Why did I decide to start a hunting farm? To explain this, we need to mentally return to the early 2000s: the “wild 90s” are over, the time has come for the rise of the economy and the formation of private business. The young private enterprise, of which I am the head, has already more or less gotten back 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 didn’t like coming somewhere for a couple of days, not for long, and besides, I already had a more or less clear idea of ​​exactly how I wanted to hunt. That’s when the idea arose to find like-minded people and create their own hunting property.

The very first and one of the most complex 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 arranged a long-term lease of land in the Ryazan region, with an area of ​​28 thousand hectares. It was obvious that the area needed help: before this, hunts were held in the reserve either for the local authorities or for local poachers. Both were episodic in nature.

The main animal in the area is the wild boar, and at the very beginning of our journey, even this ubiquitous animal was extremely scarce in the area: during the first seventeen hunts, not a single wild boar was caught. The whole point is that if now on our farm it is prohibited to shoot loppers during the rutting period, but the ban applies to the shooting of breeding stock all year round, then they used to shoot everyone in a row. Road improvement work, fertilizing and other biotechnical activities were also not carried out in the reserve: for example, in 2006, only one thousand rubles were allocated from the state budget for all biotechnical equipment. For a year. There were only two towers and four feeders on the land, to which a cartload of waste or potatoes was occasionally delivered in the fall. There was only one huntsman working, who did not have any equipment.

We started by properly organizing the protection of the land and plentiful feeding of the wild boars. Firstly, we sowed (and continue to sow now) about 130 hectares of our fields (all that is available) with oats, Jerusalem artichoke and corn. Secondly, they began to supply so much food to the feeders that the wild boars could not eat everything. The queens fed in this way began to produce twice as many offspring as before. Stray cutters who came to the feeders with excess food began to bring their neighbors' boars with them. Neighboring hunting farms began to complain that all the wild boars had gone to us, but then their numbers of wild boar and elk began to increase. By the way, we border on three hunting farms, with whose leaders we have long established friendly relations. We join forces to combat poaching, hunt wolves together, purchase seeds and food.

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

True, we developed good relations with the residents of neighboring villages quite quickly. Local men were used to poaching in the reserve, because they didn’t give vouchers. And I invited them to join my team as so-called activists. At first people were shy, thinking that they would only be used as a backup. 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 receive. 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 season is underway - we need people who scatter the grain with their hands where the seeder cannot pass, planting Jerusalem artichokes under a shovel. Activists hunt and use the amenities of the hunting base with us on equal terms. This means that we give them free trips, eat at the same table, shoot at the same shooting range. To get the opportunity to hunt on the grounds, that is, to become an activist, you need to be recommended by two members of the team. The second condition is that 10 days per season (for hunting ungulates in a pen and from a tower) or 3 days (for all other types of hunting) must be worked for the benefit of the farm, providing any possible assistance. This rule does not apply to pensioners and disabled people; they receive vouchers without working out.

Now 17 people are constantly working and maintaining the hunting farm: cooks, engineers, rangers and security guards. I personally manage the farm. But besides me, there is a director, a chief game warden 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 clean-up days, organize competitions (hunting biathlon, shooting at a “running boar”, skeet shooting, in an electronic shooting range), and hold them in the hunting lodge open lessons biology for schoolchildren.

Today the farm is on a commercial basis doesn't work and most likely won't work in the future. The five volunteer founders fully cover all material costs. All hunts are non-commercial, only for yourself and friends. But there are a lot of friends, and therefore during the season, every weekend someone hunts on the grounds.

Our hunting limit is as follows. Licenses for moose - 12 per year. For wild boars – 60+, but this limit can be increased if there is a threat of epidemics. There is also fox hunting, hare hunting and several types of bird hunting. Probably, it would be possible to follow the example of the famous hunting user Viktor Labusov and make the farm partially commercial. But, firstly, while this is not necessary, all owners are satisfied with the chosen option of cooperation. Secondly, all the founders understand that the hunting business will not bring stunning income, and even for this reason they do not think about it seriously. And thirdly, Viktor Labusov, as far as I know, immediately oriented his hunting enterprise towards conducting both commercial hunts and hunts “for himself”. For us, if we ever decide to take a commercial route, we will have to rebuild the entire system of work. So for now we have no such plans. True, recently I had ideas, as an experiment, to come to an agreement with the owners of a base for fishermen, which is being built on the banks of the Oka River not far from us. The point is to offer their guests hunting in our lands at the price list. Something similar was done at the Breeze hunting reserve.

Over the five years of hunting, we have 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, moose, foxes and hares. We are actively fighting wolves, and therefore we have a lot of animals. But I believe that the beast should be twice as large and it should be more diverse (which is not the case now). I dream that both 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 many animals there are as a result.

The second task is the fight against two-legged predators. We carry out security only with the help of members of our team and, in my opinion, quite effectively, but despite our efforts, we always detain one or two poachers once a quarter. To be honest, today I don’t know how much we are able to solve this problem. After all, there is a direct relationship - the more animals, the more poachers. Which is logical: neither a wolf nor a poacher will go into a poor farm where there are few animals.

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

The main problem of modern huntsmen, I believe, is that they can tense up, grit their teeth and do what is needed once (and then you need to look for such people). But most of them 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 that’s in the best case. And in the worst case, you leave without completing anything. However, most rangers with whom I have worked are constantly convinced that they are working too much.

Yes, there is a lot of work, I don’t argue. Every day, rangers do fairly routine work: delivering feed along the same roads to the same feeders, servicing 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 a lot of advantages in work, as in the famous black joke: “The executioner doesn’t know a break, but don’t say anything, work in the open air, work- 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 huntsman at our own expense, share meat, not only work together, but also relax.

As a leader, I lack responsibility, interest, passion, initiative, and love for their work in huntsmen. Unfortunately, many rangers are indifferent to the fact that their work can be used by poachers; they do not have a zealous attitude towards “their” lands. I came to the conclusion that no matter how you explain that we are working for ourselves, a rare huntsman will look at the farm as his own. As the older generation says, “if it’s not native, it doesn’t hurt.” Apparently, in Russia, in general, compared to Europe, the internal sense of property (the sense of owner) is poorly developed.

I am increasingly inclined to think that I will not be able to “grow” an employee who would meet all my simple requirements. Apparently, you need to look for a ready-made specialist with education and experience working in a hunting enterprise similar to ours. But searching is also not an easy task. For example, at one time we were looking for a director by advertising in the newspaper. We searched for a very long time and interviewed 30 candidates. In the end, they still found a director among their own. He 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 again everything will start all over again.

I'm almost sure that the problems we face exist in others as well. Russian farms. I would be very glad if someone dissuaded me of this...

Russian hunting magazine, June 2013

3668

What are the problems and concerns of hunting today?

Currently, a number of laws have been adopted regarding the hunting industry, but they are not very successful.

They say hunting is bad due to these laws?

Laws relating to hunting can be viewed from different angles. Most citizens are happy, since the laws imply becoming a hunter without investment (free of charge if there is no criminal record) and then, without much red tape, obtaining permission to buy a gun, purchasing a ticket for 400 rubles to a public hunting ground. A minority of citizens, having (of their own free will) done what the majority does, additionally joins the community of hunters, adding the worry of paying membership fees and working on obtaining vouchers at prices set by the hunting user.

So this is a clear inequality.

Only the inequality is not in additional investments (labor, money), but in consciousness and care for hunting resources. For the most part, citizens find it beneficial and calm to be a hunter, while the other one needs the rigmarole with all the worries about the hunting area.

They say there are fewer members of society?

This is a natural process, a person searches for where everything is easier.

But how to stop this process?

The Russian Hunting and Fishing Union made a number of proposals to the government to strengthen the hunting industry. In terms of reducing the one-time fee for a long-term hunting agreement, giving rangers the right to draw up protocols, the right to learn the hunting minimum when joining hunters, the participation of the public union of hunters in matters to protect hunting and fishing resources. At the same time, the hunter has the right to choose where to take part in hunting: on the farm of the hunting user or on public hunting grounds.

You are the record holder for the longest work experience in the hunting society. In your opinion, today which form of farming is winning and which is losing?

I would name three main forms of hunting management:

1) Public form of hunting management;

2) Private form of hunting management;

3) State form of management (public) hunting management.

But there are a number of problems for each of these forms. The social form of hunting management is strong in its mass, but weak economically.

The private form is strong economically, but weak in that it covers a narrow circle of hunters.

The state form of hunting management is abandoned by the state for survival and is strong only in the regulatory framework.

I'm in Lately I met a lot with scientists, leaders of republican and regional societies, heads of enterprises, entrepreneurs, those people who love hunting and support its prosperity. There is only one conclusion - it is necessary to connect hunters' societies (their farms) with private capital through mutually beneficial agreements.

Are there any results already on this proposal?

The result is far from achieved, but the first such agreement was concluded between the financial society and an individual entrepreneur.

Secret, with whom exactly?

There is no secret. This is IP Ablov N.K. Our fellow countryman is a resident of the Kamyzyaksky district, a successful entrepreneur, a prudent owner, a district deputy, a lover of hunting and fishing.

What is the essence of the agreement?

The regional society has a license and enters into a hunting agreement for hunting grounds with the regional administration, and the individual entrepreneur makes a one-time payment (at the rate of 10 rubles per 1 hectare) and is encumbered by a contract for 49 years of management economic activity in these hunting grounds. The regional society and the individual entrepreneur are mutually responsible for the management of the hunting enterprise. The hunter is not disadvantaged in the hunting grounds, and the individual entrepreneur has the opportunity to create an area with the services of a ranger at a special fee. But I personally don’t really want anyone to sell cartridges, etc. in this area. So we get services at all levels of the economy.

What are the benefits for an entrepreneur?

The entrepreneur has an increased opportunity to expand hunting and fishing services, and his status increases. The truth is there are more worries.

And yet, what’s wrong with us in the hunting industry?

In general, these are imperfect laws and, if they exist, there are huge problems in them. For example, Kazakhstan adopted a law regarding hunting, but defined the role of public hunting organizations and allowed the issuance of a single hunting ticket. In Belarus, rangers have received high security status and state support. Many countries have given serious priority to farmers who want to protect hunting and fishing resources. It has long been clear to everyone that hunting in itself does not bring profit.

And what did you come to?

IN Orenburg region 97% of hunters dropped out of society. A deplorable picture in Kalmykia and Dagestan. There are almost no hunting grounds in the Stavropol region, and in general, who benefits from this decline is a mystery to me and to other hunting users.

In the Astrakhan region there is a real mess in matters of movement and recreation in the Volga delta, that is, there is no peace for hunting and fishing resources. True, a number of promising projects have been adopted by the regional leadership - these are natural Park in the north of the region and earlier - orders on wetlands of international rank. The latter is not working, and the park has just started operating. If the management of the park and the district communities (Akhtubinskoye, Chernoyarskoye, Enotaevskoye) jointly take care of the safety of hunting and fishing resources, of course, there will be results.

Do you think the Astrakhan hunting society will not fall apart like in Orenburg?

No. Although at the beginning my colleagues, the heads of hunting farms, did not immediately support me on the issue of uniting business and society, but now the previously accepted contractual conditions are mutually beneficial and are taken as a basis.

Maybe there is some other hidden reserve for improving hunting and fishing activities and the preservation and reproduction of hunting and fishing resources?

Yes, of course there is, not just a reserve. Powerful economic structure. The tourist league, headed by V.A. Popov.

How do you see collaboration for the benefit of nature?

The society has had mutual relations with travel agencies on services, biotechnology, and reproduction of hunting resources for many years. Some travel agencies are an example of the prudent use of hunting and fishing resources.

And more specifically?

The hunting society enters into agreements with travel agencies to create sites with the services of a ranger. These areas are heavily guarded and the area is sold out. Young ducks and pheasants are produced. The rest zone is much higher than in other places of the hunting grounds. Naturally there is a lot of game, and hunting is better.

This experience needs to be expanded. But some heads of hunting enterprises are opponents of such areas and are jealous of decisions about contracts with travel agencies, which, I think, is a big mistake.

It turns out that you are not the enemy collaboration for the benefit of nature with travel agencies?

I believe that the travel agency is directly interested in improving such an indicator as the hunter’s prey, but it has recently worsened.

There are many travel agencies, but one territory.

There is a territorial carrying capacity of the hunting farm (in our natural conditions, approximately 60 hectares per hunter). Actual - the amount of game to be harvested. There is enough space in the territory for both our own and visitors, but the actual throughput suffers.

The regional community is the main hunting user. Doesn't he have a lot of territory?

So what's the matter?

We need the political will of our leadership to create a team that will determine the strategy of what we are talking about.

08/08/2011 | The future could belong to collective hunting farms... But it doesn’t exist

Miroslav Madejski, General Director of Diana Hunting Club LLC, at the presentation of the feed and additives he produces. Photo - Andrey Shalygin

Miroslav Madejski: “I was prompted to write my opinion by the fact of an interview with Anton Bersenev. The battle over a unified state hunting license has finally ended. It’s amazing that our huge country has been discussing one document that concerns all of us, hunters, for so many years. It was discussed for another year 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 within a year or not?!

This ticket is actually only a confirmation that the person, by registering, has joined the ranks of hunters.

The rank of such a ticket is zero, considering that no knowledge is required to obtain it. Most likely, hunting officials couldn't come up with anything smarter than either making the hunting societies work or putting them out of business after they stopped having money flowing in for the tribute paid to be a hunter. In fact, it is unlikely that it will now be possible to sit idle indefinitely. Most likely, all their actions were aimed at accelerating the collapse of the existing post-Soviet system of societies. The prevailing bureaucratic scheme of confiscating land from companies for any reason (violation) has extended the privatization process for a long time. And how can a society not violate the requirements in such circumstances, when officials only need 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 the biotechnical requirements for. And as a consequence: local hunters will have no incentive to work for society. Now it’s clear why the hunting industry in the country has been brought to such a deplorable state! And the question arises: why was it necessary to destroy everything in order to now build it anew?!

If the improvement of legislation moves in the same direction, then in the future “ticket holders” will go into the forest just to drink vodka.

The owners of private hunting grounds, which at one time were so attacked by all the magazines that the oligarchs would take the land, knock out everything that moved there and abandon it, have proven the opposite. It’s great that the head of the department is a supporter of the private owner of the land. However, in my opinion, you shouldn't overdo it. Why not create conditions for the existence of all types of property or economic activity? In private hunting farms there is also an indefinable problem: how to reduce costs? People will work for the owner only for money. With qualified and responsible labor force there is a problem in the villages. The owners were never able to find mutual language

with local hunters. The confrontation became poaching and theft. And it seemed that it was so easy to come to an agreement with local hunters, to create brigades that would serve on a voluntary basis as rangers for the right to hunt in these areas. The psychological barrier between the poor and the rich is still very large. The future could also belong to collective hunting farms , when, for example, a district society that does not know how to stay afloat on its own would have a sponsor or a group of sponsors as new solvent members of society who would receive additional rights of influence in exchange for material and technical support. Local hunters would carry out ongoing 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 to out-of-town commercial hunts. And such societies could operate at minimal costs. But there is one BUT... These societies must become independent legal entities and have the right to decide everything for themselves. And most importantly: to have the right to dispose of animals raised at the expense of one’s own labor and invested financial resources. In some European countries

This system of interaction between local and city hunters works great, especially if they have a major sponsor. The system works flawlessly, because some cannot do without others.

Russian Hunting Trophy Records. Photo - Andrey Shalygin. Officials from the “hunting supervision” act in a win-win manner: while the society is working, they keep part of the shooting permits for themselves, selling them, and as soon as the hunting industry falls into decay, then kicking back the fee for drawing up a hunting agreement to some moneybag opens up the way for them to solve larger problems, leading to The result is that the regularly collected tribute for the production quota can forever warm their pockets. Until the state resolves this issue by passing an appropriate law, nothing will move forward. The same should apply to private farms. The fashion of having your own hunting ground will soon pass, because any toy gets boring over time, and in this case it also creates too many problems for the owner, and, being a very expensive undertaking, hits hard on the pocket. Privatization has not yet ended, but there are already so many proposals for the sale of land!

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

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

A separate topic: commercial hunting. It must be not only profitable, but also profitable. There is still little knowledge in the country about how to run such a farm.

I know what I'm saying. We launched the production and sale of fertilizers, feeds and licks for almost all types of game animals. Separate mineral and vitamin compositions have been developed for all types of game animals. And what we hear everywhere in response: “We have everything, because we purchased so 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, an abundance of animals exists thanks to the use of feed laid out specifically for animals, although most of the food used is expired food intended for people. 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. We also had to take into account the fact that throughout the central, eastern and northern parts Russia's agriculture is dying, 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 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 supplied to 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 hunting as an industry, from an economic point of view, can become competitive with agriculture. Only in Russia is a wild animal not a pest in areas where there is almost no Agriculture

. To grow 1 kg of wild animal meat you need no more than 30% of the feed supplied with human participation, and it does not require the cost of a huge infrastructure, as is the case with farms in agriculture. Currently, the problem of hunting is no less acute than ten years ago. And it lies not only in high cost

licenses and vouchers for certain types of animals, but also in the rationality of farming itself. In our country, hunting is classified either as agriculture or forestry, or is considered as an independent branch of environmental management, and, finally, according to V.V. Dezhkin, as “an integral and important component

The most convincing arguments come from the authors who consider hunting to be a specific branch of agricultural production. This issue was considered in some detail by V.K. Melnikov.

He attributed the following to the main features of agriculture: the combination of the economic process of reproduction with natural reproduction; a more significant gap between the production period and the working period than in industry; the use of land as the main means of production, and not just as the location of the enterprise; seasonality of production and its complexity; the great influence of natural factors on labor productivity; the vastness of the labor arena of a large territory. All these features of agriculture are uniquely characteristic of hunting. But the latter has a number of specific features, which were already noted by D.N. Danilov, S.D. Pereleshin, V.N. Skalon, V.K. Melnikov and other researchers.

The main ones:

Low income received per unit area of ​​hunting land compared to agricultural land;
- direct impact on the subject of labor (game animals), as a rule, only at the time of their capture and the insignificance of that part of the labor that is aimed at reproduction (the rest of the time, animals are subject to only indirect influence, when the conditions of their existence change);
- limited opportunity the use of mechanization in production, especially when harvesting animals;
- the predominance of individual labor over collective labor in the main production process - the extraction of animals;
- the use of hunting lands and game animals as the main means of production, the inseparability of hunting lands from game animals. Where there are no game animals, there are no hunting grounds, and, therefore, there cannot be a farm itself.

IN modern world Newer and more advanced forms of farming are appearing, financed by individual individuals and legal entities who invest quite large amounts of money in the organization, as well as in a complex of biotechnical and reproductive activities. But still in most cases it is used main principle market relations: with a minimum of investments - maximum profits.

The profitability of hunting farms leaves much to be desired, but if they still exist, then it’s worth it.

There are a number of proposals that will make their existence a little easier, and to some extent apply the market principle, but more on that below.

Considering the current problems of hunting management, I would like to focus on the most important ones, which were mentioned by some heads of hunting farms and chairmen of regional OOiR. In turn, they are also proposals for bringing Russia’s hunting industry out of the crisis; it is necessary to restore the federal body for control over the use of wildlife and management of the country’s hunting industry, thereby ensuring the independence of the hunting industry, and to transfer all task forces on the fight against poaching from the subjects of the federation to the subordination of this body.

Adopt the Law of the Russian Federation “On Hunting and Game Management”, in which:

a) expand the powers of the constituent entities of the federation to determine quotas for the production of game animals, except for rare and endangered ones;
b) provide benefits for hunting users engaged in enclosure game breeding;
c) simplify the procedure for assigning hunting lands to promising users;
d) expand the rights of game users in terms of rationing and use of game animals;
e) increase the responsibility of government agencies for the economic consequences of their decisions and restrictive measures if they cause economic damage to hunting users and the state.

• Strengthen and improve the system of training personnel in the hunting industry (game wardens, rangers).
• Create an all-Russian non-profit organization (association) of hunting users to protect their rights and interests, develop legislative initiatives on hunting and game management.
• Introduce mandatory training and an exam (similar to the principle of obtaining a driver’s license) for citizens wishing to take advantage of the waiver.
• Develop and widely use incentive measures for hunting users who have achieved positive results in increasing the number of game animals.
• Return the right to huntsmen and game wardens to inspect and draw up reports on violations of hunting rules.

Another important problem is accounting. Winter route accounting, in my opinion, is already outdated; there are more advanced methods, no more labor-intensive than ZMU, that allow a more accurate assessment of the capacity of hunting grounds.

In addition to general economic problems, it is necessary to note the problems of ordinary hunters, who every year have less and less chance of acquiring licenses for large game animals due, as noted above, to the high cost of licenses and vouchers. In such a situation, low-income hunters take the path of poaching.

It is not difficult to satisfy the recreational needs of society, and along with organizing hunts, it is possible to conduct ecological excursions household chores for both Russian and foreign volunteers. In America and Europe, for example, tourists pay money to listen to the howl of wolves and watch some moments of the life of wild animals.

Watching wild animals in nature is much more interesting than in a zoo. From the same storage sheds you can display feeding bears and wild boars. Recording a video of capercaillie and black grouse showing is more difficult than successfully organizing a hunt for it, observing elk during the rut and luring them in - all this will bring good income and allow you to better study the animals.

The hunting fauna is very diverse, each species is attractive in its own way, and in order to observe them in the wild, a competent approach from game managers is necessary. Close collaboration with scientists studying wildlife, this will have a fruitful influence on the development of science as a whole.

During the hunting season, farms accumulate large and varied biomaterial that needs to be examined. It is already obvious that with increased pressure on any species of animal, the number of individuals in the offspring increases, and the total extermination of, for example, wolves will not solve the problem of increasing the number of ungulates.

Having several dens on the territory of the farm, it is possible to maintain the optimal number of wolves, while making good money from tourists. Organize exciting hunts for wabu, and the wolves, in turn, will protect their brothers from attacks. Wolves have very well expressed territoriality, the average area of ​​the territory of one family is approximately 500 square kilometers. When the offspring transition to independent life, they leave their parents and move away from the places where they were born.

There are many examples of a happy neighborhood between wolves and ungulates. An example would be Yellowstone national park V North America. There, by the thirties of the twentieth century, the wolf was completely exterminated, but in 1995, contrary to public statements, it was again imported from Canada.

After many years of observations, scientists national park confirmed the fact that wolves eat mainly weak and sick animals. For reliability, I will cite the data of P.N. Korablev on assessing the health status of moose based on periodontal disease in the area of ​​the Central Forest Reserve from the book by V.P. Bolotov "Wolf Hunt".

In our country, the wolf is illegal, but poaching and various diseases cause much more damage to farms than the “gray” one. Managers of wild boar breeding farms, I think, can also confirm this.

In Russia, hunting is moving to a newer and more advanced type of development - commercial. And I would like to see progressive management methods that are wisely combined with the rational use of wildlife.