THE GEF FOREST BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION PROJECT AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION IN THE BELOVEZHSKAYA PUSHCHA
Alexandr I. Luchkov,
Alexei G. Artuchevsky,
Nature Protected Territories and
Hunting Grounds Division of the President's
Affairs Management Department
of the Republic of Belarus,
Minsk,
Belarus
INTRODUCTION
The 1500 km2 Bialowieza Forest of Poland and Belarus is the last remnant of the once vast lowland primeval forest of Europe. The first known records of the Belovezhskaya Pushcha are from Herodotus (about 450 B.C.), who wrote about tribes dwelling in the valleys of the Narev, Lesnaya and Narevka rivers. Dense virgin forests, inhabited by aurochs (wild oxen), tarpans (wild horses), bison, moose, bears, wild boars, deer and other wildlife, are mentioned in the Ipatievskaya Chronicles of 983. At that time, the territory of the present Pushcha and vast forested areas along the banks of the Nieman, Shchara, Yaselda and Bug rivers, and their tributaries, were populated by the Yatviagi, a tribe of Lithuanian priests. Princes from Lithuania, Polish kings and Russian tsars have successively protected the Belovezhskaya Pushcha since the 14th century. With the exception of certain extinct species such as the aurochs, the tarpan and the bear, the Belovezhskaya Pushcha still provides a view of the flora, fauna and natural processes of the original primeval forest.
Figure 64. Young Eagle Owl
in alder wood. Forestry Jas'en,
Belovezhskaya Pushcha,
May 2001 (JE)
Over half of the forest is old growth (100 years or more) in natural conditions; some forest stands are from 250 to 350 years old, and there are individual trees from 350 to 600 years old. Three features characterise the Pushcha: effective long-term protection of relict forest patterns and processes, high diversity and richness in ecosystems, and its significance as research site due to its location in the transition zone between European Deciduous Forest and Eurasian Coniferous Forest. This provides the Belovezhskaya Pushcha with special biogeographical, climatical, hydrological, natural and cultural conditions.
THE GEF BELOVEZHSKAYA PUSHCHA FOREST BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION PROJECT
Given the above-mentioned importance of this forest complex, a systematic research project was initiated by the World Bank in 1993. This GEF-funded project (Global Ecology Facility) supported efforts to conserve biodiversity in the Belovezhskaya Pushcha. The aims of the project were to:
- develop and implement scientifically-orientated techniques and methods for biodiversity conservation;
- institute control over forest management and other land use research (e.g. ecological agriculture);
- adjust the boundaries of the protected areas to reflect the maintenance requirements of a self-sustaining ecosystem. The project contributed towards this goal by providing technical training and new tools such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS).
The results of the GEF Belovezhskaya Pushcha Forest Biodiversity Conservation Project have already been published in a book edited by Luchkov, Tolkach, Berwick and Brylski (Minsk, 1997). The management actions that have been generated by this project are diverse and highlight a number of initiatives that need to be followed. The main recommended management actions are as follows:
- adding four areas of botanical and hydrological importance;
- protecting riparian corridors in the Support Zone;
- establishing supporting regulations and policies for the zones and associated activities;
- re-zoning sanitation cutting to leave dead wood in natural areas (such as the Wilderness and Conservation Zones) and increase its removal in economic areas;
- reducing ungulate populations and eliminating artificial winter feeding;
- providing anti-helminth treatment if still necessary after population reductions;
- establishing a bison exchange programme based on population viability requirements;
- reducing or stopping wolf harvest;
- cloning rare plants, screening sites, and re-establishing natural populations;
- developing extension programmes for new landowners in ecological agriculture and associated trade technologies;
- developing extension and assistance programmes for nature-based tourism development;
- establishing a programme to involve local public in land use planning through education, committee memberships, extension, and public meetings;
- providing GIS as an extension tool and developing it as an analytic tool;
- planning the next phase of research, development, and management by employing an ecosystem analysis approach.
IMPLEMENTATION OF MANAGEMENT ACTIONS FOLLOWING THE COMPLETION OF THE GEF PROJECT
Zoning actions. Boundary adjustments were made after the completion of the GEF project to include special territories in the Belovezhskaya Pushcha such as the Dikoie Botanic Sanctuary (a total of 7539 ha), several reclamation sites (366 ha), agricultural lands from collective farms (1436 ha), as well as collective farms' forests (7570 ha). These lands were assessed as a result of concern about the sustainable development of the Belovezhskaya Pushcha National Park. Moreover, a 500-metre wide riparian protection zone alongside main streams and wetlands has been included in the Belovezhskaya Pushcha National Park. Such an action enables these linear riparian zones to be used as wildlife travel corridors between otherwise isolated populations in fragmented habitats.
Forestry Management reflects two issues confronting the Belovezhskaya Pushcha: the lack of regeneration in old mature stands, and the transition to a spruce monoculture with a reduced presence of pine, oak and ash, typical of the climax lowland forest. In some places, forestry management is now directed towards fencing off areas with rare and vanishing tree species such as silver fir, maple and lime, because of the heavy pressure caused by high ungulate populations as a result of artificial feeding. In the managed-use buffer (Support) zone, various forestry activities include fire protection, harvesting, regeneration, thinning, haymaking, and mushroom and berry collection.
Particular management challenges are to understand the pathologies of old-growth stands, and how to enhance regeneration in pine and oak stands, particularly through reducing the number of wild herbivores who consume regenerative growth and modify the environment in other ways harmful to healthy forest development. The stock of reproductive silver fir trees in the Tisovka Woods, which have been added to the Belovezhskaya Pushcha, had fallen to only 20 individual examples. After fencing, a number of instances of fresh sprouting and regeneration have been observed.
Figure 65. Narev river and
sauna near Rudjna (OdB)
Wildlife Management during recent years has mainly addressed the need to decrease the artificially high number of wild ungulates maintained through an expensive feeding programme. The project's research has suggested reducing the excessive number of artificially fed wild ungulates (red deer by 50-75%), while feeding bison only during occasional periods of stress. As a result of such management actions, the total numbers of red deer and wild boar have reduced significantly (by approximately 30% and 40 % respectively).
Over the 1997-2001 period, the programme of bison resettlement has continued. More than twenty individuals were transported to new suitable habitats both in the Republic of Belarus and abroad.
Figure 66. Hole made by
Otter to enable it to fish
below the icecap.
Lake Lyadskoie,
Belovezhskaya Pushcha,
February 2001 (OdB)
Agricultural Management reflects the conversion of over 60% of wetlands within the interior Support Zone to agricultural uses. This loss of natural systems has reduced biodiversity in the Belovezhskaya Pushcha through both the conversion itself and through the diversion of water to fields by ditching and draining bogs and marshes. To ensure the conservation of several threatened unique complexes rich in biodiversity, four areas were incorporated into the Belovezhskaya Pushcha National Park: the Dikoie Bogs, the Tisovka Woods, the Diky Nikor, and the Glubanets. This required the withdrawal of thousands of hectares of agricultural lands and the decommissioning of drainage structures. These actions have stabilised the wetland ecosystem hydrology and preserved an important relict grove of silver fir.
CONCLUSIONS
The zoning and management actions have both taken advantage of tools acquired by the National Park within the GEF project, most notably Geographic Information System (GIS). With the assistance of different scientific institutes, several GIS modules were created covering topography, forest vegetation, soils, and various themes reflecting rare plant locations, home ranges and forage resources of specific animals, extent of pollutants etc.
This brief summary of the outcomes of the GEF project has lacked the space to describe many of the closely related activities performed within the project which have also had a significant importance. For example, Poland and Belarus have co-hosted sessions of their mutual scientific councils every year since 1996, several programmes on raising public awareness were carried out in the National Park and, with a contribution by the park's staff, a Nature-based Tourism Development Programme has been actively implemented.
This document has reviewed the follow-up actions to the GEF grant. Some of the management implications have already been acted upon, and programmes have been initiated by the government and the Belovezhskaya Pushcha management. For example, local residents have been included for the first time on the Park steering committee, reducing the ungulate populations has begun, drained wetlands have been incorporated into the Belovezhskaya Pushcha protected area, and commercial nature-based tourism and hunting development has started. To preserve the natural forests of the Belovezhskaya Pushcha, a special Husbandry and Game Hunting Area "Shereshevskoye" has been set up in the Support Zone of the State National Park. In this way a start could be made with reducing ungulate populations in the National Park itself without harmful economic consequences. The outcomes of the GEF project also point towards forestry and agricultural management actions to match properly ecological and economic goals. Looking to the future, the GEF-funded project stresses the importance of systematic planning the next phase of research, development, and management, through employing an ecosystem analysis approach.