No. 35 Spring 2004

In this issue: • New Zapovednik for Kazakhstan • Preserving Plant Diversity in Belarus • Restructuring of Russia’s Ministry of Natural Resources • Norway and Russia: Preserving Cultural Landscapes in Kenozersky National Park

PROMOTING BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION IN RUSSIA AND THROUGHOUT NORTHERN EURASIA CONTENTS CONTENTS

Voice from the Wild (A Letter from the Editors)...... 1 ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION

Draft Forest Code Met with Concern and Opposition………………21 PROTECTED AREAS

A Unique Experience in Moose

Domestication at Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik...... …………………...2 CONFLICT RESOLUTION Vsevolod Stepanitsky Shares His Thoughts Zapovedniks and Local Government: on Komandorsky Zapovednik’s History and Future ...... 6 A Conflict of Interests in the Adygeya Republic ...... ……………24 In Kenozersky National Park, Norway and Russia Working to Preserve Traditional Cultural Landscapes ...... 9 NGO NEWS A New Zapovednik for Kazakhstan.....………………………………………………11 Muraviovka Park: Organic Farming and

Nature Conservation at Work Together...... ………………...27 ENDANGERED SPECIES

The Middle Spotted Woodpecker: NEWS OF THE DAY

Sentinel of European Russia’s Oak Forests...... ……....………………...12 Zapovedniks by Mail: Just an Envelope Away………………...…………….30

The Wild Reindeer of Kola Peninsula…..………………………………………….15 In Russia, a Rare Crocus Again in Bloom………………...………………………31

BULLETIN BOARD...... 32 CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT Russia’s Ministry of Natural Resources Restructured ABSTRACTS IN RUSSIAN...... 33 and under New Leadership...... …………………18

Identifying Important Plant Areas in Belarus...... …………………..19 CONSERVATION CONTACTS...... Back cover

The mission of the Center for Russian Nature Russian Conservation News is produced with support from many won- Conservation (CRNC) is to promote the conservation of derful conservation-minded people! We could not do our work without nature in Russia and throughout the former Soviet you! Special thanks to: Juliana T. Williams, Andrea Williams and Chas Union, and to assist conservation groups in that region Dewey, Winslow Duke, Harriett Crosby, Andrew Sabin, Bernie McHugh, through information exchange, coordination of profes- the Weeden Foundation, Bill Eichbaum, Lisa Woodson, Rodney Cole, sional and education exchanges, and provision of tech- and the Center for Conservation Innovation at World Wildlife Fund. nical assis- We'd also like to thank all of our subscribers and special contributors, tance to pro- especially the following: Matthew Auer, Thomas Babcock, Cynthia tected areas. Barakatt, Ronald Beavers, Jr., W. Horton Beebe-Center, Gerard Boere, CRNC is a Joan Bridgwood, Bill Chandler, Dave Cline & Olga Romanenko, Evelyn Cochran, Wallace Cole, Mary Cooper, Jane Costlow, William Cox, Susan project of the Helms Daley and Sean Daley, Nicholas Day, Andrew Durkin, Martin Tides Center. Farrell, Jr., William Fuller, Kennedy Gilchrist, Kevin Gilligan, Geoffrey Harper, Ken Harte, John Hemenway, Dale R. Hemming, Joan Hoblitzell, Nancy Hopps, Freeborn Jewett, Jr., George Johnson, Nadezhda Kavrus- Hoffmann, Eliza Klose, J.C. Krieg, Kyle Lussier, Michael James McGrady, © Copyright 2004 CRNC/Tides Center. Rick McGuire, Mary Anne Mekosh, Rev. Ivan Mina, Kazuo Morimoto, Lois Morrison, Edward Mulrenin, Douglas Murray, David Ostergren, Ashley Pakenham, Jack Padalino, John Prentice, Phillip Pryde, Guido Rahr of the Wild Salmon Center, Thomas Rainey, Nicholas Robinson, RCN has many partners and friends in Russia, including Russian Life Magazine, Jonathan Sachs, David Sears, Birgith Sloth, the Partnership for Zapovedniks, whose mission is to offer Brooke Stevens, Fred Strebeigh, Gregory & Judy Streveler, Michael organizational, technical, Thoma, Trust for Mutual Understanding, Peter Ward, William Wasch, Jr., and financial help to Gary Waxmonsky, Don Weeden, and Frederick Welty. zapovedniks and nation- al parks in Russia. ISSN 1026-6380 Voice from the Wild (A letter from the editors)

n the spring, when all is new and young, we are reminded of I nature’s fragility and delicacy. For conservationists in Russia, this spring also offered a reminder of how vulnerable are the institu- tions that have been established to protect her. Months of political machinations and maneuvering, carried out at the highest levels in EDITORIAL BOARD Moscow, have left the conservation community fearing for the future of the country’s unique system of protected nature areas, Executive Editor: Margaret Williams and indeed, the wealth of natural riches that it harbors. Assistant Editor: Melissa Mooza In this issue of , we offer readers our Managing Editor: Nikolai Maleshin Russian Conservation News analysis of the important political and legislative processes that Graphics Artist: Maksim Dubinin have launched such widespread concern. We report on how the Design and Layout: Design Group A4 sweeping governmental reforms initiated by President Vladimir Computer Consultation: Putin after his landslide victory in March have transformed the Natalie Volkova Ministry of Natural Resources and further diminished its capacity to effectively manage the country’s protected areas. We also share Translation: Melissa Mooza with you an account of another political drama that continues to Subscriptions Manager: John Deever unfold, largely, it seems, behind closed doors: the persistent drive Contributing Authors: Valery Brinikh, to overhaul Russia’s forest legislation, very much at the expense of Sergei Kossenko, Mikhail Kozhykhov, protective forests and other protected areas, and with little con- Olga Makarova, Galina Pronkina, cern for the long-term social and ecological consequences. Andrei Satsyuk Contributing Artists and A survey of Russia’s protected area system offers insight into what Photographers: I. Filus, V. Kantor, is at stake. In this issue of RCN, we offer readers just that, a pot- G. Kataev, E. Ledovskikh, I. Shpilenok, pourri of articles which captures well the remarkable diversity of I. Torgachkin, A. Zimenko Russia’s reserves, illustrating the breadth of natural and biological Ackowledgement: Maps of Russia’s resources, experience, and knowledge encompassed within them. protected areas that are featured in this issue were prepared using the Among other articles in this issue, we will share with you a report Protected Areas GIS database of the on efforts underway in Laplandsky Zapovednik to preserve and Biodiversity Conservation protect the region’s wild reindeer population, which is increasingly Center/International Socio-Ecological pressured by domestic reindeer herds. Also in the Russian North, Union. For more information, please we find another interesting initiative being carried out in consult http://reserves.biodiversity.ru Kenozersky National Park, where a joint team of Norwegian and /gis/database.html. Russian specialists is working to preserve the park’s cultural land- scapes. In this issue, we also feature a piece on Russia’s first non- governmental nature park, Muraviovka Park, in the Russian Far East. The park’s demonstration farm is making steady strides ON THE COVER toward organic certification, and in the process, gaining valuable and transferable experience in this exciting new field.

Of course, our coverage of nature conservation efforts in Eurasia, carried out both within and beyond the bounds of Russia’s pro- tected area system, would be unbalanced is we failed to present cases in which conservation objectives are not being fully met. Still far too numerous are the instances in which, despite best efforts by many, a cluster of factors contribute to performance shortfalls. We offer several such examples in this issue, including the cases of Kavkazsky Zapovednik, where local authorities’ ambitions threaten the reserve’s territorial integrity; and Komandorsky Zapovednik, where staffing and funding is still insufficient to adequately pro- tect the reserve’s resources.

In parting, we offer on the final pages of this Spring issue of RCN, word of an exciting discovery: a rare crocus, found in bloom in southern Russia, where it has not been sighted for more than one hundred years. This small, delicate flower, we think, is a sign of Moose Calf (Alces alces). Cover draw- promise, that despite adversity, the beauty and wonder of wild ing by I. Filus (Altaisky Zapovednik). Russia will endure.

Spring 2004, No. 35 1 Protected Areas Protected Areas

A Unique Experience in Moose Domestication at Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik

By Mikhail Kozhykhov and Andrei Satsyuk

A note from the editors: The following article highlights a long-term project that has been supported for many years, first by the Soviet management authorities overseeing zapovedniks and continuing today. In publishing this article, RCN had questions about whether such projects should in fact be supported by a nature conservation organization. Indeed, our vision for zapovedniks is one in which they are contributing to the conservation of wild nature, not trying to reverse the wild in nature. However, because our mission is to highlight the diversity and content of the protected areas systems in Eurasia, we made the decision to publish this story.

eep in the forests of the D Ural Mountains, scientists Man and Moose: A Brief History and researchers at Pechoro- In his article entitled “On Breeding Moose,” published prior to Ilychsky Zapovednik in Russia’s Russia’s Great October Revolution (1917) in the “News of the Komi Republic have compiled a Archangelsk Society for the Study of the Russian North,” Vladimir unique and truly remarkable Anfilov cites a number of examples which attest to previous efforts record of work with one of the to domesticate, breed, and utilize the moose. He writes: “Ancient region’s most charismatic Romans were delighted by the moose’s original form and figure. denizens, the moose (Alces They brought the animal to Rome and moose were used in almost alces). For more than fifty years, every Roman celebratory procession, much to the wonder and the zapovednik, through its astonishment of crowds. The Scandinavians utilized the moose as experimental moose farm, has well; under King Karl XI, the Swedish army used moose, which can been actively involved in efforts easily cover 360 kilometers a day, to transport couriers.” From to domesticate this largest mem- other sources we learn that moose were used as means of trans- ber of the deer family. port in Latvia and Poland; there are also accounts of Finnish nobil- ity in the 1870s setting out on winter hunts near Vyborg in sleighs pulled by moose.

Although the zapovednik’s The moose possesses a number efforts to domesticate the moose of characteristics that support its have certainly been the most domestication. It has the size concentrated and systematic in and strength to serve as a beast recent history, there is com- of burden; female moose average pelling evidence to suggest that 470 kilograms, while males can in all the history of Man and grow to exceed 500 kilograms. Moose, these efforts have not The moose is herbivorous, mean- been without precedent. In many ing that its conversion of bio- eras and among many cultures, mass is relatively efficient. It is the moose, which inhabits also early maturing and is highly forested zones of North America productive; moose in captivity and Eurasia, has been considered can reproduce for up to 17 a promising candidate for years, and cows average 1.4

Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik. domestication. calves per birth over their repro- ductive lifetime. The moose is Map by M. Dubinin.

2 Russian Conservation News Protected Areas also unique in its ability to adapt What would ultimately become to various environments. the most successful experimental Furthermore, the moose has a farm for breeding moose, howev- very good disposition, is trusting, er, would not be created until and relatively non-resistant in 1949, when the moose farm at captivity. Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik was established. Comprised of Efforts to domesticate the moose pine, spruce, and fir forests; in modern Russia can be traced bogs; meadows; and mountain back to the 1930s, when “Soviet tundra well-suited to the moose, Science,” heavily influenced by the zapovednik’s territory had the politics of the day, was large- always supported a healthy wild ly guided by the prevailing prin- moose population. By the mid ciple that nature should be 1940’s, this population had improved in order to better increased sharply, and by the accommodate the needs of the early 1950’s, moose had become working man. Under the banner so numerous in the zapovednik of this new “proletarian science,” that they had begun to deplete Young moose being raised in captivity. Photo courtesy of Pechoro-Ilychsky Soviet specialists attempted to their forage base. This robust Zapovednik. acclimatize non-native plant and and healthy population was an animal species, domesticate wild ideal one from which to begin The farm’s stock of moose was animals, and selectively breed for creating domestic stock. initially created using newborn new, “improved” species. calves separated from their Following this general direction In the more than fifty years that mothers by special hunting in science, the Committee for it has been operational, the brigades equipped and skilled to Zapovedniks, under the moose farm has raised 520 remove the young moose with- Presidium of the All-Russian moose representing eight gener- out killing their mothers. These Central Executive Committee, ations. Over the course of its young moose were then bottle- issued an order in 1934 to estab- work, the moose farm at fed, nurtured, and raised in vari- lish captive breeding facilities Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik ous environments on the moose for moose in a number of has developed and refined farm. zapovedniks in western Siberia methodologies to domesticate and Yakutia. and support moose in captivity. On the Pechoro-Ilychsky moose farm, young moose are kept in small corrals, in which they are entirely reliant on humans for their food. The moose are fed a mix of pre-prepared feed and cuttings from trees including birch, poplar, willow, and moun- tain ash. In the next phase of the domestication process, older moose are moved to a larger corral, which covers six square kilometers and includes natural forage sources such as trees and shrubby undergrowth. Moose in the larger corral are also period- ically fed by moose farm staff. It’s important to note that when the moose are being fed in these captive environments, food Former moose farm Director Mikhail Kozhukhov with two of his charges. delivery is accompanied by a Photo courtesy of Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik.

Spring 2004, No. 35 3 Protected Areas

wild, but they eventually, and tion characterized by low white almost always, return to the blood cell counts) induced by moose farm, guided by their radiation exposure. sense of “home,” and the familiar signals around meal time. When It should be noted, however, the female moose return to the that the milk production appli- farm with their young, they are cation has not been developed hand-milked by moose farm at Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik, staff, who then bottle feed the primarily due to the zapoved- young moose calves. This hand nik’s remoteness and distance feeding helps to strengthen the from possible markets. The bond between human and moose reserve is 40 kilometers away and furthers the domestication from the nearest paved road and process. more than 600 kilometers from Syktyvkar, the closest large city. In its work over the years, the Nevertheless, a group of moose farm has successfully Ukrainian specialists traveled to exploited many of the benefits Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik that domesticated moose offer after the Chernobyl disaster in society. Moose from the moose 1986, in order to investigate the Hand milking a moose. Photo courtesy of farm have been saddle broken possibility of creating a moose Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik. and trained to pull sleighs and farm with up to 500 head of wagons around the zapovednik’s milking moose. Such an under- loud audible signal, which the territory. A full grown moose can taking would have required at moose come to associate with carry 125 kilograms and pull a least 10-15 years, and because the supplemental feeding pro- sleigh or cart weighing up to victims of the Chernobyl disaster vided on the moose farm. 400 kilograms; they can also required immediate treatment, negotiate thickets, windfalls, and the project was not pursued. As moose reach sexual maturity, rapids that would sideline the they are reintroduced to their common horse or mule. The moose farm’s extensive natural environments, that is, experience working with moose the wild territory of the Theoretically, milk production has yielded invaluable and zapovednik. Mature male moose for human consumption is incomparable information about are simply set free, as they, when another possible aspect of the animal’s physiology and biol- in rut, can be very aggressive and domestic moose use. Because ogy. Zapovednik staff, together dangerous to people. Mature free ranging moose eat hundreds with researchers from other sci- female moose are also set free of shrubs and woody plant entific institutions, have pub- during the mating season. They species not eaten by other ungu- lished more than 200 scientific mate with wild bull moose and lates, their milk has unique articles based on research gath- give birth to their calves in the immunological properties and ered at the moose farm. increased nutritional value. Scientists from the Pavlov and What’s in a Name? Moose milk contains twice as Komi Institutes of Physiology many essential and non-essential have extensively researched the Both elk and alces are said to amino acids as does cow’s milk. moose’s digestive and cardiovas- be derived from the Greek Perhaps more significantly, it cular systems. Zapovednik staff, alke, meaning strength. contains high levels of lysozyme. together with researchers at the Lysozyme is an enzyme known Komi Institute of Physiology, Source: “The Ultimate Ungulate to be an effective immunological have researched moose milk Page: Your Guide to the agent and has also demonstrated yields and composition.Y. P. World’s Hoofed Mammals,” analgesic and anti-inflammatory Knorre and B.G. Shubin, who on-line at: properties. It has been used by were instrumental in the moose http://www.ultimateungulate. oncologists in the treatment and farm’s creation, studied skull .com/Artiodactyla/Alces_alces. therapy of leukopenia (a condi- standards for different age .html

4 Russian Conservation News Protected Areas groups of domesticated moose. moose farm has attracted the Using their research, they devel- interest of other groups and oped a methodology still widely organizations also hoping to used today for determining the develop similar facilities. Twenty age of a moose based on the eight reproductive moose from wear of mandibular dentition. the Pechoro-Ilychsky farm have Other scientists have studied been used to establish new moose diseases and epidemiolo- moose farms at Kostromsky gy. The moose farm has also Agricultural Station, Yaroslavsky been used as a practical research Scientific Institute for Animal base for biology students from a Husbandry and Feed, and number of universities and agri- Zatonsky Forest Service in cultural and pedagogical insti- Nizhny Novgorod Region. The tutes. Thanks to the moose farm, moose farm has also provided it is quite possible that the these and other organizations moose has become one of with methodological and practi- Russia’s most thoroughly studied cal recommendations. ungulates. The herd heads home. Photo courtesy of Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik. The moose farm also plays an has also received requests from important role in environmental other organizations interested in through grant making organiza- education and promoting envi- establishing moose farms. After tions or private donors, as the ronmental awareness among lay the Third International government has proven to be an audiences. The moose farm Symposium on the Moose, held unreliable source, an even larger receives up to 500 visitors annu- at the moose farm in August and group of moose could be sup- ally, including many foreigners. September of 1999, a number of ported. It has also been the subject of a organizations, including number of films, both popular Zhigulevsky and Baikalsky Despite the fact that the moose and scientific, including “Tale of National Parks, and the farm at Pechoro-Ilychsky the Forest Giants,” “Domestication of Prophylactic Defense Institute in Zapovednik is now operating at the Moose,” and “Man and Moose.” Sverdlovsk Region, submitted decreased capacity, its signifi- The moose farm has also been applications to receive reproduc- cance and contributions should featured in almost ten television tive moose. Unfortunately not be underestimated. It has programs, widely aired on though, these projects were not given much to the world of sci- Russian television. carried out for financial reasons. ence and has served as an exam- ple for people interested in the Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik’s Sadly, the economic turmoil of domestication of moose and successful experience with the the 1990’s seriously affected other wild animals. These are moose farm operations achievements in which the and the farm’s stock zapovednik, and, in fact, the dropped to just three entire Komi Republic, take great head by 2001. The situa- pride. tion is slowly improving, however, and now the Mikhail Kozhykhov previously farm supports six moose served as the Director of the — five females and one Moose Farm at Pechoro-Ilychsky male. Given the farm’s Zapovednik. Andrei Satsyuk is current financial situa- the current Director of the tion, it is capable of zapovednik’s moose farm and supporting up to ten works in the reserve’s moose. If additional Department of Environmental sources of funding were Education. Have moose, will travel. Photo courtesy of identified, likely Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik.

Spring 2004, No. 35 5 Protected Areas

Vsevolod Stepanitsky Shares His Thoughts on Komandorsky Zapovednik’s History and Future

A Note from the Editors: With a marine zone of 3,648,679 hectares, Komandorsky Zapovednik is Russia’s largest marine protected area. The reserve protects a unique marine ecosystem with features including marine mammal rookeries, seabird colonies, sea otter colonies, kelp forests, and long stretches of continental shelf not yet damaged by bottom-trawling. In 2003, Komandorsky Zapovednik was designated as a biosphere reserve by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Despite this honor and despite the zapovednik’s great intrinsic value, the Russian government has yet to allocate sufficient funds for its protection and management.

The following interview with Vsevolod Stepanitsky was conducted by RCN Managing Editor Nikolai Maleshin for MPA News. Mr. Stepanitsky is the Deputy Director of the former Department of Strictly Protected Nature Areas, within the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation. MPA News is a publication of the University of Washington’s School of Marine Affairs. The publication is devoted to the planning and management of marine protected areas (MPAs). RCN thanks MPA News for permission to reprint this interview.

PA News: As a UNESCO zapovednik’s zonation is not should this problem be stopped? M Biosphere Reserve, structured according to the clas- Komandorsky Zapovednik is sic biosphere reserve scheme VS: To solve the problem of ille- required to have a multi-use (which incorporates a core area, gal fishing, the zapovednik must buffer zone surrounding a highly a buffer zone, and an outer tran- develop strong coastal protec- protective core zone. The sition area), but is instead organ- tion and marine patrol services Russian Ministry of Natural ized into two distinct primary that are adequately financed and Resources has not yet put this zones, the core and buffer zone. equipped with modern commu- multi-use buffer zone in place When Komandorsky Zapovednik nications and technologies. and almost the entire site was planned in the early 1990’s, Recently, the World Wide Fund remains highly protected. Why is it was planned to be a biosphere for Nature (WWF) provided there no multi-use buffer zone? reserve. Very rarely is this the Komandorsky Zapovednik with case, that a protected area is stationary radios, the use of VS: Actually, the territory of the planned from its inception to be which will enhance the reserve’s zapovednik is, in fact, zoned, for biosphere reserve. It is also protection capacities. multi-use purposes. The interesting to note that while Maintaining constant radio com- Bering Island has a buffer zone, munication between the most other islands, including Medny, remote cordons of the zapoved- Arii Kamen, and Toporkov, are nik will help determine with included entirely within the core greater speed and accuracy the area. The total area of the coordinates and positioning of zapovednik is 3,648,679 poaching vessels and will further hectares, of which 3,463,300 aid in their apprehension. hectares are comprised of the Komandorsky Zapovednik staff Bering Sea and waters of the received training in the installa- North Pacific, located within a tion and use of these radio sta- 30-mile zone of the islands. tions; training sessions were organized by WWF and conduct- MPA News: Illegal fishing is a ed by specialists from the com- significant threat to pany “Vyek Kamchatka Plyus.” The Commander Islands. Map by M. Komandorsky Zapovednik. How Dubinin.

6 Russian Conservation News Protected Areas

It is also very important that the MPA News: Besides illegal fish- zapovednik develop strategic ing, what other acute problems partnerships. Working alone, the will the zapovednik need to reserve will never be able to address in the future? combat illegal fishing because it has no means with which to VS: The zapovednik should work conduct sea patrols. Currently, to raise its profile in the eyes of the zapovednik has only eight people living on the Commander inspectors, two ranger cabins, Islands, as well as those living two snowmobiles, and one old elsewhere in Kamchatka Region. ATV. Leasing patrol vessels is There is also a problem with very expensive. To illustrate staffing; the zapovednik operates these costs: Renting a vessel of with a very limited staff, which medium tonnage and with affects its effectiveness. unlimited range costs approxi- Komandorsky Zapovednik mately $105,000 per month and should also work toward devel- one patrol flight by helicopter oping a system for the delivery from Kamchatka to the of environmental education, Commander Islands costs including work with the local $10,000- $12,000. community and school children. And of course, the zapovednik The Federal Border Service of must take concrete steps to the Russian Federation must be develop ecotourism because the more extensively involved in the educational value of the protection of the zapovednik’s Commander Islands is so high. It 30-mile marine zone. One of the is also very important for the Red-faced Cormorant (Phalacrocorax urile) nesting on the cliffs of the border service’s functions is to zapovednik to develop partner- Commander Islands. Photo by A. Zimenko. combat the illegal harvest of ships with scientific and conser- marine bioresources in Russia’s vation organizations in the of marine animal protection, and marine waters. The service is United States; we think having command of the English very well equipped, not only prospects for developing an language, he is capable of with speed boats for patrolling, international trounsboundary breathing new life into but also with planes and heli- protected area, that would Komandorsky Zapovednik. copters. Recently, the zapoved- include several refuges on the nik, Ministry, and the Northeast Aleutian Islands, as well as our MPA News: What direct or indi- Regional Department of the Komandorsky Zapovednik, are rect assistance might foreign Federal Border Service developed very real. partners offer the zapovednik? and approved a strategic docu- ment, called “Preserving Russia’s MPA News: And does the VS: The best form of direct assis- Protected Areas,” which outlines zapovednik have any contacts or tance would be financial sup- plans for the joint protection of communication with the port. We have encountered prob- the marine bioresources within American side now? lems with equipment donation the 30-mile protected marine in the past. Formalities of the zone surrounding the VS: I think that they will soon customs process can persist for Commander Islands. materialize, especially since we months and sometimes years; recently appointed a new direc- and sometimes these problems The Kamchatka-based Special tor for the zapovednik, Nikolai are simply irresolvable. The best Marine Inspectorate of Russia’s Pavlov, who has professional form of indirect assistance Ministry of Natural Resources contacts with specialists in the would be providing opportuni- should also be more involved in United States. Being an energetic ties for specialists from protection activities. person, a specialist in the sphere Komandorsky Zapovednik to

Spring 2004, No. 35 7 Protected Areas become familiar with the prac- what will these plans feature? affecting his district. Efstifeev tices and activities of the nation- maintains close contacts and al parks and refuges on the VS: One local official in particu- works collaboratively with Aleutian Islands and elsewhere lar, Alexander Efstifeev, is very Kamchatskaya Oblast officials, as in Alaska. active in this regard. Efstifeev is well as the local service of the the head of the Aleutsky Russian Federation’s Federal MPA News: Does the Russian Administrative District of the Safety Service (FSB). He has the government have plans to Commander Islands and he has drive and initiative to make a encourage sustainable develop- been working very energetically difference. But like the zapoved- ment for the local population of to address the social and eco- nik, is lacking in financial the Commander Islands. If so, nomic development issues resources.

Komandorsky Zapovednik in the International Spotlight

April was a busy month for Komandorsky Zapovednik, Russia's largest marine protected area and a key area for biodiversity in the Bering Sea. Home to the world's second largest concentration of northern fur seals (second only to Alaska's Pribilof Islands), a healthy population of sea otters, sea lions, millions of seabirds and about 700 people, the Commander Islands have an important place in history.

Today the Commanders continue to play a significant role in marine conservation, particularly in the form of Komandorsky Zapovednik. However, since the establishment of the nature reserve in 1993, financial and other difficulties have prevented real nature protection from taking place. Illegal fishing in the marine zone and lack of public support are just a few of the challenges facing the reserve.

New leadership for the marine reserve Happily, though, things are now looking up for the nature reserve. In April, a new director was named to head the zapovednik, Nikolai Pavlov. Mr. Pavlov comes to the Zapovednik from the Marine Mammal Management Division of the Northeast Fisheries Management Department (SevvostRybvod). The timing of Pavlov’s designation was perfect, as a long-planned Commander Islands Conservation Workshop also took place in April in Petropavlovsk, Kamchatka, where the zapovednik headquarters are located. The workshop was organized by the Pacific Institute of Geography and the Audubon Society of Alaska, with sponsorship from the World Wildife Fund (WWF), Russian Bird Conservation Union, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service. For three days a delegation of Russian and Alaskan scientists, managers, conserva- tionists, and representatives from the Commander and Pribilof Islands (of Alaska) shared information on problems and opportunities for the Commanders. The group prepared a list of priority actions, which will be published along with the Commanders Avian Conservation Plan, a part of Audubon’s work to identify and support Important Bird Areas around the Bering Sea.

In closing the workshop, excitement about the possibilities for the reserve was palpable, as was enthu- siasm for supporting Mr. Pavlov in his new position as the head of this important marine protected area. Now the hard work begins – implementing the many ideas that will make the Commander Islands the world-class marine protected area that it truly is.

Modern-day expedition to the Commander Islands Immediately following the Commander Islands Conservation Workshop, WWF’s Bering Sea Ecoregion Program launched an expedition to the nature reserve. The expedition had many purposes: to support several scientists doing work in the zapovednik’s marine zone; to test satellite technology being devel- oped to combat illegal fishing; to develop better understanding of community concerns surrounding the reserve; and to document in film the special nature of these islands teeming with life. A second summer expedition will follow in June, as will more news about the Commanders in future issues of RCN!

8 Russian Conservation News Protected Areas In Kenozersky National Park, Norway and Russia Working to Preserve Traditional Cultural Landscapes Compiled by RCN Editors sion of tree worship that dates al landscape is not insignificant. back to pagan times; when As physical characteristics from enozersky National Park, standing among the “sacred the territory’s historic periods K which is located in groves,” the untouched areas of are lost or muted, the integrity Arkhangelsk Region in northern virgin forest preserved intact of the site, its historic identity European Russia, is a remarkable since antiquity, a visitor to the and significance, are also dimin- example of a traditional cultural park understands something ished. landscape. The park’s complex of about the culture of those – the natural and man-made features Ugro-Finnish tribes and Slavic Fortunately, authorities, the local reveals important aspects about settlers – who came before. community, and partners abroad the region’s history: who lived have recognized the property’s there, how they lived, what val- At the same time, the park offers great intrinsic value and are now ues and beliefs they had, and insights into more contemporary working to preserve the integrity how they interacted with and cultures. We see clearly in its of Kenozersky National Park’s influenced their natural environ- landscapes the effects of the cultural landscape. Much work ment. When gazing upon the political and economic changes toward this end has been accom- park’s unique architecture, its that have transformed Russia plished by the bilateral Russian- churches and chapels built cen- over the last century. We see that Norwegian Commission on turies ago from hand-hewn logs; many people have left the small Cooperation in Environmental when encountering, along the villages dotting the parks territo- Issues. In 2002, the Commission park’s roads, pine trees trimmed ry, abandoning their homes and initiated a new project to restore with colorful ribbons, an expres- fields, hoping to make their way and manage culture landscapes in larger, more afflu- and valuable semi-natural vege- ent cities. We see that tation types within the park. many traditional agri- cultural practices and This project, “Traditional methods have been Cultural Landscapes in the foregone and fields Barents Region- the Kenozersky left fallow. We also see National Park Model,” aims to the park’s “sacred develop management methods groves,” once found for especially valuable uninhabit- among broad meadows ed and abandoned areas within and now encroached the park. The project also aims upon by the expand- to develop agricultural methods ing forests. The cumu- for inhabited, or “living,” villages lative effect of these that maintain the park’s biodi- changes on the cultur- versity and other landscape val- ues.

Project implementers chose two model territories in which to focus their efforts: the village Porzhinskoye, which was aban- doned fifteen years ago; and the village Zikhnovo, which is still inhabited. They then registered and mapped the meadow types in and around each of these two Kenozersky National Park. Map by M. Dubinin.

Spring 2004, No. 35 9 Protected Areas

ment methods for preserving the park’s cultural landscapes and valuable semi-natural vegetation types. These recommendations will be tailored to incorporate the interests of the local com- munity, which will play an important role in maintaining the park’s landscape qualities in the future.

It is expected that the experi- ence gained working with these two model territories will be transferable for application in other sites in Kenozersky National Park, as well as other national parks across Russia.

This article was compiled using materials from the report A “living village.” Photo by I. Shpilenok. “Traditional Cultural Landscapes in the Barents Region-the KNP villages, also documenting con- as for its overall biodiversity. Mode,” published by The temporary and previous land use Norwegian Directorate for Nature practices. Although they have Project implementers have also Management, 2004. The report is completed only the first phase of begun studying the effects of dif- available on line at: work under this project, prelimi- ferent management methods on http://english.dirnat.no/wbch3.ex nary results have demonstrated the biodiversity and species e?ce=18647. the importance of traditional composition of semi-natural hay Alexander Kozykin, Head managed (semi-natural) mead- meadows and pastures. Based on Forester at Kenozersky National ows for the park’s landscape this research, the experts will Park, also contributed to the diversity and impression, as well recommend appropriate manage- compilation of this article.

Kenozersky’s pastoral landscape. Photo by I. Shpilenok.

10 Russian Conservation News Protected Areas

A New Zapovednik for Kazakhstan

A note from the editors: The following text is an adapted version of an article that originally appeared in Ekopravda, an electronic bulletin of the Ecological Press Center in Almaty, Kazakhstan. The bulletin is also widely circulated on Ekosvodka, a publication of the International Socio-Ecological Union in Moscow.

n March 1, 2004, the which proposed that the ammon nigrimontana) are also O Government of Kazakhstan zapovednik be created over now threatened, and could soon issued a decree creating 34,300 hectares in the central disappear from the region alto- Karatausky Zapovednik. This part of the Karatausky Mountain gether. new federal zapovednik, which Range, was likewise not realized. will encompass more than However, the creation of 34,000 hectares in the Yuzhno- In 2001, the Karatausky Range Karatausky Zapovednik repre- Kazakhstan Region, in southern was included among priority sents an important step in pro- Kazakhstan, will be under the areas for the Central Asia tecting the region’s rare, endem- authority of the Committee for Transboundary Biodiversity ic, and even relict species, some Forestry and Hunting, within Project, implemented by GEF of which have endured since Kazakhstan’s Ministry of and the World Bank. As part of antiquity and offer scientists a Agriculture. this project, a complex scientific glimpse into the formation of evaluation of the biodi- plant communities and individ- versity status of the ual species in the region over Karatausky time. Mountain Region For more information about the was new zapovednik, please contact: carried T. S. Kerteshev, out in Scientific Advisor for Protected 2002. Area Planning and Management, Results of Central Asian Transboundary the evalua- Project for Biodiversity tion con- Conservation of the Western firmed the Tian Shan, Email: Map by M. Dubinin. great conser- [email protected]. vation value of the territory and underscored Biologists have been advocating the need to protect it through for the creation of this protected the creation of a zapovednik. area since the 1980’s. Scientists from Kazgiprograd Institute pre- Research showed that the previ- pared the first draft plan for the ous non-sustainable use of the reserve in 1989, but this first territory, together with decade’s effort was stymied by the fact lack of any established conserva- that much of the territory pro- tion regime, had depleted its posed for inclusion in the rich biological resources. In the zapovednik was being used as central part of the Karatausky pasture land. Another plan for Range, a number of rare and the creation of Karatausky endangered plant species have Zapovednik was ordered by the already been lost and Red Data Kazakhstan Ministry of Ecology Book species such as Sogd ash Kara Tau Agrali Sheep (Ovis ammon nig- and Biological Resources in (Fraxinus sogdiana) and the rimontana). Drawing reprinted from the 1998. This second iteration, Kara Tau Argali sheep (Ovis Red Data Book of the RSFSR, 1985.

Spring 2004, No. 35 11 Endangered Species Endangered Species

The Middle Spotted Woodpecker: Sentinel of European Russia’s Oak Forests

By Sergei M. Kossenko are especially difficult for birds. for insects in and under bark. The middle spotted woodpeck- These adaptations include the ong ago, broad-leaved forests er’s preference for such forests is woodpecker’s straight, chisel- L blanketed the European con- attributable to its specialization shaped bill for pecking wood; its tinent. With the conversion of in feeding, specifically the adap- long, barbed tongue that searches land for agricultural purposes, tations that assist it in foraging cracks and crevices for food; the majority of these forests, especially those growing in rich and fertile soil, were cut down. Since then, oak forests have Enlarged Area steadily decreased in size and number, and with them, the habitat of the middle spotted woodpecker (Dendrocopos medius medius).

In central European Russia, which provides habitat to most of the Russian population of middle spotted woodpeckers, annual harvest volumes of oak species exceed by far annual growth rates, and as a result, oak forests have decreased in territory by eighteen percent over the last twenty years. Some silviculturists contend that if this trend con- tinues at present levels, it is pos- sible that the oak forests of European Russia may disappear by 2070.

The widespread destruction and fragmentation of oak forests has had a serious impact on the mid- dle spotted woodpecker, which is now listed in the Russian Red Data Book as a “decreasing species.” This species demon- strates a strong preference for Relative sizes and locations of populations of the Middle Spotted Woodpecker in broad-leaved forests dominated European Russia (marked by circles) and proposed network of protected areas to by oak, where bark-dwelling preserve their habitat (shaded areas). insects are plentiful, even during Map by S. Kossenko and adapted by M. Dubinin. the long winter months, which

12 Russian Conservation News Endangered Species

vents the extinction of the The Middle Spotted Woodpecker species. Such a system would be comprised of habitat areas and as an Umbrella Species ecological corridors that are suitable for the species and that Because of its close ecological link to oak forests, the middle spot- ensure the viability of local pop- ulations. ted woodpecker serves as an “umbrella species.” Efforts to con-

serve the woodpecker also favor other species of the same commu- For this reason, conservationists nity, in this case, the entire suite of species connected to broad- from the Russian Bird leaved forests. Among other rare or vulnerable bird species which Conservation Union are working to develop such a system on a will benefit from efforts to protect the middle spotted woodpecker model territory within six adja- are: the black stork , greater spotted eagle (Ciconia nigra) (Aquila cent regions in Central European clanga), lesser spotted eagle (Aquila pomarina), and the black kite Russia: Bryansk, Kaluga, Kursk, (Milvus migrans). Orel, Smolensk, and Tula Regions. They, more so than oth- ers, are close to the center of the middle spotted woodpecker’s and its paired sublingual salivary and disperse to support flourish- Russian range; furthermore, this glands which secrete a sticky ing woodpecker populations, territory is an ecologically opti- fluid that makes the barbed and consequently, the species mal zone for oak. Oak forests in instrument for capturing insects. distribution is scattered and iso- this area are distinguished by lated. Current landscape ecology their high productivity, and for Unfortunately, though, many of theories suggest that species this reason are very significant European Russia’s remaining endure in such fragmented habi- to the Russian population of intact oak forests are too small tat only if individual populations middle spotted woodpeckers. are united within a greater sys- tem. This allows for the The proposed system will be exchange of individuals between comprised of three territory populations, which, in turn, pre- The Woodpecker’s Role within the Forest Ecosystem

Woodpeckers belong to a guild of birds known as “primary cavity excavators.” Members of this guild, which also includes chickadees and nuthatches, excavate nest cavities in dead or live, defective trees. The cavities they excavate are often used by “secondary cavi- ty users,” including small ducks, owls and raptors, many passerines, and mammals such as bats and squirrels. Woodpeckers also drill sap wells that provide nourishment for a wide variety of species and they play an important role in the regulation of forest insect pests.

Compiled using information from “Inventory Methods for Woodpeckers,” available on the website of British Columbia’s Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management at:

The Middle Spotted Woodpecker http://srmwww.gov.bc.ca/risc/pubs/tebiodiv/woodpeckers/index.htm (Dendrocopos medius medius), depend- ent on the oak. Photo by I. Shpilenok.

Spring 2004, No. 35 13 Endangered Species types: core areas, with higher carrying capacity and the ability The Russian Bird to support long-term population viability; ecological links, with Conservation Union lower carrying capacity and abil- ity to support short-term popu- lation viability; and transit areas, The Russian Bird Conservation Union (RBCU) is a non-governmen- unable to support viable popula- tal, non-profit organization, the primary activity of which is to tions, but able to provide for the inform, educate, and unite broad groups of people to protect avian dispersal of individuals. species diversity and populations in Russia. The organization is an The first step in creating the sys- all-Russian organization with autonomous regional branches work- tem was to gather data on the ing in 59 regions of the country. Many of the regional branches location of local populations have their own charters, budgets, and leadership. Since March and the distribution of individu- 1995, RBCU has been BirdLife International’s Partner Designate in als within them. Members of the research team carefully studied Russia and as such, coordinates all of the organization’s activities forest maps, satellite imagery, in Russia. RBCU is comprised of more than 2,600 citizens of and forest service plans to deter- Russia, the Commonwealth of Independent States, and other coun- mine which areas were most tries. likely to be inhabited by local woodpecker populations. The researchers then inventoried these areas in 2002-2003, and with their findings, developed a spotted woodpecker are: woodpeckers living in oak map of local populations. They Nerusso-Desyanskoye, in Bryansk forests that cannot be designat- then tagged individual birds and Region; Kozelskiye Zaseki, in ed as protected. determined that their dispersion Kaluga Region; Banischansky Les, range is no less than 55 kilome- in Kursk Region; and Tulskiye For additional information on ters. Zaseki, in Tula Region. These ter- the Russian population of the ritories will serve as core areas middle spotted woodpecker, as Taking the habitat requirements of the planned network. well as efforts to preserve it, of the middle spotted wood- please consult the website of the pecker into account, researchers In the future, the proposed eco- Russian Bird Conservation Union determined that the majority of logical network could be at: http://www.rbcu.ru. the local populations within the expanded to include additional model territory could be united regions. This would require The author would like to express in a system, within which indi- expansion of the existing net- his appreciation to the John D. vidual exchange would be possi- work of strictly protected nature and Catherine T. MacArthur ble. According to researchers’ areas, with special attention to Foundation for supporting his data, more than 1,000 pairs the conservation requirements of research on the middle spotted could be protected within such a the middle spotted woodpecker. woodpecker in Russia, and to the model protected areas system. Possible interventions include GIS Laboratory of the Because no fewer than 500 indi- the establishment of a protec- Biodiversity Conservation Center viduals are required to ensure tion regime for high conserva- for providing cartographic mate- long-term genetic viability, it can tion value oak forests or the rial. be assumed that the total popu- preservation of them as part of lation within the model territory the protected land fund until it Sergei M. Kossenko is a Senior should be sufficient to ensure is possible to confer them with Scientist at Bryansky Les viability. special protected status. It is also Zapovednik. important that more favorable Within the model territory, those forest use practices be devel- areas offering the best prospects oped; this would help preserve for preservation of the middle habitat for those middle spotted

14 Russian Conservation News Endangered Species The Wild Reindeer of Kola

Peninsula Distribution of wild and domestic rein- deer on Kola Peninsula. Map by O. Makarova and adapted by M. Dubinin. By Olga Makarova wild herds. During the late ild reindeer (Rangifer 1960’s and W tarandus tarandus) long early 1970’s, rein- ranged freely across the Kola deer husbandry Peninsula in far northwestern developed rapidly, Russia, their populations large and the number of and robust. At the end of the domestic reindeer nineteenth century, however, increased by 70,000 man’s influence and activities head, climbing to a began to negatively impact the record 82,000 peninsula’s reindeer populations. reindeer in 1971. The introduction of domestic This population reindeer to the region by Komi- explosion and Izhem immigrants hastened the associated over- development of reindeer hus- grazing severely bandry, which in turn increased damaged forage pressure on wild populations reserves in the and drove them into remote region. herds by farmers who sold and areas. The wild reindeer faced consumed or utilized the valu- further adversity with the con- Wild reindeer populations were able meat and hides, officials struction of the Murmansk-St. further threatened by a wide- subscribed to another theory, Petersburg railway in 1915, spread hunting campaign in the that the domestic reindeer had which fragmented their migra- 1960s and 1970s, ostensibly joined wild herds. However dubi- tion routes and severed the con- launched to protect domestic ous, these claims served as nection between eastern and herds. During this period, a quar- grounds for unleashing a cam- western sub-populations. ter of the domestic reindeer paign against the wild reindeer. population went missing Articles endorsing the wild rein- Laplandsky Zapovednik was cre- (Makarova, 1978). Although it is deer hunt regularly appeared in ated in 1930 to protect wild quite possible that the domestic local newspapers, and in 1965, a reindeer from these increasing reindeer were taken from their state-run hunting and slaughter- threats. And indeed, by the late 1960’s, the Kola Peninsula’s wild reindeer populations were begin- Reindeer in Russia ning to show signs of recovery. Russia has always been a leading country in domesticated and wild The western region of the penin- reindeer populations. As of the year 2000, Russia was home to two sula, in which the zapovednik thirds of the world’s population of domesticated reindeer was located, supported up to (1,357,700 animals) and 1,246,000 wild reindeer. In Russia, rein- 12,000 individuals, while the deer husbandry has served as a base for the traditional way of life eastern population numbered of most of the indigenous people of the Russian North, while 8,000 wild reindeer. hunting wild reindeer also plays an important role in the life of more than ten indigenous groups. Unfortunately, the end of the decade ushered in a difficult Text adapted from the final report for the Sustainable Reindeer period for both wild reindeer Husbandry Project, a Norwegian-initiated effort under the populations, as pasture degrada- Sustainable Development Working Group of the Arctic Council. tion and hunting caused a sharp Complete text of this report is available on line at: population decline among the http://www.reindeer-husbandry.uit.no

Spring 2004, No. 35 15 Endangered Species

already exceeds 1,000 individu- of Laplandsky Zapovednik. The eindeer as a als. The eastern population of zakaznik’s territory is comprised “Keystone Species” R wild reindeer is even larger, of pine spruce forest and alpine Reindeer are a migratory comprising no less than 6,000 tundra, which is an important species and their seasonal individuals. forage base for the reindeer. presence in different parts of Now that this land has been their range is crucial to main- The proximity of domestic rein- conferred with protected status, taining the web of life in tun- deer herds still poses a problem the western population of wild dra ecosystems. For this rea- for the preservation of Kola reindeer will be able to move son, wild reindeer are consid- Peninsula’s wild reindeer popula- freely and safely between it and ered by ecologists to be a tions, even for western herds the zapovednik. “keystone” species of the protected by Laplandsky North. Zapovednik. Because wild and This western population of wild domestic reindeer compete for reindeer is of particularly high house operation, Murmansky pasture, an inventory of the conservation value and must be Gospromkhoz (State Enterprise peninsula’s pastureland and a carefully preserved and studied for Commercial Hunting and general study of their use needs (Makarova, 1990). Although ulti- Trapping), was created with the to be conducted. Reindeer mately they belong to the same primary purpose of carrying out deplete pasture, particularly subspecies (Rangifer tarandus regular wild reindeer hunts. Over mountain tundra pasture, very tarandus), the western reindeer twelve years’ time, more than quickly, and under conditions of are differentiated from other 10,000 wild reindeer were killed normal population growth, wild populations by several of their (Makarova, 1978), and by the reindeer tend to leave the physiological characteristics, beginning of the 1980s, the two boundaries of the zapovednik including relatively long limbs, wild populations together barely within seven to ten years, thus large antlers, and protruding numbered 1,500-2,000 individuals. leading to greater contact with withers. Studies suggest that the domestic animals. This mixing of western population, which Despite this sharp population populations further compromises reflects characteristics of both decline, wild reindeer on Kola the integrity of the wild reindeer forest and tundra reindeer Peninsula have endured, thanks population’s genetic purity. (Makarova, 1989; 1990), may in large part to the existence have came to Kola Peninsula and interventions of Laplandsky Recently, an important step was from more southern forest Zapovednik and other protected taken toward stabilizing the Kola regions, and may be related to a areas on the peninsula. The Peninsula’s western population mountain-tundra reindeer. western population, which pri- of wild reindeer. On February 28, marily inhabits Laplandsky 2003, the government of Zapovednik, is growing and the Murmanskaya Oblast created a It is also important to note that population on the reserve new zakaznik to the northwest the genetic purity of the western

Wild reindeer grazing in Laplandsky Zapovednik. Photo by G. Kataev.

16 Russian Conservation News Endangered Species

Photo by G. Kataev. continued protection. The west- Makarova, O. A. “Morphological ern population has been devel- Characteristics of the Wild oping independently for a long Reindeer (Rangifer tarandus L.) population has been largely pre- time, and contact with domestic of Kola Peninsula” (in Russian). served, and it is essential that reindeer occurs much less fre- Abstracts of Papers. II congressus measures be taken to ensure its quently here than in the eastern theriologicus internationalis, part of the peninsula. Brno, 1978. omesticated vs. Wild Furthermore, because the D Reindeer domestic reindeer in the west Makarova, O. A. “Towards a Domesticated reindeer cannot are primarily of local heritage, Systematic Position of the Wild be considered totally “domes- interbreeding does less harm Reindeer of Kola Peninsula” (in ticated” animals. They are a than it does in the east, where Russian). Forest Reindeer, 19-29. slightly domesticated form of domestic reindeer brought from Petrozavodsk: 1989. the same biological species as the Bolshezemelskoi tundra by Komi-Izhem and Nenets settlers Makarova, O. A. “Use of Rangifer tarandus. In reindeer are relatively far more numerous. Immeasurable Features in the herding, only wild growing Taxonomy of Rangifer tarandus” biological resources of pasture Olga Makarova is Deputy (in Russian). Materials of the All- are used; because domesticat- Director of Science at Pasvik Union Theoretical Society of the ed and wild reindeer compete Zapovednik and former Senior USSR Academy of Sciences, 81. for the same forage base, they Science Researcher at Laplandsky Moscow: 1990. negatively influence one Zapovednik. another and can thus be con- Makarova, O. A. “Characteristics sidered ecological antagonists. References: of the Western Population of Wild Reindeer of Murmansk Makarova, O. A. “Protection and Region during the Period of Text adapted from the Hunting of Ungulates in Deep Depression” (in Russian). Sustainable Reindeer Murmansk Region” (in Russian). Resources, Ecology, and Rational Husbandry Project final Abstracts of Papers. II congressus Use of Wild Reindeer in the USSR, report, previously referenced theriologicus internationalis, 110-18. Novosibirsk: 1990. on page 15. Brno, 1978.

Spring 2004, No. 35 17 Conservation Management Conservation Management

Russia’s Ministry of Natural Resources Restructured and under New Leadership

Compiled by RCN Editors

n March 9, 2004, President Within the new O Vladimir Putin announced structure, the follow- his new Cabinet of Ministers. ing federal organs This announcement came two will be carrying out weeks after his decision to dis- activities in the solve his previous Cabinet, and sphere of ecology and just five days before the coun- nature use: the try’s presidential elections, Federal Agency for which Putin won handily, with Forestry, the Federal 71.2% of the vote. Agency for Water Resources, the Federal To the post of Minister for Agency for Mineral Natural Resources, Putin Use, and the Federal appointed a figure unfamiliar to Service for the Russia’s new Minister of Natural Resources, Yuri those in Russia’s conservation Oversight of Ecology Trutnev. Photo from www.newsru.com. community, Yuri Petrovich and Nature Use. Trutnev. Trutnev previously These organs will all fall within the served as the Governor of Perm branch, each federal organ type Ministry of Natural Resources. Region (in the Ural Mountains), is uniformly and rigidly limited before which he was Mayor of in its functions and capacities. Within the new structure of the Perm and a member of the Perm “Services” lack the capacity to “natural resources block” of the City Duma. His past experience manage property and to provide executive branch, responsibility working explicitly in the field of paid services, while “Agencies” for management of the federal natural resource management or are not ascribed with control system of protected nature areas utilization is limited to several and protection functions. remains unclear. Although the years spent working for various Because management of the pro- regulations governing the oil extraction companies in the tected area system requires that Federal Service for the Oversight Perm Region. all of these functions be com- of Ecology and Nature Use stipu- bined into a single body, the late that protected areas falls In addition to naming new new, highly fragmented structure within its authority, the Service, Ministerial appointments, Putin seems like a recipe for failure. as an organ, is not invested with also announced a change in the the capacities to adequately structure of the executive Fearing the implications of this, manage all aspects of the system. branch. The executive branch which could be especially devas- In fact, none of the organs with- will have three levels: Ministries, tating for the system in light of in the current structure of the which will be responsible for recent modifications to Russia’s “natural resources block” of the policy formulation and decision Land and Forest Codes, leaders executive government are. making; Federal Services, which in the Russian conservation community are actively advocat- will be responsible for policy According to the March 9 presi- ing for the creation of a special- implementation; and Federal dential order, which recast the ized Agency for Strictly Agencies, which will be responsi- structure of the executive ble for monitoring and oversight. Protected Nature Areas.

18 Russian Conservation News Conservation Management

Identifying Important Plant Areas in Belarus

By Galina Pronkina

n Belarus, work is underway I on a challenging new project to identify the country’s Important Plant Areas (IPAs). The project is being implement- ed by The World Conservation Union’s (IUCN) Office for the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), in partnership with the Institute for Experimental Botany, National Academy of Sciences, Belarus. The initiative builds on previous work carried out by PlantLife International and falls within the framework of the European Strategy for Plant Conservation, developed by the Council of Europe and Planta Europa, a network of governmental and nongovern- mental organizations working in the field of plant conservation.

Important Plant Areas in Belarus. Map by M. Dubinin. The Global Strategy for Plant Conservation The term “Important Plant Area” In April 2002, at the Sixth Conference of the Parties to the Convention may remind many readers of the on Biodiversity, the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation was adopt- long-running BirdLife ed with the overall goal of halting the current and continuing loss of International Project by a similar plant diversity. The Strategy underscores the need to save all plant name to identify Important Bird diversity – not only rare species, but also more common species, the Areas. In fact, this association is diversity of which is decreasing due to the intensification of economic right on target; the two pro- activities and the development of more and more new parcels of land. grams have much in common.

Each of the Strategy’s objectives incorporate concrete targets, the accomplishment of which will support the achievement of the Based on PlantLife’s definition of Strategy’s main goal- to stop the loss of plant biodiversity by 2010. the term, an “Important Plant This goal is closely related to one of the goals of the Convention on Area” is “a natural or semi-natu- Biodiversity, which aims to stop biodiversity loss by 2010. ral site exhibiting exceptional botanical richness; and/or sup- One of the primary targets of the Strategy (Target 5) is to identify the porting an outstanding assem- most important areas for plant diversity and to protect no less than blage of rare, threatened and/or 50% of them by 2010. The identification of these areas has already endemic plant species and/or begun in many regions of the world, including Europe. vegetation of high botanical value.” Identification of these territories is an important step

Spring 2004, No. 35 19 Conservation Management in conserving plant diversity Without the resolution of these because it allows conservation issues, implementation of this planners to more effectively ana- project in other countries of the lyze plant communities and the CIS would be difficult. threats they face, as well as to Identification of Important Plant develop plans for their manage- Areas in Russia, for example, ment. would require participation from many specialists nationwide. In Although projects to identify such a broad scale effort, it Important Plant Areas have been would be crucial that approaches carried out successfully in and criteria were unified and numerous European and Central that information gathered was and Eastern European countries, incorporated into a single data- efforts to do so in Belarus have base. Project implementation in been challenged. One of the pri- Belarus might play a role in con- mary obstacles to implementa- firming the criteria for tion has been the disparity that Important Plant Area identifica- exists between the habitat type tion, and this would help imple- classifications used in countries menters devise approaches more of the European Union (EU) and acceptable to all countries. For those used in the former Soviet this reason, the IPA Program in Cover from a publication on Planta Union. There are also discrepan- Belarus is important, not only Europa’s European Plant Conservation cies in the lists that have been for its support of plant conserva- Strategy. compiled of species for conser- tion, but also for its important please consult the IUCN-CIS vation; for example, the lists role in harmonizing nature con- website at: http://www.iucn.ru. include species widespread in servation practices in the EU and Eastern Europe, but omit truly CIS. Galina Pronkina is the rare species that are found only Coordinator of the Important in countries of the CIS. For more information on the Plant Area Project for the IUCN Important Plant Area Program, Office for the Commonwealth of Independent States. Spotlight on Important Plant Areas in Belarus A number of the Important Plant Areas identified in Belarus are located on the territory of existing zapoved- niks and national parks, including Blue Lakes Zakaznik and Belovezhskaya Puscha National Park. Blue Lakes Zakaznik One of Belarus’ most exceptional Important Plant Areas is Blue Lakes Zakaznik. The reserve, which occupies 1,500 hectares in the Mydel District of Minsk Region, was established in 1972; its territory was subsequently incorporated into Narochansky National Park in 1999. At the heart of the reserve is the Bolduk Lake Group, also known as the Blue Lakes, which is a favorite place for tourists and visitors to the reserve. This relatively small territory provides habitat to a great number of rare and endangered plant species and communities. Among them are plants included in Appendix 1 of the Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, such as Slender Green Feather-Moss (Drepanocladus vernicosus), Leathery Grape Fern (Botrychium multifidum), Yellow Lady-slipper (Cypripedium calceolus), and Eastern Pasque Flower (Pulsatilla patens). Belovezhskaya Pushcha National Park With it territory under various states of protection since the fifteenth century, Belovezhskaya Pushcha National Park is the oldest national park in all of Europe. It occupies 87,600 hectares in southwestern Belarus, where it is adjacent to Bialowieza National Park in Poland. The reserve is 88% forested with mixed broad-leaved and conifer forests of "old growth" virgin stands. Situated between boreal and temperate zones, the reserve harbors elements and mixtures of both northern and southern floral species. The park is repre- sented by 12 main forest associations and 38 nationally threatened plant species can be found on its territory. Belovezhskaya Pushcha National Park was inscribed on the United Nation’s Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) World Heritage List in 1992.

20 Russian Conservation News Environmental Legislation Environmental Legislation

Draft Forest Code Met with Concern and Opposition

Compiled by RCN Editors Council, just five days later, on involvement by foresters, special- November 26, 2003; and were ists from Russia’s heavily forested ussia has some of the richest finally signed into law by President regions, or NGO representatives. R forest resources in the world. Vladimir Putin on December 10. It’s worth noting that, while the Their management is largely pre- proposed draft of the Forest Code scribed by a legislative document However damaging, these changes had numerous official versions, called “The Forest Code.” This were barely in place when a whole only once during the entire course Code, the standing version of of its preparation was it publicly which dates back to 1997, pro- Management Categories of presented, and even then, only in vides the legal framework for the Russia’s Forests a semi-closed session held in the utilization, protection, conserva- Russia’s forests are subdivided Ministry of Economic tion, and regeneration of Russia’s into three groups in accor- Development. forests. Recently, Russian bureau- dance with their ecological crats embarked on an aggressive The draft finally saw the light of and economic importance: campaign to modify the current day on February 2, 2004, when the • “First Group” forests Forest Code and to enact new Ministry of Economic include: forests protecting legislation that would open the Development and Trade submitted waterways; forest belts way for the privatization of it to the Cabinet for review. around industrial cities; and Russia’s forests. Generally speaking, the draft pro- forest tracts of highly valu- posed the introduction of private able tree species. Efforts toward this end began in ownership of forests under the • “Second Group” forests are earnest in the fall of 2003, when terms that after a particular plot found in areas densely pop- the Ministry of Economic had been leased for 15 years, its ulated by humans and are Development and Trade sponsored lessor could purchase the land. available for small-scale a bill to amend Russia’s standing This draft Code also contained a timber operations. Forest Code. The proposed amend- number of points that represented • “Third Group” forests are ments sought to allow “First significant setbacks for the protec- primarily “industrial” Group” (protective) forests to be tion and management of forests forests, managed to meet conferred with a different group and forested ecosystems in Russia. national economic and tim- status, which would allow them to Specifically, this draft Forest Code ber export demands. be harvested or utilized. (For more prepared by the Ministry of information about the system cat- Economic Trade and egorizing Russia’s forests, please new set of regulations was pro- Development: consult the text box on this page). posed in a subsequent, altogether The proposed changes also made new draft of the Forest Code, • Allowed for privatization of accessible to development non- developed by the Ministry of regional protected areas. federal level protected areas such Economic Development and as Russia’s many regional-level Trade. The preparation process of • Limited public access to forests. nature parks. These amendments this new draft, which began this The proposed draft lacked any were swiftly passed by the lower past winter, was by no account mechanism to protect public chamber of Russian Parliament, transparent or participatory. The interests in regard to subsis- the Duma, on November 21, 2003; document was drafted in complete tence-oriented non-timber forest they were then approved by the secrecy, without public review or use (such as berry and mush- upper chamber, the Federation discussion, and, notably, without room collecting, which are

Spring 2004, No. 35 21 Environmental Legislation

essential to the socio-economic base of many regions).

• Allowed for the privatization of “Third Group Forests,” a category of forest set aside as reserves for future use. It also allowed for the privatization of several cate- gories of protected lands which have particular significance to the public (such as forest belts along highways and railroads, forest management units in urban “green zones,” forests on resort territories, nut-producing orchards, and pre-tundra forests). Privatization of such lands would create conflicts between local land users and private landowners and contra- dict the primacy of public and incentives for creating eco- “The voice of the public should be access, which is an underpinning nomically effective forest use heard!” Photo by V. Kantor (Greenpeace- Russia). of the federal forest law. over the long term. Specifically, it lacked financial mechanisms ticularly serious in areas not • The Code lacked a foundation to ensure responsibility and dominated by forest industry, as no clear stipulation was made on the responsibility of govern- ment to finance reforestation and silviculture.

• The Forest Code envisioned a highly decentralized governmen- tal structure for forest manage- ment (three federal agencies and one in each of the regions). At the same time, however, no defi- nitions or guidance were provid- ed for regional-level manage- ment. Such a situation would create conditions for predomi- nance of high-level managers, who would have power without accountability, which could cre- ate opportunities for corruption. The situation would also result in a loss of qualified staff in the regions; in Siberia, for example, where the Forest Service is one of the primary employers, as many as 120,000 highly quali- fied, lower-level Forest Service Greenpeace activists hoisting a banner accountability for reforestation employees could be let go. over the entrance to the Ministry of and silvicultural activities. This Economic Trade and Development. Photo by V. Kantor (Greenpeace-Russia). problem would have been par-

22 Russian Conservation News Environmental Legislation

A variety of groups expressed strong and vocal opposition to this draft Code, with Russia’s envi- ronmental NGO’s leading the charge. On February 19, the day the government began reviewing the draft Code, NGO leaders organized a press conference in Moscow to raise awareness about the threats posed to Russia by the New Forest Code; on this same day, Greenpeace staged a very visi- ble demonstration literally right on the Ministry’s doorstep. Then on March 25, a group of NGOs including Greenpeace, WWF, the Biodiversity Conservation Center, the International Socio-Ecological Union, and the Druzhina Movement, met with representa- their concern about the draft “Involve forestry specialists in developing the Code!” tives from the Ministry of Photo by V. Kantor Forest Code. (Greenpeace-Russia). Economic Development and Trade to express their concerns about With the eyes of the nation upon As this issue of RCN goes to press, the Forest Code and the exclusive them, federal level officials also we have learned that the Ministry manner of its preparation. began to sound off on the draft. The of Economic Development and Chair for the State Duma Committee Trade, perhaps in response to pub- Cries of protest were also heard for Natural Resources and Resource lic pressure, perhaps in response from the regions. On March 11, in Development, Natalya Komarova, to pressure exerted from within Kursk Region, in Central Russia, spoke critically of the draft, as did the government, has prepared yet concerned forest experts and Sergei Mironov, the Speaker of the another new draft of the Code. deputies from the Kursk Regional Federation Council. It is also widely This latest version is, in many Duma met to discuss the new ver- known that Russia’s new Premier senses, a radical departure from sion of the draft Forest Code. Minister, Mikhail Fradkov, is general- the draft endorsed two months Legislators from the heavily forest- ly opposed to the introduction of prior; it excludes provisions for ed Russian Far East also con- private property on forests. In a private land ownership, allows for tributed their concerns to the dis- Cabinet meeting on April 12, the creation of new protected cussion. The Parliamentary President Putin advised his new areas on forested territories, and Association of Far East and Trans- Minister of Natural Resources Yuri also prescribes a structure for Baikal States, in which representa- Trutnev that “close attention should local-level forest management. tives from the ten eastern adminis- be paid to fundamental problems (of This latest iteration has yet to trative regions comprising Russia’s the Forest Code, Ed.), and that all of undergo review, and given past Far Eastern Federal District partici- the controversial issues should be events, it is still quite premature to pate, officially decided not to sup- analyzed again together with the speculate on what may lie ahead. port the bill, and on April 2, the Ministry of Economic Development In the weeks and months to come, Association adopted a resolution and the State Duma.” RCN, Russia’s conservation com- that the introduction of private munity, and indeed all of Russia, property on Russia’s forests “is Despite waves of protest and objec- will be closely following this possible only through national ref- tion, the Cabinet nevertheless pre- important issue, on which the fate erendum.” And in countless liminarily adopted the draft Forest of Russia’s forest resources may regions across Russia, thousands of Code on March 18, with plans to very well hinge. citizens signed petitions and prepare its final version for submis- addressed letters to President sion to the Duma for review by April Putin, parliamentary leaders, and 18. local elected officials expressing

Spring 2004, No. 35 23 Conflict Resolution Conflict Resolution

Zapovedniks and Local Government: A Conflict of Interests in the Adygeya Republic

By Valery Brinikh ago, when Stalin all but laid waste to Russia’s protected area ccording to Article 72 of the system. Like many other reserves A Constitution of the Russian at the time, Kavkavsky Federation, the country’s strictly Zapovednik was drastically protected nature areas fall with- reduced in size. In 1951, in the joint management of the the reserve was reduced Russian Federation, i.e., the fed- by more than 200,000 eral center, and the Federation’s hectares, or more than subjects, i.e., the regions. For the two thirds of its territory. protected areas, this placement Among the territory transferred is precarious, to say the least. out from the zapovednik’s man- Quite often, the goals and inter- agement was the Lagonaki ests of local authorities do not Plateau. No longer under protec- coincide with those of more tion, the plateau, a center of conservation-minded representa- regional plant endemism, with Kavkazsky Zapovednik. Map by M. tives from the regional organs of over 250 endemic plant species Dubinin. the Ministry of Natural including bellflower (Campanula Resources. Many local authorities autraniana), saxifrage (Saxifraga federal document has yet to be view the protected areas within colchica), and spurge (Euphorbia issued, however, due to a num- their jurisdiction not as a means oschtenica), was terribly abused. ber of irreconcilable issues, many to preserve, in perpetuity, their Its alpine pastures were exploit- of which sprung from the fact region’s unique natural complex- ed mercilessly through the late that the territory’s exact bound- es and biodiversity, but rather as 1980’s, causing widespread ero- aries had not been determined, an obstacle to economic and sion and pasture degradation. nor had land tenure been estab- infrastructural development. lished prior to the issuance of Thanks to the efforts of con- the local land committee’s cer- We find one of the most striking cerned zapovednik staff and tificate. For this reason, territori- examples of an adversarial other environmentalists, Adygeya al claims against Kavkazsky zapovednik-local government authorities consented in 1990 Zapovednik have persisted for relationship in the Adygeya and 1992 to reincorporate into more than ten years. Republic, in the Western Kavkazsky Zapovednik more Caucasus Mountain Region. Here, than 16,000 hectares of Lagonaki While state ownership of land Kavkazsky Zapovednik has fallen Plateau. In 1993, the local land was absolute, efforts to usurp in the crosshairs of the local committee issued a certificate zapovednik territory were limit- Adygeya government, which is confirming the zapovednik’s ed to small scale development eager to advance its economic authority over the territory and efforts that targeted discrete development initiatives on the its rights to maintain a strict land parcels. Small recreation territory of the zapovednik, conservation regime in perpetu- and tourism businesses began to which it considers its own. ity. This certificate was granted sprout up on the zapovednik’s as a temporary guarantee of territory. One investor created a The first pages of this long story rights until the federal govern- resort, “Kavkaz,” near the village were written over a half century ment issued its own act. This of Guzeripl, as well as a tourist

24 Russian Conservation News Endangered Species

Zapovednik. Despite having cul- Kavkazsky Zapovednik tivated a “green image,” thanks The Caucasus Mountain Region of southwestern Russia is one of in large part to participation in the most biologically diverse landscapes in the Northern WWF’s Gift to the Earth Hemisphere. Kavkazsky Zapovednik, located in the Stavropol and Program, the government of the Krasnodar Krais, is one of a chain of nature reserves protecting Adygeya Republic ceased to this biological hot spot. Here, unique Caucasian tur and chamois maintain a policy of conserva- scramble up steep mountain slopes, while rare European bison tion regarding the Lagonaki browse in young forests. Scores of other endangered animals and Plateau, and instead began view- plants find refuge in this extensive protected area. ing it as an attractive investment opportunity. In 1999, the region- In awe of the region's timeless beauty, Christopher Shaposhnikov, al government revived its long the founder of Kavkazsky Zapovednik, wrote in 1928: "The sight of festering plan to construct a snowy mountains [caressed] my eyes with their milky mist. Here I road from Maikop to Dagomys, have feasted my eyes for more than half a century! Dear to my which would run right through mind and heart, my own mountains! And I feel with delight that I the plateau and lead to a ski have done a great deal for you, my beloved mountains! All the joy resort, also planned for develop- that you have given me, all that I have perceived in your ravines ment. (For more information on and on your summits, I have compressed into one great idea - and the planned road construction, now we have a Zapovednik!" please consult “A Long and Winding Road through the The preceding description is an excerpt of text about Kavkazsky Caucasus Must be Stopped,” an Zapovednik available on the Wild Russia website (http://www.wild- article which appeared in RCN russia.org). Wild Russia is a project of the Center for Russian Nature 19, published in Spring 1999. Conservation, the organization which also publishes Russian This article is available on the Conservation News. Wild Russia is an international effort to docu- Russian Conservation News web- ment images of the wild nature harbored in Russia’s system of strict site at http://www.russianconser- nature reserves and national parks. vation.org). Fortunately, ecolo- gists succeeded in preserving the shelter, “Fisht,” located else- establishment on zapovednik terri- where on the zapovednik’s terri- tory is not substantiated by any tory. In 2000, the zapovednik documentation, and thus can be instigated a court action against considered illegal. When ques- the owner. Although it was tioned about the matter in 2003, established in court proceedings former Minister of Natural that the tour base is, in fact, Resources Valery Artukhov tried to unlawfully located on the pass the shelter off as part of the zapovednik’s territory, efforts to zapovednik’s scientific research halt the facility’s operations have center. He also attempted to been unsuccessful. explain away the ski trail and lift being constructed on the slope of More recently, other unlawful uses nearby Mt. Fisht, also inside the of the zapovednik’s territory have zapovednik. According to occurred, these even more flagrant Artukhov, these, we are to believe, and controversial. A tourist shelter, are “phenological inventory trails called “Lunnaya Polyana,” was built for inquisitive scientists.” on the delicate territory of Lagonaki Plateau. This shelter is These isolated incidents of terri- part of the “Dogmys” resort com- torial misuse are alarming and A lift similar to this one at Mussa- plex, which belongs to none other upsetting, but not nearly as Achitara Mountain, also in the Caucasus, than the Presidential much so as a series of attempts is planned for Mt. Fisht in sensitive Administration of the Russian to actually seize the territory of alpine habitat now protected in Kavkazsky Zapovednik. Federation. The existence of this Lagonaki Plateau from Kavkazsky Photo by E. Ledovskikh.

Spring 2004, No. 35 25 Conflict Resolution territorial integrity and protect- by law. The General Prosecutor tration of Kavkazsky ed regime of Lagonaki Plateau. of the Adygeya Republic pursued Zapovednik, which reports to The related court process, which the matter, and brought a suit the Ministry of Natural was initiated by the local gov- against the Adygeya Republic’s Resources, has been powerless to ernment, and continued through Cabinet of Ministers, as well as act against this most recent reso- 2001, ended in favor of the Department of Natural lution. Environmental NGOs Kavkazsky Zapovednik. Resources and Environmental have stepped in, and are current- Protection, under the Ministry of ly in court with the Adygeya After the zapovednik’s rights to Natural Resources, for their neg- Cabinet of Ministers, hoping to the territory were upheld in a ligence in observing standing secure the status and fate of court of law, ecologists were conservation legislation. On Lagonaki Plateau once and for hopeful that there would be no December 3, 2003, the Adygeya all. more attempts on Lagonaki Republic Arbitration Court ruled Plateau. They were also opti- in favor of the zapovednik, Analysis of the current situation mistic that an upcoming change which gained back the Lagonaki in Kavkazsky Zapovednik, and in leadership in the Adygeya Plateau, and the 2001 resolution Russia’s protected area system as Republic would further improve lost legal strength. a whole, supports the discom- the situation. Future events, forting conclusion that the sys- however, would show that the Desperate to document its claim tem’s demise will be swift and regional government was far on the contested territory, the inevitable, if measures aren’t from giving up its ambitions. Adygeya Cabinet of Ministers taken to diffuse the conflicts of issued yet another resolution, interest that exist between On August 13, 2001, the Adygeya just 5 days after the arbitration zapovedniks and local govern- Cabinet of Ministers issued court’s finding. This latest reso- ments. It is also of great impor- Resolution #271, which reversed lution, Resolution # 343, again tance to address the underlying the 1990 and 1992 decrees that asserted the invalidity of the causes of these conflicts, partic- had transferred Lagonaki Plateau 1990 and 1992 decrees. The ularly, lax federal management and several other territories to President of the Adygeya and the weakness of related leg- Kavkazsky Zapovednik. In Republic, K. Sovmenom, dis- islation. December of that same year, the cussed the issue with former Severo-Kavkazsky Circuit Court Minster of Natural Resources, Valery Brinikh is the former repealed Resolution #271. Valery Artyukhov, and the two Director of Kavkavsky Despite the court ruling, the bureaucrats reached an agree- Zapovednik. He is currently a Cabinet of Ministers did not ment favorable to the regional graduate student at Maikopsky annul the resolution, as required government. Sadly, the adminis- State Technical University.

Fisht-Oshtensky Mountain Massif in Kavkazsky Zapovednik. Photo by E. Ledovskikh.

26 Russian Conservation News NGO News NGO News

Muraviovka Park: Organic Farming and Nature Conservation at Work Together

Compiled by RCN Editors, with invaluable information and assistance from George Danner and Margaret Scoles.

A Note from the Editors: In our twenty-sixth issue, published in the summer of 2001, RCN acquainted readers with Muraviovka Park in the Amur Region. (This article is available on the Russian Conservation News website at http://www.russianconservation.org). The first non-governmental nature park in Russia, Muraviovka Park was created in 1993 with the goal of developing and implementing sustainable nature use practices on the park’s territory. In honor and recognition of Muraviovka’s tenth anniversary, celebrat- ed in 2003, we continue our coverage of the park’s work with this account of efforts underway to obtain organic certification for the park’s demonstration farm.

or more than ten years, staff, livestock. The alternative crop Russia is generally to collect F supporters, and friends of production and wildlife preser- straw at the rear of the combine Muraviovka Park have delighted vation strategies that are being during harvest and periodically in watching the growth and implemented on the farm are deposit it in piles across the expansion of the park and its expected to improve local eco- field. These straw piles are then many activities. Particularly suc- nomic and environmental condi- later set afire to remove them cessful and worthy of recogni- tions, as well as to provide for from the field. This uncontrolled tion have been efforts to imple- the preservation of native flora burning does not offer any soil ment self-sustaining and ecologi- and fauna. improvement benefit and pres- cally clean agricultural practices ents a very real wildfire risk. within the park’s territory. Work On the farm’s 567 hectares, dif- Fires in the region annually in this direction began in earnest ferent varieties of crops, includ- destroy thousands of hectares of in 1997, when park managers ing wheat, soybeans, barley, corn, wildlife habitat, along with the created a “demonstration farm” and perennial grasses are being eggs and chicks of ground nest- in order to provide local farmers grown in test plots, and in field ing birds. Adult birds and other with research and information conditions without the use of mammals also sometimes perish about sustainable and environ- pesticides or commercial fertiliz- in the conflagrations. mentally appropriate strategies ers. Farm managers have also for growing crops and raising incorporated various innovative The farm employs a number of management practices and tech- other innovative methodologies. niques that differ from those For example, to control against commonly used in Russia. For crop diseases, harmful insects, example, the demonstration and weeds, while at the same farm began using combines to time building soil structure and mulch and spread small grain fertility, the farm rotates crops, and soybean straw across the fallows fields for a season, and Russia fields during harvest. This uses “green manure,” a term used process facilitates straw decom- to describe a leguminous crop position into the soil, which planted only so that it might improves soil structure, water grow and then decompose into holding capacity, and fertility. the soil. To control wind erosion Standard practice in this area of across flat fields, the farm is Map by M. Dubinin.

Spring 2004, No. 35 27 NGO News allowing deforested areas to reforest naturally. It also recently established a tree nursery to pro- vide seedlings for planting in windbreaks.

Demonstration farm staff, led by the park’s Deputy Director Sergei Shalagin, carefully monitor farm activities. Recording crop yields on a yearly basis and by variety provides an indicator of soil conditions and fertility, as well as the success of various produc- tion practices. Farm staff also monitor the effect of the demonstration farm’s activities on local wildlife species. In all Margaret Scoles working with Sergei Shalagin, the Farm Director, and Marina Kolodina, the respects, the demonstration farm Park Education Coordinator. Photo provided by Friends of Muraviovka Park. has enjoyed good results. It con- sistently produces higher crop mulched small grain straw, the and Oriental White Storks yields than other farms in the demonstration farm has become observed on the park’s territory region, with soybeans averaging one of the top farms in the has increased three-fold, while from 1.3 to 2.0 tons per hectare region. Organic and sustainable wild boar have been observed and small grains averaging from farming has also helped protect for the first time in decades. 2.0 to 2.5 tons per hectare. With and enhance wildlife habitat and the elimination of early growing biodiversity. Since the park’s Building on these successes, weeds and the decomposition of inception in 1993, the number Muraviovka Park has recently of Red-crowned Cranes, White- begun the process of obtaining naped Cranes, Hooded Cranes, organic certification for the

About the Organic Certification Process

Earning organic certification involves a complex, multi-step process. It begins with the submission of an application and “organic system plan” to a certification agency. The certification agency then reviews the application to determine if the applicant meets established criteria. An independent inspector visits the site to verify operational activity and to ascertain that the organic sys- tem plan is being followed. The inspector submits a report to the certification agency that should confirm that no prohibited mate- rials such as synthetics or pesticides have been used on the site within three years prior to certification. The report also provides insight into whether the operation is protecting and enhancing the natural resources of the land and determines if records are in place to track the crops from organic seed to sale. After reviewing the inspector’s report, the certification agency makes a determina- tion to award or postpone certification of the applying organiza- tion.

Margaret Scoles inspecting the demonstra- Text adapted from an article written by independent farm inspector tion farm at Muraviovka Park. Photo pro- Margaret Scoles in the February 2004 issue of “Zhuravl,” the vided by Friends of Muraviovka Park. newsletter of Friends of Muraviovka Park.

28 Russian Conservation News NGO News

Muraviovka Park will be certified Organic Certification in Russia as organic before the fall harvest of 2005. While working toward certification, Muraviovka Park is facing a number of challenges that are specific to the Russian context. Very For additional information about little organic certification is being done in Russia and there are few Muraviovka Park, or to view the organized crop improvement groups or Russian certification latest issue of “Zhuravl,” the agencies. In addition, the distance from European or American cert- newsletter of the Friends of ification agencies and inspectors greatly increases the cost of Muraviovka Park, on-line, please annual fees, while additional expenses may be incurred by shipping to specialty or foreign markets. Nevertheless, the opportunity for consult the International Crane more Russian farms to "go organic" increases each year. As multi- Foundation website at: national corporations continue to advocate pesticide use and to http://www.savingcranes.org/ introduce GMO (genetically modified organisms) crops into the abouticf/friends.asp. Over the agricultural environment, countries and consumers opposed to years, the International Crane these products will seek out growers and uncontaminated produc- Foundation in Baraboo, tion areas for their purchases. Wisconsin, has provided stead- fast support to the Muraviovka demonstration farm. For in 2003. As part of the certifica- Park project, which is largely Muraviovka Park, organic certifi- tion process, an independent driven by the enthusiasm and cation would provide access to organic crop inspector from the commitment of Moscow State markets that support higher United States, Margaret Scoles, University ornithologist, Sergei prices for production, for exam- inspected the farm during the Smirenski. ple, those in Japan. This summer of 2003. Ms. Scoles was – increased profitability will help acting as an inspector for a US – to support the park’s long-term based certification agency that is financial sustainability. It will accredited by the US Department also demonstrate to local farm- of Agriculture (USDA) to certify in ers the value of introducing low the US and is accredited by the input production and alternative International Federation of marketing strategies. Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) to certify internationally. Muraviovka Park submitted its While on site at Muraviovka, Ms. first application for certification Scoles reviewed the farm’s A Hooded Crane (Grus monachus) eating records, crops, soil conditions, amongst a flock of geese at the park. Photo storage, environmental impact provided by Friends of Muraviovka Park. and physical activity. George Danner has worked Unfortunately, the drought and with Muraviovka Park since its floods of 2003, which resulted in establishment. He is an inde- seed loss and tillage interrup- pendent organic farm production tion, waylaid the certification and organic food processing process for Muraviovka, and ulti- inspector and currently serves as mately contributed to the certifi- an agricultural consultant for the cation agency’s decision to post- park’s demonstration farm. pone certification. The farm will Margaret Scoles is the work through 2004 to reorganize Executive Director and Training crop rotation and production, Manager for the Independent and in 2005 will resubmit its Organic Inspectors Association. application to a certifier, with an While working as an independent eye toward undergoing another contractor, she conducted an on-site inspection during the inspection of Muraviovka Park’s summer of 2005. Farm managers demonstration farm in 2003. Planting trees for windbreaks. Photo pro- and supporters are hopeful that vided by Friends of Muraviovka Park. the demonstration farm at

Spring 2004, No. 35 29 News of the Day News of the Day

Zapovedniks by Mail: Just an Envelope Away

or several years now, the FRussian Postal Service, Pochta Rossii, has been issuing commem- orative envelopes featuring select zapovedniks. With the addition of envelopes for Tsentralno-Lesnoi, Kavkasky, and Khingansky Zapovedniks in 2003, the series has grown to include fifteen envelopes; it is projected to con- tinue through 2004.

The idea for the commemorative series originated in 1998 with Aleksei Popov, then Director of Bolshaya Kokshaga Zapovednik in the Republic of Mari El. He pro- posed the idea to staff at the NGO Environmental Education Centre “Zapovedniks” in Moscow, who were receptive, and contacted the organization responsible for print- ing stamps and philatelic items for the Russian Postal Service with inquiries. The Moscow-based pub- lishing enterprise, Marka, reviewed and approved the proposal, and in 1998 issued the inaugural envelopes, which featured images of Barguzinsky and Sikhote- Alinsky Zapovedniks.

Each envelope in the series fea- tures a color landscape image of the zapovednik, with representa- tive wildlife in the foreground. The envelopes are produced in quantities of 500,000 to one mil- lion and are available in post offices across Russia. The envelope series has helped promote aware- RCN thanks the publishing enterprise Marka for its permission to use these images. ness and raise visibility for Russia’s zapovednik system nationwide.

30 Russian Conservation News News of the Day News of the Day

In Russia, a Rare Crocus Again in Bloom

he BioDat Agency announced T earlier this spring that Crocus biflorus (C. tauricus (Trautv.)Puring), a very rare cro- cus, listed in Russia’s Red Data Book, was found February 11, in the outlying areas of Novorossisk, in Krasondar Region (in southern Russia, just east of the Black Sea). The cro- cus, which also grows in Crimea, Southern Europe, and northwest- ern Asia Minor, had not been observed in its Russian range since 1896. Some botanists sur- mised that the population may have been destroyed by exten- sive development in the region; others believed that the plant, which blooms exceptionally early, may have simply been overlooked.

Scientists have not disclosed the conservation community. Every Rare beauty: Crocus biflorus. Photo by I. precise location of their unique year, students participating in Torgachkin. find, perhaps concerned that it the Druzhina Movement for may be overrun by zealous Nature Conservation organize flower pickers. In southern raids on illegal flower peddlers their loved ones flowers specially areas of Russia, the Caucasus as part of their “Operation cultivated for sale. Mountain Region, and Ukraine, Primrose” campaign. In many harvesting wildflowers has large cities across Russia, student To view color photographs of become a full-fledged industry, activists conduct raids on mar- Crocus biflorus (C. tauricus kets and at train stations, where and every spring, tens of thou- (Trautv.)Puring), please consult: they keep a watchful eye out for sands of people can be spotted http://www.biodat.ru/data/ wildflower-bearing passengers at markets and train stations in 8-marte.htm. large cities across Russia, selling arriving from the south. In small, inexpensive bouquets, Moscow, members of the city’s This article was compiled by RCN usually of snowdrop (Galanthus Ecological Police also assist the Editors using information avail- sp.) and cyclamen (Cyclamen student activists in combating able on http://www.biodat.ru, sp.), which have been harvested the illegal flower trade. Their without concern for species sur- combined efforts are primarily Russia’s largest website devoted vival and diversity. aimed at raising awareness to biodiversity conservation. among the flower-picking and The uncontrolled over-exploita- purchasing public. Campaign tion of wildflower resources has participants encourage passers- not gone unnoticed by Russia’s by not to patronize those selling wildflowers, but instead to buy

Spring 2004, No. 35 31 Bulletin Board BULLETIN BOARD

Support RCN On-line Island to Barrow. The conference is Russian Conservation News is free and open to the public on a pleased to announce the addition of a walk-in basis. For more information, new feature to the RCN website that please consult: enables you to donate online, instantly! International http://www.nps.gov/akso/beringia. Our DonateNow button is a major Conference: Integrated step forward into the emerging arena Management of Natural International of e-philanthropy and we're excited Resources in the Conference: Caspian Ecology 2004 to provide this new option to you. We Transboundary invite you to utilize this new feature Dniester River Basin Istanbul, Turkey and look forward to receiving your November 25- 26, 2004 Chisinau, Moldova tax deductible donation online via This conference will include sessions September 16-17, 2004 our web site, http://www.russiancon- on: the unique natural diversity of the Organized by "Eco-TIRAS" servation.org. Caspian Basin; the environmental sta- International Environmental tus of the Caspian Region; environ- Association of River Keepers, in coop- Second International mental safety measures for oil compa- eration with the Ministry of Ecology Conference on nies engaged in offshore operations; and Natural Resources of Moldova, control and prevention of oil spills Circumpolar Vegetation this conference will offer participants and other emergencies; and opportu- Classification and the opportunity to evaluate and dis- nities for collaboration among Mapping cuss legal, institutional, and economic Tromso, Norway Caspian nations in protecting Caspian instruments for managing the natural June 2-6, 2004 ecosystems and improving the resources of the transboundary region’s environmental status. The The Second International Conference Dniester River. Other conference top- on Circumpolar Vegetation event is sponsored by: the Ministry of ics will include: wetland conservation Classification and Mapping will Environment Protection Republic of and protected areas creation; ecologi- focus on issues related to classifica- Kazakhstan; the Ministry of Natural cal monitoring of the trans-Dniester tion, mapping, and modeling of vege- Resources of the Russian Federation; ecosystem; and increased public tation in Arctic tundra regions. The the Ministry of Ecology of Azerbaijan; involvement in conservation activities. classification portion of the confer- the Ministry of Nature Protection of For additional information, please ence will be primarily devoted to veg- Turkmenistan; and the Department of contact conference organizers at: etation surveys of syntaxa or mono- Environment Protection Islamic [email protected] or ilyatrom@ graphs on special areas or regions of Republic of Iran. For additional infor- hotmail.com. the Arctic. mation, please consult: The mapping portion will focus on http://www.caspianecology.iteca.kz. circumpolar and large-regional scale International mapping efforts. Conference: Beringia Invitation to Readers The last major gathering of Arctic Days 2004 The editorial board of Russian vegetation scientists was at the Anchorage, Alaska Conservation News extends an invita- International Conference on October 21-23, 2004 tion to our Western readers and sub- Classification of Arctic Vegetation, This three-day conference, sponsored scribers to share news of their work held at the Institute of Arctic and by the National Park Service and the in conservation in Northern Eurasia. Alpine Research, Boulder CO, USA, 5-9 Anchorage Museum of History and Abstracts to accompany the articles March 1992. Since then there has Art, brings together researchers, com- will be created and translated into been considerable progress toward munity and Native leaders, and others Russian and published in RCN for our classification and mapping as a means from the United States and Russia to Russian readers. Submissions accom- of understanding the Arctic as a single celebrate the unique cultural and nat- geo-ecosystem, and to aid in numer- panied by photos or illustrations will ural heritage shared by the two ous efforts to model the response of receive special consideration. Please nations in the central Beringia region. vegetation to climate and land-use send your articles to us at: This gathering provides a forum for changes. For further information, [email protected]. the public to hear about projects, please visit: activities, and cultural events taking http://www.geobotany.uaf.edu/cavm_ place in eastern Chukotka and workshop_2004.html, or contact Northwest Alaska from St. Lawrence Christine Martin at [email protected].

32 Russian Conservation News Abstracts in Russia Аннотации статей, представленных в номере

Раздел I. Охраняемые террито- охранительным законодательством. Од- рии. нако новый проект Лесного кодекса РФ, разработанный Минэкономики РФ, не «Уникальный эксперимент по одомашни- только не решает этих противоречий, но ванию лося в Печоро-Илычском заповед- создает предпосылки для серьезного со- нике». Михаил Кожухов, Андрей Сацук. На циального взрыва. территории Печоро-Илычского заповед- ника, расположенного в предгорьях се- Раздел II. Виды животных и рас- верного Урала более 50 лет проводится тений находящиеся под угрозой Раздел V. Разрешение конфлик- беспрецедентный эксперимент по одо- исчезновения. тов. машниванию лося - одного из самых «Средний дятел: страж дубовых лесов «Заповедники и региональная власть: крупных животных бореальных лесов. За Европейской части России» . Сергей Ко- конфликт интересов в Республике Ады- годы изучения были описаны многие сенко. По прогнозам ученых, если сокра- гея». Валерий Бриних. Для заповедников в особенности биологии и экологии лосей, щение дубовых лесов будет идти на евро- современных условиях, считает автор ранее неизвестные науке, десятки моно- пейской равнине России теми же темпа- статьи, есть лишь два подхода – либо же- графий посвящены этой тематике. Но ми, что и за последние 20 лет, то они сткая конфронтация с региональными многое уже в прошлом. Сейчас лосефер- полностью исчезнут к 2070 году. Вместе с властями, ведущая к самоизоляции; либо - ма – подразделение отдела экологическо- лесами исчезнет и множество видов жи- наоборот, соглашательская позиция, веду- го просвещения. Публикуя эту статью, вотных и растений, тесно связанных эво- щая к усилению хозяйственного воздей- RCN задается вопросом, насколько такие люцией с дубом, как эдификатором . Сре- ствия на охраняемые природные ком- питомники соответствуют целям и зада- ди них средний дятел (Dendrocopos плексы и объекты. Оба варианта имеют чам заповедников, миссия которых – со- medius medius), наиболее тесно связан серьезные изъяны, не позволяющие реко- хранять дикую природу, а не преобразо- пищевой специализацией с дубовыми ле- мендовать их для полноценного исполь- вывать ее на «благо человека», как нас сами. Статья описывает методику сохра- зования. Лучшей иллюстрацией совре- учила «партийная наука». нения среднего дятла на основе создан- менных негативных взаимоотношений «Интервью с Всеволодом Степаницким о ной в Орловской, Калужской, Курской и заповедника с региональной властью яв- Командорском заповеднике». Н. Малешин. других областях экологической сети с яд- ляется ситуация в Республике Адыгея, где Командорский заповедник, имея аквато- рами в виде ООПТ. Кавказский заповедник встал на пути ре- рию в 3,б48,б79 га, является самым боль- гиональной власти, лоббирующей свои шим охраняемым природным морским проекты экономического развития непо- районом России. Уникальная морская Раздел III. Менеджмент в сфере средственно на территории заповедника. экосистема с лежбищами морских млеко- охраны природы. питающих, птичьими базарами, колония- «Российское министерство природных Раздел VI. Неправительственные ми калана, лесами бурых водорослей и ресурсов реструктурировано и назначен организации. Опыт работы. участком шельфа, никогда ранее не под- его новый руководитель». Указом Прези- вергалась воздействию донных тралений. дента РФ от 9 марта 2004 г. «О системе и «Природный парк «Муравьевка»: сочета- Несмотря на его выдающуюся ценность, структуре федеральных органов испол- ние интересов охраны природы и эколо- государство, с одной стороны, не выделя- нительной власти» установлено (п.1), что гически чистого сельскохозяйственного ет достаточно средств для его охраны, а с в систему федеральных органов исполни- производства». Подготовлено редакцией другой стороны – сам заповедник пока тельной власти входят федеральные ми- журнала RCN по материалам Георга имеет крайне низкий рейтинг в регионе, нистерства, федеральные службы и феде- Даннера и Маргарет Сколес. В 21 выпус- что неблагоприятно сказывается на его ральные агентства, которые выполняют ке журнала RCN уже знакомил читателей работе. свои особые и специфические функции. с первым неправительственным природ- «Проблемы сохранения культурных ланд- Однако ООПТ России места в этой струк- ным парком «Муравьевка», созданном в шафтов в Кенозерском национальном туре не нашлось. Окажет ли влияние на- Амурской области в 1993 году группой парке». Александр Козыкин. Исключитель- значение нового министра МПР Юрия энтузиастов под эгидой Социально-Эко- ная репрезентативность культурных Трутнева на судьбу и функционирование логического союза. В дни празднования ландшафтов и высокая концентрация их ООПТ, пока не известно. своего десятилетия, парк демонстрирует ценных элементов делает Кенозерский «Выявление ключевых ботанических блестящие результаты устойчивого при- национальный парк уникальным регио- территорий в Беларуси». Галина Пронь- родопользования на своей территории. ном, аналога которому нет на террито- кина. В рамках реализации Европейской Возможно, что он станет законодателем рии России. Поэтому не случайно, что стратегии сохранения растений, разрабо- моды в сфере экологически чистого сель- норвежские специалисты решили при- танной Советом Европы и Planta Europa скохозяйственного производства, став нять участие в работах по восстановле- начато выявление Ключевых ботаниче- первой ООПТ в России имеющей серти- нию культурных ландшафтов в нем, т.к. ских территорий (КБТ) Европы. В про- фицированную американскими агроно- парк – замечательный пример северо- цессе реализации проекта планируется мами демонстрационную ферму такого русского традиционного устройства про- подготовить перечни и описания КБТ, типа. странства, сохранившего черты раннего определить основные факторы угрозы и средневековья. дать предложения по мерам сохранения Раздел VII. Новости дня. «Новый заповедник в Казахстане». В цен- этих участков. «Уникальный первоцвет найден в России тральной части Каратау уже утерян ряд спустя более 100 лет». По материалам редких видов растений и животных. Раздел IV. Природоохранное за- сайта «www.biodat.ru». В окрестностях Ясень согдийский и каратауский архар в Новороссийска (Краснодарский край) скором времени могут исчезнуть с терри- конодательство. найден шафран двухцветковый - Crocus тории Каратауского хребта. Чтобы это не «Проект нового Лесного Кодекса столк- biflorus, который в последний раз регист- произошло 1 марта 2004 г. Правительство нулся с критикой и обеспокоенностью в рировался на территории России 100 лет Казахстана издало постановление о соз- обществе». Лесное российское законода- назад в 1896 году. дании Каратауского государственного тельство сложно и запутано. Отдельные природного заповедника в Южно-Казах- положения лесных законодательных и станской области на площади более 34 нормативных актов вступают в противо- тыс. га. речия с земельным, водным и природо-

Spring 2004, No. 35 33 CONSERVATION CONTACTS

BioDat Agency. Email: [email protected]. T. S. Kerteshev. Scientific Advisor, Protected Area Website: http://biodat.ru. Planning and Management. Central Asian Transboundary Project for Biodiversity Conservation of the Valery Brinikh. Polevaya Ulitsa 50, Stanitsa Khanskaya, Western Tian Shan, Maikopsky Raion, Adygeya Republic, Russia 385060. Email: Email: [email protected]. [email protected] (please include “for V.Brinikh” in sub- ject line). Komandorsky Zapovednik. Nikolai Pavlov, Director. Prospekt Karla Marksa 29/1, Office 213, Petropavlovsk- Center for Russian Nature Conservation. Margaret Kamchatsky, Kamchatskaya Oblast, Russia 683006. Tel: +7 (415- Williams, Executive Director. Post Office Box 57277. 22) 5-54-18. Washington, DC USA 200317-7277. Tel: +1 (202) 778-9573. Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected], [email protected]. Website: http://www.russiancon- Sergei Kossenko, Senior Scientist. Bryansky Les Zapovednik. servation.org. Nerussa Station, Suzemsky Raion, Bryanskaya Oblast, Russia 242180. Tel: +7 (08353) 95789. Email: [email protected]. Ecological Press Center. Oksana Tarnetskaya, Director. Ulitsa Seifullina 597-208, Almaty, Kazakhstan 480072. Tel: +7 (3272) Laplandsky Zapovednik. Zeleny Pereulok 8, Monchegorsk, 64-37-94. Tel/Fax: +7 (3272) 67-52-45. Email: [email protected]. Murmanskaya Oblast, Russia 184506. Website: http://www.ecostan.org/ecopress/. Tel: +7 (815-36) 5-80-18. Email: [email protected].

Friends of Muraviovka Park (an affiliate of the Olga Makarova, Deputy Director of Science. Pasvik International Crane Foundation). P.O. Box 447, Baraboo, WI Zapovednik. Rayakosky, Pechengsky District, Murmanskaya USA 53913. Websites: http://zhuravl.freeshell.org, Oblast, Russia 184404. Tel: +7 (815-54) 2-13-65. http://www.savingcranes.org/abouticf/friends.asp. Email: [email protected].

Important Plant Area Project. Galina Pronkina, MPA News – International News and Analysis on Marine Coordinator. IUCN Office for the CIS. Ulitsa Marshala Protected Areas. John B. Davis, Editor. School of Marine Vasilievskovo 17, Moscow, Russia 123182. Tel: +7 (095) 190 46 Affairs, University of Washington, 3707 Brooklyn Avenue, NE, 55. Fax: +7 (095) 490 58 18. Email: [email protected]. Website: Seattle, Washington USA 98705. Tel: +1 (206) 685-1582. Fax: +1 http://www.iucn.ru. (206) 543-1417. Email: [email protected]. Website: http://www.mpanews.org. International Crane Foundation. E-11376 Shady Lane Rd. P.O. Box 447, Baraboo, WI USA 53913. Tel: +1 (608) 356-9462. Muraviovka Nature Park. Sergei Smirenski, Director. P.O. Fax: +1 (608) 356-9465. Website: http://www.savingcranes.org. Box 447, E-11376 Shady Lane Road, Baraboo, WI USA 53913- 0447. Tel: +1 (608) 356-9462, ext. 130. Fax: +1 (608) 356-9465. International Socio-Ecological Union. P.O. Box 211, Email: [email protected]. Moscow, Russia 119019. Tel: +7 (095) 124-7934. Email: [email protected], [email protected]. Website: http://seu.ru. Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik. Andrei Satsuk, Director of the zapovednik’s Moose Farm, and Methodologist with the Kavkazsky Zapovednik. Ulitsa K. Marksa 8, Sochi, Adlersky reserve’s Department of Environmental Education. Yaksha, District, Krasnodarsky Krai, Russia 354340. Tel: +7 (862-2) 69- Troitsko-Pechorsky Raion, Komi Republic, Russia 169436. 20-03. Fax: +7 (862-2) 44-52-65. Email: [email protected]. Tel: +7 (82138) 95680.

Kenozersky National Park. Ulitsa Vyiucheiskovo 18, Russian Bird Conservation Union. Shosse Entuziastov 60, Arkhangelsk, Russia 163061. Tel: +7 (818-2) 28-18-67. Building 1. Moscow, Russia 111123. Fax: +7 (818-2) 28-18-67 Email: [email protected]. Tel/fax: +7 (095) 176-10-63. Email: [email protected]. Website: http://www.rbcu.ru.

Subscribe to Russian Conservation News! LETTERS TO THE EDITOR can be mailed to: Margaret Williams • Foreign subscriptions: add $6 Sponsor...... $500 PO Box 57277, Washington, DC 20037-7277 for Canada and $15 for all other Tel.: (202) 778–9573 Patron ...... $100 countries E-mail: • Back issues available for $5 each Supporter ...... $75 In Russia our address is: • Make check or money order in Institute of Economics, Nakhimovsky Prospect Organization..$45 U.S. currency payable to CRNC/ 32, suite 802 117218, Moscow, Russia Phone/Fax: +7 (095) 332–4066 Tides Center and send to: Individual ...... $30 Russian Conservation News Mailing address: Box 71, 117321, Moscow, Russia PO BOX 57277 Student...... $20 E-mail: Washington, DC 20037-7277