Critical vulnerabilities: Russia must impose a complete ban on the logging of cedars and oaks

Russia must urgently impose a ban on the logging and exploitation of cedar forests and oak groves. There is a catastrophic destruction of these species, which has already led to a reduction in the food base for wild animals and triggered an uncontrolled ecological collapse. We are witnessing a cascading degradation of ecosystems, starving animals approaching humans, and loss of habitat. Animals literally have nothing to eat, and this is confirmed by scientists, leading academics of the country, and relevant domestic experts.

We are losing entire natural systems that have formed over millennia. In place of cedar and oak forests, secondary forests are emerging, which cannot replace the destroyed ecosystems in terms of biological diversity, food base, or stability. The consequence is the collapse of food chains, a reduction in the number of forest animals, soil and water regime degradation, and increasing conflicts between humans and wildlife due to the loss of natural habitat.

Let me try to explain in more detail.

Look.

If you turn off the electricity in a house with electric heating, everything will fall apart.

First, it will get cold. Then the pipes for both heating and water supply will freeze and burst. The sewage system will freeze. The good thing is that you can store food in the house without a refrigerator—they won't spoil anyway. Because your refrigerator also ran on electricity: few people these days store food in a cellar or outside in winter.

Electricity in this illustrative example is the "critical vulnerability of the system." Without electricity, nothing will function at all. The entire system will collapse as a functional whole.

An emergency doctor knows such critical vulnerabilities when every second counts: cardiac arrest, respiratory arrest, rupture of the femoral artery.

Either resuscitation immediately—or nothing, there will be no one to resuscitate.

We. Here. Now. In Russia in 2026. And we are precisely in the position of an emergency doctor: either we achieve protection for the critical vulnerabilities of natural biocenoses, or a catastrophic collapse of forest ecosystems will begin. We are on the edge!

Keystone species in ecosystems—that's what I'm talking about when discussing critical vulnerabilities of systems.

In conditions where there are few of us, comrades; where we have little strength; in conditions of resource scarcity and powerful external pressure, what should we do?!

The answer seems simple to me: we need to direct all available forces to protect the most important. To protect keystone species in ecosystems. Among animals, these are predators: those who are ruthlessly destroyed for impressive trophies, accused of being "evil." And for whose protection the average person, frightened by media scare stories about "terrifying beasts emerging from the dreadful taiga," does not stand up and never will. Alas, emotions are manipulated, and there is insufficient systemic biological knowledge to counteract such emotional pressure in society.

And among plants, these are mother trees. Local centers of first-level ecosystem self-restoration, so to speak. For Siberia and the Far East of our country, these are the cedar and, partly, for more northern territories, the larch and fir. For the southern regions of Europe and the Far East, this also includes the oak.

Do you think people in the past worshipped sacred trees in vain? Do you think sacred oaks or sacred cedars are naive and an anachronism? That's not the case. On the contrary, this seemingly 'archaic' understanding of the forest as a living and thinking entity is precisely where the future lies!

An edifier (from the Latin 'builder') is, in a broad sense, an organism whose activity creates or significantly alters the surrounding environment. This systematic category includes dominant producers, the so-called 'forest-forming trees.' This is not something new, but literally the foundational knowledge about forests that has been known for a long time.

Keep your greedy hands off at least the old cedar groves and oak woods, or we won't be able to preserve the forests at all! This should become the foundation of scientific forest management.

I'm talking about the simplest things: the level of basic concepts in an ecology course or an encyclopedia article. The level of defining the meaning of concepts in general.

A keystone species is one that has a disproportionately large impact on its natural habitat, on its biocenosis. This concept was introduced to science back in 1969 by zoologist Robert Paine. An eternity ago at the current pace of societal changes!

Edifier species play a crucial role in maintaining the structure of an ecological community, influencing all other organisms in the ecosystem. Without these structure-forming species, the ecosystem would be completely different. If it didn't cease to exist altogether!

The role of a keystone species in an ecosystem is analogous to the role of a keystone at the top of an arch in architecture. Even though the keystone experiences the least pressure compared to other stones in the arch, without it, the arch would immediately collapse. Keystone. Key stone. The stone that binds a mountain of stones into an architectural structure. Into a system.

Similarly, in an ecosystem, radical changes can occur if a keystone species disappears, even if that species constituted a small part of the ecosystem in terms of biomass or productivity. This concept has long been known in ecology and conservation biology!

However, the existing system of state forest management is deeply unscientific and anti-systemic. And I'm not just talking about Russia—the problem is clearly global! We, a portion of the scientific community, some thoughtful and active individuals in general, are all trying to influence the system that actually makes decisions, the state management. But we carry little weight, we lack strength! Money pulls everything, and state management remains commercial and resource-based: what cannot be consumed simply does not exist for such a bureaucratic system. 'Non-material entities' like keystone species, edificators, forest-forming or ancient mother trees simply do not exist for officials. For them, only cubic meters of timber and 'economic feasibility' exist.

It's complete madness, but if we were to evaluate universities by such criteria, then professors and academics would need to be assessed by their weight in kilograms! Not by knowledge, scientific achievements, or contributions to the training of students and young scientists, but by kilograms of body weight! Why is such a crazy and unscientific approach still applied when assessing the value of natural ecosystems?!

The question is largely rhetorical: simply because biological systems are not evaluated as systems at the level of state management. All assessments are resource-based. This is the external environment, which serves as a source of resources. Endless and uncontrolled.

In this paradigm, a cedar or an oak is not a function within the system but merely timber. A resource for sale and, consequently, the enrichment of certain already wealthy groups.

For reference, let me provide an assessment of the Russian Far East. A local example.

The emergence of starving tigers (a key predator species) in populated areas reveals the festering sore of overall biocenosis degradation:

• tigers lack food due to the declining populations of ungulates (boars, deer, musk deer, etc.);
• which, in turn, is related both to hunting and, primarily, to the degradation of the biocenosis resource base as a whole;
• specifically, the destruction of the structural cedars and oaks.

When it comes to the cedar-broadleaf forests of the Far East—those forests that form the core of the tiger's feeding and spatial habitat network—the picture is grim.

The area estimates are as follows:

— 6.44 million hectares in 1946;

— 5.45 million hectares in 1956;

— 4.27 million hectares in 1961;

— 2.88 million hectares in 2001;

— about 2.94 million hectares in 2007.

This represents a reduction of approximately 54.3% compared to the 1946 level.

(Koryakin V. N. Cedar-broadleaf forests of the Russian Far East. — 2009)

I will provide a few quotes from his work:

"The development of forests and primarily the excessive industrial exploitation focused mainly on the use of cedar timber without considering other raw material benefits of these forests has led to their severe depletion and devaluation: a significant reduction in occupied area, a several-fold decrease in Korean cedar timber reserves, and a decline in stand productivity."

"Further use of cedar forests in the previous mode would inevitably be associated with their complete transformation in operational forests into secondary or sustainably derived stands, which do not meet the goals of management."

That is, many years ago, in his doctoral dissertation, the scientist spoke about the colossal scale of cedar destruction and the urgent need for changes.

And this data only goes up to 2007; beyond that, there have been no major independent assessments. Except for scientists confirming that the situation has worsened exponentially and everything is on the brink of collapse.

Moreover, the figure of 2.94 million hectares does not mean that we are talking about fully intact cedar forests of the previous type. According to the study, at the beginning of the 21st century, secondary degraded forest ecosystems were spread over an area at least twice the size of the remaining primary cedar-broadleaf forests. In other words, even where a forest is formally listed as such on a map, it is often no longer the kind of cedar forest that provides nuts, creates a complex ecosystem structure, and supports both plant and animal communities around it. Often, the forest area is assessed where cedar is present, not the cedar forests themselves. And when a bureaucratic official claims in their responses that we have 'so many cedars that we don't know what to do with them,' it must be understood that they are evaluating based on the expanses of territories where cedar may be found.

As you already know from my earlier materials, hungry tigers, which are on the brink of extinction and listed in the Red Book of the Russian Federation, have been approaching humans in recent years. Scientists and experts unanimously confirm that the problem lies in the destroyed habitat and lack of food sources—they literally have nothing to eat and nowhere to live. This is confirmed by new research from scientists and the federal government.

So, in March 2026, at the 'Eastern Russia' meeting, Doctor of Biological Sciences Andrey Goncharov (Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences) stated:

"Currently, in the Primorsky Krai, 8 out of 10 cedars have been cut down — the cedar broadleaf forests are practically destroyed. This was the main habitat of the tiger: the cedars fed everyone — from chipmunks to boars, which are the primary food source for the predator. In fact, the tiger has nowhere to live."

At the same meeting, it was stated:

"On the initiative of the parliamentary body and the Ministry of Forestry, the FNC Biodiversity of the Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences conducted a study on the tiger's food base. The conclusion is unequivocal: 'the food base in the Primorsky Krai does not match the tiger population. It simply has nothing to eat — and this is one of the reasons why it approaches humans.'"

Thus, everything is fully confirmed by both the state management system and relevant experts.

Meanwhile, on the other hand, we have a catastrophic situation with the destruction of oak groves. Oaks, like cedars, form and support entire ecosystems. The oak groves are located in the southern part of the Far East and cover approximately 2 million hectares. The trend is the same: a reduction by half over about half a century with qualitative systemic degradation.

Edificators, forest-forming trees, key species, or mother trees. These terms are not quite synonyms, but they encompass and describe aspects of the same thing — that element of a complex living system without which the system is doomed.

These are not just cedars or oaks, but specifically the old trees that have survived so far, plus the viable part of the biocenosis they sustain. If we lose them, we lose everything! Therefore, we can and must at least draw maximum attention from both society and the state to the problem of their destruction.

I have studied numerous studies and assessments available on oaks. In a 2018 scientific work titled "The State of Tree Species and Reproduction of Oak Stands in the Forest-Steppe Zone," the following is confirmed:

"In the last 50 years, the decline of oak in the forest-steppe has reached catastrophic proportions and threatens the complete disappearance of the species."

"Currently, almost the entire territory of European Russia is experiencing another wave of oak forest decline."

"In the near historical perspective, if urgent measures are not taken for the intensive reproduction of oak, it may completely disappear from the forest-steppe zone."

The research was conducted by Doctor of Biological Sciences, leading researcher at the Institute of Forestry of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS) V. G. Storozhenko, along with other specialized experts. A very serious work confirming the severe crisis of oak forest loss in Russia.

Thus, comrades, an urgent ban on the logging of cedars and oaks in wild forests is necessary in Russia. They need to be placed under federal protection while it is still possible. This is fully supported by modern science and historical data.

We will pursue this within our projects and are launching a permanent Public Initiative to the Government of the Russian Federation on the need to ban the logging of cedars and oaks. In a state of resource scarcity and increasing pressure, we need to concentrate our remaining forces and capabilities on preserving key species.

© PAVEL PASHKOV