吉林省野生动物损害特点及补偿工作评价被引量：7

The Characters of Wildlife Damage Case and Compensation Processing Assessment in Jilin Province

下载PDF

导出

摘要分析了2007~2013年吉林省野生动物损害补偿案件,结果表明野生动物损害案件数量逐年上升,野猪造成的损害占94.07%,其中99.94%为损害农作物,东北虎损害案件占1.38%,其中捕食家畜占99.72%。白山、延边地区是损害发生主要地区,其中长白、靖字、安图、汪清、珲春案件数量占全省数量62.33%。通过问卷调查和专家评估,研究表明吉林省野生动物损害补偿运行良好,补偿工作在政策支撑、案件处理方面专家评分较高,而损害案件补偿过程中在运行经费、监督检查、信息处理、科学研究等方面存在不足,应在今后工作中进行调整。 We reviewed wildlife damage compensation files in Jilin Province from 2007 to 2013. The numbers of cases increased annually. Wild boar damage cases accounted for 94% of the total number, among which nearly all were crop damage cases. Tiger damage cases accounted for 1.4% of all claims andnearly all were due to killing of cattle. Baishan and Yanbian districts were major regions where wildlife damage took place. The cases from 5 counties in this region, Chang- bai, Jingyu, Antu, Wangqing, Hunchun, accounted for 62% of all claims made in Jilin province. Using questionnaire survey and expert evaluation, we found that wildlife damage compensation functioned well in Jilin province. Policy support and case processing received high scores in expert evaluation. But there were deficiencies in operating costs, supervisory review, information docu- mentation and damage prevention research, and these should be rectified in future.

作者孙丽李伟东艾平郑振河马琼芳吴景才孔维尧

机构地区吉林省林业科学研究院吉林省林业调查规划院东北林业大学野生动物资源学院

出处《野生动物学报》北大核心 2015年第1期48-53,共6页 CHINESE JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE

关键词野生动物损害补偿案件吉林省层次分析 Wildlife damage Compensation casesJilin province Hierachical analysis

分类号 S764 [农业科学—森林保护学]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献32

1Conover M R, Decker D J. Wildlife damage to crops: perceptions of agricultural and wildlife professionals in 1957 and 1987 [ J]. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 1991, 19(1) : 46 -52.
2Conover M R. Perceptions of grass - roots leaders of the agricultural community about wildlife damage on their farms and ranches [ J ]. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 1994, 22( 1 ) : 94 - 100.
3Conover M R. Wildlife management by metropolitan residents in the United States; practices, perceptions, costs, and values [ J ]. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 1997, 25(2) : 306 -311.
4Fall M W, Jackson W B. The tools and techniques of wildlife damage management - changing needs : an Introduction [ J ]. International biodeterioration & biodegradation, 2002, 49 (2 - 3) : 87 - 91.
5Sukumar R. The management of large mammals in relation to male strategies and conflict with people [ J ]. Biological Conservation, 1991, 55(1): 93-102.
6O'Connell - Rodwell C E, Rodwell T, Rice M, et al. Living with the modem conservation paradigm: can agricultural communities co - exist with elephants a five - year case study in east caprivi, namibia [J]. Biological Conservation, 2000, 93(3): 381-391.
7Saberwal V K, Gibbs J P, Chellam R, et al. Lion - Human con- flict in the gir forest, India [J]. Conservation Biology, 1994, 8 (2) : 501 -507.
8Bangs E E, Fritts S H, Fontaine J A, et al. Status of gray wolf res- toration in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming [ J ]. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 1998, 26(4) : 785 -798.
9Breitenmoser U. Large predators in the Alps: The fall and rise of man's competitors [J]. Biological Conservation, 1998, 83 (3) : 279 - 289.
10Nyhus P, Fischer H, Madden F, et al. Taking the bite out of wild- life damage the challenges of wildlife compensation schemes [ J ]. Conservation in Practice, 2003, 4(2): 37 -43.