国家公园中荒野的适应性规划与管理——来自北美的启示

（美）万斯·G.马丁 （加）哈维·洛克 曹越 张倩

在许多北美的国家公园尤其是那些最知名的国家公园中，荒野具有重要的保护价值。荒野在加拿大和美国的通俗文化中是一个适用于许多情景的概念，包括但不限于国家公园。就像汉语一样，“荒野”这个词的意思也取决于上下文。因此，在聚焦北美“国家公园中的荒野”及其与中国的潜在关联之前，首先应简要阐释荒野的广义含义以及这一概念在保护地中的应用。

荒野一般有3个基本特征：物理和生物特征、社会特征、象征性特征，其中物理和生物特征是最首要的。荒野指的是在自然栖息地、动植物群落、生物过程（包括演化过程）和生态系统服务方面保持完整或基本完整的大面积土地[1]。这反映了该词的北欧起源：野生动物栖息地，这里土地的意志主导人类的意志。它是一个以野性为主的地方，自然是首要的，人类的利用有限，但这并不意味着没有人[2]。满足基本生活需求的狩猎和采集、非机动娱乐活动、精神层面的满足以及不时出现的放牧（在不影响物理和生物价值的情况下）都是与荒野相容的人类使用方式；而农业、伐木、采矿、筑坝、修路和建立永久性城镇等转化性活动会破坏荒野的固有特征，使其不再是荒野。从这个意义上说，荒野是一种特定的物理和生物状态，无论它是否位于受保护区内，都可以存在于北美和世界其他地方[3-4]。

在北美和其他地方，荒野还可以作为一种特定保护地的正式名称，与国家公园有所区别。在加拿大和美国的国家、省/州级别都可以找到具有法定名称的荒野保护地。国际自然保护联盟（IUCN）、世界保护地委员会（WCPA）将这些地区列为“1b类”自然保护地，并将其定义为：“大部分保留原貌或仅有微小变动的大片区域，其自然特征和影响留存，没有永久性或明显的人类居住痕迹，受到保护和管理以保持其自然原貌。”[5]

荒野存在于北美的一些国家公园里，但并非所有的国家公园都有荒野。大多数国家公园（美国的一些文化历史遗址除外）都有野性特征，荒野是由野性占主导的大片区域，通常远离城市和农业用地，城市和农业景观虽不具备荒野特征，但可以提供宝贵的野性因素（例如野生鸟类和哺乳动物，森林斑块，湿地和自然美景）[6]。虽然城市国家公园可以提供野外体验，但它们并不具备荒野的特质。

本研究将聚焦于中国和北美具有荒野条件的公园，即“国家公园中的荒野”。在国际上，尽管国家公园和荒野是IUCN定义的Ⅱ类和1b类保护地，且许多国家的保护地体系都遵循这样的指导方针，但实际上，这两种类型保护地在地理上存在一定程度的重叠。特别是在北美的大型和最具代表性的国家公园中，荒野地通常占公园总面积的95%以上。国家公园与荒野的关系取决于特定保护地中不同的保护目的和重点。无论荒野地是否被定义为国家公园的核心部分或独立的保护区，荒野的保护价值和质量都应作为关键因素予以关注。中国具有荒野的国家公园通常位于胡焕庸线以西，以及极北地区[7-8]；同样，在北美，它们大多位于西经100°以西或不适合农业的北部地区。在探讨国家公园中的荒野时，中国和北美之间有着惊人的相似之处。

1 加拿大国家公园中的荒野

从加拿大最早建立国家公园开始，荒野就被认为是一种价值。1887年关于创立落基山国家公园（现在的班夫国家公园）的辩论记录中，就提出荒野价值是加拿大的优势，应该在国家的第一个国家公园中得到保护[9]。

至1908年，加拿大已经出现了几个包含大片荒野区域的大型国家公园。加拿大第一任国家公园专员J.B.哈金将荒野认定为国家公园的关键价值。他将国家公园与城市公园区分开，指出“国家公园实际上就是自然状态下的大片荒野”。他从美国国家公园之父约翰·缪尔那些优雅的荒野著作中获得同样的支持，强调人们体验荒野对健康、娱乐和精神慰藉的重要性[10]。 哈金还对20世纪30年代在美国成立的荒野协会（一个倡导组织）深表赞同[11]。

在1917年世界上首届国际国家公园会议期间，许多美国发言人倡导修路以支持通往国家公园的汽车旅游。虽然哈金意识到旅游业作为公园经济基础的重要性，但他的观点很大程度集中在国家公园的荒野价值上，他说：“我想强调‘荒野’这个词，因为这对我来说是国家公园最重要的一点。”[12]

在哈金漫长的职业生涯中，一直致力于将加拿大国家公园的道路最少化、荒野最大化。他建议尽可能限制机动车道的建设，原因包括保障体验质量，如精神体验，“在这些寂静的荒野中有‘圣地’。徒步或骑马穿越的人所享受和体验到的是那些坐着汽车呼啸而过的人永远不会知道的”[11]。对加拿大人来说，荒野是一种珍贵的国家价值。然而自然资源开采是加拿大经济的主要来源，是否保护荒野是一场对野性自然的热爱与自然资源开采带来的经济价值之间的辩论[13]。

20世纪70年代初，印第安和北方事务部长让·克雷蒂安创立了10个国家公园。30年后，当他担任加拿大总理时，着手创立了另外10个国家公园，并扩建了3个已有的国家公园。其中许多公园都具有突出的荒野价值。

哈金坚信的国家公园荒野核心价值最初没有得到任何法律或监管措施的支持。哈金之后的公园管理者在第二次世界大战后的几年里倾向于强调旅游业和道路建设，而非荒野保护。越来越多的道路建设、旅游设施和滑雪开发进入了国家公园。

1.1 加拿大正式保护荒野价值

公园倡导者主张对荒野进行更正式的保护，于1979年引入了荒野分区制度。但这种制度仍然容易产生变化，所以加拿大公园和荒野协会通过游说，呼吁在国家公园内设定合法荒野区。虽然1987年《国家公园法》中就有认定规定，但公园管理者不希望有这样的限制，所以他们没有设定荒野区。然而，班夫国家公园的另一轮商业旅游开发压力引发更为激烈的全国性辩论。为努力减少班夫的开发，并防止在其他地方的类似问题发生，联邦政府于2000年将班夫、贾斯珀、库特尼和约霍国家公园超过90%的区域认定为合法的荒野区。

加拿大在以城市和农场为主的地区有非常小的国家公园，与荒野概念通常不相关；而北部有非常大的国家公园，游客很少，荒野是其内部及周边的主要特征。一些原住民担心荒野概念会排斥人类，而另一些人则认为荒野概念反映了他们对该地区的传统利用情况。

加拿大公园管理局的《国家公园荒野区域宣言行动计划》反映了这些地区差异。8个加拿大国家公园已经合法地宣布荒野受法律保护，其中6个位于加拿大中部的共享景观地区，2个位于加拿大北部，与不反对荒野概念的原住民共同管理。另有4个国家公园被指定为荒野。爱德华王子岛国家公园是第一个被城市和农场包围的国家公园，提出了部分荒野区划的提议。而有争议的是，班夫国家公园的一小部分但重要的荒野被改用于滑雪开发，依然是当前有待解决的问题[14]。

1.2 加拿大国家公园中的荒野保护

加拿大的国家公园有5种分区类型，荒野可以大致对应5种分区中的前两个。

1）I区——特殊保存区域。指包含或支持独特的、受威胁的或濒危的自然或文化特征，或属于一个代表自然区域特征的最佳范例，具有值得特别保护的特定地区或特征。保存是关键考虑因素，不得允许机动车的进入和通行。如果该地区的脆弱性使公众无法进入，将尽量为公园游客提供适当的场外项目和展览，以展示该地区的特殊特征。

2）II区——荒野区。指能很好地代表自然区域并将被保护为荒野状态的大面积区域。以最小的人为干扰使生态系统得以持续化保护是其关键考虑因素。

此外，该分区政策还补充道：“除最小的国家公园外，I区和II区将共同构成所有国家公园的大部分面积，并对维护生态系统的完整性做出最大贡献。”[15]

以下数据摘自37个已制定管理计划并标明分区的加拿大国家公园。一些公园的分区还没有完成（大部分是新公园），公园管理规划仍在制定中。I区：占公园面积的0.02%～78%，平均占10.30%。II区：占公园面积的11.00%～100%，平均占83.22%。I区+II区：占公园面积的17.00%～100%，平均占93.50%。只有2个公园的I区和II区之和不到公园总面积的50.00%，即爱德华王子岛（44.00%）和格鲁吉亚湾岛（17.00%)。这2个公园面积都很小，位于加拿大南部，游客很多。

从加拿大国家公园保护荒野的经验来看，如果不将荒野价值作为法律规定的价值进行特别保护，开发压力将会侵蚀荒野价值。即使有法律保护，最受旅游业欢迎的国家公园也会因减少荒野面积面临巨大的压力。旅游压力很小的偏远国家公园可能不需要这种额外的保护。中国景观最好和最具标志性的国家公园可能会面临与班夫国家公园类似的挑战。为了保持受欢迎的国家公园的荒野价值，需要国家做出重大承诺，并建立强有力的监管框架。

2 北美跨境国家公园荒野保护路径

加拿大和美国长期和平享有边界。他们根据国家法律共同创建了瓦特顿-冰川国际和平公园。加拿大已经将瓦特顿公园的一部分指定为合法的荒野，而美国的冰川公园则利用管理规划来保护其大片的荒野区域。这些公园也是联合国教科文组织指定的世界遗产地，如同黄石到育空走廊（Y2Y）中的其他几个标志性国家公园——黄石、班夫、贾斯珀、库特尼、约霍和纳汉尼（后5个都在加拿大），都有法律规定的荒野，黄石公园则有受行政法规所保护的荒野。以上情况引发了一项提议，即考虑建立一个世界遗产综合体，将由Y2Y走廊沿线相互连接的国家公园荒野地区组成[16]。这种跨境荒野保护的方法可能会启发中国边境附近地区。

3 美国国家公园系统中的荒野

对于荒野在美国国家公园中的作用，最好通过一些文化背景来理解。荒野概念和相关立法随着100多年前美国快速发展的国家和文化而演变。关键在于理解道路建设/基础设施发展与荒野价值之间的紧张关系。

19世纪的工业革命推动了经济增长，加上年轻的美国有向外扩张的倾向，导致了许多有争议和不恰当的土地利用实践。大面积的野性区域很快被人类所利用，并经常因破坏生态的伐木、采矿和农业活动而退化[17]。

虽然早期的国家公园内停止了此类活动，但美国第一批国家公园仍然存在优先发展旅游业而非保护荒野价值的倾向。当世界上第一个国家公园于1872年在黄石建立时，旨在成为“一个供人们受益和享受的公共公园或娱乐场所”[18]，它优先考虑的是人类而不是荒野保护。游客需要的旅馆、露营地和商店都需要道路支持，道路带来巨大好处的同时也破坏了栖息地、造成污染、导致物种灭绝，摧毁了自然美景和宁静[19]。

伴随着美国人对汽车的迷恋，国家公园也卷入了全国性的公路建设热潮。1913年美国有100万辆汽车，16年后数量急剧增加到2 300万辆。美国幅员辽阔，加上经济的增长和美国人对个人权利和自由的向往，推动了汽车行业的爆炸式增长，而非公共交通扩张。因此，数千千米的道路得以修建，为酒店和娱乐基础设施提供服务，满足驾车穿越和观赏游乐的需求。且道路建设几乎完全由美国政府资助。

美国土地管理的一种主要形式是通过农业部下属的国家林业局（USNFS）管理的国家森林系统，创建于20世纪初，目的是将非农业林地公有化。1915年，新的美国林业局授权在联邦地区建立露营地和小木屋，1916年，美国国会将所有联邦公路建设资金的15%分配给林业局[20]。除了旅游业，其他开发活动也需要大量的道路建设，特别是在林业局所管理的土地上进行商业性伐木。

20世纪初，美国西部还修建了大量水坝。一项在约塞米蒂国家公园中心建造大坝的提议引发了激烈的公众辩论。旧金山市希望在壮观的赫奇赫奇山谷的图奥勒米河上筑起水坝进行城市供水。关于是否应该允许这样做的全国性争论持续了20年，但环保主义者输了。大坝于1913年获得批准，河谷被洪水淹没[21]。

随着美国的发展变化，自然性和野性之间的内涵开始有所区别。景观的自然性通常是人为产生的，通常出现在高度管理的公园和美丽的城市绿地和花园中。野性是指那些以生态为中心的属性，被认为是更具自由意志的（或由自我决定的），几乎没有人类干预，包括承认自然内在的精神和按照自己的方式自然进化的权利[22]。

一些人认为，工业和商业在正式保护地或附近荒地内几乎不受限制地发展对荒野来说是危险的，最终是致命的，需要一些具体的措施来保护这些价值。

3.1 美国正式保护荒野价值

北美第一部荒野保护法于19世纪90年代在纽约州通过，建立了阿迪朗达克公园以保护流入纽约市的哈德逊河的源头。该公园的主题是美国自然保护史上的标志性主题——“永远的荒野”。

在美国国家土地上，20世纪初出现了将荒野作为正式保护地的概念。约翰·缪尔等民间社会的保护主义领袖首先提出了这一观点，他们主张在国家公园内保护荒野区。缪尔创立了塞拉俱乐部，并领导了反对修建赫奇赫奇大坝的斗争（虽然最终失败了）。他对荒野的热爱可以用其著作《我们的国家公园》（1901年）中的一句话来概括：“靠近大自然的心，偶尔彻底放松，攀爬一座山峰或在丛林里度过一周，洗净你的灵魂。”美国林业局的职员奥尔多·利奥波德主张在国家公园管理局所管辖的土地上保护荒野。利奥波德的《沙乡年鉴》（1949）是美国荒野文学的经典之作。他在书的前言中写道：“像风和日落一样，野性事物被认为是理所当然的，直到进步开始消灭它们。现在我们面临的问题是，是否值得以自然、野生和自由的代价来换取更高的‘生活水平’。”利奥波德和其他人成功地推广了荒野概念，直到美国林业局（1924年）在新墨西哥州的吉拉国家森林内指定了3个所谓的“原始”地区，总面积为2 250 km2。虽然被认为是美国国家政府正式指定的第一个“荒野”，但它不受国家法律保护，而是受美国国家林业局行政命令的保护[23]。

一场由公民发起的“保护野性与荒野”的倡议开始生根发芽。利奥波德和其他人创立了荒野协会。在主要由社会组织和一些倾向于荒野保护的政治家坚持不懈地进行了数十年的战略性倡导之后，1964年美国通过了《荒野法》。该法案规定，无论哪个机构控制的荒野地都受法律保护，所以它既适用于国家公园，也适用于国家森林。与机构行政行为明显不同的是，这是只能通过国会进一步立法才能修改的国家法律。《荒野法》用异乎寻常的诗意语言来描述和区分荒野及其在美国文化和自然资源管理中的角色，是世界上第一部致力于荒野概念的国家立法。此外，该法案创建了国家荒野保护系统（NWPS），法案通过后，许多先前指定的原始地区被重新分类为国家荒野地区。

国家荒野保护系统最初由13个州的54个指定区域组成，总面积37 000 km2。这些指定区域覆盖了由国家公园管理局、渔业和野生动物管理局（自1978年以来由国土资源部的土地管理局管理）和农业部的美国林业局管理的联邦土地。如今，该系统由美国44个州和领地的803个地区组成，总面积近452 000 km2，占美国面积的5%，其中超过50%位于遥远的阿拉斯加州北部[24]。

3.2 美国国家公园的荒野保护

在国家荒野保护系统认定的803个荒野区中，有61个位于50个国家公园中，总面积为17.8万km2。要了解美国国家公园系统，须重点关注美国国家公园管理局（USNPS）管理的19种命名分类，包括国家海岸、战场、纪念馆、纪念碑、公园大道、野生和风景河流等。在美国国家公园管理局管理的425个独立单位中，实际上只有63个是真正的国家公园[25]。

以黄石公园、大峡谷、约塞米蒂、落基山脉和大沼泽地这5个最具代表性的美国国家公园为例，显然国家公园内大量没有被《荒野法》正式认定的土地和水域也被作为荒野进行管理，这是因为国会要求所有美国国家公园评估其土地和水域的荒野属性，并将这些地区分类“研究”成为荒野地，评估等级包括“合适”“建议”“推荐”“认定”。为了符合1964年《荒野法》，被分类的地区都将作为已经“认定”的荒野来管理[26]。管理内容包括禁止机动车辆、无永久性的基础设施，以及应用“最少工具规则”，即任何管理都应以最少的干预和非机械化的方式进行。

黄石国家公园是美国最著名的公园。自1972年以来，其总面积8 900 km2中约有8 093 km2（90%）被“推荐”为荒野，因此被作为荒野区进行管理。然而，美国国会尚未对将这片土地合法纳入美国荒野保护地体系的建议采取行动。同样，在美国访问量第二大的国家公园——大峡谷国家公园中，其93%的面积被提议作为荒野区进行管理，但尚未被认定[27]。

相反，标志性的约塞米蒂国家公园（加利福尼亚州）面积为3 082 km2，其中2 851 km2（93%）根据《荒野法》被正式认定为荒野[28]。落基山国家公园（科罗拉多州）在受欢迎程度上排名第三，2019年有近500万游客。在1 075 km2的总面积中，有1 008 km2（93%）在2009年被正式认定为荒野，这是荒野倡导者35年来坚持不懈工作的一个高潮[29-30]。

这里特别要提的是佛罗里达的大沼泽地国家公园，它创建于1934年，早于《荒野法》颁布。这是美国第一个专门为保护其独特的荒野而建立的国家公园，创建的唯一目的是保护脆弱的生态系统。公园内5 260 km2的玛乔丽·斯通曼·道格拉斯荒野区域于1978年被认定，是西经100°以东最大的指定荒野区[31]。

3.3 原住民和美国国家公园的荒野

现在美国境内的所有土地都是以前美洲原住民、阿拉斯加原住民和夏威夷原住民的领土。总的来说，美国在与这些原住民的关系上有一段不堪回首的历史，这段历史也延伸到了美国的保护地范畴。1964年的《荒野法》忽略了印第安人，早期的荒野名称和荒野管理认定也没有与印第安人协商或合作，以及阐明他们的需求、用途和遗产。可能的例外是，政府认识到有必要保护西南部美洲原住民住址和史前遗址的可观文化和遗产价值。尽管这种疏忽最终得到了纠正，但一度给人留下了一种难以消除的荒野印象——是为精英、欧洲遗产游憩者创造的禁区。各种形式的赔偿都是必要的，而且正在处理中。世界上许多保护地也面临着类似问题[32]。

原住民在1980年的《阿拉斯加国家名胜地保护法案》（ANILCA）中得到承认。该法案在整个州45%（404 685 km2）的土地上建立了新的联邦保护区，其中包括由所有联邦土地管理机构管理的认定荒野区230 670 km2。阿拉斯加州95%的国家公园都在荒野管理之下。经过与阿拉斯加原住民的大量磋商，ANILCA规定了原住民在荒野和其他保护区内的生计用途，并对《荒野法》进行了重大修改，包括允许机动运输（主要是雪车）和半永久性帐篷营地和平台，用于生存狩猎、捕鱼和采集[33]。此外，一些美国家公园管理局所管辖土地是与传统所有者共同管理的，如熊耳国家纪念地（犹他州）。

为了与原住民的生活相融，美国国家公园管理局做出了正式努力。国家公园管理局内正式设定了美洲印第安人联络办公室，为部落政府和部落成员提供有关自然资源、公园政策、公园单位、公园实践、土地恢复等服务，并解决美洲原住民与国家公园之间长期存在的问题。尽管进展不易，但终于开始实现。

4 荒野与中国国家公园系统及建议

4.1 中国荒野与国家公园现状

在中国，荒野的现代概念最初是通过西方自然文学引入的，并逐渐被自然保护主义者和自然爱好者所熟知。21世纪初，程虹、侯文惠等翻译了《荒野与美国思想》和《低吟的荒野》等美国自然文学经典，还撰写了《寻归荒野》等介绍美国自然文学的书籍，这些书籍使中国人对具有异国文化背景的荒野概念有了深入了解[34-36]。

在现代中国的自然保护领域中，荒野是一个外来概念，尚未得到国内法律和政策的官方确认。而近年来，环境的变化促使中国对荒野概念的理解加深。来自WILD基金会、全球荒野基金会和IUCN荒野专家组的专家向中国学者、从业者和政府人员提供了他们的专业知识，加速了这一领域的国际合作。最重要的是，建立生态文明作为国家领导和中央政府的一项重要战略，为激发中国对这一概念的兴趣以及东西方之间相关信息的交流与合作提供了最佳框架。

在这个过程中，“荒野”一词逐渐进入中国自然保护政策制定者、研究者、实践者和爱好者的意识中。然而，人们对荒野概念的理解仍然存在分歧，这与对荒野科学的研究缺乏有关，特别是在生物-物理维度上。文化差异也会影响对该术语的理解和更好、更深的发展。

近年来，中国学者从不同角度对荒野概念在中国的应用进行了开创性的重要研究。最突出的是，清华大学的杨锐和曹越借鉴国际荒野制图方法，绘制了首张中国大陆国土尺度的荒野地图，初步确定了中国荒野的分布情况[37-38]。他们的研究结果表明，中国不同质量的、事实上的荒野覆盖范围很大。基于这些结果，这些中国学者呼吁建立中国荒野保护系统。其他领域的学者，如苏州大学的高山，已经开始从哲学和环境美学的角度探讨中国文化背景下的荒野概念。新成立的“自然、荒野与文明”在线中心通过跨学科交流、通讯、辩论等方式，推动着中国荒野立法目标的实现。

2013年，中国提出建立国家公园体制，形成了一种新的自然保护体系和模式，旨在提高环境治理能力。国家公园系统的建立旨在保护最有价值的自然场所，并为子孙后代保存宝贵资源。根据官方定义，国家公园是中国最有价值的自然生态区，保护着极其丰富和重要的生物多样性。2017年9月，《建立国家公园体制总体方案》正式发布，明确了国家公园在中国复杂保护地体系中的定位，确立了国家公园的首要功能是保护重要自然生态系统的原真性、完整性，同时兼具科研、教育、游憩等综合功能。2019年6月，《关于建立以国家公园为主体的自然保护地体系的指导意见》提出了严格保护、世代传承的基本原则[38]。到目前为止，国家公园是中国最重要的保护地类型，与自然保护区和自然公园一起成为新的三大保护地类型。

目前中国国家公园的定义和保护目标与国际上荒野的概念非常相似，尤其是国际上认定的原真性、完整性和最严格的保护要求是保护荒野的本质属性。目前中国的10个国家公园试点项目，特别是三江源国家公园、祁连山国家公园等西部地区的国家公园，在地理位置上覆盖了中国西部最重要的荒野地。

在国家公园体制改革初步完成的阶段，大量研究指出，目前中国国家公园在候选地上的科学选择、国家公园边界、合理分区、科学管理等方面还存在诸多不足[39-40]。现有的国家公园试验区在划定边界和区划方面多遵循以前的《自然保护区条例》，在保护区的扩大、划定边界和区划、管理等方面缺乏足够的科学依据。因此，国际经验，特别是美国、加拿大等建立了相对成熟的荒野保护制度的国家，可以为中国国家公园制度的完善提供有益的借鉴。

4.2 对于中国荒野保护的建议

1）将中国的荒野价值主流化，融入生态文明理念。正如世界著名生态伦理学家霍姆斯·罗尔斯顿三世所指出的那样，荒野是生态文明的必要条件，对荒野的充分保护是生态文明成熟的标志。荒野保护应成为中国自然保护地体系的重要组成部分，特别是可以与“碳达峰”和“碳中和”目标以及生物多样性政策相结合。清华大学研究团队认为，荒野在中国主流化的过程还应该包括在公众中普及荒野保护，这将极大地帮助构建一个非常重要的社会基础，让人们理解、支持和自发地采取行动保护中国的野性自然[41]。

2）加强全国荒野存量调查，建立中国荒野区分布位置、价值、特征等数据库。在此基础上，提出中国不同荒野区的命名和分类体系，可用于相应的适应性规划和管理。在调查中，亟须加强区域尺度的荒野制图与规划研究，借鉴国际上的荒野识别方法，为解决中国国家公园系统和其他保护地的保护缺口以及其他空间规划用地提供新的科学范式。这也将确保重要生态系统的原真性和完整性被完全纳入中国国家公园的保护范围，并对不同景观空间进行适当的规划和管理。

3）在确定国家公园核心区与控制区的划分时，建议先确定具体荒野的属性和价值，科学、动态地调整功能分区。这将有助于制定最具适应性的国家公园分区控制措施，从而明确禁止、限制和允许人类活动的原则，采用例如可接受的改变极限（LAC）原则。

4）为加强中国国家公园的科学管理，建议借鉴国际上成熟的、具有最佳实践性的荒野管理原则和监测方法。例如，通过确定野性自然的价值、质量和属性，确保国家公园生态原真性得到保护；通过适当的荒野游憩开发利用和管理，提升公众对国家公园野性自然美学的审美。借鉴北美的经验和教训，热门国家公园应该从一开始就平衡荒野游憩和旅游需求，注重生态保护，避免旅游开发占主导。在管理方面，借鉴国际上使用最少工具和以最少侵入性和非机动方式管理干预措施的原则。在适应性管理的过程中，一开始就将保护地内的原住民纳入治理共同体，尊重他们的传统知识，维护他们对荒野的神圣价值观。

在国际上，与其他类型的保护地不同，只有11个国家对荒野进行了国家立法。另有37个国家在省级或州级立法中保护荒野。还有23个国家以行政命令或功能区划对荒野进行保护。荒野概念正在被迅速地采用，显示出人们对其概念和实用性的广泛接受。1989年，在IUCN系统内登记的荒野地区有44个，截至2015年，已确定的荒野保护地约有3 000个。

根据中国国家公园的定义，这些公园似乎将覆盖中国大部分事实上的荒野。充分吸收和呼应国际上在荒野科学与管理方面的经验，可以使中国国家公园管理者和决策者按照国际通行的程序工作，为中国国家公园的科学建设、管理和长远发展积累宝贵的经验。

人们强烈支持制定中国的国家公园法[42]。为了加强中国的荒野研究，建立“中国荒野保护体系”也可以纳入中国国家公园法的范畴。此外，中国未来的荒野工作和实践，特别是国家公园系统的荒野保护，不仅可以保护生物多样性、美景和原真性，还可以为中国和国际游客提供世界级的荒野体验，这也是一个快速发展的商业领域。

5 结论

笔者认为，用法律保护荒野可以成为中国以国家公园为中心的保护地体系的一个有益维度。中国的国家公园可以采用与加拿大和美国类似的方式划定荒野。中国和美、加之间丰富的交流证明，这3个国家的保护地专业人员都有很多东西需要相互学习。

在加拿大和美国，荒野概念的发展和制度化，是因为加速建设了侵入性和破坏性的基础设施，特别是道路所构成的威胁。中国最受欢迎的国家公园可能也面临着类似的旅游压力。荒野的认定确保了一些地区免受旅游基础设施破坏的压力，而访客仍然可以得到适当的管理，以允许其拥有原始的体验感。

鉴于过去20年生态科学和景观规划的发展，中国现在可以在国家公园改革的早期利用荒野概念。这将确保大范围景观的安全性，并更迅速、直接和有效地帮助应对气候崩溃、物种丧失和流行病等经济和社会的灾难性威胁。

在学术研究兴趣之外，荒野概念也越来越被认为是保护中国自然美景、保护其野生环境的原真性和完整性以及其对国家乃至世界的重要生态系统服务的重要工具。发展具有中国特色的荒野概念，与当地传统社区和谐相处，也完全符合国际关于保护地的标准和方法。

中国提出了富有远见的生态文明国策，既要保护红线，又要尊重人与自然的统一。在中国的国家公园中运用荒野的概念可以帮助创建并维护一个美丽的中国。

（编辑/李清清）

作者简介：

（美）万斯·G.马丁/男/荒野基金会（美）前主席/全球荒野基金会（南非）主席/世界自然保护联盟自然保护地委员会荒野专家组联合主席

（加）哈维·洛克/男/世界自然保护联盟自然保护地委员会后爱知目标特别工作组组长/Y2Y跨境保护倡议联合创立者/加拿大公园与荒野协会前主席

曹越/男/博士/清华大学建筑学院助理教授/研究方向为国家公园与自然保护地、荒野保护与再野化、景观规划设计

张倩/女/硕士/荒野基金会（美）、全球荒野基金会（南非）中国事务代表/世界自然保护联盟自然保护地委员会荒野专家组主管/研究方向为荒野管理

MARTIN V G，LOCKE H，CAO Y，ZHANG Q.Adaptive Planning and Management of Wilderness in National Parks: Insights from North America[J].Landscape Architecture, 2023, 30(10): 20-33.DOI: 10.12409/j.fjyl.202304050166.

Adaptive Planning and Management of Wilderness in National Parks: Insights from North America

(USA)Vance G.Martin, (CA)Harvey Locke, CAO Yue, ZHANG Qian

Abstract:[Objective] China is a country rich in wilderness.It would be very useful to create a wilderness related perspective and adaptive management approach for China’s national parks based proteted areas system and other territorial spaces.This will strengthen scientific research and land management,thereby better protecting China’s natural beauty and the authenticity and integrity of national parks.[Methods/process] Wilderness as a protected area concept that was developed subsequent to the national park concept, starting somewhat simultaneously in both Canada and the United States around the turn of the 20th century.The 100-year history of wilderness conservation in North America has undergone continuous adaptive planning and management adjustments as concepts, environments, and conflicts have changed.

[Results/conclusion]Research shows that in North America’s most representative national parks, wilderness areas typically make up more than 95 percent of the total park area.The relationship between national parks and wilderness depends on the different conservation purposes and priorities in a particular protected area.Whether wilderness is defined as a core part of a national park or as a separate protected area, the conservation value and quality of wilderness is addressed as a key factor or managed in a manner and in accordance with principles.The researcher focuses on reviewing the experiences and lessons learned in the history of wilderness adaptive management in national parks in Canada and the United States, and proposes four suggestions for China, which has similar vast coverage of wilderness resources.Including: mainstreaming wilderness values and integrating them into China’s ecological civilization construction, especially the construction of protected areas system with the core status of national parks, as well as carbon peak and carbon neutrality, biodiversity conservation policies and objectives;Strengthen the construction of the national wilderness survey and inventory, and establish the classification and identification standards for China’s wilderness;To scientifically and dynamically adjust the functional zoning of national parks by determining specific wilderness attributes and values; Drawing on international wilderness management guidelines and practices, develop a technical guide for adaptive management of wilderness areas in China, make a balanced plan between tourism development and wilderness recreation in popular national parks from the beginning, and include indigenous peoples in the main body of joint governance.

Keywords:wilderness; national park; protected areas; wilderness in national parks; adaptive management; North America

©BeijingLandscape ArchitectureJournal Periodical Office Co., Ltd.Published byLandscape ArchitectureJournal.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license.

Wilderness is an important conservation value in many of North America’s national parks,especially the most famous ones.In the general cultures of both Canada and the US, wilderness is a concept used in many contexts that include but go beyond national parks.Much like in Chinese, the meaning of the word wilderness is context dependent.Thus, we begin by briefly explaining the broader meaning of wilderness and the application of the idea to protected areas in general before we narrow the focus to “national park wilderness” in North America and its potential relevance to China.

In general, wilderness has three essential characteristics: physical and biological, social, and iconic.The physical and biological value of wilderness is of primary importance.It refers to large areas of land that are intact or mostly so in terms of natural habitat, faunal and floral assemblages, biological processes, including evolutionary processes and ecosystem services[1].This reflects the Northern European origins of the word which referred to the place of wild animals where the will of the land dominates over the human will[2].It is place dominated by wildness(Chinese: 野性) , where nature is primary and human use is limited.But that does not mean people-free.People using wilderness for subsistence hunting and gathering, non-motorized recreational activities, spiritual fulfilment and sometimes for grazing when done in a way that does not impair the physical and biological values are human uses compatible with wilderness;transformational activities such as farming, logging,mining, dam building, road-building, and permanent towns degrade the inherent characteristics of wilderness such that their presence causes an area to cease to be wilderness.In this sense, wilderness is a place in a certain physical and biological condition whether or not it is in a protected area.Thus, wilderness can and does exist outside of protected areas in North America and elsewhere in the world.Wilderness has been translated into Chinese as 荒野(Pronounce as “Huangye”)[3-4].

“Wilderness” can also be a formal name for a specific kind of protected area distinct from a national park, in North America and elsewhere.Legally named wilderness protected areas are found at national, provincial and state levels in both Canada and the United States.The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA)classes such areas as protected natural area“Category 1b” and defines them as: “Protected areas that are usually large unmodified or slightly modified areas, retaining their natural character and influence, without permanent or significant human habitation, which are protected and managed so as to preserve their natural condition.”[5]

Wilderness is present in some of North America’s national parks but not all national parks have wilderness.Most national parks (except some cultural historic sites in the US) have wildness(Chinese: 野性), no matter where they are located across the Three Global Conditions.Whereas wilderness is a large area dominated by wildness that is generally remote from cities and farms, cities and farmed landscapes do not have wilderness but can offer valuable aspects of wildness (such as wild birds and mammals, forest patches, wetlands and natural beauty)[6].Thus, while urban national parks may offer an experience of wildness, they do not have wilderness qualities.

Parks with wilderness conditions - “national park wilderness”- in China and North America will be the focus of this paper.Internationally, even though National Parks and Wilderness are two categaries of protected areas defined by IUCN as category Ⅱ and category 1b and many countries are following such a guidance for their protected areas system, but de facto, these two types of protected areas are geograpcally overlaped to some extent.Especially in large and most representative National Parks like those in the North America,the wilderss ares usually covers more than 95% of the toal coverage of the parks.The relationship between Natioanl Parks and Wilderness depends on different purpose and focus of protection in certain protected areas, whether the wilderness areas should be defined as a core part of a naitonal park or independent as a protected area, the protection of wilderenss values and quality should be concerned as the key factors.In a Chinese context, this means that national parks with wilderness will generally be west of the Hu line except for in the far north[7-8]and, similarly, in North America they are mostly west of the 100th Meridian or in northern areas not suitable for agriculture.When considering national park wilderness opportunities, the similarities between China and North America are striking.

1 Wilderness in Canada’s National Parks

From the earliest creation of national parks in Canada, wilderness was recognized as a value.The record of the 1887 debate that led to the creation of Rocky Mountains National Park (now Banff National Park), includes discussion that wilderness values were a strength of Canada that should be protected in the country’s first national park[9].

By 1908 there were several large national parks with large wilderness areas in them.Canada’s first Commissioner of national parks, J.B.Harkin,identified wilderness as a key value of national parks.He distinguished national parks from city parks noting “The national park, on the other hand, is a huge area and in reality is a wilderness in its natural state.” He drew support for his arguments about the importance of people experiencing wilderness for health, recreation and spiritual solace from the elegant wilderness writings of John Muir who is strongly associated with America’s first national parks[10].Harkin was also“deeply in sympathy” with the Wilderness Society，an advocacy organization, that was created in the US in the 1930s[11].

During the world’s first international national parks conference in 1917, many American speakers advocate the road-building to support automobile tourism to national parks.While Harkin recognized the importance of tourism as an economic rationale for parks, he focused his remarks in large measure on the wilderness values of national parks saying “I want to emphasize the word ‘wilderness’because to me it is the all- essential point when it comes to national parks.”[12]

The desire to minimize roads and maximize wilderness in Canada’s national parks continued throughout the long career of Harkin.He suggested that the building of motor roads should be restricted as much as possible.Reasons include quality of experience, such as the spiritual: “in these silent wildernesses there are ‘holy places’.Those who penetrate them on foot or on horseback enjoy and experience which those who whizz through them in cars can never know”[11].For Canadians, the wilderness is a cherished national value.Whether to protect it or not is a debate between the love of wild nature and economic value that comes from natural resource extraction, which is a major source of the Canadian economy[13].

In the early 1970’s ten new national parks were created under the Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs, Jean Chretien.Thirty years later when he was Prime Minister of Canada, he set in motion the creation of ten more and the expansion of three existing national parks.Many of these parks have outstanding wilderness values.

The core value of wilderness in national parks that Harkin so deeply believed in was not initially supported by any legal or regulatory measures.Park administrators after Harkin had a tendency towards emphasizing tourism and road-building over wilderness preservation in the years following World War II.More road building, tourism facilities, and ski developments found their way into national parks.

1.1 Formally Protecting Wilderness Values in Canada

Park advocates argued for more formal protection for wilderness.In 1979 wilderness zoning was introduced.However, this was still too easy to change, so the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, lobbied for the legal designation of wilderness inside national parks.While the provision allowing for such designation by regulation came into theNational Parks Actin 1987, Park administrators did not want such restrictions so they did not put wilderness designations in place.However, another round of commercial tourism development pressure in Banff led to an even more vociferous national debate.In an effort to reduce development in Banff National Park and prevent similar problems elsewhere, the federal government designated more than 90% of Banff, Jasper, Kootenay and Yoho National Parks as legal wilderness areas in the year of 2000.

Canada has very small national parks in areas dominated by cities and farms where wilderness is not often a relevant concept, and very large national parks in the north which receive very low visitation and in which wilderness is the dominant condition both in and around them.Some Indigenous People are concerned that the wilderness idea excludes people while others are comfortable that the term reflects their traditional use of the areas.

Parks Canada’sAction Plan for the Declaration of Wilderness Areas in National Parksreflects these regional differences.Eight Canadian national parks have legally declared wilderness protected by regulation.Six of the eight are located in the Shared Landscape of Middle Canada, two are in Northern Canada co-managed with Indigenous People who are comfortable with the wilderness concept.Four additional national parks have wilderness designation.Prince Edward Island National Park is the first national park surrounded by cities and farms for which some wilderness designation is proposed.And, controversially, removing a small but important part of the wilderness of Banff National Park to accommodate ski development in return for some reduced use elsewhere on the ski hill is also pending[14].

1.2 Wilderness Protection in Canada’s National Parks

There are five types of zoning in National Parks in Canada.Wilderness can be roughly equated to 2 of the 5 zones.

1) Zone I — Special Preservation.Specific areas or features which deserve special preservation because they contain or support unique, threatened or endangered natural or cultural features, or are among the best examples of the features that represent a natural region.Preservation is the key consideration.Motorized access and circulation will not be permitted.In cases where the fragility of the area precludes any public access, every effort will be made to provide park visitors with appropriate off-site programs and exhibits interpreting the special characteristics of the zone.

2) Zone II — Wilderness.Extensive areas which are good representations of a natural region and which will be conserved in a wilderness state.The perpetuation of ecosystems with minimal human interference is the key consideration.

Further, the policy adds: “Zones I and II will together constitute the majority of the area of all but the smallest national parks, and will make the greatest contribution toward the conservation of ecosystem integrity.”[15]

The following summary data is based on information from 37 national parks where zones are identified and mapped in a current management plan.Zoning has not been completed in a few parks, mostly newer parks where the park management plan is still under development.Zone I: range from 0.02% to 78.00% of the park area,mean 10.30%.Zone II: range from 11.00% to 100%, mean 83.22%.Zone I+II: range from 17.00% to 100%, means 93.50%.Only 2 parks had zone I + II representing less that half of the total park area: Prince Edward Island NP (44.00%) and Georgian Bay Island NP (17.00%).Both are very small, southern Canada, very high visitation parks.

When it comes to reserving wilderness, the lesson from Canada’s national parks is that wilderness values will be eroded due to development pressures unless wilderness is specifically protected as a value by law.Even then there are strong pressures to reduce the wilderness area in national parks that are most popular for tourism.Remote national parks with very low tourism pressure may not need such additional protection.Similar challenges to those faced by Banff National Park can be reasonably anticipated for China’s most scenic and iconic national parks.To retain wilderness values in popular parks, a major national commitment is required as well as a strong regulatory framework.

2 Transboundary National Park Wilderness Approach in the North America

Canada and the US have long enjoyed a peaceful border.Together they created by national laws Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park.Canada has designated a portion of Waterton as legal wilderness while Glacier on the US side uses management planning to protect its substantial wilderness areas.These parks are also a designated UNESCO World Heritage Site as are several other iconic national parks in the Yellowstone to Yukon Corridor (Y2Y) — Yellowstone, Banff, Jasper,Kootenay, Yoho, and Nahanni.The later five are all in Canada and all have legally designated wilderness.Yellowstone has administratively protected wilderness.This has led to a proposal to think in terms of a World Heritage Complexes which would consist of interconnected national park wilderness areas along the Y2Y Corridor[16].Such transboundary approaches to wilderness could be of interest along on near China’s borders.

3 Wilderness in the US National Parks system

The role of wilderness in national parks in the USA is best understood with some cultural context.The wilderness concept and associated legislation evolved with the young and rapidly growing culture and nation of the United States beginning over 100 years ago.Essential to this is understanding the tension between road-building/infrastructure development and wilderness values.

The 19th century Industrial Revolution,driven economic growth, and the expansionist tendencies of a youthful United States of America across its vast country created many contentious and ill-conceived land use practices.Large wild areas were quickly transformed to human uses and are often degraded by ecologically damaging logging, mining and agricultural practices[17].

While early national parks stopped such activities, there was still a tendency towards prioritizing tourism development over protecting wilderness values in the first US national parks.When the world’s first national park was established in 1872 at Yellowstone, it was to be “a public park or pleasuring-ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people”[18].The priority was human instead of wilderness protection.Tourists required hotels, campgrounds and shops, all of which required roads.Roads can bring great benefits, but they also fragment habitat, create pollution, drive species extinction, and always destroy natural beauty and solitude[19].

A national road-building spree accompanied the American love-affair with the automobile and national parks were not exempt.There were one million cars in 1913, and dramatically increased to 23 million in 16 years.The physical expansiveness of America, coupled with growing economic means and the American proclivity towards personal freedom and liberty, fueled this explosion of automobiles over the expansion of adequate public transportation.Therefore, thousands of kilometers of roads were built to service the hospitality and entertainment infrastructure to satisfy the demands of driving through and viewing the “pleasuring grounds.” Roadbuilding was almost entirely subsidized by the US government.

A major form of land management in the US is through the National Forest System, administered by the National Forest Service (USNFS) which is within the Department of Agriculture.It was created around the beginning of the 20th century to keep non-agricultural forest lands in public instead of private ownership.In 1915 the new US Forest Service authorized the building of campgrounds and cabins in federal areas, and in 1916 the US Congress allocated fully 15% of all federal highway construction funds to the Forest Service[20].In addition to tourism, other development required massive road building, especially commercial logging on Forest Service lands.

Massive dams were also built in the American west in the early 20th century.A controversy over a dam proposed to be built in the heart of Yosemite National Park generated significant public debate.The City of San Francisco wanted the Tuolumne River in the spectacular Hetch Hetchy Valley dammed for its water supply.A national controversy raged for 20 years over whether this should be allowed, but the conservationists lost.The dam was approved in 1913 and the valley was flooded[21].

As America was transformed by development, a distinction emerged between naturalness (Chinese: 自然性) and wildness(Chinese: 野性).Naturalness qualities are usually anthropogenically-derived, often found in highly managed parklands and beautiful urban green space and gardens.Wilderness values are those ecocentric attributes considered more free-willed (or self-determined), with the least amount of human intervention, including a recognition of an inherent spirit within and rights of nature to evolve on her/its’ own terms[22].

Some people regarded as dangerous and ultimately fatal to wilderness the virtually unchecked growth of industrial and commercial development in wildlands within and near formal protected areas.They felt that something specific was needed to protect those values.

3.1 Formally Protecting Wilderness Values in the US

The first wilderness protection law in North America was passed in the 1890s in New York State with the creation of the Adirondack Park to protect the headwaters of the Hudson River which flows to New York City.The theme adopted by this park is iconic in US conservation history:“Forever Wild”.

On US national lands, the concept of wilderness as a formal protected area emerged in the early years of the 20th century.It was first enunciated by civil society conservation leaders such as John Muir who argued for its protection in national parks.Muir founded the Sierra Club and led the ill-fated battle against the Hetch Hetchy dam.His love for the spirit and necessity of wilderness is the subject of considerable research and many books by and about him, which can perhaps be best summarized by a quote from his book,Our National Parks(1901): “Keep close to Nature’s heart, and break clear away once in a while, and climb a mountain or spend a week in the wood.Wash your spirit clean.” Aldo Leopold, an employee of the US Forest Service (USFS), argued for wilderness protection on USFS lands.Leopold’sSand County Almanac(1949) is a revered classic of American wilderness literature.In its’ foreword, he writes: “Like winds and sunsets, wild things were taken for granted until progress began to do away with them.Now we face the question whether a still higher ‘standard of living’ is worth its cost in things natural, wild and free.” Leopold and others successfully promoted the wilderness concept until the USFS designated (in 1924) three so-called“primitive” areas within the Gila National Forest(New Mexico), totaling 2,250 km2.Considered the first “wilderness” officially designated by the US national government, it was not protected by national law but rather by administrative fiat of the USFS[23].

A citizen-driven initiative to “protect wildness and wilderness” took hold.Leopold and others created The Wilderness Society.After decades of strategic and persistent advocacy primarily by civil society and some conservationinclined politicians, in 1964 the United States’Wilderness Actwas passed into law.It provides for legal wilderness protection to be overlaid on federal lands regardless of which Agency controls them, so it applies to both national park and national forests.Differing significantly from agency administrative actions, this was national legislation that can only be changed by a further act of Congress.Containing unusually poetic language to describe and differentiate wilderness and its role in the United States’ culture and approach to natural resource management, theWilderness Actwas the first national legislation in the world dedicated to the wilderness concept.In addition, the Act created the National Wilderness Preservation System(NWPS) and, upon its passage, many of the previously designated primitive areas were reclassified as national wilderness areas

The NWPS was initially composed of 54 designated areas across 13 States totaling 37,000 km2.These designations were overlaid on portions of federal lands managed by the National Parks Service and Fish and Wildlife Service (and since 1978 in the DOI’s Bureau of Land Management) and the US Forest Service of the Department of Agriculture.Today it consists of 803 areas in 44 US States and Territories, totaling almost 452,000 km2or 5% of the United States,over half of which is in the far northern State of Alaska[24].

3.2 Wilderness protection in US National Parks

Of the 803 areas of officially designated wilderness in the NWPS, 61 are located in 50 National Parks, covering a total area of 178,000 km2.To understand the US National Park System, it is important to note that there are 19 different named classifications of areas administered by the US National Park Service(USNPS), including National Seashores, Battlefields,Memorials, Monuments, Parkways, Wild and Scenic Rivers, and others.Of 425 individual units managed by the USNPS, there are 63 actual National Parks[25].

When one considers Yellowstone, Grand Canyon, Yosemite, Rocky Mountains, and Everglades, five of the most iconic US national parks, it becomes clear that a substantial amount of the land and waters within the NPS are managed as wilderness without being officially designated as such under theWilderness Act.This is because a Congressional order requires all US National Parks to evaluate their lands and waters for wilderness attributes and to categorize these areas as for“study” to be a wilderness area, and then“suitable”, “proposed”, “recommended”, or“designated”.Areas once categorized are to be managed as if they are already “designated”wilderness in order “to meet the letter and the spirit” of the 1964Wilderness Act[26].This management includes such things as no motorized vehicles, no permanent infrastructure, and application of the “minimum tool rule” ie, any management intervention (often referred to as‘stewardship’) is to be conducted in the least intrusive and non-mechanized manner.

Yellowstone National Park is the most famous of all US parks.Since 1972, some 8,093 km2(90%) of its total 8,900 km2have been“recommended” for wilderness designation and are therefore managed as wilderness.However, the US Congress has not yet acted on the recommendation to legally bring the land into the USWPS.similarly,in the Grand Canyon National Park, which is the second most visited National Park in the US, 93%of its area are proposed for and managed as wilderness but are yet to be designated[27].

Conversely, the iconic Yosemite National Park (California) is 3,082 km2in area, of which 2,851 km2(93%) is officially designated wilderness under the Wilderness Act[28].Rocky Mountain National Park (Colorado) ranks third in popularity,with almost 5,000,000 visitors in 2019.Of its’1,075 km2, 1,008 km2(93%) was officially designated as wilderness in in 2009, culminating 35 years of persistent work by wilderness advocates[29-30]..

Special mention should be made here for Everglades National Park (Florida), which is created in 1934 long before theWilderness Act.It was the first US National Park expressly established to preserve its unique wilderness,created for the sole purpose of protecting a fragile ecosystem.The 5,260 km2Marjorie Stonemam Douglas Wilderness area within the park was designated in 1978 and is the largest designated wilderness east of the 100th Meridian[31].

3.3 Indigenous Peoples and US national park wilderness

All lands within what is now the United States were formerly the territory of Native Americans, Native Alaskans, and Native Hawaiians.In general, the US has a troubled history in its relations with these Indigenous Peoples.This history extends to US protected areas.TheWilderness Actof 1964 omitted mention of Native Americans and early wilderness designations and wilderness management directives did not involve consultation or collaboration with Native Americans to account for their needs, uses,and heritage.The possible exception to this was the recognition by government of the need to protect the considerable cultural and heritage value of Native American dwellings and prehistoric sites in the Southwest.Despite the fact that this oversight was eventually corrected, it created an initial image of wilderness that has taken many years to erase,that of restricted areas created for elite, Europeanheritage recreationists.Reparations of many sorts are needed and are being addressed.Similar issues confront many protected areas around the world[32]。

Indigenous People were recognized in theAlaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act(ANILCA) of 1980.ANILCAcreated new designations of federal protected areas on 45%(404,685 km2) of the state, including 230,670 km2of designated wilderness managed by all federal land management agencies.Some 95% of all National Parks in Alaska is under wilderness management.Considerable consultation with Native Alaskans resulted inANILCAproviding for subsistence uses within wilderness and other protected areas, with significant variants to theWilderness Actincluding motorized transport(primarily snow machines) and semi-permanent tented camps and platforms for subsistence hunting, fishing and gathering[33].In addition, comanagement with traditional owners is underway in some NPS lands, such as Bears Ears National Monument (Utah).

There are formal efforts by the USNPS to better engage with Indigenous Peoples.The American Indian Liaison Office within the NPS was officially established to serve tribal governments and tribal members with regard to natural resources, park policy, park units, park practice, land restoration, and the resolution of long-standing issues between Native Americans and USNPS.Progress, while long overdue, is finally being realized.

4 Wilderness and China’s National Parks System and Suggestions

4.1 Wilderness and National Parks in China

In China, the modern concept of wilderness was initially introduced through western nature literature and gradually became known to conservationists and nature lovers.In the early 21st century, Cheng Hong, Hou Wenhui and others translated some American natural literature classics such asWilderness&The American MindandThe Singing Wildernessinto Chinese.They also wroteReturn to the Wildernessand other books to introduce American nature literature, which gave an insight into the wilderness concept that had an exotic cultural background[34-36].

In modern China’s nature protection world,wilderness is an external concept and has not been officially confirmed by domestic laws and policies.In recent years, however, circumstances converged to increase the understanding of wilderness within China.International cooperation on this subject accelerated when experts from the WILD Foundation, Wilderness Foundation Global and the Wilderness Specialist Group (of IUCN) offered their expertise to Chinese scholars, practitioners and government leaders.Further, and most importantly, the establishment of ecological civilization as an important strategy of national leaders and the central government provided the best framework that encouraged both Chinese interest in the concept and the exchange and cooperation of relevant information between the East and the West.

Through this process, the term “wilderness”has increasingly entered into the awareness of China’s nature protection policy makers, researchers,practitioners and enthusiasts.However, there are still different understandings around the concept of wilderness, this is related to the lack of research into wilderness science, especially the biologicalphysical dimension.Cultural differences also affect comprehension and the development of a better,deeper understanding of the term.

In recent years, Chinese scholars have conducted pioneering and important research from different perspectives on how the concept of wilderness can be applied to China.Most prominently, using the experience of the international wilderness mapping methods, Yang Rui and Cao Yue from Tsinghua University drew the first national-scale wilderness map of mainland China, thus initially identifying the distribution of China’s wilderness[37-38].The results of their research indicated that China has a large coverage of de-facto wilderness of different qualities.Based on such results, these Chinese scholars called for the establishment of a China Wilderness Protection System.Scholars in other fields, such as Gao Shan from Soochow University, have begun to explore the concept of wilderness in the context of Chinese culture from the perspectives of philosophy and environmental aesthetics.In a bottom-up approach, as part of the newly-launched Nature,Wilderness and Civilization online centre, they use trans-disciplinary exchanges, newsletters, debates and other practices to promote the goal of a China’s wilderness act.

In 2013, China formally introduced the establishment of a national park system, forming a new system and model for nature protection which requires enhanced capabilities of environment governance.This national park system is established to protect the most valuable natural places and save them for future generations.According to the official definition, National Parks are the most valuable natural ecological areas in China, protecting extremely rich and important biodiversity.In September 2017, theOverall Plan for Establishing the National Park Systemwas officially released, clarifying the positioning of National Parks in China’s complex protected area system, establishing that its primary function is to protect the authenticity and integrity of important natural ecosystems by: using the most strict and overall protection; using a systematic approach to protecting natural ecosystems; and preserving comprehensive functions such as scientific research, education, and recreation.In June 2019,the Guiding Opinions on Establishing a Natural Reserve System with National Parks as the Main Bodyproposed the basic principles of strict protection and inheritance from generation to generation[38].So far, National Park is the most important type of protected areas in China and, alongside Nature Reserves and Nature Parks, is one of the three new major categories of protected areas.

The current definition and protection goals of national parks in China are very similar to the international concept of wilderness, especially the authenticity, integrity, and strictest protection requirements that internationally are the essential attributes of protecting wilderness.Considering the current ten national park pilot projects, especially the national park pilot projects in the west such as the Three Rivers Source National Park and Qilian Mountain National Park, these national parks geographically cover the most important wilderness in western China.

During the preliminary completion of the national park system reform, numerous studies have determined that the current Chinese national parks still have many shortcomings such as the scientific selection of candidate sites, national park boundaries, rational zoning, and scientific management[39-40].Existing national park pilot areas mostly follow the previousRegulations on Nature Reservesin creating boundary delineation and zoning, and lack sufficient scientific basis for the expansion of protected areas, setting boundaries and zoning, and conducting management.Therefore, the international experience, especially the United States, Canada and other countries that have established relatively mature wilderness protection systems, could provide helpful models for the refinement of Chinese national parks system.

4.2 Suggestions on Chian Wilderness protection

1) Mainstream the wilderness values in China and integrate them into Eco-Civilaztion.As the world-famous ecological ethicist Holmes RolstonⅢ noted that wilderness is essential for the ecological civilization, and adequate wilderness protection is the sign of the maturity of ecological civilization.Wildernss protection should be important part of nature conservation in China,ecpecially it could be integraded into “rbon peaking”and “carbon neutrality” targets, and biodiverstiy policies as well.According to chinese wilderness and national parks scholars Yang Rui and Cao Yue from Tsinghua university, the mainstreaming process of wildernss in china should also include the populization of wilderness protection in the pubic, which could greatly help to build up a very important social foudation for undertanding,supporting and spontaneous actions for protecting wild nature in China[41].

2) Strengthen wilderness inventory investigation across the country, which would enable a data base for China’s wilderness areas and their locations, values, characteristics, etc.Based on the database, it is sugested that a designation and classificaiton system of different China’s wilderness areas could be used for adaptive planning and management accordingly.Within the inventory investigation, it is relatively urgent to strengthen wilderness mapping and planning research on a regional scale, using international wilderness identification methods to provide a new scientific paradigm that addresses the protection gaps in Chinese national parks system and other protected areas, as weill as other land for spatial planning.This would also ensure that important authenticity and integrity of the ecosystem is fully included into the scope of protection of Chinese national parks,and appropriate planning and managment in other spaces of different landscapes.

3) When determining the distinction between the core area and the controlling area of the national park, it is recommended to scientifically and dynamically adjust the functional zoning by first determining the characteristics and values of the specific wilderness.This allows for the best national park zoning control measures, thus also clarifying the prohibition, restriction, and permission of human activities based on principles such as the Limited Acceptable Changes (LAC).

4) To strengthen scientific management of China’s national parks, it is recommended to incorporate the principles and monitoring methods of well-developed, best-practice international wilderness management.For example, by determining the value, quality, and attributes of wild nature, we can ensure the protection of the ecological authenticity in national parks; and by developing appropriate wilderness recreation usage and management, we can enhance public appreciation of the aesthetics of wild nature in national parks.Drawing on the experience and lessons from North America, popular national parks should balance wilderness recreation and tourism demand from the beginning, focusing on ecology and avoiding the dominance of tourism development.In terms of management, we should learn from the international principles of using the least tools and managing interventions in a minimally invasive and non motorized manner.In the process of adaptive management, at the beginning, indigenous peoples in protected areas should be included in the governance community,respecting their traditional knowledge, and maintaining their sacred values regarding the wilderness.

Internationally, unlike other types of protected areas, national wilderness legislation is only in 11 countries.However, an additional 37 countries protect wilderness in provincial or statelevel legislation.Administrative designation, or zoning, occurs in an additional 23 other countries.The wilderness concept is being rapidly adopted,showing great acceptance of its concept and usefulness.In 1989, there were 44 wilderness areas registered within the IUCN system and, as of 2015,there were some 3,000 units thus identified.

Because of the definition of China’s national parks, it appears these parks will cover most of China’s de-facto wilderness.By fully absorbing and then adapting international experience in wilderness science and management, China’s park managers and policy-makers can be working in accord with internationally accepted procedures to gain valuable experience for the scientific construction, management and long-term development of China’s national parks.

There is strong support for enacting China’s national park law[42].To strengthen China’s wilderness research, the establishment of a ‘China Wilderness Protection System’ can also be included in the scope of China’s national park law.Furthermore, China’s future work and practices on wilderness, especially wilderness protection in the national parks system, could not only protect biodiversity, beauty and authenticity, it would also provide world-class wilderness experiences to Chinese and international tourists, a rapidly expanding business sector.

5 Conclusion

We suggest that legally protecting wilderness could be a useful dimension of China’s national park-centric protected areas system.Wilderness designation in China’s national parks could be done in similar ways as Canada and the United States do.Protected area professionals in all three countries have a great deal to learn from each other, as recognized by a rich history of interchange through formal protocols agreed between China，the United States and Canada.

In both Canada and the United States, the wilderness concept was developed and institutionalized because of the threats posed by accelerating construction of intrusive and damaging infrastructure, especially roads.China’s most popular national parks may also face similar by inventible tourism pressures.Wilderness designation ensure the protection of some areas against heavy tourist infrastructures, while citizen visitation could be still properly managed to allow for a primitive experience.

Given the evolution of ecological science and landscape planning in the past 20 years, China could now take advantage of the wilderness concept early in its national park reform.This will secure large landscapes, and more quickly, directly and efficiently help address the economically and socially disastrous threats of climate breakdown,species loss, and the threat of further pandemics.

In addition to scholarly interest, the wilderness concept enjoys a growing recognition as an important tool to protect China’s natural beauty,the authenticity and integrity of its wildness, and its globally and nationally important ecological services.Deployment of the wilderness concept with Chinese characteristics, in harmony with traditional local communities, would be fully in accord with international protected area standards and methods.

China’s visionary national policy of Ecocivilization recognizes the necessity of both protecting red line areas, as well as honoring the unity of people and nature.Putting the wilderness concept to use in China’s National Parks could help create and maintain a Beautiful China.