Village of the Russian Non-Black Earth Region. 1960-1980s

annotation

Keywords

Time scale - century

Bibliographic description:
Denisova L.N. Village of the Russian Non-Black Earth Region. 1960-1980s // Proceedings of the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 1997-1998 Vol. 2 / Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Russian History; resp. ed. A.N.Sakharov. M.: IRI RAS, 2000. pp. 426-478.

Article text

L.N. Denisova

VILLAGE OF THE RUSSIAN NON-BLACK EARTH REGION. 1960—1980s

For Russia, the agrarian question has been a leading one throughout its centuries-old history. All major socio-economic transformations in the country depended on his decision, and tragic pages in the history of the state were associated with it. The study of problems of agrarian history is relevant for all periods of the country's development. Among modern ones, agricultural policy has come to the fore, since the survival of the state is connected with it.

The historical path of the post-war village is difficult and contradictory. It was accompanied by economic ruin and desolation of the village. Rural life has long become unattractive. Political and economic campaigns to rebuild it did not bring the expected results. The village was poor. Non-Black Earth region due to its geographical location within the state and natural and climatic features during the 19th-20th centuries. turned out to be the most affected region in Russian history. It includes the Northern, Central, Northwestern, Volga-Vyatka economic regions, up to 30 regions and national autonomies in total. The non-chernozem region is the original Russian lands, an area of ​​traditional Russian statehood and culture. This is an area of ​​difficult natural and climatic conditions. From here, raw materials and human resources were largely drawn for all construction projects in the North, the Baltic republics, Siberia and the Far East, personnel for the extractive industries of the country's economy, the recovery of virgin lands and the development of cities. This is where government policies have had dire consequences. The first boarded-up houses, dying and dead villages appeared in the Non-Black Earth Region. The loss of this area from Russian history is not only the loss of land, the abandonment of settlements and the transformation of the region into abandoned virgin lands, but also the loss of national relics and Russian cultural heritage.

The beginning of the desolation of the Non-Black Earth Region, especially the North, dates back to the 19th century. In the pre-revolutionary period, this process was noticeable and was caused by the fact that Russia had the opportunity to develop the lands of the south and southeast. Wars, revolution, industrialization, collectivization - all these shocks had a strong impact on the state of the economy and the size of the rural population. The redistribution of labor in favor of industry and the city devastated the countryside. The situation in the Non-Black Earth Region has worsened due to the development of virgin and fallow lands. Having developed 45 million hectares of virgin land, more than 13 million hectares at the same time (1954-1959) were taken out of circulation in the European part of the country. In the USSR as a whole, the pre-war level of grain production was reached by 1955, in the Non-Black Earth Region - by 1967.

The unjustified liquidation of so-called unpromising villages caused enormous damage to the region. In many villages there is no working-age population left. Migration to the Non-Black Earth Region was generated by the increasing backwardness of the village in economic, social, and cultural terms.

Irrational farming, violation of traditionally established management systems, and land reclamation measures have brought the Non-Black Earth Region to the brink of an environmental crisis. By the end of the 20th century. the region acquires the status of Non-Chernozem Chernobyl.

The shocks experienced by the village could not but affect the spiritual and moral foundations of its population. The destruction of the traditional way of life and orientation led to indifference and apathy not only to public life, but also to one’s own destiny. Interest in the rural way of life has also been lost. The departure of the population from places of traditional residence leads to desolation and loss of monuments of national culture.

The experience of the Russian village again and again brings us back to understanding the path we have traveled.

The basis for the development of sectors of the national economy is the material and technical base, the power supply of the people working in it. For 1918-1987 620.2 billion rubles were allocated for agriculture, or 42 rubles. per 1 hectare of sown area. The share of capital investments in agriculture was in 1918-1949. - less than 1% of national income. In subsequent years - less than 5%, in the 70-80s. - 5.4-7.2%. However, these capital investments were not aimed at improving the fertility of the land and technologies for growing crops: 40% of the allocations went to the purchase of expensive and often low-quality machinery and equipment, up to 20% - to water management construction and up to 10% - to the construction and equipment of farms and livestock complexes.

Since the 60s. The collective farm economy was increasingly based on the use of the state budget. Since 1971, comprehensive planning of capital investments in the construction of industrial, residential, cultural and other facilities began. The possibilities for government lending and the use of long-term and short-term loans for special purposes were expanded. In the early 70s. Almost all collective farms switched to direct bank lending. For the 60-70s. long-term loans for capital investments of collective farms amounted to a huge amount - 42 billion rubles, they were supposed to be used for the industrialization of labor, specialization and concentration of production. In practice, loans were used to repay overdue payments, build unplanned facilities, make numerous payments not related to the direct activities of collective farms, and pay salaries. The result was a high level of debt on farms. In some of them, debts significantly exceeded the cost of fixed and working capital. The total credit debt of agricultural enterprises to the state amounted to by the end of the 80s. RUB 230 billion

Due to the difficult economic situation of collective and state farms, large amounts of debt were periodically written off from them: in 1965 - 2 billion rubles, in 1975 - 3.5, in 1978 - 7.3, in 1982 - 9, 7 billion rubles. The funds allocated by the state were reduced. At the same time, there was a shortfall in their receipt by farms, their use for other purposes than their intended purpose, and their seizure for various organizations and societies. Using these funds, clubs and libraries were built, district centers were improved, and contributions from numerous voluntary societies were paid; Some of the buildings built by the farms were transferred free of charge to other organizations and institutions.

The economy of the Non-Black Earth Region developed in the context of the country's agrarian system. Billions recorded by statistics during the 60-80s. accounted for a little more than 30% of Russia's capital investments in agriculture. Taking into account inflation, shortfalls in local funds, and the gratuitous transfer of some of them back to the state, there was a reduction in investment in agriculture in the Non-Black Earth Region. In 1989 alone, 40 million rubles were withdrawn from the Non-Black Earth Committee. Compared to the Baltic republics, material government expenditures in the region were 2, and compared to Belarus - 1.5 times less.

The village was waiting for modernly equipped complexes that could change the life of a collective or state farm, and, therefore, give people stable, well-paid work. But every year in all regions of the Non-Black Earth Region, construction plans did not correspond to the capabilities of construction organizations, and the commissioning dates were postponed. In the 60s the level of integrated mechanization in dairy farming was less than 10%; in the 70s. - 40%, in the 80s. - 67%, on pig farms, respectively: 25, 67, 76%, on poultry farms - 17, 73, 91%. Among the farms and complexes there were many where the equipment and mechanisms did not work completely or partially, mechanization remained only in the reports. Only a third of cattle farms and half of pig farms were transferred to mechanized operation. In livestock farming in the 80s. up to 70% of workers were engaged in manual labor. Mostly they were women. From the collective farm “Path of Ilyich” in the Kozelsky district of the Kaluga region, workers wrote to the newspaper “Rural Life” (1964): “We do not have days off or vacations. It is very difficult to work like this, because a person cannot work all year round and not have a single day of rest. The car is stopped for repairs, but we don’t have hands of steel. We deliver the feed ourselves and milk it by hand. Our board doesn’t have enough time to repair the watering troughs in a year, so we have to water the cows ourselves.”

Mechanization slowly entered working life. The financial backwardness of many farms, high prices for equipment and spare parts did not allow them to re-equip production in a short time.

During 1958-1960. equipment that belonged to MTS was sold to collective farms. The costs of its acquisition (over 32 billion rubles) placed a heavy burden on farms. Many collective farms have been paying off debt for decades. The state subsequently wrote off these debts. The acquired equipment made it possible to almost completely mechanize the rise of steam, plowing, sowing and harvesting of grain, sowing of sunflowers, sugar beets, and fiber flax.

The technical equipment of agriculture determines the level of development of the industry. Up to 40% of the farm's funds were spent on its purchase. However, by the end of the 80s. the village experienced a shortage of technical means. 40% of Russia's tractor fleet, a fifth of grain harvesters, a third of forage harvesters, three-quarters of potato harvesters, and all flax harvesters were concentrated in the Non-Black Earth Region. For all technical means, the regulatory need was not satisfied. In the 80s The demand of Non-Black Earth farms for tractors was satisfied by 80%, grain combines - by two-thirds, potato harvesters - by four-fifths, plows - by two-thirds, beet harvesters - by 60%. Prices for industrial products for rural areas remained high, and the sale of agricultural products did not make it possible to replenish the vehicle fleet. Only for 1965-1985. prices for means of production and other types of industrial products for agriculture increased by 2-5 times, and purchase prices for agricultural products delivered to the state by approximately 2 times. By raising prices, state enterprises covered their costs at the expense of collective and state farms. The total amount of unjustified increases in prices for the main types of industrial means of production and production and technical services for the country's agriculture for 1984-1985. amounted to more than 18 billion rubles.

Collective and state farms in the Non-Black Earth Region needed to increase and update their fleet of vehicles. For the 60-80s. the level of mechanization increased slowly. By the end of the 80s. only half of the potato area was harvested by machine, vegetable planting was mechanized by four-fifths, and harvesting by a quarter. At the end of the 70s. only a third of workers on collective and state farms worked with the help of machines and mechanisms by the end of the 80s. - less than half. The rest worked manually. (For comparison: in the USA, per 1 thousand hectares of arable land there were three times more tractors and 2.4 times more grain harvesters; the total energy capacity per 1 average annual worker in the Non-Black Earth Region was a third of this figure in the USA). The insufficiency of capital investments directed by the state in agriculture did not allow maintaining a high technical level of farms, which led to a decrease in the growth rate of agricultural products. In most Western countries, economic support for farmers reached 40-50% of the cost of commercial agricultural products, and in Japan and Finland - 80%. In Germany, rural subsidies accounted for 12.7% of gross domestic product, in Denmark - 17.7, in the UK - 27.2, and in Russia - only 4.8%. The Russian non-black earth village bore the main burden of material costs. Overcoming the backlog without government support turned out to be unrealistic. The agricultural problem worsened.

Collective and state farms in the Non-Black Earth Region were significantly less well supplied with personnel than farms in other regions of the republic. If the average for Russian farms in the 70s. for every 100 tractors there were 133 tractor driver-drivers, then in the Non-Black Earth Zone - 116. A third of the collective and state farms in the region had less than one operator per tractor, and in the Arkhangelsk, Kalinin, and Kostroma regions, 60-70% of farms. For 1971-1973 the number of tractor drivers in the Non-Black Earth Region increased by only 9 thousand people, but 247 thousand were trained. As a result, 40% of farms had idle equipment. The largest number of such collective and state farms was in the Kalinin region (80%), Smolensk (74), Novgorod (70), Pskov (70), Tula (60), Kaluga (50). Many farms were not provided with personnel to work even one shift. The fact of incomplete use of funds due to a lack of personnel, especially qualified personnel, was stated. At the same time, their number was decreasing. In the early 80s. the number of regions and autonomies of the Non-Black Earth Region that did not have machine operators for each tractor reached 15; in the Ryazan region there were 85 tractor drivers per 100 tractors, in the Kalinin region - 83, in the Tula region - 81, in the Smolensk and Pskov regions - 80 each. A sixth of the cadre of machine operators in the 80s. annually left collective farms and state farms. The prospect of a renewed life was so distant that the villagers preferred any job in another region.

Vocational schools, which became secondary schools in 1969, annually graduated thousands of general mechanics. In the 70-80s. SPTU in Russia trained 700-800 thousand tractor drivers, drivers, and combine operators per year. Only a few of them connected their lives with the village. In fact, medium-sized vocational schools trained specialists in mass professions for the city. The shortage of personnel in agricultural production remained high. However, they could be interchanged, since the level of mechanization remained low and training was short-term. The most difficult problem is training specialists. Agricultural universities and technical schools trained thousands of them. But there were few people willing to work in the village. Only 60% of engineers and technicians had higher and secondary specialized education, the remaining positions were occupied by practitioners. The middle management was also mainly headed by workers who did not have special education. The prestige of agricultural professions remained low. Surveys of rural residents showed that the majority did not want their children to choose their parents’ profession. “We have been poking around in soil and manure all our lives, let at least you have a cultural life”; “We have been trampling mud all our lives in the village, knowing nothing but work, so at least you can live like a human being” (from the statements of parents in the Kirov region). In the village, urban registration was highly valued, believing that it served as a means to improve the conditions of study, work, and life.

The state transferred the problems of village life to collective and state farms. In difficult production conditions, some farms achieved high results. These are collective farms headed by P.A. Malinina, V.A. Starodubtsev, M.G. Vagin, G.I. Sanin, A.V. Gorshkov and others. A considerable number of farms maintained an acceptable standard of work and living for their workers. But the majority remained unprofitable with low production and cultural indicators, with virtually no qualified personnel. They lived with the prospect of a renewed life. But she moved away.

The Russian Non-Black Earth Region is one of the main regions that produced agricultural products for the republic. 5 thousand collective farms and 5 thousand state farms had 1/5 of Russia’s farmland at their disposal. To improve and expand them, reclamation work was carried out. The pace was slow, the use of new lands was ineffective. By the mid-80s. in the Non-Black Earth Region less than 1/10 of the farmland was drained (in the Baltic states over 1/2, Belarus - 1/4). A significant part of the newly introduced lands was not used: in the Non-Black Earth Region up to 40%. At the same time, vast areas of previously used land fell out of use and were overgrown with bushes. At the same time, an unreasonably large amount of land, including arable land, was allocated for industrial construction. Widespread reclamation measures turned out to be disastrous.

The improvement of the fertility of agricultural land was facilitated by the balanced application of organic and mineral fertilizers to the soil. In the Non-Black Earth Region, over 60% of arable soils were classified as low phosphorus soils, and about 40% were classified as low potassium soils. Over 32 million hectares of soil in the region (80%) needed liming. There was a shortage of fertilizers, limestone, and equipment everywhere. The situation was aggravated by the abuse of pesticides and herbicides. In 1965, a letter was sent to “Rural Life” from the village of Bylino, Zagorsky district, Moscow region: “Recently, a forest was pollinated from an airplane with pesticides. The air was all poisoned, there was nothing to breathe. All the plants in the residents' gardens have died, vegetables and potatoes are drying out. The adjacent pastures were poisoned, and cattle were prohibited from being driven. Water bodies are also poisoned. Peas on an area of ​​20 hectares lay down and withered, 5 hectares of beets in the village of Sadovnikov died. Now it’s time to make hay and we are afraid that we will poison the livestock with this feed in the winter.” Instead of intensifying production, a number of regions found themselves on the brink of an economic crisis. Most of the Non-Black Earth lands did not exceed 40 on the 100-point system for calculating soil fertility. This meant that the land was on the verge of complete depletion.

After 1965, farmland decreased and by the end of the 80s amounted to . about 45 million hectares, or 20% of the agricultural area of ​​Russia. In the structure of farmland, arable land accounted for more than 2/3, 1/3 was natural forage land - pastures and hayfields. The leading place in the structure of sown areas belonged to grain crops - up to 50%, the second place was occupied by fodder crops - 40%, then the area under potatoes - 7% and fiber flax - 2%; They grew hemp and sugar beets. Vegetables occupied less than 1% of the sown area, a small part was given over to perennial fruit and berry plantings. Among the grains, rye, wheat, barley, oats and buckwheat predominated. The level of seed production was low. Less than 80% of grain areas were sown with high-grade seeds. Agricultural yields throughout the 60-80s. remained low; by the end of the 80s. for grains it amounted to 13 centners per hectare, for fiber flax it was unchanged - 2.7, for potatoes it decreased to 116 centners per hectare. In the 60-80s. a third of the cattle, pigs, and up to 10% of sheep and goats were concentrated in the Non-Black Earth Region. The number of cows was recorded at 7 million, sheep and goats decreased by half (5.7 million), pigs increased slightly, amounting to 11 million heads. Livestock productivity remained low. By the end of the 80s. Milk yield per cow was less than 3 thousand kg, wool shearing was 2.5 kg per sheep. Only the egg production of laying hens increased: in the 60-80s. 1.7 times and amounted to 248 pieces. Low rates were associated with poor care and insufficient amounts of complete feed for livestock. Farms were provided with them by 50-80%. A third of the herd of cows are dry cows. There were frequent cases of animal deaths. Statistics recorded that in the second half of the 80s. On average, 1.9 million heads of cattle, 4.5 million pigs, and 5.2 million sheep and goats died in Russia per year.

The country's growing needs for agricultural products were supposed to be satisfied through inter-farm cooperation, concentration and specialization of production in large farms. This course began to be implemented with particular persistence since 1976. Industrial methods of production based on complex mechanization, automation and scientific organization of labor gave both high capital productivity and efficiency. Good indicators were noted at the livestock complexes “Shchapovo”, “Kuznetsovsky”, “Voronovo”, “Ramenskoye” of the Moscow region, named after. 50th anniversary of the USSR Gorky, “New World” and “Pashsky” Leningrad, “Sotnitsinsky” Ryazan, “Livensky” and “Mtsensky” Oryol, “Lyubomirsky” Vologda region. These are the few and the best farms. But they did not determine the level of livestock farming in the Non-Black Earth Region. Given the scattered and small number of settlements, the lack of communications and, most importantly, the financial poverty of collective and state farms, the idea of ​​a large production complex turned out to be unfeasible. For the overwhelming majority of farms, it was more profitable to create small, well-equipped farms that could be maintained at the proper financial and personnel level. But the desire to quickly transform the region into a specialized livestock-raising center led to the liquidation of small farms, long-term construction of large ones, and in general to a decrease in returns from this industry. With 1/5 of Russia's agricultural land during the 60-80s. In the Non-Black Earth Region, approximately a third of the gross output of crop and livestock production was produced. A sixth of grain crops, half of potatoes, up to 40% of vegetables, and almost all flax products were grown here. The non-Black Earth region provided a third of the meat, up to 40% of the milk and eggs produced in Russia. It accounted for 15% of the gross agricultural output of the former USSR: 13% of grain, half of flax fiber, a third of potatoes, a fifth of vegetables, 16% of meat, a fifth of milk and a quarter of eggs. The share of this region in the total capacity of the country's food industry enterprises was: for meat production - 33%, whole milk products - 48, cheese - 33, alcohol from food raw materials - 40, starch - 66%. The Russian Non-Black Earth Region remained a large agricultural region, one of the main suppliers of agricultural products for the country. However, low field productivity and low livestock productivity hampered the implementation of state targets. In the region, annual failure to fulfill state procurement plans was recorded. When forming them, the real situation in the region was not taken into account. Government purchases in all categories of farms for the 60-80s. increased slightly in grain (up to 3.5 million tons), vegetables (up to 2.6 million tons), livestock products (milk - up to 3.7 million tons, livestock, poultry - up to 3.7 million tons, eggs - tsam - up to 16 billion units), and almost halved in wool (5.3 thousand tons) and flax products (119 thousand tons); Potato purchases remained unchanged (4.5 million tons). The state purchased from the Non-Black Earth Region 11% of grain, 94% of flax and fiber, 64% of potatoes, 36% of vegetables, 32% of livestock and poultry, 39% of milk, 47% of eggs, 5% of wool.”

Personal subsidiary plots played a significant role in rural life. They provided the peasant family with basic food products, and often sold part of the products, replenishing the family budget. Private farms of villagers took part in state purchases of agricultural products. However, the attack on personal farmsteads led to a reduction in the area of ​​personal plots, a reduction in the number of livestock and poultry, often leading to the complete elimination of private farming. Only for 1958-1963. the size of farmland used by citizens decreased by 20% (600 thousand hectares). The lack of feed, the possibility of haymaking and grazing, and high taxes led to the fact that up to half of the families in the village did not keep a cow in their farmstead, and a third did not keep any livestock at all. Many families even gave up raising poultry. This meant that a third of the rural population had to be provided with food through the public and government sectors. The country's food problem was getting worse. In the Non-Black Earth Region by the mid-60s. personal farms provided 46% of the gross production of meat, 41% of milk, 61% of eggs, 66% of wool.

In the subsequent period, the personal farmstead of rural residents continued to play a significant role in the production of agricultural products and government procurement.

The public sector did not fully satisfy the food needs of the country's population. Private farming remained an important source of solving the food problem. In 1990, it produced about 30% of meat, milk, eggs, vegetables, 65% of potatoes, 54% of fruits and berries, 26% of wool. Personal subsidiary farming used 10 million hectares of land, and it provided about 25% of gross output and more than 10% of marketable products in the agricultural sector of the economy. In addition, in the country, 12 million families of workers and employees had collective gardens with an area of ​​more than 800 thousand hectares, and 6.7 million families had collective gardens with an area of ​​500 thousand hectares.

Of course, food production and the development of private farming is primarily a rural problem. For city dwellers, work in the garden plot was primarily of a social and health nature and, to a lesser extent, was an additional source of income. For villagers, private farming occupied a leading place in their livelihoods, including as a source of additional income.

In 1990, the income of collective farmer families from personal farming in the country as a whole amounted to 1,808 rubles. per year, or 25% of the total annual family income (in some regions up to 40%). The same figure for retired collective farmers is 41% of annual income, while for workers and employees in cities it is 3.1%. The financial situation of the peasants was largely connected with their personal farmstead. The villagers not only provided themselves with food, but also sold part of the products to state, cooperative organizations, and on the collective farm market.

In 1990, the collective farmers' subsidiary farm produced 3 times more potatoes than was used for personal consumption, vegetables and melons by 20%, fruits and berries by 44%, and milk by 10%. Egg production fully covered personal consumption, and meat production - by 73%.

Having only 2% of agricultural land, and, as a rule, of worse quality, without receiving government investment, limits on material resources, land reclamation, subsidiary plots provided 25% of the total gross agricultural output in 1990.

On a personal farmstead, labor, almost completely devoid of mechanization, was 2 times more productive than on collective and state farms. The productivity of a hectare of personal land was 20 times higher than on state farms, 13 times higher than on collective farms. These are indicators of a desperate economy, behind which lies the hard work of the whole family. Such productivity of exclusively manual labor, achieved at the expense of time and the full dedication of the entire family, cannot radically solve the food problem. At the same time, let us take into account that all this “productivity” is achieved after a working day in the public economy. What is the true price of such a harvest?!

According to data for 1993, the individual sector as a whole had 20% of arable land and produced up to 80% of potatoes, up to 55% of vegetables, up to 36% of meat, and up to 31% of milk. As the famous agricultural scientist V.P. Danilov writes, analyzing the course of reforms of the 90s, “the spread of small individual production is in fact the result - and evidence! - destruction of large-scale commodity production and the general crisis in agriculture, rolling it back to the family-consumer level. Agrarian reform is intended to ensure not a return to small and minute subsistence production, but a movement forward - to modern forms of large-scale production, capable of dynamic development in the constantly changing production and technical conditions of the late 20th - early 21st centuries." .

The procurement system had a negative impact on the development of production. It developed in the 30s. and with minor changes continued to function until the end of the 80s. Agricultural enterprises were informed of plans for production and procurement of products, often without taking into account their real capabilities, which were obviously impossible for many farms. The state, by all means available to it, forced the economy to fulfill procurement plans as much as possible. Collective farms and state farms often gave away almost all of their harvests. But after completing the procurement, in order to preserve the livestock population and have seed funds, in the fall they turned to the state for “help” and bought their own products at exorbitant prices.

Attempts were made to overcome the existing procurement system. In 1958, the system of compulsory supplies was replaced by a single form of state procurement - the purchase of agricultural products at set prices. This opened up the possibility of the emergence of new relations between collective farms and the state. However, during the Seven Year Plan, this idea was not realized. The March 1965 Plenum of the Party Central Committee decided to establish firm plans for the purchase of agricultural products for the five-year period. But in practice, these plans were overgrown with additional tasks that were arbitrarily allocated to farms. The decision of the May 1982 Plenum of the Party Central Committee on the transition to a unified procurement plan for the five-year period also remained a paper directive. The practice of levying procurement remained the same, and prices for agricultural products were low. The cost of production of basic products on collective farms grew at a much faster pace than the purchase prices for them. In 1980, the products sold to the state by collective farmers brought a loss: milk - 9%, cattle - 13%, pigs - 20%, poultry - 14%, wool - 11%. This was one of the reasons for the economic decline of agricultural enterprises. At the end of the 80s. a fifth of collective and state farms in the Non-Black Earth Region were unprofitable. Their debt to the state amounted to 335 million rubles. Every third farm brought losses of almost 200 thousand rubles. in year .

The shortage of agricultural products was aggravated by its huge losses all the way from the field to the consumer: losses of grain amounted to 20%, potatoes and vegetables - about 40%, meat - up to 1 million tons. It was officially recognized that up to a third of the grown crop for various reasons it did not reach the consumer.

Throughout the 60-80s. Most farms in the Non-Black Earth Region had low production indicators. Life was getting worse. The villages were emptying. At the end of the 50s. 180 thousand villages and hamlets were scattered throughout the Non-Black Earth Region. More than 70% of them had up to 100 inhabitants. In a quarter of the settlements lived from 100 to 500 people. and about 4% of villages had over 500 inhabitants. Given the small number and scattering of villages, another trend was recorded - the emergence of a special category of rural settlements that had no or practically no working population. Demographers argued that in the future the overwhelming number of such settlements will be among the settlements deprived of a working-age population.

One of the ways to achieve agrarian prosperity was seen in the consolidation of collective and state farms. This process was most intense in 1957-1960, when up to 10 thousand previously consolidated collective farms disappeared annually. As a result, the average crop size of many farms has increased by 3 or more times. Giant unmanaged collective and state farms were created, numbering 120 villages each and covering up to 30 thousand hectares of crops. In the conditions of the Non-Black Earth Region, this further aggravated agricultural problems.

An analysis of the activities of state farms, carried out in the mid-60s, led to the conclusion that “the inverse relationship between the intensity and size of farms ... is so constant and ubiquitous that it appears as a certain pattern. It will manifest itself as long as farms are not able, according to their material capabilities, to conduct production equally intensively over the entire land area.” They did not have such opportunities in those years. However, there are also more radical points of view. V.P. Popov writes: “The real reason for the consolidation of small collective farms, which entailed the resettlement of “unpromising” villages and their abandonment, was the desire of the authorities to organize another radical change in the village way of life, to destroy the remains of the rural community, to unify the village and its people, to force them to continue to dutifully work on collective farms, to further centralize the management of the peasants...” and as a result of this policy, “the unification of the “poor” with the “rich” led to intra-village discord and increased social tension , did not increase the efficiency of collective farm production. Unable to resist the bad will of the “transformers,” the peasants fled even more densely from the village.” According to V.P. Popov’s calculations, “the absolute number of those who fled from the village for 1960-1964. almost 7 million people.” .

Simultaneously with the consolidation of farms, the transformation of collective farms into state farms was carried out. It began to be implemented in the second half of the 50s. First of all, economically weak farms underwent reorganization. For the 50-70s. In Russia, over 17 thousand collective farms were transformed into state farms. Regions appeared (for example, Leningrad), where agricultural production was only on state farms. The reorganization of a significant number of collective farms into state farms and the consolidation of farms led to the fact that the workplaces of most enterprises were scattered throughout the production area. Thus, “objectively” the question arose about the construction of large central estates and the “unpromising” of the overwhelming number of villages. To solve the problems, a state policy began to be vigorously pursued to rationalize resettlement: the resettlement of residents from the so-called unpromising villages to large settlements. By 1970, the total number of villages and hamlets had decreased from 180 thousand to 142 thousand; the majority of settlements (64%) that ceased to exist were in settlements with up to 100 inhabitants. The focus on large urban-type settlements was in conflict with the conditions of traditional agricultural production, which, given the large spaces and underdeveloped transport network, required dispersal and proximity to the land. As a result, over 40% of villages almost completely lost their production functions. The state saw one of the reasons for economic difficulties in the inability to organize the production process due to the scattering of villages on the territory of one farm and their small number. In the subsequent period, the policy of eliminating small villages intensified even more. Vasily Belov called the fight against so-called unpromising villages a “crime against the peasantry.” “In the Vologda region,” he wrote in Pravda, “several thousand villages ceased to exist due to lack of prospects. And in the North-West - tens of thousands. Let’s think about it: out of 140 thousand non-black-earth villages, only 29 thousand were supposed to be left.”

Government Decree of 1974 on Non-Black Earth for 1976-1980. 170 thousand families from small villages and villages were identified for resettlement. In Russia, only about 43 thousand rural settlements were identified as promising and planned for further development.

At the end of the 70s. in the Non-Black Earth Region, a third of the administrative districts numbered 200-500 or more settlements. In the Vologda, Yaroslavl and Kalinin regions, on average there were over 300 of them per district. In the Pskov region, more than half of the districts had over 500 villages and hamlets.

The non-chernozem village remained the smallest in Russia (122 people versus 240 on average for the republic). The share of the smallest settlements (up to 50 inhabitants) was about 60% of rural settlements. In the Vologda, Novgorod, Kirov, and Yaroslavl regions, the share of these settlements exceeded 70% of their number. Subsequently, this process continued.

Due to limited resources, a radical transformation of promising villages was possible in 15-20 years or more. Settlement throughout the Non-Black Earth Region could last at least 50 years. Awareness of the negative consequences led to the refusal to divide settlements into promising and unpromising and from planning resettlement: in 1980, such a decision was made by Gosgrazhdanstroy.

Only in the 60-70s. About one third of the rural settlements of the Non-Black Earth Region disappeared, which amounted to about 60 thousand villages, the area of ​​arable land since the 30s. decreased by 10%, and hayfields and pastures - almost 2 times. In the Pskov region, there were 18 thousand houses abandoned by their residents. Under them, more than 15 thousand hectares of fertile land, including garden land, were empty. In the Kalinin region in 1988 there were 14 thousand empty houses. For the 70-80s. the rural population decreased here from 834 thousand people to 483 thousand, or almost half. Over 15 years, the area of ​​agricultural land has decreased by 16%. In the Novgorod region, a strict pattern was in effect for a century: a decrease in population by 1% always led to the loss of 1.1% of land.

In the second half of the 80s. In rural Russia, 490 thousand residential buildings were empty, the total area of ​​uncultivated land reached 200 thousand hectares. To restore the balance of land use for 1958-1983. In the Moscow region alone, 25 thousand hectares of new land were allocated for recreation, of which almost 10 thousand hectares are agricultural lands.

The townspeople energetically began to acquire village houses. This was officially recognized as one of the ways to preserve the housing stock of the rural hinterland.

Three types of settlements have formed in the Non-Black Earth Region. These are central villages of farms, agro-industrial complexes and associations. They made up less than 10% of all populated areas and concentrated more than a third of the population. These villages were connected by a network of well-maintained roads to city and regional centers. Living conditions there were the most favorable. Next are points of concentration of individual production and service facilities that worked in conjunction with farm centers. These included the villages of departments and brigades. In the absence of well-maintained paved roads connecting them with the city and the central estate, living conditions there were very unfavorable. The third type is points without production facilities with partial or complete absence of service institutions. Living conditions here were the most unfavorable, but a fifth of the villagers lived here. In areas with a fragmented network of populated areas, there were over half of such villages. More than 85% of the villagers in this region in 1990 lived in villages with fewer than 200 people. More than half of them lived in settlements with fewer than 50 inhabitants. A fifth of the villagers lived in villages and hamlets numbering from 51 to 100 people. and only 15% - from 101 to 200 inhabitants.

The Russian Non-Black Earth Region is characterized by a high degree of urbanization. In the 70s the rural population accounted for 25% of the population of the region (in the country - 40%, in Russia - 33%), and the share of the agricultural population directly involved in agricultural work was relatively small: in the North-Western region - 30 %, Central - 38, Volga-Vyatka - 50%. The urban population increased annually by 750 thousand people. and amounted to 90% in a number of regions.

For the 60-80s. The rural population decreased by a third. In 1989, 64 million people lived in the Non-Black Earth Region, 40% of the population of Russia, 32% of the villagers of the republic. 80% of the population are city dwellers. More than two-thirds of new townspeople in the recent past are villagers. Urbanization of the Non-Black Earth Region opened up opportunities for villagers to find employment in cities while remaining village residents. The number of commuter migrants turned out to be significant. Standardized working hours, higher wages and, most importantly, non-agricultural work were preferable. As a rule, commuter migrants worked in industry (up to 70%) and were employed in less skilled labor than city dwellers. Over 30% worked as general workers, junior service personnel, 14% as highly qualified industrial workers, 13% as forestry and timber industry workers, 10% as non-production employees. Pendulum migration made it possible to partially satisfy the city's needs for unskilled and low-skilled labor without territorial expansion of the city.

For several decades, the rural population of the Non-Black Earth Region has been sending labor to industrial centers more intensively than in other areas. For the 60s and 70s. The region's villages accounted for about 30% of the migration increase in the country's cities, while the share of the Non-Black Earth Region in the rural population did not exceed 15%.

In the 60-70s. Russia's rural areas fully provided for the migration growth of their own cities and, in addition, a fifth of the migration growth of the urban population in other republics. Intensive outflow from villages created a labor shortage in the non-Black Earth agriculture. Here, a relationship was discovered between the intensity of rural migration and such indicators as the share of the agricultural population in the entire rural population and the labor load per collective farmer per year. In general, regions with a significant agricultural population and high labor loads (Novgorod, Smolensk, Vologda, etc.) were also characterized by a higher outflow of population.

Demographers have recorded: since the early 70s. Russia's population is not reproducing itself. The forecast came true. In the 70s and 80s. The rural population of the Non-Black Earth Region decreased by 1.5%, the number of people employed in agricultural production - by 1.3-2.5%, and the number of women working on collective and state farms - by 5%.

In the 80s There is a tendency to reduce the absolute and relative size of migration of the rural population of the Non-Black Earth Region. For 1981-85. the number of villagers decreased by 844 thousand, while in 1966-70. by 2 million 162 thousand. But this does not indicate positive changes in the village, but rather the fact that as a result of the previous large-scale outflow of people of mobile age and the sharp aging of the village, in many areas and farms there was no one to migrate. For the 80s The rural population of Russia decreased by 8%, the Central Black Sea region - by 18%, the Volga-Vyatka region - by 17%, the Central region - by 15%, the Volga region - by 12%. In Russia at the beginning of 1991 there were 38.7 million rural residents. Population growth in the republic was 0.6% annually—12th in the country. In a number of regions of Russia, the number of deaths exceeded the number of births. Moreover, if in 1987 natural population decline was observed only in the Pskov, Kalinin and Tula regions, then by 1990 a third of the republic’s population, living in 21 territories, belonged to this category. These are all areas of the North-Western, Central and Central Chernozem regions (except for the Bryansk and Belgorod regions) and the Gorky region. In the rural areas of most territories, natural decline has been recorded since the mid-70s, and in the Pskov and Kalinin regions - a quarter of a century. Over the past 30 years after the All-Union Census of 1959, the rural population of the country decreased by 10%, and in the Non-Black Earth Region by 42%. In many areas of the Non-Black Earth Strip, the number of inhabitants has decreased by half or more. In the Kirov region by 1990, 40% of the number of residents in 1959 remained, in the Pskov region - 45, in the Kostroma and Yaroslavl regions - 46 each, in the Kalininskaya and Smolensk regions - 47 each, in the Gorky region - 49, in the Novgorod region - 50 %. The most able-bodied and educated part of the population rushed to the cities. Cities attracted people. The city was and remains not only a center of industry, a consumer of labor, but it is the center of civilization. This is a cultural magnet where you can get an education and become familiar with cultural values. The city is a source of progress and its development requires replenishment. But this process is very contradictory. On the one hand, the development of cities is a progressive process, but, on the other hand, it leads to the devastation of the countryside, leads to the marginalization of part of society, the disappearance of villages and the rural way of life.

The increased outflow of labor from agriculture in the Non-Black Soil Strip, compared to other regions of Russia, is caused, on the one hand, by the proximity of cities and industrial enterprises and, on the other, by a higher level of manual low-paid labor and unsatisfactory housing and living conditions . According to surveys conducted in the Non-Black Earth Region, dissatisfaction with work remained in first place among the reasons for leaving the village: manual work, lack of work in the specialty, poor working conditions, irregular working hours. The need to improve the level of culture of the place of residence has noticeably increased. A tense, unregulated working day at the height of the agricultural season and poorly developed consumer services hampered cultural development. This became one of the main motives for migration. The villager, determined to leave the village, was pushed out not only by reasons related to work, but also by the entire system of rural life, the way of life characteristic of the village. First of all, those who moved to the city were those who had a technical specialty - a driver, a tractor driver, a builder (among them, migration was 20-30%) and could relatively quickly adapt to industrial work. As a rule, people with low levels of education rarely moved to the city. The decline in the rural population was mainly due to young people, especially those aged 20-29 years. The mobility of young people is five times greater than that of other age groups. Migrants aged 16-29 years old accounted for up to 70% of all those who left, while among those who arrived in the village they were less than 30%. Over 60% of those who left the village were young women.

The predominant outflow of the most educated and qualified part of the labor force hampered the economic and social development of the village. Special surveys of migrants from the village showed an extremely high proportion among them of people who had a secondary education and machine operators. A situation arose when the training of machine operators in the countryside became, to some extent, a form of preparation for relocation to the city. The youth did not want to put up with the fact that they were “hillbillies”, that “we’ll get away with it, whatever’s worse, we’ll just plug the holes.” (From the statements of schoolchildren in the Kostroma region) and left her native place. The resettlement addresses were known: national economic construction sites, the North, Siberia, the Baltic states. Many sought prosperity in cities. For most collective and state farms, personnel remained one of the main issues. Only 5% of farms were fully provided with them.

The state was interested in securing a cadre of agricultural workers; the solution was found to be simple and cruel: collective farmers were deprived of their passports. According to the current exemplary Charter of the agricultural artel of 1935, membership in the collective farm had to be formalized by submitting an application followed by a decision on admission of artel members at the general meeting. In practice, children of collective farmers were automatically included in the lists of collective farmers and were deprived of their passports.

This was the case until the mid-70s. A government decree of 1974 introduced a new type of USSR citizen passport in 1976, which were to be issued (exchanged) to all citizens over 16 years of age during 1976-1981.

The Russian Non-Black Earth Region has endured all the socio-economic transformations. State dictatorship and the inability of collective and state farms to resist it undermined the economic foundations of the village.

The redistribution of labor in favor of industry and the city devastated the countryside. The destruction of the traditionally established settlement system led to the disappearance of thousands of villages, the loss of traditional forms of management and way of life.

The state mainly solved the problems of social and cultural reconstruction of the village at the expense of collective farms. They also paid the members of their artel. All social payments (pensions, benefits, etc.) were also made from the collective farm budget.

Until the end of the 50s. wages in most collective farms in Russia were based on workdays. The best farms paid wages to collective farmers. In 1959, less than 7% of collective farms in the Non-Black Earth Region switched to this system (in Russia - 8%). The salary of collective farmers was 28 rubles, which turned out to be half the salary of state farm workers and three times less than that of industrial workers. Wages were paid irregularly. Since 1966, collective farms began to move to guaranteed wages. During the transition to new conditions, there were often cases of violation of the conditions of its application. This was expressed in the fact that the wage fund grew faster than gross output. In addition, the increase in wages occurred with a decrease in productivity. The introduction of guaranteed wages improved the economic and financial situation of collective farmers. By the end of the 80s. a collective farmer received 221 rubles, a state farm worker - 263 rubles. This was less than what industrial workers earned, however, given the income from their personal farmstead, such a salary allowed them to live at a good level. But such high salaries in practice could be confirmed only by some farms in the Non-Black Earth Region. Average statistical indicators covered the problems of rural life of collective and state farms of the region, which for the most part belonged to the category of low-profitable and unprofitable enterprises.

While pumping economic indicators out of collective and state farms, the state did not pay pensions to collective farmers, like all other citizens of the country. This issue was transferred to collective farms. Most of them were not able to significantly support their veterans, and often could not support them at all. From the Moscow region, collective farmer Z.A. Velikanova wrote in 1962 in “Rural Life”: “I am 60 years old, of which 32 years I worked on the collective farm. In 1960, due to poor health, I retired. The collective farm allocated a pension of 3 rubles. 50 kopecks My husband died at the front in 1943. For my work, I was awarded the medal “For Valiant Labor.” In 1963, only a quarter of the country's elderly collective farmers and disabled people received pensions. Only since 1965 were collective farmers equal to other citizens of the country. But at the same time, the retirement age for them was increased by 5 years. The minimum pension was 12 rubles. per month. By 1980, the amount of monthly pension payments was increased to 28 rubles.

For many years, a significant part of the income created in agriculture was directed to solving national problems. The total costs for social and domestic needs in the city significantly exceeded similar costs in the countryside. In terms of the level of development of the material base of social infrastructure, the village noticeably lagged behind urban settlements. Per one rural resident in the 70-80s. capital investments in the development of institutions and enterprises of the social sphere in rural areas were almost 3 times less than in the city. The situation was complicated by the fact that the volume of investments in the non-productive sphere of the village was absorbed by 60-70%.

The best farms of the Non-Black Earth Region financed the modern construction of a complex of cultural and community buildings, including a cultural center, shops, a hospital, a clinic, a canteen, a service center, a post office, a school, and a boarding school. This is what the central estates of economically strong farms looked like: collective farms “Bolshevik” of the Vladimir region, “Mir” of the Torzhoksky district of Kalininskaya, “Path to Communism” of Dzerzhinsky and “Russia” of the Kozelsky district of Kaluga, “Bolshevik” of the Palekhsky district of Ivanovskaya, state farm “Frunze” of the Suzdal district of the Vladimir region, many farms in the Moscow region and Leningrad region, which were in a privileged position. The economy of most farms in the Non-Black Earth Region did not provide opportunities for spending on cultural and everyday needs. In the 60s contributions from collective farms for these purposes amounted to less than 1% of their cash income.

The difficult economic situation of a significant number of collective and state farms deprived them of the opportunity to solve social problems and engage in the construction of housing, cultural and everyday life facilities. The financial instability of farms did not allow housing construction to be carried out in sufficient quantities. The volume of construction in the Non-Black Earth Region differed sharply in various regions and autonomies. If in the Leningrad region an average of 26 apartments were built per state farm per year, then in the Novgorod region - 12, Bryansk, Ryazan regions and Chuvashia - 7 each, Kaluga region - 5 per farm. Using government loans, village residents in the 60s. built a fifth of the housing in the 70-80s. - seventh. Residents of collective farms in the 60s. 40% of the housing was rebuilt in the 70s. - third, in the 80s. - quarter. Manor-type houses accounted for 80% of the newly introduced residential area. Housing improvements lagged far behind those in the city. The rural population, as a rule, lived in their own poorly equipped houses, built and repaired using their savings. In the private sector, household amenities were often not provided. By the end of the 80s. only half of the housing stock in Russian villages was provided with running water, and a third with central heating. One sixth was provided with hot water supply. Gas was installed in 80% of houses. In many villages there was no radio broadcast network. But the bigger problem was the lack of light. A letter from residents from the collective farm “Krasnoe Znamya” in the Kalyazinsky district of the Kalinin region, sent in 1974 to “Rural Life”: “We bought televisions, receivers, refrigerators, washing machines. But these smart devices are inactive due to lack of electricity. Collective farmers sit in the evenings with a torch, because There aren’t even kerosene lamps.”

In the mid-60s. In the collective farms of the Pskov region, 70% of the rural population did not have electric lighting and used kerosene lamps. In 1970, about 12% of villages had no electricity. Electrification covered an increasing number of villages in subsequent years, but also in the late 80s. there were villages without electricity. Collective farmers counted on improving life in their villages; the government planned to improve only those that were promising from the state point of view.

Telephone communications slowly entered the life of the village. The gap from the city was 6 times. By the end of the 80s. only every third Russian family in the city and the eighth in the countryside had telephones. In the villages, a third of trade, medical institutions, schools, and consumer and cultural service enterprises did not have telephones.

Off-road conditions remained a persistent problem. By the mid-70s. less than half of the central estates of collective and state farms in the Non-Black Earth Region were connected by roads with regional centers. More than 60 thousand villages and villages were located at a distance of over 6 km from the bus stop. By the end of the 80s. in the Non-Black Earth Region per 1 thousand square meters. m there were only 48 km of paved roads, which was 6 times less than in Lithuania and 11 times less than in Estonia. Approximately one third of the central estates were cut off from regional centers. It was found that with bad roads, transport costs in the cost of agricultural products reached 40-47%. However, the poor condition of roads had a negative impact not only on the economy. It limited the possibilities of improving the culture of life, the villagers’ assimilation of the achievements of socio-cultural progress, and had a negative impact on the psychology of people, since they felt cut off from the world.

Rural residents overcame considerable difficulties to purchase industrial and food products. In most villages there were no shops, and the range of goods that were functioning was extremely narrow. We went shopping to district and regional centers. Families of collective farmers purchased up to 40% of goods in city stores. Moreover, each rural family annually spent approximately 160 hours traveling to the city to buy goods. Urban living standards gradually came to the villages. By the end of the 80s. the majority of rural families purchased televisions, three quarters - radios, over 60% - refrigerators, washing machines, 25% - vacuum cleaners. Although this was a noticeable improvement in life, nevertheless these indicators were 1.5-2 times lower than the city level. Household services provided in rural areas were small. A significant part of the villagers remained outside of such services and were also forced to turn to the city. From 30 to 65% of villagers in the region rated consumer services, recreational conditions, trade, catering, housing and roads unsatisfactorily.

The consumer attitude of the state towards the countryside gave rise to special principles of policy in the field of culture. It considered the production indicators of collective and state farms to be the main criterion for the distribution of material and financial benefits. Therefore, the minimum state budget allocated for the cultural needs of the village was distributed mainly among economically strong farms. Others gradually fell apart and slipped into industrial and cultural poverty. In the conditions of the Non-Black Earth Region, only a small number of villages, usually large ones, had on their territory a secondary school, a cultural center or club, and a library. The presence of cultural institutions served as a stimulus for life in the village. The rest of the villages lived in cultural isolation for many years.

The rural secondary school performs the most important social functions. It has a direct impact on the state of the economy, largely determining the future of the village. 60-70s brought significant progress to the education system. This was the period when universal secondary education was implemented throughout the country. This was especially important for the village. The policy of concentrating the population in large settlements led to the liquidation of a large number of schools. At the same time, secondary schools were built on central estates, and the composition of teachers was improved. Middle schools began to predominate among schools. For the 60-80s. the number of rural schools in Russia has more than halved. In the Non-Black Earth Region there were many farms that did not even have a primary school on their territory. There were not enough boarding schools for all students, and transportation was limited. In 1967, parents from the Kostroma region wrote to Rural Life: “We live in the village of Krasnaya Zvezda, and the children go to school more than 4 kilometers away in Lebedyanka. In winter there are severe frosts and snowstorms; more than once we have had to look for wandering children. Sometimes the frost reached 32°C."

Of the 49 thousand villages of the Non-Black Earth Region, over 10 thousand children went to school more than 3 km away every day. By the end of the 80s. 48 thousand schools operated in rural areas. A significant part of them were recognized as emergency. In the Non-Black Earth Region - up to 2 thousand. The number of rural schoolchildren decreased in the 60-80s. doubled and amounted to less than 6 million.

The main problem of rural schools in the Non-Black Earth Region remained the lack of enrollment, which was associated with the peculiarities of settlement in the region. By the end of the 70s. Half of the primary schools had fewer than 16 students. There were schools where 2-3 students were taught. Every fifth eight-year school had no more than 100 students. A significant proportion of secondary schools were also classified in this category. Schools appeared where there were no students for all grades: eight-year schools with 5-6 grades and ten-year schools with 7-8 grades. The level of training in some schools was low. There was no teaching in certain subjects. This made further education difficult, hampered advancement up the social ladder, and largely predetermined the future fate of young people.

The social program provided for the presence of preschool institutions. However, in the 60s. only 11% of collective farms opened kindergartens and nurseries. These were small seasonal institutions for the sowing and harvesting period. There were practically no stationary kindergartens. Women took their children with them to work. A letter from a worker at the Kalinin collective farm in the Kirov region, sent in 1969 to the newspaper “Rural Life”: “It’s been 25 years since we have children’s institutions. Women, you have to take your guys with you to work or lock your house. So they grow like weeds in the backyard, and things end in tragedy. The combine operator's son, left unattended, drowned in a pond, the combine operator's son D. lit a fire, and only by luck did disaster not happen. The chairman ordered that the premises of the nursery be transferred to a veterinary hospital; care for artiodactyls is apparently higher than for the children of collective farmers.”

The club remained the center of attraction for rural residents. In the village, he is actually the only representative from cultural institutions. Along with the school, the club creates a minimum of cultural amenities for living in the countryside. The need for cultural institutions was great. Only 60% of rural settlements had club establishments at home or nearby. Villagers actively took part in the work of the club. The best creative teams took part in shows, competitions and festivals. Most villagers remained outside of cultural services, relying on their own capabilities and leisure needs. Lines from a letter to the newspaper “Rural Life” from residents of the “Progress” collective farm in the Roslavl district of the Smolensk region (1968): “Young people usually do not stay. They are running away from the dark collective farm life. Four clubs are closed. Young people get together somewhere: they smoke, drink, play “the fool.”

Village life takes place in plain sight. High morality was supported by the church. The number of religious institutions declined sharply. Many churches were used as clubs, warehouses, cinemas, and workshops. Others were barbarously destroyed. In 1953, there were 15 thousand Orthodox churches in the country, in 1986 - about 7 thousand. The number of parishioners was declining; they were mainly elderly people. In the 80s the revival of the church led to an increase in believers and visitors to religious institutions. The survey data showed: 40-50% of the Russians surveyed considered themselves believers (more than 90% of them considered themselves to be members of the Russian Orthodox Church). At the end of 1989, about 60% of Russians were baptized. But only 10% of parishioners attended church regularly. Young people showed great interest in religion. Many saw in the formation of faith and strengthening of religiosity the origins of the revival of national self-awareness.

Hard, non-mechanized work without days off or holidays had a negative impact on the health of rural residents. The lack of social insurance forced collective farmers to work no matter how they felt. The lack of medical facilities and doctors exacerbated the problem.

Only in 1970, a unified system of insurance for collective farmers from the funds of the same collective farms was introduced on collective farms. Farms contributed 2.4% of the wage fund.

In all indicators of health care, rural areas lagged far behind cities. In rural hospitals, there were 4 square meters per hospital bed. m instead of the required 7. Of the 18 thousand rural clinics, 14 thousand were located in so-called adapted premises, of the 4 thousand regional hospitals, 2.5 thousand were deprived of hot water, and in 700 there was no cold water . The main medical institution in the village was the paramedic-obstetric first-aid post. By the end of the 80s. Less than half of the villages had them. The supply of doctors in rural areas was half the urban level. Mostly nursing staff worked in rural medical institutions.

Difficult working conditions, unsettled living conditions, and unsatisfactory organization of medical care had a negative impact on the health of the villagers. Excessive alcohol consumption made the situation worse. Average life expectancy was recorded at 68-69 years, which is 6-7 years lower than in developed countries in Europe and 11 years lower than in Japan. Most regions of the Non-Black Earth Region exceeded the average Russian mortality rate. The Pskov, Novgorod, Ryazan, Kalinin and Tula regions had the highest levels (13-14 deaths per 1 thousand population). Note that these are the regions with the oldest populations. However, this is not the only reason. The mortality rate of able-bodied men in rural areas is 11% higher than in the city, and for women - by 17%. Male villagers more often died from injuries and accidents, usually caused by alcohol intoxication, while females died from diseases of the circulatory system.

The Russian Non-Black Earth Region has undergone all the socio-economic reforms of the country. His contribution to the economy was great, but his potential was not inexhaustible. The region's farms suffered enormous damage during the Great Patriotic War. The restoration and development of industry required the attraction of hundreds of thousands of peasants from the villages. Significant resources for raising virgin lands were also drawn from the Non-Black Earth Region. Contrary to the objective natural and climatic conditions of the region, where traditionally farming was carried out in small villages, a policy of concentrating production and population in large villages and on the central estates of collective and state farms was carried out everywhere. The destruction of the traditional settlement system led to the extinction of Russian non-black earth villages. The price proportions for the exchange of agricultural products for industrial goods were not in favor of the agricultural sector. But the main thing is the state dictate and the complete helplessness of collective and state farms to resist it. The state acted as a manager of agricultural production, carrying out various organizational and economic activities without coordination with farms. Financial assistance was provided in small amounts. Collective and state farms were burdened with huge plans and were associated with the state with long-term, short-term and other obligations. They constantly paid for equipment, then for feed, then for seeds. The state sometimes wrote off part of the debt, because it was impossible to collect it from the farms. This was some compensation for the colossal work of people tied to the land. Fate determined them to be peasants until the mid-70s. they were deprived of their passports.

By attaching collective farmers to the land and dooming them to hard work, the state cared primarily about state welfare. It drew food and raw materials from the agricultural sector, depriving it of patronage and support.

The advanced farms of the Non-Black Earth Region led a prosperous life. They occupied a priority position in the state’s agricultural policy. Investments, equipment, and personnel were sent here first and in the required quantities. The elite status of the best collective and state farms also resulted in high agricultural indicators. The miserable existence of the rest remained the result of the same policy. The state, due to objective and subjective reasons, supported only a select few. The villagers did not work for the benefit of their particular farm. They always worked as a whole for the state, which pumped food out of farms half-free and free of charge. It so happened in state policy that the village was obliged to support the city, almost always to its own detriment. Many years of hard work with the sole goal of getting out of poverty and misery did not justify itself. Most of the farms in the Non-Black Earth Region had low production indicators throughout the 60-80s. The level of development of social infrastructure noticeably lagged behind the city level. The villages were emptying.

The past decades of economic experimentation have brought many areas of the Non-Black Earth Region to a critical point. A meager rural landscape that has become a symbol of the dying village of non-black earth Russia: rickety houses with boarded up windows, abandoned wells, arable land overgrown with bushes. The abandoned house of the Russian side is the fate of most villages in the Non-Black Earth Region.

Great hopes were placed on the agrarian reforms that began in December 1991. The attack on the collective and state farm system led to its liquidation. One of the successes of the agrarian reform in Russia, especially in the Non-Black Earth Region, is facilitating the migration to the countryside of the population who have not lost interest in working on the land. But surveys of sociologists recorded that almost two-thirds of the first individual farms created by city dwellers did not aim at permanent residence in the countryside and independent agricultural work.

The fate of the Non-Black Earth Region is in the hands, first of all, of the rural inhabitants of the region themselves. But over the 60 years of absolute dominance of large-scale production, several generations of its workers have changed. First of all, lack of professional knowledge of the full process of the cycle of agricultural work, and not the fear of dispossession or reluctance to work, repelled former collective farmers and state farm workers from the transition to individual farming.

By the fall of 1993, the total number of individual farms, called farms, in Russia exceeded 260 thousand. Their land area is 11 million hectares, the cultivated area is about 6 million hectares. The average size of such a farm was 42 hectares of total land, 22 hectares of crops. Their share in production was determined to be 2-3%.

The liberation of prices for goods and services not only did not eliminate, but even further strengthened the inequivalence of exchange between city and countryside. For 1992-1993 purchasing prices for meat increased 45 times, for milk - 63 times. For gasoline - 324 times, for the K-700 tractor - 828 times, for the T-4 tractor - 1344 times.

The state's failure to pay for delivered agricultural products was devastating for Russian agriculture. As of December 10, 1993, the state's debt to the peasants amounted to 1 trillion 800 million rubles.

All forms of agriculture became unprofitable. A catastrophic decline in production began. Compared to 1990, Russia in 1993 produced 40% of grain, 45% of vegetable oil, 50% of meat products, 53% of dairy products.

As a result of the destruction of the collective and state farm system, agricultural production indicators began to decline. Thanks to new forms of farming, there was no food abundance on earth. Most former collective farmers did not see real prospects for a better life. There was less and less hope for successful rural activities. Real restructuring at home convinced the villagers of hasty, ill-conceived solutions to agrarian problems, new difficulties, sometimes insoluble, and their own uselessness.

Just the desire to feel like the owner of your land is not enough for this land to generate income. The new economic system needs serious material support. To equip one farm, according to estimates of Belarusian economists, 10 million rubles were required. (in 1992 prices). Most peasants who chose the farming path did not have such funds.

The state provided loans to farmers. However, interest on “preferential” loans was initially set at 8%, then at 20%, then at 213%. As a result, over half of the farmers went bankrupt in 1993, and another 60 thousand in 1995. About 10 million hectares of agricultural land in Russia were neglected, not cultivated, and overgrown with weeds and shrubs. There is hardly any doubt that in the coming years Russia will not be able to provide itself with food in accordance with its needs.

For many years the village only gave, receiving practically nothing in return. The time must come to repay debts.

In the preface to the famous book by A.I. Shingarev “The Dying Village” in 1907, there are the lines: “Is the normal existence of the state conceivable, are calm and contented farmers conceivable, is any fruitful work to renew society conceivable?” dilapidated forms of state life with the existence of such dying villages? . Today the problem of the survival of the Russian village is just as relevant.

FOOTNOTES of the original text

DISCUSSION OF THE REPORT

N.A. Ivnitsky:

The report well characterizes the situation in the 60-80s. in the village.

Have you tried to compare the situation in the villages of the Non-Black Earth Region during the years of stagnation with the present time?

L.N. Denisova:

The situation has worsened. The state dictatorship continues even now, only with greater cruelty. Collective farms are practically prohibited. For the Non-Black Earth Region, farming is actually a disaster. Given the difficult natural and climatic conditions, scattered villages, lack of finance and equipment, when the tractor was divided into 8-10 families, the beginning of the farming movement failed. Of course, there are successful farmers, but there are only a few of them. This path as a general was not thought out.

Maybe in the Kuban or in other areas farming will develop, but as practice has shown, not in the Vologda region. In the Non-Black Earth Region this turned out to be unpromising.

Therefore, the residents themselves, who at first fell into euphoria about the fact that they would have land, they would not have to work every day on the collective farm, etc., gradually came to the conclusion that they needed to return to the collective farms. This movement, for example, is gaining strength in the Vologda region.

A.K. Sokolov:

This period is marked as the period of implementation of the policy of eliminating differences between city and countryside. These differences are very peculiar, but, nevertheless, have any successes been achieved or not?

L.N. Denisova:

Of course, progress has been made. Collective farmers received passports, social guarantees, and pensions. From this point of view, the village is to a certain extent equal to the city. But the city moved forward, and the village caught up, and the differences changed, but did not disappear.

A.K. Sokolov:

I got the impression that just at this time a type of village with city standards was being established, but in a deteriorated version.

L.N. Denisova:

This mainly concerns the advanced farms of the Non-Black Earth Region.

L.N. Nezhinsky:

I have two questions. What we today conventionally (or not conventionally) call an attempt at Kosygin reforms in the mid-60s, and you know that documents and memoirs are gradually appearing, and their number is increasing, were there any intentions to radically change approaches? including in agricultural and social policy in the Non-Black Earth Region.

Second question. What was the general demographic situation at the beginning of the period you are studying, that is, by the end of the 50s - early 60s, and how did the 80s end in this regard? are there comparable figures?

L.N. Denisova:

Kosygin's reforms were implemented in the villages. They were both planned and implemented, but were quickly curtailed. Solid five-year plans were overgrown with additional tasks, and the system returned to its place again.

As for the population decline, in the Non-Black Earth Region it decreased in the 60-80s. half, and in some areas - by 60-65%.

O.M.Verbiikaya:

When you talk about the fact that the population in the village was declining, and the reason for this was the most difficult working conditions and general way of life as such, you get the impression that this is a purely Soviet phenomenon, that this is the result of an unfair, ill-considered, unbalanced policy of the Soviet state and party . But it is known that this trend is worldwide, global in nature. Now all Western society is an industrial society, and the number of people who are engaged in agricultural labor is negligible compared to the total population. Is this somehow connected with global trends, or do you think that this is the result of the disastrous policies of the country’s leadership?

L.N. Denisova:

The reduction of the rural population as a progressive process is typical for industrialized countries, such as Russia and especially the Non-Black Earth Region in the 60-80s. impossible to relate. In the Non-Black Earth Region, the number of villagers decreased not due to the introduction of technology, new technologies, but due to the impossibility and unwillingness to stay in the village, i.e. agrarian policy of the state.

E.A. Osokina:

The problem of long-term development is very important: what is suitable and what is not suitable for the development of agriculture: farming or collective farms. It is not the development of this region within the Soviet period that needs to be compared, i.e. collective farm and post-collective farm, and with the development of regions in pre-revolutionary times. My PhD thesis is devoted to the development of industrial areas at the beginning of the 20th century. I didn’t take the Vologda province, but I took the Yaroslavl, Kostroma, and Vladimir provinces. There were no collective farms there, but agriculture was developing, especially the meat and dairy industry. Have you tried to compare not with the Soviet period, but with the pre-revolutionary period, and on the basis of this predict what should take root in the Non-Black Earth Region, farming or collective farms?

It seems to me that farming has not taken root in the Non-Black Earth Region, not because it is not suitable for this region, but because the conditions have not been created: neither legal nor technical.

L.N. Denisova:

I made such comparisons using the example of the Vologda province. Here, the farmers' movement, as shown by survey materials conducted in the 80s and 90s, turned out to be unviable. The reason is not only that a legal and technical basis has not been created in the Vologda region, but also that nature itself has not created a basis here in order to work individually.

I.E. Zelenin:

You covered a fairly long period: the 60s, 70s, 80s. It is possible to outline some stages of development, for example, of agricultural policy and economics. There was the Khrushchev period, and the Brezhnev period, and the Gorbachev period. And a little earlier the issue of the food program arose. During this period, a general line could be pursued, but still these stages may differ in some way, in particular politically.

L.N. Denisova:

For the Non-Black Earth Region, a special stage was the mid-70s, when the mass resettlement of villages began, in fact, the liquidation of the Non-Black Earth Region.

I.E. Zelenin:

Those. did resettlement have a negative impact?

L.N. Denisova:

I didn't talk about the negative meaning. Despite the general common sense, for some villages and regions, for the entire Non-Black Earth Region, it was a destructive hurricane. At the same time, individual collective farms, state farms and villages were improved.

I.E. Zelenin:

What if we look at this from a production point of view?

D.N. Denisova:

From the point of view of production, here we can highlight the mid-60s, the eighth five-year plan, show certain successes, but in general this was the only period in the development of the history of this long-suffering region.

I.P. Ostapenko:

What percentage of collective farms were electrified in the late 80s?

Second question. Do you consider demographic changes during this period, in particular, the gender composition of the rural population during this period?

And the last question. Was illiteracy of the rural population eliminated during the period under study?

D.N. Denisova:

Official statistics say that by the end of the 80s. The country's collective and state farms were completely electrified, but judging by closed reports in the former TsGANKh and especially by letters from peasants to Rural Life, throughout the entire period there was a certain number of villages where there was no electricity. But there is a nuance here: the power line was installed, but either the pole fell, or the voltage was weak, or the light bulbs were not delivered.

Regarding literacy. Universal secondary education is an indisputable achievement of the Soviet government. This was a colossal leap for the village. In the 60-70s. Great efforts were made to implement first incomplete (eight-year) and then complete secondary education. There were costs involved in implementing the school reform, but the number of dropouts and dropouts from school without a matriculation certificate did not exceed 2-3%.

I.P. Ostapenko:

What is the criterion for literacy?

L.N. Denisova:

Secondary education. In 1977, the USSR moved to universal secondary education. But the level of education in the village was often low.

As for the gender composition, the non-chernozem village was predominantly female.

V.P. Danilov:

We listened to a very interesting report, which gave a rather specific, detailed description of the village of the Non-Black Earth Region for about 20-30 years, and the questions that were asked about the report indicate that the specific picture that was recreated in the report is undoubtedly is of general interest. But to understand the processes that took place, it would be useful to consider this period within a somewhat broader chronological framework.

The process of outflow of the rural population of the Non-Black Earth Region of Russia is indeed connected with the global civilizational process of decline in the rural population and growth at the expense of the urban population. But as for the Non-Black Earth Region of Russia, here this process is significantly intensified by the outflow of population from the North to the South, which began long before the revolution. It probably took place back in the 17th - early 19th centuries, and would have been more intense if not for serfdom, which kept not only landowner peasants, but also state peasants tied to the land. And state peasants prevailed in the Non-Black Earth Region. And only since the 80s. last century, with the abolition of the temporary obligation for landowner peasants (for state peasants the same norms were extended with some delay), an active outflow of population from the North and from the Non-Black Earth Region of Russia to the South began. We have recorded the intensive formation of the foreign population on the Don, Kuban, and other regions of the South-East precisely since the 80s. XIX century Moreover, we know where they come from: from a community in the Tver province, from the Kaluga province. So far, even fewer are from Vologda and Arkhangelsk. For them, this wave will reach the years of the civil war.

During the Civil War, in 1918-1919. The flow of population from the Non-Black Earth Region to the south, to the Don and to the Kuban took on such proportions that it can already be called a mass outflow of the population. And, taking advantage of the special conditions of the civil war, complete freedom, “wherever I want, I go, especially since I have a weapon in my hands,” the population began to leave these places. Here it is necessary to take into account the environmental conditions of the Non-Black Earth Region. His characteristic lack of land played a role.

These are very important processes that continued in the future. And, by the way, they continue to this day. Post-Soviet times have arrived. What is characteristic of the Black Nose Land? This is primarily the desolation of villages. It would seem that the propagandists of post-Soviet reforms tried to attract, in particular, to the Vologda region and other northern regions of the Russian Non-Black Earth Region people from other, completely northern regions, but nevertheless people left. If we talk about the massive outflow of the population from the northern regions, then they bypass the Vologda region and go further to the South, and not only because the climatic conditions in the South are more convenient for life, but also because the working conditions in the northern regions of Russia, of course , very heavy. This needs to be taken into account. Why hasn’t the farming movement in the North experienced any noticeable growth at all? (A.K. Sokolov: And “The Arkhangelsk Man”?). And this is from the realm of the most shameless propaganda. This kind of “men” can be organized and planted in any region, creating certain conditions, just as they were created for the “Arkhangelsk peasant” at the expense of the state farm, on whose territory this farm was created. All attempts, when the propaganda of this “Arkhangelsk peasant” was going on, to say about what supposedly makes the economy successfully run, did not penetrate our press. (N.A. Ivnitsky: And how many such “men” there were...).

And one more important circumstance related to the general direction of agricultural development of the Non-Black Earth Region. E.A. Osokina said that in pre-revolutionary Russia in the Non-Black Earth Region, a trend of transition to intensive livestock farming began to stand out. This is a very important point in understanding what happened over about a century in the Russian Non-Black Earth Region. This trend in the development of especially oil and dairy farming in the Non-Black Earth Region led to the development of a project in the Danish version of the development of agriculture in the Non-Black Earth Zone of Russia. This project in Soviet times was adopted by the People's Commissariat of Agriculture in 1923-1924, and until 1927 (of course, a very short time) the foundations were laid to specialize the direction of agrarian agricultural development of the region, and this direction , of course, assumed the creation of a wide agricultural market within the country, accordingly specializing areas, for example, grain production for grain production, etc. This is a very progressive direction. In the future, if Russia survives, if it can overcome the trials that have now befallen it, then it must inevitably return to this version of the agrarian development of the Non-Black Earth Region, in the center of which is the oil and dairy sector.

But it turned out that collectivization was underway, and, starting from the late 20s, the Stalinist leadership made a widespread demand that each region feed itself with bread and provide grain production. This deeply erroneous direction affected the fate of agriculture in the 60-80s. It was not for nothing that N.S. Khrushchev, who continued this direction, tried to plant corn crops in the Arkhangelsk province.

All this must be shown in a broader historical perspective.

N.A. Ivniikiy:

The report is interesting. When finalizing it, it is necessary to strengthen the showing of the positive aspects of life in the Non-Black Earth Region in the 60-80s, especially in comparison with the subsequent period.

Secondly, it is necessary to emphasize more strongly how the legal position of the peasant has changed, starting with the receipt of passports, and talk about the material side. Give a comparison with the current state of production.

If we used to say that 20 or 23% of capital investments and allocations in agriculture is not enough, these are allocations on a residual basis, now it is good to have 2-3%, and we consider this an achievement.

P.N.Zyryanov:

The question has already arisen of connecting the report with the history of the same region, but in an earlier period, approximately from the 19th century. Let's not go too far, let's connect this with the peasant reform of 1861. Indeed, over 155 years this region has undergone very dramatic turns in its destiny.

First of all, after the reform of 1861, it found itself in a very disadvantageous position compared to the black earth region. Very large sections were made there. But the land still fed the peasant, and here, since the main role was played by quitrent, and not corvee, the land was taxed above its profitability, that is, the exploitation of the plot brought a loss, which was covered by outsiders or, as they said then, other thoughts. Therefore, the peasant tried to push away any extra allotment, and until about the 60s. here there was a reduction in the cultivated areas - waterlogging, overgrowth with bushes, forests, etc. But at the same time there was a demographic explosion of the population. This was due to the abolition of serfdom and the introduction of zemstvos, when elementary principles of hygiene and sanitation were introduced. Then child mortality dropped sharply. In the Chernozem region, catastrophic consequences began to brew, because the land plot became smaller and smaller, and in the Non-Black Earth region the opposite happened. Here the peasant, when he went to the city to earn money, took with him two or three grown-up sons, and in the city he earned more. Therefore, the situation in the Non-Black Earth Region began to improve. With the money that the peasant brought from the city, he began to improve his farm.

There was already talk about the fact that grass sowing had begun to be introduced, and peasants were switching to multi-field crop rotations. This process began in the 90s. last century, and when it ended, I cannot say. This process went on throughout the entire period before the outbreak of the First World War, it continued during the First World War, and continued until collectivization. Moreover, it should be noted that in the process of intensifying agriculture in the Non-Black Earth Region, he relied on the community, and not on farms.

V.P. Danilov:

During Soviet times, the production part of the plan was adopted. Not a form of organization, cut or community, but the development of butter and dairy farming as the main direction of agricultural production in the Non-Black Earth Region. This plan, adopted in 1924, when Alexey Petrovich Smirnov was the People's Commissar of Agriculture, was called the “Danish plan.”

P.N.Zyryanov:

He also assumed some semblance of cuts. There were such cases that those who did not want to move to multi-field would be singled out.

L.N. Nezhinsky:

It is necessary to pay attention not only to the production orientation of the development of our agricultural economy, but also to something else: to social forms - community or cuts.

And here a comparison with the pre-revolutionary period was appropriate.

P.N.Zyryanov:

There is no plan for the reconstruction of the countryside that would be suitable for all regions, all countries. And these farms, cuts, or, as they say now, farming, are not very suitable for the Non-Black Earth Region. What is required here is a combination of collective efforts in one form or another.

L.N. Nezhinsky:

A very interesting, fundamental, thoughtful report was heard. You can agree with the interpretation of certain issues, or you can disagree, but in general a problem was posed that goes far beyond the scope of the topic “History of the Russian Non-Black Earth Region”. I think everyone will agree with this.

What is the Russian Non-Black Earth Region? This is two and a half thousand kilometers from west to east and at least one and a half thousand kilometers from north to south, i.e. that's almost as much as all or more than all of Western Europe put together. The problems and questions raised in the report go far beyond the purely agrarian problem of this region.

In fact, one of the main themes of the history of Russia, the history of Soviet society, is touched upon to one degree or another, because the conclusions and observations of the speaker largely influence the overall history of the development of our country in these years, and not only in these years.

Composition of the Non-Chernozem Zone

Non-chernozem region, non-chernozem zone - an agricultural and industrial region of the European part of Russia.

In total, the Non-Black Earth Region includes 32 federal subjects, incl. 22 regions, 6 republics, 1 territory, 1 autonomous district and two federal cities. The area is 2411.2 thousand square meters. km

Received its name from the predominant soil type as a contrast to the Black Earth.

Includes four economic regions:

Northern economic region

Northwestern economic region

Central economic region

Volgo-Vyatka economic region,

as well as certain regions of Russia:

Kaliningrad region

Perm region

Sverdlovsk region

Udmurtia

Northern region

Republic of Karelia

Komi Republic

Arhangelsk region

Nenets Autonomous Okrug

Vologda Region

Murmansk region

North-West region

Includes the following subjects of the Russian Federation:

Leningrad region

Novgorod region

Pskov region

Saint Petersburg

central District

Includes the following subjects of the Russian Federation:

Bryansk region

Vladimir region

Ivanovo region

Kaluga region

Kostroma region

Moscow region

Oryol Region

Ryazan Oblast

Smolensk region

Tver region

Tula region

Yaroslavl region

Volgo-Vyatsky district

Includes the following subjects of the Russian Federation:

Mordovia

Kirov region

Nizhny Novgorod Region

The Non-Black Earth Region is a huge territory stretching from the shores of the Arctic Ocean to the forest-steppe zone and from the Baltic Sea to Western Siberia. The non-chernozem region is named after its soil cover, which is dominated by podzolic soils.

Since ancient times, the Non-Black Earth Region has played and continues to play a major role in the history of Russia, in its economic and cultural development. Here, between the Oka and Volga rivers, the Russian state arose at the end of the 15th century, from here the population then settled throughout the vast country. On this territory, for centuries, the people defended their freedom. Russian industry was born here.

In our time, the Non-Black Earth Region has retained a primary role in the political, economic and cultural life of the country. Large cities are located here - centers for training qualified personnel, the most important industrial bases, the most developed areas by humans, good hayfields and pastures for livestock, since the landscapes of the Non-Black Earth Region are for the most part favorable for human life and economic activity.

Characteristics of the Non-Black Earth Region

The Non-Black Earth Region is an important agricultural region. Here is 1/5 of the agricultural land area of ​​Russia. The development of agriculture here is facilitated by good moisture and an almost complete absence of drought. True, the soils here are poor in humus, but with proper reclamation they can produce good yields of rye, barley, flax, potatoes, vegetables, and forage grasses. But since the first half of the 60s, there has been a decrease in the growth rate of agricultural products. The reasons for this lie in the adverse impact of humans on the landscapes of the Non-Black Earth Region and in the social sphere. The outflow of the population of agricultural areas to cities turned out to be very unfavorable. The rural population here has decreased by an average of 40% in recent years. The reasons for this can be very different: increased industrial construction, more favorable living conditions in cities, poor development of the social sphere in villages. As a result of the lack of workers, agricultural land was reduced, attention to anti-erosion work weakened, and waterlogging and overgrowing of fields began. This ultimately led to a decline in agricultural productivity and the lag of agriculture in the area.

In order to solve the problems that arose, a resolution was adopted “On measures for the further development of the economy of the Non-Black Earth Region”. It assumed the following measures: improving living conditions of people, especially in the Northern regions;

improvement (reclamation - a set of measures to improve soils with the aim of long-term increase in their fertility) of lands by draining and irrigating them, applying fertilizers, liming soils, effectively combating erosion, uprooting trees and shrubs, snow retention and regulation of snowmelt, enlarging fields and improving them forms;

Problems of rational use of Non-Black Earth lands and ways to solve them

In the depths of the Non-Black Earth Region there are deposits of iron (KMA), stone (Pechersk basin) and brown (Moscow basin) coals, apatites of the Kola Peninsula, table salts of Lake Baskunchak. Oil is produced between the Volga and the Ural Mountains, as well as in the northeast of the region. Most of the deposits are located in well-developed areas. This increases their value.

When mining minerals, land is disturbed, its fertile layer is destroyed, and a new form of relief is created. With the mine method of mining, large areas are occupied by waste rock dumps. In open-pit mining areas, quarries are formed on the surface of the earth. Sometimes these are extensive pits 100-200 m deep or more. There is a lot of disturbed land in the Moscow basin, in areas where construction raw materials and peat are developed. Much attention is now being paid to restoring the value of these disturbed lands (their reclamation). In their place, reservoirs are created. They are returned to agricultural and forestry use. For densely populated areas this is especially important.

The problem of the Non-Black Earth Region is associated with the use of the natural resources of this region, primarily with the development of agriculture in it. The soils here are not as fertile as chernozems, but soil and agroclimatic resources allow the cultivation of rye and barley, flax and potatoes, vegetables and oats, and forage grasses. Forest floodplain meadows are good hayfields and pastures for livestock. However, not enough agricultural products are produced here now.

For the further development of agriculture in the Non-Black Earth Region, it is necessary to rationally use and improve (meliorate) lands, build roads and improve living conditions for people.

The main type of reclamation here is the drainage of excessively wet lands. Along with drainage, it is necessary to apply fertilizers and liming of soils, in places to irrigate and combat soil erosion, remove stones and uproot trees and shrubs, snow retention and regulation of snowmelt, enlargement of fields and improvement of their shape.

INTERNATIONAL INDEPENDENT

ECOLOGICAL AND POLITICAL SCIENCE UNIVERSITY

INTERNATIONAL INDEPENDENT UNIVERSITY

OF ENVIRONMENTAL & POLITICAL SCIENCES

BY SUBJECT:

RATIONAL NATURE MANAGEMENT

“THE PROBLEM OF RATIONAL USE OF NON-BLACK EARTH LAND”

Completed by: III year student

Specialty: SK service and tourism

Soprunova Yulia Vyacheslavovna

Checked by: teacher

Shcherba Vladimir Afanasievich.

Introduction

1. Composition of the non-chernozem zone.

2. Characteristics of the Non-Black Earth Region.

3. Problems of rational use of Non-Black Earth lands and ways to solve them.

Conclusion.

Introduction

Earth - a universal natural resource necessary for many branches of human activity. For industry, construction, and land transport, it serves as the ground on which production facilities, buildings, and structures are located.

Earth- a unique type of resource. Firstly, it cannot be replaced by other resources. Secondly, although land is a universal resource, each plot of it can be used most often for only one purpose - for arable land, haymaking, construction, etc. Thirdly, land resources can be considered exhaustible, since their area is limited by the size of the earth's land, state, and specific economy. But, possessing fertility, land resources (namely soil), with proper use and agricultural technology, regular fertilization, soil protection and reclaimed measures, renew and even increase their productivity.

1. Composition of the non-chernozem zone

Non-Black Earth region, Non-chernozem zone-- agricultural and industrial region of the European part of Russia.

In total, the Non-Black Earth Region includes 32 federal subjects, incl. 22 regions, 6 republics, 1 territory, 1 autonomous district and two federal cities. The area is 2411.2 thousand square meters. km

Received its name from the predominant soil type as a contrast to the Black Earth.

Includes four economic regions:

Northern economic region

Northwestern economic region

Central economic region

Volgo-Vyatka economic region,

as well as certain regions of Russia:

Kaliningrad region

Perm region

Sverdlovsk region

Udmurtia

Northern region

Republic of Karelia

Komi Republic

Arhangelsk region

Nenets Autonomous Okrug

Vologda Region

Murmansk region

North-West region

Includes the following subjects of the Russian Federation:

Leningrad region

Novgorod region

Pskov region

Saint Petersburg

central District

Includes the following subjects of the Russian Federation:

Bryansk region

Vladimir region

Ivanovo region

Kaluga region

Kostroma region

Moscow region

Oryol Region

Ryazan Oblast

Smolensk region

Tver region

Tula region

Yaroslavl region

Volgo-Vyatsky district

Includes the following subjects of the Russian Federation:

Mordovia

Kirov region

Nizhny Novgorod Region

The non-Black Earth region is a huge territory stretching from the shores of the Arctic Ocean to the forest-steppe zone and from the Baltic Sea to Western Siberia. The non-chernozem region is named after its soil cover, which is dominated by podzolic soils.

Since ancient times, the Non-Black Earth Region has played and continues to play a major role in the history of Russia, in its economic and cultural development. Here, between the Oka and Volga rivers, the Russian state arose at the end of the 15th century, from here the population then settled throughout the vast country. On this territory, for centuries, the people defended their freedom. Russian industry was born here.

In our time, the Non-Black Earth Region has retained a primary role in the political, economic and cultural life of the country. Large cities are located here - centers for training qualified personnel, the most important industrial bases, the most developed areas by humans, good hayfields and pastures for livestock, since the landscapes of the Non-Black Earth Region are for the most part favorable for human life and economic activity.

2. Characteristics of the Non-Black Earth Region

The non-Black Earth region is an important agricultural region. Here is 1/5 of the agricultural land area of ​​Russia. The development of agriculture here is facilitated by good moisture and an almost complete absence of drought. True, the soils here are poor in humus, but with proper reclamation they can produce good yields of rye, barley, flax, potatoes, vegetables, and forage grasses. But since the first half of the 60s, there has been a decrease in the growth rate of agricultural products. The reasons for this lie in the adverse impact of humans on the landscapes of the Non-Black Earth Region and in the social sphere. The outflow of the population of agricultural areas to cities turned out to be very unfavorable. The rural population here has decreased by an average of 40% in recent years. The reasons for this can be very different: increased industrial construction, more favorable living conditions in cities, poor development of the social sphere in villages. As a result of the lack of workers, agricultural land was reduced, attention to anti-erosion work weakened, and waterlogging and overgrowing of fields began. This ultimately led to a decline in agricultural productivity and the lag of agriculture in the area.

In order to solve the problems that arose, a resolution was adopted “On measures for the further development of the economy of the Non-Black Earth Region”. It assumed the following measures: improving living conditions of people, especially in the Northern regions;

improvement (reclamation - a set of measures to improve soils with the aim of long-term increase in their fertility) of lands by draining and irrigating them, applying fertilizers, liming soils, effectively combating erosion, uprooting trees and shrubs, snow retention and regulation of snowmelt, enlarging fields and improving them forms;

3. Problems of rational use of Non-Black Earth lands and ways to solve them

In the depths of the Non-Black Earth Region there are deposits of iron (KMA), stone (Pechersk basin) and brown (Moscow basin) coals, apatites of the Kola Peninsula, table salts of Lake Baskunchak. Oil is produced between the Volga and the Ural Mountains, as well as in the northeast of the region. Most of the deposits are located in well-developed areas. This increases their value.

When mining minerals, land is disturbed, its fertile layer is destroyed, and a new form of relief is created. With the mine method of mining, large areas are occupied by waste rock dumps. In open-pit mining areas, quarries are formed on the surface of the earth. Sometimes these are extensive pits 100-200 m deep or more. There is a lot of disturbed land in the Moscow basin, in areas where construction raw materials and peat are developed. Much attention is now being paid to restoring the value of these disturbed lands (their reclamation). In their place, reservoirs are created. They are returned to agricultural and forestry use. For densely populated areas this is especially important.

The problem of the Non-Black Earth Region is associated with the use of the natural resources of this region, primarily with the development of agriculture in it. The soils here are not as fertile as chernozems, but soil and agroclimatic resources allow the cultivation of rye and barley, flax and potatoes, vegetables and oats, and forage grasses. Forest floodplain meadows are good hayfields and pastures for livestock. However, not enough agricultural products are produced here now.

For the further development of agriculture in the Non-Black Earth Region, it is necessary to rationally use and improve (meliorate) lands, build roads and improve living conditions for people.

The main type of reclamation here is the drainage of excessively wet lands. Along with drainage, it is necessary to apply fertilizers and liming of soils, in places to irrigate and combat soil erosion, remove stones and uproot trees and shrubs, snow retention and regulation of snowmelt, enlargement of fields and improvement of their shape.

Conclusion

Land degradation has occurred throughout human history. Numerous studies have shown that in the history of agriculture alone, as a result of the development of processes of erosion, secondary salinization, soil dehumification and other phenomena, humanity has lost more than 105 billion hectares, which significantly exceeds the entire global area of ​​arable land. According to estimates by soil scientists, about 8 million hectares are lost from agricultural use every year around the world due to their development by settlements, highways, mining and other objects.

Rational use of land: expansion of areas under oats and barley, due to wheat, as more productive crops suitable for feed; rational use of land under crops of flax, potatoes, and vegetables. However, the adopted reform program could not be implemented, since the economic crisis of the 80s. deeply affected the entire country. It is impossible to solve the problem of the Non-Black Earth Region in any one area. Only a complete recovery of the economy will help with this.

The problem of rational use of land resources, their protection from destruction and increasing soil fertility is one of the most important tasks of scientific research. They involve a whole range of sciences - agrochemical, biological, chemical, economic. Geography also plays an important role as a complex science and its branch areas - soil geography, hydrology, geomorphology, climatology, agricultural geography, etc. Only as a result of comprehensive research can areas requiring reclaimed work be studied and identified, as well as their consequences predicted, influence on other components of natural complexes.

Bibliography

1. Rakovskaya E.M. Geography: nature of Russia, textbook for the 8th grade of educational institutions. M.: “Enlightenment”, 2004

2. Abramov L.S. Fundamentals of constructive geography. M.: “Enlightenment”, 1999

3. Dronov V.P., Rom V.Ya. Geography of Russia: population and economy, textbook for 9th grade. M.: Bustard, 2002.

5. www.geography.kz

Similar documents

The current state of the use of natural resources in Russia, problems and ways to resolve them, future prospects. The main mineral, water, forest, and land resources of the Ural region, their assessment and problems of rational use.

abstract, added 10/20/2010


General characteristics of the Caspian region. Geographical location, geology and minerals. Geomorphology and climate. Flora and fauna. Sources of environmental pollution in the Caspian region. Ways to solve the environmental problem of the region.

course work, added 12/02/2010


The state of agriculture in the North Caucasus today, possibilities for the long-term development of the region. Brief description of the region: geographical location, natural resources, population. History of the development of agriculture in the North Caucasus.

test, added 09/03/2010


Characteristics of the Penza region from an economic and geographical position. Patterns of land use and forms of territory organization, features of the location of the agro-industrial complex. Analysis of the activities of the regional agricultural sector.

course work, added 11/25/2012


Natural conditions of the Togul region, its position in the Altai region. Socio-economic conditions of the area. Structure of agricultural land. Volume of industrial production. Distribution of land by type of ownership.

course work, added 05/27/2015


History of economic development and settlement of the region. Modern characteristics of industry and agriculture. Administrative and territorial division of the region, its natural resource potential. Resettlement and urbanization of the region, ways of improvement.

abstract, added 12/05/2010


Geoinformation support for rational environmental management using the example of hydrocarbon deposits in the Uvat region. Creation of a landscape-ecological map of part of the deposit territory. Resource database, vegetation analysis.

thesis, added 10/01/2013


Territorial natural-technical systems, typology, approaches to study. The main factors influencing the formation of PTS boundaries. Analysis of problems in the study and rational use of natural resources of the territory, determination of directions for their solution.

test, added 12/22/2010


Basic cartographic information about the Omsk region - a subject of the Russian Federation, part of the Siberian Federal District. Features of the location of the territory within the borders of the state. Natural conditions and resources. Ways to solve environmental problems.

course work, added 12/24/2012


Prerequisites and factors for the formation of modern specialization of the regional economy - industry and agriculture. Industrial and social structure of the region. Intra-district and inter-district economic relations. Prospects for the development of the region.

The Non-Chernozem Region, or more precisely, the Non-Chernozem Zone, is a huge territory stretching from the shores of the Arctic Ocean to the forest-steppe zone in the south with its chernozem soils and from the Baltic Sea to Western Siberia. There are 28 regions and republics, as well as the Perm Territory, the Nenets Autonomous Okrug and two cities of federal significance. The Non-Chernozem Zone is included in four large economic regions - North-Western, Northern, Volga-Vyatka and Central. Its total area is 2824 thousand km 2. This is larger than the area of ​​France, Spain, Italy, Sweden, Norway, Finland and Germany combined. About 60 million people live in the Non-Black Earth Region, i.e. more than 1/3 of the population of Russia. Since ancient times, the Non-Black Earth Zone has played and continues to play a major role in the history of our Motherland, in its economic and cultural development. Here, between the Oka and Volga rivers, at the end of the 15th century. The Russian centralized state arose. The Russian national culture was created in the Non-Black Earth Region, from here the Russians settled throughout the vast country. On this territory, for centuries, the Russian people defended their freedom and independence. Russian industry was born here, large Russian cities grew and developed.

And in our time, the Non-Black Earth Region has retained a primary role in the political, economic and cultural life of the country. The Center of the Non-Black Earth Region, St. Petersburg, the Urals are the most important industrial bases, forges of scientific and labor personnel. In the Non-Black Earth Region there is the capital of our Motherland - Moscow, the second city in economic and cultural importance - St. Petersburg and such largest cities and industrial centers as Nizhny Novgorod, Yekaterinburg, Perm, Yaroslavl, Izhevsk, Tula, etc.

The Non-Black Earth Region is an important agricultural region of Russia. Here is 1/5 of the country's agricultural land area.

The development of agriculture here is favored by the presence of huge tracts of arable land, many meadows and pastures, as well as good moisture and the almost complete absence of droughts. True, the soils here are poor in humus. However, the soils of the Non-Black Earth Region in climate-favorable areas, when carrying out the necessary reclamation (draining, liming, applying mineral fertilizers), can produce up to 80 centners of grain and up to 800–1000 centners of potatoes per hectare.

The development of agriculture in the Non-Black Earth Region based on its intensification, land reclamation, comprehensive mechanization and chemicalization is the level of a national task.

The development of the Non-Black Earth Region will take more than one decade. It is necessary to increase the production of a variety of agricultural products.

But the accelerated growth in the production of grain, meat, milk, potatoes, vegetables, and other products is only one aspect of the rise in agriculture in the Non-Black Earth Region. After all, all the resulting products need to be preserved and processed. Therefore, new grain elevators, meat processing plants, dairies, and storage facilities for potatoes and vegetables are being built here.

It is especially important to organize large mechanized farms in dairy and meat farming - the main branch of agriculture in the Non-Black Earth Region. The population of this zone is the largest consumer of milk and fresh meat.

Work is underway to change the structure and geography of cultivated crops. Thus, the areas under oats and barley are expanding due to wheat, as they are more productive and, in addition, suitable for feeding livestock, work is underway to more rationally place industrial crops (primarily flax), to concentrate plantings of potatoes and vegetables.

The primary task is to develop new non-chernozem lands for arable land, improve existing arable land, and increase its fertility. Another important task is the creation of cultivated pastures.

The Non-Black Earth Region has been given an important task - to transform it into a region of highly productive agriculture and livestock farming, as well as the development of related industries.

It is unthinkable to fulfill the tasks of transforming agriculture in the Non-Black Earth Region without the active participation of young people. This goal will be attractive to boys and girls; here there is an opportunity for everyone to apply their knowledge, energy, and show their love for working on earth.

The Near North-West, small towns and rural areas between Tver, Pskov, St. Petersburg and Cherepovets - this is the Russia that has been least fortunate for 100 years. Maybe all 150 - although the population here increased until the First World War, with the beginning of the rapid industrial development of the country and the advent of railways (that is, already from the 1860s), both capitals began to actively pump out the population from these swampy, infertile lands.

Of course, these lands were barren and swampy before, but before the advent of St. Petersburg it was a borderland and at the same time the main trade route to the West, and at the same time a springboard for the development of the riches of the wild lands of the North and even Siberia (which once served as the basis for the wealth of Novgorod). Frequent wars did not really affect the hinterland, military operations were mainly carried out on the borders, military garrisons in numerous fortresses created jobs and attracted government funding. The punitive campaigns of Ivan the Terrible and the subsequent Livonian War, followed by the Time of Troubles, caused great damage to the region, but subsequently these lands quickly recovered, and in the 17th century Novgorod remained the second most populous city in the country. The more securely located Tver Principality had slightly more fertile soils, income from trade there was slightly less, and after joining the Moscow Principality it finally became part of Central Russia. With the advent of the Northern Capital, the regional centers of Pskov and Novgorod lost most of their importance, but for the northwestern outback, the construction of St. Petersburg was rather a plus - a large sales market appeared for local products, primarily for furs and timber; Gradually, going to the city to work (otkhodnichestvo) became widespread. Tver, on the contrary, with the development of Volga trade and the construction of artificial waterways between Moscow and St. Petersburg, entered a new phase of prosperity. An important and profitable business for the locals also became the maintenance of major roads from the new capital - primarily to Moscow, and from the end of the 18th century to Warsaw.
But the emerging railways led to the fact that passenger and cargo flows began to pass through these places in transit - neither the Yamsk service nor the postal stations were no longer required, and industrial development increased the number of jobs in the capitals many times over, and locals began to leave there for other reasons. seasonal earnings, and more and more often forever. The Tver region continued to flourish and at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries, Tver was able to take advantage of all the advantages of the industrial revolution in Russia.
But the first strong blow to these lands was dealt by the First World War, which quietly turned into the Civil War - the first military operations in these parts in two hundred years. First, the First World War brought large infrastructure projects here - primarily the construction of rolling (i.e., parallel to the front line) railways. However, the Civil War did not allow them to be completed; they were only partially implemented (not counting the fully constructed lines Narva - Pskov and Pskov - Polotsk). Starting from the second half of the 1920s, the outflow of population began with renewed vigor; the industrialization of the 1930s almost did not affect these regions, as a result, already in 1939 the population of these lands was significantly less than in 1913. Tver grew greatly in the wake of industrialization and developed quite in line with the rest of the country. The Great Patriotic War completely bled the near North-West (including the Tver region). Almost everything was destroyed, the cities were depopulated, much was never restored (for example, many ancient architectural monuments in small towns, sections of the Novgorod - Staraya Russa, Gdov - Pskov, Pskov - Polotsk railways, the tram systems of Pskov and Staraya Russa).

Oddly enough, this is a rare case - in the USSR they tried to eliminate all the consequences of the war and, as a rule, actually eliminated them. Moreover, when it came to railways, they were rightly considered as the basis of the country’s transport system. The Northwestern Non-Black Earth Region became the only region where, during the years of Soviet power, the density of the railway network did not increase, but decreased significantly. Despite the great war destruction, the Tver region continued to stand apart and remain more prosperous - post-war reconstruction quickly gave way to further development of the region. But since the 1960s, a general crisis of the rural Non-Black Earth Region began, affecting the Pskov and Novgorod regions, and then the Tver region especially strongly - the land here is worse, and not far from large cities, where a significant part of the local youth goes. The 1990s predictably worsened the trend. The Tver region, which was previously more prosperous, has already suffered greatly here - it is among the leaders in the number of villages that become abandoned every year, and the roads and state of urban improvement here are the worst in Central Russia.

The proximity of Moscow, which works here like a vacuum cleaner to pump out the most capable and promising population, has a disastrous effect on the region.

As a result, the countryside was naturally depopulated, and the Pskov region was included in world textbooks on demography (more than a fivefold decrease in population over a hundred years). The central part of the Leningrad region (suburban area of ​​St. Petersburg), Novgorod (late industrialization of the 1960s and tourism), Pskov (tourism), Tver and individual cities of the Tver region (surviving industry) were almost unaffected. The Pskov region is poorer, but generally more well-groomed; in the Novgorod region there is a striking contrast between Novgorod, which looks no worse than St. Petersburg, and the murdered, almost deserted countryside; the Tver region, which, according to statistics, is richer than the Pskov and Novgorod regions, looks much worse than its northwestern neighbors.

Probably, the north-west of the Non-Black Earth Zone is the only part of the country that has definitely lost something during the years of Soviet power. A sort of symbol of what we have lost since 1917.
All this began to be created as a preface to the post about Gdov, but it turned out to be so much that it had to be put into a separate post. About Gdov itself and Lake Peipus - in the next part.