ECOS 43 (3.1.2)- Conservation on the frontline: Azov-Black Sea Ecological Corridor

Before the war

The following account is based on information provided by Igor Studennikov, director of the Odesa-based Centre for Regional Studies* (CRS) and Oleg Dyakov of Rewilding Ukraine. Before the Russian invasion, with support from the UK-based Endangered Landscapes Programme, CRS, Rewilding Ukraine, WWF and other partners had developed comprehensive plans for nature restoration along the Azov-Black Sea coast and its hinterlands. This included: establishment of an Azov-Black Sea Ecological Corridor (ABSEC) protected areas association; engagement with forest authorities and hunters’ organisations on forestry policies; protection and creation of wildlife corridors; the re-introduction of keystone herbivores such as kulan (wild ass), Saiga antelope and Ukrainian grey cattle, as well as improved management of other animals involved in natural grazing. An important outcome of this work was a more holistic vision of nature conservation and ecological restoration policies within ABSEC by Ukraine’s Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources. A key recommendation was the need for a new forestry policy with the focus on climate change adaptation, ecological restoration and biodiversity conservation.

Wildfire due to shelling in Mykolaiv Region, August 2022. Photo credit: Dsns.gov.ua Wikipedia

Current situation

More than half of the area identified for the project has been subject to Russian occupation, although a Ukrainian counter-offensive is presently underway. Current and previously occupied territory included the entire regions of Kherson, Zaporizzhia (the location of Europe’s largest nuclear power station) and Donetsk in southern and eastern Ukraine. The Mykolaiv region is on the front line and suffering from intense shelling and missile strikes.

Nevertheless, the project team has remained in contact with the administrations of some protected areas in the Kherson region and have raised funds for the Askania-Nova Biosphere Reserve (where 80% of staff remain in position) to assist with the purchase of feed and veterinary supplies.1 This reserve is one of the main sources of animals for re-introduction programmes. Askania is also involved in carrying out investigations for an ELP-funded carbon sequestration/storage assessment project.2 A major problem has been inability to visit Askania and conduct joint field work both on site and at the Tarutino Steppe.

Proposed work in the Odesa Region (Dniester delta reed bed restoration and rewilding in the area of the Tuzly Lagoons) has been suspended. Although a proposal for restoration of the Dniester delta reed bed was previously approved by the Odessa Regional State Administration for support from the State Fund for Regional Development.

The Ukrainian Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources and some NGOs are currently trying to document the ecological impact of the war. Whilst some facts have been established, an accurate and comprehensive assessment cannot be conducted until Russian-occupied areas return to Ukrainian government control. However, even in protected areas of which Ukraine has control, full assessments are extremely difficult.

For example, whilst there is a general understanding of the extent of ecosystem damage in the Ukrainian outer delta of the Danube Biosphere Reserve (DBR), access to this is currently impossible. The area is contaminated with unexploded shells and bombs, naval mines and other explosive remnants of war. In addition, military authorities have restricted access to the area even for DBR’s researchers and rangers.

Despite these restrictions, the overall ecological impact of the invasion and military operations has become increasingly clear. This includes: habitat destruction and disturbance of animals, especially during migration periods; contamination of protected areas and fires; wider environmental pollution linked to highly toxic substances present in missiles, and as a result of the destruction of industries and warehouses; and, a rise in the level of groundwater in abandoned coal mines leading to contamination with heavy metals.

Among the many negative impacts of the invasion is poaching in protected areas and the theft of endangered herbivores and their transportation to Russia. In particular this has occurred from Dzharylgach Island (Dzharylgachsky National Park) and Byriuchyi Island belonging to the Azov-Sivash National Park. These areas, together with Askania-Nova, are the main sources of herbivores for rewilding in the Azov-Black Sea eco corridor. However, there is currently no comprehensive understanding of the real situation on the ground.

With regard to marine wildlife, it is also difficult to know precisely what is happening. Mass deaths of dolphins have been reported, for instance by the Tuzly Lagoons National Park authority. However, the cause of deaths is not presently clear – these could be due to warfare, epizootic disease (something that occurred in the past) or a combination of factors. On a more positive note, cessation of fishing because of the war may help to restore marine ecosystems including food resources for mammals.

Little Sasyk Lagoon, Tuzly Lagoons National Park. Photo credit: Endangered Landscapes Programme

In the longer term – and as has happened elsewhere in the world – the effects of war can ironically help create the conditions for ecological restoration. For example, the destruction by fire of non-native conifer forest (planted for sand dune stabilisation) on the Kinburn Spit may enable the restoration of natural coastal steppe landscape maintained by herbivores. Steppe restoration is a key component of the Azov-Black Sea ecological corridor.  Similarly, in Kherson region non-native forest destruction may facilitate replacement with native species of Dnieper birch (Betula Borysthenica Klokov), oak and others.

Great White Pelicans of Tuzly Lagoons. Photo credit: Sergey Ryzhkov, Wikipedia

However, the consequences of war are also very uncertain. Depopulation of some areas now under Russian occupation and farm abandonment may contribute the conditions for ecological restoration, habitat network extension and the enhancement of ecological connectivity across the Azov-Black Sea eco corridor. Alternatively, there is widespread concern that protected areas and other places of nature conservation importance, as well as areas of rewilding potential like steppes, may be converted into croplands. This follows the recent grain export agreement to tackle the global food crisis caused by the war in Ukraine.

Priorities for international assistance

In terms of interventions by international organisations, these priorities are proposed:

  • Providing Ukraine with methods of environmental damage assessment and compensations that could be claimed against Russia.
  • Reinstatement and improvement of the environmental monitoring system.
  • Assistance with developing a good quality ecological restoration and sustainable development strategy for post-war Ukraine (This is important as the Ministry of Environmental Protection currently has no clear strategic vision of post-war restoration).
  • Financial assistance.

Plans for the future

As stated earlier, at the end of 2021 the Centre for Regional Studies and partners had a substantial project portfolio for the Azov-Black Sea Ecological Corridor, either already underway, approved or subject to funding. This included major landscape restoration and climate adaptation programmes in the Dniester delta and wider river basin supported by the Odesa Regional State Administration and the Ukrainian Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources. It is hoped this work will resume as circumstances allow.

Release of Kulan (wild ass) for grazing steppe. Photo credit: Andrey Nekrasov/Rewilding Ukraine

Another major project involved enhancement of ecosystem resilience in the Tuzly Lagoons through restoration of natural processes. This aims to restore steppe plots around the Tuzly Lagoons National Park in order to create natural habitats lost due to the conversion of coastal steppe into croplands. The intention is to reintroduce large herbivores able to maintain the steppe landscape by grazing as well as to ensure connection between the Tuzly Lagoons group and the Black Sea. A key objective is the preservation of an important stopover site for migratory birds, including the Dalmatian pelican, the white pelican and flamingos, and nesting places for waterfowls. Cooperation is planned between the Tuzly Lagoons National Park administration, Rewilding Europe and WWF to identify and raise funds, including potential support from the European Union’s Black Sea Basin Programme.

Proposals for the Tuzly Lagoons reflect the centrality of steppe restoration to the Azov-Black Sea ecological corridor. Restoration of illegally ploughed natural areas of the Tarutino Steppe demonstrate that a methodology developed by Askania-Nova Biosphere Reserve is successful and will be used to restore steppe sites elsewhere. The re-introduction of native species like kulan for natural grazing is essential for the maintenance of steppe landscapes. Analysis of opportunities for the reintroduction of kulan, whose populations have critically declined across the ABSEC over the past four centuries, show that land exists for their release along the entire ecological corridor. Again, the main source of kulan is Askania-Nova; who also involved in the (ELP-funded) carbon sequestration and storage assessment project and presently conducting field work. However, other areas of ABSEC are also important as both sources of large herbivores, including deer, and sites for their release enabling a more strategic approach to future management once peaceful conditions resume.

A possible source of funding for steppe restoration may be carbon credits based on the ability of natural grasslands to sequester and store carbon. Notwithstanding the profound challenges of Russia’s war on Ukraine, work continues on “different areas of the steppe – “untouched (natural), ploughed and restored areas, hayfields, and pastures …. to compare the level of carbon absorption and retention to determine the most effective forms of management in this regard.”2 The aim of the new project is to provide a scientific basis for the inclusion of steppe ecosystems in the system of carbon credits.

Tarutino Steppe. Photo credit: Maxim Yakovlev/Endangered Landscapes Programme

Note

* The Odesa-based Centre for Regional Studies is an independent research and project management organisation that has worked in the Azov-Black Sea and the Danube regions since October 1998.  CRS’ multidisciplinary team has a strong academic background with specialisms in ecology, geography, biology, history, economics and regional studies, and for more than two decades has conducted research and developed projects in nature conservation and restoration, sustainable management of natural resources, Integrated Coastal Zone Management and River Basin Management, local community development and regional planning. Since 1998, CRS has implemented 24 projects in partnership with other academic and research institutions, national, regional and local public authorities, international organisations, and partners from culturally and linguistically diverse countries. 

References

1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Askania-Nova

2 https://www.endangeredlandscapes.org/new-research-surrounding-economic-benefits-of-restoring-the-steppe

Cite:

Mackinnon, Janet “ECOS 43 (3.1.2)- Conservation on the frontline: Azov-Black Sea Ecological Corridor” ECOS vol. 43 (3.1.2) ECOS 43 (3.1), British Association of Nature Conservationists, www.ecos.org.uk/ecos-43-3-1-2-conservation-on-the-front-line-azov-black-sea-ecological-corridor/.

Leave a Reply