“In the days of doubt, in the days of painful reflection on the fate of my country, you alone are my support and the support, of the great, mighty, truthful and free Russian language! Were it not for you – they do not fall into despair at the sight of all that is done at home? .. “- Human rights was Ivan Turgenev, saying these words. He knew in fact that in hard times for all things happening around there in our language precise and apt definition.
Photo by Yuri Sarajevo
Especially I love Russian proverbs and saying: «While the thunder clap, the peasant will not cross himself». «Wood cut — chips fly». «From fire — Yes frying pan». «How about a wall peas». The latter is perfect to describe what can be seen in summary of proposals received in part of the public discussion of the draft Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation «On Amending A list of the most valuable wildlife aquatic biological resources belonging to species listed in Red Book of the Russian Federation and (or) protected by international treaties of the Russian Federation for the purposes of Articles 226.1 and 258.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation» (Further — Scroll). Rather, in the part where the position expressed by the Ministry of Russia — federal executive body, the developer of a draft regulatory act.
It seems that «there» nobody listen and they do not hear. AND not hear want. Expressed by scientists and known figures of hunting scope virtually unanimously recognized the project does not in charge of the modern hunting effect, contrary to the existing status of the species, destabilizing the situation, and not afraid of the Soviet clichés, socially harmful. AND even demonstrating incompetence direct authors. AND We receive a response style «a Vaska listens, yes eats».
Some items are puzzling answer: «The draft resolution does not directed and not entail improving the conservation status of sable or musk deer» (here and Further emphasis added. — Ed.). Sorry, but Why, then, there is a list? What in this case is the introduction of criminal responsibility, if not improving the conservation status?
Or: «…Positive dynamics of many species due to hunting resources in including the improvement of the methods of accounting and application of modern technologies». We all remember how recently «improved» SCM.
By the way, since when improving accounting methods promotes the growth of the animals? On I think the authors have to answer It means only the positive dynamics of reporting indicators. But it even raises doubts as available MNR official data in production several times lower than the volume it is legal (within the law) on sale sable auctions.
Read on: «The proposal does not connected with presence or absence of an immediate threat to populations of sable or musk, and with the need to prevent the negative effects of overhunting» (grammar and spelling cited document saved. — Auth.). AT respect musk — Yes, and respect sable — definitely not.
Sable modern conditions — how to say so? — not Can not «overfishing» so there was a threat to its population. The specifics of the process is not It allows. Available land is already «divided», a master remote is too expensive at current prices transport and fuel. What is on Currently in each specific area reached the maximum economically viable level of development of the resource. How many animals fall into dozens, then Hundreds set traps — it is virtually impossible to predict. At the same time try to catch sables «until the last» — senseless idea: costs are not pay off.
With very few exceptions, people are engaged in the fur trade for a living, and not for the love of art. However, even in the absence of malice, not critical for small local population «overfishing» on one or two individuals is almost inevitable.
But also it is not all. The authors actually painted in the publicly that exclusively targeted sounding ordinary Russian hunter, and already the most vulnerable link in the chain.
Hunter, no Indigenous Peoples caught «under Article»In addition to criminal punishment automatically disqualified carrying and possession of weapons, and It means for many years lose the opportunity to go on fishing and feed the family. «Implementing organizations engaged in activities purchase of products hunting, caught animals procedure established by law (for example, the contract of sale) is not It can be regarded as a criminal act». It is deliberately create all possible conditions for the organization «Left» chain — Legalization sable as the production of indigenous peoples?
«Implementation of the hunting of indigenous peoples and persons equated to such peoples, to and musk deer sable without any permits and without paying fees for their use is not illegal hunting and It can not be qualified as a criminal offense». Now it becomes clear why «List of types of addition «musk-deer» and «sable», by According to the developers, «does not require any changes in the law «On the hunt…» and It will not create a corruption-factors for indigenous peoples».
«It should be noted that the draft decree provides for a delayed rate entry into force of the draft decree (from 1 August 2015), as it is planned to introduction into together with other changes aimed at minimize administrative barriers in obtaining rights Sable extraction and and transparency and controlled flow of products of fishing on all stages». Here, obviously, there is a It means that the developers kindly give hunters time for fishing then to nasushit crackers or evacuated from the taiga (in other words, to go to hell).
Although representatives of the Ministry of Natural Resources through the line to assure face by the proponent of Russian hunters that «draft decree does not aimed at production cuts, or the complete prohibition of production sable or musk. The draft resolution is aimed at increased responsibility for smuggling, illegal mining and turnover of these animals and products thereof. The draft resolution does not covers the legal hunting (including mining) and turnover and sable musk deer», It is little consolation.
Future positive changes are indicated only hints. «Dates» same fine in Unlike the hazy rainbow promises a resolution to bring very specific: for murder sometimes get less. From this attitude to people like to cattle, which understands only the whip? What finally overlap oxygen for commercial hunters — This, to be frank, not the most prosperous population category?
Of all the proposals supported by large, received only a review MA And Chechushkova VI Prikhodko, who proposed from musk deer and sable separate supported the need for its inclusion in the list. Separate — It means separated. Therefore let us leave the destiny in kabarozhek the competence of their defense a closer look at the situation with sable.
Clearly, the threat of the number of sable country-wide scale is not. The system of production, procurement and auction sales finally adjusted and stable. Moreover, it is absolutely transparent. Give me one sphere, we have a percentage of legality. So why change something?
Ministry of Russia justifies the planned change that falls under the sable «Agreements international standards on humane trapping of wild animals between the European Community, Canada and the Russian Federation (AIHTS; hereinafter — Agreement). It is not directed to protection sable, muskrat, raccoon dog, along with other types of fur-bearing animals, fauna and Eurasia North America.
It only regulates the methods of getting listed in It common species of animals to ensure unhindered access of products derived from them on the international market. Permanent link to Statement like trying to hide behind the fig leaf. Excuse the pun, but turns sucks too.
By the way, I draw the attention of readers that all the past «hunting» projects and Resolution somehow inexplicably fell to While Duma sent to full strength holiday. What there’s someone deliberately trying to «circumvent» not Only industry professionals, but and legislative power.
Elizabeth Tselyhova29 August 2014 at 00:00