Ukraine, the land and its people

by Stepan Rudnytskyi

Besides this, the Dnieper and its tributaries are navigated by a great number of rafts. In 1910 the number of them was 15,676.

Of the river harbors of the Dnieper system, Kherson carries on the greatest exchange of goods (10 million q. in 1910). Then follow Kiev (5.3 million q.), Katerinoslav (3.1 million q.), Cherkassi (2.1 million q.), Niznodniprovsk (1 million q.), Chernihiv (0.6 million q.), and Pinsk (0.5 million q.).

Navigation on the Don, as a result of the small volume of water, is much slighter than the Dnieper navigation, despite the absence of rapids. In 1900, the number of steamboats on the Don was 189, with 10,000 horse-power (in 1906 it was 382); the number of other ships 488, with 200,000 tonnage (in 1906 only 471 ships). The main river-harbor is Rostiv, which handles goods to the amount of 7.5 million q. annually.

A good deal smaller still is the navigation of the Dniester. Here, in 1900, there were only 9 steamers, with 200 horse-power (16 steamers in 1906), and 187 ships of other kinds with a tonnage of 22,000 tons (277 of them in 1906). The harbors of the main stream are Benderi (handles 0.7 million q. of goods) and Maiaki (0.5 million q.). On the Kuban River 69 steamers (counting in those of the Kura) and 131 other ships plied in 1906. [[305]]

In general, river navigation in the Ukraine is on a very moderate scale. The negligence of the Russian Government and the low grade of culture limit the development of Ukrainian interior navigation. Thru the regulation of the Dnieper rapids and the connection of the river systems of the Dnieper and Dniester with the Baltic waters, by means of practicable canals, the waterways of the Ukraine could attain a wonderful importance.

Having come to the end of our description of Ukrainian traffic, we must still devote some attention to Ukrainian sea-navigation. Its present condition is as lamentable as the general condition of Ukrainian traffic. Of course, there is no doubt that the Black Sea has many qualities unfavorable to the development of navigation—its seclusion, the lack of good harbors, and an abundance of dangerous storms. Yet, what are these disadvantages against modern engineering? To assign all the blame to the low grade of Russian industry, as the Russian publicists are in the habit of doing, will not do. The causes of the slight development of Pontian navigation should be sought in the low cultural conditions of the ruling Russian nation and in the indolence of the government, which is not properly encouraging this navigation. The Russian steamers do not enjoy a good reputation on the Black Sea. Pontian coastwise navigation, which at the beginning of the 19th Century had a splendid start, and was carried on predominantly by Ukrainians, has not been able to develop properly under the heavy fist of the government. Today, conditions on the Black Sea are such, that the transportation of a unit by weight of goods from one Pontian harbor to another, costs just as much as the transportation of the same unit from the same port to England.

The number of steamers which sail the Black Sea under the Russian flag was, in 1901, only 316, with a tonnage of 187,000 tons, that is, 42% of the number and 52% of the [[306]]tonnage of the entire steamship fleet of Russia. In 1912 the figures were 410 steamers, 223,000 tons, the percentages being 42% and 47%. The number of sailing vessels in 1901 was 635, with a total tonnage of 47,000, and in the year 1912 there were 827 sailing vessels, with over 53,000 tons. The development of Pontian navigation is thus going a very slow, if not a retrogressive course.

The Russian Black Sea steamers maintain a more or less regular service between the most important Black Sea ports—Odessa, Mikolaiv, Kherson, Sevastopol, Rostiv, Novorossysk, etc. From Sevastopol a line goes to Constantinople, from Odessa one to Alexandria and Vladivostok.

Despite this miserable condition of Pontian navigation, from a European point of view, it still has greater significance than navigation on other seas of Russia. Near the end of the past century, 70% of the total oversea exportation of Russia by weight, and 65% by value, went thru the harbors of the Ukrainian coast. To be sure, in 1896, only 7.5% of the ships which visited these ports sailed under the Russian flag. In the year of 1911 it was not much different; of the outgoing ships only 11.4%, and of the incoming ships only 13.9% carried the Russian flag!

Among the Black Sea ports, Odessa, now, as ever, takes first place. The imports of Odessa, in 1911, amounted to 19.2 million q., the exports 26.2 million q. This, by the way, is an example of the great preponderance of exportation over importation. In other ports the disparity is even greater. Thus, the imports of Mikolaiv amount to only 2.3 million q., the exports 22.8 million q. For Tahanroh the respective figures are 1.9 and 19.5, for Novorossysk 1.5 and 18.3, for Mariupol 3.1 and 16.2, for Kherson 1.1 and 11.3, for Feodosia 0.6 and 4.8, for Rostiv 2.1 and 2.4, for Berdiansk 0.3 and 3.9, for Eupatoria 0.8 and 2.9, for Akerman 0.4 and 2.0.