If, moreover, we take into account the attitude towards hunting as some kind of secondary industry, if we take into account the unjustified throwing from one organizational form to another, the restructuring and transfer of the hunting industry from one department to another, unskilled personnel and insufficient departmental scientific support, it turns out that the situation of this industry was much worse, than agriculture, forestry and other farms.
Hunting and fishing enterprises have been in a particularly difficult state in the last two or three decades. Extremely low material and technical equipment of the lands, incomplete ownership of raw materials, non-guaranteed hunting use for full-time hunters and extremely low wages for their labor, mixing of exploiting and controlling functions in state farms, the predominance of procurement functions over production and reproduction functions in cooperative farms, as well as the increasing tilt of hunting and fishing enterprises towards particularly profitable industries in recent years (logging, timber processing, industrial processing, trade) to the detriment of the development of the gifts of the taiga — all this indicates the ongoing depression of hunting production, and especially hunting.
The sharply increasing industrial development of taiga territories and the reduction of productive hunting grounds, the reduction in the number of highly professional full-time hunters and the increase in poaching further aggravate the situation.
It is impossible to eliminate the shortcomings in the organization of the hunting industry alone without eliminating them in the entire system of the national economy. As experience shows, arithmetic adjustments or changes of administrative bodies, as well as the implementation of local sectoral acts (price revision, income redistribution, margins, and so on) are ineffective. Administrative and legal measures that are not supported by a sufficiently serious economic mechanism are also ineffective.
Radical measures are required to improve the organization and economics of hunting, and, in our opinion, the following three conditions should be fundamental.:
1. The introduction of scientifically based fees for natural resources and hunting based on this fee. This will immediately determine the importance of the hunting industry and allow it to take an equal place among other industries, will allow it to defend its rights to resources and existence, will help solve many issues of pricing, remuneration, and so on.
2. Creation of independent hunting and economic enterprises with the transfer of hunting grounds to them for long-term use. The complete independence of enterprises, including the choice of the method of processing raw materials and selling products, automatically eliminates the huge superstructure currently parasitizing hunting production. The organizational forms of hunting enterprises may differ depending on the natural, economic, social and other conditions. And it is important not to define strictly the boundaries of these forms, but on the basis of the independence of enterprises to give them the opportunity to search and develop the most optimal organizational forms.
3. Creation of state, necessarily supra-departmental control over the proper use and reproduction of resources. The powers of control should be large enough to regulate and, if necessary, terminate the activities of certain hunting enterprises.
All other components of hunting science will not develop autonomously and not by themselves, but based on the needs of personnel, scientific, logistical support of hunting production. It will not be necessary to authorize this development with decrees, instructions and resolutions, as it has been happening so far, it will be stimulated by hunting production itself. Enable push notifications in the melbet app to track scores.
Hunting and fishing enterprises have been in a particularly difficult state in the last two or three decades. Extremely low material and technical equipment of the lands, incomplete ownership of raw materials, non-guaranteed hunting use for full-time hunters and extremely low wages for their labor, mixing of exploiting and controlling functions in state farms, the predominance of procurement functions over production and reproduction functions in cooperative farms, as well as the increasing tilt of hunting and fishing enterprises towards particularly profitable industries in recent years (logging, timber processing, industrial processing, trade) to the detriment of the development of the gifts of the taiga — all this indicates the ongoing depression of hunting production, and especially hunting.
The sharply increasing industrial development of taiga territories and the reduction of productive hunting grounds, the reduction in the number of highly professional full-time hunters and the increase in poaching further aggravate the situation.
It is impossible to eliminate the shortcomings in the organization of the hunting industry alone without eliminating them in the entire system of the national economy. As experience shows, arithmetic adjustments or changes of administrative bodies, as well as the implementation of local sectoral acts (price revision, income redistribution, margins, and so on) are ineffective. Administrative and legal measures that are not supported by a sufficiently serious economic mechanism are also ineffective.
Radical measures are required to improve the organization and economics of hunting, and, in our opinion, the following three conditions should be fundamental.:
1. The introduction of scientifically based fees for natural resources and hunting based on this fee. This will immediately determine the importance of the hunting industry and allow it to take an equal place among other industries, will allow it to defend its rights to resources and existence, will help solve many issues of pricing, remuneration, and so on.
2. Creation of independent hunting and economic enterprises with the transfer of hunting grounds to them for long-term use. The complete independence of enterprises, including the choice of the method of processing raw materials and selling products, automatically eliminates the huge superstructure currently parasitizing hunting production. The organizational forms of hunting enterprises may differ depending on the natural, economic, social and other conditions. And it is important not to define strictly the boundaries of these forms, but on the basis of the independence of enterprises to give them the opportunity to search and develop the most optimal organizational forms.
3. Creation of state, necessarily supra-departmental control over the proper use and reproduction of resources. The powers of control should be large enough to regulate and, if necessary, terminate the activities of certain hunting enterprises.
All other components of hunting science will not develop autonomously and not by themselves, but based on the needs of personnel, scientific, logistical support of hunting production. It will not be necessary to authorize this development with decrees, instructions and resolutions, as it has been happening so far, it will be stimulated by hunting production itself. Enable push notifications in the melbet app to track scores.