DEAR MR. BUSTERUD:

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140012-9
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 48
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 27, 2000
• Sequence Number: 12
• Publication Date: July 28, 1975
• Content Type: LETTER

Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO0100014000012-9
July 28, 1975
State Dept. declassification & release instructions on file
Mr. John A. Lus terud
Executive Office of the President
Counc..:.L on Euviroment al Quality
722 Jackson Place 14.17.
Washington, 0. C. 20006
Lnclosed is my final report on my experience as a legal scholar under
Area Xi of the U.S.-U.S.S.R.. Environmental Protection Agreement.. Also
att~racl l is the research article I have completed in draft form that I
hope to have published l.it a legal journal in the Uvited States.. I returned
home somewhat ahead of schedule, on July 13, because t:iierc t:-as no opportunity
to conduct further research. Scheduled trips to the Latvian Natio.ml Park
and to Baikal were canceled by the Soviets-. and Mr. Kolhasov was out of
Moscow on his annual leave.
I believe that, c'espite sorie difficulties, I was able to carry out the
work planned, as I hope the enclosed report dcrioi~str.:~te s. I wil.% , of course,
hold myself available to give you any additional information you may desire
about my experience or in connection with future Soviet-American cooperation
under Area ".I. I am grateful for the opportunity to uiyder_take this assi ,n--
ment .
Sincerely yours,
r`7
Thomas J. Schocubauri
Professor of Law
C.C.-Mr. Leon H.S. Sl.awecIk:I.
TS:jr
It i./ y -C.(i-V
 Approved For Release 20009/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140Y2-9
REPORT ON THE WORK. OF THE FIRST
LEGAL SCHOLAR. TO GO TO THE
SOVIET UNION UNDER THE U.S.-U.S.S.R.
ENVIRONMENTAL AGREEMENT
MAY-JULY
1975
For: Council on Environmental Quality
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs,
Department of State
By: Thomas J. Schoenbaum, Professor of Law, University of North Carolina
at Chapel Hill=
Date: July,28, 1975.
Since my visit to the Soviet Union was a "pioneer" effort, I feel it
would be useful to set out both the benefits and the difficulties in order
that subsequent legal scholars under the Environment Agreement may benefit
from my experiences. In general, I regard the trip as successful.. I was
able to carry out my project, and the Russians cooperated very readily in
some respects, but this cooperation was always achieved only after initial
problems were overcome. This makes the process of carrying out legal re-
search in the Soviet Union very difficult. Effective research is possible,
however, but essential qualities are persistence, patience, a sense of humor
and knowing the right moment to "put your foot down."
Two work products resulted from my research. First, I produced a draft
article for publication in the United States entitled, "Ecological Reserves
in the Soviet Union: A Useful Idea for American Environmental Law?" A copy
of this is attached. Second, I wrote an essay for publication in the Soviet
Union entitled, "Some Comparative Aspects of the Laws of the Soviet Union
and the United States Relating to the Preservation of Natural Areas." This
will be published in the Soviet journal, Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i javo.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 20 9/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140 2-9
I was hosted by Dr. 0. Kolbasov and the "Sector on Environmental
Protection" of the Institute of State and Law. This group, of course,
is primarily responsible for carrying out the cooperation under Area XI
of the Environmental Agreement. One of the difficulties with my re-
search and. with the implementation of this part of the Agreement is that
this is a newly formed Sector with relatively low esteem among Soviet
administrators and scientists concerned with Environmental Protection.
Moreover, the Sector consists of only six persons. Four of them are
primarily concerned with international law aspects unrelated to the con-
cerns of the U.S.-U.S.S.R. Agreement, i.e., the environmental protection
work of the United Nations, environmental cooperation among the members
of COMECON, the international law of the sea and environmental cooper-
ation with the German Democratic Republic. One of the persons desig-
nated to specialize in Soviet law on environmental protection is primar-
ily interested in international law. Dr. Kolbasov, the leader of the
Sector, is currently more of an administrator than a scholar in the
American sense and acts as the chief spokesman and propagandist both
internally and abroad.,spreading the official governmental view of Soviet
environmental progress. Another difficulty is that two more Soviet
bureaucracies have administrative responsibilities for the legal cooper-
ation program, Hydromet and the Academy of Sciences. In many instances
the members of the Sector did everything they could to be helpful, but
problems arose on the part of the other organizations. Neither Hydromet
nor the Academy of Sciences appear to have much interest in Area XI.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved-For Release 200bi9J/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140-9 3.
Upon my arrival in Moscow, I was placed in a small ,dirty dormitory
room (measuring 8 x 10 feet) in the Academy of Science Hotel and shown a
desk in the reading room of the library of the Institute where I could
work. This was the only part of the cooperation that came easily. Any-
thing else was achieved only with great effort both by me and by my Soviet
hosts. The reading of Soviet decrees and legislation and essays in legal
journals is, of course, not very revealing and, in preparation for my work,
I had already completed this phase to a large extent in the United States.
I believe that the best methodology to employ in connection with legal
research in the Soviet Union is to carry out interviews and case studies
in the particular area of research. I had communicated this to the Soviets
several months before leaving for the Soviet Union, and I assumed that
approval of my plan of research also meant approval of this methodology. I
found, however, that this was not the cased and the major difficulties I ex-
perienced were in carrying out this plan. I was successful in working out
most of the problems, but not to the extent that I had hoped.
On my arrival I was told that I could not go to two of the areas
listed in my plan of`research, the proposed Russian Forest national park
and the ecological reserve at Lake Baikal. Instead, two other areas were
substituted, the Latvian National Park and Voronezh Reserve. I was also
given a written, signed itinerary of specific dates of interviews and
visitation of study areas. It turned out, however, that not one item of
this itinerary was carried out according to the schedule, and I learned
that no arrangements whatsoever had been made with the proper agencies
Approved For Release 2000/09106 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140012-9
 Approved For Release 20001/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A0010001400 9
and authorities. Some promised activities were canceled and rescheduled
several times before they actually took place. Other activities were can-
celed altogether, such as my substituted trip to the Latvian National Park,
which was called off two hours before my plane was scheduled to depart.
Even when I was successful in visiting an area to carry out a case-study,
there were obstacles. At the Voronezh Reserve when I asked to see a copy
of the particular regulations governing the use by the public of the re-
serve, the Director gave me the ridiculous answer that these rules were
stamped for internal use only.
On the basis of my experience, I would recommend the following specific
points for future scholars:
1. Arrange a detailed itinerary in advance of departure and try
to get the Soviets to give specific confirmation of the sched-
ule. General confirmation is not enough. One should also be
aware that a program of research, once set, cannot be changed
on the scholar's side; the Soviet side, on the other hand,
will feel free to make unilateral deletions or changes unless
confirmation is given in advance. .
2. I found that my submission before departure of a list of
specific research questions or issues was quite helpful.
3. In interviews and case studies, the tendency is to give
general or pat answers. Cross examination is a necessary
skill, and it is also useful. to interview more than one
person concerned with a particular problem.
4. Difficulties with the ruble per-diem given by the Soviets should
be straightened out. I was told I would receive 10 rubles per day.
I was instead given only 8.50 rt.bles a day by the Institute. At
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved for Release 2000M/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO0100014001Q9
the end of my stay I was asked to sign a statement that I had
received 10 rubles a day. Through this process I discovered
that the Institute was given 10 rubles a day by Hydromet but
1.50 rubles a day was kept by the Institute. The Institute
did not want this fact known to Hydromet and wanted me to lie
in writing to cover up what was happening to the money.
5. The orientation by the Department of State should include a
more detailed discussion of the. practical and professional
difficulties of working in the Soviet Union. There are ways
of working these out and of having a pleasant work experience.
6. When I first arrived I was told that the Institute would be
responsible for arranging leisure time cultural activities
in the area around Moscow. Most of these promises were broken
with the explanation that the "roads were crowded" or an
equally lame excuse.
In summary, although this report has dealt primarily with the difficul-
ties of carrying out research in the Soviet Union, I should like to point
out that I regard my experience as useful beyond my expectations. Despite
problems, the Soviets are genuinely interested in aiding research and in
opening within certain limits their administrative process to legal scholars;
some of the problems resulted from organizational difficulties rather than
a lack of a spirit of cooperation. I was in the end able to obtain accepr
to high-ranking Soviet administrators and to carry out two case studies.
The Soviets realize the problems, and I believe they will make some effort
to correct them for succeeding scholars under the program. I hope that
the attached article is evidence that Soviet-American cooperation in the
area of environmental law can be of scholarly benefit.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2000%6/06: CIA-RDP79-00798A0010001400,*9
k
ECOLOGICAL RESERVES IN THE SOVIET UNION:
A USEFUL IDEA FOR AMERICAN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW?
by
Thomas J. Schoenbaum*
Despite the fact that the Environmental Protection Agreement between the
1
United States and the Soviet Union has been in effect for over three years,
very little is known about the legal and administrative regulation of environ-
2
mental quality in the Soviet Union. Yet the Soviet experience is important
both in itself, because the Soviet Union comprises a significant portion of
3
the biosphere, and as a subject of comparative study.
Some Soviet legal writers are fond of stating that environmental degra-
dation is a by-product of the private greed of capitalist societies. They
point to the USSR Constitution which declares all natural resources, lands,
waters, minerals and forests, to be the property of the state, incapable of
4
.private ownership and exploitation. But as Professor Goldman has vividly point'-
5
ed out, state ownership of resources has not assured. the maintenance of en-
vironmental quality in the Soviet Union. On the contrary, in the Soviet Union,
as in the United States, tremendous environmental problems have been caused by
increased urbanization and industrialization and development of natural re-
sources. Many of the rivers of the European part of the Soviet Union are
6
heavily polluted; vast water diversion projects have altered the ecological
character of the Lower Volga and adversely affected the water level of the
7
Caspian Sea and the Aral Sea; pollution of Lake Baikal., the largest body of
8
freshwater in the world, has been a source of controversy in the Soviet Union,
9
and its ultimate fate is still undecided. Moreover, tremendous environmental
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 ? Approved For Release 200Q 99/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140 1-9
problems must be faced in. connection with the development of Siberia, a
virtual wilderness greater in area than the entire United States.
On the other hand, the Soviet political and social system has lessened
the impact of some environmental problems which are as yet unsolved in the
United States. For example, the problem of urban sprawl, characterized by
the U.S. Council on Environmental Quality as a major factor in causing air
10
pollution and waste of energy and land resources, is largely absent in the
Soviet Union, where expansions of urban centers are more carefully planned.
The extensive areas of green belts surrounding almost all Soviet cities would
11
be the envy of American city planners. Moreover, efficient mass transportation
systems and the fact that there are vastly fewer numbers of privately owned
automobiles in the Soviet Union than in the United States mean that levels of
12
air pollution are generally lower.
In the last several years, new laws dealing with most aspects of environ-
mental protection have been passed in the Soviet Union. The centerpiece of
recent legislative activity is Decree 898 of December 29, 1972, jointly issued
by the Central Committee of the Communist Party and the Council of Ministers
13
of the U.S.S.R. Soviet writers refer to it as a "comprehensive program of
14
action." This decree freely admits past neglect of environmental protection
and attempts to state general policies relating to all aspects of environmental
quality, allocating jurisdictional responsibility for carrying out these policies
to the appropriate union-and republic-level ministries, departments and
organizations. Since this law attempts to integrate environmental considerations.
with economic planning (Gosplan was ordered to form a. department of environmental
protection), to set a national environmental policy and to confer jurisdiction
for environmental protection on all important developmental, agencies and groups
in the Soviet Union, it may be considered as roughly analogous to the National
15
Environmental Policy Act in the United States. The Soviet Union has also recently
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2006iDW06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140 9
enacted legislation regarding the use of particular resources. A comprehensive
decree setting a national land use policy and elaborating principles of land use
16
was issued in 1968. A new law regulating water use and controling of water
17 18
pollution was passed in 1970, and air pollution legislation dates from 1969.
In addition, pursuant to the order of the Council of Ministers of the U.S.S.R.,
all fifteen Soviet republics have issued conservation decrees dealing with the
preservation of certain lands and waters and conservation practices to be employed
19
in the use of lands, waters and forests.
In order to come to an understanding of Soviet law in this area., it is
of course necessary to go beyond mere study of formal decrees and enactments.
However, Soviet law is of such a character so as to present severe], obstacles to
the American-trained 'lawyer. First, in the United States, environmental law is
extremely ocess oriented. Substantive norms are often quite genera]. and even
20
vague, but the law usually imposes a.very definite, complex procedural frame-
21
work, that is usually designed as a mechanism for checks and balances as well
as to be sure that all relevant groups have their say. Much environmental
litigation is over the question of the adequacy of the decisionmaking process.
In Soviet law,-however, the process of decisionmaking is usually not regulated by
law. It is often difficult, even for Russion lawyers, to pinpoint. the actual.
decisionrakers. For example, Soviet law apparently requires that an environmental
22
impact analysis must be made as a part of all economic and developmental planning.
Gosplan has no published regulations dealing with the particular requirements
of this analysis, however, and environmental impact data is not made public; thus
23
it is impossible to determine if or how well this is carried out.
Second, the substantive norms of Soviet environmental law are vague and
generalized. A particular agency is simply given jurisdiction over a problem.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved -For Release 2000 6`/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO0100014001
and enjoined to solve it. Very few if any standards for administrative action
are set out. This leads to an extreme amount of administrative discretion to
interpret the law as the agency sees fit as well as to ad--hoc decisionmakirig.
For example, in the area of water pollution control, legislation merely prohibits
24
discharges in excess of established norms, and there are no uniform effluent
standards for industrial and municipal sewage. Instead, there is an attempt to
tailor effluent standards to the particular discharger, on a case-by-case basis,
formulating temperature requirements, degree of treatment, strength and type of
effluent and time of discharge depending on the particular uses made of the body
25
of water into which the discharge is made.
A third characteristic of Soviet environmental law is that its effective-
ness depends on external factors, such as whether the monetary expenditure need-
26
ed will be included in the five year economic plan formulated by Gosplan and
whether the plant manager or those responsible for spending the money will in
fact use it for its designated purpose. An agency in the Soviet Union cannot,
therefore, compel enforcement of standards and norms; it must rely on the prior-
ities as developed by Gosplan, which is basically oriented toward economic pro-
duction and development not environmental protection. Even when pollution con-?
trol equipment is provided for in economic plans, there are instances where
27
overzealous plant managers will simply use the money for another purpose.
A fourth difference between American and Soviet environmental law is
that in the Soviet system the general public and the courts have little or no
participation in the setting of environmental policy. There is, of course, no
judicial review of decisionmaking in the Soviet Union, and conservation organi-
zations, such as the All-Russian Society For the Protection of Nature, which
has a total membership of twenty million, exist mainly to publicize the im-
portance of environmental protection and governmental actions to enhance it.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2000W06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO0100014001QO9
Policy struggles do occur, of course, but they are usually on the. level of
high ranking governmental officials; differences are quietly resolved.
1In order to penetrate the real problems and accomplishments of Soviet
environmental law, then, the administrative process must be opened to view
28
through interviews and case studies. This article is an attempt to apply this
methodology to a particular environmental problem, the designation and adminis-
tration of natural areas withdrawn from economic exploitation in the Soviet Unior,..j
Land use to protect the integrity of the biosphere is a growing national
and internatibnal requirement. Nations must work together not only on pollution
control measures but also on conservation of resources and the maintenance of a
minimum level. of quality of those resources. Land is increasing recognized as
perhaps the most important resource` of all, since it provides the habitat and
setting for many other resources. Although land use measures will continue to be
a matter of national law for individual states, nations must come to terms with
29
the problem of cooperation in creating a reserve of land resources. This article,
after presenting an analysis of the Soviet system of land use control to preserve
natural areas and proposing a new institution for consideration by the United
States, will suggest a basis for future cooperation in this field between the
United States and the Soviet Union.
I. MAJOR CATEGORIES OF LANDS WITHDRAWN PROM ECONOMIC
EXPLOITATION IN THE SOVIET UNION
30
Under the 1968 Land Legislation, the lands of the Soviet Union are divided
31
into six different primary use designations: agricultural lands, settlement
32
lands, lands occupied by industry, transportation, health resorts and nature
33 34 35
reserves, state forest lands, state water resources lands and state reserve
36
lands. Within these general categories, lands substantially withdrawn from economic
exploitation include parts of the state forest lands and settlement lands as well.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2000/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO010001400W-b
as four major categories of nature reserve lands: zakaznik (nature reserve),
pamiatnik irod (natural monument), nati.onalni park (national park) and zapovednik
37
(ecological reserve). The latter category is the most interesting and significant
from the American viewpoint.
There is as yet no unified legal or administrative,framework for the
governance of withdrawn lands in the U.S.S.R. Natural areas are authorized by
a bewildering plethora of laws on the union and republic levels. They are ad-
ministered by scores of various agencies on different political levels. One
of the great needs of Soviet environmental law is a union-level law governing
the administration of natural areas, and such legislation is being prepared at
38
the present time.
A. State Forest Reserve
Over one-half of the area of the Soviet Union is designated as State Forest
Land. A significant portion of these lands (170 million hectares) are categorized
39
as "group one" forests that are withdrawn from commercial timber production.
These forests are located in the populous areas of European Russian, along high-
ways and waterways as well. as extensive tracts of northern forests bordering on
40
the tundra. Many of these areas are open for recreation, and cutting or dis-
turbance of trees is allowed only for the removal of diseased and dead trees,
41
fire protection and forest regeneration and improvement.
There is, however, no mechanism in Soviet law to assure the permenance of
group one forests. These areas are under the jurisdiction of the state Committee
of Forest Management, which has the main task of assuring fulfillment of the
42
plans for timber exploitation. Particular areas of forest lands are subject to
being administratively reassigned to categories allowing exploitation. Moreover,
Soviet writers have criticized the forest management practices that are applied
43
to group one forests. Furthermore, there are numerous instances of non-enforce-
44
meat or only nominal enforcement of violations of forest---cutting restrictions.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140012-9
 Approved For Release 20QV9106 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO0100014 2-9
B. Green Belt Areas
Soviet administrators are justly proud of the extensive green belt system
that surrounds almost all large cities of the Soviet Union. Urban. development
is in general, kept within city limits. Land outside city limits45to a radius
of up to fifty kilometers in the case of the llar.gest city, Moscow, is de-
signated as the suburban and green belt zone. This land is used for trans-
portation corridors and recreational facilities as well as for small, indepen-
dent satellite towns. Each district of the, urban area is given responsibility
and funding to set up a recreational area within this zone and permission can
4.7
be given for the construction of private "dachas." The forested area that
exists within these zones is managed according to group one specifications
that prohibit timber cutting except for maintenance purposes. Much of this
forested area cannot be entered except along certain proscribed paths. Growth
of the urban area into such zones can occur only through the process of an-
nexing parts of these zones into the city itself and thus will occur only
50
as required by the growth of population.
C. "Zakazniks" (Nature Reserves) and Natural. Monuments
Zakazniks and natural monuments are categories of preserve land that5are
given protected. status under Article 40 of the 1968 Land Legislation Act.
52
There is no clear legal distinction between these two forms. Authority for
the creation of such areas is derived from laws on natu5e conservation in
effect in each of the fifteen separate Soviet Republics. Impetus for the crea-
tion of such areas usually comes from the local level with individual oblasts,
kra or autonomous areas. They are often created by decrees of executive
committees of such areas with the approval of the Council of Ministers on the
republic level. Responsibility of maintaining the areas is up to.the local
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2000/x/06: CIA-RDP79-00798AO010001400103
executive committees but is often delegated. to local organizations such as
54
collective and state farms, cities or scientific organizations. Each individ-
ual area has its own rules of management, but in general economic activity
55
that would impair the natural condition of the monument is prohibited. Many
56
zakazniki. are administered as hunting reserves, however.
Some natural monuments and zakazniks are established for the permanent
preservation of an area, while many are given protection for a shorter period,
usually ten years, to allow the restoration of a particular stock of birds or
57
animals. The numbers of zakazniks and natural monuments, then, fluctuate wide-
ly, but this form offers protection to large territories of the Soviet Union.
The Lithuanian Soviet Republic, for instance, contains 91 zakazniks totaling
58
over 320,000 acres as well. as over 600 natural monuments. These areas are
usually classified according to the primary object of protection, as botanical,
59
geological, lake and zoological zakazniks.
D. National Parks
The creation of national or nature parks is in its infancy in the Soviet
Union. There is as yet no modern legislation on the union level, although it
is contemplated that this will be included in the proposed legislation regu-
60
lating natural areas in the Soviet Union. In the 1970`s, however, under the.
61
authority of a 1921 decree, three national parks have been created in the Baltic
republics. Several more are planned including a controversial national park
62
at Lake Baikal..
The influence of American practices are readily apparent in the emerging
Soviet national park system. The basic reason for creation of national parks
is an increase in mass tourism, leisure time and personal mobility. National
Parks are intended to combine human recreational needs with nature protection.
As in the United States, Soviet national parks are divided into differing
use zones, hunting and fishing are allowed in certain areas; there are
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 200 /06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140( -9
hotels, restaurants and tourist facilities and auto traffic is allowed
63
along proscribed roadways. Lands around the parks are restricted as to
64
use to provide a buffer zone for the protection of the park. Under the auspices
of the US-USSR Environmental. Protection Agreement, Soviet authorities are
presently studying American experience with the administration of the national
65
park system in order to gain ideas for implementation in the U.S.S.R.
D. Ecolo cal Reserves (Lapioved.niki)
Zapovedn.iki or ecological. reserves are the most important type of Soviet
66
protected areas under section 40 of the 1968 Land Legislation Act. This insti-
tution has no real counterpart in American law. Soviet ecological reserves are,
in principle, areas completely withdrawn from economic exploitation and ded.--
dicated to scientific research on the functioning of ecological systems. A
permanent scientific staff is assigned the task of collecting data on geologi-
cal, hydrological and other physical processes as well as monitoring flora and
wildlife resources as they exist in their natural state. Such reserves have
or are being established in all the differing biomes and ecological zones of the
67
Soviet Union in order to preserve "standards of nature" for various ecological
zones. These function as ecological baseline areas against which the influence
of human activity in unprotected areas of the same original ecological character
can be compared in order to establish and define the impact of human activity
68
on the environment. At the same time the ecological reserves constitute "pools"
of genetic material to ensure its survival for future generations and to allow
reintroduction of species of plants and animals into their original ecological
69
habitat outside the area of the reserves. Another principal function of these
areas is to allow the preservation of rare and endangered species of plants and
70
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 20W9/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A00100014%P2-9
Tourism is a subsidiary purpose and is generally allowed only for pre-
71
arranged excursions and along certain prescribed routes. In most ecological
reserves., mass tourism is not permitted., and a reason for the movement: to
create national parks in the Soviet Union is to create a dual system of natural
areas, one that would accomodate recreational activities and another system
27
which would be kept as free as possible from the impact of man's activities.
Soviet ecological reserves are created and regulated under legislation
on the union-republic level. Only very minor differences exist between the
laws of the various union-republics, however, since the current republic-level
legislation was passed pursuant to a 1961 order of the Council of Ministers
73
of the U.S.S.R. Impetus for the creation of a reserve usually comes from
influential scientific groups such as the Academy of Sciences on the union or
union republic levels, very little role is played by the public or conservation
74
organizations. Formal. application is made to the Council of Ministers at the
union-republic level who have the legal authority to decree the establishment
of an ecological reserve, but in fact, approval must be obtained from both
Gosplan, which is in charge of economic planning on the union level, as well
75
as from the Ministry of Agriculture of the U.S.S.R.
Once established, Soviet ecological reserves are under the jurisdiction of
many different governmental agencies. In some republics, such as the Russian
Socialist Federated Socialist Republic and Georgia, they are under the Council
of Ministers; in others such as Latvia, Estonia and Kazakh S.S.R., they are
within the Committee on Forestry; in still other republics (Azerbaijan),
76
they are under a. Committee for Nature Protection. In addition, there are four.--
teen union-level ecological reserves run by the Ministry of Agriculture of the
77
U.S.S.R., and many in Siberia are under the Soviet Academy of Sciences.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2000 /06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO010001400 9
Altogether about twenty different departments are responsible for administering
the national system of ecological reserves in fifteen different republics.
This has created a serious problem of coordination of the research efforts and
methodologies. In order to combat this, the Central Laboratory on Nature Con-
78
servation and the U.S.S.R. Ministry of Agriculture exercise oversight functions.
The present number of ecological reserves in the Soviet Union total 110
covering about 7.5 million hectares or 0.3 percent of the area of the country,.
In the last five years thirteen new reserves protecting 500,000 hectares
79
have been created, and about forty additional reserves are planned. Soviet
administrators distinguish three separate types of ecological reserves. First,
there are about forty reserves that are wilderness tracts never significantly
altered by man. Here the emphasis is on ecological baseline studies. Second,
other reserves are islands of a restored natural environment surrounded by
agricultural and urban lands. These. are established to provide a stock of
wildlife and genetic material to enrich the surrounding areas. Third, some
reserves recreate through artifical means a portion of a preexist:in material
environment in areas that have been radically altered by human activity such as
dam construction. The purpose of these areas is to provide a place of refuge
80
for the preexisting natural ecological systems.
Although some ecological reserves have their own individual, regulations,
general rules apply to all. such areas. Hunting, fishing economic and commer-
cial activity is forbidden. Tourism, when permitted, is limited. to specified
82
zones. In the other hand, fire prevention methods and control of plant diseases
through the limited application of pesticides is permitted. Tree cutting for
forest regeneration and for maintenance is allowed in certain zones of forested
83
ecological reserves. The taking of animals, birds and plants is permitted to
84
regulate overpopulation of stock and for scientific purposes; moreover, many
 Approved For Release 2O O9/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO0100014SW2-9
1. The Administration of a Wilderness
La ovednik - The Kavvkaz Reserve
The Kavka.z 7.apovednik is one of the best administered reserves of the
Soviet Union. Within its boundaries are 266,000 hectares of virgin wilderness
and it is surrounded by a buffer zone of about 50,000 hectares; it is thus
86
a good example of a type one, wilderness reserve.
The major area of the Kavka.z reserve sprawls across the northern Caucasus
mountain region near the Black Sea resort cities of Sochi, Gagra and Pitsunda
Encompassing a varied area of river valleys and glacier covered mountain peaks,
it preserves the diverse fauna and flora of a. mountain area that serves as the
transition between the sub-tropical climate of the Black Sea coast and the con-
tinental area to the north.
The reserve is under the direct administration of the Deaprtment of Nature
Protection, Reserves and Hunting of the Ministry of Agriculture of the U.S.S.R..,
although the legal authority for the establishment and administration is the
87
republic-level law on zapavednLkki of the Russian Federation. Despite the fact
that it is thus nominally under the administration of a republic-level agency,
in.practice both long and short term scientific research plans are prepared
according to guidelines set at the union-level; and the plans themselves must
88
be approved by the union-level agency. This direct coordination and the fact
that the reserve itself is a union-level state agency appears to be a major
contributing factor to the relatively high quality of its administration.
A director and a scientific council are in charge of the over-all adminis-
tration of the reserve. The work of the reserve is divided among six separate
divisions: (1) a Bookkeeping Office to keep the accounts, (2) an Office of
Buffer Zones to supervise hunting and other activities permitted .in the buffer
areas established to protect the reserve from human activity, (3) a Forest
Protection section whose seventy rangers enforce reserve regulations,
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 ? Approved For Release 2006/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO010001400-9
(4) an Internal Economics Office which repairs reserve facilities,
(5) an Office of Experimental Economic activity that sells souvenirs and
operates tourist facilities at a profit and (6) a Scientific Office consisting
of twenty scientists of different fields who conduct and supervise the scienti-
fic research work of the reserve. All the divisions except the Office of
1139
Experimental Economic Activity receive annual operating funds from the state.
The work of the scientific staff of the preserve consists of extensive
90
field work, laboratory work and reporting results in the form of scientific
papers. Monitoring stations have been established throughout the reserve,
and much of the scientific work is to inventory, classify and monitor the flora
and fauna of the reserve as well as the ecological interrelationships of
different species. The physical properties of the reserve such as the hydro-
logy, meteorology, air quality and soil properties are extensively monitored
also. The optimum population level of. certain higher animals is scientifically'
determined, and the numbers of some higher animals such as wolves and hoofed
91
animals are kept within the'population limits determined. The reserve is a
refuge and a center for research on several endangered species such as the
European Bison and its function as a gene pool of many rare and relict species
is very important. Scientific study is also made of the impact of man.on.
different ecosystems as well as on the restoration and increase of the biologi-
cal productivity of natural complexes. Some of the scientific work seems also
to have direct economic application, such as studies of the optimum conditions
93
for the growing of certain types of trees.
The reserve also has a very important tourist and educational. function
and, because of its location near the Black Sea resort cities, it is one of
the most visited Soviet ecological reserves, accomodating 500,000 visitors
yearly. Tourists and visitors are carefully confined to specific areas, -
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2QQJ09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO0100014Q&12-9
however. About 80 percent of the visitors come to a non contigious 300
hectare portion of the reserve situated close to the. Black Sea coast. Ex-
cursions are encouraged to the Khosta Grove., a stand of unique relict cau-
casus mountain vegetation including oak, beech, boxwood and yew trees that'
are several hundred years old. Here there is a visitor center9, zoo, nature
trails, the reserve headquarters and scientific laboratories. A second
road has been built into the reserve to the top of Mount Akhun, the highest
point along the Black Sea coast where commercial facilities for visitors have
95
been built.
In the major portion of the reserve, which lies about 50 miles inland,
two extensive unpaved roads have been designated as open to hikers; one about
125 miles in length, that bisects the reserve from north-east to south-west;
the other covers about 40 miles in the northern section of the reserve.
Visitors here, as in the other section of the reserve, are forbidden to hunt,
96
fish'or disturb the wildlife or vegetation. In 1972, the Ministry of Trans--
portation of the Russian Federation proposed to build a road through the pre-
serve along the longer of the two hiking roads in order to connect two cities.
This attempt was blocked through the efforts of the Academy of Sciences and
the All Russian Society for the Protection of Nature, but it was decided to put
the road through the northern section of the reserve following the route of
the second open hiking road. An increase in commercial facilities for visitors
97
is expected to result from this decision.
This incident is indicative of what appears to be the major problem of
the Soviet reserve system - their relatively weak legal status, Although the
scientific plans are formulated for five year periods and reviewed very year,
there is no written or legally binding comprehensive plan for use of the
reserve and no regulatory norms other than the relatively vague rules contained
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 200840 /06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO0100014OQ -9
in the. general law on reserves of the Russian Federation. This creates the
opportunity for ad--hoc administrative actions by the strong development-
oriented agencies affecting the resources of the reserve. It would seem that
the adoption of a legally binding plan for the overall operation and administ-
ration of the reserve would at least present a legal barrier to be overcome
by the governmental departments that would take actions affecting the reserve.
2. The Administration of a Restored.--Environment Reserve -
Voronezh Iapovednik
The Voronezh Ecological Reserve is situated in the center of the European
part of the Soviet Union about 400 miles south of Moscow. It preserves a
31,000 hectare island of the original fauna and flora of this region which is
now completely devoted to agriculture, industrial and commercial activity.
Several extremely rich forest ecosystems are represented including some 133
species of trees and shrubs, 900 species of plants, 187 types of birds and
98
54 species of mammals including elk, deer, moose, wild pig and beaver.
In contrast to the Kavkaz Zaovednik, Voronezh is too small to serve as
a standard of nature, a virgin wilderness area relatively free from outside in-
fluences. Instead, it is designed to serve as a. refuge and center of population
of animals and plants that would otherwise disappear totally because of the
influence of man. It is a reservoir of natural systems from which wildlife can
spread out to also populate existing suitable habitat in the surrounding area.
In some instances, especially as to beaver and deer, the work of the reserve
is to reintroduce wildlife to former parts of their range where they have
been eliminated. Populations of many animals are heavily managed, and wolves
have been completely exterminated because of the proximity of the reserve to
99
settled areas.
The scientific research of the reserve centers on beaver propogation. A
carefully managed population of about 300 beaver exist in the natural state, and,
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140012-9
NW *W01
in addition, there is an experimental beaver farm where the animals are
100
raised in captivity for introduction. into other areas. In the future, it is
contemplated that the Voronezh population will serve as the center from which
other farms will be established for the extensive commercial raising of beaver.
Other divisions of the reserve conduct research on the relationship between
forest soils and forest productivity, manunalism diseases, the biological con-
trol of insect pests and techniques for the temporary immobilization of ani-
orals so they can.be tagged or studied for short periods. A staff of fourteen
101
scientists is permanently assigned to the reserve.
The natural systems of the Voronezh reserve, despite their richness, are
adversely affected by the fact that there is no buffer zone surrounding the
reserve. Although no pesticides have ever been used on the reserve, they are
extensively used on the surrounding agricultural areas. Water pollution
that has its source outside the reserve is a problem. About 30,000 tourists
are accomodated each year, and they are encouraged to visit a museum and nature
center, the beaver farm and three short trails along which group tours can be
102
conducted; they are not allowed in other areas of the reserve.
The rules of the reserve. are enforced by fifty forest rangers. Although
the use regulations are substantially identical to the norms contained. in the
103
Russian Federation law, special rules allow hay cutting in certain areas as
104
well as other activities such as harvesting of wild fruits and berries.
11. A CRITIQUE OF SOVIET ADMINISTRATION OF ECOLOGICAL RESERVES
Other than the embryonic national park system, the network of ecological
reserves in the Soviet Union is the only nationally- organized system to pro-
tect natural areas. It is an institution that in general has been successful,
not only in protecting varying samples of the rich ecosystems of the U.S.S.R
and many endangered and rare species, but also in generating most of the wild-
life and ecological research being done in that country. Soviet authorities
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00'798A001000140012-9
 Approved For Release 200Q}9/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140QJ ' 9 '
have -wisely resisted the temptation to open them to mass tourism and are in-
stead creating a parallel system of national parks to fulfill this need.
At the same time it is well recognized by Soviet scholars and adminis-
trators that reforms are needed to perfect the system of zapovedniki A chief
problem is the multiplicity of different bureaucracies in charge of administra--
tion of the system. Direct control of the reserves on the republic level is
vested in agencies such as forestry committees, whose main task is the economic
exploitation of resources pursuant to the centralized economic plans developed
1.05
at the union and republic levels. Coordination at the union level is exercised
by the Central Laboratory on Nature Conservation and the Department.of State
Nature Reserves that are relatively weak subdivisions of the power:tul union-
level Ministry of Agriculture whose main job, of course, is ful.l.f: i.limce.nt of
agricultural production quotas. This has resulted in two major problems;
preservation and research is often sacrificed to timber and agricultural pro-
106
duction, hunting and fishing interests. There is also great pressure for re-
search to have direct application to increased timber, production or exploitation
107
of resources. In addition, research is often incoordinated and Soviet writers
complain of non-standardized and conflicting methodologies, classification
108
systems and nomenclature.
Difficulties have also been experienced in the operation of new zapovedni_ki
as well as in assuring their permanent status. The process of creating new
109
reserves.is unregulated by law, and the key authorization is needed from two
union-level agencies concerned almost completely with economic production,
110
Gosplan and the Ministry of Agriculture. Thus the realization of proposals to
protect large additional tracts representative of all the ecosystems of the
U.S.S.R. has been an extremely slow process. In addition, under the present
system there seems to be no real impediment to simple administrative abolition
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 200W/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140(-9
of ecological reserves or radical changes in their boundaries. In both 1951
111
and 1961, large numbers of reserves were simply abolished. Lthere is no legal
requirement for the permanent maintenance of ecological. reserves, and the lack of a
ministry for environmental protection in the Soviet Union means that there is
no powerful. administrative arm that can resist the economic planners designs
on the resources of particular areas
Another problem grows out of the fact that the legal norms and rules
governing zapovedniki are very vague and often difficult to enforce. There is
no union-level legislation and the republic level laws merely restrict
certain activities such as tree cutting, hunting, fishing and economic activity
but allow the administrators of the individual reserve or the direct super-
visory state committee the freedom to make exceptions or qualifications from
112
the general norms and standards. This leads to wide variations between in-
dividual reserves that are subject to the same legal standards. For example,
while most reserves do not provide tourist facilities, some accomodate. hundreds
113
of thousands of tourists per year and operate as "de facto" national parks.
114
Others allow economic and agricultural activities within their boundaries.
Moreover, theLrograms to eliminate wolves and other predators in Soviet Re-
serves are inconsistent with the legal requirement that the natural ecosystems
be undisturbed by man. Reserves are also insufficiently protected from out-
side influences that may infringe on the protected environment. The law pro-
vides for the maintenance of buffer zones around reserves but does not define
115
either their extent or the permissible activity within such buffer zones. The
"Principles of Water Legislation of the U.S.S.R." does, however, provide pro-
tection for the water of preserves against withdrawal, diversion and discharge
116
of wastes. In addition, difficulties of enforcement of the standards and
rules of reserves have been encountered because present law merely subjects
the violator to sanctions under the general laws against unauthorized hunting,
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 20W09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A00100014WI2-9
1.1.7
fishing and felling of trees. in the case of violation of a standard parti-
cular to a reserve that is not applicable in territories outside reserves,
11.8
there is no enforcement mechanism.
Efforts are underway to correct some of these shortcomings, however. A new
law is being prepared on the union-level that would provide a comprehensive regu-
latory structure and legal. basis for all types of Soviet natural. areas. The
final shape of this legislation is unclear, since its passage is envisioned
119
for 1976, but several areas of reform are being discussed. First, a new agency
would be created on the union-level that would act as a supervisory authority
for Soviet natural areas and especially for ecological reserves. Soviet ad-
ministrators consider it essential that this agency be independent of and
superior to the ministries concerned with economic exploitation of particular
120
resources. The new agency would have wide powers to coordinate the wildlife
research efforts of ecological reserves, thus unifying the present fragmented
program in this area. A legal. basis would be provided for the creation of new
preserves and for the addition of areas to represent all the ecological areas
121
of the Soviet Union. Second, although day-to-day administration would remain
in the republic level agencies, the union-level law would provide a legal.
framework for the different categories of Soviet natural areas, eliminating the
122
wide differences in administrative practice that now exist. Third, new re-
gulations would specify the conditions for using the reserves for tourism and
123
from economic activity. The law would also relate to the stabilization of
the territory of natural areas and conditions for the withdrawal of areas from
124
the reserve system. Fourth, the enforcement of the regulations for the use of
reserves would be stregthened by providing a legal basis for administrative,
civil and criminal law sanctions for those who violate the rules of natural
Approved For Release 2000/09/06: CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 20000/06: CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140
125
areas. Such reforms are certain to be opposed by Soviet economic planners,
but, would contribute greatly to strengthening the system of nature reserves
in the Soviet Union.
III. THE USEFULNESS OF THE CONCEPT OF ECOLOGICAL RESERVES IN
THE UNITED STATES AND FOR FURTHER U.S. - SOVIET COOPERATION
IN THE FIELD OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Until very recently, the importance of the direct protection of wildlife
and wildlife habitat was underestimated in the United States. Environmental
law has concentrated on pollution control and the conservation of physical re-
sources. Wildlife protection was an important by-product of this concern,
but direct effort for wildlife and ecosystem management was concerned with
game management and the protection of higher species of direct usefulness to
126
man. The effort to preserve non-game species by a few organizations like the
National Audubon Society was thought to be a minor aim to protect birds and
animals for aesthetic reasons. Publicity and concern for endangered species
has largely been stock-specific with little regard for the ecosystem in
which they function. Little concern has been given to the value of preserving
endangered ecosystems.
This situation is slowly changing. The economic importance of consumptive
uses of wildlife has continued to grow, but as.even larger increase has occurred
in the value of non-consumptive uses as Americans increasingly utilize wild-
127
life resources for nature study, photography and wildlife viewing. Even more
importantly, increasing recognition is being given to the fact that the pre.--
servat.ion of diverse ecosystems and a reservoir of biological species is nec-
essary to man's survival. The Council on Environmental Quality has called
attention to the fact that man directly depends on thousands of species of
plants and animals and many of these arc dependent on the ecological roles played
128
by other forms of life. Man may in the future have to draw on stocks of
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved-For Release 2000/$ 06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO010001400W
genetic material of the diverse ecosystems of the world to satisfy his needs.
The noted biologist, Dr. Rene Dubos, has voiced his concern that the over-
simplification of ecosystems inherent in industrialization and intensive
agricultural.. activity may cause a chain reaction leading to widespread failures
129
of the ecosystems of the planet. Concern for endangered species has evolved
from concentration on a few higher species to studies that now show that one--
tenth of certain lower animal species as well as one---tenth of North American
130
plant species are presently endangered.
Recent federal legislation has displayed an awareness of this new basis
131
for wildlife management. The Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, establishes
protection for marine mammals in order that they may continue to fulfill an
132
important niche in the marine ecosystem. The Endangered Species Act of 1973,
provides mechanisms for the protection of endangered and threatened species of
plants and lower animal life as well as higher species of wildlife. It also
133
emphasizes the protection of habitat of such species.
Still more must he done, however. The federal government has never under-
taken to systematically preserve large samples of the original North American
ecosystem in their natural state. Moreover, there is no federal focus for
wildlife research, monitoring and information about the functioning of eco-
systems. The Council on Environmental Quality has stated that the fragmented
and limited ecological research activities scattered among federal agencies,
universities and professional societies renders this information largely
unavailable to aid in the solution of particular environmental problems, to
provide a basis for regulatory activity involving natural resources and to aid
134
in determining national goals and priorities.
Formal creation by the federal government of a national system of eco.
logical reserves for the same general purposes as the system now emerging
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2000h/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140O9
in the Soviet Union could contribute to the solution of these problems.
Such a system together with an agency statutorily empowered to coordinate
research would provide the needed federal focus to broad based ecological re-
search, wildlife surveys and monitoring and would have immediate practical use-
135
fulness. Ecological baselines. would be created in order to measure and com-
pare environmental impact in non-protected areas. This system would also act
as a reservoir of genetic diversity and would help to develop the management
techniques and knowledge necessary to ensure the survival of rare and en-
dangered species. Long range monitoring would provide an early warning
system for potentially detrimental environmental disruption. A data base
would be provided that would enable parameters to be created for the efficient.
economic use and management of our resources.
Such a system might be created with a minimum of expense by utilizing
insofar, as possible existing public lands and an existing governmental agency,
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Many areas of the public lands such as
certain wilderness areas, parts of national parks and national forests are
presently managed under legal principles that would be consistent with the
management of a system of ecological reserves. In addition there could be pro-
vision for state, university and even privately owned lands to he added to the
system on a voluntary basis. In some cases, of course, extensive new areas
would have to be acquired to ensure a systematic representation of all habitats
or to protect endangered species. The establishment of a tallgrass prairie
reserve, for example, would be needed to provide representation of this unique
1.36
original American ecosystem.
The creation of such a system in the United States with similarities to
the zapovedniki of the Soviet Union would, as a by-product, lead to greater
international cooperation for protection of the biosphere. With the Soviet
Union now instituting a system of national parks modeled in many respects on
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 20f9/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO0100014-9
the Uaited States' example., there would be a reapproachment of the legal
institutions of both countries that would accelerate the effort already
begun within the framework of the U.S. - U.S.S.R. Environmental Protection
Agreement to exchange information, standardize terminology and research me-
thods. This cooperation might be regularized through.the negotiation of a
now treaty between the two countries on the model of the Convention on Nature
137
Protection and Wild Life Preservation in the Western Hemisphere that would
pledge the permanence of the reserve systems in both countries and would de-
fine the specific channels of international cooperation..
CONCLUSION
Despite its different economic and social system, the Soviet Union has
evolved a legal and administrative framework for the preservation of natural
areas that deserves the attention of American lawyers and administrators.
The Soviet zapovednik (ecological reserve) has no exact counterpart in Am-
erican law in that it combines a nationally organized system of scientific re-
search with the preservation of representative ecosystems in their natural
state. Although the Soviet institution is not without problems, it has
generally been a success and is being reformed and expanded. The adoption
of an analogous national system of ecological reserves by the United States
would help to provide a needed federal focus for wildlife and ecological re-
search and would have the additional advantage of furthering the international
effort to conserve land resources and the integrity of the ecosystems of the
biosphere.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved. For Release 200W?/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140&W-9
Citations
*Professor of Law, University of North Carolina. The author was the
first legal scholar to work in the Soviet Union in connection with the im-
plementation of the provision for legal and administrative cooperation in
Article 2 of the US--USSR Agreement on Cooperation in the Field of Environmental
Protection. The writer gratefully acknowledges the cooperation of many Soviet
lawyers and scientists, especially Oleg KOibasov and Alexander Timoshenko of
the Institute of State and Law, Moscow, Andre Barabanstchikov, Director of the
Kavkaz State Reserve and Boris Kester, Director of the Voronezh State Reserve.
1. Agreement on Cooperation in the Field of Environmental Protection with the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, May 23, 1972, [1972] 23 U.S.T. 845,
T.I.A.S. No. 7345.
2. Only a few books and articles have been published in English and these con-
sist chiefly of translations of Soviet authors. See Water Resources Law
and Policy in the Soviet Union (I. Fox ed. 1971); G. Aksenyonok, Land Law,
in Fundamentals of Soviet Law 286 (P. Romashkin ed. undated); Continent,
The Soviet--U.S. Environmental Protection Agreement, 1.4 Nat. Res. J. 275
(1974). The pioneering work in this field has been done by non--legal
scholars. See P. Pryde, Conservation in the Soviet Union (1972); M. Cold-
man, The Spoils of Progress: Environmental Pollution in the. Soviet Union
(1972); Powell, The Social. Costs of Modernization: Ecological Problems
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140012-9
 Approved For Release 20Qg{U9/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO0100014W2-9
in the U.S.S.R., 1971. World Politics 618; Bush, Environmental Problems in
the U.S.S.R., 21 Problems of Communism 21 (1972); M. Goldman, Environmental
Disruption in the Soviet Union, in Proceedings of International. Symposium:
3.
Environmental Disruption, 171 (Tsuru ed. Mar. 1970).
The total area of the Soviet Union is 2,240,220 hectares, about 2
1/2 times
4.
the size of the United States.
U.S.S.R. Constitution of 1936, art 14.
S.
6.
Goldman, supra note 2.
Id. at 108--111.
7.
Id at 226--228.
8.
Id. at 178-203.
9.
A plan to establish a national park at Lake Baikal is still not, implemented
as a policy struggle continues in the Soviet Union over the use of the'
resources of the Baikal watershed. In.1975, however, a paper-making factory
was temporarily closed by the Soviet government because its effluent
exceeded allowable limits. Interview with 0. Kolbasov, Head of Section
of Environmental Law of the Institute of State and Law, Moscow on June 9,
1975.
10. Fifth Annual Report of the Council on Environmental Quality 9-15 (1.974).
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 20QW09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A00100014QQr12-9
See Real Estate. Research Corporation, The Costs of Sprawl: Environmental and
Economic Costs of Alternative Residential Development Patterns at the Urban
Fringe, prepared for the Council on Environmental Quality; the Office of
Policy Development and Research, Department of Housing and Urban Development;
and the Office of Planning and Management, Environmental. Protection. Agency
(1974).
11. See text accompanying notes 45-50 infra.
.12. This situation may change, however, as there is increased emphasis on the
production and use of private automobiles in the Soviet Union. Moreover, there
are no emission controls on Soviet autos and trucks comparable to the stand-
ards contained in Title II of the Federal Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. ?? 1857f?-1
to 1857f-12 (1970).
13. Postanovleniy ob usil.eniy prirody i ulychsheni.y ispol'zovaniya prirodnikh
resursov (Decree on the Reenforcement of Nature and the Better Use of Natural
Resources), Sobraniye Postanovleniy S.S.S.R. (Collection of Decrees of the
U.S.S.R.), No. 2, p. 19 (1973) [hereinafter cited as Decree 898].
14. 0. Kol.basov, Priroda pod ochranoiy zakona (Nature Under the Protection of
the Law) 20 (1975) [hereinafter cited as Kolbasov].
15. 42 U.S.C. ? 4221 et seq. (1970).
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2009&9/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140Q, -9
Y
16. Osnovy zemelnogo zakonodatel' stva S.S.S.R. I soyuznikh respublik (Fca.nda--
mental Land Legislation of the U.S.S.R. and the Soviet Republics), December
13, 1968, Vedomosti Verkhovnogo Sovieta C.C.C.R. (Record of the Supreme
Soviet of the U.S.S.R.) No. 51, p. 485 (1968). [hereinafter cited as
Fundamental Land Legislation].
17. Osnovy vodnogo zakonodatel' stva S.S.S.R. i soyuznikh respublik (Fundamental
Water. Legislation of the U.S.S.R. and the Soviet Republics), December 10, :1970,
Vedomosti. Verkhovnogo Sovieta S.S.S.R.. (Record of the Supreme Soviet of the
U.S.S.R.) No. 50, p. 566 (1970). [hereinafter cited as Water Law D~'cree].
18. Osnovy zakonodatel' stva S.S.S.R. i soyuznikh respublik o zdravocokhranenii
(Fundamental Legislation of the U.S.S.R and the Soviet Republics on the
Protection of Health), December 19, 1969, Vedomosti Verkhovnogo Sovieta.
S.S.S.R. (Record of the Supreme Soviet of the U.S.S.R) No. 52, p. 466
(1969).
19. The decrees of the fifteen republics are almost identical. For the text of
the decree of the Russian Federation see Ob okhrane prirody v RSFSR (On
the Protection of Nature in the Russian Federation), October 27, 1960,
Vedomosti Verkhovnogo Sovieta RSFSR (Record of the Supreme Soviet of the
Russian Federation) No. 40, p. 586 (1960) [hereinafter cited as Nature
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2000&9/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140f# -9
Conservation Law of the Russian Federation]
20. For an example see the substantive section of the National Environmental
Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. ?4321 (1970).
21. The NEPA impact statement process is, of course, the best example of this.
See 42 U.S.C. ? 4332 (1970)._
22. All Soviet ministries and agencies are required to elaborate and submit to
Gosplan long range and annual plans for environmental protection as an
integral part of their draft plans for economic development. Decree 898,
supra note 13, art.3; Kolbasov Interview supra note 9.
23. Kolbasov Interview, supra note 9.-
24. Water. Law Decree, supra note 17, art 38.
25. Kolbasov, supra note 14 at 67-68. This system bears resemblance to the
American system of water pollution control before 1972, which was a
notorious failure.
26. Gosplan regularly budgets the financing of pollution control equipment in
the plans for the building of new factories and industrial, complexes.
Kolbasov Interview, supra note 9.
27. Id.
28. This is now possible to a certain extent with the cooperation of Soviet
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2,/09/06: CIA-RDP79-00798A0010001*012-9
authorities under the auspices of the U.S.-U.S.S.R. Environmental Protection
Agreement.
29. See Tarlock, Land Use Choice: National Prerogative vs. International
Policy, 13 Nat. Res. J. 344 (1973); The United Nations' Educational,
Scientific and Cultural. Organization (UNESCO), one of the few international
organizations to take up this question, has proposed to define criteria,
ways and means for the establishment of an adequate network of biosphere
reserves. United Nations Environment Programme, Report of the United
Nations Environment Programme on its second session, Nairobi, 11 to 22
March, 1974, UNEP/GC/26 (10 April.. 1974), Annex I, pp. 87-95.
30. Fundamental Land Legislation, supra note 16, art. 4.
31. In the Soviet Union, agricultural organizations and individuals who operate
a. farm without hired labor are granted the permanent use of such land.
Fundamental Land Legislation, supra note 16, art. 22.
32. These include lands outside city limits that serve as a green and
open space area and as a reserve for future expansion. Fundamental Land
Legislation, supra note 1.6, art. 34.
33. This is a miscellaneous category of special. purpose lands.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2000106 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO0100014004&L9
34. This category includes not only forested land but also lands not afforested
but designated for forestry use. Fundamental Land Legislation, supra note.
1.6, art. 43.
35. These lands are submerged lands as well as those used for water resource
projects: Fundamental Land Legislation, supra note 16, art 44.
.36. This is a catch-all category including all land not within the other five
use designations. Fundamental Land Legislation, supra note 16, art 45.
37. No English term is adequate to translate the Russian word zapoveclnik. Its
literal meaning is "forbidden area." However, ecological reserve seems to
be the emerging English term and this will be used here.
38. Interview with V. Krinitsky, Head of Department of State Nature Reserves,
U..S.S.R. Ministry of Agriculture, on.June 27, 1975. See also text accompany-
ing notes 119-125 infra.
39. Soviet forests are divided into three groups or categories. Group I forests
are not to be used for commercial harvesting of timber. Group II forests
are designated open to commercial cutting, but the annual. cut in any given
tract must not exceed the annual forest growth. Group III forests are open
to intensive timber harvesting. Postanovleni.y S.N.K. S.S.S.R. 0 poryadke
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 20001/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A00100014002-9
otvoda lesosek v lesakh gosydarstvennogo fonda S.S.S.R. (Decree on the Order
of allotment of wood cutting areas and the State Forest Fund of the U.S.S.R.)
April 23, 1943, Sbornik zakonodatelvnykh aktov o zemle (Collection of
Legislative Acts on Land), Pt. 8, p. 249, art. 1. [hereinafter cited as USSR
Forest Law]. See Pryde, supra note 2 at 94-95; see also G. Aksenyonok,
supra note 2 at 305-307.
40. Pryde, supra note 2 at 95.
41. U.S.S.R. Forest Law, supra note 39, art. 1.
42. For an account of Soviet practice in this regard see Pryde, supra note 2 at
95-98.
43. N. Kuznetsov and M. L'vovich, Problems of Complex Use and Conservation of
Water Resources, in Water Resources Law and Policy in the Soviet Union,
21, 36-37 (I. Fox ed. 1971).
44. E. Zhemvrovsky, Pravovaya Okhrana lesov (Legal Protection of Forests), 1974
Sovietskoe Gosudarstva i pravo (Soviet State and Law), No. 3 pp. 78-80.
45. Interview with V. Borisov, Secretary General, Central Research Laboratory
on Nature Conservation, U.S.S.R. Ministry of Agriculture, Moscow on June 24,
1975; See Pryde, supra note 2 at 3.57 for a list of the radius of green--heft
zones around selected Soviet cities.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140012-9
 Approved For Release 2000{,89/06: CIA-RDP79-00798AO0100014000-9
r
46. Green-belt zones are given legal protection under the Fundamental Land
Legislation, supra note 16, art 34. See also Decree 898, supra note 13,
art. 13, which charges the Council of Ministers of each Union-republic
with the task of completing long term and short range plans for the bound-
aries of green-belt zones for all Soviet cities. In response to Decree
898, th`e city of Sochi inventoried and expanded its green belt area as
well as natural monuments within the city limits. T. Gontaro,,
Zelyenyy naryad goroda (Green Apparel for Cities), Soviety Deputatov
Trydyashchikhsya (Council of Deputies of the Workers), No. 9, p. 37-38 (Sept.
1973).
47. Borisov Interview, supra note 45. Many Russians are openly critical. of
the number of dachas that have been permitted in the green-belt zone
around Soviet cities.
48. See text accompanying note 39 supra.
49. Republic-level legislation allows tree cutting in. green-belt areas only
with the permission of the local Soviet Executive Committee. Nature Con-
servation Law of the Russian Federation, supra note 19, arts. 7 and 10.
50. Borisov Interview, supra note 45.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved [-or Kelease ZOO IOb : (;IA-KL)PIU-UU19SAUU'I00014UMJW-9
a ? v
51. Fundamental Land Legislation, supra note 16 art. 40.
52. Natural monuments are usually of a smaller area than zakazniks, sometimes
consisting merely of individual trees or rock formations.
53. For example see Nature Conservation Law of the Russian Federation, supra
note 19, arts. 8-9.
54. L. Shanoshnikov, Postoyannye zakazniki v sisteme okhrany prinody SSSR
(Permanent Reserves in the System of Protection of Nature in the U.S.S.R.)
in Primechatel' nye prirodynye lanshafty SSSR i ikh okhrana (Outstanding
Natural Landscapes of the U.S.S.R. and their Protection), 1, 7 (L. Shanosh-
nikov ed. 1967).
55. Id.
56. Borisov Interview, supra note 45.
57. Pryde, supra note 2 at 65.
58. Borisov, The Soviet System of Protected Natural Areas, 45 National Parks and
Conservation. Magazine 8, 10 (1971); The total number of zakaniks was 1000
comprising 10,000,000 hectares in 1960. See Pryde, supra note 2 at 65.
59. Shanoshnikov, supra note 54 at 10--I1.
60. Krinitsky Interview, supra note 38.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 20QW09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A00100014SW2-9
" ) V
61. Soviet authors trace the origin of the Soviet national park system to a.
decree issued during Lenin's time entitled "On the Preservation of Natural
Monuments, Gardens and Parks." For the text of this decree in English, see
Pryde, supra note 2 at 213.
62. Krinitsky Interview, supra note 38. For an account of the bake Baikal con-
troversy see Goldman, supra note 2 at 178-209; see also Pryc.e, supra note
2 at 63, 147-150.
63. L. Velousova, ob organi.zatsii prirodikh parkov v sovietskom soyze (On the
Organization of National Parks in the Soviet Union) in Primechateinge
prorodnye landshafty SSSR i ikh okhrana (Outstanding Natural. Landscapes in
the U.S.S.R. and their Protection), 144, 144-146 (L. Shanoshnikov ed 1967).
64. Interview with A. Shalupov, Head of Committee on Hunting and Reserves,
Russian Federation, on June 20, 1975.
65. Krinitsky Interview, supra note 38.
66. Fundamental Land Legislation, supra note 16, art 40.
67. I. Gerasimov and L. Abramov, Chelovek, obshchestvo i okryzhayshchaya srede
(Man, Society and the Environment), 264 (1973).
68. Kri.nitsky Interview, supra note 38.
69. L. Okorokova, Pravovoy rezhim zapovednikov (The Legal Regime of Ecological
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 200&M/06: CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140W-9
Reserves), 1974 Sovietskoe gosudarstvo i pravo, 66, 69-70 (July 1.974).
70. Id at. 66-67.
71. I Gerasimov and L. Abramov, Chelovek, obshchestvo i okhryzhayshchaya srede
(Man, Society and its Environment), 271 (1975); some Soviet ecological
reserves permit mass tourism, however, such as Tberda in the Caucacus
Borisov Interview, supra note 45.
72. Krinitsky Interview, supra note 38.
73. Elkin and Konstantinidi, Pravovoe polozhenie gosudarstvennykh zapovednikov
(Legal Regulation of State Ecological. Reserves), 1973 Sotsi.alistichesk.aya
zakonst' (Socialist Legislation), 8. The law on zapovedniki of the Russian
Federation is, of course, the most important and is the model for the
legislation in effect in the other union-republics. Ob utverzhdenii poloz-
heniya o gosudarstvennykh zapovednikakh RSFSR, nakhodyashchikhsya v vedenii
glavnogo upravleniya okhotnich' ego khozyaystva i zapovednikov pri sovete
ministrov RSFSR (On the Establishment of Regulation of State 8cological
Reserves of the Russian Federation under the Administration of the Central
Bureau for Hunting and Ecological Reserves within the Council of Ministers
of the Russian Federation), Decree No. 769 of the Council of Ministers of
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140012-9
 ,Approved For Release 200(9/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140&9
the Russian Federation on June 5, 1962, Sbornik postanovleniy RSFSR
(Collection of Decrees of the RSFSR) No. 11, p. 61 (1962) [hereinafter cited
as Russian Federation Law on Ecological Reserves].
74. Interview with V. Emelianova, Professor of Law, Moscow State University,
June 17, 1975.
75. Id.
76. V. Emelianova, Sistema organov upravleniya zapovednim delom (System of
Administrative Organa Dealing with Ecological Reserves), 20 Uchcnie
Zapiski, 159, 160 (1970)
77. Krinitsky Interview, supra note 38.
78. Id.
79. Id. For a listing of Soviet Ecological Reserves as of 1966, see Pryde,
supra note 2 at 201--209.
80. Krinitsky Interview, supra note 38.
81. Russian Federation Law on Ecological Reserves, supra note 73, art. 10.
82. Id., art 12.
83. Id., art 14.
84. Id., art. 13.
85. Pryde, supra note 2 at 60,
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140012-9
 , approved For Release 20W09/06: CIA-RDP79-00798AO0100014802-9
86. See text accompanying supra note 80.
87. Russian Federation Law on Ecological Reserves, supra note 73.
88. Interview A. Barabanstchikov, Director of the Kavkaz Za.povednik on July 18,
1975.
89. Id.
90. The construction of new scientific laboratory facilities and offices are
planned for 1976. Barabanstchikov Interview, supra note 88.
91. Barabanstchikov Interview, supra note.88. There seems to be a changing
attitude in the Soviet Union toward predators and especially wolves. In
1971, Professor Pryde reported an effort to exterminate wolves in Soviet
Preserves. Pryde,-supra note 2 at 60. The Director of the Kavkaz
Zayovednik reports, however, that Soviet authorities now recognize the
necessity to protect wolves and other predators within reserves, but feel
that it is necessary to sceintifically manage their numbers. Barabanst-
chikov Interview, supra note 88.
92. Interview supra note 88. For an account of the efforts to protect the
European Bison in the Kavkaz Zapovednik see Pryde, supra note 2 at 73-75.
93. Barabanstchikov Interview, supra note 88. This work has centered on the
growing conditions for the yew and boxwood trees of the Kavkaz zapovednik
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 4pproved For Release 20Q09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000149W2-9
and efforts to propagate them outside the reserve. Id. For additional in--
tion concerning the scientific work of the Kavkaz ZaTovednik see
f
94.
orma
Pryde, supra note 2 at 56-57.
A new zoo and expanded tourist facilities are planned for the Khosta
95.
grove in 1976.
Id.
Parabanstchikov Interview, supra note 88.
96.
Id.
97.
Id. Despite the existence of large buffer zones where only hunting and, some
commercial logging is permitted, some parts of the reserve appear to be
adversely affected by industrial activity. The river that forms the
boundary of the unique Khosta grove appears to be highly polluted by sedi-
mentation that perhaps has its source in the operations of a quarry located
on the opposite bank of the river. The noise emanating from the quarry
operations can be heard in many parts of the Khosta grove. Observations
by the author, July 9, 1975.
98. Interview B. Kester, Director, Voronezh Ecological Reserve, on July 14, 1975.
Like the Kavkaz, Voronezh is a union-level raLove.dnik that publishes its
own scientific journal.
99. Id.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 200009/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140W-9
100. The experimental beaver farm has a capacity of about 7100 beavers. There
are presently about 150,000 heavers in the natural state in the Soviet Union;
it is estimated that about one-half this number are descended from Voronegh
beavers. Interview N. Lavrova, Head of Beaver Laboratory, Voronezh Reserve,
on July 14, 1975.
101. Kester. Interview, supra note 98.
102. Id.
103. See text accompanying notes 81-85 supra.
104. Kester Interview, supra note 98.
105. Emelianova, supra note 76 at 162.
106. Id. at 162-163.
107. See Pryde, supra note 2 at 46-47.
108. 1 Gerasimov and L Abramov, Chelovek., obshchestvo i okruzhayshchaya s.reda
(Man, Society and the Environment), 272 (1-973).
109. This fact is lamented by Soviet writers. See L. Okorokova, Pravoboy
rezhim gosudarstvennikh zapovednikov v SSSR (The Legal Regime of State
Ecological Reserves in the U.S.S.R.) 9 (1971).
110. See text accompanying note 75 supra.
111. See Pryde, supra note 2 at 51-52, 59; This was apparently done to permit
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 Approved For Release 20QWfl9/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140$ 2-9
the economic exploitation of some areas. Okorokova, supra note 69 at 72.
This apparently could happen again. The law of the Latvian Union-Republic,
for example, states that abolition or changes in status of ecological re-
serves is in the discretion of the Latvian Council of Ministers. Poloz-
henie No. 826 o gosudarstvennikh zapovednikakh (Decree on State Ecological
Reserves) Dec. 29, 1961, Vedomosti Verkhovnogo Soveta i Pravitel.'stva LSSR
(Record of the Supreme Soviet of the Latvian SSR No. 6, art 30 (1962)
[hereinafter cited as Latvian Law on Ecological Reserves].
112. For the general norms applicable to ecological reserves see text accompanying
notes 81-85 supra.
1.13. Borisov, supra note 58 at 13.
114. Elkin and Konstantinidi, supra note 73 ati10.
115. Russians Federation Law On Ecological. Reserves, supra note 73, art. 17.
116. Water Law Decree, supra note 17, art 30; See Kolbasov, supra note 14 at 68.
117. Russian Federation Law on Ecological Reserves, supra note 73, art. 24.
118. Emelianova, Otvetstvennoct' za naruzhen'ie rezhima zapovednikov (Responsibil-
ity for the violation of the Regime of Ecological Reserves) 24 Uchebye
Vypusk 158, 158-159 (1971).
119. Sholupov Interview, supra note 64.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 ' V Approved For Release 2008/Q9/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140&W-9
10
120. Id.
121. Krinitsky Interview, supra note 38.
122. Shalupov Interview, supra note 64.
123. L. Okorokova, Pravovoy Rezhim gosudarctvennikh zapovednikov v SSSR (Legal
Regime for State Ecological Reserves), 11--12 (1971).
.124. Id. at 9, 11-12.
125. Emelianova. Interview, supra note 74.
126. Fifth Annual Report of the Council on Environmental Quality, 179 (1974).
127. Id. at 181, 324.
128. Id. at 325.
129. See Hill, Ecologists Fear Peril to Nature, The New York Times, June 8, 1975,
130. Fifth Annual Report of the Council on Environmental Quality, 325 (1974).
131. 16 U.S.C.? 1361 et seq. (Supp. 1972).
132. 16 U.S.C.? 1531. et seq. (Supp 1974).
133. 16 U.S.C. ?1534 (Supp. 1974).
134. Fifth Annual Report of the Council on Environmental Quality, 330-33, (1974).
135. In July, 1974, the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality es-
tablished an interagency program to develop a National System of Ecological
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000140012-9
 ? rY
R er
136. See Farney, Trying to Restore a Sea of Grass, The Wall Street Journal,
June 6, 1975, P. 15 col, 5.
137. Oct. 12, 1940, 56 Stat. 1354 (1942), T.S. No. 981 (effective April 30, 1942).
Approved For Release 200QW/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140(9
Reserves. Id. at 204.
Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP79-00798A001000140012-9