The Russian Far Easturbansustainability.snre.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/...When a group of colleagues and I decided in 1997 to produce a new edition of The Russian Far East: Forests,

The Russian Far East

Newell, J. 2004. The Russian Far East: A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. McKinleyville, CA: Daniel & Daniel. 466 pages


The Russian Far EastA R E F E R E N C E G U I D E F O R C O N S E R V A T I O N A N D D E V E L O P M E N T

S E C O N D E D I T I O N

Josh Newell

DR AFT COPY — NOT FOR SALE OR CITATION



Contents

List of fi gures, maps, tables, and appendixes vi

Preface ix

Acknowledgments x

Useful terms xii

How to use this book xix

1 / Overview of the Russian Far East 3

2 / Primorsky Krai 111

3 / Khabarovsk Krai 145

4 / Jewish Autonomous Oblast 179

5 / Amur Oblast 197

6 / Republic of Sakha 227

7 / Magadan Oblast 259

8 / Chukotsky Autonomous Okrug (Chukotka) 283

9 / Koryak Autonomous Okrug (Koryakia) 313

10 / Kamchatka Oblast 341

11 / Sakhalin Oblast 375

Appendixes 415

List of abbreviations 425

Notes 427

A note on transliteration 445

Contributors 447

Index 450


v i T H E R U S S I A N F A R E A S T

Figures

Figure 1.1 Industrial production and trade in the rfe . . . . 8

Figure 1.2 Growing stock of mature and overmature forests in the rfe, 1961–2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Figure 1.3 Pollock as a component of total rfe catch, 1985–1999. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Figure 1.4 4 4 rfe red/blue king crab harvest, U.S. and Russia, 1970–1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Figure 1.5 Energy surplus and defi cit for selected countries, 1965–2020. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Figure 1.6 Russian timber exports to Northeast Asia, 6 Russian timber exports to Northeast Asia, 61991–2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Figure 1.7.7. Causes of forest fi res in the rfe, 1987–1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

Figure 1.8 Distribution of tigers, rfe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

Figure 1.9 Distribution of leopards, Primorsky Krai and northeastern China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

Figure 2.1 Foreign trade with Primorsky Krai, 2000 . . . . 115

Figure 2.2 Timber harvest in Primorsky Krai, 1959–2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

Figure 3.1 Industrial production in Khabarovsk Krai, 1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Figure 3.2 Foreign trade with Khabarovsk Krai, 2000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

Figure 3.3 Gold production in Khabarovsk Krai, 1991-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

Figure 4.1 Industrial production in the Jewish Autonomous Oblast, 1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181

Figure 5.1 Industrial production in Amur Oblast, 2000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200

Figure 5.2 Exports from Amur Oblast, 2000 . . . . . . . . . . 201

Figure 5.3 Soviet-era industry in Amur Oblast . . . . . . . . 211

Figure 5.4 Nonforested lands in Amur Oblast4 Nonforested lands in Amur Oblast4 . . . . . . . . . 212

Figure 6.1 Gold production in Sakha, 1993–1999 . . . . . 247

Figure 6.2 Gold reserves and production in Sakha, by region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248

Figure 7.7.7 1 Industrial production in Magadan Oblast, 1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261

Figure 7.7.7 2 Gold production in Magadan, 1993–2000 . . . 261

Figure 7.7.73 Population growth in Magadan City, 1939–1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271

Figure 7.7.7 4 Gold extraction from the Upper Kolyma, 4 Gold extraction from the Upper Kolyma, 41934 -1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273

Figure 10.1 Industrial production in Kamchatka Oblast, 1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343

Figure 11.1 Japanese timber harvest in southern Sakhalin, 1912–1935 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401

Figure 11.2 Forest fi res on Karafuto, 1926–1935 . . . . . . . 402

Figure 11.3 Timber production in Sakhalin Oblast, 1940–1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403

Figure 11.4 Change in the Annual Allowable Cut 4 Change in the Annual Allowable Cut 4for Sakhalin Oblast, 1953–1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 404

Figure 11.5 Foreign investment in the timber industry, Sakhalin Oblast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405

Maps

Map 1.1 Russian Far East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Map 1.2 Geographic regions of the Russian Federation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Map 1.3 Permafrost and larch cover of the Russian Federation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Map 1.4 Terrestrial ecosystems of the Russian 4 Terrestrial ecosystems of the Russian 4Federation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Map 1.5 Frontier forests of the Russian Federation. . . . . . . 15

Map 1.6 Battle for the Sikhote-Alin forests6 Battle for the Sikhote-Alin forests6 . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Map 1.7.7. Protected areas and biodiversity hotspots of Primorsky Krai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Map 1.8 Protected areas and biodiversity hotspots of Khabarovsk Krai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Map 1.9 Protected areas and biodiversity hotspots of Jewish Autonomous Oblast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Map 1.10 Protected areas and biodiversity hotspots of Amur Oblast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

List of fi gures, maps, tables, and appendixes


Map 1.11 Protected areas and biodiversity hotspots of Republic of Sakha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Map 1.12 Protected areas and biodiversity hotspots of Magadan Oblast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Map 1.13 Protected areas and biodiversity hotspots of Chukotsky Autonomous Okrug . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Map 1.14 Protected areas and biodiversity hotspots 14 Protected areas and biodiversity hotspots 14of Koryak Autonomous Okrug . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Map 1.15 Protected areas and biodiversity hotspots of Kamchatka Oblast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Map 1.16 Protected areas and biodiversity hotspots 16 Protected areas and biodiversity hotspots 16of Sakhalin Oblast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Map 1.17 Marine harvest quotas of the rfe . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Map 1.18 King crab harvest quotas of the rfe . . . . . . . . . 57

Map 1.19 Energy infrastructure of the rfe. . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Map 1.20 Offshore petroleum reserves and projects, rfe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Map 1.21 Timber export to China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

Map 1.22 Timber export to Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

Map 1.23 Timber export to South Korea . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

Map 1.24 Mineral deposits of the Russian Far East24 Mineral deposits of the Russian Far East24 . . . . . 82

Map 2.1 Primorsky Krai. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

Map 2.2 Mining deposits of Primorsky Krai . . . . . . . . . . 135

Map 2.3 Indigenous lands of Primorsky Krai . . . . . . . . . 141

Map 3.1 Khabarovsk Krai. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144

Map 3.2 Mining deposits of Khabarovsk Krai . . . . . . . . . 166

Map 3.3 Timber production in southern Khabarovsk Krai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170

Map 3.4 Indigenous lands of Khabarovsk Krai4 Indigenous lands of Khabarovsk Krai4 . . . . . . . . 173

Map 4.1 Jewish Autonomous Oblast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

Map 4.2 Forests of Jewish Autonomous Oblast . . . . . . . . 191

Map 4.3 Mining deposits of Jewish Autonomous Oblast. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192

Map 5.1 Amur Oblast. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204

Map 5.2 Mining deposits of Amur Oblast . . . . . . . . . . . 205

Map 5.3 Hydropower development in Amur Oblast . . . 222

Map 5.4 Indigenous lands of Amur Oblast4 Indigenous lands of Amur Oblast4 . . . . . . . . . . 224

Map 6.1 Republic of Sakha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226

Map 6.2 Mining deposits of Sakha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243

Map 7.7.7 1 Magadan Oblast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258

Map 7.7.7 2 Indigenous land use in Magadan Oblast . . . . . 277

Map 7.7.73 Mining deposits of Magadan Oblast . . . . . . . . 279

Map 8.1 Chukotsky Autonomous Okrug. . . . . . . . . . . . 282

Map 8.2 Indigenous lands of Chukotsky Autonomous Okrug. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308

Map 9.1 Koryak Autonomous Okrug . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312

Map 9.2 Mining deposits of Koryakia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316

Map 9.3 Indigenous lands of Koryak Autonomous Okrug. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332

Map 10.1 Kamchatka Oblast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340

Map 10.2 Mining deposits of Kamchatka Oblast . . . . . . 361

Map 10.3 Indigenous lands of Kamchatka Oblast . . . . . 364

Map 11.1 Sakhalin Oblast. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374

Map 11.2 Sakhalin offshore oil and gas projects. . . . . . . 380

Tables

Table 1.1 Population of the rfe, 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Table 1.2 Global carbon stocks in vegetation and top 1 m of soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Table 1.3 Major environmental issues and problem areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Table 1.4 Countries with the world’s remaining 4 Countries with the world’s remaining 4frontier forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Table 1.5 Ramsar Sites in the rfe, March 2002 . . . . . . . . 34

Table 1.6 Group I, II, III forests in the 6 Group I, II, III forests in the 6 rfe . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Table 1.7.7. Output of the rfe forest sector, 1995–1998 . . . . 68

Table 1.8 Reported rfe timber production, 1995–2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

Table 1.9 Top fi fteen timber producers in the rfe . . . . . . 70

Table 1.10 Resource base and production of strategic metals and minerals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

Table 1.11 Foreign investment in the rfe, 1995-2001 . . . . 88

Table 1.12 Foreign investment and public fi nance in resource extraction projects in the rfe . . . . . . . . . . 90

Table 1.13 Populations of indigenous peoples in the rfe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

Table 2.1 Protected areas in Primorsky Krai . . . . . . . . . . 121

Table 2.2 Timber industry employment, Primorsky Krai. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

Table 2.3 Timber production in Primorsky Krai, 1998 -2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

Table 3.1 Protected areas in Khabarovsk Krai . . . . . . . . . 155

L i s t o f f i g u r e s , m a p s , t a b l e s , a n d a p p e n d i x e s v i iNewell, J. 2004. The Russian Far East: A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. McKinleyville, CA: Daniel & Daniel. 466 pages

v i i i T H E R U S S I A N F A R E A S T

Table 3.2 Production of major gold mining companies, Khabarovsk Krai, 1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

Table 3.3 Forest cover in Khabarovsk Krai . . . . . . . . . . . . 168

Table 3.4 Timber production in Khabarovsk 4 Timber production in Khabarovsk 4Krai, 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

Table 4.1 Employment by industry within JAO, 1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182

Table 4.2 Protected areas in the Jewish Autonomous Oblast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184

Table 4.3 Natural monuments in the Jewish Autonomous Oblast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186

Table 5.1 Animal species of Amur Oblast. . . . . . . . . . . . . 196

Table 5.2 Protected areas in Amur Oblast . . . . . . . . . . . 205

Table 5.3 Structure of industry in Amur Oblast, 1992–1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211

Table 5.4 Employment in Amur Oblast, 4 Employment in Amur Oblast, 4 1999 . . . . . . . . . 212

Table 5.5 Degraded forest lands in Amur Obast. . . . . . . . 213

Table 5.6 Timber production in Amur Oblast, 6 Timber production in Amur Oblast, 61985–1999. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213

Table 5.7.7. Forest Cover in Amur Oblast, 1999. . . . . . . . . . 213

Table 5.8 Main timber producers in Amur Oblast, 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213

Table 5.9 Mineral resources in Amur Oblast . . . . . . . . . . 216

Table 5.10 Agricultural production in Amur Oblast, 1980–1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

Table 5.11 Agricultural land use in Amur Oblast, 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

Table 5.12 Degraded agricultural lands in Amur Oblast, 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

Table 5.13 Major power stations in Amur Oblast . . . . . . . 221

Table 6.1 Protected Areas in the Republic of Sakha. . . . 236

Table 6.2 Major gold mining companies and associations in Sakha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248

Table 6.3 Sakha’s energy resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252

Table 7.7.7 1 Leshkozes (Forest Service Divisions). . . . . . . . . 275

Table 8.1 Protected areas in Chukotsly Autonomous Okrug. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293

Table 10.1 Forest stock in Kamchatka Oblast by land category, 1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347

Table 10.2 Protected areas in Kamchatka Oblast . . . . . . 349

Table 11.1 Protected areas in Sakhalin Oblast . . . . . . . . 386

Table 11.2 Timber exports and major exporters in Sakhalin Oblast, 1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406

Appendixes

Appendix A Major topological features in the rfe. . . . . . 415

Appendix B The forest resources of Russia and the rfe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 416

Appendix C Foreign trade in the rfe, 1992–2001 . . . . . . 417

Appendix D Foreign trade and full trade turnover, by region, 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418

Appendix E Distribution of rfe timber stock, by dominant species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419

Appendix F Average timber stock in the rfe, by dominant species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419

Appendix G rfe Experts, Hotspot Conference, 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420

Appendix H Catch quotas for major species in the rfe basin, 2001. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 422

Appendix I Russian timber exports to Northeast Asia, 1991–2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423

Appendix J Chinese imports of Russian logs, 1996–2000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423

Appendix K Gold production in Russia and the rfe, 1991–2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424


When a group of colleagues and I decided in 1997 to produce a new edition of The Russian Far East: Forests, Biodiversity Hotspots, and Industrial Developments, we foresaw only a mod-erate revision. “We will have a new edition by 2000,” I boldly pronounced. Then we began adding new sections, doubling the length of each chapter, and encouraging our Russian regional coordinators to commission contributions from as many specialists as possible. The fi rst edition had eighteen contributing authors; this edition has more than ninety.

I found myself overwhelmed by the amount of material we had to translate and edit. These tasks were made more diffi cult by my desire —almost obsession—to add informa-tion (a tidbit about diamond mining here, about nuclear power there) in the chapters to ensure even coverage and to give the book the unifi ed tone necessary for a reference guide, but without silencing the voices of the original writers.

Despite these changes and additions, the structure of this new edition remains fundamentally the same as that of the fi rst one. This book, too, is divided into chapters by political division (e.g., krai, oblast) and not by ecological boundary (e.g., temperate climate, forest, tundra), although the ecologi-cal elements constitute discrete sections within the chapters. Russian environmentalists, politicians, and the corporate sector—although scientists perhaps less so — clearly identify more closely with the political divisions. For instance, on environmental issues Anatoly Lebedev, my good friend and colleague, rarely strays outside the borders of Primorsky Krai and Dima Lisitsyin focuses solely on Sakhalin Oblast.

As did the fi rst edition, this tries to reach out to as many audiences as possible; I like to think of the book as a kind of travel guide for the Russian Far East development com-munity or, as my former colleague, Lisa Tracy, put it, “a hybrid book.” My intention was to make the text as useful for the business person or World Bank offi cial as it is for the scientist or environmentalist; to bring all those involved in the Russian Far East together into some kind of dialogue; to provide so much useful information that the business com-munity would have to have the book and, while scanning the various sections for data on natural resources, fi nd themselves absorbed by Dale Miquelle’s review of the plight of the Sibe-rian tiger or by Geoffrey York’s account of the untrammeled poaching that is devastating the salmon rivers of Kamchatka.

I had initially planned to subtitle the book “a reference guide for sustainable development” rather than “conservation and development”—hoping that it would be a blueprint. But,

Preface

as the project developed, it became clear that this material provides only a starting point: It describes problems incurred by some industrial activities, it catalogues the biodiversity “hotspots,” and it documents the plight of protected-area systems. In hopes of fostering the discussions about how to achieve an ecologically sustainable economy in the region, we added the section Toward Sustainable Development. In it, many contributors question the current development trajec-tory and suggest some alternatives. Nevertheless, the rfedesperately needs more model development projects, more insight from the environmental community about what sus-tainable development should look like, and more willingness in the World Bank and other development agencies to look beyond fossil-fuel development and mining. The rather artifi -cial chapter subdivisions in the book, Ecology and Economy, symbolize how far we have to go.

The reader may ask, “Why all the fuss about the rfe ?” Quite simply because the rfe is the most biologically diverse region of the largest country on Earth. Its preservation is crucial not only for the plants and animals that depend on healthy ecosystems, but for ourselves, who do likewise! The region is a vital storehouse of natural resources that will inevitably be tapped, particularly as globalization and foreign investment further integrates its economy into the larger North Pacifi c economy. We depend on rfe fi sheries for food, rfe forests to absorb our carbon dioxide, rfe natural gas and coal to supply our power plants, and rfe timber to build our houses. With this growing infl uence (and interdependence) comes, not only the responsibility for the international com-munity to work with Russians to ensure sustainable devel-opment, but also the responsibility to protect what should remain intact. As I wrote in the preface to the fi rst edition:

Rafting down the Bikin River in the summer of 1993was my introduction to the Russian Far East. One evening we hiked up from the village of Ulunga at the headwaters of the river to a lookout to watch the sunset. Korean pine and fi r forests extended as far as the eye could see; no roads and no towns, only that small village of fi fty families. Sitting up there in the mountains, seeing the river, the sky, and the trees, I understood why we need wilderness preserved.

Josh NewellSeattle, Washington

P r e f a c e i xNewell, J. 2004. The Russian Far East: A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. McKinleyville, CA: Daniel & Daniel. 466 pages

x T H E R U S S I A N F A R E A S T

Tracing my path since the fi rst edition of The Russian Far Eastbegan as an idea hatched with colleagues in Tokyo restaurant in the fall of 1993, I am tempted to thank people chronologi-cally. Because there are, however, so many to acknowledge and because so many have helped me in stretches throughout this period, it is better to thank them by subject.

Project genesis

Andrei Laletin, Randy Helten, Emma Wilson, and Alexander Dobrynin were instrumental in developing the original 1995Hotspot Study and J. P. Myers, Charly Moore, and others at the W. Alton Jones Foundation made the study a reality. Emma and I developed the outline for the 1996 Russian Far 1996 Russian Far 1996East, with help from Rick Fox. In 1998, Emma, Rick, and I met for a two-day work session with Zbig Karpowicz at the iucn offi ces in Cambridge, England, where we developed the basic structure for the book. Eiichiro Noguchi provided use-ful ideas throughout the development process.

Writing

This text would have been impossible without contribu-tions from the more than ninety authors who wrote sections, almost always for meager fi nancial reward. I thank them all for their writing, and for their patience in waiting for publica-tion. I would also like to thank the University of Washington Press and the National Bureau of Asian Research for allowing me to publish a condensed version of Tony Allison contribu-tion on the fi shing industry.

Translation

The daunting task of translating the contributions from the Russian authors fell to a number of talented individuals. Serge Glushkoff and his father Kirill Glushkoff translated most of the Russian contributions to the regional chapters; the Biodiversity Hotspots sections were translated by Herrick Fox. Other sections were translated by Misha Blinnikov, Vladimir Dinets, Alexander King, Patricia Ormsby, Oleg Svistunov, and Emma Wilson.

Mapping

Mike Beltz played a large role in the developmental stages of the map making. We had initially thought to develop a data-base and so had the twelve Russian coordinators prepare a number of thematic maps of protected areas, biodiversity hot-spots, industries, indigenous peoples’ areas, and so on. Mike,

Acknowledgments

Rankin Holmes, and others at The Ecology Center, Inc, with help from Oleg Svistunov (FoE –J), digitized the data on pro-tected areas and hotspots and prepared an initial design for maps 1.7–1.16. Matthew McKinzie at the Natural Resources Defense Council and Rory Newell (FoE –J) digitized the others. Guirong Zhou helped me prepare most of the maps themselves and Dennis Martin advised on their fi nal design. Dana Morawitz helped with the regional reference maps and with a number of the forestry maps; Joe Miller helped with the oil and gas maps. Phil Hurvitz, Luke Rogers, and Bill Haskins provide helpful technical support.

Figures

Frank Deserio developed and drafted the initial fi gures, and Dennis Martin and I worked together to produce the fi nal design.

Photography

Thanks to all the photographers (listed on p. 449) who pro-vided images for this book.

Editing

Frances Bowles, the copyeditor, has been an absolute blessing to work with. I appreciate her insightful editorial queries, some of which led me to rearrange or cut entire sections, and her understanding as I chronically broke deadlines. Jeremy Tasch, Alexander King, Melinda Herrold, Devin Joshi, and Emma Wilson had the diffi cult task of both writing and edit-ing chapters. A small army of editors also helped out: Annie Belt, Vladimir Dinets, Ian Duncan, David Gordon, Jessica Graybill, Randy Helten, Christina Kincaid, Susan Newell, Gloria Pan, Marta Steele, Maggie Suzuki. Sharon Vonasch proofread the entire book.

Reviews

I would like to thank the following for their helpful reviews: Michael Bradshaw, Patricia Gray, Jessica Graybill, Anatoly Lebedev, John Marzluff, Peter Newell, Doug Norlen, Timo-thy Nyerges, Jonathan Oldfi eld, Judith Thornton, and Craig ZumBrunnen.

Design

Thanks to Dennis Martin for his typographic and design skill and his patience when dealing with an author (me) who perpetually changed his mind.


General support

Thanks to all who provided support in one form or another: Dmitry Aksenov, Marina Alberti, Ken Allen, Xan Augerot, Magnus Bartlett, Michael Biggins, Sergei Chebetov, Terry Choate, Rory Cox, Lucy Craft, Sue Daniels, Maxim Du-binin, Justin Ferrari, Megan Finaly, Paige Fisher, Jim Ford, Richard Forrest, Dan Gotham, Robert Hathaway, Krista Jen-sen, Hiroaki Kakizawa, Naomi Kanzaki, Basia Kieska, Shane Krause, Jonathan Lang, Dave Martin, Ikuko Matsumoto, Bente Molenaar, Vladimir Moshkalo, Dylan Myers, Sang-min Nam, Anna Newell, Damon Newell, Daniel Newell, Nicholas Newell, Susan Newell, Keita Nishimura, Eiichiro Noguchi, Yutaka Okamoto, Tokiharu Okazaki, Yuri On-odera, Patricia Ormsby, Len Ottow, Alexander Perepecheko, Jorli Perine, Dave Poritzky, Claes Lykke Ragner, Peter Riggs, Lin Robinson, Tina Rohila, Chris Rusay, Peter Schlesinger, Dmitry Sharkov, Greg Shelton, Eric Shulenberger, Jirou Sugi-yama, Michael Steppler, Tom Stone, Yukiko Tomishima, Lisa Tracy, Nathaniel Trumbull, Masanobu Yamane, and Andrei Zhakarenkov.

Then, at some remove from the production, were those who know the project only as The Book, demanding all my attention and riding rough-shod over relationships—my good friends from Brown, my friends from Tokyo and Seattle, my brothers and sister, my parents, and other loved ones—all of whom I must thank for their forbearance.

Funding

This project would have been impossible with fi nancial sup-port from the W. Alton Jones Foundation between 1993 and 1998, the Pro-Natura Foundation (Hiroshi Okamoto and Kiyoshi Okutomi), the Natural Resources Defense Council (Christopher Paine and Matthew McKinzie), Bob and La-dorna Eichenberg, and Howard and Elinor Smith. A special thanks also goes out to the Urban Ecology program and the Department of Geography, both at the University of Wash-ington, which provided the facilities (offi ce space, computers, printers, scanners, supplies) necessary to write and produce the book.

A c k n o w l e d g m e n t s x iNewell, J. 2004. The Russian Far East: A Reference Guide for Conservation and Development. McKinleyville, CA: Daniel & Daniel. 466 pages

x i i T H E R U S S I A N F A R E A S T

Siberia. The name supposedly stems from the Tartar word sibir, or sleeping land. To foreigners, the name usually refers to the vast expanse of Russia stretching from the Ural Mountains in the west to the Pacifi c seacoast in the east. Russians, however, generally consider Siberia’s eastern edge to be a series of mountain ranges stretching from western Chita Oblast northward through western Sakha to the Arctic Ocean. Beyond that lies what Russians call Dalny vostok, the Far East.

Russian Far East. Geographers disagree on the boundaries of the Russian Far East. Some limit the region to those areas affected by the monsoon climate and Pacifi c Ocean, i.e., Pri-morsky, Khabarovsk, Amur, Sakhalin, Magadan, Chukotka, and Kamchatka. Others defi ne the rfe by its economic ties with the Pacifi c Rim and include the Republic of Sakha; we have chosen the latter defi nition herein. The Far East and Zabaikalye Association, a nongovernmental economic group that coordinates interregional programs, also includes the Republic of Buryatia and Chita Oblast.

Basic structure of the Russian government

Russia is a federal state with a republican form of govern-ment.1 With the formation of the Russian Federation in 1991, a loose federation of eighty-nine administrative divisions (see Republic, Krai, Oblast, and Okrug,and Okrug,and below) replaced Russia’s formerly unitary structure. In December 1993 a new constitu-tion was adopted by a national vote. The constitution created a two-chamber national legislature: the lower house, or Duma, consists of 450 deputies elected on a territorial basis; the upper house, or Federation Council, consists of 178 depu-ties, two from each of Russia’s eighty-nine administration regions. Two-thirds of the Duma candidates are elected in a simple majority vote; the remaining third are elected from political party lists (requiring at least 5 percent of the total vote). State offi cials appoint representatives to the Federation Council. The people elect the president of Russia every fi ve years. The president’s role is to establish and maintain the political, legislative, and economic stability of the country. In addition, the president chairs the Security Council, which is responsible for preserving state security and political stabil-ity as well as for defending the human rights and liberties of Russia’s citizens.

Useful terms

The new constitution gives the president a large amount of direct power. Boris Yeltsin introduced the Presidential Decree in 1992 in order to pass economic and political re-forms quickly. Unless used judiciously, this decree can under-mine the very institutions that give legitimacy to the state as a democracy. Strangely, the deputies in the Duma authorized the decree, which has served to weaken their power as legisla-tors as well as the power of those in the judicial branch.

The president and his staff are responsible for the func-tioning of the executive branch, which consists of the Federal Executive Government (formerly the Council of Ministers) and is chaired by the prime minister. Members are from the ministries, the state committees, and other government agen-cies and commissions. The president nominates the prime minister and the heads of all executive bodies. The legislature (Duma and Federation Council) can approve nominees and demand the resignation of cabinet members; the president has the power to dissolve the legislature and call for new elections. The prime minister oversees the sizeable Execu-tive Administration of the Prime Minister; of his staff, eight deputy prime ministers require legislative and presidential approval. The Executive Administration develops and imple-ments economic reforms and administers programs for each industry.

The Kremlin, the seat of Russia’s national government since 1917, sits at the center of Moscow and houses the 1917, sits at the center of Moscow and houses the 1917executive branch, several ministry offi ces, and the president’s primary residence. Russian tsars began building the massive structure —literally a walled fortress encompassing not only government buildings but also Russian Orthodox churches—in the fourteenth century.

Republic, Krai, Oblast, Okrug. Administrative divisions (or regions) of the Russian Federation, similar to provinces in Canada. The Russian Federation has twenty-one republics, six krais, fi fty oblasts (one autonomous), ten autonomous okrugs,okrugs,okrug and two federal cities, Moscow and Saint Petersburg. Each republic, krai, oblast, and oblast, and oblast okrug has its own legislative okrug has its own legislative okrugand executive branch. The local legislature, which consists of an elected body, headed by a chairman, drafts and adopts local laws and regulations. Generally, the governor appoints offi cials to lead executive agencies, commissions, and com-mittees, although sometimes the local legislature may also do so. In some republics (such as in the Republic of Sakha), an elected president, rather than a governor, governs a council


U s e f u l t e r m s x i i i

of ministers, ministries, and agencies that form the executive branch.

Generally, these administrative divisions have less au-tonomy from the federal government than do the states in the United States. A republic, however, has greater autonomy from Moscow—with, for example, a greater leeway in paying taxes and fees to the capital—than does a krai, oblast, or oblast, or oblastokrug, and is usually established in a region with a signifi cant okrug, and is usually established in a region with a signifi cant okrugnon-Russian indigenous population. Furthermore, while all krais and oblasts technically have the same status with respect to the federal government, in practice some have more autonomy from Moscow than others, usually because of differences in their historical development. Primorsky and Khabarovsk, for example, maintain strong economic ties with the Pacifi c Rim; these ties, coupled with their great geograph-ical distance from Moscow, have at times led these adminis-trative regions to behave independently of, or even contrary to, federal directives. Some governors act autonomously, passing laws that do not comply with federal legislation or misallocating federal funds. During the Soviet period, some krais included autonomous oblasts created for ethnic minori-ties. During perestroika, most oblasts in central Russia became independent from their krais, and many became republics. Specifi cally established for indigenous peoples, an okrug is okrug is okrugan administrative subdivision most often under the jurisdic-tion of an oblast; some, however, are relatively free of this jurisdiction. Chukotka Autonomous Okrug, for example, is developing economic ties with Alaska (importing fuel, food, and other essential supplies) and becoming less infl uenced politically and economically by Magadan Oblast. This is partially because of Chukotka’s great geographical distance from the regional capital.

Raion. An administrative subregion of a republic, krai, oblast, oblast, oblastor okrug. okrug. okrug Raion is often translated as district and less often district and less often districtas county. In this book, raion is left untranslated. There are about twenty-fi ve raions in Primorsky Krai, fewer in other regions. Most raions are similar in size to counties in the United States. Large cities may encompass several raions.

This decentralization of power has disadvantages and ad-vantages. The proliferation of new regional and federal legis-lation leads to laws that often confl ict. Similarly, the jurisdic-tions of city and regional offi ces are often vague, overlapping, and even contradictory. In addition, some regional offi cials are both inexperienced and poorly trained, most administra-tions are operating with inadequate budgets, and corruption within regional administrations remains an intimidating problem. On the other hand, regional administrations have unprecedented power over local governance, resource use and allocation, and future development. Citizens are now able to participate in decision making at the community level.

President Vladimir Putin is trying to increase the central-ization of power, an effort strongly resisted by regional of-fi cials. He has carved the country into seven federal districts,

each headed by a superboss who oversees the governors; the rfe comprises one such district. In addition, Putin wants to give the federal government the right to dissolve regional Dumas (parliaments) if federal rules are broken. The federal and regional power struggle will continue to hinder effective governance.

Ministries, state committees, and agencies

The following list, by no means complete, briefl y describes, in alphabetical order, most of the major ministries, commit-tees, councils, and agencies relevant to this book.

Authority on Hydrometeorology and Monitoring of the Environment (Rosgydromet). Rosgydromet collects informa-tion on radiation and chemical contamination of the environ-ment to distribute to relevant federal authorities, various branches of industry, defense organizations, and the public.2

The authority works closely with the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Russian Space Agency. It is also active in international policy and coordinates with international in-stitutions on such issues as climate change, ozone depletion, environmental pollution, the Arctic, and the global ocean.

Committee on Land Resources and Land Management (Goskomzem). This committee, replaced by the Land Cadastre Service of Russia (Roskomcadaster), was respon-sible for land reform and developing land taxation. It helped oversee the laws adopted in 1999, “On land reform” and “On farm,” that paved the way for Russian citizens to own land. Roskomcadaster has assumed its basic functions and a number of important land-use planning and monitoring responsibilities.3

Far Eastern Scientifi c-Industrial Council. Composed of fi shing industry representatives, regional government offi cials, and members of tinro (Pacifi c Institute of Fisheries and Ocean-ography), Glavrybvod, and the Federal Fisheries Committee, this council meets twice yearly, either in Moscow or in the rfe. The council is essentially a forum for hammering out regional policies and negotiating quota allocations. Because of sharply different positions among administrative regions over quota allocations, this council has lost some status as a unifi ed regional voice for the industry.

Federal Committee on Mining and Industry (Gostekhnadzor).This committee oversees some facets (e.g., occupational safety) of mining, oil, gas, and other hazardous industries.4

Gostekhnadzor also issues required licenses and permits for all phases of industrial projects, from design to operation.

Federal Energy Commission (FEC). The fec regulates some components of the energy sector, including electric utilities


x i v T H E R U S S I A N F A R E A S T

and thermal energy (oil, petrochemicals, natural gas) trans-port and transportation services (e.g., pipelines).5 The fecalso determines the operating budgets for nuclear plants and Russia’s utilities monopoly, United Energy System. Finally, the fec reviews proposed programs for the developing power sector, and resolves disputes between regional energy com-missions, wholesale market customers, and suppliers.

Federal Fisheries Committee. The Fisheries Committee is similar to the U.S. National Marine Fisheries service. The committee develops and implements fi sheries policy, coor-dinates scientifi c research, grants licenses to fi shing fl eets, and determines fi shing seasons, fi shing zones, and fi shing grounds. Within the committee administrative structure, but quite independent, is the Federal Research Institute of Fisher-ies and Oceanography (vniroies and Oceanography (vniroies and Oceanography ( ). vniro coordinates biological assessments, helps determine fi shery quotas, and oversees most scientifi c research related to fi sheries.

Federal Security Service (Federalnaya Sluzhba Bezopasnosti or FSB). Created in 1993 as one of the successors to the kgb, the fsb is Russia’s internal intelligence service. Like other similar agencies, the Foreign Intelligence Service (Sluzhba Vneshney Razvedki or svr) and the Federal Border Service (Federalnaya Pogranichnaya Sluzhba or fbs), the fsb is sub-ordinate only to the Russian president. Like the fsb, the fbs conducts counterintelligence operations, and also battles smuggling, enforces customs regulations, and the illegal harvest and export of natural resources. There are three fbs district headquarters in the rfe, in Khabarovsk (Far East), Vladivostok (Pacifi c), and Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky (Northeast). The fbs has recently become an important agency in the battle against illegal fi shing. The Northeast fbs, for example, operates about twenty-fi ve ships and forty aircraft, mainly around Petropavlovsk, Provideniya, and Magadan.6 The ships usually carry an 6 The ships usually carry an 6

inspector from one of the rybvods (see explanation of Glavrybvod) and make between fi fty and one hundred boardings during each patrol. Illegal catches are usually confi scated and then sold. Revenue from fi nes and confi s-cated cargo goes to the Federal Fisheries Committee, with a small percentage going to the fbs.

Ministry of Agriculture and Food. This ministry coordinates the agriculture and food processing industries and develops harvest regulations and agrarian and land reforms.7 The Hunting Administration, a division within the ministry, oversees most of the country’s zakazniks (wildlife refuges, see below) as well as the hunting industry.

Ministry of Atomic Energy (Minatom). Minatom absorbed all the functions, staff, and assets of its predecessor—the Ministry of Atomic Power and Industry (mapi), also known as the Nuclear Energy Industry Ministry (1986–1992).8 Its

duties include developing nuclear armaments, overseeing the country’s nuclear facilities, and converting military facilities to civilian use.

Ministry of the Economy (Minekonomii). The Ministry of the Economy coordinates state policy to attract foreign invest-ment and coordinates the activities of federal and regional executive bodies in regard to foreign investors. It also organizes international tenders, prepares concession and production-sharing agreements, and organizes credits from international fi nancial organizations (e.g., World Bank, Inter-national Monetary Fund).9

Ministry of Finance (Minfi n). Minfi n is responsible for the federal budget, foreign and inherited (from the ussr) external debts, and establishing, regulating, and collecting taxes.10

Minfi n also has jurisdiction over numerous state committees. One such committee is the powerful State Fund for Precious Metals (Gokhran) —formerly the Russian Committee for Precious Metals and Stones (Roskomdragmet)—which over-sees the selling and trade of precious metals and gemstones, namely diamonds, platinum, palladium, and gold. Gokhran closely tracks trade in precious metals and gems within Rus-sia, requiring that a percentage of each be offered for sale to Gokhran before being sold domestically or internationally. Another committee is the State Customs Committee (gtk), which advises Minfi n on import and export tariffs, and customs regulations.

Ministry of Foreign Economic Relations and Trade. This minis-try coordinates and regulates Russian foreign trade and mili-tary and technical cooperation with other countries. It works with other federal agencies to pursue a unifi ed trade policy.11

The ministry has branches in most of Russia’s administrative regions. The State Inspectorate on Trade, Product Quality, and Consumer Protection (Gostorginspektsiya) also falls under its jurisdiction.

Ministry of Fuel and Energy (Mintopenergo). One of Russia’s most powerful ministries, Mintopenergo manages all facets of federal energy policy (oil, natural gas, coal, and electric). Mintopenergo’s responsibilities include: 1) satisfying domes-tic fuel and energy demands, 2) ensuring foreign economic commitments are honored, 3) balancing federal and regional interests, 4) maintaining existing production and techno-logical relationships, 5) increasing effi cient use of natural resources, and 6) helping to create large vertically integrated companies that link upstream and downstream activities.12

Mintopenergo also represents the federal government’s inter-est in private companies, allowing the government to act as both shareholder and regulator—a clear confl ict of interest. The ministry controls energy companies through a variety of means, such as restricting oil export quotas for certain companies.


U s e f u l t e r m s x v

Ministry of Industry (Minprom). This ministry guides and manages federal policy for science and technology, which in-cludes coordinating the activities of related federal executive agencies.13 The responsibilities of Minprom include: defi ning the direction of research and development in Russia, preserv-ing and promoting this scientifi c and technical potential, adapting science and technology to market economy condi-tions, guiding federal support for scientifi c and technological innovation, and marketing high-tech products and services.

Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD). mvd has had a long, often infamous history in the Soviet Union and in post-Soviet Russia.14 Its predecessor, the 14 Its predecessor, the 14 nkvd, operated Stalin’s gulags. The nkvd underwent a series of organizational and name changes until 1954, when it became the mvd, and the security police (kgb) were fi nally separated from the street police. The well-armed mvd has recently been criticized worldwide for its military operations inside Russia, notably in Chechnya. Today, mvd operates Russia’s correctional labor institutions, pretrial detention facilities, and prisons. Surprisingly, mvdhas increased in size during the post-Soviet era. Offi cially, mvd has 264,000 staff, but some reports set the fi gure as high as 800,000. A range of decrees, orders, and instruc-tions— often marked “Secret,” and unpublished or publicly unavailable —regulate mvd actions.

Ministry of Natural Resources. On May 17, 17, 17 2000, Presiden-tial Decree 867 abolished the Russian Federal Forest Service (Rosleskhoz) and the State Committee on Environmental Protection (or Goskomekologia), folding their responsibili-ties into the Ministry of Natural Resources.15 Both the forest service and the committee retain regional offi ces throughout the rfe, which are now under the jurisdiction of the minis-try. These offi ces are referred to in this book with the region’s name fi rst, e.g., Khabarovsk Forest Service and Khabarovsk Committee on Environmental Protection. Once Russia’s primary regulatory agencies, the forest service and state com-mittee may become less effective in managing resource use under the ministry’s jurisdiction. The ministry also actively promotes industrial development and issues licenses to natural resource users. Of particular concern is the effect that the new confi guration may have on Russia’s environmental impact assessment process, which includes expertiza (State expertiza (State expertizaEnvironmental Review or ser) and ovos (Assessments of Environmental Impacts).16 The powerful 16 The powerful 16 expertiza, man-dated by the 1991 Law on Environmental Protection and the 1995 Federal Environmental Review Act, assesses whether a proposed project meets Russian environmental regulations and standards. The ovos, created by the former Ministry of Environment, seeks to establish the process for identifying environmental impacts and to obtain different views on the degree of these impacts.

The abolition of the Committee on Environmental Pro-tection continued a decade-old trend in Russia of degrading

the status of environmental protection. In 1996, the Yeltsin Administration demoted the Ministry of Environmental Protection to a committee and abolished the Department of Environmental Protection and Use of Natural Resources. Funding has been stripped from most federally targeted environmental programs and, since 1998, there have been two attempts to abolish two other government bodies charged with protecting the environment: the State Committee for Land Policy and the State Committee for the Affairs of the North (see pp. 000–000, for a summary).

Ministry of Transportation (Mintrans). Mintrans is responsible for all facets of Russia’s transportation infrastructure (sea, river, air, car, and city—including trolleybuses, buses, trams, and subways).17 The ministry also works on international transportation issues, such as attracting cargo transit into Russia and developing international transportation corridors.

National Administration of Fishery Enforcement Resources Restoration, and Regulation of Fishing (Glavrybvod). Estab-lished in late 1993, Glavrybvod is part of the Fisheries Com-mittee. It regulates the industrial harvest of fi sh and other marine mammals and plants in Russia’s internal waters, on the continental shelf, and in the two-hundred-mile exclusive economic zone. There are six branches of Glavrybvod in the rfe, each responsible for regulating a particular region: Sakhalinrybvod, Primorrybvod, Amurrybvod, Okhotskryb-vod, Kamchatrybvod, and Chukotrybvod. Okhotskrybvod, however, lacks the resources to monitor part of its region (the northwestern Bering Sea), so Kamchatrybvod does the moni-toring for it and provides some fi nancing and equipment. Primorrybvod, the lead branch, collects information from the other rybvods and relays it to Moscow. Glavrybvod has been widely criticized for failing to regulate exports and punish fi shing violations; in 1998 most of the Glavrybvod’s enforce-ment duties were transferred to the fbs, which subsequently hired many Glavrybvod personnel.

Pacifi c Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography (TINRO). Although tinro’s functions are very similar to those of tinro’s functions are very similar to those of tinrovniro, their relationship is unclear. Offi cially, tinro is di-rectly responsible to the Fisheries Committee, not to vniro. tinro’s headquarters are in Vladivostok, with closely aligned tinro’s headquarters are in Vladivostok, with closely aligned tinrocenters in Khabarovsk (Khftinro), Magadan (Maginro), and Chukotka (Chftinro). Two other institutes, Sakhniro(Sakhalin) and Kamchatka (Kamchatniro), are also similar in name and function to tinro, but are essentially indepen-dent from it. tinro operates a research fl eet in Vladivostok that has been known, somewhat notoriously, to fi sh with scientifi c quotas and then sell the catch for profi t.

Putina Enforcement Operations. A joint fbs -Rybvod-Spetsmorinspektsia effort, some of the Putina (fi shing season) Putina (fi shing season) Putinaenforcement operations have been quite effective not only


x v i T H E R U S S I A N F A R E A S T

in catching poachers, but also in bringing together the three main enforcement agencies.

Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS). Peter the Great estab-lished the Russian Academy of Sciences in Saint Petersburg in 1724. The academy confers the highest level of education in Russia and has scientifi c institutes throughout Russia. The academy has approximately fi ve hundred members and publishes journals in all academic fi elds (humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences). In the rfe, the Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences (febras) includes institutes throughout the region.18

Russian Central Bank. The Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia), which is independent of fed-eral, regional, and local government structures, carries out functions set by the Constitution of the Russian Federation (article 75) and the Law on the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia) (article 22).19

Special Marine Inspectorate (Spetsmorinspektsia). Part of the now-defunct Committee on Environmental Protection, Spetsmorinspektsia may no longer be functional. Even when operational, Spetsmorinspektsia is relatively weak, with few vessels and limited staff and funds.

State Committee for Development of the North (Goskomsever).This committee designs and coordinates programs for the vast, resource-rich Russian North and its indigenous peoples. Goskomsever’s goals frequently confl ict with those of Russia’s natural resource commissions and committees.20

State Committee for Statistics (Goskomstat). Russia’s statistics agency, Goskomstat collects data on topics ranging from in-dustrial production to employment (federal, regional, district, and city) and distributes it to industries, government agen-cies, and the public.21 Goskomstat has eighty-nine regional committees and more than twenty-two hundred district (raion) departments.

Territorial Fishing Industry Committees. Within each adminis-trative region (krai, oblast), these committees coordinate and oblast), these committees coordinate and oblastdistribute quota allocations to fi rms, scientifi c institutions, and other groups.

Ecological terms

Alas. A geographical phenomenon caused by melting permafrost. Prevalent in central and southern Sakha, alasare believed to be remnant vegetation that covered most of Northeast Asia during the last Ice Age. Isolated populations of rooks (Corvus frugileus) and other animals common to grasslands live in alas ecosystems. alas ecosystems. alas Alas allowed the Yakut Alas allowed the Yakut Alas

people to breed horses after migrating from Transbaikalia to present-day Sakha. If disturbed, alas often turn into arid alas often turn into arid alasbarrens or shrublands.

Annual Allowable Cut (AAC). The amount of forest that can be cut in a region without overlogging; determined by each region’s Forest Inventory Agency.

Bonitet. An aspect of forest productivity measured on a scale of I through V (I being the highest); bonitet is measured by the height that trees reach after a specifi c number of years. Only an estimate, bonitet fi gures can be manipulated easily bonitet fi gures can be manipulated easily bonitetto suit bureaucratic needs or policy priorities.

Broadleaved. Deciduous (also called “nemoral” in Europe and “hardwood” in the United States) forests of various tree species, usually characterized by high biodiversity. In the rfe, broadleaved forests occur in the warmest climates, such as southern Primorsky Krai. These forests often look surpris-ingly similar to the hardwood forests of the Great Smoky Mountains; the two areas share many of the same genera of plants and animals. An unusual type of broadleaved forest is that of the Mongolian oak (Quercus mongolicus), which is formed by a dominant tree species and tends to grow in dry areas between forest and grassland zones. The Mongolian oak country of the Amur Basin is not unlike the tallgrass prairies of eastern Kansas.

Eastern Siberian (Angarian), Okhotsk-Kamchatkan, Manchurian, and Dahurian fl oral and fauna regions. Russian biologists usually track a species to its supposed origin—Eastern Siberian (Angarian), Okhotsk-Kamchatkan, Man-churian, or Dahurian—and classify it accordingly. Grassland species are usually referred to as Dahurian, whereas species common to the rfe’s southern broadleaved forests are usually referred to as Manchurian. A wide array of species common to the coastal ecosystem—tallgrass meadows, stone birch, and Ayan spruce forests, for example —are said to form Okhotsk-Kamchatkan fl ora and fauna. Species of the boreal forests and alpine regions of Eastern Siberia are called Eastern Siberian or Angarian fl ora and fauna. Although used widely in Russian literature, this classifi cation method is often im-precise. Eastern Siberian fauna, for example, includes species with origins ranging from East Asia (musk deer) to America (Siberian chipmunk) to Central Asia (Siberian ibex) to the Himalayas (rosy fi nch) and elsewhere.

Forest classifi cation. The Russian Forest Service classifi es forests by ecological importance, using three categories to indicate their allowable land use: Group I (highest), Group II, and Group III.

Lesistost. The percentage of a given territory covered by forest. Defi nitions of forestforest. Defi nitions of forestforest. Defi nitions of differ slightly between regions: forest differ slightly between regions: forest


U s e f u l t e r m s x v i i

for example, thickets of dwarf Japanese stone pine may be included or not.

National park (natsionalnyi park) . A federally protected territo-ry in which small-scale educational, recreational, and cultural activity, as well as scientifi c research is allowed. These parks are usually split into zones: strictly protected for scientifi c research, recreational, agricultural, and so on. In actuality, some are actually large suburban recreation areas. Many national parks are adjacent to or near zapovedniks.

Natural monument (pamyatnik prirody) . Usually covering between 100 and 500 ha, this designation protects particular landscape features, such as caves, forests, lakes, waterfalls, and so on. Commercial activity on these territories is pro-hibited by law. Most administrative regions have dozens of natural monuments, but obtaining a complete list is usually diffi cult.

Ramsar site. A wetland of international signifi cance, as deter-mined by specifi c criteria established by the member states of the Ramsar Convention.

Russian Red Data Book. The Russian variant of the World Conservation Union (iucn) listings, the Red Data Booklists rare and endangered species of fl ora and fauna. Russia publishes national and regional Red Data Books; the criteria are similar to those used for compiling the iucn books. Un-like in the United States, the listing of a species in the Red Data Book offers the species no legal protection; however, this Book offers the species no legal protection; however, this Booklisting can be infl uential in determining where to create a protected area or to limit development.

Smallleaved birch (Betula) and aspen (Populus tremulae,

P. davidiana) forests. These forests are usually secondary and tend to be gradually replaced by other types of forest, most commonly by conifer forests. A notable exception is the park-like forest of stone birch (B. ermanni), widespread in areas with a maritime climate. Birches and aspens might also grow in broadleaved forests, but never in pure stands, although they do form isolated groves in the grasslands of the Amur region, which greatly resemble the Canadian prairies.

Territory of traditional nature use (TTP, from the Russian terri-

toriya traditsionnogo prirodopolzovaniya). Territories set aside for the traditional subsistence activities of indigenous peoples. The term is often a euphemism for reserves created for indig-enous peoples, or even for rural populations in general.

Thermokarst. Erosion due to permafrost. Its surface mani-festations (sinkholes, round-shaped lakes) often resemble limestone karst formations. Thermokarst occurs naturally in karst formations. Thermokarst occurs naturally in karstalmost all permafrost areas and creates some very unusual landscapes, particularly in places with no forest cover and

a markedly continental climate, such as Northern Sakha. If the forest is logged or a settlement built on permafrost, thermokarst erosion may rapidly become catastrophic, with the widespread destruction of soil cover, river pollution from increased runoff, and the collapse of man-made structures. Some Southern Sakha towns look as though they were used for bombing practice, with craters caused by thermokarst ero-sion marking the streets and plazas.

World Heritage site. A natural or cultural site, these areas are considered to have outstanding physical, biological, or geological features. Threatened plant or animal habitats, scientifi cally or aesthetically valued areas, and areas set aside simply for conservation, can all be nominated as potential World Heritage sites by government members. Nominated sites must be submitted to the World Heritage Center.

Zakaznik. An area set aside for the preservation of smaller ecosystems or individual species. Zakazniks may be protected federally or regionally. Restrictions on commercial activi-ties are sometimes limited to certain seasons. Categories of zakazniks include zoological, botanical, landscape, geological, and others. Many zakazniks have been established in order to regulate commercial hunting so that viable wildlife popula-tions may be maintained.

Zapovednik. A strictly protected federal nature reserve. Zapovedniks are established to protect representative areas of a particular landscape or bioregion. In theory, all forms of commercial activity are prohibited; human activity is restrict-ed to scientifi c research and monitoring. Some zapovedniks, however, have small recreational zones; drastic budget cuts have forced many zapovednik directors to open the reserves to zapovednik directors to open the reserves to zapovedniktourism.

Useful Russian terminology

Russians often use contractions when referring to agencies, companies, or other entities with cumbersome names. Here are some frequently encountered Russian abbreviations and their English equivalents:

Dal — Far Eastern Dal — Far Eastern Dal

Gos — State

Khoz — Ownership

Kom — Committee

Les — Forest, timber

Min — Ministry

Nedr — Mining, mineral resources

Prom — Industry, industrial

Ryb — Fish, fi shing


x v i i i T H E R U S S I A N F A R E A S T

Dallesprom. Far Eastern Forestry Department; now a private company.

Goslesfund. State Forest Fund, originally an analogue of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (blm).

Gospromkhoz. (gpx) State Enterprise; could be operating in hunting, fi shing, logging, or all of the above.

Kolkhoz. The collective farm (kollektivnoye khozyaistvo); once the vision of socialist agriculture, in which peasants pooled their land and resources to create large, effi cient, coopera-tive farms. The harvest was requisitioned by the state, which in turn provided the kolkhoz with modern agricultural kolkhoz with modern agricultural kolkhozmachinery. The kolkhoz system remains largely intact in kolkhoz system remains largely intact in kolkhozmany regions of post-Soviet Russia, despite government ef-forts since 1992 to aid privatization. The transition to private farming is slow: local offi cials oppose the disbanding of collective farms and the general populace is wary of change and poorly informed about their rights of land ownership. Similarly, the Soviet farm (sovkhoz) is a state-owned farm, still in existence, which operates much like the kolkhoz.

Leskhoz. Originally differed from a lespromkhoz in that it was lespromkhoz in that it was lespromkhozresponsible for forest management, now many are logging businesses.

Lesnichestvo. Forest Service station, often also the territory serviced by such a station.

Lespromkhoz.(lpx) Collective Forestry Enterprise, now usu-ally a private company.

Russians also commonly use abbreviations when writing about the numerous forms of companies allowed under the Russian government. Here are some that frequently appear in this book and their approximate English equivalents:

AO (aktsionernoye obshchestvo) . A joint-stock (publicly owned) company.

GOK (gorno-obogatitelniy kombinat).GOK (gorno-obogatitelniy kombinat).GOK An ore-enriching com-bine, generally in charge of individual mining operations, but subject to control from Moscow. This structure is in contrast to the artel, an independent mining operation working with-artel, an independent mining operation working with-artelout state support.22

JV (sovmestnoe predpriyatie) . A joint-venture company with international partners.

OAO (otkrytoe AO). An open joint-stock company; it is allowed to sell stock publicly and must regularly provide fi nancial data.

OOO (Obshchestvo s ogranichennoi otvetstvennostiyu) .Similar to a U.S. limited liability company: owners have title to a portion of the property, but hold no stock; they become owners by paying into a common fund.23

TOO (tovarishchestvo s ogranichennoi otvetstvennostiyu) .A limited liability company; now defunct.

ZAO (zakrytoeZAO (zakrytoeZAO ( AO).zakrytoe AO).zakrytoe A closed joint-stock company; it distrib-utes stock to select shareholders, and shares may be sold only after being offered to current shareholders.

Weights, measures, and currency

The metric system has been used throughout this study.

1 hectare (ha) = 2.5 acres

1 kilometer (km) = 0.6 mile0.6 mile0.6

1 square kilometer (sq. km) = 0.4 square mile0.4 square mile0.4

1 cubic meter (cu. m) = 1.3 cubic yards; in the timber industry, approximately 200 board feet

1 kilogram (kg) = 2.2 pounds

1 ton (metric ton) = 1,000 kg or 2,204 pounds204 pounds204

1 centner (Russian) = 100 kg

u.s.$1 = 30.4 rubles (June 4 rubles (June 4 16, 2003)


Documents

The Russian Far Easturbansustainability.snre.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/...When a group of colleagues and I decided in 1997 to produce a new edition of The Russian Far East: Forests,