文章 Articles

一位藏族官员眼中的气候变化

全球变暖恶化环境变迁使青藏高原的草场受到了威胁。李泰格采访当地官员,对如何对付这场前所未有的挑战进行了报道。

Article image

一位土生土长的藏族官员,会怎样看待气候变化?

九月中旬,我们几位同行自发组织过一次“气候变化西藏行”——实地走访西藏应对气候变化的情况。

第一站是那曲。那曲位于藏北高原,距离拉萨300多公里。选择那曲,原因之一是中国农业科学院农业环境与可持续发展研究所(CAAS)正在那里开展适应气候变化的研究项目。

中国农业科学院方面并没有研究人员长驻那曲。不过,项目负责人林而达研究员事先向我们推荐了一位采访对象:那曲地区行政公署副专员江村旺扎。 林而达与江村旺扎相识于2003年。那一年,全国政协人口、资源、环境委员会赴那曲调研草原保护与建设。身为全国政协委员的林而达,是调研团队的一个主要人物。

当时的江村旺扎,是那曲地区农牧局的党组书记。他代表那曲向调研团队汇报藏北高原生态环境的问题,给林而达留下了很深的印象。

藏北高原平均海拔4500米以上,是长江、怒江、澜沧江等大江大河的发源地,草原面积占全国草原面积近一成。林而达长期研究气候变化,并多次亲历联合国气候变化谈判,深知藏北高原在气候变化之战中的重要地位。

但令人痛心的是,藏北高原的草原生态近年来退化严重。于是,林而达决定与江村旺扎开始合作,首先利用卫星遥感对那曲地区的草地退化现状进行监测。

林而达的中国农业科学院农业环境与可持续发展所争取到一笔研究经费,并帮助那曲地区培训技术人员。但经费还是不够。江村旺扎专门跑去找西藏自治区的有关领导,做起“游说”的工作。

江村旺扎没有对我们透露当初的“游说”细节。不管怎样,他最终获得了所需的经费。

在草地退化遥感监测的基础上,双方又共同绘制了那曲地区的草地生态功能区划——其土地被划分为严格保护生态区、重点治理与控制利用区,以及资源开发利用区。

据说,这是西藏第一个地区性的生态功能区划方案。但问题在于,方案会不会成为一纸空文,最终无法执行呢?江村旺扎的回答是,这个方案分发到了那曲各级官员手中,正在成为当地“国土综合规划、生态环境保护规划和建设规划的理论基础”。

那曲地区与中国农业科学院的合作并不是一帆风顺。本来,在距离那曲地区行政公署所在地不太远的地方,研究人员设立了一个载畜量试验基地。所谓载畜量试验,是将试验草地划分为若干块,按周期进行牛羊的轮牧,以估算不同气候和生态条件下草地所能承载的牲畜数量。江村旺扎说,希望今后可以为牧民提供“载畜量”的预测服务,“就像天气预报那样”。

青藏铁路通车以后,那曲要修建一个大型物流中心,占用了原来的载畜量试验基地。这让江村旺扎感到惋惜,“就像是一个电视记者没有了摄像机。”

后来,研究人员在安多县新选了一片试验基地,载畜量试验才得以继续。这也是目前正在进行的国家科技支撑重点课题“藏北生态屏障区适应气候变化技术示范”的一个组成部分。

新的试验基地海拔接近5000米,再往前不远就是著名的唐古拉山口。江村旺扎带着我们这些记者,沿青藏公路驱车北上。 在公路两旁,不时可以见到一些光凸凸的草地。江村旺扎给我们介绍这些退化草地时,看上去颇有些伤感。

草地和畜牧业是那曲的根基。但不幸的是,受气候变化、人为干扰、过度放牧和鼠害等因素影响,当地的草地退化非常严重。根据中国农业科学院与那曲地区合作开展的遥感监测,截止到2004年,那曲共有3.2亿亩草地出现退化,占该地区草地总面积的一半,其中重度和极重度退化面积超过0.6亿亩。

江村旺扎及其同事并不打算坐以待毙。从那曲地区行政公署所在地出发,驱车两个多小时以后,我们看到一片已经退化的草地。尽管同行的有那曲地区农牧局的技术人员,但江村旺扎还是亲自上阵,给我们讲解这片草地上正在进行的试验:通过从怒江源头取水、采用喷灌方式补充水分,以及结合补播、施肥、灭鼠等措施,以逐渐恢复退化草地的生产力。

江村旺扎还打算带我们去看更为偏僻的载畜量试验基地。但我们这些记者中已经有人出现了高原反应,只好往回撤退,留下了一些遗憾。 江村旺扎表示,希望通过退化草地恢复、载畜量评估等技术示范,摸索出藏北高原适应气候变化的合理方案,然后在牧民中传播和推广相关。 “气候变化是影响草原生态演替的一个主要因素,传统产业只能从如何适应的角度去思考”,他说,“对于藏北草原生态的认识,以及如何指导草原畜牧业,只能从我做起,从基础研究开始。”

和我们的交谈中,江村旺扎还提起了近年来不断出现的湖泊水灾。从2004年起,那曲地区那曲县那么切乡就不断被上涨的湖水侵扰,共有200多户牧民迁出了祖祖辈辈居住的地方。

江村旺扎清楚地记得他闻讯赶到那么切乡水灾现场后目睹的情景:肆虐的湖水一路上行,穿过位于低洼处的草场,慢慢向高处侵入。很多牧民的房屋和畜圈羊棚都快被淹没,还有一些牧民的房屋开始冒水。

“从明朝以来的史料和牧民的传说中,都未曾发现有类似的事情。”他补充说。

在很多科学家看来,全球变暖导致的冰川消退加速,正是藏北高原湖泊水位上涨的一个重要原因。而江村旺扎的脑子中,还记得这样一个数据:由于湖水上涨,那曲地区已经搬迁和等待搬迁的有上万人之多。要知道,整个那曲地区的人口加起来也不过42万人。

对这位藏族地方官员而言,气候变化早已是日常工作中的一个重要内容。

和我们告别之前,江村旺扎提出了一个问题:既然西方科学家可以从他们的空气中检测出亚洲飘过去的污染物颗粒,中国科学家能不能在青藏高原找到西方国家一百多年前开始排放温室气体、并且影响青藏高原生态环境的证据?

据说,这个问题难住了气候变化专家林而达。

李泰格,北京的环境与科学记者,擅长深度报道。1997年获四川大学工学硕士;2003-2004年,获Knight科学新闻奖学金资助,在麻省理工学院做访问学者。

 

首页图片livepine

发表评论 Post a comment

评论通过管理员审核后翻译成中文或英文。 最大字符 1200。

Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated. Maximum characters 1200.

评论 comments

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

政府官员

看到有这样关注气候变化并且热心做实事的政府官员我感到很欣慰。很多官僚只关心能增添政绩的漂亮工程,而忽视国家真正需要的长远利益。而且大多数地方还没有像藏北高原这样深切感受到气候变化对生产生活造成的巨大影响,所以人们也就不重视吧。真希望能多一些江村旺扎这样的官员,多一些政府做的实事啊。

Government Official

I’m very glad to see this official who is paying attention to climate changes and practically working for that. Lots of officials care only about the projects which can bring brilliant political achievements, but ignore those long-term benefits that our country really needs. And in most of the places people can’t feel exactly the big impact of climate changes on our productions and livings as people from the northern Tibetan plateau. Maybe that’s why people are not really paying attention to this. I sincerely hope there will be more officials like Wandrak as well as more practical actions from government.

(This Comment was translated by Fangfang CHEN)

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

政府的应对?

“第三极”青藏高原对全球气候的重要性我们都知道,现在它的恶化这么迅速而且严重,实在是令人忧虑。这是个大问题啊,我觉得中央政府应该重视,采取措施调查、研究并控制青藏高原的改变,不然后果不堪设想啊。

Any response from the government?

We are all aware of the significance of the Tibetan plateau to the global climate as "the third pole". It has brought many concerns that it is being so quickly and badly damaged. I think the central government should pay more attention to the problem, investigate, analyse and finally keep the changes of the Tibetan plateau under control. Otherwise, the consequences will be unthinkable.(Translated by Shen Zheng)

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

青藏高原,能否保住?

同意2号评论,现在青藏高原生态环境的迅速恶化真是惊心动魄。作为一个环境问题门外汉,我很关心一个问题,那就是我们到底能不能找到有效的方法阻止青藏高原的恶化?如果不能,那是否意味着我们有朝一日要面临着全国性甚至全球性的气候巨变?

Will the Tibetan plateau make it?

I agree with Comment No.2 in the fact that the rapid worsening of the environment on the Tibetan plateau is indeed horrifying. As a rookie in environment issues, I am very concerned with the issue of whether we can find an effective way to stop this worsening. If we can't, does that mean that one day we will face a climate change that is nationwide or even worldwide?
(Translated by Shen Zheng)

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

一些想法

提出以下几点问题与大家讨论:
1.单单用卫星遥感监测草地得出退化的结论有待进一步商榷,因为文章中未提与原来的何基数(baseline)作比较而得出此结论。因此,我觉得草地退化是近几十年发生的还是很早以前就有类似情况,只有当地的牧民清楚。卫星遥感数据应结合当地牧民的经历和看法。
2.在未清楚藏北的草地是否是平衡系统还是非平衡系统的情况下,测算出载畜量要非常小心,因为在非平衡系统下,载畜量随每年的降水气温的气候因素发生变化,而不是一个固定的数据。
3.文章中所提“通过从怒江源头取水、采用喷灌方式补充水分,以及结合补播、施肥、灭鼠”改善草地现状的可行性应进一步论证,因为其推广价值不明朗,原因是补充水分(灌溉)和施肥的办法在缺水区投资会很大,而且会影响周边地区的地下水位,并干扰自然的牧草生长机制,从长远角度讲,有可能导致在生态上的适得其反的结果。

some thoughts about this article

I would like discuss with anyone in the following aspects: firstly, the conclusion that grasslands has degraded needs to be confirmed further if only using satellite remote sensing monitoring to measure because in this article author didn’t make any comparison between the new measurement and baseline. Therefore I think whether degradation of grasslands is recently happened or happened a long time ago, the question only can be answered by local herdsmen. Actually satellite remote sensing monitoring should be combined with herdsmen’s experiences and their opinions. Secondly, it should be very cautious when we measure the carrying capacity of grasslands before we have a clear knowledge about whether grasslands in northern Tibet is an equilibrium system or not. Thirdly, in the article he suggested that “pipe water from the head-waters of Nujiang and adopt sprinkling irrigation, combined with sowing again, fertilizing and eradicating rats” so as to improve the status quo of grasslands. Its feasibility should be investigated further and the value to popularize is still an uncertainty. Because investment of irrigation and fertilization will be huge in dry zone and will affect groundwater level in neighboring areas and interrupt the natural growth mechanism of pastures as well. In the long run, it is likely to result in unintended negative consequences in ecology.

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

同意评论4

完全同意评论4的观点。在环保事业中不但要有热情,还得有谦虚谨慎的科学态度,尊重当地经验,结合科学分析,小心求证。好心办坏事虽然动机不错,但造成的危害不见得小。

I agree with Comment #4

I couldn’t agree with Comment #4 more. We should do environmental protection work not only with passion but also with modest and prudent attitude, by doing scientific analysis and careful verification in accordance with local experience. Good intentions could bring bad results. Although people who do it are acting from good motives, the damage they cause could be very serious(Translated by Xiaoyu Guan).

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

一些感想

因此,我觉得倘若藏北的草地状况在退化,其改善办法不能采取脚痛医脚的办法,因为气候变化导致的草地退化在当地所能做的事微乎其微(只有通过宣传让温室气体排放大国减少排放量)。在当地能做的事是大力改善和提高当地牧民的基础教育和职业教育,让更多的牧民走出草原从事其他行业(比如当地的服务业,汽车摩托车维修、餐饮),这样既缓解由于人口增长给草场带来的压力,同时,让藏北的传统牧区文化得以继续继承下去,因为在这种发展模式下,牧民当中有些从事牧业,而同时另一些家庭成员从事非牧产业。所以,目前大量的用于改善草原生态环境的资金(比如推牧还草工程)用在基础和职业教育上,从长远角度讲,其经济、社会、文化、生态方面的效果肯定比采取脚痛医脚的单单改善生态的办法取得事半功倍的效果。

Some ideas

Therefore, I believe we should not take stop-gap measures to handle the possible degradation of grasslands in northern Tibet, for we can do little in local areas to cure the grassland degradation caused by climate change (the only choice is to get the countries of huge greenhouse gas emissions to cut emissions through publicity). What we could do there is to improve the fundamental education and vocational education of local herdsmen in order to help them get jobs in other trades, such as local services including automobile repair and catering. This would not only relieve the stress to the grasslands brought by population growth, but also help pass on the traditional nomadic culture in northern Tibet to generations, because some of the herdsmen are doing animal husbandry while others doing other work. As a result, spending the funds that are now used to improve the eco-environment of the grasslands on fundamental and vocational education would be a better choice than stop-gap measures in terms of economic effects, social effects, cultural effects and ecological effects in the long run.

(Translated by Xiaoyu Guan)

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

草地退化

我同意4号评论。实际上,草地退化有很多的种类――有些并不是真正的退化。而怎么应对退化也存在着不同的科学意见。有种有意思的新看法是,放牧其实有利于提高草场的自我恢复功能,所以退牧政策也许是个错误。牧民的那些传统一直维护着牧区的生态平衡;只是现在他们发现篱笆和其他东西限制了他们的传统。确定的是,我们应该相信那些有着可靠经验的牧民,而不是那些过去制定了错误的“最好政策“的官员。

由CHEN FANGFANG翻译

degradation

I agree with comment 4. In fact the degradation of the grasslands varies greatly -- in some places it is not degraded. And there is some scientific debate about what is the best response to degradation. There is some interesting new work that suggests that grazing helps the grasslands to be more resilient so taking yak herds off the grasslands might be the wrong policy. Herders have kept the ecological balance for generations by using traditional methods. Now they find this difficult because of fencing and other restrictions. Surely it is best to trust the people with a proven track record of conservation, rather than officials who have been wrong in the past about the best policies.

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

辉映

如是:应对全球气候变化——公民应该怎么办?
必须把建设资源节约型、环境友好型社会放在工业化、现代化发展战略的突出位置,落实到每个单位、每个家庭。五是要大力提高全社会参与的意识和能力,营造全民应对气候变化的良好环境。…深入开展节能减排全民行动,坚决打好节能减排攻坚战。2008年06月29日《人民日报》。提高公众对气候变化问题的科学认识,动员全社会参与应对气候变化,推动《国家方案》的实施。
2006年11月联合国粮农组织的一份报告指出:畜牧业造成了18%的温室气体排放,已经超过了交通运输业,包括汽车、飞机、火车和船只等。此外,畜牧业消耗了世界1/3的谷物和90%的大豆,占用了70%的农业用地,世界上80%的森林砍伐与畜牧业有关,导致酸雨的氨排放的64%来源于畜牧业。
这意味着一个肉食者消耗了巨大的环境代价,请关注。

Light and reflection

About this: Dealing with global climate change – what should people do? One must develop an energy saving, environmentally friendly model of society, and give it a prime position in the strategic development of industrialisation and modernisation, realising it in each unit and every family. To greatly raise society’s consciousness and ability to participate, building a good environment in which the whole population can deal with climate change .…thoroughly carry out the reduction of energy usage and emission by the whole population, resolutely fighting for energy reduction and emission (People’s Daily newspaper dated 29 June 2008). By raising the public’s scientific knowledge in questions of climate change, mobilising the whole society to deal with climate change, it becomes a moving force for the implementation of the ‘National Programme’. According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Committee report in November 2006, the livestock farming industry accounted for 18% of greenhouse gas emission, and has already exceeded that from the transportation industry, including cars, aeroplanes, trains and ships etc. Furthermore, the livestock farming industry consumed one third of the world’s cereal and 90% of soya. It occupied 70% of farming land use. 80% of the world’s forest felling is connected with livestock farming. 64% of emitted ammonia which leads to acid rain came from the livestock farming industry. This suggests that a carnivorous person consumes what is equivalent to a large share of the environment – please take heed.
Translated by Somui Cheung