PROJECT TEAM

GLOSSARY

Biological diversity – all life forms, from tiny microorganisms to highest animals within ecosystems and whole ecosystems. It is not only diversity of species, but also that of genetic codes accounting for the living being capacity to survive and develop due to essential qualities reflected in these codes.

Natural and agricultural zoning – territorial division based on essential environmental conditions and agro-biological requirements to agricultural crops and used for land evaluation and developing land survey guidelines on land use and protection.

Degraded lands – lands which have lost their modal qualities under the impact of anthropogenic and natural factors and the use of which is environmentally unacceptable and economically unfeasible.

Environmental stability of territories – indicator dependent on the agricultural development rate, including the ploughing-up rate and intensity of land use, intensity of amelioration and land clearing, territorial development, etc.

Anthropogenic load (pressure) – impact of human activities on the environment, including land resources.

Optimization of land use – identification of the most environmentally sustainable and economically feasible composition of lands, including agricultural lands.

Environmental rehabilitation of territories – restoration of the capacity of degraded territories and ecosystems for performing biosphere and economic functions. Unlike re-naturalization, rehabilitation does not presuppose the obligatory restoration of all components of degraded ecosystems. For example, it may be impossible to restore a destroyed peat deposit or that of any mineral resource. In carrying out environmental rehabilitation, priority is given to the restoration of ecosystems’ biosphere functions, i.e. their ability to conserve the environment and reproduce resources, to conserve and reproduce biodiversity, as well as their self-regulating and self-organizing capacities.

Intensive soil use – use f soils with maximum application of energy (in the form of fuel, fertilizers, pesticides, etc) per area unit.

1. PROJECT RATIONALE

The Strategic Resume summarizes the outcomes of the Project of reviewing agricultural practices in relation to transboundary protection of biodiversity and soil conservation.

The aim of the Project was to assess current agricultural practices in Belarus, Ukraine and Russia and their impact on the loss of biological and landscape diversity, soil degradation and contamination. Based on this assessment, a system of measures conducive to an optimized land use structure and environmentally balanced farming was proposed.

The land structure within the Dnipro Basin existing in the three participating countries, as well as current land use methods and agricultural practices caused a number of unfavorable environmental changes, in particular degradation and contamination of soils and ecosystems at large. In some regions, these changes acquired a critical scale, having an extremely adverse impact on natural landscapes and leading to a considerable loss of biological diversity and soil fertility.

Large areas of agricultural land are subject to water erosion [1, 2, 3, 4]. Within the Dnipro Basin, plough lands with the total area of 1 million hectares have mildly or highly eroded soils. A great part of the territory is deflated, including light texture soils (light land) constituting the surface of sandy terraces of the Dnipro and its tributaries. Deflation is also observed on over-drained peateries common for transboundary areas. The soils of the Dnipro terraces above the flood lands, as well as of flood lands and terraces of its tributaries are salinized. Large areas of waterlogged and over-moist land are to be found in the northern part of the basin. Man-caused contamination with radionuclides, heavy metals and pesticides is another critical factor accounting for the soil fertility deterioration in the Dnipro Basin. Over the last decades, physical soil degradation has become growingly manifested in soil thickening, and the formation of a solid surface crust resulting from the loss of valuable agronomic soil composition. Among other causes of soil degradation are: the shortage of organic fertilizers, imbalanced application and wash-off of organic substances, common use of heavy agricultural machinery coupled with an insufficient soil loosening. Irrigated lands suffer from flooding observed in 15-20% of all areas, secondary salinization (5-10%) and alkalinization (over 30% or irrigated lands), loss of soil composition and de-humification. In Polessye, where the share of areas with double water regime regulation is relatively low, the excessive expansion of drained areas has an adverse impact on the land quality. The condition of soil micro-flora also deteriorates because of an overloading on agro-landscapes and consequent de-humification, as well as man-caused contamination aligned to a sharply reduced application of fertilizers, especially organic ones, and increased use of pesticides. As a result, soil fertility is damaged, and the capacity of soil to bay and decompose toxic compounds (in particular, metal-organic ones) is decreased.

The use of degraded and infertile lands for farming is both environmentally inaccessible and economically infeasible, since it entails annual direct losses (as the cost of growing plant produce is higher than that of the yielded harvest). Some experts estimate the overall environmental damage caused by the loss of fertile soil layers, humus and nutrients, by soil degradation etc, adjusted to the Dnipro Basin area, at over 350-500 million US dollars per year.

Unfortunately, the environmental and economic damage caused by the use of land under excessive anthropogenic pressure was never properly assessed before, as the reining ideology insisted that “soil fertility could not decrease under socialist economy”. The in-depth analysis of the problem that has started recently cannot possibly embrace the whole scope of the problem, especially in its quantitative terms. A considerable drop in productivity and stability of ecosystems, intensive degradation processes, increased cost of soil rehabilitation testify to the pressing nature of the problem in question.

Therefore, the aim of the Project was to assess current agricultural practices in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine with regard to their contributing to the loss of biological and landscape diversity, soil degradation and contamination. Besides, the Project was geared to develop, on the basis of the said assessment, a system of measures leading to the improvement of land composition and environmentally balanced agriculture.

2. MAIN PROBLEM ZONES AND CHALLENGES

Over the last years, a mixed economy has been formed within agrarian-industrial complexes of Ukraine and Russia, the majority of enterprises have been re-organized, productive and land relations have been reformed and land use boundaries have changed. These changes have affected economic and commercial activities, planning of territories, cultivation area composition, farming and agricultural production systems in general. The application of mineral fertilizers and pesticides has reduced tenfold, the use of organic fertilizers – by several times.

All of the above factors combine in changing the environmental situation in agrarian landscapes, undermine the ecosystem stability and, thus, necessitate the development of new approaches to environmental protection and conservation. In this respect, the Dnipro Basin deserves special attention.

The conducted analysis testifies that soil landscape is used unsustainably in the Dnipro Basin. On the one hand, specialization of agricultural production characteristic of the former planned economy that tended to ignore environmental implications of unsustainable land use is still in place in many regions. The specialization presupposed an intensive development of one or several branches of plant growing or cattle breeding, which limited the use of environmentally friendly planning of territories by agricultural enterprises, administrative districts and oblasts.

On the other hand, following the deep crisis in agriculture, the system of controlling the activities of agricultural producers and land planning services collapsed. Therefore lands within water-protecting zones and riversides have been used unsustainably for household farming, building summer cottages and small processing enterprises, as well as for organizing small farms. The planting of water protecting forest and shrub belts has stopped.

In view of the above, approaches to agricultural practices and land use planning in the Dnipro Basin should be urgently revised and reformed.

The Dnipro Basin total area in the territories of Ukraine, Russia and Belarus is 511.8 thousand square kilometers. Agricultural land occupies 31,082.6 thousand hectares (60.7% of the total basin area, see Table 2.1 and Figure 2.1), of which 22,925.3 thousand hectares are plough lands (44.8%, Figure 2.2).

Table 2.1. Agricultural development rate of the Dnipro Basin lands

These lands have a relatively high natural fertility rate, the majority of them can be used for effective land farming and cattle breeding. At the same time, the agricultural development and ploughing-up rates of the Dnipro Basin territory (especially in Ukraine) are extremely high, exceeding by many times the corresponding indicators found in the developed countries of the world. Since these lands are intensively ploughed up, the biological diversity in the region is adversely affected, the anthropogenic load on the landscapes is growing, which, in its turn, leads to the degradation of the latter.

In terms of global environment, the alleviation of anthropogenic load (pressure) is viewed as a sought outcome of conservation activities, as one of strategic objectives of environmental stabilization and safety. Understandably, the reduction of agricultural activity scopes can only be auspicious if the lands are used in a sustainable manner and natural biological and geographical sites typical for the region in question are formed.

Weakened state control of ecosystems is one of the factors contributing to depletion of species composition and extinction of numerous species. The exhaustion of ecosystems, reduction of their species diversity is harmful for their stability. Short-term consequences of reduced species diversity may not be quite obvious, yet in the long run they can cause environmental disasters.

The fact often overlooked in analyzing environmental challenges is that the ecosystem stability factor depends, to a great extent, on the volumes of primary production per area unit, i.e. on the gross photosynthesis production. It is commonly believed that the gross photosynthesis production for the Earth is, in general, relatively stable, although this stability can be threatened, given the growing СО2 concentrations in the atmosphere.

This matter may seem to be of a theoretical rather than practical nature. Yet this is the first impression. A deeper insight will reveal that the amount of bound solar energy determines the quantity of organic substance received by soil. The decreased receipt part in the balance of organic substance can lead to the reduction of humus content in the soil and, thus, reduction of soil fertility. The loss of soil fertility inevitably entails soil degradation, diminished stability of functioning ecosystems, and their replacement with less valuable ones having a lower energy balance (see Figure 2.2).

Soil in the Dnipro Basin is highly eroded. The areas of eroded plough land expand from the upper flows of the river southwards (see Table 2.2 and Figure 2.3). Among the natural and agricultural regions most affected by water erosion are the steppe and forest-steppe zones of Ukraine.

Table 2.2. Erosion rate of the Dnipro Basin lands

* – Eroded and erosion-susceptible lands

A reversed regularity is observed in respect of the areas of waterlogged lands. In the Upper Dnipro Basin, waterlogged lands, naturally, occupy larger areas (Table 2.3 and Figure 2.4). Part of them was drained, but they have not been used effectively over the last years.

Table 2.3. Bogginess of the Dnipro Basin territory

As for the current state of ameliorated systems, it can hardly be characterized as satisfactory. No new systems are being set up, the old ones being in need of urgent and comprehensive reconstruction. 15% of irrigated lands suffer from flooding in spite of the dramatic reduction in watering caused by the shortage of sprinkling equipment, high cost of fuel, lubricants and electricity. Secondary salinization is observed in 7%-8% of total area of irrigated lands, while soil alkalinization – in 25%-35% of their area. Almost universally, irrigation has resulted in de-humification and soil disturbance.

Approaches to land drainage have two essential aspects to them. On the one hand, until the 1990s, the areas of drained land were expanded to a maximum possible size, often with no regard of double regulation of water regime or of a special role waterlogged ecosystems have to play in conserving wildlife habitats and natural flora, as well as in regulating hydrological regime of the territory. Deep irreversible drainage, unreasonably big share of intertilled crops in the crop composition and minimum share of perennial herbs lead to an unusually rapid mineralization of peat formation coupled with the loss of peat layer, susceptibility to deflation, surfacing of infertile, sometimes even toxic gley soil (with high content of ferric oxide).

Looking critically at the current practices of involving waterlogged lands in agricultural use, one cannot deem them expedient for a number of reasons [5]. The majority of these lands are adjacent to Polessye (forest) zone, with its specific landscapes constituted by intermingling marshy lowlands and sandy upland accumulations. The lowland periphery is represented by semi-hydromorphic, light texture soils that, when in their natural condition, are the most productive. As a rule, drainage of waterlogged territories leads to the change in the overall hydrology of such landscapes, the ground water depression curve often going beyond the perimeter of intended drainage. The soil moisture level on the lowland periphery drops significantly, and the soil there, having light texture, and, consequently, low moisture-holding capacity, loses fertility. Thus, the economic effect of drainage proves much less than initially estimated. The above applies to economic aspects of drainage, which, in every particular case, should take into account the character of ameliorated landscapes, including their hydrological indicators, and the correlation between the area of waterlogged lands and that of lands with peripheral semi-hydromorphic soils, as well as the soil qualities, fertility and prospects of further use (following drainage). In environmental terms, it seems essential that Polessye zone is a basin (trough) where the amount of water depends on the accumulation of snowmelt of the last glacierization. The discharge of sub-surface water in the course of drainage, which in some cases is not sufficiently substantiated, can be detrimental to the overall humidification of Polessye landscapes and, given the hydro-physical soil characteristics, to the productivity of those landscapes at large. Under the circumstances, irreparable harm is done to biodiversity.

Bogs and marshes are specifically positioned between the minor biogenous and major biological circulation of substances; they transfer CO² from biogenous circulation into biological one and remove it from the atmosphere 7-15 times as effectively as forests do. When drained, peat bogs, instead of removing CO² from the atmosphere, start polluting it, thus aggravating the greenhouse effect [6,7].

Secondary bogging-up, observed in some areas and caused by the worsened functioning of the existing drainage systems, can be considered favorable for the environment, since it is usually accompanied with the decrease in river basin contamination with agro-chemicals, reduction of eutrophication scope, restoration of the population and species composition of water fauna, etc. Unfortunately, these processes have not been studies lately, although research in this area is critical. According to the findings of fragmental environmental monitoring, in spite of the reduced contamination from agricultural production, the general contamination with chemical toxicants remains high, and sometimes even grows. The reason lies in the renewed operation of local industrial enterprises, in particular of chemical ones, and in the transboundary toxicant transport with atmospheric masses, coming from the industrially developed European countries.

The outcomes of the above environmental monitoring testify that the soils of the basin, especially on the Dnipro flood lands near Dorogobuzhsky industrial complex in Smolensk Oblast and in Dnipropetrovsk Oblast, are contaminated very considerably [8, 9].

Over the last ten years, the content of many contaminants in the water of the Dnipro and its tributaries has risen noticeably and exceeded the established maximum admissible concentrations. Among such contaminants are ammonium (exceeding MAC by 22 times), nitrates (76 times), oil products (12-42 times), phenols (14-71 times), heavy metals (5-134 times) and organochlorine pesticides (2-72 times).

The general level of the Dnipro water mineralization has increased, if slightly. The concentrations of copper and zinc in water are fairly high along the whole river. High concentrations of iron and manganese have been registered in the river water near Dnipropetrovsk. Phenol concentrations surpass the admissible levels on the entire basin area. In the zones of intensive agricultural production (especially in the southern part of the Basin) the Dnipro suffers from man-caused contamination with chemicals released into the river together with surface flows and wastewater discharges from water treatment facilities of agricultural enterprises that are, for the most part, inefficient. Great amounts of nutrients and pesticides have accumulated in bottom sediment of the Dnipro water reservoirs. In summer months of low flow, these contaminants return to the river water and are carried down the flow. Thus, high metal concentrations in the bottom sediment were registered in samples from the Konoplianka, Vorskla and Mokraya Moskovka Rivers. Pesticide contamination of various concentrations was observed in water and bottom sediment samples from estuary parts of fourteen Dnipro tributaries. In more than half of the Dnipro tributaries, the concentration of organochlorine pesticides exceeded the MAC established for fisheries.

As mentioned above, plough lands cover 44.8% of the total basin area. Disproportionately high rates of their agricultural development and ploughing-up contribute a lot to the destabilization of environmental situation in the Dnipro Basin.

Agro-landscape environmental stability is known to depend directly on how well preserved its natural phyto-coenoses are. Environmental stability and territorial anthropogenic load factors were used to assess the state of land resources as regards their potential and actual susceptibility to anthropogenic loading (pressures). The latter factor¹⁾ is a calculated indicator reflecting the shares of lands with different environmental stability (forests, shrubs, meadows, pastures, marshes, reserve land, etc). Based on this factor, the northern and western parts of the Dnipro Basin can be assessed as relatively stable, whereas the southern part is the most vulnerable (susceptible).

Figure 2.5. Environmental stability factor of the Dnipro Basin territory (as of 2002)

Land composition analysis, particularly in what concerns agricultural land, reveals an imbalanced composition harmful for the land quality and fertility.

On the other hand, the share of plough lands is gradually decreasing, while the area of forage grasslands and forest plantations (i.e. environmentally stabilizing lands whose ecosystems function like natural ones, under the minimum anthropogenic impact) is growing, which can be considered a sign of an improving environmental situation. So, a broad-scale re-naturalization of the environment seems to be under way in the region, conducive to the environmental optimization of land use.

Since natural-climatic conditions in the Dnipro Basin are varied, it is necessary to develop an environmentally optimized land composition at the most representative territorial level characterized by uniform natural and economic conditions. The unit meeting these requirements is natural agricultural district (zone) – the smallest taxonomic unit of the natural-and-agricultural zoning [10].

Ukraine seems to have a land reserve composition, categorized by all land users and land owners for different natural agricultural zones (districts), which is the most destabilizing for the Dnipro Basin biodiversity (Table 2.4,% of total area). Tables 2.5, 2.6 and 2.7 show environmental stability and ecological load factors of the land reserves in the Ukrainian, Russian and Belorussian parts of the Dnipro Basin.

These are baseline data for developing the optimized structure of land resources use, their distribution by lands and environmentally sustainable territory planning.

Table 2.4. Land composition in the Ukrainian part of the Dnipro Basin, %

Table 2.5. Environmental stability and anthropogenic load factors in the Ukrainian part of the Dnipro Basin (as of 2002)

Table 2.6. Environmental stability and anthropogenic load factors in the Russian part of the Dnipro Basin (as of 2002)

Table 2.7. Environmental stability and anthropogenic load factors in the Belorussian part of the Dnipro Basin (as of 2002)

Thus, steppe and forest-steppe zones within Ukraine’s territory appear to be the most unstable ones in respect of conserving biodiversity on agricultural lands (see Table 2.5).

The total area of agricultural lands in the Dnipro Basin adversely affected by water erosion is 4.9 million hectares, including 4.0 million hectares of plough lands (constituting 26% of the total area of these lands). 1.7 million hectares of eroded lands have medium and highly eroded soils. Of special concern are the erosion scale and intensity on black and other fertile soils.

The area of eroded plough lands in the basin expands by 30-50 thousand hectares per year, the expansion rate of the area of medium and highly eroded soils being especially high. Annual losses of fertile continuum of plough land in the Dnipro Basin amount, on the average, to 14 thousand hectares. In a number of territories in the forest-steppe zone, these losses are even higher, at 20 thousand hectares per year. In general, 220 million tons of soil, with over 9 million tons of humus and 5 million tons of nutrients, are annually washed off the plough lands (on the average, 6 centners of humus and 3 centrners of nutrients are washed off from every hectare of plough land). Erosion products are partly accumulated in the gully network, partly are transmitted into the Dnipro and its tributaries, thus causing the silting of water bodies and their contamination with organic compounds and agro-chemicals.

Analysis of the change in soil humus content over time testifies that over the last 20 years the (absolute) humus content in plough land reduced, on the average, by 0.3%, in the steppe zone sometimes by 0.4%-0.6%.

Erosion of pastures is slower and less intensive. However, the unrestricted cattle grazing leads to grass sod depletion, which, in its turn, catalyzes erosion processes.  Alongside flat land erosion, intensive processes of linear corrosion and gully-formation are under way.

The area of active gullies approaches 100 thousand hectares. The waterfront of the Dnipro water reservoirs extends for over 3 thousand kilometers, 1100 kilometers of which are eroded escarpments in need of urgent stabilization, as over 6 thousand hectares of land have already been lost to bank erosion, accompanied with the inflow of 400 million cubic meters of bank erosion products into the water reservoirs.

Over 3 million hectares of land are systematically subject to wind erosion, while up to another 10 million hectares – to dust storms. Dust storms annually occur in Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kharkiv oblasts.

Other quality indicators of land reserves (salinization, alkalinity, excessive moisture content, etc) also tend to deteriorate. Thus, according to the State Committee of Ukraine for Land Resources, in the Dnipro Basin 4.8 million hectares of plough land (24.7%) have acid soil, 1.1 million hectares (5.7%) have alkaline soils and 675 thousand hectares (3.4%) have saline soil. Besides, 829 thousand hectares of agricultural lands have soil with excessive moisture content, 904 thousand hectares have waterlogged soil and 170 thousand hectares have stony soil.

While in 1985-1990 lime was annually applied at over 1.5 million hectares of acid soil, average doze being 5 tons per hectare, nowadays lime application has practically ceased.

The monitoring findings testify that a long-term agricultural use of lands with especially valuable soil accelerates dramatically (due to increased microbiological activity) the bio-geo-chemical cycle processes, changing (i.e. speeding up) the soil-formation rhythm (see Table 2.8). As a result, soil needs to be constantly supplied with energy material. Absence of such supplies on fallow lands and their shortage on plough land were offset by mobilizing all other available resources, which has eventually led to depletion and drop in fertility of ploughed land, as well as to the break down of the initial biodiversity balance in these soils.

Table 2.8. Microbial coenoses of natural and agricultural ecosystems

Another evidence of reduced biodiversity in the region is the fluctuation in bird populations in the biosphere reserve “Askaniya Nova”. Located close to virgin lands under special protection treatment, this reserve has been used over the last forty years as a site for observing changes in biodiversity in the zone of man-made landscapes where forest and wetland biotopes have been formed resulting from large-scale irrigation. The introduction of semi-natural biotopes into steppe habitats is conducive to a growing species diversity, the tendency having been revealed at the early stages of avifauna study in the reserve [11,12]. Analysis of findings at those stages and their comparison with the contemporary data show that at the early stages the number of species grew, while later certain species were extinct. A dramatic change in the populations of bird species has also been observed. Anthropogenic factors had a great impact on bird populations that immigrated to the steppe zone from other natural zones, since they started settling in the new territory, which was often limited in space. Two contrary processes have been observes over the last 10 years: re-naturalization, on the one hand, and destruction, on the other, both being fairly pronounced. Since the early 1990s, agricultural production in the region has declined, which has affected the condition of plough lands. At the same time, direct impact on wildlife has intensified because of biotope transformation and uncontrolled hunting. Moreover, natural factors, including climatic ones, have contributed noticeably to periodical substantial biotope changes, which, in their turn, distress avifauna. Birds are one of the most sensitive indicators of the environmental situation. Several observations have been made of their ability to differentiate protected territories from those were hunting was allowed. In humid years, for example, qualitative and quantitative characteristics of bird populations commonly improve. Thus, before describing the most essential changes in the avifauna of “Askaniya Nova”, it seems appropriate to give a brief outline of the factors that have caused the said changes. Among these factors, directly or indirectly linked with human activities, are the following:

- shrinkage of irrigated land acreage leading to the decreased fertility and productivity of agricultural lands, reduced amount of crop residue and concentration of some bird species within a limited areas under crop, the latter experiencing excessive loading;

- reduction of rice-growing areas resulting in dry-up of waterlogged territories and, thus, in decreased waterfowl populations or their stopping to nestle in the region;

- total burn-down of stub-land destroying nestling places;

- annual massive burn out of forest belts damaging protective and nutritious properties of these biotopes and affecting both settlements of passerine and predatory birds in the nestling period and their stop-over sites during migrations;

- ploughing-up of the remaining virgin land along Lake Sivash coast bringing about the change in biotopes of steppe species.

- Factors relating to re-naturalization processes seem to be as follows:

- increased acreage of weed-grown lands;

- unstable weather conditions and their direct or indirect impact; increased or decreased atmospheric precipitation;

- raised annual precipitation rate;

- flooding of some lands because of drainage systems breakdown, etc.

In some years, certain species may actively settle in the area, their populations growing for two-three years and then going down, almost to extinction.

The available data testify that the qualitative composition of biodiversity on agricultural lands is rapidly deteriorating in entire territory of the Dnipro River Basin. Its current condition can be assessed as pre-critical, tending towards progressive aggravation.

^{______________________________}

1)       Environmental stability (ES) is calculated based on the agro-landscape stability criterion and on assessment of different types of land against this criterion. A system of factors, reflecting the environmental importance of each land type and ranging from 0 for developed lands to 1 for forests, has been designed [12]. The ES level of each specific area is determined by calculating mean weighed ES factor on the basis of the current land composition. If the obtained value is less than 0.33, the territory is assessed as environmentally unstable; if it varies within the range 0.33-0.5, the territory is stable-to-unstable; if it does not exceed 0.5-0.66, the territory is of medium stability; the territory is considered environmentally stable if the obtained value is 0.66 and more.

3. MAJOR PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS

The following conclusions can be drawn on the basis of the undertaken comprehensive analysis of agricultural land use and current agricultural practices in the three countries (Belarus, Russia and Ukraine) of the Dnipro Basin.

1. High agricultural development rate of the territory (ranging from 43.2% to 68.3%), plough land erosion rate (amounting to 18%-30%), uncontrolled land amelioration and anthropogenic pressures have an adverse impact on the quality and self-restoring capacity of soil, plant and other types of biodiversity.

2. This adverse impact on biodiversity manifests itself in manifold ways, including:

- large-scale destruction of soil, wetland and other types of biological diversity resulting from high ploughing-up rate of the territory, intensive soil erosion, wide-ranging amelioration of bogs and marshes in all three countries;

- anxiety shown y many animal species as a reaction to changed quality and condition of agricultural land, particularly in forest (Polessye) and steppe zones;

- land and water contamination on the periphery of large cattle-breeding farms and complexes;

- replacement of hygrophilous plant species with those characteristic of dry-land habitats, and increased acreage of steppified meadows where vegetation is affected by xerophication;

- deterioration of habitats of aquatic species contributing to biodiversity because of euthrophication of lakes and rivers caused by the influx of excessive nutrient amounts into their water;

- irreversible changes in fauna brought about by the anthropogenic change in hydrological regimes of about 5 million hectares of land in the territory of Belarus and Ukraine, namely: reduction of wetland and marsh species, particularly waterfowl, replacement of original species by alien ones and altered correlation of species;

- territorial re-distribution of marsh, wetland and other types of biological diversity;

- frequent fires on drained marshlands and adjacent habitats;

- breakdown, following the ploughing-up of drained territories, of a unified system of wetland and forest habitats, that used to exist prior to marsh amelioration, into separate fragments, which hampers migration of many animal species.

3. Differential approach to land use based on the specificity of regional (local) sets of natural indicators can serve as an effective means of conserving and rehabilitating biodiversity, as well as of rationing anthropogenic pressures (loads) on the Dnipro Basin territory. To these ends, a map of natural-agricultural zoning of the major part of the Dnipro Basin was developed within the Project framework. The map shows the boundaries of territories with identical climate characteristics. For each of the singled-out taxonomic units, information has been compiled on its land composition and agricultural land use.

Based on the research outcomes and conclusions, the following documents and recommendations have been developed:

1) Optimized structure of environmentally significant lands for environmentally unstable and stable-to-unstable territories (Table 3.1 and Figure 3.1), required changes in the composition of lands important for agricultural and non-agricultural biodiversity (Table 3.2), and indicators of agricultural loading (agricultural development and ploughing-up rates) in the new, optimized land composition (Table 3.3).

Table 3.1. Optimized structure of the Dnipro Basin lands important for agricultural and non-agricultural biodiversity

(in currently environmentally unstable and stable-to-unstable territories)

Table 3.2. Required changes in the composition of lands environmentally significant for agricultural and non-agricultural

biodiversity in the Dnipro Basin (in currently environmentally unstable and stable-to-unstable territories)

Table 3.3. Indicators of agricultural load in the Dnipro Basin for currently environmentally unstable and stable-to-unstable territories

2) Conception and proposals on the conservation of degraded and low-fertility plough lands aimed to preserve soil biodiversity and wild fauna in environmentally unstable and stable-to unstable territories (Table 3.4 and Figure 3.2).

Table 3.4. Conservation of degraded and low-fertility plough lands in currently environmentally unstable

and stable-to-unstable territories of the Dnipro Basin

3) Recommendations on designing natural and ameliorated agro-landscapes with due regard of the method of environmentally justified, landscape-based land use planning conducive to biodiversity conservation and rehabilitation;

4) Guidelines for improving agricultural practices, reducing contamination and preserving soil and water types of biodiversity. The priority measures should include:

- land protection against water erosion;

- discontinuation and prevention of destructive anthropogenic impacts on soil;

- observance of the use regimes of specially protected areas;

- water resources protection from contamination with chemical toxicants;

- formation of conservational agro-landscapes.

Figure 3.1. Optimized structure of lands important for agricultural and non-agricultural biodiversity in the Dnipro Basin

(in current environmentally unstable and stable-to-unstable territories)

Figure 3.2. Conservation of degraded and low-fertility plough lands in environmentally unstable

and stable-to-unstable territories of the Dnipro Basin

4. PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN (SAP)

1. The Dnipro Basin environmental problems can be grouped by their scale and urgency for transboundary biodiversity conservation (in the context of reducing contamination and protecting soils) as follows:

2. In order to improve the environmental situation and ensure biodiversity conservation in the Dnipro River Basin, the participating countries should do the following:

- conduct an exhaustive study and thoroughly describe the current state of biodiversity and develop an interstate action plan of its conservation;

- jointly draft required amendments to relevant national legislations on protection, rehabilitation and use of land (in particular, agricultural land) and biodiversity pertaining to it;

- develop a strategy for creating a biodiversity cadastre, within the frameworks of the land cadastre, and a relevant informational database, with a section concerning genetic resources that can be used in agriculture;

- carry out research and personnel training in the field of biodiversity identification, conservation and sustainable use;

- conduct campaigns reaching out to policy and decision makers, business community and general public, and raising their awareness of the need for biodiversity conservation;

- take complete stock of genetic resources available in Ukraine, Russia and Belarus and use them jointly and equally for the common benefit of the participating countries, in particular for breeding highly productive and disease-resistant agricultural crop varieties;

- evaluate environmental impact of proposed agricultural projects to be implemented as part of agrarian and agricultural reforms in the riparian countries.

3. Management, monitoring and control of the condition and functioning of marsh landscapes (wetlands) should be focused on the three following areas:

- in order to avert negative processes and phenomena and to maintain environmental balance in the basin landscape, regular control over the condition of natural components of agro-landscapes should be exercised, including: control of surface and ground water quality, ecological purity of soils, state of forests and shrubs both within the ameliorated systems and in the adjacent territories;

- control and maintenance of water regimes optimal for agricultural crops on ameliorated lands should be ensured, the best timing and modern technologies of soil treatment, sowing, crop growing and harvesting should be used;

- environmentally justified restrictions on agricultural (plant-growing and cattle-breeding) output should be imposed: the ceilings of agricultural produce output should be limited depending on the optimal mix of environmentally-friendly components of used agro-technologies. Any artificial stimulation of agro-coenoses is inadmissible as, while increasing land productivity and soil fertility, it destroys ecological balance. Therefore, the correlation between the energy input and output should be carefully maintained.

4. The character of agricultural use of peat soils should be chosen with due regard of their peat layer thickness, the share of land with these soils in the farm’s total agricultural land acreage, the level of land transformation and cultivation, available water supply of the territory, the farm’s demand for grass fodder and forage grain. In so doing, the following principles should be applied:

- peat soils where dry peat bed is up to one-meter deep should be used exclusively as cultivated hayfields and pastures, growing grain crops can be permitted in the periods of re-meadowing;

- peat soils where dry peat bed is over one-meter deep should be used as cultivated meadows of long-term use (10-15 years without re-meadowing), as well as in the system of soil-conservational grain-crop-and-grass rotation with the perennial grass share of 50%-60%;

- the lesser share of peat soils in the total acreage of the farm’s agricultural lands, the greater share of them should be used as meadows and the lesser – as plough lands in the system of soil-conservational grain-crop-and-grass rotation, and vice versa;

- if peat soils occupy 30%-50% of the farm’s agricultural lands, part of their area (with the deepest peat bed) can be used as plough land in the system of soil-conservational grain-crop-and-grass rotation, while the other part should be used to set up cultivated, highly productive meadows;

- if peat soils occupy 50%-100% of the farm’s agricultural lands, about 30%-50% of them should be used as meadows, and the other 50%-70% – as plough land in the system of soil-conservational grain-crop-and-grass rotation, located in the areas with the deepest peat bed;

- all areas with peat soils, regularly flooded because of poor operation of amelioration systems, should be withdrawn from plough lands and be used exclusively as meadows of long-term use grown with hygrophilous grasses;

- given a correctly regulated water regime, peat-gley and peaty-gley soils as well as thin peat soils should be used to grow leguminous and Gramineae perennial grasses, while middle and thick peat soils – to grow grain crops.

5. Biodiversity conservation should be dependent on sustainable and environmentally safe agricultural practices based on state-of-the-art research and technological development, with the account of environmental specifics of every region, which is likely to improve (optimize) the composition of the Dnipro Basin land reserves. One of the priority measures in pursuing biodiversity preservation is a mandatory conservation of degraded and low fertility soils of plough land (with further restoration of fauna and flora habitats on these lands). In the long-term perspective, the following steps should be made: first, setting up a territorial environmental network of natural landscapes subject to special protection; second, improving agricultural practices by minimizing their adverse impact on the environment; third, designing and adopting at the national level a system of investing in environmental and conservational activities.

6. In order to implement the above proposals targeting the rehabilitation and restoration of natural habitats, the participating countries should draft new and improve the effective legislation and regulations (standards) of environmentally sustainable land use, etc. The national environmental legislations should be harmonized with the relevant international and European norms.

7. Alongside the implementation of already adopted international instruments on the protection and use of transboundary areas (Rio de Janeiro Declaration on Environment and Development (1992), Convention on the Protection of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (1992), Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (1971), Pan-European Strategy of Biological and Landscape Diversity Conservation (1995) and others), the three riparian countries should continue to take an active part in international organizations promoting biodiversity conservation.

REFERENCES

1. Качественная характеристика сельскохозяйственных угодий (Quality Characteristics of Agricultural Lands). – К.: Госкомзем Украины, 1996.

2. Природная среда Белоруссии (Natural Environment in Belarus). – Минск.: Национальная академия наук Беларуси, 2002.

3. Схема эрозионного районирования Украины (Map of Erosion Zoning of Ukraine). – К.: Институт землеустройства УААН, 1992, – 18 с.

4. Агроэкологический мониторинг в Смоленской области (Agro-ecological Monitoring in Smolensk Oblast). – Смоленск.: Смоленский сельскохозяйственный институт, 2001, – 244 с.

5. Основы формирования устойчивого плодородия мелиорированных почв (Fundamentals of Forming Sustainable Fertility of Ameliorated Soils). –К.: Институт землеустройства УААН, 1996, – 104 с.

6. Лиштван И.И., Бамбалов Н.Н., Ярошевич Л.М. Экологические проблемы гидромелиорации в Полесье (Environmental Challenges of Hydro-melioration in Polessye). // Природные ресурсы. 1998, – №2, – С. 57-61.

7. Н.Н. Бамбалов. Стадии антропогенной революции осушенных торфяных почв (Stages of Anthropogenic Revolution of Drained Peat Soils) // Эколого-экономические принципы использования мелиорированных земель. – Минск: 2000, – С.7-11.

8. Биофизические основы эколого-адаптивного земледелия (Bio