State Monopolization of Fur Hunting in the Far Eastern Republic in 1920–1922: Perspective of N.A. Mikhailovsky, Head of Fishing Department

Abstract

The article discusses the state fur monopoly in the Far Eastern Republic (1920–1922). N.A. Mikhailovsky was the head of the Sub-Department for Fisheries and Hunting at the Ministry of Agriculture. His scientific approach to fur monopoly was rather unusual for the bureaucratic nomenclature of those days. The author performed a comprehensive analysis of N.A. Mikhailovsky’s views on the nature of the fur monopoly, the experience of its implementation in the Far Eastern Republic, the consequences of the poor implementation methods, and the ways the commercial and raw material economy used to get out of the crisis. The research relied on the principles of objectivity and historicism, with historical-genetic and formal-legal methods. N.A. Mikhailovsky could foresee the disastrous outcome of the hastily adopted legal provisions as the sudden drop in fur legally harvested by the Central Union of Cooperatives led to smuggling. However, he did his best to improve the legislative procedure of state monopolization. N.A. Mikhailovsky faced the difficult foreign policy situation in the frontier and the domestic economic crisis. He had to act at the limit of his departmental capabilities, trying to overcome the resistance of the controlling organs, e.g., the Ministry of Industry and Trade. He made a number of very careful attempts to bring to the authorities the situation with gangs that smuggled the fur "counter currency" abroad. During 1921 – early 1922, he proposed a number of measures to rationalize the system of commercial fur harvesting while maintaining a limited state monopoly. As a result, the government took the correct legislative strategy to establish productive relationships with the local hunting communities.