Hunting grounds and their classification

Hunting resources are usually considered as a set of hunting grounds and the game animals and birds inhabiting them. The ecosystem connection between land and animals is very important in terms of hunting resource management. It makes no sense to consider lands, systematize them, evaluate them without taking into account the animals inhabiting them, without taking into account the reaction of animals to the quality and structure of habitats, since the study of lands in this case is done primarily for recording and assessing accounting resources, for studying the ecology and fundamentals of obtaining hunting and commercial fauna. The number of animals depends on the quality of habitats, and a change in the quality of land certainly entails a change in the abundance of their numbers.

The classification of hunting grounds underlies not only scientific hunting research, but also practical activities (animal censuses, resource assessment, hunting management design, etc.) that form the basis for planning, organizing and maintaining hunting.

The law of worldwide zoning, formulated by V.V. Dokuchaev, became generally accepted. There are 9 landscape zones on the territory of Russia: icy, tundra, forest-tundra, taiga, mixed and broad-leaved forests, forest-steppe, steppe, semi-desert, desert. However, the need to divide such large areas to analyze the distribution of hunting resources is obvious. Zonal signs of changes in vegetation, soils and their productivity change living conditions individual species game animals, general structure population and even its species composition. Differences in relief leave their mark on both the nature and distribution of vegetation and animals. In addition, the economic development of territories plays a certain role in this regard. All this, to one degree or another, affects the state of hunting resources.

Small natural territorial complexes can be grouped according to their significance for a particular type of game animal or for all types of game resources together. In this case, types of hunting grounds – typological combination of sites according to similar habitat conditions for game animals and birds. The typology of hunting areas can be more detailed or more general. Types of hunting grounds can combine natural complexes with a greater or lesser degree of homogeneity, depending on the goal. If the classification of hunting grounds is needed for an accurate ecological analysis of the location of one species of animal, a more detailed typology is carried out. For integrated hunting management, land types are usually more generalized.

When managing relatively large areas of fishing grounds, they are often used groups of hunting ground types – association of types of land that are more or less similar in terms of habitat conditions for game animals. Further consolidation of land types will lead to the division of territories into land classes, then - to land categories.

The method for identifying types of hunting grounds and larger taxa was developed by D.N. Danilov (1960, 1966) and other major game managers and is described in detail in a number of methodological manuals and books. It should only be noted that all of these categories are distinguished primarily by the nature and degree of similarity of the vegetation cover of different areas of land.

Classification of hunting grounds is necessary, as already emphasized, to analyze the living conditions of animals and identify patterns in the distribution of their resources. What ideas about the connection between animals and land are included in the principles of land classification; the same forms of connections can be identified using this classification. If, for example, the average numbers of animals in natural zones were calculated, then zonal changes in their numbers are established. If the classification of land is carried out according to the composition of the vegetation of animal habitats, then using it it is possible to determine the dependence of the animal population on the vegetation. If you construct a series of habitats identified by vegetation depending on the degree of their moisture, then you can also determine the influence of this factor on animal resources, etc.

In principle, it is possible to divide the territory and build a classification of habitats according to any of the conditions for the existence of animals. However, it is more advisable to use a complex of signs. This is possible when using landscape classification of hunting areas.

V.V. Dezhkin (1978) formulated the following basic provisions for the landscape classification of hunting grounds:

1. Animal habitats are considered to be natural territorial complexes - systems of interconnected natural components: air, water, upper layers rocks, soil, vegetation and fauna. All of the categories listed above, from zones and countries to facies, are natural territorial complexes of different ranks. Systematization of natural territorial complexes makes it possible to analyze the distribution of animal resources depending on the nature and location of any component of these systems, as well as on the complexes as a whole.

2. In landscape taxonomy, there are two concepts: an individual natural territorial complex and typological groups of complexes. This difference means that each complex is individual, unique in time and space, but the complexes have common features that allow us to carry out a typology of complexes. The smaller and simpler the complexes, the more often they are considered in typological groups. Thus, all the main categories of morphological division of the landscape (facies, tracts and landscapes themselves) have typological taxa: types of facies, classes of facies, types of facies; types of tracts, classes of tracts, types of tracts, etc. The typological association thus results in different breadths – from narrower typological groups to broader ones, similar to the unification of land types into groups of types, classes and categories of land.

Natural zoning taxa are not typified and are considered individually. In some cases, a typology of natural areas is carried out over large areas. It is not practical to typify larger zoning categories.

In a specific category, the largest complexes are usually considered as individual, and small ones as typological. On the territory of one hunting area, landscapes and even localities can be assessed individually, and tracts and facies – in typological terms. Thus, in any territory there are larger individual complexes with a natural alternation of smaller ones, usually considered typologically.

All these concepts lead to the following. It is possible to construct a unified classification scheme that includes natural systems of different size and complexity of structure and their technological groups; it is possible to carry out a classification of any level of detail on any territory depending on the goals, depth and subtlety of the study; Landscape systematization allows us to simultaneously analyze the dual nature of the distribution of animals: regional patterns of distribution (from place to place, according to individual complexes) and typological patterns (repeated in similar conditions, according to typological groups of complexes).

3. The main unit of landscape classification of hunting grounds is landscape. In some cases, neighboring categories (natural area, terrain, less often complexes of tracts or large background tracts) can also be the main ones. Territories of this rank are inhabited by groups of game animals, with a relatively constant population, the resource potential of which can only change within such territories, and not among smaller complexes over which animals are constantly redistributed due to their mobility. For animals, the whole set of alternating small complexes is important, the nature of their combination, the ratio of areas - all this together constitutes single habitats for them, represented by the main categories of landscape division of land.

4. Due to the mobility of animals, the importance for them of each individual small complex (or the corresponding phytocenosis) decreases. Small morphological parts of landscapes can only be considered as the internal content of the main categories of classification. A typology of small complexes is needed to characterize, describe, and map the main categories.

In this regard, the technology methodology for small complexes is not of fundamental importance. In a number of cases, the typological grouping of small areas of the territory only based on the characteristics of vegetation cover can completely replace the typology of morphological parts of the landscape. If the typology of land according to vegetation is carried out not formally, but with a more an integrated approach, taking into account the connection of vegetation with the relief, degree of moisture and the nature of the soil, then the types of land will approximately correspond to the types of sub-tracts or tracts, the groups of land types will correspond to the classes of sub-tracts or tracts, etc.

Landscape zones of the Russian Federation are shown in Fig. 1. Their generalized characteristics are given in the monograph by V.V. Dezhkina, V.A. Kuzyakina, R.A. Gorbushina et al. (1978).

Figure 1. Landscape zones of the Russian Federation: A. - Arctic desert, B. - Tundra, C. - Forest-tundra, G. - Taiga, D. - Subtaiga forests, E. - Forest-steppe, Z. - Steppe, W. - Semi-desert, I. - Desert (according to V.V. Dezhkin et al., 1978)

Traditionally, the following categories of hunting grounds are distinguished: forest, open, water, swamp. Their productivity is determined in monetary terms.

Forest hunting grounds in the Russian Federation they occupy an area of ​​7688 thousand km 2. They are concentrated mainly in the taiga zone, subtaiga forests and partly in the forest-steppe, forest-tundra and Caucasus mountains. The productivity of forest lands changes according to the same patterns as the productivity of all lands (total productivity): from north to south it increases, and decreases as the climate continentality increases in the same zones and subzones. Maximum productivity is characteristic of broad-leaved forests in the south of the subtaiga zone. Forests in the northeast of Russia (Yakutia, northern Transbaikalia, northern Krasnoyarsk Territory) have minimal economic productivity.

Open lands(tundra, meadow, field, desert, semi-desert and steppe) are characterized by lower productivity than forest lands. For open hunting grounds, the ruggedness of the terrain is of great importance. The redistribution of snow cover, mosaic nature of land, economic development of territories, conditions for shelter, digging holes, etc. depend on it.

water areas occupy an area of ​​about 900 thousand km 2 in the Russian Federation. They are distributed unevenly throughout the territory. There are many lakes in the tundra zone, fewer in the forest-tundra zone. There are most taiga reservoirs in the north-west of the European part of the country, in Western Siberia and Central Yakutia. The forest-steppe and steppe of the West Siberian Lowland are characterized by an abundance of lakes. A unit area of ​​small reservoirs provides significantly more hunting products than the same area of ​​large reservoirs, since game animals are more associated with shallow waters, coastal and coastal vegetation. The area of ​​small lakes accounts for a large length of coastline and coastal shallow waters. Rivers are less productive than lakes, shallow reservoirs, overgrown peat quarries, ponds, settling tanks of sugar factories and other “area” reservoirs. The exception is deltas and estuaries of southern rivers (Kuban, Volga, etc.). The productivity of reservoirs of the same type gradually increases from north to south. Aquatic lands are among the most productive hunting grounds in monetary terms.

wetlands are about 1120 thousand km 2 (6.5% of the total area). The main areas of swamps are located in the tundra, forest-tundra and taiga zones, where raised-type swamps predominate. They have relatively low productivity even compared to lowland swamps. The productivity of lowland bogs north of the southern border of the subtaiga also decreases somewhat, but is much less than the productivity of all wetlands together.

Forest hunting grounds are particularly diverse. Each tract, even a relatively small one, consists of alternating different types of forest, forest swamps, clearings, edge thickets, clearings, burnt areas, artificial forest plantings (forest crops), differing in hunting management.

Scheme of the typology of forest lands by D.N. Danilov (1960, 1963, 1966, 1972) built according to the phytocenological principle, which is based on forest typology. This is the most appropriate and justified approach, since in forest conditions all forestry activities are carried out on a forest typological basis and the hunting use of forest animals, as an element of forest biogeocenosis, cannot be an exception in this regard.

In practice, forest taxation areas do not coincide with hunting areas, for the reason that forest animals, as a rule, do not live only in one of them. Therefore, the type of hunting ground, as a hunting taxation unit, is unification of areas of hunting grounds characterized by similar living conditions for animals and requiring, under equal economic prerequisites, the same hunting activities.

By classifying any specific area as a particular type of land, we not only give it a name and find its place in the land classification system, but also determine for which game animals it is most suitable, in what ways it is best to hunt in it and in what ways increase its productivity. That is why the typology of lands is the basis for their inventory during hunting management. It is only necessary to achieve a uniform understanding of the types of land so that the inventory materials are in all cases of good quality and comparable.

The main criterion by which the first division of forest lands is made is the age of the planting (tree stand). Forest stands are divided into age classes at intervals of 10 years for hardwoods and 20 years for conifers. At the same time, age classes I and II are considered young, III and IV – middle-aged, all other classes are progressively classified as ripening, ripe and overmature plantings. For hunting, such detail is excessive. In terms of hunting, it is more expedient to divide forests by age into three groups of age classes: young, middle-aged and old. In terms of the conditions that ensure the life of game animals and birds, these groups differ significantly from each other.

Young growths are characterized by the fact that they have an abundance of wood and branch food available to dendrofagous animals. In young trees, before the canopy closes, the ground cover is well developed, there are many berry plants, mushrooms, insects, and mouse-like rodents. There are excellent protective and feeding conditions for the white hare, wild ungulates, and some mustelids. However, the lack of fruits and seeds of tree and shrub species, as well as thick and strong branches from which to peck needles, buds, catkins, is the main factor in the low number of wood grouse, hazel grouse, and black grouse.

Middle-aged forests, especially those at the age of polewood, are the poorest in terms of food. The twig food here has already “gone” from under the beast’s muzzle; regrowth and undergrowth are not yet developed; the grass cover, being shaded by the closed canopy, degraded; The main forest-forming species have not yet reached reproductive age and do not produce fruits and seeds. There is little game in such conditions. But middle-aged forests have good protective properties and in winter, especially in cold and windy weather with relatively shallow snow cover, many ungulates and predatory animals find shelter in them.

In old forests, the living conditions for many forest game animals are most favorable. Here, as the tree stand thins out, undergrowth and clumps of regrowth appear, ground cover develops, including berry fields, trees and shrubs that have reached reproductive age begin to bear fruit steadily, and hollow trees appear.

The quality of hunting grounds also depends on the density of the tree canopy. In forestry practice, there are 10 gradations of density (from 0.1 to 1.0). In game management, it is customary to distinguish only 3 groups of tree canopy density: sparse (0.1-0.4), medium-close (0.5-0.7) and dense (0.8-1.0) stands. Animals also have their own requirements for tree stand density, however, the influence of this factor is rather indirect, associated with the lighting regime under the forest canopy.

Next sign, by which types of forest land are distinguished, is the composition of forest-forming species. The fodder and protective properties of the land directly depend on the composition of the forest stand. In forestry, the composition is indicated in the form of formulas, where the numbers indicate the share of participation of a particular species in the forest stand, and the letters correspond to its name. So the formula 10C will mean clean pine forests, 10B – clean birch forests, etc. In complex forest stands, the formula 8D1Os1Lp indicates that it consists of 80% oak, 10% aspen and 10% linden. Variations in species composition within oak forests, pine forests, spruce forests, etc. there can be a lot; for hunting they are not of significant importance; the main (first in the formula) breed is decisive. More often, in this regard, only deciduous or coniferous stands are distinguished. Moreover, if a forest stand contains equal numbers of coniferous and deciduous species, then it is classified as a coniferous forest, since coniferous species have a stronger influence on the conditions that form under the forest canopy; coniferous species, in this case, will be represented in the formula in first place.

Tree stands of certain species that are of particular importance for certain game animals can be divided into separate types of hunting grounds: cedar forests, spruce forests, pine forests, oak forests, aspen forests, young pine forests, etc.

D.N. Danilov, based on the classification of forest types according to V.N. Sukachev, identifies the following main types of hunting grounds.

1. swampy forest(a group of sphagnum forest types with low-growing and low-density tree stands on flat, swampy soils that are not drained along the bottom of basins).

2. Mossy forest(groups of green moss and long moss forest types, with tall tree stands of varying density, with sparse undergrowth; located on more or less flat terrain, on gentle slopes).

3. Floodplain forest(a group of swamp-grass forest types, with tall tree stands, with a well-developed herbaceous cover, located along the valleys of rivers, streams, along the bottom of ravines and thalwegs).

4. Complex forest(groups complex types forests, with tall, multi-tiered tree stands, with dense and varied undergrowth; growing in rich, well-drained soils).

5. Dry or lichen forest(a group of lichen forest types with suppressed growth and sparse tree stand; grow on dry and poor soils, on hilltops).

6. rocky forest(a group of forest types located on steep slopes of mountainous terrain; rocky soils, stands of average productivity).

Each of the above types of hunting grounds consists of several types of forest, however, it has common stable characteristics. Thus, the type of hunting ground “mossy forest” combines such types of forest as mossy pine, lichen, heather, lingonberry, bracken, sorrel, blueberry, and fern forests; spruce forests, long moss, lingonberry, mossy, bracken, sorrel, snot, nettle, fern. All these types of forests are characterized by stable seed production; berry fields are well represented in them, which determines satisfactory feeding and protective conditions for many game animals.

Thus, specific types of forest hunting grounds are determined by the dominant species of the tree stand. Within the breed - according to age (young, middle-aged, etc.) and growing conditions, forest types (swampy spruce forest, heather pine forest, sedge oak forest, etc.). Lands that are similar in some economically important characteristic are combined into groups of land types (dark coniferous forests, swampy forests, young coniferous forests, etc.). Classes of hunting grounds are characterized by the main tracts of forest plantations (pine forests, foliage forests, spruce forests, cedar trees, oak forests, etc.). Categories of hunting grounds have fundamental differences (forest, aquatic, swamp-meadow, etc.). The landscape classification of hunting grounds corresponds to 9 main landscape zones.

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 any significant differences for applied purposes. Less often there are cases when, practically important feature or property, the 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 years, it 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 total amount areas of allotments classified as a specific 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 an equal amount of area. 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 those areas where there are many large rotten stumps and logs inhabited by large carpenter ants left from the former spruce forest. Such areas are a special type of bear area. Here is an example when an environmentally 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 quite typical meager quantity twig food (of which the main ones are 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. Pechora dark coniferous 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 purely practically, since population density is not a stable property of the 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. Here there is enough qualitative difference 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 growing conditions. This is reflected in the quality class and type of forest (for which certain quality characteristics are also typical), in the chemical composition of 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 defining every time feed containers even for the most important feed.

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 just don't own the necessary methods. This is a vast area to explore. Ultimately, for the 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 the proportion of the 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 units (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. It should be in the title diagnostic signs: the dominant species of the upper tier (sometimes the second, if it is typical and well defined), 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 areas should in no case be confused with the set of often enlarged typological categories that are resorted to 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.

Most forest plantations are in one or another stage of age and species succession. The stages have different longevity. The most short-term, ephemeral 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 shelters 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). The types of forest hunting grounds, their capacities, seasonal quality 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 circulation, resorting to them only when it is necessary to decipher for final assessment for any purpose (for example, for hunting land reclamation activities). 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 quality characteristics of a territory can only be used for purely on-farm practical purposes of a general nature, for example, to assess the comparative productivity of individual areas, excluding the current population density. 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-diagram of the distribution of several forest species of grouse birds by forest type (more precisely, by group of types), compiled by forester Leontyev, was published. 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 moss, long-moss, 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: the degree of richness of forest soils and 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 assortment of forest types fits into the framework from complex hazel types to sorrel forests in combination with riparian forests (fontinale) in forest floodplains and hollows. Such integration is of economic importance.

Forest typology is most closely related to the quality of growing conditions and 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 nymphs or scillas in the soil cover as forest hunting grounds, etc.

Game animals and birds in different times 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 forest type becomes very important and even with such subtle differences as sorrel, 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 of 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 by its winter nutrition, but already O.I. Semenov-Tyan-Shansky showed that although during the winter the capercaillie eats a lot pine needles, its reserves per hectare are so abundant that 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. higher than 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. Maybe, best results will occur when birds resettle from a similar type 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 forest 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.

Public hunting ground of Shchelkovsky district

Area: 20,333 hectares

Northern: from point 38°8"32.985"E 56°5"59.92"N up the middle. current b.i. Vorya tributary to point 38°10"41.963"E 56°5"40.95"N, then in a straight line to point 38°11"22.648"E 56°5"27.531"N, then in a straight line to point 38°11"35.655 "E 56°5"49.516"N, then in a straight line to point 38°14"35.462"E 56°7"1.147"N, then in a straight line to point 38°15"7.416"E 56°6"55.866"N, then in a straight line to point 38°18"54.362"E 56°8"55.581"N, then in a straight line to point 38°19"0.091"E 56°9"18.197"N, then in a straight line to point 38°19"22.053" E 56°9"24.478"N, then in a straight line to point 38°20"8.648"E 56°9"24.73"N.

Eastern: from point 38°20"8.648"E 56°9"24.73"N along the road to the intersection with the river. Width at point 38°20"20.283"E 56°10"25.158"N, further down the middle. the flow of the river Shirenka to the village of Golovino, then in a straight line to point 38°24"40.038"E 56°6"53.455"N, then in a straight line to point 38°25"2.498"E 56°6"43.805"N, then in a straight line to point 38°24"59.151"E 56°6"8.557"N, then in a straight line to point 38°24"36.158"E 56°5"50.019"N, then down the middle. the flow of the river Dubenka to the junction with the administration. border Chernogolovka GO.

South: from the junction of the river. Dubenka with adm. border Chernogolovka GO in the south-west direction along this adm. border to the village of Makarovo.

Western: from the settlement. Makarovo along the road towards the settlement. Bogorodskoye to point 38°15"23.536"E 56°0"54.73"N, then in a straight line to point 38°14"46.117"E 56°0"38.242"N, then in a straight line to point 38°14"18.986"E 56°0"40.243"N, then in a straight line to point 38°13"29.906"E 56°0"26.928"N, then along straight to point 38°12"1.809"E 56°0"29.618"N, then up the middle. the flow of the river Vorya to point 38°8"32.985"E 56°5"59.92"N.

Public hunting ground of Shatursky district

Area: 10,016 hectares

North: from point 39°31"7.841"E 55°47"14.401"N eastward along the adm. border of Vladimir and Moscow regions. to point 39°47"40.943"E 55°49"49.081"N.

Eastern: from point 39°47"40.943"E 55°49"49.081"N then in a straight line to point 39°46"38.862"E 55°49"26.36"N., then in a straight line to point 39°46" 35.253"E 55°48"49.88"N, then in a straight line to point 39°44"57.273"E 55°48"48.865"N, then in a straight line to point 39°44"55.209"E 55°48"16.431 "N, then in a straight line to point 39°43"5.717"E 55°48"14.65"N, then in a straight line to point 39°43"4.657"E 55°47"17.063"N, then in a straight line to point 39°42"9.868"E 55°47"12.513"N, then in a straight line to point 39°42"15.836"E 55°46"4.34"N, then in a straight line to point 39°41"12.517"E 55 °46"3.887"N, then in a straight line to point 39°41"34.203"E 55°43"43.42"N.

South: from point 39°41"34.203"E 55°43"43.42"N in a westerly direction in a straight line to point 39°31"18.67"E 55°43"42.186"N, then in a straight line to point 39 °30"17.822"E 55°43"26.185"N.

Western: from point 39°30"17.822"E 55°43"26.185"N in a northerly direction along the adm. the border of Orekhovo-Zuevsky and Shatursky districts to the junction with the adm. border of the Vladimir region, then in the northeast direction along the adm. border of Moscow and Vladimir regions. to point 39°31"7.841"E

Public hunting ground in Solnechnogorsk district

Area: 18,140 hectares

North: from the intersection of adm. borders of Solnechnogorsk and Klin
districts with r. Katysh in the northeast direction according to the adm. border of Solnechnogorsk and Klin districts to the intersection with the b.i. tributary of the river Istra, and further down its middle. flow to the village of Golovkovo.

Eastern: from the village of Golovkovo up to the middle. the flow of the river Istra to the village. Sudnikovo, further along the road through the village. Melechkino, Kurilovo, Novaya to the village. Polezhaiki.

South: from the village. Polezheyki along the road through the village. Lopotovo to the Istra reservoir to point 36°48"45.228"E 56°4"35.407"N then in a straight line to point 36°48"23.029"E 56 °4 "22.177" N, then in a northwest direction along the adm. the border of the Istra and Solnechnogorsk districts to the junction with the adm. border of the Klinsky district.

Western: from the junction of adm. borders of the Klin, Istra and Solnechnogorsk districts in the northern direction along the adm. border of Solnechnogorsk and Klin districts to the intersection with the river. Katysh.

Entrepreneurs who love hunting are often concerned with the question: “How to rent hunting grounds?” Where, where, but in Russia there really is plenty to choose from!

The total area of ​​hunting grounds, i.e. the habitat of wild animals, in the Russian Federation is 1.5 billion hectares. The number of species of animals that are allowed to be hunted (hunting resources) is 228. The hunting sector provides a trade turnover of 80–100 billion rubles.

This is more cost-effective than feeding minks and arctic foxes in enclosures. The traditional classification distinguishes between open, forest, swamp and aquatic hunting grounds. Public relations related to their exploitation are regulated by the Federal Law “On Hunting and the Conservation of Hunting Resources...”

Forest resources are considered the most in demand. In their midst, private hunting grounds are most often organized. There are several classifications of them. The first of them (based on the age of the tree stand) uses a ten-year gradation for deciduous trees and a twenty-year gradation for coniferous trees. (classes 1 and 2 – young trees, classes 3 and 4 – middle-aged, then – ripening, ripe and overmature plantings).

The second classification, according to D.N. Danilov, distinguishes between swampy, mossy, floodplain, complex, dry and lichen, rocky forest. This is the most general classifications, in fact there are many more of them.

The legal classification involves three groups: the first - publicly accessible hunting lands (which by law occupy at least 20% of the total), the second - those assigned to individuals and legal entities (in fact, the subject of study in this article), and finally the third - lands, hunting in which are limited or prohibited by the established regime of protected areas.

Those interested in how to rent hunting grounds should be oriented towards the second group.

Selection of land for rent. Pre-planning

It is obvious that an entrepreneur in the field of hunting business chooses for himself a lease of forest land that is promising and potentially profitable, while using hunting management techniques. The activities that it includes are divided into preparatory, field and office.

Of course, you have to “measure seven times” before renting a hunting ground. During preparatory activities, documents of land departments of district executive committees, environmental organizations, veterinary services, and agricultural departments are studied. The point of field work is to qualitatively assess the populations of the leased territory.

The final stage of the assessment process is desk work, during which information from the preparatory and field stages is summarized, forest lands are assessed in monetary terms, the hunting area is territorially planned, shooting standards are carried out, biotechnical and security measures are planned, and optical management maps and diagrams are drawn up. The species abundance of hunting resources, how they are distributed spatially, and the sufficiency of natural food are assessed.

Thus, anyone interested in how to rent hunting grounds cannot do without a huntsman survey of the lands.

How much space should I rent? Opinions, of course, may vary. We believe that the point of view of Doctor of Biological Sciences Alexey Danilkin, who believes that in the temperate zone, an area of ​​ten thousand hectares is suitable for effective regulation of the number of ungulates, deserves attention. A more moderate approach assumes an area of ​​thirty thousand hectares. The cost of such a rental in its moderate version will cost the entrepreneur $600.

Registration of rent

If we answer the question “how to rent hunting grounds” from a legal point of view, then we will, of course, talk about documentary operations. The main stages of registering a lease are acquiring the status of an individual entrepreneur or a legal entity, selecting and leasing specific lands, concluding a hunting agreement with the State Hunting Inspectorate (as a result of winning the auction), and obtaining a state license to use hunting resources.

Licensing will require you to submit an application to the relevant executive body state power, containing information about the future hunting business, as well as the expected quality and time parameters for the use of wildlife (shooting and restoration). It makes sense to draw up such an application based on the results of desk work. In fact, this is a draft business plan for a hunting enterprise.

The option of purchasing hunting grounds as a property is possible, but it is much more expensive, and, accordingly, we can talk about profitability here only over long periods of time. This is more of an investment than a business.

Ways to develop modern hunting

After acquiring the rights of use, the question becomes relevant: how to organize a hunting enterprise? An entrepreneur, having rented a hunting property, not only receives a profit from it, but also purposefully works to ensure that this profit becomes higher.

Of primary importance is the accuracy of determining the number of animals in a given farm at the beginning of the hunting season. This is the cornerstone from which all the main indicators of the hunting management are planned. First of all, they take into account fur animals, as well as large artiodactyls. Their number is estimated at the number of individuals per thousand hectares of land. To do this, first a count is made on sample sites and routes, and then this sample is rounded up for the entire land area.

The criterion for the quality of hunting farms is the productivity coefficient of the land (this indicator is calculated for each animal species).

For good lands it is equal to 250, for those with above-average quality – 165, for average – 100, for below-average quality – 50, for poor – 15. In practice, this means, for example, that in good hunting grounds there are 2.5 times more animals, than in average.

Getting good land for rent is, of course, great luck. And, as a rule, it does not happen. Be realistic, they will rent you at most an average farm.

You have to improve its quality: improve the food supply, increase protective and nesting properties by increasing forest cover and enriching plantings. It may even be necessary to carry out land reclamation in a certain area. Only on the basis of a reliable “feeding rear” will it be possible to further develop the hunting business.

If there is a sufficient amount of feed, additional measures to artificially populate land with animals and birds have a good effect.

The success of the hunting farm depends on the rangers

It is obvious that understanding how to organize a private hunting enterprise must combine not only the approaches of entrepreneurship, but also specific aspects of the huntsman's business. Proper management of hunting should ensure expanded reproduction of animals and birds.

To do this, you need to navigate migrations, know the biology of the main animal species and their ability to repopulate. However, it is incorrect to assume that it is advisable to increase the population of certain game animals above the optimal one. The food supply deteriorates and diseases begin. Such purposeful activity, solving the problem of how to organize a hunting enterprise, is called game management, and it is professionally practiced by rangers.

Some economic issues

Where to start the economic activity of a hunting farm? First, measures should be taken to minimize the number of roads. Ideally, there should be one left leading to forestry, equipped with a checkpoint and barrier.

Extra roads, even if deforestation is being carried out with their help, should be attempted to be closed at legally. And then dig it up and fill it up. This puts a barrier to auto poaching and prevents a certain number of risks in the future. The cost of clearing the road and equipping the post will be about $1000.

Documentary support of the hunt

What documents support the hunting business? Each hunter, in accordance with the Federal Law “On Hunting,” must have in his hands an unlimited hunting license of a unified federal standard issued by the State Hunting Inspectorate. (The limitation for receiving it is an unexpunged or unexpunged conviction for an intentional crime).

The second document the hunter receives is a hunting permit (license). It operates within the boundaries of the hunting authority that issued it. In turn, the hunting management receives voucher (license) forms from the territorial body of the State Hunting Inspectorate.

When hunting licensed animals, that is, catching them by tracking and pursuing them in a state of natural freedom, the hunter, instead of a permit, receives a license from the hunting enterprise or signs an agreement. It should be noted that the validity of both the voucher and the license is limited in time. After use, the forms of these documents are handed over by hunters to the hunting farm. In addition, monitoring compliance with hunting deadlines and recording voucher forms (licenses) is a function of the hunting management.

Organization of hunting farm activities

In general, the organization of the activities of a hunting farm is regulated and carried out by its staff. It is these people, who know how to organize a hunting enterprise, who determine the level of service for hunters visiting the relevant areas. The basic range of services provided includes the organization of accommodation and meals, huntsman services, as well as the processing of trophies.

Additional services significantly increase the profitability of hunting: bathing services, massage, swimming pool, water routes, games (billiards, volleyball, table tennis), organization of picnics with barbecue, areas for sports games, shooting (shooting range), laundry, internet, transport services, ecotourism for hunting.

The overall activities of the business in question are carried out on the basis of a plan that takes into account, in addition to the products obtained directly from the hunting farm itself, also investments in it. It should be noted right away that the first two to three months after its organization, the hunting enterprise works to reach the break-even point. During the same period, entrepreneurs in the field of hunting business are recommended to enter into agreements with third-party organizations in order to increase the flow of funding.

Game staff

The minimum staff of a hunting establishment includes a manager, a huntsman and a cook. The manager plans its development and controls the implementation of this plan. Requirements for it: higher education(preferably special), availability of vehicles, experience in the hotel business is welcome.

He personally negotiates and concludes contracts with partners and clients, organizes work, and supervises personnel.

A huntsman must have a higher specialized or secondary education and two years of work experience in this specialty. It takes into account the number of animals, monitors compliance with hunting rules, carries out security measures and measures to regulate the number of animals. He prepares food, salt licks, arranges feeding areas and feeding troughs, and artificial nests.

The cook, of course, must be a real specialist in preparing game dishes. The success of the hunting business will also depend on his skill. The cook and huntsman should arrange accommodation separately from the guest houses.

Profit

Since the main types of costs have already been mentioned by us in this article, it remains for us to show the areas of profitability of the hunting industry. Each such farm approves its own tariffs for trophies obtained by hunters. Only a small percentage of them is income from the sale of vouchers and licenses (300–1000 rubles).

The main source of income is payment by hunters (clients of the hunting farm) for transport services, services of a huntsman, cook, accommodation, services related to the processing of harvested trophies (salting, smoking, freezing of meat, skinning and processing, intermediary services for making stuffed animals). If the hunting enterprise has a reservoir, then it receives additional income from the rental of fishing equipment and payment for the fish caught (tariffing is based on weight).

Hunting goods business

Hunter entrepreneurs, especially city dwellers, are often interested in what is needed to open a hunting store? To do this, firstly, you should focus on legal norms regulating the sale of weapons. To open a business, you will need to invest about 3 million rubles in it. Documented permission from the local authorities and the local police department and a license to sell weapons will be required. Its price is 150 thousand rubles.

The remaining cost items are typical and apply to all entrepreneurs starting their own business. This includes state and tax registration, registration with a statistical agency, rent, and a security and fire alarm service agreement. And, of course, opening a hunting store involves purchasing equipment ($8-10 thousand) and goods ($5-6 thousand).

Conclusion

Organizing a profitable hunting enterprise is a specific matter. For its successful functioning, it is important to combine the skills of rangers, outstanding organizational skills, enthusiasm for establishing service, and unique cuisine.

Farms that have entered into agreements with large enterprises for the recreation of hunters from among their employees operate successfully and rhythmically. Also promising are the organization of elite hunting, with planned trophies, and the development of eco-tourism.

“Word of mouth” is of great importance: effective hunting, guaranteeing trophies, as well as well-established service are the key to the commercial success of the hunting industry.

Hunting business plan. How to rent hunting grounds - all the most necessary and useful things for business on the website

Hunting grounds are considered to be all field, forest and wetland areas that serve as habitat for animals and birds and can be used for hunting. These lands are leased to the hunting user. In the concept of hunting grounds, two sides should be distinguished: ecological - lands as a habitat for game animals, and hunting - lands as a production area on which the hunting process takes place. Hunting grounds cannot include areas unsuitable for game animals (settlements, roads, quarries). These lands are not leased to the hunting user.

To characterize hunting grounds, categories and types of hunting grounds are distinguished.

Type of hunting grounds – these are areas of territory with similar habitat conditions for game animals (mainly food and protective conditions). With the same intensity of economic use, areas classified as one type of hunting grounds have a homogeneous composition, equal density of animals and birds, and require the same biotechnical measures.

All lands of the branch of the BSTU - “Negorelsky educational and experimental forestry enterprise” (hunting grounds fund) are divided into three main categories:

Forest hunting grounds.

Field hunting grounds.

Wetland hunting areas.

Forest hunting grounds – forested lands of the State Forest Fund (SFF) and other land users. They serve as a habitat for ungulates, the white hare, upland game, some fur-bearing species of game animals and partly the brown hare.

Table 1.2 shows the distribution of hunting grounds by type for the hunting industry as a whole.

Table 1.2 - Distribution of hunting areas by category and type

Name of types of hunting grounds	Housekeeping
Pine young trees
Dry boron
Boron complex
Bor is wet and swampy
Continuation of Table 1.2
Spruce forest is complex
The spruce forest is damp and wet
Birch forest is dry and complex
Birch forest damp and swamp
Osinniki
Broadleaf plantings
Renewed fellings
Total forest
Shrubs
Total field
Wetlands
Raised bogs
Lowland marshes
Transitional swamps
Total wetlands
Total hunting grounds
Unsuitable
Area within approved boundaries

As can be seen from Tables 1.2, forest hunting lands leased occupy more than half of the area of ​​hunting lands (67.5%). Of the forest types, complex boron is the most widely represented (34.1%).

The area of ​​oak forests and other broad-leaved plantations, although small (0.6%), but their participation significantly improves the quality of forest land for ungulates (wild boar, deer, roe deer). It should be noted that oak is often found in other plantings as an admixture, and also in significant quantities in the undergrowth.

The field hunting grounds of the established farm can be characterized by a significant number of fields used in agriculture.

The main wetlands are concentrated in the floodplain of the Ussa and Peretut rivers. There are no large or medium-sized lakes on the farm’s territory.

The reclamation network on the farm is very wide, but it is of little use for the habitat of semi-aquatic mammals and waterfowl, since it does not have a constant water level, is 80% devoid of coastal woody vegetation and is subject to the negative influence of the anthropogenic factor.

Lands unsuitable for hunting animals (settlements, of which there are 28 in the territory being developed, roads, quarries, existing peat mining) occupy 1400 hectares or 6.1% of the total area of ​​the site being constructed.

Division of the hunting area into hunting economic zones.

On the territory of the hunting farm there are 4 hunting economic zones:

rest zone;

zone of predominant hunting of ungulates (seven areas);

zone of predominant hunting for fur-bearing animals, upland, field and waterfowl;

area for training, catching up and (or) competitions hunting dogs, birds of prey and decoy animals (three sections)

The area of ​​the rest zone is 2021.5 hectares or 8.6% of the farm area, which is located in the south of the Negorelsky forestry. By decision of the Uzdensky district executive committee No. 759 in the Litvyansky forestry on June 13, 2008. A biological reserve of local significance, Lenchino, with an area of ​​288.8 hectares (1.1%) was formed. On the territory of which hunting is prohibited, except for hunting in quarters 113 and 133. It is advisable to include the territory of this reserve in the rest zone (except for quarters 113, 133). This means that the total area of ​​the rest zone is 2262.5 hectares (9.7% of the farm area).

The boundaries of the local biological reserve "Lenchino" are as follows: in the north - from the north-western corner of the square. 111 of the Litvyanskoe forestry of the Negorelsky educational and experimental forestry enterprise in a western direction along the northern border of blocks 111, 112 and the northern border of section 2 of the quarter 113 of the Litvyansky forestry of the Negorelsky educational and experimental forestry enterprise; in the east - along the eastern border of divisions 2, 6, 11, 15 of quarter 113, then along the eastern border of quarters 133, 149, 166 of the Litvyanskoye forestry of the Negorelsky educational and experimental forestry enterprise; in the south - along the southern border of block 166, along the western border of blocks 166 and 149; along the southern border of blocks 148 and 147 of the Litvyansk forestry of the Negorelsky educational and experimental forestry enterprise; in the west - along the western border of blocks 147 and 130, along the western border of block 111 of the Litvyanskoye forestry of the Negorelsky educational and experimental forestry enterprise to the starting point.

7 areas of predominant farming of ungulates have been identified. The area of ​​this zone on the farm is 13087.5 hectares or 56.2% of the territory.

Hunting dog training zone (3 areas) with a total area of ​​725 hectares or 3.1% of the territory.

The remaining area is reserved for hunting small game, which amounts to 7215.0 or 31.0% of the territory, where hunting for ungulates can also be carried out.