白龙江林区森林资源价值评价研究

Evaluation on forest resources in Baiiongjiang River forest region

对白龙江林区森林资源价值进行了评价研究。指出:(1)森林资源价值由经济价值和公益价值组成。经济价值应用碳税法或培育成本法进行评价,公益价值应用工业成本法、机会成本法、水资源费等方法进行评价,两价值评价前应核准森林类型、面积、蓄积量等。(2)评价结果表明:白龙江林区森林总生物量55.13 Tg,即总碳贮量22．05 Tg C,折合总经济价值(即碳贮量价值)239.5亿元,生物量生产力为708．0 Gg／a,即碳贮量283.2 Gg C／a,折合经济价值3.1亿元/a;年均公益价值5.8亿元／a,其中释放O2量价值占52％、防止土壤侵蚀量价值占9％、涵养水源价值占39%,这些森林资源的年总价值在8．9亿元/a以上。(3)森林生物量是森林碳贮量的载体,用有林地的生物量与蓄积量建立的生物量经验系数R平=0.725 4、R幼=0.564 7、R中=0．671 0、R近=0．718 3、R成=0．742 9、R过=0.768 6符合甘肃实际情况, 所揭示的生物量数据是可靠的;评价森林资源的公益价值应从其实际防护重点入手,不区分防护重点地套用所有指标进行评价,会误导人们的认识和决策。

The value of forest resources in Bailongjiang River forest region were evaluated. And the following conclusions were drawn：（1）The value of forest resources Consisted of economic value and public value. The economic value should be accounted by methods of taxing on carbon or nurture cost, while public value by methods of industrial cost, opportunitive cost, fees on water resource and so on. Forest type and area including the amount of growing stock should be checked before forest value was accounted. （2） The results of the accounting showed that： forest biomass in Bailongjiang River was 55. 13 Tg, carbon storage was 22.05 TgC, the retraced economic value（the carbon storage value）was 239.5 million yuan, forest biomass yield capacity was 708.0 Gg/a, carbon storage capacity was 283.2 GgC/a, retraced economic value was 3.1million yuan/a. The average public value was 5.8 million yuan/a,of which 52% was value of O2 releasing,9% for preventing soil erosion, and the value of conserving water held 39%. The contribution of forest resources to Green GDP accounting was more than 8.9 million yuan/a. （3）Forest biomass was a carrier for forest carbon storage,the coefficients of biomass in experience index Raverage=0. 725 4, Ryouth=0.564 7, Rmiddle = 0. 671 0,Rnear-mature= 0. 7183, Rmature= 0.742 9, Rover-mature=0.7683, which built on biomass and the amount of growing stock in forested land were suited to the local realities in Gansu. The biomass calculated by such coefficients was credible. Public value on forest resource should be accounted with mature indexes considering the forest＇s major protection target, otherwise it would result in misunderstanding and error in decision.