CC BY
9DOI: 10.12731/2658-6649-2022-14-2-356-372 UDC 338.436.33
ORGANIZING SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL LAND MANAGEMENT IN ALTAI KRAI: A GEO-ECOLOGICAL PROSPECT
V.L. Tatarintsev, M.M. Shostak, L.M. Tatarintsev
In recent decades, the agriculture of Altai Krai has been considered an aggro-industrial complex. The total land area is 17 million hectares, and more than 11.5 million hectares are classified as agricultural lands. The area of arable land amounts to 6.5 million hectares. More than 90% of total agricultural land area, to various extents, is subject to erosion and soil blowing; less than 10 kg of mineral fertilizers are required. According to expert estimates, agricultural crops experience an acute lack of nutrients in the soil, which deteriorates the quality of the crop. In this regard, contemporary agricultural land management in Altai Krai is highly volatile and unsustainable. One example is the Strategic Direction ofScientific and Technological Development of the Russian Federation and other long-term regulatory documents defining the development of agriculture in the next 10-15 years, which establish the transition of some agricultural organizations to an alternative, high-tech, and environmentally friendly organic agricultural sector. Organic farming is based on the management of organic agricultural land. In those territories that conform to certification requirements, organic land management in Altai Krai can partly become an alternative path to an agro-industrial one. However, to move to a high-tech level of organization ofcontemporary agricultural land management in Altai Krai, it is necessary to implement all measures related to the geo- and agro-ecological justification of the use of the territory. To be exact, it is crucial to conduct (1) retrospective analysis of land management (based on the materials ofsoil surveys and land management systems for collective and state farms developed in the last century); (2) assessment of the ecology of the structure of the agricultural landscape and the structure of acreage and crop rotation system; (3) modeling of the agricultural landscape and the ratio of land; (4) ecological and economic analysis of land-use models.
Keywords: Altai krai; organization of sustainable agricultural land use; agricultural landscape; geo-ecological assessment; modeling of the agricultural landscape
For citation. Tatarintsev V.L., ShostakM.M., Tatarintsev L.M. Organizing Sustainable Agricultural Land Management in Altai Krai: a Geo-Ecological Prospect. Siberian Journal of Life Sciences and Agriculture, 2022, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 356-372. DOI: 10.12731/2658-6649-2022-14-2-356-372
ОРГАНИЗАЦИЯ УСТОЙЧИВОГО УПРАВЛЕНИЯ ЗЕМЛЯМИ СЕЛЬСКОХОЗЯЙСТВЕННОГО
НАЗНАЧЕНИЯ В АЛТАЙСКОМ КРАЕ: ГЕОЭКОЛОГИЧЕСКАЯ ПЕРСПЕКТИВА
В.Л. Татаринцев, М.М. Шостак, Л.М. Татаринцев
В последние десятилетия сельское хозяйство Алтайского края рассматривается в качестве агропромышленного комплекса. Общая площадь земель составляет 17 млн га, из них более 11,5 млн га отнесены к сельскохозяйственным угодьям. Площадь пашни составляет 6,5 млн га. Более 90% общей площади сельскохозяйственных угодий в той или иной степени подвержены эрозии и выдуванию почв; требуется менее 10 кг минеральных удобрений. По экспертным оценкам сельскохозяйственные культуры испытывают острую нехватку элементов питания в почве, что ухудшает качество урожая. В связи с этим современное управление сельскохозяйственными угодьями в Алтайском крае отличается высокой изменчивостью и неустойчивостью. В качестве примера можно привести Стратегию научно-технологического развития Российской Федерации и другие долгосрочные нормативные документы, определяющие развитие сельского хозяйства на ближайшие 10-15 лет, устанавливающие переход ряда сельскохозяйственных организаций на альтернативный, высокотехнологичный и экологически чистый органический сельскохозяйственный сектор. Органическое земледелие основано на управлении органическими сельскохозяйственными угодьями. На тех территориях, которые соответствуют сертификационным требованиям, органическое землепользование в Алтайском крае отчасти может стать альтернативой агропромышленному. Однако для перехода на высокотехналогичнъйуровень организации современного землеустройства сельскохозяйственного назначения в Алтайском крае необходимо реализовать все мероприятия, связанные с гео- и агроэкологическим обоснованием использования территории. А именно, крайне важно провести (1) ретроспективный анализ землеустройства (по материалам почвенных обследований и разработанным системам землеустройства в прошлом веке для колхозов и совхозов), (2) оценку экологии структуры агроландшафта и структуры посевнык площадей и системы севооборотов, (3) моделирование сельскохозяйственного ландшафта и соотношения земель и (4) эколого-экономический анализ моделей землепользования.
Ключевые слова: Алтайский край; организация устойчивого землепользования; агроландшафт; геоэкологическая оценка; моделирование агроландшафта
Для цитирования. Татаринцев В.Л., Шостак М.М., Татаринцев Л.М. Организация устойчивого управления землями сельскохозяйственного назначения в Алтайском крае: геоэкологическая перспектива // Siberian Journal of Life Sciences and Agriculture. 2022. Т. 14, № 2. C. 356-372. DOI: 10.12731/26586649-2022-14-2-356-372
Introduction
Current social and economic reforms radically changed land and property relations in Russia, its regions, and municipalities, significantly affecting the economy and society. As a result, various approaches and methods of regulation, planning, and organization of land management are required. Modern agro-industrial production has exhausted itself [13], as a result of which the direction of scientific and technological progress of Russia until 2035 and other long-term documents [16; 17; 23] outline areas related to greening production processes in the agricultural industry. Furthermore, many landowners employed in agricultural production often have different, even conflicting, interests, and those monitoring studies (soil, geobotanical, land management, etc.) conducted by state institutions for land design in the territory of the Russian Federation at the beginning of the 21st century became irrelevant and lost funding. Therefore, a system of land management, life support, and vital activity of the population and the state should be organized. It should also address the sustainable use of land resources [1; 8; 10; 15; 26]. Therefore, the problem raised in this paper is relevant, and research in this direction is essential to increase the sustainability of agricultural land management as a basis for the anthropogenic factor of geosystems.
For the first time, a multicomponent analysis of the medio-stabilizing role of the ratio of land and the structure of acreage was conducted for the studied territory over a long period of time. As a result, it was found that this is one of the main causes of its instability, which can be controlled. In this regard, innovative models of agricultural land use management were proposed, taking into account the reproduction of soil fertility and the stability of agricultural production, which will increase the stability of agricultural landscapes.
The scientific novelty of the research is determined by the following factors:
- the geoecological assessment of the impact of the composition of land on the sustainability of agricultural land use was conducted for the first time;
- the assessment of the erosion hazard of the structure of sown areas of agricultural land use of the municipal district was conducted for the first time;
- unique models of agricultural land use management that affect sustain-ability were developed taking into account the geoecological factors of the territory, offering different scenarios of its organization.
Materials and methods
The paper aims to determine the geo-ecological foundations in justifying measures for organizing sustainable agricultural land management based on the example of a municipal district in Altai Krai - Siberian Federal District. To achieve the research goal, it was necessary to analyze the land management system of the region and evaluate the ecological agro-landscape with a sowing crop rotation and perform modeling of agricultural lands.
This research is based on surveys of Altai Krai, including our municipal district, carried out by the Altai Research Institute of Land Design in 1970-2000. In addition, we presented the materials obtained as a result of the conducted research in the form of tables and diagrams.
A systematic approach or analysis was widely used to study natural systems (landscapes, biogeocenoses), create cultural systems for agricultural land management, and optimize agricultural landscapes and agroecosystems [6; 12; 18; 19]. When studying the local features of geosystems, various field, stationary, and office methods were used [3]. The geo-information system Mapinfo Professional 12.0 was applied to analyze and construct cartographic models. We analyzed and compared the obtained empirical models of agricultural landscapes using a comparative approach [7; 20; 21]. The cartographic method was a regular and integral part of the comparative analysis (approach).
We also used historical and abstract logical methods, mathematical processing of primary data, analysis, synthesis, and modeling of processes and objects [11; 24].
Results
The administrative territory of the Klyuchevskoy district and its dry steppe landscapes, which are geographically located in the west of Altai Krai, were the research object. From the west, the region borders Kazakhstan; the northern border runs past the Kulundinsky district, the eastern - past the Rodinsky district, and the southern - past the Mikhailovsky district of Altai Krai. The research area is a part of the Kulunda steppe, located in its central part, a lacustrine-alluvial plain. According to cadastral records, the area of the municipal district amounts to about 304.5 thousand hectares, of which 241.7 thousand hectares is agricultural land.
In accordance with agroclimatic zoning, the territory of Klyuchevskoy district is included in the warm (III) slightly humid region (east of the Klyuchevskoy Region), and the main part of the administrative district is located in the warmer arid region (IV) [25].
The landscapes of the Kulunda steppe are characterized by instability; they are subject to changes in the process of economic activity [9]. This situation is due to several factors: (1) the ease of soils in terms of the distribution of its particles by size and their formation in an arid climate; (2) the absence of bio-geocenoses formed under natural conditions; and (3) the low water reserves collected on the surface of the earth. These factors determine the development of desertification, soil degradation, weathering, salinization, and alkalinization. It is critical to increase the stability of agricultural landscapes and protect the water and soil resources of territories of this category [5; 22]. The characteristics of the studied agricultural lands are presented in Table 1. Negative factors for agricultural soils such as erosion, deflation, salinization, and alkalinization are of global importance [5; 22].
The characteristics of the studied agricultural lands (as of January 1, 2020) are given in Table 1 [18]. Air erosion is one of the negative factors of agricultural soils. For the studied region, air erosion is a common and dangerous phenomenon.
Table 1.
Characteristics of agricultural land, area (ha)
Type of agricultural land Total area Eroded Highly wind-eroded Saline Alkalinized
Agricultural land 221,263 700 16,632 5,134 24,859
Arable land 157,982 659 14,697 1 11,348
Fallow land 2,571 - - - -
Perennial plantations 120 - 67 - -
Hayfields 3,962 41 402 185 1,729
Pastures 56,628 - 1,466 4,909 23,954
When analyzing land management, one should assess the relationship between the ecological stability of the territory and the structure of land within the boundaries of the district. The environmental indicators used for the assessment should reflect the ecological stability and diversity of the landscape of the territory. These indicators include (1) the level of surface tillage, (2) forest cover, the ratio of natural and agricultural land (arable land, meadows, and forest
plantations), (3) the coefficient of environmental sustainability of the territory (Kes), (4) anthropogenic load (Kal), and (5) the index of ecological diversity [4]. The evaluation indicators are presented in Table 2.
Table 2.
Environmental indicators of the Klyuchevskoy district (as of January 1, 2020)
Indicators District (total area) Agricultural land Cultivated land
Cultivated land area, ha 304,333 241,730 221,623
Arable land, ha 157,982 157,982 157,982
Fallow land, ha 2,571 2,571 2,571
Hayfields, ha 3,896 3,896 3,896
Pastures, ha 56,898 56,898 56,898
Forests, trees, and bushes, ha 52,721 3,718 3,568
Water objects, ha 8,372 273 273
Built-up areas, ha 2,626 1,471 1,276
Ploughness, % 51.9 65.3 71.3
Forest cover, % 17.3 1.5 1.6
Land ration: arable land, meadows and forest, % 51.9:20.8:17.3 65.3:26.2:1.5 71.3:28.6:1.6
K 0.41 0.27 0.30
K, grade 3.15 3.50 3.82
It is necessary to conduct a comprehensive analysis of agricultural land and cultivated land for the studied region since the environmental sustainability of territories can vary significantly. In particular, the degree of surface tillage, the condition of the forests, and the percentage of soil types indicate the high stability of the landscape. Therefore, there will be different proposals for optimizing natural territories and agricultural lands. Priority should be given to measures aimed at farmland optimization.
Fig. 1 shows the results of an assessment of the erosion hazard of cultivated area structure in the research area (as of July 1, 2019).
The analysis of the ratio of the area of crops as a percentage is required to establish an optimum for creating favorable conditions for maintaining the stability of the territory in anti-erosion and anti-icing issues and ensuring the planned amount of crop products. Fig. 1 shows that cereals in the dry steppe should occupy 40%, grasses - 40-50%, accompanying crops - 10%-20% of the total area of crops.
20 40 60 80 100% share of grain crops
Fig. 1. The coefficient of erosion hazard for cereals (a) and perennial grasses (b)
in the crop structure
Soil-protective crop rotations are the factor with the most remarkable ability to protect land under arable land. The erosion hazard coefficient is 0.3-0.4.
The results of the evaluation of crop rotation used by agricultural organizations in the municipal area are given in Table 3. Crop rotation is discussed in terms of its ability to balance organic matter. A sustainable positive balance of organic matter is provided by soil-protective crop rotation, fodder 3-field with sweet clover, and irrigated 5-field with forage three-year perennial grasses. Field crop rotation in dry steppe conditions does not contribute to fertility reproduction; furthermore, it negatively affects the balance of organic matter.
Table 3.
Humus balance and the need for organic fertilizers
Type of crop rotation Humus balance, t/ha Manure application, t
1 ha 1 ha of crop rotation
Soil-protective
1. Herbal 6-field +2.59 - -
2. Grain-herbal with strip placement of crops 5-field +0.1 - -
Field
1. Grain-herbal 4-field -2.4 24 6
2. Grain-herbal 6-field -2.5 25 4
3. Grain fallow with sweet clover as fertilizer 6-field -2.76 28 5
The end of a table
4. Grain fallow 5-field -3.43 34 7
5. Grain fallow 4-field -3.46 35 8.7
Forage (without irrigation)
1. Forage 3-field with sweet clover +0.3 - -
2. Forage 7-field, including perennials 4 years 0 - -
3. Forage 2-field -1.6 16 8
By-farm (with irrigation)
1. Forage 5-field, including perennials 3 years +1.5 - -
2. Forage 2-field -1.3 13 6.5
3. Forage 3-field -2.7 27 9
Having analyzed land use in the Klyuchevskoy district of Altai Krai, we proposed 10 land management models (Table 4). The first three models have sufficient resource intensity, models 4-8 support the functioning of agricultural landscapes, but landscapes, nevertheless, remain ecologically unstable. The last two models are environment-restoring.
Table 4.
Land management models in the municipal district (as of January 1, 2020)
Models Share of lands, %
agricultural arable forage cultivated stabilizing non-agricultural
Resource-consuming (to a high degree) 79.4 51.9 20.7 72.6 22.7 6.7
Resource-consuming (to a medium degree) 78.7 47.1 24.8 72.0 27.6 7.3
Resource-consuming (to a lower degree) 78.7 43.3 28.6 72.0 31.3 7.3
Ecologically stable 78.0 40.0 27.5 67.5 34.66 10.5
Balanced 76.5 33.0 32.9 66.0 46.2 10.5
Balanced (from the medical point of view) 78.0 29.1 38.2 67.5 45.5 10.5
Lea tillage 78.0 14.6 52.9 67.5 58.7 10.5
Soil-protective 79.4 14.7 54.2 68.9 60.0 10.5
Virgin 78.0 0 67.5 67.5 73.3 10.5
Nature-protective 14.0 0 8.5 8.5 79.2 10.5
Table 5 presents indicators of the efficiency of agricultural land management under the proposed land management models.
Table 5.
Indicators of land management efficiency (as of January 1, 2020)
Indicators Models of land management
1* 2 3 4 5 6 7 8** 9 10
Productivity per 100 hectares at comparable prices, thou. RUB
Gross products 640 600 619 588 571 603 510 - 445 1,824
Consumed products 520 486 501 476 463 489 413 - 361 410
Profits 343 332 338 322 307 318 259 - 254 270
Productivity per 100 hectares of cultivated land, centner
Cereals 784 718 661 616 518 448 224 - no no
Milk 171 167 216 211 245 307 336 - 362 414
Meat 5 5 6 6 7 9 10 - 15 14
Break-even level, % 115 124 120 121 115 111 103 - 133 192
Note*: Model names are given in Table 4; ** economic indicators of Model 8 and Model 9 are practically identical.
Data in Table 5 were obtained based on the study of an extensive land management system. Table 5 shows that the value of gross and marketable output is determined by the ratio of land areas.
A decrease in the area of arable land leads to a decrease in the number of products received from arable land. The increase in livestock production is caused by an increase in the area of forage lands. In our calculations, we took two nominal heads of cattle on 5 hectares of forage land. Thus, the existing reserves of intensifying the land use of the territory were not taken into account.
Discussion
The geo-ecological assessment of modern land exploitation in the Kly-uchevskoy district revealed that the stability of the territory of the district is higher (Kes= 0.41) than the territory of agricultural land (Kes = 0.27-0.30) due to the presence of pine forests. The territory with agricultural land is characterized by the lowest level of ecological stability. This situation objectively proves an increase in the coefficients of topsoil cultivation and anthropogenic load, a decrease in the index of forest coverage, and the coefficient Kes <0.33, a negative balance of natural territories and arable land. The territory of the district is "unstable stable" (Kes = 0.41). The coefficient of anthropogenic load shows a change in the ecological state of land and agricultural lands (an increase from 3.15 to 3.82) towards deterioration. The ecological assessment of the exploitation of agricultural lands shows the deterioration of the ecological
condition of the private territories and those used by legal entities. These territories are less resistant to negative processes due to their narrow production specialization [14].
An ecological assessment of the crop ratio and the crop rotation system indicates that the erosion hazard coefficient increases with an increase in the proportion of grain crops and a decrease in the part of the perennial grasses. Soil-protective crop rotations protect arable land most effectively when four or five out of six fields are covered with perennial grasses.
This fact is evidenced by the coefficients of erosion hazard. Conservation crop rotations provide a positive balance of organic matter [2].
The results of the efficiency of using arable land indicate that the structure of crops has a positive impact on profitability. Indicators of economic efficiency and profit show the high economic efficiency of using arable land [4].
Quantitative analysis reveals that the productivity of arable land exploitation in the Belgorod region is four or five times higher, and in the Rostov region - six or seven times higher than in the Klyuchevskoy district of Altai Krai.
Optimization of dry steppe agricultural landscapes is built following the principles of sufficiency, environmental requirements, and economic potential.
Based on the calculations above, 10 algorithms or models of land management and optimization of agricultural landscapes in the region were proposed. So, the area of arable land from the first pattern to the last one decreases from 158 thousand hectares to 0. At the same time, forage areas (hayfields and pastures) increased from 60.5 thousand hectares in the 1st model to 205.3 thousand hectares in the 8th model. While the percentage of arable land to forage areas is changing, the total area of land and agricultural areas is decreasing since part of them is allocated to protective forest belts, microrelief, water protection zones around residential areas, along road and railway communications, and those for strengthening light soils. The ninth and fifth models are characterized by the most significant forest cover.
Conclusion
The territory of the studied object has a weak stability of economic operation; it differs significantly in the character of agricultural lands and areas of natural conditions. Deflation is a limiting factor for land use.
The erosion hazard coefficient is 0.3-0.4. Land-use models that we developed will significantly improve the stability of the territory. To increase the environmental sustainability of the agricultural landscapes of the dry steppe zone, and, in particular, of the Klyuchevskoy district of Altai Krai, it is necessary to reduce the arable land area to an environmentally acceptable level (30%-40% of
the total area of the municipal district) and bring the area of field-protective forest plantations to the norm of 1 hectare per 25-30 hectares of agricultural land.
Additionally, the resulting livestock products and intensive technologies of land exploitation in field cultivation compensate for the drop in crop yields.
This study shows that the geoecological assessment of agricultural land use is obligatory and integral, which allows one to optimize the use of land and economic and social resources, ensuring its competitiveness and efficiency.
References
1. Chernogorov A.L., Chekmarev I.I., Vasenev I.I. Gogmachadze G.D. Agroeko-logicheskaya otsenkazemel'i optimizatsiyazemlepol'zovaniya [Agro-ecological land assessment and land-use optimization]. Moscow, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 2012, 268 p.
2. Dunets A.N., Latysheva O.A., Myagkiy P.A., Tatarintsev V.L., Tatarintsev L.M. Agroekologicheskaya otsenka sel'skokhozyaystvennogo zemlepol'zovaniya i meropriyatiya po yego okhrane [Agroecological assessment of agricultural land management and measures for its protection]. Vestnik KrasGAU [Bulletin of the Krasnoyarsk state agrarian university]. 2019, vol. 9, no. 150, pp. 11-18. http:// www.kgau.ru/vestnik/2019_9/content/2.pdf
3. Arkhangel'skiy A.M. Metodika polevykh fiziko-geograficheskikh issledovaniy [Methodology of field physical and geographical research]. Moscow, Vysshaya shkola, 1972, 303 p.
4. Bocharov S.N., Tatarintsev V.L., Tatarintsev L.M. Agroekologicheskaya otsenka sel'skokhozyaystvennogo zemlepol'zovaniya Altayskogo kraya s tsel'yu uveli-cheniya produktivnosti [Ecological and economic assessment of agricultural land use in Altai Krai to increase its productivity]. Vestnik KrasGAU [Bulletin of the Krasnoyarsk state agrarian university]. 2019, vol. 1, no. 154, pp. 18-26. http://doi.org/10.36718/1819-4036-2020-1-18-26
5. Budritskaya I.A., Tatarintsev V.L., Tatarintsev L.M. Vestnik agroekologicheskoy otsenki pochv Kulundy [Agroecological assessment of the soils of the dry steppe Kulunda]. Vestnik Altayskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Altai State Agrarian University]. 2015, vol. 11, no. 133, pp. 42-50.
6. Vasenev I.I. Agroekologicheskoye modelirovaniye i proyektirovaniye (interak-tivnyy kurs): uchebno-prakticheskoye posobiye [Agroecological modeling and design (interactive course): An educational and practical guide]. Moscow: Publishing house of RGAU - MSHA named after K. A. Timiryazev, 2010, 260 p.
7. Vlasova T.V., Tatarintsev V.L. Otsenka zemlepol'zovaniya v munitsipal'nykh obrazovaniyakh sukhostepnoy zony kulundy [Assessment of land management
in the municipalities of the dry steppe zone of Kulunda]. Vestnik Altayskogo agrarnogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Altai State Agrarian University]. 2009, vol. 8, no. 58, pp. 26-30.
8. Tatarintsev V.L., Tatarintsev L.M., Makenova S.K., Shostak M.M. Geoecologi-cal assessment of landscapes as a basis for the organization of sustainable agricultural land use. Sustainable Development of Mountain Territories, 2021, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 485-497. http://naukagor.ru/ru-ru/about/textsofarticles
9. Kashtanov A.N. Shcherbakova A.P. Landshaftnoye zemledeliye. Chast' 1-2 [Landscape farming. Part I-II.]. Kursk, VNIIZIZPE, 1993, 98 p.
10. Kiryushin V.I. Ekologizatsiyazemledeliya i tekhnologicheskayapolitika [Greening agriculture and technology policy]. Moscow, Moscow State Agricultural Academy named after K. A. Timiryazev, 2000, 473 p.
11. Kiryushin V.I. Ekologicheskiye osnovy zemledeliya [Ecological foundations of agriculture]. Moscow, Kolos, 1996, 365 p.
12. Myagkiy P. A., Repenok D.A., Tatarintsev V.L., Tatarintsev L.M. Modelirovani-ye sel'skokhozyaystvennogo zemlepol'zovaniya v Altayskom kraye [Modeling of the agricultural land use in Altai Krai]. Vestnik Altayskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Altai State Agrarian University]. 2018, vol. 161, no. 3, pp. 26-32. http://www.asau.ru/vestnik/2018/3/026-032.pdf
13. Khalin N.S., Nazarova I.V., Simakova S.A., Dymova L.V. Monitoring plodorodi-yapochv zemel 'nogo naznacheniya Altayskogo kraya: spravochnik [Monitoring of soil fertility of agricultural lands in altai Krai: A reference book]. Barnaul, Paragraph, 2019, 384 p. http://agrohim22.ru/index.php/publishe
14. Tatarintsev V.L., Tatarintsev L.M., Matsyura A.V., Bondarovich A.A. Organizat-siya ekologicheskogo zemledeliya na osnove landshaftnogo analiza [Organization of sustainable agricultural land management in Altai Krai using landscape analysis]. Ustoychivoye razvitiye gornykh sobytiy [Sustainable development of mountain territories]. 2020, vol. 3, no. 45, pp. 339-349. http://naukagor.ru/ru-ru/articles/ArtMID/2504/ArticleID/3416/site-map
15. Korshunov S.A., Lyubovedskaya A.A. Asaturova A.M., Ismailov V YA., Konovalen-ko L.Yu. Organicheskoyesel'skoyekhozyaystvo: innovatsionnyye tekhnologii, opyt, perspektivy [Organic agriculture: innovative technologies, experience, prospects]. Moscow, FSBSI Rosinformagrotech, 2019, 96 p. https://ksh.volgograd.ru/upload/ iblock/P0CHHO0PMArP0TEX%20BepcTKa%20orgamc_cx_2019-1_copy.pdf
16. Pravitel'stvo Rossiyskoy Federatsii, uchastki ot 29 iyunya 2016 g. № 1364-r [Government of the Russian Federation, Order No. 1364-r of June 29, 2016], 2016. URL: http://static.government.ru/media/files/9JUDtBOpqmoAatAh-vT2wJ8UPT5Wq8qIo.pdf
17. Rasporyazheniye pravitel'stva RF ot 10 avgusta 2019 g. № 1796-r, 2019 g. [Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated August 10, 2019 No. 1796-r, 2019], 2019. URL: https://www.garant.ru/products/ipo/prime/ doc/72522534/
18. Tatarintsev L.M. Ekologicheskiye aspekty sel'skokhozyaystvennogo zemlepol'zovaniya v Altayskom kraye [Environmental aspects of agricultural land use in Altai Krai]. Vestnik Altayskogogosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Altai State agrarian university]. 2010, no. 1, pp. 49-52.
19. Tatarintsev L.M., Tatarintsev V.L., Budritskaya I.A. Kontseptsiya upravleniya ze-mel'nymi resursami Altayskogo kraya v sovremennykh usloviyakh [The land management concept in Altai Krai in current conditions]. Vestnik Altayskogo gosu-darstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Altai State Agrarian University]. 2014, vol. 7. no. 117, pp. 165-170. http://www.asau.ru/vestmk/2014/7/165-170.pdf
20. Tatarintsev L.M., Tatarintsev V.L., Vlasova T.V. Modelirovaniye sovremenno-go zemlepol'zovaniya v sukhikh stepyakh [Modeling modern land use in dry steppe]. Barnaul, Publishing house of ASAU, 2010, 103 p.
21. Tatarintsev L.M., Tatarintsev V.L., Kiryakina Yu.Yu. Organizatsiya sovremen-nogo zemlepol'zovaniya na ekologo-landshaftnoy osnove: monografiya [Organization of modern land use on an ecological-landscape basis: monography] Barnaul, Publishing House of ASAU, 2011, 106 p.
22. Tatarintsev L.M., Tatarintsev V.L., Pakhomya O.G. Faktory plodorodiya kashta-novykh pochv, sukhiye stepi, yuzhnykh masshtabov i urozhaynost' yarovoypsh-enitsy: monografiya [Fertility factors of chestnut soils of dry steppe in the south of Western Siberia and yield of spring wheat: Monography]. Barnaul, AGAU Publishing House, 2005, 105 p.
23. Ukaz Prezidenta RF ot 12.01.2016 №642 (red. ot 15.03.2021) "O Strategii nauchno-tekhnologicheskogo razvitiya Rossiyskoy Federatsii" [Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated 01.12.2016 No. 642 (ed. dated 15.03.2021) "On the Strategy of scientific and technological development of the Russian Federation"], 2021. URL: http://www.consultant.ru/document/ cons_doc_LAW_207967/
24. Schwebs G.I. Metodicheskiye ukazaniya po landshaftnym issledovaniyam dlya sel 'skokhozyaystvennykhpredpriyatiy [Methodological guidelines for landscape research for agricultural purposes]. Moscow, VASHNIL, 1990, 58 p.
25. Yanova Ye.I., Kukharskaya V.L., Morozkova M.M. Agroklimaticheskiye resursy Altayskogo kraya (bez Gorno-Altayskoy avtonomnoy oblasti) [Agro-climatic resources of the Altai Territory (without the Gorno-Altai Autonomous Region)]. Leningrad, Hydrometeoizdat, 1971, 155 p.
26. Tatarintsev V., Lisovskaya Yu., Tatarintsev L. Agricultural Landscape Quality as a Key Factor Fostering Environmentally Safe Agricultural Land Use in the Arid Steppe of the Altai Region. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. Series International Scientific and Practical Forum on Natural Resources, the Environment, andSustainability, 2021, no. 670, pp. 012036. https://iopscience.iop.org/issue/1755-1315/67071
Список литературы
1. Агроэкологическая оценка земель и оптимизация землепользования / Черногоров А.Л., Чекмарев И.И., Васенев И.И. Гогмачадзе Г. Д. М.: Московский государственный университет им. М. В. Ломоносова, 2012. С. 268.
2. Агроэкологическая оценка сельскохозяйственного землепользования и мероприятия по его охране / Дунец А.Н., Латышева О.А., Мягкий П.А., Татаринцев В.Л., Татаринцев Л.М. // Вестник КрасГАУ. 2019. Т.9. №150. C.11-18. http://www.kgau.ru/vestnik/2019_9/content/2.pdf
3. Архангельский А. М. Методика полевых физико-географических исследований. М.: Высшая школа. 1972. С. 303.
4. Бочаров С.Н., Татаринцев В.Л., Татаринцев Л.М. / Агроэкологическая оценка сельскохозяйственного землепользования Алтайского края с целью увеличения его продуктивности // Вестник КРАСГАУ Т.1, №154. С. 18-26. http://doi.org/10.36718/1819-4036-2020-1-18-26
5. Будрицкая И.А., Татаринцев В.Л., Татаринцев Л.М. / Агроэкологическая оценка почв сухостепной Кулунды // Вестник Алтайского государственного аграрного университета. 2015, Т.11. №133. С. 42-50.
6. Васенев И.И. Агроэкологическое моделирование и проектирование (интерактивный курс): учебно-практическое пособие. М.: Издательство РГАУ -МСХА им. К. А. Тимирязева, 2010. С. 260.
7. Власова Т.В., Татаринцев В.Л. / Оценка землепользования в муниципальных образованиях сухостепной зоны кулунды // Вестник Алтайского государственного аграрного университета. 2009. T.8, №58. С. 26-30. http:// www.asau.ru/vestnik/2009/8/Agroecology_Vlasova.pdf
8. Геоэкологическая оценка ландшафтов как основа организации устойчивого аграрного землепользования / Татаринцев В.Л., Татаринцев Л.М., Макено-ва С.К., Шостак М.М. // Устойчивое развитие горных территорий. 2021. Т. 13. № 4. С. 485-497. http://naukagor.ru/ru-ru/about/textsofarticles
9. Каштанов А.Н., Щербакова А.П. Ландшафтное земледелие. Часть 1-2. К.: ВНИИЗИЗПЭ, 1993. С. 98.
10. Кирюшин В.И. Экологизация земледелия и технологическая политика. М.: Московская государственная сельскохозяйственная академия имени К. А. Тимирязева. 2000. С. 473.
11. Кирюшин В.И. Экологические основы земледелия: Учеб. для с.-х. вузов. М.: Колос. 1996. С. 365.
12. Моделирование сельскохозяйственного землепользования в Алтайском крае / Мягкий П.А., Репенёк Д.А., Татаринцев В.Л., Татаринцев Л.М. // Вестник Алтайского государственного аграрного университета. 2018. Т.161. № 3. С. 26-32. http://www.asau.ru/vestnik/2018/3/026-032.pdf
13. Мониторинг плодородия почв земель сельскохозяйственного назначения Алтайского края: справочник / Халин Н.С., Назарова И.В., Симакова С.А., Дымова Л.В. Б.: Параграф. 2019. C. 384. http://agrohim22.ru/index.php/ publishe
14. Организация устойчивого сельскохозяйственного землепользования на основе ландшафтного анализа / Татаринцев В.Л., Татаринцев Л.М., Ма-цюра А.В., Бондарович А.А. // Устойчивое развитие горных территорий. 2020. Т.3. №45. С. 339-349. http://naukagor.ru/ru-ru/articles/ArtMID/2504/ ArticleID/3416/site-map
15. Органическое сельское хозяйство: инновационные технологии, опыт, перспективы / Коршунов С.А., Любоведская А.А. Асатурова А.М., Исмаилов
B.Я., Коноваленко Л.Ю. М.: ФГНУ Росинформагротех. 2019. С. 96. https:// ksh.volgograd.ra/upload/iЫock/РОСИНФОРМАГРОТЕХ%20верстка%20 organic_cx_2019-1_copy.pdf
16. Правительство Российской Федерации, распоряжение от 29 июня 2016 г. № 1364-р, 2016. URL: http://static.government.ru/media/files/9JUDtBOpqmo AatAhvT2wJ8UPT5Wq8qIo.pdf
17. Распоряжение Правительства РФ от 10 августа 2019 г. № 1796-р, 2019. URL: https://www.garant.ru/products/ipo/prime/doc/72522534/
18. Татаринцев Л.М. Экологические аспекты сельскохозяйственного землепользования в Алтайском крае // Вестник Алтайского государственного аграрного университета. 2010. №1. С. 49-52.
19. Татаринцев Л.М., Татаринцев В.Л., Будрицкая И.А. Концепция управления земельными ресурсами Алтайского края в современных условиях // Вестник Алтайского государственного аграрного университета. 2014. Т.7. №117. С. 165-170. http://www. asau.ru/vestnik/2014/7/165-170.pdf
20. Татаринцев Л.М., Татаринцев В.Л., Власова Т.В. Моделирование современного землепользования в сухой степи. Б.: Изд-во АГАУ. 2010.
C. 103.
21. Татаринцев Л.М., Татаринцев В.Л., Кирякина Ю.Ю. Организация современного землепользования на эколого-ландшафтной основе: монография. Б.: Изд-во АГАУ, 2011. С. 106.
22. Татаринцев Л.М., Татаринцев В.Л., Пахомя О.Г. Факторы плодородия каштановых почв сухой степи юга Западной Сибири и урожайность яровой пшеницы: монография. Б.: Изд-во АГАУ, 2005. С. 105.
23. Указ Президента РФ от 01.12.2016 №>642 (ред. от 15.03.2021) "О Стратегии научно-технологического развития Российской Федерации," 2021. URL: http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_207967/
24. Швебс Г.И. Методические указания по ландшафтным исследованиям для сельскохозяйственных школ. М.: ВАСХНИЛ, 1990. С. 58.
25. Янова Е.И., Кухарская В.Л., Морозкова М.М. Агроклиматические ресурсы Алтайского края (без Горно-Алтайской автономной области). Л.: Гидроме-теоиздат. 1971. С. 155.
26. Tatarintsev V., Lisovskaya Yu., Tatarintsev L. Agricultural Landscape Quality as a Key Factor Fostering Environmentally Safe Agricultural Land Use in the Arid Steppe of the Altai Region // IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. Ser. International Scientific and Practical Forum on Natural Resources, the Environment, and Sustainability, 2021, no. 670, pp. 012036. https://iopscience.iop.org/issue/1755-1315/670/1
DATA ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Vladimir L. Tatarintsev
Altai State University
61, Lenin Ave., Barnaul, 656049, Russian Federation
kafzem@bk.ru
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5368-726X
Maria M. Shostak
Altai State University
61, Lenin Ave., Barnaul, 656049, Russian Federation
shostak.mari@mail.ru
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1236-6109
Leonid M. Tatarintsev
Altai State Agricultural University
98, KrasnoarmeyskiyAve., Barnaul, 656049, Russian Federation
kafzem@bk.ru
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4308-6110
ДАННЫЕ ОБ АВТОРАХ Татаринцев Владимир Л.
Алтайский Государственный Университет
просп. Ленина, 61, г. Барнаул, 656049, Российская Федерация
kafzem@bk.ru
Шостак Мария М.
Алтайский Государственный Университет
просп. Ленина, 61, г. Барнаул, 656049, Российская Федерация
shostak.mari@mail.ru
Татаринцев Леонид М.
Алтайский Государственный Аграрный Университет просп. Красноармейский, 98, г. Барнаул, 656049, Российская Федерация
kafzem@bk.ru
Поступила 06.02.2022
После рецензирования 14.02.2022
Принята 04.03.2022
Received 06.02.2022 Revised 14.02.2022 Accepted 04.03.2022
