DOCSLIB.ORG

List of National Parks in Russia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
List of National Parks in Russia SNo Name Location Area (ha) Established 1 Alaniya National Park Republic of North Ossetia–Alania 54,926 1998 2 Alkhanay National Park Zabaykalsky Krai 138,234 1999 3 Anuysky National Park Khabarovsk Krai 429,370 2008 4 Bashkiriya National Park Republic of Bashkortostan 79,800 1986 5 Buzuluksky Bor National Park Orenburg Oblast 106,000 2007 6 Chavash Varmane Bor National Park Chuvash Republic 25,200 1993 7 Kalevalsky Bor National Park Republic of Karelia 74,343 2006 8 Kenozersky National Park Arkhangelsk Oblast 139,663 1991 9 Khvalynsky National Park Saratov Oblast 25,514 1994 10 Kurshskaya Kosa National Park Kaliningrad Oblast 6,621 1987 11 Losiny Ostrov National Park Moscow, Moscow Oblast 12,881 1983 12 Mariy Chodra National Park Mari El Republic 36,600 1985 13 Meshchyora National Park Vladimir Oblast 118,900 1992 14 Meshchyorsky National Park Ryazan Oblast 103,014 1992 15 Nechkinsky National Park Udmurt Republic 20,753 1997 16 Nizhnyaya Kama National Park Republic of Tatarstan 26,587 1991 17 Orlovskoye Polesye National Park Oryol Oblast 77,745 1994 18 Paanajärvi National Park Republic of Karelia 104,473 1992 19 Pleshcheyevo Ozero National Park Yaroslavl Oblast 23,790 1988 20 Pribaykalsky National Park Irkutsk Oblast 418,000 1986 21 Prielbrusye National Park Kabardino-Balkar Republic 100,400 1986 22 Pripyshminskiye Bory National Park Sverdlovsk Oblast 49,050 1993 23 Russkaya Arktika National Park Arkhangelsk Oblast 1,426,000 2009 24 Russky Sever National Park Vologda Oblast 166,400 1992 25 Samarskaya Luka National Park Samara Oblast 134,000 1984 26 Sebezhsky National Park Pskov Oblast 50,021 1996 27 Shorsky National Park Kemerovo Oblast 418,200 1989 28 Shushensky Bor National Park Krasnoyarsk Krai 39,173 1995 29 Smolenskoye Poozerye National Park Smolensk Oblast 146,237 1992 30 Smolny National Park Republic of Mordovia 36,500 1995 31 Sochi National Park Krasnodar Krai 193,737 1983 32 Taganay National Park Chelyabinsk Oblast 56,400 1991 33 Tunkinsky National Park Buryat Republic 1,183,662 1991 34 Udegeyskaya Legenda National Park Primorsky Krai 88,600 2007 35 Ugra National Park Kaluga Oblast 98,623 1997 36 Valdaysky National Park Novgorod Oblast 158,500 1990 37 Vodlozersky National Park Republic of Karelia 468,915 1991 38 Yugyd Va National Park Komi Republic 1,891,701 1994 39 Zabaykalsky National Park Buryat Republic 267,177 1986 40 Zov Tigra National Park Primorsky Krai 82,152 2007 41 Zyuratkul National Park Chelyabinsk Oblast 88,249 1993 For other more formats kindly visit www.downloadexcelfiles.com Original source : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_parks_of_Russia.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • No. 19: Future Scenarios for the South Caucasus
    caucasus analytical caucasus analytical digest 19/10 digest There is an increasing awareness of the artificial based on opportunistic alliance building. Relation- nature of the concept of the South Caucasus, group- ships between governments, outside forces, and domes- ing together three countries, which are indeed not to tic actors cease as quickly as they develop. Though giv- be treated as one entity. Especially the countries of the ing an impression of political progress, the region as a South Caucasus regard this concept with hesitation as whole stagnates socially and economically and leaves they see the danger that it neglects, at least conceptu- itself exposed to outside intervention. Peaceful coexis- ally, the individual development paths and character- tence and local escalation of conflict come and go. istics of each country. Countries of the South Cauca- While mild forms of authoritarianism assert them- sus will not fulfill the external expectations of regional selves in the countries of the South Caucasus, the integration, but fragment. Over time, individual coun- region remains a contested space. As Europe becomes tries might integrate with outside neighbours. It may less engaged, due to lack of progress and the political well be possible that in 2025 Armenia will have under- developments on the ground, Russia and Turkey real- gone advanced integrated with Turkey, Azerbaijan will ize mutual benefits from cooperating economically and have become part of the Caspian region and Georgia politically in the region. Meanwhile, Russia is able to will have oriented West and become an integral part of create a space of “sovereign democracies” including Mol- the Black Sea region.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX 6. a List of Natural Areas in Preferential Protection (NAPP) Accessible for Federal Grid Company for the Purposes of Operation
    APPENDICES APPENDIX 6. A List of Natural Areas in Preferential Protection (NAPP) Accessible for Federal Grid Company for the Purposes of Operation A type of title Location (RF region, № Federal Grid Company Facility Land area, hectares to the land city, etc.) Name of NAPP MES of Center Upper Don PMES 1 220kV HVL Voronezhskaya 1.2 (11.944km) 35.8 Leased Russia, Voronezh The Voronezh State Natural Region, Verkhnehavsky Biospheric Reserve District Volga-Don PMES 2 500 kV HVL Balashovskaya-Lipetskaya (8.468km, supports 0.3157 Leased NN 894-9150) Novokhopersk District, The Khoper State Natural Voronezh Region Reserve 3 500 kV HVL Balashovskaya – Lipetskaya 2 (with a branch to Novovoronezhskaya NPP), 8.777 km, supports NN 894-916. 0.8406 Moscow PMES Moscow Region, 4 220 kV Kashira-Oka 1,2 11.97 In actual use The Prioksky Terrace State Serpukhov District Biospheric Reserve Priokskoye PMES Kaluga Region, 5 500 kV HVL Smolenskaya NPP – Kaluzhskaya 0.984 In open-ended Ugra National Park permanent use Ukhnovsky District 0.135 Leased Kaluga Region, 6 220 kV HVL Cherepet – Liteinaya Kaluga Blaze Reserve Kozelsky District 7 220 kV HVL Cherepet – Tsementnaya 0.051 500 kV HVL Smolenskaya NPP - Mikhailovskaya Kaluga Region, 8 2.912 Leased Uljanovsky District Chernozemnoye PMES 9 500 kV HVL Novobryanskaya – Yelets (commissioned in 185.5 Leased Orel Region, Orel Forest National Park 1997, supports NN 212-308, 26.5km long) Khotynetsky District MES Siberia Khakasskoye PMES 10 500 kV HVL Sayano-Shushenskaya HPP – Leased Republic of Khakassia Shoria National
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Species of Shield-Head Vipers in the Caucasus
    Nature Conservation Research. Заповедная наука 2016. 1 (3): 11–25 RARE SPECIES OF SHIELD-HEAD VIPERS IN THE CAUCASUS Boris S. Tuniyev Sochi National Park, Russia e-mail: [email protected] Received: 03.10.2016 An overview is presented on shield-head vipers of the genus Pelias distributed in the post-Soviet countries of the Caucasian Ecoregion. The assessment presents the current conservation status and recommendations to vipers’ ter- ritorial protection. Key words: Caucasian Ecoregion, shield-head vipers, current status, protection. Introduction The Caucasian Ecoregion (the territory south- to-landscape descriptions (Tunieyv B.S. et al., 2009; ward from the Kuma-Manych depression to north- Tuniyev S.B. et al., 2012, 2014). The stationary works eastern Turkey and northwestern Iran) is the centre (mostly on the territory of the Caucasian State Nature of taxonomic diversity of shield-head vipers within Biosphere reserve and Sochi National Park) conducted the genus Pelias Merrem, 1820, of which 13–18 a study of the microclimatic features of vipers’ habitats species are found here. Without exception, all spe- including temperature and humidity modes of air and cies have a status of the different categories of rare- the upper soil horizon. The results were compared with ness, they are included on the IUCN Red list, or in thermobiological characteristics of the animals (Tuni- the current and upcoming publication of National yev B.S. & Unanian, 1986; Tuniyev B.S. & Volčik, and Regional Red Data Books. Besides the shield- 1995). In a number of cases difficult to determine the head vipers the Caucasian Ecoregion inhabit three taxonomic affiliation, in addition to the classical meth- representatives of mountain vipers of the genus ods of animal morphology and statistics, biochemistry Montivipera Nilson, Tuniyev, Andren, Orlov, Joger and molecular-genetic analysis methods have been ap- & Herrman, 1999 (M.
    [Show full text]
  • Moss Occurrences in Yugyd Va National Park, Subpolar and Northern Urals, European North-East Russia
    Biodiversity Data Journal 7: e32307 doi: 10.3897/BDJ.7.e32307 Data Paper Moss occurrences in Yugyd Va National Park, Subpolar and Northern Urals, European North-East Russia Galina Zheleznova‡, Tatyana Shubina‡, Svetlana Degteva‡‡, Ivan Chadin , Mikhail Rubtsov‡ ‡ Institute of Biology of Komi Scientific Centre of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Syktyvkar, Russia Corresponding author: Tatyana Shubina ([email protected]) Academic editor: Yasen Mutafchiev Received: 10 Dec 2018 | Accepted: 25 Mar 2019 | Published: 01 Apr 2019 Citation: Zheleznova G, Shubina T, Degteva S, Chadin I, Rubtsov M (2019) Moss occurrences in Yugyd Va National Park, Subpolar and Northern Urals, European North-East Russia. Biodiversity Data Journal 7: e32307. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.7.e32307 Abstract Background This study produced a dataset containing information on moss occurrences in the territory of Yugyd Va National Park, located in the Subpolar and Northern Urals, European North- East Russia. The dataset summarises occurrences noted by long-term bryological explorations in remote areas of the Subpolar and Northern Urals from 1943 to 2015 and from studies published since 1915. The dataset consists of 4,120 occurrence records. The occurrence data were extracted from herbarium specimen labels (3,833 records) and data from published literature (287 records). Most of the records (4,104) are georeferenced. A total of 302 moss taxa belonging to 112 genera and 36 families are reported herein to occur in Yugyd Va National Park. The diversity of bryophytes in this National Park has not yet been fully explored and further exploration will lead to more taxa.
    [Show full text]
  • RCN #33 21/8/03 13:57 Page 1
    RCN #33 21/8/03 13:57 Page 1 No. 33 Summer 2003 Special issue: The Transformation of Protected Areas in Russia A Ten-Year Review PROMOTING BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION IN RUSSIA AND THROUGHOUT NORTHERN EURASIA RCN #33 21/8/03 13:57 Page 2 CONTENTS CONTENTS Voice from the Wild (Letter from the Editors)......................................1 Ten Years of Teaching and Learning in Bolshaya Kokshaga Zapovednik ...............................................................24 BY WAY OF AN INTRODUCTION The Formation of Regional Associations A Brief History of Modern Russian Nature Reserves..........................2 of Protected Areas........................................................................................................27 A Glossary of Russian Protected Areas...........................................................3 The Growth of Regional Nature Protection: A Case Study from the Orlovskaya Oblast ..............................................29 THE PAST TEN YEARS: Making Friends beyond Boundaries.............................................................30 TRENDS AND CASE STUDIES A Spotlight on Kerzhensky Zapovednik...................................................32 Geographic Development ........................................................................................5 Ecotourism in Protected Areas: Problems and Possibilities......34 Legal Developments in Nature Protection.................................................7 A LOOK TO THE FUTURE Financing Zapovedniks ...........................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Amur Tiger Conservation in Russia in 2017
    Amur Tiger Conservation in Russia in 2017 Progress report by Phoenix Fund January 1 – June 30, 2017 SMART In February 2015, the simultaneous count of Amur tigers and Amur leopards showed that about 523-540 Amur tigers occur today in the Russian Far East (comparing to 430-500 individuals recorded during the previous count in 2005). Same upward tendency was registered with the global population of Amur leopards, which numbers grew from 30 to 60-70 species in a decade. Despite sustained conservation efforts over recent years and encouraging recent monitoring results, the big cats still remain at risk due to poaching, logging, forest fires, and prey depletion. Every year the wild populations of Amur tigers and Amur leopards officially lose up to ten individuals due to poaching, collisions with vehicles and other causes of death. According to official statistics and trusted sources, as many as 11 Amur tigers died from January through June 2017. The ongoing alarming mortality in these species requires powerful and innovative solutions that leverage and build on existing capacity if we are to be successful in halting the loss of invaluable endangered wildlife. In this regard, thanks to continuous support from the Kolmarden Fundraising Foundation Phoenix continued implementing its complex conservation programme with the following objectives: 1) to reduce poaching of Amur tigers and their prey species and improve protection of their habitat; 2) to improve law enforcement efforts within federal-level protected areas; 3) and to raise people’s awareness about the state of, and the threats to, the Amur tiger population and involve the public in nature conservation actions.
    [Show full text]
  • Transport and Infrastructural Basis of the Tourism Development Strategy in the Arkhangelsk Oblast © Aleksandr Yu
    Aleksandr Yu. TSVETKOV. Transport and infrastructural basis … 35 UDC [338.48+332.14](470.11)(045) DOI: 10.37482/issn2221-2698.2020.38.44 Transport and infrastructural basis of the tourism development strategy in the Arkhangelsk Oblast © Aleksandr Yu. TSVETKOV, Cand. Sci. (Econ.), associate professor E-mail: [email protected] Department of Management, Higher School of Economics, Management and Law, Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov, Arkhangelsk, Russia Abstract. The article, devoted to the analysis of transport and geographical locations, describes possible strategies for the development of tourism in the Arkhangelsk Oblast. The main goal of the research was the development of logistic schemes of the transportation of tourists from the places of formation of tourist flows to the Arkhangelsk Oblast. The methodological basis of the article is to determine the economic dis- tances between potential tourist distribution centers and their places of interest in the area. Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Arkhangelsk were considered as the main towns of departure. Kargopol, Solvychegodsk, Kholmogory and Lomonosovo, Solovki, Kenozersky National Park, and Pinega caves are regarded as the main sites of tourist interest in the Arkhangelsk Oblast. It was determined that Kargopol is the most acces- sible for tourists, and Kenozersky National Park is the most recognizable by tourists but the least accessible. The object of world cultural heritage, the Monastery of the Transfiguration of the Saviour on Solovki is the most accessible for tourists from the territory of Karelia. It is recommended to optimize the schedule and to synchronize the work of transport for tourists to improve the transport accessibility of recreational facili- ties in the area.
    [Show full text]
  • Îõðàíÿåìûå Ïðèðîäíûå Òåððèòîðèè(Àíãë).Pm6
    PROTECTED AREAS IN RUSSIA: LEGAL REGULATION Moscow v 2003 2 Protected Areas in Russia: Legal Regulation. An Overview of ederal Laws. Edited by A.S.Shestakov. KMK Scientific Press Ltd., Moscow, 2003. xvi + 352 p. Reviewer: Dr. O.A.Samonchik, Devision of Agrarian and Land Laws, Institute of State and Law, Russian Academy of Sciences G.A. Kozulko, international expert on protected areas, Chief of the Belovezhskaya Puzha XXI Century Public Initiative This research and publication have been made possible by funding from The Service for Implementation of National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (Biodiversity Service) established by a consortium of United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the World Conservation Union (IUCN), the European Centre for Nature Conservation (ECNC) and the Regional Environmental Centre for Central and Eastern Europe (REC) ã 2003 WW Russia ã 2003 M.L.Kreindlin, A.V.Kuznetcova, V.B.Stepanitskiy, A.S.Shestakov, ISBN 5-87317-132-7 E.V.Vyshegorodskih 3 LIST O ACRONIMS ATNM area of traditional nature management of indigenous peoples of the North, Siberia and the ar East of the Russian ederation IUCN The World Conservation Union MNR Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian ederation NP national park PA protected area R Russian ederation SPNA specially protected natural area SSNR state strict nature reserve (zapovednik) WW World Wide und for Nature 4 TABLES AND IGURES Tables: Table 1. Number and Area of Specially Protected Natural Areas in Russia (as of the beginning of 2003) Table 2. Matrix of Management Purposes of Specially Protected Natural Areas of Russia Table 3. Proposals for Establishing State Strict Nature Reserves and National Parks in the Russian ederation for 2001-2010 Table 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Baikal Project 2012-2014 Results and Events Booklet.Pdf
    Photo by Elena Chumak GEF: “The GEF unites 182 countries in partnership with international institutions, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the private sector to address global environmental issues while supporting national sustainable development initiatives. Today the GEF is the largest public funder of projects to improve the global environment. An independently operating financial organization, the GEF provides grants for projects related to biodiversity, climate change, international waters, land degradation, the ozone layer, and persistent organic pollutants. Since 1991, GEF has achieved a strong track record with developing countries and countries with economies in transition, providing $9.2 billion in grants and leveraging $40 billion in co-financing for over 2,700 projects in over 168 countries. www.thegef.org” UNDP: “UNDP partners with people at all levels of society to help build nations that can withstand crisis, and drive and sustain the kind of growth that improves the quality of life for everyone. On the ground in 177 countries and territories, we offer global perspective and local insight to help empower lives and build resilient nations. www.undp.org” UNOPS: is an operational arm of the United Nations, helping a range of partners implement $1 billion worth of aid and development projects every year. UNOPS mission is to expand the capacity of the UN system and its partners to implement peacebuilding, humanitarian and development operations that matter for people in need. Photo by Elena Chumak Contents Project Achievements
    [Show full text]
  • Perspectives on Nature Conservation – Patterns, Pressures and Prospects
    PERSPECTIVES ON NATURE CONSERVATION – PATTERNS, PRESSURES AND PROSPECTS Edited by John Tiefenbacher Perspectives on Nature Conservation – Patterns, Pressures and Prospects Edited by John Tiefenbacher Published by InTech Janeza Trdine 9, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia Copyright © 2012 InTech All chapters are Open Access distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license, which allows users to download, copy and build upon published articles even for commercial purposes, as long as the author and publisher are properly credited, which ensures maximum dissemination and a wider impact of our publications. After this work has been published by InTech, authors have the right to republish it, in whole or part, in any publication of which they are the author, and to make other personal use of the work. Any republication, referencing or personal use of the work must explicitly identify the original source. As for readers, this license allows users to download, copy and build upon published chapters even for commercial purposes, as long as the author and publisher are properly credited, which ensures maximum dissemination and a wider impact of our publications. Notice Statements and opinions expressed in the chapters are these of the individual contributors and not necessarily those of the editors or publisher. No responsibility is accepted for the accuracy of information contained in the published chapters. The publisher assumes no responsibility for any damage or injury to persons or property arising out of the use of any materials, instructions, methods or ideas contained in the book. Publishing Process Manager Romana Vukelic Technical Editor Teodora Smiljanic Cover Designer InTech Design Team First published February, 2012 Printed in Croatia A free online edition of this book is available at www.intechopen.com Additional hard copies can be obtained from [email protected] Perspectives on Nature Conservation – Patterns, Pressures and Prospects, Edited by John Tiefenbacher p.
    [Show full text]
  • Entries in the Barents Encyclopedia (By Topic Category)
    Entries in the Barents Encyclopedia (by topic category) The list is divided into the following six sections: A. 118 submitted articles (as of 20 April 2011) (p. 4) B. 169 entries for which we have contracted authors (p. 18) C. 67 entries for which we have suggested or invited (but not contracted) authors (p. 39) D. 55 entries for which we have no suggested authors (p. 51) E. 113 suggested entries that might be included if space allows (p. 57) F. 158 suggested entries that are not likely to be included (p. 67) Note: As of April 20, 2011, we have 409 entries/articles to be included in the Barents Encyclopedia! Thus, we do not need any more new entry suggestions unless this is required for reasons of “balance” or serious omissions! Column contents In column “S” the status of the entry word is indicated (for labels, see top of p. 4). In column “E” the suggested entry word is stated. In column “Enc” the a cronym for the encyclopedia where the entry was found (see listing below) or the name of the person suggesting the entry is listed. In column “T” the “topics category” to which the suggested entry belongs (see category codes 1–12 below); In column “T alt” an alternative topic classification is given. In column “L” the suggested Length of entry is stated. (For labels of the different types of entries identified, see table below!) In column “A” the name (and affiliation/email address) of the suggested author is listed. In column “C” you may enter comments about the suggested entry.
    [Show full text]
  • Moscow 2019 A.N
    Moscow 2019 A.N . SEVERTSOV INSTITUTE OF ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES PERMANENT EXPEDITION OF RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES FOR STUDY OF RUSSIAN RED DATA BOOK ANIMALS AND OTHER KEY ANIMALS OF RUSSIAN FAUNA Rozhnov V.V., Yachmennikova A.A., Hernandez-Blanco J.A., Naidenko S.V., Chistopolova M.D., Sorokin P.A., Dobrynin D.V., Sukhova O.V., Poyarkov A.D., Dronova N.A., Trepet S.A., Pkhitikov A.B., Pshegusov R.H., Magomedov M.-R.D. STUDY AND MONITORING OF BIG CATS IN RUSSIA KMK Scientific Press Moscow 2019 Rozhnov V.V., Yachmennikova A.A., Hernandez-Blanco J.A., Naidenko S.V., Chisto- polova M.D., Sorokin P.A., Dobrynin D.V., Sukhova O.V., Poyarkov A.D., Drono- va N.A., Trepet S.A., Pkhitikov A.B., Pshegusov R.H., Magomedov M.-R.D. Study and Monitoring of Big Cats in Russia. Moscow: KMK Scientific Press Ltd., 2019. 138 p. This monograph provides a comprehensive review and analysis of the available litera- ture on the monitoring of big cats. Special attention is paid to the most up-to-date methods based on recent advances in technology, resulting in useful tools to remotely and non- invasively study animals in natural habitats, essential when working with rare species. Existing large- and small-scale approaches to monitoring big cats are described. Methods of monitoring the habitat conditions of the species and their dynamics, as well as the basics of modeling territories with suitable conditions for leopards, are suggested. The whole range of field sampling methods that enable data to be processed using contempo- rary techniques is described.
    [Show full text]