About the site
Oasis online magazine
Analytical journalism
Guest book
Magazine       "Oasis"
No. 24 (44) December 2006
№ 23 (43) December 2006
№ 22 (42) November 2006
№ 21 (41) November 2006
№ 20 (40) October 2006
№ 19 (39) October 2006
№ 18 (38) September 2006
№ 17 (37) September 2006
No 16 (36) August 2006
15 (35) August 2006
No. 14 (34) July 2006
№ 13 (33) July 2006
№ 12 (32) June 2006
№ 11 (31) June 2006
No 10 (30) May 2006
No 9 (29) May 2006
№ 8 (28) April 2006
№ 7 (27) April 2006
No. 6 (26) March 2006
No. 5 (25) March 2006
№ 4 (24) February 2006
№ 3 (23) February 2006
№ 2 (22) January 2006
№ 1 (21) January 2006
on       journal [PDF]:
Oleg Panfilov,
project Manager,

Dmitry Alyaev,
chief editor,

Roman Zyuzin,
webmaster [at] cjes.ru

Adil Dzhalilov,

a diamond stylus,

Nargis Zokirova,
zokirova77 [at] mail.ru

Representative Names
in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan
not disclosed

Lyudmila Burenkova,
technical editor,
lyuda [at] cjes.ru

Elena Dorokhova,
Save or spend?
Murat Beysenkulov (Almaty)
Nowadays, it is rare to meet someone who would not understand the need to protect the environment. The idea of ​​harmonizing the relationship between society and nature is close and understandable to everyone, since the dependence of people's well-being on the quality of their natural environment becomes more and more obvious.

It would seem that in this situation the solution of the environmental problem in the country should not cause any particular difficulties. Moreover, the need to protect nature and careful use of natural resources is not only established in the minds of the majority of the members of our society, but is also an essential component of the state’s strategies.

The Constitution of Kazakhstan provides for environmental protection. A number of legislative acts have been adopted for the preservation of nature, balanced environmental management and the presentation of basic requirements for environmental management. The Republic has ratified many international treaties and declarations in the field of environmental protection and is a member of various international environmental NGOs.

In Kazakhstan over the past decade, all environmental legislation has been updated. The update is associated with known political changes and was carried out mainly on the basis of environmental legislation adopted in the USSR. The implementation of these laws allowed us to achieve some positive results. The laws define the legal, economic and social foundations for the protection of the environment, establish an authorized body in the field of environmental protection - the Ministry of Environment Protection of the Republic of Kazakhstan. In particular, the Law "On Environmental Protection" discloses an economic mechanism for environmental protection and environmental management. It also identifies the main types of environmental management and the main conditions for their implementation. The system of payments for special nature use (principle of payment) is defined. The law also regulates the issues of rationing the quality of the environment, including the types of standards, the procedure for their approval. Formulated environmental requirements for economic and other activities and principles of environmental impact assessment. Funds have been allocated for environmental purposes, plans have been made for resuscitation to improve the natural environment. Created powerful facilities for wastewater treatment, water recycling system.

However, all these are only the first and very modest steps towards solving the environmental problem in the country, which as a whole remains extremely tense. Everyone knows that at present, the level of pollution of Kazakhstan’s rivers and lakes is still unacceptably high, and in such rivers as Ili, Nura and Irtysh in recent years, the water quality has even deteriorated. Until now, we do not have standards for the qualitative state of the biosphere and the inorganic environment, and data on atmospheric pollution are in no way linked to the quality of water in rivers and lakes.

What is the reason for such a depressing state of affairs in the field of environmental protection, including water resources? The reasons are obviously several. This is the insufficient knowledge of very complex environmental problems, and the imperfection of technology and technology, and the lack of funds allocated for nature protection, etc. But the most important thing is the viciousness of the current management system, which is the point of this article.

The system of legal regulation of the protection and use of natural resources of Kazakhstan at the national level is the legislation of the republic. Legal regulation of nature management and environmental protection of the territories of Kazakhstan is carried out on the basis of general comprehensive laws on environmental protection, as well as laws establishing the legal regime of individual natural objects - the subsoil, wildlife, waters, coastal zones, protected areas, etc. Currently, the environmental management system in Kazakhstan is designed so that several departments monitor the quality of the environment. So, the Committee on Water Resources is responsible for the protection of water resources, the Committee for Forestry - Forest, the Committee for Land Resources (Ministry of Agriculture) - Land, the Committee for Geology (Ministries of Energy and Mineral Resources) - Ground and Mineral Waters Thus, the industries exploiting natural resources are also responsible for their protection. In other words, all of these departments represent environmental interests. None of these departments really protects nature from pollution and the depletion of its resources. At best, they only record the negative impacts on nature and are limited to writing prescriptions and fines.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with the environmental and environmental components. But in no case should you mix one with the other. In the case of such a mixture, an economically stronger system (in this case, the former Ministry of Water Management) will suppress the weaker one (the Ministry of Environmental Protection) and not only bleed it, but also replace its real work with an imitation covering only one interest - environmental management.

For example, consider the structure of control over the state of water resources. The Water Resources Committee is an economic entity. The responsibilities of the Committee include the development of the water sector to meet the needs of the economy and the population. In other words, instead of reducing water consumption, the committee is forced to increase its volume, since this institution is economically interested in expanding the use of water resources.

As is well known in irrigated agriculture “only half of the water taken from sources comes to plants”. Only when transporting water through the main channels lost 20% -25% due to filtration. In addition, water is lost in the inter-farm and on-farm canals. Water that has gone into the ground swamps and salinizes the fields, destroys their fertility. Instead of retired lands at the cost of huge costs, new ones are being developed (evidence of this is the tragedy of the Aral).

At the same time, this department, within the framework of a long-term state program for the protection of the environment and the rational use of natural resources, draws up a “plan for the rational use of water”, which is, in fact, a profanation.

Such mismanagement of the most valuable natural resource is explicable. After all, the leaders of the former Ministry of Water Resources (whose successor is the Committee on Water Resources) and its local representatives have become accustomed to the fact that water is worth nothing, is taken free of charge and is supplied through canals with an earthen channel. Unfortunately, natural resources - this basis of the foundations of social production - are still not even counted as part of the country's national wealth. Namely, such wasteful, incomplete, extensive, inefficient use of natural resources as a result of improper management of the system - this is the source of exhaustion and pollution of the environment.

Summarizing the above, it can be stated that it would be more logical to take away the functions of state control from the above listed, so-called nature management agencies and leave them to the Ministry of Environmental Protection, where there are legislative prerequisites for this.
All messages are moderated by the webmaster.
* Email
* Message
[fields marked with * are required]