羌塘高原人与野生动物冲突的成因

doi:10.31497/zrzyxb.20190714

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 随着自然保护事业的发展,人与野生动物冲突加剧成为自然保护与地区发展面临的新问题。但人与野生动物冲突研究具有多主体性、复杂性和跨学科性,研究难度大。本文以羌塘高原为例,采用人与野生动物相互作用社会生态系统的概念,梳理了人与野生动物冲突主体的规模、分布,识别了食草野生动物与家畜争食牧草、人类聚落与野生动物竞争生存空间、草场围栏分隔栖息地及阻断迁徙通道等三种主要冲突类型。考虑草畜兽平衡核算了草地承载状况,模拟了家畜与野生动物生存空间重叠,刻画了草场围栏对栖息地及迁徙通道的影响。从重叠空间的资源竞争及人类活动扰动等方面剖析了人与野生动物冲突成因。可为厘清冲突机制,提高干预效果提供新认知。

关键词: 人与野生动物相互作用社会生态系统, 承载力, 放牧, 栖息地, 生态位, 人与野生动物冲突

Abstract: With the great progress of nature conservation in the last decades, human-wildlife conflict (HWC) has emerged as a new issue regarding protected areas. It is important to understand the causes for HWC and take effective measures to reduce HWC. However, research on HWC, characterized by systematicity, complexity, composed by multi-agents, and having feedback mechanism among agents, is difficult for us. Taking the Changtang Plateau in Tibet as an example, with the concept of social-ecological system of human-wildlife interactions, the distribution and quantity of agents of HWC is illustrated by field survey, statistical data and remote sensing data. Three main types of HWC in the study area is identified: (1) Forage competition between domestic livestock (sheep, goats and domestic yak) and herbivore wildlife (Pantholops hodgsonii, Equus kiang, Procapra picticaudata, Gazelle); (2) Living space competition between human settlements and wildlife habitats; (3) Fence separated the pasture and blocked the migratory routes of wildlife like Tibetan antelope. The pasture carrying capacity is examined by integrating wildlife with domestic livestocks. The overlaying of grazing pasture with wildlife habitat was modelled with the Maxent niche model and analyzed with the aid of GIS (geographic information system). Carrying capacity rate including both domestic livestock and herbivore wildlife was 110%, while domestic livestock stock rate was only 98%. Spatial overlapping rate was more than 50% for Tibetan antelope and domestic livestock. The impact of fence on habitat and migratory route of wildlife is also analyzed. Finally, causes for HWC are assembled from the aspects of the resource competition, the overlaying of living space, and the disturbance from human activities such as fence. The study is helpful to clarify the HWC cause and formation mechanism, and to improve the performance of conflict reduction measures.

Key words: human-wildlife conflict, carrying capacity, ecological niche, habitat, social-ecological system of human-wildlife interactions, grazing

徐增让, 靳茗茗, 郑鑫, 魏子谦. 羌塘高原人与野生动物冲突的成因[J]. 自然资源学报, 2019, 34(7): 1521-1530.

XU Zeng-rang, JIN Ming-ming, ZHENG Xin, WEI Zi-qian. Causes for human-wildlife conflict on Changtang Plateau in Tibet[J]. JOURNAL OF NATURAL RESOURCES, 2019, 34(7): 1521-1530.

参考文献

[1] GRAY C L, HILL S L L, NEWBOLD T, et al. Local biodiversity is higher inside than outside terrestrial protected areas worldwide. Nature Communications, 2016, 7(12306): 1-7.
[2] JOCHUM K A, KLISKEY A A, HUNDERTMARK K J, et al.Integrating complexity in the management of human-wildlife encounters. Global Environmental Change, 2014, 26: 73-86.
[3] ALEXANDER J, CHEN P J, DAMERELL P, et al.Human wildlife conflict involving large carnivores in Qilianshan China and the minimal paw-print of snow leopards. Biological Conservation, 2015, 187: 1-9
[4] LISCHKA S A, TEEL T L, JOHNSON H E, et al.A conceptual model for the integration of social and ecological information to understand human-wildlife interactions. Biological Conservation, 2018, 225: 80-87.
[5] MARGULIES J D, KARANTH K K.The production of human-wildlife conflict: A political animal geography of encounter. Geoforum, 2018, 95: 153-164.
[6] DE SOUZA J C, DA SILVA R M, GONCALVES M P R, et al. Habitat use, ranching, and human-wildlife conflict within a fragmented landscape in the Pantanal, Brazil. Biological Conservation, 2018, 217: 349-357.
[7] NOGA S R, KOLAWOLE O D, THAKADU O T, et al."Wildlife officials only care about animals": Farmers' perceptions of a Ministry-based extension delivery system in mitigating human-wildlife conflicts in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. Journal of Rural Studies, 2018, 61: 216-226.
[8] FOX J L, MATHIESEN P, YANGZOM D, et al. Modern wildlife conservation initiatives and the pastoralist/hunter nomads of Northwestern Tibet. Rangifer, 2004, SI(15): 17-27.
[9] SHARMA R K, BHATNAGAR Y V, MISHRA C.Does livestock benefit or harm snow leopards?. Biological Conservation, 2015, 190: 8-13.
[10] 曹建军, 许雪贇, 杨书荣, 等. 青藏高原不同草地利用方式产生的原因及其对社会—生态系统的影响研究进展. 自然资源学报, 2017, 32(12): 2149-2159.
[CAO J J, XU X Y, YANG S R, et al.Advance in the reasons for two different grassland use patterns formed and their each effects on the socio- ecological system on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Journal of Natural Resources, 2017, 32(12): 2149-2159.]
[11] 贡布泽仁, 李文军. 草场管理中的市场机制与习俗制度的关系及其影响: 青藏高原案例研究. 自然资源学报, 2016, 31(10): 1637-1647.
[GONGBU Z R, LI W J.The role of market mechanisms and customary institutions in rangeland management: A case study in Qinghai Tibetan Plateau. Journal of Natural Resources, 2016, 31(10): 1637-1647.]
[12] FOX J L, BARDSEN B-J.Density of Tibetan antelope, Tibetan wild ass and Tibetan gazelle in relation to human presence across the Chang Tang Nature Reserve of Tibet, China. Acta Zoologica Sinica, 2005, 51(4): 586-597.
[13] FOX J L, DHONDUP K, DORJI T.Tibetan antelope Pantholops hodgsonii conservation and new rangeland management policies in the Western Chang Tang Nature Reserve, Tibet: Is fencing creating an impasse?. Oryx, 2009, 43(2): 183-190.
[14] 达瓦次仁. 羌塘地区人与野生动物冲突的危害以及防范措施. 中国藏学, 2010, (4): 71-78.
[ZLAWA T R.The harmfulness and preventive measures of the conflict between men and wildlife in Chang Tang areas. China Tibetology, 2010, (4): 71-78.]
[15] 徐增让, 郑鑫, 靳茗茗. 自然保护区土地利用冲突及协调: 以羌塘国家自然保护区为例. 科技导报, 2018, 36(7): 8-13.
[XU Z G, ZHENG X, JIN M M.Harmonizing conflicts of land multifunction in natural reserces: Qiangtang National Natural Reserve as an example. Science & Technology Review, 2018, 36(7): 8-13.]
[16] 董世魁, 武晓宇, 刘世梁, 等. 阿尔金山自然保护区基于野牦牛、藏野驴、藏羚羊适宜栖息地的生态容量估测. 生态学报, 2015, 35(23): 7598-7607.
[DONG S K, WU X Y, LIU S L, et al.Estimation of ecological carrying capacity for wild yak, kiang, and Tibetan antelope based on habitat suitability in the Aerjin Mountain Nature Reserve, China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2015, 35(23): 7598-7607.]
[17] BERGER A.A Brief Maxent Tutorial. 1996. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/aberger/www/html/tutorial/tutorial.html.
[18] TSERING D.A sustainable mechanism for wildlife protection and consumptive wildlife utilization in the Chang Tang region of Tibet. China Tibetology, 2013, 2: 9-18.
[19] 国务院新闻办公室. 青藏高原生态文明建设状况. 北京: 人民出版社, 2018.
[The State Council Information Office of the People's Republic of China. Ecological Progress on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Beijing: People's Publishing House, 2018.]
[20] SCHALLER G B, KANG A, CAI X, et al.Migratory and calving behavior of Tibetan antelope population. Acta Theriologica Sinica, 2006, 26(2): 105-113.
[21] BUZZARD P J, WONG H M, ZHANG H B.Population increase at a calving ground of the Endangered Tibetan antelope Pantholops hodgsonii in Xinjiang, China. Oryx, 2012, 46(2): 266-268.
[22] 徐志高, 王晓燕, 宗嘎, 等. 西藏羌塘自然保护区野生动物保护与牧业生产的冲突及对策. 中南林业调查规划, 2010, 29(1): 33-37.
29(1): 33-37.
[XU Z G, WANG X Y, ZONG G, et al.The conflict and strategy between wildlife protection and livestock production in Qiangtang Natural Reserve. Central South Forest Inventory and Planning, 2010, 29(1): 33-37.
[23] 中国科学院青藏高原综合科学考察队. 西藏草原. 北京: 科学出版社, 1992: 146.
[Comprehensive Scientific Investigation Team of the Tibet Plateau of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Tibetan Grassland. Beijing: Science Press, 1992:146.]
[24] IUCN. SSC Antelope Specialist Group. Pantholops hodgsonii. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T15967A50192544. 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-2.RLTS.T15967A50192544.en.
[25] BUZZARD P B, BOS M J.The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T2892A101293528. 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-2.RLTS.T2892A101293528.en.
[26] STRUEBIG M J, LINKIE M, DEERE N J, et al.Addressing human-tiger conflict using socio-ecological information on tolerance and risk. Nature Communications, 2018, 9: 1-9.