‘Territories of Traditional Nature Use’ without indigenous users – case of Western districts of Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug – Yugra

DOI: 10.33876/2311-0546/2021-54-2/324-339

Abstract

The special land law for indigenous peoples of Yugra was written in 1992 and became a counterweight to the development of the oil and gas industry and the growing alienation of natural land. As early as 1989, a third of the Okrug’s territory was reserved for indigenous land management. The «Regulation about the status of family lands in the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug» defined ‘rodovye ugod’ya‘ (family lands) as a natural-territorial complex where indigenous people have historically led a traditional life. Family lands were regarded as the basis for traditional nature management, and a space for preserving the original culture. By 1999, 465 family lands had been allocated, taking up half of the Surgut and Nefteyugansk districts and a quarter of the Nizhnevartovsk district. These were the lands of the historical residence of the Hanty. In the west of Yugra, in the Kondinsky and Berezovsky districts (where the Mansi mostly lived), the family lands occupied 3.3 and 16.4% of the area. The article analyzes what caused the disproportions. On the example of the Kondinsky and Berezovsky districts, the economic and ethnic situation that determined the difference between the western and eastern parts is described. I mark the specific problems of allocating ancestral lands, the special decisions of the administrations, and the case of five family lands from the Bolchary village is separately analyzed. In 2001, the Regulation on Family Lands was absorbed by the Federal law on Territories of Traditional Nature Use. The article describes the difficulties that arose during the change of jurisdiction and discusses the disputed status of the owners (ex-rodoviki). The final legal status was obtained only after the functional zoning of the territories of traditional nature use (ex-family lands) in 2015. The result of the work was a set of special maps showing the exact boundaries, the size of forage and pasture zones, and the number of indigenous people permanently residing on the land. These data showed that in the western regions of the KhMAO-Yugra, the family lands did not fulfill their original task of creating reserves for original culture and traditional nature management. In 2014, less than 0.5% of the indigenous population lived permanently on family lands, and their contribution to the traditional economy was insignificant. The article uses specific examples to analyze the reasons why the concept of traditional nature management turned out to be inoperable. The differences between the concept of traditional nature management created by the state and the realities of the existence of ancestral lands are shown.

For Citation: Abramov, I.V. 2021. ‘Territories of Traditional Nature Use’ without indigenous users – case of Western districts of Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug – Yugra. Herald of Anthropology (Vestnik Antropologii) 2: 324–339.

Refereces

• Fedorova, E.G. 2010. Nacionalnye obshhiny srednej Sosvy i ix sozdateli [National community middle Sosva and their creators]. In Etnokulturnoe nasledie narodov Severa Rossii. Ed. by E.A. Pivneva, 203–210. Moscow: OOO «Avgust Borg».
• Kharamzin, T.G. 2001. Ekonomika traditsionnogo prirodopol'zovaniia korennykh narodov Severa [Traditional nature management of the native peoples of the North]. Khanty-Mansiisk.
• Kharamzin, T.G. and N.G. Khairullina. 2000. Obskie ugry: sotsial'no-ekonomicheskaia situatsiia na poroge tret'ego tysiacheletiia (Po materialam sotsiologicheskikh issledovanii) [Ob Ugrians: socio-economic situation on the threshold of the third Millennium (based on sociological research)]. Khanty-Mansiisk: Poligrafist.
• Khaknazarov, S.Kh. 2016. Problemy sotsial'no-ekonomicheskogo razvitiia territorii traditsionnogo prirodopol'zovaniia korennykh narodov KhMAO-Yugry (po materialam sotsioologicheskikh issledovanii) [Problems of socio-economic development of the territories of traditional land use of indigenous peoples of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug – Yugra (based on sociological research)]. Khanty-Mansiisk: Iugorskii format.
• Kuchinskii, M.G. 2007. Ritorika traditsionnosti i realii prirodopol'zovaniia [The rhetoric of tradition and the realities of nature]. Rasy i narody. Sovremennye etnicheskie i rasovye problemy. Vol. 33: 58–88.
• Kurikov, V.M. 2012. Perspektivy razvitiya tradicionnyh otraslej hozyajstvovaniya na territoriyah sel’skih poselenij Yugry [Prospects of development of traditional economic sectors in the territories of rural settlements of Yugra]. Vestnik ugrovedeniya, 4 (11): 147–154.
• Loginov V.G., Iu.V. Popkov and E.A. Tiugashev. 2009. Korennye malochislennye narody Severa, Sibiri i Dal'nego Vostoka: politiko-pravovoi status i sotsial'no-ekonomicheskoe polozhenie. Ekaterinburg: Institut ekonomiki UrO RAN.
• Novikova, N.I. 2008. Ed. Liudi Severa: prava na resursy i ekspertiza [People of the North: rights to resources and expertise]. Moscow: Izdatel'skii dom «Strategiia».
• Novikova, N.I. 2014. Oxotniki i neftyaniki: Issledovanie po yuridicheskoj antropologii [Hunters and oilmen: a study in legal anthropology]. Moscow: Nauka.
• Martynova E.P. Aborigennoe predprinimatel'stvo v Severnom Priob'e [Aboriginal entrepreneurship in the Northern Ob region]. Vestnik antropologii. 2019. 2 (46): 72–85.
• Martynova, E.P., Pivneva E.A. 2001. Tradicionnoe prirodopol`zovanie narodov Severnogo Priob`ya [Traditional nature management of the peoples of the Northern Ob region]. Moscow.
• Pakhomov, V.P., M.N. Ignat'eva, V.N. Beliaev, V.G. Loginov , A.A. Litvinova, A.I. Permiakov and A.I. Raishev. 2000. Metodicheskie materialy po vzaimootnosheniiam korennykh malochislennykh narodov Severa s khoziaistvuiushchim sub"ektami [Methodological materials on the relationship of indigenous small-numbered peoples of the North with economic entities]. Ekaterinburg: Institut ekonomiki UrO RAN.
• Pika, A.I., and B.B. Prokhorov. 1994. (eds.) Neotraditsionalizm na Rossiiskom Severe (etnicheskoe vozrozhdenie malochislennykh narodov Severa i gosudarstvennaia regional'naia politika) [Neotraditionalism in the Russian North (ethnic revival of small-numbered peoples of the North and state regional policy)] Moscow: In-t narodnokhoziaistvennogo prognozirovaniia RAN.
• Pivneva, E.A. 2019. "Skol'ko vesit rybii khvost?": etnichnost' i biurokratiia v traditsionnom rybolovstve na Obskom Severe ["How much does a fish tail weigh?": ethnicity and bureaucracy in traditional fishing in the Ob North]. Herald of Anthropology (Vestnik antropologii) 2(46): 86–102.
• Territorii traditsionnogo prirodopol'zovaniia Khanty-Mansiiskogo avtonomnogo okruga – Iugry v period 1992-2004 gg. Informatsionnyi obzor [Territories of traditional environmental management of indigenous peoples of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug – Ugra in the period 1992-2004. Information review]. Yekaterinburg: OOO «Dom Akva-Press».
• Viget E., 2002. Ekonomika i traditsionnoe zemlepol'zovanie vostochnykh khantov [Economy and traditional land use of the Eastern Khanty]. In Ocherki istorii traditsionnogo zemlepol'zovaniia khantov (materialy k atlasu) [Essays on the history of traditional land use of the Khanty (materials for the Atlas)], 167–222. Yekaterinburg: Thesis.