Journal of Korean Society of Forest Science (한국산림과학회지)

Korean Society of Forest Science (한국산림과학회)
권호 표지

The Relationship between Characteristics of Forest Fires and Spatial Patterns of Forest Types by the Ecoregions of South Korea

한국의 생태지역별 산불특성과 임상분포패턴과의 관계

  • Lee, Byungdoo (Division of Forest Fire, Korea Forest Research Institute) ;
  • Song, Jungeun (Department of Forest Sciences, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Myungbo (Division of Forest Fire, Korea Forest Research Institute) ;
  • Chung, Joosang (Department of Forest Sciences, Seoul National University)
  • 이병두 (국립산림과학원 산불연구과) ;
  • 송정은 (서울대학교 산림과학부) ;
  • 이명보 (국립산림과학원 산불연구과) ;
  • 정주상 (서울대학교 산림과학부)
  • Received : 2007.08.31
  • Accepted : 2007.10.05
  • Published : 2008.03.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

It is necessary to examine relationship between spatial patterns of forest types and characteristics of forest fires for efficient management of fire and forest. By the ecoregions of South Korea, we computed landscape indices for whole types of forests(landscape level) and pine forests(class level), and analyzed characteristics of forest fires using statistics of forest fires from 1991 to 2006. We performed canonical correlation analysis to model the relationship between the landscape indices and the statistics of forest fires. At landscape level, forest patches were larger and more complex in the ecoregions which had higher percentage of forest area. At class level, pine forest patches were more complex and closer to neighbor patches in the coastal ecoregions. The ecoregions including metropolitan areas and cities had more frequent fire occurrences per 1,000ha, while mountainous coastal ecoregions had more burned areas and faster spread of fire growth rate. The canonical correlation between the landscape indices for pine forests and the statistics of forest fires was statistically significant at the 0.05 level and explained more than 70% of the variation in fire variables. The results showed that combustion time per fire was longer in the ecoregions which had larger and more aggregated pine forest patches.

산불을 고려하여 효율적으로 산림을 관리하기 위해서는 임상분포패턴과 산불특성과의 관계 규명이 요구된다. 본 연구에서는 기후형과 산불 빈도 및 규모를 표현하는데 유용한 생태지역을 단위로, 임상분포패턴 및 산불특성을 분석하고, 두 인자 간의 관계를 살펴 보았다. 이를 위해 수치임상도의 경관분석을 통해 생태지역별 전체 임상과 산불에 취약한 소나무 임분의 분포패턴을 분석하고, 산림청의 산불통계자료를 이용하여 생태지역별 산불특성을 추출한 다음 정준상관분석을 수행하였다. 임상패치는 산림면적비율이 높은 생태지역일수록 크고 복잡하였으며, 소나무 임분은 해안지역을 중심으로 형태가 복잡하고 패치 간의 근접성이 높았다. 1,000ha 당 산불발생건수는 도시화된 생태지역에서 많았으나, 건당 피해면적과 확산속도는 낮았다. 이와 반대로 "강원해안" 등 산림비율이 높은 생태지역에서는 적은 발생건수와 넓은 피해면적, 빠른 확산속도를 보였다. 정준상관분석 결과 산불특성은 소나무 임분의 경관지수와 유의한 상관관계가 있었는데, 소나무 임분 면적이 크면서 응집된 구조를 갖는 해안 생태지역일수록 장시간 연소되어 피해면적이 큰 특성을 보였다.

Keywords

References

  1. 김철민, 노대균, 전은진. 2004. 수치임상도 접합에 의한 우리나라 산림정보지도 제작. 한국임학회. 2004 학술연구발표논문집 (2): 64-66
  2. 산림청. 2005. 2005년 산불통계연보. pp. 197
  3. 성웅현. 2000. 응용 다변량 분석. 이론, 방법론, SAS 활용. 도서출판 탐진. 서울. pp. 397
  4. 신준환. 1997. 산림생태계 구분체계. 국립산림과학원. 임업정보 69: 23-26
  5. 신준환, 김철민. 1996. 우리나라의 생태계 구분(1): 생태권역 구분. 산림과학논문집. 54: 188-199
  6. 이병두. 2005. GIS와 RS를 이용한 2000년 삼척산불 행동 특성 분석 및 산불확산예측모델 개발. 서울대학교 박사학위 논문. pp. 117
  7. 이병두, 정주상. 2006. 1970-2005년 동안의 산불 발생건수 및 연소면적에 대한 시계열모형 추정. 한국임학회지 95(6): 643-648
  8. 이영준. 2002. 정준상관분석의 이해. 도서출판 석정. 서울. pp. 187
  9. Baker, W.L. 1989. Effect of scale and spatial heterogeneity on fire interval distributions. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 19: 700-706 https://doi.org/10.1139/x89-109
  10. Broncano, M.J. and Retana, J. 2004. Topography and forest composition affecting the variability in fire severity and post-fire regeneration occurring after a large fire in the Mediterranean basin. International Journal of Wildland Fire 13(2): 209-216 https://doi.org/10.1071/WF03036
  11. Cumming, S. and Vernier, P. 2002. Statistical models of landscape pattern metrics, with applications to regional scale dynamic forest simulations. Landscape Ecology 17(5): 433-444 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021261815066
  12. Ducan, B.W. and Schmalzer, P.A. 2004. Anthropogenic influences on potential fire spread in a pyrogenic ecosystem of Florida, USA. Landscape Ecology 19(2): 153-165 https://doi.org/10.1023/B:LAND.0000021714.97148.ac
  13. Gonzlez, J.R., Palah, M. and Pukkala, T. 2005. Integrating fire risk considerations in forest management planning in Spain-a landscape level perspective. Landscape Ecology 20(8): 957-970 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-005-5388-8
  14. Hargrov, W.W., Gardner, R.H., Turner, M.G., Romme, W.H. and Despain, D.G. 2000. Simulating fire patterns in heterogeneous landscape. Ecological Modelling 135: 243-263 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3800(00)00368-9
  15. Larsen, C.P.S. 1997. Spatial and temporal variations in boreal forest fire frequency in northern Alberta. Journal of Biogeography 24: 663-673 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.1997.tb00076.x
  16. Lee, B., Park, P.S. and Chung, J. 2006. Temporal and spatial characteristics of forest fires in South Korea between 1970 and 2003. International Journal of Wildland Fire 15(3): 389-396 https://doi.org/10.1071/WF05090
  17. Lloret, F., Calvo, E., Pons, X. and Daz-Delgado, R. 2002. Wildfires and landscape patterns in the Eastern Iberian Peninsula. Landscape Ecology 17(8): 745-759 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022966930861
  18. McGarigal K. and Marks B.J. 1995. FRAGSTATS: Spatial Pattern Analysis. Program for Quantifying Landscape structure. US Department of Agriculture, Pacific Northwest Research Station GTR-351
  19. McGarigal, K., Cushman, S.A., Neel, M.C. and Ene, E. 2002. FRAGSTATS: Spatial Pattern analysis Program for Categorical Maps. Computer software program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Available at the following web site: www.umass. edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html
  20. Mouillot, F., Ratte, J.P., Joffre, R., Moreno, J.M. and Rambal, S. 2003. Some determinants of the spatio-temporal fire cycle in a mediterranean landscape (Corsica, France). Landscape Ecology 18(7): 665-674 https://doi.org/10.1023/B:LAND.0000004182.22525.a9
  21. Parisien, M.A., Peters, V.S., Wang, Y., Little, J.M., Bosch, E.M. and Stocks, B.J. Spatial patterns of forest fires in Canada, 1980-1999. International Journal of Wildland Fire 15(3): 361-374 https://doi.org/10.1071/WF06009
  22. Pew, K.L. and Larsen, C.P.S. 2001. GIS analysis of spatial and temporal patterns of human-caused wildfires in the temperate rain forest of Vancouver Island, Canada. Forest Ecology and Management 140: 1-18 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00271-1
  23. Ritters, K.H., O'Neill, R.V., Hunsaker, C.T., Wickham, J.D., Yankee, D.H., Timmins, S.P., Jones, K.B. and Jackson, B.L. 1995. A factor analysis of landscape pattern and structure metrics. Landscape Ecology 10(1): 23-39 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00158551
  24. Romn-Cuesta, R.M., Gracia, M. and Retana, J. 2003. Environmental and human factors influencing fire trends in enso and non-enso years in tropical Mexico. Ecological Applications 13(4): 1177-1192 https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2003)13[1177:EAHFIF]2.0.CO;2
  25. Schroeder, D. and Perera, A.H. 2002. A comparison of large-scale spatial vetetation patterns following clearcuts and fire in Ontario's boreal forests. Forest Ecology and Management 159: 217-230 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00434-0
  26. Stenhouse, R.N. 2004. Fragmentation and internal disturbance of native vegetation reserve in the Perth metropolitan area, Western Australia. Landscape and Urban Planning 68: 389-401 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00151-8
  27. Tinker, D.B., Resor, C.A.C., Beauvais, G.P., Kipfmueller, K.F., Fernandes, C.I. and Baker, W.L. 1998. Watershed analysis of forest fragmentation by clearcuts and roads in a Wyoming forest. Landscape Ecology 13(3): 149-165 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007919023983
  28. Turner, M.G. and Romme W.H. 1994. Landscape dynamics in crown fire ecosystems. Landscape Ecology 9(1): 59-77 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00135079
  29. Turner, M.G., Gardner, R.H. and O'Neill, R.V. 2001. Landscape ecology in theory and practiceL pattern and process. Springer. U.S.A. pp. 401