DOCSLIB.ORG

A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. Mckinleyville, CA

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. Mckinleyville, CA Logging practices. Despite years of intensive industrial log- Whatever happened to Hyundai’s logging ging, 75 percent of the krai remains forested. However, the operation in Svetlaya? composition has changed and the quality of those forests Perhaps no joint venture in the RFE has received more declined considerably. In the past fi fty years, more than half attention from the international community than Svetlaya of the Korean pine forests in the rfe have been destroyed and PRIMORSKY Timber Joint Venture. In 1991, Hyundai Corporation (South replaced by broadleaved species. Overlogging occurs in many Korea) and two Primorsky regional timber enterprises of the ash and spruce forests, most of which are in protected (Primorlesprom and Terneiles) signed a 30-year agree- riverine forest zones, largely in the upper mountain belt of the ment with the Primorsky Krai government. In 1992, the southern Sikhote-Alin. Logging techniques, particularly in Hyundai joint venture tried to get access to log the Upper the spruce forests, have caused profound long-term ecosystem Bikin basin. The Bikin River is the largest old-growth transformations, frequently causing irrevocable changes in watershed in Primorsky Krai. Despite protests from the forest cover. Selective logging, usually in the form of high- Udege and environmentalists, then Primorsky Krai Gover- grading, is the most widely practiced method, conducted on nor Kuznetsov gave rights for Hyundai to log 500,000 cu. 62 percent of the territory and contributing about half of the m annually.9 The Udege protested and won; the Primorsky total timber harvest. By law, under this logging method, for- Krai Duma passed a law overturning the governor’s deci- esters are required to leave intact seedlings up to 10 to 14 cm sion. Svetlaya appealed the decision to Primorsky’s Re- in diameter, which reportedly allows for a natural regenera- gional Court, which favorably sided with the international tion rate of forty to fi fty years. joint venture. The case continued to the Russian Supreme There are signs that the industry lacks accessible timber Court, where the lower court’s decision was overturned in and is making efforts to secure new, formerly undeveloped favor of the Udege. The Supreme Court made a unilateral forestlands. Terneiles, Primorlesprom, and other major ruling based on a Presidential Decree, passed in 1992, companies are targeting the forest areas in the north of the giving indigenous groups the right of formal consent for krai, with strong support from a krai administration ready any encroachment onto their traditional lands. As these groups had granted no consent, the Court ruled that the governor had no legal standing for transferal of additional logging rights to Svetlaya. Despite failing to gain access to the Bikin basin, the joint venture still had considerable forestlands on the Svetlaya plateau, and during the early 1990s, was logging approximately 200,000 cu. m per year and selling the logs, mainly to Japan.10 However, by 1997, logging was scaled back considerably, and since then the joint venture has gone bankrupt. The reasons behind the failure are un- clear. Some point to the failure of the joint venture to gain access to upper Bikin, having clear-cut most of the ac- cessible forests near Svetlaya. Others attribute the bank- ruptcy to the Russian partners, who sought to “bleed” Hyundai into bankruptcy so they could seize the timber harvesters and other equipment left by the enterprise and use the renovated Svetlaya port facilities for their sole purposes. Still others point to general corruption within Russia as the reason for Hyundai’s withdrawal. Regard- less of the reasons, the joint venture’s failure has clearly cooled foreign investor interest in the timber industry in Primorsky; to date only one major forestry joint venture exists—the Terneiles-Sumitomo venture in Plastun. Meanwhile, the Upper Bikin basin issue has not been settled. While the Basin was declared a wildlife refuge (zakaznik) in 1998, there are regular attempts by industry Newell, J.to circumvent2004. thisThe designation Russian and log theFar territory. East: A Reference Guide for Conservation and Panichev Alexander — JN Development. McKinleyville, CA: Daniel & Daniel.The Udege protested 466 pages Hyundai Corporation’s plans to log the Upper Bikin basin and won. Primorsky Krai Ⅲ 133 to overlook established environmental policy. This has been numerous gulfs and bays suitable for mariculture and coastal made all the easier since the dissolution of the Federal Com- fi shery farms. The most promising species for artifi cial mittee on Environmental Protection and the Forest Service reproduction are Japanese laminaria (Laminaria japonica), by presidential decree in March 2000. Primorsky crest, Pacifi c mussel (Mytilus trossulus), trepang, and salmon. Some of these species have been artifi cially PRIMORSKY cultivated for decades. Japanese laminaria (sea cabbage) has Fishing been cultivated in the krai since 1976. At one stage 5,000 Until the mid-1950s, Primorsky’s fi sh and invertebrate tons were produced a year, with a yield of twenty-six tons per harvest centered along the coast, mainly using a low-tonnage hectare. Today, enterprises lack equipment to produce dry fl eet. But by the late 1950s, the industry had developed a laminaria and, as a result, produce no more than several tons large-tonnage fl eet and greatly reduced the variety of species of this highly valuable product. Cultivation of Primorsky caught, focusing on the most commercially valuable. This led crest also began twenty years ago. Two crest farms oper- to rising fi sh harvests and the concentration of processing ated successfully in Minonosok Cove of Poset Bay and in enterprises in a few large cities, with the subsequent decline of Vladimir Bay. In 1989, 40 -ha plantations yielded 180 tons many coastal fi shing communities. However, with a declin- of crest, but production has since declined. However, there ing resource base in the Bering Sea and Sea of Okhotsk, is interest in reviving these farms, and within fi ve to seven where about 80 percent of Primorsky’s companies obtain years, benthic cultivation of crest could produce nearly ten their catch, a new focus is being put on rejuvenating coastal tons. Preliminary estimates show that it may be possible to fi shing and on aquaculture. One of the major initiatives cultivate four thousand tons of Pacifi c mussels yearly. within the Committee of Fisheries is to develop a coastal Trepang has become the most prized product of Primor- fi sheries development plan. sky’s mariculture industry. High demand on foreign markets Harvest fi gures show that during the past fi fty years, the makes cultivation of this species potentially very lucrative. average annual catch in the Russian eez of the Sea of Japan Substances extracted from trepang are used to treat cardio- has been about 180,000 tons. The main varieties included vascular diseases and to slow the growth of some malignant fl ounder, herring, pollock, and sardines. Primorsky’s coastal tumors. The annual production of trepang could rise to waters are inhabited by nearly forty varieties of invertebrates between 300 and 500 tons per year and could reduce pressure that hold promise for future commercial harvest. Primorsky’s on stocks, which are being destroyed by poaching. Trepang coastline is nearly 1,200 km long. The coastal aquatic regions harvesting has been illegal since 1997 because of the alarming are divided into approximately 120 fi shing sites, which under decreases in the catch. The amount of illegal harvest is not current regulation are distributed among eighty companies well known; some put the fi gure as high as 400 tons annu- that are lessees. Lessees can, in addition, catch certain species ally. Also, the distribution of scientifi c quotas of trepang to at other companies’ sites. According to estimates made in the Pacifi c Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography (tinro) 1995 by the Pacifi c Institute of Geography, each kilometer of and other research institutes has fueled the harvesting of the Primorsky’s coastline yielded nearly u.s.$4,500 from mari- species, either by the institutes themselves or by the sale of culture activities and coastal fi shing; these estimates include these quotas to commercial fi rms. Most of the illegal harvest fi gures for illegal catches and smuggled sea foods. Never- is exported to China, where one kilogram of dried trepang theless the fi shery enterprises of Primorsky pay too little can command u.s.$60. attention to certain potential catch targets located in the There is also interest in establishing salmon hatcheries in coastal zone. As the 1995 data indicate, only 7 percent of the the krai. In 1994, the Federal Fisheries Committee, tinro, potential catch is actually caught. Fish harvests, as noted, and the Russian fi rm SS Lotiko developed and adopted a represent slightly more than one-third of the total available detailed program entitled “Primorsky’s Salmon,” which called catch. Flounder, pollock, and salmon found in Peter the for the construction of seven fi sh hatcheries and twelve fi sh Great Bay and near the northern coast of Primorsky account farms. There are two small-scale hatcheries in the Khasan for the increased number of fi sh caught. To increase harvest region (Ryazanovka and Barabashevka farms). If these two levels further, it will be necessary to revive the use of standing facilities prove successful, similar ones may be built along the seines, standing nets, and benthic traps in the littoral zone at Kievka, Narva, Margaritovka, Avvakumovka, Edinka, and depths of up to twenty meters. Pacifi c squid has the greatest Samarga Rivers and in the town of Ternei. There are also potential (300,000 tons) among the resources available. Real- hopes of harvesting two types of char, Dolly Varden (Salveli- izing this potential, however, will require a special resource nus malma) and kunja (Salvelinus kamchatica).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 5. Project Environmental Impact 63 5.1
    E1188 TRANSLATION FROM RUSSIAN Preparation stage for the Project on Fire Management in High Conservation Value Forests of the Amur-Sikhote-Alin Ecoregion Grant GEF PPG TF051241 Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized F I N A L R E P O R T Project on Fire Management in High Conservation Value Forests of the Amur- Sikhote-Alin Ecoregion Environmental Impact Assessment Public Disclosure Authorized EIA Leader D.Biol. B.A. Voronov Public Disclosure Authorized Khabarovsk – February 2005 2 Summary Report: 125 pages, figures 4, tables 12, references 70, supplements 2 AMUR-SIKHOTE-ALIN ECOREGION, HIGH CONSERVATION VALUE FORESTS, MODEL TERRITORIES, RESERVES, FOREST FIRE MANAGEMNT, CONSERVATION, BIODIVERSITY Analysis and assessment of Project on Fire Management in High Conservation Value Forests of the Amur-Sikhote-Alin Ecoregion Goals: assessment of Project environmental impact and contribution to the implementation of the program on forest fire prevention, elimination and control in the Amur-Sikhote-Alin ecoregion. Present-day situation, trends and opportunities for developing a fire prevention, elimination and control system were in the focus of attention. Existing data and materials have been studied to reveal forest fire impact on environment as well as Project environmental impact. Project under consideration is aimed at improving current fire management system and strengthening protection of ecoregion forests from degradation, which make it extremely socially and ecologically valuable and important. 3 List of Specialists Senior researcher, C.Biol.Sc. A.L. Antonov (Chapter 3) Senior researcher, D.Biol. B.A. Voronov (Introduction, Chapters 2,5,6) Senior researcher, C.Agr.Sc. A.K. Danilin (Chapter 4) Senior researcher, C.Biol.Sc.
    [Show full text]
  • Newell, J. 2004. the Russian Far East
    Industrial pollution in the Komsomolsky, Solnechny, and Amursky regions, and in the city of Khabarovsk and its Table 3.1 suburbs, is excessive. Atmospheric pollution has been increas- Protected areas in Khabarovsk Krai ing for decades, with large quantities of methyl mercaptan in Amursk, formaldehyde, sulfur dioxide, phenols, lead, and Type and name Size (ha) Raion Established benzopyrene in Khabarovsk and Komsomolsk-on-Amur, and Zapovedniks dust prevalent in Solnechny, Urgal, Chegdomyn, Komso- molsk-on-Amur, and Khabarovsk. Dzhugdzhursky 860,000 Ayano-Maysky 1990 Between 1990 and 1999, industries in Komsomolsky and Bureinsky 359,000 Verkhne-Bureinsky 1987 Amursky Raions were the worst polluters of the Amur River. Botchinsky 267,400 Sovetsko-Gavansky 1994 High concentrations of heavy metals, copper (38–49 mpc), Bolonsky 103,600 Amursky, Nanaisky 1997 KHABAROVSK zinc (22 mpc), and chloroprene (2 mpc) were found. Indus- trial and agricultural facilities that treat 40 percent or less of Komsomolsky 61,200 Komsomolsky 1963 their wastewater (some treat none) create a water defi cit for Bolshekhekhtsirsky 44,900 Khabarovsky 1963 people and industry, despite the seeming abundance of water. The problem is exacerbated because of: Federal Zakazniks Ⅲ Pollution and low water levels in smaller rivers, particular- Badzhalsky 275,000 Solnechny 1973 ly near industrial centers (e.g., Solnechny and the Silinka River, where heavy metal levels exceed 130 mpc). Oldzhikhansky 159,700 Poliny Osipenko 1969 Ⅲ A loss of soil fertility. Tumninsky 143,100 Vaninsky 1967 Ⅲ Fires and logging, which impair the forests. Udylsky 100,400 Ulchsky 1988 Ⅲ Intensive development and quarrying of mineral resourc- Khekhtsirsky 56,000 Khabarovsky 1959 es, primarily construction materials.
    [Show full text]
  • Subject of the Russian Federation)
    How to use the Atlas The Atlas has two map sections The Main Section shows the location of Russia’s intact forest landscapes. The Thematic Section shows their tree species composition in two different ways. The legend is placed at the beginning of each set of maps. If you are looking for an area near a town or village Go to the Index on page 153 and find the alphabetical list of settlements by English name. The Cyrillic name is also given along with the map page number and coordinates (latitude and longitude) where it can be found. Capitals of regions and districts (raiony) are listed along with many other settlements, but only in the vicinity of intact forest landscapes. The reader should not expect to see a city like Moscow listed. Villages that are insufficiently known or very small are not listed and appear on the map only as nameless dots. If you are looking for an administrative region Go to the Index on page 185 and find the list of administrative regions. The numbers refer to the map on the inside back cover. Having found the region on this map, the reader will know which index map to use to search further. If you are looking for the big picture Go to the overview map on page 35. This map shows all of Russia’s Intact Forest Landscapes, along with the borders and Roman numerals of the five index maps. If you are looking for a certain part of Russia Find the appropriate index map. These show the borders of the detailed maps for different parts of the country.
    [Show full text]
  • ICARM) in the NOWPAP Region
    NOWPAP POMRAC Northwest Pacific Action Plan Pollution Monitoring Regional Activity Centre 7 Radio St., Vladivostok 690041, Russian Federation Tel.: 7-4232-313071, Fax: 7-4232-312833 Website: http://www.pomrac.dvo.ru http://pomrac.nowpap.org Regional Overview on Integrated Coastal and River Basin Management (ICARM) in the NOWPAP Region POMRAC, Vladivostok 2009 POMRAC Technical Report No 5 МС TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary...................................................................................................................................................4 1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................6 1.1 Introduction to Regional Seas Programme and NOWPAP Region.............................................................6 1.2 Brief introduction of Integrated Coastal and River Basin Management in the NOWPAP Region...........................................................................................................................7 1.3 Importance of ICARM procedures for the Region and necessary ICARM strategy in the NOWPAP Region...............................................................................................7 1.4 Geographical scope of NOWPAP area....................................................................................................9 1.5 Institutional arrangements for developing this overview..........................................................................10 2 Part I.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Lead Contamination in the Rudnaya Pristan–Dalnegorsk
    Environmental Lead Contamination in the Rudnaya Pristan – Dalnegorsk Mining and Smelter District, Russian Far East Margrit C. von Braun1, Ian H. von Lindern2, Nadezhda K. Khristoforova3, Anatoli H. Kachur3, Pavel V. Yelpatyevsky3, P. Vera Elpatyevskaya3, Susan M. Spalinger1 1Environmental Science and Engineering Programs, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho 83844 2TerraGraphics Environmental Engineering Inc., 121 S. Jackson St., Moscow Idaho, 83843 3Pacific Geographical Institute, Russian Academy of Science, Vladivostok, Russia Abbreviated title: Env. Lead Contam. in Russian Lead Smelter District Person to whom correspondence should be sent: Margrit von Braun, Ph.D., P.E. Director, Environmental Science and Engineering Programs University of Idaho, Morrill Hall 207 Moscow, Idaho 83844-3006 Phone: 208-885-6113 Fax: 208-885-4674 e-mail: [email protected] 1 Abstract The results of 30 years of studies by a Russian scientific team and a preliminary survey of soil metals concentrations conducted by a joint US-Russian research team in a remote mining and smelting region of the Russian Far East (RFE) indicate significant soil lead contamination and a high probability of childhood lead poisoning. Lead concentrations in residential gardens and yards (500 – 4600 mg/kg) and in roadside soils (500 – 23000 mg/kg) exceeded USEPA guidance for remediation. Preliminary biokinetic estimates of mean blood levels suggest children are at significant risk of lead poisoning from soil/dust ingestion. Samples of other potentially important pathways, such as air, surface and ground water, paint, interior dust and garden produce, as well as pediatric and occupational blood lead levels, are needed. An assessment of the industry’s ability to reduce exposure levels through modernization and more effective control of emissions and materials handling should also be accomplished.
    [Show full text]
  • CONSERVATION ACTION PLAN for the RUSSIAN FAR EAST ECOREGION COMPLEX Part 1
    CONSERVATION ACTION PLAN FOR THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST ECOREGION COMPLEX Part 1. Biodiversity and socio-economic assessment Editors: Yuri Darman, WWF Russia Far Eastern Branch Vladimir Karakin, WWF Russia Far Eastern Branch Andrew Martynenko, Far Eastern National University Laura Williams, Environmental Consultant Prepared with funding from the WWF-Netherlands Action Network Program Vladivostok, Khabarovsk, Blagoveshensk, Birobidzhan 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS CONSERVATION ACTION PLAN. Part 1. 1. INTRODUCTION 4 1.1. The Russian Far East Ecoregion Complex 4 1.2. Purpose and Methods of the Biodiversity and Socio-Economic 6 Assessment 1.3. The Ecoregion-Based Approach in the Russian Far East 8 2. THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST ECOREGION COMPLEX: 11 A BRIEF BIOLOGICAL OVERVIEW 2.1. Landscape Diversity 12 2.2. Hydrological Network 15 2.3. Climate 17 2.4. Flora 19 2.5. Fauna 23 3. BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION IN THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST 29 ECOREGION COMPLEX: FOCAL SPECIES AND PROCESSES 3.1. Focal Species 30 3.2. Species of Special Concern 47 3.3 .Focal Processes and Phenomena 55 4. DETERMINING PRIORITY AREAS FOR CONSERVATION 59 4.1. Natural Zoning of the RFE Ecoregion Complex 59 4.2. Methods of Territorial Biodiversity Analysis 62 4.3. Conclusions of Territorial Analysis 69 4.4. Landscape Integrity and Representation Analysis of Priority Areas 71 5. OVERVIEW OF CURRENT PRACTICES IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION 77 5.1. Legislative Basis for Biodiversity Conservation in the RFE 77 5.2. The System of Protected Areas in the RFE 81 5.3. Conventions and Agreements Related to Biodiversity Conservation 88 in the RFE 6. SOCIO-ECONOMIC INFLUENCES 90 6.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Quarterly Report Third Quarter, FY00 (April–June 2000)
    Technical, Educational & Policy Assistance for Conservation, RFE Third Quarter FY00 World Wildlife Fund Technical, Educational and Policy Assistance for Conservation in the Russian Far East Ecoregion Quarterly Report Third Quarter, FY00 (April–June 2000) This report describes the activities of World Wildlife Fund's project “Technical, Educational and Policy Assistance for Conservation in the Russian Far East Ecoregion” during the third quarter of fiscal year 2000 (April-June 2000), under Cooperative Agreement #118-A-00-95-00303-00 with USAID. The main objectives of this project are to increase the long-term sustainability of nature conservation in the Russian Far East by: 1. Establishing a Small Grant Program to support biodiversity conservation initiatives. 2. Building ecotourism capacity in and around nature reserves to increase public support for conservation and generate income for nature protection activities. 3. Providing assistance to improve fire response capability including: 3.1. Increase public awareness on fire prevention – Design a National Strategy 3.2. Improve interagency cooperation on fire identification and suppression 3.3. Provide technical assistance on purchasing radio communication equipment and fire fighting equipment for mobile forest fire fighting teams 4. Ensuring the sustainability of the USAID funded project results World Wildlife Fund, 1250 - 24th Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20037 USA telephone: (202) 778-9716 fax: (202)-293-9211 e-mail: [email protected] 1 Technical, Educational & Policy Assistance for Conservation,
    [Show full text]
  • A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. Mckinleyville, CA
    OVERVIEW OVERVIEW Newell, J. 2004. The Russian Far East: A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. McKinleyville, CA: Daniel & Daniel. 466 pages 22 THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST OVERVIEW OVERVIEW Newell, J. 2004. The Russian Far East: A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. McKinleyville, CA: Daniel & Daniel. 466 pages O v e r v i e w 23 OVERVIEW OVERVIEW Newell, J. 2004. The Russian Far East: A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. McKinleyville, CA: Daniel & Daniel. 466 pages 24 THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST OVERVIEW OVERVIEW Newell, J. 2004. The Russian Far East: A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. McKinleyville, CA: Daniel & Daniel. 466 pages O v e r v i e w 25 OVERVIEW OVERVIEW Newell, J. 2004. The Russian Far East: A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. McKinleyville, CA: Daniel & Daniel. 466 pages 26 THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST OVERVIEW OVERVIEW Newell, J. 2004. The Russian Far East: A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. McKinleyville, CA: Daniel & Daniel. 466 pages O v e r v i e w 27 OVERVIEW OVERVIEW Newell, J. 2004. The Russian Far East: A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. McKinleyville, CA: Daniel & Daniel. 466 pages 28 THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST OVERVIEW OVERVIEW permafrost becomes swampy, however, organic matter quick- Ecology ly decomposes, releasing trapped methane and CO2 from the plant matter and soil. Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas Josh Newell and Vladimir Dinets with a warming effect ten to twenty times higher than that of Researchers and scholars have written extensively on the envi- CO2. Logging, mining, and other industrial activity can also ronmental destruction that occurred under the Soviet Union.
    [Show full text]
  • 12 Cases of Cleanup and Success
    Blacksmith Institute’s World’sBlacksmith Worst Institute’s Polluted PlacesWorld Report Worst 2009 Polluted Places Report 2009 12 Cases of 12Cleanup Cases of and Success CleanJust a few small, Up bright and spots among Success over a billion lives affected. Produced in collaboration with Green Cross Switzerland Remediation // Legislation // Innovation // Education This document was prepared by the staff of Blacksmith Institute in partnership with Green Cross Switzerland with input and review from a number of experts and volunteers, to whom we are most grateful. Primary Authors Meredith Block, MPA, David Hanrahan, MSc Contributions Cyrille Adam, EdM, Richard Fuller, Sasha Hoff, Stephan Robinson, PhD, Bhaskar Sen Gupta, PhD, Jennifer Spiegler, Budi Susilorini, Ellie Tang, MPA Special Thanks To: Jack Caravanos, Nathalie Gysi, Brian Wilson, Anne Reiderer, Ira May; the members of the Technical Advisory Board (see appendix for listing), Blacksmith Institute staff, Christina Bigler, Valodia Shevtsov, Don Feil, Michael Benedict, Wolfgang Schimpf, Magdalene Sim, Pam Zarella, Triplesmart and Gustavo Cejas. For questions, comments and feedback, please contact Blacksmith Institute in New York City at the following address: Blacksmith Institute 2014 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10035 +1 (646) 742 0200 [email protected] Media inquires should be directed to Magdalene Sim in New York at [email protected] Media inquiries in Europe should be directed to Nathalie Gysi at Green Cross Switzerland: Green Cross Switzerland Fabrikstrasse 17 8005 Zurich, Switzerland +41 (0) 43 499 13 10 [email protected] This report is available online at www.worstpolluted.org World’s Worst Polluted Places 2009 3 Table of Contents I. Letter from Blacksmith Institute Founder .................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Newell, J. 2004. the Russian Far East: a Reference Guide for Conservation and Development
    Appendix A Major topological features in the RFE Size Maximum Elevation (m Last Seas (000 sq. km) depth (m) Active volcanoes Location above sea level) eruption Beringovo (Bering Sea) 2,315 5,500 Kamchatka Okhotskoe (Sea of Okhotsk) 1,603 3,521 Klyuchevskoi Vostochny Yaponskoe (Sea of Japan) 1,602 3,720 (Eastern) Range 4,800 ongoing Vostochno-Sibirskoe (East Siberian Sea) 913 915 Tolbachik Vostochny Range 3,682 1976 Laptevykh (Laptev Sea) 662 3,385 Ichinsky Sredinny (Central) Range 3,621 unknown Chukotskoe (Chukchi Sea) 595 1,256 Kronotsky Gamchen Ridge 3,528 1923 Koryaksky Vostochny Range 3,456 1957 Length Basin size Shiveluch Vostochny Range 3,283 2001 Rivers and tributaries (km) (000 sq. km) Bezymyanny Vostochny Range 3,085 1998 Zhupanovsky Vostochny Range 2,927 1956 Amur (with Argun) 4,444 1,855 Avacha Vostochny Range 2,750 1991 Lena 4,400 2,490 Mutnovsky Vostochny Range 2,323 1999 Olenyok 2,270 219 Maly (Lesser) Kolyma 1,870 422 Semlyachik Vostochny Range 1,560 1952 Indigirka 1,726 360 Karymsky Vostochny Range 1,486 2001 Anadyr 1,150 191 Vilyui (tributary of Lena) 2,650 454 Kuril Islands Aldan (tributary of Lena) 2,273 729 Alaid Atlasov I. 2,339 2000 Olyokma (tributary of Lena) 1,436 210 Tyatya Kunashir I. 1,819 1973 Zeya (tributary of Amur) 1,242 233 Chikurachki Paramushir I. 1,816 1995 Markha (tributary of Vilyui) 1,181 99 Fussa Paramushir I. 1,772 1984 Omolon (tributary of Kolyma) 1,114 113 Sarychev Matua I. 1,446 1976 Krenitsyn Onekotan I.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Federation
    NEASPEC-NEAMPAN1 Management Plans and Strategies at Selected Sites of NEAMPAN in the Russian Federation 1 This report was prepared by SAVELYEV, Anatoly (Center for International Project), ORLOVA,Tatiana (National Scientific Center of Marine Biology Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Science), SUTYRINA,Svetlana (Sikhote-Alin Biosphere Reserve), and KACHUR,Anatolii (Institute of Geography of the Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences) Table of Contents 1. Basic information of the target MPA .......................................................................................................... 3 2. Background of strategic/management plan of the target MPA ................................................................. 13 3. Objective of MPA management plan ........................................................................................................ 19 4. Key contents of the management plans ..................................................................................................... 21 4.1. Links between monitoring/assessment results and management ........................................................ 24 5. NEAMPAN sites studies ........................................................................................................................... 26 5.1. Overview ............................................................................................................................................ 26 5.2. Sikhote-Alin Nature Biosphere Reserve ............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Environmental Problems
    Conflict Studies Research Centre Russi an Series 06/41 Defence Academy of the United Kingdom Russian Environmental Problems Dr Mark A Smith Key Points * Russia inherited a grave environmental legacy from the Soviet Union. Air and water pollution are extremely high and have had an extremely deleterious effect on health. * Spending on environmental protection is very low, and is insufficient to clean up the environment. Most major projects are funded by international institutions * Efforts to uncover information regarding pollution at nuclear and military facilities is hampered by the state’s concern to maintain security. * Environmental controls and monitoring capacity have been reduced since 2000. The state places more emphasis on economic growth than countering pollution. Consciousness of environmental issues amongst the population is relatively low. * NGOs play a major role in attempting to raise consciousness and to lobby for environmental conservation and controls. The leadership however is generally averse to such activities, particularly if they have international connections. 06/41 Russian Environmental Problems Dr Mark A Smith This paper will give a brief overview of the general environmental situation in the Russian Federation, and the post-Soviet leadership’s policies towards the environment and pollution.1 A General Overview of the Environmental Situation The Soviet Union bequeathed the Russian Federation an unenviable environmental and ecological legacy. The emphasis that the Soviet system had placed on heavy industry, largely for the purposes of national security, meant that environmental concerns took second place to the need for industrial development. Little concern was expressed during the Soviet period over environmental issues, although it would be wrong to say that there was complete silence.
    [Show full text]