Today only lazy people do not talk about nature conservation. Politicians, environmentalists, heads of large mining and processing enterprises, housewives and even children at school are constantly worried about protection environment- forests, natural resources, land, wildlife. The default list also includes the hunting wealth of our planet, which requires not only the preservation of the existing population of wild animals, but also reasonable management in this area, the renewal of the number of those that are staggering on the brink in some regions. But a healthy, properly managed game population can always and endlessly provide a person with meat, fur, feathers and down, as well as provide an opportunity for active recreation - hunting. What are modern tendencies hunting farms in the world and in our country - an overview below.

Today only lazy people do not talk about nature conservation. Politicians, environmentalists, managers of large mining and processing enterprises, housewives and even children at school are constantly worried about protecting the environment - forests, natural resources, land, wildlife. The default list also includes the hunting wealth of our planet, which requires not only the preservation of the existing population of wild animals, but also reasonable management in this area, the renewal of the number of those that are staggering on the brink in some regions. But a healthy, properly managed game population can always and endlessly, fur, feather and down, as well as provide an opportunity for active recreation - hunting. What are the current trends in hunting farms in the world and in our country - an overview below.

World trends in the development of hunting grounds

The task of preserving and improving the population is faced not only by interested hunters and biologists, but also by society as a whole.

In some European countries more wild animals die every year under the wheels of cars than from the bullets of hunters. So far, only ecologists and conservationists are concerned about this issue - they study statistics, put the most dangerous places on maps, put up warning signs, for example, that there is often a road or deer in this place.

Or they block the road - but this is a very expensive and impractical solution, because in this way the migration routes of animals are blocked. Also, reflective plates are installed at the corners, which warn the animals of the approach of danger. There have also been attempts to build special tunnels under the road, but the animals mostly ignore them and follow the beaten paths. The construction of airducts is more successful. But it's even more expensive.

Russian road sign "Wild animals on the road"

Huge damage to wildlife is caused by human economic activity - drainage and cultivation of land, changing the water landscape, deforestation and mining, the construction of industrial enterprises and the transport network lead to an increasing limitation of living space for wild animals that die from lack of food and stress.

So far, there are few ways to protect wildlife at the regional and state level.

The first is the organization of nature reserves, sanctuaries and parks, where the natural complex is under strict state protection and human intervention is minimized.

The second option is the formation of hunting farms, in which hunters' collectives (or clubs) are given lands not only with the right to hunt there, but also with the obligation to maintain their condition at the proper level.

Hunting is not a new thing. Even the Egyptian nobility kept lands with wild animals for entertainment. were under protection for at least twelve centuries. And Emperor Genghis Khan in his possessions limited the hunting of certain types game, when it became clear that farmers and warriors would simply exhaust mountain sheep and saigas for meat, despite their huge number. The American Indians had strict limits on the number of animals killed in one season in one area, so as not to deplete their stocks and reproduction opportunities.

Bugs and issues

In the desire to manage the living natural wealth, mankind has made many mistakes. One of them is the destruction of one type of animal that people thought was coyotes and the protection of those whom they hunted. For example, at the beginning of the 20th century in the United States, almost all predatory animals were destroyed in the Yellowstone Park area, which led to a sharp increase in the number. Their numbers became so great that it became a disaster for the entire region. Only for very cold winter In 1919/20, more than 20 thousand heads died from cold and hunger, and another 4 thousand elks were shot by hunters. Then the number of wolves, bears and cougars was restored and now they independently regulate the number of deer at the proper level.

The second mistake is the importation of wild animals in places where they have never lived. Of the successful such actions, according to the results, experts name only two: breeding in the USA and brown trout.

All the rest had unpleasant and even tragic consequences for local ecosystems. For example, the carp introduced into the waters of the United States has displaced almost all local, much more valuable species of fish. The muskrat brought to Europe from the USA has become a real pest here, like the gray squirrel. When it was brought to New Zealand, in just 10 years of life without natural enemies, it became an enemy of the nature of these islands. And the government distributed free ammunition to hunters to destroy livestock. Now there are practically no deer in nature - only in special farms. Mongooses were brought to Jamaica to destroy snakes, and at the same time they ate almost all land crabs, which used to be a tangible item of export income. Now the Jamaican government is looking for ways to get rid of the mongoose. In recent decades, such experiments have become much more cautious.

Another mistake in environmental protection is when the authorities, out of good intentions, issue serious laws without first consulting with biologists and without being sufficiently qualified to understand the processes that are taking place.

A striking example is that the authorities of some US states have banned the hunting of female deer. It seems that the goal is noble and the protests of hunters were ignored. When the females stopped being shot, the population began to grow sharply, and in just three years there were so many animals in the area that its resources were not enough for everyone. Starving deer began to produce sick offspring, caused catastrophic damage to their range (which cannot be restored for more than 10 years), and the population itself has practically died out.

But, nevertheless, put on a very high level and stably provides the maximum possible prey of hunting birds and animals without reducing the population, as well as full-fledged conservation of their habitat.

What will change in Russian hunting in 2015-2017

And now to domestic realities. Based on the study of activities Russian Department Hunting under the Ministry of Nature of the Russian Federation for 2014, this body accepted for consideration and implementation of two main documents relating to the main tasks and changes for the coming years of the Russian hunting economy.

Received the working titles “Strategy for the development of hunting facilities for 2015-2017. and until 2030” and “Action Plan” for the implementation of this Strategy.

The need for such changes is long overdue, primarily due to the absolutely inefficient and sometimes illegal use of Russian hunting grounds. Contributing, among other things, to the massive spread of poaching, misuse of the territories of hunting bases and other actions that turn the noble art of hunting into a way of personal gain and theft of state resources.

Given the above, the state has planned a number of measures, the main ones being tracking the livestock of the beast from space, eliminating the black market for furs, destroying underground "forest" dens, restaurants and hotels, providing support to legal hunters (while tightening attitudes towards illegal ones), introducing Western style - number tags for and much more.

A separate line should be mentioned the direction of forces and funds for the organization of mass aviary and semi-aviary breeding of animals.

Expected reaction

For many innovations, the Department expects a wave of criticism and negative reaction - but not at all constructive, but related to the lack of interest of many influential people and structures in such changes. The reason for this is obvious - the loss of huge profits and easy, essentially not controlled by anyone, ways to turn hunting grounds into their own feeding grounds and places for "intimate relaxation" - both their own and many "dear guests". The lobby of such a “pseudo-public” liberal layer of organizations will be serious - however, when trying to find out their roots, already in 2014 it was repeatedly found that in fact they turned out to be the heirs of various disbanded institutions, interdepartmental lobbyists restructured for debts of unclear origin and subordination of agencies, etc. .

Unfortunately, many of the planned innovations will not meet with understanding among ordinary hunters either - which is due to the still largely indestructible attitude towards hunting (and not only hunting - but also fishing, forest gathering and other extraction of forest gifts), how exactly to poaching .

The essence of which is pure consumerism - without the slightest concern about the restoration of forest resources. Be it livestock, birds, fish or a slowly renewable resource of not only fauna but also flora.

Perfectly understanding and taking into account these factors, the state as a whole and the Department of Hunting and the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation in particular, will nevertheless strictly adhere to the chosen direction of a radical change in attitude towards the forest surrounding us and its inhabitants. And when communicating with hunters and owners (current and future) of hunting farms, engage in patient explanation of the ongoing Strategy and the inevitability of the chosen civilizational path of relation to Nature and Hunting.

First changes in hunting agreements

• first of all, the work will be aimed at sectoral sustainable development - including measures to increase the number of wild animals and birds, preserve and increase species diversity, ecosystem sustainability and simplify the accessibility of hunting for ordinary citizens;
• the practice of long-term (with the impossibility of making changes) hunting management agreements with a duration of 20-40 years, which often led to mass violations and changes in both the qualitative and territorial composition of hunting grounds, will be subject to change - up to the use of these lands for other than their intended purpose;
• when transferring rights and obligations from one hunting user to another, the priority will be the choice of a user who is determined to increase the number of livestock and carry out other activities useful for the hunting economy - as opposed to the current trend of using hunting lands for leasing, illegal construction, etc.;
• there will be a significant reduction in administrative barriers for registration of obtaining the use of hunting grounds, renegotiation of contracts, prolongation of terms and amendments to agreements.

Harmonization of hunting and forestry legislation

Currently, the tenant of the hunting grounds is carrying out a variety of (including really necessary) forest protection measures - including the protection of the site, ensuring its fire safety, preparing land development projects, incurring financial costs - but the forest DOES NOT CHANGE.

All this is good - but does not contribute in any way to the main purpose of the hunting farm: to increase the number of animals.

According to the new Strategy, it will be mandatory to create enclosures in designated areas for breeding and keeping in conditions of semi-free existence. At the same time, the rules for planned biotechnical measures that do not harm the forest, as well as the possibility of fencing enclosure areas, will be approved by the federal executive authority.

In a word, the hunting user will have to turn exclusively into the creator and guardian of the hunting stock - and not the builder of illegal hotels, dens and baths, while still not paying taxes and working for the pockets of the figures lobbying their existence, creating a vicious vicious circle work of state ownership on a private owner, using loopholes in the legislation.

Improving the order of hunting management

The existing system of arrangement of hunting farms without uniform all-Russian requirements will also disappear - in which in each subject of the Russian Federation measures for arrangement are invented “from the ceiling”.

Not only that such actions are often far from professionalism and rational use budgetary funds - they are also not mandatory for execution, and their executors are organizations that are not subject to state accreditation. In the new Procedure, accreditation of a single sample will become mandatory - as well as a certain list of arrangement measures that are mandatory for execution throughout Russia.

Streamlining production turnover

The main thing in this direction will be the obligatory practice of marking the hunted animal or bird with special numbered self-fixing seals - without which it has long been impossible. Such an innovation would prevent (or at least significantly reduce) a lot of current violations. First of all, poaching, the prosperity of the "black market", shooting several animals for 1 permit, non-payment of taxes, shooting wild animals as "bred", etc.

Without the use of marking seals, hunting will be strictly prohibited - with quite serious fines for violating this requirement (up to 5 thousand rubles for individuals, up to 50 thousand rubles for officials and up to 1 million rubles for legal entities).

Why did I decide to start a hunting farm? To explain this, we must mentally return to the early 2000s: the “dashing 90s” are over, the time has come for the economy to rise and private business to emerge. The young private enterprise, of which I am the head, has already more or less got on its feet, so there are financial opportunities to go hunting, and free time.

I didn’t master hunting abroad then, but I hunted in Russia. I did not like to come somewhere for a couple of days, not for long, and besides, it was more or less clear how I wanted to hunt. Then the idea arose to find like-minded people and create their own hunting farm.

The very first and one of the most difficult problems(and there were many of them) was building relationships with the regional authorities. It was necessary to convince them to give us one of the nine regional reserves for hunting grounds. Fortunately, the management believed in us and allowed us to “steer”. And in 2008, we issued a long-term lease of land in the Ryazan region, with an area of ​​28,000 hectares. It was obvious that the lands needed help: before that, hunting was carried out in the reserve either for the local authorities or for local poachers. Both were episodic.

The main animal in the lands is the wild boar, and at the very beginning of our journey, even this ubiquitous animal was extremely scarce in the lands: in the first seventeen hunts, not a single wild boar was caught. The thing is that if now in our farm it is forbidden to shoot billhooks during the rutting season, and the ban applies to shooting breeding stock all year round, then they used to shoot everyone in a row. Work on the improvement of roads, top dressing and other biotechnical activities in the reserve were also not carried out: for example, in 2006, only one thousand rubles were allocated from the state budget for all biotechnology. For a year. There were only two towers and four feeding troughs on the grounds, to which a cart of waste or potatoes was occasionally delivered in autumn. There was one huntsman who did not have any equipment.

We started by properly organizing the protection of the land and the abundant feeding of wild boars. Firstly, we sowed (and continue to sow now) about 130 hectares of our fields (all that is) with oats, Jerusalem artichoke and corn. Secondly, they began to bring so much food to the feeders that the wild boars could not eat everything. Queens fed in this way began to bring twice as many offspring as before. Stray billhooks, who came to the feeders with surplus food, began to bring neighbor's wild boars with them. Neighboring hunting farms began to complain that the wild boars had all gone to us, but then the number of wild boar and elk began to grow. By the way, we border on three hunting farms, with the leaders of which we have long established friendly relations. We join forces to fight poaching, we hunt wolves together, we buy seeds and feed.

It’s even scary to remember the initial amount of work: it was necessary to equip salt licks, make bathing pits, cut clearings in the forest, clear forest roads littered with fallen trees, purchase equipment, find rangers, “make friends” with the local population ...

Truth, a good relationship with the inhabitants of neighboring villages, we developed quite quickly. Local men are used to poaching in the reserve, because they didn’t give vouchers. And I invited them to my team as so-called activists. At first, people shied away, they thought that they would only be used to catch up. Now we have more than 30 activists, this is a well-coordinated friendly team, guys whom I am always glad to see, whose help I really need and really get it. They help us clear roads, lay out food, lay hare salt licks, clear swamps, make artificial nests, and clean towers. Now, for example, the sowing campaign is underway - people are needed who scatter the grain with their hands where the seeder does not pass, they seat the Jerusalem artichoke under the shovel. Activists hunt and use the amenities of the hunting base with us on an equal footing. This means that we give them free tours, eat at the same table, shoot at the same range. To be able to hunt on the grounds, that is, to become an activist, you need to be recommended by two members of the collective. The second condition - 10 days per season (for hunting ungulates by paddock and from a tower) or 3 days (for all other types of hunting) must be worked out for the benefit of the economy, providing any feasible assistance. This rule does not apply to pensioners and the disabled, they get vouchers without working off.

Now 17 people are constantly working and serving the hunting ground: cooks, engineers, rangers and security guards. I personally run the business. But besides me, there is a director, a chief hunter and a chief engineer who are responsible for order in my absence. I communicate with the team every day by phone and at least once every two weeks in person. Before the start of the hunting season, we hold operational meetings. In our free time, we work on subbotniks, organize competitions (hunting biathlon, shooting at the “running boar”, skeet, electronic shooting), we conduct open biology lessons for schoolchildren in the hunting house.

Today, the farm is not operating on a commercial basis and most likely will not work in the future. Five volunteer founders fully cover all material costs. All hunts are not commercial, only for yourself and for friends. But there are many friends, and therefore, every weekend in the season, someone hunts in the lands.

We have the following limit on hunting. Moose licenses - 12 per year. For wild boars - 60+, but this limit can be increased if there is a threat of epidemics. There is also hunting for foxes, hares and several types of bird hunting. Probably, it would be possible to follow the example of the well-known hunting user Viktor Labusov and make the farm partly commercial. But, firstly, while this is not necessary, all owners are satisfied with the chosen cooperation option. Secondly, all the founders understand that the hunting business will not bring a stunning income, and even for this reason they do not seriously think about it. And thirdly, Viktor Labusov, as far as I know, immediately oriented his hunting farm to conduct both commercial hunting and hunting “for himself”. For us, if we ever decide to embark on a commercial footing, we will have to rebuild the entire system of work. So we don't have any plans for now. True, recently I had ideas, as an experiment, to agree with the owners of the base for fishermen, which is being built on the banks of the Oka not far from us. The bottom line is to offer their guests hunting in our lands at a price list. Something similar was done in the Breeze hunting farm.

For five years of hunting use, we managed to solve many problems. But many problems, or rather tasks, still remain.

The first is animal breeding. We do a lot to breed wild boars, elks, foxes and hares. We are actively fighting wolves, and therefore we have a lot of animals. But I believe that the animal should be twice as large and it should be more diverse (which is not observed now). I dream that fallow deer and roe deer will appear in our forests. Belarus serves as an example for me in this matter: I see how much is being done and how much there is as a result of the beast.

The second task is the fight against bipedal predators. We carry out protection only by members of our team and, in my opinion, quite effectively, but, despite our efforts, once a quarter we definitely detain one or two poachers. To be honest, today I do not know how we are generally able to solve this problem. After all, there is a direct relationship - the more the beast, the more poachers. Which is logical: neither a wolf nor a poacher will climb into a bad economy, where there are few animals.

But the most serious problem is the attitude of people working on the farm. All five years I have been trying to establish good working relationships with rangers, to ensure that they take the initiative, keep to work. But, unfortunately, this does not work out with all members of our team. Due to the fact that not all rangers work responsibly, the whole team suffers and things get up. It turns out that if I personally do not keep everything under control every day and check every step, nothing will be done.

The main problem of modern rangers, I think, is that they can tense up, grit their teeth and do what they need once (and then you need to look for such). But for the most part, they are not ready for constant daily painstaking work. Sometimes it seems that their main goal is to quickly do what they were told and go home - and then at best. And at worst, leave without doing anything. However, most of the gamekeepers I have worked with are constantly convinced that they work too hard.

Yes, there is a lot of work, I do not argue. Gamekeepers are engaged every day in quite routine work: delivering feed along the same roads to the same feeders, maintaining equipment that breaks down all the time, and guarding the territory. But, firstly, no one forces you to work around the clock, and secondly, there are also many pluses in work, as in the well-known black joke: then with people! Seriously, we have the opportunity to pay workers a decent salary not only by Ryazan, but also by Moscow standards, send them to study jaegers at our own expense, share meat, not only work together, but also relax.

As a leader, I lack responsibility, interest, dedication, initiative, and love for my work in rangers. Unfortunately, many huntsmen are indifferent to the fact that poachers can use their work, they do not have a zealous attitude towards “their” lands. I came to the conclusion that no matter how you explain that we work for ourselves, a rare ranger will look at the farm as if it were his own. As the older generation says, "not native - not sick." Apparently, in Russia, in general, compared with the same Europe, the internal sense of ownership (the feeling of the owner) is poorly developed.

I am more and more inclined to think that I will not be able to “grow up” an employee who would meet all my simple requirements. Apparently, we need to look for a ready-made specialist, with education and experience in a hunting farm like ours. But searching is also not an easy task. For example, at one time we were looking for a director by advertising in a newspaper. We searched for a very long time, interviewed 30 candidates. In the end, they still found the director among their own. It turned out to be an old acquaintance who built our hunting base many years ago, whom we tested in practice and whom we trust. He is a reliable person, but now he is already 67 years old, and soon he will not be able to work, he will have to look for a new one - and everything will start all over again.

I'm almost sure that the problems we face are also in others. Russian farms. I would be very happy if someone would dissuade me from this ...

Russian hunting magazine, June 2013

In hunting magazines, at meetings and in conversations, everything is the same: which of the models of the hunting economy is worthy of choice and to what extent should the state interfere in the work of the hunting economy? In practice, we see the action of a certain confrontation between officials and hunting users. The former want to use government positions to distribute what nature gives and the hunt users have grown, the latter demand that they be given rights in order to be able to decide which animals should be given an advantage in the lands, how many of them should be and how much should be withdrawn.

There are many examples in history when disputes and discussions on any subject could drag on in Russia ad infinitum. Officials, as always, defend their rights, life makes its own adjustments, but nothing changes in hunting farms and cannot change by itself. Everything goes on as usual, and everyone turns in his own way: as best he can or as it is beneficial for him. Some hunters take as much from nature as they can (almost idle and give nothing to wild animals in return), and wait for better times when it will be possible to invest effort and money without any risk. Others develop hunting as part of entertainment. Still others negotiate with government agencies so that they do not interfere. And almost all of them indicate in their reporting such results of accounting that are beneficial to them (depending on relations with the local Okhotnadzor).

Having studied the models of hunting farms that exist on the territory of Russia, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that all of them, or at least most of them, are focused on amateur sponsorship, that is, people buy hunting farms for themselves only because it is fashionable and prestigious . Perhaps the sophisticated reader will call it something else, but all this is nothing but a kind of struggle for the survival of the powerful of this world - only in a more refined form.

The problem ceased to exist in those subjects Russian Federation where the land was distributed. And it is there that it is clearly seen that laws and life exist on their own, in deep separation from each other! The success of hunting users can be assessed in different ways. However, it should be noted that the total number of animals is growing, and this is all thanks to their efforts and investments. Another thing is whether this growth justifies the effort and patience expended, does it correspond to the finances invested in it? An increase in the number of animals and even their trophy qualities as a goal is one thing, but the issue of self-sufficiency or profitability of a hunting farm is completely different. From the information about the last meeting with the new curator of hunters in the Ministry of Natural Resources, we clearly see that the government would also like to increase the number of animals, during the discussion the question of how to do this was even raised, and now a plan is being developed to get out of this situation.

Why does it never occur to anyone to think about the financial side of hunting management? Is it really not clear that the introduction of profitability mechanisms will put everything in its place. It will be profitable - the financial flow will rush to where the invested money can pay off, the number of animals will quickly increase, meat of wild animals will appear on the shelves (after all, the hunters themselves will not be able to eat as much as they will produce). But while the ordinary hunting user is left alone with his fate, only those farms are developing where the property serves as a toy for its wealthy owners. Here the economic calculation of the owner is not at all interested. The point is only to show oneself, while the “toy” has not yet got tired or bought a new one. Almost all hunting farms are single-profile. If agricultural work is carried out there, it is only for the purpose of preparing animal feed, more for the species or to maintain animals in the enclosure, the number of which is not controlled by the Okhotnadzor.

I had to develop the concept of running more than one hunting farm, and I can draw the following conclusion: in fact, a hunting farm as a leading single-profile enterprise cannot be profitable in Russia at the present time!

How to become profitable? Agricultural and tourism activities seem to automatically fit into the framework of a hunting enterprise. Recently, not only I have pointed out in my publications the need to introduce the concept of "farm hunting". Professor Danilkin A.A., for example, wrote a whole book on this topic, however, designating with such a term only the captive keeping of wild game animals. Why is this question so acute? If the purpose of the hunting economy is to make the cultivation of wild game animals, in contrast to Agriculture where domestic animals are raised, or if it is determined that hunters must raise animals before hunting, and also take into account the fact that nature, given the aggression on the part of humanity, which reproduces at a tremendous pace, has exhausted its ability to independently regulate the further growth in the number of animals , - then, based on the foregoing and taking into account the political component in the country, it is not possible to make any government decisions regarding the development of the hunting economy without the participation of budgetary funds.

To begin with, a legislative framework should be created to equalize the status of hunting and agriculture. And you and I understand that this process can last for more than one year, because it is always so hard for our legislators! In order to succeed in creating something, you need to “learn” from good examples. The interpretation that a hunting economy is the same as a farm, only with wild game animals, is already accepted by many. In many hunting farms enclosure keeping of animals is being developed, it is a pity that so far not by the method of economic calculation, which is beneficial not only for owners, but also for animals. I often observe how most investors build enclosures just because they can get the result of their labor on their territory without the demand of officials.

A negative phenomenon has also spread: the enclosure is used as a maternity hospital, from where the grown animals are released into the land. If the territory is large, and the feeding system is arranged wisely, then there are almost no losses among animals. You can always negotiate with the local service, turn a blind eye to unauthorized release, and in which case - a symbolic fine. It is almost impossible to prove where the animal was taken from: from the enclosure or outside it.

When will our legislators finally mature and understand that it is necessary to remove corruption schemes and trust the owner-investor, because in the first place only he and no one else is interested in increasing the number of animals on the territory given to him for use?

There are about 3 million ungulates in Russia. Without taking into account the fact that in recent years abandoned agricultural lands in the northern and central parts of Russia have become an immense food base for wild animals, at least 20 million individuals will be able to feed themselves. With the use of these abandoned fields and with artificial feeding of animals, I dare to make a forecast, their number could grow to 50 million heads. The whole world could be provided with "wild" meat, grown quite cheaply and relatively quickly on our Russian soil.

Everywhere else they say that it is necessary to support agriculture, that it is necessary to develop affordable tourism, the so-called agrotourism or ecotourism. To coordinate all this, a special state structure is required. It should be noted that it already exists. In addition, all hunting farms are legal entities with all the ensuing organizational capabilities, rights and obligations, reporting, etc. Work in a hunting farm is seasonal, in agriculture it is also seasonal, the same is true in the tourism sector. If we collect all these types of activities within the framework of one enterprise and provide it with all the benefits and compensations existing for agriculture for newly developed tourist places, then everything could move forward, and the hunting farm could take a step forward.

So the goal has been set. Now let's talk about what and how to feed. Previous articles have already discussed the behavior of animals in the enclosures of the Biosfera exemplary farm, where mineral and vitamin supplements and licks developed by the Diana Hunting Club are used. Yes, in the summer there was no need to feed with grain, because the crops of different crops were enough for the full nutrition of the animals, and they were in good condition. A month before the start of the rut, it was decided to put a mixture of cereals into the feeders with the addition of a complex of micro- and macroelements in order to strengthen the body of both sires and females, which, in turn, should also contribute to the conception of stronger animals. After the end of the rut, grain feeding was suspended for a while, because a cheaper and healthier food appeared - potatoes.

A variety of food in terms of the degree and sequence of maturation and as the seasons change, preserves the ability of animals to assimilate and digest it in the best possible way, and as a result, does not cause dependence on what is laid out in the feeders. But the season for potatoes and juicy grass ended in October ... And then it was time to return to grains with the addition of a full complex of minerals. In parallel, energy briquettes with a full composition of vitamins began to be laid out in the feeders, so the animals throughout the winter will be provided with a complex of microelements, which are so necessary for the full assimilation of basic feeds and the development of healthy livestock.

Economic calculation of the effectiveness of the use of mineral additives for wild game animals

Every hunter who has visited the forest at least once and followed the life of its inhabitants could observe undigested swollen grains in animal excrement. Everyone knows that grain is not 100% digested in the body of animals. With the help of scientific experiments, it was revealed that there is approximately the following ratio:

■ non-crushed grain is digested — up to 20%;

■ crushed grain is digested — up to 40%;

■ crushed grain with the addition of a balanced complex of mixtures of microelements, macroelements and vitamins necessary for the body of wild game animals is assimilated by 70-80%!

■ the cost of 1 ton of non-crushed grain with delivery in 2011 is about 12,000 rubles. The cost of the mineral mixture with delivery and the cost of crushing and mixing is about 800 rubles;

■ uncrushed grain is assimilated by 20%, that is, in the amount of 2,400 rubles, and in the amount of 9,600 rubles. grain is lost in the form of excrement;

■ one ton of crushed grain, together with a mixture of a full range of mineral additives for DOL, will cost only 12,800 rubles, while the grain will be absorbed by the animal body by 80%, that is, in the amount of 9,600 rubles, but in the form of excrement it will be lost in 4 times less, that is, in the amount of 2400 rubles;

■ the difference will be 9600 rubles. - 2400 rubles. = 7400 rubles.

Thus, the hunting user saves 7400 rubles. for each ton of purchased grain, that is, by mixing a complex of minerals worth 800 rubles, he can buy 4 times less grain, and the result of feeding will be the same. Given the fact that the delivery of inexpensive fodder grain purchased in the south to hunting farms is carried out, as a rule, by rail or road transport with a carrying capacity of about 40 tons, the benefit is obvious and can amount to almost 300,000 rubles. With the money saved, at least you can buy a full range of feed briquettes, both mineral-salt and vitamin.

In addition, in summer, animals tend to eat more natural food of plant origin, which costs nothing. And thanks to the use of vitamin and mineral feed additives, “green” feed will be eaten more actively and absorbed better, that is, the same effect is achieved as if we fed animals with grain feed.

In order to achieve maximum results when using mineral and vitamin supplements, an important factor is the proper organization and installation of the solonetz. When building salt licks, many huntsmen make a mistake: the recesses on the aspen must be made smaller and deeper in order to prevent the animals from throwing off the briquettes. But it is best to make the groove deeper, diverting water from the bottom and further along the tree trunk, which will ensure the impregnation of the upper layer of aspen and at the same time allow animals to gnaw on the trunk. If the briquettes float in water, they quickly dissolve, which leads to material losses.

During our observations, some interesting conclusions appeared in other hunting farms. After analyzing them, we outlined several stages of work for those who decided to introduce a modern system of feeding wild animals in their lands. To begin with, it was recommended to accustom animals to such a new phenomenon as feeders and salt licks with a new balanced feed and licks enriched with a complex of micro- and macroelements. It turned out that the matter is not so simple. At first it seemed to us that when constructing a salt lick in one fallen aspen, it would be better to make several recesses, in each of which to place different types licks, so that different animals have the opportunity to choose exactly what they need, taking into account individual needs and reactions to the unique taste and smell of each briquette, but it turned out that in practice this scheme still does not work.

Watching the animals, the rangers noticed that if in one of the recesses there is one of the briquettes that the animals do not like for some reason, then the animals do not fit this salt lick at all. This is especially clear in moose. The Diana Hunting Club website describes in detail the method of feeding on the feeding grounds, but as a result of observations from the information coming from the rangers, some recommendations had to be changed. Currently, we recommend laying only one type of briquette in one felled aspen, the tree where the briquette of another type will be placed should be felled at a distance of at least 50 m. terrain. I emphasize “localities”, because it has been established that animals of the same species react differently to a briquette of the same composition in different hunting grounds and even in remote places of the same hunting ground.

One can argue about which word is better to use in this situation: “lure”, “lure”, etc. But it seems to me that it would be more appropriate to call this process accustoming animals to a given feed composition. I advise every hunting user who has begun to feed animals according to modern recommendations not to be upset if the animals do not immediately rush to the briquettes with minerals. Since the spring of last year, all types of our briquettes are available to moose on the territory of the moose farm near Kostroma. There are almost laboratory conditions for observations, since the connection with the past can be traced very clearly: in what form were animals of both sexes a few years ago and in what form are they now, what kind of fur they have, how much milk they give, what trophies they have, etc. In this In 1999, adult animals were divided into three groups: some eat only natural food, others only have access to pure salt, and the third - salt with minerals. All types of briquettes laid out in different feeders are licked in different quantities. Based on this alone, it is, of course, too early to determine the algorithm. The results will have to wait another year. However, today we are already seeing a positive trend in moose.

After switching from natural moose milk to powdered moose milk, once a day, milk is enriched with the P-Moose mixture, which includes a full range of micro- and macroelements necessary for young moose. The daily mix ration increases as the calves gain weight. The cold will come, and the entire livestock will switch to a winter, energy diet. Since moose have been given a lot of attention here in past years, all data on weight gain, as well as the results of analyzes, are with our specialists.

In the Kostroma region there is another hunting farm where observations are being made - NP Center for the Protection and Reproduction of Fauna and Flora. Around - deaf taiga. And the farm is also interesting because there are no others involved in feeding outside of it, which means that there is no competitive poaching of animals. There are no agricultural fields and residential villages there either. Within one year, more than 50 fodder sites and salt licks were built here, moreover, on the accessible part of the hunting farm with a total area of ​​32.5 thousand hectares. Until July, salt licks were built according to the first option, where several types of briquettes were laid out in one fallen aspen. Moose actively visited some salt licks, but they did not approach some of them at all. As a result, we had a question: how suitable was the choice of place for the animals and why did they visit some and did not honor others with their attention at all? After all, all salt licks were built where moose were usually seen, where there was a natural food base in the form of old and fresh clearings, where there was water nearby, shelters for young animals and other components.

In summer, more moose were seen on the territory of the hunting ground than last year. Now it is important to determine: will they move, as usual, in the winter, or will they stay and keep close to the newly built feeders? Well, we will be able to answer this question by the summer, when it becomes known: by how much the number of moose could increase. Classic driven hunting has been suspended on the hunting grounds so that the animals can feel more confident. The author of the article, together with the local huntsman Volodya, came up with a new way of moose hunting in November, which can be implemented in the future in addition to the traditional autumn hunting “for a groan” and which, no doubt, can become one of the main ones in these lands.

From time to time, the huntsman with working dogs should approach feeding grounds or salt licks where moose are kept, and determine the ways for the animals to leave. At first, you just have to watch. Moose will gradually get used to dogs. Animals will also always leave in almost the same direction. Over time, they will stop abruptly fleeing on the swings, but will slowly move away, defending themselves from the dogs barking at them with their powerful horns. From the outside, this picture is more like a game of some with others. However, thanks to the dogs, it will be possible to clearly hear where the animals are moving. It is in these directions that it will be necessary to clear the overgrown forest paths, and in the future - to build semi-towers. Thus, the removal of an elk will become quiet and barely noticeable for other individuals, if, of course, the hunter's shot is well-aimed. And most importantly, with this method of hunting, breeding work will become possible. If cows and large sires feel confident, then the entire local population will stay in the land.

A curious phenomenon was also noted in the maral farm: all the time a flock of small birds flew to the feeders to peck at the vitamin-mineral briquettes “Br-min-vit”, which was not observed when one oat was laid out in the feeders. Once, at dawn, the huntsman on duty noticed a pair of black grouse sitting in a trough, which became an important factor for further monitoring of the feeders. And in the lands of a recently organized hunting farm in the north of the Kamchatka region, located a little higher than the village of Esso in the vicinity of the Snezhny volcano, salt licks for elks were built last spring, where Br-Los and Br-Gol briquettes flavored with the smell of anise were laid out . The effect is amazing. All these salt licks not only began to be actively visited by elk, but the number of elk constantly kept in the lands and in the vicinity of solonetzes increased significantly, which was determined by the number of traces left, and also recorded by video recorders.

Near natural salt licks, always visited by bighorn sheep, soil salt licks were built in log cabins. The video recorders recorded one interesting fact: the rams, who had always visited natural salt licks before, stopped noticing them, and constantly approached artificial ones containing a full range of micro- and macroelements. The hunter, shocked by the results, decided to refrain from organizing hunting in these places this year, and possibly even next year, in order to provide peace to the animals and consolidate confidence that in this area there is not only a forage base necessary to meet the needs of the animal organism , but also neutralized the anxiety factor. Animal migration routes are constantly monitored, which in the future will make it possible to determine the places for hunting, and organized in such a way that the animals cannot determine that the feeders are at risk to their lives. This is how the work in the land changes when a real owner appears there!

Interesting observations were also made in the Ozernoe hunting farm in the Kaluga region. The farm has several enclosures where spotted and red deer, fallow deer and wild boars are kept. There are also red, spotted deer and free-range wild boars. Feeding started in September, so we have only minimal information so far. But I would like to note that 20 soil salt licks in a log house with clay were built in this territory in a short time, and animals immediately began to visit them intensively, although salt was always available to animals throughout the territory of the land. A little later, a decline in visits was noted, which is understandable: the animals made up for a severe lack of minerals and began to visit them only when necessary. For the same reason, moderate licking of the briquettes in the feeders was also observed. In total, it is still difficult to determine the amount of use of licks, because there are a large number of feeding grounds on the territory of the hunting farm, and each has several feeders.

Animals, I would say, have excessive access to everything their bodies need. There, the animals mainly feed in feeders, and natural plants here can only be considered an addition to their main diet. Here, the result of observations is rather more important for planning the cost of feeding. We should get an unequivocal answer: how much will the consumption of cereals decrease? From year to year, game rangers had to monitor the presence of grain in the feeders, and every year it turned out that approximately the same amount of grain left each year. Since the territory of the hunting farm is very large, and crushed grain must be put into feeders in small doses, but often, there is still a technical difficulty in switching to feeding with crushed grain - more workers and equipment need to be involved. Now the issue of acquiring automatic feeders with dispensers is being decided. In this advanced hunting farm, we expect to receive answers to many questions that interest us: how much will the fertility of females, the weight gain of young animals, the weight and size of the horns of bulls increase?

During the September exhibition "Hunting World of Russia" in Kaluga, a seminar was held at the hunting estate "Hunting Club", where Ostanin V.A. in practice, he proved a rare point of view, which is shared by the author of this article - hunting management, based only on the enclosure of animals, does not make sense from an economic point of view. It was decided that the main task of the hunting farm would be the breeding of sika deer. As a result, a small enclosure was built with an area of ​​slightly more than 10 hectares, where for three years in a row in November 40-50 young pregnant females and several mature bulls were launched. In the aviary, they gave birth and raised offspring, the rut also took place in the aviary. In November, everyone was released outside the enclosure. After that, its veterinary treatment was carried out and the next batch of purchased deer was launched. It was planned to work according to this scheme until the number of more than 500 individuals is reached. It should be noted that the feeders were built around the enclosure, behind its fence, and during all this time there were no losses of animals due to their departure to neighboring farms. From which we can conclude that from an economic point of view it is not advisable to build large expensive enclosures, moreover, you can be left without that group of clients who do not accept hunting in fences.

In the next issues of the Safari magazine, we will provide readers with regular results of observations on the use of various methods of hunting management, including the results of feeding animals. In conclusion, I would like to note that the developers of the Diana Hunting Club thought that the proposal to use the feeding method, proven in many countries, and the availability of our products will arouse great interest among hunting users and the desire to switch to modern intensive hunting management. But alas... It didn't happen. The sales manager quite often receives an answer: “... But we have everything ...” To the question: “What do you feed?” - the answer follows: "... we bought a huge amount of cereals and a couple of tons of salt - pure sodium glucanate ..." And they do not particularly want to go deep into the proposed calculation of the efficiency of feeding with cereals. Probably, they don’t need money, so they don’t save?!

Published based on the materials of the magazine "Safari" No. 2, 2012.

08/08/2011 | The future could be for collective hunting farms ... But it is not

Miroslav Madejski, General Director of "Diana's Hunting Club" at the presentation of feeds and additives produced by him. Photo - Andrey Shalygin

Miroslav Madejski: "I was prompted to write my opinion by the fact of an interview with Anton Bersenev. The battle over the unified state hunting license has finally ended. It is striking that one document relating to all of us, hunters, has been discussed by our huge country for so many years. Another year was discussed then: will the officials have time to cope with the preparations for issuing tickets, and it seems that for another year everyone will be dealing with the question: will they be able to issue tickets to everyone during the year or not?!

This ticket is actually only a confirmation that the person, having registered, joined the ranks of the hunters.

The rank of such a ticket is zero, given that no knowledge is required to obtain it. Most likely, the hunting officials could not come up with anything smarter than to either make the hunting societies work or ruin them, after they stopped the flow of money for the tribute paid for being a hunter. As a matter of fact, it is unlikely that now it will be possible to sit idle forever. Most likely, all their actions were aimed at accelerating the collapse of the existing post-Soviet system of societies. The prevailing bureaucratic scheme - to seize land from companies for any reason (violation) dragged out the privatization process for a long time. And in such circumstances, how can the society not violate the requirements, when it is enough for officials to cut the number of permits for the extraction of ungulates, and the society will have no revenue?! There will be no sale - there will be nothing to fulfill biotechnical requirements. And as a result: there will be no incentive for local hunters to work for society. Now it is clear: why the hunting economy in the country has been brought to such a deplorable state! And the question arises: why was it necessary to ruin everything in order to build anew now ?!

If the improvement of legislation moves in the same direction, then in the future "ticket holders" will go to the forest only to drink vodka.

The owners of private hunting farms, which at one time were so run over by all the magazines that, they say, the oligarchs will take the land, knock out everything that moves there and abandon it, proved the opposite. It is great that the head of the department is a supporter of a private owner in the land. However, in my opinion, you should not overdo it. Why not create conditions for the existence of all types of property or economic activity? In private hunting farms, this is also an indefinable problem: how to reduce costs? People will work for the owner only for money. There is a problem with a qualified and responsible workforce in the villages. The owners have not been able to find mutual language with local hunters. Opposition was poaching and theft. And it seemed that it was so easy to come to an agreement with local hunters, to create brigades serving on a voluntary basis, rangers for the right to hunt in these lands. The psychological barrier between the poor and the rich is still very large.

The future could also be for collective hunting farms when, for example, a district society that is not able to stay afloat on its own would have a sponsor or a team of sponsors as new solvent members of the society who would receive additional rights of influence in exchange for material and technical support. Local hunters would carry out current biotechnical and security work in their free time from their main work, and visitors would take care of feed, equipment and equipment. It could be fun for local hunters to cater for visiting commercial hunters. And such societies could operate at minimal cost. But there is one BUT ... These societies should become independent legal entities and have the right to decide everything for themselves. And most importantly: to have the right to dispose of animals grown at the expense of their own labor and invested financial resources. In some European countries, such a system of interaction between local and urban hunters works great, especially if they have some major sponsor in the composition. The system works flawlessly, because one cannot do without the other.

Russian Hunting trophy records. Photo - Andrey Shalygin.

Now societies are being trampled on both sides. Officials from the “hunting supervision” act in a win-win situation: while the society is working, they keep part of the shooting permits for themselves, selling them, and as soon as the hunting farm falls into decay, then a rollback for drawing up a hunting agreement to some moneybags opens up ways for them to solve bigger problems, leading to As a result, the regularly collected tribute for the production rate can forever warm their pockets. Until the state resolves this issue by adopting an appropriate law, nothing will move forward. The same should apply to private households. The fashion to have your own hunting ground will soon pass, because any toy gets bored with time, and in this case it also creates too many problems for the owner, and, being a very expensive undertaking, hits the pocket hard. Privatization has not yet ended, and how many proposals for the sale of land already!

And this means that the sponsorship model of hunting management will be relevant, since only a few can afford to pay all the costs associated with hunting management.

In my opinion, an increase in the number of state inspectors for protection is nothing more than an increase in legal poachers. If the land has an owner, then he will independently decide: how to protect them. It is important that law enforcement agencies work in a reliable manner to protect the property rights of a citizen.

A separate topic: commercial hunting. It should be not only profitable, but also profitable. So far, there is little knowledge in the country: how to manage such a farm. Such a farm is close to a farm. It is necessary to learn how to attract animals, keep them in the land, feed or feed them in order to increase immunity, increase the fertility of females, as well as the percentage of reared young and the number of individuals that survived the winter, increase the rate of weight gain and, finally, improve the quality of trophies. Also, you can not do without the development of selection skills. The reduction of predators must be made profitable, not expendable. In my opinion, increasing the premium for wolf prey will give a little. Like it or not, this is just another possibility of a corrupt arrangement.

I know what I'm saying. We launched the production and sale of dressings, feed and licks for almost all types of game animals. For all types of hunting animals, separate compositions of minerals and vitamins were developed separately. And what we hear everywhere in response: “We have everything, because we bought so many and so many tons of grain and salt.” There are no analogues of such an integrated approach to feeding wild animals in the world. In the United States, for example, the abundance of animals exists thanks to the use of food laid out specifically for animals, although most of the time, expired products intended for people are still used as food. We have developed an innovative system of balanced feeding in addition to natural food, which is more than enough in the vast expanses of Russia. I had to take into account the fact that agriculture is dying throughout the central, eastern and northern parts of Russia, villages are disappearing, because they have become uncompetitive in relation to the southern regions of Russia, as well as to foreign food producers. Russia can be fed by three or four southern regions of the Russian Federation, if, of course, modern agricultural technology works. After all, wild animals were fed on agricultural fields with plants with a rich composition of microelements coming into them from the soil as a result of the use of fertilizers. For animals, all this is too poor food. In such circumstances, it is in Russia that the hunting economy, as an industry, from an economic point of view, can become competitive with agriculture. Only in Russia, a wild animal is not a pest in areas where there is almost no agriculture. It takes no more than 30% of human-supplied feed to grow 1 kg of wild animal meat, and does not require huge infrastructure costs, as is the case with farms in agriculture.