Disappeared Herds: The Loss of Reindeer Herding in the Evenki Community of Western Yakutia During the Soviet Era

Belolyubskaya Galina Stepanovna PhD in Politics Researcher, Department 'Human in the Arctic Region', Institute for Humanities Research and Indigenous Studies of the North, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences 677027, Russia, respublika Sakha, g. Yakutsk, ul. Petrovskogo, 1 gbelolubskaya@gmail.com Other publications by this author

Introduction. In the social sciences and humanities, numerous Russian and foreign studies have been devoted to the study of the lifestyle and problems of indigenous communities in the Arctic (and Subarctic) [Pika (ed.) 1999; Kasten (ed.) 2002; Habeck 2003; Vitebsky 2005; Stammler 2005; Brandisauskas 2017, etc.]. Among them, a large number of works stand out, related to the study of nomadic Evenk communities in Russia [Nikolaev 1964; Tugolukov 1985; Fondahl 1998; Anderson 2000; Sirina 2006; Dutkina and Belyanskaya 2014; Lavrillier and Gabyshev 2017, etc.]. The central place in these studies is occupied by the study of everyday life, traditional farms, religious beliefs and ethics, ideas about the earth and the surrounding world. However, scientists mainly work with those communities where the main traditional economy of nomadic communities – reindeer husbandry - is still preserved. The problems of communities that have lost reindeer husbandry as a type of management remain beyond the attention of researchers.

This article will focus on the Evenk community of Western Yakutia – the Sadyn National Forest of the Mirninsky district, where reindeer husbandry practically ceased to exist in the late 1970s. As S.I. Boyakova writes, this community "often, due to its relative smallness and isolation from other territorial groups, they even forget to mention when listing modern local groups of the Evenk ethnic group" [Boyakova 2024: 58]. Meanwhile, the history of this site is of particular scientific interest, since it turned out to be at the epicenter of events related to the development of the diamond industry in Western Yakutia [Vecherin 1997; Stepanov 2002, etc.]. Soviet industrialization and collectivization completely changed the way of life of the indigenous peoples of the North [Sannikova 2007], which actualizes the study of the history of these transformations and their consequences. In this context, the loss of reindeer husbandry in the Sadyn region is a critically important issue that reflects the broader processes of interaction of indigenous peoples with socio-economic and political changes in the 20th century.

This work is based on a wide range of unpublished archival documents of the Sadyn National Evenki nasleg, stored in the municipal archive of Mirny. These materials made it possible to reconstruct key events related to the state of reindeer husbandry in the Soviet period. In addition, the author's field materials collected in 2019-2021 in the village of Syuldyukar in the Mirninsky district of the RS(Ya) were involved. In particular, the memories of local residents have become an important source, which complement the documentary data, revealing the social and cultural aspects of the events of those years.

A few facts from the history of Sadynsky nasleg. Western Yakutia as an economic zone includes 7 uluses, including Mirninsky, where 71,203 people lived as of January 1, 2023 [Statistics 2023]. At the moment, in the Mirninsky district, the only municipality with the status of national Evenki is Sadynsky nasleg. The administrative center of nasleg is located in the village of Syuldukar with a population of 389 inhabitants [Statistics 2023]. The ancestors of the current inhabitants of Sadynsky nasleg, as noted by S.I. Boyakova, appear already in the first written sources of the XVII century – the Cossacks' replies and yasach books [Boyakova 2024: 59]. According to local residents, the place where Syuldukar is now located served as a parking lot for nomads. Subsequently, already in Soviet times, this area began to play a significant role in regional cargo transportation, since the warehouses of the Holbos organization, the consumer cooperation union, were located there [Ignatieva 2019: 63].

The first houses in this area appeared in the early 1950s. These structures were built to accommodate the workers of the Amakin geological exploration expedition, organized in 1949 to search for diamonds in the region. Numerous residents of Sadynsky nasleg worked in this expedition as cabins, guides for geologists. In 1954, the first diamond deposit was discovered in Western Yakutia. The diamond industry expanded rapidly, requiring more and more resources. Therefore, in 1956, the village of Syuldukar was founded, the main task of which was to supply agricultural products for the rapidly developing diamond industry.

In 1960, the Soviet government created a state farm "Novy" on the basis of existing collective farms on the territory of the Mirninsky district. The main activity of the department of the state farm "Novy" in Syuldukar was the development of animal husbandry: the production of meat and dairy products, harvesting of furs and breeding of deer. However, reindeer husbandry in Sadynsky nasleg did not last long. In the mid-1970s, the management of the state farm decided to slaughter about 1,200 heads of state deer. During one winter of 1976-1977, Sadynsky lost all state deer. After the disappearance of the state deer, the villagers kept a small herd of private deer until the mid-2000s. In 2006, a festival was organized in nasleg, to which the remaining deer were specially brought. Since then, the inhabitants of Suldukar have not seen live deer anymore. As can be seen from the description of events, in the Soviet era reindeer husbandry in nasleg went through serious changes, culminating in its complete decline. The decision of the state farm to slaughter animals was a turning point in this dramatic story. To this day, local residents do not know what was behind this decision. The study of oral history materials and archival documents will help shed light on the disappearance of reindeer husbandry in Sadynsky nasleg.

The state of reindeer husbandry in Sadynsky nasleg in the 1960s. According to archival data, the number of deer in the nasleg in the 1960s fluctuated within 2,000 heads; for example, according to data on the state of animal husbandry for 1965, there were 2,032 state deer in nasleg after calving (MA, F.39, op.1, D.29, L.21), and in 1968 – 2307 deer after calving (MA, f.39, op.1, d.46, l.11). In addition, private deer were kept in nasleg, which grazed together with the state ones. According to household books, only some families had their own deer: some had one deer, others had 4-5 or 12-15.

Among the archival materials, the most interesting are two documents on the state of reindeer husbandry in Sadynsky nasleg in the 1960s. One of them dates back to 1964 and covers discussions on reindeer husbandry issues at meetings of the Sadynsky National Council of Workers' Deputies (MA, f.39, op.1, d.20, l.24). The other, dating back to 1969 and entitled "On the results of reindeer husbandry in 1968 and tasks for 1969" (MA, f.39, op.1, d.49), sheds light on the state and prospects of reindeer husbandry during this period in the Sadyn region.

The 1964 document highlights the positive changes in the industry, noting that "in recent years the number of deer has increased 1.5 times, the number of deer has been significantly reduced" (MA, F.39, op.1, D.20, L.24). However, the 1969 report says that in recent years, the development of reindeer husbandry in Nasleg has not been given due attention. As a result, the number of deer does not increase, and the farm remains unprofitable (MA, F.39, op.1, D.49). It follows that reindeer herders faced the task of constantly increasing their livestock. According to data on the state of animal husbandry in 1965 and 1968, there was a noticeable increase in the number of deer. However, in 1968, the state farm had to purchase an additional 115 deer in order to reach a total of 2307 heads (MA, F.39, op.1, d.46, l.11). This indicates that the number of deer was not increasing as fast as the Soviet authorities wanted.

The main problem faced by reindeer herders in the face of the need for a constant increase in livestock was the loss of deer. In the 1964 report, the main issue was the loss of 228 deer during 1963 (MA, f.39, op.1, d.20, l.24). Among the reasons for this were "indiscipline of reindeer herders, violation of labor rules, and non-adherence to the pasture route drawn up by the department [of the state farm]" (MA, f.39, op.1, d.20, l.24). This fragment emphasizes not only the personal responsibility of reindeer herders for each deer, but also the need to strictly follow the set route set by the state farm. Any deviations from these routes were fully the responsibility of the reindeer herders.

From the 1969 report, one can get a more detailed idea of how the Soviet bureaucracy linked the death of deer with the observance of established routes. In particular, the document notes that in two herds the state plan was fulfilled by 97.6% and 95%, respectively, and the safety of young animals was 100% in both herds (MA, F.39, op.1, D.49). It is further emphasized that "the positive experience of these herds is that that they had correctly drawn up the routes of their herds at the beginning of the year, and strictly adhered to these routes. In other herds, as a result of incorrect route planning, deer were frequently driven through many areas throughout the year. As a result, large losses and deaths of deer were allowed" (MA, F.39, op.1, D.49). Thus, the state ordered reindeer herders not only to preserve and increase their livestock, and ensure the safety of young animals, but also strictly follow predetermined routes. In the Soviet system, reindeer husbandry turned from a way of life not just into production, but into a rigidly bureaucratic industry.

The reports for 1964 and 1969 vividly reflect the difficult conditions in which reindeer herders found themselves. The 1964 report says: "Until now, reindeer herders have not been provided with normal working conditions. No additional payments are paid for the rearing of young animals and for the preservation of large deer without losses. In addition, holidays and weekends are not paid to reindeer herders or are not provided by shift shepherds" (MA, F.39, op.1, D.20, L.24). The meaning of this becomes clearer from the 1969 report, which briefly notes that "reindeer herders are not provided with days off" (MA, F.39, op.1, D.49). That is, in the absence of shift shepherds, reindeer herders did not have days off at all and did not receive any additional payment for this.

The 1969 report highlights that "reindeer herders live in very difficult conditions. They are not provided with the necessary equipment/tents, overalls, iron stoves, etc. ... The wages of reindeer herders are low. The rate per reindeer herder is high" (MA, F.39, op.1, D.49). According to the memoirs of the villagers, the salary of reindeer herders was about 70-100 rubles, which was almost three times lower than the average salary of 288 rubles in Yakutia in the 1970s [BSE 1978]. It is important to mention here that from 1930 to 1966, collective and Soviet farms compensated workers not with money, but with workdays. It has not yet been possible to find out when the transition from workdays to cash wages took place at the Novy state farm, established in 1960. The 1969 report recognizes the need to involve young people in reindeer husbandry for at least one year (MA, f.39, op.1, d.49). This highlights that reindeer husbandry has become unattractive for young people. Low salaries have certainly played a key role in this situation.

According to the stories of the old residents of the village, deer require constant year-round care. Domestic deer cannot exist without humans. In summer, the camp must be fumigated to protect the animals from midges. It requires special skills to avoid accidental fires. It is also necessary to protect deer from wolves and other wild animals, including wild deer, which can take pets with them.

In addition, deer are susceptible to various diseases. As stated in the 1964 report, "there were massive diseases of deer with hoof and scabies. The fight against these diseases was carried out very poorly, poorly provided with medicines. Due to the remoteness, the distance between the herds, one veterinarian was unable to serve all the herds during the mass disease of deer" (MA, F.39, op.1, D.20, L.24). As this document shows, the state farm allocated only one veterinarian to care for about 2,000 deer, and in general, it is obvious that veterinary care was poorly organized.

The management of the state farm expected reindeer herders to run a "profitable farm" (MA, f.39, op.1, d.49). The 1969 report even mentions the category of "fatness of deer", which was divided into high, medium and low. The report expressed dissatisfaction with the practice of starting the slaughter of deer in January-February, when the animals were already beginning to lose their fatness. In particular, the report says the following: "As a rule, in recent years, deer have been slaughtered in January and February. By this time, the deer will lose their fatness and extra care costs are incurred for slaughtered deer in 2-3 months" (MA, F.39, op.1, D.49). The state farm carefully assessed the live weight of the animals and the amount of meat transferred to the state.

As can be seen from the above, reindeer herders and the state farm were faced with the task of preserving and increasing the state deer population. Reindeer herders were directly responsible for each animal. This highlights an important point: the decline of reindeer husbandry in Sadynsky nasleg in the late 1970s could not have been the initiative of the reindeer herders themselves. Such decisions could only be made at the state level.

The history of the loss of reindeer husbandry in Sadynsky nasleg in the 1970s. In the period from the late 1960s to the early 1970s, documents on the state of reindeer husbandry in Sadynsky nasleg indicate significant changes in the industry. New problems that have not been mentioned before are emerging. The expanding mining industry attracted more and more visiting workers, which became a threat to the survival of deer in nasleg. For example, the 1970 report says: "Every year, deer are shot and killed by dozens of unknown persons, expedition workers, "hunters" from the city. For example, this year two deer were shot at the first herd and taken away by car. This is just what I saw. And so no one knows who has not been clarified. The case was handed over to the investigative authorities, but there is still no result" (MA, F.39, op.1, 57, L.13). At a meeting of residents of Syuldukar on December 12, 1970, one of the residents spoke: "In the summer, the Khomus where I live also shot my own deer, one tugut was taken away by motorboat. I contacted the police, but an employee came to me only 1.5 months after that incident" (MA, F.39, op.1, 57, L.31). As these materials show, law enforcement agencies practically did not deal with such cases.

The Minutes of the village council meeting of December 10, 1970, speak of the mass poisoning of deer, as a result of which many young animals died. The document states that "specialists arrived and could not establish a diagnosis" (MA, F.39, op.1, D.55, L.37). The reasons for the death of the deer have remained unclear. In addition, predators, especially wolves, were named among the factors of the decrease in the number of deer (MA, F.39, op.1, D.55, L.37).

Finally, in April 1972, the reduction of pasture lands was discussed at the Naslega meeting. This caused a number of problems, such as the prolonged stay of herds in one place, which worsened the condition of existing pastures (MA, F.39, op.1, D.64, L.14). As a result, according to the nasleg report for 1972, the total number of deer amounted to 1,484 heads (MA, F.39, op.1, D.64, L.48), that is, in a few years the number of animals decreased by a third.

Meanwhile, the situation of reindeer herders remained virtually unchanged compared to the 1960s. According to the minutes of the village Council meeting on April 14, 1972 (MA, f.39, op.1, d.64, l.14-17), their salaries remained low and did not increase. In an attempt to reduce the loss and theft of deer, round-the-clock duty was organized in some herds in the summer. Reindeer herders continued to face delays in obtaining necessary equipment such as protective clothing and tents, and were not provided with sleds, saddles, ropes and radios. The issue of providing firearms for self-defense and protection of deer was also discussed. In addition, the absence of a veterinarian in nasleg has significantly complicated the life of reindeer herders. The document noted: "Improvement and facilitation of the work of the reindeer herder is poorly carried out, winter quarters and corals are not being built" (MA, F.39, op.1, D.64, L.15). As a result, some reindeer herders began to refuse to work in herds, which led to a critical shortage of personnel.

Pyotr Ignatiev, a resident of Syuldukar, spoke at a meeting in 1972, stressing: "The comrades who spoke mainly focus on three issues. There is no pasture land, there are no personnel, we will not be able to increase the number of deer. Then we should talk not about the development of reindeer husbandry, but about how to get rid of deer. This is wrong. The conversation should be conducted in only one direction – it is about the development of reindeer husbandry" (MA, F.39, op.1, D.64, L.14). The preservation of reindeer husbandry was of paramount importance for the residents of Sadynsky nasleg.

However, in February 1973, at the naslega meeting, concern was expressed for the first time that "the governing organizations express an opinion on the elimination of deer in our department of the state farm, since reindeer husbandry is unprofitable" (MA, F.39, op.1, D.71, L.2). Subsequent documents indicate increasing pressure on reindeer herders who tried to preserve reindeer husbandry. The minutes of the 1975 residents' meeting note: "due to the unfair attitude of reindeer herders to their duties, the chronic death and loss of deer continues" (MA, f.39, op.1, d.81, l.78). Under the Soviet system, responsibility for the decline of reindeer husbandry was assigned to the reindeer herders themselves, who for decades were they are deprived of a decent salary and the necessary resources.

According to data at the beginning of 1974, there were 1,146 state deer in nasleg (MA, f.39, op.1, d.81, l.86). The last mention of reindeer husbandry in archival documents is contained in the minutes of the meeting dated December 23, 1976, where one of the participants remarked: "Reindeer husbandry was a traditional industry in our country farms. In my opinion, the elimination of reindeer husbandry will cause some damage to our economy, especially with regard to transport" (MA, f.39, op.1, d.82, l.25). Archival materials no longer provide information about the reasons for the elimination of reindeer husbandry. It simply disappears from reports and other documents, with the exception of static data on the number of animals in the forest. For example, the report for 1977 indicated that the total number of state deer was 37 (MA, F.39, op.1, D.84, L.36).

According to local residents, the dramatic reduction in the number of deer to 37 in 1977 was the result of mass slaughter. Before the mass slaughter, the state farm began selling deer into private hands. Some families were able to buy and keep a small number of animals. According to the memoirs of one of the old-timers, "all the deer were slaughtered. There was a paddock near the village, where the mass slaughter was carried out. Then the meat was taken out somewhere... They explained to us that the state farm was going to abandon reindeer husbandry and switch to other forms of management. And that's all they told people" (PMA 2021). Given the realities of the Soviet system, residents could not oppose this decision. Another old resident said the following: "They said, "Why do you need deer?" And then they came and killed all the deer. Our old people almost cried blood. They felt deep sadness. They believed that our very existence was possible only because of the deer" (PMA 2021). Thus, the state farm organized the slaughter of deer and, obviously, attracted people from outside for this. This did not happen overnight, but during the winter of 1976-1977. Even today, residents call the slaughtering site "the place where the deer were slaughtered."

One of the elders of the village believes that the authorities of that time were of the opinion that "Reindeer husbandry is useless... No one thought then that Evenks lived here, and that they could not live without deer. They did what was beneficial to them. In addition, the health of the deer deteriorated, and the shepherds experienced various difficulties, then only the elderly remained in this area. Young people preferred careers in other fields. That was the root of all the problems. The general position was that deer were no longer needed" (PMA 2021).

According to some residents, deer have become an obstacle to the extraction of resources and the development of the diamond industry. One of the old-timers shared: "Where there are deer, expeditions cannot work. Therefore, in order to extract resources, they destroyed reindeer herding here" (PMA 2021). He also noted: "We kept our deer in the areas where they were going to work. The deer were right above the bowels. How could they do their job if there were deer nearby? They even demanded that the reindeer calving take place in a predetermined location" (PMA 2021). Another resident expressed a similar opinion, saying, "Deer could not compete with diamonds" (PMA 2021). However, officially reindeer husbandry in nasleg was liquidated under the pretext of its unprofitability and lack of profit. Archival materials show that the official version blamed the decline of the industry on the reindeer herders themselves, who until recently tried to preserve reindeer husbandry, struggling with a constant shortage of resources. This local history of the loss of reindeer husbandry illustrates how in the Soviet system bureaucratic responsibility was shifted to ordinary workers, while key decisions were made "from above", at the state level.

Researchers share the opinion of residents of Sadynsky nasleg that industry played a crucial role in the decline of reindeer husbandry [Boyakova 2024]. But there is no direct mention in archival documents that the elimination of reindeer husbandry was somehow connected with the expansion of industrial work. Although in the same documents, evidence can be found that the decline of reindeer husbandry was associated with an acute shortage of pastures and a massive influx of workers who arrived to participate in extractive projects. Thus, it becomes clear that the reason for the liquidation of reindeer husbandry was not its unprofitability, but the conflict with the growing extractive industry, which displaced the traditional industry.

Conclusion. For the residents of Sadyn Nasleg, deer are a cultural symbol inextricably linked with the Evenk identity. They did not accept the loss of reindeer husbandry and today attempts are being made in nasleg to revive it, adapting it to modern realities, including the use of such unusual forms as corral reindeer husbandry. The loss of reindeer husbandry has become not only an economic but also a cultural tragedy for the local community. An analysis of oral history materials, residents' memories and archival documents shows that the elimination of reindeer husbandry in the Soviet period was due not only to internal problems of the industry, but in many ways was the result of a conflict between the traditional way of life of indigenous peoples and the industrial interests of the state. This story is important not only as a study of local processes, but also as an example of the universal challenges faced by indigenous peoples in the context of global socio-economic changes.