WWF WWF is one of the world’s largest and most experienced independent conservation WWF-Russia organizations, with almost 5 million supporters and a global network active in more than 19, bld.3 Nikoloyamskaya St., 100 countries. 109240 Moscow WWF’s mission is to stop the degradation of the planet’s natural environment and to build a Russia future in which humans live in harmony with nature, by: Tel.: +7 495 727 09 39 • conserving the world’s biological diversity Fax: +7 495 727 09 38 • ensuring that the use of renewable natural resources is sustainable [email protected] • promoting the reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption. http://www.wwf.ru The Nature Conservancy The Nature Conservancy - the leading conservation organization working around the world to The Nature Conservancy protect ecologically important lands and waters for nature and people. Worldwide Office The mission of The Nature Conservancy is to preserve the plants, animals and natural 4245 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 100 NNATIONALATIONAL PPROTECTEDROTECTED AAREASREAS communities that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters Arlington, VA 22203-1606 they need to survive. Tel: +1 (703) 841-5300 http://www.nature.org OOFF TTHEHE RRUSSIANUSSIAN FFEDERATION:EDERATION: MAVA The mission of the Foundation is to contribute to maintaining terrestrial and aquatic Fondation pour la ecosystems, both qualitatively and quantitatively, with a view to preserving their biodiversity. Protection de la Nature GGAPAP AANALYSISNALYSIS To this end, it promotes scientific research, training and integrated management practices Le Petit Essert whose effectiveness has been proved, while securing a future for local populations in cultural, 1147 Montricher, Suisse economic and ecological terms. Tel : +41 (0)21 864 46 20-22 AANDND PERSPECTIVEPERSPECTIVE FFRAMEWORKRAMEWORK Fax : +41 (0)21 864 42 30 www.mava-foundation.org GAP ANALYSIS AND PERSPECTIVE FRAMEWORK AND PERSPECTIVE ANALYSIS GAP Vladimir Krever, Mikhail Stishov, Irina Onufrenya NATIONAL PROTECTED AREAS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION: OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION: AREAS PROTECTED NATIONAL Vladimir Krever, Mikhail Stishov, Irina Onufrenya NNATIONALATIONAL PPROTECTEDROTECTED AAREASREAS OOFF TTHEHE RRUSSIANUSSIAN FFEDERATION:EDERATION: GGAPAP AANALYSISNALYSIS AANDND PPERSPECTIVEERSPECTIVE FFRAMEWORKRAMEWORK Moscow 2009 Executive Summary Russia currently has more than 12,000 national, regional, and local protected areas, covering 200 million hectares or 11.9 percent of the country. Federally managed protected areas, including 101 strict nature reserves (zapovedniks), 40 national parks, and 69 federal sanctuaries (zakazniks), cover 54 million hectares or about 3 percent of the country’s territory. Russia has eight UNESCO World Natural Heritage sites. Thirty–four protected areas are biosphere reserves, while 24 protected areas are Ramsar sites. Criteria for establishing categories of protected areas in Russia in the planning stages are rather vague, and in this report we recommend a framework for determining appropriate protected area categories and management levels. We analyzed the PA network to determine whether formal categories reflect actual protected regimes and found that in 79 percent of the cases, categories assigned to individual protected areas were compatible with the official PA status. In the scope of this analysis we also assessed the conservation value of IUCN Category I PAs (zapovedniks) accord- ing to five categories based on size, scale of disturbance of natural habitats and adjacent lands, integrity of natural communities, and presence of rare, endangered, and unique natural features. A total of 28 zapovedniks were found to be entirely pristine with the highest level of integrity for all criteria considered, while the majority of zapovedniks received high scores for overall conservation value. We also found that 91 of 101 zapovedniks fully correspond to IUCN categories Ia and Ib. Twenty-one of the 35 national parks operating in Russia in 2007 would be more appropriately listed under category I than II. Using GIS data, we analyzed the geographical representativeness of the existing PA network relative to the total land area of the country. National PAs are represented in all physical-geographical provinces of Russia, and in cer- tain areas like the Caucasus, the Ural Mountains, and Baikal, zapovedniks make up two-thirds to three-quarters of the protected area network. We also assessed representativeness of the existing PA network in WWF Ecoregions and found that of the 49 WWF Ecoregions in Russia, PAs are absent in only six. Overall, the northern, eastern, and southern Ecoregions of Russia have the most comprehensive PA networks. For Russia as a whole, we considered representation of climate-hypsometric groups, specific groups of landscapes, and vegetation cover. Maximum coverage by the PA network is found in several boreal landscapes, in subboreal semi- humid coniferous landscapes with temperate continental climate, and in several types of subtropical landscapes. The representativeness of the existing PA network was also assessed according to larger landscape typology categories, such as zonal series and altitudinal classes. Within the zonal series, Arctic, boreal barren, sub-boreal alpine, and sub- boreal humid landscapes are the most thoroughly represented in PA network. Subtropical landscapes are the least represented in the PA network. Mountain landscapes are more fully represented than lowlands and plains. Only three subtypes of vegetation cover – temperate latitude deserts, bog forests and halophyte meadows, and riparian for- ests in floodplains are not represented. The most extreme and biologically poor ecosystems are the best represented within the PA system, including arctic deserts, arctic tundra, highlands, glaciers, salt flats, and northern deserts. For forest vegetation types, PA coverage is more or less sufficient, with the exception of deciduous forest types which have relatively low coverage. Steppe areas are the least represented within the existing PA network. We assessed the overall physical-geographical representativeness of the PA network and found that the Amur- Primorye, the Altai-Sayan, Dauria and Fennoscandia regions have large coverage of PA representativeness zones (more than 70 percent of the total area). The lowest share of representativeness zones (15 to 20 percent) is found in the Yakutsk depression, Central Siberia, and Northeast Asia. We also analyzed the current representativeness of the zapovednik system for diversity of climate types, consid- ering data on average temperatures, amplitudes of monthly temperature fluctuations, and precipitation. As a result of this analysis, we identified 147 areas not covered by the existing zapovednik system and requiring integration into the perspective PA network in order to ensure representation of the majority of different combinations of land- scape conditions and climate dynamics in Russia. Due to the absence of adequate data on terrestrial flora and fauna diversity, we assessed representativeness and coverage of the PA network only for vascular plants, lichens, and vertebrate animals. For other groups, we had to limit the analysis to species included in the Red Data Book of Russia. On average, 87 percent of vertebrate species in Russia are represented in the existing PA network, while only 43 percent of all forms included in the Russian Red Data Book are covered. Almost 95 percent of the mammal species occurring regularly in Russia are represented in existing PAs, while only 51 percent of all rare and threatened mammal species (excluding whales and dolphins) are granted adequate protection in PAs. About 86 percent bird fauna have been recorded within PAs, but only 41 of all rare and endangered birds are sufficiently protected in the existing PA network. About 75 percent of reptiles and 93 percent of 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY amphibians are found within the existing PA network, while only 36 percent of endangered reptiles and two percent of endangered amphibians are ensured protection in PAs. The representativeness of rare and endangered insect spe- cies within the PA network may be as high as 71 percent. From 65 to 68 percent of the total wild flora of Russia are found in zapovedniks, however, more than 55 percent of the species of vascular plants are represented in three or fewer zapovedniks. Two-thirds of all wild ancestors of cultivated plants have been noted in zapovedniks. Approximately 70 percent of the country’s lichen diversity is found in zapovedniks or national parks, although almost half of the lichens occur within three or fewer PAs. More than 90 percent of the lichens listed in the Russian Red Data Book are found in zapovedniks or national parks. In addition to the terrestrial gap analysis, we analyzed the representativeness of marine protected areas. Less than a fifth of the landscape diversity of Arctic seas is represented within the existing PA system, while the Polar Arctic and the Laptev-East Siberian basins lack marine PAs altogether. A similar level of representativeness was found for Far Eastern seas. The seas of the Atlantic Ocean basin include the Bay of Finland in the Baltic Sea, and parts of the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea. There are no marine PAs the Baltic Sea and in Black Sea coastal waters, and only one coastal PA in the Sea of Azov. Marine PAs were also assessed according to marine WWF Ecoregions: PAs exist in 11 of the 15 marine WWF Ecoregions, comprising an overall representativeness