Leonid Baskin

Rapid declines of large mammal populations after the collapse of the Soviet Union

Anecdotal evidence suggests that socioeconomic shocks strongly affect wildlife populations, but quantitative evidence is sparse. The collapse of socialism in Russia in 1991 caused a major socioeconomic shock, including a sharp increase in poverty. We analyzed population trends of 8 large mammals in Russia from 1981 to 2010 (i.e., before and after the collapse). We hypothesized that the collapse would first cause population declines, primarily due to overexploitation, and then population increases due to adaptation of wildlife to new environments following the collapse. The long-term Database of the Russian Federal Agency of Game Mammal Monitoring, consisting of up to 50,000 transects that are monitored annually, provided an exceptional data set for investigating these population trends. Three species showed strong declines in population growth rates in the decade following the collapse, while grey wolf (Canis lupus) increased by more than 150%. After 2000 some trends reversed. For example, roe deer (Capreolus spp.) abundance in 2010 was the highest of any period in our study. Likely reasons for the population declines in the 1990s include poaching and the erosion of wildlife protection enforcement. The rapid increase of the grey wolf populations is likely due to the cessation of governmental population control. In general, the widespread declines in wildlife populations after the collapse of the Soviet Union highlight the magnitude of the effects that socioeconomic shocks can have on wildlife populations and the possible need for special conservation efforts during such times.

Moose — Alces alces

Three subspecies occur: A. a. alcesLinnaeus, 1758 (European Russia, Ural Mountains, W Siberia, Altai Mountains); A. a. pfizenmayeriZukowski, 1910 (E of Yenisey River to Chersky Range); A. a. buturliniChernyavsky et Zhelesnov, 1982 (NE Siberia); A. a. cameloidesMilne-Edwards, 1867 (Amur region, Sikhote-Alin Mountains) (Chernyavsky and Zheleznov 1982; Heptner 1989).

Number of wild and domestic reindeer in Russia in the late 20th century

The dynamics of wild and tame reindeer populations in Russia during 1991-99 are described. Causes of declining numbers during this period are suggested and comparison is made with population fluctuations in the past.

Differences in the ecology and behaviour of reindeer populations in the USSR

The population differences in ecology and behaviour of reindeer (Rangifer tarandus spp.) is closely paralleled by the characteristic features of reindeer husbandry which reveals the close relationship between behaviour and husbandry. The western portion of the reindeer husbandry region in the USSR is vast. The reindeer are maintained on a semi-loose basis; the herd is scattered over the range; the social activity of the reindeer is lower; the herdsmen gather the herd using dogs, the herdsmen migr.ate together with the herd during the summer, grazing the herd in the vicinity of the tent for 2-5 days at a time. In the eastern portion of the region (Yakutia, Chukotka, Kamchatka), the ranges are more restrictive; the reindeer are grazed in a compact mass in summer; their feeding and movement are rigidly regulated; their social activity is high; the herd is gathered in foot without dogs. In summer, herdsmen follow the herd with light tents, the place of grazing being changed almost daily. In the taiga reindeer are raised mostly for transportation, although the hides and meat are also important; the reindeer are bigger, tamer and can be used for riding. The herds are small and the management of them is aimed at retaining the reindeer near home or the camp; migrations are short; often forest reindeer husbandry is of a sedentary nature. Attempts to change the pattern of reindeer husbandry and the methods of herding are not always successful. The harmony of environmental conditons, morphology, physiology, ecology and behaviour of reindeer and methods of husbandry are more easily disrupted than altered.

Direction of escape in reindeer

We tested the hypothesis that reindeer prefer to run uphill and upwind when escaping from man. Groups of wild and feral reindeer in Norway, Svalbard and on Wrangel Island were approached and their behaviour and direction of escape were recorded. Two stages of interaction with man were studied: first flight and final withdrawal. First flights proved to be away from man, upwind and uphill. Most final withdrawals were in the direction reindeer were moving when first observed.

Wild Boar — Sus scrofa

Five subspecies occur: S. s. scrofa Linnaeus, 1758 (European part of Russia); S. s. attila Thomas, 1912 (Caucasus, Carpathian Mountains); S. s. nigripes Blanford, 1875 (Middle Asia, Kazakhstan); S. s. sibiricus Staffe, 1922 (Transbaikal); S. s. ussuricus Heude, 1888 (Far East) (Adlerberg 1950). During 1935–1988, 9285 animals were transferred between different parts of the range (Danilkin 2002).

Reindeer — Rangifer tarandus

Five subspecies occur: R. t. tarandusLinnaeus, 1758 (European part of Russia excluding Ural Mountains); R. t. pearsoniLydekker, 1902 (Novaya Zemlya Archipelago); R. t. sibiricusMurray, 1886 (Siberian tundra and Arctic Ocean islands); R. t. valentinaeFlerov, 1933 (forest zone of Siberia, in the east up to Stanovoy Range, S Siberian Mountains, Altai); R. t. phylarchusHollister, 1912 (Kamchatka Peninsula, regions adjoining the Sea of Okhotsk, Amur region) (Heptner 1989). Despite the fact that wild and tame reindeer populations live in the same area and there is an exchange of some individuals, Shubin and Ionova (1984) and Shubin and Ephimtseva (1988) found rather different frequencies of alleles in two loci. They concluded that the two forms evolved separately. In Novaya Zemlya, among 6,000 reindeer living on these islands, in 1986, 10% demonstrated color features of tame reindeer, as a result of hybridization since 1928–1933, when 604 tame reindeer were acclimatized there (Zubkov 1935; Novikov 1983a; Kupriyanov and Belikov 1986; Khakhin 1998). Feral populations of reindeer inhabit the Wrangel Island, domestic reindeer from Chukchi Peninsula were introduced in 1948, and have become feral since 1972 (Baskin and Skogland 1997).

Populations of wild and feral reindeer in Siberia and Far East of Russia

Identification and cataloging of discrete reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) populations in Siberia and the Far East of Russia has not been carried out. This prohibits accurate measures of population structure and dynamics that would allow more intensive management of this important renewable resource. To rectify the lack of information, an inventory was made that identifies 84 wild populations and 3 feral populations originating from domestic reindeer. This inventory summarizes the information available on the location, approximate population size, approximate range size, and occurrence by ecoregions and habitat types of each of those 87 reindeer populations. The 87 reindeer populations used a collective landmass of about 3 000 000 km2. The range size for each population was calculated to be between 446 km2 and 392 267 km2, with a mean ± SE of 34 033 ± 5734 km2. The 86 populations for which population size could be approximated totaled 790 655 reindeer, with an approximate mean ± SE of 9194 ± 2517, a minimum size of 50, and maximum size of 145 000. The location of the calving grounds could be determined for only 26 (30%) of the 87 reindeer populations.

Snow Sheep — Ovis nivicola

In Russia, Ovis canadensis was often used as a synonym for Ovis nivicola (Heptner 1989). Four subspecies are recognized: O. n. nivicola Eschscholtz, 1829 (Kamchatka Peninsula); O. n. alleni Matschie, 1907 (Okhotsk-Kolyma Upland); O. n. lydekkeri Kowarzik, 1913 (Yakutia, Okhotsk-Kolyma Upland, the Kodarsky Ridge); O. n. borealis Severtzov, 1873 (the Putoran Mountains).

Mouflon — Ovis aries

In Red List 2000, the synonym Ovis orientalis Gmelin, 1774 is used. In Russian literature, the name O. ammon gmelini Blyth 1840 is used (Heptner 1989).