Ссавці Карпат у Червоній книзі України

Abstract

The composition of the mammal fauna of the Ukrainian Carpathians is analysed, which includes 77 species of 19 families. Compared to the previous checklist of Carpathian mammals (1997), 5 species that occur only in adjacent plains or have not been recorded in the region for a long time were excluded and 4 new alien and sibling species were added to the current checklist. According to the latest (third) edition of the Red Data Book of Ukraine (2009), 39 mammal species from the Carpathians obtained protected status. Compared to the previous edition, in which 20 mammal species were listed, the number of rare species in the new edition increased twice. Most species belong to bats (24 species), carnivores (7), and rodents (5). Among them, the distribution of 5 species in Ukraine as of 2009 was restricted to the Carpathian region: Spalax graecus, Terricola tatricus, Chionomys nivalis, Sorex alpinus, and Ursus arctos. Analysis of changes in the content of the new list of protected species and of their statuses shows an essential deterioration of population state of many species. According to the results of this review, two species obtained the status “extinct” (Miniopterus schreibersii and Eliomys quercinus). The status of a number of species was risen and six species were entitled by the status “disappearing” (Rhinolophus ferrumequinum, Myotis emarginatus, Myotis dasycneme, Barbastella barbastellus, Chionomys nivalis, and Ursus arctos) and two species became “critically endangered” (Spalax graecus, Mustela lutreola, and Bison bonasus). At the same time, the status of 4 species was soften (Myotis daubentonii, Plecotus austriacus, Eptesicus nilssonii, and Felis silvestris), while 8 species are beyond the risk of disappearance (Plecotus austriacus, Nyctalus noctula, Pipistrellus pipistrellus, Pipistrellus pygmaeus, Pipistrellus kuhlii, Eptesicus serotinus, Arvicola scherman, and Mustela putorius). The issues of coordination of conservation statuses of different mammal species were considered in detail since IUCN criteria have not been used in Ukraine, as well as the shortcomings in approaches to the creation of red lists. The effectiveness of maintaining open access and constantly updated databases for the assessment of conservation statuses of species, similarly to the IUCN database, is highlighted.