R e s e a rc h U nit E n v iro n m e n ta l P o lic y
( I n t e r n a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e fo r E n v iro n m e n t a n d S o c ie ty ) W is s e n s c h a fts z e n tru m B e rlin f ü r S o z ia lfo rs c h u n g
HUG p re 8 7 - 4
SOVIET MANAGEMENT OF BIOSPHERE RESOURCES
P h il ip R. P r y d e 1
WISSENSCHAFTSZENTRUM BERLIN FÜR SOZIALFORSCHUNG
Forschungsabteilung
’’Normbildung und Umwelt”
* San D iego S ta te U n iv e rs ity Reichpietschufer 50
D-1000 Berlin (West) 30 Tel.: 25 491-0 To be p u b l i s h e d in a G erm an v e r s io n in : H elm ut S c h r e ib e r ( E d . ) : E n v iro n m e n ta l P ro te c tio n in E a s te r n E u ro p e , F r a n k f u r t a .M .,
New Y ork: C am p u s, fo rth c o m in g 1987/88.
IIUG - P o ts d a m e r S tr . 58, 1000 B e rlin (W est) 30, T e l.: - 26 10 71
In this paper a detailed overview is given of the environmental problems in the fields of soil protection, nature protection, water and air pollution control, and environmental monitoring, problems which the Soviet Union has to overcome in the 1990s.
The author also deals with the international activities of the Soviet Union in the environmental field. His conclusion is that only through a major reallocation of investment funds and a change in the national priorities can a further deteriora tion of the environment be prevented.
Zusammenfassung
Management von natürlichen Ressourcen in der Sowietunion In diesem Papier gibt der Autor eine detaillierte Übersicht über die Umweltprobleme, die die UdSSR in den 90er Jahren meistern muß, wenn sich die schon jetzt problematische Umwelt
situation nicht weiter verschlechtern soll. Er geht dabei auf die Bereiche Bodenschutz, Naturschutz, Wasser- und Luftrein
haltung ein. Außerdem behandelt er das Problem der Messung von Umweltschäden und damit auch die Umweltberichterstattung sowie internationale Aktivitäten der UdSSR im Umweltschutz. Der
Autor kommt zu dem Ergebnis, daß nur mit einer erheblichen Steigerung der öffentlichen Investitionsmittel und einer Neu
festsetzung der nationalen Prioritäten umweltpolitische Erfolge errungen werden können.
1
1. Introduction
Virtually every country in the world shares the dual prob
lems of an increasing population and a decreasing natural re
source base. The Soviet Union, despite being the country clos
est to self- sufficiency in natural resources, is no exception to this rule. This vast country, containing a sixth of the world's land area, shares common borders with 14 other na
tions. Environmental problems do not respect these borders, as was dramatically emphasized by the 1986 Chernobyl accident.
Thus, the USSR's environmental management policies are of critical and continuing worldwide importance.
The USSR has published numerous general works regarding nat
ural resource conservation (Astanin and Blagosklonov,
Vorontsov and Kharitonova, Kolbasov, and many others), outling both Marxist philosophy and Soviet practice in this area; some focus on Eastern Europe as well as the USSR (Maksakovsky). In sharp criticism of these practices is an emigre work, first published in the Federal Republic of Germany in 1978
(Komarov). General works published in America include two that appeared in 1972 (Pryde, Goldman), together with later volumes such as those by Jackson, Singleton, Volgyes, Jensen, and De- Bardeleben that have examined various aspects of Soviet natu
ral resource management.
The purpose of this paper will be to summarize the state of biosphere resources conservation in the Soviet Union in the 1980's and to identify areas where increased attention will be needed in the 1990's. The term "biosphere resources" is here used in the broad sense of all animal and vegetative re
sources, as well as the land, water, and air environments in which they live. The Soviet land itself as a resource to be preserved will be examined first.
2. Conserving Soviet Land and Forests
Natural resources associated with the land may be classified into two categories: renewable and non-renewable. The former include vegetation, wildlife, and most fresth water; the lat-
ter include mineral resources, and, in a practical sense, soil.
Although topsoil is technically renewable over a lengthy pe
riod of time, this period is too long to have economic signif
icance .
Soil conservation is imperative anywhere, but especially so in the Soviet Union. Soviet agriculture, hard-pressed in many years to meet its minimal planned output, cannot tolerate poor conservation practices. Unfortunately, the USSR, like tsarist Russia before it, suffers a continuing soil erosion problem.
This problem results primarily ffom the extensive occurence of fine- grained, wind-deposited soils, called loess, over much of the fertile steppe region of the country. In the past,
farming practices often were inadequate to protect this highly erodable topsoil. Consequently, throughout European Russia and the Ukraine there are extensive networks of water-carved gul
lies and ravines (Stebelsky). Since the 1950's, there has been a continuing campaign to arrest the further spread of such gullying by planting stabilizing vegetation. This is a long
term fight, however, and the pace of the effort will need to be maintained throughout the 1990's
In the southern part of the Ukraine and northern Kazakhstan, the major problem has been deflation (wind-caused erosion). In dry springs, dust storms, such as those that occurred in 1928 and 1960, can cover huge areas (Pryde, 1972). The 1960 storm produced dust fall-out over wide areas of Eastern Europe, es
pecially in Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Rumania. In Kazakhstan, dust storms, of varying degrees of intensity, are quite common (see Table 1).
3
TABLE 1: I n c i d e n c e o f D u st S to rm s i n N o r t h e r n K a z a k h s ta n Number o f d a y s w i t h d u s t s to r m s
Maximum, A v e ra g e f o r A p r i l -
A p r i l - O c to b e r i n S t a t i o n O c to b e r a n y on y e a r
A v e ra g e i n maximum
m onth
M onth o f maximum ( s t a t i s t i c a l
a v e r a g e )
V e r k h n e u r a l ’ sk O d e ssk o y e K r a s n o z e r s k o y e B a r n a u l
K o k c h e ta v K u s ta n a y A k ty u b in s k K a ra g a n d a
S e m i p a l a t i n s k T s e l i n o g r a d T u rg a y P a v l o d a r
2 .7 4 .1 6 .8 9 .5 1 0 .3 1 2 .0 1 2 .6 1 8 .5 2 0 .1 2 0 .5 2 0 .9 2 1 .6
13 18 19 31 37 37 34 38 37 53 56 49
0 .9 1 .4 2 .4 3 .0 2 .9 3 .0 2 .8 4 .0 4 .7 5 .0 3 .7 6 .4
J u n e May May May May May J u n e J u n e J u n e J u l y J u l y May
S o u r c e : K .F . Z h ir k o v , "0 p y l ’ny k h b u r y a k h v s te p y a k h Z apadnoy S i b i r i i K a z a k h s t a n a " , I z v e s t i y a A k a d e m ii n a u k SSSR, s e r i y a g e o g r a f i c h - e s k a y a , 1 9 6 3 , No. 6 , p .5 2 .
Efforts to combat deflation and dust storms have included such measures as instituting more soil-conserving methods of cultivation, and protecting fields from wind and loss of mois
ture by planting rows of trees around the fields (termed shel- terbelts). Shelterbelts, however, grow best in more humid ar
eas where dust storms occur less frequently. In the arid
steppe regions of Kazakhstan and the Ukraine, such shelterbelt plantings have proven less effective.
One of the most heavily exploited of the Soviet Union's bi
otic resources are its forests, and Soviet periodicals have often been critical of the timber industry's harvesting prac
tices. In order to promote forest conservation, all Soviet forests have been placed into one of three categories. Group I forests are the most highly protected, and in these forests only essential maintenance cutting is permitted. Although a small amount of highly regulated cutting may be allowed in Group II forests, the total area covered by Group II forests must not be decreased, so as to maintain watershed, soil pro-
tection, and wildlife habitat values. Group III forests are the commercial woodlands; these strech across the broad ex
panse of northern European Russia and Siberia.
In the Group I forests, resource conservation is accepted as the overriding goal, and in general these forest are well pro
tected. In the Group II forests, however, problems of over
cutting have occasionally been reported. Since these lightly- covered woodlands often occur in parts of the country where urbanization and agriculture have decimated the forested
lands, unauthorized timber cutting in these areas needs to be more tightly controlled.
Group III forests are intended to be commercially logged, but here, too, certain problems arise. The more accessible forests tend to be over-exploited, while remote areas are lit
tle used, and suffer from frequent fires. Also, since the log
ging brigades move periodically to new cutting locations, they lack a continuing interest in the areas they have cut, and proper reforesting is not always done fully in the manner that regulations require. These problems are frequently discussed in Prauda and Izuestiya; at least five such articles appeared in 1984 alone.
A third topic of land conservation is the reclamation of mined areas. Numerous articles in the Soviet press (e. g., Burykin) have pointed out reclamation problems associated with such open- pit operations as the Kursk Magnetic (iron ore) Anomoly, and have called for better land conservation prac
tices in this and other mining areas (for the location of pla- cenames referred to in the text, see Figure l).For the 1990's, the conservation role played by vegetative resources needs to receive much more emphasis, This includes (1) additional
plantings to stabilize soil, including the provision of irri
gation water where necessary, (2) strict enforcement of timer cutting norms and reforestination regulations, and (3) more effective reclamation of mined areas.
4 ^ QJ
3. Genetic Preservation: Wildlife Resources
The previous discussion of timer resources views them pri
marily as an economic resource. But forests are also a key component of regional ecosystems, which include a large number of other resources such as wildlife. If forests are not con
served, wildlife and other environmental values suffer as well.
The current concern over diminishing reserves of forests and wildlife are not limited to aesthetic or philosophical
considerations. Contemporary advancements in medical research and agriculture, for example, depend on the availability of the diverse genetic properties contained in the gene pool of the world's inventory of plants and animals (Myers). In recent years, references to genetic preservation have begun to appear much more frequently in articles by Soviet specialists on bio
logical preservation (e. g., Isakov and Krinitskiy).
In the Soviet Union, as elsewhere, the primary cause of
wildlife depletion is the elimination of habitat necessary for breeding grounds, migration routes, and wintering areas. The USSR has converted tens of millions of hectares of wildlife habitat into farmland, transportation routes, cities and mines. All of these forms of economic progress have taken
their toll on the natural environment. To counter this loss of habitat, the Soviet Union has established an extensive network of nature preserves, called zapouedniki. In them, plants and animals, as well as their accompanying ecosystems, are fully protected, and many threatened species such as the European bison, river beaver, sable and saiga have been successfully propogated.
Pollution is almost as common an enemy of biotic resources as is loss of habitat. For example, pesticides used to promote crop growth often act as biocides, killing beneficial species in addition to the intended ones (Pryde, 1971, Vasil'yev,
Voronova). Effluents from cities and industry have had a sig
nificantly adverse effect on the Soviet Union's waterways and the fish resources found in them. (The problems of pollution will be discussed in more detail in a subsequent section).
6
But pollution is not only cause of reduced catches in inland fisheries that were once highly productive. Other problems in
clude over-fishing, increased salinity (particularly a problem in the Sea of Azov), and diversion of river water to irrigate new farmland in Central Asia, the Caucasus, and elsewhere. The Ministry of Fisheries has attempted to alleviate these prob
lems by introducing new species into depleted water bodies, and building new stock ponds and fish hatcheries. Neverthe
less, the decline that occurred in many important species, such as sturgeon, has not yet been reversed (Kamentsev).
Hunting is a popular sport in the Soviet Union and is, of course, highly regulated. But there appear to be problems in the enforcement of these regulations. As a particularly strik
ing example, one report stated that none of 300 ducks banded in 1976 on Lake Chany survived to breed; all had been shot by hunters (Komarov). The same author notes that licenced profes
sional hunters who commercially shoot or trap game for meat and hides are also known to excede allowed quotas.
Poaching is also a long-standing problem. One common target species is sturgeon, which is taken for its caviar. Deer,
antelope, and elk are frequently poached for meat. Despite the occasional imposition of very harsh penalties for poaching, the problem seems to continue. Unfortunately, in addition to civilian hunters, occasionally government officials are also involved in poaching schemes (Komarov, Prokhorov, Volkov).
The Soviet Union has enacted a great many laws to promote conservation of its flora and fauna. An important step was the enactment in the 1960's by the fifteen Union republics of
comprehensive environmental laws to regulate the use and man
agement of their natural resources. However, no national law to guide the management of wildlife was passed until 1980.
This act, the "Law of the U.S.S.R. on the Protection and Uti
lization of the Animal World", established nationwide policies for all aspects of wildlife conservation. As of 1986, however, no comparable law for preserving botanical resources had been enacted.
Throughout the 1990's, it seems clear that habitat destruc
tion, pollution, and the expansion of cities and agriculture will inevitably cause wildlife numbers to continue to decline.
All of the problems enumerated above will need to be effec
tively addressed in the 1990's if Soviet flora and fauna, and its vital genetic information, is not to suffer significant losses.
4. The Special Case of Endangered Species
Throughout the world, an increasingly important problem in wildlife conservation is the plight of endangered species.
Endangered species are those whose numbers have declined to the point where the species is currently under threat of ex
tinction. In addition to the most critical category of endan
gered, there are also the lesser categories of threatened and rare, which denote species about which there is great concern, but which are not presently in as critical a condition as
those destinated endangered.
All of the species that fall into any of these categories are recorded, and their status described, in volumes called
"Red Books". The Ssoviet Union's "Red Book" ("Krasnaya kniga") first appeared in 1978, and a revised and expanded two-volume edition was published in 1985 (Borodin). The first volume .of the 1985 edition lists 70 species (or sub-species) of wildlife that are considered endangered (see Table 2); the second vol
ume lists hundreds of species of plants of which 135 have been given the endangered status.
8
TABLE 2 : Rare and Endangered Species of Wildlife in the Soviet Union
CATEGORY ENDANGERED THREATENED RARE
Mammals 23 18 40
Birds 21 25 16
Reptiles 7 7 16
Fish 7 0 1
Insects 9 75 99
All others 3 8 30
Source: Krasnaya kniga SSSR, 1985
The distribution of the 70 species of endangered wildlife tthroughout the Soviet Union is not at all uniform. Most of these species are found near the southern borderlands of the Soviet Union, especially in the Transcaucasus, most portions of Central Asia, and the southernmost part of the Soviet Far East. In addition, several pelagic (oceanic) species, mostly marine mammals, are endangered in the waters of the Okhotsk, Black, Baltic, and Barents seas. The five westernmost Union republics, the extensive taiga (coniferous forest) belt, and the tundra zone all contain very few of the endangered fauna listed in the Soviet red book (Pryde, 1986).
There are several possible explanations for this tendency for the endangered species to be found near the country's southern borders. An important physiographic reason is that these are mountainous areas containing a high degree of verti
cal biological zonation, and therefore much species diversity.
In such areas, some of these species exist within small, eas
ily disturbed "island" populations. Equally important, many of these borderland regions have been subject to considerable landscape transformation in recent decades, which has sharply reduced critical wildlife habitat. A third reason might be
that some of these species occur primarily in neighboring countries, and have only a small range within the USSR. Fi
nally, several of the bird species must annually migrate over nearby countries that are experiencing very troubled condi
tions, such as the Middle East, Afghanistan, and Southeast Asia.
Any country that has undergone as much economic transforma
tion as the Soviet Union will always find that at least a few species of plants and animals have become endangered, but with care the end result need not be extinction. There are several steps that the Soviet Union might take in the next decade to improve the chances of survival of its endangered species. One step would be establish more wildlife preserves, particularly in the Transcaucasus, Central Asia, and other areas where en
dangered species are concentrated. (This topic will be dis
cussed in the next section). Stronger enforcement of hunting regulations is also clearly necessary. Finally, more effective international agreements with neighboring countries are needed for the protection of migrating and wintering avifauna.
5. Genetic Preservation: Landscape Conservation
One of the most widely used conservation measures is the designation of significant parcels of land as some type of preserved natural area. To this end, the Soviet Union has cre
ated national parks, nature reserves, hunting preserves, and a large number of partially protected areas. Of these, the na
tionwide system of nature reserves (in Russian zapovednik, plural zapovedniki) are the best known and most important.
The primary purpose of these nature reserves is not tourism, but rather environmental monitoring and scientific research
(the word zapovednik means a restricted place). Most have been createdd in areas of typical or significant landscapes or
ecosystems, or in areas of particular biotic importance; only a few are found in areas of outstanding geological interest.
All have the task of studying the various environmental ele
ments found within them and the ways in which they may be changing, including changes resulting from outside human in-
10
fluences. Individual zapovedniki are managed by a number of different national or Union republic agencies; there is no single nation-wide agency that manages the entired network.
The first zapovedniki started to be established shortly af
ter the 1917 revolution, though the creation of such a system had been advocated some years earlier. The number of reserves grew rapidly until 1951, at which time they were reduced by 68 % and their total area by 88 %. Subsequently, the system again began to expand, and today there are approximately 130 of these reserves (Pryde, 1972, Fischer, Borodin and Sy- royechkovskiy). The growth of the system is illustrated in Table 3.
Table 3: Growth of Preserved Areas in the soviet Union
Type of area 1950 1960 1970 1980 1986 1990
Zapovedniki 128 90 100 120 130 140
Biosphere reserves 0 0 0 7 17 20
Hunting preserves 0 0 6 7 8 10
National parks 0 0 0 7 10 15
Zakazniki 7 (probably in excess of 1000
(est,)
During the 1970's, the United Nations established a coopera
tive program called "Man and the Biosphere", and as part of this may nations have created what are termed biosphere re
serves. In the case of the Soviet Union, it was natural to se
lect some of the most significant of the zapovedniki to re
ceive this additional designation and, initially, seven re
serves were chosen (Sokolov, Pryde, 1984). There are now 17 Soviet biosphere reserves (IUCN, 1985), and the number will probably exceed 20 by the early 1990's.
The 1970's also saw the first national parks established within the Soviet Union. They are usually referred to offi
cially as "national natural parks", and are created by deci
sions of the Union republic in which they are located. The first was the Lakhemaa national park in Estonia (1971); todsy they exist in about eight of the fifteen Union republics, with three existing or proposed in the Russian Republic (Table 3).
They appear to have a duel role of recreation and landscape preservation.
Other types of preserved areas in the Soviet Union include hunting preserves, wetlands of international importance, and zakazniki. Hunting preserves are similar to nature reserves except that sport hunting is permitted in them; some origi
nally were zapovedniki. "Wetlands of International Importance"
is a new United Nations category of protected areas; the 1985 IUCN report listed 12 of these in the USSR. Some of these ap
pear to include zapovedniki within them. How they are managed is not known to me. Zakazniki (a term that is usually not translated) are used to protect only certain features in a given area, or to provide protection only over a proscribed period of time. They are not necessarily meant to be permanent designations. Their exact numers thus continually vary some
what, but the total numer may be in the thousands.
The network of zapovedniki in the USSR is proficiently oper
ated by staffs that are well trained in environmental manage
ment. Since active scientific research (including experimenta
tion) is practiced in the reserves, only portions of them are retained in a "wilderness" status. Some agricultural activi
ties may occur in them, as well. The most common threat to the preserves is the dedire of other ministries to use all or por
tions of particular zapovedniki for economic purposes, such as mining, agriculture, or transportation routes (Pryde, 1977).
Pollution or biotic invasion from outside sources is occasion
ally of concern, and, as noted earlier, poaching remains a re
curring problem.
A final consideration is that the total area of the country covered by zapovedniki is not very large (less than one per
cent). If all types of partially and fully protected areas are counted, the figure is still only about 8 % (Dergachev). This is perhaps surprising in a country where all land is owned by the state. This means, among other things, that preserved ar
12
eas can play only a limited role in providing protected habi
tats for Soviet biota, particularly wildlife. Accordingly, many Soviet biologists and geographers have called for a large expansion of the system. This should be an important part of the U.S.S.R.'s environmental agenda for the 1990's.
However, it will not be sufficient just to increase the to
tal area. The new preserves must be located in the environmen
tally most critical habitats, such as in riparian and coastal wetland areas. Also, as in other countries, preserve managers would like to see greater amounts of money and personnel made available to them in the future. The creation of a unified management agency for all the zapovedniki might also be a step that would increase their visibility and funding priority at the national level.
6. Conserving Water Quality
It was noted in the earlier section on wildlife that fish populations in many Soviet water bodies have declined, and that one major reason has been pollution. In the course of the industrialization of the USSR, it was perhaps inevitable that at least some lakes and rivers would become polluted. Prior to the 1960's, few Soviet municipalities had adequate wastewater treatment plants (Pryde, 1972). As a result, not only were the fish in nearby water bodies becoming contaminated, but a
health threat existed for neighboring human populations as well. Over the past three decades, increased funding has per
mitted the construction of many modern new facilities, and mu
nicipal pollution has thus tended to decrease as a problem.
Pollution originating at industrial sites is not so well re
solved. As late as the 1970's, the portions of rivers down
stream from most industrial cities suffered some degree of contamination. Certain rivers in the eastern part of the
Ukraine, the Urals, and West Siberia were especially polluted (ZumBrunnen, 1984). Today, purification facilities are alwasy a part of the plans for new industrial plants, but for various reasons, these plants sometimes start up without the specified facilities being operational (Khrenov). In addition, the nec-
essary funds to retrofit older factories with adewuate pollu
tion abatement equipment are often not allocated.
Accidents, of course, occasionally occur as well. Izvestiya reported in October of 1983 the collapse of a dam for storing salt wastes near the town of Drogobych in the western Ukraine (Zakharko). The resulting flood polluted the Dnestr River for over 500 kilometers below the dam, causing significant fish kills, and contaminating many cities' municipal water sup
plies. Several month of natural flushing were required to re
store the river to normal.
The USSR has passed numerous laws aimed at preventing pollu
tion of its waterways. The first national water quality law, enacted in 1960, made the Ministry of Public Health responsi
ble for establishing and enforcing water quality standards.
today, all of the fifteen Union republics have similar laws.
Special decrees have also been enacted that address a particu
lar regional problem, such as protecting the quality of water in the Volga Basin, the Caspian Sea, or Lake Baikal.
The fight against pollution in Lake Baikal deserves special mention. Lake Baikal is about 700 km long, and is both the deepest and the most voluminous freshwater lake in the world.
It is the home of over 1,700 species of plants and animals.
Most significantly, some 75 % of these are endemic, making Lake Baikal one of the truly great natural treasures of the earth (Pryde, 1972).
The primary threat to Lake Baikal has been two large wood processing plants, one built on its shores and the other one near a river that goes to the Baikal. The main question was whether the proposed purification facilities at these new fac
tories would adequately protect the unusually pure waters of this lake. An additional threat was soil erosion produced by all the logging that was planned on the steep hillsides sur
rounding the lake.
During the late 1960's, (but starting even in the 50's) the fate of Lake Baikal became the first major environmental controversy to be publically debated in Soviet newspapers.
Although there was little chance that the plants would not be
14
built, the prolonged debate did result in several significant modifications being adopted, the 1969 special resolution on protecting Lake Baikal set up a commission to monitor the lake's water quality. Should unacceptible pollution occur, a diversion pipeline was authorized to carry effluents to
rivers not draining into the lake. It was later decided to send the wood pulp from the plants elsewhere for processing.
Logging was prohibited on the steeper hillsides, and pro
tected areas have been created at several locations in the Baikal basin.
Despite all this, it is still not clear whether Lake Baikal has been adequately protected. Some deterioration in water quality is acknowledged, and many scientists still feel that some of the lake's biota remains in jeopardy (Galaziy, 1983).
Before the end of the 1990's, it should be clear whether a major mistake has been made.
In summary, the agenda for the 1990's for improving water quality in the Soviet Union can be stated in two words: pri
orities, and funding. Inadequate funds are allocated for building new purification facilities, as well as for expand
ing existing ones. In addition, even allocated funds may not be used; Pravda reported that from 1975-1985 authorized pol
lution-control funds were underutilized by 15 % (Poletayev).
Since all construction in the USSR is paid for out of current budget funds, a new water treatment plant could mean one less new airplane or oil well. In the Soviet planning process, it is to relegate water quality to a lower priority than indus
trial expansion.
7. Atmospheric Quality
The atmosphere is not always thought of as a biosphere re
source, but without question it is. Not only do many animal species spend a significant portion of their lives in it, but fallout from a polluted atmosphere can adversely affect all other components of the biosphere, in some cases thousands of miles from the source of the pollution.
Within the Soviet Union, the emphasis on rapid
industrialization from the late 1920's through the 1970's meant that available iindustrial funds went into building new factories and power plants. At that time, controls on atmo
spheric emissions were as little known in the USSR as in the west. Consequently, cities suffering from these early "dirty1 technologies, such as the steel mills at Magnitogorsk, may not find relief until these obsolete facilities are replaces
But even newer plants are sometimes opened or expanded be
fore adequate air quality facilities are installed, and smaller sources of emissions are often ignored. Kromarov be
lieves that Soviet industries emit on the average twice as much pollution per unit of output as do Western factories
(Komarov 1980). Pravda has noted that air quality is
"unfavorable" in such industrial cities as Krasnoyarsk, No
rilsk, Zaporozh'ye, and Omsk (Poletayev).
In the past, automobile pollution has been comparatively low, but with the present rapid increases in automobile pro
duction, the situation could soon turn for the worse. Truck emissions have always been little regulated, and Pravda re
ported one inspection of Moscow-bound trucks in which half were emitting too much smoke to be measured accurately
(Nozdryakov).
Electrical power plants that burn coal are one of the most significant sources of air pollution. Large power plants using this fuel are found throughout the USSR. From them, millions of tons of ash, sulfur, and nitrogen oxides enter the atmo
sphere each year, despite existing legal requirements for abatement.
The sulphur and nitrogen emissions from these plants, along with those from other industrial and vehicular sources, com
bine with atmospheric water vapor to produce airborn drplets of sulfuric and nitric acid. When this precipitates out, it is known as acid rain. The problems of damage to forests in Germany and acidification of lakes in Scandinavia are well known. The USSR must certainly produce a large amount of acid rain internally, but the problem has been little publicized
16
in that country to date. One outside estimate appeared in the journal Environmental Science and Technology, which in 1984 (6, 173) suggested that nearly 900,000 hectares in the Soviet Union might be subjected to acid rain. In such areas, agri
cultural output could be reduced, forests and wildlife habitat could be damaged, and lakes could acidify. It is in
evitable that the USSR will have to take this problem much more seriously in the 1990's.
In an effort to conserve and reduce emissions from fossil fuels, Soviet planners have committed the country to an
increasingly heavy reliance on nuclear power. Over 40 commer
cial reactors are now in operation, with at least 30 more planned to be on line or under construction by 1995. Prior to 1986, this commitment received little adverse foreign com
ment, and almost none from within the USSR itself, despite a serious accident in the Urals in the 1950's (Medvedev). Fol
lowing the Chernobyl disaster, however, a re-evaluation of the Soviet program has been undertaken, in light of the seri
ous radioactive fallout that occured not only in the USSR, but in western Europe as well (Hohenemser et a l .). Better op
erator training, some redesign of the reactors themselves, stronger containment, and more effective emergency plans are clearly needed at both existing and planned Soviet reactors, especially the graphite ones. This will result in an increase in their cost and in the cost of the electricity they pro
duce, but it must be done. Despite all this, so far there seems to be little if any reduction in the ultimate scope of the Soviet nucelar program, though its growth may occur at a somewhat slower pace than previously planned.
The administrative approach to air pollution in the Soviet Union is to enact very strict standards. These standards are enforced by the Chief Directorate of the Hydrometeorlogical Service, but since they are so stringent, they are often not met (Mote). In 19 80? in the USSR passed a national law setting air quallity management procedures for the country (Anon., 1980a). As with water pollution, the main needs for the
1990's are t o give air quality a higher priority in planning and to privide far greater funding for emission abatement ac
tivities .
8. Monitoring Environmental Change
Over the past two decades, the importance of studying
changes to the biosphere produced by human activities has be come increasing clear. Meanwhile, this type of environmental monitoring is being carried out in many countries, including the Soviet Union. An example of comprehensive environmental monitoring in the USSR is the "Kursk Model Oblast" project taking place in the Kursk region, 500 km south of Moscow. It entails several long-term studies on such variables as air and water quality, biotic changes, pesticide pollution, and soil fertility and erosion (Grin).
Perhaps even more important are environmental impact assess
ments that attempt to predict in advance the probable environmental consequences, especially adverse ones, that will result from proposed economic development projects. An important part of such studies is determining actions that can be taken to reduce or avoid these adverse changes; these actions are termed mitigation.
Soviet resource specialists now acknowledge that at least some of the larger projects undertaken in the Soviet Union in the past have had significant adverse effects on the environ
ment. Examples would be the loss of water from the Caspian Sea, and the salinization of the Sea of Azov, that resulted from building reservoirs and irrigation projects along the Volga and Don rivers. In retrospect, it is agreed that inade
quate advance environmental analysis was carried out prior to building these projects.
In response to such problems, environmental impact assess
ments on major projects have been increasingly carried out since the late 1970's. The controversy concerning Lake
Baikal, which was summarized earlier, helped to publicize the need for such studies. However, the Soviet Union has no na
tional law yet that specifies how environmental reports should be organized and what they ought to cover. Instead, numerous laws have been enacted which regulate the use of land, water, wildlife, and other resources. While these laws do not specifically mandate environmental impact assessments,
18
they do discuss "conservation", "preservation", and
"preventing harmful actions" in a manner that suggests the need to evalutate the environmental consequences of major projects. For example, the wildlife protection act of 1980 calls for "the organization of scientific studies aimed at substantiating measures for the protection of the animal
world" (Article 21). On the other hand, this section does not specifically say that such studies are mandatory, that they must be completed prior to the project, or that they must in
clude mitigation measures. Therefore, a national law that would mandate these concepts would be useful.
Nevertheless, several major projects have received consider
able environmental analysis during the 1970 's and 1980's. The most notable of these are the various proposals for diverting water from northern lakes and rivers south into the basins of the Caspian and Aral seas for irrigation and other purposes
(Micklin, 1986). Numerous studies have been carried out on the probable effects of such diversions, both in the areas that would receive the water, and in the northern areas that would lose it.
These studies have produced some striking changes in Soviet thinking about these projects. Emphasis has shifted from mas
sive diversions form the Ob River system into Central Asia to smaller diversions from northern European rivers into the Volga-Caspian system (Figure 2). Indeed, as of late 1986, the concept of massive transfers from the Ob River seems virtu
ally to have been abandoned. At the same time, the engineer
ing details of the projects have undergone considerable modi
fications to respond to the environmental problems that have been identified.
Another type of environmental investigation involves what are termed "baseline studies" of large regions. Baseline studies provide an environmental assessment of a region at some particular time, to provide a frame of reference for evaluating changes that may take place in the future. One ma
jor Soviet study of this type has involved the vegetation and other resources in the vicinity of the new Baikal-Amur (BAM) railroad in East Siberia. These studies provide baseline data
19
for monitoring the changes that will result from the proposed economic development along the new rail line (Shabad and
Mote).
9■ International Efforts of the USSR
Over the past decades, the Soviet Union has been party to numerous international agreements concerning environmental problems and biotic preservation. These include both efforts involving organizations associated with the United Nations, as well as bi-national and multi-national agreements. An early example of the latter was a compact with Canada, Norway, Den
mark, and the U.S. for the protection of the polar bear. The program has been very successful, and polar bear numbers are now considered stable (Uspenskiy, 1977).
One of the largest bi-lateral agreements was the 1972 accord between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R which authorized the exchange of hundreds of environmental specialists in a wide range of scientific fields. The US and USSR also have other programs aimed iat helping particular species; the Siberian crane
serves as one good example. The Soviet Union has entered into numerous agreements with other countries to regulate fishing in both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. It was signed sper- ate agreements with Norway, Finland, and Poland concerning the shared water resources along each of these borders
(Kolbasov). As a result of international negotiations over a long period, the Soviet Union has agreed to sharply limit its whaling activities in the northern oceans.
The USSR is also very active in the affairs of the United Nations. As examples, the USSR hosted the 1977 UNESCO confer
ence on environmental education in Tbilisi and, as noted above, participates in the U.N.'s "Man and the Biosphere Pro
gram". Two Soviet agencies, the Ministry of Agriculture and the All-Russian Society for the Conservation of Nature, par
ticipate in the activites of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resoruces (IUCN), etc.
10. An Agenda, for the 1990's
What are the most important biosphere problems that the So
viet Union needs to focus on in the 1990 's? Certainly there is a need for a higher priority, and funding, for pollution abatement. T.his is equally imperative for both air and water pollutants. There will also need to be more attention paid to the promptness of constructing pollution control facilities, to maintaining them, and to enforcing the anti-pollution reg
ulations that do exist. All of this will be required to pre
vent serious problems in the 1990's from acid rain, ozone de
pletion, and genetic impoverishment.
It became very evident in 1986 that major changes will need to be instituted in the management and design of the commer
cial nuclear energy program, particularly that portion of it involving graphite (RBMK) reactors. This will be especially necessary in order to avoid a repetition of the tragedy at Chernobyl.
The longstanding fight against soil erosion must be contin
ued, and still better reclamation and reforestation of gul
lies, mined lands, and timber harvesting areas must be empha
sized .
Accelerating the pace of environmental education should also be a goal for the 1990's. This can be done both in the school system and by conservation organizations. Although citizen conservation groups, such as the All-Russian Society for the Conservation of Nature, do exist in the U.S.S.R. and perform a valuable education function, in general public input into environmental policy decisions at the governmental level is not great. No citizen environmental group in the Soviet Union enjoys the degree of political influence that organizations such as the Green Party in Germany or the Sierre Club in the United States can wield. Still, even within the framework of the Soviet system, a greater degree of responsiveness to the public's environmental concerns could be instituted, although this might well need some decentralization of decision-mak
ing .
21
Greater attention will have to be paid to biotic preserva
tion, and especially to endangered species, during the next decade. Part of this will involve creating more nature re
serves (zapovedniki) and other types of protected areas, par
ticularly in the southern portions of the country, and espe
cially in critical habitats (riparian and coastal areas, etc.). Also needed are more agreements with neighboring coun
tries to protect a wide variety of migratory species. The fight against poaching will need to be made more effective, and losses from habitat destruction and pesticides decreased.
A law on the preservation of vegetation is also needed.
Two institutional changes that have been identified are the need for a single national agency to manage the zapovedniki network, and for a national law to mandate and govern the preparation of environmental impact assessments. At present, both of these important functions are carried out in a rather uncoordinated manner.
Even if significant advances occur in all these areas, new forms of pollution and new technologies will cause new prob
lems to arise. As consequence, there is a difficulty in allo
cating resources to accomplish all the environmental tasks that can be identified for the foreseeable future. And even if resources are available (and so far they were not), long periods of time may be neede to accomplish these goals. .Se
rious problems exist that cannot be resolved in one or even two five-year plans, with acid rain serving as just one good example.
In summary, it is clear that in the 1990's more funds for resource conservation and pollution control will need to be allocated. In addition to this, however, the Soviet political proecess must increase its level of awareness of environmental problems, and be willing to give biosphere protection a
significantly higher priority than it enjoys at present. Only in this way can the quality of the Soviet environment not suffer further, and perhaps irreparable, harm in the process of advancing the development of the nation's economy.
REFERENCES
NOTE: In the entries that follow, "CDSP" refers to the journal Current Digest of the Soviet Press.
Anon. (1980a). Law of the U.S.S.R. on Air Quality. CDSP 32(28), 9-12 and 19.
Anon. (1980b), Law of the U.S.S.R. on the Protection and Utilization of the Animal World, CDSP, 32(29), 10-14 and 24.
Astanin, L. P. and Blagosklonov, K. N. (1983). Conser
vation of nature. Moscow, Progress Publishers.
Borodin, A. M., ed. (1985). Krasnaya kniga SSSR. (2 vols.) Moskva, Izdat. Lesnayaprom.
Borodin, A. M. and Syroyechkovskiy, Ye. Ye., eds.
(1983). Zapovedniki SSSR. Moskva, Izdat.
Lesnayaprom.
Burykin, A. (1983). "Not by Ore Alone", Pravda, Aug.
29, 1983, p. 7, as translated in CDSP 35(35), 22.
DeBardeleben, J. (1985). The Environment and Marxism- Leninism. Boulder: Westview Press.
Dergachev, V. A. (1986). "Osobennosti organizatsii prirodookhrannoy deyatel'nosti v beregovoy zone morey SSSR", Izvestiya vsesoyuznogo geografich- eskogo obshchestva, 118(3), 207- 214.
Fischer, D. (1981). "Nature Reserves of the Soviet
Union: An Inventory", Soviet Geography: Review and Translation, 22, 500- 522.
Galaziy, G. I (1981) "The Ecosystem of Lake Baikal and Problems of Environmental Protection", Soviet Geography: Review and Translation, 22(4), 217-225.
Goldman, M. (1972). The Spoils of Progress. Cambridge:
The MIT Press.
Grin, A. M. (ed.). (1980). Izuchenie i otsenka
vozdeistvia cheloveka na prirodu. Moskva: Akademii nauk SSSR, Institut geografii.
Hohenemser, C. et a l . (1986). "Chernobyl: An Early Re
port", Environment, 28(5), 6-13, 30-43.
Isakov, Yu. and Krinitskiy, V. "The System of Protected Natural Areas in the USSR and Prospects for Its Development", Soviet Geography 27(2), 102-114.
IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources). (1985). 1985 United Na-
23
tions List of Nationa Parks and Protected Areas.
Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.
Jackson, W. A. D. (ed.) (1978). Soviet Resource Manage
ment and the Environment. Columbus: AAASS.
Jensen, R . , Shabad, T., and Wright, A. (eds.). (1983).
Soviet Natural Resources in the World Economy.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kamentsev, V. (1984). "The fish on our table", Lit.
gazeta, Sept. 12, 10, as translated in CDSP, 36(38), 12-13.
Khrenov, Yu. (1985). "Who is Indebted to Nature", Izvestiya, June 8, 1985, p. 2, as translated in CDSP 37(23) , 22.
Kolbasov, 0. (1983). Ecology: Politcal Institutions and Legislation. Moscow, Progress Publishers.
Komarov, Boris. (1980). The Destruction of Nature in the Soviet Union. White Plains, M. E. Sharpe.
Maksakovsky, V. P. (1983). The Rational Utilization of Natural Resources and the Protection of the
Environment. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Medvedev, Z. (1979). Nuclear Disaster in the Urals. New York, Norton.
Micklin, P. (1986). "The Status of the Soviet Union's North-South Water Transfer Projects Before Their Abandonment in 1985-86", Soviet Geography, 27(5),
287-329.
Mote, V. (1978). "Soviet Atmospheric Resource Manage
ment", in Jackson, op. cit., 204-214.
Myers, N. (1983). A Wealth of Wild Species. Boulder, Westview Press.
Nozdryakov, A. (1977). "The City and the Automobile", Pravda, Nov. 22, 1977, p. 3, as translated in CDSP 29(47), 6.
Poletayev, P. (1986). "Responsible for Nature", Pravda, June 5, 1986, p. 3, as translated in CDSP, 38(23), p. 23.
Prokhorov, V. (1983). "Can the Marmot Sleep?", Pravda, Oct. 21, 3, as translated in CDSP, 35(42), 20.
Pryde, P. R. (1971). "Soviet Pesticides", Environment, 13(9), 16- 24.
Pryde, P. R. (1972). Conservation in the Soviet Union.
Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Pryde, P. R. (1977). "Recent Trends in Preserved Natu
ral Areas in the U.S.S.R.", Environmental Conser
vation, 4(3), 173-8.
Pryde, P. R. (1983). "The 'Decade of the Environment' in the U.S.S.R.", Science, 220, 274-9.
Pryde, P . R . Union",
(1984). "Biosphere Reserves in the Soviet Soviet Geography, 25(6), 398-408.
Pryde, P. R. (1986). "Strategies and Problems of Wildlife Preservation in the USSR", Biological Conservation, 36(4), 351- 374.
Shabad, T. and Mote, V. (1977). Gateway to Siberian Re
sources (The BAM). New York: John Wiley.
Singleton, F. (ed.) (1976). Environmental Misuse in the Soviet Union. New York: Praeger.
Sokolov, V. (1981). "The Biosphere Reserve Concept in the USSR", Ambio, 10(2-3), 97-101.
Stebelsky, I. (1974). "Environmental Deterioration in the Central Russian Black Earth Region: the Case of Soil Erosion", The Canadian Geographer, 18(3), 232-249 .
Uspenskiy, S. M., e d . (1977). Belyy rnedved' i yego okhrana v Sovetskoy Arktike. Moskva, Min.
Sei'khoz.
Vasil'yev, V. P., ed. (1983). Okhrana okruzhayushchey sredi pri ispol'zovanii pestitsidov. Kiev,
"Urozhay".
Volgyes, I. (1974). Environmental Deterioration in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. New York:
Praeger.
Volkov, 0. (1980). "Poacher's Path", Lit. gazeta, Feb.
6, 1980, p. 11, as translated in CDSP, 32(7), 16 and 24.
Voronova, L. D., e d . (1977). Uliyaniye pestitsidov na dikikh zhivotnykh nazemnykh i vodnykh ekosistem.
Moskva, MSKh SSSR.
Vorontsov, A. and Kharitonova, N. (1977). Okhrana prirody. Moskva: Izdat. "Lesprom".
Zakharko, V. (1984). "Northern Water for the South", Izvestiya, June 22, 1984, p. 2, as translated in CDSP 36(25), 1-3.
ZumBrunnen, C. (1984). "A Review of Soviet Water Qual
ity Management: Theory and Practice", in Demko, G.
and Fuchs, R. (eds.), Geographical Studies on the Soviet Union. Chicago: University of Chicago.
