文章 Articles

“Who are these people now?”

Tibetan herders are struggling to adjust to sedentary life on the edge of the city of Golmud. Xia Liwei visited one family and listened to their story.

Article image

Fifty-eight-year-old Sonka never dreamed he might one day leave his ancestral village of Cuochi, on the Qinghai-Tibet plateau, and move to the outskirts of Golmud, a largely Han Chinese city in northwest Qinghai province. Much less did he imagine his family’s entire way of life would change. 

An unaffected smile brightened Sonka’s dark face as he welcomed me warmly into his home. His wife and daughter served tea and snacks, while Ouyao, a member of the staff at local NGO, Snowland Great Rivers Environmental Protection Association, translated Sonka’s explanation of how he came to live in Golmud.

In 2005, this family of five, together with almost 300 other herding households from Sanjiangyuan – Qinghai’s “Three Rivers Source” area, which contains the headwaters of the Yangtze, Mekong and Yellow River – were relocated to a settlement eight kilometres south of Golmud. The move was part of the government’s “ecological migration” scheme, designed to protect the region’s delicate environment.

Sonka agreed to move after local government officials told him that herders pose a “threat to the grasslands”, along with the plateau pika, a small mammal considered a pest for competing with other species for food and degrading the land. If moving would be good for the grassland, Sonka said, he was willing to do so. He arranged for someone else to look after the family’s several head of cattle – this would provide some extra money for the family, and also give him a way to return to the village, should he wish to, a decade down the line.  

“So, have the grasslands improved since then?” I asked.

“Yes. I go back several times a year, and the grass is looking better and better,” Sonka replied.

For Sonka, another advantage of the move is that his children can go to school more easily. In Cuochi, the elementary school only went up to third grade, and both facilities and teaching were poor. Now the children can go to the elementary school over the road and, later, to middle school in Golmud – no matter what other challenges they face, education here is better than in Cuochi.

That doesn’t mean everything is perfect, however. In fact, the family has plenty of complaints about the local schooling. They have various fees to pay, adding up to 300 yuan to 400 yuan (US$48 to $63) over the year, and Sonka thinks the teachers are too casual about their lessons: one took three weeks sick leave and there was no supply teacher to fill in. His youngest son used to attend the school, but there were so many holidays and so few classes that they worried he wasn’t learning anything. Instead, they sent him to a Buddhist orphan school, much further away from home.

Sonka’s daughter, Wurong Zhuoma, was in fourth grade when she moved schools. She whispered to us that, after a year in the new place, her legs and arms were covered with marks where the teacher had hit her. She said she was too scared to tell her parents in case the teacher found out and hit her more. Not one student in the class had escaped the teacher’s blows, she said.

But Sonka’s biggest worry is that the family is spending more money than it brings in.

The government pays each relocated family an annual subsidy of 8,000 yuan (US$1,266). When they first moved, Sonka thought such a large sum would be enough to feed and clothe all five of them. But he soon found out that, in the new village, everything costs.

In Cuochi, it was different: they had meat and milk from their own cattle, used dung for fuel and wore homemade sheepskin clothing. They rarely needed cash. The family was also used to having meat at every meal, but they can’t afford to buy it at the market in the new place. Sonka keeps in touch with relatives back in Cuochi, and asks them to bring beef or mutton when they visit. And when he goes to Cuochi, he brings back as much meat as he can carry.

Sonka is uneducated, unskilled and can’t speak Mandarin. The only work available to him is basic labouring – construction work, for instance, or moving goods. It’s tiring and the hours are long, and Sonka is often the oldest worker on site. But the family needs the money.

When caterpillar fungus – an ingredient used in Chinese medicine – is in season, the family goes out to pick it. Sonka’s sons are fast diggers and can collect a lot. His daughter also works in a hotel. Between the fungus harvesting and the hotel work, the family makes around 8,000 yuan, but after paying a fungus-collection fee of 1,500 yuan per head, they end up clearing only 2,000 yuan (US$316).

The other families in the village face the same problem: a serious shortage of money. I met Kangzhuo, a nun from a Sichuan nunnery, who was visiting her sister. She said she was disgusted with conditions here: “There’s no grasslands, no cows and no sheep – what have they got? Just a cramped house!”

She pointed at the wasteland surrounding the village. “Who are these people now? They’re not Tibetans and they’re not Han. If they were Tibetan, they would have grasslands and livestock; if they were Han, they could speak Mandarin and work. But they can’t herd, and they can’t work.”

Standing in front of an empty house, she continued to complain: “There’s a government regulation saying you can’t sell these houses. But, if the herders can’t survive here, what else are they meant to do? Some people have sold their houses anyway, at a very low price.”

The relocation policy states that, after 10 years, the herders can decide whether to stay in their new homes or return to their villages. Most say they want to go back. They say they miss the grasslands and life in the new village is tough.

Ma Wenqing is head of the Qumalai county office in Golmud. He said many of the problems in the new village are related to the hukou,or household registration system. Because they are still registered in their home village, the herders are only entitled to free or subsidised healthcare at Qumulai County Hospital, for instance, and making the trip there and back costs 500 yuan (US$79). Ma has encouraged the herders to shift their household registrations to Golmud, saying this would not only bring them preferential treatment, but also make it easier to implement and report on infrastructure projects.

In the nearby Yangtze River village, where residents are already registered in Golmud, the conditions are much better – they even have sports facilities. But Sonka explained that, because many people are reluctant to leave their native land, they are also reluctant to change their registration. “It’s like betraying your home,” he said. And so the problem has not been resolved.

After meeting Sonka, I asked myself whether the relocation policy is worth the sacrifice each member of his family – and others like his – has made. Will it bring them happier lives? Will it protect and preserve the precious Tibetan culture and its simple values? If the answer to these questions is no, then the ecological migration policy should be re-examined.

Xia Liwei was a 2010 participant in the project Grassland Tribes.

Homepage image by Fan Mingxiao

 

Now more than ever…

chinadialogue is at the heart of the battle for truth on climate change and its challenges at this critical time.

Our readers are valued by us and now, for the first time, we are asking for your support to help maintain the rigorous, honest reporting and analysis on climate change that you value in a 'post-truth' era.

Support chinadialogue

发表评论 Post a comment

评论通过管理员审核后翻译成中文或英文。 最大字符 1200。

Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated. Maximum characters 1200.

评论 comments

Default thumb avatar
ian.tian

个人的一些看法

自从看了刘鉴强老师的《天珠》一书,我对藏区和藏族人的生活传统和历史有了更多的认识。根据文章表达的信息,移民的初衷是要响应国家的“三江源生态保护计划”政策,为了保护当地的生态环境。这无可厚非。问题是,藏人牧民祖祖辈辈都生活在那片草地上,祖祖辈辈都与当地的环境相宜而居,藏人怎么就成了和鼠兔一般的草原危害者了?《天珠》一书说明了很多藏人都在坚持着传统的生活习惯和其特有的文化习俗,这些传统就是藏人能和自然和谐相处的根本原因,虽然也有很多受到商业文化冲击而改变的藏人。

呼应文章末尾的问题:生态移民政策带给牧民的是生活习惯被迫改变;原先基本是自给自足被迫变为无产者艰辛谋生,有一技之长者倒无虞温饱,苦的是像文中被采访者松加之流;移民的目的是保护环境,但在民生问题前这个目的份量如何?若移民后的善后工作做足也就罢了,但现实是没有,更何况,牧民是不是环境变坏的主因且存疑问;幸福与否得看当事人自己的感受,文章中流露出的是“不”幸福;文化和价值观受制于客观世界,再具体一点就是生活环境中的一草一木一石,藏人没了世代赖以生存的环境,其原本的文化和价值观迟早会消逝或被侵蚀。

My two cents

Ever since reading Liu Jianqiang's book "Heavenly Pearl", I have had a deeper understanding of the Tibetan regions and the Tibetan people, as well as their traditional way of life and history. According to this article, their reason for responding to the government's "Three Rivers Source Ecological Protection" policy is to protect the region's environment; this is most understandable. However, Tibetan herders have lived on those grasslands for generations, and have done so in harmony with the local environment. So, how can they be compared to the pika as a threat to the region's environment? In "Heavenly Pearl", it described how a lot of Tibetans are preserving their traditional way of life and unique customs; these traditions are exactly the reason why Tibetans have been able to live in harmony with nature.

To reiterate the issue the article raises at the end, the ecological migration policy forces these herders to change their way of life. Originally self-sufficient, these herders have become property-less, trying to eke out a living. Whilst some have the skills to scrape by, there are those worse off like Sonka in the article. The reason for their migration, he says, is to protect their environment, but how does this compare with the issue of maintaining a livelihood? If they were able to find adequate work after migrating, then this wouldn’t be an issue. However, this is not the case. Moreover, whether or not herders are the main reason for why the environment is suffering is still in doubt. Whether they are happy or not depends on how they themselves feel about it, however the article reveals that they don’t seem to be. Culture and values are at the mercy of our material world; to be more specific, at the mercy of the very grass, trees and rocks in our everyday surroundings. Whether Tibetans will have any descendants depends on their environment, however their culture and values will disappear or be eroded sooner or later.

Default thumb avatar
rebecca.nie

生态移民在国际上也颇受争议

其实美国的生态移民也颇受争议,而且有些移民问题甚至遗留至今。中国的广大区域有自己独特的人文遗产,所以解决生态问题应该探索适合自己的答案而不应照搬国外的方案。因为人文遗产和生态遗产是相辅相成的瑰宝,所以我们不可以顾此失彼。

Ecological migration has caused controversy in other countries, too

In fact, ecological migration has caused considerable controversy in the United States, too, where migration problems have left a legacy which is still felt even today. China is so vast, with its numerous regions each boasting their own unique cultural heritage; solving ecological problems requires searching for answers relevant to each unique situation - not indiscriminately copying other countries' approaches. Cultural heritage and ecological legacy are both important treasures. We should not be so concerned with one that we neglect the other.

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

社会变化得太快

其实,不用说藏民,就看看我们汉民吧。如果与30年前比较一下,我们现在的生活是什么样子,是好了还是坏了?不能这么简单地比吧。是社会在发展,人只能去适应社会,否则就只能被淘汰。50年代的草原是什么样子,有多少人,人口增长率是多少,多少家畜?移民前哪?

Society has changed so fast

Hang on, let's first have a look of the life of the Han people, not Tibetans. If compared with 30 years ago, is our life better or worse? It's not an easy comparison. In the developing world, people have to adjust to new social norms or be eliminated. What did the grasslands look like in the 1950s? What was the population growth rate at that time? How many livestock did they have before moving?