To begin with, let us remind you that after several delays the
Russian Government carried at last a resolution №1641-р with a
detailed description of the borders of Baikal protection zones:
central, buffer and a zone of weather impact. The Central zone
(CEZ) is the most important one in the matter of protection of the
Lake Baikal as it includes area of lake water, its islands, water
protection zone and specially protected territories. Besides, in
its last variant it coincides with the territory of the World
Natural Heritage to which the Lake Baikal belongs since 1996.
Namely for the CEZ the Department of Natural Resources composed
and sent for the agreement in all concerned ministries, departments
and regions on May 14, 2007 The List of activities forbidden in the
CEZ of Baikal natural territory which became the object for
attacks.
There is some history. In fact the list of such activities has
been existed since 2001 as a Governmental Regulation №643 from
August 30. This document was so stringent that being a non-working
one (the CEZ borders within which it must have been worked hadn't
existed at that time) caused a negative reaction in Baikal regions.
The necessity of its softening, in order to let inhabitants of the
coastal regions in Irkutsk district and the Republic of Buryatia
live and work normally, became the reason of making amendments
which cause new dissatisfactions. And this dissatisfaction is based
mostly on elementary ignorance of the very subject of
dissatisfaction.
Let us leave the rhetoric by MK of Buryatia about the forbidden
reactor production in the CEZ. It is unlikely that the production
of these aggregates was ever or will be the base of wellbeing for
Baikal region inhabitants. It must be mentioned that Stanislav
Beloborodov isn't satisfied with the fact that "the fishing made by
agricultural and not agricultural producers in Baikal and rivers
flowing into it, in the spawning places of valuable species of
fish" was referred to the forbidden activity. He imagined that
after the list will come into force it would turn with terrible
social consequences for a fishing plant in Nizhneangarsk (Northern
Baikal region of the Buryatia).
Nevertheless, the author most likely reads inattentively what he
is writing. It is a very important moment that the fishing is
forbidden in places of spawning of valuable species of fish. One
might be not a specialist in a fishing trade to understand that the
places of spawning of valuable species of fish must be guarded
thoroughly because the fish which Nizhneangarskiy fishing plant
would catch will spawn there. Possibly this measure will help to
stabilize and then to improve the situation with northern Baikal
population of omul which as other its populations is in low
level.
Mr. Beloborodov is also anxious in vain about the prohibition on
production of building materials and many other industrial products
because these prohibitions don't apply to the production of goods
for local needs. It is astonishing as well that those obstacles
which are supposedly put in the way of development of special
economical zones of tourist direction by the List also cause
dissatisfaction. At the same time MK of Buryatia doesn't worry
about the fact that similar zone in Listvyanka is being built
without ecological assessment, without taking into account Russian
and international experience of the natural tourism organization,
original and vulnerable Baikal ecosystem. The newspaper didn't pay
attention to repeated statements of Irkutsk scientists that their
opinion was ignored while projecting zone in Listvyanka.
The journalist neglected also a point allowing mining operations
in those places where licenses for work had been received before
the List came into effect. It must be clear in the mind of Mr.
Beloborodov as a journalist how these licenses are being received
when "it is necessary". As in the case with Holodnenskiy complex
ore deposit this situation might turn into chemical pollution of
Baikal and this can influence on wellbeing of inhabitants, firstly,
on the Northern Baikal region in the Republic of Buryatia.
Anyhow, concerning prohibition of water treatment MK of Buryatia
criticizes fairly the new List. This point forbidding practically
any way of water treatment is not clear and needs revision what
hopefully will be done according to the results of document
agreement both by Irkutsk and the Buryatia.
The Baikal region inhabitants suffer from the lack of
information and namely this turns into the fear in front of any
changes. Baikalsk is the brightest example where the Baikal pulp
and paper mill is situated. Here the only question about there
point of view towards the future of the city gives rise to
misunderstanding, irritation and even aggression.
One must underline that in spite of statements made by MK of
Buryatia the List of forbidden activities limits the development of
large-scale production ready to destroy Baikal in a short space of
time. Let us remind "Eastern Siberia - Pacific Ocean" pipeline as a
typical example. It is necessary to add that the List was done not
for UNESCO but for the future generation of Russia which if Baikal
would be saved could enjoy its beauty and use its resources with
care and also in the interests of local inhabitants.