Ministry of the Natural Resources and Ecology of the Russian Federation Federal State Institution “State Nature Biosphere Reserve “Katunskiy” "Global Change in Mountain Sites (GLOCHAMOST) ‐ Coping Strategies for Mountain Biosphere Reserves" Assessment report on the Katunskiy State Nature Biosphere Reserve (Russian Federation) Accomplished under UNESCO fee contract #8766319 Author: Tatjana Yashina Cartography: Andrei Klepikov Ust‐Koksa, 2009 [1]
Transcript
Ministry of the Natural Resources and Ecology of the Russian Federation
Federal State Institution “State Nature Biosphere Reserve “Katunskiy”
"Global Change in Mountain Sites (GLOCHAMOST) ‐ Coping Strategies for
Mountain Biosphere Reserves"
Assessment report on the Katunskiy State Nature Biosphere
Reserve (Russian Federation)
Accomplished under UNESCO fee contract #8766319
Author: Tatjana Yashina Cartography: Andrei Klepikov
Ust‐Koksa, 2009
[1]
[2]
Contents A.Current state of climate and existing natural resources (biodiversity, water), land use and socio‐economic conditions. Characterization of Stresses. A1.Climate A2.Water resources A3.Biodiversity A4.Land use and socio‐economic conditions C.Projected scenarios C1.Climate C2.Water resources C3.Biodiversty and ecosystems C4.Land use Adaptation strategy for Katunskiy BR – an outline References
3 3 5 7 9 14 14 16 17 18 20 22
Abstract The assessment report addresses the issues of global change and its effects onto water resources, biodiversity, ecosystems, land use and socio‐economic realm of Katunskiy Biosphere Reserve (Altai Mountains, Russia) as a follow‐up of the GLOCHAMORE Project. The baseline characteristics of climate, water resources, biodiversity and land use are presented and major stresses such as climate change, global market change and impact of tourism are analyzed. Preliminary scenarios were developed for abovementioned key issues. As the practical outcome, an outline of the adaptation strategy for Katunskiy Biosphere Reserve is proposed. Acknowledgements This assessment would not have been possible without funding from UNESCO Man and Biosphere Program, and we gratefully acknowledge this organization. Also, we would like to express our sincere thanks to Ms. Elena Tveritinova (UNESCO Moscow Office), who assisted the contract accomplishment with logistical information.
[3]
A. Current state of climate and existing natural resources (biodiversity, water), land use and socio‐economic conditions. Characterization of Stresses. A.1. Climate The climate of the Katunskiy BR is characterized by the meteorological data from 3 weather stations, located at different altitudes (Ust‐Koksa, 950 m.a.s.l., Akkem, 2050 m.a.s.l. and Kara‐Tyurek, 2600 m.a.s.l.). Baseline characteristics of climate are presented at Table 1.
Table 1 Baseline climatic characteristics of Katunskiy Biosphere Reserve (after Sukhova et al, 2004)
Station/period Mean temperatures, 0C Precipitation, mm
Ust‐Koksa I ‐23.3 11 II ‐20.0 9 III ‐10.3 9 IV 0.9 23 V 8.6 52 VI 13.7 61 VII 15.4 73 VIII 13.8 69 IX 8.0 36 X 0.1 28 XI ‐11.1 26 XII ‐18.9 21 Year ‐1.90 418
Akkem I ‐21.1 13 II ‐17.2 10 III ‐13.6 11 IV ‐6.2 31 V 1.5 63 VI 6.7 78 VII 8.3 89 VIII 7.1 83 IX 2.8 47 X ‐4.7 36 XI ‐12.0 31 XII ‐16.9 26 Year ‐5.4 518
Kara‐Tyurek I ‐16.9 8 II ‐16.4 10
[4]
III ‐13.1 15 IV ‐7.9 34 V ‐1.8 52 VI ‐4.2 80 VII 6.3 94 VIII 5.2 88 IX 0.3 46 X ‐6.4 37 XI ‐12.8 26 XII ‐16.5 19 Year ‐6.3 508
Regional trend of change of mean annual temperature, fixed by the analysis of climatic data from Barnaul weather station established in 1835 (Kharlamova, 2000), shows significant warming from ‐0.5 to +2.30C. Local temperature variations are not so clear, since Central Altai is characterized by the lowest rates of warming in the region. Nevertheless, the observations from meteorological stations show the general trend of warming. Soja et al (2006) provides analysis of climatic data from Kara‐Tyurek weather station, showing (see Table 2) about 2‐degree warming in winter and about half‐degree warming in summer season.
Table 2 Climate change data from Kara‐Tyurek meteorological station (Soja et al., 2006)
Time period
Tw ΔTw Ts ΔTs ΔL5 Pa ΔPa
Before 1960s
‐15.1 5.2 752
1961‐1998
‐13.2 +1.9 5.7 +0.5 +6 882 +130
Tw – temperarture of January, Ts – temperature of July, Pa – annual precipitation, L5 – days with continuous temperature above +5
Sukhova et al (2005) also indicate, that the most significant warming is observed in spring and winter seasons, while in summer this trend is not so clear. The changes of mean January air temperature during last 40 years observed at all three stations are presented at Fig. 1. As seen from the graph, the winter warming is more intensive at lower altitudes within intermountain depression, where Ust‐Koksa station is located. The trend of warming is accompanied by slight increase of annual precipitation (see Fig. 2). However, there is no clear dependence between trends of precipitation change at different altitudes. At the tops of mountain ranges (as demonstrated by the data from Kara‐Tyurek weather station) increase of precipitation during spring and summer is observed, while there is no
significant change in winter and even decrease in autumn. Observations at Akkem station, which is typical for high‐altitudinal valleys, show increase of precipitation in summer, accompanied by its decrease in transitional seasons. Within intermountain depressions, rapid increase of summer precipitation is observes with no significant changes during for other seasons.
Fig. 1 Changes in mean January temperatures in Katunskiy BR (data from 3 weather
stations)
Fig. 2. Changes in precipitation in Katunskiy BR (data from 3 weather stations)
A.2. Water Resources Katunskiy BR is recognized as “water tower”, where the most part of discharge of river Katun is formed. It is the most significant center of modern glaciation in Siberia with 317 glaciers covering the total area of 230 km2. Estimated water amount reserved in the glaciers is 7.370 billion tons (Galakhov et al, 1999).
[5]
[6]
In 1970s the water balance of high‐altitudinal catchments of the Tomichka river tribute (containing small kar glacier) and Akkem river (containing large glacier of valley type) were investigated by researchers for Barnaul and Tomsk Universities. The study included field measurement of the components of water balance for these catchments (Galakhov et al, 1999). Classic equation of water balance for catchments with glaciation could be considered as:
W = m + Xl + E – y – Fi+f , where
- W – changes of water reserve in the catchment, - m – mass of water, formed by melting of snow, firn and ice, - X – rain precipitation, - E – condensation or evaporation, - y – liquid discharge, - F – mass of water, frozen in firn of ice fields
Components of water balance of these basins, calculated from the field measurements held in 1960‐70s, are presented in the table below.
Table 3. Structure of water balance of typical river basins of Katunskiy Ridge (after Galakhov, et al, 1999)
The comparative diagrams of the structure of water balance for high‐altitudinal catchments with small (Tomichka) and large (Akkem) glaciers are presented at Fig. 3. These data show that 60‐65% or total water influx is caused by melting of ice and snow. The role of glacial feed for Akkem river is 52% of total discharge (Catalog…, 1978). For river basins with smaller glaciations area, it contributes 10‐15%.
Fig.3. Comparative diagrams of the structure of water balance for different high‐altitudinal catchments
Mass balance of the glaciers has also been investigated within Tomichka river basin during 1960‐1970s. Its dynamics at different altitudinal zones is presented in the Table 4. In general, repeated inventories in different areas of the Altai mountains show that during the period of instrumental measurements (approximately, since 1870s) small kar glaciers have lost 20‐40% of its area and large glaciers of valley type – from 8 to 20%.
Table 4 Dynamics of Tomich glacier mass balance at its different altitudinal zones, g/sm2
(after Galakhov et al, 1999) Altitude, km a s l Year
A.3. Biodiversity Biological diversity of the Katunskiy BR is presented by app. 1000 spp of higher vascular plants (incl. 9 endangered spp), 161 spp of birds (20 are endangered) and 52 spp of mammals (1 is endangered). Among the last Snow leopard (Uncia uncia), inscribed into the Red Book of the Russian Federation and into the IUCN Red Lists, is most charismatic. Habitats of this animal are coordinated with peri‐glacial ecosystems, and combined with high press cause by illegal hunting and low density of population, it makes the animal extremely vulnerable to climate change. The map of spatial distribution of Snow leopard in Katunskiy BR and its surroundings is presented in Fig.4.
[7]
Fig. 4. Distribution of the Snow leopard in Katunskiy BR and its surroundings
Vegetation communities of Katunskiy BR are diverse and presented by several vegetation belts: steppes, combination of steppes and woods, montane woods (taiga), subalpine meadows, alpine‐type meadows and shrubs and high‐mountain tundra. In order to detect changes in alpine ecosystems, GLORIA site has been established in Katunskiy BR in 2005. This monitoring suggests long‐term measurements of the ground temperature coupled with detailed vegetation counts according to the standard protocols at four summits located in the ecotones above the treeline (The GLORIA Field Manual, 2004). Time series of measurements of the ground temperature during 2005‐2008 show slight increase of temperature (see Fig. 5). Conditions of plant growth in the alpine environment are determined also by the length of the vegetation period with temperatures above +50C, as well as by the length of snow cover period. These data could serve as a background for further temporal analysis of the dynamics of alpine communities and are presented in Table 5. For the observed period, which is quite short to make any projections, decrease of the duration of vegetation period is fixed.
[8]
[9]
Fig. 5. Dynamics of ground temperatures at southern plots at summits AME (2181 meters a.s.l.) and LAD (2475 meters a.s.l.) for 2005‐2008
Table 5
Climatic conditions of the plant growth and species richness of the alpine ecosystems of Katunskiy Biosphere Reserve (GLORIA RU‐AKA Target region)
Number of days
with snow cover with temperature >5 with temperature > 10
Summit and plot
code
Altitude, m.a.s.l.
2006 2007 2008 2006 2007 2008 2006 2007 2008
Species richness
AME_E22 2181 240 225 -- 106 97 99 90 85 83 56
AME_W22 2181 228 203 -- 104 100 87 91 99 83 64
AME_S22 2181 201 159 -- 130 169 122 113 97 70 65
AME_N22 2181 254 258 --- 89 90 71 59 68 61 63
ALI_S22 2231 214 206 --- 106 107 110 90 86 -- 65
ALI_W22 2231 254 255 -- 92 86 76 60 68 70 39
ALI_E22 2231 224 211 -- 105 100 104 101 99 85 62
ALI_S22 2231 277 292 -- 61 51 52 49 41 47 65
PRO_N22 2358 264 246 -- 70 75 76 39 39 67 38
PRO_E22 2358 224 2009 ---- 92 89 89 71 77 79 50
PRO_S22 2358 236 229 -- 103 101 102 86 83 76 49
LAD_E22 2475 285 271 -- 60 58 -- 49 52 -- 24
LAD_S22 2475 219 239 -- 101 95 97 89 83 86 30
LAD_W22 2475 233 238 --- 108 93 97 75 79 78 24
A.4. Land Use and Socio‐Economic Conditions The structure of the land use of Katunskiy BR is presented at Fig. 6. Below it is briefly characterized with regard to biosphere reserve zonation. Core zone. According to the legislation, no human activities are allowed within the core zone of Katunskiy Biosphere Reserve except for patrolling, researches and monitoring and limited scientific and eco‐tourism. The land is state‐owned, and the administration of the reserve is responsible for the state and management of this area. Buffer zone. In buffer zone limited use of natural resources is allowed. There are following types of human activities:
• recreation and tourism, • collection of medicinal plants and non‐timber forest products (cedar nuts), • hunting, • fishing, • apiculture, • limited cattle grazing.
Fig. 6. Current structure of land use in Katunskiy Biosphere Reserve
Recreation and tourism develops in the limited sites of the buffer zone, which includes Lake Tajmenje and Ozernaya river and Lake Middle Multinskoe. Due to limited number of recreants (about 500‐700 per year), the impact onto natural ecosystems is unsignificant and limited only to touristic trails. Subalpine meadows in the western part of investigated area are natural habitats of medicinal plants (mainly, Rhodiola rosea and Hedysarum theinum). Both these plants are traditionally used by local people for medicinal purposes. Rhodiola rosea is rare plant included into the Red data book of Russian Federation, however, during 2000‐2007 it was collected for industrial purposes. The total volume extracted from the buffer zone could be estimated as 2‐3 tons of roots per year. In 2007‐2008 due to strengthening of law enforcement this illegal process has been reduced. Field studies in 2008 showed that the restoration of the natural plant communities is in place, and in next 3‐4 years the resources of the plants will increase up to natural volumes. The reason of this quick recovering is the specific way of collection when the small parts of roots stay in the soil and spurt as a new plant in the next vegetation season. Hunting is a traditional activity for local people also spread in the buffer zone. The main animals for hunting are fur mammals (sable, mink etc.), ungulates (Musk deer, Maral (Siberian subspp of Red deer) and Roe deer), and bears. Hunting in the buffer zone is strictly controlled by State Hunting Control Service and limited up to 50‐150 fur animals per year. Long‐term monitoring results of the state of populations of these animals in the core and buffer zones show that this limited activity does not affect the state of populations in the core. The illegal hunting in the eastern part of transition zone cause greater impact onto wildlife population of the core area of the BR.
[10]
Grazing impact on the natural ecosystems nowadays could also be assessed as low. After the collapse of the USSR with its planned economy followed by economical decline, the number of sheep has been significantly reduced, and the ecosystems were given a possibility to restore. Now in the buffer zone the grazing load could be estimated as 300‐500 of sheeps, so this is twice less than 40 years before. Now chemicals are not used in the grazing lands, so, according to the environmental impact assessment, the state of grazing lands in the buffer zone is good. The land of buffer zone is mainly state‐owned and local authorities of Ust‐Koksa administrative district and Federal Forestry Service manage these lands. However, several sites has been rented for a long‐term by local people for development of private apiaries. Transition zone. In the transition zone there are 10 permanent settlements with total population of ~ 4500 people are located. During 2000‐2009, the population of these settlements decreased by 9%. According to official data, unemployment is 7% (calculated from the number of people, applied to the Center of Employment); however, hidden unemployment could be estimated as 30%. Special survey, carried in 2009, showed that local population of highly dependent on the natural resources (by hunting, fishing, collecting non‐timber forest products etc). Fig. 7 represents the degree of its dependency.
Fig. 7. Degree of dependence of local communities on the natural resources
The land use types are more diverse here and include:
In this zone, the share of private‐owned lands increases, because all the maral farms and other agricultural enterprises are privately‐owned. The basic environmental impact is caused by the maral farms. These are large fenced areas where animals are reared in close to natural conditions. The basic product is maral antlers, which is exported to South Korea and China for pharmaceutical industry. The total number of animals in the farms of BR is 8800. Maral farming is a traditional economy in the Central Altai. It was established in the region in 18 century. During this 300 years period maral farms evolved from small parks up to 30‐40 ha with 10‐20 deers to large economies of about 5000 ha with 500‐2500 animals. The farm is divided into several parks used by sub‐groups of animals in different seasons. Based on field investigation of the state of ecosystems of maral farm major changes in ecosystems were figured out. The changes include:
• changes in species composition and increasing the role of anthropochorus species in plant communities,
• damage to shrubs and young trees, • sealing of upper soil horizons causing changes in air and moisture regime of soil and
deterioration of plant growth conditions, • erosion processes along the main trails and fences.
Another important issue cause by maral farms is the disturbance to wildlife (large mammals) of the surrounding lands. The fenced farms covering huge areas block the natural migratory routes of ungulates and cause fragmentation of populations. However, until now this process is not well‐investigated. Being fully export‐oriented, these economies are vulnerable to global market changes. The price of the conserved antlers, exported from the biosphere reserve, varied significantly during last 15 years – from 750 USD at the beginning of 1990s to less than 200 USD in 2008 (see Fig. 8).
Fig. 8. Dynamics of the prices of the conserved Maral antlers exported from Katunskiy BR
The major cause of the prices default is competition with producers from New Zealand and China. However, due to large areas, the state of economy in maral farms could significantly affect the whole BR territory in the case of its possible expansion or reduction. In the transition zone Mt. Belukha – the highest peak of Siberia and the major recreational site of the Altai mountains is located. It attracts lots of tourists of different categories – starting from mountaineers to religious pilgrims following the doctrine of famous painter and philosopher Nicolas Roerich, who considered that Mt. Belukha is one of the ways to mystical Shambala. The total amount of tourists is about 15 000 – 25 000 annually. The environmental impact is analyzed by the system of indicators including vegetation cover (species composition, abundance, presence of anthropochorus species, biomass of plant communities, state of trees), soil sealing and presence of erosion. The results of this study show that the negative impact of tourism localized only to trails and camp site and doesn’t affect the 95% of the whole area. However, further increasing the number of visitors without equipment the camping sites and paving the trails at the most sites will cause irreversible changes in natural ecosystems. Grazing is also spread in the northern part of the transition zone. The total area of grazing lands is 45900 ha. It does not cause any significant changes in ecosystems due to low pressure. The total grazing load is 1700 cows, 2000 horses and 11000 sheeps.
[13]
C. Projected scenarios C1. Climate Until now, there were no small‐scale climate modeling for the territory of the Central Altai. Regional climate model for the Altai mountains was developed by E. Parfenova and N. Chebakova (2000). The model is based on the system of regressions, describing dependency of basic climate parameters (mean July temperatures and annual precipitation) from the altitude, longitude and latitude with regard to geobotanical provinces. For the Central Altai province proposed regressions are as follows:
where H – altitude, Lat – latitude. In the frames of this project, for Katunskiy BR these climate parameters were calculated on the base of digital elevation model. The results are presented at Fig. 9.
Fig. 9. Preliminary climate model of Katunskiy BR
[14]
This model is a preliminary one, because it does not take into account the local circulation, causing additional moistening of the western part of the territory due to the western air mass movement. However, this model can be used for preliminary projections of climate change. Since there was no sophisticated modeling of regional climate change, WWF (2001) provides general scenario for climate change in the Altai‐Sayan Ecoregion. Within the next 50 years the January temperature in most parts of the Altai‐Sayan region will increase by 2‐3 OC , moreover around the Mt. Belukha the temperature will likely increase by 4‐5 OC. At the same time, increased precipitation by 20% is also very possible, especially during winters. On the whole, the second quarter of the century may see warming that is twice as fast as the warming in the first quarter.
Several researches (Parfenova et al, 2000, Mikhaylov et al, 1992) indicate following conditions as the most probable climate change scenario in the Altai mountains for next 20 years: increase of annual precipitation by 20% and increase of summer temperatures by 20C. According to this, the model of projected climate for next 20 years was calculated (see Fig. 10).
Fig. 10. Projected climate parameters for 2029 However, this model and projection requires further improvement, firstly, by incorporation of the
[15]
atmospheric circulation processes. C2. Water resources Existing data does not allow to make any sophisticated modeling of climate‐change induces changes of water resources within Katunskiy Biosphere Reserve. Nevertheless, the generic consequences of climate change could be considered as follows (see Fig. 11).
Fig. 11. Quality assessment of the changes in water balance of Katunskiy BR
Increase of temperatures, especially in summer season, as it is observed since 1960s, will cause intensification of glacier melting. Sophisticated research efforts are required for quantitative estimation the role of more intensive glacier melting in river discharge formation, because the increase of precipitation should also be considered. However, according to field measurements in Akkem river basin, the mean thickness of ice melting is 5‐5.5 mm per 10C of positive temperature (Catalog, 1978).
In its turn, the glacier melting will decrease the amount of water stored in glaciers and in the long‐term perspective will negatively affect the river discharge in summer season, since currently ice melting water contributes up to 50% of river discharge at high elevations.
Increased by 20% precipitation, especially in winter seasons, as projected by WWF (2001), will definitely cause increased probability of extreme floods. However, this will not cause any serious risks for the well‐being of local communities since the most of the biosphere reserve’s territory is not populated.
[16]
C3. Biodiversity and ecosystems
In the context of large region of Siberia, climate change will cause significant changes of floristic diversity. Fig. 12 illustrates modern (a) and projected for 2090 (б) number of species of high vascular plants. For the Altai mountains the increase of the number of flora species is expected caused by northward migration of the steppe and desert species from Mongolia.
Fig. 12. Modern (a) and projected for 2090 (б) number of flora species (after Assessment report,
2009). 0 – water, 1 – up to 100, 2 – 100‐300, 3 – 300‐600, 4 – 600‐900, 5 – 900‐1200, 6 – 1200‐1500, 7 – 1500‐1800, 8 – 1800‐2100, 9 – 2100‐3000, 10 – 3000‐4000. Narrow indicates location of Katunskiy BR The pattern of ecosystem cover will also change, mostly caused by upward shift of the treeline (by 50‐100 m for 2090) and subalpine shrubs (by 100‐200 m) (Mikhailov et al., 1992). This will cause fragmentation of alpine ecosystems. In general, Parfenova and Chebakova (2000) forecast the decrease of the area of mountain tundra ecosystems by 18%, subalpine shrub ecosystems by 4% and increase of mountain woods (taiga) complexes by 15% and steppes complexes by 3.5%.
[17]
[18]
With regard to mammals, the area would likely see more unfavorable winter conditions for ungulates and predatory mammals, and force upon them large seasonal migrations. A few years of particularly heavy snowfalls may then be followed by the massive death of animals. Due to the intensification of the summer dry period, the ungulates will be forced to spend more time on high mountain pastures, thus increasing competition with cattle. The most vulnerable to climate change species are those who inhabit alpine and glacial‐nival ecosystems. Among flagship vulnerable species there are Snow leopard, living at high altitudes and dependent of the populations of ungulates, and Rhodiola rosea – alpine plant suffering also from over‐collection. C4. Land use Based on the long‐term complex program of socio‐economic development of Ust‐Koksa district, during next 20 years two land use scenarios were developed for the buffer and transition zones of Katunskiy Biosphere Reserve.
Inertial scenario is based on the assumption that current situation in social and economic realms will stay unchanged significantly. Increasing the number of tourists, stimulating moderate development of appropriate infrastructure (trade, hotels, etc.), is expected. However it will not cause principal changes in social realm, economics and agriculture. The degree of local people’s dependence on the natural resources will stay at current level (about 25% are highly dependent and 20% are moderately dependent), consequently, further illegal harvesting of medicinal plants and poaching will remain. This will particularly threaten Musk deer and Red deer populations within the biosphere reserve. Increased visitation of popular touristic sites in the transition zone (Mt. Belukha and Multinskie lakes) will cause degradation of trails, garbage accumulation and loss of attractiveness of the territory. Grazing pressure could slightly increase up to the level of 1980s.
Limited investments attracted by tourism development will be short‐term and expected to continue up to 2012‐2013. After, without target governmental support, the investment impulse will fade. Along with the process of the destruction of material and technical capacity of local economies, this will cause unemployment. Combined with general increase of the total number of population, this situation will strengthen the pressure on the environment and increase degree of dependence of local communities on the natural resources up to 60%.
Optimistic scenario is based on the assumption that most of the projects will be implemented under financial support from republican and federal government. It will cause the changes of the economic structure of the area. Development of tourism will still play the leading role, but it will stimulate development of agriculture, food industry, service sector and investments into trail equipment and ecosystems’ carrying capacity. In addition, construction of mini hydropower station
on Multa river will inspire development of wood processing industry (small enterprises). This economic development will decrease unemployment and increase the incomes of local people.
Perspective projects to be implemented within the transition zone of Katunskiy BR (with expected governmental financial support):
2010 ‐ 2019:
• Construction of the mini‐hydropower station at the Multa river
• Organization of the touristic complex in Verkh‐Ujmon village
• Wood‐processing enterprise in Ognyevka village
• Livestock enterprises in large villages
• Small enterprises on medicinal plants packaging
2019‐2029:
• Construction of large all‐year ski resort near Katanda village
Fig. 13. Optimistic land use scenario for Katunskiy BR
[19]
[20]
Environmental concerns of this scenario are related to following:
1. Generally reduced (in comparison with current state) pressure on wildlife from poaching caused by increased employment and income of local people;
2. Increased grazing pressure on summer pastures up to the level of 1985; 3. At transport‐accessed sites the rate of deforestation will increase by demand of wood‐
processing industry, however, this negative impact will occur at limited locations of small area.
The most vulnerable to global change are local maral (Red deer) farmers, who have 90%‐export‐oriented economy and highly depend on fluctuations of global market. The final product – conserved Maral antlers – is raw material for pharmaceutical industry and traditional medicine in South Korea and China. Since the animals use natural pastures, the projected upward shift of vegetation will also affect the productivity of pastures, and – consequently – the quality of the farm production.
Maral farms are usually rich with resources for different types of recreation – horseback trips, treatment courses based on antler broth, trophy hunting. Processing of antlers instead of its simple conservation for further export will decrease its dependency on the global market. There is an experience of the farm‐based small enterprise producing biologically active supplements. Other maral products like meat are also perspective for further producing, however, for its realization marketing and advertising efforts are needed.
C5. Adaptation strategy for Katunskiy Biosphere Reserve – an outlines
The general aim of the strategy is to maintain ecosystem services of the territory of Katunskiy BR and to reduce the vulnerability of local communities to global change,
The general guiding principles for global change adaptation strategy for Katunskiy Biosphere Reserve are as follows:
1. Usage of adaptive management to maintain flexibility
2. Monitoring and tracking changes in weather, hydrology, ecosystems and land use
3. Identification of possible futures through modeling
4. Maintaining the resiliency of ecosystems and minimizing stress at the core zone
5. Raising public awareness on the effects of global change
[21]
6. Implementation of demonstration project on sustainable use of natural resources in changing conditions
Therefore, the objectives include:
1. Further designing of the monitoring program to adequately detect the signals of the effects of climate change and land use onto the natural ecosystems.
2. Strengthening the partnerships with research institutions for conducting modeling of changes in hydrology, biodiversity and ecosystems.
3. Development of educational and interpretative programs on the global change‐related issues for different target groups (children, farmers, decision‐makers, visitors etc.)
4. Implementation of demonstration projects on (1) alternative energy supply (solar batteries, mini hydropower schemes) (2) sustainable tourism (focused on the most stressed areas in the transition zone – Multinskiy lakes and Belukha massif) and (3) diversification of vulnerable economies (maral farms). The last could include development of tourism within maral farms, marketing of additional maral products like meat, establishment of small enterprises for processing raw materials into pharmaceutical products etc.
[22]
REFERENCES
1. Assessment report on climate change and its effects on the territory of the Russian Federation. Vol. 2. Effects of climate change. Federal Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring Service. Moscow, 2008. [In Russian]
2. Catalog of the glaciers of the USSR. Vol.15, part 4. Basin of upper Katun River. V. Revyakin, M. Dushkin. Leningrad, 1978 [in Russian]
3. GALAKHOV, V.P., MUKHAMMETOV, R.M., 1999. Glaciers of the Altai. Novosibirsk. [In Russian]
4. KHARLAMOVA, N.F., 2000. Dynamics of thermal regime within intracontinental regions of Russia during the last 160 years. In: Vestnik of Altai State №3 (17). Barnaul. с.56‐58. [In Russian]
5. MIKHAILOV, N.N., CHISTYAKOV K.V. et al, 1992. Geoecology of the intermountain depressions. Leningrad [In Russian]
6. PARFENOVA, E., CHEBAKOVA, N., 2000. Projected changes of vegetation of the Altai Mountains under climate warming and compilation of projection maps // Geobotanic Mapping, p.p.26 – 31 [In Russian]
7. SOJA, A.J., TCHEBAKOVA, N.M., FRENCH, N.H.F. et al. 2006. Climate‐induced boreal forest change: Predictions versus current observations. Global and Planetary Change, doi:10.1016/jgloplacha.2006.07.028.
8. SUKHOVA, M.G., RUSANOV, V.I., 2004. Climate of the landscapes of the Altai Mountains and its assessment for human life‐sustaining. Novosibirsk [In Russian]
9. SUKHOVA, M.G. et al., 2005. Reconstruction, modern trends and possibl;e future scenarios of climate change. A case study of Katunskiy Ridge. In: Geoecology of the Altai‐Sayan mountain region. Vol. 2. Gorno‐Altaisk, pp 161‐165. [In Russian]
10. The GLORIA Field Manual. Multi‐summit approach, 2004. Eds: H. Pauli, M. Gottfried et al. Luxembourg.
11. WWF, 2001. Ecoregional Climate Change and Biodiversity Decline, Issue 1, Altai‐Sayan Ecoregion, 26 p.
