Hunting grounds. Hunting grounds and their classification

HUNTING AREAS AND HUNTING MANAGEMENT

Hunting grounds include all land, forest and water-covered areas in which wild animals and birds live (or may live) and which can be used for hunting hunting farm. It should be remembered that the concept of hunting grounds distinguishes between the ecological side, lands as a habitat for game animals and birds, and hunting grounds, lands as a production area where hunting farms can be created and hunting can be carried out.

Areas in which there are no living conditions for game animals, as well as territories in which, although there are game animals and birds, but there is no possibility of hunting, are not included in the hunting grounds.

Such areas include nature reserves, green areas, settlements; they make up no more than 3-4% of the country's territory.

The entire territory of our Motherland is 22.4 million square meters. km. Two thirds of the hunting areas are managed by forestry and agriculture. This obliges hunting in this territory in agreement with the main land users.

It is customary to divide hunting grounds into six categories of similar homogeneity: forest, which also includes shrubs; arable land (area occupied by the cultivation of agricultural crops); meadows (hayfields, pastures, pastures); swamps, ponds; other lands, which include tundra, desert sands, salt marshes, ravines, rocky areas, etc.

Hunting grounds are not equal in terms of conditions for the habitat of wild animals. Their quality is determined by the presence of food, protective, nesting and other conditions necessary for the life and reproduction of animals and birds. These conditions are determined primarily by the composition of flora representatives characteristic of specific areas.

However, abundant vegetation alone is not enough to create optimal conditions life and reproduction of certain species of wild animals.

Depth snow cover is a factor limiting the growth of roe deer, wild boar, and sika deer. Badgers, foxes and wolves need ravines and hillocks to make burrows.

WITH natural conditions, i.e., the types of land, the methods of hunting different types of game are also consistent. Most often, when determining the typology of hunting grounds, plant groups are taken as a basis: spruce forests (green moss spruce forests, blueberry spruce forests), pine forests (white moss pine forests, lingonberry pine forests), leaf frogs, feather grass steppe, fescue steppe: lakes with a border of tall vegetation, etc. . P.

In a typology constructed taking into account plant groups, the name itself gives an idea of ​​the nature of the land, the composition of its vegetation, and the possibility of storing food for game.

Forest hunting areas are divided into types based on the morphology of plant communities. Forest areas with similar habitat conditions and a homogeneous composition of game are called types of forest hunting grounds.

In forest areas of the same type, the same measures are taken to reproduce wild animals and birds, as well as to hunt them.

The initial distribution of forest areas into types of hunting grounds is made according to the dominant type of tree stand. Within these types, lands are distinguished according to the age of the main species - young stands, middle-aged stands and types formed by old trees. Rare areas are classified into a separate type - open spaces.

All other forest stands are divided into types of hunting grounds, taking into account the places of growth. The designation of the type of land has a double name: swampy spruce forest, lichen pine forest, young cedar, etc. Such names of types of hunting grounds are associated with their characteristics and are understandable to the huntsman and hunter.

Types of forest land are grouped into classes - spruce forests, pine forests, cedar trees, foliage forests, and the classes, in turn, are divided into land categories - forest lands.

Forest management materials are the basis for determining the typology of forest hunting grounds and their subsequent inventory. This is carried out similarly to land management in agricultural enterprises. The relative commercial assessment of forest lands shows the degree of suitability of land types for the reproduction of game of certain species, and the specific one determines the yield of fur products per unit area (land productivity) assigned to the farm.

One of the most reliable indicators of the value of hunting land types is the average productivity over several years. D. Danilov proposed dividing land into five quality classes:

THE BEST LANDS are distinguished by high protective conditions, species diversity of the food supply, frequent and plentiful food harvests, and the highest population density of game animals (grade I).

GOOD LAND - the main habitat, the protective properties are high, the yields of basic feed are good, the population density is significant (II quality).

MEDIUM LAND - the food supply is more uniform in species composition, protective conditions are satisfactory, forage harvests are rarer and smaller in size, population density is uneven over the years, on average low (grade III).

BAD LAND - low-forage, with poor protective conditions, stations of sporadic settlement in years with good food yield (grade IV).

VERY BAD LANDSCAPE - stations that are of little use this species(V quality).

Two types of hunting management work have been legalized - inter-farm and intra-farm. The task of inter-farm hunting management includes the distribution of land between tenants, legal registration of the boundaries of the allocated land and the development of a first-stage action plan. As a result of this, documents are drawn up and issued to the tenant for the right to use the state hunting fund.

After the legal assignment of land to the tenant and the creation of a farm, on-farm hunting management is carried out, the first stage of which consists of drawing up a game management project, and the second includes a number of measures to implement the project’s recommendations into farm practice.

When developing a project for on-farm hunting management, the following is taken into account: inventory of hunting grounds; mapping; accounting of game animals and birds and food for them; land valuation; results of studying natural and economic conditions; organization and equipment of the territory (allocation of reproduction and fishing areas); long-term plans for reproduction activities; methods of exploitation of game animals on the farm; calculations of use and standards for shooting and catching; possibilities and extent of using by-products (berries, nuts, mushrooms, etc.); opportunities for developing auxiliary activities; the methods of game breeding used, objects and their volume; capacity (in person-days) for sports facilities.

Where to hunt animals? It’s clear with the protected area - there’s no need to go there. Where can you officially hunt animals? If ducks are swimming in a city park, is it a good idea to go there with a gun and shoot them? Alas, in this case there is a high probability that the person will be held accountable. Even if it’s a hooligan thing. But it will. After all, it is impossible among broad daylight shoot and scare law-abiding citizens. You can drive off and look for prey in the fields. But here too there are some peculiarities. The best option is specialized land. They created the necessary conditions for the development of living creatures. There are private hunting grounds and public areas. Let's focus on the second ones.

Introductory information

It should be noted that in terms of regulatory support, everything is bad with this. For example, the legality of transferring certain territories for private use is now quite topical. After all, many such events took place in the dark, in violation of the current antimonopoly legislation. But before we sort all this out, we should turn to the regulations. Namely, Federal Law No. 209 of July 24, 2009 “On hunting and the conservation of hunting resources and on amendments to certain legislative acts Russian Federation". According to this Federal Law, the following division is provided:

1. Assigned hunting grounds. These include objects that are used individual entrepreneurs or legal entities on the basis provided federal law.
2. Public hunting grounds. These include objects on the territory of which individuals have the right to freely stay to hunt animals.

There is one interesting clarification. Thus, according to current legislation, publicly accessible hunting grounds must occupy at least one fifth of the entire territory of the subject allocated for the hunting of animals. It is also possible to change the hunting grounds registered before the adoption of the regulatory framework from the option of long-term licenses to hunting agreements.

Controversial issues

The state of affairs discussed above has attracted much criticism. For example, in the Voronezh region the number of publicly accessible hunting grounds is only three percent of total number allocated territory. The transfer to hunting relations from licenses leads to the fact that the norm required by law is unlikely to be fulfilled. After all, such a change does not lead to the emergence and formation of publicly accessible lands. It turns out that the actually distributed licenses will now be indefinite. This causes quite a significant intensity of passions. Now information about this has been transferred to the Constitutional Court in order to somehow influence the situation. Why is this so important? The fact is that, according to the Tax Code, a hunting permit in such public lands costs only 650 rubles. Whereas assigned territories operate on a different principle - the price in them is determined by the tenant. And in such cases, as a rule, the cost is tens of times higher.

About the allocation of territories

Many people are concerned about the issue of boundaries. Public hunting grounds often do not have a clearly established boundary. Although this is important for planning, territorial game management and conservation natural resources. The Sakhalin region can be cited as an example of good work. They prepared a document that described the physical and geographical data of the territory, the number of hunting resources, the socio-economic characteristics of the subject, as well as an action plan for their rational use. Attached to the diagram was a map indicating land (both public and assigned), green areas, and so on. In addition, a separate consideration is given to where such a territory could be created in the future. Moreover, an electronic version of the map is available on the official website of the Ministry of Forestry and Hunting Sakhalin region. Therefore, anyone can familiarize themselves with it and even download it. The Tyumen region has also proven itself quite well. They decided to work through auctions. Causes mixed feelings Ivanovo region. Thus, all territories that were transferred under license were recognized as publicly accessible lands. Whereas things didn’t go any further: a map with boundaries was not drawn up, no auctions were held. As a result, we had to reap our own mistakes - many local decisions had to be overturned through the courts. Information instructive for officials came from the Tver region. There, due to non-compliance with federal legislation and administrative delays, Deputy Governor Melnikov resigned. And after him came the Minister of Natural Resources and Environment Protasov.

Implementation of legal requirements

Public hunting grounds are being created slowly and with difficulty. In many regions there are still no designated territories or they are present in insufficient quantities. So, the same can be said about Moscow, Kostroma, Yaroslavl, Vladimir, Nizhny Novgorod, Ryazan, Tula, Smolensk, Kaluga and many other regions. By the way, for several years there has been active discussion about the fact that there are literally no public hunting grounds in Russia. And then suddenly the heads of those responsible began to roll. At the same time, the transition period created a number of unique situations. For example, money is not going to the state budget due to the fact that the situation is in limbo. At the same time, tenants, on the basis of previously concluded licenses, continue to receive funds, while almost all of it goes to them as net profit. In essence, this situation has led to legalized lawlessness. Without schemes for placement, use and protection, hunting lands turn into a real stumbling block between various “murky” personalities with people who want to live according to the law, and not according to concepts. It is very important. After all, a diagram is a document territorial structure, which should promote the rational use and conservation of natural diversity.

Consideration from different points of view

Public hunting grounds should be considered not only as a place where animals can be hunted, but also as a habitat for wild animals. They perform feeding, protective and nesting roles. In the first case, everything depends on the available amount of food. Protective properties are manifested in how well you can hide from enemies and bad weather. Nesting suitability shows how suitable the territory is for the birth and rearing of young animals. In this regard, the type of hunting area plays an important role. It is determined by a set of characteristics that have a certain significance for the life of animals and the process of their production. As a rule, living conditions are taken into account, mainly feeding and protective ones. In this case, the composition of birds and animals is taken into account. In addition, one should not discount the wide variety of natural landscapes. The largest unit here is the category. On the territory of the Russian Federation there are:

1. Tundra.
2. Steppe.
3. Forest.
4. Swamp.
5. Aquatic.
6. Alpine.

Each of the listed categories is divided into classes and groups. What are they? Classes are distinguished depending on what biological forms of forest-forming species are present in the land. In this case, deciduous, mixed, dark coniferous and light coniferous are distinguished. At the same time, forested areas that are not afforested (cleared areas, dry areas and burnt areas) are independent class. Now about the groups. In this case, the typological division is carried out depending on the predominant tree species: cedar forests, birch forests and pine forests.

What does the participation process look like?

The hunting grounds of the Leningrad region were chosen as the object. You can find a diagram that shows clear boundaries. In this regard, the situation is not bad. True, this scheme, even in 2018, is still not in the “approved” state. At the moment, over 150 hunting grounds are assigned. Their popularity and activity are due to the fact that, despite the difficult climate, hunting the animal is quite effective. In addition, a large area is allocated for hunting. Leningrad region thanks coniferous forests With big amount hunting tourism has developed well for fur-bearing and ungulate animals. People come here not only from other regions of the Russian Federation, but also from neighboring Baltic states. There are also many swamps, rivers and lakes. For example, wild boar hunting is popular. True, a number of people have such popularity negative consequences. For example, the same wild boar hunt will cost from 10 to 25 thousand rubles per unit on private territory. But with public lands, as mentioned above, there are significant problems. Although in some places the cost can be even higher. The size of public areas is not very large. Several small plots are located near St. Petersburg. The rest, larger in area, are located in Podporozhye and Tikhvin districts. To obtain a permit, you must pay a fee. Although how Alternative option- You can negotiate on the spot with the duty forester or huntsman. If you are interested in renting hunting grounds, then this option is not suitable. Everything will have to be decided centrally within the framework of the order established in 2012.

Criticism of public areas

Why is this happening? Why can't critics rest? The point here is simple - problems arise with security, biotechnology is not carried out, and there is a risk that poachers will kill the game. But at the same time, the task is to preserve nature for children. This is much more important than holding various World Football Championships and Olympics. Moreover, nature, which helped the formation of our ethnic group, should not only be preserved, but also increased. This applies not only to plants, but also to the animal world. That is why it seems that there is no need for the land to occupy a large area.

Correcting the situation

The creation of publicly accessible hunting grounds is unlikely to lead to the extinction of wildlife. Despite criticism that there is no one to guard and monitor the increase natural resources. Is it so? When hunting in this area you have to pay money. And not only for the opportunity to hunt, but also when harvesting licensed species of animals. And all this money goes to the owner - the state. Therefore, if you think logically, it is on his shoulders that the concern for the protection and enhancement of natural resources that exist in publicly accessible lands should fall. How to use the available opportunities? A likely solution to the current situation will be a situation in which publicly accessible lands will become testing grounds where the system will be tested government controlled hunting farm. The ranger service could take on the responsibility for protecting the territory. Game managers will be able to draw up plans for relevant work. To do this, you can involve not only specialists, but also everyone who wants to hunt game. Of course, it will be necessary to provide state coercive rights, uniforms, means of communication, transport and service weapons. But before attempting something like this, the boundaries of hunting grounds throughout the country should be established and approved by decisions of authorized structures.

Continuation of thoughts about development

How to finance events? As an experiment, you can create some kind of structure, for example, the All-Russian Fund for the Increase wildlife on the territory of publicly accessible hunting grounds.” Financing will be provided through payments from natural resource users. If desired, you can find many sources of income. For example, order excursions, accompanying experienced shooters. For this purpose, it is possible to create forest areas and carry out the required work on the development and conservation of existing natural resources. In this case, it is necessary to take care of the presence of a rigid vertical of power. This is necessary so that local bureaucrats do not establish their own rules and regulations, ruining a good idea in the bud. It is desirable that this be federal structure with direct subordination to the government. This includes not only foresters, fisheries protection and similar structures, but also scientific institutions. This will allow you to make complex, rational decisions. For example, it was decided to cut down a section of forest. But there is a breeding ground for wood grouse on it. Or there are plans to build a road. In such cases, it is necessary to carefully study all factors and make competent, scientifically based decisions. It is necessary to provide for the possibility of compensation for damage caused to nature. And only taking into account numerous factors will a permit for hunting or a decision to suspend it be made for the growth of populations.

Conclusion

As you can see, there is still a long time until the situation in the hunting sector is completely resolved. Let’s start with at least a full-fledged introduction of the regulatory framework as federal level, and locally. After all, unaccepted schematic maps and many other issues to this day do not allow one to calmly enjoy the hunting process. There are complaints about the symbols used, the speed of work, and the implementation of laws in full. Moreover, after a fairly long period of validity of the law, voices are increasingly being heard to abolish the practice of assigning hunting lands. The argument is based on the facts that hunting users often get money from ordinary people, and from the state. At the same time, funds are not invested in the development of the economy, which entails the depletion of natural resources.

The concept of “hunting grounds” has changed significantly due to changes in the role of hunting in human life. Now the interpretation of hunting grounds as territories in which game animals live is not enough. The involvement of increasingly vast territories in economic use has led to the deterioration of living conditions and a reduction in the number of game animals. The increasingly acute shortage of hunting resources led to the introduction of resource-saving forms of their use.

Now, only those areas where game animals live are recognized as hunting grounds, hunting them is allowed and hunting is carried out. This definition excludes reserves and areas from hunting grounds national parks organized for the preservation of specimens natural nature along with all the animals living there, including hunting ones. Densely populated areas, green areas around industrial centers, and populated areas themselves are also excluded from hunting grounds. In such territories, game animals do not live permanently, but occasionally appear during their seasonal movements or escaping persecution in hunting grounds. Conducting a hunt is contrary to the principles of safety of the local population.

Types and purposes of hunting grounds.Hunting grounds are divided into 3 categories based on the nature of their use. The first category includes public lands in which hunting is permitted within established periods in compliance with the rules for its conduct, and access to them is open to all hunters with corrected hunting documents. In the European part of Russia, very few hunting grounds of this category have been preserved, and within the Moscow region there are none at all. The second category includes hunting reserves. Part of the hunting grounds is allocated for them in order to improve the living conditions and reproduction of certain species of animals by limiting the access of hunters and banning hunting. In nature reserves, the ban on hunting a species or group of game animals is temporary, unlike in nature reserves, where it is permanent and applies to all species of animals. The third category is formed by assigned hunting grounds” assigned to state, cooperative, and public organizations that receive priority rights to use the resources of game animals within the boundaries of hunting farms. The hunting farm as an organizational and economic unit in the system of using the state hunting fund was legally formalized with the relevant government decrees back in 1930 in the USSR. Since then, the anonymity in the use of hunting resources has been eliminated, which is more consistent with the already completed transformation of hunting into one of the types of leisure activities. Strengthening the role of hunting society unions in managing farms has increased the interest of hunters in rational use number of game animals, contributed to the expansion of work on the protection and reproduction of their stocks. The basis of the farms' activities was to provide conditions for the practice of hunting and for the reproduction of the state hunting fund.

Categories of hunting areas. Hunting grounds as animal habitats are divided into 4 categories, differing in the composition of the animals living in them and the hunting conditions: forest, field, swamp and aquatic. The main categories are divided into additional ones, for example, water - into lakes and rivers, which can be small and large, and the forest category includes, for example, in addition to the forest itself, also shrubs, burnt areas and clearings. Field hunting grounds are divided mainly into arable land and meadows. Swamps can also be different; they are divided into forested and non-forested, upland and lowland, in accordance with characteristic features species composition of animals living in them. This division of the territory is also necessary because the organization of hunting in each case is structured differently, and the differences relate not only to the types of game animals, but also to the timing, hunting season, safety rules, and much more.

In specific territories, even the main categories of hunting grounds can be presented in full or truncated form and in different proportions of the areas they occupy. Hence the differences in the species composition and abundance of game animals in a given territory, and, consequently, the possibility of hunting one or another number of these animals and organizing hunting for them. The wider and on a sufficient area the main categories of hunting grounds are represented, the more diverse the possibilities for using the livestock are. Taking into account the condition and quality of hunting grounds is the basis of hunting management. This helps to navigate what species of animals, what habitat conditions exist and what reserves of these game species are available. Without knowing this, it is impossible to decide how many and what types of animals can be hunted, in what timeframes and what types of hunts can be organized in a given territory. The number of animals is not the same in different years, therefore, there is a need to find out and assess the hunting situation in each area of ​​the territory allocated for hunting. These works can only be carried out by professionals, so the entire hunting process can be divided into a preparatory stage and an implementation stage. At the first stage, mainly professional game managers work. The success of the next stage, which is always carried out with the participation of the consumer - a hunter who has expressed a desire to participate in one or another type of hunting, to obtain one or another type of game animal, depends on the quality of the work they perform. Costs in the first stage must be compensated in the second.

All these circumstances influence the development and very existence of amateur hunting, especially in such a densely populated and industrial Moscow region. Relations between land tenants here are strained due to the growing shortage of lands rich in game animals, especially in the forest category. There is an increasing discrepancy between the interests of the hunting industry and the interests of other land users and the fact that hunting societies, as public associations that have legal rights, act as secondary users of leased lands relative to primary users - agriculture and forestry. Hunting lands are redistributed between users, the boundaries of hunting farms are changed, and their number is reduced. Within the Moscow region, various associations of amateur hunters have in their use about 3.5 thousand hectares of hunting grounds. Hunting can be carried out in 61 hunting grounds, most of which are assigned to the Moscow Society of Hunters and Fishers. These farms are maintained mainly at the expense of the Ministry of Education and Resource Management, part of the financing is provided from funds earned by hunting farms. In the future, the cost of hunting for an amateur hunter will undoubtedly increase, which may have different consequences for the hunting industry in the region.

• < Назад
• Forward >

Every hunter and gamekeeper understands what hunting grounds are. Their boundaries are determined by laws or masters. A novice or an experienced hunter may encounter a problem such as private property, a protected area, etc. That is, go to those places where your actions will be regarded as poaching and you will have to answer in court. To prevent this from happening, you need to go fishing fully prepared. First you need to find hunting cards. It’s better to look for fresh ones so that they are from the current year. Use them to find the land closest to you, determine the season, what animal or bird is actively living there and hit the road.

The layout of the hunting grounds is very simple: the map shows the boundaries of private property, public places and protected areas. The hunter himself decides on the prey, equipment and methods of travel, but when going to private property, do not forget to familiarize yourself with their rules.

We recommend that residents of Moscow and the Moscow region hunt on our territory. The boundaries here are large, so clients will be able to please themselves with different types of hunting for wild animals, furs and birds. Fishermen will also not be left idle, because on the site there are several reservoirs filled with different fish. As many as 82,000 hectares of forest-steppes with their inhabitants are waiting for you. Our area is safe, comfortable, exciting and inexpensive. In addition, we provide comfortable living and recreational conditions for all family members. If you want to taste victory, come to Ozernoye.

Hunting specialists determine its main content in increasing the productivity of the population of game animals and stabilizing it at the achieved level (Leopold, 1933). The first steps in this direction are regulation of production levels. The main task of the hunting industry is to increase the capacity of hunting grounds.

The American game specialist W. Grange (1949) pointed out that at present any species of animal can live on earth only if there is a habitat to which it is versatilely adapted. He wrote that since an animal and its habitat, or habitat, are inseparable, they constitute a biological unity. In hunting, therefore, in order to obtain the desired response from game, it is almost always necessary to change the habitat. Based on the unity of game with its habitat, the central theme of hunting should be considered the maintenance and preservation of the plant environment, i.e., primary productivity. This is the first, basic step that must be achieved. Creating an abundance of game according to a management plan is only possible when we are aware of the necessary adaptive properties in the relationship between animal and habitat to control certain aspects of the habitat in favor of the game.

Any land should be considered as a territory intended for a certain type of land use: hunting, haying, arable, fishing land, etc. - otherwise this is a specifically economic term.

Hunting grounds are territories in which hunting or amateur (sport) hunting is or can be carried out. At the same time, these are territories in which game animals constantly live (or have permanent flyways or passages), or territories where they are temporarily absent, but there are all the conditions for their habitation and exploitation. It is quite obvious that those lands where there are such conditions for the habitat of game animals, but at least according to the conditions of public safety, hunting cannot be carried out, cannot be considered hunting grounds. Thus, in England it is considered possible to rent out forests for hunting purposes only outside 60 km from large cities.

Our forest hunting grounds are located on the territory of the USSR State Forest Fund. In contrast to various schemes for the scientific zoning of the earth's land with its inland water bodies - landscape-geographical, zoogeographical, geobotanical, biogeocenotic, etc. - the tasks of typologizing hunting grounds, in particular forest ones, as an economic category, will also be purely applied. This must never be forgotten and must always be kept in mind, since this does not in any way contradict scientifically based management of hunting. Very often, the identified types of forest hunting grounds will coincide with the types of forest biogeocenoses, with forest types and other divisions of natural historical zoning. This is quite natural, since game animals in the forest form part of forest biogeocenoses and always closely interact with many of their other elements. It is important that such a coincidence for the type of forest hunting ground may not exist, because between two or three types of biogeocenosis there will not be differences significant for applied purposes. Less frequently, there are cases when, due to a practically important feature or property, a type of biogeocenosis forms two or three types of hunting grounds, for example, due to the age stages of forest vegetation succession or due to different human impacts.

Types of forest (and any other) hunting grounds have the right to independent existence only in cases where their allocation expresses a clear practical purpose, thereby pursuing the applied objectives of hunting.

The type of hunting ground is equivalent to such scientific terms as habitat type, biotope, species station, etc. It is advisable to use it only in relation to each species of game animals and birds separately. The point is that reconciling dissimilar demands different types to the habitat, and even in different seasons of the year, is extremely difficult, often impossible, and most importantly, not caused by practical necessity. Any event in a particular hunting area is always decided for a specific species, and not in general. At the same time, the type of forest hunting ground is an obvious, tangible reality, only its meaning is often different and dissimilar.

Type of hunting ground, like any type, as a result of typification natural phenomena- everything is always a known generalization (generalization), therefore, abstraction from the concrete reality of individual forest tracts. This is the selection of the typical in the diverse, therefore it is impossible to conduct and build a farm according to the types of hunting grounds. A land type does not have a specific, real spatial extent. If it is detected, the land becomes a forest (or other) tract of this type. It is only possible to determine the limits of territories, divisions of a given type of land and the total amount of areas of divisions attributed to a certain type.

Objects of forest management are forest blocks limited in nature, ranger detours, fishing grounds and plots, economic parts or departments, i.e. areas that in nature have sufficient dimensions for this and certain natural or artificial boundaries and natural boundaries (clearings, sights, roads, permanent paths).

For a single species of animal, such territories will mostly be composed of a combination of areas of various types of forest hunting grounds of varying value and importance for a given species. Only such territories and areas should receive a summary taxation assessment - characteristics or quality. Typology in itself is only a means to facilitate the overall grading through averaging the quality ratings of individual plots according to their typical, species ratings.

For example, a site consists of a number of sections of two types of land with equal amount areas. The quality of one type is I, the other is III, therefore, the average quality for this territory is II. Hence the grading of the hunting ground type is, as it were, a semi-finished product on the way to grading the economic part of the territory (for example, a huntsman's detour).

All types of hunting grounds used by this species throughout the year are unique to this species. Hunting areas can be distinguished by season, highlighting the key areas of a given season, and also keeping in mind the season that contains factors that are at a minimum and thus determine the overall capacity of the specific areas. The division of hunting forest lands into natural and non-natural is extremely important. It is no coincidence that since ancient times hunters have distinguished beaver, capercaillie, elk, grouse, hare, mustel, sable and other lands. Each species has its own set of characteristic lands; for some species they will coincide, but often their significance, quality and seasonal use do not coincide.

The types of hunting grounds should differ from each other in characteristics that are essential for each given species (Danilov, 1960). A piece of territory is called a type of hunting ground, even when it has a significant difference for only one species and only one seasonal factor.

Thus, the type of hunting ground is a primarily species-specific concept. However, the lingonberry pine forest will be a type of hunting ground for squirrels, wood grouse, hazel grouse and other species, but its value, quality, capacity and productivity will be different for each species, independent for species that use the same food resources, shelters, etc.

The criterion for identifying a type can be not only one, seasonal factor, but also the conditions of typological classifications. Let's take deciduous young trees of age class I-II (7-15 years) in a clearing after a spruce herbaceous-oxalis forest. The attitude of a number of species to it will first of all be affected by whether it is a continuous plantation, or whether it contains gaps, clearings, and open spaces, although from a forest typological point of view, in all cases it will be an oxalis-herbaceous birch forest. Therefore, in addition to the type, it is necessary to include in the definition the age and condition of the stand, since these are different hunting grounds. But this is not enough if we identify the presence and area of ​​land characteristic of brown bear. Then we will include in their number only such areas where what remains of the former spruce forest there are many large rotten stumps and logs inhabited by large carpenter ants. Such areas are a special type of bear area. Here is an example when an ecologically and economically justified identification of a type does not fit into any classification schemes. In other cases, for some species, small-leaved forests of III-IV age classes are combined into one type of middle-aged deciduous forest, regardless of the species of the first tier of the forest stand. We will not find significant differences for these species here.

A group of complex spruce forests is sufficient for elk, but not for squirrels. This type is characterized by a rather meager amount of twig food (the main one is rowan shoots). Linden and hazel are mostly poorly eaten by elk. It is necessary to distinguish between the types of spruce forests from the group of complex ones, widely accepted in forest typology: linden spruce forest and hazel spruce forest. The fact is that the coppice linden is indifferent to the squirrel, and the hazel, when it bears fruit, forms an important food component for it.

The types of forest hunting grounds will vary in terms of productivity and conditions for fishing. In the upper reaches of the river. Dark coniferous pechory mixed forests along the banks big rivers(in the Komi language - “sjort”) - very feeding, stable lands of high productivity for squirrels, but for its fishing they are very unprofitable due to the height of the planting and the dense cover of the crowns.

Sometimes the population density of a species per unit area is considered a criterion for the validity of identification. This is unlikely to be fundamental, even in purely practical terms, since population density is not stable property land. It would be more thorough to distinguish two groups of lands: with stable and unstable (in time) forage resources. In the absence of overpopulation, twig and herbaceous food will be stable for a certain period of time (with the exception of such phenomena as drought), periodically fruiting seeds of tree and shrub species, fruits, berries, mushrooms, etc. will be unstable.

If we use population density data, then it should be perennial and from different areas within the range of occurrence of the type of land. These data should be expressed as extreme values ​​and long-term average values. In practice, when carrying out hunting management, it is difficult to obtain such material in 1-2 years.

So, differences between types of forest hunting grounds can be qualitative and quantitative (within the limits of a given quality). Naturally, when discussing the criterion for identifying a type, the question arises about the extent of differences. The difference must be such that, first of all, it satisfies the requirements of statistical reliability: if the population density indicator is determined with an accuracy of 20% (which does not often happen in practice), then the difference will be real, it will be a difference of at least 50-60%. Often the accuracy of the counts will be significantly lower. Our data on the reserves of food resources per unit area are even less accurate.

Even when we talk about a qualitative characteristic, its dimension cannot be ignored, since we are pursuing purely practical, economic goals when dealing with types of land. For example, when typologizing forest lands for moose according to the winter season (twig food), it is hardly practical to determine the difference between the types of spruce-green moss forests by the presence of rowan and buckthorn in the sparse undergrowth. It’s a different matter if we evaluate the difference between forest types in terms of nesting conditions for the pine marten. It is enough that there are hollow trees with a diameter of about 30 cm or more, not necessarily in the first tier and on each hectare, often just a few topless, overmature aspens. Probably, one per 10 hectares will be enough and not necessarily in all parts of the habitat of a given individual. There is enough qualitative difference here within the same forest type and age class.

A stable correlation with diagnostic characteristics of the type of forest land, especially those recorded by forest management, is important. In practice, it is impossible to determine quantitative differences in the size of fruiting of conifers, it is so labor-intensive, and the yield itself is unstable.

It is known that all the main indicators of tree stands and forest biogeocenosis as a whole change in parallel with changes in the fertility of forest soils and the entire complex of habitat conditions. This is reflected in the quality class and type of forest (for which certain quality levels are also typical), in chemical composition wood, in the biochemistry of needles and annual shoots, etc. Therefore, the properties of the type of forest hunting ground can be assessed and distinguished without each time determining feeding containers even for the most important feeds.

Usually, when determining productivity from a series of trial plots, from model trees and other methods, we create a very exaggerated idea of ​​the practical capacity of land for a given species. The same can be said about the yield of berries and even more so about mushrooms. Here we simply do not have the necessary methods. This is a vast area to explore. Ultimately, for a type of forest land, it is necessary to know not only the gross stock and yield, but also what part of it can actually be developed by game animals (not only in terms of redundancy, but also in terms of accessibility and specific gravity part developed by game).

There are elements in forest lands that are very important for hunting, which cannot be included in the characteristics of the types. Some very incomplete correlation can only be established with age - the formation of small clearings-windows, or windows, due to the loss of part of the tree stand. They are extremely important and valuable in the nesting and brooding periods of grouse birds; they must be created artificially. It is difficult to identify them in the scheme of types of forest hunting grounds; they can only be included as elements that increase the quality of the type of forest land.

In general, we can talk about a complete schematic classification scheme of types of forest hunting grounds. It should be based on the general ecological scheme of forest types by Academician V.N. Sukachev in combination with age classes and species composition of the forest stand. Such a classification must take into account all the elements essential for game animals in a species-specific context; therefore, it is also needed for forest hunting. This does not mean that it should be applied in its expanded form in all cases. The allocation should be consistent with the extent of our knowledge of the ecology of species.

This is just the first stage. The second stage is the selection of what is naturally available within a given territory. The third stage should take into account: 1) the possibility of effective use of types in the practice of a given hunting enterprise (species focus, degree of management intensity); 2) the ability to determine them in practice in nature and identify them based on forest management materials. This is significant, since usually game management is not able to re-examine all forest management areas (no more than 10-20%). It is possible that other types important for a given economy can be separately isolated from the composition of less differentiated types.

The numerous types arise from the practical needs of the economy. Not all cases of practical activity require the entire set of types at once. Typically, events are held for a specific species, often only on a seasonal basis and in stages. We need a set of characteristic seasonal types of land and their placement. A different season will require a different set of land types, etc. Each time we will be dealing with a small number of types.

We talked about forest type as a basis. The name should contain its diagnostic features: the dominant species of the upper tier (sometimes also the second, if it is typical and well expressed), the dominant species of the undergrowth (especially important for the economy) and plants - indicators of ground cover (for example, buckthorn-blueberry pine forest).

A typology does not have to adhere to one level of precision and detail. For one type of land, a forest type can be used entirely, for another - an ecological group (for example, a lingonberry pine forest and a group of dry forests-lichens, heathers, steppes) regardless of their different origins, because their significance is similar and small. We will probably not dissect the raised sphagnum bog complex for the most part. The significance of its elements for game animals varies, but the degree of their population is always low, so farming in it is impractical, since it is often a complex complex that cannot be mapped.

So, it is impossible to combine all spruce forests into one type. First of all, it is necessary to distinguish between fruit-bearing and non-fruit-bearing spruce forests based on age. The size of fruiting will vary significantly depending on forest type and quality class (Danilov, 1953). The same can be said about the distribution of blueberry abundance.

It is quite natural to take into account the area occupied by the type of land on the farm and the maximum sizes of individual plots. If a type makes up 1-2% of the area and does not occur in patches larger than 0.5 hectares, it can be neglected.

However, in all cases we must go from complex to simple. Just as in forest management the area of ​​a block and allotment is determined by the category of forest management, in game management of forests it is necessary to proceed from the categories of forest management and hunting management.

The type of forest hunting ground can be complex in a number of characteristics - mixed in the composition of species and at the same time different ages within adjacent age classes. There may be a special type of birch forest with clumps and single pines, etc. But you always need to know why the type is distinguished and how to master it.

The scientific and applied classification of types of forest hunting grounds should in no case be confused with the set of often enlarged typological categories that are used in practice.

In practice, a very important property of a forest hunting ground should be considered the degree of its stability. Truly stable lands do exist, but they vary in origin and significance. On the one hand, these are self-renewing multi-layered forests of different ages, both primary (mainly mountainous) and secondary, i.e., those that have restored the original structure after a period of successional development, on the other hand, these are various unexploited (due to economic low value) plantings, such as pine in a sphagnum bog and a number of similar plantings.

Majority forest plantations is in one or another stage of age and breed succession. The stages have different longevity. The most short-lived and ephemeral are the initial stages: cutting areas (the stage before the closure of the canopy of the reforestation that forms on it) and the stage of young growth (10-20 years). The duration of the cutting stage (or renewed burning) is quite variable depending on the availability of self-seeding or the development of stump or root shoots. Sometimes, especially in the northern taiga, many years pass in the stage of grass-moss cover. There are enough cases where forest regeneration turns out to be completely impossible (usually due to surface swamping and the growth of moss), and the cutting area turns into a mossy wasteland.

The climax stage, i.e., a mature forest, will be relatively long, including plantings that, from a forestry point of view, become overmature. The duration of this stage depends on human forestry activities.

The lifespan of individual stages in coniferous and deciduous plantations is different. In deciduous plantings, development to the climax stage occurs in general terms 2 times faster. In reality, there are significant differences between different hardwood species (for example, between aspen and oak). A game warden who constantly works in forests must remember the pace of succession processes that determine the continuously changing food capacity and other properties of forest plantations. Hence the hunting quality - the concept is far from stable even in relation to the same territory.

However, the complexity of the problem of a forest hunting ground in the approach to the forest as a habitat for game animals does not end there. The dignity of a particular tract (site, bypass) consists not only of the quality of the individual sections that form it and the different types of land, but also of their mutual combination. The effect of its development by one or another species depends to a large extent on what a given area borders on.

It is known that a land rich in food, but devoid of refuges and shelters, loses the opportunity to be developed by game animals. This can be compensated by the proximity to the land, which created a protective environment, but has little food only within the radius of daily activity of individuals of this species. For species with a limited radius of daily activity, this is a very important condition. The American game warden and ecologist A. Leopold back in 1933 called this important circumstance interpersion, i.e., the interpenetration of two or more types of land. Hence the concentration of life and its manifestations at the junction, the contact of lands, each of which provides the individual life requirements of the species.

Our research has confirmed that often the population count indicators on the border line are average between the two contacting types of land. Sometimes they are higher than in each of the replacement land types separately. The ratio of indicators varies from year to year. For example, in the winter of 1938/39 in the Zhigulevsky Nature Reserve, along 10 km of the route, the tracks of the white hare were distributed as follows:

Otherwise, the edge (contact) in terms of the number of traces occupied an intermediate position, close to average. In the next winter season of 1939/40 the following data were obtained:

The occurrence of tracks fell, but in the contact areas it remained at a higher level.

Everything that is stated here can be called an introduction to the doctrine of forest habitats of game animals and birds and its applied application in hunting, therefore a lot of space was devoted to defining the content of the concept and term “hunting ground”.

This term is purely applied, economic. In the practice of hunting farms, it is necessary to deal with on-farm divisions of the territory that have specific areas and boundaries, which in the process of hunting taxation should receive a quality class (forest blocks, ranger rounds or areas, fishing areas, departments, etc.). The bonuses must be specific to each species (year-round, seasonal or based on the key season). Types of forest hunting grounds, their capacities, seasonal quality characteristics and their combination into groups of lands peculiar to the type should form the basis of any hunting taxation research and practical work, but they should not be involved in everyday economic turnover, resorting to them only when it is necessary to decipher the final assessment for some purpose (for example, for activities for hunting land reclamation). The basic principle in hunting taxation should be from complex to simple, simplicity should be the result of hard work and creative generalization of the researcher. Average interspecific land values ​​can only be used for purely on-farm practical purposes general, for example to assess the comparative productivity of individual sites, excluding current population densities. In other cases, they can lead to erroneous judgments. Numbers should not obscure the real phenomena of living nature.

In the book edited by Academician V. N. Sukachev “Dendrology with the Fundamentals of Geobotany” (1934), a diagram of the distribution of the distribution of several forest species grouse birds by forest type (more precisely, by group of types), compiled by forester Leontyev. The diagram shows that no species is limited to inhabiting one group of forest types. The only difference is that one species, with its distribution, covers a larger number of forest types, while the other covers a smaller number. This book says a lot about the importance of the age stage in any type of forest, about the importance of the species composition. It is obvious that, despite all the ecological value and importance of the study of forest types, they do not fully explain the patterns of distribution of game animals in the forest environment. In many cases, the forest types identified by forest typologists and geobotanists have differences that are too subtle to allow them to identify at least quantitative, rather than qualitative, differences in the occurrence of individual species. Such differences are probably easier to detect in invertebrate faunas.

Even such larger categories as the group of types (green mossers, long-mossers, etc.) do not limit the distribution of game animals to their limits, although their significance is still very significant and different. Leontiev's scheme showed only differences in the relationship of individual species to those environmental factors, on which the classification of forest types by Academician V.N. Sukachev is based: on the degree of richness of forest soils and on the intensity and type of their moisture (stagnant, flowing).

It is also of considerable importance that one or another type of forest rarely covers an entire territory with an area comparable to the radius of activity of an individual individual. Therefore, to identify quantitative differences in distribution in different types Forests of forest voles and shrews are always a more realistic task than for game animals and birds. But it is impossible to deny the existence of differences between forest types and their significance in this case. Another thing is that this is not necessary for the practice of hunting at its modern level.

Apparently, it would be more realistic to deal with different combinations of habitat types, especially since there is undoubtedly a certain pattern in such combinations. For the simplest example, let’s take the combination of sphagnum pine or spruce forests in the depressions of the relief with lichen and lingonberry forests on the elevations. We find a classic example in the forests of Karelia, but this pattern is much broader. Another example is within the Ruzsky forestry enterprise of the Moscow region, where over large areas the range of forest types fits into the framework from complex hazel types to sorrel forests in combination with primordial ones (fontinale) in forest floodplains and hollows. Such integration is of economic importance.

Forest typology is the most closely associated with the quality of growing conditions and with the quality of forest stands. The connection between forestry grades and grades of forest hunting grounds is the most direct and immediate, of course, other things being equal, that is, within the same age and breed. Exceptions are rare and only confirm the rule. In some cases, in the typology of forest hunting grounds, it is necessary to distinguish forest types, for example, blueberry spruce forest and sorrel spruce forest, because their quality as hunting grounds is quite different. It is necessary to take into account the differences between a spruce or aspen forest and a linden forest, but there is no need to separate plantings with a predominance of moss or scilla in the soil cover as forest hunting grounds, etc.

Game animals and birds in different time years and for different purposes, they develop various forest hunting grounds, forest types with different combinations of tree stands by species and ages. The same species colonizes either the crown zone, and then age and species are decisive, or the soil layer with ground vegetation, and then the type of forest becomes very important, and even with such subtle differences as oxalis, herbaceous-oxalis, sorrel-blueberry, herbaceous-blueberry and blueberry spruce forest, aspen forest, birch forest. In other cases, the layer of undergrowth and undergrowth is mastered, then differences in soil cover are reflected only correlatively, indirectly. First of all, it is obvious that in all cases of applied research it is equally harmful to start from any biased, “principled” point of view. We have so far mastered applied ecology too little for this.

When determining the relationship of individual species of forest animals and birds to types of hunting grounds, one must exercise great caution and beware of unfounded generalization.

For example, it is considered a classic position that the capercaillie is a bird pine forests. In general, when comparing the distribution of numbers with the dominance of forest species, this is true. However, the fact is that the capercaillie is very closely related to the pine tree only through its winter nutrition, but O.I. Semenov-Tyan-Shansky already showed that although the capercaillie eats a lot of pine needles during the winter, its reserves per hectare are so abundant that the winter food cannot limit the number of wood grouse. In any case, the capercaillie inhabits forests where the participation of pine does not exceed 10-15%, where pine is practically found only in small clumps, or even only interspersed with individual trees. (Central Forest Reserve, central part of the Zavidovo Game Reserve, Ruzsky Forestry Enterprise. In the latter case, the spring density is 3/1000 hectares, i.e. above the regional average).

In other seasons, the presence of pine is not necessary for wood grouse. Thus, in the Central Forest Reserve, the current is located in an overmature aspen forest. In the Ruzsky forestry there are currents in mixed large forests, in old aspen forests and even in old birch large forests. The presence of wood grouse is also known (Southern Urals, Zhiguli).

This does not mean that wood grouse can be resettled outside the pine forest complex, since this is by no means the optimal conditions for wood grouse. Perhaps better results will be obtained when birds are resettled from similar types of land. However, it would be risky to resettle wood grouse from typical biotopes into atypical areas.

Thus, the Altai maral has been living in the Zavidovo Game Reserve for about 30 years. For many years it inhabited mainly damp, swampy deciduous forests, and in winter it stayed near haystacks. Relatively recently, he mastered almost the entire central part of the farm. The deer were exported from the Shabalinsky deer farm. Deer were also brought to the Pereslavl forestry and hunting area (Yaroslavl region), and there they immediately began to develop (primarily agricultural) lands adjacent to the forest. The stationary distribution in both cases turned out to be different, which led to different practical conclusions, and conclusions for the first period of introduction would have to be made taking into account data on the development of local conditions at all points of settlement of this species. And there are many such examples.