Russia’s Report
on the
Montreal Process
Criteria and
Indicators
for the
Conservation and Sustainable Management
of Temperate and Boreal Forests
2003
PART 1. FORESTS AND FOREST MANAGEMENT IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF FOREST MANAGEMENT
CATEGORIES OF THE FOREST FUND LANDS
ASSESSMENT OF FOREST RESOURCES
STATE FOREST FUND ACCOUNT (SFFA)
INVENTORY OF PRESERVED FORESTS
IVENTORY OF CURRENT CHANGES IN THE FOREST FUND
FOREST MANAGEMENT IN THE AREAS POLLUTED BY
RADIONUCLIDES
FOREST RESTORATION AND PROTECTIVE AFFORESTATION
CONTROL AND PROTECTION OF FORESTS
SPECIALLY PROTECTED NATURE TERRITORIES
OBSERVANCE OF FOREST LEGISLATION
Criterion 1. CONSERVATION OF BIOLOGICAL
DIVERSITY
Indicator 1.1. Ecosystem diversity
Indicator 1.2. Species diversity
Indicator 1.3. Genetic diversity
Criterion 2. MAINTENANCE OF PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY
OF FOREST ECOSYSTEM
Indicator 2a. Area of forest land and net area
of forest land available for timber production
Indicator 2c. The area and growing stock of
plantations of native and exotic species
Indicator 2d. Annual removal of wood products
compared to the volume
determined to be sustainable
Criterion 3. MAINTENANCE OF FOREST ECOSYSTEM
HEALTH AND VITALITY
Indicator 3b. Area and Percent of Forest Land
Subjected to Levels of Specific Air Pollutants
Criterion 4. CONSERVATION AND MAINTENANCE OF
SOIL AND
WATER RESOURCES
Indicator 4a. Area and percent of forest land
with significant soil erosion
Criterion 5. MAINTENANCE OF FOREST CONTRIBUTION
TO GLOBAL CARBON CYCLES
Indicator 5c. Contribution of forest products
to the global carbon budget
Indicator 6.1. Production and consumption
Indicator 6.2. Recreation and tourism
Indicator 6.3. Investment in the forest sector
Indicator 6.5. Employment and community needs
The Montreal process started in 1994. It is one of the few regional and international undertakings where the participating countries are striving to use criteria and indicators to achieve the sustainable forest management. According to the definition given at the European Ministerial conference held in Helsinki in 1993, the sustainable forest means “the stewardship and use of forests and forest lands in a way, and at a rate, that maintains their biodiversity, productivity, regeneration capacity, vitality and their potential to fulfil, now and in the future, relevant ecological, economic and social functions, at local, national, and global levels, and that does not cause damage to other ecosystems”.
The
Montreal process is an activity performed by the intergovernmental working
group of experts developing scientifically grounded criteria and indicators of
forest protection and sustainable forest use within temperate and boreal forest
zones. Twelve countries take part in the Montreal process: Argentina,
Australia, Canada, China, Mexico, New Zealand, republic of Korea, the Russian
Federation, USA, Uruguay, Chile, and Japan. About 50% of the world forests and
90% of the forests of temperate and boreal forest zones are located in the
territory of the participating countries. Criteria and indicators serve as
instruments to assess changes and tendencies in forest state and management.
Presently, there are 7 criterions and 67 corresponding indicators developed and
widely accepted. The first five criterions assess environmental functions and
characteristics of the forests. The sixth criterion reflects socio-economic
benefits provided by forests. The seventh criterion describes political terms
and conditions required to maintain the sustainable forest management. For more
details on Montreal process please visit web site at: http://www.mpci.org/.
The
National report of the Russian Federation on the criteria and indicators of the
sustainable forest management is developed based on the Russian obligations to
follow Principles of sustainable forest management, adopted by the 1992 United
Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Rio-de-Janeiro, 1992) and
confirmed by the Declaration on the Sustainable Development (Santiago, 1995).
This report is designed to provide objective information about the state and
the use of Russian forests. This report will be presented at the XII World
Forestry Congress, held in Quebec (Canada) in September 2003. A discussion
dedicated to the Montreal process will be held within the framework of the
World Forestry Congress, and the following activities are scheduled:
·
The
general review of the year 2003 achievements will be presented;
·
National
reports on forests will be provided;
·
Political
obligations for the participating countries (Santiago declaration and Montreal
working group) will be confirmed;
·
Perspective
goals for the Montreal process will be defined for the coming 5 years.
Formulating
the “National Report of the Russian Federation on Criteria’s and Indicators”,
the following sources were used:
·
Data
from the State Forest Account (from the years 1998, 1993, 1988, 1983, 1978);
·
Report
“Environment of the Russian Federation in the Year 2000”;
·
Goskomstat
publication “Environmental Protection in the Russian Federation in the year
2001”;
·
Report
“State and Utilization of the Forest Resources of the Russian Federation in the
Year 2001”;
·
The
information updated from the forest management and planning;
·
Analytical
data of the Forest Cadastre and forest monitoring;
·
The
data provided by the state bodies of nature protection;
·
Scientific
reports (research institutions and MNR Russia).
Data
collection and analysis, maps and illustrations were provided by the VNIILM
stuff (All-Russian Research Institute of Silviculture and Forestry
Mechanization) and also by other forestry experts working in different units
and divisions of the Ministry of Natural Resources.
Russia is
one of the major forest powers in the world. The Forest Fund, which consists of
both forested and non-forested land, takes up about 12 mill.km2. Forests cover about 8 mill.km2 and over 25% of the global forest
standing volume is concentrated in Russia. Russian forests are crucially
important for the planet because they regulate environmental conditions and
prevent negative climate changes.
Boreal
forests and takes up about 60% of all boreal forests in the world and 95% of
closed forest area in Russia. A major part of the forests is characterized by
low growth potential and high vulnerability due to the forest ecosystems being
extremely sensitive to any intervention. Indigenous peoples, preserving
centuries-old traditions, mainly inhabit these lands. They have managed to
maintain their way of living based on the use of forest resources and thus
practice hunting, fishing, reindeer breeding, gathering of berries and
mushrooms, etc. Having an extensive forest management experience, Russia is
recognized to be a world leader in silviculture, forest protection, science and
research.
The history
of forest management in Russia stretches for more than 200 years.
According
to the edict of Emperor Pavel I the Forest Department was set up in 1798. The
established structure of forest management has proved to be a success as the
main principles have been observed up to the present.
According
to the current legislation, the state forest administration includes forest
use, monitoring and control activities, as well as protection and reforestation
throughout the country. Management and administration functions are carried out
by the President of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Russian Federation,
executive bodies of the subjects of the Russian Federation, and specially
authorized state forest administration bodies.
Specially
authorized state forest administration bodies are represented by the Ministry
of Natural Resources (MNR Russia) and the State Forest Service (SFS) (Fig. 1. The Structure of Forest Management in the Russian Federation).
The following departments constitute the SFS:
·
Department
of Forest Use;
·
Department
of the Forest Fund;
·
Department
of Control, Protection, and Reforestation of the Forest Fund;
·
Regional
Forest Management Bodies in the subjects of the Russian Federation as well as
Forest Management Units (leskhozes).
Also, the
MNR Russia consists of:
·
State
Forest Planning and Inventory Enterprises (that were reorganized in the year
2002 and are currently titled “Forest Inventory and Planning Institutes”);
·
Airborne
Forest Protection Service (“Avialesookhrana”);
·
Science
and Research (“Department of The following MNR Divisions coordinate activities
ensuring sustainable nature resource management:
·
Department
of Research and Interaction with the Scientific Community;
·
Department
of Specially Protected Nature Territories and Sites as well as Conservation of
Biodiversity;
·
Human
Resources Department, Continuing Education and Social Policy. Research and
Interaction with the Scientific Community”);
·
Educational
Institutions.
The
following MNR Divisions coordinate activities ensuring sustainable nature
resource management:
·
Department
of Research and Interaction with the Scientific Community;
·
Department
of Specially Protected Nature Territories and Sites as well as Conservation of
Biodiversity;
·
Human
Resources Department, Continuing Education and Social Policy.
MNR Russia
is lead by the Minister, who is nominated by the President of the Russian
Federation, and the First Deputy Minister supervises forestry issues.
The Statute
ratified by MNR Russia, regulates the activity of the state forest management
body (Order N 235 dated April 27, 2002). The sustainable forest management is
implemented by the state forest policy.
According
to the Forest Code of the Russian Federation (1997), Forest Fund lands,
including all forests, located on the defense lands, are under Federal
jurisdiction. The federal law allows property rights transfer in favor of the
subjects of the Russian Federation. Both the civil legislation and the Forest
Code guarantee the free access to the forests. There are Forest Fund
allotments, which are available for lease by citizens and juridical persons. In
addition to this, there is short-term use; concessional use and use of
forestlands free of charge, which are all widely practiced.
The Forest
Fund and other lands constitute almost 69% of the total land area of the Russian
Federation. MNR Russia controls and governs 95.83% of the Forest Fund area
is governed and controlled by MNR Russia while other ministries and agencies
manage the rest of the forests (Fig. 2. Administration of the Forest Fund and other
lands).
The total
land area of Russia, including water bodies, amounts to 1.7 bill. ha. In spite
of the fact that the extreme North and European South territories are forestless,
forests are the most representative type of vegetation and the major renewable
natural resource in the country.
In Russia,
the notion “forest resources” is associated with the “Forest Fund” concept. The
term itself was formed resulting from the history of the state forest
management. The Forest Fund comprises lands that are covered with forest
vegetation (forested lands) or may be potentially covered (unforested lands,
non-forest lands). Forest Fund lands are managed for forestry purposes.
The total area
of the Forest Fund lands is a rather permanent index and changes
insignificantly due to the land transfer for industrial construction, farming
and/or agricultural use.
As of January
1, 2002 the total area of the Forest Fund lands is 1113.84 mill. ha, making
up to 69% of the total land area of Russia. As for the closed forests, 78%
are located in the Asian territory and 22% are distributed throughout the
European territory of Russia. Percentage of forestlands has a rather uneven
distribution and is a changing index. Since 1966 it has increased from 41%
and reached the index 45.3% today. During the period 1966–2001 the annual
average increase of land area covered with forest vegetation was 2 mill. ha.
The reasons for this increase differ, so for the Asian territories of Russia
the increase was connected to verifications of forestland characteristics
and for the European-Ural part of Russia the increase was a result of natural
regeneration and the planting of unforested areas. The Forest Fund is an area
under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian
Federation. Depending on its natural peculiarities and given different functional
importance, the Forest Fund lands are subdivided into a number of categories
(Fig. 3. Classification of the Forest Fund Lands, mill. ha (as of January 1,
2001).
The distribution of categories has a mosaic structure, which consists of forest and nonforest vegetation, water bodies, roads, different land use patterns, and settlements that are historically based on natural processes and human activities. The level of biological diversity and stability of the Forest Fund area is determined by the continuous change of the mosaic as it influences habitats, ecological niches, migration conditions, and dispersions of plants and animals. Every category is managed following specific forest management rules, inventory regulations and individual measures. The existing legislation as well as the set of standards and methodological documents is based on the subdivided categories approach.
The
sustainable forest management of Russia tends to solve a set of environmental
and economic issues based on the aspects of local, regional, national, and
global importance. The financial structure ensures that:
·
means
and resources for reforestation, maintenance, forest guard and protection are
guaranteed;
·
there
is necessary interest to earn and invest the capital needed for all aspects
related to the forest sector;
·
methods
for fixing payments for forest resource that must be based on both state
management and market economy.
The
financial system is relying upon the mechanism of getting forest revenues that
are based on a system of payments for the Forest Fund use. Under the market
economy, such a system has become an effective instrument of managing the
economic and legal aspects of forest use. The system of payments is of great
importance for the promotion of sustainable use and reforestation of the land.
The
establishment of reasonable and wellgrounded rates of payment for the use of
forest resources is a fundamental measure to ensure revenue and replenishment
of the budget. According to the Forest Code of the Russian Federation, forests
are under Federal jurisdiction. Major expenses of the state forest management,
such as forest guard, forest protection, reforestation and sustainable use,
have to be covered by the federal budget and therefore, the State has the right
to receive revenues from the Forest Fund utilization.
According
to the Article 108 of the Forest Code of the Russian Federation, the following
activities and expenses are financed by the federal budget:
·
federal
body of forest administration expenses,
·
the
expenses of regional bodies of forest management,
·
the
expenses of national parks, forest fire protection,
·
the
protection of forests against pests and diseases,
·
drainage,
the construction, maintenance and repair of irrigation networks, seed breeding
expenses,
·
forest
monitoring expenses,
·
the
upkeep of the State Forest Cadastre, etc.
Forest
regeneration costs are to be covered by the budgets of the regions of the
Russian Federation. The need for forest regeneration results from forest use
and, therefore, the financial source for the regeneration of the forest should
include revenue from timber sales and other forest utilization payments. The
structure of financial management consists of:
·
the
federal budget capital to cover management activities, forest fire protection
activities and forest protection from pests and diseases;
·
the
means of the budget of the regions of the Russian Federation that are allocated
for the forest regeneration;
·
the
forest management unit’s own means, which include: price of timber, rental
charges, forest taxes, various earnings from the forest products’ sales, and
gains from shelterbelt afforestation.
In the year
2001, the federal budget consisted of 2614.7 mill., which is by far not enough
to cover forestry expenses (Fig. 4. Forest Management Expences, mill. roubles). The lack of federal budget support
is compensated by additional capital earned by forest management units. In
the year 2001, the structure of the financial expenditures of the Forest Fund
broke down as follows: the federal budget consisted of 32.4%, the budget of
the regions of the Russian Federation covered 9.4%, and personal capital of
the forest management units amounted to 58.2%. Personal capital in 2001 totaled
4691.9 mill. roubles, including: 3171.7 mill. roubles from forest products
sales; 136.1 mill. roubles from transport services; 103.2 mill. roubles from
shelterbelt afforestation; 28,2 mill. roubles from seed and planting stock
sales; and 1252.7 mill. roubles from other revenue returns.
The Federal
Law “On the Federal Budget for the Year 2002” foresees significant changes in
the financial structure of forestry. Based on the minimum cost of timber, all
the payments related to the Forest Fund use will be transferred to the budgets
of the regions of the Russian Federation as revenues. The federal budget will
receive deductions made up from rental charges and other forest payments that
are over the minimum timber price. Earlier, those payments were transferred to
the forest management bodies.
To assess
Russian forests, it is important to consider their condition and location.
Nowadays, only 29.8% of the Forest Fund area, which is almost half of the
forested area, with the final growing stock of 40.0 milliard m3, is suitable for exploitation. The
amount of mature and overmature stands amounts to 41.8% of the total area and
represents 58% of total growing stock. The majority of these forests is located
in the Asian part of Russian and mainly belongs to the second and third group.
The predominant tree species is the larch, which occupies over 45.2% of the
area (40.6% of the growing stock). Almost 80% of forests located in the Asian
part of Russia grow on permafrost soils. The average site quality class for
coniferous tree species is not higher than IV and the average growing stock is
36.5 m3 /ha in Magadan,
71.5 m3 /ha in
Chukotka, and 92.8 m3 /ha in Yakutija. Under the current level of socio-economic development
in Siberia, only 1/3 of the forested area is of market value. The remaining 2/3
of the area is not yet perceived for market value, but must be preserved to
carry out biosphere and other ecological functions. Forest distribution over
the land area stipulates specific research methods. The most precise and reliable
forest assessment methods are practiced in the regions that have wide forest
exploitation. A set of various assessment methods providing approximate data
and preliminary results are then applied to the rest of the territory.
At present,
the structure of forest resource assessment includes:
·
State
Forest Fund Account;
·
State
forestry Cadastre;
·
Forest
monitoring;
·
Forest
Management and Planning;
·
Forest
pathology and other inspections;
·
Inventory of current changes
in the Forest Fund (Fig. 5. Forest account structure)
The primary
responsibilities of the State Forest Fund Account (SFFA) is to ensure that
there is:
·
Sustainable
forest management;
·
Forest
guard and protection;
·
Forest
reproduction;
·
Systematic
quality and quantity control.
Also, SFFA
is required to provide federal and regional authorities, juridical persons, and
other concerned parties with reasonable data and reliable information. SFFA
data is used for keeping the State forest cadastre. SFFA management is based on
the forest inventory and planning data which is updated by the SFFA. SFFA takes
stock of clearings, felling sites, areas of new forest plantations, areas that
have burned down, forest areas affected by pests and diseases, and in addition,
it keeps track of the changes in forested areas and traces the growing stock.
Up to the year 1999, the SFFA was carried out every five years. It was crucial
to get region based summarized forestry characteristics and to present them by
the start of each five-year plan. Presently, taking into account the dynamic
character of civil society development and, also, the demand for actual and
updated information, the State Forest Fund Account is conducted annually.
The State
Forest Cadastre is upkept according to the Article 68 of the Forest Code of the
Russian Federation and contains information on economical, environmental and
other Forest Fund characteristics. The State Forest Cadastre data is used for:
·
State
forest management;
·
The
practical implementation of forest management plans;
·
The
conversion of forest lands into nonforest lands to be used for purposes that
not related to forest management and Forest Fund use;
·
Forest
Fund lands withdrawal;
·
The
establishment of timber prices and other forest payments;
·
Assessment
of the forest user’s economic activity.
Forest
monitoring is a system to observe, assess, and forecast the Forest Fund
dynamics and its condition for the purposes of the state forest management,
guard and protection, which is aimed at the increase of the forest’s ecological
value.
·
In
accordance to various goals and structural divisions, monitoring consists of
different methods:
·
Forest
resource monitoring;
·
Forest
Fund lands monitoring;
·
Forest
fire monitoring;
·
Purpose-oriented,
specific monitoring (including monitoring of the forests, subjected to
industrial emissions and radioactive pollution);
·
Monitoring
of remote and little-researched forests (by means of remote sensing);
·
Forest
monitoring conducted within a framework of international agreements and
conventions.
Taken as a
whole, the structure of forest monitoring is reliable enough and meets the
requirements, but its technical provision is quite low. Nowadays, all the data
sources and information flows are utilized in monitoring activities and forest
condition assessment.
An account
of the forest in Russia is based on a periodic Forest Fund inventory conducted
in accordance with forest inventory and planning procedures. Each territory
must be inventoried every 10-15 years. The actual area of annual forest inventory
and planning is about 30 mill. ha, which covers 3% of the Forest Fund area
at the most. Thus, both the area and the quantity of sites that exceed the
inspection period required by the guidelines are accumulating (Fig. 6. Forest Fund Area
Distribution and Inventory Periodicity as of April 15, 2002).
Forest inventory
and planning has been carried on 61.4% of the Forest Fund area. About 32.6%
of the forest area has been thoroughly studied, while 6% of the area was inventoried
by using simplified methods, such as aerial-visual inspection and remote sensing.
Information about the scope and level of forest inventory and planning throughout
Russia is presented in the Fig.
7. The Extent of Exploration of the
Russian Forests.
At present,
basic forest account information is gained from forest inventory and planning.
Reliability of the data presented by administrative regions, regions of the
Russian Federation and by the federal districts is strongly dependent on the
volume and quality of the forest account. Forest inventory and planning is
comprised of a system of measures providing for sustainable Forest Fund use,
higher efficiency in management, and common and unified policies in science,
technology and research. Forest inventory and planning throughout all the
territories of the Forest Fund in Russia is conducted by state forest inventory
and planning institutions that follow common and unified rules and approaches,
which are established by the federal forest management body. The following
parameters are taken into account by inventory and planning operations:
·
Species
composition;
·
Age
distribution;
·
The
health and condition of the forest;
·
Other
quality and quantity indices.
In the year
2001, 108 forest management units located in 31 subjects of the Russian
Federation were involved with the inventory and covered a total area of 28.3
mill. ha, while aerial photography covered an area of 16.8 mill. ha.
Inventory of
the preserved forests in Siberia and the Far East is conducted using
aerial-visual inspection and remote sensing methods and covers the areas where
there is no scheduled exploitation for the coming 15-20 years. These forests
are mainly used for local needs. In contrast with forest inventory and
planning, the preserved forests inventory does not conduct forest management
and site planning. All the boundaries are marked and determined by natural
borders such as watersheds and rivers. In the year 2001, the preserved forests
inventory covered an area of 5.1.mill. ha.
Forest
pathology inspection is carried out to detect pests, diseases and other
pathological damage and aims to assess the health and condition of the Forest
Fund. Forest pathology experts, working for the forest protection divisions of
the Ministry of Natural Resources, implement the above-mentioned inspections.
The inventory is conducted in:
·
The
areas which are under the mass outbreaks of pests and diseases;
·
The sites
damaged by windfalls, fires and other natural calamities;
·
Forests
suffering from industrial pollution.
Efficient
and flexible monitoring and control is annually performed over an area of 7-9
mill. ha. In addition, forest pathology expeditions conduct surveys in the
areas where there are complex and unfavorable pathology conditions (almost 8
mill. ha). These expeditions are conducted in order to verify the size of
outbreaks and look deeper into the influencing factors, as well as to define
the forest protection measures, which are necessary to be implemented.
Implementation of the above-mentioned measures allows for timely detection of
negative changes in the forests and assists to make forecasts and predictions
easier. Annual inspections are conducted on the targeted sites contaminated
with radionucleids and are aimed at verifying the boundaries of radioactive
pollution, which are to be reflected in the maps. All the activities are
conducted following the norms, guidelines and requirements adopted for the
forestry sector.
An
inventory of current changes in the Forest Fund is a permanent duty of the
forest management unit staff. The idea is to monitor the occurring changes
resulting from both forestry measures and natural calamities and to reflect
them in the reporting documentation. Documentation of the inventory of current
changes consists of the basic statistics reported by the forest management
units. It is annually submitted to the regional divisions of the Ministry of
Natural Resources. The data can be obtained using ground methods (regular
surveys, sampling plots) or remote sensing.
For an
inventory of the current changes in the preserved forests, space and aerial
photography of different scales is utilized, as well as geographical
informational systems (GIS) technologies, which are established by the forest
inventory and planning institutions.
When
natural calamities occur, aerial- and telephotography is used for the most
urgent and efficient recording.
Remote
sensing interpretation is used in the forest management and planning procedures
to reflect the spotted changes and trends.
Documentation
of the current changes in the Forest Fund is widely used in monitoring and controlling
the Forest Fund and is extensively employed in forest management and planning.
Almost 60%
of the total land area of the Russian Federation is considered to be relatively
favorable for the forest growth. About 67% of the forestlands meet the
coniferous site factor requirements, and 17% are covered with sparse coniferous
forests. Taiga and tundra zones take up about 78% of the Forest Fund area.
All the
forests are divided into three groups according to their economic and environmental
functions. Group I forests (20%) carry out protective functions with restricted
usage regimes. Group II forests (6%) are located in the areas of high
population density and/or low forest resource potential, and maintain strict
forest use practices. These forests also carry out protective functions, having
limited usage regimes. Group III forests (73%) are located in the forest
abundant regions of Russia and are of commercial value. These forests are meant
to meet economic needs on a constant and sustainable basis by providing timber
and at the same time, not undermining forest protection functions.
During the
last decades, a clear tendency of the Group I forests increase has been established
(Fig. 8. Forest Fund Area by Designated Use Categories, thousand ha).
This process demonstrates
that the state priorities have been maintained, while aiming at further development
and preservation of the protective functions of the forests.
The major
tree species that make up the forests in the Russian Federation are larch,
pine, Siberian pine, spruce, oak, beech, birch, aspen and others. The above
species constitute some 90% of all the forested area of the Russian Federation.
Other tree species (such as pear, chestnut, and walnut) occupy an area of less
than one mill.ha and shrubs (such as Pinus pumila and Betulaceae)
cover the remaining area. All of the forests forming species are clustered into
three groups: the coniferous group (79%), hardwoods (2%), and softwoods (19%).
Within the
coniferous group, the greatest area of land and growing supply belongs to the
Larch predominant stands of Siberia and the Far East (more than half of the
total area of the coniferous group). Pine trees occupy 23% and spruce trees 15%
of the area.
Taken as a
whole, these areas, which are covered by these major tree species, have
remained quite stable during last decades. Certain changes in the coniferous
group area were mainly caused by new measurement regulations adopted in 1985
and 1994. The decrease in forest area for Oak seedlings in the European-Ural
part of Russia is the only exception. The decrease was caused by unsatisfactory
pathological conditions resulting from natural processes and to a lesser
extent, by anthropogenic factors.
Silviculture
experts and forest pathology specialists have repeatedly discussed the oak
issue, which remains as one of the leading priorities of the Ministry of
Natural Resources. The increase in area for softwoods is a negative tendency
caused by low demand. The annual allowable cut is steadily decreasing in all
regions of the Russian Federation and birch and aspen are becoming predominant
among the softwoods.
As for the
hardwood group, Stone Birch, which grows in the Far East, occupies half of the
area, while the most valuable species, such as oak and beech cover one fourth
of the total area.
More than
half of all the forests in the Russian Federation are growing on the permafrost
soils of Siberia and the Far East, which is a fact that contributes to the
rather low productivity of timber-producing areas of the forests. Only 55% of
the total forested area of the Russian Federation is considered to be
potentially accessible ecologically or economically. A major part of these
forests are located in the North European region and along the Trans-Siberian
railway. These are areas that already were intensively logged during the past
decades.
According
to the 2001 state Forest Fund account, the growing stock of major tree species,
which make up the forests in the Russian Federation, is 74.5 bill. m3 , including 41.5 bill. m3 of mature and overmature trees with
an average growing reserve of some 137 m3 per hectare. In the forests of potential
exploitation (remote areas), the growing reserve is higher and makes up to 167
m3 per hectare.
The annual mean volume increment for the total forested area of the entire
Russian Federation is estimated to be 871.45 mill. m3 (1.34 m3 per hectare).
Half of the total area of coniferous forests is composed of mature and overmature trees. During the last decades, a clear trend is that the age structure of the coniferous forests is becoming more evenly distributed.
The area
of young trees is increasing, the area of middle aged and maturing trees is
quite stable, and the area of mature and aged trees is decreasing (Table 1). A tendency of leveling of the coniferous
tree’s age structure has settled in the European Russia. In the hardwood’s
group the age structure has been quite stable during the past 20 years. The
accumulation of mature and overmature trees in the softwood category is also
observed.
Purpose-oriented
final felling is the only efficient means to improve and regulate the age
structure.
According
to the figure of an annual increment per 1 hectare, Russia ranks among the
following countries: Great Britain (100 m3), Bulgaria (104 m3),
USA (110 m3). To make a comparison with Austria and Switzerland,
these figures are 212 m3 and 334 m3 respectively. At the same time, judging by the mean volume of standing forests
per capita, Russia (600 m3) concedes only to Canada (900.1 m3),
exceeding Finland (328.1 m3) and Sweden (272.7 m3). This
clearly proves that Russia is the one of the most forestry abundant countries
of the Northern hemisphere. The total area of potentially exploitable forests
in Russia is twice as big as the total forested area of Europe. The size of an
exploitable forest site per capita shows that Russia is among the five largest
forest powers of the world. Only in Canada, Finland, Sweden and Brazil will one
find a larger area than that found in Russia.
Traditionally,
the notion “forest use” implies forest harvesting and logging. Timber is
harvested at the final felling of mature and aged stands. Various assortments
are produced which are needed for both domestic and world markets.
A grounded
and reasonable volume of timber felled, which is statistically calculated, is
referred to as the Annual Allowable Cut (AAC). In the past years, AAC totaled
up to 500 mill. m3 , including 300 mill. m3 for the coniferous category. The ratio of AAC
and actual harvest illustrates the “state-of-the-art” in all branches of the
forestry sector. In spite of the fact that in 1999 there was an increase in
forest harvesting (for the first time over the past few years), only 20% of AAC
was actually logged.
Along with
the decrease of production, Russia is still going through structural
reorganization. However, the forest sector has started to move its production
facilities to the regions with higher consumption levels and those, which are
located closer to foreign markets. Thus, based on the economic reasons, North
Western, Northern, Central and Western parts of Russia have been prioritized
for forest use and development. The most significantly low AAC used is found in
the forest abundant areas of Siberia and the Far East. Huge forest production
facilities were established in these areas during the Soviet times and have
become unclaimed due to the lack of forest markets, both domestic and foreign.
The most favorable economic conditions are created in the European part of
Russia, where the AAC is used at 60-90%, in connection with the coniferous
category.
It is
necessary to note, that in the beginning of the nineties, growing environmental
protection demands had resulted in an AAC decrease of almost 100 mill. m3 . The final felling AAC, completed
for the year 2001, consists of 549.8 mill. m3 , including 509.1 mill. m3 of the forests that are governed by
the Ministry of Natural Resources.
The
significant decrease of forest losses is included among the positive trends in
forest management and utilization. The area of undercuts and littered felling
sites has reduced nearly two times. The relative loss per 1 m3 of timber harvested has decreased as
well as the damage caused during felling operations.
According
the Forest Code, forest lease and forest auctions (standing volume) are the
major approaches in relation to forest use. In some regions, where the demand
for standing timber exceeds the supply, a competition among the forest users
has occurred, in which they aim to obtain a leased forest allotment.
At present,
there are nearly 3500 state forest enterprises that specialize in logging and
processing. Plus, there are 33 thousand various companies addressing these very
same issues, as well as trading. Nowadays, 97% of the total number of forest
harvesting operations is privatized. The most steady and reliable tenants are
those, who have a vertical integrated structure that is established on the
basis of the centralization of financial flows, market activities and
maintenance, which covers the full technological cycle, beginning at the
felling site to ending with the final product. The largest of them are:
·
Arkhangelsk
pulp and paper mill;
·
Solikamsbumprom
Joint Stock Company (JSC);
·
Solombalsky
JSC;
·
Syktyvkrsky
JSC;
·
Onezhsky
JSC
·
Manturovsky
plywood production.
Each of
these includes a number of logging enterprises. By integrating with forest management
units, these companies provide raw materials, thereby investing into the
renovation of logging enterprises. It shows the growing interest that large
owners have in the area of efficient development and maintenance.
In the year
2001, about 2.9 thousand allotments were leased, covering the area of 90
mill.ha and having an annual logging volume of 123.5 mill. m3 .
In
comparison to the year 2000, the rental charge for 1 m3 of growing timber in the year 2002
increased by 5.3 roubles (32.7%) and totaled 28.7 roubles. The auction price of
1 m3 grew to 18.2
roubles (30%) and totaled 77.7 roubles. The average rate of the forest tax is
38.5 roubles at the minimum rate of 17.9 roubles. The maximum price of a
coniferous cubic meter was reached at timber auctions in the Kaliningrad region
and totaled 383 roubles. In the Penzenskaya region, the price was 366 roubles,
in Bryanskaya – 252 roubles, in Vladimirskaya – 261 roubles, and in Kaluzhskaya
region – 218 roubles.
Intermediate
forest use includes thinning, selective sanitary felling, reconstruction
felling and other types of felling in the low value stands, as well as removal
of shrubs and trees, which are loosing their ability to help with nature
protection.
These
different types of felling are conducted to ensure high productive forest
growth, to improve the trees quality and sanitary condition of a forest.
Sanitary
felling is carried out with a purpose to improve the stand’s condition by
taking away infected, damaged, dead and perishing trees.
Thinning
represents a system of selective types of felling that are the growing process
of a forest stand. Thinning ensures favorable conditions for growing the best
forest forming trees.
Depending
on the age of a stand and the economic purposes of forest growing, thinning is
subdivided into the following types:
·
Shelterwood
felling (up to 10 years), for improving species composition and the growth of
the main forest forming tree species
·
Sanitation
felling is conducted in a young stand 11-20 years of age to improve growth
condition and regulate the density of the main tree specie.
·
Crown
thinning is conducted in middle aged stands (21-40 years) to create favorable
conditions for the best stem and crown formation
·
Thinning
is carried out in a maturing stand to create favorable growing conditions.
In 2001,
the volume of intermediate fellings and other cuts made up 18.2. It makes
more than 20% of timber harvested at the final fellings. In fact, higher volumes
could be harvested. The volume of intermediate fellings can make up at least
half of the final fellings volume without breaking the rules of forest management.
Timely fellings and using trees that are dying off could increase the intermediate
felling volume (Fig. 9. Intermediate Felling Volumes, mill. m3; Fig.
10. Other Fellings Volumes, mill. m3).
In the year
2001, about 46.8 mill. ha of forest stands were transferred to the high value category
due to the timely conducted intermediate thinnings. The sanitary fellings were
carried out over the total area of 250 thousand hectares (including clear
sanitary fellings of 61.2 thous. ha).
Forest
resources include both timber and non-timber forest products. Minor forest
products, secondary forest use, and hunting are of special importance for the
people, who closely depend on forests. Traditionally, minor forest products
include: fodder, technical raw materials, and decorative raw materials for
ornamental and applied art.
Technical
raw materials include mainly tanning substances and natural dyes. The most
popular fodder is vitamin flours produced from coniferous twigs and is used as
supplementary fodder for livestock.
Forests
growing at permafrost soils are of quite low productivity. However, they are
abundant in terms of non-timber forest products and bear significant social and
economic value. According to experts, the estimated annual commercial yield of
berries (cranberry, cowberry, blueberry) makes up 4 mill. tones and mushrooms
make up about 2.1 mill. tones. The stocks of medicinal plants (Panax
ginseng, Eleutherococcus senticosus, Rhodiola rosea, Schisandra chinensis,
etc.) are of great demand both at the domestic and international markets and
are extensively growing in the forests. The economic value of non-timber forest
products and services offered by forests, growing at permafrost soils, is
higher than the growing timber value. Strengthening and developing recreational
values, tourism, hunting and nature protection is in many cases more profitable
than harvesting.
According
to experts, the estimated market value of commercial stock of wild berries
amounts to more than 10 bill. USD annually, while commercial stock of mushrooms
is estimated as 5 bill. USD annually. According to the Forest Code of the RF
other types of forest use, other than harvesting, are carried out. These are:
·
By
products, e.g. stumps, birch bark, coniferous twigs
·
Secondary
forest use (hay, grazing, beekeeping, berries, mushrooms, nuts, medicinal
plants, moss, lichen)
·
Forest
Fund areas used for hunting.
Cranberry,
fox berry, cloudberry, blueberry, and raspberry are among the major species of
wild-growing berries of interest and demand.
Siberian
pine is the key nut-producing wildgrowing tree species. Almost 40 mill. ha are
covered with Siberian pine forests, and this tree is the major forest forming
species for Western and Eastern Siberian forests and the Far Easter taiga. To
preserve these forests, the so-called nut-harvesting zones started have been
marked since 1953. These zones are excluded from the commercial forests and the
felling of Siberia pine is prohibited. At present, over 10.5 mill. ha of
Siberian pine forests have been transferred to the category of nut harvesting.
Thickets
and brushwoods of Dwarf Siberian pine occupy almost 25 mill. ha in the mountain
forests of East Siberia in the Far East.
Mushrooms
are one of the most important non-timber forest products. This is a large group
of primary plants inclusive of over 30 thousand species. About three thousand
of the species are the so-called “cape” mushrooms, and over 200 of the species
are edible. Birch sap is one of the high-demand, non-timber forest products.
Although there are about 40 birch species in Russia, only European birch and
White birch are used for birch sap commercial harvesting.
According
to the Basic Rules of Miner Forest Use, sap harvesting is allowed in a mature
stand designated for final felling not earlier than 5 years before the
prescribed cut.
Up until
now, non-timber forest resources have not been included in the planned
commercial exploitation. A proper account of available non-timber forest
products is still missing.
Forest
ecosystems are characterized by high radioactive sensitivity, a great capacity
to absorb radionuclides, and slow purification. In addition, long-lasting
radionuclides, such as caesium-137 and strontium-90, join the biological
circulation of substances and can accumulate in perennial vegetation.
Uncontrolled
use of radio-polluted forest resources, as well as staying in a forest with
gamma-radiation exceeding the level of natural radiation, is dangerous for the
human life. Therefore, a special, safety-based approach is applied for the
management of radio-contaminated forests. This approach is based on principles
of regulation, substantiation and optimization of radiological safety. All
these activities are differentiated by zones of radioactive pollution and take
into account levels of soil, land surface, vegetation pollution, and the dose
of gamma-radiation. Based on these parameters, an individual forest management
approach is elaborated by paying special attention to labor protection and
radiation safety.
Obligatory
radiation control and safety observations are conducted on the territories
affected by radioactive pollution. These activities are performed by the
Radiation Control Service (RCS), which employs experts in the field of
radiology and forest experts, who are responsible for forest management,
protection and regeneration. The RCS is part of the state forest management
administration at all levels (from Federal to local). The RCS also carries out
an obligatory control over the forest products by tracing caesium-137 and
strontium-90 content and by meeting other requirements and standards.
At present,
the total area of the Forest Fund land that is polluted by caesium-137, resulting
from the Chernobyl accident, takes up 1 mill. ha. All totaled, the lands that
are polluted by radio nuclides are registered in 130 forest management units
and spread over 23 subjects of the Russian Federation. The condition of the
polluted lands is under permanent monitoring. Special measures are undertaken
to decrease the dose and to prevent secondary environmental pollution. The
data of the areas of the Forest Fund, polluted as a result of the Chernobyl
accident, are provided in Table 2. The radioactive
pollution has dramatically changed the natural and consumer characteristics
of the Forest Fund lands, thereby breaking forest management approaches and
practices of multiple forest use. This pollution has also caused significant
changes in reforestation, forest fire protection and protection from pests
and diseases. It also influences the social and economic structure. The radioactive
background in the forests, contaminated with long-lasting radio nuclides,
is changing very slowly. The cleansing process will spread over decades and
during this period, the Forest Fund lands will be radioactively dangerous.
Thus, a special system of forest management, aiming at safety and health protection,
as well as other ecologically sound approaches, has been developed and introduced
into the zones where there is radioactive pollution.
The main
goal of forest restoration is to timely restore economically valuable stands in
the felling sites, burnt areas and dying off sites, as well as to decrease
Forest Fund land area that is not covered with forest vegetation.
The
overwhelming majority of forests in Russia are of natural origin and only 3% of
lands covered with forest vegetation are artificially planted. Forest
restoration is closely linked to harvesting. Reduction of harvesting volumes
for the last 10 years has caused the decrease of clear felled areas as the main
forest restoration sites.
The forest
restoration volumes from the mean annual actual harvest of 0.5 mill. ha (1997–
2001) are presented in Fig. 11 (Reforestation dynamics,
thousand ha). In total, reforestation measures in Russia are carried
out in accordance with the established standards.
In the year
2001, almost 214 km of forestry roads were constructed. Also, 1207 tones of
seeds were collected, including 177 tones of coniferous species (pine, spruce,
larch) and 1586 mill. items of planting material were grown. Agro technical
treatment of the forest plantations was conducted over an area of 913.4 thousand
ha, almost 173.1 thousand ha were prepared for planting in 2002. Over 1.43
mill. ha of young stands were transferred to the category of economical value.
Protective afforestation represents a complex approach to plant, grow and use
forests to protect agricultural lands, soil, roads, channels and settlements
from unfavorable natural phenomena such as droughts, storms, water erosion,
dust storm, snow drift, floods and damaging mechanical impact. Over 18.1
thousand ha of farmlands were planted under protective afforestation in 2001
and almost 98.1 thousand ha of low value forests underwent land improvement.
About 657 mill. roubles were withdrawn from the budgets of the subjects of the
Russian Federation and allocated for the forest restoration in 2001. This
covered only 23% of the required sum. The missing means came from the forest
management unit’s profits that were received from timber sales and other
activities.
Forest fire protection. The area of land that is classified
as Class I and Class II for fire danger, which is characterized by low flammability,
takes up 32.7% of the Forest Fund. Class III of forest danger is characterized
by medium flammability and takes up 30.3% of land area. Class IV and Class
V (high and extremely high flammability) amount to 37.0% of the total Forest
Fund area. The average amount forest area that is annually burned by forest
fires totals about one million ha and varies considerably, depending on climatic
conditions. Creeping fires are the most common and they burn away about 90%
of the total forest fires area. In the Russian forests, anywhere from 17 to
36 thousand forest fires are registered annually (Fig. 12. Flammability Dynamics of the Russian Forests
Over the Period of 1991–2001). About 20.9 thousand fires were spotted in 2001,
and the area totaled about 868 thousand ha. This is 372 thousand ha less than
in 2000. The mean area of a forest fire has decreased by 24.8 ha and amounts
to about 41.6 ha. The damage caused by forest fires in 2001 was estimated
at 2.9 billion roubles. There are two major reasons for forest fires, which
are: anthropogenic (due to agricultural burnings and human carelessness),
and natural (lightning).
According
to the forest flammability analysis, over the past 10 years, up to 72% of
forest fires are caused by humans, about 7% result from agricultural burnings,
7% originate from lightning and 14% of fires are due to other causes. Figure 13 (Main Causes
of Forest Fires) presents the data on the forest fires caused in 2001. Up to 40% of the
fires in Siberia and the Far East are caused by lightning. Fires, caused by
humans, usually occur in the areas of highly developed infrastructure. According
to the Forest Code, forest fire protection is carried out by ground and aerial
methods. Almost 751.2 mill. ha are under aerial and ground observation. The
forest fire fighting service employs about 100 thousand people to work on
land, and a network of technically equipped divisions, such as fire tanks,
fire land rovers, tractors, bulldozers, high-pressure pumps, fire extinguishers,
and other tools, has been developed. Every forest management unit is equipped
with forest fire towers that are provided with TV and remote control equipment.
The federal fire fighting body, called “Avialesookhrana”, is comprised of
23 air bases – 4 of which have their own aircraft divisions, conducts all
aerial forest fire observations. The total number of staff amounts to 3.7
thousand persons.
Forest fire
suppression costs amounted to 621.3 mill. roubles in 2001, but only 485.4 mill.
roubles were covered by the Federal budget. The damage caused by forest fires,
which have the tendency to increase in number and area, as well as their
frequency and the extreme situations caused by massive and overwhelming forest
fires, which take place about 2-3 times a decade, allow forest fires to be in
the category of emergency status.
From forest
fire suppression experience, it has become clear that forest protection
propaganda against forest fires has to be enhanced, involving different social
and age groups of the local population. Also, timely detection by applying
space, aerial and ground methods, as well as further development of specialized
forest fire fighting units has to be enhanced. GIS technologies help greatly in
making forecasts, providing flexible and timely assistance, strengthening
operative maneuverability, and with the stationing of the fire fighting
brigades.
There is a
need for forest fire zoning of the Forest Fund area, especially in Siberia and
the Far East. This work requires re-working the current legislation and paying
special attention to the environmental and economical assessment of the
consequences of forest fires.
Forest protection from pests and diseases. Forest protection from pests and
diseases plays quite a significant role in the State Forest Service activities
(Ministry of Natural Resources division). The mean area of pests and disease
outbreaks composes up to 2.7 million ha annually. The average area of perishing
forests amounts to 60 thousand ha annually and varies greatly. Thus, during the
outbreak of mass reproduction of phytophagans in 1996, the perishing forests
were registered as being over 198 thousand ha. The increase of needle- and
leaf- eating insects has been observed for the last three years. This trend
depends on many factors. The first reason has to do with the natural
fluctuation of the pest populations. Favorable weather conditions may speed up
the natural process of pest development, and they are able to increase their
numbers in a short time, which can lead to an outbreak of harmful pests. The
total area of harmful pest and disease outbreak made up 10 million ha in 2001.
Nearly 70% of this area was affected by the Siberian moth (Dendrolimus
sibiricus) and the gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar).
In Yakutia,
an outbreak of the Siberian moth (Dendrolimus sibiricus) spread over an
area of 6 million ha and started to fade away only after certain measures were
undertaken and favorable natural conditions occurred. According to the forecast
of the Forest Protection Service, in the year 2002 there was a risk of
significant damage caused by the most damaging pests, which are leaf- and
needleeating insects. Irreversible consequences may have been caused by:
·
Siberian
moth, which damaged an area of 336.6 thousand ha in Khabarovsk region, 40
thousand ha in Irkutsk region, and 10 thousand ha in Buriatia;
·
Nun
moth (Liparis), which damaged an area of 12.8 thousand ha in the Kurgan region
and 11.3 thousand ha in Mordovia;
·
Sawflies,
which damaged an area of 19.2 thousand ha in Volgograd region, 7.5 thousand ha
in Kurgan region, 9.2 thousand ha in Rostov region, and 21.6 thousand ha in
Chelyabinsk region.
The sawyer
beetle (Monochamus sp.) is the most wide spread stem pest. Outbreaks of
the Monohamus have reached the areas of 115 thousand ha in the
Krasnoyarsk region and 10 thousand ha in the Primorsky district. There are two
leading forest diseases, which are wide spread all over Russia. One is fir
cancer, which damaged 445 thousand ha in the Kemerovo region, and the other is
root rot, which damaged 160.5 thousand ha in Moscow, Brjansk, Perm, and
Voronezh region.
Apart from
the biological peculiarities of pest and disease development, a set complex of
negative factors is causing an overall deterioration of the forest pathological
situation in the Russian forests. Forest Protection Service shortcomings, such
as lack of forest protection experts and insufficient financing, do not allow
for the ability to timely conduct forest pathology inspections and apply
pest-exterminating operations.
Applying
different methods and technical means helps to carry out monitoring and control
over the destructive insects and diseases. However, none of the existing
methods is universal or, in other words appropriate for any case. Controlling
has a chance of being successful if it is carried out systematically by
applying all means available. The approach depends on the species composition
(meaning pests and diseases), the degree of damage caused, and the
environmental and natural conditions in a forest stand. Over half a million
hectares is annually treated against pests and diseases. The combination of
bacterial and viral preparations amounts to 55% of the biological methods used.
An area of
10 million ha is annually involved in forest health monitoring, which is a
system of flexible and efficient control over the condition of the forest that
ensures timely detection of pathological changes in a stand, as well as comes
up with forecasts.
In 2001,
forest pathology expeditions were carried out over an area of 7.5 million ha
and the method used was airborne landing. Using ground methods about 180
thousand hectares were inspected. Unfortunately, the surveyed area is twice as
small as the required one, which would ensure timely detection of pathological
changes and help to prescribe due means of forest protection.
A network
of specially protected nature territories plays an important role in preserving
typical and unique natural landscapes, plant diversity, wildlife, and sites of
natural and cultural heritage. According to the Federal law of the Russian
Federation “On the Specially Protected Natural Territories” (N 33 dated March
14, 1995), the specially protected natural territories include land plots and
water bodies, with the air space above them, within the boundaries of the sites
of special value in terms of science, aesthetics, recreation and health care.
These are the sites that are officially excluded from management regime and
that are under specific nature protection management. The following categories
of specially protected sites that are officially in use:
·
State
nature reserves (strict nature zapovedniks), including biosphere reserves;
·
National
parks;
·
Nature
parks;
·
Wildlife
preserves (zakaznik);
·
Nature
monuments;
·
Dendrological
parks (arboreta) and botanical gardens;
·
Resorts
and health-care sites.
Apart from
the specially protected territories, the following sites are of due importance
and environmental value:
·
Forest
reserves;
·
Forest
stands of special value;
·
Forest
stands of due scientific and historical importance;
·
Genetic
reserves;
·
Relict
habitat sites populated with rare, endemic, and threatened flora and fauna
species.
These all
play a crucial role in the formation of an ecological framework of a certain
region. A state nature reserve (zapovednik) is the most traditional form of
site protection and is clearly prioritized for biological diversity
conservation. One hundred zapovedniks, with a total area of 33.5 million ha,
were established in the Russian federation by the year 2002. They stretch over
the territory of 64 subjects of the Russian Federation. According to the legislation,
zapovedniks are establishments for nature conservation, scientific research and
environmental education.
The system
of Russian state nature reserves (zapovedniks) is recognized with respect all
over the world. Twenty-one zapovedniks have the international status of
biosphere reserves, seven are under the jurisdiction of the World Cultural and
Natural Heritage convention, ten are under the jurisdiction of the Wetlands
convention of international importance, especially as being considered to be waterfowl
habitat, and four zapovedniks have been awarded with European Union Diplomas.
Territories, that include natural complexes and sites, that have special
economic, historical and aesthetic value, that are intended for nature
conservation, environmental, educational, scientific, and cultural purposes,
and that are designed for regulated tourism, are declared as national parks. By
the year 2002 there were 35 national parks in Russia with a total area of 6.9
mill. ha.
Nature
parks of regional importance fit into a rather new category of specially
protected areas. They represent establishments for nature conservation and
recreation that come under the jurisdiction of the subjects of the Russian
Federation. At present, the national parks network is in the developmental
stage, and only 30 nature parks are officially registered.
Wildlife
preserves (zakaznik) are the territories of special importance for the
preservation or restoration of natural complexes (or components), as well as
for the maintaining of ecological balance. State zakazniks carry out nature
protection functions under the regime of restricted economic activities and
restricted utilization of natural resources. There are 68 wildlife preserves of
the federal importance (total area 12.5 mill.ha) and 2.5. thousand wildlife
preserves of regional importance.
Nature
monuments are unique and irreplaceable sites of high ecological, scientific,
cultural and aesthetic value, which are of natural and artificial origin.
Depending on the value of the site, it can be of federal or regional
importance. There are 9 thousand nature monuments in Russia including 27 nature
monuments of federal importance (total area 4.2 mill. ha).
There are
153 resorts with a balneological, climatic and mud-care profile in Russia. Most
of them (52 resorts) are located in the Northern Caucasus.
Recreation
is an important aspect of forest use. Forest lands, accessible for walks and
visits, such as nature parks, zakazniks, urban and municipal forests, are considered
sites for recreational use. In no uncertain terms, all the Forest Fund lands
(both covered and noncovered with forests) are considered as recreational sites
and include rivers, lakes, glades, rocks, alpine meadows, roads, etc.
Recreational use is defined as the utilization of the forest benefits for the
recreation of people. According to the Forest Code of the Russian Federation,
the forest users, when on the Forest Fund sites that are designated for
cultural, health improving, tourism and sporting purposes, must undertake site
improvement measures. Natural landscapes and forests have to be preserved and,
therefore, fire safety rules and sanitary requirements have to be followed.
Forest
policy implementation requires adequate and appropriate personnel. There are
220.1 thousand employees currently working for the State Forest Service (MNR
Russia), including 62.8 thousand managers and experts. About 23.6 thousand
experts have graduated from schools of higher education and 32 thousand have a
vocational school education. At present, foresters (“Forestry and Forest Park
Management”) are trained in 14 different higher education institutions all over
Russia. Additionally, forest faculties were established in ten more higher education
institutions.
Specialized
MNR higher educational institutions (15 vocational schools, 4 forest colleges,
and 3 technical colleges) offer vocational education in forestry. Teaching and
training at these institutions of higher education, is focused the four majors.
Every year there are approximately three thousand people, who graduate with a
technical specialization.
Different
forms of continuous education and raising qualification are being developed.
For instance, an intensive three – year program is offered to obtain the degree
of the higher education. The program is designed for those, who have received
special secondary voluntary education. Specialized institutions of continuous
education aid in professional skills improvement of managers and other experts.
Educated foresters, forest managers, forest scientists and many others are
working in a forest and constitute the basis for the successful and perspective
forest management.
Ten
research institutions present the Ministry of Natural Resources of Russia.
Since the beginning of the 1990’s, considerable personnel reductions took
place. The total staff of the institutions was reduced twice, the number of
Ph.D and Doctoral holders have reduced 1.6 times. Nevertheless, research institutions
do function and provide scientific grounds to every forest management sector.
MNR Russia is the only state executive body (in addition to the Ministry of
Science) ensuring implementation of major research and experimental practices.
Thus, the status of forest research institutions has been changed, and since
they have become part of MNR structure, they share responsibility with other
forest management bodies in the subjects of the Russian Federation. Ensuring
scientific and technical progress in forestry is their key responsibility.
Up to the
year 2002 forest research and experimental activities were carried out within
the federal forest research programs such as ”Forest Fire Protection, “Forests
of Russia”, and “State Support of Nature Reserves and National Parks”. Research
institutions took part in the activity of the following subprograms:
·
The
Russian Forest;
·
Forestry
Genetics: The Priority Directions of Further Development;
·
Volga
Revival;
·
Complex
Timber Utilization;
·
Chernobyl
and Ural programs on radioactive rehabilitation of land and population; · EGASKRO
program;
·
Joint
Russia-Belorussian programs, aiming at overcoming consequences of the Chernobyl
disaster.
The
sub-program “Forests” was developed and supported by the federal program titled
“Ecology, Environment and Natural Resources of the Russian Federation
(2002–2010). Its main goal is to conserve and reproduce the forests as a raw
material resource providing locals with timber and non-timber forest products.
Teaching that forest is an important nature-forming component when managed in a
proper and sustainable way is another goal of the program.
Forest
science gains new perspective focusing on international commitments of the
Russian Federation. Convention on Biodiversity, Convention of Climate Change,
standing volume certification, and a set of requirements to be met for the
entering FAO are among the issues of scientific and practical interest.
National norms and standards have to be in line with the world standards.
The
violation of the forest legislation, including illegal harvesting, unauthorized
occupation of the Forest Fund lands, damage by sewage, chemical and radioactive
substances, industrial and consumers emissions causes significant damage to the
forests leading to greater ecological consequences.
Low efficiency
of the executive bodies was revealed in the analysis conducted to control
the observance of the forest legislation revealed. Up to now, none of the
articles of the Forest Code determining the authority of the subjects of the
Russian Federation (Articles 36, 43, 96, 107, 121, 122, and 123) have ever
been implemented in any region. State programs on use, control, protection
of the Forest Fund lands and reproduction of forests (Art.70) were adopted
and are implemented in 14 subjects of the Russian Federation. Only 23% of
total expenses in the field of use, control, protection of the Forest Fund
land and forest reproduction are financed (Art. 108). Harvesting guidelines
(secondary forest use) are adopted for 12 subjects of the Russian Federation
(Art. 120). The number of revealed cases on legislation violations has grown
during the past years. In 2001, about 29.4 thousand violations were registered
in the Forest Fund lands under the MNR jurisdiction. Almost 941.4 thousand
m3 of timber were harvested illegally
(Fig. 14. Illegal Harvesting in the Russian Forest). The estimated damage is 2.8 bill.
roubles.
A considerable increase of illegal harvesting has occurred and was registered in a number of regional MNR departments:
·
The
Republic of North Osetia – Alania – 3 times increase;
·
Khanty-Mansiisk
autonomous district – 2.6 times increase;
·
The
Republic of Adygeya – 2.5 times increase;
·
Kursk region
– 2.3 times increase;
·
Cheljabinsk
region – 2.1. time increase.
At the same
time, there is a steady progress in combating illegal harvesting in some other
regions. The forest guard officials have reported that the number of violations
in certain regions such as Murmansk region, Kemerovo, Magadan, Komi, and Perm’
is still increasing.
Illegal
harvesting is not only a forestry related issue; it also involves
transportation and trade of the illegal timber, illegal timber processing,
illegal export, as well as customs violations and price infringements. In 2001
there were more than 10.2 thousand protocols on forest violations submitted to
the investigation agencies and another 9.4 thousand protocols were ordered an
inquiry. About 1142 persons were made responsible for criminal infringements
and administrative bodies imposed over 7 thousand penalties.
Apart from
forest protection the State Forest Protection Service carries out a set of measures
on the protection of wildlife and habitats. There were over 3729 violations of
the wildlife legislation registered in the year of 2001. Therefore, there is a
critical need to strengthen and improve the State Forest Protection Service.
According to the data from January 1, 2001 the number of the State Forest
Protection Service employees was 106.1 thousand persons, including 66.2
thousand forest rangers, 12.8 thousand of foremen, 14 thousand of foresters and
assistant foresters. According to the estimated standard of forest guard and
protection, there are 123 thousand persons needed to guarantee efficient
control and protection of the Forest Fund lands.
The main
goal of the State Forest Service of Russia (SFS) is to represent the country at
negotiations with other states and international organizations on the issues of
sustainable forest management, environmental protection and global forest
policy developments. The SFS takes an active part in the process of
international negotiations on forests and explains the position of Russia on
the issue of implementation of national strategies and programs on sustainable
forest management. SFS experts take an active part in the Intergovernmental
Working Group on Criteria and Indicators of nature conservation and sustainable
management of boreal and temperate forests (Montreal process). Another
important regional forum actively attended by SFS is the Pan-European process
including the Ministerial Conference on Protection of Forests in Europe.
One of the
fundamental goals of the state forest service of Russia is the preparation and
implementation of international agreements signed by the Russian Federation.
The ones on cooperation in the field of forestry are of particular interest.
The forest service ensures realization of signed agreements with the USA,
Canada, Finland, Sweden, Hungary, Great Britain and other countries. The
Ministry of Natural Resources coordinated bilateral relations with foreign
miniseries and agencies responsible for forestry. We are proud to announce
following programs as the State Forest Service accomplishments:
·
Russian
– Finnish program on the development of the North-West of Russia;
·
Russia
– USA program on monitoring of gypsy moth population in Primorsky kray;
·
Russia
– Canada and Russia – Switzerland programs on model forests.
Grants
offered by international sponsoring institutions have become additional sources
for forestry development in the subjects of the Russian Federation has become.
During the past decades the projects on sustainable forest management and
biodiversity conservation have been supported by the US Agency for
International Development (USAID), TACIS, Know-How Foundation, the British
Council, Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA), the Worldwide
Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF), and the World Conservation Union (IUCN).
There is a
global process of reappraisal of the importance of forests and their role in
human’s life. Not too long ago forests were considered simply as forest
products providers such as wood source and fuel wood supplier. At present,
forests attained social and cultural value. Mankind has developed a new
strategy of sustainable development, and thus, – economic prosperity without
jeopardizing this resource.
The
sustainable forest management agrees with a principle that is included in the
Forest Code of the Russian Federation and comes as following: “ensuring
sustained and unexhaustive use of Russian forests, their protection and
reproduction”.
Forests
meet various human requirements; they are a source of numerous ecologically
safe foodstuffs, they represent living environment for many people and maintain
people’s spiritual and physical health. Therefore, forests serve as a
fundamental link in nature conservation and natural regulation of environmental
processes. Forests represent the very basis for the human survival.
Russian
forests with their preserved vast virgin territories are of global importance
due to the extensive forest cover, rich biodiversity, their role in the global
carbon and oxygen cycles, and their potential impact on international trade of
forest products.
Judging by
the forest area and the growing stock, the Russian forests make up 50% of the
total area and standing volume of boreal and temperate zones.
It is a
great responsibility to carry out a qualitative account of forest state and
condition, ensuring their safety, reproduction and sustainable use.
Maintenance
and enhancement of national forest resources can be achieved through sustainable
forest management. Such a forest management should provide sustainable use of
forest resources, functions and benefits, which are of value for present and
future needs of human civilization on the basis of the balance of interests of
different population groups, industry and forest administration without causing
any damage to environmental quality and biodiversity of forests.
Forests
provide living conditions for humans, as well as they ensure steady environment
and contribute to stable economic development of a country. Forest conservation
is a certain guarantee of biodiversity conservation, which is one of the key
components of the sustainable development. The diversity and the variety of
endemic species presented in the forests of Primorje, Altai, Sayjan, Caucasus,
and of Southern Urals is the highest compared to similar ecosystems of the
world. Vast and immense pre-tundra forests play vital role maintaining stable
climatic conditions and preventing tundra forests from advancing towards the
south. Thus, the forests of Siberia and the Far East located at permafrost
soils are of special importance. As for the forests of arid zone, they keep the
deserts from further expanding. Criteria and indicators of the sustainable
forest management of the temperate and boreal forests include a set of
estimates that allow determining the progress of one country or another towards
the sustainable forest management.
Criteria
and indicators represent a clear reference for the decision-makers and for
those, who formulate national forest policy. Also, they serve as a basis for
international cooperation in the field of forest protection and sustainable forest
management.
With the
help of Montreal criteria’s, which are: biodiversity, forest productivity,
forest health and vitality, soil and water resources, input of forests into the
global carbon cycle, socio-economic benefits, juridical, political and organizational
contexts, the priorities of the sustainable forest management have been set.
Forest
management that is based on criteria and indicators presupposes ecosystem
approach. Individual criteria and indicators are unable to provide an
exhaustive account of forest conservation and a thorough assessment of
sustainable development of the forest ecosystems. Thus, they have to be
considered in an agreement with other criteria and indicators.
Biodiversity
is defined as variability of living organisms, including diversity within the
species, among the species and among the ecosystems. Conservation of forest
biodiversity is important to support forest productivity and resistance.
In the
Russian Federation forest management is aiming at the sustainable forest use
and is striving for efficient forest protection, conservation, and
reforestation. Forest management is based on the principles of sustainability
and biodiversity conservation. It is also directed at strengthening both: the
resource potential and environmental capacity of the forests. Moreover, it aims
to meet the needs and requirements of the society and rests on the
scientifically grounded and multipurpose forest management and exploitation
(Forest Code of the Russian Federation, Article 3).
Conservation
of biological diversity presupposes maintenance of historically developed
ecosystems as well as fully formed natural landscapes that have become habitats
for various groups of living organisms. Biological diversity means the
diversity of ecosystems, species and also genetic diversity. The existing
information about the biological diversity of Russian forests is far from being
complete. Forest ecosystem inventory is currently being conducted based on typological
approach. The key information on biological diversity that has developed
through time and characterizes this particular group of indicators was obtained
from the State Forest Fund Accounts up to the year of 2001. High forest
ecosystem diversity is a clear feature of Russian forests. About 25% of
undisturbed forests of the world are concentrated in Russia. These are vast
areas that constitute a certain standard of biological diversity and natural
development of the forest ecosystems. The assessment of Russian forests by the
“Biodiversity Conservation” criteria was performed using three groups of
indicators that looked at the three different levels: ecosystem, specie, and
genetic levels.
The total
area of major forest forming species is used to evaluate this indicator. This
data is obtained from the State Forest Fund Account. The land area (trees
and shrubs) and major forest forming species is shown in the Table
3.
Larch predominance (Larix sibirica, Larix gmelinii,
Larix cajanderi, Larix czekanowskii) represents the largest area and highest
volumes among the coniferous forests. These stands are in a very good condition
as they are located in the areas of weak infrastructure (Siberia and the Far
East) (Fig. 15. The Distribution of the Major Forest Forming Species).
Pine predominant stands (Pinus sylvestris mostly)
have been under heavy exploitation for many years. Pine stands are second most
distributed forests in the territory of the Russian Federation. Careful forest
management is required for maintaining the existing biodiversity of pine
stands. Dark coniferous forests constitute about 13% of the total Forest Fund
area. More than a half of them are located in the European-Ural part of Russia.
Spruce forests are predominantly represented by Picea abies, Picea obovata,
Picea ajanensis, also including hybrid forms of spruces formed at the
borders of the areals. Fir dominating stands are limited and grow at the
restricted areas mostly in the Urals, in south and west Siberia, and in the Far
East. Limited areas of the pure fir stands are formed by Abies sibirica,
Abies nordmanniana, Abies nephrolepis, and Abies sachalinensis. Dark
coniferous forests (taiga forest zone) are generally undisturbed. Balanced and
sustainable management of dark coniferous forests are required to “bridge”
commercial, environmental, and biodiversity components.
Siberian pine (Pinus sibirica) forests are
mostly located in Siberia, and Pinus koraensis stands found in the Far
East. In total, their area constitutes about 40 mill. ha. Siberian pine is of a
great value not only for timber, but also for the variety of non-timber
products. Moreover, Siberian pine forests represent unique habitats for many
species of flora and fauna and thus should become a high priority since they
are the key components of the sustainable forest management.
Stands with birch predominance are very common among
the softwooded broadleaved forests (Betula pendula and Betula
pubescens mostly). Smaller areas are occupied with aspen (Populus tremula)
forests. Forests constituted by these broadleaved species are formed mainly at
the felling sites, forest fire sites and at the abandoned agricultural lands.
Forest stands with alder (Alnus incana, Alnus glutinosa, Alnus hirsuta),
poplar (Populus nigra, Populus suaveolens, Populus maximovichii) and
willow predominance (Salix alba, Salix fragilis) are mostly coincided
with riverbanks and provide soil and water protection functions. Linden stands
also belong to softwooded broadleaved forests and have been actively exploited
in the past. Uncontrolled use of linded stands resulted in a rapid decrease of
their distribution area. Linden is growing widely in the European part of
Russia, and Tilia cordata represents the majority of stands in the
Urals. Smaller areas of linden are found in the south of the Far East and are
mostly presented by Tilia amurensis, Tilia mandshurica, Tilia taquetti.
Among the hardwooded broadleaved species, birch is the
predominant specie growing mostly in the Far East (Betula costata, Betula
davurica, Betula ermanii, Betula lanata, Betula schmidtii). Among
hardwooded broadleaved species oak stands are the second most distributed
specie. These forests are characterized by high level of biodiversity. About
55% of oak forests are concentrated in the European part of Russia (Quercus
robur). Mongolian oak (Quercus mongolica) is predominant in the Far
East. Forest areas formed by another hardwooded species such as beech,
blackwood, ash, maple or elm are not significant and, therefore, of a special
value. They require delicate approach and caring management. Haloxylon forests (Haloxylon
aphyllum) represent rather unique plant type, which is characteristic for
semideserts of Prikaspy. They provide soil and water protection functions.
Other forests, such as chestnut – Castanea sp, pear – Pyrus sp, Gleditsia
sp, walnuts – Juglans regia, Manchzhurian nut – Juglans
mandshurica) occupy small areas but are vitally important for biodiversity
conservation. Dwarf Siberian pine (Pinus pumila) forests growing in
Siberia and in the Far East are of significant ecological value and are also
important source of nuts. Apart from the Dwarf Siberian pine, growing in the
unfavorable conditions, shrub forms of the birch species (Betula ovalifolia,
Betula fruticosa) are widely spread in Siberia and in the Far East.
Information
about the area of distribution of the forest forming species by age is not
presented in the State Forest Fund Account (SFFA). However, this information is
kept in the SFFA database. Forest stands are grouped into the age groups based
on the age of final felling and on the age classes. Age class is an interval,
characterizing the age of trees and shrubs:
·
20
years gradation was set for hardwoods and coniferous of seed origin;
·
10
years gradation was set for softwoods and hardwoods of sprout origin;
·
5
years or one year gradation was set for shrubs.
Siberian
pine forests are an exception as the age class gradation is 40 years.
Depending
on the age, forest stands are divided into five groups: 1 – young growth of the
1st age group, 2 – young growth of the 2nd age group, 3 –
middle aged forests, 4 – maturing forests, 5 – mature and overmature forests.
Table 4 provides information about forest distribution of the major forest forming
species based on its age group. Mature and overmature stands are dominating
in every group of forest forming species throughout the Russian Federation.
Middle-aged forests are the second most spread forests in the territory of
the Russian Federation. Maturing stands occupy the smallest areas. Forest
distribution based on different age classes is highly uneven. Leaf tree species are predominant in
the area of mature and overmature stands. They have a remote location growing
mostly in Siberia and are of limited exploitation (Fig.
16. Extent of Area by Age Class, years). Currently, there has been a pattern
of the decrease of the areas of mature and overmature coniferous stands.
There is
no generalized data on forest species composition of specially protected areas.
IUCN representative office for Russia and CIS countries, together with WWF
– Russia has generalized data on the areas of nature-protected forests that
belong to different categories of IUCN (Table 5).
Protected
forests include stands, growing in the nature protected areas and other stands
that belong to the Group I forests. According to the IUCN classification, about
23.4% of land area, which is covered with forest vegetation, belong to
different forest conservation categories.
According
to IUCN classification, state nature reserves (strict protection) belong to
Category I of protected lands constituting 1.3% of the total land area. These
are the most strictly protected areas. National parks and nature parks (ecosystem
conservation and tourism) fall into Category II (0.8% of the total land area),
category III and IV (conservation of natural features and conservation through
active management) are represented by the state nature zakazniks (wildlife
preserves); nature monuments of federal, regional, and local significance;
forests of historical and scientific value, and stands of special value (4.9
% of the total land area). Category V (landscape/seascape conservation and
recreation) includes state shelterbelt forests and occupies insignificant
area. They carry out ecological and water protective functions (Fig. 17. Percent of Forest Land Managed for Protection
in Relation to the Total Area of The Forest Fund). Category VI (sustainable use of
natural ecosystems) includes most of the Group I forests (15.8% of the total
land area), including sanitary zones of water supply sources, resort areas
buffer zones, ravine forests, fruit stands, nut producing forests, pre-tundra
forests, spawning grounds protection forests, forest green belts, lentochny
bor (pine forest belt), forest stands of sparsely wooded lands, restricted
forest areas along the water bodies. Data on the major forest forming species
of national parks is presented in Table 6.
Group I
forests is the best category to evaluate using 1.1d indicator. The major functions
of Group I forests are: water protection, water regulation, and ravine function
(Table 7).
According to the location and to the functions, Group I forests are divided into the following categories:
·
Restricted
forest stripes along rivers, lakes, water reservoirs and other water bodies;
·
Restricted
forest stripes protecting spawning grounds;
·
Ravine
forests;
·
Protected
forests along the of the federal, republic and regional railroads;
·
State
shelterbelt forests;
·
Lentochny
bor (pine forest belt);
·
Forests
of desert and semi desert areas, steppe and forest steppe; mountainous forest stands
of sparsely wooded lands that are of vital environmental importance;
·
Forests
of the green zones around settlements and administrative buildings;
·
Forests
of the sanitary zones of water supply sources;
·
Forests
of nut producing areas;
·
Fruit
stands;
·
Pre-tundra
forests;
·
Forests
of the I, II, and III zones of the sanitary protection of the resorts.
Final felling is conducted at the areas of the following categories:
·
Restricted
forest stripes along rivers, lakes, water reservoirs and other water bodies;
·
Protective
forests along the federal, republic and regional;
·
Forests
of the green belts around settlements and administrative buildings;
·
Lentochny
bor (pine forest belt);
·
Forests
of desert and semi desert areas, forests of steppe and forest steppe, mountainous
forest stands of sparsely wooded lands that are of vital environmental
importance.
Final felling at these areas aims at stands’ improvement, is directed to strengthen forest natural functions and is designed to timely and efficiently use mature and overmature stands.
A large number of extra valuable tree species such as Siberian pine, pine, spruce, oak, beech, hornbeam, maple, ash, elm and stone birch belong to the Group I forests, which is characterized by restricted exploitation regime. In terms of area, middle aged and maturing stands are dominating. They provide excellent environmental and water protection functions.
The index
of fragmentation widely accepted in Central and Western Europe, is not commonly
used in Russia. Most of the land area is covered with dense forests.
Low-density forests are located:
·
Along
the southern border of the forest zone (going from forest zone to steppe zone);
·
Along
the northern border of the forest zone (going from forest zone to tundra zone);
·
In the
areas of the developed agriculture and farming;
·
At sparsely wooded lands
(southern part of the European-Urals) (Fig. 18. Extent of Forest Fund Areas by Forest Zones
and Sub Zones).
Forest land
percentage is determined by correlation between the land area covered with
forest vegetation and the total area of a concrete region (Table 8). It is the most frequently used index to
demonstrate forest fragmentation (Figure 19. Forest Land Percentage, %).
The most complete information on forest fragmentation is found at the locally obtained data of the State Forest Account. This information is represented at the management maps and plans of each forest management unit.
In Russia
the inventory of composition of flora and fauna species is far from being
completed. Thus, for some taxonomic groups of living organisms it is hard to
determine the number of forest dependent species.
Vascular plants. There are about 11 400 species of
vascular plants of 1488 genus’s and of 197 families currently registered in
Russia. According to preliminary estimates, there are only 30% of vascular
plants (about 3.5 thous. of species) related to the forest ecosystems.
Bryophytes. All three classes of
bryophytes represent the bryoflora of the Russian Federation: Anthocerae,
Hepaticae, and Bryales. The amount of
bryophytes totals up to 1370 species and 1000 of them are represented by Bryales. The
majority of bryophytes are considered as important components of boreal forest
ecosystems.
Algae. There are over 9000
species of seaweeds, sweet waterweeds, and soil algae registered in the
territory of the Russian Federation. Some of them are permanent inhabitants of
forest soils and epiphytes, settling on the tree trunks.
Lichens. There are about 3000
species of lichens found in Russia. Similarly to aquatic plants and bryophytes,
many lichens represent tree epiphytes as well as constitute a part of ground
vegetation in boreal forest ecosystems.
Fungus. Fungus is a part of
nature, representing one of its key components. Funguses demonstrate high
levels of diversity and are present in almost all terrestrial ecosystems.
Slime moulds (Myxomycetes) and mushrooms (Macromycetes)
are considered to be the major forest dependent species. Slime moulds are a
least studied fungus group. There were about 211 species of 10 families
discovered in Russia, which makes about 30% of the world mycobiota.
Mushrooms is a large (over 3 thous. species) and
diverse in terms of biology and taxonomy fungus group with most of edible
mushrooms and mycorhiza-forming forms included. Institute of Botany of the
Russian Academy of Science came up with a list of 241 rare mushroom species and
103 species that need to be protected.
Individual
groups of vertebrates are studied relatively precisely. The diversity of
invertebrate species (insects in particular) is weakly researched. There are
taxonomy reviews missing on the main groups of land insects.
Vertebrates. There are about 1300 species of
vertebrates that belong to 7 different classes found in Russia. Mammals are the
best-studied group. There are almost 320 species of mammals registered, 90 of
which are associated with forest ecosystems. Bird fauna (732 species) is
thoroughly investigated as well. The overwhelming majority of birds (515
species) are nesting birds and 27 of them are nesting within the Russian
Federation. The largest in number are the following orders: Passeriformes,
Charadriiformes, and Anseriformes. There are about 9% of bird species
included in the Red Data Book (Extinct and Endangered Species of the Russian
Federation). There are no reliable data on the number of forest dependent
species. However, almost 70% of birds in Russia proliferate within the forest
zone. Due to the severe climatic conditions of the vast territory of the
Russian Federation, the fauna of reptiles and amphibians of Russia is not numerous
(75 and 27 species respectively). Forest dependent species are not found so
far.
Invertebrates. Presently, there is only approximate
information available on the number of invertebrate species in the fauna of the
Russian Federation. The preliminary estimates show about 130-150 thousand
species, which make up 10% of the global diversity. Insects constitute the
basis of the fauna (97%). The following taxonomic groups of invertebrates are most frequently
associated with a forest ecosystem:
·
Protozoa (about 6500 species);
·
Annelides (about 1000 species);
·
Insects (about 100 thous. species);
·
Arachnida class (about 10 thous. species).
Please, see
Attachment for the number of the most studied
groups of plants and animals at nature reserves and national parks.
In the last few decades certain species of flora and
fauna have become extinct whereas some of them are still endangered (the areas
of distribution are reducing, the numbers are decreasing). The Red Data Book
contains the aggregated information on the state and conditions of the rare and
endangered species (sub-species, populations) of wild plants and animals as
well as the number of protection measures. Every specie (or sub-specie) listed
in the Red Data Book is referred to a certain category of the Red Data Book of
IUCN and other national Red Lists of Threatened Species. As for the Red Data
Book of the Russian Federation, the following categories are accepted:
·
0 (Ex)[2]
– apparently
extinct species (subspecies);
·
1 (E) – endangered species (sub-species) are
hard to preserve if the factors, contributing to the their decrease of population
are to continue. Taxons, which population has reduced to critical levels and
also which areas of distribution have dramatically reduced, belong to the
endangered species category;
·
2 (V) – sensitive and vulnerable species (subspecies)
include taxons that are likely to be moved to the above-mentioned category of
endangered species if the factors, contributing to the decrease in their
population are to continue. This category also includes taxons which population
went down due to their excessive usage, considerable disturbance of habitats
and other changes in the environment;
·
3 (R) – rare species (sub-species). This
category includes taxons represented by small populations that are not
endangered, vulnerable, sensitive or extinct, but yet, running risks to be in
this category. Usually, these taxons are bound to a very limited territory or
have narrow ecological amplitude, or else – are scattered over the vast
territories;
·
4 (I) – species or sub-species of uncertain status.
Most likely, they belong to one of the above-mentioned categories, but the
information about them is not provided.
In total there 440 of angiosperms species, 11 of Gymnospermae
species, and 10 fern plants included in the Red Data Book of Extinct
and Endangered Species of the Russian Federation (Plants, 1988). It is estimated
that about 2-3 thousand species are endangered at a greater or lesser degree.
The Red Data Book includes over 50% of vascular plants, 36% of bryophytes,
94% of fungi and 86% of lichens represented at the state nature reserves (1998)
(Sokolov et al., 1997). Forest dependent plants are a considerable part (over
40%) of the total amount of species, included in the Red Data Book (Table 9). Mainly, it goes for Gymnospermae,
fungi, and lichen that are closely related to the forest ecosystems.
According to the Red Data Book (1985), the amount of
endangered vertebrate species is 197. The new edition of the Red Data Book
(2000) showed 283 endangered species (subspecies), thus demonstrating an unfavorable
pattern of decrease of fauna species. Presently, at the time of economic transition
and structural changes there is a higher risk to loose such a valuable biodiversity.
In 1985 there were 49 species of rare and endangered invertebrates, which
constitute 0.033% of the total amount of species included in the Red Data
Book. In the new addition of the Red Data Book (2000), the number went up
to 155 animals. About 45% of animals included in the Red Data Book are closely
related to forest ecosystems (Table 10).
The
reduction of the areas of distribution of rare species is directly linked to
anthropogenic activity. The major damage is caused by:
·
Clearcuts;
·
Reducing
forested area for farmlands;
·
Transformation
of the flood plains to hayfields and grazing lands;
·
Fens
and bogs drainage;
·
Forest
fires over the vast territories;
·
Chemical
protection against pests and diseases;
·
Medicinal
plants collection;
·
Wild
plants collection, etc.
Anthropogenic
pressure on the forest landscapes has lead to the reduction of the considerable
part of forest dependent populations. In some cases, such forestry measures
like sanitary harvesting and cleaning of dead wood result in a loss of a whole
group of living organisms, vitally dependent on the decaying deadfall.
As for big
mammals, they suffer greatly from poaching. In order to protect this group of
animals it is important to reinforce campaigns against poaching and to control
the observance of the bans on harvesting. Special attention has to be paid to
the protection of key habitats of birds and animals.
The majority of rare species of limited areas of distribution are living in broadleaved, broadleaved – coniferous, and coniferous forests in the Caucasus, in southern Siberia, and the Far East. The majority of rare species are concentrated in the zone of broadleaved forests of the European part of Russia and in the Urals.
The data
presented in this section is preliminary and is still to be supplied with
additional information and has to be verified.
Broadleaved forests, Siberian pine-broadleaved forests
as well as spruce–fir forests of the Primorsky kray and Sakhalin play a key
role in preserving populations of many rare species. A number of rare mammals
inhabit only remote areas of difficult access and thus, are found on the
territories of nature reserves. These rare mammals include:
·
Amur tiger (Pantera tigris altaica);
·
East Siberian leopard (Pantera pardus orientalis);
·
Amur forest cat (Felis euptilura);
·
Red wolf (Cuon alpinus);
·
Himalayan bear (Ursus thibetanus);
·
Ussur spotted deer (Cervus nippon hortulorum);
·
Amur goral (Nemorhaedus caudatus);
·
Sakhalin musk deer (Moschus moschiferus
sachalinensis);
·
Giant shrew (Sorex mirabilis).
The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) has launched specific
projects to preserve tiger and leopard. More than 11 bird species and 7 species
of insects belong to a number of forest dependent organisms with limited areas
of distribution.
There are 21 species of trees and shrubs of limited
areas of distribution:
·
Calopanax (Kalopanax septemlobus);
·
Birch (Betula schmidtii);
·
Hop hornbeam (Ostrya carpinifolia);
·
Oak (Quercus dentate);
·
Apricot (Armeniaca mandshurica);
·
Pearl bush (Exochorda serratifolia);
·
Chinese prinsepia (Princepia sinensis);
·
Nut (Juglans ailanthifolia);
·
Magnolia (Magnolia obovata);
·
Korean larch (Larix olgensis);
·
Japanese red pine (Pinus densiflora);
·
Japanese yew (Taxus cuspidate);
·
Needle juniper (Juniperus rigida);
·
Microbiota (Microbiota deussata);
·
Tea-plant (Oplopanax elatus);
·
Aralia (Aralia continentalis, Aralia cordata);
·
Hazel (Corylis colurna);
·
Rododendron (Rhododendron faurieri, Rhododendron
schlippenbachii);
·
Shrubby lespedeza (Lespedeza cyrtobotrya).
The Red Data Book includes about 18 species of
vascular grass like plants of areas of distribution found in the Far East.
Mountain Forests of the Caucasus
Protected and rare mammal species occurring in
mountainous forests include:
·
Bison (Bos bonasus),
·
Wild goat (Carpa aegagrus,)
·
Giant noctule (Nyctalus lasiopterus.)
Following
are the rare bird species registered in Russia:
·
Short-toed eagle (Circaetus gallicus);
·
Caucasian blackcock (Lyrurus mlokosiewiczi);
·
Nuthatch (Sitta krueperi);
·
Short-toed tree creeper (Certhia brachydacyla).
Caucasian viper (Vipera kaznakowi) and muddiver
(Pelodytes caucasius) represent rare and protected reptile species of
the Caucasus.
As for the insects, Caucasian ground beetle (Carabus
caucasicus), longhorn beetles (Rhesus serricollis), and mnemozins (Parnassius
mnemosyne) are the first ones to be protected.
Forest ecosystems of the Caucasus play a vital role in
maintaining 14 species of vascular grass like plants as well as the following
populations of rare tree species and shrubs:
·
Pitsunda pine (Pinus brutia subsp. pityusa);
·
Common yew (Taxus baccata);
·
Greek juniper (Juniperous excelsa);
·
Radde birch (Betula raddeana);
·
Date-plum persimmon (Dyospyros lotus);
·
Fig tree (Ficus carica);
·
Wing nut (Pterocarya pterocarpa);
·
Colchida box (Buxus colchica);
·
Etruscum honeysuckle (Lonicera etrusca);
·
Dwarf spindle-tree (Euonymus nana).
Bison, short-toed eagle, golden eagle (Aquila
chrysaetos), giant noctule, voskovik-otshel’nik (Osmoderma eremita),
mnemozina are found in the mixed and broadleaved forests of the European part
of Russia. Russian desman (Desmana mosschata) occur in the forests of
the flooded lands of the European part of Russia (Oksky nature reserve), while
its number in the natural area of distribution (rivers: Dnepr, Volga, Don and
Ural) is drastically decreasing.
To protect bison population there have been established
specific nurseries in Prioksko-Terrasny and Oksky nature reserves. The
offspring is transported to the other parts of Russia, where the bison
population requires restoration.
Some predator bird species are nestling in the forest
steppe zone. These are:
·
Evropeiskii tjuvik (Accipiter brevipes);
·
Harmel (Aquila heliaca);
·
Saker falcon (Falco cherrug).
As for the tree species, Cretaceous pine (Pinus
sylvestris var.cretacea) has quite a limited area of distribution and is found
in the forest steppe zone. Such vascular plants as umbrageous sedge (Carex
umbrosa subsp.umbrosa), blue pea (Lathyrus venetus), Russian
fritillary (Fritillaria ruthenica), narrow helleborine, red helleborine (Cephalantera
longifolia, C.rubra), Litvinov pea (Lathyrus litvinovii) are widely
presented in the forests of the European part of Russia.
In the forested flooded lands of the northern Urals
and in the west of Siberia (along the Enisey river) west Siberian beaver (Castor
fiber pohlei) occur in a very limited area of distribution.
The forests of southern Siberia play a vital role in
preserving the following species of rare and endangered populations of animals
such as:
·
Tuva beaver (Castor fiber tuvinicus);
·
Dagan fritillary (Fritillaria dagana);
·
Harmel (Aquila heliaca);
·
Saker falcon (Falco cherrug);
·
Mnemoziny.
As for the plants, Siberian dog’s tooth (Erythronium
sibiricum) is the one to be preserved in this area.
The criteria
and the related indicators reveal forest policy of the Russian Federation and
compliance with the principles of biodiversity conservation and sustainable
forest management.
The forests
of Russia play a vital role in the process of biodiversity conservation of
temperate and boreal forests of Eurasia in ecosystem, species, and genetic
levels.
The
ecosystem diversity maintenance is provided by long-term preservation of land
area covered with forest vegetation. Species composition of Russian forests is
rich and diverse. Coniferous (native) forest forming species occupy the largest
portion of the land area, covered with forest vegetation (over 70%). Soft
leaved (secondary) forests occupy about 16% of the land area covered with the
forest vegetation. The unbalanced age structure is characteristic for the
Russian forests, where prevailing mature and overmature forests are the most
ecologically valuable.
Nature
protected areas are considered to be the key components in the process of
biodiversity conservation. Forest area of nature reserves is growing,
demonstrating a good and stable trend. They currently constitute 7% of the land
area covered with forest vegetation. The following categories: forests of the
special protective value; forests of nature reserves, and Group I forests
constitute 23% of the total forest area of Russia.
Low level
of fragmentation is characteristic for the most areas of coniferous and mixed
forests. It is a favorable factor contributing to the preservation of the
various forest dependent species.
All the
rare and endangered species are registered in the Russian Federation. All of
them are included in the Red Data Book. Preservation of about 40% of animal and
plant species included in the Red Data Book, involves forest ecosystems.
Thus,
monitoring biodiversity conservation involves all the groups and indicators and
is conducted at a high level.
Forest is a
source of timber and of the variety of other products derived form it. Not a
single economy is able to develop in a sustainable way without the use of
forest products. At the same time, sustainable forest development cannot be
practiced without spatially organized forestry and ecologically sound and
balanced harvesting approaches. It is utterly important to maintain
productivity of the forest ecosystem in order to ensure the effective carbon
sequestration, which is vital for keeping atmospheric gas composition stable.
Nowadays,
timber harvesting is the main forest use in Russia. The so-called commercial
forests are designated to meet the needs of timber for commercial purposes
only. Forest management and planning operations for commercial forests have
been finalized taking into account their geographic characteristics as well
as their economic accessibility for the upcoming 10 years (Table
11).
More than
half of Russian forests grow in permafrost areas of Siberia and the Far East,
thus demonstrating low productivity rates at these regions (the average index
of a forest site is IV). Only 54% of the total growing stock is of commercial
interest. Its major part, which is located in the European east and also along
the Transsiberian railroad, has been considerably exhausted during the past
century (Fig. 20. Mean Growing Stock,
m3/ha). Table
12 presents the development of growing stock on forest land available
for timber production.
Until the
mid 1970s the area of felling sites was considerably larger than reforestation
volumes. Unfortunately, in the areas of intensive forest exploitation the
principle of sustainability and unexhaustive forest management has never been
followed. Vast coniferous stands were harvested without performing any reforestation.
According to Rosgiproles data, only in the year of 1989 the areas of forest
regeneration started to exceed the areas of felling sites. Therefore, the
decrease of planting volumes that occurred in early 1990s didn’t have much
effect on the increase of the areas of forest plantations. Since then the
share of forest plantations has been growing steadily. The development of
area and volume indices of forest plantations is presented in the Table 13 and at the Fig.
21 (The Percentage of Forest Plantations
in the Total Land Area Covered with Forest Vegetation).
Naturally
growing species are usually used in forest plantations. The area of exotic
species is insignificant, constituting about 1-2% of the total area of forest
plantations.
Scientifically
grounded Annual Allowable Cut (AAC) defines reasonable volumes of final fellings
in mature and overmature stands. At present, AAC is over 500 mill. m3, including 300 mill. m3 of the coniferous species. Despite
the fact that there is a pattern of increasing harvesting volumes, only 20%
of AAC has been actually harvested (Table 14).
Forest abundant
areas of Siberia and the Far East are underharvested simply because giant
logging and wood processing enterprises of the Soviet era turned out to be
unclaimed due to the undeveloped markets. The European part of Russia provides
more optimistic picture: about 60 – 90 % of the AAC has been harvested here
(Severny, Severo-Zapadny, Tsentral’ny, and Volgo-Vjatsky economic regions)
(Fig. 22. The
Share of Actual Harvest of the Mean Increase of the Standing Volume, %).
Forest is
a source of numerous species of medicinal plants, variety of foodstuffs, and
technical raw materials. These products are collected for the local needs
and are also exported to other regions. According to the experts, the annual
sales of drugs derived from medicinal plants is estimated to be about 10 bill.
USD. The ecosystems of forest bogs and marshes are of special value as they
combine several resources: biological, soil, organic, and mineral. Russian
forest ecosystems are unique suppliers of wild plants and berries, mushrooms
and nuts, as well as valuable species of medicinal plants and technical raw
materials (Table 15, Table 16)
Key Indices of Foodstuff Resources of the Forest Fund Area (as of 1999):
Siberian Pine nuts:
The area of nut producing forests, thous.ha 9553
Siberian pine forests included, thous.ha 6644
Mean biological resources, thous.tones 1071
Dwarf Siberian Pine nuts:
The area of middle aged, maturing,
mature and overmature stands, thous.ha 36014
Average yield, kg/ha 70
Biological resources, thous.tonnes 2521
Birch syrup:
The area of maturing, mature and
overmature stands, thous.ha 40766
Biological resources, thous.tonnes 875509
Annual possible extraction, thous.tonnes 8755
Honey production of lime stands:
The area of maturing, mature and
overmature stands, thous.ha 2781
Average possible volume
of honey production, thous.ha 1451
Table 17 shows the number of the most valuable game species and hunting volumes
during the period of 1998–2000. State forest protection service provides the
protection of animals and their habitats. Every forest management unit conducts
a number of activities aimed at habitat improvement and site restoration.
Preservation
and maintenance of forest productivity is an important and strategic task of
the state forest service, which is controlled by the Ministry of Natural
Resources of Russia. Regular monitoring of the state of forest resources and
sustainable forest management are important for the successful execution of
this task.
Timber
harvesting is going to stay a key component of the forest use. At present,
forested area available for forest exploitation takes up to 46% of the total
land area covered with forest vegetation. The remaining area is either located
in hardly accessible areas or plays protective functions in the regions of high
population density. Forests, inaccessible for commercial exploitation play
important ecological and nature-protective role.
Unfortunately,
relatively low levels of the forest resource usage are characteristic for
Russia. Only 22% (145 mill. m3) of the Annual Allowable Cut 500 (mill. m3) is being currently harvested. Under exploited
forests are located in Siberia and in the Far East.
The
preservation of forest productivity is possible to achieve by developing a
forest use strategy that would combine selective felling and clearcuts. Also,
we should refuse to apply destructive and damaging forest harvesting machinery
that destroys natural environment.
Reforestation plays an important role in maintaining forest productivity. Traditionally, reforestation activities involve native tree species that are well adapted to the local environment. The percentage of exotic species is very low. During the past years, harvesting volumes were exceeding the volumes of reforestation. Only in the year 2002 reforestation rates grew higher and exceeded annual harvesting volumes. Up to the year 2010, the area of 6.9 mill. ha must be reforested under the federal program “Ecology and Natural Resources of Russia”. Reforestation strategy has to be developed taking into consideration natural reforestation capacity of the Russian forests. Creation of forest plantations is welcomed only when natural regeneration is unable to ensure the required quality of the forests.
Besides the
high timber volumes of the Russian forests they are also rich with non-timber
forest products. The obtained information shows that harvesting volumes of the
forest-based foodstuffs are much lower than the potential capacity of the
forests, which ensures their sustainable use. However, the data is incomplete
and more information is required on the current state of the non-timber forest
values, levels of actual extraction and restoration capacity.
Forest
pathology monitoring includes the following activities:
·
Forest
state inspections;
·
Determining
the causes of the forest dye off;
·
Observation
of the damage caused by pests and diseases;
·
Observation
of the damage caused by other negative factors.
The results
of the forest pathology surveys are annually generalized and analyzed by the
state forest service and its divisions. Forest pathology monitoring as well as
collection and submission of the data follow a set of regulations, rules and
orders.
In comparison
to the land area covered with forest vegetation the share of forests damaged
by natural calamities varies between 0.3 to 1.6% in different years. However,
the absolute values of mentioned percentages are considerably big (Table 18).
Pests and
diseases represent a serious danger for the Russian forests (Fig. 23. The Development of Pests and Disease Outbreaks
and the Volume of Forest Protection Measures, thous. ha, Fig.
24. The Share of Forests Affected by Pests and Diseases
Outbreakes, %). In the early 2002 there were vast pest’s and disease outbreaks (over
the area of 10.3 mill. ha and 1.1 mill. ha respectively) registered in the
territory of Russian Federation.
Total area
affected by outbreaks of pests and diseases is considerably larger in European
north and in Urals. In the remote areas of Siberia and the Far East the data on
these outbreaks is incomplete. Forests of highly populated and industrialized
territories of the European-Ural part of Russia are much more susceptible to
pests and diseases.
Among
pests, the Siberian moth (Dendrolimus sibiricus) is the major threat for
the forests as it is precipitately growing in numbers throughout its area of
distribution. Nun moth and pine sawfly are widely spread throughout the
territory of the Forest Fund. There is an intensive spread of bark beetles in
the area already weakened by industrial emissions (European – Ural part of
Russia). The maximum density of the outbreaks monitored during the last three
years is registered in:
·
Volgogradskaja
oblast (364.9 thous. ha);
·
Saratovskaja
oblast (285. 5 thous.ha);
·
Rostovskaja
oblast (201.1 thous. ha);
·
The
republic of Kalmykia (188.4 thous. ha).
High density
of outbreaks occurring during the past years is characteristic for the Central
part of Russia:
·
Kaluzhskaja
oblast (81.8 ha);
·
Orlovskaja
oblast (58.0 ha);
·
Brjanskaja
oblast (48.6 ha);
·
Moskovskaja
oblast (43.1 ha);
·
Tambovskaja
oblast (33.0 ha);
·
Buzuluksky
pine forest (40.1 ha).
As for the
forest fires, the areas burned in the recent years vary from 0.02% to 0.3% of
the land area covered with forests. Anthropogenic factor, which constitutes
almost 88% of all the inflammations, remains the major cause for forest fires.
In the European part of the Russian Federation almost 100% of forest fires
occur because of harmful human activity. In the Urals, Siberia and in the Far
East lightning appears to be the main cause for forest fires. Flammability dynamics
of the Russian forests is discussed in details in the 1st part of the book.
Hydrometeorological
Service of Russia provides complex network to monitor conditions of the Russian
forests. Currently there are thirty-five stations responsible for monitoring
and control of the Russian forests. These stations are located near the large
industrial enterprises. They are designed to monitor vast territories with serious
forest damage. These specially designed stations infrequently inspect certain
sites of special value that belong to nature monuments and biosphere reserves.
Analytical
survey of the largest industrial enterprises, data from the emission zones as
well as literature studies have shown that almost 1.3 mill.ha of forest
ecosystems suffer from the emissions including:
·
The
zone of absolute damage – irreversibly destroyed forest ecosystems that could
occupy the area of 26 – 65 thous.ha (2-5% of the forested area);
·
The
zone of heavy damage, which may occupy the area of 130 – 195 thous.ha (10-15%);
·
The
zone of moderate damage, which may cover the area of 390 – 520 thous.ha
(30-40%);
·
The
zone of weak damage, which may cover the area of 520 – 650 thous.ha (40-50%)
(Karaban, Gitarsky, 2001).
Forest
regeneration in the zones of heavy and absolute damage is impossible without
reducing waste disposal and without performing additional forestry measures.
According
to different experts, total area of polluted forests varies from 0.9 mill.
ha to 5 mill. ha. Table 19 presents the
total area of forests perished due to the direct emissions of industrial enterprises.
In the Russian
Federation there is no systematic analysis of biological components of the
forest ecosystems that is performed at the federal or regional levels. Therefore,
there is no reliable information on this particular indicator. Information
in the Table 20 shows the preliminary data
about areas with fundamentally disturbed ecological processes as well as areas
with damaged forest vegetation.
Up to the year 1989, forests burned in the fires were never registered in the state accounts on perished stands. Since forest fire is a major reason of the forest devastation, the number of totally perished forests since 1989 has grown considerably. Annual statistics showed that the forest area loss in 1989 had reached about 334 thous. ha. Destruction of forests by fire has grown considerably – from 63.6% in1992 to 91.1% in 2000. The actual value of forest fires as a reason of the forest die off has grown considerably: from 63.6% in 1992 to 91.1% in 2000. The scale of the area burned fluctuates greatly from year to year.
According to sanitary and forest pathology review of the Russian forests, the area of died off stands in the year 2000 was 2.3 times higher than its annual average value. However, in 2001 the same area occupied 327 thous.ha, which is about the annual average value. Usually, the cyclic pattern of forest devastation can be explained by the climatic factors, contributing to both: forest flammability and mass outbreaks of pests and diseases.
The area of forests, perished due to the combination of human and biological factors, annually constitutes about 342.8 thous.ha. This number greatly fluctuates (between 120 thous.ha to 650 thous.ha).
Maintaining
the acceptable sanitary conditions of forest ecosystems is the key task of the
State Forest Service (which is supervised by the Ministry of Natural Resources
of Russia, MNR). MNR annually analyze forest pathology and generalize sanitary
data. Forest fires are one of the major reasons for the forest damage,
deterioration, and, finally, die off. Every year between 0.4 thous, ha and 250
thous.ha of the forest area are being destroyed by fires, which constitute from
0.0001% to 0.03% of the forested area respectively. To secure fire safety, the
Russian government passed a plan of urgent measures to prevent forest fires and
to mitigate the consequences of forest and peat ignitions. Along with the
traditional methods, remote sensing is another method widely used to spot the
fires during the fire season. Following are the fire fighting divisions
employed to suppress the fires:
·
Ground
units and subdivisions;
·
Forest
Fire Suppression Aviation brigades;
·
Ministry
of Emergency of the Russian Federation;
·
Ministry
of Defense.
A set of
preventive measures, which were designed to strengthen the technical base of
forest fighting brigades allow the perfection and further development of fire
fighting system and preservation of the Russian forest resources.
It is also
important to mention, that forest fires play a serious role in the
environmental evolution, defining the structure and development of the taiga
forests. Thus, it is important to restructure the existing forest fire
protection service transforming it into the forest fire management system that
would not only provide effective fire suppression, but would also apply
prescribed burning as an alternative way to resolve problems and address
certain issues (the reduction of forest debris, huge forest fires prevention,
stimulation of natural regeneration).
Forest
protection from pests and diseases is based on the data provided by monitoring
activities on sanitary conditions of the forests as well as on forest pathology
surveys. To ensure timely identification of the outbreaks, forest pathology
surveys are conducted annually over the area of 10 mill. ha. During the
past few years the forest state has worsened as the areas of pests and diseases
outbreaks has grown and expanded. Forested area seized by outbreaks of pests
and diseases fluctuates from year to year (from 0.2% to 1.4% of the total
forested area). At the same time the area of forests, perished from pests and
diseases is relatively small and fluctuates from 0.0005 to 0.003% of the total
forested area. Biological and chemical suppressants are widely used as either a
ground or aerial method to control the outbreaks. Usually, the area, where
fire-pestsdiseases extermination measures are conducted is much smaller than
the area of an outbreak itself.
It is
important to mention that the dynamics of the perished forested areas is
preconditioned by the climatic factors, contributing to both: forest
flammability and mass outbreaks of pests and diseases.
Forest
damage resulting from industrial pollution is of local character. At the
present time, the area of perished stands (resulting from the industrial
pollution) varies between 0.02% and 0.03% of the total forested area). A
considerable decrease of harmful emissions results in obvious improvements of
the forest state in the industrial zones.
Systematic
soil and water monitoring separately for forested and non-forest areas are not
conducted in Russia. Selected information, analysis and certain generalizations on the state
of water resources country- and region- wise are annually presented in the
national report “On the State of Natural Environment of the Russian Federation”.
Water and
wind erosion, mostly occurring at farmlands and agricultural lands that
particularly lack forest vegetation, are the most damaging to soils. About 129 mill. ha of agricultural
lands in Russia represent areas highly susceptible to water and wind erosion.
Almost 54.1 mill. ha of them are already eroded. These areas mostly belong to
agricultural lands (plough lands and grazing lands) of steppe zone, semideserts
and mountainous sites. The major task of the forest management units, located
in the areas of eroded lands and sparsely forested areas, is to create forest
protective stands at plough lands and mountainous grazing sites. Protective
afforestation of eroded lands is needed at the area of 14 mill. ha. In 2001
about 3.2 mill. ha (23%) was planted in Russia. The greatest planting areas are
located in Juzhny, Privolzhsky and Tsentral’ny federal districts. Existing
areas of protective forests positively influence over 30 mill. ha of
neighboring lands offering protection against erosion. Major factors
restraining protective afforestation deal with weak financing and lack of due
understanding and motivation to practice this measure. During the past 40
years, the highest volumes of protective afforestation were registered in the period
between 1966–1975. A steady decline started in 1975 and it continues presently.
In the year 2001 the volume of protective afforestation was rather low – only
18.1 thous. ha.
There is no
reliable data about the areas subjected to heavy soil erosion. According to the
expert reports, these lands are highly limited because forest ecosystems
provide necessary soil and water protection. Ravine forests are included into
the Group I forests (“protective forests“ according the Russian Forest Fund
classification). These forests provide protection against erosion. Special
forest management regime is characteristic for these stands. Final fellings are
not allowed. In 2001 the total area of ravine forests is 13.4 mill. ha.
All the
forests carry out protective functions. However, the specially designated
forests, which belong to the Group I forests, practice these functions at the
best. The biggest area under the Group I forests is occupied by:
·
Restricted
areas protecting breeding grounds of the most valuable fish species;
·
Pre
tundra forests;
·
Restricted
areas along the water bodies;
·
Green
belt forests;
·
Ravine
forests.
Group I forests
constitute the major part of the Forest Fund both: in the densely populated
regions like Juzhny, Privolzhsky, Tsentral’ny federal districts as well as
in sparsely populated areas of Severny, Ural’sky, and Sibirsky federal districts
(Fig. 25. The Share of Group
I Forests in the Total Forest Area of Russia).
Forest area
designated for protective functions is steadily increasing and presently constitutes
19% of the total forest area (Fig.
26. Area Development of Group I Forests Carrying
Out Protective Functions).
To represent
water bodies within the Forest Fund area, a share of surface water bodies
(rivers and lakes) of the total Forest Fund area was taken as a criterion.
The data presented in the Table 21 was obtained
from the State Forest Account (1998). Relatively high percent of water bodies
is observed in Severo-Zapadny (2.83%) and Ural’sky (3.89%) federal districts.
Low percent of water bodies is registered in Tsentral’ny (0.38%) and Privolzhsky
(0.42%) federal districts. The highest values are reached in lake-abundant
areas (over 5% of the area) (Murmanskaja oblast’, Republic of Karelia, Yamalo-Nenetsky
autonomous district).
Insignificant
variability of water bodies’ values throughout the regions is caused by different
natural conditions rather than by anthropogenic factor. There were no
significant changes within the boundaries of the federal districts in the last
20 years (1978–1998). Certain alterations might have occurred due to land
re-distribution among the landowners.
Preservation
of soil and water resources as well as strengthening their protective functions
are the central elements of the sustainable forest management. During the past
20 years there is a gradual increase of the Group I forests area. This evidence
shows that the protection and management of the protective forests has
significantly developed and improved. Agricultural lands of sparsely forested
areas are heavily eroded. In these regions protective forests are especially important
since they provide soil and water protective functions. Unfortunately, in the
past decades the area of protective afforestation has significantly decreased.
Existing
information on chemical, physical and biological characteristics of forest soils
and waters located at the forest territories is far from being complete.
Additional surveys are required to draw reliable conclusions.
One of the
globally recognized problems is the climate change caused by various
anthropogenic factors. This results from escalation of the greenhouse effect.
Forests play a key role in carbon sequestration and thus, maintain relatively
stable atmospheric gas content. Russian forests, the area of which constitutes
one fifth of the total world forests, represent a huge carbon pool in a form of
a biomass of living organisms, living residues of various levels of decay,
humus components and peat. Balanced and efficient use of the Forest Fund areas
as well as the observance of the sustainable forest management is the issues of
a national priority. These issues are particularly highlighted in the Forest
Code of the Russian Federation.
Carbon
cycle within a forest ecosystem is a balance between the absorption of
atmospheric carbon (CO2) by the aboveground vegetation and its release during decomposition of
the dead organic matter, concentrated at a ground surface and in the soil. This
difference (netto ecosystem productivity) defines quantative changes of carbon
pool within ecosystem and identifies its role in the biosphere.
Systematic,
site-based, and stationary information is available on biomass supply based on
structural elements of plant vegetation and litter. There is much less
information available on root stocks, current increment of aboveground and
under ground biomass, annual trees’ die off, as well as leaf and needle die
off. Very few data exists on the quantative assessments of degradation rates of
the dead organic matter in the soil and on the surface. A complete carbon
cycle, assimilated during the photosynthesis process, could be traced based on
this.
According
to VNIILM data, there are 104 bill. tones of organic matter (excluding organic
matter of the soils) accumulated within Forest Fund area and outside of it.
(total area – 1178554.4 thous. ha). Over 51 bill. tones of carbon, including
34 bill.tones of phytomass carbon and 17 bill. tones of dead organic mass
carbon (deadwood, snags, logs, and litter) are deposited there. About 182
bill. tones of carbon is stored in forest (Table
22). Since 1983 there is a steady reduction of the carbon pool. Most
likely, it is related to the decrease of mature and overmature stands and
to an overall decline of productive forests. The natural change of species
composition started in early 1960-es is slowly progressing to this day.
The ecosystem
netto production index was calculated following FAO guidelines and being based
on the State Forest Account data. Average index of growing stock increment
was taken as a basis and a conversion index was used based on the literature
sources. Presently, the annual index of ecosystem netto production of the
Russian forests is 1200 mill. tones or 600 mill. tones of carbon per year
(Table 23).
Carbon release
resulting from felling operations, forest fires, outbreaks of pests and diseases,
waste and fuelwood incineration is about 110 mill. tones per year. Thus, in
Russia pure annual carbon deposition into the biomass and into the living
organic matter (excluding humus) is about 490 mill. tones of carbon (600 mill.
tones – 110 mill. tones) (Figure
27. Carbon Balance in Forest Ecosystems Throughout Russia, mill. tones of
carbon per year).
It is
impossible to assess the contribution of forest products to the global carbon
budget since there is no reliable data not only about the size of forest
processing and production, but also about the estimates of the life expectancy
for forest products. To make preliminary calculations of carbon balance, the
total annual amount of harvested and logged timber (30 mill. tones of carbon)
can be considered as CCO 2 release since about the same volume of timber products is burned down or
naturally decomposed by microorganisms.
It was
estimated that the total amount of carbon stored in the organic matter of the
forest ecosystems in Russia is about 233 bill. tones which includes 34
bill.tones deposited in phytomass, 17 bill. tones in the dead organic mass
(deadwood, snags, logs, and litter), and 182 bill. tones is concentrated in
humus. The largest carbon pool is in the organic matter of the soils of boreal
forests, located in the northern parts of Russia, where decomposition rate is
slowed down. This data repeatedly confirm the vital role of Russian forests in
the global carbon balance.
There is a
steady pattern of netto ecosystem productivity registered in Russia and
presently, it is about 600 mill. tones of carbon per year. In the forests of
Russia, total carbon release has dropped down from 130 to 110 mill. tones of
carbon per year. Thus, carbon balance is positive and it is about 500 mill.
tones per year. In 1990, annual anthropogenic release of carbon was 650
mill.tones while annual global emission of C-CO2 constitutes 6100 mill. tones (according to
MGEIK). Thus, the share of Russian forests in global carbon release is 11%.
Presently, due to the considerable decline of industrial production, annual
carbon release has not been higher than 500 mill. tones per year. Thus, Russian
forests (excluding channeling of carbon to marsh, tundra and grasslands
ecosystems) completely compensate industrial emission of C-CO2 .
According
to the Forest Code of the Russian Federation (Article 80, 1997), the following
types of forest use can be practiced:
·
Forest
harvesting;
·
Turpentine
collection;
·
By-products
collection (stumps, birch bark, coniferous twigs, etc);
·
Use of
forests for secondary values (hay, grazing, bee-keeping, berries, mushrooms,
nuts, medicinal plants, moss, lichen);
·
Use of
forests for hunting;
·
Use of
forests for science and research;
·
Use of
forests for aesthetic values, tourism and recreation.
Maintenance
and enhancement of long-term multiple forest usages is the principal task of
forest officers and managers. Major requirements for the use of forest
recourses are defined in the Article 79 of the Forest Code of the Russian
Federation.
Forest industry of the Russian Federation is
represented by 21 thousand enterprises. About three thousand of them are of
giant and medium size. About 95% of them are joint stock companies with
over 1.5 mill. employees.
For the past several years, forest industry has been
undergoing a deep economic crisis. Forest resources are underutilized and the
processing efficiency is low. In Russia as a whole, the volumes of final
fellings decreased three times during the last several years. In 2001
only 4.4% of the total industrial production of Russia felt within forest
industry, wood processing industry, pulp and paper industry. The share
of forestry exports, in the total volume of Russian exports, constitutes only
4.2%.
However,
Russia is ranked second among roundwood exporters, thus holding one of the
central positions in the world. About 21.6% of the total roundwood timber sold
at the world market is coming from the Russian Federation. For the most part
Russian export consists of unprocessed roundwood timber, which price is three
times lower than sawn timber.
In 2002, export of unprocessed roundwood timber grew
up 15.4% and constituted 36.6 mill.m3 (1.64 bill.USD), while processed timber
export volume grew up 18.9%, constituting 5.22 mill. m3 (865.5 mill.USD).
In the year 2001, the volumed total removals by giant
and medium sized enterprises were 87.2 mill. m3 (Fig. 28. The Development
of Total Timber Removals by Giant and Medium Enterprises).
The actual wood costs of 1 m3 vary greatly throughout Russia constituting 134
roubles in Juzhny district and 544 roubles in the Far East. In 2001, the
average actual wood cost of 1 m3 was 353 roubles, whereas the average market price of 1 m3 of timber was 585 roubles. In 2002, the
average market price for a set of final products is provided below:
Product Price,
roubles
Roundwood timber (for sawntimber production), m3 646.01
Sawntimber, m3 1324.49
A set for wooden boxes production, m3 1468.28
Scaleboard, m3 6653.25
Roundwood timber (for pulpwood production), m3 367.01
Chipboard, m3 2513.11
Pulpchips (for pulpwood production), m3 289.06
Commercial cellulose, tones 9656.85
Paper, tones 12278.33
Board, tones 8935.29
Carrier board, tones 8453.99
A considerable decline of forestry production was registered
starting in 1990 (Table 24). However,
during the past five years there has been a tendency for the production growth
in the areas of cellulose, paper, board, chipboard, fiberboard production.
The scaleboard production volumes have exceeded the production levels of 1990.
There is a tight connection between secured financial
backing of forestry and forest industries. Without interaction between these
two branches, it is nearly impossible to practice sustainable forest management
and unexhaustive use of forest resources. Both of these approaches (sustainable
forest management and unexhaustive use of forest resources) require solving a
number of economic and environmental problems, paying extra attention to the
local, regional, federal, and global importance of Russian forests.
Wood utilization provides principal incomes of the
forestry branch. There are several legal grounds for the use of Forest Fund
plots. They include: forest lease, gratuitous use contracts, auction-based
documentation, and regional authorities resolutions. Payment schemes and income
distribution procedures are determined in the Forest Code of the Russian Federation,
in the Budget Code and in the Tax Legislation. Forest use and exploitation
generates revenue from two sources: forest taxes or rental charges. Forest tax
is collected for any type of forest use. State authorities of the subjects of
the Russian Federation determined payment rates, which are based on lease
contracts or defined at the auctions. The rates should not be lower than the
minimum timber stumpage price, determined by the government of the Russian
Federation.
Up to the year 2001, a following scheme of income
distribution was defined (the Forest Code of the Russian Federation, Article
106): ·
·
40% of the payments (minimum rates) are channeled to
the federal budget; ·
·
60% of the payments are directed to the budgets of the
subjects of the Russian Federation.
Forest
taxes and rental charges that were over minimum cost of timber rate were
channeled to the forest management units than, were added to the budget means
and were spent for the forestry needs.
In the year 2002 the scheme was changed. According to
the federal law “On the Federal Budget of the Year 2002”, at present, 100% of
payments at minimum cost of timber rates are channeled to the budgets of the
subjects of the Russian Federation. Revenue from the minimum cost of timber
rates, other forest use payments, payments for the transformation of
forestlands, and forest fund withdrawal payments go to the federal budget.
The share of minimum cost of timber rate is 71.6% of
the total lease payments.
Rental
charges (forests, leased for harvesting purposes) constituted 2.67 bill.roubles
in the year 2001 and 2.84 bill.roubles in the year 2002 (6.4% growth). About
1.51 bill.roubles was received from the forest auctions (growing timber sale)
in 2001 and 1.04 bill.roubles in 2002 (24.5% decrease).
Forest tax for 1 m3 of growing timber was 38.8 roubles in 2001 and 37.9 roubles in 2002
(2.3% decrease). In 2001 the actual rate of a forest tax was 43% higher than
the minimum cost of timber rate and in the year 2002 the rate decreased by 31%.
It is worthwhile to mention that the growth of payment
rates correspond with the growth of market price for 1 m3 of roundwood. Thus, payment for the growing
timber is only 5 – 7% of the price paid for roundwood timber. The share may
vary throughout the country from 2% to 25%.
General information on the income from forest use during
the period 2000 – 2002 is presented in the Table
25.
The share of the total income from the forest
exploitation is 36%, withdrawal and conversion payments are 3%, penalties for
forest legislation violations – 1%, extra budget means (realization of the
produce of the forest management units) – 35%, other – 25%. The principal
income of extra budget entries comes from final fellings (56%), where the price
of 1 m3 of merchantable wood
is 305 roubles.
Russian
Forests contain huge amounts of foodstuffs (mushrooms, berries, nuts), furs,
game, medicinal plants and technical raw materials. Economic value of
non-timber forest products (particularly northern and eastern forests) is
higher than the timber value.
Based on
permits and licenses, tenants and other collectors harvest non-timber forest
products. According to the Article 70 of the “General Guidelines on Secondary
Forest Use” rental charge is determined by the lease contract requirements.
Payments for seasonal forest use are paid through stumpage price when permits
are issued. For the local population secondary forest use is free of charge.
According to experts, the estimated annual yield of berries (cranberry, cowberry, blueberry) makes up 4 mill.tones, Siberian pine nuts – about 1 mill. tones, and mushrooms – about 2.1 mill.tones. The estimated market value of commercial stock of wild berries amounts to more than 10 bill. USD, while commercial stock of mushrooms is estimated as 5 bill. USD.
Table 26 shows harvesting and production volumes of forest-based foodstuffs. As
Russia is developing towards market oriented economy, commercial enterprises
become responsible for the collection of non–timber forest products. None
of these enterprises report to the Board of Statistics. Therefore, the actual
volumes of non-timber forest products are not available. The volumes of non-timber
forest products are linked directly to its productivity, which greatly vary
from year to year.
Table 27 presents data on non-timber forest products costs income rates (per item
sold). Vegetable raw materials cost the most whereas birch syrup has the lowest
price. As for the income rates, vegetable raw materials and wild nuts keep
the leading position among other forest based products.
Over 60% of
the Group I forest area (excluding state natural reserves, national parks,
protection zones of parks and reserves, antierosion forests, pre-tundra
forests, water supply sanitary zones) is used for recreation and tourism. Group
II and Group III forests are also used for these purposes, excluding areas not
suitable for recreation and tourism for natural, climatic and environmental
reasons (Yamalo-Nenetskii, Evenkiisky, Chukotsky, and Koryaksky autonomous
districts and almost half of the Saha Republic). Urban forests are used for
various kinds of recreational activities as well. Thus, the total area used for
recreation and tourism constitutes 564.3 mill.ha (64% of forest land within and
outside the Forest Fund).
Forest land
of national parks used for recreation and tourism constitute 39% of the total
area of national parks at the federal level. As for regional nature parks, this
ratio is about the same. Protected zones of about one third of all nature
reserves are also used for recreation and tourism.
A considerable
amount of the facilities available for general recreation and tourism are
provided in the territory of national parks (Table 28).
Environmental
protective belt around Moscow has been chosen as an example, to provide detailed
information about the so-called “green belt” surrounding large cities. This
particular belt consists of 39 forest parks (total area 162.5 thous.ha including
66.4 thous.ha of forest lands) and has a radius of 10 km from the city boarder
(Table 29). According to the year 2000 monitoring,
the area of urban forests in Moscow is about 11081 ha. There are 94 urban
parks, 700 public gardens, 10 boulevards, and 125 nature monuments located
in Moscow.
In Russia
areas designed for recreation and tourism are accessible almost all year round.
In summer, recreation load in the forests located close to the settlements is
much higher due to mass collection of berries and mushrooms, wild plants,
medicinal plants and birch syrup. The average period of heavy recreation load
on the forests varies from 120 to 150 visitor days depending on the latitude.
Forest
financing consists of state investment (709.2 mill.roubles in the year 2000)
and operational costs (7650.9 mill.roubles in the year 2000). Thus, the value
of operational costs is 11 times higher than state investments for the same
activities.
In the past
few years there has been a steady increase of extra budget means of financing.
As it is shown in the Table 30, in the year
2001 the percentage of extra budget means of financing has been 65.6% of the
total forestry expenses.
State financing
has been gradually decreasing and in the year 2001 it constituted only 24.2%.
(Table 31).
In 2002
financial resources have been distributed as following:
·
32% -
had been used to financially support staff and administration of the forest
management units;
·
7% -
had been used for forest fire suppression;
·
1% -
had been used for forest pests and diseased protection;
·
55% -
had been used for forest management (forest management unit level).
In 2001
Total expenses, including all sources of financing, constituted 13.8 roubles
per one hectar.
In 2001
regional budgets covered only 23% of the necessary amount needed for
reforestation. The rest 60% was covered by means of the forest management units.
In 2001
about 102.4 mill.roubles were paid as capital investments from the federal
budget in 2001, which was 63% compared to the year 2000.
A sub program
titled “Forests” was approved within the federal program “Environment and
Nature Resources in Russia for the Period 2002 – 2010” (the resolution N 860
of the government of the Russian Federation dated December 7, 2001). The total
value of financial investments within this sub program is 49418.1 mill.roubles
(Table 32).
Forestry is a science based and research capacious branch of economy. There are 9 research institutions and one design office that belong to the State Forest Service (managed by MNR). The research institutions are full members of MNR professional network. Along with regional forest management bodies, they are also responsible for further development and promotion of science and research.
Forest
research institutions provide sound grounds for each forestry component:
·
Silviculture;
·
Reforestation;
·
Forest
use and exploitation;
·
Forest
fire protection;
·
Forest
protection from pests and diseases;
·
Forest
mensuration;
·
Forest
resources account and assessment;
·
Forest
economics;
·
Monitoring,
etc
The main
functions of forest research institutions include:
·
Providing
scientific grounds for forest management and decision-making (analysis and
forecast of trends and developments, including socio-economic assessments,
planning and decision making);
·
Adjustments
and corrections of normative base and standards according to the amendments
made in the Forest Code of the Russian Federation (1997);
·
Optimization
and modernization of organizational structure and information flows based on
computer technologies;
·
Improvements
of forest field tests and experiments;
·
Control,
monitoring and technical examination of all the forestry projects (including
forestry aspects, silviculture and environmental issues);
·
Working
out a mechanism to introduce regionally tested research innovations.
Table 33 presents the value of financial support for forest research activities
coordinated by MNR Russia.
Direct involvement
of the local population in the forest sector including forestry, woodprocessing,
and pulp and paper industries had decreased from 3.4% in 1970 to 1.6% in 1998.
Since 1999, the employment rates started to grow (Figure 29. The Development
of Involvement of Local Population in Forestry (% of average annual number
of employed population).
Wage rate
is the index, which reflects the well being of a social sphere of any branch
of industry. In the year 2000, monthly salary of a ranger was 707 roubles,
ranger manager assistants’ salary was 2047 roubles; ranger managers’ salary
was 2250 roubles, forest management units directors’ salary constituted 4312
roubles. The average monthly salary of forest
management units’ officials in the year 2002 constituted 2650 roubles, which
was 75% higher that in 2001. In general, the average salary of the employees
in the forest sector has always been lower than the rates paid in the other
branches of economy. In 1998 it constituted 58.3% in the all-Russian average salary rate, in
1999 – 63.1%, and in 2000 – 55.6%. The forest sector employees are exposed
to the higher danger (Table 34).
In December 2000 a program titled “Labor Protection Program For the Period 2001 – 2005” was passed by the MNR Russia, Ministry of Labor and Social Development and some other related institutions. This program is designed to ensure safety for the people working in forestry as well as specifies a set of measures aimed to decrease a number of industrial injuries.
The Forest
Sector plays an essential economic and social role in the development of the
Russian Federation. By the domestic gross output value the forest sector takes
fifth place and keeps forth place by the export volume. However, being one of
the key components of a national forest income, forest resources are not used
effectively. This leads to weak financial income flows to the budget, which in
return unable the authorities to cover the required costs.
Following
are the ways to increase budget income:
·
Forest
users have to be directly involved in the market economy;
·
Forest
usage and exploitation costs, reflecting the real price for this resource, have
to be fixed;
·
Deep
timber processing has to be developed.
Also,
higher incomes have to be ensured based on the development of secondary forest
resources as well as the use of “by products”, use of forests for the purposes
of hunting, recreation or tourism.
Russian
Forests have a great potential to further develop tourism and recreation activities.
The total area available for these developments is over 500 mill.ha. Vast areas
of virgin and unexploited forests are of unique scientific and aesthetic value.
Involvement
of the local population is one of the key parameters that reflect socio-economic
value of forests. Presently, only 1.7% of the annual average number of people,
involved in forest sector meaning forestry, wood processing, pulp and paper
industries.
In general,
employment in forestry has decreased two times in the last 30 years. There are
two major reasons for that: low salary rates and the overall economic crisis in
the country.
The major
principles of forest management are defined in the Forest Code of the Russian
Federation (1997), in the Constitution of the Russian Federation (1993), and in
the number of other legal documents. Presently, these principles are designed
to “provide unexhaustive and sustainable forest use, regeneration, forest
protection and conservation of the forests”.
Forest
legislation is under the authority of both: the Russian Federation and the
subjects of the Russian Federation.
There are
over 300 legislative documents regulating forest use, reforestation, protection
and conservation. In general, the forest legislation allows performing
sustainable forest management and guarantees forest preservation.
The
following components are called “objects of the forest relations”:
·
The
Forest Fund of the Russian Federation;
·
Forest
Fund sites and the right to use them;
·
Forests
outside the Forest Fund;
·
The sites
outside the Forest Fund and the right to use them;
·
Trees
and shrubs.
The Forest
Fund land and the forests outside the forest Fund occupy about 69% of the total
land area of the Russian Federation. Almost 96% of the total forested area is
managed by MNR Russia. Other ministries and departments manage the rest 4% of
the area.
According
to the forest legislation, Forest Fund area and the land under the Ministry of
Defense are of Federal ownership. It is allowed by the federal law to transfer
the Forest Fund sites to the ownership of the subjects of the Russian
Federation. Both: civil legislation and the Forest Code of the Russian
Federation guarantee the right for free access to the forests for all the
citizens of the Russian Federation. Forest Fund sites are allowed to be:
·
Leased;
·
Gratuitously
used;
·
Short-term
used;
·
Granted
in concessions.
Individuals
and organizations are allowed to practice any of the above-mentioned
approaches. The federal law “The Territories of Traditional Nature Use by the Native
People of Siberia and the Far East” was passed in the year 2001. The
territories of traditional nature use were declared to be protected areas. Such
areas are created particularly to maintain traditional nature use with special
consideration given to the interests and concerns of the native people, many of
which still live in the forests.
During the
past few years Russia had undergone some considerable socio-economic changes.
The Forest Code of the Russian Federation contains many contradictions and has
many unclear legislative notions. Some of the norms are of declarative character,
as they are not supported by legal mechanisms for realization. All the
above-mentioned reveal the necessity for a new edition of the Forest Code.
Above all, the new document needs to take into account all the changes made in
Tax legislation, financial legislation, and civil code of the Russian. The new
version of the Forest Code will contribute to:
·
The
effective forest management, forest use and utilization, forest protection and
reforestation;
·
The
more efficient use of the Forest Fund;
·
The
budget income increase as grounded costs of forest usage will be determined and
the payments will be legally secured. In order to secure further development
and perfection of the normative and legal base of the Russian forestry, a
Center on Legal Research, Handling and Control of the Forest Practices was
established in the year 2002.
The major
tasks of the Center include:
·
Elaboration
of the related laws and documentation including concepts, projects, and
economic justifications;
·
Analysis
and generalization of the practiced regulations;
·
Submission
of the scientifically grounded suggestions on how to improve the situation.
In 2002
there were developed 80 legal documents. Some of them determine harvesting
operations and reforestation in the forests that belong to different
categories. The central topics for the perfection of the forest legislation
include:
·
Clear
definition of legal status of forests;
·
Keeping
and supporting state forest ownership;
·
Introduction
of the market mechanisms in the forest sector.
Forest
preservation of and sustainable forest management are the central elements of
the national program on environmental safety of Russia. To support ongoing
environmental education is a key goal of this approach. The particular
importance of environmental education is secured by the Constitution of the
Russian Federation and by the Edict of the President “On the National Strategy
of the Russian Federation in the Field of Environmental Protection and
Sustainable Forest Management” dated 04.02.1994. Currently there are being
developed many educational programs, study guides, and schoolbooks on
environmental matters and sustainable forest development. Compulsory
professional retraining programs as well as qualification rising courses are
offered to the forestry specialists. To raise public awareness and for the
purpose of information dissemination about the state of environment and about
the improvement measures, a Russian Federal Environmental Information Agency
has been established in 1994. Presently, over 20 publications are being
released in Russia. They discuss current situation in the areas such as
economics, forestry planning, organization, and management, forest legislation.
State
Forest Service (MNR division) had developed Forestry Development Concept for
the period between 2003-2010 in order to define the most prioritized directions
of national forest policy development. The Government of the Russian Federation
had approved this Concept.
This
Concept contains some suggestions on a number of measures to increase forest
utilization effectiveness. Stabilized forest activities and production volumes,
quality improvements and effectiveness enhancement are predicted for the
above-mentioned period. Striving to improve Forest Fund quality, the following
activities have been planned until the year 2010:
·
To
conduct reforestation over the area of 7 mill.ha;
·
To
bring young stands into the “valuable stands” category over the area of 9.5
mill.ha;
·
To
build 5.4 km of roads for forestry transportation needs.
Further
elaboration of forest legislation and subsequent development of the new edition
of the Forest Code of the Russian Federation are stipulated by the.
A
coordinating board was established in 2003 in order to build partnerships and
promote interactions between the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Forest
industries representatives. Thus, the following institutions were invited for
cooperation: MNR, Minpromnauka, Minekonomrazvitija as well as representatives
of the largest forest logging and processing enterprises, export agencies, and
home equipment producing. The coordinating board will consider and try to resolve the following
acute topics: unexhaustive and sustainable forest utilization, price indexes,
forest operations at the felling sites, and forest fire protection.
Presently,
MNR Russia practice General Agreements with administration of the subjects of
the Russian Federation. These agreements provide mutual approaches and action
plans in the field of forestry such as conducting large economic and
organizational field tests.
At present,
foresters (“Forestry and Forest Park Management” speciality) are trained in 14
different higher education institutions all over Russia. Forestry faculties
were additionally established in ten more higher education institutions.
Specialized
MNR higher educational institutions (15 vocational schools, 4 forestry
colleges, and 3 technical colleges) offer vocational education in forestry. At
these institutions education is focused in four specializations. Every year,
approximately three thousand people graduate from these institutions.
Forestry
training stations based either on forest districts or forest management units
function in some forest settlements. The pupils acquire knowledge of forest,
forest management and, also, gain practical forest experience.
There are
different forms of continuous education and raising qualification being
developed in Russia. For instance, an intensive, three – year program is
offered to obtain higher education. This program is designed for those, who
have already received special secondary voluntary education. Specialized
institutions of continuous education carry out professional skill improvement
programs for managers and other experts.
The state
forest protection service provides safety to the Forest Fund and monitors the
observance of the forest legislation. Here are the following violations
revealed by the state forest protection service: illegal harvesting,
unauthorized occupation of the Forest Fund lands, damage by sewage, chemical
and radioactive substances, uncontrolled industrial and consumers emissions.
Reforestation and soil reclamation committed by the mining and construction
companies are considered to be the most flagrant violations. The State Forest
Service works hard on preventing, nipping and suppressing of the violations; it
determines fines and hands out documentation to courts and other law
enforcement agencies.
Current
forestry reform is aimed at:
·
The
establishment of reasonable, profitable, cost-effective, and competitive
production;
·
Providing
favorable conditions and extended opportunities for foreign and domestic
investors in the forest sector;
·
Capital
accumulation in the most prioritized areas;
·
Development
of the forest export;
·
Changing
the existing structure of the forest export and shifting towards deep timber
processing;
·
Small
business support;
·
Intensification
of the state control.
One of the central
elements of the forestry sector reconstruction, which would lead out of the
crisis and direct towards sustainability, is the advanced production
development on the basis of wood processing located in the regions of major
harvesting.
Presently,
forest income alone is unable to cover management and reforestation costs. In
general, forestry is a subsidized. Forest income is primarily determined by the
payments, collected from forest use; therefore, the formation of these payments
and charges has to be of principal importance. The increase of the forest
income can be achieved by substituting taxable payments with taxable rental
payments for the forest resource. Switching to rental payments will allow us to
link the following elements: payment rates, Forest Fund characteristics,
exploitation terms, final product price, industrial costs of both: harvesting
and wood processing.
If forest
legislation is going to be improved, the introduction of rental payments would
provide forestry with guaranteed revenues which could be used for reforestation
purposes. Rental payments would thus guarantee stable profit that would
reimburse timber merchants. Rental payments would provide budgets of different
levels with additional incomes.
There are
several different ways to change the existing system of payments for the
growing stock. In any case, a certain portion has to be allotted to cover
regeneration costs, and the total rate should not exceed the forest rent. State
fiscal policy determines particular approach to change the existing system of
payments for the growing stock.
The
introduction of rental approach is based on the following preconditions (to be
ensured by the Government of the Russian Federation):
·
Forest
payment rates have to cover forest regeneration costs;
·
Payments
for growing stock should be based on rental costs;
·
The
distribution of payments has to reckon in the replenishment of the state budget
and has to take into consideration economic interests of all the parties:
forestry itself, forest users, the subjects of the Russian Federation and
municipal bodies.
Center of
Analysis and Forecast of the Growing Stock Prices was established in 2002 in
order to improve the system of forest payments, to increase budget
replenishment, and to stimulate market developments. The Center collects and
analyzes commercial information on forest use and exploitation. It also
predicts economic development based on price and costs development.
The State
Forest Fund Account (SFFA) data is a principal source of information important
for to measure or describe indicators of the sustainable management. SFFA
management is based on the forest inventory and planning data which is updated
by the SFFA. Up to the year 1999, the SFFA was carried out every five years. It
was crucial to get region based summarized forestry characteristics and to
present them by the start of each five-year plan. Presently, taking into
account the dynamic character of civil society development and, also, the
demand for precise and updated information, the State Forest Fund Account is
conducted annually.
Forest
monitoring data is an additional source of information and its detailed
structure is provided in the 1st part of the book. Both annual
reports on statistics published by Goskomstat and forestry periodicals could be
very helpful in the assessment of indicators.
At present,
basic forest account information is gained from forest inventory performed over
the whole territory of the Russian Federation. For more details please, refer
to the 1st section of this book.
A set of
research institutes coordinated by the Russian Academy of Science and the Ministry
of Natural Resources conduct integrated and comprehensive research of the
forest ecosystems. These institutions include:
·
The
Institute of Sylviculture;
·
Center
on Ecology and Forest Productivity;
·
The
Institute of Forest and Timber.
For more
details please, see “Forest Science” chapter in the 1st part of the
book.
Instruction
guide for the forest management and planning contains the forecast for the
Forest Fund. The development forecast:
·
Characterizes
the effectiveness of the forest use and forest management activities planned;
·
Allows
to see the effect of these activities on the quantative and qualitative
characteristics of a forest stand;
·
Allows
the assessment of the sustainability of the Forest Fund use.
The
forecast of the Forest Fund development must be carefully planned (felling
rotation included) for the prolonged period. It is impossible to design
long-term forecasts of stands’ development without the use of modern
information technologies including mathematical modeling, GIS, and the system
of data base management.
According
to the widely accepted program “Introduction of GIS Technologies into the
Forest Sector During the Period of 1999-2005”, the GIS system has to be
introduced in 68 subjects of the Russian Federation. Introduction of the GIS
technologies is planned in 1427 forest management units. It has been decided that the results
of forest management and planning operations should be submitted in the
electronic format, using GIS technology. Thus, a considerable amount of maps
and other information on forest resources will be available for further
processing and analysis using modern information technologies.
Currently,
an informational complex for the Forest Fund development prognoses is being
designed. Two institutions are responsible for its development: VNIILM and
Moscow State Forestry University.
A
continuous decline of the forest industrial production along with weakening of
the state management has revealed several negative tendencies in forest use,
reforestation, and protection. Being one of the most important factors in the
economic growth of the Russian Federation, forest resource potential as well as
its environmental value is utilized ineffectively. Possessing almost a quarter
of the world forests, Russia produces only 3% of the global forestry production
using only 20% of its Annual Allowable Cut. The National Forest Policy is
presently under the revision. Its major goals are to bring forestry into the
leading positions, to reconstruct forest sector towards sustainable
development, and to improve forest management. Thorough changes in juridical,
structural and economic backgrounds of the forest preservation and its
sustainable use are envisaged in the ongoing reform.
This
particular publication is the first National report of the sustainable forest
management, based on 7 criterions and 67 indicators that were developed within
the framework of the “Montreal process” and adopted in the year 1995. The first
six criterions reflect key characteristics and functions of the forest
ecosystems such as:
·
Biodiversity;
·
Productivity;
·
Health
and sanitary conditions;
·
Soil
and water resources preservation;
·
Forest
deposit to the global carbon cycle;
·
Socio-economic
benefits.
Criterion 7
provides juridical, structural, and economic conditions for the sustainable
forest management.
Present
report provides information on 42 indicators out of 67 possible. Major reasons
for not providing information on the remaining 28 indicators are:
·
Lack
of statistical data and
·
Lack
of understanding of how to interpret and assess certain indicators.
Criterion 1
of the present report is focused on the issue of biodiversity conservation and
is discussed in details. Here is information on the 8 out of 9 possible
indicators. The analysis of these indicators shows that Russian forests play
vital a role in biodiversity preservation of temperate and boreal forests of
Eurasia at all three levels: ecosystem level, species level, and genetic level.
There are two positive factors contributing to biodiversity preservation: the
increase of land area covered with forest vegetation and the increase of
forested area that provides protective functions. Additional and more thorough
research is required for the following issues:
·
More
accurate assessment of typological biodiversity, succession development, and
forest fragmentation, particularly in the territories of nature protection;
·
The inventory,
specification, and precise definition of the forest dependent species that
belong to different taxonomic groups;
·
The
development of methodological approaches to assess genetic diversity of the
representatives of forest dependent populations found in different parts of the
area of their distribution.
Using
Criterion 2, which assesses forest productivity, there is enough information
obtained on all 5 indicators. Maintenance of forest productivity and
preservation is provided by regular inventory of forest resources and includes
the definition of the exploitation volume. Timber harvesting is going to stay a
key component of the forest use and can be performed at the area, which is 46%
of the total land area, covered with forest vegetation. Presently, Russia is
characterized by insufficient use of the forest resource, where only 22% of the
Annual Allowable Cut is harvested. The areas of reforestation, which were
already smaller then felling sites, have considerably decreased during the past
years. Only 2002
reforestation areas exceeded the areas of felling sites. Besides the high
timber volumes of the Russian forests they are also rich with non-timber forest
products. However, there is more information required on the current state of
the nontimber forest values, levels of its actual extraction and restoration
capacity.
Using
Criterion 3, which assesses health of forest ecosystems and its vitality, there
is data obtained on all the 3 indicators. There are annual analysis and
generalizations made on forest fires, sanitary, and pathological forest
condition. Forest fire is the major damaging factor, however, it also play a
serious role in the environmental evolution, defining the structure and
development of the taiga forests. To ensure fire safety, the Russian government
passed a plan of urgent measures to prevent forest fires. To suppress fires and
to mitigate the consequences of forest and peat ignitions, all fires fighting
means are used, including ground units, forest fire suppression aviation brigades,
Ministry of emergency divisions and Ministry of defense subdivisions. Forest
protection from pests and diseases is based on the data provided by the
monitoring activities on sanitary conditions of the forests as well as on
forest pathology surveys.
Due to
incomplete information, only 3 out of 8 possible indicators characterize
Criterion 4, which describes soil and water resources. The available data shows
the increase of the Group I forests, which mainly provide soil and water
protection functions. This tendency indicates improvements in soil and water
protection. Additional research has to be conducted in order to obtain data on
indicators, reflecting chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of
forest soils and water ecosystems.
There is detailed
information available on all three indicators under Criterion 5, which reflects
the contribution of the Russian Federation into the global carbon cycle. The
estimations of the total carbon pool stored in the organic matter of the forest
ecosystems (233 mlrd. tones) prove the exceptional role of Russian forests in
the global carbon balance. About 500 mill. tones of carbon are accumulated in
the Russian forests, which completely compensate the domestic industrial
emission of C-CO2.
As for
Criterion 6, reflecting socio-economic functions of the forests, only 9 out of
19 possible indicators are presented. The received information illustrates the
importance of socioeconomic functions of the Russian forests, although Russian
forest sector is presently undergoing a crisis. This tendency is reflected in
the decrease of final felling volumes, timber export volumes, and in the
considerable decrease of the involvement of the local population in the forest
sector. Additional research is especially desired in the areas of: cultural,
social and spiritual inquiries and values, as well as needs, demands and
necessities of the population.
As for
Criterion 7, 11 indicators out of 20 possible were presented, which shows the
necessity for additional information. The Criterion 7 survey illustrates that
the principle of sustainable forest management has been already reflected in
the forest legislation of the Russian Federation. Thorough changes and further
improvements of juridical, structural and economic backgrounds of the
preservation of forests and their sustainable use are envisaged in the ongoing
reform. The National Forest Policy is presently under the revision. Its major
goals are to bring forestry into the leading positions, to reconstruct forest
sector towards sustainable development, and to improve forest management.
As a whole,
all the indicators of the Montreal process that are described in this Report
illustrate that the Forest sector of the Russian economy is on its way towards
the sustainable forest development.
1.
Blagovidov
A., Ochagov D., Ptichnikov A. Sokhranenie bioraznoobrazija lesov Rossy: vklad
OOPT i lesov 1 gruppy. M: IUCN – Vsemirnyi sojuz okhrany prirody,
Predstavitel’stvo dlja Rossy i stran CNG, 2002, 108 s.
2.
Cherepanov
S.K. Sosudistye rastenija Rossy i sopredel’nykh gosudarstv (v predelakh
byvshego SSSR). Spb.: Mir i Sem’ja, 1995. 992 s.
3.
Chuenkov
B.S., Filipchuk A.N., Orlova O.L., Vukolova I.A. Pravovye i ekonomicheskie
osnovy planirovanija mnogotselevogo lesopol’zovanija i lesoproizvodstva lesnykh
resursov. // Mnogotselevoe lesoispol’zovanie na rubezhe XXI veka. Pushkino;
VNYLM, 1999. S. 81…101.
4.
Chumachenko
S.I., Palenova M.M., Korotkov V.N. Prognoz dinamiki taksatsionnykh pokazatelei
lesnykh nasazhdeny pri raznykh stsenarijakh vedenija lesnogo khozjaistva;
model’ dinamiki lesnykh nasazhdeny FORRUS-S // Ekologija, monitoring i
ratsional’noe prirodopol’zovanie. Nauchnye trudy MGUL. Vypusk 314. (FTSP “
Integratsija”). M: Izd-vo MGUL, 2001. S. 128…146.
5.
Doklad
ministra prirodnykh resursov Rossyskoi Federatsy V.G. Artjukhova na
Vserossyskom s’ezde lesovodov 27 fevralja 2003 goda// Rossyskaja lesnaja
gazeta, 2003, Mart, N 5(07). S.8…9.
6.
Federal’naja
tselevaja programma “Ekologija i prirodnyje resursy Rossii (2002-2010 gody)”
M., 2001. 210 s.
7.
Filipchuk
A.N. Obshie tendentsy ustoichivogo upravlenija lesami i lesoispol’zovanija //
Lesokhozjaistvennaja informatsija. M: VNYLM, 2002. N 8. S 60...63.
8.
Filipchuk
A.N., Moiseev B.N. Vklad lesov Rossy v uglerodny balans planety //
Lesokhozjaistvennaja informatsija. 2003. N 1.S. 27…34.
9.
Instruktsija
o porjadke vedenija gosudarstvennogo ucheta lesnogo fonda. M: VNYTSlesresurs,
1997, 79 s.
10.
Instruktsija
po provedeniju lesoustroistva v lesnom fonde Rossy. CH. 1 M: VNYTSlesresurs,
1995, 176 s.
11.
Isaev
A.C., Korovin G.N. Ustoichivoe upravlenije lesami Rossy: problemy i reshenija//
Nauchnye aspekty ekologicheskikh problem: trudy Vserossyskoi konferentsy. V 2
t. T.1. M: Nauka, 2002 S. 75…88
12.
Karaban’
P.T.,Gitarsky M.L. Osobennosti monitoringa lesnykh ekosistem, podverzhennykh
vozdeistviju promyshlennykh vybrosov zagrjaznjajushikh veshestv// Obzor
zagrjaznenija prirodnoi sredy v Rossyskoi Federatsy za 2000 god. M:
Rosgidromet, 2001. S 49…52
13.
Krasnaja
kniga Rossii: pravovye akty. Ofitsial’noe izdanie. Moskva: Gosudarstvennyi
komitet RF po okhrane okruzhajushei sredy, 2000.134 s.
14.
Krasnaja
kniga Rossyskoi Federatsy. Zhivotnye. M:Izdatel’stva ACT, Astrel’, 2000, 860 s.
15.
Krasnaja
kniga RSFSR (rastenija). M: Rosagropromizdat, 1988. 590 s.
16.
Krasnaja
kniga RSFSR (zhivotnye). M: Rossel’khozizdat, 1985. 454 s.
17.
Lesnoy
fond Rossii (po dannym gosudarstvennogo ucheta lesnogo fonda po sostojaniju na
1 janvarja 1998 g.) Spravochnik.M: VNYTSlesresurs, 1999. 650 s.
18.
Lesnoy
fond Rossii (po uchetu na 1 janvarja 1993 g.) Spravochnik M: VNYTSlesresurs,
1995. 281 s.
19.
Lesnoy
fond SSSR (po uchetu na 1 janvarja 1978 g.) M: Goskomles SSSR,1982. T.1 – 601
s. T.2 – 683 s.
20.
Lesnoy
fond SSSR (po uchetu na 1 janvarja 1983 g) M: Goskomles SSSR, 1986-1987. T.1 –
891 s. T. 2 – 973 s.
21.
Lesnoy
fond SSSR (po uchetu na 1 janvarja 1988 g.) Statistichesky sbornik M: Goskomles
SSSR, 1990-1991. T. 1-1005 s. T. 2 – 1021 s.
22.
Moiseev
B.N., Alferov A.N., Strakhov V.V. Ob otsenke zapasa i prirosta ugleroda v
lesakh Rossy / / Lesnoe khozjaistvo. 2000. N 4. S.18…20.
23.
Narodnoe
khozjaistvo RSFSR v 1989 g. Stratistichesky ezhegodnik. M: Respublikansky
informatsionno-izdatel’sky tsentr Goskomstata RSFSR, 1990. 692 s.
24.
O
sostojany okruzhajushei prirodnoi sredy Rossyskoi Federatsy za 1988-1998 gody.
Prilozhenie 2 k Gosudarstvennomu dokladu “O sostojany okruzhajushei prirodnoi
sredy Rossyskoi Federatsy v 1998 godu”. M: Gosudarstvennyi tsentr
ekologicheskikh program, 1999. 135 s.
25.
Osnovnye
polozhenija ustoichivogo razvitija Rossii // ispol’zovanie i okhrana prirodnykh
resursov v Rossy.2002.N 9-10.S. 13…103.
26.
Pisarenko
A.I., Strakhov V.V. Na puti k ustoichivomu upravleniju lesami Rossy // Leskhoz.
Inform. 1996. Vyp. 1.S.1…17.
27.
Pisarenko
A.I., Strakhov V.V., Moiseev B.N., Alferov A.M. Vklad lesov Rossii v uglerodnyi
balans planety i problema lesovosstanovlenija // ispol’zovanie i okhrana
prirodnykh resursov Rossii. 2000. N 6. S. 54…66.
28.
Rossysky
statistichesky ezhegodnik; Stat. Sb. M: Goskomstat Rossii, 2000. 642 s.
29.
Rossysky
statistichesky ezhegodnik; Stat. Sb. M: Goskomstat Rossii, 2001. 679 s.
30.
Rusova
I.G. Net prognoza bez analiza. Vo VNYLM sozdan tsentr po provedeniju analiza i
prognoza tsen na drevesinu, otpuskaemuju na kornju, i drugie lesnye resursy
//Rossyskaja lesnaja gazeta. 2003.Fevral’. N 3 (05). S. 4.
31.
Sbornik
normativnykh pravovykh aktov v oblasti ispol’zovanija, okhrany, zashity lesnogo
fonda i vosproizvodstva lesov. Pod redaktsiei JU.P. Shuvaeva. Sostaviteli;
Girjaev M.D., Kirillov D.M., Nikitan A.G., Novosel’tseva A.I. Rodin S.A.,
Terekhin E.M., Filipchuk A.N. M: VNYLM, 2002. 640 s.
32.
Shuvaev
JU.P. Lesoupravlenie v Rossyskoi Federatsy: sostojanie, problemy, puti
reshenija // Lesnoe khozjaistvo. 2003. N.1. S. 2…4.
33.
Sokhranenie
biologicheskogo raznoobrazija v Rossii: Pervy natsional’ny doklad Rossyskoi Fed
eratsy. M: Tsentr okhrany dikoi prirody SoES, 1997. 170 s.
34.
Sokolov
V.E., Filonov K.P., Nukhimovskaja JU.D., Shadrina G.D. Ekologija zapovednykh
territory Rossy. M: Janus-K, 1997, 567 s.
35.
Strakhov
V.V., Filipchuk A.N., Mokritsky V.A. Kratky natsional’ny ocherk o sektore
lesnogo khozjaistva i lesnykh tovarov. Rossyskaja Federatsija // Serija
dokumentov po sektoru lesnogo khozjaistva i lesnoi promyshlennosti
(ESE/TIM/SP/14). OON Zheneva, 1997, N 14. 20s. (rus.,angl.,fr. Jaz.)
36.
Strakhov
V.V., Filipchuk A.N., Shvidenko A.Z. Ustoichivoe razvitie lesnogo khozjaistva
Rossy i strategija lesouchetnykh rabot // Lesn. Khozjaistvo. 2001. N 1. S.
7…10.
37.
Strakhov
V.V., Pisarenko A.I., Borisov V.A. Globalozatsija lesnogo khozjaistva. M:
VNYTSlesresurs, 2001. 400 s.
38.
Svodny
spisok osobo okhranjaemykh prirodnykh territory Rossyskoi Federatsy M:
VNYTSlesresurs, 2001. 452 s.
39.
The
Montreal process: Year 2000. Progress Report. Canada. Canadian Forest Service.
Ottawa, 2000.
40.
Tikhonov
A.V. Krasnaja kniga Rossy. M: ROSMEN-PRESS, 2002. 414 s.
41.
Vtoroe
natsional’noe soobshenie Rossyskoi Federatsy. M: Mezhvedomstvennaja komissija
Rossyskoi Federatsy po problemam izmenenija klimata, 1998, 123 s.