WORLD WIDE FUND PROGRAM FOR MARINE CONSERVATION
IN THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST

Vassily Spiridonov,
Marine Program Coordinator WWF Russian Office WWF,
Ul. Nikoloyamskaya 19, kor. 3, Moscow 109240 Russia,
Fax: (095) 727-09-38, E-mail: vspiridonov@wwf.ru

Despite years of marine studies, Russia’s own numerous seas and the enormous role the sea plays in the Russian economy, national programs for marine preservation and biodiversity conservation have remained mostly on the drawing board. For most Russian citizens and many scientists, the sea, its nature and resources are remote and of little concern. Public opinion in Moscow and St. Petersburg is riled by occasional stories about the plundering of Russia’s seas, about the huge volumes of illegally exported fish and other seafoods, and the dumping of military waste in the water. But people who live along the coasts, the non-depleting use of the sea’s biological resources has always been a pressing problem. On the other hand, reliable data on the state of the marine environment and marine organisms is hard to come by.

Meanwhile man’s impact on the sea has never been greater. In the space of one generation, pollution and foreign species have changed the biological aspect of the Black Sea. Poachers risk depleting the sturgeon populations in the Caspian, Azov and Black seas altogether. Virtually every square meter of the bottom of the Barents Sea has been trawled at least once. Against this backdrop, the seas in the Far East may seem relatively undisturbed by man. However, illegal fishing for crab and other seafood, encouraged by the imperfect tax system in Russia and the inexhaustible demand in southeast Asia, has reached colossal proportions in these waters. Resources that could promote the welfare of poor communities along Russia’s Far East coast are instead being exploited intensively and unchecked. Wide-ranging projects for reclaiming gas and oil resources are being developed in places that are important for fishing and crabbing or places that contain unique coastal and littoral habitats, for example areas where rare species of whales are found. At the same time, oil companies spend as little as possible on ecological safety. Gold mining, forest cutting and forest fires have hurt the salmon rivers and, through them, the marine ecosystems and the natives who depend upon the salmon for their livelihood. Waters and bottom deposits around big seaports like Vladivostok and Nakhodka are heavily polluted. Russia’s comparatively small "warm-water" Far East coast is now seriously endangered by the pressure of tourism.

That said, as we begin our wide-ranging marine nature conservation program in the Russian Far East, we are in a somewhat better situation than if we were working, say, in the Barents Sea, to say nothing of the Caspian or Black Sea. The seas of Russia’s Far East may be viewed as several fairly self-contained eco-regions. Fortunately, an appreciable part of the marine and littoral ecosystems in ecoregions of Japan, Okhotsk and the Bering Sea remain comparatively undisturbed by man. Therefore, by taking into account the basic components of biodiversity and the global processes that influence them (e.g. climate changes, socioeconomic tendencies, traditional uses of marine resources by native populations), one can, in principle, get a sense of how to conserve this biological diversity. Any biodiversity conservation strategy should be worked out by scientists and ecologists in cooperation with regional authorities, state institutions and local communities. Nature conservation organizations could act as catalysts in this process.

This was exactly the WWF’s approach when it launched its first Russian marine conservation program in 1998, with the seas of the Far East as its top geographical priority. Of course, any regional program for biodiversity conservation needs a strategy first of all. A successful strategy can help not only to preserve our great natural heritage but also to promote its sustainable use. To draft and implement a marine nature conservation strategy will require much work and energy on the part of Russia’s marine biologists, geographers, economists and experts in environmental and marine law. It will also require a willingness on the part of federal and regional authorities to work with non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Meanwhile, marine conservation efforts in the Far East may set an example for Russia’s other marine and coastal regions, especially the Siberian part of the Arctic Ocean and the Barents and White seas. This is why we feel that a properly organized effort to conserve Russia’s Far East seas could do much to integrate the country as a whole. The WWF strategy does not claim to be a substitute for Russia’s overall marine nature conservation strategy. But it could do a lot of good in and of itself, particularly as it will incorporate the following principles:

• conserving biodiversity and sustainable growth of the whole region;
• scientifically analyzing ecological problems;
• collaborating with state agencies and public organizations

Preparing the WWF Strategy

In late 1998, WWF’s Russian office began drafting a marine biological diversity conservation strategy for the Far East and identifying the most urgent problems. To this end, WWF sent a questionnaire out to marine biologists, oceanologists, fishery experts, conservationists and members of the State Ecology Committee (Goskomekologiya). We received roughly fifty responses. As expected, answers varied depending on the respondent’s immediate problems in his or her field and from what geographical vantage point they viewed the Far East. However, their answers proved very useful in that they helped us take differing opinions into consideration and to classify those anthropogenic factors posing the greatest danger to the biodiversity of the Far East seas. We organized a series of WWF marine seminars to discuss particular problems.

After consultations with a number of experts and member of the relevant State Committees (Ecology, Fishery), we prepared a first draft of our strategy, which was further discussed at a workshop in Vladivostok (May 21-24, 1999). The seminar was attended by some fifty ecologists, marine biodiversity specialists, inspectors and conservationists. They represented fourteen institutes from Anadir, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatka, Magadan, Uzhno-Sakhalin, Vladivostok and Moscow; six regional NGOs (Chukhotka, Kamchatka, Sakhalin, Primoriye Krai and Magadan Oblast), ten state organizations (of the Koryak Autonomous Okrug; Magadan, Kamchatka and Sakhalin oblasts; and the Khabarovsk and Primoriye krais). Although opinions differed on many issues, the discussion was productive. And the first draft of our strategy was substantially changed. And although the result is unlikely to satisfy all those who contributed to it, the WWF marine strategy can only be called a collective effort, which attempts to balance different views and approaches.

The goal

The Russian WWF Marine Program’s principal goal for 2000-2001 is to conserve and restore biodiversity and to prevent the disruption of natural ecological processes in the seas of the Russian Far East.

This goal is in keeping with the WWF’s basic principle, according to which ecosystems, natural resources and life forms must be conserved for their absolute value and for the use of future generations [6].

The northwest Pacific Ocean presents a rare possibility for biodiversity conservation since this part of the ocean, despite 250 years of whaling and hunting, remains relatively undisturbed by man. Thus, for most of the Far East seas, the aim is to preserve the existing biodiversity and maintain natural ecological processes, including the traditional occupations of coastal peoples. For at least two thousand years, as ethno-ecological and historical research shows, human activity has been an integral part of the Bering Sea ecosystem: it is inseparable from the age-old dynamic of ecosystem components and local crises [1,4,7]. Today this increasing activity is coming up against growing anthropogenic pressure and global climate changes which, in their turn, have affected biodiversity and the sea’s biological resources. This is why use must be made sustainable, taking into account the positive aspects of the native peoples’ experience. This is no simple task given the economic disintegration in Russia, and the vast abandoned expanses of the Pacific coast. In those places hardest hit by poaching (Southern Kuriles, Primoriye), pollution (Primoriye), or intensive industrial development, biodiversity must be restored.

The strategy’s main components

To guide us in determining the main components of the WWF’s marine strategy for the Russian Far East, we used the joint marine policy of the WWF and the International Union of Nature Protection, described in the 1998 pamphlet Creating a Sea Change, the WWF/IUCN Marine Policy. We also followed the general strategy of the WWF Russian program. We ended by dividing the WWF marine program into six interrelated steps:

• Development and integration of protected waters into a regional ecological framework;
• Conservation of individual species;
• Sustainable use of the sea’s biological resources.
• Drafting of legislation and international agreements on marine ecological problems;
• Ecological education and information for the local population; support for local environmental initiatives;
• Prevention and mitigation of the destructive effects of industry on the marine shelf and pollution of coastal tracts and pools.

None of these steps, however, can be accomplished without taking into account the interests of coastal inhabitants and without collaborating with the Russian communities and small indigenous peoples who have always lived here and depended on the sea for their livelihood. Moving down the Far East from north to south, these peoples are the Chukchis, Eskimos, Alyutors, Koryaks, Itelmen, Kamchadals, Aleuts of the Commander Islands, Evens, Niwches, Oroches and Oroks.

The WWF marine program and the indigenous and long-time population of the Russian Far East

A system of protected natural territories (PNT) is a traditional form of environmental protection. In recent years, the PNT concept has been substantially revised under the influence of new ideas about an ecological network or framework. The revised concept is still far from complete. This was clearly shown at a discussion of the PNT concept organized by the WWF’s Russian office [9] followed by a seminar in Golitsino (15-17 December 1999). No matter how the PNT concept develops, traditional land use territories will remain a key component. And these traditional land use territories may include marine sections. One such territory already exists: it is called Tkhsanom and includes a section of territorial waters 2 nautical miles from the low tide mark (Resolution of the Koryak autonomous okrug Governor, dated 2 December 1998). Tkhsanom is an example of a successful collaboration between activists from Associations of Small Indigenous Peoples of the North, Far East and Siberia; the WWF and the local administration.

Our job now is to evaluate existing PNTs with respect to their contribution to marine biodiversity conservation and to determine which marine areas are most in need of exploitation limitations, including restrictions on industrial use of the shelf and shore coupled with development of coastal fishing and traditional fisheries. At the same time, we must understand what can be done to conserve this ethno-biodiversity. Nearly every settlement along the Arctic-Northern-Pacific coast of Eurasia should have its own ecological niche: its own unique combination of marine and river fisheries [5, 7]. Creating the necessary legislation for the organization of traditional use marine areas will be even more difficult than creating continental PNTs and will require a thorough analysis of the existing legislation.

Protection of individual marine species is aimed primarily at specific populations of whales and salmon, which migrate hundreds and thousands of miles across natural and political borders. Protection of small populations of Arctic and Grey whales in the Okhotsk Sea will first require a detailed evaluation of the populations’ status. Here the experience and knowledge of the local population together with the coastal communities’ monitoring methods may play a decisive and so include the native population in solving global problems of biodiversity conservation.

The protection of salmon is a different matter. The indigenous and long-time population has traditionally depended on salmon fishing in rivers and estuaries and therefore must act as an independent force to conserve the genetic diversity of these fish. Thanks to their gene pool and to the existence of numerous populations specifically adapted to particular places of migration and spawning, the salmon populations have a certain level of resistance to harmful changes in the environment and to the increasing pressure of fisheries. Incidentally, indigenous peoples should be consulted on a question that is currently being decided without their participation. This question concerns permission for Japan to engage in salmon drift-boat fishing in Russian economic waters. The fishing quotas for the Japanese come at a price, of course: the price includes building materials for salmon-breeding farms. This would appear to be useful. But the observers on Japanese fishing ships tend to look the other way when quotas are exceeded; marine mammals and birds often become entangled and die in the drift nets. Although artificial breeding is undoubtedly necessary, its influence on the gene pool of wild populations should be evaluated more thoroughly.

Another economic activity with its share of lobbyists is the building of oil pipelines on Western Kamchatka and Sakhalin, which will inevitably cross a lot of rivers. The WWF will try to keep people informed concerning any threats to salmon biodiversity (e.g. drift-boat fishing and the projected pipelines). We will also insist that the opinion of indigenous peoples concerning these non-traditional activities be taken into account by the federal authorities.

We consider that the native population itself must develop coastal fishing. Coastal fishing and other traditional uses of the sea’s biological resources in the Russian Far East may be supported on a sustainable basis and thus serve as an economic alternative to predatory-style expedition fishing. The development of coastal fishing may help prevent poaching. Fishing laws that have been adopted in certain Far East regions (Sakhalin, for example) give small indigenous peoples the right to priority use of the water’s biological resources use in the territories they have traditionally inhabited, and the right to use traditional methods of fishing, provided these methods do not hurt, directly or indirectly, biodiversity or the reproduction of these marine resources and are not harmful to humans (Art. 25 of the law “On fishing and fisheries in Sakhalin oblast”, adopted 25.04.1999). The correctness of this approach is clear and the WWF marine program will support legislation that reflects it.

Relations between indigenous peoples and the populations they exploit are not, as is popularly thought, harmonious. The appearance of new technical equipment and new ways of fishing – and the dearth of other foodstuff -- have made the coast systems of life support highly vulnerable [7]. Therefore, regional concepts of sustainable use should be incorporated into the legislation concerning coastal fishing and hunting. They should represent a synthesis of traditional knowledge and modern science [10]; at the same time, they should be phrased in such a way as to be understandable and acceptable to local peoples. Otherwise they will be seen as just another bureaucratic exercise.

Needless to say, regional legislation alone will not suffice. Federal legislative mechanisms, too, are needed to ensure that part of the enormous profits made be huge companies like American Seafood and Dalmoreprodukt [2] (whose state-of-the-art supertrawlers deprive small coastal artels of their catches) go to developing coastal fisheries. The WWF’s main role in developing legislation is to bring in qualified specialists and also to communicate new ideas to federal and regional legislators.

Traditional knowledge of marine life has in large part been lost by the younger generations of indigenous peoples of the Russian North and Far East. Chukchi and Eskimo children often can’t name the animals they see in the sea and on the coast. In coastal settlements of the Far East, where the adults tend to be unemployed alcoholics, the growing generation is usually neglected. Children must be educated in marine ecology. If at least some of them come to see the sea living sea as their livelihood and an absolute value, they may become creative participants in the environmental protection process or “Action network”.

Our job is to apply existing educational methods and technologies to marine ecological education and to inform different population groups about the marine environment in terms understandable to them. The WWF will undoubtedly support those associations and activists engaged marine education in the Far East. At the same time, we feel keenly the lack of ideas and concepts that would go beyond the efforts of one club or center. Here the local initiatives of indigenous peoples are badly needed.

Concerning the effects of industry on shelf ecosystems, the 1993 Concept for Studying and Extracting Carbohydrate Resources on the Marine Shelf of the Russian Far East and North East deserves mention. This exceptionally narrow-minded concept was neatly summed up by a man in the Ministry of Natural Resources: “For the next fifty years Russia will be a resource country”, in other words, “a seller of resources”. Unfortunately, as so often happens here, departmental lobbies are passed off as State policy. In accordance with this concept, the oil-fields on Sakhalin’s northeast shelf of Sakhalin are being drilled with little or no consideration for international ecological safety norms. At the same time, NGOs such as Sakhalin Ecology Watch and the Ecojurice Institute have undoubtedly changed public opinion and forced oil companies to at least pretend to pay more attention to ecological problems. We would like to do more work in this area with interested organisations and with independent ecological and legal experts. Public demonstrations of the hazards of marine oil and gas exploitation as well as public discussion of their alternatives (fishing, other sources of energy) are essential. News of environmental abuses can no longer be confined to web pages on the internet. [8] The WWF wants the consensus among indigenous peoples and long-time residents to become a factor in discussions of ecologically risky projects on the marine shelf of the Russian Far East.

The WWF marine program is greatly interested in collaborating with regional NGOs on the coasts of Siberia and the Far East; with Associations of small indigenous peoples of the North, Far East and Siberia; with State organizations in charge of environmental protection, natural resources and regional policy; and with experts in marine ecology, biodiversity and the socio-economic problems of indigenous peoples and longtime residents. We believe that the WWF’s priorities in protecting marine biodiversity are largely in keeping with the international work being done in the Arctic region (see the item in this issue on the international seminar in Montreal on the conservation and management of marine ecosystems in the circumpolar region) and extending more and more into the North Pacific. Please write with your comments on the WWF Marine Program – or to request the full text of the WWF Marine Strategy – to the address above.

Literature

1. Arutyunov S.A., Krupnik I.I., Chlenov M.A. Whale Avenue. Antiquities of the Senyavin Strait Islands. Moscow: Nauka, 1982. 174 p. (In Russian)

2. Vahrin S. The Coast Must Save the Shore or Do Russia’s Fishermen Have a Future? // Severnaya Pacifica, 1999, No. 1 (7). P. 5-15. (In Russian)

3. Golovnin V. The Mafia and the Sea. The View from Tokyo. Izvestia, 23.10.1997. (In Russian)

4. Dinesman L.G., Kiseleva N.K., Savinetskij A.B., Hasanov B.F. Century Dynamics of Coastal Ecosystems of Northeast Chukotka. Moscow: Argus, 1996. 187 p. (In Russian)

5. Iohelson V.I. Koryaks. Material Culture and Social Organization. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 1998. 237 p. (In Russian)

6. Indigenous Peoples and Environmental Protection. Declaration of the WWF’s principles. Moscow: Izdatelstvo Ros. predstavitelstva, 1997. (In Russian)

7. Krupnik I.I. Arctic Ethnoecology. Models of Traditional Nature Use by Marine Hunters and Reindeer Breeders in Northern Eurasia. Moscow: Nauka, 1989. 271 p. (In Russian)

8. Murashko O. Fish and Oil in the Okhotsk Sea. Different points of view // Mir korennikh narodov - Living Arctic. Moscow, 1999. No. 1. P. 34-44. (In Russian)

9. Discussing the Concept of Protected Natural Territories in Russia // Zapovedniki i nationalnie parki. 1999. No. 27. P. 35-48. (In Russian)

10. Freese S. Creating Guidelines for Consumptive use of Arctic Species // Arctic Bulletin. 1998. No. 2. P. 12-13.