The Commission on Ecology has been abolished in the Civic Chamber: nature conservation is under pressure.

Never before, in all the years of our work together, have nature defenders faced such intense pressure. In a normal, functioning system, society identifies environmental problems, documents what is happening “on the ground,” and passes this information “upward” so that these problems can be addressed. This is literally the immune system within a social institution.

Today, wildlife is being torn apart with such force that many of the things happening are simply incomprehensible — they do not fit into any scientific or even minimally rational management logic. The interests of big business have been placed above the interests of future generations! We see a bill allowing clear-cut logging around Lake Baikal; we see a proposal effectively legalizing the direct destruction of any protected natural area in the country; a proposal allowing clear-cut logging in protective mountain forests; and the weakening of protections for Red Book-listed animals, whose “harvesting” is being expanded further and further. What more is there to say when amendments have been pushed through allowing endangered plants and fungi to be transplanted so their habitats can be handed over to big business? This is fundamentally unscientific, because species cannot be protected without protecting their habitats.

And this is only part of what we are witnessing today. Madness! Madness! Catastrophic madness!

At the same time, unfortunately, pressure is being placed on those who are trying to protect nature. Many have already stopped fighting entirely, experts have been silenced, scientists are ignored, and they are now afraid even to speak publicly about existing problems. Almost everyone within the system who helped society achieve change and protect nature has lost their position. And let me remind you that even the prosecutors who previously helped defend a protected area and reliably uncovered an organized crime against the UNESCO World Heritage Site of the Lago-Naki Plateau were dismissed “due to a loss of trust.”

And now there has been another blow to nature conservation: the crucial Commission on Ecology and Sustainable Development of the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation, chaired by Elena Sharoykina, has been abolished. She is a very courageous woman who helped resolve numerous problems and possessed an outstanding vision for the future. Moreover, Sharoykina headed the Coordinating Council for Environmental Well-Being and the Development of Non-Financial Public Reporting Practices. This was a separate advisory body under the Civic Chamber and should not be confused with the commission itself. The commission consisted of members of the Civic Chamber, while the council could bring together a broader range of public organizations and experts.

The commission itself was a separate institutional body within the state. Entirely different commissions existed alongside the environmental commission: the Commission on Territorial Development, Urban Environment and Infrastructure, and the Commission on Housing and Utilities, Construction and Roads. There were 20 commissions in total. I am emphasizing this specifically because it is essential for understanding what happened.

This summer, the final 43 members of the new Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation were approved. When the new chamber assembled for its first plenary session, one of its first decisions was to announce the creation of 19 new commissions — one fewer than in the previous composition.

THEY ABOLISHED ONLY ONE COMMISSION — THE COMMISSION RESPONSIBLE FOR NATURE CONSERVATION.

The crucial commission headed by Elena Sharoykina no longer exists; it was simply removed. Yet this was an essential body that helped balance competing interests, enabled environmental problems to be brought before the government, conducted investigations into the destruction of nature, and achieved real change. It was a FUNDAMENTAL structure connecting society and the state in the protection of Russia’s wildlife.

At the same time, the new Civic Chamber created a Commission on the Urban and Natural Environment. Two people whose work focuses on urban development were placed in leadership positions. This has virtually nothing to do with wildlife conservation. Through this maneuver, attention was shifted away from the struggle against the destruction of the COUNTRY’S PROTECTED-AREA SYSTEM and redirected toward a subject favored by officials — the modernization of urban parks, where large budgets can be allocated and spent.

As for Elena Sharoykina, unfortunately, I have not yet had the opportunity to meet her personally because of the geographical distance — I am from Siberia and spend most of my time there. However, we have mutual acquaintances and contacts within the government. In any case, we have always been connected through a common struggle, cooperation with the same people in government, and related work. We will definitely need to meet personally!

Sharoykina attempted to join the ninth composition of the Civic Chamber and was even officially registered as a candidate in the field of “Public Health and Environmental Protection.” In her application, she highlighted her extensive experience leading the environmental commission, the Coordinating Council, and the National Committee for the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration.

But she was deliberately excluded, and Elena Sharoykina lost the opportunity to continue leading the Civic Chamber’s environmental commission.

Now I will explain why. I previously prepared an article about the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation — a state body that has repeatedly conducted extremely rigorous investigations and revealed the scale of environmental destruction in Russia. For example, its report presented figures showing that forest restoration in Russia is, in essence, largely fictitious: enormous amounts of public money are “spent,” while in practice up to 90% of all planted seedlings die within the first three years. That report was prepared jointly with Elena Sharoykina’s commission.

Now let us consider the scale of the work carried out by the commission that was abolished:

• It systematically initiated detailed reviews of “dangerous” laws that we opposed — laws associated with the destruction of the country’s protected-area system. For example, the commission called for rigorous scrutiny of amendments allowing clear-cut logging around Lake Baikal, changes to the boundaries of protected areas, the logging of mountain forests for resort construction, and other measures. Elena Sharoykina, as head of the commission, was a key part of our society’s immune system for protecting wildlife.

  
  

• Together with Sharoykina’s commission, the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation conducted investigations and demonstrated that officials formally record only the number of seedlings planted, even though “in reality, up to 90% of the seedlings subsequently die.” In other words, officials simply “spend” the money allocated for planting, “report the number of hectares,” and then forget about the actual outcome.

  
  

• Following this report and on the basis of audit data, Sharoykina demanded that restored forests be measured not by the number of seedlings planted, but by the number of trees that survive for at least 15 years after planting.

  
  

• The commission became actively involved in addressing Russia’s waste-management reform. It established a dialogue with major retailers and packaging manufacturers and proposed new rules for recycling and disposing of toxic waste.

  
  

• Sharoykina advocated transparent accounting of hazardous waste. With her support, a digital platform was launched to record and monitor Class I and Class II hazardous waste.

  
  

• In August 2024, Sharoykina was invited to join the State Council of the Russian Federation and became a member of its Commission on Environmental Well-Being, demonstrating federal recognition of her achievements. This commission is responsible for overseeing national environmental projects, and her participation allowed her to directly influence nature-conservation strategy.

  
  

• Do you remember how the Ministry of Natural Resources tried to push through a bill permitting bears to be killed throughout the winter while they were hibernating? Sharoykina was one of the few people who publicly opposed the ministry’s proposal to allow the winter hunting of brown bears for trophies. She stated that this initiative represented the direct lobbying of hunting interests within government.

  
  

• Following the catastrophic fuel-oil spill in the Black Sea near Anapa, Sharoykina called for scientists and companies to be urgently involved in mitigating the consequences. She emphasized that “equipment, machinery, protective gear and logistics” were urgently needed at the disaster site.

  
  

• As chair of the National Committee for the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration, Sharoykina concluded Russia’s first regional agreement with Arkhangelsk Region. This cooperation means that the region is becoming a pilot “Arctic representative” of the UN Decade and will receive support in developing a strategy for restoring forests and ecosystems. Under her leadership, an international nature-conservation initiative is therefore being implemented at the national level in Russia.

  
  
• Sharoykina pointed out that the Forest Code adopted in 2006 effectively dismantled the system of local forestry management. Today, only around 20,000 forestry officers work in the Russian Federation, even though the country contains approximately 20% of the world’s forests. In her review published in the Accounts Chamber’s bulletin, she demanded the restoration of a fully functioning forestry-management system and increased funding to “establish a clear structure” for forest protection. This is critically important for combating wildfires and illegal logging, because without effective forestry protection, no planting campaign can save the forests — especially when forest planting in the country is largely fictitious and up to 90% of the seedlings later die.

These are the facts. All of this is part of our shared struggle! We opposed the same legislative proposals, documented problems, passed them “upward,” and worked to achieve change. A tremendous number of improvements became possible only through close cooperation with our allies inside the government.

One of our most important allies was Elena Sharoykina’s commission. Now that commission no longer exists! Public attention has been redirected toward the “urban environment,” while genuine wildlife protection and fundamental environmental problems requiring urgent public and governmental action have been left without support.

We will continue protecting nature, no matter what. Together with you, our allies, we remain among the few who are still standing and continuing this work. Let us keep moving forward.

© PAVEL PASHKOV