🚀 go-pugleaf

East-West-Newsletter BUND, part 3
Rundbrief Osteuropa BUND, Teil 3

Bund f�r Umwelt- und Naturschutz Deutschland
11. Rundbrief des Arbeitskreises Osteuropa, 15. Juni 1996
Redaktion: Erdmuthe Arnold, Valentin Thurn, David Oberhuber.


Russische Baeume fuer US-Saegewerke faellen und bestrahlen

Von Tilman Streif, Seattle (dpa) - Ein Fuenftel aller Waelder
der Erde stehen in Sibirien, und im Nordwesten der USA sind
wegen Holzmangels die Saegewerke ohne Arbeit. US-Investoren
haben sich deshalb ein Projekt ausgedacht, das Umweltschuetzern
den Atem verschlaegt: Sibirische Baeume sollen gefaellt und dann
in den US-Bundesstaaten Oregon und Washington zu Bauholz
verarbeitet werden. Vor dem Export sollen sie noch in Sibirien
bestrahlt werden, um Krankheitserreger in den Staemmen
abzutoeten. Die dabei eingesetzten Gammastrahlen werden aus
radioaktivem Kobalt gewonnen. Mehr als vierzig
Umweltschutzorganisationen in Russland und den USA haben einen
Offenen Brief an US-Vizepraesident Al Gore verfasst, der in
dieser Woche in Washington mit dem russischen
Ministerpraesidenten Viktor Tschernomyrdin ueber
Wirtschaftsfragen diskutierte. "Steuerzahler in den USA
finanzieren Aktivitaeten, die einmalige Waelder zerstoeren
koennten", heisst es in dem Brief der Umweltschuetzer. Die
US-Handelsbehoerde unterstuetzt mit Zuschuessen die Plaene, die
Waelder in der sibirischen Khabarowsk-Region zugunsten der
heimischen Industrie abzuholzen. 500 000 Dollar erhielt eine
Gruppe von Saegewerksbesitzern fuer eine Studie, die den
wirtschaftlichen Nutzen der Abholzung in Russlands Osten
ermitteln soll. Gleichzeitig aber bemueht sich die Forstbehoerde
US Forest Service, den Lebensraum des sibirischen Tigers in
dieser Gegend zu erhalten. "Absolut widerspruechlich" ist nach
Meinung von David Gordon das Verhalten der US-Regierung. Gordon
spricht fuer das Umweltzentrum PERC, das die Federfuehrung beim
Protest uebernommen hat. PERC (Pacific Environment and
Ressources Center) setzt sich fuer den Aufbau einer
holzverarbeitenden Industrie in Sibirien selbst ein. So koennten
dort Arbeitsplaetze geschaffen und auch Entscheidungen ueber das
Ausmass der jaehrlichen Holzernte getroffen werden. "Damit waere
ein erneuerbarer Waldbestand sichergestellt", sagt David Gordon.
US-Investoren unter der Fuehrung der Firma REM dagegen wollen
100 Millionen Dollar (knapp 150 Millionen Mark) in das Projekt
stecken, Baeume aus Sibirien in die USA zu holen.
REM-Projektleiter Kurt Sagovac sagt, dass auch die geplanten elf
Bestrahlungsfabriken in Russland Arbeitsplaetze schaffen
wuerden. Den Vorwurf der Umweltschuetzer, dass dieses Projekt
Sibirien in eine US-Holzexportkolonie verwandeln koennte, laesst
Kurt Sagovac nicht gelten: "Russland muss wie jedes
Entwicklungsland seine Wirtschaft zunaechst mit dem Export von
Rohmaterial ankurbeln."

dpa 02.02.1996

Dazu auch der Bericht von Anne Janssen (Aus Taiga News no 16)

(...) In a letter to Vice President Al Gore, 47 U.S. and Russian
environmental groups have expressed their concern over the
environmental consequences stemming from growing U.S. federal
financing of private companies logging Russia's primary forests,
particularly in Siberia and the Russian Far East. U.S. taxpayers
are financing several private joint ventures in Siberia and the
Russian Far East. According to the letter, the activities of
these private timber ventures could destroy unique forest
habitats. They could also undermine and contradict important
biodiversity conservation programs currently underway in the
Russian Far East, programs which are being implemented by U.S.
federal agencies (USAID, US Forest Service, etc.) and non-profit
groups. At the same time, OPIC, TDA and other U.S. government
agencies are funnelling millions of public dollars into private
joint timber ventures that will liquidate forests in the same
regions, often in the very areas targeted by conservationists
for biodiversity conservation or formal protected-territory
status. For example, TDA is providing $500,000 to the Global
Forestry Management Group (a private consortium of U.S.
sawmills) to carry out a feasibility study to log in the Khor
watershed and elsewhere. TDA has neglected to consider the fact
that the Khor's intact forests are vital for the survival of
native Udege people and the endangered Siberian tiger. OPIC is
supporting other private timber joint ventures in the Russian
Far East, including a GFMG venture to log a 1-million-acre tract
of virgin fir and spruce forests near Vysokogornoye, Khabarovsk
Region, and a Pioneer Group joint venture to log lowelevation
primary forest near Siziman Bay. Additionally, the Export-Import
Bank is developing a Memorandum of Understanding with the
Russian timber industry to promote U.S. government subsidised
exports to Russia of timber harvesting equipment including
chainsaws and bulldozers. Given the current lack of enforcement
of Russian forestry regulations, the equipment imported by Ex-Im
Bank will only increase the pace at which the Russian timber
industry is logging its primary forests. According to the
letter, these federally-backed plans will transform Siberia and
the Russian Far East into a massive whole-log export colony.
(Source: PERC)

Since the end of 1995, Taiga Rescue Network has a new
International Coordinator in charge of the Jokkmokk office. Her
name is Anne Janssen. She introduces herself like this: Before
coming to TRN I was working with Greenpeace, all over Canada as
a fund raiser and then finally in Germany as the Forest Campaign
Assistant. The experience of working from both a consumer and
producer perspective is proving to be helpful in understanding
TRN activities and the potential of a boreal network. Our aims:
the protection and sustainable use of the boreal forests. 

rogols@nn.apc.org, 21.02.96

Wildlife in the Russian Amazon is under the threat

Bikin Basin is a unique territory in the Russian Far East which
comprises species diversity of southern Ussuriland, Amurland and
the Sikhote Alin range. It is the largest survived area of
virgin Ussuriland forests and thickets with complex
geomorphology, variety of landscapes, and high diversity of
flora and fauna. It is the last territory where Udege indigenous
hunters continue to live in their own settlement in a fragile
balance with the surrounding nature. (Note of Natalya Kanchuga,
Chairwoman of Bikin Obshchina: In fact, there are THREE
watersheds in the central Sikhote-Alin where Udege actively
pursue a traditional way of life. Two are in Primorskii Krai:
the Samarga River watershed with its national village, Agzu, and
the Bikin River watershed and the national village of Krasnyi
Yar. In Khabarovskii Krai, Udege hunt and trap in the Khor River
watershed; their national village is called Gvasyugi.) More than
170 species of birds breed in the Bikin Basin, twelve of which
(from 56 in a whole Russia) are listed in the categories of
Globally Threatened and Near-Threatened. Among them: Oriental
White Stork (Ciconia boyciana), Blakiston's Fish Owl (Ketupa
blackistoni), Japanese Crane (Grus japonensis), Hooded Crane
(Grus monacha), Chinese Merganser (Mergus squamatus), Mandarin
Duck (Aix galericulata), Long-billed Ringed Plover (Charadrius
placidus), Far-Eastern Curlew (Numenius madagascariensis),
Shrenk's Little Bittern (Ixobrychus eurhythmus), Siberian
Spruce-Grouse (Falcipennis falcipennis). The Bikins' populations
of the Hooded Crane, Blakiston's Fish Owl and Chinese Merganser
are possibly ones of the largest strongholds in the Far East.
Nowadays unique and exotic wild life of the Bikin-land is under
a threat. Only three years passed after a scandalous attempts of
South Korean Hyundai corporation to exterminate the Bikins
wildlife by logging the forests in the upper parts of the Bikin
area. The attempts had been stopped by the resistance of the
Udege people helped by Green Peace and other International
organizations (see Survival International newsletter 1992). Now
once again the Hyundai successors, calling themselves a
Russian-South Korean Joint-stock timber company "Svetlaya" and
some other similar enterprises continue their violent attempts
to log 300,000 ha of old-grown forests in the same area. If they
will be succeed, the last region of the virgin part of
Ussuriland will be brought to an end. It happened to the three
rest large Ussuriland rivers, Ussuri, Iman and Khor during last
50 years.  In fact, nowadays the Bikin Basin is the largest left
oasis of the Ussuriland biodiversity surrounded by the disturbed
lands. This oasis is packed between the logged forests in the
low and middle parts of the river and by low-diversity larch-
and birch - secondary forests in the upper parts of the river.
The logging of the upper Bikin watershed area will clearly
result in the irreversible shifts of the river's hydrographic
regime. This, in turn, will lead to frequent floods in rich
broad-leaved gallery forests causing its deterioration (as
happened to the forests along Iman and Khor rivers). The only
way to save this last refuge of the pristine Ussuriland
wilderness is to raise public awareness campaign for the
protection of this area. International research projects could
be also an important step in this direction as they could focus
attention of conservationists to the Bikin Basin and facilitate
world-wide public awareness. An initiative group of Russian
ornithologists has been carrying out surveys of the Bikin River
Basin (Primorsky region, Far East Russia) since 1990. Currently
we survey the large unexplored country in the upper reaches part
of the river, including elevated watersheds between Bikin River
and Khor River and between Bikin and the Japanese Sea (the site
of the barbarous logging activity). In 1995-1997 the research
was supported by the National Geographic Society. The main
objective of the study are:

extensive mapping of avian biodiversity and initiation of
species distribution data-base for the Bikin catchment area (the
point-counts, mist-netting and other methods are applied);

study of relationships between species and their complex
environment (patterns of distribution, habitat preferences,
stability of species assemblages).

future projects on biology and conservation of Hooded Crane,
Blakiston's Fish Owl, Chinese Merganser, Long-billed Ringed
Plover, Siberian Spruce Grouse and some other species.

making a film about the Bikin wild life

The future of the Bikin wildlife which is called Russian Amazon,
now entirely depends on the International conservation lobby and
cannot be solved within Russia. We do hope that our initiative
will contribute to the conservation on the region. Any your
comments and suggestions on this matter will be greatly
appreciated. 

The leader of the Bikin Initiative Research Group Dr. Konstantin
Mikhailov, Paleontological Institute, Russian Academy of
Sciences Profsoyuznaya St., 123; Moscow 117647; Russia E-MAIL:
kmikh@paleo.msk.su

mishaj@glas.apc.org, 22.03.96

Ergaenzungen einer regionalen Aktivistin

Natalya Kanchuga, Chairwoman of Bikin Obshchina - (...) The
article addresses important issues, but unfortunately, contains
a number of distortions that we would like to draw to your
attention. 

(...) "... Now once again the Hyundai successors, calling
themselves a Russian-South Korean Joint-stock timber company
"Svetlaya" and some other similar enterprises continue their
violent attempts to log 300,000 ha of old-grown forests in the
same area..." In fact, the Russian-South Korean joint venture
"SVETLAYA' was in operation BEFORE the 1993 attempt to acquire a
timber base on the PEYA plato above the headwaters of the ZEVA
River basin that feeds into the Bikin River. The JV "SVETLAYA'
currently harvests timber in the SVETLAYA River watershed, on
the eastern, coastal slope of the Sikhote-Alin. The interest in
the Bikin remains strong among Hyundai and its representatives
continue to seek approval to cut in the Bikin. Hyundai's latest
attempt is under the guise of testing a theory of natural
reforestation developed by a Vladivostok forest specialist, Dr.
Yurii Manko. Manko's plan is to use selective cut methods to
harvest timber in the desiccating spruce stands in the
headwaters of the Zeva River. It is obvious that the clear cut
methods used on the Peya plato have led to the deforestation of
that region; attempts to artificially restock the area has
yielded very marginal results. Manko's plan calls for selective
cut that will leave a healthy atmosphere for natural
reforestation by removing the dead trees and providing young
live trees openings to mature into healthy forest. Manko wants
to watch a series of parameters against which to test his
theory: -- changes in hydrology;-- changes in the condition of
the forest edge;-- rate of natural regeneration. Hyuandi is
requesting a timber base of 50,000 cubic meters a year to begin
the test. If the results are 'positive' and forest ecology is
not degraded, increased volumes will be requested. Hyundai has
been unsuccessful in convincing the Primorskii Krai officials of
the efficacy of its plan and has not been provided any timber in
the Bikin upon which to run the experiment. At the same time,
Hyundai has made two trips to the village of Krasnyi Yar since
November 1995 in an attempt to gain approval of their plans from
the Udege. At a series of public meetings Hyundai
representatives were told that harvest in the headwaters runs
counter to the interests of local people and that they should
not expect any support from people in the Bikin. There are also
attempts by Russian timber consortiums working the forests of
TERNEI RAION to gain access to the Bikin. It is the opinion of
many that these companies pose a much greater threat to the
forests of the Bikin than does Hyuandi since it will be
difficult to block their efforts if they were to gain access to
the Bikin. Hyuandi is an international company and subject to
international public relations campaigns; domestic companies are
not so vulnerable to international pressure. 

"...The only way to save this last refuge of the pristine
Ussuriland wilderness is to raise public awareness campaign for
the protection of this area..." The Udege of the central
Sikhote-Alin are working to such an end. In each of the three
national villages, a citizen advisory board, called an
obshchina, has been elected to gauge public opinion and promote
values and locally developed agendas. For instance, in Krasnyi
Yar, our Bikin Obshchina is engaged in a letter writing campaign
with Krai, Federal and international officials; the aim of the
correspondence is to encourage a timely resolution of the land
tenure and resource use issues in the Bikin that considers local
interests. On the Primorskii Krai level an effort is underway to
create a special protected territory in the middle and upper
portions of the Bikin River watershed. For the past four years,
Pavel Sulyandziga, President of the Association of Indigenous
Peoples of Primorskii Krai and Advisor to the Governor on
Indigenous Affairs has been spearheading the effort. Under the
direction of the Association of Indigenous Peoples of Primorskii
Krai, normative documents promoting the political, economic,
social and cultural interests of the region's indigenous peoples
are being prepared. The four pieces of legislation cover: Legal
Status of Indigenous Peoples in Primorskii Krai; Obshchina
(local self management body); Territory of Traditional Natural
Resource Use (TTP); Clan, Family and Other Forms of Traditional
Economic Organization. These projects will be presented to the
Primorskii Krai Duma legislation for consideration and eventual
passage. 

"...The future of the Bikin wildlife which is called Russian
Amazon, now entirely depends on the International conservation
lobby and cannot be solved within Russia..." This statement is
without basis, for it is only from within Russia that the Bikin
issue can be resolved. The international community can provide
moral, and at times, material support for local efforts; it
cannot resolve the issue for the people living in the Bikin.
Many international groups (Pacific Environment and Resources
Center, Sacred Earth Network, ISAR, USAID/EPT, Survival
International, Greenpeace and others) are working closely with
the people of the Bikin to develop land tenure legislation and
sustainable economic development programs that protect the
region's unique biodiversity and that meet historically evolved
land use needs of local people. The day to day contact with
these groups is helping us better understand what can be
accomplished in our effort to resolve the Bikin issue. It is our
opinion that if the international community attempts to 'solve'
the Bikin issue independently of local people and their
representatives in Primorskii Krai, its efforts are doomed to
fail. So we suggest that we work together to accomplish the long
term protection of the Bikin watershed, its biodiversity and the
ways of its indigenous peoples. (...)

udege@glas.apc.org, 22.03.96

Territory of Traditional Natural Resource Use TTP in the Bikin
Region.

by Pavel Sulyandziga, President of Primorskii Region Association
of Indigenous Peoples (PRAIP), Krasnyi Yar. - Since to date
there are misunderstandings on what it means to organize and
operate a TTP in the Bikin, I would like to offer my comments.
Confusion among those interested and working on protected
territory issues in the Russisn Far East is caused by ignorance
of the 1993 Temporary Provision by the Primorskii Krai Council
of Deputies that creates procedure for creating a TTP and
existing Russian law on local self administration and resource
use is poorly understood. It has become obvious that
international groups as well as Russians are unclear on the
concept of a TTP.

1) What is a TTP? A TTP is a specially designated territory
consisting of landscapes essential to the traditional needs of
local peoples. Though a TTP might be called 'ethnic' territory,
it is in fact a protected territory that provides for indigenous
interests to remain in forest ecosystems and methods for
managing those systems on the long term.

2) What is achieved by creating a TTP in the Bikin? A TTP
extends existing specially protected territorial boundaries
established in the middle drainage of the Bikin River to include
the entire upper drainage. An opportunity is created to define
and implement management patterns for land, water and wildlife
that enhance the life of local peoples and provide practical
procedures that promote sustainable resource use. Indigenous
peoples become administratively vested in the territory as they
develop local self-management policies.

3) How does a TTP differ from other forms of protected
territory? A TTP provides indigenous peoples an administrative
right to oppose and veto development patterns that threaten
traditional economic activities. 

4) Can the Udege sell these lands? No. The fact is that the
watersheds natural resources in the TTP belong to the state and
not to indigenous peoples, and as such, this means that a right
to sell and lease these values is vested in Federal, Krai and
Raion administrations. As I pointed out earlier, a TTP provides
indigenous peoples an opportunity to block activities that local
people feel are inappropriate given landscape policy. 

5) What is needed to protect landscapes in the TTP? Develop and
adopt rules and other legally binding acts needed to manage a
TTP in Primorskii Krai; Attract capital investment that funds
local processing of non-timber forest products; Organize tourism
in the region; Address poaching throughout the watershed; Study
landscape components as part of a general program of interactive
management in the Bikin.

6) Why is a TTP, and not a national park or other specially
protected territory, an optimal choice for the Bikin? A TTP
satisfies two essential conditions: protection of native
assemblages and promotion of traditional activities for
indigenous peoples. The TTP also allows local people to develop
responsible landscape management practices. Other specially
protected territories (reserves, refuges) only partially
accommodate indigenous interests and can prohibit or
significantly restrict traditional activities. National Parks
are close in intent to a TTP. And new working rules for national
parks do accommodate the activities of indigenous peoples.
People in the Bikin, however, have reservations about a park:
The park administration has the authority to expand and restrict
traditional activities. How would an administration be
assembled? What criteria would this administration use to
resolve conflicts involving traditional activities? And the
working rules make no provision for existing local
self-management structures in park administration. That is why a
TTP in the Bikin is the optimal first step and represents the
beginning of a management process that will evolve as it
encounters new challenges. Many feel that portions of the Bikin
may indeed be suitable for inclusion in a national park system
and consider this an important issue for discussion as the
watershed's management process is developed.

udege@glas.apc.org, 16.03.96

WHO IS BOSS IN THE TAIGA?

by Anatolii Lebedev - In the two years the Tiger brigades of the
Krai Committee on Environmental Protection and Natural Resource
have been operating in Primor'e, rare is the 'taiga' person who
has yet to learn of the teams work. Though it might be a bit too
bold to say that these quick response teams have fundamentally
reversed the way hunters view the stripped taiga competitor,
changes are occurring. Long lasting changes, however, will take
years, will require a well planned economic and social strategy
on the part of administrators responsible for the taiga, and
most importantly, it will require endless amounts of enthusiasm
and bravery on the part of at least one person. Team leaders
have to take charge if the brigades are to be effective, and in
the case of Pozharskii Raion, where a brigade was created in
September of 1995, the person who took the lead in that region's
anti-poaching campaign was Aleksandr Rogachevskii, a chauffeur
for the Raion Committee on Environmental Protection and Natural
Resources. Sasha is the first to admit that during his special
training to prepare him for the lead role in that region's
anti-poaching project, the leader of the Tiger brigades,
Vladimir Shchetinin of the Krai Committee, warned his local
representative in the Bikin that he should be ready to encounter
a range of difficulties, including threats and all kinds of
rumors. But most importantly, the Krai Committee would be there
to support Sasha should things get rough. With this in mind,
Rogachevskii and his team set off to work the Raion. But by the
end of November, after detaining E. Shcherbin for poaching a
wild boar, the team leader got a taste of the danger to standing
up to local forces; his latest catch happened to be the personal
driver of Konstantin Voitseshevskii, the head of the Pozharskii
Raion administration. Sergei Gorborukov, chairperson of the
Raion Committee, was soon given an order to return the
confiscated license, and when he refused, the head of the
administration immediately raised the stakes by drawing in the
Krai Committee. Shchetinin was invited to Luchegorsk for a
visit. This is how Rogachevskii describes what followed:
"...Shchetinin pointed to our excellent work and at the same
time added that Voitseshevskii spared no effort in dumping all
over me. I felt the results right away: in December, Gorborukov,
Raion Committee Chairperson, did everything possible to hinder
the work of the brigade; he refused to provide a car to make
raids and constantly reminded us that the best thing to do would
be to cool our jets and cut off the raids until New Year's; this
to not enrage Voitseshevskii. We were forced to find
transportation any way we could. The chairperson reminded me at
every occasion that Voitseshevskii was moving to have me fired
from my job at the Committee..." "... In the end, Gorborukov
caved in and without any warning, a notice was sent to the Krai
Committee to release me from my job at the Raion Committee. All
this despite the fact that Gorborukov had no apparent problems
with my work. On December 28th he let me know that Mikhail
Bibikov, Chairperson of the Krai Committee, had no intention of
extending my contract. The explanation was simple: first, I had
been too zealous in my work, and secondly, Voitseshevskii had
been on the phone to Bibikov about the matter, and so the
decision had been made..." Rogachevskii got nowhere when he went
to Vladivostok in an attempt to get at the 'truth' in the
matter. As stated in the Tiger brigade's charter, each team
member signs an annual contract. Or doesn't sign, for as they
say, it all depends upon the mood of the boss. This 'fact'
denies those in the line of fire any opportunity to appeal to a
union; the only avenue is to appeal to the courts. Only not
every Russian easily matures to an understanding of how the
courts work. For us, the children of an imperial government,
this democratic habit is something new. And for many in this
country, the hope for fair play has long since gone up in smoke.
And that's a real drag! Because in this instance, the case more
than deserved a hearing in court, though the chances are slight
that the issue would have been ruled in the favor of those
defenseless few trying to protect the environment. After a
couple of brief conversations with Shchetinin and Bibikov at the
Krai Committee, the evidence for Rogachevskii's down fall was
reveled: in trying to bring about some fair play in Pozharskii
Raion by nailing the Raion's chief administrator's personal
driver, the brigade leader got a bit too mouthy about what took
place. One has to admit that acting the tough guy puts officials
in an even tougher spot when it comes to defending the work of
subordinates. The question remains, however, why these officials
have been as equally silent about the massive effort to protect
the rights of a single poacher, when there is plenty of time to
talk about the way Rogachevskii behaved in his conflict with
Raion officials. And just what Voitseshevskii said to Bibikov
and Gorborukov about this obstinate inspector, or even if he
spoke to them at all, well, all this is a big secret. Krai
Committee officials deny any pressure from Voitseshevskii to
remove Rogachevskii. At the same time it disseminates a constant
flow of unsubstantiated and unfounded information about
Rogachevskii: how he supposedly didn't get along with his two
other colleagues; how he supposedly liked to drink on the job,
and in general, well.... No surprise here that these 'facts'
surfaced after the head of Pozharskii Raion took an active role
in trying to draw attention away his driver. Just try to make
public anything about Voitseshevskii, about his outrageous
behavior in the taiga, about his constant efforts to cover up
other highly placed poachers in the Raion or his threats and
blackmail. The restraints are obvious upon anyone dedicated to
enforcing environmental protection laws and defending the
environment. It is a sure bet that loud mouths are going to feel
it in the end. Even government inspector status is inadequate
protection from the long arm of local administrators. And firing
principled workers from the Pozharskii Raion Committee is not
something new. About a year and a half ago, Vasilii Maisak, the
head knocking chairperson of the Pozharskii Raion Committee got
shuffled out the door. And if it hadn't been for the personal
request of Maisak to not write anything about his sacking, this
article might have appeared back then. We are not just talking
about someone with principles getting the boot. What we have
going here is a general understanding of fairness, legality and
democracy. When someone gets 'twisted' by the system, then it is
first of all a tragedy for the person involved. A tragedy for
that person and for the people doing the twisting. The nation is
also victimized when officials trample the law to abuse those
righteously trying to protect the environment. When authorities
cover work to their own self interests, it is the interests of
the people that are betrayed, those very people who are trying
to serve the state in a fair and equitable way. Of course, the
work of an environmental protection inspector is never an easy
task when an impoverished nation pounds on the environment. All
the more when a portion of the fines levied against violators
make up the basic budget of the inspectors; the search for
'fines' become an end in and of itself and replaces the very
process of trying to promote environmental protection and
environmental awareness. Yes, to respect the offender is
important, just as it is vital that an effort be made to bring
each and every infraction to court. Only it is no secret who
gets justice in the Raion when it comes to charging a person
close to the head of the administration. And for those with a
golden nostalgia for former Party authority can rest assured:
there have been no serious changes in Russian life except for
the value of the rouble. In petitioning Pavel Sulyandziga,
Advisor to the Governor of Primorskii Krai on Indigenous
Affairs, Rogachevskii suggested that the Tiger brigades might be
more effective if support provided by international groups were
transferred to the Primorskii Krai Department of Hunting
Resources. The brigades would have some authority in the taiga,
including the right to conduct a search and to carry weapons,
powers that the Krai Committee can't provide. This really isn't
the point. Given a normal atmosphere in the Raion, one where its
authorities are first of all concerned about legal guarantees
and not the entertainment of its buddies, then there is a
reasonable chance that some semblance of order can be provided
in the taiga. Raids by the Tiger brigades are most often carried
out together with the police, wildlife managers, inspectors from
Primorskii Krai Marine Resource Department and Raion
Environmental Protection Committees. Nor is the point that
'contract' people need to have better employment guarantees,
though this is important. The point is that the environment
plays a major role in everyone's life these days, and the battle
is not so much for tigers as it is for humans, for developing an
awareness of their role in the environment and the need for
authorities to be responsive to the law and the citizenry. If
authorities live by their own, individual laws, as was the case
for 80 years in Russia, they will sooner or later be swept away.
This will be a sad moment since one and all are interested in a
stable and trustworthy faith in authority. Given the complaints
about Voitseshevskii, people need to remember some recent Bikin
River watershed history. Back in 1993, when the Russian-South
Korean joint-venture "Svetlaya" geared up for a full scale
attack on the timber in the headwaters of the Bikin River
watershed, this with the full support of the Krai
administration, Voitseshevskii, along with many others in the
Raion, took a stand against the logging this gem of the RFE. The
most generous of promises from the South Korean partners did not
bend him and there is no doubt that his leadership on the issue
helped people to keep believe in the government. It showed
people that both the people and its leadership are the true care
takers of the taiga, and everyone together, the average hunter
and the top administrator in the Raion are responsible before
the environment. For the only way to live in peace and harmony
is the observance of the law before which all are equal.

mishaj@glas.apc.org, 16.03.96

Menschenrechte und Umweltbewegung In Russland

Der Fall Alexandr Nikitin

Am 6. Februar 1996 um 7 Uhr morgens wurde der russische
Umweltaktivist Alexandr Nikitin von fuenf Agenten des Foederalen
Sicherheitsdienstes FSB (einer der russischen Geheimdienste)
verhaftet. Wir berichteten bereits ausfuehrlich in Rundbrief Nr.
10 von 31.3.1996. Der Mitarbeiter des Murmansker Bueros der
norwegischen Umweltgruppe Bellona, der an der Untersuchung der
Umweltsituation in den militaerischen Einrichtungen der
russischen Nordmeerflotte beteiligt ist, wird der Spionage
beschuldigt. Nach dem russischen Strafrechts drohen Nikitin im
Falle der Verurteilung mindestens 10 Jahre Haft. Die
Hoechststrafe wuerde die Hinrichtung fuer Aleksandr Nikitin
bedeuten. Nikitin, dem in den ersten Monaten sogar die freie
Wahl eines Anwalts seines Vertrauens verweigert wurde, sitzt zur
Zeit in Isolationshaft. Im Folgenden eine Chronologie der
juengsten Entwicklungen und eine offizielle FSB-Presseerklaerung
ueber den Fall Nikitin:

St. Petersburg branch of the FSB arrested Alexandr Nikitin,
captain of 1st degree. The former marine officer is accused of
high treason by espionage, in accordance with paragraph 64 A of
Russian Criminal Law. Investigations have disclosed that
Alexandr Nikitin through his contact with Environmental
Foundation Bellona has delivered to Bellona secret and top
secret material concerning Russias nuclear fueled fleet for
payment. In this he used his contacts among marine officers. The
illegal activities Nikitin is accused of are beyond the scope of
what an environmental organisation should be concerned with, and
is provoking our countries defence ability. The case is placed
under the investigative branch of FSB in St. Petersburg. Nikitin
is held in isolated custody at the FSB at Liteynly 4.

Chronological overview

May 7 1996: Voiced by Ronald Rindestu, Norwegian County
Administrators raised the Nikitin-case with their collegues from
Murmansk and Arkhangelsk counties, during a meeting May 6 and 7
in the Barents Council. Rindestu asked what will happen to the
Lepse project, which was granted funds from the Barents Council
in 1994, and whether the council legally could continue to use
the Bellona report "The Russian North Fleet, Sources to
Radioactive Contamination" as background material, now that it
has been classified by the FSB.

May 6 1996: Members of the EU Parliament, Doeke Eisma, Carlos
Pimenta and Martine Gredler asked Parliamentary questions to the
European Commission on the Nikitin case today. Commission
spokesperson Mr. Sabba answered that the Commission is very
concerned with the treatment of NGOs in North West Russia.
Nikitin, said Sabba, as a Russian national, must be treated in
accordance with Russian law, but the Commision is following the
case. The Commission has been active in Murmansk in that it has
instituted the Lepse project, and the TACIS programme supports
many activities in the region. Delivering his speech in flowing
terms, Sabba seemed determined to show that the Commission had
taken all necessary action at the appropriate time. In the
following approx. one hour long debate, MEP Ken Collins
emphasised the human rights angle of the matter, and asked the
Commission whether they would bring up the case with the Council
of Europe.

May 2 1996: Letter from United States Department of State, John
E. Herbst Principal Deputy Coordinator, Russia and the Caucusus

April 30 1996: Ukraine: 19 environmental activists were arrested
after participating in an anti nuclear demonstration outside the
Ministerial Council in Kiev on April 23. Five of the activists
were taken directly to a court meeting, and were sentenced to
three to five days imprisonment. The five were Ira Korol, Nadia
Sherchenko, Vladimir Slivyak, Dima Tolomatsky and Sergey
Fomichev. They were not allowed to defend themselves in court,
nor to meet with a lawyer. The activists, gathered in Kiev for a
10 year memorial for the Tchernobyl accident, were released
after having started a hunger strike in the prison. Bellona
contact Alexey Klimov was visited by local FSB agents in
Severodvinsk today. Three copies of the Bellona report "The
Russian North Fleet - Sources of Radioactive Contamination" were
confiscated. The agents presented an official FSB order, stating
that distribution of the report within Russia is illegal,
because it contains state secrets. It is unlikely that the FSB
has authority to make such a decision.

April 26 1996: 11:45 local time four officers from FSB visited
Bellonas office in Murmansk. Kpt. Maksimenkov, head of the
investigation group, was among them. They informed that they
would perform a investigation experiment in accordance with
Russian code. They said that they did not need to get
permission, since they have a right to perform such experiments
in rooms of any juridical person on the territory of Russia.
After that, in a presence of Sergey Filippov and two witnesses,
FSB officers faxed two pages to the Bellona office in Oslo using
Bellonas faxmodem and faxmachine. Bellonas logo were on the
pages followed by meaningless characters. The officers
documented the time it took to send the faxes to Oslo. After
that, the experiment was over. The witnesses and Sergey Filippov
signed a protocol and then the FSB officers left Bellonas
office. 

April 24 1996: Both Bellona head Frederic Hauge and
environmental councel to President Jeltsin, A. Jablokov, raised
the Nikitin-case and the need for openness, during the hearing
about nuclear safety ten years after the Tchernobyl accident in
Brussels today. The hearing, arranged by Globe International and
Bellona, was open to EU MEPs and invited guests. Approx. 70
persons attended, most of them journalists.

(...)

April 22 1996: The Bellona office in Murmansk was searched by
agents from the FSB again today. Two local FSB officers and one
from St. Petersburg, with two witnesses in tow, told Bellona
employee Sergey Philippov to leave, as they wanted to talk to
Bellona secretary Luba Kovaleva. The agents did not provide IDs
or a search warrant, but on being prompted by Philippov answered
that they would carry out their task regardless. The agents
stayed at the office for an hour, checking telephone lines and
taking notes on technical issues from the fax and modem manuals.

April 21 1996: Moscow Nuclear Safety and Security Summit
Declaration (...).

April 20 1996: Canadian Prime Minister Chretien today expressed
his concerns for the Nikitin case, during a meeting with Russian
president Yeltsin. Chretien delivered a letter of concern to
Yeltsin, and said that Canada will follow the case thouroughly
and could gladly welcome Nikitin in case Russia finds him too
much of a problem.

New Scientist has an Editorial about the Nikitin-case: "In the
anarcy of the former soviet union, it is amazing what you can
find out by browsing through press clippings, government reports
and books by retired russian admirals. It is amuzing, but to the
FSB, the state security police, not amusing. Its officers have
arrested Alexandr Nikitin, one of the russian authors of the
report,(...) If the nuclear situation in the rest of Russia is
as bad as it is on the Arctic naval bases, the country needs
help. And it won't come from the state security police."

The NGO conference Moscow Nuclear Summit Watch supported the
case of Alexandr Nikitin with an appeal to President Yeltsin,
signed by co-chairmen Alexei Yablokov and Thomas Cochran.

April 18 1996: The new Bellona Report "The Russian North Fleet -
Sources of Radioactive Contamination" was released at a press
conference in Moscow today, the day before the G7+1 meeting on
nuclear safety in Moscow. It was his work on this report that
led to the arrest of Alexandr Nikitin. Whereas Bellona can prove
that all information in the report stems from open sources, the
FSB claims to have found state secrets in the material.

April 17 1996: (...) The group of investigators from FSB have
since April 16 been in Murmansk interrogating several people as
a part of their investigation in the Nikitin case. Two of the
people in Bellonas staff in Murmansk were interrogated once
more. They were also presented a document where they were asked
to sign a paper of security clearance in relation to the
interrogations they had to go through in the Nikitin case. The
staff members of Bellona refused to sign the paper. In addition
to this the FSB has interrogated several of the officers in the
North Fleet that have been in contact with Nikitin. It is not
known how long time the FSB agents were in Murmansk.

At a press conference the 17. April a Committee for defence of
Alexandr Nikitin was founded (...).

April 10 1996: Alexandr Nikitin was put on isolation today,
after having shared cell with two other prisoners at different
times. Alexandr is quite certain that both the two cellmates
were FSB agents. (...)

After going through most of the FSB evidence, Nikitin's lawyer
Jury Schmidt today ascertained that the FSB's case against
Nikitin is based on material in the upcoming report on the
Northern Fleet.

April 9 1996: Head of Bellona Murmansk and coauthor of the
upcoming report, Igor Kudrik, was threatened with a half year
imprisonment today, when he refused to answer certain questions
during interrogation without a lawyer present. He also refused
to sign a paper of security clearance. Kudrik fears he is next
on FSB's list of alleged environmentalist spies.

April 4 1996: Alexandr Nikitin shall be kept in custody two more
months awaiting his trial, ruled a Russian military court today.
The court rejected a request from the lawyer to release Nikitin
for bail until the trial is raised. The time of this trial is
uncertain. During the custody hearings, Nikitin was placed in a
cage guarded by six soldiers armed with machine-guns. The
lawyer, Yuri Schmidt, claims that the FSB are still breaking the
Russian Constitution in their handling of the case against
Alexandr Nikitin. The judge in the custody hearing pointed out
that the FSB had done a mistake in refusing Nikitin a lawyer.

March 29 1996: Alexandr Nikitin was allowed to meet his lawyer
Jury Schmidt today, in accordance with the constitutional court
which on Wednesday 27th ruled that the strict security measures
enforced by the FSB towards the lawyer are illegal. The meeting
took place in the FSB prison in St. Petersburg. The lawyer will
now be allowed access to the case documents prepared by the FSB
against Nikitin. The FSB refused a request from Nikitin's wife
Tatyana Tchernova, who applied to meet with her husband in
prison. According to Nikitin's lawyer Jury Schmidt, the refusal
is in violation of the law, and a complaint has been filed with
the State Prosecutor in St. Petersburg. Probably Tatyana will be
able to meet with her husband next week.

March 27 1996: The Constitutional Court today made the verdict
in favor of the complaints from Alexandr Nikitin and Bellona.
Alexandr Nikitin now has the right to freely choose his own
lawyer. 

Neueste Informationen ueber die norwegische Umweltgruppe Bellona
erhaeltlich: Bellona bietet hervorragende weitere Informationen
im world wide web: http://www.grida.no/ngo/bellona/nikitin.htm

VLADIMIR PETRENKO BEGAN A HUNGER STRIKE

In Protest of the extreme human rights violations against him
the last several months Vladimir Petrenko (Shikhany, Saratov
Oblast) began a hunger strike on January 22nd.

BACKGROUND INFO (by The Center for Assistance to Environmental
Initiatives): Vladimir Petrenko served in the Soviet Army in the
early 1980s in Shikhany where he became a victim of chemical
weapons experiments. This led to a series of chronic illnesses
including lung and intestinal disorders, and also thyroid
disease. He received occupational disability status due to
having been sent to Chernobyl as part of a clean-up team. In
1991, the Command of Deputy and Environmental Activity illegally
laid off Petrenko for political reasons. He received no
compensation and was essentially blacklisted in Shikhany and
Volsk, making it difficult to feed his two small children. The
military officials refused to recognize that Petrenkos illnesses
were connected with his service. Only after two and a half
years, with the interference of the Supreme Council of Russia,
the Central Military-Physicians Commission granted Petrenko
invalid status. Petrenkos treatment was prevented by the
blockade on all information on the tests conducted on him. At
age 34, he was named an invalid with 25 chronic disorders.
Despite this, Petrenko was denied by the Court the admission of
the fact that the experiments had been conducted on him, and
thus he was denied compensation for emotional harm as well as
physical and psychological suffering, caused and subjected upon
him by the Command of the Shikhany Institute. Earlier Vladimir
Petrenko made known to the public the fact that experiments were
being conducted on people for the purpose of testing new classes
of chemical weapons. Because of this, he has experienced
numerous repressions on the part of the military. In the Centers
opinion, the fabricated evidence against Petrenko is now being
used as an attempt to discredit him in the eyes of the public.
The drawn-out investigation plus denying him his right to leave
the country, are both tactics to deprive Vladimir Petrenko the
opportunity to continue his environmental activity and to seek
assistance from human-rights organizations.

July 1995. Vladimir Petrenko filed a lawsuit against the
Shikhany Military Institute where he worked for many years and
where he was subjected to the chemical weapons experiments. A
decision was made on the federal level to grant Vladimir
financial compensation for the harm done to his health when sent
to Chernobyl to do clean-up. The Oblast Court refused to convict
the Institute of conducting inhuman tests using new chemical
weapons on Petrenko in 1982.

July 30, 1995. Vladimir's former colleague in the Shikhany
Institute insulted him and then came to blows. In defending
himself, Vladimir tryed to hold the man back, and the other guy
ended up with some bruises. Vladimir was convicted for
misbehavior and for committing bodily harm.

Oct 3, 1995. The Military Division 61469, where Vladimir
Petrenkos wife, Svetlana, has worked for the last 13 years,
demoted her for the third time in one year. Despite the pleas of
human rights organizations the Institute has announced that she
will be laid off as of March 1st, 1996.

Nov 4, 1995. Captain Kulev from Volsk-17 denied Petrenko his
right to leave the country. This was done in the absence of a
lawyer. Petrenko turns to the Volsk Special Prosecutor with
complaints about the violations being committed against him.

Dec 25, 1995. Petrenko receives a response stating that there
are ten days to complete a preliminary investigation of the
incriminated Petrenko, but nothing was mentioned of the other
violations.

Jan 19, 1996. Petrenko announced to Captain Kulev and sent
letters to the General Prosecutor of Russia, the Chair of the
Presidential Commission on Human Rights, Sergei Kovalev, and
other organizations, stating that if his petition stating his
objection to the preliminary investigation will not be satisfied
by 9:00 a.m. on January 22nd, he will start a hunger strike.

Jan 22, 1996. Kulev summoned Petrenko. Petrenko began a hunger
strike.

Today, Febr 1996, Vladimir is in the Saratov occupational
diseases clynic for a check-up holding on hunger strike. He
won't stop the hunger strike until his requests be satisfied.

RECEIVE MORE INFORMATION/SEND LETTERS OF SUPPORT TO: Press
Service-Center for Assistance to Environmental Initiatives
410026 Saratov P.O. Box 1476, tel: (8452) 50-67-39 email:
volga@glas.apc.org

volga@glas.apc.org (Olga Pitsunova) - 02.02.96

"Vladimir Petrenko's Hunger Strike"

[From Express-Chronicle Newspaper, No. 5, February 2, 1996]
VOLSK-17 (SARATOV REGION). - Vladimir Petrenko's hunger strike
has continued into the tenth day. In the early 1980s Petrenko
served in Shikhany in the army, where he was the victim of
experiments with poisonous substances [chemical weapons]. On
July 3, 1995, a lawsuit on Petrenko's behalf was launched in
Saratov Regional Court against the Ministry of Defense, to
compensate him for damages to his health. At the conclusion of
the court investigation, a representative of the Ministry of
Defense insulted and struck Petrenko several times. Petrenko's
actions to defend himself (he restrained the officer's hands)
were ruled as "hooliganism", instigating a criminal case against
him under Article 206 of the Russian Criminal Code. Later he was
indicted under Article 112 ("Deliberate infliction of light
bodily injury") as well. As Petrenko's lawyer Vitalina Dmitrieva
reported in the January 31 issue of Express-Chronicle, his blood
pressure has badly fallen. In the past Petrenko participated in
military chemical experiments; he has status as a third-group
disabled person, and his lawyers fear that continuation of the
hunger strike could lead to irreversible consequences. Petrenko
began his hunger strike on January 22, demanding the removal of
a Mr. Kulev, an investigator with the local special police. The
investigator was not replaced, but in the course of several days
Petrenko's investigation was completed and the case transferred
to the Procurator [prosecutor], who must sign the indictment and
transfer the case back to court. Petrenko altered the terms of
his hunger strike, and is now demanding that the Saratov
Regional Procurator assume supervision of the case. (Since
Petrenko lives in Volsk-17, next to the Shikhansky military
site, supervision over his case is assigned to a Special
Procurator's Office. Petrenko considers the existence of the
Special Procurator's Office unconstitutional.) The lawyer V.
Dmitrieva reported that Petrenko is in no mood to compromise:
"He believes that unless he can bring himself back to good
health, no one will pay attention to his case." Translation:
Lisa Tracy

"The Hunger Strike Protest Has Ended"

[From Zemlya Saratovskaya newspaper, February 16, 1996] - On
February 13 Vladimir Petrenko, co-chair of the regional Union
for Chemical Safety and the Russian Green Cross, ended his
hunger strike, begun on January 22 as a symbol of his protest
against the lack of legal limits observed by the Military
Special Procurator [Prosecutor] of the village of Shikhany.
Petrenko ended his hunger strike after a press conference in the
Russian-American Press Center organized by Greenpeace, Ecojuris,
the "Memorial" human rights center, the Socio-Ecological Union,
and the Moscow Legal Defense Center, on the topic of persecution
of environmentalists by the Russian authorities. One example of
this persecution is the Petrenko case. Representatives of
organizations taking part in the press conference sent a
telegram to Petrenko, persuading him to stop his hunger strike
(the telegram from Ecojuris in particular asserts that
Petrenko's health and strength will come in useful not only for
him but also for other people). Note: Ecojuris lawyers are
defending Vladimir Petrenko's case in Russian court.
Translation: Lisa Tracy

Pacific Environment and Resources Center, perc@igc.apc.org,
18.03.96

Kurzmeldungen

Jedinaja Energetitscheskaja Sistema Rossii (AO) - EES Rossii

verkauft auf dem internationalen Markt 4,5% der Aktien mit einem
Nennwert von je 500 Rubeln. Das Grundkapital betraegt 21,558
Mrd. Rubel. Die Gesellschaft besitzt Mehrheitsbeteiligungen an
60 regionalen Energiewirtschaftsgesellschaften, 35 Kraftwerken
und Forschungsinstituten. Sie kontrollert 70% der
Stromproduktion in Russland. Das Register der Aktieninhaber
fuehrt das Moskauer Zentraldepot. Informationen bei der
Foederalen Wertpapierkorporation, 103704 Moskau, Kitajskij
projesd 9, 007-095-139 69 26, 132 69 70; Fax: 132 69 18, 132 68
43.

Auf einer Tagung im Oktober in Moskau erklaerten Vertreter von
Jedinaja Energetitscheskaja Sistema Rossii (AO), dass die
Jahresleistung der russichen Kraftwerke bis zum Jahr 2000 um 12
Gigawatt auf 200 sinken werde, da 25% der technischen Anlagen
von Waermekraftwerken im Jahr 2000 veraltet sein wird. Sie
produzieren 70% der Elektrizitaet und 50% der Waermeenergie.

Im Dezember legte EES Rossii ein Investitionsprogramm fuer die
naechsten sechs bis acht Jahre vor. Es sieht den Bau von 44
Waerme- und Wasserkraftwerken vor (Kapazitaet: insgesamt 45 Mio
kW), von 45 Umspannwerken und von der Verlegung von ueber 9.600
km Stromleitungen vor. Der Investitionsbeadrf der russischen
Stromindustrie wird auf 40 bis 72 Mrd US $ geschaetzt, von denen
der Sektor selbst 70% investieren will, 10-12% aus
Aktienverkaeufen kommen sollen und 20% als Kredite aufgenommen
werden sollen. Da wahrscheinlich noch weiteres Auslandskapital
noetig sein wird sollen Auslandsinvetitionen angezogen werden:
So ist eine "Ost-West-Energieschiene" mit einer Kapazitaet von 4
Mio kW geplant, die auf Initiative von deutschen Firmen zusemmen
mit Belarus und Polen vorbereitet wird. Ausserdem sollen ein
Schwarzmeer-und ein Baltikumsverbund geschaffen werden. 1996 -
1998 soll mit 90 Mio US $ von der Europaeischen Bank fuer
Wiederaufbau und Entwicklung (EBRD), London, westliche
Technologie gekauft werden.

OSTinvest, 43/95, 27.10.1995, S. 17/18; 45/95, 10.11.1995, S.
25; 49/95, 8.12.1995, S. 17.

Umweltprogramm fuer Wolgabecken:

Am 10.11.1995 hat die russische Regierung ein Umweltprogramm
fuer das Wolgabecken beschlossen, das bis 2010 die Wolga
wiederbeleben soll. Ziele sind die Saeuberung des Flussbettes,
des Ufers und der umgebung des Flusses. 38 regionale
Verwaltungseinheiten sind an dem Programm beteiligt. Die Kosten
der ersten Projektphase sollen 8 Bio Rubel betragen

OSTinvest, 46/95, 17.11.1995, S. 7.

Pollution in Pskov

PSKOV - The greatest source of pollution in the city is the
heavy metal spread from the smokestack of the Pskov factory of
radio components, according to a two-year investigation of the
environmental quality of life in Pskov completed in September.
Heavy metals were also found in high concentration in the city
dump. Auto and rail transport are most responsible for oil-based
pollution. An ecological map of Pskov and a computer database
are to be established based on the results. (Novosti Pskova, 27
Dec.)

"ECODEFENSE!" Moskovsky prospekt 120-34 236006
Kaliningrad/Koenigsberg Russia telephone/fax +7 0112 437286
E-mail: ecodefense@glas.apc.org

PSKOV OBLAST- The construction of a coal-processing plant on the
territory of the Kalinin Kholkhoz, near the village of Zaguzy,
and also the construction of a temporary electrostation on
Iubileinii and Palkinskii Highways, have been temporarily
blocked. The reason for the halt in construction of both
projects is the absence of an ecological investigation in
project documentation. (Pskovskaia Pravda, 26 Dec.) 

"ECODEFENSE!" inform

Traffic in Moscow

On December 23, Activists of "Rainbow Keepers" environmental
group were blocking some cars with cutted trees near Sadovoe
Koltso, center of the Moscow, where nobody can cut anything
green (tree or something else) by the act of Moscow government.
But worldwide known opera songer Ms. Vishnevskaya can cut this
trees to construct there opera schools (Moscow government,
forgetting first act, gave her the permission to cut by another
act). 4 activists were arrested, trial coming soon. Boycott
Vishnevskaya' opera concerts!

"ECODEFENSE! inform" No. 71 DECEMBER 1995 -
ecodefense@glas.apc.org - 28.12.95

Kola-Halbinsel, The First Environmental Atlas of the Peninsula:

will soon be completed. The largest contributor to the work was
the Institute of Problems of the Industrial Ecology of the
North. Preparation of the atlas lasted two years. An electronic
version of the atlas is also planned. This version is to be
updated at regular intervals.

Murmansk Vestnik, 21 Feb., laut ECODEFENSE!inform 78-79, 07.03.96

St.Petersburg -A Recycling Project For Aluminium Cans

has been presented by the environmental center ECAT. The
introduction of aluminum soft drink cans by foreign producers
has led to a sharp rise in the percentage of aluminum cans in
the city garbage. No recycling program for those cans exists in
the city today. Aluminum cans are now bought only abroad, at the
cost of 12 to 15 cents (U.S.) per can. A recycling program would
allow those cans to be produced in the Petersburg area.

SPb Vedomosti, 22 Feb., laut ECODEFENSE!inform 78-79, 07.03.96

Literatur:

"The Russian Far East: Forests, Biodiversity, and Industrial
Developments" 

by Josh Newell and Emma Wilson. A 220-page study on the Russian
Far East (RFE) including:

Quick Refernce Factsheets: Region-by-region summaries of
geography, climate, flora and fauna, biodiversity hotspots
(protection priorities), main resources, forestry, foreign
trade, infrastructure, and future outlook.

Contributions of Russian Ecologists: 1995 Vladivostok Conference
Resolution - a consensus by over 70 Russian ecologists and
government officials on biodiversity hotspots. Essays by twelve
Russian experts on native peoples, forests, major industries,
foreign investment and joint ventures. Most of these essays are
unpublished elsewhere. 

Maps: Eighteen two-color maps of existing protected areas,
biodiversity hotspots, key industrial developments, and
infrastructure. Tables and Charts: * Statistics on the main
timber harvesters, forest stock, dominant forest species,
foreign joint-ventures, foreign trade, and industrial output.
Photos: Images from some of the region's best photographers.

Price: U.S. $28.50, U.K. 17.50 pounds, Japan: Y4000, Shipping
and Handling add: $3.00, 2.00 pounds., Y340; Prepaid Orders
only, Pay by Check, money order, Visa, Eurocard or Mastercard,
credit card orders by phone O.K.

Mrs L. M. Wilson Friends of the Earth Japan UK distributor, 33
Maple Grove, Worsley, Manchester, M28 7ED TEL: +44 161 790 7404
- Make checks payable to Friends of the Earth - Japan

St Petersburg - A New Issue of the Journal "The Baltic Region -
our Common Habitat"

has recently been published. It contains several interviews with
the leaders of environmentally high-risk enterprises in St.
Petersburg and Sosnovyi Bor. Oleg Bodrov is editor of the
journal. Contact by e-mail: bodrov@glas.apc.org. 

Vechernii Peterburg, 23 Feb. laut ECODEFENSE!inform 78-79,
07.03.96

International Financial Institutes Activities

Belarus: The World Bank

is preparing a Urban Water and Solid Waste Management Project
with the Ministry of Housing and Municipal Services for US $ 30
million to develop a municipal waste treatment and water supply
management program;

is appraising a Petroleum Sector Development Project with
Belarusneft/Belnefteprodukt for US $ 40 million for
restructuring, technology and equipment transfer to rehabilitate
selected oil production facilities.

Estonia: The World Bank

is preparing a Housing Development Project with the Ministry of
Economic Affairs for US $ 15 million to develop the housing
market, longer term housing and finance strategies, and
regulatory reform;

is preparing the appraisal report for an Agriculture Project
with the Ministry of Agriculture and Environment for US$15.3
million to support reform and restructuring of the sector.

Latvia: The EBRD

is preparing a US $ 82.1 million (ECU 104,319,351) Riga
Environment project to finance short term priority investments
in Riga Waterworks. Contact: Riga City Council, tel.
+3712-320-680, fax. +3712-220-785

Lithuania: The World Bank

approved the Siauliai Environment Project with the Ministry of
Environmental Protection for US $ 6.2 million to manage the
river basis water and wastewater;

is preparing a Highway Project with the Road Administration for
US$15 million to expand maintenance, complete by-passes, improve
roads and management;

is completing negotiations on a Geothermal Project with the
Ministry of Energy and Lithuania State Power System for US $
12.8 million to demonstrate geothermal energy as an indigenous
resource to replace imported fossil fuel and to reduce emission
of GHG;

is preparing an Energy Efficiency/Housing Project with the
Ministry of Construction and Urban Development for US $ 10
million to increase energy efficiency in residential and public
buildings, and improve thermal efficiency of existing housing;

processing the appraisal report for an Agriculture Project with
the Ministry of Agriculture for US$30 million to reform and
restructure the agricultural and forestry sectors.

Poland: The World Bank:

is completing negotiations for a Solid Waste Management
Privatization Project for US $ 60 million to improve solid waste
collection in one or two major cities;

is preparing a Geothermal and Environment (Podhale) Project with
Geotermia Podhalanska for US $ 55 million to reduce air
pollution and associated damages to health and environment;

is preparing an Energy Efficiency Project (formerly Power
Distribution) with Integrated Energy Efficiency Improvement for
US $ 100 million to invest in energy efficiency, demand-side
management, and institutional strengthening and restructuring;

is completing negotiations on the Bialsko-Biala Water and
Wastewater Project with the Bielsko Biala Municipal Utility for
US $ 21.5 million for institutional strengthening and investment
for water supply and wastewater systems;

has approved a Power Transmission Project with the Polish Power
Grid for US $ 120 million for investments in transmission and
dispatching;

is preparing a Coal Sector Adjustment Operation for US $ 150
million to close and merge mines, finance mine site reclamation.

RUSSIA:

THE IMF agreed on Feb. 23, 1996 to lend Russia US $ 10 billion
for general economic support despite tragic developments in
Chechnya, under the condition that Russia abolish export duties
on oil and gas. According to the IMF, the duties keep domestic
energy prices in Russia artificially low, when market- oriented
prices would encourage more local energy efficiency. Russia
agreed to change duty policies for gas in April, and for oil in
July, 1996. (Washington Post, Feb. 23, 1996)

The WORLD BANK:

has delayed project processing on the Gas Injection
Demonstration Project with Purneftegas for US$47 million; 

is completing negotiations on the Bridge Rehabilitation Project
with the Federal Highway Department, and Ministry of Transport
for US$350 million to improve the condition of the public road
network;

is preparing a Petroleum Joint Venture Project for US $ 500
million for major new oil field development in Western Siberia;

is preparing a Krasnodar Power Generation Project for US$500
million for a 900MW combined cycle generator;

is appraising a Biodiversity Conservation Priority Response
Program for US$6.2 million to establish a national biodiversity
strategy, assist protected areas, and develop various resource
management strategies for the Lake Baikal region.

THE EBRD is preparing a US $ 73.5 million (ECU 93,326,056) St.
Petersburg Water Development project to improve the reliability
and quality of drinking water in St. Petersburg. Contact:
Vodocanal of St. Petersburg, Felix V. Karmazinov, tel. +7812-
2741090, fax. +7812-274-1361.

"ECODEFENSE!" Moskovsky prospekt 120-34 236006
Kaliningrad/Koenigsberg Russia telephone/fax +7 0112 437286
E-mail: ecodefense@glas.apc.org

"ECODEFENSE!inform, Nr. 80, MARCH 1996, ecodefense@glas.apc.org
(Vladimir Slivyak), 07.03.96

850 Millionen DM der Europaeischen Union fuer den Umweltschutz:

aus der Frankfurter Rundschau, 7.10.1995: In den kommenden vier
Jahren will die EU knapp 850 Millionen Mark in den Umweltschutz
investieren. Ein Teil der Mittel soll auch mittel- und
osteuropaeischen Laendern zur Verfuegung gestellt wrden. Darauf
verstaendigten sich die Umweltminister der EU in Luxemburg. Die
Debatte soll nach Angaben aus Delegationskreisen aeusserst
kontrovers verlaufen sein. Forderungen, den Betrag noch einmal
um ein Drittel der jetzt bewilligten Summe zu erhoehen, seien am
Widerstand Deutschlands, Frankreichs und Grossbritanniens
gescheitert. Bundesumweltministerin Merkel (CDU) zufolge ist ein
Kompromiss gefunden worden, der vorsieht, nach zwei Jahren zu
ueberpruefen, obdie Mittel reichen.

aktuelle Atompolitik

INTERNATIONAL PETITION FOR A NUCLEAR FREE FUTURE

Dear Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Secretary General of the United
Nations:

In 1996, in the tenth year following the Chernobyl disaster, we
wish to draw your attention to our concern for a nuclear free
world for the future generations. We the undersigned support
following demands:

Stop the promotional and technological functions of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) concerning nuclear
energy. The IAEA should be a purely control agency that gives
NGO's participation in policy making.

Create a new International Energy Agency under the U.N. for
research and promotion of renewable energy.

We hope Mr. Secretary General that you will undertake
initiatives to implement these demands as soon as possible.

Name,Address, etc.....

Please copy and spread this petition. Return signed petitions
before november 30th 1996 to : Abolition 2000 - Chernobyl WG c/o
FOR MOTHER EARTH, Gewad 15, 9000 Gent, Belgium Phone
+32-9-2334924 Fax +32-9-2337302

IAEA Says 438 Nuke Plants Operating Worldwide

Vienna (Reuter) 07.05.96 - Five new nuclear power plants came
into operation since 1994 and a mothballed plant in Armenia came
back on stream, bringing the total number around the world to
438, the United Nations nuclear agency said Thursday. Four new
reactors with a combined capacity of 3,290 megawatts of
electricity were connected last year to power grids in India,
South Korea, Britain and Ukraine, the Vienna-based International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said. In addition, Romania opened a
Canadian-built reactor at Cernavoda on the Danube 170 km (105
miles) east of Bucharest in April, the IAEA told Reuters.
"Cernavoda was launched by the Canadian prime minister (Jean
Chretien) and the Romanian authorities last week, just before
the anniversary of Chernobyl (on April 26)," said IAEA spokesman
David Kyd. "It is not yet in commercial use, but it is up and
running," Kyd said. Cernavoda is the first Western-designed
nuclear power plant in Eastern Europe. Romania's power authority
Renel said Cernavoda would begin generating commercial
quantities of electricity in the fourth quarter of 1996. An
Armenian plant at Medsamor was reconnected to the local
electricity grid in 1995 after being shut down following a
devastating earthquake in 1988, Kyd said. Two nuclear reactors
were shut down in 1995, one in Canada and one in Germany. "That
would bring us up to 31 countries with operating reactors," he
said. The IAEA said 38 nuclear power plants were currently under
construction in 14 countries, including five in Ukraine, five in
South Korea, four in Russia and four in India. The United States
runs the greatest number of nuclear power plants with 109 in
operation. France comes second with 56, followed by Japan with
51. Ukraine, site of the world's worst nuclear accident at the
Chernobyl plant in 1986, has 16 reactors in operation. The IAEA
said 17 countries relied on nuclear power plants to supply at
least a quarter of their electricity needs, but in some areas of
Europe it was significantly higher. Nuclear power's share of
electricity production was highest in Lithuania at 85.59
percent, followed by 76.14 percent in France and 55.52 percent
in Belgium. The share dropped to slightly below half in Sweden
at 46.61 percent, 46.43 percent in Bulgaria, 44.14 percent in
Slovakia and 42.30 percent in Hungary. The IAEA said the total
nuclear power generation around the globe rose to 2,227.94
terawatt-hours, more than the world's total electricity
generation from all sources in 1958. Overall, nuclear power
plants provided about 17 percent of the world's electricity
production in 1995.

Belene in Bulgarien

In 1990 the construction of the Belene NPP was frozen mainly
because of two reasons: the official statement of the experts
from the Bulgarian Academy of Science, which pointed out the
full inexpediency of the Belene NPP in many aspects like seismic
insecurity of the ground of the plant; negative environmental
impact in the region; economic ineffectiveness, and secondly the
pressure of the public against this construction. Now five years
later the public opinion is prepared to accept Belene as the
only possible solution for its energy future. All popular
newspapers in Bulgaria present interviews and statements of
experts in which they explains how secure and clean the nuclear
industry is and how close we are to the energy crisis, which can
be avoided only with new nuclear energy capacities. Government
officials speak of Belene as an unquestionable fact. In the
mostly watched TV program "Observer" a famous journalist
presented 30 minutes videofilm about the Kozloduy NPP. He walks
inside the plant, asks questions and always receives the same
answer - everything is very secure and there is no radiation and
no danger about the health of the people. So through the media
the public opinion is step by step focused on the unescapable
need of Belene. The new Energy Strategy for the development of
Bulgaria till 2010 has been recently proposed in the Parliament.
The main new energy capacity building option in this strategy is
the construction of Belene. The PM Widenov explained in the
parliament what the plans of the government are about the
construction of Belene. He said that until 2000 Belene is not an
alternative for the government. This period will be used for
technical investigation, licensing of the building site and
financial investigation (possibilities for exporting electricity
should be analyzed in this investigation). There is not an
alternative Energy Strategy proposed in the Parliament to be
discussed. There are some specific arguments against the
construction of Belene, which make the plant very dangerous and
problematic: 

the seismic insecurity of the building site. The common seismic
activity of the region is assessed at 8 degree (MSK) this is the
maximum degree estimated for the construction of a NPP. So the
position of the building site does not give the necessary needed
seismic reserve.

because of his specific position Belene would have a high
negative impact on the environment in the region, which is clear
proved in the Bulgarian scientist statement. For example climate
change; destruction of the water balance; possible pollution of
the underground water; cancer decease as result from the
combined impact of the radioactivity and chemical plant in the
town.

economic inefficiency and the real possibilities for Bulgaria to
build its energy capacity without using nuclear energy. Several
environmental groups decided to make the public aware of this
arguments.

People from the NGOs do not believe that we can change something
with our campaign and they are not motivated to participate. So
we need to attract and motivate more people for our campaign. We
should connect the media and the experts, so that the experts
opinion can be heard by the public. In this way the people will
accept more seriously our actions. We should organize a public
discussions about Belene with all objective arguments "for" and
"against" the construction. we are preparing a video film which
can be presented by the tv and distributed in the country. Our
main goal is to overcome the human disbelief and lack of
information and force them to participate actively in such
decision like the construction of a new NPP. How is it possible
to achieve this?

For more information and contacts: ftearth@bulnet.bg Parchevich
street N.30 Sofia 1000 Bulgaria tel:00359 2 88 01 07 fax:00359 2
81 92 90

Mochovce in der Slowakei

Premierminister Vladimir Meciar, der starke Mann der Slowakei,
verkuendete, dass der erste Block des umstrittenen Reaktors im
Juni 1998 in Betrieb gehen werde. Ende April erteilte die
Slowakei einen Auftrag ueber die Lieferung von Leittechnik an
Siemens. Aehnlich wie bei der Inbetriebnahme des ersten
rumaenischen AKW Cernavoda wartete man also geschickt den Trubel
rund um den Tschernobyl-Jahrestag ab, damit die Nachricht in der
Flut anderer Atom-Artikel untergeht. Auftragssumme: 153
Millionen DM, finanziert zu 85 Prozent von der Kreditanstalt
fuer Wiederaufbau (KfW) in Frankfurt / Main. Die KfW ist eine
oeffentliche Bank, sie gehoert zu 80 Prozent dem Bund und zu 20
Prozent den Laendern. Die KfW will den Kredit nur geben, wenn
Siemens dafuer eine Hermes-Buergschaft der Bundesregierung als
Absicherung bekommt (dieser war Anfang Mai noch nicht
beschlossen). Der Bank reicht es also nicht, dass die
slowakische Regierung vor zwei Monaten das Haftungsrisiko fuer
moegliche Unfaelle uebernahm (das war aber fuer Siemens wichtig,
denn bei einem GAU in der Slowakei will man nicht haftbar
gemacht werden). Ein weiterer Auftrag von 84 Millionen DM ging
an die Franzosen (Framatome). Zusammen mit dem Siemens-Anteil
gibt es also fuer Sicherheitsmassnahmen 237 Millionen Mark.
Insgesamt soll das AKW Mochovce jetzt nur noch rund eine
Milliarde DM kosten. Letztes Jahr waren es noch 1,5 Milliarden.
Ein Viertel der Auftragssumme geht also an EUCOM (European
Consortium Mochovce), das Gemeinschaftsunternehmen von Siemens
und Framatome, rund ein Zehntel nach Russland, aber der
Loewenanteil an tschechische (Skoda) und slowakische
Unternehmen. Juraj Krivosik vom slowakischen Umweltverband "Za
matku zem" haelt Widerstand noch fuer sinnvoll, weil die
tschechischen Banken als Hauptfinanziers von Mochovce bislang
nur etwas mehr als die Haelfte der Finanzierung vertraglich
zugesichert haben.