生物多样性 ›› 2023, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (9): 22447.  DOI: 10.17520/biods.2022447

• 论坛 •    下一篇

关于自然保护地整合优化工作中几个关键问题的讨论与建议

崔国发*()   

  1. 北京林业大学生态与自然保护学院, 北京 100083
  • 收稿日期:2022-08-04 接受日期:2023-09-05 出版日期:2023-09-20 发布日期:2023-10-14
  • 通讯作者: *E-mail: fa6716@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    科技部第三次新疆综合科学考察课题(2021xjkk1206)

Discussion and suggestions on several key issues in the integration and optimization of protected areas

Guofa Cui*()   

  1. School of Ecology and Nature Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083
  • Received:2022-08-04 Accepted:2023-09-05 Online:2023-09-20 Published:2023-10-14
  • Contact: *E-mail: fa6716@163.com

摘要:

自然保护地整合优化工作是建立以国家公园为主体的自然保护地体系的基础性工作, 是解决各类自然保护地各种矛盾冲突和历史遗留问题的重大历史性工作。我国自然保护地整合优化工作从2020年2月开始, 省级自然保护地整合优化预案逐步完善, 但最终形成一个具有科学性、合理性和可操作性的自然保护地整合优化预案还面临非常艰巨的任务。本文主要针对自然保护地分类分级分区、风景名胜区整合优化、生态保护红线衔接、永久基本农田调出等几个关键问题开展了系统分析和讨论, 认为: (1)以自然景观为主要风景资源和保护对象的风景名胜区, 可单独作为一个类别, 与自然保护区、自然公园并列; 主要风景资源是人文景观的风景名胜区不宜列入自然保护地体系。(2)水产种质资源保护区、野生植物原生境保护区、自然保护小区、野生动物重要栖息地的主要功能是自然保护, 应归类为自然保护区, 而不应归类为自然公园。(3)不应再新增“生态自然公园”类型; 不应把森林公园、地质公园、湿地公园等公园名称改为森林自然公园、地质自然公园、湿地自然公园。(4)如果自然保护区、自然公园、风景名胜区统一分为两级管理, 则应该是国家级、省级。国家级森林公园、国家级湿地公园、国家级草原公园等都不宜省略“级”字。(5)可参照国家公园管控区、功能区分层设置方法, 自然保护区、自然公园、风景名胜区等也可分层设置管控区、功能区。不应简单地把自然保护区核心区、缓冲区、实验区3个功能区直接转为核心保护区(宜称严格控制区)和一般控制区2个管控区。风景名胜区、自然公园不宜整体按一般控制区管理, 也可设置核心保护区(即严格控制区)。(6)应肯定以自然景观为主要风景资源和保护对象的风景名胜区在自然保护地体系中的分类地位和自然保护功能, 应一并纳入自然保护地整合优化预案中。(7)不宜把自然保护地整体划入生态保护红线, 而是把自然保护地内林地、草地、水域等土地利用类型中生态功能重要、生态环境敏感脆弱的“地块”划入生态保护红线。(8)自然保护地是一个地理单元, 也是生态空间、生产空间和生活空间的镶嵌体。永久基本农田是高质量耕地的“地块”, 保留在自然保护地内并不会改变其生产空间属性, 可不调出自然保护地。自然保护地法、国家公园法、自然保护区条例等的制修订宜充分考虑各类自然保护地发展历史和管理现况。

关键词: 自然保护地, 国家公园, 自然保护区, 风景名胜区, 自然公园, 整合优化

Abstract

Aim: The integration and optimization of protected areas represent fundamental endeavors aimed at establishing a comprehensive protected area system, with national parks as the central component. It also constitutes a significant historical initiative designed to address an array of conflicts in these protected areas and to rectify lingering historical problem. Since February 2020, the integration and optimization plan for consolidating and enhancing protected areas at the provincial level has been gradually improved. However, the ultimate goal of crafting a well-considered, practical, and scientifically grounded strategy for the integration and optimization of protected areas remains a formidable challenge. This article proposes some suggestions for reference in the integration and optimization of protected areas.

Method: This paper provides comprehensive and systematic analysis and discussion of several pivotal issues, including the categories division, classification and zoning of protected areas, the integration and optimization of natural scenic areas, the connection of ecological conservation redlines, and the transfer out of permanent basic farmland.

Results: The following suggestions may be valuable: (1) Scenic areas featuring natural landscapes as their main scenic resources and protected objects should constitute a distinct category, separate from nature reserves and natural parks; Scenic areas whose main scenic resources are cultural landscapes should not be included from the protected areas system. (2) The main function of aquatic germplasm resources reserve, wild plant original habitat reserve, mini nature reserve, and important habitats of wild animals are nature preservation, categorizing them as nature reserves rather than natural parks. (3) The type of “ecological natural park” should not be introduced. The names of natural parks such as forest parks, geological parks, and wetland parks, should not be changed to forest natural parks, geological natural parks, or wetland natural parks. (4) In cases where nature reserves, natural parks, and scenic areas are divided into two levels of management, these levels should be national and provincial. The term “level” should not be omitted in names like national forest parks, national wetland parks, national grassland parks, etc. (5) Drawing inspiration from the tiered setup method of control areas and functional areas of national park, nature reserves, natural parks, scenic areas, etc., can also adopt a tiered approach from control areas and functional areas. The three functional areas of core area, buffer area and experimental area of nature reserve should not be simplified into two control areas: core protection area and general control area. Scenic areas and natural parks should not be managed as a single general control area, but core protection areas (i.e., strictly controlled areas) can also be established. (6) The classification status and nature protection function of scenic areas with natural landscape as the main scenic resources and protected subjects in the protected areas system should be acknowledged and included in the protected areas integration and optimization plan. (7) It is not appropriate to encompass the entire protected area within the ecological conservation redline. Instead, it is more suitable to include the “land plots” with significant ecological functions and sensitive and fragile eco-environment in the forest land, grassland, water areas, and other land types in the protected area into the ecological conservation redline. (8) The protected area represents a geographical unit and a mosaic of ecological space, production space and living space. Permanent basic farmland is a “plot” of high-quality cultivated land, and its production space attribute remains unchanged if it is retained within the protected area. Therefore, it cannot be removed from the protected area.

Conclusion: The approval of the integration and optimization plan for natural reserves, as well as the revision of the Protected Areas Law, National Parks Law, and Nature Reserve Regulations, should take into thorough account the development history and management status of various types of natural reserves.

Key words: protected area, national park, nature reserve, scenic area, natural park, integration and optimization