“5·12”汶川地震极重灾区生态服务功能恢复总体评估

doi:10.11870/cjlyzyyhj201604020

长江流域资源与环境 >> 2016, Vol. 25 >> Issue (04): 685-694.doi: 10.11870/cjlyzyyhj201604020

•　自然灾害　• 上一篇

“5·12”汶川地震极重灾区生态服务功能恢复总体评估

杨渺^1,2, 谢强¹, 方自力¹, 刘孝富^3,4, 廖蔚宇¹, 王萍⁵

1. 四川省环境保护科学研究院, 四川成都 610041;
2. 中国科学院生态环境研究中心, 北京 100085;
3. 中国环境科学研究院环境信息科学研究所, 北京 100012;
4. 北京师范大学地表过程与资源生态国家重点实验室, 北京 100875;
5. 四川省遥感信息测绘院, 四川龙泉 610100

收稿日期:2015-07-21 修回日期:2015-09-23 出版日期:2016-04-20
通讯作者: 谢强 E-mail:fzili@163.com
作者简介:杨渺(1976~),男,高级工程师,博士,主要研究方向为生态功能评估、区域规划与地理信息系统.E-mail:miaoy02@163.com
基金资助:
2011年国家环保公益性行业科研专项(2011467026)

ASSESSMENT OF “5.12” WENCHUAN EARTHQUAKE RESTORATION: ECOLOGICAL SERVICES FUNCTION IN SEVERELY AFFLICTED AREAS

YANG Miao^1,2, XIE Qiang¹, FANG Zi-li¹, LIU Xiao-fu^3,4, LIAO Wei-yu¹, WANG Ping⁵

1. Sichuan Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China;
2. Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences , Beijing 100085, China;
3. Institute of Environmental Information, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China;
4. State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China;
5. Sichuan Remote Sensing Geomatics Institute, Longquan 610100, China

Received:2015-07-21 Revised:2015-09-23 Online:2016-04-20
Supported by:
Environmental Nonprofit Specific Research Project (2011467026)

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 2008 年“5·12”汶川特大地震,对生态系统造成巨大威胁。为了解汶川地震灾区生态恢复总体状况,以期为灾区中长期生态恢复跟踪监测、生态恢复措施的制定和调整提供决策支持,分别以2007年、2009年、2013年代表地震前、地震后以及恢复期3个时期,采用土壤侵蚀敏感性、林冠截留量、生境适宜性等指标,分别评估了汶川地震极重灾区10个县市水土保持功能、水源涵养功能、生物多样性保护功能的状况及变化动态。结果表明:研究区的水土保持功能、水源涵养功能,以及生物多样性保护功能在震后遭到了严重破坏。总体来说5a后,区域生态服务功能得到了一定程度的恢复,但未达到震前水平。在极重灾区10个县市中,地理上位于中南部的6个县市(汶川、都江堰、什邡、彭州、绵竹、安县)在地震中总体受损程度较大。6个县市处于中国西部泥石流、滑坡的活跃区,震后因降雨诱发滑坡泥石流,导致了龙门山、茶坪山局部区域的水土保持功能、水源涵养功能、生物多样性保护功能在恢复期进一步下降,甚至低于震后。其中汶川县草坡乡、银杏乡、耿达乡、卧龙镇、三江乡有较大范围的功能下降,另外,都江堰市、彭州市、什邡市、绵竹市、安县等也分别有较大面积的功能下降区。区域生态服务功能在未来10a内,有可能进一步恶化。灾后重建一定程度上改善了区域生态功能状况,加快了生态功能恢复进程。但是,也存在对生态服务功能的恢复与维持重视不足等问题。部分灾后重建项目的实施,甚至又导致局部地区出现生态服务功能的退化。建议(1)加强汶川地震极重灾区中长期生态恢复遥感及地面监测、评估,进行生态服务功能恢复效应评估;(2)加强干旱河谷、龙门山及茶坪山等重点区域的生态修复。

关键词: 汶川地震, 生态服务, 生态恢复, 水土保持功能, 水源涵养功能, 生物多样性功能

Abstract: Since the super earthquake happened on May 12^th 2008 in WenChuan, ecosystems in WenChuan have significant been affected. The purpose of this research is to provide strategical supports for medium to long term ecological recovery monitoring ecological restoration. and three different time periods were assessed, including 2007 (before earthquake), 2009 (after earthquake), and 2013(restoration). The research adopts a lot of index number such as sensitivity of soil erosion, canopy interception, and suability of habitat condition to assess the status change among function of water and soil conservation, water conservation, and species diversity ten areas that were severely afflicted areas. The result shows that water and soil conservation, water conservation, and species diversity protective functions have been destroyed in study area after the earthquake. Overall, after five years to some extent the ecological service in the study area has recovered, while it was still short of the standard before the earthquake. Six cities (Wenchuan, Dujiangyan, Shifang, Pengzhou, Mianzhu, Anxian) located in central-south were have high degree of damage compare to other four cities. These areas are the dynamic districts of debris flow and landslide. Due to large amount of rainfall after the earthquake, landslide and debris flow caused the recovery rate of water conservation function and species diversity protective function decreased; including Caoping village, Yinxin village, and Gengda village, Wolong village, and Sanjiang village. In addition, the function of water conservation and species diversity protective function in Dujiangyan, Pengzhou, Shifang,Mianzhu, and Anxian were also slight declined. Although, the reconstruction of post-disaster to some extent has changed ecological function status and improved ecological function recovery progress, less maintained attention to ecological function recovery would become a problem to the whole project progress. For example, enforcement project of post-disaster reconstruction causes the ecological service function degraded in local area. Therefore this research provides two recommendations: 1) reinforcement of medium to long term ecological recovery remote sensing and ground monitor, as well as to provide the assessment of the effect of ecological function recovery in study area; 2) reinforcement of ecological restoration in key areas such as drought river- valley, Longmen Mountain, and Chaping Mountain etc.

Key words: Wenchuan earthquake, ecological services, ecological restoration, water and soil conservation function, water conservation function, species biodiversity

中图分类号:

X171.4

杨渺, 谢强, 方自力, 刘孝富, 廖蔚宇, 王萍. “5·12”汶川地震极重灾区生态服务功能恢复总体评估[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25(04): 685-694.

YANG Miao, XIE Qiang, FANG Zi-li, LIU Xiao-fu, LIAO Wei-yu, WANG Ping. ASSESSMENT OF “5.12” WENCHUAN EARTHQUAKE RESTORATION: ECOLOGICAL SERVICES FUNCTION IN SEVERELY AFFLICTED AREAS[J]. RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT IN THE YANGTZE BASIN, 2016, 25(04): 685-694.

参考文献

[1] 欧阳志云, 徐卫华, 王学志, 等. 汶川大地震对生态系统的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2008, 28(12): 5801-5809. [OUYANG Z Y, XU W H, WANG X Z, et al. Impact assessment of Wenchuan Earthquake on ecosystems[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2008, 28(12): 5801-5809.]
[2] 崔书红. 汶川地震生态环境影响及对策[J]. 环境保护, 2008(13): 37-38.
[3] 王智, 庄亚芳, 蒋明康, 等. 汶川地震对自然保护区的生态影响评估及对策[J]. 四川环境, 2009, 28(3): 46-49. [WANG Z, ZHUANG Y F, JIANG M K, et al. Impact assessment of Wenchuan Earthquake on ecological environment in the nature reserves and the strategy[J]. Sichuan Environment, 2009, 28(3): 46-19.]
[4] 黄从红, 杨军, 张文娟. 生态系统服务功能评估模型研究进展[J]. 生态学杂志, 2013, 32(12): 3360-3367. [HUANG C H, YANG J, ZHANG W J. Development of ecosystem services evaluation models: research progress[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2013, 32(12): 3360-3367.]
[5] 黄桂林, 赵峰侠, 李仁强, 等. 生态系统服务功能评估研究现状挑战和趋势[J]. 林业资源管理, 2012(4): 17-23. [HUANG G L, ZHAO F X, LI R Q, et al. Evaluation of ecosystem services: current status, challenges and prospects[J]. Forest Resources Management, 2012(4): 17-23.]
[6] 杨渺, 谢强, 谭晓蓉, 等. 基于GIS/RS的地震灾区流域水土保持功能恢复效应评价[J]. 四川环境, 2013, 32(1): 39-45. [YANG M, XIE Q, TAN X R, et al. Assessment of restoration of soil and water conservation function in watershed in earthquake disaster area based on GIS/RS[J]. Sichuan Environment, 2013, 32(1): 39-45.]
[7] 李双权. 长江上游森林水源涵养功能研究[D]. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学硕士学位论文, 2008: 47-48. [LI S Q. Study on water conservation of forest ecosystem in the upper reaches of Yangtze River[D]. Hohhot: Master Dissertation of Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2008: 47-48.]
[8] 欧阳志云, 刘建国, 肖寒, 等. 卧龙自然保护区大熊猫生境评价[J]. 生态学报, 2001, 21(11): 1869-1874. [OUYANG Z Y, LIU J G, XIAO H, et al. An assessment of giant panda habitat in Wolong Nature Reserve[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2001, 21(11): 1869-1874.]
[9] 王学志, 徐卫华, 欧阳志云, 等. 生态位因子分析在大熊猫(Ailuropoda melanoleuca)生境评价中的应用[J]. 生态学报, 2008, 28(2): 821-828. [WANG X Z, XU W H, OUYANG Z Y, et al. The application of Ecological-Niche factor analysis in giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) habitat assessment[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2008, 28(2): 821-828.]
[10] 王文杰, 潘英姿, 徐卫华, 等. 四川汶川地震对生态系统破坏及其生态影响分析[J]. 环境科学研究, 2008, 21(5): 110-116. [WANG W J, PAN Y Z, XU W H, et al. Analysis on ecosystem destroy and its ecological impact caused by earthquake in Wenchuan, Sichuan Province[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences, 2008, 21(5): 110-116.]
[11] 申国珍, 谢宗强, 冯朝阳, 等. 汶川地震对大熊猫栖息地的影响与恢复对策[J]. 植物生态学报, 2008, 32(6): 1417-1425. [SHEN G Z, XIE Z Q, FENG C Y, et al. Influence of the Wenchuan earthquake on giant panda habitats and strategies for restoration[J]. Journal of Plant Ecology (Chinese Version), 2008, 32(6): 1417-1425.]
[12] 许强, 李为乐. 汶川地震诱发大型滑坡分布规律研究[J]. 工程地质学报, 2010, 18(6): 818-826. [XU Q, LI W L. Distribution of large-scale landslides induced by the Wenchuan earthquake[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 2010, 18(6): 818-826.]
[13] 李岳东, 方自力. "5·12"汶川大地震极重灾区生态破坏评估[M]. 成都: 四川科学技术出版社, 2010: 88-90.
[14] 苏凤环, 刘洪江, 韩用顺. 汶川地震山地灾害遥感快速提取及其分布特点分析[J]. 遥感学报, 2008, 12(6): 956-963. [SU F H, LIU H J, HAN Y S. The extraction of mountain hazard induced by Wenchuan Earthquake and analysis of its distributing characteristic[J]. Journal of Remote Sensing, 2008, 12(6): 956-963.]
[15] 崔鹏, 韦方强, 陈晓清, 等. 汶川地震次生山地灾害及其减灾对策[J]. 中国科学院院刊, 2008, 23(4): 317-323. [CUI P, WEI F Q, CHEN X Q, et al. Geo-hazards in Wenchuan Earthquake area and countermeasures for disaster reduction[J]. Bulletin of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2008, 23(4): 317-323.]
[16] 唐川. 汶川地震区暴雨滑坡泥石流活动趋势预测[J]. 山地学报, 2010, 28(3): 341-349. [TANG C. Activity tendency prediction of rainfall induced landslides and debris flows in the Wenchuan Earthquake areas[J]. Journal of Mountain Science, 2010, 28(3): 341-349.]
[17] 张钰, 陈晓清, 游勇, 等. 汶川地震后肖家沟泥石流活动特征与灾害防治[J]. 水土保持通报, 2014, 34(5): 284-289. [ZHANG Y, CHEN X Q, YOU Y, et al. Activity characteristics and disaster control of Xiaojia Gully debris flow after Wenchuan Earthquake[J]. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2014, 34(5): 284-289.]
[18] 谢洪, 钟敦伦, 矫震, 等. 2008年汶川地震重灾区的泥石流[J]. 山地学报, 2009, 27(4): 501-509. [XIE H, ZHONG D L, JIAO Z, et al. Debris flow in Wenchuan Quake-hit area in 2008[J]. Journal of Mountain Science, 2009, 27(4): 501-509.]
[19] 余斌, 马煜, 张健楠, 等. 汶川地震后四川省都江堰市龙池镇群发泥石流灾害[J]. 山地学报, 2011, 29(6): 738-746. [YU B, MA Y, ZHANG J N, et al. The group debris flow hazards after the Wenchuan Earthquake in Longchi, Dujiangyan, Sichuan Province[J]. Journal of Mountain Science, 2011, 29(6): 738-746.]

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

“5·12”汶川地震极重灾区生态服务功能恢复总体评估

ASSESSMENT OF “5.12” WENCHUAN EARTHQUAKE RESTORATION: ECOLOGICAL SERVICES FUNCTION IN SEVERELY AFFLICTED AREAS

PDF (PC)

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

Metrics

推荐阅读 10

[1]	赵小汎. 土地利用生态服务价值指标体系评估结果比较研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25(01): 98-105.
[2]	匡武, 芮明, 张彦辉, 严云志, 吴添天. 巢湖湖滨带生态恢复工程对暴雨径流氮磷削减效果研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2015, 24(11): 1906-1912.
[3]	姚飞, 陈龙乾, 张宇, 吴沛瑶, 张红梅, 王秉义. 巢湖水陆交错带生态服务价值梯度分析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2015, 24(09): 1568-1576.
[4]	刘超琼, 彭开丽, 陈红蕾. 安徽省土地利用变化下的生态敏感性时空规律[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2015, 24(09): 1584-1590.
[5]	吴松, 安裕伦, 马良瑞. 城市化背景下喀斯特流域生态服务价值时空分异特征——以贵阳市南明河流域为例[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2015, 24(09): 1591-1598.
[6]	杨世凡, 安裕伦, 王培彬, 马良瑞, 胡锋, 孙泉忠. 贵州赤水河流域生态红线区划分研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2015, 24(08): 1405-1411.
[7]	张志明, 高俊峰, 闫人华. 基于水生态功能区的巢湖环湖带生态服务功能评价[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2015, 24(07): 1110-1118.
[8]	尹占娥, 田娜, 殷杰, 迟潇潇. 基于遥感的上海市湿地资源与生态服务价值研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2015, 24(06): 925-930.
[9]	杨钟贤, 刘邵权, 苏春江. 汶川地震重灾区交通通达性分析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2009, 18(12): 1166-.
[10]	曾旭, 陈芳清, 许文年, 王建柱, 夏振尧. 大型水利水电工程扰动区植被的生态恢复[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2009, 18(11): 1074-.
[11]	杜耘,蔡述明,王学雷,何报寅,徐贵来,江明喜,薛怀平,肖飞. 神农架大九湖亚高山湿地环境背景与生态恢复[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2008, 17(6): 915-915.
[12]	王永健,陶建平,张炜银,臧润国,王微,李宗峰. 岷江上游土地岭生态恢复过程中植被特征研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2006, 15(4): 511-516.
[13]	刘世梁, 傅伯杰,刘国华,马克明. 岷江上游退耕还林与生态恢复的问题和对策[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2006, 15(4): 506-510.
[14]	蒋天文,樊志宏. 大江大河从“公共资源”到“公地悲剧”演变的内在机理分析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2006, 15(3): 315-319.
[15]	蔡邦成,陆根法,宋莉娟,陈克亮. 南水北调东线水源地保护区生态建设的生态经济效益评估[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2006, 15(3): 384-387.