Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment (환경영향평가)

Korean Society of Environmental Impact Assessment (한국환경영향평가학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Studies on the Integrated Stream Naturalness Assessment Based on Abiotic and Biotic Factors

비생물 및 생물 요인에 기초한 통합적 하천자연도 평가기법에 관한 연구

  • Pyo, Jae-Hun (Chungrok Environmental Ecosystem Research Institute) ;
  • Mun, Hyeong-Tae (Department of Bioscience, Kongju National University)
  • Received : 2010.06.07
  • Accepted : 2011.02.11
  • Published : 2011.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Integrated stream naturalness based on abiotic and biotic factors were developed. Abiotic factors considered in this study were types of land use in the riparian area, river bank and high water bed streamside, revetment, bed substrate and artificial construction of streamside. Biotic factors included types of vegetation, assemblages of fish, macroinvertebrate, bird and mammal(Otter) in streams. The presence/absence of legal species and biological assessment index were also weighted as important parameters in this study. Scoring criteria selected for each matrix was five rating system; 1=poor, 2=moderate, 3=fair, 4=good, 5=excellent. Numerical ratings for the matrix were then summed. This resulted in a minimum score of 13 if all matrix at a site were poor, and a maximum score of 65 if all matrix were excellent. Five grade system from poor(I) to excellent condition(V) was employed. To verify its validity in natural environment, the evaluation system was applied to the Gapchun stream which is a test bed selected. Our result showed that stream naturalness of each reach was clearly distinguished by biotic and abiotic characteristics. Determination of correlation coefficient between abiotic and biotic factors was also high ($R^2=0.96$, p<0.05). In conclusion, assessment for stream naturalness reflecting abiotic and biotic factors was useful method representing stream integrated.

Keywords

References

  1. 건설교통부, 2002, 금강 수계 하천정비기본계획.
  2. 권영수, 남형규, 유정칠, 박영석, 2007, 서울 도시 하천에서 월동하는 수조류의 분포특성, 한국환경생태학회지, 21(1), 55-66.
  3. 김동찬, 이정, 박익수, 2000, 자연형 하천복원을 위한 하천자연도 평가 -수원천을 중심으로-, 한국조경학회지, 27(5), 138-149.
  4. 김석규, 김철, 정장면, 2005, 하천정비 전.후의 하천자연도 평가, 한국수자원학회논문집, 1296-1301
  5. 김종오, 김옥선, 김선혜, 2001, 하천의 자연도 평가 및 활용에 관한연구 -진주시 지방하천을 대상으로-, 경상대학교 공학연구원 논문집, 1, 31-38.
  6. 민희규, 2007, 무선추적에 의한 수달의 행동생태 및 서식지 환경에 관한 연구, 경상대학교 박사학위청구논문.
  7. 박봉진, 성영두, 강태호, 2003, 우리나라 하천특성을 고려한 하천자연도 평가의 제안, 한국수자원학회지, 36(6).
  8. 박봉진, 신종이, 정관수, 2005, 하천의 생물서식처 복원을 위한 하천자연도 평가(I)평가방법의 제안, (II)평가방법의 적용, 한국수자원학회논문집, 38(1), 37-57.
  9. 박봉진, 성영두, 정관수, 2006, 하천 생물 서식처 평가를 위한 하천자연도와 수질의 상관성 분석, 한국수자원학회논문집, 386-390.
  10. 박익수, 2000, 자연형하천복원을 위한 도시중.소하천의 하천자연도 평가에 관한 연구, 경희대학교 석사학위청구논문.
  11. 박진원, 2002, 서울지역 도시하천의 식생현황과 하천 자연도 평가, 경상대학교 석사학위청구논문.
  12. 시정개발연구원, 1996, 자연형하천으로의 정비방안 연구, p125, p206.
  13. 안영희, 2004, 경기도 남부 주요 도시 하천의 식물상, 식생, 식물자연도에 대한 군락 생태학적 연구, 안동대학교 박사학위청구논문.
  14. 안태진, 2007, 소하천 환경조성사업의 평가를 위한 소하천자연도 평가, 한국수자원학회 논문집, 40(5), 359-369.
  15. 이명우, 양호연, 2001, 생태하천계획을 위한 하천자연도 평가기준의 설정-만경강 생태하천 가꾸기 사업을 중심으로-, 한국조경학회 학술발표 논문집, 15-18.
  16. 이우신, 박찬열, 임신재, 허위행, 2002, 만경강 지역 조류 군집의 특성과 관리방안, 한국생태학회지, 25(2), 61-67.
  17. 이준호, 강태호, 성영두, 윤세의, 2003, 하천복원을 위한 하천평가기법의 적용성 연구, 한국방재학회 논문집, 3(4), 131-143.
  18. 조용현, 1997, 생태적복원을 위한 중소하천자연도 평가방법개발, 서울대학교박사학위청구논문.
  19. 한국수자원공사, 2003, 하천자연도평가지침, 업무 메뉴얼, 한국수자원공사.
  20. 환경부, 2002, 하천복원 가이드라인, 환경부.
  21. 환경부, 2007, 수생태계 건강성 조사 및 평가 지침, 환경부.
  22. 환경부, 2009, 생태.자연도 작성지침, 환경부.
  23. 有田一郞, 1994, 코가이강에서 조류의 도피거리조사, 생태계획연구소연보, 1-14.
  24. Anderson, B. W., R. D. Ohmart, and J. Rice., 1983, Avian and Vegetation Community Structure and Their Seasonal Relationships in the Lower Colorado River Valley, Condor, 85, 392-405. https://doi.org/10.2307/1367978
  25. Barbosa, A. M., R. Real, A. L. Marquez, and M.A. Rendon., 2001, Spatial, environmental and human influences on the distribution of Otter(Lutra lutra) in the spanish provinces, Diversity and Distribution, (7), 137-144.
  26. Barbour, M. T., J. Gerristen, B. D. Synder, and J. B. Stribling, 1999, Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers : Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish. Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, D. C.
  27. Boon, P. J., 1988, The Impact of River Regulation on Invertebrate Communities in the U. K. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management, 2, 389-409. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrr.3450020314
  28. Bub, B. R., D. J. Flaspohler, and C. J. F. Huckins., 2004, Riparian and Upland Breeding-bird Assemblages along Headwater Streams in Michigan's Upper peninsula, Journal of Wildlife Management, 68(2), 383-392. https://doi.org/10.2193/0022-541X(2004)068[0383:RAUBAA]2.0.CO;2
  29. Coleman, J. T. H., M. E. Richmond, L. G. Rudstam, and P. M. Mattison., 2005, Foraging Location and Site Fidelity of the Double-crested Cormorant on Oneida Lake, New York. Waterbirds, 28(4), 498-510. https://doi.org/10.1675/1524-4695(2005)28[498:FLASFO]2.0.CO;2
  30. Collier, K. J. and R. H. S. McColl,. 1992, "Assessing the Natural Value of Newzealand Rivers," in P. J. Boon et al., 1992, River Connservation Management, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 195-211.
  31. Dudgeon, D., 1994, Functional Assessment of the Effects of Increased Sediments Loads Resulting from Riparian-zone Modification of a Hong Kong Stream. Verh. Internat. Verein. Limnol, 25, 1790-1792.
  32. Dudgeon, D., 1995, Environmental Impacts of Increased Sediment Loads Caused by Channelization: A Case Study of Biomonitoring in a Small River in Hong Kong. Asian Journal of Environmental Management, 3(1), 69-77.
  33. IUCN, 1990, IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals-IUCN, Gland.
  34. Kruuk, H., 1995, Wild otters: Predation and Populations. Inst, Terrestrial Eco., Banchory, Scotland, Oxford Univ.
  35. LAWA(Laenderarbeitsgemeinschaft Wasser), 2000, Gewaesserstrukturguetekartierung in der BRD. 1. Auf. Schwerin.
  36. Milhous, R. T., R. C. MacArthur, F. D. Shields, Jr., and J. R. Adams., 1993, Sediment and Aquatic Habitat Associations in River Systems: Result from the ASCE Task Commitee on Sediment Transport and Aquatic Habitat. Long Term Resource Monitoring Program, 93-R008.
  37. Minshall, G. W., 1988, Stream Ecosystem Theory: A Global Perspective. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 7(4), 263-288. https://doi.org/10.2307/1467294
  38. National River Authority, 1993, Landscape Assessment, Conservation Techical Handbook 2, NRA, p2.
  39. Nowak, R. M., 1999, "Walkers Mammals of the World". The johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
  40. Otto, A., 1995, Rheinland-Pfalz Aktion Blau: Gewasserentwicklung Rheinland Pfalz, Ministerium fur Umwelt und Forsten.
  41. Prichard, D., H. Barrett, J. Cagney, R. Clark, J. Fogg, K. Gebhart, P. L. Hansen, B. Mitchell, and D. Tippy., 1998, Riparian Area Management: Process for Assessing Proper Functioning Condition. TR 1737-9(Revised 1998). Bureau of Land Management, REV 98, Service Center, Co, 51.
  42. Rosenberg, D. M. and V. H. Resh., 1993, Freshwater Biomonitoring and Benthic Macroinvertebrates. Chapman and Hall, New York, p488.
  43. Tori, G. M., S. Mclord, K. Mcknight, T. Moorman, and F. A. Reid., 2002, Wetland Conservation and Ducks Unlimited: Real World Approaches to Multispecies Management. Waterbirds (Special publication 2), 115-121.
  44. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)., 1991, Selection of Biological Indicators for Integrating Assessments of Wetland, Stream, and Riparian Habitats. Biological Criteria; Research and Regulation.
  45. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)., 1998, Stream Visual Assessment Protocal. National Water and Climat Center Technical Note, 99-1.
  46. Vannote R. L., Minshall G. W., Cummins K.W., Sedell J. R., Cushing C.E,. 1980, The River Continuum Concept. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science, 37(1), 130-137. https://doi.org/10.1139/f80-017
  47. http://mab.unesco.or.kr/aboutbs.html.