SIBERIAN NATURE: CURRENT STATUS
A Report by Dr. Andrei Laletin and Dr. Dmitrii Vladyshevskii
West Siberian Plain: Hotspots
Natural conditions
West Siberian plain is one of the largest lowland areas in the world. It is fringed by the ancient Urals mountains in the west, and by the East-Siberian Plateau in the east. The latter boundary is unclear, we accept it going along the left margin of the Yenesei river valley. The southern boundary is also unclear: in the southwest it goes along the hills of Kazakhstan, in the east - in the foothills of the Altai, Kuznetsk Altai and Western Sayans. The plain itself is a lowland with uplifted margins. The lowest part of the plain, sometimes situated almost at the sea level, is in the north, near the Ob river mouth.
A prominent feature of the West Siberian plain, as well as the northern Asia as a whole, is the widespread permafrost. The southern boundary of its distribution goes between 61 and 62 N latitude (fig.1). As follows from the map, scattered pockets of permafrost can be found far away to the south as well. The depth of summer thawing of permafrost is minimal in the north, and is about 1 m in the tundra zone. In northern taiga, where woody vegetation takes up about the half or slightly more of the area, thawing layer increases to 2 m, with the deepest thawing found in sandy soils.
South of 63-64 N latitude permafrost can be found only deep underneath the surface, at 150 m or deeper. Such permafrost does not have any impact on vegetation.
Another important feature of the region is the widespread distribution of wetlands. Over 30% of the territory is covered by true wetlands - one of the highest percentages for wetlands in the world. Slightly less than 50% of wetlands are forested, while the rest represent open marshes with few trees. The wettest part is in the north, where the amount of precipitation greatly exceeds the evaporation. In the middle and southern part the wetlands are commonly found on the water divides, where the runoff is minimal, and on the flattest sites.
The majority of the precipitation contributes to the surface runoff, and only 19% goes underground. Ninety percent of all precipitation makes it to the rivers, and then to the ocean. Landlocked lakes collect about 10% of the runoff. Most of the lakes concentrate in the north, and in the south in forest-steppes and steppes.
The most important factor influencing wildlife distribution is climate. At northern limit of tree distribution in forest-tundra (fig.2) the mean annual soil temperature is -1 to -3 C, decreasing with the distance from major rivers to -5 C. Ninety-nine to a hundred days a year have air temperatures above +5 C, and only 57-70 days - above +10 C. The precipitation is greater in the western part of forest-tundra - up to 550 mm a year and lower in the east - up to 300 mm.
Vegetation
At the northern limit of distribution trees grow in scattered groves on not steep southern slopes. Such forests grow on poor shallow soils, low in humus, and moist, producing low low-density forests, more diverse in the Ob floodplain, and less diverse elsewhere. At least 50% of the territory is occupied by open, usually marshy, areas. They are particularly numerous along water divides. The forests are composed of four tree species: Scotch pine (Pinus silvestris L.), siberian spruce (Picea sibirica Ledeb.), Siberian [cedar] pine (Pinus sibirica Du Tour), and Siberian larch (Larix sibirica Led.). Among deciduous trees a few species of birch (Betula spp.) and aspen (Populus tremula L.) are common. At least 187-189 species of plants per 100 sq.km are found in the north. Few rare species are detected (only one is listed in the Red Data Book - arctic paintbrush (Castilleja arctica Krey et. Serg.)). Overall, the plant cover preserves its pristine look. Up to 80% of all forests are old-growth.
As we move southward, the stands become denser and taller. The productivity also goes up (150 cu. m of timber per ha as compared with mere 50 cu. m in tundras). The forest composition remains essentially the same. Closer to the Ob river, on the floodplain, birch, Siberian pine and spruce are the most common. The southern part of northern taiga subzone is dominated by Scotch pine. No rare species of plants is found here.
The middle taiga typically includes spruce-Siberian pine-fir forests intermittent with birch and aspen secondary groves. Pine forests are found in wetlands.
Productivity of these forests is considerable - up to 300 cu.m per ha. Such stands usually grow along creeks and rivers on well-drained soils. Up to 504 species of plants can be found per 1000 (?PROBABLY 100) sq. km. No species from the Red Data Book are found.
Southern taiga has very diverse forests (fig.2). They are more productive (up to 500 cu.m per ha), and their composition is more diverse (for instance, at least 5 birch species grow there). Many forbs and grasses are found here (535 species per 100 sq.km). At least 5-6 species belong to the Red Data Book of Russia. Most of them, however, are widespread in other parts of Siberia, so it is hard to consider them true rarities. Another aspect of southern taiga and so-called subtaiga to the south is decreasing amount of wetlands. Soils in the area are fertile, well suited for agricultural production on cleared sites.
Forest steppe is a separate natural zone. Some of it was artificially created by humans. Forest groves in this zone alternate with hay meadows and pastures, as well as with crops. In some cases productivity of such forest islands remains quite high (500 cu. m per ha), usually these are Scotch pine forests. In other cases, due to increased aridity productivity somewhat declines. Plant diversity here equals that of southern taiga.
Wildlife
Most rare species are found among the best studied groups of animals, such as mammals and birds. As far as the invertebrates are concerned, Olshwang (1977) provides interesting data on long-term monitoring in the forest tundra. Overall he found 480 species of invertebrates in soils, 39 of which were represented only by 1-3 individuals. We may assume that this diverse and poorly studied group possesses many truly unique species, of which we know almost nothing.
Birds have the most species among the vertebrates. Avifauna increases from 145-160 species in forest tundra to 215-224 species in southern taiga and subtaiga. No data are available on birds in forest steppe zone. Due to extensive research of Ravkin and colleagues (Ravkin, 1973; 1978; 1984; Ravkin and Lukyanova, 1976; Vartapetov, 1984) much is known about species diversity and distribution of birds in main forest habitats (table 2).
While the overall bird diversity increases towards south, the variation in the number of nesting pairs does not demonstrate any regular trend. There is a pronounced decline in both species diversity and population numbers in the habitats with the lowest productivity - in bogs.
It is harder to quantitatively assess the situation with the endangered species, listed in the Red Data Book. Some of such species are found only irregularly and infrequently in a few locations within each subzone. For some others published data mention only the fact of occurrence (breeding) without any information on the actual number of individuals observed. Frequently even the length of observation is unknown which makes any assessment of the trends in population size impossible. All these scarce data that we found on endangered species were presented in the table 3.
The following species were found by different authors among transient or uniquely occurring rare birds associated with forests or forested landscapes: snake eagle (Circaetus gallicus Gm.), gyrfalcon (Falco rusticolus L.), mountain double snipe (Gallinago solitaria Hods.), swan eagle (Aquila heliaca Sav.), hooded crane (Grus monacha Temm.), white-naped crane (G. vipio Pall.), Siberian white crane (G.leucogeranus Pall.), common spoonbill (Platalea leucorodia L.).
The data gathered by Ravkin et al. (Table 3 above) are the most accurate available, and represent a much more accurate picture than the one presented by the Red Data Books of USSR, or Russia.
Information about numbers and diversity of mammals is generally of less interest. First, there are almost no papers available summarizing population data on all the existing mammal groups, since each group typically is counted separately by different methods. Second, numbers of small mammals vary widely from year to year. Most frequently only relative data are available describing increase or decrease in numbers from year to year, but not the actual density per unit area. Frequently the same counting problem applies to larger mammals as well. There are almost no rare species of mammals in the West Siberia, except the west siberian subspecies of beaver (Castor fiber pohley Ser.). There has been an observed decline in numbers of this species after World War II due to abolishing of Kondo-Sosva Zapovednik and increase in human disturbance in the region due to oil extraction. After the creation of Malaya Sosva Zapovednik in 1976 the population of beavers there had only three to four animals. In 1992 eight beavers were found in the Zapovednik.
Human impact on the nature of the West Siberian Plain
Brief history
Western Siberia was first included into the economy of the Russian Empire in the 18th century. It was promoted by the high value of natural firs. By the end of the 17th century sable's (Martes zibellina L.) pelt cost 7 rubles and up, silver fox (Vulpes vulpes L.) - 8 rubles. For comparison, price of a horse was only 2 rubles, of a cow - 1 ruble 50 kopecks, and 100 kg of rye grain - mere 38 kopecks.
Slow settlement of southern steppe and forest-steppe zones of Siberia occurred during the whole 18th century. The majority of the economic output was agricultural products, which constituted 91% of the market. Only after the railroad from the European Russia reached Western Siberia in 1913 did the latter receive 5 million people from other parts of Russia.
World War I and then Russian Revolution and the ensuing Civil War (1914-1922) interrupted the development of agriculture and industry of Siberia. By the year 1932, however, the overall economic output of West Siberia exceeded the level of 1913 3.4 times. Most rapidly were developing agriculture, fisheries, and especially timber production. The industry began to develop mostly after World War II, particularly 10-15 years after. Population growth was not very significant. By 1959 the population had grown by only 56% as compared to the 1913 level.
Contemporary period
Intensification of regional development began in the early 1960s. This was caused by the development of oil and gas fields in the northern part of the region. First oil was extracted there in 1963. By 1988 408 million metric tons of crude oil and 505 bill. cu. m of natural gas had been obtained. The extraction was going without any environmental protection measures in place. All the efforts were aimed at obtaining as much product as fast and cheap as possible.
Today the main oil extraction is going in the middle reaches of the Ob river in middle taiga. The extraction takes up a large area of 100,000 sq. km (about 4% of the total West Siberian territory). This area is to expand 3 to 4 times in the future. The actual cost of the environmental protection measures constitutes only 1% of the total investment. It is estimated that in order to eliminate negative impact of oil extracting operations at least 10-11% should be spent on protection. There is no hope that any increase in the environmental protection spending will take place now.
Oil and gas extraction boosted the population, which in Tyumen region alone grew 8.2-fold in the period from 1959 to 1989. Today the growth stopped. The workforce was notoriously poorly educated - over 60% constituted people who dropped out of the high school (were inferior students). The specialists with pre-college and college education constituted only 19% of the total - half the country's average. Most of poorly educated people were spending much time hunting and fishing which they did without bothering to comply with any regulations. Due to such reckless taking of wildlife, frequent pipeline breaks, oil spills, and fires the nature has suffered tremendous losses. We should add that today the old pipelines require more repairs than ever before.
Impact on forests
Forests, including woodlands, of western Siberia occupy 150.5 million ha. In different region the percent of forested area varies from 24% in Novosibirsk region to 58-59% in Kemerovo and Tomsk regions. The forest proper constitutes 60%, or 90 million ha. Most disturbed (grazed, cut, damaged by fire) forests are located in the least forested regions (79.5% of all the forests in Novosibirsk region are disturbed). In more forested areas damage is correspondingly smaller (in Tomsk and Tyumen regions - 35-36%).
Protected forests belonging to the group I constitute 14% of the total. Although this is a rather high percentage, much of them had been heavily cut prior to designation. Even today, however, 59.2% of all the forests in the area are still old-growth. 9.7% constitutes young stands. Most stands in the region have low density (28.7 % have relative density of 0.3-0.4, only 11.2% have density of 0.8-1.0). Forests are not productive. Forests with high productivity ("bonitet" I-III) occupy only 30.1% of the total. This timber stock is currently unevenly utilized (fig.3a).
In the first zone (upper North) there are only 5.4 million ha of forests, where they are not exploited, and poorly studied. Zone 2 has estimated 650 million cu.m of timber stock, about 1 million of which is being cut annually. Thus, the disturbance of such forests is low. Zone 3 further to the south is one of the main timber producing areas, especially along the left bank of the Ob, where there is a railroad. Here the annual cut reaches 10 million cu.m (which corresponds to about 100,000 ha cut per year). In the northeast of this zone timber cuts are small and mostly satisfy local demand. Zone 4 is especially swampy (48% under wetlands), and is therefore unevenly cut. This is where Tobolsk wood mill is proposed to be built. Zone 5 suffered severely from timber exploitation, especially in the south. Here up to 36% of all coniferous forests were replaced by birch groves on clearcuts and burned areas.
Finally, zone 6 is located in the densely populated forest steppe where the forests have experienced the greatest amount of exploitation. Birch is particularly prominent here, covering 43% of all forested lands. Most of the forests here belong to group I. Current difficult economic situation in Russia makes cuts of timber here possible, despite existing prohibitions. Moreover, pine forest shelterbelts in the forest steppes are particularly vulnerable to fires. No particularly harmful for endangered flora types of impact is noticed here.
Impact on animals
Invertebrates. Data on invertebrates are sketchy at best. Butterflies, beetles and bumblebees and other large insects are studied the best. West Siberia boasts 16-17 insect species listed in the Red Data Book of the USSR. Main negative factor for them is agricultural development: plowing of virgin lands and grazing.
Vertebrates. Mammals and birds have suffered the most. Sable was at the brink of extinction early in this century. Today sable's population has recovered, which is probably not going to happen with the west siberian beaver subspecies.
Situation with rare birds is shown in table 3. Spoonbill was found for the last time in 1952. It was nesting on the trees along watercourses. Among other forest zone birds white Siberian crane has suffered greatest losses. Only a single pair probably nests in Malaya Sosva Zapovednik today. Gyrfalcon is obviously a threatened tundra species of raptor. Formerly, many were captured for sport hunting purposes, but today such use is unlikely. Now gyrfalcons commonly fall victim to Arctic fox traps. Not much is known about the status of their population. About 11 pairs per 900 sq. km nested in Southern amal in the 70s.
Among other not so rare but declining species alarming is the state of osprey. It occurs exclusively along large internal waterbodies rich in fish, in places where people are also very common. Not infrequently hunters shoot at defenseless large birds, especially raptors, for fun. Also, due to declining fish populations, osprey suffers the consequences of diminishing food base. It is unclear why Saker falcon and swan eagle eagle populations are so low. They are much more common in Central Siberia.
Impact on forest communities
The most fragile are the forests at the natural limit of tree distribution - in tundras and forest steppes. In the latter zone human impact is also especially profound. After many years of scientists' attempts, this has been finally understood by the government and a few zapovedniki and national parks are now being designed in the forest steppe zone. Their organization is still in the future, and meanwhile forests in the area continue to be exploited.
Central Siberia
Central Siberia is usually defined as the vast territory encompassing almost the whole Yenesei watershed. This territory is very diverse. It includes eastern end of the West Siberian plain, western half of the huge Central Siberian plateau and extends to the foothills if the Altai-Sayans mountains.
In a few places the plateau has pronounced folds - the Byranga mountains on the Taimyr peninsula, and the Putoran and Syverma ranges to the south. On average they reach elevation of 1000 m a.s.l. Generally, the plateau is deeply dissected by watercourses creating canyonlands that greatly diversify the landscape. In the east of the region there are also a few dissected trapp-type plateau (Vilui, Central-Tungus, etc.). Many ranges form In the areas of deep faults and folds.
Permafrost distribution is similar to that in western Siberia. Summer thaw also reaches about one meter below the surface. In northern taiga permafrost already occurs in scattered pockets. This subzone is rich in hummocky peat bogs with high ice saturation of the clayey sediments.
Overall there are much fewer wetlands than in western Siberia. Most marshes concentrate in the Taimyr lowlands, along the left bank of the Yenesei, and in some places on the water divides. Generally Central Siberia has conditions most favorable for intensive water runoff. Runoff coefficient here is 0.65, as compared with 0.34 for western Siberia. The majority of runoff gets into the Kara and the Laptev's seas. The drainage basin of the Yenesei is asymmetric, with 83% of it being located along the right (eastern) bank. An important characteristic of this river is that it gets water from the rivers of Lake Baikal, since the only Baikal's outlet, Angara, is the major Yenesei's tributary. In fact, at the confluence of the two rivers, Angara carries 1.5 times as much water as Yenesei, so the term "tributary" cannot be readily assigned to it.
The rivers get the majority of their water from the soil water supply, which also precludes development of extensive wetlands. Surface runoff is prominent only in the mountains. Most lakes concentrate in the tundra. Landlocked lake basins of the forest-steppe and steppe zones occupy a minor portion of the territory (1.7%). Many of these lakes are salty or slightly saline.
Climate, although generally similar to that of western Siberia, is markedly more continental. Eastern part of the region receives less precipitation, there are fewer frost-free days in the year. Thus, in northern and middle taiga frost-free period is only 60 days a year, in the southern taiga - 75 days. Relief is a major factor in precipitation distribution. In the east, precipitation on leeward slopes is only 300 mm a year (with 400-500 mm a year being the average for taiga in general). Southern inter-mountain basins are quite arid (especially the largest of them, Minusinsk basin, and Khakassian steppes).
Vegetation
In the northern part of taiga zone, in forest tundra, vegetation is mostly represented by extensive larch stands. Tree-wise only the Yenesei valley can boast some diversity, an even there the tree species are all the same, as in western Siberia. Larch forests are composed of Siberian larch in the west, and mostly of Daurian larch (Larix daurica) in the east. Among deciduous trees krummholz sinuous birch and small-leaved Kuzmichev's birch are the most common. The forests are low productive and sparse (growth class Va-Vb, canopy cover 0.2-0.4). There is less than 40-60 cu.m of timberstock per ha. No rare species gave been encountered here.
northern taiga has generally very similar forest vegetation. Productivity and canopy cover grows slightly (the latter up to 0.4-0.5). The timberstock in places is 80 cu.m per ha, mostly siberian and daurian larches.
The middle taiga is in the transitional zone where larch forests gives way to Scotch pine forests and mixed coniferous stands of fir, spruce and Siberian pine. These trees are particularly numerous along the Yenesei river. The productivity dramatically increases (up o250 cu.m per ha), so does the canopy cover (0.6-0.7). East of Yenesei fir and mixed coniferous forests predominate. They are less productive - only 100-130 cu.m per ha. At the most elevated sites on the plateau grow low productive pine groves (less than 100 cu.m per ha). General diversity of relief increases vegetation diversity.
In southern taiga productivity increases further, and forest covers up to 90% of the whole area. Landscape heterogeneity and tree diversity remains the greatest along Yenesei. East of the river pine forests used to thrive very recently, but today they have been mostly cut. Average productivity in the subzone is quite high, trees belong to the growth classes II and III, producing 225-250 cu.m timber per ha. Herbaceous plant diversity greatly increases here, with a few species listed in the Red Data Book (the same as in western Siberia).
Subtaiga and forest-steppes generally resemble their West Siberian counterparts. Most coniferous stands have been cut and replaced by birch and aspen. Spruce and fir occur within the forest-steppe zone mostly along the creek valleys. Besides more widespread rare plants, dissected violet (Viola incisa Turcz.) grows here. This plant is endemic to the south of Siberia, it is an endangered species.
Wildlife
Analyzing wildlife we paid most attention to the birds, since they are the best studied class of vertebrates in the region, and have many endangered species. At the same time, only one subspecies of mammals qualifies for rare status (Putorana subspecies of snow mountain sheep Ovis nivicola borealis Sev.).
Birds have been extensively studied by Rogacheva et al. (1983). In four years they discovered 99 species, six - listed in the Red Data Book. Of these six only three (peregrine falcon, gyrfalcon and white-tailed sea eagle) are connected with forests. Quantitative data are provided by Dorogov et al. (1988). Two species, golden eagle and osprey (neither of which was listed by Rogacheva et al.) they list as "very rare". For gyrfalcon 160-200 pairs are listed. Average nesting density for gyrfalcon is one pair per 250 sq. km. This is about one third of the highest density reported for this species (11 pairs per 900 sq. km). For another species, peregrine falcon, overall Taimyr population is estimated at 200-220 nesting pairs, or 900-1100 birds in the end of summer, after fledging of the young.
The bird population numbers increase southward from the Arctic circle. The most abundant of all rare birds white-tailed sea eagle is commonly found in northern and north of the middle taiga. It occurs along major rivers, and on lakes. On medium-size rivers a pair can be found every 40-60 km. According to different data, however(Rogacheva, 1988), this species is rare in northern taiga. Peregrine falcon is found in similar numbers. Both species are found three-four times as frequently as osprey. Finally, in the last few years new data were obtained on another rare bird species - little curlew (Numenius minutus Gould.) found at a few locations at the border of northern taiga and forest-tundra. Overall, the data on bird numbers in the Central Siberia do not correlate well with those for Western Siberia, where, in particular, golden eagle is much more abundant in the north.
Putorana snow sheep is listed in the Red Data Book as the only rare mammal in the region. A zakaznik (wildlife sanctuary) had been created for its protection in 1984, later transformed into a Zapovednik with the area of 330,000 ha. About 1,500 of sheep inhabit it. The main factor of population decline for the subspecies is shooting by reindeer shepherds, and by members of various expeditions. The number of expeditions has precipitously dropped in the last years. Reindeer herding has also been in decline.
southern taiga has seen the major thrust in ornithological studies. It has 170 bird species in the summertime (Rogacheva, 1988), Vladyshevsky and Shaparev (1975) have found 154 species in six years. Ravkin (1984) - 144 species in two. Among forest-type habitats the highest bird diversity was found in forest groves surrounded by fields - 734 individuals per sq. km during nesting season with overall diversity of 36 species. Higher species diversity was noted for mixed stands, where 50 species were found (632 individuals per sq. km).
There are few rare birds in southern taiga and subtaiga. Most of them occur in the area during migrations. Among nesting rarities peregrine falcon is relatively common along the Angara river (40-60 km of stream per pair).
The vertebrate fauna of the forest-steppe zone and southern foothills has been most studied in Minusinsk depression and Zapovednik "Stolby". The first detailed studies in Minusinsk were done in 1902. Later data are available for the mid-century, and the period of 1963-1984 (Prokofyev, 1987). The latter authors notes the extirpation of four nesting species in the area. Two of them, black stork and spoonbill are listed in the Red Data Book. Two others are rather common species which disappeared due to destruction of their prime habitat - shrubs on the river banks.
Among species, formerly occurring in the region during migrations, eight have disappeared. Some of them were just accidental migrants, others - rare species found at the edge of their shrinking geographic range. Most catastrophic was the decline of Great Bustard (Otis tarda L.), grey goose (Anser anser L.) and swan goose (Cygnopsis cygnoid L.). None of them was dependent on woody vegetation. Finally, most game species and raptors also declined. Such trend is shared with other regions of the country. Steppe and near-water species tend to disappear first.
Twenty-eight species have increased their numbers. In some cases this could be simply an artifact due to recent increase in the volume of studies. For 8-10 species such increase is doubtlessly real. Fifteen species are endangered, but none of them is forest species. Some others are threatened - 26 species, only two of which are forest birds - capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus L.) and great gray shrike (Lanius excubitor L.).
Poluchkin (1988) analyzed changes in bird population of Zapovednik "Stolby" near Krasnoyarsk. The last list for the reserve included 199 species, 146 of which were nesting (73.4%). Ninety-six were typical forest birds (65.7% of the total). Non-forest birds (other 50) included species inhabiting river banks, cliffs, meadows, steppes and human settlements.
Analysis of bird population of the Zapovednik has demonstrated that the smallest changes have occurred in its central, least disturbed part. Only four of the total 100 species there have experienced decline, while five - increase in numbers. Two species, golden eagle and peregrine falcon, stopped nesting in the reserve. Another district along the Mana river has been extensively cut. The river itself has been used for 50 years for transporting logs and summer recreation. There are 161 species of birds, with 20 declining in numbers and 10 increasing. The third district where nature has also been much altered demonstrates similar tendency: among 154 species 27 are declining, while 15 increasing. Three species have stopped nesting. In the fourth district, adjacent to a city, among 157 species 42 are declining, while 14 increasing. Six species have disappeared in 40 years. Everywhere typical taiga species decline.
Among mammals listed in the Red Data Book we should mention extirpation of the eared, or Daursky, hedgehog (Erinaceus dauricus Sun.) from Achinsk forest-steppe, and decrease of population of long-tailed nocturnal bat (Myotis longicaudatus Ogn.). The latter species of bat is one of the first candidates for the Red Data Book of Russia. In the former USSR only 3 occurrences were listed. Khritankov and Melnikov (1988) found three males of the species during exploration of caves in 1981-1985 in the south of Krasnoyarsk region. Finally, many game species of mammals decline, especially river otter and roe deer, although the latter is still relatively common.
Human impact on the nature of the Central Siberia
Brief history
At first, the human impact has been very similar to that in western Siberia. Early settlers were mostly interested in trading firs. Only in the middle of the 18th century did the settlement of the forest-steppe and agriculture development begin. 1830-1840s had seen the "gold rush" developing in Yeniseisk province. In 1847 there were obtained 1.3 thousand pounds ( about 47,000 pounds) of gold, about 90% of the total production that year in Russia. Today Siberia retains the leading position in gold production.
After the Revolution of 1917 the paths of development diversified. For instance, timber imports via Igarka sea port increased considerably. The intention to create a chain of mills along the Trans-Siberian railway did not materialize before the World War II. At that time development of Kuzbass coal mining region took a priority. The most significant industrial project completed before the war was establishment of the city of Norilsk to explore one of the world's richest copper-nickel deposits (1935-1936). At the beginning of the war a number of large military plants were evacuated to Krasnoyarsk from Central Russia, which laid ground for the subsequent specialization of the region in military production.
Contemporary period
The further development of defense and energy-producing industries characterizes this period. Another major branch of industry is timber production, stimulated by the construction of two largest mills in the USSR in eastern Siberia. All in all, these processes greatly stimulated regional population growth (fig.4). It needs to be noted that Central Siberia objectively has all the conditions for energy production and development of energy-consumptive industrial enterprises (such as production of non-ferrous metals). Thus, if in the former Soviet Union before the reforms reservoir construction cost 40 rubles per 1,000 kWh on average, it was only 20 rubles in the Central Siberia.
Environmental situation also favored major construction projects. If on average 53 ha of land were flooded per 1000 kWh of power generated in the USSR, only 17 ha were in the Central Siberia. The mining of 1 million metric tons of coal from open pits required 20 ha of land on average in the country. Only 7 ha were needed in the Kansk-Achinsk coal basin. All of this stimulated energy extracting industries.
Impact on forests
Krasnoyarsk Krai (region) forested lands occupy 135.2 million ha with about 50% of the regional territory being actually forested. Closed forests occupy 100 million ha (no forests are found in the southern foothills in the region). About 30% of the forested lands have been disturbed.
About 18% of all the forests belong to the group 1 (protected forests). Most of the forests are true old-growth, with young stands occupying only 5.7% of the total forested land. The vast territory of the Central Siberia may be conveniently subdivided into five forest management districts. (fig.3b).
District 7 (3 on the figure) has essentially pristine forests, except limited amount of timber cuts for local needs. In the past when reindeer raising was prominent in the area, reindeer ranchers cut wood as well. Similar situation exists in the eighth (2nd) district in the Putoran mountains. District 9 is located in the watersheds of Nizhni and Podkamenny Tungusska, it is heavily forested (up to 85%) with timber stock of 80 cu.meters per ha. In its northern part these forests are still reserved for the future use, most of them composed of larch. District 10 (4) is where most timber is produced today. Average stock there is 250-300 cu.m per ha. Bratsk and Ust'-Ilimsk timber mills alone process up to 30 million cu.m of timber from the district annually. With the current intensity of timber production in the district the forests will last for no more than 30 years.
The last Krasnoyarsk-Kansk district (number 11 (5)) was extensively cut in the past. Today a few remaining pockets of mature forest are being cut in there. The future restoration of the coniferous forests in the area is a questionable issue, since for the most part mature seed-producing stands have long gone, remaining too little seed material for successful revegetation.
Impact on wildlife
Again, most of the existing data concern to birds and mammals. As was mentioned earlier, inhabitants of steppes and forest-steppes, and shore birds have experienced the greatest decline. Spoonbill, for instance, has disappeared from the south of Central Siberia, as well as from western Siberia. Only in the last decade did the decline of hooded crane stopped. Other crane species remain rare migrants (except grey crane, Grus grus, which however still declines in numbers). On the positive note, two very rare in western Siberia raptors - imperial eagle and Saker falcon have stabilized their population in the south of Central Siberia, where they are relatively common.
There are no significantly declining species in the taiga zone. Although Chinese bush warbler (Bradypterus taczanowskius Swin.) is listed in the Red Data Book, we lack the data on its previous numbers. Moreover, recent counts using "spider web" nets proved that this secretive species is not as rare as was previously believed.
There are many rare species in tundra and forest-tundra. For some the reasons for low population numbers are unknown, and may be natural (for example, Rossi's gull (Rodostechia rosea MacGil.), or minor curlew). Kelberg and Brillintov (1990) cite accidental trapping of birds by Arctic fox traps as the leading cause of their death (100-150 birds a year). This is about 25% over the natural death causes, which is a substantial additional negative factor.
An important indirect factor of human disturbance might be an increase in competition and predation due to human activities. An example may be the introduction of European beaver which made survival of local subspecies unlikely. Domestic dogs in the area more frequently specialize in hunting wildlife. In the human-settled floodplains there has been reported a few-time increase in clutch and fledglings in meadows and wetlands due to increased predation from crows. In dry years in the steppe and forest-steppe zones the haymeadow mowing and grazing increases many fold. This destroys grass habitat for many wild animals.
Mountains of the Siberian South
Geographical position and natural conditions
This region includes a vast territory extended from west to east from the western tip of the Altai to eastern Sayans. The northern boundary is marked by a low-elevation Salair range (about 500 m a.s.l.). Further eastward lies Kuznetsk Alatau range. The northeastern slope of the latter borders Minusinsk Depression, which in its turn is adjacent to the Western Sayans in the south. The Altai mountains is a large system of folds, the heart of which - Katunsko-Chuyskii range has elevations up to 4.0-4.5 thousand meters. All these summits are covered by everlasting snow.
western Sayans is fringed by the Altai and Kuznetskii Alatau in the west and eastern Sayans in the west. This range is lower than the Altai with elevations below 2,880 m. eastern Sayans reach Lake Baikal in the east. The mountain system of the south of Siberia is shown on fig....
Climate of the Siberian South is diverse. Salairo-Kuznetsk physiographical province has notoriously cold winters, with minimal temperatures reaching 45 C below, and moderately warm or cool summers. northern Altai has similar climate with the sum of effective temperatures (sum of the average daily temperatures during the vegetative season - M.B.) 1200-1600 degrees C and 300-800 mm precipitation a year. western Altai is warmer with the sum of effective temperatures reaching 2200 C. Although the precipitation varies there greatly, some places get 1500 mm a year.
western Sayan is characterized by typical for the mountains moderately cold climate with great amount of precipitation. Depressions between the mountains have warmer climate, for example Minusinsk Depression has sum of effective temperatures of 1800-2000 C. As one travels eastward, continentality of climate grows, reaching its peak already beyond the border of Russia in Mongolia.
The Altai-Sayan mountain country is characterized by presence of permafrost, primarily within the central part of each range on northern slopes and in the swamps at the valley bottoms. Permafrost gets 100-200 m thick and has temperatures 1-2 degrees C below zero.
Large amount of precipitation makes the mountains natural water reservoirs for the numerous rivers. Even when rivers themselves begin outside the Altai-Sayan system, the amount of water influx from the mountains is so large that it totally controls the timing and degree of floods. In basins located at 900 - 1300 m a.s.l the annual runoff is 700-950 mm a year, while in those at higher elevations - up to 1100 mm.
Soils in the region include Chestnut soils, mountain chernozems, chernozem-like soils of herbaceous forests, sod-forming podzolic soils, and acid non-podzolic soils up to poorly developed high-elevation soils high in the mountains. Generally fertility is the greatest at the feet of the mountains.
Vegetation
High variety of environmental conditions in the mountains makes vegetation particularly diverse. We describe vegetation district by district (physiographic district being subdivision of physiographic province - MB), each having its peculiarities.
Salairo-Kuznetsky district is characterized by monotonous vegetation - aspen-birch forest-steppe on the plains and dark conifer (fir) taiga in the mountains with aspen groves on clearcuts. Northern Altai district has typical for the mountains elevational belts of vegetation with pine - larch forests in the foothills and fir taiga on the upper slopes. Many forbs in these forests belong to the species commonly found in broad leaf forests. Southwestern Altai has particularly severe climate, and as a result, widespread larch forests. At higher elevations (1200- 1660 m) larch-spruce taiga predominates. Central Altai has larch forests with Siberian pine occurring on the upper slopes, and typical alpine tundras. Southeastern Altai is warmer, which enables growth of Scotch pine in the Chulymshan valley, and even development of semi-deserts. Most forests are dry larch forests.
western Sayans in their northern part have productive pine and larch stands. Many disturbed by fires and logging. Southern larch forests are the most widespread, taking up to 70% of western Sayans territory and having timber stock of 600 cu.m/ha. Kunznetsk-Minusinsk lowlands district is occupied by pine forests in the lowlands, with larch increasing up slope. Fir and Siberian pine forests occupy water divides. Part of the Minusinsk depression is occupied by strips of Scotch pine forests. They usually measure about four to five km in width, and 50 km in length. Forest strips are not more than 10 km apart. These forest strips are unique natural objects requiring extra protection.
eastern Sayans are also subdivided into three districts. South-western district is adjacent to western Sayans. This is a fairly mountainous region with productive fir forests having up to 800 cu.m of timber per ha. The South-eastern district has typical altitudinal zones of vegetation. Scotch pine forests and larch occupy the foothills. Above, at 700-1000 m elevation grow highly productive Siberian pine forests. Further up the slope grow fir forests.
Some scholars include Kansk forest-steppe district in southern district of eastern Sayans. This is a plain with rolling hills gradually turning into the mountain foothills. Previous pine forests have been cut by now and replaced by birch groves.
The vegetation diversity of this large region varies. It is the highest in the mountainous part of the Altai Krai, where 1133 + - 343 species are found per 10,000 sq. km, and up to 2070 species per 100,000 sq. km (Malyshev, 1994). western and Eastern Sayans have considerably lower diversity - 718 and 991 species per 10,000 and 100,000 sq. km respectively.
Regarding rare species, the official data of the Red Data Book differ considerably from the more recent estimates (Stepanov, in press). The latter paper describes the Altai-Sayan mountain country as having great variety of rare endemic species, which are particularly threatened in the foothills, the are most disturbed by humans. A few species are listed in the Red Data Book of the USSR, such as endemic Brachantemum baranovii Krasch., that was found at the mouth of Chuya river. Baikal primrose (Anemone baikalensis Turcz.) is endemic to Siberia with rather wide range and growing in low-mountainous taiga. Sayan buttercup (Ranunculus sajanensis M.Pop.) is a poorly studied endemic of eastern Sayans inhabiting subalpine meadows. Besides these species, many other rare ones occur throughout the area (e.g., Lady's slipper, helmet orchid, etc.).
Wildlife
Vertebrates have been unevenly studied. The best known are the birds of the Altai which enables us to compare the existing data published by two different authors. The least studied is the fauna of eastern Sayans.
Altai
A compilation about the birds of the Altai was written by Kuchin (1975, 1982). He had counted 309 species occurring on the territory of 262,000 sq. km after 22 years of observations. Another monograph (Ravkin, 1973) was written based on the results of five years of expedition work during all seasons. He studied birds only in the southeastern Altai, the area making up only 7-8% of the total area of the region. He found 199 species. >From the difference between the two lists in 110 species, 40 % weren't supposed to be found by Ravkin, since they occur completely outside the studied area. The rest 60% were not found due to unknown reasons. Some of them might have disappeared by the time of Ravkin's expeditions, and simply quoted by Kuchin from earlier literature.
Kuchin lists 21 species from the Red Data Book of Russia, while Ravkin only 11. Five of these were found by Kuchin from the area of Ravkin's investigations. The comparison reveals that even after many years of field work, the obtained data cannot be considered thoroughly reliable, and that omission of some rare species is not unusual.
Of the 20 habitats visited by Ravkin, the most diverse avifauna was found in the forests in the foothills. The aspen-birch lowland forest 66 species and 1020 individual were recorded per 100 ha during the nesting season. Another forest type in the lowlands yielded 64 species and 867 individuals. The lowest species diversity and bird numbers were found in the least productive of all the communities studied - shrubby tundras (22 species and 199 individuals) and stony tundras (13 species and 105 individuals).
The mammal fauna of the Altai is the most diverse of all the regions described here, and includes 100 species ( udin et al., 1979, Sobansky, 1988). Some of them occur in the Altai at the fringe of their range, and are only regionally rare. Others are rare throughout their range, the Altai included. A few have probably gone extinct (red wolf (Cuon alpinus Pall.), dzeren antelope (Gazella gutturoza Pall.). Among other Red Data Book species Altaiskii Krai boasts snow leopard (Uncia uncia Schreb.), manul cat (Felis manul Pall.), mountain sheep (Ovis ammon L.). The former two species live in the southeast of the Altai. Manul is rather common within the core area of its range, in Tuva republic. Snow leopard is rare throughout its range. According to Sobansky (1988) there are a few dozen of these cats in the Altai.
Argali sheep is an example of a once widespread species, but now at the verge of extinction. Due to competition from livestock and hunting it disappeared from many habitats and only 70-80 now remain in the southeastern Altai.
Western Sayans
Petrov and Rudkovsky (1985) provide the most extensive treatment of the birds in the area. They studied birds in the near- Yenesei part of western Sayans, where they found 212 species, 180 of them nesting. Of the nine habitats they studied the highest diversity (99 species) was noticed in the mixed bottomland forests. Fewest number of species was found in the mountain tundras (26).
Sixteen species belong to the Red Data Book of Russia, Among them two are migrants, and status of four is uncertain. Other rare species nest in the area. One, Godlewskii's bunting (Emberiza godlewskii Tacz.), is considered abundant in the mountain steppes. Altai mountain grouse (Tetraogallus altaicus Geb.) and mountain double snipe (Gallinago solitaria Hod.) are common in some habitats. All other threatened species are rare, for example, osprey, white-tailed eagle, steppe eagle (Aquila rapax L.), imperial eagle (Aquila heliaca Sav.). Among 11 studied habitats most of these species were found in not more than five, while some only in one (black stork, demoiselle crane).
The mammal diversity is estimated at 70 species (Syroechkovsky and Rogacheva, 1979). Sokolov (1979) who studied the mammals of the Siberian pine forests of Siberia, lists 48 species for western Sayans. The Red Data Book species of mammals live either in the southernmost part of the region (snow leopard), or occur only during migrations (argali sheep, red wolf, manul). Zavatsky (1988) has thoroughly studied snow leopard in Sayano-Shushensky zapovednik. His estimate is 20 leopards for the area, which he considers close to the natural density of 0.1 individuals per 1000 ha.
Human impact on the mountain nature
The main types of human impact in the southern Siberian mountains are determined by complicated transportation system, limited conditions for agriculture, and high soil erosion. Main resources are timber, minerals, and hydropower. Livestock raising, hunting and tourism are secondary types of resource use.
The Altai-Sayan forests cover 27.2 million ha with estimated 4.1 billion cu.m of timber in stock, 35% of it of the valuable Siberian cedar pine. One half of the forests belong to the protected 1st group as nut-producing stands. Today almost all accessible lowland and foothill forests have been already cut. Today due to the difficult economic situation in Russia logging of high elevation forests have decreased.
The main environmental consequence of the mountain logging is erosion of mountain slopes and formation of talus slopes. Today it is nearly impossible to determine which of such slopes are natural, and which are human-induced. Where soil remains intact, natural revegetation goes quite successfully.
Mining occurs mostly in so-called Rudnii (ore - M.B.) Altai. Here over 150 deposits have been mined since the middle 18th century. Ust'-Kamenogorsk, Zyryanovsk, Leninogorsk and other cities appeared due to mining of polymetallic ores. Among non-ferrous metals gold, tungsten and tin are the most abundant. The famous Kuzbass coal-mining basin is also part of the region. Today over 150 million metric tones of coal is produced here annually. This is the main industrial and energetic base of Russia.
Coal mining influences all natural communities, including forests. In particular, it requires a lot of timber for construction which is taken from the local forests. Industry-induced population growth led to the increase of hunting, including poaching, especially by the members of different expeditions. Hunting caused decline of many species, including ungulates, marmot (Marmota bobac Mull.), river otter (Lutra lutra L.).
Hydropower development is especially profitable when assessed on the basis of the acreage of land flooded per unit of energy generated. Thus, the most high-elevation Sayanskoe reservoir has the least acreage flooded per unit of water volume - 0.4 sq. km per 1 million cu.m). For the middle-elevation Krasnoyarsk reservoir this indicator is 0.7, while for the lowland Novosibirsk reservoir - whole 2.4). Such assessment, however, does not take into consideration the fact that mountain valleys have also the most valuable land which is used by many species as wintering grounds. When the reservoirs are small and few in number, the overall impact is not great. Further increase of hydrodams quickly makes living conditions unbearable for many animals. It becomes particularly acute problem for ungulates who cannot cross open water downstream from the dam in the winter time.
Livestock raising has the most negative impact on nature in the Altai, where there are many mountain pastures. Grazing led to the decline of argali sheep and mountain population of reindeer (Rangifer tarandus L.). Grazing is also detrimental for wild flowers, and vegetation in general. Today grazing can be confounded only by creation of Zapovedniki or zakazniki (nature preserves).
Hunting combined with poaching becomes more widespread cause of population decline and range shrinking of the most prized game species - ungulates, sable, marmot, capercaillie. Some improvement in the situation is due to the ongoing economic reform process which dramatically raised the cost of transportation, and reduced opportunities for using state transport for private hunting. On the other hand, quality of state inspectors' work has been steadily declining.
Tourism, just like hunting, is declining due to increased costs and is mostly confined to the vicinity of major urban centers. Most likely, this process will continue until there will be an improvement in the economic situation. In the recent past tourism was responsible for habitat destruction of many river-dependent species, since major trails were going alongside the streams.
Near-Baikal and Trans-Baikal
Natural conditions
This region of Siberia is unique first of all due to the presence of Lake Baikal and surrounding it mountain relief. Three administrative regions compose the region: Buryat republic and Irkutsk and Chita oblasts. The total area is 1.6 million sq. km.
Near-Baikal occupies mostly the southeastern part of the Central Siberian Plateau deeply dissected by river valleys. Irkutsk oblast is located entirely within the Near-Baikal. From the southeast the plateau is bordered by eastern Sayan and near-Baikal ridges comprising so-called "Irkutsk amphitheater". From the north, Irkutsk amphitheater is bordered by North Baikal and Potomskoe plateaux, from the southeast - by the Khamar-Daban range.
Trans-Baikal region is primarily in Buryatia. This is a deeply dissected mountainous area at elevations 500-700 m. To the south and east from it lies Selenga plateau at 1200-1600 m. Mountains there alternate with vast intermountain depressions. The eastern part of Trans-Baikal is occupied by Vitim plateau (about 1000 m elevation). Similarly elevated relief is typical for Chita oblast.
Climatically, the whole region is very continental, the Trans-Baikal being more continental than Near-Baikal. Unlike in western Siberia, relief and proximity to Baikal here play more important role than latitude in determining climatic patterns. July temperatures on the plains in Irkutsk oblast are 18 C on average, the summer is hot but short. Frost-free period is mere 90-100 days. The winter is cold with the mean January temperature of -21 C. Bodaibo, located to the east, has January mean temperatures of -33.3 C. As a rule, in winter time it is warmer in the mountains.
Precipitation is unevenly distributed. Khamar-Daban receives the greatest amount of up to 1000 mm annually. Plains of Trans-Baikal are arid with only 200-300 mm. Permafrost occurs in scattered spots, for example, in the northern part of Western Near-Baikal, and the southeast of Chita oblast.
Hydrology of the region is complex. It is situated within the watersheds of two great rivers, Yenesei and Lena. Baikal separates the two. Lakes are abundant, especially in the east. There are also a few large artificial reservoirs: Bratskoe (5,470 sq. km), Ust-Ilimskoe (1,387 sq. km), although they are dwarfed by Lake Baikal (31,500 sq. km). Described relief in conjunction with general aridity of climate predetermines low amount of wetlands.
Soils are very diverse. Forest soils of Near-Baikal are mostly sod-podzolic forest soils. Widespread sod-carboniferous soils are distinguished for their fertility. Podzolic proper soils are rare due to lack of precipitation. Trans-Baikal is characterized by widespread mountainous sod-forming soils. In the flat areas mountain forest soils with different degrees of podzolization are also formed.
Vegetation
Near- and Trans-Baikal differ considerably in regard to vegetation. Irkutsk oblast' is one of the most forested in Russia with 72% forest-covered. As in other parts of Siberia, the tree diversity is low. Out of 25 trees only ten are widespread. Larch occupies 34% of the forested area, Scotch pine - 32%, Siberian cedar pine - 8%, spruce - 6%, and fir only 1%. The rest (19%) are deciduous trees, mostly birch.
Scotch pine forests here been logged the most. They concentrate along Angara river, in proximity to Bratsk and Ust-Ilimsk mills. Larch forests grow primarily in the north and north-east of the region in pure stands. In other places larch occurs together with Scotch pine, or less commonly with Siberian pine. Larch forests of Near-Baikal are very productive with some trees reaching 900 years of age, with trunk diameter of 1.5 m and height of 60 m. Fir stands have restricted range growing in the moist habitats. Deciduous forests, mostly birch, grow throughout the region, except in the mountains. They usually replace coniferous stands after clearcuts or fires.
Trans-Baikal is generally less forested than Irkutsk region (58%). Forests there occupy 51 million ha, two thirds of it in larch. Pine forests are productive and diverse, growing chiefly in the foothills.
Floristic diversity of the region differs in its different parts. For Near-Baikal it is estimated at 2359 species. Fourty-five species are listed in the Red Data Books. Eighteen Among them are forest species. The majority, however, are inhabitants of dry steppes of Chita oblast. Four rare species are Baikal endemics. Most of the endangered forest species are associated with specific habitats - banks of rivers and streams, stone and pebble beds, cliffs, mountain bogs, etc. Typical forest species are mostly widespread in Siberia and outside it.
The most endangered, and possibly already extinct, is Bordunov's magadenia (Magadenia bardunovii M.Pop.) known from one location in Buryatia near a spring on limestone. Among obviously threatened are a few Baikal endemic with narrow ranges, known from a few small populations - Hedisarum zundukii Peschkova, Astragalus olchonensis Gontsch. No special measures are presently taken to protected these plants. Only accidentally they may happen to occur in one or another Zapovednik or national park. We also lack data about which part of the region is studied in terms of its plant communities.
Wildlife
Unlike plants, terrestrial animals did not acquire any endemic species because of Lake Baikal. At least Red Data Books lack any data on such endemic forms. Moreover, insect species that are listed from the Baikal area belong to widespread species occurring throughout large portion of Eurasia (5 species of bumblebees, 2 other Hymenoptera and 8 butterflies). It should be noted that insect fauna of Near-Baikal is studied better than those of other parts of Siberia. In Trans-Baikal enthomological research is also being done in Barguzinsky Zapovednik, and a few locations in Chita oblast and Buryatia.
On the contrary, vertebrate fauna is not so well-studied as in Western and Central Siberia. Existing data are limited and restricted to a few small taxonomic groups. Therefore, we discuss primarily rare species included in the Red Data Book of Russia. Conditionally they can be subdivided into three groups. First includes widespread species rare, or very rare throughout their range: black stork, golden eagle, white-tailed eagle, peregrine falcon, steppe eagle, imperial eagle, great bustard, hooded crane).
Second group encompasses species with restricted ranges, primarily outside the region considered here. Such species either temporarily come to the region from the adjacent territories, or permanently live in small populations at the edges (manul cat, red wolf, dzeren antelope, tiger, demoiselle crane, white-naped crane, Saker falcon, gyrfalcon, Altai mountain grouse, Bewick's swan (Cygnus bewickii Swin.), little curlew, mountain goose (Eulabeia indica Lat.), long-tailed eagle (Haliaetus leucoryphus Pall.)).
Finally, the third group is represented by sparsely distributed species, however, occurring in relatively large populations. They require special protection (daurian hedgehog, swan goose, asian dowitcher (Limnodromus semipalmatus Blyth.), relict gull (Larus relictus Lonn.).
With the exception of tiger, which is not typical for Trans-Baikal anyway, not one of the aforementioned species is strictly forest one. that is occurring only in forests without requiring additional habitats: e.g., open wetlands, meadows required for cranes, storks, shore birds, or open space for hunting required for raptors. In fact, the majority of rare species in the region avoids forests.
Our analysis, which we have not done for other regions, demonstrates that it is precisely these non-forested areas that have been most disturbed by human activities. It is there where wildlife is most directly persecuted by hunters. Such habitats also have the greatest number of the threatened species. It does not mean, of course, that all forest wildlife in the region is completely out of danger. However, all in all we have to admit that the most loss has been inflicted upon the animals of steppes and inner waterbodies.
Our Knowledge of the State of Siberian Forests and Possible Applications for the Establishment of Protected Areas
In this chapter we analyze existing data on plants and animals. Microorganisms, fungi and lichens have been so little studied that it is impossible for now to define rare species and discuss potential for their protection.
Forest communities
Trees are the best studied of all the Siberian organisms. There is no basis to expect that some new tree species can be discovered in the Siberian taiga. Similarly, it is improbable to believe that some tree species may become threatened without such fact being immediately noticed. Therefore, here we focus only on discussing the status of the forest communities.
The chief monograph summarizing the results of forest studies in Siberia was published in 1969 with the title "Forests of the Urals, Siberia and the Far East" by a group of authors. Although dated, it remains the only major monographs dealing with this huge territory as a whole so far. Numerous materials about the current state of the forests in particular regions are scattered in many journals and monographs. Analysis of this literature from the standpoint of forest state and protection shows that depletion of mature stands in the most accessible areas continues to occur. On the other hand, the most remote areas experience little use, as before. Natural regeneration of cut areas, especially in southern taiga and subtaiga goes poorly (especially in so-called herbaceous types of forest).
In the most disturbed southern forests a very common process is replacement of coniferous forests after clearcuts with deciduous second-growth. If enough coniferous stock is present around the site, coniferous forest will eventually regenerate as a result of succession. However, since coniferous trees are being logged first and in ever-increasing volumes, natural seed sources in the vicinity of the clearcut disappear, and the restoration of coniferous forests at first gets delayed and finally stops.
Replanting conifers artificially and provide adequate maintenance today is impossible, considering overall disastrous economic situation in Russia. Such situation promotes cutting of conifers in the proximity to the major industrial centers further, since development of new areas is a costly affair. As if to make the situation worse, in 1994 a new outbreak of siberian gypsy moth (Dendrolimus sibiricus) - the main pest of Siberian pine-fir forests. Russian forestry industry today has no means to provide pest control. Fire protection has also become problematic, many fires are nowadays caused by careless public that does not observe fire safety rules in forests. Overall, a lot is known about the precarious situation with the Siberian forests. Simple listing of difficulties, however, does not help to resolve the issues.
Forest-associated plants
Evaluation of species diversity and trends of change was recently published in a monograph by Malyshev (1994), and also by Vodopyanova (1984), providing lists of species discovered on plots the size of 100 sq.km each from tundra to southern taiga. Information about rare species appears in the Red Data Book of Russia (RDBR) (1988). As was already mentioned, there are few rare species in SIberia, mostly endemics concentrating around Lake Baikal.
Another source of information is flora lists from different Zapovedniki, including Wrangel Island, Barguzinskii, Kronotskii, Baikalskii, Altaiskii, Stolby, Malaya Sosva, Ussuriiskii, Kedrovaya Pad', Sayano-Shushenskii. This information enables to tell which Red Data Book species occur in preserves, and is, therefore, protected. It should be emphasized that in all such cases, presence of populations of rare plants in zapovedniki is only a coincidence, because this fact had not been taken into account when the zapovedniki were established.
Altaiskii Zapovednik has eight species of plants from the RDBR. This is 27% of the total number of endangered or threatened plants of Altaiskii Krai. Only 23% of all RDBR species occur in Stolby Zapovednik, and only 20% in Sayano-Shushenskii. Baikalskii zapovednik hosts 18% of all rare plants of Baikal region. Dezhkin et al. (1986) estimated that on average 21% of RDBR species occur in zapovedniki. The most widespread of the rare species are also the ones most commonly found in the preserves (such as orchids - Lady's slipper (Cypripedium calceolus L.), Large-flowered Lady's slipper (C.macrantha Sw.), Epipactis aphyllum Sw., Dactylorrzhia baltica Kling., Orchis militaris L.).
These species have range of 3 to 7.5 million sq.km. Considering that the summary area of the zapovedniki protecting these species is only 15-18 thousand sq.km, it becomes clear that only 0.24-0.5 % of the range of the species is actually protected. There is no evidence that populations of such protected species are actually doing better in preserves than outside. Evidently, role of Zapovedniki in the protection of such species cannot be considered substantial.
Why is the percentage of the range protected in zapovedniki so low in Siberia? It may even seem as if organizers of Zapovedniki system deliberately tried to stay away from including rare plant populations within the proposed preserves! In reality, the reasons for such oddly low percentages are the following. The amount of rare species rapidly decline as we travel northward. There most rare species concentrate in Chukotka peninsula tundras. No zapovedniki exist there yet. At the same time, the .....[line cut off] ...zapovedniki were primarily set up in the North, where land is the least valuable.
Another aspect of zapovedniki is their role in conservation of plant species diversity. When we know about the composition of the regional flora and flora of zapovednik in the same region, we can compare the two to figure out the representativeness of the zapovednik flora of that of the region. It turned out that the most representative was the flora of Altaiskii zapovednik (80% of the regional species were found there, but only 27% of the Red Data Book species! Sayano-Shushenskii Zapovednik includes 48.4% of all flora of the Siberian South. Together with Stolby Zapovednik they include 56%.
Similar figures were obtained for preserves outside the territory discussed in this paper. Thus, Kronotskii Zapovednik in Kamchatka has 73% plants of the peninsula and 58% of the Kamchatka oblast (part of which lies outside the peninsula). Laplandskii zapovednik on Kola peninsula has 40% of the regional flora. Overall, the data of this sort are in short supply. It must be mentioned that theoretical relationship between the amount of plant species and the area is well-developed in the ecology (Arrenius' equation).
Animals
Different taxonomic groups of animals have been studied unevenly in Russia, like in the rest of the world. Smaller organisms with great species diversity are the least studied. Thus, in the USSR there were no country-wide data available on mites, spiders, and most soil invertebrates. Among insects butterflies and beetles are the best studied. Of 80 to 100 thousand insect species of the Soviet Union only 202 species, or 0.2%, were listed in the RDB of USSR. For well-studied birds the percentage of listed rare species was much greater (80 species, about 10%). For mammals 18.6% were listed. The same rule holds true for Siberia, only its fauna is even less studied than the rest of the country.
For instance, the leading Siberian enthomologist Korshunov (1988) noted that for only three of 14 "old" Siberian zapovednik do the data on insects exist (Stolby, Altaiskii and Barguzinskii). The following account demonstrates how far is our knowledge from comprehensive.
In the oldest Siberian Zapovednik Stolby near Krasnoyarsk the first papers on beetle fauna were published in the 1960s, when one of the habitats yielded 30 species. In the following paper Korshunov (1969) listed another 66 species. Two years later the same author was providing already the list of 260 beetles from the same place (Korshunov and Opanasenko, 1971)! Later the beetle fauna of the Zapovednik was studied again ( anovskii and Pogonina, 1988). The authors found 136 more species. It is easy to imagine how incomplete are the lists of insects based on the work of one field season. However, this kind of lists is the one most frequently encountered in the literature.
Speaking about insufficient knowledge of Siberian insects, Korshunov estimates that about 100 butterflies will have to be listed in the next edition of the RDBR. At the same time, in the RDB of the USSR (1984) only 28 such species are listed for Siberia. It is impossible today to find out which percentage of these species occur in zapovedniki. The rate of increase of species with area is also unknown.
In a small paper on butterflies in Stolby Zapovednik Korshunov (1969) lists 98 species from just one family (Lepidoptera, Diurnales). Of them only two, machaon Papilio machaon L. and hay butterfly hero (Coenonympha hero L.) belong to the RDB of the USSR. According to the RDB itself, however, seven rare species of butterflies occur in the area.
Current decline in scientific research in Russia makes it improbable that new sites with high concentration of rare insects will be discovered. Therefore, in the newly created zapovedniki rare insects and other invertebrates will be included incidentally, similarly to what has happened in the past with plants. In the best-case scenario we may hope that using data on ecological requirements of rare insect species new preserve will appear in the areas of their concentration.
Vertebrate fauna, on the hand, is studied to the extent making possible predictions of species numbers and diversity for any given unsurveyed territory. Such forecast will be more reliable for more common species, and much less - for rare species. How can we express the reliability of such estimates? We consider this question below using birds, most thoroughly studied group, as an example.
In most cases information on numbers and species of birds is provided on the basis of one-year field work, typical for Siberia. Comparison of these data with the long-term monitoring studies are shown in table 4. The data in the table were obtained by different authors, so difference in the degree of professionalism may be responsible for the disparity of data alongside with the actual differences in bird abundance. That the skills of the researchers play important role is clear from the fact that in most cases the fewest number of species was registered in the first year of observations.
General, albeit weak, tendency is increased accuracy of the counts with the decline of species diversity. The analysis may also include a coefficient of similarity between two lists that equals 100% when both all the species on the lists and the abundance of each species are identical. In such a case, the coefficient between the results of the long-term studies and one-year expeditions would be 40-51%, or 76-82% if only species diversity is taken into account. These figures are close to the accuracy of bird fauna predictions for yet unsurveyed territories based on previous experience given by the Laboratory of Environmental Monitoring at the Biological Institute of the Russian Academy of Science (headed by Dr.Ravkin). Such predictions considered only overall potential diversity of birds. As for the rare species, unfortunately for conservationists, nobody has attempted to predict their distribution in Siberia so far.
Common sense tells us that it is not probable that for abundant species, which are recorded in many dozens of individuals per count, the abundance will vary 2-3 times from count to count. For rare species, on the other hand, it is quite possible that such will be encountered only one-two times during the count, or not at all. Overall, it will appear as if its diversity fluctuates widely. For example, in a bird count in three different southern taiga sites using of the 15 most abundant species for measuring similarity between the sites the following similarity coefficients were obtained: 80%, 67% and 67%. Using the 15 most rare species for calculation of the same coefficient gave similarity of 13%, 7% and 7%. That means that Among 15 species only 1 or 2 were occurring in two sites.
From this observation follows an important conclusion. If our goal in creating zapovedniki is to preserve the natural diversity of species of a particular landscape, we need to include the widest variety of habitats possible, especially the richest in bird species, and having greater abundance of birds. If, however, we desire to protect specifically the rare birds, then specific and rather extensive counts need to be carried out to find out which rare species occur in the area in the first place, and in which quantity.
Let us consider now hoe representative are zapovedniki in terms of the birds they are protecting. When we compared the bird list for Stolby zapovednik with that for the whole southern forest zone, it turned out that Stolby with the area of only 47,000 ha protects 100 species, 79% of all nesting birds in the natural zone. In a larger but less extensively surveyed Sayano-Shushenskii zapovednik (390,000 ha) at least 74% of all the birds of Krasnoyarsk region are found. Ravkin (1978, 1984) and us in this present report have looked into how much we can extrapolate from the results of bird counts on a small territory to find out the general composition of bird population of the larger subzone. The conclusion is that rather accurate estimates can be obtained if at least 1% of the territory is thoroughly surveyed.
Situation with rare species, however, is entirely different. Most zapovedniki don't protect the majority of such. The actual percentage protected by zapovedniki seems to be close to the reported by Dezhkin et al. (1986) - 25% of the total number of rare species. The role of zapovedniki in conservation of different species is different. Some species happen to be on the reserve territory only accidentally, while others are deliberately protected (table 5).
The data from the Red Data Books are based on conclusions of scientists-experts, or extrapolation of data from a few count sites onto the whole country. Materials of Ravkin et al., on the other hand, represent an unprecedented for Russia actual counts from a very large territory. Overall, the figures reveal both low reliability of the estimates of rare species of birds in the Red Data Books, and also that zapovedniki probably cannot provide much protection to these species.
In some zapovedniki protection of particular rare species was high on the agenda from the beginning. Thus, Taimyrskii and Wrangel Island zapovedniki were created Among other things to protect Red Data Book species of red-breasted goose (Rufibrenta ruficollis Pall.) and white goose (Chen hyperboreus Pall.). Protection of swan goose was one of the reasons for creation of the recently established Daurskii zapovednik. In such cases the majority of population of a rare species may be included into a preserve. Obviously, this is possible only for species naturally concentrating in large numbers in a few places, as is common for waterfowl. For forest species this simply doesn't work, since they settle vast territories and usually don't have dense populations.
Unlike birds, mammals always enjoyed more recognition Among Zapovedniki organizers. For example, Sayanskii and Barguzinskii zapovedniki played an important role in restoration of Siberian sable. Malaya Sosva and Azas were created to protect beaver. Wrangel Island is a veritable maternity ward for polar bears. Putoransky zapovednik was created for protection of mountain sheep. Daurskii zapovednik not only protects swan goose, but also daurian hedgehog. One of the main goals of Sayano-Shushenskii zapovednik is protection of snow leopard.
Without a doubt, as new real threats appear in the future, new zapovedniki will have to be set up to protect particular species. It is easier done for small species with small individual territories, and much more difficult for large predators. It is not accidental that Turanskii zapovednik in the Central Asia failed to save Turanskii tiger. Today only 20-22 tigers lives in Sikhote-Alinsky and Lazovsky zapovedniki out of the total 150-200. Since tigers settle taiga more or less evenly, even if the area of present zapovedniki was to double this would not provide sufficient protection to tigers. Better method of protection of large predators is preservation of their prey base (e.g., wild ungulates) and protection against poaching inside, as well as outside preserves.
Status of natural protected areas in Siberia
Siberia, as the rest of Russia, is at crossroads today. It is hard to predict what the situation with natural resources will be in the region in the future. It is, however, possible to take specific measures to protect those of existing natural objects which are the most threatened today. Such object are clearly becoming the surviving forests in the vicinity of major industrial and urban centers in Siberia. Mostly this is the taiga between middle taiga boundary and the foothills of southern Siberian mountains. Development of more remote areas is hardly possible today, since Russia itself lacks investment funds, while international investors favor development of more accessible regions with developed infrastructure. The Far Eastern timber industry is the target investment area for the international investors.
On the other hand, as logging in middle taiga dwindles, it shifts to the southern taiga and subtaiga forests, and to the foothills, already heavily degraded by timber cutting. The last leftover coniferous stands that survived massive logging by powerful lespromkhozy (state timber companies) are now being cut an unprecedented rate. As a result, the last remaining seed sources of conifers in the southern taiga get rapidly depleted, and birch and aspen gain competitive advantage and stay indefinitely.
Forest replanting is minuscule due to lack of funding. Even if some replanting is done, quite frequently saplings die because no maintenance is provided. In such conditions, it is essential to create reserves to protect last coniferous stands in forest-steppe, subtaiga forests and southern taiga. Such reserves will provide crucial seed base for restoration projects in their vicinity after the current economic crisis, hopefully, ends. Otherwise, seed export from other places will be necessary. This will alter genetic composition of local tree populations, and may preclude recreation of healthy stock.
Unfortunately, distribution of existing zapovedniki does not help to solve this problem (fig.5), Thus, no zapovedniki exist in southern taiga or subtaiga forests. Table 6 demonstrates that no new zapovedniki are projected for the southern taiga, except one for the protection of fir forests.
The data show that almost 70% of all zapovedniki and national parks are located in mountainous parts and tundra and forest-tundra. The total area of these regions constitutes only 20% of the Siberian territory. At the same time, southern taiga, subtaiga, steppes and forest-steppes occupy up to 80% (?? - number is cut off), but the preserves' area there is negligible.
Such strategy of establishing preserves is aimed to mislead public. Huge arctic zapovedniki allow the government to fulfil the letter of the law by protecting areas which have low economical value and are not experiencing much pressure anyway. In the regions where land is especially valuable, created zapovedniki are fairly small. The major focus of future activities is obviously creation of more evenly distributed network of zapovedniki in all natural zones of Siberia, first and foremost in southern taiga and subtaiga.
Natural diversity depends not only on the natural zone, climate and relief, but also on the actual geographical latitude. Unfortunately, very little has been done to study latitudinal effects on biodiversity in Siberia, especially from the plant ecologists' perspective. I.Korotkov (1973, 1977), for example, demonstrated that when two plots are studied within ostensibly the same forest type (i.e., having the same dominant tree species), but separated by a few degrees of latitude (about 500 km), the forbs and mosses can differ to such extent that the two plots should be considered as belonging to two different types of forest. More studies should be done concerning this effect.
Distribution of vertebrates, especially birds, is studied much better. Invertebrates, unfortunately, are studied very poorly, there are no comprehensive monographs considering distribution of all taxonomic groups in Siberia as yet. Some ecological groups are studied better than others, for example soil microfauna. Considerable amount of papers has been published, especially on tundras, in particular on Taimyr peninsula. Krivolutsky and Golosova (1986) analyzed all existing papers on the distribution of Siberian armored mites (Oribatei) in 19 districts. The total number of species and subspecies known is 555. About 25 endangered relict species were found, and it is estimated that about the same number might still be discovered. Again, such compilation is unique. Most papers on invertebrates, as was already mentioned, discuss only specific groups from specific, more or less randomly selected locations. D.Krivolutsky, A.Pokarzhevsky and u.Chernov provide ample references of works of this sort in their papers. It is impossible to do any comparative analysis between the regions using these results. Other groups of invertebrates, like spiders, are studied even worse. There are few enthomological studies.
Only birds can be used to attempt comparative analysis for Siberia. Bird counts were done in a few locations separated by 250-400 km going east-west and 1000-1800 km going north-south (table 7). Unfortunately, neither Soerensen's coefficient in this case, nor other similar coefficients give error estimates. Laboratory of Forest Animal Ecology at the Institute of Forest in Krasnoyarsk began methodological research to obtain such estimates, but had to stop due to lack of funding. The accuracy of such indexes remains, therefore, an open question.
(Number in parentheses) indicates number of species in Malaya Sosva zapovednik according to the long-term observations.
Quite unexpectedly there is a great difference between the bird faunas of the forest-tundras of western and central Siberia. Other coefficients are close to the expectations. The smallest difference along east-west transect was the difference between the adjacent forest subzones. Quite predictably, the highest difference was noted for the regions remote from each other: the minimal similarity between mountains and tundra (0.38), 0.57 - between mountains and northern taiga, 0.60 - between mountains and middle taiga, 0.67 - between mountains and southern taiga, 0.71 - between mountains and subtaiga, and 0.75 between mountains and forest-steppe. Stolby and Sayano-Shushenskii zapovedniki have high similarity between their respective bird faunas - 0.76.
Overall, the existing data confirm our expectations that southern forests have more diverse bird fauna, and that very different habitats will have low degree of similarity in terms of birds inhabiting them. It also allows to conclude that the historical zonal principle of distribution of protected areas in the Soviet Union should be continued applied in the future, since it does reflect the natural distribution of fauna.
It is difficult to undertake similar analysis of local faunas for mammals. Most work has been done with small mammals (insectivores, rodents) trapped by some particular method (ditch traps, or "one-animal" cage traps). Overall, the diversity of mammals increases southwards and especially in the mountains. In practical terms, establishment of zapovedniki should take into account not so much the overall mammal diversity, but rather the data on presence of threatened or endangered taxa, and their population density. Although the same principle can be applied for all other living organisms, it has special meaning for mammals, who as a rule have large ranges and high diversity of known forms and subspecies, most of which are not going to become threatened any time soon.
Home | Letter from President | Programs | Maps | History | Lectures | Publications | Contributors | Russian | Contact
