Reserving verdant landscapes

About two years ago, the president of Ukraine signed two edicts to set up two national parks. What made one wary was the issuance of subsequent edicts on the establishment of 11 more national parks, two nature reserves, one botanical garden, and a landscape reserve. Fifteen nature reserves re-designated with a stroke of the pen during one day! It had taken 30 years to establish 23 national parks (less than one per year) and now there were 11 to be created overnight. There is a new draft of the National Program for the Development of Nature Preserves until 2020, but the bill is shelved at the Verkhovna Rada. This program envisages the establishment of as many as 60 national parks, six nature preserves, and three biosphere preserves.

COMBINING SECURITY AND RECREATION

Ukraine currently has 39 national parks, compared to 50 in the world’s number one country, the United States; fifty means one park per state, but Ukraine appears to have more: 1.5 per what is known here as an “administrative-territorial unit.” Rations are a stubborn thing, considering that Texas is larger than Ukraine.

A national park is a large area where protection of the environment is combined with rest-and-recreation activities, so people can enjoy being in the lap of nature. Between five and ten percent of the territory of such parks is allocated for R&R, yet environment protection is at the top of the agenda. Unlike nature preserves, national parks cannot be made off limits for the general public.

Ukraine’s first Carpathian National Park has been in existence since 1980, with its major tourist attractions reliably protected by the state, such as 2,061-meter-high Mt. Hoverla, unique Ukrainian Carpathian landscapes, as well as Lake Maricheika and Lake Nesamovyte high up in the mountains. Up there you have an impressive view of Ukraine’s highest mountain peaks (after Mt. Hoverla) Brebeneskul, Petros, and Pip Ivan Marmarosky. There are also such natural treasures as the Shatsk Lakes in Volyn, Ukraine’s deepest Lake Svytiaz, highland Lake Synevyr in the national park of the same name, and the primeval beech forest in the Uzhansky National Park. The Cretaceous landscapes in the Sviati Hory National Park in Donetsk oblast never fail to gladden one’s heart.

People must be the first to take an interest in setting up national parks. In Africa, part of the proceeds from the sale of hunting licenses in a given national park is spent on road construction and repair, construction of schools, hospitals, and other elements of social infrastructure. Naturally, people who live within the boundaries of such national parks will be interested in reproducing wildlife and original landscape.

Everything stated above is in de jure terms. In de facto terms, the newly established Ukrainian national parks, particularly Hetmansky National Park (HNP), are a different story. HNP is made up of 40 small parcels of land in three administrative districts (raions) of this administrative region (oblast), namely in Trostianets, Okhtyrka, and Velyka Pysarivka. How much budget money will it take now to determine their boundary lines! Besides, it is necessary to reinforce the park’s security personnel.

To somehow implement the presidential edict concerning HNP, the Ministry for Protection of the Environment of Ukraine (Minpryrody) ordered the State Environmental Protection Directorate of Sumy oblast to assist the HNP administration in terms of office equipment, furniture, stationery, transport, and so on. Eventually HNP received a motor vehicle from the Directorate. Then what? The chief manager had to bring his own armchair to the office or buy one with his money.

NATIONAL PARKS HAVE TO EARN ENOUGH TO SUPPORT THEMSELVES

There is no alternative to national parks, considering that their land is public property — in other words, this land is owned by the Ukrainian people. The problem is finding the money to maintain this property, let alone services and infrastructure. Financing the Nature Preserve Fund (PZF) of Ukraine is easier said than done, especially in regard to capital development projects, including purchases of vehicles and equipment. The material-technological base of such environmental protection agencies has not been practically upgraded.

Central budget appropriations for the PZF institutions provide for only 35 percent of what they actually need (compared to 90 percent in the US). Most of this money is channeled into maintenance and payroll. This low funding level explains their status, which is going from bad to worse.

There is no denying the fact that the national parks and nature and biosphere preserves will never receive 100 percent budget funding. As it is, the progress of Ukrainian PZF is problematic unless the funding procedures are reformed. Among these reforms is a better use of the recreational potential. Here the problem can be solved if the preserves earn money to support themselves. Certain steps have been taken in this direction; 20–25 percent of the Minpryrody’s national parks and nature and biosphere preserves are operating on a self-financing basis.

For example, a national park offers a list of officially approved paid services, including “timber-processing.” This particular item adds considerably to their bank accounts. However, this source of revenue should be replaced by one from rest, recreation, and ecotourism. There are deputy managers for recreation and marketing on national parks’ staff, but there is no evidence of such marketing and recreational services. One of the main reasons is the absence of average-income consumers, as well as the lack of such national parks’ consumer-worthy products. Also, when making recreational arrangements, it appears what is probably best described as subjective problems.

For example, Carpathian National Park annually hosts numerous tourist groups (between 50 and 100 visitors). Among its popular attractions is a mass ascend to Mt. Hoverla, along with recreational services. About one million people visited this park in the peak year 1988, under the Soviets, including 30,000 tourists who climbed to the top of Mt. Hoverla. In 2002 a new record was set when more than 11,000 reached the peak of “Ukrainian Fujiyama” as part of all-Ukrainian mountain climbs commemorating the anniversary of the Declaration of Ukrainian Independence. Another record was set on July 16, 2005, commemorating the declaration’s anniversary, when 17,000 people climbed to the top of Mt. Hoverla. Another thing is whether they can be qualified as ecotourists. Their number and the garbage they leave behind may well cause the Carpathians to sink below the level of immersion in asthenosphere, a phenomenon known as isostasy.

On Dec. 25, 2009, the incumbent president signed another edict setting up Meotida National Park near the Sea of Azov. It was based on an existing regional landscape park with its administration. The only change was ownership; from now on it is not municipally but nationally owned. The president was busy on New Year’s Eve, signing an edict establishing Tuzlovski Lymany National Park in Odesa oblast. On Jan. 12, 2010, he conferred the title “Merited Environmental Worker” on more than 20 people who worked in this sphere. That’s right — you work hard, you deserve a reward, especially in view of the upcoming big event, presidential elections.