Voice from the Wild (A Letter from the Editors)

This fortieth issue of Russian Conservation News goes to press just days after Russian President Vladimir Putin released a statement on April 26, 2006, concern- ing the necessity of re-routing a planned oil pipeline beyond the watershed of . Conservationists and private citizens across welcomed this EDITORIAL BOARD decision, a triumph of environmental stewardship and social responsibility over Executive Editor: Margaret Williams the bottom-line interests of big business. In fact, though, the victory is the entire Assistant Editor: Melissa Mooza world's to celebrate. Lake Baikal, the oldest and deepest of our planet's lakes, with twenty percent of the earth's freshwater resources, is widely regarded as one the Managing Editor: Natalya Troitskaya world's greatest natural treasures. In fact, for its outstanding natural values and for Graphics Artist: Maksim Dubinin its importance to humankind as a whole, the lake was inscribed on the United Design and Layout: Design Group A4 Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Computer Consultation: Natalie Volkova Heritage List ten years ago, in 1996. Translation: Cheryl Hojnowski and Melissa Mooza In this special issue of RCN, we examine Russia's World Natural Heritage sites - Subscriptions Manager: there are seven in addition to Lake Baikal – and the implementation of the Sarah Millspaugh UNESCO Convention concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Contributing Authors: A. Blagovidov, Heritage (Convention) in the Russian Federation. For many of the almost thirty A. Butorin, Z. Irodova, A. Kargopoltsev, Russian protected areas that are included in the country's World Natural Heritage M. Kreindlin, O. Krever, N. Maxakovsky, sites, this prestigious international status has yielded real, tangible gains. One of N. Ovsyanikov, A. Petrov, A. Rudomakha, I. Sharapov, M. Shishin, P. Schmidt, the greatest benefits that we see in inscription is that it has helped to further raise and E. Shubnitsina awareness about and to popularize the territories, both in Russia and beyond its Contributing Artists and borders. This increased attention has certainly helped generate new funding and Photographers: A. Butorin, other opportunities for the protected areas, as well increase advocacy for their Y. Demyanchuk, R. Hooper, V. Kantor, protection. B. Mayerhofer, N. Ovsyanikov, E. Ponomariova, E. Shubnitsina, I. Timukhin, A. Troitsky, S. Trepet, In the course of our work to prepare this journal, we also came to the conclusion and V. Trigubovich that many important issues related to the Convention's implementation in Acknowledgement: Maps of Russia's pro- Russia and to the Russian sites themselves remain unresolved and require careful tected areas that are featured in this issue attention. Chief among the problems we have noted is the dearth of Russian fed- were prepared using the Protected Areas GIS eral legislation that specifically and substantively addresses Russia's World Natural database of the Biodiversity Conservation Center/International Socio-Ecological Heritage sites. It is not entirely clear to many authorities, elected officials, repre- Union. For more information, please consult sentatives of the business community, and the general public what types of activi- http://oopt.info/gis/database-eng.html ties are permitted and prohibited on the territories of World Natural Heritage sites; nor are there established procedures for resolving disputes concerning these territories. Another problem that might have potential repercussions on dispute ON THE COVER resolution is the fact that the boundaries of three of Russia's World Natural Heritage sites – , Lake Baikal, and – are imprecise and require clarification.

Yet another shortcoming that we have identified in our study of Russia's imple- mentation of the Convention is a lack of coordinated management – both on federal- and site-specific levels. Despite the vast size of some of Russia's World Natural Heritage sites (the largest, Lake Baikal, occupies more than twice the area of Switzerland) and the complexity of their composition, none have specialized management plans or discrete staffing and budgets. If sites were to develop these important attributes, work across them would be better coordinated and more effective; and it would be easier to attract targeted funding to support activities benefiting an entire site, and not just one of its component parts.

That the resolution of these and other problems have been identified by pro- tected area managers and Russian and international conversation organizations as priorities for the future, gives us at RCN hope that important steps toward the more effective management and protection of Russia's World Natural Heritage sites will be made in the near term. Given the steady encroachment on some of Russia's highly valuable natural territories by Russia's economy-driving extractive industries, this becomes an increasingly urgent task, for Russia and A mountainous landscape of the Western for the world. Caucasus. Cover drawing by I. Timukhin.

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 1 Introduction to World Natural Heritage Sites in Russia Introduction to World Natural Heritage Sites in Russia

World Natural Heritage Sites in Russia

By Olga Krever and Aleksey Butorin

Map by M. Dubinin.

he Convention concerning the provide com- TProtection of World Cultural and prehensive Natural Heritage (World Heritage support to globally outstanding monu- Heritage were created, and within two Convention, or Convention) was ments of culture and natural objects. years, the first cultural and natural sites adopted at the seventeenth session of In 1975, twenty-one states ratified the were inscribed on the World Heritage the UNESCO General Conference on Convention and today States Parties to List. The Galapagos (Ecuador), November 16, 1972, and came into the Convention number 180 states. Yellowstone National Park (USA), effect on December 17, 1975. The pri- Nahanni National Park (), and mary objective of the Convention is to To strengthen the effectiveness of the Simen National Park (Ethiopia) were unite the efforts of the international Convention's work, in 1976, a among the first natural sites to receive community to identify, protect, and Committee and Fund for World World Heritage status. In recent years,

2 Russian Conservation News Introduction to World Natural Heritage Sites in Russia the list has become highly representa- among which eleven are strict nature from the corresponding subjects of tive, both of the planet's diverse reserves () and five are the Russian Federation sent proposals regions, and in the number of sites. As national parks. to Russia's Ministry of Natural of the beginning of the year 2006, the Resources about their inscription on list includes 160 natural, 628 cultural, Russia is indisputably rich in unique the UNESCO World Heritage List. In and 24 mixed natural-cultural sites in natural complexes, which are, very January 2006, the 137 countries around the world. importantly, undisturbed by human nomination was submitted to the Universally known natural sites such activities. According to the approxi- World Heritage Centre. as the Great Barrier Reef, Hawaiian mate estimates of scientists, Russia has Islands, the volcanoes of Kamchatka, close to twenty territories that are Work is currently being carried out to the Grand Canyon, Mount worthy of World Natural Heritage sta- present on the World Heritage List Kilimanjaro, and Lake Baikal are pro- tus. The most prospective sites were those natural sites included on the tected under the Convention. The identified as part of a joint project on Russian Federation's Tentative List. total area of World Natural Heritage boreal forests, which was implement- Work is also underway to expand sites comprises more than 13% of the ed by UNESCO and The World Russia's Tentative List of prospective territory protected in specially pro- Conservation Union (IUCN). and nominated natural complexes tected nature areas worldwide. with the addition of sites such as the In early 2005, Russia's Ministry of Green Belt of Fennoscandia, the Kuril Russia (as the former ) Natural Resources proposed that the Islands, the Great Watershed of Valdai, signed the World Heritage Convention Putorana Plateau, Magadan Nature the , the Volga Delta, and in 1988 and is now represented on the Reserve, the Commander Islands, and the Bikin River Valley. The expansion World Heritage List by fifteen cultural Daurian Steppes be included on the of Russia's Tentative List is a critical and eight natural sites. At present, the Tentative List for the Russian step toward inscribing new sites; since following sites in Russia have World Federation, which presents the territo- 2003, the World Heritage Centre has Natural Heritage status: Virgin Komi ries that Russia may decide to nomi- accepted for consideration only those Forests, Lake Baikal, Volcanoes of nate for inscription on the World nominations that state parties have Kamchatka, Golden Mountains of Heritage List in the future. The afore- previously declared on their Tentative Altai, , Central mentioned sites were selected based Lists. Sikhote-Alin, Uvs Nuur Basin, and the on an analysis of their natural signifi- Natural System of Wrangel cance, which was carried out by scien- Olga Krever is the Head of the Division Reserve. In the number of its natural tific and public organizations and of Legal Regulation in the Sphere of sites inscribed on the list, Russia shares approved by the Ministry of Natural Specially Protected Nature Areas, within third place among nations with Resources during the period 2000- the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Canada, after Australia, with eleven 2004. During this period, documenta- Russian Federation. Aleksey Butorin is sites, and the , with tion necessary for submission to the the Director of the Natural Heritage twelve sites. Thirty Russian specially UNESCO World Heritage Centre was Protection Fund and a Scientist at the protected nature areas (in whole or in prepared for all territories. In addition, Institute of Geography, Russian Academy part) have World Heritage status, for all territories, executive organs of Sciences.

Organizations Participating in the Nomination of Russian Natural Properties

The following non-governmental and scientific organizations have participated in the preparation of Russia's World Natural Heritage nominations over the years: Greenpeace-Russia, German Society for Nature Conservation (Naturschutzbund Deutschland, NABU), World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), Natural Heritage Protection Fund, Biodiversity Conservation Center, the Save Committee, Greens of Kamchatka, Altai-21st Century, “Northern Caucasus” Working Group, “Brok,” “” Environmental Group, Institute of Geography (Russian Academy of Sciences), Dresden Technical University, Moscow State University's Departments of Geography and Biology, Russian State Design and Survey Institute (Rosgiproles Institute), Pacific Institute of Geography (Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences), Institute of Biological Problems of the North (Russian Academy of Sciences), Altaisky State University and Ubsunursky International Biosphere Center. In addition, staff of many of Russia's zapovedniks and national parks significantly contributed to the organization of field research and document preparations. Information provided by the Natural Heritage Protection Fund.

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 3 Introduction to World Natural Heritage Sites in Russia The Benefits of World Heritage Status in Russian Practice

By Aleksey Butorin

nquestionably, World Heritage Ustatus brings with it numerous Benefits of World Heritage Status for Russia’s World advantages, both in terms of nature Natural Heritage Sites conservation and in garnering com- • Additional guarantees of the full preservation and integrity of unique nat- prehensive support for territories ural areas inscribed on the World Heritage List. The Convention concerning the • Increase in the prestige of natural areas and the institutions governing Protection of World Cultural and them Natural Heritage (World Heritage • Increase in the popularity of territories inscribed on the World Heritage Convention, or Convention) offers its List States Parties and their inscribed sites • Greater capacity to attract financial support for World Heritage sites, first broad legal, informational, economic, and foremost from the World Heritage Fund. and networking opportunities, which • Development of alternative types of natural resource use, including eco- have been developing and improving logical tourism and traditional trades for more than three decades. • Organization of monitoring and inspection of conservation activities in natural areas At present, the Convention is one of the most effective global instruments Compiled by Aleksey Butorin. to protect natural and cultural objects. The need to fulfill obligations within Golden Mountains of Altai, the Virgin helped prevent the construction of a the framework of the Convention, as Komi Forests, and the Western road through the territory of well as the attention and scrutiny Caucasus, where the necessity of regu- Kavkazsky , which is part international experts and the global lating economic activity on the World of the Western Caucasus World community as a whole give to Heritage object stimulated a number Heritage site, and helped preserve the inscribed sites, has helped put a stop of nature conservation activities. In territorial integrity of Yugyd Va to a number of industrial or economic the case of Lake Baikal, for instance, National Park, which is part of the projects, which, if carried out, would World Heritage status helped facilitate Virgin Komi Forests site. have been harmful to Russian World the adoption of a new federal conser- Natural Heritage objects. Illustrative vation law, “On Protecting Lake The prestige associated with World examples of this are Lake Baikal, the Baikal.” World Heritage status also Heritage status can serve as motivation for placing new territories under pro- tection. During the preparation of sev- eral World Natural Heritage nomina- tions, local governments have adopted decisions to expand existing specially protected nature areas and create new ones. For instance, during work on the Bashkirian Urals nomination (Editor's Note: this nomination was submitted to the World Heritage Centre in 1998, but not selected for inscription), the gov- ernment of the Republic of Bashkiria agreed to establish an entomological special purpose reserve, Altyn Solok Zakaznik (93,580 hectares). In 1997, during the preparation process of the Western Caucasus nomination, four specially protected nature areas, with a total combined area of 12,869 hectares, were created in the Republic High profile events involving World Heritage sites, like this trip to Uvs Nuur Lake, attract the of Adygea. Together with Kavkazsky attention of authorities, scientists, and the public to the importance of preserving natural Biosphere Zapovednik, these four pro- heritage. Photo by A. Butorin. tected areas – one nature park and

4 Russian Conservation News Introduction to World Natural Heritage Sites in Russia three nature monuments – all Another important foreign donor for the Russian “Natural Heritage received World Heritage status in Russia's World Natural Heritage sites Protection Fund,” has, in recent years 1999. The preparation of the Central has been the United Nations provided funding to a number of Sikhote-Alin nomination facilitated Development/Global Environmental Russian specially protected nature the creation of a 746,484 hectare Facility (UNDP/GEF). Currently, areas that are inscribed on the World regional-level special purpose land- UNDP/GEF is implementing a $13.8 Heritage List. In 2003-2004, these two scape reserve, Verkhnebikinsky million (with GEF funding totaling organizations awarded grants to facili- Zakaznik, as well as the preparation of $7.6 million, and CIDA funding total- tate internet access for Kronotsky documents necessary to create Udege ing $3.1 million) project, “Biodiversity Zapovednik, which is part of the Legend National Park (Editor's Note: Volcanoes of Kamchatka site, and to According to a January 23, 2006, press Zabaikalsky National Park, which is a release from Russia's Ministry of component of the Lake Baikal site. In Natural Resources, the Ministry is cur- 2005, the two funds assisted rently approving with stakeholder min- Yugyd Va istries and organs documents related to National Park, the creation of Udege Legend National which is a com- Park, as well as three other national ponent of the parks.) Virgin Komi Forests site, in cre- With World Heritage status often ating infrastructure comes wider recognition and a higher for ecological profile. Numerous activities have been tourism develop- undertaken to popularize Russia's ment. The German World Natural Heritage sites. A variety World Heritage of printed promotional materials such Foundation also as hardcover album-style books, calen- recently approved dars, and booklets have been pub- funding technical lished. A series of video films was pro- assistance for Yuzhno- duced and information about Russia's Kamchatsky Zakaznik. World Natural Heritage sites was post- ed on numerous websites, including that of the UNESCO World Heritage Conservation Centre. High profile events such as in Four Products like this book, poster, and com- international expeditions to Russian Specially Protected Areas on the pact disk help inform the public about Russia's World Natural Heritage sites. natural complexes during the nomina- Kamchatka Peninsula: A tion preparation process, visits by Demonstration of the Sustainable UNESCO and World Conservation Approach,” which specifically targets Union (IUCN) experts to Russian sites, four components of the Volcanoes of Despite the isolated examples men- and World Heritage inscription cere- Kamchatka World Heritage site. tioned above, significant efforts have monies have made specially protected Another UNDP/GEF initiative that, not been undertaken in Russia to use nature areas with World Heritage sta- when approved by Russia's Ministry of World Natural Heritage site status to tus more attractive to local govern- Natural Resources, will create new improve the socio-economic situation ment and business, and, in a number funding opportunities for a Russian in the regions where the sites are of cases, targets of concrete financial World Natural Heritage site is the located. For a number of reasons, and technical assistance. “Biodiversity Conservation in the World Natural Heritage status in Russia Russian Part of the Altai-Sayan has heretofore been used for a single Several Russian World Natural Heritage Ecoregion” Project. The project, which goal: to attract legal instruments of the sites have also received financial sup- has a total project budget of $6 million Convention to mitigate the impacts of port from international governments (with GEF funding totaling $3.5 mil- development activities on World and organizations. For example, lion), incorporates the Golden Heritage sites and on surrounding ter- Pechoro-Ilychsky Zapovednik, which is Mountains of Altai World Heritage site. ritories. This “one-sided” approach in part of the Virgin Komi Forests World UNDP/GEF is now in the process of implementing the Convention can Heritage site, has received targeted sup- preparing a project, “Biodiversity instigate conflicts with host regions port through the Komi Model Forest Conservation of Virgin Forests in the and with territorial organs of local Project, a boreal forest conservation ini- Upper Reaches of the Pechora River”, management, which in turn, could tiative financed by the Swiss Agency of which will incorporate the Virgin stall the process of nominating new Development and Cooperation and Komi Forests World Heritage site. territories. implemented by the World Wide Fund for Nature (1996- 2002) and the Silver The German World Heritage To create a positive image of World Taiga Foundation (2002-2006). Foundation, working together with Heritage status, it is important that

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 5 Introduction to World Natural Heritage Sites in Russia work be undertaken to demonstrate international partnership activities, recreational, scientific, educational, that it is not a prohibitive mechanism, such as the Partnerships for and nature conservation but a mechanism for alternative Conservation Initiative (PACT) purposes. development. In the short-term, Programme. However, in the long run, industrial development projects may the overwhelming majority of territo- Aleksey Butorin is the Director of the yield greater economic benefits than ries subject to industrial development Natural Heritage Protection Fund and those brought by traditional trades, lose a great number of their valuable a Scientist at the Institute of Geography, ecological tourism, or participation in qualities, which makes them unfit for Russian Academy of Sciences.

World Heritage Status Brings Sites Increased Opportunities for International Collaboration and Assistance The World Heritage Convention calls upon the international community to participate in the protection of cul- tural and natural heritage of universal value through the provision of collective assistance. The Convention also establishes procedures and channels through which States Parties may request international assistance for cultural or natural heritage sites within their territories. The Convention further established a Fund for the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage of Outstanding Universal Value, called the “World Heritage Fund," which functions as a trust fund from which the World Heritage Committee can allocate funding. A brief overview of this important resource, as well as other select key sources of support that have evolved since the Convention was adopted by UNESCO in 1972, follows below.

The World Heritage Fund cities, earthen architecture, and marine sites. PACT is The World Heritage Fund was created in 1972 by the also working to expand the existing network of bilater- Convention with the purpose of assisting States Parties al and multilateral partnership and intergovernmental in identifying, preserving, and promoting World institutions to maintain a system of international coop- Heritage sites. Contributions to the Fund are made by eration. Under the auspices of this initiative, agree- States Parties, on a compulsory or voluntary basis. The ments concerning the incorporation of World Heritage World Heritage Committee allocates funding on a pri- into development programs have been concluded with ority basis, with particular focus on the most threat- such diverse partners as: the World Bank, the Inter- ened sites, as well as on sites situated in developing American Development Bank, the United Nations countries. Annually, about $4 million is made available Development Programme/Global Environmental to States Parties requesting assistance in one of the fol- Facility (UNDP-GEF) Small Grants Programme, the lowing five categories: preparatory assistance, technical Agence Française de De´veloppement, the European cooperation, emergency assistance, training, and edu- Union, and the Japanese Bank for International cational and promotional assistance. The majority of Cooperation. awarded grants do not exceed $30,000, although some projects valued at more than $100,000 have been fund- United Nations Foundation ed. Russia received $30,000 from the World Heritage The United Nations Foundation is one of the World Fund to carry out a training seminar in 1999 targeting Heritage Centre's major partners. The Foundation, the needs of natural heritage sites. The World Heritage established in 1998 with Ted Turner's $1 billion gift to Fund also provided funding for a seminar on boreal support UN causes and activities, has partnered with the forests, which took place in St. Petersburg in fall 2003. World Heritage Centre to support and promote the management and conservation of World Natural The Partnerships for Conservation Heritage sites. Since its inception, the Foundation has Initiative (PACT) Programme contributed over $32 million for the effective manage- Launched in 2002 by the World Heritage Centre, PACT ment and protection of World Natural Heritage sites. is a solutions-oriented approach to sustainable World Heritage conservation, which aims to raise awareness Funds-in-Trust and to mobilize sustainable recourses for the long-term Funds-in-Trust are donations given by countries to sup- conservation of World Heritage. It aims to involve a port specific projects with defined goals and objectives. network of companies, foundations, conservation and Funds-in-Trust projects have been established with the research institutions, and media organizations interest- Governments of the Netherlands, France, Italy, Japan, ed in assisting in the implementation of the World and Spain, and with Flemish authorities. Heritage Convention. Funding priority is given to sites inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger, as Compiled by RCN Editors using the UNESCO World well as to World Heritage conservation initiatives Heritage Centre's “World Heritage Information Kit.” addressing themes such as sustainable tourism, forests,

6 Russian Conservation News Introduction to World Natural Heritage Sites in Russia UNESCO's World Heritage List and the Place of Russian Natural Territories on It

By Nikolai Maxakovsky

great number of various specially river delta, that of the Ganges and provides habitat for the IUCN Red Aprotected nature areas are includ- Brahmaputra Rivers, which is included Data Book-listed Siberian Tiger ed among the World Natural Heritage in the “Sundarbans National Park” (Panthera tigris altaica). The Uvs Nuur sites inscribed on UNESCO's World property, in India and Bangladesh; the Basin presents a combination of con- Heritage List. This includes almost 150 Earth's tallest peak, Mt. Everest, which trasting landscapes, which ranges from national parks, including 4 in Russia; rises up above Nepal's Sagarmatha high alpine to deserts, that is no fewer than 120 nature reserves, National Park; Africa's tallest mountain, unique across Eurasia. The Natural including 11 Russian zapovedniks; and Kilimanjaro in Tanzania; and the System of Wrangel Island Reserve, close to 25 regional-level nature parks, world's largest collection of coral reefs which is home to the world's largest of which 7 are located in the Russian and islands, Australia's Great Barrier assemblage of birth dens, Federation. In addition, the territory of Reef. has extremely high biological diversity close to 60 biosphere reserves - among all islands. Russia's Kavkazsky Biosphere The position of Russia's sites on the Zapovednik being one of them - coin- UNESCO List – in terms of their value - It is important to note that two cides, partially or entirely, with World should leave no doubt in anyone's Russian objects, Kamchatka and Natural Heritage sites. Nearly twenty mind. These sites can rightfully be con- Baikal, are inscribed on the List Wetlands of International Importance sidered the common property of all according to all four selection criteria. such as the Selenga Delta, which falls humanity. Each of them possesses, to a Only 17 of 160 natural phenomena within the borders of the Lake Baikal greater or lesser extent, traits that may inscribed on the List are worthy of this World Natural Heritage site, similarly be universally recognized as unique, distinction, with Yellowstone and coincide with sites inscribed on the both on a regional and global scale. Grand Canyon National Parks in the World Heritage List. US being among them. The Virgin Komi Forests, for instance, Russia's eight World Natural Heritage comprise the most extensive massif of Geographic Distribution sites comprise just five percent of the untouched northern taiga in . Considering the diverse representation 160 such sites that have been identi- Lake Baikal is the most ancient (25 of countries on the UNESCO List – fied worldwide. Nevertheless, Russia's million years) and the deepest (1,620 some countries have many sites, others sites occupy a very important place on meters) freshwater lake on the planet. have a single site, and others still, not a the List because they are entrusted It also boasts one of the highest levels one – the distribution of World with the responsibility of “represent- of endemism, with 75% of all species Natural Heritage sites worldwide is ing” almost all of northern Eurasia. and forms being endemic. The highly inequitable. Some regions are Comparing Russia's World Natural Volcanoes of Kamchatka site includes relatively more saturated with these Heritage sites with foreign natural Klyuchevskaya Sopka, which, at 4,750 sites: the Mediterranean, South East monuments having the same status meters, is the highest active in , the mountainous “Wild West” of allows one to depict more clearly the Eurasia, and the Valley of Geysers, Canada and the US, the Caribbean international significance of the which is one of the largest accumula- Basin, Equatorial Africa, and the east- zapovedniks and parks in Russia that tions of geysers on the planet. The ern shore of Australia, together with have World Natural Heritage status. Golden Mountains of Altai site, which New Zealand and adjacent islands. provides habitat to several globally There exist, however, “gaps” on the Value of World Natural Heritage Sites rare species of animals including the distribution map of World Natural Only the world's most famous natural snow leopard (Unica unica), includes Heritage sites: Central Eurasia phenomena are included among the Mount Belukha, which at 4,506 (, Kazakhstan, and northern natural objects of global significance meters, is the highest point in Altai ), the Arab Peninsula and Persian inscribed on the World Heritage List. and as a whole, as well as Gulf countries, the more developed For instance, on the list one finds: the Teletskoye Lake, one of Siberia's largest prairie regions of the US and Canada, Grand Canyon, the Earth's deepest lakes. The Western Caucasus site the Canadian Arctic, the Sahara Desert, canyon, with depths of more than encompasses one of Europe's largest and arid regions of Australia. 1,500 meters; Yellowstone Park, with massifs of untouched mountain the planet's largest concentration of forests, which offers habitat to a popu- Although Russia possesses eight World geysers; the planet's most active vol- lation of rare mountain bison (Bison Natural Heritage sites, it appears on cano, Kilauea, which is part of the bonasus montanus). The Central the global World Heritage map as “Hawaii Volcanoes National Park” Sikhote-Alin is a highly valuable mixed something of a “gap” due to the coun- property, in the US; the world's largest coniferous-broad leaved forest that try's vast size. Especially underrepre-

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 7 Introduction to World Natural Heritage Sites in Russia

Forests, Altai, Central Sikhote-Alin, the mountain ranges surrounding Lake Baikal, and Kamchatka's highest volca- noes. Only the Wrangel Island and Uvs Nuur Basin sites deviate from the “alpine ranks,” although, strictly speak- ing, mountains can be found there as well. This disproportional distribution by type is partially corrected thanks to both the significant size of the majori- ty of Russian World Natural Heritage sites, as well as their cluster structure. This allows them to encompass not just alpine areas, with their , waterfalls, caves, and other elements of typical alpine relief; but also low mountain areas, overgrown with forests; mountain plateaus; and some- times also adjacent plains, such as the Most of Russia's World Natural Heritage sites are situated in the country's mountainous Pechora Lowland included in the regions. Photo by S. Trepet. Virgin Komi Forests site. As World Natural Heritage status is conferred on new Russian territories in the future, sented are the European part of the zone. If World Natural Heritage status is for example the Great Watershed of country, the northern regions of conferred upon additional Russia pro- Valdai, which represents a hilly lake Siberia, and the Russian Far East. tected areas - above all, this refers to zone of European mixed forests, the Indeed, almost all of Russia's World prospective properties on which work typological diversity of such objects Natural Heritage sites seem to be is still being carried out such as the will increase. “crowded” into they country's remote Great Watershed of Valdai, the mountainous or coastal areas. These Greenbelt of Fennoscandia, and the Conclusion areas are situated primarily outside of Putorana Plateau - then the established Having analyzed the current represen- the plains regions, which are occupied spatial-geographic “imbalance” might tativeness of Russia's natural territories by zonal vegetation such as , be significantly corrected. inscribed on the UNESCO World forest, steppe, and forest-steppe. The Heritage List, one can conclude that, only site that is an exception to this Typological Diversity despite the definite imbalance, that is rule is the Virgin Komi Forests, which The natural sites inscribed on the to say, the inequality in the geographic is located in the continent's interior. UNESCO List are exceptionally diverse. distribution of sites and their inade- They represent the Earth's most varied quate typological diversity, that exists For this reason, the rich biological and ecosystems and natural phenomena. on the whole, Russia is gradually mov- landscape diversity of Russian nature is, Encompassing this diversity is, essen- ing toward occupying a worthy spot on the whole, represented far from ade- tially, one of the primary objectives of on this prestigious international list. quately. True, certain consolation can the experts who formulate the List. For However, the matter of increasing the be taken in the fact that some of this reason, alpine regions, volcanoes number of World Natural Heritage Russia's World Natural Heritage sites are and geysers, massifs of virgin forest in sites (ideally, up to 15-20 sites), the striking in the diversity of their natural various natural zones of the Earth, ter- desirability of them more adequately complexes, which significantly increas- ritories of desert, steppe and savannah, reflecting Russia's natural-landscape es their representativeness. In the tundra and open woodlands, as well as diversity, and, above all, the impor- Golden Mountains of Altai and Uvs caves and waterfalls, rivers and lakes, tance of establishing effective manage- Nuur Basin sites, for instance, one wetlands, river deltas and mangroves, ment of sites that have already encounters almost all landscape types fjords, reefs, atolls, and islands all fig- received this high status, merits further characteristic to Central Eurasia: glacial ure on the List. discussion. Only in this case will alpine mountains, alpine meadows, Russia's zapovedniks and parks mountain tundra, forests, forest-steppe, Against this backdrop, Russia's natural become full-fledged members of the semi-desert, and deserts. Diverse land- World Heritage sites may seem at a global “family” of World Natural scapes types are also encountered in cursory glance to be, as a whole, quite Heritage sites. the Lake Baikal World Natural Heritage homogenous type-wise. As already site. The inscription on the List in 2004 noted, they are primarily located in Nikolai Maxakovsky is a Senior of Wrangel Island, the northernmost alpine areas, at elevations of 1,500- Scientist at the Russian Research World Natural Heritage site, is an 2,000 meters and more. Such are the Institute for Cultural and Natural important breakthrough in the Arctic Western Caucasus, Virgin Komi Heritage in Moscow.

8 Russian Conservation News Introduction to World Natural Heritage Sites in Russia International Seminar on Baikal Attracts Specialists to Discuss Alternative Nature Use on World Natural Heritage Sites

By Zhanna Irodova uring the summer of 2005, more Director of the Baikal Center for and studied Russia's World Natural Dthan thirty people representing Ecological and Citizen Initiatives, for Heritage sites, and for each of them, various Russian and foreign organiza- instance, shared with participants proposed collaboration with analo- tions implementing work under the information about work to establish gous sites abroad. Without a doubt, UNESCO Convention concerning the the Great Baikal Trail, a hiking trail such collaboration would be very use- Protection of World Cultural and planned to extend around Lake ful for Russian territories by helping Natural Heritage gathered in Baikal. Tamara Savenkova of the them to establish international con- Pribaikalsky National Park, on the Institute of Geography, Siberian tacts and to develop these relation- shores of Russia's famous Lake Baikal, Branch of the Russian Academy of ships. It is also possible that analogous to participate in a seminar called Sciences, presented participants with territories might share similar prob- “Management of World Natural an overview of the strategic manage- lems and that solutions that have been Heritage Sites: Developing Alternative ment of organizations protecting the successfully applied abroad, might also Nature Use.” Participants included lake and adjacent territories. be applicable in Russia. The interna- managers of specially protected tional exchange of experience in the nature areas that are inscribed on the While focusing on the development of fields of environmental education and World Heritage List, and representa- alternative nature use, the seminar ecotourism has already proven very tives from scientific and non-govern- addressed two primary themes: World productive. Vera Chizhova, a professor mental organizations, as well as from Natural Heritage sites as a foundation at Moscow State University, who is a the local Irkutsk Oblast government. for economic development in Russia; highly regarded Russian specialist in The event, which took place August and the interrelation between ecologi- the field of ecotourism, and who 15-19, 2005, was organized jointly by cal tourism and the sustainable devel- attended the Baikal seminar, expressed the Russian Natural Heritage opment of World Natural Heritage her belief that the introduction of a Protection Fund and by the host sites. new type of ecotourism that has been reserve, Pribaikalsky National Park. A popularized abroad, “green,” or ecolog- number of organizations – the The lectures by Nikolai Maxakovsky, a ical-cultural tourism, would be very rel- German Federal Agency for Nature faculty member at the Russian evant for Russia. Conservation, the Institute of Research Institute for Cultural and Geography (within the Siberian Natural Heritage, were fundamental for Art Pedersen, of UNESCO's World Branch of the Russian Academy of the seminar. In addition to offering a Heritage Centre, expressed his Sciences), the UNESCO World general overview of World Natural thoughts and proposals about using Heritage Centre, Moscow State Heritage, Maxakovsky also presented World Heritage status for the conser- University, the Russian Research examples of alternative types of nature vation and sustainable development Institute for Cultural and Natural use on World Natural Heritage sites in of territories bearing this distinction. Heritage, Greenpeace-Russia, and The other countries. He closely analyzed He also spoke about how such sites World Conservation Union (IUCN) – supported the seminar. Spotlight on the Natural Heritage Protection Fund The selection of Lake Baikal as the site The Natural Heritage Protection Fund's mission is to provide for the overall of the 2005 seminar was not without support of World Heritage sites, as well as to facilitate the acquisition of this good cause. Lake Baikal was inscribed status for new natural sites in Russia and other CIS states. The Fund, which on the World Heritage List as a natural was established in the year 2000, provides technical and financial assistance site in 1996, having met all four natu- to World Heritage sites, including: their enhancement in compliance with the ral criteria; the site is comprised of World Heritage Convention, management plan development, organization of three zapovedniks, three national seminars for the staff of component properties, promotion of World Heritage parks, and two zakazniks. Numerous sites in Russia and abroad, and assistance in developing alternative nature NGOs are also active in the region. management practices. The Fund also coordinates the interaction of World The training seminar offered partici- Heritage sites and regional non-governmental and scientific organizations pants the opportunity to become with the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and with other international envi- acquainted with the site, with efforts ronmental and financial organizations working within the framework of the underway to protect it, and with Convention. many of the people collaborating to Information provided by the Natural Heritage Protection Fund. do so. Arkady Kalikhman, Program

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 9 Introduction to World Natural Heritage Sites in Russia might serve as a platform for regional Among the topics inspiring the most At the seminar, participants agreed economic development. active discussion among participants upon the necessity of creating coordi- were: the interrelation between the nating councils for World Natural Yuri Buivolov, a specialist with Russia's development of tourism and protec- Heritage sites. Such councils are espe- Ministry of Natural Resources, shared tion, the sustainable development of cially important for sites comprised his views on this subject. He sees World Heritage sites, the use of World of several protected areas and are increasing the management effective- Heritage status, and opportunities and envisioned as being the foundation of ness of World Heritage sites as being difficulties of interaction among World an Association of World Natural the main task at present. Alexey Natural Heritage territories. At the close Heritage Sites of the Russian Blagovidov from IUCN spoke in detail of the seminar, a working group drafted Federation, which is already being about how local communities can par- a series of proposals. Among them, the planned for the future. I think that ticipate in alternative nature use activi- following are notable: the development these plans can realistically be real- ties in specially protected areas. He of comprehensive regional programs to ized. The first steps toward doing so also noted which Russian territories develop ecotourism on World Natural will be discussed at the next training have been most successful in this Heritage sites; the initiation of work in seminar, which will take place in sense. Over the course of the seminar, this sphere with the World Heritage summer 2006 and focus on work the heads of the zapovedniks and Centre; the creation of a system of envi- with local communities. national parks inscribed on the List ronmental education; and involving also shared preliminary results of simi- regional business and government in Zhanna Irodova is the Deputy lar activities carried out within their problem solving and local communities Director for Environmental Education reserves. in ecologically-oriented activities. at Katunsky Zapovednik.

Seminar Series Yields Draft Program for World Heritage Convention Implementation in Russia

The August 2005 seminar was one of three such seminars carried out during the period 2003-2005, within the framework of a special training program for managers of Russian protected areas inscribed on the World Heritage List. The program is being implemented by the Natural Heritage Protection Fund, a Russian non-governmental organization, with support from the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN). The first seminar in the series, “Management of World Heritage Sites in the Russian Federation,” was held August 11-17, 2003, on the Isle of Vilm in Germany. The second seminar, “Sustainable Development as the Basis of Preserving World Natural Heritage Sites: Management Planning,” was held on the , a peninsula straddling the Russian-Lithuanian border, May 17-21, 2004. During the course of the seminar series, participants drafted a medium-term program for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention in Russia. Key elements of the pro- gram included: • Developing a concept and a special Federal Program for the implementation of the Convention, specifically as it concerns natural sites. • Introducing amendments to Russian federal legislation and to regional laws that will define the legal status of World Natural Heritage sites. • Compiling a list of Russian natural sites recommended for nomination to the World Heritage List. • Establishing World Heritage site coordination centers, which is especially important for sites that incorporate several pro- tected areas with different statuses. The coordination centers should become the foundation for the future Association of Russian World Natural Heritage Sites. • Developing a strategy for identifying alternative funding for World Heritage sites. Maintaining contacts with members of the World Heritage Centre's PACT Program. • Developing management plans for Russian World Natural Heritage sites. • Describing the borders of World Natural Heritage sites. • Developing a system of reactive monitoring in World Natural Heritage sites; developing a unified method of acquiring, pro- cessing, and presenting information on the conservation status of World Natural Heritage sites. • Attracting the attention of local communities, regional businesses, and local government to World Heritage site-related issues. • Developing alternative employment opportunities for local communities (such as ecological tourism or traditional folk crafts); applying low-cost job growth and wage-push mechanisms to environment-oriented production. • Providing informational support to World Heritage sites (such as publishing an informational bulletin, translating and dis- seminating World Heritage-related literature, designing web-sites for World Heritage sites). • Organizing annual training seminars, working meetings, and exchange programs with World Heritage sites outside of Russia. Initiating cooperation between "twin sites". • Preparing nominations for territories included on the "Tentative List" of the Russian Federation, and Commander Islands; and for the trans-boundary nominations Green Belt of Fennoscandia (Russia-Finland-Norway) and Daurian Steppes (Russia-Mongolia-China).

Information provided by the Natural Heritage Protection Fund.

10 Russian Conservation News Introduction to World Natural Heritage Sites in Russia Russian-German Collaboration in Protecting World Heritage

By Peter Schmidt and Aleksey Butorin

ince 1995, Germany has provided the Bashkirian Urals, Western Sthe Russian Federation with active Caucasus, Curonian Spit, Putorana assistance in work to implement the Plateau, and Magadan Nature Reserve Convention concerning the Protection nominations. The German Society for of World Cultural and Natural Nature Conservation (NABU) helped Heritage. During the period 1995- with the preparation the Volcanoes of 2002, within the framework of an Kamchatka, Green Belt of agreement on collaboration in the Fennoscandia, Vodlozersky National sphere of environmental protection, Park, Bashkirian Urals, Western The German Federal Agency for Caucasus, and Uvs Nuur Basin nomi- Nature Conservation (BfN) provided nations. The International Academy financial and scientific assistance in for Nature Conservation, Island of the preparation of ten nominations. Vilm, participated in the preparation of the Vodlozersky National Park and Four of these territories have already Green Belt of Fennoscandia nomina- received UNESCO World Heritage sta- tions. Participants in a 2005 training seminar tus: Volcanoes of Kamchatka (1996); funded by the German Federal Agency for Western Caucasus (1999); Curonian Since 2003, BfN has provided support Nature Conservation (BfN). Photo provided Spit (2000); and Uvs Nuur Basin for a training program for managers of by A. Butorin. (2003). Two additional nominations – Russian specially protected nature Putorna Plateau and Magadan Nature areas that are part of natural sites Reserve – were prepared and present- inscribed on the World Heritage List. An international conference marking ed on the Russian Federation's Under this program, the Natural ten years of Russian-German collabo- Tentative List of natural objects, and Heritage Protection Fund, a Russian ration within the framework of the the Putorana Plateau was submitted to NGO, has conducted three interna- Convention concerning the the World Heritage Centre in 2005. tional training seminars on topics Protection of World Cultural and The Russian part of the Green Belt of including the implementation of the Natural Heritage (Convention) will be Fennoscandia nomination has been Convention, management plan prepa- held this summer at the Institute of completed and is planned to be sub- ration, and developing alternative Geography (Siberian Branch of the mitted to the World Heritage Centre as nature use. Independent experts and Russian Academy of Sciences) in a transboundary nomination (with German specialists from Marburg Irkutsk. Participants in the event, who Finland and Norway). The Vodlozersky University, the BfN, and the German will include representatives of various National Park and Bashkirian Urals World Heritage Foundation provided governmental bodies, non-govern- nominations were not inscribed on significant assistance in conducting mental organizations, and academic the World Heritage List after a World the seminars. institutions, will review Russian- Conservation Union (IUCN) expert German collaboration in this sphere evaluation in 1998 found that they did During the period 2003-2005, the to date and will also identify priorities not satisfy requirements for natural German World Heritage Foundation, for future joint work. Participants will uniqueness. The possibility of prepar- together with the Natural Heritage also revise and ratify a strategy and ing a repeat nomination for this site Protection Fund, provided technical action plan for implementing the under the cultural landscape criteria is assistance to Kronotsky Zapovednik, Convention in the Russian being considered. Zabaikalsky National Park, and Yugyd Federation. Va National Park (components of the A number of German organizations Volcanoes of Kamchatka, Lake Baikal, Peter Schmidt is a professor took part in jointly preparing nomina- and Virgin Komi Forests sites, respec- at the Institute for General Ecology tions with Russian colleagues. The tively) in providing the territories and Environmental Protection, within German Federal Agency for Nature with email access and equipping them the Faculty of Forestry, Geosciences Conservation (BfN) provided financial for ecological tourism. In 2006, the and Hydrosciences at Dresden assistance for the preparation of all German World Heritage Foundation University of Technology. Aleksey nine nominations and participated in allocated funding to purchase vehicles Butorin is the Director of the Natural the preparation of the Putorana for another component of the Heritage Protection Fund and a Plateau nomination. Dresden Volcanoes of Kamchatka site, Yuzhno- Scientist at the Institute of Geography, University of Technology assisted with Kamchatsky Nature Park. Russian Academy of Sciences.

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 11 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas Introduction to the Case Studies Section

note from the editors: in the priority. Accompanying these texts, This site was planned on geographic Afollowing section of the journal, you'll also find detailed maps of the principles to encompass the entire we offer readers the chance to famil- World Heritage sites, which will help Lake Baikal basin, or watershed, and iarize themselves with the eight you to place them within Russia and not to coincide exclusively with spe- Russian territories that have to date within their respective regions. cific existing protected areas. been inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List for their outstanding na- For your reference, we also provide In our case study articles, which follow tural attributes. For each of Russia's information about the protected each respective introductory text, World Natural Heritage sites, we pre- nature areas that comprise or are you'll see that some authors have cho- sent first a brief introductory text, and included in each territory. You'll notice sen to focus on positive achievements then a longer and more specific article immediately the diversity of protected made possible thanks to World about the site or a particular issue areas that have been included in the Heritage status, while other correspon- affecting it. sites. Federal-level protected areas – dents have offered their insights into zapovedniks, national parks, and fed- significant conservation threats that Our introductory pages offer general eral zakazniks – are by and large the have emerged despite it. It would be descriptions of the sites, which detail backbone of most sites. However, very difficult in the scope of this one some of their most outstanding natu- numerous regional level protected publication to offer an exhaustive ral values. We are sure that these areas – including regional zakazniks, treatment of each site, but we feel that superlative-laden snapshots will offer nature monuments, and nature parks when considered as a whole, our “case readers clear understanding of why – have also been conferred with World study” articles offer readers a broad the sites were selected to receive this Heritage status. The complex compo- and balanced understanding of some prestigious international recognition sition of the Lake Baikal site we of the different issues affecting Russia's and why their protection is a global believe merits particular attention. World Natural Heritage sites today.

Photo by S. Trepet.

12 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

Virgin Komi Forests

Inscribed on the World Heritage List: 1995 Criteria for inscription: Natural Criteria (ii), (iii)* Total area: 3.28 million hectares Protected areas comprising the site: 1. Pechoro-Ilychsky Biosphere Zapovednik (721,322 hectares); 2. Pechoro- Ilychsky Biosphere Zapovednik Buffer Zone (666,000 hectares); 3. Yugyd Va National Park (1,891,701 hectares) * For a description of these selection criteria, please see the journal's rear inside cover.

irgin Komi Forests was Russia's The site's territory Vfirst natural site to be inscribed on stretches for more than the UNESCO World Heritage List. This 300 kilometers from nomination opened a new page in the north to south along the history of environmental protection in western slope of the Russia. The site consists of two pro- sub-polar and northern tected nature areas, Pechoro-Ilychsky in the Biosphere Zapovednik and Yugyd Va Republic of Komi. This National Park. Together, they comprise mountain system has a the largest remaining massif of virgin significant influence on forests in Europe, which is nearly the region's climate. On undisturbed by human activities. eastern slopes, typical Siberian flora abruptly Virgin Komi Forests is a genuine treas- replaces European ury of the taiga. Its territory provides species and forms habitat to more than 40 mammal that are typical for the species, including brown bear (Ursus moist western slopes of arctos), sable (Martes zibellina), and the Urals Mountains. (Alces alces); 204 species, Natural complexes form including species listed in the Russian complex mosaics in Red Data Book such as white-tailed some places; along nar- Map by M. Dubinin. eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) and osprey row river valleys, taiga vegetation (Pandion haliaetus); and 16 fish extends high up into the mountains. species, the most valuable of which are two glacial relict species, Arctic char Spruce (Picea sp.) and fir (Abies sp.) pine (Pinus sibirica), which grows here (Salvelinus alpinus) and Arctic grayling trees, the main tree species in the site's at the northwestern edge of its natural (Salvelinus alpinus). forests, are accompanied by Siberian range. Central and northern taiga forests are followed by forest-tundra. Mountain tundra and rocky areas near- ly devoid of vegetation occupy large areas. It is here that the Pechora River begins its 1,809 kilometer-long flow to the and joins with its crys- tal clear tributaries.

Conservation Threats: Possible renewal of gold mining activities in the River Valley, which is located in the northern part of the World Heritage site; and possible decrease in the territory comprising the World Heritage site.

Materials for this and subsequent site descriptions provided by Greenpeace- The Kozhim River flows through the taiga forests of Yugyd National Park. Russia and the Natural Heritage Photo by E. Shubnitsina. Protection Fund.

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 13 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas Protecting Territory and Developing Tourism in Yugyd Va National Park

By Elena Shubnitsina

Typical mountainous landscape in the Narodnaya River Valley in Yugud Va National Park. Photo by E. Shubnitsina.

ugyd Va National Park was created Ural Mountains cast doubt on the for the park because they had other Yin 1994 by a decree of the Russian future of the region's natural resources plans for the territory: they intended Government with the goal of preserv- and its landscapes. The Kozhim River, to utilize the region's natural ing the unique natural landscapes of one of the most beautiful rivers in the resources. In order to justify preserving the northern and sub-Arctic Ural Ural Mountains, which has long the Kozhim River Basin within the Mountains, although scientists had attracted tourists, particularly suffered. park's borders, two environmental proposed and offered justification for The infamous Pechora Cooperative, impact assessments were carried out, the park's creation as early as the and the later the “Terra” company, first on the republic level, and later on 1970s. One of the primary reasons for mined for gold along the shores of the the federal level. The experts' findings inscribing the park on the World Kozhim River. In the course of just one were unanimous: the majority of the Heritage List was to increase its status decade, their activities transformed catchment area of the Usa River, a in hopes of mitigating the growing the river's amazing valleys into “lunar large tributary of the Pechora River, threats presented by industrial compa- landscapes.” forms in the Kozhim River Basin, and nies and authorities eager to utilize the industrial activity in the upper reaches park's rich natural resources. Indeed, Representatives from industrial circles of the spawning rivers there would in the 1980s, intensive mining activity in the were opposed to inflict irreversible harm upon the in the upper reaches of rivers in the the borders that scientists proposed Pechora River Basin.

14 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

Since then, attempts to “clarify,” or, in its actions and that its interests in tected nature in the face of compet- more accurately, to alter, the park's having a “detailed review” of the park's ing interests. borders by seizing territory from its territory conducted were nothing very center for the purposes of mining more than a transparent attempt to One of the park's primary goals, in valuable minerals, persist. The then alter the park's borders. In addition, addition to protecting nature and car- head of the Komi Republic, Yuri they recognized that the integrity of rying out environmental education- Spiridonov, had approved a number of Russia's largest national park was not related activities, is creating conditions documents that would alter the park's all that was at stake. Because the pro- for regulated tourism and recreation. territory such that the Kozhim River tected area has World Heritage status, no longer fell within its borders. the international reputation of the Photo by E. Shubnitsina. However, all these attempts were over- Russian Federation turned by court decisions that found was also on the them to be illegal. Nevertheless, min- line. ing enterprise representatives have not abandoned their efforts to alter the On May 20, 2005, the gen- Popular park's borders. In November 2004, the eral prosecutor of the Komi hiking trails Government of the Komi Republic Republic issued a statement to have long issued a decree “concerning the con- the Head of the Republic, crossed the firmation of Yugyd Va National Park's Vladimir Torlopov, demanding park's territory borders,” according to which close to that the decree be overturned on and nearly all 36,000 hectares of alpine tundra at the the grounds that, according to leg- types of tourism very center of the park, its most pris- islation, the national have a great future tine and vulnerable part, would be park is federal prop- in the park, including “removed” for gold mining. The erty and only feder- sport and scientific decree was based on the results of for- al organs can deter- tourism. Scientists est survey work, which seemed to mine its area and approve from Finland, determine that the park has a “surplus its borders. Although people in Norway, and of land.” However, because only land the Komi Republic's Ministry of other countries surveyors can precisely determine a Nature offered assurances that the come to territory's area, and they have not yet previous year's “confirmation” of the Yugyd Va while partici- done so in the park, the forest survey- borders of Yugyd Va had been pating in scientific expedi- ors' findings are not conclusive. approved by the Ministry of Natural tions and every year students Resources of the Russian Federation, from institutes of higher learning in Non-governmental organizations it became clear that no such approval the Komi Republic and elsewhere in appealed to the public prosecutor of had been given and that the Russia spend their field practice here. the Komi Republic with the request Government of the Russian that the legality of the decree be ascer- Federation had not adopted a deci- The number of people wanting to tained. Specialists and ecologists felt sion in the matter. Furthermore, the come to Yugyd Va increases with that the Komi Republic was unjustified forest survey work, upon which the every year and this is an indicator not decision to only of economic stabilization in remove the Russia, but also of the park's work to park's territory attract tourists. However, to this day, a had been significant portion of tourists visiting based, was con- the park's territory remain “wild,” ducted in a meaning that their activities are one-sided man- unregulated. The reasons for this are ner, without manifold, but inadequate financing of participation the park and staffing shortages are by the adminis- among the primary ones. Just 53 peo- tration of the ple, including 37 people in the protec- national park, tion service, staff Yugyd Va, a territory and without occupying almost 2 million hectares. undergoing an In other words, there is one inspector environmental for every 50,000 hectares of land in impact assess- the park. ment. This example illus- Some people believe that the solu- trates just how tion to the park's staffing problem Some parts of the Kozhim River still bear the scars of past gold mining difficult it is to lies in “cutting back” its territory. activities carried out along its course. Photo by E. Shubnitsina. preserve pro- “Why so much territory?” they ask.

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 15 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

Volume and Source of Yugyd Va National Park Funding, Since 1995

Thousands of Rubles Federal Budget Republic and Local Budgets 5000 Off-Budget Income Generated from 4000 Activities Carried out in the Park

3000

2000

1000

0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Year

Over the last decade, tourism and other activities have become an increasing source of income for Yugyd Va National Park, growing from 102,000 rubles in 1995 to 1,394,900 rubles in 2004. Diagram provided by E. Shubnitsina.

“The park's management can't han- In recent years, income generated from Urals, and one from the Swiss dle such a giant anyway.” However, activities carried out in the park such Directorate of Development the great value of the park is precise- as tourism have comprised close to a Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid to ly its territorial integrity and lack of quarter of the park's operating budget. protect the Kozhim River. Work with fragmentation. Establishing control Federal funding, of course, is insuffi- local communities, which is a good tra- over such a territory is certainly not cient to cover all needs. Work to equip dition for the park, is an important easy. There aren't enough people; the territory must be carried out with component of these projects. means of transportation and com- the park’s own efforts or with donor munications are inadequate. But money. In 2005, the park received two In order for the park to successfully ful- these are resolvable problems. After grants: one from the Natural Heritage fill its objectives, it must address several all, the park wasn't established just Protection Fund and the German main issues, including resolving the for one decade and it has already World Heritage Foundation to develop issue of nature use within the park and proven its right to exist. ecological tourism in the sub-Arctic developing environmental tourism, which means developing the park's infrastructure and creating a visit cen- ter in Syktyvkar, the capital of the Komi Republic, among other activities.

In conclusion, I would like to empha- size the fact that the park's financial problems are certainly important, but not the main issue. It is equally impor- tant that people realize that unique natural complexes belong to all humanity, to both simple people and to those invested with power and authority. No amount of protection and no tranche of funding will yield results, if people on all levels – from the local population to the govern- ments of Komi Republic and Russian Federation – do not realize the impor- tance of protecting the natural her- itage of the Virgin Komi Forests.

These rafters on the Balbano River are among the increasing number of tourists visiting Elena Shubnitsina is the Deputy Yugyd Va National Park each year. Photo by E. Shubnitsina. Director of Yugyd Va National Park.

16 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

Lake Baikal

Inscribed on the World Heritage List: 1996 Criteria for inscription: Natural Criteria (i), (ii), (iii), (iv)* Total area: 8.8 million hectares (encompassing the entire Lake Baikal basin) Protected areas included in the site: 1. Baikalsky Biosphere Zapovednik (165,724 hectares); 2. Barguzinsky Biosphere Zapovednik (374,322 hectares); 3. Baikalo-Lensky Zapovednik (660,000 hectares); 4. Pribaikalsky National Park (418,000 hectares); 5. Zabaikalsky National Park (246,000 hectares); 6. (an uncalculated portion of the park's 1,183,662 hectares); 7. Kabansky Federal Zakaznik (12,100 hectares); 8. Frolikhinsky Federal Zakaznik (109,200 hectares) * For a description of these selection criteria, please see the journal's rear inside cover.

ake Baikal is a lake of superlatives. vides habitat to some LIt is the world's deepest (1,637 of the richest and meters) and oldest (about 25 million most unusual fresh- years) freshwater lake. It contains water fauna in the 23,600 cubic kilometers of freshwater, world. which comprises more than 20% of the world's freshwater supply. The Of the 2,630 plant Lake Baikal basin is located in the cen- and animal species tral part of the Baikal rift zone, which and sub-species is one of the Earth's largest ancient rift found in the lake to systems. Together with its basin, the date, more than 80% lake comprises a very distinctive and cannot be found any- delicate natural ecosystem, one which where else in the also facilitates the self purification world. Few are they in process that produces Bailal’s unbe- Russia who have lievably clear water. never heard of the Baikal omul The lake's basin and the surrounding (Coregonus autum- mountain ecosystems comprise one nalis migratori) or of Siberia's most important natural Baikal sturgeon boundaries, where the borders of (Acipenser baerii various flora and fauna complexes baicalensis). Two come together. Biogeocenosis are unique pelagic Map by M. Dubinin encountered here that are found sculpin species, the nowhere else in the world. Isolated greater and lesser golomyanka dybowskii, respectively) representa- since antiquity, the Baikal basin pro- (Comephorus baicalensis, Comephorus tives of a family endemic to Baikal, are well known among ichthyologists of the world. The lake ecosystem is crowned by a seal that is typically marine in its origins, the Baikal seal (Phoca sibirica).

Conservation Threats: Pollution of Lake Baikal by the Baikalsk Cellulose Kombinat, a paper and pulp mill in Baikalsk, a small city at the southern end of the lake; pollution of Lake Baikal through the Selenga River, Lake Baikal's largest tributary; unregulated construction along the lake's shores, which is made possible by weak legis- A view of Barguzinsky Zapovednik, Russia's first zapovednik, and one of eight federal lation; possible construction of oil and protected areas included in the Lake Baikal World Heritage site. Photo by V. Kantor gas pipelines; and possible mining of (Greenpeace-Russia). minerals in the lake basin.

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 17 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas Oil Pipeline Construction Threatens Lake Baikal

By Mikhail Kreindlin, Andrey Petrov, and Ilya Sharapov

or several years now, Russia's state- blueprint for the Fowned oil pipeline company, Eastern Siberia- Transneft, has been working to devel- Pacific Ocean op a project for a pipeline that would Pipeline System. carry oil from the oil-rich regions of western and eastern Siberia to the But Transneft, as it Pacific coast, for export to countries of turned out, had no the Pacific Rim. According to the pro- intention of adhering ject's first iteration, the pipeline would to this approved plan. run from the city of Angarsk north- Inspections conduct- ward to the Baikal-Amur Mainline ed by the Federal (BAM) Railroad, and then along the Service for Oversight BAM to the port of Nakhodka in the in the Sphere of Russian Far East. In October 2003, Nature Use under extreme public pressure, the (Rosprirodnadzor) in Committee for State Environmental June and September Impact Assessments, within the 2005 confirmed that Ministry of Natural Resources of the Transneft was imple- Russian Federation, rejected the proj- menting work ect. Among other reasons for its deci- according to another sion, the committee cited the fact that plan altogether. The the proposed pipeline would have inspectors confirmed crossed the catchment basin of Lake Transneft was indeed Baikal, a World Heritage site, and conducting surveying neared the lake's shore by as little as 12 activities beyond the kilometers. route approved by the state environ- After this initial rejection, Transneft mental impact assess- prepared a revised version of the ment and within the Near-Baikal segments of pipeline routes proposed by Transneft pipeline project in December 2003. World Heritage Site. during the period 2003-2006. Map by M. Dubinin, using infor- According to this second option, the They corroborated mation provided by Greenpeace-Russia. pipeline would be moved 80-100 kilo- accounts that meters away from Lake Baikal and Transneft subcontractors had clear-cut Rosprirodnadzor representatives in beyond the boundaries of the World a strip of forest along this unsanc- Buryatia, Transneft officials presented Heritage site. Despite numerous viola- tioned pipeline route. After the second technical-economic justification mate- tions in environmental impact assess- investigation in September, Russian rials that supported the construction ment procedure and the public's con- Minister of Natural Resources Yuri of the pipeline along the BAM Railroad cerns about pipeline construction in Trutnev met with Transneft's president, and through the World Heritage site. the mountainous regions north of the Semyon Vainshtok, to discuss the The company had begun presenting lake, the state environmental impact investigation's findings. Trutnev sug- this illegal option as if it were the offi- assessment for the investment justifi- gested that the company consider all cially approved route! In a letter sent cation phase of the project, conducted possible options for laying the pipeline to Andrei Malyshev, the acting head of by the Federal Service for Ecological, route at a safe distance from Baikal, or Rostekhnadzor, Deputy Minister of Technological, and Nuclear Oversight otherwise risk the project losing a Natural Resources Valentin Stepankov (Rostekhnadzor), resulted in a favor- favorable finding from the state envi- wrote that the materials Transneft pre- able finding. This outcome concerned ronmental impact assessment. pared for the technical-economic jus- Russia's environmental community, tification phase did not correspond members of which urged both Nevertheless, Transneft continued its with legislative requirements of the President Putin and Transneft's leader- work. In August 2005, the company Russian Federation. He also noted that ship to re-examine the situation. completed the next phase of project Transneft had illegally altered the Nevertheless, on December 31, 2004, documentation, the technical-eco- approved pipeline route by moving it Russian Prime Minister Mikhail nomic justifications. At public hear- closer to Lake Baikal, which according Fradkov issued a decree approving the ings and in negotiations with to law, would necessitate the favorable

18 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas finding from the state's initial environ- which has 12 levels of intensity. This devoting particular attention to mental impact assessment being over- area is also subject to significant Transneft's construction of the Eastern turned. impacts of erosion, flooding, and cryo- Siberia-Pacific Pipeline System and its genic processes. These factors make threats to the lake. They decided to Again, Transneft ignored all warnings pipeline construction here a risky send a special mission to inspect the and continued its work as if nothing prospect. Any accident caused by a situation on the ground. Thus, in were wrong. When questioned about November 2005, a joint mission from the illegality of the company's activities, UNESCO's World Heritage Centre and its leaders responded that they were the World Conservation Union (IUCN) acting according to direct orders from visited the Baikal Region. the government and the president. The mission's participants became In October 2005, the technical-eco- acquainted with the pipeline situation nomic justifications for this third ver- and listened to various points of view, sion of the pipeline, which threatened including those of independent envi- to bring the oil pipeline within 800 ronmentalists, NGO representatives, meters of Lake Baikal, were submitted and officials. They conducted numer- to Rostekhnadzor to undergo a state ous site visits around the lake, includ- environmental impact assessment. ing to Baikal's northern shore, where Violations in established assessment the pipeline was planned to be laid; procedure were committed from the Baikalo-Lensky Zapovednik; and very beginning. For example, accord- During an inspection carried out in June Pribaikalsky National Park. Their trip ing to Transneft's request, 2005, Greenpeace specialist Mikhail concluded in Moscow, where they met Kreindlin registers the illegal logging car- divided the subject of with leaders from the Ministry of Rostekhnadzor ried out by Transneft's subcontractors the assessment, the Eastern Siberia- working along Lake Baikal's near-shore Natural Resources, Rosprirodnadzor, Pacific Ocean Oil Pipeline System, into area before the proposed route received and Rostekhnadzor. The mission's par- two objects, the pipeline segment official approval. Photo provided by M. ticipants had hoped to meet with from Taishet to Skovorodino and the Kreindlin. Transneft's leadership, but were only oil terminal at Perevoznaya Bay. able to arrange a meeting with a staffer strong earthquake or by exogenic geo- at the company's Severobaikalsk Despite active opposition by logical and other natural processes office, who refused to answer any Transneft, Greenpeace-Russia, the could lead to an ecological catastro- questions and refused to help arrange World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), phe, both along the pipeline route and a meeting with his supervisors in and the Buryat Regional Union for in nearby areas, including Lake Baikal. Moscow. Baikal conducted an independent public environmental impact assess- Yet, the project's developers did not Based on their trip, the UNESCO-IUCN ment of the project. Their conclusions estimate the possible impact that an experts found that the situation on were unanimous: the oil pipeline accidental oil spill might have on Lake Lake Baikal was far from normal, and would be a threat the environment, Baikal's unique ecosystems and its key decided that, if the pipeline were run and the proposed route was nothing component, the extensive wetlands of along the lake's shores, they would short of bewildering, given the other the combined deltas of the Upper recommend that the World Heritage possible options in the Baikal region. Angara and Kichera Rivers. Nor did Committee place Lake Baikal on the they present convincing evidence that List of World Heritage in Danger. They According to the route proposed by they would ensure the ecological safe- further stated that if Russian authori- Transneft, 113 kilometers of the ty of proposed activities for the public, ties continued to disregard the pipeline would run through the Lake for the environment, and above all, for Committee's requirements concerning Baikal World Heritage site. In addi- Lake Baikal's unique ecosystems. the lake's conservation, then Lake tion, the proposed pipeline route Analysis of the project shows that if Baikal would be excluded from the would run through the Baikal Rift the proposed pipeline were to be built, UNESCO World Heritage List altogeth- zone, where it would cross several Lake Baikal – at the very minimum, its er. There have been no such prece- high mountain ridges and one of northernmost part – could be irre- dents in the world, and for Russia, this Russia's most seismically active territo- versibly harmed. would be a great embarrassment. ries. According to data gathered by the Institute of the Earth's Crust, which is This grim possibility evoked much After the UNESCO-IUCN mission, the part of the Siberian Branch of the concern from the UNESCO World battle for Baikal entered a decisive Russian Academy of Sciences, earth- Heritage Committee. Participants in phase. Famous Russian actors and quakes in individual parts of this the 29th session of the UNESCO World musicians, deputies to the , region can reach 10-11 points on the Heritage Committee, which took place and the public at large appealed to Medvedev-Sponheuer-Karnik, or MSK- in Durban, South Africa, actively dis- President Putin with their concerns 64, macroseismic intensity scale, cussed Baikal's conservation status, about the pipeline project's possible

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 19 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

recommended that in favor of the permissibility of con- the project be revised struction on Baikal's shore, and by to include alternative March 3, the experts' positive finding options for running was approved by Rostekhnadzor. the pipeline beyond Lake Baikal's catch- This development launched a wave of ment basin. protest against the construction of the pipeline in such close proximity to Despite the expert Lake Baikal. Thousands of privates cit- committee's com- izens participated in demonstrations pelling conclusions, and rallies held in cities across Russia: the head of Irkutsk, Ulan-Ude, Moscow, Rostekhnadzor, Novosibirsk, Rostov-on-Don, Omsk, Konstantin Angarsk, Severobaikalsk, Kazan, and Pulikovsky, did not Cheboksari. In the Baikal region, the ratify the group's neg- Governor and Legislative Assembly of ative findings issued Irkutsk Oblast came out against the On April 21, 2006, hundreds of demonstrators turned out in on January 24. Instead, pipeline's construction, as did the Moscow to protest the Transneft pipeline route. Photo by A. Troitsky. in violation of both People's Khural of Buryaita. The issue effects on Lake Baikal. Numerous aca- the federal law “On environmental also evoked great concern from the demics from the Russian Academy of impact assessment” and state environ- UNESCO World Heritage Committee Sciences appealed to the head of mental impact assessment procedures, and on March 10, 2006, the Rostekhnadzor. They noted that the he prolonged the federal environmen- Committee's Chairperson Ina pipeline's route in the Baikal region tal impact assessment process by thirty Marcˆiulonyteˆ sent a letter to Russian could be changed and that it was also days and added 34 new experts to the President Vladimir Putin expressing possible – and safer – to lay the committee. A significant portion of concern regarding the approval of the pipeline along the territory of Yakutia, the new committee members had proposed routing of the pipeline which would circumvent seismologi- absolutely no prior experience in oil through the Lake Baikal World cally active regions north of Baikal and pipeline transport and some of them Heritage site. In her appeal, she eliminate the threat of polluting Baikal had previously spoken out in favor of explained that the Committee may with oil. On December 24, 2005, the pipeline construction, meaning decide to inscribe the site on the List UNESCO's Director-General, Koichiro that they were neither independent of World Heritage in Danger at its next Matsuura, appealed to Russian Prime nor objective. The work of the new session and also urged the re-examina- Minster Mikhail Fradkov with the committee was also organized in such tion of the proposed routing. request that plans to construct the a way that many of the experts were pipeline through the World Heritage neither given the opportunity to famil- Some of the possible consequences of site be abandoned. iarize themselves with materials relat- pipeline construction in the Lake ed to the pipeline construction, nor Baikal watershed are grave indeed. By the third week of January, it were they informed of working group Given the high seismology of the became clear that these efforts were sessions. In addition, representatives region and the real danger of terrorist not in vain. The members of the of some NGOs were denied access to acts targeting the pipeline, the likeli- expert committee conducting the sessions, and among those who did hood of natural or human-caused state environmental impact assess- attend, many were not allowed to accidents on the pipeline is quite high. ment of the technical-economic justi- voice their opinions. On March 1, As a result of such an accident, a sig- fications for the first part of Transneft's 2006, the majority of experts came out nificant quantity of oil would end up Eastern Siberia-Pacific Ocean Pipeline System issued their findings. They found that the submitted materials did Greenpeace-Russia and World Heritage not fully coincide with the Russian In the mid-1990s, Greenpeace-Russia became the first nature conservation Federation's environmental protection organization in that country to initiate work within the framework of the legislation and norms. They conclud- UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of World Cultural and ed that construction according to the Natural Heritage. In 1994, the organization concluded an agreement with the proposed plan would be unacceptable, Russian Federation's Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural citing the fact that it presented great Resources to conduct work through the year 2000 to inscribe Russian natural potential harm to the local population territories on the list. Since then, the organization has continued its work (in the event of a spill or accident) and both to prepare new World Heritage nominations for Russia's most valuable to the lake, which they specifically natural territories as well as to ensure constant control over the state of con- identified as a World Heritage Site pro- servation of protected natural territories already inscribed on the List. tected by Russian legislation and the Information provided by Greenpeace-Russia. UNESCO Convention. Finally, they

20 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas in Lake Baikal, which would irrepara- World Heritage site would inevitably Basin and World Heritage site, and bly harm the entire ecosystem of the lead to the Lake Baikal site being instead begin developing another northern part of the lake and have a added to the World Heritage in route option, specifically, that pro- catastrophic effect on the lives of peo- Danger List. Such a development posed by the Siberian Branch of the ple living in the region. With the start would negatively affect Russia's inter- Russian Academy of Science to run of pipeline construction in the Baikal national reputation, creating an image the pipeline through Yakutia, well to region, the anti-pipeline protest of it as a country that would knowing- the north of Lake Baikal. movement would further grow and ly violate its international obligations; spread from the immediate Baikal this would be particularly palpable Mikhail Kreindlin is the Legal Expert region (Irkutsk Oblast and the during Russia's chairmanship of the for Greenpeace-Russia's Forest Republic of Buryatia) to other parts of “Group of Eight” during 2006. For Program. Andrey Petrov, PhD, is Siberia and across Russia, which these reasons, it is imperative that Greenpeace-Russia's World Heritage would lead to increased social ten- Transneft abandon its plans to build Project Coordinator. Ilya Sharapov is sions and conflict. Finally, pipeline the “Eastern Siberia-Pacific Ocean” the Assistant Coordinator of construction on the territory of the pipeline through the Lake Baikal Greenpeace-Russia's Baikal Program.

Late Breaking Update: Putin Insists that the Pipeline Route be Moved On April 26, at a conference on the socio-economic devel- opment of regions in Russia's Siberian Federal Okrug, Russian President Vladimir Putin made a clear and decisive announcement concerning the hotly debated route of Transneft's Eastern Siberia-Pacific Ocean Pipeline, which up until that time threatened to approach Lake Baikal by as little as 800 meters. Before conference participants, who included leaders of fifteen Siberian regions, ministers rep- resenting six Russian ministries, representatives of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and the president of Transneft, Semyon Vainshtok, President Putin insisted that the pipeline be moved at least 40 kilometers to the north, beyond the Lake Baikal watershed. He further instructed that construction on the pipeline begin from two sides, Participants in a demonstration held in Moscow on April 21, and that all necessary documentation concerning the 2006, hold a banner that reads, “Putin, save Baikal!” pipeline's route around Lake Baikal should be prepared by Photo by A. Troitsky. the time construction reaches the points where the lake would need to be circumvented. need to be laying commercial pipeline from the deposits anyway and participation in the Transneft project would Russian conservation organizations have welcomed this ultimately decrease their pipeline construction and subse- decision as a victory for both the environment and for civil quent maintenance costs. In addition, the development of society. At the same time, however, they remain wary of the this route would help develop the economically underde- company's intentions to follow through on the President's veloped southern regions of Yakutia. If a planned oil pro- orders after the public outcry dies down in the future, and cessing plant is con- will vigilantly follow the situation to ensure that plans to structed in the region, move the pipeline beyond the Baikal watershed are real- Yakutia will be able to “If there is even just a very ized. provide its own fuel minute, the smallest risk of and not be reliant polluting Baikal, then we In the future, project planners will begin examining alter- upon delivery from the must think of future genera- native pipeline routes. Enjoying the support of leaders in south, which is cur- tions and do everything not Irkutsk Oblast and the Republic of Yakutia, scientists, and rently financed from just to minimize this danger, environmental organizations is the so-called “Yakutsky” federal and regional but to eliminate it. And this option. This route, one of two proposed by the Siberian budgets; this would means that the pipeline sys- Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, would run result in significant tem that we're talking about along the Lena River circumventing the Lake Baikal Rift savings for both the must go beyond the northern Zone. It would also offer maximum proximity to large east- federal and regional border of Lake Baikal's ern Siberian oil deposits. This proximity would increase the governments. watershed.” value of the deposits and the oil extraction companies Russian President Vladimir working them might even consider participating financially Text prepared by Putin, April 26, 2006 in the construction of the arterial pipeline since they would RCN Editors.

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 21 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

Volcanoes of Kamchatka

Inscribed on the World Heritage List: 1996, extended in 2001 Criteria for inscription: Natural Criteria (i), (ii), (iii) in 1996; Natural criterion (iv) in 2001* Total area: 3.7 million hectares Protected areas comprising the site: 1. Kronotsky Biosphere Zapovednik (1,007,134 hectares); 2-3. Yuzhno- Kamchatsky Federal Zakaznik and Yuzhno-Kamchatsky Nature Park (800,000 hectares); 4. Bystrinsky Nature Park (1,250,000 hectares); 5. Nalychevo Nature Park (265,000 hectares); 6. Kluchevskoi Nature Park (376,000 hectares) * For a description of these selection criteria, please see the journal's rear inside cover.

he Volcanoes of Kamchatka World These rare geological objects are THeritage site consists of six protect- accompanied by unique biological val- ed nature areas that together offer the ues. Of Kamchatka's 1,168 total plant fullest possible conception of the species, 10% may be found in this diverse volcanic activity in the region. region only. Approximately half of the Thirty active and approximately 300 world's population of Steller's sea eagle extinct volcanoes are concentrated (Haliaeetus pelagicus) inhabits the here on the Peninsula, as are over 150 peninsula, as do over 10,000 brown thermal and mineral springs. Dozens of bears – the Kamchatka subspecies geysers, hot springs, fumaroles, water- (Ursus arctos beringianus) is one of falls, sharp peaks of mountain ridges, the world's largest bears – bighorn wells, turquoise lakes, and carpets sheep (Ovis Canadensis), wild of multi-colored algae give the famous (Rangifer tarandus), sea lions Valley of Geysers its fairy tale appear- (Eumetopias jubatus), and sea otters ance. The Uzon Caldera is one of the (Enhydra lutris). peninsula's oldest and most interesting geological phenomena. The caldera is a The region provides important spawn- huge depression with 200-800 meter- ing habitat for Pacific salmon high walls and a total area of 100 (Oncorhynchus sp.). From summer square kilometers. A very large through until early winter, visitors to hydrothermal system has formed in the the peninsula can observe one of caldera and mineral and ore formation nature's unique phenomena: the processes may be observed here. migration of millions of salmon mak-

Volcanoes of Kamchatka World Heritage Site. Map by M. Dubinin.

ing their way upstream to their spawn- ing sites.

Thousands of lakes and whole river systems nearly undisturbed by human activities – among the world's last corners of wild nature – are situated within the protected nature areas inscribed on the World Heritage List.

Conservation Threats: Poaching of salmon resources; and possible pollution from gold mining carried Bezymyannaya Sopka Volcano in Klyuchevskoi Nature Park is one of 30 active volcanoes on out on territories neighboring the the Kamchatka Peninsula. Photo by Y. Demyanchuk. World Heritage site.

22 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas Klyuchevskoi Nature Park Establishes International Contacts, Welcomes International Guests

By Anatoly Kargopoltsev Klyuchevskoi Nature Park at a Glance

Klyuchevskoi Nature Park occupies 376,000 hectares in the northeastern part of the Kamchatka Peninsula. Twelve volcanoes are compactly located on the park's territory, as are nearly 400 cinder cones, 47 glaciers, hundreds of lava flows, and vast lava plateaus formed here by prolonged eruptions. This is the most power- ful volcanic massif on the Kamchatka Peninsula and across the Russian Federation as a whole. The volca- noes range in age from 7,000-50,000 years. No less than two eruptions occur annually, the duration of which ranges from several days to several months. The tallest volcano in Eurasia, “Klyuchevskoi” (4,750 meters), emits an average of up to 55 million tons of basalt material from depths of up to 30 kilometers.

In 1975, in the region of Tolbachik Volcano, the Great Tolbachik Fissure Eruption took place. In the total volume of igneous material released (more than 2 Klyuchevskaya Sopka Volcano, the highest volcano on Kamchatka cubic kilometers) and the extent of its impact on the Peninsula and also the highest active volcano in Eurasia, rises above the natural environment, it ranks as one of our planet's six village of Klyuchi. Photo by R. Hooper. most powerful fissure eruptions. The eruption site presently serves as a natural laboratory for the synthe- sis of new materials and for observing self-regenera- n 1995, three regional nature The group's recommendations tion processes of flora and fauna. In the last 30 years, Iparks were established on positively influenced local more than 25 previously unknown minerals have the Kamchatka Peninsula: decision makers on the been discovered here. Nalychevo, Bystrinsky, and ground, and in 1999, upon the Yuzhno-Kamchatsky Nature initiative of the head of the The park is surrounded by a network of picturesque Parks. In 1996, all three were Directorate of Kamchatka river valleys and lakes. Wild ducks, gesse, swans, and inscribed on the UNESCO Nature Parks and the staff of Steller's sea eagles (Haliaeetus pelagicus) nest here. World Heritage List as part of the Institute of Volcanology The peninsula's largest river, the Kamchatka River, the Volcanoes of Kamchatka (Far Eastern Division, USSR flows from the southwest to the northeast, and then nomination. Representatives Academy of Science), the eastward along the park's borders. The villages of Lazo, of the first international nature Governor of Kamchatka issued Kozyrevsk, and Klyuchi, which are home to loggers, conservation committees that a resolution creating a new fishermen, and hunters, are located along its banks. visited the site supported its nature park, “Klyuchevskoi.” Indigenous peoples of Kamchatka - the Itelmen and inscription on the List, but Less than two years later, in Kamchadal – inhabit the area. were surprised to learn that December 2001, the UNESCO Kamchatka's most active group World Heritage site Volcanoes The presence of fir, broadleaf, and birch forests; of volcanoes was not included of Kamchatka was expanded alpine meadows; mountain tundra; and uplands cre- as part of the nomination. to include one more territory, ates favorable conditions for the region's diverse flora They recommended that a sec- Klyuchevskoi Nature Park. and fauna. Close to 400 plant species, including 17 ond nomination including that are listed in the Red Data Book of the Kamchatka's Kluchevskaya Due to both the park's remote- Kamchatka Oblast, grow here. Bighorn sheep (Ovis Volcanic Group, world- ness and the financial prob- canadensis), black-capped marmot (Marmota renowned for its unique lunar lems facing the region, local camtschatica), rock capercaillie (Tetrao parvirostris), landscapes and for the massive authorities devoted little atten- (Gulo gulo), lynx (Felis lynx), Kamchatka eruption, in 1975, of the tion and funding to the park brown bear (Ursus arctos), and moose (Alces alces) Tolbachik Volcano, be submit- until 2003, when the first steps also inhabit the park. ted. were made to catalyze activi-

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 23 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas ties in Klyuchevskoi Nature Park. Jasper National Park, strongly resem- There, I saw what we should be striv- Despite the fact that just two people bles Klyuchevskoi Nature Park. Both ing for in our Russian parks; I also staff the park, they were able, in three are alpine parks with glaciers, peaks observed what value wild nature, years' time, to establish collaboration receding into the sky, alpine tundra, untouched by civilization, might pres- with all organizations using the park's and alpine meadows. Climactic condi- ent for people. Such territories are grounds, including with tour firms and tions are also analogous. Jasper now relatively few in Germany, but scientific-research institutes carrying National Park, however, lacks active opportunities to preserve extensive out their activities in the park. They volcanism, and Ron was particularly areas of pristine wilderness still exist in also constructed hiking trails and, for interested in this aspect of our park. Russia. the first time, conducted research on Brigitte has visited many World zoning the park's territory. They con- Natural Heritage sites and is well At the seminar, I made many new ducted outreach work with local com- familiar with the challenges that arise friends with like-minded Germans. I munities and also established contacts in implementing plans for their devel- was amazed by their readiness to pro- with international nature conservation opment; she also knows what missteps vide real assistance to our park. In just organizations. These international are commonly made and how to cor- a matter of days, the Bremen-based organizations have shared their expe- rect them. private Manfred-Hermsen-Stiftung rience and provided assistance that Foundation processed a grant that was very important in implementing Ron, Brigitte, and I spoke at length allowed us to purchase three power and improving the effectiveness of during the seminar and, with the assis- scythes. The foundation acquired the planned activities. tance of Anastasia Kurbatova and power scythes and delivered them to Aleksei Butorin from the Russian us at the airport just before our flight The annual international seminars Natural Heritage Protection Fund, for- to Moscow. I would never have held in Russia for the directors of mulated a plan: to organize a joint thought such efficiency possible, not World Heritage sites, which were expedition through Klyuchevskoi even in my wildest dreams! By the organized by the Russia Natural Nature Park. The media attention that beginning of the tourist season, we Heritage Protection Fund, with assis- such an expedition would attract, as were using them to clear brush from tance from Germany's Federal Agency well as the meetings that expedition roads and tourist trails. And all this for Nature Conservation, have played a members would hold with local com- was made possible thanks to the foun- significant role in establishing these munity members, would raise aware- dation representative, Stephanie international contacts for ness about the park among a broader Hermsen, and the WWF translator, Klyuchevskoi Nature Park. The train- circle of conservationists and tourists, Elena Kozlova. After this, I understood ing seminars conducted on both in Russia and abroad. Local com- that our expedition plan was realistic. Kamchatka as part of the UNDP/GEF munities on Kamchatka would also While we were still in Germany, Elena project have been similarly important. develop an increased sense of pride in Kolb helped me to get in touch with Experts from World Wide Fund for and responsibility for their region, a Brigitte by phone and we agreed on Nature (WWF) offices in Germany, unique territory of international signif- our next steps. Canada, the US, and Russia have par- icance that attracts visitors from all ticipated in the seminars and high- around the world. The expedition Finally, on August 24, 2005, after much lighted the global importance of envi- would also demonstrate to the oblast planning, we launched our expedition ronmental protection and biodiversity government that international interest to Klyuchevskoi Park. We began in conservation. in the park remains high and that Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, to where working to improve its territory would Ron and Brigitte had flown. From At the directors' seminar held at help preserve its natural landscapes, there, we drove for 650 kilometers to Kurshskaya Kosa National Park in and flora and fauna, as well as facili- the village of Klyuchi, where the 2004, I was fortunate to make the tate funding for its long-term mainte- Institute of Volcanology and acquaintance of many leaders of spe- nance. Seismology's Kamchatka Volcano cially protected nature areas from Station has been located since 1935. other countries. Among them were We corresponded extensively about Our guests learned that, for seventy Ron Hooper, the director of Jasper the trip over the next two years. In years now, intensive scientific research National Park in Canada, which is one May 2005, upon the initiative of Elena work has been carried out on the of four national parks that comprise Kolb and Viktor Nikiforov, leaders at park's territory not only by Russian the Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks WWF Germany and WWF Russia, volcanologists, but also by specialists World Heritage site; and Brigitte respectively, a large group of staff from in other Earth Science fields from dif- Mayerhofer, a consultant specializing specially protected nature areas on ferent countries of the world. in UNESCO World Natural Heritage Kamchatka were invited to Germany Scientists from these countries come and a representative of the German to participate in a seminar on the here every year with hope and fre- World Heritage Fund. Ron has much issues facing their protected areas. The quently leave with discoveries. experience organizing several national seminar offered us the rare opportuni- parks in Canada. Furthermore, the ty to become acquainted with the The following day, we embarked on park of which he is now director, activities of Germany's national parks. what would be twelve-day-long

24 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

increasing levels of poaching in the region.

After our expedition, our guests met with the heads of Kamchatka Oblast's Directorate of Natural Resources. They spoke about their impressions of the park and recommended subsequent steps to implement priority activities. In closing they said, “We feel privileged to have had the opportunity to visit this territory. Klyuchevskoi Park is worthy of its status as a World Heritage site. This territory is unusually valuable for Kamchatka, for Russia, and for the entire world.”

I believe that our goals for the expedi- Led by Klyuchevskoi Nature Park Director Anatoly Kargopoltsev, expedition members hiked tion were realized. We found real sup- to the crater of Bezymyannaya Sopka Volcano. Photo provided by B. Mayerhofer. port for our efforts to develop the park, and we found that support among spe- journey across Klyuchevskoi Park. We mot (Marmota sibirica), and observed cialists and practitioners, who were began at the Apakhonchich black-capped marmot (Marmota able to not only confirm the territory's Seismology Station, and continued to camtschatica) and brown bears (Ursus value, but also provide practical assis- the northeastern slope of arctos). We were alarmed by the tance in developing management Klyuchevskaya Sopka Volcano, and increase of household wastes left plans in the future. And our collabora- then on to Bezymyannaya Sopka behind by park visitors, as well as by tion with them continues. Upon the Volcano. From there, we proceeded to the lack of necessary infrastructure, recommendation of expedition partic- the central part of the park, to the equipment, and means of communica- ipants, we submitted grant proposals mountainous lava plateau of the tion to provide for safe tourism and to the German World Heritage Fund, as Studennaya River, and then on to nature protection in the park. We met well as to WWF Russia and WWF Tolbachik Volcano, and finally to the with representatives of the indigenous Germany. In 2006, we plan to imple- famous cone of the Great Tolbachik communities, accompanied them on ment a joint program to research Fissure Eruption. This eruption, which their fishing trips, ate marvelous meals Yuzhno-Kamchatsky Nature Park, took place in 1975, destroyed all sur- of salmon, and were concerned by the another component of the Volcanoes rounding vegetation and entirely of Kamchatka World Natural Heritage changed the landscape's appearance. site. Since the expedition, there has Thirty years after the eruption, life at also been increasing support for our the site is beginning to be restored; at work among local decision makers: the the same time, lunar craters of these oblast budget for the year 2006 includ- cones retain temperatures of up to ed a new line for Klyuchevskoi Park 200-400o Celsius in some places. and additional funds from the state program to support specially protected During our hike, under a rainbow's arc, nature areas were also allocated. we made a forced crossing of a deep canyon of the Sukhaya Khapitsa River. I am confident that, in the near future, Sinking right into the muck, we Kamchatka will become an example crossed a muddy stream at the base of for Russia of how to treat nature with Bezymyannyi Volcano, where we care. And this is being made possible enjoyed an encounter with tourists thanks to participation in the process from Germany, France, the US, by committed people like the two Sweden, and Russia. We ascended the Elenas, Anastasia and Aleksei, Viktor very active crater of the and Stephanie, as well as Brigitte and Bezymyannaya Sopka Volcano, observ- Ron, who came to help us using their ing the growth of its new dome. We own funds and during their vacation descended beneath the clouds and time. A great big thanks to them all for rose above them, braving foul weather Expedition members Ron Hooper and this support. to ascend the crater of the Plosky Brigitte Mayerhofer stop to rest at an over- Tolbachik Volcano. We contemplated look above the Sukhaya Khapitsa River. Anatoly Kargopoltsev is the Director a tranquil colony of Mongolian mar- Photo provided by B. Mayerhofer. of Klyuchevskoi Nature Park.

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 25 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

Golden Mountains of Altai

Inscribed on the World Heritage List: 1998 Criteria for inscription: Natural Criterion (iv)* Total area: 1.64 million hectares Protected areas comprising the site: 1. Altaisky Biosphere Zapovednik (881,238 hectares); 2. Katunsky Biosphere Zapovednik (150,079 hectares); 3. Belukha Mountain Nature Park (262,800 hectares); 4. Ukok Plateau Quiet Zone Nature Park (252,904 hectares); 5. Teletskoye Lake (93,753 hectares) * For a description of these selection criteria, please see the journal's rear inside cover.

ocated at the junction of Central tion in the Altai LAsia and Siberia, in Russia's moun- region of endem- tainous Altai region, the Golden ic species that Mountains of Altai World Heritage site often have limit- is distinguished by its unique nature. ed habitats. Close There are few places in the world to 60 mammal where one encounters such contrast- species, 11 ing combinations of various land- amphibian and scapes over such a small area. reptile species, and 20 fish The region's flora and fauna are species inhabit diverse and, to a great extent, unique. the area. Among Altai pine forests – forests of Siberian rare mammal pine (Pinus sibirica) that are the species, the snow lifeblood and nourishment for numer- leopard (Uncia ous animal species – are still preserved uncia) is worthy in the Teletskoye Lake basin. Siberia's of particular largest sub-alpine and alpine meadows attention. are also found here. Also unique in the southern Altai region is the rich com- The region's geo- bination of vegetation types; here, logical history is semi-deserts, steppes, and tundra also unique. It is interact closely with one another. “written” in the region's uncom- The diversity of landscapes has mon forms of Golden Mountains of Altai World Heritage site. Map by M. Dubinin. enabled the origination and preserva- relief, for exam-

ple, in the high the Katun and Chulyshman Rivers, terraces of the present as deep, narrow canyons. The Katun River, Chulyshman River Valley is very pictur- which amaze esque and is adorned by numerous with their waterfalls in the river's lateral tributar- grandeur, or in ies. Altai's true gem is Teletskoye Lake. Mount Belukha, Because of its clear water, the majestic which is crowned mountains framing it and rich wildlife, with glaciers and people call the lake “Little Baikal.” snowfields and rises almost 1,000 Conservation Threats: Jettisoned meters above lower, sub-orbital stages of booster nearby moun- rockets launched from Baikonur tains ranges. Cosmodrome falling on the territory of Altaisky Zapovednik; poaching; and River valleys in proposed construction of roads and Peaking at 4,506 meters, Mount Belukha is Siberia's tallest mountain. the Altai region, pipelines to China through the Ukok Photo by A. Butorin. foremost those of Pleateau.

26 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas Examining Alternative Development Scenarios for the Ukok Plateau

By Mikhail Shishin

The near-untouched Ukok Plateau is one of the natural objects comprising the Golden Mountains of Altai World Heritage site. Photo by V. Kantor (Greenpeace-Russia).

articipants in the twenty-second People in countries across the region byists singing the praises of the multi- Psession of the World Heritage have periodically raised the issue of corridor project (this is how people Committee held in Kyoto, Japan, in using the plateau for this purpose. are referring to the road and gas 1998 adopted a decision that was Among the most active advocates of pipeline together) has become more very important for the Altai doing so are scientific and political cir- harmonious. Mountain Region. They chose to cles in China's Xinjiang Uygur inscribe five of the region's natural Autonomous Region, the largest Initiators of the project have made two territories – Altaisky and Katunsky province in northwestern China. They primary arguments in favor of con- Zapovedniks, Lake Teletskoye, the are persistently advancing a proposal structing the transportation corridor. Mt. Belukha Mountain Massif, and to construct a transportation corridor, The first argument is geopolitical in the Ukok Plateau – on the UNESCO which would include a road and gas nature and concerns the importance of World Natural Heritage List. Almost pipeline, from western Siberia, Russia developing international rela- simultaneously with the territories' through the Ukok Plateau, and on to tions with China and other Asian coun- acquisition of this prestigious inter- China. This idea has found support tries. Russia and China have actively national status, a real threat to one of among a number of scientists in the participated in integration processes them emerged. This was the propos- Siberian Branch of the Russian under the Shanghai Cooperation al of a large-scale project to trans- Academy of Sciences, among bureau- Organization, as well as in other multi- form the Ukok Plateau, located at the crats, and, of course, among road con- lateral international and bilateral proj- borders of Mongolia, Kazakhstan, struction firms hungry for a lucrative ects, and this work has brought real China, and Russia, into a transporta- order from the government. Recently, benefit to the people of Russia and tion corridor. the chorus of Russian and Chinese lob- China. International relations experts

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 27 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

Russian territory, and view it as a con- venient means by which for the Chinese to resolve demographic, pub- lic health, and possibly, political ten- sions in the northwestern region of China. Finally, if construction on the transportation corridor were begun, we might expect a visit to the Altai region by a UNESCO commission exploring the possibility of the Altai site being given “World Heritage in Danger” status. This would seriously tarnish the reputation of both the region and Russia as whole, which, of course, is extremely undesirable.

The obvious shortcomings of con- structing a direct road from Russia to China through the Ukok Plateau do not mean that it is not worth develop- The Ukok Plateau provides habitat for the very rare snow leopard (Unica unica); road or ing collaboration with China or build- pipeline construction through the area could threaten the great cat's very existence there. ing roads in the region in general. The Photo by V. Trigubovich. most rational and mutually-beneficial resolution to the Altai Region's trans- portation problem is to rebuild and and politicians have quite fairly noted the Ukok Plateau poses a number of further develop the Chuisky Tract, that this changing relationship signals threats. The construction of the road which extends for 600 kilometers the creation of a multi-polar, rather and gas pipeline would, of course, from the city of Biisk in Altaisky Krai than mono-polar, world order. And as damage the plateau's unique natural to the Mongolian border. A main a region that links four countries, Altai complexes. The Ukok Plateau provides transportation artery of the Altai plays a very important role in this new habitat to numerous rare plant and Mountain Region, the tract has played world order. animal species. Its role in stabilizing a colossal role in strengthening the water and air quality in southwest- Russia's position in the Central Asian The second argument in favor of con- ern Siberia is also very important to region, as well as in its relations with structing the transportation corridor is each country in the region. A signifi- Mongolia and China. an economic one. Construction of a cant portion of the local population of road across the Ukok Plateau would the Altai Republic perceives the road's Developing a regional transport net- facilitate increased trade development construction as a violation of their work on the foundation of the between China and southern Siberia. native lands and their ancestor's Chuisky Tract would entail first direct- However, because of Russia's colonial graves. Indeed, the Ukok Plateau pre- ly linking it to Mongolia's “Millennium export structure to China, trade along serves invaluable cultural landscapes Road,” (a 2,000 kilometer-long road this road would be most profitable for of great interest to people the world envisioned to cross the country longi- China. More than sixty percent of over. In the 1990s, for instance, arche- tudinally) that is, directly linking it Russia's exports to China are nonre- ologists from Novosibirsk found with Mongolia right up to the Khingan newable and renewable natural unique burial mounds (called kurgan Ridge. Access to the territory of resources and products of their primary in Russian) here dating back to the Chinese Altai could then be gained processing. This means that Russia Scythian Era. The most widely known through the far western Mongolian would be exporting strategic resources and highly prized find from the exca- province of Bayan-Ulgi, located 60 along the transportation corridor such vation was the “Ukok Princess,” the kilometers from the Mongolian- as lithium, vanadium, and molybde- mummified, tattooed body of a young Russian border-crossing at Tashant, num; timber; oil; and gas. In return, woman who had lived about 2,500 and the Dayan-Nur crossing through Russia imports low-quality Chinese years ago. the Mongolian Altai Ridge. The dis- consumer goods and agricultural prod- tance from Bayan-Ulgi Province to the ucts, which are less expensive than the Among other concerns about the con- Chinese border is just a little over 100 Siberian equivalent due to favorable cli- struction of a road through Ukok is kilometers. The use of an already exist- matic conditions and cheap labor in the fact that it would serve as a direct ing transportation crossing between Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. channel by which legal and illegal western Mongolia and China near the Chinese immigrants could enter Bulgan River is also possible. However, the potential construction Russia. Many Russians are concerned Additionally, some data suggest that of a transportation corridor through by potential Chinese expansion into China is already building a similar

28 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas highway. Of course, this option for developing a road network in the region should undergo environmental and other impact assessments in each country, although many experts believe that the public, the scientific community, and many influential politicians in the region would most likely accept this option.

And as for the Ukok Plateau? Experts support two general strategies for the region's development in the future. This first involves the production of ecologically clean products and the sustainable use of medicinal plant resources. The second strategy is to develop ecological tourism in the region of the plateau. The decision of the government of the Altai Republic in June 2005 to create a nature park on the plateau, the “Ukok Plateau Quite Zone” Nature Park, is a step for- In addition to its outstanding natural features, the Ukok Plateau also preserves cultural and ward in this process. The park will historic values. Here, a ring of stones marks an ancient burial site on the plateau. include special zones for educational Photo by V. Kantor (Greenpeace-Russia). and ecological tourism in addition to areas where these activities will be for- bidden. are also in the process of preparing ation of international tourism routes. UNESCO World Heritage nomina- It would also bring the people of the The region already draws hundreds of tions, and scientists from China's four countries significantly closer people from across the Altai Republic, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region and help save the Ukok Plateau's who come for curative treatments in have recently expressed great inter- landscapes, natural complexes, and the thermal springs located near the est in nominating the “Kanas” cultural treasures for current and plateau. There is growing interest in Nature Park to the UNESCO World future generations. the plateau elsewhere in Russia, and in Heritage List. With the inscription of China and Mongolia. Kanas Nature these sites on the list, a truly unique Mikhail Shishin is the Director of the Park, which is adjacent to the Ukok international complex would be cre- Altai 21st Century Foundation, a non- Plateau on the Chinese side, is visited ated, which would be very attractive governmental organization based in by several hundred thousand tourists a to tourists and encourage the cre- the city of Barnaul in Altai Krai. year and is functioning effectively. The number of tourists visiting from the Mongolian side of Ukok has sharply Conservation Alert! increased as well. On March 21, 2006, during an official visit to China, Russian President Considering its unique biological Vladimir Putin issued a statement about an agreement reached with the diversity, its historical and cultural Chinese concerning the delivery of Russian natural gas to China. According to significance, and its relatively unde- the memorandum signed by Russia's gas monopoly, Gazprom, and the China veloped state, one may predict National Petroleum Corporation, Russia has committed to export up to 80 bil- increasing international interest in lion cubic meters of natural gas to China annually, beginning in 2011. The the Ukok Plateau and the Altai natural gas will be delivered along two routes, one from western Siberia and Region as a whole. The inscription of one from eastern Siberia. While discussing the memorandum with journalists the plateau and other nearby sites on in Beijing, President Putin, ostensibly comparing the two routes, noted that the UNESCO World Heritage List has delivery from western Siberia would be “easier to implement” and “faster.” In already amplified this interest, as has this regard, he spoke of plans to construct a new pipeline system, preliminarily the inclusion of the Altai Sayan called “Altai,” that would cross the western portion of the Russian-Chinese Region on the World Wildlife Fund's border. Construction along this area might cause irreversible harm to the list of 200 territories most important region's natural and cultural complexes, including those of the Ukok Plateau. for biodiversity conservation. Adjacent specially protected nature Text prepared by RCN Editors. areas in Mongolia and Kazakhstan

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 29 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

Western Caucasus

Inscribed on the World Heritage List: 1999 Criteria for inscription: Natural Criteria (ii), (iv)* Total area: 300,000 hectares Protected areas comprising the site: 1. Kavkazsky Biosphere Zapovednik and Buffer Zone (288,200 hectares); 2. Bolshoi Tkhach Nature Park (3,700 hectares); 3. Headwaters of the Pshekha and Pshekhashkha Rivers Nature Monument (5,776 hectares); 4. Headwaters of the Tsitsa River Nature Monument (1,913 hectares); 5. Buinyi Ridge Nature Monument (1,480 hectares) * For a description of these selection criteria, please see the journal's rear inside cover.

n the diversity of its flora and fauna, mountain systems Iand in the state of their conserva- is significantly less tion, the western part of the Greater rich in comparison. Caucasus Range has no equal - not only in the Caucasus region, but also Ancient and con- among other mountainous areas in temporary alpine Europe and western Asia. A great num- glaciers have ber of rare, endemic, and relict plant played a large role and animal species that are threatened in forming the ter- with extinction are concentrated on rain of the Western the site's territory. It is especially Caucasus. Glacial important for its preservation of little- troughs, karst lakes, disturbed habitat of highly vulnerable and moraines are large mammal species such as moun- widely distributed tain bison (Bison bonasus montanus), here. In the lime- Caucasian red deer (Cervus elaphus stone massifs in the caucasicus), West Caucasian tur northern part of (Capra caucasica), Caucasian chamois the territory, (Rupicapra rupicapra caucasica), a numerous caves Caucasian sub-species of brown bear and cavities – (Ursus arctos), and (Canis lupus). including Russia's longest (more than The Western Caucasus is distinguished 15 kilometers) and by the exceptional species richness of deepest (more than its flora and fauna. Nine hundred and 1,600 meters) cave Western Caucasus World Heritage site. sixty-seven vascular plant species – form complex subterranean systems Map by M. Dubinin. grow in just the high mountain zone. with rivers, lakes, and waterfalls. The high mountain flora of other On rocky out- The territory of the Western Caucasus croppings of vari- site is abundant in picturesque objects: ous age and com- mighty waterfalls; jagged mountain position, very peaks rising up to 3,360 meters in interesting rem- height; turbulent clear water mountain nants of extinct streams; crystal clear mountain lakes; organisms may be immense trees, including majestic firs observed. Thanks spanning 2 meters in diameter and to the discovery of reaching up to 85 meters in height; numerous gigan- rare including orchids; and tic ammonite much more. shells – some more than one Conservation Threats: Poaching and meter in diameter unauthorized logging; and proposed – the Belaya River projects to construct roads through the Valley has World Heritage site and develop ski The vast diversity of mountain landscapes in the Western Caucasus supports the exceptional richness of the region's flora and fauna. acquired global resorts and other tourist infrastructure Photo by V. Kantor (Greenpeace-Russia). renown. near the World Heritage site.

30 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas Extending the Western Caucasus World Heritage Site: Plans and First Steps

By Andrey Rudomakha

he largest massif of mostly undis- Tturbed mountainous territories in Europe and Western Asia is located in the western part of the Greater Caucasus Mountain Range. The territo- ries are distinguished by their remark- able diversity of geology, ecosystems, and species, and are, in fact, the most valuable territories in Europe for bio- diversity. Positioned between Europe and Asia, and isolated from other mountain ranges by seas and plains, the region boasts Europe's highest lev- els of floral and faunal endemism. For instance, of the 1,580 vascular plant species registered in the World Heritage site, approximately one third is endemic to the Caucasus. The Western Caucasus provides key habitat for many animal species and sub- species endemic to the Caucasus, such as the West Caucasian tur (Capra cau- casica), Caucasian chamois (Rupicapra rupicapra caucasica), Caucasian red deer (Cervus elaphus caucasicus), and Caucasian mink (Mustella lutreola turovi), among oth- ers. Natural landscape diversity here is also extremely high.

The Western Caucasus World Natural Heritage site is comprised of several specially protected nature areas with- in three administrative subjects, or regions, of the Russian Federation: Krasnodar Krai, the Republic of Adygea, and Karachay-Cherkess Republic. Kavkazsky Biosphere Zapovednik forms the core of the Western Caucasus site. Also included in the site are: the section of Kavkazsky Biosphere Zapovednik's buffer zone that is located in the Republic of Adygea; Bolshoi Tkhach Nature Park; and three natural monu- ments - Buiny Ridge, the Headwaters of the Pshekha and Pshekhashkha Rivers, and the Headwaters of the Tsitse River. Plans to build a resort complex on the Loganaki Plateau, pictured here, threatens this In addition to the aforementioned ter- unique natural object on the territory of Kavkazsky Zapovednik. Photo by V. Kantor ritories, a significant part of Sochinsky (Greenpeace-Russia).

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 31 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

National Park, totaling approximately that have gathered over Kavkazsky Colchica Massif,” in the Republic of 57,000 hectares, was intended to be Zapovednik. Specifically, these threats Adygea. part of the World Heritage site. The include: a project to build a road inclusion of these lands, which com- between Cherkessk and Adler, which It is also very important that the World prise a single whole within the would run through Kavkazsky Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) succeed remaining massif of untouched nature Zapovednik; a project to construct an in its efforts to create a “biosphere of the Western Caucasus, was alpine ski resort on the Lagonaki polygon” in Karachay-Cherkess approved. However, for various rea- Plateau in Kavkazsky Zapovednik; and Republic. This territory would unite sons, they were ultimately not includ- plans to bring the 2014 Winter Kavkazsky and Teberdinsky Biosphere ed in the World Heritage site. Other Olympics to Sochi and hold events in Zapovedniks via a corridor along the parts of the region's landscape, which the region of the town Krasnaya Great Caucasus Ridge. were originally proposed for inclusion Polyana, on the territories of in the site – the Mzymta River Valley Sochinsky National Park and There are many other highly valuable and Kurdzhips Gorge – were similarly Kazkazsky Zapovednik. World parts of the massif of intact and mostly excluded from the World Heritage site. Heritage status has also helped popu- undisturbed territories of the Western Thus, there still remain many undis- larize the specially protected nature Caucasus, which are also very impor- turbed natural territories in the areas comprising the site, as informa- tant to include in the World Heritage Western Caucasus region that are not tion about them has been broadly dis- site, but which do not yet have any presently protected by World Heritage seminated in UNESCO and IUCN pub- protection status. In this regard, it is status. lications, as well as on the websites of very important that new specially pro- international organizations working tected nature areas be established on In the future, if Russia as a whole and within the framework of the these lands; in Krasnodar Krai, for its western Caucasian regions in par- Convention. instance, this might include the cre- ticular, become more oriented on ation of Mezmaisky and Acheshbok nature conservation-related goals, it It is imperative that other existing spe- Nature Parks (in Apsheronsk and will be extremely important that cially protected nature areas in the Mostovskoi Districts, respectively). efforts be undertaken to further region be included in the World These natural areas are currently sub- expand the Western Caucasus World Heritage site. These include: ject to significant development pres- Heritage site. The existing site has Teberdinsky Zapovednik and sure. Large-scale logging is being car- already benefited significantly from its Damkhurts and Arkhyzsky Zakazniks ried out in both of these areas. In the World Heritage status. In many in Karachay-Cherkess Republic; the region of Mezmai village, there are respects, this status is section of Kavkazsky Biosphere plans to create a large dolomite open helping to Zapovednik's buffer zone that is locat- quarry above the unique Kurdzhips combat ed in Krasnodar Krai, as well as Gorge, which was initially intended to numerous Sochinsky National Park's strictly pro- be included in the World Heritage site. threats – large- tected zone, Sochinsky Federal Thanks to the work of the non- scale economic Zakaznik, and Chernogorye Regional governmental organization utilization and Zakaznik, also in Krasnodar Krai; and Environmental Watch on the North seizure of territory, the natural monu- Caucasus, the first steps toward estab- chief ment, “Box lishing these specially protected among nature areas have already been taken them – and local authorities and nature pro- tection bodies have approved their creation. Acheshbok Nature Park has even been approved by a decision of the local Mostovskoi District Administration.

It is also very important to expand the territory of Bolshoi Tkhach Nature Park, which is

Caucasian tur (Capra caucasica). Photo by S. Trepet.

32 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas already part of the World Heritage site. port by state structures is Due to opposition by the local forestry now seriously complicat- department, the park was established ing work to expand the to protect just half of the territory that Western Caucasus World conservation planners deemed neces- Heritage site. sary. Widespread logging is now taking place on the land that was not includ- Nevertheless, the critical ed in the nature park. situation that currently exists requires increased Finally, new protected areas should be effort to expand the site, as created – and subsequently included it is possible that only this in the Western Caucasus World will help preserve many Heritage site – in the extensive region unique natural areas. In this of Khatsavita-Markopidzh-Dzhentu, in regard, activity by interna- Krasnodar Krai's Mostovskoi District, tional nature conservation as well as in the Urupsky District of organizations directed Karachaevo-Cherkessia. Work toward toward expanding the ter- these goals is not currently being car- ritory of the World ried out, but is necessary, as there are Heritage site acquires par- plans to mine the Markopidzh apatite ticular significance. deposit and to build a ski resort and military training ground on Khatsavita Andrey Rudomakha Mountain. is the Coordinator of the Maikop-based Unfortunately, the numerous eco- non-governmental nomic development plans that exist organization in regard to the pristine territories of Environmental Watch Typical mountain landscape of the Western Caucasus. the Western Caucasus, and their sup- on the North Caucasus. Photo by S. Trepet.

The World Conservation Union (IUCN) on Expanding the Western Caucasus World Heritage Site

Several years ago, Russia submitted a nomination to the World Heritage Committee that proposed extending the Western Caucasus World Heritage site to include Teberdinsky Biosphere Zapovednik. As part of the evaluation process, experts from IUCN conducted a technical evaluation of the nomination in July 2003. They found that the nominated site would add value to the conservation objectives of the existing Western Caucasus World Heritage site. They noted that the new nomination was “distinct from the existing property in relation to its altitudinal and landscape variations, as it contains a more complete sample of alpine and sub-alpine features, which are not seen in the existing property.” They also observed that Teberdinsky Biosphere Zapovednik is “characterized by a very high degree of naturalness, containing extensive tracts of undisturbed mountain forests and sub-alpine meadows which are only grazed by native animals.”

Nevertheless, the IUCN technical evaluators did not recommend that the nomination be inscribed on the World Heritage List. They found that the distance between the new nomination and the existing site – forty kilometers – and an assess- ment of their values might “point more to the concept of a serial nomination than an extension to the existing site.” The IUCN evaluation also noted that it was unclear how the new nomination might be managed collaboratively with the existing property. In conclusion, the IUCN Evaluation recommended that Russia carry out a comprehensive assessment of the Western Caucasus to identify all potential sites that may merit inclusion in a serial World Heritage site and that would represent all the outstanding universal values of the region.

Taking the findings from the IUCN Technical Evaluation into consideration, participants in the 28th session of the World Heritage Committee, held in Suzhou, China, in the summer of 2004, decided not to approve the proposed extension to the Western Caucasus site. The Committee also echoed IUCN's recommendation that an assessment of the Western Caucasus be carried out to identify other sites possibly meriting future inclusion in a World Heritage site.

Text prepared by RCN Editors using materials from the IUCN Technical Evaluation of the nomination to extend the Western Caucasus site with the inclusion of Teberdinsky Biosphere Zapovednik, as well as from the “Report of the 28th Session of the World Heritage Committee.”

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 33 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

Central Sikhote-Alin

Inscribed on the World Heritage List: 2001 Criteria for inscription: Natural Criteria (iv)* Total area: 395,000 hectares Protected areas comprising the site: 1. Sikhote-Alinsky Biosphere Zapovednik (390,184 hectares); 2. Goralovy Federal Zakaznik (4,749 hectares) * For a description of these selection criteria, please see the journal's rear inside cover.

he southern Russian Far East is one The mountainous Tof the planet's largest and least region of the Sikhote- human-altered centers for the conser- Alin is one of the vation of ancient coniferous-broadleaf world's last large, and broadleaf forest communities. whole territories Thanks to the region's location along inhabited by the the great path of distribution for plant Amur tiger (Panthera and animal species along the Asian tigris altaica); just Pacific coast, which ranges from the approximately 500 of tropics to temperate latitudes, one the great cats remain observes here a very complex and var- in total. Many other iegated picture of the diffusion and rare, endangered, and mixing of heterogeneous elements of endemic species flora and fauna, particularly southern found on the site's and northern elements. territory require pro- tection. Among them Many rare and endangered species are the Amur goral, a inhabit the site's territory, with a signif- type of goat-ante- icant portion of them being preserved lope, (Nemorhaedus here only. Vascular plant species num- caudatus), Asiatic ber nearly 1,200 species. More than black bear (Ursus thi- 370 bird species have been registered betanus), Japanese Central Sikhote-Alin World Heritage site. within the Central Sikhote-Alin World and hooded cranes (Grus japonensis, Map by M. Dubinin. Heritage site, while 71 mammal G. monacha), black stork (Ciconia species inhabit the territory. nigra), Chinese merganser (Mergus squamatus), Blakiston's fish owl (Ketupa blakistoni), ginseng (Panax ginseng), and rhododendron fauriei (Rhododendron fauriei).

The region's picturesque terrain and deep rivers, together with its excep- tionally diverse flora and fauna and the presence of exotic-looking plants and animals recalling the tropics, give the nature of the Central Sikhote-Alin traits that are completely unique. Numerous objects of great aesthetic and recre- ational value are situated on the terri- tory of the World Heritage site: rocky massifs scattered amidst the taiga; waterfalls, lakes, and rapids; and the intricate rock formations, reefs, and sandy bays of the Sea of Japan coast.

Conservation Threats: Poaching; and possible future logging on territo- Sea of Japan coast protected in Sikhote-Alinsky Zapovednik. Photo by V. Kantor ries neighboring the World Heritage (Greenpeace-Russia). site.

34 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas World Heritage Status for Unique Territories in the Bikin River Valley?

he Central Sikhote-Alin World cably entwined with the THeritage site is currently com- region's natural resources. prised of two territories situated on 395,000 hectares in the eastern part of World Conservation Union Primorsky Krai: Sikhote-Alinsky (IUCN) experts who conducted Biosphere Zapovednik and Goralovy an evaluation of the nominated Zakaznik. Initially, however, an territories, including a site visit expanded version of the site – with a to them during summer 2001, total area of approxi- mately 1.63 million hectares – was envi- sioned, and when the Central Sikhote- Alin nomination was submitted to the World Heritage Centre for considera- Map by M. Dubinin. tion in the year 2000, the nomination pro- pating in the process. They also rec- posed the inscription ommended that activities in areas of two territories in adjacent to the Bikin watershed in addition to those both Primorsky and Khabarovsky that were ultimately Krais be regulated. They further Although the Bikin River valley provides key habitat to many rare inscribed. Those advised that linkages between the species and is of vital importance to the indigenous Udege nation, two territories were this territory in northeastern Primorsky Krai was not included in the Bikin protected areas and Sikhote- the Bikin Territory of Central Sikhote-Alin site. Photo by V. Kantor (Greenpeace-Russia). Alinsky Zapovednik be improved Traditional Nature through the creation of a comprehen- Use (TTNU) and sive network of protected nature Verkhnebikinsky Regional Zakaznik, found that the nomination did meet the areas, with full involvement of indige- both situated in the northeastern part criterion under which it was proposed - nous people. of Primorsky Krai, in the middle and criterion (iv), related to the presence of upper reaches of the Bikin River Valley. the most important and significant nat- Consistent with these goals, work is ural habitats for in situ biodiversity con- now underway to obtain federal status The Bikin River basin is the only terri- servation. At the same time, however, for Verkhnebikinsky Zakaznik, which tory on the western slope of the they recommended that inscription of is currently a regional-level protected Sikhote-Alin mountain system that the two Bikin River territories be area; to develop a management plan; remains largely unaffected by deferred until their management was and to create, in the middle flow of destructive human activities. The improved. The UNESCO World the Bikin River, Russia's first federal- region preserves an intact massiff of Heritage Committee, which reviewed level territory of traditional nature use. Ussuri taiga, which provides habitat the Central-Sikhote Alin nomination at Greenpeace-Russia, WWF-Russia, the to many rare flora and fauna species, its 25th Session, held in Helsinki in 2001, Natural Heritage Protection Fund, and some of which are at the edge of their concurred with this opinion and the Association of Indigenous Peoples range. The high concentration of encouraged Russia to improve manage- of the North of Primorsky Krai are Amur tigers (Panthera tigris altaica) ment of the Bikin River protected areas actively involved in these efforts. The here is especially notable. According before nominating them as an exten- preparation of a Bikin River Valley the World Wild Fund for Nature sion to the existing site. nomination to extend the current (WWF), as many as 50-80 Amur Central Sikhote-Alin World Heritage tigers, or about 15% of the Far Eastern In their technical evaluation report, site remains a prospective direction population, inhabit the Korean pine IUCN evaluators issued specific recom- for the future. forests of the Bikin River Valley. The mendations regarding the Bikin terri- Bikin River Valley is also of vital tories. For example, they suggested Text prepared by RCN Editors with importance to a small indigenous that Russia develop an effective and assistance from Alexey Butorin, of the nation, the Udege, whose traditional integrated collaborative management Natural Heritage Protection Fund, and activities – and fishing – and, regime for the entire Bikin watershed, Mikhail Kreindlin, of Greenpeace- indeed, entire way of life, are inextri- with indigenous people fully partici- Russia.

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 35 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

Uvs Nuur Basin

Inscribed on the World Heritage List: 2003 Criteria for inscription: Natural Criteria (ii), (iv)* Total area: 1.069 million hectares Protected areas comprising the site: 1. Ubsunurskaya Kotlovina Biosphere Zapovednik (Russia) (258,620 hectares); 2. Uvs Nuur State Nature Reserve (Mongolia) (810,233 hectares) * For a description of these selection criteria, please see the journal's rear inside cover.

traddling the border of Mongolia Sand Russia, the Uvs Nuur Basin is one of the most uncommon locales in all of Central Asia. A unique complex of neighboring, closely interacting, and highly contrasting ecosystems – ranging from taiga to desert – is pre- served in this region. Glaciers, snow- fields, and mountain tundra in the alpine zone and sub-alpine meadows transition into the vast mountain taiga zone, which, in turn, alternates with forest-steppe, steppe, semi-arid desert, and even shifting sand dunes, creating, in, its beauty and diversity, a natural phenomenon. No where else on the Uvs Nuur Basin World Heritage site. . Eurasian continent is it possible to see Map by M. Dubinin such diverse landscapes in such close proximity to one another. encountered here. Taiga species The value of the site is not limited to include maral (Cervus elaphus its natural features. The cultural her- The territory of the basin is located in sibiricus), lynx (Felis lynx), and wolver- itage objects – archeological monu- an area where European-Siberian and ine (Gulo gulo). In steppe habitats, one ments, many of which have not been Central Asian floral and faunal com- finds Mongolian lark (Melanocorypha studied to this day – located here are plexes interact with one another, mongolica), Demoiselle crane of great significance. Nowhere else in which has determined its unusually (Anthropoides virgo), and long-tailed Central Asia are kurgans, or burial high species diversity, compared to Siberian ground squirrel (Citellus mounds, so densely concentrated; other temperate latitudes. High undulatus), while houbara bustard some estimates put the figure at mountain and even tundra species – (Chlamydotis undulata) and mid-day 20,000, and the majority of them are rock ptarmigan (Lagopus mutus), Altai gerbil (Meriones meridianus) may be older than the Egyptian pyramids. snowcock (Tetraogallus altaicus), and found in deserts. Three hundred and Thousands of cave drawings and stone snow leopard (Uncia uncia) – are fifty-nine bird species have been iden- sculptures – remnants of Middle Age tified here. Many relict species that settlements and Buddhist temples – have disappeared from other areas shape this unique natural-cultural have found refuge in the sheltered landscape. conditions of the basin. Centuries-old traditions of Man's har- The region is relatively sparsely popu- monious existence with nature are still lated, and the absence of industrial carefully kept here. The ancient cul- objects allows the basin to be pre- ture of steppe nomads is alive, while served as a natural laboratory for the famous Tuvan art of throat-singing studying biosphere processes. The is also preserved here. types of human activities that have developed in the Basin (for example, Conservation Threats: Livestock The northern edge of the great Gobi Desert nomadic livestock husbandry) organ- pasturing; poaching; and possible begins in the Uvs Nuur Basin. Photo by ically blend into its landscapes and do future development of mineral A. Butorin. not disturb natural processes. resources deposits in the region.

36 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas Russia and Mongolia Collaborate to Preserve the Uvs Nuur Basin

Compiled using materials provided by the UNESCO Moscow Office nscribed on the World Heritage List Iin 2003, Uvs Nuur Basin was Mongolia's first World Natural Heritage site and the first trans-boundary World Natural Heritage site for Russia. World Heritage Committee members immedi- ately recognized the outstanding inter- national significance of the basin, a natural phenomenon exceptional in both its beauty and landscape diversity, and inscribed the territory according to two selection criteria.

Soon after the Uvs Nuur Basin's inscription on the list, the Mongolian National Commission for UNESCO ini- tiated a project to elaborate a joint Mongolian-Russian site management plan for the new World Heritage site. The project aimed to facilitate the har- monious development of territories within the site and to improve trans- boundary collaboration. With support The Uvs Nuur Basin site boasts a great diversity of landscapes, from deserts to mountain from the UNESCO World Heritage taiga. Photo by A. Butorin. Centre, the Natural Heritage Protection Fund, a Russian non- governmental organization, imple- conservation of the Russian part of the Workshop for the Elaboration of a mented the Russian part of this inter- World Heritage site. They also con- Joint Site Management Plan for the national project during the summer ducted numerous meetings with local Uvs Nuur Basin Trans-boundary World and autumn of 2005. administrative and commercial struc- Heritage Site, held in Ulangom, tures, scientific organizations, and Mongolia, September 11-15, 2005. Within the framework of the project, non-profit organizations, during The international workshop partici- the Natural Heritage Protection Fund which they proposed ways of develop- pants adopted recommendations con- arranged two trips to Tuva for experts ing and improving relations with the cerning the revision of existing man- – Yuri Buivolov, Head of the Division reserve. The trip's focal event was a agement plans and the elaboration of for Specially Protected Nature Areas, republic-wide conference on the man- a joint management plan for better within Russia's Federal Service for agement of and prospects for develop- conservation of the World Heritage Oversight in the Sphere of Nature Use; ing the Russian part of the Uvs Nuur site. Based on these recommendations Valery Chichagov, a professor at the Basin World Heritage site. The confer- and the results of the Russian and Institute of Geography, within the ence took place in Kyzyl on September Mongolian parts of the project, an Russian Academy of Science; and 8, 2005, with the support of the gov- agreement was reached with UNESCO Alexey Butorin, Director of the Natural ernment of the Tuva Republic. At its and IUCN concerning the necessity of Heritage Protection Fund - to visit close, conference participants pre- continuing work to develop a man- Kyzyl, the republic's capital. The par- pared a resolution that reflected fea- agement plan. The UNESCO expert ticipants also visited Ubsunurskaya tures, problems, and shortcomings in assured conference participants that Kotlovina Biosphere Zapovednik; the management of the Russian part of the project would be continued seven of the zapovednik's nine cluster the Uvs Nuur Basin World Heritage through 2006-2007, and promised territories (those which are located Site; the resolution also contained a future funding. A preliminary work within the basin) comprise the Russian list of priority activities for the period plan for 2006-2007 was also estab- portion of the trans-boundary World 2006-2011. lished and the Russian and Mongolian Heritage site. specialists who will participate in the The resolution and other documents working group implementing activi- During the trip, participants gathered from the Russian part of the project ties under the plan were also deter- information on the present state of were presented at the UNESCO mined.

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 37 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

Recommendations for Developing a Management Plan for the Uvs Nuur Basin World Heritage Site Participants in the project to elaborate a joint Mongolian-Russian site management plan for the trans-boundary Uvs Nuur Basin World Heritage site compiled an extensive list of almost twenty recommendations for future implementa- tion. A brief overview of some of these recommendations follows below.

Territorial Planning species including the snow leopard and argali, should be • The possible creation of new territories and their subse- removed. quent inclusion in the World Heritage site should be • The preparation and implementation of projects to reintro- reviewed. duce wild animals, including rare species, should be coordi- • The boundaries of territories included in the World Heritage nated and strictly controlled. The scientific foundation for site as well as their buffer zones should be clarified. possibly reintroducing the Mongolian gazelle (Procapra • The possible introduction of functional zoning on individ- gutturosa) should be prepared and related issues should be ual management sites that are more problematic should be coordinated. considered. Work with Local Communities and Regional Improving Collaboration across Borders Development • Collaboration among scientific groups and organizations • Environmental education work with local communities should be improved. should be improved and activities to involve local commu- • Information on the status of biodiversity and other natural nities in nature conservation activities such as work to com- components within the World Heritage site should be more bat poaching should be developed. widely available, including through the creation of GIS data- • Particular attention should be devoted to using World bases. Data preservation formats should be standardized. Heritage status to improve local socio-economic conditions.

Collaboration with UNDP/GEF Projects Expansion of the World Heritage Nomination • Particular attention should be devoted to collaboration with • Consideration of the World Heritage site's geological, his- Russian and Mongolian UNDP/GEF projects to preserve bio- toric, and cultural values should be incorporated into the diversity in the Altai-Sayan Region, above all those involving joint research plan, with an eye toward possibly expanding local communities in nature conservation activities and the the site under an additional selection criterion related to the development of plans to preserve individual rare and representation of stages of the Earth's history. endangered animal species such as the snow leopard (Panthera uncia), Argali sheep (Ovis ammon ammon), and Other Special Considerations musk deer (Moschus moschiferus). • Consideration should be given to issues of pasture use and the regulation of grazing pressure. Species Conservation • The importance of studying the spread of avian flu and • Human-made structures along some parts of the Russian- decreasing its threat to people on both sides of the border Mongolia border that prevent the free migration of rare should be recognized.

A small herd of yak grazing with Tuva's highest mountain, Mongum-Taiga Mountain, in the background. Photo by A. Butorin.

38 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas

Natural System of Wrangel Island Reserve

Inscribed on the World Heritage List: 2004 Criteria for inscription: Natural Criteria (ii), (iv)* Total area: 2.226 million hectares Protected areas comprising the site: Wrangel Island Zapovednik (2.226 million hectares) * For a description of these selection criteria, please see the journal's rear inside cover.

rangel and Herald Islands boast tiwake (Rissa tri- Wthe highest levels of floral and dactyla). Typical rep- faunal species diversity in the Arctic. resentatives of North Typically Arctic and relatively southern Pacific marine avi- Asian and American taxa have blended fauna, such as pelag- here. Vegetation communities include ic cormorant Epoch relicts that in cer- (Phalacrocorax tain places have landscape-forming pelagicus), horned significance; for that reason, the puffin (Fratercula islands' landscapes are much closer to corniculata), tufted those of the Pleistocene Epoch than puffin (Lunda cir- most others existing today. rhata) and common murre (Uria aalge) Unique vegetation community types also nest there. and endemic soil types are present on the island. Close to 40 endemic vascu- Wrangel Island is lar plant, insect, bird, and mammal the location of the species inhabit the island. Some of only large perma- these species are relicts and are among nent snow goose the least numerous species in the (Chen caerulescens) world. The islands and their surround- colony in the Arctic. ing marine zones provide key habitat Wrangel and Herald Natural System of Wrangel Island Reserve World Heritage site. for numerous rare and specially pro- Islands boast the Map by M. Dubinin. tected and animals. The largest highest density of bird colonies in the , ancestral polar bear (Ursus maritimus) Wrangel Island is the site of numerous which number up to 250,000-300,000 dens in the world, with 300-600 interesting and important paleonto- nesting birds, are situated on Wrangel female bears coming ashore to give logical finds. The skeletal remains of Island. Prevalent among nesting birds birth each year. The reserve is also numerous Pleistocene and Holocene species are: the thick-billed murre home to the world's largest popula- Epoch mammals including the wooly (Uria lomvia), black guillemot tion of Pacific (Odobenus ros- (Mammuthus primigenius), (Cepphus grylle) and black-legged kit- marus). steppe wisant (Bison priscus), and wild horse (Equus caballus) are numerous, particularly in the island's plain regions. Remains of the wooly rhinoceros (Coelodonta antiquitatis) have also been found on the island, as have the remains of a previously unknown subspecies, (Mammuthus primigenius wrangelensis).

Conservation Threats: Degradation of natural vegetation communities by increasing unregulat- ed populations of introduced rein- deer; and climate change. Icy waters washing the shores of Wrangel Island. Photo by A. Butorin.

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 39 Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas Overcoming a Difficult Period of Transition in the Russian High Arctic

By Nikita Ovsyanikov he first strict nature reserve in the became very difficult and by 1997, stopping for a single season. The peo- TRussian Arctic, Wrangel Island approximately two thirds of the vil- ple working on the island during this Zapovednik was established in 1976. lage's residents, or over 130 people, period – scientists, inspectors, and The young zapovednik enjoyed its had left the island. technicians – were also able to repair greatest period of development in the some of the zapovednik's equipment; 1980s. During this decade, the The zapovednik was in a critical state. four field research stations; a base reserve's headquarters were located on In 1995, regional authorities even pro- camp at Somnitelnaya Bay; and several Wrangel Island, in the small village of posed closing the reserve altogether. structures in the village of Ushakovsky, Ushakovsky, which had a population Yet, phasing down work on the which remains as the zapovednik's pri- of about 200 people, including a small zapovednik's territory and closing its mary base during the winter period. number of indigenous Chukchi. island base would be tantamount to They also repaired a guest home (for Zapovednik staff lived fulltime on the losing the island's infrastructure, 11-12 people) and house for zapoved- island, leaving for the mainland on including bases at Rogers and nik staff (for 5-6 people) at business trips or vacations only. The Somnitelnaya Bays and a network of Somnitelnaya Bay. reserve's scientific staff wintered in the village and spent summers at field One can imagine what effort these research stations out on the tundra in accomplishments required, given the various parts of the island. Passenger changes that had taken place on the flights to and from the island were car- island. Because of the difficult living ried out on a weekly basis and the and working conditions on the island, zapovednik's basic supplies were deliv- its increased isolation from the main- ered by boat during the summer and land, and the unpredictability of fall. The zapovednik was not the only flights, many zapovednik staff had left institution or organization existing on the island, leaving the zapovednik's the island at the time. A post office, scientific and protection divisions store, local government office (the vil- understaffed compared to staffing lev- lage council), and local branch of the els in the 1980s. Those who remained state Border Service were also based in began carrying out their research and Ushakovsky. A polar meteorological Arctic poppies add color to the landscape monitoring activities on an expedition station, which was affiliated with the on Wrangel Island. Photo by N. Ovsyanikov. basis, meaning that staff members state Hydro-Meteorological Service, come to the island for a specific period was located on a spit adjacent to the field research stations. In order to pre- of field work, and upon its comple- village and a military base used to vent the complete cessation of work tion, leave the island. Inspectors are monitor airspace was located 20 kilo- on the island and full evacuation, it was stationed at the zapovednik on a rota- meters to the north of Ushakovsky, on necessary, in 1997, to urgently reorgan- tional basis. Among the other organi- Cape Gavai. ize the zapovednik and resettle from zations that previously existed in the island people who were not direct- Ushakovsky, only the meteorological Beginning in 1992, however, life on ly involved in the zapovednik's work or station, which has fallen into deep the island and work at the zapovednik the work of the polar station. After a decline, and whose staff has been cut began to change significantly, as the long and painful process, the zapoved- to 5-6 people, remains active. Without pains of Russia's post-Soviet socio- nik's office was transferred to Cape a support system in the village, field economic transition were felt particu- Schmidt in 1998. Work there had just work on the island has become more larly acutely in the Arctic regions. barely begun when, due to budget cuts, challenging, as field researchers and During the period 1992-1997, regular regional authorities issued orders to rangers must, to a great extent, rely delivery of supplies to the village near- transfer all federal institutions - includ- only on themselves. Financing expen- ly ceased altogether, with the last sea- ing the zapovednik's office - from Cape sive flights and updating the zapoved- based fuel shipment to the island tak- Schmidt to the city of . This sec- nik's transportation remains a chief ing place in 1994. By 1996, regular ond relocation operation was begun in problem for the reserve. Because the passenger flights no longer serviced 2000, and finished in 2001. island's landscapes are diverse and not the island. By 1997, the village's service easily traversed by ground transport, a organizations stopped working entire- Despite these years of transition and helicopter is needed not just to trans- ly and both the village store and post relocation, the zapovednik continued port people, but also to deliver sup- office closed. Under these circum- its protection, monitoring, and plies. Meeting the zapovednik's basic stances, life and work on the island research work on Wrangel Island, not goals requires a least seven helicopter

40 Russian Conservation News Case Studies: World Heritage Status and What it Means for Russia’s Protected Areas flights (each 2.5 hours long) from the researchers have observed clear island, which is a truly unique living city of Pevek, on Chukotka's Arctic changes in the status of the popula- laboratory in which to study the coast, to Wrangel Island, with the opti- tion and activity of polar bears, in the effects of global climate change on mal number of trips to facilitate nor- reproduction of Arctic terrestrial pred- nature. For the zapovednik, moderniz- mal work being ten. ators (arctic , snowy owls, ing the island's scientific research sta- and ) and herbivorous ani- tions is now a very high priority. During 2000, the zapovednik's most mals (, ungulates, and geese) difficult year financially, no federal on the island, and in the island's popu- The reserve's acquisition of World funding was allocated for air deliveries. lations of musk ox and reindeer and Natural Heritage status in 2004 offers Nevertheless, the zapovednik's staff their impacts on vegetation. In 2000, new stimulus and prospects for mod- was able, even during the year 2000, to wolves, occasional visitors to the ernizing its base on the island. Upon continue research and maintain the reserve, appeared on Wrangel Island adopting the decision to inscribe the reserve's island base. This was made and the wolverine population reserve's natural system on the possible thanks to the implementation increased, which should affect the UNESCO World Heritage List, the that year of additional projects such as entire fauna complex. In recent years, World Heritage Committee recom- those to film footage of the island, to changes in individual parts of the mended that the zapovednik prepare receive groups of ecotourists, and to island's coastline have also been a management plan and strategy for its organize a geological expedition for observed; these changes are obviously development. The committee suggest- the University of Washington. Also pro- related to changes in ice cover and ed that the plan include strategies for: viding critical support – both of indi- storm activity of the . developing and managing tourism and vidual projects and the reserve's work These are only the first likely signs of visitation; implementing alternative as a whole – throughout the reserve's global climate change's affects on the energy sources; resolving transporta- transitional period were the US Fish island and its populations and in the tion issues; implementing monitoring and Wildlife Service, the Canadian future one may expect additional and research programs; preserving his- Wildlife Service, Pacific Flyway Study changes – to individual communities toric and paleontological objects; Committee, Polar Bears International, and the landscape as a whole. developing personnel policies for staff World Wildlife Fund, and International working on the island; and removing Fund for Animal Welfare. Most recently, But realizing plans to transform household wastes from the site of an two eco-tourism companies, Zegrahm Wrangel Island Zapovednik into a well old village at Somnitelnaya Bay. To & Eco-Expeditions and Poseidon equipped, modern Arctic research sta- achieve these goals, the Committee Arctic Voyages, and the Murmansk Sea tion can be possible only within the recommended that the reserve submit Steam Navigation Company, provided framework of a comprehensive pro- proposals to international funding assistance by delivering supplies to the gram to develop the zapovednik's organizations. Management plan island by sea: construction materials, a infrastructure. The infrastructure that development and funding identifica- small supply of fuel, and food supplies currently exists on the island, which tion are, of course, lengthy processes for winter and for field camps. How- has been preserved, and improved as and the zapovednik is still in the early ever, it should be noted that the avail- much as possible thanks to the self- stages of this work. Nevertheless, the ability of such opportunities and occa- sacrificing work of the zapovednik's reserve's staff is hopeful that World sional side projects is unpredictable staff, was created using construction Heritage status will enhance opportu- and a reliable foundation for the methods and technology dating back nities, as has been the case for other reserve can not be based upon them to the first half of the twentieth centu- World Heritage properties in the past. alone. ry. In no way does it correspond with the technologies that other countries Nikita Ovsyanikov, one of the world's In the future, the zapovednik – now use at their Arctic research stations. foremost polar bear researchers, is the only Russian research base in the Nor can it support the implementa- Deputy Director for Environmental High Arctic carrying out long-term tion of all necessary research on the Education at Wrangel Island Zapovednik. research of Arctic biota – hopes to modernize its base on the island and transform it into an Arctic research station equipped with modern tech- nologies and facilities that would pro- vide comfortable conditions for carry- ing out complex ecological research. Monitoring and studying the zapoved- nik's natural complexes is becoming even more important, considering the increasingly apparent and frequent signs that nature in the Arctic is react- With the world's highest density of ancestral polar bear (Ursus maritimus) dens, Wrangel ing to global climate change. On Island is a key habitat area for this species, recently listed as vulnerable on the 2006 IUCN Wrangel Island, for instance, Red List of Threatened Species. Photo by N. Ovsyanikov.

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 41 The Future The Future

World Natural Heritage Sites in Russia: Future Prospects By Alexey Blagovidov ussia's eight World Natural Heritage Rsites are by no means an exhaustive selection of the country's natural terri- tories that are worthy of this interna- tional distinction. For this reason, one of the primary directions for future development is preparing new nomi- nations and working to inscribe new sites on the List. Four are currently included on Russia's “Tentative List:” the Putorana Plateau, Magadansky Zapovednik, the Commander Islands, and the Daurian Steppes. There are still many other Russian territories in addition to these that satisfy criteria for Map by M. Dubinin. inscription on the World Heritage List. Above all, these include: the Green Belt sequences will be obviously beneficial of Fennoscandia, the Bikin River Valley, for the country and for the individuals Malaya Sosva Zapovednik, Pinezhsky involved. As far as the Russian natural Zapovednik, the Western Sayan, sites inscribed on the World Heritage Tsentralno-Sibirsky Reserve, the Great List are concerned, such benefits have benefits. At the same time, neither Valdai Watershed, and the Tunguska not yet been demonstrated. In fact, at government officials, nor the person- Phenomenon, an area of swamps and times, the designation seems to have nel of those specially protected nature bogs amidst the Central Siberian taiga. the opposite effect, as it carries particu- areas comprising the sites have yet There are also several unique biogeo- lar burdens and new responsibilities. learned how to effectively use to the graphic regions within which it is nec- In addition to the regular lengthy World Heritage site image to receive essary to select concrete objects, since reports that government officials must additional benefits. Such perceptions the entire region can not be inscribed submit to the World Heritage could be changed if both the benefits in the List. In the first place, these Committee about the status of the site, of World Heritage site status and higher regions include the last northern-taiga there is a constant need to react to sit- management standards were more fir massif untouched by logging in uations when any – even insignificant clearly demonstrated. European Russia; the unique lake sys- – threat to the natural complexes aris- tem of the Russian Northwest, which es. In accordance with the sites' high For such sites to deliver more benefits includes the interconnected lakes, Lake international status, officials are for nature as well as people surround- Ladoga, Lake Onega, and the Finnish expected to report before the highest ing the protected area, an important Lake Saimaa; and the Western Siberian official channels on the reasons for the task for the future is to create linkages larch forests. The inscription of these threat, its source, and the work under- between the preservation of natural objects on the World Heritage List way to mitigate it. Numerous problems, landscapes and opportunities for posi- would significantly increase the list's a lack of financial resources, and the tive income growth in local communi- representativeness. emotional – yet not always construc- ties. At the same time, local communi- tive – criticisms by environmental ties should come to see the nature of However, in order for these nomina- NGOs acutely concerned about the their region as a unique, self-renewing tions to be submitted to the World possible loss of the World Heritage resource, the sustainable use of which Heritage Committee, good will is nec- sites, have created among experts in is based on principles of non-exhaust- essary from the Russian Government, the Ministry of Natural Resources and ing exploitation. as the designation depends on an ini- among part of the national World tiative by the Ministry of Natural Heritage Committee a negative percep- Alexey Blagovidov currently Resources. Such good will may be tion of World Heritage sites as territo- works as a Consultant for the World expected only in the case that its con- ries that bring more problems than Conservation Union (IUCN) in Moscow.

42 Russian Conservation News The Future

Spotlight on Russia's Tentative List

ote from the Editors: Active work is currently underway to expand the number of Russia's World Natural Heritage Nsites. As we've shared with readers elsewhere in this journal, a key step in the nomination process of new sites is their inclusion on “The Tentative List.” Russian Conservation News is pleased to acquaint you with the four natural territories that are currently on Russia's Tentative List: Putorana Plateau, Commander Islands, Magadan Nature Reserve, and Daurian Steppes.

Putorana Plateau

Nomination status: Nomination submitted to the World Heritage Centre in 2005 Proposed criteria for inscription: Criteria (vii), (viii), (ix), (x)* Total area proposed for inscription: 1,887,251 hectares Protected area comprising the nomination: Putoransky Zapovednik (1,887,251 hectares) * For a description of these selection criteria, please see the journal's rear inside cover.

Situated in the northwestern part of the Central Siberian Plateau, the Putorana Plateau is Siberia's largest basalt highland, which has been virtually undisturbed by The Putorana Plateau boasts Russia's highest human activities. Vast canyons dissect the plateau's spectacular traprock ridges. The concentration of waterfalls; this waterfall on scale and number of waterfalls on the plateau are impressive; it is here that the the Kureika River is the plateaus' most power- ful. Photo by A. Butorin. highest concentration of waterfalls in Russia may be found. Numerous lakes having depths of up to 400 meters dot the plateau and the plateau's lake fjords are very picturesque. More than 1,300 plant species have been registered on the Putorana Plateau. The northeastern borders of the range of Siberian larch (Larix sibirica) and Siberian spruce (Picea obovata) pass along the plateau. The plateau is also the northernmost distribution limit in central Siberia for a number of species including Siberian flying squirrel (Pteromys volans), lynx (Felis lynx), sable (Martes zibellina), and black-billed capercaillie (Tetrao parvirostris). The migration route of Eurasia's largest population of wild reindeer (Rangifer tarandus), the Taimyr population, which numbers more than 600,000 individuals, passes through the plateau. An aboriginal form of big horn sheep, the Siberian snow sheep (Ovis canadensis nivicola), inhabits the region; this little-studied population was separated from the main range of the species about 15,000 years ago.

Commander Islands

Nomination status: Nomination prepared in 2003 Proposed criteria for inscription (subject to change): Criteria (vii), (viii), (ix), (x)* Total area proposed for inscription: 3,648,679 hectares Protected area comprising the nomination: Komandorsky Biosphere Zapovednik (3,648,679 hectares) * For a description of these selection criteria, please see the journal's rear inside cover.

The Commander Islands form the westernmost extent the Aleutian Archipelago, which stretches between Asia and North America and supports biogeographic Steller's Arch, a unique rock formation on the links between the two continents. Together with species having Asian origins, Bering Island coast. Photo by E. Ponomariova. representatives of North American flora and fauna are also common here. Some of them, such as Canada goose (Branta Canadensis), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), glaucous-winged gull (Larus glaucescens), and red-legged kittiwake (Rissa brevirostris), are found no where else in Russia. Mountain tundra adds much to the unique beauty of the Commander Islands' natural complexes. The mountain tundra here has developed in the absence of per- mafrost and herbivores, which are factors that form tundra communities on the mainland. The islands' coastal zone and sur- rounding waters are renowned for their remarkable species diversity of rare marine mammals and sea birds; many of them, including the Stejneger harbour seal (Phoca vitulina stejnegeri), Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), humpbacked and right whales (Megaptera novaeangliae, Eubalaena glacialis), and short-tailed albatross (Diomedea albatrus), are listed in the Russian Red Data Book and on the IUCN Red List. The Commander Islands Shelf is one of the last shelf regions in Russia's Far Eastern commercial waters that has not been exposed to the massive effects of trawl fishing and has been preserved in its natural condi- tion.

Fall 2005/Winter 2006 No. 40 43 The Future

Magadan Nature Reserve Nomination status: Nomination prepared in 2003 Proposed criteria for inscription (subject to change): Criteria (vii), (viii), (x)* Total area proposed for inscription: 883,817 hectares Protected area comprising the nomination: Magadansky Zapovednik (883,817 hectares) * For a description of these selection criteria, please see the journal's rear inside cover.

Magadansky Zapovednik, which is located near the western coast of the Sea of Okhotsk, is comprised of six units that represent the land- scape diversity and natural complexes of Magadan Oblast. Model territories of northern Far Eastern taiga are preserved undisturbed here. The zapovednik provides habitat to 729 vascular plant species, as well as 32 fish species, 173 bird species, and 39 terrestrial mam- mal species. The largest seabird rookeries in the northern Pacific region are located in the reserve's coastal units. The zapovednik pro- vides nesting habitat for birds on the IUCN Red Listed such as Steller's sea eagle (Haliaeetus pelagicus), osprey (Pandion haliaetus), peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), and the extremely rare Blakiston's fish owl (Ketupa blakistoni). The golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), white-tailed eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla), and Bewick's swan (Cygnus bewickii) may also be encountered in the reserve. A relict forest of Siberian spruce (Picea obovata) is situated in the Magadan's Sea of Okhotsk. Photo by A. Butorin. reserve's Yamskoi unit, a full 1,000 kilometers away from the species' principal distribution areas in Yakutsk and Khabarovsk Krai. The northernmost reproductive rookery of Steller's sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) in the Sea of Okhotsk is located on the largest of the reserve's Yamskiye Islands.

Daurian Steppes

Nomination status: Russian portion of this joint nomination with Mongolia and China has been prepared Proposed criteria for inscription (subject to change): Criteria (ix), (x)* Total area proposed for inscription (Russian portion): (44,752 hectares) Protected area comprising the Russian portion of the nomination: Daursky Biosphere Zapovednik (44,752 hectares) * For a description of these selection criteria, please see the journal's rear inside cover.

Located in southeastern Siberia, in southern Chita Oblast, Russia's Daursky Biosphere Zapovednik presents a number of well-preserved Central Asian steppe ecosystems. One of the world's largest flyways for waterfowl and near shore birds crosses the reserve's territory; thirty-seven of the species migrating along this route are listed in the Russian Red Data Book, while 20 are included on the IUCN Red List. The zapovednik has biosphere reserve status and its Torey Lakes are recognized as a Ramsar Wetland of International Importance. The nomination's territory provides habitat to 314 bird species and 47 mammal species including the dzeren, or Mongolian gazelle, (Procapra guttur- osa), which is encountered nowhere else in Russia, and the rare Pallas' cat (Felis manul), and Daurian hedgehog (Mesechinus dauuricus). Flora includes 360 vascular plant species, of which three have been included in Russia's Red Data Book. The nomi- nation also includes a belt of pine forest, which is a unique natu- Duarian steppe. Photo provided by A. Troitsky. ral phenomenon in the steppes east of Lake Baikal.

Nomination descriptions prepared using materials provided by Greenpeace-Russia and the Natural Heritage Protection Fund.

44 Russian Conservation News