Journal of Korea Water Resources Association (한국수자원학회논문집)

Korea Water Resources Association (한국수자원학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A study on indicator & criteria for assessment of river environmental naturalness -focused on biological characteristics

하천환경 자연도의 평가지표 및 기준 연구 - 생물적 특성을 중심으로

  • Received : 2019.07.23
  • Accepted : 2019.09.18
  • Published : 2019.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to provide the legal and institutional guidelines and standards that can be used in the whole river restoration project and to analyze and evaluate the performance of the river project. We constructed an assessment system of four biological taxa that can represent the river environments, namely, evaluation indexes and standards of vegetation and birds, benthic invertebrates and fishes. Specifically, the assessment indicator and criteria of biological characteristics are summarized, so that in case of vegetation community, vegetation diversity, vegetation complexity, and vegetation naturalness can be quantitatively assessed through the combination of three indices. Based on the scientific basis of the advanced techniques, benthic invertebrates, fishes, and birds were proposed to quantitatively evaluate assessment grades according to the classification of biological data. In order to evaluate biological characteristics, which are a part of river environmental naturalness, we proposed a comprehensive biological index and evaluation grade applying the weight of these four biological taxa, and it clearly reflects the characteristics of river environment in test bed.

본 연구는 하천복원사업의 전 과정에서 활용될 수 있는 법 제도적 지침과 기준을 제공하고 하천사업의 성과를 진단 평가할 수 있는 한국형 표준화된 하천환경 평가체계 구축과정의 일환으로서 하천생태계의 수변 및 수서환경을 대변할 수 있는 4개의 생물 분류군, 즉 식생과 조류, 그리고 저서 무척추동물과 어류의 평가지표 및 기준 등 평가체계를 구축하였다. 구체적으로 생물적 특성의 평가지표 및 기준을 정리하면, 식생의 경우 식생 다양도와 식생 복잡도, 그리고 식생 자연도 등 3가지 지수의 조합을 통한 하천 식생군집의 구조적 특성을 정량적으로 평가할 수 있도록 하였다. 저서 무척추동물과 어류, 그리고 조류의 경우도 선진 기법의 과학적 근거를 바탕으로 우리나라 하천특성에 적합하도록 생물적 자료의 평가등급 획정에 따른 정량적인 생물지수 평가법을 제안하였다. 아울러 하천환경 자연도의 한 부문인 생물적 특성의 평가를 위하여 이들 4개 생물분류군의 가중치를 적용한 종합 생물지수 및 평가등급화 방안을 제시하였으며, 이에 대한 시험하천의 적용결과에서도 생물분류군 간 비교적 일관성 있게 하천환경의 특성을 반영하고 있는 것으로 분석되었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Barbour, M. T., Gerritsen, J., Snyder, B. D., and Stribling, J. B. (1999). Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and wadeable rivers: periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrates, and fish. second edition. EPA 841-B-99-002, U.S.
  2. Belletti, B., Rinaldi, M., Buijse, D., Gurnell, A. M., and Mosselman, E. (2014). "A review of assessment methods for river hydromorpholgy." Environmental Earth Sciences, Vol. 73, No. 5, pp. 2079-2100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-014-3558-1
  3. Bode, R. W., Novak, M. A., and Abele, L. E. (1991). Methods for rapid biological assessment of streams. NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, N.Y.
  4. Bryce, S. A., Hughes, R. M., and Kaufmann, P. R. (2002). "Development of a bird integrity index: using bird assemblages as indicators of riparian condition." Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 294-310.
  5. Chun, S. H. (2016). "Some problems and improvement of domestic system for river environment assessment." Journal of Korean Society of Hazard Mitigation, KOSHAM, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 305-317 (in Korean with English summary). https://doi.org/10.9798/KOSHAM.2016.16.1.305
  6. Chun, S. H. (2017). "Review and discussion on policy and legal system for river environments management in Korea." Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment, Vol. 26, No. 6, pp. 431-444 (in Korean with English summary). https://doi.org/10.14249/EIA.2017.26.6.431
  7. Chun, S. H. (2018). "Suggestion of zoning criteria based on the assessment system for river envrionment." Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment, Vol. 27, No. 6, pp. 647-657 (in Korean with English summary). https://doi.org/10.14249/EIA.2018.27.6.647
  8. Chun, S. H., Kim, C. B., Kim, W. R., Park, S. G., and Chae, S. K. (2015). "Analysis of stream environmental assessment systems in Korea: focus on the biological aspect." Ecology and Resilient Infrastructure, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 108-117 (in Korean with English summary). https://doi.org/10.17820/eri.2015.2.2.108
  9. EC (2000). Directive 2000/60/EC of the European parliamentand of the council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Communities, Vol. 327, pp. 1-73.
  10. Hauer, F. R., and Lamberti, G. A. (1996). Methods in stream ecology. Academic Press, Massachusetts, Cambridge, p. 696.
  11. Hilsenhoff, W. L. (1982). Using a biotic index to evaluate water quality in streams. Technical Bulletin No. 132, Department of Natural Resources, Madison, Wisconsin, p. 22.
  12. Hilsenhoff, W. L. (1988). "Rapid field assessment of organic pollution with a family-level biotic index." Journal of the North American Benthological Society, NABS, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 65-68. https://doi.org/10.2307/1467832
  13. Hunter, J. R. L. M. (1990). Wildlife forests and forestry, principles of managing forests for biological diversity, regents. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J., p. 370.
  14. Martin, K., and Paddy, C. (1992). Vegetation description and analysis. John Wiley&Sons, Hoboken, N.J..
  15. Ministry of Environment (MOE) (2011). Survey & assessment of aquatic ecosystem in river.
  16. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT) (2012). Integrated guidelines for nature-friendly river management.
  17. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT) (2015). Guideline for setting up of basic river plans. p. 67.
  18. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT) (2019). Technical report on assessment system for river environment. p. 376.
  19. Parsons, M., and Norris, R. (2004). "Development of a standardized approach to habitat assessment in Australia." Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, Vol. 98, No. 1-3, pp. 109-130. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EMAS.0000038182.03176.97
  20. Sakio, H., and Tamura, T. (2008). Ecology of riparian forests in Japan, Springer (in Japanese).
  21. Young, J. S., Ammon, E. M., Weisberg, P. J., Dilts, T. E., Newton, W. E., Wong-Kone, D. C., and Heki, L. G. (2013). "Comparison of bird community indices for riparian restoration planning and monitoring." Ecological Indicators, Vol. 34, pp. 159-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.05.004