«NEWS FROM OUR COLLEAGUES»

SOME BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION ISSUES IN TURKMENIAN PROTECTED AREAS

Turkmenistan has a high degree of biodiversity — there are more than 20 thousand species, including about 7,050 species of higher and lower plants and about 13,000 vertebrate and invertebrate species. Today, the total area of PAs of all categories is 1,978,300 ha, or more than 4% of the country’s area: zapovedniks (strict nature reserves) — 784.6 thousand ha (39.7%), zakazniks (natural refuges) — 1 155.9 thousand ha (58.4%), protected zones — 35.4 thousand ha (1.8%), and nature monuments — 2.3 thousand ha (0.1%). National parks and resource management PAs do not exist in the country (The state…, 2002).

Biodiversity conservation issues in Turkmenistan are dealt with by research department of 8 zapovedniks with their subordinate zakazniks as scientific-research centres that carry out all-year-round long-term monitoring of ecosystems in three provinces: Turan (Amu-Daria, Kaplankyr and Repetek zapovedniks), Mountaineous Middle-Asian (Koitendag, or Kugita, zapovednik) and Kopetdag-Khorasan (Kopetdag and Syunt-Khasardag zapovedniks). Ecosystems of Badkhyz Zapovednik located on the conjunction of the Karakums, Kopetdag-Khorasan Mountains, and Parapamis foothills and Khazar (former Krasnovodsky) zapovednik where Trans-Caspian Desert meet the Caspian Sea water area, are also protected.

Today, research studies in Turkmenian zapovedniks and zakazniks are still aimed more at flora and fauna inventory rather than at better environmental conservation. Disturbances in biocenotic chains in PA natural ecosystems are adequately reflected in the taxonomic composition of protected species listed in the national Red Data Book (1999). 232 species (78 plants and 155 animals) out of 271 Red Data Book’s plant and animal species are registered in the PAs, including 53 endemic species.

The situation with biodiversity conservation remains complicated in Khazar Zapovednik (Vasiliev, Gauzer, 2001), which should be designated a Ramsar site, but the Ramsar Convention has not been ratified by the government yet. Its area and neighbouring lands suffer from excessive hunting and poaching. General ecological situation was complicated by the intrusion of alien species (up to 50) and growing disturbance: during the last decade, the number of high-speed motor-boats increased by 10 times. Burning, mowing, and etching-out of reed, bulrush, and rod lead to destruction of many secure sites suitable for birds’ nesting, overnight and winter staying. As a result, according to monitoring data (Vasiliev, Gauzer, 2001), by 2000, bustard, Little Bustard, Demoiselle Crane and a number of other species almost disappeared from the shore; bittern, flamingo, ruddy shelduck, saker falkon, eagle owl, and etc. stopped nesting there. In non-protected areas of the South-East Caspian, sea gulls suffer from local people who regularly gather birds’ eggs. However, the impact of these negative factors on ecosystems has not reached the limit by now, and ecosystems have not lost self-restorability.

Chronicles of Nature providing information on current state of biodiversity at zapovednik level is the only element of the former monitoring system in Turkmenistan that is maintained till today. Unfortunately, the findings of Chronicles of Nature are not always analysed to develop recommendations of national, or at least, regional significance. At the same time, data collected through long-term monitoring in the middle of the 1990s show that the negative disturbance factor in protected sites of Khazar Zapovednik has grown.

All the zapovedniks in Turkmenistan were designated in accordance with “The Standard Zapovednik Regulations…” developed by the USSR State Planning Department and the State Committee on Science and Technics in 1981. According to this document, lands given to a newly-designated zapovednik must be completely withdrawn from economic development. Therefore, people living in neighbouring areas perceived zapovedniks as socially alien institutes that limited their rights for recreation and economic development, and it was typical not only for Turkmenistan, but also for many other parts of the Soviet Union. This created negative public attitude towards biodiversity conservation as a whole and towards certain species (mainly, game species) in particular. Lack of explanatory work with local communities regarding possible advantages that people could have after the designation of such a PA, resulted in regular conflicts between the authorities and local communities for resources (forest, land, grazing, hunting, etc.). Efforts of conservation organisations during the transition period were aimed largely at maintaining zapovedniks as governmental conservation institutions. Their work was complicated by contradictory legislation and legislation vacuum at the beginning of the 1990s.

To eliminate all these contradictions, it is necessary to integrate protected natural areas into regional development schemes and to turn PAs into a beneficial factor contributing to regional development.

Thus, in the framework of the WWF project “Leopard conservation in Turkmenistan” (1999—2003), a mechanism to compensate for the damage leopard does to domestic cattle through the creation of a so-called ‘insurance herd’ was developed. It required very modest funds provided by the WWF to develop such a herd in the Sumbara valley of Garrygalin. If a leopard kills cattle of a private owner, reimbursement is given in kind from the ‘insurance herd’. Since animals in this herd multiply as well, the damage reimbursement mechanism becomes self-sustaining. Thus, predators could avoid extermination – at least by this part of population.

Regional UNEP and IPGRI project “In situ/on farm agricultural biodiversity conservation (fruits and wild relative cultures) in the Central Asia” demonstrates a new approach to sustainable development of agriculture in Turkmenistan. Its aim is to ensure food security in the country and maintenance of environmental stability. This is a first experimental step towards agro-biodiversity conservation of traditional agricultural crops and national selection kinds when main performers are local communities. In this case welfare of a farmer’s family depends directly on the economic significance of biodiversity. It gives an incentive to farmers to introduce agro-biodiversity maintaining innovations and sustainable use of resources.

All these measures promote, either directly or indirectly, environmental management of PAs in the country. In the conservation policy of Turkmenistan, the beginning of the XXI century was signified by the development of a National Action Plan for Environmental Protection (NAPEP) and adoption of the Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Strategy and Action Plan (BCSUSAP). The main focus of these documents is the improvement of PA management practices. In the nearest future, it will be necessary to reassess principles of the PA network development and criteria to measure the process, change borders of some areas, designate Balkan Zapovednik, prepare all documents essential to designate planned national parks (Sumbara and Kugitan), and develop mechanisms to improve community involvement into PA management.

A new project aimed at biodiversity conservation in Koitendag is being developed. Most significant parts of the project will be the designation of a national park and ecological tourism development.

Further development of the new conservation scheme in Turkmenistan allows to reconcile the two competing attitudes to nature – nature use and protection – through the creation of a natural habitat management system that will not only reinforce conservation of certain zapovednik sites but also contribute to the restoration of areas damaged previously in the course of their urban development.

Literature

G. L. Kamakhina,
Katena Ecological Club