The history of preservation of the Kinburn spit is quite long and can be divided into the period up to the 20th century – non-systematic, the period of episodes of preservation of individual local areas of Kinburn and the period of the 20-21st centuries, when the bequest of the peninsula in the modern sense was already necessary, justified and more systematic. The first is primarily the ancient Greek (Olvian) time and the period of Tatar rule is closely related to the Cossack era. A somewhat allegorical assumption of the seeds of the commandment on the Kinburn spit in the Olvian period can be the presence at that time on the peninsula of the sacred forest of Hekate, where the Greeks conducted their religious rituals and where, according to some descriptions, there was a temple of Demeter, according to others, an altar dedicated to the goddess. Further evidence of the fact that already at the beginning of the 18th century, the use of fish resources was somewhat regulated, and that this, accordingly, had its own need, is the report to the basket of the army colonel of Zaporozhye Gerasim Maly: “Those fishermen who vow to estuaries, also where and in God with nets , they ask me for tickets to fish near Ochakov and below Ochakov, but I do not allow them to go there. But they, fishermen, go to Ochakiv independently without a written permit.” separate teams were sent out, about which A. Biletskyi, the chieftain of the basket, wrote that he was sending a detachment of Zaporozhians “to protect it (fishery) and catch thieves, as well as to maintain order among fishermen.” In general, the Cossacks treated the Dnieper and the estuary with respect, calling the former Grandfather, the latter the Great Estuary. This attitude was also reflected in the Constitution of P. Orlyk, where it is stated: to protect the ancient rights and privileges under the Zaporozhian Army and not allow anyone from the spiritual or secular authorities to build and fish in the zagat on the Dnieper down from Perevolochnaya. Especially the fields, rivers, rivers and all lands up to Ochakov itself must forever belong to no one else, only the Zaporizhzhya Nizovy Army.” spits, about the high number and variety of animals and birds, the commander described some species on the spit, he was also impressed by the richness of Kinbourn’s fish resources. Apparently, the Komandantske tract got its name from the Suvorivka period, where oaks grew and are still growing, which were especially valued at that time – the period of wooden shipbuilding and, accordingly, required a special (commandant) protection regime.
The pre-revolutionary and especially the post-revolutionary period of the 20th century was the beginning of already systematic work and concrete steps to create a network of reserves and bequests both in Kinburn and in the Ukrainian SSR as a whole. In 1892, based on the results of a steppe expedition, the outstanding Russian soil scientist V.V. Dokuchaev wrote the book “Our steppes before and now”, where he touched on the problems of the disappearance of the steppes and the need to preserve them. His follower I.K. Pachosky in 1910 substantiated the need for long-term stationary scientific observations on natural areas of the lower Dnieper steppes, to which he included the Kinburn sandy steppe. During the years 1925-1926, a People’s Commissariat commission worked within the Kherson district, which had to determine the natural conditions and possibilities of economic use of the “sands of the Dnieper bottom”. Along with purely economic results regarding the prospects of afforestation and viticulture, the expedition also studied the natural vegetation of the sands. Botanists led by Professor Makhov compiled a 3-page soil-botanical map and revealed the degree of soil and vegetation disturbance. Only the Ivano-Rybalchansk arena, including the Kinburn spit, was defined as a virgin sandy steppe. On February 26, 1926, the People’s Commissariat of the Ukrainian SSR made a decision to create hunting reserves on the Belosarai, Obitochnaya, Berdyansk and Kinburn spits, which can be considered the first effective step in the organization of preservation and regulation of hunting species of animals in the territory of Kinburn.
The next step, already in bequeathing the territory of Kinburnska Kosa, was made on 19.07.1928, when the Resolution of the Ukrainian SSR RSC declared “Sand reserves in the lower reaches of the Dnieper” (15,000 ha), which included the Ivano-Rybalchanska Dacha, the Solonoozerna Dacha, and the Volyzhyn forest (all of this now parts of the Black Sea Reserve), as well as the “Burkuty” tract (6,000 hectares). However, the composition of the “reserves” was also interpreted quite loosely by the participants. On the map of steppe reserves, published by E. Lavrenko in 1928, “existing steppe state reserves” are marked: Ivanivska Arena, Burkuty. As with the Oversea “Reserves”, the Sand “Reserves” were the collective name of several areas. Reserves were subordinated to NKZS. The resolution determines the presence of economic-administrative and security personnel at the nature reserves. The possibility of creating “relevant scientific institutions” at the reserves is foreseen. However, their own administration of sand “reserves” was never formed. It was decided at the level of NKZS that it is cheaper and easier to merge the newly created nature conservation areas into the already existing organizationally “Nadmorsky Reserves”. After such a decision, the “Volyzhyn forest” tract became part of the Black Sea Biosphere Reserve, but the documentary evidence of this relates only to 1937.
In the first years of Ukraine’s independence, immediately after the promulgation of the law of Ukraine “On PZF of Ukraine” in June 1992, at the initiative of a large environmental faction of deputies of the regional council (S. V. Shapovalov), by the decision of the Mykolaiv Regional Council dated 15.10.92 No. 16 on the square 17,800.2 hectares (of which 5,631 hectares were occupied by the water area), the regional landscape park “Kinburnska Kosa” was created, the first in Ukraine, in which the management of the park and the corresponding staff of employees appeared. At that time, this decision was supported by the Pokrovsk village council. Thus, the entire territory of the Kinburn spit and part of the water area around it are included in the lands of the nature reserve fund. The creation of the “Kinburnska spit” RLP was considered as a basis for acquiring the status of a protected territory of national importance, and even then in the early 1990s, the question of forming a national nature park on its basis was considered quite seriously. Due to the lack of funds in the central budget, the proposals were not accepted and postponed for some time, with a mark on the documents regarding the formation of the national park: “Registered as a regional landscape park.” The activities of the newly created RLP “Kinburnska Kosa” in a short time solved the tasks that the local community hoped to solve (for the sake of objectivity, it should be added that the general economic conditions of the period 1991-1994 contributed to the solution of these problems), namely:
- Total artificial afforestation, which caused the loss of hay lands and pastures, was stopped, at that time livestock keeping was the main source of income for the local population.
- The issue of uncontrolled tourist flow was settled, when (according to the information of the village head G.M. Agafonov) in the early 1990s, only from the city of Odesa and only in the areas of the Kovalivskyi and Rymivskyi beaches on weekends, from 5 to 8 pleasure steamers docked, delivering almost a thousand tourists.
The regional landscape park made a significant contribution to the study and description of the park’s natural complexes, the formation of personnel potential, laid the foundations for protection and recreational activities, and promoted the popularization of the Kinburn spit – already as an object for organized, ecological tourism. Proposals for the creation of a national park at Kinburn were taken into account during the preparation in 1998-99 of the “Program for the Formation of the State Ecological Network for the Period 2000-2015”. The creation of the National Natural Park on the basis of the “Kinburn Spit” national natural park was also supported by scientists from various institutions and the environmental community. But, unfortunately, there were also opponents in the form of individual economic structures and local authorities. Also, a significant part of the local community became an opponent of the idea of a Kinburn reserve, since the RLP began to interfere with the new economic interests of the villagers, namely the acquisition of land plots and their subsequent sale at a time when the price of one acre of land in Kinburn reached up to 4-5 thousand US dollars. Land owners within the settlements of the Pokrovsk Council, both existing and potential, understandably considered the future NPP an even greater threat to their chance for a prosperous existence.
The meeting during the working trip of the Prime Minister of Ukraine to the Mykolaiv region on August 17, 2007 can be considered the beginning of the preparatory period in the creation of a new NPP in Kinburn. According to its results, a separate mandate was given to intensify work on the implementation of the Econetwork Development Program for the creation of national parks in the region. The next significant step in this direction was the Decree of the President of Ukraine, V. A. Yushchenko. No. 774 dated August 27, 2008. It states that in order to ensure the maintenance of ecological balance, preservation, reproduction and effective use of natural complexes and objects that have a special nature conservation and health value, a list of parks is provided, among which the national natural parks “Buzkiy Gard” are named (working name – “Granite-steppe Pobuzhzhya”) and “Biloberezhya Svyatoslav” (working name – “Kinburn’s braid”) in the Mykolaiv region. In addition to the importance of the decision, at the official level, the new name of the park – “Biloberezhja Svyatoslav” – was announced for the first time. This name was proposed by the director of the RLP – Z.O. Petrovych, as a historical and spatial (the territory should have included areas around Berezan Island and in the Berezan district) alternative to the name supported by the vast majority of representatives of the environmental community – NPP “Kinburnskyi”.
Purposeful work at the level of the Ministry of Ecology began after consideration and approval of the petition of the NGO “Regional Black Sea Network of Public Organizations” – O.M. Derkach. and the scientific rationale for the creation of the Kinburnska Kosa National Park (Biloberezhya Svyatoslav) developed by the Institute of Zoology named after Schmalhausen – performed by Taraschuk S.V. these unique personalities and the public associations and departments of institutions headed by them were the driving force behind the creation of the NPP. In the developed scientific justification, it was proposed to include the entire part of the Kinburnskaya Kosa Peninsula within the Mykolaiv Oblast (with the exception of the Volyzhyn Forest area), Berezan Island and 100,000 hectares of water areas of the Black Sea, Yagorlytsk Bay and the Dnipro-Buzka estuary as part of the new NPP. But against such large-scale proposals and in general against the creation of the park and the inclusion of their lands in it, the bodies of the State Forestry Service at all levels, the Pokrovsk village council and representatives of the fishing collective farm “Svidomist” – that is, all the main land users on the Kinburn spit. It was possible to reverse the situation only after a meeting in the Volyn region on July 10, 2009, which took place with the participation of the President of Ukraine V. A. Yushchenko, when he directly accused representatives of the State Forestry Agency of delaying the creation of the NPP “Biloberezhya Svyatoslav” and expressed that he did not understand what values were driving by people blocking the creation of a national natural park. The President gave two months for the blocking issues to be lifted. After that, the approval process went more dynamically. Forestry authorities changed their resistance strategy – they initiated the transfer of the newly created park under the management of the State Forestry Service in a special order, contrary to the decision made at the same meeting on 07/10/2009 that national natural parks are created, transferred and coordinated exclusively within the structure of the Ministry of Ecology of Ukraine.
Enumerating all the obstacles that arose on the way to the creation of the park, the inconsistency and even diversity of positions regarding the very functioning of the NPP, it can be stated that all this blurred the quality and clarity of the initial positions and reduced the quality of the very materials for its creation. In the decisive periods, the permanent director of the RLP “Kinburnska Kosa” was actually removed from the discussion process due to his extremely strained relations with representatives of the local authorities. Activists of public organizations, scientists took part in working meetings to which they were invited, but they were not invited to all of them. Decisions on the creation of the park at the main levels: district and oblast were made, changed, adjusted to the satisfaction of those interested in local and departmental interests, and not always to the benefit of the main one – the formation of a whole protected territory. From the submitted scientific justification for the creation of the “Biloberezhja Svyatoslav” NPP, the areas of many valuable territories in terms of nature protection were removed, or some were included partially – only 25,000 hectares of the proposed areas, for example, 75,000 hectares of the adjacent water area were included. “Svidomist”, the lands of the reserve and others, as well as the lands of the villages of the Pokrovsk Village Council, a total of 2226.57 hectares were not included in the territory of the National Nature Park “Biloberezhya Svyatoslav”. lands that belonged to the RLP “Kinburnska Kosa”, of which:
-671.55 ha – the plot of the collective farm “Svidomist” in the district of the village of Vasylivka, which includes the tract Vasylkivski plavni, Glynyshche. Tatarske;
- 220 ha – a natural floodplain complex in the tracts of Rossokha, Shchablevate, in the area of the destroyed Vasylivsky ponds
- 283.14 ha – the Stavka (Pond) site of the Svidomist collective farm in the Pokrovka village area, which includes two-thirds of the orchid field, part of the Pokrovsk spit, Cherepashiny Island;
- 1,051.88 ha – settlements of the Pokrovka, Pokrovske, Vasylivka farm system with natural sagas “Kovalivska”, “Morozivska”, “Peredriivska” and others.
Accordingly, such valuable tracts of RLP “Kinburnska Kosa” as Kovalivska saga, Morozivska saga, Peredriivska saga, Chimylivska sagas, Vasylivski plavni, Glynyshche and some others are not completely included in the NPP today. If you can find arguments and agree with the conditions for not being part of the park of settlements of the Pokrovsk Village Council, then the other specified territories and natural complexes of Kinburn had and have significant environmental value and need to be included in the composition of the protected object, at least within the framework of the necessary next expansion of the park territory.
Thus, the foundations of the national park, which was created rather against the grain, in the form of agreed used materials, could not be perfect and accurate. As the participants of the process recall, many materials and maps were reviewed and finalized, as eyewitnesses recall, “on the hood of the car.” The creation project was guilty of a significant number of errors, inaccuracies and discrepancies, which subsequently greatly complicated the development of land management projects and the project of territory organization, its functional zoning.
However, despite all the difficulties and disagreements, the “Biloberezhya Svyatoslav” National Nature Park was created by the Decree of the President of Ukraine No. 1056 of December 16, 2009, a month before the first round of the presidential elections of Ukraine. Despite the predominant area of water bodies, the park was created in order to preserve the natural complexes of the steppe zone, and it was really a victory for the ecological community – the second national park in its history appeared in the Mykolayiv region.
But shortly after the presidential elections, the new central government, which replaced the administration of V. A. Yushchenko, the local government, the vast majority of which at that time consisted of representatives of the pro-government (pro-presidential party) recovered and, for a kind of revenge, undertook the revision of many decisions made by the previous government – in including the legality of the Decree of the President of Ukraine on the creation of the “Biloberezhya Svyatoslav” and “Buzky Gard” NPPs. In accordance with the appeals of citizens and deputies of local councils of both Pokrovska village and Ochakivska district, the session of the Mykolaiv regional council on April 16, 2010 made a decision to an appeal to the newly elected President of Ukraine regarding the cancellation of the predecessor’s decrees related to the creation of national natural parks, the main among them was the “Biloberezhya Svyatoslav” NPP. This decision of the Regional Council found its support in the Cabinet of Ministers, as evidenced by the report sent by the Deputy Head of the Department of the Secretariat of the CMU Timofeyev V. G. to the Vice Prime Minister Boris Kolesnikov. The essence of the report note: “… decrees of President V. A. Yushchenko about the announcement of new national parks contain one or another error and therefore need to be revised.” The public represented almost 45 environmental organizations and parties, as well as a number of mass media, acted promptly and actively to protect the park and parks, first in the Mykolaiv region and then throughout Ukraine. On April 20, 2010, a large-scale and effective campaign “Let national parks be!” was organized. – coordinators Yulia Grechka, O.M. Derkach. Activists collected more than 2,000 signatures, sent 50 collective and individual appeals, held a number of press conferences, including at the republican level, in particular at UNIAN. And only such large-scale influence of the public, it can be confidently asserted, swayed the decision of the officials of the administration of the President of Ukraine. The APU expressed its position in a letter dated May 12, 2010, addressed to the head of the National Ecological Center of Kyiv, in which the public was assured of support for the creation of national nature parks and the unconditional implementation of the law “On the Program for the Development of the Eco-Network for 2000-2015”. But quite a lot of time passed between this letter and the appointment of the park director in December 2011 and the formation of the park directorate in March 2012. During this period, on November 7, 2010, another significant event was held – a local referendum of the residents of the Pokrovsk village council, where the overwhelming majority again voted against the decision to create the “Biloberezhja Svyatoslav” NPP (338 people took part in the referendum, against the NPP – 292 people, for the park – 45 people). The results of the local referendum, which went beyond the established legislative limits, were not taken into account in the future – nullification nature protection direction of the future PZF facility was planned at the expense of the revived initiative supported by the local authorities to subordinate the future park to the State Forestry Agency of Ukraine. For this purpose, by order of the Mykolaiv Regional Department of Forestry and Hunting, the Project for organizing the territory of the new park was developed and presented on April 14-15, 2011. After the development of the Regulation on the NPP, which was approved by the order of the Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources of Ukraine No. 313 of August 31, 2011, the next blow against the NPP was the promotion of candidates for the position of director of the park of people who were most opposed to its creation. But here, too, the public, the NGO “Kinburn-Life” in the person of Shpolyanskyi M.Yu. it was necessary to take operational effective countermeasures of an informational nature. In December 2011, Yu.I. Kozlovskyi, an ecologist, former deputy director of the Kinburnian Spit, was appointed director of the park.
The start of the park’s active nature conservation activities in March 2012 was clearly related to solving a wide range of organizational, economic, personnel and financial problems. It was also necessary to harmonize and establish at least non-confrontational relations with the community of the basic Pokrovsk village council. At that time, this opportunity was provided by three circumstances:
The team of the national nature park included almost 40 local residents, including a large number of skeptics and people who even protested against its creation. Together with their families, it could be about 150 to 200 people from the Pokrovsk community, at least neutrally disposed towards the park.
The newly appointed director of the park made every effort to re-register the legal address of the park from the city of Mykolaiv to the village of Pokrovka in the Ochakiv district, which made it possible to transfer the main part of the income tax to the budget of the Pokrovka village council. For example, the total transfers in 2012 amounted to UAH 212,426, which even after deductions to the budgets of the higher levels by the village council was almost 1/4 of its income.
The territories of settlements of the Pokrovsk Council were not included in the territories of the NPP, which significantly reduced the level of tension in relations with the local population.
But despite such serious factors as grounds for interaction with the local community, constructive relations were not so easily formed. It is necessary to take into account the rather specific, independent, almost insular mentality of local residents, due to their isolated existence (the two settlements of Kinburna Pokrovka and Pokrovske are villages of rural development). The whole life of the local residents was connected with the use of the natural resources of the peninsula, in particular with hunting, fishing, salt extraction, cattle grazing, etc.. The park administration needed to take steps towards the community in order to dispel both the well-founded doubts of the local residents and the provoked rumors – and the main thing is to convey the need for them to comply with the requirements of environmental protection legislation and the future prospects of this. These steps were as follows:
In mutual information and understanding not only of the problems of the park, but also of the community itself, which is not always interesting to the directorates of PZF institutions. From the first months of the park’s operation, the deputy director of the park was included in the executive committee, and the chairman of the Pokrovsk village council, accordingly, became a member of the NTR of the park. A representative of the national park was traditionally present at each session of the Pokrov village council.
The park management, from the very beginning, took the direction not of a complete ban on the traditional use of nature by the local population, but on introducing it into the legislative framework – this concerned primarily both fishing and harvesting of hay, salt, mushrooms, berries, reeds, storm emissions of zoster (folk name Kamka) . Areas, volumes of use of natural resources and limits on their use were determined, which made it possible for users to obtain appropriate permits in 2013. Such an approach caused understanding among the vast majority of the population of the Kinburn Spit.
But two main issues remained acute and confrontational with the local population in 2012-13:
First. During the autumn-winter period of the end of 2012 and the beginning of 2013, the situation with wolf attacks on domestic animals of local residents worsened. The problem arose after on the territory of the nature reserve fund in accordance with the amendments to the law of Ukraine “On the PZF of Ukraine” dated January 21, 2010. As a result, it was determined that in the economic zones of the NPP and RLP activities are carried out in accordance with the requirements of the zones of anthropogenic landscapes of biosphere reserves, in which hunting is prohibited. Undoubtedly positive changes to the legislation in general, had a lot of negativity in terms of the possibility of regulating the number of predatory animals (the procedure is regulated in the law “On Hunting and Hunting”). In addition, the question of shooting a wolf is further complicated by the inclusion of this species in the protected lists of the Berne Convention. After the local forest and hunting farm decided not to extend the term of the hunting land lease, the number of predators began to steadily increase. As a result, the following happened: in the autumn-winter period of 2013, 58 individuals of domestic animals were destroyed on the territory of the Kinburn Spit. The problem has acquired not only the character of a discussion, but also high social tension, and the accusations of the community have already been directed at the national park. In 2013, the Park Directorate, after repeated emotional discussions with the participation of both supporters of shooting and its opponents, managed to obtain permission No. 65-15 dated 05/16/2013 for the shooting of three individuals of the predator out of 16 individuals. that were accounted for as of February 12, 2013. After the effective shooting on November 5, 2013, the number of attacks on domestic animals in 2014 decreased by 6.7 times. In the following year, the attacks continued to decrease significantly and are now episodic, despite the fact that there are up to 6-8 wolf individuals on the Kinburn Spit every year. Such a result of the event confirmed the assumption that the main factor in reducing damage from wolves is not so much reducing their number as maintaining the instinct of fear of humans in the pack. The removal of only 3 wolf individuals out of 14-16 individuals did not harm the wolf population, but allowed to relieve social tension among local residents.
Second. Zoning of the park territory. The project for the organization of the territory and functional zoning of the “Kinburnska Kosa” RLP, which was developed for more than 10 years, was constantly disagreed with, including and especially by the Pokrovsk village council. A possible way out of the impasse, according to specialists of the regional government, could be Decision No. 9 of the Mykolaiv Regional Council on March 16, 2007, which approved the scheme of functional zoning of the RLP, according to which protected areas amounted to 780 hectares, regulated recreation zones – 239 hectares. and extended village boundaries. Representatives of the environmental community contested this decision and the zoning scheme in court, in terms of expanding the boundaries of settlements, which further exacerbated the confrontation. After the start of the operation of the national park, it was the turn of the NPP administration to solve these issues. In August 2012, the Ministry of Ecology demanded to provide a map scheme of the preliminary zoning of the territory. The management of the park, on its own initiative, addressed its proposals to the community of the Pokrovsk Village Council, despite the fact that this is not a mandatory requirement of regulatory documents. The issue aroused lively interest and discussion among local residents, it was considered first at a meeting of the executive committee of the Pokrovsk village council, then at a session of the village council, and at it local deputies proposed to continue consideration of the issue at another, already away session of the council during which the deputies had to inspect in kind all proposed protected areas. The results of the discussion and the search for mutual compromises were somewhat unexpected: if earlier the representatives of the local community did not even accept the term protected area, then in September 2012, during the departure from the community, three additional plots were proposed for bequest, two of which are reasonably included under the time of development of the Project for the organization of the territory in the next year as part of the protected areas of the NPP. As a result, the total area of protected areas on land amounted to almost 1,660 hectares, which is almost twice the size of the protected areas proposed in the temporary zoning scheme in 2007 for the “Kinbourne Spit” RLP and which then caused violent protests from the local community. Zoning in the form of a map scheme of protected areas on dry land was approved by the relevant decision of the Pokrovsk Village Council session and certified by the signature of the chairman and the seal of the Council.
During the short initial period of the NPP’s activity, during March-October 2012, it was possible to equip and carry out repairs in the buildings where the park administration and the Pokrovsky branch were located. 52 units were assembled by not quite experienced SDO employees. protocols on violations of environmental legislation according to the AUC of Ukraine, 75 pieces of poaching tools were seized, work was organized at recreation areas, where almost 48,000 UAH were collected. for recreational services provided. According to the main indicators and ratings for 2012, during this period the park was included in the top ten parks of Ukraine. The proof of a confident, active start was the holding of joint meetings of the Coordinating Council of the “Ramsar Convention” committee on the protection of the VBU and a regional seminar on the development of the protected areas in October 2012 at the base of the park, at a fairly high level. The Coordinating Council supported the park’s initiative to restore an important section of the VBU, the tract “Bienkovi plavni”. With the help of the NGO “Ukrainian Society for the Protection of Birds”, the decision was implemented in the following years, the water exchange of the plavni and the full functioning of the wetland complex were restored. And that’s why it was completely unexpected that the director of the park Yu.I. Kozlovsky was notified in December 2013 that he was dismissed according to the relevant order of the Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources of Ukraine, without explaining the reasons.
Conclusions:
The history of the establishment of the “Biloberezhya Svyatoslav” NPP begins with the nineties of the 20th century. In that period, the nature protection function in the region was quite successfully performed by the regional landscape park “Kinburn spit”. The activity of the regional landscape park became the basis for the creation and rather dynamic initial activity on its basis of the PZF object of national importance – NPP “Biloberezhya Svyatoslav”. This approach is, in our opinion, promising for the creation of new parks in the future, but it is necessary to take into account the circumstances that the successor, together with the progress of the primary object, takes on all the negativity of the problems and contradictions that have arisen.
The nature and tension of the confrontation with the local authorities and the community during the creation of the “Biloberezhja Svyatoslav” NPP, exacerbated unresolved problems, indicate that in matters affecting the life of the local population, only mechanical decision-making according to the defined regulatory framework is not enough. During this period, it is also necessary to plan and carry out a coordinated wide-ranging promotional campaign with the involvement of leading specialists of sociologists, socio-technologists and, of course, representatives of environmental organizations and mass media. The purpose of such measures should be both the study of problems and the search for ways to solve them, and the formation of representatives of the local community of the need, correctness, prestige and profitability of creating such objects as a national park on their territory.
In the modern period, when measures are declared and carried out to increase the role of the local community, the administration of the newly created PZF facility needs to establish effective multilateral contacts with the regional community. The basis of the approach should be the principle of sustainable development of the territory and the search for an optimal algorithm of interaction between the park administration and the community to achieve the main goal of preserving the natural complexes of the protected area and frugal, balanced nature management.
Based on the accumulated experience of the NPP, we also propose amendments to Art. 52 of the Law on the NRF of Ukraine and the Land Code of Ukraine of other normative acts, which would contain the following approach: “Projects of land allocation to objects of the PZF of Ukraine are an integral and integral part of the Creation Project.” This approach will prevent the situation of “walking in circles” in matters of approval of the next land management projects, unjustified refusals of land users. It will also make impossible the situation that occurs quite often at PZF objects – when the project of organization and functional zoning of the territory is first developed, and only then the land management projects. Such an imperfect sequence of design works can significantly correct and level the Functional Zoning Project itself. There is also no doubt about the significant saving of time and financial resources when implementing such changes to the legislation. It is also necessary to supplement the Provisions on National Parks, especially at the stage of the beginning of their activity with a section on general rules for the protection of the park territory. The problem is that typical Regulations do not take into account the peculiarities of the park, all security activities are tied to the zoning of the territory and the zone protection regime. Due to the fact that in almost all parks, a significant period of 2 to 4 years passes before the approval of the Zoning Project, due to the undeveloped regulatory framework, this time can jeopardize all measures of administrative influence on violators, if only the requirements of the standard Regulation are used.
Authors: Chaus V.B., Kozlovskyi U.І.
