Protected Areas in the Russian Arctic Download

Home , Ajania, Alazeya, Amguema, Amguema (river), Anabar Plateau, Apatity

Protected Areas in the Russian Arctic: Current State and Prospects for Development УДК 502.21(985-751.1) ББК 28.088л6 Contents C Preface 4 Protected Areas in the Russian Arctic: Current State and Prospects for Development C by M.S. Stishov Introduction 6

ISBN 978-5-906219-06-0 1. The existing network of protected areas in the Russian Arctic 11 This book is a contribution towards fulfilling the Russian Federation’s commitment in the field of protected areas under the Convention on Biological Diversity. It includes analyses of the representativeness of protected areas in the 2. Representativeness, completeness and main gaps arctic region of Russia and assessment of their role in the conservation of rare and valuable species of flora and fauna. of the protected area network in the Russian Arctic 32 The book is the first study of the representativeness of regional protected areas that includes a comprehensive analysis 2.1. Representativeness and completeness of the Russian Arctic protected area network for of protected areas of all categories. Problems related to regional protected areas, options for solving the identified problems, and prospects for enhancing Russia’s arctic protected area networks are all based on the analyses of the landscapes and ecosystems 33 representativeness and completeness that are presented in this book. 2.1.1. Polar desert and tundra zones 33 The book’s target audiences are experts working in regional and federal governmental bodies responsible for the 2.1.3. Pacific maritime subarctic zone 58 functioning of protected areas, staff of existing protected areas, and all those interested in wildlife conservation in Russia. 2.1.4. Representativeness of the existing PA network for landscape-ecosystem diversity and main Suggested citation: network gaps 64 Stishov, M.S. 2013. Protected Areas in the Russian Arctic: Current State and Prospects for Development. WWF 2.2 Representativeness, completeness and main gaps of the Russian Arctic protected areas Russia. network for rare animals, plants and lichens 74 УДК 502.21(985-751.1) 2.2.1. Mammals 75 ББК 28.088л6 2.2.2. Birds 82 2.2.3. Amphibians and reptiles 89 Acknowledgements 2.2.4. Fishes of inland waters 89 Project coordinator and author: M.S. Stishov Authors of network-wide syntheses and analyses 2.2.5. Insects 96 Existing network of protected areas – M.S. Stishov, P.I. Zbanova 2.2.6. Freshwater and land molluscs 98 Key problems in the existing protected area network – M.S. Stishov 2.2.7. Vascular plants 99 Prospects for development of protected areas – M.S. Stishov, P.I. Zhbanova 2.2.8. Bryophytes (mosses and liverworts) 129 The information and analyses presented in this book are drawn from a number of regional and thematic reviews. 2.2.9. Lichens 134 Authors of regional reviews 2.2.10. Representativeness of the existing PA network for rare species, and unprotected areas key to Murmansk Oblast – V.N. Petrov rare species conservation 137 Arkhangelsk Oblast – A.G. Kirilov Nenets Autonomous Okrug – I.A. Lavrienko, O.V. Lavrienko 2.3. Representativeness and completeness of the Russian Arctic protected areas network Komi Republic – S.V. Degteva, A.K. Blagovidov with respect to areas with high nature conservation value 147 Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug – M.V. Mirutenko, E.S. Ravkin, O.V. Brigadirova, V.B. Petrunin 2.3.1. Wetlands of international importance 148 Krasnoyarsk Krai – O.N. Nogina, E.B. Pospelova Sakha Republic – L.S.Volkova, Y.S.Sivtsev 2.3.2. Important bird areas 156 Magadan Oblast – A.V. Andreev 2.3.3. Seabird nesting colonies and nesting areas 168 Chukotka Autonomous Okrug – N.G. Shevchenko, M.S. Stishov 2.3.4. Coastal sea mammal rookeries 177 Kamchatka Krai – O.V. Chernyiagina, E.G.Lobkov, V.E. Kirichenko, J.N. Gerasimov 2.3.5. Main calving areas of wild reindeer herds 179 Authors of thematic reviews 2.3.6. Nesting, moulting and migratory staging areas for game species of waterfowl 184 Landscapes and ecosystems – M.S. Stishov, G.M. Tertitskiy 2.3.7. Spawning and rearing grounds, feeding areas and migratory routes of commercial Rare mammal species – B.I. Sheftel fish species 186 Rare bird species – V.V. Morozov, S.A. Bukreev, M.S. Stishov Rare fish species – M.S. Stishov 2.3.8. Coastal marshes 188 Rare invertebrate species – A.K. Blagovidov, M.S. Stishov 2.3.9. Intact forest landscapes 188 Rare species of plantae vesculares – V.J.Razevin 2.3.10. Rare and relict communities and ecosystems 192 Rare bryophyte species - M.S. Ignatov Forest, open woodland and shrub communities 192 Rare lichen species – G.P. Urbanavichus, I.N. Urabanavichene Key bird habitats – T.V.Sviridova, S.A. Bukreev Steppe, cryophytic-steppe and tundra-steppe communities 193 Wetlands – O.J. Anisimova, I.E. Kamenova Communities associated with distinctive substrates 193 Seabird nesting colonies – M.V. Gavrilo, M.S. Stishov Thermophilic communities 195 Coastal breeding-grounds of sea mammals – M.V. Gavrilo, A.A. Kochnev Wild caribou – L.M. Baskin, P.I. Danilov, V.V. Larin, V.V. Mosolov, V.P. Novikov, I.M Ohlopkov, V.M. Safronov 2.3.11 Completeness of the Russian Arctic PA network for areas of high nature conservation value 196 Swampland communities – G.A. Sergienko, M.A. Shreders Virgin forest areas – D.A. Aksenov, I.V. Glushkov, M.L. Karpachevskiy, T.O. Yanitskaya, A.J. Yaroshenko 3. Prospects for improvement of the protected area network Rare and relict species and ecosystems – M.S. Stishov, A.K. Blagovidov in the Russian Arctic 207 Russian translator: Denis Maksimov 3.1. Existing plans and proposals for development of federal and regional PA networks Editor of translated texted: Joan Eamer in the Russian Arctic 207 Cartography: M.S. Stishov, I.A. Yaroshenko 3.2. Proposed PA network in the Russian Arctic based on evaluation of the existing network’s completeness and representativeness 219

Published by WWF-Russia Printed by Skorost Tsveta Number of copies: 1 000 For free destribution Text: © WWF-Russia, 2014. All rights reserved. Cover: © WWF-Russia The Programme of Work on Protected Areas was signed in 2004 and the country exceed any plausible exploitation quotas. This undermines the Preface at the 7th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention populations of mammals, birds and fish. on Biological Diversity (COP 7). This programme largely defines In The Foundations of Governmental Policy in the Arctic for the Period until the requirements and approaches for the establishment and maintenance of protected 2020 and Further Prospects (approved by the President of the Russian Federation areas (PAs) for all the signing parties. on September 18, 2008 – #1969), the “conservation of unique arctic ecosystems” is One of the key goals of the program is the planning and creation of a listed as one of the top national priorities. There are two goals outlined as central in representative network of protected areas both at the national and regional levels. assuring ecological integrity for the arctic environment. The first is the conservation From 2005 to 2012, WWF Russia completed projects on protected areas for the and the protection of the arctic environment. The second is the eradication of whole of the Russian Federation (www.wwf.ru/resources/publ/book/292), as ecological consequences that result from human activity and global climate change. well as for specific regions of Russia and neighboring countries. The following There are two main tools for implementation of the second of these goals. The first regions were targeted: the Altai-Sayan Ecoregion (www.wwf.ru/resources/publ/ is the development of concrete guidelines for the use of bioresources in the Russian book/292), the Republic of Altai (www.wwf.ru/resources/publ/book/764) and Arctic, as well as undertaking specific actions to preserve the arctic environment, countries of Central Asia (www.wwf.ru/resources/publ/book/179). Current such as pollution monitoring. The second is the creation of protected areas, a key projects focus on perspectives on protected area development in the Russian element of the environmental policies of the Russian Federation. Arctic. The goal of the current WWF Russia effort is the development of a network The circumpolar Arctic occupies approximately 4 per cent of the surface area of of protected areas in the Russian Arctic. Protected areas must be representative the Earth but is home to only 1 per cent of global biological species. Although there of the biological diversity present in the region and work towards conserving the is a relative low level of biodiversity in the Arctic, it plays a key role in conserving biological and landscape diversity of the Arctic in the context of future socio- global biodiversity. The low biological diversity of the Arctic sharply increases economic developments. The main steps in development of this network are: the evolutionary-ecological significance of each individual species as well the 1. Analysis of the representativeness of the existing network of federal and regional importance of many of these species to humans. It also enhances the community- protected areas, followed by assessment of the efficiency of the protected areas forming role of many species in the structure of habitats and ecosystems. in the protection of regional biological diversity The Russian sector of the Arctic takes up no less than a third of the entire Arctic 2. Identification of gaps in the current PA system, based on the above analysis and plays a globally important role in the conservation of ecosystems because it hosts 3. Identification of areas that require the creation of new protected areas to close the most typical Arctic landscapes. The Russian Arctic is home to approximately 80 these gaps per cent of all species typically found in arctic landscapes and 90 per cent of the estimated 2,000 species found in the circumpolar Arctic. Due to their ecological 4. Assignment of the optimal designation and management level (federal or distinctiveness, many species found in the Arctic are extremely sensitive to various regional), along with priority level, for each proposed protected area forms of habitat change. It is important to note that the final list of proposed protected areas includes all Anthropogenic pressure on arctic land and sea ecosystems has been rapidly areas that are necessary to achieve two goals: 1) establishment of a network that increasing over the past decades. There has been a proliferation of industries that is representative of arctic biodiversity, and 2) preservation of rare and valuable previously had a limited presence and that are now aggressively expanding into species. It is clear that, in the future, the potential for establishing the proposed arctic ecosystems. Human activity has also rapidly increased, leading to more system will largely depend on how environmental considerations are positioned in roads and other linear features, more industrial enterprises and more and expanded the socio-economic development of specific regions, as well as to what degree these communities. Large regions of the Kola Peninsula, lower reaches of the Pechory considerations conflict with economic objectives. River, Bolshezemelskaya Tundra, Yamal Peninsula, the southern part of the Taymyr This project has been completed with the support of WWF Netherlands. Peninsula, northern Sakha Republic, Chukotka and other areas have been negatively The electronic version of the book is published on the Internet at www.wwf.ru/ affected. Ecosystems, together with plant and animal species, are subject to habitat resources/publ/book/eng/835. All comments and reviews of this publication can be reduction, habitat fragmentation and extirpation. sent to [email protected]. In the past years, the commercial use of arctic bioresources has been overwhelmingly unsustainable and destructive to the Russian Arctic. The number V.G. Krever of animals, plants and bioresources that are collected and removed from the region Head of the Biodiversity Programme of WWF Russia

4 5 This review provides an up-to-date evaluation of Introduction terrestrial protected areas (PAs) in the arctic region of Russia. It includes evaluation of how well the PA network represents natural biodiversity and how complete the network is for biodiversity conservation. Gaps in the existing federal and regional PA networks of the Russian Arctic were identified in the course of the evaluation. Results of the analyses were used to develop recommendations for measures to conserve the natural biodiversity of the Russian Arctic in the context of projected climate change and planned socio-economic changes. The world scientific literature uses the terms “Arctic” or “arctic region” in reference to regions with quite different definitions, ranging from only polar deserts to the full range of zonal subdivisions, from polar deserts in the north

to boreal forests in the south. The most frequent areas considered as arctic are Polar desert zone Tundra zone the lands to the north of the treeline or beyond the forest-shrub vegetation that Tundra-forest zone Mountain pine zone extends along watersheds. This corresponds to the polar desert and tundra zone, Forest-meadow zone sometimes excluding the southern tundra zones. Arctic region boundary (red line)

This review uses a common, fairly inclusive definition of the Arctic. The Figure 1. Boundaries and zones of the Russian arctic region boundary is drawn along the southern border of the tundra-forest zone, as defined by Parmuzin (1979)1, and thus the arctic region includes the polar desert, tion along watercourses, and extensive marshes. The Beringian mountain pine tundra and forest-tundra zones, as well as the forest-meadow zone as an ana- tundra (tundra-forest) and the Pacific coast forest-meadow zone should also be logue for the marine coastal tundra-forest ecosystems of the Kamchatka Penin- included in the hypoarctic belt. Landscape diversity in the eoarctic belt is re- sula and the northern Kurile Islands. The mountain pine zone is included in the lated to differences in the proportions of barren ground and vegetation cover, arctic region as a separate zone specific to the Beringia sector – note, however, while in the hypoarctic belt it is related to the differences in proportions of forest that it is usually considered as a special tundra subzone or as tundra-forest. cover in watersheds. Thus, in total, five zones make up the natural landscape within the boundaries The boundaries of the arctic region as defined above differ slightly from the defined for the arctic region (Figure 1). boundaries of the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) area. The The arctic region (as defined above) completely covers two biogeographic differences between the two sets of boundaries are not systematic, but rather belts – eoarctic and hypoarctic – that have been described based on zoogeo- are specific to different regions (Figure 2). The most important difference is graphic studies (by A.A. Kischinskiy2) and botanical-geographical studies (by our inclusion in the arctic region of the whole Pacific coastal forest-meadow B.A. Yurtsev3). Areas within each biogeographic belt are characterized by com- zone. Specifically, the Kamchatka Peninsula and northern Kuriles Islands are mon features of their histories and their environments, with similarities in the included in the arctic region for this review, while they are not included in the processes that shaped the development of their flora and fauna and similarities CAFF arctic area, though the latter does include the Commander Islands, which in their modern species assemblages. The eoarctic belt includes polar deserts, are in the same ecological zone. Our approach appears reasonable, as the CAFF arctic tundra, and northern and mid-zone tundra, i.e. areas without forest-shrub area includes tundra-forest, and part of the sparse taiga regions that are not more vegetation on flat watersheds. The hypoarctic belt includes southern tundra, the “arctic” than the landscapes of Kamchatka. tundra-forest transition zone, sparse northern forests, vigorous shrub vegeta- Other differences between the two sets of boundaries are related to prefer- ences for particular boundaries of zonal divisions and subdivisions in regions between the tundra and taiga zones, including taiga south of the sparsely for- 1 Parmuzin, Y.P. 1979. Tundra-Forest Zone of the USSR. Misl Press, Moscow. 396p. [in Russian] ested northern taiga. The CAFF boundary passes further north in the European 2 For example, Kishchinsky, A.A. 1988. Ornithofauna of Northeastern Asia: History and part of Russia, except on the Kola Peninsula and in Western Siberia, where it Current Status. Nauka, Moscow. 288 pp. [in Russian] corresponds approximately to the southern edge of the tundra-forest zone. This 3 For example, Yurtsev, B.A. 1966. Hypoarctic Botanico-Geographical belt and origin of its zone is normally considered as a separate natural zone, but is considered by Y.P. flora. Nauka, Moscow and Leningrad. 92 pp. [in Russian] Parmuzin as a subzone of the tundra-forest zone.) The CAFF boundary follows

6 7 Verkhnekolymsky, Eveno-Bytynsky, Verkhyansky, Oimyakon, Momsky and Abyisky regions (ulus), most of Olenek, Zhigansky and Tomponsky regions, and about half of Tomponsky region, as well as smaller areas of Mirnisnsky, Verkhnevilyuisky and Ust’-Maisky regions; 11) Chukotka AO; 12) Magadan province; 13) Kamchatka region; 14) the northern part of the Okhotsk district of Khabarovsk region; and, 15) most of the Northern-Kurile region of Sakhalin province. To summarize, six regions of the Russian Federation (Murmansk province, Nenets AO, Yamalo-Nenets AO, Magadan province, Chukotka AO and Kamchatka AO) are entirely or almost entirely within the Russian Arctic. Four regions (Archangel province, Komi Republic, Krasnoyarsk region and Sakha- Polar desert Yakutia) are each about one-third within the Arctic. Relatively small parts of an Tundra Tundra-forest additional three regions (Khanty-Mansi AO, Khabarovsk region and the Sakha- Sparse forest lin Republic) are included (Figure 3). Taiga (boreal forest) Boundaries: Mountain pine zone Arctic region This review is underlain by a general evaluation of representativeness and Forest-meadow zone CAFF area completeness of the protected area (PA) network the Russian Arctic, and also Figure 2. Boundaries of the Russian Arctic as defined for this review and as defined by the Conservation of Arctic by evaluations undertaken by the regional authorities for certain regions of the Flora and Fauna working group of Arctic Council (CAFF) Russian Federation. First, the review focuses on the main part of the Arctic: the polar desert and tundra zones, which, in many cases, are better studied than the a parallel of latitude in the Russian plain and the Russian part of Fennoscandia. tundra-forest zone, and which are of the highest concern in the context of pro- Because of this, the CAFF area on the Kola Peninsula includes tundra-forest, jected climate change and planned industrial development. At the regional level, sparse forest and some areas of more densely treed taiga. By contrast, the CAFF evaluation of the status and representativeness of PA networks and of gaps in the area boundary passes south of the boundary used for this review in middle Si- beria, covering northern taiga areas in addition to tundra-forest. In the northeast the CAFF boundary is to the north of this review’s boundary for the arctic region, but extends further south of the southern edge of the tundra-forest zone (as can be seen in Figure 2). Thus the CAFF area includes rather large areas of sparse forest, except in the southern Okhotsk coastal area. The arctic region covers 35 per cent of the total area of Russia and includes all or part of 13 regions of the Russian Federation (Figure 3). The regions included in the Russian Arctic are: 1) nearly all of Murmansk province, except the far southern part; 2) the northern edge of Archangel province, including the whole of Mezen and part of Primorsky municipal regions, and also the islands of Franz-Josef Land, Victoria and Novaya Zemlya, which are governed by Archangel administration; 3) Nenets Autonomous Okrug (AO); 4) one-third of the northern part of the Komi Republic (including the municipalities of Vorkuta, Boundary of the arctic Inta, Usinsk, and about half of the areas of Pechora, Izhemsk and Ust’-Celem region Areas of the arctic region regions); 5) Yamalo-Nenets AO, except the southern-most part of Purovsky and excluded from the regional Krasnoselkupsky regions; 6) the far north of the Berezovsky and Beloyarsky evaluation

regions of Khanty-Mansi AO; 7) Taimyr (Dolgano-Nenets); 8) the far north of Figure 3. Administrative subdivisions in the arctic region of Russia the Turukhansky district, as well as 9) Evenkiysky municipal region of Krasno- 1 – Murmansk province, 2 – Archangel province, 3 – Nenets AO, 4 – Komi Republic, 5 – Yamalo-Nenets AO, 6 – Khanty-Mansi AO, 7 – Taimyr (Dolgano-Nenets) MR of the Krasnoyarsk region, 8 – Turukhansky MR of the yarsk region; 10) over half of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia), including Anabar- Krasnoyarsk region, 9 – Evenliysky MR of the Krasnoyarsk region, 10 – Sakha Republic (Yakutia), 11 – Chukotka AO, 12 – Magadan province, 13 – Kamchatka region, 14 – Khabarovsk region, 15 – Sakhalin province. sky, Bulunsky, Ust’-Yana, Allaikhovsky, Nizhnekolymsky, Srednekolymsky, (See text for more detail.)

8 9 networks were carried out only for regions of the Russian Federation that are At the beginning of 2012 there were 450 pro- entirely or substantively within the Arctic. Thus the territories of Khanty-Mansi 1. The existing tected areas within the boundaries of the Russian AO, Khabarovsk region, Sakhalin province and Turukhansky municipal region Arctic, excluding marine areas (shown in Figure of the Krasnoyarsk region have not been included in this review, although they network of 4, listed in Table 1, and summarized by type and are associated with the Russian Arctic (Figure 3). The combined “arctic” areas region in Table 2). Their total area is just over 94.6 of these regions is less than 3.5 per cent of the Russian Arctic as defined for this protected areas million hectares, which amounts to 16.2 per cent review, and therefore is not of great significance for this assessment. The arctic of the total area of the Russian Arctic. Buffer zones parts of these regions are at the southern edge of the Arctic, generally in zones in the Russian and traditional land management areas, as well as that are transitional to the boreal forest. planned PAs, are not included in the list of Russia’s It is important, when reading this report, to bear in mind that the data pre- Arctic arctic PAs used for these calculations. For PAs lo- sented reflect the varying levels of detail and extent of knowledge, both about cated partly in the Arctic, only the areas within the the range of natural features discussed and about the many regions and jurisdic- Arctic were included. tions. In particular, the level of knowledge is much better for some groups of arctic-dwelling plants and animals than for others. Table 1. The Russian Arctic protected areas list The list is current to the first quarter of 2012 and excludes buffer zones, traditional land management areas and planned PAs. Management jurisdictions: Fed – federal, Reg – regional, Mun - municipal Area for each PA does not include marine areas and areas located outside of the arctic region. Where labelled “n.d.” the area is not defined.

Man- Focus or Num- agement type or Area Year ber on Name or description Type jurisdic- features pro- (ha) estab- map tion filed lished Murmansk province Strictly protected 101 Lapland Reserve reserve Fed Biosphere 278,436 1957 Strictly protected 102 Pasvik Reserve reserve Fed 14,727 1992 Strictly protected 103 Kandalaksha Reserve reserve Fed 10,450 1932 104 Murmansk tundra area Game reserve Fed Game 295,000 1987 105 Tuloma Game reserve Fed Game 33,700 1989 106 Kanozero Game reserve Fed Game 65,660 1989 Astrophyllites of Eveslogchorr 107 Mount Nature monument Fed Geological 4 1985 Zalezh' Jubileinaya (Jubilee 108 pegmatite deposit) Nature monument Fed Geological 0.5 1985 109 Mogil'noe Lake Nature monument Fed Hydrological 17 1985 110 Polar-alpine Botanical garden Fed 1,332 1970 Complex 111 Seidozero Nature reserve Reg (landscape) 17,400 1982 112 Simbozero Nature reserve Reg Biological 401 113 Ponoi B80 Nature reserve Reg Fishery 98,600 2002 Complex 114 Lapland forest Nature reserve Reg (landscape) 172,330 2011 115 Varzuga Nature reserve Reg Fishery 45,093 1982 Complex 116 Kolvitsky Nature reserve Reg (landscape) 43,600 1982

10 11 Figure 4. Protected areas in the Russian Arctic Categories (colour codes): F – federal, R – regional and municipal; 1 – strictly protected reserves (zapovedniks), 2 – nature reserves (zakazniks), 3 – national and nature parks, 4 – nature monuments, 5 – other PA types . Number labels on the PAs correspond to numbers in Table 1.

12 13 Man- Focus or Man- Focus or Num- agement type or Area Year Num- agement type or Area Year ber on Name or description Type jurisdic- features pro- (ha) estab- ber on Name or description Type jurisdic- features pro- (ha) estab- map tion filed lished map tion filed lished 117 Ponoi Nature reserve Reg Zoological 98,600 1981 150 Ivanovskaya Guba Bay Nature monument Reg Botanical 7,480 2009 Siberian cedar in Nikel Forest Seabird colonies of Dvorovaya 118 District Nature monument Reg Forest 0.2 1986 151 Guba Bay Nature monument Reg Zoological 610 2009 119 Cedars of Okunevoe boundary Nature monument Reg Forest 20 1980 Rock carvings of Chalmny- Nature – 152 Varre Nature monument Reg Historical 1 1980 Cedars on the Zapadnaya Litsa 120 River Nature monument Reg Forest 2 1980 Geological- 153 Lovozero Geophysical Station Nature monument Reg Geophysical 4 1980 Larches of the Lower Tuloma 121 reservoir Nature monument Reg Forest 6 1980 Pegmatites of Mount Maly 154 Punkuruaiv Nature monument Reg Geological 2 1980 Cedar zone of the Krivets 122 forest Nature monument Reg Forest 2 1980 155 Glacial boulder Nature monument Reg Geological 0.1 1980 Sheepback Rock by Basaltoid lavas near Rizh- 123 Semenovskoe Lake Nature monument Reg Geological 0.5 1980 156 Guba Bay Nature monument Reg Geological 9 1980 Area of Siberian larch of non- Shuoni-Kuets Geological- Geological- 124 native origin Nature monument Reg Forest 0.9 1980 157 Geophysical Area Nature monument Reg Geophysical 300 1980 Area of Siberian larch Spruce zone along the arctic 125 plantation Nature monument Reg Forest 5.6 1986 158 boundary Nature monument Reg Forest 0.5 1980

126 Pines along the boreal Nature monument Reg Forest 4.6 1980 159 Kitkuai river valley Nature monument Reg Botanical 3 1980 boundary of the area Archangel province Area of cedar of non-native 211 Russian Arctic National park Fed 1,426,000 2009 127 origin Nature monument Reg Forest 0.4 1980 212 Frantz-Josef Land Nature reserve Fed 1,600,000 1994 128 Larch grove of Taibola Nature monument Reg Forest 2 1980 213 Soyana Nature reserve Reg 154,000 1983 Komsozero Lake and 500 m of 129 lakeside Nature monument Reg Hydrological 50 1980 214 Primorsky Nature reserve Reg 160,000 1983 Nenets AO 130 Ekostrov kintische Nature monument Reg Nature – 105.5 1980 (churchyard) Historical Strictly protected 221 Nenets reserve Fed 131,500 1997 131 Fluorites of the Elokostrov Nature monument Reg Geological 2 1980 overthrust 222 Nenets Nature reserve Fed Zoological 188,500 1985 132 Eichfeld's Grove Nature monument Reg Forest 0.3 1980 223 More-Yu Nature reserve Reg Complex 54,765 1999 Cedars and larches near 224 Vaygach Nature reserve Reg Complex 242,778 2007 133 Khibiny Station Nature monument Reg Forest 2 1980 225 Shoinsky Nature reserve Reg Complex 16,400 1997 134 Aikuaivenchorr Gorge Nature monument Reg Botanical 2 1980 226 Nizhnepechorsky Nature reserve Reg Complex 88,073 1998 135 Cryptogramma Gorge Nature monument Reg Botanical 1 1980 Bolshie Vorota Canyon (Big 136 Yuksporlak Nature monument Reg Botanical 3 1980 227 Gate) Nature monument Reg Complex 212 1987 137 Waterfall on Shuonijoki River Nature monument Reg Hydrological 1 1980 228 The Stone Town Nature monument Reg Complex 4,858 2011 Arnicas and poppies of 229 Pym-Va-Shor Nature monument Reg Complex 2,425 2000 138 Indichyok Gorge Nature monument Reg Botanical 1 1980 Komi Republic 139 Maly Punkuruaiv Nature monument Reg Botanical 5 1980 301 Yugyd Va National park Fed Natural 1,891,700 1994 Arnicas of the gorge by Lake 140 Palga Nature monument Reg Botanical 1 1980 302 Khrebtoviy Nature reserve Reg Complex 4,000 1989 141 Mount Flora Nature monument Reg Botanical 10 1980 303 Sula-Kharjaginsky Nature reserve Reg Forest 6,500 1984 304 Marsh (wetland)-ocean Nature reserve Reg Marsh 178,975 1978 142 Siberian larches in the Nature monument Reg Forest 12 1980 Lovozero Forest District 305 Larkovsky (raised bog) Nature reserve Reg Marsh 14,000 1989 143 Amazonites of Mount Nature monument Reg Geological 1 1980 Hopkovsky and Kletchatiy Parusnaya 306 (raised bog) Nature reserve Reg Marsh 5,500 1989 144 Amethysts of Ship Cape Nature monument Reg Geological 1 1980 307 Chukchinskoe Nature reserve Reg Marsh 8,000 1978 145 Waterfall on Chavanga River Nature monument Reg Hydrological 100 1980 308 Usinsky Nature reserve Reg Complex 138,300 1978 146 Waterfall on Chapoma River Nature monument Reg Hydrological 50 1980 309 Usinsky Nature reserve Reg Ichthyological 11,910 1984 Eutrophic swamp in the 310 Syninsky Nature reserve Reg Biological 135,400 1989 147 southern foothills of Khibiny Nature monument Reg Botanical 10 1980 311 Adak Nature reserve Reg Complex 3,000 1984 Junipers in the Magazine- 148 Musyur upland Nature monument Reg Botanical 3,000 1980 312 Ponju-Zaostrennaya Nature reserve Reg Complex 7,020 1978 Habitat of Bryoria bicolor near 313 Usa-Yunyaga Nature reserve Reg Marsh 3,000 1978 149 Mount Vidpahk Nature monument Reg Botanical 1,500 2009

14 15 Man- Focus or Man- Focus or Num- agement type or Area Year Num- agement type or Area Year ber on Name or description Type jurisdic- features pro- (ha) estab- ber on Name or description Type jurisdic- features pro- (ha) estab- map tion filed lished map tion filed lished 314 Intinskoe Nature reserve Reg Marsh 3,500 1978 402 Kunovat Nature reserve Fed Zoological 220,000 1982 315 Rodionovskoe Nature reserve Reg Marsh 1,730 1978 403 Nadym Nature reserve Fed Zoological 564,000 1986 316 Pechora Nature reserve Reg Marsh 6,583 1989 404 Nizhne-Obsky Nature reserve Fed Zoological 128,000 1982 317 Hayminsky Nature reserve Reg Botanical 225 1978 405 Yuribei Nature park Reg 509,544.3 2010 318 Nadpoimenny Nature reserve Reg Marsh 255 1989 406 Verkhnepoluisky Nature reserve Reg Biological 195,322 2009 319 Nebesanyur Nature reserve Reg Marsh 1,600 1978 407 Gornokhadatinsky Nature reserve Reg Biological 187,461 2009 320 Shelyayur Nature reserve Reg Marsh 1,854 1989 408 Messoyakhinsky Nature reserve Reg Biological 86,592 2005 321 Bolshoy (Large) Nature reserve Reg Marsh 767 1989 409 Polar-Ural Nature reserve Reg Biological 32,540 2005 322 Nomburgsky Nature reserve Reg Botanical 2,000 1984 410 Pyakolsky Nature reserve Reg Biological 407,747 2005 323 Verhnetsilemsky Nature reserve Reg Floristic 13,200 1984 411 Sobty-Yugan Nature reserve Reg Biological 343,519 2010 324 Novoborsky Nature reserve Reg Meadow 636 1989 412 Yamal Nature reserve Reg Biological 1,828,720 2006 325 The marsh "Putannye Ozera" Nature reserve Reg Marsh 100 1978 413 Harbei Nature monument Reg Geological 650 1999 326 Enganepe Nature reserve Reg Forest 790 1989 Khanty Mansi AO (Yugra) 414 Numto Nature park Reg 721,797 1997 327 Genetic Reserve of Siberian Genetic reserve Reg Forest 1,120 1978 spruce and Siberian larch 415 Sorumsky Nature reserve Reg Game 159,300 1995 328 Syvyu Nature monument Reg Geological 5 1989 416 Berezovsky Nature reserve Reg Ornithological 43,320 1978 329 Balbanyu Nature monument Reg Botanical 3 1989 417 Leshak-Schelya Nature monument Reg Paleontological 2,320 2008 330 Limbekoyu (Yareney) Nature monument Reg Geological 2 1989 418 Un-Novyinklor and Ai- Nature monument Reg Hydrological 1,000 1996 331 Lolashor Nature monument Reg Geological 0 1989 Novyinklor lake system 332 Kayuk-Nyrd Nature monument Reg Geological 25 1989 Krasnoyarsk region 333 Verhniy(Upper) Nortnicha-el Nature monument Reg Geological 20 1989 Strictly protected 501 Great Arctic reserve Fed 3,188,288 1993 334 Koltso (Ring) Nature monument Reg Geological 1 1984 Strictly protected Cedar on the island 502 Taimyr reserve Fed 1,744,910 1979 335 Medvezhiy(Bear) Nature monument Reg Cedar 1 1989 Strictly protected 336 Sokolovo Nature monument Reg Cedar 185 1967 503 Putoransky reserve Fed 1,887,251 1988 337 Levoberezhniy Nature monument Reg Marsh 1,880 1989 504 Brekhovsky islands Nature reserve Fed Complex 288,487 1999 338 Kremen'el' Nature monument Reg Cedar 13 1967 505 Purinsky Nature reserve Fed Zoological 787,500 1988 339 Sharyu Nature monument Reg Geological 100 1984 506 Severozemelsky (northern) Nature reserve Fed Complex 421,701 1996 340 Srednie Vorota (Middle Gate) Nature monument Reg Geological 250 1984 Nature- on the River Sharyu 507 Geographic Centre of Russia Nature monument Reg Historical 11,859 1993 341 Adz'vinskiy Nature monument Reg Geological 5 1984 Sakha Republic (Yakutia) 342 Vadcharty Nature monument Reg Cedar 120 1978 Strictly protected 601 Ust-lensky reserve Fed 1,433,000 1985 343 Key section of late and early Nature monument Reg Geological 1 1989 Permian boundary 602 Ust-Vilyuisky Nature park Reg 919,221 1997 344 Olysya Mount Nature monument Reg Geological 200 1984 603 Momsky Nature park Reg 1,959,887 1996 345 Lemva Nature monument Reg Botanical 36 1978 604 Kolyma Nature park Reg 2,160,492 2000 346 Larch Nature monument Reg Forest 120 1978 605 Yana mammoths Nature reserve Reg Paleontological 3,300,000 2010 347 Parnoka-Yu Nature monument Reg Forest 15 1978 606 Sutoruokha Resource reserve Reg 293,643 1996 348 Waterfall on Halmer-Yu River Nature monument Reg Hydrological 1 1989 607 Saiylyk Resource reserve Reg 18,412 1980 349 Yun’yakhaty Nature monument Reg Cedar 25 1978 608 Lake Ozhogino Resource reserve Reg 203,756 1996 350 Marsh by Yun'-yaga farm Nature monument Reg Marsh 100 1978 609 Shangina Basin Resource reserve Reg 200,459 2001 351 Bogatyr Schelye Nature monument Reg Geological 1 1973 610 Badyarikha Basin Resource reserve Reg 575,901 2001 352 Vorkuta Nature monument Reg Geological 5 1984 611 Kytalyk Resource reserve Reg 2,852,655 1996 353 Vorkuta Nature monument Reg Meadow 31 1984 612 Terpei-Tumus Resource reserve Reg 1,023,821 1997 354 Pemboy Mount Nature monument Reg Geological 130 1984 613 Lena Delta Resource reserve Reg 6,052,688 1996 Yamalo-Nenets AO 614 Yasachnaya Basin Resource reserve Reg 997,098 2002 Strictly protected 615 Sylgy-Ytar Resource reserve Reg 19,943 1984 401 Gydan reserve Fed 878,174 1996

16 17 Man- Focus or Man- Focus or Num- agement type or Area Year Num- agement type or Area Year ber on Name or description Type jurisdic- features pro- (ha) estab- ber on Name or description Type jurisdic- features pro- (ha) estab- map tion filed lished map tion filed lished 616 Ozhogino Basin Resource reserve Reg 1,323,676 2002 662 Dolguchan Resource reserve Mun 308.9 1999 617 Undyulyung Resource reserve Reg 878,912 1994 663 Inderkey Protection zone Mun 57,600 1995 618 Tuostakh Resource reserve Reg 503,530 1997 664 Lake Challa Protection zone Mun 50,000 1995 619 Oldyo Resource reserve Reg 601,544 2002 665 Echiy River Protection zone Mun 229,800 1995 620 Muna Resource reserve Reg 287,389 2000 666 Khaltysy River Protection zone Mun 132,400 1995 621 Chaigurgino Resource reserve Reg 2,363,043 1982 667 Nelgese (Nelgehe) River Protection zone Mun 223,900 1995 622 Eselyakh Resource reserve Reg 1,660,501 1996 668 Lake Abyrabyt Protection zone Mun 131,700 1995 623 Medvezhyi (Bear) Islands Resource reserve Reg 13,990 2002 669 Lake Namy Protection zone Mun 28,300 1995 624 Kolyma-Koren Resource reserve Reg 208,628 2002 670 Kyuchyus River Protection zone Mun 56,400 1995 625 Kurdigino-Krestovaya Resource reserve Reg 1,080,024 2002 671 Oyun-Yuryage Protection zone Mun 224,000 1995 626 Tommot Resource reserve Reg 251,254 2001 672 Nenneli River Protection zone Mun 78,400 1995 627 Ygyanna Resource reserve Reg 268,830 1974 673 Lake Dapdary Protection zone Mun 69,400 1995 628 Troitskoe Resource reserve Reg 5,080 1975 674 Suruktakh River Protection zone Mun 29,700 1995 629 Verkhneindigirsky Resource reserve Reg 428,369 1992 Ulakhan Kyuyel (Anabar ulus 675 (region)) Unique lake Mun 6,938 1994 630 Suntar-Khayata Resource reserve Reg 66,600 1996 Ulakhan Kyuyel (Bulun ulus 631 Sededema Resource reserve Reg 65,000 1995 676 (region)) Unique lake Mun 11,046 1994 632 Orulgan-Sis Resource reserve Reg 1,183,906 2000 677 Siegemde Unique lake Mun 3,645 1994 633 Khotu Resource reserve Reg 3,047,475 2000 678 Sebyan Kyuyel Unique lake Mun 2,071 1994 634 Gorny (mountain) Resource reserve Reg 634,381 2002 679 Buustaakh Unique lake Mun 20,000 1994 635 Bur Resource reserve Reg 2,216,580 2000 680 Ozhogino Unique lake Mun 2,000 1994 636 Beke Resource reserve Reg 1,549,141 2000 681 Mogotoevo Unique lake Mun 16,000 1994 637 Alakit Resource reserve Reg 1,791,759 2000 682 Bolshoe (Great) Morskoe Unique lake Mun 12,000 1994 638 Linde Resource reserve Reg 1,287,220 2001 (Mainychin-Ankavatan) 639 Tukulan Resource reserve Reg 470,250 1999 683 Chukochye Unique lake Mun 7,000 1994 640 Kele Resource reserve Reg 400,600 1996 684 Labynkyr Unique lake Mun 3,000 1994 641 Tyukyan Resource reserve Reg 60,000 1996 685 Dzhelinde Unique lake Mun 2,500 1994 642 Timirdikeen Resource reserve Reg 5,200 1996 Magadan region 643 Oiyagossky Yar Nature monument Reg Paleontological 1,291 1971 Strictly protected 701 Magadan reserve Fed 883,817 1982 644 Khaptashinsky Yar Nature monument Reg Paleontological 5,000 1971 702 Talan Island Nature monument Fed 152 1991 645 Lyakhovsky Nature monument Reg Paleontological 5,000 1971 703 Odyan Nature reserve Reg Zoological 72,700 1993 646 Berelekhsky Nature monument Reg Paleontological 1,000 1971 704 Omolon Nature reserve Reg Zoological 102,700 1980 647 Chukochye Nature monument Reg Paleontological 2,000 1971 705 Taigonos Nature reserve Reg Zoological 400,000 1978 648 Kitchan Resource reserve Mun 650,000 1999 706 Kavinsky Valley Nature reserve Reg Complex 243,000 1961 649 Solokut Resource reserve Mun 382,200 1999 707 Malkachan Tundra Nature reserve Reg Complex 45,000 1967 650 Markhara Resource reserve Mun 851,000 2000 708 Khinike Nature reserve Reg Complex 370,000 1986 651 Kharaulakh Resource reserve Mun 542,000 2001 709 Atargansky Nature monument Reg Geological 30 1983 652 Zashiversk Resource reserve Mun 374,132 1999 710 Mayakan Volcano Nature monument Reg Geological 27 1983 653 Kytalyk Resource reserve Mun 1,564,490 2001 711 Talsky Nature monument Reg Water 35 1983 654 Kerbecheen Resource reserve Mun 193,160 1999 712 Khasynsky Nature monument Reg Botanical 29 1983 655 Eiemyu Resource reserve Mun 201,600 1999 713 Ola Plateau Nature monument Reg Complex 40 1983 656 Alakit Resource reserve Mun 2,165,000 2001 714 Basalt Nature monument Reg Geological 15 1983 657 Beke Resource reserve Mun 1,498,700 2001 715 Sandy Nature monument Reg Geological 20 1983 658 Birekte Resource reserve Mun 712,500 1999 716 Aborigen Nature monument Reg Botanical 45 1983 659 Alazeya Resource reserve Mun 536,200 2001 717 Nelyudimaya Nature monument Reg Geological 12 1983 660 Terpei-Tumus Resource reserve Mun 3,994,803 1999 718 Jack London Lake Nature monument Reg Complex 1,200 1983 661 Mekchirge Resource reserve Mun 40,400 1999

18 19 Man- Focus or Man- Focus or Num- agement type or Area Year Num- agement type or Area Year ber on Name or description Type jurisdic- features pro- (ha) estab- ber on Name or description Type jurisdic- features pro- (ha) estab- map tion filed lished map tion filed lished 719 Nelkobinsky Nature monument Reg Water 257 1983 823 Chegitun Nature monument Reg Complex 20 1983 720 Taskansky Nature monument Reg Botanical 31 1983 824 Eastern Nature monument Reg Complex 23 1983 721 Omulevsky Nature monument Reg Geological 29 1983 825 Pekulney Nature monument Reg Botanical 37 1983 722 Zamkovoe Nature monument Reg Botanical 40 1983 826 Cape Kozhevnikov Nature monument Reg Zoological 48.3 2011 723 Seimchan Nature monument Reg Botanical 35 1983 827 Cape Vankarem Nature monument Reg Zoological 40 2007 724 Dzhegdyan Nature monument Reg Geological 21 1983 828 Klyuchevoy Nature monument Reg Water 21 1983 Nature- Kamchatka region 725 Island in the Kolyma River Nature monument Reg Historical 8 1983 901 Kronotsky Strictly protected Fed 1,007,134 1967 726 Kananyzhsky Nature monument Reg Geological 27 1983 reserve 727 Avlandinsky Nature monument Reg Botanical 15 1983 Strictly protected 902 Koryaksky reserve Fed 244,156 1995 728 Tavatumsky Nature monument Reg Geological 19 1983 Strictly protected 729 Shirokaya Nature monument Reg Geological 16 1983 903 Commander Islands reserve Fed 185,379 1993 730 Omolon Nature monument Reg Botanical 25 1983 904 South Kamchatka Nature reserve Fed Complex 225,000 1995 731 Motykleisky Nature monument Reg Botanical 15 1983 905 Volcanoes of Kamchatka Nature park Reg 2,475,036 2010 732 Vesely Nature monument Mun Botanical 17 1984 906 Tayozhny (Taiga) Nature reserve Reg Landscape 41,000 1986 733 Ryabinovy Nature monument Mun Botanical 18 1984 907 Beaver (Bobrovy) Nature reserve Reg Biological 51,000 1994 734 Prokhladny Nature monument Mun Botanical 0.95 1984 908 Ichinsky Nature reserve Reg Biological 183,400 1994 735 Chasha Nature monument Mun Botanical 12 1984 909 Chubuk river bank Nature reserve Reg Biological 49,100 1994 736 Kamenny (stone) Venets Nature monument Mun Complex 15.5 1984 910 Kharchinskoe Lake Nature reserve Reg Biological 10,000 1977 737 Primuseiny Nature monument Mun Botanical 0.17 1984 911 Khlamovitsky Nature reserve Reg Biological 900 1960 Khabarovsk region 912 Oleny Dol (Deer Vale) Nature reserve Reg Biological 70,400 1995 738 Kava Nature reserve Reg Zoological 607,000 1987 913 Udochka River Nature reserve Reg Biological 99,000 1983 Chukotka AO 914 Nalychevo Tundra Nature reserve Reg Biological 15,000 1972 Strictly protected 801 Wrangel Island reserve Fed 795,650 1976 915 Zhupanov Firth Nature reserve Reg Biological 2,500 1994 802 Beringia National park Fed 1,487,700 2012 916 Timonovsky Nature reserve Reg Biological 72,000 1983 803 Lebediny Nature reserve Fed 390,000 1982 917 Three Volcanoes Nature reserve Reg Biological 53,400 1985 804 Avtotkuul Nature reserve Reg Complex 250,000 1971 918 Surchiny Nature reserve Reg Biological 64,900 1994 805 Ust-Tanyurersky Nature reserve Reg Game 415,000 1974 919 Kol River Nature reserve Reg salmon 220,242 2006 806 Chaunskaya Guba Nature reserve Reg Complex 210,500 1995 920 Cape Nalychev Nature reserve Reg Biological 2,500 1994 807 Anyui Nature monument Reg Geological 125,00 1983 921 Paratunka Health resort zone Reg 23,370 1993 808 Ayon Nature monument Reg Botanical 13 1983 922 Malkinskaya Health resort zone Reg 19,600 1993 809 Pineiveem Nature monument Reg Botanical 23 1983 923 Apapelskaya Baba Nature monument Reg Geological 4 1981 810 Rauchuagytgyn Nature monument Reg Water 573 1983 Ledum-larch forest by the 924 village Esso Nature monument Reg Biological 75 1980 811 Routan Nature monument Reg Botanical 19 1983 Ocherous fields in the lower 812 Duck (Kekur) Nature monument Reg Geological 70 1983 925 reaches of the Kavavlya River Nature monument Reg Geological 6 1983 813 Lake Elgygytgyn Nature monument Reg Geological 350 1983 926 Oganchinsky Mineral Springs Nature monument Reg Water 18 1981 814 Palyavaam Nature monument Reg Botanical 19 1983 927 Camel extrusion in the Avacha Nature monument Reg Landscape 5 1983 Nature- volcano group 815 Pegtymel Nature monument Reg Historical 11 1983 928 Lakes around the Bakening Nature monument Reg Water 8,175 1983 816 Telekai Grove (Beresovsky) Nature monument Reg Botanical 23 1983 Volcano 817 Tnekveem Grove Nature monument Reg Botanical 37 1983 929 Lake Zelenoe (Green) Nature monument Reg Water 13 1983 818 Amguem Nature monument Reg Botanical 27 930 Lake Kostakan Nature monument Reg Water 240 1983 819 Lake Achchen Nature monument Reg Water 9,000 1975 931 Lake Sokoch Nature monument Reg Water 515 1983 820 Thermal Nature monument Reg Complex 31 1983 Aquarium area on the Levaya 932 (Left) Avacha Nature monument Reg Water 100 1983 821 Chaplin Nature monument Reg Botanical 9 1983 Crater Lake of Maly (Small) 822 Mechigmen (Lorino) Nature monument Reg Water 17 1983 933 Semyachik Volcano Nature monument Reg Water 68 1981

20 21 Man- Focus or Man- Focus or Num- agement type or Area Year Num- agement type or Area Year ber on Name or description Type jurisdic- features pro- (ha) estab- ber on Name or description Type jurisdic- features pro- (ha) estab- map tion filed lished map tion filed lished 934 Mount Zaikin Cape Nature monument Reg Landscape 870 1990 Northern and southern breakthrough of the Great 935 Mount Babiy Kamen Nature monument Reg Landscape 1,480 1990 974 Tolbachik Fissure Eruption, Nature monument Reg Geological 4,490 1983 936 Lake Topolovoe Nature monument Reg Water 13 1983 1975-1976 937 Lake Dalnee Nature monument Reg Water 520 1981 Sheepback Rock by the 975 Studenaya River Nature monument Reg Landscape 150 1983 938 Vachkazhets Massif Nature monument Reg Landscape 4,020 1981 Edelweiss Glade in upper reach 939 Utashud Island Nature monument Reg Biological 30 1981 976 of Studenaya River Nature monument Reg Biological 40 1983 940 Sopka Goryachaya Hill Nature monument Reg Landscape 975 1990 Kozyrevskaya dry river valley 941 Gavryushkin Kamen' Island Nature monument Reg Biological 12 1981 977 on the western trail of Sopka Nature monument Reg Landscape 1,150 1983 Ploskaya Hill 942 Nalychevo Hot Springs Nature monument Reg Hydrothermal 8 1983 Canyon of sculptures on 943 Volcano Khodutka Hot Springs Nature monument Reg Hydrothermal 1992 978 Plosky Tolbachik Nature monument Reg Geological 350 1983 944 Karymsky Lake Nature monument Reg Water 2,300 1981 Plantation of non-native 945 Caldera of Ksudatch Volcano Nature monument Reg Landscape 5,100 1981 979 coniferous species in the Nature monument Reg Biological 4 1980 settlement Kozyrevsk 946 Timonovsky Hot Springs Nature monument Reg Hydrothermal 1 1981 980 Ambon Rock Nature monument Reg Geological 1 1983 947 Starichkov Island Nature monument Reg Biological 93 1981 981 Bogoslov Island Nature monument Reg Landscape n.d. 1983 Utyugi area on Levaya (Left) 948 Avacha Nature monument Reg Landscape 4,600 1983 982 Witgenstein Cape Nature monument Reg Landscape n.d. 1983 949 Sopka Nikolskaya Hill Nature monument Reg Landscape 26 1983 983 Kekura Island of Witgenstein Nature monument Reg Landscape n.d. 1983 984 Cape Grozny Nature monument Reg Landscape n.d. 1983 950 Tri Brata (Three Brothers) Nature monument Reg Landscape 0 1983 Rock 985 Dobrzhansky Island Nature monument Reg Landscape n.d. 1983 951 Tumroki area Nature monument Reg Hydrothermal 100 1980 986 Semenovskaya Spit Nature monument Reg Landscape n.d. 1983 952 River Nikolka area Nature monument Reg Biological 2,950 1983 987 Cape Zubchaty Nature monument Reg Landscape n.d. 1983 Yar Generalka by Kamchatka 988 Cape Yuzhny (southern) Nature monument Reg Landscape n.d. 1983 953 River Nature monument Reg Geological 100 1983 989 Skala (Rock) Cape Nature monument Reg Landscape n.d. 1983 954 Andrianovskie Waterfalls Nature monument Reg Landscape 8 1983 990 Lake Ilirgytgyn Nature monument Reg Water n.d. 1981 955 Ozernaya-Tolbachik River Nature monument Reg Biological 5,600 1981 991 Lake Potatgytgyn Nature monument Reg Water n.d. 1981 956 Lake Kapovoe (Podsopochnoe) Nature monument Reg Water 120 1981 992 Yuzhnaya-Glubokaya Bay Nature monument Reg Water n.d. 1983 Khangar Volcano and 957 Kuzhgumk Lake Nature monument Reg Landscape 4,800 1981 993 Anastasia Bay Nature monument Reg Water n.d. 1983 958 Lake Opalinskoe Nature monument Reg Water 30 1981 994 Lake Palanskoe Nature monument Reg Water n.d. 1981 959 Tolmachev waterfalls Nature monument Reg Landscape 8 1981 995 Palana Rapids Nature monument Reg Water n.d. 1983 960 Nizhne-Opala Mineral Springs Nature monument Reg Water 15 1983 996 Belaya (White) River Nature monument Reg Water n.d. 1981 961 Savanskie Hot Springs Nature monument Reg Hydrothermal 0 1983 997 Palanskie Geothermal Springs Nature monument Reg Hydrothermal n.d. 1981 998 Verkhoturov Island Nature monument Reg Biological n.d. 1981 962 Verkhne-Opala Mineral Nature monument Reg Water 2 1983 Springs 999 Ptichiy (Bird) Island Nature monument Reg Biological n.d. 1981 963 Karymai Spring Nature monument Reg Water 1,200 1983 9100 Manchzhur Island Nature monument Reg Biological n.d. 1983 964 Cold Mineral Springs Belye Nature monument Reg Water 2 1981 Forb-larch forest in the valley (White) Waterfalls 9101 of the Penzhyna River Nature monument Reg Biological n.d. 1980 Kamchatka pearl oyster of 9102 River Belogolova pearl mussel Nature monument Reg Biological n.d. 1983 965 Valuy River Nature monument Reg Biological 19 1983 9103 Tochilinsky Section Nature monument Reg Geological n.d. 1981 966 Kutkhiny Baty Nature monument Reg Geological 3 1981 9104 Cape Kinkilsky Nature monument Reg Geological n.d. 1981 967 Flounder (Toporkov) Island Nature monument Reg Biological 4 1981 9105 Amethysts of Shamanka River Nature monument Reg Geological n.d. 1983 968 Kurile Lake Nature monument Reg Water 6,900 1981 9106 Golubye Ozyora (Blue Lakes) Nature monument Reg Water 175 1983 Rock piles of Bezymianny 969 Volcano Nature monument Reg Geological 160 1983 9107 Mount Ledenaya (Ice) Nature monument Reg Landscape n.d. 1991 970 Stolbovoy Island Nature monument Reg Biological 20 1981 9108 Fiord-Lavrov Bay Nature monument Reg Water n.d. 1991 971 Azhabach'ye (Azabache) Lake Nature monument Reg Biological 6,250 1981 Thermal springs of Tintikun 9109 Lagoon Nature monument Reg Hydrothermal n.d. 1991 972 Dvukhyurtochnoe Lake Nature monument Reg Water 1,200 1981 9110 Tylele Volcano Nature monument Reg Landscape n.d. 1991 973 Dolgoe Lake on Storozh River Nature monument Reg Water 90 1983 9111 Cone Pauk (Spider) Nature monument Reg Landscape n.d. 1991

22 23 Num- Man- Focus or Year 35 77 10 14 agement type or Area 15 450 338 140 ber on Name or description Type jurisdic- features pro- (ha) estab- 267 TOTAL map lished 232,467 67,111,068 95,600,888 22,697,325 57,602,891 12,682,872 13,556,079

tion filed 15,299,980

9112 Khukhlotvayam Thermal Nature monument Reg Hydrothermal 500 1992 region

amchatka amchatka Springs K 4 2 3 2 33 18 111 148 123

9113 Rusakovskye Thermal Springs Nature monument Reg Hydrothermal 500 1992 79,426 195,622 5,377,145 1,661,669 3,519,854 1,436,669 2,479,738 Malamvayam Lagoon (habitat 1,338,342

9114 for brent geese) Nature monument Reg Water n.d. 1993 AO

hukotka hukotka C - - - 3 1 1 9115 Drankinskye Thermal Springs Nature monument Reg Hydrothermal 300 1992 4 28 25 22 10,411 795650 9116 Golubye Ozyora (Blue Lakes) Nature park Mun 4,702 1999 898,411 3 571 761 2 673 350 1,487,700 1,265,500

9117 South-west Tundra Nature reserve Mun Biological 123,000 1990

egion egion

9118 Sobolevsky Station Nature reserve Mun Biological 55,000 1996 R agadan agadan M - - - 2 6 1 6 37 39 64 30

Cape Perevalny Mineral 2207

883,969 9119 Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 90 1992 883,817

2,119,424 1 235 391 Springs 1,233,400

egion

9120 South-Karaginsky Mineral Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 240 1992 R

habarovsk habarovsk Springs K ------1 1 1 9121 Lake Kalanan Nature monument Mun Water 200 1992 607,000 607,000 607,000

9122 Sigaiektap Mineral Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal n.d. 1992

Kervokomleiveyam Mineral (Yakutia) epublic epublic

9123 Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 200 1992 R

1 3 Springs 1 akha akha S 85 46 38 52 16 12

9124 Vevivayam Mineral Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 1,500 1992 100,491 1,433,000 1,433,000 5,039,600 61,582,443 45,045,149 15,104,294 53,047,752

9125 Tyklyavayam Mineral Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 1,200 1992

9126 Khailyulinskye Mineral Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 80 1992 region rasnoyarsk rasnoyarsk K - - - - - 7 6 1 3 3 Springs 1 11,859

9127 Ukinsky Mineral Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 400 1992 11,859 8,329,996 8,318,137 6,820,449 1 497 688

9128 Gnunvayam Mineral Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 200 1992 (Yugra)

AO ansi

9129 Slyadnevsky Mineral Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 100 1992 M ------5 5 1 2 2 hanty hanty K 3,320 927,737 927,737 721,797 9130 Malamvayam Thermal Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 1,700 1992 202,620

9131 Makedonsky Thermal Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 1500 1992

AO enets

Levokiuchinsky Thermal N Yamalo- - - - 4 1 1 9132 Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 900 1992 3 11 13 12

Springs 650 878,174 509,544 5,382,269 1,790,174 3,592,092 9133 Levoukinsky Thermal Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 80 1992 3 993 901

9134 Pravoukinsky Thermal Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 80 1992 public

- e R omi K - - - -

9135 Lake Tsarskoe Nature monument Mun Water 1 1992 - 1 1 54 53 26 27 3,275 553,240 Kangalatvayam Mineral 550,035 2,458,140 1,891,700

9136 Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 500 1992 1 891 700

AO enets 9137 Ivashkinsky (Penkarsky) Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 300 1992 N - - - - - 9 2 7 1 5 Springs 3 7,495 729 511 409 511 320 000 131 500 Okessynveyam Mineral 590 516

9138 Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 80 1992

9139 Goryachy Log (hot ravine) Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 500 1992 region

rchangel rchangel A ------4 2 2 1 9140 Ietvayam Thermal Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 64 1992 3 314,000 3,340,000 3,026,000 1,426,000 9141 Tymlat Thermal Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 500 1992 1,914,000

9142 Lake Ossora, Kopaika Brook Nature monument Mun Water 75 1992 region

urmansk urmansk M - - - - 3 9143 Kinginsky Mineral Spring Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 150 1992 1 59 10 49 10 42 1,332 13,333 699,326 489,336 303,613 9144 Atvenaivayam Mineral Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 100 1992 870,384 1,188,662 Alkhavitovayam Mineral 9145 Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 300 1992 ber ber ber ber ber ber ber ber ber (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) A rea A rea A rea A rea A rea A rea A rea A rea A rea Num - Num - Num - Num - Num - Num - Num - Num -

9146 Spring #147 (Perunov 1986) Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 300 1992 N um - 9147 Demidovsky Mineral Springs Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 1,500 1992 9148 Spring #4 (Pogozhaev 1962) Nature monument Mun Hydrothermal 80 1992 PA s PA Total F ederal R egional Municipal N ational and nature parks nature re - serves and reserves Strictly protected reserves N ature monu - ments* O ther types Table 2 Table down by region broken by the various types of PAs, protected numbers and area Arctic: of the Russian areas Protected *Including unique lakes of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia)

24 25 Figure 7. Relative numbers of Russian Arctic nature monuments with different features profiled Types of features (colour codes): GG – geological, geological-geophysical and paleontological; HD – F F hydrological, including hydrothermal; BL – biological, including botanical and zoological; LC – landscape and R R a combination of features, including forest, marsh and nature-historical M M

Figure 5. Numbers of protected areas (left) and total area protected (right) of protected areas under federal, regional and local management jurisdiction, shown as percentages of the totals for the Russian Arctic Categories (colour codes): F – federal, R – regional, M – municipal (local) GG HD BL LC

total number of PAs) in the Russian Arctic (Figure 6). Their total area, however, is tiny – about a quarter of a percent of the total area of PAs in the Arctic. Spr Spr About one-third of Russian Arctic nature monuments profile various hydro- Np Np logical features, including hydrothermal features like hot springs (Figure 7). About a quarter of nature monuments profile landscape features such as forests, NrR NrR meadows or marshes, or profile a combination of natural and historical features. NM NM Biological nature monuments (including those with a botanical or zoological OC OC focus) and geological nature monuments (including those with specialized areas of interest such as geology, geophysics and palaeontology) each make up about 22 per cent of the total number of nature monuments. About one-third (140) of all arctic PAs are nature reserves. Genetic and re- Figure 6. Numbers of areas (left) and total area protected (right) of different types of protected areas, shown as source reserves are similar to nature reserves in terms of management and op- percentages of the totals for the Russian Arctic Protected area types (colour codes): Spr – strictly protected reserves; Np – national and nature parks; NrR – nature eration. Nature, genetic and resource reserves combined account for the largest reserves and reserves, including resource reserves of the Sakha Republic; NM – nature monuments; OC – other share (71 per cent) of the total area protected through arctic PAs (Figure 6). The categories 14 strictly protected nature reserves (3 per cent of the total number of PAs) are PAs managed by regional authorities and under regional jurisdiction are well next in total area protected (14 per cent), followed by the 3 national and 7 nature in the lead among Russian Arctic PAs, both in terms of their numbers (75 per parks (which, combined, make up 2 per cent of the number of parks and 14 per cent of PAs) and in the area protected (60 per cent of the total protected area of cent of the total area protected). Finally, other types of PAs combined amount the Russian Arctic) (Figure 5). There are very few federal PAs (35, amounting to to 3 per cent of the number of PAs in the region that was evaluated. The “other” 8 per cent of the total number) – however, federal PAs cover almost one-fourth category includes the strictly protected Polar-Alpine Botanical Garden in the of the total area protected in the Russian Arctic since, on average, they are much Murmansk region, protection zones of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia) and health larger than regional PAs. Local PAs, managed, for example, by local administra- resorts of the Kamchatka region. The total area protected by these PAs is about tive and municipal authorities, are more numerous than federal PAs but cover a 1 per cent of the total area of arctic PAs. smaller area. The proportions of numbers of local PAs and total area protected Among regions, Kamchatka has by far the largest number of PAs that are by local PAs are approximately equal (about 16 per cent). completely or partly within its arctic area: 148 PAs, or one-third of the total Nature monuments (including the unique lakes of the Sakha Republic) are the most numerous type of PA, with 267 nature monuments (60 per cent of the 26 27 MR MR AR AR NN NN KM KM YN YN KM KM KR KR YK YK KB KB MG MG CH CH KC KC MR AR NN KM YN KR YK MG CH KC

Figure 8. Numbers of areas (left) and total area protected (right) for protected areas in the Russian Arctic, shown as proportions within each region MR – Murmansk province, AR – Archangel province, NN – Nenets AO, KM – Komi republic, YN - Yamalo-Nenets fed reg mun AO, KM - Khanty Mansi AO, KR – Krasnoyarsk region, YK - Sakha Republic (Yakutia), KB - Khabarovsk Region, MG – Magadan region, CH - Chukotka AO, KC - Kamchatka region Figure 9. Proportion of the arctic part of each region that is protected through PAs under federal, regional and municipal jurisdictions number for the Russian Arctic (Figure 8, left chart). This lead in PA numbers is Jurisdictions (colour codes): fed – federal, reg – regional, mun - municipal Regions: MR – Murmansk province, AR – Archangel province, NN – Nenets AO, KM – Komi republic, YN – mainly due to Kamchatka’s 123 nature monuments. The Sakha Republic (Yaku- Yamalo-Nenets AO, KR – Krasnoyarsk region, YK - Sakha Republic (Yakutia), MG – Magadan region, CH – tia) ranks second with 85 PAs in its arctic area, just under one-fifth of the total Chukotka AO, KC – Kamchatka region number in the Russian Arctic. Next in number of PAs are Murmansk province Arctic, with about one-third of the republic’s total arctic area being included in (59) and the Komi Republic (54), 13 per cent and 12 per cent of the total num- its PA network. Archangel province ranks second, with protection of 25 per cent ber, respectively, then Magadan (37 PAs) and Chukotka (28), which make up of its arctic area, which mainly consists of archipelagos in the Arctic Ocean. The 8 per cent and 6 per cent, respectively, of the total number of PAs. The fewest Komi Republic and Kamchatka region each have PA coverage of over 10 per number of PAs are in the Yamalo-Nenets and Nenets AOs, in Krasnoyarsk recent of their arctic areas. The remaining six regions have less than 10 per cent of gion and Archangel province, and also in Khanty Mansi AO and Khabarovsk their arctic areas included in their PA networks. Half of these, including Nenets region (each of which have only a small proportion of their total area within and Chukotka AOs and the Magadan region, have less than 5 per cent PA cover- the Arctic – see Figure 3 and Table 2). There are no PAs in the arctic part of the age. The PA networks in six regions (Murmansk province, Krasnoyarsk region, Sakhalin region (the northern Kurile Islands). The Sakha Republic (Yakutia) has Nenets, Yamalo-Nenets and Chukotka AOs, and Magadan region) clearly need by far the greatest area protected through arctic PAs (Figure 8, right chart): 64 to be enhanced to meet currently accepted targets for minimum proportions of per cent of the total for the Russian Arctic. Krasnoyarsk region ranks second (at regions that should be protected. 9 per cent), while Yamalo-Nenets AO and Kamchatka (the leader in numbers of The relative areas protected through different management jurisdictions also PAs) share third position. vary from region to region (Figure 9). The prevalence of federal PAs is evident Although the proportion of the area of the Russian Arctic that is included in in the arctic parts of Archangel province, Komi Republic, Krasnoyarsk region PAs is relatively high (over 16 per cent), the proportion of the arctic part of each and Chukotka AO, and, to a lesser extent, in Murmansk province. Federal and region that is protected varies considerably (Figure 9)4. The Sakha Republic regional PAs protect roughly equal areas in Nenets AO. For the remaining re- (Yakutia) is the leader among Russian regions that are partly or fully within the gions (Yamalo-Nenets AO, Sakha Republic (Yakutia), Magadan region and Kamchatka region), regional PAs prevail. In Yakutia, where the largest area is protected through regional PAs, and the area of federal PAs is minimal, one- 4 From this point on, the following regions of the Russian Federation are excluded from analyses of regional networks, as only small proportions of their total areas are within the quarter of the total protected area in the arctic part of the republic is managed Russian Arctic (along its southern border): Khanty Mansi AO, Khabarovsk region and Sakhalin region. 28 29 by local (municipal) authorities. This is the only region with significant area tected by parks in Archangel and strictly protected reserves in Magadan. The protected at the local management jurisdiction. remaining four regions are dominated by protection through nature reserves and There are also major differences among regions, both in numbers of PAs other reserves, reaching a maximum in Yakutia, where reserves account for 90 and in total area protected through the various PA categories (Figure 10, left). per cent of the protected area. Nature monuments dominate in four regions (Murmansk, Magadan, Chukotka Overall, the characteristics of the Russian Arctic PA network, such as and Kamchatka) where they make up at least three-quarters of all PAs. They numbers of PAs, areas protected, and distribution of the types of PAs, are quite are also relatively numerous in Nenets AO and the Komi Republic, accounting satisfactory and approach the target for terrestrial ecosystem protection (17 per for one-third to one-half of PAs. Archangel province is the only region with no cent of area protected by 2020). However, there is clearly significant unevenness nature monuments in its arctic sector. in PA network development among regions. For example, the PA networks of Strictly protected reserves are in 8 of the 10 evaluated regions (all except the Sakha Republic (Yakutia) and Kamchatka can be considered among the best Archangel and Komi), but they are a major category only in the Krasnoyarsk in the nation and in the world, but those of Nenets and Chukotka do not meet region. The PA network of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia) is quite distinct: it in- modern criteria for adequate ecosystem protection. In conclusion, based on the cludes only one nature reserve and very few nature monuments, but includes a indicator of total area protected, the existing PA networks of all but three regions well-developed network of resource reserves and unique lakes, which are simi- need to be enhanced. lar in function and management features to nature reserves and nature monuments, respectively. Accordingly, Yakutia’s resource reserves are considered as nature reserves and unique lakes are considered as nature monuments for the purposes of classification in this report. In addition, Yakutia has a large number of other types of PAs (see Table 1 for details). Differences among regions in the relative areas protected through each PA are linked to the relative sizes of strictly protected reserves, parks, and nature reserves and reserves (Figure 10, right). Relative areas of these three PA categories are comparable in Chukotka and Kamchatka. Krasnoyarsk region differs from the other regions in that the majority of its protected are secured through strictly protected reserves. Parks account for a large proportion of the total protected area of the Komi Republic. Nature reserves are dominant in the PA networks of Archangel and Magadan regions, slightly exceeding the areas pro-

MR AR NN KM YN KR YK MG CH KC MR AR NN KM YN KR YK MG CH KC

Spr Np NrR NM OC Spr Np NrR NM OC

Figure 10. Numbers of areas (left) and total area protected (right) of different types of protected areas in the Russian Arctic, shown as proportions within each region Types of PAs (colour codes): Spr – strictly protected reserves, Np – national and nature parks, NrR – nature reserves and reserves, NM – nature monuments, OC – other categories. Regions: MR – Murmansk province, AR – Archangel province, NN – Nenets AO, KM – Komi Republic, YN - Yamalo- Nenets AO, KR – Krasnoyarsk region, YK - Sakha Republic (Yakutia), MG – Magadan region, CH - Chukotka AO, KC – Kamchatka region

30 31 A perfect network of protected 2.1. Representativeness and completeness of 2. Representativeness, areas would represent the region’s the Russian Arctic protected area network for landscape and biological diversity landscapes and ecosystems completeness and main sufficiently, secure the conservation of rare, endangered and vulnerable 2.1.1. Polar desert and tundra zones gaps of the protected natural communities, including populations of rare species of flora In most classification systems, polar desert and tundra are treated as separate area network in the and fauna, and also protect key natural (physical-geographic, landscape, geobotanical, etc.) zones, though they habitats such as breeding grounds. share the dominant characteristic of the absence of forest vegetation. Along with Russian Arctic This section presents the results of other strong similarities in plant communities, this has led to both polar desert analyses designed to evaluate the and tundra being treated in this analysis as a single tundra zone or region, with level of compliance of the existing polar desert being considered as a subzone (equivalent to high arctic tundra). PA network of the Russian Arctic with these criteria and to identify the main Protected areas of various status and management level cover nearly 20 per gaps in the PA network. cent of the total area within the boundaries of the polar desert and tundra zone The analysis is in three parts. The first part (Section 2.1) evaluates the as defined for this analysis. This figure excludes the Kola Peninsula’s tundra and representativeness and completeness of the existing network of arctic PAs with tundra-like landscapes, which, as they extend in a narrow strip on the edge of respect to the diversity of landscapes and ecosystems of the arctic region, taking other zones and have sparse forest coverage, are grouped with the forest-tundra into consideration features of particular importance to species diversity. The zone. In addition, areas dominated by Pacific coastal mountain pine landscapes second part (Section 2.2) evaluates the arctic PA network’s completeness in are designated as a separate zone (Figure 1). This overall rate of protection of 20 relation to rare and endemic taxa of animals, plants and lichens of the Russian per cent is high and could be considered satisfactory, but the extremely uneven Arctic, and identifies key conservation areas for their protection. The third part distribution of PAs means that the network is not sufficiently representative of (Section 2.3) provides a similar evaluation for lands with high conservation the diversity of landscape and ecosystems in the evaluated regions. value, including those with high concentrations of animals, areas important for The entire polar desert and tundra zone that was evaluated was divided commercial species, and areas important for reproduction. The only PAs and into six large geographic regions, one for polar desert and five for tundra (Fig- features of PAs that have not been included in the evaluations are those with ure 11). These geographic regions mainly correspond to the WWF ecoregions. natural values defined exclusively by abiotic features (for example, waterfalls)5. They differ only in that Novosibirskie Islands and Wrangel Island are designat- The conclusion (Section 3) presents an overview of the identified gaps – areas ed as separate WWF ecoregions, while here we include them with the relevant requiring protection in order to achieve full compliance of the Russian Arctic continental geographic regions. PA network with the above criteria. The main analyses of representativeness and completeness of the arctic PA network were carried out in 2011, and some changes to the PA network have occurred since then. Note that a few PAs (regional nature reserves) have moved to an uncertain status since 2011, due to the expiry and non-renewal of their legal protection in some regions. Their lands, however, are considered reserved pending reinstatement of formal protection. These cases are specified in the text. The reserves with this status are considered as protected for the purposes of evaluating representativeness and identifying gaps in the PA network.

5 With the exception of this general review, the series of reviews presented on representativeness and completeness of existing regional PA networks of the Russian Arctic were produced by WWF of Russia. The networks contain PAs that protect abiotic features (such as waterfalls and springs) that represent specific scientific, educational and esthetic values. These areas have been included in analyses only when they also have biological value. Areas that are Figure 11. Geographic regions of the polar desert and tundra zone unprotected at present and have been nominated by regional experts as candidates for protection Regions: PD – polar desert, EET – Eastern European tundra, WET – Western European tundra, MST – Middle Siberian tundra, EST – Eastern Siberian tundra, CT – Chukotka tundra are included in the general list of prospective areas to be added to the PA network (Section 3). 32 33 The Circumpolar Arctic Vegetation Map (CAVM)8, with its bioclimatic subzone maps and floristic provinces (equivalent to biogeographic or biotogenetic

Figure 12. Proportions of geographic regions of tundra provinces), was used for classification of ecosystem types. The CAVM divides and polar desert that are protected through local, landscape into fewer zones than the classification scheme described above. regional and federal PAs Regions: PD – polar desert, EET – Eastern European There are five zones labelled A to E that are subzones of the polar desert and tundra, WET – Western European tundra, MST – Middle Siberian tundra, EST – Eastern Siberian tundra zone as defined for this review. Subzone A roughly matches polar de- tundra, CT – Chukotka tundra serts, including both northern and southern landscape types; subzones B and C

Area protected (per cent) PD EET WET MST EST CT are equivalent to the northern and southern arctic tundra landscape zones; subzone D is equivalent to the northern and middle subarctic tundra types; subzone Federal PAs Regional and municipal PAs E is equivalent to the southern subarctic tundra landscape type. Another consideration is that the boundaries based on landscape and those based on geobotani- Figure 12 shows the unevenness of the distribution of total area protected: cal features do not always match, and indeed are sometimes quite different from over 50 per cent of the area in the Eastern Siberian tundra region is protected those used in the CAVM for vegetation zones. through the PA network, while, at the other extreme, the areas of the Eastern Geographic regions are defined as the group of ecosystems within a specific European and Chukotka tundra regions that are protected fall well below 10 per subzone of a specific province within a region. Ecosystem types are defined cent. The Western Siberian tundra region has a slightly higher protection rate, based on the CAVM classification (based on vegetation structure), subdivided reaching 10 per cent – the value used in this evaluation as the minimum require- based on these geographic regions: one ecosystem type represents one vegeta- ment. Polar desert and Middle Siberian tundra regions have fairly high rates of tion community type within one geographic region. 20 to 30 per cent. The relative amounts protected through different management jurisdictions also vary. Federal PAs are predominant in the polar desert and the Figure 13 shows the number of landscape types represented in each geo- Chukotka tundra regions, while regional and municipal PAs protect more area in graphic region’s PAs compared with their total number in the region, along with the Western Siberian and Eastern Siberian tundra regions. Federal and regional/ the proportion of the total area of each region that is made up of landscape types municipal PAs protect about the same area as the Middle Siberian tundra region. that are represented in the region’s PAs. These are the two main indicators used in this review to evaluate landscape (Figure 13) and ecosystem (Figure 14) rep- A set of key landscape and ecosystem types was defined for assessing the resentativeness of polar desert and tundra geographic regions. representativeness of the existing PA networks in the evaluated regions with respect to landscape and ecosystem diversity. The polar desert and Middle and Eastern Siberian tundra regions lead in landscape representativeness (Figure 13), with similar rates. Their PAs include Landscape types were assigned based on the landscape map of the USSR about 70 per cent of landscape types present in each region, and landscape types developed by A.G. Isachenko6, along with V.D. Aleksandrova’s classification represented in their PAs occupy about 85 per cent of their regions’ areas. The scheme for geobotanical divisions of the Arctic7, which provides detailed in- Western Siberian tundra region follows, with a big drop between proportions of formation for landscape features. Based on the latter, with some additional numbers of landscape types represented in PAs and the area occupied by them materials consulted, seven landscape zones were identified: 1) northern and 2) in the region. This is due to the absence of many comparatively less-widespread southern polar desert, 3) northern and 4) southern arctic tundra, 5) northern sub- landscape types in protected areas. The lowest values for the indicators of land- arctic tundra, 6) middle subarctic tundra (also referred to as typical tundra) and scape representativeness are for the PA networks of the Eastern European and 7) southern subarctic tundra (also referred to as southern tundra). In addition, Chukotka tundra geographic regions. The latter has a slightly higher proportion four climate zones were identified: 1) ocean coastal, 2) temperate-continental, of landscape types included in its PA network than the former, but these land- 3) continental and 4) hypercontinental. The combinations of landscape and scape types cover smaller areas than in the Eastern European tundra region. This climate zones form climatogenic groups of landscapes. Lithogenic landscape is because the Chukotka tundra region has a more diverse landscape, while the types (landscapes determined by the underlying geology) shown in the map two geographic regions have nearly the same proportion of their areas protected. developed by A.G. Isachenko are also used as they relate to the climatogenic groups of each geographic region. In general, the indicators of landscape representativeness (Figure 13) are correlated with the relative area protected in each region (Figure 12), but there

6 Isachenko, A.G. 1985. Landscapes of the USSR. LGU-Press, Leningrad. 320 pp. [in Russian] 8 CAVM Team. 2003. Circumpolar Arctic Vegetation Map (1:7,500,000 scale). Conservation of 7 Aleksandrova, V.D. 1980. The Arctic and the Antarctic: Their Division into Geobotanical Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) Map No. 1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska. Areas. Cambridge University Press. 247 pp. 34 35 allocation of PAs definitely plays a strong role in the Middle Siberian tundra region, where high values for both indicators of representativeness are achieved with a comparatively small total area covered by PAs. Representativeness indicators related to ecosystem diversity (Figure 14) present a similar picture, with one important exception. The Western Siberian tundra region joins the ranks of the geographic regions leading in representativeness due to the relative uniformity of its vegetation cover. The same reason accounts for the high values of both indicators in the polar desert geographic region. Finally, for the two regions with the lowest levels of ecosystem representativeness, the Chukotka tundra region’s PA network performs better for both indicators than the Eastern European tundra region.

PD EET WST MST EST CT Generally, the highest representativeness of PAs in terms of both landscape and ecosystem diversity is achieved in the polar desert and the Middle Siberian and Eastern Siberian tundra regions, while the lowest rates are in the Eastern

Figure 13. Landscape representativeness of the PA network for polar desert and tundra geographic regions European tundra and Chukotka tundra regions (directly related to the compara- Indicators of landscape representativeness (colour codes): 1 – proportion of the number of landscape types in each tively small proportions of protected areas in these two regions – see Figure geographic region that is included in the region’s PAs; 2 – proportion of the total area of the region that is made up of landscape types that are represented in the region’s PAs 12). The Western Siberian tundra region falls in the middle rank for landscape Regions: PD – polar desert, EET – Eastern European tundra, WST – Western Siberian tundra, MST – Middle Siberian tundra, EST – Eastern Siberian tundra, CT – Chukotka tundra representativeness, being characterized by a relatively low proportion of protected area and relatively few landscape types represented in PAs. However, owing to the uniformity of its vegetation cover, this region has a high rate of ecosystem representativeness. Figure 15 and Figure 16 display the representativeness rates of existing PA networks for landscape units of the polar and tundra geographic regions, defined as areas within a single landscape region belonging to a single climatogenic group. Figure 17 and Figure 18 display these rates for biogeographic units, defined as areas that belong to a single bioclimatic zone and a single floristic (biogeographic) province, within the boundaries of one geographic polar desert or tundra region. The main indicators of PA representativeness for both landscape and biogeographic units are 1) the relative area protected within each unit and 2) the PD EET WST MST EST CT number of landscape or ecosystem types occurring in PAs in relation to the distribution of these types within each unit. Each of the units falls into one of three categories, in terms of both area protected and diversity of landscape or Figure 14. Ecosystem representativeness of the PA network for polar desert and tundra geographic regions ecosystem types protected: a) no PAs; b) PA area is insufficient, or landscape Indicators of ecosystem representativeness (colour codes): 1 – proportion of the number of ecosystem types in each geographic region that is included in the region’s PAs; 2 – proportion of the total area of the region that is made up or ecosystem diversity is insufficiently represented; c) PA area is satisfactory or of ecosystem types that are represented in the region’s PAs Regions: PD – polar desert, EET – Eastern European tundra, WST – Western Siberian tundra, MST – Middle Siberian representation of landscape or ecosystem diversity is satisfactory. The threshold tundra, EST – Eastern Siberian tundra, CT – Chukotka tundra of 10 per cent protection was set for categorizing the area protected sufficient, while inclusion of 75 per cent of landscape or ecosystem types was set as the is not a direct relationship. The most remarkable example of this lack of depend- threshold for categorizing the unit as sufficiently representative of landscape or ence of representativeness on the proportion of area protected is the roughly ecosystem diversity. equivalent values for representativeness of the Middle Siberian and Eastern Si- All landscape and biogeographic units were then divided into four groups berian tundra region PA networks, accompanied by a more than a twofold dif- based on the combination of the categories for the two indicators (related to area ference in the relative areas protected in these two regions. In this case, optimal

36 37 A network s within polar desert and tundra landscape units A Proportion each of polar desert and tundra landscape unit that is protected through the P Proportion landscape of types that occur in P igure 15. igure 16. Colour codes (per cent protected): 1 – none, 2 – less than 10%, 3 – 10-45%, 5 – more than 4 – 45-75%, 75% See text for definitionof landscape units. F Colour codes (per cent occurrence): 1 – none, 2 – 20-50%, 4 – 75-95%, 3 – 50-75%, 5 – 100% See text for definitionof landscape units. F

38 39 igure Proportion 17. each of polar desert and tundra biogeographic unit that is protected through network the PA igure 18. Proportion biogeographic of types that occur within in PAs polar desert and tundra biogeographic units F Colour codes (per cent protected): 1 – none, – less 2 than 10%, 3 – 10-45%, 5 – more 4 – 45-75%, than 75% See text for definitionof biogeographic units. F Colour codes (per cent occurrence): 1 – none, 2 – 20-50%, 4 – 75-95%, 3 – 50-75%, 5 – 100% See text for definitionof biogeographic units.

40 41 and related to representation of diversity), as described above. The categories are: • 1 – units without PAs • 2 – units with insufficient PA area and insufficient landscape or ecosystem diversity represented in PAs • 3 – units with insufficient PA area, but satisfactory representation of the unit’s landscape or ecosystem diversity, or the reverse (sufficient PA area but insufficient landscape or ecosystem diversity representation) • 4 – units with sufficient PA area and satisfactory representation of the unit’s landscape or ecosystem diversity. This classification system can then be used to assign priorities for establishing new PAs or enhancing existing PAs to improve landscape or ecosystem representativeness of each geographic region’s PA network. Figure 19 displays the landscape units in the four categories described above. These categories can be considered priorities for enhancing the PA network at the scale of landscape units in the evaluated polar desert and tundra geographic regions. As seen on the map, the existing PA network provides sufficient representation of the landscapes of the Chukotka Peninsula, Wrangel Island, the northern part of Yana-Indigirka-Kolyma Lowland, Novosibirsk Islands, the Lena river delta, the coastal area between the deltas of Khatanga and Olenek rivers, the major part of the Taimyr Peninsula, the southern islands of the Novaya Zemlya Archipelago and the northern edges of Gydan and Yamal peninsulas, including Beliy Island and Franz-Josef Land Archipelago. There are no PAs along the arctic coast and in the southern tundra regions of Western Chukotka, in the southern tundra of the Eastern Siberia continental sector, in the southern tundra of Western Taimyr, in the northern part of Sev- ernaya Zemlya and in the middle part of Novaya Zemlya. These regions are of the highest priority for creating new PAs and enhancing existing ones by extending them to include adjacent lands in order to improve landscape representativeness. Two of these locations, the north of Severnaya Zemlya and the centre of Novaya Zemlya, are currently largely covered with glaciers and do not have an important role for biodiversity conservation. However, as climate change progresses, they will play key roles in conserving arctic biota. To some extent this may also apply to the arctic coast of Chukotka. The PA networks of the southern tundra of Eastern Chukotka and the typical tundra of Western Chukotka, the northwest part of Taimyr (except the Kara sea coast), southern and central regions of Yamal and Gydan, including Tazovsky Peninsula and almost the whole Eastern European tundra region, including the southern edge of Novaya Zemlya, have sufficiently developed PA coverage, based on the criteria

used for this evaluation. . Assessment landscape of units for adequacy area of protected and landscape diversity represented in PAs, Among biogeographic units (Figure 20), Eastern Chukotka and Wrangel igure 19

Island, the Yana-Indigirka-Kolyma Lowland and Novosibirsk Islands, Anabar- F for polar desert and tundra geographic regions Categories (colour codes): 1 – units without 2 – units PAs; with insufficientPA area and insufficient diversitylandscape represented 3 – units in PAs; with insufficientPA area, but satisfactory representationdiversity, or the reverseof the (sufficient PA unit’s landscapearea but insufficient landscape diversity representation);sufficientPA areaand 4 – units and satisfactory with representationof the unit’s landscape diversity 42 43 Olenek tundra, the arctic coasts of Taimyr and of Severnaya Zemlya Archipel- ago, as well as Franz-Josef Land, are considered to have sufficient PA area and sufficient representation of ecosystem types that are inherent to that unit. Units without PAs, as is the case with the landscape units along the arctic coast and the southern tundra of Western Chukotka and the Yugorsky Peninsula, as well as units with low ecosystem representativeness, are in the typical tundra zones of Western Chukotka and Southern Chukotka, and in the southern tundra zones of Taimyr, the European tundra region and Novaya Zemlya. Figure 21 and Figure 22 show how measures of representativeness of ecosystem and landscape types in PA networks depend on the relative area protected in landscape and biogeographic units, respectively. Figure 21 clearly shows that when PAs occupy more than 50 per cent of a landscape unit, all inherent landscape types are represented. When the landscapes are comparatively uniform and/or PA networks are optimally designed, similar levels are achieved for this indicator at comparatively much lower proportions of protected area (as low as 12 to 13 per cent). On the other hand, no landscape units with 9 to 10 per cent (or less) of their area protected exceed a value for representation of landscape diversity of 60 per cent. In all cases, when the relative area of PAs exceeds 10 per cent, at least 60 per cent of landscape types are represented. For ecosystems and biogeographic units (Figure 22) the relationship is not as clear, but the same general trend is evident: full representativeness of all ecosystem types in PAs can be achieved only when the relative PA area exceeds 10 per cent of the biogeographic unit area. It is important to note that, in both cases, the threshold level of 10 per cent of PA area for the unit is approximately equivalent to the minimum of PA area needed to achieve a satisfactory degree of landscape and ecosystem representativeness (at least 60 per cent representation of landscape types and at least 40 to 50 per cent representation of ecosystem types). In all cases where the representativeness of landscape and ecosystem types in the PA network was 100%, the total area protected exceeded this 10 per cent threshold. Figure 23 was produced by overlaying the two maps showing categories of adequacy of protection of regions of the polar desert and tundra zone, with respect to landscape representativeness (Figure 19) and ecosystem representativeness (Figure 20). Categories shown on this combined map are based on the matrix shown in Table 3. Each of the five categories represents a combination of representativeness and adequacy of protection for both landscapes and ecosystems. igure 20. Assessment biogeographic of units for adequacy area of protected and ecosystem diversity represented in for polar PAs, desert and tundra geographic regions F Categories (colour codes): 1 – units without 2 – units PAs; with insufficientPA area and insufficient satisfactoryecosystem diversity representation represented PAs; 3 – the of in unit’sunits ecosystem with insufficient diversity, PA or thearea, reverse but (sufficientPA areaarea but andinsufficient satisfactory ecosystem representation diversity the of representation); unit’s ecosystem and 4 – diversity units with sufficient PA

44 45 Figure 21. Landscape representativeness of PAs as a function of the relative area protected in landscape units of polar desert and tundra geographic regions

Relative number landscape of types (%) in PA Relative PA area (%)

Figure 22. Ecosystem representativeness of PAs as a function of the relative area protected in landscape units of polar desert and tundra geographic regions

Relative PA area (%) Relative number ecosystem of types (%) in PA

Table 3. Matrix of categories of biogeographic and landscape units, polar desert and tundra regions

Landscape unit categories (Figure 19)

1 2 3 4 1 1 1 2 3 2 1 2 3 4 Biogeographic unit categories (Figure 20 xx) 3 2 3 4 5 4 3 4 5 5 The resultant combined categories are used in the map below (Figure 23) igure 23. Polar desert and tundra zone regions classified according to landscape-ecosystem representativeness and F priority for protection See text and 3 for definition Table of categories.

46 47 The categories mapped in Figure 23 are gradations of representativeness of ity. In light of the projected future significance of these areas, it would be wise to PAs for landscapes and ecosystems. These categories can also be considered as advance the priority for enhanced protection measures for these regions by at least indicators of priority for establishing new PAs or enhancing existing PAs across one category. The same line of reasoning applies to the Novosibirsk Islands. the polar desert and tundra zone of the Russian Arctic. It is important to note Figure 24 presents a consolidation of regions and rationales for prioritization that, while categories 1 and 5 are clearly defined, the intermediate categories for prompt action to optimize the PA network to conserve current and prospective tend to group together regions with varying combinations of relative area pro- landscape-ecosystem diversity, taking the above considerations into account. tected and landscape-ecosystem representativeness. For example, the middle category 3 includes both regions with average scores for adequacy of protection of both ecosystems and landscapes and regions with a high score for one of these 2.1.2. Forest-tundra zone and low score for the other. Systems for classifying landscape zones commonly describe a forest-tundra Regions with less well-developed PA networks, either with no protected areas zone to the south of the tundra zone. This zone is generally defined as natural or with insufficient total area protected and with low landscape-ecosystem rep- complexes combining tundra and sparse forest, commonly extending along river resentativeness include the whole of Western and Southern Chukotka, southern valleys and plains, and forming a separate natural landscape zone or transition tundra areas of Western Taimyr, Yugorsky Peninsula, southern tundra areas of belt between tundra and taiga landscape zones. The taiga zone to the south is the Eastern European region and the tundra part of Novaya Zemlya, excluding usually divided into three subzones: southern, middle and northern taiga. Forest- the southern end and the western coast of South (Yuzhniy) Island. These regions tundra is generally a mix of northern sparse forest and patches of open tundra could be considered as the highest priorities for creation of new PAs or for en- patches, while the northern taiga zone is a more continuous woodland, with no hancing existing PAs with the goal of improving landscape-ecosystem representa- patches of tundra. In some classification systems, northern sparse forests are tiveness. The final setting of priorities, however, should also allow for forecasted included with the forest-tundra subzone (thus broadening the definition of this shifts in natural zones related to climate change. For the most part, current climate subzone). In other systems, northern sparse forest is defined as a strip along the models forecast the continuation of conditions that will support tundra ecosys- northern border of the northern taiga subzone. Yet other classification systems tems up to the end of the current century, except for on the islands of the Arctic consider northern sparse forest to be a separate taiga subzone. Ocean and in the coastal area of Western Chukotka, parts of the Yakutia coast Y.P. Parmuzin (1979)9 defined and ground-truthed the wide band of land- (Yana and Indigirka interfluve, the Lena river delta, the arctic coast of Taimyr, and scapes between tundra and original taiga. These landscapes are neither tundra the coastal areas of Gydan and Yamal.) As shown in Figure 23 , nearly all these nor taiga – their natural features differ from both tundra and taiga landscapes areas fall within category 5, meaning they are characterized as having sufficient and are unique to these zones. Y.P. Parmuzin, through this work, defined land- total area protected and sufficient representativeness of their landscape and eco- scape forest-tundra zones that extend between the forest and tundra zones and system diversity, according to the criteria used in this analysis. include northern sparse forests (Figure 25). The boundaries of the forest-tundra An exception is the arctic coast of Western Chukotka, where there are no PAs. zone defined by Y.P. Parmuzin are used as the framework for this evaluation. This region may be considered as the top priority for protection. Northern Novaya The zone is divided into five large geographic regions, called zones by Y.P. Zemlya and its adjacent islands, along with the southern end of Novaya Zemlya, Parmuzin, but referred to in this report as regions, as the forest-tundra zone is are also candidates for areas to be designated high priority for improvement of the primarily subdivided by region, rather than by landscape features (Figure 25). PA network, for the same reasons. Higher priority should also be given to areas Included within the Kola tundra and forest-tundra geographic region is the nar- of Western Chukotka that currently host typical tundra landscapes, notably those row strip of tundra, or, more precisely, maritime tundra-like landscape, of the representing mountainous areas along what may become the southern border of Kola Peninsula that is not included within the tundra zone in the Circumpolar tundra as the climate changes. These areas are potential refuges for tundra biota Arctic Vegetation Map10. and their protection could play an important role in conserving alpine tundra eco- Protected areas of various status and management level cover 11.6 per cent systems. Regions that could serve as refuges for continental tundra when ecosys- of the total area of the forest-tundra zone as defined above. This figure slightly tems shift due to global warming currently have sufficient area protected, but it is exceeds the accepted required minimum proportion of protected area of 10 per unevenly distributed. There are strict nature reserves (the classification with the highest degree of protection) in the Lena Delta, Taimyr, and the north part of Gy- 9 Parmuzin, Y.P. 1979. Tundra-Forest Zone of the USSR. Misl Press, Moscow. 396p. [in dan. However, in Yamal and in the Yana-Indigirka-Kolyma Lowland, protected Russian] areas are under regional management and have far less nature-protection capac- 10 CAVM Team. 2003. Circumpolar Arctic Vegetation Map (1:7,500,000 scale). Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) Map No. 1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska. 48 49 Figure 25. Geographic regions of the forest-tundra zone Geographic regions: KL – Kola tundra and forest-tundra, WE – Western Europe forest-tundra, WS – Western Siberian forest-tundra, MS – Middle Siberian forest-tundra, ES – Eastern Siberian forest tundra

Figure 26. Proportions of geographic regions of forest-tundra that are protected through regional, municipal and federal PAs Regions: KL – Kola tundra and forest- tundra, WE – Western Europe forest-tundra, WS – Western Siberian Forest-tundra, MS – Middle Siberian forest-tundra, ES – Eastern Siberian forest-tundra

KL WE WS MS ES

Forest-tundra regions Federal PAs Regional and municipal PAs

cent, but is much less – about half – of the protection rate for the polar desert and tundra zone (see above). Figure 26 shows that the 10 per cent required minimum for PA coverage is achieved and slightly exceeded in three of five forest-tundra regions: Kola, Middle Siberia and Eastern Siberia. The relative area that is protected (8.5 per cent) in the Eastern European region is close to the minimum required area, but the proportion protected in Western Siberia is extremely low at only 4.5 per cent. The proportion protected in each region also varies between regional/ municipal and federal PAs. While the proportions protected through these two designation/management levels are very similar for the European and Western Siberian regions, regional and municipal PAs dominate in the Middle and East- ern Siberian regions. A set of key landscape and ecosystem types was defined for assessing the representativeness of the existing PA networks in the evaluated regions with respect to landscape and ecosystem diversity, following the same methodology

igure 24. Polar desert and tundra zone regions prioritized for prompt actions network on PA optimization applied to the polar desert and tundra zone. F Colour and letter codes: 1 – region with and no PAs with landscapes and/or ecosystems not commonlyand ecosystems: represented a – arctic in and coast PAs, also Western of with potential Chukotka; as refuges 2 – regions with for tundra and no PAs with landscapes landscapesPeninsula, and/or ecosystems с – southern not commonly tundra represented Western of Taimyr, – southern d b – Yugorsky in PAs: tundra Western of and/or Chukotka; ecosystems 3 – regions represented with or with no PAs insufficient in existing butarea insufficiently, PAs, protected andand alsowith landscapeswith potentialnorthern as refuges Novaya Zemlyafor includingtundra landscapes adjacent islands, and ecosystems: g – typical tundra e – tundra Western of parttheir Chukotka; Novaya of landscapes Zemlya, 4 – regions f – and ecosystems with insufficient h – southern in PAs: area tundra protected the of Europeanand/or insufficient tundracompletely protectedrepresentativeness area (Kanin regions that and of Pechora are potential southern refuges tundra), for tundra i – Southern landscapes Chukotka; 5 – completely and ecosystems, or almost thereby warranting enhanced status classification PA of or management regime

50 51 Landscape types were assigned based on the landscape map of the USSR Representativeness indicators related to ecosystem diversity (Figure 28) developed by A.G. Isachenko11 along with the classification of forest-tundra show less variability, with the highest rate being in the Kola region and the low- subdivisions derived by Y.P. Parmuzin. Based on these sources and some ad- est being in the Eastern European and Western Siberian regions. ditional materials, four zonal-altitude landscapes types were defined: 1) tundra Thus, in general, the Kola region has the most representative combination (only in the Kola region), 2) forest-tundra, 3) sparse forest and 4) scree (alpine of landscape and ecosystem diversity, followed by the Middle and Eastern Sibe- tundra). In addition, five climate zones were identified: 1) moderate-continental, rian regions, then the Western Siberian region. The least representative region, 2) continental, 3) hypercontinental, 4) continental-maritime and 5) maritime- based on the criteria used in this evaluation, is the Eastern European region. monsoon. The combinations of landscape and climate zones form climatogenic Figure 29 and Figure 30 display the representativeness rates of existing PA groups of landscapes. Lithogenic landscape types (landscapes determined by networks for landscape units of the forest-tundra geographic regions, defined the underlying geology) shown in the map developed by A.G. Isachenko are as areas within a single landscape region belonging to a single climatogenic also used as they relate to the climatogenic groups of each geographic region. group. Figure 31 and Figure 32 display these rates for biogeographic units, de- Selection of ecosystem types was based on the Vegetation Map of the USSR fined as areas that belong to a single bioclimatic zone and a single floristic (bio- (for High Schools), with a scale of 1:4,000,00012 along with additional materi- geographic) province, within the boundaries of one geographic forest-tundra als – in particular, the vegetation map of the USSR drawn by V.B. Sochava, region. 13 taken from the Physiographic Atlas of the World . Based on these resources, As with the analysis for polar desert and tundra regions, the relative area four zonal-altitude ecosystem types were defined: 1) south-tundra, 2) sparse for- protected within each unit and the number of landscape or ecosystem types oc- est-tundra, 3) sparse north-tundra and 4) mountain tundra, as well as six types curring in PAs in relation to the distribution of these types within each unit are based on similarities of evolutionary origin of plant communities: 1) Northeast the main indicators of PA network representativeness. Each of the units falls European, 2) Northeast European-West Siberian, 3) West Siberian (Ural-Siberi- into one of three categories, both in terms of area protected and diversity of an), 4) Angaridian, 5) Beringian-Angaridian and 6) Angaridian-Beringian. Geo- landscape or ecosystem types protected: a) no PAs; b) PA area is insufficient graphic groups of ecosystems were then defined based on combinations of these (less than 10 per cent protected), or landscape or ecosystem diversity is insuf- zonal-altitude types and plant community types, based on the Vegetation Map ficiently represented (less than 75 per cent of landscape or ecosystem types of the USSR (for High Schools). represented); c) PA area is satisfactory (at least 10 per cent protected) or repre- As with the analysis of the polar desert and tundra zone, the two main indi- sentation of landscape or ecosystem diversity is satisfactory (at least 75 per cent cators used to evaluate landscape and ecosystem representativeness are 1) the of types represented). number of landscape/ecosystem types represented in each region’s PAs com- All landscape and biogeographic units were then divided into four groups pared with their total number in the region, and 2) the proportion of the total based on the combination of the categories for the two indicators (related to area area in each region that is made up of the landscape-ecosystem types that are and related to representation of diversity), as described above. The categories represented in the region’s PAs. are: 1 – units without PAs; 2 – units with insufficient PA area and insufficient Figure 27 displays these indictors for landscape representativeness of the PA landscape or ecosystem diversity represented in PAs; 3 – units with insufficient network for forest-tundra regions. Both indicators have the highest landscape PA area, but satisfactory representation of the unit’s landscape or ecosystem di- representativeness in the tundra and forest-tundra regions of the Kola Peninsula, versity, or the reverse (sufficient PA area but insufficient landscape or ecosystem where they are close to the maximum possible rate. They are followed in degree diversity representation); and 4 – units with sufficient PA area and satisfactory of representativeness by Western, Middle and Eastern Siberian forest-tundra representation of the unit’s landscape or ecosystem diversity. This classification regions that are relatively high in proportion of total area of the landscapes that system can then be used to assign priorities for establishing new PAs or enhanc- are represented in PAs, but poorer in representativeness of landscape diversity. ing existing PAs to improve landscape or ecosystem representativeness of each The PA network of the Eastern European region is the least representative: the geographic region’s PA network. proportion of landscape diversity represented in this region’s PAs is similar to Figure 33 displays forest-tundra landscape units in four categories as de- that of the three regions of Siberia, but the proportion of the area of landscapes scribed above. Existing PA networks are classified as fully representative of available in PAs is considerably lower than in all other forest-tundra regions. landscape diversity only for the sparse forests of the Kola Peninsula and the hy- 11 Isachenko, A.G. 1985. Landscapes of the USSR. LGU-Press, Leningrad. 320 pp. [in Russian] percontinental alpine tundra landscapes of Eastern Siberia (bright green). One 12 Sochava, V.B., Isachenko, T.I., and A.N. Lukicheva. 1955. small forest-tundra unit in the Urals has no PAs (red). Insufficient PA area and 13 Sochava, V.B. 1964. Academy of Science of USSR, Department of Cartography, Moscow. 52 53 incomplete representativeness of landscape types characterize the PA networks region (tundra, open boreal and north-taiga sparse forest), as are the Ural moun- in the moderate-continental forest-tundra of the Eastern European region, the tain tundra (Eastern European region), the Middle Siberian mountain tundra, forest-tundra and sparse forests of Western Siberia, as well as the continental and the Angaridan mountain tundra and open boreal sparse forests of Eastern forest-tundra and sparse forests, and also some hypercontinental alpine tundra Siberia. There are no PAs in the Northeastern European open boreal sparse forests of Eastern Siberia (yellow). These regions, in combination with the Ural forests, the Western Siberian open boreal and the north-taiga sparse forests of forest-tundra unit, could be assigned top priority for PA network enhancement Middle Siberia. The following biogeographic units have less than 10 per cent with the goal of improving landscape representativeness. Second priority could of their areas protected and less than 75 per cent of their ecosystem types repre- be assigned to regions in category 3 (pale green), for which either total area sented: northeastern European north-taiga sparse forests, northeastern Western protected is insufficient or representativeness of landscape types is insufficient. Siberian open boreal sparse forests of the Eastern European region, open boreal This includes the forest-tundra of the Kola Peninsula, the sparse forests in the and north-taiga sparse forests of Western Siberia, and the Angaridan-Beringian Eastern European region, the hypercontinental forest-tundra and sparse forests mountain tundra and north-taiga sparse forests of Eastern Siberia. The three of Middle Siberia, and the hypercontinental sparse forests, maritime monsoon units with no PAs and these four biogeographic units with both inadequate area sparse forests and alpine tundra forests of Eastern Siberia. protected and inadequate representation of ecosystem types are considered top Figure 34 shows adequacy of protected area and ecosystem representative- priority for developing new and/or enhanced protected areas with the goal of ness of biogeographic units. The entire Kola Peninsula is characterized by suf- upgrading ecosystem representativeness for forest-tundra ecosystems. At the ficient PA area and sufficient representation of ecosystem types native to the next priority level, optimization of PA networks for ecosystem representativeness is needed for biogeographic units where either the total area protected or the representation of ecosystem types is inadequate: the northeastern European Western Siberian north-taiga sparse forests of the Eastern European region, the Figure 27. Landscape representativeness of Angaridan open boreal and north-taiga sparse forests of Middle Siberia, and the the PA network for forest-tundra geographic regions Angaridan north-taiga sparse forests and the Beringian-Angaridan open boreal Indicators of landscape representativeness (colour codes): 1 – percentage of the and north-taiga sparse forests and mountain tundra of Eastern Siberia. number of landscape types in each geographic region that is included in Figure 35 and Figure 36 show how measures of representativeness of eco- the region’s PAs; 2 – proportion of the total area of the region that is made up of system and landscape types in PA networks depend on the relative area pro- landscape types that are represented in the tected in landscape and biogeographic units, respectively. The interdependence region’s PAs Regions: KL – Kola tundra and of these two aspects of the PA network is clear, as it is for the polar desert and forest-tundra, EE – Eastern European KL EE WS MS ES forest-tundra, WS – Western Siberian tundra regions. The analysis indicates that complete representativeness of land- forest-tundra, MS – Middle Siberian forest- tundra, ES - Eastern Siberian forest-tundra scape diversity might be achieved when at least 8 per cent of the total area of the unit is protected (Figure 35). When the total protected area of a landscape unit is at or above 8 per cent, the representativeness of landscape types does not fall below 45 to 50 per cent. When the total protected area is less than 8 per cent, no more than 50 to 55 per cent of landscape diversity is represented in the

Figure 28. Ecosystem representativeness of unit. When this analysis is carried out for biogeographic units (Figure 36), the the PA network for forest-tundra geographic equivalent threshold is 12 per cent of the total area protected. Ecosystem rep- regions Indicators of ecosystem representativeness resentativeness for units with total protected area at or above this threshold all (colour codes): 1 – percentage of the number of ecosystem types in each geographic have representativeness levels from 60 to 100 per cent. In units that are below region that is included in the region’s PAs; this threshold for total protected area, no more than 75 per cent of ecosystems 2 – percentage of the total area of the region that is made up of ecosystem types that are are represented. represented in the region’s PAs Regions: KL – Kola tundra and forest- Figure 37 was produced by overlaying the two maps showing categories tundra, EE – Eastern European forest- tundra, WS – Western Siberian forest- KL EE WS MS ES of adequacy of protection of forest-tundra regions with respect to landscape tundra, MS – Middle Siberian forest-tundra, ES - Eastern Siberian forest-tundra representativeness (Figure 35) and ecosystem representativeness (Figure 36). Categories shown on this combined map are based on the matrix shown in Ta- ble 3 in the section above on polar desert and tundra regions. Each of the five

54 55 Figure 32. Proportion of biogeographic types that occur in PAs within forest-tundra biogeographic units Figure 29. Proportion of each forest-tundra landscape unit that is protected through the PA network Colour codes (per cent occurrence): 1 – none, 2 – 20-50%, 3 – 50-75%, 4 – 75-95%, 5 – 100% Colour codes (per cent protected): 1 - none, 2 – less than 10%; 3 – more than 10% See text for definition of biogeographic units. See text for definition of landscape units.

Figure 33. Assessment of landscape units for adequacy of area protected and landscape diversity represented in PAs, for forest-tundra geographic regions Categories (colour codes): 1 – units without PAs; 2 – units with insufficient PA area and insufficient landscape Figure 30. Proportion of landscape types that occur in PAs within forest-tundra landscape regions diversity represented in PAs; 3 – units with insufficient PA area, but satisfactory representation of the unit’s landscape Colour codes (per cent occurrence): 1 – none, 2 – 20-50%; 3 – 50-75%; 4 – 75-95%; 5 – 100% diversity, or the reverse (sufficient PA area but insufficient landscape diversity representation); 4 – units with sufficient See text for definition of landscape units. PA area and satisfactory representation of the unit’s landscape diversity

Figure 34. Assessment of biogeographic units for adequacy of area protected and ecosystem diversity represented in PAs, for forest-tundra geographic regions Figure 31. Proportion of each forest-tundra biogeographic unit that is protected through the PA network Categories (colour codes): 1 – units without PAs; 2 – units with insufficient PA area and insufficient ecosystem Colour codes (per cent protected): 1 – none, 2 – less than 10%, 3 – more than 10% diversity represented in PAs; 3 – units with insufficient PA area, but satisfactory representation of the unit’s ecosystem See text for definition of biogeographic units. diversity, or the reverse (sufficient PA area but insufficient ecosystem diversity representation); 4 – units with sufficient PA area and satisfactory representation of the unit’s ecosystem diversity

56 57 categories represents a combination of representativeness and adequacy of pro- 100 tection for both landscapes and ecosystems. This classification can be used for 90 setting priorities for establishing new PAs and enhancing existing PA networks 80 Figure 35. Landscape representativeness of in order to improve landscape-ecosystem representativeness. PAs as a function of the relative area protected 70 in landscape units of forest-taiga geographic Based on these criteria, the existing mix of PAs in each of the following regions 60 regions could be considered as fully representative of the region’s landscape- 50 ecosystem diversity: the Kola tundra and forest-tundra areas, the Ural moun- PA, % 40 tain-tundra region, the continental alpine tundra landscapes of Middle Siberia, 30 and the hypercontinental Angaridan open boreal sparse forests and alpine tun- 20 dra landscapes of Eastern Siberia. The evaluation also indicates that PAs of the 10 Relativenumber of landscape variants in Relative number landscape of types (%) in PAs 0 following regions adequately represent landscape-ecosystem biodiversity: the 0 10 20 30 40 northeastern Western Siberian north-taiga sparse forests of the Eastern Europe- Relative PAComparative area (%) PA area, % an area, the hypercontinental forest-tundra and sparse forests of Middle Siberia, 100 and the hypercontinental Angaridan sparse forests of Eastern Siberia. 90 All other regions require expansion and optimization of their PA networks 80 70 in order to upgrade their landscape-ecosystem representativeness. However, it Figure 36. Ecosystem representativeness of is hardly worth assigning priority to the Ural forest-tundra and the Middle Si- PAs as a function of the relative area protected 60 in landscape units of forest-tundra geographic berian and northeastern European Western Siberian forest-tundra as separate regions 50 prioritized regions with no existing PAs, due to their small areas and similarity 40 in landscapes and ecosystems to adjoining regions of Western Siberia. These PA network,% 30 regions are therefore merged with the adjoining regions for the purpose of set- 20 ting priorities, leaving only one small area with no PAs and thus of top prior- 10 Relative number landscape of types (%) in PAs Relativelandscape numberof variants in 0 ity for action: forest-tundra in the western part of the Eastern European region 0 10 20 30 40 (Figure 38a). Next in priority are forest-tundra and open boreal sparse forests RelativeComparative PA area (%) PA area, % in the eastern part of the Eastern European region, characterized by ecosystems that are transitional between northeastern European and Western Siberian types (Figure 38b), the entire Western Siberian forest-tundra region (Figure 38c) and sparse forests and alpine tundra of the transitional continental-maritime sector of Eastern Siberia (Figure 38d). Among prioritized regions, the following are assessed to be at a lower priority for optimization of their PA networks: sparse forests of the western part of the Eastern European region (Figure 38e), continental forest-tundra and sparse forests of Middle Siberia (Figure 38f), alpine tundra landscapes of the Anabar Plateau (Figure 38g) and the Kystyk Plateau (Figure 38h) of the hypercontinental sector of the Middle Siberian region, and the Beringian-Angaridan sparse forests (Figure 38i) and maritime monsoon sparse forests and alpine tundra (Figure 38j) of the Eastern Siberian region.

2.1.3. Pacific maritime subarctic zone In the Pacific maritime sector of Eurasia, under the influence of an oceanic climate, the forest-tundra zone is replaced with two subzones for which there is no agreed upon system of delineation. First is the range of landscapes domi- Figure 37. Forest-tundra regions classified according to landscape-ecosystem representativeness and priority for protection nated by stunted mountain pine trees (“stlannik”). These landscapes have no See text and Table 3 for definition of categories.

58 59 Figure 38. Forest-tundra regions prioritized for prompt action on PA network optimization Colour codes: 1 – top priority (region with no PAs), 2 – second priority, 3 – lower priority; see text for descriptions of areas a to j.

analogues except the low alpine tundra belts of mountains in Eastern Siberia. Zonal classification systems consider this landscape-ecosystem type, which is specific to the northeastern Asia tundra subzone, as a Pacific maritime- vari Figure 39. Pacific maritime subarctic stunted mountain Figure 40. Relative area protected for Pacific maritime pine woodland and forest-meadow subzones subarctic stunted mountain pine woodland and forest- ant of forest-tundra. The other subzone is the fairly large distribution range of Subzones: FM – forest-meadow, MPW – stunted meadow subzones forest-meadow landscapes covering a major part of the Kamchatka Peninsula. mountain pine woodland This subzone is characterized by a combination of birch parkland forests, sparse forests with stunted growth, and tallgrass meadows. Remote analogues are the ranges of stunted birch woodlands in the south of Greenland and Iceland and in the northern part of Fennoscandia. Earlier classification systems had not recognized these forest-meadow landscapes as distinct units and had grouped them with the northern taiga or north-taiga sparse forests. More recent studies consider them as a separate forest-meadow zone, typical for the Pacific maritime sectors of the subarctic. For the purposes of this evaluation, both these landscape/ecosystem types are considered as distinct natural zones (referred to as subzones in this discussion for clarity): 1) stunted mountain pine woodlands and 2) forest-meadows (Figure 39). Combined, they form the Pacific maritime subarctic zone, considered here as the maritime analogue of the forest-tundra zone. Protected areas of different categories and management levels occupy about 12 per cent of the area Figure 41. Landscape representativeness of the PA Figure 42. Ecosystem representativeness of the PA in the Pacific maritime subarctic zone, slightly exceeding the generally accepted network for Pacific maritime subarctic stunted mountain network for Pacific maritime subarctic stunted mountain pine woodland and forest-meadow subzones pine woodland and forest-meadow subzones minimum requirement of 10 per cent protection. There are, however, differenc- Indicators of landscape representativeness (colour Indicators of ecosystem representativeness (colour es between the stunted mountain pine woodland subzone (which is about 7 per codes): 1 – percentage of the number of landscape types codes): 1 – percentage of the number of ecosystem types in each subzone that is included in the subzone’s PAs; in each subzone that is included in the subzone’s PAs; 2 – cent protected, well below the minimum required level) and the forest-meadow 2 – percentage of the total area of the region that is made percentage of the total area of the region that is made up up of landscape types that are represented in the region’s of ecosystem types that are represented in the region’s subzone, which is about 20 per cent protected (Figure 40). PAs PAs Figure 41 and Figure 42 present the results of evaluations of landscape and ecosystem representativeness in stunted mountain pine woodland and forest- meadow subzones of the subarctic Pacific maritime zone. See the forest-tundra section above for a description of the derivation of the two indicators of repre-

60 61 sentativeness presented in each figure: 1) proportion of landscape and ecosystem types included in each subzone’s PAs, and 2) proportion of the total area of each subzone that is made up of these representative landscape and ecosystem types. Both landscape and ecosystem representativeness are higher in the PA network of the forest-meadow subzone than in the PA network of the stunted mountain pine woodland subzone. The proportion of the total area of each subzone that is made up of representative landscape and ecosystem types (indicator 2) is equal or very close in the two subzones, exceeding 90 per cent in all cases. However, the proportion of representative landscape and ecosystem types that is protected is considerably greater in the forest-meadow subzone. Figure 43 and Figure 44 display the representativeness rates of existing PA networks for landscape regions of the Pacific maritime subarctic zone, defined as areas within a single landscape subzone belonging to a single climatogenic group. Figure 45 and Figure 46 show analogous indicators for biogeographic regions, defined as areas that belong to a single bioclimatic zone and a single floristic (biogeographic) province, within the boundaries of one Pacific maritime subarctic subzone. Figure 43. Proportion of each Pacific maritime Figure 44. Proportion of landscape types that occur While there are no regions without PAs among the five landscape regions of subarctic landscape region that is protected through in PAs within Pacific maritime landscape regions the PA network Colour codes (per cent occurrence): 1 – none, 2 – the two evaluated subzones, only two regions have a sufficient proportion (over Colour codes (per cent protected): 1 – none, 2 – less 20-50%; 3 – 50-75%; 4 – 75-95%; 5 – 100% 10 per cent) of their total area protected. These regions are forest-meadow and than 10%, 3 – more than 10% See text for definition of landscape regions. See text for definition of landscape regions. alpine tundra landscape regions of the forest-meadow subzone (Figure 43). The evaluated regions may be divided into three groups based on the degree of landscape representativeness: 1) those with less than 50 per cent representation of landscape diversity – mountain tundra landscapes of the stunted mountain pine woodland subzone, and the sparse forest landscape region of the forest-meadow subzone; 2) those with 50 to 75 per cent representation – woodlands typical of the stunted mountain pine woodland subzone, and alpine tundra landscapes of the forest-meadow subzone; 3) those with greater than 75 per cent representation – the region of forest-meadow landscape (Figure 44). Combining results of the two analyses shown in Figure 43 and Figure 44 resulted in the definition of three categories based on priority for creating additional PAs with the goal of improving landscape representativeness of the PA network (Figure 47). Top priority are the mountain tundra landscapes of the stunted mountain pine woodland subzone and sparse forest landscapes of the forest-meadow subzone. Next in priority are the tundra landscapes of the stunted mountain pine woodland subzone and the alpine tundra landscapes of the forest-meadow subzone. Forest-meadow landscapes are well represented in the network and require no additional land protection measures.

Among five landscape regions that are similar, to varying degrees, to bio- Figure 45. Proportion of each Pacific maritime Figure 46. Proportion of ecosystem types that occur subarctic biogeographic region that is protected in PAs within Pacific maritime biogeographic regions geographic regions, the greatest proportion of protected area includes regions through the PA network Colour codes (per cent occurrence): 1 – none, 2 – 20- with forest-meadow and mountain tundra ecosystems in the forest-meadow Colour codes (per cent protected): 1 – none, 2 – less 50%; 3 – 50-75%; 4 – 75-95%; 5 – 100% than 10%, 3 – more than 10% See text for definition of biogeographic regions. subzone. None of the regions are without PAs. All five regions are also char- See text for definition of biogeographic regions. acterized as having relatively high (more than 50 per cent) representation of

62 63 ecosystem types in PAs. The degree of representativeness does not exceed 75 per cent in stunted mountain pine woodland regions, but is greater than 75 per cent in all three regions of the forest-meadow area. Combining results of the two analyses related to ecosystem representativeness (Figure 45 and Figure 46) resulted in the definition of three categories based on priority for creating additional PAs with the goal of improving ecosystem representativeness of the PA network (Figure 48). All biogeographic regions of the forest-meadow subzone fall into the category of full representation of ecosystem diversity, and only regions of the stunted mountain pine woodland subzone need enhancement of the PA network to improve ecosystem representativeness. The final overview (Figure 49) was produced by overlaying the two maps that show categories of adequacy of protection of Pacific maritime subarctic regions with respect to landscape (Figure 47) and ecosystem (Figure 48) representativeness, following the same method used for tundra and forest-tundra regions, above. This overview shows three categories of landscape-ecosystem representativeness that can also serve as categories for setting priorities for creating new PAs and enhancing existing ones, with the goal of upgrading the landscape and ecosystem representativeness of the PA network. Based on these criteria, the existing mix of PAs in forest-meadow and alpine tundra landscapes and in ecosystems of the forest-meadow subzone could be considered as fully Figure 47. Adequacy of protection of Pacific maritime Figure 48. Adequacy of protection of Pacific maritime subarctic regions with respect to landscape diversity subarctic regions with respect to ecosystem diversity representative of their respective region’s landscape-ecosystem diversity. Re- Categories are defined in the text. Categories are defined in the text. gions with lower landscape-ecosystem representativeness through PA networks are: stunted mountain pine woodland landscapes and ecosystems and north- The degree of representativeness of main landscape and ecosystem types is ern taiga sparse forest landscapes and ecosystems of the stunted mountain pine similar for the three major zones of the Russian Arctic, with variation among woodland and forest-meadow subzones. The regions with the lowest represen- zones generally not exceeding 10 per cent (Figure 50 and Figure 51). The Pa- tativeness, and thus the highest priority for enhancement of PA networks, are the cific maritime subarctic zone leads overall in representativeness of both land- mountain tundra areas of the stunted mountain pine woodland subzone. scapes and ecosystems in its PA network, followed by the polar desert and tundra zone, with the forest-tundra zone PA network being least representative. For 2.1.4. Representativeness of the existing PA network for ecosystem and landscape types that are over 10 per cent included in PAs, the landscape-ecosystem diversity and main network gaps polar desert and tundra zone has the highest proportion of types represented. As a general rule (for the Arctic as a whole and for each major zone, exclud- Overall, protected areas occupy about 14 per cent of the Russian Arctic as ing one ecosystem type in the Pacific maritime subarctic zone), when compara- defined for this evaluation. The proportion of land protected is highest for the tively little land is protected, landscape and ecosystem representativeness do polar desert and tundra zone, at over 20 per cent. By contrast, the proportions not reach the threshold of 75 per cent, a threshold used here to indicate satis- of land protected for the forest-tundra and Pacific maritime subarctic zones are factory representation through the PA network. Proportions of the total area of much lower: 11.5 per cent and 12 per cent respectively. the evaluated regions of the Russian Arctic that are made up of landscape and The existing PA network contains ecosystem types represented through the PA network are 83 per cent and 92 per • 55 per cent of all regional landscape types and 64 per cent of all regional cent respectively, and 50 per cent and 57 per cent, respectively, of landscapes ecosystem types ( i.e. landscape and ecosystem types distributed only and ecosystems have more than 10 per cent of their areas protected. within the defined regions); and The largest proportion of landscapes and ecosystems are available in the PA • Over 10 per cent of the total area of 34 per cent of all landscape types network of the Pacific maritime subarctic zone, in both cases approaching 100 and 43 per cent of all ecosystem types. per cent (Figure 52 and Figure 53). The smallest values are in the polar desert

64 65 100 90 80 70 60 50 Figure 49. Pacific maritime subarctic regions classified according to landscape-ecosystem 40 representativeness and priority for protection Categories are defined in the text. 30 20 10 0 PD&TПП&Т ТЛ FT ПТХPMS PD&T FT PMS

1 2

Figure 52. Relative area of landscapes in the major zones of Figure 53. Relative area of ecosystems in the major zones the Russian Arctic of the Russian Arctic 1 – all landscape types available in the PA network, 2 – 1 – all ecosystem types available in the PA network, 2 – landscape types that are more than 10% included in PAs ecosystem types that are more than 10% included in PAs Zones: PD&T – polar desert and tundra, FT – forest-tundra, Zones: PD&T – polar desert and tundra, FT – forest- PMS – Pacific maritime subarctic tundra, PMS – Pacific maritime subarctic

and tundra zone, despite this zone having the highest proportion of land protected. Note that the relative areas of landscapes and ecosystems that are more than 10 per cent included in PAs, the pattern is reversed, with the highest values being in the polar desert and tundra zone and the lowest being in the Pacific maritime subarctic zone (Figure 52 and Figure 53). Figure 54 maps the distribution of areas for which regional landscape and ecosystem types are absent or poorly represented in PAs. These areas are ranked according to representativeness of the relevant landscapes and ecosystems in their respective PA networks. For a more complete assessment of priorities for additions to the PA network, it is important to take into account the regional values of indicators of landscape-ecosystem representativeness resulting from link- ing landscape and biogeographic units associated with these identified areas. All other things being equal, the highest priority area is located in the region with the least overall landscape-ecosystem representativeness (i.e. the least availabil- ity of different landscape and ecosystem types in its PA network and the smallest area of landscapes and ecosystems represented in its PA network). PD&T FT PMS PD&T FT PMS Each of three major zones of the Russian Arctic has priority rankings assigned for landscape-biogeographic regions based on their landscape-ecosystem

Figure 50. Representativeness of regional landscape types Figure 51. Representativeness of regional ecosystem representativeness. Figure 55 shows these for all three zones. These categories in the PA network of the Arctic types in the PA network of the Arctic were used to clarify priorities for additions to the PA network for the areas with Categories (colour codes): 1 – all landscape types, 2 – Categories (colour codes): 1 – all ecosystem types, 2 – landscape types that are more than 10% included in PAs ecosystem types that are more than 10% included in PAs poor representation of landscapes and ecosystems. Both priority rankings for Zones: PD&T – polar desert and tundra, FT – forest-tundra, Zones: PD&T – polar desert and tundra, FT – forest- PMS – Pacific maritime subarctic tundra, PMS – Pacific maritime subarctic each area (Figure 54) and priority rankings for the region that the area is located in (Figure 55) were used. When an area is associated with two regions, the rank

66 67 – extremely – poorly represented network the in area of more the than PA (not per 3 – missing – network the in area, of the PA 2 – 1 – igure 54. Areas for which regional landscape and ecosystem types are absent or poorly represented in PAs igure 55. Landscape-ecosystem representativeness landscape-biogeographic of regions in the Russian Arctic. F Colour codes: regional landscapes and ecosystems cent the of area), 3 – represented in network the PA the of area, but with the proportion the of protected area more than 3 per cent, but less than per 10 cent the of total area F Colour codes degrees 1-5: of landscape-ecosystem representativeness to satisfactory(1), from representativeness absence or extremely both of landscapes poor representativeness and ecosystems in network the of PA landscapes (5) and ecosystems of the region in networkPA

68 69 corresponding to the lowest degree of representativeness was used. The result-

ing composite scores were then categorized as three priority levels for additions Climate-related groups of to the PA network of areas with no or poor representation of landscape and eco- Region landscapes Geographic groups of ecosystems P riority system diversity through their current PA systems (Figure 56). Table 4 presents a list of these areas, along with the types of landscapes and ecosystems in need Northern Yuzhnyy Island and 14 southern Severnyy Island, Novaya 1 Moderately continental northern Ural-Novaya-Zemlya northern of protection. Zemlya arctic tundra arctic tundra It is important to note that the evaluated territories are not evenly distrib- Litke Peninsula and Pankratyev 15 Island (northwest of Novaya 3 Maritime southern polar desert Ural-Novaya- Zemlya polar desert uted, especially those in the top two priority categories. Most are concentrated Zemlya) in the European-Western Siberian sector (except the Kola Peninsula), and also Western Siberian northern taiga 16 The North-Sos’va upland 2 Continental sparse forest sparse forest in the Far Northeast (except Kamchatka), mostly in Chukotka. Generally, areas Western Siberian northern taiga of concentration of the highest priority areas coincide with areas with the least 17 The West of Siberian ridge 1 Continental sparse forest sparse forest Schuchya, Khadytayakha and developed PA networks. 18 Yakhadyyakha river basins 3 Continental southern tundra Yamal-Gydan southern tundra (southern Yamal)

19 Upper Nadym and Pur river basins 2 Continental sparse forest Western Siberian northern taiga Table 4. sparse forest 20 Southern Tazovskiy Peninsula 2 Continental southern tundra Yamal-Gydan southern tundra Areas with landscape and ecosystems missing or poorly represented in their PA Western Siberian open boreal sparse networks, prioritized for joining the PA network with the goal of upgrading its landscape- 21 Middle reaches of Taz river basin 2 Continental forest-tundra forest ecosystem representativeness Western Siberian northern taiga 22 Upper Taz river basin 1 Continental sparse-forest sparse forest 23 Mesoyakha river basin 2 Continental southern tundra Yamal-Gydan southern tundra

Climate-related groups of 24 Turukhan river basin 2 Continental forest-tundra Western Siberian open boreal sparse Region landscapes Geographic groups of ecosystems forest P riority Upper reaches of the Bolshaya Western Siberian open boreal sparse 25 Kheta River 1 Continental forest-tundra forest Lower Mezen and Kuloy (southern Moderately continental forest- Northeastern European open boreal Right bank of Yenisey River Continental forest-tundra and Western Siberian open boreal and 1 coast of Mezen Bay and northern 1 tundra and sparse forest and north-taiga woodlands 26 between Lower Tunguska and 2 part of the Peza river basin) Dudinka sparse forest north-taiga sparse forest 2 Lower Kanin Peninsula 2 Moderately continental southern Kanin-Pechora southern tundra Upper reaches of the Pyasina Taimyr-Severnaya Zemlya southern tundra 27 River and Agapa river basin 1 Continental southern tundra tundra 3 Northern Kanin Peninsula 2 Moderately continental southern Kanin-Pechora southern tundra Taimyr-Severnaya Zemlya southern tundra 28 Dickson outskirts 3 Continental north arctic tundra arctic tundra 4 Tobysh Upland 1 Moderately continental Northeastern European open boreal Komsomolets, Schmidt, Ushakov Taimyr-Severnaya Zemlya polar forest-tundra woodlands 29 and Vize islands 2 Continental northern polar desert desert 5 Malozemel'skaya Tundra 2 Moderately continental southern Kanin-Pechora southern tundra Taimyr-Severnaya Zemlya polar tundra 30 Southern Bolshevik Island 3 Continental southern polar desert desert 6 Kolguev Island 3 Moderately continental typical Kanin-Pechora northern subarctic Taimyr-Severnaya Zemlya polar tundra tundra 31 Chelyuskin Peninsula 3 Continental southern polar desert desert 7 Southern Bol'shezemel'skaya 2 Moderately continental forest- Kanin-Pechora southern tundra Upper reaches of the Upper Continental northern typical Taimyr-Severnaya Zemlya southern Tundra tundra 32 Taimyr River 3 tundra arctic-tundra 8 Lower Pechora River 2 Moderately continental southern Kanin-Pechora southern tundra Extra-continental southern arctic Taimyr-Severnaya Zemlya southern tundra 33 Eastern Byrranga mountains 3 tundra arctic-tundra 9 Chernaya river basin and 2 Moderately continental typical Kanin-Pechora northern subarctic Hypercontinental forest-tundra Angarida open boreal woodland and Eneymusyur Upland tundra tundra 34 Khetta river basin 3 and alpine tundra alpine-tundra Upper reaches of Khoseda-Yu Moderately continental southern Angarida northern taiga sparse 10 and More-Yu rivers (including 2 Kanin-Pechora southern tundra 35 Upper reaches of the Kotuy River 3 Hypercontinental sparse-forest forest Vashutkin Lakes) tundra Anabar and northern Vilyui Hypercontinental alpine tundra Angarida alpine tundra and northern Ural-Novaya-Zemlya southern 36 Plateau 3 and sparse forest taiga sparse forest 11 Kara river basin 2 Continental southern tundra tundra Forest-tundra interfluves of Anabar Angarida northern taiga sparse Moderately continental typical Ural-Novaya-Zemlya northern 37 and Olenek rivers 3 Hypercontinental sparse-forest forest 12 Yugorskiy Peninsula 1 tundra subarctic tundra Hypercontinental typical and Southern Yuzhnyy Island, Novaya Moderately continental southern Ural-Novaya-Zemlya northern and 38 Mountain-ridge of Chekanowskiy 2 southern tundra Anabar-Olenek southern tundra 13 Zemlya 1 arctic tundra southern arctic tundra Forest-tundra of Lena, Yana and 39 Indigirka interfluves 3 Hypercontinental forest-tundra Angarida open boreal woodland

70 71 Climate-related groups of Region landscapes Geographic groups of ecosystems P riority

Southern tundra of Kolyma Yana-Indigirka-Kolyma southern 40 Lowland 3 Continental southern tundra tundra Continental typical and southern Western Chukotka middle- and 41 Northern Anyuyskiy highlands 1 tundra southern subarctic tundra Moderately continental northern Western Chukotka northern 42 Coastal area of Western Chukotka 1 subarctic tundra subarctic tundra Upper reaches of Palyavaam and Moderately continental typical Western Chukotka middle subarctic 43 Pegtymel rivers 2 tundra tundra Moderately continental typical Eastern Chukotka middle subarctic 44 Upper reaches of Amguema River 3 tundra tundra Moderately continental and 45 Upper reaches of Belaya River 1 maritime typical and southern Western and Eastern Chukotka tundra southern tundra 46 Northeast part of Anadyr Lowland 2 Maritime southern tundra Southern Chukotka southern tundra 47 Southeast part of Anadyr Lowland 1 Maritime southern tundra Southern Chukotka southern tundra Northeast coastal area of Koryak 48 Highlands 1 Maritime southern tundra Southern Chukotka southern tundra Central region of Koryak 49 Highlands 3 Maritime mountain tundra Pacific maritime mountain tundra Angarida-Beringia northern taiga Upper reaches of Anadyr, Bolshoy Continental-maritime sparse forest sparse forest and mountain tundra; 50 Anyuy, Penzhina and Oloy rivers 2 and alpine-tundra; maritime and Pacific maritime stunted mountain stunted mountain pine woodland pine woodland- tundra Angarida-Beringia northern taiga 51 Northern Kolyma highlands 2 Continental-maritime sparse forest sparse forest Angarida-Beringia northern taiga 52 Southern Kolyma highlands 2 Continental-maritime sparse forest sparse forest Hypercontinental north taiga Angarida-Beringia northern taiga 53 Oimyakon highlands 3 sparse forest and mountain-tundra sparse forest and mountain tundra Hypercontinental north taiga Angarida-Beringia northern taiga 54 Yana and Elga tableland 3 sparse forest and mountain tundra sparse forest and mountain tundra

These areas are mapped on Figure 56 using the numbers from this table. Areas prioritized for joining the Arctic PA network with the goal of upgrading its landscape-ecosystem igure56. F representativeness Numbers correspond to the numbers in 4. Table

72 73 2.2 Representativeness, completeness and measures for habitat protection, and m is the number of rare taxa protected main gaps of the Russian Arctic protected areas through the PA network but requiring additional habitat protection. network for rare animals, plants and lichens This section evaluates the representativeness of the existing arctic PA 2.2.1. Mammals network with respect to rare taxa of the Russian Arctic. It examines the level of Fifty mammal taxa (species, subspecies and distinct populations) inhabit habitat protection for rare taxa and identifies unprotected areas that are key to the Russian Arctic within the boundaries defined for this report (Table 5). These their conservation. are mammals (excluding cetaceans) listed in red data books of Russian Arctic The evaluation covers all groups of terrestrial vertebrates, fishes of inland regions, including 12 species, subspecies and populations listed in the Red Data waters, insects, freshwater and land molluscs, vascular plants, bryophytes and Book of Russia. Nine are aquatic species (sea otter and Pinnipedia), while 14 lichens. These taxonomic groups have been analyzed to varying degrees of detail are forest taxa inhabiting arctic regions at the northern edge of their ranges, and, and thoroughness, depending on how well they have been researched in arctic as a rule, not spreading beyond the zone of sparse tree cover. The remaining areas, and also depending on the urgency of implementing habitat protection 27 species, subspecies and populations are representatives of fauna complexes measures aimed at their conservation. For each taxonomic group, evaluations that are either endemic to the Arctic or originated from tundra, forest-tundra, include taxa listed in the Red Data Book of Russia and in red data books of Russian Arctic regions. Subject to resources, we also evaluated species on monitoring lists (inventories of animal and vegetation species requiring special attention), restricted endemics and other species not listed in red data books, exceptional taxa (for example, those only known to occur at a single location in Russia), and sub-sets of species that have been recommended as additions to the Red Data Book of Russia or to regional red data books. In addition to the focus on protection measures for rare taxa within the PA networks, the evaluation considers the degree to which existing protected areas are adequate for conservation of rare taxa at the regional scale. Evaluated taxa were divided into three categories: 1) completely secured in terms of habitat protection and requiring no additional measures; 2) partly protected but in need of additional habitat protection measures; and, 3) unprotected and requiring habitat protection. For some taxa, special habitat protection measures are inapplicable or obviously ineffective – for example, where the taxon is known to occur in only a single location in a region, or where the number of individuals is very low. When deriving the main indicators, these taxa were grouped with the first category (taxa requiring no additional habitat protection measures). Figure 57. Adequacy of habitat protection for rare The two main indicators, with respect to the protection of rare taxa, of the mammal taxa in the Russian Arctic A – taxa listed in the Red Data Book of Russia; B – taxa regional PA networks and the PA network for the entire Russian Arctic are: 1) listed only in regional red data books; C – taxa listed in regional red data books, including species in the Red how well rare taxa are represented in the PA network (“representativeness”); Data Book of Russia and restricted endemics Categories (colour codes): 1 – completely protected and, 2) how completely the network protects habitat of rare taxa (“habitat through PA networks or requiring no additional protection completeness”). The indicator of representativeness is defined as protection; 2 – protected through PA networks but requiring additional protection measures; 3 – not the number of rare taxa in PAs as a per cent of the total number of taxa in the represented in PA networks and requiring protection evaluated taxonomic group. The indicator of habitat protection completeness is defined by the formula (n+m/2)100/N, where N is the total number of rare taxa in the taxonomic group, n is the number of rare taxa requiring no additional

74 75 north-taiga, alpine tundra and tundra-steppe landscapes and spread to the arctic are protected through the PA network but need additional protection measures zone and/or the subarctic zone. In addition to those listed in the Red Data Book is set at 50 per cent complete, the overall status of habitat protection is: 68 per of Russia, four taxa endemic to the Arctic are of interest in terms of adequacy cent complete for all evaluated species, subspecies and populations of mammals of habitat protection due to their genetic uniqueness and comparatively limited listed in the regional red data books, 74 per cent complete for taxa listed in distributions. the Red Data Book of Russia, and 63 per cent complete for taxa listed only in Of the 54 species, subspecies and populations of mammals that are found regional red data books. in the Russian Arctic and listed in the Red Data Book of Russia and/or in the Rare mammals have the highest level of protection in the Murmansk region arctic regional red data books, or are restricted endemics (Figure 57), 26 are where all red-listed taxa are adequately protected (Figure 59). The majority of either protected adequately through PA networks in all regions that they occur other regions have values for the indicator of habitat protection completeness or are not in need of habitat protection. The remaining 28 taxa require additional (for all evaluated species) of between 60 per cent and 88 per cent. Two regions – habitat protection in at least one of the evaluated regions. Five of twelve taxa the Archangel region and Nenets AO – have unprotected populations of wild listed in the Red Data Book of Russia require no additional protection measures; reindeer. The lowest levels of habitat protection for rare mammals are in the two taxa (the reindeer of Novaya Zemlya and the Chukotka population of Yakut Magadan region and Chukotka AO. These two regions lead in the number of bighorn sheep) are not protected at all through the PA network. mammal species listed in the regional red data books. The level of protection is Fifty-four rare and endemic mammal taxa were evaluated in 10 regions of especially low in Chukotka, where more than half of rare mammals lack habitat Russia located completely or partly in the Arctic. These taxa can be divided into protection, and only 4 out of 13 species have protection that is rated as complete. 88 regional populations, including 29 populations of taxa that are listed in the There are about 40 unprotected areas that have significant habitat for species Red Data Book of Russia. Figure 58 shows the distribution of these regional of mammals that are rare in the Russian Arctic (Figure 60). The majority are populations among 10 Russian regions, as well as the adequacy of their habitat concentrated in northeast Asia and on islands and in coastal areas of the western protection through the PA network. If the level of habitat protection for taxa that sector of the Arctic Basin. Nearly half of these regions are important for conservation of species listed in the Red Data Book of Russia. Eleven of the areas support populations of species listed in regional red data books, including ungulate, carnivore and squirrel species. Eight areas in the Magadan region and Chukotka are important only for small mammals (insectivores, chiropterans and murine rodents) that are listed in regional red data books. Protection of these species

Number rare of mammal populations MR AR NN KM YN TE YK MG KC CK

Habitat protection level (%) MR AR NN KM YN TE YK MG KC CK

Figure 58. Adequacy of habitat protection for rare and endemic mammals in 10 Russian Arctic regions Categories (colour codes): 1– completely protected in PA networks or requiring no additional protection; 2 – protected in PA networks but requiring additional protection measures; 3 – not represented in PA networks and requiring protection Figure 59. Indicator of habitat protection completeness for rare and endemic mammals in 10 Russian Arctic regions Regions: MR – Murmansk region; AR – Archangel region; NN – Nenets AO; KM – Komi Republic; YN – Yamal- Regions: MR – Murmansk region; AR – Archangel region; NN – Nenets AO; KM – Komi Republic; YN – Yamal- Nenets AO; TE – Taimyr and Evenk regions of Krasnoyarsk Territory; YK – Sakha Republic (Yakutia); MG – Magadan Nenets AO; TE – Taimyr and Evenk regions of Krasnoyarsk Territory; YK – Sakha Republic (Yakutia); MG – Magadan region; KC – Kamchatka; CK – Chukotka AO region; KC – Kamchatka; CK – Chukotka AO

76 77 requires only protection of sufficient areas of their ecotopes (small ecological Table 5. units that form suitable habitat for a species). Rare mammals of the Russian Arctic listed in federal and regional red data books, Ecotopes for rare and endemic mammals of the Arctic are known for some categorized according to their needs for habitat protection regions, though to varying degrees. Additional surveys are needed in other re- Key to symbols used in the table: gions to identify ecological areas similar to those that are known to support rare – Not listed in the regional red data book or not present in the arctic part of the region 0 No extra measures for habitat protection needed and endemic arctic mammal species. Regions needing additional surveys are + Relatively well represented in the PA network, but extra measures for habitat protection are advisable Novaya Zemlya, Severnaya Zemlya and the northeast coastal area of Taimyr, ++ Protected in the PA network, but not enough for conservation +++ Not protected in the PA network; urgently needs habitat protection where surveys may reveal significant concentrations of polar bears and their dens, and also the Anabar Plateau, which could be a significant ecotope for the

Turuchan pika. AO

TAXON R e public M urmansk region A rchangel region N enets AO K omi R epublic N enets Yamal- AO and Taimyr E venk MR S akha (Yakutia) - M agadan re gion K amchatka C hukotka

LISTED IN THE RED DATA BOOK OF RUSSIA Mednovsky polar fox (Alopex lagopus semenovi) – – – – – – – – 0 – Polar bear (Ursus maritimus) 0 + 0 – 0 + 0 – 0 + Sea otter (Enhydra lutris) – – – – – – – – 0 – European harbour seal (Phoca vitulina vitulina) 0 0 0 – – – – – – – Kuril harbour seal (Phoca vitulina stejnegeri) – – – – – – – – 0 – Grey seal (Halichoerus grypus grypus) 0 0 0 – – – – – – – Atlantic walrus (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus) – ++ ++ – 0 0 – – – – Laptev sea walrus (Odobenus rosmarus laptevi) – – – – – + + – – – Steller sea lion (Eumitopias jubatus) – – – – – – – + + ++ Novaya Zemlya reindeer (Rangifer tarandus pearsoni) – +++ – – – – – – – – Putorana snow sheep (Ovis nivicola borealis) – – – – – + – – – – Yakutia snow sheep (Ovis nivicola lydekkeri) Chukotka population – – – – – – – – – +++ LISTED IN REGIONAL RED DATA BOOKS Flat-skulled (brown) shrew (Sorex roboratus) – – – – – – – ++ – +++ Eurasian least shrew (Sorex minutissimus) – – – – – – – + – +++ Tundra shrew (Sorex tundrensis) – – – – – – – ++ – – Kamchatka shrew (Sorex camtschatica) – – – – – – – + – – Slender shrew (Sorex gracillimus) – – – – – – – + – – Eurasian water shrew (Neomys fodiens) – – – – – – – +++ – – Eastern water bat (Myotis petax) – – – – – – – 0 – – Brandt's bat (Myotis brandti) – – – – – – – 0 0 – Brown long-eared bat (Plecotus auritus) – – – – – – – 0 – – Northern bat (Eptesicus nilssonii) 0 – – – – 0 – +++ 0 – Northern pika (Ochotona hyperborean) – – – 0 – – – – – – Black-capped marmot (Marmota camtschatica) – – – – – – 0 + – +++ Eurasian beaver (Castor fiber) 0 – – – – – – – – – Wood lemming (Myopus schisticolor) 0 – – – – – – – – – Amur lemming (Lemmus amurensis) – – – – – – + +++ – +++ Kamchatka lemming (Lemmus flavescens) – – – – – – – – 0 – Portenko’s Siberian brown lemming (Lemmus – – – – – – – 0 sibiricus portenkoi) – – North American brown lemming (Lemmus trimucronatus) – – – – – – – +++ 0 –

78 79 – – – – AO – northern –

TAXON R e public – north – part of M urmansk region A rchangel region N enets AO K omi R epublic N enets Yamal- AO and Taimyr E venk MR S akha (Yakutia) - M agadan re gion K amchatka C hukotka – Andrew Island, 13 Arctic lemming (Dycrostonyx torquatus) – – – – – – – +++ + – – area – Cape of Vankarem Wrangel lemming (Dycrostonyx vinogradovi) – – – – – – – – – 0 – Buyunda 38 – river valley, – centre of the Koryak the centre – Upland, of

North Siberian vole (Microtus hyperboreus) – – – – – – – ++ – +++ Novaya Zemlya, – 6 Harvest mouse (Micromys minutus) – – – – – – – +++ – – Korean field mouse (Apodemus peninsulae) – – – – – – – 0 – – European mink (Mustela lutreola) – – – ? – – – – – – – Elgygytgyn – Lake area, 25 European otter (Lutra lutra) – – – – 0 0 – +++

European badger (Meles meles) – – – – 0 – – – – – Shelagsky – Ridge, 19

Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) 0 – – – 0 – – 0 – – – regions requiring additional survey work to identify

Harp (Greenland) seal (Phoca groenlandica) – – – – – 0 – – – – – northeastern coast of Taimyr, 12 – Great – Annachag Ridge, 37 Bearded seal (Erignathus barbatus) – – – – – – 0 – – – – areas – to the key protection species of from regional red data Reindeer (R. t. tarandu) Pezha River population – – +++ – – – – – – –

Siberian tundra reindeer (R .t. sibiricus) Bely – – – – 0 – – – – – – southeast – part Kolguev of Island, 5

Island population Anabar – Plateau, 18 Siberian tundra reindeer (R. t. sibiricus) North Chernaya – Murgai and basins, river 30 Gydan Peninsula population – – – – + – – – – – area – the of Ilirney Lakes, 24 Siberian tundra reindeer (R. t. sibiricus) Polar Ural population – – – – ++ – – – – – – Severnaya Zemlya, 11 Okhotsk reindeer (R. t. phylarchus) Kamchatka population – – – – – – – – ++ – Siberian musk deer (Moschus moschiferus) – – – – – – – 0 – –

Yakut snow sheep (Ovis nivicola lydekkeri) Sakha – – – – – – 0 – – – Republic (Yakutia) population Great – Putoran Lakes, 17

Okhotsk snow sheep (Ovis nivicola alleni) 35 Antsyferov – Island, river valley, Kulu Kavinskaya Valley Nature Reserve population – – – – – – – ++ – – – Ushakov Island, 10 – north – part Timansky of Ridge, 4 Muskox (Ovibos moschatus) – – – – – + – – – 0 – north – part Anyui of Upland, 23 ARCTIC REGIONAL ENDEMICS Anadyr upper reaches – 29 of River, Saint Lawrence Island shrew (Sorex jacksoni) – – – – – – – – – 0 Turuchan pika (Ochotona turuchanensis) – – – – – 0 – – – – – Vize Island, 9 Siberian brown lemming (Lemmus sibiricus – – – – – – 0 – – –

novosibiricus) areas – keytothe protection onlyspecies of insectivores, of chiropterans and murine rodents from the regional red data books; – Cape – Bering, 22 Beringian arctic fox (Alopex lagopus beringensis) – – – – – – – – 0 – the northern – Kuriles, 34 – Kosminskie – Lakes, 3 – Omolon river valley, 28 valley, river Omolon – – lower reaches lower – Balakhnya of River, 16 – Victoria – Island, 2 – areas – to the key protection more or one species of from the Red Data Russia; Book of b d e – Elovka river basin, 33 Elovka – – Sob and Laryegan river basins, 8 – Amguem-Kuvet – Massif, 21 – Cape of Navarin, 27 of Cape – – Peschany – Island, 15 a b c – Cape Olyutorsky, 32 – igure 60. Unprotected areas that are key for the conservation rare of mammal species in the Russian Arctic – regions requiring additional survey work to identify key areas for protection of species from the Red Data Book of Russia; e F a Categories codes): (colour Tsvetkov Cape,Tsvetkov 14 and Cape Onmyn, 20 booksincluding ungulates, carnivores and marmots; с d key areas for protection regional of arctic endemics Key to areas shown on map: 1 Pekulney 26 Ridge, edge of Vaigach Island, 7 Kegali river valley, – lower 39 reaches River of Gizhiga, 40 – Elikchan Lakes, – River 41 Dukcha, – Babushkin 42 – Kekurny 43 Bay, 44 Bay, – Bulun river basin 31

80 81 2.2.2. Birds A total of 118 species, subspecies and distinct populations of birds listed in regional red data books (not including occasional visitors and single observa- tions) are found in the Russian Arctic within the boundaries defined for this report (Table 6). Among these are 35 bird species and subspecies that are listed in the Red Data Book of Russia. Figure 62. Adequacy of habitat protection in Of these 118 arctic bird taxa, 77 that are listed in the Red Data Book of Rus- 10 Russian Arctic regions for rare birds listed in (A) the Red Data Book of Russia, and (B) sia and/or in the red data books of Russian arctic regions are protected adequate- Number rare of bird populations regional red data books MR AR NN KM YN TE YK MG KC CK Categories (colour codes): 1– taxa completely ly in all regions through the PA network or are not in need of habitat protection protected in PA networks or requiring no (Figure 61). The remaining 41 bird taxa require protection of additional habitat additional protection; 2 – taxa protected in PA networks but requiring additional protection in at least one of the regions evaluated. Of 35 taxa listed in the Red Data Book of measures; 3 – taxa not represented in PA networks and requiring protection Russia, 11 require no additional protection. The remaining 24 listed species and Regions: MR – Murmansk region; AR – subspecies are protected through some PAs, with the number of PAs through Archangel region; NN – Nenets AO; KM – Komi Republic; YN – Yamal-Nenets AO; which they are protected ranging from a few to many. TE – Taimyr and Evenk regions of Krasnoyarsk Territory; YK – Sakha Republic (Yakutia); Regional red data books list 118 bird taxa. These taxa can be divided into MG – Magadan region; KC – Kamchatka; CK – 268 regional populations, including 125 regional populations of bird taxa that Chukotka AO are listed in the Red Data Book and have ranges completely or partly in arctic parts of the 10 regions evaluated for this report. Figure 62 shows the distribution Number rare of bird populations of these regional populations among the regions, as well as the adequacy of their MR AR NN KM YN TE YK MG KC CK habitat protection through the PA network. If the level of habitat protection for

taxa that are protected through the PA network but need additional protection is set at 50 per cent complete, then the overall status of habitat protection for rare birds is 80 per cent complete. Figure 63 graphs the values for the indicator of habitat protection completeness for rare birds in each region, calculated as described above. The highest levels of protection (over 90 per cent complete) are in the Murmansk region, Yamal- Nenets AO and Yakutia, and the lowest (56 per cent complete) is in Chukotka, where PAs with significant numbers of red-listed taxa are relatively small. The habitat protection completeness levels are quite low (60 to 70 per cent) in Taimyr, Yamal-Nenets AO and the Komi Republic (where PA network coverage is limited in the northern Arctic). Taimyr is among the leading regions in terms of the proportion of PA network coverage, but many areas with high conservation value for Figure 61. Adequacy of habitat protection for rare rare birds are outside the PA boundaries. bird taxa in the Russian Arctic A – taxa listed in the Red Data Book of Russia; B – The information shown above contributed to the identification of the 51 main taxa listed only in regional red data books; C – taxa listed in regional red data books, including species unprotected areas in the Russian Arctic that are key for protecting taxa of birds in the Red Data Book of Russia rare in Russia or in certain arctic areas (Figure 64). Six of these areas are impor- Categories (colour codes): 1– taxa completely protected through PA networks or requiring no tant only for the conservation of regionally rare species that are not in the Red additional protection; 2 – taxa protected through PA networks but requiring additional protection Data Book of Russia, while 23 areas are important for at least one species listed measures; 3 – taxa not represented in PA networks and requiring protection in the Red Data Book of Russia. Some of these 23 areas are also important for regionally rare species. The remaining 22 areas are important for the protection of two to four taxa that are rare in Russia and are listed in the Red Data Book.

82 83 - AO

Figure 63. Indicator of habitat TAXON protection completeness for rare birds in 10 Russian Arctic regions M urmansk region A rchangel region N enets AO K omi R epublic N enets Yamal- AO and Taimyr E venk MR S akha R epub Regions: MR – Murmansk lic (Yakutia) M agadan region K amchatka C hukotka region; AR – Archangel region; NN – Nenets AO; KM – Komi Greater spotted eagle (Aquila clanga) – – – – 0 – 0 – – – Republic; YN – Yamal-Nenets Pale (pallid) harrier (Circus macrourus) – – ++ – 0 – – – – – AO; TE – Taimyr and Evenk regions of Krasnoyarsk Territory; Gyrfalcon (Falco rusticollis) – – + – – + – – – – YK – Sakha Republic (Yakutia); Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrines) – – + – – + – – – – MG – Magadan region; KC – Kamchatka; CK – Chukotka AO Siberian crane (Grus leucogeranus) – – 0 – 0 0 + – – – See text for indicator definition. Habitat protection level (%) Hooded crane (Grus monacha) – – – – – +++ – – – – MR AR NN KM YN TE YK MG KC CK Chinese oystercatcher (Haematopus ostralegus – – – – – – – 0 0 – osculans) Eurasian oystercatcher (Haematopus ostralegus – – – – 0 – – – – – longipes) Rock sandpiper (Calidris ptilocnemis kurilensis) – – – – – – – – 0 – Table 6. Buff-breasted sandpiper (Tryngites subruficollis) – – – – – – – – – + Spoon-billed sandpiper (Eurynorhynchus pyg- Rare birds of the Russian Arctic listed in the federal and regional red data books, – – – – – – – +++ + ++ categorized according to their needs for habitat protection meus) Far eastern curlew (Numenius madagascariensis) – – – – – – – 0 0 – Key to symbols used in the table: Red-legged kittiwake (Rissa brevirostris) – – – – – – – – 0 – – not listed in the Red Data Book of Russia or not present in the arctic part of the region Ivory gull (Pagophila eburnea) – + 0 – – + 0 0 0 0 0 No extra measures for habitat protection needed Aleutian tern (Sterna aleutica) + Relatively well represented in the PA network, but extra measures for habitat protection are advisable – – – – – – – ++ 0 0 ++ Protected in the PA network, but not enough for conservation Long-billed marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus – – – – – – – + 0 – +++ Not protected in the PA network; urgently needs habitat protection marmoratus perdix) Kittlitz's murrelet (Brachyramphus brevirostris) – – – – – – – + 0 0

- Eurasian eagle-owl (Bubo bubo) 0 – – – 0 – 0 – – +++ AO Blakiston's fish owl (Ketupa blakistoni) – – – – – – – 0 – – TAXON Great grey shrike (Lanius excubitor excubitor) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 – 0 LISTED IN REGIONAL RED DATA BOOKS M urmansk region A rchangel region N enets AO K omi R epublic N enets Yamal- AO and Taimyr E venk MR S akha R epub lic (Yakutia) lic (Yakutia) M agadan region K amchatka C hukotka Red-throated loon (Gavia stellata) – – 0 – – – – – – – LISTED IN THE RED DATA BOOK OF RUSSIA Leach's storm petrel (Oceanodroma leucorhoa) – – – – – – – – 0 – Yellow-billed loon (Gavia adamsii) 0 0 + – 0 + 0 0 0 ++ Fork-tailed storm petrel (Oceanodroma furcata) – – – – – – – – 0 – European shag (Phalacrocorax aristotelus) 0 – – – – – – – – – Great cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo carbo) 0 – – – – – – – – – Aleutian Canada goose (Branta canadensis leu- Red-faced cormorant (Phalacrocorax urile) – – – – – – – – 0 – – – – – – – – – +++ – copareia) Northern gannet (Sula bossana) 0 – – – – – – – – – Pale-bellied brant goose (Branta bernicla hrota) – 0 – – – – – – – – Snow goose (Chen caerulescens) – – – – – – 0 – 0 – Black brant (Branta nigricans) – – – – – – 0 0 0 ++ Eastern taiga bean goose (Anser fabalis midden- – – – – – – 0 – + +++ Red-breasted goose (Rufibrenta ruficollis) – – – – ++ ++ 0 – – – dorfii) Lesser white-fronted goose (Аnser erythropus) – 0 ++ +++ 0 ++ 0 0 0 + Tundra bean goose (Anser fabalis serrirostris) – – – – – – – – 0 – Emperor goose (Philacte canagica) – – – – – – – – – ++ Greylag goose (Anser anser) – – 0 – – – – – – – Tundra swan (Cygnus bewickii) – ++ ++ +++ ++ ++ 0 0 0 ++ Whooper swan (Cygnus cygnus) 0 0 – 0 – 0 0 0 0 0 Baikal teal (Anas Formosa) – – – – – – 0 0 0 ++ Common shelduck (Tadorna tadorna) 0 – – – – – – – – – Scaly-sided merganser (Mergus squamata) – – – – – – – – +++ – American wigeon (Anas Americana) – – – – – – – – – 0 Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) 0 0 – 0 0 0 0 0 0 +++ Common pochard (Aythya ferina) – – – – – – – – 0 – White-tailed eagle(Haliaeetus albicilla) 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 ++ +++ Common merganser (Mergus merganser) – – – – – – – – 0 – Steller's sea eagle (Haliaeetus pelagicus) – – – – – – – + 0 – Smew (Mergellus albellus) 0 – – – – – – 0 0 – Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetus) 0 0 – – 0 0 0 0 0 0 Common scoter (Melanitta nigra) – – – – – – 0 – – –

84 85 - - AO AO TAXON TAXON M urmansk region A rchangel region N enets AO K omi R epublic N enets Yamal- AO and Taimyr E venk MR S akha R epub M urmansk region A rchangel region N enets AO K omi R epublic N enets Yamal- AO and Taimyr E venk MR S akha R epub lic (Yakutia) lic (Yakutia) M agadan region K amchatka C hukotka lic (Yakutia) M agadan region K amchatka C hukotka

Black (American) scoter (Melanitta Americana) – – – – – – 0 – – – Eurasian curlew (Numenius arquatus) +++ – – – – – – – – – Common eider (Somateria mollissima) 0 – ++ – – – 0 – – – Glaucous-winged gull (Larus glaucescens) – – – – – – – – 0 – Spectacled eider (Somateria fischeri) – – – – – – 0 – – ++ Little gull (Larus minutes) – – 0 – – +++ – – – – Steller's eider (Polysticta stelleri) +++ – – – – – 0 – 0 ++ Sabine's gull (Xema sabini) – – – – – + 0 – 0 0 Hen (northern) harrier (Circus cyaneus) – – – – – – – 0 0 0 Ross's gull (Rhodostethia rosea) – – – – – + 0 0 0 0 Northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) – – – – – – – 0 0 – Parasitic jaeger (Stercorarius parasiticus) popula- – – – – +++ – – – – – Common buzzard (Buteo buteo) 0 – – – – – – – – – tion of the upper reaches of the River Pyakupur Pigeon guillemot (Commander Islands) (Cepphus Common kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) 0 – – – – – – 0 – – – – – – – – – – 0 – columba kaiurka) Eurasian hobby (Falco subbuteo) 0 – – – – – – – – – Pigeon guillemot (Kuril Islands) (Cepphus colum- Red-footed falcon (Falco vespertinus) – – – 0 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0 – ba snowi) Commander rock ptarmigan (Lagopus mutus ridg- – – – – – – – – 0 – Whiskered auklet (Aethia pygmaea) – – – – – – – – 0 – wayi) Least auklet (Aethia pusilla) – – – – – – – – 0 – Sandhill crane (Grus Canadensis) – – – – – – 0 – 0 – Parakeet auklet (Cyclorrhynchus psittaculа) – – – – – – – – 0 – Common crane (Grus grus) 0 0 0 0 – 0 0 – – – Ancient murrelet (Synthliboramphus antiquus) – – – – – – – 0 + – Common pied oystercatcher (Haematopus os- – – 0 0 – – – – – – tralegus ostralegus) Great grey owl (Strix nebulosa) 0 – – – – – – – – +++ Eurasian dotterel (Eudromis morinellus) 0 – – – – 0 – 0 – 0 Ural owl (Strix uralensis) 0 – – – – – – 0 – – Grey plover (Pluvialis squatarola) population of Short-eared owl (Asio flammeus) – – – – – – – 0 – +++ – – – – +++ – – – – – the upper reaches of the River Pyakupur Eurasian pygmy owl (Glaucidium passerinum) 0 – – – – – 0 – – – Rock sandpiper (Calidris ptilocnemis ptilocnemis) – – – – – – – – – 0 Barn swallow (Hirundo rustica) – – – – – – 0 – 0 – Rock sandpiper (Kuril Is.) (Calidris ptilocnemis Horned lark (Eremophila alpestris) 0 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0 – quarta) Alpine accentor (Prunella collaris) – – – – – – – 0 – – Sanderling (Calidris alba) – – – – – + – – – – White-throated dipper (Cinclus cinclus) 0 – – – – – 0 – – – Sharp-tailed sandpiper (Calidris acuminata) – – – – – +++ – – 0 – Brown dipper (Cinclus pallasii) – – – – – – 0 0 – – Dunlin subspecies kistchinski (Calidris alpina Troglodytes wren (Troglodytes troglodytes palle- – – – – – – – 0 – – – – – – – – – – 0 – kistchinski) scens) Dunlin (Calidris alpinа) population of the upper Scandinavian ring ouzel (Turdus torquatus torgua- – – – – +++ – – – – – 0 – – – – – – – – – reaches of the River Pyakupur tus) Red-necked stint (Calidris ruficollis) – – – – – 0 – – – – Eyebrowed thrush (Turdus obscures) – – – – – – 0 – – – Baird's sandpiper (Calidris bairdii) – – – – – – – – – 0 Siberian thrush (Zoothera sibirica) – – – – – – 0 – – – Long-toed stint (Calidris subminuta) – – – – – +++ – – – – Grey-cheeked thrush (Catharus minimus) – – – – – – 0 – – – Western sandpiper (Calidris mauri) – – – – – – – – – 0 Pallas's rosefinch (Carpodacus roseus) – – – – – – – 0 – – Broad-billed sandpiper (Limicola falcinellus) + – +++ +++ +++ 0 +++ – – Commander Islands gray-crowned rosy finch – – – – – – – 0 – – Semipalmated sandpiper (Calidris pusilla) – – – – – – – – – 0 (Leucosticte tephrocotis maxima) Nordmann's greenshank (Tringa guttifer) – – – – – – – +++ – – Wandering tattler (Heteroscelus incanus) – – – – – 0 – – – – Grey-tailed tattler (Heteroscelus brevipes) – – – – – – – – – 0 Great snipe (Gallinago media) – – 0 – – 0 – – – – Solitary snipe (Gallinago solitaria) – – – – – – – 0 0 0 Eurasian woodcock (Scolopax rusticola) – – – – – – 0 0 – – Jack snipe (Lymnocryptes minimus) – – – 0 – – 0 – – – Bar-tailed godwit (Limosa lapponica) – – 0 – – – – – – – Long-billed dowitcher (Limnodromus scolopace- – – – – – +++ – – – – us) Little curlew (Numenius minuta) – – – – – +++ 0 +++ – +++

86 87 2.2.3. Amphibians and reptiles – Kara

– Rovny Rovny – Amphibians and reptiles are very sparse in the arctic regions and are not – Schmidt Schmidt – – Oira river river Oira – well represented in the Red Data Book of Russia. Several species are, however, – lower Agapa listed in the regional red data books. Those listed are peripheral species, present – Velt river basin, Velt – in some arctic areas at the northern edges of their ranges. They are quite widely distributed and abundant in areas south of the Arctic and are not in need of spe- – Vize Island, 6 Island, Vize – – Kubalakh – and Alysardakh cial habitat protection. These species include the moor frog (Rana arvalis), the Siberian tree frog (Rana amurensis), the common toad (Bufo bufo), the vivipa- – Olskaya Lagoon, 49 Lagoon, Olskaya – rous lizard (Lacerta vivipara) and the common European adder (Vipera berus). – Kolguev – Island, 12 The only characteristic inhabitant of the area, but just in its southern sub- – Krainiy and Vtoroy islands, 43 islands, Vtoroy and Krainiy – arctic part, is the Siberian salamander (Salamandrella keiserlingii), listed in the – Victory Island, 5 Island, Victory – red data books of Nenets and Yamal-Nenets AOs, Komi Republic and Sakha – Aachim Peninsula and Nolde Bay, 38 Yakan Cape, Aachim – Yakan 38 Peninsula Bay, and Nolde – lower Gorbita River, 28 - upper Verkhnyaya Taimyr

– Bolshaya Oyu and Kheiyakha river basins, 18 Republic (Yakutia). This species is widely distributed within Yamal-Nenets AO

– Babushkin Bay, 48 Bay, Babushkin – and Yakutia PA networks. The Siberian salamander is found in the Bolshaya Rogovaya river basin in the Komi Republic and it has spread to Nenets AO – Cape – Svyatoi Nos, 11 along the river valley corridor. Nenets AO is the only confirmed, and evidently – Essei Lake – and upper 33 Kotuy River, – upper Gyda River and environs of Yambuto Lake, 23 the farthest north, site of this species in Europe (see unprotected area key to the conservation of this species, Figure 66). – Meinepilgin lake network, 42 network, lake Meinepilgin – – Ekarma Island, 47 Island, Ekarma – – areas – protecting key for birds that are rare in the region plus one species listed 2.2.4. Fishes of inland waters – southern island of Novaya Zemlya, 4 Zemlya, Novaya of island southern – The presence in parts of the Russian Arctic of rare and vulnerable freshwater – Aion Island – and Kyttyk Peninsula, 37

– Vivi and Agata Vivi lakes, – 32 and migratory fishes with very narrow distributions is of great interest in terms – Tas River lower reaches, 22 – Mesna – and river Torna basins, 10 of biodiversity conservation. Many of these fishes are, or may be, separate spe- – middle reaches of Kheta and Boganida rivers, 27 – middle reaches of River Bolshaya Rogovaya, 17

– Keingypilgin lagoons, 41 lagoons, Keingypilgin – cies or subspecies. Species discussed in this section are listed, along with scientific names, in Table 7. – Bolshoe and Maloe lakes, 46 lakes, Maloe and Bolshoe –

The ranges of three species (the Alaska blackfish, the pygmy whitefish and the Bering cisco) are mainly in North America. They are represented in Russia – Omolon river valley, 36 river Omolon – valley, only by peripheral populations on the Chukotka Peninsula. Thirty fish taxa are endemic to the Russian Arctic, including the Kildin Island Atlantic cod (the lake – Pur River upper basin, 21

– Khaipudyrskaya Bay, 16 form, which is found only in Mogilnoe Lake on Kildin Island); 2 species of Pa- – Volochanka river basin, 26 cific salmon that are endemic to Kamchatka (Kamchatka salmon and steelhead

– Chizha – and Yazhma river basins, 9 trout, which is alternatively classified as Parasalmo mykissa, rainbow trout); – southern and eastern shores of Lake Imandra, 3 Imandra, Lake of shores eastern and southern – long-finned char from Elgygytgyn Lake; and, 24 forms of char of the Salvelinus

– areas – protecting key for birds that are rare in the region; orange genus, 7 of which have not yet been described. There are two phylogenetic lines among these chars: 1) the “arctic” line, represented by six forms in the Taimyr and Evenk drainage areas, three forms in North Yakutia, two Chukotka species and one (Boganida char) found in both Taimyr and Chukotka; and 2) the “Pacif- ic” line which includes six Kamchatka forms, five Okhotsk Sea forms and one – Pyakupur River upper reaches, 20 northern Kurils form. Very few of these chars have a distinct taxonomic status, – Kamchatka river valley near the village of Klyuchi, 45 Klyuchi, of village the near valley river Kamchatka –

– lakes – in outskirts the village of Oyusardakh, 35 – Nes’ and Nes’ Mgla – river basins, 8 – Edges of Lake Kieshyaur, 2 Kieshyaur, Lake of Edges – – right bank area of River Dudapta, 25 but the many endemic char populations with limited distributions constitute the high biological diversity value of this important group of arctic fishes. – Vankarem Lowland, Amguema river mouth and Ukouge Lagoon, 40 Lagoon, Ukouge and mouth river Amguema Lowland, Vankarem – – Sengeisky Island, 14 - Neruta river basin, 15 igure 64. Unprotected areas that are key for the conservation rare of bird species in the Russian Arctic river basin, 19 mouth, 50 – Motyklesky – Malakachan 51 Bay, Bay river, 24 lakes, 34 39 in the Red Data Book Russia, of or just one species listed in the Red Data Book Russia; of 1 red – areasAreas: key for protecting several bird species listed in the Red Data Book Russia of F Categories yellow codes): (colour Island, 7 13 31 the Bludnaya River, mouth of - Bolokhnya 30 Bolshaya River, lower - 29 River, 44 Island,

88 89 Five of the taxa shown in Table 7 (Kildin Island Atlantic cod, Kamchatka Table 7. salmon, pygmy whitefish, small-mouth char and long-finned char) are listed in Rare endemic and peripheral forms of freshwater and migratory fishes of the Rus- the Red Data Book of Russia, and four more (Amguema and Pilkhykay black- sian Arctic and their habitat protection status fish, Boganida char and longhead char) are in the “List of fauna species requir- Key to symbols and abbreviations used in table: ing special attention to their status in nature and to their monitoring” (an annex RDBr red Data Book of Russia to the Red Data Book of Russia). Twelve species are listed in the regional red List “List of fauna species requiring special attention to their status in nature and to their monitoring” MR Murmansk region data books of Chukotka, Kamchatka and Magadan. Thirteen endemic popula- MG Magadan region CH Chukotka tions found in the waters of Taimyr, Evenk, Yakutia, Okhotsk Sea and Northern KC Kamchatka + habitat protected (to varying degrees) Kuriles (Table 7) have no nature-protection status but probably should, even 0 no or very little habitat protection though they are not described as distinct species or subspecies and are unlikely to be given distinct taxonomic classifications in the future. The most significant waters for protection of the rare fishes under considera- Unprotected areas with high species Taxon conservation value

tion are Norilsk-Pyasinsky Lakes and Lake Khantaiskoe, which among them books status

support six forms of char (Taimyr, Dryagin’s, Boganida, Yessay, mountain tion status egional red data R egional red abitat protection H abitat protection protection needed? protection and deep-water char). Two of these (mountain and deep-water char) are only I s additional habitat - F ederal nature-protec known to occur in these lakes. Also of importance are Kamchatka’s Kronotskoe Kildin Island Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua kildinensis) RDBR MR + No Lake (endemic long-head and Schmidt’s chars, and also the more widespread Alaska blackfish (Dallia pectoralis) CH + No white char), and Elgygytgyn Lake in Chukotka (endemic small-mouth char, Amguema blackfish Dallia( admirabilis) List CH 0 Yes Lakes in lower Amuema River long-finned char and Boganida char). All these waters are protected: Kronot- Pilkhykay blackfish (Dallia delicatis- Pilkhykay lake area of Cape Dzhen- sima) List CH 0 Yes letren skoe Lake is within the boundaries of the strictly protected reserve of the same Pygmy whitefish (Prosopium coulteri) RDBR CH 0 Yes Ekityki Lake; lake network in the mid- name, Elgygytgyn Lake is a natural monument, and Norilsk-Pyasinsky Lakes dle reaches of Amguema River Bering cisco (Coregonus lauretta) CH + No and Lake Khantaiskoe are in the buffer zone of the Putorana Strictly Protected Penzhina arctic cisco (Coregonus sub- KC + Yes Penzhina and Talovka river basins Reserve – but they are clearly in need of higher nature-protection status. In autumnalis) Kamchatka salmon (Parasalmo pen- Snatolvayam river basin and other riv- addition to these waters, Taimyr Lake supports Taimyr and Dryagin’s char; the shinensis) RDBR KC + Yes ers of Western Kamchatka Boganida river basin and Pennoe Lakes in the Belaya river basin in Chukotka Steelhead trout (Parasalmo cf. Clarkia) KC 0 Yes Tigil river basin Boganida char (Salvelinus boganidae) List CH + Yes Boganida river basin (Taimyr); lakes support Boganida char; Yessey Lake supports Yessey char; and Lake Azabachye Baranye and Pennoe (Chukotka) in the Kamchatka river basin supports white char. Small-mouth char (Salvelinus elgiticus) RDBR CH + No Chukot char (Salvelinus andriashevi) CH 0 Yes Ystikhed Lake (Chukotka Peninsula) Yakutian char (Salvelinus jacuticus) 0 Yes Aranastakh Lake (lower Lena River) Eastern char (Salvelinus orientalis) + No Cherskii's char (Salvelinus czerski) + No Taimyr char (Salvelinus taimyricus) + Yes Taimyr Lake Dryagin’s char (Salvelinus drjagini) + Yes Taimyr Lake Yessey char (Salvelinus tolmachoff) + Yes Yessey Lake Putorana char (Salvelinus sp. ) + No Deep-water char (Salvelinus sp.) + Yes Mountain char (Salvelinus sp. ) + Yes White char (Salvelinus alba) KC + No Longhead char (Salvelinus kronocius) List KC + No Schmidt’s (big-nosed) char (S. Schmidtii) KC + No Dalnee Lake in the Paratunka river Dalneozersky char (Salvelinus kroginsae) KC + Yes basin Ushky Lake in the floodplain of the Ushkovsky char (Salvelinus kuznetzovi) KC 0 Yes middle reaches of Kamchatka River Nachikinsky Lake in the Bolshaya Nachikinsky char (Salvelinus sp.) KC + Yes river basin Levanidiv’s char (Salvelinus lewanidovi) MG, KC + Yes Yama and Penzhina river basins Uegina lake-river network of Okhota Neiva char (Salvelinus neiva) MG 0 Yes River; Rogovik Lake

90 91 of rare fishes in the PA network is 65 per cent (22 of 34 taxa), and the overall habitat protection completeness is estimated at 52 per cent.

Unprotected areas with high species In addition to the five species labelled “RDBR” in the federal protection Taxon conservation value books status status column in Table 7, one species plus several distinct populations of three tion status species (all with distributions partly in the Russian Arctic) are listed in the egional red data R egional red abitat protection H abitat protection protection needed? protection I s additional habitat

- F ederal nature-protec Red Data Book of Russia. The bullhead (Cottus gobio) is quite common in the Chistoe and Glubokoe lake char (Salve- linus sp. ) 0 Yes Chistoe and Glubokoe lakes waters of Nenets AO and the Komi Republic, where it does not require special Mak-Mak lake char (Salvelinus sp ) 0 Yes Mak-Mak Lake protection. The bullhead is also listed in the Red Data Book of Yamal-Nenets Elikchan lakes char (Salvelinus sp.) 0 Yes Elikchan Lakes AO, where it is distributed only within the Kara river basin. Within the area Gritsenko char (Salvelinus gritzenkoi) 0 Yes Chernoe Lake (Onekotan Island) evaluated for this report, the nelma (sheefish) of the European part of Russia Long-finned char (Salvethymus svetovi- dovi) RDBR CH + No (Stenodus leucichthys nelma) inhabits the Ponoi river basin, where it is protected in the Ponoi Reserve. It is also found in the Pechora River, where main feeding areas are located within the boundaries of the Nenets Strictly Protected Reserve and the Nizhnepechorsky Reserve. Additional habitat protection measures would not likely contribute significantly to its conservation. The taimen(Hucho Additional populations that are completely protected are: Kildin Island taimen) of the Polar Urals is widely distributed in arctic Russia, including in Atlantic cod, protected through Mogilnoe Lake, a federal natural monument; waters within the PA network, but, because its abundance is generally very eastern char, inhabiting Labynkyr Lake (Yakutia), which has been designated low, additional protection measures would likely not be effective. The Siberian as a unique regional lake; and, Putorana char, endemic to Lake Ayan, which sturgeon (Aсipenser baerii) of the Ob basin is partly protected in its feeding is located in the Putoransky Strictly Protected Reserve. Populations of areas of the lower Ob River and within the Nizhneobsky Strictly Protected Alaska blackfish and Bering cisco are well distributed in Beringia National Reserve, but it clearly is in need of further protection – with top priority being Park and Cherskii’s char is relatively common in waters of the PA network protection of its spawning grounds in the lower Ob and its feeding areas in the of arctic regions of Yakutia. Levanidiv’s char inhabits the Yama River in lower Pur and Taz rivers. the Magadan Strictly Protected Reserve, but requires additional protection measures. Kamchatka salmon and Penzhina and arctic cisco are found in waters In total, nine fish species, subspecies and populations inhabiting the Russian protected through the PA network, but both need additional habitat protection. Arctic are listed in the Red Data Book of Russia. Just one species (the pygmy Kamchatka’s Dalneozersky and Nachikinsky chars, which inhabit large sockeye whitefish) has no protection. Two taxa (Kamchatka salmon and Siberian sturgeon salmon spawning rivers in the vicinity of Dalnee and Nachikinskoe lakes, are of the Ob river basin) require extra protection. As a result, representativeness protected only during migration, at which time fishing in the spawning grounds of red-listed fishes in the PA network amounts to nearly 90 per cent and their is prohibited by the Fishing Rules. protection level is 78 per cent. The remaining taxa that were evaluated have no habitat protection. These Red data books of Russian regions completely or partly located in the arctic are: Yakutian char from Lake Aranastakh; Chukotka amguema and Pilkhykay area contain from 2 to more than 20 forms (species, subspecies and populations) blackfishes; pygmy whitefish and Chukot char; steelhead char and Ushkovsky of fresh-water and migratory fish, including fishes described above that are listed char; five forms of char from the Okhotsk Sea coastal area, including Neiva in the Red Data Book of Russia. Some of the regionally red-listed fishes, though, char, that are common in the Uega lake-river network in the Okhota river basin are part of commercial and/or sports fisheries. Fishes subject to harvest have been and in several rivers that flow to Tauy Bay in Rogovik Lake; three fish taxa listed in red data books because their abundance has been significantly reduced, from Chistoe and Glukhoe, Mak-Mak, and Elikchan lakes that have not yet either generally or at the local level. Habitat protection measures, including the been described and are probably forms of neiva; and Gritsenko’s char from Lake establishment of PAs, can be ineffective for a variety of reasons, one of which Chernoe on the Onekotan Peninsula. is that rare fish taxa are in the same waters as actively fished species. Overall, protection of fish is focused on protection of commercial stocks rather than Of the 34 rare endemic and peripheral taxa of freshwater and migratory protection of rare fishes, and the main protection methods used are regulating fishes in the Russian Arctic, 13 taxa are completely protected, 12 haveno fisheries and other measures such as issuing temporary local fishing restrictions. protection, and 9 are protected but in need of additional protection. In total, 21 of the evaluated fish taxa need better protection (Table 7). The representativeness Table 8 and Figure 65 show representativeness of evaluated species and populations of fishes in the PA network and their habitat protection completeness 92 93 levels in different regions of Russia (fully or partly located in the arctic area). Regions with at least several populations in need of protection and for which, in principle, habitat protection might be applied, are shown in Figure 65. For areas – these seven regions, the indicator of representativeness of rare fishes in the PA network ranges from 50 to 85 per cent, and the indicator of habitat protection completeness ranges from 7 to 80 per cent, but is between 50 and 70 per cent in majority of the regions.

Table 8. Representativeness in the PA network and habitat protection completeness for rare fishes inhabiting inland waters of the Russian Arctic – areas key for the protection of species, populations populations species, of protection the for key areas –

Region of Russia network (%) - S pecies listed and rec listing ommended for data red in regional books which habi - S pecies for might be tat protection applied S pecies represented PA in the regional network habi - S pecies requiring tat protection of R epresentativeness the PA H abitat protection completeness (%)

Murmansk region 2 1 1 0 100 100 Archangel region 4 0 4 0 100 100 Nenets AO 8 6 4 4 50 67 Komi Republic 3 2 0 2 0 0 Yamal-Nenets AO 7 5 6 1 86 80 Taimyr and Evenk regions 16 11 9 9 56 45 Sakha Republic (Yakutia) 7 3 6 1 86 67 Magadan region 11 7 6 7 55 7 Kamchatka region 22 14 17 7 77 68 Chukotka AO 14 10 9 5 64 55

Figure 65. Indicators of (A) representativeness in the PA network, and (B) habitat protection completeness, for rare species of freshwater and migratory fishes in seven Russian Arctic regions Indicators (A – representativeness and B – habitat protection completeness) are described in the text. b Russia; of Book Data Red the in listed populations or distributed species narrowly taxa and/or more and two of protection the for areas key – Regions: NN – Nenets AO; YN – Yamal-Nenets AO; TE – Taimyr and Evenk regions of Krasnoyarsk Territory; YK – Sakha Republic NN YN TE YK MG KC CK (Yakutia); MG – Magadan region; KC – Kamchatka; CK – Chukotka AO

A B a b c igure 66. Unprotected areas that are key to the conservation rare of amphibians and (area rare 1) endemic fishes(areas of the 2 32) Russianto Arctic key for the protection of one narrowly distributed taxon and/or species or population listed in the Red Data Book of Russia; с Russia; of Book Data Red the in listed population or species and/or taxon distributed narrowly one of protection the for key and forms listed in regional red data books F a codes): (colour Categories

94 95 In total, 62 of the 94 regional rare and endemic populations of fishes in

the Russian Arctic (66 per cent) are represented in the PA network. Habitat Figure 67. Adequacy of habitat protection is afforded to 59 regional populations, 24 of which have a sufficient protection in eight Russian Arctic regions for rare insect species listed level of protection, and 12 of which are partly protected. The value for the habitat in regional red data books Categories (colour codes): 1 – protection completeness indicator for rare and endemic fishes of the Russian protected in PAs, 2 – not present in PAs. Arctic is thus 51 per cent. Of fish taxa evaluated, 36 regional populations require Regions: MR – Murmansk region; habitat protection, and, of these, 23 populations have no protection. NN – Nenets AO; KM – Komi Republic, TE – Taimyr and Evenk Thirty-two areas were evaluated as unprotected or insufficiently protected for regions of Krasnoyarsk Territory; YK – Sakha Republic (Yakutia); the conservation of rare fishes. These are single lakes, lake-river networks and MG – Magadan region, KC – Kamchatka; CK – Chukotka AO Number rare of insect species river basins that have high value for fish conservation (Figure 66). Nine of these MR NN KM TE YK MG KC CK are important for regionally rare species and populations, while the majority (18) are the only known habitat or key habitat for a single narrow endemic or peripheral taxon. Five areas are the only known habitat or key habitat for two or more narrow endemic or peripheral taxa. Among these unprotected areas, Figure 68 shows the most important areas of the Russian Arctic for protect- Norilsk-Pyasinskiy Lakes and Khantaiskoe Lake are partly protected through ing rare insect taxa. The highest priority among these are the following areas being in the buffer zone of the Putoransky Strictly Protected Reserve, but they with particularly high diversity of rare insect species: the Shapkina river basin, are in need of a higher nature-protection status. Kara river basin, Upper Usa and Sob rivers in the Polar Urals, Schuchya and Khadytayakha river basins in southern Yamal, the mountainous part of the Ko- tuy river basin in southern Taimyr, and the outskirts of Seimchan in Kolyma. 2.2.5. Insects Places that are important because they support narrow endemic taxa that are Only one insect species listed in the Red Data Book of Russia is found in the unknown outside of these areas are: the northern part of the Kanin Peninsula, area evaluated in this report. It is the yellow-headed acantholyda (sawfly,Acan - tholyda flaviceps), which lives on the Kola Peninsula and is protected through the PA network of the Murmansk Region. Insects are listed in red data books and lists of fauna requiring special attention in eight arctic regions (Figure 67). The maximum proportion of rare insect species with habitat protection is achieved in the Murmansk region, Kamchatka region and Chukotka AO: all species listed in regional red data books are represented in these regions’ PA networks. Next in proportion of insect species protected are the Komi Republic and Sakha Republic (Yakutia), each with nearly two-thirds of rare insect species protected through their PA networks. Nenets AO and Magadan region have the lowest proportions of rare insects protected. Overall, as 69 of 104 regional populations of insects species listed in the re-

gional red data books are found in at least one PA, the value for the indicator of a representativeness of the existing PA network with respect to rare insects listed b in the regional red data books is 66 per cent. с Of the 35 regional populations of red-listed insects not represented in the PA network, 12 are described based on a single specimen or have extremely low Figure 68. Unprotected areas with high conservation value for rare insects of the Russian Arctic Categories (colour codes): a – areas with concentrations of rare insect species or presence of narrow endemics; b – areas abundance and an unknown distribution. Habitat protection measures are not with one or two red-listed species; с – areas with species requiring habitat protection and listed in annexes to regional red data books relevant for these taxa. The remaining 23 regional populations of insect species Areas: 1 – the north of the Kanin Peninsula, 2 – Indiga river basin, 3 – Kosminskoe Lake, 4 – Neruta river basin, 6 – Shapkina river basin, 7 – Lower Izhma River, 8 – Kara river basin, 9 – Padimeity Lake, 10 – Lower Khalmer-Yu River, listed in the red data books need habitat protection measures, and, among these, 11 – Upper Usa and Sob rivers, 12 – Ochenyrd ridge, 13 – middle reaches of Schuchya and Khadytayakha rivers, 14 – the rarest, most narrow endemic taxa are on regional lists of fauna requiring Krasnoselkup outskirts, 15 – Mountain area of Kotuy river basin, 16 – upper Inyali and Myuryule rivers, 17 – middle reaches of Amguema River, 18 – Belaya river mouth, 19 – Seimchan outskirts, 20 – Omsukchan outskirts, 21 – outskirts special attention. of Palatka and Madaun villages

96 97 upper Inyali and Myuryule rivers, the middle reaches of Amguema River, and the site “Utesiki” near the Belaya river mouth. The endemic insect taxa in this last category of areas are not currently red-listed, but their at-risk status makes them candidates for listing in the federal and regional red data books. Figure 69. Unprotected areas of northeast Russia that are key to the conservation of rare freshwater and land molluscs Categories (colour codes): a – known habitat for two or more narrow endemic 2.2.6. Freshwater and land molluscs species listed in regional red data books; b – known habitat for one narrow endemic Two species of fresh-water molluscs listed in the Red Data Book of Russia species listed in a regional red data book; с – known habitat for species (not narrow are found in the area evaluated for this report: the freshwater pearl mussel (Mar- endemics) listed in regional red data books and/or areas that are expected to contain garitifera margaritifera), living in waters of the Kola Peninsula, and Midden- habitat for rare species but need additional dorf’s pearl mussel (Dahurinaia middendorfii), endemic to western Kamchatka. study; d – known habitat for species listed in regional red data books, e – known The last large self-sustaining populations of the freshwater pearl mussel have habitat for species listed in the Red Data а Book of Russia d survived only in the Varzuga and Umba river basins on the Kola Peninsula. A Areas: 1 - Motykley river mouth and the b nature reserve in the Varzuga area provides protection to river ecosystems that thermal springs along the banks of the e River Ulukhan in the area of Motykley с support this species. The Umba river basin, however, requires habitat protec- Bay, 2 – Chistoe Lake, 3 – Grant Lake, 4 – Elergytgyn Lake, 5 – middle reaches of tion – both to conserve the freshwater pearl mussel and to protect spawning the Kolyma River, 6 – middle reaches of the Omolon River and upper reaches of rivers grounds that are valuable for several fish species. Middendorf’s pearl mussel in Western Kamchatka is known from only a few specimens found on the western coast of Kamchatka (the upper reaches of the Golygina, Nachilova, Kol, Vorovskaya and Khairyu- zova rivers). It is protected through a natural monument created specifically for its conservation Valuy Lake, in the upper reaches of Golygina River. Develop- ment of any further protection measures first requires work to identify the specific areas the mussel inhabits in the upper reaches of western Kamchatka rivers. rivers and in the upper reaches of the Golygina, Nachilova, Kol, Vorovskaya and Freshwater and land molluscs are listed in some regional red data books: Khairyuzova rivers in Kamchatka, aimed at identifying new habitats for Mid- Nenets AO, Chukotka AO and the Magadan region. Overall, of the 24 regional dendorf’s pearl mussel and the bladder snail. populations of land and freshwater molluscs in the arctic region listed in the federal and regional red data books, 16 populations (67 per cent) are represented in PAs of various categories. Of these, 10 populations are satisfactorily 2.2.7. Vascular plants protected in the PA network (about 42 per cent), while three species (freshwater This review is focused on species primarily growing in the Arctic (i.e. in pearl mussel, Middendorf’s pearl mussel and bladder snail, Physa streletskaja) northern treeless, mainly tundra areas) due to 1) the large number of species definitely require additional habitat protection. Additional protection is also ad- that could be included in the category of rare species growing in the entire area visable for three red-listed representatives of the Beringiana genus. The remain- evaluated for this report; and 2) because there is not sufficient information for ing seven species (eight regional populations), one-third of the total number of an evaluation of the flora in many of the vast forest-tundra areas of Russia. freshwater molluscs listed in red data books, are not present in the PA network. Regional red data books formed the basis for drawing up the list of rare spe- As a result, the indicator of the level of habitat protection of the PA network for cies of vascular plants in the Russian Arctic. The red data books cover most land and freshwater molluscs, is slightly below 45 per cent. zones and subzones up to the steppes. An exception is Chukotka AO, which is Unprotected areas of the Russian Arctic that have high value as habitat for located totally within the tundra zone, as are Taimyr and Evenk municipal re- unprotected or insufficiently protected species of land and freshwater molluscs gions. The Taimyr sector does not yet have a red data book, though this vast area (Figure 69) are: the Umba river basin in the Kola Peninsula, areas in northeast is of great ecological importance for the Russian Arctic as it covers the whole Asia (Elergytgyn Lake in Chukotka, Grand Lake in upper Yama River, Chis- range of zones and subzones, from polar deserts to northern sparse woodlands toe Lake in Magadan region), and also Motykley river mouth and the thermal and mountain tundras of Putorana. This analysis of the distribution of vascular springs along the banks of the River Ulukhan in the area of Motykley Bay. Ad- plants in the Arctic is based on summarized reports and numerous regional flo- ditional studies are required in the middle reaches of the Kolyma and Omolon ristic publications.

98 99 The nature of rare taxa distribution in the evaluated area is used to define the criteria for Of the 514 taxa listed in the Red Data Book of Russia (2008), 22 are in inclusion in the analysis. The review includes taxa ranging from those spread throughout the treeless regions of the Far North (Table 10). Narrow endemics account for the whole Arctic, but low in abundance, to local endemics. It also includes species that have 14 of these taxa: the Chukotka endemics Gastrolychnis soczaviana, Cardamine small arctic populations with restricted ranges distinct from the main part of the species’ sphenophylla, Chrysosplenium rimosum subsp. dezhnevii, Potentilla beringen- range south of the Arctic (where the species might be common). Subarctic taxa with ranges sis, Oxytropis sverdrupii and Artemisia senjavinensis; the amphiberingian en- that extend into the southern Arctic at the northern edges of their ranges are not included, demics Papaver walpolei and Primula tschuktschorum; Oxytropis sublongipes, even though they are rare in the Arctic. which occurs only in the basins of the Anadyr and Penzhina rivers; the Okhotsk- Table 9 lists 471 species and subspecies requiring protection in the Russian Koyma endemic Magadania olaёnsis; Myosotis czekanowskii, an endemic tax- Arctic. Of these, 232 taxa are included in one or more regional red data book; 40 on of the lower Lena River; Castilleja arctica, endemic to arctic and subarctic of these taxa need protection in regions where they are not currently red-listed. western Siberian; Cotoneaster cinnabarinus, an endemic species from the Mur- In addition, 199 rare and endemic taxa are not included in regional red data mansk region and northern Karelia; Arnica angustifolia subsp. alpine, which is books but require regional protection (lower section of Table 9). The latter two a north European race of a circumpolar species and is distributed in northern categories are recommended for inclusion in regional red data books. Fennoscandia and the Kola Peninsula, as well as growing in gypsum sediments of White Sea coastal areas in Archangel province. Note that many authors con- Distribution of the need for protection of rare vascular plants by administrative area sider Myosotis czekanowskii to be a form of the widely distributed Myosotis reflects the areal extent of the tundra ecozone, the diversity of landscape and climatic condi- alpestris subsp. asiatica Vestergr. and do not assign it separate taxonomic status. tions, and the level of species richness for each region. The current network of regional and federal PAs plays an important role in the conservation of rare vascular plants and could be Aconogonon alaskanum, Hedysarum americanum and Cardamine purpurea expanded to provide protection for all important sites for rare plants. are distributed in North America. Within Eurasia, the first two species occur only in the far east of the Chukotka Peninsula, and Cardamine purpurea only occurs on Wrangel Island. The Chukotka-American arctic-boreal-montane spe- Table 9. cies Erigeron compositus is more widely distributed, but its distribution is dis- Numbers of rare species of vascular plants in nine Russian Arctic regions and their junctive, related to persistence of postglacial relict populations. needs for habitat protection Only two species from the Red Data Book of Russia are widely distributed: the nearly circumpolar and mainly boreal-forest hydrophyte Tillaea aquatic, which has a strongly fragmented distribution; and the nearly circumpolar arc- AO tic-boreal-montane species Rhodiola rosea, which is widely distributed in the Russian Arctic. The roseroot (golden root) is distributed unevenly in the tundra

urmansk region M urmansk region N enets AO K omi R epublic N enets AO Yamal- and Taimyr E venk MR S akha R epublic (Yakutia) C hukotka M agadan region K amchatka region zone and is more common in maritime regions where it can sometimes grow in

Requiring no additional habitat protection 0 0 0 1 0 21 31 6 1 large clumps (for example, in north Koryak). Roseroot, however, is harvested measures for its medicinal properties, which can lead to reduced abundance, especially in Well represented in PAs but additional protection measures are advisable 2 10 0 9 0 25 19 12 4 inhabited regions. Protected in PAs, but not sufficiently for their conservation 12 38 13 17 0 14 40 28 17 The lapponian poppy (Papaver lapponicum (Tolm.) Nordh.), occurring on Not protected in PAs and urgently in need the Kola Peninsula, is listed in the Red Data Book of Russia (2008) as a nar- of habitat protection 3 8 0 6 0 0 8 1 1 region’s red data book region’s Number of species and subspecies listed in the row endemic of northern Fennoscandia. Recent studies have revealed that this Total 17 56 13 33 0 60 98 47 23 polymorphous complex has a nearly circumpolar distribution that can be classi- - - Requiring no additional habitat protection measures 0 0 0 0 11 3 55 3 0 fied in four races: Canada-Greenland subsp. occidentale; amphiatlantic subsp. Well represented in PAs but additional pro- lapponicum, including the Murmansk coastal area; Ural-Taimyr-North Karyak tection measures are advisable 0 0 0 0 61 4 28 5 1 subsp. Jugoricum; and the Taimyr-North-Yakut subsp. orientale (Elven et al., Protected in PAs, but not sufficiently for their conservation 1 1 0 0 23 16 57 13 8 2011)14. Not protected in PAs and urgently in need 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0

Number of rare and of habitat protection regional red data book tion and not listed in the species requiring protec endemic species and sub Total 1 1 0 0 96 23 141 21 9 14 Elven, R., Murray, D., Razzhivin, V., Yurtsev, B. (Eds). 2011 onwards. Checklist of the TOTAL 18 57 13 33 96 83 239 68 32 panarctic flora (PAF) vascular plants. Version 2011. http://www.nhm.uio.no/english/research/ infrastructure/paf/ 100 101 The Red Data Book of Russia includes the Far East-North American boreal Table 10. marine quillwort (Isoёtes maritima Underw.) (= I. beringensis Kom.) for the Distribution among Russian Arctic regions of vascular plants listed in the Red Data Magadan region, also observed in the south of Kamchatka and on the Com- Book of Russia, and their needs for habitat protection mander Islands. But the floristic summary of the Magadan region (Berkutenko 15 Key to symbols used in table: et al., 2010) lists only I. echinospora Dur. subsp. asiatica (Makino) A.Löve – Not listed in the region’s red data book (= I. asiatica Makino). The latter has also been found in north Koryak (in the { } Where symbols are enclosed in braces { } the taxon is not included in the red data book for that region 0 No additional measures needed for habitat protection middle reaches of the River Nygchekveem and Lake Vechnoe) and observed in + Relatively well represented in the PA network, but additional measures for habitat protection are advisable ++ Protected in the PA network, but not enough for conservation the Olyutorsky area of south Koryak, in northern Kamchatka and on Karaginsky +++ Not protected in the PA network and in urgent need of habitat protection Island. The Far East Pacific boreal-forest species I. Asiatica is characterized A blank cell indicates that the taxon is not known to occur in the region. by a sporadic distribution over its entire range and must be either one taxon AO or several representatives of the compound polymorphous circumboreal unit № Taxon AO gion region I. echinospora. Further study is needed to clarify the taxonomy of this species region (Yakutia) N enets AO E venk MR M urmansk Taimyr and Taimyr K amchatka - M agadan re N enets Yamal- C hukotka K omi R epublic

complex. S akha R epublic Overall, only 2 of the 22 species that are listed in the Red Data Book of 1 Maritime quillwort (Isoёtes maritime Underw.) ++ Alaska knotweed (Aconogonon alaskanum (Wight Russia and grow north of the treeline have no habitat protection. They are both 2 ex Hultén) Soják) 0 Chukotka narrow endemics: Silene soczaviana (boreal catchfly, Gastrolychnis Silene soczaviana (boreal catchfly, Gastrolychnis 3 soczaviana (Schischk.) Tolm. & Kozhanch.) +++ soczaviana), growing only in the Ust-Belsky ultrabasite array, and the Beringian Lapland poppy (Papaver lapponicum (Tolm.) cinquefoil (Potentilla beringensis), occurring only on the outskirts of Lavren- 4 Nordh.) ++ tiya village. Eight of the red-listed species are completely protected and the 5 Walpole's poppy (Papaver walpolei A.E. Porsild) 0 Purple bittercress (Cardamine purpurea Cham. & remaining 12 are represented in PAs but require additional habitat protection. 6 Shlecht.) 0 This translates into a representativeness value of 91 per cent for vascular plants Wedge-leaved bittercress (Cardamine spheno- 7 phylla Jurtz.) + listed in the Red Data Book of Russia in the existing PA network in the Russian 8 Water pygmyweed (Tillaea aquatica L.) 0 Arctic, and a habitat protection completeness of 64 per cent. 9 Roseroot (golden root, Rhodiola rosea L.) ++ + ++ 0 {+} + + + + An additional 22 taxa of vascular plants occurring in tundra areas are on Saxifrage (Chrysosplenium rimosum Kom. subsp. 10 dezhnevii Jurtz.) 0 the “List of taxa requiring special attention to their status in nature and to their 11 Cotoneaster (Cotoneaster cinnabarinus Juz.) ++ monitoring” (included in Table 11). Almost all are narrow endemic species with 12 Cinquefoil (Potentilla beringensis Jurtz.) +++ small populations and they certainly merit full red-listed status at the federal 13 Oxytrope (Oxytropis sublongipes Jurtz.) ++ – level. Two of the taxa recommended for inclusion in the Red Data Book of Rus- 14 Sverdrup oxytrope (Oxytropis sverdrupii Lynge) {0} sia are not represented in PAs. The first is arctic seepweed (Suaeda arctica), Sweetvetch (Hedysarum americanum (Michx.) 15 Britt.) {0} which occurs at the mouth of the River Apapelgino, Chukotka, and at the mouth Magadania (Magadania olaёnsis (Gorovoi et N.S. of the River Malkachan in the Magadan region. The second is Gorodkov’s loco- 16 Pavlova) M. Pimen et Lavrova) + Chukotka primrose (Primula tschuktschorum weed (Astragalus gorodkovii), which grows in the upper Sob river region, Polar 17 Kjellm.) 0 + Urals. Eight taxa are adequately protected, and the remaining 10 are represented Forget-me-not (Myosotis czekanowskii (Trautv.) R. 18 Kam. et V. Tichomirov) ++ in PAs but need additional protection. The representativeness indicator of the 19 Arctic Indian paintbrush (Castilleja arctica Krylov ++ + {+} arctic PA network for these tundra vascular plants that are considered rare at the et Serg.) federal level is 91 per cent (the same as for vascular plant species listed in the 20 Cutleaf daisy (Erigeron compositus Pursh) ++ ++ Narrowleaf arnica (Arnica angustifolia subsp. Red Data Book of Russia), and the indicator of habitat protection completeness 21 alpina (L.) I.K. Ferguson [Arnica alpina (L.) Olin, ++ is 61 per cent. Arnica fennoscandica Jurtz. & Korobkov]) 22 Wormwood (Artemisia senjavinensis Bess.) 0

15 Berkutenko, A.N., Lysenko D.S., Khoreva M.G., Mochalova O.A., Polejaev A. N., Andrianova E.A., Sinelnikova N.V., Yakubov, V.V. 2010. Flora and vegetation of Magadan region (checklist of vascular plants and review of vegetation). Magadan: Institute of Biological Problems of the North, Far-East Branch of Russian Academy of Science. 364 pp. [in Russian] 102 103 The extent of tundra in each region strongly influences the number of red- Table 11. listed taxa included in each regional red data book (Table 11). The areal extent of Rare species and subspecies of vascular plants listed in the Red Data Book of Russia tundra varies a great deal from region to region. The amount of research that has and/or in regional red data books, and their needs for habitat protection (for nine been carried out on the tundra flora of each region is also variable. For example, Russian Arctic regions) the European North is notable for the high level of floristic study (Alexandrov et Key to symbols used in table: al., 200416; Sergienko, 2000a17, 2000b18, 200519). Owing to its special status, the – Not listed in the region’s red data book Novaya Zemlya Archipelago is related administratively to Archangel province { } Where symbols are enclosed in braces { } the taxon is not included in the red data book for that region as well as to Franz-Josef Land. Much attention has been paid to development of 0 No additional measures needed for habitat protection 19 + Relatively well represented in the PA network, but additional measures for habitat protection are advisable a balanced PA network (Sergienko, 2005 ), work on establishment of new PAs ++ Protected in the PA network, but not enough for conservation is ongoing, and the archipelago’s vegetation cover is being adequately studied. +++ Not protected in the PA network and in urgent need of habitat protection A blank cell indicates that the taxon is not known to occur in the region. Only in recent years, since publication of the Red Data Book of the Nenets AO Taxa marked in bold and highlighted in grey are on the ”List of taxa requiring special attention to their status in nature and (2006), has the whole area of Vaigach Island had the status of regional nature to their monitoring” (Red Data Book of Russia, 2008).

reserve. The level of floristic study of the Asian part of arctic Russia is also quite - high. The flatlands and lowlands of northern Yakutia, however, are an exception. AO № Taxon Of note is the extreme unevenness of PA network development in the Asian part AO region region region M agadan N enets AO E venk MR M urmansk Taimyr and Taimyr K amchatka lic (Yakutia) N enets Yamal- C hukotka

of arctic Russia. Although one-third of northern Yakutia has nature-protection S akha R epub K omi R epublic status, the PA network is very poor in Taimyr and in the northeast, despite these Juniper club moss (Lycopodium juni- 1 ++ being key areas with a high diversity of vascular plants and with rare taxa that peroideum Sw.) Inundated club moss (Lycopodiella merit protection. Taimyr has a development plan for its PA network (see below), 2 ++ inundata (L.) Holub) and in the near future the Red Data Book of the Krasnoyarsk Area, Includ- Club spikemoss (Selaginella selagi- 3 – – – – – 0 ing Taimyr and Evenk Municipal Regions will be published. Currently these noides (L.) P. Beauv.) regions have no red data book. The PA network of northeast Asia is aimed at 4 Scouring rush (Equisetum hiemale L.) – ++ protection of game birds and widely distributed animals. Despite this, the main 5 Quillwort (Isoёtes asiatica Makino) +++ Northern moonwort (Botrychium bo- areas with high diversity of rare plants have nature-protection status (Wrangel 6 – ++ +++ – ++ {+} – – reale Milde) Island Strictly Protected Reserve, and Beringia National Park on the Chukotka Lanceleaf grapefern (Botrychium lan- 7 + – – Peninsula.) There remains, however, a need to enhance the PA network in the ceolatum (S.G. Gmel.) Ängstr.) Leathery grapefern (Botrychium robus- continental regions in the south part of northeast Asia. 8 ++ – tum (Rupr.) Underv.) American rockbrake (Cryptogramma 9 ++ acrostichoides R.Br.) Parsley fern (Cryptogramma crispa 10 ++ (L) R. Br.) Radde’s parsley fern (Cryptogramma 11 {++} raddeana Fomin) Fragile rockbrake (Cryptogramma stel- 12 – – – + ++ ++ leri (S.G. Gmel.) Prantl) Long beechfern (Phegopteris connecti- 13 – + – – lis (Michx.) Watt) Common bracken (Pteridium aquili- 14 {0} num (L.) Kuhn.) 16 Alexandrov, G.A., Zaitseva, I., and K.K. Kobyakov. 2004. Rare Plants of Murmansk Region. Ostrich fern (Matteuccia struthiopteris 15 {+} 0 Apatity. 162 pp. [in Russian] (L.) Tor.) 17 Sergienko, V.G. 2000a. Botanical Objects of Eastern Europe North Required Special Alpine lady-fern (Athyrium distentifo- 16 – ++ Protection. Botanical Journal: 85(8): 123-131. [in Russian] lium Tausch ex Opiz) 18 Sergienko, V.G. 2000b. Rare Plants and Plant Required Protection in Nenetsk Autonomous Subarctic lady-fern (Athyrium filix- Okrug. Botanical Journal: 85(11): 126-130. [in Russian] 17 femina (L.) Roth subsp. cyclosorum {++} 19 Sergienko, V.G. 2005. Designing Protected Area Networks and Conservation of Nature (Rupr.) C. Chr.) Ecosystems in Relation to Economical Activity in European North. FGU «SPNIILH», Saint Petersbug. 194 pp. [in Russian] 104 105 - - AO AO

№ Taxon № Taxon AO AO region region region region region region M agadan M agadan N enets AO N enets AO E venk MR E venk MR M urmansk M urmansk Taimyr and Taimyr and Taimyr K amchatka K amchatka lic (Yakutia) lic (Yakutia) N enets Yamal- N enets Yamal- C hukotka C hukotka S akha R epub S akha R epub K omi R epublic K omi R epublic Glade fern (Diplazium sibiricum Pondweed (Potamogeton subretusus 18 + {++} 41 – – {++} (Turcz. ex Kunze) Kurata) Hagstr. ) Western oak fern (Gymnocarpium dry- Sheathed pondweed (Potamogeton 19 – – – – + – – 42 {++} {++} opteris (L.) Newm.) vaginatus Turcz.) Intermediate oak fern (Gymnocarpium Marsh arrow-grass (Triglochin palustre 20 {+} 43 – – – {++} – – x intermedium Sarvela) L .) Mountain bladder fern (Cystopteris 44 Widgeongrass (Ruppia maritima L.) 0 21 montana (Lam.) Desv. [Rhizomatopt- – – +++ {+} {++} ++ 45 Common eelgrass (Zostera marina L.) {+} – – eris montana (Lam.) Khokhr.]) Bluntleaved orchid (Lysiella oligan- Alpine woodsia (Woodsia alpina 46 0 ++ ++ 22 {+} 0 {++} tha (Turcz.) Nevski) (Bolt.) S. F. Gray) Heart-leaved twayblade (Listera cor- Narrow buckler fern (Dryopteris car- 47 ++ +++ + 23 {++} data (L.) R. Br.) thusiana (Vill.) H. P. Fuchs) White adder's mouth (Malaxis mono- Alpine buckler fern (Dryopteris expan- 48 ++ 24 – – – – {++} – – phyllos (L.) Sw.) sa (C. Presl) Fraser-Jenk. & Jermy) Aleutian bog orchid (Platanthera tipu- Northern holly fern (Polystichum lon- 49 ++ 25 ++ loides (L. fil.) Lindl.) chitis (L.) Roth) Narrow-leaved marsh orchid (Dacty- Siberian polypody (Polypodium sibiri- 50 +++ ++ 26 ++ lorhiza traunsteineri (Saut.) Soó) cum Sipl. [P. virginianum L.]) Lesser rattlesnake plantain (Goodyera 51 +++ +++ 27 Siberian spruce (Picea obovata Ledeb.) – – – 0 repens (L.) R. Br.) Siberian deathcamas (Zigadenus sibiri- Fragrant orchid (Gymnadenia conopsea 28 {++} 52 ++ +++ cus (L.) A. Gray) (L.) R. Br.) 29 Marsh Calla (Calla palustris L.) ++ False musk orchid (Chamorchis alpina 53 +++ Narrowleaf bur-reed (Sparganium an- (L.) Rich.) 30 – – – + – – gustifolium Michx.) Small-white Orchid (Leucorchis albida 54 ++ Flowering rush (Butomus umbellatus (L.) E. Mey.) 31 ++ L.) Victory onion (Allium ochotense Prokh. 55 0 ++ Dwarf sagittaria (Sagittaria natans [Allium victorialis L.]) 32 + Pallas) Seaside rush (Juncus ambiguus Guss. Small pondweed (Potamogeton berch- 56 var. ossoraicus (V. Novikov) V. No- {++} – 33 – – – {+} {++} toldii Fieb.) vikov) Northern pondweed (Potamogeton Northern green rush (Juncus alpinoar- borealis Raf.) [Potamogeton filiformis 57 ticulatus Chaix subsp. nodulosus {0} 34 Pers. subsp. borealis (Rafin) Hult., {++} – – (Wahlenb.) Hamet-Ahti) Stuckenia filiformis subsp. borealis Beringian rush (Juncus beringensis 58 {0} (Raf.) Tzvelev & Elven] Buchenau) Fries' pondweed (Potamogeton friesii 35 – – {++} {++} 59 Thread rush (Juncus filiformis L.) – – – – ++ – Rupr.) 60 Moor rush (Juncus stygius L.) – {++} Sago pondweed (Potamogeton pecti- 36 – {0} Bulrush (Bolboschoenus planiculmis natus L.) 61 ++ (Fr. Schmidt) Egor.) Richardson's pondweed (Potamogeton Arctic cottongrass (Eriophorum cal- 37 perfoliatus L. subsp. richardsonii (A. {++} 62 ++ litrix Cham. ex C.A. Mey.) Benn.) Hult.) Bulrush (Baeothryon uniflorum (Trau- Small pondweed (Potamogeton pusil- 63 ++ 38 {++} tv.) Egor.) lus L.) Onescale spikerush (Eleocharis uniglu- Floating pondweed (Potamogeton 64 – {0} – – 39 – – – ++ mis (Link) Schult.) natans L.) Siberian bog sedge (Kobresia sibirica Siberian pondweed (Potamogeton si- 65 – + – – – – – 40 ++ {++} ++ (Turcz. ex Ledeb.) Boeck.) biricus A. Benn.)

106 107 - - AO AO

№ Taxon № Taxon AO AO region region region region region region M agadan M agadan N enets AO N enets AO E venk MR E venk MR M urmansk M urmansk Taimyr and Taimyr and Taimyr K amchatka K amchatka lic (Yakutia) lic (Yakutia) N enets Yamal- N enets Yamal- C hukotka C hukotka S akha R epub S akha R epub K omi R epublic K omi R epublic Simple bog sedge (Kobresia sim- Yakutian wheatgrass (Elytrigia jacuto- 90 {++} pliciuscula (Wahlenb.) Mack.subsp. rum (Nevski) Nevski ) 66 + – – – – – subholarctica T.V. Egorova[K. subhol- Vogul brome (Bromopsis vogulica arctica (T.V. Egorova) T.V. Egorova]) (Socz.) Holub [B. pumpelliana 91 – – + 67 Sedge (Carex amgunensis Fr. Schmidt) {0} – (Scribn.) Holub Yellow-flowered sedge (Carex anthox- subsp. vogulica (Socz.) Tzvel.]) 68 {0} anthea C. Presl) Wrangel Island sweetgrass (Hierochloe 92 {0} 69 Arnell sedge (Carex arnellii Christ) {++} wrangelica Jurtz. & Probat.) Augustinovitch sedge (Carex augusti- Annulate sweetgrass (Hierochloe annu- 70 {+} nowiczii Meinsh.) 93 lata V. Petrov [Hierochloe odorata (L.) {++} {++} – – Wahlenb. subsp. kolymensis Prob.]) 71 twocolor sedge (Carex bicolor All.) + – – {+} – Krylov blue oatgrass (Helictotrichon 72 Yukon sedge (Carex bonanzensis Britt.) – {+} – 94 ++ krylovii (Pavl.) Henrard) Needleleaf sedge (Carex duriuscula C. 73 {+} {+} Wrangel Island oatgrass (Trisetum A. Mey.) 95 {0} wrangelense (Petrovsky) Probat.) Enervose sedge (Carex enervis C. A. 74 {++} Eurasian junegrass (Koeleria asiatica Mey.) 96 ++ ++ – – – – – – Domin) 75 Krause’s sedge (Carex krausei Boeck.) – + – – {+} – Yurtsev trisetokoeleria (x Trisetokoe- Livid sedge (Carex livida (Wahlenb.) 97 {0} 76 ++ leria jurtzevii Probat.) Willd.) Taimyr trisetokoeleria (Trisetokoeleria Mackenzie sedge (Carex mackenziei taimyrica Tzvel. [Koeleria asiatica 77 – – {+} – 98 {+} {0} V. Krecz.) s.str. × Trisetum agrostideum (Laest.) Pyrenean sedge (Carex micropoda C. Fries]) 78 + ++ – A. Mey.) Vodopyanova’s hairgrass (Deschamp- 99 {++} {++} Middendorf sedge (Carex middendorfii sia vodopjanoviae O. D. Nikif.) 79 {+} Fr. Schmidt) Mountain hairgrass (Vahlodea atropur- 100 – ++ ++ Rockdwelling sedge (Carex petricosa purea (Wahlenb.) Fr. ex Hartm.) 80 {++} Dew.) Honda mountain hairgrass (Vahlodea 101 0 Weak arctic sedge (Carex supina flexuosa (Honda) Ohwi) Willd. ex Wahlenb. subsp. spanio- Rough bent grass (Agrostis scabra 81 ++ {+} – – {++} 102 {+} {++} – carpa (Steud.) Hultén [С. spaniocarpa Willd.) Steud.]) Baffin fescue (Festuca baffinensis Trautvetter sedge (Carex trautvetteri- 103 – – – ++ 82 {+} – {++} Polunin) ana Kom.) Boreal fescue (Festuca hyperborea Boreal bog sedge (Carex paupercula 104 – ++ – – 83 – – – – {+} Holmen ex Fred.) Michx.) Kolyma fescue (Festuca kolymensis Williams sedge (Carex williamsii 105 {++} {++} – {++} 84 – ++ – – – – – Drob. ) Britton) Bearded fescue (Festuca sabulosa (An- Alaskan wheatgrass (Elymus alaskanus 106 + 85 {0} derss.) Lindb. fil.) (Scribn. & Merr.) А. Löve) Viviparous fescue (Festuca vivipara 107 – ++ Fibrous wheatgrass (Elymus fibrosus (L.) Smith) (Schrenk) Tzvelev subsp. subfibrosus 86 ++ – – – Large-flowered arctic meadow grass (Tzvelev) Tzvelev [E. subfibrosus 108 (Arctopoa eminensis (C. Presl ) Pro- {+} – – (Tzvel.) Tzvel.]) bat.) High-arctic wheatgrass (Elymus hyper- 87 – {0} – {+} Trautvetter arctic meadow grass (Arc- arcticus (Polun.) Tzvel.) 109 topoa trautvetteri (Tzvel.) Probat. [Рoa + Nepli wheatgrass (Elymus neplianus 88 {++} {++} trautvetteri Tzvel.]) (V. Vassil.) Czer.) 110 Short bluegrass (Poa abbreviata R. Br.) ++ – – 0 – Tundra wildrye (Elymus sajanensis 111 Alpine bluegrass (Poa alpina L.) – – – – – {0} – 89 (Nevski) Tzvel. subsp. ceruleus (Jurtz.) {0} Tzvel.)

108 109 - - AO AO

№ Taxon № Taxon AO AO region region region region region region M agadan M agadan N enets AO N enets AO E venk MR E venk MR M urmansk M urmansk Taimyr and Taimyr and Taimyr K amchatka K amchatka lic (Yakutia) lic (Yakutia) N enets Yamal- N enets Yamal- C hukotka C hukotka S akha R epub S akha R epub K omi R epublic K omi R epublic Beringian bluegrass (Poa beringiana Triflorous mannagrass (Glyceria tri- 112 ++ – 136 ++ – Probat.) flora (Korsh.) Kom.) 113 Bluegrass (Poa filiculmis Roshev.) {+} + – Balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera 137 0 114 Jordal bluegrass (Poa jordalii A. Pors.) {+} L.) Arctic bluegrass (Poa lanata Scribn. 138 Aspen (Populus tremula L.) – – – + – – 115 {+} – – et Merr.) 139 Mountain Willow (Salix arbuscula L.) – + Shortcoal bluegrass (Poa pseudoabbre- Tiny creeping willow (Salix arctica 116 – + – 140 – {+} viata Roshev.) Pall. subsp. jamutaridensis Petrovsky) Rough bluegrass (Poa raduliformis Magadan willow (Salix magadanensis 117 {++} {++} {++} 141 + Probat.) Nedoluzhko) Wrangel Island bluegrass (Poa Whortle-leaved willow (Salix myrs- 118 {0} 142 – – – ++ vrangelica Tzvel.) inites L.) Narrow alkali grass (Puccinellia an- Barrenground willow (Salix niphoclada 143 + 119 gustata (R. Br.) E.L. Rand et Redf. – {+} Rydb.) subsp. palibinii (Sørens.) Tzvel. 144 Bedewed willow (Salix rorida Laksch.) + – ++ Beringian alkali grass (Puccinellia x Sprouting leaf willow (Salix stolonifera 120 0 145 {+} beringensis Tzvel.) Cov. subsp. carbonicola Petrovsky) Boreal alkali grass (Puccinellia borea- 121 {+} – {+} Grey alder (Alnus incana (L.) Moench lis Swall.) 146 subsp. hirsuta (Spach) Á. Löve & D. {++} Byrrangen alkali grass (Puccinellia Löve) 122 {+} byrrangensis Tzvel.) Alaska wild rhubarb (Aconogonon 147 0 Gorodkov alkali grass (Puccinellia alaskanum (Wight ex Hultén) Soják) 123 {0} gorodkovii Tzvel.) Amphibious bistort (Persicaria am- 148 – +++ Yenisey alkali grass (Puccinellia jenis- phibia (L.) S. F. Gray) 124 {+} seiensis (Roshev.) Tzvel.) Krause’s sorrel (Rumex krausei Ju- 149 0 Lena alkali grass (Puccinellia lenensis rtz. & Petrovsky) 125 {+} {++} (Holmb.) Tzvel.) Thick-leaved rhubarb (Rheum com- 150 – {++} Tundra alkali grass (Puccinellia tenella pactum L.) 126 (Lange) Holmb. subsp. alaskana {0} Oak-leaved goosefoot (Chenopodium 151 {0} (Scribn. et Merr.) Tzvel.) glaucum L. var. pulchrum Aellen) Ice grass (Phippsia concinna (Th. Fr.) Gmelin's saltbush (Atriplex gmelinii C. 127 – – – – – + 152 {0} – – Lindeb.) A. Mey.) Chukot pucciphippsia (x Pucciphippsia Baltic saltbush (Atriplex nudicaulis 128 {0} 153 – ++ czukczorum Tzvel.) Bogusl.) Drooping woodreed (Cinna latifolia Asian povertyweed (Monolepis asi- 129 ++ ++ + 154 {++} – +++ (Trev.) Griseb.) atica Fisch. et C. A. Mey.) Melic grass (Schizachne callosa Arctic seepweed (Suaeda arctica Ju- 130 ++ 155 +++ (Turcz. ex Griseb.) Ohwi) rtz. & Petrovsky) Drooping onion grass (Melica nutans Tuberous springbeauty (Claytonia 131 – ++ 156 {0} + – L.) tuberosa Pall. ex Willd.) Timber oat grass (Danthonia interme- Vasilyev’s claytoniella (Claytoniella 157 ++ 132 dia Vasey [D. riabuschinskii (Kom.) ++ vassilievii (Kuzen.) Jurtz.) Kom.) 158 Water brickweed (Montia fontana L.) – – – + – Aleutian mannagrass (Glyceria alnas- 133 {0} Bunge stitchwort (Stellaria bungeana teretum Kom.) 159 – – ++ Fenzl.) Lithuanian mannagrass (Glyceria lithu- 134 + Northern starwort (Stellaria calycantha anica (Gorski) Gorski) 160 {+} – – (Ledeb.) Bong.) Long spicate mannagrass (Glyceria 135 {++} Matted starwort (Stellaria dicranoides spiculosa (Fr. Schmidt) Roshev.) 161 0 (Cham. & Schlecht.) Fenzl)

110 111 - - AO AO

№ Taxon № Taxon AO AO region region region region region region M agadan M agadan N enets AO N enets AO E venk MR E venk MR M urmansk M urmansk Taimyr and Taimyr and Taimyr K amchatka K amchatka lic (Yakutia) lic (Yakutia) N enets Yamal- N enets Yamal- C hukotka C hukotka S akha R epub S akha R epub K omi R epublic K omi R epublic Long stalked chickweed (Stellaria mo- Larkspur (Delphinium cryophilum 162 – – ++ 186 ++ nantha Hultén) Nevski) Porphiry’s mouse-ear chickweed Drummond's anemone (Anemone 163 ++ – 187 {0} {++} (Cerastium porphyrii Schischk.) drummondii S. Wats.) Knotted pearlwort (Sagina nodosa (L.) Small-flowered anemone Anemone( 164 – – {++} – 188 0 Fenzl) parviflora Michx.) Arctic pearlwort (Sagina saginoides Wind flower (Anemonidium dichoto- 165 – – – {++} {++} + – – 189 – {++} {++} (L.) H. Karst.) mum (L.) Holub) Alpine sandwort (Minuartia obtusiloba Magadan meadow anemone (Pul- 166 ++ – (Rydb.) Hause) 190 satilla magadanensis Khokhr. et ++ Fescue sandwort (Arenaria formosa Worosch.) 167 – – {++} Fisch. ex Ser.) Pasqueflower (Pulsatilla multifida 191 – {+} – – Tundra sandwort (Arenaria pseu- (Pritz.) Juz.) 168 dofrigida (Ostenf. & Dahl) Juz. ex – + White water buttercup (Batrachium 192 – {+} Schischk.) aquatile (L.) Dumort.) Longstem sandwort (Arenaria longipe- Glabrade buttercup (Ranunculus 169 0 193 – – {+} dunculata Hultén) glabriusculus Rupr.) Salt sandspurry (Spergularia salina J. Gray’s buttercup (Ranunculus grayi 170 – {++} 194 + – et C. Presl) Britton) Oligophyllous catchfly Silene( pauci- Punctuated buttercup (Ranunculus 171 ++ ++ – 195 + folia Ledeb.) punctatus Jurtz.) Ural gypsophila (Gypsophila uralensis Nenets buttercup (Ranunculus samo- 172 +++ Less.) 196 jedorum Rupr.[R. hyperboreus Rottb. + – + Siberian catchfly Lychnis( sibirica L. subsp. arnellii Scheutz]) 173 ++ ++ – – {++} subsp. samojedorum Sambuk) Proliferous buttercup (Ranunculus sar- 197 {+} 0 Hairy Siberian catchfly Lychnis( sibiri- mentosus Adams) 174 – – {0} ca L. subsp. villosula (Trautv.) Tolm.) Spitsbergen buttercup (Ranunculus Campion (Gastrolychnis attenuata 198 x spitsbergensis Hadac [Coptidium x ++ ++ {+} + {+} – 175 {0} (Farr) Czer.) spitsbergense (Hadac) Elven]) Ostenfeld’s catchfly (Gastrolychnis os- Tripartite buttercup (Ranunculus 176 {0} {+} tenfeldii (A.E. Porsild) Petrovsky) tricrenatus (Rupr.) Jurtz. et Petrovsky 199 [Ranunculus hyperboreus Rottb. subsp. – {+} – – Sochava catchfly Gastrolychnis( socza- 177 +++ tricrenatus (Rupr.) Á. Löve & D. viana (Schischk.) Tolm. & Kozhanch.) Löve]) Triflorous catchfly (Gastrolychnis 200 Virgin's bower (Clematis fusca Turcz.) 0 178 triflora (R. Br. ex Sommerf.) Tolm. & {0} Parviflorous columbine Aquilegia( Kozh. subsp. wrangelica Jurtz.) 201 + – parviflora Ledeb.) Arctic campion (Steris alpina (L.) 179 – ++ ++ Anadyr poppy (Papaver anadyrense Sourkova) 202 {+++} Petrovsky) Dwarf water lily (Nuphar pumila 180 – +++ +++ Anyuy poppy (Papaver anjuicum (Timm.) DC.) 203 ++ ++ Tolm.) Pygmy water lily (Nymphaea tetragona 181 – ++ +++ – – Deep-green poppy (Papaver atrovirens Georgi) 204 {0} Petrovsky) Anomalous peony (Paeonia anomala 182 ++ ++ ++ Limestone poppy (Papaver calcareum L.) 205 {0} Petrovsky) Marsh marigold (Caltha serotina 183 {++} Snow poppy (Papaver chionophilum Tolm.) 206 {0} Petrovsky) Globeflower (Trollius apertus Perf. ex 184 ++ – Gorodkov’s poppy (Papaver gorodko- Igoschina) 207 {0} vii Tolm. et Petrovsky) Globeflower (Тrollius chartosepalus 185 ++ ++ Schipcz.)

112 113 - - AO AO

№ Taxon № Taxon AO AO region region region region region region M agadan M agadan N enets AO N enets AO E venk MR E venk MR M urmansk M urmansk Taimyr and Taimyr and Taimyr K amchatka K amchatka lic (Yakutia) lic (Yakutia) N enets Yamal- N enets Yamal- C hukotka C hukotka S akha R epub S akha R epub K omi R epublic K omi R epublic Peak poppy (Papaver hypsipetes Beringian rockcress (Arabidopsis bur- 208 {++} 230 {+} – ++ Petrovsky) sifolia (DC.) Botsch.) Lapland poppy (Papaver lapponicum Chukot rockcress (Arabidopsis ts- 231 {0} 209 (Tolm.) Nordh. subsp. jugoricum – – – {+} – chuktschorum (Jurtz.) Jurtz.) (Tolm.) Tolm.) White alpine false candytuft 232 – ++ ++ Whitewool poppy (Papaver leucotri- (Smelowskia alba (Pall.) Regel) 210 {+} 0 chum Tolm.) Chukot hedinia (Hedinia czukotica Chekanovsky poppy (Papaver mi- (Botsch. & Petrovsky) Jurtz., Ko- 211 crocarpum DC. subsp. czekanowskyi 0 – robk. & Balandin [Hediniopsis czu- 233 ++ (Tolm.) Tolm. [P. czekanowskii Tolm.]) kotica Botsch. & Petrovsky, Hedinia 212 Nivale poppy (Papaver nivale Tolm.) {+} {++} tschuktschorum Jurtz., Korobk. & Balandin in Balandin ]) Iceland poppy (Papaver nudicaule L. 213 {0} Pedatiform bittercress (Cardamine subsp. insulare Petrovsky) 234 ++ ++ pedata Regel et Til.) Poppy (Papaver paucistaminum Tolm. 214 {+} + – Purple bittercress (Cardamine purpu- et Petrovsky) 235 0 rea Cham. & Shlecht.) Inland pillow-like poppy (Papaver Richardson's bittercress (Cardamine 215 pulvinatum Tolm. subsp. interius Petro- {+} 236 + vsky) sphenophylla Jurtz.) Lena pillow-like poppy (Papaver pulvi- Trifid bittercress (Cardamine trifida 216 {+} {++} 237 – – + natum Tolm. subsp. lenaense Tolm.) (Lam.ex Poir.) B. M. Jones) Multiradiant poppy (Papaver multira- Umbrella bittercress (Cardamine um- 217 {0} 238 {+} – – diatum Petrovsky) bellata Greene) Shamurin’s poppy (Papaver schamuri- Victor’s bittercress (Cardamine victoris 218 {+} 239 0 + – nii Petrovsky) N. Busch) Ushakov’s poppy (Papaver uschako- Arctic bladderpod (Lesquerella arctica 219 {0} 240 {+} – 0 vii Tolm. & Petrovsky) (Wormsk. ex Hornem.) S. Wats. Variable poppy (Papaver variegatum Great nesodraba (whitlow-grasses, 220 {+} {++} Tolm.) Nesodraba grandis (Langsd.) E.L. Greene [Draba hyperborea Desv. Walpol poppy (Papaver walpolei A.E. 221 0 241 (1814), J. Bot. Agric. 3: 172, non 0 Porsild) Alyssum hyperboreum L. (1753), Sp. Arctic corydalis (Corydalis arctica 222 {+} – – Pl. 651; Nesodraba hyperborea Jurtz. Popov) (1973), Bot. Zhurn. 58,12: 1748]) Aleutian cress (Aphragmus eschscholt- Chamisso whitlow-grass (Draba 223 0 242 {+} – – zianus Andrz. ex DC.) chamissonis G. Don) Pink braya (northern-rockcress, Braya Eschcholtz whitlow-grass (Draba es- 243 – + {0} 224 аёnеа Bunge [Braya rosea (Turcz.) + chcholtzii Pohle ex N. Busch) Bunge]) Greenland whitlow-grass (Draba 244 + – Smooth northern-rockcress (Braya gla- groenlandica Ekman) 225 bella Richardson [Braya aёnea Bunge {+} {0} Hoary whitlow-grass (Draba incana subsp. pseudoaenea Petrovsky]) 245 – ++ L.) Alpine northern-rockcress (Braya hu- Kjellman whitlow-grass (Draba kjell- 226 milis (C.A.Mey.) Robins. subsp. arctica – – {++} 246 + {++} manii Lid ex Ekman) (Bocher) Rollins) Dolichocarpous whitlow-grass (Draba 227 Hairy braya (Braya pilosa Hook.) {+} + {0} 247 0 – lonchocarpa Rydb.) Thorild-Wulff hairy braya (Braya Magadan whitlow-grass (Draba maga- 228 pilosa Hook. subsp. thorild-wulffii (Os- {0} 248 + danensis Berkut. et Khokhr.) tenf.) Petrovsky) Maja whitlow-grass (Draba majae Ber- Leguminous braya (Braya siliguosa 249 +++ 229 {0} + kut. et Khokhr.) Bunge)

114 115 - - AO AO

№ Taxon № Taxon AO AO region region region region region region M agadan M agadan N enets AO N enets AO E venk MR E venk MR M urmansk M urmansk Taimyr and Taimyr and Taimyr K amchatka K amchatka lic (Yakutia) lic (Yakutia) N enets Yamal- N enets Yamal- C hukotka C hukotka S akha R epub S akha R epub K omi R epublic K omi R epublic Snow whitlow-grass (Draba nivalis Many-flower saxifrage (Saxifraga re- 250 – – – – {0} – – – 274 {+} – – Liljebl.) dofskyiAdams) Norwegian whitlow-grass (Draba nor- Sub-monanthous saxifrage (Saxifraga 251 ++ + 275 {+} vegica Gunn.) submonantha A. Khokhr. et Kuv.) Oliganthous whitlow-grass (Draba Bear saxifrage (Saxifraga x ursina 252 +++ – – – – 276 – – {0} pauciflora R. Br.) Sipl.) Pohle whitlow-grass (Draba pohlei Glabrate gooseberry (Ribes glabellum 253 + {+} ++ 277 {+} Tolm.) (Trautv. et C. A. Mey.) Hedl.) Higher whitlow-grass (Draba praealta Monanthous cotoneaster (Cotoneaster 254 {0} 278 + Greene) х antoninae Juz. ex Orlova) Prozorovsky whitlow-grass (Draba Cinnabaric cotoneaster (Cotoneaster 255 {+} {++} 279 ++ prozorowskii Tolm.) cinnabarinus Juz.) Sambuk whitlow-grass (Draba sam- Black cotoneaster (Cotoneaster niger 256 {+} bukii Tolm.) 280 (Wahlb.) Fr. [Cotoneaster melanocar- ++ – Taimyr whitlow-grass (Draba taimy- pus Fish. ex Blytt]) 257 {+} rensis Tolm.) Altai cotoneaster (Cotoneaster uniflo- 281 ++ ++ Spoon-leaf penny-cress (Thlaspi coch- rus Bunge) 258 ++ 0 ++ leariforme DC.) Medium meadowsweet (Spiraea media 282 – – – – + Kamchatka penny-cress (Thlaspi F. Schmidt) 259 ++ – camtschaticum Karav.) Anachoretic cinquefoil (Potentilla ana- 283 {+} 0 – 260 Water awlwort (Subularia aquatica L.) – – +++ ++ – choretica Soják) Water pygmyweed (Tillaea aquatica Anadyr cinquefoil (Potentilla anady- 261 0 284 + ++ L.) rensis Juz.) Anyuy cinquefoil (Potentilla anjuica 262 Golden root (Rhodiola rosea L.) ++ + ++ 0 {+} + + {+} + 285 {++} Petrovsky) Red brush (Rhodiola quadrifida (Pall.) 263 ++ + Beringian cinquefoil (Potentilla berin- Fisch. еt Mey.) 286 ++ gensis Jurtz.) Kamchatka aizoon stonecrop (Sedum 264 aizoon L. subsp. kamtschaticum {++} – – 287 Cinquefoil (Potentilla crebridens Juz.) + – (Fisch.) Hult.) Egede cinquefoil (Potentilla egedii 288 – – 0 – – – Dezhnev’s golden saxifrage (Chrysosp- Wormsk.) 265 lenium rimosum Kom. subsp. dezhnevii 0 Yakut cinquefoil (Potentilla jacutica 289 + – Jurtz.) Juz. [P. macrantha Ledeb.]) Rosendahl’s golden saxifrage (Chrys- Kuznetsov’s cinquefoil (Potentilla 266 {0} 290 – ++ – osplenium rosendahlii Packer) kuznetzowii (Govor.) Juz.) Northern golden saxifrage (Chrysosple- Lynge cinquefoil (Potentilla lyngei 291 {++} ++ 267 nium tetrandrum (Lund ex Malmgren) – – – {+} – – – Jurtz. & Soják) Th. Fries) Nudicaulous cinquefoil (Potentilla nu- 292 – {++} Yellow saxifrage (Saxifraga aizoides dicaulis Willd. Ex Schlecht.) 268 – + ++ L.) Pretty cinquefoil (Potentilla pulchella 293 ++ {+} + 0 Anadyr saxifrage (Saxifraga anadyren- R. Br.) 269 ++ sis Losinsk.) Pillow-like cinquefoil (Potentilla pul- 294 {+} {++} {+} Arctic littoral saxifrage (Saxifraga arc- viniformis Khokhr.) 270 {+} – tolitoralis Jurtz. et Petrovsky) Tikhomirov’s cinquefoil (Potentilla 295 ++ {+} {++} – Tufted saxifrage (Saxifraga cespi- tikhomirovii Jurtz.) 271 tosa L. subsp. monticola (Small) A.E. {+} Cobweb cinquefoil (Potentilla х tomen- 296 {+} {+} – Porsild) tulosa Jurtz.) Funston's saxifrage (Saxifraga funstonii Wrangel cinquefoil (Potentilla 272 {+} – – – 297 {0} (Small.) Fedde) wrangelii Petrovsky) Milky-white saxifrage (Saxifraga lac- 273 0 tea Turcz.)

116 117 - - AO AO

№ Taxon № Taxon AO AO region region region region region region M agadan M agadan N enets AO N enets AO E venk MR E venk MR M urmansk M urmansk Taimyr and Taimyr and Taimyr K amchatka K amchatka lic (Yakutia) lic (Yakutia) N enets Yamal- N enets Yamal- C hukotka C hukotka S akha R epub S akha R epub K omi R epublic K omi R epublic Alaska punctated avens (Dryas punc- Subarctic albiflorous locoweed Oxy( - 298 tata Juz. subsp. alaskensis (A.E. Por- {0} 320 tropis leucantha (Pall.) Bunge subsp. {0} sild) Jurtz.) subarctica Jurtz.) Little rose (Chamaerhodos erecta (L.) Anadyr Middendorf’s locoweed 299 ++ Bunge) 321 (Oxytropis middendorffii Trautv. subsp. ++ ++ Large-flowered rose (Chamaerhodos anadyrensis (Vass.) Jurtz.) 300 ++ grandiflora (Pall. ex Schult.) Bunge) Blue Middendorf’s locoweed (Oxytro- Alpine lady's mantle (Alchemilla al- 322 pis middendorffii Trautv. subsp. coer- {++} 301 +++ pina L.) ulescens Jurtz. & Petrovsky) Shag spine (Caragana jubata (Pall.) Dwarf locoweed (Oxytropis pumilio 302 0 323 {++} – Poir.) (Pall.) Ledeb.) Alpine milkvetch (Astragalus alpinus Putorana locoweed (Oxytropis pu- 303 {++} 324 {++} L. subsp. alaskanus Hultén) toranica M. Ivanova) Reflexed locoweed(Oxytropis revoluta Northern marine milkvetch (Astragalus 325 ++ – boreomarinus Khokhr. [A. marinus Ledeb.) 304 ++ Boriss. subsp. boreomarinus (Khokhr.) Shmorgunova’s locoweed (Oxytropis 326 {++} N. S. Pavlova]) schmorgunoviae Jurtz.) Shrubby milkvetch (Astragalus fruti- Arctic Lena muddy locoweed (Oxytro- 305 {++} cosus Pall.) 327 pis sordida (Willd.) Pers. subsp. arcto- {0} Gorodkov’s milkvetch (Astragalus lenensis Jurtz.) 306 +++ gorodkovii Jurtz.) Shamurin’s muddy locoweed (Oxytro- Subitaneous milkvetch (Astragalus 328 pis sordida (Willd.) Pers. subsp. scha- {++} {++} 307 inopinatus Boriss. subsp. oreogenus {++} {++} murinii Jurtz.) Jurtz.) Locoweed (Oxytropis sublongipes 329 ++ – Kolyma milkvetch (Astragalus koly- Jurtz.) 308 ++ – mensis Jurtz) Sverdrup locoweed (Oxytropis sver- 330 {0} Norwegian milkvetch (Astragalus nor- drupii Lynge) 309 – – – – – – {+} vegicus Grauer) Tikhomirov’s locoweed (Oxytropis 331 {+} Okhotsk milkvetch (Astragalus ocho- tichomirovii Jurtz.) 310 {++} tensis Khokhr.) Trautvetter’s locoweed (Oxytropis 332 {++} Polar milkvetch (Astragalus polaris trautvetteri Meinsh.) 311 ++ + – Benth. ex Hook.) Monanthous locoweed (Oxytropis uni- 333 {0} Milkvetch (Astragalus pseudoadsur- flora Jurtz.) 312 {++} 0 – – gens Jurtz) Ushakov’s locoweed (Oxytropis uscha- 334 0 Seale’s milkvetch (Astragalus sealei kovii Jurtz.) 313 {++} ++ Lepage) Vaskovsky’s locoweed (Oxytropis 335 {++} Valley milkvetch (Astragalus vallicola vasskovskyi Jurtz.) 314 0 Gontsch.) Wrangel locoweed (Oxytropis 336 0 Nodding locoweed (Oxytropis deflexa wrangelii Jurtz.) 315 {+} – (Pall.) DC. subsp. deflexa) Alpine sweetvetch (Hedysarum ameri- 337 {0} Dezhnev’s nodding locoweed (Oxytro- canum (Michx.) Britt.) 316 pis deflexa (Pall.) DC. subsp. dezhnevii {0} Mackenzie’s sweetvetch (Hedysarum 338 0 (Jurtz.) Jurtz.) mackenzii Richardson) Even locoweed (Oxytropis evenorum Large-flower vetch (Vicia macrantha 317 {++} – – 339 + – Jurtz. et Khokhr.) Turcz. Ex Jurtz.) Subitaneous locoweed (Oxytropis in- Alpine enchanter's nightshade (Circaea 318 {0} 340 ++ opinata Jurtz.) alpina L.) Katenin’s locoweed (Oxytropis kateni- Whorled water milfoil (Myriophyllum 319 {0} 341 – {++} – – nii Jurtz.) verticillatum L.)

118 119 - - AO AO

№ Taxon № Taxon AO AO region region region region region region M agadan M agadan N enets AO N enets AO E venk MR E venk MR M urmansk M urmansk Taimyr and Taimyr and Taimyr K amchatka K amchatka lic (Yakutia) lic (Yakutia) N enets Yamal- N enets Yamal- C hukotka C hukotka S akha R epub S akha R epub K omi R epublic K omi R epublic Scottish licorice-root (Ligusticum Rock jasmine (Androsace semiperen- 342 – + 366 ++ scoticum L.) nis Jurtz.) Ola Magadania (Magadania olaёnsis Western arctic shootingstar (Dode- 367 0 343 (Gorovoi et N.S. Pavlova) M. Pimen + catheon frigidum Cham et Schlecht.) et Lavrova) Golden dwarf gentian (Gentianella 368 – +++ Victor’s Magadania (Magadania victo- aurea (L.) H. Smith) 344 + ris (Schischk.) M. Pimen et Lavrova) Fourpart dwarf gentian (Gentianella Macoun's woodroot (Podistera macou- 369 propinqua (Richards.) Gillett subsp. {0} 345 0 nii (Coult et Rose) Math. et Const.) arctophila (Griseb.) Tzvel.) Hairy phloiodicarpus (Phloiodicarpus Marsh felwort (Lomatogonium rotatum 370 – ++ {++} – 346 villosus (Turcz. ex Fisch. & C.A. Mey.) {++} 0 – (L.) Fr. ex Fern.) Ledeb.) Carinthian felwort (Lomatogonium 371 ++ ++ Siberian phloiodicarpus (Phloiodi- carinthiacum (Wulf.) Reich.) 347 carpus sibiricus (Steph. ex Spreng.) + Alaskan phlox (Phlox alaskensis 372 {0} Koso-Pol.) Jordal) Congested mooncarrot congested (Se- 348 ++ – {+} – 373 Siberian phlox (Phlox sibirica L.) – {++} ++ seli condensatum (L.) Reichenb. fil.) Arctic alpine forget-me-not (Eri- Avacha violet (Viola avatschensis W. 349 {++} – 374 trichium arctisibiricum (Petrovsky) A. – {+} – – Becker & Hultén) Khokhr.) Langsdorff violet (Viola langsdorffii Silky arctic forget-me-not (Eritrichium 350 {0} 375 {+} {+} {++} Fisch. ex Ging.) sericeum (Lehm) DC.) 351 Maurits violet (Viola mauritii Tepl.) {+} – Chekanovsky forget-me-not (Myosotis Small-spur violet (Viola microceras 376 czekanowskii (Trautv.) R. Kam. et V. ++ 352 ++ Rupr.) Tichomirov) Teesdale violet (Viola rupestris F. W. Nudicaulous thyme (Thymus glabri- 353 – ++ 377 ++ Schmidt) caulis Klok.) One-flowered wintergreen (Moneses Oligophyllous thyme (Thymus pauci- 354 – – 0 378 ++ uniflora (L.) A.Gray) folius Klok.) Heather (Cassiope ericoides (Pall.) Reverdatto thyme (Thymus reverdat- 355 {++} – – 379 ++ {++} D. Don) toanus Serg.) Clubmoss mountain heather (Cassiope American wild mint (Mentha canaden- 356 + 380 0 lycopodioides (Pall.) D. Don) sis L.) 357 Cranberry (Oxycoccus paluslris Pers.) – – + 381 Water mudwort (Limosella aquatica L.) – – {0} {++} {+} – – Northern primrose (Primula borealis 382 Silver speedwell (Veronica incana L.) {+} {++} – 358 {++} – – – Duby) Slim (prone) speedwell (Veronica 383 + Greenland primrose (Primula egalik- tenella All. [V. humifusa Dicks.]) 359 0 sensis Wormsk.) 384 Spiked speedwell (Veronica spicata L.) ++ ++ Bird's-eye primrose (Primula farinosa Arctic Indian paintbrush (Castilleja 360 – ++ ++ 385 + {+} L.) arctica Krylov et Serg.) Siberian primrose (Primula nutans 361 – – {0} Vorkuta arctic Indian paintbrush (Cas- Georgi) 386 tilleja arctica Krylov et Serg. subsp. ++ ++ Strict primrose (Primula stricta Hor- vorkutensis Rebr.) 362 – – – – {+++} nem.) Lapland Indian paintbrush (Castilleja 387 – ++ Chukchi primrose (Primula tschuk- lapponica Gand.) 363 0 + tschorum Kjellm.) Pseudohyperborean Indian paintbrush 388 {+} {++} Tufted loosestrife (Naumburgia thyrsi- (Castilleja pseudohyperborea Rebr.) 364 – ++ ++ – flora (L.) Rchb.) Cold-weather eyebright (Euphrasia 389 {++} Rock jasmine (Androsace triflora frigida Pugsley) 365 ++ – – – – Adams)

120 121 - - AO AO

№ Taxon № Taxon AO AO region region region region region region M agadan M agadan N enets AO N enets AO E venk MR E venk MR M urmansk M urmansk Taimyr and Taimyr and Taimyr K amchatka K amchatka lic (Yakutia) lic (Yakutia) N enets Yamal- N enets Yamal- C hukotka C hukotka S akha R epub S akha R epub K omi R epublic K omi R epublic Shrubby pennellianthus (Pennellian- Kamchatka edelweiss (Leontopodium 390 + 414 ++ ++ thus frutescens (Lamb.) Crosswhite) kamtschaticum Kom.) Lousewort (Pedicularis eriophora Stellate edelweiss (Leontopodium stel- 391 {++} – – 415 + Turcz.) latum Khokhr.) Northern lousewort (Pedicularis hyper- Arctic daisy (Dendranthema arcticum 392 +++ ++ borea Vved.) subsp. polare (Hultén) Heywood 416 – – – 0 – Okhotsk lousewort (Pedicularis ocho- [Arctanthemum arcticum subsp. polare 393 – ++ tensis A. Khokhr.) (Hultén) Heywood]) Pennell’s lousewort (Pedicularis pen- Mongolian daisy (Dendranthema mon- 394 – – + – – 417 – – ++ nellii Hulten) golicum (Ling) Tzvel.) Entireleaf daisy (Hulteniella integrifo- Lousewort (Pedicularis sudetica 418 0 Willd. subsp. novaiae-zemliae Hult. lia (Richards.) Tzvel.) 395 – – – {+} – [Pedicularis novaiae-zemliae (Hult.) Narrowleaf arnica (Arnica angustifolia Ju. Kozhevn.]) subsp. alpina (L.) I.K. Ferguson[Arnica 419 ++ 396 Lousewort (Pedicularis tristis L.) – ++ ++ alpina (L.) Olin, Arnica fennoscandica Jurtz. & Korobkov]) Ural lousewort (Pedicularis uralensis 397 +++ ++ Boreal siberian sagebrush (Artemisia Vved.) 420 {0} 0 ++ arctisibirica Korobkov) Lousewort (Pedicularis venusta 398 ++ (Bunge) Schangin ex Bunge) 421 Tarragon (Artemisia dracunculus L.) {++} – ++ Alpine butterwort (Pinguicula alpina Yellow sagebrush (Artemisia flava 399 – ++ – ++ – – 422 ++ L.) Jurtz.) Butterwort (Pinguicula algida Maly- Fringed sagewort (Artemisia frigida 400 – 0 423 {++} schev) Willd.) Gray plantain (Plantago canescens Cudweed sagewort (Artemisia glom- 401 0 424 ++ – Adams subsp. jurtzevii Tzvel.) erata Ledeb.) Squashberry (Viburnum edule (Michx.) Henrietta sagebrush (Artemisia henriet- 402 0 425 ++ Raf.) tae Krasch.) Astrocodon (Astrocodon expansus (J. Sagebrush (Artemisia laciniatiformis 403 ++ 426 + {++} – Rudolph) Fed.) Kom.) Arctic bellflower Campanula( uniflora Sagebrush (Artemisia lagopus Fisch. ex 404 ++ – 427 {++} – L.) Bess. subsp. lagopus) Chukot arctic bellflower (Campanula Sagebrush (Artemisia lagopus Fisch. 405 + tschuktschorum Jurtz. et Fed.) 428 ex Bess. subsp. triniana (Bess.) Ko- {++} – robkov) Cutleaf daisy (Erigeron compositus 406 ++ ++ Norwegian mugwort (Artemisia nor- Pursh) 429 ++ + vegicaFries) Fleabane (Erigeron eriocalyx (Ledeb.) Sagebrush (Artemisia samoiedorum 407 Vierh.[E. uniflorus L. subsp. eriocalyx – – – {+} 430 – {+} (Ledeb.) A. et D. Love]) Pamp.) Fleabane (Erigeron flaccidus (Bunge) Arctic wormwood (Artemisia senjavin- 408 ++ 431 0 Botsch.) ensis Bess.) Hyperborean fleabane Erigeron( hyper- Gmelin's wormwood (Artemisia gmeli- 409 0 boreus Greene) 432 nii Web. ex Stechm. subsp. scheludja- {++} koviae Korobkov[A. sacrorum Ledeb.]) Komarov’s fleabane (Erigeron 410 0 – – Trinius sagebrush (Artemisia triniana komarovii Botsch.) 433 0 Besser) Kamchatka sneezewort (Ptarmica 411 {++} – – Pallas chrysanthemum (Ajania pallasi- camtschatica (Rupr. ex Heimerl) Kom.) 434 ++ ana (Fisch. ex Bess.) Poljakov) Catsfoot (Antennaria pseudoarenicola 412 {+} Eared Indian plantain (Cacalia auricu- Petrovsky) 435 ++ lata DC.) Wooly catsfoot (Antennaria villifera 413 – ++ ++ – – – – Boriss.)

122 123 - - AO AO

№ Taxon № Taxon AO AO region region region region region region M agadan M agadan N enets AO N enets AO E venk MR E venk MR M urmansk M urmansk Taimyr and Taimyr and Taimyr K amchatka K amchatka lic (Yakutia) lic (Yakutia) N enets Yamal- N enets Yamal- C hukotka C hukotka S akha R epub S akha R epub K omi R epublic K omi R epublic Aleutian ragwort (Senecio cannabifo- Petrovsky’s dandelion (Taraxacum 436 ++ 460 {+} lius Less.) petrovskyi Tzvel.) Northern groundsel (Senecio hyperbo- Dandelion (Taraxacum platylepium 437 {0} 461 – – {+} realis Greenm.) Dahlst.) Yakut groundsel (Tephroseris jacutica Dandelion (Taraxacum pseudoplat- 438 – ++ – 462 {0} (Schischk.) Holub) ylepium Jurtz.) Groundsel (Tephroseris schistosa Dandelion (Taraxacum semitubulosum 463 0 439 (Charkev.) Barkalov [Senecio schis- ++ ++ Jurtzev) tosus Charkev.]) Senyavin’s dandelion (Taraxacum sen- 464 {0} Shangin’s saw-wort (Saussurea javinensis Jurtz. et Tzvel.) 440 + ++ schanginiana (Wydl.) Fisch. ex Herd.) Stepanova’s dandelion (Taraxacum 465 – {++} {+} Tilesius saw-wort (Saussurea tilesii stepanovae Worosch.) 441 ++ – – – – – – (Ledeb.) Ledeb.) Tamara’s dandelion (Taraxacum tama- 466 {+} {++} Dandelion (Taraxacum acricorne rae Charkev. et Tzvel.) 442 {++} – {++} Dahlst.) Tolmachev’s dandelion (Taraxacum 467 {0} Whiteflower dandelion Taraxacum( tolmaczevii Jurtz. ) 443 ++ ++ albescens Dahlst.) Wrangel dandelion (Taraxacum 468 {0} Anadyr dandelion (Taraxacum anadyri- wrangelicum Tzvel.) 444 {++} {++} {++} cum Tzvel.) Dwarf alpine hawksbeard (Crepis nana 469 {0} – – – – Arctic dandelion (Taraxacum arcticum Richards.) 445 ++ – – – – (Trautv.) Dahlst.) Blackish hawksbeard (Crepis nigres- 470 – + – – Chukot dandelion (Taraxacum czukoti- cens Pohle) 446 {+} cum Jurtz.) Taz hawkweed (Hieracium tazense 471 +++ Glabrate dandelion (Taraxacum gla- Schljakov) 447 {++} – – brum DC.) Gorodkov’s dandelion (Taraxacum 448 – {++} gorodkovii Charkev. et Tzvel.) Horned dandelion (Taraxacum hy- 449 {0} parcticum Dahlst.) Yakut dandelion (Taraxacum jacuticum 450 + Tzvel.) Yurtsev’s dandelion (Taraxacum ju- 451 {++} rtzevii Tzvel.) Koryak dandelion (Taraxacum korjako- 452 – – {++} – – – rum Charkev. et Tzvel.) Lena dandelion (Taraxacum lenense 453 {0} 0 {++} Tzvelev) Leucocarpous dandelion (Taraxacum 454 {++} leucocarpum Jurtz. et Tzvel.) Lunge dandelion (Taraxacum lynge- 455 {0} anum Hagl.) Nanaun dandelion (Taraxacum nanau- 456 {0} nii Jurtz.) Snow dandelion (Taraxacum nivale 457 – ++ – – – Lange ex Kihlm.) Novaya-Zemlya dandelion (Taraxacum 458 {+} novae-zemliae Holmb.) Physocarpous dandelion (Taraxacum 459 {0} – – phymatocarpum J.Vahl)

124 125 The 471 taxa of vascular plants presented in Table 11 form 638 regional populations in nine evaluated regions of Russia. The habitat protection status Figure 71. Indicators of representativeness and habitat of these regional populations, which are all either listed or recommended for protection completeness of the PA listing in regional red data books, is summarized in Figure 70. The majority of network for rare taxa of vascular plants in nine Russian Arctic regional populations of rare vascular plant taxa in the Russian Arctic are repre- regions Regions: MR – Murmansk region; sented in the arctic PA network, though only one-fifth of the total number are NN – Nenets AO; KM – Komi protected completely and require no additional protection measures. Overall, Republic; YN – Yamal-Nenets AO; TE – Taimyr and Evenk the indicator of habitat protection completeness of the PA network is 58 per cent regions of Krasnoyarsk Territory; YK – Sakha Republic (Yakutia); for rare vascular plants, with a relatively high degree of representativeness (rep- MG – Magadan region; KC – resentation of regional populations in the PA network) of 96 per cent. Kamchatka; CK – Chukotka AO The high degree of representativeness of rare plants in the PA network is typ- MR NN KM YN TE YK MG KC CK ical for all regions. Yamal-Nenets AO has the lowest representativeness (slight- R P ly less than 80 per cent) and many regions have close to 100 per cent of their Figure 72. Adequacy of habitat rare plant taxa represented in the PA network (Figure 71). Chukotka and Yakutia protection of rare vascular plants in nine Russian Arctic regions have the largest shares of taxa completely protected, followed by Taimyr and Categories (colour codes): 1– Magadan regions (Figure 72). These four regions also display the greatest rich- completely protected in PA networks or requiring no additional ness of diversity of rare arctic species (Figure 72) and the highest values (55 to protection; 2 – protected in PA networks but requiring additional 60 per cent) for the indicator of habitat protection of rare vascular plants through protection measures; 3 – not the arctic PA network (Figure 71). The lowest levels of habitat protection (40 to represented in PA networks and requiring protection 43 per cent) are in Murmansk region, Nenets, and Yamal-Nenets AO. Regions: MR – Murmansk region, AR – Archangel region, In order to secure sufficient habitat protection through the arctic PA network NN – Nenets AO, KM – Komi Republic, YN – Yamal-Nenets for the conservation of rare species of vascular plants that are listed or recom- AO, TE – Taimyr and Evenk regions of Krasnoyarsk Territory, mended for listing in the red data books of Russia and of the arctic regions, 79 YK – Sakha Republic (Yakutia), additional areas of varying categories and sizes are recommended as additions MG – Magadan region, KC – Kamchatka, CK – Chukotka AO MR NN KM YN TE YK MG KC CK to the PA network (Figure 73). Most of these could be designated as natural monuments or “microreserves”. The most valuable of these merit habitat protection at the federal level. Areas with habitat suited to local endemics that do not

occur outside of the areas shown, and areas that are the only known habitats of rare species in Russia are: the Rybachy Peninsula and upper Sob River in the Polar Ural; Lysaya and Appa mounts in the vicinity of Verkhoyansk; Appapel- gino river mouth; Ust-Belsky ultrabasic massif and the outskirts of Lavrentiya Figure 70. Adequacy of habitat protection in Chukotka; and, the source of Oksa River and the Malakachan river mouth in for 638 regional populations of rare vascular plant taxa of the Russian Arctic the Okhotsk coastal area. A little over half of the areas that have been identified Categories (colour codes): 1 – completely as gaps in the PA network and are shown in Figure 73 represent areas with high protected through PA networks or requiring no additional protection; 2 – protected densities of several to many species that are rare and in need of protection at the through PA networks but requiring additional protection measures; 3 – not represented in regional level. PA networks and requiring protection

126 127 2.2.8. Bryophytes (mosses and liverworts) Twenty-seven bryophyte species that are listed in the Red Data Book of – Ilirney Ilirney – – western Russia are found in the Russian Arctic as it is defined for the purposes of this – Vashutkiny Vashutkiny – – Lysaya and and Lysaya – – basins of the the basins – of report. Of these, 13 species are leafy bryophytes (mosses) and 14 species are – areas with single – Malakachan river river Malakachan – – Indiga river basin, liverworts. Another 38 species (25 mosses and 13 liverworts) could be recom- – Lovna city outskirts, mended for listing in the Red Data Book of Russia, since their current status is

– upper Verkhnyaya Taimyra equivalent to that of designated rare and vulnerable species. Overall, 65 species – regions with concentrations of of concentrations with regions – – Severny Pekulney river basin, of bryophytes are considered rare in the Russian Arctic (Table 12). Of these, 51 – sources of Vaamochka river and and river Vaamochka of sources – – Khaipudyr bay, 26 bay, Khaipudyr – species (78.5 per cent) occur in arctic PAs. The total number of rare leafy moss – lower reaches of Ossora and Karaga Karaga and Ossora of reaches lower – – Rogozinka river mouth, 36 – Apapelgino river mouth, 51 mouth, river Apapelgino – – Ola river basin, 73 basin, river Ola – – Sula river basin, 18 species is 28, and 73 per cent of these are represented in the PA network. The remaining 23 rare species are liverworts, 82 per cent of which are represented – north of Kanin north – of Peninsula, 13 – Lower Ponoy River, 7 – basins – reaches lower River and of 32 Usa Sob, – Dachnye Klyuchy (foot of Mutnovsky Volcano) in the PA network.

Table 12. – Tamvatney Massif, 62 Massif, Tamvatney – – Ortina River, basin, 25 basin, Ortina – River, – upland Lontokoisky Kamen, 39 Rare bryophytes of the Russian Arctic: their distribution in PAs and their key habitat – upper and middle reaches of Maimechi River (Kotuy Plateau), Plateau), (Kotuy River Maimechi of reaches middle and upper – – middle reaches of Kotuikan (Anabar Plateau), 47 Plateau), (Anabar Kotuikan of reaches middle – – Kosminskie Lakes, 17 rctic – Lumbovka Bay, 6 areas outside of PAs – sources of Oksa River, 72 River, Oksa of sources – – Kara – river basin, 31 Bryophytes marked in bold are species listed in the Red Data Book of Russia. All ussian A – lower reaches of Penzhina River, 67 River, Penzhina of reaches lower –

– Bolshie Bannye Springs, 79 others are species recommended for listing. Those highlighted in grey are species not known to occur in existing PAs.

– Neruta river basin, 24 basin, river Neruta – Number of PAs – Dudinka outskirts, 38 Species in which the Key habitats outside existing PAs species is known – Nygchekveem river basin, 61 basin, river Nygchekveem –

– Motykley Springs, 71 Springs, Motykley – Leafy mosses – western coast of Yenisey Bay in Leskino village area, 35

– upland Kosminsky Kamen, 16 Andreaea blyttii 5 Planned Khibiny National Park; Kotuy Plateau (Taimyr) Andreaea crassinervia 0 Teriberka river mouth (Kola Peninsula) – Anaginsky Springs, 78 Barbula amplexifolia 1 Kotuy Plateau (Taimyr) – middle reaches of Popigay River, 46 River, Popigay of reaches middle – Barbula jakutica 1 Kotuy Plateau (Taimyr) Bryoerythrophyllum

– Varzuga river basin, 11 - Kola coastal White the area Kola Sea, of 12 - basin, river Varzuga 11 – 0 Afanasyev Lakes (Taimyr) – Krasnoe Lake, 60 Lake, Krasnoe – latinervium

– eastern – coastal area peninsula, Yugra of 30 Bryoerythrophyllum – middle reaches of Penzhina River, 66 River, Penzhina of reaches middle – 1 Afanasyev Lakes (Taimyr) rotundatum Bryoxiphium norvegicum var. 3 – Zavyalov Island, 77 Japonicum Campylium longicuspis 3 Yunto Lake (Yamal) – Afanasyev Lakes, 45 Lakes, Afanasyev – – Velt River, basin, 22 - Kolguev Island, 23 Island, Kolguev - 22 basin, River, Velt –

– north of Anyuy Upland (basins of the Lyupveem, Alyarmagtyn and Pogynden rivers), 50 rivers), Pogynden and Alyarmagtyn Lyupveem, the of (basins Upland Anyuy of north – Dichelyma capillaceum 0 Enmynvaam river basin (Chukotka); Baranye Lake (Chukotka) – lower reaches of Bolokhnya River and Bludnaya river mouth, 42 mouth, river Bludnaya and River Bolokhnya of reaches lower –

– lower reaches of Laiyakha River, 34 Site Kumakh-Surt (lower Lena, Yakutia); Afanasyev Lakes Didymodon johanseni 3 – southern coast of Cheshskaya Bay, 15 (Taimyr)

– source of Palyavaam River, 54 - Kamarina river basin, 55 - sources of Kanchalan and Tanyurer rivers, 56 Didymodon giganteus 0 Site Kumakh-Surt (lower Lena, Yakutia) – Berindzhinskie Springs (Bay of Shelting), 70 Shelting), Berindzhinskie of – (Bay Springs – Omolon river valley, 65 valley, river Omolon –

– Kildin Island, Teriberka river mouth, Svyatoy Nos Cape (Kola Peninsula), 5 Encalypta brevipes 8 Site Kumakh-Surt (lower Lena, Yakutia) a b c – west of Yugra peninsula, Yugra west of – 29 – Spafaryev Island, 76 Funaria polaris Bryhn 4 Afanasyev Lakes (Taimyr) – Ust-Belsky ultrabasic massif, 59 massif, ultrabasic Ust-Belsky – – areas with local endemics requiring habitat protection, and species only known to occur in Russia at one location, b location, one at Russia in occur to known only species and protection, habitat requiring endemics local with areas – Hilpertia velenovskyi 2 Kotuy Plateau (Taimyr) – Khibiny tundra – Lovozero and areas, 10

– Svyatoy Nos cape, 21 cape, Nos Svyatoy – Indusiella thianschanica 1 Kotuy Plateau (Taimyr)

– Zelenyi Mys Cape, 49 Cape, Mys Zelenyi – Jaffueliobryum latifolium 0 Kotuy Plateau (Taimyr) Kiaeria riparia 1 nprotected areas that are key for the conservation rare of species vascular of plants in the R – Ledynoy area, 64 area, Ledynoy – Leptopterigynandrum austro- 2 Golubaya river basin (Chukotka)

– upper Yablon River, 53 alpinum – Babushkin Bay, 75 – B. Annychag Ridge, 69 Ridge, Annychag B. – – coastal area of Lake Taimyr, 41 Taimyr, Lake of area coastal – – Padimeity – lakes, 28 – Rybachiy Peninsula, 2 Mielichhoferia macrocarpa 1 Mielichhoferia – Lavrentiya outskirts, 58 outskirts, Lavrentiya – – lower reaches of Kotuy (Kotuy Plateau), 44 Plateau), (Kotuy Kotuy of reaches lower – – Chaichiy cape, 20 cape, Chaichiy – 1

igure 73. U mielichhoferiana mouth, 74 rivers, 68 rivers, Appat mountains, 48 mountains, Appat Lakes, 52 19 of Verkhnyaya and Nizhnyaya Khadyta, 33 F Categories (colour codes): a codes): (colour Categories that species relict, mostly peripheral, of concentrations with regions and several books, data red regional in to listing many for species recommended or listed are and that protection require habitat require that species additional habitat protection andare listed are in regional listed red data books or recommended for listingAreas: 1 in regional red data books (except peripheral species), с 57 63 Chirynay, rivers Nes, Mgla, Chizha and Yazhma, 14 43 8 - Kait city Kait outskirts, - 8 9 lakes, 27 coast of Yenisey Bay in the area of the abandoned villages of Laida and Zverevskie Pesky, 37 River, 40 River,

128 129 Site Kumakh-Surt (lower Lena, Yakutia); Lobuya river basin Half (25) of the rare bryophyte species represented in the arctic PA network Myrinia rotundifolia 1 (middle reaches reaches of Kolyma River); Kotuy Plateau (Taimyr) and either listed or recommended for listing in the Red Data Book of Russia are Myurella acuminate 3 Kotuy Plateau (Taimyr) only known to occur in a single PA (Figure 74). Another 20 species (40 per cent) Ochyraea mollis 3 Planned Khibiny National Park occur in two or three PAs, and only 5 species (10 per cent) are found in four or Ochyraea smithii 3 Planned Khibiny National Park; planned Poriy Les Nature Reserve five PAs.Encalypta brevipes, which is listed in the Red Data Book of Russia, is Oreas martiana 1 the most widely distributed in the PA network, occurring in eight arctic PAs. It is Orthotrichum pellucidum 0 Kotuy Plateau (Taimyr) Plagiothecium undulatum 1 clear, however, that the state of knowledge of the distribution of rare bryophytes Pseudocrossidium obtusulum 0 Afanasyev Lakes (Taimyr); Inyaly River (Yakutia) in the arctic PA network is incomplete, reflecting the lack of sufficient research Pterygoneurum kozlovii 0 Inyaly River (Yakutia) on bryophytes in many regions. Pterygoneurum lamellatum 2 Kotuy Plateau (Taimyr); Baranye Lake (Chukotka) Schistidium cryptocarpum 2 Although the representativeness of the existing arctic PA network is high for Seligeria galinae 0 Afanasyev Lakes (Taimyr) bryophytes, it should not be considered adequate for the conservation of all spe- Seligeria oelandica 1 cies listed in Table 12, including species that occur in the existing PAs. At least Tayloria hornschuchii 3 22 of the 51 species represented in PAs require additional protection in areas Tetrodontium repandum 2 where they are relatively abundant (Figure 75). If the habitat protection level for Tomentypnum falcifolium 1 Tortula lingulata 0 Kotuy Plateau (Taimyr) those species with partial protection is set as 50 per cent, the overall habitat pro- Voitia hyperborean 2 tection completeness for rare bryophyte species occurring in arctic regions and Liverworts listed or recommended for listing in the Red Data Book of Russia is 60 per cent. Apotreubia hortonae 0 Kapchuk Lake (Putorana); sources of Artyk River (Yakutia) Biantheridion undulifolium 3 Buchegia romanica 5 Cryptocolea imbricata 3 Cryptocoleopsis imbricate 1 Figure 74. Number of rare bryophyte species Cryptothallus mirabilis 2 Bolshaya Rogovaya River (Nenets AO); planned Khibiny National Park” (listed or recommended for listing in the Red Data Book of Russia) in PAs of the Russian Arctic Dichiton integerrimum 1 Planned Khibiny National Park Eocalypogeia schusteriana 2 Fossombronia alaskana 0 Enmynvaam river basin (Chukotka) Number species of Gymnocolea fascinifera 1 Gymnomitrion pacificum 1 Haplomitrium hookeri 2 Lovna outskirts (Kola Peninsula); Tsaga river valley (Kola Peninsula); Isopaches alboviridis 2 Western coastal area of Lumbovka Bay (Kola Peninsula) Number of PAs Lophozia decolorans 1 Lophozia elongate 4 Western coastal area of Lumbovka Bay (Kola Peninsula) Lophozia perssonii 0 Marsupella commutata 0 Pekulney Lake (Chukotka); sources of Enmynvaam River; Koryak upland Figure 75. Adequacy of habitat protection for 65 rare bryophyte species of the Russian Arctic that Nardia breidleri 2 Planned Khibiny National Park; western coastal area of Lumbovka are listed or recommended for listing in the Red Bay (Kola Peninsula); Lovna outskirts (Kola Peninsula) Data Book of Russia Nardia compressa 1 Categories (colour codes): 1 – completely protected through PA networks or requiring no Nardia unispiralis 1 additional protection; 2 – protected through PA Orthocaulis hyperboreus 3 networks but requiring additional protection Prasantus jamalicus 1 measures; 3 – not represented in PA networks and requiring protection Scapania imbricate 1 Scapania matveyevae 1 Scapania rufidula 1 Scapania sphaerifera 5 Schofieldia monticola 1

130 131 The level of bryophyte research in the Arctic is not sufficient for identifying unprotected areas with suitable habitat for all evaluated species. Nineteen Figure 77. Occurrence in unprotected areas that are key for the conservation of rare bryophyte diversity PAs of seven Russian Arctic regions of rare bryophytes that in the Russian Arctic as a whole can be identified based on currently available are listed in regional red data knowledge (shown in red in Figure 76). All species in Table 12 (with the books Categories (colour codes): 1 – exception of Lophozia perssonii) occur in the aggregation of these areas and the occur in PAs; 2 – not known to occur in PAs. existing PAs. For the majority of these rare bryophytes, sufficient abundance Regions: MR – Murmansk and diversity have been secured. region; NN – Nenets AO; KM – Komi Republic; TE – Taimyr and Evenk regions of In addition to their listings in the Red Data Book of Russia, bryophytes are Krasnoyarsk Territory; YK – included in most regional red data books that cover Russian Arctic regions, Sakha Republic (Yakutia); KC – Kamchatka; CK – with the exception of those of Yamal-Nenets AO and the Magadan region. A Chukotka AO Number bryophyte of species MR NN KM TE YK KC CK significant proportion of regionally red-listed species is made up of species that are peripheral and rare within the region but quite common and widespread in other regions. Accordingly, not all of these species require special protection. Figure 77 shows the distribution of numbers of bryophyte species listed At the same time, unprotected areas with high densities of rare bryophytes have in regional red data books, and how many are represented in regional PA been have been identified in nearly all arctic regions. Protection of these areas networks, for seven Russian Arctic regions. Bryophyte species considered rare could have significant conservation value for overall arctic bryophyte diversity. at the regional scale have the highest levels of representation in PA networks Areas with similar habitat characteristics to those identified as important for in Kamchatka and Chukotka (where over 70 per cent of rare bryophytes occur bryophytes that are rare at the national scale should be taken into consideration in PAs) and the lowest level in Taimyr (where 19 per cent of rare bryophytes when developing plans for regional PA networks. occur in PAs). Overall, 118 of the 233 regional populations of bryophytes listed in regional red data books are represented in the PAs of the respective region, giving a value of close to 50 per cent for the indicator of representativeness. In addition to the 19 key areas that have been identified for conservation of bryophytes that are rare in the Russian Arctic as a whole, 18 areas important for the conservation of regional bryophyte diversity were identified based on a brief regional review. These are shown in green in Figure 76. Bryophytes that are nationally rare also occur within the boundaries of some of these areas. While the creation of PAs aiming only at protection of rare bryophytes would not be an accepted rationale (with the exception of small natural monuments created to protect unique habitat for especially rare species), occurrence and abundance of rare bryophyte species, especially in the areas identified in Figure 76, should be taken into consideration when planning regional PA networks. Most important among the areas with significant value for rare bryophyte N – key for bryophytes rare nationally conservation identified in Figure 76 are: Kotuy Plateau (with 20 rare- bryo R – key for bryophytes rare regionally phyte species) and Afanasyev Lakes in Taimyr (about 7 species), the area that is Figure 76. Unprotected areas that are key to the conservation of bryophyte species that are rare nationally or regionally planned for the future Khibiny National Park on the Kola Peninsula (about 12 in the Russian Arctic Areas: 1 – Lovna outskirts, 2 – planned Khibiny National Park, 3 – planned Poriy Les Nature Reserve, 4 – Tsaga river species) and the Kumakh-Surt area, located along the lower reaches of the left valley, 5 – Teriberka river mouth, 6 – western coastal area of Lumbovka Bay, 7 – B. Rogovaya River, 8 – Yamto Lake, bank of the Lena River (about 7 species). 9 – Kapchuk Lake, 10 – Kotuy Plateau, 11 – Afanasyev Lakes, 12 – Site Kumakh – Surt, 13 – Inyaly river valley, 14 – sources of Artyk River, 15 – Lobuya river mouth, 16 – Enmyvaam river basin, 17 – Baranye Lake, 18 – Golubaya river basin, 19 – Pekulney Lake, 20 – north of Kanin Peninsula, 21 – Kolguev Island, 22 – Svyatoy Nos Cape, 23 – Neruta river basin, 24 – Kozhym river basin, 25 – Inta area, 26 – Vorkuta river basin, 27 – Dudinka outskirts, 28 – source of Verkhnyaya Taimyra River, 29 – northern edge of Anabar Plateau, 30 – middle reaches of Poligay River, 31 – Dyuganda river mouth, 32 – source of Yablon River, 33 – Belaya river mouth, 34 – Elovka river basin, 35 – Levyi Kikhchik river basin, 36 – interfluve of the Bystraya, Bolshaya and Nachilova rivers, 37 – Dachnye Klyuchy Springs (Mutnovsky volcano foot)

132 133 2.2.9. Lichens Lichens are currently listed in the red data books of all arctic regions of Russia, but the numbers listed vary considerably from region to region. Figure Fourteen species of lichens listed in the Red Data Book of Russia occur 79 shows the numbers of rare lichen species listed in regional red data books that within the boundaries of the Russian Arctic as it is defined for this report. That occur in each Russian Arctic region, classified as occurring or not occurring in amounts to 1 per cent of the total number of lichen species in the Russian Arc- the region’s PA network. Clearly the lowest representativeness for rare lichens tic (about 2,000). Twelve of the red-listed species occur in existing PAs of the is in the PA networks of the Murmansk region and Kamchatka, the regions with Arctic (almost 86 per cent). Six species require no additional habitat protection the most extensive lists of lichens in their red data books. The PA networks of at the federal level in the Arctic, while the creation of additional PAs could be Yamal-Nenets AO and the Magadan region represent all listed rare lichens – but recommended to protect the remaining six species (Table 13 and Figure 78). there are only one or two species listed for these regions. All rare lichens listed in the red data book of Taimyr are represented in the region’s PA network. Over Table 13. Rare lichens of the Russian Arctic that are listed in the Red Data Book 88 per cent of red-listed lichen species in Nenets AO occur in the region’s PA of Russia network. For the Komi Republic, this value is 87 per cent, and for Chukotka it is Lichen species highlighted in grey are unknown in existing PAs. 85 per cent. The representativeness is lower in Yakutia, where slightly over 70 Number of per cent of red-listed lichens are protected in the region’s PA network. Archangel PAs in which Species the species is Key habitats outside the existing PAs province was not evaluated because its regional red data book does not contain known species distributed in the arctic part of the province. Asahinea scholanderi 6 Bryoria fremontii 3 Overall, 132 of 162 regional populations (71 per cent) of rare lichen species Cetraria kamczatica 7 Iskaten Ridge (Chukotka) listed in the Red Data Book of Russia and/or in the red data books of arctic regions are represented in the PA networks. The overall habitat protection level is Cetraria steppae 0 Inyaly river mouth and Ystan-Yuryakh river mouth (middle reaches of Indigirka River (Sakha Republic (Yakutia)) also 71 per cent. Taking into consideration the species recommended for listing Cetrelia alaskana 1 Arnagastaakh River (Sakha Republic (Yakutia)) in regional red data books, the values of these indicators change slightly: 70 per Cladonia graciliformis 1 Elovka River, Dachnye Istochniki Springs (Kamchatka) Cladonia vulkanii 1 Elovka River (Kamchatka) cent for representativeness and 67 per cent for habitat protection completeness. Leptogium burnetiae 0 Elovka River (Kamchatka) Twenty unprotected areas within the Russian Arctic that have significant Lichenomphalia hudsoniana 5 Krasny Yarchik Mount (Kamchatka) value for protecting rare lichens listed in the red data books of Russia and its Lobaria pulmonaria 7 Sula river basin, Kosminskie Lakes (Nenets AO) arctic regions have been identified and are shown in Figure 80 (a-c). Adding Masonhalea richardsonii 7 Sources of Moltan River (Magadan region) these areas to the PA network should provide full representativeness and com- Parmelia bоrisorum 1 Tiksi outskirts, middle reaches of Indigirka River (Sakha Republic (Yakutia)) plete habitat protection for rare lichens. As is the case with bryophytes, PAs Stereocaulon dactylophyllum 3 would not be created just to protect lichens, though some areas with high densi- Stereocaulon saviczii 3 ties of rare species merit this status. The identified unprotected areas with high conservation values for lichens shown in Figure 80 should be taken into account Note that this graph has the numbers and colours reversed from the pattern when planning regional PA networks. in other similar graphs. If you could change the legend to: green-1, orange-2, red-3, then the caption below will be correct. Another eight species of lichens with primarily arctic and arctic-alpine distribution might be recommended for inclusion as rare species in the Red Data Book of Russia. These are Allantoparmelia almquistii, Arctopeltis thuleana, Figure 78. Adequacy of habitat protection for 14 rare species of Platismatia laconosa, Stereocaulon wrightii, Sticta arctica, Tuckermannopsis lichens listed in the Red Data Book of Russia and occurring in the Russian Arctic inermis, Umbilicaria lyngei and Usnea sphacelata. Some of these species are Categories (colour codes): 1 – completely protected through PA listed in the red data books of arctic regions of Russia. All are represented in networks or requiring no additional protection; 2 – protected through PA networks but requiring additional protection arctic PAs and need no additional protection measures. Taking these species into measures; 3 – not represented in PA networks and requiring account, the total representativeness in the Russian Arctic PA network of lichens protection that are rare at the federal level is 91 per cent, while the habitat protection completeness for these lichens is 77 per cent.

134 135 The most important of these identified areas are Khibiny, the basins of Sula Figure 79. Occurrence of rare lichen species listed in regional and Ortina rivers in Malozemelskie tundra area, the areas around the mouths red data books in nine regions of Inyaly and Ystykh-Uryakh rivers in the middle reaches of Indigirka River, of the Russian Arctic and their representation in protected areas and Elovka river basin in Kamchatka (Figure 80). Adding these areas to the PA Categories (colour codes): 1 – occur in PAs, 2 – do not occur network should provide the greatest value in conservation of the diversity of li- in PAs. chens rare across the Russian Arctic and regionally. An additional 13 areas (Fig- Regions: MR – Murmansk region; NN – Nenets AO; KM – ure 80d) were identified as candidates to set aside for the protection of endemic Komi Republic; YN – Yamal- Nenets AO; TE – Taimyr and and regionally rare species of lichens. Some of these species might be recom- Evenk regions of Krasnoyarsk Territory; YK – Sakha Republic mended for listing in regional red data books and the Red Data Book of Russia. (Yakutia); MG – Magadan region; CK – Chukotka AO;

KC – Kamchatka Number rare of lichen species MR NN KM YN TE YK MG CK KC 2.2.10. Representativeness of the existing PA network for rare species, and unprotected areas key to rare species conservation Results of the above evaluations by taxonomic group are synthesized in this section. Table 14 and Figure 81 present 1) an overview of the patterns of occurrence in existing PAs of the rare and endemic taxa of animals, plants and lichens of the Russian Arctic that are listed or recommended for listing in the Red Data Book of Russia; and 2) the level of habitat protection for these taxa through the PA network.

Table 14. Representativeness and habitat protection completeness of Russian Arctic PAs for rare animals, plants and lichens that are listed or recommended for listing in the Red Data Book of Russia RDBR=Red Data Book of Russia a d b c Groups of organisms Figure 80. Unprotected areas that are important for the conservation of rare and endemic lichens in the Russian Arctic Areas: 1 – planned Khibiny National Park, 2 – Rybachiy and Sredniy peninsulas, 3 – Podpakhta Bay, 4 – Ponoy river

mouth and Orlovskiy Cape, 5 – Varzuga river basin, 6 – Salnitsa river basin, 7 – northern part of Kanin Peninsula, - in the arc Taxa tic area s in PA Taxa in need of Taxa additional habi - tat protection - R epresentative ness of the PA network (%) C ompleteness of - habitat protec tion (%) 8 – Kolguev Island, 9 – Yuzhny Island of Novaya Zemlya, 10 – Sula river basin, 11 – Ortina river basin, 12 – Vorkuta river basin, 13 – middle reaches of Sob River, 14 – sources of Khadatayakha River, 15 – middle reaches of Khutyyakha Mammals 12 10 7 83 74 River, 16 – lower reaches of Laptayakha River, 17 – Kharasavey Cape, 18 – Nikandrovskie Islands and Yenisey Bay, 19 – Kapchuk Lake, 20 – source of Verknyaya Taimyra River, 21 – basin of Anabar River the middle reaches, 22 – middle Birds 35 33 25 94 65 reaches of Indigirka River, the mouth of Inyaly River, the region of the mouth of Ystyn-Uryakh River, 23 – lower reaches Listed in RDBR plus narrow arctic endemics 38 26 22 68 55 of Indigirka River, 24 – Anyuy Upland, left bank of Maliy Anyuy River, Elombal Mountain, 25 - Anyuy Upland, sources Fishes of inland of Kaneliveem River and Pogynden river basin, 26 – Krest Bay and Iskaten Ridge, 27 – Dzhenletren Cape, 28 – sources waters Only those listed in RDBR 9 8 3 90 78 of Maltan River, and Yablonevy Pass, 29 – Elovka river basin, 30 – Leviy Kikhchik river basin, 31 – interfluve of the Insects 1 1 0 100 100 Bystraya, Bolshaya and Nachinova rivers, 32 – Krasny Yarchik Mountain, 33 – Dachnye Klyuchi Springs (at the foot of Mutnovskiy Volcano) Freshwater and land molluscs 2 2 2 100 50 Listed in RDBR plus narrow arctic endemics 44 40 22 91 61 Vascular plants Only those listed in RDBR 22 20 12 91 64 Listed in RDBR plus narrow arctic endemics 65 51 37 78 60 Bryophytes Only those listed in RDBR 27 21 16 78 59 Listed in RDBR plus narrow arctic endemics 22 20 8 91 77 Lichens Only those listed in RDBR 14 12 8 86 64 TOTAL 219 183 124 84 64 136 137

Figure 81. Indicators of representativeness in the PA network and habitat protection completeness for rare and endemic plant and animal taxa of the Russian Arctic that are listed or recommended for listing in regional red data books Indicators (representativeness and habitat protection F ish Moss completeness) are described in Birds Insects

the text. Lichens Mollusca Mammals Vascular Plants Representativeness Habitat protection completeness

Overall, the existing PA network of the Russian Arctic has a representativeness value of 79 per cent and a habitat protection completeness of 63 per cent for rare and endemic taxa. This means that 852 rare taxa in the evaluated groups in the Russian Arctic are in need of varying types and levels of habitat protection. The 852 rare taxa in need of further protection break down as follows: 136 vertebrates, 37 invertebrates (insects and molluscs), 622 plants and 57 lichens. Adequate habitat protection for these rare species might be achieved by adding 193 key unprotected areas to the PA network (Table 15). All these areas were assessed and assigned a priority ranking based both on their significance for conservation of specific groups of rare plants and animals, and on their value for the overall conservation of rare species diversity. (The method of deriving this priority ranking is described in the text following Figure 82.) Different three-point scales were used to estimate the relative significance of the identified areas for the various groups of animals and plants: Mammals: 3 (most significant) – areas with key conservation values for taxa listed in the Red Data Book of Russia; 2 – areas important for the conservation of ungulates, predators or large rodents (marmots) listed in regional red data books; 1 – areas important for insectivores, chiropterans or murine rodents listed in regional red data books. Birds and fishes: 3 (most significant) – areas considered key for the conservation of more than one taxon that is either listed in the Red Data Book of Russia or is a narrow endemic fish species not listed federally; 2 – areas important for a single taxon that is either listed in the Red Data Book of Russia or is a narrow endemic fish species not listed federally; 1 – areas important for the conservation of taxa listed in regional red data books. igure 82. Unprotected areas that are key for the conservation rare of and endemic plants and animals the of Russian Arctic: location and priority ranking F Priorities (colour codes): I – high, II – medium, III – low for namesSee 15 Table areas of (table numbers correspond to map numbers) and significanceof identified areas for major taxa.

138 139 Molluscs: listing in regional red data books and in the Red Data Book of Russia, including • 3 (most significant) – areas supporting two and more narrow endemic species species endemic to the Arctic and to certain regions, as well as species at the listed in a regional red data book; northern edges of their distributions. • 2 – areas supporting a single narrow endemic species listed in a regional red To assess the total significance of identified key unprotected areas, differences data book; in the vulnerability of the various groups of plants and animals, as well as the potential efficacy of habitat protection in their conservation, were taken into • 1 – areas supporting species that are listed in regional red data books but are consideration. The total significance was calculated as the sum of the scores not narrow endemics. for each taxonomic group, weighted for the different taxonomic groups by Insects: multiplying the scores for mammals and birds by three and multiplying the • 3 (most significant) – areas with high densities of several species listed in scores for fishes and vascular plants by two. The total significance values for regional red data books, and areas with the only known habitat for narrow all areas were then divided into three categories that reflect their priority for endemic species; inclusion in the PA network. The highest priority (1) was assigned to areas with • 2 – areas important for one to two species listed in regional red data books; a total significance score of 10 or more; mid-level priority (2) was assigned for areas with total significance scores of 4 to 9; and, the lowest priority (3) was • 1 – areas supporting species listed in annexes to regional red data books and assigned to areas with total significance scores of less than 3. requiring habitat protection. Vascular plants: Table 15. • 3 (most significant) – areas supporting local endemics and species known in Russia to be present only in a single location that requires habitat protection; Unprotected areas that are key for the conservation of rare and endemic plants and animals of the Russian Arctic: significance for major taxa and priority ranking • 2 – areas with high densities of several to many species requiring additional habitat protection and listed or recommended for listing in regional red data Significance (see text): higher numbers are of books (except for species peripheral for the arctic area); greater significance Areas • 1 – areas supporting single species requiring habitat protection that are listed (numbers correspond to the numbers or recommended for listing in regional red data books, and areas with high in Figure 82) priority) Birds I nsects TOTAL L ichens

densities of plant species peripheral for the arctic area (mostly relict species) P riority (1 is top M olluscs M ammals F ishes and Bryophytes amphibians ascular plants ascular

listed in regional red data books. V Bryophytes: 1 Outskirts of Lovna 1 2 4 3 2 Area around Kieshyaur Lake 1 3 3 • 3 (most significant) – areas of especially high density of rare species; 3 Khibiny and Lovozero tundra areas 1 3 3 8 2 4 Outskirts of Kaita 1 2 3 • 2 – areas supporting single species listed or recommended for listing in the 5 Southern coast of Imandra Lake 1 3 3 Red Data Book of Russia; 6 Poriy Les 2 2 3 7 Umba river basin 2 2 3 • 1 – areas supporting a single species that is listed in a regional red data book. 8 Tsaga river valley 2 2 3 Lichens: 9 Teriberka river mouth 2 2 6 2 10 Kildin Island 2 4 3 • 3 (most significant) – areas with high densities of rare species of lichens listed 11 Svyatoy Nos Cape (Murmansk region) 2 4 2 and recommended for listing in regional red data books and the Red Data 12 Western coastal area of Lumbovka Bay 2 2 6 2 Book of Russia, and key areas for more than one species listed in the Red Data 13 Rybachiy and Sredniy peninsulas 3 2 8 2 14 Podpakhta Bay 2 2 3 Book of Russia; 15 Ponoy river mouth – Orlovskiy Cape 2 2 6 2 • 2 – areas important for the conservation of certain species from the Red Data 16 Kola coast of the White Sea 1 2 3 17 Varzuga river basin 1 1 3 3 Book of Russia and not more than two or three species listed in regional red 18 Salnitsa river basin 1 1 3 data books; 19 Novaya Zemlya 3 2 15 1 20 North of Vaigach Island 3 9 2 • 1 – areas important for one to several species listed in regional red data books, 21 Viktoria Island 3 2 15 1 and areas with high densities of rare species that might be recommended for 22 Vize Island 3 2 15 1

140 141 Significance (see text): higher numbers are of Significance (see text): higher numbers are of greater significance greater significance Areas Areas (numbers correspond to the numbers (numbers correspond to the numbers in Figure 82) in Figure 82) priority) priority) Birds Birds I nsects I nsects TOTAL TOTAL L ichens L ichens P riority (1 is top P riority (1 is top M olluscs M olluscs M ammals M ammals F ishes and F ishes and Bryophytes Bryophytes amphibians amphibians ascular plants ascular plants ascular V V 23 Ushakov Island 3 9 2 67 Dudinka outskirts 1 2 4 2 24 Schmidt Island 2 6 2 68 Rogozinka river mouth 1 2 3 25 North of Kanin Peninsula 2 2 1 3 10 1 69 Leskino village Outskirts 1 2 3 26 Nes and Mgla river basins 3 2 13 1 70 Laida village outskirts 1 2 3 27 Chizha and Yazhma river basins 2 2 10 1 71 Lower reaches of Agapa River 3 9 2 28 Mesna and Torna river basins 3 9 2 72 Righ bank area of Dudypta River 2 6 2 29 Svyatoy Nos Cape (NAO) 2 1 1 9 2 73 Volochanka river basin 2 6 2 2 30 Chaichiy Cape (NAO) 1 3 74 Middle reaches of Kheta and Boganida 3 2 13 31 Southern coastal area of Cheshskaya Bay 1 2 3 rivers 1 32 Kolguev Island 3 3 1 1 3 24 1 75 Lower reaches of Gorbita River 2 6 2 33 Velt river basin 3 1 11 1 Upper reaches of Verkhnyaya Taimyra 15 1 76 River 3 2 1 1 34 Sula river basin 1 3 5 2 77 Taimyr Lake 3 2 10 1 35 Ortina river basin 1 1 3 6 2 Lower reaches of Bolshaya Bolokhnya 14 36 Shapkina river basin 3 3 3 78 River 2 2 1 1 37 Indiga river basin 1 1 3 79 Bludnaya river mouth 1 1 5 2 38 Sengeiskiy Island 2 6 2 80 Andrey Island 3 9 2 39 Neruta river basin 3 1 1 1 13 1 81 Tsevetkov Cape 3 9 2 40 Khaipudyr Bay 2 1 8 2 82 Norilsk-Pyasin lakes 3 3 2 1 18 1 Middle reaches of Bolshaya Rogovaya 14 83 Khantaiskoe Lake 3 6 2 41 River 3 1 1 2 1 84 Middle reaches of Kotuikan River 2 4 2 42 West of Yugra Peninsula 2 2 10 1 85 Upland Lantokoy Kamen 1 2 3 43 Northeast of Yugra Peninsula 1 2 3 86 Kotuy Plateau 3 2 3 10 1 44 Kosminskie lakes 2 1 1 9 2 87 Afanasyev lakes 2 3 7 2 45 Upland Kosminsky Kamen 2 1 8 2 88 Vivy and Agata lakes 2 1 8 2 46 Upper reaches of Kozhim and Yunyakha 1 1 3 rivers 3 Essey Lake and upper reaches of Kotuy 12 89 River 2 3 1 47 Vorkuta river basin 1 1 2 3 90 Popigay river basin 2 2 1 11 1 48 Lower reaches of Izhma River 1 1 3 91 Middle reaches of Anabar River 1 1 3 49 Vashutkiny Lakes 1 2 3 Lysaya and Appat mountains 6 50 Padimeita Lakes 1 1 3 3 92 (Verkhoyansk outskirts) 3 2 51 Kara river basin 3 1 3 2 18 1 93 Lower reaches of Inyaly and Ystyn- 2 3 5 Schuchya river basin including Yamto 5 Uryakh rivers 2 52 Lake 3 2 2 Upper reaches of Inyaly and Myuryule 3 53 Middle reaches of Khutyakha River 1 1 3 94 rivers 3 3 54 Upper reaches of Khadatayakha River 1 1 3 95 Aranagstaakh River (lower reaches of 2 2 55 Lower reaches of Laptayakha River 1 1 3 Indigirka River) 3 56 Kharasavey Cape 1 1 3 96 Peschaniy Island 3 9 2 97 Aranastakh Lake 2 4 2 57 Upper reaches of Sob, Laryegan and Usa 2 3 3 1 16 1 rivers 98 Kubalakh and Alysardakh lakes 2 6 2 58 Ochenyrd Ridge 1 1 3 99 Lakes in outskirts of Oyusardakh village 3 9 2 59 Upper reaches of Pyakupur River 1 3 3 100 Kumakh-Surt site 3 3 3 Lower reaches of Verkhnyaya Khadyta 60 2 4 Zeleniy Cape (lower reaches of Kolyma 4 and Nizhnyaya Khadyta rivers 2 101 River) 2 2 61 Lower reaches of Laiyakha River 2 4 2 102 Lobuya river mouth 2 2 3 62 Upper reaches of Pur river basin 2 6 2 103 Dyuganda river mouth 1 1 3 63 Lower reaches of Taz and Pur rivers 2 2 10 1 104 Omolon river valley 2 3 1 17 1 64 Upper reaches of Gyda River and area 3 9 105 Aion Island and Kyttyk Peninsula 3 9 2 around Yambuto Lake 2 106 Shelagskiy Cape 3 9 2 65 Outskirts of Krasnoselkup village 2 2 3 107 Apapelgino river mouth 3 6 2 66 Nikandrovskie Island 1 1 3 108 Aachim Peninsula and Nolde Bay 3 9 2

142 143 Significance (see text): higher numbers are of Significance (see text): higher numbers are of greater significance greater significance Areas Areas (numbers correspond to the numbers (numbers correspond to the numbers in Figure 82) in Figure 82) priority) priority) Birds Birds I nsects I nsects TOTAL TOTAL L ichens L ichens P riority (1 is top P riority (1 is top M olluscs M olluscs M ammals M ammals F ishes and F ishes and Bryophytes Bryophytes amphibians amphibians ascular plants ascular plants ascular V V

109 Yakan Bay 2 6 2 Dachnye Klyuchy Springs (Mutnovskiy 4 151 volcano foot) 1 1 1 2 Lower reaches of Amguema River and 13 110 Ukouge Lagoon 3 2 1 152 Bolshye Bannye Springs 1 2 3 111 Middle reaches of Amguema River 3 3 3 153 Anagin Springs 1 2 3 112 Vankarem and Onman capes 3 9 2 154 Krasniy Yarchik Mountain 1 1 3 113 Lavreniya outskirts 3 6 2 155 Penzhina river basin (middle reaches) 3 6 2 114 Dzhenretlen Cape 1 1 3 156 Nerpichye Lake 1 2 3 115 Amguema-Kuvet Massif 3 2 13 1 157 Kopylye Lake 1 2 3 116 Iskaten Ridge 2 2 3 158 Kapovoe Lake 1 2 3 2 117 Upper reaches of Kanchalan and Tanyurer 2 4 159 Golyginskoe Lake 1 3 rivers 2 160 Tigil and Snatolvaam river basins 3 6 2 118 Komarina river basin 2 4 2 161 Ushky Lake 2 4 2 119 Northern Pekulney river basin 3 2 13 1 162 Nachikinskoe Lake 2 4 2 120 Ilirney lakes 3 2 13 1 163 Dalnee Lake 2 4 2 121 North of Anuy Upland 3 2 2 15 1 164 Chernoe Lake (Onekotan Lake) 2 4 2 122 Ekityky Lake 2 4 2 165 Ekarma Lake 2 6 2 123 Pilkhykay Lake 2 4 2 166 Antsyferov’s Lake 3 9 2 124 Elergytgyn Lake 3 3 3 167 Babushkin Bay 2 3 2 19 1 125 Ystikhed Lake 2 4 2 168 Ola river basin and Ola Lagoon 3 2 13 1 126 Bering Cape 3 9 2 169 Oira river mouth 2 6 2 Enmyvaam river basin and Elgygytgyn 11 170 Motykley Bay 3 3 2 16 1 127 Lake 3 2 1 171 Malkachan Bay 3 3 15 1 128 Baranye and Pennoe lakes 2 2 6 2 172 Shelting Bay 2 4 2 129 Golubaya river basin 2 2 3 173 Sources of Oksa River 3 6 2 130 Upper reaches of Yablon River 1 1 3 3 174 Zavyalov’s Island 2 4 2 131 Belaya river mouth 3 3 1 10 1 175 Spafaryev’s Island 2 4 2 132 Krasnoe Lake 1 2 3 176 Ueginskaya lake network 2 4 2 133 Upper reaches of Anadyr River 2 6 2 177 Elikchanskie Lakes 1 2 1 8 2 134 Lagoons of Keingypilgin 3 9 2 178 Kekkurniy Bay 2 6 2 135 Tamvatney Massif 2 4 2 179 Kulu river valley 1 3 3 136 Nygchekveem river basin 1 2 3 180 Bolshoy Annachag Ridge 1 2 7 2 Upper reaches of Vaamochka and 4 137 Chirynay rivers 2 2 181 Buyund river valley 1 3 3 138 Meinepilgin lake network 3 2 11 1 182 Kegaly river valley 1 3 3 139 Navarin Cape 3 9 2 183 Lower reaches of Gizhyga River 1 3 3 140 Olyutor Cape 3 9 2 184 Dukcha River 1 3 3 141 Krainiy and Vtoroy islands 1 3 3 185 Bulun river basin 1 3 3 142 Rovniy Island 1 3 3 186 Rogovik Lake 1 2 3 143 Murgal and Chernaya river basins 2 2 10 1 187 Chistoe Lake 2 2 6 2 144 Ledyanaya mountain area 2 2 10 1 188 Yama river basin 2 4 2 145 Lower reaches of Penzhina River 2 4 2 189 Mak-Mak Lake 2 4 2 190 Maltan River, upper reaches 2 2 3 Lower reaches of Ossora and Karaga 4 146 rivers 2 2 191 Outskirts of Seimchan settlement 3 3 3 192 Outskirts of Omsukchan settlement 2 2 3 Kamchatka river valley in Klyuchy village 6 147 area 2 2 193 Outskirts of Madaun and Palatka 2 2 148 Bolshoe and Maloe lakes 2 6 2 settlements 3 149 Elovka river basin 2 1 3 10 1 Interfluve of Bystraya, Nachilova and 4 3 150 Leviy Kichkhik rivers 1 1 2 Thirty-eight areas are identified in Table 15 as the most serious gaps in the PA network, with top priority for being added to the network. Within these areas

144 145 are occurrences and concentrations of several to many rare and endemic species. 2.3. Representativeness and completeness of Eighty-six areas scored as second priority for significance and for additional the Russian Arctic protected areas network with habitat protection. As a rule, these areas are of key importance for one rare species of vertebrate or especially rare, endemic representatives of other groups respect to areas with high nature conservation that are listed in the Red Data Book of Russia. Sixty-nine areas were assigned value third priority. These are mostly areas of significance to single species of inver- In this section we evaluate the representativeness and completeness of the tebrates, plants and lichens listed in regional red data books. Establishment of existing PA network in relation to protection of Russian Arctic areas with high small PAs – “micro-reserves” – and natural monuments at the regional level, nature conservation value. Evaluations are presented below for each of the or joining these areas to bigger, established PAs (if the areas adjoining them following categories of areas with high conservation value: have sufficient nature-protection value) should be enough to provide the needed 1. Wetlands of international or national importance protection. 2. Important bird areas Distributions of the identified areas with key conservation value for rare species of animals, plants and lichens are quite uneven (Figure 82). The highest 3. Areas with nesting seabird colonies density of areas identified in the European part of the Russian Arctic, in Chu- 4. Coastal rookeries (breeding grounds) of sea mammals kotka, and in the maritime area of Magadan region, in Taimyr and Kamchatka. It 5. Main calving areas of wild reindeer herds is clear that these regions include both poorly developed (Chukotka and Nenets 6. Nesting, moulting and staging areas for waterfowl AO) and well developed (Murmansk region, Taimyr and Kamchatka) PA networks. The lowest density of identified key areas is in two regions: 1) the forest- 7. Spawning, rearing and feeding areas and migration routes of commercial tundra part of the Komi Republic and Western Siberia, a region with relatively fishes low biodiversity, particularly for relict and endemic species; and 2) the whole 8. Areas with widespread marsh ecosystems arctic part of Yakutia, where the PA network is particularly well developed. 9. Areas with relatively intact forest ecosystems 10. Rare, unique and relict communities and ecosystems Areas with nature conservation value based solely on the significance of rare and endemic taxa are not included in this evaluation as they have been discussed in the previous section (Section 2.2). While it is acknowledged that especially valuable and rare abiotic sites deserve protection, they are not included in this evaluation unless their nature conservation value is also related to biological diversity. Some areas fall into more than one of the high value conservation area categories, but as each of the ten categories has unique characteristics, are discussed separately. The indicator used to evaluate how completely the existing PA network protects areas with high nature conservation value (“completeness”) is calculated as (n+m/2)100/N, where N is the total number of known areas of specific type in the arctic region, n is the number of known areas located completely or mainly within PAs, and m is the number of partially protected areas which need additional protection. It should be noted that estimates of the completeness of the PA network are rather tentative. This is because areas of high nature conservation value likely remain to be discovered, and also because their designations can be highly subjective.

146 147 2.3.1. Wetlands of international importance Table 17. In the Russian Arctic there are 115 wetlands that meet the Ramsar Conven- Russian Arctic wetlands included in the Promising Ramsar Convention List tion criteria for wetlands of international importance. Most are considered rep- Numbers correspond to labels on the map, Figure 83.

resentative, rare or unique wetland types for their respective biogeographic re- Special significance gions and are in natural or near-natural condition (Ramsar Convention criterion (based on Ramsar Convention criteria) 1). The identified wetlands support plant and animal populations that are vital for the maintenance of biodiversity in their respective biogeographic regions (criterion 3), and/or provide habitat for wetland biota at critical stages in the biological cycle and/or habitat for threatened wetland communities (criterion 2). N Wetland About half of the wetlands discussed support vulnerable or endangered species (criterion 2). In addition, most of the wetlands are consistent with special criteria for birds: they support the existence of large numbers of birds (criterion 5) and/or significant proportions of the populations of individual species (criterion 6). Many of the sites are also consistent with the Ramsar special criteria for fish ey habitats for rare birds rare K ey habitats for L arge numbers of waterfowl, shorebirds waterbirds and /or S pawning, feeding and rearing fish for areas L arge seabird colonies ( I B A s) I mportant bird areas s PA P resenceof wetland sufficient for (++ area insufficient for + area protectionя; wetland protection) (criteria 7 and 8). 11 Fjarvann V ++ Ten wetlands located in the Russian Arctic are on the Ramsar Convention 12 Ainovy Islands + + V ++ list and have been declared wetlands of international importance through an 13 Gavrilovsky Archipelago + + + V ++ Act of the Government of the Russian Federation (Table 16). An additional 97 14 Seven Islands Archipelago + + V ++ wetlands are included on a list of proposed Ramsar sites (Table 17), and 8 are 15 Torna-Shoininskoye interfluve, Kanin Peninsula + + V ++ classified as valuable mires (non-forested peatlands in the Ramsar wetland clas- 16 South shore of Cheshskaya Bay V sification system) (Table 18). All are shown on the map, Figure 83. 17 Kosminskaya lake network 18 Sengeisky Island and Sengeisky Strait 19 Kolokova Bay + + Table 16 20 Russky Zavorot Peninsula + + V ++ 21 Korovinskaya Guba, Pechora Bay + + ++ Russian Arctic wetlands included in the Ramsar Convention list of wetlands of inter- 22 Pechora river delta + + + + national importance 23 Bolvanskaya Bay + Numbers correspond to labels on the map, Figure 83. 24 Shapkina-Years interfluves 25 River Chernaya + V Significance 26 Pakhanchnskaya Bay + 27 Khaipudyrskaya Bay + V + Wetlands of international importance Existing PAs 28 Vashutkiny, Padimeiskie and Kharbeiskie lake networks + V N 29 South Yamal river basins + + V + aterfowl

are species R are W F ish N eed for establishing or s expanding PA 30 Yuribei river valley + + + V ++ 1 Kandalaksha Bay + Kandalaksha Reserve 31 Mordy-Yakha river basin + + ++ 2 Ob Bay Islands, Kara Sea + + + Nizhneobsky Federal Nature Reserve 32 West Yamal river basins + + ++ 3 Nizhneye Dvuobye + + + Kunovatsky Federal Reserve + 33 Bely Island (with Malygin Strait)) + + + ++ 4 Brekhovsky Islands + + Brekhovsky Islands Reserve 34 Numerous lakes in the Pyaku-Pura-Nadym interfluves + 5 Pura and Mokoritto interfluve and river valleys + + Purinsky Federal Reserve 35 YUrtovskoye Lakes in the Venga-Pura and Yety-Pura interfluves + 6 Gorbita river delta + + + 36 Numerous lakes on the left bank of the River Pur 7 Parapolsky Valley + Koryaksky Reserve + 37 Lake networks of the Bolshaya Khadyr-Yaha river basin + + 8 Point Utkholok + + 9 River Moroshechnaya + + 38 Group of lakes in the Chaselka-Kharampur interfluves + + 10 Karaginsky Island + + + 39 Chertovskaya lake network 40 Lower reaches of the River Messo + + ++

148 149 Special significance Special significance (based on Ramsar (based on Ramsar Convention criteria) Convention criteria)

N Wetland N Wetland ey habitats for rare birds rare K ey habitats for L arge numbers of waterfowl, shorebirds waterbirds and /or S pawning, feeding and rearing fish for areas L arge seabird colonies ( I B A s) I mportant bird areas s PA P resenceof wetland sufficient for (++ area insufficient for + area protectionя; wetland protection) birds rare K ey habitats for L arge numbers of waterfowl, shorebirds waterbirds and /or S pawning, feeding and rearing fish for areas L arge seabird colonies ( I B A s) I mportant bird areas s PA P resenceof wetland sufficient for (++ area insufficient for + area protectionя; wetland protection) 41 Lower reaches of the River Taz + + 74 Lower reaches of the Rauchuya River and Kyttyk Peninsula + V 42 Our river delta + + 75 Ust-Chaun + V + 43 Islands in the Kara Sea north of Gydansky Peninsula + + 76 Billings Cape + V 44 Oleny Island and Yuratskaya Bay shores + + V ++ 77 Wrangel Island + + V ++ 45 Sibiryakov Island + V ++ 78 Lower reaches of the Amguema River, and Ukouge Lagoon + + V 46 Lakes on northeastern Gydansky Peninsula + + 79 Belyak Spit + + V ++ 47 Izvestiya Tsik Islands + + V ++ 80 Southern Kolyuchinskaya Bay + + V ++ 48 Pyasina river delta + + V ++ 81 Michigmenskaya Bay + + + V ++ 49 Right bank of the Dudypta River + V 82 Senyavinskiye Straits + V ++ 50 Volochanka river basin + V 83 Lake Elgytytgin + ++ 51 Lake Kurluska and the middle reaches of the Botanida River + V 84 Lower reaches of the Avtatkul River + + V + 52 Nordenskjold Archipelago + V ++ 85 Markovskaya Depression + + V + 53 Lower reaches of the Nizhnyaya Taimyra River + + V ++ 86 Balytychanskaya Depression ++ 54 Lower reaches of the Verkhnyaya Taimyra River + V + 87 Kavinskaya Valley and Lake Chukcha + + V ++ 55 Lower reaches of the Leningradksaya River + + V 88 Talan Island + + V ++ Gusikha river basin with the lower reaches of the Bolshaya 89 Olskaya Lagoon + + + 56 Balakhnya River + V 90 Babuskin Bay V 57 Muruktinskaya river basin + V 91 Nakhatandzhinskaya tundra area + 58 Khara-Tumus Peninsula and the shores of the adjacent Nordvik Bay V + 92 Malkachanskaya tundra area + + + V + 59 Muna river basin + + V + 93 Yamskie Islands + + V ++ 60 Lena river delta + + + V ++ 94 Northern Korf Bay + V 61 Novosibirsk Islands + V ++ 95 Gek Bay V 62 Yana river delta + + ++ 96 Malamvayam Lagoon + + V 63 Santa-Uryakh river basin + V ++ 97 Lake Nerpichye + 64 Upper reaches of the Khroma River + + ++ 98 Thermomineral springs in the Kirevna river valley + 65 Indigirka river delta and Khromo-Sundurskoye interfluves + + V ++ 99 Lake Kharchinskoye + V ++ 66 Indigirka-Kolyma interfluves + + V ++ 100 Lower reaches of Kamchatka River + 67 Kolymo-Alazeiskaya Lowland lake network + V + 101 Semyachiks Estuary V ++ 68 Lower reaches of the Chukochya River + ++ 102 Zhupanovs Estuary + + V ++ 69 Medvezhyi Islands ++ 103 Vyakhil river mouth + V 70 Khalerchinskaya tundra area + ++ 104 Avachinskaya Bay + + V + 71 Kolyma river delta + + V ++ 105 Pervy Kurilsky Strait + 72 Omolon-Anyukskoye interfluves ++ 106 Opal-Galygin interfluves + + V ++ 73 Middle reaches of the Omolon River + 107 Lakes Bolshoye and Maloye + V

150 151 Table 18. Valuable mires (non-forested peatlands) of the Russian Arctic Numbers correspond to labels on the map, Figure 83. Large N Valuable mire Rare bird numbers of Some measure species birds of protection 108 Chalmny Varre Mire + + + 109 Morskie Mkhi mire network + 110 Koltsa Mires + + 111 Usinskoye Mire + + 112 Mire in the River Pyasina near the Tarei river mouth + 113 Kideran Mire + + 114 Ossorskoye Mire + Krutogorovskoye and Bolshoe Kolpakovskoye mire 115 network +

The 10 wetlands on the Ramsar Convention list are important bird areas significant as large nesting, moulting and migratory staging areas. Over half of these are essential for the preservation of rare bird species. Two wetlands, Nizhneye Dvuobye and Ob Bay Islands, are vital spawning, rearing and feeding areas for commercial fish species (Table 16). Four of the ten wetlands discussed are part of federal or regional PAs, but it is recommended that additional areas receive protection, and that the boundaries of other PAs be expanded (as indicated in Table 16). Kunovatsky Reserve currently only covers a small segment of the Nizhneye Dvuobye wetlands. The same situation exists for Koryaksky Reserve, which protects only a small segment of the Parapolsky Valley wetlands. If these PAs cannot be expanded, consideration should be given to creating additional PAs to cover these areas. In addition, the Gorbita river mouth, Karaginsky Island, the Point Utkholok area and the Moroshechnaya river valley in Kamchatka are not protected. These areas were originally declared as reserves and remain reserved for PAs, but their status has never been finalized. All of these areas badly need protection. Of the 97 arctic wetlands on the list of proposed Ramsar sites (Table 17), 60 are designated as important bird areas, 38 play key roles in the preservation of Sufficiently protected Incompletely protected Unprotected rare species, 64 meet the Ramsar Convention special criteria for birds because they are areas where large numbers of birds congregate for nesting, moulting or migration, and 28 meet the special criteria for fish as areas vital for spawning, rearing and feeding. Of these 97 proposed Ramsar sites, 46 are entirely or almost entirely protected through PAs of various categories and management levels (Figure 83 and Table 17). Another 11 wetlands have relatively small proportions protected – too small to ensure their conservation. This means that only about half of the proposed Ramsar wetlands of the Russian Arctic are protected. Protected wetlands make up over two-thirds (the highest proportion) of Included on the Ramsar Convention list Included on the list of proposed Ramsar sites mires Valuable the areas that meet the Ramsar special criteria for fish, but no more than half igure 83. Valuable wetlands international of importance in the Russian Arctic

(the lowest proportion) of all wetlands that meet the special criteria for birds. F Site labels correspond to the numbers and 18. Table 17 Table in 16, Table 152 153 70

Figure 84. Adequacy of protection of 97 wetlands 60 on the list of proposed Ramsar sites, shown for three categories of Ramsar Convention criteria 50 РВ – wetlands that meet the Ramsar Convention special criteria for fish; П – wetlands that meet the 40 Ramsar Convention special criteria for birds, Р – key wetlands for rare species 30 Note that some wetlands belong to more than one category. 20

Number of wetlands 0 РВ П Р

НеохраняемыеUnprotected ЧаPartly стично protected охра няемые ПолностьюCompletely охраняемые protected

Two of the eight peatlands in the Arctic region on the list of Russia’s valuable mires (Table 18) are significant for rare bird species. Six are waterfowl and migratory bird staging areas near water bodies. Five of the valuable mires are protected in regional reserves, but the other three, Tareiskoye Mire in Taimyr, and Ossorskoye Mire and the Krutogorovskoye and Bolshoye Kolpakovskoye mire network in Kamchatka, are still in need of protection. Of the 115 wetlands identified in the Arctic region as meeting the Ramsar Convention criteria for protection, 46 currently have no protection in place. A further 13 are inadequately protected. If we consider that all these wetland areas should be protected, the value for the indicator of completeness of protection of important Russian Arctic wetlands is about 54 per cent. Unprotected (or almost completely unprotected) wetlands can be divided into three groups based on their conservation significance: 1. Wetlands of highest significance are especially important for the breeding and migration of birds, or are key spawning and rearing grounds and feeding areas for fish. These wetlands may also meet the special Ramsar criteria for fish and birds, or be essential for the preservation of rare species. 2. Wetlands of mid-level significance meet special Ramsar criteria for birds but not for fish, and are not essential for rare species. 3. Wetlands of lower significance meet general Ramsar criteria, but do not meet

the special criteria for birds or fish, and are not vital for the protection of rare Second priority etlands in need of expansion

species. W f irst priority Of the 46 substantively unprotected wetlands, 18 are classified as category I, 17 as category II and 11 as category III. All three classifications of wetlands are shown in Figure 85, along with additional wetlands for which the current PAs should be extended. Especially dense clusters of valuable but unprotected wetlands occur along the southwest Barents sea coast, in the Western Siberia tundra forest zone, and in the Central Taimyr region. They are less common in Kam- Highest importance Medium importance Lower importance

chatka and along the coast of the Sea of Okhotsk. wetlands U nprotected igure 85. Valuable unprotected wetlands and wetlands international of importance in the Russian Arctic that need additional protection F Site labels correspond to the numbers and 18. Table 17 Table in 16, Table

154 155 2.3.2. Important bird areas There are 132 important bird areas (IBAs) in the Russian Arctic (Figure 86 and Table 19). Of these, 78 completely or partly overlap with wetlands on either the list of Ramsar Convention wetlands of international importance or the list of wetlands proposed for Ramsar site designation (see Section 2.3.1), and 24 are recognized as federal IBAs. Of the total number of IBAs, 41 are fully protected (about 30 per cent of the total area of IBAs in the Russian Arctic), 32 are partially protected (about 50 per cent of the total IBA area), and the remaining 59 have no protection (about 20 per cent of the total IBA area). The proportion of protected area is over 70 per cent in only one-third of the partially protected IBAs, and, in some, it is less than 5 per cent – at which point they are essentially unprotected. Note also that the number of unprotected IBAs has increased since 2000 due to the closing of some reserves in the Chukotka AO and in the Kam- chatka region when their protected status expired. Completely protected, Partly protected Unprotected igure 86. Important bird areas the of Russian Arctic F Label numbers conform to numbers in 19. Table

156 157 and grant federal area, convert to a A rctic N ational Park status Kharbeiskie Lapland Reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve strictly protected reserve Bolshezemelsky Reserve Establish a federal reserve Establish a federal reserve Establish a nature monument E xpand and grant federal status C onvert to a strictly protected reserve Expand Nenetsky Reserve or establish Including in R ussian E xpand protected area to cover entire IB A Convert to being part of Kandalakshsky or E xpand to cover entire IB A E xpand to cover entire IB A E xpand to include the continental tundra area Establish a state reserve on Vashutkiny Lakes Vashutkiny Establish a state reserve on easures required for complete protection for required M easures complete protection for required M easures and regional reserves on Lakes Podimeski s s

PA PA R eserve Pasvik R eserve Lapland Reserve Kuloisky R eserve Shoinsky R eserve Ponoisky R eserve Varzugsky Reserve Varzugsky N enetsky R eserve. Vaigachsky Reserve Vaigachsky Kandalaksha R eserve Kandalakshsky R eserve Kandalakshsky R eserve Kandalakshsky R eserve

Franz Josef Land Federal Reserve

Murmansk Tundra Federal Reserve Tundra Murmansk N enetsky R eserve; F ederal

roportion of area protected area of roportion P protected area of roportion P

0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 83% 24% 17% <1%

15% 31% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% >80% 100% > 95%

aluable wetlands wetlands aluable V wetlands aluable V

V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

arge seabird colonies seabird arge L colonies seabird arge L

+ + + + +

complexes complexes

habitat for bird species species bird for habitat species bird for habitat

+ + + + reas with representative representative with reas A representative with reas A

species species

ey areas for globally rare rare globally for areas ey rare globally for areas ey K

K + + +

igrating and wintering areas wintering and igrating M areas wintering and igrating M

Significance Significance

+ + + + + + + + + + + +

water birds and/or shorebirds and/or birds water shorebirds and/or birds water

congregations of waterfowl, waterfowl, of congregations waterfowl, of congregations

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + esting and moulting moulting and esting N moulting and esting N I B A I B A ersky Bereg Kolguev Island Chernaya river basin interfluve Torna-Shoina Kanin Peninsula interfluve) (Yazhma-Nes A rkhangelskaya Bay Lakes Vashutkiny, Vashutkiny, Lakes Podimeiskie and Khorbeiskie South shore of C heshskaya Bay Vaigach Island Vaigach Lapta Vorondeiskaya Peninsula Khaipudyrskaya Bay, Khaipudyrskaya Bay, Bolshoi Zelenetz, Dolgy and Matveyev islands Murmansk State Tundra Murmansk State T Strelna-Varzuga Strelna-Varzuga interfluve East Murman shore Russky Zavorog and eastern Malozemelnaya tundra areas Fjarvann (Skonning Area) Experimental Kandalaksha Bay Vicinity of Lake Vicinity Kneshyaur Middle reaches of the Bolshaya R ogovaya R iver Gavrilovsky A rchipelago F lor C ape A inovy Islands Ponoiskaya Basin Lapland Biosphere R eserve River Kuloi and its flood plain Seven Islands Bezymyannaya Bay and Gribovaya Bay with adjacent basin Table 19. Table Important bird areas of the Russian Arctic region, their significance and protected status, andrecommendations for improving 86 for locations of IBAs. See Figure № № 027 025 026 024 013 021 023 020 022 019 011 012 009 008 018 010 007 006 017 005 016 004 003 002 015 001 014 their protection

158 159 and convert to a and convert to a Park Reserve) federal reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve E xpand the reserve strictly protected reserve C onvert to a national park Establish a federal reserve Establish a federal reserve E xpand to cover entire IB A E xpand to cover entire IB A E xpand to cover entire IB A E xpand to cover entire IB A Establish a strictly protected reserve Expand the buffer zone of the reserve Expand the buffer E xpand to cover entire IB A E xpand to cover entire IB A Establish a national park or federal reserve easures required for complete protection for required M easures complete protection for required M easures Establish a reserve (include the IBA in Bikada Establish a reserve (include the IBA Expand and include entire area in Yuribei Nature Yuribei Expand and include entire area in R eserve R eserve R eserve R eserve R eserve s s PA PA N ature Park protected reserves R esource eserve. Gydansky R eserve Taimyrsky Reserve. Taimyrsky Yuribei Nature Park Yuribei ullus R esource eserve and its ullus Strictly Protected R eserve Yugydva N ational Park Yugydva Terpei-Tullus buffer zone buffer Terpei-Tullus Purinsky F ederal R eserve. Kytalyk R esource eserve Gornokhadatynsky R eserve Kunovatsky F ederal R eserve Brekhovskie Islands R eserve Bolshoi A rktichesky Bolshoi A rktichesky Bolshoi A rktichesky Bolshoi A rktichesky Bolshoi A rktichesky Nizhneobsky Federal Reserve. Muna Strictly Protected R eserve Ust-Lensky Reserve; Lena Delta Terpyai-Tumus Resource Reserve Terpyai-Tumus Yuzhno-Yamalsky Reserve, Yuribei Yuribei Reserve, Yuzhno-Yamalsky erpei- T

erpei- T

Chaigurino and Kolyma-Koren strictly T T

roportion of area protected area of roportion P protected area of roportion P

0% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

11% 79% 30% 70% 85% 80% 35% 22% 68% 80% 47% 67% 3,5% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

aluable wetlands wetlands aluable V wetlands aluable V

V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

arge seabird colonies seabird arge L colonies seabird arge L

complexes complexes

habitat for bird species species bird for habitat species bird for habitat

+ + + reas with representative representative with reas A representative with reas A

species species

ey areas for globally rare rare globally for areas ey rare globally for areas ey K

K + + + + + + + + + + + + +

igrating and wintering areas wintering and igrating M areas wintering and igrating M

Significance Significance

+ + + + + + + + +

water birds and/or shorebirds and/or birds water shorebirds and/or birds water

congregations of waterfowl, waterfowl, of congregations waterfowl, of congregations

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + esting and moulting moulting and esting N moulting and esting N sik Islands I B A I B A T Upper Anabar Upper Muna-Besyuke Preobrazheniya Island Gorbigo river basin Sibiryakov Island Terpei-Tumus Khara-Tumus Peninsula Khara-Tumus and adjacent shore of N ordvik Bay Gusikha river basin with the lower reaches of Bolshaya Balakhnya R iver Lower reaches of the Leningradskaya River Pyasino river delta Izvestiya Muruktinskaya Taimyra Lower Upper and middle Yuribei Kytalyk Lower Yuribei Lower Lower reaches of Ob Kolyma Delta Dvuobye Lower reaches of Taimyra Verkhnyaya R iver Lena Delta Puro river basin Right bank of Dudypta R iver Nordenskjeldo A rchipelago Shchuchya and Khodytoyakho river basins Yorkutoyakho river Yorkutoyakho valley Lake Kurluska and middle reaches of Boganida R iver Volochanka Brekhovskie Islands Yugyd Vo National Vo Yugyd N ature Park O leny Island and shores Bay of Yurotskaya № № 058 057 056 043 042 055 041 038 039 040 037 035 036 034 054 033 032 053 031 051 052 050 048 049 030 029 045 046 047 028 044

160 161 network Lowland present one) N ational Park Establish a reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve E xpand the reserve Establish a federal reserve Establish a federal reserve Establish a federal reserve E xpand to cover entire IB A E xpand to cover entire IB A E xpand to cover entire IB A E xpand to cover entire IB A Establish a seasonal reserve E xpand Beringia N ational Park Include in Magadansky R eserve Establish a federal nature monument Establish a reserve or nature monument Include in the protection zone of Beringia Re-establish former reserves (or expand the Establish a strictly protected reserve network Establish a seasonal strictly protected reserve easures required for complete protection for required M easures complete protection for required M easures Establish a federal reserve on Vankaremskaya Vankaremskaya Establish a federal reserve on Establish a federal nature monument or reserve s s PA PA R eserve R eserve R eserve reserves. lazeisky, C hukochya and A lazeisky, vtatkul R eserve Basin reserves A Beringia N ational Park Beringia N ational Park Beringia N ational Park Beringia N ational Park Beringia N ational Park Beringia N ational Park Wrangel Island R eserve Wrangel Federal nature monument Lebediny Federal Reserve Chaunskaya Guba Reserve Magadansky R eserve, Molokchan Indirkei Seasonal Protection Zone Lake Troitskoye Strictly Protected Troitskoye Lake Zashiversk, Saiylk and Badyarikhi Delta-Lena Strict Nature Resource Buustakh Strictly Protected R eserve

Sededema Strictly Protected Reserve Yana D elta Strictly Protected R eserve Yana

Kurdigino-Krestovaya strictly protected haigurinov, C haigurinov,

roportion of area protected area of roportion P protected area of roportion P

0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0%

11% 45% 50% 50% 52% 25% 50% 95% 70% 25% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

aluable wetlands wetlands aluable V wetlands aluable V

V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

arge seabird colonies seabird arge L colonies seabird arge L

+ + + + + + + + + +

complexes complexes

habitat for bird species species bird for habitat species bird for habitat

+ reas with representative representative with reas A representative with reas A

species species

ey areas for globally rare rare globally for areas ey rare globally for areas ey K

K + + + + + + + + + + +

igrating and wintering areas wintering and igrating M areas wintering and igrating M

Significance Significance

+ + + + + + + + + + +

water birds and/or shorebirds and/or birds water shorebirds and/or birds water

congregations of waterfowl, waterfowl, of congregations waterfowl, of congregations

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + esting and moulting moulting and esting N moulting and esting N I B A I B A alan Island T Kavinskaya Valley and Valley Kavinskaya Lake Chukcha Babushkin Bay Molokchanskaya tundra area, Molokchansky and Perevolochny Bays Vankaremskaya Lowland Vankaremskaya and Kolyuchinskaya Bay shore Billings C ape Island Wrangel U st- C haun Inchounskaya and Uelenskaya Lagoons Mechigmen Lagoon Mechigmensky Bay West shore of C haun Bay West Lake Ildirkei (Indirkei) Troitskoye Lake Beringovsky Kolymsko-Alazeiskaya Lowland (lake network) Sededema Meinypylginskaya lake network and Lake Kaipylgin N avarin C ape Markovskaya D epression U pper reaches of Kanchalan N izhneanadyrskaya Lowland Meechkyn Spit Novosibirsky A rchipelago Islands Sirenekovskoye shore area Abyiskaya Lowland Kolymo-Alazeiskaya Lowland (Sundrun- Konkovaya interfluve) O leneksky Bay Getlyangen Lagoon and Khalyustkin C ape Senyavinskie Straits Sanga-Yuryakh Sanga-Yuryakh river basin, include Shirokoston Peninsula and Lake Buustokh Yana and Syuryuktyakh Yana river deltas Ratmanov Island № № 091 090 089 088 073 071 072 069 074 087 086 070 067 068 085 065 066 083 084 082 081 080 079 064 078 063 061 062 076 077 060 059 075

162 163 Establish a reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve Establish a reserve Establish a federal reserve Re-establish former reserve Re-establish former reserve E xpand to cover entire IB A Establish a nature monument Establish a nature monument Re-establish Reka Belaya Reserve Establish federal nature monument Establish a federal nature monument Establish a federal nature monument Establish a federal nature monument Establish a reserve or nature monument easures required for complete protection for required M easures complete protection for required M easures s s PA PA R eserve R eserve R eserve R eserve aigonos R eserve T Magadan R eserve Nature monument Nature monument Nature monument Nature monument Koryaksky R eserve Komandorsky Reserve

Yugo-ZApadny Tundrovy Reserve Tundrovy Yugo-ZApadny Bogoslov Island Nature Monument

Yuzhno-Kamchatsky Federal Reserve Yuzhno-Kamchatsky Yuzhno-Kamchatsky Federal Reserve Yuzhno-Kamchatsky

roportion of area protected area of roportion P protected area of roportion P

0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 15% 30%

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

aluable wetlands wetlands aluable V wetlands aluable V

V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

arge seabird colonies seabird arge L colonies seabird arge L

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

complexes complexes

habitat for bird species species bird for habitat species bird for habitat

reas with representative representative with reas A representative with reas A

species species

ey areas for globally rare rare globally for areas ey rare globally for areas ey K

K + + + +

igrating and wintering areas wintering and igrating M areas wintering and igrating M

Significance Significance

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

water birds and/or shorebirds and/or birds water shorebirds and/or birds water

congregations of waterfowl, waterfowl, of congregations waterfowl, of congregations

+ + + + + + + + + + + + esting and moulting moulting and esting N moulting and esting N I B A I B A Cape Lopatka Opukha Lagoon Makaryevsky E stuary Tymlat Lagoon Tymlat Annuyengvyn Lagoon Manilskie Islands Dobrzhonsky and Islands Temchun R ekkiniksky Bay Valley Poropolsky R ovny Island Vasily Island Vasily Bogoslov Island Kavacha Lagoon C ape O lyugorsky- Irino R iver Inya Commander Islands Malamovoyam Lagoon C ape Krasny Stolbovoy Island Lake Khorchinskoye Geka Bay N orthern Korf Bay Signalny Island U tkholok C ape O rno Kovrizhka R ock Verkhoturovo Island Verkhoturovo R iver Moroshechnaya Semyachiksky Estuary Zgupanovsky Estuary Karaginsky Island Lake Khlamovitskoye Karaga Bay Lake Maloye Starichkov Island Kekurny Bay Impoveyem Lake Bolshoye Lake Makovetskoye Yamskie Islands Yamskie Lake Kurilskoye № № 116 115 112 113 114 111 110 108 109 107 106 105 103 104 132 131 130 102 129 128 099 100 101 127 098 126 097 125 124 123 096 122 095 120 121 093 094 119 118 092 117

164 165 Over half of the IBAs in the Russian Arctic support large groups of water- – – fowl (especially geese), water birds and/or shorebirds during nesting or moult- –

ing. Over one-third of arctic IBAs occur in areas where these birds congregate – 041, – 024, 6

for wintering or for migration. About one-quarter of IBAs are crucial areas for 42 101, – nesting and migration of globally rare species, including the red-breasted goose, – 038, 25

lesser white-fronted goose and white crane. One-quarter of IBAs are sites of – 009, 5 large seabird colonies (Figure 86). The IBAs that feature seabird colonies have 41 111, –

the highest level of protection, with over half completely protected. Of the IBAs – 035, 24 – 012, 4 – 012, that are key habitat for rare species, 40 per cent are completely protected and approximately 30 per cent are partially protected. The nesting and moulting – 045, 23 grounds of waterfowl, water birds and shorebirds have the least protection: only – 008, 3 – Belaya – River, 40 about one-quarter are fully protected and about 40 per cent have no protection – 006, 2 (Figure 87). – 046, 22 About half of the total area of the IBAs in the Russian Arctic is protected, 39 115, –

but only 40 of the 132 IBAs have sufficient protection. To completely protect – 048, 21

the IBAs of the Russian Arctic, approximately 80 PAs should be established or 38 083, – expanded (Table 19 and Figure 88). This could be achieved through the follow- – 043, 20 ing measures: – 084, – 37 Expand Kandalakshsky, Gydansk and Taimyrsky reserves and Beringia National Park (or their protection zones). Kunovatsky, Nizhneobsky and – 039, 19 Lebediny federal reserves should also be expanded, along with the 14 active 36 085, –

regional PAs of Yuribei Nature Park, Ponoisky, Kuloisky, South Yamal, – 030, 18

Brekhovskie Islands, Chaunskaya Bay and Taigonos reserves, and Chaigurgino, 080, – 35 Alazeisky, Kurdigino-Krestovaya, Sdedema, Kytalyk, Muna and Yana Delta – 017, 17 – 017, resource reserves. All these PAs should be expanded to cover the total or majority of the area of their associated IBAs. 34 081, – – 021, 16 Re-establish the former reserves of Verkhoturov Island, Karaginsky Island,

Belaya River, Utkholok, Morooshechnaya River and Laguna Kazarok in the 33 079, – Kamchatka region, and Tumansky and Tundrovy in Chukotka AO. These – 075, 32 075, – –13+14+15 019, – 073, 31 073, – Figure 87. Adequacy of protection – 022, 12 of the 132 important bird areas in the Russian Arctic, shown by categories of significance – 071, 30 071, – Significance (colour codes): Л Г – – 025, 11 nesting or moulting congregations of waterfowl, water birds and/or shorebirds; МЗ – migrating or – 013, 10 wintering congregations; Р – key 29 070, – habitats for globally rare species; К – large seabird colonies

The total of the four categories – 014, 9 exceeds the total number of IBAs 066, – 28 Number IBAs of because most of them belong to egional and two and more categories. F ederal R municipal – 027, 8 – 063, 27 063, –

Unprotected Partly protected Fully protected igure 88. Sites proposed to as protect PAs important bird areas 26 – 12 59 – 127, 58 – 130, – 088, 57 56 – 132, 53 – 089, 54 – 096, – 093, – 100, 48 – 098, – 112, 55 – 099, 49 47 51 52 50 – 097, 44 46 – 108, – 107, – 104, 45 – 103, 102, 43 F Key to site labels (the first numberof each pair is the number on this map, and the second number is the site number 1 Table 19): in 023.7

166 167 reserves lost their protected status between 2000 and 2010. These areas should have their protected status reinstated, or should be added to active PAs. Establish 51 new PAs. Some of these would be created through the amalgamation of existing PAs, including 22 federal PAs or parts of PAs. These PAs would primarily be made up of: 1) significant nesting, moulting and staging areas for migratory birds, 2) key nesting and staging areas for globally rare migratory species: the right bank of the rivers Dudypta and Volochanka, the Gorbita river area, Kolymsko-Alazeiskaya and Vankaremskaya lowlands, the Menyplginskaya lake network and Malakchanskaya Tundra and 3) areas with especially large seabird colonies: Arkhangelskaya Bay, Bezymannaya Bay, Gribovaya Bay, Ratmanov Island and Navarin Cape. Grant federal status to some regional PAs associated with especially significant IBAs vital for globally rare and endangered species. Vaigachsky, Murmansk Tundra, Kuloisky, Shoinsky and Ponoisky reserves, and Yuribei Nature Park and Kytalyk and Muna resource reserves, are currently protected, but should be granted federal status. Vaigach State Reserve (or Vaigach Island of Bolshazemelsky Reserve), Katalyk and Shoinsky reserves, Yuribei National

Park and Murmansk Tundra, Kuloisky, Ponoisky and Muna federal reserves Arctic – to boreal-Pacific transition type.Populations (nesting of colonies could be established.

2.3.3. Seabird nesting colonies and nesting areas Seabirds are essential components of both arctic marine and arctic coastal ecosystems. The populations of most species are still fairly abundant, but they boreal-Atlantic, – А-B are highly vulnerable due to their colonial nesting pattern. Obligate-colonial species nest in relatively few, dense aggregations, often in high numbers, with

hundreds or even millions of seabird pairs in one colony Because of this nesting Arctic, – bАt pattern, all breeding grounds with large colonies (defined as those of at least 1,000 pairs) of obligate-colonial seabirds should be afforded some form of protection. Seabird colony locations are shown on Figure 89. – high – Arctic, А The coast and islands of the Arctic ocean basin The coasts and islands of Russian Arctic seas support about 150 seabird colonies with populations of at least 1,000 pairs, the core of which are obligate- colonial species. These colonies consist of combinations of 20 bird species: • fulmar (Fulmarus glacialis); • northern gannet (Morus bassana); • three cormorants and shags: great cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), common

shag (Phalacracorax aristotelis) and pelagic cormorant (Phalacrocorax A Main protected (green) and unprotected (red) seabird colonies the of Russian sector the of Arctic ocean basin

pelagicus); A h A bAt A -B igure 89. – 1-10 thousand,pairs): 1 – 1-10 thousand; 2 – 10-50 – 50-100 3 thousand, 4 – over thousand 100 F Distribution areas colonies various of of types: hА

168 169 • six gull and tern species: glaucous gull (Larus hyperboreus), great black- clude 7 to 10 species, and only 4 colonies have 9 to 10 species nesting within backed gull (Larus marinus), herring gull (Larus argentatus), Siberian them. The most diverse colonies have the greatest protection (Figure 91): about gull (Larus hueglini), black-legged kittiwake (Rissa tridactyla), Arctic tern half of colonies with 1 to 3 species are in PAs, about two-thirds of colonies with (Sterna paradisaea); 4 to 6 species are protected, and all four of the colonies with greatest species • nine species of the auk family: dovekie (Alle alle), razorbill (Alca torda), richness (with 9 to 10 species) are within PAs. Brünnich’s guillemot or thick-billed murre (Uria lomvia), common guillemot According to S.M. Uspensky’s classification20, the core obligate-colonial (Uria aalge), black guillemot (Cepphus grylle), pigeon guillemot (Cepphus seabird colonies of Russia’s northern coasts fall into three main types, based on columba), Atlantic puffin (Fratercula arctica), horned puffin Fratercula ( species composition and population structure: boreal-Atlantic, arctic and high- corniculata) and tufted puffin (Fratercula cirrhata). latitude arctic. Additionally, the colonies on the easternmost part of the region About two-thirds of the colonies (96 out of 151, or 64 per cent) are within could be classified as an arctic to boreal-Pacific transition type. protected areas (Figure 90). The major size groups all have approximately the Boreal-Atlantic colonies are confined to the Murmansk coast of the Rus- same proportion of colonies protected, except the biggest: those with nesting sian Arctic. They are rich in boreal species (great cormorant, common shag and pair populations of more than 100,000 (Figure 90 right bar). The six seabird Atlantic puffin), and are co-dominated by kittiwake and Brünnich’s guillemot. colonies in this size range, all on Novaya Zemlya, are outside of the PA network. Glaucous gull is absent, but herring gull and great black-backed gull are oc- These colonies can include up to 10 different seabird species, but no more casionally abundant. In the past few decades, the Murman colonies have been than 6 species nest in 88 per cent of the colonies. Only 18 known colonies in- frequented by two additional boreal-Atlantic species: northern gannet, which nests in the Seven Islands Archipelago, and the great skua (Catharacta skua). Twelve seabird species are found in these boreal-Atlantic colonies. Up to 10 can be found nesting in the same colony, though the average is 6. There are 19 large colonies with populations of between 1,000 and 50,000 pairs, mostly located in West Murman and Cape Gorodetsky. The total population of Murman colonial seabirds is estimated at approximately 160,000 pairs. Up to 15,000 Figure 90. Numbers of protected of these pairs are Arctic terns and eider ducks, both of which typically select and unprotected seabird colonies in the Arctic ocean basin, grouped by coastal rocky terrain with shelves suitable for nesting, scarps above the sea, and colony size flat rocky peaks. Atlantic puffins typically nest on islands with vegetated slopes suitable for burrowing, while the Larus gull species nest on the rims and scarps

Number colonies of 1-10 thousand 10-50 thousand 50-100 thousand Over 100 thousand of cliffs, and on the open areas of islands. Of the 19 large seabird colonies of Murman, 10 are protected in Kandalak- Within PAs Outside of PAs sha Reserve and in the regional nature monument of Dvorovaya Bay rookery. These protected colonies include some in the most diverse category (10 species), located on Seven Islands and in Dvorovaya Bay, and Russia’s largest Atlantic puffin colony, located on the Ainovy Islands. These protected areas also contain most of the Russian population of common shags, a large proportion of the Murman eider duck population, the entire small Russian northern gannet population, and a large share of Russia’s population of great skuas. Both the northern gannet and the great skua have recently begun to nest in Russia. In addition, a considerable Figure 91. Numbers of protected and unprotected seabird colonies in proportion of Murman herring gull and great black-backed gull populations repro- the Arctic ocean basin, grouped by species diversity duce in these areas.

Number colonies of In arctic-type colonies, Brünnich’s guillemot and black-legged kittiwake are the main species. Black guillemot and glaucous gull, which are common

Within PAs Outside of PAs 20 Uspensky S.M. 1969. Life in High Latitudes on the Example of the Birds. Mysl., Moscow. 463 pp. [in Russian] 170 171 in the Russian Arctic, are also present, but their abundance in large colonies is seacoast. In this impoverished subtype of colony, dovekie occupy only fractured usually negligible compared to that of the two main species. Dovekie are found rocky cliffs because of the cold climate. in the western Arctic, along with a few colonies of fulmars. Boreal species, There are 71 seabird colonies belonging to the high-latitude arctic colony including Atlantic puffin, common guillemot and razorbill, are found in small type. Most of these are estimated to be fewer than 5,000 pairs, and only 4 colo- numbers. There are 10 seabird species found in arctic-type colonies. The most nies are of over 10,000 pairs. In addition to being generally smaller than the diverse colonies, however, are composed of no more than 7 species, with the other types of colonies, the high-latitude arctic colonies are also the least stud- average number of species per colony being 4. ied. The greatest number of colonies with unknown populations is of this type, Colonies classified as arctic-type occupy classical rookeries on sea-facing and most of the colonies that have not yet been classified are located in the Franz cliffs. There are 47 known arctic-type colonies, widespread in two separate ar- Josef Land Archipelago, the area with the most of this colony type. Almost all eas: 43 in Novaya Zemlya and 4 on islands of the Laptev and Eastern Siberian of the high-latitude arctic colonies (68 out of 71) are within PAs, mainly in the seas (Figure 89). Colonies on Novaya Zemlya differ in the proportions of kit- Franz Josef Land and Severozemelsky federal reserves. tiwake subspecies R. t. tridactyla and R. t. pollicaris from those in the eastern Colonies of the arctic to boreal-Pacific transition type are typical of the sector of the Arctic. arctic coasts of Chukotka and Wrangel and Herald islands. Compared with the The largest seabird nesting grounds in the Russian sector of the Arctic ocean arctic-type colonies, they are richer in species of Pacific origin (Pacific cormo- basin are the arctic-type colonies of hundreds of thousands of seabirds on the rant, horned puffin and tufted puffin and, in the easternmost region, the Pacific west coast of Novaya Zemlya. Only 9 of the 47 arctic-type colonies are located subspecies of common guillemot (Uria aalge inornata) and the pigeon guil- in PAs: 4 colonies in the eastern sector of the Arctic, and 5 colonies in Russian lemot, a Pacific endemic. However, these Pacific seabird taxa do not dominate, Arctic National Park, at the northern end of Novaya Zemlya. with kittiwake and Brünnich’s guillemot (subspecies U. lomvia heckeri) being High-latitude arctic colonies are common in areas with the most severe cli- most common. Colonies of this type include some combination of 10 seabird mates, such as Franz Josef Land and Severnaya Zemlya archipelagos, the Kara species. The most diverse colonies (Herald Island and Kolyuch Island) include Sea islands and De Long Archipelago. Many colonies are dominated by dove- 8 species, while the average is 6 species. The biggest colony of this type on the kie. Brünnich’s guillemot and kittiwake are common and abundant and black continental coast is on Kolyuchin Island. Of the 14 colonies of this type, 9 (64 guillemot and glaucous gull are also characteristic of these colonies, along with per cent) are located within the protected areas of Wrangel Island Reserve and fulmar in the Atlantic sector. Six colonial seabird species nest in high arctic Beringia National Park. This includes the largest colonies (those with popula- colonies, but they are seldom encountered together in one colony (with rare tions of up to 50,000 pairs) as well as the most species-rich colonies. exceptions, such as Rubiny Rock in the Franz Josef Land Archipelago). The Of the four types of obligate-colonial seabird colonies, the high-latitude average is three species per colony. arctic type is the most abundant in the Russian sector of the Arctic ocean ba- An impoverished version of high-latitude arctic colonies is common in ma- sin, although arctic-type colonies contain the greatest numbers of nesting birds. rine regions with the most severe ice conditions, such as northeastern Kara Sea and northwestern Laptev Sea. In these severe conditions, Brünnich’s guillemot is absent and dovekie is completely dominant. The proportion of black guillemots increases in the eastern sector of the Arctic. In the De Long Archipelago, Figure 92. Correlation of where conditions are most severe, there is a high proportion of black guillemots protected and unprotected and few common guillemots. The dovekie, a high-latitude Atlantic species, is seabird colonies in the Arctic Ocean basin in absent in this region. groups of various types. Type of colonies: hA – The typical habitats of high-latitude arctic colonies are rock bluffs (like high-latitude arctic, А – arctic, bAt – boreal- those of arctic-type colonies), in addition to scree slopes at the base of cliffs, Atlantic, A-B – arctic to where the largest dovekie colonies are found. Some of the colonies on Franz boreal-Pacific transition Josef Land (including those with guillemot species) are typically on rock bluffs

between several hundred metres to one kilometre from the coastline. There is a hA A bAt A-B kittiwake colony on Severnaya Zemlya on a lakeshore 30 kilometres from the Within PAs Outside of PAs

172 173 High-latitude arctic colonies are the best protected type, with 96 per cent being Bering coast of Chukotka within PAs. The boreal-Atlantic and arctic to boreal-Pacific transition types are At least 25 seabird colonies occur on the Bering coast of Chukotka. (Figure also well protected, at 53 per cent and 64 per cent, respectively. The proportion 93). These colonies usually have nesting populations of over 2,000 to 3,000 ob- of protected arctic-type colonies is only 19 per cent, but the largest colonies are ligate-colonial birds. The largest colonies, with populations in excess of 100,000 within PAs. birds, are confined to Tatmanov Island, Cape Century, the coast between capes Seabird colonies in the Arctic ocean basin are generally well protected, but Ginter and Faddey, and Cape Navarin. some gaps in the Arctic PA network remain. The most obvious is the area cover- Over half of these colonies (13 out of 25) are located in Beringia National ing the Novaya Zemlya seabird colonies (Figure 89). These are the biggest sea- Park, including one of the largest colonies, on Cape Century. However, most of bird colonies in the Russian sector of the Arctic ocean basin, located on the larg- the larger colonies on the Bering coast of Chukotka are not protected, including est nesting grounds and rookeries, including Bezymyannaya Bay, Gribovaya the region’s biggest nesting areas on Ratmanov Island and Cape Navarin. There Bay, Arkhangelskaya Bay, Vilkhitsky Bay, Pukhovy Bay and Sakhanikha Pen- are five big seabird nesting areas in this region that need protection and should insula. These areas alone account for more than half of the seabird population of be given at least reserve or nature monument status. These nesting areas are Novaya Zemlya. Russia’s biggest colony of the boreal-Atlantic type is completely located on Ratmanov Island and Cape Navarin, along the Enmelen coast (capes outside of the PA network. This colony, located in Murman, (on Cape Gorodet- Kekilin, Enmelen and Bering), and the coastal strips between capes Ginter and sky, Rybachy Peninsula) is the biggest rookery on the coast of the south Barents Barykov, and between capes Otvesny and Faddey. Sea. Colonies of the high-latitude arctic type are generally well-protected, with the exception of the largest seabird colony in the Kara Sea (on Samoilovich Island), which is the also largest colony of Atlantic black-legged kittiwakes at the eastern Coasts and islands of the Kamchatka and Magadan regions edge of their range. Over 1,000 significant colonial seabird nesting grounds occur on the Korya- Preobrazhenye Island is part of Terpei-Tumus Strictly Protected Reserve, kia Coast, Kamchatka Peninsula, and the northern Sea of Okhotsk and its adja- but merits greater protection for a number of reasons. It is the nesting area of the western Laptev Sea’s largest arctic-type seabird colony. It is primarily composed of species at the western edges of their ranges, such as the Bering Sea black- legged kittiwake subspecies R. tridactyla pollicaris and a Brünnich’s guillemot subspecies (probably the northern Siberian subspecies U. l. eleonorae). This is the most westerly large colony in the eastern sector of the Arctic, and the only large colony near the Taimyr coast. There are approximately 30,000 pairs of seabirds estimated to nest on Preobrazhenye Island, but no systematic surveys have been carried out.

Ivory gull colonies, listed in the Red Data Book of Russia and discussed Figure 93. Large protected (green) and unprotected (red) above in the section on rare bird species (Section 2.2.2), are of special signifi- colonial seabird nesting grounds on the Bering seacoast of Chukotka cance among the facultative-colonial seabird species of the Arctic ocean basin. See Figure 89 for colony populations. Main colonies that require protection: 1 – Ratmanov White Sea colonies of nesting eider ducks and facultative-colonial birds of the Island, 2 Enmelen Coast, 3 – Cape Ginter and Cape Barykov, 4 – Cape Otvesny and Faddey Cape, 5 – Cape gull family (lesser black-backed gull, arctic tern, and others) and smaller num- Navarin bers of great cormorants, black guillemots and razorbills on lowland, treeless islets and skerries are also notable. These colonies are formed by at most 10 species, and usually consist of a mix of 3 to 7 species, with an average of 6. They usually have small populations, seldom consisting of more than 1,000 pairs. However, there are several colonies in Kandalaksha Reserve that are exception- ally large compared with others in the White sea basin.

174 175 cent islands. In most of these colonies, facultative-colonial species either make There are more than 200 large colonial seabird nesting areas within the up the entire population or are the dominant species. These colonies do not have Russian Arctic boundaries as defined for this report. About 62 per cent are particularly large or dense populations. However, about 30 of the largest colo- located within PAs. However, this is misleading, as fewer than half of the large nies and clusters of colonies (Figure 94) are made up of obligate-colonial spe- seabird colonies in the Arctic ocean basin and on the coast of the Bering Sea in cies. These undoubtedly need protection, which could be efficiently provided. Chukotka are protected, while about 70 per cent of the smaller colonies (up to On Kamchatka Peninsula and its adjacent islands, large seabird colonies of 10,000 breeding pairs) are protected. obligate-colonial species are all within PAs (Figure 94), including the largest To ensure the complete protection of the nesting grounds of colonial seabirds and most diverse seabird colonies of the Commander Islands, Verkhoturov Is- across the Russian Arctic, another 23 areas, primarily those with especially land and Karaginsky Island. On the Koryakia Coast, only two out of eight large large colonies, should be added to existing PAs or granted protected area status obligate-colonial seabird colonies are classified as nature monuments These in their own right: protected colonies are located on Dobrzhansky and Temchun islands in Penzha • Areas with top priority for protection: Bezymyannaya Bay, Gribovaya Bay, and on Bogoslov Island on the Pacific coast. Other obligate-colonial colo- Bay, Arkhangelskaya Bay, Vilkitsky Bay, Pukhovoy Bay and Sakhanikha nies on the Koryakia coast are not protected. The largest seabird colonies of the Peninsula on Novaya Zemlya, and Ratmanov Island and Cape Navarion on Sea of Okhotsk coast (Magadan region) are on the Yamskye Islands – about Chukotka 10 million nesting birds of 12 species. These colonies are protected through • Areas of slightly lower priority for protection: Samoilovich Island in the Kara the Magadansky Reserve. Seabird colonies on Taigonos Peninsula and Talan Sea, colonies between Cape Ginter and Cape Faddey, Vasily Island and Cape Island, where the population of nesting birds is also in excess of one million Olyutorsky on the Koryakia coast and Rovny Island in Penzhinskaya Bay individuals, are also protected. Several large colonies are located in the Taui Bay area. These colonies have large residential areas close to their migration routes, • Areas with less urgent need for protection: colonies on the Enmelen coast in which makes them vulnerable and in need of special protection (Figure 94). Ten Chukotka, on Signalny Island, and Cape Krasny in Olyutorsky Bay, as well colonial seabird nesting areas are not protected by the current PA network in as colonies on Cape Oria, on Umara and Shelikan islands and in Loshadinaya the Kamchatka and Magadan regions. The largest and most significant colonies Bay nest on Vasily Island, Cape Olyutorsky and Rovny Island. Other less significant unprotected colonies are located on Loshadinaya Bay and Tri Brata Island. 2.3.4. Coastal sea mammal rookeries In addition to Pinnipedia listed in the Red Data Book of Russia, the Pacific walrus (Odobenus rosmarus divergens) and northern fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus) congregate in large coastal rookeries with varying degrees of Figure 94. Large protected (green) and unprotected (red) colonial seabird nesting permanence along the coastlines of the Russian Arctic. The reproductive grounds in the Kamchatka and Magadan regions rookeries of northern fur seal within the area discussed in this report are See Figure 89 for colony populations. Main colonies that require protection: 1 – concentrated on the Commander Islands and protected in the islands’ reserve Loshadinaya Bay, 2 – Shelikan Island, 3 – Tri th Brata Island, 4- Umara Island, 5 – Rovny Island, and experimental biosphere facility. Since the 19 century, over 80 areas on 6 – Cape Oria, 7 – Cape Krasny, 8 – Signalny the Russian coast have been identified as sometimes being used as rookeries by Island, 9-Olutorsky Cape, 10 – Vasily Islands Pacific walrus. The distribution of animals in these rookeries varies, depending on factors such as sea ice conditions. Since 2000, 31walrus rookeries have been active along the Russian coast (Figure 95). The largest of these are along the eastern arctic coast (Cape Serdtse- Kamen, Cape Schmidt, Cape Vankarem, Cape Onmyn and Cape Kolyuchin) and the southeast coast of the Chukotka Peninsula (Rudder Bay and Meyechkin Spit). Half of all rookeries that have been recorded since 2000, including the three largest, are located in PAs such as Beringia National Park, Wrangel Island Reserve, and several nature monuments. However, the rookery on Cape Serdtse- Kamen, which has been the most permanent rookery over the last century,

176 177 and which is located near the highly productive shallow zones of the Sea of To sum up, a total of at least 14 coastal Pinnipedia rookeries known in the Chukotka, is not protected. This is the result of the boundary changes made Russian Arctic region are breeding areas for Atlantic and Laptev walrus subspe- when Beringia Nature Park was converted to a national park. cies and northern sea lions (see Section 2.2.1). Half of these overlap sea bird According to the “Rules for protecting and hunting of sea mammals”, visit- rookeries that also need protection. ing or doing any work (such as installing navigation equipment) within a 12- mile radius of a rookery requires the permission of the Fish Protection Agency. 2.3.5. Main calving areas of wild reindeer herds Permission is also required for any sea vessels to be present within this 12-mile radius, or for any aircraft flying below 4,000 metres. However, these rules are Fifty wild reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) herds are found within the Russian only applied to the 10 rookeries on the Chukotka list, some of which are now Arctic. Of these, 13 are listed in federal and regional red data books (Figure 96, insignificant or unused. Establishing protection zones in accordance with these Table 20 and Section 2.2.1). Three of these herds originate from introduced do- rules is generally ineffective because walrus distributions are in constant flux. mestic reindeer: those on Wrangel Island, Bering Island and Karaginsky Island. Because of this, most of the largest rookeries are now outside of protection The Wrangel and Bering island herds are both protected through reserves. zones. For this reason, establishing PAs is not the optimal form of comprehensive walrus protection. However, in the interim period, before a more flexible approach to walrus protection is developed, it would be reasonable to protect the Table 20. areas where large rookeries have been reported. Even though they may currently Wild reindeer herds of the Russian Arctic region be relatively small or even non-existent, in time these rookeries may become Herds listed in the Red Data Book of Russia and regional red data books are in large again. A PA regime will help retain the attractiveness of the sites for the bold type; feral domestic reindeer herds are italicized. Locations of herds are shown on animals and prevent them from being degraded by human economic activity. Figure 96. In addition to protecting rookeries in existing PAs, protection is recommend- Coverage of year-round habitat by PAs: ed for the largest rookeries that are not currently protected on Cape Serdtse- – no protection Kamen, Cape Onmyn, Rudder Bay and Meyechkin Spit. In addition, walrus + insignificant protection ++ significant protection rookeries that are adjacent to other areas in need of protection (such as the Russ- +++ complete or almost complete kaya Koshka Spit rookery), could be included in PA networks. Tentative estimate of Coverage of Need for additional Herd total number habitat by PAs protection? of reindeer 1 Lapland 500 ++ yes 2 Tersky Coast 6,000 + yes 3 River Peza 2,000 – yes 4 Novaya Zemlya Unknown – yes 5 Usinskoye Mire 100 +++ no 6 River Lemva 1000 + yes 7 Shuryshkarskaya 200 + yes Figure 95. Main rookeries of Pacific walrus, 2000-201Green – protected, red – unprotected 8 Shchuchinskaya 100 + yes Numbered rookeries: 1 – Cape Serdtse-Kamen, 9 Nadym-Purovskaya 30,000 + yes 2 – Cape Schmidt, 3 – Cape Vankarem, 4 – Cape Onmyn, 5 – Cape Kolyuchin, and the southeast coast 10 Pur-Tazovskaya 2,000 + yes of the Chukotka Peninsula (6 – Rudder Bay and 7 – 11 Bely Island 2,000 +++ no Meyechkin Spit) 12 Yavai Peninsula and Shokalsky Island Unknown ++ yes 13 Mamont Peninsula Unknown + yes 14 Gydanskaya 1,500 + yes 15 Sibiryakov Island 300 +++ no Several 16 Chichagovskaya hundred – yes animals Several 17 Agapovskaya hundred – yes animals

178 179 18 West Taimyr 70,000 – yes Several hundred 19 Putoranskaya animals – yes 20 Purinskaya 145,000 ++ no 21 Dudyptinskaya 110,000 + yes 22 Lake Taimyr 5,000 ++ yes Several 23 Lower Taimyr thousand ++ no animals Several hundred 24 Severnaya Zemlya animals + yes Several hundred 25 Faddey Bay animals + yes Several 26 Maria Pronchishcheva Bay Hundred +++ no animals 27 Popigaiskaya Unknown +++ no 28 Leno-Olenekskaya 33,000 ++ no 29 Bulunskaya Unknown ++ no 30 Kystykskaya Unknown + yes Several hundred 31 Lenskaya animals +++ no 32 Novosibirskaya Unknown +++ no 33 Yano–Indigirskaya 40,000 ++ no 34 Indigirskaya Unknown +++ no 35 Sudrunskaya 30,000 + yes 36 Galgavamskaya 2,000 +++ no Several hundred 37 Kolymskaya animals ++ yes Tens of 38 Omolono-Anyuiskaya thousands – yes 39 Elgygytginskaya 8,500 – yes Several 40 Amguemskaya thousand – yes animals Several 41 Wrangel Island thousand +++ no animals 42 Mainskaya 50,000 + yes 43 Murgalskaya 100 – yes 44 Parapolskaya 300-400 ++ no 45 Karaginsky Island 300 – no 46 Bering Island 1,000 +++ no 47 Yelovsko-Ukinskaya 300-500 – yes 48 Kronotsko-Zhupanovskaya 2,500 ++ yes 49 South Kamchatka 50 +++ no 50 Kavinskaya 1,000 + yes Distribution wild of reindeer herds in the Russian Arctic Included in regional or Russian red data books No conservation status Known calving areas Herd ranges Feral domestic reindeer herds igure 96. igure Number labels correspond to herd numbers in 20. Table F

180 181 Of 34 herds (all herds except the 3 introduced herds and the 13 herds listed – in red data books), 11 consist of small numbers of reindeer (no more than several hundred animals) and need the highest level of protection for conservation and recovery. Usinskoye Mire, Sibiryakov Island, Maria Pronchishcheva Bay and Lenskaya herds have habitat protection through PAs. Key habitats for the Lapland, Severnaya Zemlya and Kolyma herds are covered by PAs that

are large, but still insufficient for the survival of the herds. Key habitats of the Ridge, Timan northern – – southwestern Putoranskoye Chichagovskaya, Agapovskaya, Putoranskaya and Faddey Bay herds have little – Shchuchya river basin, 10 or no protection. Twenty-three herds of thousands to tens of thousands of reindeer need protection on their key calving grounds if they are to continue to reproduce and Ridge, Ulakhan-Tas Plateau, 22- Kystyk – – right bank of Anadyrn in its middle reaches, remain abundant. The entire Popigaiska herd inhabits areas utilized for con-

ventional natural resource development, and Novosibirskaya, Indigirskaya and – Agapa river basin, 15 Galgavamskaya herds inhabit resources reserves, where reindeer hunting is al- lowed but other activities detrimental to reindeer are prohibited. A large part of the habitat of the Lower Taimyr herd is within the strictly protected Great Arctic Reserve, providing a high standard of protection, although limited hunting is – Pronchishchev – Ridge, 21

permitted. However, it would be wise to establish zones with a special protec- 4 Lakes, Kosminskie and basin river Pezha – tion regime to protect calving pastures that are located within nature parks and

resources reserves. – Uboinaya river basin, 14 – Lemva river basin, 8- Sob and Voikar river basins, 9 Some herds, such as the Purinskaya and Yano-Indigirskaya herds, have full – upper reaches of Amguema River, 27 protection of their calving grounds. Sixteen herds that have winter and summer

pastures and migration corridors protected to varying degrees are still in need Bolshevik Island, – 20 of protection of their calving grounds. Special consideration should be given to the Omolono-Anyuiskaya, Kavnskaya and Amguemskaya herds, whose calving areas are unknown. – Tersky coast and eastern Keivy, 3 Keivy, eastern and coast Tersky –

Out of the 47 original wild herds (i.e. excluding those descended from do- 19 Bay, Faddey – – Elgytgytgin Lake area, 26 mestic reindeer), including herds listed in the Red Data Book of Russia and – Kare side Severny of Island, 7

regional red data books, the ranges of 10 are partly or fully within PAs or areas – northeastern Gydansky Peninsula, 13 designated for traditional use (and prohibiting development). The protected areas associated with 11 herds are large, those associated with 15 herds are small, and 11 herds have their ranges completely or almost completely outside of PAs. Overall, PAs are needed in varying degrees to protect 21 herds (44 per cent of the total number of wild reindeer herds). However, only 19 of the 47 herds are – Kalamisamo – Peninsula, 18 adequately protected, and 28 herds (almost 60 per cent) need additional protec- – Omolon-Anyuya interfluve, 25 tion (or the expansion of existing PAs), primarily for calving grounds. Adequate protection could be provided for the Lapland, Mamont Island, Lake Taimyr, Kronotsko-Zhupanovskaya, and other herds, by expanding current PAs or by – southern Gydansky Peninsula, 12 establishing new PAs adjacent to existing PAs. Candidate areas for PAs that

would provide habitat protection for wild reindeer herds are shown in Figure 97. nprotected key areas essential for the conservation wild of reindeer herds For herds that migrate over long distances, special measures are needed to protect the most vulnerable areas in their migration corridors, such as areas – lower reaches of Anyuya, 24 igure U 97. – Gusinaya Zemlya Peninsula and Mezhdusharsky Island, 6 – Territory to be occupied by Lapland Forest Conservation Area, 2 Area, Conservation Forest Lapland by occupied be to Territory – 5 Tazovsky Peninsula, 11 Kamen-Kharbei 16- , Plateau Hill, 17 23 28 – Murgal and Chernaya river basin; 30 – upper reaches the of rivers and Ozernaya Yelovka 1 where reindeer herds cross large rivers, and to prevent hindrances to migration F 182 183 from infrastructure such as pipelines. Protection of river crossings is essential ing migration, 11 wetland areas (12 per cent) area used for moulting and during for the Taimyr herds (West Taimyr, Purinskaya and Dudyptinskaya) that swim migration, and 17 areas (18.5 per cent) are of importance as staging areas during across the Pyasina, Pur, Kheta and other rivers. Protection from infrastructure migration (Figure 99). Nesting congregations are found in of 64 areas (70 per hindering migration is essential for herds in oil- and gas-producing areas, for cent), moulting congregations are found in 68 areas (74 per cent) and migration example, for the Nadym-Purovskaya herd. staging areas are found in 52 areas (57 per cent) (Figure 100). Add a legend: (box to represent filled areas): Calving areas more or less The protection status of these 92 wetlands is as follows: 32 (about 35 per certain; (box to represent striated areas): Calving areas uncertain cent) are either completely or largely protected; 10 have PAs that, though extensive, are insufficient for the complete protection of the large concentrations of waterfowl that make use of the wetlands; 50 (over half) are either completely or 2.3.6. Nesting, moulting and migratory staging areas for almost completely unprotected. Wetlands used for nesting and moulting are the game species of waterfowl best protected category, with over half being completely or partially protected (Figure 99). Only about one-quarter of moulting and migratory staging areas There are 92 significant nesting, moulting and migratory staging areas of are protected. game species of waterfowl (geese and ducks) in the Russian Arctic (Figure 98). Slightly over half of the congregations of waterfowl in completely or partly Most are designated as either important bird areas (Section 2.3.2) or are in- protected wetlands are related to nesting (Figure 100). About 40 per cent of cluded on the Ramsar Convention lists of wetlands of international importance moulting areas are protected to some degree, while migratory staging areas (Section 2.3.1). However, a discussion of these wetlands specifically in terms are the least protected, with only 35 per cent being entirely or partially located of their significance for the conservation of game species of waterfowl is war- within PAs. ranted. Of the 92 wetlands important for game species of waterfowl, 31 (34 per cent) are used by large concentrations of nesting and moulting waterfowl, 34 (37 Figure 99. Adequacy of protection per cent) are used by waterfowl for nesting, moulting and as staging areas dur- of wetlands important for game species of waterfowl in the Russian Arctic (for combinations of use for nesting, moulting and migration) Important to waterfowl congregations for: NMo – nesting and moulting, NMoMi – nesting, moulting and migration, MoMi – moulting and migration, Мi – migration number wetlands of NMo NMoMi MoMi Mi Unprotected Partly protected Fully protected

Nesting and Migration Sufficiently moulting protected Figure 100. Adequacy of protection of wetlands important for game Moulting and Wintering InsAufficiently species of waterfowl in the Russian migration protected Arctic (shown individually for nesting, moulting and migration) Nesting, moulting Unprotected and migration Important to waterfowl congregations for : N – nesting, Mo – moulting, – Mi -migration Figure 98. The most important nesting, moulting and migratory areas for large concentrations of game species of waterfowl in the Russian Arctic number wetlands of N Mo Mi Unprotected Partly protected Fully protected

184 185 Over one-half of all the areas where waterfowl congregate (50 out of 92) are in need of protection, and another 10 require expansion or the establishment of PAs (Figure 98). Of greatest significance are areas in which all three types of congregations are found, for example the Malaya Zemlya tundra, the lower reaches of the river Taz, the southern West Siberian tundra-forests, and the waterfowl staging areas in Siberian tundra-forest, as well as the Kamchatka coast (Figure 98). In addition to the areas discussed above, wintering waterfowl form large congregations in the Russian Arctic in East Murman, on the Tersky coast of the White Sea and in First Kurily Strait (Figure 98). They need protection, but are beyond the scope of this report.

2.3.7. Spawning and rearing grounds, feeding areas and migratory routes of commercial fish species Many water bodies in the Russian Arctic are essential to the spawning, rearing, feeding, and migration of valuable commercial fish species. However, 40 areas play a special role in reproduction for fish stocks that are of value at least at the regional scale (Figure 101). Half of these 40 areas are completely or mainly located within PAs. Another nine are partially protected. The current PA network covers about 61 per cent of significant fish spawning areas. The areas most in need of protection are: • Western Siberia: the Pur river delta, the lower reaches of the river Taz and the lake systems of the Pur-Taz interfluves; Distribution and protection status coastal of marshes along the coasts arctic of seas and the northern Bering Sea

Figure 101. Significant spawning, feeding and growing, and migration areas for valuable commercial fish species 1 – unprotected, 2 – partly protected, 3 – completely or mainly protected igure 102. F

186 187 • Taimyr: the lower reaches of the Leningradskaya River; c. are not fragmented by infrastructure elements, and do not contain human • Chukotka: the lower reaches of Amguema River and Ukouge Lagoon, the population centres; Meinypilginskaya lake system, and lakes Elergyttyn and Mainitz; d. Show no signs of major changes caused by economic activities in the past • Kamchatka: the Utkholok, Kolpakov and Oblukovina river basins. 70 years (such as ploughing or industrial development), and are not in close proximity to infrastructure; Some existing PAs also need to be expanded: the Varzuga, Tuloma, Kola and Lokanga river basins on the Kola Peninsula, the Pechora river delta, the Upper e. do not contain burnt-out areas bordering on infrastructure. Dvuobye, the Omolon-Anoiskoye interfluve, Markovskaya basin in the middle Intact forest landscapes are commonly made up of various ecosystem types, reaches of the river Anadyr, and the lower reaches of the Chaun River. including unforested (meadow, mire, uplands and riverine) ecosystems, and are shaped by natural fire regimes. Many scholars recognize that large natural areas such as these are essential for the preservation of all levels of biological 2.3.8. Coastal marshes diversity. The large size of these landscapes and their relative freedom from Marine coastal areas with sediment accumulations supporting marsh disturbance allow them to support viable populations of most species typical to vegetation are essential for maintaining biological diversity and are one of the ecosystems they represent. Within IFAs, these typical species have patterns the important habitat types in the Arctic. They are highly productive and are of abundance and distribution determined by their biological characteristics essential for the exchange of nutrients and energy between marine and terrestrial and the natural features of the landscape, rather than by human disturbance and ecosystems. Marsh belts are narrow, but often extend for many kilometres along habitat alteration. Large natural land blocks are needed for the conservation of the coast. stable populations of many big mammals that are especially sensitive to human In Russia, 176 areas along the coasts of the arctic seas and the northern disturbance and to changes to their habitats, changes to associated water bodies Bering Sea have been identified as significant coastal marsh ecosystems. Forty- and mires, and to the dynamics of forest ecosystems that determine patterns eight (27 per cent) of these are completely or partially included in coastal PAs of natural disturbances, such as fires and large-scale windfalls. The central (Figure 102). Fifteen of 20 main types of coastal marsh ecosystems occur within portions of large natural landscapes are most resistant to marginal effects existing coastal PAs (i.e. the coastal marsh PA network represents 75 per cent of (changes in natural ecosystems caused by human impact on adjacent areas). distinct marsh biotic communities). Typical examples of marginal effects are: biological pollution (e.g. invasion of alien plant species into natural ecosystems from adjacent roads, logged areas, Best preserved are marshes on the north coast of Yamal and Gydan, on the potentially leading to changes in the composition and dynamics of ecosystems); East Siberian Sea and Laptev Sea coasts, and on Chukotka Peninsula – areas changes in water regimes caused by alteration of adjacent drainage systems; with well-developed PA networks. There are considerable gaps in coastal marsh peat formation in logged areas; and the degradation of the edges of forests protection along the eastern Pechora Sea and the south coast of Anadyr Bay, adjacent to logged areas. It should also be noted that the central portions of however, as these marshes are characterized by types of marsh vegetation large natural landscapes are seldom visited by people, and are consequently communities that are not represented in the region’s PA network. Areas with least affected by poaching or human-caused fires. It follows from the above that extensive coastal marsh systems in need of protection include Tazovskaya, all species in intact forest landscapes are capable of long-term self-maintenance Gydanskaya and Chaunskaya bays, marshes on the White Sea coast of the Kola in a changing environment. Peninsula and Khatangsky Bay (Figure 102). It is impossible to estimate what minimum area of a forest needs to protected in order to preserve all of its characteristic constituents in a natural condition for 2.3.9. Intact forest landscapes an unlimited period of time. A range of ecosystem types, each subject to its own range of local conditions, is needed to preserve wildlife diversity. Undoubtedly, Intact forest landscapes (IFLs) are defined as relatively unfragmented the larger the natural area preserved, the greater the number of its features and ecosystems in forested zones with a canopy density of no less than 20 per cent its species that can be preserved in their natural condition on a long-term basis. and canopy height of at least 7 m, and which: Similarly, it should be noted that the relationships between forest landscape a. cover large areas (no less than 50 000 ha) and have a width of at least 10 km characteristics and the survival patterns of many extremely sensitive plant and (i.e. enclose a circle with a diameter of at least 10 km); animal species are still poorly understood. Therefore, the conservation of large b. occur as a continuous mosaic of natural ecosystems, regardless of their type; intact forest landscapes is a reasonable precautionary measure.

188 189 The delineation and mapping of IFLs were based on the assumption that natural area whose condition is as close to natural as possible, compared with relatively intact areas of at least 50,000 ha can maintain on an ongoing basis, the neighbouring areas of the forest zone. However, IFLs are expected to contain following forest landscape and ecosystem processes that have been destroyed significant wildlife populations. or are disappearing rapidly in fragmented landscapes considerably affected by Intact forest landscapes are limited in the Russian Arctic, occurring only 21 human activities (Yaroshenko et al., 2001 ): in European Russia, Western Siberia and Kamchatka (Figure 103). They are a. natural disturbance dynamics both at a small scale (e.g. creation of forest most common in Kamchatka, which also has the largest proportion of IFL area gaps from falling of or death of individual trees) and on a larger scale (e.g. protected (26 per cent). In Western Siberia and European Russia, about 16 to 17 fires, or desiccation of plants from herbivorous insects or extreme weather per cent of the number of IFLs are protected. Overall, about 20 per cent of IFLs conditions); in the Russian Arctic are protected. Figure 103 shows areas in need of protec- b. sustainable populations of plant and animal species especially sensitive to tion in order to provide full protection of various intact forest areas: Jaurijoki human impact; river basin (1), the areas to be occupied by Khibiny National Park (2) and Poty c. catchment areas of streams, lakes, mires and minor rivers in a state unaltered by economic activities; d. Combinations and distributions (on a spatial and temporal basis) of ecosystems and habitat types typical of particular landscapes; e. rare and unique ecosystems. IFLs are also essential for maintaining global-scale ecosystem balance, including climate. Forests provide the main natural storage of carbon reserves.

Their removal leads to reduction of stored carbon through СО2 emissions and alters ecosystem structure, including major changes to relative amounts of different age classes of tree stands, different types of land cover, and different suc- cessional stages related to fire. In accordance with the above definition, IFLs are not “wildlife areas” in the

strictest sense of the term. Forests, especially those in European Russia, are an Unprotected In need of protection intricate natural-anthropogenic complex, with the lands closest to pristine con- (first priority) In need of protection dition still bearing traces of human activity. Most of the forested area, at least Protected (second priority) in European Russia, has been subjected more frequently to direct or indirect human activities than it has been influenced by natural disturbance events such as lightning and wildfires. Influences include clearing for agricultural cultiva- tion, and changes in the abundance of animals due to hunting and fishing. Many taiga areas are used, or have been used until recently, for game hunting. Traces of old settlements can be found in several currently unpopulated and “wild” taiga areas, especially on the shores of large lake shores and along river banks. Common features of many natural taiga landscapes are small hayfields along- Figure 103. Intact forest areas of the Russian Arctic in Europe and West Siberia (top) and Kamchatka (bottom) side small rivers. Some of these hayfields are still in use, but most have been See text for definition of intact forest areas. Numbered areas are abandoned. Many northern European taiga areas, especially mountainous areas, proposed protected areas (see text for the names of these areas). have been used until recently as the main nutrient supplies for reindeer farms, and are still in use by local residents. Therefore, an IFL is best understood as a

21 Yaroshenko A.Y., P.V. Potapov, and S.A. Turubanova. 2001. The Last Intact Forest Landscapes of Northern European Russia. Greenpeace Russia and Global Forest Watch, Moscow. 75 pp.

190 191 Les Conservation area (3) on the Kola Peninsula, the northern White Sea-Kuloi 40-45 per cent. About two-thirds of the major community types are represented Plateau (4), and the eastern Urals foothills (5). in the PA network, resulting in a value for the indicator of representativeness of 65 per cent (Figure 105). 2.3.10. Rare and relict communities and ecosystems Steppe, cryophytic-steppe and tundra-steppe communities The rare and relict communities and ecosystems of the Russian Arctic Steppe, cryophytic-steppe and tundra-steppe communities are relicts of the that need special consideration and measures for their protection fall into four earlier tundra-steppe vegetation cover that dominated vast areas of northern main categories: 1) forest, open woodland and shrub communities; 2) steppe, Eurasia in the cryoarid epochs of the Pleistocene. Fragments of these communi- cryophytic-steppe and tundra-steppe communities; 3) communities associated ties are common in the Arctic and are generally confined to south-facing slopes with distinctive substrates; 4) thermophilic communities. and remnant rocks. These communities have a high nature conservation value, due to their high diversity of rare, relict and endemic plant species, including Forest, open woodland and shrub communities those of central Asian origin. They are also valuable as refuges for cryoarid Insular forests and open woodlands in the tundra zone and at its boundary plants – refuges from which earlier types of arctic vegetation can re-establish (which commonly occur as relicts of earlier taiga and open woodland vegetation themselves if changes in climate occur. that grew during the Holocene thermal optimum), are of utmost interest for Xerophytic and cryoxerophytic plant groups commonly occur in north- nature conservation as rare communities and ecosystems of the Arctic. The east Asia and dominate the vegetative cover of the Yakutia, Chukotka and the greatest value of these “islands” of forest and open woodland is as natural Magadan regions. They also occur in Taimyr, and the westernmost groups are arboretums and sites for potential tundra afforestation in case of changes in found in the tundra zone of Western Siberia. climate. These communities create the most favourable mesoclimatic and Practically all the main varieties of the steppe, cryophytic-steppe and tun- edaphic conditions (related to the existence of thick tabetisols) for many boreal dra-steppe plant groups in the Arctic region (including their petrophytic and plant and animal types that are uncommon in tundra ecosystems. In addition, psammophytic varieties) occur within existing PAs. They are therefore fully these areas are essential for scientific research, for example on the occurrence of represented in the Russian Arctic PA network (Figure 105). However, the pro- forest-free tundra and on the growth of boreal species under extreme conditions. portion of protected area for these communities is no more than 50 per cent. In In addition to the northernmost insular open woodlands, other areas of nature the Chukotka AO they are most completely protected, while Yana and Indigirka conservation and scientific interest are the northernmost parts of the closed steppe, and forest-steppe landscapes generally, are the most substantial gaps in north-taiga forests growing in southeastern Taimyr and Northeast Asia. Relict the present PA network. dark coniferous forests, growing in tundra-forest and forest-meadow zones, should also be recognized as rare forest ecosystems in need of protection. With Communities associated with distinctive substrates respect to the shrub communities of the Arctic region, special attention should Rare communities of interest, from the point of view of maintaining the be given to tall willow and alder forests growing north of their typical range (i.e. diversity of flora and fauna, are often formed on distinctive substrates. These in the northern belt of typical tundra and in arctic tundra), where they commonly occur on a limited scale because of the presence of rare stenotopic species, whose occur as relicts. lithology is responsible for the distinctive patterns of relevant plant groups and Special attention should also be paid to distinctive and rare grass-dryad associated invertebrate animal groups. In the Arctic region the categories of tundra communities that have an upper canopy layer of a creeping form of greatest interest in are calcephytic biotic communities formed on carbonate spruce, about 50 cm in height. They are found in the tundra zone in the vicinity rocks, communities associated with basic and ultrabasic rock exposures, and of Lake Yun-to in South Yamal, and in the southeastern Polar Urals. sand-dune communities. At least 17 of the areas shown in Figure 104 are essential for the conserva- About 90 per cent of the main varieties of rare communities that are formed tion of rare communities and ecosystems of forest, open woodland and shrub on distinctive substrates occur in the Russian Arctic’s PA network. However, vegetation, based on current knowledge of the vegetation cover and ecosystems only two-thirds of the area of these communities is protected. Hence, the of the Russian Arctic. It is impossible to assess the abundance of the communi- completeness of the PA network is 60-65 per cent, with basic and ultrabasic ties in the present PAs, because many of them are not well-studied. Less than rock exposures being least protected. half of the known area of forest, open woodland, and shrub communities are within existing PAs, resulting in a value for the indicator of completeness of

192 193 Figure 105. Indicators of representativeness and completeness of the Russian Arctic PA network with respect to rare and relict communities and ecosystems – sand-dune – communities; Ecosystems: F – forest, С – Cryophytic-steppe and tundra- steppe, S – associated with the distinctive features of substrate, Т – thermophilic ecosystems associated with hot springs F C S T – steppe, cryophytic-steppe and tundra-steppe

hosenia groves within tundra; D – dense spruce forest Representativeness completeness C

Thermophilic communities Communities of biota that evolve in connection with thermal water exposures are of great scientific interest. Rare algobacterial communities develop around hydrothermal occurrences, and the communities surrounding these areas

– communities – basic of and ultrabasic rock exposures; K are refuges for thermophilic flora and entomofauna relatively uncommon in the Arctic under the current climatic conditions. These communities often display a high species diversity, consisting of assemblages of rare species, some of them

– tall-shrub communities within arctic tundra, G endemic, and others not occurring elsewhere the Arctic. In the Russian Arctic, hydrothermal occurrences are most abundant in Kam- chatka, but are also quite common on the Chukotka Peninsula and on the coast of the Okhotsk Sea, in the Magadan region. All the major types of thermophilic communities occur in the PAs of the Chukotka AO and the Kamchatka region, including terrestrial communities that form in the warmed areas surrounding hot springs, and hydrothermal algobacterial communities. Consequently, these communities are fully represented in the PA network, and at least 85-90 per cent of them are protected.

– larch – forest andwoodlands carbonateon soils; J Overall, about 90 per cent of all the categories of the Russian Arctic’s rare and relict communities and ecosystems that are discussed above are represented in the PA network, while about 50-55 per cent of their total area is protected. The highest indices of representativeness and completeness of protection are for thermophilic communities and ecosystems formed in hydrothermal localities, while rare and relict forest ecosystems have the poorest level of representation I J K L (Figure 105). On the basis of current knowledge, at least another 51 areas should

– calcephytic – communities; I be added to the PA network to make it highly representative and complete for E F G H the conservation of rare and relict communities and ecosystems. Most of areas recommended to be added are concentrated in the Taimyr, Chukotka and A B C D Magadan regions, as shown in Figure 104. igure 104. Unprotected areas with rare and relict ecosystems and communities in need protection of ypes: A – island spruce forests on the northern edge forest; of B – larch forest on the northern edge forest; of C – Populus- L – thermophilic communities F T within tundra-forest and forest-meadow zones; E– prostrate spruce communities,communities;H F

194 195 2.3.11 Completeness of the Russian Arctic PA network for Forest and coastal marsh ecosystems typically have low values of complete- areas of high nature conservation value ness of protection. This is because the proportion of area protected (for forests) and number of areas protected (for marshes) was calculated using total area, Table 21 shows preliminary estimates of the completeness of the Russian or the total number of areas, while in all other cases the number of known ter- Arctic PA network with respect to its protection of the areas of high nature-con- ritories needing protection was taken as the initial number. In all other cases, servation value discussed in this section. Completeness of protection was gener- completeness values vary from slightly more than 40 per cent to over 60 per ally estimated from the proportion of the relevant areas that are protected, with cent. The highest values are for colonial seabird nesting grounds, calving areas the exception of intact forest landscapes. For all types of areas except for intact of wild reindeer (not counting Red Data Book of Russia populations), and areas forest landscapes, completely or mainly protected areas were given a complete- important for spawning, rearing and feeding by commercial fish species. Areas ness value of 1, while partly (insufficiently) protected areas were given a com- important for congregations of waterfowl are the least protected (40 per cent), pleteness value of 0.5. This method of calculating is somewhat arbitrary and is while all other areas have completeness of protection values of about 50 per not absolutely correct. For example, the true degree of completeness of the PA cent. It is important to keep in mind that the various types of areas of high con- network for colonial seabird nesting grounds is slightly lower than shown in the servation value shown in Table 21 often overlap, so the same area, or part of the Table 21 because the number of especially large colonies in unprotected areas is same area, may fall into two or more categories (for example, many wetlands disproportionally high. A reverse of this pattern is found in coastal sea mammal are important bird areas) rookeries: most of the largest rookeries are protected, so the true completeness After taking into account these overlapping areas of high nature conserva- of protection is slightly higher than is shown in Table 21. However, the figures tion value, there are 178 areas in the Russian Arctic that are unprotected or in Table 21 do show the relative completeness of protection of the various types insufficiently protected (Table 22 and Figure 106). Complete protection could of areas. For slightly disturbed forests, the proportion of their area that is within be provided by including them in the Arctic PA network. PAs was taken as the value for completeness of protection. Estimates of the relative significance of the nature conservation values of these areas are presented in Table 22 using a three-point scale, with 3 represent- Table 21. ing the highest nature conservation value and 1 representing the lowest. These Completeness of protection of the PA network for areas of high nature conservation estimates are based on the official status of the areas (for example, important value in the Russian Arctic bird areas of international, national or regional significance), their quantitative characteristics (for example, populations of seabird colonies, size of waterfowl congregations frequenting the area), their relative scarcity and uniqueness (es-

s pecially for rare and relict communities), and other factors. Calving grounds of PA

s in PA s in PA wild reindeer are all given the highest significance score of 3. (see text) E stimated protection protection R ussian A rctic C ompletely or nprotected in U nprotected Total number in number Total artly protected P artly protected completeness, %

mainly protected mainly protected The total significance estimates were obtained by summing all individual the Wetlands 115 56 13 46 54 scores. If an area is both a wetland of international importance and an important Important bird areas 132 41 32 59 43 bird area, only the highest estimate was used. Similarly, if a seabird colony site Colonial seabird nesting grounds 207 126 2 79 61 is an important bird area, only the score for significance as a seabird nesting area

Coastal rookeries of sea mammals (except those listed in the Red Data 31 15 - 16 48 was used. Total scores, varying from 1 to 8, were calculated, and the 178 areas Book of the Russia) were then subdivided into three categories, based on their priority for inclusion Key areas of wild reindeer habitats (except for populations listed in 63 the Red Data Book of Russia and introduced island populations) 35 16 12 7 in the PA network. Areas with total significance scores of over 5 were classi- Nesting, moulting and migratory staging areas of game species of fied as priority category 1 (highest priority), those with a total score of 3 to 5 waterfowl 92 32 10 50 40 Areas important for reproduction of commercial fish species 40 20 9 11 61 were included in category 2, and those with a total score of 1 or 2 were put in Coastal marshes 176 44 - 132 25 category 3. Intact forest landscapes 20 Rare and relict communities and ecosystems 210 100 30 80 55

196 197 Table 22. Significance Unprotected areas of high nature conservation significance of Arctic Russia that need protection See text for explanation of derivation of scores for significance and priority ranks. Significance

Areas etlands W I ntact forests I mportant bird areas P riority (1 is top priority) alving areas of wild reindeer C alving areas coastal rookeries of sea mammals coastal rookeries Areas waterfowl for areas C ongregating istribution areas of marsh ecosystems D istribution areas olonial nesting grounds of seabirds and C olonial nesting grounds etlands Spawning areas for commercial fish species commercial for Spawning areas Total (higher numbers are most significant) numbers are (higher Total are and relict communities and ecosystems and relict R are W I ntact forests 27 Bolvanskaya Bay 2 3 5 2 I mportant bird areas P riority (1 is top priority) 28 Shapkina-Yersa interfluve 1 2 3 2 alving areas of wild reindeer C alving areas coastal rookeries of sea mammals coastal rookeries

ongregating areas for waterfowl for areas C ongregating 29 Neruta river basin 2 2 3 istribution areas of marsh ecosystems D istribution areas

olonial nesting grounds of seabirds and C olonial nesting grounds 30 Ortina river basin 2 2 3 Spawning areas for commercial fish species commercial for Spawning areas Total (higher numbers are most significant) numbers are (higher Total are and relict communities and ecosystems and relict R are 31 Chernaya river basin 2 1 2 4 2 1 Vicinity of Lake Kieshyaur 1 1 3 32 Khaipudyrskaya Bay 2 2 2 6 1 2 Khibiny and Lavozero tundra 3 3 6 1 33 Pakhanchnskaya Bay 2 2 2 6 1 3 East Murman coast 1 1 3 34 Vashutkiny, Padimeiskie and Kharbeiskie 1 2 2 4 2 4 Pory Les 3 3 2 lakes Middle reaches of Bolshaya Rogovaya 5 Varzuga river basin 1 3 4 2 35 River 2 2 3 6 Tersky coast of the White Sea 2 1 2 3 36 Chernyshov Range 2 2 3 7 Kola and Tuloma river basins 2 2 3 37 Lemva river valley 3 3 2 8 Cape Gorodetsky 3 3 2 38 Bol, I Mal and Oyu river basins 2 2 3 9 Arkhangelskaya Bay, Novaya Zemlya 1 3 3 2 39 Kara river basin 3 2 5 2 Bezymyannaya and Gribovaya bays, 40 Yorkutayakha river basin 1 1 3 10 Novaya Zemlya 1 3 3 2 41 Shchuchya and Khadytayakha river basins 1 2 3 2 8 1 11 Vikitsky Bay, Novaya Zemlya 3 3 2 42 Lake Yanto 1 1 3 12 Pukhovoy Bay, Novaya Zemlya 3 3 2 43 North Sosvinskaya Hill 2 2 3 13 Sakhanikha Peninsula, Novaya Zemlya 3 3 2 Estern foothill of the North Urals – 14 White Sea-Kuloi Plateau 3 3 2 44 Manya river basin 3 3 2 15 Upper reaches of Nes River 2 2 3 45 Lakes in the Pyaku-Pura-Nadym 2 3 5 2 16 Yazhma-Nes interfluve, Kanin Peninsula 2 3 1 6 1 interfluve 17 Chizha river basin 2 2 3 Yurtovskoye Lakes in the Venga-Pura- 46 Yety-Pura interfluve 2 2 3 18 Kolguev Island 1 2 1 4 2 47 Lakes on the left bank of the river Pur 1 3 4 2 19 Kosminskie Lakes 1 3 4 2 48 Lake systems in the Khadyr-Yakha river 1 3 1 5 2 20 River Bolshaya Gornostalya 2 2 3 basin 21 Tobyshskaya Hill 2 2 3 Group of lakes in the Chaselka- 49 Kharampura interfluve 1 3 1 1 6 1 22 Varandeiskaya Lapta Peninsula 1 1 3 50 Chertovskaya lake system 1 3 1 5 2 23 South coast of Cheshskaya Bay 1 2 3 1 6 1 51 Southwestern Tazovsky Peninsula 3 3 2 24 Pechora river delta 2 2 3 52 Lower reaches of the Taz and Pur rivers 1 3 3 7 1 25 Sengeisky Island 1 3 4 2 53 Messoyakha river basin 3 3 2 26 Kolokova Bay 3 3 6 1

198 199 Significance Significance

Areas Areas etlands etlands W W I ntact forests I ntact forests I mportant bird areas I mportant bird areas P riority (1 is top priority) P riority (1 is top priority) alving areas of wild reindeer C alving areas of wild reindeer C alving areas coastal rookeries of sea mammals coastal rookeries of sea mammals coastal rookeries ongregating areas for waterfowl for areas C ongregating waterfowl for areas C ongregating istribution areas of marsh ecosystems D istribution areas of marsh ecosystems D istribution areas olonial nesting grounds of seabirds and C olonial nesting grounds of seabirds and C olonial nesting grounds Spawning areas for commercial fish species commercial for Spawning areas fish species commercial for Spawning areas Total (higher numbers are most significant) numbers are (higher Total most significant) numbers are (higher Total are and relict communities and ecosystems and relict R are communities and ecosystems and relict R are

Islands in the Kara Sea north of Gydansky 81 Muna-Besyuke 1 1 3 54 Peninsula 3 3 2 82 Srednyaya river mouth (Anabar) 2 2 3 55 Yambuto Lakes and Gyda River 3 2 5 2 83 Upper Anabar 2 2 3 56 Tazovskaya Bay 1 1 3 84 Oleneksky Bay 2 2 3 57 Gydanskaya Bay 1 1 3 85 Pronchishchev Range 3 3 2 58 Samoilovich Island 2 2 3 86 Kystyk Plateau 3 3 2 59 Southern Bolshevik Island 3 3 2 87 Ulakhan-Tas Ridge 3 3 2 60 Uboinaya river basin 3 3 2 88 Abyiskaya Lowland 2 1 3 2 61 Agapa river basin 3 3 2 Kolymsko-Azeiskaya Lowland (lake Upper reaches of the rivers Verkh, 89 system) 2 2 4 2 62 Taimyra and Fadyukuda 3 3 2 Mount At-Khaiata (vicinity of North and west shores of Levinsson- 90 Chokurdakha) 1 1 1 3 63 Loessing Lake 3 3 2 91 Upper reaches of Yana River 2 2 3 64 Kalamisao Peninsula, Lake Taimyr 3 3 2 92 Middle reaches of Indigirka River 3 3 2 65 Faddey Bay 3 3 2 93 Upper Indigirka River 2 2 3 66 Kamen-Kherbei Hill 3 3 2 Pogynden river basin (Anyuiskoye 67 Right bank of the river Dudypta 3 2 2 5 2 94 Upland) 3 3 2 68 Volochanka river basin 3 2 3 2 95 Omolon-Anyuiskoe interfluve 1 3 1 5 2 Lake Kurluska and the middle reaches of 96 Kytyk Peninsula 3 2 2 1 6 1 69 Boganida River 3 1 3 2 97 Elgygytgyn lake area 3 3 2 70 Lower reaches of Leningradskaya River 1 1 2 2 6 1 98 Northern Lake Aion 1 1 3 Gusikha river basin with the lower 71 reaches of Bolshaya Balakhnya River 2 1 1 3 2 99 Aachim Peninsula 1 1 3 Right bank of Khatanga at the Bludnaya 100 Billings Cape 2 1 2 3 72 river mouth 3 3 2 101 Vankaremskaya Lowland 3 3 2 2 7 1 Mire on Ptasina River near the Tarei river 73 mouth 1 1 3 102 Cape Onman 1 1 3 74 Lower reaches of Maimacha River 3 3 2 103 Cape Serdtse-Kamen 3 3 2 75 Southern Khaara-Tas Range 3 3 2 104 Ratmanov Island 1 3 3 2 76 Gulinsky Massif 2 2 3 105 Upper reaches of Tymytvaam River 1 1 3 106 Rudder Bay 2 2 3 77 Lower reaches of the Koitukan River and 3 3 2 middle reaches of the Kotui River 107 Enmelensky coast (Cape Bering) 1 1 3 78 Muruktinskaya Depression 2 1 1 3 2 108 Myechkin Spit 1 2 2 3 79 Gorbita river basin 3 2 1 4 2 109 Lower Anadyr Lowland, lower reaches of 3 2 5 2 80 Khara-Tumus Peninsula 1 2 1 3 2 the rivers Velikaya and Tumanskaya 110 Middle reaches of Anadyr River 3 3 2

200 201 Significance Significance

111 Keingypilgin Lagoons 2 2 3 141 Tri Brata Island 1 1 3 112 Upper reaches of Palevaam River 2 2 3 142 Umara Island 2 2 3 113 Upper reaches of Amguem River 3 2 5 2 143 Shelikan Island 2 2 3 114 River Bol.Osinovaya 2 2 3 144 Loshadinaya Bay 1 1 3 115 River Kaichikveem 2 2 3 145 Karaga Bay 2 1 3 2 116 Lake Bezymyannoye 2 2 3 146 Ossorskoye Mire 1 1 3 117 Upper reaches of Kanchalan 1 2 3 2 147 Lake Nerpichye 2 1 3 2 118 Ust-Belsky Massif 3 3 2 Hot mineral springs in the Kirevna river 148 valley 3 3 2 119 Tamvatnei Massif 2 2 3 149 Dachnye hot mineral springs 3 3 2 120 Meinypylginskaya lake system 2 2 2 6 1 150 Bolshye Bannya hot mineral springs 2 2 3 121 Lake Ekergytgyn 2 2 3 151 Anaginskie hot mineral springs 2 2 3 122 Lake Mainitz 3 3 2 152 Yelovka river basin 2 2 3 123 Cape Navarin 1 3 3 2 153 Lower reaches of Kamchatka River 2 1 3 2 124 Bering rookeries 1 3 3 2 154 Cape Oria 1 2 2 3 Malakchanskaya tundra, Malakchansky 125 and Perevolochny bays 2 3 1 6 1 155 Gek Bay 1 1 1 3 126 Babushkin Bay 1 2 2 3 156 Northern Korf Bay 2 1 1 3 2 127 Nakhatadzhanskaya Tundra 2 2 4 2 157 Signalny Island 1 2 2 3 128 Olskaya Lagoon 3 1 4 2 158 Cape Krasny 1 2 2 3 129 Khal-Degi Lakes 1 1 3 159 Kavach Lagoon 1 1 3 130 Kekurny Bay 1 1 3 160 Cape Olyutorsky-Cape Irina 1 2 2 3 131 Chubukulakhskie steppes 2 2 3 161 Vasily Island 1 2 2 3 Vicinity of town of Moi-Urusta and Mal. 162 Rovny Island 1 2 2 3 132 Annychag Ridge 2 2 3 163 Rekkiniksky Bay 1 1 2 3 Left bank of Kolyma, upstream of 133 Zamkovy Nature Park 2 2 3 164 Parapolsky Valley 2 2 3 134 Kidley Ridge 2 2 3 165 Manilskie Lakes 2 1 3 2 135 Karkadon-Stolbovoy interfluves 1 1 3 166 Makaryevsky Estuary 1 1 2 3 136 Middle reaches of Omolon River 1 1 3 167 Tymlat Lagoon 1 1 2 3 137 Berendzhunskie thermal mineral springs 2 2 3 168 Annuengvyn Lagoon 2 2 3 138 Boustakh river valley 2 2 3 169 Opuka Lagoon 2 2 3 139 Khalanchaga-Chernaya interfluve 2 2 3 170 Vakhil river mouth 2 2 3 140 River Inya 1 3 4 2 171 Lakes Bolshoe and Maloe 2 1 2 3

202 203 Significance

Areas etlands W I ntact forests I mportant bird areas P riority (1 is top priority) alving areas of wild reindeer C alving areas coastal rookeries of sea mammals coastal rookeries ongregating areas for waterfowl for areas C ongregating istribution areas of marsh ecosystems D istribution areas olonial nesting grounds of seabirds and C olonial nesting grounds Spawning areas for commercial fish species commercial for Spawning areas Total (higher numbers are most significant) numbers are (higher Total are and relict communities and ecosystems and relict R are

172 Kolpakova and Oblukovina river basins 1 3 4 2 173 Utkholok 3 3 3 2 174 River Moroshechnaya 3 3 3 2 175 Malamvayam Lagoon 2 2 2 3 176 Eastern Keivy 3 2 3 177 Jaurijoki river basin 3 3 2 178 Iokanga river basin 2 2 3

The significance scores and priority rankings for the 178 areas (Table 22) were then looked at in terms of their potential for protection of more than one category of high conservation value. The results are shown in Figure 106.

High priority (I) ussia that need protection, along with priority rankings • 14 areas identified in three to four or two categories of high conservation value and given the maximum score for significance for all of these categories rctic R Mid priority (II): • 77 areas identified in one category of high conservation value and given the maximum score for significance in that category • areas identified in two categories of high conservation value and given the maximum score for significance in one of those categories • areas identified in three categories of high conservation value but not given the maximum score for significance in any of those categories Least priority (III) • areas identified in no either one or two categories of high conservation value and not given the maximum score for significance for any category As in the case of key areas for protection of rare species (Section 2.2), the nprotected areas high of nature conservation value A of

distribution of gaps in the PA network connected with protecting areas of high . U nature conservation value is non-uniform (Figure 106). They are mainly concentrated in the tundra and forest-tundra belt from the White Sea-Kuloi Plateau igure 106 Number labels on the map correspond with numbers in 22. Table Priority rankings are explained in the text. F

204 205 to South Yamal, in the eastern Western Siberian forest-tundra zone, in Taimyr Analyses of the representativeness and on the Sea of Okhotsk coast in the Magadan region, and on the shores of 3. Prospects for and completeness of the Russian Olyutorsky and Karaginsky bays. The least concentration of unprotected areas Arctic PA network (presented of high nature conservation value is in a vast area in Middle and Eastern Siberia, improvement of in Section 2), were undertaken which consists of the southeastern Taimyr area, northern Evenkia, arctic Yakutia to identify significant gaps in and the inland Magadan region. In the case of Yakutia, this could largely be due the protected area the network’s effectiveness for to the well-developed protected area network, while in the other cases it is due conservation of species, populations to the low concentration of areas with high conservation values or to the absence network in the Russian and communities, for protection of information about them. of rare plants and animals, and for Arctic protection of rare and unique natural ecological complexes, including sites that are especially important for reproduction. Plans and proposals for PA network development in the various arctic regions are at different stages, from awaiting approval to active implementation. Plans and proposals also cover areas that are important for the conservation of outstanding geological, paleontological, hydrological and other abiotic sites, as well as sites of interest for tourism and recreation, including areas of natural beauty. Note also that a recent WWF initiative developed and presented proposals for enhancing the federal PA network of Russia (Protected areas of Russia, modern state and development prospects, 2009). This initiative included proposals for protected areas in the Arctic, some of which have been incorporated into the existing PA network of Russia or into regional protected area plans. This section presents a consolidated review of the current plans and proposals for development of regional and federal PA networks of the Russian Arctic, followed by the plan for arctic PA network development based on this report’s gap analysis, and recommendations for federal PA network development. The plan outlined below is aimed at securing a high degree of both representativeness and completeness of the PA network for the conservation of natural diversity in the Russian Arctic.

3.1. Existing plans and proposals for development of federal and regional PA networks in the Russian Arctic All areas proposed as new PAs, new groups of PAs and essential extensions of existing PAs of the Arctic may be grouped into three categories based on their status: 1. areas incorporated into approved plans for development of federal and regional PA networks and areas, and/or those for which the lands having been reserved for PAs; 2. areas included in regional plans, including components of land management plans that are at the evaluation and approval stages;

206 207 3. areas proposed as PAs by various institutions, scientific centres and public organizations, but not included in plans for development of regional PA Proposed networks, as well as areas for which PAs had been planned in the past but Title Proposed category management were not established. level S tatus

Overall, the Russian Arctic has 272 areas in these three status categories on map N umber (Table 23 and Figure 107), not including buffer zones, traditional land manage- 124 Marine meadows to the west of Lumbovka Bay Nature monument Regional 1 ment areas, insignificant extensions of PA sites, and proposals for changes in 125 Limy Mill Nature monument Regional 1 category or management level for existing PAs. The total area of the 272 areas 126 Hollow Swamp Nature monument Regional 1 127 Nadbrodniki of Schuchye lake valley Nature monument Regional 1 is nearly 44 million hectares, about half of the total area of existing PAs in the Barents Sea coastal sites between Lumbovka Bay and Cape Russian Arctic. 128 Orlovskiy Nature monument Regional 1 Archangel region Table 23. Strictly protected 201 Novaya Zemlya* reserve Regional 3 List of currently planned and proposed protected areas in the Russian Arctic 202 Victoria Island National Park Regional 3 (excluding buffer zones, traditional land management areas, insignificant extensions 203 Karskiye Vorota* Nature reserve Regional 3 of PA sites, and proposals for changes in category or management level for existing PAs) 204 Goose Land* Nature reserve Regional 3 205 Mityushykha Bay (Lagernoe)* Nature reserve Regional 3 See text for explanation of status column. Nenets AO Strictly protected 206 Bolshaya Zemlya* reserve Federal 2 Proposed 207 Severny Timan National Park Federal 2 Title Proposed category management 208 Pay-Khoiskiy (or Yugra)* National Park Federal 2

level S tatus 209 Kolguev* Nature reserve Federal 2

umber on map N umber 210 Yazhmo-Nesinskiy* Nature reserve Federal 2 Murmansk region 211 Kosminskiy Nature reserve Federal 2 101 Khibiny* National park Federal 1 212 Cape Yarnisalya Nature monument Federal 2 102 Kano-Umba Nature park Regional 1 213 Kanin Kamen* Nature reserve Regional 2 103 Rybachiy and Sredniy Peninsula Nature park Regional 1 214 Cheshskaya Bay Nature reserve Regional 2 104 Spruces of Alla-Akkayarvy Nature reserve Regional 1 215 Ortinskiy Nature reserve Regional 2 105 Kolvitskiy (extension) Nature reserve Regional 1 216 Sengeiskiy Nature reserve Regional 2 106 Kaita Nature reserve Regional 1 217 Chernaya River Nature reserve Regional 2 107 Poriy Les* Nature reserve Regional 1 218 Pakhancheskiy Nature reserve Regional 2 108 Ionn-Newgoaiv Nature reserve Regional 1 219 Veltskiy Nature reserve Regional 2 109 Pazovskiy Nature reserve Regional 1 220 Shapkinskiy Nature reserve Regional 2 110 Varzuga Nature reserve Regional 1 221 Shomokhovskie Sopky Nature reserve Regional 2 111 Marine communities of Barents sea bays Nature reserve Regional 1 222 Gull Nature reserve Regional 2 112 Swamps by the lake Alla-Akkayarvy Nature monument Regional 1 223 Svyatoy Nos Nature reserve Regional 2 113 Forests in upper reaches of Malaya Pechenga River Nature monument Regional 1 224 Nesskiy Nature monument Regional 2 114 Khyam-ruchey Nature monument Regional 1 225 Nerutinskiy Nature monument Regional 2 115 Spring bog of Turyev Peninsula Nature monument Regional 1 226 Kara ring structure Nature monument Regional 2 116 Lichens of intact forests in the coastal area of the White Sea Nature monument Regional 1 227 Silurian strip mine by Velikaya River Nature monument Regional 2 117 Liverworts by Sukhoy Brook Nature monument Regional 1 228 Volonga River Nature monument Regional 2 118 Rare plants of the northwestern slope of Lovna Mount Nature monument Regional 1 229 Indigskiy Nature monument Regional 2 119 Teriberka rocks Nature monument Regional 1 230 Gornostaliy Nature monument Regional 2 120 Grape ferns near Kolvitsy village Nature monument Regional 1 231 Mikulinskiy Nature monument Regional 2 121 Kandalaksha coast Nature monument Regional 1 232 Vateg-shor Nature monument Regional 2 122 Pyatnozerye Nature monument Regional 1 233 Outcrop Vastyanskiy Kon’ Nature monument Regional 2 123 Rare liverworts and lichens in upper reaches of Tsaga River Nature monument Regional 1 234 Naryan-Mar Nature monument Regional 2 235 Glacial erratic mass Sercheiyu Nature monument Regional 2

208 209 Proposed Proposed Title Proposed category management Title Proposed category management

level S tatus level S tatus umber on map N umber on map N umber

236 Glacial erratic mass Oshshor Nature monument Regional 2 429 Upper reaches of Nyaravapaetayakha River Nature monument Regional 3 237 Location of Triassic vertebrates by Kheiyakha River Nature monument Regional 2 430 Nadym-Numgy Delta Nature monument Regional 3 238 Waterfall Dalniy Nature monument Regional 2 431 Upper reaches of Kheiyakha (Longyegan) River Nature monument Regional 3 239 Amderminskiy fluorite Nature monument Regional 2 432 Pine terraces of the Left Khetta Nature monument Regional 3 240 Peschanaya River Nature monument Regional 2 433 Upper reaches of Baidaratayakha Nature monument Regional 3 Komi Republic 434 Sedelnikovo Nature monument Regional 3 301 Upper reaches of Kara River Nature reserve Regional 3 Khanty-Mansi AO 302 Canyon of the Niya-Yu River Nature reserve Regional 3 435 Manskiy** National Park Federal 3 303 Midstream of Bolshaya Rogovaya River* Nature reserve Regional 3 Krasnoyarsk region 304 B. Lakhorta Lake Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature reserve/strictly 501 Levinson-Lessinga Lake protected reserve Federal 2 305 Seida Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature reserve/strictly 306 Sereda river mouth Nature reserve Regional 3 502 Meduza Bay and Rogozinka River mouth protected reserve Federal 2 Yamal-Nenets AO 503 Bolshaya Kheta** Nature reserve Federal 3 401 Synsko-Voykarskiy Nature park Regional 2 504 Muruktinskaya Bolsom** Nature reserve Federal 3 Flood land of Ob’ River in the interfluve of Malaya and 505 Bolshoy Kotuy* Nature park Regional 2 402 Bolshaya Ob’ Nature park Regional 3 506 Geographic centre of Russia Nature park Regional 1 403 Pelyazhya Girt and Pelyazhiy Lakes Nature park Regional 3 507 Popigay Ethnic-Nature park Regional 2 404 Midstream of Nurmayakha River Nature park Regional 3 508 Gorbita* Nature reserve Regional 1 405 Chaselsko-Kharampurovskie lake network Nature park Regional 3 509 Agapa Nature reserve Regional 1 406 Lower reaches of Kharbey and Longotyegan rivers Nature park Regional 3 510 Taimyr Lake Nature reserve Regional 2 407 Sabyakha River Nature park Regional 3 511 Verknyaya Taimyra Nature reserve Regional 2 Basin of Longotyegan River by the southern foot of Kharcheruz 408 Ridge Nature park Regional 3 512 Dudypto-Boganidskiy* Nature reserve Regional 2 409 Basin of Vardroperskiy Sor Nature park Regional 3 513 Volochanskiy Nature reserve Regional 2 410 Basin of Yadayakhodyyakha Nature park Regional 3 514 Gorbiachinskiy Nature reserve Regional 2 411 Neito-Yambuto lakes Ethnic-Nature park Regional 3 515 Moiyero river valley Nature reserve Regional 2 412 Messoyakha river mouth Ethnic-Nature park Regional 3 516 Lower reaches of Tanama River Nature reserve Regional 2 413 South-Shuryshkarskoe Dvuobye Ethnic-Nature park Regional 3 517 Verknevilyuy* Nature reserve Regional 2 414 Antipayuta river mouth Ethnic-Nature park Regional 3 518 Essey Lake Nature reserve Regional 2 415 Lower reaches of Pur River* Ethnic-Nature park Regional 3 519 Kiryaka-Tas Nature reserve Regional 2 416 Chertovskaya lake network Ethnic-Nature park Regional 2 520 Cape Tsvetkova Nature reserve Regional 2 417 Midstream Schuchya river basin Ethnic-Nature park Regional 3 521 Leningradskaya river mouth Nature monument Regional 3 Left bank area of Pur River in the basin of Tydyotta and 522 Glaciers of Byrrang Nature monument Regional 2 418 Yagenetta rivers Nature reserve Regional 3 523 Upper reaches of Boyarka and Romanikha rivers Nature monument Regional 3 419 Tydeotta Nature reserve Regional 2 524 Tulay-Kiryaka Nature monument Regional 2 420 Nadym Delta Nature reserve Regional 3 525 Slope of Putorana Plateau at lakes Bokovoe and Bogatyr Nature monument Regional 3 421 Chaselka River Nature reserve Regional 3 526 Kaiyerkan outcrop Nature monument Regional 2 422 Khudosey River at inflow of Limpynitylky (Orlovaya) River Nature reserve Regional 3 527 Krasnye kamni outcrop Nature monument Regional 2 423 Numto-Nadym lake network Nature reserve Regional 3 528 Tareiskoe wetland Nature monument Regional 2 424 Tanama river basin Nature reserve Regional 3 529 Bearing strip mines of lower Silurian and lower Devon at Tarey Nature monument Regional 2 425 Right bank area of Taz River Nature reserve Regional 3 River 426 Left bank area of Taz River Nature reserve Regional 3 530 Balakhiya Mount Nature monument Regional 2 Sob river valley between 130th th 531 Marshes at Leskino village Nature monument Regional 3 427 and 150 km. of the Chum- Nature reserve Regional 3 Labytnangy railway 532 Outskirts of Laida village Nature monument Regional 3 428 Confluence area of Bolshaya and Malaya Ob’ rivers Nature monument Regional 3 533 Yenisey valley in outskirts of Dudinka Nature monument Regional 3

210 211 Proposed Proposed Title Proposed category management Title Proposed category management

level S tatus level S tatus umber on map N umber on map N umber

534 Langdokoiskiy kamen Nature monument Regional 3 Strictly protected 801 Chukotka upland reserve Federal 3 535 Selyankin Cape outcrop Nature monument Regional 3 Sakha Republic (Yakutia) Strictly protected 802 Central-Koryak* reserve Federal 3 601 Nuorda** Nature monument Federal 3 803 Elgygytgyn (central Chukotka)* National park Federal 1 602 Darpir Lake** Nature monument Federal 3 Beringovskiy (including area of the former Tumanovskiy Nature reserve/strictly 603 Peschaniy Island* Nature monument Federal 3 804 Nature Reserve)* protected reserve Federal 3 604 Inyaly-Terde* Refuge Regional 3 805 Navarinskiy* Nature reserve/strictly Federal 3 605 Appyt and Lysaya mounts Nature monument Regional 3 protected reserve 606 At-Khaiyata mount (larch forest) Nature monument Regional 1 Nature reserve/National 806 Omolonskiy park Federal 2 607 Geographic centre of Yakutia Nature monument Regional 1 807 South Chukchi (Vaamochka)* Nature reserve Federal 2 608 Kisilyakh Nature monument Regional 1 Nature reserve/nature 609 Mat’-gora Nature monument Regional 1 808 Meechkin Spit monument Federal 2 610 Agraphena Island Nature monument Regional 1 809 Lagoon* Nature reserve Federal 3 611 Krestovka Nature monument Regional 1 810 Rauchua-Aionskiy* Nature reserve Federal 3 612 Merchimden Nature monument Regional 1 811 Cape Navarin* Nature monument Federal 2 613 Tiis-Khaia Nature monument Regional 1 812 Cape Serdtse Kamen Nature monument Federal 3 614 Tyngaralaakh Nature monument Regional 1 813 Ratmanov’s Island Nature monument Federal 3 615 Ki and Tas Nature monument Regional 1 814 Ilirneiskiy Nature park Regional 2 616 Seveki Nature monument Regional 1 815 Aluchinskiy Nature park Regional 2 617 Senkyu Nature monument Regional 1 816 Severopekulneyskiy Nature park Regional 3 618 Ebian Maas Nature monument Regional 1 817 Severoanyuiskiy Nature reserve Regional 3 Magadan region 818 Shalaurovsko-Yakanskiy (Severochukotsliy) Nature reserve Regional 3 Strictly protected 819 Nizhneanyuiskiy Nature reserve Regional 3 701 Tumanskiy** reserve Federal 3 820 Oloiskiy Nature reserve Regional 3 702 Motykleiskiy Nature park Regional 3 821 Verkhneanadyrskiy Nature reserve Regional 3 703 Olskoe Plateau Nature park Regional 3 822 Onmen Nature reserve Regional 3 704 Jack London Lake* Nature park Regional 3 823 Srednekhaturskiy Nature reserve Regional 3 705 Chorgo-Okhandya Nature park Regional 3 824 Apapelginskiy Nature monument Regional 3 706 Buyunda Nature park Regional 3 825 Bezymyannoe Lake Nature monument Regional 3 707 Tuonakh Nature park Regional 3 826 Ekityki Lake* Nature monument Regional 3 708 Taskanskiy Nature reserve Regional 3 827 Amguema* Nature monument Regional 3 709 Verkhnesudarskiy Nature reserve Regional 3 828 Lavrentyevskiy Nature monument Regional 3 710 Sources of Oksa River Nature reserve Regional 3 829 Ystekhed Lake Nature monument Regional 3 711 Malkachan Landscape reserve Regional 3 830 Cape Kittivarken Nature monument Regional 3 712 Zamkoviy Landscape reserve Regional 3 831 Ust’-Belskiy* Nature monument Regional 3 713 Balygychan Landscape reserve Regional 3 832 Mainits Lake Nature monument Regional 2 714 Sugoi Landscape reserve Regional 3 833 Elergytgyn Lake Nature monument Regional 3 715 Korkodon Landscape reserve Regional 3 834 Cape Onmyn Nature monument Regional 3 716 Verkhnesugoiskiy Landscape reserve Regional 3 835 Tynynvaamskiy Nature monument Regional 3 717 Verkhneomolonskiy Landscape reserve Regional 3 836 Pilkhykai Nature monument Regional 3 718 Berendzhinskiy thermal springs Nature monument Regional 3 837 Idlidlya Island Nature monument Regional 3 Khabarovsk region 838 Kargyn Island Nature monument Regional 3 719 Suntar-Khayata* Nature park Regional 2 839 Russkaya Koshka Nature monument Regional 2 Chukotka AO 840 Cape Bolshoi Baranov Nature monument Regional 3

212 213 Proposed Proposed Title Proposed category management Title Proposed category management

level S tatus level S tatus umber on map N umber on map N umber

Nature monument/ Nature reserve/nature 841 Krasnoe Lake nature reserve Regional 3 934 Geka Bay monument Regional 2 842 Northern Koryak Nature monument Regional 2 Nature reserve/nature 935 Korf Gulf monument Regional 2 843 Seutakan Lake Nature monument Regional 2 Nature reserve/nature 844 Rudder Bay Nature monument Regional 2 936 Karaga Bay monument Regional 2 Kamchatka region Nature reserve/nature 901 Karaginskiy and Verkhoturov’s islands* National park Federal 1 937 Manilskie lakes monument Regional 2 Nature reserve/nature 938 Seinav mount massif Nature monument Regional 2 902 Vasiliy Island* monument Federal 2 939 Sivuchiy and Kirun islands Nature monument Regional 2 Nature reserve/nature 903 Cape Krasniy* monument Federal 2 940 Kiselevskie waterfalls Nature monument Regional 2 941 Vasilyevskoe Lake Nature monument Regional 2 904 Cape Olyutorskiy – Cape Irina* Nature reserve/nature Federal 2 monument 942 Apachinskie thermal springs Nature monument Regional 2 Nature reserve/nature 943 Wetland at Apon’ River Nature monument Regional 2 905 Cape Orna* monument Federal 2 944 Wetland at Mutnushki site Nature monument Regional 2 906 Gremuchie thermal springs Nature monument Federal 2 945 Zheltovskie thermal springs Nature monument Regional 2 907 Nerpichye Lake* Nature reserve Regional 2 Sakhalin region 908 Opala River Nature reserve Regional 2 Strictly protected 909 Oblukovinskiy* Nature reserve Regional 2 946 Srednekurilskiy** reserve Federal 3 910 Khapitsa River Nature reserve Regional 2 947 Severokurilskiy** Nature reserve Federal 3 911 Zhupanova River Nature reserve Regional 2 * territories that have been proposed by WWF of Russia as federal PAs and 912 Utkholok* Nature reserve Regional 1 incorporated into the federal plan or regional plans or proposals 913 Moroshechnaya River* Nature reserve Regional 2 914 Belaya River* Nature reserve Regional 1 ** territories that have been proposed by WWF of Russia as federal PAs and not 915 Lagoon Kazarok-Malamvayam* Nature reserve Regional 2 incorporated into existing PA plans or management plans 916 Verkhne-Penzhinskiy Nature reserve Regional 1 917 Palanskoe Lake Nature reserve Regional 2 918 Shamanka River Nature reserve Regional 2 919 Penzhinskiy coastal area* Nature reserve Regional 2 920 Ukelayat-Opuka* Nature reserve Regional 2 921 Olyutorskiy coastal area Nature reserve Regional 2 Of all 272 planned protected areas, 39 (nearly 14 per cent) are at the federal 922 Elovka River Nature reserve Regional 2 management level (including Khibiny and Elgygytgyn national parks (central 923 Khairyuzov Bay Nature reserve Regional 2 Chukchi) that are listed in the development plan for the federal PA network). 924 Semlyachikskiy Estuary Nature reserve Regional 2 925 Vakhil river mouth Nature reserve Regional 2 The remaining are under regional management jurisdiction. Most plans and pro- 926 Bolshoe and Maloe lakes Nature reserve Regional 2 posals are for establishing nature reserves and other reserves (123, or 44.4 per 927 Mokovetskoe Lake Nature reserve Regional 2 cent) and nature monuments (108, or 39.3 per cent). In addition, there are 32 928 Avachinskaya Bay* Nature reserve Regional 2 proposals and plans for nature- and ethnic-nature parks, 6 for national parks (in 929 Lower reach of Kamchatka River Nature reserve Regional 2 northern Timan, Yugra Peninsula, northern Ural in Khanty-Mansi AO, and in Nature reserve/nature 930 Rovniy Island* monument Regional 2 Karaginskiy and Verkhoturov’s islands in Kamchatka) and 6 plans and proposals for strictly protected reserves (in Novaya Zemlya, Bolshezemelskaya tundra 931 Kavacha Lagoon Nature reserve/nature Regional 2 monument area, Shelikhov’s Gulf coastal area, Magadan region, Chukotka and Koryak up- Nature reserve/nature 932 Rekkinskaya Bay monument Regional 2 lands, and in the northern part of the middle Kuriles). Nature reserve/nature 933 Signalniy Island monument Regional 2

214 215 Table 24. Numbers of planned and proposed PAs in regions of the Russian Arctic Number of planned and proposed PAs Region Number of Status category (see text) existing PAs Total 1 2 3 Murmansk region 59 28 28 0 0 Archangel region 4 5 0 0 5 Nenets AO 9 35 0 35 0 Republic Komi 54 6 0 0 6 Yamal-Nenets AO 13 34 0 3 31 Khanty-Mansi AO 5 1 0 0 1 Krasnoyarsk region 7 35 3 22 10 Republic Sakha (Yakutia) 85 18 13 0 5 Khabarovsk region 1 1 0 1 0 Figure 107. Proportions in three status categories of numbers (left) and total areas (right) of 272 planned and proposed PAs of the Russian Arctic Magadan region 37 18 0 0 18 See text for definition of status categories. Chukotka AO 28 44 1 11 32 Kamchatka AO 148 45 4 41 0 Of the 272 PAs that were at the planned or proposed stage at the begin- Sakhalin region 0 2 0 0 2 ning of 2012, only 49 (one-fifth) (Figure 107, left chart) are in the first status Total 450 272 50 115 113 category (in approved land management plans or approved through resolutions of regional administrations, or lands formally reserved for protection). These are: 28 PAs in the Murmansk region that are included in approved management plans for development of the regional PA network up to 2038; 2 nature reserves in Taimyr; 1 nature park in the Evenk area; 13 nature monuments with lands reserved in Yakutia; 1 national park in Chukotka that is included in the federal PA plan; and 4 areas that were formerly nature reserves in the Kamchatka region, 3 of which have plans for their restoration and 1 that is a planned national park. As the remaining planned and proposed PAs are equally distributed between the other two categories, about 60 per cent of all areas in Table 23 are included in various official protected area and land management plans at various stages of evaluation and approval. The total area of these planned PAs is nearly 29 million hectares. The proportions in the three status categories are slightly different when examined by area of proposed PAs (Figure 107, right chart), rather than by numbers of PAs, with relatively more area proposed for protection being in the first and second categories. The differences, however, are not significant, Number PAs of especially considering that the areas of proposed PAs are rough approximations. MR AR NN KM YN KM KR YK KB MG CK KC SH Chukotka and Kamchatka are the leaders among arctic regions in terms Existing Planned and proposed of absolute numbers of planned and proposed PAs, followed by Nenets AO, Yamal-Nenets AO and the Krasnoyarsk region, all three of which are near the Figure 108. Numbers of existing and planned and proposed PAs in the Russian Arctic regions same level Table 24. Slightly fewer PAs are planned in the Murmansk region, Regions: MR – Murmansk region, AR – Archangel region, NN – Nenets AO, KM – Komi Republic, YN – Yamal- Nenets AO, KM – Khanty-Mansi AO, KR – Krasnoyarsk region, YK – Sakha Republic (Yakutia), KB – Khabarovsk and, continuing in order of decreasing number, the Magadan region and Ya- region, MG – Magadan region, CK – Chukotka AO, KC – Kamchatka region, SH – Sakhalin region kutia. The Archangel region and Komi Republic have the fewest planned PAs among regions that have the majority of their lands within the Arctic. There are still fewer proposed and planned PAs in the regions with little arctic territory: Khanty-Mansi AO, and Khabarovsk and Sakhalin regions. 216 217 Examination of existing and planned PAs by region reveals a relationship 3.2. Proposed PA network in the Russian Arctic among numbers of these two categories (Figure 108). In regions with a suf- based on evaluation of the existing network’s ficiently large number of existing PAs (Murmansk, Komi, Yakutia and Kam- chatka), the number of planned and proposed PAs is fewer than one-third to half completeness and representativeness of the number of those already in place, while in regions with few existing PAs Of the 272 planned and proposed PAs listed in Table 23 and discussed in the (Nenets, Yamal-Nenets and Krasnoyarsk), the number of planned and proposed previous section, 159 correspond to gaps identified in the analyses of complete- PAs is several times greater than the number of those currently in place. ness and representativeness of the existing PA network of the Russian Arctic Examination of the status of planned and proposed PAs by region shows a (Section 2). These planned or proposed PAs will address (partly or completely) great deal of variation in how advanced the regions are in terms of their devel- 156 gaps identified in the analysis in Section 2.4. The remaining 113 planned or opment, evaluation and approval processes for prospective PAs (Figure 109). proposed PAs were not included in the gap analysis in Section 2.4 as their focus Murmansk region was the only region with a fully approved plan for its PA is protection of abiotic features and landscapes of aesthetic and recreational network development when the survey of PA network plans was conducted for value – though some also have a secondary goal related to conservation of bio- this review (early 2012). Nenets AO, Krasnoyarsk region and Kamchatka all logical diversity and biological resources. had plans developed and at the evaluation stage. The Krasnoyarsk region also Among 395 PAs and extensions to PAs in the plan for development of the had three PAs established through a special decision, and Kamchatka had lands Russian Arctic PA network (Figure 110 and Table 25), 47 (slightly less than reserved for establishing four PAs. Establishment of a certain number of PAs is 12 per cent) are proposed as federal PAs: 9 strictly protected reserves and group- stipulated in the land management plans of Yamal-Nenets and Chukotka AOs, ings of existing strictly protected reserves, 7 proposed national parks and group- and, at the beginning of 2012, there were proposals for more than the stipulated ings of existing national parks, 22 federal nature reserves (10 of which could be numbers of PAs in the two regions. Development plans for PA networks were designated as strictly protected reserves) and 7 nature monuments. The remain- not available or did not provide for PA establishment in the arctic areas of Arch- ing 348 proposed PAs are planned at the regional management level: 34 nature angel region, Komi Republic, Khanty-Mansi AO, Magadan region and Sakhalin parks, 161 nature reserves (16 of which could be designated as nature monu- region, though some proposals had been made for establishing arctic PAs in ments or networks of nature monuments), 148 nature monuments and 5 net- these regions. works of nature monuments or nature reserves that consolidate nature monuments. The total area of proposed protected areas amounts to nearly 59 million hectares, slightly over 60 per cent of the total area of existing PAs.

Number PAs of MR AR NN KM YN KM KR YK KB MG CK KC SH

Category 1 Category 2 Category 3

Figure 109. Numbers of planned and proposed PAs with in three status categories, shown for each region of the Russian Arctic See text for explanation of status categories. Regions: MR – Murmansk region, AR – Archangel region, NN – Nenets AO, KM – Komi Republic, YN – Yamal- Nenets AO, KM – Khanty-Mansi AO, KR – Krasnoyarsk region, YK – Sakha Republic (Yakutia), KB – Khabarovsk region, MG – Magadan region, CK – Chukotka AO, KC – Kamchatka region, SH – Sakhalin region

218 219 Figure 110. Proposed Russian Arctic protected area system Colour codes 1-5: proposed PAs coded according to priority rankings, with priority 1 (red) being top priority. See text for more details. Colour code 6 (blue): existing PAs. The numbers in Table 25 correspond to the number labels.

220 221 Table 25. List of proposed protected areas in the Russian Arctic Proposed Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments

NamesB PAs included in approved development plans, or those being evaluated, are map egory S tatus the list ment level highest) Basis for umber on N umber inclusion in named in accordance with those plans. For others, geographic names of places proposed P riority (1 is for PAs are used. Forests in area of sources of Malaya Nature monu- Basis for inclusion in the list: FP – plan for development of federal PA network; 18 Pechenga River RS 5 ment Regional 1 RS – regional plans for development of PA networks; RP – regional proposals for Rare plants on the northwestern Nature monu- 19 slope of Mount Lovna RS+GAP 5 ment Regional 1 PA establishment or development of regional networks; GAP – results of analysis for Nature monu- completeness and representativeness of the existing PA network 20 Teriberka rocks RS+GAP 4 ment Regional 1 Nature monu- Priority: from 1 to 5 points in decreasing order for importance for biodiversity 21 Grape ferns at Kolvitsy village RS 5 ment Regional 1 conservation and for enhancing representativeness of the existing PA network Nature monu- 22 Kandalaksha coast RS+GAP 5 ment Regional 1 Status: 1 – included in approved plans or lands have been reserved for PA; 2 – Nature monu- included in development plans at the evaluation or approval stage; 3 – proposals are not 23 Pyatiozerye RS 5 ment Regional 1 Rare liverworts and lichens in upper Nature monu- included in official development plans or, if in plans and programmes that have expired, 24 reaches of Tsaga River RS+GAP 5 ment Regional 1 were have not been realized Maritime meadows to the west of Nature monu- 25 Lumbovka Bay RS+GAP 4 ment Regional 1 Nature monu- 26 Limestone mill RS 5 ment Regional 1 Proposed cat- Proposed Name of PA or area manage- Comments 27 Hummock swamp RS+GAP 5 Nature monu- Regional 1 map egory

S tatus ment the list ment level highest) Basis for umber on N umber inclusion in

P riority (1 is Nadbrodniki of Schuchye lake Nature monu- 28 valley RS 5 ment Regional 1 Murmansk region Nature monu- 29 Kieshyaur Lake GAP 4 ment Regional 3 1 Khibiny FP+GAP 2 National park Federal 1 Nature monu- 2 Kano-Umba RS+GAP 5 Nature park Regional 1 30 Podpakhta Bay GAP 5 ment Regional 3 3 Rybachiy and Sredniy Peninsula RS+GAP 3 Nature park Regional 1 31 Kil’din Island GAP 5 Nature monu- Regional 3 4 Alla-Akkajarvi spruces RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 1 ment 5 Kolvitskiy (extension) RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 1 Archangel region 6 Kaita RS+GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 1 Strictly pro- 32 Novozemelskiy (Novaya Zemlya) RP+GAP 1 tected reserve Federal 3 7 Poriy Les RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 1 Cluster for 8 Ionn-Newgoaiv RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 1 33 Victoria Island RP+GAP 4 National park Federal 3 the national 9 Pazovskiy RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 1 park “Russian Arctic” 10 Varzuga RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 1 34 Whitesea-Kuloy Plateau GAP 4 Nature reserve Federal 3 Marine communities in Barents 11 Sea bays RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 1 35 Karskiye Vorota RP+GAP 1 Nature reserve Regional 3 12 Eastern Keivy GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 36 Goose Land RP+GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 3 Extension for 37 Mityushikha Bay (Lagernoe) RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 13 Kola and Tuloma basins GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 “Tuloma” na- Nenets AO ture reserve Bolshezemelskiy (Bolshaya Strictly pro- Extension for 38 Zemlya) RS+GAP 2 tected reserve Federal 2 14 Iokanga basin GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 Murmansk tundra reserve 39 Northern Timan RS+GAP 4 National park Federal 2 Nature monu- 40 Pai-Khoy (or Yugra) RS+GAP 1 National park Federal 2 15 Eastern Murman GAP 4 ment network/ Regional 3 41 Kolguevskiy RS+GAP 2 Nature reserve Federal 2 Nature reserve 42 Yazhmo-Nesinskiy RS+GAP 1 Nature reserve Federal 2 Nature monu- 16 Terskiy coast GAP 3 ment network/ Regional 3 43 Losminskiy RS+GAP 2 Nature reserve Federal 2 Nature reserve Nature monu- 44 Cape Yarnisalya RS 5 ment Federal 2 17 Wetlands at Alla-Akkajarvi Lake RS 5 Nature monu- Regional 1 ment 45 Kanin kamen’ RS+GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 2

222 223 Proposed Proposed Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments

map egory map egory S tatus S tatus the list ment level the list ment level highest) highest) Basis for Basis for umber on N umber on N umber inclusion in inclusion in P riority (1 is P riority (1 is

46 Cheshskaya Bay RS+GAP 2 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature monu- 76 Dalniy Waterfall RS 5 ment Regional 2 47 Ortinskiy RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature monu- 48 Sengeiskiy RS+GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 2 77 Amderminskiy fluorite RS 5 ment Regional 2 49 River Chernaya RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 2 78 Peschanaya River RS 5 Nature monu- Regional 2 50 Pakhancheskiy RS+GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 2 ment 51 Veltskiy RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 2 Komi Republic 52 Shapkinskiy RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 2 79 Upper reaches of the Kara River RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 53 Shomokhovskie hills RS+GAP 2 Nature reserve Regional 2 80 Vrkhneusinskiy RP+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 54 Chayachiy RS+GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 Midstream of Bolshaya Rogovaya 81 River RP+GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 3 55 Svyatoy Nos RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 2 82 Yunyakha and B.Lakhorta RP+GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Shoyninskiy 56 Interfluve of Torna and Mostovikha GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 nature reserve 83 Seida RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 57 Kolokova Bay GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 84 Sereda river mouth RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 58 Bolvanskaya Bay GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Expansion for Sula-Khary- Expansion 85 Tobysh upland GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 aginskiy nature for Nizhne- reserve 59 Delta of Pechora GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Pechorskiy reserve Expansion for “Wetland 60 Varandey Lapta GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 86 Interfluve of Shapkina and Ersa GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 Ocean” nature Expansion for reserve 61 Northern Vaygach GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Vaygach nature 87 Chernyshev’s ridge GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 reserve 88 Lemva river basin GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 62 Nesskiy RS+GAP 1 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature monu- Nature monu- 89 Lower reaches of Izhma River GAP 5 ment Regional 3 63 Nerutinskiy RS+GAP 3 ment Regional 2 Nature monu- Kara astrobleme (remains of an Nature monu- 90 Vorkuta river basin GAP 4 ment network Regional 3 64 ancient meteorite-impact) RS+GAP 1 ment Regional 2 Yamal-Nenets AO Silurian strip mine at Velikaya Nature monu- 65 River RS 5 ment Regional 2 Basin of Schuchya and Khady- Strictly pro- 91 tyyakha rivers GAP 2 tected reserve Federal 3 Nature monu- 66 River Volonga RS 5 ment Regional 2 92 Synsko-Voykarskiy RS+GAP 4 Nature park Regional 2 Nature monu- 93 Floodplain of Ob River in interfluve RP 5 Nature park Regional 3 67 Indigskiy RS+GAP 4 ment Regional 2 of Malaya and Bolshaya Ob’ Nature monu- 94 Pelyazhya Duct and Pelyazhiy RP+GAP 4 Nature park Regional 3 68 Gornostaliy RS+GAP 4 ment Regional 2 Lakes Nature monu- Middle reaches of Nurmayakha Extension for 69 Mikulinskiy RS 5 ment Regional 2 95 RP 5 Nature park Regional 3 the nature park River “Yuribey” Nature monu- 70 Vateg-shor RS 5 ment Regional 2 Chaselsko-Kharampurovskiy lake 96 network RP+GAP 3 Nature park Regional 3 Nature monu- 71 Vastyanskiy Kon’ outcrop RS 5 ment Regional 2 Lower reaches of Kharbey and Lon- 97 gotyegan rivers RP 5 Nature park Regional 3 Nature monu- 72 Naryan-Mar RS 5 ment Regional 2 98 Sabyakha River RP 5 Nature park Regional 3 Nature monu- 99 Basin of Longotyegan River at the RP+GAP 4 природный Regional 3 73 Sercheiyu glacial erratic mass RS 5 ment Regional 2 southern foot of Kharcheruz’ ridge парк 100 Basin of Vardroperskiy Sor RP 5 Nature park Regional 3 74 Oshshor glacial erratic mass RS 5 Nature monu- Regional 2 ment 101 Yadayakhodyyakha river basin RP 5 Nature park Regional 3 Locations of Triassic vertebrates at Nature monu- 102 Neito-Yambuto lakes RP 5 Nature park Regional 3 75 Khaiyakha River RS 5 ment Regional 2 103 Messoyakha river mouth RP+GAP 1 Nature park Regional 3

224 225 Proposed Proposed Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments

map egory map egory S tatus S tatus the list ment level the list ment level highest) highest) Basis for Basis for umber on N umber on N umber inclusion in inclusion in P riority (1 is P riority (1 is

104 Yuzhno-Shuryshkarskoe Dvuobye RP 5 Nature park Regional 3 Nature monu- 133 Sedelnikovo RP 5 ment Regional 3 105 Antipayuta river mouth RP 5 Nature park Regional 3 Nature monu- 106 Lower reaches of Pur River RP+GAP 1 Nature park Regional 3 134 Kharasavey Cape GAP 5 ment Regional 3 107 Chertovskaya lake network RS+GAP 2 Nature park Regional 2 135 Lower reaches of Laptayakha River GAP 5 Nature monu- Regional 3 Extension for ment Gornokhadat- Nature monu- Upper reaches of rivers Sob, Khar- inskiy nature 136 Ochenyrd Ridge GAP 4 ment Regional 3 108 bey and Longotyergan GAP 4 Nature park Regional 3 reserve with category Nature monu- change 137 Lower reaches of Layyakha River GAP 4 ment Regional 3 Left bank area of the river Pur in Nature monu- 109 the basin of rivers Tydyotta and RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 138 Vilkitskiy and Neupokoev’s islands GAP 4 ment Regional 3 Yagenetta Nature monu- 110 Tydeotta RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 2 139 Upper reaches of Gydan Bay GAP 5 ment network Regional 3 111 Nadym Delta RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Khanty-Mansi AO 112 Chaselka River RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 140 Man’skiy GAP 4 National park Federal 3 Krasnoyarsk region 113 Khudosey River at inflow of RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Limpynitylky Orlovaya Extension 114 Naumto-Nadym lake network RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 for the Great 141 Uboinaya river basin GAP 4 Strictly pro- Federal 3 Arctic strictly 115 Tanama river basin RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 tected reserve protected re- 116 Right bank area of Taz River RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 serve 117 Left bank area of Taz River RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Extension for the Great 118 Yorkutayakha river valley GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Strictly pro- 142 Chelyuskin Peninsula GAP 5 tected reserve Federal 3 Arctic strictly Extension for protected re- 119 Khutyyakha river valley GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 the nature park serve “Yuribey” Nature reserve/ Extension for Lower reaches of rivers Verknyaya 143 Levinson-Lessinga Lake RS+GAP 4 strictly protected Federal 2 Taimyr strictly 120 and Nizhnyaya Khadyta GAP 2 Nature reserve Regional 3 protected re- reserve serve 121 Upper reaches of Pyakupur River GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 Extension Lake network in interfluve of Nature reserve/ for the Great 122 Pyakupur and Nadym GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 Meduza Bay and Rogozinka river 144 mouth RS+GAP 5 strictly protected Federal 2 Arctic strictly 123 Yurtovskoe lake network GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 reserve protected reserve Lake network in the basin of Bolsh- 124 aya Khadyr-Yakha River GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 3 Extension for Severozemel- 125 Messoyakha river basin GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 145 South of Bolshevik Island GAP 4 Nature reserve Federal 3 skiy nature Extension for reserve Yambuto lakes and upper reaches of Strictly pro- Gydan strictly 146 Bolshaya Kheta GAP 5 Nature reserve Federal 3 126 Gyda River GAP 3 tected reserve Federal 3 protected reserve 147 Muruktinskaya Basin GAP 4 Nature reserve Federal 3 Area of Bolshaya and Malaya Ob Nature monu- 148 Vize Island GAP 3 Nature monu- Federal 3 127 junction RP 5 ment Regional 3 ment Upper reaches of Nyaravapaetay- Nature monu- Nature reserve/ 128 akha River RP 5 ment Regional 3 149 Verkhnyaya Taimyra RS+GAP 2 strictly protected Federal 2 reserve Nature monu- 129 Nydy-Numgy Delta RP 5 ment Regional 3 Nature reserve/ 150 Dudypto-Boganidskiy RS+GAP 2 strictly protected Federal 2 Upper reaches of Kheyyakha Nature monu- reserve 130 (Longyegan) RP 5 ment Regional 3 Lower reaches of B. Balakhnya Nature reserve/ 131 Pine terraces of the left Khetta RP 5 Nature monu- Regional 3 151 GAP 2 strictly protected Federal 3 ment River reserve Upper reaches of Baydaratayakha Nature monu- 132 River RP 5 ment Regional 3

226 227 Proposed Proposed Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments

map egory map egory S tatus S tatus the list ment level the list ment level highest) highest) Basis for Basis for umber on N umber on N umber inclusion in inclusion in P riority (1 is P riority (1 is

Nature reserve/ Yenissey valley in outskirts of Nature monu- 152 Lower reaches of Bludnaya River GAP 2 strictly protected Federal 3 184 Dudinka RP+GAP 4 ment Regional 3 reserve Nature monu- 153 Gorbita RS+GAP 3 Nature reserve Federal 1 185 Langdokoyskiy kamen RP+GAP 5 ment Regional 3 154 Agapa RS+GAP 3 Nature reserve Federal 1 Nature monu- 186 Selyankin Cape outcrop RP 5 ment Regional 3 155 Popigay RS+GAP 4 Nature park Regional 2 Nature monu- 156 Bolshoy Kotuy RS+GAP 2 Nature park Regional 2 187 Ushakov’s Island GAP 4 ment Regional 3 157 Geographic centre of the Russian RS+GAP 4 Nature park Regional 2 Nature monu- Federation 188 Schmidt Island GAP 4 ment Regional 3 158 Lake Taimyr RS+GAP 2 Nature reserve Regional 2 189 Samoilovitch Island GAP 5 Nature monu- Regional 3 159 Volochanskiy RS+GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 2 ment 160 Gorbiachinskiy RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature monu- 190 Nikandrovskie Islands GAP 5 ment Regional 3 161 Moyero river valley RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature monu- 162 Lower reaches of Tanama River RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 191 Andrew’s Island GAP 4 ment Regional 3 163 Verkhnevilyuyskiy RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 192 Norilsk-Pyasinskie Lakes GAP 4 Nature monu- Regional 3 164 Lake Essey RS+GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 2 ment 165 Kiryaka-Tas RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature monu- 193 Khantaiskoe Lake GAP 4 ment Regional 3 166 Tsvetkov Cape RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 2 Sakha Republic (Yakutia) 167 Faddey Gulf GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 168 Kamen’-Kherbey GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 194 Peschaniy Island GAP 4 ment Federal 3 Upper reaches of Pyasina and 195 Elginskoe Plateau GAP 5 Nature park Regional 3 169 Agapa rivers GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 196 Upper reach of Anabar River GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 170 Lower reaches of Maimechy River GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 197 Pronchischevoy Ridge GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 171 Turukhan river basin GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 198 Chekanovskiy Ridge GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 172 Leningradskaya river mouth RP+GAP 4 ment Regional 3 199 Kystyk Plateau GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 200 Muna-Besyuke GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 173 Glaciers of Byrranga RS+GAP 5 Nature monu- Regional 2 ment 201 Upper reaches of Indigirka GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Upper reaches of Boyarka and Ro- Nature monu- 202 Ulakhan-Tas and Suor-Uyata ridges GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 174 manikha rivers RP 5 ment Regional 3 203 Kolyma-Alazey lowland GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 175 Tulay-Kiryaka RS 5 ment Regional 2 204 Abiy lowland GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 Slope of Putorana Plateau at lakes Nature monu- Nature reserve/ 176 Bokovoe and Bogatyr RP 5 ment Regional 3 205 Inyaly-Terde RP+GAP 3 nature monu- Regional 3 ment network Nature monu- 177 Kaierkan outcrop RS 5 ment Regional 2 Nature reserve/ 206 Upper reaches of Yana RP+GAP 4 nature monu- Regional 3 Nature monument network 178 Krasnye kamni outcrop RS 5 ment Regional 2 Nature monu- Nature monu- 207 Nuorda GAP 5 ment Regional 3 179 Tareyskoe swamp RS+GAP 5 ment Regional 2 Nature monu- Base strip mines of lower Silurian Nature monu- 208 Darpir Lake GAP 5 ment Regional 3 180 and lower Devon at Tareya River RS 5 ment Regional 2 Nature monu- Nature monu- 209 Appyt and Lysaya mounts RP+GAP 5 ment Regional 3 181 Mount Balakhnya RS 5 ment Regional 2 Nature monu- Nature monu- 210 At-Khaiyata Mount (larch forest) RS+GAP 5 ment Regional 1 182 Marshes at Leskino village RP+GAP 5 ment Regional 3 Nature monu- Nature monu- 211 Geographic centre of Yakutia RS 5 ment Regional 1 183 Outskirts of Laida villlage RP+GAP 5 ment Regional 3

228 229 Proposed Proposed Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments

map egory map egory S tatus S tatus the list ment level the list ment level highest) highest) Basis for Basis for umber on N umber on N umber inclusion in inclusion in P riority (1 is P riority (1 is

Nature monu- 238 Buyunda RP+GAP 4 Nature park Regional 3 212 Kisilyakh RS 5 ment Regional 1 239 Tuonakh RP 5 Nature park Regional 3 Nature monu- 213 Mat’-gora RS 5 ment Regional 1 240 Tumanskiy (Bulun) GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 241 Taskanskiy RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 214 Agrafena Island RS 5 Nature monu- Regional 1 ment 242 Verkhnesudarskiy RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 243 Sources of Oksa River RP+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 215 Krestovka RS 5 ment Regional 1 244 Malakachan RP+GAP 2 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 216 Merchimden RS 5 ment Regional 1 245 Zamkoviy RP+GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 246 Balygychan RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 217 Tiis-Khaiya RS 5 Nature monu- Regional 1 ment 247 Sugoy RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 248 Korkodon RP+GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 218 Tyngaralaakh RS 5 ment Regional 1 249 Verkhnesugoyskiy RP+GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 219 Ki and Tas RS 5 ment Regional 1 250 Verkhneomolonskiy RP+GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 251 Kegaly River Valley GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 220 Seveki RS 5 Nature monu- Regional 1 ment 252 Lower reaches of Gizhiga River GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 221 Senkyu RS 5 Nature monu- Regional 1 Interfluve of Karkadon and Stol- ment 253 bovaya GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 254 Kulu river valley GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 222 Ebian Maas RS 5 ment Regional 1 255 Kekkurniy Gulf GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 223 Srednyaya river mouth GAP 5 ment Regional 3 256 Nakhatadzhanskaya tundra area GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 257 Babushkin Gulf GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 3 224 Aranastakh Lake GAP 4 Nature monu- Regional 3 ment 258 Buostakh river valley GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 225 Kumakh-Syurt site GAP 5 Nature monu- Regional 3 Olskaya Lagoon and lower reaches ment 259 of Ola GAP 2 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 260 Shelting Gulf GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 226 Dyuganda river mouth GAP 5 ment Regional 3 Nature reserve/ 227 Upper reaches of Inyaly and Myu- GAP 5 Nature monu- Regional 3 261 Chubulakhskie steppes GAP 4 nature monu- Regional 3 rele rivers ment ment 228 Kubalakh and Alasardakh lakes GAP 4 Nature monu- Regional 3 Nature monument 262 Outskirts of Seymchan GAP 5 ment Regional 3 229 Aranagstaakh River GAP 5 Nature monu- Regional 3 Nature monument 263 Outskirts of Omsukchan GAP 4 ment Regional 3 230 Lyubuya river mouth GAP 5 Nature monu- Regional 3 Nature monument 264 Maliy Annychag GAP 4 ment Regional 3 231 Lakes in outskirts of Oyusardakh GAP 4 Nature monu- Regional 3 Nature monu- village ment 265 Rogovik Lake GAP 4 ment Regional 3 232 Zeleniy Cape GAP 4 Nature monu- Regional 3 Nature monument 266 Mak-Mak Lake GAP 4 ment Regional 3 Magadan region 267 Chistoe Lake GAP 4 Nature monu- Regional 3 Extension for ment Yama Valley and interfluve of Strictly pro- Yamskiy area Nature monu- 233 GAP 4 Federal 3 of Magadan 268 River Dukcha GAP 5 ment Regional 3 Khalanchaga and Chernaya tected reserve strictly protected reserve Nature monu- 269 Umar Island GAP 5 ment Regional 3 234 Motykleyskiy RP+GAP 4 Nature park Regional 3 Nature monu- 235 Olskoe Plateau RP+GAP 4 Nature park Regional 3 270 Tri Brata islands GAP 5 ment Regional 3 236 Jack London Lake RP+GAP 4 Nature park Regional 3 271 Zavyalov’s island GAP 4 Nature monu- Regional 3 237 Chorgo-Okhandya RP 5 Nature park Regional 3 ment

230 231 Proposed Proposed Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments

map egory map egory S tatus S tatus the list ment level the list ment level highest) highest) Basis for Basis for umber on N umber on N umber inclusion in inclusion in P riority (1 is P riority (1 is

Nature monu- 301 Onmen RP+GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 3 272 Oyra river mouth GAP 4 ment Regional 3 302 Srednekhatyrskiy RP+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 273 Shelikan Island GAP 5 ment Regional 3 303 Iskaten’ Ridge GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 304 Golubaya river basin GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 274 Spafaryev’s Island GAP 4 Nature monu- Regional 3 ment 305 Upper reaches of Kanchalan River GAP 2 Nature reserve Regional 3 Outskirts of Palatka and Madaun Nature monu- 306 Komarinaya river basin GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 3 275 villages GAP 5 ment network Regional 3 307 Northern Pekulney river basin GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 3 276 Suntar-Khayata RS+GAP 5 Nature park Regional 2 Nature reserve/ 277 Khal-Degy lakes GAP 4 Nature park/ Regional 3 308 Meechkin Spit RS+GAP 5 nature monu- Regional 2 nature reserve ment 278 Inya river valley GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature reserve/ 279 Yeginskaya lake network GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 309 Krasnoe Lake RP+GAP 4 nature monu- Regional 3 ment Nature monu- 280 Loshadinaya Bay GAP 5 ment Regional 3 Nature monu- 310 Apapelginskiy RP+GAP 4 ment Regional 3 Chukotka AO Nature monu- Strictly pro- 311 Bezymyannoe Lake RP+GAP 4 ment Regional 3 281 Chukchi upland RP+GAP 2 tected reserve Federal 3 Nature monu- Strictly pro- 312 Ekityki Lake RP+GAP 4 ment Regional 3 282 Central-Koryak RP+GAP 3 tected reserve Federal 3 Nature monu- 283 Elgygytgyn (Central-Chukchi) FP+GAP 1 National park Federal 1 313 Amaguema RP+GAP 5 ment Regional 3 Beringovskiy (including the area Nature reserve/ Nature monu- 284 of the former Tumanovskiy Nature RP+GAP 4 Strictly pro- Federal 3 314 Lavrentyevskiy RP+GAP 4 ment Regional 3 Reserve) tected reserve Nature monu- Nature reserve/ 315 Ystekhed Lake RP+GAP 4 ment Regional 3 285 Navarinskiy RP+GAP 2 Strictly pro- Federal 3 tected reserve Nature monu- 316 Cape Kittivarken RP 5 ment Regional 3 Nature reserve/ 286 South-Chukchi (Vaamochka) RS+GAP 1 Strictly pro- Federal 2 317 Ust’-Belskiy RP+GAP 2 Nature monu- Regional 3 tected reserve ment Nature reserve/ 318 Mainits Lake RS+GAP 3 Nature monu- Regional 2 287 Lagoon RP+GAP 2 Strictly pro- Federal 3 ment tected reserve 319 Elergytgyn Lake RP+GAP 4 Nature monu- Regional 3 288 Omolonskiy RS+GAP 2 Nature reserve Federal 2 ment 289 Rauchua-Aionskiy RP+GAP 2 Nature reserve Federal 3 Nature monu- 320 Cape Onmyn RP 5 ment Regional 3 Nature monu- 290 Cape Navarin RS+GAP 2 ment Federal 2 Nature monu- 321 Tynynvaamskiy RP+GAP 5 ment Regional 3 Nature monu- 291 Cape Serdtse Kamen’ RP+GAP 4 ment Federal 3 Nature monu- 322 Pilkhykay RP+GAP 4 ment Regional 3 Nature monu- 292 Ratmanov’s Island RP+GAP 4 ment Federal 3 Nature monu- 323 Idlidlya Island RP 5 ment Regional 3 293 Ilirneyskiy RS+GAP 4 Nature park Regional 2 Nature monu- 294 Aluchinskiy RS+GAP 4 Nature park Regional 2 324 Kargyn Island RP 5 ment Regional 3 295 Severopekulneyskiy RP+GAP 3 Nature park Regional 3 325 Russkaya Koshka RS 5 Nature monu- Regional 2 296 Severoanyuyskiy RP+GAP 1 Nature reserve Regional 3 ment Shalaurovsko-Yakanskiy (North- 326 Cape Bolshoy Baranov RP 5 Nature monu- Regional 3 297 Chukchi) RP+GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 3 ment 298 Nizhneanyuyskiy RP+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 327 Northern Koryak RS 5 ment Regional 2 299 Oloyskiy RP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 300 Verkhneanadyrskiy RP+GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 3 328 Seutakan Lake RS 5 ment Regional 2

232 233 Proposed Proposed Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments

map egory map egory S tatus S tatus the list ment level the list ment level highest) highest) Basis for Basis for umber on N umber on N umber inclusion in inclusion in P riority (1 is P riority (1 is

Nature monu- Nature reserve/ 329 Rudder Gulf RS+GAP 5 ment Regional 2 365 Vasiliy’s islands RS+GAP 5 nature monu- Regional 2 ment Nature monu- 330 Cape Shelagskiy GAP 3 ment Regional 3 Nature reserve/ 366 Cape Krasniy RS+GAP 5 nature monu- Regional 2 Nature monument 331 Cape Dzhenletren GAP 5 ment Regional 3 Nature reserve/ 332 Enmelenskiy coast GAP 4 Nature monu- Regional 3 367 Cape Olyutorskiy – Cape Irina RS+GAP 4 nature monu- Regional 2 ment ment 333 Tamvatney massif GAP 3 Nature monu- Regional 3 Nature reserve/ ment 368 Cape Oria RS+GAP 5 nature monu- Regional 2 Kamchatka region ment 334 Utkhlok RS+GAP 2 Strictly pro- Federal 1 Nature reserve/ tected reserve 369 Rovniy Island RS+GAP 4 nature monu- Regional 2 ment 335 Karaginskiy and Verkhoturov’s RS 5 National park Federal 1 Island Nature reserve/ Nature monu- 370 Kavacha Lagoon RS 5 nature monu- Regional 2 336 Gremuchie thermal springs RS 5 ment Federal 2 ment 337 Nerpichye Lake RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature reserve/ 371 Rekkikinskaya Bay RS+GAP 5 nature monu- Regional 2 338 Opala River RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 ment 339 Khapitsa River RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature reserve/ 340 Zhupanova River RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 372 Signalniy Island RS+GAP 5 nature monu- Regional 2 ment 341 Moroshechnaya River RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature reserve/ 342 Belaya River RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 1 373 Geka Bay RS+GAP 5 nature monu- Regional 2 ment 343 Kazarok-Malamvayam Lagoon RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature reserve/ 344 Verkhne-Penzhinskiy RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 1 374 Korfa Gulf RS+GAP 4 nature monu- Regional 2 345 Lake Palanskoe RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 ment 346 Shamanka River RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature reserve/ 375 Karaga Bay RS+GAP 3 nature monu- Regional 2 347 Penzhinskiy coastal area RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 ment 348 Ukelayat-Opuka RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature reserve/ 349 Olyutorskiy coastal area RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 376 Manilskie lakes RS+GAP 3 nature monu- Regional 2 ment 350 River Elovka RS+GAP 3 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature monu- 351 Khairayuzov’s Gulf RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 377 Mount Seynav massif RS 5 ment Regional 2 352 Semlyachikskiy estuary RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 378 Sivuchiy and Kirun islands RS 5 Nature monu- Regional 2 353 Vakhil river mouth RS+GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 ment 354 Bolshoe and Maloe lakes RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature monu- 379 Kiselevskie waterfalls RS 5 ment Regional 2 355 Mokovetskoe Lake RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 Nature monu- 356 Avachinskaya Bay RS 5 Nature reserve Regional 2 380 Vasilyevskoe Lake RS 5 ment Regional 2 357 Lower reaches of Kamchatka River RS+GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 2 381 Anaginskie thermal springs RS+GAP 4 Nature monu- Regional 2 358 Parapolskiy Dol GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 ment 359 Tymlat Lagoon GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 382 Wetland at the Apon’ River RS 5 ment Regional 2 360 Annuengvyn Lagoon GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 Nature monu- 361 Makaryevskiy estuary GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3 383 Wetland at the Mutnushky site RS 5 ment Regional 2 362 Kamchatka river mouth GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 384 Zheltovsky thermal springs RS 5 Nature monu- Regional 2 Basins of Oblukovina and Kolpa- ment 363 kova rivers GAP 4 Nature reserve Regional 3 385 Ushky Lake GAP 4 Nature monu- Regional 3 Basins of Lev.Kichkhik, Nachilova ment 364 and Bolshaya rivers GAP 5 Nature reserve Regional 3

234 235 Proposed Name of PA or area Proposed cat- manage- Comments

map egory S tatus the list ment level highest) Basis for umber on N umber inclusion in P riority (1 is

Nature monu- 386 Kopylye Lake GAP 5 ment Regional 3 Nature monu- 387 Kapovoe Lake GAP 5 ment Regional 3 Nature monu- 388 Dalnee Lake GAP 4 ment Regional 3 Nature monu- 389 Bolshie Bannye Springs GAP 4 ment Regional 3 Nature monu- 390 Nachkinskoe Lake GAP 4 ment Regional 3 Nature monu- 391 Mount Krasniy Yarchik GAP 5 ment Regional 3 Figure 111. Numbers (left) and areas (right) of proposed PAs and extensions of existing PAs, by priority Colour codes are priorities – 1 is highest. Nature monu- 392 Dachnye thermal mineral springs GAP 3 ment Regional 3 Nature monu- in number of areas with proposed PAs of the highest priority. Chukotka AO is 393 Golyginskoe Lake GAP 5 ment Regional 3 in second place, with 3 proposed PAs of the highest priority. An additional 2 Sakhalin region top-priority proposed PAs are in Western Siberia, and none are in Middle and Srednekurilskiy (including Chernoe Strictly pro- 394 Lake and Ekarma Island) GAP 4 tected reserve Federal 3 Eastern Siberia and the Kamchatka region. Severokurilskiy (including Antsy- Second priority was assigned to 26 proposed PAs, and third priority was as- 395 frov’s Island) GAP 4 Nature reserve Federal 3 signed to 32 proposed PAs. In total, the top three categories account for 69 areas or nearly 18 per cent of the total number. The fourth category contains 124 areas All territories included in proposed PA development plan were ranked for (31 per cent), and the fifth (lowest priority) was assigned to 201 areas, slightly priority on a scale of 1 to 5, reflecting their overall value for conserving natural over half of the total number (Figure 111, left chart). diversity of the Arctic and for securing PA network representativeness (Table Proportions of proposed total areas of the PAs of the five priority ranks vary 25 and Figure 111). The method used for assigning priority to identified gaps in considerably (Figure 111, right chart). Nearly one third (32 per cent) of their the existing PA network (see Section 2) was also used here. The highest prior- total area accounts for first three categories. The fifth priority rank (assigned to ity rank (1) was awarded to proposed protected areas that address two or more half of the number of PAs) covers only 28 per cent of the total area, mainly due identified network gaps. All areas planned and proposed as PAs by regions, but to the large number of small features and areas proposed as nature monuments. not identified in evaluations of completeness and representativeness of the PA The proposed PA network plan envisions an increase of PA numbers in the network for the Russian Arctic were given the lowest priority ranking of 5, as Arctic region from 450 to roughly 826 (excluding proposed extensions to 19 they clearly have the least value in relation to the main objectives of the pro- existing protected areas) – an increasing the number of PAs by a factor of about posed PA network. 1.8 (Table 26). The number of federal and regional PAs would approximate- Only 11 proposed protected areas were assigned the highest priority (about ly double. Municipal PAs have not been taken into consideration in this plan. 3 per cent of the total number): Novozemelskiy Strictly Protected Reserve and Among different categories of PAs, the most valuable – national and nature Karskie Vorota Nature Reserve in Novaya Zemlya, Yazhmo-Nessinskiy and parks – are envisioned to increase by a factor of nearly 5 in the proposed plan Nesskiy nature reserves, Pai-Khoyskiy National Park (Yugra) and Kara As- (from 10 to 48 PAs). The number of nature reserves and reserves would more trobleme Nature Monument in Nenets AO, Messoyakha and lower reaches of than double. Less valuable types of PAs, strictly protected reserves and nature the Pur River (both nature parks) in Yamal-Nenets AO, Elgygytgyn National monuments, would increase by 1.4 times and 1.6 times, respectively. As a result, Park (central Chukchi), Severoanyuyskiy (either a nature reserve or a strictly the proposed PA network in the Russian Arctic would be expected, upon full im- protected reserve) and Yuzhnochukotskiy (also either a nature reserve or a strict- plementation, to increase the relative number of parks and nature reserves and ly protected reserve). Of these 11 proposed protected areas, 6 are located in the decrease the relative number of nature monuments, strictly protected reserves European sector of the Russian Arctic and 4 are in Nenets AO, the lead region and other PA categories.

236 237 Table 26. Numbers of existing and proposed PAs in the Russian Arctic and its regions Proposed new PAs (not Categories and regions Existing including extensions of Total in the PAs existing PAs) proposed network ALL 450 376 826 Federal PAs 35 39 74 Regional PAs 338 337 675 Municipal PAs 77 0 77

Strictly protected reserves 14 6 20 National and nature parks 10 38 48 Nature reserves and reserves 140 172 312 Nature monuments 267 160 427 Other categories 15 0 15 Number PAs of MR AR NN KM YN KM KR YK KB MG CK KC SH Murmansk region 59 28 87 Archangel region 4 5 9 Existing Proposed Nenets AO 9 38 47 Komi Republic 54 10 64 Figure 112. Number of existing and prospect PAs in the Russian Arctic regions Yamal-Nenets AO 13 45 58 Regions: MR – Murmansk region, AR – Archangel region, NN – Nenets AO, KM – Komi Republic, YN – Yamal- Nenets AO, KM – Khanty-Mansi AO, KR – Krasnoyarsk region, YK – Sakha Republic (Yakutia), KB – Khabarovsk Khanty-Mansi AO 5 1 6 region, MG – Magadan region, CK – Chukotka AO, KC – Kamchatka region, SH – Sakhalin region Krasnoyarsk region 7 48 55 Sakha Republic (Yakutia) 85 39 124 Khabarovsk region 1 5 6 Magadan region 37 42 79 Chukotka AO 28 53 81 Kamchatka region 148 60 208 Sakhalin region 0 2 2

For the arctic regions of Russia, the largest absolute numbers of proposed PAs are in the Kamchatka region and Chukotka AO, followed by the Kras- noyarsk region and Yamal-Nenets AO, then the Magadan region, Sakha Re- public (Yakutia) and Nenets AO (Table 26 and Figure 112). In relative terms, among the 10 main arctic regions (excluding Khanty-Mansi AO, Khabarovsk region and Sakhalin region), the most notable increase of PA numbers would be for the Krasnoyarsk region (increasing by about 7 times), and also for Ne- nets (increasing more than 4 times) and Yamal-Nenets AO (increasing about 3.5 times). The smallest proposed changes are for regions that currently have the most developed PA networks: Murmansk region, Komi republic, Sakha republic and the Kamchatka region. Generally, the regional PA networks of this last group are similar in terms of proposed changes, with the obvious leadership of Kamchatka and the Republic Sakha (Yakutia) in terms of existing PAs. The total area of existing and proposed PAs for the Russian Arctic amounts to nearly 153 million hectares. Full implementation of the plan for development of the PA network would entail an increase in total protected area of more than 1.6 times, resulting in 26.3 per cent of the Russian Arctic being protected through the enhanced PA network. 238 239