Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology (한국환경생태학회지)

Korean Society of Environment and Ecology (한국환경생태학회)
권호 표지

Using AHP to Analyze the Evaluation Factors Related to Wildlife Passage Management

AHP기법을 활용한 야생동물이동통로의 기능개선을 위한 평가항목 분석

  • Received : 2010.11.15
  • Accepted : 2010.12.31
  • Published : 2010.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The rapid increase of wildlife passage installation since the late 2000s was aimed to reduce roadkill caused by habitat fragmentation and losses related to road construction, but wildlife-vehicle collisions are now still occurred even near the wildlife passage area. This is the reason that the effectiveness of wildlife passage have not been evaluated in combination with absence of monitoring data and management strategy of the wildlife passage. The AHP method are used, in this study, to identify the evaluation factors affecting the effectiveness of the present 367 wildlife passages in a mitigation measures to reduce road effects on wildlife species. Ten evaluation factors are derived from third levels in the AHP analysis. Priority setting to identify appropriate management strategies in first level is selected among four second levels on facility, environment, wildlife species and management tool. The AHP analysis suggested that neighboring environments are the most important factor at the second level, and passage structure, harmony with natural surroundings, wildlife occurrence and monitoring of the passage are also important factors at the third levels. In summary, effective measurements of wildlife passage management is based on managing the passage with neighboring topography and natural surrounding. This is useful to establish wildlife passage management strategy in order to reduce the negative effects of roads on wildlife species.

서식지 파편화로 발생하는 야생동물과 차량과의 충돌사고(이하 '로드킬')를 방지하기 위해 2000년대 후반부터 야생동물이동통로가 활발하게 설치되었으나 로드킬 발생은 여전히 감소하지 않고 있어 야생동물이동통로의 실효성 분석이 필요하며, 설치 이후 단편화된 유지관리로 인해 야생동물이동통로에 대한 평가 및 기능개선을 위한 관리기법이 부족한 실정이다. 이에 본 연구에서는 야생동물이동통로의 유지관리를 위한 기본방향 및 관리기법을 제시하기 위해 현재 설치 운영되고 있는 367개 이동통로에 적용할 수 있는 평가항목과 항목별 중요도를 AHP 기법에 의해 파악하였다. 분석결과, 평가항목은 3단계로 구분할 수 있었으며 총 10개 평가항목이 도출되었다. 야생동물이동통로의 유지관리를 위한 우선순위 도출을 목표(Level 1)로 시설인자, 환경인자, 동물인자, 관리인자로 구성된 Level 2의 중요도 분석에서는 환경인자가 가장 중요한 것으로 나타났다. Level 3에서는 구조 적합성(시설인자), 주변지형과의 조화(환경인자), 야생동물 이용빈도(동물인자), 모니터링 기기 운영여부(관리인자)가 중요 평가항목으로 조사되었다. 즉 야생동물이동통로의 유지관리를 위해서는 주변지형과의 조화와 야생동물 이용빈도를 우선적으로 고려해야 할 것이다. 이같은 연구 결과는 우리나라에 설치되어 있는 야생동물이동통로의 유지관리 방향 및 각 이동통로의 정비전략을 모색하기 위한 평가자료로 활용될 수 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. Alisa, W.C. (2007) From roadkill to road ecology -A review of the ecological effects of roads-. Journal of Transport Geography 15(5): 396-406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2006.11.006
  2. Allen, R. and A. McCullough(1976) Deer-car accidents in southern Michigan. Journal of Wildlife Management 40(2): 317-325. https://doi.org/10.2307/3800431
  3. Brooker, L., M. Brooker and P. Cale(1999) Animal dispersal in fragmented habitat: measuring habitat connectivity, corridor use, and dispersal mortality. Conservation Ecology [online] 3(1): 4. Available from the Internet. URL: http://www. consecol.org/vol3/iss1/art4/
  4. Choi, T.Y.(2007) Road-kill mitigation strategies for mammals in Korea: data based on survey of road-kill non-wildlife passage use, and home range. Seoul National Univ. Ph.D. Dissertation. 219pp. (in Korean with English summary)
  5. Decision Science(2000) Expert Choice Manual. pp. 7-16.
  6. Forman, R.T.T., D. Sperling, J.A. Bissonette, A.P. Clevenger, C.D. Cutshall, V.H. Dale, L. Fahrig, R. France, C.R. Goldman, K. Heanue, J.A. Jones, F.J. Swanson, T. Turrentine and T.C. Winter(2002) Road ecology: Science and solutions. Island Press, Washington, D.C., 481pp.
  7. Kang, H.G., T.K. Park, H.L. Kim, S.T. Kim and S.E. Lee(2009) Study on the GIS based environmental assesment techniques for enviromental friendly road route plan. Journal of Korean Society of Environmental Engineers 31(3): 223-231. (in Korean with English abstract)
  8. Kim, K.G. and J.Y. Choi(1998) A theoretical study on the wildlife passage for connecting fragmented habitat (1) - In the case of wildlife passage types and design process -. Journal of the Korea Institute of Landscape Architecture 26(2): 293-307. (in Korean with English abstract)
  9. Kim, K.G., J.Y. Choi and S.G. Son(2000) Landscape materials ecological restoration: A study on the wildlife corridor for connecting fragmented habitat - focused on site selection and design methods -. Journal of the Korea Institute of Landscape Architecture 28(1): 70-82. (in Korean with English abstract)
  10. Kim, M.S.(2005) The existing conditions and problems of ecological corridor in Korea -focusing on planting species. Journal of the Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology 8(1): 17-26. (in Korean with English abstract)
  11. Korea National Park Service(2009) Comprehensive plan on mitigation measures to reduce roadkill in National Parks. Korea National Park Service, pp. 3-13. (in Korean)
  12. Laura, A.R. and A. John(1996) Status of state monitoring activities and mitigation efforts. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 24(2): 276-283.
  13. Lee, K.J. and B.H. Han.(2002) Planting plan of ecological corridor at destroyed mountain area as a result of road construction. Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology 16(3): 321-337. (in Korean with English abstract)
  14. Lee, Y.W. and M.W. Lee(2006) Eco-corridor positioning for target species -by field surveying of mammals road-kill-. Journal of the Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology 9(3): 51-58. (in Korean with English abstract)
  15. Lim, S.H. and G.S. Cho(2002) The methodology of GSIS spatial analysis integrating of fuzzy and AHP theory. Journal of the Korean Society of Civil Engineers. 22(1): 173-184. (in Korean with English abstract)
  16. Ministry of Environment(2007) Development of read type-specific and animal species-specific management techniques according to analysis of the degree of fragmentation of wildlife habitats by roads, and of causal factors behind road-kills. Ministry of Environment, pp. 25-35. (in Korean)
  17. Ministry of Environment(2010) Guidelines for design management of wildlife crossing structures in Korea. Ministry of Environment, pp. 3-74. (in Korean)
  18. Park, J.H., H.S. Yoo and M.Y. Park(2009) A study on assessment items analysis for eco-corridors area -Using the analytic hierarchy process-. Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Impact Assessment 18(5): 301-312. (in Korean with English abstract)
  19. Quinn, J.F. and A. Hastings(1987) Extinction in Subdivided Habitats. Conservation Biology 1(2): 198-208.
  20. Satty, T.L.(1980) The Analytic Hierarchy Process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation (decision making series). McGraw-Hill, New York, 289pp.
  21. Shin, S.A. and T.M. Ahn(2008) Approach to the Location of Wildlife Corridors on Highways -Between Yang-jae and Pan-gyo ICs of Seoul-Busan Highway, Korea-. Journal of the Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology 11(2): 19-27. (in Korean with English abstract)
  22. Son, E.G. and I.S. Hwang(2009) A GIS-based method for bicycle route network determination using AHP analysis in Busan. Journal of the Korea Association of Geographic Information Studies 12(4): 182-190. (in Korean with English abstract)
  23. Song, I.J.(2006) Analysis on the effect of ecological corridor in Seoul and construction of management manual. Seoul Development Institute. pp. 109-132. (in Korean)
  24. Song, J.Y., M.S. Kim, I.S. Kim, T.H. Kim, I. Roh, S.W. Seo, E.K. Seo, J.K. Seo, J.Y. Yang, K.D. Woo, H.J. Won, Y.G. Lee, Y.H. Lim, S.H. Han and M.G. Moon(2009) Roadkill of amphibians in the Korea National Park. Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology 23(2): 187-193. (in Korean with English abstract)