñîîòâåòñòâóþùèå ñòåïíûì ìå- gorodskoe Zavolzhye” and targeted for the êà íà òîïîãðàôè÷åñêîé êàðòå â îêíå ArcView. ñòîîáèòàíèÿì. Âðó÷íóþ âû÷èùàåì îáú- most productive realization of actions on at- åêòû, ñîîòâåòñòâóþùèå çàëåæàì, êîòîðûå tracting the species to artificial nests. View of the Imperial Eagle’s breeding âû÷èñëÿåì ïî èõ ãåîìåòðèè (ïðàâèëüíûì territory on the êîíòóðàì, ÷óæäûì ïðèðîäíûì âûäåëàì). Surveys topographic map within During realization of these actions in the ArcView. Ýòàï 2. Ñîçäàíèå êàðòû ìåñòîîáèòà- territory of the Kamsko-Bakaldinskie wet- íèé. lands a pair of Golden Eagles occupied an 3. Äëÿ èçâåñòíûõ ãí¸çä ïî ïîëåâûì îïè- artificial nest. The breeding territory (fig. 9) ñàíèÿì, à òàêæå â ArcView 3õ ïî òåìàòè÷å- was formed at the forest-wetland landscape ñêèì êàðòàì, îïðåäåëÿåì îñíîâíûå ïàðà- typical for the species under conditions of ìåòðû èõ ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ: taiga of Eastern Europe. According to differ- 3.1. âèä ãíåçäîâîãî äåðåâà ent researchers birds were observed and in 3.2. òèï ëåñà other areas of this wetlands and it allowed 3.3. âîçðàñò ëåñà to assume other pairs breeding in the re- 3.4. ïåðåïàä âûñîò â êì/êì gion. As a result we supposed a breeding 3.5. ýêñïîçèöèÿ ñêëîíà* group inhabiting the territory of wetland 3.6. îðèåíòàöèÿ ãíåçäîâîãî äåðåâà îò- with the unique scheme of breeding ter- íîñèòåëüíî îïóøêè ëåñà è/èëè ñêëîíà ritory distribution. And it was all the data 3.7. äèñòàíöèÿ äî îòêðûòîãî ïðîñòðàí- of surveys. We known one active nest of ñòâà (îïóøêè) eagles and there were rumours that some 3.8. äèñòàíöèÿ äî ëåñà* Golden Eagles lived in neighbouring bogs. 3.9. äèñòàíöèÿ äî ðåêè 3.10. äèñòàíöèÿ äî ïîëÿ Data Processing 3.11. äèñòàíöèÿ äî ïàñòáèùà In this case not it is not so obvious as in 3.12. äèñòàíöèÿ äî ñòîÿ÷åãî âîäî¸ìà the first example, and we will build up the 3.13. äèñòàíöèÿ äî íàñåë¸ííîãî ïóíêòà model of potential breeding territories of 3.14. äèñòàíöèÿ äî ôåðìû Golden Eagles by guesswork. The problem * – ïàðàìåòðû, îïðåäåëÿåìûå â òåõ ñëó- becomes more difficult because we should ÷àÿõ, êîãäà èõ îïðåäåëåíèå âîçìîæíî, not only build the model of potential breed- íàïðèìåð, èìååòñÿ ÿðêî âûðàæåííûé ðå- ing territory distribution, but also pick out ëüåô èëè ãíåçäî ðàñïîëîæåíî ñðåäè îò- their centers which should be characterized êðûòîãî ïðîñòðàíñòâà. by the largest share of probability of the 4. Çàïèñûâàåì ïàðàìåòðû äëÿ êàæäîãî eagle’s nest location. ãíåçäà â àòðèáóòèâíóþ òàáëèöó âåêòîðíî- We do not know parameters of distribu- ãî ñëîÿ. tion of the Golden Eagle in this territory, 5. Ïîëó÷àåì ïî êàæäîìó ïàðàìåòðó but we see that following the topographi- îïèñàòåëüíóþ ñòàòèñòèêó M±SD. cal map and satellite image, this territory is 114 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

similar to others with forest-wetland land- scapes, which may be far from it at the dis- tance of hundreds kilometers. Parameters of spatial distribution of the Golden Eagle are rather typical for Eastern European popu- lation of the species. Thus for building the model of potential breeding territory distri- bution within the Kamsko-Bakaldinskie wet- lands we use parameters of distribution of eagles in the Upper Kama breeding group investigated during previous field seasons. The list of parameters of Golden Eagle’s breeding territory distribution as follows: 1. Distance between centres of neighbour territories – 9.9±1.2 km. 2. Radius of the breeding territory buffer – 6.4±1.1 km. 3. Diameter of a breeding territory – 5.68±0.98 km. 4. Overlapping of a breeding territory Îòîáðàæåíèå âåêòîð- 6. Âûáèðàåì ðàáîòàþùèå ïàðàìåòðû, with a buffer zone of the neighbour territory íîãî ñëîÿ ëåñîâ, ñîç- êðèòåðèåì ÷åìó ÿâëÿþòñÿ íîðìàëüíîå – 5±0.7%. äàííîãî ïî êîñìîñíèêó Landsat ETM+ 2000, â ðàñïðåäåëåíèå è îòêëîíåíèå îò ñðåäíåãî 5. High pine forest within the breeding îêíå ArcView. íå áîëåå 30%. territory – 100% priority. View of a vector layer 7.  ArcView 3õ ñ ïîìîùüþ ñòàíäàðòíîé 6. The open peatbog within the breeding of forests created on ôóíêöèè ïîñòðîåíèÿ áóôåðîâ ïî òåìàòè- territory – 100% priority. the basis of a satellite ÷åñêèì êàðòàì ïîøàãîâî ñòðîèì áóôåð- 7. Lake within the breeding territory – image Landsat ETM+ íûå çîíû, ïî êàæäîìó ïàðàìåòðó èñïîëü- 50% tolerance. 2000, within ArcView. çóÿ ñðåäíåå çíà÷åíèå. 8. Pine wastelands within the breeding 8. Ñëèâàåì áóôåðíûå çîíû â åäèíûé territory – 50% tolerance. ñëîé. 9. A buffer zone around settlements which 9. Ñ ïîìîùüþ ìîäóëÿ X-Tools îáðåçàåì the species cannot inhabit – 5.3±1.1 km. êàðòó ðàñòèòåëüíîñòè ïî êîíòóðó ñëîÿ áó- Data processing as well as in the previous ôåðíûõ çîí – ïîëó÷àåì êàðòó ãíåçäîïðè- example with the Imperial Eagle is divided ãîäíûõ äëÿ ìîãèëüíèêà ìåñòîîáèòàíèé. into several steps. The first step – prepara- tion of topographical maps. The second – Ýòàï 3. Ïîèñê ïàðàìåòðîâ, ïî êîòî- creation of habitat maps (fig. 10). The third ðûì ñòðîèì êàðòó ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïè- – the final step – generating the model of ðîâîê. potential breeding territories of Golden Ea- 10. Ïàðàìåòðû ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ãí¸çä gles for the Kamsko-Bakaldinskie wetlands ýêñïîðòèðóåì â Statistica 5.0 è îñóùåñò- (fig. 11). The first article on this theme was âëÿåì äèñêðèìèíàíòíûé àíàëèç äàííûõ: published in 2006 (Karyakin et al., 2006), 10.1. Âûáèðàåì ñëåäóþùèå ïàðàìåòðû: however the step-by-step algorithm of data 10.1.1. âèä ãíåçäîâîãî äåðåâà processing within GIS-software has been 10.1.2. òèï ëåñà described neither in that paper nor in the 10.1.3. âîçðàñò ëåñà articles on results of activities on the artifi- 10.1.4. ïëîùàäü ëåñà cial nest installing (Bakka, et al., 2010). 10.1.5. ïåðåïàä âûñîò â êì/êì 10.1.6. äèñòàíöèÿ äî îòêðûòîãî ïðî- Step-by-step algorithm of data ñòðàíñòâà (îïóøêè) processing in ArcView 3.õ. 10.1.7. äèñòàíöèÿ äî ïàñòáèùà Stage. 1. Preparing the topographical 10.1.8. äèñòàíöèÿ äî íàñåë¸ííîãî ïóíêòà maps for the GIS-analysis. 10.1.9. äèñòàíöèÿ äî ôåðìû 1. Create a raster map for the territory 10.2. Ãðóïïèðóåì ïåðåìåííûå ïî âèäó of Kamsko-Bakaldinskie wetlands based ãíåçäîâîãî äåðåâà, âûáðàâ ìåòîä Forward on topographical maps (scale 1:200 000). stepwise. Topographical maps are scanned, convert- 10.3. Íà äèàãðàììå ðàññåÿíèÿ êàíî- ed in raster data TIFF format and registered íè÷åñêèõ çíà÷åíèé ñìîòðèì ðåçóëüòàò è in ArcView in projection UTM-83, zone 38 âûáèðàåì òîò âàðèàíò ãðóïïèðîâêè ïåðå- (datum WGS-84). Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 115

ìåííûõ, êîòîðûé íàèáîëåå àäåêâàòíî ðàç- 1.1. Merge and index maps in the graphic äåëÿåò çíà÷åíèÿ íà ãðóïïû. editor Adobe Photoshop CS2, as a result the 10.4. Îïðåäåëÿåì ãðóïïèðóþùèé àòðè- raster in TIFF format indexing in color should áóò äëÿ ñîçäàíèÿ êàðòû ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïè- be created for each sheet. ðîâîê. 1.2. Coordinates of angular points of top- ographical maps are recalculated from ÑÊ- Ýòàï 4. Ñîçäàíèå êàðòû ãíåçäîâûõ 42 in WGS-84 the program PHOTOMOD ãðóïïèðîâîê. GeoCalculator. 11.  ArcView 3õ ïî òåìàòè÷åñêèì êàð- 1.3. Calculated coordinates are exported òàì, íà îñíîâàíèè âûáðàííîãî ãðóïïèðó- to *.txt format. þùåãî àòðèáóòà èç àòðèáóòèâíîé òàáëèöû, 1.4. The *.txt file with coordinates for ref- ñòðîèì ïîëèãîíû Òèññåíà, èñïîëüçóÿ ìî- erence points is imported in ArcView, thus äóëü Edit Tools. using option Add Event Theme it is trans- 12. Íà îñíîâàíèè ïîëèãîíîâ Òèññå- formed to a shapefile. íà ôîðìèðóåì ðàáî÷èé âåêòîðíûé ñëîé 1.5. Using Image Warp extension topo- ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê, âûäåëÿÿ â îòäåëü- graphical maps are registered in projection íûå ïîëèãîíû çîíû ïåðåêðûòèÿ ìåæäó UTM-83, zone 38. ãðóïïèðîâêàìè, åñëè òàêîâûå î÷åâèäíû. 1.6. Using Transparent Legend exten- 13. Ñ ïîìîùüþ ìîäóëÿ X-Tools îñóùåñò- sion maps are visually merged in the united âëÿåì èäåíòèôèêàöèþ êàðòû ìåñòîîáè- layer. òàíèé ïî ðàáî÷åìó âåêòîðíîìó ñëîþ ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê ñ çàíåñåíèåì ñî- Stage 2. Creation of habitat map. îòâåòñòâóþùèõ àòðèáóòîâ â àòðèáóòèâíóþ 2. Vector theme of settlements is created òàáëèöó. on the basis of topographical maps. 14. Ïî òèïó äîìèíèðóþùèõ áèîòîïîâ 2.1. Using Spatial Analyst extension top- îòíîñèì ïîëèãîíû êàðòû ìåñòîîáèòàíèé, ographical maps are converted to GRID for- îñòàâøèåñÿ çà ïðåäåëàìè ñëîÿ ãíåçäîâûõ mat. ãðóïïèðîâîê, ê òîìó èëè èíîìó òèïó. 2.2. Black colored areas indicating settle- 15. Âûâîäèì èòîãîâóþ êàðòó ìåñòîîáè- ments and roads are converted as a sepa- òàíèé, ðàçäåë¸ííóþ íà ãíåçäîâûå ãðóïïè- rate theme from the GRID-theme. ðîâêè ñ çàïèñàííîé àòðèáóòèâíîé èíôîð- 2.3. Using Edit Tools extension (option ìàöèåé, â èòîãîâûé âåêòîðíûé ñëîé. Eliminate) small polygons are deleted. The remained polygons not being settlements Ýòàï 5. Ñîçäàíèå êàðòû ïîòåíöèàëü- are deleted manually from the theme. íûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ. 2.4. On the basis of satellite images Land- 16.  ArcView 3õ ñ ïîìîùüþ ìîäóëÿ sat ETM+ 2000–2001 and Aster 2001-2006 Nearest Features îïðåäåëÿåì äèñòàíöèè settlements which have been extinct now ìåæäó áëèæàéøèìè ñîñåäÿìè è ñîçäà¸ì are noted. The main criteria for it are the êàðòó äèñòàíöèé. essential reduction of the area of the open 17. Ñ ïîìîùüþ ìîäóëÿ Edit Tools èç êàð- ground inside of contour of settlement and òû äèñòàíöèé óäàëÿåì ãåîìåòðè÷åñêèå overgrowing the roads to the settlement. äóáëèêàòû ëèíèé äèñòàíöèé ìåæäó äâóìÿ Polygons of these settlements are deleted áëèæàéøèìè ñîñåäÿìè. manually from the vector theme. 18. Äëÿ êàæäîé ãíåçäîâîé ãðóïïèðîâêè 3. Create polygon for the analysis of the îïðåäåëÿåì ñðåäíþþ äèñòàíöèþ è ñòàí- Golden Eagle distribution. äàðòíîå îòêëîíåíèå. 3.1. Based on the theme of settlements 19. Ñ ïîìîùüþ ìîäóëÿ Repeating Shapes extracted from a topographical map buffer äëÿ êàæäîãî êîíòóðà ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðî- zones with width of 5.3 km are created for âîê íà êàðòå ìåñòîîáèòàíèé ïî ñðåäíåìó the territory characterized by absence of ðàññòîÿíèþ ìåæäó áëèæàéøèìè ñîñåäÿìè, breeding Golden Eagles with high prob- îïðåäåë¸ííîìó äëÿ ýòîãî êîíòóðà, ñòðîèì ability. ïîêðûòèå èç êðóãîâ èëè ãåêñàãîíîâ, èìè- 3.2. The territory out of buffers of settle- òèðóþùåå ñõåìó ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ïîòåíöè- ments is converted to a shapefile that is a àëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêîâ. zone of the Golden Eagle possible breeding. 20. Îïèðàÿñü íà ðåïåðíûå òî÷êè, ÿâëÿþ- 4. Create the map of Golden Eagle habi- ùèåñÿ èçâåñòíûìè ãí¸çäàìè ìîãèëüíèêîâ, tats. êîððåêòèðóåì ÷åðíîâîé âåêòîðíûé ñëîé 4.1. On the basis of satellite images Land- ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìî- sat ETM+ and using Image Analyst exten- ãèëüíèêîâ ñ ïîìîùüþ ìîäóëÿ ShapeWarp, sion (Seed tool), polygons of wetlands, pine 116 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

ïîäòÿãèâàÿ öåíòðû ó÷àñòêîâ ê èçâåñòíûì wastelands, lakes and high pine forests are òî÷êàì. chosen. These polygons are converted to a 21. Ïî îòêîððåêòèðîâàííîìó ÷åðíî- shapefile (fig. 10). âîìó ñëîþ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ 4.2. Border zones between peatbogs and ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêîâ ñ ïîìîùüþ ìîäóëÿ high pine forests, pine wastelands and high X-Tools ïîëó÷àåì ñëîé öåíòðîèäîâ. pine forests and lakes and high pine forests 22. Ïî ñëîþ öåíòðîèäîâ ñ ïîìîùüþ ñòàí- are converted in a shapefile separately. äàðòíîé ôóíêöèè ïîñòðîåíèÿ áóôåðîâ ñòðîèì èòîãîâûé ñëîé ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåç- Stage 3. Generating the model of poten- äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêîâ, çàäàâ íóæíóþ tial breeding territories. äèñòàíöèþ äëÿ ïîñòðîåíèÿ êðóãîâ. 5. On the basis of map of habitats of the Golden Eagle the system of potential breed- Îöåíêà ðåçóëüòàòà ing territories are created. Íà÷í¸ì ðàçáèðàòüñÿ ñ òåì, ÷òî ïîëó÷è- 5.1. Using extension Repeating Shapes ëîñü, íà÷èíàÿ ñ 3-ãî ýòàïà. Èòàê, ìû ïîëó- (Jenness 2005.) and the measured means ÷èëè ðàáîòàþùèå ïàðàìåòðû ðàçìåùåíèÿ of the nearest neighbor distances generate ãí¸çä ìîãèëüíèêà íà ïëîùàäêàõ (òàáë. 2). round polygons which model the distribu- Ïåðâîå, ÷òî áðîñàåòñÿ â ãëàçà – ïëîùàäü tion of potential breeding territories. ëåñà, â êîòîðîì ðàçìåùàåòñÿ ãíåçäî, 5.2. Using known nest locations correct ñèëüíî âàðüèðóåò (îò 0,1 äî 311 êì2), íî the model using ShapeWarp (McVay 1998) ïðè ýòîì ïàðû, ãíåçäÿùèåñÿ íà ñîñíàõ, extension by moving the centers of the óñòðàèâàþò ãí¸çäà â äîñòàòî÷íî áîëüøèõ rounds to the known breeding territory of ïî ïëîùàäè ó÷àñòêàõ ëåñà. Ìèíèìàëüíûé the Golden Eagle and centers of high pine ðàçáðîñ èìåþò òàêèå ïàðàìåòðû, êàê äèñ- forests bordering with peatbogs. òàíöèÿ îò ãíåçäà äî ôåðìû – 0,1–5 êì, â 5.3. Using XTools extension (Delaune 2003) ñðåäíåì 1,81±1,52 êì, äî íàñåë¸ííîãî a new centroid layer is created on the basis of ïóíêòà – 0,1–5 êì, â ñðåäíåì 1,62±1,53 êì transformed theme of round polygons. è ïåðåïàä âûñîò – 0–0,6 êì/êì, â ñðåäíåì 5.4. The final system of round polygons 0,02±0,02 êì/êì. imitating the distribution potential breeding Äèñêðèìèíàíòíûé àíàëèç ïàðàìåòðîâ territories is constructed around centroids by ðàçìåùåíèÿ ãí¸çä íà ïëîùàäêàõ ïî âêëþ- means of standard option of buffer creating. ÷¸ííûì â ìîäåëü ïàðàìåòðàì, òàêèì êàê äèñòàíöèÿ äî íàñåë¸ííîãî ïóíêòà è ïåðå- Estimation of the result ïàä âûñîò, ïîêàçàë ÷¸òêèå ðàçëè÷èÿ ìåæäó So, applying the parameters of distri- ñòåðåîòèïàìè ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ìîãèëüíèêà íà bution of Golden Eagle’s breeding terri- ñîñíàõ, áåð¸çàõ è òîïîëÿõ (òàáë. 3, ðèñ. 4). tory in the Upper Kama breeding group Ôóíêöèè êëàññèôèêàöèè îòîáðàæåíû â we have constructed the model of poten- òàáëèöå 4. Î ÷¸ì ýòî ãîâîðèò? Î òîì, ÷òî tial breeding territory distribution for the ìû ñìåëî ìîæåì äåëèòü ìåñòîîáèòàíèÿ Kamsko-Bakaldinskie wetlands (fig. 11). ìîãèëüíèêà íà íàøåé êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòî- The breeding territory ¹1 has become ðèè íà òðè òèïà, ñîîòâåòñòâóþùèå ñòåðåî- a reference point of the model creating. òèïàì ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ìîãèëüíèêà íà ñîñíàõ, This territory was formed around artificial òîïîëÿõ è áåð¸çàõ. Ñàìûé ïðîñòîé ïîäõîä nests (on the site eagles used 3 artificial – èñïîëüçîâàòü äëÿ äåëåíèÿ ìåñòîîáèòàíèé nests locating on a line in 3 km by turns ïàðàìåòðû, âêëþ÷¸ííûå â ìîäåëü äèñêðè- during several years). ìèíàíòíîãî àíàëèçà. Îäíàêî äåëåíèå áó- Constructing the model of potential äåò òî÷íåå, åñëè èñïîëüçîâàòü è ðÿä äðóãèõ breeding territories of Golden Eagles has âèäèìûõ â ÃÈÑ ëàíäøàôòíûõ õàðàêòåðè- allowed to determine 19 territories for the ñòèê, êîòîðûå íå áûëè îòîáðàæåíû â ìî- area of 2,300 km2. As a result of target äåëè, òàê êàê íå èìåþò ÷¸òêîãî îòíîøåíèÿ check of potential territories and moni- ê ïàðàìåòðàì ðàçìåùåíèÿ ãí¸çä (íàïðè- toring of existing system of artificial nests ìåð, äîëÿ ëåñà íà ãíåçäîâîì ó÷àñòêå îò (the nests installed before 2000, and the åãî îáùåé ïëîùàäè, ñîîòíîøåíèå ïîëÿ/ nests built after 2000, during target check ïàñòáèùà íà ãíåçäîâîì ó÷àñòêå è ò.ä.). of them in the centers of potential territo- Ñëåäóþùèé øàã – îïðåäåëåíèå äèñòàí- ries) 12 breeding territories of Golden Ea- öèé ìåæäó ãí¸çäàìè ðàçíûõ ïàð. Ýòîò gles have been discovered with a different øàã âàæåí òåì, ÷òî èìåííî ñðåäíåå ðàñ- degree of data verification. We recognized ñòîÿíèå ìåæäó ãí¸çäàìè áóäåò òåì ïî- the territories as “confirmed” which eagles êàçàòåëåì, ïî êîòîðîìó áóäåò ñòðîèòüñÿ (8 territories) had bred in, as “probable” – Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 117

Òàáë. 2. Ïàðàìåòðû ðàçìåùåíèÿ ãí¸çä ìîãèëüíèêà (Aquila heliaca), âûÿâëåííûõ íà ïëîùàäêàõ. Table 2. Parameters of the Imperial Eagle’s (Aquila heliaca) nest distribution discovered in the study plots.

Äèñòàíöèÿ Ïåðåïàä âûñîò äî îïóøêè (êì/êì) Äèñòàíöèÿ Äèñòàíöèÿ äî Äèñòàíöèÿ (êì) Maximum height äî ïàñòáèùà íàñåë¸ííîãî äî ôåðìû Ïëîùàäü Distance to difference measured (êì) ïóíêòà (êì) (êì) Ãíåçäîâîå ëåñà (êì2) the nearest in DEM for 1 km Distance to Distance to the Distance to äåðåâî Area of open space line across steepest the nearest nearest settle- a livestock Nesting tree forest (km2) (km) gradient (km/km) pasture (km) ment (km) farm (km) Ñîñíà / Pine 27.0 0 0.06 0 0.1 0.5 Ñîñíà / Pine 311.0 0.5 0.02 0.5 0.3 5.0 Ñîñíà / Pine 45.0 0.1 0.005 0.1 0.5 0.5 Ñîñíà / Pine 45.0 0.1 0.005 0.1 0.9 0.1 Ñîñíà / Pine 45.0 0.1 0.005 0.1 1.1 2.0 Ñîñíà / Pine 48.0 0 0.005 0 0.5 0.5 Ñîñíà / Pine 67.0 0 0.005 0 0.5 4.0 Ñîñíà / Pine 95.0 0 0.005 0 1.1 4.0 Ñîñíà / Pine 87.0 0 0.005 0 0.8 0.1 Áåð¸çà / Birch 0.3 0 0.04 0 2.0 1.5 Áåð¸çà / Birch 3.6 0 0.04 0 4.0 2.0 Áåð¸çà / Birch 6.6 0 0.04 0 2.0 2.5 Tîïîëü / Poplar 0.1 0 0 0 5.0 1.0 Tîïîëü / Poplar 3.0 0 0.005 0 1.5 1.5 Tîïîëü / Poplar 6.0 0 0.005 0 4.0 2.0 Ñðåäíåå Average (M±SD) 52.64±78.12 0.05±0.13 0.02±0.02 0.05±0.13 1.62±1.53 1.81±1.52

ïîêðûòèå èç êðóãîâ, èìèìèòèðóþùåå which a pair of birds had been recorded or ñèñòåìó ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ. Äèñêðèìè- single adults had been observed repeatedly íàíòíûé àíàëèç ïîêàçàë ðàçíèöó â ðàç- and their permanent perches (2 territories) ìåùåíèè ãí¸çä íà ñîñíàõ, áåð¸çàõ è òî- had been found in, to “possible” – which ïîëÿõ, ñëåäîâàòåëüíî, ñ÷èòàåì äèñòàíöèè only perches or subadults (2 territories) ïî ãí¸çäàì, óñòðîåííûì íà ðàçíûõ âèäàõ had been recorded in. It should be noticed, äåðåâüåâ, îòäåëüíî. Çäåñü âñòà¸ò âîïðîñ, that during that period on a background of

Òàáë. 3. Èòîãîâàÿ òàáëèöà äèñêðèìèíàíòíîãî àíàëèçà äàííûõ (æèðíûì ïîìå÷åíû ïàðàìåòðû, âêëþ÷¸ííûå â ìîäåëü, êóðñèâîì – íå âêëþ÷¸ííûå â ìîäåëü). Table 3. The final table on the discrimanant analysis of data (bold font marks the parameters included in the model, italic– not included in the model).

Ïàðàìåòðû ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ãí¸çä Wilks’ Partial F-remove 1-Toler. Parameters of nest location Lambda Lambda (2.11) p-level Toler. (R-Sqr.) Äèñòàíöèÿ äî íàñåë¸ííîãî ïóíêòà (êì) Distance to the nearest settlement (km) 0.54 0.29 13.40 0.001 0.93 0.07 Ïåðåïàä âûñîò (êì/êì) Maximum height difference measured in DEM for 1 km line across steepest gradient (km/km) 0.31 0.51 5.36 0.024 0.93 0.07 Ïëîùàäü ëåñà (êì2) / Area of forest (km2) 0.15 0.93 0.37 0.70 0.99 0.01 Äèñòàíöèÿ äî îïóøêè (êì) Distance to the nearest open space (km) 0.15 0.98 0.11 0.89 0.99 0.01 Äèñòàíöèÿ äî ïàñòáèùà (êì) Distance to the nearest pasture (km) 0.15 0.98 0.11 0.89 0.99 0.01 Äèñòàíöèÿ äî ôåðìû (êì) Distance to a livestock farm (km) 0.15 0.98 0.09 0.91 0.99 0.01 118 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

Òàáë. 4. Ôóíêöèè êëàññèôèêàöèè ïàðàìåòðîâ ðàçìåùåíèÿ ãí¸çä ìîãèëüíèêà íà ïëîùàäêàõ ïî äàííûì äèñêðèìèíàíòíîãî àíàëèçà. Table 4. Classification functions of parameters of the Imperial Eagle’s nest location on the plots according with the Discriminantal analysis data.

Ïàðàìåòðû ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ãí¸çä Ãíåçäîâîå äåðåâî / Nesting tree Parameters of nest location Ñîñíà / Pine Áåð¸çà / Birch Òîïîëü / Poplar p=0.6 p=0.2 p=0.2 Äèñòàíöèÿ äî íàñåë¸ííîãî ïóíêòà (êì) Distance to the nearest settlement (km) 1.06872 4.1673 4.49553 Ïåðåïàä âûñîò (êì/êì) / Maximum height difference measured in DEM for 1 km line across steepest gradient (km/km) 73.05524 241.5568 85.06265 Constant -1.32193 -11.9969 -9.61838

ñ÷èòàòü ëè äèñòàíöèþ ìåæäó âñåìè ñîñå- peak of number of hares and activities on äÿìè èëè áëèæàéøèìè? Åñëè íåò î÷åâèä- the artificial nest installing there was an íîé çàâèñèìîñòè ëèíåéíîãî ðàçìåùåíèÿ intensive formation of breeding territories ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ âäîëü êàêèõ-ëèáî of Golden Eagles, and the new pairs con- îáúåêòîâ, âèäèìûõ íà ñíèìêå (îïóøêà sisted of young birds. Formation of pairs ñïëîøíîãî ïðîòÿæ¸ííîãî ìàññèâà, ðåêà was confirmed in 3 territories which have è ò.ï.), ëó÷øå ñ÷èòàòü äèñòàíöèè ìåæäó initially occupied by individuals in the age áëèæàéøèìè ñîñåäÿìè.  íàøåì ñëó÷àå of 3–5 years and they began to breed only äèñòàíöèÿ äëÿ ãí¸çä, ðàñïîëîæåííûõ íà 1–3 years later (Bakka et al., 2010). And all ñîñíàõ, ñîñòàâëÿåò (n=8) 2,39–11,73, â real breeding territories were formed in the ñðåäíåì 5,93±3,22 êì, äëÿ ãí¸çä, ðàñ- centers of potential sites. All registrations ïîëîæåííûõ íà áåð¸çàõ, – (n=2) 14,54– of birds had made before 2006 were also 15,23, â ñðåäíåì 14,89 êì, äëÿ ãí¸çä, in the centers of potential sites. ðàñïîëîæåííûõ íà òîïîëÿõ, – (n=2) Considering the occurrence of new data 17,23–24,12, â ñðåäíåì 20,68±4,87 êì. on the Kamsko-Bakaldinskaya breeding Ðèñ. 4. Äèàãðàììà ðàñ- ñåÿíèÿ êàíîíè÷åñêèõ Ïîñòðîåííàÿ ïî ýòèì ïàðàìåòðàì ñõå- group of Golden Eagles the new model çíà÷åíèé ïàðàìåòðîâ ìà ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ of potential breeding territory distribution ðàçìåùåíèÿ ãí¸çä ìî- âíóòðè êîíòóðà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè developed on all the territory of wetlands ãèëüíèêà íà ïëîùàäêàõ. ïðåäñòàâëåíà íà ðèñóíêå 5. Îíà ñîñòîèò including the right side of the Kerzhenets Fig. 4. Scatterplot of èç 222-õ îáúåêòîâ (130 îáúåêòîâ, ñîîò- river has been constructed (fig. 12). The canonical scores of parameters of the âåòñòâóþùèõ ïîòåíöèàëüíûì ó÷àñòêàì, new model has also included the param- Imperial Eagle’s nest íà êîòîðûõ ïðåäïîëàãàåòñÿ ãíåçäîâàíèå eters of distribution of Golden Eagle’s distribution on plots. ìîãèëüíèêà â ñîîòâåòñòâèè ñî ñòåðåîòè- breeding territories in relation to each other and in relation to elements of a landscape within the considered area. As a result several types of bogs have been included in the model, the radius of buff- ers around settlements has been reduced up to 3.05 km, the posts of the Forestry Service existing on a place of former set- tlements have been removed from the theme of settlements, also the nature ter- ritories characterized by constant people presence (pastures, peat mines etc.) have been added to the theme of settlements with the buffer radius of 1.4 km. As a result of updating the model of potential breeding territories distribution for the Golden Eagle on all territory of the Kamsko-Bakaldinskie wetlands 26 breeding territories have been established in the area of 3,100 km2. And only territory has been added to the number established within the previous variant of the model developed for the area of 2,300 km2 (fig. 12). In addition to 12 territories of Golden Eagles already Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 119

known another 4 territories had been dis- covered by 2008, and in one case (in 2007) the territory was formed in a buffer zone be- tween three confirmed breeding territories (due to increasing the density of the breed- ing group). The figure 13 has shown the final result of monitoring the breeding group of Golden Eaglen inhabiting the Kamsko-Bakaldins- kie wetlands. Now all 26 potential breed- ing territories are known as inhabited by Golgen Eagles with a particular measure of confidence: the breeding is confirmed for 11 territories, the breeding is quite probable for 7 territories (adult birds and permanent perches were recorded, a ju- venile was observed near another site), and the breeding is possible for 3 terri- tories (perches, remains of preys and pel- Ðèñ. 5. Ñõåìà ðàçìå- ïîì ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íà ñîñíàõ, 67 – íà áå- lets were found), status of 5 territories is ùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ð¸çàõ è 25 – íà òîïîëÿõ). unclear, since they have not surveyed, but ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìî- Ñëåäóåò îñòàíîâèòüñÿ íà ñòåðåîòèïå the data of questionnaire show the pres- ãèëüíèêà íà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè. ãíåçäîâàíèÿ. Ïîä íèì ìû ïîíèìàåì ðàç- ence of Golden Eagle there (see Bakka et Fig. 5. Distribution of ìåùåíèå ìîãèëüíèêîì ãíåçäà â ëàíäøàôòå al., 2010). Only territory of Golden Eagles potential breeding òàêèì îáðàçîì, ÷òîáû îíî ñîîòâåòñòâîâàëî stood apart from the model. There is the territories of the ïî êîìïëåêñó ïàðàìåòðîâ íåêîìó òèïè÷- confirmed breeding in the artificial nest. Imperial Eagle in the íîìó âàðèàíòó, õàðàêòåðíîìó äëÿ ìíîæå- This territory has appeared in peak of a key territory (numbers of plots are similar with ñòâà ïàð îðëîâ â äàííîì ðåãèîíå. Âûäå- hare number (fig. 12, 16) and has caused the same in the text). ëåííûå íàìè ñòåðåîòèïû ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íà increasing the density of breeding group Labels: 1 – pine-type of ñîñíå, áåð¸çå è òîïîëå èìåþò ñëåäóþùèå for the period of peak of the main prey nesting habit, 2 – birch- õàðàêòåðèñòèêè. Ãíåçäî, ñîîòâåòñòâóþùåå species number. type of nesting habit, 3 – poplar-type of ñòåðåîòèïó ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íà ñîñíå, ðàñ- Comparing the model of potential breed- nesting habit. ïîëàãàåòñÿ íà âîçâûøåííîì ó÷àñòêå òåð- ing territories being constructed with use ðàñû (âîäîðàçäåëüíîãî óâàëà èëè ñîïêè), of parameters of distribution of the Upper ïðåèìóùåñòâåííî â âåðõíåé ÷àñòè ñêëîíà Kama breeding group and based on one èëè íà åãî âåðøèíå, îáû÷íî â êðóïíîì known living nest and the modern model ìàññèâå ëåñà, âñåãäà ñ âèäîì íà ïàñòáèùå è ôåðìó è/èëè íàñåë¸ííûé ïóíêò. Ãíåçäî óñòðàèâàåòñÿ ïðåèìóùåñòâåííî íà ñîñíå, íà å¸ âåðøèíå, íî ìîãóò áûòü âàðèàíòû óñòðîéñòâà ãí¸çä íà äóáàõ, ðåæå áåð¸çàõ, îáû÷íî â òåõ áèîòîïàõ, ãäå ñîñíîâûé ëåñ çàìåù¸í âòîðè÷íûì øèðîêîëèñòâåííûì èëè ìåëêîëèñòâåííûì. Ãíåçäî, ñîîòâåò- ñòâóþùåå ñòåðåîòèïó ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íà áå- ð¸çå, ðàñïîëàãàåòñÿ â õîëìèñòî-óâàëèñòîì, îáû÷íî âîäîðàçäåëüíîì, ëàíäøàôòå, â íèæíåé ÷àñòè èëè â ïîäíîæèè ñêëîíà, â êîëêå èëè ãðóïïå äåðåâüåâ, ñðåäè ïàñòáèù, íî ÷àñòî âíå ïðåäåëîâ âèäèìîñòè ñ ôåðìû èëè íàñåë¸ííîãî ïóíêòà. Ãíåçäî óñòðàèâà- åòñÿ ïðåèìóùåñòâåííî íà áåð¸çå, ðåæå äóáå èëè îñèíå, â ñåðåäèíå êðîíû. Ãíåçäî, ñîîòâåòñòâóþùåå ñòåðåîòèïó ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íà òîïîëå, ðàñïîëàãàåòñÿ â âûïîëîæåííîì, ÷àñòî ïîéìåííîì, ëàíäøàôòå, ñ ìèíèìàëü- íûì ïåðåïàäîì âûñîò, íà òåððèòîðèè ñ ìè- Ñàìêà ìîãèëüíèêà íà ãíåçäå. Ôîòî À. Ïàæåíêîâà. íèìàëüíûì ëåñíûì ïîêðûòèåì, â ïðåäåëàõ Female of the Imperial Eagle on the nest. âèäèìîñòè ñ ïàñòáèùà, íî îáû÷íî âíå ïðå- Photo by A. Pazhenkov. 120 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

Ñòåðåîòèïû ãíåçäî- âàíèÿ ìîãèëüíèêà: íà áåð¸çå – äåðåâî ðàñò¸ò â íèæíåé ÷àñòè ñêëîíà, ãíåçäî óñòðîåíî â ðàçâèëêå ñòâîëà â ñåðåäèíå èëè âåðõíåé òðåòè êðîíû (ââåðõó), íà ñîñíå – äåðåâî ðàñò¸ò â âåðõíåé ÷àñòè ñêëîíà èëè íà âåðøèíå âîçâûøåííîñòè, ãíåçäî óñòðîåíî íà âåðøèíå äåðåâà (â ñåðåäèíå); íà òîïîëå – äåðåâî ðàñò¸ò â ïîíèæåíèè ðåëüå- ôà, ñðåäè îòêðûòîãî ëàíäøàôòà, â óäàëåíèè îò êðóïíûõ ëåñíûõ ìàññèâîâ, ãíåçäî óñòðîåíî â ðàçâèëêå ñòâîëà â ñåðåäèíå èëè âåðõíåé òðåòè êðîíû. Âàðèàíòû ðàñïîëîæå- íèÿ ãí¸çä ìîãèëüíèêà: ââåðõó – íà äóáå, áåð¸çå è ñîñíå â ñî- îòâåòñòâèè ñî ñòåðåî- òèïîì ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íà áåð¸çå; â öåíòðå – íà áåð¸çå, ñîñíå è äóáå â ñîîòâåòñòâèè ñî ñòå- ðåîòèïîì ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íà ñîñíå; âíèçó – íà îëüõå, òîïîëå è îïîðå ËÝÏ â ñîîòâåòñòâèè ñî ñòåðåîòèïîì ãíåçäîâà- íèÿ íà òîïîëå. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Patterns of the Imperial Eagle nesting: birch- type – tree was in the bottom part of slope, nest was placed on the fork of trunk in the mid-crone or in the its upper part (upper), pine-type – tree was in the upper part of slope äåëîâ âèäèìîñòè ñ ôåðìû èëè íàñåë¸ííî- being created on parameters of distribution or on the top of upland, ãî ïóíêòà. Ãíåçäî óñòðàèâàåòñÿ ïðåèìóùå- of several real nests of Golden Eagles of the nests was placed on ñòâåííî íà òîïîëå, ðåæå âÿçå èëè áåð¸çå, â Kamsko-Bakaldinskaya breeding group (fig. the top of tree (center); âåðõíåé ÷àñòè êðîíû. 14) we can speak only about several distor- poplar-type – tree was in lowlands surrounded Òåïåðü ïîäðîáíî ðàññìîòðèì ïîëó÷èâøó- tions in a peripheral part of the final model. open landscapes far þñÿ ñõåìó. Íà ñõåìå âûäåëÿþòñÿ òðè êëàñòå- Distortions are connected generally with from large forests, ðà ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, ñîîòâåòñòâóþ- buffer removing and changing its radius. nests was placed in ùèõ ñòåðåîòèïó ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ìîãèëüíèêà íà Distortions of the model seem to be mini- the fork of trunk in the mid-crone or in its ñîñíàõ, òàê êàê èìåííî íà ýòèõ òåððèòîðèÿõ mal at input of new parameters because it is upper part. Different ïðèñóòñòâóþò ñîñíîâî-øèðîêîëèñòâåííûå based mainly on polygons of a vector map nests locations for the ëåñà. Âñþ öåíòðàëüíóþ ÷àñòü êëþ÷åâîé òåð- of bogs and opportunities of movements of Imperial Eagle: upper ðèòîðèè çàíèìàþò ïîòåíöèàëüíûå ó÷àñòêè, potential breeding territories are strongly – on oak, birch and pine according with ñîîòâåòñòâóþùèå ñòåðåîòèïó ãíåçäîâàíèÿ limited by borders of these polygons. Such the birch-type nesting; íà áåð¸çå, ïðè÷¸ì äàæå òàì, ãäå íà ïëîùàä- little distortions allow to solve with the center – on birch, pine êå èçâåñòíû ãí¸çäà â îòêðûòîì ëàíäøàôòå great efficiency two essential tasks – to nar- and oak according with íà òîïîëÿõ. Ñâÿçàíî ýòî ñ òåì, ÷òî îòêðûòûå row a zone of searching the nests of Golden the pine-type nesting; bottom – on alden, ó÷àñòêè ñ ãí¸çäàìè íà òîïîëÿõ â ïðåäåëàõ Eagles and a zone of the artificial nest in- poplar and electric pole ïëîùàäêè áûëè èçîëèðîâàíû, è ïðîñòðîèòü stalling. The last task is the extremely actual according with the ïîêðûòèå èç íåñêîëüêèõ ñîñåäíèõ ó÷àñòêîâ because essentially reduces not only labour, poplar-type nesting. äèàìåòðîì 20,68 êì çäåñü íå ïðåäñòàâèëîñü but also costs of artificial nest installing, and Photos by I. Karyakin. âîçìîæíûì. also increases efficiency of actions since al- Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 121

Òàáë. 5. Ðåçóëüòàòû ïðîâåðêè ñõåìû ðàçìåùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêà. Table 5. Results of checking the model of the Imperial Eagle’s potential breeding territory distribution.

Ñòåðåîòèï ãíåçäîâàíèÿ Nesting habit Ñîñíîâûé Áåð¸çîâûé Òîïîë¸âûé Âñåãî Pine type Birch type Poplar type Total Âñåãî ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ / Total number of potential areas 130 67 25 222 Îáñëåäîâàíî ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ Number of surveyed potential areas 77 32 10 119 Îáíàðóæåíî ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêîâ Number of discovered breeding territories of the Imperial Eagle 78 31 11 120 Ïîòåíöèàëüíûå ó÷àñòêè, íà êîòîðûõ îáíàðóæåíû ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè ìîãèëüíèêîâ / Number of potential areas which the Imperial Eagle’s breeding territory were found in. 69 25 8 102 Îáíàðóæåíî ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêîâ â ïðåäåëàõ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ / Number of the Imperial Eagle’s breeding territories within the potential areas 74 28 10 112 Êîëè÷åñòâî ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, â êîòîðûõ ïîïàëî ïî 1 ðåàëüíîìó ãíåçäîâîìó ó÷àñòêó ìîãèëüíèêîâ / Number of potential areas including 1 real breeding territory of the Imperial Eagle 65 22 7 94 Êîëè÷åñòâî ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, â êîòîðûõ ïîïàëî ïî 2 ðåàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà ìîãèëüíèêîâ / Number of potential areas including 2 real breeding territories of the Imperial Eagle 3 3 6 Êîëè÷åñòâî ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, â êîòîðûõ ïîïàëî ïî 3 ðåàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà ìîãèëüíèêîâ / Number of potential areas including 3 real breeding territories of the Imperial Eagle 1 1 2 Îáíàðóæåíî ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêîâ çà ïðåäåëàìè ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ / Number of the Imperial Eagle’s breeding territories discovered out of the potential areas 4 3 1 8

Ãëàâíûé âîïðîñ – íàñêîëüêî äîñòîâåðíà lows to install nests exactly in the centers ñõåìà èç 222-õ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ of potential breeding territories with a high ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêà, ïîñòðîåííàÿ íàìè share of probability of their occupancy. ïî 15 ãí¸çäàì (6,76% èçâåñòíûõ ãí¸çä îò ïðîåêòèðóåìîé ÷èñëåííîñòè âèäà íà êëþ- Conclusions ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè)? Èìåííî àíàëèçîì å¸ Two examples described above and real- äîñòîâåðíîñòè ìû ñåé÷àñ è çàéì¸ìñÿ. ized in quite real territories with quite cer- Íåëüçÿ ñêàçàòü, ÷òî âñÿ ýòà òåððèòîðèÿ tain species have illustrated the method â íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ ïîëíîñòüþ èçó÷åíà, of building “the model of distribution of îäíàêî îíà åæåãîäíî, äî 2010 ã. âêëþ- potential breeding territories” and its suc- ÷èòåëüíî, ïîñåùàåòñÿ ðàçíûìè îðíèòî- cessfulness. The efficiency of this method is ëîãàìè è ëþáèòåëÿìè ïòèö è áàçà äàííûõ connected with the fact that predicting the ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêîâ åæåãîä- raptor’s breeding territory distribution we íî ïîïîëíÿåòñÿ. Ê íàñòîÿùåìó âðåìåíè base on two important biological features. óäàëîñü ïîñåòèòü 119 ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåç- The first – distribution of raptors is defined äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, ÷òî ñîñòàâëÿåò 53,6% îò by the nesting and hunting habitats. The îáùåãî ÷èñëà ñïðîåêòèðîâàííûõ â ñõåìå second – raptors in their distribution try to (òàáë. 5, ðèñ. 6). occupy all area comfortable for a life with Ïîñåùåíèå ó÷àñòêîâ ïîêàçàëî, ÷òî â öå- the distances between nearest neighbors al- ëîì ñõåìà ÿâëÿåòñÿ ðàáî÷åé. Ãíåçäîâàíèå lowing them to hunt productively and avoid ìîãèëüíèêà óñòàíîâëåíî íà 102-õ ó÷àñò- conflicts with each other. If there is only êàõ, ÷òî ñîñòàâëÿåò 85,71% îò ÷èñëà ïðî- nesting habitat without any hunting habitat, âåðåííûõ. Ïðè ýòîì, ïðè ïðîâåðêå 119 the raptor will not inhabit such territory. If ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áûëî âûÿâëåíî there is only hunting habitat, and the nest- 120 ðåàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ (ðèñ. 7). ing habitat is absent, we can project several Çà ïðåäåëàìè ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ îá- variants of raptor presence, but in any cases íàðóæåíî 8 ãí¸çä ìîãèëüíèêîâ, ïðè÷¸ì this phenomenon can have a casual charac- 122 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

ter. Equal distribution in the same landscape can be distorted owing to influence of the several negative factors causing bird deaths that is basically discovered during field sur- veys and impact on methods of forecasting of territory distribution. Thus in the most cases raptors are distrib- uted under the relation to each other and to elements of a landscape as usual geo- metrical objects under the relation to each other and to other geometrical objects. Accordingly to predict the breeding terri- tory distribution and/or to define a number of raptors for any territory it is necessary to input breeding territories and the key ele- ments of a landscape equal to the nesting and hunting habitats of raptors into GIS- software as simple geometrical objects. Then another important factor in the model Ðèñ. 6. Ðåçóëüòàòû ïðîâåðêè ñõåìû ðàçìåùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ creating is the nearest neighbor distance. ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêà. The landscape does not ideal to provide Fig. 6. Results of checking the model of the Imperial Eagle’s potential breeding the ideal equal distribution of raptor breed- territory distribution. ing territories in it. Depending on quality of environment, predators will separate ðîâíî ïîëîâèíà èç íèõ íàõîäèòñÿ â íå- from each other, avoiding poor habitats for ïîñðåäñòâåííî áëèçîñòè îò ãðàíèö ïîòåí- hunting and nesting, or on the contrary will öèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ (3 – â áóôåðíîé çîíå be located closer to each other competing øèðèíîé 500 ì, 1 – íà óäàëåíèè 1,5 êì for the most productive habitats, however îò êðàÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíîãî ó÷àñòêà), à äðóãèå these “displacement” will be determined 4 íàéäåíû â íåòèïè÷íûõ ãíåçäîâûõ áèî- by a certain limiting range which depends òîïàõ (ëèáî íà áîëüøîì ðàññòîÿíèè îò on the environment capacity and ability of îïóøêè âíóòðè òåððàñíîãî áîðà, ëèáî â raptors to search each other and to form ëèñòâåííûõ ëåñàõ âíóòðè ãðóïïèðîâîê ñî pairs successfully. Hence, the distance be- ñòåðåîòèïîì ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íà ñîñíàõ). Íà tween territories cannot be less or more 8-ìè ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêàõ than the certain values. If we can present ðàçìåñòèëîñü ïî 2–3 ðåàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ the border between the nesting and hunt- ing habitats as a line the model construct- ing will meet the reality as much as pos- sible. Distributing the breeding territories along this line and basing on a certain value of nearest neighbor distance we can predict the distribution and number of ter- ritories with the minimal error because the displacement of territories are limited both the line and the next sites.

Acknowledgments We would to thank all ornithologists and birdwatchers who surveyed the poten- tial territories that had been projected in the GIS-model, and gave information on the discovered breeding territories of ea- gles to us: Sergey Adamov, Sergey Bakka, Timofey Barabashin, Rinur Bekmansurov, Dmitry Korzhev, Alexey Levashkin, An- Ðèñ. 7. Ðàçìåùåíèå ðåàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêîâ îòíîñèòåëüíî drey Medvedev, Elvira Nikolenko, Michael ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ. Neljubin, Lyudmila Novikova, Alexey Fig. 7. Distribution of real breeding territories of the Imperial Eagle regarding with Pazhenkov, Dmitry Postnikov, Vladimir Se- potential breeding territories. mennoj, Andrey Semenov. Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 123

Òàáë. 6. Ðåçóëüòàòû ïðîâåðêè ñõåìû ðàçìåùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêà. Table 6. Results of checking the model of the Imperial Eagle’s potential breeding territory distribution.

Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè (ïàðû) Ìåòîä / Method Estimated number (pairs) Ïåðåñ÷¸ò ïëîòíîñòè íà ïëîùàäêàõ íà îáùóþ ïëîùàäü êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè Computing the density calculated on the study plots for a total area of the key territory 363 (168–784) Ïåðåñ÷¸ò ïëîòíîñòè, ïîëó÷åííîé ïî ìåòîäó ìàðøðóòíîãî ó÷¸òà, íà ïëîùàäü ïðèîïóøå÷íîé çîíû íà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè* Computing the density calculated at the transect counts for the area of open space along the margin of the woods within the key territory* 238 (181–295) Ïåðåñ÷¸ò ïëîòíîñòè íà ãíåçäîïðèãîäíîé ïëîùàäè íà ïëîùàäêå íà ãíåçäîïðèãîäíóþ ïëîùàäü íà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè Computing the density calculated at the area of breeding habitats in a study plot for the total area of breeding habitats in the key territory 240 (162–318) Ðàçäåëüíîãðóïïîâîé ïåðåñ÷¸ò ïëîòíîñòè íà ãíåçäîïðèãîäíîé ïëîùàäè íà ïëîùàäêå íà ãíåçäîïðèãîäíóþ ïëîùàäü íà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè** Computing the density calculated at the area of breeding habitats in a study plot for dif- ferent habitats for the total area of breeding habitats in the key territory** 198 (141–255) Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè ïóò¸ì ïîñòðîåíèÿ ñõåìû ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ Estimated number calculated by means of generating the model of potential breeding territories 222

* Ïëîùàäü ïðèîïóøå÷íîé çîíû ëåñîâ îïðåäåëÿëàñü ïóò¸ì ïîñòðîåíèÿ áóôåðà âäîëü âíåøíåãî êðàÿ ïîëèãîíîâ òåìàòè÷åñêîé êàðòû ëåñîâ (øèðèíà áóôåðà â äàííîì ïðèìåðå ñîîòâåòñòâóåò øèðèíå ó÷¸òíîé ïîëîñû). * The area of open space along the margin of the woods was calculated by means of creating the buffer along the out borders of polygons at the thematic map of woods (width of the buffer in the example corresponds to width of a transect). **  äàííîì ïðèìåðå ó÷¸òíàÿ ïëîùàäü â ñîîòâåòñòâèè ñî ñòåðåîòèïàìè ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ìîãèëüíèêà ïîäåëåíà íà òðè ÷àñòè è ïîêàçàòåëè ïëîòíîñòè, ïîëó÷åííûå â êàæäîé å¸ ÷àñòè, ýêñòðàïîëèðîâàëèñü íà òåððèòîðèè, òàêæå âûäåëåííûå ïî ñòåðåîòèïó ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ìîãèëüíèêà (ñì. ìåòîäèêó âûäåëåíèÿ ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê â îïèñàíèè ñõåìû ïîñòðîåíèÿ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ). ** In this case according with nesting habits of the Imperial Eagle the study plot was divided into three parts and densities calculated for every part, were extrapolated on the territories that had been also determined following the nesting habits of the Imperial Eagle (see the methods of generating the map of breeding groups in the description of generating the model of breeding territories.

ó÷àñòêà, ïðè÷¸ì, ëèøü â 2-õ ñëó÷àÿõ ïðè- ó÷àñòêîâ îò èõ ïðîåêòèðóåìîãî êîëè÷å- ÷èíîé ÿâëÿåòñÿ íåïðàâèëüíîå îòíåñåíèå ñòâà). Îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè â 222 ãíåç- äàííûõ òåððèòîðèé â ãðóïïó ìåñòîîáèòà- äîâûõ ó÷àñòêà äëÿ êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè íèé ñ èíûì ñòåðåîòèïîì ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ìî- ïëîùàäüþ 31244,9 êì2 ìîæíî ñ÷èòàòü ãèëüíèêà, à â îñòàëüíûõ ñëó÷àÿõ ðå÷ü èä¸ò äîñòîâåðíîé, ïðè óñòàíîâëåííîé îøèá- î ïðåâûøåíèè îïòèìàëüíîé ïëîòíîñòè â êå ìåíåå 1%. Ñðàâíåíèå ñ îöåíêàìè, ïî- ñâÿçè ñ õîðîøèìè êîðìîâûìè è/èëè ãíåç- ëó÷åííûìè èíûìè ìåòîäàìè (ñì. òàáë. 6), äîâûìè óñëîâèÿìè. ïîêàçûâàåò áîëüøîå ïðåèìóùåñòâî âû- Òàêèì îáðàçîì, ðàçìåùåíèå ðåàëüíûõ øåîïèñàííîãî ìåòîäà. ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêîâ îòêëî- Äëÿ òèïè÷íîãî ëàíäøàôòà, âêëþ÷àþùåãî íèëîñü îò ñõåìû íà 14,29%, íî ïðè ýòîì â ñåáÿ íàèáîëåå õàðàêòåðíûå ãíåçäîâûå è ÷èñëåííîñòü ìîãèëüíèêà íà ãíåçäîâàíèè îõîòíè÷üè áèîòîïû ìîãèëüíèêà, ìèíèìàëü- íà îáñëåäîâàííûõ òåððèòîðèÿõ ïðåâûñè- íûì ïîðîãîì, ïðè êîòîðîì öåëåñîîáðàçíî ëà ðàñ÷¸òíóþ âñåãî íà 0,84%. èñïîëüçîâàòü ñõåìó ïîñòðîåíèÿ ïîòåíöè- Ïðîâåðêà ñõåìû ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåç- àëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, áóäåò 3 ñîñåäíèõ ãíåçäî- äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêîâ ïîêàçàëà, âûõ ó÷àñòêà, åñëè ñõåìà ñòðîèòñÿ âîêðóã ÷òî ïðè íåêîòîðûõ èìåþùèõñÿ èçúÿíàõ íèõ äëÿ ïëîùàäè íå áîëåå 10 òûñ. êì2, ëèáî ðàçäåëüíîãðóïïîâîå ìîäåëèðîâàíèå ïî 6 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ â äâóõ ãðóïïàõ, ïî 3 ñòåðåîòèïàì ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ïîçâîëÿåò ñ ó÷àñòêà â êàæäîé, óäàë¸ííûõ äðóã îò äðóãà áîëåå ÷åì 80% òî÷íîñòüþ îïðåäåëÿòü íà ðàññòîÿíèå íå áîëåå 200 êì, åñëè ñõåìà ìåñòîïîëîæåíèå ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ñòðîèòñÿ ìåæäó ãðóïïàìè äëÿ ïëîùàäè íå ìîãèëüíèêà â ïðîñòðàíñòâå, îñíîâûâàÿñü áîëåå 10 òûñ. êì2. Ñëåäóåò ó÷èòûâàòü, ÷òî íà íåáîëüøîì êîëè÷åñòâå àíàëèçèðóå- ÷åì ìåíüøå êîëè÷åñòâî ìîäåëüíûõ ãíåç- ìûõ ãí¸çä (5–10% èçâåñòíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, òåì áîëüøå êîíå÷íàÿ ïî- 124 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

Òàáë. 7. Ãíåçäîâûå äåðåâüÿ ìîãèëüíèêà íà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè. ëèçèðîâàòü äàííûå ïî âñåì 120 ãí¸çäàì, Table 7. The Imperial Eagle’s nesting trees within the key territory. èçâåñòíûì íà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè è ñäå- ëàòü ðÿä âûâîäîâ î ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâêàõ Ñòåðåîòèï Ãíåçäîâîå äåðåâî / Nesting tree ìîãèëüíèêà â ðàññìàòðèâàåìîì ðåãèîíå. ãíåçäîâàíèÿ Ñîñíà Äóá Áåð¸çà Âÿç Îëüõà Òîïîëü Âñåãî Íà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè äîìèíèðóåò Nesting habit Pine Oak Birch Elm Alder Poplar Total ñòåðåîòèï ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ìîãèëüíèêà íà ñî- Ñîñíîâûé ñíàõ – 65,0% îò îáùåãî êîëè÷åñòâà èçâåñò- Pine-type 62 11 5 78 íûõ ãí¸çä, ïðè ýòîì, ñîáñòâåííî íà ñîñíàõ Áåð¸çîâûé ðàñïîëàãàåòñÿ 51,67% ãí¸çä, îñòàëüíûå, Birch-type 3 27 1 31 ñîîòâåòñòâóþùèå äàííîìó ñòåðåîòèïó, – Òîïîë¸âûé íà äóáàõ è áåð¸çàõ (òàáë. 7). Âòîðóþ ïî- Poplar-type 1 3 7 11 çèöèþ çàíèìàåò ñòåðåîòèï ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íà Âñåãî / Total 62 14 32 2 3 7 120 áåð¸çàõ – 25,83% îò îáùåãî êîëè÷åñòâà èçâåñòíûõ ãí¸çä, ïðè ýòîì, ñîáñòâåííî íà ãðåøíîñòü ïîñòðîåíèÿ «ñõåìû» è ðàñ÷¸òà áåð¸çàõ ðàñïîëàãàåòñÿ 26,67% ãí¸çä. Íà ÷èñëåííîñòè. äóáàõ óñòðàèâàåò ãí¸çäà 11,67% ïàð ìî- ãèëüíèêîâ íà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè è â Îáñóæäåíèå íåêîòîðûõ ïîáî÷íûõ îñíîâíîì äóá ÿâëÿåòñÿ íåêèì çàìåíèòåëåì ðåçóëüòàòîâ ðàáîòû ñîñíû, òàê êàê ïî ëàíäøàôòíîé ïðèóðî-  çàêëþ÷åíèè õîòåëîñü áû âåðíóòüñÿ ÷åííîñòè ãíåçäîâûõ äåðåâüåâ è õàðàêòåðó ê äèñêðèìèíàòíîìó àíàëèçó, íî óæå ïî- óñòðîéñòâà ãí¸çä â êðîíå îñíîâíàÿ ìàññà âòîðèâ åãî ñ òåì èìåþùèìñÿ ìàòåðèàëîì, ïîñòðîåê íà äóáàõ ñîîòâåòñòâóåò «ñîñíî- êîòîðûé íàðàáîòàí ê 2010 ã., ò.å., ïðîàíà- âîìó» ñòåðåîòèïó. «Òîïîë¸âûé» ñòåðåîòèï

Òàáë. 8. Èòîãîâàÿ òàáëèöà äèñêðèìèíàíòíîãî àíàëèçà ïàðàìåòðîâ ðàçìåùåíèÿ ãí¸çä ìîãèëüíèêà íà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè (æèðíûì ïî- ìå÷åíû ïàðàìåòðû, âêëþ÷¸ííûå â ìîäåëü, êóðñèâîì – íå âêëþ÷¸ííûå â ìîäåëü). Table 8. Final table of discriminant analysis parameters of the Imperial Eagle’s nest distribution in the key territory (bold font marks parameters included in the model ,italic – not included in the model).

Ïàðàìåòðû ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ãí¸çä Wilks’ Partial F-remove 1-Toler. Parameters of nest distribution Lambda Lambda (2.11) p-level Toler. (R-Sqr.) Äèñòàíöèÿ äî íàñåë¸ííîãî ïóíêòà (êì) Distance to the nearest settlement (km) 0.36 0.62 35.03 0.0000 1.00 0.0005 Ïåðåïàä âûñîò (êì/êì) Maximum height difference measured in DEM for 1 km line across steepest gradient (km/km) 0.40 0.56 44.68 0.0000 0.86 0.14 Ïëîùàäü ëåñà (êì2) / Area of forest (km2) 0.31 0.73 21.56 0.0000 0.86 0.14 Äèñòàíöèÿ äî îïóøêè (êì) Distance to the nearest open space (km) 0.22 1.00 0.10 0.90 0.76 0.24 Äèñòàíöèÿ äî ïàñòáèùà (êì) Distance to the nearest pasture (km) 0.22 1.00 0.10 0.90 0.76 0.24 Äèñòàíöèÿ äî ôåðìû (êì) / Distance to a livestock farm (km) 0.22 0.99 0.83 0.44 0.98 0.02

Òàáë. 9. Ôóíêöèè êëàññèôèêàöèè ïàðàìåòðîâ ðàçìåùåíèÿ ãí¸çä ìîãèëüíèêà íà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè ïî äàííûì äèñêðèìèíàíòíîãî àíàëèçà. Table 9. Classification functions of parameters of the Imperial Eagle’s nest distribution in the key territory according with data of Discriminant analysis.

Ãíåçäîâîå äåðåâî / Nesting tree Ïàðàìåòðû ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ãí¸çä Ñîñíà / Pine Áåð¸çà / Birch Òîïîëü / Poplar Parameters of nest distribution p=0.65 p=0.26 p=0.09 Äèñòàíöèÿ äî íàñåë¸ííîãî ïóíêòà (êì) Distance to nearest settlement (km) 0.68545 2.0895 2.29034 Ïåðåïàä âûñîò (êì/êì) / Maximum height difference measured in DEM for 1 km line across steepest gradient (km/km) 50.56768 189.0970 10.78322 Ïëîùàäü ëåñà (êì2) / Area of forest (km2) 0.00575 -0.0053 0.00011 Constant -2.32230 -10.3418 -7.88053 Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 125

÷òî «áåð¸çîâûå» ãíåçäîâûå ãðóïïèðîâêè ôîðìèðóþòñÿ âîêðóã «ñîñíîâûõ», à òî- ïîë¸âûå ëåæàò íà ñàìîé ïåðèôåðèè, ïî ñóòè – íà ãðàíèöå îïòèìàëüíûõ è ñóáîï- òèìàëüíûõ ìåñòîîáèòàíèé ìîãèëüíèêà.  ýòîé ñâÿçè õî÷åòñÿ îòìåòèòü, ÷òî ñòåðåî- òèï ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íà òîïîëÿõ â ïîíèæåííûõ ýëåìåíòàõ ðåëüåôà âðÿä ëè èìååò êàêîå- òî îòíîøåíèå ê ïòèöàì ÷óæäûõ ïîïóëÿöèé, íàïðèìåð ïðèêàñïèéñêîé, êàê ýòî ïðåäïî- ëàãàëè Â.Ï. Áåëèê è Â.Ì. Ãàëóøèí (1999). Ñêîðåå âñåãî, ýòî ñòåðåîòèï ñòîêîâûõ ìå- ñòîîáèòàíèé åäèíîé Âîëãî-Óðàëüñêîé ïî- ïóëÿöèè, íàñåëÿþùåé ëåñîñòåïü îò Âîëãè äî Óðàëà, ÿäðàìè êîòîðîé ÿâëÿþòñÿ «ñî- ñíîâûå» ãíåçäîâûå ãðóïïèðîâêè. Çà áîëåå ÷åì 10-ëåòíèé ïåðèîä èìåííî íà ó÷àñòêàõ ñî ñòåðåîòèïîì ãíåçäîâàíèÿ îðëîâ íà òî- ïîëÿõ ïàðû äîñòàòî÷íî ñèíõðîííî ïðîïà- äàëè è ïîÿâëÿëèñü, ïðè÷èíîé ÷åìó ñëóæè- ëà, âèäèìî, êîðìîâàÿ ñèòóàöèÿ â ðåãèîíå Ðèñ. 8. Äèàãðàììà ðàññåÿíèÿ êàíîíè÷åñêèõ çíà÷åíèé ïàðàìåòðîâ ðàçìåùåíèÿ â öåëîì (Êàðÿêèí, 2007). ãí¸çä ìîãèëüíèêà íà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè. Fig. 8. Scatterplot of canonical scores of parameters of the Imperial Eagle’s nest Ïðèìåð âòîðîé, èëè distribution in the key territory. Öèôðû â ÃÈÑ ÿ çàíåñó, ÷òîá íàéòè áåðêóòà â ëåñó! íà êëþ÷åâîé òåððèòîðèè ÿâëÿåòñÿ ðåäêèì – 9,17%, ïðè òîì, ÷òî ñîáñòâåííî íà òî- Ââåäåíèå ïîëÿõ ðàñïîëàãàåòñÿ 5,83% ãí¸çä.  ïîé- Ïðèìåð îòðàáîòêè ìåòîäèêè ðåàëèçîâàí ìàõ ìàëûõ ðåê íåêèì çàìåíèòåëåì òîïîëÿ íà òåððèòîðèè Íèæåãîðîäñêîãî Çàâîëæüÿ ÿâëÿåòñÿ îëüõà, íà êîòîðîé îáíàðóæåíî â ïðåäåëàõ Íèæåãîðîäñêîé îáëàñòè íà 2,5% ïîñòðîåê ìîãèëüíèêîâ. ãðàíèöå ñ Ðåñïóáëèêîé Ìàðèé Ýë. Ðåçóëüòàò äèñêðèìèíàíòíîãî àíàëèçà ïî  äàííîì ñëó÷àå âûáîð ïàë íà áåðêóòà 120 ãí¸çäàì ñ âêëþ÷åíèåì â ìîäåëü òàêèõ (Aquila chrysaetos), êàê íà õèùíèêà, èìåþ- ïàðàìåòðîâ, êàê äèñòàíöèÿ äî íàñåë¸ííî- ùåãî ñàìûå êðóïíûå ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè è ãî ïóíêòà, ïåðåïàä âûñîò è ïëîùàäü ëåñà íàñåëÿþùåãî íàèìåíåå îñâîåííûå òåððè- (òàáë. 8, 9, ðèñ. 8), â ñðàâíåíèè ñ òåì, ÷òî òîðèè, ÷òî â óñëîâèÿõ ëåñî-áîëîòíûõ ëàíä- ïîëó÷åí ïî 15 ãí¸çäàì (òàáë. 3, 4, ðèñ. 4), øàôòîâ Íèæåãîðîäñêîãî Çàâîëæüÿ ñîçäà¸ò óêàçûâàåò íà áîëüøóþ áëèçîñòü ïàðàìå- îãðîìíûå òðóäíîñòè äëÿ ïðîäóêòèâíîãî åãî òðîâ ðàçìåùåíèÿ íåêîòîðûõ ãí¸çä ìîãèëü- âûÿâëåíèÿ. Áåðêóò âêëþ÷¸í â Êðàñíóþ êíè- íèêà â ðàçíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâêàõ. ãó Ðîññèè (Ãàëóøèí, 2001à) è Êðàñíóþ êíè- Òåì íå ìåíåå, ðàçäåëåíèå íà ãðóïïèðîâêè î÷åâèäíî è õîðîøî ïðîñëåæèâàåòñÿ íà äèàãðàììå ðàññåÿíèÿ êàíîíè÷åñêèõ çíà- ÷åíèé (ðèñ. 8).  çîíå áëèçêèõ çíà÷åíèé ëåæàò äàííûå ïî ãí¸çäàì, êîòîðûå ðåàëü- íî íà ìåñòíîñòè íàõîäÿòñÿ â ïîãðàíè÷íîé çîíå ìåæäó ãíåçäîâûìè ãðóïïèðîâêàìè. Àíàëèç êàðòû ïîêàçûâàåò, ÷òî ïî ìåðå ñíèæåíèÿ ëåñèñòîñòè òåððèòîðèè è çà- ìåíû õâîéíûõ ïîðîä íà ëèñòâåííûå ïðî- èñõîäèò ïåðåõîä ìîãèëüíèêà ñ ñîñíû íà áåð¸çó è äàëåå – íà òîïîëü â ñîâåðøåí- íî áåçëåñíûõ è ðîâíûõ ìåñòîîáèòàíè- ÿõ, ïðè÷¸ì ïëîòíîñòü ãíåçäîâàíèÿ òàêæå ñíèæàåòñÿ (îíà ìàêñèìàëüíà â ñîñíîâûõ Áåðêóò (Aquila chrysaetos). ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâêàõ, ñðåäíÿÿ – â áå- Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. ð¸çîâûõ è ìèíèìàëüíàÿ – â òîïîë¸âûõ).  Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). ðåãèîíàëüíîì ìàñøòàáå õîðîøî çàìåòíî, Photo by I. Karyakin. 126 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

ãó Íèæåãîðîäñêîé îáëàñòè (Áàêêà, 2003) è 2000 ã. ïîñòðîèëè ãíåçäî è ïîïûòàëèñü ÿâëÿåòñÿ ïðèîðèòåòíûì âèäîì â îáëàñòíîé ãíåçäèòüñÿ (Áàêêà è äð., 2001). Ïîÿâëåíèå ïðîãðàììå ìåðîïðèÿòèé ïî âîññòàíîâëå- ýòîãî ãíåçäîâîãî ó÷àñòêà áåðêóòà â ãðóï- íèþ ÷èñëåííîñòè ïóò¸ì ñîçäàíèÿ ñèñòå- ïå Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêèõ áîëîò ïîçâîëèëî ìû èñêóññòâåííûõ ãíåçäîâèé (Áàêêà è äð., ïîäîéòè ê ïëàíèðîâàíèþ ìåðîïðèÿòèé ïî 1999; 2001; 2003; 2010; Áàêêà, Íîâèêîâà, âîññòàíîâëåíèþ ÷èñëåííîñòè ýòîãî âèäà 2005, 2006; Íîâèêîâà, 2003). íà îñíîâå ÃÈÑ-òåõíîëîãèé. Ê êîíöó 90-õ ãã. â Íèæåãîðîäñêîé îá- ëàñòè ïðåäïîëàãàëîñü ãíåçäîâàíèå 3–5 Ôîðìóëèðîâêà çàäà÷è ïàð áåðêóòîâ (Áàêêà, Áàêêà, 1997), èç Ïîñòðîåíèå ìîäåëè ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ íèõ 1–2 ïàðû – íà Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêèõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòà íà òåððèòîðèè áîëîòàõ.  1998–2000 ãã. â îáëàñòè ñòàëà áèîñôåðíîãî ðåçåðâàòà «Íèæåãîðîäñêîå ðåàëèçîâûâàòüñÿ ïðîãðàììà ïî óñòàíîâ- Çàâîëæüå» äëÿ íàèáîëåå ïðîäóêòèâíîé ðå- êå ãíåçäîâûõ ïëàòôîðì äëÿ ðåäêèõ âèäîâ àëèçàöèè ìåðîïðèÿòèé, íàïðàâëåííûõ íà õèùíûõ ïòèö, â òîì ÷èñëå è äëÿ áåðêóòà. ïðèâëå÷åíèå ýòîãî âèäà íà èñêóññòâåííûå Óæå â 1999 ã. îäíó èç ïëàòôîðì áåðêó- ãíåçäîâüÿ. òû ñòàëè èñïîëüçîâàòü êàê ïðèñàäó, à â Ïîëåâûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ Óïîìÿíóòûé âûøå ãíåçäîâîé ó÷àñòîê íà ïëàòôîðìå (ðèñ. 9) ñôîðìèðîâàëñÿ â ëåñîáîëîòíîì ëàíäøàôòå, òèïè÷íîì äëÿ äàííîãî âèäà â óñëîâèÿõ âîñòî÷íî- åâðîïåéñêîé òàéãè. Ïî äàííûì ðàçíûõ èññëåäîâàòåëåé áûëè èçâåñòíû âñòðå÷è ïòèö è â äðóãèõ ðàéîíàõ ãðóïïû áîëîò, ÷òî ïðåäïîëàãàëî íàëè÷èå è äðóãèõ ïàð, à ñëåäîâàòåëüíî, èìåþùóþñÿ íà òåððèòîðèè ãíåçäîâóþ ãðóïïèðîâêó ñî ñâîåé óíèêàëü- íîé ñõåìîé ðàçìåùåíèÿ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñò- êîâ. Íà ýòîì, ïîæàëóé, âñå ìàòåðèàëû ïî- ëåâûõ èññëåäîâàíèé è çàêàí÷èâàþòñÿ.  àêòèâå åñòü æèëîå ãíåçäî áåðêóòà è ñëóõè î òîì, ÷òî íåñêîëüêî áåðêóòîâ îáèòàåò â îêðåñòíûõ áîëîòàõ.

Êàìåðàëüíàÿ îáðàáîòêà äàííûõ  äàííîì ñëó÷àå íå âñ¸ òàê î÷åâèäíî, êàê â ñëó÷àå ñ ìîãèëüíèêîì, è ïðåäñòîèò ïðàê- òè÷åñêè «òêíóòü ïàëüöåì â íåáî», ïîñòðîèâ ñõåìó ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòîâ. Îñëîæíÿåòñÿ çàäà÷à åù¸ è òåì, ÷òî íåîáõîäèìî íå òîëüêî ïîñòðîèòü ñõå- ìó ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, íî è âûäåëèòü èõ öåíòðû, ãäå ñ ìàêñèìàëüíîé äîëåé âåðîÿòíîñòè âîçìîæíî íàõîæäåíèå ãíåçäà áåðêóòà. Ìû íå çíàåì ïàðàìåòðîâ ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ áåðêóòà íà äàííîé òåððèòîðèè, íî âèäèì ïî òîïîãðàôè÷åñêîé êàðòå è êîñìè÷åñêî- ìó ñíèìêó, ÷òî îíà àíàëîãè÷íà äðóãèì òåð- ðèòîðèÿì ñ ëåñîáîëîòíûìè ëàíäøàôòàìè, ïóñòü è óäàë¸ííûì íà ñîòíè êèëîìåòðîâ. Ïàðàìåòðû ïðîñòðàíñòâåííîãî ðàñïðå- äåëåíèÿ áåðêóòà äîñòàòî÷íî òèïè÷íû äëÿ Ðèñ. 9. Ãíåçäîâîé ó÷àñòîê áåðêóòà (Aquila chrysaetos) ¹1 â ãðóïïå Êàìñêî- âîñòî÷íîåâðîïåéñêîé ïîïóëÿöèè âèäà, Áàêàëäèíñêèõ áîëîò (ââåðõó – íà ìîçàèêå êîñìîñíèìêîâ Landsat ETM+ 2000 ã., âíèçó – íà òîïîãðàôè÷åñêîé êàðòå). â ñâÿçè ñ ÷åì äëÿ ñîçäàíèÿ ñõåìû ðàç- ìåùåíèÿ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòà íà Fig. 9. Breeding territory of the Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) ¹1 in the Kamsko-Bakaldinskie wetlands (upper – on satellite images Landsat ETM+ 2000., Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêèõ áîëîòàõ èñïîëüçóåì bottom – on a topographic map). ïàðàìåòðû ðàçìåùåíèÿ ïòèö Âåðõíåêàì- Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 127

âîãî ó÷àñòêà – 50% äîïóñê. 9. Áóôåðíàÿ çîíà âîêðóã íàñåë¸ííîãî ïóíêòà, â êîòîðîé âèä íå ìîæåò ãíåçäèòüñÿ – 5,3±1,1 êì. Ðàáîòà, êàê è â ïðåäûäóùåì ïðèìåðå ñ ìîãèëüíèêîì, èä¸ò â íåñêîëüêî ýòàïîâ. Ïåðâûé ýòàï – ïîäãîòîâêà êàðòîãðàôè÷å- ñêîé îñíîâû. Âòîðîé ýòàï – ñîçäàíèå êàð- òû ìåñòîîáèòàíèé áåðêóòà â ðåãèîíå (ðèñ. 10). Òðåòèé ýòàï – çàêëþ÷èòåëüíûé ýòàï ðà- áîòû – ïîñòðîåíèå ñõåìû ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòîâ äëÿ Êàìñêî- Áàêàëäèíñêèõ áîëîò (ðèñ. 11). Ïåðâàÿ ïó- áëèêàöèÿ ïî äàííîé òåìå ïðîøëà â 2006 ã. (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2006), îäíàêî íè òîãäà, íè â îïóáëèêîâàííûõ ðåçóëüòàòàõ áèîòåõíè- ÷åñêèõ ìåðîïðèÿòèé (Áàêêà è äð., 2010), ïîøàãîâûé àëãîðèòì îáðàáîòêè äàííûõ â ÃÈÑ íå áûë îïèñàí.

Ïîøàãîâûé àëãîðèòì îáðàáîòêè äàí- íûõ â ArcView 3.õ Ýòàï. 1. Ïîäãîòîâêà êàðòîãðàôè÷å- ñêîé îñíîâû äëÿ ÃÈÑ-àíàëèçà. 1. Íà òåððèòîðèþ Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêèõ áîëîò ñîçäà¸ì ðàñòðîâóþ ïîäëîæêó èç òîïîãðàôè÷åñêèõ êàðò Ì 1:200 000. Òî- ïîãðàôè÷åñêèå êàðòû ñêàíèðóåì, ïåðåâî- äèì â ðàñòðîâûé ôîðìàò TIFF è ðåãèñòðè- ðóåì â ArcView â ïðîåêöèè UTM-83, çîíà 38 (äàòóì WGS-84). 1.1.  ãðàôè÷åñêîì ðåäàêòîðå Adobe Photoshop CS2 ñêëåèâàåì è èíäåêñèðóåì Ðèñ. 10. Ôðàãìåíò òåìû áîëîò è ïóñòîøåé â ArcView (ââåðõó) è ãåíåðàëèçîâàí- êàðòû, â èòîãå äëÿ êàæäîãî ëèñòà ïîëó÷àåì íàÿ êàðòà áîëîò, ðàíæèðîâàííàÿ ïî òèïàì áîëîò (âíèçó). öâåòîäåë¸ííûé ðàñòð â ôîðìàòå TIFF. Fig. 10. Fragment of the thematic map of wetlands and wastelands in ArcView 1.2.  ïðîãðàììå PHOTOMOD GeoCal- (upper) and generated map of wetlands ranged on type of wetlands (bottom). culator ïåðåñ÷èòûâàåì êîîðäèíàòû óãëî- âûõ òî÷åê òîïîãðàôè÷åñêèõ êàðò èç ÑÊ-42 ñêîé ãíåçäîâîé ãðóïïèðîâêè, âûÿñíåííûå â WGS-84. â ïðåäûäóùèå ïîëåâûå ñåçîíû. 1.3. Ïåðåñ÷èòàííûå çíà÷åíèÿ ýêñïîðòè- Ïàðàìåòðû ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ãíåçäîâûõ ðóåì â òåêñòîâûé ôîðìàò. ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòà: 1.4. Òåêñòîâûé ôàéë ñ êîîðäèíàòàìè 1. Ðàññòîÿíèå ìåæäó öåíòðàìè ãíåçäî- îïîðíûõ òî÷åê èìïîðòèðóåì â ArcView, âûõ ó÷àñòêîâ – 9,9±1,2 êì. ãäå ïðåîáðàçîâûâàåì â øåéï-ôàéë ñ ïî- 2. Ðàäèóñ áóôåðà ãíåçäîâîé òåððèòîðèè ìîùüþ îïöèè Add Event Theme. – 6,4±1,1 êì. 1.5. Ñ ïîìîùüþ ìîäóëÿ Image Warp 3. Äèàìåòð ãíåçäîâîãî ó÷àñòêà – îñóùåñòâëÿåì ïðèâÿçêó òîïîãðàôè÷åñêèõ 5,68±0,98 êì. êàðò â ïðîåêöèþ UTM-83, çîíà 38. 4. Ïåðåêðûâàíèå ãíåçäîâîãî ó÷àñòêà ñ 1.6. Äàëåå êàðòû âèçóàëüíî ñëèâàåì â áóôåðíîé çîíîé ñîñåäíåé ãíåçäîâîé òåð- åäèíîå ïîêðûòèå ñ ïîìîùüþ ðàñøèðåíèÿ ðèòîðèè – 5±0,7%. Transparent Legend. 5. Ó÷àñòîê âûñîêîñòâîëüíîãî ñîñíîâî- ãî ëåñà â ïðåäåëàõ ãíåçäîâîãî ó÷àñòêà – Ýòàï 2. Ñîçäàíèå êàðòû ìåñòîîáè- 100% ïðèîðèòåò. òàíèé. 6. Îòêðûòîå âåðõîâîå áîëîòî â ïðåäåëàõ 2. Íà îñíîâå òîïîãðàôè÷åñêèõ êàðò ñîç- ãíåçäîâîãî ó÷àñòêà – 100% ïðèîðèòåò. äàåì âåêòîðíóþ òåìó íàñåë¸ííûõ ïóíêòîâ. 7. Îçåðî â ïðåäåëàõ ãíåçäîâîãî ó÷àñòêà 2.1. Òîïîãðàôè÷åñêèå êàðòû ïåðåâîäèì – 50% äîïóñê. â ôîðìàò GRID ñ ïîìîùüþ ìîäóëÿ Spatial 8. Ñîñíîâûå ïóñòîøè â ïðåäåëàõ ãíåçäî- Analyst. 128 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

òîðèè, íà êîòîðîé áåðêóò ñ âûñîêîé äîëåé âåðîÿòíîñòè îòñóòñòâóåò íà ãíåçäîâàíèè. 3.2. Òåððèòîðèè, îãðàíè÷åííûå áóôå- ðàìè íàñåë¸ííûõ ïóíêòîâ, ïðåîáðàçóåì â øåéï-ôàéë, îïðåäåëÿþùèé çîíó âîçìîæ- íîãî ãíåçäîâàíèÿ áåðêóòà. 4. Ñîçäàåì êàðòó ìåñòîîáèòàíèé áåðêóòà. 4.1. Ïî ìîçàèêå êîñìîñíèìêîâ Landsat ETM+ ñ ïîìîùüþ Image Analyst èíñòðó- ìåíòîì îòáîðà âûäåëÿåì ïîëèãîíû áîëîò, ñîñíîâûõ ïóñòîøåé, îç¸ð è âûñîêîñòâîëü- íîãî ñîñíîâîãî ëåñà. Äàííûå ïîëèãîíû ïðåîáðàçóåì â øåéï-ôàéë (ðèñ. 10). 4.2. Ïîãðàíè÷íûå ýêîòîíû áîëîòî/âû- ñîêîñòâîëüíûé ëåñ, ñîñíîâàÿ ïóñòîøü/ âûñîêîñòâîëüíûé ëåñ è îçåðî/âûñîêî- ñòâîëüíûé ëåñ èçâëåêàåì â îòäåëüíûé øåéï-ôàéë.

Ýòàï 3. Ñîçäàíèå êàðòû ïîòåíöèàëü- íûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ. 5. Ïî êàðòå ìåñòîîáèòàíèé áåðêóòà ñòðîèì ñèñòåìó ïðåäïîëàãàåìûõ ãíåçäî- âûõ ó÷àñòêîâ. 5.1. Äëÿ òåìû ýêîòîíîâ, ìåòîäîì áëè- æàéøåãî ñîñåäà ïî çàäàííîìó ðàññòîÿíèþ ñ èñïîëüçîâàíèåì ðàñøèðåíèÿ Repeating Shapes, ñòðîèì ñåòü êðóãëûõ ïîëèãîíîâ, èìèòèðóþùóþ ñòðóêòóðó ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòà. 5.2. Ñ ïîìîùüþ ðàñøèðåíèÿ ShapeWarp îñóùåñòâëÿåì òðàíñôîðìàöèþ ñèñòåìû êðóãëûõ âåêòîðíûõ ïîëèãîíîâ äëÿ ñîâìå- ùåíèÿ èõ öåíòðîâ ñ ó÷àñòêàìè âûñîêî- ñòâîëüíîãî ëåñà âäîëü áîëîò è åäèíñòâåí- íûì èçâåñòíûì ãíåçäîì áåðêóòà. Ðèñ. 11. Cõåìà ðàçìå- 2.2. Èç ãðèä-òåì èçâëåêàåì îáëàñòè ÷¸ð- 5.3. Ïî òðàíñôîðìèðîâàííîé òåìå êðó- ùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ íîé çàëèâêè, ñîîòâåòñòâóþùèå íàñåë¸í- ãëûõ ïîëèãîíîâ ñîçäà¸ì ñåòü öåíòðîèäîâ ñ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ íûì ïóíêòàì è äîðîæíîé ñåòè. ïîìîùüþ XTools. áåðêóòà â îñíîâíîì ìàññèâå Êàìñêî- 2.3. Îñóùåñòâëÿåì ýëèìèíàöèþ ìåëêèõ 5.4. Âîêðóã öåíòðîèäîâ ñ ïîìîùüþ Áàêàëäèíñêèõ áîëîò ïîëèãîíîâ ñ ïîìîùüþ Edit Tools (îïöèÿ ñòàíäàðòíîé ôóíêöèè ïîñòðîåíèÿ áóôå- (ââåðõó) è çàíÿòîñòü ïî- Eliminate) ïóò¸ì èõ óäàëåíèÿ. Îñòàâøèåñÿ ðîâ ñòðîèì èòîãîâóþ ñèñòåìó êðóãëûõ òåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ïîëèãîíû, íå ÿâëÿþùèåñÿ íàñåë¸ííûìè ïîëèãîíîâ, èìèòèðóþùóþ ðàñïðåäåëå- áåðêóòàìè, óñòàíîâëåí- íàÿ ê 2006 ã. (âíèçó) ïóíêòàìè, âû÷èùàåì èç òåìû âðó÷íóþ. íèå ïðåäïîëàãàåìûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2006). 2.4. Ïî êîñìîñíèìêàì Landsat ETM+ áåðêóòà. Fig. 11. GIS-model of 2000–2001 ã. è Aster 2001–2006 ãã. âûÿâ- distribution of potential ëÿåì íàñåë¸ííûå ïóíêòû, êîòîðûå ïåðå- Îöåíêà ðåçóëüòàòà breeding territories ñòàëè ñóùåñòâîâàòü â íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ, Èòàê, ïðèìåíèâ ïàðàìåòðû ðàçìåùåíèÿ of the Golden Eagle êðèòåðèåì ÷åìó ñëóæèò ñóùåñòâåííîå ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòà âåðõíåêàìñêîé within the Kamsko- Bakaldinskie wetlands ñîêðàùåíèå ïëîùàäè îòêðûòîãî ãðóíòà ãíåçäîâîé ãðóïïèðîâêè, ìû ïîñòðîèëè ñõå- (upper) and occupancy âíóòðè êîíòóðà íàñåë¸ííîãî ïóíêòà è çà- ìó ðàçìåùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ of potential territories ðàñòàíèå äîðîã, âåäóùèõ ê íàñåë¸ííîìó ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòà ñíà÷àëà äëÿ îñíîâíîãî by eagles that had ïóíêòó. Ïîëèãîíû ýòèõ íàñåë¸ííûõ ïóí- ìàññèâà Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêèõ áîëîò (ðèñ. been recorded by 2006 (bottom) (Karyakin et êòîâ óäàëÿåì èç âåêòîðíîé òåìû âðó÷íóþ. 11). Òî÷êîé îòñ÷¸òà ñõåìû ñòàë ãíåçäîâîé al., 2006). 3. Îãðàíè÷èâàåì îáëàñòü äëÿ àíàëèçà ó÷àñòîê ¹1, ñôîðìèðîâàâøèéñÿ íà ïëàò- ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ áåðêóòà. ôîðìàõ (íà ó÷àñòêå áåðêóòû íåñêîëüêî ëåò 3.1. Ïî òåìå íàñåë¸ííûõ ïóíêòîâ, èçâëå- èñïîëüçîâàëè ïîïåðåìåííî 3 ãíåçäîâûå ÷åííîé èç òîïîãðàôè÷åñêîé êàðòû, ñòðîèì ïëàòôîðìû, ëåæàùèå íà ëèíèè â 3 êì). áóôåðíûå çîíû øèðèíîé 5,3 êì äëÿ òåððè- Ïîñòðîåíèå ñõåìû ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåç- Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 129

ôîíäà, øëî èíòåíñèâíîå ôîðìèðîâàíèå ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòîâ èç ìîëî- äûõ ïòèö. Ôîðìèðîâàíèå ïàð äîïîäëèí- íî óñòàíîâëåíî íà 3-õ ó÷àñòêàõ, êîòîðûå èçíà÷àëüíî çàíÿëè îñîáè â âîçðàñòå 3–5 ëåò è ñòàëè ðàçìíîæàòüñÿ ëèøü ñïóñòÿ 1–3 ãîäà (Áàêêà è äð., 2010). Ïðè÷¸ì, âñå ðåàëüíûå ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè ôîðìèðî- âàëèñü èìåííî â öåíòðàõ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ. Âñå íàáëþäåíèÿ ïòèö äî 2006 ã. çàðåãèñòðèðîâàíû òàêæå â öåíòðàõ ïî- òåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ. Ó÷èòûâàÿ ïîÿâëåíèå ñâîäà íîâûõ äàííûõ ïî Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêîé ãíåçäîâîé ãðóï- ïèðîâêå áåðêóòîâ, áûëà ïîñòðîåíà íîâàÿ ñõåìà ðàçìåùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäî- âûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, ðàçâ¸ðíóòàÿ íà âñþ òåððè- òîðèþ êîìïëåêñà áîëîò, âêëþ÷àÿ ïðàâî- áåðåæüå ð. Êåðæåíåö (ðèñ. 12).  íîâîé ñõåìå ó÷òåíû ïàðàìåòðû ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ áåðêóòà íà ðàññìàòðèâàåìîé òåððèòîðèè êàê ïî îòíîøåíèþ äðóã ê äðóãó, òàê è ïî îòíîøåíèþ ê ýëåìåíòàì ëàíäøàôòà.  ðå- çóëüòàòå â ìîäåëü âêëþ÷åíû íåêîòîðûå òèïû áîëîò, ðàäèóñ áóôåðà íàñåë¸ííûõ ïóíêòîâ óìåíüøåí äî 3,05 êì, èç ñèñòåìû íàñåë¸ííûõ ïóíêòîâ óäàëåíû êîðäîíû ëåñ- íè÷åñòâ, ñóùåñòâóþùèå íà ìåñòå áûâøèõ ñåëåíèé, ê ñèñòåìå íàñåë¸ííûõ ïóíêòîâ äîáàâëåíû ïðèðîäíûå òåððèòîðèè, íà êî- òîðûõ ïîñòîÿííî ïðèñóòñòâóþò ëþäè (òîð- ôîïðåäïðèÿòèÿ, âûïàñû è ò.ï.), áóôåð äëÿ êîòîðûõ îïðåäåëåí â 1,4 êì.  ðåçóëüòàòå êîððåêòèðîâêè ñõåìû ðàç- ìåùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñò- êîâ áåðêóòà íà âñþ òåððèòîðèþ Êàìñêî- Ðèñ. 12. Cõåìà ðàçìå- äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòà ïîçâîëèëî âûäå- Áàêàëäèíñêèõ áîëîò óäàëîñü âûäåëèòü 26 ùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ëèòü 19 òåððèòîðèé íà ïëîùàäè 2,3 òûñ. òåððèòîðèé íà ïëîùàäè 3,1 òûñ. êì2, ïðè- ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ êì2.  ðåçóëüòàòå öåëåíàïðàâëåííîé ïðî- ÷¸ì, äëÿ òåððèòîðèè, îòðàáîòàííîé ðàíåå, áåðêóòà â ìàññèâå 2 Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêèõ âåðêè ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ è ìîíèòî- ïëîùàäüþ 2,3 òûñ. êì , äîáàâèëñÿ òîëüêî áîëîò, ïîñòðîåííàÿ ïî ðèíãà ñóùåñòâóþùåé ñèñòåìû ãíåçäîâûõ îäèí ó÷àñòîê (ðèñ. 12). Ê 2008 ã. íà ðàññìà- ðåàëüíûì ãíåçäîâûì ïëàòôîðì (ïëàòôîðì, óñòàíîâëåííûõ äî òðèâàåìîé òåððèòîðèè óäàëîñü âûÿâèòü, â ó÷àñòêàì 2000–2006 ãã. 2000 ã., è ïëàòôîðì, ñîîðóæåííûõ ïî- äîïîëíåíèå ê 12 óæå èçâåñòíûì ãíåçäîâûì (ââåðõó) è çàíÿòîñòü ïî- òåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ñëå 2000 ã., â õîäå èõ öåëåâîé óñòàíîâ- ó÷àñòêàì áåðêóòîâ, åù¸ 4, ïðè÷¸ì, â îäíîì áåðêóòàìè, óñòàíîâëåí- êè â öåíòðàõ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ) ñëó÷àå (â 2007 ã.) ó÷àñòîê ñôîðìèðîâàëñÿ íàÿ ê 2008 ã. (âíèçó). óäàëîñü âûÿâèòü 12 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ â áóôåðíîé çîíå ìåæäó òðåìÿ äîñòîâåð- Fig. 12. GIS-model of áåðêóòîâ ðàçíîé ñòåïåíè äîñòîâåðíîñòè. íûìè ãíåçäîâûìè ó÷àñòêàìè (çà ñ÷¸ò óïëîò- distribution of potential Ê äîñòîâåðíûì ìû îòíåñëè ó÷àñòêè, íà íåíèÿ ãíåçäîâîé ãðóïïèðîâêè). breeding territories êîòîðûõ óñòàíîâëåíî ãíåçäîâàíèå îðëîâ Èòîãîâûé ðåçóëüòàò ìîíèòîðèíãà of the Golden Eagle within the Kamsko- (8 ó÷àñòêîâ), ê âåðîÿòíûì – íà êîòîðûõ Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêîé ãíåçäîâîé ãðóïïè- Bakaldinskie wetlands âñòðå÷åíû ïàðû ïòèö èëè íåîäíîêðàòíî ðîâêè áåðêóòîâ ïîêàçàí íà ðèñóíêå 13.  in 2000–2006 (upper) íàáëþäàëèñü âçðîñëûå îñîáè è îáíàðó- íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ íà âñåõ 26 ïîòåíöèàëü- and occupancy of æåíû èõ ïîñòîÿííûå ïðèñàäû (2 ó÷àñòêà), íûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêàõ, ñ òîé èëè èíîé potential territories by eagles that had been ê âîçìîæíûì – íà êîòîðûõ îáíàðóæåíû ñòåïåíüþ äîñòîâåðíîñòè, çàðåãèñòðèðîâà- recorded by 2008 ðàçîâûå ïðèñàäû ïòèö èëè âñòðå÷åíû íå- íî ïðèñóòñòâèå áåðêóòîâ: äëÿ 11 ó÷àñòêîâ (bottom). ïîëîâîçðåëûå áåðêóòû (2 ó÷àñòêà). Ñëå- óñòàíîâëåíî ãíåçäîâàíèå îðëîâ, äëÿ 7 îíî äóåò çàìåòèòü, ÷òî â ýòîò ïåðèîä, íà ôîíå âåñüìà âåðîÿòíî (íà 6 ó÷àñòêàõ íàáëþäà- ïèêà ÷èñëåííîñòè çàéöà è ìåðîïðèÿòèé ëèñü âçðîñëûå ïòèöû è îáíàðóæåíû ïî- ïî ñîçäàíèþ èñêóññòâåííîãî ãíåçäîâîãî ñòîÿííûå ïðèñàäû, ïîáëèçîñòè îò îäíîãî 130 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

Ðèñ. 13. Cõåìà ðàçìåùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòà â ìàññèâå Êàìñêî- Áàêàëäèíñêèõ áîëîò è èõ çàíÿòîñòü îðëàìè çà ïåðè- îä ñ 2000 ïî 2010 ãã. Fig. 13. GIS-model of distribution of potential breeding territories of the Golden Eagle within the Kamsko- Bakaldinskie wetlands (upper)and occupancy of potential territories by eagles in 2000–2010 (bottom).

Ñðàâíåíèå ñõåìû ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåç- äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, ïîñòðîåííîé ïî âåðõíå- êàìñêèì ïàðàìåòðàì îò îäíîãî ãíåçäà, è ñîâðåìåííîé ñõåìû, ïîñòðîåííîé ïî ïà- ðàìåòðàì ðàçìåùåíèÿ íåñêîëüêèõ ðåàëü- íûõ ãí¸çä áåðêóòà Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêîé ãðóïïèðîâêè (ðèñ. 14), ïîçâîëÿåò ãîâî- ðèòü âñåãî ëèøü î íåñêîëüêèõ èñêàæå- íèÿõ â ïåðèôåðèéíîé ÷àñòè ïîñëåäíåé. Èñêàæåíèÿ ñâÿçàíû, ïî áîëüøîìó ñ÷¸òó, ñ óäàëåíèåì è èçìåíåíèåì áóôåðîâ. Èñ- êàæåíèÿ ñõåìû îêàçàëèñü ìèíèìàëüíûìè ïðè ââîäå íîâûõ ïàðàìåòðîâ ïî òîé ïðè- ÷èíå, ÷òî îíà âñÿ áàçèðóåòñÿ, ïðåèìóùå- ñòâåííî, íà ïîëèãîíàõ âåêòîðíîé êàðòû áîëîò è âîçìîæíîñòè äâèæåíèÿ ó÷àñòêîâ â òó èëè èíóþ ñòîðîíó ñèëüíî îãðàíè÷å- ó÷àñòêà âñòðå÷åíà ìîëîäàÿ ïòèöà), äëÿ 3-õ íû. Òàêàÿ íè÷òîæíîñòü èñêàæåíèé ïîçâî- ó÷àñòêîâ ãíåçäîâàíèå áåðêóòà âîçìîæ- ëÿåò ñ ìàêñèìàëüíîé òî÷íîñòüþ ïîäîéòè ê íî (íàõîäêè ïðèñàä, ïîåäåé è ïîãàäîê) è ðåøåíèþ äâóõ ïîñòàâëåííûõ çàäà÷ – ñó- ñòàòóñ 5 ó÷àñòêîâ íå ÿñåí, òàê êàê îíè íå ùåñòâåííîìó ñóæåíèþ çîíû ïîèñêà ãí¸çä îáñëåäîâàíû, íî î ïðèñóòñòâèè áåðêóòà áåðêóòà è çîíû óñòàíîâêè èñêóññòâåííûõ íà íèõ ñâèäåòåëüñòâóþò îïðîñíûå äàííûå ãíåçäîâèé. Ïîñëåäíåå êðàéíå àêòóàëüíî (ñì. Áàêêà è äð., 2010). Èç ñõåìû âûáè- åù¸ è ïîòîìó, ÷òî ñóùåñòâåííî ýêîíîìèò âàåòñÿ åäèíñòâåííûé ãíåçäîâîé ó÷àñòîê íå òîëüêî òðóäîâûå, íî è ôèíàíñîâûå çà- áåðêóòîâ, ïðè÷¸ì ñ äîñòîâåðíî óñòàíîâ- òðàòû íà âîçâåäåíèå ïëàòôîðì, à òàêæå ëåííûì ãíåçäîâàíèåì íà ïëàòôîðìå, êî- óâåëè÷èâàåò ïðîäóêòèâíîñòü ìåðîïðèÿ- òîðûé ïîÿâèëñÿ â ïèê ÷èñëåííîñòè çàéöà òèé, òàê êàê ïîçâîëÿåò ñòàâèòü ïëàòôîð- (ðèñ. 12, ¹16). Ýòîò ó÷àñòîê âûçâàë óïëîò- ìû òî÷å÷íî, â öåíòðàõ ïðåäïîëàãàåìûõ íåíèå ãíåçäîâîé ãðóïïèðîâêè íà ïåðèîä ó÷àñòêîâ, ïðè âûñîêîé äîëå âåðîÿòíîñòè ïèêà ÷èñëåííîñòè îñíîâíûõ âèäîâ-æåðòâ èõ çàñåëåíèÿ. áåðêóòà. Îáñóæäåíèå íåêîòîðûõ ïîáî÷íûõ ðåçóëüòàòîâ ðàáîòû  çàêëþ÷åíèè õîòåëîñü áû ñêàçàòü ïàðó ñëîâ îá îöåíêå ÷èñëåííîñòè áåðêóòà íà Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêèõ áîëîòàõ. Õîòÿ çà- äà÷à îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè â äàííîì ñëó÷àå íå áûëà ñôîðìóëèðîâàíà, îíà ëîãè÷íî âûòåêàåò èç íåîáõîäèìîñòè íàéòè ìàêñè- ìàëüíîå êîëè÷åñòâî áåðêóòîâ íà äàííîé òåððèòîðèè è ïðîñ÷èòàòü âîçìîæíîñòè çàñåëåíèÿ áåðêóòîì òåõ òåððèòîðèé, ãäå

Ðèñ. 14. Ðàçíèöà â ñõåìàõ ðàçìåùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëü- íûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòà, ïîñòðîåííûõ ïî ðàçíûì ïàðàìåòðàì. Fig. 14. Differences between models of distribution of potential breeding territories of the Golden Eagle created on different parameters. Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 131

×ÀÑÒÜ ÒÐÅÒÜß, ÇÀÊËÞ×ÈÒÅËÜÍÀß

Íà äâóõ âûøåîïèñàííûõ ïðèìåðàõ, ðåà- ëèçîâàííûõ íà âïîëíå êîíêðåòíûõ òåð- ðèòîðèÿõ ñ âïîëíå êîíêðåòíûìè âèäàìè, áûëî äîñòàòî÷íî ÷¸òêî ïðîèëëþñòðèðîâà- íî, êàê ðàáîòàåò ìåòîä ïîñòðîåíèÿ «ñõå- ìû ðàçìåùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ» è íàñêîëüêî óñïåøíî îí ðàáîòà- åò. Âîçíèêàåò âîïðîñ: ñ ÷åì ýòî ñâÿçàíî? À ñâÿçàíî ýòî ñ òåì, ÷òî, ïðîãíîçèðóÿ ðàç- ìåùåíèå ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ õèùíèêîâ, ìû îïèðàåìñÿ íà äâå âàæíûå áèîëîãè÷åñêèå îñîáåííîñòè. Ïåðâàÿ – ðàçìåùåíèå õèù- íèêîâ â ïðîñòðàíñòâå îïðåäåëÿåò ñîâî- êóïíîñòü ãíåçäîïðèãîäíîãî è îõîòíè÷üåãî áèîòîïîâ. Âòîðàÿ – îíè ñòàðàþòñÿ çàïîë- Ïòåíåö áåðêóòà â ãíåçäå íà ïëàòôîðìå. Ôîòî Ñ. Áàêêè. íèòü îïòèìàëüíîå äëÿ æèçíè ïðîñòðàíñòâî Nestling of the Golden Eagle in the artificial nest. Photo by S. Bakka. ïîëíîñòüþ è ðàâíîìåðíî, äèñòàíöèðóÿñü äðóã îò äðóãà íà ðàññòîÿíèå, ïîçâîëÿþùåå îí íå áûë îáíàðóæåí, íî áûëè ïðîâåäåíû èì ïðîäóêòèâíî îõîòèòüñÿ è íå âñòóïàòü ìåðîïðèÿòèÿ ïî åãî ïðèâëå÷åíèþ íà èñ- â îñòðûå êîíôëèêòíûå îòíîøåíèÿ äðóã ñ êóññòâåííûå ãí¸çäà.  äàííîì ñëó÷àå ñõå- äðóãîì. Åñëè åñòü ãíåçäîïðèãîäíûé áèî- ìà ïðåäïîëàãàåò âîçìîæíîñòü íîðìàëüíî- òîï, íî íåò îõîòíè÷üåãî – õèùíèêà íà òåð- ãî ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íà Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêèõ ðèòîðèè íå áóäåò. Åñëè åñòü îõîòíè÷èé, áîëîòàõ 26 ïàð áåðêóòîâ. Ïðè ýòîì, ýòî íî íåò ãíåçäîïðèãîäíîãî, óæå ìîãóò áûòü ÷èñëî íèæå ¸ìêîñòè Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêèõ âàðèàíòû, ïðè êîòîðûõ õèùíèê áóäåò, íî áîëîò, íî âûøå ðåàëüíîé ÷èñëåííîñòè âèäà ýòî ÿâëåíèå ìîæåò íîñèòü ñëó÷àéíûé õà- íà ãíåçäîâàíèè. ðàêòåð. Ðàâíîìåðíîñòü ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ â Òî, ÷òî ¸ìêîñòü Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêèõ îäíîòèïíîì ëàíäøàôòå ìîæåò èñêàæàòüñÿ áîëîò î÷åâèäíî áîëüøå, è ïðè âñïûø- ïî ïðè÷èíå âëèÿíèÿ íåñêîëüêèõ íåãàòèâ- êàõ ÷èñëåííîñòè îñíîâíûõ âèäîâ êîðìîâ íûõ ôàêòîðîâ, âûçûâàþùèõ ñìåðòíîñòü áåðêóò ìîæåò ãíåçäèòüñÿ çäåñü ñ áîëüøåé ïòèö, ÷òî, â ïðèíöèïå, âûÿâëÿåòñÿ â õîäå ïëîòíîñòüþ, ïîäòâåðæäåíî íàáëþäåíèÿ- ïîëåâûõ èññëåäîâàíèé è íàêëàäûâàåò ñâîé ìè. Ïåðåñ÷¸ò ìîäåëè ñ ó÷¸òîì ìèíè- îòïå÷àòîê íà ìåòîäû ïðîãíîçèðîâàíèÿ ìàëüíûõ äèñòàíöèé ìåæäó áëèæàéøèìè ðàçìåùåíèÿ ó÷àñòêîâ. ñîñåäÿìè ïîçâîëÿåò ãîâîðèòü î âîçìîæ- Èòàê, â áîëüøèíñòâå ñëó÷àåâ, õèùíèêè â íîñòè ãíåçäîâàíèÿ çäåñü 38 ïàð, ÷òî íà ïðîñòðàíñòâå ðàçìåùàþòñÿ ïî îòíîøåíèþ òðåòü áîëüøå îïòèìàëüíîé ÷èñëåííîñòè. äðóã ê äðóãó è ê ýëåìåíòàì ëàíäøàôòà êàê Ìîæíî ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî ìèíèìàëüíàÿ îáû÷íûå ãåîìåòðè÷åñêèå îáúåêòû ïî îò- ÷èñëåííîñòü – ýòî ïîêàçàòåëü ðàçìåùå- íîøåíèþ äðóã ê äðóãó è ê äðóãèì ãåîìåòðè- íèÿ, ïðè êîòîðîì âûïàäàþò áëèæàéøèå ÷åñêèì îáúåêòàì. Ñîîòâåòñòâåííî, ÷òîáû â ãðóïïàõ ñîñåäè, îõîòíè÷üè òåððèòîðèè ñïðîãíîçèðîâàòü ðàçìåùåíèå ãíåçäîâûõ êîòîðûõ îãðàíè÷åíû îäíèì êðóïíûì ó÷àñòêîâ è/èëè îïðåäåëèòü ÷èñëåííîñòü áîëîòîì.  òàêîì ñëó÷àå ìèíèìàëüíàÿ õèùíèêîâ íà êàêîé-ëèáî òåððèòîðèè, â ÷èñëåííîñòü ñîîòâåòñòâóåò 12 ïàðàì. ÃÈÑ íåîáõîäèìî ïðåäñòàâèòü ãíåçäîâûå Òàêèì îáðàçîì, ïðåäåëû ÷èñëåííîñòè ó÷àñòêè è êëþ÷åâûå ýëåìåíòû ëàíäøàô- áåðêóòà äëÿ Êàìñêî-Áàêàëäèíñêèõ áîëîò òà, ñîîòâåòñòâóþùèå ãíåçäîïðèãîäíîìó è îïðåäåëåíû â 12–38 ïàð, ïðè îïòèìàëü- îõîòíè÷üåìó áèîòîïàì õèùíèêîâ, â âèäå íîé ÷èñëåííîñòè 26 ïàð. Âîçìîæíî, ÷òî ïðîñòûõ ãåîìåòðè÷åñêèõ îáúåêòîâ. Äà- â íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ ÷èñëåííîñòü òåððè- ëåå îïðåäåëÿþùóþ ðîëü â ìîäåëèðîâàíèè òîðèàëüíûõ ïàð áåðêóòîâ íà Êàìñêî- áóäåò èãðàòü äèñòàíöèÿ ìåæäó ñîñåäÿìè. Áàêàëäèíñêèõ áîëîòàõ íèæå îïòèìàëü- Ëàíäøàôò íå áûâàåò èäåàëüíûì, ÷òîáû íîé, íî î÷åâèäíî âûøå ìèíèìàëüíîé è îáåñïå÷èòü èäåàëüíîå ðàâíîìåðíîå ðàñ- ñîñòàâëÿåò îêîëî 19 ïàð (±2 ïàðû). Äëÿ ïðåäåëåíèå ó÷àñòêîâ õèùíèêîâ â í¸ì.  ïëîùàäè â 3,1 òûñ. êì2 ýòî ñîîòâåòñòâó- çàâèñèìîñòè îò êà÷åñòâà ñðåäû, õèùíè- åò ïëîòíîñòè 0,55–0,68, â ñðåäíåì 0,61 êè áóäóò äèñòàíöèðîâàòüñÿ äðóã îò äðóãà, ïàð/100 êì2 îáùåé ïëîùàäè, ÷òî êðàéíå èçáåãàÿ ïëîõèå äëÿ îõîòû è ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íåïëîõîé ïî òî÷íîñòè ïîêàçàòåëü. ó÷àñòêè, ëèáî íàîáîðîò – ñáëèæàòüñÿ, 132 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

Ðèñ. 15. Ïðèìåð âñòóïàÿ â êîíêóðåíòíûå îòíîøåíèÿ çà Îøèáêà ñàìîãî ìåòîäà ïîñòðîåíèÿ ñõå- ïîñòðîåíèÿ ñõåìû ïî- íàèáîëåå ïðîäóêòèâíûé áèîòîï, îäíàêî ìû, â ñëó÷àå ñ ìàêñèìàëüíûìè è ìèíè- òåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ýòè «ñìåùåíèÿ» áóäóò îïðåäåëÿòüñÿ íå- ìàëüíûìè äèñòàíöèÿìè, ñîñòàâëÿåò 14% ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòà âäîëü óñëîâíîé ëèíèè ýêî- êèì ëèìèòèðóþùèì äèàïàçîíîì, êîòî- è 23%, ñîîòâåòñòâåííî. Îøèáêà ïîñòðî- òîíà ìåæäó ãíåçäîâûì ðûé îãðàíè÷èâàåòñÿ, ñ îäíîé ñòîðîíû, åíèÿ ñõåìû ïî ñðåäíåé äèñòàíöèè ñî- (ëåñ) è îõîòíè÷üèì ¸ìêîñòüþ ñðåäû, ñ äðóãîé – âîçìîæ- ñòàâëÿåò 14% ïî îòíîøåíèþ ê ïðåäïîëà- (áîëîòî) áèîòîïàìè. íîñòüþ õèùíèêîâ èñêàòü äðóã äðóãà è ãàåìîìó ìèíèìóìó è 46% îòíîñèòåëüíî Fig. 15. Example of óñïåøíî ôîðìèðîâàòü ïàðû. Ñëåäîâà- âîçìîæíîãî ìàêñèìóìà. Òàêèì îáðàçîì, creating the model of òåëüíî, äèñòàíöèÿ ìåæäó ó÷àñòêàìè íå ïðè ïîñòðîåíèè ñõåìû ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ distribution of potential breeding territories of ìîæåò áûòü ìåíüøå èëè áîëüøå îïðåäå- ó÷àñòêîâ ìû èçáåãàåì äàæå 2-êðàòíîé the Golden Eagle along ë¸ííûõ çíà÷åíèé. Åñëè ìû ìîæåì ïðåä- îøèáêè ñðåäíèõ ïîêàçàòåëåé, íå ãîâîðÿ conditional borderline ñòàâèòü ýêîòîí ìåæäó ãíåçäîïðèãîäíûì óæå î 3–5-êðàòíîé îøèáêå, âîçìîæíîé between breeding è îõîòíè÷üèì áèîòîïîì â âèäå ëèíèè, òî ïðè ñòàíäàðòíûõ ìåòîäàõ ýêñòðàïîëÿöèè (forest) and hunting (wetlands) habitats. ïîñòðîåíèå ñõåìû áóäåò ìàêñèìàëüíî ó÷¸òíûõ äàííûõ. ïðèáëèæ¸ííûì ê ðåàëüíîñòè. Ðàñïðåäå- Èñõîäÿ èç âûøåèçëîæåííîãî ìàòåðèà- ëÿÿ âäîëü ýòîé ëèíèè ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè, ëà, ìîæíî ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî ìåòîä ïî- îïèðàÿñü íà íåêóþ âåëè÷èíó äèñòàíöèè ñòðîåíèÿ ñõåì ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìåæäó ñîñåäÿìè, ìîæíî ïðîãíîçèðîâàòü ðàáîòàåò òîëüêî íà îðëàõ. Îäíàêî, èìå- ðàçìåùåíèå è êîëè÷åñòâî ó÷àñòêîâ ñ ìè- þùèåñÿ ó íàñ ìàòåðèàëû ãîâîðÿò î âîç- íèìàëüíîé îøèáêîé, òàê êàê ñìåùåíèå ìîæíîñòè øèðîêîãî ïðèìåíåíèÿ äàííîé ó÷àñòêîâ áóäåò îãðàíè÷åíî êàê ëèíèåé, ìåòîäèêè. Îíà àïðîáèðîâàíà è íà äðó- òàê è ñîñåäíèìè ó÷àñòêàìè. ãèõ âèäàõ õèùíûõ ïòèö, èìåþùèõ äîñòà- Íà ðèñóíêå 15 îòîáðàæ¸í ïðèìåð ïî- òî÷íî âûðàæåííóþ òåððèòîðèàëüíîñòü ñòðîåíèÿ ñõåìû ðàçìåùåíèÿ ãíåçäîâûõ (íàïðèìåð, áîðîäà÷ Gypaetus barbatus, ó÷àñòêîâ áåðêóòà âäîëü ëèíèè, äîñòàòî÷- îðëàí-áåëîõâîñò Haliaeetus albicilla, òå- íî ãðóáî îïðåäåëÿþùåé ýêîòîí ëåñ/áî- òåðåâÿòíèê Accipiter gentilis, äëèííîõâî- ëîòî. Ñõåìà ïîñòðîåíà ïî ìàêñèìàëüíîé ñòàÿ íåÿñûòü Strix uralensis è äð.) (Áàêêà, äèñòàíöèè ìåæäó ñîñåäÿìè (ðèñ. 15 – B, Êèñåë¸âà, 2008; Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2009; C), ìèíèìàëüíîé (ðèñ. 15 – D, E) è ñðåä- Ñ.Â. Áàêêà, È.Â. Êàðÿêèí, À.Ï. Ëåâàøêèí, íåé (ðèñ. 15 – F) ïóò¸ì ïîäòÿæêè öåí- Ë.Ì. Íîâèêîâà, À.Ñ. Ïàæåíêîâ, íåîïó- òðîèäîâ ó÷àñòêîâ ê ëèíèè (ðèñ. 15 – B, D) áëèêîâàííûå äàííûå). Òîãäà âîçíèêàåò è íàîáîðîò, èõ äèñòàíöèðîâàíèÿ îò ëèíèè çàêîíîìåðíûé âîïðîñ, ìîæíî ëè ðàáî- (ðèñ. 15 – C, E). Îïèðàÿñü íà ýòó ñõåìó, òàòü òàêèì ìåòîäîì ïî âèäàì, êîòîðûå íå ìîæíî óòâåðæäàòü, ÷òî â çîíå ðàññìà- èìåþò ÿðêî âûðàæåííîé òåððèòîðèàëü- òðèâàåìîãî ýêîòîíà òåîðåòè÷åñêè ìîæåò íîñòè è ñêëîííû îáðàçîâûâàòü ãíåçäîâûå ãíåçäèòüñÿ îò 6 äî 13 ïàð áåðêóòîâ, ïðè êîíöåíòðàöèè (ñêîïà Pandion haliaetus, îïòèìàëüíîì óðîâíå ÷èñëåííîñòè â 7 ïàð. ëóíè Circus sp.), ëèáî äàæå êîëîíèè (ñèïû Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 133

Gyps sp., êîá÷èêè Falco vespertinus)? – â ôîðìå òàáëèö ñðåäñòâàìè ðåëÿöèîííûõ Åñòåñòâåííî, ìîæíî, åñëè ìû ìîæåì óâè- ÑÓÁÄ; êëàññó àòðèáóòà (Attribute class) äåòü ïî êàðòå è/èëè ñíèìêó ãíåçäîâîé è ïðè ýòîì ñîîòâåòñòâóåò èìÿ êîëîíêè, èëè îõîòíè÷èé áèîòîïû âèäà è ïîëó÷èòü ïà- ñòîëáöà (Column),èëè ïîëÿ òàáëèöû (Field). ðàìåòðû ðàçìåùåíèÿ â ïðîñòðàíñòâå êî- Àòðèáóòèâíûå äàííûå (Attribute data) ëîíèé è îòäåëüíûõ ïàð. Íî, åñòåñòâåííî, óïîðÿäî÷èâàþòñÿ, õðàíÿòñÿ è ìàíèïóëè- ñëåäóåò àïðîáèðîâàòü ìåòîä íà ïðàêòèêå ðóþòñÿ â ñèñòåìàõ óïðàâëåíèÿ áàçàìè è àäàïòèðîâàòü åãî êîíêðåòíî ê èññëåäóå- äàííûõ, êàê ïðàâèëî, ðåëÿöèîííîãî òèïà. ìîìó âèäó.  áîëåå øèðîêîì ñìûñëå ïîä àòðèáóòîì Î÷åíü âàæíîé ñîñòàâëÿþùåé â àïðî- ïîíèìàåòñÿ ëþáîå, ïðîñòðàíñòâåííîå è áàöèè ìåòîäà ïîñòðîåíèÿ ñõåìû ðàçìå- íåïðîñòðàíñòâåííîå, ñâîéñòâî îáüåêòà; ùåíèÿ ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ÿâëÿåòñÿ â ýòîì ñëó÷àå ãîâîðÿò î ïðîñòðàíñòâåí- ïðîâåðêà ýòèõ ó÷àñòêîâ íà ïðåäìåò ãíåç- íûõ àòðèáóòàõ (Spatial attribute) è íå- äîâàíèÿ âèäà. Âîò çäåñü ìû ñòàëêèâàåìñÿ ïðîñòðàíñòâåííûõ àòðèáóòàõ (Aspatial ñ ìàññîé ïîäâîäíûõ êàìíåé, î êîòîðûõ attribute). Ïðîöåññ ïðèñâîåíèÿ ïðî- øëà ðå÷ü âî âñòóïèòåëüíîé ÷àñòè äàííîé ñòðàíñòâåííûì îáúåêòàì àòðèáóòîâ èëè ðàáîòû. Î÷åâèäåí òîò ôàêò, ÷òî ñïåöèà- ñâÿçûâàíèÿ îáüåêòîâ ñ àòðèáóòàìè íî- ëèñò, êîòîðûé íå çàíèìàåòñÿ öåëåâûì îá- ñèò íàçâàíèå àòðèáóòèðîâàíèÿ (Attribute ðàçîì èñêîìûì âèäîì, âî ìíîãèõ ñëó÷àÿõ tagging, attribute matching). íå ñïîñîáåí ëîêàëèçîâàòü åãî ãíåçäîâîé Áàçà äàííûõ, ÁÄ (Data base, database, ó÷àñòîê íà ìåñòíîñòè è íàéòè ãíåçäî. DB) – ñîâîêóïíîñòü äàííûõ, îðãàíèçî- Ïðîäóêòèâíîñòü ñïåöèàëèñòà, êîòîðûé âàííûõ ïî îïðåäåë¸ííûì ïðàâèëàì, çàíèìàåòñÿ öåëåâûì îáðàçîì èñêîìûì óñòàíàâëèâàþùèì îáùèå ïðèíöèïû îïè- âèäîì, áóäåò, ïî îïðåäåëåíèþ, âûøå, îä- ñàíèÿ, õðàíåíèÿ è ìàíèïóëèðîâàíèÿ íàêî è çäåñü âîçìîæíû âàðèàíòû.  ÷àñò- äàííûìè. Õðàíåíèå äàííûõ â ÁÄ îáåñïå- íîñòè, ïðèâû÷êà îðèåíòèðîâàòü ïîèñê ÷èâàåò öåíòðàëèçîâàííîå óïðàâëåíèå, íà òèïè÷íûå ãí¸çäà è ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè ñîáëþäåíèå ñòàíäàðòîâ, áåçîïàñíîñòü ìîæåò ïðèâåñòè ê ïðîïóñêó íåòèïè÷íûõ. è öåëîñòíîñòü äàííûõ, ñîêðàùàåò èçáû- Ñ òàêèìè ïðîáëåìàìè ñòàëêèâàåòñÿ ïî- òî÷íîñòü è óñòðàíÿåò ïðîòèâîðå÷èâîñòü äàâëÿþùåå áîëüøèíñòâî èññëåäîâàòåëåé. äàííûõ. ÁÄ íå çàâèñèò îò ïðèêëàäíûõ Ïîýòîìó íåîáõîäèìî ó÷èòûâàòü ñóáúåê- ïðîãðàìì. Ñîçäàíèå ÁÄ è îáðàùåíèå ê òèâíûé ôàêòîð, êîòîðûé íåóêëîííî áó- íåé (ïî çàïðîñàì) îñóùåñòâëÿþòñÿ ñ ïî- äåò âëèÿòü íà îöåíêó ðåçóëüòàòà. ìîùüþ ñèñòåìû óïðàâëåíèÿ áàçàìè äàí- íûõ (ÑÓÁÄ). Ïðîãðàììíîå îáåñïå÷åíèå Áëàãîäàðíîñòè ëîêàëüíûõ âû÷èñëèòåëüíûõ ñåòåé (ËÂÑ)  çàêëþ÷åíèè õî÷åòñÿ ïîáëàãîäàðèòü ïåðâîíà÷àëüíî ïîääåðæèâàëî ðåæèì âñåõ îðíèòîëîãîâ è ëþáèòåëåé ïòèö, êîòî- ðàáîòû, ïðè êîòîðîì ðàáî÷èå ñòàíöèè ðûå îáñëåäîâàëè ïîòåíöèàëüíûå ó÷àñòêè, ñåòè ïîñûëàëè çàïðîñû ê ÁÄ, ðàñïîëî- ñïðîåêòèðîâàííûå â ÃÈÑ, è äåëèëèñü ñâî- æåííîé íà îáñëóæèâàþùåì èõ êîì- åé èíôîðìàöèåé ïî âûÿâëåííûì ãíåçäî- ïüþòåðå – ôàéë-ñåðâåðå (File server), âûì ó÷àñòêàì îðëîâ, – ýòî Ñåðãåé Àäàìîâ, ïîëó÷àëè îò íåãî íåîáõîäèìûå ôàéëû, Ñåðãåé Áàêêà, Òèìîôåé Áàðàáàøèí, Ðè- âûïîëíÿëè ñîâîêóïíîñòü îïåðàöèé ïî- íóð Áåêìàíñóðîâ, Äìèòðèé Êîðæåâ, Àëåê- èñêà, âûáîðêè è êîððåêòèðîâêè – òðàí- ñåé Ëåâàøêèí, Àíäðåé Ìåäâåäåâ, Ýëüâèðà çàêöèé (Transaction) è îòñûëàëè ôàéëû Íèêîëåíêî, Ìèõàèë Íåëþáèí, Ëþäìèëà îáðàòíî. Ïðè äðóãîì ðåæèìå ðàáî÷èå Íîâèêîâà, Àëåêñåé Ïàæåíêîâ, Äìèòðèé ñòàíöèè ËÂÑ âûñòóïàþò â ðîëè êëèåíòîâ, Ïîñòíèêîâ, Âëàäèìèð Ñåìåííîé, Àíäðåé à ñåðâåð ÁÄ ïîëíîñòüþ îáñëóæèâàåò çà- Ñåìåíîâ. ïðîñû (êàê ïðàâèëî, çàïèñàííûå íà ÿçû- êå SQL) è îòñûëàåò êëèåíòàì ðåçóëüòà- Ñïåöèôè÷åñêèå òåðìèíû, èñïîëüçî- òû, ðåàëèçóÿ òåõíîëîãèþ êëèåíò-ñåðâåð âàííûå â ñòàòüå (Client/Server). Àòðèáóò (Attribute) – ñèí. ðåêâèçèò – Áóôåðû (Buffers) – ïîëèãîíàëüíûå îáú- ñâîéñòâî, êà÷åñòâåííûé èëè êîëè÷åñòâåí- åêòû îïðåäåë¸ííîé øèðèíû, ñîçäàííûå íûé ïðèçíàê, õàðàêòåðèçóþùèé ïðî- âîêðóã ëþáûõ âåêòîðíûõ îáúåêòîâ âõîä- ñòðàíñòâåííûé îáúåêò (íî íå ñâÿçàííûé ñ íîãî ñëîÿ. åãî ìåñòîóêàçàíèåì) è àññîöèèðîâàííûé Âåêòîðíàÿ ìîäåëü äàííûõ (Vector ñ åãî óíèêàëüíûì íîìåðîì èëè èäåíòè- data model) – öèôðîâîå ïðåäñòàâëåíèå ôèêàòîðîì. Íàáîðû çíà÷åíèé àòðèáóòà òî÷å÷íûõ, ëèíåéíûõ è ïîëèãîíàëüíûõ (Attribute value) îáû÷íî ïðåäñòàâëÿþòñÿ ïðîñòðàíñòâåííûõ îáüåêòîâ â âèäå íà- 134 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé

áîðà êîîðäèíàòíûõ ïàð, ñ îïèñàíèåì òîëüêî ãåî- Ëèòåðàòóðà ìåòðèè îáúåêòîâ, ÷òî ñîîòâåòñòâóåò íåòîïîëîãè- Áàêêà À.È., Áàêêà Ñ.Â., Ïåñòîâ Ì.Â. Áèîòåõíè÷åñêèå ÷åñêîìó âåêòîðíîìó ïðåäñòàâëåíèþ ëèíåéíûõ è ìåðîïðèÿòèÿ äëÿ óâåëè÷åíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè ðåäêèõ õèùíûõ ïîëèãîíàëüíûõ îáüåêòîâ, èëè ãåîìåòðèè è òîïîëî- ïòèö â Íèæåãîðîäñêîé îáëàñòè. – Íàçåìíûå è âîäíûå ýêî- ãè÷åñêèõ îòíîøåíèé (òîïîëîãèè), ÷òî ñîîòâåòñòâóåò ñèñòåìû: ñáîðíèê íàó÷íûõ òðóäîâ. Âûï. 15. Íèæíèé Íîâ- ãîðîä, 1999. Ñ. 46–48. âåêòîðíî-òîïîëîãè÷åñêîìó ïðåäñòàâëåíèþ.  ìà- Áàêêà À.È., Áàêêà Ñ.Â., Ïåñòîâ Ì.Â. Îðãàíèçàöèÿ è ïðî- øèííîé ðåàëèçàöèè âåêòîðíîé ìîäåëè äàííûõ ñî- âåäåíèå áèîòåõíè÷åñêèõ ðàáîò ïî îõðàíå ðåäêèõ âèäîâ îòâåòñòâóåò âåêòîðíûé ôîðìàò ïðîñòðàíñòâåííûõ æèâîòíûõ. Ìåòîäè÷åñêîå ïîñîáèå. Ïîä ðåä. À.À. Êàþìîâà. äàííûõ (Vector data format). Íèæíèé Íîâãîðîä, 2001. 39 ñ. Ãåîãðàôè÷åñêàÿ èíôîðìàöèîííàÿ ñèñòå- Áàêêà Ñ.Â. Áåðêóò Aquila chrysaetos L. – Êðàñíàÿ êíèãà ìà (Geographical Information System, GIS) – ñèí. Íèæåãîðîäñêîé îáëàñòè. Ò. 1. Æèâîòíûå. Íèæíèé Íîâãî- ãåîèíôîðìàöèîííàÿ ñèñòåìà, ÃÈÑ – èíôîðìàöè- ðîä, 2003. Ñ. 90–91. îííàÿ ñèñòåìà, îáåñïå÷èâàþùàÿ ñáîð, õðàíåíèå, Áàêêà Ñ.Â., Áàêêà À.È. Ñîñòîÿíèå è îõðàíà íåêîòîðûõ îáðàáîòêó, äîñòóï, îòîáðàæåíèå è ðàñïðîñòðàíå- ðåäêèõ âèäîâ ïòèö â Íèæåãîðîäñêîé îáëàñòè. – Ôàóíà, ýêî- ëîãèÿ è îõðàíà ðåäêèõ ïòèö Ñðåäíåãî Ïîâîëæüÿ: Ñáîðíèê íèå ïðîñòðàíñòâåííî-êîîðäèíèðîâàííûõ äàííûõ ñòàòåé ïî ìàòåðèàëàì Âñåðîññèéñêîé íàó÷íî-ïðàêòè÷åñêîé (ïðîñòðàíñòâåííûõ äàííûõ). ÃÈÑ ñîäåðæèò äàííûå êîíôåðåíöèè «Ðåäêèå ïòèöû Ñðåäíåãî Ïîâîëæüÿ». Ñà- î ïðîñòðàíñòâåííûõ îáúåêòàõ â ôîðìå èõ öèôðî- ðàíñê, 1997. Ñ.13–16. âûõ ïðåäñòàâëåíèé (âåêòîðíûõ, ðàñòðîâûõ è äð.), Áàêêà Ñ.Â., Êèñåë¸âà Í.Þ. Îðëàí-áåëîõâîñò â Íèæåãî- âêëþ÷àåò ñîîòâåòñòâóþùèé çàäà÷àì íàáîð ôóíê- ðîäñêîé îáëàñòè, Ðîññèÿ. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðà- öèîíàëüíûõ âîçìîæíîñòåé, â êîòîðûõ ðåàëèçóþò- íà. 2008. ¹13. Ñ. 21–27. ñÿ îïåðàöèè ãåîèíôîðìàöèîííûõ òåõíîëîãèé èëè Áàêêà Ñ.Â., Êèñåë¸âà Í.Þ., Íîâèêîâà Ë.Ì. Âëèÿíèå áèî- ÃÈÑ-òåõíîëîãèé (GIS tehnology), ïîääåðæèâàåòñÿ òåõíè÷åñêèõ ìåðîïðèÿòèé íà ÷èñëåííîñòü ðåäêèõ âèäîâ äíåâíûõ õèùíûõ ïòèö â Íèæåãîðîäñêîé îáëàñòè. – Ìàòå- ïðîãðàììíûì, àïïàðàòíûì, èíôîðìàöèîííûì, ðèàëû IV êîíôåðåíöèè ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì Ñåâåðíîé Åâðà- íîðìàòèâíî-ïðàâîâûì, êàäðîâûì è îðãàíèçàöèîí- çèè (Ïåíçà, 1–3 ôåâðàëÿ 2003 ã.). Ïåíçà, 2003. Ñ. 24–26. íûì îáåñïå÷åíèåì. Áàêêà Ñ.Â., Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Êèñåë¸âà Í.Þ., Äåíèñîâ Ä.À., Ãåîèíôîðìàöèîííûé àíàëèç (GIS based analysis) Êàðïååâ Â.Å., Ëåâàøêèí À.Ï., Íåêðàñîâ Ì.Ñ. Èòîãè ìîíè- – àíàëèç ðàçìåùåíèÿ, ñòðóêòóðû, âçàèìîñâÿçåé òîðèíãà ñîñòîÿíèÿ è îõðàíû ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê ðåä- îáüåêòîâ è ÿâëåíèé ñ èñïîëüçîâàíèåì ìåòîäîâ ïðî- êèõ âèäîâ äíåâíûõ õèùíûõ ïòèö â Íèæåãîðîäñêîé îáëà- ñòðàíñòâåííîãî àíàëèçà è ãåîìîäåëèðîâàíèÿ. ñòè â 1988–2009 ãîäàõ, Ðîññèÿ. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ Êîíâåêñíûé ïîëèãîí (Convex hull) – íàèìåíüøèé îõðàíà. 2010. ¹18. C. 46–67. Áàêêà Ñ.Â., Íîâèêîâà Ë.Ì. Âëèÿíèå áèîòåõíè÷åñêèõ ìå- ïîëèãîí, îïèñûâàþùèé âñå èëè âûáðàííûå âåêòîð- ðîïðèÿòèé íà âîññòàíîâëåíèå îïòèìàëüíîãî óðîâíÿ ÷èñ- íûå ýëåìåíòû âõîäíîãî ñëîÿ. ëåííîñòè ðåäêèõ âèäîâ äíåâíûõ õèùíûõ ïòèö â Íèæåãî- Ïîëèãîíû Òèññåíà (Thiessen polygons) – ñèí. äèà- ðîäñêîé îáëàñòè. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2005. ãðàììû Âîðîíîãî (Voronoi diagrams) – ïðåäñòàâëÿþò ¹1. Ñ. 34–35. ñîáîé ãåîìåòðè÷åñêèå êîíñòðóêöèè, îáðàçóåìûå îò- Áàêêà Ñ.Â., Íîâèêîâà Ë.Ì. Ðåçóëüòàòû ìîíèòîðèíãà èñ- íîñèòåëüíî ìíîæåñòâà òî÷åê òàêèì îáðàçîì, ÷òî ãðà- êóññòâåííûõ ãí¸çä äëÿ ðåäêèõ âèäîâ äíåâíûõ õèùíûõ ïòèö íèöû ïîëèãîíîâ ÿâëÿþòñÿ îòðåçêàìè ïåðïåíäèêóëÿ- â Íèæåãîðîäñêîé îáëàñòè â 2005 ã. – Áóòóðëèíñêèé ñáîð- ðîâ, âîññòàíàâëèâàåìûõ ê ëèíèÿì, ñîåäèíÿþùèì äâå íèê. Ìàòåðèàëû II ìåæäóíàðîäíûõ Áóòóðëèíñêèõ ÷òåíèé (ã. Óëüÿíîâñê, 21–24 ñåíòÿáðÿ 2005 ã.). Óëüÿíîâñê, 2006. áëèæàéøèå òî÷êè. Ñ. 142–146. Ðàñòðîâàÿ ìîäåëü äàííûõ (Raster data model) – Áåëèê Â.Ï., Ãàëóøèí Â.Ì. Ïîïóëÿöèîííàÿ ñòðóêòóðà öèôðîâîå ïðåäñòàâëåíèå ïðîñòðàíñòâåííûõ îáúåê- îðëà-ìîãèëüíèêà â Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè. – Êîðîëåâñêèé òîâ â âèäå ñîâîêóïíîñòè ÿ÷ååê ðàñòðà (ïèêñåëîâ) ñ îðåë: ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå, ñîñòîÿíèå ïîïóëÿöèé è ïåð- ïðèñâîåííûìè èì çíà÷åíèÿ è êëàññà îáúåêòà â îòëè- ñïåêòèâû îõðàíû îðëà-ìîãèëüíèêà (Aquila heliaca) â ÷èå îò ôîðìàëüíî èäåíòè÷íîãî ðåãóëÿðíî-ÿ÷åèñòîãî Ðîññèè. Ñáîðíèê íàó÷íûõ òðóäîâ. Ñåðèÿ: Ðåäêèå âèäû ïðåäñòàâëåíèÿ êàê ñîâîêóïíîñòè ÿ÷ååê ðåãóëÿðíîé ïòèö. Â.1. Ïîä ðåä. Â.Ï. Áåëèêà. Ì., 1999. Ñ. 129–139. ñåòè (ýëåìåíòîâ ðàçáèåíèÿ çåìíîé ïîâåðõíîñòè). Áèááè Ê., Äæîíñ Ì., Ìàðñäåí Ñ. Ìåòîäû ïîëåâûõ ýêñ- ïåäèöèîííûõ èññëåäîâàíèé. Èññëåäîâàíèÿ è ó÷¸òû ïòèö. Ðàñòðîâàÿ ìîäåëü äàííûõ ïðåäïîëàãàåò ïîçèöèîíè- Ïåðåâîä ñ àíãëèéñêîãî. Ì., 2000. 186 ñ. ðîâàíèå îáúåêòîâ óêàçàíèåì èõ ïîëîæåíèÿ â ñîîò- Áîãîëþáîâ À.Ñ. Ìåòîäû ó÷¸òà ÷èñëåííîñòè ïòèö: ìàðø- âåòñòâóþùåé ðàñòðó ïðÿìîóãîëüíîé ìàòðèöå åäèíîî- ðóòíûå ó÷¸òû. Ìåòîäè÷åñêîå ïîñîáèå. Ì., 1996. 17 ñ. áðàçíî äëÿ âñåõ òèïîâ ïðîñòðàíñòâåííûõ îáúåêòîâ Áîðîäèí Î.Â. Ìîãèëüíèê. – Êðàñíàÿ êíèãà Óëüÿíîâ- (òî÷åê, ëèíèé, ïîëèãîíîâ è ïîâåðõíîñòåé); â ìàøèí- ñêîé îáëàñòè / Ïîä íàó÷. ðåä. Å.À. Àðòåìüåâîé, Î.Â. Áî- íîé ðåàëèçàöèè ðàñòðîâîé ìîäåëè ñîîòâåòñòâóåò ðîäèíà, Ì.À. Êîðîëüêîâà, Í.Ñ. Ðàêîâà; Óëüÿíîâñê, 2008. ðàñòðîâûé ôîðìàò ïðîñòðàíñòâåííûõ äàííûõ (Raster Ñ. 404–407. data format).  öèôðîâîé êàðòîãðàôèè ðàñòðîâîé Ãàëóøèí Â.Ì. Áåðêóò Aquila chrysaetos – Êðàñíàÿ êíè- ãà Ðîññèéñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè. Ò. 2. Æèâîòíûå. Ì., 2001à. ìîäåëè ñîîòâåòñòâóåò ìàòðè÷íàÿ ôîðìà ïðåäñòàâ- Ñ. 440–442. ëåíèÿ öèôðîâîé êàðòîãðàôè÷åñêîé èíôîðìàöèè Ãàëóøèí Â.Ì. Ìîãèëüíèê Aquila heliaca – Êðàñíàÿ êíè- (ÃÎÑÒ 28441-90. Êàðòîãðàôèÿ öèôðîâàÿ. Òåðìèíû è ãà Ðîññèéñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè. Ò. 2. Æèâîòíûå. Ì., 2001á. îïðåäåëåíèÿ). Ñ. 399–401. Öåíòðîèä (Centroid) — öåíòð ìàññ ôèãóðû. Äóáèíèí Ì.Þ. Ïðèìåíèå TRLegend äëÿ ðàáîòû ñ ðàñ- Techniques and Methods Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 135

òðîâûìè òîïîêàðòàìè. – GIS-lab. çàêà÷àíî 1 îêòÿáðÿ 2010 ã. 1963. Ñ. 130–136. Äóáèíèí Ì.Þ., Ðûêîâ Ä.À. Îòêðûòûå íàñòîëüíûå ÃÈÑ: ×åëèíöåâ Í.Ã. Ìåòîäû ðàñ÷¸òà ïëîòíîñòè íàñåëåíèÿ æè- îáçîð òåêóùåé ñèòóàöèè. Ãåîïðîôèëü, ìàðò-àïðåëü 2010. âîòíûõ ïî äàííûì ìàðøðóòíûõ ó÷¸òîâ. – Ïðîñòðàíñòâåííî- Ñ. 34–44. < http://gis-lab.info/qa/os-gis-geoprofile.html> âðåìåííàÿ äèíàìèêà æèâîòíîãî íàñåëåíèÿ. Íîâîñèáèðñê, çàêà÷àíî 1 îêòÿáðÿ 2010 ã. 1985. Ñ. 5–14. Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè Óðàëüñêîãî ðåãèîíà. Ñî- ×åëèíöåâ Í.Ã. Ðàñ÷¸ò ïëîòíîñòè íàñåëåíèÿ ïòèö ïî ðàäè- êîëîîáðàçíûå (Falconiformes), Ñîâîîáðàçíûå (Strigiformes). àëüíûì ðàññòîÿíèÿì è óãëàì îáíàðóæåíèÿ íà ìàðøðóòå. – Ïåðìü, 1998. 483 ñ. Ýêîëîãèÿ è ïîâåäåíèå ïòèö. Ìîñêâà, 1988. Ñ. 198–207. Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Îð¸ë-ìîãèëüíèê â Óðàëüñêîì ðåãèîíå. – ×åëèíöåâ Í.Ã. Ìåòîä ðàñ÷¸òà ïëîòíîñòè íàñåëåíèÿ ïòèö Êîðîëåâñêèé îð¸ë: ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå, ñîñòîÿíèå ïîïóëÿöèé ïðè ó÷åòàõ íà êðóãîâûõ ïëîùàäêàõ. – Âñåñîþçíîå ñîâåùà- è ïåðñïåêòèâû îõðàíû îðëà-ìîãèëüíèêà (Aquila heliaca) â íèå ïî ïðîáëåìå êàäàñòðà è ó÷¸òà æèâîòíîãî ìèðà: Òåç. Ðîññèè. Ñáîðíèê íàó÷íûõ òðóäîâ. Ñåðèÿ: Ðåäêèå âèäû ïòèö. äîêë. ×. 1. Óôà, 1989. Ñ. 404–405. Â.1. / Ïîä ðåä. Â.Ï. Áåëèêà. Ì., 1999. Ñ. 41–53. ArcView Image Analyst. Ðóêîâîäñòâî ïîëüçîâàòåëÿ. Data+. Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè (ìåòîäè÷åñêèå ðåêî- Ìîñêâà, 1999à. 214 c. ìåíäàöèè ïî èçó÷åíèþ ñîêîëîîáðàçíûõ è ñîâîîáðàçíûõ). ArcView GIS 3.3. Ðóêîâîäñòâî ïîëüçîâàòåëÿ. Data+. Ìî- Íèæíèé Íîâãîðîä, 2004. 351 ñ. ñêâà, 1999á. 380 ñ. Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Ïîïóëÿöèîííàÿ ñòðóêòóðà àðåàëà âîñòî÷- ArcView Spatial Analyst. Ðóêîâîäñòâî ïîëüçîâàòåëÿ. Data+. íîåâðîïåéñêîãî ìîãèëüíèêà â Âîëãî-Óðàëüñêîì ðåãèîíå è Ìîñêâà, 1999ñ. 146 c. å¸ äèíàìèêà â ïîñëåäíåå ñòîëåòèå. – Ýêîëîãè÷åñêèé âåñò- BirdLife International, 2008. Aquila heliaca. – IUCN 2010. íèê ×óâàøñêîé Ðåñïóáëèêè. Âûï. 57. Ìàòåðèàëû Âñåðîñ- IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3. . Downloaded on 08 October 2010. ïòèö íà òåððèòîðèè Âîëæñêî-Êàìñêîãî êðàÿ», 24–26 ìàðòà Blondel J., Ferry C., Frochot B. Censusing breeding birds 2007 ã. ×åáîêñàðû, 2007. C. 163–171. by the I.P.A. method. – Pol. Ecol. Stud. 1977. Vol. 3. ¹4. Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Áàêêà Ñ.Â., Íîâèêîâà Ë.Ì. Ïðèìåíåíèå P. 15–17. ÃÈÑ äëÿ ïîâûøåíèÿ ýôôåêòèâíîñòè ìåðîïðèÿòèé ïî âîñ- Buckland S.T., Anderson D.R., Burnham K.P., Laake J.L. ñòàíîâëåíèþ ÷èñëåííîñòè áåðêóòà íà òåððèòîðèè áèî- Distance Sampling: Estimating abindance of biological ñôåðíîãî ðåçåðâàòà «Íèæåãîðîäñêîå Çàâîëæüå», Ðîññèÿ. populations. London, 1993. 446 p. accessed 1 May 2010. Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Êîíîâàëîâ Ë.È., Ãðàáîâñêèé Ì.À., Íèêî- DeLaune M. Guide To the ODF XTools ArcView Extension. ëåíêî Ý.Ã. Ïàäàëüùèêè Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîãî ðåãèîíà. – Ïåðíà- 2000. accessed 1 May 2010. Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã., Ëåâèí À.Ñ., Êîâàëåíêî Dixon T.J. The distance at which sitting birds can bee seen À.Â. Ìîãèëüíèê â Ðîññèè è Êàçàõñòàíå: ïîïóëÿöèîííûé at sea. – Ibis. 1977. 119. P. 372–375. ñòàòóñ è òðåíäû. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2008. Jarvinen O., Vaisanen R.A. Line transect method: a standard ¹14. C. 18–27. for field-work. – Pol. Ecol. Stud. 1977. Vol. 3. ¹4. P. 7–17. Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Ïàæåíêîâ À.Ñ. Îð¸ë-ìîãèëüíèê â Ñàìàðñêîé Jenness, J. Nearest features (nearfeat.avx) extension for îáëàñòè. – Êîðîëåâñêèé îð¸ë: ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå, ñîñòîÿíèå ArcView 3.x, v. 3.8a. – Jenness Enterprises. 2004. Available ïîïóëÿöèé è ïåðñïåêòèâû îõðàíû îðëà-ìîãèëüíèêà (Aquila at: accessed 1 October 2010. âèäû ïòèö. Â.1. / Ïîä ðåä. Â.Ï. Áåëèêà. Ì., 1999. Ñ. 73–77. Jenness, J. Repeating shapes (repeat_shapes.avx) extension Íàóìîâ Ð.Ë. Îðãàíèçàöèÿ è ìåòîäû ó÷¸òà ïòèö è âðåäíûõ for ArcView 3.x. – Jenness Enterprises. 2005. Available at: ãðûçóíîâ. Ì., 1963. 137 ñ. Íîâèêîâà Ë.Ì. Âëèÿíèå áèîòåõíè÷åñêèõ ìåðîïðèÿòèé accessed 1 October 2010. íà ïîâûøåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè êðóïíûõ õèùíûõ ïòèö íà êëþ- Hayne D.W. An examination of the strip census methods ÷åâûõ îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèõ òåððèòîðèÿõ â Íèæåãîðîäñêîé for estimating animal population. – J. Wildlife Managment. îáëàñòè. – Êëþ÷åâûå îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèå òåððèòîðèè Ðîñ- 1949 13 (2). P. 145–157. ñèè. 2003. ¹2 (18). Ñ. 48–50. McVay K. ShapeWarp extension. – ESRI. 1998. accessed 1 Oc- Ïåòðèíüø À. Ïåðñïåêòèâû ïðèìåíåíèÿ ìåòîäà ôèíñêèõ tober 2010. ëèíåéíûõ òðàíñåêòîâ (ÔËÒ) â ó÷åòàõ ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ïòèö äëÿ McVay K. ImageWarp 2.0 Updated March 16, 1999. – ESRI. ìîíèòîðèíãà èõ ÷èñëåííîñòè. Îðíèòîëîãèÿ. 1986. ¹21. 1999. Ñ. 118–125. accessed 1 October 2010. Ïðèñÿæíþê Â.Å., Íàçûðîâà Ð.È., Ìîðîçîâ Â.Â., Palmgren P. Quantatative Untersuchungen über die Øèëèí Í.È., Þîæàíñêèé À.Ò., Êîæóðèíà Å.È. 2003* Vogelfauna in den Wäldern Südfinnlands mit besonderer Ðîññèÿ* Êðàñíûé ñïèñîê îñîáî îõðàíÿåìûõ ðåäêèõ è Berücksichtigung Ålands. – Acta zool. Fennica. 1930. ¹7. íàõîäÿùèõñÿ ïîä óãðîçîé èñ÷åçíîâåíèÿ æèâîòíûõ è P. 1–218. ðàñòåíèé (âûï. 2). ×. 1. Ïîçâîíî÷íûå æèâîòíûå. Ì., Recher H.F. Report of working group on the need for 2004. 304 ñ. standardized census methods. – Stud. in Avian Biol. 1981. Ðàâêèí Å.Ñ., ×åëèíöåâ Í.Ã. Ìåòîäè÷åñêèå ðåêîìåíäàöèè ¹6. P. 580–581. ïî êîìïëåêñíîìó ìàðøðóòíîìó ó÷¸òó ïòèö. Ì., 1990. 33 ñ. Sutherland W.J., Newton I., Green R.E. Bird Ecology and Ðàâêèí Þ.Ñ. Ê ìåòîäèêå ó÷¸òà ïòèö â ëåñíûõ ëàíäøàô- Conservation: A Handbook of Techniques. Oxford, 2004. òàõ. – Ïðèðîäà î÷àãîâ êëåùåâîãî ýíöåôàëèòà íà Àëòàå. 389 p. Íîâîñèáèðñê, 1967. Ñ. 66–75. Tchoukanski I. EditTools extension for ArcView 3.x. – ET Spatial Ðàâêèí Þ.Ñ., Äîáðîõîòîâ Á.Ï. Ê ìåòîäèêå ó÷¸òà ïòèö Techniques. 2004. accessed 1 October 2010. 136 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

RaptorResearch ИЗУЧЕНИЕ ПЕРНАТЫХ ХИЩНИКОВ

ResultsofMonitoringoftheSakerFalconPopulationintheAltai- SayanRegionin2009–2010,Russia РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ МОНИТОРИНГА ПОПУЛЯЦИИ БАЛОБАНА В АЛТАЕ- САЯНСКОМ РЕГИОНЕ В 2009–2010 ГОДАХ, РОССИЯ KaryakinI.V.(CenterofFieldStudies,N.Novgorod,Russia) NikolenkoE.G.(SiberianEnvironmentalCenter,Novosibirsk,Russia) VazhovS.V.(AltaiStateUniversity,Barnaul,Russia) MitrofanovO.B.(StateNatureBiosphereReserve“Altaiskiy”,Gorno-Altaisk,Russia) Карякин И.В. (Центр полевых исследований, Н.Новгород, Россия) Николенко Э.Г. (МБОО «Сибирский экологический центр», Новосибирск, Россия) Важов С.В. (Алтайский государственный университет, Барнаул, Россия) Митрофанов О.Б. (Алтайский государственный природный биосферный заповедник, Горно-Алтайск, Россия)

Êîíòàêò: Àáñòðàêò Èãîðü Êàðÿêèí  ñòàòüå ïðèâåäåíû ðåçóëüòàòû èçó÷åíèÿ àâòîðàìè ñîêîëà-áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug) â 2009–2010 ãã. â Àëòàå- Öåíòð ïîëåâûõ Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå.  2009 ã. ïîëåâûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ ïðîâîäèëèñü íà òåððèòîðèè Ðåñïóáëèêè Àëòàé, â õîäå èññëåäîâàíèé êîòîðûõ áûëî âûÿâëåíî 38 íîâûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áàëîáàíîâ è îñìîòðåíî 8 ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ.  2010 ã. â 603000, Ðîññèÿ, Êðàñíîÿðñêîì êðàå, ðåñïóáëèêàõ Õàêàñèÿ, Òûâà è Àëòàé îñìîòðåíî 62 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà áàëîáàíîâ (15,62% Íèæíèé Íîâãîðîä, îò îáùåãî êîëè÷åñòâà èçâåñòíûõ â íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå 397 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ), 51 óë. Êîðîëåíêî, 17a–17 èç êîòîðûõ îêàçàëñÿ çàíÿòûì ïòèöàìè è íà 28 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêàõ çàðåãèñòðèðîâàíî óñïåøíîå ðàçìíîæåíèå. òåë.: +7 831 433 38 47 Èç ïîñåùàâøèõñÿ ó÷àñòêîâ 5 áûëè âûÿâëåíû âïåðâûå â 2010 ã., 3 – âîññòàíîâèëèñü â ïðåäåëàõ ïðåæíèõ èñ- [email protected] ÷åçíóâøèõ ó÷àñòêîâ è 54 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà áûëè ìíîãîëåòíèìè, âûÿâëåííûìè ðàíåå. Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà, ñ ó÷¸òîì ýêñïåðòíûõ îöåíîê, ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà 2010 ã. ñîñòàâèëà 1372–1646, â ñðåäíåì 1518, òåð- ðèòîðèàëüíûõ ïàð, ïðè ýòîì – 703–844, â ñðåäíåì 778, óñïåøíûõ ïàð. Ïî ñðàâíåíèþ ñ 2008 ã. ÷èñëåííîñòü Ýëüâèðà Íèêîëåíêî ñîêðàòèëàñü íà 3%. ÌÁÎÎ «Ñèáèðñêèé Êëþ÷åâûå ñëîâà: õèùíûå ïòèöû, ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè, áàëîáàí, Falco cherrug, ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå, ÷èñëåííîñòü, ýêîëîãè÷åñêèé öåíòð» ãíåçäîâàÿ áèîëîãèÿ. 630090, Ðîññèÿ, Íîâîñèáèðñê, à/ÿ 547 Abstract òåë./ôàêñ: Basing on author’s research in 2009–2010 the paper contains information on distribution, numbers and breeding +7 383 363 00 59 biology of the Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) in the Altai-Sayan region. The territory of the Republic of Altai was [email protected] surveyed in 2009: 38 new breeding territories of the Saker Falcon were discovered and 8 territories known earlier were inspected. A total of 62 breeding territories of the Saker Falcon (15.62% of 397 territories already known in Ñåðãåé Âàæîâ the Altai-Sayan region) located in the Krasnoyarsk Kray, Khakassia, Tyva and Altai Republics were visited in 2010: Àëòàéñêèé 51 territories were occupied and 28 territories were successful. Five territories were discovered in 2010, 3 – re- ãîñóäàðñòâåííûé covered within borders of old empty territories and 54 – were perennial and were known earlier. Considering the óíèâåðñèòåò expert estimation a total of 1,372–1,646 pairs (averaging 1,518 pairs) breed in the region in 2010, and 703–844 òåë.: +7 963 534 81 07 pairs (averaging 778 pairs) are successful. Comparing data with 2008 the number declining in 3% is recorded. [email protected] Keywords: birds of prey, raptors, Saker Falcon, Falco cherrug, distribution, number, breeding biology.

Îëåã Ìèòðîôàíîâ Àëòàéñêèé Ââåäåíèå, ìåòîäèêà Introduction and Methods ãîñóäàðñòâåííûé ïðèðîäíûé  ðàìêàõ ïðîåêòà ÏÐÎÎÍ/ÃÝÔ «Ñî- A field group of the Siberian Environmen- áèîñôåðíûé õðàíåíèå áèîðàçíîîáðàçèÿ â ðîññèéñêîé tal Center and the Field Study Center under çàïîâåäíèê, ÷àñòè Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîãî ýêîðåãèîíà» ýêñ- the project of UNDP/GEF “Biodiversity Con- 649000, Ðîññèÿ, ïåäèöèîííîé ãðóïïîé Ñèáýêîöåíòðà è servation in the Russian Part of the Altai- Ðåñïóáëèêà Àëòàé, Ãîðíî-Àëòàéñê, ïð-ò Öåíòðà ïîëåâûõ èññëåäîâàíèé îñóùåñò- Sayan Ecoregion” has carried out surveys to Êîììóíèñòè÷åñêèé, 1, âëåíà ðàáîòà ïî ìîíèòîðèíãó ïîïóëÿöèè estimate numbers of the Saker Falcon (Falco à/ÿ 91 ñîêîëà-áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug) â ðîññèé- cherrug) in the Russian part of the Altai- òåë.: +7 38822 669 47 ñêîé ÷àñòè Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîãî ðåãèîíà.  Sayan ecoregion. Territories were surveyed [email protected] õîäå ðàáîòû, ïðîõîäèâøåé â 2009 ã. ñ 19 from 20th May to 25th July, including sev- ìàÿ ïî 20 èþëÿ â ðåñïóáëèêå Àëòàé è â eral study plots that have been monitored Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 137

Contact: 2010 ã. ñ 18 ìàÿ ïî 15 èþëÿ íà òåððèòîðèè Igor Karyakin þãà Êðàñíîÿðñêîãî êðàÿ, ðåñïóáëèê Õàêà- Center of Field Studies Korolenko str., 17a–17, ñèÿ, Òóâà è Àëòàé, îáñëåäîâàíû êëþ÷åâûå Nizhniy Novgorod, ó÷àñòêè, íà êîòîðûõ ìîíèòîðèíã áàëîáàíà Russia, 603000, îñóùåñòâëÿåòñÿ ñ 1999 ã., à òàêæå ïîñå- tel.: +7 831 433 38 47 ùàëèñü íîâûå òåððèòîðèè äëÿ óòî÷íåíèÿ [email protected] îöåíîê ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Ðåñïóáëè- Elvira Nikolenko êå Àëòàé. NGO Siberian Environ-  õîäå ðàáîòû âèçóàëüíî ôèêñèðîâàëèñü mental Center âñå âñòðå÷è ñ ñîêîëàìè, ïî ñëåäàì ïîì¸òà P.O. Box 547 Novosibirsk, âûÿâëÿëèñü ïðèñàäû èëè çàíÿòûå ñîêîëàìè Russia, 630090, ãíåçäîâûå ïîñòðîéêè íà ñêàëàõ, äåðåâüÿõ tel./fax: è ñîîðóæåíèÿõ ÷åëîâåêà. Äëÿ íàáëþäåíèÿ +7 383 363 00 59 èñïîëüçîâàëèñü áèíîêëè 12–60x. Ìåñòà [email protected] îáíàðóæåíèÿ ïòèö è èõ ãí¸çä ôèêñèðîâà- Áàëîáàí (Falco cherrug). Sergey Vazhov ëèñü ñ ïîìîùüþ ñïóòíèêîâûõ íàâèãàòîðîâ Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Altai State University Garmin è âíîñèëèñü â áàçó äàííûõ (Íîâè- tel.: +7 963 534 81 07 êîâà, Êàðÿêèí, 2008). Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug). [email protected] Photo by I. Karyakin. Ïðè õàðàêòåðèñòèêå ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ Oleg Mitrofanov èñïîëüçîâàíû òåðìèíû: State Nature Biosphere - çàíÿòûé ãíåçäîâîé ó÷àñòîê – ó÷àñòîê, earlier in 1999, as well as some new sites Reserve “Altaiskiy” íà êîòîðîì îòìå÷åíî ïðèñóòñòâèå ïòèö, P.O. Box 91, in the south of the Krasnoyarsk district, the Kommunistucheskiy âíå çàâèñèìîñòè îò íàëè÷èÿ ðàçìíîæå- Republic of Khakassia, Tuva and Altai. ave., 1, íèÿ; The total length of survey routes was Gorno-Altaisk, Republic - ïóñòóþùèé, ïîêèíóòûé ëèáî ïðåêðà- 10,186 km (fig. 1). We set up 8 study plots of Altai, Russia, 649000 òèâøèé ñâî¸ ñóùåñòâîâàíèå ãíåçäîâîé tel.: +7 38822 669 47 (fig. 2, table 1). Density parameters that were [email protected] ó÷àñòîê – ó÷àñòîê, íà êîòîðîì ïòèöû ïå- calculated for habitats in the study plots were ðåñòàëè âñòðå÷àòüñÿ â òå÷åíèå ïîñëåäíèõ extrapolated on similar habitats of the region òð¸õ ëåò; with ArcView 3.3 ESRI. The total area of typi- - óñïåøíûé ó÷àñòîê – ó÷àñòîê, íà êîòî- cal habitats of the Saker in the Russian part of ðîì îòìå÷åíî óñïåøíîå ðàçìíîæåíèå. the Altai-Sayan region under extrapolation Ê çàíÿòûì ãíåçäîâûì ó÷àñòêàì â ðåãèî- was 149,364.7 km2 (Krasnoyarsk region and íå â öåëîì ìû îòíîñèì è òå, êîòîðûå íå the Republic of Khakassia – 20,593.24 km2, ïðîâåðÿëèñü ïîñëåäíèå íåñêîëüêî ëåò, íî Republic of Altai – 34,063.46 km2 and Re- íà ìîìåíò èõ ïîñëåäíåé ïðîâåðêè íà íèõ public of Tyva – 94,708.0 km2). ïðèñóòñòâîâàëè è/èëè ðàçìíîæàëèñü ïòè- For characterizing the breeding territories öû. we used the following terms: Ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòü ýêñïåäèöèîííûõ ìàðø- - occupied breeding territory: a territory ðóòîâ â 2009 ã. ñîñòàâèëà 3655 êì, â 2010 where birds were noted, breeding indisput- ã. – 10186 êì (ðèñ. 1).  îñíîâíûõ ìåñòàõ able; ãíåçäîâàíèÿ áàëîáàíà, êîòîðûìè ÿâëÿþòñÿ - empty, abandoned or extinct breeding êðóïíûå ñòåïíûå êîòëîâèíû ðåãèîíà è ëå- territory: a territory where birds were not ñîñòåïíûå äîëèíû ðåê, â 2009 ã. ïîñåùà- noted for the last three years; ëèñü 13 ïëîùàäîê, â òîì ÷èñëå 12 íîâûõ, â - successful breeding territory: a territory 2010 ã. ïîñåùàëèñü 8 ïëîùàäîê, çàëîæåí- where breeding was successful. íûõ â 2008 ã. (ðèñ. 2, òàáë. 1). Ïîêàçàòåëè

Ïòåíöû áàëîáàíà â Distribution and Number, ãíåçäå. Ðåñïóáëèêà Negative Impacts Òûâà, 07.06.2010. We found 372 breeding territories of Ôîòî Ý. Íèêîëåíêî. the Saker in the Altai-Sayan ecoregion Chicks of the Saker in 1999–2006. We noted that 50 known Falcon in the nest. breeding territories had become extinct Republic of Tyva, 07/06/2010. by 2006. Many territories have become Photo by E. Nikolenko. extinct owing to destruction of nests in Southern Tuva. Unfortunately this means that their recovery is improbable. In 2006– 2008, Sakers have not been recorded in 17 breeding territories. During surveys in 2008 we found nests especially in new ter- 138 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

ritories. Altogether 57 new breeding ter- ritories were found. Thus, at the moment we know 362 breeding territories of Sak- ers (where adult birds or breeding were recorded, i.e. territories were occupied) in the Altai-Sayan ecoregion. We surveyed 125 breeding territories in 2008 (34.53% of a total number of known territories in the Altai-Sayan ecoregion), 108 of which were noted to be occupied by birds and 55 to be successful (Karyakin, Nikolenko, 2008). The territory of the Republic of Altai was surveyed in 2009: 38 new breeding territo- ries of the Saker Falcon were discovered and 8 territories known earlier were inspected. A total of 62 breeding territories of the Sak- er Falcon (15.62% of 397 territories already known in the Altai-Sayan region) located in the Krasnoyarsk Kray, Khakassia, Tyva and Altai Republics were visited in 2010: 51 territories were occupied and 28 territories were successful. Five territories were dis- covered in 2010, 3 – recovered within bor- ders of old empty territories and 54 – were perennial and were known earlier. Data of counts in 2009–2010 are shown in the table 1, occupancy and breeding suc- cess – in the table 2. Estimation of the Saker numbers for typical breeding habitats in the Altai-Sayan region without expert assess- ment is shown in the table 3. A total of 1,372–1,646 breeding pairs (1,518 pairs on average) and 703–844 suc- cessful pairs (778 on average) are estimated to inhabit the Altai-Sayan ecoregion in 2008 (Karyakin, Nikolenko, 2008). Considering the expert estimation a total of 1,372–1,646 pairs (averaging 1,518 pairs) breed in the region in 2010, and 703–844 pairs (averag- Ðèñ. 1. Ìàðøðóòû ýêñïåäèöèé 2009 è 2010 ãã. Óñëîâíûå îáîçíà÷åíèÿ: ing 778 pairs) are successful (table 4). ÐÀ – Ðåñïóáëèêà Àëòàé, ÐÕ – Ðåñïóáëèêà Õàêàñèÿ, ÐÒ – Ðåñïóáëèêà Òûâà, Catching the females is probably the most ÊÊ – Êðàñíîÿðñêèé êðàé. serious problem for the Saker Falcon popu- Fig. 1. Field routes in 2009 and 2010. Labels: ÐÀ – Republic of Altai, ÐÕ – Republic lation in the Altai-Sayan ecoregion. We ob- of Khakasia, ÐÒ – Republic of Tyva, ÊÊ – Krasnoyarsk kray. served males and females in 29 nesting sites with use of video camera in 1999–2000 and ïëîòíîñòè, ïîëó÷åííûå íà ïëîùàäêàõ, ýêñ- can confirm disappearance of all birds in the òðàïîëèðîâàëèñü íà ìåñòîîáèòàíèÿ ðåãè- pair in 2 sites, only females – in 5 sites and îíà, àíàëîãè÷íûå òåì, êîòîðûå âêëþ÷àþò replacement of birds – in 22 sites: males ïëîùàäêè. were replaced in 3 sites and females – in Ðàñ÷¸ò ïðîèçâîäèëñÿ â ñðåäå ÃÈÑ 19 (fig. 5). The tendency of vanishing the (ArcView 3.3 ESRI) íà îñíîâå êàðòû òè- breeding pairs along the Mongolian-Rus- ïè÷íûõ ìåñòîîáèòàíèé, ïîäãîòîâëåííîé sian frontier has been already outlined for â ðåçóëüòàòå äåøèôðîâêè êîñìîñíèìêîâ last 3 years. Landsat ETM+ è àíàëèçà òîïîãðàôè÷å- Thus, the negative trend of the Saker ñêèõ êàðò Ì 1:200000. Îáùàÿ ïëîùàäü numbers has been registered all over the òèïè÷íûõ ìåñòîîáèòàíèé áàëîáàíà â Altai-Sayan region (table 4). However, ðîññèéñêîé ÷àñòè Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîãî ðå- while the total number decreased dur- ãèîíà, áåç Àëòàéñêîãî êðàÿ, íà êîòîðûå ing the last 5 years (2003–2010) by 20%, Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 139

changes in different breeding group num- bers are not similar. Populations in Kha- kassia suffer very much; there is a steady decline of numbers for the past 8 years by 34%. While the breeding group in the northwest of the Republic remains more or less stable, the breeding groups in the central part decreased by 50%. The impact of catching in Tuva is considerably lower. A number decreased by 17% was noted only in 2003–2006, and the number has been stable for the last years or has even in- creased a little. The number has decreased by 15% in Altai due to the disappearance of males from territories on the periphery of the Chujskaya steppe, where females were caught in 1998–2002 and pairs have not recovered until this day. On the other hand, the number in the Western Altai has slightly increased and has remained stable along the state border for the past 11 years. No known breeding territory vanished dur- ing last 3 years. Once more evidence of illegal catching of the Saker Falcon in South-Eastern Altai has been obtained in 2010. We observed a fe- male with a leather ring on its foot near one of living nests. Such rings are often used to tether caught birds to a peg.

Population Biology and Breeding In the Altai-Sayan region the average brood size is 2.64±1.06 chicks (n=278; range 1–5 chicks). Depending on prey num- bers and spring climate conditions breeding success of falcons may vary greatly (table 5). The average brood size in 2008 was 2.48±0.96 chicks per successful nest (n=33; range 1–4 chicks), but the portion of suc- cessful nets per total number of occupied Ðèñ. 2. Ó÷¸òíûå ïëîùàäêè. Óñëîâíûå îáîçíà÷åíèÿ: À – ãðàíèöû ïðèðîäíûõ nests was only 50.9%. The largest number ðàéîíîâ,  – ïðèðîäíûå ðàéîíû, â êîòîðûõ ñîñðåäîòî÷åíû îñíîâíûå of empty nests was found in the left side ìåñòîîáèòàíèÿ áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug). Íóìåðàöèÿ ïëîùàäîê ñîîòâåòñòâóåò of the Tes-Hem River and on the southern íóìåðàöèè â òàáë. 1. slope of the Tannu-Ola Mountains in the Fig. 2. Surveyed plots. Labels: A – borders of nature regions, B – nature regions north of the Ubsunur depression where an including main habitats of the Saker (Falco cherrug). Numbers of plots in the figure are similar ones in the table 1. extensive decline of numbers of main prey species of falcons was observed. Only two nests (8.7%) of 23 occupied breeding ter- îñóùåñòâëåíà ýêñòðàïîëÿöèÿ, ñîñòàâèëà ritories were successful in the study plot lo- 149364,7 êì2 (â Êðàñíîÿðñêîì êðàå è cated in the left side of the Tes-Hem River Ðåñïóáëèêå Õàêàñèÿ – 20593,24 êì2, â and both placed close to the state border Ðåñïóáëèêå Àëòàé – 34063,46 êì2, â Ðå- with Mongolia. ñïóáëèêå Òûâà – 94708,0 êì2). Ïðè àíà- The average brood size in the Republic of ëèçå äèíàìèêè ÷èñëåííîñòè èñïîëüçîâà- Altai in 2009 was 2.5±1.17 chicks (n=12; íû äàííûå ïî ðåãèîíó â ïðåäåëàõ ãðàíèö range 1–5 chicks) per successful nest; in ÷åòûð¸õ âûøåóêàçàííûõ ñóáúåêòîâ Ðîñ- 2010 – 2.83±0.89 chicks (n=23; range 1–5 ñèéñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè, áåç ó÷¸òà ãîðíîé chicks) per successful nest. It was 54.9% of ÷àñòè Àëòàéñêîãî êðàÿ è Êåìåðîâñêîé successful nests per occupied nests. Distri- îáëàñòè, òàê êàê â 2008 ã. è â òåêóùèé bution of successful nests within observed 140 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Òàáë. 1. ×èñëåííîñòü è ïëîòíîñòü áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug) íà ïëîùàäêàõ. Íóìåðàöèÿ ïëîùàäîê ñîîòâåòñòâóåò íóìåðàöèè íà ðèñ. 2. Table 1. Number and density of the Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) in plots. Numbers of plots in the table are similar ones in the fig. 2. ) 2 ) 2 ) 2 ) 2 ) 2 ) 2

Ðåãèîí Ïëîòíîñòü óñïåøíûõ ïàð óñïåøíûõ Ïëîòíîñòü (x/100 êì Ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè ó÷àñòêè Ãíåçäîâûå Breeding territories ãíåçäîâûå Èñ÷åçíóâøèå ó÷àñòêè Extinct breeding territories è Âîññòàíîâèâøèåñÿ ãíåçäîâûå ïîÿâèâøèåñÿ ó÷àñòêè New breeding territories ó÷àñòêè Çàíÿòûå ãíåçäîâûå Occupied breeding territories ó÷àñòêè ãíåçäîâûå Óñïåøíûå Successful breeding territories ãíåçäîâûå Áåçóñïåøíûå ó÷àñòêè Unsuccessful breeding territories çàíÿòûõ ãíåçäîâûõ Ïëîòíîñòü (x/100 êì ó÷àñòêîâ Ãîä / Year Ãîä Ïëîùàäêà / Plots Ïëîùàäü (êì District Area (km Density of occupied breeding territories (x/100 km Density of successful breeding pairs (x/100 km Êðàñíîÿðñêèé êðàé Krasnoyarsk District 2010 1 300.0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0.67 0 Ðåñïóáëèêà Õàêàñèÿ Republic of Khakassia 2010 2 639.7 5 1 0 4 1 3 0.63 0.16 Ðåñïóáëèêà Òûâà 2010 3 1072.7 7 0 6 7 4 3 0.65 0.37 Republic of Tyva 2010 4 3308.3 22 3 0 19 15 4 0.57 0.45 -,,- 2010 5 761.4 11 0 0 11 6 5 1.44 0.79 -,,- 2010 6 631.7 9 1 0 8 5 4 1.27 0.79 Ðåñïóáëèêà Àëòàé 2010 7 625.4 9 0 0 9 6 3 1.44 0.96 Republic of Altai 2009 7 625.4 9 0 0 9 5 4 1.44 0.80 -,,- 2009 9 135.109 3 0 0 3 1 2 2.22 0.74 -,,- 2009 10 95.903 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -,,- 2009 11 359.095 3 0 0 3 - - 0.84 - -,,- 2009 12 50.808 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -,,- 2009 13 166.588 2 0 0 2 - - 1.20 - -,,- 2009 14 261.565 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -,,- 2009 15 180.252 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -,,- 2009 16 470.74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -,,- 2009 17 276.875 2 0 0 2 - - 0.72 - -,,- 2009 18 77.13 5 0 0 5 3 2 6.48 3.89 -,,- 2009 19 306.38 1 0 0 1 - - 0.33 - -,,- 2009 20 386.02 3 0 0 3 1 2 0.78 0.26

ãîä ýòè òåððèòîðèè íå ïîñåùàëèñü. breeding range was rather uniform. Îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà, êàê è Analysis of changes in brood sizes in the ïðåæäå, îñíîâàíû íà ó÷¸òå çàíÿòûõ ãíåç- Altai-Sayan region is shown the increase in äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ íà ïëîùàäêàõ. Ýòè çàíÿòûå the maximum brood size for last 12 years (R2=0.67) as well as the average brood size Ïòåíöû áàëîáàíà â 2 ãíåçäå íà ñêàëå. (R =0.16) (fig. 6). These tendencies are Ðåñïóáëèêà Àëòàé, noted on the background of decreasing 07.07.2010. the number of occupied breeding territories Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà and declining the breeding success. In spite Chicks of the Saker of large fluctuation the number of successful Falcon in the nest on breeding territories per occupied neverthe- the rock. 2 Republic of Altai, less decreases (R =0.48) (fig. 8). The main 07/07/2010. reason of the declining of breeding success Photo by I. Karyakin. seems to be the decrease in female num- bers and in age of females in breeding pairs in the population. The analysis of breeding success of pairs with old and young females in monitoring plots in 2001–2008 has shown that the av- erage number of eggs and hatched chicks in a brood of young females is 3.08±1.24 chicks (n=12; range 1–5). Old birds have sta- Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 141

bly 3.0±0.61 eggs at average (n=17; range 2–4). Thus the perishing of offspring of pairs with young females is higher (64.86%) than with old females with which the perishing of chicks reaches only 11.76%. As a result, pairs with old females were more produc- tive over 4 years of monitoring: the aver- age number of fledglings was 2.65±0.79 chicks per successful nest (n=17), whereas with young females the number was only 1.08±1.16 chicks (n=12).

Conclusion Monitoring the Saker population in the Altai-Sayan region has shown the steady decrease in the species number. Despite the rates of decreasing become lower un- fortunately the Saker number is far from stable, and its decrease apparently will be continued as long as the main negative fac- tors will exist. The main reason of the decrease in the Saker numbers in the low disturbed territory of the Altai-Sayan region is the illegal catch- ing of falcons generally females. Disappear- ance of females and as a result sharp de- crease in ages of females in breeding pairs was confirmed by perennial observations of breeding pairs in study plots and the bird ringing. For stabilizing the Saker number in the Altai-Sayan region we recommend follow- ing measures: 1. To intensify struggle against illegal catching in the region that reduce its nega- tive impact (especially in the Republic of Khakassia, Kosh-Agach region of the Re- public of Altai and in the Republic of Tyva). 2. To press for retrofitting the power lines Ðèñ. 3. Ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè áàëîáàíà. Óñëîâíûå îáîçíà÷åíèÿ: À – èçâåñòíûå è hazardous for birds with bird protective de- âïåðâûå âûÿâëåííûå ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè, ïîñåùàâøèåñÿ â ãîä èññëåäîâàíèé; vices.  – èçâåñòíûå ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè, âûÿâëåííûå ðàíåå, íî íå ïîñåùàâøèåñÿ â ãîä 3. To carry out activities for increasing the èññëåäîâàíèé. Saker numbers in nature: Fig. 3. Breeding territories of the Saker Falcon. Labels: 1 – breeding territories - installing the artificial nests in the re- observed during these years, 2 – known breeding territories not observed during these years. gions inaccessible for poachers (South Tyva is the most preferential region); - releasing birds being bred in captiv- ó÷àñòêè ïðèðàâíåíû ê ïàðàì, õîòÿ â ðÿäå ity (preferentially females) in nature ñëó÷àåâ èõ çàíèìàþò îäèíî÷íûå ñàìöû, ïîòîìó ÷òî ñàìêè íà íèõ èñ÷åçëè ëèáî íå Considering the scale of realizing a gov- áûëè âñòðå÷åíû âî âðåìÿ íàáëþäåíèé. Îò- ernmental program to erect artificial nests ñþäà ñëåäóåò, ÷òî ÷èñëåííîñòü ðåàëüíûõ for the Saker Falcon in the Central Mongolia ñôîðìèðîâàííûõ ïàð íåñêîëüêî íèæå (Dixon et al., 2010) it is necessary to achieve ÷èñëà çàíÿòûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ è ëå- realizing such program in aimags border- æèò ãäå-òî â ïðîìåæóòêå ìåæäó îöåíêîé ing upon Russia especially in the Ulangom ÷èñëåííîñòè çàíÿòûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ aimag which flat steppes in the Ubsunuur è óñïåøíûõ ïàð. Çàíÿòîñòü ó÷àñòêîâ äî- depression are very perspective to create a âîëüíî äèíàìè÷íà è èçìåíÿåòñÿ â òå÷åíèå new breeding population of the Saker Fal- 2–3-õ ëåò, îäíàêî íà ìíîãèõ òåððèòîðèÿõ con in artificial nest sites in. 142 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

ôàêòè÷åñêîãî. ×èñëåííîñòü óñïåøíûõ ïàð ñèëüíî êî- ëåáëåòñÿ ïî ãîäàì, â çàâèñèìîñòè îò ÷èñ- ëåííîñòè îñíîâíûõ îáúåêòîâ ïèòàíèÿ áàëîáàíà â ðàçíûõ ïðèðîäíûõ ðàéîíàõ ðåãèîíà.  ãîäû îáøèðíûõ äåïðåññèé êîðìîâ (íàïðèìåð, 2003 è 2008 ãã.) ðàç- íèöà ìåæäó ÷èñëîì çàíÿòûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ è óñïåøíûõ ãí¸çä ìîæåò áûòü äîâîëüíî çíà÷èòåëüíîé. Ýòî îáúÿñíÿåò è ðàçíèöó â îöåíêàõ ÷èñëåííîñòè óñïåø- íûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ â ðàçíûå ãîäû, íåñìîòðÿ íà òî, ÷òî çàíÿòîñòü ó÷àñòêîâ îñòà¸òñÿ ñòàáèëüíîé.

Ðåçóëüòàòû èññëåäîâàíèé Ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå, ÷èñëåííîñòü, óãðîçû Çà ïåðèîä èññëåäîâàíèé ñ 1999 ã. ïî 2006 ã. â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ýêîðåãèîíå, â ïðåäåëàõ Êðàñíîÿðñêîãî êðàÿ è ðåñïó- áëèê Õàêàñèÿ, Òûâà, Àëòàé, âûÿâëåíî 372 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà áàëîáàíîâ. Èç íèõ ê 2006 ã. ïðåêðàòèëè ñâî¸ ñóùåñòâîâàíèå 50 ó÷àñòêîâ.  ïåðèîä ñ 2006 ïî 2008 ãã. áà- ëîáàí ïåðåñòàë ðåãèñòðèðîâàòüñÿ åù¸ íà 17 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêàõ.  ñåçîí 2008 ã., â õîäå öåëåíàïðàâëåííîãî îáñëåäîâàíèÿ ðÿäà íîâûõ òåððèòîðèé, âûÿâëåíî 57 íîâûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áàëîáàíîâ, ïðåèìó- ùåñòâåííî â ðåñïóáëèêàõ Òûâà è Àëòàé.  èòîãå, ê 2008 ã. â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèî- íå ñòàëî èçâåñòíî 362 çàíÿòûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà áàëîáàíîâ.  2008 ã. áûëî îñìî- òðåíî 125 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áàëîáàíà (34,53% îò îáùåãî êîëè÷åñòâà èçâåñòíûõ íà òîò ïåðèîä â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ýêîðåãè- îíå), 108 èç êîòîðûõ îêàçàëèñü çàíÿòûìè ïòèöàìè è íà 55 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêàõ çà- ðåãèñòðèðîâàíî óñïåøíîå ðàçìíîæåíèå (Êàðÿêèí, Íèêîëåíêî, 2008).  2009 ã. ïîëåâûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ ïðîâîäèëèñü íà òåððèòîðèè ðåñïóáëèêè Àëòàé, â õîäå Ðèñ. 4. Çàíÿòîñòü è óñïåøíîñòü îáñëåäîâàííûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áàëîáàíîâ â êîòîðûõ áûëî âûÿâëåíî 38 íîâûõ ãíåç- 2009–2010 ãã. äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áàëîáàíîâ è îñìîòðåíî Fig. 4. Occupation and success of the surveyed breeding territories of the Saker 8 ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ.  2010 ã., â ðàìêàõ Falcon in 2009-2010. Labels: A – surveyed breeding territories of the Saker Falcon, ìîíèòîðèíãà, îñìîòðåíî 62 ãíåçäîâûõ 1 – successful nest, 2 – dead clutch or brood, 3 – empty nest occupied by the pair, ó÷àñòêà áàëîáàíîâ (15,62% îò îáùåãî 4 – empty nest occupied by the male, 5 – empty breeding territory, 6 – nest was not inspected. êîëè÷åñòâà èçâåñòíûõ â íàñòîÿùåå âðå- ìÿ â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå 397 ãíåç- ó÷àñòêè ñ îäèíîêèìè ñàìöàìè ñîõðàíÿþò- äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ), 51 èç êîòîðûõ îêàçàë- ñÿ äëèòåëüíîå âðåìÿ.  áîëüøèíñòâå ñëó- ñÿ çàíÿòûì ïòèöàìè è íà 28 ãíåçäîâûõ ÷àåâ ìû èõ ñ÷èòàåì çàíÿòûìè äî òåõ ïîð, ó÷àñòêàõ çàðåãèñòðèðîâàíî óñïåøíîå ïîêà íà ó÷àñòêå âèçóàëüíî ðåãèñòðèðóåòñÿ ðàçìíîæåíèå. Èç ïîñåùàâøèõñÿ 62-õ ñàìåö èëè ñîõðàíÿþòñÿ ñëåäû åãî ïðèñóò- ó÷àñòêîâ ëèøü 5 ó÷àñòêîâ áûëè âûÿâëå- ñòâèÿ íà ïðèñàäà è/èëè ãíåçäå. Êàê òîëüêî íû âïåðâûå â 2010 ã., 3 âîññòàíîâèëèñü âñå ïðèçíàêè ïðåáûâàíèÿ ñàìöà ïðîïàäà- â ïðåäåëàõ ïðåæíèõ, ðàíåå èñ÷åçíóâøèõ þò, ó÷àñòîê ïåðåâîäèòñÿ â ðàçðÿä ïîêèíó- ó÷àñòêîâ, è 54 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà áûëè òûõ. Ïîýòîìó ðåãèñòðèðóåìûé íàìè òðåíä ìíîãîëåòíèìè, âûÿâëåííûìè ðàíåå. ïàäåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè íåñêîëüêî îòñòà¸ò îò Ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå áàëîáàíà â ðåãèîíå Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 143

îñòà¸òñÿ äîñòàòî÷íî ñòàáèëüíûì ïîñëåä- ñòè áàëîáàíà íà ãíåçäîâàíèè â òèïè÷íûõ íåå äåñÿòèëåòèå. Èìååòñÿ åù¸ íåñêîëüêî ìåñòîîáèòàíèÿõ Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîãî ðåãèî- áåëûõ ïÿòåí â ðàñïðåäåëåíèè ýòîãî ñîêî- íà, áåç ïðèâëå÷åíèÿ ýêñïåðòíûõ îöåíîê, ëà ïî òåððèòîðèè ðåãèîíà, îäíàêî îíè ïî- ïðèâåäåíà â òàáëèöå 3. ñòåïåííî çàêðûâàþòñÿ, ïðèíîñÿ ëèøü ïðî-  Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå, â ïðåäåëàõ ãíîçèðóåìûå ðåçóëüòàòû. Îáñëåäîâàíèå ãðàíèö Êðàñíîÿðñêîãî êðàÿ è ðåñïóáëèê íåêîòîðûõ ðàéîíîâ Ñåâåðî-Çàïàäíîãî, Õàêàñèÿ, Àëòàé è Òûâà, ïî äàííûì ó÷¸òîâ Öåíòðàëüíîãî è Þãî-Âîñòî÷íîãî Àëòàÿ â 1999–2000 ãã. (ñ ïðèâëå÷åíèåì ó÷¸òíûõ 2009 ã. íå èçìåíèëî ïðåäñòàâëåíèé î ðàñ- äàííûõ ïî Âîñòî÷íîé Òóâå è Àëòàþ çà ïðîñòðàíåíèè áàëîáàíà è íå ïîâëèÿëî 2001–2002 ãã.) ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà áûëà íà îöåíêè åãî ÷èñëåííîñòè. Êàê è ïðåä- îöåíåíà â 1600–2096, â ñðåäíåì 1841, ïîëàãàëîñü ðàíåå, áàëîáàí îêàçàëñÿ äî- ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ïàð (Karyakin et al., 2004). ñòàòî÷íî ðàâíîìåðíî ðàñïðåäåë¸í íà Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â 2006 ã., ãíåçäîâàíèè íà ïëàòî Óêîê è â äîëèíå ð. ñ ó÷¸òîì èñ÷åçíóâøèõ ïàð íà ïëîùàäêàõ, Òàðõàòà â Þãî-Âîñòî÷íîì Àëòàå, â äîëèíå ñîñòàâëÿëà 1372–1868, â ñðåäíåì 1613, ð. Êàòóíü è â ñòåïíûõ äîëèíàõ ðåê Ñåâåðî- ïàð (Êàðÿêèí, 2008). Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè Çàïàäíîãî Àëòàÿ, îòñóòñòâóÿ íà ðàçìíîæå- áàëîáàíà ñ ó÷¸òîì ýêñïåðòíûõ îöåíîê ïî íèè â äîëèíàõ Äæàçàòîðà, Àðãóòà, Êîêñû, òåððèòîðèÿì, äëÿ êîòîðûõ íåò äàííûõ ðå- Êàðàãàÿ è âî âëàæíûõ Àáàéñêîé è Óéìîí- ãóëÿðíîãî ìîíèòîðèíãà, ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà ñêîé ñòåïÿõ. 2008 ã., ñîñòàâèëà 1372–1646, â ñðåäíåì Ó÷¸òíûå äàííûå 2009–2010 ãã. îòðàæå- 1518, òåððèòîðèàëüíûõ ïàð, ïðè ýòîì – íû â òàáëèöå 1, çàíÿòîñòü è óñïåøíîñòü 703–844, â ñðåäíåì 778, óñïåøíûõ ïàð ó÷àñòêîâ – â òàáëèöå 2. Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííî- (Êàðÿêèí, Íèêîëåíêî, 2008).

Òàáë. 2. Ïîêàçàòåëè ðàçìíîæåíèÿ áàëîáàíà â îáëàñòÿõ Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîãî ðåãèîíà â 1999–2010 ãã. Table 2. Data on the Saker breeding in the different districts of the Altai-Sayan region in 1999–2010.

Ðåãèîí / District â 1999-2006 ãã. ó÷àñòêè ãíåçäîâûå Èçâåñòíûå Known breeding territories in1999-2006 â 2000-2006 ãã. èñ÷åçíóâøèå ó÷àñòêè, Ãíåçäîâûå Extinct breeding territories in 2000-2006 ê 2006 ã. çàíèìàåìûå ñîêîëàìè ó÷àñòêè, Ãíåçäîâûå Occupied breeding territories in 2006 â 2006-2008 ãã. èñ÷åçíóâøèå ó÷àñòêè, Ãíåçäîâûå Extinct breeding territories in 2006-2008 âïåðâûå â 2008 ã. âûÿâëåííûå ó÷àñòêè, Ãíåçäîâûå New breeding territories in 2008 ó÷àñòêè â 2008 ã. ãíåçäîâûå Ïîñåùàâøèåñÿ Observed breeding territories in 2008 ó÷àñòêè Çàíÿòûå â 2008 ã. ãíåçäîâûå Occupied breeding territories in 2008 ó÷àñòêè â 2008 ã. ãíåçäîâûå Óñïåøíûå Successful breeding territories in 2008 âïåðâûå â 2009–2010 ãã. âûÿâëåííûå ó÷àñòêè, Ãíåçäîâûå New breeding territories in 2009–2010 â 2009–2010 ãã. âîññòàíîâèâøèåñÿ ó÷àñòêè, Ãíåçäîâûå Recovered breeding territories in 2009–2010 ó÷àñòêè â 2010 ã. ãíåçäîâûå Ïîñåùàâøèåñÿ Observed breeding territories in 2010 ó÷àñòêè Çàíÿòûå â 2010 ã. ãíåçäîâûå Occupied breeding territories in 2010 ó÷àñòêè â 2010 ã. ãíåçäîâûå Óñïåøíûå Successful breeding territories in 2010 Êðàñíîÿðñêèé êðàé Krasnoyarsk District 17 2 15 2 2 4 2 1 2 2 Ðåñïóáëèêà Õàêàñèÿ Republic of Khakassia 33 7 26 1 8 12 11 6 2 4 3 1 Ðåñïóáëèêà Àëòàé Republic of Altai 52 6 46 1 14 21 20 13 38 12 12 6 Ðåñïóáëèêà Òûâà Republic of Tyva 270 35 235 13 33 88 75 35 3 3 44 34 21 Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêèé Ðåãèîí Altai-Sayan Region 372 50 322 17 57 125 108 55 43 3 62 51 28 144 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Òàáë. 3. Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà äëÿ òèïè÷íûõ ìåñòîîáèòàíèé Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîãî ðåãèîíà áåç ýêñïåðòíûõ îöåíîê. Table 3. Estimation of the Saker number within the typical habitats in the Altai-Sayan Ecoregion (without expert estimation).

2008 2010 Óñïåøíûå Óñïåøíûå Çàíÿòûå ãíåçäîâûå Çàíÿòûå ãíåçäîâûå ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè ó÷àñòêè Successful ó÷àñòêè Successful Occupied breed- breeding ter- Occupied breed- breeding ter- Ðåãèîí / District Ïëîùàäü / Area ing territories ritories ing territories ritories Ðåñïóáëèêà Õàêàñèÿ è Êðàñíîÿðñêèé êðàé Republic of Khakassia and Krasnoyarsk District 20593.2 151 81 136 27 Ðåñïóáëèêà Àëòàé Republic of Altai 34063.5 346 201 346 173 Ðåñïóáëèêà Òûâà Republic of Tyva 94708.0 860 412 830 513 Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêèé ðåãèîí Altai-Sayan Region 149364.7 1356 (1005–1707) 695 (515–875) 1312 (1000–1624) 713 (558–868)

Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà, ñ ó÷¸- êàñèè.  îñíîâíîì ìåñòà îòëîâà ïòèö ïðè- òîì ýêñïåðòíûõ îöåíîê, ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà óðî÷åíû ê ðàéöåíòðàì, ðàñïîëîæåííûì 2010 ã. ñîñòàâèëà 1322–1596, â ñðåäíåì áëèç ìåñò ïëîòíîãî ãíåçäîâàíèÿ áàëîáàíà 1468, òåððèòîðèàëüíûõ ïàð, ïðè ýòîì – – ýòî Êîø-Àãà÷ (Àëòàé), Óæóð (Êðàñíîÿð- 723–858, â ñðåäíåì 791, óñïåøíûõ ïàð ñêèé êðàé), Êîïüåâî, Øèðà Áîãðàä, Óñòü- (òàáë. 4). Àáàêàí, Àñêèç (Õàêàñèÿ). Íåîæèäàííûì Áîëüøèíñòâî ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, íà êî- îêàçàëñÿ âûñîêèé ïðåññ ëîâà â Õàêàññêîì òîðûõ äåðæàòñÿ îäèíî÷íûå ñàìöû, ïðè- çàïîâåäíèêå. Èç ïÿòè âûÿâëåííûõ ãíåçäî- óðî÷åíî ê òðàäèöèîííûì ðåãèîíàì ëîâà âûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áàëîáàíîâ íà òåððèòîðèè ïòèö. Êàê âèäíî íà ðèñóíêå 4, íàèáîëüøåå êëàñòåðîâ ãîñóäàðñòâåííîãî ïðèðîäíîãî êîëè÷åñòâî òàêèõ ó÷àñòêîâ âûÿâëåíî â Êîø- çàïîâåäíèêà «Õàêàññêèé» «Õîëë-Áîãàç» è Àãà÷ñêîì ðàéîíå Ðåñïóáëèêè Àëòàé è â Õà- «Êàìûçÿêñêàÿ ñòåïü» â 2008 ã. îäèí óæå

Òàáë. 4. Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíà ñ ó÷¸òîì ýêñïåðòíûõ îöåíîê. Table 4. Estimation of the Saker number in the Altai-Sayan Ecoregion including expert estimation.

2003 2006 2008

Ïëîùàäü

Ðåãèîí / District Area ó÷àñòêè Çàíÿòûå ãíåçäîâûå Occupied breeding territories ó÷àñòêè ãíåçäîâûå Óñïåøíûå Successful breeding territories ó÷àñòêè Çàíÿòûå ãíåçäîâûå Occupied breeding territories ó÷àñòêè ãíåçäîâûå Óñïåøíûå Successful breeding territories ó÷àñòêè Çàíÿòûå ãíåçäîâûå Occupied breeding territories ó÷àñòêè ãíåçäîâûå Óñïåøíûå Successful breeding territories Ðåñïóáëèêà Õàêàñèÿ è Êðàñíîÿðñêèé êðàé Republic of Khakassia and 246 107 221 186 182 98 Krasnoyarsk District 20593.2 (220–270) (96–117) (195–245) (164–206) (145–201) (78–108) Ðåñïóáëèêà Àëòàé 465 202 455 383 397 190 Republic of Altai 34063.5 (310–610) (135–265) (300–600) (253–505) (352–442) (169–212) Ðåñïóáëèêà Òûâà 1130 491 937 789 939 547 Republic of Tyva 94708.0 (1070–1216) (465–529) (877–1023) (739-861) (875–1003) (510–584) Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêèé ðåãèîí 1841 800 1613 1358 1518 778 Altai-Sayan Region 149364.7 (1600–2096) (696–911) (1372–1868) (1155-1573) (1372–1646) (703–844) Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 145

äàâíî íå çàíèìàëñÿ ïòèöàìè, íà äâóõ ó÷àñò- êàõ ïðèñóòñòâîâàëè ëèøü ñàìöû (ñàìêè, âå- ðîÿòíî, áûëè îòëîâëåíû) è ëèøü äâà ãíåç- äà, óäàë¸ííûõ îò ïåðèôåðèè ãîð âãëóáü ïðåäãîðíîé ëåñîñòåïè, áûëè óñïåøíûìè.  2010 ã. ïîñëåäíèé ó÷àñòîê áàëîáàíîâ â çàïîâåäíèêå îêàçàëñÿ ïîêèíóòûì ïòèöàìè. Ðàäóåò òî, ÷òî â áëèæàéøèõ ê çàïîâåäíèêó îêðåñòíîñòÿõ ñôîðìèðîâàëñÿ íîâûé ó÷à- ñòîê èç ìîëîäûõ ïòèö, ó êîòîðûõ, ê ñîæà- ëåíèþ, â 2010 ã. óñïåøíîñòü ðàçìíîæåíèÿ íå óñòàíîâëåíà. Êàê ïðàâèëî, áîëüøàÿ ÷àñòü ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, íà êîòîðûõ äåðæàòñÿ îäèíî÷- Ñàìåö áàëîáàíà íà ïðèñàäå. Ðåñïóáëèêà Òûâà, íûå ñàìöû, ïåðåõîäèò â ðàçðÿä ïîêèíóòûõ 11.06.2010. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. â òå÷åíèå ñëåäóþùèõ òð¸õ-÷åòûð¸õ ëåò. È Male of the Saker Falcon on the perch. Republic of òîëüêî â ðåäêèõ ñëó÷àÿõ íàáëþäàåòñÿ âîñ- Tyva, 11/06/2010. Photo by I. Karyakin. ñòàíîâëåíèå ïàð çà ñ÷¸ò ìîëîäûõ ñàìîê.  ýòîé ñèòóàöèè âûãëÿäèò êðàéíå ïîçèòèâíûì åù¸ 2 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà áàëîáàíîâ, òàêæå ïðîöåññ âîññòàíîâëåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè áà- èç ìîëîäûõ ïòèö, íà îäíîì èç êîòîðûõ ñî- ëîáàíà â Òóâèíñêîé êîòëîâèíå, ãäå â 2006 êîëû óñïåøíî âûâåëè ïîòîìñòâî.  öåëîì ã. Ñèáýêîöåíòðîì íà ñðåäñòâà ÃÃÔ ðåàëè- íà ïëîùàäêå çà 3 ãîäà ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëî- çîâûâàëñÿ ïðîåêò ïî ñîçäàíèþ ñèñòåìû áàíà óâåëè÷èëàñü ñ îäíîé äî ñåìè ïàð. èñêóññòâåííûõ ãíåçäîâèé â áûâøåì àãðî- Ïðèìå÷àòåëüíî òî, ÷òî âñ¸ ýòî ïðîèñõîäèò ëàíäøàôòå (Êàðÿêèí, Íèêîëåíêî, 2006). íà ôîíå ðåãóëÿðíîãî èçúÿòèÿ ñàìîê èç ïî- Ê 2008 ã. çäåñü ñîõðàíÿëàñü åäèíñòâåííàÿ ïóëÿöèè.  ÷àñòíîñòè, íà ýòîé æå ïëîùàä- ïàðà ñîêîëîâ, ðàçìíîæàâøàÿñÿ íà îïîðå êå â Òóâèíñêîé êîòëîâèíå, íà ïîñëåäíåì ËÝÏ. Óæå â 2009 ã. íà äàííîé òåððèòîðèè ñîõðàíÿâøåìñÿ ó÷àñòêå, â ïàðå ñî ñòàðûì ïðîèçîøëî âîññòàíîâëåíèå äðóãîãî ãíåç- ñàìöîì â 2010 ã. íàáëþäàëàñü ìîëîäàÿ äîâîãî ó÷àñòêà áàëîáàíîâ, íà êîòîðîì ñàìêà, îêîëüöîâàííàÿ íàìè â ïðåäûäóùèå ïòèöû ïåðåñòàëè ðåãèñòðèðîâàòüñÿ åù¸ ãîäû ïòåíöîì. â 2002 ã. – ìîëîäûå ñîêîëû çàíÿëè ãíåç- Èçúÿòèå ñàìîê, âèäèìî, íàèáîëåå ñå- äîâóþ ïëàòôîðìó íà äåðåâå, â êîòîðîé ðü¸çíàÿ ïðîáëåìà äëÿ Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîé óñïåøíî ðàçìíîæàëèñü â 2009 è 2010 ãã. ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà. Íà 29 ãí¸çäàõ ñ  2010 ã. íà ïëàòôîðìàõ ñôîðìèðîâàëîñü 1999–2000 ãã. ìû ðåãóëÿðíî ñíèìàëè íà âèäåî ñàìöîâ è ñàìîê è ìîæåì ãîâîðèòü îá èñ÷åçíîâåíèè ïàð íà 2-õ ãí¸çäàõ, èñ- 2010 ÷åçíîâåíèè ñàìîê íà 5 ãí¸çäàõ è ñìåíå ïàðòíåðîâ íà 22-õ ãí¸çäàõ çà 12 ëåò, ïðè ýòîì íà 3-õ ãí¸çäàõ ñìåíèëèñü ñàìöû è íà 19 – ñàìêè (ðèñ. 5). Åñëè ê 2008 ã. åù¸ ñîõðàíÿëîñü 3 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà, íà êîòîðûõ ñàìêè áûëè ñòàðûå, íàáëþ- äàâøèåñÿ ïîñëåäíèå 10 ëåò, òî â 2010 ã. ñòàðûå ñàìêè ñìåíèëèñü íà ìîëîäûõ è íà ýòèõ ó÷àñòêàõ. Ïðè÷¸ì, íà îäíîì èç íèõ ñòàðàÿ ñàìêà, ïîìå÷åííàÿ ñïóòíèêîâûì ïåðåäàò÷èêîì â 2004 ã. (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2005), ïðîïàëà â 2009 ã., à â 2010 ã. â Çàíÿòûå ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè ó÷àñòêè Çàíÿòûå ãíåçäîâûå Occupied breeding territories ó÷àñòêè ãíåçäîâûå Óñïåøíûå Successful breeding territories çàíÿòûõ ãíåçäîâûõ Òðåíä çà 2003–2010 ãã. (%) ó÷àñòêîâ Trend of occupied breeding territories in 2003–2010 (%) çàíÿòûõ ãíåçäîâûõ Òðåíä çà 2008–2010 ãã. (%) ó÷àñòêîâ Trend of occupied breeding territories in 2008–2010 (%) ïàðå ìû íàáëþäàëè áîëåå ìîëîäóþ ïòèöó (óæå áåç ïðèçíàêîâ þâåíèëüíîãî íàðÿäà), 162 32 êîòîðàÿ áûëà íàìè îêîëüöîâàíà ïòåíöîì. (125–181) (25–36) -34% -11% Ñåé÷àñ èç 29 ïàð, íàõîäÿùèõñÿ ïîä ðåãó- 397 198 ëÿðíûì íàáëþäåíèåì, â 5 ïàðàõ ñàìêè ñ (352–442) (176-221) -15% 0 íàøèìè êîëüöàìè, ò.å., îíè áûëè îêîëü- 909 561 öîâàíû ïòåíöàìè íà ýòèõ æå ìîíèòîðèí- (845–973) (522–601) -20% -3% ãîâûõ ïëîùàäêàõ. Ïîêà íè îäíîãî îêîëü- 1468 791 öîâàííîãî ñàìöà íà ïëîùàäêàõ âñòðåòèòü (1322–1596) (723–858) -20% -3% íå óäàëîñü. 146 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

íî ÿäû, â òîì ÷èñëå è áðîìàäèàëîí, âñ¸ åù¸ ïðèìåíÿþòñÿ, â ÷àñòíîñòè â Óëàíãîì- ñêîì àéìàêå. Âäîëü ðîññèéñêîé ãðàíèöû, íà ó÷àñòêå îò Òåñ-Õåìà äî îç. Óáñó-Íóð, ïî òåððèòîðèè Ìîíãîëèè ïóùåíà â äåé- ñòâèå íîâàÿ ïòèöåîïàñíàÿ ËÝÏ, êîòîðàÿ ìîæåò ÿâëÿòüñÿ ïðè÷èíîé ãèáåëè äåñÿòêîâ áàëîáàíîâ åæåãîäíî.  öåëîì ïî Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîìó ðåãèîíó ñîõðàíÿåòñÿ íåãàòèâíûé òðåíä ÷èñëåííî- ñòè áàëîáàíà (òàáë. 4, ðèñ. 6), õîòÿ òåìïû ïàäåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè çàìåäëÿþòñÿ (äîñòî- âåðíîñòü àïïðîêñèìàöèè R2=0,99). Åñëè çà ïåðèîä ñ 2003 ïî 2006 ãã. ïàäåíèå ÷èñ- ëåííîñòè ñîñòàâëÿëî 12,38%, òî çà ïåðèîä ñ 2006 ïî 2008 ãã. – óæå 5,89%, çà ïåðèîä Ðèñ. 5. Ñìåíà ïàðòí¸ðîâ â ïîñòîÿííî íàáëþäàåìûõ ïàðàõ. ñ 2008 ïî 2010 ãã. – 3,29% (ðèñ. 6). Ïðè îáùåì ñîêðàùåíèè ÷èñëåííîñòè âèäà çà Fig. 5. Replacement of birds in the pairs under perennial observation. ïîñëåäíèå 8 ëåò (ñ 2003 ïî 2010 ãã.) íà 20% äèíàìèêà ðàçíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïè- Çà ïîñëåäíèå 3 ãîäà íàìåòèëàñü òåí- ðîâîê íåîäèíàêîâà. Áîëüøå âñåõ ñòðàäà- äåíöèÿ èñ÷åçíîâåíèÿ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ åò Õàêàñèÿ – çàôèêñèðîâàíî íåóêëîííîå áàëîáàíîâ âäîëü ìîíãîëüñêîé ãðàíèöû â ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè íà 34% çà 8 ëåò. Þæíîé Òóâå, íåñìîòðÿ íà âîññòàíîâëå- Åñëè ãíåçäîâàÿ ãðóïïèðîâêà íà ñåâåðî- íèå ãíåçäîâîãî ôîíäà, áëàãîäàðÿ óñòà- çàïàäå ðåñïóáëèêè îñòàåòñÿ áîëåå èëè ìå- íîâêå ñèñòåìû èñêóññòâåííûõ ãíåçäîâèé â íåå ñòàáèëüíîé, òî ãíåçäîâûå ãðóïïèðîâêè îõðàííîé çîíå çàïîâåäíèêà «Óáñóíóðñêàÿ öåíòðàëüíîé ÷àñòè ñîêðàòèëèñü íà 50%.  êîòëîâèíà» è àêòèâíûì îñâîåíèåì èõ ìîõ- ïåðâóþ î÷åðåäü ñîêðàùåíèå ïðîèñõîäèò íîíîãèìè êóðãàííèêàìè (Buteo hemila- çà ñ÷¸ò îòëîâà ïòèö, êîòîðûé âåä¸òñÿ, ïî- sius). Ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè ãíåçäîâîé âèäèìîìó, íåñêîëüêèìè ãðóïïàìè, ïðåè- ãðóïïèðîâêè â ëåâîáåðåæüå Òåñ-Õåìà, ìóùåñòâåííî â Øèðèíñêîì, Îðäæîíèêèä- âîçìîæíî, ïðîèñõîäèò íå òîëüêî ïî ïðè- çåâñêîì, Áîãðàäñêîì, Óñòü-Àáàêàíñêîì è ÷èíå îòëîâà ïòèö, íî è ïî ïðè÷èíå ãèáåëè Àñêèçñêîì ðàéîíàõ (îñîáåííî ïîñòðàäàëè ïòèö â Ìîíãîëèè âî âðåìÿ êî÷¸âîê. Çäåñü ãðóïïèðîâêè áàëîáàíà â ïîñëåäíèõ òð¸õ ìîæåò èãðàòü ðîëü êàê ãèáåëü ñîêîëîâ îò ðàéîíàõ). Òàê, íà áîëüøåé ÷àñòè òåððèòî- îòðàâëåíèÿ, òàê è îò ïîðàæåíèÿ òîêîì íà ðèè Àñêèçñêîãî ðàéîíà ðåñóðñ ãíåçäÿùèõ- ËÝÏ. Íåñìîòðÿ íà ïðåêðàùåíèå ìàññîâûõ ñÿ áàëîáàíîâ âûáðàí ïðàêòè÷åñêè ïîëíî- êîìïàíèé ïî áîðüáå ñ ïîë¸âêîé Áðàíäòà ñòüþ.  Òóâå ïðåññ ëîâà çíà÷èòåëüíî íèæå. (Microtus [Lasiopodomys] brandtii) ñ ïðè- Çäåñü ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè íà 17% ìåíåíèåì ÿäîâ íîâîãî ïîêîëåíèÿ, ëîêàëü- ïðîèçîøëî â ïåðèîä ñ 2003 ïî 2006 ãã.,

Áàëîáàí ñ êîëüöîì. Ðåñïóáëèêà Òûâà, 05.06.2010. Ñàìêà áàëîáàíà íà ãíåçäå. Ðåñïóáëèêà Òûâà, 09.06.2010. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Saker Falcon with ring. Republic of Tyva, 05/06/2010. Female of the Saker Falcon in the nest. Republic of Tyva, 09/06/2010. Photo by I. Karyakin. Photo by I. Karyakin. Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 147

çà ãîä – 54,9%.  2009 ã. äîëÿ óñïåøíûõ ãí¸çä îò çàíÿòûõ â Ðåñïóáëèêå Àëòàé ñî- ñòàâèëà 58,82%.  âûâîäêàõ áàëîáàíà â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå îò 1 äî 5 ïòåíöîâ, â ñðåäíåì (n=278) 2,64±1,06.  çàâèñèìîñòè îò ÷èñ- ëåííîñòè îáúåêòîâ ïèòàíèÿ è õàðàêòåðà âåñíû, óñïåøíîñòü ðàçìíîæåíèÿ ñîêîëîâ ìîæåò ñóùåñòâåííî èçìåíÿòüñÿ (òàáë. 5).  2008 ã. âûâîäêè ñîñòîÿëè èç 1–4, â ñðåä- íåì (n=33) 2,48±0,96, ïòåíöîâ íà óñïåø- íîå ãíåçäî, ïðè÷¸ì, äîëÿ óñïåøíûõ ãí¸çä îò ÷èñëà çàíÿòûõ ñîñòàâèëà ëèøü 50,9%. Îñíîâíàÿ ìàññà ïóñòóþùèõ ãí¸çä áûëà ñî- ñðåäîòî÷åíà â ëåâîáåðåæüå Òåñ-Õåìà è ïî þæíîìó øëåéôó Òàííó-Îëà íà ñåâåðå Ðèñ. 6. Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå è òåìïû Óáñóíóðñêîé êîòëîâèíû, ãäå íàáëþäàëàñü ïàäåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè ýòîãî âèäà â 2003–2010 ãã. îáøèðíàÿ äåïðåññèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè îñíîâ- Fig. 6. Estimation of the Saker number in the Altai-Sayan ecoregion and its nega- íûõ êîðìîâ (Êàðÿêèí, Íèêîëåíêî, 2008). tive trend in 2003–2010.  2009 ã. â Ðåñïóáëèêå Àëòàé âûâîäêè áàëîáàíîâ ñîñòîÿëè èç 1–5, â ñðåäíåì çà ïåðèîä ñ 2006 ïî 2008 ãã. ÷èñëåííîñòü (n=12) 2,5±1,17, ïòåíöîâ íà óñïåøíîå äàæå íåñêîëüêî ïîäðîñëà, íî â 2010 ã. ñíî- ãíåçäî.  2010 ã. âûâîäêè áàëîáàíîâ â ðå- âà óïàëà çà ñ÷¸ò âûïàäåíèÿ ó÷àñòêîâ âäîëü ãèîíå ñîñòîÿëè èç 1–5, â ñðåäíåì (n=23) ìîíãîëüñêîé ãðàíèöû.  Òóâèíñêîé êîòëî- 2,83±0,89, ïòåíöîâ íà óñïåøíîå ãíåçäî, âèíå íà Åíèñåå íà÷àëñÿ ïðîöåññ çàìåùå- ïðè÷¸ì äîëÿ óñïåøíûõ ãí¸çä îò ÷èñëà çà- íèÿ áàëîáàíà ñàïñàíîì (Falco peregrinus), íÿòûõ ñîñòàâèëà 54,9% (ñì. âûøå) è îíè ïîäîáíî òîìó, ÷òî íàáëþäàåòñÿ â Õàêàñèè áûëè ðàñïðåäåëåíû áîëåå èëè ìåíåå ðàâ- ñ 2002 ã. Íà Åíèñåå â áëèæàéøèõ îêðåñò- íîìåðíî â àðåàëå âèäà. íîñòÿõ Êûçûëà óæå íà 3-õ èçâåñòíûõ ãíåç- äîâûõ ó÷àñòêàõ ïîñëå èñ÷åçíîâåíèÿ áàëî- áàíîâ â 2009–2010 ãã. ïîÿâèëèñü ñàïñàíû, ïðè÷¸ì, â îäíîì ñëó÷àå ïàðà ñôîðìèðîâà- ëàñü èç ìîëîäûõ ïòèö.  Ðåñïóáëèêå Àëòàé íàáëþäàåòñÿ ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè íà 15%, ïðåèìóùåñòâåííî çà ñ÷¸ò èñ÷åçíîâå- íèÿ ñàìöîâ ñ ó÷àñòêîâ ïî ïåðèôåðèè ×óé- ñêîé ñòåïè, íà êîòîðûõ ñàìêè áûëè îòëîâ- ëåíû åù¸ â íà÷àëå 2000-õ ãîäîâ, è ïàðû íå âîññòàíàâëèâàþòñÿ äî ñèõ ïîð.  Çàïàäíîì Àëòàå ÷èñëåííîñòü, íàïðîòèâ, íåçíà÷èòåëü- íî ïîäðîñëà, à âäîëü ãîñãðàíèöû ñ Ìîí- ãîëèåé îñòà¸òñÿ ñòàáèëüíîé â òå÷åíèå ïî- ñëåäíèõ 11 ëåò. Çà ïîñëåäíèå 3 ãîäà çäåñü íè îäèí èç èçâåñòíûõ ó÷àñòêîâ íå èñ÷åç.  2010 ã. â Þãî-Âîñòî÷íîì Àëòàå áûëî ïî- ëó÷åíî åù¸ îäíî ñâèäåòåëüñòâî ïðåññà íåëå- ãàëüíîãî îòëîâà íà ãðóïïèðîâêó áàëîáàíîâ. Íà îäíîì èç æèëûõ ãí¸çä íàáëþäàëàñü ñàì- êà ñ êîæàíûì êîëüöîì íà ëàïå. Òàêèå êîëüöà îáû÷íî èñïîëüçóþòñÿ äëÿ ïðèâÿçûâàíèÿ îò- ëîâëåííûõ ïòèö ê êîëûøêàì.

Ðàçìíîæåíèå Äîëÿ óñïåøíûõ ãí¸çä îò çàíÿòûõ â 2010 ã. ñîñòàâèëà â Êðàñíîÿðñêîì êðàå Ïòåíöû áàëîáàíà â ãí¸çäàõ íà ñêàëàõ. è Õàêàñèè – 20,0%, â Ðåñïóáëèêå Òûâà Ðåñïóáëèêà Òûâà, 10.06.2010. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà – 61,76%, â Ðåñïóáëèêå Àëòàé – 50,0%, Chicks of the Saker Falcon in the nests on the rocks. â ñðåäíåì ïî Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîìó ðåãèîíó Republic of Tyva, 10/06/2010. Photos by I. Karyakin. 148 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Òàáë. 4. Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå ñ ó÷¸òîì ýêñïåðòíûõ îöåíîê. Table 4. Estimation of the Saker number in the Altai-Sayan Ecoregion including expert estimation.

×èñëî ïîñåù¸ííûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ Óñïåøíûå ãí¸çäà Observed breeding territories Successful nests ×èñëî Äîëÿ óñïåøíûõ ïòåíöîâ íà Äîëÿ çàíÿòûõ ãí¸çä îò ÷èñëà Äîëÿ óñïåøíûõ óñïåøíóþ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ïîñåùàâøèõñÿ ãí¸çä îò ÷èñëà ïàðó îò ÷èñëà ïîñåù¸ííûõ ó÷àñòêîâ çàíÿòûõ ó÷àñòêîâ Number of Occupied breeding Successful nests per Successful nests chicks per Âñå Çàíÿòûå territories per all ob- Âñå all observed territo- per occupied brood (M±SD) Ãîä / Year Total Occupancy served territories All ries breeding territories (n) (Lim) 1999 98 53 54.08 52 53.06 98.11 2.25±0.74 (n=51) (1–3) 2000 83 20 24.10 20 24.10 100.00 2.38±0.65 (n=13) (1–3) 2001 61 31 50.82 29 47.54 93.55 2.44±1.19 (n=25) (1–4) 2002 102 46 45.10 45 44.12 97.83 3.00±1.31 (n=37) (1–5) 2003 77 46 59.74 20 25.97 43.48 2.69±1.03 (n=13) (1–4) 2004 61 51 83.61 34 55.74 66.67 2.24±0.83 (n=29) (1–4) 2005 42 39 92.86 25 59.52 64.10 3.73±0.87 (n=26) (1–5) 2006 20 19 95.00 16 80.00 84.21 2.69±1.30 (n=16) (1–5) 2008 125 108 86.40 55 44.00 50.93 2.48±0.96 (n=33) (1–4) 2009 34* 34* 100.00 20 58.82 58.82 2.50±1.17 (n=12) (1–5) 2010 62 51 82.26 28 45.16 54.90 2.83±0.89 (n=23) (1–5) Âñå / Total 765** 498** 65.10 344* 44.97 69.08 2.64±1.06 (n=278) (1–5)

* – òîëüêî òå ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè, íà êîòîðûõ óäàëîñü îñìîòðåòü ãí¸çäà (âñåãî çà ãîä ïîñåùàëîñü 46 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, íî íà 12 èç íèõ ëèáî íå óäàëîñü íàéòè ãíåçäî, ëèáî íå óäàëîñü îñìîòðåòü åãî). * – only the breeding territories which nests were inspected in (a total of 46 breeding territories were observed a year, but nests were not found or not inspected in 12 territories). ** – ñ ó÷¸òîì ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áàëîáàíà, îáíàðóæåííûõ â ïðåäûäóùèå ãîäû è ïîâòîðíî ïîñåùàâøèõñÿ â ïîñëåäóþùèå ãîäû. ** – including the breeding territories, found during previous years and visited once again next years.

Íèçêàÿ äîëÿ óñïåøíûõ ãí¸çä â Êðàñíîÿð- ñòîÿë ë¸ä è ñîêîëû, íå óñïåâøèå ïðèñòó- ñêîì êðàå è Õàêàñèè â 2010 ã., âîçìîæíî, ïèòü ê ðàçìíîæåíèþ â íîðìàëüíûå ñðîêè, ñâÿçàíà ñ ïîãîäíûìè óñëîâèÿìè. Íà ñåâå- âèäèìî æäàëè ïîòåïëåíèÿ è àêòèâíîñòè ðå Õàêàñèè 20 ìàÿ íà ìíîãèõ îç¸ðàõ åù¸ ñóñëèêîâ. Âåñüìà âåðîÿòíî, ÷òî íåêîòî- ðûå ïàðû ïðèñòóïèëè ê ðàçìíîæåíèþ ïî- Ïòåíöû áàëîáàíà â ãíåçäå íà ñêàëå. ñëå 20 ìàÿ.  ÷àñòíîñòè, â Þãî-Âîñòî÷íîì Ðåñïóáëèêà Òûâà, Àëòàå, ãäå ïîãîäíûå óñëîâèÿ â ýòîì ãîäó 09.06.2010. òàêæå áûëè ïëîõèå, 7 èþëÿ íàìè áûë îá- Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà íàðóæåí âûâîäîê ñ îïåðÿþùèìèñÿ ïòåí- Chicks of the Saker öàìè â âîçðàñòå 30 äíåé, ò.å., íà 3 íåäåëè Falcon in the nest on ïîçæå íîðìàëüíûõ ñðîêîâ ðàçìíîæåíèÿ the rock. Republic of Tyva, ýòîãî âèäà íà äàííîé òåððèòîðèè. 09/06/2010. Àíàëèç äèíàìèêè ÷èñëà ïòåíöîâ â âû- Photo by I. Karyakin. âîäêàõ â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå óêà- çûâàåò íà ðîñò çà ïîñëåäíèå 12 ëåò êàê ìàêñèìàëüíîãî ÷èñëà ïòåíöîâ â âûâîäêàõ (äîñòîâåðíîñòü àïïðîêñèìàöèè R2=0,67), òàê è ñðåäíåãî êîëè÷åñòâà ïòåíöîâ â âû- Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 149

è ïàäåíèÿ óñïåøíîñòè ðàçìíîæåíèÿ. Äîëÿ óñïåøíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ îò ÷èñëà çà- íÿòûõ, õîòÿ è ñèëüíî ôëóêòóèðóÿ, âñ¸ æå ñîêðàùàåòñÿ (äîñòîâåðíîñòü àïïðîêñèìà- öèè R2=0,48) (ðèñ. 8).  îñíîâå ïðè÷èí ñíèæåíèÿ óñïåõà ðàçìíîæåíèÿ, êàê óæå îòìå÷àëîñü âûøå, ëåæèò ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñ- ëà ñàìîê â ïîïóëÿöèè è ñíèæåíèå âîçðàñòà ñàìîê â ðàçìíîæàþùèõñÿ ïàðàõ. Àíàëèç ïðîäóêòèâíîñòè ïàð ñî ñòàðûìè è ìîëîäû- ìè ñàìêàìè íà ìîíèòîðèíãîâûõ ïëîùàä- êàõ â 2001, 2003–2004 è 2008 ãã. ïîêàçàë, ÷òî êîëè÷åñòâî ÿèö, à, ñëåäîâàòåëüíî, è òîëüêî ÷òî âûëóïèâøèõñÿ ïòåíöîâ â âûâîä- êå ìîëîäûõ ñàìîê êîëåáëåòñÿ â øèðîêèõ ïðåäåëàõ – îò 1 äî 5, ñîñòàâëÿÿ â ñðåäíåì (n=12) 3,08±1,24, â îòëè÷èå îò ñòàðûõ ïòèö, îòêëàäûâàþùèõ áîëåå èëè ìåíåå ñòàáèëüíî (n=17) â ñðåäíåì 3,0±0,61 ÿéöà (îò 2-õ äî 4-õ). Ïðè ýòîì, ãèáåëü ïîòîìñòâà ó ïàð ñ ìîëîäûìè ñàìêàìè âûøå è ñîñòàâ- ëÿåò 64,86%, ïî ñðàâíåíèþ ñî ñòàðûìè, ó êîòîðûõ îòõîä ïòåíöîâ äî âûëåòà – ëèøü 11,76%.  èòîãå ïàðû ñî ñòàðûìè ñàìêàìè çà 4 ãîäà íàáëþäåíèé ïîäíÿëè íà êðûëî â ñðåäíåì (n=17) 2,65±0,79 ïòåíöîâ íà óñïåøíîå ãíåçäî, à ñ ìîëîäûìè – (n=12) 1,08±1,16 (Êàðÿêèí, Íèêîëåíêî, 2008). Íà óñïåøíîñòü ðàçìíîæåíèÿ áàëîáàíîâ â ðåãèîíå äîñòàòî÷íî ñèëüíîå âëèÿíèå îêàçûâàåò äèíàìèêà ÷èñëåííîñòè îñíîâ- Ðèñ. 7. Ðàçìåð âûâîäêîâ áàëîáàíà â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå â öåëîì (A) è íà íûõ îáúåêòîâ ïèòàíèÿ. Îäíàêî, ïî ïðè÷è- ìîíèòîðèíãîâûõ ïëîùàäêàõ Òåñ-Õåì è Òàííó-Îëà (B) â 1999–2010 ãã. íå àñèíõðîííîñòè êîëåáàíèé ÷èñëåííîñòè Fig. 7. Brood sizes of the Sakers in the Altai-Sayan region (A) and Tes-Hem and ðàçíûõ âèäîâ-æåðòâ â ðàçíûõ ÷àñòÿõ ðåãè- the Tannu-Ola plots (B) in 1999–2010. Labels: 1 – average brood size, 2 – maxi- îíà, óñïåõ ðàçìíîæåíèÿ è ïðîäóêòèâíîñòü mum brood size. ðàçìíîæàþùèõñÿ ïàð áàëîáàíîâ â ðàçíûõ ÷àñòÿõ ðåãèîíà êîëåáëþòñÿ òàêæå àñèí- õðîííî. Ïàäåíèå óñïåõà ðàçìíîæåíèÿ è/ èëè ïðîäóêòèâíîñòè, ïî ïðè÷èíå íèçêîé ÷èñëåííîñòè êîðìîâ, â îäíîé ÷àñòè ðå- ãèîíà êîìïåíñèðóåòñÿ óâåëè÷åíèåì óñïå- õà ðàçìíîæåíèÿ è/èëè ïðîäóêòèâíîñòè â äðóãîé åãî ÷àñòè. Äàííàÿ çàâèñèìîñòü íà- ãëÿäíî ïîêàçàíà íà ðèñóíêå 8- ïî äèíà- ìèêå ïðîäóêòèâíîñòè âûâîäêîâ áàëîáàíîâ íà ðàçíûõ ïëîùàäêàõ â Òóâå. Ê ñîæàëåíèþ, ïîêà íå óäàëîñü â ïîë- íîé ìåðå îáðàáîòàòü äàííûå ïî ïîëîâîé ñòðóêòóðå âûâîäêîâ, îäíàêî àíàëèç âûâîä- êîâ â 2006 è 2008 ã. íà ïëîùàäêàõ Òåñ-Õåì è Òàííó-Îëà ïîêàçûâàåò äîìèíèðîâàíèå ñàìîê (70%) íà ïîñëåäíåé ïëîùàäêå, ãäå çà ïîñëåäíèå ãîäû ñàìêè â ðàçìíîæàþùèõñÿ Ðèñ. 8. Óñïåõ ðàçìíîæåíèÿ áàëîáàíà â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå â 1999–2010 ãã. ïàðàõ íàèáîëåå èíòåíñèâíî ìåíÿëèñü. Fig. 8. Breeding success of the Sakers in the Altai-Sayan region in 1999–2010. Çàêëþ÷åíèå âîäêàõ (äîñòîâåðíîñòü àïïðîêñèìàöèè Ìîíèòîðèíã ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà â R2=0,16) (ðèñ. 7). Âñ¸ ýòî ïðîèñõîäèò íà Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå ïîêàçûâàåò ôîíå ñîêðàùåíèÿ ÷èñëà çàíÿòûõ ó÷àñòêîâ óñòîé÷èâîå ïàäåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè âèäà. 150 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Íåñìîòðÿ íà òî, ÷òî òåìïû ñîêðàùåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè ñíèçèëèñü, ñòàáèëèçàöèè íå íàñòóïàåò, è, âèäèìî, ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà áóäåò ïðîäîëæàòü ïàäàòü, ïîêà áóäóò ñîõðà- íÿòüñÿ êëþ÷åâûå íåãàòèâíûå ôàêòîðû. Ïà- äåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà îïðåäåëÿåòñÿ öåëîé ñîâîêóïíîñòüþ êàê åñòåñòâåííûõ, òàê è àíòðîïîãåííûõ ôàêòîðîâ, âêëþ÷àÿ ãèáåëü íà ËÝÏ è îò îòðàâëåíèÿ, õèùíè÷å- ñòâî ôèëèíà (Bubo bubo) (ñì. Êàðÿêèí, Íè- êîëåíêî, 2008), îäíàêî îñíîâíîé âêëàä â ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè ïîïóëÿöèé âèäà, â ñëàáîîñâîåííîì Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèî- íå, âíîñèò íåëåãàëüíûé îòëîâ ïòèö. Áîëü- øîé îòõîä ñàìîê è, êàê ñëåäñòâèå, ðåçêîå ñíèæåíèå èõ âîçðàñòà â ðàçìíîæàþùèõñÿ Ñë¸òîê áàëîáàíà. Ðåñïóáëèêà Àëòàé, 06.07.2010. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. ïàðàõ, äîêàçàíî ðåãóëÿðíûìè íàáëþäåíèÿ- Fledgling of the Saker Falcon Republic of Altai, ìè çà ïàðàìè íà ïëîùàäêàõ, â òîì ÷èñëå è 06/07/2010. Photo by I. Karyakin. êîëüöåâàíèåì. Ñòîëü âûñîêèé îòõîä ñàìîê ìîæåò áûòü òîëüêî ïî ïðè÷èíå ñåëåêòèâ- íîãî èõ îòáîðà â ïðèðîäå, ïîýòîìó ìû Ïðîáëåìíîé òåððèòîðèåé âî âñåõ îò- ñêëîííû îòíîñèòü ýòî íà ñ÷¸ò íåëåãàëüíîãî íîøåíèÿõ äëÿ Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêèõ ïîïóëÿöèé îòëîâà êàê â ðåãèîíå, òàê è íà ìèãðàöèÿõ áàëîáàíîâ îñòà¸òñÿ Ìîíãîëèÿ, â êîòîðîé ñîêîëîâ â ñîñåäíåé Ìîíãîëèè è Êèòàå. ìíîãèå äàæå îñ¸äëûå ïòèöû, ãíåçäÿùèåñÿ Äëÿ ñîêðàùåíèÿ ïàäåíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè íà Òàííó-Îëà è Ñåíãèëåíå, ïðîâîäÿò äî- áàëîáàíà â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå ðå- ñòàòî÷íî ìíîãî âðåìåíè â õîäå îñåííåå- êîìåíäóåòñÿ: çèìíèõ êî÷¸âîê. 1. Óñèëèòü áîðüáó ñ áðàêîíüåðñêèì ëî- Äî ïîñëåäíåãî âðåìåíè â Ìîíãîëèè âîì â ðåãèîíå, ÷òîáû óìåíüøèòü åãî íå- èìåþò øèðîêîå ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå ËÝÏ ãàòèâíîå âëèÿíèå (îñîáåííî â Ðåñïóáëèêå 6–15 êÂ, íå îñíàù¸ííûå ïòèöåçàùèòíû- Õàêàñèÿ, â Êîø-Àãà÷ñêîì ðàéîíå Ðåñïó- ìè óñòðîéñòâàìè, è ïðîäîëæàþò ñòðî- áëèêè Àëòàé è â Ðåñïóáëèêå Òûâà). èòüñÿ íîâûå, êàê ïðàâèëî, ýòî ËÝÏ íà 2. Äîáèâàòüñÿ îñíàùåíèÿ âñåõ ïòèöåî- áåòîííûõ îïîðàõ ñî øòûðåâûìè èçîëÿ- ïàñíûõ ËÝÏ â ðåãèîíå ïòèöåçàùèòíûìè òîðàìè êèòàéñêîãî ïðîèçâîäñòâà. Ïðî- Ïòåíöû áàëîáàíà ñîîðóæåíèÿìè. áëåìà ãèáåëè ïòèö íà ËÝÏ, â òîì ÷èñëå â ãíåçäå íà ñêàëå. 3. Ïðîâîäèòü ìåðîïðèÿòèÿ ïî ïîâûøå- è áàëîáàíîâ, äëÿ Ìîíãîëèè èçâåñòíà Ðåñïóáëèêà Òûâà, íèþ ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â ïðèðîäå: (Amartuvshin et al., 2010), îäíàêî êàêèõ- 05.06.2010. - óñòàíîâêà ãíåçäîâûõ ïëàòôîðì â íå- ëèáî ìàñøòàáíûõ ïðîåêòîâ ïî îñíàùå- Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà äîñòóïíûõ äëÿ ëîâöîâ ðàéîíàõ (íàè- íèþ ËÝÏ ïòèöåçàùèòíûìè ñîîðóæåíèÿ- Chicks of the Saker áîëåå ïðèîðèòåòíà Þæíàÿ Òóâà); ìè â ñòðàíå íå ïðîâîäèòñÿ.  ðàìêàõ Falcon in the nest on the rock. Republic of - âûïóñê â ïðèðîäó ïòèö, ðàçâåä¸í- òðàíñãðàíè÷íûõ Ðîññèéñêî-Ìîíãîëüñêèõ Tyva, 05/06/2010. íûõ â íåâîëå (ïðåèìóùåñòâåííî ñà- ïðèðîäîîõðàííûõ èíèöèàòèâ èìååò Photo by I. Karyakin. ìîê). ñìûñë ðåàëèçîâàòü ìîäåëüíûå ïðîåêòû ïî îñíàùåíèþ ïòèöåîïàñíûõ ËÝÏ ïòè- öåçàùèòíûìè óñòðîéñòâàìè ðîññèéñêîãî ïðîèçâîäñòâà, õîòÿ áû â Óáñóíóðñêîé êîòëîâèíå, íà ïðèãðàíè÷íûõ ñ Ðîññèåé òåððèòîðèÿõ. Ìîíãîëèÿ îñòà¸òñÿ äî ïîñëåäíåãî âðå- ìåíè ëåãàëüíûì ýêñïîðòåðîì áàëîáàíîâ. Ñîãëàñíî èíôîðìàöèè èç áàçû äàííûõ ïî òîðãîâëå âèäàìè ÑÈÒÅÑ â 1997–2008 ãã., Ìîíãîëèÿ ýêñïîðòèðîâàëà â îáùåé ñëîæ- íîñòè 2612 áàëîáàíîâ (îò 25 äî 400 ïòèö â ãîä), îäíàêî, ó÷èòûâàÿ ðÿä íåñîîòâåò- ñòâèé â äîêóìåíòàõ è îòñóòñòâèå æ¸ñòêîãî êîíòðîëÿ çà îòëîâîì, íåèçâåñòíî, ñêîëüêî ñîêîëîâ ôàêòè÷åñêè áûëî ýêñïîðòèðîâà- íî è, âèäèìî, ðåàëüíûé ýêñïîðò ïðåâû- Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 151

øàåò îôèöèàëüíûå öèôðû â ðàçû (Zahler et al., 2004). Ê òîìó æå, î÷åâèäíî è òî, ÷òî ïîëèòèêà âûäà÷è ëèöåíçèé íà îòëîâ áàëîáàíîâ ìîíãîëüñêîé ñòîðîíîé îðè- åíòèðîâàíà íà îñâîåíèå ðåñóðñà èìåííî ðîññèéñêèõ ìèãðàíòîâ, òàê êàê îòäà¸òñÿ ïðèîðèòåò îòëîâó â ñåâåðî-çàïàäíûõ àé- ìàêàõ Ìîíãîëèè â ñðîêè ìàññîâîé ìè- ãðàöèè ðîññèéñêèõ ïòèö ÷åðåç ýòó òåððè- òîðèþ. Ó÷èòûâàÿ àêòèâíîå ëîááèðîâàíèå ÷èíîâíèêàìè ÎÀÝ ñîõðàíåíèÿ òåêóùåãî ñòàòóñà áàëîáàíà â Ïðèëîæåíèè II ÑÈ- ÒÅÑ è àêòèâíóþ ïîääåðæêó Ìîíãîëèè, êàê ñòðàíû-ýêñïîðò¸ðà, âðÿä ëè ñëåäóåò îæèäàòü êàêèõ-ëèáî èçìåíåíèé â ñòîðî- íó îãðàíè÷åíèÿ è/èëè çàïðåòà òîðãîâëè Ñàìêà áàëîáàíà ñ êîæàíûì êîëüöîì íà ëàïå, óëåòåâøàÿ îò áðàêîíüåðîâ. Ðåñïóáëèêà Àëòàé, ñîêîëàìè ýòîé ñòðàíîé. Òåì íå ìåíåå, 07.07.2010. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. ó÷èòûâàÿ ðåàëèçàöèþ ìàñøòàáíîé ïðà- Female Saker with a leather ring escaped âèòåëüñòâåííîé ïðîãðàììû ïî ñîçäàíèþ from poachers. Republic of Altai, 07/07/2010. ãíåçäîâîãî ôîíäà äëÿ áàëîáàíà â Öåí- Photo by I. Karyakin. òðàëüíîé Ìîíãîëèè (Dixon et al., 2010), ìîæíî äîáèâàòüñÿ ðåàëèçàöèè ìåðîïðè- ÿòèé â ïîãðàíè÷íûõ ñ Ðîññèåé àéìàêàõ, Ôîêñ Í. Ïðåäâàðèòåëüíûå ðåçóëüòàòû ïðîåêòà ïî èçó÷åíèþ ìèãðàöèè áàëîáàíà â Ðîññèè. – â ÷àñòíîñòè â àéìàêå Óëàíãîì, ãäå â Óá- Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2005. ¹2. ñóíóðñêîé êîòëîâèíå èìåþòñÿ îãðîìíûå Ñ. 56–59. ïåðñïåêòèâû äëÿ ïðèâëå÷åíèÿ áàëîáàíà Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã. Ðåçóëüòàòû íà ãíåçäîâàíèå â ðîâíîé ñòåïè. ïðîåêòà ïî âîññòàíîâëåíèþ ìåñò ãíåçäîâàíèÿ õèùíûõ ïòèö â Òóâèíñêîé êîòëîâèíå, Ðåñïó- Áëàãîäàðíîñòè áëèêà Òûâà, Ðîññèÿ. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ Àâòîðû áëàãîäàðíû ÏÐÎÎÍ/ÃÝÔ çà îõðàíà. 2006. ¹7. Ñ. 15–20. ôèíàíñèðîâàíèå èññëåäîâàíèé, íàïðàâ- Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã. Ðåçóëüòàòû ëåííûõ íà èçó÷åíèå áàëîáàíà, à òàêæå ìîíèòîðèíãà ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà â Àëòàå- áëàãîäàðÿò Ðèíóðà Áåêìàíñóðîâà, Ðîìà- Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå â 2008 ã., Ðîññèÿ. – Ïåðíàòûå íà Ëàïøèíà, Àíäðåÿ Ñåì¸íîâà, Äìèòðèÿ õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2008. ¹14. Ñ. 63–84. Ïòåíöû áàëîáàíà â Íîâèêîâà Ë.Ì., Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Ìåòîäè÷åñêîå Øòîëÿ, Àëåêñàíäðà Ìàêàðîâà è Ðîìàíà ãíåçäå íà ñîñíå. ðóêîâîäñòâî ïî ñáîðó ïîëåâûõ äàííûõ, èõ ââî- Ðåñïóáëèêà Òûâà, Áàõòèíà çà ó÷àñòèå â ýêñïåäèöèÿõ è âñå- äó â áàçû äàííûõ, ïðåäâàðèòåëüíîé êàìåðàëü- 30.05.2010. ñòîðîííþþ ïîìîùü â èçó÷åíèè áàëîáàíà Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà íîé îáðàáîòêå è âûâîäó ìàòåðèàëîâ äëÿ îò÷å- â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå. òîâ è Ëåòîïèñè ïðèðîäû. Í. Íîâãîðîä, 2008. Chicks of the Saker Falcon in the nest on 116 ñ. the pine-tree. Ëèòåðàòóðà Amartuvshin P., Gombobaatar S., Richard Republic of Tyva, Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Áàëîáàí â Ðîññèè. – Ïåðíàòûå H. The assessment of high risk utility lines and 30/05/2010. õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2008. ¹12. Ñ. 28–47. conservation of globally threatened pole-nesting Photo by I. Karyakin. Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã., Ïîòàïîâ Å.Ð., steppe raptors in Mongolia. – Asian Raptors: Science and Conservation for Present and Future. The proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Asian Raptors, 23–27 June, 2010, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. Ulaanbaatar, 2010. P. 58. Dixon N., Batsukh M., Damdinsuren S., Amarsaikhan S., Gankhuyag P.-O. Artificial Nests for Saker Falcons II: Progress and Plans. – Falco. 2010. ¹35. P. 6–8. Karyakin I., Konovalov L., Moshkin A., Pazhenkov A., Smelyanskiy I., Rybenko A. Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) in Russia. – Falco. 2004. ¹23. P. 3–9. Zahler P., Lhagvasuren B., Reading R.P., Wingard J.R., Amglanbaatar S., Gombobaatar S., Barton N., Onon Y. Illegal and unsustainable wildlife hunting and trade in Mongolia. – Mongolian Journal of Biological Sciences. 2004. ¹2 (2). P. 23–31. 152 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

SakerFalconintheKaratauMountains,Kazakhstan БАЛОБАН В ГОРАХ КАРАТАУ, КАЗАХСТАН KaryakinI.V.(CenterofFieldStudies,N.Novgorod,Russia) LevinA.S.,KovalenkoA.V.(InstituteofZoology,CommitteeofaScienceofMinistryof EducationandSciences,Almaty,Kazakhstan) Карякин И.В. (Центр полевых исследований, Н. Новгород, Россия) Левин А.C., Коваленко А.В. (Институт зоологии Комитета Науки Министерства образования и науки, Алматы, Казахстан)

Êîíòàêò: Àáñòðàêò Èãîðü Êàðÿêèí  ñòàòüå ïðèâåäåíû ðåçóëüòàòû èçó÷åíèÿ àâòîðàìè ñîêîëà-áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug) â 2010 ã. â ãîðàõ Êà- Öåíòð ïîëåâûõ ðàòàó íà þãå Êàçàõñòàíà è íà ïðèëåãàþùèõ òåððèòîðèÿõ. Âî âðåìÿ ïîëåâîé ðàáîòû îáíàðóæåíî 33 ãíåç- èññëåäîâàíèé äîâûõ ó÷àñòêà áàëîáàíîâ, 12 æèëûõ ãí¸çä. Ïîëíûé ó÷¸ò ñîêîëîâ îñóùåñòâë¸í íà 11 ïëîùàäêàõ îáùåé 603000, Ðîññèÿ, ïëîùàäüþ 1273,2 êì2, ÷òî ñîñòàâëÿåò 9,61% îò îáùåé ïëîùàäè ãîðíûõ ìàññèâîâ Áîðàëäàÿ, Ìàëîãî è Íèæíèé Íîâãîðîä, Áîëüøîãî Êàðàòàó, 30,10% îò îáùåé ïëîùàäè ìåñòîîáèòàíèé áàëîáàíà â ãîðíûõ ãðóïïàõ. Ëèíåéíûå ìàðø- óë. Êîðîëåíêî, 17a–17 ðóòû ïðîâåäåíû íà 6 ó÷àñòêàõ ÷èíêîâ îáùåé ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòüþ 20,85 êì, ÷òî ñîñòàâëÿåò 14,27% îò îáùåé òåë.: +7 831 433 38 47 ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòè ÷èíêîâ íà ïîäãîðíîé ðàâíèíå. Îáùàÿ ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà îöåíåíà â ãîðàõ Êàðàòàó è [email protected] íà ïðèëåãàþùèõ òåððèòîðèÿõ â 105–145 ïàð, â ñðåäíåì 125 ïàð, 76% èç êîòîðûõ ãíåçäèòñÿ â îñíîâíîì ãîðíîì ìàññèâå Êàðàòàó. ×èñëåííîñòü óñïåøíûõ ïàð îöåíåíà â 63–87, â ñðåäíåì 75, ïàð. Êëþ÷åâûå ñëîâà: õèùíûå ïòèöû, ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè, áàëîáàí, Falco cherrug, ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå, ÷èñëåí- Àíàòîëèé Ëåâèí íîñòü, ãíåçäîâàÿ áèîëîãèÿ. Èíñòèòóò çîîëîãèè, Ìèíèñòåðñòâî Abstract îáðàçîâàíèÿ è íàóêè Basing on author’s research in 2010 the paper contains information on distribution, numbers and breeding biology Êàçàõñòàí, Àëìàòû, of the Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) in the Karatau Mountains (Southern Kazakhstan). During surveys 33 breeding òåë.: +7 3272 69 48 76 territories and 12 living nests of Sakers were discovered. The complete census of falcons was carried out on 11 [email protected] study plots of a total area of 1273.2 km2, that made 9.61% of a total area of the Boralday, Karatau and Small Ka- ratau Mountains, and 30.10% of a total area of the Saker habitats in the mountain areas. Counts on transects were Àíäðåé Êîâàëåíêî conducted at 6 fragments of cliff-faces with a total length of 20.85 km, that was 14.27% of a total length of all cliff- 405030, Êàçàõñòàí, faces on the submountain plain. A total of 105–145 pairs of the Saker Falcon, at average 125 pairs, are estimated Àëìàòû, to breed in the Karatau Mountains and adjacent regions. And 76% of the estimated number inhabit mainly the óë. Âàõòàíãîâà, 11Á–3 Karatau Mountains. The number of successful was assessed at 63–87 pairs , at average 75 pairs. òåë.: +7 727 394 08 93 Keywords: birds of prey, raptors, Saker Falcon, Falco cherrug, distribution, number, breeding biology. +7 701 570 25 60 +7 777 339 10 35 [email protected] Ââåäåíèå Introduction Ãîðíûå õðåáòû íà þãå ñòðàíû ïðàêòè÷å- Populations of rare raptor species inhab- Contact: ñêè íå îáñëåäîâàëèñü íà ïðåäìåò èçó÷åíèÿ iting the mountain ranges at the south of Igor Karyakin Center of Field Studies ïîïóëÿöèé ðåäêèõ õèùíûõ ïòèö ñ 50–70-õ ãã. Kazakhstan have not almost surveyed since Korolenko str., 17a–17, ïðîøëîãî âåêà.  íàèáîëåå êðóïíîé îòå÷å- 1950–70s. According to “Birds of Kaza- Nizhniy Novgorod, ñòâåííîé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîé ñâîäêå «Ïòèöû khstan” the Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) was 603000, Russia Êàçàõñòàíà» óêàçûâàåòñÿ, ÷òî áàëîáàí (Falco not a rare species in the Karatau Mountains tel.: +7 831 433 38 47 [email protected] cherrug) ãíåçäèòñÿ â íåáîëüøîì êîëè÷åñòâå ïî îòðîãàì Òàëàññêîãî Àëàòàó, íàéäåí â çà- Anatoliy Levin ïàäíîé ÷àñòè Êèðãèçñêîãî Àëàòàó, íåðåäîê Institute of Zoology, â Êàðàòàó (Êîðåëîâ, 1962). Èíòåðåñíî, ÷òî Ministry of Education and Sciences, Â.Ã. Êîëáèíöåâ (2004), èçó÷àâøèé õèùíûõ Almaty, Kazakhstan ïòèö Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó ñ 1983 ã., î áàëîáàíå tel.: +7 3272 69 48 76 âîîáùå íå óïîìèíàåò íè äëÿ Áîðàëäàÿ, íè [email protected] äëÿ Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó, íè äëÿ ÷èíêîâ ïîäãîð- Andrey Kovalenko, íîé ðàâíèíû.  1993 ã. â Êàðàòàó áûëî íàé- Vahtangova str., 11b–3, äåíî 3 ãíåçäà áàëîáàíîâ: ïåðâîå – â óùåëüå Almaty, Kazakhstan, Êóðñàé çà Êåíòàó ïî äîðîãå íà Àùèñàé, âòî- 405030 ðîå – âîçëå ×óëàê-Êóðãàíà, â óùåëüå þæíåå tel.: +7 727 246 29 11 +7 701 570 25 60 âûõîäà òðàññû ñ Àùèñàÿ íà ×óëàê-Êóðãàí èç +7 777 339 10 35 ãîð â äîëèíó è òðåòüå – â óùåëüå Àêòóãàé ó +7 700 910 05 32 Æàíàòàñà; ýòè ìåñòà ïîñåùàëèñü òàêæå 23– Áàëîáàí (Falco cherrug). [email protected] 25 àïðåëÿ 1996 ã. è 31 ìàÿ – 2 èþíÿ 1997 Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. ã., íî áàëîáàíîâ çäåñü óæå íå âñòðå÷àëè (Ð. Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug). Ïôåôôåð, Î. Áåëÿëîâ, ëè÷íîå ñîîáùå- Photo by I. Karyakin. Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 153

Ðèñ. 1. Ìàðøðóò ýêñïåäèöèè. Fig. 1. Expedition route.

(Korelov, 1962). V.G. Kolbintsev (2004) re- searched raptors of the Small Karatau since 1983 does not mention about the Saker at all. Surveys of the Saker Falcon were carried out in the northwestern part of Karatau in 2005. There were 3 breeding territories, a total number was estimated at 40–50 pair for all the mountain range; however that number was considered as overestimated due to the Saker preferring to inhabit only the foremost slope of the Karatau, and it was decreased up to 15–16 pairs (Karyakin et al., 2008). However according with data of inspectors of the Hunting Service Sak- ers breed throughout the Karatau, but their íèå).  2005 ã. â ñåâåðî-çàïàäíîé ÷àñòè number was decreased last years. For sur- Êàðàòàó, â õîäå ýêñïåäèöèè ïî èçó÷åíèÿ veying the last “blank spot” on the Saker áàëîáàíà, áûëî îáíàðóæåíî 3 ãíåçäîâûõ breeding range in Kazakhstan the field ó÷àñòêà ýòèõ ñîêîëîâ, à ÷èñëåííîñòü ñîêî- group of the Bird Conservation Union of ëîâ ïóò¸ì ýêñòðàïîëÿöèè ó÷¸òíûõ äàííûõ Kazakhstan has tried to carry out the recon- íà âñþ ïëîùàäü õðåáòà îïðåäåëåíà â 40–50 noitring surveys of the Karatau mountains ïàð; îäíàêî äàííàÿ îöåíêà áûëà àâòîðàìè in 2010. The main aim of research was the ïðèíÿòà çàâûøåííîé è íà îñíîâàíèè òîãî, preliminary estimating the number of Sakers ÷òî áàëîáàí ïðèóðî÷åí òîëüêî ê ïåðåäî- breeding throughout the mountain range. âîìó ñêëîíó Êàðàòàó, áûëà ïåðåñìîòðå- íà äî 15–16 ïàð (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2008). Methods Òåì íå ìåíåå, ïî ñâåäåíèÿì ñîòðóäíèêîâ The expedition was carried out on April, þæíî-êàçàõñòàíñêîé òåððèòîðèàëüíîé èí- 3–23 2010. For this period, we were observ- ñïåêöèè, áàëîáàí ãíåçäèòñÿ íà âñ¸ì ïðî- ing the Ulken-Buuryltau mountains in the òÿæåíèè Êàðàòàó, íî ÷èñëåííîñòü åãî çíà- bottom of Small Karatau (on April, 3–4), a ÷èòåëüíî ñîêðàòèëàñü çà ïîñëåäíåå âðåìÿ. plateau of the Small Karatau and upper reach Äëÿ çàêðûòèÿ ïîñëåäíåãî «áåëîãî ïÿòíà» â of gorges on its northern side (on April, 5–7), êàçàõñòàíñêîì àðåàëå áàëîáàíà â 2010 ã. gorges of the northern side of the Small Ka- ãðóïïîé Ñîþçà îõðàíû ïòèö Êàçàõñòàíà ratau in vicinity of the Koktal settlement (on ïðåäïðèíÿòà ïîïûòêà ðåêîãíîñöèðîâî÷íî- April, 8–9), upper reaches of canyons of the ãî îáñëåäîâàíèÿ Êàðàòàó ñ öåëüþ ïîëó÷å- Boralday and Kashkarata rivers, the Ulken- Bugun gorge at the junction of the Boral- day and Small Karatau mountain ranges (on April, 10–12), southern side of southwestern part of Karatau and the Achisay and Kurasay gorges up to the central part of the ridge (on April, 12–17), central part of Karatau and upper reaches of the Ushozen and Besarysh gorges (on April, 18–19), gorges of northern side of Karatau on a site between the Suzak and Barykly settlements (on April, 19–21), several gorges of northern part of Karatau on the border of the Karatau Nature Reserve (on April, 21–22), cliff-faces along Kyzylkol, Sorkol, Ashikol and Akkol lakes (on April, 22–23) (fig. 1).

Ðèñ. 2. Ó÷¸òíûå ïëîùàäêè. Fig. 2. Study plots. 154 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Òàáë. 1. Ðåçóëüòàòû ó÷¸òà áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug) íà ïëîùàäêàõ è ìàðøðóòàõ.  The group traveled by vehicle. A total ñêîáêàõ ïðèâîäèòñÿ êîëè÷åñòâî è ïëîòíîñòü ïàð ñ ó÷¸òîì ïîêèíóòûõ ñîêîëàìè length of automobile routes without transit ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ. Almaty–Taraz–Almaty has made 1,894.8 km Table 1. Results of the Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) census on study plots and (fig. 1). transects. In brackets there are numbers and density of pairs including abandoned breeding territories. The complete census of falcons was car- ried out on 11 study plots of a total area Ãîðíûå ãðóïïû Êàðàòàó / Karatau Mountains of 1,273.2 km2 (fig. 2, table 1), that made Ãíåçäîâûå Ïëîòíîñòü 9.61% of a total area of the Boralday, Small ó÷àñòêè (ïàð/100 êì2) Karatau and Karatau mountains, and 30.10% Ïëîùàäü (êì2) Breeding Density of a total area of Saker habitats in the moun- tain areas. Counts on transects were con- Ïëîùàäêè / Plots Area (km2) territories (pairs/100 km2) ducted at 6 fragments of cliff-faces with a 1 120.2 6 4.99 total length of 20.85 km, that was 14.27% 2 307.7 5 1.63 of a total length of all cliff-faces on the sub- 3 48.3 2 (3) 4.14 (6.22) mountain plain. 4 78.0 2 2.57 The Saker numbers were calculated within 5 117.7 2 1.70 GIS-software (ArcView 3.3 ESRI) on the ba- 6 99.4 2 2.01 sis of the habitat vector map created as a 7 58.3 1 (2) 1.72 (3.43) result of analysis of satellite images Land- 8 119.9 0 0 sat ETM+ 2000 with ground verification and 9 38.3 0 0 topographic maps (scale 1:500000). 10 159.5 6 3.76 The area of the Saker habitats in the Small 11 126.1 0 0 Karatau, Boralday and Karatau mountains Âñåãî / Total 1273.2 26 (28) 2.04 (2.20) was outlined along the contours of granite 2 ×èíêè / Cliff-faces ridges at 5864.1 km (fig. 4, table 2). A total length of cliff-faces on the submountain plain Ãíåçäîâûå Ïëîòíîñòü of northern side of the Small Karatau was cal- Ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòü ó÷àñòêè (ïàð/10 êì) culated at 146.12 km (fig. 4, table 2). (êì) Breeding Density Characterizing the breeding territories the ×èíêè Cliff-faces Length (km) territories (pairs/10 km) terms are used as follows: Óëüêåí-Áóóðûëòàó - occupied breeding territory – a territory Ulken-Buuryltau 2.11 0 0 where adults were noted, not depending Óëüêåí-Áóóðûëòàó on the breeding; Ulken-Buuryltau 1.77 0 0 - empty, abandoned, or vanished breed- Êûçûëêîëü ing territory – a territory where birds have Kyzylkol 3.38 0 0 not been recorded last three years; Ñîðêîëü / Sorkol 1.21 1 8.26 - successful territory – a territory where Àøèêêîëü successful breeding was noted. Ashikkol 6.36 2 3.14 Results of research Àêêîëü / Akkol 6.02 1 1.66 Distribution and number Âñåãî / Total 20.85 4 1.92 For all the period of surveys 33 breeding territories of the Saker were discovered (fig. íèÿ ïðåäâàðèòåëüíîé îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè 3). Old nests with falcon droppings were áàëîáàíà íà âñ¸ì ïðîòÿæåíèè õðåáòà. found in 2 of them, however birds were not recorded. Therefore only 31 territories Ìàòåðèàë è ìåòîäèêà are recognized as occupied by Sakers now.  ðàññìàòðèâàåìîì ðåãèîíå ðàñïîëî- Nests were found only in 20 occupied ter- æåíû òðè õðåáòà: Ìàëûé Êàðàòàó, Áîðàë- ritories, birds with clear breeding behav- äàé è ñîáñòâåííî Êàðàòàó. Áîðàëäàé, ïî iour and/or within breeding habitats were ñóòè, ÿâëÿåòñÿ åñòåñòâåííûì ïðîäîëæå- encountered in 6 territories, and perennial íèåì Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó è îòäåëåí îò íåãî perches with fresh falcon droppings were óùåëüåì ð. Áîðàëäàé, íàçûâàåìîì Áîðàë- observed in 5 territories, unfortunately birds äàéñêèé ïðîðûâ. Íàèáîëüøàÿ àáñîëþòíàÿ were not noted. Living nests were discov- âûñîòà ãîð çäåñü 1656 ì. Âåðøèíû áîëü- ered in 12 territories: females were incubat- øåé ÷àñòüþ îêðóãëûå, ñêëîíû õðåáòîâ è ing eggs or warming nestlings. The brood ãîð èçðåçàíû ìíîãî÷èñëåííûìè óçêèìè was possibly lost in one nest (empty nest è ãëóáîêèìè óùåëüÿìè, ïðîðåçàííûìè â had been covered by female down and ñîâåðøåííî ðàçíûõ ñêàëüíûõ ïîðîäàõ, separate fuzzes of nestlings) Five nests were Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 155

Ðèñ. 3. Ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug), èçâåñòíûå â Êàðàòàó ê 2010 ã. Fig. 3. Breeding territories of the Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) known in the Karatau mountains by 2010.

occupied by falcons, but were empty ow- ing to absence or unsuccessful breeding, and 2 nests were old, however males were encountered there (probably we failed in searching for occupied nests). The Saker was not found breeding on the northern side of Small Karatau, as well as on a plateau of Small Karatau and in the up- per reaches of gorges of the northern side in spite of the fact that other raptors, such as the Long-Legged Buzzard (Buteo rufinus) and the Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) nested there with quite normal density. Also we not observed Sakers in canyons of ïî äíó óùåëèé îáû÷íî òåêóò ðåêè è ðó- the Boralday and Kashkarata rivers, despite ÷üè. Âñÿ ñåâåðî-âîñòî÷íàÿ ÷àñòü Áîðàëäàÿ, of presence of cliffs at height of 300–400 m âîñòî÷íàÿ ÷àñòü Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó è îñåâàÿ and high density of large birds of prey. The è ñåâåðíàÿ ÷àñòè Êàðàòàó èçîáèëóþò ãðà- first and only falcon observed in the Small íèòíûìè ìàññèâàìè, ÷àñòî ñ ãëóáîêèìè, Karatau was encountered in the Ulken-Bu- íî îáû÷íî êîðîòêèìè óùåëüÿìè. Îñåâàÿ gun gorge sitting on a high granite cliff. ÷àñòü Êàðàòàó ñëîæåíà ìîùíûìè ãðàíèò- The density of Sakers has made 0.46 íûìè ãðÿäàìè, îðèåíòèðîâàííûìè ñ þãî- pairs/100 km2 in Small Karatau. For granite âîñòîêà íà ñåâåðî-çàïàä. Ñàìàÿ âûñîêàÿ ridges of the Boralday and the southwest of öåíòðàëüíàÿ ÷àñòü õðåáòà äîñòèãàåò âûñî- Small Karatau (without a study plot on the òû 2176 ì (ã. Áåññàç). northern side of Small Karatau) the density Íà ïîäãîðíîé ðàâíèíå ñåâåðíîãî ôàñà was 0.56 pairs/100 km2. These parameters Êàðàòàó è Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó øèðîêî ðàñ- allow to assume 3–30 pairs, at average 9 ïðîñòðàíåíû ÷èíêîâûå îáðàçîâàíèÿ èç pairs of the Saker breeding in the granite ðàêóøå÷íèêîâ è ãëèí, ñôîðìèðîâàâøèå- ridges of Boralday and Small Karatau (ta- ñÿ âîêðóã îç¸ð è ñîðîâ. Íåêîòîðûå èç ble 2). A little bit other situation with the íèõ ðàñïîëîæåíû íà ïîäíÿòèÿõ è èìåþò Saker breeding was observed in Karatau. ñâîè íàçâàíèÿ, â ÷àñòíîñòè, Óëüêåí-Àêòàó Due to the territory was inaccessible for hu- è Óëüêåí-Áóóðûëòàó. man the breeding groups have remained Ýêñïåäèöèÿ ïðîõîäèëà ñ 3 ïî 23 àïðåëÿ in the granite ridges of the central part of the range (northern part of Karatau) and in the closed valleys of its central part (fig. 2, plots 1–6, 10). A total of 26 breeding ter- ritories were discovered, one of them was abandoned. There were 11 living and 2 empty nests in 25 occupied breeding ter- ritories. And males were observed near old nests in 2 territories. Adults or perches were observed in another 10 territories. The density of the Saker breeding territories in Karatau has made 2.37 pairs/100 km2. Thus a number of Sakers for granite ridges and gorges of Karatau is estimated at 72–140 pairs, at average 101 pairs. The nearest neighbour distance in Kara-

Ðèñ. 4. Ìåñòîîáèòàíèÿ áàëîáàíà â ãîðàõ Êàðàòàó è íà ïîäãîðíîé ðàâíèíå. Fig. 4. Habitats of the Saker Falcon in the Karatau mountains and the submountain plain. 156 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Òàáë. 2. Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà ïî äàííûì ó÷¸òîâ íà ïëîùàäêàõ è ìàðø- tau ranged from 2.0 (plot ¹1) to 13.75 km ðóòàõ. (plot ¹2), averaging 5.18±3.50 km. Table 2. The Saker numbers according with data of counts on study plots and Developing the model of potential breed- transects. ing territories based on the average dis- Ãîðíûå ãðóïïû Êàðàòàó / Karatau Mountains tance and distances within the limits of 95% of a confidence interval allows to assume Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè 85–105 breeding territories in Karatau. This Ïëîòíîñòü (ïàðû) range of numbers seemed to be more ad- (ïàð/100 êì2) Estimated equate. Ãîðíûå ãðóïïû Ïëîùàäü (êì2) Density number Outside of mountains the Saker was Mountains Area (km2) (pairs/100 km2) (pairs) breeding on cliff-faces of a plain to the Êàðàòàó north of the Small Karatau mountains. There Karatau were 5 breeding territories. The density of Mountains 4252.4 2.37 (1.70–3.30) 101 (72–140) falcons on the observed cliff-faces averaged Ìàëûé Êàðàòàó 1.92 pairs/10 km of cliff-faces (1.18–3.12 è Áîðàëäàé pairs/10 km of cliff-faces), that assumed Malyi Karatau 17–46 pairs, on the average 28 pairs, to Mountains breed there. and Boraldai The analysis of calculated figures allows Mountains 1611.7 0.56 (0.17–1.88) 9 (3–30) to decrease the general number of the Âñåãî / Total 5864.1 110 (75–170) Saker in the region under consideration ×èíêè / Cliff-faces to 105–145 occupied breeding territories. Îöåíêà Taking into account that the share of suc- ÷èñëåííîñòè cessful nests per all found ones was 60%, Ïëîòíîñòü (ïàðû) Ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòü (ïàð/10 êì) Estimated it seemed, that number of successful pairs ×èíêè (êì) Density number in the region at the period of beginning of Cliff-faces Length (km) (pairs/10 km) (pairs) brood rearing was 63–87 pairs, on the av- Âñåãî / Total 146.12 1.92 (1.18–3.12) 28 (17–46) erage 75 pairs. Âåñü ðåãèîí Total region 138 (92–216) Subspecies Birds that we had observed though a tel- 2010 ã. Çà ýòî âðåìÿ áûëè îñìîòðåíû ãîðû escope in details were undoubtedly identi- Óëüêåí-Áóóðûëòàó â ïîäíîæèè Ìàëîãî Êà- fied as F. ch. milvipes. Unfortunately good ðàòàó (3–4 àïðåëÿ), ïëàòî Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó images of birds have not been made. There- è âåðõîâüÿ óùåëèé åãî ñåâåðíîãî ôàñà fore the problem of subspecies identification (5–7 àïðåëÿ), óùåëüÿ ñåâåðíîãî ôàñà Ìà- of Sakers in the Karatau remains unsolved. ëîãî Êàðàòàó â ðàéîíå Êîêòàëà (8–9 àïðå- ëÿ), âåðõîâüÿ óùåëèé Áîðàëäàé, Êàøêàðàòà Breeding biology è óùåëüå Óëüêåí-Áóãóíü íà ñòûêå Áîðàëäàÿ The Saker main nesting habit in the Ka- è Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó (10–12 àïðåëÿ), þæíûé ratau mountains is large niches at the high ôàñ þãî-çàïàäíîé ÷àñòè Êàðàòàó è óùåëüÿ steep granite walls of cliffs faced to steppe À÷èñàé è Êóðàñàé ââåðõ äî îñåâîé ÷àñòè valleys. Another fact of interest was Sakers õðåáòà (12–17 àïðåëÿ), öåíòðàëüíàÿ ÷àñòü nesting on steep cliffs of 300–400 m among Êàðàòàó è âåðõîâüÿ óùåëèé Óøîçåí è Áå- colonies of the Griffon Vulture (Gyps fulvus), ñàðûø (18–19 àïðåëÿ), óùåëüÿ ñåâåðíîãî that has not been described in Kazakhstan ôàñà Êàðàòàó íà ó÷àñòêå ìåæäó íàñåë¸í- till now. íûìè ïóíêòàìè Ñóçàê è Áàêûðëû (19–21 We have examined 20 nests of Sakers (in- àïðåëÿ), íåñêîëüêî óùåëèé ñåâåðíîé ÷à- cluding old ones with inhabited on the oc- ñòè Êàðàòàó íà ãðàíèöå Êàðàòàóñêîãî çà- cupied territories) in the Karatau mountains ïîâåäíèêà (21–22 àïðåëÿ), ÷èíêè âäîëü and 7 – on cliff-faces. îç¸ð Êûçûëêîëü, Ñîðêîëü, Àøèêîëü è Àê- The height of nest location in the Ka- êîëü (22–23 àïðåëÿ) (ðèñ. 1). ratau varies from 6 to 150 m, averaging Ãðóïïà ïåðåäâèãàëàñü íà àâòîìîáè- 47.25±38.80 m. Te owners of Saker nests in ëå ÓÀÇ. Îáùàÿ ïðîòÿæåííîñòü àâòîìî- the Karatau were (n=20, fig. 5) Long-Leg- áèëüíûõ ìàðøðóòîâ, áåç ó÷¸òà òðàíçèòà ged Buzzard – 30% of nests, Golden Eagle – Àëìàòû–Òàðàç–Àëìàòû, ñîñòàâèëà 1894,8 25%, Raven (Corvus corax) – 15%, Egyptian êì (ðèñ. 1). Vulture (Neophron percnopterus) and Black Ìàðøðóò çàêëàäûâàëñÿ òàêèì îáðàçîì, Stork (Ciconia nigra) – 5% for each; 20% of ÷òîáû ïî ìàêñèìóìó îõâàòèòü íàáëþäåíè- nests were found in large niches among Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 157

ÿìè ìåñòà, ïðèãîäíûå äëÿ óñòðîéñòâà áà- the colonies of the Griffon Vulture. There ëîáàíàìè ãí¸çä. Ïîýòîìó ïåðåäâèæåíèå were 70% of nests in niches, and 85.7% of ïðîèñõîäèëî ëèáî ïî äíó óùåëèé, ëèáî ïî them (n=14) were placed in the top third ïëàòî ñ âûåçäàìè íà ìûñû óùåëèé. Ñêàëû, of rocks. ÿâëÿþùèåñÿ èñêëþ÷èòåëüíûìè ìåñòàìè On cliff-faces Sakers nested at the height ãíåçäîâàíèÿ áàëîáàíà íà äàííîé òåððè- of 2–11 m, at average 7.14±4.06 m. All 7 òîðèè, îñìàòðèâàëèñü â îïòèêó (áèíîêëè nests were located in niches, mainly in the 12õ è òðóáà 20–60õ).  õîäå îñìîòðà ñòà- top third of cliff-faces (16.7%). The main ðàëèñü âûÿâèòü ñëåäû ïðèñóòñòâèÿ ñîêîëîâ owner of Saker nests was the Egyptian Vul- (ïðèñàäû, îáëèòûå ïîì¸òîì), ãí¸çäà ðàç- ture – 57.14%. Also a nest was placed with- ëè÷íûõ õèùíèêîâ, ëèáî íèøè ñî ñëåäàìè out any construction in a niche. èõ çàíÿòîñòè ñîêîëàìè, à òàêæå ñàìèõ âçðîñëûõ ïòèö. Ðàññòîÿíèå ìåæäó òî÷êàìè Conclusions íàáëþäåíèé íà ìàðøðóòàõ âàðüèðîâàëî îò Now the breeding group of the Saker in 0,2 äî 1,5 êì è ñóùåñòâåííî çàâèñåëî îò the Karatau mountains and adjacent territo- îáçîðà. Íåêîòîðûå ñêàëüíûå îáíàæåíèÿ ries is the largest in all the south and south- îñìàòðèâàëèñü ñ òð¸õ ðàêóðñîâ, ÷òîáû íå east of Kazakhstan. Taking into account data óïóñòèòü èç âèäó ñëåäû ïðèñóòñòâèÿ ñîêî- of surveys in 2005 and 2010 there are 36 ëîâ ëèáî ñàìèõ ïòèö. breeding territories (28.8% of projected Ìåñòà îáíàðóæåíèÿ ïòèö è èõ ãí¸çä ôèê- number). A total of 105–145 pairs (averag- ñèðîâàëèñü ñ ïîìîùüþ ñïóòíèêîâûõ íàâè- ing 125 pairs) are estimated to breed there, ãàòîðîâ Garmin è âíîñèëèñü â áàçó äàííûõ. 76% of them inhabit mainly the Karatau Ïîëíûé ó÷¸ò ñîêîëîâ îñóùåñòâë¸í íà 11 mountains. The population trend is unclear, ïëîùàäêàõ îáùåé ïëîùàäüþ 1273,2 êì2 but the dynamics of number is undoubtedly (ðèñ. 2, òàáë. 1), ÷òî ñîñòàâëÿåò 9,61% îò negative. îáùåé ïëîùàäè ãîðíûõ ìàññèâîâ Áîðàë- Vanishing the Saker in foremost ridges of äàÿ, Ìàëîãî è Áîëüøîãî Êàðàòàó, 30,10% Karatau and around settlements could be îò îáùåé ïëîùàäè ìåñòîîáèòàíèé áàëî- explained by the catching of birds only. áàíà â ãîðíûõ ãðóïïàõ. Ëè- íåéíûå ìàðøðóòû ïðîâåäåíû íà 6 ó÷àñòêàõ ÷èíêîâ îáùåé ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòüþ 20,85 êì, ÷òî ñîñòàâëÿåò 14,27% îò îáùåé ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòè ÷èíêîâ íà ïîä- ãîðíîé ðàâíèíå. Ðàññ÷èòûâàë- ñÿ ñðåäíåâçâåøåííûé ïîêàçà- òåëü ïëîòíîñòè íà ïëîùàäêàõ è ìàðøðóòàõ, îøèáêà ñðåäíåé ïëîòíîñòè è íåñèììåòðè÷íûé äîâåðèòåëüíûé èíòåðâàë (Ðàâ- êèí, ×åëèíöåâ, 1990). ×èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà îöå- íèâàëàñü â ñðåäå ÃÈÑ (ArcView 3.3 ESRI) íà îñíîâàíèè âåêòîð- íîé êàðòû, ïîäãîòîâëåííîé ïî êîñìîñíèìêàì Landsat ETM+ 2000 ã. è ðàñòðîâûì êàðòàì ìàñøòàáà 1:500000. Ïëîùàäü ìåñòîîáèòàíèé áà- ëîáàíà â ãîðíûõ ãðóïïàõ Ìàëî- ãî Êàðàòàó, Áîðàëäàÿ è Êàðàòàó îïðåäåëåíà ïî êîíòóðàì ãðà- íèòíûõ ìàññèâîâ â 5864,1 êì2

Óùåëüÿ Áîðàëäàÿ. Çäåñü áàëîáàíà íàéòè íå óäàëîñü. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Boraltay gorges. No falcons were observed there. Photos by I. Karyakin. 158 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

ðûå ãí¸çäà ñî ñëåäàìè ïîì¸òà ñîêîëîâ, îäíàêî ïðèñóòñòâèå ïòèö âûÿâèòü íå óäà- ëîñü. Ïîýòîìó ìû ëèøü 31 ó÷àñòîê îòíî- ñèì ê çàíÿòûì áàëîáàíàìè â íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ. Èç çàíÿòûõ ó÷àñòêîâ íà 20 îáíàðó- æåíû ãí¸çäà, íà 6 âñòðå÷åíû ïòèöû ñ ÿâíî ãíåçäîâûì ïîâåäåíèåì è/èëè â ãíåçäîâûõ áèîòîïàõ è íà 5 ó÷àñòêàõ îáíàðóæåíû ìíîãîëåòíèå ïðèñàäû ñî ñëåäàìè ñâåæå- ãî ïîì¸òà, íî ïòèö âñòðåòèòü íå óäàëîñü. Íà 12 ó÷àñòêàõ îáíàðóæåíû æèëûå ãí¸ç- äà, íà êîòîðûõ ñàìêè íàñèæèâàëè êëàäêè èëè ãðåëè ïóõîâèêîâ, íà îäíîì, âåðîÿòíî, ïîãèá âûâîäîê (ïóñòîå ãíåçäî áûëî ðàâíî- ìåðíî ïîêðûòî íàñåäíûì ïóõîì ñàìêè è îòäåëüíûìè ïóøèíêàìè ïòåíöîâ), 5 ãí¸çä áûëè çàíÿòûìè ñîêîëàìè, íî ïóñòîâàëè ïî ïðè÷èíå íåðàçìíîæåíèÿ èëè íåóäà÷íîãî ðàçìíîæåíèÿ, è 2 ãíåçäà îêàçàëèñü ñòà- ðûìè, íî áëèç êîòîðûõ âñòðå÷åíû ñàìöû (âîçìîæíî, çàíÿòûõ ãí¸çä íàéòè ïðîñòî íå óäàëîñü). Íà ñåâåðíîì ôàñå Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó áà- ëîáàí íàìè íå îáíàðóæåí íà ãíåçäîâà- íèè, íåñìîòðÿ íà òî, ÷òî çäåñü èìåþòñÿ óñëîâèÿ äëÿ åãî ãíåçäîâàíèÿ. Âåðîÿòíî, îòñóòñòâèå çäåñü áàëîáàíà – ÿâëåíèå ïî- ñëåäíèõ ëåò è ðåçóëüòàò ñîêðàùåíèÿ åãî ÷èñëåííîñòè. Ñâÿçàíî ýòî ñ òåì, ÷òî ñêà- ëû, óäîáíûå äëÿ ãíåçäîâàíèÿ áàëîáàíà, ðàñïîëàãàþòñÿ â óñòüåâîé ÷àñòè óùåëèé, õîðîøî ïðîñìàòðèâàþòñÿ ñ ðàâíèíû, ïî êîòîðîé èä¸ò àñôàëüòèðîâàííàÿ äîðîãà, ñîåäèíÿþùàÿ òàêèå ãîðîäà, êàê Òàðàç, Êàðàòàó è Æàíàòàñ. Ò.å., òåððèòîðèÿ èäå- àëüíà äëÿ îòëîâà ñîêîëîâ, îñîáåííî â ïå- Ñêàëû õðåáòà Ìàëûé (ðèñ. 4, òàáë. 2). Ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòü ÷èíêîâ ðèîä ðàçë¸òà ñë¸òêîâ. Êàðàòàó. Íà âåðõíåì íà ïîäãîðíîé ðàâíèíå ñåâåðíîãî ôàñà Íå îáíàðóæåí íàìè áàëîáàí íà ïëà- ôîòî ãíåçäîâàÿ ñêàëà Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó îïðåäåëåíà â 146,12 êì òî Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó è â âåðõîâüÿõ óùå- áàëîáàíîâ. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. (ðèñ. 4, òàáë. 2). ëèé ñåâåðíîãî ôàñà, íåñìîòðÿ íà òî, ÷òî äðóãèå õèùíèêè, òàêèå, êàê êóð- Cliffs of the Small Ïðè õàðàêòåðèñòèêå ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ Karatau mountains. èñïîëüçîâàíû òåðìèíû: ãàííèê (Buteo rufinus) è áåðêóò (Aquila A nesting cliff of Sakers - çàíÿòûé ãíåçäîâîé ó÷àñòîê – ó÷àñòîê, chrysaetos), çäåñü ãíåçäÿòñÿ ñ âïîëíå is on the upper image. íà êîòîðîì îòìå÷åíî ïðèñóòñòâèå ïòèö, íîðìàëüíîé ïëîòíîñòüþ. Photos by I. Karyakin. âíå çàâèñèìîñòè îò íàëè÷èÿ ðàçìíîæå-  óùåëüÿõ ðåê Áîðàëäàé è Êàøêàðàòà íèÿ; áàëîáàíà íàì òàêæå îáíàðóæèòü íå óäà- - ïóñòóþùèé, ïîêèíóòûé ëèáî ïðåêðà- ëîñü, íåñìîòðÿ íà íàëè÷èå ñêàëüíûõ ñòåí òèâøèé ñâî¸ ñóùåñòâîâàíèå ãíåçäîâîé âûñîòîé 300–400 ì è âûñîêîé ïëîòíîñòè ó÷àñòîê – ó÷àñòîê, íà êîòîðîì ïòèöû ïå- êðóïíûõ õèùíûõ ïòèö. Ïåðâîãî è åäèí- ðåñòàëè âñòðå÷àòüñÿ â òå÷åíèå ïîñëåäíèõ ñòâåííîãî ñîêîëà, êîòîðîãî ìû íàáëþ- òð¸õ ëåò; äàëè â Ìàëîì Êàðàòàó, óäàëîñü âñòðåòèòü - óñïåøíûé ó÷àñòîê – ó÷àñòîê, íà êîòî- ëèøü â óùåëüå Óëüêåí-Áóãóíü íà âûñîêîé ðîì îòìå÷åíî óñïåøíîå ðàçìíîæåíèå. ãðàíèòíîé ñòåíå. Ïòèöà áûëà èäåíòèôè- öèðîâàíà êàê ñàìåö 2-õ ëåò. Çäåñü æå Ðåçóëüòàòû èññëåäîâàíèé ðàñïîëàãàëîñü ìíîãîëåòíåå ãíåçäî, ÿâíî Ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå è ÷èñëåííîñòü äëèòåëüíîå âðåìÿ çàíèìàâøååñÿ áàëî- Çà âåñü ïåðèîä ðàáîòû óäàëîñü âûÿâèòü áàíàìè ðàíåå, îäíàêî áåç ñâåæèõ ïîò¸- 33 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà áàëîáàíîâ (ðèñ. 3). êîâ ïîì¸òà.  5,5 êì âíèç ïî óùåëüþ íà Èç íèõ íà 2-õ ó÷àñòêàõ îáíàðóæåíû ñòà- ñòåíàõ óùåëüÿ áûëè îáíàðóæåíû íèøè ñ Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 159

ÿâíûìè ñòàðûìè ñëåäàìè ðàçìíîæåíèÿ íèÿ òåððèòîðèè. Äëÿ ãðàíèòíûõ ìàññèâîâ áàëîáàíà (ïîò¸êè ïîì¸òà íà ïðèñàäàõ è Áîðàëäàÿ è þãî-çàïàäà Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó ãíåçäîâûõ ïîñòðîéêàõ), íî ñîêîëû âñòðå- (áåç ó÷¸òà ïëîùàäêè íà ñåâåðíîì ôàñå ÷åíû íå áûëè. Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó) ïëîòíîñòü ñîñòàâëÿåò Ó÷¸ò íà 3-õ ïëîùàäêàõ â Ìàëîì Êàðàòàó 1,12 è 0,56 ïàð/100 êì2, ñîîòâåòñòâåííî. ïîçâîëèë âûÿâèòü 2 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà, çà- Ýòè ïîêàçàòåëè ïðåäïîëàãàþò âîçìîæ- íèìàåìûõ ñîêîëàìè ðàíåå, è 1 ãíåçäîâîé íîñòü ãíåçäîâàíèÿ â ãðàíèòíûõ ìàññèâàõ ó÷àñòîê, çàíèìàåìûé â íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ. Áîðàëäàÿ è Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó 5–61 ïàð, â  ðåçóëüòàòå ïëîòíîñòü ñîñòàâèëà 0,92 ñðåäíåì 18 ïàð, áàëîáàíîâ â ïðîøëîì, ïàð/100 êì2 äëÿ íåäàâíåãî ïðîøëîãî è è 3–30 ïàð, â ñðåäíåì 9 ïàð, â íàñòîÿ- 0,46 ïàð/100 êì2 äëÿ ïåðèîäà îáñëåäîâà- ùåå âðåìÿ (òàáë. 2). Ó÷èòûâàÿ áîëüøóþ îøèáêó îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â ãðàíèòíûõ ìàññèâàõ Áîðàëäàÿ è Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó, ñëåäóåò ïðèíÿòü êàê áîëåå àäåê- âàòíûé íèæíèé å¸ ïðåäåë, ò.å. 3–15 ïàð. Áîëåå òî÷íî îöåíèòü ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáà- íà çäåñü íå ïðåäñòàâëÿåòñÿ âîçìîæíûì èç- çà òîãî, ÷òî ãíåçäîâàÿ ãðóïïèðîâêà ñèëüíî ïîäîðâàíà è ðàâíîìåðíîå ðàñïðåäåëåíèå âèäà â ãíåçäîïðèãîäíûõ ìåñòîîáèòàíèÿõ íàðóøåíî. Íåñêîëüêî èíàÿ ñèòóàöèÿ ñ áàëîáàíîì ñêëàäûâàåòñÿ â Êàðàòàó. Çäåñü, áëàãîäàðÿ òðóäíîäîñòóïíîñòè òåððèòîðèè, ãíåçäî- âûå ãðóïïèðîâêè ñîõðàíèëèñü â ãðàíèòíûõ ìàññèâàõ îñåâîé ÷àñòè õðåáòà (ñåâåðíàÿ ÷àñòü Êàðàòàó) è â çàêðûòûõ äîëèíàõ åãî öåíòðàëüíîé ÷àñòè (ðèñ. 2, ïëîùàäêè 1–6, 10). Âñåãî âûÿâëåíî 26 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñò- êîâ, îäèí èç êîòîðûõ îñòàâëåí ñîêîëàìè. Íà 25 çàíÿòûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêàõ îáíà- ðóæåíî 11 æèëûõ è 2 ïóñòûõ ãíåçäà, íà 2-õ ó÷àñòêàõ âñòðå÷åíû ñàìöû áëèç ñòàðûõ ãí¸çä. Íà îñòàëüíûõ 10 ó÷àñòêàõ ëèáî íà- áëþäàëèñü âçðîñëûå ïòèöû, ëèáî îáíàðó- æåíû ïðèñàäû.  íåáîëüøèõ óùåëüÿõ þæíîãî ôàñà Êà- ðàòàó áàëîáàí ãíåçäèëñÿ åù¸ â 90-õ ãã. (Á. Åñåíòàåâ, ëè÷íîå ñîîáùåíèå), îäíàêî â íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ çäåñü åãî îáíàðóæèòü íå óäàëîñü. Ëèøü íà îäíîì ó÷àñòêå íà ñêàëå èìåëèñü ñëåäû ïðèñàä áàëîáàíà ñ çàìûòûì ïîì¸òîì áîëåå ÷åì 10-ëåòíåé äàâíîñòè íà òåððèòîðèè, ãäå â 90-õ ãã. áûëè èçâåñòíû 3–4 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà (ðèñ. 2, ïëîùàäêà 11). Ìû ýòîò ó÷àñòîê äàæå íå ñòàëè âêëþ- ÷àòü â áàçó äàííûõ. Ïëîòíîñòü ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áàëîáà- íîâ â Êàðàòàó ñîñòàâèëà 2,46 ïàð/100 êì2 äëÿ íåäàâíåãî ïðîøëîãî è 2,37 ïàð/100 êì2 äëÿ ïåðèîäà îáñëåäîâàíèÿ òåððèòî- ðèè. Èñõîäÿ èç ïîñëåäíåãî ïîêàçàòåëÿ, ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà äëÿ ãðàíèòíûõ ìàñ- ñèâîâ è óùåëèé Êàðàòàó îöåíåíà â 72–

Ñêàëû þæíîé è öåíòðàëüíîé ÷àñòè õðåáòà Êàðàòàó. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Rocks of southern and central parts of the Karatau mountains. Photos by I. Karyakin. 160 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Ñêàëû ñåâåðíîãî ôàñà Êàðàòàó, ïëîòíî íàñåë¸ííûå áàëîáàíîì. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Cliffs of the northern side of Karatau, inhabited densely by the Saker. Photos by I. Karyakin.

è þæíîìó ìàêðîñêëîíó õðåáòà. Îäíàêî, ñîâðåìåííûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ ïîçâîëÿþò å¸ îò÷àñòè ðåàáèëèòèðîâàòü. Äèñòàíöèÿ ìåæäó ñîñåäíèìè ãíåçäî- âûìè ó÷àñòêàìè áàëîáàíîâ â Êàðàòàó âàðüèðóåò îò 2,0 (ïëîùàäêà ¹1) äî 13,75 êì (ïëîùàäêà ¹2), ñîñòàâëÿÿ â ñðåäíåì 5,18±3,50 êì. Ïîñòðîåíèå ñõåìû ïîòåíöèàëüíûõ ãíåç- äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ïî ñðåäíåé äèñòàíöèè è äèñòàíöèÿì â ïðåäåëàõ 95% äîâåðèòåëü- íîãî èíòåðâàëà ïîçâîëÿåò ïðåäïîëàãàòü íàëè÷èå â Êàðàòàó îò 85 äî 105 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ. Âåðîÿòíî, ýòîò äèàïàçîí îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè èìååò ñìûñë ñ÷èòàòü áîëåå àäåêâàòíûì, òàê êàê ñõåìà áîëåå òî÷íî èìèòèðóåò ïðîñòðàíñòâåííîå ðàñïðåäåëå- íèå áàëîáàíà â Êàðàòàó. Âíå ãîð íàìè òàêæå ïîñåùàëàñü ïîä- 140 ïàð, â ñðåäíåì 101 ïàðó. Ñëåäóåò çà- ãîðíàÿ ðàâíèíà Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó. Çäåñü, â ìåòèòü, ÷òî ïðåæíÿÿ îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè âîñòî÷íîé å¸ ÷àñòè, â 1998–1999 ãã. â ìàñ- áàëîáàíà äëÿ Ñåâåðî-Çàïàäíîãî Êàðàòàó ñèâå Óëüêåí-Áóóðûëòàó áûëî îáíàðóæåíî â 40–50 ïàð (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2008), ïî- 2 ãíåçäà áàëîáàíîâ (À. Ãàâðèëîâ, ëè÷íîå ëó÷åííàÿ ïî äàííûì ó÷¸òîâ 2005 ã., îêà- ñîîáùåíèå). Íà äàííîé òåððèòîðèè íàìè çàëàñü áëèçêîé ê îöåíêå 2010 ã. (Ñåâåðî- áûëî îñìîòðåíî 6 ó÷àñòêîâ ÷èíêîâ, ïðî- Çàïàäíûé Êàðàòàó çàíèìàåò îäíó òðåòü îò òÿæ¸ííîñòü êîòîðûõ ñîñòàâèëà 14,3% îò ïëîùàäè âñåãî ãîðíîãî ìàññèâà Êàðàòàó, îáùåé ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòè ÷èíêîâ íà âñåé áåç ó÷¸òà Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó è Áîðàëäàÿ). ïîäãîðíîé ðàâíèíå Ìàëîãî Êàðàòàó. Íà Îíà áûëà îòáðîøåíà êàê çàâûøåííàÿ ÷èíêîâûõ îáðàçîâàíèÿõ âûÿâëåíî 5 ãíåç- èç-çà íåõâàòêè äàííûõ ïî îñåâîé ÷àñòè äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ áàëîáàíîâ. Ïðè÷¸ì, ëèøü 4 ìû âêëþ÷èëè â ó÷¸ò, òàê êàê íà ó÷àñòêå ó îç. Êûçûëêîëü îáíàðóæåíà ëèøü ïîñòî- ÿííàÿ ïðèñàäà ñîêîëîâ, êîòîðûå ìîãëè ãíåçäèòüñÿ è íå íà ÷èíêå, íàïðèìåð, íà ËÝÏ, ïðîõîäÿùåé âäîëü îçåðà. Íà ÷èíêàõ Óëüêåíü-Áóóðûëòàó áàëîáàíà íàéòè íå óäà- ëîñü, êàê è ñëåäîâ åãî ïðåáûâàíèÿ. Ïëîò- íîñòü áàëîáàíà â öåëîì ïî îñìîòðåííûì ÷èíêàì ñîñòàâèëà â ñðåäíåì 1,92 ïàð/10 êì ÷èíêîâ (1,18–3,12 ïàð/10 êì ÷èíêîâ), ÷òî ïðåäïîëàãàåò çäåñü ãíåçäîâàíèå 17–46 ïàð, â ñðåäíåì 28 ïàð. Åäèíñòâåííûé ó÷à- ñòîê ÷èíêà, íà êîòîðîì âûÿâëåíî 2 ãíåç- äîâûõ ó÷àñòêà ñîêîëîâ (îäèí æèëîé) â 2,5 êì äðóã îò äðóãà, – ó÷àñòîê âäîëü îç. Àøèê- êîëü. Íà âñåõ îñòàëüíûõ ó÷àñòêàõ, âíå çà- âèñèìîñòè îò èõ ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòè, ãíåçäè- ëàñü îäíà ïàðà áàëîáàíîâ.  ñâÿçè ñ ýòèì

×èíêè ïîäãîðíîé ðàâíèíû ìåæäó Ìàëûì Êàðàòàó è Ìîéûíêóìàìè. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Cliff-faces of the submountain plain between the Small Karatau mountain range and the Mojynkum Sands. Photos by I. Karyakin. Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 161

îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà â 17–46 ïîïåðå÷íûé ñâåòëûé ðèñóíîê íà ñïèíå. ïàð, ïîëó÷åííàÿ ïðÿìîé ýêñòðàïîëÿöèåé Ëèøü îäèí ñîêîë, âñòðå÷åííûé â Ìàëîì íà âñþ ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòü ÷èíêîâ, âûãëÿäèò Êàðàòàó (åäèíñòâåííûé èç âñòðå÷åííûõ â î÷åíü îïòèìèñòè÷íîé. Åñëè ïðèíÿòü âî ýòèõ ãîðàõ) âûçâàë äèñêóññèþ ñðåäè àâòî- âíèìàíèå, ÷òî íà ïðîòÿæ¸ííûõ ÷èíêàõ ðîâ íà òåìó åãî ïîäâèäîâîé ïðèíàäëåæíî- ãíåçäèòñÿ íå áîëåå 2-õ ïàð, ïîëó÷àåòñÿ, ñòè. Îñòàëüíûå, êîòîðûõ óäàëîñü õîðîøî ÷òî íà âñåõ ÷èíêàõ ïîäãîðíîé ðàâíèíû ðàññìîòðåòü â òðóáó, áûëè îäíîçíà÷íî ìîæåò ãíåçäèòüñÿ îò 17 äî 25 ïàð áàëîáà- èäåíòèôèöèðîâàíû êàê öåíòðàëüíîàçèàò- íîâ, â ñðåäíåì 21 ïàðà. ñêèå áàëîáàíû (F. ch. milvipes). Àíàëèç îöåíîê ÷èñëåííîñòè ïîçâîëÿåò Ê ñîæàëåíèþ, êà÷åñòâåííûõ ôîòîãðà- ñíèçèòü îáùóþ îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëî- ôèé ïòèö ñäåëàíî íå áûëî ïî ïðè÷èíå íå- áàíà íà ãíåçäîâàíèè â ðàññìàòðèâàåìîì äîñòóïíîñòè áîëüøèíñòâà ãí¸çä áåç ñïåöè- ðåãèîíå äî 105–145 çàíÿòûõ ãíåçäîâûõ àëüíîãî ñíàðÿæåíèÿ, à íà êëàäêàõ è ïðè ó÷àñòêîâ. Ó÷èòûâàÿ òî, ÷òî äîëÿ óñïåøíûõ ìàëåíüêèõ ïóõîâèêàõ â õîëîäíóþ ïîãîäó ãí¸çä îò ÷èñëà íàéäåííûõ ñîñòàâèëà 60%, ñàìîê íå õîòåëîñü áåñïîêîèòü. Ïîýòîìó ìîæíî ïðåäïîëàãàòü, ÷òî ÷èñëåííîñòü âîïðîñ î ïîäâèäîâîé ïðèíàäëåæíîñòè êà- óñïåøíûõ ïàð â ðåãèîíå, íà ïåðèîä íà- ðàòàóñêèõ áàëîáàíîâ îñòà¸òñÿ îòêðûòûì. ÷àëà âûêàðìëèâàíèÿ âûâîäêîâ, ñîñòàâëÿåò 63–87 ïàð, â ñðåäíåì 75 ïàð. Ãíåçäîâàÿ áèîëîãèÿ Îñíîâíîé ñòåðåîòèï ãíåçäîâàíèÿ áàëî- Ïîäâèäû áàíà â ãîðàõ Êàðàòàó – êðóïíûå íèøè íà Íå ñîâñåì ÿñåí ïîäâèäîâîé ñòàòóñ áà- âûñîêèõ îòâåñíûõ ãðàíèòíûõ ñòåíàõ, îáðà- ëîáàíà, ãíåçäÿùåãîñÿ íà Êàðàòàó. Ïî ìíå- ù¸ííûõ â ñòåïíûå äîëèíû. Òåì íå ìåíåå, íèþ Ð. Ïôåôôåðà (ëè÷íîå ñîîáùåíèå), åñòü è èñêëþ÷åíèÿ, òàêèå êàê ãíåçäîâàíèå Êàðàòàó äîëæåí íàñåëÿòü òóðêåñòàíñêèé íà ñòåíàõ â óçêèõ óùåëüÿõ â óäàëåíèè îò âû- áàëîáàí (F. ch. coatsi): èç 3-õ íàáëþäàâ- õîäà óùåëèé â ñòåïíûå äîëèíû (9,1% ó÷àñò- øèõñÿ âçðîñëûõ ïòèö â 1993 ã. 2 áûëè êîâ èç 33) è ãíåçäîâàíèå íà íåáîëüøèõ ïîõîæè ïî îêðàñêå íà coatsi. Íà ýòî æå ñêàëüíûõ îñòàíöàõ ñðåäè óâàëèñòîé ñòåïè óêàçûâàþò íàáëþäåíèÿ Î. Áåëÿëîâà (ëè÷- íà ãîðíûõ ïëàòî è â ãîðíûõ äîëèíàõ (6,1% íîå ñîîáùåíèå), êîòîðûé â ãîðàõ Êàðàòàó ó÷àñòêîâ èç 33). Îáðàùàåò íà ñåáÿ âíèìà- ñíÿë íà âèäåî ïòèöó, ïîõîæóþ ïî îêðà- íèå ãíåçäîâàíèå áàëîáàíîâ íà îòâåñíûõ ñêå íà coatsi. 300–400-ìåòðîâûõ ñêàëàõ ñ êîëîíèÿìè áå-  2005 ã. íà ñåâåðî-çàïàäíîé îêîíå÷- ëîãîëîâûõ ñèïîâ (Gyps fulvus), ÷òî äî ñèõ íîñòè Êàðàòàó õîðîøî óäàëîñü ðàçãëÿäåòü ïîð íå áûëî îïèñàíî â Êàçàõñòàíå. ïàðó ñîêîëîâ ïðè ïîñåùåíèè èõ ãíåçäà ñ Çà ïåðèîä ðàáîòû áûëî îñìîòðåíî 20 êëàäêîé. Îáå ïòèöû áûëè ñ îäíîòîííîé ãí¸çä áàëîáàíà (âêëþ÷àÿ ñòàðûå ãí¸çäà áóðîé îêðàñêîé ñïèíû, ñâåòëûì íèçîì ñ íàðÿäó ñ æèëûìè íà çàíÿòûõ ó÷àñòêàõ) â äëèííûìè êîðè÷íåâûìè ïÿòíàìè, èõ ðóëå- ãîðàõ Êàðàòàó è 7 – íà ÷èíêàõ. âûå áûëè ëèøåíû ÷¸òêîãî ðè- ñóíêà. Âñ¸ ýòî óêàçûâàëî íà òî, Àíäðåé Êîâàëåíêî è Èãîðü Êàðÿêèí íàáëþäàþò ÷òî áàëîáàíû áûëè òèïè÷íû çà ãíåçäîì áàëîáàíà. Ôîòî À. Ëåâèíà. äëÿ ïîïóëÿöèè, íàñåëÿþùåé Andrey Kovalenko and Igor Karyakin watched ãðàíèòíûå ìàññèâû Êàçàõñêî- the nest of the Saker Falcon. Photo by A. Levin. ãî ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêà. Ïòèöû ýòîé ïîïóëÿöèè â íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ îòíîñÿòñÿ ê ïîäâèäó cherrug, êîòîðûé â óñëîâèÿõ Öåíòðàëüíîãî Êàçàõñòàíà èç ëåñîñòåïè ïî ãðàíèòíûì ìàñ- ñèâàì ïðîíèêàåò äàëåêî íà þã äî ñàìîãî þãà Âîñòî÷íîé Áåòïàê-Äàëû è Ïðèáàëõàøüÿ. Íàøè íàáëþäåíèÿ 2010 ã. òàêæå íå ïîçâîëÿþò îòíåñòè íàáëþäàâøèõñÿ íàìè ïòèö ê coatsi.  òî æå âðåìÿ, îíè íå ìîãóò áûòü îòíåñåíû è ê cherrug, ò.ê. âñå íàáëþäàâøè- åñÿ ïòèöû èìåëè õàðàêòåðíûé 162 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

– â ñåðåäèíå. Ò.å., áàëîáàí ÿâíî èçáåãàåò ãíåçäèòüñÿ íà îòêðûòûõ ñâåðõó ïîëêàõ â âåðõíåé ÷àñòè ñêàë, íî ïðè ýòîì ÿâíî èç- áèðàåò íèøè, óñòðîåííûå â âåðõíåé ÷à- ñòè ñêàë. Âèäèìî, ãíåçäîâàíèå íà ïîëêàõ âûçâàíî ëèìèòîì íèø, è â ýòîì ñëó÷àå áàëîáàí ïðåäïî÷èòàåò íèæíèé ÿðóñ, èç- áåãàÿ òåì ñàìûì, âåðîÿòíî, íåãàòèâíîãî âëèÿíèÿ ïëîõèõ ïîãîäíûõ óñëîâèé. Íà ÷èíêàõ áàëîáàíû ãíåçäÿòñÿ â äèà- ïàçîíå âûñîò îò 2 äî 11 ì, â ñðåäíåì íà âûñîòå 7,14±4,06 ì. Âñå 7 ãí¸çä ðàñ- ïîëàãàëèñü â íèøàõ, ïðåèìóùåñòâåííî â âåðõíåé òðåòè îáðûâîâ (16,7%). Îñíîâ- íûì ïîñòàâùèêîì ïîñòðîåê äëÿ áàëîáàíà ÿâëÿåòñÿ ñòåðâÿòíèê, â åãî ñòàðûõ ãí¸ç- äàõ îáíàðóæåíî 57,14% ãí¸çä áàëîáà- íà, ïðè÷¸ì, âñå îíè ëåæàëè â ïðåäåëàõ 200-ìåòðîâîé äèñòàíöèè îò æèëûõ ãí¸çä ñòåðâÿòíèêà.  28,57% ñëó÷àåâ áàëîáàíû çàíèìàëè ïîñòðîéêè êóðãàííèêà íà åãî æèëûõ ó÷àñòêàõ, äèñòàíöèðóÿñü îò ýòîãî õèùíèêà íà 200–500 ì. Òàêæå îäíî ãíåç- äî áûëî óñòðîåíî áåç ïîñòðîéêè â íèøå, õîòÿ áàëîáàíû ðàçìíîæàëèñü íà ó÷àñòêå ñòåðâÿòíèêà, ãäå â ïðåäåëàõ 100 ì çîíû ÷èíêà âîêðóã ãíåçäà ñîêîëîâ ðàñïîëà- ãàëèñü 6 ñòàðûõ ïîñòðîåê ñòåðâÿòíèêà è êóðãàííèêà è æèëîå ãíåçäî ñòåðâÿòíèêà. Áëèæàéøàÿ ê ãíåçäó áàëîáàíà ïîñòðîéêà ñòåðâÿòíèêà íàõîäèëàñü â 6 ì â òîé æå ëè- íèè íèø, ÷òî è ãíåçäî áàëîáàíà. Ðèñ. 5. Õàðàêòåð Âûñîòà ðàñïîëîæåíèÿ ãí¸çä â Êàðà- Êëàäêè è âûâîäêè áàëîáàíîâ íàìè â óñòðîéñòâà ãí¸çä áàëî- òàó âàðüèðóåò îò 6 äî 150 ì, ñîñòàâëÿÿ â 2010 ã. íå ïðîâåðÿëèñü, òàê êàê áîëüøóþ áàíà â ãîðàõ Êàðàòàó. ñðåäíåì 47,25±38,80 ì. Èíòåðåñíî òî, ÷àñòü âðåìåíè ñòîÿëà õîëîäíàÿ ïîãîäà, è Fig. 5. The Saker Falcon ÷òî âñå ãí¸çäà â äèàïàçîíå âûñîò íèæå áîëüøèíñòâî ãí¸çä áûëè íåäîñòóïíû áåç nest locations in the 10 ì (15% èç 20) ÿâëÿëèñü ñòàðûìè è íå Karatau mountains. ñíàðÿæåíèÿ. çàíèìàëèñü ñîêîëàìè óæå â òå÷åíèå ìíî- Èíôîðìàöèÿ ïî 3-ì ãí¸çäàì, íàéäåííûì ãèõ ëåò. Äîìèíàíòà ñðåäè ïîñòàâùèêîâ â 1993 ã., ïðèâîäèòñÿ íèæå (Ð. Ïôåôôåð, ãíåçäîâûõ ïîñòðîåê äëÿ áàëîáàíà â Êà- Î. Áåëÿëîâ, ëè÷íîå ñîîáùåíèå). ðàòàó âûäåëèòü äîâîëüíî ñëîæíî (n=20, Ãíåçäî áàëîáàíà, îáíàðóæåííîå 9 ìàÿ ðèñ. 5): 30% ãí¸çä ðàñïîëàãàëîñü â ïî- 1993 ã., ðàñïîëàãàëîñü íà ñêàëüíîé ãðÿäå, ñòðîéêàõ êóðãàííèêà, 25% – â ïîñòðîé- äëèíîé 400–500 ì, äîñòèãàþùåé â ñàìîé êàõ áåðêóòà, 15% – â ïîñòðîéêàõ âîðî- âûñîêîé òî÷êå 150 ì, íà 60-ìåòðîâîé íà (Corvus corax), ïî 5% – â ïîñòðîéêàõ ñêàëå ñåâåðî-ñåâåðî-âîñòî÷íîé ýêñ- ñòåðâÿòíèêà (Neophron percnopterus) è ïîçèöèè, íàõîäÿùåéñÿ â âåðõíåé òðåòè ÷¸ðíîãî àèñòà (Ciconia nigra), ñîîòâåò- ñêëîíà; îíî áûëî óñòðîåíî â 20 ì îò ñòâåííî; 20% ãí¸çä âûÿâëåíû â êðóïíûõ âåðøèíû ñêàëû, â ïðîñòîðíîé íèøå øè- íèøàõ â êîëîíèÿõ ñèïîâ, óãîë íàáëþäå- ðèíîé 1,2 ì, âûñîòîé 0,7 ì è ãëóáèíîé íèÿ çà íèìè â òðóáó íå ïîçâîëÿë ðàñ- 0,6 ì, â ïîñòðîéêå âîðîíà.  ãíåçäå íà- ñìàòðèâàòü ïðîñòðàíñòâî íèø, ïîýòîìó õîäèëîñü 3 ïòåíöà â âîçðàñòå 10–12 äíåé ñîâåðøåííî íåÿñíî, êàêîâ áûë â íèõ ìà- è 2 ÿéöà-áîëòóíà. òåðèàë, íî ìîæíî ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî ýòî Ïóñòîå ãíåçäî áàëîáàíà, îáíàðóæåí- áûëè ïîñòðîéêè ñèïîâ.  íèøàõ óñòðî- íîå 10 ìàÿ 1993 ã., ðàñïîëàãàëîñü â åíî 70% ãí¸çä, ïðè÷¸ì 85,7% èç íèõ ñêàëüíîì ìàññèâå áëèç óñòüÿ óùåëüÿ, â (n=14) óñòðîåíû â âåðõíåé òðåòè ñêàë. öåíòðàëüíîé ÷àñòè 40-ìåòðîâîé ñêàëû Íà ïîëêàõ áûëî îáíàðóæåíî 20% ãí¸çä, çàïàäíî-ñåâåðî-çàïàäíîé ýêñïîçèöèè è ïðè÷¸ì ïîëîâèíà èç íèõ (n=4) óñòðîåíà áûëî óñòðîåíî â ïîñòðîéêå êóðãàííèêà â íèæíåé òðåòè ñêàë è 25% (îäíî ãíåçäî) â íèøå, â 15 ì îò ïîäíîæèÿ ñêàëû. Ïðè- Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 163

Åäèíñòâåííîå ãíåçäî ìåðíî â 120 ì ê þãó îò ãíåçäà áàëîáàíîâ îòëîâà.  íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà â Êàðàòàó, íà ðàñïîëàãàëîñü æèëîå ãíåçäî êóðãàííè- Êàðàòàóñêîé ãíåçäîâîé ãðóïïèðîâêè áà- êîòîðîì ñîêîëîâ ìîæ- íî áûëî íàáëþäàòü áåç êîâ, è ñîêîëû âðåìÿ îò âðåìåíè îæåñòî- ëîáàíà ñóùåñòâåííî ñíèçèëàñü, è âèä ñî- èñïîëüçîâàíèÿ òðóáû. ÷åííî àòàêîâàëè èõ. õðàíèëñÿ â îñíîâíîì â òðóäíîäîñòóïíûõ Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Ãíåçäî áàëîáàíà, îáíàðóæåííîå 11 ãðàíèòíûõ ìàññèâàõ è çàêðûòûõ äîëèíàõ The only nest of the ìàÿ 1993 ã., ðàñïîëàãàëîñü íà 150- öåíòðàëüíîé ÷àñòè õð. Êàðàòàó. Áàëîáàí Saker in Karatau which ìåòðîâîé ñêàëå þãî-âîñòî÷íîé ýêñïîçè- â Êàðàòàó îñòà¸òñÿ óÿçâèìûì, òàê êàê â falcons could be öèè, â 35 ì îò âåðøèíû, â íèøå îêðóãëîé çèìíèé ïåðèîä íå òîëüêî ìîëîäûå, íî observed without a telescope in. ôîðìû äèàìåòðîì îêîëî 1 ì è ãëóáèíîé è âçðîñëûå ïòèöû âûíóæäåíû ïîêèäàòü Photos by I. Karyakin. 0,7 ì, áåç ïîñòðîéêè.  ãíåçäå áûëî âèä- ñâîè ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè è, ñîâåðøàÿ êî- íî 2-õ ïòåíöîâ ðàçíîé âåëè÷èíû ñòàðøå ÷¸âêè, âûõîäèòü íà ðàâíèíó. Çäåñü îíè 20 äíåé. ìîãóò áûòü ëåãêî ïîéìàíû ëîâöàìè. Ïîêà Ãíåçäî áàëîáàíà, îñìîòðåííîå â ñåâåðî- áóäåò ñîõðàíÿòüñÿ ñïðîñ íà ñîêîëîâ, îíè çàïàäíîì Êàðàòàó 15 àïðåëÿ 2005 ã., ðàñ- áóäóò îòëàâëèâàòüñÿ, è íàäåÿòüñÿ íà ñòà- ïîëàãàëîñü íà ñêàëüíîì ãðåáíå âåðøèíû áèëèçàöèþ è ðîñò ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà ïåðåäîâîé ñêëàäêè õðåáòà â ïîñòðîéêå â Êàðàòàó, à òåì áîëåå âî âñ¸ì Þæíîì áåðêóòà, óñòðîåííîé íà îòêðûòîé ïîëêå â Êàçàõñòàíå, â áëèæàéøåì áóäóùåì íå ñåðåäèíå 8 ì ñêàëû, è ñîäåðæàëî êëàäêó ïðèõîäèòñÿ. èç 5 ÿèö (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2008). Áëàãîäàðíîñòè Çàêëþ÷åíèå Àâòîðû áëàãîäàðÿò Ìåæäóíàðîäíîå  íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ ãíåçäîâàÿ ãðóïïèðîâ- êîíñóëüòàöèîííîå àãåíòñòâî ïî äèêîé ïðè- êà áàëîáàíîâ â Êàðàòàó è íà ïðèëåãàþùèõ ðîäå (IWC, UK) çà ôèíàíñèðîâàíèå ýêñïå- òåððèòîðèÿõ ÿâëÿåòñÿ ñàìîé êðóïíîé íà äèöèè íà Êàðàòàó, à òàêæå Ð. Ïôåôôåðà, âñ¸ì þãå è þãî-âîñòîêå Êàçàõñòàíà. Çäåñü, Î. Áåëÿëîâà, À. Ãàâðèëîâà è Á. Åñåíòàåâà, ñ ó÷¸òîì èññëåäîâàíèé 2005 è 2010 ãã., ïîäåëèâøèõñÿ ñâîèìè íåîïóáëèêîâàííû- âûÿâëåíî 36 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ñîêîëîâ ìè äàííûìè î áàëîáàíå â Êàðàòàó. (28,8% îò ïðåäïîëàãàåìîé ÷èñëåííîñòè), à ÷èñëåííîñòü îöåíèâàåòñÿ â 105–145 Ëèòåðàòóðà ïàð, â ñðåäíåì 125 ïàð, 76% èç êîòîðûõ Êîëáèíöåâ Â.Ã. Ñîâðåìåííîå ñîñòîÿíèå ïî- ãíåçäèòñÿ â îñíîâíîì ãîðíîì ìàññèâå Êà- ïóëÿöèè ðåäêèõ ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ âèäîâ ñîâ è õèù- íûõ ïòèö â Ìàëîì Êàðàòàó. – Êàçàõñòàíñêèé ðàòàó. Ïîêàçàòåëè òðåíäà íåÿñíû, íî òî, îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2003. Àëìàòû, ÷òî äèíàìèêà ÷èñëåííîñòè íåãàòèâíà, ýòî 2004. Ñ. 214–219. îäíîçíà÷íî. Êîðåëîâ Ì.Í. Ïòèöû Êàçàõñòàíà. Ò. 2. Îò- Èñ÷åçíîâåíèå áàëîáàíà â ïåðâóþ î÷å- ðÿä Õèùíûå ïòèöû – Falconiformes. Àëìà-Àòà, ðåäü â ïåðåäîâûõ ñêëàäêàõ Êàðàòàó è âî- 1962. Ñ. 488–707. êðóã ãîðîäîâ ìîæíî îáúÿñíèòü òîëüêî îò- Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Êîâàëåíêî À.Â., Áàðàáàøèí ëîâîì ïòèö. Íà ýòî æå óêàçûâàþò äàííûå Ò.Î., Êîðåïîâ Ì.Â. Êðóïíûå õèùíûå ïòèöû Áåêåòà Åñåíòàåâà, êîòîðûé çíàë ãí¸çäà áàññåéíà Ñàðûñó. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2008. ¹13. C.48–87. áàëîáàíîâ â ïåðåäîâûõ óùåëüÿõ þæíîãî Ðàâêèí Å.Ñ., ×åëèíöåâ Í.Ã. Ìåòîäè÷åñêèå ôàñà Êàðàòàó â 90-õ ãã., íî ñåé÷àñ çäåñü ðåêîìåíäàöèè ïî êîìïëåêñíîìó ìàðøðóòíîìó ïòèöû ïðàêòè÷åñêè ïîëíîñòüþ èñ÷åçëè, ó÷¸òó ïòèö. Ì.: ÂÍÈÈ îõðàíû ïðèðîäû è çàïî- ïðè÷¸ì, ïî åãî ìíåíèþ, â ðåçóëüòàòå âåäíîãî äåëà, 1990. 33 ñ. 164 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

ChinkSakerFalcon–isaSeparateSubspeciesInhabitingNorth-West oftheMiddleAsia ЧИНКОВЫЙ БАЛОБАН – САМОСТОЯТЕЛЬНЫЙ ПОДВИД, НАСЕЛЯЮЩИЙ СЕВЕРО-ЗАПАД СРЕДНЕЙ АЗИИ PfefferR.G.(Greifvogelzoo“BayerischerJagdfalkenhof”,Schillingsfürst,Germany) KaryakinI.V.(CenterofFieldStudies,N.Novgorod,Russia) Пфеффер Р.Г. (Зоопарк хищных птиц «Баварский соколиный двор», Шиллингсфюрст, Германия) Карякин И.В. (Центр полевых исследований, Н. Новгород, Россия)

Êîíòàêò: Àáñòðàêò Èãîðü Êàðÿêèí  ñòàòüå ïðèâîäÿòñÿ äàííûå èññëåäîâàíèé àâòîðîâ, êîòîðûå ìîòèâèðóþò âûäåëåíèå íîâîãî ïîäâèäà – ÷èíêî- Öåíòð ïîëåâûõ âîãî áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug aralocaspius), íàñåëÿþùåãî ñåâåðî-çàïàä Ñðåäíåé Àçèè. Ñòàòóñ ïîäâèäà áûë íå èññëåäîâàíèé ÿñåí â òå÷åíèå 70 ëåò è â ðàçíûõ ñâîäêàõ ðàçíûìè èññëåäîâàòåëÿìè ïðèðàâíèâàëñÿ ê îäíîìó èç 3-õ ïîäâèäîâ, 603000, Ðîññèÿ, ñîãëàñíî ïðèíÿòîé â ÑÑÑÐ ïîäâèäîâîé íîìåíêëàòóðû. Íèæíèé Íîâãîðîä, Êëþ÷åâûå ñëîâà: õèùíûå ïòèöû, ñîêîëû, áàëîáàí, Falco cherrug, ïîäâèäû, çîîãåîãðàôèÿ, ñèñòåìàòèêà. óë. Êîðîëåíêî, 17a–17 òåë.: +7 831 433 38 47 Abstract [email protected] There are data of author’s research that prove the describing of new subspecies – Chink Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug aralocaspius), inhabiting north-west of the Middle Asia. Status of the subspecies has been unclear during last 70 years, and different researchers in different publications recognized it as one of 3 subspecies according with the subspecies nomenclatures accepted in the USSR. Contact: Keywords: birds of prey, falcons, Saker Falcon, Falco cherrug, subspecies, zoogeography, systematics. Ralf Pfeffer Otto-Stumpf-Weg 14, Leimen, Germany, 69181 Ââåäåíèå Introduction tel.: +4 962 24 926 630 Çíà÷èòåëüíàÿ èíäèâèäóàëüíàÿ èçìåí÷è- Significant individual variability of the [email protected] âîñòü áàëîáàíîâ (Falco cherrug) îïðåäåëÿåò Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) determines the Igor Karyakin áîëüøîå ðàçíîîáðàçèå îêðàñêè îïåðåíèÿ significant variety of color of plumage of indi- Center of Field Studies îñîáåé îäíèõ è òåõ æå ìåòàïîïóëÿöèé, ÷òî viduals of the same populations that essen- Korolenko str., 17a–17, ñóùåñòâåííî îñëîæíÿåò àíàëèç âíóòðè- tially complicates the analysis of intraspecific Nizhniy Novgorod, Russia, 603000 âèäîâîé ãåîãðàôè÷åñêîé èçìåí÷èâîñòè. geographical variability. It was the fact that tel.: +7 831 433 38 47 Èìåííî ýòî îïðåäåëèëî çàïàäíûé ïîäõîä defined the western approach to the system- [email protected] ê ïîäâèäîâîé ñèñòåìàòèêå áàëîáàíîâ, êî- atics of the Saker subspecies. Within this ap- òîðûé ïðèçíà¸ò ëèøü äâà ïîäâèäà: îáûêíî- proach only two subspecies are recognized: âåííûé èëè çàïàäíûé áàëîáàí (F. ch. cher- nominal or western Saker (F. ch. cherrug) and rug) è öåíòðàëüíîàçèàòñêèé (ìîíãîëüñêèé) Central Asian (Mongolian) or eastern Saker èëè âîñòî÷íûé áàëîáàí (F. ch. milvipes) (F. ch. milvipes) (Koblik, et al., 2006; Vaurie, (Êîáëèê è äð., 2006; Vaurie, 1961; 1965). 1961; 1965). In some cases the Altai Saker or  ðÿäå ñëó÷àåâ èç âîñòî÷íîãî áàëîáàíà the Altai Falcon (F. ch. altaicus) is determined, âûäåëÿåòñÿ àëòàéñêèé áàëîáàí èëè àëòàé- ñêèé ñîêîë (F. ch. altaicus), òðàêòóåìûé íå- êîòîðûìè èññëåäîâàòåëÿìè êàê ñàìîñòîÿ- òåëüíûé âèä (Êîáëèê è äð., 2006; Forsman, 2007; Vaurie, 1965). Äàííûé ïîäõîä èãíî- ðèðóåò ñâåäåíèÿ î ãåîãðàôè÷åñêîé ëîêà- ëèçàöèè êðóïíûõ ïîïóëÿöèé ñîêîëîâ, â êîòîðûõ äî 90% îñîáåé õàðàêòåðèçóþòñÿ îäíîòèïíûì îêðàñîì îïåðåíèÿ. Î÷åâèä- íî, ÷òî ó ïòèö îïðåäåë¸ííûõ ãåîãðàôè÷å- ñêèõ ðàñ íåêîòîðûå õàðàêòåðíûå äåòàëè îêðàñêè âåñüìà ïîñòîÿííû, ÷òî ïîçâîëÿåò äîñòàòî÷íî òî÷íî îïðåäåëÿòü ïîäâèäîâóþ ïðèíàäëåæíîñòü äàæå îòäåëüíûõ ýêçåìïëÿ- ×èíêîâûé áàëîáàí (Falco cherrug aralocaspius). ðîâ. Ê îäíîé èç òàêèõ ðàñ îòíîñÿòñÿ áàëî- Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. áàíû, íàñåëÿþùèå îáøèðíóþ òåððèòîðèþ Chink Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug aralocaspius). ìåæäó Êàñïèéñêèì è Àðàëüñêèì ìîðÿìè, ñ Photo by I. Karyakin. Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 165

èñòîðè÷åñêè ñëîæèâøèìñÿ íåïîâòîðèìûì and it is recognized by some researchers as ëàíäøàôòîì. Òî, ÷òî äàííûé ðåãèîí íà- a full species (Koblik et al., etc., 2006; For- ñåëÿåò óíèêàëüíûé ïîäâèä áàëîáàíà, õî- sman, 2007; Vaurie, 1965). Unfortunately ðîøî îòëè÷èìûé îò îêðóæàþùèõ åãî ðàñ, within this approach data on geographical îòíîñÿùèõñÿ ê çàïàäíûì áàëîáàíàì, óæå localization of large populations of falcons, íåîäíîêðàòíî îáñóæäàëîñü (Ïôåôôåð, which contains up to 90% of individuals with 2009; Êàðÿêèí, Ïôåôôåð, 2009).  äàí- the same plumage, are ignored. The birds of íîé ñòàòüå ïðèâåäåíû ðåçóëüòàòû àíàëèçà the certain geographical races seem to have êîëëåêöèîííûõ îáðàçöîâ è èññëåäîâàíèé some quite constant specific features in color áèîëîãèè áàëîáàíîâ, íàñåëÿþùèõ Àðàëî- of plumage that allows defining rather pre- Êàñïèéñêèé ðåãèîí, ïîçâîëÿþùèå óñòàíî- cisely subspecies of even separate individu- âèòü åãî ïîäâèäîâóþ ñàìîñòîÿòåëüíîñòü. als. The Sakers inhabiting the extensive terri- tory between Caspian and Aral Seas belongs Ìàòåðèàëû è ìåòîäû to one of such races. In this article there are Àâòîðàìè îáðàáîòàíû êîëëåêöèîííûå results of the analysis of collected specimens ìàòåðèàëû, õðàíÿùèåñÿ â êîëëåêöèÿõ çîî- and research of biology of Sakers, inhabiting ëîãè÷åñêèõ ìóçååâ Ìîñêîâñêîãî ãîñóíè- the Aral-Caspian region, that allow to estab- âåðñèòåòà (Ìîñêâà, Ðîññèÿ), Çîîëîãè÷å- lish its subspecies originality. ñêîãî Èíñòèòóòà ÐÀÍ (Ñàíêò-Ïåòåðáóðã, Ðîññèÿ) è Èíñòèòóòà çîîëîãèè Êîìèòåòà Materials and methods Íàóêè Ìèíèñòåðñòâà îáðàçîâàíèÿ è íàó- Authors have analyzed the collection sam- êè (Àëìàòû, Êàçàõñòàí).  îáùåé ñëîæíî- ples kept in zoological museums of the Mos- ñòè èçó÷åíû 17 øêóðîê ïòèö, â òîì ÷èñëå cow State University (Moscow, Russia), Zoo- 5 âçðîñëûõ ñàìöîâ, 6 âçðîñëûõ ñàìîê è 6 logical Institute of the Russian Academy of ìîëîäûõ ïòèö. Ïðîìåðû âçÿòû ñ 11 òóøåê Science (St. Petersburg, Russia) and Institute ïòèö. Êðûëî (ìàêñèìàëüíî âûïðÿìëåííîå of Zoology of Committee of the Science of the íà ïëîñêîñòè) è õâîñò èçìåðÿëèñü ëèíåé- Ministry of Education and Science (Almaty, êîé ñ òî÷íîñòüþ äî îäíîãî ìèëëèìåòðà. Kazakhstan). A total of 17 skins of birds, in- Äëÿ ñðåäíèõ âûáîðîê ðàññ÷èòûâàëîñü cluding 5 adult males, 6 adult females and ñòàíäàðòíîå îòêëîíåíèå. 6 young birds were studied. Measurements Èç ïðèçíàêîâ îêðàñêè è ðèñóíêà îïåðå- are taken from 11 samples of birds. Wing íèÿ ñðàâíèòåëüíîìó àíàëèçó ïîäâåðãíóòû and tail were measured by a ruler to within ýëåìåíòû îêðàñêè ñïèíû è òåìåíè, õàðàê- 1 mm. For the average values of sample the òåð ðèñóíêà ìàíòèè, ãîëîâû, õâîñòà, íà standard deviation was calculated. áðþøêå, áîêàõ è øòàíàõ. Objects for the comparative analysis were Äàííûå î ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèè, ÷èñëåííî- the coloring features of feather tracts as fol- ñòè è ãíåçäîâîé áèîëîãèè ïîäâèäà ñîáðàíû lows: crown, mantle, back, head, tail, belly, â ðåçóëüòàòå öåëåâûõ ýêñïåäèöèé â 1980, flanks and trousers. 1989, 1993, 1994, 2003 è 2004 ãã. Ìåòî- Data on distribution, number and breed- äèêà ïîëåâîé ðàáîòû ïîäðîáíî îñâåùåíà ing biology of subspecies are obtained as â îòäåëüíûõ ïóáëèêàöèÿõ (Êàðÿêèí è äð., a result of target surveys in 1980, 1989, 2005à, 2005á). 1993, 1994, 2003 and 2004. The technique Ïðè ñðàâíåíèè îêðàñêè ÷èíêîâûõ áà- of field surveys is published in detail (Kar- ëîáàíîâ ñ äðóãèìè ôîðìàìè, àâòîðû äëÿ yakin et al., 2005à, 2005á). ïîëíîòû ñâåäåíèé ñâîåîáðàçíûõ áàëîáà- Comparing the plumage of Chink Sakers íîâ, îáèòàþùèõ â Ìàëîé Àçèè, íî åù¸ with other subspecies for completeness of íå îïèñàííûõ â êà÷åñòâå ïîäâèäà, íèæå data authors have conditionally named the óñëîâíî áóäóò íàçûâàòü àíàòîëèéñêèìè original Sakers, living in the Asia Minor, (ñì. Ïôåôôåð, 2009), à óíèêàëüíûõ ïî but not described yet as a separate subspe- îêðàñêå è ðèñóíêó ñîêîëîâ, âñòðå÷àþùèõ- cies, as Anatolian ones (see Pfeffer, 2009), ñÿ ïðåèìóùåñòâåííî íà Àëòàå è â Ñàÿíàõ and the falcons unique in coloring of plum- â ïðåäåëàõ àðåàëîâ îáûêíîâåííîãî, öåí- age encountered mainly in the Altai-Sayan òðàëüíîàçèàòñêîãî è ìîíãîëüñêîãî áàëîáà- mountains within breeding ranges of nomi- íîâ, ïðîèñõîæäåíèå è ñòàòóñ êîòîðûõ äî nal, Central Asian and Mongolian Sakers, ñèõ ïîð ñïîðíû, – àëòàéñêèìè ñîêîëàìè. whose origin and status have been unclear till now, – the Altai Falcons. Ðåçóëüòàòû è èõ îáñóæäåíèå Ãåîãðàôè÷åñêèå âàðèàöèè èçìåíåíèÿ Results and the discussion îêðàñêè îïåðåíèÿ âçðîñëûõ áàëîáàíîâ Geographical variations in the coloring 166 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

×èíêîâûé áàëîáàí. and marking of plumage for adult Sakers are Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. determined by a combination of four major Chink Saker Falcon. factors that causes the specific coloring of Photo by I. Karyakin. contour feathers of upperparts and under- parts of the body. The first is the structure and character of horizontal markings. They are almost absent at the nominal Saker, ap- pearing on the rump and the bottom part of mantle as separate horizontal pale spots at the Chink Saker and gradually develop (gradually transforming into the regular shape of strips) in the row: Anatolian Saker îïðåäåëÿþòñÿ êîìáèíàöèåé ÷åòûð¸õ îñ- – Turkestanian Saker – Centralasian Saker íîâíûõ ôàêòîðîâ, îïðåäåëÿþùèõ îñî- – Altai Falcon – Mongolian Saker – Tibetan áåííîñòè îêðàñêè êîíòóðíûõ ïåðüåâ íà Saker. The second – coloring of crown. Its âåðõíåé è íèæíåé ñòîðîíàõ òåëà. Ïåðâîå intensity decreases in the row: Altai Falcon – ñòðóêòóðà è ðàñïîëîæåíèå ïîïåðå÷- (black or blackish-brown) – Tibetan Saker – íîãî ñâåòëîãî ðèñóíêà. Îí ïðàêòè÷åñêè Turkestanian Saker – Centralasian – nomi- îòñóòñòâóåò ó îáûêíîâåííûõ áàëîáàíîâ, nal Saker – Anatolian – Chink Saker (dirty- ïîÿâëÿåòñÿ íà ïîÿñíèöå è â âèäå îòäåëü- white, sometimes with weak wine or ochre íûõ ñâåòëûõ ïîïåðå÷íûõ ïÿòåí íà íèæ- shade). The third – presence and intensity íåé ÷àñòè ìàíòèè ó ÷èíêîâûõ áàëîáàíîâ of a grayish-bluish shade and a degree of its è ïîñòåïåííî óñèëèâàåòñÿ (ïîäíèìàåòñÿ covering the body. The Chink and Tibetan âñ¸ âûøå, äîñòèãàÿ â èòîãå øåè è ïðèîá- Sakers have no it in their plumage. It is de- ðåòàÿ ïîñòåïåííî õàðàêòåð ñïëîøíûõ veloped weekly on the rump of some birds ïîïåðå÷íûõ ïîëîñ) â ðÿäó: àíàòîëèéñêèé of nominal Sakers, and well on the rump of áàëîáàí – òóðêåñòàíñêèé áàëîáàí – öåí- Centralasian Saker, coloring sometimes and òðàëüíîàçèàòñêèé áàëîáàí – àëòàéñêèé ñî- the mantle; and it is strongly developed at êîë – ìîíãîëüñêèé áàëîáàí – òèáåòñêèé the Altai Falcon, Turkestanian, Anatolian áàëîáàí. Âòîðîå – îêðàñêà òåìåíè. Åãî and Mongolian Sakers. The fourth – charac- èíòåíñèâíîñòü ñíèæàåòñÿ â ðÿäó: àëòàé- ter of dark markings of underparts. They are ñêèé ñîêîë (÷¸ðíîå èëè ÷åðíîâàòî-áóðîå) developed as separate circle and horizon- – òèáåòñêèé áàëîáàí (ò¸ìíî-êîðè÷íåâîå, tal markings at the nominal Saker. The dark èíîãäà ÷åðíîâàòî-áóðîå) – òóðêåñòàíñêèé horizontal marking is gradually grown in the áàëîáàí (êðàñíîâàòî-êîðè÷íåâîå èëè ðû- in row: Chink Saker – Turkestanian Saker – æåå) – öåíòðàëüíîàçèàòñêèé áàëîáàí (ðàç- Anatolian Saker – Centralasian Saker – Mon- íûå îòòåíêè îõðèñòîãî èëè âèííîãî öâåòà) golian Saker – Altai Falcon – Tibetan Saker – îáûêíîâåííûé áàëîáàí (îò îõðèñòîãî äî (it is developed in to the regular shape of ãðÿçíî-áåëîãî) – àíàòîëèéñêèé áàëîáàí strips on flanks, trousers as well as on un- (áåëîâàòîå ñî ñëàáûì âèííûì îòòåíêîì) – dertail coverts at both last subspecies). ÷èíêîâûé áàëîáàí (ãðÿçíî-áåëîå, èíîãäà The geographical races of Sakers living in ñî ñëàáûì âèííûì èëè îõðèñòûì îòòåíêîì). Asia tend to become increasingly barred from Òðåòüå – íàëè÷èå è èíòåíñèâíîñòü ñèçîãî west to east (exception – Anatolian Saker). îòòåíêà è ñòåïåíü åãî ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèÿ. The birds lacking horizontal markings in Ó ÷èíêîâîãî è òèáåòñêîãî áàëîáàíîâ îí their plumage predominate in the territory îòñóòñòâóåò, ó ðåäêèõ ýêçåìïëÿðîâ îáûê- of the Central Kazakhstan. But the terri- íîâåííûõ áàëîáàíîâ åäâà íàìå÷àåòñÿ íà tory to the west of the Central Kazakhstan ïîÿñíèöå, õîðîøî âûðàæåí íà ïîÿñíèöå, is inhabited by Sakers with sufficiently pro- à èíîãäà è íà ìàíòèè öåíòðàëüíîàçèàòñêèõ nounced although not very contrasting áàëîáàíîâ è ñèëüíî âûðàæåí ó àëòàéñêîãî horizontal markings on the back. Also these ñîêîëà, òóðêåñòàíñêîãî, àíàòîëèéñêîãî è falcons differ in their sizes; they are smaller, ìîíãîëüñêîãî áàëîáàíîâ. ×åòâ¸ðòîå – õà- than birds from the neighbour metapopula- ðàêòåð ò¸ìíîãî ðèñóíêà íèçà. Ó îáûêíî- tions. In spite of the fact that the breeding âåííîãî áàëîáàíà îí â âèäå êðóãëûõ (íà grounds of Aralocaspian Sakers is located ãðóäè) èëè ïðîäîëüíûõ ïÿòåí, â äàëüíåé- on the migration route of falcons from the øåì ïîïåðå÷íûé õàðàêòåð ýòîãî ðèñóíêà forest-steppe metapopulations (F. c. cher- ïîñòåïåííî íàðàñòàåò â ðÿäó: ÷èíêîâûé rug), and also is the wintering grounds for áàëîáàí – òóðêåñòàíñêèé áàëîáàí – àíà- large Siberian Sakers (F. c. milvipes and F. òîëèéñêèé áàëîáàí – öåíòðàëüíîàçèàòñêèé c. saceroides), mixing of phenotypes does Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 167

áàëîáàí – ìîíãîëüñêèé áàëîáàí – àëòàé- not occur in view of deep ecological dis- ñêèé ñîêîë – òèáåòñêèé áàëîáàí (ó ïîñëåä- tinctions between subspecies. The listed cir- íèõ äâóõ îí ïðèíèìàåò õàðàêòåð ïðàâèëü- cumstances seem to be the sufficient basis íûõ ïîïåðå÷íûõ ïîëîñ íå òîëüêî íà áîêàõ for the description of geographical race of è øòàíàõ, íî è íà ïîäõâîñòüå). the Saker in the Aral-Caspian region. Ñðåäè ãåîãðàôè÷åñêèõ ðàñ áàëîáàíîâ, ðàñïðîñòðàí¸ííûõ â Àçèè, íàáëþäàåòñÿ Falco cherrug aralocaspius Pfeffer et óñèëåíèå ïîïåðå÷íîïîëîñàòîãî ðèñóíêà ó Karyakin subsp. n. áàëîáàíîâ ïî ìåðå ïðîäâèæåíèÿ ñ çàïà- Holotype äà íà âîñòîê (èñêëþ÷åíèå – àíàòîëèéñêèé Adult male. It was collected on March, áàëîáàí). 21, 1965; western cliff-faces of the Ustyurt Íà òåððèòîðèè Áåòïàê-Äàëû è Êàçàõñêî- Plateau, Kugusem well, Karyn-Zharyk de- ãî ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêà äîìèíèðóþò ïòèöû, pression. Collectors Savinov and Ganjushin. â îêðàñêå ñïèíû êîòîðûõ ïîëíîñòüþ îò- It was defined by Korelov as F. ch. coatsi, ñóòñòâóåò ïîïåðå÷íîïîëîñàòûé ðèñóíîê. and redefined by Korelov in 1995 as F. ch. Ìîæíî áûëî áû ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî äàëåå aralocaspius. Place of storage: the Zoologi- íà çàïàä íà òîé æå øèðîòå ðàñïðîñòðàíå- cal Museum of the Institute of Zoology of íû ñîêîëû ñ àíàëîãè÷íîé îêðàñêîé, îä- the Committee of Science of the Ministry of íàêî ýòî íå òàê. Íà òåððèòîðèè, ëåæàùåé Education and Science, Almaty, Kazakhstan. çàïàäíåå Áåòïàê-Äàëû è Êàçàõñêîãî ìåëêî- Inventory number: 18670/163. ñîïî÷íèêà, ñîñòàâëÿþò îñíîâíîé ôîí áà- Paratypes ëîáàíû, èìåþùèå ïîïåðå÷íî-ïîëîñàòûé 1. Adult female. It was collected on May, ðèñóíîê ñïèíû, õîòÿ è ñëàáî âûðàæåí- 28, 1947; Mangyshlak Peninsula, vicinities íûé. Èíîãäà ðèñóíîê èõ õâîñòà ïðèíèìà- of the Tauchik settlement (Taushik). Collec- åò õàðàêòåð ñêâîçíûõ ïîïåðå÷íûõ ïîëîñ. tor: Chekmenyov. It was defined by Korelov Êðîìå òîãî, ó íåêîòîðûõ îñîáåé íà áîêàõ as F. ch. coatsi, and redefined by Korelov in è øòàíàõ ò¸ìíûå ïÿòíà èìåþò ñåðäöåâèä- 1995 as F. ch. aralocaspius. Place of storage: íóþ ôîðìó, ïðèäàþùóþ èì õàðàêòåð ñëà- the Zoological Museum of the Institute of áî âûðàæåííîãî ïîïåðå÷íîãî ðèñóíêà. Zoology of the Committee of Science of the Ýòè ñîêîëû îòëè÷àþòñÿ òàêæå ìåíüøèìè, Ministry of Education and Science, Almaty, ÷åì ïòèöû èç ñîñåäíèõ ìåòàïîïóëÿöèé, Kazakhstan. Inventory number: 6730/56. ðàçìåðàìè. Íåñìîòðÿ íà òî, ÷òî îáëàñòü 2. Adult female. It was collected on June, ãíåçäîâàíèÿ àðàëîêàñïèéñêèõ áàëîáàíîâ 21, 1947; Mangyshlak Peninsula, Tushybek ëåæèò íà ïóòè ìèãðàöèè ñîêîëîâ èç ëå- settlement (southern macroslope of Western ñîñòåïíûõ ìåòàïîïóëÿöèé, îòíîñÿùèõñÿ Karatau mountains). Collector: Dolgushin. It ê ïîäâèäó cherrug, à òàêæå ÿâëÿåòñÿ îá- was defined by Korelov as F. ch. coatsi, it is ëàñòüþ çèìîâêè êðóïíûõ ñèáèðñêèõ áàëî- redefined by Korelov in 1995 as F. ch. ar- áàíîâ (milvipes è saceroides), ñìåøèâàíèÿ alocaspius. Place of storage: the Zoological ôåíîòèïîâ íå ïðîèñõîäèò ââèäó ãëóáîêèõ Museum of the Institute of Zoology of the ýêîëîãè÷åñêèõ ðàçëè÷èé ìåæäó ïòèöàìè. Committee of Science of the Ministry of Ed- Ïåðå÷èñëåííûå îáñòîÿòåëüñòâà ïðåäñòàâ- ucation and Science, Almaty, Kazakhstan. ëÿþòñÿ äîñòàòî÷íûì îñíîâàíèåì äëÿ îïè- Inventory number: 6728/56. ñàíèÿ ãåîãðàôè÷åñêîé ðàñû áàëîáàíà â 3. Adult female. It was collected on June, Àðàëî-Êàñïèéñêîì ðåãèîíå. 11, 1959; Turgay river, 100 km lower the Amangeldy settelment. Collector: Dol- Ñàìêà ÷èíêîâîãî áàëî- gushin. It was defined by Korelov as F. áàíà íà êëàäêå. cherrug without noting the subspecies. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Place of storage: the Zoological Museum Female of the Chink of the Institute of Zoology of the Commit- Saker Falcon in the nest with clutch. tee of Science of the Ministry of Education Photo by I. Karyakin. and Science, Almaty, Kazakhstan. Inventory number: 14960/140. 4. Adult female. It was collected on Sep- tember, 3, 1934; to the southeast from Kara Bogaz Gol Gulf in vicinity of the Bulmudzier village. Collector: Minin. It was defined as F. cherrug without noting the subspecies. Place of storage: Zoological Museum of the Zoological Institute of the Russian Academy 168 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Falco cherrug aralocaspius Pfeffer et of Science, St. Petersburg, Russia. Inventory Karyakin subsp. n. number: 75567/137-935. Ãîëîòèï Âçðîñëûé ñàìåö. Äîáûò 21 ìàðòà 1965 ã., Description Çàïàäíûé ÷èíê ïëàòî Óñòþðò, êîëîäåö Êó- Plumage of adult birds ãóñåì, âïàäèíà Êàðûí-Æàðûê. Êîëëåêòîðû Head of adult birds appears rather dirty- Å. Ñàâèíîâ è À. Ãàíþøèí. Îïðåäåëåíà Ì. white above, with more or less narrow mark- Êîðåëîâûì êàê F. ch. coatsi, ïåðåîïðåäå- ings, varying from clay to dark-brown, on the ëåíà Ì. Êîðåëîâûì â 1995 ã. êàê F. ch. crown. Cheeks are whitish with sparse and aralocaspius. Ìåñòî õðàíåíèÿ: Çîîëîãè÷å- narrow brownish streaking growing denser ñêèé ìóçåé Èíñòèòóòà çîîëîãèè Êîìèòåòà and wider towards the ears, and sometimes Íàóêè Ìèíèñòåðñòâà îáðàçîâàíèÿ è íàóêè, and below the eye, forming in that case pale Àëìàòû, Êàçàõñòàí. Èíâåíòàðíûé íîìåð: and the hardly perceptible moustache. 18670/163. Back is clayish-brown, becoming gradu- Ïàðàòèïû ally paler from the mantle to the rump with- 1. Âçðîñëàÿ ñàìêà. Äîáûòà 28 ìàÿ 1947 ã., out a grayish-bluish shade. Back coverts are ï-îâ Ìàíãûøëàê, îêðåñòíîñòè Òàó÷èêà (Òàó- with pale-brown or seldom rufous margins. øèêà). Êîëëåêòîð Ä. ×åêìåí¸â. Îïðåäåëåíà Scapulars are uniformly brown with pale- Ì. Êîðåëîâûì êàê F. ch. coatsi, ïåðåîïðå- brown margins. Vanes in the bottom third äåëåíà Ì. Êîðåëîâûì â 1995 ã. êàê F. ch. of scapulars of some birds may be spot- aralocaspius. Ìåñòî õðàíåíèÿ: Çîîëîãè÷åñêèé ted: small roundish rufous spots are located ìóçåé Èíñòèòóòà çîîëîãèè Êîìèòåòà Íàóêè pairwise at the edge of vanes, which can Ìèíèñòåðñòâà îáðàçîâàíèÿ è íàóêè, Àëìàòû, develop cross-bars in coloring of individu- Êàçàõñòàí. Èíâåíòàðíûé íîìåð: 6730/56. als from eastern population of the subspe- 2. Âçðîñëàÿ ñàìêà. Äîáûòà 21 èþíÿ cies. Lesser, median, greater and primary 1947 ã., ï-îâ Ìàíãûøëàê, Òóøûáåê (þæ- coverts are uniformly clayish-brown with íûé ìàêðîñêëîí Çàïàäíîãî Êàðàòàó). rather wide pale-ochre or sandy margins. Êîëëåêòîð È. Äîëãóøèí. Îïðåäåëåíà Ì. Some times there are dirty-white round- Êîðåëîâûì êàê F. ch. coatsi, ïåðåîïðåäå- ish or oval horizontal spots covering outer ëåíà Ì. Êîðåëîâûì â 1995 ã. êàê F. ch. vanes of greater and median coverts. Ter- aralocaspius. Ìåñòî õðàíåíèÿ: Çîîëîãè- tails are generally clayish with rather wide ÷åñêèé ìóçåé Èíñòèòóòà çîîëîãèè Êîìè- margins, pale-ochre in the top part and be- òåòà Íàóêè Ìèíèñòåðñòâà îáðàçîâàíèÿ è coming gradually sandy in the bottom. Lo- íàóêè, Àëìàòû, Êàçàõñòàí. Èíâåíòàðíûé cated pairwise spots are dirty-white, sandy íîìåð: 6728/56. or pale-ochre; roundish in the top part of 3. Âçðîñëàÿ ñàìêà. Äîáûòà 11 èþíÿ the feather and growing to horizontal oval 1959 ã., ð. Òóðãàé â 100 êì íèæå ñ. Àìàí- in the bottom: some individuals show a ten- ãåëüäû. Êîëëåêòîð È. Äîëãóøèí. Îïðåäå- dency for cross-bars. Secondaries are usu- ëåíà Ì. Êîðåëîâûì êàê F. cherrug áåç ally brownish-clayish with small round ochre óêàçàíèÿ ïîäâèäà. Ìåñòî õðàíåíèÿ: Çîî- spots located pairwise. Primaries are uni- ëîãè÷åñêèé ìóçåé Èíñòèòóòà çîîëîãèè formly brown, becoming blackish-brown to Êîìèòåòà Íàóêè Ìèíèñòåðñòâà îáðàçî- the tip. Outer vanes, excepting the bottom âàíèÿ è íàóêè, Àëìàòû, Êàçàõñòàí. Èí- third, show the grayish-ochre hardly percep- âåíòàðíûé íîìåð: 14960/140. tible spots. Rump appears rather paler than 4. Âçðîñëàÿ ñàìêà. Äîáûòà 3 ñåíòÿáðÿ back; coverts are usually clayish with imper- 1934 ã., ê þãî-âîñòîêó îò Êàðà-Áîãàç-Ãîëà ceptible ochre or dirty-sandy margins. Tail â îêðåñòíîñòè Áóëüìóäçèåðà. Êîëëåêòîð is generally brown or clayish. Large round Ìèíèí. Îïðåäåëåíà êàê F. cherrug áåç spots, located pairwise, vary from buffish to óêàçàíèÿ ïîäâèäà. Ìåñòî õðàíåíèÿ: Çîî- dirty-white and form tail-bars, which very ëîãè÷åñêèé ìóçåé ÇÈÍ ÐÀÍ, ÑÏá, Ðîññèÿ. rare have the unbroken character. The central Èíâåíòàðíûé íîìåð: 75567/137-935. pair is often darker, spots appear hardly con- trasting, smaller and are often visible only in Îïèñàíèå the bottom third or quarter of the tail. Âçðîñëûå ïòèöû Throat and breast are whitish. The color- Ó âçðîñëûõ ïòèö ãîëîâà ñâåðõó ing becomes some darker from top to bot- ãðÿçíîâàòî-áåëàÿ, èíîãäà ñî ñëèâî÷íûì tom of the underbody, and trousers, vent è î÷åíü ðåäêî – ñâåòëî-âèííûì îòòåíêîì, and undertail coverts show a prominent ñ áîëåå èëè ìåíåå óçêèìè íàñòâîëüíûìè creamy or even light ochre shade. Spots ïåñòðèíàìè íà òåìåíè îò ãëèíèñòîãî äî at the palest individuals are clayish, at the Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 169

Êîëëåêöèîííûå ýêçåìïëÿðû ÷èíêîâûõ áàëîáàíîâ èç Çîîëîãè- ÷åñêîãî ìóçåÿ Èíñòè- òóòà çîîëîãèè Êîìèòåòà Íàóêè Ìèíèñòåðñòâà îáðàçîâàíèÿ è íàóêè, Àëìàòû, Êàçàõñòàí. Ôîòî À. Êîâàëåíêî. Specimens of Chink Sakers from Zoological Museum of the Institute of Zoology of the Committee of Science of the Ministry of Education and Science, Almaty, Kazakhstan. Photos by A. Kovalenko.

ò¸ìíî-áóðîãî öâåòà. Áîêà ãîëîâû áåëîâà- others – light brown or brown; drop-shaped òûå, èíîãäà ñî ñëèâî÷íûì îòòåíêîì, ñ ðåä- or as vertical markings on the upper breast êèìè è óçêèìè ïðîäîëüíûìè áóðîâàòûìè they gradually grow bolder towards lower ïåñòðèíàìè, ñãóùàþùèìèñÿ è ðàñøèðÿþ- breast; markings become lanceolate and ùèìèñÿ íà óøíûõ ïàðòèÿõ, à èíîãäà è ïîä heart-shaped on flanks. Belly shows the ãëàçàìè, îáðàçóÿ â òàêîì ñëó÷àå áëåäíûé, markings narrowing to strips. Vent and íå÷¸òêî î÷åð÷åííûé óñ. undertail coverts are not marked, trousers Ñïèíà ãëèíèñòî-áóðàÿ, ïîñòåïåííî ñâåò- show the elongated spots. ëåþùàÿ îò çàøåéêà ê ïîÿñíèöå, áåç ñèçîãî Plumage of young birds îòòåíêà. Ïåðüÿ ñïèíû ñ êàéìàìè ñâåòëî- Juvenile Chink Sakers resemble the palest áóðîãî, ðåæå ðûæåâàòîãî öâåòà, â ïåðåäíåé nominal juvenile Sakers in plumage. Head ÷àñòè ñïèíû èíîãäà ñ ò¸ìíûìè íàñòâîëüÿìè. appears light ochre coloring above with Ïëå÷åâûå ïåðüÿ áóðûå ñî ñâåòëî-áóðûìè brown markings in the top of feather around êàéìàìè è ÷àñòî ñ ò¸ìíûìè íàñòâîëüÿìè. the shaft. Moustaches often are completely Ó íåêîòîðûõ ýêçåìïëÿðîâ â íèæíåé òðåòè absent. Feathers of the mantle are pale- ïëå÷åâûõ íà âíåøíèõ êðàÿõ îïàõàë ïîÿâ- brown with wide, but hardly contrasting ëÿþòñÿ ìåëêèå, êðóãëûå, ñóïðîòèâíî ðàñ- rufous margins. Sometimes inner vanes of ïîëîæåííûå ïÿòíà ðæàâ÷àòîãî öâåòà, êîòî- tertails show small and sparse ochre spots. ðûå ó îñîáåé èç âîñòî÷íûõ ÷àñòåé àðåàëà Outer vanes of primaries and secondaries ìîãóò ïðèíèìàòü õàðàêòåð ïîïåðå÷íîãî show ochre points or little spots. Tail is uni- ðèñóíêà. Ìàëûå, ñðåäíèå è áîëüøèå êðî- formly brown. One or two pairs the central tail feathers are often uniformly colored or with ochre spots in their bottom quarter. The others, at least to inner vanes, shows round spots. Underparts often have a prom- inent ochre shade in the coloring and are

Êîëëåêöèîííûé ýêçåìïëÿð ÷èíêîâîãî áàëîáàíà èç Çîîëîãè÷åñêîãî ìóçåÿ Çîîëîãè÷åñêîãî èíñòèòóòà ÐÀÍ, ÑÏá, Ðîññèÿ. Ôîòî À. Êîâàëåíêî. Specimen of the Chink Saker from the Zoological Museum of the Zoological Institute of the Russian Academy of Science, St. Petersburg, Russia. Photos by A. Kovalenko. 170 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

þùèå êðûëà ãëèíèñòî-áóðîãî öâåòà ñ äî- covered by brown vertical markings or the âîëüíî øèðîêèìè ñâåòëî-îõðèñòûìè èëè elongated spots. ïåñî÷íîãî öâåòà êàéìàìè. Íà âíåøíèõ îïà- õàëàõ áîëüøèõ è ñðåäíèõ êðîþùèõ èíîãäà Sizes åñòü ãðÿçíî-áåëûå êðóãëûå èëè îâàëüíî- The Chink Saker is the smallest subspe- ïîïåðå÷íûå ïÿòíà. Òðåòüåñòåïåííûå ìà- cies. The wing length of 5 males varied from õîâûå ãëèíèñòîãî öâåòà ñî ñðàâíèòåëüíî 331 to 367, at averaged 346.0±13.42 mm, øèðîêèìè êàéìàìè, áëåäíî-îõðèñòûìè â the tail length was accordingly 181–197, at âåðõíåé ÷àñòè è ïîñòåïåííî ïåðåõîäÿùè- average 190.4±8.47 mm. The wing length ìè â ïåñî÷íûé öâåò – â íèæíåé. Ãðÿçíî- of 6 females was 376–392, averaging áåëûå, ïåñî÷íîãî èëè ñâåòëî-îõðèñòîãî 385.17±7.76 mm, tail length – 200–225, öâåòà, ñóïðîòèâíî ðàñïîëîæåííûå ïÿòíà averaging 210.0±10.32 mm. èìåþò â âåðõíåé ÷àñòè îêðóãëóþ ôîðìó, ïðèíèìàÿ íèæå ïîïåðå÷íî-îâàëüíóþ, ïå- Differential diagnosis ðåõîäÿùóþ ó íåêîòîðûõ îñîáåé â ñêâîç- Unlike nominal subspecies (F. ch. cherrug) íîé ïîïåðå÷íûé ðèñóíîê. Âòîðîñòåïåí- adult Chink Sakers show a tendency for pale íûå ìàõîâûå áóðîâàòî-ãëèíèñòîãî öâåòà ñ barring in the rust and mantle and dark bar- ìåëêèìè êðóãëûìè îõðèñòûìè ñóïðîòèâíî ring in flanks and trousers. Among eastern ðàñïîëîæåííûìè ïÿòíàìè. Ó íåêîòîðûõ Sakers Chink ones are streaked less. Also it is ýêçåìïëÿðîâ òàêèå ïÿòíà èìåþòñÿ òîëüêî the single subspecies, besides Tibetan, that íà âíåøíèõ îïàõàëàõ âòîðîñòåïåííûõ ìà- have no grayish-bluish shade to upperparts. õîâûõ. Ïåðâîñòåïåííûå ìàõîâûå áóðîãî, â The Chink Saker is the smallest-sized sub- ïîñëåäíåé òðåòè – ÷åðíîâàòî-áóðîãî öâå- species. The sizes of the nominal Saker vary òà. Íà âíåøíèõ îïàõàëàõ, èñêëþ÷àÿ íèæ- significantly, however the minimal sizes of íþþ òðåòü, ìàëîêîíòðàñòíûå, ñ ðàçìûòûìè birds are approximate to the average sizes of êðàÿìè, ñåðîâàòî-îõðèñòûå ïÿòíà. Ïîÿñíè- Chink ones. According to Baumgart (Baum- öà íåñêîëüêî ñâåòëåå ñïèíû, ïåðüÿ îáû÷- gart, 1991) the wing length for males is 343– íî ãëèíèñòîãî öâåòà ñ ìàëîêîíòðàñòíûìè 370 mm, on average 356.3 mm, females – îõðèñòûìè èëè ãðÿçíî-ïåñî÷íîãî öâåòà 380–423 mm, on average 393.5 mm. êàéìàìè. Ïðèìåðíî ó ïîëîâèíû ýêçåìïëÿ- The Chink Saker differs from the coloring of ðîâ îíè ïîëíîñòüþ ëèøåíû ïÿòåí, ó îñòàëü- Turkestanian subspecies (F. ch. coatsi): lacks íûõ îíè ïåñî÷íîãî öâåòà, ìàëîêîíòðàñòíû the grayish-bluish shade to upperparts, red- è åäâà çàìåòíû è ëèøü èçðåäêà ïðèíèìàþò dish-rufous color to the crown and the con- õàðàêòåð ïîïåðå÷íîãî ðèñóíêà. Ðóëåâûå trasting markings (moustaches) to the head. áóðîãî èëè ãëèíèñòîãî öâåòà. Êðóïíûå, Chink Sakers are less than Turkestanian îò ñâåòëî-ðûæåãî äî ãðÿçíî áåëîãî öâåòà, one. According to Dementyev (1951) the ñóïðîòèâíûå ïÿòíà îáðàçóþò ïîïåðå÷íûé sizes of Turkestanian Sakers are as follows: ðèñóíîê, êîòîðûé, âïðî÷åì, èñêëþ÷èòåëü- wing length of males (n=14) 336–363 mm, íî ðåäêî èìååò ñêâîçíîé õàðàêòåð. Öåí- on average 352.6 mm, wing length of fe- òðàëüíàÿ ïàðà ðóëåâûõ íåðåäêî îêðàøåíà males (n=17) – 375–410 mm, on average íåñêîëüêî òåìíåå, à ïÿòíà íà íåé ìåíåå 393.4 mm. However this range includes êîíòðàñòíû, ìåíüøåãî ðàçìåðà è íåðåäêî measurements of Chink Sakers because De- ïîÿâëÿþòñÿ ëèøü â íèæíåé òðåòè èëè ÷åò- mentyev did not separate Turkestanian Sakers âåðòè õâîñòà. from birds from the Aral-Caspian region; thus Ãîðëî è çîá áåëîâàòûå, äàëüøå êíèçó the minimal sizes in this range are of Chink îñíîâíîé ôîí íåñêîëüêî òåìíååò, ïðèíè- Sakers. Nevertheless, average values in this ìàÿ íà øòàíàõ, íèçå áðþõà è ïîäõâîñòüå sample even including Chink birds are higher ñëèâî÷íûé èëè äàæå áëåäíî-îõðèñòûé îò- than average values of Chink birds only. òåíîê. Ïÿòíà ó íàèáîëåå ñâåòëîîêðàøåí- In general Chink Sakers seem to be the íûõ ýêçåìïëÿðîâ ãëèíèñòîãî, ó îñòàëüíûõ smallest form of the species with pale and – ñâåòëî-áóðîãî èëè áóðîãî öâåòà. Íà âåð- hardly contrasting coloring of plumage. õó ãðóäè îíè êàïëåâèäíîé ôîðìû èëè â âèäå ïåñòðèí, ïîñòåïåííî ïåðåõîäÿ äàëåå Genetic identification êíèçó ê âûòÿíóòîé ëàíöåòîâèäíîé, à íà áî- Unfortunately, data on the genetic analysis êàõ – ê ñåðäöåâèäíîé, ôîðìå. Íà áðþøêå of samples of the Chink Saker are extremely ïÿòíà âíîâü ñóæàþòñÿ, ïðèíèìàÿ õàðàêòåð poor, however they once again confirm the ïðîäîëüíûõ ïåñòðèí. Íèç áðþøêà è ïîä- subspecies relating to the group of eastern õâîñòüå íå èìåþò ðèñóíêà, íà øòàíàõ – âû- Sakers. There was only sample actually of òÿíóòûå ïÿòíà. the Chink Saker, taken by R. Pfeffer from a Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 171

Ñë¸òêè ÷èíêîâîãî áàëîáàíà. Ôîòî À. Ïàæåíêîâà. Fledglings of the Chink Saker Falcon. Photos by A. Pazhenkov.

Ìîëîäûå ïòèöû nestling in the Kugusem natural boundary Îêðàñêîé è ðèñóíêîì ìîëîäûå ÷èíêîâûå in 1993 (code of sample F.c.che-195). The áàëîáàíû â ïåðâîì ãîäîâîì íàðÿäå î÷åíü mitochondrial DNA analysis has shown the ïîõîæè íà íàèáîëåå ñâåòëûõ îáûêíîâåí- observed haplotype (Í-74) of the sampled íûõ ìîëîäûõ áàëîáàíîâ. Ãîëîâà ñâåðõó individual belonging to group A (eastern ñâåòëî-îõðèñòàÿ, ñ áóðûìè íàñòâîëüíûìè haplotypes) (Nittinger et al., 2007). ïåñòðèíàìè. Óñû íåðåäêî ïîëíîñòüþ îò- ñóòñòâóþò. Ïåðüÿ ìàíòèè ñâåòëî-áóðûå ñ Distribution øèðîêèìè, íî íå êîíòðàñòíûìè ðûæèìè The breeding range of the Chink Saker êàéìàìè. Íà âíóòðåííèõ îïàõàëàõ òðåòüå- stretches from east coast of Caspian Sea, ñòåïåííûõ ìàõîâûõ èçðåäêà ìàçêè èëè ïÿò- covering the Mangyshlak Peninsula and the íûøêè îõðèñòîãî öâåòà. Íà âíåøíèõ îïà- Ustyurt Plateau, coast of Aral Sea, southern õàëàõ ïåðâîñòåïåííûõ è âòîðîñòåïåííûõ part of the Turgay Plateau, to the Ulytau foot- ìàõîâûõ îõðèñòûå òî÷êè èëè ïÿòíûøêè. hills in the north, and at least to the Sarysu Ðóëåâûå áóðîãî öâåòà. Îäíà èëè äâå ïàðû River in the east. In the Kyzyl Kum desert öåíòðàëüíûõ ðóëåâûõ íåðåäêî îäíîòîííûå, the subspecies nests on riverine precipices ëèáî îõðèñòûå ïÿòíà ïîÿâëÿþòñÿ â íèæíåé of the Amu Darya river in the west, on elec- èõ ÷åòâåðòè. Îñòàëüíûå, ïî ìåíüøåé ìåðå tric poles between Zarafshan and Uchkuduk íà âíóòðåííèõ îïàõàëàõ, ïîêðûòû êðóãëû- towns in the central part, on and most likely ìè ïÿòíàìè. Îñíîâíîé ôîí íèçà ÷àñòî ñ çà- in the outlier mountains (Tamdytau, Bukan- ìåòíûì îõðèñòûì íàë¸òîì. Ðèñóíîê â âèäå tau and others) in the east. In the Kara Kum áóðûõ ïåñòðèí èëè âûòÿíóòûõ ïÿòåí. desert it nests on riverine precipices of dry washes (Uzboy and others) in the west: an Ðàçìåðû adult bird was collected in the Central Kara ×èíêîâûå áàëîáàíû – ñàìûé ìåëêèé Kum in vicinities of the Mary town, that al- ïîäâèä. Äëèíà êðûëà ó ïÿòè ñàìöîâ êî- lows to assume the subspecies breeding on ëåáàëàñü îò 331 äî 367 ìì, ñîñòàâèâ â electric poles, as well as in similar habitats ñðåäíåì 346,0±13,42 ìì, äëèíà õâîñòà in Kyzyl Kum. In the southeast of Turkmeni- ñîñòàâèëà, ñîîòâåòñòâåííî, 181–197, â stan it extends in its distribution to the Bath- ñðåäíåì 190,4±8,47, ìì. Ó øåñòè ñàìîê yz Upland, where obviously, intergrades äëèíà êðûëà ñîñòàâèëà 376–392, â ñðåäíåì with the Turkestanian Saker. The birds from 385,17±7,76, ìì, äëèíà õâîñòà – 200–225, that territory have pale and hardly contrast- â ñðåäíåì 210,0±10,32, ìì. ing coloring of plumage, that is a diagnos- 172 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Äèôôåðåíöèàëüíûé tic feature of the Chink Saker, as well as the äèàãíîç prominent horizontal markings that make it  îòëè÷èå îò îáûêíîâåí- similar to Turkestanian ones. íûõ áàëîáàíîâ (F. ch. cher- There is a buffer zone in width of rug), ñ êîòîðûìè àðåàë ÷èí- 200–300 km around of the core of breeding êîâîãî ãðàíè÷èò íà ñåâåðå è population of the Chink Saker, which covers âîñòîêå, ó âçðîñëûõ îñîáåé Mangyshlak Peninsula, Usturt, Kinderli-Kayas- ÷èíêîâîãî íà ïîÿñíèöå è anskoe, Kaplankyr and Chelungkyr Plateaus ìàíòèè ïîÿâëÿåòñÿ ñâåòëûé, in the south and the Shagyray Plateau in the à íà áîêàõ è øòàíàõ – ò¸ì- north, as well as cliff-faces of Aral sea region íûé ðèñóíîê, èìåþùèé ïî- and cretaceous riverine precipices of the ïåðå÷íûé õàðàêòåð.  ðÿäó lower reaches of the Emba river, where Sak- âîñòî÷íûõ áàëîáàíîâ ó ÷èí- ers have not been discovered breeding, or ×èíêîâûé áàëîáàí. êîâûõ îí âûðàæåí â íàèìåíüøåé ñòåïåíè. the breeding of separate pairs of Chink Sakers Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Êðîìå òîãî, ÷èíêîâûé áàëîáàí åäèíñòâåí- (frequently in mixed pairs with birds of neigh- Chink Saker Falcon. íûé, ïîìèìî òèáåòñêîãî, íå èìåþùèé ñè- bour subspecies) only have been known. Photo by I. Karyakin. çîãî îòòåíêà â îïåðåíèè âåðõà. The area of post-breeding movements of ×èíêîâûå áàëîáàíû ìåíüøå îáûêíî- Chink Sakers covers all territory of the West- âåííûõ. Ðàçáðîñ ðàçìåðîâ îáûêíîâåííûõ ern Kazakhstan, extending to the South Ural áàëîáàíîâ äîñòàòî÷íî áîëüøîé, îäíàêî Mountains (in the north) and the Volga river ìèíèìàëüíûå ðàçìåðû ïòèö ïðèáëèæà- basin and Caucasus (in the northwest and the þòñÿ ê ñðåäíèì ðàçìåðàì ÷èíêîâîãî ïîä- west). It is not absolutely clear how young âèäà. Ïî äàííûì Â. Áàóìãàðòà (Baumgart, birds cross Caspian Sea during post-breeding 1991), äëèíà êðûëà ñàìöîâ îáûêíîâåí- movements. It is rather probable, that it is íûõ áàëîáàíîâ ñîñòàâëÿåò 343–370 ìì, â an original ecological trap for young falcons ñðåäíåì 356,3 ìì, ñàìîê – 380–423 ìì, and many of them perish in the sea, and the â ñðåäíåì 393,5 ìì. basic way of movements is around of Cas- Îò òóðêåñòàíñêèõ áàëîáàíîâ (F. ch. pian Sea. The farthest registrations of adult coatsi), ãðàíè÷àùèõ ñ àðåàëîì ÷èíêîâûõ birds which had been identified as Chink Sak- ñ þãà, ÷èíêîâûå îòëè÷àþòñÿ îòñóòñòâèåì ers, took place within the Kazakhstan in the ñèçîãî íàë¸òà, êðàñíîâàòî-ðûæåé îêðà- Atyrau, Aktyubinsk, Kostanay and Chimkent ñêè íà òåìåíè è êîíòðàñòíîãî ðèñóíêà íà districts. Thus actually all adults were en- ãîëîâå (óñîâ). countered within the breeding range even in ×èíêîâûå áàëîáàíû ìåíüøå òóðêåñòàí- the autumn-winter period. ñêèõ. Ã.Ï. Äåìåíòüåâ (1951) ïðèâîäèò ñëåäóþùèå ðàçìåðû òóðêåñòàíñêèõ áà- Population Status ëîáàíîâ: êðûëî ñàìöîâ (n=14) 336–363 According to data obtained in 2008 au- ìì, â ñðåäíåì 352,6, ìì, êðûëî ñàìîê thors known about 282 breeding terri- (n=17) – 375–410 ìì, â ñðåäíåì 393,4, tories (304 breeding territories including ìì. Îäíàêî, ýòà ñåðèÿ âêëþ÷àåò ïðîìåðû pairs vanished for the period from 2004 to ÷èíêîâûõ ïòèö, òàê êàê Ã.Ï. Äåìåíòüåâ íå 2008) only within the Kazakhstan part of the îòäåëÿë èõ îò ïòèö èç Àðàëî-Êàñïèéñêîãî breeding range of the Chink Saker. ðåãèîíà, ïîýòîìó ìèíèìàëüíûå ðàçìåðû The average density in the region on was â ýòîé ñåðèè ñîîòâåòñòâóþò ÷èíêîâûì áà- 15.83 breeding pairs/100 in km of cliff-faces ëîáàíàì. Òåì íå ìåíåå, ñðåäíèå ïîêàçà- of plateaus (table 1), and the average near- òåëè â ýòîé âûáîðêå, äàæå ñ ó÷¸òîì âêëþ- est neighbour distance was 3.88±5.15 km ÷åíèÿ â íå¸ ïîêàçàòåëåé ÷èíêîâûõ ïòèö, (0.25–51.30; n=259). âûøå ïîêàçàòåëåé òîëüêî ÷èíêîâûõ ïòèö. A total of 905 pairs of Sakers were esti-  öåëîì ÷èíêîâûå áàëîáàíû ïðîèçâî- mated to breed on cliff-faces of the Aral- äÿò âïå÷àòëåíèå ñàìûõ ìåëêèõ, ñâåòëî- è Caspian region in 2003; 685 pairs of them ìàëîêîíòðàñòíî-îêðàøåííûõ ôîðì âèäà. were projected to inhabit Kazakhstan, 121 pairs – Uzbekistan and 100 pairs –Turkmeni- Ãåíåòè÷åñêàÿ èäåíòèôèêàöèÿ stan (Karyakin, 2004). Surveys carried out in Ê ñîæàëåíèþ, äàííûå ãåíåòè÷åñêîãî 2004 and more critical approach to the map àíàëèçà îáðàçöîâ ÷èíêîâîãî áàëîáàíà verifying and vectorizing were the reason êðàéíå ñêóäíû, îäíàêî îíè ëèøíèé ðàç for recalculating a total number of Sakers. ïîäòâåðæäàþò îòíîøåíèå ïîäâèäà ê ãðóï- As a result, the number of Sakers breed- ïå âîñòî÷íûõ áàëîáàíîâ. Ãåíåòè÷åñêîìó ing on cliff-faces in the Kazakhstan part of àíàëèçó áûëà ïîäâåðãíóòà ëèøü îäíà ïðî- the region at 1021–1216 pairs, on average Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 173

áà, äîñòîâåðíî ïðèíàäëåæàùàÿ ÷èíêîâûì 1119 pairs (Karyakin et al., 2004; Karyakin áàëîáàíàì, âçÿòàÿ Ð. Ïôåôôåðîì ó ïòåí- et al., 2005b). And a total 1075–1325 pairs, öà èç ãíåçäà â óðî÷èùå Êóãóñåì â 1993 ã. on average 1200 pairs, were assessed to (êîä ïðîáû F.c.che-195). Àíàëèç ìèòîõîí- breed on cliff-faces in the Kazakhstan part of äðèàëüíîé ÄÍÊ ïîêàçàë ïðèíàäëåæíîñòü the Aral-Caspian region in 2006 (table 2). âûäåëåííîãî ãàïëîòèïà (Í-74) ê ãðóïïå A total length of cliff-faces in the Aral- À (âîñòî÷íûå ãàïëîòèïû) (Nittinger et al., Caspian region outside Kazakhstan has 2007). been unknown exactly, since they was vec- torized on the basis of topographical maps Ãåîãðàôè÷åñêîå ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå (scale 1:500000) in 2004, but satellite im- Ãíåçäîâîé àðåàë ÷èíêîâûõ áàëîáàíîâ ages was not analyzed for their verifica- ïðîñòèðàåòñÿ îò âîñòî÷íîãî ïîáåðåæüÿ tion. Thus the obtained figures, at 587.71 Êàñïèéñêîãî ìîðÿ, îõâàòûâàÿ Ìàíãûøëàê km for Uzbekistan and at 780.32 km for è Óñòþðò, ïîáåðåæüå Àðàëüñêîãî ìîðÿ, Turkmenistan, are broad-brush estimations þæíóþ ÷àñòü Òóðãàéñêîãî ïëàòî, ãäå ïðî- only for calculation of the Saker numbers. íèêàåò íà ñåâåð äî îòðîãîâ Óëûòàó, à íà The number of Sakers, calculated for these âîñòîê, ïî ìåíüøåé ìåðå, äî ð. Ñàðûñó.  lengths of cliff-fases, as a result of extrapola- ïåñêàõ Êûçûëêóì ãíåçäèòñÿ â çàïàäíîé ÷à- tion of average values of breeding density of ñòè – íà áåðåãîâûõ îáðûâàõ Àìóäàðüè, â the species in the Kazakhstan part of region öåíòðàëüíîé – íà îïîðàõ ËÝÏ ìåæäó ãîðî- in 2006 was 78–108, on average 93 pairs äàìè Çàðàôøàí è Ó÷êóäóê, à â âîñòî÷íîé – in Uzbekistan and 109–139, on average ÷àñòè, ïî âñåé âåðîÿòíîñòè, èìåííî ýòîò 124 pairs – in Turkmenistan. Nine Saker’s ïîäâèä íàñåëÿåò îñòàíöîâûå ãîðû Òàìäû- nests were known on cliff-faces of south- òàó, Áóêàíòàó è äð.  ïåñêàõ Êàðàêóì íà çà- ern Ustyurt and the Sarykamysh depres- ïàäå ãíåçäèòñÿ â áåðåãîâûõ îáðûâàõ ñóõèõ sion in 1980-s, and the distance between ðóñåë (Óçáîé è äð.), ýêçåìïëÿð âçðîñëîé nearest nests on Southern Ustyurt was 1.5 ïòèöû, äîáûòîé â Öåíòðàëüíûõ Êàðàêóìàõ km (Shubenkin, Antipov, 1990). Bukreev â ðàéîíå ã. Ìàðû, ïîçâîëÿåò ïðåäïîëî- (1997) estimated the Saker number in the æèòü çäåñü ãíåçäîâàíèå íà îïîðàõ ËÝÏ, Kaplankyr Nature Reserve at 20–25 pairs êàê è â ñõîäíûõ áèîòîïàõ Êûçûëêóìîâ. for the end of 1990s. A total of 120–150 Íà þãî-âîñòîê â Òóðêìåíèè ïðîíèêàåò äî pairs were assessed to breed in Uzbekistan Áàäõûçà, ãäå, î÷åâèäíî, èíòåðãðàäèðóåò ñ in 1990s, and 33% of the number inhabit mountain outlier uplands and in flat part of the Kyzyl Kum desert as well as 20% – loess cliffs of the Amu Darya River and cliff-fases of the Usturt Plateau (Atajanov, 2002). Con- sidering our data and published information we can only assume 300–500 pairs of the Saker breeding on cliff-faces and precipices outside Kazakhstan in 2006. Besides cliff-faces and precipices of pla- teaus in the territory of region Sakers use mountain outliers and precipices ravines for nesting. Earlier at least 29–34 pairs were pro- jected to nest in such habitats in the Kaza- khstan part of region (Karyakin et al., 2005b) and 15–20 pairs – outside Kazakhstan. Unfortunately we have not yet estimate a number of Sakers, nesting on electric poles in the region, but undoubtedly this nesting habit has arisen not so long ago and has not widely distributed yet. We assume the total number of the falcons nesting on electric poles in the region does not exceed 100 pairs. Summarizing the numbers of Saker, breed- ing under different conditions in the region, we project 1510–1980 pairs breeding in Ðèñ. 1. Ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå ÷èíêîâîãî áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug aralocaspius). the entire region. It can be approximated Fig. 1. Distribution of the Chink Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug aralocaspius). to 1500–2000 breeding pairs in 2006. It is 174 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

òóðêåñòàíñêèì áàëîáàíîì. Èìåííî çäåñü a total number of all population of the sub- ó ïòèö, èìåþùèõ ñâåòëóþ è ìàëîêîíòðàñò- species described. íóþ ðàñöâåòêó, ñâîéñòâåííóþ ÷èíêîâûì We purposefully bring to a focus that this áàëîáàíàì, ïðîÿâëÿåòñÿ íàèáîëüøåå ðàç- estimation has been done for the 2006, âèòèå ïîïåðå÷íîãî ðèñóíêà, ÷òî ñáëèæàåò since for the short period of surveys from èõ ñ òóðêåñòàíñêèìè. 2004 to 2008 the monitoring has shown Îñíîâíîé ðåçåðâàò ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ÷èí- the steady decline in the Saker numbers in êîâûõ áàëîáàíîâ îõâàòûâàåò Ìàíãûøëàê, the Kazakhstan part of the region. After the Óñòþðò, Êèíäåðäè-Êàÿñàíñêîå ïëàòî, Êà- reconstruction of the road Atyrau-Beyneu the illegal catching of falcons has essentially increased and immediately had a negative impact on the breeding group living along the road. Sakers have vanished in all breed- ing territories around the settlements which the road passes through (around Beyneu and Shetpe settlements). For 4 years of monitor- ing the species has not been registered al- ready in 22 breeding territories. It means that the decline in numbers at 7.24%. Falcons are caught illegally in all countries within the region under consideration. And despite of poor appeal of the Chink Saker for falconry, rates of the illegal trapping of the subspecies will be increasing while the numbers of other larger subspecies will be declining.

Biology Chink Sakers show several diagnostic fea- tures noticeably distinguishing them from other Saker subspecies. The subspecies oc- cupy almost exclusively low deserted and semideserted areas of the western part of Central Asia. These territories were a seabed at the Cretaceous period. At the beginning of Pleistocene those ancient seas started to dry up, leaving in many places in the proc- ess of their digression the row of coastal cliff-faces or “chink” that had extended for thousands of kilometers, curved and bro- ken in some places. It is curious, if falcons have a choice whether to nest on cliff-faces or on rocks, as for example in the Karatau Mountains in the Mangyshlak Peninsula, they prefer undoubtedly cliff-faces. It seems especially surprising, because in the Ka- ratau Mountains there are many rocks with numerous nests of Ravens (Corvus corax), Long-Legged Buzzards (Buteo rufinus) and Golden Eagles (Aquila chrysaetos), and their slopes and adjoining valleys are abundant in the Greater Gerbil (Rhombomus opimus) and the Yellow Souslik (Spermophilus ful-

Ìåëîâûå, ðàêóøå÷íèêîâûå è ãëèíÿíûå îáðûâû ïëàòî – îñíîâíûå ìåñòà ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ÷èíêîâîãî áàëîáàíà. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà è À. Ïàæåíêîâà. Chalky, shell-stone and clay cliff-faces of plateaus are the main nesting sites for the Chink Saker Falcon. Photos by I. Karyakin and A. Pazhenkov. Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 175

ïëàíêûð è ×åëþíãêûð íà þãå è Øàãûðàé vus), being favourite prey species for these è îáðûâû Ïðèàðàëüÿ íà ñåâåðå. Çäåñü falcons. Despite of careful surveys of the Ka- ãíåçäèòñÿ äî 90% ïòèö âûäåëÿåìîãî ïîä- ratau Mountains carried out in 1993, 2003 âèäà. Âîêðóã ýòîãî ðåçåðâàòà ñóùåñòâóåò and 2004, there was no living nests of the î÷åâèäíàÿ áóôåðíàÿ çîíà øèðèíîé 200– Saker while falcons were discovered nesting 500 êì, ãäå ãíåçäîâàíèå áàëîáàíà íîñèò on cliff-faces, which were located in some î÷àãîâûé õàðàêòåð – ãíåçäîâûå ãðóïïè- cases at the distance of 5–7 km from moun- ðîâêè èç íåñêîëüêèõ ïàð ôîðìèðóþòñÿ tains, with very high density – 3.7–4.5 pairs â ñèëüíî óäàë¸ííûõ äðóã îò äðóãà áèîòî- per 100 km2 or 16.8–18.3 pairs per 100 km ïàõ, ïîõîæèõ íà òàêîâûå â îñíîâíîì ïî- of cliff-faces. ïóëÿöèîííîì ÿäðå, íà áîëüøåé æå ÷àñòè Breeding success of Sakers, nesting on òåððèòîðèè ãíåçäîâàíèå íåèçâåñòíî, ëèáî chinks, was unusually high. Their nests ãíåçäîâàíèå îòäåëüíûõ ïàð ñîêîëîâ (÷àñòî contained 4.1 nestlings at average (n=61; â ñìåøàííûõ ïàðàõ ñ ñîñåäíèìè ïîäâèäà- range 3.8–4.6) in 2003-2004 (Karyakin et ìè) íîñèò ñëó÷àéíûé õàðàêòåð (ðèñ. 1). al., 2005). Îáëàñòü êî÷¸âîê ÷èíêîâûõ áàëîáàíîâ The abundance in niches suitable for fal- îõâàòûâàåò âñþ òåððèòîðèþ Çàïàäíîãî con’s nesting in chinks has provided the ter- Êàçàõñòàíà, âïëîòü äî Þæíîãî Óðàëà (íà ritorial conservatism of Sakers weakening. ñåâåðå), áàññåéíà Âîëãè è Êàâêàçà (íà Unlike other subspecies of eastern Sakers ñåâåðî-çàïàäå è çàïàäå). Ñàìûå êðàéíèå territorial males which as a rule are constant ðåãèñòðàöèè ìîëîäûõ ïòèö, êîòîðûå áûëè in use of breeding territory during all their èäåíòèôèöèðîâàíû êàê ÷èíêîâûå áàëî- life, Chink Sakers can leave their breeding áàíû, èìåëè ìåñòî â Ðîññèè íà òåððèòî- territories and occupy new ones to avoid ðèè Îðåíáóðãñêîé îáëàñòè (ð. Ãóáåðëÿ, the dangerous neighbourhood of Golden ð. Ñàìàðà, îç. Àéêå), Ñàìàðñêîé îáëàñòè Eagles or Eagle Owls (Bubo bubo) or at the (Ãðûçëû, Ñèíèé Ñûðò), Àñòðàõàíñêîé îá- decrease in numbers of the main prey spe- ëàñòè (Áîãäèíñêî-Áàñêóí÷àêñêèé çàïîâåä- cies, moving in the areas more safe and íèê, ïîãèáøàÿ íà ËÝÏ ïòèöà), Êàëìûêèè abundant in food. (Óëàí-Õîë, ïîãèáøàÿ íà ËÝÏ ïòèöà) è Äà- Surveys carried out in 2003–2004 have ãåñòàíà (Ñóëàê, îêðåñòíîñòè Êàñïèéñêà è shown that depending on factors mentioned Êèçëÿðà). Ïîêà íå ñîâñåì ÿñíî, êàê ìîëî- above the breeding density of Chink Sakers äûå ïåðåñåêàþò Êàñïèé â ïåðèîä ïîñëåã- can change in 2–3 times on the same sites. íåçäîâîãî ðàçë¸òà, âåñüìà âåðîÿòíî, ÷òî At local decreases in numbers of the main îí ÿâëÿåòñÿ ñâîåîáðàçíîé ýêîëîãè÷åñêîé prey species breeding groups of Sakers can ëîâóøêîé äëÿ ìîëîäûõ ñîêîëîâ è â ìîðå became denser on sites with an abundance ìíîãèå èç íèõ ãèáíóò, à îñíîâíîé ïóòü êî- in food and the nearest neighbour distance ÷¸âîê âñ¸ æå èä¸ò â îáõîä Êàñïèÿ, ñ þãà can be only 250–300 m, while distances be- è ñ ñåâåðà. Ñàìûå êðàéíèå ðåãèñòðàöèè tween inhabited nests of Sakers and Long- âçðîñëûõ ïòèö, êîòîðûå áûëè èäåíòèôè- Legged Buzzards can decrease to 50–80 m, öèðîâàíû êàê ÷èíêîâûå áàëîáàíû, èìåëè and in some cases even to 5–15 m. Such ìåñòî â ïðåäåëàõ Êàçàõñòàíà â Àòûðàóñêîé plasticity is also promoted by the circum- îáëàñòè (â îêðåñòíîñòè Ãóðüåâà, ïîãèáøàÿ stance, that Chink Sakers less than other íà ËÝÏ ïòèöà), Àêòþáèíñêîé îáëàñòè (Ìó- subspecies depend on nests built by other ãîäæàðû), Êîñòàíàéñêîé îáëàñòè (âåðõîâüÿ bird species. Many niches in chinks by vir- Òóðãàÿ) è ×èìêåíòñêîé îáëàñòè (Çàïàäíàÿ tue of features of their form and size can Áåòïàê-Äàëà). Ò.å., ôàêòè÷åñêè âñå âñòðå÷è be used by falcons even if there are there âçðîñëûõ ïòèö, äàæå â îñåííå-çèìíèé ïå- are no old nests there. More than a third ðèîä, ëåæàò â ïðåäåëàõ ãíåçäîâîãî àðåàëà. (33.9%) of nests of Chink Sakers are placed in niches without any nest constructions. ×èñëåííîñòü This parameter does not exceed 1–3% for Ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà 2008 ã. àâòîðàì èç- other subspecies of Sakers nesting on rocks âåñòíî òîëüêî â ïðåäåëàõ êàçàõñòàíñêîé and cliffs in Russia, East Kazakhstan and ÷àñòè àðåàëà ÷èíêîâîãî áàëîáàíà 282 Mongolia (Gombobaatar et al., 2007; Kar- ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà (304 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñò- yakin, 2008; Karyakin, Nikolenko, 2008; êà ñ ó÷¸òîì ïàð, èñ÷åçíóâøèõ çà ïåðèîä ñ Potapov et al., 2002). 2004 ïî 2008 ãã.). The average height of nest location was Ìàêñèìàëüíûå ïîêàçàòåëè ëîêàëüíîé 33.9 m (n=265; range 3–120 m). ïëîòíîñòè õàðàêòåðíû äëÿ ìåëîâûõ îáðûâîâ Depending on weather and food condi- þæíîãî ÷èíêà Óñòþðòà, Àêòàó è Êèíäåðëè- tions the dates of breeding can essentially 176 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

change in different years: the earliest dates of hatching eggs were the last decade of February, the latest ones were registered at the beginning of May). The main part of birds starts to breed in 2–3 decades of March. The average size of complete clutch size was 4.63 eggs (n=16). As a rule clutch- es contained 3–6 eggs. The clutch consist- ed of 7 eggs was found on the Usturt Pla- teau in 2006. The sizes of eggs were rather small: 53.4–58.0×39.2–43.1, on average 54.98×42.08 (n=21). Adults are sedentary; however can move within the breeding range of subspecies during the post-breeding period. Young falcons make movements, which prob- ably, do not have a nature of steady migra- tions. In particular on the basis of increase in number of falcons in June-August in the Ðèñ. 2. Ó÷¸òíûå ïëîùàäêè. Íóìåðàöèÿ ïëîùàäîê ñîîòâåòñòâóåò íóìåðàöèè â Aral Sea region, we can assume that many òàáëèöå 1. young Sakers move to the north during the Fig. 2. Study plots. Numbers of study plots in the figure are similar ones in the table 1. post-breeding period and begin to move in a southern direction only with birds migrat- ing from the north and/or with forming a Êàÿñàíñêîãî ïëàòî. Çäåñü áàëîáàíû ãíåçäè- snow cover. ëèñü â 0,25–25,5 êì ïàðà îò ïàðû, â ñðåä- íåì (n=135) â 2,91±3,1 êì. Íà êðóïíûõ Ethymology ìåëîâûõ ñòåíàõ ðàññòîÿíèå ìåæäó æèëûìè Describing the subspecies we have used ãíåçäàìè îò 0,5 äî 1 êì ñòàíîâèòñÿ íîðìîé. the scientific name Falco cherrug aralocas- Ïëîòíîñòü ãíåçäîâàíèÿ áàëîáàíà ïî ó÷¸òó pius, to achieve at once two aims: we cor- íà áîëüøèõ ïëîùàäÿõ èçìåíÿåòñÿ îò 8,35 rectly name the breeding grounds of sub- äî 31,12 ïàð/100 êì îáðûâîâ, ñîñòàâëÿÿ â species and eliminate the misunderstanding ñðåäíåì 19,08 ïàð/100 êì íà Ìàíãûøëàêå, which has arisen because of insufficiency of 12,60 – íà Óñòþðòå è 24,93 – íà Êèíäåðëè- data in 1939, when Kleinschmidt described Êàÿñàíñêîì ïëàòî (òàáë. 1, ðèñ. 2). the subspecies under the single bird col- Âòîðîé òèï îáðûâîâ, ìåíåå ïëîòíî íà- lected in the winter in Lankaran. ñåë¸ííûé áàëîáàíàìè, ÷åì ïðåäûäóùèé The common name of subspecies “Chink – ýòî ðàêóøå÷íèêè. Ïëîòíîñòü ðàñïðå- Saker” from one hand reflects the most im- äåëåíèÿ áàëîáàíà íà áîëüøåé ÷àñòè ðà- portant biological and diagnostic feature of êóøå÷íèêîâûõ îáðûâîâ âàðüèðóåò îò 3,7 the described subspecies, as the overwhelm- äî 20,2 ïàð/100 êì, ñîñòàâëÿÿ â ñðåäíåì ing majority of nests was discovered in nich- 14,6 ïàð/100 êì îáðûâîâ. Èñêëþ÷åíèåì es of cliff-faces. From another hand it gives ÿâëÿþòñÿ ðàêóøå÷íèêîâûå îáðûâû âïà- also clear geographical orientation since ar- äèí Êèíäåðëè-Êàÿñàíñêîãî ïëàòî. Çäåñü eas where specific cliff-faces or “chinks” are íàáëþäàþòñÿ î÷åíü âûñîêèå ïîêàçàòåëè distributed, are precisely localized (Ustyurt ïëîòíîñòè áàëîáàíà – äî 44,2 ïàð/100 êì Plateau, Mangyshlak Peninsula and adjoining îáðûâîâ, îäíàêî ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòü òàêèõ regions) and are within the breeding range of ó÷àñòêîâ îãðàíè÷åíà, ÷åì, âèäèìî, è âû- the new described subspecies. çâàíà êîíöåíòðàöèÿ ñîêîëîâ. Ñ åù¸ ìåíüøåé ïëîòíîñòüþ áàëîáàí Acknowledgments ãíåçäèòñÿ íà ãëèíÿíûõ îáðûâàõ, ðàñïðî- Authors would like to thank A.V. Kova- ñòðàí¸ííûõ äîâîëüíî øèðîêî â ñåâåðíîé lenko who has given an opportunity to use ïîëîâèíå ðåãèîíà (Óñòþðò, Øàãûðàé, Êà- his personal photoarchive of specimens of ðàòóï). Ïëîòíîñòü ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ áàëîáà- Chink Sakers, kept in museums of Russia and íà íà áîëüøèíñòâå ãëèíÿíûõ îáðûâîâ âà- Kazakhstan, and also all participants of sur- ðüèðóåò îò 1,5 äî 5,6 ïàð/100 êì. Îïÿòü veys in the Aral-Caspian region especially òàêè, åñòü èñêëþ÷åíèå – ãëèíÿíûå îáðûâû A.S. Pazhenkov, A.S. Levin, A.V. Moshkin, ïîáåðåæüÿ Àðàëüñêîãî ìîðÿ (âîñòî÷íûé L.M. Novikova, T.O. Barabashin, A.R. Se- ÷èíê Óñòþðòà, îáðûâû ñåâåðíîãî ïîáå- menov, as well as A.V. Kovalenko. Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 177

Òàáë. 1. ×èñëåííîñòü è ïëîòíîñòü áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug) íà îáðûâàõ ó÷¸òíûõ ïëîùàäîê. Íóìåðàöèÿ ïëîùàäîê ñîîòâåòñòâóåò íóìåðàöèè íà ðèñ. 2. Table 1. Number and density of the Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) on cliff-faces at the plots. Numbers of plots are similar ones in the fig. 2.

Ïëîòíîñòü (ïàð/100 êì Ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòü Ãíåçäîâûå îáðûâîâ) îáðûâîâ (êì) ó÷àñòêè Density ×èíêè Ïëîùàäêè Length of cliffs Ãîä Breeding (pairs/100 km Cliffs Plots (km) Year territories cliffs) Ìåëîâûå îáðûâû Àêòàó 4 71.9 2003 6 8.35 Chalky cliffs of the Aktau range 5 34.7 2003 4 11.53 Þæíûé Àêòàó è îâðàã Àùûáàñ Southern Aktau and Aschibas ravine 20 29.3 2004 6 20.48 Ìåëîâûå îáðûâû Àêòàó 2, 23 93.2 2004 29 31.12 Chalky cliffs of the Aktau range 1, 24 289.7 2004 54 18.64 Ï-îâ Ìàíãûøëàê / Mangyshlak Peninsula 518.8 2003–2004 99 19.08 Þæíûé (ìåëîâîé) ÷èíê ïëàòî Óñòþðò Southern (chalky) cliff-faces of the Usturt Plateau 6 55.6 2003 7 12.60 Çàïàäíûé ÷èíê ïëàòî Óñòþðò Western cliff-faces of the Usturt Plateau 7 80.5 2003 3 3.73 Ñåâåðíûé ÷èíê ïëàòî Óñòþðò 10 34.5 2003 3 8.71 Northern cliff-faces of the Usturt Plateau 11 24.6 2003 3 12.19 9, 21 120.4 2004 27 22.43 Çàïàäíûé ÷èíê ïëàòî Óñòþðò Western cliff-faces of the Usturt Plateau 8, 22 142.8 2004 7 4.90 Ñåâåðíûé ÷èíê ïëàòî Óñòþðò 31 64.9 2006 15 23.13 Northern cliff-faces of the Usturt Plateau 32 9.2 2006 1 10.86 33 42.7 2006 6 14.07 34 20.3 2006 0 0 Ïëàòî Óñòþðò / Usturt Plateau 595.3 2003–2006 72 12.09 Êîëåíêåëè è Æåëüòàó Kolenceli and Zheltau Cliffs 25 95.8 2004 7 7.31 ×èíê ïëàòî Øàãûðàé 27 53.9 2004 3 5.57 Cliff-faces of the Shagyray Plateau 35 51.5 2006 3 5.82 Ïëàòî Øàãûðàé / Shagyray Plateau 105.4 2004–2006 6 5.69 Âïàäèíà Êàðàãèå / Karagie Depression 13 67.1 2004 12 17.89 Êàñïèéñêèé ÷èíê Êèíäåðëè-Êàÿñàíñêîãî ïëàòî Caspian seaside cliff-faces of the Kinderli-Kayas- anskoe Plateau 14 69.4 2004 2 2.88 Âïàäèíà Êàóíäû / Kaundy Depression 15 34.9 2004 10 28.62 Ñåâåðî-âîñòî÷íûé ÷èíê Êèíäåðëè-Êàÿñàíñêîãî 16 113.2 2004 28 24.73 ïëàòî (óñòóïû Êóëàíäû) Northern-eastern cliff-faces of the Kinderli-Kayas- anskoe Plateau (Kulandy cliffs) 17 31.2 2004 8 25.68 Âïàäèíà Æàçãóðëû / Zhazgurly Depression 18 14.4 2004 5 34.83 Âïàäèíà Áàñãóðëû / Basgurly Depression 19 24.9 2004 10 40.15 Êèíäåðäè-Êàÿñàíñêîå ïëàòî Kinderli-Kayasanskoe Plateau 355.1 2004 75 21.12 Àðàëüñêèé ÷èíê ïëàòî Óñòþðò Aral cliff-face of the Usturt Plateau 12 30.3 2003 7 23.12 Îáðûâû ï-îâà Êàðàòóï Cliff-faces of the Karatup Peninsula 26 19.3 2004 3 15.57 Îáðûâû âïàäèí Ñåâåðíîãî Ïðèàðàëüÿ 28 10.7 2005 3 28.00 Cliff-faces of the Northern Aral Sea Region 29 9.6 2005 1 10.41 Îáðûâû ï-îâà Øóáàðòàðàó Cliff-faces of the Shubartarau Peninsula 30 28.7 2005 7 24.40 Ïðèàðàëüå / Aral Sea Region 98.6 2003–2005 21 21.31 Àðàëî-Êàñïèéñêèé ðåãèîí Aral-Caspian Region 1768.9 2003–2006 280 15.83 178 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Òàáë. 2. Îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà, ãíåçäÿùåãîñÿ íà îáðûâàõ â Àðàëî-Êàñïèéñêîì ðåãèîíå (íà òåððèòîðèè Êàçàõñòàíà). Table 2. Estimated numbers of pairs of the Saker Falcon breeding on cliff-faces in the Aral-Caspian region (only the territory of Kazakhstan).

Áàëîáàí / Saker Falcon Ïëîòíîñòü (ïàð/100 Ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòü êì îáðûâîâ) ×èñëåííîñòü (ïàðû) Íàçâàíèå ïëàòî Ãðóïïà ÷èíêîâ îáðûâîâ (êì) Density (pairs/100 Estimated number Plateau Types of cliffs Length of cliffs (km) km cliffs) (pairs) Ïëàòî Óñòþðò Ñåâåðíûé Usturt Plateau Northern cliff-face 1275.19 12.09 154 Çàïàäíûé Western cliff-faces 713.91 86 Ìåëîâîé Chalky cliffs 2509.42 303 Àðàëüñêèé Aral cliff-faces 96.53 12 Ïëàòî Óñòþðò / Usturt Plateau 4595.05 556 Êèíäåðëè-Êàÿñàíñêîå ïëàòî Âïàäèíû Kinderly-Kayasan Plateau Cliffs of depressions 470.75 21.12 99 Ñåâåðî-âîñòîê NE cliff-faces 792.07 167 Ïðèêàñïèé Caspian cliff-faces 203.08 43 Êèíäåðëè-Êàÿñàíñêîå ïëàòî Kinderly-Kayasanskoe Plateau 1465.90 310 Êîëåíêåëè è Æåëüòàó Cliff-faces of Kolenkely and Zheltau 132.59 7.31 10 Ïëàòî Øàãûðàé / Shagyrai Plateau 377.15 5.69 21 Ìàíãûøëàê / Mangyshlak peninsula 663.46 19.08 127 Ïðèàðàëüå (áåç Óñòþðòà) Aral Sea Region (without Aral cliff-faces of the Usturt Plateau) 830.87 21.31 177 Âñåãî â ðåãèîíå / Total 8065.02 1200

ðåæüÿ Àðàëüñêîãî ìîðÿ). Çäåñü îòâåñíûå â êàçàõñòàíñêîé ÷àñòè ðåãèîíà, â 1021– ñòåíû îáðûâîâ äîñòèãàþò â âûñîòó 50 ì, 1216 ïàð, â ñðåäíåì â 1119 ïàð (Êàðÿêèí è è îíè ñëîæåíû áîëåå ïëîòíûìè ãëèíàìè, äð., 2005á; Karyakin et al., 2004). Ñ ó÷¸òîì ÷òî ïîçâîëÿåò äëèòåëüíîå âðåìÿ ñîõðà- ðåçóëüòàòîâ èññëåäîâàíèé, ïîëó÷åííûõ â íÿòüñÿ íèøàì. Èìåííî ïî ýòîé ïðè÷èíå Ïðèàðàëüå (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2005à), íà ïëà- íà äàííîé òåððèòîðèè áàëîáàíû ãíåçäÿò- òî Øàãûðàé (Ïàæåíêîâ, Êîðæåâ, 2006) è ñÿ ñ ïëîòíîñòüþ 15,6–23,13 ïàð/100 êì. íà ñåâåðíîì ÷èíêå Óñòþðòà, îáùàÿ ÷èñ- Ðàññòîÿíèå ìåæäó ãí¸çäàìè ñîñòàâëÿåò â ëåííîñòü ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíîâ, ãíåçäÿ- ñðåäíåì 4,85±2,1 (2,07–8,10; n=8) êì. ùèõñÿ íà îáðûâàõ ÷èíêîâ â êàçàõñòàíñêîé  ñðåäíåì ïî òåððèòîðèè ðåãèîíà ïëîò- ÷àñòè Àðàëî-Êàñïèéñêîãî ðåãèîíà, ïî ñî- íîñòü áàëîáàíà íà ãíåçäîâàíèè íà îáðûâàõ ñòîÿíèþ íà 2006 ã. îöåíåíà â 1075–1325 ÷èíêîâ ïëàòî ñîñòàâëÿåò 15,83 ïàð/100 êì ïàð, â ñðåäíåì â 1200 ïàð (òàáë. 2). (òàáë. 1, ðèñ. 2), ïðè ñðåäíåì ðàññòîÿ- Òî÷íàÿ ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòü ÷èíêîâ â Àðàëî- íèè ìåæäó ãí¸çäàìè áëèæàéøèõ ñîñåäåé Êàñïèéñêîì ðåãèîíå çà ïðåäåëàìè Êàçàõ- 3,88±5,15 êì (0,25–51,30; n=259). ñòàíà íåèçâåñòíà, òàê êàê îíè áûëè îöèô-  2003 ã. ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà íà îá- ðîâàíû ïî êàðòàì Ì 1:500000 â 2004 ã. ðûâàõ Àðàëî-Êàñïèéñêîãî ðåãèîíà áûëà è íå êîððåêòèðîâàëèñü ïî êîñìîñíèì- îöåíåíà â 905 ïàð, èç êîòîðûõ ãíåçäîâà- êàì. Ïîýòîìó ïîêàçàòåëè, ïîëó÷åííûå äëÿ íèå 685 ïàð ïðåäïîëàãàëîñü íà òåððèòî- Óçáåêèñòàíà â 587,71 êì è Òóðêìåíèñòàíà ðèè Êàçàõñòàíà, 121 ïàðû – íà òåððèòîðèè â 780,32 êì, îñòàþòñÿ ëèøü ïðèìåðíûì Óçáåêèñòàíà è 100 ïàð – íà òåððèòîðèè îðèåíòèðîì äëÿ ðàñ÷¸òà ÷èñëåííîñòè áà- Òóðêìåíèè (Êàðÿêèí, 2004). Äîïîëíèòåëü- ëîáàíà è, êàê ïîêàçûâàåò ïðàêòèêà ðàáî- íûå èññëåäîâàíèÿ 2004 ã. è áîëåå êðè- òû â Êàçàõñòàíå, îíè íèæå ðåàëüíîé ïðî- òè÷íûé ïîäõîä ê îöèôðîâêå êàðò, â ñâåòå òÿæ¸ííîñòè ÷èíêîâ â 1,5–2 ðàçà. Îöåíêà íîâûõ äàííûõ, ïîçâîëèëè îöåíèòü ÷èñëåí- ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáàíà, ïîëó÷åííàÿ äëÿ íîñòü áàëîáàíà, ãíåçäÿùåãîñÿ íà îáðûâàõ ýòîé ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòè ÷èíêîâ, â ðåçóëüòàòå Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 179

Ïòåíöû ÷èíêîâîãî òîïàõ êàê ìèíèìóì 29–34 ïàð â êàçàõñòàí- áàëîáàíà â ãíåçäå íà ñêîé ÷àñòè ðåãèîíà (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2005á) è ËÝÏ. Êûçûëêóìû. Ôîòî È. Äåíèñîâà. 15–20 – çà ïðåäåëàìè Êàçàõñòàíà. Ïîêà ñîâåðøåííî íå ïîääà¸òñÿ îöåíêå Chicks of the Chink Saker Falcon in nest on ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíîâ, ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ â ðå- the electric pole. Kyzyl ãèîíå íà ËÝÏ, íî îïðåäåë¸ííî ýòîò ñòåðå- Kum desert. îòèï ãíåçäîâàíèÿ íå òàê äàâíî çàðîäèëñÿ Photo by I. Denisov. è íå ïîëó÷èë øèðîêîãî ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèÿ. Äëÿ Êàçàõàñòàíà âñÿ èíôîðìàöèÿ î ãíåçäî- âàíèè áàëîáàíîâ íà ËÝÏ îãðàíè÷èâàåòñÿ ïåñêàìè Áîëüøèå Áàðñóêè (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2005á), îêðåñòíîñòÿìè Áàéêîíóðà è íèçî- ýêñòðàïîëÿöèè ïîêàçàòåëåé ñðåäíåé ïëîò- âüÿìè Ñûðäàðüè (Êîâàëåíêî, 2005; 2006), íîñòè ãíåçäîâàíèÿ âèäà â êàçàõñòàíñêîé ãäå â ñóììå ãíåçäèòñÿ âðÿä ëè áîëåå 20 ÷àñòè ðåãèîíà ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà 2006 ã., ïàð. Áîëåå ðàñïðîñòðàí¸í ýòîò ñòåðåîòèï ñîñòàâëÿåò 78–108, â ñðåäíåì 93, ïàð – â ãíåçäîâàíèÿ â Óçáåêèñòàíå (Ìèòðîïîëü- Óçáåêèñòàíå è 109–139, â ñðåäíåì 124, ñêèé è äð., 1987), ãäå óæå â 90-å ãã. íà ËÝÏ ïàð – â Òóðêìåíèñòàíå. Èçâåñòíî, ÷òî áûëî îáíàðóæåíî 17% îò îáùåãî êîëè÷å- áàëîáàí ãíåçäèòñÿ ïî âñåìó óçáåêñêîìó ñòâà ãí¸çä áàëîáàíà, èçâåñòíûõ â ñòðàíå, à ÷èíêó Óñòþðòà, íà ÷èíêàõ Êàïëàíêûðà è ïëîòíîñòü èõ ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ ñîñòàâèëà 32 îáðûâàõ Êàðà-Áîãàç-Ãîëà â Òóðêìåíèè ãíåçäà íà 400–450 êì ËÝÏ (Àòàäæàíîâ, (Kreuzberg-Mukhina et al., 2001; ß. Àòàä- 2002). Ìîæíî ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî ñóììàð- æàíîâ, óñòíîå ñîîáùåíèå, Ë. Êîíîâàëîâ, íàÿ ÷èñëåííîñòü ñîêîëîâ, ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ íà ëè÷íîå ñîîáùåíèå), îäíàêî ñîâðåìåííûõ ËÝÏ â ðåãèîíå, íå ïðåâûøàåò 100 ïàð. ó÷¸òíûõ äàííûõ ïî ýòèì òåððèòîðèÿì Ñóììèðóÿ îöåíêè ÷èñëåííîñòè áàëîáà- íåò. Íà ÷èíêàõ Þæíîãî Óñòþðòà è Ñàðû- íîâ, ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ â ðàçíûõ óñëîâèÿõ â ðåãè- êàìûøñêîé âïàäèíû â 80-õ ãã. áûëî íàéäå- îíå, ïîëó÷àåì îöåíêó ÷èñëåííîñòè äëÿ âñå- íî 9 ãí¸çä áàëîáàíà, ïðè÷¸ì ðàññòîÿíèå ãî ðåãèîíà â 1510–1980 ïàð. Ìû íå ó÷ëè ìåæäó ãí¸çäàìè ðàçíûõ ïàð íà Þæíîì â ñâîèõ ðàñ÷¸òàõ âîçìîæíîñòü ãíåçäîâàíèÿ Óñòþðòå ñîñòàâëÿëî 1,5 êì (Øóáåíêèí, áàëîáàíà íà èñêóññòâåííûõ ñîîðóæåíèÿõ, Àíòèïîâ, 1990). Äëÿ êîíöà 90-õ ãã. ÕÕ íå îòíîñÿùèõñÿ ê ËÝÏ, â Êûçûëêóìàõ è ñòîëåòèÿ Ñ.À. Áóêðååâ (1997) îöåíèâàë Êàðàêóìàõ, â îñòàíöîâûõ ãîðàõ, ãäå, ñêî- ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà â Êàïëàíêûðñêîì ðåå âñåãî, ãíåçäîâàíèå âèäà íîñèò ñëó÷àé- çàïîâåäíèêå â 20–25 ïàð.  Óçáåêèñòàíå íûé õàðàêòåð, ê òîìó æå, â ðÿäå ñëó÷àåâ, â 90-õ ãã. ÷èñëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà îöåíèâà- îöåíêà áûëà ýêñïåðòíîé, ïîýòîìó å¸ ñìåëî ëàñü â 120–150 ïàð, èç êîòîðûõ 33% îáè- ìîæíî îêðóãëÿòü äî 1500–2000 ãíåçäÿùèõ- òàëî íà îñòàíöîâûõ âîçâûøåííîñòÿõ è â ñÿ â ðåãèîíå ïàð ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà 2006 ã. ðàâíèííîé ÷àñòè Êûçûëêóìîâ è 20% – íà Ýòî è åñòü ñóììàðíàÿ îöåíêà ÷èñëåííîñòè ëåññîâûõ îáðûâàõ áàññåéíà ð. Àìóäàðüè âñåãî âûäåëÿåìîãî íàìè ïîäâèäà. è ÷èíêàõ Óñòþðòà (Àòàäæàíîâ, 2002). Ïî- Ìû öåëåíàïðàâëåííî àêöåíòèðóåì âíè- æàëóé, ýòèì îãðàíè÷èâàþòñÿ âñå ëèòå- ìàíèå íà òîì, ÷òî ýòà îöåíêà íà 2006 ã., ðàòóðíûå äàííûå î ÷èñëåííîñòè âèäà íà òàê êàê çà êîðîòêèé ïåðèîä íàáëþäåíèé èíòåðåñóþùåé íàñ òåððèòîðèè. Ó÷èòûâàÿ íàøè äàííûå, à òàêæå ëèòåðàòóðíûå èñòî÷- íèêè, ìîæíî ëèøü ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî ÷èñ- ëåííîñòü áàëîáàíà íà ÷èíêàõ è îáðûâàõ çà ïðåäåëàìè Êàçàõñòàíà, ïî ñîñòîÿíèþ íà 2006 ã., ìîæåò ñîñòàâëÿòü 300–500 ïàð. Ïîìèìî îáðûâîâ ÷èíêîâ ïëàòî, íà òåð- ðèòîðèè ðåãèîíà áàëîáàí ãíåçäèòñÿ íà îáíàæåíèÿõ îñòàíöåâ è ñòåí «ñàåâ» (îâðà- ãîâ). Ïåðâûå ÿâëÿþòñÿ òî÷å÷íûìè îáúåê- òàìè, à âòîðûå íå âûðàæåíû â ìàñøòàáàõ 5-êèëîìåòðîâûõ êàðò, à â ðÿäå ñëó÷àåâ ïëî- õî èäåíòèôèöèðóþòñÿ è íà êîñìîñíèìêàõ ñ ðàçðåøåíèåì 14 ì. Ïîýòîìó íå ïðåäñòàâ- Ñàìêà ÷èíêîâîãî áàëîáàíà íà êëàäêå. ëÿåòñÿ âîçìîæíûì ïðîâåñòè òî÷íóþ ýêñ- Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. òðàïîëÿöèþ íà ýòè òèïû áèîòîïîâ. Ðàíåå Female of the Chink Saker Falcon in the nest with ïðåäïîëàãàëîñü ãíåçäîâàíèå â òàêèõ áèî- clutch. Photo by I. Karyakin. 180 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

íåé Àçèè.  ãåîëîãè÷åñêè ñðàâíèòåëüíî íåäàâíåå âðåìÿ îíè áûëè äíîì ìåëîâûõ ìîðåé, êîòîðûå â íà÷àëå ÷åòâåðòè÷íîãî ïåðèîäà íà÷àëè ïåðåñûõàòü, îñòàâëÿÿ âî ìíîãèõ ìåñòàõ, ïî ìåðå îòñòóïëåíèÿ, áå- ðåãîâûå îáðûâû, ïðîòÿíóâøèåñÿ èçðå- çàííîé, ìåñòàìè ïðåðûâàþùåéñÿ ëèíèåé íà òûñÿ÷è êèëîìåòðîâ. Ýòè ìåëîâûå, ðåæå ðàêóøå÷íèêîâûå èëè ïåñ÷àííèêîâûå îá- ðûâû, èìåíóåìûå ÷èíêàìè, äîñòèãàþùèå 300 ìåòðîâ âûñîòû è íåðåäêî îáðàçóþùèå íåñêîëüêî ñòóïåíåé, ÿâëÿþòñÿ èçëþáëåí- íûìè ìåñòàìè ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ÷èíêîâûõ áàëî- áàíîâ. Íàëè÷èå, âûñîòà è ñòðóêòóðà ÷èíêîâ âî ìíîãîì îïðåäåëÿþò ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå, îñîáåííîñòè ðàçìåùåíèÿ è ÷èñëåííîñòè îïèñûâàåìîãî ïîäâèäà. Ëþáîïûòíî, ÷òî òàì, ãäå ñîêîëû èìåþò âûáîð, ãíåçäèòüñÿ ëè íà ÷èíêàõ èëè íà ñêàëàõ, êàê, íàïðèìåð, â ãîðàõ Êàðàòàó íà Ìàíãûøëàêå, îíè îò- äàþò îäíîçíà÷íîå ïðåäïî÷òåíèå ÷èíêàì. Ýòî êàæåòñÿ îñîáåííî óäèâèòåëüíûì, åñëè ó÷åñòü, ÷òî ãîðû Êàðàòàó èçîáèëóþò ñêàëà- ìè ñ ìíîãî÷èñëåííûìè ïîñòðîéêàìè âî- ðîíîâ (Corvus corax), êóðãàííèêîâ (Buteo rufinus) è áåðêóòîâ (Aquila chrysaetos), êà- çàëîñü áû, îòâå÷àþùèìè ñàìûì èçûñêàí- íûì òðåáîâàíèÿì áàëîáàíîâ, à íà èõ ñêëî- Ãíåçäî ÷èíêîâîãî áàëî- ñ 2004 ïî 2008 ãã. ìîíèòîðèíã ïîêàçàë íàõ è â ïðèëåãàþùèõ äîëèíàõ â èçîáèëèè áàíà â íèøå ìåëîâîãî óñòîé÷èâîå ñîêðàùåíèå ÷èñëåííîñòè áà- âîäÿòñÿ áîëüøèå ïåñ÷àíêè (Rhombomus îáðûâà â ïîñòðîéêå âîðîíà (Corvus corax) ëîáàíà â êàçàõñòàíñêîé ÷àñòè àðåàëà. Ïî- opimus) è æ¸ëòûå ñóñëèêè (Spermophilus Ïëàòî Óñòþðò. ñëå çàâåðøåíèÿ ðåêîíñòðóêöèè òðàññû íà fulvus), ÿâëÿþùèåñÿ èçëþáëåííûìè êîðìî- Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. ó÷àñòêå Àòûðàó–Áåéíåó ïðåññ íåëåãàëü- âûìè îáúåêòàìè ýòèõ ñîêîëîâ. Íåñìîòðÿ Nest of the Chink Saker íîãî îòëîâà íà ñîêîëîâ ñóùåñòâåííî âîç- íà òùàòåëüíûå îáñëåäîâàíèÿ ãîð Êàðàòàó â Falcon in the niche of ðîñ, ÷òî íåçàìåäëèòåëüíî îòðàçèëîñü íà 1993, 2003 è 2004 ãã., òàì íå áûëî îáíàðó- chalky cliff in a Raven’s ãðóïïèðîâêàõ, áëèæàéøèõ ê òðàññå. Áà- æåíî íè îäíîãî æèëîãî ãíåçäà áàëîáàíîâ, (Corvus corax) nest. Usturt Plateau. ëîáàíû èñ÷åçëè íà âñåõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñò- â òî âðåìÿ êàê íà ÷èíêàõ, ðàñïîëîæåííûõ Photos by I. Karyakin. êàõ âîêðóã íàñåë¸ííûõ ïóíêòîâ, ëåæàùèõ èíîãäà âñåãî â 5–7 êì, îíè ãíåçäèëèñü ñ íà òðàññå (âîêðóã Áåéíåó è Øåòïå). Çà î÷åíü âûñîêîé ïëîòíîñòüþ – 3,7–4,5 ïàð íà 4-ëåòíèé ïåðèîä ìîíèòîðèíãà âèä ïåðå- 100 êì2 èëè 16,8–18,3 ïàð íà 100 êì ÷èí- ñòàë ðåãèñòðèðîâàòüñÿ íà 22-õ ãíåçäîâûõ êîâ. Èçâåñòíî, ÷òî ãíåçäîâîé ñòåðåîòèï ó ó÷àñòêàõ, ÷òî ïîäðàçóìåâàåò ñîêðàùåíèå áàëîáàíîâ â çíà÷èòåëüíîé ìåðå îïðåäåëÿ- ÷èñëåííîñòè íà 7,24%. Ïðåññ íåëåãàëüíî- åòñÿ çàïå÷àòëåíèåì, òî åñòü, ñîêîëû îòäà- ãî ëîâà åñòü âî âñåõ ñòðàíàõ, ëåæàùèõ â þò ïðåäïî÷òåíèå ãí¸çäàì, ïîõîæèì ñâîèì ïðåäåëàõ ðàññìàòðèâàåìîãî ðåãèîíà, ïî- ðàñïîëîæåíèåì íà ðîäèòåëüñêîå ãíåçäî, â ýòîìó, íåñìîòðÿ íà ñëàáóþ ïðèâëåêàòåëü- êîòîðîì îíè âûðîñëè. Ýòî ìîæåò îçíà÷àòü íîñòü óñòþðòñêîãî áàëîáàíà â êà÷åñòâå òîëüêî îäíî – äàæå åñëè áàëîáàíû è ïðåä- ëîâ÷åãî ñîêîëà, îí áóäåò ëèøü óñèëèâàòüñÿ ïðèíèìàëè âðåìåíàìè ïîïûòêè ãíåçäèòüñÿ ïî ìåðå èñòîùåíèÿ ðåñóðñà äðóãèõ, áîëåå íà ñêàëàõ, óñïåõ èõ ðàçìíîæåíèÿ áûë ïî êðóïíûõ ïîäâèäîâ. êàêîé-òî ïðè÷èíå ñòîëü íèçîê, à êîëè÷å- ñòâî âûëåòåâøèõ ïòåíöîâ òàê íè÷òîæíî Áèîëîãèÿ ìàëî, ÷òî îíè íèêàê íå ñìîãëè ïîâëèÿòü íà ×èíêîâûå áàëîáàíû õàðàêòåðèçóþò- ãíåçäîâîé ñòåðåîòèï ìåñòíîé ïîïóëÿöèè. ñÿ ðÿäîì ÷åðò, çàìåòíî îòëè÷àþùèõ èõ Íàïðîòèâ, óñïåøíîñòü ðàçìíîæåíèÿ áà- îò áîëüøèíñòâà äðóãèõ ôîðì áàëîáàíîâ. ëîáàíîâ, ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ íà ÷èíêàõ, íåîáûê- Ýòîò ïîäâèä íàñåëÿåò ïî÷òè èñêëþ÷èòåëü- íîâåííî âûñîêà. Èõ ãí¸çäà ñîäåðæàëè â íî íèçìåííûå (íà Ìàíãûøëàêå ìåñòàìè 2003–2004 ãã. (n=61) îò 3,8 äî 4,6, â ñðåä- íèæå óðîâíÿ ìîðÿ) ïóñòûííûå è ïîëóïó- íåì ïî 4,1, ïòåíöà (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2005). ñòûííûå îáëàñòè çàïàäíîé ÷àñòè Ñðåä- Äëÿ ñðàâíåíèÿ ïðèâåä¸ì ðàçìåð âûâîäêîâ Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 181

Âûâîäêè ÷èíêîâîãî áàëîáàíà. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Broods of the Chink Saker Falcon. Photos by I. Karyakin.

áàëîáàíîâ â äðóãèõ ðåãèîíàõ: îò 3,0 äî æ¸ííîñòü ñêàëàõ. Âûñîêàÿ ïðîäóêòèâíîñòü 4,3 – â Íàóðçóìå (Áðàãèí, Áðàãèí, 2009), ÷èíêîâûõ áàëîáàíîâ èìååò, ïî-âèäèìîìó, 2,9 – â Âîëãî-Óðàëüñêîì ðåãèîíå Ðîññèè è äðóãèå ïðè÷èíû, òàê èëè èíà÷å ñâÿçàí- (Êàðÿêèí, 2004à), 2,8 – â Çàèëèéñêîì Àëà- íûå ñ ãíåçäîâàíèåì íà ÷èíêàõ. Îáèëèå íà òàó, 2,7 – â Áåòïàêäàëå (Ïôåôôåð, 1986), ÷èíêàõ ïðèãîäíûõ äëÿ óñòðîéñòâà ãí¸çä 2,6 – â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå (Êàðÿêèí, íèø ïðèâåëî ê çàìåòíîìó îñëàáëåíèþ Íèêîëåíêî, 2008), îò 1,4 äî 3,7, â ñðåä- òåððèòîðèàëüíîãî êîíñåðâàòèçìà áàëîáà- íåì ïî 2,8 – â Ìîíãîëèè (Ãîìáîáààòàð è íîâ, ïîçâîëÿþùåìó èì ëåã÷å ðåàãèðîâàòü äð., 2007). íà èçìåíåíèå âíåøíèõ óñëîâèé.  îòëè÷èå Ïî ñóòè äåëà, â êà÷åñòâå åäèíñòâåííîãî îò äðóãèõ ôîðì âîñòî÷íûõ áàëîáàíîâ, ñåðü¸çíîãî ëèìèòèðóþùåãî óñïåøíîñòü òåððèòîðèàëüíûå ñàìöû êîòîðûõ îáû÷íî ðàçìíîæåíèÿ ÷èíêîâûõ áàëîáàíîâ ôàê- âñþ æèçíü îñòàþòñÿ âåðíû îäíàæäû îê- òîðà ìîæíî ñ÷èòàòü õèùíè÷åñòâî î÷åíü êóïèðîâàííîìó ãíåçäîâîìó ó÷àñòêó, äëÿ ìíîãî÷èñëåííîãî â àðåàëå ýòîãî ïîäâèäà ÷èíêîâûõ íå ñîñòàâëÿåò ïðîáëåì èçáåãàòü ôèëèíà (Bubo bubo). Ìîæíî ïðåäïîëî- îïàñíîãî ñîñåäñòâà áåðêóòîâ èëè ôèëèíîâ æèòü, ÷òî ýòîìó õèùíèêó íàìíîãî ñëîæ- èëè îñòàâëÿòü ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè ïðè ïà- íåé îáíàðóæèòü æèëûå ãí¸çäà áàëîáàíîâ äåíèè ÷èñëåííîñòè âàæíåéøèõ êîðìîâûõ ñðåäè ìíîãî÷èñëåííûõ íèø íà ïðîòÿíóâ- îáúåêòîâ, ïåðåìåùàÿñü â áîëåå áåçîïàñ- øèõñÿ íà äåñÿòêè è ñîòíè êèëîìåòðîâ âû- íûå è êîðìíûå ðàéîíû. ñîêèõ ÷èíêàõ, ÷åì â ñóùåñòâåííî áîëåå Íàáëþäåíèÿ 2003–2004 ãã. ïîêàçàëè, íèçêèõ è èìåþùèõ íåçíà÷èòåëüíóþ ïðîòÿ- ÷òî â çàâèñèìîñòè îò âûøåïåðå÷èñëåí- 182 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Æèëûå ãí¸çäà áàëîáàíà è êóðãàííèêà, óñòðîåí- íûå âñåãî â íåñêîëüêèõ ìåòðàõ äðóã îò äðóãà. Ïëàòî Óñòþðò, 2004 ã. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Living nests of the Saker Falcon and Long- Legged Buzzard located at only several meters between them. Usturt Plateau, 2004. Photos by I. Karyakin.

íûõ ôàêòîðîâ, ïëîòíîñòü ÷èíêîâûõ áàëî- Íà ïåðèôåðèÿõ àðåàëà ÷èíêîâîãî áà- áàíîâ íà ãíåçäîâàíèè ìîæåò èçìåíÿòüñÿ ëîáàíà, ãäå îòñóòñòâóþò íàñòîÿùèå ÷èíêè, â 2–3 ðàçà íà îäíèõ è òåõ æå ó÷àñòêàõ. ñîêîëû îòäàþò ïðåäïî÷òåíèå ãíåçäîâûì Ïðè ëîêàëüíûõ äåïðåññèÿõ ÷èñëåííî- áèîòîïàì ñî ñõîäíîé òîïîãðàôèåé. Íà- ñòè îñíîâíûõ îáúåêòîâ ïèòàíèÿ ãðóï- ïðèìåð, íà ñåâåðå Óñòþðòà îíè ïîñå- ïèðîâêè áàëîáàíà ìîãóò óïëîòíÿòüñÿ íà ëÿþòñÿ íà îáðûâàõ îâðàãîâ, â íèçîâüÿõ ó÷àñòêàõ ñ îáèëèåì ïèùè è ðàññòîÿíèå Àìóäàðüè â ëåññîâûõ îáðûâàõ ðåêè, ïî ìåæäó ñîñåäíèìè æèëûìè ãí¸çäàìè ìî- Óçáîþ è äðóãèì âûñîõøèì ðóñëàì – íà æåò äîñòèãàòü âñåãî 250–300 ì, ïðè ýòîì êàíüîíîïîäîáíûõ ñêëîíàõ, â Áàäõûçå – íà äèñòàíöèè äî æèëûõ ãí¸çä êóðãàííèêîâ îáðûâàõ, ñâîåé ñòðóêòóðîé î÷åíü ïîõî- óìåíüøàþòñÿ äî 50–80 ì, à èíîãäà äàæå æèõ íà ÷èíêè Ìàíãûøëàêà. Êðàéíå ðåäêî, 5–15 ì. Ïîäîáíîé ïëàñòè÷íîñòè ñïîñîá- êàê, íàïðèìåð, â äîëèíå ðåêè Áàéêîíóð, ñòâóåò è òî îáñòîÿòåëüñòâî, ÷òî ÷èíêî- ïîñåëÿþòñÿ â íèøàõ áåðåãîâûõ ñêàë.  âûå áàëîáàíû ìåíüøå äðóãèõ ïîäâèäîâ Êûçûëêóìàõ â 1976, 1979 è 1981 ãã. áûëî çàâèñÿò îò íàëè÷èÿ ãí¸çä, ïîñòðîåííûõ îòìå÷åíî ãíåçäîâàíèå áàëîáàíîâ, ïî âñåé äðóãèìè âèäàìè ïòèö (âîðîíàìè, êóð- âåðîÿòíîñòè ÷èíêîâûõ, íà îïîðàõ ËÝÏ ãàííèêàìè, áåðêóòàìè è ñòåðâÿòíèêàìè ìåæäó ãîðîäàìè Çàðàâøàí è Ó÷êóäóê (Ìè- Neophron percnopterus). Ìíîãèå íèøè â òðîïîëüñêèé è äð., 1987) è ýòîò ñòåðåîòèï ÷èíêàõ, â ñèëó îñîáåííîñòåé èõ ôîðìû ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ïîñòåïåííî ðàñøèðÿåò ñâîþ è ðàçìåðîâ, ìîãóò èñïîëüçîâàòüñÿ ñî- ãåîãðàôèþ â Êûçûëêóìàõ (Àòàäæàíîâ, êîëàìè äàæå â òîì ñëó÷àå, åñëè â íèõ 2002).  2003–2004 ãã. 4 ãíåçäà ÷èíêîâûõ îòñóòñòâóþò ñòàðûå ãí¸çäà. Áîëåå òðåòè áàëîáàíîâ îáíàðóæåíû íà îïîðàõ ËÝÏ (33,9%) ãí¸çä ÷èíêîâûõ áàëîáàíîâ ðàñ- â ïîñòðîéêàõ êóðãàííèêîâ è ìîãèëüíèêîâ ïîëàãàëèñü â íèøàõ áåç ïîñòðîåê. Ó äðó- (Aquila heliaca) â ïåñêàõ Áîëüøèå Áàðñóêè ãèõ ïîäâèäîâ áàëîáàíîâ, ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ íà (Êàðÿêèí, 2004á; Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2005á). ñêàëàõ è îáðûâàõ â Ðîññèè, Âîñòî÷íîì  ñîâðåìåííûé ïåðèîä ãíåçäîâàíèå áàëî- Êàçàõñòàíå è Ìîíãîëèè, ýòîò ïîêàçàòåëü áàíà íà ËÝÏ óñòàíîâëåíî âäîëü Ñûðäàðüè íå ïðåâûøàåò 1–3% (Ãîìáîáààòàð è äð., (Êîâàëåíêî, 2005; 2006). Ìîæíî ïðåäïî- 2007; Êàðÿêèí, 2008; Êàðÿêèí, Íèêî- ëîæèòü, ÷òî ïîïóëÿöèè ñ ýòèì íîâûì ãíåç- ëåíêî, 2008; Potapov et al., 2002). äîâûì ñòåðåîòèïîì, â ñèëó õîðîøåé çà- Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 183

ùèùåííîñòè ãí¸çä è íàëè÷èÿ ìíîãî÷èñëåííûõ ëèíèé ËÝÏ, áóäóò ðàñòè. Ãíåçäÿòñÿ ÷èíêîâûå áàëî- áàíû, êàê óæå óêàçûâàëîñü, ïðåèìóùåñòâåííî â íèøàõ ÷èíêîâ, îòäàâàÿ ïðåäïî÷òå- íèå íàèáîëåå âûñîêèì ìåëî- âûì ñòåíêàì ñåâåðíûõ ýêñïî- çèöèé. Ãí¸çäà ðàñïîëàãàþòñÿ íà âûñîòå 3–120, â ñðåäíåì (n=265) 33,9, ì. Ñðîêè ðàç- ìíîæåíèÿ, ïî-âèäèìîìó, â çàâèñèìîñòè îò ïîãîäíûõ óñëîâèé è ñîñòîÿíèÿ êîðìî- âûõ ðåñóðñîâ, ìîãóò â ðàçíûå ãîäû ñóùåñòâåííî êîëåáàòü- ñÿ (ñàìûå ðàííèå äàòû íà÷à- ëà îòêëàäêè ÿèö ïðèõîäÿòñÿ, âîçìîæíî, óæå íà ïîñëåä- íþþ äåêàäó ôåâðàëÿ, íàè- áîëåå ïîçäíèå, âåðîÿòíî ïî- âòîðíûå, çàðåãèñòðèðîâàíû â ïåðâûõ ÷èñëàõ ìàÿ, îñíîâíàÿ ìàññà ïòèö ïðèñòóïàåò ê ðàç- ìíîæåíèþ âî 2–3 äåêàäàõ ìàðòà. Ðàçìåð ïîëíîé êëàä- êè â íîðìå êîëåáëåòñÿ îò 3 äî 6, ñîñòàâëÿÿ, â ñðåäíåì ïî 16 íàáëþäåíèÿì, 4,63 ÿéöà. Òîëüêî íà Ãíåçäî ÷èíêîâîãî áàëîáàíà íà ïîëêå ìåëîâîãî îá- Óñòþðòå â 2006 ã. îáíàðóæåíà êëàäêà áà- ðûâà â ïîñòðîéêå êóðãàííèêà (Buteo rufinus). Ïëàòî ëîáàíà èç 7 ÿèö. Ðàçìåð ÿèö ñðàâíèòåëüíî Óñòþðò. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. íåáîëüøîé: 53,4–58,0×39,2–43,1, â ñðåä- Nest of the Chink Saker Falcon on the ledge of chalky íåì 54,98×42,08 ìì (n=21). cliff in a Long-Legged Buzzard’s (Buteo rufinus) nest. Usturt Plateau. Photos by I. Karyakin. Âçðîñëûå ÷èíêîâûå áàëîáàíû îñ¸äëû, õîòÿ è ìîãóò âî âíåãíåçäîâîé ïåðèîä ñî-

Ãíåçäîâàíèå ÷èíêîâîãî áàëîáàíà íà ãëèíÿíûõ îáðûâàõ â íèøàõ è íà ïîëêàõ áåç ïîñòðîåê íîñèò íîðìàëüíîå ÿâëåíèå. Ïëàòî Óñòþðò, 2004 ã. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. It is common that Chink Sakers do not use any nest construction for nesting in niches and ledges on clay cliff- faces. Usturt Plateau, 2004. Photos by I. Karyakin. 184 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Êëàäêè ÷èíêîâîãî áà- áàëîáàíîâ, íàñåëÿþùèõ ãîðû Ñðåäíåé ëîáàíà èç 5, 6 è 7 ÿèö. Àçèè, ïðåäïîëîæèë èõ ïðèíàäëåæíîñòü Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. ê ðàñå Falco cherrug saseroides. Îäíàêî â Clutches of the Chink 1995 ã., çà ãîä äî ñâîåé ñìåðòè, àíàëèçèðóÿ Saker Falcon with 5, 6 and 7 eggs. êîëëåêöèþ Çîîëîãè÷åñêîãî ìóçåÿ Èíñòèòóòà Photos by I. Karyakin. Çîîëîãèè, Ì.Í. Êîðåëîâ ïðèø¸ë ê âûâîäó î ïîäâèäîâîé ñàìîñòîÿòåëüíîñòè áàëîáàíîâ, îáèòàþùèõ ìåæäó Êàñïèéñêèì è Àðàëüñêèì ìîðÿìè è ïåðåîïðåäåëèë èõ êàê Falco cher- rug aralocaspius, ïåðâîíà÷àëüíî îïèñàí- íûõ Î. Êëÿéíøìèäòîì (Kleinschmidt. Falco XXXV, 1939). Ê ñîæàëåíèþ, îïóáëèêîâàòü ñâîè äîâîäû îí òàê è íå óñïåë. Íî ñàì Î. Êëÿéíøìèäò ñâ¸ë àðàëîêàñïèéñêèé ïîä- âèä â êà÷åñòâå ñèíîíèìà ñ îáûêíîâåííûì áàëîáàíîì, îáèòàþùèì ê âîñòîêó îò Âîëãè, ò.å., ñ ïîäâèäîì áåç ðàçâèòîãî ïîïåðå÷íî- ãî ðèñóíêà íà âåðõíåé ÷àñòè òåëà. Ýòî íå- äîðàçóìåíèå íå áûëî ó÷òåíî è óñòþðòñêèé áàëîáàí êàê F. ch. aralocaspius, íà îñíîâà- íèè ïåðåîïðåäåëåíèÿ Ì.Í. Êîðåëîâà, áûë âêëþ÷¸í â ñâîäêó ïî ïòèöàì Êàçàõñòàíà Ý.È. Ãàâðèëîâûì (1999) â êà÷åñòâå îäíîãî èç ïîäâèäîâ, îáèòàþùèõ â ñòðàíå. Òàêèì îáðàçîì, íàó÷íîå íàçâàíèå áàëîáàíà, âû- ïàâøåå èç íàó÷íîé ëèòåðàòóðû íà 60 ëåò, áûëî ðåàíèìèðîâàíî â 1999 ã. è ïðîäóáëè- ðîâàíî â ñëåäóþùåì, óæå àíãëîÿçû÷íîì èçäàíèè Ý.È. è À.Ý. Ãàâðèëîâûõ (Gavrilov, Gavrilov, 2005). Òàê êàê ýòî íàçâàíèå óêî- ðåíèëîñü çà óñòþðòñêèì áàëîáàíîì è õî- ðîøî õàðàêòåðèçóåò åãî ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå, áûëî íåëîãè÷íî îò íåãî îòêàçûâàòüñÿ, îïè- ñûâàÿ ýòîò ïîäâèä, ïîýòîìó îíî ñîõðàíåíî â ïóáëèêàöèè Ð.Ã. Ïôåôôåðà (2009), à âû- áîð åãî ðàçúÿñí¸í â ïîñëåäîâàâøåé ñðàçó âåðøàòü êî÷¸âêè â ïðåäåëàõ àðåàëà ïîä- ïóáëèêàöèè È.Â. Êàðÿêèíà è Ð.Ã. Ïôåôôå- âèäà. Ìîëîäûå ñîêîëû ñîâåðøàþò êî÷¸â- ðà (2009). êè, êîòîðûå, âèäèìî, íå íîñÿò õàðàêòåðà Äàâàÿ îïèñûâàåìîìó ïîäâèäó íàó÷íîå óñòîé÷èâûõ ìèãðàöèé.  ÷àñòíîñòè, íà íàèìåíîâàíèå Falco cherrug aralocaspius, îñíîâàíèè óâåëè÷åíèÿ ÷èñëåííîñòè ñî- ìû äîñòèãàåì ñðàçó äâóõ öåëåé – êîððåê- êîëîâ â èþíå-àâãóñòå â Ïðèàðàëüå, ìîæíî òíî óêàçûâàåì ðàéîí îáèòàíèÿ ïîäâèäà ïðåäïîëîæèòü, ÷òî â õîäå ïîñëåãíåçäî- è óñòðàíÿåì íåäîðàçóìåíèå, âîçíèêøåå âîãî ðàçë¸òà ìíîãèå ìîëîäûå áàëîáàíû èç-çà íåäîñòàòî÷íîñòè ñâåäåíèé â 1939 ã., ïåðåìåùàþòñÿ íà ñåâåð è ëèøü ñ ìèãðà- êîãäà Î. Êëÿéíøìèäò îïèñàë ñâîé ïîäâèä öèåé ñåâåðíûõ ïòèö è/èëè óñòàíîâëåíèåì ïî åäèíñòâåííîìó ýêçåìïëÿðó, äîáûòîìó ñíåæíîãî ïîêðîâà íà÷èíàþò êî÷¸âêè â çèìîé â Ëåíêîðàíè. þæíîì íàïðàâëåíèè. Ðóññêîå íàçâàíèå ïîäâèäà «÷èíêîâûé áà- ëîáàí» íå òîëüêî îòðàæàåò õàðàêòåðíåé- Ýòèìîëîãèÿ øóþ áèîëîãè÷åñêóþ îñîáåííîñòü îïèñû-  ïîñëåäíåé ñâîäêå ïî ïòèöàì Ñîâåò- âàåìîãî ñîêîëà, ïîäàâëÿþùåå áîëüøèíñòâî ñêîãî Ñîþçà Ã.Ï. Äåìåíòüåâ (1951), õà- ãí¸çä êîòîðîãî áûëî îáíàðóæåíî â íèøàõ ðàêòåðèçóÿ ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå òóðêåñòàí- ÷èíêîâ. Îíî äà¸ò è ãåîãðàôè÷åñêóþ îðè- ñêîãî áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug coatsi), åíòèðîâêó, ïîñêîëüêó ðàéîíû, ãäå îïèñàí- î÷åíü àêêóðàòíî íàïèñàë, ÷òî «áûòü ìî- íûå âûøå ëàíäøàôòíûå ñòðóêòóðû íîñÿò æåò, ñþäà æå îòíîñÿòñÿ áàëîáàíû ñ Óñòü- íàèìåíîâàíèå «÷èíêè», äîñòàòî÷íî ÷¸òêî Óðòà è Á. Áàëõàíîâ». Ì.Í. Êîðåëîâ (1962) ëîêàëèçîâàíû (ïëàòî Óñòþðò, Ìàíãûøëàê â ñâîäêå ïî Êàçàõñòàíó, âèäÿ î÷åâèäíîñòü è ïðèëåãàþùèå ðàéîíû) è âñå íàõîäÿòñÿ â ðàçëè÷èé ïòèö ñ Óñòþðòà è òóðêåñòàíñêèõ ïðåäåëàõ àðåàëà âûäåëåííîãî ïîäâèäà. Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 185

Áëàãîäàðíîñòè ñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2004. Àâòîðû âûðàæàþò îãðîìíóþ áëàãîäàð- Àëìàòû, 2005. Ñ. 45–49. íîñòü À.Â. Êîâàëåíêî, ïðåäîñòàâèâøåìó Êîâàëåíêî À.Â. Îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèå èññëåäî- âîçìîæíîñòü èñïîëüçîâàòü åãî ëè÷íûé ôî- âàíèÿ â äîëèíå íèæíåé Ñûðäàðüè è íåêîòîðûõ ïðèëåãàþùèõ òåððèòîðèÿõ â 2005 ã. – Êàçàõ- òîàðõèâ òóøåê ÷èíêîâûõ áàëîáàíîâ, õðàíÿ- ñòàíñêèé îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèé áþëëåòåíü 2005. ùèõñÿ â ìóçåéíûõ êîëëåêöèÿõ Ðîññèè è Êà- Àëìàòû, 2006. Ñ. 59–69. çàõñòàíà, à òàêæå âñåì ó÷àñòíèêàì ïîëåâûõ Êîðåëîâ Ì.Í. Îòðÿä Õèùíûå ïòèöû. – Ïòèöû èññëåäîâàíèé â Àðàëî-Êàñïèéñêîì ðåãèîíå, Êàçàõñòàíà. Ò. 2. Àëìà-Àòà, 1962. Ñ. 488–707. îñîáåííî À.Â. Êîâàëåíêî, À.Ñ. Ïàæåíêîâó, Ìèòðîïîëüñêèé Î.Â., Ôîòòåëåð Ý.Ð., Òðåòüÿ- À.Ñ. Ëåâèíó, À.Â. Ìîøêèíó, Ë.Ì. Íîâèêî- êîâ Ý.Ð. Ïòèöû Óçáåêèñòàíà. Îòðÿä Ñîêîëîî- âîé, Ò.Î. Áàðàáàøèíó, À.Ð. Ñåì¸íîâó. áðàçíûå. Òàøêåíò, 1987. Ñ. 123–246. Ïàæåíêîâ À.Ñ., Êîðæåâ Ä.À. Õèùíûå ïòèöû Ëèòåðàòóðà è ñîâû ïëàòî Øàãûðàé, Êàçàõñòàí. – Ïåðíàòûå Àòàäæàíîâ Ì.À. Ñîâðåìåííûé ñòàòóñ ñîêîëà- õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2006. ¹7. Ñ. 56–61. áàëîáàíà â Óçáåêèñòàíå è ïðîáëåìà åãî ñî- Ïôåôôåð Ð.Ã. Ê ýêîëîãèè áàëîáàíà íà þãî- õðàíåíèÿ. Àâòîðåôåðàò íà ñîèñêàíèå ñòåïåíè âîñòîêå Êàçàõñòàíà. – Ðåäêèå æèâîòíûå Êàçàõ- êàíäèäàòà áèîëîãè÷åñêèõ íàóê. Àêàäåìèÿ íàóê ñòàíà. Àëìà-Àòà, 1986. Ñ. 157–160. Ðåñïóáëèêè Óçáåêèñòàí, Èíñòèòóò çîîëîãèè. Ïôåôôåð Ð. Ê âîïðîñó î ãåîãðàôè÷åñêîé Òàøêåíò, 2002. 17 ñ. èçìåí÷èâîñòè áàëîáàíîâ. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè Áðàãèí Å.À., Áðàãèí À.Å. Ìíîãîëåòíèé ìî- è èõ îõðàíà. 2009. ¹16. Ñ. 68–95. íèòîðèíã ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà â Íàóðçóìñêîì Øóá¸íêèí Â.Ï., Àíòèïîâ Ñ.Ì. Ýêîëîãèÿ è çàïîâåäíèêå è íà ñîïðåäåëüíûõ òåððèòîðèÿõ. îõðàíà õèùíûõ ïòèö ïóñòûíü Þæíîãî Óñòþð- – Ýêîëîãèÿ, ýâîëþöèÿ è ñèñòåìàòèêà æèâîòíûõ: òà è Ñàðûêàìûøñêîé âïàäèíû. – Îõðàíà ïðè- Ì-ëû Âñåðîñ. íàó÷íî-ïðàêòè÷. êîíô. ñ ìåæäó- ðîäû Òóðêìåíèñòàíà. Âûï. 7. Àøõàáàä, 1990. íàðîäíûì ó÷àñòèåì. Ðÿçàíü, 2009. Ñ. 189–190. Ñ. 115–125. Baumgart W. Der Sakerfalke. Second edition. Áóêðååâ Ñ.À. Îðíèòîëîãèÿ è çàïîâåäíîå Wittenberg Lutherstadt, 1991. 159 p. äåëî â Òóðêìåíèñòàíå. Ì., 1997. 156 ñ. Forsman D. The Raptors of Europe and the Ãàâðèëîâ Ý.È. Ôàóíà è ðàñïðîñòðàíåíèå Middle East. A Handbook of field Identification. ïòèö Êàçàõñòàíà. Àëìàòû, 1999. 198 ñ. London, 2007. 589 p. Ñ. Ãîìáîáààòàð, Ä. Ñóìúÿà, Ïîòàïîâ Å., Á. Ìóíõ- Gavrilov E., Gavrilov A. The Birds of Kaza- çàÿà, Á. Îäõóó. Áèîëîãèÿ ðàçìíîæåíèÿ ñîêîëà khstan (abridged edition). Tethis ornithological áàëîáàíà â Ìîíãîëèè – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ research. Vol. II. Almaty, 2005. 228 p. îõðàíà. 2007. ¹9. Ñ. 17–26. Karyakin I., Levin A., Novikova L., Pazhenkov Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Áàëîáàí â Âîëãî-Óðàëüñêîì ðå- A. Saker in the North-Western Kazakhstan: re- ãèîíå è íà ïðèëåãàþùèõ òåððèòîðèÿõ. – Ñòåï- sults of the 2003–2004 surveys. – Falco. 2004. íîé áþëëåòåíü. 2004à. ¹15. Ñ. 32–39. ¹24. P. 11–13. Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Áàëîáàí íà ïëàòî Óñòþðò: êðàò- Kleinschmidt O. Sichere Namen für die bei- êèå ðåçóëüòàòû ýêñïåäèöèè 2003 ã. – Ñòåïíîé den westlichen Würgfalkenrassen. – Falco. 1939. áþëëåòåíü. 2004á. ¹15. Ñ. 40–41. XXXV. Nr. 2. P. 27–29. Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Áàëîáàí â Ðîññèè. – Ïåðíàòûå Kreuzberg-Mukhina E., Abdulnazarov B., õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2008. ¹12. Ñ. 28–47. Lanovenko E., Atajanov M. Large falcons and Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Áàðàáàøèí Ò.Î., Ìîøêèí À.Â. problems of their protection in Uzbekistan. – Áàëîáàí â Ïðèàðàëüå. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è Saker Falcon in Mongolia: research and con- èõ îõðàíà. 2005à. ¹4. Ñ. 44–49. servation (Proceedings of II International Con- Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Ëåâèí À.Ñ., Íîâèêîâà Ë.Ì., ference on Saker Falcon and Houbara Bustard, Ïàæåíêîâ À.Ñ. Áàëîáàí â Çàïàäíîì Êàçàõñòà- Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, 1–4 July 2000) / E. Po- íå: ðåçóëüòàòû èññëåäîâàíèé 2003–2004 ãã. – tapov, S. Banzragch, N. Fox & N. Barton, eds. Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2005á. ¹2. Ulaanbaatar, 2001. P. 101–109. Ñ. 42–55. Nittinger F., Gamauf A., Pinsker W., Wink M., Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã. Ðåçóëüòàòû Haring E. Phylogeography and population struc- ìîíèòîðèíãà ïîïóëÿöèé áàëîáàíà â Àëòàå- ture of the saker falcon (Falco cherrug) and the Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå â 2008 ã., Ðîññèÿ. – Ïåðíàòûå influence of hybridization: mitochondrial and õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2008. ¹14. Ñ. 63–84. microsatellite data. – Molecular Ecology. 2007. Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Ïôåôôåð Ð. Ê âîïðîñó î ïîä- ¹16. P. 1497–1517. âèäîâîé ïðèíàäëåæíîñòè è íàó÷íîì íàçâàíèè Potapov E., D. Sumya, S. Gombobaatar, Fox N.C. áàëîáàíîâ, íàñåëÿþùèõ ñåâåðî-çàïàä Ñðåäíåé Mongolian Altai Survey 2001 – Falco. 2002. ¹19. Àçèè. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà. 2009. P. 9–10. ¹17. Ñ. 89–92. Vaurie C. Systematic Notes on Palearctic Birds. Êîáëèê Å.À., Ðåäüêèí ß.À., Àðõèïîâ Â.Þ. No. 45. Falconidae: The Genus Falco (Part 2). – Ñïèñîê ïòèö Ðîññèéñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè. Ì., 2006. Am. Mus. Novitates. 1961. 2038. P. 1–24. 256 ñ. Vaurie C. The Birds of the Palearctic Fauna. Êîâàëåíêî À.Â. Îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêèå íàáëþäå- Non-Passeriformes. H & F Witherby, London, íèÿ â ðàéîíå êîñìîäðîìà Áàéêîíóð. – Êàçàõ- 1965. 763 p. 186 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

MonitoringResultsofRaptorBreedingGroupsintheFoothills andLowMountainsofAltaiin2010,AltaiKray,Russia РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ МОНИТОРИНГА ГНЕЗДОВЫХ ГРУППИРОВОК КРУПНЫХ ПЕРНАТЫХ ХИЩНИКОВ В ПРЕДГОРЬЯХ И НИЗКОГОРЬЯХ АЛТАЯ В 2010 ГОДУ, АЛТАЙСКИЙ КРАЙ, РОССИЯ VazhovS.V.,BachtinR.F.,MakarovA.V.(AltaiStateUniversity,Barnaul,Russia) Важов С.В., Бахтин Р.Ф., Макаров А.В. (Алтайский государственный университет, Барнаул, Россия)

Êîíòàêò: Àáñòðàêò Ñåðãåé Âàæîâ Ïðèâîäÿòñÿ ðåçóëüòàòû èññëåäîâàíèé àâòîðîâ â 2010 ã. Ïðîâåðåíî 7 ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ è îáíàðóæåíî 3 íîâûõ 659300, Ðîññèÿ, ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà ñòåïíûõ îðëîâ (Aquila nipalensis), óñïåøíûìè îêàçàëèñü ëèøü äâà èç íèõ. Ïðîâåðåíî 26 Àëòàéñêèé êðàé, ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ è âûÿâëåíî 13 íîâûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêîâ (Aquila heliaca). Çàíÿòûå ãí¸çäà íàáëþ- ã. Áèéñê, à/ÿ 25 äàëèñü íà 83%, à óñïåøíîå ðàçìíîæåíèå çàðåãèñòðèðîâàíî íà 82% ó÷àñòêîâ. Ïðîâåðåíî 11 ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ òåë.: +7 963 534 81 07 è îáíàðóæåíî äâà íîâûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà áåðêóòîâ (Aquila chrysaetos), çàíÿòûå ãí¸çäà íàáëþäàëèñü íà 64% [email protected] ó÷àñòêîâ, à óñïåøíîå ðàçìíîæåíèå – âî âñåõ çàíÿòûõ ãí¸çäàõ. Ïðîâåðåíî 4 ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ è âûÿâëåíî äâà íîâûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà áàëîáàíîâ (Falco cherrug), çàíÿòûå ãí¸çäà íàáëþäàëèñü íà 75% ó÷àñòêîâ. Ïðîâåðåíî Ðîìàí Áàõòèí 3 ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ è îáíàðóæåí îäèí íîâûé ãíåçäîâîé ó÷àñòîê ñàïñàíà (Falco peregrinus). Ïðîâåðåíî 5 ðàíåå [email protected] èçâåñòíûõ è âûÿâëåí îäèí íîâûé ãíåçäîâîé ó÷àñòîê ôèëèíà (Bubo bubo), çàíÿòûå ãí¸çäà íàáëþäàëèñü òîëüêî íà 33% ó÷àñòêîâ. Ìîíèòîðèíã ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê êðóïíûõ õèùíûõ ïòèö â ïðåäãîðüÿõ è íèçêîãîðüÿõ Àë- òàÿ ïîêàçàë, ÷òî ïëîõèå ïîãîäíûå è ðàçëè÷íûå â ðàçíûõ ìåñòàõ êîðìîâûå óñëîâèÿ â ýòîì ñåçîíå ïî-ðàçíîìó Àëåêñàíäð Ìàêàðîâ ñêàçàëèñü íà ïîïóëÿöèÿõ ðàçíûõ âèäîâ. t_makarova1959@ Êëþ÷åâûå ñëîâà: ïðåäãîðüÿ è íèçêîãîðüÿ Àëòàÿ, êðóïíûå ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè, õèùíûå ïòèöû, ãíåçäîâûå ãðóï- mail.ru ïèðîâêè.

Abstract Contact: The authors are reporting the results of their research made in 2010. 7 previously known breeding territories of Sergey Vazhov Steppe Eagles (Aquila nipalensis) were checked, 3 new ones were found, only two of them were proved to be suc- P.O. Box 25 cessful. 26 previously known breeding territories of Imperial Eagles (Aquila heliaca) and 13 new ones were found. Biysk, Altai Kray, Occupied nests were observed in 83% and successful breeding was recorded in 82% of the territories. 11 previ- Russia, 659300 ously known breeding territories of Golden Eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) were checked, 2 new ones were found; tel.: +7 963 534 81 07 64% were proved to be occupied, successful breeding was recorded in all the surveyed nests. 4 previously known [email protected] breeding territories of Saker Falcons (Falco cherrug) were checked, 2 new ones were found, and occupied nests were recorded at 75% of territories. 3 previously known breeding territories of Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) Roman Bachtin were checked, the new one was found, 5 previously known breeding territories of Eagle Owls (Bubo bubo) were [email protected] checked, the new one was found, occupancy of nests at the surveyed territories was 33% only. Monitoring of rap- tor breeding groups in the foothills and low mountains of Altai has shown that bad weather and different in various Alexander Makarov places feeding conditions had a different impact on the population of different species this season. t_makarova1959@ Keywords: foothills and low mountains of Altai, raptors, birds of prey, breeding groups. mail.ru

Ââåäåíèå The expeditionary group of the Altai State Òåððèòîðèÿ Àëòàéñêîãî êðàÿ âûäåëÿåòñÿ University visited the foothills and low íà ôîíå áîëüøèíñòâà ñîñåäíèõ ñóáúåêòîâ mountains of the Altai to monitor the groups Ðîññèéñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè (çà èñêëþ÷åíè- of large raptors breeding from April, 3rd to åì Ðåñïóáëèêè Àëòàé) êàê î÷àã ðàçíîî- July, 17th 2010.The area under research is áðàçèÿ ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ è íàñòîÿùèé located within 12 administrative regions of ðåôóãèóì, ãäå ñîõðàíÿþòñÿ èõ êðóïíûå the Altai Kray. æèçíåñïîñîáíûå ãðóïïèðîâêè. Íå ñìî- òðÿ íà òî, ÷òî ïðåäãîðíàÿ ðàâíèíà áîëü- Steppe Eagle (Aquila nipalensis) øåé ÷àñòüþ ðàñïàõàíà, è ëèøü ìåñòàìè 7 previously known breeding territo- ñîõðàíèëèñü ëàíäøàôòû ïåòðîôèòíûõ ries of Steppe Eagles were checked and 3 êóñòàðíèêîâûõ ñòåïåé ìåëêîñîïî÷íèêà, new ones were found. An adult bird was êîòîðûå èñïîëüçóþòñÿ â êà÷åñòâå ïàñò- observed at one of the previously known áèù, ñòåïíûå ïðåäãîðüÿ Àëòàÿ ÿâëÿþòñÿ territories (the nest was not checked). The îäíèì èç êðóïíåéøèõ â ñòðàíå ñòåïíûõ known nests were checked and a new one ðåôóãèóìîâ (Ñìåëÿíñêèé, 2005). Ñåâåðî- was found at the rest of the territories. De- àëòàéñêèå ïðåäãîðüÿ, ãäå ñðåäè ïîäãîðíûõ spite the high percentage of territories with îñòåïí¸ííûõ ðàâíèí èìåþòñÿ ïðèðå÷íûå occupied nests: 83.3% (n=6), successful è âîäîðàçäåëüíûå ìàññèâû ìåëêîñîïî÷- breeding was recorded only in two of them íèêà, à òàêæå ãîðíîëåñíîé ïîÿñ íèçêî- (40.0% of the occupied nests). there were Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 187

ãîðèé Ñåâåðî-Çàïàäíîãî Àëòàÿ, íàñåëåíû çíà÷èòåëüíûìè ïîïóëÿöèÿìè ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ, â òîì ÷èñëå ðåäêèõ è óãðîæàå- ìûõ âèäîâ, òàêèõ êàê ñòåïíîé îð¸ë (Aquila nipalensis), áåðêóò (Aquila chrysaetos), ôè- ëèí (Bubo bubo), ìîãèëüíèê (Aquila heliaca) ñàïñàí (Falco peregrinus) è áàëîáàí (Falco cherrug). Îäíàêî ñîâðåìåííîå ñîñòîÿíèå õèùíûõ ïòèö â êðàå äàëåêî íå òàê áëàãîïîëó÷íî, êàê ýòî ìîæåò ïîêàçàòüñÿ. Âûæèâàíèå ìíîãèõ ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê â íàñòîÿ- ùåå âðåìÿ ïîñòàâëåíî ïîä âîïðîñ. Ìíîãî- ÷èñëåííûå óãðîçû ïîðîæäàþòñÿ ñåëüñêî- õîçÿéñòâåííûì èñïîëüçîâàíèåì ñòåïíûõ òåððèòîðèé, ëåñîïîëüçîâàíèåì, èíôðà- Ñòåïíîé îð¸ë (Aquila nipalensis) íà îïîðå ïòèöåî- ñòðóêòóðîé ýíåðãåòè÷åñêîãî êîìïëåêñà, ïàñíîé ËÝÏ. Áàññåéí ð. Àíóé. 12.04.2010. áðàêîíüåðñòâîì è èíîé äåÿòåëüíîñòüþ Ôîòî Ð. Áàõòèíà. ÷åëîâåêà, ÷òî îáóñëîâëåíî îòñóòñòâèåì The Steppe Eagle (Aquila nipalensis) on pole of äåéñòâåííîé ïðàâîâîé çàùèòû ïåðíàòûõ hazardous power line. Anuy river basin. 12/04/2010. Photo by R. Bachtin. õèùíèêîâ íà òåððèòîðèè êðàÿ. Áîëüøèí- ñòâî èìåþùèõñÿ ÎÎÏÒ ëèáî íå âêëþ÷àþò âàæíûõ äëÿ ïòèö áèîòîïîâ, ëèáî èìåþò two chicks in the nest on one of surveyed ðåæèì, äàæå ôîðìàëüíî íå ñïîñîáíûé sites on June, 19th. There were two fledg- îáåñïå÷èâàòü çàùèòó ýòèõ âèäîâ (Ñìåëÿí- lings in another nest and a lost egg surveyed ñêèé, 2005). on July, 16th. The clutch of one egg was lost Èç ñêàçàííîãî âûòåêàåò íåîáõîäèìîñòü in one checked nest for an unknown reason, ïîñòîÿííîãî ìîíèòîðèíãà ïîêà åù¸ ñî- and there were two died broods of one and õðàíèâøèõñÿ ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê ðåä- three chicks in others, the cause of deaths êèõ è óãðîæàåìûõ âèäîâ õèùíûõ ïòèö â was unknown. Occupancy of one territory ïðåäãîðüÿõ è íèçêîãîðüÿõ Àëòàÿ. was not confirmed. Three previously unknown breeding ter- Ìåòîäèêà ritories of Steppe Eagles have been found Ñ 3 àïðåëÿ ïî 17 èþëÿ 2010 ã. ýêñïåäèöè- this year: the territorial birds were encoun- îííîé ãðóïïîé Àëòàéñêîãî ãîñóíèâåðñèòå- tered at the right bank of the Charysh river, òà ïîñåùàëèñü ñåâåðíûå ïðåäãîðüÿ Àëòàÿ, between the Charysh and Loktevka riv- ïðåäãîðíàÿ àêêóìóëÿòèâíàÿ ðàâíèíà, ïðè- ers and in the upper reaches of the Aley ìûêàþùàÿ ñ ñåâåðà ê Àëòàéñêèì ãîðàì, è river. We failed to be found nests. Nowa- Ïðåäãîðüÿ Àëòàÿ. íèçêîãîðüÿ Ñåâåðî-Çàïàäíîãî Àëòàÿ ñ öå- days in the foothills of the Altai Mountains 11.04.2010. ëüþ ìîíèòîðèíãà ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. (within the Altai Kray) there are 98 known êðóïíûõ ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ. Îñìîòðåí- breeding territories of the Steppe Eagle. It Foothills of the Altai mountains. íàÿ òåððèòîðèÿ íàõîäèòñÿ â ïðåäåëàõ 12 is 35.0–36.3% of the population number, 11/04/2010. àäìèíèñòðàòèâíûõ ðàéîíîâ Àëòàéñêîãî that is estimated at 270–280 breeding pairs Photo by S. Vazhov. êðàÿ: Ñîâåòñêîãî, Àëòàéñêîãî, Ñìîëåíñêî- (Karyakin et al., 2005). The average brood size of Steppe Eagles in 2010 was 2.0±0.41 nestlings (n=4; range 1–3 nestlings).

Imperial Eagle (Aquila heliaca) 26 previously known breeding areas of the Imperial Eagle were checked, 13 new ones were found. Nests were not found in 5 territories, but the adults were observed (the territories were residential). The nests were not checked in three territories for the reason for birds being absent there. Also empty nests were recorded in five territo- ries. Living nests were noted in 14 territo- ries, but they were not checked. Successful breeding was recorded in 9 of 11 monitored 188 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

ãî, Ïåòðîïàâëîâñêîãî, Ñîëîíåøåíñêîãî, territories (81.8%). All successful nests con- Óñòü-Êàëìàíñêîãî, ×àðûøñêîãî, Øèïóíîâ- tained broods: 6 nests with two chicks and ñêîãî, Êðàñíîù¸êîâñêîãî, Êóðüèíñêîãî, 3 nests with three chicks, on the average Çìåèíîãîðñêîãî è Òðåòüÿêîâñêîãî. Ýêñ- (n=9) 2.33±0.17 chicks. The breeding failed ïåäèöèîííàÿ ãðóïïà ïåðåäâèãàëàñü íà in two nests (18.2%, n=11). A clutch of two àâòîìîáèëå ÂÀÇ-21213 èëè ÂÀÇ-21061. eggs died in one of them due to disturbance Ïðè ýòîì ïîñåùàëèñü ðàíåå âûÿâëåííûå by herders. It should be mentioned that the ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè, à òàêæå îñìàòðèâàëèñü Golden Eagle successfully bred in that nest òåððèòîðèè, ãäå âåðîÿòíî ãíåçäîâàíèå in 2009 (Karyakin et al., 2009b). The stage êðóïíûõ õèùíèêîâ, íî â ïðåæíèå ãîäû èõ when the brood had died in the second nest ãí¸çä íå îáíàðóæåíî. Ãíåçäîïðèãîäíûå was unknown. áèîòîïû îñìàòðèâàëèñü â îïòèêó íà îñòà- At the one of surveyed territories in the íîâêàõ ÷åðåç êàæäûå 200–400 ì ñ öåëüþ interfluve of the Peschanaya and Anuy rivers îáíàðóæåíèÿ ãí¸çä èëè ïòèö, ñèäÿùèõ íà the Imperial Eagle’s nest with a clutch was ïðèñàäàõ (Êàðÿêèí, 2004). Íàáëþäåíèå destroyed by the wind last year (Karyakin et çà íåáîëüøèìè êîòëîâèíàìè è äîëèíàìè al., 2009b). Now eagles have constructed îñóùåñòâëÿëîñü ñ äîìèíèðóþùèõ âîçâû- the new nest nearby the ruined one. The øåííîñòåé â òå÷åíèå 30 ìèí.–1,5 ÷àñîâ. nest was inhabited, but not checked. Ïðè îñìîòðå ìåñòíîñòè èñïîëüçîâàëèñü There are 11 nests of the Imperial Eagle áèíîêëè 8×25, 8×45 è 12×45. Âñå ìåñòà in 10 of 13 breeding territories surveyed in îáíàðóæåíèÿ ïòèö è èõ ãí¸çä ôèêñèðîâà- 2010: 10 were on birches (Betula sp.), one – ëèñü ñ ïîìîùüþ ñïóòíèêîâûõ íàâèãàòîðîâ on the willow (Salix sp.). The latter fact is of Garmin Etrex è âíîñèëèñü â áàçó äàííûõ particular interest. This is the first nest of the ArcView GIS 3.2a. Îáùàÿ ïðîòÿæ¸ííîñòü Imperial Eagle in Altai found on a willow. ýêñïåäèöèîííûõ ìàðøðóòîâ (âêëþ÷àÿ There were 66 breeding territories of the òðàíçèòíûå) ñîñòàâèëà îêîëî 7600 êì. Imperial Eagle known in 2009 in the foothills and low mountains of the Altai (within the Ðåçóëüòàòû Altai region). Currently 79 territories have Ñòåïíîé îð¸ë (Aquila nipalensis) been already known. It is 25.6–27.6% of the Ïðîâåðåíî 7 ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ ãíåçäî- population number, estimated at 286–308 âûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ñòåïíûõ îðëîâ è îáíàðóæå- breeding pairs (Karyakin et al., 2005). íî òðè íîâûõ. Íà îäíîì èç ðàíåå èçâåñò- Probably, the high breeding success of íûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ãíåçäî íå ïðîâåðÿëîñü, íî the Imperial Eagle with a high percentage Ðèñ. 1. Îáñëåäîâàí- ïîäòâåðæäåíî ïðåáûâàíèå ïàðû âçðîñëûõ of occupied nests (83.3%, n=30) as well íûå ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè ïòèö (ó÷àñòîê æèëîé), íà îñòàëüíûõ ïðî- as a large proportion of broods with three ñòåïíîãî îðëà (Aquila âåðåíû èçâåñòíûå ãí¸çäà è íàéäåíî íîâîå. chicks (44.4%, n=9) is connected with a nipalensis). Íåñìîòðÿ íà âûñîêèé ïðîöåíò ó÷àñòêîâ ñ high population rate of Red-Cheeked Sou- Fig. 1. Surveyed çàíÿòûìè ãíåçäàìè: 83% (n=6) îò èõ ÷èñ- slik (Spermophilus erythrogenys) this year. breeding territories of the Steppe Eagle ëà ñ ïðîâåðåííûìè ãíåçäàìè, óñïåøíîå There were no nests with one chick found. (Aquila nipalensis). ðàçìíîæåíèå îòìå÷åíî òîëüêî íà äâóõ èç Comparing the data it should be noted that throughout the Altai mountains broods of three chicks were noted for 4.49% of pairs of Imperial Eagles, and a chick for 44.94%; the average brood size was 1.6±0,58 (n=89) (Karyakin et al., 2009b).

Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) 11 previously known breeding territories of the Golden Eagle were checked and two new ones were found. Occupied nests were surveyed in 7 territories (63.64%, n=11). Empty nests were noted in two territories. One of known nests on a larch (Larix sibiri- ca) located in the middle reach of the Kuy- acha river was occupied by the Common Buzzard (Buteo buteo). Earlier such cases have not been noted in Altai. The Imperial Eagle’s nest on a birch tree in the middle reach of the Anuy river, which the Golden Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 189

Eagle successfully had bred in (Karyakin et al., 2009b; Karyakin et al., 2010), was re- peatedly occupied by the Imperial Eagle this year, and Golden Eagles have not been recorded there. Successful breeding was recorded in all 7 territories. All nests contained broods: 5 nests with one chick and two ones with two chicks, the average brood size (n=7) was 1.29±0.18 chick. This year two breeding territories of Golden Eagles unknown earlier have been found. No nests were found there. Currently in the foothills and low mountains of the Altai (within the Altai region) 43 breeding territories of Golden Eagle are known. It is 20.3–22.9% of the population number, esti- mated at 188–212 breeding pairs (Karyakin et al., 2010).

Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) 4 breeding territories of Saker Falcons previously known were checked and two new ones found. Nests Occupied by Saker Falcons were observed in three territories (75.0%, n=4). Successful breeding was not- ed in the nest on the foothills of the Sem- inskiy mountain ridge, on June, 22nd 2010; there was the fledgling of very dark morph (type altaicus, “Altai Falcon”, Pfeffer, 2009). It should be said that both adult birds of the pair as well as the fledgling were of plum- age typical for the Altai-Sayan region (inter- mediate between pale and dark morphs) in Ãí¸çäà îäíîé ïàðû íèõ (40% îò ÷èñëà çàíÿòûõ ãí¸çä ñ ïðî- 2008 (Karyakin, 2008, Karyakin, Nikolenko, ñòåïíûõ îðëîâ (ââåð- ñëåæåííîé ñóäüáîé).  ãíåçäå íà îäíîì 2008). õó): ñòàðîå íà ñóõîì In the one of breeding territories found êóñòå (ñëåâà) è æèëîå èç íèõ, â îêðåñòíîñòÿõ ñ. Êóðüÿ (ìåæäó- íà çåìëå (ñïðàâà), ðå÷üå ×àðûøà è Ëîêòåâêè), 19 èþíÿ áûëî this year, the male of the pair had extremely æèëîå ãíåçäî äðóãîé äâà îïåðÿþùèõñÿ ïòåíöà. Íà äðóãîì, áëèç light plumage, almost white; the proportion ïàðû ñòåïíûõ îðëîâ ñ. Îãíè (ïðåäãîðüÿ Áàùåëàêñêîãî õðåáòà), of such birds in the population of Sakers in íà ñêàëüíîì âûõîäå the Altai-Sayan region is only 2% (Karyakin, (âíèçó). Ïðåäãîðüÿ 16 èþëÿ áûëè äâà îïåð¸ííûõ ïòåíöà è Áàùåëàêñêîãî õðåáòà, ÿéöî-áîëòóí.  îäíîì ãíåçäå (ó ñ. Íîâî- 2008, Karyakin, Nikolenko, 2008), the fe- 11.06.2010 (ââåðõó) êàëìàíêà) ïî íåèçâåñòíîé ïðè÷èíå ïîãèá- male was normally colored, intermediate è 16.07.2010 (âíèçó). ëà êëàäêà èç îäíîãî ÿéöà, íà äâóõ äðóãèõ between pale and dark morphs. Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. (îáà áëèç ñ. Îãíè) – âûâîäêè èç îäíîãî è Nests of a pair of the òðåõ ïòåíöîâ, ïðè÷èíû ãèáåëè òàêæå íå Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) Steppe Eagle (upper): old nest on the dried óñòàíîâëåíû. Íà îäíîì èç ó÷àñòêîâ áëèç 3 Peregrine Falcon breeding territories up bush (at the left) ñ. Íîâîêàëìàíêà èçâåñòíîå ãíåçäî â ýòîì previously known were checked and one and living nest on the ãîäó íå ïîäíîâëÿëîñü ïòèöàìè, íå óäàëîñü previously unknown was discovered. Oc- ground (at the right), íàéòè è íîâîãî ãíåçäà, êàê è ïîäòâåðäèòü cupied nests were recorded in all territories living nest of another pair of eagles on the ïðåáûâàíèå âçðîñëûõ ïòèö íà ýòîì ó÷àñò- known earlier. A lost clutch of 4 eggs was rock (bottom). Foothills êå (âîçìîæíî, ó÷àñòîê ïîêèíóò îðëàìè). found in one of the nests on the Babyrgan of the Baschelakskiy  ýòîì ãîäó âûÿâëåíû òðè ðàíåå íåèç- mountain on May, 3rd 2010. The clutch is mountain ridge, âåñòíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà ñòåïíûõ îðëîâ: most likely to have been lost due to the hu- 11/06/2010 (upper) and 16/07/2010 íà âîäîðàçäåëå ðåê Ìàðàëèõà è Ñîñíîâêà man disturbance. (bottom). (ïðàâîáåðåæüå ×àðûøà), â ìåæäóðå÷üå The new breeding territory was discov- Photos by S. Vazhov. ×àðûøà è Ëîêòåâêè è â âåðõîâüÿõ ð. Àëåé ered in the vicinity of the Belokurikha town. (ìåæäó ñ¸ëàìè Åêàòåðèíèíñêîå è Òðåòüÿ- Currently there are 19 known breeding terri- êîâî), âñå îíè ëîêàëèçîâàíû ïî âñòðå÷àì tories of the Peregrine Falcon in the foothills 190 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

òåððèòîðèàëüíûõ ïòèö ñ ÿâíûì ãíåçäîâûì and low mountains of the Altai (within the ïîâåäåíèåì. Ãí¸çä íà íèõ îáíàðóæèòü Altai Territory). It makes 11.2–18.1% of the ïîêà íå óäàëîñü ïî ïðè÷èíå ñëîæíûõ population number, estimated at 105–169 óñëîâèé (ñïëîøíîé ñíåãîâîé ïîêðîâ, çà- breeding pairs (Karyakin, Nikolenko, 2009). òðóäíÿþùèé ïåðåäâèæåíèå, íèçêàÿ îñâå- ù¸ííîñòü â íåïîãîäó è ñóìåðêè).  íàñòî- Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo) ÿùåå âðåìÿ â ñåâåðíûõ ïðåäãîðüÿõ Àëòàÿ 5 breeding territories of the Eagle Owl (â ïðåäåëàõ Àëòàéñêîãî êðàÿ) èçâåñòíî 98 previously known were checked and a new ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ñòåïíîãî îðëà, ÷òî one was found. Occupied nests were ob- ñîñòàâëÿåò 35,0–36,3% îò ðàñ÷¸òíîé ÷èñ- served in two territories (33.33%, n=6). An ëåííîñòè, êîòîðàÿ îöåíèâàåòñÿ â 270–280 adult bird of the pair was lost in one of the ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ïàð (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2005). territories; remains of the bird were found  âûâîäêàõ ñòåïíîãî îðëà â 2010 ã. íà- at 20 m from the nest on May, 14th 2010. áëþäàëîñü 1–3 ïòåíöà, â ñðåäíåì (n=4) Probably it had been murdered by the ea- 2,0±0,41. gle. Nearby the Golden Eagle’s as well as Àáñîëþòíîå áîëüøèíñòâî ãí¸çä ñòåïíî- the Steppe Eagle’s breeding territories were ãî îðëà â ïðåäãîðüÿõ Àëòàÿ ðàñïîëàãàåòñÿ found; owl feathers were found in the latter íà ñêàëàõ (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2005), ïîýòî- nest, probably, the owl was preyed by the ìó îïðåäåë¸ííûé èíòåðåñ ïðåäñòàâëÿåò eagle. Empty nests were recorded in 4 ter- îáíàðóæåíèå ãíåçäà íà çåìëå â îêðåñò- ritories. Successful breeding of was noted íîñòÿõ ñ. Îãíè. Ýòî ãíåçäî óñòðîåíî â in only nest in the Peschanaya river basin; îñíîâàíèè êóñòà íà âåðøèíå íåáîëüøîé there was the chick on May, 25th and the ñîïêè.  ýòîì ãîäó ðàçìíîæåíèå â í¸ì fledgling – on June, 14th 2010. áûëî áåçóñïåøíûì (ïîãèá âûâîäîê èç The breeding territory previously unknown òð¸õ ïòåíöîâ). Íàõîäèòñÿ äàííîå ãíåçäî was found in the Charysh river basin. The íà èçâåñòíîì ãíåçäîâîì ó÷àñòêå, ãäå â found nest was empty. Poor occupancy of ïðîøëîì (2009) ãîäó îðëû ðàçìíîæàëèñü nests this year as well as in the past is most â àëüòåðíàòèâíîì ãíåçäå íà âåðøèíå ñó- likely connected with unfavorable weather õîãî êóñòà. conditions in early spring. The owl is prob- Ïèòàíèå ñòåïíûõ îðëîâ â ñåçîí 2010 ã., ably to a greater extent than other raptors ñóäÿ ïî îñòàíêàì æåðòâ ïîä ïðèñàäàìè è suffering from adverse weather conditions íà ãí¸çäàõ, çàìåòíî íå îòëè÷àëîñü îò ðà- at the beginning of the breeding period. In íåå íàáëþäàâøåãîñÿ íà ýòîé òåððèòîðèè many nesting sites the owls have not appar- (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2005): îñíîâíûìè êîðìî- ently even begun to breed. âûìè îáúåêòàìè áûëè àëòàéñêèé öîêîð (Myospalax myospalax) è êðàñíîù¸êèé Conclusion Ìîãèëüíèê (Aquila ñóñëèê (Spermophilus erythrogenys). The monitoring of breeding groups of large heliaca). Áàññåéí Ïðè ïðîâåðêå îäíîãî èç æèëûõ ãí¸çä raptors in the foothills and low mountains of ð. Àíóé, 03.06.2010. ñòåïíîãî îðëà áëèç ñ. Îãíè íàáëþäàëîñü Altai has shown that bad weather and dif- Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. íåîáû÷íî àãðåññèâíîå ïîâåäåíèå âçðîñ- ferent feeding conditions this season had a Imperial Eagle (Aquila ëîé ñàìêè. Îíà äâàæäû èìèòèðîâàëà àòàêó different impact on populations of various heliaca). Anuy river basin, 03/06/2010. íà íàáëþäàòåëÿ, âûõîäÿ èç ïèêèðîâàíèÿ â species. High occupancy of Imperial Eagle Photo by S. Vazhov. íåñêîëüêèõ ìåòðàõ îò ÷åëîâåêà. nests and their breeding success are obvi- ously connected with high population rates Ìîãèëüíèê (Aquila heliaca) of Red-Cheeked Souslik observed in most Ïðîâåðåíî 26 ðàíåå èç- areas of the foothills. Low percentage of oc- âåñòíûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ cupied by Golden Eagle nests, starting to ìîãèëüíèêîâ è âûÿâëåíî 13 breed one month earlier than other eagles, íîâûõ, ðàíåå íåèçâåñòíûõ. may be due to bad weather conditions in Íà ïÿòè ó÷àñòêàõ ãí¸çä îá- early spring, but in occupied nests, with an íàðóæèòü íå óäàëîñü ïî ïðè- abundance of food 100% breeding success ÷èíå ñëîæíûõ óñëîâèé äëÿ has been recorded. Low breeding success of èõ âûÿâëåíèÿ (ãóñòàÿ ëèñòâà, the Steppe Eagle, despite the abundance of ñêðûâàþùàÿ ïîñòðîéêè íà food and high occupancy of nests, might be ëèñòâåííûõ äåðåâüÿõ, ïëî- an evidence of the particular vulnerability of õàÿ âèäèìîñòü â íåïîãîäó è this species. Bad weather conditions in early ñóìåðêè) íî ïîäòâåðæäåíî spring had the most negative impact on the ïðåáûâàíèå âçðîñëûõ ïòèö, population of the Eagle Owl; thus the lowest ÷òî ñâèäåòåëüñòâóåò î çàíÿ- occupancy of nests has been recorded. Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 191

Ðèñ. 2. Îáñëåäîâàííûå ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè ìîãèëüíè- êà (Aquila heliaca). Fig. 2. Surveyed breeding territories of the Imperial Eagle (Aquila heliaca).

äîì ìîãèëüíèêà íà ñîñíå (Pinus sylvestris), ó ñ. Ñîëîíåøíîå (áàññåéí ð. Àíóé), êî- òîðûé ïóñòîâàë è â 2009 ã. Îäèí ó÷àñòîê ïóñòîâàë ïî ïðè÷èíå âûòåñíåíèÿ ìîãèëü- íèêà áåðêóòîì (Aquila chrysaetos), êîòî- ðûé è â ïðîøëîì (2009), è â ýòîì ãîäó óñïåøíî íà í¸ì ðàçìíîæàëñÿ. Ïðè÷èíû, ïî êîòîðûì ïóñòóþò äâà äðóãèõ ó÷àñòêà, íåèçâåñòíû. Íà 14 ó÷àñòêàõ ãí¸çäà áûëè æèëûìè, íî èõ ñîäåðæèìîå íå ïðîâåðåíî (â îñíîâ- íîì ïòèö íå ñïóãèâàëè ñ ãí¸çä èç-çà áîëü- øîé âåðîÿòíîñòè ãèáåëè ÿèö èëè ïòåíöîâ îò õîëîäà). Óñïåøíîå ðàçìíîæåíèå çà- òîñòè ó÷àñòêîâ. Íà òð¸õ – ãíåçäà íå ïðî- ðåãèñòðèðîâàíî íà 9 ó÷àñòêàõ (81,8% âåðÿëèñü, íå óäàëîñü âñòðåòèòü íà íèõ è îò ÷èñëà çàíÿòûõ ãí¸çä ñ ïðîñëåæåííîé ïòèö. ñóäüáîé). Íà ìîìåíò ïîñëåäíåé ïðîâåðêè Íà ïÿòè ó÷àñòêàõ ãí¸çäà ïóñòîâàëè, íà âñå óñïåøíûå ãí¸çäà ñîäåðæàëè âûâîäêè: äâóõ èç íèõ óäàëîñü ïîäòâåðäèòü ïðåáû- øåñòü ïî äâà ïòåíöà è òðè – ïî òðè, â ñðåä- âàíèå âçðîñëûõ ïòèö (ó÷àñòêè æèëûå), à íåì (n=9) 2,33±0,17 ïòåíöà. Ïîä îäíèì òðè – âåðîÿòíî ïóñòîâàëè, â òîì ÷èñëå èç íèõ, ãäå íà ìîìåíò ïîñëåäíåé ïðîâåð- ó÷àñòîê ñ åäèíñòâåííûì èç èçâåñòíûõ â êè áûëî äâà ïî÷òè ïîëíîñòüþ îïåðåííûõ ãîðàõ Àëòàÿ (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2009á) ãíåç- ïòåíöà, îáíàðóæåí òðóï ïîëóîïåðèâøåãî- ñÿ òðåòüåãî, âûïàâøåãî èç ãíåçäà. Ñóäÿ ïî ðàçíèöå â âîçðàñòå îñòàâøèõñÿ ïòåíöîâ, ïîãèá ñðåäíèé. Ýòî ãíåçäî î÷åíü íåáîëü- øîå äëÿ ìîãèëüíèêà, ÷òî, âåðîÿòíî, è ñòàëî ïðè÷èíîé òîãî, ÷òî ïòåíåö âûïàë. Ó÷èòû- âàÿ ýòî, íà ðàííèõ ñòàäèÿõ âûêàðìëèâà- íèÿ ïòåíöîâ ñðåäíèé âûâîäîê ñîñòàâëÿë 2,44±0,18 ïòåíöà.  äâóõ èç ïðîâåðåííûõ ãí¸çä (18% îò ÷èñëà çàíÿòûõ ãí¸çä ñ ïðî- ñëåæåííîé ñóäüáîé) ðàçìíîæåíèå áûëî íåóäà÷íûì.  îäíîì èç íèõ, ìåæäó ñ¸ëàìè Ñîëîâüèõà è Áåð¸çîâêà (ñðåäíåå òå÷åíèå ð. Àíóé), ïîãèáëà êëàäêà èç äâóõ ÿèö.  50 ì îò íåãî áûëè óñòàíîâëåíû êîðìóøêè äëÿ êîðîâ ñ ñîëüþ è îíî, âåðîÿòíî, áûëî áðîøåíî èç-çà áåñïîêîéñòâà ïàñòóõàìè. Ñëåäóåò ñêàçàòü, ÷òî â ïðîøëîì (2009) ãîäó â ýòîì ãíåçäå óñïåøíî ðàçìíîæàëñÿ áåðêóò, è ýòîò ó÷àñòîê ìîãèëüíèêà ñ÷èòàë- ñÿ ïóñòóþùèì (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2009á). Íà

Ãí¸çäà ìîãèëüíèêîâ: ââåðõó – íà âåðøèíå áåð¸çû, áàññåéí ð. ×àðûø, 15.05.2010 (ñëåâà) è 13.06.2010 (ñïðàâà); âíèçó ñëåâà – íà áåð¸çå, áàññåéí ð. Àíóé, 05.05.2009; âíèçó ñïðàâà – íà ñîñíå, áàññåéí ð. Àíóé, 05.06.2009. Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. Nests of the Imperial Eagle: upper – on the top of birch, Charysh river basin, 15/05/2010 (at the left) and 13/06/2010 (at the right); bottom at the left – on the birch, Anuy river basin, 05/05/2009; bottom at the right – on the pine, Anuy river basin, 05/06/2010. Photos by S. Vazhov. 192 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

êî èç-ïîä äåðåâà.  í¸ì 20 èþíÿ áûëî äâà ïóõîâûõ ïòåíöà ñ ðàñêðûâàþùèìèñÿ òðóáêàìè ìàõîâûõ, ðóëåâûõ è êðîþùèõ ïåðüåâ. Îäíî èç íàéäåííûõ æèëûõ ãí¸çä ìîãèëü- íèêà óñòðîåíî íà âåðøèíå áåð¸çû, ÷òî òàêæå ïðåäñòàâëÿåò èíòåðåñ. Ýòî ïåðâîå òàêîå ãíåçäî èç èçâåñòíûõ íà Àëòàå, îíî íàõîäèòñÿ ó ñ. ×àðûøñêîå (ñðåäíåå òå÷å- íèå ð. ×àðûø). Õîòÿ ìîãèëüíèê ñòðåìèò- ñÿ óñòðàèâàòü ãí¸çäà íà âåðøèíàõ èëè â âåðøèííûõ ìóòîâêàõ äåðåâüåâ, ñïåöèôè- êà êðîí, îñîáåííî áåð¸ç è òîïîëåé, êàê ïðàâèëî, íå ïîçâîëÿåò ýòîãî, ïîýòîìó àá- ñîëþòíîå áîëüøèíñòâî ãí¸çä ìîãèëüíèêà íà áåð¸çàõ óñòðîåíî â âåðõíåé òðåòè èëè â ñåðåäèíå ñòâîëà (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2009á). Ýòà æå ïîñòðîéêà ëåæèò íà âåðõíèõ âåò- âÿõ êðîíû, êàê íà êóñòå. Ïðîâåðèòü ñî- äåðæèìîå ãíåçäà íå óäàëîñü, îíî ñîâåð- øåííî íåäîñòóïíî, òàê êàê îïèðàåòñÿ íà î÷åíü òîíêèå âåòêè. Íà ýòîì ãíåçäîâîì ó÷àñòêå íàéäåíî òàêæå ñòàðîå àëüòåðíà- òèâíîå ãíåçäî, óñòðîåííîå êàê áîëüøèí- Âûâîäêè ìîãèëüíèêîâ: ñëåâà – áàññåéí ð. Ïåñ÷àíàÿ, 25.05.2010 (ââåðõó) è ñòâî äðóãèõ: â îñíîâàíèè âåòâåé â ñåðå- 14.06.2010 (âíèçó); ñïðàâà ââåðõó – áàññåéí ð. Àíóé, 02.06.2010; ñïðàâà âíèçó – áàññåéí ð. ×àðûø, 16.07.2010. Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. äèíå ñòâîëà áåð¸çû. Broods of the Imperial Eagle: at the left – Peschanaya river basin, 25/05/2010  2009 ã. â ïðåäãîðüÿõ è íèçêîãîðüÿõ Àë- (upper) and 14/06/2010 (bottom); upper at the right – Anuy river basin, òàÿ (â ïðåäåëàõ Àëòàéñêîãî êðàÿ) áûëî èç- 02/06/2010; bottom at the right – Charysh river basin, 16/07/2010. âåñòíî 66 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ìîãèëüíèêà: Photos by S. Vazhov. 31 èç íèõ âûÿâëåí ñ 2001 ïî 2008 ãã. (Êà- ðÿêèí è äð., 2009à) è 35 – â 2009 ã. (Êàðÿ- êàêîì ýòàïå ïðîèçîøëà ãèáåëü ïîòîìñòâà êèí è äð., 2009á).  íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ çäåñü âî âòîðîì ãíåçäå, òàêæå â ñðåäíåì òå÷å- èçâåñòíî óæå 79 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ ýòîãî íèè Àíóÿ, íåèçâåñòíî. Ïðè ïðîâåðêå 4 îðëà, ÷òî ñîñòàâëÿåò 25,6–27,6% îò ðàñ- ìàÿ â íåì ñèäåëà ñàìêà ìîãèëüíèêà, êî- ÷¸òíîé ÷èñëåííîñòè, îöåíåííîé â 286–308 òîðóþ íå ñãîíÿëè èç-çà ïëîõîé ïîãîäû. ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ïàð (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2005). Ïðè ñëåäóþùåé ïðîâåðêå, 3 èþíÿ, ãíåçäî Ñèòóàöèÿ ñ ïèòàíèåì ìîãèëüíèêà â ñå- îêàçàëîñü ïóñòûì. çîí 2010 ã. ðåçêî ðàçëè÷àëàñü â ðàçíûõ Íà îäíîì èç ó÷àñòêîâ â ìåæäóðå÷üå ìåñòàõ ïðåäãîðèé è íèçêîãîðèé.  Êóÿãàí- ðåê Ïåñ÷àíàÿ è Àíóé, ãäå â ïðîøëîì ñêîé êîòëîâèíå (ñðåäíåå òå÷åíèå ð. Ïåñ- (2009) ãîäó ãíåçäî ìîãèëüíèêà ñ êëàäêîé ÷àíîé) íàáëþäàëàñü ëîêàëüíàÿ äåïðåññèÿ áûëî ðàçðóøåíî âåòðîì (Êàðÿêèí è äð., ÷èñëåííîñòè äëèííîõâîñòîãî ñóñëèêà 2009á), â ýòîì ãîäó îðëàìè íà ïðîòèâî- (Spermophilus undulatus), îñòàíêè êîòî- ïîëîæíîì ñêëîíå äîëèíû ðó÷üÿ, íàïðî- ðîãî íå îáíàðóæåíû íè íà ãí¸çäàõ, íè òèâ ðàçðóøåííîãî, ïîñòðîåíî íîâîå ãíåç- ïîä ïðèñàäàìè ìîãèëüíèêîâ, æåðòâàìè äî. Îíî áûëî æèëûì, íî åãî ñîäåðæèìîå êîòîðûõ áûëè àëòàéñêèé öîêîð, îáûêíî- ïðîâåðèòü íå óäàëîñü. âåííûé õîìÿê (Cricetus cricetus), ñèáèð- Íà 10 èç 13 âûÿâëåííûõ â 2010 ã. ãíåç- ñêèé êðîò (Talpa altaica) è òåòåðåâ (Tetrao äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ îáíàðóæåíû 11 ãíåçäî- tetrix). Íàïðîòèâ, â àðåàëå êðàñíîù¸êî- âûõ ïîñòðîåê: 10 íà áåð¸çàõ (Betula sp.) ãî ñóñëèêà (ñðåäíåå òå÷åíèå ðåê Àíóé è è îäíà íà èâå (Salix sp.). Ïîñëåäíèé ôàêò ×àðûø, ìåæäóðå÷üå Àíóÿ è Ïåñ÷àíîé, ïðåäñòàâëÿåò îïðåäåë¸ííûé èíòåðåñ. ïðåäãîðüÿ Ñåìèíñêîãî è Áàùåëàêñêîãî Ýòî ïåðâîå íàéäåííîå íà Àëòàå ãíåçäî õðåáòîâ) íàáëþäàëàñü âûñîêàÿ ÷èñëåí- ìîãèëüíèêà íà èâå ðàñïîëàãàåòñÿ â ïîé- íîñòü ïîñëåäíåãî è îí, íàðÿäó ñ àëòàé- ìå ×àðûøà, ìåæäó ñåëàìè Êðàñíîùåêî- ñêèì öîêîðîì, áûë îñíîâíûì îáúåêòîì âî è Õàðëîâî. Ïîñòðîéêà ñäåëàíà â ðàç- ïèòàíèÿ íå òîëüêî ìîãèëüíèêà, íî òàêæå âèëêå â ñåðåäèíå ñòâîëà, íà âûñîòå 12 áåðêóòà è ñòåïíîãî îðëà. Âåðîÿòíî, èìåí- ì. Çàìåòíîñòü ãíåçäà êðàéíå íèçêà – îíî íî ñ âûñîêîé ÷èñëåííîñòüþ ýòîãî âèäà ñêðûòî ëèñòâîé è ïðîñìàòðèâàåòñÿ òîëü- â ýòîì ãîäó ñâÿçàíà âûñîêàÿ óñïåøíîñòü Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 193

Ñàìêà ìîãèëüíèêà â ãíåçäå íà òîïîëå â ïðåäãîðüÿõ Áà- ùåëàêñêîãî õðåáòà, 11.06.2010 (ââåðõó) è ïòåíöû ìîãèëüíèêà â ãíåçäå íà èâå â ïîéìå ð. ×àðûø, 20.06.2010 (âíèçó). Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. Female of the Imperial Eagle in the nest on a poplar in foothills of the Baschelakskiy mountain ridge in 11/06/1010 (upper) and chicks of the Imperial Eagle in the nest on a willow tree in the Charysh river flood-lands in 20/06/2010. Photos by S. Vazhov.

ðàçìíîæåíèÿ ìîãèëüíèêà è âûñîêèé ïðî- Ãí¸çäà áåðêóòà (Aquila chrysaetos) íà ñêàëàõ â ïðåä- öåíò ó÷àñòêîâ ñ çàíÿòûìè ãí¸çäàìè: 83% ãîðüÿõ Àëòàÿ. 12.06.2010, 27.06.2010. Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. (n=30) îò ÷èñëà ó÷àñòêîâ ñ ïðîâåðåííûìè ãí¸çäàìè, à òàêæå áîëüøàÿ äîëÿ âûâîäêîâ Nests of the Golden Eagle(Aquila chrysaetos) on rocks in the foothills of the Altai mountains. 12/06/2010, ñ òðåìÿ ïòåíöàìè: 44,4% (n=9). Âûâîäêîâ 27/06/2010. Photos by S. Vazhov. èç îäíîãî ïòåíöà íå îòìå÷åíî. Äëÿ ñðàâ- íåíèÿ, äàííûå â öåëîì ïî Àëòàþ (Êàðÿ- êèí è äð., 2009á): âûâîäêè èç òð¸õ ïòåí- äà ïóñòîâàëè, íî íà ïîñëåäíåì âñòðå- öîâ íàáëþäàþòñÿ ó 4,49% ïàð, èç îäíîãî ÷åíà âçðîñëàÿ ïòèöà (ó÷àñòîê æèëîé). – ó 44,94%, ñðåäíåå êîëè÷åñòâî ïòåíöîâ Îäíî èç äâóõ àëüòåðíàòèâíûõ ãí¸çä íà â âûâîäêå 1,6±0,58 (n=89). ëèñòâåííèöàõ (Larix sibirica) â ñðåäíåì òå÷åíèè ð. Êóÿ÷à (áàññåéí ð. Ïåñ÷àíîé) Áåðêóò (Aquila chrysaetos) áûëî ïóñòûì, äðóãîå îêàçàëîñü çàíÿòûì Ïðîâåðåíî 11 ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ ãíåç- êàíþêîì (Buteo buteo). Ðàíåå íà Àëòàå äîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ è îáíàðóæåíî äâà íî- òàêèõ ñëó÷àåâ íå îòìå÷àëîñü, õîòÿ åñòü âûõ. Çàíÿòûå áåðêóòàìè ãí¸çäà íàáëþ- ñâåäåíèÿ îá èñïîëüçîâàíèè ïîñòðîåê äàëèñü íà 7 ó÷àñòêàõ – 64% (n=11) îò áåðêóòà íà äåðåâüÿõ â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì èõ ÷èñëà ñ ïðîâåðåííûìè ãí¸çäàìè. Íà ðåãèîíå áàëîáàíîì (Falco cherrug) (Êà- äâóõ èç íèõ: áëèç ñ. Êóÿãàí (ñðåäíåå ðÿêèí è äð., 2005), ìîãèëüíèêîì è, âå- òå÷åíèå ð. Ïåñ÷àíîé) è ó ñ. Ñàââóøêà ðîÿòíî, ñòåïíûì îðëîì (Êàðÿêèí è äð., (ïðåäãîðüÿ Êîëûâàíñêîãî õðåáòà) ãí¸ç- 2010), à íà ñêàëàõ – áàëîáàíîì, áîðîäà- 194 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

÷îì (Gypaetus barbatus), è ìîõíîíîãèì êóðãàííèêîì (Buteo hemilasius) (Êàðÿ- êèí è äð., 2010). Ïîñòðîéêó ìîãèëüíèêà íà áåð¸çå, ìåæäó ñ¸ëàìè Ñîëîâüèõà è Áåð¸çîâêà (ñðåäíåå òå÷åíèå ð. Àíóé), â êîòîðîé â 2009 ã. óñïåøíî ðàçìíîæàëñÿ áåðêóò (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2009á; Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2010), â ýòîì ãîäó çàíèìàë ìîãèëü- íèê, à áåðêóòû íà ýòîì ó÷àñòêå íå âñòðå- ÷åíû. Óñïåøíîå ðàçìíîæåíèå çàðåãèñòðè- ðîâàíî íà 7 ó÷àñòêàõ (100% ó÷àñòêîâ ñ çàíÿòûìè ãí¸çäàìè). Íà ìîìåíò ïîñëåä- íåé ïðîâåðêè âñå ãí¸çäà ñîäåðæàëè âû- âîäêè: ïÿòü ïî îäíîìó ïòåíöó è äâà – ïî äâà, â ñðåäíåì (n=7) 1,29±0,18 ïòåíöà. Âûâîäêè èç äâóõ ïòåíöîâ íàáëþäàëèñü â ãí¸çäàõ â äîëèíå ð. ×àãûðêà (áàññåéí ×àðûøà) è íà ãîðå Áàáûðãàí (ïðåäãîðüÿ Ðèñ. 3. Îáñëåäîâàííûå ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè áåðêóòà (Aquila chrysaetos). Ñåìèíñêîãî õðåáòà). Íà îáîèõ â 2009 ã. Fig. 3. Surveyed breeding territories of the Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). ðàçìíîæåíèå áûëî íåóäà÷íûì: â äî- ëèíå ×àãûðêè ïîãèáëà êëàäêà (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2010), à íà Áàáûðãàíå óñïåøíîå ðàçìíîæåíèå áåðêóòà ïîñëåäíèé ðàç îòìå÷àëîñü â 2007 ã., â ãíåçäå íà ñîñíå (Âàæîâ, Áàõòèí, 2008).  2008 ã. ïîïûò- êà ðàçìíîæåíèÿ â ýòîì ãíåçäå îêàçàëàñü íåóäà÷íîé, ñêîðåå âñåãî, èç-çà ïîæàðà, â ðåçóëüòàòå êîòîðîãî âûãîðåë âåñü þæíûé ñêëîí (Âàæîâ, 2009), à â 2009 ã. ãíåçäî íà ñîñíå ÷àñòè÷íî ðàçðóøèëîñü, è ïòèöû ïîñòðîèëè íîâîå ãíåçäî, íà ñêàëå, â 40 ì îò ñòàðîãî, íî îíî îêàçàëîñü ïóñòûì, õîòÿ 16–17 ìàÿ ïàðà ïòèö íàáëþäàëàñü ó ãíåçäà, à ñàìåö òîêîâàë (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2010), 22 èþíÿ 2010 ã. â ãíåçäå íà ñêàëå áûëî äâà îïåðåííûõ ïòåíöà. Ïî îäíîìó ïòåíöó â âûâîäêàõ áåðêóòîâ îòìå÷åíî áëèç ñ. Ñîëîâüèõà (ñðåäíåå òå÷å- íèå ð. Àíóé), íà ð. Îñèíîâêà áëèç ñ. Íîâî- êàëìàíêà, ãäå, êðîìå æèâîãî ïòåíöà, áûëî ÿéöî ñ ïîãèáøèì íà ïîñëåäíèõ ñòàäèÿõ íàñèæèâàíèÿ ýìáðèîíîì; íà ð. Êàëìàíêà (ïðåäãîðüÿ Áàùåëàêñêîãî õðåáòà), ìåæäó

Âûâîäêè áåðêóòà: ñëåâà – ãí¸çäà íà ñêàëàõ â ïðåäãî- ðüÿõ Áàùåëàêñêîãî õðåáòà, 14.05.2001–12.06.2010; ñïðàâà ââåðõó – ãíåçäî íà ëèñòâåííèöå â áàññåéíå ð. ×àðûø, 15.05.2010; ñïðàâà â öåíòðå – ãíåç- äî íà ñêàëå â ïðåäãîðüÿõ Áàùåëàêñêîãî õðåáòà, 12.06.2010; ñïðàâà âíèçó – ãíåçäî íà ñêàëå â áàñ- ñåéíå ð. Àíóé, 27.06.2010. Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. Broods of the Golden Eagle: at the left – nests on rocks in the foothills of the Baschelakskiy mountain ridge, 14/05/2010–12/06/2010; upper at the right – nest on the larch in the Charysh river basin, 15/05/2010; center at the right – nest on the rock in the foothills of the Baschelakskiy mountain ridge, 12/06/2010; bottom at the right – nest on the rock in the Anuy river basin, 27/06/1010. Photos by S. Vazhov. Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 195

Îïåðåííûå ïòåíöû æüå ð. ×àðûø, ìåæäó ñ¸ëàìè Ùåáíþõà è áåðêóòà â ãí¸çäàõ íà ×àðûøñêîå. Ãí¸çä çäåñü îáíàðóæèòü ïîêà ñêàëàõ. Ïðåäãîðüÿ Áàùåëàêñêîãî (ââåðõó) íå óäàëîñü.  íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ â ïðåä- è Ñåìèíñêîãî (âíèçó) ãîðüÿõ è íèçêîãîðüÿõ Àëòàÿ (â ïðåäåëàõ õðåáòîâ, 27.06.2010, Àëòàéñêîãî êðàÿ) èçâåñòíî 43 ãíåçäîâûõ 22.06.2010. ó÷àñòêà áåðêóòà, ÷òî ñîñòàâëÿåò 20,3– Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà è Ð. Áàõòèíà. 22,9% îò ðàñ÷¸òíîé ÷èñëåííîñòè, êîòîðàÿ îöåíèâàåòñÿ â 188–212 ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ ïàð Fledglings of the Golden Eagle in the (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2010). nests. Foothills of Ïèòàíèå áåðêóòîâ â ñåçîí 2010 ã., ñóäÿ the Baschelakskiy ïî îñòàíêàì æåðòâ ïîä ïðèñàäàìè è íà (upper) and Seminskiy ãí¸çäàõ, çàìåòíî íå îòëè÷àëîñü îò íàáëþ- (bottom) mountain ridges, 27/06/2010, äàâøåãîñÿ íà ýòîé òåððèòîðèè â ïðåæíèå 22/06/2010. ãîäû (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2010): îñíîâó ðàöèî- Photos by S. Vazhov íà ñîñòàâëÿëè àëòàéñêèé öîêîð è êðàñíî- and R. Bachtin. ù¸êèé ñóñëèê.

Áàëîáàí (Falco cherrug) Ïðîâåðåíî 4 ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ ãíåçäî- âûõ ó÷àñòêà è âûÿâëåíî äâà íîâûõ, ðàíåå íåèçâåñòíûõ. Çàíÿòûå áàëîáàíàìè ãí¸çäà íàáëþäàëèñü íà òð¸õ ó÷àñòêàõ – 75,0% (n=4) îò èõ ÷èñëà ñ ïðîâåðåííûìè ãí¸ç- äàìè. Ãíåçäî íà ñêàëüíîì îñòàíöå â âåð- õîâüÿõ ð. Àÿ áëèç ñ. Âåðõ-Àÿ (ïðåäãîðüÿ ñ¸ëàìè Ñâàëîâêà è ×àðûøñêîå (ñðåäíåå Ñåìèíñêîãî õðåáòà) ïóñòîâàëî, êàê è â òå÷åíèå ð. ×àðûø) è â íèçîâüå ð. Èíÿ áëèç ïðîøëîì ãîäó, íî íà ýòîò ðàç çäåñü íå óäà- ñ. ×èíåòà. Ïîñëåäíåå â 2009 ã. ïóñòîâàëî ëîñü âñòðåòèòü ïòèö, êàê è íàéòè ñëåäîâ èõ (Êàðÿêèí è äð., 2010). Íà òð¸õ ó÷àñòêàõ ïðåáûâàíèÿ â ýòîì ãîäó (â 2009 ã. áàëîáàí (â äîëèíå ð. ×àãûðêà, ó ñ. Ñîëîâüèõà è çäåñü äåðæàëñÿ). Âîçìîæíî, ýòîò ó÷àñòîê íà ð. Îñèíîâêà) áåðêóòû ðàçìíîæàëèñü ïîêèíóò ïòèöàìè. â òåõ æå ãí¸çäàõ, ÷òî è â ïðîøëîì ãîäó, Óñïåøíîå ðàçìíîæåíèå áàëîáàíà îò- à íà äâóõ (íà ð. Êàëìàíêà è ìåæäó Ñâà- ìå÷åíî íà äðóãîì ó÷àñòêå â ïðåäãîðüÿõ ëîâêîé è ×àðûøñêèì) ïåðåìåñòèëèñü â Ñåìèíñêîãî õðåáòà. Ãíåçäî íà äàííîì àëüòåðíàòèâíûå, ïóñòîâàâøèå â ïðîøëîì ó÷àñòêå, ïðåäñòàâëÿþùåå ñîáîé ãëóáî- ãîäó, ãí¸çäà. êóþ íèøó â âåðõíåé òðåòè ñêàëû, îá-  ýòîì ãîäó ïî íåîäíîêðàòíûì âñòðå÷àì íàðóæåíî 21 èþíÿ 2008 ã., òîãäà òàì òåððèòîðèàëüíûõ ïòèö ñ ÿâíûì ãíåçäîâûì áûëî òðè ñë¸òêà.  2009 ã. îíî áûëî ïîâåäåíèåì âûÿâëåíî äâà ðàíåå íåèçâåñò- çàíÿòî îáûêíîâåííîé ïóñòåëüãîé (Falco íûõ ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêà, îáà â ïðàâîáåðå- tinnunculus), áàëîáàí íàáëþäàëñÿ ïîáëè- çîñòè, íî àëüòåðíàòèâíîå ãíåçäî íàéòè íå óäàëîñü.  2010 ã. ýòî ãíåçäî ñíîâà îêà- çàëîñü çàíÿòûì áàëîáàíîì: 3 ìàÿ ó ãíåç- äîâîé ñêàëû íàáëþäàëè òð¸õ ïòèö, îäíà èç êîòîðûõ âûëåòåëà èç ãíåçäîâîé íèøè, âòîðàÿ òóäà çàëåòåëà, çàìåíèâ ïåðâóþ (î÷åâèäíî, â ãíåçäå áûëà êëàäêà). Âûëå- òåâøèé áàëîáàí ñòàë àòàêîâàòü òðåòüåãî. Ïîñêîëüêó äî áëèæàéøåãî èçâåñòíîãî ãíåçäîâîãî ó÷àñòêà (ó ñ. Âåðõ-Àÿ) 18 êì, ïðèñóòñòâèå òðåòüåãî áàëîáàíà ïîçâî- ëÿåò ïðåäïîëîæèòü íàëè÷èå ïîáëèçîñòè åù¸ îäíîãî ãíåçäîâîãî ó÷àñòêà. Ïðè ñëå- äóþùåì ïîñåùåíèè ãíåçäà, 22 èþíÿ, íà

Ðèñ. 4. Îáñëåäîâàííûå ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè áàëîáàíà (Falco cherrug). Fig. 4. Surveyed breeding territories of the Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug). 196 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

Ïàðà áàëîáàíîâ (Falco cherrug) íà ãíåçäå è èõ ñë¸òîê. Ïðåä- ãîðüÿ Ñåìèíñêîãî õðåáòà, 03.05.2010, 22.06.2010. Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. Pair of the Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) in the nest and their fledgling near the nest. Foothills of the Seminskiy mountain ridge, 03/05/2010, 22/06/2010. Photos by S. Vazhov.

Ãíåçäîâàÿ ñêàëà (ñëåâà) è ãíåçäî (ñïðàâà) áàëîáàíà íà ð. Èíÿ. 13.06.2010. Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. Nesting cliff (at the left) and nest (at the right) of the Saker Falcon in the Inya river valley. 13/06/2010. Photos by S. Vazhov.

êðàþ íèøè ñèäåë ñë¸òîê î÷åíü ò¸ìíîé áåðåãó. Ñîäåðæèìîå ãíåçäà íå ïðîâåðÿ- îêðàñêè (òèï altaicus, «àëòàéñêèé ñîêîë» ëè. Ó ãíåçäà íà îñòàíöå áëèç Êîëûâàíñêîãî ïî: Ïôåôôåð, 2009). Îáå âçðîñëûå ïòè- îçåðà 19 èþíÿ íàáëþäàëñÿ âçðîñëûé áà- öû, êàê è ñë¸òêè 2008 ã., áûëè òèïè÷íîé ëîáàí (ó÷àñòîê æèëîé), åãî ñîäåðæèìîå äëÿ Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîãî ðåãèîíà îêðàñêè, òîæå íå ïðîâåðÿëè. õàðàêòåðíîé äëÿ öåíòðàëüíîàçèàòñêîãî Íîâûå ó÷àñòêè âûÿâëåíû â äîëèíå ð. Ñî- áàëîáàíà F. ch. milvipes (Êàðÿêèí, 2008; ñíîâêà ó ñ. Îçåðêè (áàññåéí ð. ×àðûø) è Êàðÿêèí, Íèêîëåíêî, 2008). íà âîäîðàçäåëå ðåê Íèæíÿÿ Êàëìàíêà è Ãíåçäî áàëîáàíà â ñòàðîé ïîñòðîéêå âî- Ìàëàÿ Ñëþäÿíêà (ìåæäó ñ¸ëàìè Îãíè è ðîíà (Corvus corax), íà ïðèðå÷íîé ñêàëå â Ñëþäÿíêà). Íà ïåðâîì èç íèõ 12 àïðåëÿ íèçîâüå ð. Èíÿ áëèç ñ. ×èíåòà, ïðîâåðåíî 2010 ã. íàáëþäàëè òåððèòîðèàëüíóþ ïàðó, 13 èþíÿ 2010 ã., îíî îêàçàëîñü æèëûì, êàê íî ãíåçäî íàéòè íå óäàëîñü. Íà âòîðîì è â 2009. Ñàìêà ñèäåëà íà ãíåçäå, à ñàìåö ó÷àñòêå ãíåçäî òîæå íå íàéäåíî, âçðîñëàÿ áåñïîêîèëñÿ è ëåòàë ñ êðèêàìè ïðè ïîÿâ- ïòèöà îòìå÷åíà 11 èþíÿ 2010 ã. â ÷åòûð¸õ ëåíèè íàáëþäàòåëåé íà ïðîòèâîïîëîæíîì êì îò òî÷êè, ãäå 17 àïðåëÿ 2009 ã. íà- áëþäàëè òåððèòîðèàëüíóþ ïàðó ñ ÿâíûì Ñàïñàí ãíåçäîâûì ïîâåäåíèåì: ñàìåö ïåðåäàë (Falco peregrinus). Êàòóíü, 03.05.2010. ñàìêå äîáû÷ó (êðàñíîù¸êîãî ñóñëèêà). Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. Îí áûë î÷åíü ñâåòëîé îêðàñêè, ïî÷òè Peregrine Falcon áåëîé, äîëÿ òàêèõ ïòèö â ïîïóëÿöèè áà- (Falco peregrinus). ëîáàíà â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå âñåãî Katun river, 2% (Êàðÿêèí, 2008; Êàðÿêèí, Íèêîëåíêî, 03/05/2010. Photo by S. Vazhov. 2008), à ñàìêà îáû÷íîé, õàðàêòåðíîé äëÿ öåíòðàëüíîàçèàòñêîãî áàëîáàíà (F. ch. milvipes) îêðàñêè.

Ñàïñàí (Falco peregrinus) Ïðîâåðåíî òðè ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ ãíåç- äîâûõ ó÷àñòêà â ïðåäãîðüÿõ Ñåìèíñêîãî Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 197

íà Áàáûðãàíå îòìå÷àëèñü è ðàíåå (Âà- æîâ, Áàõòèí, 2008).  äðóãîì ãíåçäå ñàï- ñàíà íà Áàáûðãàíå, â ñòàðîé ïîñòðîéêå áåðêóòà, 3 ìàÿ 2010 ã. áûëà ïîãèáøàÿ êëàäêà èç 4-õ ÿèö, ñàìêà åù¸ ïðîäîëæà- ëà å¸ íàñèæèâàòü. Ñêîðåå âñåãî, êëàäêà ïîãèáëà èç-çà áåñïîêîéñòâà ëþäüìè: â íåñêîëüêèõ ìåòðàõ îò ãíåçäà áûëà ñïè- ëåíà (î÷åâèäíî, áåíçîïèëîé) áîëüøàÿ ïèõòà, ëåæàùàÿ çäåñü æå. Óñïåøíîå ðàç- ìíîæåíèå çàðåãèñòðèðîâàíî â ãíåçäå íà ñêàëüíîì îñòàíöå â äîëèíå Êàòóíè áëèç ñ. Ïîäãîðíîå, 3 ìàÿ 2010 ã. â í¸ì áûëà êëàäêà èç 4-õ ÿèö, 26 ìàÿ øëî âûëóïëå- íèå, è â ãíåçäå áûëè 3 ïòåíöà è ÿéöî, à 2 èþíÿ – 4 êðóïíûõ ïóõîâûõ ïòåíöà. Âåðîÿòíûé ãíåçäîâîé ó÷àñòîê âûÿâ- ëåí â ïðåäãîðüÿõ ×åðãèíñêîãî õðåáòà. Âçðîñëàÿ ïòèöà íàáëþäàëàñü 11 àïðåëÿ Ðèñ. 5. Îáñëåäîâàííûå ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè ñàïñàíà (Falco peregrinus). 2010 ã. ïðèìåðíî â 2-õ êì þæíåå óñòüÿ Fig. 5. Surveyed breeding territories of the Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus). ð. Áåëîêóðèõà. Ïðåäïîëàãàåìîå ìåñòî ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ñàïñàíà – ñêàëüíûå âûõîäû õðåáòà: äâà íà ãîðå Áàáûðãàí è îäèí â ñåâåðíîãî ôàñà ×åðãèíñêîãî õðåáòà â ïðèëåãàþùåé ÷àñòè äîëèíû Êàòóíè, è îêðåñòíîñòÿõ ã. Áåëîêóðèõà.  íàñòîÿùåå âûÿâëåí îäèí ðàíåå íåèçâåñòíûé. Íà âðåìÿ â ïðåäãîðüÿõ è íèçêîãîðüÿõ Àëòàÿ èçâåñòíûõ ó÷àñòêàõ ãí¸çäà áûëè çàíÿ- (â ïðåäåëàõ Àëòàéñêîãî êðàÿ) èçâåñòíî òû ñàïñàíàìè. Ãíåçäî â íèøå ñêàëüíîãî 19 ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ, ÷òî ñîñòàâëÿåò îñòàíöà ó âåðøèíû ãîðû Áàáûðãàí 3 ìàÿ 11,2–18,1% îò ðàñ÷¸òíîé ÷èñëåííîñòè, 2010 ã. áûëî æèëûì, íî åãî ñîäåðæèìîå êîòîðàÿ îöåíèâàåòñÿ â 105–169 ãíåçäÿ- íå ïðîâåðÿëè. Ñàìêà íàñèæèâàëà, à ñà- ùèõñÿ ïàð (Êàðÿêèí, Íèêîëåíêî, 2009). ìåö íàõîäèëñÿ ïîáëèçîñòè íà ïðèñàäå. Ïðè ïîÿâëåíèè íàä ñêàëîé òðåòüåãî ñàï- Ôèëèí (Bubo bubo) ñàíà îáå ïòèöû ñòàëè ñ êðèêàìè ïðîãî- Ïðîâåðåíî 5 ðàíåå èçâåñòíûõ ãíåçäî- íÿòü åãî. Êîíôëèêòû ìåæäó ñàïñàíàìè âûõ ó÷àñòêîâ è âûÿâëåí îäèí íîâûé. Çà-

Êëàäêè ñàïñàíà: ââåðõó ñëåâà – ïðåäãîðüÿ Ñåìèíñêîãî õðåáòà, âíèçó ñëåâà è ñïðà- âà – äîëèíà ð. Êàòóíü. 03.05.2010. Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. Clutches of the Peregrine Falcon: upper at the left – foothills of the Seminskiy mountain ridge, bottom at the left and right – Katun river valley. 03/05/2010. Photos by S. Vazhov. 198 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ

ëè âçðîñëîé ïòèöû, òðóï êîòîðîé ñ îòî- ðâàííîé ãîëîâîé è êðûëîì íàéäåí 14 ìàÿ 2010 ã. â 20 ì îò ãíåçäîâîé íèøè, êîòîðàÿ áûëà ïî÷èùåíà è ãîòîâà äëÿ îòêëàäêè ÿèö. Ôèëèí áûë óáèò íå ìåíåå 2,5 íåäåëü íà- çàä, ñêîðåå âñåãî, îðëîì. Ïîáëèçîñòè íà- õîäÿòñÿ ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè áåðêóòà è ñòåï- íîãî îðëà, â ãíåçäå ïîñëåäíåãî íàéäåíû ïåðüÿ ôèëèíà, âåðîÿòíî, îí è óáèë åãî. Íà 4-õ ó÷àñòêàõ: äâóõ â ñðåäíåì òå÷åíèè ð. Êóÿ÷à (áàññåéí ð. Ïåñ÷àíîé), îäíîì â âåðõîâüÿõ ð. Êàìûøèíêà áëèç ñ. Âåðõ- Êàìûøèíêà è îäíîì â ñðåäíåì òå÷åíèè ð. Ñîñíîâêà, ìåæäó ñ¸ëàìè Àëåêñååâêà è Êðàñíûå Îðëû, ãí¸çäà áûëè ïóñòûìè è íå ïîäíîâëÿëèñü â ýòîì ãîäó. Íà ó÷àñò- êå â âåðõîâüÿõ ð. Êàìûøèíêà âñòðå÷åí âçðîñëûé ôèëèí (ó÷àñòîê æèëîé), à íà òð¸õ äðóãèõ ñëåäîâ ïðåáûâàíèÿ ïòèö íå Ðèñ. 6. Îáñëåäîâàííûå ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè ôèëèíà (Bubo bubo). îáíàðóæåíî. Fig. 6. Surveyed territories of the Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo). Óñïåøíîå ðàçìíîæåíèå îòìå÷åíî â ãíåçäå â íèçîâüå ð. Êóÿ÷à ó ñ. Êóÿãàí íÿòûå ôèëèíàìè ãí¸çäà íàáëþäàëèñü íà (áàññåéí ð. Ïåñ÷àíîé). Îíî ïðåäñòàâ- äâóõ ó÷àñòêàõ – 33% (n=6) îò ÷èñëà ó÷àñò- ëÿåò ñîáîé áîëüøóþ íèøó â ïîäíîæèè êîâ ñ ïðîâåðåííûìè ãí¸çäàìè. Íà ó÷àñò- ïðèðå÷íîé ñêàëû, 25 ìàÿ 2010 ã. â í¸ì êå â äîëèíå ð. Îñèíîâêà áëèç ñ. Íîâîêàë- áûë ïóõîâîé ïòåíåö ñ ïîÿâèâøèìèñÿ ìàíêà (ïðåäãîðüÿ Áàùåëàêñêîãî õðåáòà) òðóáêàìè ìàõîâûõ, ðóëåâûõ è êðîþùèõ ðàçìíîæåíèå íå ñîñòîÿëîñü èç-çà ãèáå- ïåðüåâ. Âòîðîé ðàç ãíåçäî ïîñåòèëè 14

Ïóõîâîé (ñëåâà) è îïåðÿþùèéñÿ (ñïðàâà) ïòåíåö ôèëèíà (Bubo bubo) â ãíåçäå. Áàññåéí ð. Ïåñ÷à- íîé, 25.05.2010, 14.06.2010. Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. The chick (left) and the fledgling (right) of the Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo) in the nest. Peschanaya river basin, 25/05/2010, 14/06/2010. Photos by S. Vazhov.

Òðóï ôèëèíà ïîä ãíåç- äîì â äîëèíå ð. Îñèíîâêà, 14.05.2010. Ôîòî Â. Êîçèëà è Ñ. Âàæîâà. Dead Eagle Owl near the nest in the Osinovka river valley, 14/05/2010. Photos by V. Kozil and S. Vazhov. Raptor Research Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 199

èþíÿ, ïòåíåö áûë ïîêðûò ìåçîïòèëåì, íûõ è ïîìîùü ïðè îáðàáîòêå ìàòåðèàëà, òðóáêè ìàõîâûõ è ðóëåâûõ ïî÷òè ïîë- Â.Ì. Âàæîâó çà ôèíàíñîâóþ ïîääåðæêó íîñòüþ ðàñêðûëèñü.  ãíåçäå íàéäåíû è òðàíñïîðòíûå óñëóãè, à òàêæå Àíòîíó îñòàíêè òð¸õ îáûêíîâåííûõ õîìÿêîâ, Êîðîáêî, Âëàäèìèðó Êîçèëó è Åâãåíèþ äâóõ êîðîñòåëåé (Crex crex), ãàëêè (Cor- Êëþåâó, ïðèíèìàâøèì àêòèâíîå ó÷àñòèå â vus monedula), äâóõ ïîë¸âîê-ýêîíîìîê ýêñïåäèöèÿõ è âñåñòîðîííå ïîìîãàâøèì â (Microtus oeconomus) è îáûêíîâåííîé ðàáîòå. ïîë¸âêè (Microtus arvalis). Ðàíåå íåèçâåñòíûé ãíåçäîâîé ó÷àñòîê Ëèòåðàòóðà ôèëèíà âûÿâëåí â ñðåäíåì òå÷åíèè Âàæîâ Ñ.Â. Íåêîòîðûå íàáëþäåíèÿ äíåâíûõ Ñîñíîâêè, ìåæäó ñ¸ëàìè Àëåêñååâêà õèùíûõ ïòèö è ñîâ â ïðåäãîðüÿõ Ñåâåðíîãî Àë- è Êðàñíûå Îðëû (áàññåéí ð. ×àðûø). òàÿ. – Àëòàé: ýêîëîãèÿ è ïðèðîäîïîëüçîâàíèå. Êàê óæå óïîìèíàëîñü, íàéäåííîå íà Òðóäû VIII ðîññèéñêî-ìîíãîëüñêîé íàó÷íîé í¸ì ãíåçäî, â íèøå â ïîäíîæèè ñêàëû êîíôåðåíöèè ìîëîäûõ ó÷¸íûõ è ñòóäåíòîâ. Áèéñê: èçä-âî ÁÏÃÓ, 2009. Ñ. 7–11. íà ñêëîíå ñîïêè, áûëî ïóñòûì è â ýòîì Âàæîâ Ñ.Â., Áàõòèí Ð.Ô. Î âñòðå÷àõ ðåäêèõ ãîäó íå ïîäíîâëÿëîñü. Íèçêàÿ çàíÿòîñòü âèäîâ ñîêîëîîáðàçíûõ (Falconiformes) â Àëòàé- ãí¸çä ôèëèíàìè â ýòîì ãîäó, êàê è â ñêîì è Ñîâåòñêîì ðàéîíàõ Àëòàéñêîãî êðàÿ. – ïðîøëîì, ñêîðåå âñåãî, ñâÿçàíà ñ íå- Áèîðàçíîîáðàçèå, ïðîáëåìû ýêîëîãèè Ãîðíî- áëàãîïðèÿòíûìè ïîãîäíûìè óñëîâèÿìè ãî Àëòàÿ è ñîïðåäåëüíûõ ðåãèîíîâ: íàñòîÿùåå, ðàííåé âåñíîé, ïîñêîëüêó ôèëèí ãíåç- ïðîøëîå, áóäóùåå. Ìàòåðèàëû Ìåæäóíàðîä- äèòñÿ íà çåìëå èëè â íèøàõ ïîä ñêàëàìè íîé êîíôåðåíöèè. Ãîðíî-Àëòàéñê: ÐÈÎ ÃÀÃÓ, è ïðèñòóïàåò ê ðàçìíîæåíèþ ðàíüøå 2008. Ñ. 56–60. äðóãèõ õèùíèêîâ. Íà ìíîãèõ ãíåçäîâûõ Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè (ìåòîäè- ó÷àñòêàõ ôèëèíû, âèäèìî, äàæå íå ïðè- ÷åñêèå ðåêîìåíäàöèè ïî èçó÷åíèþ ñîêîëîî- ñòóïèëè ê ðàçìíîæåíèþ. áðàçíûõ è ñîâîîáðàçíûõ). Íèæíèé Íîâãîðîä, 2004. 351 ñ. Îáñóæäåíèå Êàðÿêèí È.Â. Áàëîáàí â Ðîññèè. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà, 2008. ¹12. Ñ. 28–48. Ìîíèòîðèíã ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã. Ðåçóëüòàòû êðóïíûõ õèùíûõ ïòèö â ïðåäãîðüÿõ è íèç- ìîíèòîðèíãà ïîïóëÿöèé áàëîáàíà â Àëòàå- êîãîðüÿõ Àëòàÿ ïîêàçàë, ÷òî ïëîõèå ïî- Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå â 2008 ã., Ðîññèÿ. – Ïåðíàòûå ãîäíûå è ðàçëè÷íûå â ðàçíûõ ìåñòàõ êîð- õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà, 2008. ¹.14. Ñ. 63–84. ìîâûå óñëîâèÿ â ýòîì ñåçîíå ïî-ðàçíîìó Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã. Ñàïñàí â ñêàçàëèñü íà ïîïóëÿöèÿõ ðàçíûõ âèäîâ. Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå, Ðîññèÿ. – Ïåðíàòûå Âûñîêèå çàíÿòîñòü ãí¸çä è óñïåøíîñòü õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà, 2009. ¹16. Ñ. 96–128. ðàçìíîæåíèÿ ìîãèëüíèêà, î÷åâèäíî, ñâÿ- Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã., Áàðàøêî- çàíû ñ âûñîêîé ÷èñëåííîñòüþ îñíîâíûõ âà À.Í., Ñìåëÿíñêèé È.Ý., Êîíîâàëîâ Ë.È., êîðìîâûõ îáúåêòîâ: êðàñíîù¸êîãî ñóñ- Ãðàáîâñêèé Ì.À., Âàæîâ Ñ.Â., Áåêìàíñó- ëèêà è àëòàéñêîãî öîêîðà, íàáëþäàâøåé- ðîâ Ð.Õ. Áåðêóò â Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå, ñÿ íà áîëüøåé ÷àñòè ïðåäãîðèé. Íåâû- Ðîññèÿ. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà, 2010. ¹18. Ñ. 82–152. ñîêèé ïðîöåíò çàíÿòûõ ãí¸çä ó áåðêóòà, Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã., Áåêìàíñó- ïðèñòóïàþùåãî ê ðàçìíîæåíèþ íà ìåñÿö ðîâ Ð.Õ. Ìîãèëüíèê â ãîðàõ Àëòàÿ. – Ïåð- ðàíüøå äðóãèõ îðëîâ, ìîæåò áûòü ñâÿçàí íàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà, 2009à. ¹15. ñ ïëîõèìè ïîãîäíûìè óñëîâèÿìè ðàííåé Ñ. 66–79. âåñíîé, îäíàêî â çàíÿòûõ ãí¸çäàõ ïðè Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã., Âàæîâ Ñ.Â., îáèëèè ïèùè íàáëþäàëàñü 100% óñïåø- Áåêìàíñóðîâ Ð.Õ. Ìîãèëüíèê â ãîðàõ Àëòàÿ: íîñòü ðàçìíîæåíèÿ. Íèçêèé óñïåõ ðàç- ðåçóëüòàòû 2009 ãîäà, Ðîññèÿ. – Ïåðíàòûå õèù- ìíîæåíèÿ ñòåïíîãî îðëà, íåñìîòðÿ íà íèêè è èõ îõðàíà, 2009á. ¹16. Ñ. 129–138. îáèëèå ïèùè è âûñîêóþ çàíÿòîñòü ãí¸çä, Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Ñìåëÿíñêèé È.Ý., Áàêêà Ñ.Â., ñâèäåòåëüñòâóåò îá îñîáîé óÿçâèìîñòè Ãðàáîâñêèé Ì.À., Ðûáåíêî À.Â., Åãîðîâà À.Â. ýòîãî âèäà íà àíòðîïîãåííî ïðåîáðàçî- Êðóïíûå ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè Àëòàéñêîãî êðàÿ. âàííîé òåððèòîðèè. Ïëîõèå ïîãîäíûå – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà, 2005. ¹3. Ñ. 28–51. óñëîâèÿ ðàííåé âåñíîé íàèáîëåå íåãà- Ïôåôôåð Ð. Ê âîïðîñó î ãåîãðàôè÷åñêîé òèâíî ïîâëèÿëè íà ïîïóëÿöèþ ôèëèíà, ó èçìåí÷èâîñòè áàëîáàíîâ. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè êîòîðîãî íàáëþäàëàñü ñàìàÿ íèçêàÿ çàíÿ- è èõ îõðàíà, 2009. ¹16. Ñ. 68–95. òîñòü ãí¸çä. Ñìåëÿíñêèé È.Ý. Àëòàéñêèé êðàé – áóäóùåå îäíîãî èç êðóïíåéøèõ ðîññèéñêèõ î÷àãîâ ðàç- Áëàãîäàðíîñòè íîîáðàçèÿ ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ çàâèñèò îò ïðè- Àâòîðû âûðàæàþò áëàãîäàðíîñòü È.Â. ðîäîîõðàííûõ ìåð. – Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ Êàðÿêèíó çà ïðåäîñòàâëåíèå áàçû äàí- îõðàíà, 2005. ¹3. Ñ. 18–27. 200 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Êðàòêèå ñîîáùåíèÿ

ShortReports КРАТКИЕСООБЩЕНИЯ AboutBreedingtheUralOwlintheForest-SteppeZone oftheAltaiKray,Russia О ГНЕЗДОВАНИИ ДЛИННОХВОСТОЙ НЕЯСЫТИ В ЛЕСОСТЕПНОЙ ЗОНЕ АЛТАЙСКОГО КРАЯ, РОССИЯ EbelA.L.(Gebler’sEcologicalSociety,Barnaul,Russia) Эбель А.Л. (АКОО «Геблеровское экологическое общество», Барнаул, Россия)

Êîíòàêò: Äëèííîõâîñòàÿ íåÿñûòü (Strix uralensis) – The Ural Owl (Strix uralensis) is not a rare Àëåêñåé Ýáåëü äîâîëüíî îáû÷íûé âèä ëåñîñòåïíîé çîíû bird species in the forest-steppe zone of the [email protected] Àëòàéñêîãî êðàÿ, ÷àñòî âñòðå÷àþùèéñÿ Altai Kray, but there are too little records çäåñü âî âðåìÿ îñåííå-çèìíèõ êî÷¸âîê. proved its nesting here. Contact: Ïðè ýòîì, ñâåäåíèÿ î ãíåçäîâàíèè äàí- In 2009–2010 were discovered one nest Alexei Ebel íîãî âèäà â ëåñîñòåïíîé çîíå êðàéíå íå- and two broods of the Ural Owl near Bar- [email protected] ìíîãî÷èñëåííû. naul, Russia. The nest and a brood were  ïîëåâûå ñåçîíû 2009 è 2010 ãã. óñòà- founded on the left bank of the Ob’ river; íîâëåíî òðè ôàêòà ãíåçäîâàíèÿ äëèííîõ- another brood was discovered on the right âîñòîé íåÿñûòè â íåïîñðåäñòâåííîé áëè- bank. çîñòè îò ã. Áàðíàóë, ïðè ýòîì äâà èç íèõ The nest was discovered on the birch at – íà ëåâîáåðåæüå Îáè (ðèñ. 1, ¹1–3). the edge of birch forest on May, 9th 2009.  îêðåñòíîñòÿõ äà÷íîãî ïîñ¸ëêà Êîíþõè The nest was open and its previous owner 9 ìàÿ 2009 ã. îáíàðóæåíî ãíåçäî ñ íàñèæè- seemed to be the Raven (Corvus corax). âàþùåé ïòèöåé (ðèñ. 1, ¹1). Ãíåçäî îòêðû- The first brood was recorded in the ar- òîãî òèïà, âåðîÿòíî ïðèíàäëåæàùåå âîðîíó boretum of the Institute of Horticulture on (Corvus corax), ðàñïîëàãàëîñü íà îêðàèíå May, 28th 2010. It consisted of five fledg- íåáîëüøîãî áåð¸çîâîãî êîëêà íà âûñîòå lings. 10–12 ì. Ïòèöà ñèäåëà ïëîòíî. Ãíåçäî íå The second brood was found in a birch- îáñëåäîâàëîñü. Ïðè ïîâòîðíîì âèçèòå ñïó- pine forest on August, 7th 2010. It consist- ñòÿ ïÿòü äíåé îêàçàëîñü, ÷òî áåð¸çà, íà êî- ed of two fledglings.

Äëèííîõâîñòàÿ íåÿñûòü (Strix uralensis) íà ãíåçäå. Ðèñ. 1. Ðåãèñòðàöèè äëèííîõâîñòûõ íåÿñûòåé (Strix uralensis) â îêðåñòíîñòÿõ 09.05.2009. Ôîòî À. Ýáåëÿ. Áàðíàóëà. Ural Owl (Strix uralensis) in the nest. 09/05/2009. Fig. 1. Records of Ural Owls (Strix uralensis) in vicinities of Barnaul. Photo by A. Ebel. Short Reports Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 201

Âûâîäêè äëèííîõâî- ñòîé íåÿñûòè: ñëåâà – 28.05.2010, ñïðàâà – 07.08.2010. Ôîòî À. Ýáåëÿ Broods of the Ural Owl: left – 28/05/2010, right – 07/08/2010. Photos by A. Ebel.

òîðîé ðàñïîëàãàëîñü ãíåçäî, áûëà ñïèëåíà, Åù¸ îäèí, ÿâíî ïîçäíèé èëè âòîðîé, âû- êàê è íåñêîëüêî ðÿäîì ñòîÿùèõ äåðåâüåâ. âîäîê èç äâóõ ïòåíöîâ áûë îáíàðóæåí 7 Íà òåððèòîðèè äåíäðàðèÿ èíñòèòó- àâãóñòà 2010 ã. â ðàéîíå ÇÀÒÎ Ñèáèðñêèé òà ñàäîâîäñòâà Ñèáèðè (÷åðòà ãîðîäà) 28 (ïðàâîáåðåæüå Îáè) (ðèñ. 1, ¹3). Âûâî- ìàÿ 2010 ã. áûë îáíàðóæåí âûâîäîê èç 5 äîê äåðæàëñÿ â ðàçðåæåííîì áåð¸çîâî- ïòåíöîâ, ïîêèíóâøèõ ãíåçäî, íî åù¸ ïëî- ñîñíîâîì ëåñó, äîñòàòî÷íî äàëåêî îò îïó- õî ëåòàþùèõ (ðèñ. 1, ¹2). Îäèí èç ïòåí- øåê (íå ìåíåå ïîëóêèëîìåòðà). Ïòåíöû öîâ ÿâíî íåñêîëüêî îòñòàâàë â ðàçâèòèè îò óæå õîðîøî ëåòàëè, íî äåðæàëèñü âìåñòå îñòàëüíûõ èç âûâîäêà, íî òàêæå íàõîäèëñÿ è ïîñòîÿííî ïîäàâàëè ãîëîñ, áûëè ÿâíî âíå ãíåçäà. Ãíåçäî íå îáíàðóæåíî. Ðÿäîì ãîëîäíûìè, òàê êàê âñþ íî÷ü ø¸ë äîæäü. ñ âûâîäêîì äåðæàëàñü îäíà èç âçðîñëûõ Âçðîñëûõ ïòèö îáíàðóæèòü íå óäàëîñü, õîòÿ ïòèö, íî ÿâíîãî áåñïîêîéñòâà íå âûêàçû- ïòåíöû èõ, âåðîÿòíî, âèäåëè èëè ñëûøàëè, âàëà. Âûâîäîê ïðîäåðæàëñÿ â ýòîì ìåñòå òàê êàê ïåðèîäè÷åñêè íà÷èíàëè ãðîìêî ïè- îêîëî íåäåëè, à ïîòîì èñ÷åç. ùàòü è ïåðåëåòàëè ñ ìåñòà íà ìåñòî.

NoteoftheKestrelComingBackonItsBirthplaceandBreeding intheNestWhereitwasBorn,Russia РЕГИСТРАЦИЯ ВОЗВРАТА ОБЫКНОВЕННОЙ ПУСТЕЛЬГИ НА МЕСТО РОЖДЕНИЯ И РАЗМНОЖЕНИЕ В ПОСТРОЙКЕ, В КОТОРОЙ ОНА ВЫВЕЛАСЬ, РОССИЯ KaryakinI.V.(CenterofFieldStudies,N.Novgorod,Russia) NikolenkoE.G.(SiberianEnvironmentalCenter,Novosibirsk,Russia) Карякин И.В. (Центр полевых исследований, Н.Новгород, Россия) Николенко Э.Г. (МБОО «Сибирский экологический центр», Новосибирск, Россия)

Êîíòàêò: Îáûêíîâåííûå ïóñòåëüãè (Falco tinnun- Kestrels (Falco tinnunculus) are mobile Èãîðü Êàðÿêèí culus) äîñòàòî÷íî ìîáèëüíû â âûáîðå enough in their choice of breeding territo- [email protected] ãíåçäîâûõ ó÷àñòêîâ è ãí¸çä, è ïðè ïàäå- ries and nests, and at the decrease in num- Ýëüâèðà Íèêîëåíêî íèÿõ ÷èñëåííîñòè ìåëêèõ ìûøåâèäíûõ bers of rodents can move from habitats poor [email protected] ãðûçóíîâ ìîãóò ïåðåìåùàòüñÿ èç áåäíûõ in food to abandon ones, forming breeding ïèùåé ìåñò ãíåçäîâàíèÿ â áîãàòûå, îá- concentration. For this reason it is abso- Contact: ðàçóÿ ãíåçäîâûå êîíöåíòðàöèè. Ïî ýòîé lutely unclear, whether there is any relation Igor Karyakin ïðè÷èíå ñîâåðøåííî íå ÿñíî, èìååòñÿ between birds of this species and territories [email protected] ëè êàêàÿ-íèáóäü ñâÿçü ñ òåððèòîðèåé ó in the most cases; how long they keep their áîëüøåé ÷àñòè ïòèö ýòîãî âèäà è íàñêîëü- pairs and they are constant in pairs; how Elvira Nikolenko [email protected] êî îíà æ¸ñòêàÿ, íà ñêîëüêî ïîñòîÿííû often partners are changed in pairs; and ïàðû è êàê äîëãî îíè ñîõðàíÿþòñÿ, êàê whether one of partners keep fidelity to ear- 202 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Êðàòêèå ñîîáùåíèÿ

lier chosen breeding territory. It is possible to answer these questions only by marking a large number of birds. But even incidental ringing of birds at regular monitoring may be productive. For last 10 years, we were monitoring 3–5 pairs of Kestrels, a pair of Black-Eared Kites (Milvus migrans lineatus) and a pair of Upland Buzzards (Buteo hemilasius) in the Ubsunur Depression (Republic of Tyva) in a dry wash of the Kharalyg-Khem river near the road Samagaltay – Torgalyg (fig. 1) breeding on the area of 0.38 km2 in groups of small poplars. For the period 1999–2010 we not surveyed the territory only in 2007 and 2009. The lowest number of breed- ing pairs was noted in 2004 and 2010, the highest – in 2005, and there were 4 breed- Ðèñ. 1. Èññëåäóåìàÿ òåððèòîðèÿ. ing pairs in other years. The breeding suc- Fig. 1. Surveyed area. cess of kestrels in this group was very high: broods consisted of 4–8 nestlings, on aver- ïðîèñõîäèò ñìåíà ïàðòí¸ðîâ â íèõ è ñî- age (n=32) 5.78±0.94 nestlings (fig. 2). õðàíÿåòñÿ ëè ïðè ýòîì ïðèâåðæåííîñòü Every year Kestrels occupied old nests of îäíîãî èç ïàðòí¸ðîâ ê ðàíåå âûáðàííî- Magpies (Pica pica). Only in 2002, 2004 and ìó ãíåçäîâîìó ó÷àñòêó. Íà âñå ýòè âîïðî- 2010 we recorded a pair of falcons breeding ñû ìîæíî îòâåòèòü ëèøü ïîñëå ìàññîâîãî in old nests of Kites and Upland Buzzards. In ìå÷åíèåÿ ïòèö. Íî äàæå ýïèçîäè÷åñêîå the territory there were 3 of 6 nests of Mag- ìå÷åíèå ïðè ðåãóëÿðíîì ìîíèòîðèíãå pies occupied by Kestrels regularly and not ÿâëÿåòñÿ ðåçóëüòàòèâíûì è èíîãäà ïðèíî- renewed by Magpies. Distances between ñèò íåîæèäàííûå ïëîäû. nests were 20 and 100 m accordingly.  Óáñóíóðñêîé êîòëîâèíå íà òåððèòîðèè We ringed 6 and 5 fledglings of Kestrels ðåñïóáëèêè Òûâà, â ñóõîì ðóñëå ð. Õàðàëûã- occupied nests of the Upland Buzzard and Õåì îêîëî òðàññû Ñàìàãàëòàé – Òîðãàëûã Magpie there in 2004; and 7, 6 and 6 fledg- (ðèñ. 1), íà ïëîùàäè 0,38 êì2 â ãðóïïàõ lings – in 2005, all of them were in Mag- íèçêîðîñëûõ òîïîëåé (Populus sp.) â òå÷å- pie’s nests. Broods were ringed in the same íèå 10 ëåò íàáëþäàåòñÿ ãíåçäîâàíèå 3–5 Magpie’s nest both years. ïàð îáûêíîâåííûõ ïóñòåëüã, ïàðû ÷åðíî- The nest of Magpie, where we had ringed óõèõ êîðøóíîâ (Milvus migrans lineatus) fledglings in 2004 and 2005, were occu- è ïàðû ìîõíîíîãèõ êóðãàííèêîâ (Buteo pied by Kestrels once again. We observed hemilasius). Çà ïåðèîä ñ 1999 ïî 2010 ãã. there a brood consisted of 6 nestlings on ðàçìíîæåíèå ïóñòåëüã íà äàííîé òåððèòî- June, 9 2010. Observing adult birds we ðèè íàáëþäàëîñü 10 ñåçîíîâ, çà èñêëþ÷å- noted that male in the pair had been ringed íèåì 2007 è 2009 ãã., êîãäà òåððèòîðèÿ íå and the ring was on its left leg. This male ïîñåùàëàñü. Ìèíèìàëüíîå êîëè÷åñòâî ïàð was ringed in this nest in 2004. We don’t ðàçìíîæàëîñü â 2004 è 2010 ãã., ìàêñè- know the female remained former or was

Ðèñ. 2. Ðàçìåð âûâîäêîâ îáûêíî- âåííîé ïóñòåëüãè (Falco tinnunculus) â 1999–2010 ãã. íà ð. Õàðàëûã-Õåì. Fig. 2. Brood size of the Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) in 1999–2010. Haralyg- Hem river. Short Reports Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 203

Ïòåíöû ïóñòåëüãè (Falco tinnunculus), îêîëüöîâàííûå â 2004 ã. (ââåðõó) è â 2005 ã. (âíèçó) â îäíîì è òîì æå ãíåçäå. Ââåðõó ñïðàâà ïòåíåö ñ êîëüöîì íà ëåâîé ëàïå. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. Chicks of the Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus), ringed in 2004 (upper) and in 2005 (bottom) in the same nest. Upper at the left – chick with ring on its left leg. Photos by I. Karyakin.

replaced in the pair. In 2008, ringed birds were not recorded neither in this nest, nor in other nests in that cluster, hence, change of the partner occurred in 2009–2010 Thus, we can confirm, that the male grown in the monitored nest of Magpies in 2004, has taken a place of vanished male and began to breed in the same nest 5–6 years later. Probably it is the first confirmed fact for Russia of returning the Kestrel on its birthplace and breeding in the nest which it was born in.

ìàëüíîå – â 2005 ã., â îñòàëüíûå ãîäû íà òåððèòîðèè ãíåçäèëèñü 4 ïàðû ïóñòåëüã. Óñïåõ ðàçìíîæåíèÿ ïóñòåëüã â äàííîé ãðóïïèðîâêå î÷åíü âûñîê: âûâîäêè ñî- ñòîÿëè èç 4–8 ïòåíöîâ, â ñðåäíåì (n=32) 5,78±0,94 ïòåíöîâ. Ïðè ýòîì, â òå ãîäû, êîãäà íà ðàññìàòðèâàåìîé òåððèòîðèè ðàçìíîæàëñÿ ìèíèìóì ïóñòåëüã, êàêîãî ëèáî î÷åâèäíîãî ñíèæåíèÿ óñïåõà ðàç- ìíîæåíèÿ íå çàìå÷åíî (ðèñ. 2). Åæåãîäíî ïóñòåëüãè çàíèìàëè ñòàðûå ïî- ñòðîéêè ñîðîê (Pica pica). Ëèøü â 2002, 2004 è 2010 ãã. íàáëþäàëîñü îäíîêðàòíîå ðàçìíîæåíèå ñîêîëîâ â ñòàðûõ ïîñòðîé- êàõ êîðøóíà è ìîõíîíîãîãî êóðãàííèêà. Èç 6 ïîñòðîåê ñîðîê íà äàííîé òåððè- òîðèè, 3, óäàë¸ííûå äðóã îò äðóãà íà 20 è 100 ì, ñîîòâåòñòâåííî, çàíèìàþòñÿ ïó- ñòåëüãàìè ðåãóëÿðíî è íå ïîäíîâëÿþòñÿ ñîðîêàìè. Îäíî èç ãí¸çä çà 10 ëåò íà÷àëî ðàçâàëèâàòüñÿ, îäíàêî ïóñòåëüãè ïðîäîë- æàþò â í¸ì ðàçìíîæàòüñÿ. Äðóãîå ãíåçäî ñîðîêè, ïîñòðîåííîå íà îñíîâå ðàçâàëèâ- øåãîñÿ ãíåçäà ìîõíîíîãîãî êóðãàííèêà, çàíèìàåòñÿ ïóñòåëüãàìè ñ 2006 ã., ïðè÷¸ì ðàíåå, à èìåííî â 2004 ã., ïóñòåëüãè çà- íèìàëè ãíåçäî ìîõíîíîãîãî êóðãàííèêà, Ãíåçäî è âûâîäîê ïàðû ïóñòåëüã, â êîòîðîé ñàìåö óñòðîåííîå íà ýòîì æå äåðåâå áûâøèìè áûë îêîëüöîâàí â 2004 ã. â ýòîì æå ãíåçäå. õîçÿåâàìè â 2003 ã. Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà.  2004 è 2005 ãã. â ýòîé ãðóïïèðîâ- Nest and brood of the pair of kestrels, which male êå ïóñòåëüã îñóùåñòâëÿëîñü êîëüöåâàíèå was ringed in this nest in 2004. Photos by I. Karyakin. 204 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Êðàòêèå ñîîáùåíèÿ

Ñàìåö ïóñòåëüãè, 2004 è 2005 ã., ñíîâà ðàçìíîæàëèñü ïó- îêîëüöîâàííûé â ñòåëüãè – âûâîäîê ñîäåðæàë 6 ïòåíöîâ. 2004 ã. ïòåíöîì â ãíåçäå, â êîòîðîì ðàç- Ïðè íàáëþäåíèè çà âçðîñëûìè ïòèöàìè ìíîæàåòñÿ â 2010 ã. îêàçàëîñü, ÷òî ñàìåö â ïàðå îêîëüöîâàí Ôîòî È. Êàðÿêèíà. êîëüöîì ñåðèè DB, êîòîðîå ðàñïîëàãàåòñÿ Male Kestrel, being a íà ëåâîé ëàïå. Òàê êàê íà ëåâóþ ëàïó áûëè chick ringed in a nest in îäåòû êîëüöà âñåãî äâóì ïòåíöàì èç âû- 2004, has bred in this âîäêà 2004 ã. – ñàìöó è ñàìêå (ïîë îïðå- nest in 2010. Photo by I. Karyakin. äåë¸í ïî ïðîìåðàì), âûðîñøèì èìåííî â ýòîì ñòàðîì ãíåçäå ñîðîêè, òî ìîæíî ñ óâåðåííîñòüþ ãîâîðèòü î òîì, ÷òî ñàìåö, íàáëþäàåìûé â ïàðå, áûë îêîëüöîâàí òàêæå â ýòîì ãíåçäå â 2004 ã. Ñìåíèëàñü ëè ñàìêà íà ýòîì ãíåçäå, ëèáî îíà îñòà- ëàñü ïðåæíåé, íå óñòàíîâëåíî, òàê êàê ïî ôîòîãðàôèÿì ñàìîê ïóñòåëüã äîâîëüíî ñëîæíî âûÿâèòü èõ èíäèâèäóàëüíûå ðàç- ïòåíöîâ.  2004 ã. áûëî ïîìå÷åíî 6 è 5 ëè÷èÿ.  2008 ã. íè íà ýòîì ãíåçäå, íè íà ñë¸òêîâ ïóñòåëüã, çàíèìàâøèõ ïîñòðîéêè äðóãèõ ãí¸çäàõ â ýòîé ãðóïïå, îêîëüöî- ìîõíîíîãîãî êóðãàííèêà è ñîðîêè, ñîîò- âàííûå âçðîñëûå ïòèöû íå íàáëþäàëèñü, âåòñòâåííî.  2005 ã. áûëî ïîìå÷åíî 7, 6 ñëåäîâàòåëüíî, ñìåíà ïàðòí¸ðà ïðîèçî- è 6 ñë¸òêîâ ïóñòåëüã – âñå â ïîñòðîéêàõ ñî- øëà â 2009–2010 ãã. ðîê.  îäíîé èç ïîñòðîåê ñîðîê âûâîäêè Òàêèì îáðàçîì, ìîæíî óòâåðæäàòü, ÷òî êîëüöåâàëèñü â îáà ãîäà. Äðóãèå âûâîäêè ñàìåö, âûðîñøèé â íàáëþäàåìîé ïîñòðîé- íå áûëè îêîëüöîâàíû â ýòè è â äðóãèå ãîäû êå ñîðîêè â 2004 ã., ñïóñòÿ 5–6 ëåò çàíÿë ïî òîé ïðè÷èíå, ÷òî â íèõ áûëè ïóõîâûå ìåñòî èñ÷åçíóâøåãî ñàìöà è ñòàë ðàçìíî- ïòåíöû â âîçðàñòå äî 5–7 äíåé. æàòüñÿ â ýòîé æå ïîñòðîéêå. Äëÿ Ðîññèè  2010 ã. 9 èþíÿ äàííàÿ òåððèòîðèÿ ýòî, âèäèìî, ïåðâûé ïîäòâåðæä¸ííûé ñëó- ñíîâà ïîñåùàëàñü ñ öåëüþ ìîíèòîðèíãà ÷àé âîçâðàòà ïóñòåëüãè íà ìåñòî ðîæäåíèÿ ãðóïïèðîâêè ïóñòåëüã. Íà íåé â ïîñòðîéêå è ðàçìíîæåíèå â ïîñòðîéêå, â êîòîðîé ñîðîêè, â êîòîðîé ïòåíöû êîëüöåâàëèñü â îíà âûâåëàñü.

RecordofthePallas’sFishEagleonTolbo-NurLake, Bayan-UlgiiProvince,Mongolia ВСТРЕЧА ОРЛАНА-ДОЛГОХВОСТА НА ОЗЕРЕ ТОЛБО-НУР, БАЯН-УЛГИЙСКИЙ АЙМАК, МОНГОЛИЯ VazhovS.V.,BachtinR.F.(AltaiStateUniversity,Barnaul,Russia) Важов С.В., Бахтин Р.Ф. (Алтайский государственный университет, Барнаул, Россия)

Êîíòàêò: Îðëàí-äîëãîõâîñò (Haliaeetus leucoryphus) The Pallas’s Fish Eagle (Haliaeetus leucory- Ñåðãåé Âàæîâ – ðåäêèé ìàëîèçó÷åííûé õèùíèê Ìîíãîëèè phus) is a rare poorly studied raptor in Mon- òåë.: +7 3854 47 45 40 +7 963 534 81 07 (Batmunkh et al., 2010). Âñòðå÷àåòñÿ â ýòîé golia (Batmunkh et al., 2010). It can be found [email protected] ñòðàíå, òàêæå êàê â Ðîññèè è Êàçàõñòàíå, íà in this country as well as in Russia and Kaza- ïîñëåãíåçäîâûõ ìèãðàöèÿõ. Âçðîñëàÿ ïòèöà khstan in the post-breeding migrations. The Ðîìàí Áàõòèí th [email protected] áûëà çàìå÷åíà 25 àâãóñòà 2010 ã. ñ àâòîìî- adult bird was seen on the 25 of August áèëüíîé äîðîãè Áàÿí-Óëãèé – Õîâä. Îíà ñè- 2010 off the road Bayan-Ulgii – Hovde. It was äåëà íà äåðåâÿííîé îïîðå ëèíèè ýëåêòðîïå- sitting on a wooden pole of electric power Contact: Sergey Vazhov ðåäà÷è íà ñåâåðî-âîñòî÷íîì áåðåãó îçåðà line on the northeast shore of Tolbo-Nur Lake tel.: +7 3854 47 45 40 Òîëáî-Íóð (Òîì-Íóð). Îðëàí-äîëãîõâîñò (Tom-Nur Lake). The eagle let us approach to +7 963 534 81 07 ïîäïóñòèë íàñ ïðèìåðíî íà 150 ì è äàë it at the distance of approximately 150 m. Af- [email protected] âîçìîæíîñòü åãî ñôîòîãðàôèðîâàòü, ïîñëå ter that having flown along the shore of the Roman Bachtin ÷åãî, ïðîëåòåâ âäîëü áåðåãà îçåðà îêîëî lake about 200 meters it sat on the wooden [email protected] 200 ì, îí ñíîâà ñåë íà îïîðó ËÝÏ. pole of electric power line again. Short Reports Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 205

Ðèñ. 1. Ìåñòî âñòðå÷è îðëàíà-äîëãîõâîñòà Ëèòåðàòóðà (Haliaeetus leucory- D. Batmunkh, Gilbert M., S. Gombobaatar Îðëàí-äîëãîõâîñò (Haliaeetus phus). The Status and Distribution of Pallas’s Fish Eagle leucoryphus) íà îçåðå Òîëáî-Íóð. 25.08.2010. Ôîòî Ñ. Âàæîâà. Fig. 1. Location of (Haliaeetus leucoryphus) in Mongolia. – Asian the Pallas’s Fish Raptors: Science and Conservation for Present Pallas’s Fish Eagle (Haliaeetus Eagle’s (Haliaeetus and Future. Proceedings of the 6th International leucoryphus). Tolbo-Nur Lake. leucoryphus) record. Conference on Asian Raptors. 2010. P. 38. 25/08/2010. Photo by S. Vazhov.

IncubatingPeriodattheSteller sSeaEagleinNorth-Eastern Sakhalin–RoleoftheMaleandFemaleintheProcessofEgg Incubation ИНКУБАЦИОННЫЙ ПЕРИОД У БЕЛОПЛЕЧИХ ОРЛАНОВ НА СЕВЕРО-ВОСТОКЕ САХАЛИНА – РОЛЬ САМЦА И САМКИ В НАСИЖИВАНИИ КЛАДКИ NaumenkoN.V.(FarEasternFederalUniversity,Vladivostok,Russia) Науменко Н.В. (Дальневосточный государственный университет, Владивосток, Россия)

Êîíòàêò: Áåëîïëå÷èé îðëàí (Haliaeetus pelagicus) Steller’s Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus pelagicus) Íèêîëàé Íàóìåíêî ÿâëÿåòñÿ ñàìîé êðóïíîé õèùíîé ïòèöåé is the largest bird of prey in the Northern Äàëüíåâîñòî÷íûé Ôå- äåðàëüíûé Óíèâåðñèòåò ñåâåðíîãî ïîëóøàðèÿ è, ïîæàëóé, ñàìîé Hemisphere and, perhaps, the most spec- 690091, Ðîññèÿ, ýôôåêòíîé õèùíîé ïòèöåé Ðîññèè. Âèä tacular bird of prey in Russia. This species Âëàäèâîñòîê, âíåñ¸í â Êðàñíûå êíèãè ÌÑÎÏ è Ðîññèè, is included in the Red List IUCN and the óë. Àâðîðîâñêàÿ, 24–38 à òàêæå â ðÿä ìåæäóíàðîäíûõ êîíâåíöèé Red Data Book of Russia. Yet, the behav- òåë.: +7 4232 43 04 84 [email protected] è ñîãëàøåíèé ïî îõðàíå ïòèö. Íåñìîòðÿ iour of Steller’s Sea Eagles during early íà ýòî, ïîâåäåíèå áåëîïëå÷èõ îðëàíîâ íà nesting stages (nest construction and the ðàííèõ ñòàäèÿõ ãíåçäîâàíèÿ (ñòðîèòåëü- incubation period) have been studied very Contact: ñòâî ãíåçäà è èíêóáàöèîííûé ïåðèîä) èçó- poorly. Nikolay Naumenko Far Eastern Federal ÷åíî î÷åíü ñëàáî, ÷òî îáúÿñíÿåòñÿ òðóäíî- The observations have shown that University ñòüþ ïðîâåäåíèÿ äëèòåëüíûõ íàáëþäåíèé both partners took part in egg incuba- Avrorovskaya str., 24–38 â ñóðîâûõ êëèìàòè÷åñêèõ óñëîâèÿõ ñåâåðà tion; however, the roles of the male and Vladivostok, Äàëüíåãî Âîñòîêà (Ïðèàìóðüå, ñåâåð Ñà- female in this process were different. For Russia, 690091 tel.: +7 4232 43 04 84 õàëèíà, Êàì÷àòêà, Ìàãàäàíñêàÿ îáëàñòü). both nests, the incubating time spent by [email protected] Íà ñåâåðå Ñàõàëèíà îðëàíû ïðèñòóïàþò the males was approximately twice less ê ñòðîèòåëüñòâó è ðåìîíòó ãí¸çä â ïåð- than that spent by the females (Table 1). 206 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Êðàòêèå ñîîáùåíèÿ

The similarity of the results obtained for two different nests sets wondering, the more especially as the nesting experience for the pairs under observation is likely to be different. Successful nesting of pair ¹1 (fig. 1: L-1-1) was observed during three seasons (2006–2008), while for pair ¹2 (fig. 1: L-2-1) it was likely to be the first nesting. The male from pair ¹2 had subtle light spots on the underneath side of the wings, which is typical of the birds aged 6–7 years (Shtarev, 2004). The partners on egg incubating shift- ed quickly; both birds seldom were ob- served inside the nest for more than two minutes. The images show the separate Ðèñ. 1. Ðàçìåùåíèå íàáëþäàåìûõ ãí¸çä áåëîïëå÷åãî îðëàíà (Haliaeetus moments of shifting of the incubating pelagicus). bird on April 26, 2008; the time of both Fig. 1. Distribution of observing nests of the Steller's Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus birds being present in the nest was 46 pelagicus). seconds. The duration of simultaneous âîé ïîëîâèíå ìàðòà, êëàäêè ïðîèñõîäÿò â presence of the male and female on the àïðåëå, íà ôîíå ÷àñòûõ ñíåãîïàäîâ è ìè- nest for both pair over the entire obser- íóñîâûõ òåìïåðàòóð ïî íî÷àì, â ñâåòëîå vation period was less than 2% from the âðåìÿ ñóòîê â àïðåëå òåìïåðàòóðà êîëå- observation period. áëåòñÿ îò -12°Ñ äî +14°Ñ. During the entire incubation period, one of  2006–2009 ãã. àâòîð âûïîëíÿë íàáëþ- the Steller’s Sea Eagles was almost constant- äåíèÿ çà ãí¸çäàìè áåëîïëå÷èõ îðëàíîâ ly on the nest. Occasionally the incubating ïî çàäàíèþ íåôòåäîáûâàþùåé êîìïàíèè birds left the nest for a short period in order «Ñàõàëèí Ýíåðäæè». Íàáëþäåíèÿ ïðî- to evacuate; they usually did not move away âîäèëèñü â ðàìêàõ ïðîãðàììû ïî ñíè- from the nest by more than 50 m. The total æåíèþ âîçäåéñòâèÿ ñòðîèòåëüñòâà òðàñ- time of both birds being absent on nest ¹1 ñû òðóáîïðîâîäà íà ãíåçäîâûå ó÷àñòêè was 0.09–0.12% of the observation time. Pair îðëàíîâ â ðàéîíå Ëóíüñêîãî çàëèâà íà ¹2 left the nest in total for just a little more ñåâåðî-âîñòîêå Ñàõàëèíà.  íàñòîÿùåì than 1 minute out of 131.3 h of observation ñîîáùåíèè ïðåäñòàâëåíû â êðàòêîì âèäå (0.01% of the observation time). ðåçóëüòàòû íàáëþäåíèé çà äâóìÿ ãí¸çäàìè Shifting of the brooding bird for pair ¹1 â ïåðèîä èíêóáàöèè. Äëÿ ãíåçäà ¹1 (ðèñ. occurred more often than that for pair ¹2. 1: L-1-1) ïðèâîäÿòñÿ äàííûå çà äâà ñåçî- The frequency of shifting on nest ¹1 in 2007 íà (2007, 2008 ãã.), äëÿ ãíåçäà ¹2 (ðèñ. 1: and 2008 was 3.6 and 3.2 times/10 hours, L-2-1) – çà îäèí ñåçîí (2008 ã.). respectively. The shifts for nest ¹2 occurred Íàáëþäåíèÿ çà ãí¸çäàìè âûïîëíÿëèñü èç with the frequency of 2.1 times/10 h.

Òàáë. 1. Ãíåçäîâàÿ àêòèâíîñòü áåëîïëå÷èõ îðëàíîâ (Haliaeetus pelagicus) âî âðåìÿ èíêóáàöèîííîãî ïåðèîäà. Table 1. Nesting activity of the Steller’s Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus pelagicus) during the period of incubation.

Âðåìÿ Äëèòåëüíîñòü Âðåìÿ íàñèæèâàíèÿ îäíîâðåìåííîãî îòñóòñòâèÿ êëàäêè (% ïðèñóòñòâèÿ ñàìöà îáåèõ ïòèö îò âðåìåíè è ñàìêè íà ãíåçäå íà ãíåçäå (% ×àñòîòà ñìåíû Îáùåå íàáëþäåíèÿ) (% îò âðåìåíè îò âðåìåíè íàñèæèâàþùèõ âðåìÿ Time of egg íàáëþäåíèÿ) íàáëþäåíèÿ) ïòèö (ðàç/10 íàáëþäåíèÿ incubation per Time of simultane- Time of ab- ÷àñ) Íîìåð Ïåðèîä (÷àñû) time of observ- ous presence of sence of both Frequency of ãíåçäà íàáëþäåíèÿ Total time ing (%) male and female in birds in the change of birds Nest Ãîä Time of of observing Ñàìåö Ñàìêà the nest per time of nest per time of incubating number Year observing (hours) Male Female observing (%) observing (%) (times/10 hours) 1 2007 18.04–25.05 288.6 29.7 69.9 1.4 0.12 3.6 1 2008 6.04–11.05 183.3 32.0 67.5 2.0 0.09 3.2 2 2008 23.04–30.05 131.3 32.1 67.5 1.6 0.01 2.1 Short Reports Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 207

Ãí¸çäà áåëîïëå÷åãî äàííûå, ïîëó÷åííûå â ðàçíûå ãîäû è íà îðëàíà: ââåðõó – ðàçíûõ ãí¸çäàõ, ðåçóëüòàòû íàáëþäåíèé ãíåçäî ¹1 (L-1-1), îäèííàäöàòûé äåíü ïðåäñòàâëåíû â îòíîñèòåëüíûõ åäèíèöàõ. íàñèæèâàíèÿ êëàäêè, Âðåìåííûå ïîêàçàòåëè ðàññ÷èòûâàëèñü â 16.04.2008 ã., âíèçó – ïðîöåíòàõ îò îáùåãî âðåìåíè íàáëþäå- ãíåçäî ¹2 (L-2-1), øå- íèÿ, à ÷àñòîòó ñìåí íàñèæèâàþùèõ ïòèö ñòîé äåíü íàñèæèâàíèÿ êëàäêè, 29.04.2008 ã. ðàññ÷èòûâàëè êàê êîëè÷åñòâî ñëó÷àåâ, Ôîòî Í. Íàóìåíêî. ïðîèçîøåäøèõ çà 10 ÷àñîâ íàáëþäåíèÿ Nests of the Steller's (ðàç/10 ÷àñ). Sea Eagle: upper – nest Íàáëþäåíèÿ ïîêàçàëè, ÷òî â íàñèæèâà- ¹1 (L-1-1), eleventh íèè êëàäêè ó÷àñòâîâàëè îáà ïàðòí¸ðà, îä- day of egg incubation, íàêî ðîëü ñàìöà è ñàìêè â ýòîì ïðîöåññå 16/04/2008; bottom – nest ¹2 (L-2-1), sixth áûëà íåîäèíàêîâà. Âðåìÿ íàñèæèâàíèÿ day of egg incubation, êëàäêè ñàìöàìè íà îáîèõ ãí¸çäàõ áûëî 29/04/2008. Photos by ïðèáëèçèòåëüíî â äâà ðàçà ìåíüøå, ÷åì N. Naumenko. âðåìÿ íàñèæèâàíèÿ êëàäêè ñàìêàìè. Äîëÿ íàñèæèâàíèÿ êëàäêè ñàìöàìè âàðüèðîâàëà â ïðåäåëàõ 29,7–32,1%, äëÿ ñàìîê âðåìÿ íàñèæèâàíèÿ ñîñòàâëÿëî 67,5–69,9% îò îáùåãî âðåìåíè íàáëþäåíèÿ (òàáë. 1). Íàñèæèâàíèå êëàäêè ñàìöîì è ñàìêîé ó áåëîïëå÷èõ îðëàíîâ ðàíåå íàáëþäàëè â Ìîñêîâñêîì çîîïàðêå (Øóðûãèíà, Øòà- ð¸â, 2003). Âûçûâàåò óäèâëåíèå ñõîæåñòü ñïåöèàëüíî îáîðóäîâàííûõ íàáëþäàòåëü- ðåçóëüòàòîâ, ïîëó÷åííûõ äëÿ äâóõ ðàçíûõ íûõ ïóíêòîâ ïðè ïîìîùè áèíîêëåé Fujinon ãí¸çä, òåì áîëåå ÷òî îïûò ãíåçäîâàíèÿ ó 7×50 è Pentax 20×60. Ðåçóëüòàòû íàáëþäå- íàáëþäàâøèõñÿ ïàð áûë, ñêîðåå âñåãî, íèé çàïèñûâàëèñü íà öèôðîâîé äèêòîôîí ðàçíûé. Óäà÷íîå ãíåçäîâàíèå ïàðû ¹1 ìû ñ òî÷íîñòüþ äî ñåêóíä, ïàðàëëåëüíî ïðî- íàáëþäàëè â òå÷åíèå òð¸õ ñåçîíîâ (2006– âîäèëàñü ôîòîñú¸ìêà êàìåðîé Panasonic 2008 ãã.), òîãäà êàê ïàðà ¹2, âåðîÿòíî, Lumix DMC-FZ50, çàêðåïë¸ííîé íà øòàòè- çàãíåçäèëàñü âïåðâûå. Ñàìåö èç ïàðû ¹2 âå. Áîëåå ïîäðîáíî ìåòîäèêà íàáëþäåíèé èìåë ñëàáîâûðàæåííûå ñâåòëûå ïÿòíà íà îïèñàíà íàìè ðàíåå (Íàóìåíêî, 2010). èñïîäå êðûëüåâ, ÷òî õàðàêòåðíî äëÿ ïòèö Äëÿ òîãî, ÷òîáû óäîáíåå áûëî ñðàâíèâàòü â âîçðàñòå 6–7 ëåò (Øòàð¸â, 2004), èìåííî

Îòäåëüíûå ìîìåíòû ñìåíû ïàðòí¸ðîâ íà ãíåçäå ¹1 (L-1-1) 26.04.2008 ãîäà: 1 – ñàìåö ñàäèòñÿ íà ãíåçäî; 2 – ñàìêà âñòà- ëà èç ëîòêà; 3 – ïàðà âîêàëèçèðóåò; 4 – ñàì- êà ñíÿëàñü ñ ãíåçäà. Ôîòî Í. Íàóìåíêî. Some moments of birds changing in the nest ¹1 (L-1-1), 26/04/2008: 1 – male is sitting down in the nest; 2 – female stood up in the nest; 3 – pair are vocalizing; 4 – female is flying out from the nest. Photos by N. Naumenko. 208 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Êðàòêèå ñîîáùåíèÿ

â ýòîì âîçðàñòå áåëîïëå÷èå îðëàíû ïðè- âñòðå÷ó, çàòåì îáå ïòèöû âîçâðàùàëèñü ñòóïàþò ê ðàçìíîæåíèþ. Íà ñíèìêàõ õî- ê ãíåçäó, îòäîõíóâøàÿ ïòèöà ïðèñòóïàëà ðîøî âèäíî, ÷òî ãíåçäî ìîëîäîé ïàðû çíà- ê íàñèæèâàíèþ, âòîðàÿ ïòèöà ëèáî îòäû- ÷èòåëüíî ìåíüøå ïî ðàçìåðó, ÷åì ãíåçäî õàëà íåäàëåêî îò ãíåçäà, ëèáî óëåòàëà ê îïûòíîé ïàðû. ìîðþ íà îõîòó. Îáùåå âðåìÿ îòñóòñòâèÿ Ñìåíà íàñèæèâàþùåé ïòèöû ÷àùå âñå- îáåèõ ïòèö íà ãíåçäå ¹1 ñîñòàâèëî 0,09– ãî âûãëÿäåëà ñëåäóþùèì îáðàçîì. Îòäî- 0,12% îò âðåìåíè íàáëþäåíèÿ. Ïàðà ¹2 õíóâøèé îðëàí âîçâðàùàëñÿ íà ãíåçäî, íà- çà 131,3 ÷àñà íàáëþäåíèÿ îòñóòñòâîâàëà ñèæèâàþùèé âñòàâàë (îáû÷íî ïàðà â ýòîò íà ãíåçäå, â îáùåé ñëîæíîñòè, ÷óòü áîëü- ìîìåíò âîêàëèçèðîâàëà) è óëåòàë. Ïðèëå- øå îäíîé ìèíóòû (0,01% îò âðåìåíè íà- òåâøàÿ ïòèöà îñòîðîæíî ñïóñêàëàñü â ëîòîê áëþäåíèÿ). è ëîæèëàñü, íåíàäîëãî âåðòèêàëüíî ïîä- Ñìåíû íàñèæèâàþùåé ïòèöû ó ïàðû íèìàÿ õâîñò. Êàê ïðàâèëî, ïåðåä òåì êàê ¹1 ïðîèñõîäèëè ÷àùå, ÷åì ó ïàðû ¹2. ëå÷ü, ïòèöà ïåðåâîðà÷èâàëà êëàäêó. Èíî- ×àñòîòà ñìåí ïàðòí¸ðîâ íà ãíåçäå ¹1 â ãäà íàñèæèâàþùàÿ ïòèöà ïîêèäàëà ãíåçäî 2007 ãîäó ñîñòàâëÿëà 3,6 ðàç/10 ÷àñ, à â ðàíüøå, ÷åì íà íåãî ñàäèëñÿ îòäîõíóâøèé 2008 ãîäó – 3,2 ðàç/10 ÷àñ. Ñìåíû ïàðòí¸- ïàðòí¸ð. Îáû÷íî ñìåíà ïðîèñõîäèëà áû- ðîâ íà ãíåçäå ¹2 ïðîèñõîäèëè ñ ÷àñòîòîé ñòðî, îáå ïòèöû ðåäêî íàõîäèëèñü íà ãíåç- 2,1 ðàç/10 ÷àñ. äå áîëåå äâóõ ìèíóò. Íà ñíèìêàõ ïîêàçàíû îòäåëüíûå ìîìåíòû ñìåíû ïàðòíåðîâ 26 Ëèòåðàòóðà àïðåëÿ 2008 ã., âðåìÿ ïðèñóòñòâèÿ îáåèõ Íàóìåíêî Í.Â. Íåêîòîðûå îñîáåííîñòè âû- ïòèö íà ãíåçäå ñîñòàâèëî 46 ñåêóíä. Äëè- êàðìëèâàíèÿ ïòåíöîâ áåëîïëå÷èõ îðëàíîâ òåëüíîñòü îäíîâðåìåííîãî ïðèñóòñòâèÿ íà (Haliaeetus pelagicus) íà ñåâåðî-âîñòîêå Ñà- ãíåçäå ñàìöà è ñàìêè ó îáåèõ ïàð çà âåñü õàëèíà â ðàéîíå Ëóíüñêîãî çàëèâà. – Õèùíûå ïåðèîä íàáëþäåíèÿ íå ïðåâûøàëà 2% îò ïòèöû è ñîâû â çîîïàðêàõ è ïèòîìíèêàõ. ¹19. âðåìåíè íàáëþäåíèÿ. Ì., 2010. Ñ. 24–41. Øóðûãèíà Ò.È., Øòàð¸â Ð.Ô. Î ðàçìíîæå-  òå÷åíèå âñåãî èíêóáàöèîííîãî ïåðèî- íèè áåëîïëå÷åãî îðëàíà (Haliaeetus pelagicus) äà íà ãíåçäå ïî÷òè ïîñòîÿííî íàõîäèëñÿ â óñëîâèÿõ Ìîñêîâñêîãî çîîïàðêà. – Õèùíûå îäèí èç îðëàíîâ. Èçðåäêà íàñèæèâàþùèå ïòèöû è ñîâû â çîîïàðêàõ è ïèòîìíèêàõ. ¹11. ïòèöû íåíàäîëãî ïîêèäàëè ãíåçäî äëÿ äå- Ì., 2003. Ñ. 16–20. ôåêàöèè, ïðè ýòîì îíè, êàê ïðàâèëî, íå Øòàð¸â Ð.Ô. Îïèñàíèå ãîäîâûõ íàðÿäîâ ó óäàëÿëèñü îò ãíåçäà äàëüøå 50 ìåòðîâ. áåëîïëå÷åãî îðëàíà (Haliaeetus pelagicus). – Èíîãäà íàñèæèâàþùèé îðëàí, óâèäåâ âîç- Õèùíûå ïòèöû è ñîâû â çîîïàðêàõ è ïèòîìíè- âðàùåíèå ïàðòí¸ðà, ñíèìàëñÿ åìó íà- êàõ. ¹12–13. Ì., 2004. Ñ. 46–50.

TheDeathofaRingedImperialEaglethroughElectrocution atFarEastoftheOrenburgDistrict,Russia ГИБЕЛЬ МЕЧЕНОГО МОГИЛЬНИКА НА ПТИЦЕОПАСНОЙ ЛИНИИ ЭЛЕКТРОПЕРЕДАЧИ НА КРАЙНЕМ ВОСТОКЕ ОРЕНБУРГСКОЙ ОБЛАСТИ, РОССИЯ BarbazyukE.V.(InstituteofSteppeofUralBranchofRussianAcademyofSince, OrenburgStateNatureReserve,Orenburg,Russia) Барбазюк Е.В. (УРАН Институт степи УрО РАН, ФГУ ГПЗ Оренбургский, Оренбург, Россия)

Êîíòàêò: Íà òåððèòîðèè Ñâåòëèíñêîãî ðàéîíà On October 5, 2010 remains of a large eagle Åâãåíèé Áàðáàçþê Îðåíáóðãñêîé îáëàñòè 5 îêòÿáðÿ 2010 ã. with the Kazakh ring and wing tag (fig. 1) were [email protected] ïîä âîçäóøíîé ëèíèåé ýëåêòðîïåðåäà÷è found under a power line at far east of the 10 ê íàéäåíû îñòàíêè êðóïíîãî îðëà ñ Orenburg district, Russia. The remains were Contact: êîëüöîì êàçàõñòàíñêîãî öåíòðà êîëüöåâà- located under the power line only 1.21 km to Evgeny Barbazyuk [email protected] íèÿ íà íîãå è ëåæàâøåé ðÿäîì êðûëîìåò- the south of border of the Ashisay Steppe Site êîé (ðèñ. 1). Îñòàíêè ðàñïîëàãàëèñü ïîä of the Orenburg State Reserve (N 50°56’15.6’’ ïòèöåîïàñíîé ëèíèåé, âñåãî â 1,21 êì ê E 061°11’31.5’’). This Reserve site is situated Short Reports Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 209

in the eastern Orenburg District, the Russian Federation, in close proximity to the Kusta- nay District, Northern Kazakhstan. The age of remains was approximately 2–3 months i.e. the bird had been electrocuted late summer or early fall of 2010. No ringed bird remains were recorded during examination of this power line in early June. The ring number was AK0194 KAZAKHSTAN ALMATY, the tag number was Å02. Reportedly, the found electrocuted eagle was a 2-years old Imperial Eagle (Aquila heliaca) which had been ringed and tagged by E.A. Bragin on July 17, 2009 in the Nau- rzum State Nature Reserve, Kustanay Re- gion, Northern Kazakhstan (I.V. Karyakin, pers. com.). Thus, the ringed bird was dis- covered some 200 km to the south-west of the Naurzum Reserve during the second Ðèñ. 1. Ìåñòî ìå÷åíèÿ þãó îò þæíîé ãðàíèöû (îïàøêè) ó÷àñò- year of its life. (1) è ãèáåëè (2) ìîãèëü- êà «Àùèñàéñêàÿ ñòåïü» Ãîñóäàðñòâåííîãî Currently, Administration of the Orenburg íèêà (Aquila heliaca). ñòåïíîãî çàïîâåäíèêà «Îðåíáóðãñêèé» (N Steppe Reserve together with the Oren- Fig. 1. Points of marking 50°56’15,6’’ E 061°11’31,5’’). Äàííûé ó÷à- (1) and death (2) of the burg Regional Coordinator for the Project Imperial Eagle (Aquila ñòîê çàïîâåäíèêà íàõîäèòñÿ íà êðàéíåì ‘Improving the coverage and management heliaca). âîñòîêå Îðåíáóðãñêîé îáëàñòè, â íåïî- efficiency of protected areas in the steppe ñðåäñòâåííîé áëèçîñòè îò Êóñòàíàéñêîé biome of Russia’ S. Levykin are negotiating îáëàñòè Ñåâåðíîãî Êàçàõñòàíà. Âîçðàñò with the local electric utility company ‘Oren- îñòàíêîâ ñîñòàâëÿåò íå áîëåå 2–3 ìåñÿöåâ, burgenergo’ on installation of bird protec- ò.å. ïòèöà áûëà ïîðàæåíà òîêîì â êîíöå tive devices on the power lines around the ëåòà – íà÷àëå îñåíè 2010 ãîäà. Ïðè îñìîòðå Orenburg Reserve sites for protection of ýòîé æå ËÝÏ â íà÷àëå èþíÿ òðóï îòñóòñòâî- birds against electrocution. âàë. Íîìåð êîëüöà AK0194 KAZAKHSTAN ALMATY, íîìåð êðûëîìåòêè Å02. Ïî ïîëó÷åííîé èíôîðìàöèè, ïîðàæ¸í- íûé ýëåêòðîòîêîì îð¸ë îêàçàëñÿ äâóõ- ãîäîâàëûì ìîãèëüíèêîì (Aquila heliaca), îêîëüöîâàííûì è ïîìå÷åííûì Å.À. Áðàãè- íûì 17 èþëÿ 2009 ã. â óðî÷èùå Ñûïñûí Íàóðçóìñêîãî ãîñóäàðñòâåííîãî ïðèðîä- íîãî çàïîâåäíèêà â Êîñòàíàéñêîé îáëàñòè Êàçàõñòàíà (È.Â. Êàðÿêèí, ëè÷íîå ñîîáùå- íèå). Òàêèì îáðàçîì, îêîëüöîâàííàÿ ïòè- öà áûëà îáíàðóæåíà ïðèìåðíî â 200 êì ê þãî-çàïàäó îò Íàóðçóìñêîãî çàïîâåäíèêà íà âòîðîé ãîä ñâîåé æèçíè.  íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ àäìèíèñòðàöèÿ Ãî- ñóäàðñòâåííîãî ñòåïíîãî çàïîâåäíèêà «Îðåíáóðãñêèé», ñîâìåñòíî ñ ðåãèîíàëü- íûì êîîðäèíàòîðîì ïî Îðåíáóðãñêîé îáëàñòè Ïðîåêòà ÏÐÎÎÍ/ÃÝÔ/ÌÏÐ «Ñî- âåðøåíñòâîâàíèå ñèñòåìû è ìåõàíèçìîâ óïðàâëåíèÿ ÎÎÏÒ â ñòåïíîì áèîìå Ðîñ- ñèè» Ñ.Â. Ëåâûêèíûì, âåä¸ò ïåðåãîâîðû ñ ôèëèàëîì ÎÀÎ «ÌÐÑÊ Âîëãè» «Îðåí- áóðãýíåðãî» ïî âîïðîñó óñòàíîâêè ïòè- öåçàùèòíûõ èçîëÿòîðîâ íà ïòèöåîïàñíûå Îñòàíêè ìîãèëüíèêà (Aquila heliaca), ïîãèáøåãî íà ËÝÏ âîêðóã ó÷àñòêîâ çàïîâåäíèêà «Îðåí- ËÝÏ. Ôîòî Å. Áàðáàçþêà. áóðãñêèé» ñ öåëüþ èñêëþ÷åíèÿ ïîðàæåíèÿ Remains of the Imperial Eagle (Aquila heliaca) died ïòèö ýëåêòðîòîêîì. through electrocution. Photo by E. Barbazyuk. 210 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Íîâûå ïóáëèêàöèè è ôèëüìû

NewPublicationsandVideos НОВЫЕПУБЛИКАЦИИИФИЛЬМЫ Books КНИГИ

Âûøåë â ñâåò íîâûé ñáîðíèê ñòàòåé î A new book about the European vul- åâðîïåéñêèõ ïàäàëüùèêàõ «Ïàäàëüùè- tures: Buitres, muladares y legislación êè, ïîäêîðìî÷íûå ïëîùàäêè è ñàíè- sanitaria: perspectivas de un conflicto y òàðíîå çàêîíîäàòåëüñòâî: êîíôëèêò è sus consecuencias desde la Biología de la åãî ïîñëåäñòâèÿ äëÿ ïåðñïåêòèâ ïðè- Conservación / Vultures, feeding stations ðîäîîõðàííîé áèîëîãèè»: Buitres, mu- and sanitary legislation: a conflict and ladares y legislación sanitaria: perspectivas its consequences from the perspective de un conflicto y sus consecuencias desde of conservation biology. Eds.: José An- la Biología de la Conservación / Vultures, tonio Donázar, Antoni Margalida, David feeding stations and sanitary legislation: a Campión. Sociedad de Ciencias Aranzadi, conflict and its consequences from the per- Aranzadi Zientzia Elkartea, 2010. 551 p. (9) Contact spective of conservation biology. Eds.: José (ISBN 84-935986-6-2)48. Sociedad de Ciencias Antonio Donázar, Antoni Margalida, David A new book about the European vultures Aranzadi Zorroagagaina, 11 Campión. Sociedad de Ciencias Aranzadi, is bilingual with 22 papers in Spanish and E-20014 Donostia – San Aranzadi Zientzia Elkartea, 2010. 551 p. English. Written by many of the leading vul- Sebastián (ISBN 84-935986-6-2)48. ture experts in Europe, it is the most detailed tel.: +34 943 466 142 Äâóÿçû÷íîå èçäàíèå ñ 22 ñòàòüÿìè íà èñ- and up to date publication about European fax: +34 943 455 811 idazkaritza@ ïàíñêîì è àíãëèéñêîì ÿçûêàõ. Ýòî ñàìàÿ vultures. Size: 21×29.7 cm (A4). aranzadi-zientziak.org ñîâðåìåííàÿ è íàèáîëåå äåòàëüíàÿ ïóáëè- The prize of the book is €30. www.aranzadi-zientz- êàöèÿ î åâðîïåéñêèõ ïàäàëüùèêàõ, òåêñòû Contact (9). iak.org äëÿ êîòîðîé íàïèñàíû ìíîãèìè èç âåäó- ùèõ ýêñïåðòîâ ïî ïàäàëüùèêàì Åâðîïû. Ðàçìåð ñáîðíèêà: 21×29,7 ñì (A4). Ñòîèìîñòü ñáîðíèêà 30 Åâðî. Êîíòàêò (9).

Âûøåë â ñâåò íîâûé ñáîðíèê ñòàòåé î A new book about the Bonelli’s Eagle: ÿñòðåáèíîì îðëå «ßñòðåáèíûé îð¸ë: The Bonelli’s Eagle. Ecology, behaviour ýêîëîãèÿ, ïîâåäåíèå è îõðàíà»: The and conservation. Ed.: V.J. Hernández. Bonelli's Eagle. Ecology, behaviour and Madrid: Tundra Ediciones, 2010. 352 p.49 conservation. Ed.: V.J. Hernández. Madrid: A new book about the Bonelli’s Ea- Tundra Ediciones, 2010. 352 p.49 gle (Hieraaetus fasciatus) was written by Ýòî ñàìàÿ ñîâðåìåííàÿ è íàèáîëåå äå- more than 130 authors and covers more òàëüíàÿ ïóáëèêàöèÿ î ÿñòðåáèíîì îðëå than 30 countries. Main illustrator: Edu- (Hieraaetus fasciatus), òåêñòû äëÿ êîòîðîé ardo Rodríguez, photographers: José Luis íàïèñàíû áîëåå ÷åì 130 àâòîðàìè èç 30 Rodríguez, Niranjant Sant and many oth- ñòðàí ìèðà. Ñáîðíèê ïðåêðàñíî ïðîèëëþ- ers 100 photographers. Hardback, format: (10) Contact TUNDRA ñòðèðîâàí ðèñóíêàìè Ýäóàðäî Ðîäðèãåñà 31×24 cm. Apartado de Correos è ôîòîãðàôèÿìè áîëåå ÷åì 100 ôîòîãðà- The prize of the book is €60. 4047 ôîâ, èçäàí â òâ¸ðäîì ïåðåïë¸òå, ôîðìàò Contact (10). Valencia, Spain, 46006 31×24 ñì. Ñòîèìîñòü ñáîðíèêà 60 Åâðî. tel.: +34 690 303 087 http://www.tundraedic- Êîíòàêò (10). iones.es/

48 http://www.europeanraptors.org/documents/hojapedido.pdf 49 http://www.tundraediciones.es/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=26032&lang=en New Publications and Videos Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 211

Âûøëà â ñâåò íîâàÿ êíèãà îá îðëàõ «Íà- A new book about the Eagles: The Eagle áëþäàòåëè îðëîâ. Íàáëþäåíèå è îõðà- Watchers. Observing and Conserving íà ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ âî âñ¸ì ìèðå»: Raptors around the World. Eds.: Ruth The Eagle Watchers. Observing and Con- E. Tingay, Todd E. Katzner. 2010. 256 p. serving Raptors around the World. Eds.: (ISBN: 978-0-8014-4873-7). Ruth E. Tingay, Todd E. Katzner. 2010. The book contains 14 color photographs 256 p. (ISBN: 978-0-8014-4873-7). and 29 halftones. Êíèãà ñîäåðæèò 14 öâåòíûõ è 29 ÷¸ðíî- This book was written by people who have áåëûõ ôîòîãðàôèé. dedicated years to the study of eagles, to Ýòà êíèãà áûëà íàïèñàíà ëþäüìè, ïîñâÿ- provide an insider’s view for all readers, but òèâøèìè ãîäû èçó÷åíèþ îðëîâ, ÷òîáû ñäå- especially those who have never been up ëàòü âçãëÿä ñïåöèàëèñòà äîñòóïíûì âñåì close and personal with these magnificent ÷èòàòåëÿì. Äâàäöàòü äåâÿòü âåäóùèõ ñïå- yet often misunderstood creatures. In their öèàëèñòîâ ïî îðëàì äåëÿòñÿ ñâîèìè ïî- stories, twenty-nine leading eagle research- ëåâûìè íàáëþäåíèÿìè, êîòîðûõ íå âñòðå- ers share their remarkable field experiences, òèøü â èõ íàó÷íûõ ïóáëèêàöèÿõ. providing personal narratives that don’t fea- Êíèãà ñîñòîèò èç î÷åðêîâ î äâàäöàòè ture in their scientific publications. ÷åòûð¸õ âèäàõ îðëîâ, îáèòàþùèõ íà øåñòè The Eagle Watchers covers twenty-four êîíòèíåíòàõ, îò øèðîêî èçâåñòíûõ (áåëî- species on six continents, from well known ãîëîâûé îðëàí Haliaeetus leucocephalus; (Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus; Gold- áåðêóò Aquila chrisaetos) äî ìàëî èçó÷åí- en Eagle Aquila chrysaetos), to obscure íûõ (òðàóðíûé îð¸ë Oroaetus isidori; íîâî- (Black-and-Chestnut Eagle Oroaetus isidori; ãâèíåéñêàÿ ãàðïèÿ Harpyopsis novaeguine- New Guinea Harpy Eagle Harpyopsis no- ae), è îò îáû÷íûõ (îðëàí-êðèêóí Haliaeetus vaeguineae), and from common (African vocifer) äî êðèòè÷åñêè óãðîæàåìûõ (ôè- Fish Eagle Haliaeetus vocifer) to critically ëèïïèíñêàÿ ãàðïèÿ Pithecophaga jefferyi; endangered (Philippine Eagle Pithecophaga ìàäàãàñêàðñêèé îðëàí-êðèêóí Haliaeetus jefferyi; Madagascar Fish Eagle Haliaeetus vociferoides). Ðàçíîîáðàçíûå ñîáûòèÿ, vociferoides). The diverse experiences viv- ÿðêî îïèñàííûå â ýòîé êíèãå, ïîêàçûâàþò idly described in this book reveal the pas- ñòðàñòü, ñàìîîòâåðæåííîñòü è àâàíòþðèçì sion, dedication, and sense of adventure òåõ, êòî èçó÷àåò ýòèõ âåëè÷åñòâåííûõ ïòèö shared by those who study these majestic è áîðåòñÿ çà èõ ñîõðàíåíèå. birds and strive for their conservation. Êíèãà ñîäåðæèò ïîòðÿñàþùèå öâåòíûå Featuring stunning color photographs of ôîòîãðàôèè îðëîâ, èíôîðìàöèþ îá the eagles, information on raptor conserva- îõðàíå õèùíèêîâ, ñïèñîê âñåõ âèäîâ îð- tion, a global list of all eagle species with ëîâ ìèðà ñ èõ àðåàëàìè è ïðèðîäîîõðàí- ranges and conservation status, and a color íûì ñòàòóñîì, è áóäåò èíòåðåñíà äëÿ âñåõ map of the sites visited in the book, “The ëþáèòåëåé ïòèö. Eagle Watchers” will appeal to birders, con- Äëÿ äàëüíåéøåé ïîääåðæêè ïðîãðàììû servationists, and adventure travelers alike. ïî îõðàíå õèùíûõ ïòèö, îïèñàííîé â ýòîé To further support the conservation pro- êíèãå, âñÿ âûðó÷êà îò ïðîäàæè êíèãè áóäåò grams described in this book, all royalties ïîæåðòâîâàíà äâóì âåäóùèì íåêîììåð÷å- are being donated to two leading nonprofit ñêèì îðãàíèçàöèÿì äëÿ îáó÷åíèÿ ìîëîäûõ organizations for raptor conservation train- ñïåöèàëèñòîâ â îáëàñòè îõðàíû õèùíèêîâ ing and fieldwork: Hawk Mountain Sanctu- è ïîëåâûõ èññëåäîâàíèé: Ïðîãðàììà èí- ary Intern Program and the National Birds of òåðíîâ â çàïîâåäíèêå «ßñòðåáèíàÿ ãîðà» è Prey Trust. Íàöèîíàëüíûé ôîíä õèùíûõ ïòèö. Contributors: Bill Clark (Solitary Eagle Har- Àâòîðû î÷åðêîâ: Áèëë Êëàðê (÷¸ðíûé pyhaliaetus solitarius, Mexico); Rob Davies îð¸ë-îòøåëüíèê Harpyhaliaetus solitarius, (Verreaux’s Eagle Aquila verreauxii, South Ìåêñèêà); Ðîá Äýâèñ (êàôðñêèé îð¸ë Aq- Africa); Miguel Ferrer (Spanish Imperial Eagle uila verreauxii, Þæíàÿ Àôðèêà); Ìèãóýëü Aquila adalberti, Spain); Martin Gilbert (New Ôåððåð (èñïàíñêèé ìîãèëüíèê Aquila adal- Guinea Harpy Eagle, New Guinea); Justin berti, Èñïàíèÿ); Ìàðòèí Ãèëáåðò (íîâîãâè- Grant (White-Tailed Sea Eagle Haliaeetus íåéñêàÿ ãàðïèÿ, Íîâàÿ Ãâèíåÿ); Äæàñòèí albicilla, Scotland); Teryl G. Grubb, Alan R. Ãðàíò (îðëàí-áåëîõâîñò Haliaeetus albicilla, Harmata (Bald Eagle, United States); Björn Øîòëàíäèÿ); Òýðèë Ã. Ãðóá, Àëàí Ð. Õàðìàòà Helander (White-Tailed Sea Eagle, Sweden); (áåëîãîëîâûé îðëàí, ÑØÀ); Áü¸ðí Õåëàíäåð Andrew Jenkins (Martial Eagle Polemaetus (îðëàí-áåëîõâîñò, Øâåöèÿ); Ýíäðþ Äæåí- bellicosus, South Africa); Sarah Karpanty êèíñ (áîåâîé oð¸ë Polemaetus bellicosus, (Madagascar Serpent Eagle Eutriorchis as- 212 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Íîâûå ïóáëèêàöèè è ôèëüìû

Þæíàÿ Àôðèêà); Ñàðà Êàðïàíòàé (ìàäà- tur, Madagascar); Todd E. Katzner (Eastern ãàñêàðñêèé çìååÿä Eutriorchis astur, Ìàäà- Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca, Kazakhstan); ãàñêàð); Òîää Ý. Êàòöíåð (ìîãèëüíèê Aquila John A. Love (White-Tailed Sea Eagle, Scot- heliaca, Êàçàõñòàí); Äæîí À. Ëàâ (îðëàí- land); Carol McIntyre (Golden Eagle, United áåëîõâîñò, Øîòëàíäèÿ); Êýðîë ÌàêÈíòàéð States); Bernd-U. Meyburg (Lesser Spot- (áåðêóò, ÑØÀ); Áåðíä Ó. Ìåéáóðã (ìàëûé ted Eagle Aquila pomarina, Czechoslovakia ïîäîðëèê Aquila pomarina, ×åõîñëîâàêèÿ and Germany); Hector C. Miranda Jr. (Phil- è Ãåðìàíèÿ); Ãåêòîð Ê. Ìèðàíäà ìë. (ôè- ippine Eagle, Philippines); Malcolm Nicoll ëèïïèíñêàÿ ãàðïèÿ, Ôèëèïïèíû); Ìàëêîì (Grey-Headed Fishing Eagle Icthyophaga Íèêîëë (îðëàí-ðûáîëîâ Icthyophaga ich- ichthyaetus, Cambodia); Vincent Nijman thyaetus, Êàìáîäæà); Âèíñåíò Íèäæìàí (Javan Hawk-Eagle Spizaetus bartelsi, Indo- (ÿâàíñêèé õîõëàòûé îð¸ë Spizaetus bartelsi, nesia); Penny Olsen (Wedge-Tailed Eagle, Èíäîíåçèÿ); Ïåííè Îëñåí (êëèíîõâîñòûé Australia); Keisuke Saito (Steller’s Sea Eagle îð¸ë Vultur audax, Àâñòðàëèÿ); Êåèöóêå Haliaeetus pelagicus, Japan); Susanne Shultz Ñàéòî (áåëîïëå÷èé îðëàí Haliaeetus pe- (African Crowned Eagle Stephanoaetus cor- lagicus, ßïîíèÿ); Ñþçàííà Øóëüö (âåíöå- onatus, Ivory Coast); Robert E. Simmons íîñíûé îð¸ë Stephanoaetus coronatus, (Wahlberg’s Eagle Hieraaetus wahlbergi, Êîò-ä'Èâóàð); Ðîáåðò Ý. Ñèììîíñ (ñåðå- South Africa); Ruth E. Tingay (Madagascar áðèñòûé îð¸ë Hieraaetus wahlbergi, Þæíàÿ Fish Eagle, Madagascar); Janeene Touch- Àôðèêà); Ðóô Ý. Òèíãåé (ìàäàãàñêàðñêèé ton (Harpy Eagle Harpia harpyja, Panama); îðëàí-êðèêóí, Ìàäàãàñêàð); Äæàíèí Òà÷- Ursula Valdez (Black-and-Chestnut Eagle, òîí (ãàðïèÿ Harpia harpyja, Ïàíàìà); Óðñó- Peru); Munir Z. Virani (African Fish Eagle, ëà Âàëüäýñ (òðàóðíûé îð¸ë, Ïåðó); Ìóíèð Kenya); Jeff Watson (Golden Eagle, Scot- Ç. Âèðàíè (îðëàí-êðèêóí, Êåíèÿ); Äæåô land); Mark Watson (New Guinea Harpy Ea- Óîòñîí (áåðêóò, Øîòëàíäèÿ); Ìàðê Óîòñîí gle, New Guinea); Richard T. Watson (Bate- (íîâîãâèíåéñêàÿ ãàðïèÿ, Íîâàÿ Ãâèíåÿ); leur Terathopius ecaudatus, South Africa); Ðè÷àðä Ò. Óîòñîí (îð¸ë-ñêîìîðîõ Teratho- Jason Wiersma (White-Bellied Sea Eagle pius ecaudatus, Þæíàÿ Àôðèêà); Äæåéñîí Haliaeetus leucogaster, Tasmania). Âèðñìà (áåëîáðþõèé îðëàí Haliaeetus leu- Book is available on website Amazon50. cogaster, Òàñìàíèÿ). Price: $20.42. Êíèãó ìîæíî çàêàçàòü íà ñàéòå Àìàçîí50. Öåíà: 20,42 äîëëàðîâ ÑØÀ.

Âûøåë â ñâåò àííîòèðîâàííûé ñïè- New book – the bibliography of the mul- ñîê ïóáëèêàöèé î ïòèöàõ Þæíîé Àçèè titude of books published that deal with «Ïòèöû â êíèãàõ: òðèñòà ëåò îðíèòî- the birds of the South Asian region: Aash- ëîãèè Þæíîé Àçèè – áèáëèîãðàôèÿ»: eesh Pittie. Birds in books: three hundred Aasheesh Pittie. Birds in books: three hun- years of South Asian ornithology – a bib- dred years of South Asian ornithology – a liography. Ranikhet: Permanent Black, bibliography. Ranikhet: Permanent Black, 2010. 845 p. (ISBN-10: 817824294X)51. 2010. 845 p. (ISBN-10: 817824294X)51. Region here defined rather broadly as Ðåãèîí, êîòîðûé îõâàòûâàåò ñïèñîê, comprising the countries Afghanistan, çíà÷èòåëüíî áîëåå øèðîê, ÷åì Þæíàÿ Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, My- Àçèÿ è âêëþ÷àåò Àôãàíèñòàí, Áàíãëàäåø, anmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Ti- Áóòàí, Èíäèþ, Ìàëüäèâû, Ìüÿíìó, Íåïàë, bet. An introduction sets the scene, with Ïàêèñòàí, Øðè-Ëàíêó è Òèáåò. Âî ââåäå- a brief mention of the main publications íèè âêðàòöå îïèñàíû ãëàâíûå ïóáëèêàöèè, produced during each half century since ïîÿâèâøèåñÿ íà ñâåò â òå÷åíèå êàæäîé ïî- the early 18th century. Then the main part ëîâèíû ñòîëåòèÿ ñ íà÷àëà 18 âåêà. Ãëàâíàÿ of the book consists of an annotated list- ÷àñòü êíèãè ñîñòîèò èç àííîòèðîâàííîãî ing of 1715 books published during the ñïèñêà èç 1715 êíèã, èçäàííûõ â ïåðèîä ñ period 1713 to 2008. Most items are an- 1713 ïî 2008 ãã. Äëÿ áîëüøèíñòâà ïóáëèêà- notated with publication details and a öèé ïðèâîäÿòñÿ àííîòàöèè ñ äåòàëÿìè ïó- summary of their contents. A general in- áëèêàöèè è ðåçþìå èõ ñîäåðæàíèÿ. Êíèãà dex is followed by an index of 630 new ñîïðîâîæäàåòñÿ óêàçàòåëåì, ñîäåðæàùèì scientific bird names appearing in the list-

50 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0801448735 51 http://www.bagchee.com/en/books/view/59033/birds_in_books_three_hundred_years_of_south_asian_ornithology_a_bibliography New Publications and Videos Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 213

630 ñîâðåìåííûõ íàó÷íûõ íàçâàíèé ïòèö, ed books, and finally there is an index of óïîìèíàåìûõ â ïåðå÷èñëåííûõ êíèãàõ, è acronyms, co-authors and co-editors. The íàêîíåö, åñòü ñïèñîê àêðîíèìîâ, ñîàâòî- definition of a ‘book’ that is adopted is ðîâ è ñîðåäàêòîðîâ. Îïðåäåëåíèå «êíèã», very broad and includes some titles from óêàçàííûõ â äàííîì ñïðàâî÷íèêå, ïîíè- serial publications that comprise a com- ìàåòñÿ äîâîëüíî øèðîêî: â íåãî âêëþ÷åíû plete account of a country or region. Also òàêæå íåêîòîðûå íàèìåíîâàíèÿ ñåðèéíûõ included are a number of regional check- èçäàíèé, ÷òî îáåñïå÷èâàåò áîëåå ïîëíûé lists, some in the form of pamphlets and ó÷¸ò ïóáëèêàöèé ïî ñòðàíå èëè ðåãèîíó. perhaps not validly published. However, Òàêæå â íåãî âêëþ÷åíû ìíîãèå ðåãèî- their inclusion can only be considered as íàëüíûõ ÷åê-ëèñòû, íåêîòîðûå â ôîðìå a benefit to researchers, many of whom áðîøþð è, âîçìîæíî, ñàìèçäàò. Îäíà- have to rely on international abstract serv- êî, èõ âêëþ÷åíèå ìîæíî ðàññìàòðèâàòü ices, which are good at capturing papers êàê êðàéíå ïîëåçíîå äëÿ èññëåäîâàòåëåé, in mainstream serials/periodicals but very ìíîãèì èç êîòîðûõ ïðèõîäèòñÿ ïîëàãàòüñÿ variable in their coverage of minor peri- íà ìåæäóíàðîäíûå ðåôåðàòèâíûå ñëóæ- odicals and regional books. áû, êîòîðûå îõâàòûâàþò òîëüêî îñíîâíûå The prize of the book is $59. ñåðèè/ïåðèîäè÷åñêèå èçäàíèÿ è î÷åíü âû- áîðî÷íî – íåçíà÷èòåëüíûå ïåðèîäè÷åñêèå èçäàíèÿ è ðåãèîíàëüíûå ñáîðíèêè. Ñòîèìîñòü êíèãè 59 äîëëàðîâ ÑØÀ.

DVD ДИСКИ

 2009 ã. âûøåë â ñâåò êîìïëåêò èç äâóõ Two Audio-CDs “The Sounds of Raptors àóäèîäèñêîâ «Ãîëîñà ïåðíàòûõ õèùíè- and Falcons / Die Stimmen der Greifvo- êîâ è ñîêîëîâ»: Karl-Heinz Dingler, Chris- gel und Falken” have published in 2009: tian Fackelmann and Andreas Schulze. The Karl-Heinz Dingler, Christian Fackelmann Sounds of Raptors and Falcons / Die Stim- and Andreas Schulze. The Sounds of Rap- men der Greifvogel und Falken. Ample, tors and Falcons / Die Stimmen der Greifvo- 2009 (ISBN 978-3-938147-17-7). gel und Falken. Ample, 2009 (ISBN 978-3- Ýòè äâà àóäèîäèñêà ñîäåðæàò 311 çàïè- 938147-17-7). ñåé ãîëîñîâ 58 õèùíèêîâ ñåì. ßñòðåáèíûõ These two Audio-CDs present the calls è 45 ñîêîëîâ. Âðåìÿ çâó÷àíèÿ 156 ìèíóò. and other sounds of 58 Accipitridae and Ýòî íàèáîëåå ïîëíîå ñîáðàíèå ãîëîñîâ 45 Falconidae in 311 recordings. With its (11) Contact õèùíûõ ïòèö èç êîãäà-ëèáî îïóáëèêî- playing time of 156 minutes, it is the most NHBS âàííûõ, âêëþ÷àþùåå óíèêàëüíûå çàïèñè extensive sound collection available, com- 2–3 Wills Road, Totnes, ðåäêèõ è ñëàáîèçó÷åííûõ âèäîâ ïÿòè êîí- prising unique recordings of rare and little Devon, TQ9 5XN, UK tel.: +44(0)1803865913 òèíåíòîâ. Ïîðÿäîê çàïèñåé, îñíîâàííûé studied species from five continents. The or- fax: +44(0)1803865280 íà òàêñîíîìèè, ïðèíÿòîé â ñïåöèàëüíîé der of the recordings allows better compari- customer.services@ îðíèòîëîãè÷åñêîé ëèòåðàòóðå, ïîçâîëÿåò son of the sounds of similar species – based nhbs.co.uk ëó÷øå ñðàâíèòü çâóêè áëèçêèõ âèäîâ. Ïîñëå on the taxonomy presented in established êàæäîãî íàçâàíèÿ ñëåäóåò ñîîòâåòñòâóþùàÿ technical literature. Each title is followed by (12) Contact çàïèñü, ïîçûâêè ìîëîäûõ âêëþ÷åíû êàê îò- its respective recording time and begging Birdsounds.nl äåëüíûå òðåêè. Áóêëåò îáåñïå÷èâàåò áîëåå calls of juveniles are incorporated as sepa- Zuiderzeestraatweg 415 ïîäðîáíóþ èíôîðìàöèþ î çàïèñÿõ, èõ rate tracks. The booklet provides further de- NL-8091 PA Wezep the Netherlands ïðîèñõîæäåíèè, à òàêæå èíòåðåñíóþ ñî- tails about the recordings and their origin as tel.: +31 84 8396431 ïóòñòâóþùóþ èíôîðìàöèþ íà íåìåöêîì, well as interesting background information +31 6 46532448 àíãëèéñêîì è ôðàíöóçñêîì ÿçûêàõ. in German, English and French. [email protected] Êîìïàêò-äèñêè ìîæíî ïðèîáðåñòè ÷å- The CDs is available in websites of the ðåç âåá-ñàéòû NHBS52 (öåíà 27 Åâðî) è NHBS52 (price €27) and Birdsounds53 (price Birdsounds53 (öåíà 19,94 Åâðî). €19.94). Êîíòàêò (11, 12). Contact (11, 12).

52 http://www.nhbs.com/the_sounds_of_raptors_and_falcons_tefno_173568.html 53 http://www.birdsounds.nl/index.php?pg=productsitem&gr=0&id=1011&lang=en 214 Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà 2010, 19 Ñîäåðæàíèå

Ñîäåðæàíèå Contents

Ñîáûòèÿ ...... 3 Events ...... 3 Ïðîáëåìà íîìåðà ...... 21 Problem of Number ...... 21 Êàê ñïàñòè áàëîáàíà îò ïîëíîãî óíè÷òîæåíèÿ? How to Save the Saker Falcon from Extinction? Áåëÿëîâ Î.Â...... 21 Belyalov O.V...... 21 Îáçîðû è êîììåíòàðèè ...... 25 Reviews and Comments ...... 25 Ëåñëè Áðàóí è Äèí Àìàäîí – àâòîðû ïåðâîé Leslie Brown and Dean Amadon – Coauthors of the ìèðîâîé ñâîäêè ïî õèùíûì ïòèöàì. First World Review on the Birds of Prey. Øåðãàëèí Å.Ý...... 25 Shergalin J.E...... 25 Êðàòêèé îáçîð äîêëàäîâ î õèùíûõ ïòèöàõ è ñîâàõ, Short Review of the Reports about Birds of Prey îçâó÷åííûõ íà XIII Ìåæäóíàðîäíîé îðíèòîëî- and Owls on the 13th International Ornithological ãè÷åñêîé êîíôåðåíöèè Ñåâåðíîé Åâðàçèè Conference of North Eurasia (30 April – 6 May (30 àïðåëÿ – 6 ìàÿ 2010, Îðåíáóðã, Ðîññèÿ). 2010, Orenburg, Russia). Gavrilyuk M...... 29 Ãàâðèëþê Ì...... 29 Is There Any Scientific Basis for Decreasing Îáîñíîâàíî ëè íàó÷íî ñíèæåíèå ïðèðîäî- the Conservation Status of the Saker Falcon? îõðàííîãî ñòàòóñà áàëîáàíà? Ìîøêèí À.Â...... 37 Moshkin A.V...... 37 Ãíåçäîâàÿ áèîëîãèÿ è ñòàòóñ áåðêóòà â Êèòàå. Breeding Ecology and Survival Status of the Ìà Ìèíã, Äèíã Ïåíã, Ëè Âåéäîíã, ×åí Þèíã, Golden Eagle in China. Ma Ming, Peng Ding, Õó Áàîóýí...... 75 Weidong Li, Ying Chen, Baowen Hu ...... 75 Îõðàíà ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ ...... 88 Raptor Conservation ...... 88 Ðåçóëüòàòû ïðèâëå÷åíèÿ äëèííîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè Results of Attracting the Ural Owl into Nestboxes â èñêóññòâåííûå ãíåçäîâüÿ â îêðåñòíîñòÿõ in Vicinities of Biysk in 2010, Altai Kray, Russia. Áèéñêà â 2010 ãîäó, Àëòàéñêèé êðàé, Ðîññèÿ. Vazhov S.V., Bachtin R.F., Makarov A.V...... 88 Âàæîâ Ñ.Â., Áàõòèí Ð.Ô., Ìàêàðîâ À.Â...... 88 Continuation of the Project on Attraction of the Ural Ïðîäîëæåíèå ïðîåêòà ïî ïðèâëå÷åíèþ Owl into Nestboxes in a Vicinity of Akademgoro- äëèííîõâîñòûõ íåÿñûòåé íà ãíåçäîâàíèå â dok, Novosibirsk, Russia. Andreenkov O.V., îêðåñòíîñòè Íîâîñèáèðñêîãî Àêàäåìãîðîäêà, Andreenkova N.G., Zhimulev I.F...... 94 Ðîññèÿ. Àíäðååíêîâ Î.Â., Àíäðååíêîâà Í.Ã., Techniques and Methods ...... 97 Æèìóë¸â È.Ô...... 94 Ìåòîäû èññëåäîâàíèé ...... 97 Using GIS-Software for Estimation of Number and Forecasting the Distribution of Breeding Î âîçìîæíîñòÿõ ÃÈÑ â îöåíêå ÷èñëåííîñòè è Raptors: Approbation of Methods for Examples ïðîãíîçèðîâàíèè ðàçìåùåíèÿ ãíåçäÿùèõñÿ of Analysis of Distribution of the Imperial Eagle õèùíûõ ïòèö: àïðîáàöèÿ ìåòîäèê íà ïðèìåðå and Golden Eagle in the Volga-Ural Region, àíàëèçà ïðîñòðàíñòâåííîãî ðàñïðåäåëåíèÿ Russia. Karyakin I.V...... 97 ìîãèëüíèêà è áåðêóòà â Âîëãî-Óðàëüñêîì Raptor Research ...... 136 ðåãèîíå, Ðîññèÿ. Êàðÿêèí È.Â...... 97 Èçó÷åíèå ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ ...... 136 Results of Monitoring of the Saker Falcon Population in the Altai-Sayan Region in 2009–2010, Russia. Ðåçóëüòàòû ìîíèòîðèíãà ïîïóëÿöèè áàëîáàíà â Karyakin I.V., Nikolenko E.G., Vazhov S.V., Àëòàå-Ñàÿíñêîì ðåãèîíå â 2009–2010 ãîäàõ, Mitrofanov O.B...... 136 Ðîññèÿ. Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã., Saker Falcon in the Karatau Mountains, Kazakhstan. Âàæîâ Ñ.Â., Ìèòðîôàíîâ Î.Á...... 136 Karyakin I.V., Levin A.S., Kovalenko A.V...... 152 Áàëîáàí â ãîðàõ Êàðàòàó, Êàçàõñòàí. Chink Saker Falcon – is a Separate Subspecies Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Ëåâèí À.C., Êîâàëåíêî À.Â...... 152 Inhabiting North-West of the Middle Asia. ×èíêîâûé áàëîáàí – ñàìîñòîÿòåëüíûé ïîäâèä, Pfeffer R.G., Karyakin I.V...... 164 íàñåëÿþùèé ñåâåðî-çàïàä Ñðåäíåé Àçèè. Monitoring Results of Raptor Breeding Groups Ïôåôôåð Ð.Ã., Êàðÿêèí È.Â...... 164 in the Foothills and Low Mountains of Altai Contents Raptors Conservation 2010, 19 215

Ðåçóëüòàòû ìîíèòîðèíãà ãíåçäîâûõ ãðóïïèðîâîê in 2010, Altai Kray, Russia. Vazhov S.V., êðóïíûõ ïåðíàòûõ õèùíèêîâ â ïðåäãîðüÿõ Bachtin R.F., Makarov A.V...... 186 è íèçêîãîðüÿõ Àëòàÿ â 2010 ãîäó, Àëòàéñêèé Short Reports ...... 200 êðàé, Ðîññèÿ. Âàæîâ Ñ.Â., Áàõòèí Ð.Ô., Ìàêàðîâ À.Â...... 186 About Breeding the Ural Owl in the Forest-Steppe Êðàòêèå ñîîáùåíèÿ ...... 200 Zone of the Altai Kray, Russia. Ebel A.L...... 200 Î ãíåçäîâàíèè äëèííîõâîñòîé íåÿñûòè â Note of the Kestrel Coming Back on Its Birthplace ëåñîñòåïíîé çîíå Àëòàéñêîãî êðàÿ, Ðîññèÿ. and Breeding in the Nest Where it was Born, Ýáåëü À.Ë...... 200 Russia. Karyakin I.V., Nikolenko E.G...... 201 Ðåãèñòðàöèÿ âîçâðàòà îáûêíîâåííîé ïóñòåëüãè Record of the Pallas’s Fish Eagle on Tolbo-Nur Lake, íà ìåñòî ðîæäåíèÿ è ðàçìíîæåíèå â ïîñòðîéêå, Bayan-Ulgii Province, Mongolia. â êîòîðîé îíà âûâåëàñü, Ðîññèÿ. Vazhov S.V., Bachtin R.F...... 204 Êàðÿêèí È.Â., Íèêîëåíêî Ý.Ã...... 201 Incubating Period at the Steller’s Sea Eagle in Âñòðå÷à îðëàíà-äîëãîõâîñòà íà îçåðå Òîëáî-Íóð, North-Eastern Sakhalin – Role of the Male and Áàÿí-Óëãèéñêèé àéìàê, Ìîíãîëèÿ. Female in the Process of Egg Incubation. Âàæîâ Ñ.Â., Áàõòèí Ð.Ô...... 204 Naumenko N.V...... 205 Èíêóáàöèîííûé ïåðèîä ó áåëîïëå÷èõ îðëàíîâ The Death of a Ringed Imperial Eagle through íà ñåâåðî-âîñòîêå Ñàõàëèíà – ðîëü ñàìöà è Electrocution at Far East of the Orenburg ñàìêè â íàñèæèâàíèè êëàäêè. Íàóìåíêî Í.Â. ...205 District, Russia. Barbazyuk Å.V...... 208 New Publications and Videos ...... 210 Ãèáåëü ìå÷åíîãî ìîãèëüíèêà íà ïòèöåîïàñíîé ëèíèè ýëåêòðîïåðåäà÷è íà êðàéíåì âîñòîêå Îðåíáóðãñêîé îáëàñòè, Ðîññèÿ. Áàðáàçþê Å.Â. .. 208 Íîâûå ïóáëèêàöèè è ôèëüìû ...... 210

Ðåäàêöèÿ áþëëåòåíÿ «Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè è èõ îõðàíà» ïðèíèìàåò áëàãîòâîðèòåëüíûå ïîæåðòâîâàíèÿ îò îðãàíèçàöèé è îò ÷àñòíûõ ëèö. Íèæå óêàçàíû ðåêâèçèòû äëÿ ïîæåðòâîâàíèé. Îáÿçàòåëüíî óêàçûâàéòå òî÷íîå íàçíà÷åíèå ïëàòåæà, êàê ýòî ñäåëàíî â îáðàçöå!

Editors of “Raptors Conservation” accept charitable donations from the organizations and private per- sons. Requisites for donations are given below. Please note exact purpose of payment as it is made in the sample!

Ðåêâèçèòû äëÿ ïîæåðòâîâàíèé Requisites for donations in Requisites for donations in â ðóáëÿõ: USD: EURO: Ïîëó÷àòåëü: ÌÁÎÎ «Ñèáèðñêèé Beneficiary: NGO Siberian Environ- Beneficiary: NGO Siberian Environ- ýêîëîãè÷åñêèé öåíòð» mental Center mental Center ÈÍÍ 5408166026 Account: 407 038 405 002 010 Account: 407 039 785 034 710 ÊÏÏ 540801001 026 32 026 32 Ðàñ÷åòíûé ñ÷¸ò ¹ 407 038 102 Beneficiary Bank: MDM Bank Beneficiary Bank: MDM Bank 000 300 113 37 16, Lavrentieva Ave. Novosibirsk 18, Lenina Street, Novosibirsk, Áàíê ïîëó÷àòåëÿ: Ôèëèàë 630090 Russia 630004, RUSSIA «Çàïàäíî-Ñèáèðñêèé» ÎÀÎ SWIFT: URSARU55 SWIFT: URSARU55 «ÑÎÁÈÍÁÀÍÊ», ã. Íîâîñèáèðñê Corresponding Bank in U.S. JPMOR- Intermediary Bank: VTB BANK ÁÈÊ 045003744 GAN CHASE BANK. (DEUTSCHLAND) AG, êîð. ñ÷¸ò ¹ 301 018 104 000 000 Frankfurt/Main, GERMANY 007 44 SWIFT: CHASUS33 SWIFT: OWHBDEFF Íàçíà÷åíèå ïëàòåæà: «Äîáðîâîëü- Account: 400759861 Account: 0104108394 íîå áëàãîòâîðèòåëüíîå ïîæåðòâî- Purpose of payment: “Gratuitous Purpose of payment: “Gratuitous âàíèå íà óñòàâíûå öåëè îðãàíèçà- donation for implementation of the donation for implementation of the öèè (èçäàíèå «Ïåðíàòûå õèùíèêè charitable goals of the organization charitable goals of the organization è èõ îõðàíà»)» (“Raptors Conservation” publishing)” (“Raptors Conservation” publishing)”

Îòïå÷àòàíî â òèïîãðàôèè ÎÎÎ «Ïîâîëæüå» ñ ãîòîâîãî îðèãèíàë-ìàêåòà 603006, ã. Í. Íîâãîðîä, óë. Àêàäåìèêà Áëîõèíîé È.Í., 4/43–4