点击右上角
微信好友
朋友圈
请使用浏览器分享功能进行分享
建立“休挖期”与“保护基地” 青海政协委员建言保护“软黄金”******
中新社西宁1月17日电 (祁增蓓)制定冬虫夏草合理采挖与控制政策、严格禁止商业性质的挖幼虫、卖幼虫行为、建立冬虫夏草野生种质资源保护基地……正在召开的青海省两会上，青海省政协委员为保护“软黄金”冬虫夏草建言献策。
中国冬虫夏草的产量占世界产量的98%，而青海冬虫夏草占中国60%以上的产量，是世界冬虫夏草当之无愧的主产区，也是青海省虫草产区农牧民增收的重要来源。冬虫夏草天然资源十分宝贵，因此也被称为“软黄金”。
据统计数据，青海省冬虫夏草年产量约80吨至100吨，年产值180亿元(人民币，下同)至200亿元，数百万农牧民因此受益，特别是在核心产区，冬虫夏草成为农牧民家庭主要收入来源。
青海省政协委员、中国科学院西北高原生物研究所副所长魏立新17日接受中新社记者采访时表示，冬虫夏草产业的发展关乎百万农牧民生计与稳定。
“超时超限采挖，可能导致冬虫夏草子座子囊孢子在成熟前就被挖走，随后几年冬虫夏草产量便会不断下降，最后影响的还是当地的农牧民。”魏立新希望，青海能尽快制定冬虫夏草合理采挖与控制政策，设立冬虫夏草采挖控制区，实行可控制性采挖。
魏立新说，同样迫在眉睫的还有对采挖期限的规定。“南方有休渔期，我们可以设置休挖期。由于海拔、气候差异，具体时间可与当地政府、牧民等商讨后决定，建立适合各产区的冬虫夏草‘采挖期’与‘休挖期’制度。”
青海省政协委员、玉树藏族自治州工商联副主席格扎与魏立新有同样的想法，他告诉记者，近两年来，玉树在协调生态效益和经济效益方面不断努力，对冬虫夏草的采挖变得更加规范，牧民的生态意识也在不断提高，对冬虫夏草的保护也朝着好的方向发展。
格扎说，相比于产量下降给牧民造成收入下滑的影响，他更加担心不规范的采挖对生态和资源带来不可估计的后果。
“2012年左右，我们在调研时发现有些冬虫夏草主产区的草场被转包，由于经济利益的驱使，承包商往往采取毁灭性的采挖，包括采挖冬虫夏草幼虫，使得冬虫夏草资源难以实现自我修复。”魏立新说。
魏立新认为，除了严格控制私人采挖转让，禁止商业性质的挖幼虫、卖幼虫行为之外，还应在冬虫夏草自然生态系统保存完整、代表性强，核心资源集中分布或生态脆弱需要休养生息区域，建立冬虫夏草野生种质资源保护基地。
据记者了解，业界呼吁青海省政府建立冬虫夏草保护区始于2010年。魏立新提出，在确保冬虫夏草和生态环境不受损害的情况下，可开展冬虫夏草管护巡护、生态修复、调查监测等活动，进行非破坏性科学研究观测、标本采集，既有利于科研，让冬虫夏草物种得到更好的繁衍和适度的开发，又有利于增加地方农牧民的收入。
“如果能有保护基地，我们的冬虫夏草就会得到更好的保护，我相信牧民也愿意基地设立在自家草场。”格扎说。(完)
中新网评：处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事****** 中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称，将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对，企图将核污水“一倒了之”，把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。  资料图：日本福岛第一核电站。2011年，福岛核电站事故发生后，大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋，对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害，数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日，作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。 日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由，在2021年4月13日，正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多，日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。 日本政府辩称，这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全，甚至“可以喝”，这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。 事实上，经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质，核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收，长期来看，将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁，最终危害人类健康。 因此，核污水排海计划推出后，遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示，福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中，约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场，反对该计划。 日本政府认为，核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案，但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海，核污水会随着洋流流动，其影响势必会跨越国界，危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。 《韩国经济新闻》发文称，相关研究认为，福岛核污水如果排放入海，约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域，该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。 德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告，若日本将所有核污水排入海中，不到半年，整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁，包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。 日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国，有义务保护海洋环境。然而，在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上，日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。 国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估，但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论，并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下，日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设，这是极不负责任的行为。 太平洋不是日本的下水道，日本必须正视各方合理关切，在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后，制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远，若只顾眼前，执意将核污水排放入海，不仅其自身，周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单，其后果必将会危害数代人。  Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business By John Lee (ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year. Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business. The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster. On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year. The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public. In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run. Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public. The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution. The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community. The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses. According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan. As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment. However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact. Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad. The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies. If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence. 
|
)