Strict protection or managed harvest? Furbearers, institutions, and socioeconomic change in Kamchatka, Russia (1977--2001)

Human impact on wildlife is managed through two main institutional arrangements---regimes of strict protection and managed harvest. The advantages of one regime over the other have been debated, particularly in light of global and socioeconomic changes, but rarely directly compared. I compared population trends of four species of furbearers---ermine (Mustela erminea), otter ( Lufra lutra), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), and sable (Mustela zibellina)---in a strictly protected Kronotzky Zapovednik and harvested Bystrinsky Nature Park, Russia. I examined the effects of multiple biotic and abiotic variables on population abundance during the period of Soviet rule (1977-1991) and during the dramatic socioeconomic changes of the post-Soviet transition (1992-2001).;I found the type of institutional arrangement to be the most important factor in explaining changes in population abundance. During the Soviet period, both managed harvest and strict protection adequately maintained wildlife populations. The regime of strict protection, however, continued to support stable population of furbearers during the period of the post-Soviet transition, while wildlife populations of sable, the most economically valuable species, declined under the regime of managed harvest.;I concluded that strict protection is a vital institutional arrangement for the long-term maintenance of valuable wildlife populations. This conclusion suggests the need for renewed support by the Russian Government for the strictly protected areas in Russia and Kamchatka for their role in conserving economically important wildlife.