What exactly is dangerous about Bill No. 165677, which expands the permitted “taking” of Red Book animals?

The public outcry over the new draft law (resolution), which expands the destruction of animals listed in the Red Book, has reached the highest levels of government. The issue is being covered in the media, discussed in society, everywhere. People are rightly demanding answers from officials not only for the amendments introduced by the new draft law, but also for why Russia’s Red Book has been steadily eroded over several years. Why is it becoming easier and easier to kill animals that are already on the brink of total extinction?

Readers sent me a letter with a publication from one of the media outlets, and I will publish the text in full.

“A number of media outlets and internet resources are spreading false information claiming that the rules for taking Red Book animals have changed. Russia’s Ministry of Natural Resources states that the rules remain unchanged. The current regulation, which has been in force since 1997, is not changing: taking is allowed only in exceptional cases — when there is a threat to human life or to prevent массовых infectious diseases among other animals.

The draft resolution referred to by the media does not expand the list of grounds for issuing permits, but updates the procedure for granting them and for subsequent oversight. In addition, it establishes a division of powers between the federal and regional levels.

Amirkhan Amirkhanov, adviser to the head of Rosprirodnadzor: The draft resolution systematically updates the current Rules for Taking Wildlife Objects Listed in the Red Book of the Russian Federation. Its important feature is that the regulation will also apply to species included in the Red Books of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. At the same time, it is fundamentally important that the draft does not change the list of grounds for taking such species: as before, permits may be issued only in exceptional cases. The main changes concern the division of powers between Rosprirodnadzor and the authorized bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as updating the procedures for issuing permits and oversight.

Permits for taking species listed in the Red Book of the Russian Federation, as well as species simultaneously included in the federal and regional Red Books, will be issued by Rosprirodnadzor. With regard to species included only in the Red Books of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, the relevant powers will be assigned to the authorized bodies of the constituent entities. Oversight functions will be distributed in the same way. A separate block concerns the digitalization of permitting procedures.

The prepared draft resolution shifts the permit model into a more modern and technological format. For cases falling within the competence of Rosprirodnadzor, the granting of a permit will be tied to an entry in an electronic register, and notification of the applicant is intended to be carried out through the unified portal of state and municipal services.

At the same time, the draft preserves the current approach to the grounds for issuing permits: the taking of wildlife species listed in the Red Book of the Russian Federation and the Red Books of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation remains permitted only in exceptional cases. Thus, this is not about easing the protection regime, but about improving the administrative procedure, dividing competence, and increasing oversight transparency.

All changes are aimed at increasing the transparency of permitting procedures, creating a clearer distribution of competence between federal and regional authorities, and improving the oversight mechanism while preserving the current exceptional procedure for taking Red Book wildlife species.”

As you can see, Allies, our struggle has reached the very top of government. They are being forced to come out and speak about the problem. That in itself is good. What is bad, however, is that, as always, the focus is being shifted away from the main issue: this is about EXPANDING the possibilities for destroying animals listed in the Red Book.

People are now holding officials quite justifiably and fairly accountable not only for the current amendments introduced by this new resolution, but also for earlier changes through which the protection status of animals listed in the Red Book has been systematically weakened in recent years.

Let me remind you that from 2018 to 2020, the hunting lobby tried to push through the direct legalization of trophy hunting of Red Book animals. Public proposals were voiced to effectively allow the killing of rare species for money, but after public resistance this could not be pushed through directly. Moreover, it was officials themselves who called for allowing trophy hunting of endangered species.

I will cite a 2018 quotation from the federal newspaper Kommersant so that no one forgets where it all began:

“The list of trophies may be expanded: the Ministry of Natural Resources is considering the possibility of hunting Red Book animals.

The Ministry of Natural Resources is considering the advisability of trophy hunting of animals belonging to rare and endangered species, the ministry told Kommersant in response to a question about a letter that State Duma deputy Vladislav Reznik, a member of the ‘Mountain Hunters Club,’ sent to Deputy Minister Ivan Valentik. Mr. Reznik proposes assessing the possibility of introducing ‘special programs’ in Russia allowing trophy hunting of Red Book animal species so that hunters would subsequently finance the protection of those species.”

Then, from 2020 to 2025, another stage began — not open legalization, but the gradual erosion of the Red Book’s protection status. In 2020, legislation began to introduce approaches that shifted the focus away from full scientific assessment toward state monitoring data; in 2021, hunting legislation directly established not an absolute prohibition, but a regime of prohibition with exceptions; in 2023–2024, the Ministry of Natural Resources promoted new rules for the “taking” of Red Book animals, retained the hunting term “taking,” and expanded the space for lethal removal under various pretexts. In other words, first they tried to legalize trophy hunting directly, and after that failed, they began step by step to restructure the entire legal system so that killing rare species would become increasingly permissible, increasingly convenient, and capable of being “administratively formalized.”

What a “coincidence” that this began to be done deliberately immediately after high-ranking trophy-hunting officials publicly and openly called for it, while the “elite clubs” to which they belong even offered millions of rubles for the right to kill rare animals.

So now, after all of this, when the protection status has already been blurred, the authorities in February 2026 submitted for consideration new draft No. 165677, which finally and irreversibly SCALES UP the practice of shooting animals listed in the Red Book.

Officials are now writing:

“The current regulation, which has been in force since 1997, is not changing: taking is allowed only in exceptional cases — when there is a threat to human life or to prevent mass infectious diseases among other animals.”

It is remarkable how easily information can be presented in such a way that it creates the impression that the same rules have been in place since 1997. But why not tell people about the erosion of the Red Book? About the introduction of new grounds for shooting animals in 2021? Where is the information that in that same year, 2021, the provision prohibiting the hunting of Red Book animals was removed?

I will not even add anything of my own here, but simply quote the federal news agency TASS from August 1, 2021:

“Two new laws on taking animals from the Red Book of the Russian Federation come into force on August 1.

Under the new rules, the taking of rare animals is now allowed in exceptional cases, the press service of Russia’s Ministry of Natural Resources told TASS.

This concerns the federal laws of 22 December 2020 No. 455-FZ ‘On Amendments to the Federal Law “On the Animal World” and “On Hunting and the Conservation of Hunting Resources and on Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation”.’

‘This document removes the provision prohibiting the implementation of any types of hunting with respect to mammals and birds listed in the Red Book of the Russian Federation and (or) in the Red Books of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. <…> Under these rules, the taking of wildlife species belonging to species listed in the Red Book of Russia is allowed only in exceptional cases for the purpose of preserving wildlife species,’ the ministry said.

In addition, from August 1, the taking of Red Book animals is permitted for the purpose of monitoring them, regulating their numbers, protecting public health, eliminating threats to human life, preventing mass diseases among agricultural and other domestic animals, and ensuring the traditional way of life of the Indigenous small-numbered peoples of the Russian Federation.”

Yes, officials are now right that Resolution No. 13 itself has indeed existed since 1997. But its content has been actively and deliberately changed. And not speaking about that means consciously misleading the public.

This is not about “animals in general,” but about species listed in the Red Book — that is, rare and endangered wildlife species. The very meaning of the Red Book is that it is a regime of special protection for species at high risk of extinction. For such species, even the removal of a single significant individual can have catastrophic consequences, up to total extinction. Any intervention in these populations must therefore be extremely targeted, cautious, and subject to strict federal control under the supervision of the scientific community.

Suppose that, in some case, it really did become necessary to shoot a rare animal — for example, if it had indeed been hit by a car and its injuries were incompatible with life, and scientists confirmed this — then this should be done by a STATE EXPERT, with full reporting IMMEDIATELY and transmission of that reporting upward so that a scientific commission could then verify all arguments, facts, and assess the consequences for the population.

But now this will be done by representatives of BUSINESS: the new draft law specifically prescribes a mechanism for issuing online permits for the “taking” of animals listed in the Red Book, including to legal entities and entrepreneurs. There is no scientific assessment there, no state experts — there is only an official issuing a permit to shoot, and a commercial actor receiving it electronically.

What does new draft No. 165677 do, and why exactly is it dangerous?

First.

The draft extends unified rules for the “taking” of endangered animal species not only to the federal Red Book, but also to the Red Books of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. This means that the permit model itself will not remain under the control of a single center, but will be distributed among the regions, and local officials will decide which animals may be “taken.” This creates enormous ground for corruption.

The draft divides powers between the federal center and the constituent entities: for species from the federal Red Book and for species simultaneously included in the federal and regional books, permits will be issued by Rosprirodnadzor, while for species included only in regional Red Books, the powers will be transferred to regional authorities. In other words, regional officials will themselves be able to decide which animals may be handed over for shooting, without any federal oversight.

This is called “scaling downward through the system,” when more decision-making points are created, more bureaucratic discretion appears, and less real oversight remains.

Second.

The draft shifts the permit model into a DIGITAL FORMAT: permit applications can be submitted online, they will be tied to an electronic register, and the “recipient of the service” will be able to do everything remotely. Let me remind you: WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SPECIES ON THE BRINK OF EXTINCTION, and when a mass electronic system is introduced, that means there are plans, with high probability, to kill many animals on a regular basis.

If there were only two or three conflict cases and scientific intervention were genuinely needed — removal in a truly critical situation, with proven impossibility of a non-lethal method — the federal center could handle that perfectly well through a special order of the Ministry of Natural Resources. Instead, we are being offered an ELECTRONIC system for the “taking” of animals on the brink of extinction.

Third.

Legal entities and entrepreneurs, as well as citizens, including foreign nationals, will be allowed to obtain electronic permits for the “taking” of rare animal species. This had been pushed before, but not scaled up; now it will become part of an everyday “electronic process” and will also apply to regional Red Books.

A convenient working infrastructure is being built, potentially suitable for mass commercialization.

Fourth.

The new draft introduces NO MANDATORY INDEPENDENT SCIENTIFIC EXPERT REVIEW as the central barrier before a permit is issued. Officials are trying to refer to the “permit issuance procedure,” the “electronic register,” and the “division of powers,” but not a word is said about external population-level expert review, proof that no non-lethal alternatives exist, or public scientific scrutiny of the decision. In other words, the entire system is purely administrative: “from official to commercial actor.”

Fifth.

The draft is also dangerous because it scales up the APPLICABILITY OF EXCEPTIONS. In its response, the Ministry of Natural Resources claims that the “grounds are not changing.” Of course they are not changing — because they have already been eroded to the limit. What is happening now is that everything is being translated into a more convenient, more technological, and more territorially expanded format. Into a system that can be applied again and again.

In summary.

The new draft consolidates previously created exceptions for the “taking” of rare species into a digital, regionally distributed, and administratively scalable system of permits for taking Red Book animals. That is its central danger.

The logic is banal in its simplicity: first, an exception for the “taking” of rare species is formalized as a procedure. Then an electronic register and digital issuance appear. Next, powers are partially transferred to the regions, to lower-level officials. After that, decisions on shooting rare species begin to be made not as extraordinary emergency cases, but as a standard administratively managed process.

You see the problem, Allies: we are assembling the chain of changes and demanding proper modern protection for rare species, because it was through numerous draft laws and regulations that their protection status was systematically weakened. And when a new resolution appeared, naturally people began asking the authorities about the entire chain, pointing out the inadmissibility both of what has already been legalized and of what they are trying to do next.

And in response, the bureaucrat writes to us: “Calm down, we introduced that yesterday, and today we are making only a few slightly different changes.” But both “yesterday” and “today” are part of a SINGLE PROCESS OF ERODING RUSSIA’S RED BOOK, and those interested in it are precisely influential trophy hunters within the authorities.

And that is all.

A rare species ceases to be an object of unconditional protection and becomes an object of commercial interest. How else can one explain that BUSINESS will be brought into the “taking” of Red Book animals through online licenses, with the possibility of reporting a killed animal only within a long period of two months after the shooting?

© PAVEL PASHKOV