Conservation of natural heritage, traditional nature management and tourism: towards conflict-free interaction in specially protected natural areas (in a case stydy of the Ingilor Nature Park, Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Okrug)

Aim. Development of proposals for optimizing the interrelation between nature conserva­tion, reindeer breeding and tourism at the Ingilor Nature Park in the Yamal-Nenets Au­tonomous Okrug.

Methodology. A wide range of methods were used during the study. The assessment of the basic, potential and real recreational capacity was carried out in accordance with the "Methodological recommendations for determining the recreational capacity of specially protected natural areas" (2021). Simulation of recreational loads of different intensity to assess the stability of natural complexes was carried out during field work at experimental sites. For correct extrapolation, a landscape basis was used, which was also prepared during field work and subsequent processing of field materials. The study of the current state of the socio-cultural environment was carried out on the basis of an analytical in-depth interview with representatives of local communities and tourists.

Results. Landscape analysis showed that 16.1% of the territory of the Ingilor natural park is suitable to one degree or another for organizing tourist sites. Within the boundaries of the Ingilor natural park, an increase in the actual recreational load on natural complexes is observed. In the course of imitation of recreational loads in the park, 3 groups of natu­ral complexes were identified, differing in resistance to recreational loads. The approved zoning scheme for the Ingilor Natural Park is extremely imperfect. It is proposed to adjust the existing scheme of functional zoning of the park. To regulate the recreational load on the territory of the Ingilor Natural Park, it is necessary to develop and implement a system for accounting for organized and unorganized groups of tourists. It is necessary to increase the number of cordons, including in remote parts of the park, and the number of inspectors.

Research implications. Detecting recreational capacity based on landscape heterogeneity of the territory and visualizing the results in the form of a series of landscape interpretation maps has a certain methodological significance. The method of calculating recreational capacity adapted for a high-latitude region can be used to design a tourist space in regional and federal specially protected natural areas. The author's proposals can be used to optimize the relationship between nature conservation, recreation and traditional nature management in other regions.

1. Kibenko V. A., Sukhova E. A. [Problems of life and social well-being of reindeer herders in the Priuralsky district of the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug]. In: Mekhrishvili L. L., ed. Tyumenskaya oblast: istoricheskaya retrospektiva, realii nastoyashchego, kontury budushchego [Tyumen region: historical retrospective, realities of the present, contours of the future: collection of papers]. Tyumen: TIU Publ., 2019, pp. 409–417.

2. Klokov K. B., Antonov E. V. [Ethnocultural and landscape zoning of traditional northern reindeer herding in the context of municipalities of the Russian Federation]. In: Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Nauki o Zemle [Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Earth Sciences], 2022, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 696–713. DOI: 10.21638/spbu07.2022.408

3. Klokov K. B., Krasovskaya T. M., Yamskov A. N. Problemy perekhoda k ustoychivomu razvitiyu rayonnogo rasseleniya opredelyayut kharakter Rossiyskoy Arktiki [Problems of transition to sustainable development of areas of settlement of indigenous peoples of the Russian Arctic]. Moscow, Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences Publ., 2001. 23 p.

4. Magomedova M. A., Morozova L. M., Ektova S. N. [Chapter 1. Features of natural conditions and altitudinal differentiation of vegetation cover of the Polar Urals]. In: Morozova L. M., Magomedova M. A., Ektova S. N., et al. Rastitelnyy pokrov i rastitelnyye resursy Polyarnogo Urala [Vegetation cover and plant resources of the Polar Urals]. Ekaterinburg, Ural University Publ., 2006. pp. 13–41.

5. Magomedova M. A., Morozova L. M., Ektova S. N. [Chapter 5. Anthropogenic transformation of vegetation cover]. In: Morozova L. M., Magomedova M. A., Ektova S. N., et al. Rastitelnyy pokrov i rastitelnyye resursy Polyarnogo Urala [Vegetation cover and plant resources of the Polar Urals]. Ekaterinburg, Ural University Publ., 2006, pp. 555–637.

6. Nepomnyashchy V. V., Zavadskaya A. V., Chizhova V. P. Metodicheskiye rekomendatsii po opredeleniyu rekreatsionnoy yomkosti osobo okhranyayemykh territoriy [Methodological recommendations for determining the recreational capacity of specially protected natural areas]. Novosibirsk, Nauka Publ., 2021. 96 p.

7. Binnema T., Niemi M. «Let the line be drawn now»: Wilderness, conservation, and the exclusion of Aboriginal People from Banff National Park in Canada. In: Environmental History. 2006. Vol. 11. № 4. P. 724–750. DOI: 10.1093/envhis/11.4.724

8. Brockington D., Wilkie D. Protected areas and poverty. In: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 2015, no. 370. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2014.0271

9. Carrier J. G., Macleod D. V. L. Bursting the bubble: the socio-cultural context of ecotourism. In: Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 2005, vol. 11, iss. 2, pp. 315–333. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9655.2005.00238.x

10. Castree N. Neoliberalising nature I: the logics of de- and re-regulation. In: Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 2008, vol. 40, iss. 1, pp. 131–152. DOI: 10.1068/a3999

11. Dressler W., Buscher B. Market triumphalism and the CBNRM ‘crises’ at the South African section of the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park. In: Geoforum, 2008, vol. 39, iss. 1, pp. 452–465. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.09.005

12. Duffy R., Moore L. Neoliberalising nature? Elephant-back tourism in Thailand and Botswana. In: Antipode, 2010, vol. 42, iss. 3, pp. 742–766. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8330.2010.00771.x

13. Harvey D. The new imperialism. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2003. 253 p.

14. M. Zurba, K. F. Beazley, E. English, J. Buchmann-Duck Indigenous protected and conserved areas (IPCAs), Aichi Target 11 and Canada’s Pathway to Target 1: Focusing conservation on reconciliation. In: Land, 2019, vol. 8, iss. 1, p. 10. DOI: 10.3390/land8010010

15. Kelly A. B. Conservation practice as primitive accumulation. In: The Journal of Peasant Studies, 2011, vol. 38, iss. 4, pp. 683–701. DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2011.607695

16. Moola F., Roth R. Moving beyond colonial conservation models: Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas offer hope for biodiversity and advancing reconciliation in the Canadian boreal forest. In: Environmental Reviews, 2019, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 200–201. DOI: 10.1139/er-2018-0091

17. Panusittikorn P., Prato T. Conservation of protected areas in Thailand: the case of Khao Yai National Park. In: The George Wright Forum, 2001, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 67–76.

18. Vivanco L. A. Spectacular quetzals, ecotourism, and environmental futures in Monte Verde, Costa Rica. In: Ethnology, 2001, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 79–92. DOI: 10.2307/3773924

19. West P, Carrier J. G. Getting away from it all? Ecotourism and authenticity. In: Current Anthropology, 2004, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 483–498. DOI: 10.1086/422082

20. Youdelis M. «They could take you out for coffee and call it consultation!»: The colonial antipolitics of Indigenous consultation in Jasper National Park. In: Environment and Planning A, 2016, vol. 48, iss. 7, pp. 1374–1392. DOI: 10.1177/0308518X16640530