План управленияold.greenlogic.by/content/files/Elnya/Documents/EngPlan... · Web viewplace wastes, except for placing consumer wastes at areas allocated for the purposes

YELNYA REPUBLICAN LANDSCAPE RESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN(updated version)

Minsk, 2012

LIST OF EXECUTORS

Ph.D. (Biology), Sector Head, Scientific and Practical Center for Bioresources SSPA, National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, research advisor on the Management Plan update

A.V. Kozulin

Ph.D. (Engineering), Senior Research Assistant, Institute for Nature Management, National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, expert on hydrology

N.I. Tanovitskaya

Ph.D. (Biology), Deputy Director, Institute of Experimental Botany, expert on plant communities

D.G. Grummo

Expert on biodiversity and ecotourism D.S Lundyshev

The Republican Landscape Reserve Management Plan was prepared by the Scientific and Practical Center for Bioresources SSPA [state scientific and production association], the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, in 2008. In 2012, in view of the need to undertake additional activities to optimize the hydrological regime and organize ecotourism, the need to update the Management Plan was recognized. The Management Plan update primarily covered the section related to the bog hydrological regime, and description of the current status of flora and biodiversity. The Management Plan is updated in the framework of the EU/UNDP project Support to the Development of a Comprehensive Framework for International Environmental Cooperation in the Republic of Belarus.

2

CONTENTS

Summary........................................................................................................................................5

1. Background Information.......................................................................................................9

1.1 Nature Conservation Status of the Reserve.......................................................................91.2 Location, Boundaries, and Area of the Specially Protected Natural Site.......................91.3 Conservation and Use Regime of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve............121.4 Users of Land Plots and Water Bodies of the Specially Protected Natural Site..........13

2. Physiographic Conditions....................................................................................................16

2.1 Geological and Geomorphologic Composition................................................................162.2 Climatic Conditions...........................................................................................................172.3. General Characteristics, Genesis, and Current Status of the Yelnya Bog...................182.4 Hydrological Characteristics............................................................................................202.5 Soil Conditions...................................................................................................................352.6. Landscape Composition....................................................................................................38

3. Biological Diversity..............................................................................................................40

3.1. Ecosystem Diversity and Regional Structure..................................................................403.2. General Flora Description................................................................................................463.3 Flora Characteristics.........................................................................................................583.4. Rare Protected Species of the Reserve Flora..................................................................583.5. Particularly Valuable Plant Communities......................................................................643.6. Reserve Fauna....................................................................................................................703.7 Rare Protected Species of the Reserve Fauna.................................................................72

4 Social and Economic Background......................................................................................77

4.1 Economic Activity..............................................................................................................774.2 Traffic Network.................................................................................................................774.3 Population...........................................................................................................................774.4 Historical and Cultural Attractions of Areas Surrounding the Yelnya Reserve.........784.5 Research Studies................................................................................................................78

5 Appraisal of Natural Complexes and Sites of the Yelnya Reserve to Set Priorities for their

Conservation and Use..................................................................................................................80

5.1 Biological and Landscape Diversity.................................................................................805.2 Typicality and Representation..........................................................................................805.3 Natural Status and Degree of Impairment......................................................................805.4 Rarity and Uniqueness......................................................................................................805.5 Viability, Vulnerability, and Rehabilitation Capacity...................................................815.6 Manageability, Social and Economic Capacity...............................................................815.7 Special Attraction..............................................................................................................89

3

5.8 National and International Nature Conservation Importance......................................896. Factors Negatively Affecting Natural Complexes and Sites of the Yelnya Reserve.......93

6.1 Hydrological Regime Disruption......................................................................................946.2 Peat and Forest Fires.........................................................................................................946.3 Unsustainable Hunting and Fishing.................................................................................946.4 Unregulated Harvesting of Wild Resources (Mushrooms and Berries), and Development of Unregulated Tourism.......................................................................................956.5 Forest Management Activities..........................................................................................956.6 Lack of Activities Regulating the Population of the Most Significant Species............966.7 Environmental Pollution...................................................................................................96

7. Objective and Tasks of the Yelnya Reserve Management Plan.......................................97

7.1 Site Management Justification.........................................................................................977.2 Key Management Objective..............................................................................................977.3 Operational Management Tasks......................................................................................977.4 Activities under the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve Management Plan for 2012-2016.....................................................................................................................................100

Explanatory Note to Activities under the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve Management

Plan for the period of 2012-2016..............................................................................................108

List of References.......................................................................................................................116

Annex 1 List of Upper Tracheophytes of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve......120

Annex 2 Description of Particularly Valuable, Rare, and Benchmark Forest Plant

Communities of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve (based on forest management

data as of January 1, 2006 and selective on-site surveys)......................................................134

Annex 3 Species Composition and Status of Birds of the Yelnya Hydrological Reserve....140

Annex 4 Recommendations for Construction of Ecological Trails.......................................145

Annex 5 Analysis of Performance under the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve

Management Plan Activities (2008) and Proposals on Updating them................................154

Annex 6 Minutes of the Public Consultations on Endorsement of the Updated Yelnya

Republican Reserve Management Plan Developed within the Framework of Joint European

Union (EU) and United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Project No 76991 Support to

the Development of a Comprehensive Framework for International Environmental Cooperation

in the Republic of Belarus..........................................................................................................163

4

SUMMARY

Site: Yelnya

Coordinates: 550 33’ N 270 52’ E

Location: Vitebsk oblast, Miory and Sharkovshchina rayons

Status: Republican Landscape Reserve of 25,301 ha (converted in 2007), Ramsar site of 23,200 ha (established in 2002), Important Bird Area of 23,200 ha (2002).

Area: 25,301 ha

Site Description

The site is a raised bog with multiple lakes, one of the largest raised bogs in Belarus and Europe. The bog area is 20,000 ha. It is a typical natural raised bog specific to the region of Belarusian Poozerie [Lake District] and playing an important role in protecting the hydrological regime of the natural territorial complex of the region, as well as the Western Dvina River. It has a significant impact on the local microclimate formation.

Most of the mire is overgrown with low pines, but there are also significant open spaces with multiple small lakes and open water bodies. The flora in the bog part of the reserve is typical of south taiga raised bogs and represented by pine-suffruticose-sphagnosum and suffruticose-sphagnosum communities.

The Yelnya bog is located at the border of the river basin watershed. Its central part rises 7 m above its peripheral areas. The maximum peat deposit depth is 8.3 m, while on average the deposit is 3.8 m deep. There are over 100 lakes on the territory of the bog.

There are 405 species of tracheophytes, 86 species of bryophytics, and 50 species of lichens in the reserve. As to the fauna, 31 species of mammals, 150 species of birds, 5 species of reptiles, and 7 amphibians are found in the reserve.

The reserve contains 8 categories of especially valuable sites and plant communities totaling 4,895.4 ha (19.3 % of the total area of the specially protected natural site). They include the following: 1) rare forest communities; 2) natural benchmark areas least affected by human economic activity; 3) natural and artificially regenerated commercial forests of local forest-forming species characterized by high productivity and suitability for the purpose; 4) forest communities at bogs, around lakes, and at river heads; 5) rare complex paludal communities; 6) plant communities of relict, endemic, and rare species; 7) valuable sites rich in berry beds, medical and technical plants; and 8) test sites. 75.2 % of biotopes of the natural reserve area are found to be protected in Europe (according to the EEC Habitats Directive).

The Yelnya Reserve houses a significant number of animal species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus: 22 bird species, 1 mammal species, and 8 species of insects.

At the time of seasonal migration, the Yelnya mire regularly supports about 20,000 semi-aquatic birds (geese – 9,000-12,000, common crane – 4,000). One of the regular migrants is a globally endangered species – lesser white-fronted goose (Anser erythropus).

Site Management Justification

The Yelnya Reserve is one of the largest near-natural raised bogs in Europe. The international importance of the Yelnya bog is primarily related to its function as a site for stop-over on the route of wetland bird migration, conservation of internationally significant paludal plant communities and rare species of flora.

5

Owing to its significant size and watershed location, the bog complex is a stable ecosystem, which is to a certain extent unaffected by changes in surrounding areas.

However, there are a number of factors, due to which the bog can lose its importance for landscape and biological diversity conservation. Disruption of the hydrological regime, peat fires, and the increasing impact of the disturbance factor should be highlighted among the most significant negative factors damaging bog ecosystems and biodiversity. By now, over 50 % of the territory of the bog ecosystem has been subjected to significant transformation as a result of hydrological regime disruptions and fires. Further lowering of the water level and the impact of other negative factors can result in major peat fires and irreversible changes in the composition of the vegetation cover, and species composition of the flora and fauna. Since 2002, well-targeted activities have been undertaken in the reserve to optimize the hydrological regime. In 2008, the Scientific and Practical Center for Bioresources of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus developed the Reserve Management Plan. At the moment, as it is necessary to perform a comprehensive evaluation of efficiency of the activities undertaken and plan additional activities to restore the hydrological regime and develop tourism, the Management Plan needs updating.

Site Management Objectives

The key objective of the Yelnya Reserve management is to ensure sustainable functioning of the Yelnya mire––the largest and unique raised bog within the boundaries of Polotsk Lowland, which is an Important Bird Area, an Important Botanical and Ramsar site––to protect the unique bog landscape – raised bogs with lake-hollow complexes, and the most stable and powerful pockets of a set of habitats of stenotopic species ecologically closely linked to raised bogs and a range of glacial relict species of Belarusian flora and fauna.

Key Operational Tasks of Site Management

1. To undertake activities aimed at restoring the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog to ensure sustainable functioning of the bog ecosystem, prevent peat fires, and protect the typical raised bog ecosystems and the biodiversity related thereto while taking into account the interests of land users.

2. To organize forest management in the reserve aimed at biodiversity conservation by adjusting forest management plans to be consistent with the Regulations on the Yelnya Reserve.

3. To prepare recommendations on optimizing hunting and amateur fishing in the reserve to minimize the impact of the disturbance factor on migratory and nesting birds.

4. To prepare protected species habitat certificates and forward them to rayon inspectorates to be then transferred to land users for conservation. To develop activities to protect them and manage their population.

5. To ensure sustainable functioning of the state nature conservation institution managing the reserve to undertake activities under the plan of reserve management and control over compliance with its regimes.

6. To prepare proposals (a business plan) on organizing sustainable use of the major bog resource, i.e. cranberries, and its processing in Miory and Sharkovshchina rayons.

7. To prepare a project of organizing ecotourism in the reserve, including the following elements:

- developing tours of the reserve and surrounding areas taking into account biodiversity inventory data;

6

- creating the infrastructure for ecotourism development.

8. To organize an awareness-raising campaign to inform the population about the nature conservation value of the Yelnya Reserve, its conservation and use regimes.

9. For the purpose of successfully developing and implementing the Yelnya Reserve Management Plan, to establish and maintain partner relations with all the organizations and institutions involved in conservation and use of natural complexes of the reserve (the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection and its local bodies, the state nature conservation institution, local authorities, tourist organizations, land users, public, and local population).

10. To put in place a system of monitoring water levels and quality on the territory of the reserve, its flora and plant communities, biotopes, bird population, and entomofauna to assess the status of bog ecosystems and efficiency of the Management Plan implementation.

List of Key Activities and Projects under the Management Plan

Development and implementation of scientific justification and engineering project for additional activities to restore the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog.

Adjustment of the project to organize and perform forest management at Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI [state forest management institution] aimed at optimization of the forest use within the reserve boundaries in accordance with the new Regulations on the Yelnya Reserve.

Organizing sustainable use of cranberry resource.

Ensuring sustainable hunting (banning spring hunting and regulating fall hunting at sites of day stop-over and feeding of migratory birds, optimization of no-take zones).

Setting amateur fishing regimes at certain lakes.

Ensuring preparation of plant and animal habitat certificates for the species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus and transferring them to land users for conservation.

Biotechnical activities to improve the conditions for nesting of rare and game bird species (regulation of the population of undesirable species, establishing bird boxes).

Ensuring sustainable functioning of the reserve management structure to undertake activities under the reserve management plan and control compliance with its regimes.

Preparation and implementation of programs and engineering projects to put in place the conditions and infrastructure for ecotourism development (tourist trails, watch towers, special causeways, buying equipment, programs and a business plan to promote the offered tourist product in external markets, and publication of printed materials).

Creating a system of comprehensive monitoring of the Yelnya Reserve ecosystems in the framework of the NSEM [national system of environmental monitoring] and arranging observations using the system to assess the environmental status of the reserve and the efficiency of activities undertaken in the framework of the Management Plan.

Preparing and publishing promotion and outreach, and reference materials: brochures, postcards, guidebooks, calendars, etc.

Making and installing signs giving directions and other information, billboards.

7

Planned Changes in Reserve Biotope Area Resulting from the Management Plan Implementation

Biotope Area in 2008, ha

Area on completion of the second five-year cycle of the Management

Plan implementation, haNatural raised bog (sphagnosum associations)

7,756 12,756

Raised bog with disrupted hydrological regime and post-fire raised bog (heath lands)

10,750 5,750

8

1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

1.1 Nature Conservation Status of the Reserve

The Yelnya Republican State Hydrological Reserve was established by resolution of the Council of Ministers of the BSSR [Belarusian Soviet Socialist Republic] No 342 dated November 18, 1968. Initially, the boundaries of the nature conservation site coincided with those of the mire. However, in accordance with a later resolution of the Council of Ministers of the BSSR (No 103 dated April 1, 1981), the reserve was expanded by 6,800 ha by creating a buffer zone around the peat bog, including the lands of the state forestry.

To implement Instruction of the President of the Republic of Belarus No 108rp dated May 12, 2005 On Certain Measures to Improve the System of Regulatory Legal Acts and the National Register of Legal Acts of the Republic of Belarus, transformation of the Yelnya Reserve was performed in 2006. In accordance with Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus No 1833 dated December 27, 2007 On Republican Reserves, its status changed––it was transformed into the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve––and its boundaries and area were revised. The total area of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve is currently 25,301 ha.

The Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve is a most important link in the system of specially protected natural sites. In accordance with the Environmental Network Layout of the Republic of Belarus, the reserve is seen as the prospective core of national concern. In recent years, the high degree of importance of this site for conservation of landscape and biological diversity has been supported at the international level. The complex of the Yelnya forest and mire has been assigned the status of:

an Important Bird Area of international concern (1998); a Ramsar site (2002); and an Important Botanical Site (2005) of international concern.

1.2 Location, Boundaries, and Area of the Specially Protected Natural Site

The Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve is located between 55028΄–55038΄ N and 27041΄–27057΄ E. The maximum distance from north to south is 20.5 km, and from west to east – 16.6 km. The total area is 25,301 ha (253.01 km2). The nature conservation site is located in Miory and Sharkovshchina rayons, Vitebsk oblast (Figure 1.1).

The lands of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve include:

in Miory rayon, Vitebsk oblast: forestry lands in compartments No 7–63, 116 of Disna forestry section (6,450 ha), compartments No 54–61, 64–72, 80–85, 88, and 90–149 of Miory forestry section (8,930 ha), compartments No 1–52 (partially), 53–63 (partially), 64 (partially), 65, 66 (partially) – 73, 77 (partially), 78–80, 88 (partially) – 92 (partially), 94 (partially), and 97 (partially) of Germanovichi forestry section (8,818.7 ha) under Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI; and

in Sharkovshchina rayon, Vitebsk oblast: forestry lands in compartments No 63 (partially), 64 (partially), 66 (partially), 77 (partially), 81–87, 88 (partially) – 92 (partially), 93, 94 (partially), and 97 (partially) of Germanovichi forestry section under Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI (1,102.3 ha).

9

LOCATION PLAN

123

Reserve boundaries

Forestry boundaries

Rivers, streams, canals

Lakes

MAP LEGEND

Figure 1.1 – Location and boundaries of the Yelnia Republican Landscape Reserve

34

ßì í î

×åðåñû

Çî ðüêà

Áåëåâöû

Ï î äúåëüöû

Ñâåðäëû

Ï î ï ø óëè

Ì èî ðêè 1-å

Äðèãó÷è

Äèêåâî

Í î âãî ðî äû

Áóäû

Ëèï í î

Êàí àõè

×åðåì õî âî

Áëàæêè

Êî çëî âöû

Ëèï àòèí î

Äâî ðí î å Ñåëî

Ñòàð. Ï î ãî ñò

Ï òèöêèå

Êðàñí î åÎ ñòðî âî

Ï åñòóí û

Êî çëû

Ñèòüêî âî 2-å

Öåðêî âëÿí å

Î êóí åâî

Í î â. Êðþ êè

Ñî êî ëî âî

Òèì î ø êî âî

Áî í äàðöû

Í î âèí öû

Ãî ðî âöû

Áî ñÿí û å

Î ðöû

Êèñåëè

Áî ðèëî âî

Èâàí î âî

Ðóäí ÿ

Àðõèï î âî

Ñòåô àí î âî

Áðóø êè

Ñóï î ðí èöà

Ì àëÿâêè

Ëþ äâèí î âî

Áóêî âî

Êëåòî â Äâî ð

Ãàëèí î âî

Ï ëåéêè

Òóð÷èí î

Áåäåí êà

Ñóõî âåðæüå

Ãèðüÿòû

Çàï ðóäüå

Óñî âöû

Ì àñåâöû

Âî çî âí èêè

Òóðêî âî

Áàðàí ÷èêè

Òèëåâöû

Ì í þ õè

Ñóø êè

Èâàí üêè

Êî âàëåâù èí à

Ñòàí óëåâî

Êàòèëî âî

Ï î í èçî âî

Ñòàð. Êðþ êè

Áî ë.Ï î æåí üêè

Êî ëî í èöû

Âàñèëüêî âî

Ñèëî âî

Âÿçî âöû

Êàðòàâûå

Áåëÿí û

Ï àòåí êè

Êðàñî âù èí à

Áàðñó÷èí à

Êóðèëî âî

Áåëî ðóññêàÿ

Çàõàðí è

Ì î í àçû ëü

Æóêè

Õî ì è÷è

Ñóõèå

Âèäî êèÌ àë.


Ñëî áî äà

Ðåêóí û

Òàòàðû

Çàãî ðüå

Þ ðêî âù èí à

Ãðåöêèå

Çàáî ëî òüå

ßêóáî âù èí à

Êðóï åí èù å

Áàðàø êè

Ëèï î âêà

Âåí ñàì ï î ëü

Êðûø òóëè

Ñâèðù àí å

Ôðàí ï î ëü

Äÿãòåðåâî

Àëåêñàí äðî âî

Äóëüñêèå

Í î â. Ñåëî

Âèëüí î âî

Ãèçóí û

Ì àðòèí î âöû Ëèòî â÷èêè

Êðàñí î âöû

Ëàòû ø î í êè

Áåëû é Äâî ð

Ï èù àëåâêà

Ï åðåñëî âî

Ñòàëüì î êî âî

Ì ÈÎ ÐÛ

î ç.×åðåñ

î ç.Êðàñí î âñêî å

î ç.Ãðåöêî å

Çàï . Äâèí à

î ç.Ì èî ðñêî å

Âî ëòàÌ

åðèö

à

Åëüí ÿí êà

Äèñí à

î ç.Êàòèëî âî

î ç.Þ í äèëî âñêî å

88

95 96

80

90

97

81

98

82

91

83

92

99

84 85

93 94

69

65

58

55

64

54 56 57

616059

686766

70 71 72

102 103 104

115114113148

149

132

122 123 124 125

135134133

105

116

106

117

107

118

126 127 128

138137136

142143 144

129 130 131

141140139

145 146 147

120

109108

119

112111

121

110

101100

987

18 19 20

22 23 24

292827

33 34 35

10 11 12

16151413 17

21

25 26

30 3132

36 37 38

58

51

59

52

60

53

45

39

61

54

46

40

6362

55 56 57

41

47 48

42 43

49

44

50

69

7071

116

8

1

9

2 3

4 5 6 7

23 24

38 3940 41 42

27

10 11

25 26

12

46

31

16

45

30

15

44

29

14

43

28

13

17 18 19

343332

22

3736

2120

35

5255

53 54

66 6768

81 8280

797877

5657 58

69 70 71

83

84 85

59 60

72 73

8687

93

47 48 49

61 62 63

88 8990

94 92

91

51

65

50

64

118

117

116

97

î ç.Áëèæí åå

î ç.Áåëî å

î ç.Åëüí ÿ

î ç.×åðí î å

î ç.Ëî ï óõè

î ç.Áåðåæà

î ç.Äî ëãî å

î ç.ßæãèí ÿ

î ç.Ï ëî ñêî å

Åëüí ÿí êà

1 2

3

км

The total area of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve is 25,301 ha.

The boundaries of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve stretch:

in the north: from the north-western corner of compartment No 54 of Miory forestry section, Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI, eastwards along the northern boundary of compartments No 54, 55, 56, and 57, eastern boundary of compartment No 57, northern boundary of compartment No 61 of the abovementioned forestry section, to the north-western corner of compartment No 7 of Disna forestry section, Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI; then – south-eastwards along the northern boundary of compartments No 7, and 8 and southern boundary of the high voltage power line right-of-way to the north-western corner of compartment No 9; then – southwards along the north-eastern boundary of compartment No 9, eastern boundary of compartments No 12, and 15, northern boundary of compartments No 15, and 16 to the north-eastern corner of compartment No 17 of the abovementioned forestry section;

in the east: from the north-eastern corner of compartment No 17 of Disna forestry section, Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI, along the north-eastern and south-eastern boundaries of compartment No 17 westwards up to the north-eastern corner of compartment No 21; then – southwards along the eastern boundary of compartments No 21, and 25, eastwards along the northern boundary of compartment No 26; then – westwards along the south-eastern boundary of compartment No 26, southwards along the north-eastern boundary of compartment No 31; then – east- and southwards along the northern, eastern, and southern boundaries of compartment No 32; then – westwards along the south-eastern boundaries of compartments No 38, 44, 50, 57, 56, 63, and 62 of the abovementioned forestry section to the north-western corner of compartment No 22 of Germanovichi forestry section, Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI; then – east- and westwards along the northern and eastern boundaries of compartment No 22; then – southwards along the south-eastern boundary of compartment No 37, the eastern boundary of compartments No 51, 65, and 91; then – east-, south-, and westwards along the northern, eastern boundaries of compartment No 92 up to the south-eastern corner of compartment No 92 of the abovementioned forestry section;

in the south: from the south-eastern corner of compartment No 92 of Germanovichi forestry section, Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI, westwards along the southern boundary of compartments No 92, 91, 64, and 63, along the eastern and southern boundaries of compartment No 90, south-western boundary of compartment No 89, eastern and southern boundaries of compartment No 94, south-eastern boundary of compartment No 93, south-western boundary of compartment No 87, southern boundary of compartment No 73, south-eastern, south-western, and north-western boundaries of compartment No 86, southern boundary of compartment No 72, south-eastern boundary of compartment No 85, southern boundary of compartments No 84, 83, 82, 80, 81, 77, and 97 up to the south-western corner of compartment No 97 of the abovementioned forestry section; and

in the west: from the south-western corner of compartment No 97 of Germanovichi forestry section, Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI, northwards along the western boundary of compartments No 97, 77, and 66, south-western boundary of compartments No 53, 52, and 38, western boundary of compartments No 38, and 23, western and northern boundary of compartment No 8; then – eastwards along the north-western boundary of compartment No 1 of the abovementioned forestry section; then – northwards along the south-western boundary of compartments No 132, and 149 of Miory forestry section, Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI, the western boundary of compartment No 149, western and northern boundary of compartments No 148, and 88; then – eastwards along the northern boundary of compartments No 102, 103, and 104, north-western and north-eastern boundary of compartments No 95, and 96, north-western boundary of compartment No 97, western boundary of compartment No 90, north-western and north-eastern boundaries of compartment

No 80, western boundary of compartments No 81, 64, and 54 up to the north-western corner of compartment No 54 of the abovementioned forestry section.

1.3 Conservation and Use Regime of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve

The conservation and use regime of the Yelnya Reserve is described in the Regulations on the Yelnya Reserve approved by Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus No 1833 dated December 27, 2007.

On the territory of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve, it is prohibited to:

perform reclamation work, as well as work related to changing the natural landscape and current hydrological regime, except for work aimed at rehabilitation and upgrading of the irrigation and drainage systems;

produce peat and sapropels;

discharge raw waste water in the surrounding area;

burn dry plants and their standing residues, burn wood felling residues;

damage and destroy trees and shrubbery, damage the natural soil mantle, except for forest management work, as well as work to protect and preserve the forestry;

harvest wild plant and/or parts thereof on a commercial scale;

clear the shore and aquatic vegetation on the shore of Yelnya Lake, except for the areas allocated for recreation;

plough land within 100 m of the shore of Yelnya Lake, except for soil preparation for meadow formation, forest regeneration and cultivation;

take water from Yelnya Lake for industrial purposes;

make fires, put up individual tents or tent camps, arrange other recreation areas, parking lots for vehicles beyond the areas allocated for the purposes;

drive vehicles off the roads, except for vehicles of the Ministry of Emergency Situations, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection and its local bodies, Ministry of Forestry and organizations subordinated thereto, State Inspectorate of Flora and Fauna Protection under the President of the Republic of Belarus, as well as vehicles used for forest management purposes;

use vessels with engines, except for vessels of the Ministry of Emergency Situations, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection and its local bodies, State Inspectorate of Flora and Fauna Protection under the President of the Republic of Belarus, and State Inspectorate of Small Vessels;

fish on a commercial scale;

perform tree felling of any type, except for selective salvage and clear salvage felling in case of simultaneous plantation death, on plot 7 of compartment No 10, plot 2 of compartment No 15, plot 26 of compartment No 16, plot 4 of compartment No 17, plots 24, 31, and 32 of compartment No 21, plots 1, and 4 of compartment No 26, plot 1 of compartment No 27, plot 52 of compartment No 32, plot 1 of compartment No 43, plot 1 of compartment No 48, plots 1, and 3 of compartment No 49 of Disna forestry section; on plot 2 of compartment No 56, plot 41 of compartment No 57, plot 1 of compartment No 70, plot 15 of compartment No 97, plot 1 of compartment No 98, plot 1 of compartment No 99 of Miory forestry section; on plot 1 of compartment No 69, plot 1 of compartment No 83 of Germanovichi forestry section under Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI;

12

perform all principal felling on plots 2–7 of compartment No 7, plots 8, 9, and 14 of compartment No 10, plots 1, and 5 of compartment No 11, plots 5, and 29 of compartment No 16, plot 11 of compartment No 17, plots 11, and 13 of compartment No 21, plots 2, 3, 7, 18, 25, and 26 of compartment No 26, plots 13, 19, 20, and 35 of compartment No 32, plots 4, 8, 14, and 37 of compartment No 38, plot 24 of compartment No 50 of Disna forestry section; plots 1–7, 24, and 42 of compartment No 54, plots 1–3, 18, 20, 31, and 41 of compartment No 55, plots 1, 3, 4, 6–8, 10, 11, 28, and 48 of compartment No 56, plots 1–3, 5, 6, 40, 42, and 44 of compartment No 57, plot 13 of compartment No 58, plots 6, 14, and 15 of compartment No 61, plots 10, 19, and 25 of compartment No 64, plots 6, 9, 13 of compartment No 97, plot 8 of compartment No 147 of Miory forestry section; plots 8, 15, and 20 of compartment No 7, plot 25 of compartment No 16, plots 2, 13, 14, 19, 20, 28, 34, and 42–44 of compartment No 22, plot 2 of compartment No 31 of Germanovichi forestry section under Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI;

produce forest crops using introduced species of trees and shrubs;

place wastes, except for placing consumer wastes at areas allocated for the purposes of temporary waste storage prior to its transportation to landfills, treatment and/or reclamation sites; and

build industrial enterprises, housing, part-time residential facilities (summer houses, dachas).

Facilities not specified in paragraph nineteen of part one of the present item are built subject to agreement with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, Ministry of Forestry, and Ministry of Architecture and Construction.

Rehabilitation of irrigation and drainage systems, hydrological regime reconstruction, development of deposits of common commercial minerals, and application of plant-protecting agents are performed on the territory of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve subject to agreement with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection and the Ministry of Forestry.

The conservation and use regimes of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve are taken into account on developing and adjusting projects and schemes of land management in Miory and Sharkovshchina rayons of Vitebsk oblast, land reclamation projects, projects of water protection areas and shores of water bodies, hunting management, forest management and town-planning projects, and social-and-economic development programs of Miory and Sharkovshchina rayons of Vitebsk oblast.

Legal entities and private individuals guilty of breaching the conservation and use regimes of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve are liable in accordance with legislative acts.

Damages to the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve are compensated by legal entities and/or private individuals in the amount and following the procedure established by legislative acts.

1.4 Users of Land Plots and Water Bodies of the Specially Protected Natural Site

The Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve was established without withdrawal of land plots from the land users, whose lands are located within the reserve boundaries.

The user of land plots and water bodies on the territory of the Yelnya Reserve is Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI. Among the tenants of the territory are the Sharkovshchina Rayon Division of the Belarusian Society of Hunters and Fishermen RSPO [republican state and public organization], Obsterno Ltd, and the Miory Rayon Division of the Belarusian Society of Hunters and Fishermen RSPO (Figure 1.2).

13

The Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve is managed by Miory and Sharkovshchina Rayon Executive Committees, which––jointly with nature conservation bodies––ensure conservation of this reserve.

14

Figure 1.1 – Location of users of land plots and water bodies on the territory of the Yelnya Reserve

15

Land user:Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI

TenantsSharkovshchina rayon Belarusian Society of Hunters and Fishermen RSPOObsterno Ltd

Miory Rayon Belarusian Society of Hunters and Fishermen RSPO

Forestry Sections:Miory forestry sectionDisna forestry sectionGermanovichi forestry section

Forestry section boundaries Reserve boundaries Winter trails

2. PHYSIOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS

2.1 Geological and Geomorphologic Composition

The Yelnya bog is located at the lowest part of Polotsk Lowland and is a Baltic raised peat bog. The bog has an oval shape close to a quadrangle. The mire surface is flat, while its central part is strongly domed – 5-7 m above the surrounding area that is typical of Eastern European raised bogs. There are three areas, each with its dome top.

The bog was developing in the region with a flat relief. The existing minor depressions accumulated feed water, mainly precipitation water, and served as the prime pockets of peat formation. The numerous shallow water bodies and very moist depressions created there had impermeable lake clay beds. These very moist depressions––sometimes with ground water egress––became the pockets of the moss carpet development. Over time, part-decayed moss peat started to settle there. These primary pockets of bog formation had a significant impact on adjacent dry valleys primarily covered with coniferous forests. As a result of frequent forest fires occurring over dry seasons, the process of bog formation on the surrounding areas intensified. Poor mineral nutrition of primarily precipitation water predetermined the oligotrophic nature of the bog formation already at early stages of the deposit development.

The site geological composition is characterized by a thick mass (up to 400-450 m) of sedimentaries represented by sediments of the upper Proterozoic, Cambrian, Ordovician, Silurian, Devonian, and Quaternary systems. Sediments of the Quaternary system are distributed throughout the area and are represented by the lower, medium, upper, and recent divisions. Their total depth is 60-70 m.

The territory of the Yelnya Reserve is a combination of watershed and watershed-slope raised bog with adjacent areas of morainal lake and glaciolacustrine landscapes. The site is located at the lowest western part of Polotsk Lowland (the sea level elevation is 136-138 m), at the place of the large periglacial Disna water body. The surface of Polotsk Lowland is flat, with occasional bogs and peat formations, numerous residual lakes and mires. The largest of the latter is the Yelnya bog, which is confined to the low inter-fluvial depression (the second terrace of the River Disna) with a lake clay bed and is classified as a Baltic raised peat bog. The total depth of the peat layer is up to 8.3 m, while the average depth is 3.8 m.

The natural-territorial complex of the Yelnya Reserve is located at the juncture of Braslav Upland with Polotsk and Disna Lowlands, and from the geomorphologic point of view, it is a flat, sometimes hilly steppe plain. The northern, eastern, and southern parts of the reserve are confined to Polotsk Lowland and Disna Lowlands with glaciolacustrine, primarily fine-textured sediments. The western and north-western parts are located within the boundaries of the eastern part of Braslav Upland with morainal rocks, sometimes covered with glaciolacustrine and recent organogenic sediments.

The study––performed by A.P. Pidoplichko to establish the age of the bog sediments within the boundaries the peat deposit of Yelnya by means of the spore-pollen analysis––showed that the peat sediments were accumulated over the period of 8,200–9,000 years in different climatic and hydrological conditions that determined growth of relevant paludal plant communities, accumulation of different peat types, and formation of different types of deposits.

Nearly all the surrounding areas are characterized by a lower hypsometric level relative to the territory of the reserve. The absolute elevation ranges here from 135 to 140 m, and only within the boundaries of the hilly morainal lake landscape the absolute elevation reaches 160-170 m, while the range of absolute elevation is 20-25 m. Positive topographic forms are represented by morainal hills, while negatives ones – by depressions formed by melt water derived from glacial melting and marshy closed depressions.

16

17

2.2 Climatic Conditions

The climate of the area under consideration, formed in the process of the interaction of marine and continental influence, is moderately continental. The alternation of air masses of different origin creates unstable weather, with mild and wet winters and relatively cool and sunny summers.

The long-term average annual air temperature is +5.60C; it varies in different years from +3.4 to +7.60C. The warmest month of the year is July (+17.50C), while the coldest one is January (-6.20C), but a shift of the warmest and coldest periods to August and February correspondingly is often observed. The absolute range of variation in air temperature is from -40.0 to +36.00C. The average annual precipitation has slightly increased since 1991 – from 609 mm (1945–1991) to 629 mm (1992–2006).

The long-term average annual precipitation is 614 mm, varying in different years from 437 mm to 815 mm. The highest precipitation (380 mm on average) is in the warm season (April-September). Over the annual cycle, the minimum precipitation is usually observed in February (31 mm on average), and the maximum precipitation – in June (77 mm).

The average annual relative air humidity is 79 %. Over the annual cycle, the maximum relative air humidity of 88–90 % is observed in November-December and the minimum (67–74 %) – in May. The number of dry days––when the relative air humidity does not exceed 30 %––is very small (the long-term annual average is 7.7), with a third of such days falling within May.

Evaporation is one of the major elements of water consumption in the hydrological balance, which––in terms of the territory under consideration––on average represents 70-80 % of precipitation coming to the surface of the encatchment area. The average long-term total annual evaporation from the surface of river encatchment areas is 480 mm, and evaporation from the water surface during the vegetation season is 537 mm.

The amount of evaporation on raised bogs over the vegetation period depends on the prevailing types of microlandscapes. As to sphagnosum-eriophorum and sphagnosum-suffruticose, lightly wooded, ridge-hollow complexes prevailing on the territory of the Yelnya Reserve, the long-term average evaporation over the vegetation period is 439 mm. As for bogs with forest microlandscapes, the evaporation is 483 mm, while in the case of waterlogged ridge-hollow complexes and ridge-lake complexes, it is 505 mm. The average evaporation for the cold period of the year is 55 mm.

On the territory of the explored area, the general circulation of the atmosphere leads to the prevalence of westerly winds. The average annual wind speed is 3.3 m/s, the maximum average monthly wind speed is observed in winter (3.7–3.8 m/s), and the minimum – in July-August (2.7 m/s). During the day, the lowest speed is observed at night, the highest – during the day, with the diurnal variation of the wind speed well defined in the summer months and poorly defined in the winter ones.

18

2.3. General Characteristics, Genesis, and Current Status of the Yelnya Bog

The general characteristics of the Yelnya peat deposit according to the cadastre of 1979 are presented in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1 – General characteristics of the Yelnya peat deposit

Location(oblast, rayon)

Cadastre number

Average /maximum peat depth,

m

Deposit type, %

Average (R), %

Average (Aс), %

Peat deposit area within reference

boundaries, ha

Initial peat

stockpile,‘000 m3

/’000 ton at 40%

Vitebsk oblast,

Miory rayon197 3.8

8.3

B 96C 1Н 3

222222

2.49.75.8

19,984 636,29793,325

The carbon and carbon dioxide stockpile at the Yelnya peat deposit were calculated based on the methodology described in technical code of common practice 17.09-02-2009 Environmental protection and nature management. Climate. Greenhouse gas emissions and absorption. Rules for calculating emissions and absorption from natural bog ecosystems, drained peat soils, and peat deposits developed and being developed (Table 2.2).

Table 2.2 – Carbon and carbon dioxide stockpile at the Yelnya peat deposit

Area (ha) Deposit type Peat stockpile (‘000 ton)

C(‘000 ton)

CO2

(‘000 ton)

19,984 raised 93,325 49,968 183,385

The study to establish the age of the bog sediments of 0.5-0.7 m within the boundaries the peat deposit of Yelnya by means of the spore-pollen analysis was performed by A.P. Pidoplichko.

The lower layers of the sediments were accumulated in the Boreal Holocene period (9,200-8,000 years ago). The sediments of that interval are represented by the following peat types: reed and hypnum reed and hypnum (6.5-7.0 m), pine and eriophorum (6.25-6.5 m), and magellanicum peat (5.5-6.0 m).

In the Atlantic period of the Holocene (8,000-5,000 years ago), accumulation of different peat types continued. In the first Atlantic Holocene period (8,000-6,600 years ago), at the depth of 5.0-5.5 m, magellanicum peat continued to settle; at the depth of 4.0-5.0 m (6,000-6,600 years ago) – pine and eriophorum (4.5-5.0 m) and scheuchzeria peat (4.0-4.5 m); and at the depth of 3.25-4.0 m (5,000-600 years ago) a layer of fuscum and magellanicum peat was accumulated. The pollen spectrum analysis showed a marked decrease in the number of pollen of thermophilic species (Ulmus, Anercus) and alder; the latter probably indicates a decrease in the water content of the peat site. Recent changes in the pollen spectra were revealed in sediments of magellanicum peat at the depth of 2.75-3.25 m. This Betula-Pinus zone, which is characterized by a sharply reduced role of pollen of all the thermophilic representatives (Anercus, Tilia, Ulmus)––that corresponds to the beginning of the sub-Boreal phase (2,500-4,200 years ago)––has been identified in the sediments of scheuchzeria peat (2.25-2.75 m), fuscum and magellanicum peat (1.5-2.5 m). The spectra indicated a high content of spruce (Picea – 40 %) and a slight increase in the amount of oak and lime pollen.

19

Figure 2.1 – Yelnia peat deposit mineral bed relief

Peat deposit boundaries

2 4 6 8 1 0 1 2 1 4 1 6 1 8

к м

2

4

6

8

1 0

1 2

1 4

1 6

к м

The recent sediments at 0.5-1.5 m (fuscum and magellanicum peat) were accumulating over the sub-Atlantic period (800-2,500 years ago).

Studies to determine the age of bog sediments within the boundaries of the Yelnya peat deposit by means of the spore-pollen analysis [8] showed that the peat sediments were accumulated over the period of 8,200–9,000 years in different climatic and hydrological conditions that determined growth of relevant paludal plant communities, accumulation of different peat types, and formation of different types of deposits.

The central part of the bog is strongly domed – 5-7 m above the surrounding area. There are two areas, each with its dome top. The bog has an oval shape. The maximum height of the mire above the sea level is 145 m.

The bog mineral bed relief is rough, at times dissected with numerous dry valleys that resulted in bog formation starting in a few genetic centers (Figure 2.1).

20

km

km

The Figure clearly shows localized lows of the bog bed. The existing minor depressions accumulated feed water, mainly precipitation water, and served as the prime pockets of peat formation. The numerous shallow water bodies and very moist depressions created there had impermeable clay beds. These very moist depressions became the pockets of the moss carpet development. Over time, part-decayed moss peat started to settle there. Poor mineral nutrition of primarily precipitation water predetermined the oligotrophic nature of the bog formation already at early stages of the deposit development. In addition, due to proximity of the Baltic Sea and the rule of north-western winds, the humidity factor in the area is greater than one. The significant amount of precipitation (about 600 mm per year) leads to podzolization of soil and reduction of its nutrient content, which also contributed to the formation of oligotrophic plant communities.

As to peat types occurring in the deposit, raised bog peat types prevail, constituting 86 %, and the most widely spread among them is magellanicum and fuscum peat. The average degree of peat decomposition for the whole deposit (R) is 24 %, while the ash content (A) is 2.4 %.

According to the results of the geological survey of the Yelnya peat deposit performed by the Leningrad Office of Rostorforazvedka Research and Development Institute (hereinafter referred to as Rostorforazvedka), raised bog deposits dominate almost the entire area of the field, making 93.5 % of the peat stockpile. Almost everywhere, the upper layers of the deposit – 2-4 m deep – are characterized by a low degree of peat decomposition (up to 20 %). Only at the very bottom, at the places of relief depressions, there are deposits of swamp and hypnum peat. This is caused by the geomorphologic conditions of the bog formation. Yelnya is a peat bog of shallow interfluvial depressions, with underlying lacustrine sediments and poor mineral nutrition, which causes the development of oligotrophic flora.

2.4 Hydrological Characteristics

Hydrogeologic Characteristics of the Yelnya Bog

According to the report prepared in 1992 by the Ecological Commission of the Academy of Sciences of Belarus on Assessment of the Current Environmental Status of the Yelnya Hydrological Reserve and its Development Forecast [10], the hydrological regime of the Yelnya Reserve is determined by aquifers confined to Quaternary system sediments. Based on the geological composition, lithofacial characteristics of rocks, and the mode of occurrence, A.M. Grechko identifies 7 aquifer layers and systems in this area (Figure 2.2).

21

S

S

S

MAP LEGEND: bIV Holocene bog aquifer layeraIV Holocene alluvial aquifer layerlqIIIpz3 Upper Poozerie super-morainal glaciolacustrine low-yield aquifer systemqIIIpz3 Upper Poozerie morainal low-yield aquifer systemflqIIsz-IIIpz Sozh- Poozerie aqueoglacial aquifer systemqIIsz Sozh morainal low-yield aquifer systemf-sz Dnieper-Sozh aqueoglacial aquifer systemflqibr-IIdn Aquifer system of aqueoglacial, alluvial, and lake sediments located between Berezina and Dnieper

morainesWell bore. Numbers: top – well bore No; left in the numerator – yield l/s; in the denominator – depression, m; right in the numerator – depth of the established water level, mBoundaries of different aquifer systems or layers

А – B Hydrogeologic section linePiezometric level of:

а) aquifer systemflqIIsz-IIIpz

б) aquifer systemf-sz

Figure 2.2 – Hydrogeologic map of the reserve and surrounding areas

22

The study of the general regular patterns of the bog hydrological regime based on generalized hydrogeologic parameters of aquifer layers and systems and analysis of available materials have shown that the mire formation is closely related to the complex of physiographic and hydrogeologic characteristics of the explored area, which are as follows.

1. The studies area is a flat glaciolacustrine and lake plain located at the juncture of Braslav Upland with Polotsk and Disna Lowlands. The absolute level of the surface varies here within a very small range – from 138 to 145 m, which greatly complicates the formation of surface runoff in the area and contributes to its water logging.

2. Within the boundaries of the explored area from Braslav Upland to Polotsk and Disna Lowlands––in the direction of ground water flow,––Poozerie morainal low-yield aquifer layer is noticed to thin sharply. In the north-western part of the mire it is 13-15 m thick, while in its center it does not exceed 2-3 m (Figure 2.2). In these conditions, the areas of Poozerie morainal low-yield aquifer layer thinning will be characterized by a significant increase in the ground water level––in the early Holocene period this complex in the western part of the district was the closest to the surface and included ground water––and, potentially, by area water logging.

3. The boundary of the glaciolacustrine low-yield aquifer system––which overlaps with Poozerie morainal low-yield aquifer system in the eastern part of the mire and is a natural barrage for the north-northwest-directed underflow––goes through the center of the mire, from the north to the south (from village Sukhoverzhie to Elensky Ostrov area and further to the village of Budy) (see Figure 2.3).

4. On the territory of the Yelnya mire, there are a number of closed depressions, where Yelnya, Berezha, and Bolshoe Lakes are currently located.

The assumption that can be made based on the aforementioned natural characteristics of the explored area is that the Yelnya mire formed in the early Holocene period owing to three factors.

The first one was that to the west of Upper Poozerie super-morainal glaciolacustrine low-yield aquifer system, as a result of the barrage effect the aquitard glaciolacustrine sediments had on the underflow, as well as sharp thinning of the morainal and terminal morainal sediments of Poozerie glacier, the ground water level started to rise in the early Holocene period and that continued until the water began to seep onto lower areas. As the surface in the area was quite flat, the seeping ground water export was poor that resulted in water logging of the territory.

23

Figure 2.3 – Geologic and hydrogeologic section along A-B line

According to the calculations, the volume of seeping ground water could be 110-120 m3 per day or about 40 thousand m3 per year.

The second factor is that in closed depressions with no runoff, as a result of lateral ground water inflow, low areas also became waterlogged and fen bogs were formed. Such lakes as Yelnya, Chernoe, Berezha, and Bolshoe formed there over time. According to the calculations, the size of the underground water runoff to Yelnya Lake is around 640 m3 per day, to Chernoe Lake – around 240 m3 per day, to Berezha Lake – around 160 m3 per day, and to Bolshoe Lake – around 80 m3 per day. The assumption that can be made based on these data is that the formation of the mire started as fen bogs in the south-eastern, south-western, and northern parts, while in the north-eastern, central, and western parts it started as raised bogs. These conclusions are consistent with the findings of stratigraphic studies presented above.

The third, and apparently key, factor causing water logging of the area is that the amount of precipitation in this area is significantly higher than the amount of evaporation and transpiration, as well as surface and underground water runoff.

In the natural environment, the hydrological balance of the Yelnya mire developed in the following way.

The inflow elements include: precipitation infiltration; underground water runoff from Braslav Upland; and the flow-over of the head water of Sozh-Poozerie aqueoglacial aquifer system at parts of lakes confined to low closed depressions.

The outflow elements of the balance include: evaporation and transpiration; underground water runoff from the mire to Disna and Polotsk Lowlands; the flow-over of bog water to Sozh-Poozerie aqueoglacial aquifer system; and surface water runoff to the Western Dvina and Disna Rivers.

The size of the underground water inflow and outflow to and from the Yelnya mire, as well as the bog water flow over to Sozh-Poozerie aqueoglacial aquifer system were assessed.

According to the report prepared in 1992 by the Ecological Commission of the Academy of

24

Sciences of Belarus Assessment of the Current Environmental Status of the Yelnya Hydrological Reserve and its Development Forecast, the calculations made showed that the amount of the underground water runoff from Braslav Upland is around 270 m3 per day. If this indicator is converted into mm of the water layer over the total bog area, it will be only 0.5 mm per year. Thus, the outflow of ground water from the mire will be 170 m3 per year (0.3 mm of the water layer per year). The calculated amount of bog water flow-over to Sozh-Poozerie aqueoglacial aquifer system is around 60 mm per year. It shows that the mire is the intake area of head aquifer layers and systems.

Hydrological Characteristics of the Yelnya Bog

The territory of the Yelnya bog is part of Western Dvina hydrological district, the Western Dvina River basin. The hydrographic network is represented by numerous rivers and lakes, the total area of which makes 2.4 % of the territory.

The water level regime of raised bogs depends on: the precipitation regime, evaporation of water, water runoff from the bog, and mire type, composition, and relief.

Raised bog microlandscapes are characterized by: the spring maximum level coinciding with the maximum snowmelt; the summer minimum level resulting from increased evaporation from the bog surface; the fall increase of the level as a result of higher precipitation and lower evaporation; and the winter gradual decline of the level over the period between fall and spring owing to water runoff from the mire and lack of water inflow due to precipitation.

The hydrogeologic conditions have a significant impact on the hydrological regime of the Yelnya mire. Taking into account that the bog is located in an interfluve, in the western part of the mire, the ground water is partially drained by the Disna and Western Dvina Rivers. The amount of the ground water intake is around 0.5 mm in general for the mire, but its significance for the hydrological balance is high.

The hydrogeologic conditions of the bog are also determined by the flow-over of bog water into the lower head aquifer systems. The total amount of the bog water flow-over is estimated at 62 mm per year, while the calculated amount of the annual flow for sphagnum-eriophorum, sphagnum-suffruticose complexes is 141 mm, and for very moist ridge-hollow complexes and ridge-lake ones it is 75 mm.

As the Yelnya bog is located at the watershed of the Western Dvina and Disna tributaries, around 15 rivers rise here. Such tributaries of the Disna River as: the Berezha River, Rossokha River, Sinitsky stream, Yamensky stream, and Yelnyanka River drain around 60 % of the bog territory. Around 40 % of the bog territory is located at the encatchment area of the following tributaries of the Western Dvina River: the Volta River, the unnamed stream near the village of Vinogrady, and the Vyanuzhka River (Figure 2.4). The annual cycle of the river runoff regime in the reserve is characterized by high spring flood and relatively low summer water level periodically interrupted by rainfall floods. During the fall and winter season, the river water level is somewhat higher due to significant precipitation compared to the summer period, and reduced evaporation.

The average long-term magnitude of the river runoff is around 6.7 l/s per 1 km2 and the layer of the annual runoff is 211 mm. The share of the spring runoff is over 50 % of the annual one. The standard layer of the spring water runoff is 103 mm.

The lowest runoff is usually observed in late summer – early fall, when the exclusive water intake source is deep ground water. Small streams on the territory of the reserve dry up at this period.

The hydrological characteristics of main rivers and canals effluent from the mire were studied in greatest detail in the framework of the international project the Yelnya Reserve Environmental Situation Appraisal and Development of Proposals to Improve it (Table 2.3). The key hydrographic

25

characteristics of the water flows at control points (the encatchment area size, area covered with lakes, wetland, and woodland) are defined based on maps with the scale of 1: 10000. The woodland area includes only the territory of dry forest. The territory of waterlogged forest is accounted against the wetland area.

There are 36 lakes over 1 ha and 82 lakes less than 0.5 ha on the territory of the reserve. They were created in the process of the mire development.

Most lakes are located in the central and south-western parts. Groups of lakes create lake chains stretching from the south-west to the north-east. Elongated closed depressions of most lakes maintain the same orientation.

Table 2.3 – Calculated hydrological characteristics of key rivers and canals of the Yelnya bog

o/w, % MaximumNo Name of streams Encatchmen

t area, km2woodland area

wetland area

average weighted lake area

water runoff at 5 % occurrence, m3/s

1 The unnamed stream near the village of Sukhoverzhie

18.1 2 95 0 10.9

2 The unnamed canal near the village of Dulskie

17.7 1 94 0.03 10.6

3 The unnamed canal (tributary of the Volta River)

7.39 19 74 0 2.92

4 B-2-1 canal 7.10 1 96 0 5.085 The Berezha River 12.8 1 84 0.06 8.46 The unnamed canal

(tributary of the Berezha River)

3.80 5 95 0 2.04

7 The unnamed canal near the village of Bely Dvor

1.51 12 68 0 0.88

8 The canal from Yazhginya Lake

5.00 2 80 0.06 3.96

9 The Rossokha River 54.00 15 82 0 2.1610 The Sinitsky Canal 2.70 5 95 0 1.3811 The tributary of the

Sinitsky Canal2.86 4 96 0 1.40

12 The right tributary of the Yamensky Canal

0.548 16 83 0 0.33

13 The Yamensky Canal 6.75 6 94 0 3.0414 The left tributary of the

Yamensky Canal0.31 10 90 0 0.19

15 The unnamed canal near the village of Yamno

0.86 26 74 0 0.44

16 The unnamed canal 9.31 1 99 0 6.2926

o/w, % MaximumNo Name of streams Encatchmen

t area, km2woodland area

wetland area

average weighted lake area

water runoff at 5 % occurrence, m3/s

near the village of Lopatino

17 The Yelnyanka River 38.3 5 84 0.12 19.418 The Nagorny Canal

near the village of Lipno

2.70 11 89 0 1.44

19 The unnamed canal near the village of Brushki

1.21 - 100 0 0.80

20 The unnamed canal near the village of Prudy

1.82 - 100 0 1.20

21 The Grafskaya Kanava (tributary of the Vyanuzhka River)

4.00 - 100 0 2.40

22 The Vyanuzhka River 8.50 - 100 0 4.00

Water bodies are located at different hypsometric points within the peat bog. In the most raised part of the peat bog (144-142 m), there are such lakes as Lopukhi, Blizhnee, Ploskoe, and most of the small lakes (Figure 2.4).

The hypsometric position of lakes and the depth of incision and location of closed depressions determine the specific characteristics of water body intake and runoff. The whole lake complex is distributed over the runoff area between the Yelnyanka River (Yelnya Lake and Chernoe Lake), the Berezha River (Berezha, Dolgoe, Ploskoe, Yazhginya, and Tobolki-1 Lakes), and Volta River (Glubokoe, Oknistoe, Zhuchino, Tobolki-2, Beloe, Bolshoe Lakes, etc.). Lopukhi Lake takes up most of the central part of the watershed.

Greater depth of incision of closed depressions (digression) into the surrounding bog surface with distance from the highest intake point to the mire boundaries can be considered a specific feature.

The level regime of lakes depends on the presence of runoff canals. The level of lakes drained with canals is unstable and their interseasonal range of level fluctuation exceeds 1 m. As to the lakes without direct runoff, their level is relatively stable and their interseasonal range of level fluctuation does not exceed 0.3-0.5 m. The basic source of intake for lakes of all groups is ground water inflow. The impact of precipitation on the water table is important for large water bodies (Yelnya, Berezha Lakes) and for drained lakes (Ploskoe, Beloe, and Blizhnee Lakes) – up to 75 %. After the work to restore the hydrological regime is completed, the pattern of water level fluctuation is expected to change, with the summer water levels stabilizing at a higher point and with smaller annual fluctuations.

Part of the water discharge depends on water evaporation from the surface and runoff with ground water. Being part of the Western Dvina River system, the lakes are connected therewith by means of canals and the Yelnyanka, Volta, and Berezha rivers.

By their origin, closed depressions belong to the range of relict lakes, which are rare for Belarus. They formed at the place of a pristine periglacial lake, which used to take up the territory of Disna Lowland. Although big, the lakes are shallow. Their maximum depth is up to 3.5 m, while the

27

average depth makes around 1.5 m. The closed depressions are oval or elongated from the south-west to the north-east, with a low rate of articulation. At the same time, the closed depressions are well defined. Over long stretches, their shores coincide with their slopes, are made of peat, and often form a steep or even overhanging embankment. There are low shores (up to 0.3 m), with a narrow strip of sand and gravel with boulders. The slopes of closed depressions are gentle, 1.0-1.5 m high, and made of peat. There are low peaty shores and slopes in the areas near arms.

The underwater part of closed depressions is a flat recess. The maximum depth is located in the center.

In hydrological respect the lakes are runoff water or transit water bodies. The main intake sources are ground water and precipitation, as well as water runoff from the bog surface. The latter play a major role during heavy rains and spring snowmelt.

The water in lakes belongs to the hydrocarbonate class of the calcium group with low mineralization. The dominant elements of the ionic composition include: HCO3, Ca, Mg, and SO4; the water color is high, its transparency is low.

28

Figure 2.4 – The Yelnya Reserve hydrological network layout

29

Reserve boundaries

Judging by the level of aquatic organism development, the lakes belong to dystrophic ones. Blue-green algae and green algae dominate the composition of the phytoplankton, the biomass level is low. The ichthyofauna is poor, only perch and pike are found there.

Resting on glaciolacustrine clays, the Yelnya natural complex, including its large raised peat bog and numerous lakes, accumulates a lot of fresh water and regulates ground water discharge within Disna Lowlands, and has a significant influence on the hydrological regime of the region and its microclimate.

Changes in the hydrographic network and hydrological characteristics of the Yelnya bog occurred in the 20th century as a result of straightening the existing rivers, which drained the bog, and building additional canals there. In the lower peripheral area of the bog, there was also a network of canals built to drain water further into canals of the irrigation and drainage systems, which are located along most of the perimeter of the mire. Changes in the hydrographic network and construction of irrigation and drainage systems resulted in intensified ground water runoff from the territory of the wetland, capturing of ground water, which was a significant source of ground water intake for the mire, lowered ground water levels at the peripheral areas of the bog, increased depth of incision of lake closed depressions, and river and stream dry-out. The lower level of the ground water, in its turn, became one of the key causes of major and nearly annual bog fires.

For example, in the first half of the 20th century, the Berezha River, Rossokha River, Sinitsky and Yamensky streams were straightened on the territory of the bog practically along their whole length, and additional drainage canals were dug through. Owing to the steep gradient––the elevation difference of 5-7 m over the distance of 4-6 km––and deepening of canals, the latter started to play an increasingly important role in changing the bog hydrological regime. Drainage canals flow from the upper central part of the mire and then go through a series of lakes discharging water into the peripheral area of the mire and further – to the canals of the irrigation and drainage system. The study performed in 2007 showed that the following canals and straightened rivers have the greatest impact on the hydrological regime of the bog: the Yelnyanka River, Berezha, Dulsky, Yamensky, and other unnamed canals (Table 2.5). Initially, the own encatchment area of canals must have been small, but over time, the area of depressions around the canals gradually expanded as a result of peat mineralization and consolidation. Runoff depressions started to form at the bog in the direction of the canals.

Thus, over 50 years, the area where the canals impact the bog water level expanded to 300-600 m on each side thereof. That is supported by the fact that wide strips of heathland have formed along the canals, and further from the canals they are replaced with sphagnum bogs. It is likely that the factor contributing to formation of such a significant area influenced by the canals was burning-off of dry peat layers along the canals as a result of regular fires. The area influenced by the canals expands significantly as they go through a number of lakes, which have their own encatchment area. The summer water level declines in the lakes crossed by the canals by over 1 m.

The Yelnyanka River was also partially straightened. Owing to the slow flow of water, canals at raised bogs quickly overgrow with sphagnum moss, but at the Yelnya bog, where the canals are characterized by a steep gradient, the situation is the contrary – owing to the constant fast water flow, the canals deepen year by year.

The analysis of occurrence of peat fires shows that the greatest impact on the bog was that of fires on the territory adjacent to straightened rivers and open lakes. It proves that the primary cause of fires at the bog is the drainage effect of the canals resulting in lower ground water levels and desiccation of top peat layers.

30

Table 2.4 – Findings of hydraulic surveys of the Yelnya Reserve water flows (March 2007)

No Point identification No

Name Morphometric characteristics Hydraulic characteristics

Top width B, m

Maximum flow

depth H, m

Free area S,

m2

Average flow rate V, m/s

Water discharge Q, m3/s

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 81 07E011 Water flow from Berezha

Lake (in the forest 100 m downstream from the bog)

0.75 0.6 0338 0.355 0.120

2 07E012 Water flow from Berezha Lake (in the bog 700 m downstream from the lake)

1.01 0.94 0.674 0.141 0.095

3 07E02 Water flow from Dolgoe Lake to Berezha Lake

0.40 0.50 0.175 0.125 0.022

4 07E03 Water flow from Ploskoe Lake to Dolgoe Lake

0.55 0.50 0.246 0.050 0.012

4 07E041 Water flow from the bog to the irrigation and drainage system in the area of Pishelevka

0.30 0.10 0.0298 0.270 0.008

5 07E042 Water flow from the bog to the irrigation and drainage system in the area of Pishelevka

0.21 0.06 0.012 0.210 0.003

6 07E05 Water flow from Yazhginya Lake to Volozevo Lake (100 m downstream from Yazhginya Lake)

0.70 0.80 0.496 0.095 0.047

7 07E06 Water flow from Tobolka Lake

-- -- -- -- --

8 07E07 Water flow from Volozevo Lake to the Disna River

0.90 0.44 0.310 0.056 0.023

9 07E081 Water flow from Bolshoe Lake to the bog (200 m downstream from the lake)

1.50 0.68 1.012 0.197 0.200

10 07E082 Water flow from Lebedinoe Lake to Bolshoe Lake (150 m upstream from Bolshoe Lake)

0.80 1.00 0.660 0.138 0.091

11 07E09 Water flow from the bog in the area of the village of Kozly

0.80 0.45 0.216 0.227 0.049

12 07E10 Irrigation system in the area of the villages of Turkovo - Krasnovtsy

-- -- -- -- --

13 07E111 Water flow from the bog 0.90 0.50 0.327 0.081 0.027

31

No Point identification No

Name Morphometric characteristics Hydraulic characteristics

Top width B, m

Maximum flow

depth H, m

Free area S,

m2

Average flow rate V, m/s

Water discharge Q, m3/s

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8upstream from the village of Yamna (on the bog 500 m upstream from the forest edge)

14 07E112 Water flow from the bog upstream from the village of Yamna

-- -- -- -- --

15 07E113 Water flow from the bog upstream from the village of Yamna

-- -- -- -- --

16 07E12 The Yelnyanka River (200 m downstream from the bog edge)

2.10 1.12 1.302 0.303 0.394

In addition, practically all waterlogged areas on the bog periphery were drained to build irrigation and drainage systems for agricultural purposes on the territory of Burevestnik APC [agricultural production cooperative], Sharkovshchina rayon, Boevoi Partisan and Parizhskaya Communa APC, Miory rayon. Brilek site at Burevestnik APC, Sharkovshchina rayon, is located 3 km away from the reserve boundary. It is separated from the reserve by the canalized Berezha River and the existing drainage network. The areas adjacent to the site are composed of heavy loam. The sites of Dikeva-II and Nikitenki of the APC of Sharkovshchina rayon are located within the encatchment area of the Berezha River and Rossokha River, 3.5-4.0 km from the reserve boundary, and separated from the reserve by the existing drainage systems and a forest complex.

Zorka site of the APC of Sharkovshchina rayon is located 1.5-2.0 km from the reserve boundaries and is separated from it by the deeply depressed course of the Yamensky and the existing drainage canals. No ground water is found at the explored depth of 5.0 m in the areas surrounding the site. The soils are primarily fine-textured.

Ludvinovo site of the APC of Sharkovshchina rayon is primarily located 2.5 km from the reserve boundary, and is adjacent thereto in some parts. Ground water of local distribution is found at the depth of 4.7-8.9 m.

In the framework of the irrigation project for Kruki site of Boevoi Partisan APC, Miory rayon, agricultural land in the encatchment area of the Volta River and its tributary – B-2 Canal was drained. In some areas the site is directly adjacent to the reserve. The geological-lithologic composition of the forests and agricultural land adjacent to the reclaimed land around the site is represented by clay, loam, and heavy loamy sands. The ground water is found at the depth of 8-10 m.

As mentioned above, the area of influence of the drainage network on the water level lowering by up to 0.1 m on average varies from 230 m (for glaciolacustrine soils) up to 550 m (for morainal soils).

The area of influence of all the irrigation and drainage systems built overlaps with the reserve territory. The reserve ecosystems have been damaged worst in the north-eastern part of the mire.

Drainage activities on the territory of the mire and along its periphery have led to changes in the water table levels. Given the specifics of the mire and the almost complete identity of the peat

32

deposit surface relief (covered with vegetation) and the surface of the ground water contained therein, any significant permanent deflection of the upper horizon of ground water from the surface of peat sediments results in discontinuation of peat accumulation. In the event of a severe drop of the ground water level, the degree of soil aeration rises, and the intensity of decomposition of dead plant parts may exceed the rate of their accumulation, leading to discontinuation of peat formation. Even a slight permanent reduction of the ground water level of the mire may lead to a change in the type of the microlandscape.

Changes in the ground water levels have resulted in changes in the composition of the hydrological balance, hydrological characteristics of the rivers draining the mire.

Assessment of efficiency of the activities to restore the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog

The first efforts related to rehabilitation of the hydrological regime on the territory of the Yelnya Reserve were made in 1992-2002 by the civil society organization APB BirdLife Belarus [APB – Akhova Ptushak Batskauschyny – Protection of Birds of the Country] (APB) with financial support from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Belarus, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (UK) in the framework of the following projects: the Yelnya Reserve Environmental Situation Appraisal and Development of Proposals to Improve it, Rehabilitation of the Hydrological Regime and Prevention of Fires on the Potential Ramsar Site Territory of the Yelnya Hydrological Reserve. As a result of the project implementation, Belgiprovodkhoz RUE developed civil engineering designs for construction of 21 dams, of which 17– to be built on canals in the peripheral area of the mire (Table 2.5).

Construction of these 17 dams allowed for some stabilization of the water level at the mire periphery. However, closing off canals at the mire periphery did not lead to rehabilitation of the hydrological regime of its central part, which is also drained by a number of canals.

The work aimed at bog rehabilitation was also performed by the reserve administration and APB in the framework of the Global Environment Facility Small Grants Program. Besides, APB volunteers also actively participated in these efforts in the framework of the project Save the Yelnya Reserve Together.

As a result of implementing the public initiative on the territory of the bog, Miorskoe PMS [enterprise of reclamation systems] UE [unitary enterprise] and APB volunteers built a member of overflow dams on key water flows draining the central and the southern parts of the mire, in particular: along the whole length of the canal connecting Beloe Lake, Lebedinoe Lake, Bolshoe Lake, and Kurganistoe Lake (dams No 1-23); the Yelnyanka River (dams No 25-26); along the whole length of the canal from Ploskoe Lake to the outlet from the bog (dams No 27-35); on the canal from Yazhginya Lake (dams No 36-39).

33

Table 2.5 – Distribution of dam types by Belgiprovodkhoz projects on the Yelnya bog water flows

Dam numbers as per map

Canal names Construction of a timber bulkhead

Construction of a loose rock dam

2 The unnamed canal near the village of Dulskie +3 The unnamed canal (tributary of the Volta

River)+

4 B-2-1 canal +6 The unnamed canal (tributary of the Berezha

River)+

7 The unnamed canal near the village of Bely Dvor

+

9 The Rossokha River +10 The Sinitsky Canal +11 The tributary of the Sinitsky Canal +12 The right tributary of the Yamensky Canal +13 The Yamensky Canal +14 The left tributary of the Yamensky Canal +15 The unnamed canal near the village of Yamno +16 The unnamed canal near the village of

Lopatino+

18 The Nagorny Canal near the village of Lipno +19 The unnamed canal near the village of Brushki +20 The unnamed canal near the village of Prudy +21 The Grafskaya Kanava +

In 2012, the condition of most of the bulkheads at canals built at different points of time and their performance were assessed: on the periphery of the reserve No 2–21 (bulkheads under the projects of Belgiprovodkhoz, built in 2002); along the routes: from Berezha Lake to Ploskoe Lake (B-P-1–B-P-6); from Bolshoe Lake - Lebedinoe Lake - Beloe Lake (B-B-1–B-B-9); along the Dulsky Canal from the boundary of the reserve at the village of Sukhoverzhie to Bolshoe Lake (D1–D10), Yazhginya Lake to the reserve boundary (Ya-1–Ya-2), and from Berezha Lake to B-2-1 Canal (B1–B6).

The field examination, which was held in April 2012 with the purpose of making an inventory of existing hydrotechnical facilities at the Yelnya bog, showed that out of 48 dams built only 5 are fully destroyed and not functioning. As to the others, they perform the function of bog water retention to this or that extent.

The inventory of bulkheads at the canal from Berezha Lake to Ploskoe Lake showed that all the bulkheads are operational to this or that extent. However, it should be noted that nearly all the bulkheads were made not high enough; thus, the water overflows at the time of the flood gradually eroding them. In addition, when the water flows through narrow bypasses on the sides of a bulkhead, a deep secondary course is formed that reduces the efficiency of the bulkhead in water retention.

Examination of the dams, which were built by volunteers on the canals connecting Bolshoe Lake - Lebedinoe Lake - Beloe Lake, showed that practically all the dams were made not high enough; thus, the water overflows at the time of the flood gradually eroding them. The water flows on the sides, over the top, and through the bulkheads. Instead of repairing the 9 existing dams, it is reasonable to build three or four hydrological facilities that would be longer and higher to ensure the difference in the water level at the time of flood by at least 0.3 m each along the canal. Final

34

recommendations will be formulated after bulkhead re-examination over the period of the summer-fall water level lows and analysis of data on the relief.

Dams along the canal from the village of Sukhoverzhie to Bolshoe Lake. Seven dams were built under the projects of Belgiprovodkhoz RUE, of them four (D-1, D-2, D-3, and D-8) operate in the project mode – water bypasses the bulkheads on the sides, not overflowing. In the case of three bulkheads of Belgiprovodkhoz (D-4, D-5, and D-7), water overflows that may lead to their slow degradation. Two dams (D-9, and D-10) built by volunteers are nearly fully flooded, with no difference in water level. Bulkhead D-6 ensures water level difference of 30 cm, but water flows over the bulkhead, slowly eroding it.

The final assessment of the bulkheads condition and recommendations on their optimization will be provided after bulkhead re-examination over the period of the summer-fall water level lows and analysis of data on the relief.

Out of the eight dams built by volunteers on the canal from Yazhginya Lake to the reserve boundary, 5 dams are operational: Ya-1, Ya-2, Ya-3, Ya-4, and Ya-5. However, they need renovating: it is recommended to raise the level of overflow at dams Ya-1 and Ya-4 by 30 cm, lengthen dam Ya-5 on both sides by 10 m, and develop bypass courses. It is reasonable to plan construction of a new dam upstream from dam Ya-5, as the water level difference is currently 1 m there that is above the safe operation rate for such dams (0.3-0.4 m).

The other three are not functioning owing to bulkhead failure at the canal bottom.

Out of six dams on the canal from Berezha Lake to the reserve boundary, 3 dams built under the project of Belgiprovodkhoz: B-2, B-5, and B-6, are operational. But two of those (B-5 and B-6) need upgrading to form bypass courses on the sides of their bulkheads.

The remaining three bulkheads were built by volunteers; one (B-1) is operational, needing reinforcement of the construction, as there is water discharge on the sides of bulkhead B-1 along an additional 0.6 m deep course.

Two bulkheads: B-3 and B-4 create no water level difference, with water flowing over. One new dam could be built instead of upgrading the existing ones.

The field examination of ten dams along the periphery of the Yelnya bog, which were built under projects of Belgiprovodkhoz RUE in 2002, showed that seven of the bulkheads are operational.

The loose rock dam (No 3) needs renovation as water seeps through it.

Bulkhead 4 at the canal along the mire periphery is fully destroyed by the water flow, construction of a new bulkhead is required here.

In the place of destroyed bulkhead No 9 (serious bulkhead overflow), it is recommended to build two new bulkheads with the geographical coordinates of 55º27΄903N, 27º45΄389E.

Dam No 21 is operational, but needs reinforcing to provide for controlled overflow. It is reasonable to plan construction of a new dam upstream, as the water level difference at this dam is 1 m that is above the safe operation rate for the dam.

Based on the field examination of bulkhead condition and assessment of their influence on the hydrological regime, the following preliminary conclusions can be drawn:

- the bulkheads built both inside and on the periphery of the mire facilitated prevention of excess water discharge from the bog through existing canals and raising the water level by 30-50 cm (by the average canal depth) against the previously observed level. More precise assessment of efficiency of the activities undertaken will be made based on water level monitoring data;

- but formation of wide depressions along the canals as a result of peat consolidation

35

and bulkhead mineralization prevented raising the water level to the ground surface level on a large territory;

- to ensure long life of bulkheads, the following requirements should be complied with at their construction: the dams should be 30 cm higher (after consolidation) than the highest flood level; controlled bypass should be arranged to prevent formation of additional courses;

- a number of bulkheads must have been built without detailed relief analysis resulting in no water level difference ensured by some of the bulkheads;

- additional activities are required to ensure that the water level at the bog areas influenced by canals reaches the ground surface level. To this end, earth bulkheads should be built with excavators to block the whole depression at the runoff. Then it is important to identify the sites for bulkhead construction correctly, based on detailed relief data. Besides, owing to the significant volume of water flow at the time of spring floods, earth dams with bypasses should be built with bypass control at certain levels to ensure their sustainable operation.

2.5 Soil Conditions

The Yelnya peat deposit (cadastre No 197) of 19,984 ha takes the central location in the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve. It is the largest watershed and watershed-slope peat deposit in Disna Lowland, which is at the ridge-hollow stage of development, domed 5-7 m above the surrounding area, with ridge-lake complexes. The maximum peat deposit depth is 8.3 m, while on average the deposit is 3.8 m deep.

As to peat types occurring in the deposit, raised bog peat types prevail, constituting 86 %, and the most widely spread among them is magellanicum and fuscum peat. The average degree of peat decomposition for the whole deposit (R) is 24 %, while the ash content (A) is 2.4%. (Table 2.6).

Table 2.6 – The Yelnya bog peat deposit: shares of peat types and peat characteristics

No Prevailing peat type: % R, % А, %1 Magellanicum peat 36 15-30 1.3-9.42 Fuscum peat 30 10-25 1.3-3.43 Caricoso-sphagnum transition peat 10 30-35 2.3-4.04 Eriophorum peat 8 25-35 1.1-2.85 Scheuchzeria raised bog peat 7 25-30 1.0-1.66 Pine-eriophorum peat 4 30-35 1.5-1.87 Pine-sphagnum transition peat 4 30-45 1.6-8.08 Complex raised bog peat 1 15-25 0.7-3.2

The peat deposit of the bog (5.5 m) consists exclusively of raised bog peat types (Figure 2.5). It is determined by the geomorphologic conditions of this bog formation. As mentioned above, the Yelnya bog is a peat bog of shallow interfluvial depressions, with underlying lacustrine sediments and poor mineral nutrition, which causes the development of oligotrophic flora.

At early stages of the bog development, a layer of raised bog magellanicum peat up to 3 m characterized by a high degree of peat decomposition (25-30 %) accumulated on the mineral underlying soil. 0.6 km from the mire boundaries, at the depth of 2.2 m, sediments of eriophorum peat of 0.5 m cut into the layer of magellanicum peat. Above the layer of magellanicum peat, there formed a layer of 1.0-1.5 m of fuscum peat characterized by 15-20 % decomposition. The top layer of the deposit again contains magellanicum peat characterized by a low degree of decomposition (10-15 %). At early stages, this area of the bog developed as a transition bog––that is confirmed by

36

occurrence of transition swamp peat types in the lower part of the deposit––and then it continued to develop as a raised bog. A caricoso-sphagnum transition peat layer is from 1 to 2 m thick and characterized by 30 % decomposition. A layer of magellanicum raised bog peat of up to 3 m and decomposition from 15 to 30 % overlaps it. Closer to Yelnya Lake, lentils of highly decomposed (30-35 %) scheuchzeria peat and eriophorum peat––each around 1 m thick––have accumulated on transition peat layers.

According to the findings of the reconnaissance exploration of the Yelnya bog performed by the Leningrad Office of Rostorforazvedka Research and Development Institute, raised bog peat is found practically on the whole area of the deposit, making 93.5 % of the deposit volume, while the share of mixed peat type is 2 %, transition peat – 2.5 %, and fen bog peat – 2 %. Nearly everywhere, top layers of the deposit 2-4 m thick are characterized by a low degree of peat decomposition (up to 20 %) (Figure 2.5).

The underlying mineral soils of the bed of the Yelnya bog are lake clay, sand, loamy sand, and loam.

37

Figure 2.5 – Stratigraphic profiles of the Yelnia mire peat deposit

15

б

а

в

Magellanicum peat Fuscum peat Eriophorum raised bog peat Scheuchzeria raised bog peat Sapropel

Pine-eriophorum peatWoody transition peat

Woody-sphagnum transition peatCaricoso-sphagnum transition peat with sand

Loamy sandSand

MAP LEGEND:

38

2.6. Landscape Composition

In accordance with the landscape zoning of the Republic of Belarus, the reserve is located within the boundaries of the subtaiga (mixed forest) landscape subzone and makes part of Poozerie province of glaciolacustrine, morainal-lake, and hilly morainal-lake landscapes (Figure 2.8). The area is located in the south-western part of Polotsk district of flat hummock and undulating glaciolacustrine landscapes with pine forests, birch forests, and bogs. Natural territorial complexes of the reserve are represented by unsegmented mires, which prevail by area of occurrence on the site described. The whole area is located within the boundaries of one type of landscapes – flat with residual glaciolacustrine lowlands, raised suffruticose-eriophorum-sphagnum and transition suffruticose-herboso-caricoso-sphagnum bogs, white birch caricosum forests growing on peat bog soils, and less frequently – with birch-pteridiosum-hylocomiosa-oxalidosum forests growing on sod-podzol lightly gleyic soils. The landscape formation in the area is related to a pre-existing lake, which accumulated peat later on. Its relief is flat, with small mineral rincons in the form of residual glaciolacustrine lowlands covered with small-leaved secondary forests.

The surface of the Yelnya bog is represented by a wide variety of microlandscape. The parts of the mire not damaged by fires are characterized by small hollow––often with expressed retrogressive phenomena––suffruticose-sphagnosum complexes with scattered pine trees (Pinus sylvestris f. litwinowii and f. willkommii) at the top, ridge-hollow complexes – on gentle slopes, ridge-lake ones – on slopes and at the top, hummock-hollow ones – at the lower part of slopes, pine-suffruticose-sphagnosum communities (wooded ring) – on steep slopes. The width of the wooded ring, the area of the ridge-hollow complex, and the degree of its expression vary depending on the surface incline in certain parts of the bog. Lower parts of slopes house pine-eriophorum-sphagnosum, suffruticose-eriophorum-sphagnosum, and eriophorum-sphagnosum microlandscapes, which give way to mesotrophic sphagnosum, eutrophic herbosum and forest ones. The vegetation cover is currently significantly damaged by fires of past years. Large areas of the specially protected natural site are occupied by eriophorum heathlands with polytrichum moss, which formed as a result of recent fires.

In accordance with the landscape zoning of the Republic of Belarus, the site is located within the boundaries of the subtaiga (mixed forest) landscape subzone and makes part of Poozerie province of glaciolacustrine, morainal lake, and hilly morainal lake landscapes. The area is located in the south-western part of Polotsk district of flat hummock and undulating glaciolacustrine landscapes with pine forests, birch forests, and bogs. The whole area is located within the boundaries of one type of landscapes – flat with residual glaciolacustrine lowlands, raised suffruticose-eriophorum-sphagnum and transition suffruticose-herboso-caricoso-sphagnum bogs, white birch-caricosum forests growing on peat bog soils, and less frequently – with birch-pteridiosum-hylocomiosa-oxalidosum forests growing on sod-podzol lightly gleyic soils. Its relief is flat, with small mineral rincons in the form of residual glaciolacustrine lowlands covered with small-leaved secondary forests.

The Yelnya bog surface is characterized by a wide spectrum of microlandscapes. The flora of the bog part of the reserve is typical of strongly domed oligotrophic mires, which are found only in the northern part of Belarus.

39

Figure 2.6 – The Yelnya Reserve landscape composition

40

MAP LEGENDReserve boundariesPaved roadsUnpaved country roads

LandscapesFlat undulating glaciolacustrine lowland

Flat with residual glaciolacustrine lowland, raised and transition bogs

Natural aquatic complexes

3. BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY

3.1. Ecosystem Diversity and Regional Structure

The total area of the reserve is 25,301 ha. The area occupied by natural and marginally impaired ecosystems makes around 98 % of the territory. The dominant position in the natural ecosystem structure is taken by bog and forest ecosystems.

The prevailing type of ecosystems is bogs, which take up 18,506.9 ha or 70.7 % of the territory. It is the largest in Belarus raised and transition bog complex with numerous lakes. Small island overgrown with small-leaved and spruce forests are scattered all over the bog. Most of the mire is overgrown with low pines, but there are also significant open spaces with multiple small lakes and open water bodies. The flora in the bog part of the reserve is typical of raised bogs and represented by pine-suffruticose-sphagnosum and suffruticose-sphagnosum communities.

Forest ecosystems occupy 6,074.30 ha (24 %), and sparsely populated wood-suffruticose communities take up 5.8 % of the territory. The remaining part of the reserve is represented by bogs (65.7 %). It should be noted that most of the bogs in the reserve have transformed into wastelands owing to their hydrological regime disruption and moor fires. The shares of key ecosystems of the Yelnya Reserve are shown in Figure 3.1.

41

Широколиственные0.7%

Хвойные8.7%

Мелколиственные производные

10.1%

Мелколиственные коренные болотные

4.5%

Леса24.0%

Прочие земли 4.5%Болота

(поврежденные пожарами)

49.7%

Мелколесья и кустарники

5.8%Болота16.0%

25 301 га

Figure 3.1 – The Yelnia Landscape Reserve ecosystem structure

A significant part of the bog ecosystem has been subjected to transformation as a result of hydrological regime disruption and fires (Figure 3.1). In the past, the Yelnya mire also suffered from fires of different intensity.

Islands of fires dating back to 1993, 1994, 1998, and 2002 have been identified; their area covers from several dozens to several thousand hectares. A large island of fire, roughly aged at least 90-100 years, has been identified in the area of Korchevatoe Lake. As a result of the fire, the lake area nearly doubled. About 25 % of the bog territory is regularly subjected to fires––at least over the last 20 years––and the aftereffects of the fires on this territory, on condition of maintaining an optimal hydrological regime, can wear off no sooner than in 20-25 years. The area of fire sites is from several dozens to several thousand hectares. There are also spots where no fires have been registered at least for the last fifty to seventy years. The area of such spots is around 15-18 % of the bog territory. The fire periodicity is from 4-5 to 15-20 years. The highest fire periodicity is observed at the tops of the mire and at the spots with impaired hydrological regime. A radical transformation of flora is observed in such areas – no pines present in the tree layer, while white birch trees are very widely spread. As to shrubs, heather universally prevails and only isolated bilberry shrubs are registered. Even hare's-tail cotton grass is registered occasionally. The plant species most vulnerable to fires is cranberry (Oxyccocus palustris).

The fires of 1998 and especially of 2002 had catastrophic consequences for the natural ecosystems of the Yelnya Reserve. Those fires covered practically the whole area of the reserve, only northern sectors of the mire remained undamaged. Intensive field and off-site work was performed based on GIS technologies to estimate fire consequences.

It is established (Table 3.1, Figure 3.2) that the fires damaged––to this or that extent––13,145 ha (52.0 % of the territory of the test area), including:

D e g r e e I : moderately damaged plant communities occupy 1,818.6 ha or 7.2 % of the territory of the reserve. At this stage of transformation, the habitat is impaired insignificantly, the key species composition is preserved, but the density of the flora composition declines, and somewhat increased

42

Bogs (damaged by fires)

Other lands

haForests

Coniferous forests

Broad-leaved forests

Small-leaved secondary forests

Small-leaved primary swamp woodsLow forest and

shrubbery

Bogs

phytocoenotic importance of the key fire indicators – heather and Polytrichum strictum (projective cover of up to 25-30 %) – is observed. In the upper layer, apart from pine (loss of up to 20–30 %), there are individual silver and white birch shrubs. Sørensen’s similarity coefficient (KS) relative to the reference areas is >0.45.

D e g r e e I I : severely damaged plant communities form quite a wide area in the central and southern parts of the mire, totaling 5,268.7 ha (20.8 %). This stage of severe flora transformation is characterized by inhibited composition of dominant species, degraded species composition accompanied by elimination of most species (Ks=0.30-0.45), as well as by seriously increased phytocoenotic significance of heather and Polytrichum strictum (projective cover of 40–60 %). There are small undamaged fragments of paludal flora left, and their total area does not exceed 30-50 %. As to wooded areas, there are pines, mostly dead (loss of >50 %), and in the upper layer (crown density of 0.1-0.3) there are 2-3.5 meter high shrubs of silver and white birch. There is rich (up to 10-30 thousand trees per ha) undergrowth of forest-forming tree species (pine, silver and white birch, and aspen).

D e g r e e I I I : very severely damaged plant communities take up 6,058.7 ha (24.0 %). Their location very clearly tends to be linked to irrigation and drainage canals and lakes, which––while draining the surrounding areas of the mire––have played a significant role in forming fire epicenters. The communities are characterized by simple composition. The tree layer has been destroyed, and numerous charred stumps give evidence of their past existence. The key plant community forming species include heather and Polytrichum strictum. The species forming the core of unimpaired paludal plant communities are not found or very poorly represented (<5 %); Sørensen’s similarity coefficient relative to the reference areas is <0.30.

10.64 thousand ha (80.9 %) of burnt areas are open raised bogs. It shows the catastrophic consequences of the 2002 fire for the protected site, as a significant part of the unique mire was burnt (Figure 4.9).

The fires destroyed or severely damaged (loss of tree strand of >50 %) 2.36 thousand ha of forest stand (28.0 % of wooded area). The area of mature and overmature forests destroyed by fires is 525.6 ha (34.8 % of the total area of old tree stands), the area of dead high-yield forest stands is 339.8 ha (10.1 %); and the stockpile of timber in the destroyed forest stands is 234.0 thousand m3

(21.8 %), of which mature and overmature trees make 92.6 thousand m3 (45.7 %).

Fires destroyed 121.4 ha of particularly valuable parts of the reserve (rare plant communities, natural benchmark areas, biogeocenoses with protected plant species, etc.).

Non-tree flora resources of the reserve (berry beds, medical plants) must have been most severely damaged by fires. The area of berry beds declined by 1,383.3 ha (69.5 % of the pre-fire area), including cranberry – 1,308.7 ha (74.6 %), bilberry – 71.2 ha (34.5 %), and northern bilberry – 3.4 ha (18.9 %). The average annual biological reserve of the key resource – cranberries – declined by 256.6 tons (72.9 %), while the operating one dropped by 89 tons (71.1 %). The minimum annual damage resulting only from declined operating yield of cranberries is estimated at BYR 100-250 million.

The potential risk of a fire hazardous situation––similar to the 2002 one––arising on the territory of the specially protected natural sites is currently estimated as very high (Figure 4.10).

According to the standard fire hazard scale used for forest management, plant communities of the reserve are distributed in the following way: class I (very high) – 13,226.0 ha (54.8 %); class II (high) – 168.2 ha (0.7 %); class III (medium) – 2,975.5 ha (12.3 %); class IV (low) – 5,346.0 ha (22.1 %); and class V (very low) – 2,446.8 ha (10.1 %). The average fire hazard class for the reserve is II.3.

43

Table 3.1. – Aggregate data on 2002 fire aftereffects for the Yelnya Reserve natural ecosystems

Parameter

Damage characteristics

Measurement unit Value

Percentage of the pre-fire

parameter,%

Area of fire-damaged sites, o/w: ha 13,145.0

52.0

Degree I (moderately damaged) –«– 1,818.6

7.2

Degree II (severely damaged) –«– 5,268.7

20.8

Degree III (very severely damaged) –«– 6,058.7

24.0

Area of destroyed tree stands, o/w: –«– 2,364.0

28.0

Mature and overmature –«– 525.6

34.8

High-yield (Iа–I yield classes) –«– 339.8

10.1

Stockpile of timber in destroyed tree stands, o/w:

‘000 m3/ha 234.0

21.8

Mature and overmature –«– 92.6

45.7

High-yield (I–Iа yield classes) –«– 88.6

21.7

Area of damaged high-yield berry beds and medical plant sites, o/w: ha 1,5

36.76

5.3Cranberry –«– 1,3

08.77

4.6Bilberry –«– 71.

23

4.5Northern bilberry –«– 3.4 1

8.9Marsh ledum –«– 153

.44

1.1Decline of the average annual biological reserve of cranberries t -

252.6-

72.9Decline of the operating reserve of cranberries t -

89.0-

71.1Area of destroyed particularly valuable sites, ha

ha 121.4

9.9

44

Figure 3.2 – Yelnia Reserve zoning by degree of damage caused by 2002 fires (as of June 1, 2008)

45

Disna forestry section

Miory forestry section

Germanovichi forestry section

km

MAP LEGEND

Degree 0 (undamaged)

Degree I (moderately damaged)

Degree II (severely damaged)

Degree III (very severely damaged – wastelands)

Forestry section boundaries

Boundaries of the specially protected natural site

Forest compartment No

Lakes

Streams, canals, ditches

021

0

ßì í î

×åðåñû

Áåëåâöû

Ï î ï ø óëè

Áóäû

Ëèï í î

Êàí àõè

Áëàæêè

Ëèï àòèí î

Ï òèöêèå

Ï åñòóí û

Êî çëû


Î êóí åâî

Ñî êî ëî âî


Áî í äàðöû

Í î âèí öû

Ãî ðî âöû

Êèñåëè

Ðóäí ÿ

Àðõèï î âî


Áðóø êè


Ì àëÿâêè

Òóð÷èí î


Ì àñåâöû

Áàðàí ÷èêè

Ì í þ õè

Ñóø êè

Èâàí üêè



Âÿçî âöû

Êàðòàâûå

Ï àòåí êè



Çàõàðí è

Ì î í àçûëü

Ñóõèå

Âèäî êèÌ àë. Êî âàëåâù èí à

Ðåêóí û

ÒàòàðûÃðåöêèå


Ëèï î âêà

Êðûø òóëè

Ñâèðù àí å

Äóëüñêèå

Í î â. Ñåëî

Ëèòî â÷èêè




î ç.Áåðåæà

î ç.ßæãèí ÿ



Åëüí ÿí êà



î ç.×åðåñ




î ç.Áåëî å

î ç.Åëüí ÿ

Âî ëòà

Ì åðèö

à

Åëüí ÿí êà

Äèñí à

оз.Ельня

оз.Плоское

оз.Ближнееоз.Белое

Ельнянка

оз.Бережа

оз.Яжгиня

оз.Долгое

оз.Лопухи

оз.Черное

1

1

1

1

12

3

3

3

33

3

3 33

3

3

33

3

3

33 3

3

3

3

3

3

33

3 3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

44

4

4

4

4

43

5

5

3

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

4

4

4

5

5

4

1

4

3

3

3

4

5

4

4

53 3

5

4

4

5

4

4

5 3

3

3

3 4

3

5

4

0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 2 50

5

1 0

1 5

2 0

km

km V класс10.1%

I класс54.8%

IV класс22.1%

III класс12.3%

II класс0.7%

Percentage of area by fire hazard classes

MAP LEGEND

Class I (non-resistant)

Class II (relatively non-resistant)

Class III (resistant)

Class IV (relatively resistant)

Class V (highly resistant)

1

2

3

4

5

Fires resistance classes:

Figure 3.3 – Map of potential fire resistance of the Yelnia Reserve flora

46

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

3.2. General Flora Description

Forest flora. The formation and typological structure of the Yelnya Reserve forests is defined by a set of natural and anthropogenic factors. Since negative topographic forms prevail in the reserve, paludal coniferous forest and deciduous forest formations take up a significant area (23.5 % of wooded area). Intensive anthropogenic impacts (felling, fires) prior to introduction of the nature conservation regime resulted in high frequency (46.7 % of wooded area) of secondary small-leaved forests (Table 3.1).

The classification system of forest flora of the specially protected natural site includes 4 formation classes, 10 formations, 18 series, and 64 types. The prevailing kinds of tree stands are silver birch (28.4 % of wooded area), pine (19.1 %), and spruce (17.4 %) ones. Aspen (12.6 %), white birch (8.4 %), common alder (7.5 %), and grey alder (4.5 %) forests are relatively frequent. There are fragments of broad-leaved (oak, lime, ash) forests. The spectrum of typological diversity is dominated by stands of myrtillosum (19.8 %), oxalidosum (15.4 %), filicosum (12.9 %), and aegopodiosum (12.7 %) series of forest types.

The ecological structure of forests in the reserve is characterized by dominance of those forest groups, which grow on rich and relatively rich very moist soils and the shares of which correspondingly make 26.6 % and 19.8 % of the wooded area. Forests growing on peat bogs take up 23.3 %, of which on oligotrophic bogs – 4.6 %, mesotrophic bogs – 5.6 %, and eutrophic ones – 13.1 %. The share of forest groups formed on relatively rich soils of normal wetness (16.5 %) and on peaty mineral soils of oligotrophic bogs (9.4 %) is quite high in the forestry.

The average age of tree stands in the reserve is 40 years. As of January 1, 2006 the distribution of forests of the specially protected natural site by age groups was as follows: young forest stands (age classes I–II) – 30.2 % of the wooded area, middle-aged (age class III) – 26.2 %, ripening (age class IV) – 27.4 %, mature (age classes V–VI) – 10.9 %, and overmature forest stands (age class VII and above) – 5.3 %.

The average density of forest stands is 0.63. Tree stands of medium density prevail (0.6-0.8), accounting for 73.1 % of the wooded area. Forest stands of low (0.3-0.5) and high density (0.9-1.0) correspondingly take up 19.3 % and 7.6 % of the wooded area.

The average yield class of tree stands is I.9. High-yield (yield classes I–Iа) forests take up 3,034.1 ha (51.3 % of the wooded area), being located on the periphery of the reserve, as well as on mineral rincons in the center of the mire. As to middle-aged and ripening tree stands of these forests, the stockpile of timber is 240-270 m3/ha, and its average annual increase is 4-4.5 m3/ha. Medium- (yield class II–III) and low-yield (IV–Vа) tree stands correspondingly occupy 2,235.1 ha (36.8 %) and 805.1 ha (13.3 %). The stockpile of timber in middle-aged and ripening tree stands is 180-195 m3/ha (medium-yield) and 50-60 m3/ha (low-yield), while its average annual increase is 4-4.5 and 0.9-1.1 m3/ha correspondingly.

As of January 1, 2006, the total stockpile of timber in the reserve was estimated at 850.7 thousand m3. Its basis is formed by soft-wooded broadleaved species, which account for 70.6 % of the stockpile of timber, of which silver birch and white birch – 37.8 and 6.2 % correspondingly, aspen – 14.7 %, common alder – 8.3 %, and grey alder – 3.6 %. The share of coniferous species in the total stockpile of timber is 26.0 % (of which pine – 13.9 %, spruce – 12.1 %). The share of hard-wooded broadleaved species in the total stockpile of timber is insignificant – 3.4 % (Figure 6.3).

The stockpile of mature and overmature forest is 110.1 thousand m3/ha. The basic types of tree stands include silver and white birch ones – 66.7 thousand m3/ha (60.6 %). The stockpile of mature and overmature tree stands of aspen is 19.4 thousand m3/ha (17.6 %), common alder – 19.0 (17.3 %), and spruce – 3.1 thousand m3/ha (7.4 %). The share of other species (pine, grey alder, and ash) in the stockpile of mature forest stands is insignificant (~1.5 %).

Recent fires were catastrophic for timber resources of the specially protected natural site:

47

2.36 thousand ha of tree stands (28.0 % of the wooded area) were destroyed or severely damaged. The area of destroyed mature and overmature forests was 525.6 ha (34.8 % of the total area of old tree stands), and that of destroyed high-yield forest stands was 339.8 ha (10.1 %); the stockpile of timber in destroyed tree stands was 234.0 thousand m3 (21.8 %), of which mature and overmature – 92.6 thousand m3 (45.7 %). In 1997-2005, tree felling on the territory of the reserve covered 1,242.2 ha with the intensity of thinning by stockpile of timber of 50.57 thousand m3.

Paludal flora. From the point of view of the dominant classification, it is represented by 2 types, 4 formation classes, 11 formations, and 41 associations.

In descriptions of the explored mire flora, U t r i c u l a r i o c a r i c e t a formation includes those communities, which are mainly formed by large sedges – beaked sedge (Carex rostrata), tufted sedge (Carex cespitosa), blister sedge (Carex vesicaria); their co-dominants are swamp horsetail, swamp robin, and marsh cinquefoil. The moss layer is not represented or highly broken. Communities of this formation are located on waterlogged parts of fen bogs of the reserve and often mark highly swampy and soft areas. The water level is above the peat surface (+1÷+10 cm), the peat deposit described is 2-2.5 m thick, but the prevailing thickness is 0.4-1 m.

H e r b o e q u i s e t a formation is represented by one association – Equisetum fluviatile – Comarum palustre. The association unites monospecies stands of horsetail with small communities of free floating plants. Communities of this association have 2 layers: the upper layer formed by horsetail and the lower one formed by paludal mixed herbs, where the dominant species is marsh cinquefoil. The moss layer is not expressed. Equisetum fluviatile – Comarum palustre association is described for waterlogged areas of fen bogs located in the western part of the reserve. The described water level is 0÷+25 cm, and the peat deposit thickness varies within the range of 0.3-0.7 m.

In the environment of highly waterlogged habitats, there are communities of S a l i c i o c a r i c e t a formation, represented in descriptions of the association of Salix cinerea – Carex rostrata. The crown density of the suffruticose layer is not high (0.3-0.6), with shrubs of grey willow 2-4.5 m high and 2-3 cm in diameter. The dominant species of the upper layer is mixed with whortleberry willow (Salix myrtilloides), rosemary-leaved (S. rosmarinifolia) and eared willow, buckthorn, and silver birch –with a varying frequency of occurrence. The grass cover density varies (20-50 %); the dominant species is beaked sedge, with such co-dominants as purple small-reed (Calamagrostis canescens), marsh fern, common loosestrife, marsh cinquefoil, marsh bedstraw, and blister sedge.

S p h a g n e t a f u s c i formation unites sphagnosum communities of raised bog hummocks and ridges and represents the vegetation cover on tops and slopes of the mire. The typical habitats of Sphagneta fusci association are oligotrophic, with quite a low ground water level (-10÷-50 cm). The peat deposit is 2-8 m thick (the average described thickness is – 3.71±0.27 m).

Sphagneta fusci communities, forest stands are not the edificator – the leading role here is played by the moss carpet. The tree layer is non-existent or represented by rare (crown density of 0.1-0.4) and suppressed pine f. litwinowii or f. willkommii, 1-4 m high. The suffruticose-herbosum layer has two sublayers. The upper sublayer––18-35 cm high with the crown density of 10-30 %––is formed by cotton grass and heather, with scattered suppressed ledum and sporadic myrtle. The lower sublayer––5-15 cm high with the crown density of 5-40 %––is formed by bog-rosemary, crowberry, northern cranberry, with participation of small cranberry (Oxycoccus microcarpus), and red rot (Drosera rotundifolia). Descriptions of Sphagneta fusci association made for the southern part of the mire tend to mention such rare for Belarus species of arctic-boreal flora found in the suffruticose-herbosum layer as cloudberry (Rubus chamaemorus) and dwarf birch (Betula nana). The moss carpet is continuous. The plant community edificator and main component of the moss layer is an expressed oligotrophic hygrophyte – Sphаgnum fuscum. Its grass sod is mixed with S. magellanicum, S. angustifolium, Polytrichum strictum, and S. rubellum. Descriptions of Sphagneta fusci communities located in the central domed part of the mire mention patches of lichens (Cladonia arbuscula, C.pyxidata, C.rangiferina), which sometimes cover up to 10-15 % of the surface.

48

Associations of S p h a g n e t a a n g u s t i f o l i + m a g e l l a n i c i formation are mainly found on the periphery, sometimes – on the ridges of ridge-hollow complexes in lower parts of mire slopes. By distinguishing this formation, we stress the intermediary position of the explored mire flora between more northern Sphagneta fusci and southern Sphagneta magellanici.

The tree layer in Sphagneta angustifoli + magellanici associations is non-existent or represented by very scattered (crown density of 0.1-0.3, seldom – 0.4) pine f. litwinowii and f. willkommii (1-3 m high, up to 3 cm diameter). The suffruticose-herbosum layer (15-35 cm high, crown density of 20-60 %) is dominated by cotton grass, heather, and myrtle, and with higher crown density of the tree layer – ledum, sometimes co-dominated by bog-rosemary and northern cranberry. The continuous moss layer is dominated by Sphagnum magellanicum and S. angustifolium with some presence of S. fuscum and Polytrichum strictum.

We group communities dominated by Sphagnum rubellum into a separate formation, as they mark habitats with a certain environmental range, different from the communities of Sphagneta fusci, Sphagneta angustifoli + magellanici, or Sphagneta cuspidati coll. formations.

S p h a g n e t a r u b e l l i communities tend to cover small area, playing no significant role in the bog vegetation cover formation. Beak-sedge-cotton grass associations of Sphagneta rubellii form a 2-5 m wide border around lakelets and lakes, which is separated from open water by a narrow strip of caricoso-sphagnosum (Carex limosa – Sphagnum cuspidatum) flora. Besides, they are located in hollows, low parts of ridges forming terraces encroaching on the surface of hollows, and on swamp parts. The tree layer is non-existent in these associations, and the suffruticose-herbosum one is characterized by low crown density, being formed by white beak-sedge (Rhynchospora alba), and cotton grass. In the surface of the sphagnum carpet, there is a higher-density lower sublayer consisting of bog-rosemary, northern cranberry, red rot and English sundew (Drosera anglica). The moss carpet is formed by Sphagnum rubellum, which is often mixed with S. magellanicum, S. cuspidatum, and S. balticum in significant proportions (up to 30-50 %).

Callunosum-eriophorum association Eriophorum vaginatum + Calluna vulgaris – Sphagnum rubellum + Sphagnum fuscum are found on fragments of ridges and hummocks, which are characterized by small height and often have features of instability in time, being stages of ridge degeneration. The tree layer is not typical for the association, but low bog pines are quite often found in the cenosis. The upper sublayer of the suffruticose-herbosum layer is formed by cotton grass and heather, and the lower one – by bog-rosemary, crowberry, and northern cranberry. The moss layer is polydominant, consisting of Sphagnum rubellum, S. fuscum, and S. angustifolium, sometimes mixed with S. balticum.

Hollows of hummock- and ridge-hollow complexes of the oligotrophic bog are taken by S p h a g n e t a c u s p i d a t i c o l l . communities. They a characterized by small species variety and simple composition. The herbosum layer includes mud sedge (Carex limosa), white beak-sedge, Rannoch-rush (Scheuchzeria palustris), and cotton grass – either several or only one of the species found at a time. The total layer cover is 10-25 %. The following subshrubs are common, but give insignificant (2-5 %) cover: myrtle, bog-rosemary, and especially northern cranberry. The following types of red rot are typical of this community: dew plant, English sundew, and Ivan's Paddle (D. obovata). The moss carpet is continuous, consisting of sphagnum moss of Cuspidata section (Sphagnum cuspidatum, S.balticum, S.majus). They form either a mixed carpet, or one dominated by one of the species. The black color of Jungermanniaceae hollows is explained by the presence of liverworts (Cladopodiella fluitans, Сephalozia fluitans, and Mylia anomala) and the dark-reddish Zygogonium. In some of these hollows, there is absolutely no sphagnum growth, while in others there are individual slimy shoots or small groups of Sphagnum balticum, sometimes – S. cuspidatum, and seldom – S. majus. Jungermanniaceae hollows are combined with cotton grass and beak-sedge; other higher plants can be completely absent.

Communities of S p h a g n e t a p a p i l l o s i formations come in patches on the periphery of transition swamps and at the lowest parts of slopes, on the boundary between a ridge-hollow complex and

49

transition swamps. Sphagneta papillosi occupies relatively dry habitats (-4÷-20 cm). The herbosum layer is dominated by cotton grass, woollyfruit sedge, beak-sedge, and Rannoch-rush. Depending on the dominant species, the relevant associations are distinguished. The dominant species in the continuous moss carpet is Sphagnum papillosum, and its grass sod is mixed with S. magellanicum, S. angustifolium, S. rubellum, S. cuspidatum, and S. balticum.

S p h a g n e t a f a l l a c i s formation unites communities of mesotrophic sphagnum swamps, which are located in peripheral depressions of the mire.

The most widely spread association of Sphagneta fallacis formation is Carex rostrata – Sphagnum fallax, which has a typical appearance: grayish shoots of beaked sedge (Carex rostrata) form quite dense growth (5-15 % cover) 0.4-0.7 m high. In the lower layer, Rannoch-rush and mud sedge are nearly always found. There is always a slight infusion of subshrubs, particularly northern cranberry, which often bears high yields. The moss carpet is continuous, with such dominants as Sphagnum fallax with a slight infusion of S.magellanicum, S. angustifolium, and S. balticum.

Moderately moist parts of transition sphagnum swamps quite often bear Carex lasiocarpa – Sphagnum fallax association, which differs from the previous one only by some features of its structure. Thin culms of woollyfruit sedge, which are always swinging in the wind and have a silvery shade, resemble feather grass. As a rule, woollyfruit sedge forms a 10-30 % cover. Mesotrophic plants are found in the community: bog-bean, common cotton grass (Eriophorum polystachyon), and swamp horsetail. Subshrubs are also quite common, but they do not form the basic field. The dominant species in the moss carpet is Sphagnum fallax with a slight infusion of S. magellanicum, and S. cuspidatum

In parts of transition sphagnum swamps, Sphagneta fallacis communities dominated by bog-bean are found. Rannoch-rush, mud sedge, beak-sedge, as well as subshrubs (northern cranberry, bog-rosemary, and myrtle) are found here.

Eriophorum vaginatum – Sphagneta fallacis association is found in small patches on the even surface (carpets) of open parts of the bog. Communities of this association have no tree layer, and the suffruticose-herbosum layer is dominated by hare's-tail cotton grass. Most of the bog subshrubs are characterized by low projective cover. Quite large cover is registered only for bog-rosemary and northern cranberry. The moss layer is mainly formed by 2 species of sphagnum mosses – Sphagnum fallax and S. angustifolium, but there are hollow species found – S. cuspidatum, and S. balticum.

In heavily waterlogged peripheral parts of the bog (at the point of contact of oligotrophic and eutrophic flora), there are Scheuchzeria palustris + Carex lasiocarpa – Sphagnum fallax, Scheuchzeria palustris – Sphagnum fallax associations, sometimes mixed with beak-sedge, mud sedge, and beaked sedge.

In the process of mire examination, 2 associations of S p h a g n e t a o b t u s i formation were found on small sites confined to waterlogged peripheral areas of mesotrophic bogs. Carex rostrata – Sphagnum obtusum association is characterized by 2-layer composition. The herbosum layer (0.3-0.7 m high, crown density of 5-15 %) is dominated by beaked sedge, with mesotrophic species being quite common (common cotton grass, bog-bean, and swamp horsetail), while species of Scheuchzeria group (Rannoch-rush, mud sedge, and beak-sedge) are poorly represented, and the subshrub group is practically not represented. The continuous moss carpet is undividedly dominated by Sphagnum obtusum, with a slight (up to 5 %) infusion of Sphagnum subsecundum.

As for transition swamps, Menyanthes trifoliata – Sphagnum obtusum association is registered. Unlike the previous association, this one is characterized by better representation of the mesotrophic species group, including marsh cinquefoil. Scheuchzeria group, as well as subshrubs are well represented.

Meadow flora. There are no typical meadows on the territory of the reserve. In flora descriptions, there are communities confined to young bog formations, meadowed parts of the bog. These communities are classified as meadow flora on a provisional basis; they could be equally well classified as subdivisions of paludal flora.

50

In the valley of the Yelnyanka River, on the sites where forests were destroyed by recent fires, there formed small patches of poor grey meadows dominated by tufted hair-grass (Deschampsia cespitosa), purple small-reed, and black sedge (Carex nigra). Reed, purple moor grass, woollyfruit sedge, compact rush (Juncus conglomeratus), and common rush (J. effusus), and narrow small-reed (Calamagrostis neglecta) are often found here.

In the northern part of the reserve, along the power transmission line, there is an area of meadowed bog with domination of club-rush (Scirpus sylvaticus), acute sedge (Carex acuta), bog crane (Geranium palustre), and purple small-reed. Participation of the aforementioned communities in the vegetation cover is insignificant. These plant communities are not shown on the map owing to their small size.

Aquatic and coastal aquatic flora. Owing to a number of natural ecological constraints (low content of nutrients, acid media, lack of mineral sediments, presence of fine detritic sapropel, etc.), aquatic flora has no potential water area to develop. Most of the lakes are characterized by practically complete lack of aquatic flora.

Communities of higher aquatic plants are represented by 2 formations of helophytes, 4 formations of free floating hydrophytes, and 1 formation of submerged hydrophytes. The most frequent among higher aquatic plants are communities of free floating hydrophyte plants – yellow water-lily (Nuphar lutea) and white water-lily (Nymphaea candida).

Low forest and shrubs. Low forest (No 43 in Figure 3.4) formed by undergrowth (3 to 5 m high) of birch, aspen, and grey alder with the herbosum cover consisting of tufted hair-grass, reed grass (Calamagrostis arundinacea), black sedge, common tormentil (Potentilla erecta), and creeping buttercup are found at felling sites.

More moist habitats are characterized by willow vegetation combined with wet tall grass (No 44 in Figure 3.4) or herboso-caricosum cover (No 45 in Figure 3.4).

Wasteland flora. It forms the modern appearance of the reserve vegetation cover to a significant extent. In the map of flora, secondary plant communities are represented by 2 taxons.

Suffruticose-polytrichosum, often with rich undergrowth of pine and deciduous trees (No 46 in Figure 3.4). After recent fires, communities of quite simple composition are widely spread on the mire territory. In the upper layer of low density (crown density of 0.1-0.2), there are white birch and silver birch trees, aspen, and 0.5-2.5 m high pine found. There is rich undergrowth of forest-forming species registered: pine – 4-20 thousand trees per ha, white birch – 1.5-56 thousand trees per ha, silver birch – 0.5-3 thousand trees per ha, and aspen – 2-20 thousand trees per ha. The projective cover of the suffruticose-herbosum layer is 60-90 %; the dominant species include heather (projective cover of 30-75 %), while lower parts are occupied by cotton grass (4-30 %). Participation of other subshrubs (bog-rosemary, northern cranberry, and myrtle), which form the flora nucleus of unimpaired plant communities of the bog, is not high, making 1-15 %. The key dominant of the moss carpet of secondary plant communities is Polytrichum strictum (up to 75-90 % of the cover). Descriptions point at some presence of Sphagnum magellanicum (up to 15-20 %), S. angustifolium (up to 3-10 %), and S. rubellum, S. cuspidatum, and S. fuscum (up to 3 %). Post-fire communities are unstable and exclusively temporary formations. Currently, these plant communities demonstrate active demutation accompanied by: a) declining presence of small-leaved trees in the community, b) development of paludal types of pine; and c) active penetration of sphagnum mosses and subshrubs (bog-rosemary, myrtle, and ledum) into the moss layer. On the map of flora, bog parts with expressed rehabilitation developments are marked with a letter index following the key legend number (No 46а).

Chamerion, calamagrostis communities with willow and undergrowth of pine and deciduous species (No 47 in Figure 3.4). Besides the aforementioned secondary plant communities, wasteland flora ones also include communities found on felling sites, as well as on sites destroyed by tree stand fires. These are secondary communities dominated by willow herb (Chamaenerion angustifolium) and/or

51

calamagrostis, often – with shrubs and developed undergrowth of pine and small-leaved trees (silver birch, aspen, etc.).

52

Table 3.2 – Typological and ecological structure of the Yelnya Reserve forests (as of January 1, 2006)

Forest formation

Area

Edaphic groups and series of forest types, % of total forest area

Fore

sts o

n po

or sa

ndy

soils

cha

ract

eriz

ed b

y un

stab

le m

oist

ure

leve

l

Forests on relatively rich soils

Forests on rich very moist soils

Forests on peaty mineral

soilsForests on peat bogs

char

acte

rized

by

norm

al m

oist

ure

leve

l

char

acte

rized

by

very

hig

h m

oist

ure

leve

l

olig

otro

phic

bo

gs

eutro

phic

bog

s

oligo- and mesotrophic eutrophic

ha %

Vac

cini

osum

Pleu

rozi

osum

Pter

idio

sum

Oxa

lidos

um

Myr

tillo

sum

Aeg

opod

iosu

m

Filic

osum

Urti

cosu

m

Poly

trich

osum

Font

inal

e-

herb

osum

Ledo

sum

Car

icos

o-sp

hagn

osum

Spha

gnos

um

Car

icos

um,

caric

oso-

herb

osum

Filip

endu

losu

m

Thel

ypte

ri-do

sum

,sa

licos

um

Coniferous forests 2,212.8 36.5 0.2 3.4 0.6 6.0 10.5 1.2 1.6 – 3 – 2.0 4.3 2.6 1.1 – –pine 1,156.0 19.1 0.2 1.1 0.1 0.4 5.4 – – – 2.1 – 2.0 4.2 2.6 1.0 – –spruce 1,056.8 17.4 0 2.3 0.5 5.6 5.1 1.2 1.6 – 0.9 – – 0.1 – 0.1 – –Broad-leaved forests 129.0 2.1 – – – 0.2 – 1.7 – 0.2 – – – – – – – –oak 17.0 0.3 – – – 0.1 – 0.1 – 0.1 – – – – – – – –ash 111.1 1.8 – – – 0.1 – 1.6 – 0.1 – – – – – – – –lime 0.9 <0.1 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –Small-leaved secondary forests

2,764.8 45.5 – 0.5 0.5 9.1 9.0 9.8 9.5 0.3 6.4 – – – – 0.1 0.3 –

silver birch 1,729.0 28.4 – 0.5 0.5 5.7 7.1 3.4 5.3 <0.1 5.9 – – – – – – –aspen 763.8 12.6 – – – 2.6 1.3 4.0 3.9 0.2 0.6 – – – – – – –grey alder 272.0 4.5 – – – 0.9 0.6 2.3 0.3 – – – – – – 0.1 0.3 –Small-leaved swamp woods

967.7 15.9 – – – 0.1 0.3 – 1.8 0.5 – 0.3 – 1.3 – 7.8 2.0 1.8

common alder 458.9 7.5 – – – <0.1 0.3 – 1.9 0.5 – – – – – 1.1 2.0 1.7white birch 508.8 8.4 – – – – – – – – – 0.3 – 1.3 – 6.7 – 0.1TOTAL: 6,074.3 100.0 0.2 3.9 1.1 15.4 19.8 12.7 12.9 1.0 9.4 0.3 2.0 5.6 2.6 9.0 2.3 1.8

53

Table 3.3 – Formation structure and taxation indicators of reserve forests (as of January 1, 2006)

Forests

Wooded area Total stockpile Average taxation indicators

ha % ‘000 m3/ha % age, years height, m diameter,

cmyield class density stockpile

average annual

increasem3/ha

Coniferous 2,212.8 36.5 221.1 26.0 42 10.3 12.1 II.4 0.57 99.9 2.40Pine 1,156.0 19.1 118.5 13.9 54 11.2 13.7 III.3 0.57 102.5 1.90Spruce 1,056.8 17.4 102.6 12.1 28 9.4 10.5 I.3 0.58 97.1 3.47Hard-wooded broadleaved 128.1 2.1 28.8 3.4 53 20.8 21.9 1.2 0.70 224.6 4.24Oak 17.0 0.3 1.9 0.2 37 11.4 12.4 II.3 0.69 111.2 3.01Ash 111.1 1.8 26.9 3.2 56 22.2 23.3 I.0 0.70 241.9 4.32Soft-wooded broadleaved 3,733.4 61.4 600.8 70.6 39 17.0 17.3 1.5 0.67 160.9 4.13Lime 0.9 <0.1 0.1 0.0 35 16.0 16.0 II.0 0.70 155.6 4.45Silver birch 1,729.0 28.4 321.6 37.8 43 19.3 18.9 I.3 0.67 186 4.33Grey alder 272.0 4.5 30.8 3.6 26 13.2 12.1 I.4 0.67 112.8 4.34Aspen 763.8 12.6 125.1 14.7 36 16.9 18.7 I.2 0.70 163.8 4.55White birch 508.8 8.4 52.3 6.2 36 12.8 12.9 II.8 0.59 102.8 2.86Common alder 458.9 7.5 70.9 8.3 37 15.6 17.0 I.7 0.69 154.5 4.18TOTALfor reserve forests 6,074.3 100 850.7

100.0 40 14.8 15.7 I.9 0.63 140.0 3.50

54

Figure 3.4 – The Yelnia Landscape Reserve flora map

km

2

421

15

19

20

19

34

2

19

ßì í î

×åðåñû

Áåëåâöû


Ñâåðäëû

Ï î ï ø óëè

Ì èî ðêè 1-å

Í î âãî ðî äû

Áóäû

Ëèï í î

Êàí àõè

Áëàæêè

Êî çëî âöû

Ëèï àòèí î


Ñòàð. Ï î ãî ñò

Ï òèöêèå

Êðàñí î åÎ ñòðî âî

Ï åñòóí û

Êî çëû



Î êóí åâîÑî êî ëî âî


Áî í äàðöû

Í î âèí öû

Ãî ðî âöû

Êèñåëè

Ðóäí ÿ

Àðõèï î âî


Áðóø êè


Ì àëÿâêèÏ ëåéêè

Òóð÷èí î


Ãèðüÿòû

Óñî âöû

Ì àñåâöû

Âî çî âí èêè

Òóðêî âî

Áàðàí ÷èêè

Òèëåâöû

Ì í þõè

Ñóø êè

Èâàí üêè


Ñòàí óëåâî

Êàòèëî âî

Ñòàð. Êðþ êèÁî ë.Ï î æåí üêè

Êî ëî í èöû

Âÿçî âöû

Êàðòàâûå

Áåëÿí û

Ï àòåí êè


Áàðñó÷èí à


Ðóí äû

Çàõàðí è

Ì î í àçûëü

Æóêè

Ñóõèå


Ðåêóí û

Òàòàðû

Çàãî ðüå

Ãðåöêèå


Ëèï î âêà

Êðûø òóëè

Ñâèðù àí å

Äóëüñêèå

Í î â. ÑåëîÌ àðòèí î âöû

Ëèòî â÷èêè





Ì È Î ÐÛ

î ç.Áåðåæà

î ç.ßæãèí ÿ



Åëüí ÿí êà



î ç.×åðåñ




î ç.Áåëî å

î ç.Ì èî ðñêî å

î ç.Åëüí ÿ

Âî ëòà

Ì åðèö

à

Åëüí ÿí êà

Äèñí à

î ç.Êàòèëî âî

î ç.Þ í äèëî âñêî å2

1212

2332

45

45

2

9

28

29

29

26

36а

6

11

12

18

22

22

23

25

28

31

2730

3030

30

32

46

46a

3434

22

41б

42 46a

8

33

23

11

1

22

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

4

5

6

63

8

7

4

86

8

8

7

7

398

8

8

9

99

9

10

10

14

11

10

10

13

1212

12

12

12

1212

12

12

12

12

13

12

12

12

10

14

14

14

6

16

16

21

6

6

6 8

1818

18

14

18

2021

20

21

22

21

22

23 23

23

23

23

23

23

23

256

25

25

25

25

2525

25

25

25

26

26

2526

25

27

2726

2712

27

27

27

26

26

27

25 25

27

28

28

28

282827

2729

29

29

29

29

29

26

26

2929

29

32

32

32

25

27

2821

30

30

27

33

16

26

35

35

36а

36б

36б

37

38

38

38

38

38

38

3939

39

36а

38 41г

40б

40a

38

38

41

38

32

43

43

43

4545

45

45

45

4545

3038

46

46

46

46

46

46

46

46

46

46

46

46

45

46a

46a

46a

46a46a

46a

46a

46a

46a

1

38

29

46a

3434

37

43

29

46

18

34

2

25

39

7

39

35а

36б

32

2844

16

29

27

22

41а

41а

41б

41б

38

40a

40a

25

41б

41б

41б

41б

41б

41б

41в

41г

41г

41в

46a

46

46

4646

46

29

22

32 32

33

41б

36а

12

29

2

55

LEGEND OF YELNYA REPUBLICAN LANDSCAPE RESERVE FLORA MAP

FOREST FLORA

Coniferous forests

Pine (Pinus sylvestris) and spruce-pine (Pinus sylvestris, Picea abies) forests

1. Pine suffruticose (Vaccinium vitis-idaea, V. myrtillus)-hylocomiosa (Pleurozium schreberi, Dicranum spp.)2. Spruce-pine hylocomiosa (Pleurozium schreberi, Dicranum spp., Hylocomium splendens, Rhytidiadelphus

triquetrus)-oxalidosum (Oxalis acetosella) combined with pteridiosum (Pteridium aquilinum)3. Pine and spruce-pine hylocomiosa (Pleurozium schreberi, Dicranum spp., Hylocomium splendens)-

myrtillosum (Vaccinium myrtillus) 4. Spruce-pine suffruticose (Vaccinium myrtillus, V. uliginosum)-polytrichosum (Polytrichum commune) 5. Pine and white birch-pine herboso (Menyanthes trifoliata, Comarum palustre, Phragmites australis,

Thelypteris palustris)-caricosum (Carex vesicaria, C. acutiformis, C. rostrata) on fen bogs6. Pine and white birch-pine caricoso (Carex lasiocarpa, C.rostrata)-suffruticose (Ledum palustre,

Chamaedaphne calyculata, Vaccinium uliginosum, Oxycoccus palustris)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum fallax, S. magellanicum, S. angustifolium) on transition bogs

7. Pine (Pinus sylvestris f. uliginosa + standard form) suffruticose (Ledum palustre, Chamaedaphne calyculata, Vaccinium uliginosum, V. myrtillus)-hylocomiosa (Pleurozium schreberi, Dicranum polysetum)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum angustifolium, S. magellanicum) on raised bogs

8. Pine (Pinus sylvestris f. litwinowii) eriophorum (Eriophorum vaginatum)-suffruticose (Ledum palustre, Chamaedaphne calyculata, Andromeda polifolia, Empetrum nigrum, Oxycoccus palustris)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum magellanicum, S. angustifolium, S. fuscum) on raised bogs

Spruce (Picea abies) forests

9. Spruce suffruticose (Vaccinium vitis-idaea, V. myrtillus)-hylocomiosa (Pleurozium schreberi, Dicranum spp., Hylocomium splendens)

10. Spruce hylocomiosa (Hylocomium splendens, Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus)-oxalidosum (Oxalis acetosella) combined with pteridiosum (Pteridium aquilinum)

11. Spruce aegopodiosum (Aegopodium podagraria) combined with urticosum (Urtica dioica)12. Spruce hylocomiosa (Pleurozium schreberi, Dicranum spp., Hylocomium splendens)-myrtillosum

(Vaccinium myrtillus)13. Spruce suffruticose (Vaccinium myrtillus, V. uliginosum)-polytrichosum (Polytrichum commune)14. Spruce filicosum (Dryopteris filix-mas, D. carthusiana, Athyrium filix-femina) 15. Spruce caricoso (Carex acuta, C. nigra, C. rostrata, C. elongata, C. lepidocarpa)-herboso (Menyanthes

trifoliata, Equisetum sylvaticum)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum girgensohnii, S. acutifolium, S. wulfianum, S. centrale, S. palustre) on fen bogs

Broad-leaved forests

Ash (Fraxinus excelsior) forests

16. Ash and spruce-common alder-ash aegopodiosum (Aegopodium podagraria) combined with oxalidosum (Oxalis acetosella) and urticosum (Urtica dioica)

Small-leaved secondary forests

Grey alder (Alnus incana) forests

17. Grey alder aegopodiosum (Aegopodium podagraria) combined with oxalidosum (Oxalis acetosella) in place of broad-leaved-spruce forests.

18. Grey alder hylocomiosa (Pleurozium schreberi, Dicranum spp.)-myrtillosum (Vaccinium myrtillus) in place of spruce-pine and broad-leaved-spruce forests

19. Grey alder filipendulosum (Filipendula ulmaria) combined with filicosum (Dryopteris filix-mas, D. cristata, Athyrium filix-femina) and caricosum (Carex cinerea, C. vesicaria) in place of broad-leaved-spruce forests

Aspen (Populus tremula) forests

20. Aspen oxalidosum (Oxalis acetosella) in place of spruce-pine and broad-leaved-spruce forests21. Aspen aegopodiosum (Aegopodium podagraria) combined with urticosum (Urtica dioica) in place of broad-

leaved-spruce forests.22. Aspen hylocomiosa (Pleurozium schreberi, Dicranum spp.)-myrtillosum (Vaccinium myrtillus) combined

with suffruticose (Vaccinium myrtillus, V. uliginosum)-polytrichosum (Polytrichum commune) in place of spruce-pine and spruce forests

23. Aspen filicosum (Dryopteris filix-mas, D. cristata, Athyrium filix-femina) in place of broad-leaved-spruce

56

forests.

Silver birch (Betula pendula) forests

24. Silver birch suffruticose (Vaccinium vitis-idaea V. myrtillus)-hylocomiosa (Pleurozium schreberi, Dicranum spp.) in place of pine and spruce-pine forests

25. Silver birch hylocomiosa (Pleurozium schreberi, Dicranum spp., Hylocomium splendens)-oxalidosum (Oxalis acetosella) combined with pteridiosum (Pteridium aquilinum) in place of spruce-pine and broad-leaved-spruce forests.

26. Silver birch aegopodiosum (Aegopodium podagraria) combined with urticosum (Urtica dioica) 27. Silver birch hylocomiosa (Pleurozium schreberi, Dicranum spp., Hylocomium splendens)-myrtillosum

(Vaccinium myrtillus) in place of pine and spruce forests28. Silver birch suffruticose (Vaccinium myrtillus, V. uliginosum)-polytrichosum (Polytrichum commune) in

place of spruce-pine and spruce forests29. Silver birch filicosum (Dryopteris filix-mas, D. cristata, D. carthusiana, Athyrium filix-femina) in place of

broad-leaved-spruce forests.

Deciduous primary forests on bogs

White birch (Betula pubescens) forests

30. White birch mixo-herbosum (Filipendula ulmaria, Galium palustre, Thelypteris palustris, Menyanthes trifoliata, Caltha palustris, Phragmites australis, Calla palustris)-caricosum (Carex diandra, C. elongata, C. nigra, C. vesicaria) on fen bogs

31. White birch and pine-white birch caricoso (Carex lasiocarpa, C. diandra, C. appropinquata, C. nigra)-herboso (Menyanthes trifoliata, Comarum palustre, Calamagrostis canescens)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum fallax, S. centrale, S. riparium, S. obtusum, S. magellanicum) on transition bogs

Common alder (Alnus glutinosa) forests

32. Common alder and spruce-broad-leaved-common alder urticosum (Urtica dioica) combined with oxalidosum (Oxalis acetosella) and aegopodiosum (Aegopodium podagraria)

33. Common alder filicosum (Athyrium filix-femina, Dryopteris carthusiana) combined with filipendulosum (Filipendula ulmaria) on fen bogs

34. Common alder and white birch (Betula pubescens)-common alder thelypteridosum (Thelypteris palustris) combined with herboso (Menyanthes trifoliata, Calla palustris, Lysimachia vulgaris, Iris pseudacorus)-caricosum (Carex elongata, С. cinerea, C. vesicaria, C.rostrata) on fen bogs

PALUDAL FLORA

Lowlands (eutrophic)

35. Paludal herbosum (Comarum palustre, Сalla palustris, Iris pseudacorus, Equisetum fluviatile) and herboso-caricosum (Carex rostrata, C. vesicaria)

Transition (mesooligotrophic and mesotrophic) bogs

36.Hummock and depression complex: 36а suffruticose (Chamaedaphne calyculata, Andromeda polifolia)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum magellanicum, S.

angustifolium, S. fuscum) hummocks; caricoso (Carex lasiocarpa, C. rostrata)-eriophorum (Eriophorum vaginatum, E. polystachyon)-menyanthes (Menyanthes trifoliata)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum fallax, S. angustifolium, S. magellanicum) spaces between hummocks;

36б suffruticose (Chamaedaphne calyculata, Andromeda polifolia)-hypnum (Polytrichum strictum, Aulacomnium palustre)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum magellanicum, S.angustifolium, S.fuscum, S.rubellum) hummocks with scattered Pinus sylvestris and Betula pubescens; pragmites (Phragmites australis)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum fallax, S.angustifolium, S. magellanicum) spaces between hummocks

37.Scheuchzeria-sphagnosum and sphagnosum transition swamps (Carex lasiocarpa, C. rostrata, C.limosa, Eriophorum vaginatum, E. polystachyon, Scheuchzeria palustris, Menyanthes trifoliata, Sphagnum cuspidatum, S. majus, S. fallax, S. flexuosum, S. papillosum, S. obtusum)

Raised (oligotrophic) bogs

38.Pine (Pinus sylvestris f. litwinowii, f.willkommii)-eriophorum (Eriophorum vaginatum)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum angustifolium, S. magellanicum, S. fuscum)

39.Hummock-carpet complex: suffruticose (Chamaedaphne calyculata, Calluna vulgaris)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum magellanicum, S. angustifolium, S. fuscum, S. rubellum) hummocks; eriophorum (Eriophorum vaginatum)-andromeda (Andromeda polifolia)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum angustifolium, S. balticum, S. cuspidatum) carpets

40.Hummock-hollow complex:

57

40а suffruticose (Chamaedaphne calyculata, Calluna vulgaris, Empetrum nigrum)-sphagnosum hummocks (Sphagnum magellanicum, S. angustifolium, S. fuscum); eriophorum (Eriophorum vaginatum) - and herboso (Scheuchzeria palustris, Carex limosa, Rhynchospora alba)-sphagnosum hollows (Sphagnum balticum, S. cuspidatum, S. majus)

40б suffruticose (Calluna vulgaris, Empetrum nigrum)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum fuscum, S. magellanicum, S. angustifolium) hummocks with scattered pines (Pinus sylvestris f. litwinowii, f.willkommii); small eriophorum (Eriophorum vaginatum)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum angustifolium, S. balticum, S. cuspidatum) hollows often with expressed retrogressive phenomena

41.Ridge-hollow complexes and ridge-hollow-lake complexes 41а pine and (Pinus sylvestris f. litwinowii, f.willkommii)-eriophorum (Eriophorum vaginatum)-sphagnosum

(Sphagnum angustifolium, S.magellanicum, S. fuscum) ridges; small eriophorum (Eriophorum vaginatum)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum balticum, S. cuspidatum) hollows

41б eriophorum (Eriophorum vaginatum)-suffruticose (Calluna vulgaris, Empetrum nigrum)-sphagnosum (with prevailing Sphagnum fuscum) with scattered pine canopy (Pinus sylvestris f. litwinowii, f.willkommii, f. pumila) ridges; herboso (Scheuchzeria palustris, Carex limosa, Rhynchospora alba)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum cuspidatum, S. balticum, S. majus) hollows combined with open water lakes or lakes with sphagnum moss spreading (Sphagnum cuspidatum, S. majus)

41в eriophorum (Eriophorum vaginatum)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum fuscum, S. angustifolium, S.magellanicum) with scattered pine (Pinus sylvestris f. litwinowii, f.willkommii) “rincon”-ridges; well developed herboso (Scheuchzeria palustris, Carex limosa, Rhynchospora alba)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum cuspidatum, S. balticum, S. majus) hollows combined with open water lakes or lakes with sphagnum moss spreading (Sphagnum cuspidatum, S. majus)

41г eriophorum (Eriophorum vaginatum)-suffruticose (Chamaedaphne calyculata, Calluna vulgaris, Empetrum nigrum)-sphagnosum (with prevailing Sphagnum angustifolium, S. magellanicum) occasionally with scattered pine canopy (Pinus sylvestris f. willkommii, f. litwinowii) ridges; herboso (Scheuchzeria palustris, Carex limosa, Rhynchospora alba)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum cuspidatum, S. balticum, S. majus) hollows

42. Retrogressive complex: suffruticose (Calluna vulgaris, Empetrum nigrum)-sphagnosum (Sphagnum fuscum, S.rubellum) ridges with scattered Pinus sylvestris f. litwinowii and patches of lichens; Jungermanniaceae (Cladopodiella fluitans, Сephalozia fluitans, Mylia anomala) combined with degraded sphagnosum (Sphagnum cuspidatum, S. balticum) hollows and denuded peat patches

LOW FOREST AND SHRUBBERY

43.Low deciduous forest (Betula pendula, Alnus incana, Populus tremula) with herbosum canopy (Calamagrostis arundinacea, Deschampsia cespitosa, Carex nigra, Potentilla erecta, Ranunculus repens)

44.Willow stands (Salix spp.) with Betula pubescens, Alnus glutinosa wet tall herbs (Filipendula ulmaria, Anthriscus sylvestris, Angelica sylvestris, Geranium palustre, Deschampsia cespitosa, Festuca rubra)

45.Willow stands (Salix spp.) with birch (Betula pubescens) and common alder (Alnus glutinosa) mixo-herbosum (Calamagrostis canescens, Thelypteris palustris, Lysimachia vulgaris, Comarum palustre, Filipendula ulmaria, Galium palustre)-caricosum (Carex rostrata, C. vesicaria)

WASTELAND FLORA

46. Suffruticose (Calluna vulgaris, Vaccinium uliginosum)-polytrichosum (Polytrichum strictum) often with rich pine growth (Pinus sylvestris) and deciduous species (Betula pubescens, B. pendula, Populus tremula)

46а same in the phase of active demutation accompanied by reduced presence of deciduous tree species (Betula pubescens, B. pendula, Populus tremula) in secondary communities, development of paludal types of pine (Pinus sylvestris f. litwinowii, f. willkommii), active introduction of sphagnum moss (Sphagnum magellanicum, S. angustifolium, S. cuspidatum, S. Fuscum, etc.) and callunosum subshrubs (Andromeda polifolia, Chamaedaphne calyculata, Ledum palustre, etc.) into the moss layer.

47.Chamerion (Chamaenerion angustifolium), calamagrostis (Calamagrostis sp.) with willow (Salix spp.), with undergrowth of Betula pendula, Betula pubescens, Populus tremula, Pinus sylvestris.

58

3.3 Flora Characteristics

A detailed inventory of tracheophyte flora was prepared in 2006-2008. As of 2010, 405 species of tracheophytes––representing 233 genera, 83 families, 6 classes, and 5 divisions––were registered on the reserve territory. Among those – 5 horsetail species (Equisetophyta), 3 clubmoss species (Lycopodiopsida), 11 fern species (Polypodiophyta), 3 gymnospermous species (Pinophyta), and 383 flowering species (angiospermous – Magnoliophyta), of which 280 are representatives of Dicotyledones class (Magnoliopsida) and 103 – of Monocotyledones class (Liliopsida).

About 50 species of tracheophytes play the role of dominants and edificators of the vegetation cover. The flora nucleus is formed by species typical of south taiga raised bogs: hare's-tail cotton grass (Eriophorum vaginatum), common heather (Calluna vulgaris), black crowberry (Empetrum nigrum), marsh ledum (Ledum palustre), bog rosemary andromeda (Andromeda polifolia), northern cranberry (Oxycoccus palustris), northern bilberry (Vaccinium uliginosum), Rannoch-rush (Scheuchzeria palustris), Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris), white birch (Betula pubescens), and some others.

In the brioflora of the specially protected natural site, there are 86 species of bryophytics, representing 45 genera of 15 families, preliminarily identified. Liverworts (Hepaticopsida) are represented by 11 species (13 %), musci (Musci Bryopsida) – by 75 species, of which Bryidae mosses (Bryidae) – by 54 species, and sphagnum mosses (Sphagnidae) – by 21 species.

In general, the key specific features of the reserve flora include: rich variety and representation of species, domination of species of boreal-Holarctic and boreal-Euro-Western Asian origin, presence of a large number of tracheophyte species being there at the boundary of their range, a large number of important resource species, and insignificant presence of alien plant species in the vegetation cover. The dominant species are those with a wide range, mainly belonging to water paludal and meadow-edge eco-coenotic groups and typical of acidic, very wet and poor soils; the small role played by adventive species points at the comprehensive and stable nature of the flora complexes of the reserve.

3.4. Rare Protected Species of the Reserve Flora

Owing to the natural specific features of the area and the high degree of integrity of the reserve ecosystems, a lot of rare species of tracheophytes, as well as protected species of lichenised fungi and bryophytics are registered there. In total, 19 protected species have been registered on the territory at different times. Presence of some of them on this territory is of particular interest. For example, the habitat of blushing bog-moss Sphagnum molle at this specially protected natural site is the only currently proved one in the country, and the habitat of inflated notchwort Gymnocolea inflata is the second registered one on the territory of Belarus. The populations of small cranberry Oxycoccus microcarpus, dwarf birch Betula nana, cloudberry Rubus chamaemorus, buckram Allium ursinum, and lousewort Pedicularis sceptrum-carolinum registered on the territory of the reserve are among the largest and most numerous in Poozerie. Habitats of some of the mentioned protected plant species (Anacamptis morio, Corydalis intermedia, Dentaria bulbifera, Moneses uniflora, and Carex heleonastes) need verifying.

There are also a few species registered on the territory of the reserve, which require preventive protection: Empetrum nigrum, Drosera longifolia, Thalictrum aquilegifolium, Goodyera repens, Digitalis grandiflora, Utricularia intermedia, U. minor, Hepatica nobilis, Platanthera bifolia, Dactylorhiza fuchsii, D. incarnata, D. maculata, Epipactis helleborine, E. Palustris, etc.

The study of the species composition of fungi and algae is at its early stage.

The group of rare and endangered plant species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus, which have been registered on the territory of the reserve over the whole time of its existence, is

59

quite numerous and represented by 15 species:

Dwarf birch (Betula nana).

Conservation status II (EN). Rare, endangered, European Siberian arctic-boreal relict species, occurring sporadically in Belarus beyond the southern boundaries of its range on limited areas.1. Germanovichi forestry section, at the boundary of compartments No 12-13; post-fire suffruticose-polytrichosum community. A complete population, area: ~200 m2, average density of shoots per 1 m2: 50, at 90 % occurrence. 2. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 14 (plot 1), along the south-western shore of Beloe Lake, and along the shores of Tobolki-1, Tobolki-2, and Tobolki-3 Lakes, post-fire eriophorum-callunosum-polytrichosum community, occasionally in small groups.3. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 28 (plot 2), along the shore of Lopukhi Lake, ledosum-sphagnosum pine forest; area: 40 m2, average density: 5-7 plants per 1 m2. 4. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 42 (plot 2), 4 populations between Smovzh Lake and Vysokoe Lakes, post-fire callunosum-eriophorum-polytrichosum community. 5. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 43 (plot 1), along the southern shore of Smovzh Lake, post-fire callunosum-polytrichosum community; over 40 plants on the area of 40 m2. 6. Disna forestry section, compartment 33 (plot 2), 1.2 km to the north-east of Yelnya Lake, open eriophorum-suffruticose-sphagnum bog. On the area of 45 m2, over 20 vegetal and generative plants. 7. Miory forestry section, compartment No 143 (plot 2), to the east of Blizhnee Lake, post-fire eriophorum-callunosum-polytrichosum community. Two micropopulations of 20-25 m2 each. 8. Miory forestry section, compartment No 146 (plot 1), to the east of Beloe Lake (along the winter trail), eriophorum-callunosum-polytrichosum community. Two micropopulations of 20 m2 each. There are vegetal and generative plants identified.

Dwarf birch is registered near Chernoe Lake [73] on the territory of the reserve. According to the verbal report of V.V. Ivanovsky (2007), it grows in compartment No 33 of Germanovichi forestry section.

Cloudberry (Rubus chamaemorus)

Conservation status II (EN). Rare, endangered, European Siberian arctic-boreal relict species, occurring in Belarus beyond the southern boundaries of its range in small numbers on limited areas.

9. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 12 (plot 1), south-western shore of Beloe Lake, post-fire callunosum-polytrichosum community, area: 300 m2, average density: 5-10 plants per 1 m2. 10. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 24 (plots 4, 5), post-fire callunosum-polytrichosum community, in small groups.11. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 25 (plots 1, 2), post-fire callunosum-polytrichosum community, in small groups.12. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 27 (plot 2), post-fire callunosum-polytrichosum community, in small groups.13. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 28 (plot 2), post-fire callunosum-polytrichosum community, in small groups. Area: 100 m2, average density: 5-8 plants per 1 m2.14. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 41 (plot 2), post-fire callunosum-polytrichosum community, in small groups.15. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 42, post-fire callunosum-polytrichosum community, in small groups over the whole compartment.16. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 43 (plot 1), 0.4 km to the north-west of Ploskoe Lake, post-fire callunosum-polytrichosum community, in small groups. 17. Miory forestry section, compartment No 71 (plot 1), ridge-hollow complexes (suffruticose-sphagnum ridge with scattered pine); 54 plants on the area of 57 m.18. Miory forestry section, compartment No 140 (plot 4), to the east of Beloe Lake, pine eriophorum-sphagnosum forest. One population, area: 10 m2, over 50 plants; generative plants registered. 19. Miory forestry section, compartment No 142 (plot 1), northern periphery of Blizhnee Lake, suffruticose-eriophorum-sphagnosum community, in small groups along the lake shore.

In addition, within the boundaries of the specially protected natural site, cloudberry was registered in different years by V.P. Martynenko (1982, VSU), G.V. Vynaev and V.F. Pobirushko (1986,

60

MSK), I.I. Shimko (1988, personal herbarium), as well as V.V. Ivanovsky (2007, verbal report) in compartment No 10 of Germanovichi forestry section and compartment No 143 of Miory forestry section.

Wild garlic or buckram (Allium ursinum)

Conservation status III (VU). Rare endangered Central European mountain species on the north-eastern boundary of the flat part of the range. 20. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 30 (plot 8), Elensky Ostrov area. Aspen aegopodiosum forest, population area: 4 ha; projective cover: 20-50 %, occurrence: 100 %; average height of shoots: 35 cm. A complete population, generative plants dominating, juvenile and immature plants registered.21. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 16 (plot 25). Aspen aegopodiosum forest, population area: 2 ha; projective cover: 20-50 %, occurrence: 100 %; average height: 32 cm. A complete population, generative plants dominating.

Few-flowered sedge (Сarex pauciflora)

Conservation status III (VU). Rare circumpolar boreal relict species, occurring in Belarus in small localities at the southern boundary of the range.22. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 59 (plot 1), pine white birch-eriophorum-sphagnosum forest. Area: 100 m2, over 150 plants.

Small cranberry (Oxycoccus microcarpus)

Conservation status III (VU). Rare tundra-taiga species, located in Belarus close to the southern boundary of the range. On the territory of the reserve, the species is quite widely spread (occurrence in geobotanical descriptions of Sphagneta fusci formation: 80 % and Sphagneta angustifoli + magellanici formation: 67 %). Only the largest populations are described in the present paper.23. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 70 (plot 1), post-fire callunosum-polytrichosum community; in small groups over the whole plot.24. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 84 (plots 1, 2), post-fire callunosum-polytrichosum community; a small group on the area of 520 m. 25. Disna forestry section, compartment No 48 (plot 1), callunosum-eriophorum-sphagnum bog with scattered pine trees; in small groups over the whole plot.26. Disna forestry section, compartment No 49, eriophorum-suffruticose-sphagnum bog with scattered pine trees; in small groups over the whole compartment.27. Disna forestry section, compartment No 50 (plot 1) eriophorum-suffruticose-sphagnum bog with scattered pine trees; in small groups over the whole plot. 28. Miory forestry section, compartment No 67 (plot 1), eriophorum-suffruticose-sphagnum bog with scattered pine trees; in small groups over the whole plot.29. Miory forestry section, compartment No 69 (plot 3), ridge-hollow complex (suffruticose-sphagnum ridge with scattered pine trees); in small groups over the whole plot.30. Miory forestry section, compartment No 70 (plot 3), pine eriophorum-suffruticose-sphagnosum forest; in small groups over the whole plot.31. Miory forestry section, compartment No 71 (plot 1), suffruticose-sphagnosum ridge of a ridge-hollow complex with scattered pine trees; in small groups over the whole plot.32. Miory forestry section, compartment No 97 (plot 15), suffruticose-eriophorum-sphagnum bog with scattered pine trees; in small groups over the whole plot.33. Miory forestry section, compartment No 98 (plot 2), callunosum-sphagnum bog with scattered pine trees; in small groups over the whole plot.34. Miory forestry section, compartment No 99 (plot 1), eriophorum-callunosum-sphagnum bog with scattered pine; in small groups over the whole plot.

Turkish marsh gladiolus (Gladiolus imbricatus)

Conservation status IV (NT). Rare European Siberian species, occurring to a limited extent on the whole territory of Belarus.

61

35. Miory forestry section, compartment No 59 (plot 3), a waterlogged clearing in the wood. Over 10 generative plants and 22 vegetal plants, area: 22 m.

On the territory of the specially protected natural site, Turkish marsh gladiolus was also found near Chernoe Lake by N.V. Kozlovskaya and G.F. Rykovsky in 1973 (MSK).

Northern firmoss (Huperzia selago)

Conservation status IV (NT). Rare, endangered, Holarctic boreal-taiga relict species, located at the southern boundary of the range. Found in small numbers on limited area.36. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 83 (plot 7), birch spruce-oxalidosum forest. 1 sod found on the area of 0.50.5 m.

Siberian iris (Iris sibirica)

Conservation status IV (NT). Rare boreal species, occurring in Belarus within the boundaries of the range rarely and on limited areas.37. Miory forestry section, compartment No 122 (plot 6), lightly wooded mesotrophic bog. Over 20 plants on the area of 2040 m. Good condition.38. Miory forestry section, compartment No 132 (plot 3), birch caricosum forest. Over 10 plants on the area of 220 m. Vegetal and generative plants registered.

Lousewort (Pedicularis sceptrum-carolinum)

Conservation status II (EN). Rare boreal relict species, growing in Belarus close to the south-western boundary of the range.39. Miory forestry section, compartment No 122 (plot 6), lightly wooded mesotrophic bog. Often in groups over the whole plot, average: 2-3 plants per 1 m2. 40. Miory forestry section, compartment No 132 (plot 3), birch caricosum forest. Over 40 plants on the area of 230 m.

Whortleberry willow (Salix myrtilloides)

Conservation status III (VU). Relict boreal species, found in isolated localities close to the southern boundary of the range.Found in the area around the village of Germanovichi, on the mesotrophic periphery of the mire, by N.V. Kozlovskaya, I.V. Shvets, and E.E. Budov (1976, MSK). Under the study of 2006, the location was not confirmed.

Tree lungwort (Lobaria pulmonaria)

Conservation status III (VU). Rare lichens species, occurring sporadically practically on the whole territory of Belarus.41. Disna forestry section, compartment No 32 (plot 13), ash aegopodiosum forest, on tree trunks (0.5-6 m high), often on the area of 10 m2.

Inflated notchwort (Gymnocolea inflata)

Conservation status II (EN). Rare bryophytic species, single specimens occurring on the country’s territory.42. Germanovichi forestry, compartment No 68 (plot 2), on sphagnum sod over the water surface at the shore of Dolgoe Lake, single specimens.

Blushing bog-moss (Sphagnum molle)

Conservation status III (VU). Rare bryophytic species, single specimens occurring on the territory of Belarus [77].

62

43. Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 56 (plot 1), 0.5 km to the west of Ploskoe Lake, post-fire eriophorum-callunosum-polytrichosum community, single specimens.

63

34

ßì í î

×åðåñû

Çî ðüêà

Áåëåâöû


Ñâåðäëû

Ï î ï ø óëè

Áóäû

Ëèï í î

Êàí àõè

Áëàæêè

Ëèï àòèí î


Ï òèöêèå

Î ñòðî âî

Ï åñòóí û

Êî çëû



Î êóí åâî

Ñî êî ëî âî

Í î âèí öû

Ãî ðî âöû

Êèñåëè

Èâàí î âî

Ðóäí ÿ

Àðõèï î âî


Áðóø êè


Ì àëÿâêè

Ëþ äâèí î âî

Òóð÷èí î


Ì àñåâöû

Áàðàí ÷èêè

Òèëåâöû

Ì í þ õè

Ñóø êè

Èâàí üêè


Áî ë.Ï î æåí üêè


Âÿçî âöû

Êàðòàâûå

Ï àòåí êè



Çàõàðí è

Ì î í àçû ëü

Ñóõèå

Âèäî êèÌ àë.


Ðåêóí û

Òàòàðû

Ãðåöêèå


Ëèï î âêà

Êðû ø òóëè

Ñâèðù àí å

Äóëüñêèå

Í î â. ÑåëîËèòî â÷èêè




Ì È Î ÐÛ

î ç.×åðåñ


Âî ëòà

Ìåð

èöà

Åëüí ÿí êà

Äèñí à

88

95 96

80

90

97

81

98

82

91

83

92

99

84 85

93 94

69

65

58

55

64

54 56 57

616059

686766

70 71 72

102 103 104

115114113148

149

132

122 123 124125

135134133

105

116

106

117

107

118

126 127 128

138137136

142143 144

129 130 131

141140139

145 146 147

120

109108

119

112111

121

110

101100

987

18 19 20

22 23 24

292827

33 34 35

10 11 12

16151413 17

21

25 26

30 3132

36 37 38

58

51

59

52

60

53

45

39

61

54

46

40

6362

55 56 57

41

47 48

42 43

49

44

50

6970

71

116

8

1

9

2 3

4 5 6 7

23 24

38 3940 41 42

27

10 11

25 26

12

46

31

16

45

30

15

44

29

14

43

28

13

17 18 19

343332

22

3736

2120

35

525553 54

66 6768

81 8280

797877

5657 58

69 70 71

83

84 85

59 60

72 73

8687

93

47 48 49

61 62 63

88 8990

94 92

91

51

65

50

64

118

117

116

97


î ç.Áåëî å

î ç.Åëüí ÿ


î ç.Ë î ï óõè

î ç.Áåðåæà


î ç.ßæãèí ÿ


Åëüí ÿí êà

123

Species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus:Tracheophyte plants:1. Allium ursinum (Wild garlic)2. Betula nana (Dwarf birch)3. Сarex pauciflora (Few-flowered sedge)4. Gladiolus imbricatus (Turkish marsh gladiolus)5. Huperzia selago (Northern firmoss) 6. Iris sibirica (Siberian iris) 7. Oxycoccus microcarpus (Small cranberry) 8. Pedicularis sceptrum-carolinum (Lousewort) 9. Rubus chamaemorus (Cloudberry) 10. Salix myrtilloides (Whortleberry willow) Lichens: 11. Tree lungwort (Lobaria pulmonaria) Bryophytic:12. Blushing bog-moss (Sphagnum molle) 13. Inflated notchwort (Gymnocolea inflata)

Circled habitats are those mentioned in literature and herbariums

Boundaries of the specially protected natural siteForestry section boundaries


Lakes




MAP LEGEND

86

12

6 8

9

2

2

7 7

7

7

9

2

5

99

1

2

9

9

2

7

99

9

9 9

9

7

2

39

4

7

79

1

92

9

7

9

9

9

2

3

7

10

13

2

2

2

4

117

9 2

9

9

9

2

1

9

Figure 3.5 – Map of habitats of rare and protected species of tracheophytes, bryophytics, and lichens

km

64

3.5. Particularly Valuable Plant Communities

As a result of the study, 8 categories of especially valuable sites and plant communities totaling 4,895.4 ha (19.3 % of the total area of the specially protected natural site) were identified, including:

1) rare forest communities;

2) natural benchmark areas least affected by human economic activity;

3) natural and artificially regenerated commercial forests of local forest-forming species characterized by high productivity and suitability for the purpose;

4) forest communities at bogs, around lakes, and at river heads;

5) rare complex paludal communities;

6) plant communities with relict, endemic, and rare species;

7) valuable sites rich in resources; and

8) test sites.

Figure 3.6. presents the location of the particularly valuable rare and benchmark plant communities on the territory of the reserve.

It should be noted that we clearly understand certain conditionality in our classification of particularly valuable sites. For example, our list includes plant communities, which are likely to be of great natural value only in future. The list also includes those sites, whose importance is limited by a certain ecological function (for instance, water protection forests, bog areas rich in resources, etc.). On the one hand, it is related to insufficient development of the issues related to definition and protection of rare cenotaxons of the natural vegetation cover in Belarusian phytocenology, while, on the other hand, the catastrophic condition of natural ecosystems of the reserve calls for more in-depth analysis of surviving plant communities to ensure a more efficient regime of their conservation and use.

See below a description of certain particularly valuable sites and plant communities.

3.5.1 Rare forest communities

Oak forests

Grounds for conservation. Rare for Belarus plant communities.

Syntaxonomic composition. Quercetum oxalidosum, Q. aegopodiosum, Q. urticosum, Q. filicosum

Environmental conditions. Slopes of different exposition, as well as flat areas with sod-podzol sandy-loam or clay-loam soils.

Structure and species composition. There are 8 forest plots defined––total area of 13.2 ha and trunk timber stockpile of 1.9 thousand m3 (Annex). The tree stands are primarily middle-aged (45-50 years), yield classes: I–II, stockpile: 150-200 m3/ha, average annual growth: 2.5-4 m3/ha. The forest stands are condominant, the infusion of spruce, aspen, silver birch, less frequently – maple, and ash is 40-60 %. The underwood (0.4-0.8) is dominated by mountain ash, common hazel, wartybark euonymus, and bird cherry. The key dominants of the ground cover are the indicators of forest type, oak forest miscellaneous herbs of mesophytic-megatrophic group.

Flora nucleus. Nemoral (oak, goat weed, yellow archangel, European wild ginger, fingered sedge (Carex digitata), lily-of-the-valley, hepatica, wood anemone, and yellow anemone (Anemonoides ranunculoides)) and boreal species (spruce, wood-sorrel, two-leaved bead-ruby, wood rush, chickweed wintergreen, and round-leaved wintergreen).

Factors of depletion. Clear fellings.

65

Required conservation activities. Ban principal felling, monitor the condition of plant communities.

Ash forests

Grounds for conservation. Rare for Belarus plant communities

General distribution. Taiga (southern part), broad-leaved forest and forest-steppe zones of Europe.

Structure and species composition. There are 31 plots defined––total area of 82.5 ha and timber stockpile of 19.4 thousand m3 (see Annex 2). The tree stands are mainly middle-aged – 48-54 years, yield classes: I–II, stockpile of timber (70-80 years of age): 280-340 m3/ha, average annual growth: 4.4-6 m3/ha. The forest stands are condominant, with well expressed multi-layer structure. Ash is the key edificator; its co-edificators are common alder and spruce.

The presence of oak, maple, lime, birch, and aspen is insignificant, they most often form the second and third subordinated layers. There are also mono- and bi-dominant tree stands, which are represented by young forests and develop largely owing to principal and improvement fellings. In some communities there is a second layer formed with presence of ash over 15 years that serves as a reason to expect that the phytocoenotic positions of ash can be maintained and strengthened in future without human contribution. In the underwood (crown density of 0.3-0.6), the prevailing species are common hazel, mountain ash, wartybark euonymus, water elder, and other species. The herbosum layer is dominated by forest type indicators, and oak forest miscellaneous herbs of mesophytic-megatrophic group.

Flora nucleus. The nucleus species include nemoral (ash, goat weed, yellow archangel, European wild ginger, lily-of-the-valley, hepatica, wood anemone and yellow anemone, Easter-bell) and boreal species (wood-sorrel, two-leaved bead-ruby, wood rush, chickweed wintergreen, and round-leaved Wintergreen).

Factors of depletion. Clear fellings, hydrotechnical reclamation.

Required conservation activities. Decommercialize plots of ash forests at compartments No 15 (plot 2), No 17 (plot 4), No 21 (plots 24, 31, and 32) of Disna forestry section; ban principal fellings on other allocated plots (see Annex 6); arrange monitoring of the condition of communities.

Lime forests

Grounds for conservation. Rare for Belarus plant communities

General distribution. Southern part of the taiga, broad-leaved forest and forest-steppe zones of Europe.

Structure and species composition. 1 plot of 0.9 ha is distinguished (see Annex 2). The composition of the forest stand is 5L2A2GA1BsingleO [the elements of the composition are explained after Annex 2], its age is 35 years, height – 16 m, stockpile of timber – 150 m3/ha, average annual growth 4.2 m3/ha. The well developed undergrowth contains lime, maple, aspen, spruce, and oak (composition: 5M2L2A1SsingleO [the elements of the composition are explained after Annex 2]). The underwood is 2-2.5 m high with crown density of 0.7; it is formed by common hazel, mountain ash, wartybark euonymus, water elder, and alder buckthorn. As to the ground cover, the key species are wood-sorrel, yellow archangel, Easter-bell, goat weed, and hepatica.

Flora nucleus. The core species are nemoral (yellow archangel, Easter-bell, goat weed, and hepatica) and boreal (wood-sorrel, two-leaved bead-ruby, and chickweed wintergreen) species.

Factors of depletion. Clear fellings

Required conservation activities. Decommercialize the site; arrange monitoring of the condition of communities.

66

Figure 3.6 – Map of particularly valuable rare and benchmark plant communities of the Yelnia Reserve

MAP LEGEND

Natural benchmark areas least affected by human economic activity

Rare forest communities

Rare complex paludal communities

Natural and artificially regenerated commercial forests of local forest-forming species characterized by high productivity and suitability for the purpose

Forest communities at bogs, around lakes, and at river heads

Sites rich in resources

▲ Test facilities

7


Lakes

Boundaries of the specially protected natural siteForestry section boundaries

Forest compartment No

1 Miory forestry section 2 Disna forestry section

3 Germanovichi forestry section

$$

$$$$

$$

$$$$ $$ $$ $$ $$ $$ $$

$$

$$

$$$$

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

987

18 19 20

22 23 24

292827

33 34 35

10 11 12

16151413

17

21

2526

30 31 32

36 37 38

58

51

59

52

60

53

45

39

61

54

46

40

6362

55 56 57

41

47 48

42 43

49

44

50

6970

71

116

8

1

9

2 3

4 5 67

23 24

38 3940 41 42

27

10 11

25 26

12

46

31

16

45

30

15

29

14

43

28

13

17 18 19

343332

22

3736

2120

35

52

55

5354

6667 68

8182

80

797877

56 57 58

69 70 71

83

84

85

59 60

72 73

86

87

93

47 48 49

61 62 63

88 89 90

9492

91

51

65

50

64

118

117

116

88

95 96

80

90

97

81

98

82

91

83

92

99

84 85

93 94

69

65

58

55

64

5456 57

616059

686766

70 71 72

102 103 104

115114113148

149

132

122 123 124 125

135134133

105

116

106

117

107

118

126 127 128

138137136

142 143 144

129 130 131

141140139

145 146147

120

109108

119

112111

121

110

101100

44

ßì í î

×åðåñû

Çî ðüêà

Ï î ï ø óëè

Áóäû

Ëèï í î

Ëèï àòèí î

Êàí àõè

Ï òèöêèå


Êî çëî âöû

Áëàæêè

Ï åñòóí û


Êî çëû


Î êóí åâî


Ãî ðî âöû

Êèñåëè

Ðóäí ÿ

Àðõèï î âî

Áðþø êè


Ì àëÿâêè

Ëþäâèí î âî

Òóð÷èí î


Ì àñåâöû

Òóðêî âî

Áàðàí ÷èêè

Ì í þõè

Ñóø êè

Èâàí üêè



Êàðòàâûå

Ï àòåí êè



Ì î í àçûëü

Òàòàðû

Ñóõèå

Ì àë. Êî âàëåâù èí à

Âèäî êèÐåêóí û

Ãðåöêèå


Êðûø òóëè

Ëèï î âêà

Ñâèðù àí åÍ î â. Ñåëî

Äóëüñêèå

Ëèòî â÷èêè





Âî ëòà

Äèñí à

Äèñí à

Åëüí ÿí êà

î ç.×åðåñ


î ç.Åëüí ÿ

Äóëüñêèå

î ç.×åðí î åî ç.Áåëî åî ç.Áëèæí åå

î ç.ßæãèí ÿ

î ç.Ï ëî ñêî åî ç.Áåðåæà

î ç.ßæãèí ÿ


1 2

3

67

3.5.2 Natural benchmark areas least affected by human economic activity

On the reserve territory, there are 7 sites, which––judging by the forest management and taxation indicators, environmental and life conditions––can be classified as natural benchmark areas. Their total area is 20 ha, with the stockpile of trunk timber of 5.9 thousand m3.

Required conservation activities. Decommercialize the sites.

3.5.3 Natural and artificially regenerated commercial forests of local forest-forming species characterized by high productivity and suitability for the purpose

In accordance with the criteria for identifying particularly valuable plant communities, 15 high-yield forest sites have been identified on the reserve territory; their total area is 62.7 ha and the stockpile of timber is 16.7 thousand m3.

Required conservation activities: Decommercialize.

3.5.4 Forest communities at bogs, around lakes, and at river heads

On the reserve territory, in the framework of the forest management project, 66 sites of water protection and regulation concern, totaling 221.1 ha, were identified.

Required conservation activities. Ban principal felling.

3.5.5 Rare complex paludal communities with protected plant species

Grounds for conservation. Rare for Belarus boreal complex communities located at the southern boundary of their continuous range.

General distribution. Eurasian coniferous forest zone.

Distribution in Belarus. Rarely – on bogs in the northern part of the country.

Environmental conditions. Relict glacial valleys, parts of oligotrophic bogs.

Structure and species composition. The main background of the ridges is formed by heath-polytrichosum wastelands created as a result of recent fires. There are fragments of ridges undamaged by the fires and covered by scattered (0.1-0.3) suppressed pines f. litwinowii and f. willkommii 1-3 m high. The suffruticose-herbosum layer is not dense – 30-50 %; the prevailing species of 10-15 % cover are cotton grass and/or heather, with mosaic and rare ledum, bog-rosemary, cranberry, myrtle, and red rot. The continuous moss carpet of the ridges consists of Sphagnum fuscum, with infusions of S. magellanicum, S. angustifolium, and S. rubellum on slopes and at ridge feet. Hollows are not covered with forests; the suffruticose-herbosum layer is not dense – 25-30 %. The prevailing species are Rannoch-rush, mud sedge, and sometimes – beak-sedge. The moss carpet is 70-100 % wet or waterlogged, with Sphagnum cuspidatum dominating in it. Lakelets either have no aquatic flora or are characterized by single-layer cenosis of aquatic plants fixed to their beds or free floating hydrophyte ones.

Flora nucleus. The nucleus consists of sphagnum bog species (hare's-tail cotton grass, mud sedge, Rannoch-rush, white beak-sedge, bog-rosemary, heather, and species of Sphagnum genus). There are rare for Belarus tracheophytes (cloudberry and dwarf birch) and mosses (Gymnocolea inflata, Sphagnum molle).

Factors of depletion. Bog drainage.

Required conservation activities. Completely decommercialize, monitor the condition of the communities, and create a buffer zone.

68

3.5.6 Valuable sites rich in resources

Valuable sites rich in resources totaling 1,667.2 ha have been defined on the reserve territory.

Valuable sites rich in resources (both medical plants, and other types of resources) are defined for the following purposes: conservation of the stock and gene pool of valuable plants in those areas where their largest and most productive communities are located; testing on these sites methods facilitating increase in the stock of useful plants, their expansion, and expansion of their populations. It is reasonable to identify a relatively small part of the reserve territory for this purpose. The remaining part of the territory could be used for limited production of medical and other useful plants under control of the land user in those cases, when the stockpile available makes it possible. In these cases, the resource testing sites can be used to pilot––while taking nature conservation measures––methods of reasonable, environmentally sound collection of plants and examine their rehabilitation.

Required conservation activities: Ban commercial production of resources, fruit, and seeds; periodically monitor the condition of the population.

3.5.7 Habitats protected in accordance with the EU Habitats Directive

To conclude this section, we present a brief assessment of the Yelnya Reserve ecosystems in the light of their consistency with the EU Directive on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora (EU Habitats Directive). It has been established that 75.2 % of biotopes of the nature reserve are classified as protected in Europe (Table 3.3, Figure 3.7). That vividly shows the important role of the explored site for conservation of landscape and biological diversity.

Table 3.3 – Distribution of habitats protected in accordance with the EU Habitats Directive in the Yelnya Reserve

Category Areaha %

3160 Natural dystrophic lakes 997.9 3.97110 Active raised bogs 2,947.0 11.6Flora complex: 7110 (active raised bogs) combined with 7150 (retrogressive complexes)

157.0 0.6

7120 Degraded raised bogs still capable of natural regeneration 1,0781 42.67140 Transition mires and quaking bogs 915.5 3.67150 Retrogressive complexes 23.1 0.19010 Western Taiga 1,033.0 4.19050 Fennoscandian herb-rich forests with Picea abies 572.6 2.39080 Fennoscandian deciduous swamp woods 898.6 3.691D0 Bog woodland 607.1 2.491E0 Alluvial forests with common alder and ash trees 109.4 0.4TOTAL 19,042.

275.2

69

021

0

ßì í î

×åðåñû

Áåëåâöû

Ï î ï ø óëè

Áóäû

Ëèï í î

Êàí àõè

Áëàæêè

Ëèï àòèí î

Ï òèöêèå

Ï åñòóí û

Êî çëû


Î êóí åâî

Ñî êî ëî âî


Áî í äàðöû

Í î âèí öû

Ãî ðî âöû

Êèñåëè

Ðóäí ÿ

Àðõèï î âî


Áðóø êè


Ì àëÿâêè

Òóð÷èí î


Ì àñåâöû

Áàðàí ÷èêè

Ì í þ õè

Ñóø êè

Èâàí üêè



Âÿçî âöû

Êàðòàâûå

Ï àòåí êè



Çàõàðí è

Ì î í àçûëü

Ñóõèå


Ðåêóí û

ÒàòàðûÃðåöêèå


Ëèï î âêà

Êðûø òóëè

Ñâèðù àí å

Äóëüñêèå

Í î â. Ñåëî

Ëèòî â÷èêè




î ç.Áåðåæà

î ç.ßæãèí ÿ



Åëüí ÿí êà



î ç.×åðåñ




î ç.Áåëî å

î ç.Åëüí ÿ

Âî ëòà

Ì åðèö

à

Åëüí ÿí êà

Äèñí à

2

421

19

19

34

2

19

2

2

2

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

3

4

4

5

4

5

5

5

6

7

7

7

7

7

7

7

77

7

7

8

88

8

8

8

88

8

7

8

8

9a

8a

9a

9a

9a

9a

9б

9б

9б9б6

1010

1010

109

10

9

910

10

109

10

11

10

111111

121121

121

11

121121

121

11

121

121

1212

121

121

11

11

11

11

121

121

121121

12

121

оз.Ельня

оз.Плоское

оз.Ближнее оз.БелоеЕльнянка

оз.Бережа

оз.Долгое

оз.Лопухи

оз.Черное

0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 2 50

5

1 0

1 5

2 0

km

km

4

5

7

7

1

11

1

1

1

1

1

1

оз.Яжгиня

MAP LEGEND3160 Natural dystrophic lakes

7110 Active raised bogs

Flora complex: 7110 (active raised bogs) combined with retrogressive complexes (7150)

7120 Degraded raised bogs still capable of natural regeneration

7140 Transition mires and quaking bogs 7150 Retrogressive complexes 9010 Western Taiga9050 Fennoscandian herb-rich forests with Picea abies 9080 Fennoscandian deciduous swamp woods

with sphagnum and birch trees with common alder on acidic peats

91D0 Bog woodland91E0 Alluvial forests with common alder and ash treesOther lands

1

3

4

5

6

7

9a

9б

10

12

11

2

8

Figure 3.7 – Index map of the Yelnia Reserve ecosystems protected under the EU Habitats Directive

11

11

70

3.6. Reserve Fauna

The significant area and well pronounced primary biotopes of the sphagnum bog (open sphagnum bog, sphagnosum pine forest, and ridge-hollow-lake flora complexes) facilitate formation of a fauna complex of vertebrate animals here, which is most complete and representative for the raised bogs region. On primary sphagnum and ecotone parts of the mire, there are habitats of 7 species of amphibias, 5 species of reptiles, 150 species of birds (of which 113 nesting), and 31 species of mammals registered (chiroptera undercounted).

Insects. It is found that the territory of the reserve is the refugium for many circumpolar and circumboreal species, which must have survived since the times of Valdai glaciation, as well as a number of rare glacial relict species, such as Dicheirotrichus cognatus, Bradycellus ruficollis, Dytiscus lapponicus, and Hydroporus glabriusculus. Carabidae complex of oligotrophic lake shore zones of the Yelnya mire includes 18 species, among which – a number of rare and little known species: Bembidion humerale Sturm., Pterostichus angustatus., and Trichocellus cognatus. On the territory of the bog, quite rare Carabidae species Carabus clathratus L. and species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus – C.cancelatus., and Carabus nitens are very frequent. Such species as Bradycellus similis, Bradycellus ruficollis, Dicheirotrichus cognatus, Hydroporus morio, Laccophilus poecilus, and Cantharis quadripunctata are registered there for the first time ever for the territory of Belarus.

Amphibias and reptiles. The composition of amphibias and reptiles of sphagnum biotopes is relatively poor, being represented mainly by grass frog, common lizard, and European adder. In sphagnum hollows and shore zones of bog water bodies, pool frog and lake frog are also found. Moor frog and sand lizard are registered in drier ecotone and transition areas of the mire. Common newt and grass snake are locally found in low forest-suffruticose areas of drainage canal banks. The fauna complex also includes common toad and green toad, which are found in mire ecotones.

The overall density of amphibia and reptile population varies significantly in different biotopes, being determined not only by biotope conditions, but also by their specific ecological features – formation of seasonal groupings (at the time of breeding, wintering), rate of their disintegration and expansion. Due to that, the results of counting within the same count site vary by several digits, depending on their timing (from 20-50 to 1,500-2,000 specimens/ha in the sphagnum biotope group). The density of the population of the commercially valuable species of European adder registered in the sphagnum biotope group ranged from 5 to 30 specimens/ha.

Birds. Within the boundaries of the mire, 150 bird species are likely to live––taking into account the species nesting in peripheral habitats and on mineral rincons, as well as transit migratory species. Of those, the category of typical, ecologically closely linked to sphagnum bog habitats, comprises 61 nesting species, the other species are registered in different biotopes, which are adjacent to the bog, small-scale, mosaic, carved with canals and streams edging the mire tree stand.

Owing to the significant area and low commercialization, the Yelnya mire differs from all raised bogs of northern Belarus by the most pronounced ornithological complex typical of sphagnum bogs of the Baltic region and high representation compared to this biogeographical region.

All bird species typical of this type of bogs nest regularly within the boundaries of the area described; many of them have their southern nesting range boundaries on the territory of Belarus (black-throated loon (Gavia arctica), willow grouse (Lagopus lagopus), golden plover (Pluvialis apricaria), Jack snipe (Lymnocryptes minimus), whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus), and common greenshank (Tringa nebularia). Thus, the problem of protecting the environmental conditions of the Yelnya mire is directly linked to the problem of regional conservation of rare and stenotopic species ecologically closely linked to raised bogs.

The largest and most stable breeding groups of willow grouse (Lagopus lagopus, 27-45 couples; 45.2 % of the total number in Belarus), golden plover (Pluvialis apricaria, 35-50 couples), whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus, at least 10 couples), common greenshank (Tringa nebularia, 20-30 couples),

71

possibly nesting Jack snipe (Lymnocryptes minimus, 0-5 couples) are confined to the Yelnya mire. The bog located in the reserve is of regional concern as a nesting and hunting site for conservation of a predaceous bird species – the merlin, while the forests surrounding the bog are important for conservation of the lesser spotted eagle.

The reserve is also the site of regular nesting of a number of bird species of general concern for nature conservation in Europe: black-throated loon (Gavia arctica) (2-4 couples), common crane (Grus grus) (at least 14 couples), common gull (Larus canus) (15-30), great grey shrike (Lanius excubitor), wood sandpiper (Tringa glareola), and redshank (Tringa totanus).

The typical appearance of the mire biotic complexes is formed by scattered clusters of charadriiformes Charadriiformes on vast open bog areas and multiple nesting colonies of various larids Laridae on islands of small lakes.

An important specific feature of the ornithological complex is the significant representation of species, which have international and national nature conservation status (Annex 1).

In general terms, the biotope distribution of nesting bird species is illustrated in Table 3.4. Classification of species by biotope groups is based in comparing the figures of their occurrence within the whole spectrum of sphagnum bog habitats, but still it does not mean that they are strictly confined to the specified biotopes. It should be noted that key nesting sites of the aforementioned stenotopic species of raised bogs are confined to habitats of ridge-hollow-lake complexes and wetter areas of the open peat bog; it is also the place where the largest number of nesting species and the highest total density of their nesting – up to 3.0-3.5 couples/ha were registered. The average total density of their nesting for the bog is around 1.5 couples/ha.

Table 3.4 – Biotope distribution of the most Typical nesting birds

Biotope groups Number of nesting species

Typical species

Open sphagnum bog 16-21 Willow grouse (Lagopus lagopus), common crane (Grus grus), Eurasian curlew (Numenius arquata), golden plover (Pluvialis apricaria), lapwing (Vanellus vanellus), wood sandpiper (Tringa glareola), redshank (Tringa totanus), Jack snipe (Lymnocryptes minimus), meadow pipit (Anthus pratensis), whinchat (Saxicola rubetra), and yellow wagtail (Motacilla flava).

Ridge-hollow-lake complexes

22-28 Black-throated loon (Gavia arctica), mallard, common teal, willow grouse (Lagopus lagopus), merlin (Falco columbarius), common crane (Grus grus), whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus), golden plover (Pluvialis apricaria), common greenshank (Tringa nebularia), lapwing (Vanellus vanellus), great grey shrike (Lanius excubitor), redshank (Tringa totanus), hooded crow (Corvus cornix), and white wagtail (Motacilla alba).

Sphagnum pine forest

17-23 Merlin (Falco columbarius), great grey shrike (Lanius excubitor), hooded crow (Corvus cornix), tree pipit (Anthus trivialis), and common chaffinch (Fringilla coelebs).

72

It should be noted that on areas of the bog with an impaired hydrological regime, where sphagnum mosses are replaced by heather, all the typical bird species disappear. The areas, where burned peat areas have become filled with water, are getting densely populated by black-tailed godwit.

The Yelnya mire plays a significant role in protecting wetland bird migration, primarily geese and common crane, since it represents for them an optimal combination of conservation conditions of a large mire and feeding capacity of surrounding farmlands. Based on special counting of the anseriformes made prior to the present study,––APB point counting at the zone of passage for feeding––their number at the bog for the fall period was estimated within the following ranges (number of specimens): bean goose (Anser fabalis) – 2,300-4,000, greater white-fronted goose (Anser albifrons) – 1,100-1,600, greylag goose (Anser anser) – 60-90, and goose (sp.) – 1,400-2,700. Individual specimens of the specially protected species – lesser white-fronted goose – are counted. According to recent data based on single counting, the number of common crane (Grus grus) at the period of fall migration was at least 4,000 birds.

In spring 2012, in the framework of the EU/UNDP project implementation, spring migration of birds was studied on the territory of the Yelnya landscape reserve. As a result, it was found that at the time of spring migration, the Yelnya bog serves as a stop-over point of 2,023-10,115 geese (bean goose (Anser fabalis) – 600-3,000; greater white-fronted goose (Anser albifrons) – 1,400-7,000; greylag goose (Anser anser) – 23-115 birds), as well as 500-4,000 specimens of common crane (Grus grus).

Mammals. There are practically no mammals, which would be obligately linked to habitats on sphagnum bogs, as their food potential is poor and lacking variety, there are no covers, it is impossible to burrow in the peat deposit owing to the high ground water level. Wood-suffruticose biotopes of sphagnum bogs and transition areas are used as feed sites and temporary cover by moose (Alces alces), wild boar (Sus scrofa), European roe deer (Capreolus capreolus), mountain hare (Lepus timidus), predaceous mammals (wolf (Canis lupus), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), and raccoon dog (Nyctereutes procyonoides). Their occurrence and number cumulatively reflect the effect of various factors and markedly fluctuate depending on the season, reproductive period, hunting and recreation pressure.

Habitats of a range of small mammals (pine marten (Martes martes), least weasel (Mustela nivalis), European polecat (Mustela putorius), stoat (Mustela erminea), white-breasted hedgehog, common shrew (Sоuех araneus), red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris), water vole (Arvicola terrestris), bank vole (Clethrionomys glareolus), and yellow-necked mouse (Apodemus flavicollis), which make part of the mire fauna complex, are mainly linked to forest ecotones of mineral rincons and adjacent forest tree stands. Island forests are often the calving sites of moose (Alces alces).

The recently registered desiccation of the peat deposit––which is a result of reclamation work performed in the mire peripheral and surrounding areas and the draining effect of the canals made in the peat deposit––leads to reduced area of the ridge-hollow-lake complexes and waterlogged open biotopes and increased area of sphagnum pine forest and suffruticose low forest. It is inevitably accompanied by adjustment of the fauna complex, where the share of more land-based and forest-suffruticose species tends to increase, while the habitats of hydrophilic species, including those typical of only raised bogs, tend to disappear.

3.7 Rare Protected Species of the Reserve Fauna

Rare and endangered animal species. Over the whole period of research, habitation of 33 rare and endangered species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus has been registered within the boundaries of the reserve, including: 8 species of insects, 27 bird species, and 1 species of mammals (Figure 3.8):

Insects:

Carabus coriaceus (Carabus cancelatus) – Conservation status IV. Rare species, occurring on the territory of Belarus as single specimens. Registered on the territory of the reserve at wet coniferous

73

forests on mineral rincons in the bog.

Carabus cancellatus (Carabus cancelatus) – Conservation status IV. Species with a declining population. Registered at Yelnya island. Likely to be more widely spread in dry areas of the bog peripheral zone.

Carabus menetriesi (Carabus menetriesi) – Conservation status III. Species typical of fen and transition bogs. Registered in the area of Dolgoe Lake. Likely to be quite common at habitats typical for it over the whole territory of the reserve.

Carabus clathratus (Carabus clathratus) – Conservation status III. It inhabits inundated meadows, fen bogs, river banks, and lake shores. Species typical of fen and transition bogs. Registered in the area of Dolgoe Lake.

Carabus nitens (Carabus clathratus) – Conservation status III. It inhabits inundated meadows, fen bogs, and other open very wet areas. Species typical of fen and transition bogs. Registered at the periphery of the bog, near the village of Yamno.

Jutta Arctic (Oeneis jutta) – Conservation status III. It inhabits raised bogs with pine undergrowth, mainly on large mires with very moist peat.

Moorland clouded yellow (Colias palaeno) – Conservation status III. Rare species owing to bog drainage and degradation. It inhabits the periphery of bogs overgrown by forest or pine undergrowth.

Frigga fritillary (Clossiana frigga) – Conservation status II. It inhabits small clearings in the wood overgrowing with small-leaved tree species and the periphery of raised bogs.

Birds:

Black-throated loon (Gavia arctica) – Conservation status II. Very rare nesting migratory, transit migratory species with single wintering specimens. The southern boundary of the species range runs over the territory of Belarus. It inhabits water bodies on raised bogs in the north of Belarus. Registered on Blizhnee Lake (7 specimens). The total number of mature birds registered within the reserve is 18 specimens. Mature specimens were registered on large lakes (Blizhnee, Lopukhi, Glubokoe, Ploskoe, etc.). One nest with a clutch (2 younglings) was found on Glubokoe Lake. It stopped nesting on a number of lakes owing to bird disturbance by fishermen and predation of the raccoon dog.

Lesser white-fronted goose (Anser erythropus) – Conservation status IV. Transitory species. Individual specimens and small flocks are regularly registered at the mire among other goose species.

Black stork (Ciconia nigra) – Conservation status III. Inconsiderable in number nesting migratory and transit migratory species. Registered on the territory of the reserve at waterlogged forests. 1-4 couples nesting.

Black kite (Milvus migrans) – Conservation status III. Very rare species for the explored territory. Within the boundaries of the reserve, it is a visiting species, i.e. it is using it only for hunting. One hunting bird was registered on June 24, 2012 at the eastern boundary of the reserve (near the village of Lopatino), over haylands.

White-tailed eagle (Hieraaetus albicilla) – Conservation status III. Rare nesting species for the explored territory. Based on data from literature, one nesting couple was registered at the area of full grown pine forest at the edge of the mire (План управления, 2008 [Management Plan]). During the period of the research, immature and mature birds showing territorial behavior were regularly registered in the southern part of the bog. Based on the research performed, the estimated boundaries of white-tailed eagle nesting sites were identified in 2012 and 2008 (personally reported by V.Ch. Dombrovsky) (Figure 1.5.2).

Short-toed snake eagle (Circaetus gallicus) – Conservation status II. Rare nesting species of the reserve. The indicator of the status of forest-bog ecosystems (План управления, 2008 [Management Plan]). Registered nesting on the territory of the reserve since 2002 (Ивановский, 2002 [Ivanovsky]).

74

In 2012, one territorial couple––using mainly the ecotone part of the Yelnya bog periphery as its hunting site ––was found. Based on the research performed, the estimated boundaries of the nesting site were established (Figure 1.5.2). The precise location of the nest will be established in the fall period, in the framework of performing the 5th stage of the terms of reference. The short-toed snake eagle is rare as the bog feeding capacity is low that is related to the negative impact of fires. A gradual increase in the population of this species can be projected as the composition of the paludal flora and herbal complex is restored.

Hen harrier (Circus cyaneus) – Conservation status III. Rare species, one couple nesting was registered at the very boundary of the reserve on a wasteland overgrowing with birch forest, at the periphery of a farm field near the village of Lopatino (N 55,49946 E 27,93976) (Figure 1.5.2, Photo 1.5.3). In the process of counting, hunting immature birds were regularly registered near the boundaries of the reserve. Since heathlands are overgrowing with birch, the number of couples nesting on the territory of the reserve can be expected to increase in future.

Lesser spotted eagle (Aquila pomarina) – Conservation status III. Species nesting in the reserve. Based on the absolute counting performed, 13 lesser spotted eagle nesting sites were identified, of which 5 – within the reserve boundaries, 4 – in immediate vicinity of its boundaries, and 4 more – within 4-6 km from the bog edge (Figure 1.5.3). A lesser spotted eagle nest (Photo 1.5.4) with a clutch (2 eggs) was found 12 m high, on a spruce, near the village of Krasnovtsy (N 55.59857; E 027.99967). As result of research, lesser spotted eagles were found to use the reserve territory––old-age parts of the forest located on the bog perimeter––for nesting, while for hunting, they use farm fields directly adjacent to the reserve boundaries (Photo 1.5.5). Besides nesting birds, immature and not breeding specimens are found on the periphery of the reserve (Photo 1.5.6).

Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) – Conservation status II. Currently very rare species visiting the reserve territory. In 2012, one couple of ospreys was registered at the periphery of Zhada bog, 6 km away from the reserve boundaries. Nesting on two mires close to the Yelnya mire – Kamenpolie and Zhada (personally reported by V.Ch. Dombrovsky). No occurrence of osprey in the reserve can be explained by shortage of food items––low productivity of bog lakes in the reserve––and the disturbance factor at the lakes, as well as shortage of biotopes suitable for nesting. This species was earlier assumed to be nesting at compartments 51 and 31 of Germanovichi forestry section (План управления, 2008 [Management Plan]). No nests were registered when the aforementioned forest compartments were explored.

Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) – Conservation status I. One couple of golden eagles was earlier assumed to be nesting on the reserve territory, and a single specimen was registered (План управления, 2008 [Management Plan]). However, there are no documented facts of golden eagle breeding at the Yelnya bog. In 2008, a special search for golden eagle on the territory of the reserve gave no results (Домбровский, Ивановский, 2008 [Dombrovsky, Ivanovsky]). In 2012, we did not register these predaceous bird species either. Thus, the golden eagle does not nest and must have never nested on the territory of the reserve over the last 20 years, but such specimens, especially immature ones, could have been easily seen during the migration period.

Common kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) – Conservation status III. Very rare species for the reserve. No nesting sites identified. During the period of counting, one hunting specimen was registered near Blizhnee Lake.

Merlin (Falco сolumbarius) – Conservation status III. Rare nesting species. It is a typical representative of the fauna of Poozerie raised bogs (Ивановский, 1999 [Ivanovsky]). The pre-fire population within the boundaries of the reserve was estimated at 15-20 couples (План управления, 2008 [Management Plan]). On the territory of the reserve, as well as on other bogs (Николаев, 2008 [Nokolaev]), it gives preference to ridge-lake complexes and lake shores. Based on the research performed, 5 territorial merlin couples were definitely found on the territory of the Yelnya bog.

Hobby (Falco subbuteo) – Conservation status IV. Inconsiderable in number species nesting on the

75

territory of the reserve. In the process of counting, 3 territorial couples (Figure 1.5.5) were registered, all – localized on the periphery of the reserve beyond the mire. Taking the radius of hobby detection by means of the applied method of visual examination at 1.5 km, the counting area at suitable nesting biotopes constituted 27 km2. The total area of nesting biotopes––forests surrounding the mire, wooded islands on the bog––is around 60 km2. Based on these data and taking into account the low rate of detection of this species by means of visual examination, the maximum number of hobby within the boundaries of the reserve can be estimated as 7-10 nesting couples.

Willow grouse (Lagopus lagopus) – Conservation status II. Very rare species, with declining number and occurrence. In Belarus, it lives at the southern boundary of its range. It inhabits large raised bogs. The population of this species in open bogs is currently 27-40 couples. In 2006-2008, the population declined dramatically, which must have resulted from bird deaths caused by predators in snowless winters. The counting performed in winter 2012 showed that there are at least 40 couples of willow grouse living in the reserve.

Common crane (Grus grus) – Conservation status II. Rare nesting migratory and transit migratory species. Registered in the western, north-western, and central parts of the mire. Single birds, couples with clutches, as well as groups of 6-20 birds were detected. The total number at Yelnya is at least 50 couples. In the post-nesting and migratory period, the bog plays an important role as a particularly significant site, where up to several thousand cranes are concentrated.

Golden plover (Pluvialis apricaria) – Conservation status III. Rare sporadically nesting relict species with declining population. Found in Belarus at the southern boundary of its range. It inhabits large raised bogs. The research performed in 2007-2008 showed that the golden plover population is quite evenly nesting at Yelnya open raised bog biotopes. It nests at sites with relatively low wetness, as well as on the periphery of ridge-lake and ridge-hollow complexes, giving preference, however, to less wet sites. At 8 counting sites of 1 km2 each, 24 couples were counted. The average nesting density is 3-4 couples/km2. Recent research allows for estimating the total population at the bog as around 100 couples. The species is practically not detected at badly burnt heather-covered bog areas.

Jack snipe (Limnocryptes minimus) – Conservation status III. Very rare, irregularly nesting species. According to long-term observations, 2-5 couples nest at the Yelnya bog. In 2006-2008, it was not found––possibly owing to continued water level decline at most of the bog parts.

Whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus) – Conservation status III. Very rare sporadically nesting species with declining population. Being a species of boreal origin, it has its southern boundary of the range on the territory of Belarus. It inhabits large raised bogs with ridge-hollow complexes in the north of Belarus. According to long-term observations, 30-35 couples nest at the Yelnya bog. 8 couples were registered at counting sites and routes. There were also flying clutches (5-7 birds each) noted. The whimbrel prefers wetter areas to nest within the boundaries of the Yelnya mire. The local density is 1-2 couples/km2. The activities aimed at rehabilitation of the hydrological regime will definitely improve the habitat conditions for this rare species.

Eurasian curlew (Numenius arquata) – Conservation status III. Rare nesting species, inconsiderable in number. Typical species for raised and transition bogs. 24 couples were registered on counting sites and routes, flying clutches (4-5 birds each) were detected. It nests in Yelnya at the same biotopes as the golden plover, preferring, however, wetter sites, often with tree flora in the form of grouped low pines on the edges. The total population at the Yelnya Reserve is at least 50-70 couples that is significantly above earlier population estimates. Increasing water level at the bog will result in expansion of the sites suitable for nesting of this species.

Black-tailed godwit (Limosa limosa) – Conservation status III. 21 couples were counted at 8 counting sites 1 km2 each. The average nesting density is 2-3 couples/km2 on suitable for nesting biotopes. When choosing sites for nesting, the birds tend to prefer wetter parts of ridge-hollow-lake complexes; they also nest on parts of the open raised bog with relatively low wetness––a combination of dry burnt wood and a large number of mud hollows.

76

Common greenshank (Tringa nebularia) – Conservation status III. Very rare nesting species, occurring at the boundary of the range as individual couples. Nesting on open inundated meadows and fen bogs. The species quite often nests on ridge-lake complexes of Yelnya. During the period of observations, 10 couples were registered in the area of ridge-lake complexes near Blizhnee Lake and Lopukhi Lake. The total population at Yelnya is around 30-50 couples.

Common gull (Larus canus) – Conservation status IV. Common nesting species. The habitats of the common gull are characterized by high wetness and represent groups of small lakelets with numerous small islands in the form of peat-moss hummocks averaging from 1 to 20 m2. It mainly nests on islands of ridge-lake, ridge-hollow complexes; and nesting on submerged stumps in Berezha Lake––densely located in shallow water of the south-western and southern part of the lake––was also registered. 88 couples (from 4 to 33) were counted on 5 counting sites of 1 km2 each. According to updated information, the population of the species nesting at the Yelnya bog is estimated at 150-200 couples.

Eagle owl (Bubo bubo) – Conservation status II. It inhabits various habitats with open areas near water bodies. One specimen registered on a site between Dolgoe Lake and Smovzh Lake. It inhabits inundated or waterlogged deciduous forests, as well as felling sites bordering on open areas and water bodies (Гричик, Тишечкин, 2002 [Grichik, Tishechkin]). One specimen was registered on a site between Dolgoe and Smovzh Lake (План управления, 2008 [Management Plan]). According to N.N. Yakovets, signs of eagle owls’ presence (traces of feeding, casting, etc.) were noticed in the center of the mire. Besides, on April 21, 2008 a belling male eagle owl was noticed near Berezha Lake (personally reported by V.Ch. Dombrovsky). No eagle owls were registered during 2012 counting.

Short-eared owl (Asio flammeus) – Conservation status IV. Rare species, the population of which significantly varies by years depending on the pattern of the population distribution within the range. It inhabits transition and fen bogs. Based on long-term observations, up to 40-50 couples nest at the Yelnya bog.

Eurasian pygmy owl (Glaucidium passerinum) – Conservation status IV. Rare species. It inhabits full-grown mixed taiga forests with infusions of spruce. On the territory of the reserve, 1 couple was registered in compartment 31 of Disna forestry section.

Three-toed woodpecker (Picoides tridactylus) Conservation statuses IV. Species insignificant in number. Protected in Europe. In Belarus, it lives at the southern boundary of its range. It is occasionally found mainly in taiga forests surrounding the mire––the population estimate is 2-4 couples.

White-backed woodpecker (Dendrocopos leucotos) – Conservation status IV. It inhabits damp mixed and deciduous forests. On the territory of the reserve, at least 6 couples are registered in forests on the bog perimeter.

Besides, the territory of the Yelnya Reserve is a regular habitat of species not listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus, but having a conservation status in Europe. These primarily include sandpipers – redshank (Tringa tetanus), wood sandpiper (Tringa glareola), ducks – garganey (Anas querquedula) (in transit), as well as Montagu’s harrier (Circus pygargus), black grouse (Tetrao tetrix) (the population reaching 115-125 couples), nightjar (Caprimulgus europaeus), red-backed shrike (Lanius collurio), etc.

Mammals:

European badger (Meles meles) – Conservation status III. At least 6 families are registered on the territory of the reserve, one habitation was found near the village of Dulskie.

Besides, such species of rare endangered animals as dormouse and bats are quite likely to have their habitats on the territory of the Yelnya Reserve. To detect these species, additional research with specialized equipment is required.

77

4 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC BACKGROUND

4.1 Economic Activity

Miory rayon, which territory accommodates the nature reserve, is an agricultural area. Its industry is represented by processing enterprises. Currently there is a meat processing factory, feed-processing plant, bread-baking plant, milk plant, forestry enterprise, and canning plant.

The key sector of the rayon’s economy is agriculture. 22 agricultural cooperatives use 61,500 ha of land including 34,200 ha of plough land. The major areas of agricultural production include grain growing, flax manufacture, vegetable production, as well as meat and dairy products production.

Land use on the territory of the Yelnya Reserve is performed by Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI.

There are no arable areas on the territory of the reserve. 12.4 ha of haylands and pastures are part of the forestry land on the territory of the reserve.

There are peat and sapropel beds on the territory of the reserve. The core of the reserve is the Yelnya peat bed. Around 90 % of the bed is occupied by a peat deposit. The stockpile of dry peat comprises 636.3 million m3. However, even local commercial peat development will inevitably lead to a radical change of the hydrological regime.

Sapropel sediments in the largest lakes of the reserve represent quite a significant resource potential. The identified stockpile of sapropel amounts to 10.3 million m3. Sapropel sediments of the reserve lakes are unique bottom sediments for lakes of the country and can be used as a natural benchmark area of the sedimentation process in the Holocene.

A number of lakes of the reserve are accessible for amateur fishing. However, since the lakesides are difficult to access, fishing is limited to an inconsiderable number of amateurs and to large peripheral lakes mostly (Chernoe Lake, Yazhginya Lake, Bolshoe Lake, etc.).

On the territory of the Yelnya Reserve there are hunting areas of the Miory and Sharkovshchina Rayon Divisions of the Belarusian Society of Hunters and Fishermen RSPO (totaling 24 thousand ha and 0.5 thousand ha correspondingly).

As the area is difficult to access and has a specific landscape, it is little used for recreational purposes (amateur mushroom and berry picking, amateur fishing). Due to its flora and fauna aspects and unique landscapes, the area is attractive for ecotourism development, education, and outreach projects. Among the most perspective types of recreational activities are: bird watching from specially equipped sites, regional study tours, participation of amateur zoologists in biotechnical activities and scientific field research.

4.2 Traffic Network

The territory of Miory rayon is crossed by the railway Druya-Miory-Voropaevo and roads Polotsk-Braslav, Verhnedvinsk-Sharkovshchina. The Western Dvina River is navigated.

From the north, the territory of the reserve is limited by the Disna-Miory road.

4.3 Population

The population of Miory rayon totals 26.9 thousand people, including the town of Miory – 8.9 thousand people, Disna – 2.3 thousand people, and rural population – 15.7 thousand people.

78

4.4 Historical and Cultural Attractions of Areas Surrounding the Yelnya Reserve

The territory of Miory rayon has been little explored to date; however, it is attractive due to the fact that the renowned trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks” ran across this area. In this regard, sailing on archaized boats similar to those of ancient merchants has good prospects for development. The route around the Yelnya mire (Miory-Kamenpolye-Novy Pogost-Germanovichi-Disna-Uzmeny) is the most attractive for exploring the landmarks.

Miory. Neo-Gothic Uspensky Catholic Cathedral built in 1907.

Kamenpolye. Country estate of the late 19th century - early 20th century, old stables and park of the end of the 19th century.

Novy Pogost. Wooden catholic church of the 18th century. St. Nikolai’s Church built in 1878.

Germanovichi. Catholic Cathedral of Transfiguration built in 1787, Vilensk Baroque style. Country estate of the Shirins built in 1782, Classicism style.

Disna. One of the first towns in Belarus to be granted the Magdeburg Law (1569). In the mid-16th - early 18th centuries, the town was an important strategic military point and was severely damaged as a result of numerous war fares. Ancient earth ramparts of the Upper Castle, ruins of a hospital of the early 20th century, a 100-year old bridge and ferryboat, ruins of the Franciscan Church of 1773, and old town buildings are still standing.

Uzmeny. St Nikolai’s Church of 1882.

The following architectural monuments have remained intact: a church (the latter half of the 19 th

century) in the village of Golomyslo, Dedinskaya country estate, Svyato-Odigitrievskaya Church (1904) in the town of Disna, church (19th century) and Cathedral of Immaculate Conception (1939) in the village of Idolta, Kalinovskaya Svyato-Nikolaevskaya Church, Kamenopolskaya Estate, St. Trinity Church (1905-10) in the village of Kublischina, Leonpolskaya Estate and Leonpolskaya St. Trinity Church, church (1906) in the village of Nivki, Novopogostskaya Svyato-Nikolaevskaya Church, church (early 20th century) in the village of Okunevo, Svyato-Georgievskaya Church (1910) in the village of Perebrodie, Svyato-Pokrovskaya church (1930) in the village of Stephanopolie, Uzmenskaya Svyato-Nikolayevskaya Church, Tsvetsinskaya Svyato-Krestovozdvizhenskaya Church, Svyato-Nikolayevskaya Church (1878) in the village of Cheresy, Spaso-Priobrazhenskaya Church (late 19 th - early 20th centuries) in the village of Yazno, and citadel ruins in the town of Disna.

The village of Zabolotie is the native land of Belarusian sculptor, participant of the revolutionary movement of 1830-1860s G.M. Dmohovsky (1810-1863), Panchany estate – Belarusian and Polish writer V.K. Savich-Zabolotsky (1850-1893), the village of Sushki – Belarusian poets P.M. Sushko (1909-1974) and P.P. Sushko (1937-1997), the village of Novy Pogost – choir director, ethnomusic expert G.I. Tsitovich (1910-86).

4.5 Research Studies

For the last 20 years, institutes of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus and Vitebsk State University have performed periodic analysis of the ornithological complex status and trends, and the population of rare flora and fauna species.

In 1992-1993, based on field work and studied library materials, the task force of the Ecological Commission of the Academy of Sciences of Belarus––which included specialists in hydrogeology, hydrology, bog science, amelioration, agrology, botany, and zoology––accomplished an expert report on the current status of the hydrological ecosystems of the Yelnya Reserve and justified the feasibility of creating a conservation area on the basis of the reserve.

In 1998, in the framework of the research project Preparation of scientific justifications for the specially protected natural sites planned to be created according to the scheme of rational distribution

79

of specially protected natural sites of the Republic of Belarus until the year 2000, Belniipgradostroitelstva SOE [state-owned enterprise] prepared a scientific, as well as technical and economic justification for the creation of the Yelnya conservation area.

In 1999, with financial support of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), a task force of specialists in different fields––created under the civil society organization BirdLife Belarus (APB)––explored the problem of the mire ecosystem transformation under the impact of drainage, worked out and implemented the projects the Yelnya Reserve Environmental Situation Appraisal and Development of Proposals to Improve it, Rehabilitation of the Hydrological Regime and Prevention of Fires on the Potential Ramsar Site Territory of the Yelnya Hydrological Reserve. The project justification contains a brief description of climate conditions on the territory of the reserve, its geology, hydrology, biological features (fauna, flora), a description of its current environmental conditions (changes in the hydrological regime, impact of fires on plant communities, major threats for the fauna). In 2001, the project was implemented (17 dams were constructed on bog drainage canals to optimize the hydrological regime).

In 2001, the preparation work was performed for the description of the Yelnya Reserve as a Ramsar site; in 2002, the reserve was granted the status of a wetland of international importance (Ramsar site).

80

5 APPRAISAL OF NATURAL COMPLEXES AND SITES OF THE YELNYA RESERVE TO SET PRIORITIES FOR THEIR CONSERVATION AND USE

5.1 Biological and Landscape Diversity

There are 405 species of tracheophyte plants, 86 species of bryophytic ones, and 50 species of lichens on the territory of the reserve. As to the fauna, habitats of 7 species of amphibias, 5 species of reptiles, 150 species of birds (113 nesting ones), 31 species of mammals, and 149 species lepidopterous insects have been found.

The key ecosystem of the Yelnya Reserve is a raised bog characterized by a small number of plants and animal species. However, owing to the presence of nearly all biotopes typical of raised bogs of Belarus, practically all the plant and animal species found at raised bogs in Belarus grow and live at the Yelnya mire. The following bog habitats are fully represented there: sphagnum pine forests, open sphagnum bogs, ridge-hollow complexes, lakes, as well as secondary post-fire biotopes – heath wastelands.

5.2 Typicality and Representation

The Yelnya bog is a most typical example of natural Baltic raised bogs characteristic of Belarusian Poozerie. The raised bogs, primarily open sphagnum bogs, ridge-hollow and ridge-lake complexes, as well as the fauna and flora of these habitats are highly representative relative to raised bogs of that biogeographical region.

5.3 Natural Status and Degree of Impairment

Owing to the establishment of a specially protected natural site and discontinued reclamation work, the Yelnya bog has been preserved as a near-natural site. North-eastern parts of the bog have been practically unimpaired by economic activity. At the same time, as a result of the operation of the old drainage network built at the beginning of the 20th century and the impact of the irrigation and drainage systems adjacent to the bog, the hydrological regime of a significant part of the mire (around 60 %) has been disrupted. Lowering of the ground water level has resulted in peat fires and undesirable plant successions and, thus, in reduction of the population of a number of protected paludal plant and animal species.

5.4 Rarity and Uniqueness

The Yelnya mire is the largest uncommercialized raised bog in Belarusian Poozerie and one of the largest in Europe. The Yelnya bog is unique as it is the habitat of practically all plant and animal species found at raised bogs in Belarus. All bird species typical of this bog type nest regularly within the boundaries of the site described; many of them have their southern nesting range boundaries in Belarus (black-throated loon Gavia arctica, willow grouse Lagopus lagopus, merlin Falco columbarius, golden plover Pluvialis apricaria, Jack snipe Lymnocryptes minimus, whimbrel Numenius phaeopus, and common greenshank Tringa nebularia). The typical appearance of mire biotic complexes is formed by sparsely populated colonies of charadriiformes Charadriiformes on large open bog areas and numerous nesting colonies of various larids Laridae on islands of small lakes. As to flora, a significant part is represented by rare and unique for Belarus arctic-boreal species: dwarf birch Betula nana, cloudberry Rubus chamaemorus, coral-wort Dentaria bulbifera, whortleberry willow Salix myrtilloides, Siberian iris Iris sibirica, northern firmoss Huperzia selago, twayblade Listera ovata, intermediate corydalis Colydalis intermedia, Turkish marsh gladiolus Gladiolus imbricatus, morio orchis Orchis morio, and wild garlic Allium ursinum.

81

82

5.5 Viability, Vulnerability, and Rehabilitation Capacity

In spite of its large area, the raised bog is characterized by a high degree of vulnerability. Since the central part of the bog is highly raised compared to its peripheral areas, the canals built in the bog itself and its peripheral parts disrupted the hydrological regime of most of the mire that caused major peat fires and undesirable plant successions.

In spite of significant disruption of its hydrological regime and peat fires, the Yelnya bog has a great capacity to restore its natural ecosystems. Earlier activities aimed at rehabilitation of the hydrological regime showed that, if all drainage canals are stopped, bog ecosystems can be expected to recover, with the flora changing from heather to sphagnum mosses, the population of rare species increasing, and functions of carbon dioxide retention in accumulated peat recovering. A significant role in the Yelnya bog biodiversity recovery should be played by the regulation of spring hunting and fishing.

5.6 Manageability, Social and Economic Capacity

5.6.1 General features of habitat and species management

The basic features of the habitat and species management in the Yelnya Reserve are as follows:

- regulation of the ground water level through the establishment and maintenance of a specific mode of operation of the hydrotechnical facilities that reduce the water outflow from the reserve;

- forest management on the lands of the state forestry;

- control of harvesting of non-timber resources of forest and paludal plant communities, primarily of cranberries, minimizing mechanical damage to the ground cover and degradation of plant communities of raised bogs;

- comprehensive fire fighting activities aimed at preventing catastrophic fires;

- sustainable management of hunting and amateur fishing; and

- potentially: organization and development of sustainable recreation and tourism within the scientifically justified limits of recreational pressure on the ecosystems of raised bogs.

5.6.2 Proceeds from land use

The current structure of the commercial use of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve is virtually determined by:

- the resources of natural systems located there;

- its poor transport and logistical accessibility hindering its economic development;

- the consequences of catastrophic events that led to the degradation of the natural resources of the reserve – fires of unexplained origin;

- the nature of the socio-economic environment of the reserve (the structure of employment and household income in the region, industrial structure, status and development of local markets for resources, goods and services, labor, etc.); and

- regimes of the conservation and use of natural resources of the reserve set in accordance with the legislation.

The natural resources of the reserve are used in the following business activities related to their direct use:

- forestry;

- unorganized harvesting of non-timber products of plant communities for personal needs of the

83

population;

- hunting; and

- amateur fishing.

In order to analyze the use of the reserve, we estimated the value of the direct actual use of its natural resources in the above sectors. The rent-based approach centered on the definition of the capitalized value of additional wealth gained in the process of nature management was used as a basis for value estimation (1).

V=(P−C )∗Q

i (1)

V – value of the resource,

Р – market price of unit of production;

С – annual production costs per unit;

Q – annual output; and

i – capitalization index inversely proportional to the duration of the resource use.

In some cases, the consistent application of this approach proved difficult due to the lack of reliable data, particularly in terms of costs for the resource development and production; accounting of such costs is intrinsically difficult and is not conducted that complicates identification of the actual natural and man-made components of the value of goods. In such cases, the assessment was based on reasonable assumptions that prevent overestimation of the resource.

Timber resources. The forestry management in the reserve includes principal, intermediate, and side forest use, providing a certain amount of annually harvested commercial and fuel wood and non-wood forest products. Felling is almost exclusively conducted in the peripheral area around the perimeter of the reserve as its central part is an open raised bog. Forest use in the reserve is managed by Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI, represented by its Miory forestry section (north-western sector of the reserve), Disna forestry section (north-eastern sector), and Germanovichi forestry section (southern sector of the reserve).

The value of forest resources of the reserve based on the operation of forest stands was estimated in the form of a price range, the lower limit of which is determined by the stumpage value of the timber logged. The stumpage prices of the timber sold standing most closely correspond to the categories of rent in economic terms. However, the mechanism of their setting as approved by Resolution No 708 of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus dated May 30, 2007 On Approval of the Regulation for the Procedure of Setting Stumpage Prices for Timber of Main Forest Species excludes the natural rent component realized in the profits from logging that leads to undervaluation of the resource (2).

Т ij=Цсрвзij−Слз∗(1+Рлз100

)−Бз(2)

where Тij – the stumpage price per one cubic meter of timber of species i, size category j, in BYR;

Цсрвзij – the average exchange sale price of one cubic meter of species i, size category j, in BYR;

Cлз – the average weighted (standard) cost of logging of one non-specific cubic meter of timber, in BYR;

Pлз – the profitability of logging, in percent; and

Бp – costs of participation in exchange trading per one non-specific cubic meter of timber, in BYR.

In addition, the stumpage value of the timber logged, which is reflected in the records of the forestry

84

51%34%

15%

Германовичское

Дисненское

Миорское

sections for a range of felling sites, is taken as zero, which also lowers the value.

The closest alternative to the current cost estimate based on stumpage prices includes the following:

- in the case of fuel wood – the prices on the pricelist “ex felling site, upstream log storage place”, approved by Resolution No 50 of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus dated December 10, 2007 On the prices of fuel wood (except for the fuel wood for the population) harvested during principal felling, improvement felling, salvage, and other felling, and other forest management activities and sold on the terms of ex upstream log storage place, ex intermediary log storage place, ex downstream log storage place (company storage place) and free on board (ship), station (harbor) of departure; and

- in the case of commercial timber – the prices on the pricelist “ex felling site, intermediate log storage place”, approved by Resolution No 10 of the Ministry of Economy of the Republic of Belarus dated January 9, 2008 On selling prices of round timber (except for fuel wood) delivered on the terms of ex intermediary log storage place, ex downstream log storage place (company storage place), and free on board (ship), station (harbor) of departure.

In turn, if the prices specified in these pricelists are used, the value of the resource is overestimated as, in addition to the desired natural component of the value, these prices include the cost of harvesting. Therefore, they are used as the upper limit of the estimated range.

The estimate was made by averaging the data on actual harvesting in forestry sections with reduction of heterogeneous in time prices to a single value using consumer price indexes.

The value of timber resources estimated for the actually existing regime of their use is within the range of BYR 12,350 thousand to BYR 135,465 thousand per year in the prices of December 2007. Assuming that the shortfalls of the two evaluation approaches applied are mutually off-set and the accurate estimate of the value tends to be mid-range, it is possible to estimate the aggregate value as BYR 74,000 thousand per year.

More than half of the timber in the reserve at ex felling site prices is harvested by Germanovichi forestry section (Figure 5.1).

Figure 5.1 – Timber logging at the Yelnya Reserve at ex felling site prices broken down by forestry sections

At the same time, no principal felling in Germanovichi forestry section was performed in the period of 2005-2007 (Figure 5.2). In general, the share of the estimated principal felling in the reserve is not more than one fifth of the total logging, indicating a fairly low level of commercial operation of the forest stands. Principal felling is predominant in the structure of felling only in Disna forestry section, which has a prevailing share of commercial timber in the estimated logging as well (Figure 5.3).

85

Germanovichi forestry sectionDisna forestry sectionMiory forestry section

Figure 5.2 – Structure of felling at the Yelnya Reserve by types of use

In general, the situation in the reserve is exactly the contrary, which indicates a low overall economic value of its forests under the current regime of use. The exception is the north-eastern section of the reserve, where felling is conducted mostly for industrial purposes with a primary focus on commercial timber.

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Германовичское Дисненское Миорское Заказник"Ельня"

Дровяная

Деловая

Figure 5.3 – Structure of logging at the Yelnya Reserve by types of timber

The relation of specific indicators of valuation calculated relative to the average estimates of the obtained value range to the total wooded area of the reserve taken as a whole and by the constituent forestry sectors shows differences in the value and character of the resource use at different parts of the reserve (Figure 5.4).

86

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Германовичское Дисненское Миорское Заказник"Ельня"

ПР

РУ

ГП

Germanovichiforestry section

Disnaforestry section

Mioryforestry section

Yelnia Reserve

Intermediate fellingImprovement fellingPrincipal felling



Mioryforestry section

Yelnia Reserve

Fuel woodCommercial timber

Intermediate fellingImprovement fellingPrincipal felling

4 081

10 937

3 698

12 327

1 220

4 2762 921

9 319

0

2 000

4 000

6 000

8 000

10 000

12 000

14 000

Дисненское Германовичское Миорское Заказник"Ельня"

руб на 1 га вгод общейплощади

руб на 1 га вгод покрытойлесомплощади

Figure 5.4 – Specific current value estimates of Yelnya Reserve timber resources

The largest scale of felling is typical of forests in the southern segment of the reserve, despite the lack of principal felling and low merchantability of logging there. This is explained by significant forest pathology work carried out there in the context of eliminating the consequences of 2002 fires, when the southern section of the reserve suffered most. Such types of work as clearing burnt timber give a considerable amount of semi-merchantable timber, in particular, fuel wood. The most economically valuable forests are the forests of the north-eastern part of the reserve that are virtually untouched by fire and that generate a relatively high volume of commercial timber. The forests of the north-western part of the reserve are also partially affected by fires and are used most extensively due to their low performance. The specific value of the wooded land here is less than half of that for the reserve as a whole, with the share of commercial timber in its total volume is almost 2 times lower than that of principal felling.

Non-timber forest products. Another component of the value of the direct use of the reserve’s resources is non-timber forest products and paludal plant communities: mushrooms, berries, medical plants, raw materials, etc. This category of products in the reserve is harvested by:

- state forestry institutions; and

- citizens for their own needs and, in fact, for selling to wholesale buyers.

Secondary forest use by Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI broken down by its constituent forestry sections located in the reserve is shown in Table 5.1 as of 2007.

The results of a marketing research on the collection of wild berries in Miory rayon show yet a small scale of use of the Yelnya Hydrological Reserve for those purposes. The reserve today is providing 20-25 % of the total collection of berries of various species over the season. This may indicate a great potential for further development of this area.

87



Yelnia ReserveMioryforestry section

BYR per 1 ha of total area

BYR per 1 ha of wooded area

Table 5.1 – Estimated value of the products of secondary forest use at the Yelnya ReserveProduction Value, BYR TOTAL







Volume Value, BYR

Hay, t 27 9 12 2,379,989 923,240 1,231,920 48 4,535,149Medical plants, kg

210 140 179 99,480 210,000 155,490529 464,970

Cranberry, kg

284 182 312.5 1,110,156 455,000 1,221,563778.5 2,786,719

Bilberry, kg 37.7 172,090 37.7 172,090Northern bilberry, kg

9.6 20,7369.6 20,736

Cowberry, kg

136 26.85 244,800 36,252162.85 281,052

Brooms, units

270 202,500270 202,500

Brooms with a handle, units

1,170 817 650 1,111,500 776,150 655,500

2,637 2,543,150Spruce, units 161 208 390 888,682 980,414 1,731,082 759 3,600,178TOTAL 5,792,307 3,589,604 5,224,633 14,606,544

89.5% of local residents are engaged in cranberry collection each year. If we assume that only the able-bodied population of the district is involved in collection of berries and mushrooms, and the number of residents of working age is 12.5 thousand people, then––having applied the rate of participation in collection––we will get 11 thousand people. In addition, we should take into account the number of people who participate in the collection, but live in other areas: 73.5% of respondents confirmed that people from other localities are also engaged in collection of berries and mushrooms. On average, people in Miory rayon spend 22 days to gather berries and mushrooms.

Based on these data and the assumptions made, we can make a rough estimate of the annual volume of berries and mushrooms collected in the area of Miory rayon (these resources can be then processed industrially). This annual volume is calculated using the available volumes of berries and mushrooms collected by the respondents and projecting them onto the population of the rayon as a whole and taking into account the factors, assumptions, and nuances identified during the research.

The results of this projection give the following estimated volumes:

cranberry – over 600,000 kg;

bilberry – 275,000 kg;

cowberry – 200,000 kg;

northern bilberry – 145,000 kg;

chanterelle – 46,500 kg;

currant – 100,000 kg;

strawberry – 70,000 kg; and

cherry – 40,000 kg.

To date, most of these species are used only for household needs while the rest is sold by the population in retail markets and to private wholesale buyers.

Slightly more than half of the respondents indicated that the purpose of their participation in the

88

process of gathering berries and mushrooms is the subsequent use of natural resources for their own needs. 38.5 % of the respondents are interested in gathering berries and mushrooms for targeted sales in the market or to wholesale buyers. The number of respondents that currently supply collected berries and mushrooms to non-state-owned organizations and private individuals is 53.5%.

Game fauna resources. The reserve lands are leased by three users of hunting resources:

1) Miory Rayon Division of the Belarusian Society of Hunters and Fishermen RSPO 20,363 ha, 181 registered hunters;

2) Sharkovshchina Rayon Division of the Belarusian Society of Hunters and Fishermen RSPO 707 ha;

3) Obsterno PTPUE [private trade and production unitary enterprise] (since November 2007) 4,231 ha.

Due to the inaccessibility of the reserve, ungulate hunting is almost non-existent there. Spring waterfowl hunting is also banned. There are mainly local hunters sporadically hunting for fur bearers, especially the beaver, in the reserve.

At the same time, due to the reserve’s isolation and inaccessibility to man, the territory of the reserve is a natural reproduction site of the biota, including game fauna species that form single population groups in the reserve and surrounding hunting grounds. Based on this, the value of the reserve’s resources used in hunting can be estimated from the profits derived by users of hunting resources in the lands adjacent to the reserve.

Based on the average volume of harvesting during the period and the average prices for single permits and tickets, the current value of the gross income from hunting is about BYR 12,100 thousand. Since game activities in the reserve are almost non-existent, it is possible to assume the amount of gross income equal to the value estimate of the resource.

In addition, it is worthwhile to estimate such components of the value of the direct use of the Yelnya Reserve’s resources as recreational resources, resources of amateur fishing, etc., for which there are currently no reliable data.

Total current estimate and capitalization

Table 5.2 – Capitalization of components of the value of direct use of the Yelnya Reserve resources under the current regime of use

Resource Present value,

thousand BYR per

year

Capitalization index i

Capitalized value, thousand BYR

Area, ha Specific capitalized

value, thousand BYR/ha

Timber resources 73,908 0.05 1,478,153 25,301 58Non-timber forest resources 167,125 0.05 3,342,499 25,301 132Game fauna resources 12,096 0.05 241,912 25,301 10TOTAL 5,062,565 25,301 200

The analysis of the use of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve shows that there is a certain return expressed in economic terms of rent from the direct use of its resources under the actual regime established over the years. Non-timber forest products and resources of paludal plant communities

89

have the greatest value per 1 ha of the total area of the reserve. Fires in the Yelnya Reserve have materially affected the resource potential of its ecosystems.

The matter of the ecological and economic optimization of the regime of the reserve’s resource use and adjusting the existing regimes from these positions may be addressed on condition of the fullest account in the value estimate of such value components as habitat forming resources of natural communities: water treatment functions of bogs, regulation of groundwater flow, deposition of greenhouse gases, as well as recreation and tourism resources and the resources of biodiversity, which were not included in the estimate because of the lack of necessary information.

5.6.3 Potential for human use

General features

The most sustainable potential area of use of the Yelnya Reserve’s resources is recreation and small-scale tourism. They are focused on sustainable use of target ecosystem resources, primarily on aesthetic and informative resources, as well as on traditional crafts associated with them, and on sustainable harvesting of non-timber paludal and forest plant communities.

Advisory opportunities

Implementation of the concept of local development based on sustainable tourism and services, as well as on sustainable secondary forest use, could set an example for other wetlands in Belarus with a high level of biodiversity and integrity of natural communities.

Trade opportunities

To finance its statutory activities in the reserve, the reserve management structure needs additional sources of funds. As such, they should be as follows:

1) Sale of concessions to professional participants of the market of tourist services to use recreational and tourist resources of the reserve’s ecosystems;

2) Setting quotas of industrial harvesting of cranberries and some other non-timber resources of paludal and forest plant communities;

3) Training and certification of guides for the reserve;

4) Charging amateur recreants for the use of the reserve’s infrastructure;

5) Development of a registered trademark of the reserve and selling the right to its use to regional product manufacturers that meet specifically stated requirements to the quality and environmental safety;

6) Manufacturing and sale of souvenirs with attributes of the reserve; and

7) Licensing amateur fishing at equipped designated areas.

Education opportunities

Due to the fact that there are a number of settlements in the immediate vicinity of the reserve, including two towns (Miory and Disna), the possibilities of environmental education of the local population on the basis of the reserve are vast. In addition, information resources of the reserve’s ecosystems can be widely used for environmental education of its visitors given that there is an appropriate methodological framework and infrastructure.

Possible involvement of the local population

The sector of tourist services seems to be the most promising in terms of the involvement of local communities in the reserve management. The need for nature conservation activities can also provide partial and seasonal employment opportunities for the local population.

90

5.7 Special Attraction

This place is most attractive in terms of environmental protection and sustainable tourism as the reserve houses the largest near-natural raised bog in Belarus and has the international nature conservation status of a Ramsar site.

5.8 National and International Nature Conservation Importance

The bog of Yelnya is of great international importance:

- for the conservation of global biodiversity through the preservation of rare and endangered species of animals and plants in Europe;

- for cleaning the air in the European continent; and

- for the formation and maintenance of the hydrological regime in the region.

The Yelnya Reserve is of international importance for biodiversity conservation as it provides for the living of rare and vulnerable species ecologically closely linked to raised bogs, a number of glacial relicts of flora and fauna (birds: black-throated loon, willow ptarmigan, merlin, golden plover, jack snipe, whimbrel, and common greenshank; plants: dwarf birch, cloudberry, coral-wort, whortleberry willow, Siberian iris, northern firmoss, twayblade, intermediate corydalis, Turkish marsh gladiolus, morio orchis, and wild garlic) and for preserving vulnerable ecosystems of raised bogs in the region.

Most important species of flora and fauna determining the international significance of the reserve are given in Table 5.3.

91

Table 5.3 – National and international conservation status of the most important animal species of the Yelnya Reserve

Common name Latin name

Conservation statusRB Red

BookIUCN SPEC Bern

1979CMS1979

CITES1973

BIRDS AVESBlack-throated loon Gavia arctica II 3 II IIBlack stork Ciconia nigra III 3 II II IIBean goose Anser fabalis III IIGreater white-fronted goose

Anser albifrons III II

Common goldeneye Bucephala clangula III IIShort-toed snake eagle

Circaetus gallicus II 3 II II II

Montagu’s harrier Circus pygargus 4 II II IIGolden eagle Aquila chrysaetos I 3 II II IIOsprey Pandion haliaetus II 3 II II IIMerlin Falco columbarius III II II IIHobby Falco subbuteo IV II II IIEurasian pygmy owlWillow grouse Lagopus lagopus II IIIBlack grouse Tetrao tetrix 3 IIICommon crane Grus grus III 3 II II IIGolden plover Pluvialis apricaria III 4 III IIJack snipe Lymnocryptes

minimusI 3W III II

Black-tailed godwit Limosa limosa III 2 III IIWhimbrel Numenius phaeopus III 4 III IIEurasian curlew Numenius arquata III 3W III IIRedshank Tringa totanus 2 III IICommon greenshank Tringa nebularia III III IIWood sandpiper Tringa glareola 3 II IICommon gull Larus canus IV 2 IIIEagle owl Bubo bubo II 3 II IIShort-eared owl Asio flammeus IV 3 II IINightjar Caprimulgus

europaeus2 II

Three-toed woodpecker

Picoides tridactylus IV 3 II

White-backed woodpeckerGreat grey shrike Lanius excubitor 3 II

MAMMALS MAMMALIAWoolf Canis lupus II IIEuropean badger Meles meles III IIIForest dormouse Dryomis nitedula LR/nt III

PLANTSHairy agrimony Agrimonia pilosa IIEastern pasqueflower Pulsatilla patens II

92

The Yelnya Reserve has the status of a wetland of international importance (a Ramsar site) based on the following criteria.

1a – the land is a particularly good example of natural raised bogs typical of Belarusian Poozerie.

1c – the Yelnya mire, the largest mire in Polotsk Lowland, plays an important role in maintaining the hydrological regime of the natural territorial system of the region, and also of the Western Dvina, and has a significant influence on the local climate.

2b – the Yelnya mire has a key importance for preserving the most stable and strong pocket of habitats of stenotopic species ecologically closely linked to raised bogs, a range of glacial relicts of flora and fauna of Belarus.

3a –the Yelnya mire provides a regular support to about 20,000 wetland birds during seasonal migration. Here, one can find the largest local colonies of Grus grus in Belarus – up to 4,000 specimens.

The Yelnya Reserve was assigned the status of an Important Bird Area of international concern based on the following criteria of the number of nesting birds: black grouse – more than 150 couples, common crane – 60 couples, and short-eared owl – 50 couples.

The Yelnya Reserve has the status of an Important Botanical Site. It was assigned this status due to the presence of endangered species (Eastern pasqueflower (Pulsatilla patens), hairy agrimony (Agrimonia pilosa); the presence of the complex of subendemic species protected in Belarus (dwarf birch, Turkish marsh gladiolus, cloudberry, whortleberry willow, and blushing bog-moss); presence of 5 rare and protected habitat categories of international importance in accordance with the EU Habitats Directive No 92/43/EEC dated May 21, 1992: natural raised bogs (7110, 15,157 ha), bog forests (code 91D0, 571.3 ha), coniferous forests of western-subtaiga type (9010, 101.3 ha), Fennoscandian forests with the developed herbaceous flora (9050, 57 ha), and inundated forests (91E0, 97.7 ha). The total area of such habitats is 15,985.2 ha, or 61.1 % of the total area of the Yelnya Reserve.

The ecological role of the specially protected natural site in maintaining the biological and landscape diversity is largely determined by the place of the object in the structure of ecological network developed at the national and international level.

The Yelnya Hydrological Reserve serves as a potential nucleus of national concern representing one of the largest raised bogs of Europe, with the international status of an Important Bird Area and a Ramsar site. The reserve is rather isolated and has dispersed connections with other potential elements of the ecological network where small tracts of forests and wetlands, and also the River Disna, play the role of linking elements.

25 km west of the reserve is the Braslav Lakes National Park. In accordance with the project Layouts of Rational Location of Specially Protected Natural Sites of National Concern of the Republic of Belarus for 2007-2015, it is planned to establish the Zhada State National Wetland Reserve 20 km south-east of the Yelnya Reserve.

93

Figure 5.6 – Place of the Yelnya Reserve in the national ecological network

94

MAP LEGEND:

Specially protected sites:ExistingProspective

Nuclei:Of European concernOf national concernOf national concern, prospective for rehabilitation

Corridors:WaterForest

Environmental ties:Of European concern

Of interstate concern

Yelnia Reserve

6. Factors Negatively Affecting Natural Complexes and Sites of the Yelnya Reserve

The list of the key factors leading to the ecosystem degradation and reduction of the biological diversity of the Yelnya Reserve:

1) Disruption of the hydrological regime.

2) Peat and forest fires.

3) Unregulated recreational activities (amateur fishing, hunting, and tourism).

4) Unregulated harvesting of wild resources (mushrooms and berries), leading, in particular, to the increased effect of the disturbance factor.

5) Deforestation (unsustainable use of valuable forest land).

The Table below shows the area affected by the negative factors in the reserve.

Table 6.1 – Factors of anthropogenic impact on the reserve vegetation cover

Impact factorsAffected area

ha %

Direct human impact factors 16,071.5 63.5– recent clear felling 324.3 1.3– recent fires 13,145.0 52.0– haying and grazing 14.6 <0.1– recent selective felling 918.5 3.6– recreational pressure 696.6 2.8– development area, gardens 1.6 <0.1– drainage reclamation 957.44 3.8– defiled area 13.5 <0.1

Anthropogenic-driven processes 691.8 2.8– old overgrown felling sites 378.4 1.5– forest plantations at old fire and felling sites 216.6 0.9– flooding along roads 25.2 0.1– water logging of old felling sites 71.6 0.3

Linear impact factors 89.7 0.3– paved roads, gas and oil pipelines 60.4 0.2– irrigation and drainage canals 29.3 0.1Total: 16,853.0 66.6

4It’s a rather conditional value because this factor affects almost the entire territory of the reserve. Thus, Table 6.1 gives only the area of the territory, where drainage reclamation has led to a significant transformation of vegetation.

95

6.1 Hydrological Regime Disruption

Disruption of the hydrological regime due to drainage of the mire and adjacent wetland areas leads to the degradation of bog ecosystems and reduction of biodiversity. In the mid-20th century, about 20 large and small canals were made on the mire territory and along its periphery and all natural water flows were straightened (the Berezha River, the Yelnyanka River, etc.). The system is hardly used nowadays; however, it continues to have a drainage effect on the bog ecosystems.

The operation of the canals lowered the groundwater level by 0.5-1 m from the surface of the bogs, which led to the following consequences:

disappearance or reduction of the number of hydrophilic flora and fauna species, including those typical only of raised bogs in the region, change of the vegetation cover (sphagnum moss disappears and heather appears);

increased fire hazard for the bog, peat and forest fires; acceleration of overgrowing of open areas of bogs with woody suffruticose flora; and carbon dioxide emission, rather than its accumulation, is observed in drained areas of bogs as a

result of peat mineralization.

6.2 Peat and Forest Fires

Extensive fires in the Yelnya mire lead to the degradation of bog ecosystems and reduce biodiversity. A prerequisite for large fires in the bog is the lowering ground water level, which is a result of the drainage function of the canal network and straightening of rivers, leading to desiccation of the upper layers of peat and, therefore, to fire hazard. The fires on bogs with the natural ground water level burn out grass flora only, without harming the ecosystem, while they burn out the top layer of peat on the bogs with a lower ground water level.

Regular peat fires have led to the following consequences:

13.8 thousand ha, or 52.7% of the reserves and 70.8% of the mire were damaged by fires in 1993, 1994, 1998, and 2002;

the area of damaged or destroyed berry beds totaled 8,599.4 ha (73.4% of the total pre-fire area), including the areas of northern cranberry – 8,371.1 ha (72.9%), ledum – 153.4 ha (41.1%), bilberry – 71.2 ha (34.5%), and northern bilberry – 3.4 ha (18.9 %). The average annual stockpile of key resource of the reserve, i.e. cranberries, fell by 497 tons and reached 231.7 tons, or 31.8% of the pre-fire period;

destruction of typical habitats of most animal species; development of undesirable vegetation successions on fire sites (increased area of birch forests

and heathlands); and a sharp decline in sphagnum moss cover and a reduced carbon dioxide absorption function.

6.3 Unsustainable Hunting and Fishing

Spring hunting in the reserve conducted until 2005 led to constant disturbance of migratory birds at their day stop-over sites, which dramatically reduced the value of the area as a site of international importance for mass stop-over of migratory birds. Spring hunting in the reserve was banned on proposal of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection in 2010. In addition, fishing in lakes of the reserve is not regulated, resulting in constant disturbance of migratory birds in the migration and breeding season which, in its turn, leads to the extinction of a range of breeding birds.

96

6.4 Unregulated Harvesting of Wild Resources (Mushrooms and Berries), and Development of Unregulated Tourism

The mire of the reserve is a popular place for harvesting wild resources (collection of berries, mushrooms, and herbs), and in recent years – of the unregulated tourism. Lack of regulation of such activities (zoning, passage areas, trails, and stopping places) leads to disruption of the flora composition and structure, severe damage to the ground cover, and increased impact of the disturbance factor on animal groups and communities.

The assessment of recreational degradation of forests in the reserve was based on the per-unit field research and existing forest management materials. The depth of recreational degradation of forest communities (digression stage) was indicated according to the guidelines [32, 40, and 101]. The studies found that the level of recreational impact on the forest of the reserve is not significant, with a negative pressure manifested in approximately 2.6 % of the forest area (Figure 4.11). The average degree of recreational impairment is I.2.

By stage of degradation, the forests are distributed as follows (see Figure 4.11): I stage (marginally impaired) – 4,758.9 ha (78.3% of the wooded area); II stage (moderately impaired) – 1,156.7 (19.0%); III stage (badly impaired) – 147.4 ha (2.4%); and IV stage (tree stand degradation) – 11.3 ha (0.2%)

It is difficult to assess the mire flora in the context of the recreational exposure. The data on the impact of recreation on the bog flora is almost not available in the national literature.

We have adopted such a measure as the share of trail network as some indicative information to determine the extent of recreational pressure on the bog flora. To this end, we used the topographic maps, aerial photographs, forest taxation and forest management maps, and our own field research. As a result, it was revealed that, the direct effect (trampling) of people visiting the mire is currently minor and is registered for 537.9 ha (2.1% of the total area).

The results of the assessment of susceptibility of the vegetation cover of the reserve to recreational impact deserve separate analysis. This assessment was made based on the existing maximum allowable pressure for forest and bog flora on a 4-point scale: 1 – very susceptible (<1,000 persons – hours/ha× per year), 2 – susceptible (1,000-2,000), 3 – moderately insusceptible (2,000-5,000), 4 – most insusceptible (> 5,000). The flora distribution by susceptibility categories is as follows: highly susceptible – 3,126.1 ha (12.9%), susceptible – 11,064.8 ha (45.8%), moderately insusceptible – 7,341.2 ha (30.4%), and most insusceptible – 2,630.4 ha (10.9%).

6.5 Forest Management Activities

The new regimes of forest use, as set out in the Regulations on the Yelnya Reserve, are not reflected in forest management plan, which leads to felling of the most valuable areas of forests. Felling of primary forests on the mire periphery––spruce, pine, and sometimes alder stands––leads to the their undesirable replacement by communities of birches and willows, accompanied by a sharp decline in biodiversity, changes in species composition and a spatial structure of forest plant communities.

The forestry analysis shows that felling covered 1,242.8 ha of the reserve in the audit period (from 1997 through to 2005) with timber harvesting of 51.20 thousand m3.

P r i n c i p a l f e l l i n g was carried out on the area of 29.6 ha, which is 75.7 % of the area designated by the forest management plan. 2.69 thousand m3 (29.0 % of the projected target) of timber were harvested with the average intensity of thinning of 90.7 m3 per 1 ha. Such low volumes and intensity of thinning on principal felling sites seem to be associated with: 1) a large-scale damage and loss of forest stands due to fires in recent years, 2) intensive intermediate felling carried out in the past, and 3) low productivity of forest stands subject to felling.

The main types of felling in the forests of the reserve include i n t e r m e d i a t e f e l l i n g (improvement felling, selective salvage felling, conversion felling, and maintenance of undergrowth)

97

and other f e l l i n g s (clear salvage felling, cleaning), which respectively account for 62.3 and 32.5 % of the volume harvested during 1997-2005 (see Figure 4.2).

For the relevant period, the intermediate felling was carried out on the area of 892.6 ha (71.8 % of the total forest area of the reserve subjected to felling) with the volume of wood harvesting of 16.62 thousand m3 (32.5 % of the total timber harvest).

The intensity of intermediate felling averaged 18.6 m3/ha, including 19.2 m3/ha for improvement felling and 16.1 m3/ha for selective salvage felling (Table 4.5). The largest volumes of intermediate felling were observed in 1997-2001 (see Figure 4.4).

The bulk (77.8 %) of intermediate use accounts for improvement felling (lighting, cleaning, thinning, and increment felling). Improvement felling of 20.8 % of the area of forest stands was carried out in accordance with the forest management project. The thinning of the remaining area (79.2 %) was carried out in the stands, where this kind of activities was not planned in the forest management project based on forestry considerations (see Table 4.4). A similar situation is observed in relation to selective and salvage felling, 92.5 % of which were carried out on the area not planned in the forest management project.

The main causes of deviations in the spatial distribution of intermediate felling from the forest management project include the following: 1) in the actual current economic context, the undeniable preference was given to felling in dry valleys; 2) poor accessibility for transport; 3) improvement felling in the first year of the audit period in the independently selected areas due to the lack of forest management project records; 4) improvement felling in the roadside area and areas adjacent to settlements; and 5) the introduction of compartment improvement procedures. We should also take into account such factor as the problem of selling small merchantable timber mainly harvested during improvement felling that still exists in the area where the reserve is located.

Among other types of felling, the bulk (99.5 %) is related to clear salvage felling, which was carried out on the area of 294.7 ha with 31.74 thousand m3 of harvested merchantable wood (62.0 %). The intensity of wood harvesting per 1 ha at clear salvage felling averaged 99.5 m3 (see Table 4.5). The most intense clear salvage felling in the reserve was carried out in 2002 (see Figure 4.3), primarily – due to massive forest damage by a catastrophic fire.

6.6 Lack of Activities Regulating the Population of the Most Significant Species

The habitats of a number of bird species sharply deteriorated in connection with past fires and disruption of the hydrological regime. Therefore, in order to maintain their numbers it is required to implement special measures and to install man-made bird boxes (birds of prey), to increase watering of impaired areas of bogs (sandpipers) and to regulate the number of undesirable species (raccoon dog, American mink).

6.7 Environmental Pollution

There are no large industrial enterprises, livestock facilities, storage facilities for agricultural chemicals and fertilizers, oil storage facilities, car wash and service areas on the territory of the reserve. There is some local pollution of the reserve’s ecosystems with household waste in the vicinity of the villages located on the periphery of the reserve (near the villages of Mniukhi, Brushki, Budy, Vasilkovo, etc.).

Air transportation of pollutants (carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, formaldehyde, etc.) from the territories of industrialized regions adjacent to the reserve, primarily from the cities of Polotsk and Novopolotsk, poses some threat to the ecosystem.

98

7. OBJECTIVE AND TASKS OF THE YELNYA RESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN

7.1 Site Management Justification

The Yelnya mire is the largest in Belarus raised and transition bog complex with numerous lakes. It is a most typical natural raised bog specific to the region of Belarusian Poozerie [Lake District] and playing an important role in protecting the hydrological regime of the natural territorial complex of the region, as well as the Western Dvina River. It has a significant impact on the local microclimate formation.

The Yelnya mire protects existence of rare and vulnerable species, which are ecologically closely linked to raised bogs, and a range of relict glacial flora and fauna species (birds: black-throated loon, willow grouse, merlin, golden plover, Jack snipe, whimbrel, and common greenshank; plants: dwarf birch, cloudberry, coral-wort, whortleberry willow, Siberian iris, northern firmoss, twayblade, Turkish marsh gladiolus, and morio orchis) and facilitates conservation of vulnerable ecosystems of raised bogs in the region.

At the time of seasonal migration, the Yelnya mire regularly supports about 20,000 semi-aquatic birds (water birds – 9,000-12,000, common crane – 4,000). One of the regular migrants is a globally endangered species – lesser white-fronted goose (Anser erythropus).

Among the most significant factors damaging bog ecosystems and biodiversity, disruption of the hydrological regime, peat fires, and the increasing impact of the disturbance factor should be noted.

Thus, by now, bog ecosystems of over 50 % of the territory have been subjected to significant transformation as a result of disruption of the hydrological regime and fires. Further lowering of the water level and other negative impacts can cause major peat fires and irreversible changes in the vegetation cover structure, as well as flora and fauna species composition. In this regard, to eliminate or mitigate the negative effects and facilitate natural development of the raised bog, scientifically justified activities and an action plan for bog ecosystem management should be developed.

7.2 Key Management Objective

The key objective of the Yelnya Reserve management is to ensure sustainable functioning of the Yelnya mire––the largest and unique raised bog within the boundaries of Polotsk Lowland, which is an Important Bird Area, an Important Botanical and Ramsar site––to protect the unique bog landscape – raised bogs with lake-hollow complexes, and the most stable and powerful pockets of a set of habitats of stenotopic species ecologically closely linked to raised bogs and a range of glacial relict species of Belarusian flora and fauna.

7.3 Operational Management Tasks

7.3.1 To organize management of the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog to ensure sustainable functioning of the bog ecosystem, prevent peat fires, and protect typical raised bogs and the biodiversity related thereto while taking into account the interests of land users.

7.3.2 To organize forest management in the reserve aimed at biodiversity conservation. Monitor compliance with the forest management regimes specified in the Regulations on the Yelnya Reserve.

7.3.3 To prepare recommendations on optimizing amateur fishing in the reserve to minimize the impact of the disturbance factor on nesting birds. To this end – to identify the lakes, where fishing is completely banned or allowed within an established timeframe. To organize an awareness-raising campaign to inform the population about the existing regimes and limitations for fishing on reserve lakes.

7.3.4 Based on the inventory of biodiversity taken in the framework of developing the Management

99

Plan – to prepare––in accordance with the Instruction on the Procedure of Identifying, Transfer for Conservation, and Accounting of Habitats of Wild Plant and Animal Species Listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus––protected species habitat certificates and forward them to rayon inspectorates to be then transferred to land users for conservation, paying a particular attention to developing recommendations on habitat conservation.

7.3.5 To ensure sustainable functioning of the state nature conservation institution managing the reserve to undertake activities under the reserve management plan and control compliance with its regimes.

7.3.6 To prepare proposals on organizing sustainable use of the major bog resource, i.e. cranberries, and its processing in Miory rayons.

The proposals should contain: an assessment of cranberry resources and their distribution over the bog, proposals on pressure distribution, construction of trails, and feasibility study for construction of a processing plant or optimization of procurement. The process of cranberry procurement and processing is practically not organized in the district. According to some rough estimates, the amount of cranberry annually harvested on the bog territory and sold to wholesale buyers and resellers is worth over US$ 1 million. The key consumers of cranberries are countries of the European Union, where cranberries are processed to produce a variety of food products. In this regard, the feasibility of building on the territory of Miory rayon a cranberry processing enterprise––thus, ensuring sustainable use of cranberry resources and facilitating employment of local people––should be considered.

7.3.7 To prepare a project of organizing ecotourism in the reserve, including the following elements:

- developing tours of the reserve and surrounding areas taking into account biodiversity inventory data;

- developing and building special causeways for mechanical vehicles (cross-country vehicles) for tourist and other (scientific, fire fighting, and monitoring) purposes;


Vehicles (including cross-country vehicles, marsh buggies, and other similar vehicles) can be used exclusively on special causeways built along the routes specified in the Management Plan. The vehicles can deviate from the causeways only in exceptional cases (fire fighting, providing medical aid, and implementing construction projects to optimize the hydrological regime).

Several bog routes are recommended to be developed and then equipped by building a log trail, setting signs giving information, equipping tourist stations, building a basic watch tower, etc. The routes should cover the areas with the most attractive reserve landscapes (lakes, hollow complexes, habitats of rare fauna and flora species, wooded islands); however, they should not damage them. Initially, it is planned to equip several houses in the villages adjacent to the bog to provide accommodation facilities for tourists.

7.3.8 To organize an awareness-raising campaign to inform the population about the nature conservation value of the Yelnya Reserve, its conservation and use regimes. This requires preparing and publishing promotion and outreach, and reference materials: brochures, postcards, guidebooks, calendars, etc. To develop cooperation with schools. To create and maintain a positive image of the Yelnya Reserve Management Plan by means of extensive coverage of its objectives, tasks, and implementation progress in mass media.

7.3.9 For the purpose of successfully developing and implementing the Yelnya Reserve Management Plan, to establish and maintain partner relations with all the organizations and institutions involved in conservation and use of natural complexes of the reserve (the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection and its local bodies, the state nature conservation institution, local authorities, land users, public, and local population). That can be achieved through regular meetings, seminars, and public consultations.

100

7.3.10 To put in place a system of monitoring water levels and quality on the territory of the reserve, its flora and plant communities, biotopes, bird population, and entomofauna to assess the status of bog ecosystems and efficiency of the Management Plan implementation. The monitoring will be performed based on standard scientific methods. One of the major tasks of the monitoring should be assessment of the efficiency of the activities undertaken in the framework of the Management Plan and adjusting the activities planned based on findings of the monitoring.

101

7.4 Activities under the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve Management Plan for 2012-2016

No Activity Implementation period

Cost estimate, mln BYR Agency responsible Proposed sources of

financing Priority**

Operational task 1. To organize management of the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog to ensure sustainable functioning of the bog ecosystem, prevent peat fires, and protect typical raised bogs and the biodiversity related thereto while taking into account the interests of land users

1.1. Development of scientific justification for additional activities to restore the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog

2013 76.0 National Academy of Sciences of Belarus

International technical assistance

I

1.2* Development of an engineering project for additional activities to restore the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog

2013-2014 252.0 APB CSO,Yelnya SNCI,Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI


I

1.3 Implementation of the construction project for additional activities to restore the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog

2016-2017 672.0 APB CSO,Yelnya SNCI,Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI


I

1.4. Organizing and running volunteer camps to arrange construction and repair of water regulation facilities, including dams

2012-2017 - Yelnya SNCI,APB CSO

- II

Operational task 2. To organize forest management in the reserve aimed at biodiversity conservation2.1 Adjustment of the project to organize

and perform forest management at Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI aimed at optimization of the forest use within the reserve boundaries in accordance

2013 16.0 Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI, Belgosles RUE


II

102




with the new Regulations on the Yelnya Reserve

Operational task 3. To organize sustainable use of natural resources of the Yelnya Reserve3.1 Implementation of business plan

activities on organizing sustainable use of cranberry resources

2013-2016 To be defined in the business

plan

Yelnya SNCI,Miory Rayon Executive Committee

EU/UNDP project,Miory Rayon Executive Committee

II

3.2 Banning spring and fall hunting for migratory birds at the reserve

2012-2017 Not required Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection,National Academy of Sciences of Belarus,Miory Rayon Executive Committee,Yelnya SNCI

Not required II

3.3* Setting amateur fishing regimes at certain lakes, including making and installing relevant signs giving information

2012-2014 2.0 Miory Rayon Executive Committee,Hunting area users: Miory Rayon Division of the Belarusian Society of Hunters and Fishermen RSPO,Sharkovshchina Rayon Division of the Belarusian Society of Hunters and Fishermen RSPO,Obsterno PTPUE,Yelnya SNCI

III

103




3.4 Control of invasive species (American mink, raccoon dog) to minimize their negative impact on the population and communities of aboriginal species

2012-2016 - Hunting area users:Miory Rayon Belarusian Society of Hunters and Fishermen RSPO,Sharkovshchina rayon Belarusian Society of Hunters and Fishermen RSPO,Obsterno PTPUE

- III

Operational task 4. To ensure conservation and management of plant and animal habitats for the species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus4.1* Preparation of plant habitat certificates

for the species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus and transferring them to land users for conservation

2012-2016 - Yelnya SNCI;land users,Miory Rayon Inspectorate of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection,Sharkovshchina Rayon Inspectorate of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection

- II

4.2. Organization of habitat conservation for the rare and endangered plant species listed in the Red Book

2012-2016 - Yelnya SNCI,land users,Miory Rayon Inspectorate of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection,Sharkovshchina Rayon Inspectorate of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection

- II

104




4.3* Preparation of animal habitat certificates for the species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus and transferring them to land users for conservation

2012-2016 - Yelnya SNCI,land users,Miory Rayon Inspectorate of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection,Sharkovshchina Rayon Inspectorate of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection

- II

4.4 Organization of habitat conservation for the rare and endangered animal species listed in the Red Book

2012-2016 - Yelnya SNCI,Miory Rayon Inspectorate of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection,Sharkovshchina Rayon Inspectorate of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection,land users

- II

Operational task 5. To ensure sustainable functioning of the state nature conservation institution managing the reserve to undertake activities under the reserve management plan and control compliance with its regimes5.1 Equipping Yelnya SNCI with vehicles

(a car, a cross-country vehicle), GPS, other specialized equipment and accessories

2012-2013 800.0 Vitebsk Oblast Executive Committee,Yelnya SNCI

International technical assistance (EU/UNDP project)

II

Operational task 6. To undertake activities on organizing ecotourism in the reserve6.1* Construction of tourist trails in

accordance with the recommendations developed (Annex 4)

2013-2017 640.0 Vitebsk Oblast Executive Committee,Yelnya SNCI

Local budget(activity 33.6.2 under the government

II

105




program Specially Protected Natural Sites)International technical assistance (EU/UNDP project)

6.2* Development and construction of special causeways for movement of vehicles (including cross-country vehicles, marsh buggies, and other similar vehicles) along the routes identified in the Management Plan in accordance with the scheme developed (Figure 7.2)

2013-2016 400.0 Yelnya SNCI,tourist organizations,Disna Forestry Enterprise,Miory and Sharkovshchina Rayon Executive Committees


I

6.2* Construction of a watch tower 2013-2014 240.0 Yelnya SNCI International technical assistance (EU/UNDP project)

II

6.3* Equipment of tourist stations 2012-2015 80.0 Vitebsk Oblast Executive Committee,Yelnya SNCI,Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI

Local budget(activity 33 under the government program Specially Protected Natural Sites),international technical assistance (EU/UNDP project)

II

6.4 Buying equipment (accessories, gear, etc.) to organize tourism

2012-2013 160.0 Yelnya SNCI International technical assistance (EU/UNDP

II

106




project)6.5 Development of a marketing program

and business plan to promote the offered tourist product in the domestic and external markets

2012-2013 160.0 Yelnya SNCI International technical assistance,investors’ own funds

III

6.6 Preparation, publication, and dissemination of guidebooks, maps, pamphlets, brochures, and other information materials for tourists

2013-2015 140.0 Yelnya SNCI Local budget (activity 9 under the government program Specially Protected Natural Sites),international technical assistance

II

6.7 Creation of the official website of the reserve posting up-to-date tourist information there

2012-2013 96.0 Yelnya SNCI International technical assistance (EU/UNDP project)

III

Operational task 7. To create a system of comprehensive monitoring of key components of the prevailing reserve ecosystems to assess their status and development pattern, as well as the efficiency of activities undertaken in the framework of the Management Plan in accordance with the NSEM regulations7.1* Ensuring comprehensive monitoring of

reserve ecosystems2015-2016 480.0 Ministry of Natural

Resources and Environmental Protection,National Academy of Sciences of Belarus,Yelnya SNCI

Republican budget (government program Specially Protected Natural Sites)

I

Operational task 8. To organize an awareness-raising campaign to inform the population about the nature conservation value of the Yelnya Reserve, its conservation and use regimes8.1 Preparing and publishing promotion

and outreach, and reference materials: brochures, postcards, guidebooks,

2012-2016 200.0 Yelnya SNCI (activity 28 under the government program Specially Protected

III

107




calendars, etc. Natural Sites),international technical assistance

8.2 Promotion of the objectives, tasks, and progress in implementation of the Management Plan in mass media

2012-2016 - Yelnya SNCI - III

8.3 Organization of guided tours for education and instruction purposes run by reserve experts


8.4 Informing the population about the objectives of reserve creation and functioning, as well as current regimes of its conservation and use


8.5 Making and installing signs giving directions and other information, billboards

2012-2016 24.0 Vitebsk Oblast Executive Committee,Yelnya SNCI,Miory Rayon Executive Committee,Sharkovshchina Rayon Executive Committee,Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI

Local budget (activity 18 under the government program Specially Protected Natural Sites)

II

8.6 Shooting a video film about the Yelnya Reserve

2013-2014 400.0 Yelnya SNCI,EU/UNDP project


III

108

* The activities are reflected in map charts (Figure 7.1)**Priority of activities under the Management Plan:

Priority I Is assigned to those projects, which are to be completed this year. They include, for instance, those projects, implementation of which affects the overall status of the ecosystem, or the most significant sites of the territory.Shortcomings in implementing Priority I projects would result in immediate degradation of key habitats and species, or infrastructure of specially protected natural sites. This degree of priority means that there should be no significant arguments if Priority I projects are not delivered by the established deadline. All the activities assigned Priority I status are assumed to be completed in the current year; the reasons for failing to deliver a Priority I project should be specified in the annual Plan implementation information report.

Priority II Is assigned to those projects, which are important for current management. They should be completed over the period specified for the project. They primarily differ from Priority I projects by having a flexibility element, when loss of one year of such management would not result in immediate degradation of key protected natural sites in this area.Shortcomings in implementing Priority II projects would result in the following: degradation of habitats and population of species in 2-3 years; significant damage to administration of specially protected natural sites as a result of loss of credibility among the public.

Priority III Is assigned to those projects, which are desirable, but can be implemented only on condition that Priority I and II projects are fully covered with sources of financing. Low priority projects should be implemented any time over the five-year period covered by the Management Plan. Low priority is most often assigned to projects as a result of the planning party recognizing limitations related to resources.

109

Explanatory Noteto Activities under the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve Management Plan for the period

of 2012-2016

OPERATIONAL TASK 1. To organize management of the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog to ensure sustainable functioning of the bog ecosystem, prevent peat fires, and protect typical raised bogs and the biodiversity related thereto while taking into account the interests of land users.

Recommendation 1.1. Complete work on rehabilitation of the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog to prevent peat fires, restore impaired bog ecosystems and biodiversity.

In 1999-2009, the civil society organization BirdLife Belarus (APB) implemented a number of projects to restore the hydrological regime the Yelnya mire:

- Priority Activities to Optimize the Hydrological Regime of the Yelnya Bog, 2002. The project was supported with financing of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Belarus, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (UK), Wetlands International; and

- Optimizing the Hydrological Regime of the Central Part of the Yelnya Bog to Prevent Peat Fires, Restore Impaired Bog Ecosystems and Biodiversity. The project was supported with financing of GEF Small Grants Program, 2008-2009.

The inventory (May 2012) of the status of 48 dams, which are built on drainage canals on the bog periphery and in the middle of the bog, showed that:

- 41 dams continue to perform their water retention functions to a certain degree, 7 are practically not functioning owing to partial destruction of dams or formation of new bypass courses; and

- the dams built on canals in the middle of the bog perform their water retention functions only partially as the canals are located in shallows created as a result of peat consolidation.

The conclusion drawn based on the study of the bog groundwater level changes is that the activities implemented ensured groundwater level increase from 50-100 cm below the ground level to 30-50 cm. However, the optimal condition to restore the bog formation processes at the impaired part of the bog is groundwater level stabilization at the ground surface level.

To this end, additional activities are required to restore the bog hydrological regime, including:

- identifying the location of canal dams, which would facilitate raising the bog water level up to the ground surface level. That will be done based on the results of additional bog surface level surveying, study of topographic maps, and preparing a map of the bog surface relief;

- construction of new dams of a different type using excavators that will facilitate blocking not only the canal course, but also the whole depression along the canals; and

- repairing the existing dams to form controlled water bypass without ground surface erosion.

Besides the activities to block the bog drainage canals, it is planned to undertake steps to assess the impact on the bog coming from the drainage systems surrounding it and, based on that, to develop––if needed––a mire buffer zone, where economic activities would be regulated.

At the initial stage of the additional activities implementation, it is planned to prepare a new scientific justification for act ivies to restore the hydrological regime, which would include: description of the canals impacting the bog hydrological regime; assessment of their impact on the bog ecosystems; analysis of the work performed earlier; and a strategy to restore the natural water levels. At the second stage, an engineering project will be prepared to implement the tasks set in the scientific justification. The third stage will include implementation of the construction project.

110

Activity 1.1.1. Preparation of scientific justification for additional activities to restore the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog

In accordance with the technical code of common practice – the Procedure and Rules of Performing Work on Ecological Rehabilitation of Worked-out Peat Deposits and Other Impaired Bogs and Prevention of Disruption of the Hydrological Regime of Natural Ecosystems in the Process of Reclamation Work, a scientific justification is required to be prepared for performance of hydrological regime rehabilitation work. Besides its required sections, the scientific justification should include:

- assessment of the impact of earlier activities on the bog hydrological regime;

- proposals on location of new and rehabilitation of existing bulkheads based on a detailed analysis of the bog relief and status of bulkheads;

- proposals on the type of bulkheads to be used and appraisal of the types of equipment capable of operating on a natural bog;

- justification and proposals on blocking the runoff depression along the canals based on surface level surveying; and

- proposals on establishing a water protection area for the mire, and justification of limitation of economic activity to be established to prevent disruption of aquifer layers supplying water for the mire.

The cost of scientific justification preparation, taking into account the earlier research, will make US$ 9,000. The work will be financed with the proceeds of the international technical assistance. Timeline: 2013.

Activity 1.1.2. Development of an engineering project to restore the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog

Based on the conclusions of the scientific justification, the terms of reference for project design will be prepared to be approved by Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI. The organization to prepare the engineering project will be selected on a tender basis in accordance with the national regulations. The engineering project will be developed taking into account provision of the technical code of common practice Procedure and Rules of Performing Work on Ecological Rehabilitation of Worked-out Peat Deposits and Other Impaired Bogs and Prevention of Disruption of the Hydrological Regime of Natural Ecosystems in the Process of Reclamation Work. According to preliminary estimated, the project solution will involve cascaded blocking of bog drainage canals with dams of a new type and upgrading the water regulating facilities built earlier.

The cost of the construction project development, taking into account the survey work performed earlier, will make around US$ 30 thousand. The work is planned to be financed with the proceeds of the international technical assistance. Timeline: 2015.

Activity 1.1.3. Implementation of the construction project

The organization to prepare the construction project will be selected on a tender basis. Based on the tender results, a contract will be drawn to implement the construction project––its customer being Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI and its contractor – the construction organization, which would win the contraction work tender. The mandatory requirement to the tender winner will be availability of excavators capable of operating on a natural bog.

The cost of the construction project implementation will make US$ 60-70 thousand. The construction work will be financed with the proceeds of the international technical assistance. Timeline: 2016-2017.

111

Activity 1.1.4. Organizing and running volunteer camps to build and upgrade water regulating facilities, including dams.

OPERATIONAL TASK 2. To organize forest management in the reserve aimed at biodiversity conservation

Activity 2.1.

Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus No 1833 dated December 27, 2007 On Republican Reserves transformed the Yelnya Republican Hydrological Reserve into a republican landscape reserve. In this respect, forest management plans need adjusting in accordance with the new regimes of forest operation specified in the new Regulations on the Yelnya Reserve. The new Regulations on the Yelnya Reserve take into account the recommendations formulated in the process of the present Management Plan preparation. Adjustments to forest management plans in accordance with the new Regulations on the Yelnya Reserve will be introduced in 2013 in the process of new forest management planning by Disna Forestry Enterprise.

Yelnya SNCI, jointly with the State Inspectorate on Wildlife and local bodies of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, arranges control of the land users’ compliance with the new regimes.

OPERATIONAL TASK 3. To organize sustainable use of natural resources of the Yelnya Reserve

Activity 3.1.

Proposals (a business plan) on organizing sustainable use of the major bog resource, i.e. cranberries, and its processing in Miory and Sharkovshchina rayons should include: an assessment of cranberry resources and their distribution over the bog, proposals on pressure distribution, construction of trails, feasibility study for construction of a processing plant or optimization of procurement. According to some rough estimates, the amount of cranberry annually harvested on the bog territory and sold to wholesale buyers is worth over US$ 1 million. The key consumer of cranberries is Germany, where cranberries are processed to produce different food products sold in European Union countries. In this regard, the feasibility of building on the territory of Miory rayon a cranberry processing enterprise––thus, ensuring sustainable use of cranberry resources and facilitating employment of local people––should be considered.

Activity 3.2. Banning spring and fall hunting for migratory birds at the reserve

The Yelnya bog is a stop-over and rest site for migratory water bird species of international concern. The fact that at the time of spring and fall migration, over 20,000 wetland birds (including anseriformes (Anseriformes) – 9,000-12,000, Gruiformes (Gruiformes) – 2,500-4,000, and charadriiformes (Charadriiformes) – 4,000-5,000) make a stop-over on the bog was the key criterion for making this mire a Ramsar site. Thus, it is recommended to ban bird hunting on the territory of the reserve at the time of spring and fall migration (March-May and September-October). In 2012, on initiative of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, a ban on spring hunting on the territory of the reserve was approved.

It is recommended to establish a long-term ban on spring hunting.

Activity 3.3. Setting amateur fishing regimes at certain lakes.

A number of lakes in the reserve are sites for regular overnight stopovers of migratory geese and other water birds and the key nesting site for such protected bird species as the black-throated loon (Gavia

112

arctica). In addition, the common gull (Larus canus), black-tailed godwit (Limosa limosa), and common greenshank (Tringa nebularia) nest on these lakes, as well as on the ridge-hollow-lake complexes. As a result of regular visits of fishermen to these lakes and under the effect of the disturbance factor, the lakes may lose their importance as stop-over sites for geese and nesting site for a number of rare and protected bird species. In this regard, it is recommended to ban amateur fishing from March to end-June on the following lakes: Blizhnee, Ploskoe, Lopukhi, as well as Vysokoe, Sukhoe, Dolgoe, Glubokoe, and Smovzh. To this end, Miory Rayon Executive Committee adopts relevant decisions, and relevant signs giving information are installed on all the roads leading to the lakes. Responsible organization: Yelnya SNCI. Timeline: 2012.

Activity 3.4. Intensification of efforts to fight invasive species.

To mitigate the negative impact of undesirable species on game fauna, especially on ground-nesting bird species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus, a particular attention should be paid to regulation of the population of the raccoon dog and American mink on the territory of the Yelnya Reserve. With their density increased, these predators reduce the population of the eagle owl, common crane, golden plover, and other ground-nesting bird species of the Yelnya bog.

OPERATIONAL TASK 4. To ensure conservation and management of plant and animal habitats for the species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus

Activities 4.1-4.5

Based on the inventory of biodiversity taken in the framework of developing the Management Plan and current research, protected species habitat certificates should be prepared–––in accordance with the Instruction on the Procedure of Identifying, Transfer for Conservation, and Accounting of Habitats of Wild Plant and Animal Species Listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus––and forwarded to rayon inspectorates to be then transferred to land users for conservation, paying a particular attention to developing recommendations on habitat conservation.

15 plant species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus are found on the territory of the Yelnya Reserve.

To maintain the population of such plants or create conditions for their development, a set of targeted activities should be implemented, forestry employees should be informed about the appearance of the protected species, specific features of their biology, existing threats, and required conservation measures. Rayon Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Inspectorates, jointly with Yelnya SNCI, should control compliance with the requirements to conservation activities.

Habitats of 31 animal species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus are identified on the territory of the Yelnya Reserve.

To preserve the population of these species, recommendations on their conservation should be complied with. Rayon Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Inspectorates, jointly with Yelnya SNCI, should control compliance with the requirements to conservation activities.

The habitat conditions for a number of bird species have sharply deteriorated as a result of fires and disruption of the hydrological regime. In spite of the fact that quite large forests with old trees are located on the perimeter of the reserve, the number of trees suitable for nesting of large predaceous birds and black stork is limited. Thus, to maintain the population of the black stork, lesser spotted eagle, and to attract rare owl species (great grey owl Strix nebulosa) for nesting, special activities are required to establish nesting platforms in old parts of the forests on the perimeter of the reserve. Efforts to install man-made bird boxes for merlin (Falco columbarius) at the raised bog should continue. Further activities aimed at maintaining the water level at the mire, especially at its impaired parts, will have a positive effect on the bird population of charadriiformes order (Charadriiformes). In winter,

113

activities should be undertaken to regulate the population of undesirable species (raccoon dog, American mink).

In the framework of certificate preparation and their transfer for conservation, recommendations will be provided on biotechnical activities.

Responsible organization: Yelnya SNCI. Timeline: 2012-2016.

OPERATIONAL TASK 6. To undertake activities on organizing ecotourism in the reserve

Activities 6.1-6.8

Developing and implementing a project to build tourist trails and create the infrastructure for ecotourism development in the reserve, including:

construction of walking tourist routes running through the territory of the reserve and surrounding areas, taking into account the biodiversity inventory (the scientific and technical recommendations in Annex 4);

design and construction of special causeways for vehicles (cross-country vehicles) for tourist and other (research, fire fighting, control) purposes along the routes specified in Figure 7.2.

development of the ecotourism infrastructure;

construction of a watch tower;

buying equipment (accessories, gear, etc.);

establishing agro-tourist enterprises in the surrounding areas;

development of a marketing program and business plan to promote the offered tourist product in the domestic and external markets; and

preparation, publication, and dissemination of guidebooks, maps, pamphlets, brochures, and other information materials about the specially protected natural site of national concern.

Several walking routes are recommended to be developed and then equipped by building a log trail, setting signs giving information, equipping tourist stations, and building a basic watch tower. The routes should cover the areas with the most attractive landscapes of the reserve (lakes, hollow complexes, habitats of rare fauna and flora species, and wooded islands); however, they should not damage them.

To prevent damage to the ecosystems when using vehicles to move on the bog––taking into account intensified use thereof for tourist and other purposes––it should be also required that:

- Vehicles can be used to move on the bog for tourist purposes exclusively on special causeways built along the routes specified in the Management Plan (Figure 7.2.); and

- The vehicles can deviate from the causeways only in exceptional cases (fire fighting, providing medical aid, and implementing construction projects to optimize the hydrological regime).

OPERATIONAL TASK 7. To create a system of monitoring key reserve ecosystems to assess their status and development pattern, as well as the efficiency of activities undertaken in the framework of the Management Plan

A system of monitoring the status and development of components (flora, bird species composition and population, protected species) of key reserve ecosystems (raised bog, lakes) should be put in place to assess the status of bog ecosystems and efficiency of the Management Plan implementation. A particular attention should be paid to monitoring the water level at the periphery of the raised bog, near drainage canals (Dulsky, Berezha), in the centre of the mire and at lakes (Yelnya, Bolshoe, Ploskoe).

114

The monitoring will be performed based on standard scientific methods. One of the major tasks of the monitoring should be assessment of the efficiency of the activities undertaken in the framework of the Management Plan and adjustment of the activities planned based on findings of the monitoring.

OPERATIONAL TASK 8. To organize an awareness-raising campaign to inform the population about the value of the reserve

The organization of an awareness-raising and outreach campaign to inform the population about the nature conservation value of the Yelnya Reserve and the regimes of its conservation and use involves the following activities:

Preparing and publishing promotion and outreach, and reference materials: brochures, postcards, guidebooks, calendars, etc.;

Development of cooperation with education institutions;

Creating and maintaining a positive image of the Yelnya Reserve Management Plan by means of extensive coverage of its objectives, tasks, and implementation progress in mass media;

Making and installing signs giving directions and other information, billboards;

Informing the population about the current regimes on the territory of the reserve;

Undertaking practical awareness raising measures to inform the population about the regime of activities on the territory of the reserve;

Organization of guided tours for education and instruction purposes run by reserve experts; and

Shooting a video film about the Yelnya Reserve.

115

Figure 7.2 (a) – Causeway route Sukhoverzhie–Yelnya Lake to be equipped for movement of specialized vehicles

116

Figure 7.2 (b) – Causeway route Budy village-Berezha Lake to be equipped for movement of specialized vehicles

117

LIST OF REFERENCES

1. Бамбалов Н.Н. Роль болот в биосфере. – Мн.: Бел. наука, 2005. – 285 с.2. База данных "Флора сосудистых растений Центральной России" [Электронный ресурс] /

Институт математических проблем биологии РАН. – Пущино, 2001-2006. – Режим доступа: http://www.jcbi.ru/eco1/index.shtml.

3. Беленький С.Г. Закономерности формирования торфяных месторождений верхового типа как сырьевых баз для комплексной переработки торфа: Автореферат на дис. канд. техн. наук: 05.15.05. – Мн.: АН БССР ИТ, 1987. – 241с.

4. Белорусское Поозерье: анализ эколого-мелиоративного состояния. Под ред. Аношко В.С. и др. Мн., 1992. – 156 с.

5. Бирюков В.П. Замечание к списку видов птиц Красной книги Республики Беларусь//Красная книга Республики Беларусь: состояние, проблемы, перспективы: Мат.респ.науч.конф. Витебск, 2002.

6. Бирюков В.П. Некоторые закономерности распространения на гнездовании водоплавающих птиц на озерах бассейна реки Западная Двина // Веснiк ВДУ. 1998. № 2 (8). С. 91-98.

7. Бирюков В.П., Блажевич Р.Ю., Вынаев Г.В. и др. Охраняемые растения и животные БССР: Обзорная информация. Мн., 1982. – 51 с.

8. Боровик Е. А. Озера Белоруссии. Минск, 1970.9. Второв П., Второва В. Н. Эталоны природы. М., 1983, 205 с.10. Вынаев Г.В., Козловская Н.В. Редкий представитель семейства орхидных – ятрышник

обоженный во флоре Белоруссии // Весцi АН БССР. Сер. Бiял. Навук. – 1986. – 5. – С. 104-105.

11. Гигевич Г.С., Власов Б.П., Вынаев Г.В. Высшие водные растения Беларуси: Эколого-биологическая характеристика, использование и охрана. - Минск: Изд-во БГУ, 2001. – 230с.

12. Гельтман В.С. Географический и типологический анализ лесной растительности Беларуссии. Мн., «Наука и техника», 1982. –326 с.

13. Голод Д.С. и др. Болота бассейна р. Западной Двины, их использование и охрана в связи с мелиоративным освоением территории // Антропогенные изменения, охрана растительности болот и прилегающих территорий. Мн., 1981.- С. 182-187.

14. Государственный водный кадастр. Ежегодные данные о режиме и ресурсах поверхностных вод суши. Бассейны рек Республики Беларусь (по 1995 г. включительно).

15. Дементьев В.А. Геоморфологические районы Белоруссии. Сб. 4, вып. 8, серия геогр.16. Дорофеев А.М., Шимко И.И. Редкие и охраняемые виды растений Национального парка

"Браславские озера" // Веснiк ВДУ. – 2001. - № 3(21). - С. 130 - 137. 17. Иванов К. Е. Водообмен в болотных ландшафтах. – Л.: Изд. Гидрометиоиздат, 1975. С

280.18. Ивановский В.В., Кузьменко В.Я. Изменение состава орнитофауны верховых болот

Белорусского Поозерья за последние 10-15 лет // Сообщения Прибалтийской комиссии по изучению миграций птиц. – Тарту, 1989, № 20. – С. 31-35.

19. Изменение гидрографической сети Белоруссии под воздействием мелиоративных работ: Справочник. – Мн.: БелУГКС, 1986. – 320 с.

20. Изменение гидрографической сети Белоруссии под воздействием мелиоративных работ: Справочник. – Мн.: Белгидромет, 1990. – 348 с.

21. Кадастровый справочник «Торфяной фонд Белорусской ССР». – Мн., 1979.22. Касьяненко И.И. К изучению флоры и растительности в национальном парке

«Браславские озёра» // Беловежская пуща на рубеже третьего тысячелетия: Матер. научн.-практ. конф., п. Каменюки, Брестская обл., 22-24 декабря 1993 г. – Минск, 1999. – С. 214–216.

23. Красная книга Республики Беларусь: редкие и находящиеся под угрозой исчезновения 118

виды диких животных. Мн.: БелЭн, 2004. – 320 с.24. Красная книга Республики Беларусь: редкие и находящиеся под угрозой исчезновения

виды дикорастущих растений. Мн.: БелЭн, 2005. – 456 с.25. Кукушкин С.А., Радкевич Д.В., Шадурко А.А. Зарыбление промысловыми рыбами озера

Освейского» Материалы Международной научной конференции Минск, 28-30 ноября. С. 224

26. Климат Беларуси. Под. ред. Логинова В.Ф. – Мн., 1996. - 234 с.27. Ключевые ботанические территории Беларуси. Под ред. Масловского О.М., Пронькиной

А.Г. М-Мн.- Бестиор, 2005. – 80 с.28. Костоусов В.Г. Ряпушка европейская: экология и хозяйственное значение. - Минск, 1999

- 44 с. 29. Конвенция о водно-болотных угодьях, имеющих международное значение, главным

образом, в качестве местообитаний водоплавающих птиц. Рамсар, 2 февраля 1971 г.30. Кузьменко В.Я. , Ивановский В.В. Орнитофаунистические критерии выделения

охраняемых верховых болот Беларуси // Вестник ВГУ,1998, № 1 (7). - С.79 – 85.31. Кухарчик Т.И. Верховые болота Беларуси. – Мн., 1993. – 136 с.32. Марцинкевич Г.И., Клицунова Н.К., Хараничева Г.Т., Якушко О.Ф., Логинова Л.В.

Ландшафты Белоруссии. Минск, 1989. – 238 с.33. Матвеев А.В., Гурский Б.Н., Левицкая Р.И. Рельеф Белоруссии. Минск, 1988, 320 с.34. Методические рекомендации по экологической реабилитации нарушенных болот и по

предотвращению нарушений гидрологического режима болотных экосистем при осушительных работах/ А.В. Козулин, Н.И. Тановицкая, И. Н. Вершицкая; НПЦ «Биоресурсы», Институт природопользования, Минск: «Альтиора-Живые краски», 2010. – 40 с.

35. Муравицкий В.А. Распространение бурого медведя на севере Белоруссии // Охраняемые животные Белоруссии. Вып.2. – Мн., 1990. – С. 50-61.

36. Никифоров Е., Яминский Б.В., Шкляров Л.П. Птицы Белоруссии. – Мн., 1989, 479с.37. Озера Белоруссии. Под ред. О.Ф. Якушко. Мн., 1988. – С. 63-67.38. Основные гидрографические характеристики малых водотоков и их водосборов.

Белоруссия и Верхнее Поднепровье. – Мн.: Белгидромет, 1975. – 273 с.39. Отчет о НИР «Инвентаризация мест обитания (произрастания) редких видов животных и

растений, занесенных в Красную книгу Беларуси, на территории Национального парка «Браславские озера». Витебский государственный университет им. Машерова, Проблемная научно-исследовательская лаборатория", 1999 г., 68 с.

40. Отчет о НИР «Определить пространственные параметры ключевых компонентов национальной экологической сети и разработать схему рационального размещения особо охраняемых природных территорий Республики Беларусь на 2006-2015 гг.», Мн., 2004. – 153 с.

41. Отчет о НИР «Оценить современное состояние и обеспечение сохранения природных комплексов республиканских заказников «Глубокое–Чербомысло», «Большое Островито», «Заозерье», «Кривое», «Ричи», «Сосно» и «Свитязянский», созданных в 1968–1979 гг., и подготовить согласованные предложения по режимам их содержания (Задание 8.2.12), (Заключительный), Книга 7, Республиканский гидрологический заказник «Ричи», Министерство образования Республики Беларусь, Белорусский государственный университет, 2002 г., 90 c.

42. Отчет о НИР «Обоснование восстановления гидрологического режима нарушенного верхового болота Ельня» - ГНПО «НПЦ НАН Беларуси по биоресурсам», Мн. 2008 г., 48с.

43. Отчет о НИР «Подготовить научные обоснования ООПТ, предусмотренных к созданию Схемой рационального размещения особо охраняемых природных территорий Республики Беларусь до 2000 г.», книга 1 «Научное и технико-экономическое обоснование реорганизации заказника «Ельня». - ГП "БелНИИПградостроительства».

119

Мн., 1998 г. - 62 с. 44. Отчет о НИР «Провести обследование современного состояния флоры и растительности

заказника республиканского значения «Ельня» и разработать режимы по оптимизации их хозяйственного использования и охраны» - ГНУ «Институт экспериментальной ботаники им. В.Ф. Купревича». Мн., 2006 г. - 93 с.

45. Отчет о НИР «Провести инвентаризацию водно-болотных комплексов в приграничной полосе Беларусь-Латвия» - НП «Браславские озера», ГНПО «НПЦ НАН Беларуси по биоресурсам», Мн., 2008

46. Отчет о НИР «Создать сеть комплексного мониторинга экосистем (лесных, водных, болотных, луговых и других) на особо охраняемых природных территориях (включая заказник «Ельня»). - ГНУ «Институт экспериментальной ботаники им. В.Ф.Купревича». Мн., 2006 г. – 110 с.

47. Отчет о НИР «Создать сеть комплексного мониторинга экосистем (в части животного мира) на особо охраняемых природных территориях» (включая заказник «Ельня»). –Институт зоологии НАН Беларуси. Мн., 2006 г. – 143 с.

48. Отчет НИР «Исследование геоботанической структуры, продуктивности и современного состояния растительности верховых болот Беларуси. Разработка мероприятий по их рациональному использованию и охране» / Рук. задания: Бамбалов. Н.Н., отв. исп.: Тановицкая Н.И., № гос. рег. 200666878, Минск, 2010 г. С 141.

49. Отчет НИР «Оценить современное экологическое состояние Ельнинского гидрологического заказника и дать прогноз его развития» / Экологической комиссии Академии наук Беларуси. Отв. исполн.: Бамбалов. Н.Н., Минск, 1992, С 124.

50. Отчет «Восстановление гидрологического режима и предотвращение пожаров на потенциальной Рамсарской территории гидрологическом заказнике «Ельня»». Отв. исполн.: Власов, 2000.

51. Павловская И.Э. Полоцкий ледниково-озерный бассейн: строение, рельеф, история развития. Минск, 1994, 128 с.

52. Петерсон Г., Винтулис В. Новые данные о состоянии рукокрылых В Витебской области на севере Беларуси//Структурно-функц. состояние биол. разнообразия животного мира Беларуси. Тез. Докл. VIII. зоол. научн. конф. Мн., 1999.

53. Пидопличко А. П. Торфяные месторождения Белоруссии. – Мн.: АН БССР, 1961. – 193 с.54. План управления заказником республиканского значения "Ельня" / Науч. рук. проекта:

к.б.н. А.В. Козулин, Отв. исп.: О.С. Беляцкая, Минск, 2008 г.55. Плужников В.Н., Макаревич А.А. К вопросу о влиянии осушения на сток р. Припять//

Материалы научно-технической конференции «Водные ресурсы и устойчивое развитие экономики Беларуси». Том П. – Минск, 1966, с. 46-48.

56. Плужников В.Н., Макаревич А.А., Петлицкий Е.Е. Оценка и прогноз ресурсов поверхностных вод и их изменений под влиянием хозяйственной деятельности. – Мн.: ЦНИИКИВР, 1995. – 93 с.

57. Пособие по определению расчетных гидрологических характеристик. – Л.: Гидрометеоиздат, 1984. – 448 с.

58. Пособие к СниП 2.01.14-83 «Определение расчетных гидрологических характеристик» (первая редакция). – Мн.: Министерство строительства и архитектуры Республики Беларусь, 1997. – 184 с.

59. Растительный покров Белоруссии. (Под. ред. И.Ю. Юркевича и В.С. Гельтмана) – Мн., Наука и техника, 1978.

60. Рациональное природопользование Белорусского Поозерья. Под. ред. Аношко В.С. и др. Мн., 1993. – 202 с.

61. Рекомендации по оценке изменений стока малых рек Белоруссии после мелиорации/Сост. Дрозд В.В., Макаревич А.А. – Мн.: ЦНИИКИВР, 1986 – 30 с.

62. Ресурсы поверхностных вод СССР. Гидрологическая изученность. Том 5. Белоруссия и Верхнее Поднепровье. – Л.: Гидрометеоиздат, 1963. – 304 с.

120

63. Ресурсы поверхностных вод СССР. Описание рек и озер. Том 5. Белоруссия и Верхнее Поднепровье. Часть I. – Л.: Гидрометеоиздат, 1971. - 1108 с.

64. Ресурсы поверхностных вод СССР. Описание рек и озер. Том 5. Белоруссия и Верхнее Поднепровье. Часть П. – Л.: Гидрометеоиздат, 1971. - 336 с.

65. Руководство по составлению планов управления особо охраняемыми природными территориями. - Мн., 2002. – 51 с.

66. Смирнова О.В., Ханина Л.Г., Смирнов В.Э. Эколого-ценотические группы в растительном покрове лесного пояса Восточной Европы // Восточноевропейские леса: история в голоцене и современность / Под. ред. О.В. Смирновой. Кн. 1. М., 2004. С. 165—175.

67. Сушко Г.Г. Сезонная динамика активности жужелиц (Coleoptera, Carabidae) верхового болота «Ельня» // Весці Акадэміі навук Беларусі. Сер. біял. навук. – 2001, № 1. С. 139-141.

68. Тановицкая Н.И., Шевцов Н.В., Соколовский Г.В., Козулин А.В. Особенности формирования стока и зон влияния осушенных и выработанных участков болот на прилегающие территории. Природопользование 15, 2009. С. 88–95.

69. Теоретические и методические проблемы сравнительной флористики: Материалы II рабочего совещания по сравнительной флористике. Неринга, 1983. – Л.: Наука, 1987. – 283 с.

70. Флора и растительность ландшафтного заказника «Ельня» / Д.Г. Груммо, О.В. Созинов, Н.А. Зеленкевич [и др.]; под ред. Н.Н. Бамбалова; Нац. акад. наук Беларуси, Ин-т экспериментальной ботаники. – Мн.: Минсктиппроект, 2010. – 200 с.: ил.

71. Шебеко В. Ф. Гидрологический режим осушаемых территорий. – Мн., 1970. – 299 с.72. Условия проектирования мелиорации вблизи государственных гидрологических

заповедников на территории Белорусской ССР. Приложение 9. Утверждено решением Госкомитета Совета Министров по охране природы от 27.01.77 г. № 1.

73. Юркевич И.Д., Голод Д.С., Адерихо В.С. Растительность Белоруссии, ее картографирование, охрана использование. – Мн., 1979. – 248 с.

74. Юркевич И.Д., Гельтман В.С. География, типология и районирование лесной растительности Белоруссии. Минск: Наука и техника, 1965.- 288 с.

75. Юрковская Т.К. География и картография растительности болот Европейской России и сопредельных территорий // Труды Ботанического Ин-та им. В.Л. Комарова РАН / Под ред. Г.А. Елиной.– СПб, 1992.– Вып. 4.– 255 с.

76. Якушко О.Ф. Белорусское Поозерье. История развития и современное состояние озер северной Белоруссии. Мн., 1971.- 336 c.

77. Яцухно В.М., Давыдик Е.Е. Принципы и географические аспекты формирования особо охраняемых природных территорий Республики Беларусь // Географическиен проблемы природопользования в условиях антропогенной деятельности. Минск, 1996. С. 42-49.

78. Brooks, S., Stoneman, R., Conserving bogs. The management Handbook. Ed. 1997, 285 p.79. Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats. EUR25. EC, Nature and biodiversity. 2003.

– 126 р. 80. Convention on the conservation of European wildlife and natural habitats. - Council of Europe,

Bern, 1979. - 12.81. Ellenberg H. Zeigerwerte der Geffasspflanzen Mitteleuropas. Gottingen, 1992. – 282 s.82. Landolt E. Okologische Zeigerwerts zur Sweizer Flora. - Veroff. Geobot. Inst. ETH. Zurich.

1977. H.64. S. 1-208.83. Landolt E. Valeurs ecologiques liste alphabetique. Universite de Geneve. 1984. 82 s.

121

ANNEX 1 List of Upper Tracheophytes of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve5

Division: LycopodiophytaClass: Lycopodiopsida

Order: LycopodialesFamily: Lycopodiaceae Beauv. ex Mirbel

1. Lycopodium annotinum L. –– Stiff clubmoss2. Lycopodium clavatum L. –– Wolf's-foot clubmoss3. Huperzia selago (L.) Bernh. ex Schrank et Mart. –– Northern firmoss*

Division: EquisetophytaClass: Equisetopsida

Order: EquisetalesFamily: Equisetaceae L.C. Richard ex DC.

4. Equisetum arvense L. –– Common horsetail5. Equisetum fluviatile L. –– Swamp horsetail 6. Equisetum hyemale L. –– Scouring rush7. Equisetum pratense Ehrh. –– Meadow horsetail8. Equisetum sylvaticum L. –– Sylvan horsetail

Division: PolypodiophytaClass: Polypodiopsida

Order: OphioglossalesFamily: Ophioglossaceae (R.Br.) Agardh

9. Ophioglossum vulgatum L. –– Adder's fern

Order: PolypodialesFamily: Athyriaceae Alston

10. Athyrium filix-femina (L.) Roth –– Common lady-fern

Family: Aspidiaceae Mett. et Frank

11. Dryopteris assimilis S. Walker –– Buckler fern12. Dryopteris carthusiana (Vill.) H.P.Fuch –– Narrow buckler fern13. Dryopteris cristata (L.) A.Gray –– Crested wood fern14. Dryopteris expansa (C.Presl) Fraser-Jenkins et Jermy –– Spreading woodfern15. Dryopteris filix-mas (L.) Schott –– Male shield fern16. Gymnocarpium dryopteris (L.) Newm. –– Common oak fern

Family: Thelypteridaceae Pichi-Sermolli

17. Thelypteris palustris Schott –– Marsh fern18. Phegopteris connectilis (Michx.) Watt –– Sun-fern

Family: Hypolepidaceae Pichi-Sermolli

19. Pteridium aquilinum (L.) Kuhn ex Decken –– Common bracken

5 In the list below, Latin names are given as per [96], Russian ones – as per [56].

122

Division: Pinophyta (= Gymnospermae)Subdivision: PinicaeClass: Pinopsida (= Coniferae)

Order: PinalesFamily: Pinaceae Lindl.

20. Picea abies (L.) Karst. –– Common spruce21. Pinus sylvestris L. –– Scots pine

Family: Cupressaceae Bartl.

22. Juniperus communis L. –– Common Juniper

Division: Magnoliophyta (= Angiospermae)Class: Magnoliopsida (= Dicotyledones)

Order: AristolochialesFamily: Aristolochiaceae Juss.

23. Asarum europaeum L. –– European wild ginger

Order: NymphaealesFamily: Nymphaeaceae Salisbury

24. Nuphar lutea (L.) Smith –– Yellow water-lily25. Nymphaea candida J. et C.Presl –– White water-lily

Order: RanunculalesFamily: Ranunculaceae Juss.

26. Actaea spicata L. –– Baneberry27. Anemonoides nemorosa (L.) Holub –– Wood anemone 28. Anemonoides ranunculoides (L.) Holub ––Yellow anemone29. Caltha palustris L. –– Kingcup30. Ficaria verna Huds. –– Fig buttercup31. Hepatica nobilis Mill. –– Beefsteak fungus or hepatica 32. Ranunculus acris L. –– Meadow buttercup33. Ranunculus auricomus L. –– Goldilocks buttercup34. Ranunculus cassubicus L. –– Kashubian buttercups35. Ranunculus flammula L. –– Lesser spearwort36. Ranunculus lingua L. –– Great Spearwort37. Ranunculus repens L. –– Creeping buttercup38. Thalictrum aquilegifolium L. –– Columbine meadow-rue39. Thalictrum lucidum L. –– Shining meadow rue

Order: PapaveralesFamily: Papaveraceae Juss.

40. Chelidonium majus L. –– Greater celandine

Family: Fumariaceae DC.

41. Corydalis solida (L.) Clairv. –– Spring fumewort

123

Order: UrticalesFamily: Ulmaceae Mirbel

42. Ulmus scabra Mill. (Ulmus glabra Huds. non Mill.) –– Wych elm

Family: Cannabaceae

43. Humulus lupulus L. –– Common hop

Family: Urticaceae Juss.

44. Urtica dioica L. –– Stinging nettle

Order: FagalesFamily: Fagaceae Dumort.

45. Quercus robur L. –– English oak

Order: BetulalesFamily: Betulaceae S.F.Gray

46. Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertn. –– Common alder47. Alnus incana (L.) Moench –– Grey alder 48. Betula humilis Schrank. –– Shrub birch49. Betula nana L. –– Dwarf birch*

50. Betula pendula Roth –– Silver birch51. Betula pubescens Ehrh. –– White birch

Family: Corylaceae Mirb.

52. Corylus avellana L. –– Common hazel

Order: CaryophyllalesFamily: Caryophyllaceae Juss.

53. Cerastium arvense L. –– Meadow chickweed54. Coronaria flos-cuculi (L.) A.Br. –– Cuckooflower55. Dianthus deltoides L. –– Maiden pink56. Melandrium album (Mill.) Garcke –– White robin57. Moehringia trinervia (L.) Clairv. –– Three-nerved sandwort58. Myosoton aquaticum (L.) Moench –– Water chickweed59. Oberna behen (L.) Ikonn. (Silene vulgaris (Moench) Garcke) –– Common auburn60. Sagina nodosa (L.) Fenzl –– Knotted pearlsides61. Silene nutans L. –– Nottingham catchfly62. Stellaria alsine Grimm (Stellaria uliginosum Murr.) –– Bog starwort63. Stellaria graminea L. –– Heath stitchwort64. Stellaria holostea L. –– Easter-bell 65. Stellaria longifolia Muehl. ex Willd. –– Longleaf starwort66. Stellaria media (L.) Vill. –– Chickweed67. Stellaria nemorum L. –– Wood chickweed68. Stellaria palustris Retz. –– Marsh stitchwort69. Viscaria vulgaris Bernh. –– Sticky catchfly

124

Family: Amaranthaceae Juss.

70. Amaranthus paniculatus L. –– Pendant amaranth

Family: Chenopodiaceae Vent.

71. Chenopodium album L. –– Lambsquarters

Order: PolygonalesFamily: Polygonaceae Juss.

72. Fallopia convolvulus (L.) A. Love –– Black-bindweed73. Polygonum amphibium L. –– Water knotweed74. Polygonum arenastrum Boreau –– Common knotweed75. Polygonum lapathifolium L. s.str. –– Curlytop knotweed76. Polygonum nodosum (P. lapathifolium L. p.p.) –– Jointweed77. Polygonum hydropiper L. –– Water-pepper78. Polygonum minus Huds. –– Least-pickpocket79. Polygonum scabrum Moench –– Green smartweed80. Polygonum persicaria L. –– Spotted ladysthumb81. Rumex acetosa L. –– Common sorrel82. Rumex aquaticus L. –– Water sorrel83. Rumex acetosella L. –– Sheep sorrel84. Rumex crispus L. –– Curled dock85. Rumex hydrolapathum Huds. –– Great water dock86. Rumex obtusifolius L. –– Broad-leaved dock

Order: ThealesFamily: Hypericaceae Juss.

87. Hypericum maculatum Crantz –– Imperforate St John's-wort,88. Hypericum perforatum L. –– Tipton's weed

Order: ViolalesFamily: Violaceae Batsch

89. Viola arvensis Murr. –– Field pansy90. Viola canina L. –– Heath dog-violet91. Viola epipsila Ledeb. –– Dwarf marsh violet92. Viola nemoralis Kutz. –– Mountain violet93. Viola mirabilis L. –– Miraculous violet94. Viola palustris L. –– Marsh violet95. Viola riviniana Reichenb. –– Wood violet96. Viola tricolor L. –– Heartsease

Order: CapparalesFamily: Brassicaceae Burnett (= Cruciferae)

97. Berteroa incana (L.) DC. –– Hoary alyssum98. Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medik –– Common shepherd's-purse99. Cardamine amara L. –– Austere bitter-cress100. Cardamine dentata Schult. –– White cuckoo bitter-cress

125

Order: SalicalesFamily: Salicaceae

101. Populus tremula L. –– Common aspen102. Salix aurita L. –– Eared willow 103. Salix caprea L. –– Goat willow104. Salix cinerea L. –– Grey willow105. Salix starkeana Willd. –– Pale willow106. Salix myrsinifolia Salisb. –– Dark-leaved willow107. Salix myrtilloides L. –– Whortleberry willow* 108. Salix pentandra L. –– Bay willow

Order: EricalesFamily: Ericaceae Juss.

109. Andromeda polifolia L. –– Bog-rosemary, marsh holy rose110. Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (L.) Spreng. –– Bearberry111. Calluna vulgaris (L.) Hull –– Common heather112. Chamaedaphne calyculata (L.) Moench –– Golden-withy113. Ledum palustre L. –– Marsh ledum114. Oxycoccus microcarpus Turcz. ex Rupr. –– Small cranberry*

115. Oxycoccus palustris Pers. –– Northern cranberry116. Rhodococcum vitis-idaea (L.) Avror. (Vaccinium vitis-idaea L.) –– Cowberry117. Vaccinium myrtillus L. –– Bilberry118. Vaccinium uliginosum L. –– Northern bilberry

Family: Pyrolaceae Dumort

119. Chimaphila umbellata (L.) W.Barton –– Umbellate wintergreen120. Orthilia secunda (L.) House –– Sidebells wintergreen121. Pyrola minor L. –– Lesser wintergreen122. Pyrola rotundifolia L. –– Round-leaved wintergreen

Family: Empetraceae S.F.Gray

123. Empetrum nigrum L. –– Black crowberry

Order: PrimulalesFamily: Primulaceae Vent.

124. Hottonia palustris L. –– Water violet125. Lysimachia nummularia L. –– Creeping Jenny126. Lysimachia vulgaris L. –– Common loosestrife 127. Naumburgia thyrsiflora (L.) Reichenb. –– Water loosestrife128. Primula veris L. –– Cowslip129. Trientalis europaea L. –– Chickweed wintergreen

Order: MalvalesFamily: Tiliaceae Juss.

130. Tilia cordata Mill. –– Small-leaved lime

126

Order: EuphorbialesFamily: Euphorbiaceae Juss.

131. Euphorbia virgultosa Klok. –– Green spurge132. Mercurialis perennis L. –– Dog's mercury

Order: ThymelaealesFamily: Thymelaeaceae Juss.

133. Daphne mezereum L. –– Mezereon

Order: SaxifragalesFamily: Grossulariaceae DC.

134. Ribes nigrum L. –– Black currant135. Ribes spicatum Robson –– Northern red currant

Family: Saxifragaceae Juss.

136. Chrysosplenium alternifolium L. –– Golden saxifrage

Family: Droseraceae Salisb

137. Drosera anglica Huds. –– English sundew, great sundew138. Drosera x obovata Mert. et W.D.J. Koch –– Ivan's paddle139. Drosera rotundifolia L. –– Red rot

Order: RosalesFamily: Rosaceae Juss.

140. Agrimonia eupatoria L. –– Common agrimony141. Alchemilla acutiloba Opiz (A. vulgaris L. subsp. acutangula (Bus.) Palitz) –– Starry lady's mantle142. Alchemilla monticola Opiz –– Hairy lady's mantle143. Comarum palustre L. –– Marsh cinquefoil144. Filipendula denudata (J. et C.Presl) Fritsch –– Queen of the meadow145. Filipendula ulmaria (L.) Maxim. –– Meadowsweet 146. Fragaria vesca L. –– Wild strawberries147. Geum rivale L. –– Purple avens148. Geum urbanum L. –– Wood avens149. Malus domestica Borkh. –– Cultivated apple tree150. Padus avium Mill. –– Bird cherry or hackberry 151. Potentilla anserina L. –– Silverweed cinquefoil152. Potentilla argentea L. –– Silvery cinquefoil153. Potentilla erecta (L.) Raeusch. –– Common tormentil154. Potentilla norvegica L. –– Norwegian cinquefoil155. Pyrus communis L. –– Common pear156. Rosa pratorum Sukacz. –– Meadow rose157. Rubus caesius L. –– Dewberry158. Rubus chamaemorus L. –– Cloudberry*

159. Rubus idaeus L. –– Red raspberry160. Rubus nessensis W.Hall –– Apomictic blackberry161. Rubus saxatilis L. –– Stone bramble162. Sorbus aucuparia L. –– Mountain ash

127

Order: FabalesFamily: Fabaceae Lindl. (= Papilionaceae)

163. Astragalus glycyphyllos L. –– Liquorice milkvetch164. Lathyrus laevigatus (Waldst. et Kit.) Gren. –– Lathyrus laevigatus165. Lathyrus pratensis L. –– Meadow vetchling166. Lathyrus vernus (L.) Bernh. –– Spring pea167. Lotus corniculatus L. –– Bird's-foot trefoil168. Lupinus polyphyllus Lindl. –– Large-leaved lupine169. Medicago lupulina L. –– Black hay170. Trifolium aureum Poll. –– Large hop trefoil171. Trifolium hybridum L. –– Alsike clover172. Trifolium medium L. –– Zigzag clover173. Trifolium pratense L. –– Red clover174. Trifolium repens L. –– White clover175. Vicia cracca L. –– Tufted vetch176. Vicia sepium L. –– Bush vetch177. Vicia sylvatica L. –– Wood vetch

Order: MyrtalesFamily: Lythraceae Jaume St.-Hilaire

178. Lythrum salicaria L. –– Purple loosestrife

Family: Onagraceae Juss.

179. Chamerion angustifolium (L.) Holub –– Willow herb180. Circaea alpina L. –– Small enchanter's-nightshade181. Epilobium adenocaulon Hausskn. –– Fringed willowherb182. Epilobium montanum L. –– Broad-leaved willowherb183. Epilobium palustre L. –– Marsh willowherb

Order: SapindalesFamily: Aceraceae Juss.

184. Acer platanoides L. –– Norway maple

Order: GeranialesFamily: Oxalidaceae R. Br.

185. Oxalis acetosella L. –– Common wood sorrel

Family: Geraniaceae Juss.

186. Geranium palustre L. –– Bog crane187. Geranium robertianum L. –– Herb Robert

Family: Balsaminaceae A.Richard

188. Impatiens noli-tangere L. –– Touch-me-not balsam

Order: CornalesFamily: Cornaceae Dumort.

189. Swida sanguinea (L.) Opiz –– Red dogwood

128

Order: AralialesFamily: Apiaceae Lindl. (= Umbelliferae)

190. Aegopodium podagraria L. –– Goat weed 191. Angelica sylvestris L. –– Wild angelica192. Anthriscus sylvestris (L.) Hoffm. –– Cow parsley193. Cicuta virosa L. –– Cowbane194. Heracleum sosnowskyi Manden. –– Sosnowsky's hogweed195. Oenanthe aquatica (L.) Poir. –– Fine-leaved Water-dropwort196. Peucedanum oreoselinum (L.) Moench –– Mountain parsley197. Calestania palustris (L.) K.-Pol. –– Milk parsley198. Pimpinella saxifraga L. –– Burnet saxifrage199. Sanicula europaea L. –– Wood sanicle200. Selinum carvifolia (L.) L. –– Cambridge milk-parsley

Order: CelastralesFamily: Celastraceae R.Br.

201. Euonymus europaea L. –– European euonymus202. Euonymus verrucosa Scop. –– Wartybark euonymus

Order: RhamnalesFamily: Rhamnaceae Juss.

203. Frangula alnus Mill. –– Alder buckthorn204. Rhamnus cathartica L. –– Common buckthorn

Order: OlealesFamily: Oleaceae Hoffm. et Link

205. Fraxinus excelsior L. –– Common ash

Order: DipsacalesFamily: Caprifoliaceae Juss.

206. Lonicera xylosteum L. –– Fly honeysuckle207. Viburnum opulus L. –– Water elder

Family: Valerianaceae Batsch

208. Valeriana officinalis L. –– Garden valerian

Family: Dipsacaceae Juss.

209. Knautia arvensis (L.) Coult. –– Field scabious210. Succisa pratensis Moench –– Devil's-bit or devil's-bit scabious

Order: GentianalesFamily: Gentianaceae Juss.

211. Centaurium erythraea Rafin. –– Common centaury212. Gentiana pneumonanthe L. –– Marsh gentian

Family: Menyanthaceae Dumort.

213. Menyanthes trifoliata L. –– Bog-bean

129

130

Family: Rubiaceae Juss.

214. Galium album Mill. –– Hedge bedstraw215. Galium intermedium Schult. –– Phloxleaf bedstraw216. Galium mollugo L. –– White bedstraw217. Galium odoratum (L.) Scop. –– Sweet woodruff218. Galium palustre L. –– Marsh bedstraw 219. Galium uliginosum L. –– Fen bedstraw

Order: PolemonialesFamily: Polemoniaceae Juss.

220. Polemonium caeruleum L. –– Greek valerian

Family: Convolvulaceae Juss.

221. Convolvulus arvensis L. –– Field bindweed

Family: Boraginaceae Juss.

222. Myosotis palustris (L.) L. (M. scorpioides L. p.p.) –– Water forget-me-not223. Pulmonaria obscura Dumort. –– Unspotted lungwort

Order: ScrophularialesFamily: Solanaceae Juss.

224. Solanum dulcamara L. –– Bittersweet

Family: Scrophulariaceae Juss.

225. Digitalis grandiflora Mill. –– Big-flowered foxglove226. Euphrasia glabrescens (Wettst.) Wiinst. –– Euphrasia glabrescens227. Euphrasia onegensis Cajand. –– Euphrasia onegensis228. Euphrasia parviflora Schagerstrom –– Euphrasia parviflora229. Linaria vulgaris Mill. –– Common toadflax230. Melampyrum nemorosum L. –– Blue cow-wheat231. Melampyrum pratense L. –– Common cowwheat232. Pedicularis palustris L. –– Purple pedicularis233. Pedicularis sceptrum-carolinum L. –– Lousewort*

234. Scrophularia nodosa L. –– Figwort235. Verbascum nigrum L. –– Dark mullein236. Veronica chamaedrys L. –– Bird's-eye speedwell237. Veronica longifolia L. –– Tall speedwell238. Veronica officinalis L. –– Common speedwell239. Veronica scutellata L. –– Marsh speedwell240. Veronica serpyllifolia L. –– Thyme-leaved speedwell

Family: Lentibulariaceae Rich.

241. Utricularia intermedia Hayne –– Flatleaf bladderwort242. Utricularia minor L. –– Lesser bladderwort243. Utricularia vulgaris L. –– Common bladderwort

131

Family: Plantaginaceae Juss.

244. Plantago lanceolata L. –– Ribwort plantain245. Plantago major L. –– Greater plantain246. Plantago media L. –– Hoary plantain

Order: LamialesFamily: Lamiaceae Lindl. (= Labiatae)

247. Ajuga reptans L. –– Bugleweed248. Betonica officinalis L. –– Wood betony249. Clinopodium vulgare L. –– Wild basil250. Galeobdolon luteum Huds. –– Yellow archangel251. Galeopsis bifida Boenn. –– Bifid hemp-nettle252. Galeopsis tetrahit L. –– Common hemp-nettle253. Glechoma hederacea L. –– Ground-ivy254. Lamium maculatum (L.) L. –– Spotted deadnettle255. Lycopus europaeus L. –– Gypsywort256. Mentha longifolia (L.) Huds.–– Horse mint257. Mentha arvensis L. –– Field mint258. Origanum vulgare L. –– Wild marjoram259. Prunella vulgaris L. –– Heal-all260. Scutellaria galericulata L. –– Common skullcap261. Stachys palustris L. –– Marsh woundwort262. Stachys sylvatica L. –– Hedge woundwort

Family: Callitrichaceae Link

263. Callitriche cophocarpa Sendtner –– Western Water Starwort

Order: CampanulalesFamily: Campanulaceae Juss.

264. Campanula glomerata L. –– Clustered bellflower265. Campanula patula L. –– Spreading bellflower266. Campanula persicifolia L. –– Peach-leaved bellflower267. Campanula rapunculoides L. –– Creeping bellflower268. Campanula rotundifolia L. –– Harebell269. Phyteuma spicatum L. –– Spiked rampion

Order: AsteralesFamily: Asteraceae Dumort. (= Compositae)

270. Achillea millefolium L. –– Yarrow271. Antennaria dioica (L.) Gaertn. –– Southernwood272. Artemisia abrotanum L. –– Catsfoot273. Artemisia campestris L. –– Field wormwood274. Artemisia vulgaris L. –– Mugwort275. Bidens cernua L. –– Nodding beggarticks276. Bidens tripartita L. –– Three-lobe beggarticks277. Carduus acanthoides L. –– Spiny plumeless thistle278. Carduus crispus L. –– Welted thistle279. Centaurea jacea L. –– Brown knapweed280. Cirsium oleraceum (L.) Scop. –– Cabbage thistle281. Cirsium palustre (L.) Scop. –– Marsh thistle

132

282. Coniza canadensis (L.) Cronq. –– Horseweed283. Crepis paludosa (L.) Moench –– Marsh hawksbeard284. Erigeron acris L. –– Erigeron acer285. Gnaphalium uliginosum L. –– Marsh cudweed286. Hieracium silvestre Tausch.–– European hawkweed287. Hieracium umbellatum L. –– Canadian hawkweed288. Hypochoeris radicata L. –– Cat's-ear289. Inula salicina L. –– Willowleaf yellowhead290. Lapsana communis L. –– Common nipplewort291. Leontodon autumnalis L. –– Fall dandelion292. Leucanthemum vulgare Lam. –– Oxeye daisy293. Mycelis muralis (L.) Dumort. –– Wall lettuce294. Omalotheca sylvestris (L.) Sch. Bip. et F. Schultz (Gnaphalium sylvaticum L.) –– Forest cudweed295. Pilosella officinarum F.Schultz et Sch. Bip. (H. pilosella L. p.p.) –– Mouse-ear hawkweed296. Pilosella onegensis Norrl. –– Pilosella onegensis297. Ptarmica cartilaginea (Ledeb.) Ledeb. –– Willowleaf yarrow298. Senecio jacobaea L. –– Ragwort benweed299. Solidago virgaurea L. –– European goldenrod300. Tanacetum vulgare L. –– Common tansy301. Taraxacum officinale Wigg. –– Common dandelion302. Tussilago farfara L. –– Common coltsfoot

Class: Liliopsida (= Monocotyledones)Order: Alismatales

Family: Alismataceae Vent.

303. Alisma plantago-aquatica L. –– Common water-plantain

Order: NajadalesFamily: Scheuchzeriaceae Rudolphi

304. Scheuchzeria palustris L. –– Rannoch-rush

Family: Juncaginaceae L.C.Rich.

305. Triglochin palustre L. –– Marsh arrowgrass

Family: Potamogetonaceae Dumort.

306. Potamogeton natans L. –– Broad-leaved pondweed

Order: LilialesFamily: Alliaceae J. Agardh

307. Allium ursinum L. –– Wild garlic or buckram*

Family: Asparagaceae Juss.

308. Majanthemum bifolium (L.) F.W.Schmidt –– Two-leaved bead-ruby309. Convallaria majalis L. –– Lily-of-the-valley 310. Polygonatum multiflorum (L.) All. –– Solomon's seal311. Polygonatum odoratum (Mill.) Druce –– Scented Solomon's seal

133

Family: Trilliaceae Lindl.

312. Paris quadrifolia L. –– Herb paris

Order: IridalesFamily: Iridaceae Juss.

313. Gladiolus imbricatus L. –– Turkish marsh gladiolus*

314. Iris pseudacorus L. –– Yellow flag315. Iris sibirica L. –– Siberian iris*

Order: OrchidalesFamily: Orchidaceae Juss.

316. Dactylorhiza fuchsii (Druce) Soo –– Common spotted-orchid317. Dactylorhiza incarnata (L.) Soo –– Early marsh orchid318. Dactylorhiza maculata (L.) Soo –– Heath spotted orchid319. Epipactis helleborine (L.) Crantz –– Broad-leaved helleborine320. Epipactis palustris (L.) Crantz –– Marsh helleborine321. Goodyera repens (L.) R.Br. –– Creeping lady's tresses322. Platanthera bifolia (L.) Rich. –– Lesser butterfly-orchid

Order: JuncalesFamily: Juncaceae Juss.

323. Juncus alpinus Vill. –– Alpine rush324. Juncus articulatus L. –– Jointleaf rush325. Juncus bufonius L. –– Toad rush326. Juncus compressus Jacq. –– Round-fruited rush327. Juncus conglomeratus L. –– Compact rush328. Juncus effusus L. –– Common rush 329. Juncus filiformis L. –– Thread rush330. Juncus tenuis Willd. –– Slender rush331. Luzula multiflora (Ehrh. ex Retz.) Lej. –– Heath wood-rush332. Luzula pallescens (Wahl.) Bess. –– Fen wood-rush333. Luzula pilosa (L.) Willd. –– Wood rush

Order: CyperalesFamily: Cyperaceae Juss.

334. Carex acuta L. –– Acute sedge335. Carex acutiformis Ehrh. –– lesser pond sedge336. Carex appropinquata Schum. –– Fibrous tussock-sedge337. Carex argyroglochin Hornem. –– Oval sedge338. Carex cespitosa L. –– Tufted sedge 339. Carex chordorrhiza Ehrh. –– Creeping sedge340. Carex cinerea Poll. –– Silvery sedge341. Carex contigua Hoppe –– Spiked sedge342. Carex digitata L. –– Fingered sedge 343. Carex dioica L. –– Dioecious sedge344. Carex echinata Murr. –– Little prickly sedge345. Carex elongata L. –– Elongated sedge346. Carex flava L. –– Yellow sedge347. Carex hirta L. –– Hairy sedge348. Carex juncella (Fries) Th.Fries –– Carex juncella

134

349. Carex lasiocarpa Ehrh. –– Woollyfruit sedge 350. Carex leporina L. –– Oval sedge351. Carex limosa L. –– Mud sedge 352. Carex nigra (L.) Reichard –– Black sedge or common sedge353. Carex omskiana Meinsh. –– Carex omskiana354. Carex pallescens L. –– Pale sedge355. Carex panicea L. –– Carnation sedge356. Carex pauciflora Lightf. –– Few-flowered sedge*

357. Carex pseudocyperus L. –– Cyperus-like sedge358. Carex remota L. –– Remote sedge359. Carex riparia Curt. –– Greater pond sedge360. Carex rostrata Stokes –– Beaked sedge 361. Carex sylvatica Huds. –– Wood sedge362. Carex vaginata Tausch –– Sheathed sedge363. Carex vesicaria L. ––Blister sedge 364. Carex vulpina L. –– True fox-sedge365. Eriophorum vaginatum L. –– Hare's-tail cotton grass366. Eriophorum polystachyon L. –– Common cottongrass367. Rhynchospora alba (L.) Vahl –– White beak-sedge 368. Scirpus sylvaticus L. –– Club-rush

Order: PoalesFamily: Poaceae Barnhart (= Gramineae)

369. Agrostis canina L. –– Velvet bent370. Agrostis gigantea Roth –– Black bent371. Agrostis stolonifera L. –– Creeping bent372. Agrostis tenuis Sibth. –– Common bent373. Alopecurus aequalis Sobol. –– Orange foxtail374. Anthoxanthum odoratum L. –– Sweet Vernal-grass375. Brachypodium sylvaticum (Huds.) Beauv. –– False brome376. Briza media L. –– Quaking-grass377. Bromopsis inermis (Leys.) Holub –– Hungarian brome378. Calamagrostis arundinacea (L.) Roth –– Rough small-reed379. Calamagrostis canescens (Web.) Roth –– Purple small-reed380. Calamagrostis epigeios (L.) Roth –– Wood small-reed381. Calamagrostis neglecta (Ehrh.) Gaertn., Mey. et Scherb. –– Narrow small-reed382. Dactylis glomerata L. –– Cock's-foot383. Deschampsia cespitosa (L.) Beauv. –– Tufted hair-grass384. Elytrigia repens (L.) Nevski –– Common couch385. Festuca gigantea (L.) Vill. –– Giant fescue386. Festuca ovina L. –– Sheep's fescue387. Festuca pratensis Huds. –– Meadow fescue388. Festuca rubra L. –– Red fescue389. Glyceria fluitans (L.) R.Br. –– Floating sweet grass390. Melica nutans L. –– Mountain melick391. Milium effusum L. –– Wood millet392. Molinia caerulea (L.) Moench –– Purple moor grass393. Nardus stricta L. –– Mat-grass394. Phalaroides arundinacea (L.) Rauschert –– Reed canarygrass395. Phleum pratense L. –– Timothy-grass396. Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steud. –– Common reed grass

135

397. Poa annua L. –– Annual meadow-grass398. Poa palustris L. –– Swamp meadow-grass399. Poa pratensis L. –– Smooth meadow-grass400. Sieglingia decumbens (L.) Bernh. –– Common heath grass

Order: AralesFamily: Araceae Juss.

401. Calla palustris L. –– Swamp robin

Family: Lemnaceae S.F.Gray

402. Lemna minor L. –– Common duckweed403. Lemna trisulca L. –– Star duckweed404. Spirodela polyrhiza (L.) Schleid. –– Greater duckweed

Family: Typhaceae Juss.

405. Typha latifolia L. –– Bulrush

* – protected species [46].

136

ANNEX 2 Description of Particularly Valuable, Rare, and Benchmark Forest Plant Communities of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve

(based on forest management data as of January 1, 2006 and selective on-site surveys)

Forestry section

Com

partm

ent

Plot

Are

a, h

a

Composition(of the forest stand, undergrowth, underwood, and ground cover)

Elem

ent o

f for

est

stan

ds

Age

by

fore

st

elem

ents

, yea

rs

Ave

rage

hei

ght,

m

Ave

rage

dia

met

er, c

m

Type

of h

abita

t con

di-

tions

Yie

ld c

lass

Den

sity

Stockpile, m3

per 1

ha

per p

lot

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

N a t u r a l b e n c h m a r k a r e a s a n d l e a s t a f f e c t e d b y e c o n o m i c a c t i v i t y a n t h r o p o g e n i c - n a t u r a l f o r e s t s


10 7 6.8 7A3B+CA+As+M+Sundergrowth: 7As2M1L; A=15 years, h=4.0 m; 2.0 thousand trees/haunderwood: H,AB, medium

A 80 27 40 D3aeg I 0.8 340 2310

–«– 16 26 0.9 8A1B1CA+ GA+As+E+O+M+Sundergrowth: 9As1M; A=20 years, h=4.0 m; 1.0 thousand trees/ha; reliableunderwood: H, MA, medium

A 70 27 40 D3aeg I 0.7 300 270

–«– 21 24 0.9 5As4A1B+S+GAundergrowth: 8As1M1S; A=20 years, h=4.0m; 2.0 thousand trees/haunderwood: H,MA, thin

As 85 27 30 D3aeg I 0.7 300 270

–«– 21 32 0.4 7As3A+CA+Bundergrowth: 7As1M2S; A=20 years, h=3.0m; 1.0 thousand trees/haunderwood: H, medium

As 75 26 28 D3aeg I 0.7 290 120

–«– 26 1 3.3 8CA1A1S+B+O+Asundergrowth: 8As2M; A=20 years, h=3.0 m; 3.0 thousand trees/ha; reliableunderwood: H, MA, medium

CA 60 22 22 C4filip II 0.8 310 1020

–«– 26 4 4.0 4A3CA2As1S+Lundergrowth: 9As1M; A=20 years, h=4.0 m; 3.5 thousand trees/ha; reliableunderwood: H, BCh, medium

A 65 27 40 C4filic I 0.7 280 1120

137

Forestry section

Com

partm

ent

Plot

Are

a, h

a


Elem

ent o

f for

est

stan

ds

Age

by

fore

st

elem

ents

, yea

rs

Ave

rage

hei

ght,

m

Ave

rage

dia

met

er, c

m

Type

of h

abita

t con

di-

tions

Yie

ld c

lass

Den

sity

Stockpile, m3

per 1

ha

per p

lot

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14–«– 32 52 3.7 5CA1B1A1As2S

undergrowth: 10As; A=15 years, h=3.0 m; 1.0 thousand trees/ha;underwood: AB, H, GW, thin

CA 60 23 28 C4filic II 0.65 220 814

R a r e f o r e s t c o m m u n i t i e s


17 11 0.7 3O3As2M2S O 40 10 8 C4filic III 0.4 40 30

–«– 7 38 4 6As1E1A1B1CA+M+L+Sunderwood: H, BCh, thin

As 65 25 26 D3aeg I 0.7 280 1120

–«– 10 8 6.5 7As2A1CA+M+Sunderwood: H,AB, medium

As 50 25 26 D4ur I 0.7 280 1820

–«– 10 9 2.6 5As3CA2GA+B+Sunderwood: H, AB, medium

As 35 17 16 C4filic I 0.7 160 420

–«– 10 14 1.7 4As4A1B1S+CAunderwood: H, AB, medium

As 80 27 28 D3aeg I 0.7 310 530

–«– 11 1 0.5 2As1M1S5A1Bunderwood: H, medium

As 35 17 16 D3aeg I 0.8 180 90

–«– 11 5 0.8 5As3A1B1M+S+CAunderwood: H, medium

As 40 19 18 D3aeg I 0.7 190 150

–«– 15 2 1.4 3As2E2A3GAundergrowth: 7As1M2A; A=15 years, h=2.0m, 4.0 thousand trees/ha, reliableunderwood: H, AB ,thin

As 65 25 28 D3aeg I 0.6 240 340

–«– 16 5 1.7 3As2CA2ОP2GA1Asunderwood: H, thin

As 35 17 16 D3aeg I 0.8 180 310

–«– 16 29 1.3 4As5A1B+CA As 65 25 24 D3aeg I 0.8 320 420–«– 21 11 1.8 8As1A1CA+B

underwood: H, thinAs 65 25 24 D3aeg I 0.9 360 650

–«– 21 13 10.1 4As5A1B+S+O+M+As As 60 24 26 D3aeg I 0.7 260 2630–«– 21 24 0.9 5As4A1B+S+GA As 85 27 30 D3aeg I 0.6 260 230

138

Forestry section

Com

partm

ent

Plot

Are

a, h

a


Elem

ent o

f for

est

stan

ds

Age

by

fore

st

elem

ents

, yea

rs

Ave

rage

hei

ght,

m

Ave

rage

dia

met

er, c

m

Type

of h

abita

t con

di-

tions

Yie

ld c

lass

Den

sity

Stockpile, m3

per 1

ha

per p

lot

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14undergrowth: 8As1M1S; A=25 years, h=4.0m; 2.0 thousand trees/haunderwood: H, MA, thin

–«– 21 31 7.8 4As3A1B1CA1S+Oundergrowth: 8As1M1S; A=20 years; h=4.0m; 2.5 thousand trees/ha, reliableunderwood: H, MA, AB, medium

As 65 25 30 D3aeg I 0.7 280 2180

–«– 21 32 0.4 7As3A+CA+Bundergrowth: 7As1M2S; A=20 years; h=3.0m; 1.0 thousand trees/ha, reliableunderwood: H, medium

As 75 26 28 D3aeg I 0.7 290 120

–«– 26 2 3.2 6As2A1CA1GA+Bunderwood: H, MA, medium

As 70 25 28 D3aeg I 0.7 280 900

–«– 26 3 1.4 2As4A2B1CA1GA+Munderwood: H, thin

As 10 6 4 D3aeg I 0.6 30 40

–«– 26 18 3.5 4As5A1GA+B+As As 50 21 22 D3aeg I 0.7 220 770–«– 26 26 1.1 3As3A1CA2S1O+M

underwood: H, mediumAs 70 25 26 D3aeg I 0.7 300 330

–«– 31 13 1.4 4O6B+A O 45 17 14 D3aeg I 0.6 170 240–«– 32 4 0.3 3As6GA1CA As 25 13 12 D3aeg I 0.8 120 40–«– 32 5 0.8 3As4A1B1GA1CA+S


–«– 32 9 2.3 9O1S+B+GA O 50 17 16 D3aeg II 0.7 160 370–«– 32 13 2.2 3As4A1B2CA As 10 5 4 C4filip II 0.6 20 40–«– 32 19 2 8As2GA As 20 12 10 D3aeg I 0.4 60 120–«– 32 20 2.1 8As2M+GA+O+S+L As 20 12 10 D3aeg I 0.4 60 130–«– 32 23 0.7 2As3B3A1CA1GA

underwood: H, AB, mediumAs 20 10 10 C4filip II 0.6 60 40

–«– 32 35 0.7 5As4CA1Sunderwood: H, AB, medium

As 65 25 28 D3aeg I 0.6 260 180

–«– 38 4 12.1 6As2A1CA1B+E+GA As 65 25 26 D3aeg I 0.7 280 3390

139

Forestry section

Com

partm

ent

Plot

Are

a, h

a


Elem

ent o

f for

est

stan

ds

Age

by

fore

st

elem

ents

, yea

rs

Ave

rage

hei

ght,

m

Ave

rage

dia

met

er, c

m

Type

of h

abita

t con

di-

tions

Yie

ld c

lass

Den

sity

Stockpile, m3

per 1

ha

per p

lot

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14–«– 38 8 2.1 3As4A1B1O1S+CA


–«– 38 14 1.3 8As2A+CA+Eunderwood: H, thin

As 60 24 26 D3aeg I 0.7 260 340

–«– 38 37 1.7 5As3A1B1S+Lunderwood: H, AB, BCh, medium

As 65 25 28 D2ox I 0.8 330 560

–«– 50 24 2.6 3O1S6B+A+W O 45 13 16 C2pts III 0.7 180 470Germanovichi forestry section

16 25 3 4As3E1L1B1A As 35 17 20 D3aeg I 0.8 180 540

–«– 31 2 2.8 4As3E1L1B1A As 35 17 20 D3aeg I 0.8 180 500Miory forestry

section56 7 1.2 6O4B

underwood: H, AB, mediumO 40 13 12 D2ox II 0.7 110 130

–«– 56 48 2.4 7O1As2B+A O 30 11 12 D2ox II 0.7 80 190–«– 57 41 0.9 5L2A2GA1B

melliferousL 40 16 16 D2ox II 0.7 150 140

–«– 61 4 0.7 7O1S1B1A O 65 17 22 C4filic III 0.5 120 80–«– 147 8 1.9 4O5B1A

underwood: AB, MA, mediumO 70 19 26 D3aeg II 0.7 200 380

N a t u r a l a n d a r t i f i c i a l l y r e g e n e r a t e d f o r e s t s c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y h i g h p r o d u c t i v i t y a n d s u i t a b i l i t y f o r t h e p u r p o s e


89 14 2.6 9P1Bundergrowth: 10S; A=25 years; h=2.0 m; 2.0 thousand trees/ha;underwood: AB, MA, thin

P 70 22 26 A2pl I 0.7

260 680

–«– 90 22 2.7 9S1P+Bundergrowth: 10S; A=25 years; h=2.0m; 2.0 thousand trees/haunderwood: AB, MA, H, thin

S 75 24 26 D2ox I 0.7

340 920

–«– 90 23 1.4 8P1S1B+Aundergrowth: 10S; A=25 years; h=2.0 m; 2.0 thousand trees/haunderwood: AB,MA, thin

P 70 22 26 B3myr I 0.7

270 380

–«– 90 33 1 8P1S1B+A P 70 22 26 B3myr I 0. 270 51140

Forestry section

Com

partm

ent

Plot

Are

a, h

a


Elem

ent o

f for

est

stan

ds

Age

by

fore

st

elem

ents

, yea

rs

Ave

rage

hei

ght,

m

Ave

rage

dia

met

er, c

m

Type

of h

abita

t con

di-

tions

Yie

ld c

lass

Den

sity

Stockpile, m3

per 1

ha

per p

lot

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 149.2

undergrowth: 10S; A=15 years; h=1.0 m, 2.0 thousand trees/ha 7 80

–«– 94 7 7.2 9P1Bunderwood: AB, MA, mediumberry bed: bilberry 40 %

P 70 22 26 B3myr I 0.7

260 1870


26 34 1.2 8S2A+B+GAunderwood: H,MA,AB, medium

S 75 25 26 D2ox I 0.7

360 430

–«– 50 11 3 7S2P1B+Aunderwood: H, AB, MA, thin

S 70 25 28 D2ox I 0.7

340 1020

–«– 63 4 1.9 5S4P1B+A S 75 25 28 C3myr I 0.7

310 590

–«– 63 5 1.1 3S2P2B2A1CAunderwood: MA, AB, thin

S 75 25 28 C3myr I 0.7

290 320

–«– 50 33 5.1 4P3S2B1Aunderwood: AB, medium

P 65 21 26 C2ox I 0.7

250 1280

–«– 7 37 7.9 7CA2B1A+As+Sunderwood: AB, BCh, thin

CA

40 19 18 C4filic I 0.7

190 1500

–«– 15 17 2.3 6CA4B+Aunderwood: GW, thin

CA

35 17 14 C4filic I 0.7

160 370

Miory forestry sec-tion

80 9 4.4 5S3ОP2B+ GAunderwood: H,AB, medium

S 65 25 26 D2ox I 0.7

320 1410

–«– 97 14 1.6 6S2B2CA+A+Punderwood: H, medium

S 65 25 26 D2ox I 0.7

330 530

–«– 55 23 1.1 8CA1B1S CA

35 18 20 D2ox I 0.7

200 220

141

[aeg Aegopodiosumfilic Filicosumfilip Filipendulosummyr Myrtillosumox Oxalidosumpl Pleuroziosumpts Pteridiosumur Urticosum

A2 Mesophilic (fresh) bor [pine woodland]B3 Mesohygrophilic (moist) subor [deciduous-pine

forest]D2 Mesophilic (fresh) dubrava [oak woodland]D3 Mesohygrophilic (moist) dubravaD4 Hygrophilic (wet) dubravaC2 Mesophilic (fresh) sudubrava [mixed oak forest]C3 Mesohygrophilic (moist) sudubravaC4 Hygrophilic (wet) sudubrava

A AspenAB Alder buckthornAs AshB BirchBCh Bird cherryCA Common alderE ElmGA Grey alderGW Goat willowH HazelL LimeM MapleMA Mountain-ashO OakP PineS SpruceW Willow

]

142

ANNEX 3Species Composition and Status of Birds of the Yelnya Hydrological Reserve

Bird species Species status

(natures of presence)

Species of European

conservation concern(SPEC

category)

Bonn Convention

(annex)

Red Book of Belarus (conservation status)

1 2 3 4 51. Black-throated loon n 3 II II2. Mallard n3. Common teal n II4. Pintail m 3 II III5. Northern Shoveler n6. Common goldeneye n7. Bean goose m8. Greater white-fronted goose m9. Greylag goose m10. Mallard n II11. Tufted duck n II12. Black kite l 3 III13. Common goldeneye (n) II14. Habitual buzzard n15. Common buzzard n16. Lesser spotted eagle n 3 III17. Marsh-harrier n18. Hen harrier n 3 III19. Montagu’s harrier (n) II20. Sparrow hawk n21. Goshawk n22. White-tailed eagle (n) 3 II23. Short-toed snake eagle n 3 II II24. Golden eagle t 3 II I25. Osprey l 3 II II26. Merlin n II III27. Kestrel (n) III28. Hobby (n) II IV29. Duck hawk (n) 3 II I30. Willow grouse n II31. Black grouse n 332. Wood grouse n33. Common crane n 3 II III34. Golden plover n II III35. Lapwing n II36. Ruff (n) II III37. Jack snipe n II III38. Common snipe (n)39. Woodcock n

143



Species of European


category)

Bonn Convention

(annex)


1 2 3 4 540. Black-tailed godwit n 2 II III41. Whimbrel n II III42. Eurasian curlew n II III43. Redshank n 2 II44. Common greenshank n II III45. Green sandpiper n46. Wood sandpiper n 3 II47. Black-headed gull (n)48. Common gull n 2 IV49. Herring gull n50. Common tern (n) II51. Black tern (n)52. Common wood pigeon (n)53. Turtle dove (n) 354. Common cuckoo (n)55. Long-eared owl (n)56. Short-eared owl n 3 IV57. Eagle owl n? 3 II58. Snowy owl (w)59. Tawny owl n60. Eurasian pygmy owl n IV61. Tengmalm's owl n62. Nightjar n 263. Spotted woodpecker n64. White-backed woodpecker n IV65. Lesser spotted woodpecker n66. Grey-headed woodpecker n67. Black woodpecker n68. Three-toed woodpecker n 3 IV69. Wryneck n70. Skylark n 371. Tree pipit n72. Meadow pipit n73. Yellow wagtail n74. Yellow-headed wagtail75. White wagtail n76. Bluethroat n II77. Whinchat n II78. Fieldfare n II79. Blackbird n80. Redwing n81. Song thrush n II82. Robin n

144



Species of European


category)

Bonn Convention

(annex)


1 2 3 4 583. Sedge warbler n II84. Common chiffchaff n II85. Willow warbler n II86. Wood warbler n87. Pied flycatcher n II88. Crested tit n89. Great tit n90. Blue tit n91. Coal tit n92. Willow tit n93. Wren n94. Red-backed shrike n 395. Great grey shrike n 396. Magpie n97. Hooded crow n98. Raven n99. Common chaffinch n100. Yellowhammer n101. Reed bunting n

Symbols

Type of presence: m – species in seasonal migration; n – nesting; t – single registered specimens at migration (transitory); l – present at nesting period, but not nesting (aestivating), w – wintering; if the symbol is in parentheses, the species is registered irregularly and randomly.

Species of European conservation concern (SPEC). / based on: Tucker G.M., Heath M.F. Birds in Europe: their conservation status. – Cambridge: Bird Life International, 1994.

Category 1 (SPEC 1). Globally threatened species dependent on conservation measures or with insufficient data thereon.

Category 2 (SPEC 2). Species with their global population concentrated in Europe (over 50 %) and Unfavorable Conservation Status in Europe (the European status of threat to this category of species is classified as: insufficient data, localized, declining, rare, vulnerable, and endangered).

Category 3 (SPEC 3). Species, whose global population is not concentrated in Europe, but with Unfavorable Conservation Status in Europe (the European status of threat to this category of species is classified as: insufficient data, localized, declining, rare, vulnerable, and endangered).

Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention).

Appendix I includes species that have been categorized as being in danger of extinction throughout a significant proportion of their range. The parties to the Convention undertake immediate actions to protect these animals, conserving or restoring the habitats in which these species live.

145

Appendix II includes species, whose population would benefit from international cooperation in the area of their conservation and management. In particular, the parties to the Convention should ensure development of a continuous network of the most significant sites on the migratory range of migratory species.

146

Table 3.1 – Species composition and status of mammals of the Yelnya Hydrological Reserve

Species Population estimate

Habitat complex

1. Common shrew Sorex araneus S F, OA2. Pygmy shrew Sorex minutus R WL3. White-breasted hedgehog Erinaceus concolor S F, WP4. European mole Talpa europaea L F, OA5. Water shrew Neomus fodiens R WL6. Common noctule Nyctalus noctula R F7. Whiskered bat Myotis mystacinus R WL8. Parti-coloured bat Vespertilio murinus R F9. Woolf Canis lupus R F10. Red fox Vulpes vulpes S F, WP11. Otter Lutra lutra S WL12. Raccoon dog Nyctereutes procyonoides S F, WL13. Pine marten Martes martes S F14. European polecat Mustela putorius R F, WL15. American mink Mustela vison S WL16. Least weasel Mustela nivalis R F17. Stoat Mustela erminea R WL, WP18. Red squirrel Sciurus vulgaris S F19. Eurasian beaver Castor fiber S WL20. Striped field-mouse Apodemus agrarius L WP,OA21. Yellow-necked mouse Apodemus flavicollis S F22. Black rat Rattus rattus R WL23. Water vole Arvicola terrestris S WL24. Common vole Microtus arvalis L OA25. Bank vole Clethrionomys glareolus S WL, F26. Field vole Microtus agrestis S WP, WL27. Forest dormouse Dryomis nitedula R F28. Mountain hare Lepus timidus S F29. Wild boar Sus scrofa S F30. Roe deer Capreolus capreolus S WP31. Moose Alces alces S F

Symbols

Population estimate: L – large, S – standard, R – small, rare, V – very rare, single encounters.

Habitat complexes: WL – wetland, F – forest, WP – sparsely populated wood-suffruticose complex, OA – open areas, Sy – synanthropic.

147

ANNEX 4Recommendations for Construction of Ecological Trails

Design Criteria for the Projected Ecological Trail Yelnya–1

Ecological trail No 1. The ecological trail Yelnya-1 is located on the territory of Miory rayon, Vitebsk oblast, within the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve (Figure 4.1).

L a n d u s e r . Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI, (compartment No 107 (plots 7, 8, 13, and 17), Miory forestry section.

E c o l o g i c a l t r a i l b o u n d a r i e s .

The initial point of the route is located 2.14 km to the south-west of the village of Sukhoverzhie, compartment No 107 (plot 7), Miory forestry section. The initial point coordinates (WGS-84) are 55034,39.954 N 27048,48.683 E.

The destination point of the route is located 2.97 km to the south-west of the village of Sukhoverzhie, compartment No 107 (plot 13), Miory forestry section. The destination point coordinates are 55034,14.826 N 27049,04.854 E. The destination point is located within the visibility zone of two lakes – Kurganistoe and Bolshoe, which are unique in terms of their environmental and aesthetic value.

The route of the environmental trail is a curvature (Figure 4.1). The coordinates of the turning points are set out in Table. 4.1.

The buffer zone is 3 m wide along both sides of the trail.

The trackside is not outlined (since the traffic is planned on the stabilized road bed).

The total mileage of the route is 840.1 m; the trail surface area is 0.084 ha, with the buffer zone included – 0.252 ha.

Table 4.1 – Geographic coordinates of turning point location on the environmental trail of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve

No Geographic coordinates (WGS-84) Distance between turning points, m

1 55034,39.954 N 27048,48.683 E 0

2 55034,36.131 N 27048,49.626 E 119.4

3 55034,31.213 N 27048,54.392 E 173.6

4 55034,25.748 N 27049,0.116 E 196.6

5 55034,18.649 N 27049,1.999 E 222.1

6 55034,14.826 N 27049,4.854 E 128.4

Total mileage 840.10

148

Figure 4.1 – Ground location of the ecological trail Yelnya-1

Map Legend [top-down, left to right]:

Index map of the turning points of ecological trail No 1:

Lakes

Wooded area

Waterlogged area


Forest road, winter trail

Ecological trail

Compartment No

Plot No

Turning point No

Kurganistoe Lake

Bolshoe Lake

km

149

#Y

#Y

#Y

#Y

#Y

#Y

106

117

107

118119î ç.Êóðãàí èñòî å

î ç.Áî ëüø î å

6 54

9

2

12

76

3

8

45

9

5

8

1

2

7

3

4

5

31

2

4

34 45

13

14

1110

12

15

13

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 êèëî ì åòðû

S

N

EW

ÊÀÐÒÀ-ÑÕÅÌ Àðàçì åù åí èÿ ï î âî ðî òí û õ òî ÷åêýêî ëî ãè÷åñêî é òðî ï û ¹ 1

ëåñí àÿ äî ðî ãà, çèì í èê

î çåðà

ðåêè, êàí àëû , ðó÷üè

ýêî ëî ãè÷åñêàÿ òðî ï à

4

107 ¹ ëåñí î ãî êâàðòàëà

¹ ëåñí î ãî âû äåëà

ëåñî ï î êðû òàÿ òåððèòî ðèÿ

çàáî ëî ÷åí í àÿ òåððèòî ðèÿ

3 ¹ ï î âî ðî òí î é òî ÷êè

Objectives and Goals of the Projected Ecological Trail Yelnya–1. Visitor Target Groups

Objectives and goals of the trail

The objective of the ecological trail is the formation of environmental culture among people, development of their environmentally friendly and sound behavior, as well as regulation of the recreational pressure on natural complexes and sites of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve.

Goals:

1. Environmental outreach:

to create conditions for active recreation of the eco-trail visitors combined with personal outlook enrichment on the basis of free-and-easy assimilation of information and of the code of conduct in natural surroundings; and to foster the development of sustained motivation to know wild life based on respectful interaction of humans and nature (the ecocentric outlook).

2. Nature conservation:

to contain visitors of the protected nature area on the specific route (within a limited area, the model area of the specially protected natural site) in order to secure a high level of integrity of the total territory of the specially protected natural site; and to form a positive attitude towards the specially protected natural site as an effective method of nature conservation through the conscious restriction of the human impact on nature.

Visitor target groups

1 . s p e c i a l v i s i t o r s :

scientists of different profiles (biologists, ecologists, geographers, geologists, etc.); participants of ecology oriented academic conferences; teachers, professors of biology and geography; and students majoring in corresponding disciplines;

2 . “ e n t h u s i a s t i c ” v i s i t o r s :

organized amateur tourists (ecotourists, including birdwatchers – bird observing tourists, regional ethnographers), for whom trail use is one of the major goals of their voyage; andmembers of school associations of ecological and similar profiles;

3 . g e n e r a l v i s i t o r s :

secondary-school students coming for specialized lessons of nature study, biology, and geography; families, campers, orthodox pilgrims organized into tour groups; and excursionists, tourists showing no specific interest in natural sites, arriving rather occasionally than purposefully, wishing mostly to hike and take the air.

150

Major themes for tours

1. A general tour along the ecological trail

2. The Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve – the pearl of wildlife reserves of Belarus.

3. The amazing world of bog ecosystems.

4. The geological world of bogs.

5. Plants around us.

6. Helobious animals.

7. The kingdom of birds.

8. The natures’ apothecary.

9. The annals of the bog.

10. Post-catastrophic development of bog ecosystems.

11. The ecological rehabilitation of bogs.

Every tour should be available at 3 levels for the three categories of visitors, whereas tours for school students should be adjusted depending on the students’ age.

Mileage of the route

The total mileage of the route is around 1.68 km (round trip). The pattern of the route is radial.

Travel mode

A walking route.

Average length of stay

The average length of the journey (including stops) is:

General and individual visitors – 0.5 hrs. Organized school tours – 1-1.5 hrs. Organized tours for specialists and ecotourists – up to 2 hrs.

Seasonality

Functioning: year-round

Visit intensity

The optimal size of a tourist group is 10-15 people; the maximum number is 25 people.

The maximum number of tourist groups per day is 4. It is necessary to bring down the workload in May-June to 1-2 groups per day – to reduce the effect of the disturbance factor for birds.

It is allowed to walk the trail without a guide. The trail must be marked, information materials must be sufficiently complete to illustrate the specific features of the nature at the Yelnya mire.

151

Design Criteria for the Projected Ecological Trail Yelnya-2

Ecological trail No 2. The ecological trail Yelnya-2 is located on the territory of Sharkovshchina rayon, Vitebsk oblast, within the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve (Figure 4.2).

L a n d u s e r . Disna Forestry Enterprise SFMI, Germanovichi forestry section, compartment No 69 (plot 7), No 84 (plots 1, and 4).

E c o l o g i c a l t r a i l b o u n d a r i e s .

The initial point of the route is located 1.0 km to the north-west of the village of Budy, compartment No 84 (plot 4), Germanovichi forestry section. The initial point coordinates (WGS-84) are 55028,53.580 N 27047,19.644 E.

The destination point of the route is located 1.71 km to the north-west of the village of Budy, compartment No 69 (plot 7), Germanovichi forestry section. The destination point coordinates are 55029,09.780 N 27046,56.064 E. The destination point is located within the visibility zone of Yazhginya Lake, which is unique in terms of its environmental and aesthetic value.

The route of the ecological trail is a curvature (Figure 4.2). The coordinates of the turning points are set out in Table 4.2.

The buffer zone is 3 m wide along both sides of the trail.

The trackside is not outlined (since the traffic is planned on the stabilized road bed).

Table 4.4 – Geographic coordinates of turning point location on the environmental trail of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve

No Geographic coordinates (WGS-84) Distance between turning points, m

1 55028,53.580 N 27047,19.644 E 0

2 55028,55.200 N 27047,20.220 E 51.1

3 55029,2.760 N 27047,8.376 E 313.1

4 55029,6.540 N 27047,2.184 E 159.7

5 55029,9.780 N 27046,56.064 E 147.0

Total mileage 670.9

The total mileage of the route is 670.9 m; the trail surface area is 0.067 ha, with the buffer zone included – 0.201 ha.

Objectives and Goals of the Projected Ecological Trail Yelnya–2. Visitor Target Groups

Objectives and goals of the trail

The objective of the ecological trail is the formation of environmental culture among people, development of their environmentally friendly and sound behavior, as well as regulation of the recreational pressure on natural complexes and sites of the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve.

152

Figure 4.2 – Ground location of the ecological trail Yelnya-2

Map Legend [left to right, top-down]:

Yazhginya Lake

Index map of the turning points of ecological trail No 2:

1:5000

Wooded area

Waterlogged area

Reserve boundaries

Unpaved road

Compartment No

Forest road, winter trail

Lakes


Settlements

Ecological trail

km

#Y

#Y

#Y

#Y

#Y

70

83

84

î ç. ßæãèí ÿ

7

7

2

1

32

564

1

27

89

11

12

13

1

Ãåðì àí î âè÷ñêî å ëåñ-âî

1

2

3

45

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 êèëî ì åòðû

ÊÀÐÒÀ-ÑÕÅÌ Àðàçì åù åí èÿ ï î âî ðî òí û õ òî ÷åêí à ýêî ëî ãè÷åñêî é òðî ï å ¹ 2

Ì 1:5 000ëåñî ï î êðû òàÿ òåððèòî ðèÿ

çàáî ëî ÷åí í àÿ òåððèòî ðèÿãðàí èöà çàêàçí èêà

äî ðî ãà áåç ï î êðû òèÿ

ëåñí àÿ äî ðî ãà, çèì í èê

î çåðà

ðåêè, êàí àëû , ðó÷üè

ýêî ëî ãè÷åñêàÿ òðî ï à

í àñåëåí í û å ï óí êòû

84 ¹ ëåñí î ãî êâàðòàëà

153

Goals:

1. Environmental outreach:

to create conditions for active recreation of the eco-trail visitors combined with personal outlook enrichment on the basis of free-and-easy assimilation of information and of the code of conduct in natural surroundings; and to foster the development of sustained motivation to know wild life based on respectful interaction of humans and nature (the ecocentric outlook).

2. Nature conservation:

to contain visitors of the protected nature area on the specific route (within a limited area, the model area of the specially protected natural site) in order to secure a high level of integrity of the total territory of the specially protected natural site; and to form a positive attitude towards the specially protected natural site as an effective method of nature conservation through the conscious restriction of the human impact on nature.

Visitor target groups

1 . s p e c i a l v i s i t o r s :

scientists of different profiles (biologists, ecologists, geographers, geologists, etc.); participants of ecology oriented academic conferences; teachers, professors of biology and geography; and students majoring in corresponding disciplines;

2 . “ e n t h u s i a s t i c ” v i s i t o r s :

organized amateur tourists (ecotourists, including birdwatchers – bird observing tourists, regional ethnographers), for whom trail use is one of the major goals of their voyage; andmembers of school associations of ecological and similar profiles;

3. g e n e r a l v i s i t o r s :

secondary-school students coming for specialized lessons of nature study, biology, and geography; families, campers, orthodox pilgrims organized into tour groups; and excursionists, tourists showing no specific interest in natural sites, arriving rather occasionally than purposefully, wishing mostly to hike and take the air.

Major themes for tours

1. A general tour along the ecological trail

2. The Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve – the pearl of wildlife reserves of Belarus.

3. The amazing world of bog ecosystems.

4. The geological world of bogs.

5. Plants around us.

6. Helobious animals.

7. The kingdom of birds.

8. The natures’ apothecary.

9. The annals of the bog.

10. Post-catastrophic development of bog ecosystems.

154

11. Comprehensive monitoring of bog ecosystems.

12. The ecological rehabilitation of the Yelnya mire.

Every tour should be available at 3 levels for the three categories of visitors, whereas tours for school students should be adjusted depending on the students’ age.

Mileage of the route

The total mileage of the route is around 1.34 km (round trip). The pattern of the route is radial.

Travel mode

A walking route.

Average length of stay

The average length of the journey (including stops) is:

General and individual visitors – 0.5 hrs. Organized school tours – 1-1.5 hrs. Organized tours for specialists and ecotourists – up to 2 hrs.

Seasonality

Functioning: year-round

Visit intensity

The optimal size of a tourist group is 10-15 people; the maximum number is 25 people.

The maximum number of tourist groups per day is 4. It is necessary to bring down the workload in May-June to 1-2 groups per day – to reduce the effect of the disturbance factor for birds.

It is allowed to walk the trail without a guide. The trail must be marked, information materials must be sufficiently complete to illustrate the specific features of the nature at the Yelnya mire.

Ancillary

If the financing is available, the ecological trail can be equipped with:

1) A watch tower up to 5 m high, furnished with pause platforms, railings.

2) Small-scale architectural elements at stopovers or along the trail (figures of animals, sun-clocks).

3) An additional tourist route leading to the dams built for the purposes of restoring the hydrological regime and ecological rehabilitation of the bog.

In addition to that, it is necessary to develop and publish a full-color brochure (1,500 copies) containing the map of the trail, general information about it, and basic information on the specially protected natural site. It is recommended, to the extent practicable, to publish a set of postcards with pictures.

155

Ecological Trail 3 Ozeravki-Yelnya

This radial ecological trail starts at the edge of the raised bog (vicinity of the village of Konohi) and runs across the transition and raised bog up to the network of picturesque lakes at the raised bog.

Figure 4.3 – Ground location of the ecological trail Yelnya-3: Ozeravki-Yelnya

Map Legend:

1 – Parking;

2 – Fire site and fuel wood storage, shed, trash container, restroom, welcome information display;

3 – Grey crane watch tower, information display;

4 – Scenic view point (small platform slightly lifted above the trail bed), information display;

5 – Scenic view point (small platform slightly lifted above the trail bed), information display;

6 – Scenic view point (small platform slightly lifted above the trail bed), information display, guarded water approach for invertebrate sample collection.

156

ANNEX 5Analysis of Performance under the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve Management Plan

Activities (2008) and Proposals on Updating them

The Management Plan specifies the objective and key tasks of the reserve management:

7.2 Key Management Objective

The key objective of the Yelnya Reserve management is to ensure sustainable functioning of the Yelnya mire––the largest raised bog within the boundaries of Polotsk Lowland, which is an Important Bird Area, an Important Botanical and Ramsar site––to protect the unique bog landscape – raised bogs with lake-hollow complexes, and the most stable and powerful pockets of a set of habitats of stenotopic species ecologically closely linked to raised bogs and a range of glacial relict species of Belarusian flora and fauna.

7.3 Operational Management Tasks

7.3.1. To organize management of the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog to ensure sustainable functioning of the bog ecosystem, prevent peat fires, and protect typical raised bogs and the biodiversity related thereto while taking into account the interests of land users.

7.3.2 To organize forest management in the reserve aimed at biodiversity conservation. To adjust forest management plans to be consistent with the new forest management regimes specified in the Regulations on the Yelnya Reserve.

7.3.3 To prepare recommendations on optimizing amateur fishing in the reserve to minimize the impact of the disturbance factor on nesting birds. To this end – to identify the lakes, where fishing is completely banned or allowed within an established timeframe. To organize an awareness-raising campaign to inform the population about the existing regimes and limitations for fishing on reserve lakes.

7.3.4 Based on the inventory of biodiversity taken in the framework of developing the Management Plan – to prepare––in accordance with the Instruction on the Procedure of Identifying, Transfer for Conservation, and Accounting of Habitats of Wild Plant and Animal Species Listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus––protected species habitat certificates and forward them to rayon inspectorates to be then transferred to land users for conservation, paying a particular attention to developing recommendations on habitat conservation.

7.3.5 To ensure sustainable functioning of the state nature conservation institution managing the reserve to undertake activities under the reserve management plan and control compliance with its regimes.

7.3.6 To prepare proposals on organizing sustainable use of the major bog resource, i.e. cranberries, and its processing in Miory rayons.

The proposals should contain: an assessment of cranberry resources and their distribution over the bog, proposals on pressure distribution, construction of trails, and feasibility study for construction of a processing plant or optimization of procurement. The process of cranberry procurement and processing is practically not organized in the district. According to some rough estimates, the amount of cranberry annually harvested on the bog territory and sold to wholesale buyers and resellers is worth over US$ 1 million. The key consumer of cranberries is Germany, where cranberries are processed to produce different food products sold in European Union countries. In this regard, the feasibility of building on the territory of Miory rayon a cranberry processing enterprise––thus, ensuring sustainable use of cranberry resources and facilitating employment of local people––should be considered.

7.3.7 To prepare a project of organizing ecotourism in the reserve, including the following elements:

157

- developing tours of the reserve and surrounding areas taking into account biodiversity inventory data; and


Several bog routes are recommended to be developed and then equipped by building a log trail, setting signs giving information, equipping tourist stations, building a basic watch tower, etc. The routes should cover the areas with the most attractive landscapes of the reserve (lakes, hollow complexes, habitats of rare fauna and flora species, and wooded islands); however, they should not damage them. Initially, it is planned to equip several houses in the villages adjacent to the bog to provide accommodation facilities for tourists.

7.3.8 To organize an awareness-raising campaign to inform the population about the nature conservation value of the Yelnya Reserve, its conservation and use regimes. This requires preparing and publishing promotion and outreach, and reference materials: brochures, postcards, guidebooks, calendars, etc. To develop cooperation with schools. To create and maintain a positive image of the Yelnya Reserve Management Plan by means of extensive coverage of its objectives, tasks, and implementation progress in mass media.

7.3.9 For the purpose of successfully developing and implementing the Yelnya Reserve Management Plan, to establish and maintain partner relations with all the organizations and institutions involved in conservation and use of natural complexes of the reserve (the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection and its local bodies, the state nature conservation institution, local authorities, land users, public, and local population). That can be achieved through regular meetings, seminars, and public consultations.

7.3.10 To put in place a system of monitoring water levels and quality on the territory of the reserve, its flora and plant communities, biotopes, bird population, and entomofauna to assess the status of bog ecosystems and efficiency of the Management Plan implementation. The monitoring will be performed based on standard scientific methods. One of the major tasks of the monitoring should be assessment of the efficiency of the activities undertaken in the framework of the Management Plan and adjusting the activities planned based on findings of the monitoring.

To implement the tasks, 20 activities were worked out––analysis of their implementation is provided below.

7.4. Activities under the Yelnya Republican Landscape Reserve Management Plan

OPERATIONAL TASK 1. To organize management of the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog to ensure sustainable functioning of the bog ecosystem, prevent peat fires, and protect typical raised bogs and the biodiversity related thereto while taking into account the interests of land users

Recommendation 1.1. Restore the hydrological regime of the central part of the bog in the Yelnya Reserve to prevent peat fires and restore impaired bog ecosystems and biodiversity.

Activity 1.1.1. Preparation of scientific justification for rehabilitation of the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog

In accordance with the technical code of common practice Procedure and Rules of Performing Work on Ecological Rehabilitation of Worked-out Peat Deposits and Other Impaired Bogs by their Re-water logging, the scientific justification of the hydrological regime rehabilitation for the Yelnya mire was developed in 2009.

158

The justification was prepared by the Scientific and Practical Center for Bioresources of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. The work was financed by APB CSO in the framework of implementing the project of the Global Environment Facility Small Grants Program.

Activity 1.1.2. Development of an engineering project to restore the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog

Based on the findings in the scientific justification, Belgiprovodkhoz RUE prepared an engineering project.

Activity 1.1.3. Implementation of the construction project

The engineering project was implemented by Miorskoe PMS in the framework of implementing the Global Environmental Facility Small Grants Program project.

Proposals on updating activities 1.1.1.-1.1.3

As the experience under the UNDP/GEF project to restore impaired bogs has shown, achieving the objectives related to rehabilitation of the hydrological regime of raised bogs is quite difficult and practically never possible after implementation of early activities. As a rule, after the first cycle of canal blocking, the efficiency of measures taken should be assessed and additional activities to block the excessive runoff should be taken.

In this regard, at the current stage, it is necessary to assess the efficiency of the work performed to restore the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog and, if needed, undertake repair or additional activities to optimize the hydrological regime. These activities should include the following:

- analysis of the existing data on the bog hydrology for the Yelnya Reserve (key sources of water intake, runoff from the mire by natural and artificial water flows, assessment of the impact of drainage reclamation around the bog and within its boundaries on its hydrological regime;

- preparation, based on cartographic data, of a map-scheme of the bog relief in the Yelnya Reserve. Based on the relief map-scheme and on-site survey – assessment of the modern status of the hydrological regime of the raised bog at the Yelnya Reserve in spring and summer (mapping zones with different hydrological regimes: optimal for the raised bog (requiring no adjustment), requiring small adjustment, and requiring significant adjustment);

- organization of the year-round water level monitoring at the bog by putting observation wells along specially planned routes from the mire center to its periphery. A particular attention should be paid to water level monitoring in the area of drainage canal impact;

- taking an on-site inventory of the status of all water regulating facilities built prior to the water level recovery in the framework of 2007 and 2009 projects to prepare a map of water regulating facilities;

- assessment of the efficiency of activities on rehabilitation of the hydrological regime of the Yelnya bog; and

- based on the results of assessment of the current bog hydrological status – making an inventory of water regulating facilities and water level monitoring data, preparation of proposals on rehabilitation of the existing facilities and construction, if needed, of additional ones.

159

OPERATIONAL TASK 2. To organize forest management in the reserve aimed at biodiversity conservation

Recommendation 2.1. Run sustainable forestry

Activity 2.1.1. Adjusting forest management plan in accordance with the new Regulations on the Yelnya Reserve

Partially implemented.

Proposals on updating activity 2.1.1.

New data collected in the framework of the present EU/UNDP project should be introduced to forest management plans in the framework of continuous forest management.

OPERATIONAL TASK 3. To organize sustainable use of natural resources of the Yelnya Reserve

Recommendation 3.1. Organize sustainable use of natural resources of the reserve

Activity 3.1.1. Sustainable use of cranberry resources

Not implemented.

Proposals on updating activity 3.1.1.

In the framework of the EU/UNDP project, hire an expert to perform the following tasks:

- to look for enterprises, which potentially could be interested in using cranberry resources;

- to prepare an overview of the foreign experience of sustainable use of cranberry resources; and

- to hold discussions and prepare a joint plan of further actions with potential enterprises to ensure sustainable use of cranberry resources.

Recommendation 3.2. Organize sustainable hunting and fishing in the reserve to minimize the impact of the disturbance factor on migratory and nesting birds

Activity 3.2.1. Ban on spring hunting.

Spring hunting is banned in the reserve.

Activity 3.2.2. Optimizing the area of no-take zones.

Not implemented.

Activity 3.2.3. Setting amateur fishing regimes at certain lakes.

Not implemented.

160

Activity 3.2.4. Intensification of efforts to fight invasive species.

Timeline: 2012. Planned to be implemented in the framework of the next hunting management planning.

OPERATIONAL TASK 4. To ensure conservation and management of plant and animal habitats for the species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus

Recommendation 4.1. Ensure conservation and management of plant and animal habitats for the species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus.

Activity 4.1.1. Facilitation of transfer of habitats of protected plant species for conservation to land users.

15 plant species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus are found on the territory of the Yelnya Reserve.

To maintain the population of such plants or create conditions for their development, a set of targeted activities should be implemented, forestry employees should be informed about the appearance of the protected species, specific features of their biology, existing threats, and required conservation measures. Rayon Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Inspectorates, jointly with Yelnya SNCI, should control compliance with the requirements to conservation activities. In the framework of development of the Management Plan, it is planned to prepare and transfer to the state nature conservation institution data on habitats of protected species and recommendations on their conservation.


Activity 4.1.2. Facilitation of transfer of habitats of protected animal species for conservation to land users.

Habitats of 31 animal species listed in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus are identified on the territory of the Yelnya Reserve.

To preserve the population of these species, recommendations on their conservation should be complied with. Rayon Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Inspectorates, jointly with Yelnya SNCI, should control compliance with the requirements to conservation activities.

In the framework of the Management Plan development, it is planned to prepare and transfer to the state nature conservation institution data on habitats of protected species and recommendations on their conservation.


Activity 4.1.3. Development and implementation of a set of biotechnical activities to improve the habitat conditions for protected bird and plant species.

The habitat conditions for a number of bird species have sharply deteriorated as a result of fires and disruption of the hydrological regime. Thus, to maintain their population, special activities are required to install man-made bird boxes for (predaceous birds), raise the water level at impaired parts of the mire (sandpipers), and to regulate the population of undesirable species (raccoon dog, American mink).

161

In the framework of certificate preparation and their transfer for conservation, recommendations will be provided on biotechnical activities.


Proposals on updating operational task 4

To assess the population of black grouse and willow grouse (over the period from January 1 to March 1);

Based on the counting performed in the Yelnya Reserve, to assess the population of migratory wetland birds making a stop-over on the bog (over the period from April 1 to May 20);

Count the population of nesting wetland birds on the monitoring site of Yelnya (over the period from May 10 to June 10);

Count the population (mapping of the territory) of day predaceous birds on the count sites on the territory of the Yelnya Reserve (over the period from May 1 to July 1);

Perform expert appraisal of the biotope status and threats to counted bird species;

Based on the data collected, formalize conservation certificates and orders for identified habitats of protected bird species, places of migratory bird concentration, displays of the black grouse, habitats of colonies of rare species of sandpipers. The certificates should contain recommendations on optimizing habitats, requires limitations, and rules of economic activity on protected sites; and

Based on the data collected on the sites of migratory bird concentration, habitats of protected species, prepare proposals on no-take zones (map charts) (recommendation 3.2.2) and banning fishing at certain lakes (lake map and period of ban) (recommendation 3.2.3).

OPERATIONAL TASK 5. To ensure sustainable functioning of the state nature conservation institution managing the reserve to undertake activities under the reserve management plan and control compliance with its regimes.

Recommendation 5.1. Ensure sustainable functioning of the state nature conservation institution

Activity 5.1.2. Ensuring sustainable functioning of the reserve management structure to undertake activities under the reserve management plan and control compliance with its regimes

To undertake the activities in the framework of the Management Plan and control compliance with the reserve regimes, the state nature conservation institution managing the reserve needs the following vehicles and equipment: a car, vehicles for moving on the bog (cross-country vehicles), GPS, and other specialized equipment and accessories.


Proposals on implementation of operational task 5 (taking into account the objectives, tasks, and activities of the EU/UNDP project):

It is recommended to buy special vehicles and equipment in the framework of the EU/UNDP project.

162

OPERATIONAL TASK 6. To undertake activities on organizing ecotourism in the reserve

Recommendation 6.1. Develop a project of ecotourism organization in the reserve

Activity 6.1.1. Developing and implementing a project to build tourist trails and create the infrastructure for ecotourism development in the reserve

Developing and implementing a project to organize ecotourism in the reserve, including:

development of tourist routes running through the territory of the reserve and surrounding areas, taking into account the biodiversity inventory;

development of the ecotourism infrastructure;


buying equipment (accessories, gear, etc.);

establishing agro-tourist enterprises in the surrounding areas;

development of a marketing program and business plan to promote the offered tourist product in the domestic and external markets; and

preparation, publication, and dissemination of guidebooks, maps, pamphlets, brochures, and other information materials about the specially protected natural site of national concern.

Several walking routes are recommended to be developed and then equipped by building a log trail, setting signs giving information, equipping tourist stations, building a basic watch tower, etc. The routes should cover the areas with the most attractive landscapes of the reserve (lakes, hollow complexes, habitats of rare fauna and flora species, and wooded islands); however, they should not damage them. A construction project needs to be developed for the ecotrail. The cost of the project preparation and construction is around BYR 100 million.


Proposals on implementation of operational task 6 (taking into account the objectives, tasks, and activities of the EU/UNDP project):

The following activities of the Management Plan are recommended to be implemented under the EU/UNDP project:

development and construction of tourist routes running through the territory of the reserve and surrounding areas, taking into account the biodiversity inventory;


buying equipment (accessories, gear, etc.); and

equipping an information center.

OPERATIONAL TASK 7. To organize a system of monitoring key ecosystems of the reserve to assess their status, development, as well as efficiency of the Management Plan implementation.

Recommendation 7.1. Organize a system of monitoring key ecosystems of the reserve.

163

Activity 7.1.1. Organization of a system of monitoring key components of the ecosystems of the reserve

To organize a system of monitoring to assess the status and development of components (flora, bird species composition and density, protected species) of key reserve ecosystems (raised bog, lakes) to assess the status of bog ecosystems and efficiency of the Management Plan implementation. A particular attention should be paid to monitoring the water level at the periphery of the raised bog, near drainage canals (Dulsky, Berezha), in the centre of the mire and at lakes (Yelnya, Bolshoe, Ploskoe). The monitoring will be performed based on standard methods. One of the major tasks of the monitoring should be assessment of the efficiency of the activities undertaken in the framework of the Management Plan and adjusting the activities planned based on findings of the monitoring.


Proposals on updating operational task 7

Key types of monitoring the fauna and flora, as well as bog ecosystems is performed in the framework of NSEM by institutes of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. In the framework of the EU/UNDP project, it is recommended to develop monitoring points to count indicative bird species, develop routes, set measuring equipment, and measure water levels at permanent monitoring points. The system of water level monitoring is to be transferred to the state nature conservation institution.

OPERATIONAL TASK 8. To organize an awareness-raising campaign to inform the population about the value of the reserve

Recommendation 8.1. Organize an awareness-raising campaign to inform the population about the nature conservation value of the Yelnya Reserve, its conservation and use regimes

Activity 8.1.1. Organization of an awareness-raising campaign to inform the population about the nature conservation value of the Yelnya Reserve, its conservation and use regimes

Organization of an awareness-raising campaign to inform the population about the nature conservation value of the Yelnya Reserve, its conservation and use regimes includes the following activities:

Preparing and publishing promotion and outreach, and reference materials: brochures, postcards, guidebooks, calendars, etc.;

Development of cooperation with education institutions;

Creating and maintaining a positive image of the Yelnya Reserve Management Plan by means of extensive coverage of its objectives, tasks, and implementation progress in mass media;

Making and installing signs giving directions and other information, billboards;

Informing the population about the current regimes of on the territory of the reserve;

Undertaking practical awareness raising measures to inform the population about the regime of activities on the territory of the reserve; and

Organization of guided tours for education and instruction purposes run by reserve experts.


Activity 8.1.2. Making and installing signs giving directions and other information, billboards

Responsible organization: Yelnya SNCI. Timeline: 2009-2010.164

Fully implemented.

OPERATIONAL TASK 9. To establish and maintain partner relations with all the organizations and institutions involved in conservation and use of natural complexes of the reserve (the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection and its local bodies, the state nature conservation institution, local authorities, land users, public, and local population).

Recommendation 9.1.

Activity 9.1.1. Holding regular meetings, discussions, seminars, and public consultations to successfully implement the Yelnya Reserve Management Plan

Under implementation.

165

ANNEX 6Minutes

of the Public Consultations on Endorsement of the Updated Yelnya Republican Reserve Management Plan Developed within the Framework of Joint European Union (EU) and United

Nations Development Program (UNDP) Project No 76991 Support to the Development of a Comprehensive Framework for International Environmental Cooperation in the Republic of

Belarus

dated July 17, 2012, 10:00-13:00,July 17, 2012, 17 Dzerzhinskogo Street, Miory, Vitebsk oblast

Attended by:

1. Mrs. Natalya V. Minchenko Head, Department of Biological andLandscape Diversity, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection

2. Mr. Alexander I. Bodanin Deputy Chair, Miory Rayon Executive Committee3. Mr. Alexander V. Kozulin Expert on the Yelnya Reserve Management Plan4. Ms. Nina I. Tanovitskaya Consultant on the Yelnya Reserve hydrological regime

management5. Mr. Denis S. Lundyshev Biodiversity and ecotourism expert6. Ms. Marina G. Dmitrenok Yelnya Reserve subject consultant7. Mr. Vyacheslav K. Alehno Project driver8. Mr. Valery T. Kovalenok Yelnya IBA keeper9. Mr. Ivan I. Borok Director, Yelnya SNCI10. Mr. Liudvig K.Kosatkin The Miory News, newspaper columnist11. Ms. Elena A. Lavrinovich Physical Culture, Sports, and Tourism Division, Miory

Rayon Executive Committee12. Mr. Tadeush M. Rudz Miory Irrigation and Drainage Systems unitary enterprise13. Mr. Alexander E. Voevodov Miory Rayon Natural Resources and Environmental

Protection Inspectorate14. Mr. Vasily V. Matsuk Braslav Wildlife Inter-Rayon Inspectorate15. Mr. Dmitry M. Shopel Miory Rayon Division of the Belarusian Society of

Hunters and Fishermen RSPO16. Mr. Oleg A. Selyah Obsterno Ltd17. Mr. Vasily E. Zhuravsky Yelnya-Ecotour SLC [Supplementary Liability Company]18. Mr. Alexander Yu. Machulsky

Member of Integritas public organization

19. Ms. Natalya I. Budzko Director, Halberg travel agency20. Mr. Leonid E. Hahel Deputy Director, Obsterno Ltd21. Ms. Kasia I. Kazachonok Yelnya bog keeper22. Mr. Vasily V. Kazachonok Yelnya bog keeper23. Ms. Natalya V. Lavrinovich Main expert, Miory Rayon Natural Resources and

Environmental Protection Inspectorate24. Mr. Ivan V. Tsvechkovsky Game management expert, Miory Rayon Division of the

Belarusian Society of Hunters and Fishermen RSPO25. Mr. Alexander I. Zhuk Head, Physical Culture, Sports, and Tourism Division,

Miory Rayon Executive Committee

166

Statements:А.I. Bodanin – Opening: welcoming of the participants, on the importance of the Yelnya Reserve for Miory rayon, on the urgency of the Management Planning.

I.I. Borok – On the significance of the updated Management Plan as a guide to action for the next 5 years, on the substantial assistance of project expert and scientists in the reserve territory exploration, assessment of the current state of the mire, identification of previously unknown habitat of protected flora and fauna species of the reserve.

A.V. Kozulin – Presentation on the stages of the Yelnya Reserve Management Plan development and implementation, brief review for the concerned of the general contents of the Management Plan in discussion, arguments in support of the need to update it.

N.I. Tanovitskaya – Presentation on the hydrology the Veliky Mokh bog, history of changes in its hydrological regime, and its current condition, assessment of the operation of the existing water retention facilities on canals, arguments in support of the necessity of their partial repair and construction of new water retention facilities.

A.V. Kozulin – Presentation of the Management Plan: description of the ecosystems, flora and fauna, and of the importance of the reserve ecosystems, major threats and challenges. Presentation of the principle recommendations under the Management Plan.

Subjects and discussion:А.I. Bodanin: Is there a probability of water level decrease in the neighboring rivers caused by discontinued water draining from the mire due to the construction of hydrological facilities?

A.V. Kozulin: The hydrological regime will not be damaged, however, on the contrary, will come to a more natural shape. After the mire is saturated with water, the runoff of the surplus water will continue, but not through the canals,––that is currently the case––but in a more natural way for the mire – over the entire surface of the bog.

A.V. Kozulin: Ecological tourism: It is very important to develop public relations, promote information about the mire, create a website! Information support is needed for all kinds of tourism. The future of tourism belongs to private enterprises. It is necessary to advertise on the website many options for ecological routes (not necessarily fully equipped routes, but also minimally equipped or not equipped routes). The use of cross-country vehicles for the purposes of tourism should be regulated. This type of vehicles cannot be used for excursions without prior [causeway] building and equipping. It is necessary to limit their use to certain routes only so as to avoid damage to the mire.

A.I. Bodanin: It’s absolutely necessary that the English version of the website is available.

I.I. Borok: Certainly, It has been planned.

A.I. Bodanin: The website of the Braslav National Park is an outstanding experience in this respect.

N.V. Minchenko: Promotion and celebration events are of great importance. It's good advertising and a way to attract people.

I.I. Borok: The natural reserve alone will not be sufficient for attracting numerous tourists. There is an idea to create the Northern Ring route passing through a number of nature reserves in the north of Belarus.

A.I. Bodanin: The development of camping is of great importance. This practice enjoys wide popularity. It is necessary to allocate camping areas and equip them.

A.V. Kozulin: What is the situation with the development of agrotourism in the area?

167

A.I. Bodanin: Agrotourism is developing (there are lodging cottages). But the grassroots initiative is needed.

N.V. Minchenko: The Sporovsky wildlife preserve is an excellent example thereof.

V.V. Matsuk: The 7 meter difference in height of the bog is a big deal. Suppose that the “principle of spring” arises? What if a new course emerges when we make the canal dams?

A.V. Kozulin: No, this will not happen. The natural hydrological regime of the mire will be restored and excess water will run down over the entire surface as it occurs on raised bogs. In order to avoid the emergence of any additional courses it is necessary to take appropriate measures.

N.I. Tanovitskaya: The natural water level for a raised bog is water standing at the surface of the mire. It is quite normal.

V.V. Matsuk: Why are the eco-routes made so short? One needs to think of extreme tourism. It is worth to plan a three-day tour through the bog. There are people ready for that; such a route will be in demand. It is necessary to offer it on the website of the reserve. And it is very important to provide campings at the starting point and at the end of the route. A guide for such a route is also needed.

I.I. Borok: There are equipped trails and there are routes. Routes can and should be established in large quantities for different categories of tourists.

V.E. Zhuravsky: Ecological routes in Yelnya have existed for more than 5 years and there are different routes for different categories of tourists. But what is important and what impedes the progress is the following. For example, when I bring a group of children to a bog I have to ensure their safety. Accidents happen and in this case it is necessary to provide a cross-country vehicle for emergency evacuation. Another big problem is homemade cross-country vehicles cruising across the bog. Their use is out of control while they destroy the mire. Preparation of a causeway for cross-country vehicles is a long procedure: it is necessary to cut down all burnt stumps, etc. Poaching occurs – poachers steal chicks of red book-listed birds. We have figured out these people. They keep shooting on the bog every day while it is not possible to ensure a prompt field ride and to provide protection; poachers have cross-country vehicles and they go wherever they want – this is outrageous and it hurts. The state nature conservation institution has no effective means for protection so far. Berry harvesting season begins – businessmen hire homeless people and they start picking unripe cranberries before the official opening of the harvesting season. Then, when picking berries is allowed officially, they take out the after-ripened berries that they store on the bog. As a result, they cannot be fined. The homeless people destroy organized camping sites. Berries are gathered in big quantities, and Yelnya-Ecotour SLC only exported officially in one season 800 tons of cranberries. The threat of fires: preventive measures are not taken by internal affairs agencies and other organizations, awareness-raising is non-existent. There was a major raid on poachers in 2002. Poachers then retaliated and set multiple fires to the bog. Conservation measures and awareness-raising are of great importance, and it is necessary to arrange that properly.

N.V. Minchenko: You have mentioned concrete facts. Please, prepare an official letter with the above mentioned facts. Issues like that should be raised at the official level. Then the ministry will be able to take measures.

A.V. Kozulin: It is also necessary to set permissions for the use of vehicles on the territory of the mire. It is essential to arrange 1 or 2 legalized routes, to make a causeway across heavily waterlogged areas that can be destroyed by cross-country vehicles in order to protect the bog from the impact of cross-country transport.

168

N.V. Minchenko: The state nature conservation institution has held permission for off-road use of transport vehicles since 2008.

V.E. Zhuravsky: Is there a plant that would "clog up" canals, so there is no need to build dams?

A.V. Kozulin: No, there is no such plant since the bog is characterized by a steep gradient. The process of full overgrowing is not possible on the way of the stream. Once the water is stopped, the canal becomes waterlogged and covers with sphagnum, etc.

N.I. Tanovitskaya: Only dams can stop the stream and let the canals overgrow.

A.V. Kozulin: We had the idea to build dams along the canals with peat taken from the bog because over many years of the canals’ existence the peat has mineralized. This resulted in the formation of large depressions along the canals, and dams on canals only do not solve the problem of water runoff. Dams along the canals may help solve this problem.

V.E. Zhuravsky: We propose to completely ban hunting at Yelnya for all kinds of game and all seasons.

A.V. Kozulin: It would be better for the hunters as well if geese hunting at Yelnya is banned. The geese can safely spend the night in the mire then, nobody would disturb them, and they could stay here longer (for two or three weeks). And in the daytime, when the geese fly out for feeding into open fields, hunters could fowl. If geese are hunted both in the mire and in the fields, they will quickly leave the territory of the bog and its surroundings.

O.A. Selyah: The beaver improves the efficiency of hydrological facilities by building its own dams, so I propose to protect the beaver in every possible way and fight predatory mammals which can exterminate beavers.

A.V. Kozulin: The beaver does not live on a typical raised bog. Aspen and birch start growing on a post-fire bog. These plants are good for beaver, so the beaver inhabits these areas. But the activity of the beaver (area flooding and vegetation eating) leads to the extinction of aspen. Aspen does not grow on near-natural raised bogs and the beaver has nothing to do there. I.e. the activity of the beaver at Yelnya is tangible and valuable mostly on the periphery of the bog, where deciduous species grow. The beaver helps restore the hydrological regime there. But, unfortunately, in the central part of the bog, the beaver cannot solve these problems, because he lacks food there.

N.V. Minchenko: The Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection will support the ban on hunting at Yelnya.

A.V. Kozulin: We need to develop “green hunting”. We have a good experience with wood grouse mating displays which could be introduced at Yelnya for black grouse. This can be very profitable for it implies sustainable use. Hunting with camera for birds of prey is also a good area. There is great experience in the Vygonoshchanskу Wildlife Reserve with putting some bait around a blind for photo-hunting white-tailed eagles and other interesting species for wildlife photography. There is a waiting line there of those who wish to take pictures of animals from such blinds. It is necessary to conduct research of breeding game at the black grouse mating displays in the areas planned for photo-hunting and to prevent grassing of these displays.

V.E. Zhuravsky: Last year, we held two photo-hunting sessions together with Plytkevich and got outstanding experience of organizing such events.

O.A. Selyah: We support the idea of regulating the population of raccoon dogs, foxes, and wolves as we believe that raccoon dogs present a major problem for wood grouse and black grouse.

169

V.E. Zhuravsky: Shall we raise the issue of the increase of personnel of the state nature conservation institution? One should ensure the integrity and security of the reserve. Poaching is highly advanced.

A.V. Kozulin: That is right, I.I. Borok alone will not achieve anything. However, ecotourism will be developing. Problems should be solved step-by-step. The Management Plan will not be able to resolve the poaching problem.

N.V. Minchenko: Prepare an official letter to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection with the facts of poaching. We will respond. What concerns vehicles: the state nature conservation institution has no restrictions on their use, as to cross-country vehicles – indeed, it is necessary to specify routes in the Management Plan.

V.E. Zhuravsky: What are we supposed to do with the rehabilitation of the hydrological regime of the bog, how to speed up the process?

A.V. Kozulin: The project involved substantial research of the state of the mire, i.e. the theoretical part has already been completed, we need to find money for the implementation (there is a preliminary agreement regarding the GEF project, which can be the framework for the implementation).

V.E. Zhuravsky: How can we engage local authorities and financial resources in resolving these problems?

A.I. Bodanin: They can be engaged through local deputy councils, who will initiate a law.

A.V. Kozulin: There is a need to create a local public committee, an informal organization, it might work well. This should be an initiative of the state nature conservation institution. There are IBA keepers and this is good. However, this initiative must be developed actively at Yelnya, and this is the concern of the state nature conservation institution.

V.E. Zhuravsky: Can we sell sphagnum? Sphagnum sells very well.

A.V. Kozulin: No, selling sphagnum is prohibited. What is the attitude of local authorities to developing the business associated with cranberries?

A.I. Bodanin: First of all, it is necessary to rely on private business, probably, considering the possibility of raising foreign investments.

V.E. Zhuravsky: Is it possible to revive the enterprise in Sharkovschina?

A.I. Bodanin: Investors are not interested in it. The facility is out of date and there is a need for modern and energy-efficient technologies.

Resolutions:- Participants of the meeting shall prepare written proposals to be included in the Management Plan and send them within one week to the members of the project management group.

- The developers of the Management Plan shall take the proposals into account when updating the Management Plan.

Chairperson of the meeting: I.I. Borok

Secretary of the meeting: M.G. Dmitrenok

170