Transcripts from Soviet Archives

Marx-Engels |  Lenin  | Stalin |  Home Page

  Transcripts from Soviet Archives

Volume XI - 1931

VII. Socio‐political and economic situation in the Far Eastern Territory 

Summary of the PP of the OGPU on the DCK on the nature of the documents emanating from the units of the OGPU troops, for February 1931 Not earlier than February 28, 1931

Number 3

Top secret

In total, 10,942 documents were passed during the reporting period, of which 10,677 were read, which is 98% of the total number of those passed. Note: Among the passed [documents], there are no official documents and other documents that cannot be processed, in the amount of 1338. Of the read messages, 2966 messages of a positive nature were taken into account, negative ‐ 300. Extracts of a positive nature were taken 93, negative ‐ 78, ʺKʺ ‐ 86. Attitude towards party events held in the village

a) collectivization

Positive messages

“I repeat to you, apply to the Oktyabr commune. I previously prescribed you to join, but for some reason you are still pulling. You will still be in the commune. It will be worse for individual farmers. The cooperatives and the state will not supply them. You yourself should know that. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Son, February 17, 1931

“Why donʹt you enter the collective farm until now? I advise you, if the collective farm is developing well, join the collective farm, because you have to give up private property and develop collective farm construction. And once again I remind you that individual farms will not exist in the USSR by the end of the five‐year plan. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Son.

“My recommendation to you and a request to enroll in a collective farm and live a collective life, because the Central Committee of the AllUnion Communist Party of Bolsheviks has outlined in the plan that this year 80% collectivize. Therefore, it is clear that the pressure on the middle peasant individual farms will be even stronger. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Son.

“Please, Fyodor, write me letters, if something in your work, our collective farm [bothers] or something else, then let me know, I’ll probably find the ends, some kind of brake on the collective farm or else there any disorder, then write to me without fail. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Aleksandrovsk‐on‐Sakhalin VOGPU.

“I would like to ask about the collective farm, what do you think ‐ to join or not. If not, why not. It became very interesting for me to live on the collective farm. If you join, I will stay here on the collective farm. ʺ Doc. ʺANDʺ. Son. KPO, uchpunkt.

“How are you doing with collectivization? This interests me the most. I advise you to organize an artel, I think that the collective farm is already working with you with might and main. A collective farm will make your work and cultural life easier. After all, the party puts the question in such a way that by the end of the five‐year plan it will cover at least 100% of collectivization. ʺ Doc. ʺANDʺ. P. Nevolin. KPO.

b) others

Positive messages

“Write to me, as your communard, how you carry out grain procurements, and how your agriculture is getting stronger, how much grain you handed over and how much you think to sow. Grain procurement must be done at all costs. ʺ

Doc. ʺAʺ, Aleksandrovsk n / Sakhalin VOGPU.

“Venya, there is a big construction on Sakhalin, they are building a port, a railway, and a lot of attention is paid to logging, but here bureaucrats interfere with logging, and so they sent shock workers from the central cities ‐ Komsomol members for logging. Logging needs to be done, and now they are fighting bureaucrats, chopping wood and completing tasks. ʺ

Doc. ʺAʺ, Aleksandrovsk n / Sakhalin VOGPU.

“I applied for admission to the VKP (b), but how did you join the Komsomol? I advise you to do this, because you need to realize and be progressive in social construction. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Mukovin. KPO, Uchpunkt.

“Then I ask you to join the Komsomol, to develop. You will know the construction of the Soviet Union. Do not listen to the tunes of the kulaks and sing along with them, but listen to the proletarians, such as myself.


Doc. ʺANDʺ. Brother. KPO Uchpunkt.

“Now I’ll ask you how they look after the kulaks and how they deal with it, but we know how the Soviet government is cracking down, but we, the proletariat, must watch, don’t give it [fist] mercy, liquidate it as a class, but we, the fighters ʺThe Chekists often have to collide not only inside, but also have to go to the taiga every summer, we, the Chekist fighters, have the task of getting our Chekist spirit to liquidate [the kulak] as a class.ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Brother, VOGPU Cavalry Regiment.

“At the moment there is a campaign for re‐election to village councils, this is an important campaign, it coincides with the difficulties of social construction in the country. The kulaks and others, deprived of the right to vote, are trying to harm us, so you need to actively fight against such elements, prevent them from attending re‐election meetings. In no case should the disenfranchised be allowed into the village council. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Prokofiev. KPO outpost Bibikovo.

“I donʹt think you go to church now. When you were in the commune, it was probably explained to you that the church and religion only cloud your heads and lead you astray. Isnʹt that so, Vanya? I would, Vanya, advise you to learn, the present time ‐ you need to study and learn, tirelessly, and fight all religions, because nowadays an illiterate person is very bad and difficult to live and it is difficult to understand life, because he does not know what is happening around him, and how best to live. ʺ

Doc. ʺAʺ, Aleksandrovsk n / Sakhalin VOGPU.

“The third year of the five‐year plan will be a decisive year of the struggle along the entire front, an offensive against the kulak with a deployed front. The kulak will openly resist armed like never before, led by white bands. The organs of the OGPU are the instrument of the dictatorship of the proletariat, which will give a crushing blow at the very first attempt of the enemy. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. From a member of the commune Khlebnikov, a cavalry regiment of the VOGPU.

“We also have socialist competition and shock work, if you are building collectivization, then we must ensure this construction, namely, with accurate shooting, class sensitivity and a keen KGB eye in order to prevent spies, counter‐revolutionaries and smugglers from getting in on us. We must do this and will do it. You are rebuilding agriculture on a socialist track and liquidating the kulaks as a class under the slogan of complete collectivization, and we will ensure this construction by guarding the border and will always be ready to rebuff those imperialists who want to touch us with a bayonet. You know how they touched us at the Chinese Eastern Railway, where they will remember that you cannot joke with us. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. VOGPU Aleksandrovsk, Sakhalin.

On service and discipline

Positive messages

“Our service is very good. Life is fun. I have a good accordion with me.


Doc. ʺANDʺ. Gubenkov. KPO, Uchpunkt.

“Dear brother, serving in the Red Army is very good. The Red Army educates people, and you have to serve in it, and I personally serve willingly. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. VOGPU. Aleksandrovsk n / Sakhalin.

“It is good to serve, I am now a squad leader, I train young soldiers. Service in the army is good now, here they teach both literacy and military affairs. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. A. Galkin. KPO.

“I live well here. We celebrated 13 years of R.K. Kr here. army spent it very well, cheerfully. I have great achievements in my service. I donʹt think about anything else, but only how to serve well. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Husband. KPO.

“You ask how I serve. My service is very easy, you only look after order. Our commanding staff is good. In our conditions life is much better than in the linear units. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. A. Fadeev. KPO. Poyarkovo outpost.

“Well, in a word, I didn’t find anything bad in the army, except that you can learn something good, you can take an example from Larion Petrovich Evdokimov ‐ who he was before, and what kind of guy is now, he improved by 100% and got a qualification, and now he is on the right line more than me. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Comrade, the OGPU Cavalry Regiment.

“We finished equestrian studies, studied for four months, learned how to ride a horse, you wonʹt knock it down. Soon we are going to the border, and there is enough of everything, bread, clothes, everything is enough. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Egoshin. KPO, Uchpunkt.

“It’s fun for me to live here, because every five days we go to the city to different clubs, sometimes it’s difficult, but nothing, easier than at home. We have holidays, and they were very cheerful, for example, we spent the days of the Red Army ‐ it was February 23rd. The Red Army celebrated its 13th anniversary. We took the red oath that day. We had fun this day. A good dinner was arranged for us. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Korkin. KPO. Uchpunkt.

“The general conditions of service can be said that they are good in terms of food and uniforms, they are well provided for, we live in a simple, clean and warm barracks. Lighting, of course, is electric, so service in the Red Army is currently a school of political, cultural and physical development. During my short stay in the army, I firmly assimilated the general line of the party and the entire international situation, as well as the difficulties of the growth of our socialist construction and the nature of the crisis that gripped all capitalist countries, and in general I now have an idea of the course of life throughout the globe, which is not had before. All training in our army is based around the main issues of the general line of the party, and the method of competition and shock work is applied. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Comrade. 57th Separate Cavalry Frontier Detachment.

Negative messages

“I live in the Red Army, living in one word is unenviable, itʹs very difficult, very [strict] discipline, and you know what my character is, so you probably already deserve to go to court, but I donʹt know how it will end, they planned to go to school, I refused, I swore a lot with them and still fought back. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Friend. Cavalry regiment VOGPU.

“We live poorly, we go on guard every day. You did well that you stayed from this torment, you come from the guard, you go to tactical classes, you have to sleep for four hours, and those do not sleep, because the frost in the barracks is 25 degrees. The service is bad. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Zharkov M.G., cavalry regiment.

“I, a machine gunner, go on guard once every two days, it’s very hard to serve, I have to sleep five hours, and those do not sleep, because it’s cold, we are waiting for warmth. Perhaps we will leave for the summer dispossession. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. From brother Zharkov M.G., cavalry regiment.

Economy position

Positive messages

“You are asking about “shamovka”. Shamai is good, there is nowhere better: soup with meat, buckwheat porridge with lard, and dinner is good. ʺ

Doc. ʺAʺ, Aleksandrovsk n / Sakhalin VOGPU.

“I inform you that we have received new overcoats, trousers and tunics. We go to ʺyatʺ ʺ.

Doc. ʺANDʺ. KPO, Uchpunkt.

“I’ll describe my life: it’s very good to live, there is plenty to eat, we go to the movies almost every day. I walk clean, sleep clean. And what is difficult is known, because I am illiterate. ʺ

Doc. ʺAʺ, Lutsenko, KPO, Uchpunkt.

On the dangers, severities of service and anti‐moral phenomena Negative messages

“I’m in a helluva lot of bad mood, I’ll probably drive myself out of the world, it’s very difficult for us, when you knew, dear Dusya.”

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Lavrenty Konenkov, cavalry border detachment, Uchpunkt.

ʺDear friend, I received a letter from you, which was signed on January 9, but very sad, do not know what to do or do not come home, or himself decide 87 now, but I think to solve itself, is better than precious comrade. Georgy Zinovievich, it is very difficult to bear, but I think it is better to commit suicide. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Comrade, VOGPU Cavalry Regiment.

“Dear parents, my life is not red, because I miss how I came to the army, I felt fine, and now I feel bad. In general, itʹs very boring. ʺ

“I am standing on the border, and it may be that today I am alive, and tomorrow I will not be. Gangs cross the border every day and they might kill me. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Son. KPO, Uchpunkt.

“There are a lot of prostitutes, you can do it every day. My service is cheerful. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Morozov. KPO, Uchpunkt.

“The bad thing here is that there is nowhere [...]. Dangerous, there are [many] infectious. Well, how often do you look into a glass. When you drink, drink to me. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Belov. KPO, Uchpunkt.

ʺWe often hear here that our border guards are being killed at the border, and soon we will go to the border to expect a bullet in the forehead.ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Evdokimov. KPO, Uchpunkt

“When something happens to me, go to ours and ask them for a photo for my daughter Zoya. I was filmed with my father. I canʹt write, it captures my heart, and tears run from my eyes. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Husband. KPO, Uchpunkt.

“My destiny is to be in the Far East, it is possible that I will see you in two years, but it may be an accident. If only fate is destined for me to pierce a bullet in my warm heart, then only I can forget and not see you.


Doc. ʺTOʺ. From the son of Trofimov. Cavalry regiment.

“I will have to serve for two years and a half. Will I come home or not? We have such a service, we guard the border, every day we expect death from bandits, every day they go from abroad, and every day we catch defectors like dogs. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Kuznetsov. KPO, Uchpunkt.

“Now, when we moved to the division, they wanted to transfer me to the office, I also fought back with difficulty, now I was in the machinegun department, can you imagine what it means to be in the machinegun department? He also fought back, the first in the rifle squad, and now I’m sword like to completely fight off military service. Seryoga, I confess to you as a friend that I donʹt know what to do in order not to serve. And I advise you not to get into military service, and especially, in which units I am, this is just death, not service. Now soon we will probably go on an expedition or a business trip to carry the arrested. Eh, Seryoga, if you knew how hard it is for me, you know if your guys, or chaldons, you canʹt do business with them. There is one guy, his own, from Tomsk, the guy is faithful, and I made friends with him and live like a brother,88. Do you remember how we did with you, well, Seryoga, I don’t know how it will end ‐ good or bad ‐ I’ll write you.”

Doc. ʺTOʺ. L. Fedotov. Cavalry regiment.

Deconstruction of military and KGB secrets

Negative messages

“I will be abroad, now think about why it will not be possible to write letters, but I hope that we will see each other again. Dad, donʹt worry, Iʹll be alive and well. I would have said more clearly where I was going, but, believe me, I cannot. I will be close, but abroad. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. A. Strezhnev. Cavalry regiment.

“The month of December is especially good, there were gratifying phenomena, very often they carried out three to four or five arrests in one night, one Red Army soldier gave two arrests a night, especially [many] arrests are given by the left flank, they were guarded all the time in the rear, and this increases results of detentions. In December, 90 people were detained, rubles. by 2500, the first ten‐day period had already given 1500 rubles, the first flank is actively violated, especially horses are being transferred beyond Kozlovka, and in general there is a very active border crossing. A lot of people do not stay on our site, because we are few, and well, there is, of course, an unscrupulous attitude towards border protection. There were cases and even with [participation] of the detainees they violated ‐ this is Chepanov and Rodionov ‐ this is a New Yearʹs Eve with a drink in Kozlovka. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Comrade. Head of the border detachment of the OPTU.

“I will drive along the border. And neither wife, nor mother, nor father are allowed there, except for us, and therefore you, Tanya, here will only be worse off and sad. They will carry the wounded from the border and bury the dead, you will look at all this and worry. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Your husband Tankov. Cavalry border detachment.

“I am in the machine‐gun squad, now we go to the squad in a day, we stand as sentries, guard the arrested, so the posts are very responsible, if you feel a little shy, a brick will fly over the head. You stand at the post, the arrested people are working around you, they are all bandits. Our service is excellent from other field units. Our OGPU troops are looking for bandits. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Fedoseev Dmitry. Cavalry regiment.

“I am informing you of our successes in our unit. The other day, at the border, the border guards caught two violators of the border, and one led them to the outpost and started lighting a cigarette with them, at that moment they grabbed a rifle from him and pulled out a blade and cut them with a blade ‐ 16 wounds were given on the head. But, thanks to the fact that a healthy border guard was caught, he could escape from them, and they fled back abroad. But soon we will go to the border to catch and seek death for ourselves. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Comrade. 57th Khabarovsk OTKZ, cavalry border detachment of the OGPU. Epifanov.

“We go more to guard the building of the checkpoint, in this building there are arrested persons and on the street ‐ there is a sentry in almost every corner, but this does not mean that the sentries are only at the building of the checkpoint, and at each door and along the corridors, there are five floors, below full of white officers, who were caught this summer near the border, and at the top foreign delegates from all countries come, in this building the devil knows how many employees.


Doc. ʺTOʺ. Skibin. D [alne] ‐V [eastern] cavalry regiment of the OGPU.

“There are cases when a border guard, having let loose snot, catches a lot of things. For example, a Red Army soldier arrived from abroad yesterday, who caught a wound on the head with a saber from the Chinese, taking two Chinese with him, let them on the sled to them, they took him, took away a rifle, a blade and, thanks to not being able killed him to death. There are many such cases, i.e., someone who is trusting of his enemies and sleeps at the post, but it happens that one or two Red Army men bring 15 or more smugglers with large and expensive goods, from which they receive good interest from smuggling, i.e., goods ʺ.

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Friend. Khabarovsk. OTKZ, cavalry border detachment. Training station 1st squadron. Rudenkov.

“Our service [in] the OGPU is serious, one day we go to study, and the next day we go on guard and escort. We accompany the arrested to prison and drive them to work, and the sentry posts: we guard warehouses, near the main building of the PP throughout the Far Eastern Territory, where the leaders of the OGPU are engaged, and below the arrested are big criminals. It is dangerous to stand for a sentry. There was a case ‐ my friend, who was photographed with me on the card, stands behind me, inside the detention facility, at the window he began to serve the arrested people tea ‐ he served a teapot, the arrested man took the teapot, as it shoots into his eyes, scalded his whole face, now [he] lies in the hospital. And there was also a Red Army man standing at his post in the corridor, where he let the arrested go one by one to the lavatory, and I stood at another post, behind the wall. Checked tickets, now this sentry missed, missed two arrested they turned and grabbed him, and with another spittoon stunned him, I hear that, but it was impossible to kill, they jumped out the window, and one outside sentry killed one and wounded the other. So, our service ‐ keep an eye out, they are deliberately getting into the bullet, because they are so and so khan now. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Khabarovsk cavalry regiment, rifle division.

Attitude towards banditry

Positive messages

“I’ll ask you, Uncle Xena, how were you in this very kulak gang? If not, then well done, but my father, it seems, took four days, he went against me ‐ with his bare hands. ʺ

Doc. ʺANDʺ. Nephew. Khabarovsk 2nd regiment of the OGPU, rifle division.

ʺSummer will say something, maybe in connection with the summer the kulak bandits will thaw out, with whom our OGPU troops are dealing with them.ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Khabarovsk cavalry regiment of the VOGPU.

“Last year in the Sretensky district there was a gang [of] 2,000 people. One of our divisions killed these gangs and quieted this pack. ʺ Doc. ʺTOʺ. From Yakutin. Cavalry regiment.

“Our internal troops are the most desperate, as where any creature moves, then from our regiment they send 30‐40 people for 500‐1000 people. Our bunch smashes everyone to dust into small chips. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. From my husband. Cavalry regiment.

“You are asking about Popovʹs gang, yes, it is true that they broke this case. It was still March 25, 1930. For this fight against the bandits, I and two others received a wristwatch with the inscription ʺFor Braveryʺ.

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Brother. D [alne] ‐V [eastern] cavalry regiment of VOGPU,


“We must fight counter‐revolution, smuggling and banditry, we will liquidate them, where someone appears, what a pest. Our service is easy, but you need to be steadfast and courageous, to be on guard. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Nephew. D [alne] ‐V [eastern] regiment of the VOGPU.

“The political administration was created in order to liquidate counterrevolution and banditry within the USSR. We are located 40 km from the border, and bandits often appear there, but our troops will quickly eliminate them. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Husband. D [alne] ‐V [eastern] cavalry regiment of VOGPU, Khabarovsk.

“You know, dear brother, in the summer we went on an expedition, had a little fight with bandits, learned how to chop down little living people. Now we live in peace, what will happen next. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Brother. Khabarovsk D [alne] ‐V [eastern] cavalry regiment of VOGPU.

“We need to shoot such predators; we are only fighting with such in our country. Here is the fact that I wrote to you in the summer about how they mutinied in the Sretensky district, all the kulaks agitated the poor, as well as the middle peasants, and went with weapons in their hands. Bandits [like bandits] robbed and also killed active workers, and our regiment had to leave, and part of this gang was foreign. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Relatives, Khabarovsk. D [alne] ‐V [eastern] cavalry regiment of VOGPU.

“We were on an expedition to eliminate the gang. For my activity and courage, they gave me a gift: a sum of 15 rubles. Brother, when we liquidated the gang and bandit farms, we liquidated these farms and deported them in the amount of 106. At that time, two Red Army soldiers were killed and one was wounded. An operational detachment was also created there, 12 people were also killed. We fiercely rebuffed these bastards so that they would remember the 2nd regiment. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Krasnikov I.D. Cavalry regiment, communications platoon.

“In 1930, all summer they fought against banditry. Since the city is located in the border zone, around the mountains, impassable taiga, it is clear from here that there are always animals in the taiga. And the beast is not simple, but with a weapon in hand. I had to sniff gunpowder and [hear] the whistle of bullets, and not only that. I had to travel to cities and villages to eliminate my class enemies. Weʹll go again in the spring. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Skorokov F.B. Cavalry regiment.

“I spent the whole summer on a business trip, I already wrote to you that we had to disperse two gangs. They were very large, at first, they were organized, but then they were divided into two groups, and there were two thousand seven hundred and fifty of them, they raised an uprising, where there were half the kulaks and part of the poor. Where it had to be dispersed without a fight, it was impossible to disperse, the loss was small, without this there is no bloody battle. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Vorontsov, Khabarovsk 2nd D [alne] ‐V [eastern] cavalry regiment of the VO OGPU.

“On the one hand, it is good that you will receive a diploma, but on the other, that you will not have to go to liquidate the gangs. Then we will only be taken from school, so that we will not have to fight the smugglers who come to us from abroad and from us abroad. Probably, we will only have to next year, when we have already trained our fighters, when we wait for the 9th year, we will study for four months, and only then will we have to face the enemy. ʺ

Doc. ʺTOʺ. Safronov. Khabarovsk. Cavalry regiment. VOGPU, MNS school.

Head of SOU PP OGPU for DCK Raysky

Head of INFO PP OGPU for DVK Toropkin


Assistant to the authorized representative of the 4th branch of INFO PP

OGPU for DVK Gorky


1) to the head of INFO OGPU mountains. Moscow; 2) PP OGPU for DVK comrade. Deribas; 3) the head of the UKPO PP OGPU for the DCK comrade. Chernyshov; 4) the head of the PA OKDVA; 5) in the case of the 4th branch of the INFO PP OGPU in the DCK.

87    ʺDecide for yourselfʺ ‐ commit suicide

88    ʺIt will be shaʺ ‐ used as a categorical proposal, a request to stop something in the meaning of ʺenoughʺ, ʺstopʺ, ʺshut upʺ (colloquial).

 Special report No. 2 of the OGPU PP in the DCK on the political and economic state of the village. March 13, 1931

# 7

No. 610 / K from Khabarovsk

Top secret


Head of INFO OGPU Moscow

Table of contents

I. Organizational arrangements

a)  organization of seed committees

b)  re‐election of agricultural commissioners

c)   regional collective farm field unions II. Mass propaganda work

a)  lack of mass work

b)  measures to strengthen the mass agitation and practical work

III. Bringing the sowing plans

a)   bringing sowing plans to the village, collective farm and yard

b)  counter plans

c)   cutting plans

d)  unrealistic tasks

e)   agitation for rejection of plans and refusal to sow

f)    reductionist and liquidationist sentiments of the middle peasant

g)  collective farmers IV. Semfund filling

a)   filling stroke

b)  the inactivity of grassroots communist party organizations

c)   the reluctance of the middle peasant to fill the seeds

d)  supply of seed grain to collective and state farms

e)   storage of seed

V. Pulling force

a)  tractor repair

b)  fuel supply

c)   a decrease in the number of draft animals

d) slaughter and squandering of draft animals Vi. Agriculture specialization

a)  unrealistic plans

b) the negative attitude of the peasants to the introduction of industrial crops conclusions

I. Organizational arrangements

a)   organization of seed committees

Organizational measures to prepare for spring sowing in all districts of the Krai began to be carried out with a great delay. Throughout the month of January, when preparatory work should have been widely deployed in all directions and the plans were to be communicated to the village, collective farm and courtyard, in all districts of the Territory, the organizational design of regional seeding committees was just being carried out, and in the villages the process of organizing agricultural seeding committees was just beginning to unfold. Birobidzhan regional settlement was organized on January 11. Mikhailovsky (Primorye), Mikhailovsky (Amursky), Zeisky, Tambovsky and a number of other regional seeding committees were organized in the second half of January. In the Rukhlovsky region, seed committees were created in 11 villages from February 6 to 10. In Birobidzhanskiy, Ivanovskiy (Primorye), Grodekovsky and Mikhailovsky (Amur) districts began to organize agricultural seeding committees in early February. In the Mogochinsky district, on February 15, no seeding committees have yet been organized in any village. In the Mikhailovsky district (Primorye), on February 20, in five large villages, seed committees were not created. In the Zeysky district, as of February 10, a farming plant was created in only one village, Ovsyanka.

b)  re‐election of agricultural commissioners

The timeframes for the re‐election of agricultural commissioner’s set by the Territory have been disrupted everywhere. According to the directive of the regional authorities, this campaign was supposed to end by February 1, meanwhile, in all districts of the region, re‐elections began to unfold only in the second half of February. In a number of districts, re‐election of agricultural commissioners has not yet been held. [Appointed] in Ivanovsky district (Primorye) for February 24, [in] Mikhailovsky [district] (Primorye) ‐ for February 15, Suifun [district] ‐ for February 15, Mogochinsky [district] ‐ for February 15, Zeysky [district] ‐ as of February 10, Birobidzhan [district] ‐ as of February 5, no re‐election of agro‐commissioners was held in any village. In the villages of Tyndinsky district, although re‐election of agricultural commissioners is being held, due to a lack of understanding by agricultural organizations of the functions of agricultural commissioners during the sowing campaign, their role and significance is blurred by excessive stress on them. Despite the directive of the RIK on the establishment of the maximum load on one agro‐authorized representative ‐ service of 15 farms (according to the directive of the Region), in the village. Tolbuzino, one representative was elected for 65 farms; Mungalovka and Orlovka have 43 yards per representative. In with. Torai decided not to elect an agricultural commissioner, entrusting these functions to the members of the seeding committee.

c)   regional collective farm field unions

The resolution of the Regional Committee of the All‐Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks of December 9, 1930 on the staffing of collective farm and field‐livestock unions with efficient personnel by January 15, 1931 is still unfulfilled in a number of regions of the Region (10). The past district collective farm congresses have not everywhere renewed the clearly inoperable composition of even the leaders of collective farm associations, which include a completely inactive and anti‐Soviet element. In addition, in some areas the states of the Raikolkhoz‐fieldsubunions are not staffed at all with agrotechnical workers. Suifa Raikolkhoz Union is only 50% staffed with agrotechnical staff. The union has vacant positions: secretary, trainee, agronomist and two instructors.

The existing staff of technical workers is littered with an anti‐Soviet element, such as: senior accountant Deryabkina ‐ the wife of a former colonel, accountant Aksenenko ‐ the sister of the gangster Gabriel Aksenenko, who was killed last year. The composition of the operational and technical workers of the Rukhlovsky Rajivotnovodsoyuz is littered with an alien and anti‐Soviet element. For example, the instructor I.P. Gamov, a former participant in the Zeysk uprising (in 1924 on the Amur), the son of a large kulak; accountant Rubnevsky ‐ a former white warrant officer, often sabotages and shows an eager attitude; operative Puzanov is an alien element by convictions, is negligent in his case, and has a tendency to resign from service. Along with this, the composition of the board of the Rivnevotnovodsoyuz is completely inoperative. As a result, the Union almost does not carry out operational and technical work: the annual activity of the Albazinsky, Dzhalindinsky and Voskresensky collective farms has not yet been summed up, due to which the inflow to these collective farms is slowed down, and the soil is created for the growth of unhealthy moods among collective farmers. There is no extra and agronomist in the Grodekovsky Raikolkhoz Union. There is no cultural instructor in the Mikhailovsky Raikolkhoz Union (Primorye). In Ivanovskiy (Primorye), Kalininskiy, Nikolaevskiy,

Shmakovskiy, Chernigovskiy, Yakovlevskiy and Suifunskiy Raikolkhozpolevodsoyuz, the technical staff of workers is negligent, and therefore the work on preparation for sowing is unacceptably slow (accounting of agricultural implements and machines on collective farms has not Semfund passes by gravity). and the soil is being created for the growth of unhealthy sentiments among collective farmers.  II. Mass propaganda work

a) lack of mass work

The mass agitation work around the preparation for sowing among the peasant masses has not yet been developed to the proper extent. Authorized representatives of regional and regional organizations are only now leaving for places and are coming close to carrying out explanatory work in the villages and collective farms. Until the arrival of the commissioners, mass agitation work in the field of collectivization and preparation for sowing was not carried out in many villages.

Although the rural activists received sufficient energy in this area at a number of district conferences, meetings and congresses held everywhere in January of this year (conferences of teachers, political educators, congresses of state farms, collective farmers, district meetings and conferences of the poor in a number of districts), however, the bulk the peasantry to this day has not been covered to the required extent by propaganda and explanatory work. The weakness of the mass agitation work around the sowing campaign in 10 districts listed in the previous section is clearly evidenced by the unacceptably slow pace in the deployment of organizational work to prepare for sowing (seed committees are far from being organized everywhere, reelection of agricultural commissioners was almost never carried out). Of particular note is the lack of linkages between political and agricultural work. For this reason, even now there is a possibility of breakthroughs in a number of places of the Region to fulfill the plans for sowing industrial and labor‐intensive crops. In a number of villages, the peasantry reacts negatively to the development of these crops, motivating them with the failure to master them, the alleged unsuitability of lands for their cultivation, and other, undoubtedly, unfounded data, mainly arising from the conservatism of the peasantry (see ʺSpecialization of Agricultureʺ). In these villages, plans for technical crops are thwarted by general meetings. ʺ

The inadequacy of mass agitation work in the presence of intensified agitation of the kulaks in many cases is also due to a certain growth among certain layers of the middle peasants and the poor of the tendency to liquidate their economy and Mikhailovsky (Amur) ‐ mass agricultural work is not carried out at all in the villages. Similarly, in the Ivanovsky (Primorye) region. In a number of areas, public attention has not yet been diverted to preparing for sowing. In the Mikhailovsky (Primorye), Suifunsky and Mogochinsky districts, agricultural organizations carry out work exclusively in the field of logging (labor supply) and continue to ʺclean up the tailingsʺ for grain procurements and fundraising. District newspapers are not enough and often ineptly work to cover the progress of the campaign and to mobilize the attention of the peasantry around the deployment of practical work in preparation for sowing. In the local press, most of the notes on the campaigning are of a general guiding and official nature, and specific moments of village reality are not properly reflected on their pages. In the Mikhailovskaya district (Primorye), the conference of the poor, which took place in January, passed a resolution demanding an accelerated pace in work from all regional organizations, and first of all, from the district administration and the District collective farm union. This resolution was not popularized in the press, as a result of which the Mikhailovsky regional organizations, instead of a shock pace, only a month after the poor conference (February 10), convened the first meeting of the regional seeding committee.

The facts about the weak coverage of the preparation for sowing by the former district newspapers Amurskaya Pravda (Blagoveshchensk) and Krasnoe Znamya (Vladivostok) also took place in the reporting period.

b) measures to strengthen the mass agitation and practical work

The regional leading party bodies have adopted a number of measures to strengthen the mass agitation work and to quickly deploy practical activities in the field to prepare for sowing. The regional press agency ʺTOZʺ organized a competition for the best preparatory campaign in the regions. As of March 1, 12 districts have signed agreements for socialist competition; in all districts delegates and cultural brigades are sent to villages. According to the decree of regional organizations, in the order of mobilization, from March 1, 1400 party workers are sent directly to the village, of which: from regional and city organizations ‐ 300 people and regional ‐ 1100 (not counting those who are already working in the villages on various campaigns). It should be noted that only at the moment of departure of the authorized representatives to the places, incorrect settings in work are already being noted, repeating past mistakes. For example, the Tambov District Committee of the AllUnion Communist Party of Bolsheviks (Bolsheviks), 8 delegates sent to the villages, proposed to go around the entire region (34 large villages, over 100 households each) within 10 days solely in order to get acquainted with the state of affairs on the ground. Thus, this group of party workers will actually go on tour in the villages by virtue of the regulations given to them, limiting themselves to collecting information for the district committee. The touring of authorized RECs is also celebrated in the Spassky District. limiting himself only to collecting information for the district committee. The touring of authorized RECs is also celebrated in the Spassky District.

III. Bringing the sowing plans

a)   bringing sowing plans to the village, collective farm and yard

Bringing plans to the village, the collective farm and the courtyard according to the planned outlines should have been completed in all areas by February 1. However, throughout the region, with the exception of three districts (Aleksandrovsky, Mazanovsky and KhArkharinsky), the deadline was disrupted.

The delays in the deadlines set for bringing the plan to the fore are mainly due to the late dispatch [to] the field by regional organizations of control tasks for sowing and various additional adjustments to the control figures, the change of which ended only in early February. In the Chernihiv region, the Krai plan changed five times, of which the last two times in the period of the twenties of January and the first days of February. In Grodekovsky district, the last changes in the control figures came from the Krai on February 9. At this time, the plan is being brought to the sowers a second time with changes. In the Suifuny district, the last additional task was received on February 10. The plan is brought to the sowers a second time. For the Mikhailovsky district (Primorye), the last changes in the control figures were received on January 25.

In most villages and collective farms, the control figures for the sowing area presented by the RIKs are accepted almost unchanged. But, along with this, in many cases, the size of the planning targets by the general meetings of villages and collective farms are subject to significant changes, both in the direction of decreasing and increasing plans.

b)  counter plans

According to individual facts that we took into account, when the plans were communicated to the sowers in 11 districts (out of 36) from a number of villages and collective farms, counter plans were being put forward that significantly overshadow the control tasks. For example, in the Khankaysky region, most of the collective farms put forward counter plans, of which the Red Army communes: ʺ59th Tsogodaevsky regimentʺ instead of the proposed crop area of 1043 hectares, adopted ‐ 1507 and ʺ6th Red Banner Divisionʺ instead of 1398 [adopted] 1583. Counter plans in Mazanovskiy and Nikolaevskiy districts they overlap regional control tasks by about 15‐20%. In the Aleksandrovsky district, counter plans have been put forward in 30 villages (out of 80). In the Chernihiv region with. Chalcedon instead of 916 hectares took 1300 hectares, [in] with. Petrovichi instead of 315 hectares ‐ 775. In the Zeysky district, the collective farm ʺKomsomolets Severaʺ instead of 173 hectares [took] 250 hectares, the collective farm ʺVolnaʺ instead of 120 hectares [took] 180 hectares. In the Zavitinsky district, four collective farms have adopted plans with an increase of 330 hectares. In the Amuro‐Zeya region, the Astrakhanovsky collective farm has increased the plan by 300 hectares. In the Svobodnensky district, three villages have put forward counter plans. There are two communes in the Spassky District, one of them is Korean.

c)   cutting plans

A decrease in the size of the given control assignments of sowing areas by decisions of rural gatherings and meetings of collective farmers was noted in individual villages and collective farms in 10 districts. In four collective farms in the Suifun region, control targets have been reduced by 712 hectares. In with. Pushkino individual farmers adopted a plan of 130 hectares instead of the planned 314 hectares. In the Khabarovsk region, plans have been cut for the sole sector in three villages; in the commune named after ʺStalinʺ a meeting of collective farmers adopted ‐710 hectares instead of the proposed plan of 1102 hectares. In with. Limonnaya of the Aleksandrovsky district is planned according to the plan of 700 hectares, taken by the village gathering ‐350 hectares. The Novo‐Aleksandrovsky collective farm of the Tambov region has cut the plan by 350 hectares. The Prokhorovka agricultural artel of the Spassky district, instead of the 180 hectares proposed according to the plan, took over 90 hectares. In with. Solovyovka, Kalininsky District, the plan for the sole sector has been cut by 50%. General meeting with. Vvedenovka completely refused to accept the plan. In the villages of Snegurovka, Ivanovsky District (Primorye) and Roskosh, Leninsky District, individual farmers at a general meeting passed resolutions on a categorical rejection of the plans. In some villages and collective farms of the Kh. Arkharinsky and Birobidzhan districts, the plans presented were cut off. The reasons for the decrease in control tasks and refusal to accept the sowing plans in the basis are: a) incorrect allocation of plans by regional organizations between villages and collective farms, as a result of which some zemstooms and collectives are imposed with unrealistic tasks; b) the intensified agitation of the kulaks and the anti‐Soviet element, which, against the background of completely insufficient mass agitational work, finds fertile ground among not only individual farmers, mainly middle peasants, but also individual strata of collective farmers.

d)  unrealistic tasks

In a number of districts of the Krai (4), as a result of a lack of clarity in planning (poor accounting of draft power, land areas, the presence of seven grain), cases of taxing some villages and collective farms with unrealistic exaggerated tasks were noted. In one case, unrealistic tasks at the insistence of regional workers and agricultural activists are accepted by societies and collectives in view of the lack of protests by the sowers, and in the other, their ʺcounterʺ plans are cut and set at village and collective farm meetings.

For example, in the village. Pushkino, Suifunsky District, the size of arable land for the sole sector is 130 hectares, and according to the plan, the company was proposed to sow 314 hectares. Meanwhile, the number of individual farms and draft animals in this sector decreased compared to last year due to joining the collective. Despite this, nevertheless, the plan provided for the raising of virgin lands over 100% in relation to the area of developed land. The Korean collective farm ʺDrofinskyʺ of the Mikhailovsky district was given the task, in addition to grain crops, to sow 35 hectares of rice, while the collective farm has only 10 hectares of land suitable for sowing rice and cannot develop more due to the lack of special machines and facilities. Individual farmers with. New Moscow, Zavitinsky District, was proposed to sow 135 hectares, while the inhabitants of the village are exclusively poor people and farm laborers who are engaged inside earnings and sowed 26 hectares last year. When distributing the control task at home, four hectares fall on some horseless people.

In the villages of Kazanovka and Kr. The source of the Kh. Arkharinsky region has 855 hectares of land suitable for cultivation in the sole sector of land suitable for cultivation, and on the instructions of the individual farmers of these villages, they must sow 1206 hectares. In with. Voskresenovka of the Mikhailovsky District (Amur), when distributing the household plan, each individual farmer per workhorse had 6 hectares, meanwhile, the average load on a horse in a sole sector according to the regional plan is 3.5 hectares.

e)   agitation for rejection of plans and refusal to sow

In most districts of the Krai, there was an intensified agitation of the kulaks and anti‐Soviet elements against the adoption of sowing plans and sowing in general. The above data on the reduction of control assignments and refusals to accept sowing plans in a number of villages and collective farms in 10 districts of the region in most cases (for 8 districts out of these 10) are caused by the anti‐sowing agitation of the kulak.

Speculation on shortcomings in grain procurement, shortage of seed grain in some places and generally experiencing economic difficulties, kulaks and other anti‐Soviet elements are trying in every possible way to persuade the middle peasant‐individual farmer to refuse to accept plans and participate in sowing, counting thereby on disrupting the sowing campaign. So, for example, in the village. Ust‐Dei, Zeyskiy district, two well‐to‐do Old Believers systematically campaigned among the individual farmers: “Sow as little as possible, get more. Do not believe the words of the communists, otherwise all your work will be lost. They will take away the bread anyway, and you will starve” (both were arrested).

In the same area, [in] with. Palaces, well‐to‐do Ivanenko agitated: ʺWhy try in vain, all the same, all the bread will be taken away for nothing, but they themselves are recognized as fists and evicted.ʺ In with. In Novo‐Bratke, Mikhailovsky District (Amur), prosperous Ivan Viskara and Andrey Nesterenko campaigned: “You can accept the control figure, but you don’t need to sow. Tired of working for someone elseʹs uncle. The individual farmers of the village of Arsentievka refuse to sow altogether, we must also refuse. ʺ

Along with this, the kulaks and the anti‐Soviet element acted with antisowing agitation at village gatherings, seeking to disrupt meetings or, in extreme cases, cut back the sowing plans. In the village of Vedenka, Kalininsky District, a general meeting of peasants, under the influence of open agitation by the kulak‐prosperous element, issued a resolution: ʺWhoever can sow as much as he can.ʺ In with. Shumilovka of the Mikhailovsky District (Amur) at a meeting against the plan was a kulak group, among which there were middle peasant partisans. In many cases, the role in such speeches belonged to the middle peasant and, in isolated cases, to the poor peasant who had been agitated by his fists in advance.

In with. The middle peasant Cherkashin spoke at the meeting at the meeting in Tartashevka of the Kalininsky District, who said: “There is no need to accept the plan, and there is no need to give firm tasks to the wealthy either. Let everyone sow as much as he can, otherwise if we accept the plan and fail to fulfill it, then everything will be lost. ʺ

In with. Lermontovka of the Leninsky District, a group of peasants ‐ the middle peasant Yezhelya Konstantin, the middle peasant Kavalchuk Khariton, poor Timoshenko Daria and others, led by the wife of the wealthy Kharchenko Elizaveta ‐ actively opposed the adoption of the plan at the village gathering, raising a noise and whistling, intending to disrupt the meeting.

In the same area, in the village of Glebovo, a group of peasants led by the wife of the arrested kulak Afanasyev and the middle peasant Platonenko (the kulakʹs son‐in‐law) spoke out at a meeting against the adoption of the plan. In with. Tatianovka, Tambov region, poor man Uzlenok Philip tried to disrupt the meeting on sowing campaign. Waving his arms and using foul language, he shouted: ʺI have swung your plan and the communists along with the planʺ; ʺSoon all this will burst, and we will live as before.ʺ

Simultaneously with anti‐sowing agitation, the kulaks and the antiSoviet element in a number of places actively oppose the organization of collective farms, conduct anti‐collective farm agitation, terrorize individual farmers wishing to join collective farms with all sorts of provocative rumors about the imminent overthrow of Soviet power and the destruction of all collective farmers.

For example, in the village. Uspenovka Mikhaylovsky district (Amur) prosperous Mikhailenko Stepan agitated: “I can only give to the collective farm the dog that I don’t feel sorry for if it disappears. In 1918 some landowners survived, and now they have made others.” In with. Troitskoye of the Khankaysky District, a group of kulaks walked to the apartments of peasants who had rejoined the collective farm, and campaigned, mainly women, to leave the collective, saying that ʺsoon all the peasants who joined the artel will curse and even offer to move out of the village.ʺ The same group of kulaks, having met the middle peasant Sapko A.A. (old man), threatened him in every possible way for joining his sonʹs artel. In this regard, Sapko with tears begged his son to leave the collective farm.

In with. Kazanovka of the Kh. ‐Arkharinsky District, a group of antiSoviet elements Lesik, Trifonov and Arkhipov (all middle peasants) systematically agitate among the peasants, saying: “The plan does not need to be carried out, because there is no benefit from it. It is also not necessary to join collective farms, because soon this power will fall, and then all collective farmers will get it. ʺ

In with. Malinovka of the Kalininsky region middle peasant Popkov Nikifor said: ʺNot today or tomorrow there will be the death of the Soviet regime, since Poland, England and other states oppose it, so now there is no time for sowing.ʺ In with. A prominent Leninsky district, a group of well‐to‐do people threatened with reprisal Samusenko, who had joined the collective farm, offering him to immediately leave the collective. Anti‐Soviet agigation was also noted on collective farms from the side of the kulak element that penetrated the collectives

(Leninsky, Kalininsky, Mikhailovsky‐on‐Amur and other regions).

f) reductionist and liquidationist sentiments of the middle peasant In those areas where mass agitational work is completely insufficiently developed, a significant part of the middle peasants, falling under the influence of kulak agitation, show abbreviated and anti‐sowing sentiments. During the reporting period (20 days), the same sentiments were recorded in 28 villages of 12 districts, of which the most affected: Mikhailovsky district (Amur) ‐ 8 villages, Mikhailovsky (Primorye) ‐ five villages, Aleksandrovsky ‐ three and Kh. ‐Arkharinsky ‐ three.

In almost all cases, these negative sentiments of the middle peasant (and partly the poor peasant) are ʺjustifiedʺ by dissatisfaction on the basis of grain procurements, which ʺdo not give the peasant the opportunity to dispose of his labor.ʺ

Fueled by the agitation of the kulak, the dissatisfaction of this part of the one‐man middle peasantry translates into sharp anti‐sowing sentiments, which basically take two forms: 1. Unwillingness to produce crops according to the size established by plans, and to sow only the minimum land area required to feed their families, and 2. Absolute refusal to participate Seve, the tendency to completely liquidate their economy and leave the countryside for permanent earnings in state farms or in the city for industrial enterprises.

Abbreviated tendencies are manifested much more sharply than liquidationist tendencies, and often develop into clearly anti‐Soviet ones, since this trend has no definite prospects in front of itself ‐ ʺneither to the collective farm, nor to the city and not to work on its own farm.ʺ

“Whoever controls us, let him sow, but I will not sow for the state; for oneself ‐ another matter” (middle peasant Bondarev, village of Chernigovka, Kh. Arkharinsky district).

“By procurement of grain, the government kills all initiative of the peasants in their work. In the spring they tried to persuade them to sow more, and then they give firm assignments and take away all the grain, otherwise they will be brought to court under Article 61. It turns out that there is no calculation to sow” (middle peasant Kolesnikov, village of Ozeryane, Aleksandrovsky District).

“No matter how much this one is, it is still of little use. Whether you sow a lot or a little, you will still give everything” (middle peasant

Teslya, Vinogradovka village, Mikhailovsky‐on‐Amur district).

“No matter how many control figures were assigned to me, I will not sow more than two dessiatines, otherwise they will be attracted under Article 61 of the Criminal Code” (middle peasant Vyon).

“I will sow only for myself. Now it’s a time: the more you sow, the more you call yourself trouble” (middle peasant Kirichenko, village Zakharovskoe, Alexandrovsky district).

“This year we will sow the communists so much that they will be full of bread” (poor peasant from the village of Pokrovka of the same region, Dmitry Busev).

“Why do they only torture and deceive the people. After all, as soon as you sow more, you will be immediately transferred to fists. Well, what a fool would sow under such an order” (Voznesenovka village of Mikhailovsky‐in‐Primorye region, middle peasant Khomenko).

“Do whatever you want with me, but I will not sow anyway” (middle peasant Latushko, Novozhatkovo village, Mikhailovsky‐in‐Primorye region).

In the village of Abramovka, Mikhailovsky District (Primorye), out of 70 individual farms, 40 categorically refused to fulfill the household plans.

A characteristic fact took place in the village. Yaroslavka Kh. Arkharinsky district, where the middle peasant Nikolai Rudakov, after a series of active speeches at a general meeting against the adoption of the plan, jumped out into the street and, in every possible way swearing at the Soviet authorities, fell on the road and began to shout: “This is what freedom they won, they rip us off, like a protein. This is what the communists have brought us to”.

Liquidatorial sentiments are manifested in the form of categorical refusals to participate in sowing, squandering their property and leaving the village for the city or other places for permanent earnings.

“Let the village council not count on me, I will not sow anyway. The horses have already sold all, there is not much left for the denouement. Enough for us ‐ let the collective farms now sow, and we will go somewhere” (middle peasant Bikeeva, village of Galenki,

Mikhailovsky‐in‐Primorye region).

“I will not sow. Iʹll go somewhere to the city or go to Kamchatka ʺ(middle peasant Matyushenko, Bogomolovka village, Mikhailovskyin‐Primorye region).

“I will not sow anything, I decided to go to the city for production” (a low‐powered middle peasant of Baidal, Nekrasovskoe village, Aleksandrovsky district).

“Your business is to speak, and ours is to listen. I will not sow, but I will go somewhere to work” (middle peasant Zubov, village of Cheremkhovo, Ivanovsky‐on‐Amur district).

“I will not sow a single furrow. I will exhaust all my household and go to work as a farm laborer” (middle peasant Ptitsin, Albazino village, Rukhlovsky district).

Most of the farms with. Tarmunud H.‐Arkharinsky district (35 households in total) decided to leave the village for permanent work. To this end, they sent their walker to select a place of resettlement.

From s. Voskresenovka of the Mikhailovsky district (Amur), a group of partisans of 6 people (two middle peasants, three poor peasants and one farm laborer), not wanting to join the collective farm, left with their families to the mountains. Blagoveshchensk.

During the reporting period, according to data from 10 districts (out of 36), there were tendencies of group and single exits of peasants (not counting kulaks and wealthy ones) in 23 villages, of which: in Mikhailovsky district (Amur) ‐ [in] 7 villages, in Mikhailovsky (Primorye) ‐ [in] 4 villages, Aleksandrovsky ‐ [in] 4 villages, Ivanovsky (Amur) ‐ [in] three villages, etc.

Over the past two and a half months, according to our data, we have taken into account group exits of peasants (almost exclusively individual farmers) to cities and other places for permanent residence ‐ from 12 villages. The largest number of peasants leaving the villages was recorded in the Ivanovsky district (Amur), where in three villages 118 families and 49 single individuals (all individual farmers) were counted, of which: kulaks and wealthy people ‐ 36%, middle peasants ‐

40% and poor people ‐ 24%.

g) collective farmers

Among the bulk of collective farmers, the deployment of preparatory work for sowing caused a significant revival and increased activity.

The above data on the advancement of their counter crops by the collective farms, which significantly exceed the control targets, clearly characterize the activity of collective farmers in a number of districts of the region (11 districts).

In addition, the speeches of the latter on the issue of sowing campaigns at the regional conferences and meetings of the poor are quite vividly illustrating the enthusiasm of the collective farmers. So, for example, in the Aleksandrovsky district, at a meeting of the poor on the reality of seeding plans, the following speeches of collective farmers were noted.

“No matter how difficult it is, we must take into account the task of the government and carry out the sowing plan in a militant manner, and the government, for its part, will help us” (private collective farmer Berchuk, village Bochkarevka).

“The fists and podkulaks in the village are trying to agitate the fainthearted poor and middle peasants and disrupt the sowing plans of this year, but we, the poor, must unanimously repulse the kulak and the podkulak” (the poor man of the village of Sviridovka Anokhin who has joined the collective farm again).

At the time of the kulak speech at this meeting of the poor individual peasant with. Frolovka Khatimchenko on the part of the delegates, mainly collective farmers, replied with a demand to deprive him of the right         to            speak. After that,       an           ordinary               collective             farmer with. Smirnovka Nenya, who said: “Khatimchenkoʹs speech is purely kulak. He either did not understand the question himself, or, on the basis of the teachings of his Frolov kulaks, decided to agitate against sowing. We must say frankly that his words are aimed at the detriment of socialist construction. ʺ

A number of similar statements were noted by other delegates. Along with this, among some of the collective farmers, dissatisfaction with the increased pace of work in connection with the preparation for sowing and the presence of tendencies to leave the collective farms is manifested. These sentiments are mainly conditioned by the lack of provision of collective farmers with manufactured goods, the protracted process of distribution of profits in a number of collective farms and the agitation on this basis of the kulak and anti‐Soviet element that has penetrated into the collectives of collective farms (some collective farms of the Mikhailovsky‐on‐Amur, Chernigov, Leninsky and Birobidzhan districts). IV. Semfund filling

a) filling stroke

The deadline for the full backfilling of the seed pools established by the region and the NKZ by February 15 was thwarted everywhere. In the course of filling the seeds, unacceptably weak rates are still observed, especially in the individual sector, where the threat of a significant under‐fulfillment of the plan for the seed fund is already becoming real. As of March 1, the fulfillment of the plans for the seed fund is characterized by the following data: in the collective farm sector, 70.3% of the plan is covered in total, and in the sole sector ‐ 20.9%. For the collective farm sector in eight districts, the backfill plan has been fully fulfilled, for the individual one ‐ not even half of the plan has been fulfilled in any district. 

Thus, the progress of backfilling in the seven main grain regions is proceeding very poorly: in the collective farm sector, the plan was fulfilled by 67.3% and in the individual sector by 26.8%. As of March 1, the indicated areas are provided with seed grain in both sectors only by


The main reasons for the low intake of seed grain are:

a)   inactivity and right‐wing opportunistic manifestations in practice [in] rural and regional organizations; b) shortage of grain in a number of places; c) the resistance of the middle peasant‐individual farmer; and d) the protracted threshing in many collective farms.

b)  the inactivity of the new co‐party organizations

Many regional soviet organizations underestimated the importance of timely and complete collection of the socialized seed fund, as well as other branches of preparatory work for sowing. There was almost no control and management of the activities of agricultural organizations in this area. The filling of grain in a number of regions was carried out by gravity. Raikolkhozpolevodsoyuz and rayzo until February 15 were not aware of the amount of grain poured into the seed funds in their regions, with the exception of individual villages and collective farms. Many well‐to‐do kulak farms continue to sabotage grain filling with impunity (Suifunsky, Chernigovsky, Spassky, Khabarovsky, Kalininsky, Rukhlovsky, Mikhailovsky districts in Primorye). It should be noted how a very significant defect in the work of some regional organizations, which has a clearly right opportunistic coloring, their conciliatory attitude to the tendency of replacing the socialized semfonds with a system of individual ʺstorageʺ by peasants of grain subject to socialization, under their personal ʺresponsibilityʺ. The system of ʺsafe receiptsʺ has become especially widespread in Mikhailovsky (Primorye) and Spassky districts, where a number of large villages, thanks to the transition to this system, do not actually have socialized semfonds. In the Mikhailovsky district, the system of ʺsafe receiptsʺ has taken root since the beginning of the current grain procurement campaign. thanks to the transition to this system, they actually do not have socialized semfonds. In the Mikhailovsky district, the system of ʺsafe receiptsʺ has taken root since the beginning of the current grain procurement campaign.

In the Spassky District, through the Kolkhozpolevodsoyuz, even in the directive on sowing, the application of this system in practice is authorized.

Agricultural organizations also paid very little attention to the issue of creating seed funds, and in a number of cases they were completely inactive, trailing in the tail of ʺpeasantʺ sentiments, doing nothing against the malicious non‐donors, among whom there are kulaks and the wealthy. In Spassky district, 10 villages refused to fill in seeds, offering safe receipts. In the Mikhailovsky district (Primorye), [in] the village of Abramovka, out of 70 farms, 40 refused to contribute the seed grain and even issue receipts for the storage of the amount of seed grain due from them. The remaining 30 farms issued “safe receipts”.

In with. Priluki from 87 farms, no one poured grain into the Semfond, and all refused to give ʺsafe receipts.ʺ In with. Grigorievka, the plan for filling the seed fund is 80% completed, but all this grain is kept by the peasants. The stored grain has not been inspected or checked by anyone, so the possibility of squandering it is not excluded.

In with. There is no Semfond for Voznesenovka. Out of 634 households, only 45 issued ʺsafe receiptsʺ, the rest refuse.

In the Chernyshovsky district, in the villages of Merkushevka, Petrovichanka, Sivakovka, no seed funds were created. The chairmen of these village councils are campaigning against dumping grain in public barns. In the villages of Orekhovo,

Eldovak and Bogolyubovka of the Kalininsky district, the village councils in terms of creating seed funds are inactive. Semgrain was not collected at all until February 15. The situation is similar in the villages of Kulikovka and Preobrazhenovka, Zaviginsky district.

c) the reluctance of the middle peasant to fill the seeds

The completely inadequate work of the grassroots soviet in the field of preparation for sowing, the poorly developed mass agitational work in this direction, the presence of abbreviated and anti‐sowing tendencies among the sole middle peasantry, as well as the intensified agitation of the kulaks and the anti‐Soviet element against the creation of seed funds, in a number of places caused sabotage by a certain part of the middle peasantry. in the socialization of the seed. In addition to the above facts of categorical refusals of entire villages to backfill grain, in the reporting period, numerous cases of negative sentiments of individual farmers around the creation of seed funds and the evasion of middle peasants from socialization of grain were revealed under various pretexts. In with. Abramovka, Ivanovo district (Primorye), at a general meeting, the well‐to‐do Verevkin announced a categorical refusal to fill the seed fund and urged others to follow his example. As a result, remarks were heard from the peasants: ʺLet them be put on trial, but we will not carry grainʺ, ʺThey will not transplant everyone.ʺ The meeting was eventually disrupted.

Similar facts took place in the village. Prokhori of the Spassky region, Ivanovka, Zavitinsky region, N.‐Nikolaevka, Alexandrovsky region and a number of other villages. At the meeting with. Voznesenovka of the Mikhailovsky district (Primorye) middle peasant Klimenko Petr said: “In my opinion, we should not dump our seeds anywhere, let them lie at home in barns, and when we need to, we will sow ourselves, and if necessary, then we will eat, otherwise it turns out: give the seeds, and then go and ask. ʺ Often on this basis, the middle peasants are clearly anti‐Soviet sentiments. For example, at a general meeting of peasants with. Lebyazhye of the Aleksandrovsky district middle peasant Petr, written during the voting on the resolution on accelerating the filling of seeds, shouted: “Cut us, drink our blood! Bloodsuckers! Robbers! ʺ (some middle peasants supported Pismenny).

In with. At the general meeting of Frolovka, Aleksandrovsky district, middle peasant Anton Shneidik said: “All these krestkoms and collective farms have overexposed our necks. They are pulling the last juices from us. Why the hell give us grain. You give freedom to the peasant; he will save you more grain and sow more. We are now sitting half‐starved, naked and barefoot, and you are climbing with your Semfond. ʺ

In with. Voznesenovka, Mikhailovsky district (Primorye), middle peasant Klimenko Peter, referring to the activists who recorded the presence of grain from the peasants, said: “You, probably, lads, add that you will destroy not only our and your grain” (a hint of arson).

In some cases, the reluctance to fill grain is caused by the ugly storage of socialized seed funds, due to the lack of equipped grain storage facilities (see below ʺStorage of seed grainʺ).

d) supply of seed grain to collective and state farms

In a number of districts, the issue of supplying state and collective farms with semgrain still remains unresolved. The work of the regional authorities lacks clarity and clarity in this matter, which is why there is inconsistency                and discrepancy        in            the          activities              of            different organizations serving the sowing campaign.

For example, for the resettlement collective farms of the Mikhailovsky District (Primorye), 20,127 centners should be released in the order of contracting and the Red Army resettlement loan, but this amount of grain has not yet been found. To the inquiries of the Mikhailovsky regional organizations, Kryza replied that Soyuzkhleb had been given outfits for the seven‐grain for the listed collective farms, and Soyuzkhleb declares that he does not have these outfits. At the same time, on this issue, the Kraipolevodsoyuz informed the Mikhailovsky Regional Executive Committee that a loan for these collective farms would not be issued, and that therefore the seeds had to be found on the spot.

Semgrain required for Birobidzhan region for high‐grade crops (soybean ‐ 246 centners, rice ‐ 125 centners, flax ‐ 620 centners) has not yet been sent.

In the supply of sevmaterial to the state farms of Zernotrest and its delivery to the production sites, there is confusion, which threatens the implementation of seeding plans by the state farms. For example, Soyuzkhleb, which concluded an agreement with Zernotrest on the supply of seed wheat in the amount of 51,650 centners to state farms, informed Zernotrest on March 2 that he would underperform the supply of the captive by about 10,000 centners.

The regional seed‐growing union, which has undertaken to deliver 8,300 centners of soybean seeds to the state farms, is delaying the fulfillment of the contract, being completely irresponsible. As of March 1, the Regional Seed‐Growing Union of the supply of these seeds to the state farms has a notification from only one Tambov seed‐grower about the fulfillment of the order given to him for soybean seeds in the amount of 1000 centners, while according to orders he had to supply 2800 centners. The Regional Seed Grower Union is completely unaware of the completion of the order by the Suifun Seed Production Association in the amount of 5500 centners.

Dalzhirmaslo, which undertook the obligation to supply the grain state farms with 9,600 centners of soybean seeds, also knows nothing about the extent to which these orders were fulfilled for the NikolskUssuriysk Grain Refinery (7800 centners) and Soyuzkhleb (1800 centners).

The purchase of soybeans on the Kitstorne by Exporghleb is going very abnormally. The conclusion of trade agreements with Chinese merchants is delayed, meanwhile the price of soybeans rises, and, thus, the slowness in negotiations threatens to overpay for the purchased seeds.

By agreement with the Chinese, back in December, Eksportkhlib was supposed to purchase 5,000 poods of soybeans at a local price of 80 cents per pood. However, Exportkhleb did not immediately begin to implement this agreement, but dragged‐out negotiations until January. Davydov, authorized by Exportkhleba, who left for the whale side in January, signed a final agreement with the whalers on the purchase of the specified amount of soybean seeds at a price of 1 dayan per pood (during this time, the price increased by 20 cents). Meanwhile, the regional Exportkontora did not authorize this agreement, insisting on an agreement on the December price. In this regard, in February, for the third time, the head of the Mikhailovsky (Amur) branch of Dalgostorg was dispatched to the kit side for the third time to renegotiate the price of soybeans in accordance with the Krayexportkontoraʹs guidelines.

e) storage of seed

In view of the breakdown in a number of construction sites of storage facilities, some large state and collective farms have no grain storage facilities at all. There are cases of storage of large lots of semomaterial without observing elementary precautions against damage to grain, as well as destroying it in a harmful way (arson). For example, in the commune ʺChervonnoe Cossacksʺ of the Khanka region, over 10,000 poods of threshed seed grain is located in one of the production sites of the commune (ʺTuriy Rogʺ) under the open sky. In addition, about 8000 poods of grain are in different places (on the currents) without any cover and protection. For the commune ʺChervonnoe Cossacksʺ, according to the plan, Dalselstroy was supposed to complete the construction of the granary by March 15, however, until now, not only has not begun construction, but even preparatory work has not been carried out. There are no storage facilities at the Sun‐Yat‐Sen grain sovkhoz of the Mikhailovsky District (Primorye), and therefore the first batch of grain (1,000 centners) that has arrived has been lying under the open sky for a long time. Due to the onset of a thaw, the moisture content of the grain increases and, undoubtedly, damage to the entire batch of semomaterial is possible.

V. Pulling force

a)   tractor repair

The pace of the repair campaign still does not ensure timely implementation of the plan. As of March 1, all over the Territory, the tractor repair plan was completed by 45%, of which: 38.3% for the Traktorotsentr workshops, 56.8% for the state farms of Risotrest and Zernotrest. Some large workshops of the Traktorotsentr perform repair work unacceptably poorly, lagging even behind the average tractor repair indicator in the Krai. So, Bochkarevskaya workshops fulfilled the plan only by 33.6%, and the Annunciation plant ʺMetallistʺ ‐ by 18.3%. The progress of the repair campaign is greatly slowed down due to the lack of spare parts, as well as the completely lack of mobility in the work of interested organizations, and sometimes the criminal and bungling attitude on the part of some workers to the repair campaign. Spare parts for last yearʹs fleet of tractors of all Zernotrest state farms were shipped from Novorossiysk in December this year, but have not yet been delivered to the site. Repair of last yearʹs fleet with currently available spare parts is provided by no more than 10%. The workshops of the Zernosovkhozes ʺSun‐Yat‐Senʺ (Mikhailovsky district in Primorye) and ʺAmurskyʺ (Aleksandrovsky district) stopped repairs due to a lack of spare parts. In the Bochkarevsky workshops of the Traktorocenter (Aleksandrovsky District), labor productivity is too low. Absenteeism of workers has increased recently: in the second decade of February, absenteeism accounted for 9% of all workers in workshops, and in the main shops (repair and assembly) ‐ about 40%. In this regard, in February, instead of 39 tractors envisaged by the plan, the workshops repaired ‐ 9. Spassky workshops suspended repair work at the end of February due to the lack of delivery of tractors by collective farms. Of the 64 tractors that the collective farms were supposed to deliver to Spassk for repairs, by March 1, not a single tractor had been delivered to the workshops. The delay by collective farms in the delivery of tractors for repair is also noted in the Aleksandrovsky district. In the Mikhailovsky district (Primorye), the collective farms named after ʺStalinʺ and ʺLeninʺ in connection with the overload of the Nikolo‐Ussuriysk workshops had the intention to open their workshop for the production of routine repairs at the station. Ippolitovka. However, Dalrisʹs commissioner Cherenkov refused the request of these collective farms to provide them with free premises under the jurisdiction of Dalris. When the Ippolitovsky Village Council tried to administratively withdraw the aforementioned premises, then Cherenkov with arms in hand did not allow the workers of the village council to the premises. Thus, the organization of the workshops was disrupted. It should be noted that the quality of the renovation work is too low. In the reporting period, there were more than ten cases of damage to tractors and their delivery for re‐repair after test drives immediately after they came out of repair. (Grain farms ʺAmurskyʺ of the Aleksandrovsky district, ʺVostochnyʺ of the Zavitinsky district and ʺSun‐Yat‐Senʺ of the Mikhailovsky district). The difficulties of the repair campaign are further aggravated by the fact that out of the 590 tractors planned for delivery to the state farms of the Krai, 340 are old, to some extent already worn out and in varying degrees of 100% repair (out of the 340 tractors imported from the central regions Union needs repairs: capital ‐ 60%, medium ‐ 25% and current

‐ 15%).

b)  fuel supply

The supply of fuel and lubricants to the kolkhozes and sovkhozes of the Krai is proceeding unacceptably slowly. In connection with the onset of muddy roads, the sled track will certainly not be used to deliver fuel to production sites at this rate of supply.

As of February 20, the state farms of Zernotrest are provided with fuel by 10% and lubricants by 7%. In some places, the percentage of these substances is even lower. For example, for the Khankaisky region, 2630 tons of fuel must be thrown in for the sowing campaign, and on February 20, the region had only 50 tons, or 1.8% of the total required amount. The grain farm ʺPartizanʺ of the Tambov region requires 1360 tons of fuel, and on February 20 there was 20 tons or 1.5%. A very significant reason creating a brake on the timely delivery of fuel to the field is the huge shortage of containers in the regions and, in addition, the inattentive attitude towards eliminating this deficit on the part of some regional organizations. In the Grodekovsky region, there is still no accounting of containers. In the Khanka region, the Oil Syndicate base received a huge tank with a capacity of 400 tons of fuel. Zavbazoy is delaying the assembly of this tank, saying that: ʺWe will manage without it in the spring.ʺ However, the region is experiencing an acute shortage of containers: containers with a capacity of 260 tanks are required, and there are only 20 tanks. In the Tambov region, the delivery of fuel to the site is hampered solely by the lack of containers. The oil depots planned for construction in Tambovsk, Konstantinovka and Budund have not yet been completed with equipment.

c)   a decrease in the number of draft animals

Over the past two years, there has been a decrease in the number of working animals in the region. For example, according to the Krayzhivotnovodsoyuz data, in 1930 the number of horses decreased against 1929 by 15%. According to Kryseʹs data on January 1, 1930, there were 183,760 workhorses in the Region; during 1930, 12,500 head were imported from other regions; as of January 1, 1931, 187,350 workhorses were counted. Thus, in 1930, the number of draft animals decreased by 8,900 workhorses. For individual regions and villages taken for a sample, the decrease in the number of draft animals is characterized by the following data:

Spassky district

Consequently, in the Spassky District, the livestock population in 1930 decreased by 23.8%, and a particularly sharp decline occurred due to working bulls (almost 50%).

Mikhailovsky district

Thus, in the Mikhailovsky district, the number of horses in 1930 decreased by 25%, and the decline was especially sharp due to young animals (over 30%) and adolescents (over 50%). In the same area in the collective farms on January 1, 1930, there were 2020 workhorses, and on January 1, 1931 ‐ 1794. A decrease ‐ by 13.4%. In the same region, in the village of Bogolyubovka, over the past year 70 farms have sold over 10     workhorses. In   with. Ploshchad‐Aleksandrovsky,               Khankaysky district, in 1929 there were 140 work horses, and in 1930 ‐ 100. Decrease ‐ by 30%. In ten villages of the Tambov region (the most powerful of the grain regions in the Territory), the number of working livestock over the past year has decreased by 20‐30%.

d) slaughter and squandering of draft animals

The decrease in the number of draft animals in the past year was mainly due to the slaughter and squandering of horses. In the first half of 1930, a massive collectivization campaign was carried out; The kulakprosperous farms in a number of places almost completely exterminated and squandered draft animals. The mass death of livestock for the period of 1930 was noted only in one Tambov region (Sibirka) and partly in other neighboring regions, where, according to rough estimates, about 700 horses died from epizootics. However, in the same region, only in three economically powerful villages in 1930, 1,540 horses (with teenagers) were killed. In with. Zharikovo killed 800 horses, Verkhne‐Poltavka 600 and Nikolaevka 140. The reduction in the number of horses in the Spassky and Mikhailovsky (Primorye) districts (see table above) also occurred, mainly at the expense of slaughtering and squandering them, since in these areas there was no mass mortality of livestock in 1930. It should be noted that slaughter and squandering of draft animals in many areas of the region has not stopped until now, reaching relatively large sizes in some places. According to our data, the facts of slaughter and squandering of draft animals in JanuaryFebruary were noted in 11 regions of the region (out of 36 agricultural regions.

These data state the continuous slaughter and squandering of draft animals, despite the decree issued by the Council of Peopleʹs Commissars of December 27, 1930 on the categorical prohibition of this and bringing the perpetrators to justice. However, this resolution is not implemented at all by the lower administrative punitive bodies in a number of places, and at best, minimum penalties are applied to violators (mainly fines, sometimes in the amount of 10‐15 rubles), which absolutely do not give the desired effect (Nikolaevsky, N.Tambov, B.‐Mikhailovsky, Mikhailovsky and other areas). This circumstance actually stimulates the development of predatory cattle slaughter and speculation on meat in conditions of fat deficiency.

It is characteristic to note that out of the seven speculators‐butchers arrested by the PP in the last days of January for the predatory slaughter of livestock, five people have already had a criminal record for the same activity. In addition, the slaughter of horses is very clearly characterized by data on meat procurement. For example, the plan of the Aleksandrovsky Raipolevodsoyuz for a special quarter for the procurement of all breeds of livestock was fulfilled by 212%, and separately for the procurement of horses by 396%. According to the plan, it was supposed to prepare 55 horse carcasses, and 217 carcasses were prepared. The Ivanovo Raikolkhoz Union in a special quarter fulfilled the plan of meat procurement by 29%, and separately for the procurement of horses ‐ by 500%. Slaughter and squandering of livestock is, first of all, due to the curtailment and complete liquidation of the property of the kulak‐wealthy farms. But along with this, a significant place in the predatory destruction of draft animals is also occupied          by           the          middle peasant                 farms     of            individual peasants. Antikolkhoz, anti‐sowing and liquidation sentiments of some of the individual farmers, as well as the latterʹs dissatisfaction with the introduction of labor‐guiding in logging are the reasons for the destruction of livestock by the middle peasant.

“I slaughter my cattle because I want to eat meat myself, until they drove me to the collective farm, otherwise some uncle will get it on the collective farm” (Pokrovka village, B.‐Mikhailovsky district, middle peasant Soloviev).

“I want to be a poor peasant, not a middle peasant, because now it’s more profitable, and therefore I cut cattle” (Nizhne‐Tambovka village of the same district, middle peasant Baturin).

“Even if I have lost all my horses, I will know that the collective farm will not use my goods” (Fedorovka village of Khabarovsk region, middle peasant Kravchenko).

“We will reduce the livestock, which means we will get rid of the agricultural tax, we will not serve out labor, and most importantly, we will fill up with proletarians and then we will have everything” (a group of middle peasants from the village of Voronezh, Khabarovsk region).

“What can RIK do to us if we do not want to keep livestock. Whoʹs the boss? RICK or us? ʺ (middle peasant Kuznetsov, village Lazarevka, Birobidzhan region).

Vi. Agriculture specialization

a)  unrealistic plans

As a result of the absence in Kryza of accounting for rice farms in the Territory and its ignorance of the state of the irrigation systems of these farms, as well as the lack of study of new areas for a number of rice plantations, an unrealistic outline of plans is noted. According to the plan, a completely unexplored area of 800 hectares was included in the Krasnorechenskaya rice plantation system (Khabarovsk district) for sowing, of which 200 hectares are unsuitable for sowing (swampy), and the remaining 600 hectares, assigned by the project, in relation to the Krasnorechenskaya pumping station technically (from ‐ for the range of distance) cannot be watered by this station; the construction of a nonindependent pumping station for this section is not designed, since the profitability of such a structure has not been studied. In addition, the area projected for rice plantation on the territory of the Chernorechenskaya system (Khabarovsk district), cannot be irrigated due to the absence of an irrigation network and a pumping station on this site. The construction of irrigation facilities planned in this area last year was disrupted due to the lack of preparedness of interested organizations. In research work on the study of new areas by the Risotrest apparatus, gross mistakes are made that cost significant costs. For example, the regional sovkhoz ʺCominternʺ (Khanka district) designed a new area of 2000 hectares for irrigation, for the development of which 6000 rubles were spent. As a result, this project was rejected by the region.

b) the negative attitude of the peasants to the introduction of industrial crops

In view of the clearly insufficient mass agricultural work and the completely weak popularization of the decisions of the regional authorities on granting benefits to the sowing of industrial crops in a number of regions of the region, the peasantry, not excluding collective farmers, reacts negatively to the introduction of these crops, but mainly flax, hemp, sunflower and soybeans. Taught sowing plans for technical crops in some villages and collective farms are cut. In the Khankaisky region, the Korean collective farm ʺVostokʺ instead of the planned soybean sowing area of 75 hectares, took 10 hectares; the Korean commune ʺStar of Hankiʺ instead of 60 hectares took 20 hectares. In the Khabarovsk region, the commune ʺStalinʺ for various technical crops cut the planned area of 200 hectares to 133 hectares. In a number of villages in the Kh. Arkharinsky region, individual farmers cut off control tasks for the sowing of various technical crops. However, in some cases, the cutbacks of plans are explained by their unreality for individual industrial crops. For example, in the Aleksandrovsky district, the plan projected the cultivation of flax and hemp, while according to meteorological and soil conditions, these varieties cannot give good yields. For this reason, plans for sowing flax and hemp in various sizes have been cut off in 60 collective farms in the Aleksandrovsky District. In most cases, despite the favorable conditions for the cultivation of industrial crops, significant sections of the population are reluctant to accept plans for them, motivating them with the lack of the necessary knowledge to care for these crops, as well as the need for a much higher labor cost for the cultivation of industrial crops, in comparison with cereals, with lesser allegedly production effect.

“There is no point in sowing oil crops this year. Last year we spent so much work on sowing sunflowers but received almost no benefit” (collective farmer Strukov, Georgievka village, Mikhailovsky‐on‐Amur region). “Last year we sowed beans and chumiza 95 and received no benefit, but now they are imposing corn again” (collective farmer Voloshaev, Novo‐Aleksandrovka village, Tambov region).

A number of similar judgments were recorded in the Rukhlovsky, Tyndinsky and Mikhailovsky (Primorye) regions. In some villages, instead of intensifying explanatory work among sowers about the profitability of industrial crops, district and rural workers are trying to obtain the consent of the peasants through the administration to adopt plans for these crops. In such cases, the peasants noted harsh, bordering on clearly anti‐Soviet, actions. So, for example, in the village. After a series of ʺcriticalʺ speeches of the peasants on the merits of the plan proposed by him, Trofimov, authorized by the RIK, in Kazanovka of the Kh. ‐Arkharinsky District, said to the meeting in a raised tone: ʺYou do not want to work at all, so you refuse to plant flax.ʺ The peasants reacted sharply negatively to such a reproach from the commissioner and, for their part, heaped accusations against the communists. In the same area in with. Yaroslavka, at a general meeting on the sowing of technical crops, the task for which was proposed in addition to the previously adopted by society sowing plan, a low‐powered middle peasant Zenchenkov spoke, saying: “Why do we need to sow flax when there is a lot of care for him. Better to sow oats. There will be no benefit to us from flax, but only the tax will be increased, and the factories will satisfy, and the peasants are not considered. Under the Soviet regime, it became unbearable to live, they donʹt even sow what you want, and all the control figures and tasks are presented. I have not given you anything and I will not give you anything, and you will not force your industrial crops to be sowed either. Similar performances were made by three other middle peasants. conclusions

During the preparation for the sowing campaign, the following major shortcomings were noted.

1. The regional organizations directly serving the sowing campaign turned out to be unprepared in a timely manner to implement clear leadership and planning of practical work on the ground, as a result of which:

a)                   the control figures for sowing in the districts were lowered several times (four or five), and in the final study they were taught to the field only in the second half of January, moreover, these ʺfinalʺ tasks were corrected for a number of districts until February 10;

b)                  the regional sowing plan, including control tasks for all sowing indicators, was drawn up by Kryzu only at the end of January and sent out to the field in the second half of February;

c)                   the process of communicating plans to the village, collective farm, yard began to unfold with a monthʹs delay against the established date and has not yet been completed in a number of regions.

2. Regional organizations too slowly switched their attention to preparing for sowing, being engaged in ʺcleaning up the tailingsʺ for a number of other, timely not completed economic and political campaigns (grain procurement, mobilization), and also not completely outlived the right opportunist elements in their work. As a result:

a)                   the leading and planning directives of the regional economic agencies, which were already not timely delivered to the regions, were often marinated, and therefore the deployment of practical work in all branches of preparation for sowing was started with a great delay (the organization of regional seeding committees took place throughout January and agricultural seeding committees ‐ February ; re‐elections of agricultural commissioners, not only have not been carried out by the deadline, but even now they are not yet universally carried out; the directive of the Regional Committee, on the staffing of regional collective farms in a number of districts has not been fulfilled, etc.);

b)                  the pace taken in work is completely insufficient and, of course, does not ensure the timely fulfillment of the plan for the main sowing indicators (backfilling of seed stocks, repair campaign);

c)                   in some areas of work, individual regional organizations admit rightwing opportunistic manifestations in practice, treating conciliatoryly to the substitution of socialized semefonds by a system of ʺsafe receiptsʺ, sometimes sanctioning these tail‐like sentiments of 96 backward layers of the individual middle peasantry; do not show sufficient pressure on the kulak‐prosperous farms in terms of fulfilling solid tasks for filling the seed grain; do not take decisive measures to combat the slaughter and squandering of draft animals, especially by the kulaks and other persistent violators of the SNK decree of December 27, 1930, despite the ongoing predatory slaughter of cattle in a number of regions, which has become massive in some villages;

d)                  settlement and collective farm plans, as well as control assignments for technical crops, were worked out insufficiently and sometimes not seriously, and therefore in some places these plans turned out to be unrealistic.

3. Mass agitational, especially agro‐cultural work among sowers until

March was developed extremely poorly, as a result of which:

a)                   the tide in the collective farms at the current rate does not ensure the fulfillment of the sowing plan for the collective farm sector;

b)                  significant strata of individual farmers, mainly middle peasants, under the influence of kulak agitation, are struck by abbreviations, antisowing and liquidation tendencies, in this regard, offering resistance in terms of creating seed funds, cutting off and refusing to fulfill control tasks for sowing, squandering their property and working cattle;

c)                   the peasantry, not excluding collective farmers, not being sufficiently aware of the profitability of high‐grade crops, as well as the provision of benefits to the sowers of these crops, is reluctant to introduce industrial varieties, and sometimes clearly reacts with hostility to the proposed plans for technical crops, cutting them off or even refusing to execute.

Deputy PP OGPU for DCK West

Head of SOU PP OGPU for DCK Raysky

Head of INFO PP OGPU for DVK Toropkin

Head of the 1st department of INFO OGPU for DCK Landyshev

95                                         Chumiza is an annual cultivated plant of the bristle grass genus of the cereal family. Cultivated in Korea, China, India, Mongolia, Japan and other countries; in the USSR ‐ in the BSSR, the Ukrainian SSR, in the Central Asian republics, the Kazakh SSR, the Georgian SSR, in the North Caucasus, the Far East. Cultivated in small areas.

96                                         Khvostist sentiments ‐ khvostism was considered by the Bolsheviks as a kind of opportunism, which led to spontaneity in the revolutionary movement, to the belittling of consciousness. In everyday life in party life, those who were trailing ʺin the tail of events.ʺ


Special report No. 7 of the OGPU PP in the DCK on the course of the sowing     campaign,           collectivization and        the         mood    of            the peasantry. June 20, 1931

No. 19

Top secret

Table of contents

1.  Sowing course

2.  Co‐apparatus manual:

a)  the inactivity of the grassroots co‐apparatus;

b)  land designation.

3. State of the machine and tractor economy:

a)   lack of agricultural machinery and tractors;

b)  repair;

c)   mismanagement of agricultural machines and shortcomings in their operation;

d)  supply of fuel and lubricants;

e)   feeding difficulties.

4. The course of collectivization:

a)  tides in collective farms;

b)  outputs;

c)   kinks and administration. 5. The mood of the peasantry:

a)  collective farmers;

b)  poor and middle peasants;

c)   the kulaks and the anti‐Soviet element.

1.  Sowing course

Despite the fact that more than a month has passed since the start of sowing in the Krai, the pace of sowing work is low and threaten the successful completion and implementation of the sowing plan. As of June 5, of this year, 332,775 hectares have been sown in the collective farm and individual sectors, or 31.2% of the plan for both sectors. For state farms, 96,528 hectares have been sown for the same number, or 39.1% in relation to the plan for the state farm sector. There are significant breakthroughs in the implementation of the plan in the individual sector. In many villages, individual farmers have not yet begun sowing, but at best they started it in the last days of May. In the Spassky District, as of June 1, the plan for collective farms was fulfilled by 36.8%, and by individual farmers ‐ by 15.4%. Typical indicators are available for wheat sowing: 89.2% ‐ for collective farms, 17.0% ‐ for individual farmers.

Thus, it should be noted that wheat sowing was disrupted in both sectors, and the state farms came out with the best indicators (72.7% of the plan). Sowing rates for other crops also create fears for the full and successful implementation of their plans and for the implementation of the decision of the regional authorities to overlap the undersowing of wheat by other crops. Regarding the implementation of the plan for individual areas of the grain strip, it should be noted that the following are especially lagging behind: 1. Khabarovsk ‐ 3.3% of the plan; 2. Shmakovsky ‐ 8.1%; 3. Ivanovsky (Primorye) ‐ 8.3%; 4. Birobidzhan 12.9%; 5. Kalininsky ‐ 13.4%; 6. Leninsky ‐ 14.2%; 7. Pokrovsky ‐ 15.2%.

Consequently, out of 23 main grain regions of the region, 7 regions have fulfilled their sowing plans by an average of 11%.

2.  The manual of the apparatus

a)   the inactivity of the grassroots government

One of the reasons for the weak sowing progress in some districts of the Krai is the inactivity of the grassroots Soviet apparatus, as well as of the leadership in the social sector. This apparatus, both in the preparatory period and during the sowing process, poorly managed all the activities of the sowing campaign. Untimely measures were taken to discuss and bring sowing plans to the yards, to ensure full coverage of all agricultural machinery with repairs and uninterrupted carrying out of it, to identify the presence of seeds in the population and fill them, etc. For example, in the Chernihiv region, despite the fact that the start of sowing was delayed due to inclement weather, the district did not set the dates for sowing various crops until the end of May. As a result, each village and collective farm set their own terms and went to the field at their own discretion. The district did not know about the beginning of sowing in some villages for quite a long time (the villages of Vadimovka, Sivakovka, Petrovichi). It should be noted that during the preparation for sowing from the side of the district, the sole sector was paid little attention, the individual farmers fell out of sight of the district. In a significant part of villages, the cross committees have a large number of seeds, but their delivery to the poor part of the village is delayed, since there are no instructions from the district. A similar situation is noted in the Spassky, Birobidzhan and Rukhlovsky regions. Some workers of the village councils, showing complete inactivity in the work on the sowing campaign, at the same time pander to the kulak‐prosperous element in the question of their failure to fulfill the rigid tasks for sowing, often openly speaking out in defense of them.

b)  land designation

As before, in a number of villages in the Kray, the situation with land designation, especially of individual farmers, is unsatisfactory. In the Chernihiv region, the district administration limited itself only to the distribution of land to villages, but did not give instructions and did not check the degree of distribution of these lands between individual individual farms. As a result, in many villages personal land plots were not indicated to individual farmers before the beginning of June. This same phenomenon, on the other hand, gave rise to cases of unauthorized seizure of land by individual farmers without the knowledge of the village councils. In the villages of Dmitrievka and Monastyrische, land plots were not indicated to individual farmers until May 28 of this year, as a result of which some of them in the village. Dmitrievka unauthorizedly seized part of the land of the collective farm in the village of Prokhori, Spassky District, sowing wheat on them. In with. In Bueve of the Kalininsky district, the individual farmers have not yet started sowing, because to this day they do not know where they were personally allocated new land plots instead of the old ones that were given to the collective farm. At the same time, there are facts of allotment of land to individual farmers of a worse quality than they had before the time of the withdrawal of their land from collective farms to state farms. In with. Novozhatkovo, Mikhailovsky district (Primorye), in connection with the allotment of land to the grain state farm, individual farmers received new land plots that had not been sown for the past five years. This phenomenon has led to the fact that many individual farmers refuse to sow in these areas. The middle peasants Lotushko Yakov and Yegor said among the peasants: “You cannot sow on these hills. If they give us land, we will slow, but if they do not give it, we will go to work. ʺ In the same area in the village. Osinovka, as a result of the inactivity of the village council and the sowing committee in the issue of the timely allocation of land to the poor and middle peasants, the kulak‐prosperous part of the population of this village sowed all the best lands. Having stood in front of this fact, the village council suggested that the individual farmers sow the former kulak plots, but when they intended to start work, it turned out that a significant part of this land had already been plowed and sown by the collective farm. 3. State of the machine and tractor economy

a)   lack of agricultural machinery and tractors

Many state farms and collective farms of the Territory are provided with agricultural machines and tractors in insufficient quantities for the sowing campaign, which also responds to the timely completion of the sowing plans. Some of them drew up their production and sowing plans with the expectation of receiving agricultural implements and tractors according to the requests made. As a result, at present, after not receiving the expected machines, they faced the fact of significant underfulfillment of the sowing plan. In the untimely delivery of agricultural machines and tractors to the localities, a significant share of the blame falls on the district and supply organizations. In with. Slavyanka of the Posyetsky district, the agent of the bulk point Kogan Alexander, three months ago, received an order from the RIK to send agricultural machines available at the point, received in 1930, to collective farms. but until the end of May, he did not comply with this order, which put in a difficult situation some collective farms in the region, the sowing plans of which were approved by the RIK taking into account the delivery of these machines. In the same area, at the Sovtorgflot pier in the Posiet Bay, agricultural machines for the spring sowing campaign were received to the Raykolkhozsoyuz a long time ago, which have not yet been shipped to the site.

b)  repair

In some districts of the Region, the facts of incomplete repair coverage of all faulty agricultural machines and tractors continue to be noted. At the same time, in numerous cases, the facts of poor‐quality and superficial repairs were noted, as a result of which, after the first test, the machines again went out of order, and sometimes, due to the negligent attitude of the repair shops during their initial repair, they already required major repairs, i.e., restoration of some parts.

In with. Kazanka of the Svobodnensky District, due to the insignificant smithy, agricultural implements were not fully repaired.

In the RVS commune in the Chernihiv region, the plows were not repaired, the disc harrows were not assembled. In the same district, in the UVO commune, two plows after repair turned out to be faulty automatic machines, and two new seeders were missing some parts.

At the Skotovod meat farm in Sakhalin, out of seven tractors received from the AOO, three are out of order and require major repairs. A significant part of the agricultural equipment has not been repaired yet. A similar situation is noted in the state farm of the Pig Vodsoyuz in the same place.

In the Pokrovsky District, the majority of collective farms, having an agreement with the MTS for plowing and sowing the land, were almost completely unprepared for the repair of their machine and tractor facilities. Meanwhile, the MTS turned out to be poorly prepared for sowing, as a result of which the fulfillment of the plan for sowing work in these collective farms is disrupted.

c) mismanagement of agricultural machines and shortcomings in their use

The noted facts of insufficient provision of collective farms and state farms with agricultural implements and tractors and incomplete, careless carrying out of their repairs are largely aggravated by the moments of inept and irrational use of them, as well as careless and mismanaged attitude towards them on the part of the service personnel, as a result of which quite suitable agricultural machines due to their spoilage was out of order.

In Spassky District, despite the fact that tractors work 18‐20 hours a day, due to frequent downtime, they do not fulfill the established norm by 15‐20%. The reasons for downtime are: damage to tractor parts, lack of spare parts, lack of administration, etc. Frequent downtime of tractors for these reasons occurs in all collective farms in the region. In the commune ʺ12 [years] of Octoberʺ, due to the lack of spare spark plugs and piston rings, two tractors almost daily have idle times on average from 8 to 12 hours. For the same reason, the rice sovkhoz is experiencing massive tractor downtime. In the OKDVA commune, due to the fault of the tractor refueller Lapa, who did not go on duty, all the tractors had a three‐hour downtime. In addition, in the commune every day out of 12 tractors, on average, two or three do not work due to their malfunction.

In the Posyetsky district, in the Novokievsk MTS, which serves collective farms, from the beginning of the sowing campaign, they do not produce the established rate: instead of 6 hectares per day, they give an average of 1.46 hectares. The reason for the weak plowing progress is the lack of qualified tractor drivers who do not know how to handle the machines and, as a result, often damage to machine parts occurs, resulting in downtime.

In the Grodekovsky district, MTS tractors are often used irrationally. Instead of using them in the primary cultivation of the land ‐ plowing, they harrow, sow and even deliver seeds, as a result of which the plowing task is not fulfilled by about 20%. Agricultural machines are also used irrationally: plowing is done with heavy plows, while the light Luzhilnik plow gives productivity three to four times more. In the same area in the Budyonny commune, due to the low qualification of tractor drivers, frequent breakdowns of trailed implements occur.

d) supply of fuel and lubricants

One of the main hindrances in carrying out the sowing campaign in the socialist sector is shortcomings in the supply of fuel and lubricants. Continuing fuel supply interruptions cause frequent tractor downtime and failure to meet full output.

In the Konstantinovskaya MTS (Amur) in the second half of May there was absolutely no fuel. To the repeated demands of MTS for an urgent delivery of fuel, an answer was received that such was sent from a barge, but MTS did not receive it by the end of the month.

In the commune of the village of Toroi, Tyndinsky District, there is only 6 centners of fuel for tractors, while 45 centners are required to complete arable work.

On May 25, Sakhalin had 12.5 tons of fuel, which ensured their uninterrupted operation at full load for a maximum of four days. The fuel supplied by the Krai for Sakhalin is still in the city of Vladivostok and has not been abandoned due to the fault of the Sovtorgflot, which did not provide the fuel with a sufficient amount of containers. Failure to take urgent measures to transfer fuel will entail a significant disruption of the sowing plans of the state and collective farms of Sakhalin. At the same time, there are facts of negligence in the use of the available amount of fuel. A number of collective farms do not have any fuel consumption rate, which is not recorded.

In the Spassky District, fuel accounting has not yet been established in almost all collective farms. Often, due to the negligence of tractor drivers and tankers, fuel is spilled on the ground. Each tractor burns more than the norm by about 20%.

In the Grodekovsky district, the administration of the Nesterovskaya MTS does not observe fuel economy. Often, fuel is poured into the tractor directly from the bucket, with the result that half of it spills onto the ground. Barrels with lubricants are not closed, dust and water get into them, moreover, barrels are not always emptied to the end ‐ cases have been noted when up to two or three kg of fuel or lubricant remained at the bottom of the barrel.

e) forage difficulties

The deficit of the fodder fund, both in the individual and in the socialist sector, is felt especially acutely in some places at the present time, when, in connection with significant breakthroughs in sowing, the question arose about the intensive deployment of sowing work, and, consequently, the use of live draft power. In the border zone of the Birobidzhan region, in most collective farms, there is absolutely no forage, as a result of which the horses are severely exhausted and sick. The measures taken by the regional organizations to find forage did not lead to any positive results. In the commune of the village of Poltavka, Pokrovsky district, the situation with the fodder fund is very bad. By now, the commune has no forage at all. In with. Stalino, Leninsky district, there is absolutely no forage for 36 horses engaged in sowing work. To support the horses, they were fed 20 poods of food rice. A similar situation is noted in a number of villages in Rukhlovsky, Tyndinsky and other regions. 4. The course of collectivization

a)   tides in collective farms

As of June 1, throughout the Territory (excluding fishing collective farms) there are 1,317 collective farm associations (as of May 20, there were 1,283), of which 69,870 poor and middle peasant farms were united, or 48.8% in relation to all these farms (as of May 20, 47 ,4 %). In 23 main agricultural regions of the Krai, 68,477 farms or 51.9% were collectivized (as of May 20 it was 50.4%). In some areas of the Krai there are also the best indicators ‐ from 70 to 91% (Nikolsky, Ivanovsky, Mikhailovsky, Tambovsky, Blagoveshchensky, Rukhlovsky and Amuro‐Zeisky). As before, in the Olginsky, Yakovlevsky, Suchansky and Ivanovsky (Primorye) districts, the course of collectivization is very slow. As of June 1, collective farm associations covered no more than 30% of all the poor and middle peasants in these regions. Some villages of the region are already 100% collectivized (the villages of N. Ostropol, Svobodnensky district, Mogilevka, Pashkovo, Sagibovo, Kasatkino, N. Pokrovka, Kazanovka, Ukrainka, Skobeltsyno, N. Nikolaevka and Volnoe Kh. ‐Arkharinsky district, Lokhvitsy Aleksandrovsky‐on‐Amur district). In some districts of the region, significant results in the work on involving individual peasants in collective farms were achieved as a result of extensive mass explanatory work carried out by collective farmers among individual peasants. For example, in the Rukhlovsky and Tyndinsky districts, on the initiative and under the leadership of the Raizhivotnovodsoyuz, recruitment brigades were created at the collective farms, which, leaving for the villages, carried out a lot of explanatory work among individual farmers for their entry into collective farms. In addition, individual processing of each individual farmer was carried out by the commissions of authoritative collective farmers organized at the collective farms.

In the previous report No. 6, we noted a large influx into the collective farms of some villages at the expense of the well‐to‐do stratum of the village. This phenomenon was also noted during the reporting period, and, moreover, the incentive for these farms to join collective farms is the desire to avoid fulfilling firm tasks for sowing. In addition, the organization of new collective farms was noted exclusively from the kulak‐wealthy farms. In a number of villages in the Spassky District, the kulak‐wealthy part of the peasantry, in order to avoid firm assignments, partially sells its property and enters collective farms. In the same region, in the villages of Gaivoron and Prokhori, TOZs are organized exclusively from wealthy farms. In with. Chernigovka Svobodnensky region recently noted an influx into the collective farm at the expense of the well‐to‐do part of the village, which received firm tasks for sowing. In the same area in the village. Zigovka members of the ʺ12 [years] Octoberʺ collective farm from the wealthy stratum say: “We entered the collective farm because the representative said that if you go to the collective farm, you will not export grain. So, we joined the collective farm, and there it will be seen when we eat the bread, we can collect our property and leave the collective farm. ʺ In the villages of Zheltoyarovo, B. Iver and Chernovskoe of the Svobodnensky District, artels of hunters were organized exclusively from the kulakwealthy part of the peasantry of these villages.

b)  outputs

Along with the continuing massive influx of collective farms, there have been cases of exits, and these exits are of a single nature and are the result of shortcomings in the work of collective farms. The influx of new strata of collective farmers into some collective farms is hampered by their infestation by an alien and kulak element.

In the Svobodnensky district in the village. Zagan marked the exits from the local collective farm mainly poor. The exits were a consequence of the large debt of the collective farm, as a result of which a significant part of the earnings of the collective farmers went to cover this debt. In the same area in the village. Rogachevka from the commune ʺChervonyi khleborobʺ marked exits on the basis of the contamination of the commune by a wealthy and anti‐Soviet element.

In with. Konstantinovna Mazanovsky district five poor people who submitted applications for joining the local collective farm, took them back, arguing that ʺthe collective farm has the majority of strong middle peasants who have to work.ʺ

In the villages of G.‐Plyusninka and Arkadyevna of the Kh. Arkharinsky district, the poor refrain from joining the collective farm, saying: ʺThere are kulaks working there ‐ our enemies, weʹd better not go to the collective farm, weʹll wait until they are cleaned, then it will be possible to join.ʺ

c) kinks and administration

When carrying out work on collectivization on the part of some authorized representatives in pursuit of 100% coverage of individual peasants by collective farms, excesses were noted, up to the ʺforcible corralʺ of individual farmers into collective farms. These excesses in almost all cases were accompanied by moments of administration.

In with. N. Aleksandrovna Kh. ‐Arkharinsky region in view of the poor registration in the collective farm, the collectivization commissioner comrade. Kulikov applied the following method: each court was given firm assignments, and each of those who received the assignment was summoned to the village council, where he was asked to immediately hand over the seed fund or to enroll in a collective farm.

In with. In Chernigovka, Svobodnensky District, at a meeting of the poor on collectivization, RIK instructor Olyfirenko finished his long speech with the following words: ʺBefore you is one way ‐ a collective farm or a grave.ʺ The poor understood these words as follows: ʺEither enter the collective farm, or go straight to the grave.ʺ 5. The mood of the peasantry

a)   collective farmers

Some of the collective farmers, mainly from the upper part of the peasantry, who have crept into the collective farms, are trying to disintegrate them from the inside, doing work and agitating among the rest of the collective farmers for refusing to sow and for leaving the collective farm. “Why the hell do we need your plans, we will sow as much as we want. I will never agree with their plans, let them sow according to their plans” (Krasny Kut village, Spassky district, collective farmer, strong middle peasant Pavel Vaschenko). “They used to say that on the collective farm we will work the way we all want, and no one will interfere. And now they are doing everything not our way, every jerk‐member of the Komsomol is in charge. They give some plans, we worked without plans, and we will work without plans, as much as we have time to sow, then ours” (collective farm “12 [years] of October”, collective farmer Gunko Vasily). “Before, we did not know any plans, but sowed more, before, no one forced us to sow and export according to grain procurements, and the state was richer and had as much grain as you wanted, did not stand in lines and did not receive rations. Judging by the grain procurements and those plans that are given for sowing, one must assume that war is not far off, the state, as you can see, intends to stock up on grain for several years in case of war. I heard that England has already declared war on our Union” (Voznesenovka village, Mikhalovsky‐on‐Amur district).

In with. Rogacheka of the Svobodnensky district, a member of the Verchenko collective farm used to have a kulak farm, kept workers, had up to 25 acres of sowing, entered the collective farm, where he is campaigning against him, knocking the collective farmers to leave it.

b)  poor and middle peasants

Against the background of the general positive attitude towards the campaigns carried out in the countryside by the bulk of individual farmers from the poor and middle peasants, negative sentiments are also noted. Discontent with collectivization occupies a significant place in the mood of this section of the peasantry. This discontent under the influence of the kulaks and the anti‐Soviet element takes on a more pronounced character.

“Why do we need a collective farm, we have nothing even without a collective farm, and if we organize a collective farm, we will lose the last farm that we have; everything will go to dust, because then they will start to force us to work, and what you earn, then the communists will lure out of us under various pretexts, will force us to sow a lot, and when you collect the sowed, they will force you to surrender to the state ‐ in this way we will ruin our economy. No, it would be better if we stay outside the collective farm, we will live as we have lived up to the present time” (the village of Gorki, Tyndinsky district, poor man Kolesnikov). “Our newspapers write to help collective farms. And whatʹs the point in them ‐ how much the state does not help them, everything goes to dust, because all the idlers climb there. The other is not given, so they all go to the collective farm, as one on one, and nothing comes of it. After a while, these collective farms will fall apart, only one memory will remain of them” (village N.‐Listvyanka, Aleksandrovsky‐on‐Amur district, middle peasant Krasin Ivan). “We donʹt need any collective farms ‐ we lived without them, and we will live. We do not want to submit ourselves to corvee again. If earlier there was a landowner on our neck, now we are communists. Previously, there were no collective farms, and the peasant lived well, but now, with collective farms, you have to go naked, barefoot and hungry. So that they all disappear” (Tsvetkovka village, Yakovlevsky district, middle peasant Tolstoy).

Quite often, these sentiments result in direct opposition to collectivization by conducting anti‐collective farm agitation among other individual farmers. “You are in vain when you go to the collective farm. I wonʹt go, because soon whites will come from abroad and disperse all the collective farms” (village of Turiy Rog, Khanka region, middle peasant Mantis Fedot). “Do not go to the collective farm, listen to the old people, what they say ‐ they will soon be finished. Collective farmers will soon have their eyes gouged out, as the Holy Scripture says, so it will be” (village of Kanachi, Mazanovsky district, middle peasant Kolupaev).

In with. Zheltoyarovo Svobodnensky district middle peasant Balanev Ivan among the peasants is openly campaigning for disrupting collectivization. At the same time, there were numerous facts of refusals of individual farmers (poor and middle peasants) to sow and tendencies to leave the village to work in state farms and [to] logging. These sentiments took place in a number of villages of Kh. Arkharinsky, Shmakovsky, Tyndinsky, Aleksandrovsky‐on‐Amur and other regions.

c) the kulaks and the anti‐Soviet element

The kulak‐prosperous and other anti‐Soviet elements of the village continue to carry out intensified anti‐Soviet activity and agitation to disrupt all the activities of the sowing campaign, as well as collectivization. At the same time, for greater success in their antiSoviet activities, they spread anti‐Soviet rumors ʺabout the forcible confiscation of grain during grain procurementsʺ, ʺabout the imminent fall of the Soviet regime, and therefore all its campaigns in the countryside will go to waste.ʺ

“Why sow grain now, sow — all the same, the communists and the Jews will take it away. Letʹs not sow, guys, let the communists themselves sow. It is necessary to make sure that all the peasants give up sowing this year, then the time will come sooner ‐ the communists and Jews will be dispersed, and then there will be complete freedom “).

ʺAll states are going against Russia, they will beat the collective farmers and hang the communists and all those who stand for the Soviet powerʺ (Molchanovo village, Svobodnensky district, wealthy Domanin).

“There is no need to sow ‐ they will take everything away anyway. They took the seeds and made them sow. Yes, and there is nothing to work with, there are no horses” (Spasskoye village of the same district, kulak Palyuta Peter).

In with. Yukhta, Svobodnensky District, the kulaks Zavrashina and Kievsky are campaigning among the peasants against the collective farm, insisting on leaving it. At the same time, the same element, seeking the collapse of the collective farms, intimidates the collective farmers with violence if they do not leave the collective farm. Threats are also noted against active workers in the countryside and collective farms who are working on collectivization. In with. Dmitrievka of the Chernihiv region, middle peasant‐anti‐Soviet Litvinenko Petro, meeting on the street the activist‐collective farmer Yatsenko Vasily, began to threaten him: “You are the Komsomol again, do not think that you are communists and party members, we will soon carry out such collectivization that you will forget how it is and called ʺ. In with. Belogorka of the Aleksandrovsky‐on‐Amur region, a poor manpodkulak Ermolaev Parfentiy (a hooligan and a drunkard) in a drunken state threatened those peasants who signed up as members of the collective farm, saying: ʺI will deal with you, I will show you such a collective farm that you will forget to think.ʺ Sometime later, with a knife in his hand, he was breaking into the house of a collective farmer, shouting: ʺIt will not be your way, but in my opinion, you collective farmers should be strangled.ʺ

Deputy PP OGPU for DCK West

Head of SPO PP OGPU for DVK Toropkin

Authorized officer of the 2nd branch of the SPO PP OGPU for DVK Caspari


1) the head of the SPO OGPU, Moscow; 2) the secretaries of the regional committee of the CPSU (b) comrade. Perepechko and Andreev; 3) the chairman of DKIK comrade. Asatkin; 4) the chairman of the CC RCP comrade. Kulpe; 5) in the case of STR PP (original).


Memorandum of the PP of the OGPU on the DCK on the political and economic situation in the region. April 4, 1931

No. 26

Top secret

Moscow OGPU Evdokimov

Copy to Agranov, Prokofiev, Kishkin

1.                   Sowing campaign... The breakthroughs noted in the previous reports in the preparation of the sowing campaign are now getting worse in a number of regions. Especially catastrophic is the situation with the provision of fuel and lubricants for the tractor fleet of state farms, machine and tractor stations and collective farms. The availability of fuel at Soyuzneftʹs warehouses as of March 30 satisfies the April demand of MTS for four days, and of state farms for seven days. There are no lubricating oils. Of those charged in the center in JanuaryFebruary, 156 cars arrived at the station. Bochkarevo has only four cars. The delivery of fuel to the Krai was to be carried out by Soyuzneft by sea. Of the four ships charged for April, only one arrives in Vladivostok in mid‐April ‐ Embaneft. The dispatch of the rest by the order of the board of Soyuzneft was postponed for a month. The last [steamers] will arrive in Vladivostok in mid‐May. The embaneft steamer will satisfy the April fuel demand: for kerosene ‐ by 51%, for naphtha ‐ by 48%, for gasoline ‐ by 100%. Thus, the entire tractor park of the Krai, in the midst of sowing, will have to be idle for two or three weeks due to lack of fuel. The consumer market (population, logging, hospitals, etc.) has been withdrawn from the fuel supply since March. In a number of state farms and MTS tractors coming out of repair cannot be tested due to lack of fuel. In the state farms, MTS and collective farms located in the Birobidzhan, Zavitinsky and Mikhailovsky districts, the fuel arriving in April cannot be dropped until the Amur River opens in early May. These areas do not have fuel either. The total demand for petroleum products for the entire period of the sowing campaign is expressed: for kerosene ‐ 12,575 tons,

As before, the filling of seed funds and fear funds is going on very weakly. As of March 20, according to the seed funds, the procurement plan was fulfilled by individual farmers by 26.3%, and by collective farmers by 76.4%. The insurance fund on collective farms is filled up by 42.2%, according to the plan by individual farmers ‐ 116%. The presence of a semfond in a number of villages left for ʺsafe receiptsʺ [semfond] was actually not found. In the Khankaisky region, in some collective farms, the check of the seed funds, which was carried out, turned out to be available by 9 thousand centners less than indicated in the ʺsafe receiptsʺ. The weakness of backfilling of seed stocks is explained by the complete gravity of this work in a number of regions, insufficient mobilization of regional seed resources, and hopes for full satisfaction of their applications for a seed loan by the Krai. At the deepest points of the Pokrovsky region there are more than 40 thousand poods of grain that can be used for seeds, however, no measures have been taken to transport it and distribute it to scarce collective farms and villages. A similar phenomenon occurs in the Yakovlevsky district. In the Tambov and Zavitinsky districts, regional organizations unauthorizedly unloaded from wagons and distributed among collective farms the grain of ʺZernotrestʺ in the amount of more than two thousand centners. There are bugs taking into account and distribution of the seed loan from the regional office of Soyuzkhleb. The latter issued several orders to the Khingano‐Arkharinsky Regional Development Commission for receiving one thousand centners of grain at the Innokentyevsky point, but in fact there was no grain at the point. In some places, oncoming traffic is created. An equally ugly state, taking into account the progress of the repair campaign, there is no exact information on the repair for March 20 according to Kryze due to the created confusion and duplication of these places. The rate of collectivization of the Territory still does not ensure the fulfillment of the planned targets of the sowing campaign. In the collective farm sector, as of March 20 in the Territory, there are 1019 collective farms (excluding fishing ones), uniting 49,958 collective farmers, or 33.7%. The tide for 20 days in March was expressed ‐ about 4,000 collective farmers. The main producing districts of the Krai, which have all the objective possibilities to fulfill the task of collectivization given to them, do not have the proper pace: in the Aleksandrovsky district 30.5% are collectivized, in Svobodnensky ‐ 15.3%, Kalininsky ‐ 17.2%,

Shmakovsky ‐20%, in other grain areas from 30 to 50%. The feasibility of collectivization assignments in these areas is fully proved by the experience of the best areas that do not suffer from the rate of gravity, areas that have exceeded the task: 85% are collectivized in the Rukhlovsky area, 57.1% in the Amurozey area. On the part of the Krajkolkhozsoyuz, Kryzu, Zernotrest and a number of other organizations, there is no pace of deployment of mass political work on collectivization. In the Chernigov, Spassky, Khabarovsk districts in the collectivization business, there are stakes on gravity. For unsatisfactory management of mass work on the ground, lack of accounting for efficiency and planning in work, Krayz and the Krajkolkhozsoyuz were severely reprimanded by the Kraiposevkom.

2.                   Fish fishing... Preparations for the fishing season are still unsatisfactory. Some industries in Nikolaevsk, Amur do not have an industrial financial plan. There are only preliminary sketches. [As] illustrations, we present the state of the Upper Pronge fishery, which is typical for all. The fishery is not provided with construction materials, there is no industrial financial plan, and watercraft is not provided. They did not start filling the glacier with ice. In Amurrybaksoyuz, preparations for the Putin season are underway. There are no threads for small breeds, artels and catchers are not provided with threads and nets. The required number of nets, tackle, fishing gear is not taken into account. Fishing begins in early April, but Amurrybaksoyuz does not know where and how many artels will fish. In a somewhat better sense, the preparation of fishing cooperation in the Vladivostok region is under way. The trades are not fully provided with overalls, watercraft are provided, except for motorboats, which are in short supply. There is no fuel at all. The workers are provided with housing for 50%, the public catering of all fishing artels is poorly supplied. The management of collective farms [from the outside] of the Rairybaksoyuz is insufficient due to isolation from production.

3.                   Logging. The logging plan for the first quarter, which includes felling 6,472,900 cubic meters, hauling 7,506,300 cubic meters, was completed on March 20: felling ‐ 39.5%, hauling ‐ 25.7%. The export program was completed: felling ‐ by 45.3%, hauling ‐ 32.1%. Preparation for the rafting in the region is unsatisfactory. This yearʹs program is twice as large as last yearʹs. The alloy is not provided with labor, overalls and commodity products. Oversupply is observed in some timber industry enterprises, in others ‐ undersupply. The Blagoveshchensk timber industry enterprise is provided with special footwear by 488%, Khorsky ‐ only by 1.7%; the Arkharinsky region is provided with flour by 170%, and Birsky ‐ by 2%.

4.                   The eviction of kulaks of the 2nd and 3rd categories from border villages, entirely collectivized, in the Territory is completed. In total, the 2nd category was evicted ‐ 850 families, 530 families were placed in remote gold mines, 320 families were concentrated in special settlements awaiting the opening of navigation. 125 families were evicted in the 3rd category. The mood of the main strata of the peasantry in connection with the eviction in a number of regions has somewhat deteriorated. A strong growth in the activity of poor collective farmers, some strata of the middle peasantry, noted in past reports, in most cases was not consolidated, and no mass agitation work was carried out after the operation. The anti‐Soviet element took advantage of this, beginning to intensively conduct agitation, exclusively rebel, in connection with which the unstable middle peasants, the poor and some collective farmers begin to react negatively.

In Zavitinsky, Dragoshensky (formerly Ivanovsky, Amur), Leninsky districts in 14 villages, there were cases of manifestations of discontent in group conversations of peasants, especially women. Similar [situation] in some villages in other districts. In with. Komarovka, Shmakovsky District, under the influence of the anti‐Soviet elementʹs agitation, the individual farmers who worked in the logging, in response to the eviction of the kulaks, stopped working and came to the village. They were again sent to logging only by compulsion. In the same village, a group of middle peasants tried to beat up the active collective farmer Savchenko for participating in the eviction. In with. In Novo‐Alekseevka, Dragoshe District, many students in school spoke out against eviction. A group of well‐to‐do kulak youth in a drunken state showed discontent, a group of women of different strata spoke out sharply anti‐Soviet. In many villages of the frontier Grodekovsky region, inhabited in the majority by the Cossacks, at the time of the eviction from the side of significant groups of the main layers, negative sentiments were noted. Closed meetings of collective farmers and poor peasants were held passively, in latent discontent. Some activists participating in the eviction of kulaks expressed condolences, spoke out against the eviction in general. A group of peasants with. Zharikovo, Grodekovsky district, who worked at logging, at the moment when the kulaks identified among them were removed from work, protested, trying to resist. Along with this, in almost all areas there is a very positive response from the partisans, with the exception of isolated cases. Noteworthy is the fact that the exiled kulak was defended by the former leader of the party movement in the Amur, party member Chernovol, who, living at the moment in with. Yanosovka, Zavitinsky district (before the liquidation of the121worked as deputy head of Kryza for promotion), tried to drag the kulak planned for eviction into the collective farm, speaking in the village council against his eviction. The partisans who learned about this sharply condemn his act. There was no resistance on the part of the deported kulaks, with the exception of the activity of individual kulaks, as well as isolated cases of flight. In with. Komarov, Shmakovsky district, the wife of the kulak Sukhar at the time of the eviction screamed for help, broke windows, dishes, and a group of women came running. The wife of the kulak, Taranyuk, tried to beat the activist Pavlovskaya, who was making an inventory of the property. The wife of Borovikʹs fist stabbed the secretary of the village council Bulavin. In with. In Novo‐Alekseevka, Dragoshensky district, the family of the kulak Korobko (Korobko himself was withdrawn by us in 1930), poisoning the air in the room of their house with heated formalin, tightly boarded the house and fled. In the Zavitinsky district, three kulaks, who were being followed to the eviction, escaped from the convoy. In the Khingano‐Arkharinsky district, Vasily

Mikhalichenkoʹs fist, slated for seizure and eviction, fled to the Chinese side, Sukovatyʹs fist, trying to escape, was detained at the border. On the part of some authorized RECs and other Soviet workers, excesses were noted in the eviction process, as well as protection from the kulaks. In a number of villages in Shmakovsky, Grodekovsky, Birobidzhan, Border (former Mikhailovsky‐on‐Amur) districts, the necessary food supplies, in some cases clothing and necessary things, were confiscated from the evicted. In the Shmakovsky district, the authorized Shchederkin, a party member, being drunk, took away bedding from the kulaks, misbehaved, lost the secret instructions for eviction, as a result, he unauthorizedly left for an unknown destination (instructions found). In the Zavitinsky district in the village. Demyanovka, at a meeting of the activists, a locksmith‐party member, authorized for the sowing campaign, spoke out, defending the kulaks planned for eviction, arguing with an exaggeration. In the Leninsky district, in the village. Kukelevo, the chairman of the village council at a meeting of the activists spoke out against the eviction. In the same area, in the village. Lermontovka, the policeman refused to participate in the eviction.

5.                   Addition to our report on wire number 11... There is a continuing rise in rebel‐defeatist sentiments. During the second half of March, these sentiments were registered in 7 districts, 27 villages. The most widespread are still in the villages of the Rukhlovsky, Tyndinsky, Mogochinsky districts, where along with this provocative rumor about the presence of large gangs in the Territory persistently circulate. In the Svobodnensky district, in the village. Krasilovka is suspected of the presence of an insurgent group, in the same place in a special settlement at the Ukhta station, kulaks‐Osobovites are conducting insurgent agitation. In the Posyetsky district (mainly Korean), insurgent defeatist rumors are spreading in the villages by the Russian kulaks and antiSoviet elements. In Mikhailovsky Primorye, near the villages of Voznesenovka and Golenki, rumors of an imminent coup are circulating. In Golenki, in connection with the forced involvement in logging (peasants were caught on the street,

6.                   Norms. In the Sluchansky District, on the basis of a telegram from Dalkraisnab, 7667 workers were attached to the closed distributors. 12 584 workers with their families (and the mine road of logging, mechanical plant, construction works, coal exploration) are attached to the city and the latter has no food supplies to supply them. In Vladivostok, according to the Kraisnab allocation, 112,850 people are supplied with bread, while 164 thousand people are under the supply of the Central Regional Committee. As a result of the overspending, the TsRK has a supply of flour for one and a half days. In the Chernigov region, by order of the Territory, 200 workers were removed from the supply at the construction of Red Army collective farms. Collective farms have no food to supply workers. As a result, workers quit their jobs. Raipo has a supply of flour for the population for only three days.

7.                   Strikes... In Vladivostok, on March 18, 50 Easterners went on strike at the DSO brick factory due to a reduction in prices. On March 25, 25 workers started to work, the rest avoided under the pretext of lack of apartments in the area of the plant. On March 20‐21, 150 easterners went on strike at the construction works of the Dalzavod due to a decrease in prices. The initiators are petty officers. On March 26, 20 carpenters went on strike at Stroykhoz AKO due to transfer to lowerpaid jobs. In Vladivostok at Fundamentstroy, on March 27, 40 concrete workers quit their jobs due to prices and food. The second artel of 20 carpenters for the same reasons left the construction altogether. At a brick factory on March 29, 50 Eastern excavators quit their jobs on the basis of quotations. In the DGRT hostel on March 29, 38 fishermen refused to work at the shipyard on the basis of prices and food. On March 19, 200 Eastern workers went on strike at the logging sites of the Suchansky District, the initiators were the foremen. The comradely trial of the initiators of the strike by the anti‐Soviet element was thwarted. They also assumed the murder of the sent whale instructor. In Khabarovsk, at a brick factory on March 28, 29 construction workers of gels did not go to work. March 28 at the construction site of Dobrolet ‐ [did not come to work] 38 people. The reason for the absence is the lack of bread, the lack of supper. The leaders of the bagpipes ‐ artel worker Ivanov and Burmistrov, a former party member, have been repeatedly seen in anti‐Soviet agitation.

8.                   Fires... On February 18, an insulated tent of the Easterners burned down at the ASO logging in Sakhalin, one Chinese worker burned down. There, on March 9, a stable caught fire, six horses burned down. At the Ussuriysk plant in the Shmakovsky district, on the night of March 2, the administration of the plant, having set up a false fire alarm, set fire to firewood in two places on the territory of the plant. As a result, 40 cubic meters of firewood and 40 meters of the decking path were burned. March 28 on Sakhalin in the suburban village. Mikhailovka, Aleksandrovsky District, for an unknown reason, a fire broke out at the CPC dairy farm, one large building, several outbuildings were destroyed by fire, and 10 thousand rubles in losses. On the same date, in Aleksandrovka, Sakhalin, in the port, the capital building of the party construction office burned down, arson is suspected. On March 21, in the Dragashevsky district, for an unknown reason, the carpentry workshop of the Srednebel grain state farm burned down, losses 5 thousand rubles. At mine No. 3 of Artemgosrudnik, two leading parallels of the cage shaft were broken through the fault of a worker. Downtime ‐ four hours, 450 wagons of coal were not delivered.

9.                   Leaflets. On March 16, in the village of Mogochaty district, two antiSoviet leaflets, similar in content, written by hand in pencil, were found. One is glued to the doors of a private photograph, the other is glued to the building of a seven‐year school. In with. Venyukovo, in connection with the liquidation of the MTS and its transfer to another area, at night, several anti‐Soviet leaflets written by hand were pasted on the fences. In with. Several copies of counter‐revolutionary leaflets were found near the kulak of Osan at the time of his eviction at the glade of the Zavitinsky district. The details of these latter cases are being investigated.

10.                On the night of March 15, in the village of Mogocha of the same district, an employee of our apparatus, Pipkin, was attacked. One of the attackers fired two shots at Pipkin and fled. The second rushed at the employee with a revolver in his hand. In hand‐to‐hand combat, Pipkin disarmed the attacker, but could not detain him. The next day, with the assistance of dogs, detectives detained one of the attackers. He turned out to be a local party member Khomutov. The purpose of the attack and the details are being clarified. No. 150 / k.

Deputy PP OGPU for DCK West Head of SOU PP OGPU for DCK Raysky

121 ʺBefore the liquidation of the districtsʺ ‐ the district was an intermediate level of management between the region and the district. After checking the expediency of the existence of districts, the XVI Party Conference (April 1929) considered the district to be an unnecessary link in the territorial system. In July 1930, the Central Executive Committee and the Council of Peopleʹs Commissars of the USSR adopted a resolution to liquidate the districts. Their rights and obligations, as well as material and financial resources were transferred to city, district and village councils.