Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology (한국환경생태학회지)

Korean Society of Environment and Ecology (한국환경생태학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Change of Vegetation at the Ecological Restoration Area of Simwon Valley in Jirisan National Park

지리산국립공원 심원계곡 생태경관 복원공사지역 식생 변화

  • 정태준 (상지대학교 대학원 응용식물과학과) ;
  • 김연경 (한그루 27) ;
  • 김영진 (목포대학교 대학원 조경학과) ;
  • 정명희 (경상대학교 대학원 산림자원학과) ;
  • 박경희 (목포대학교 대학원 조경학과) ;
  • 신창근 (지리산국립공원 전남사무소) ;
  • 박선홍 (지리산국립공원 전남사무소) ;
  • 김영선 ((사)한백생태연구소)
  • Received : 2020.12.24
  • Accepted : 2021.04.28
  • Published : 2021.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aims to obtain basic data for systematic restoration by analyzing the monitoring results of the Shimwon Valley Ecological Landscape Restoration Project area in Jirisan National Park. In 2017, when the restoration project was completed, 12 monitoring plots and 4 control plots were installed for vegetation monitoring, and changes in the relative dominance, species diversity index and similarity between 2017 and 2020 were analyzed. The species diversity index of the surveyed areas where trees were planted during the restoration project was 0-1.4552, and the similarity index with the control group was 0% except for one survey area at 1.32%. The very low species diversity index and similarity index in the survey areas were attributed to the loss of trees planted during the restoration project due to death, damage by wild boars, or erosion by running water. On the other hand, the species diversity index was 0.9538-2.3222 in the monitoring plot where no tree was planted, and the similarity index was analyzed to be as high as 8.33%. It is necessary to continue the long-term monitoring for the development of ecological landscape restoration methods in the national park and analysis of the succession in monitoring plots where no trees were planted.

본 연구는 지리산국립공원 심원계곡 생태경관 복원공사지역의 모니터링 결과를 분석하여 체계적인 복원관리를 도모할 수 있는 기초자료를 확보하는데 그 목적이 있다. 복원사업이 완료된 2017년도에 식생 모니터링을 위한 조사구 12개소와 대조구 4개소를 설치하였고, 2017년과 2020년의 상대우점치, 종다양도지수, 유사도 등의 변화를 분석하였다. 복원사업 시 수목이 식재되었던 조사구는 종다양도지수가 0~1.4552로 나타났고, 대조구와의 유사도지수에서는 1개 조사구가 1.32%로 분석된 것을 제외하고 모두 0%로 나타났다. 조사구의 종다양도지수 및 유사도지수가 매우 낮은 것은 복원사업 시 식재된 수목이 고사하거나 멧돼지 피해, 유수에 의한 침식으로 유실되는 등의 영향으로 판단되었다. 반면 복원사업 시 수목이 식재되지 않은 미식재 조사구는 종다양도지수가 0.9538~2.3222로 나타났고, 유사도지수는 최대 8.33%까지 분석되었다. 국립공원 생태경관 복원공사지역의 복원 공법 개발을 위한 장기 모니터링과, 미식재 조사구의 천이과정을 분석하는 지속적인 연구가 필요하다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 2020년도 지리산국립공원전남사무소의 지원을 받아 연구되었음

References

  1. Brancalion, P.H., D. Schweizer, U. Gaudare, J.R. Mangueira, F. Lamonato, F.T. Farah and R.R. Rodrigues(2016) Balancing economic costs and ecological outcomes of passive and active restoration in agricultural landscapes: The case of Brazil. Biotropica 48(6): 856-867. https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.12383
  2. Cho, J.J.(2007) A Study on the remodeling models for the collective facilities area of National Park, Korea. Master's thesis, Hanyang Univ., 97pp. (in Korean with English abstract)
  3. Cole, D.N.(1991) Changes on trails in the selway-bitterroot wilderness, Montana, 1978-89. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Intermountain Research Station, 450pp.
  4. Hagen, D. and M. Evju(2013) Using short-term monitoring data to achieve goals in a large-scale restoration. Ecology and Society 18(3): 29.
  5. Hobbs, R.J. and V.A. Cramer(2008) Restoration ecology: Interventionist approaches for restoring and maintaining ecosystem function in the face of rapid environmental change. Annual Review of Environment And Resources 33: 39-61. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.environ.33.020107.113631
  6. Jeong, S.J., K.K. Oh and J.G. Oh(2001) A Study on Restoration Measures of Vegetation for Devastated Ridge Line Area in National Park, Korea. Kor. J. Env. Eco. 15(1): 69-78. (in Korean with English abstract)
  7. Jo, D.G.(2011) Theory of Ecological Restoration Plan and Design. NEXUS Institute of Environment Design, 724pp. (in Korean)
  8. Jo, Y.H., J.H. Kim and S.H. Park(2016) Grasses and Sedges in South Korea. Geobook, 528pp. (in Korean)
  9. Kim, J.S. and T.Y. Kim(2013) Woody Plants of Korean Peninsula. Dolbegae, Pahu, 689pp. (in Korean)
  10. Kim, J.W.(2013) Korea Plant Ecology Guide. Nature and Ecology, 1200pp. (in Korean)
  11. Korea National Park Research Institute(2019a) 2019 National Park Ecosystem Service Valuation Study. Korea National Park Research Institute, Wonju, 352pp. (in Korean)
  12. Korea National Park Research Institute(2019b) Development of Restoration Evaluation System of National Park Damaged Area. Korea National Park Research Institute, Wonju, 184pp. (in Korean)
  13. Korea National Park Service(2017) Research for preliminary monitoring of damaged areas in Simwon Village, Jirisan National Park. Korea National Park Service, 80pp. (in Korean)
  14. Korea National Park Service(2018) Monitoring of Simwon Valley Ecological Restoration Project, Jirisan National Park. Korea National Park Service, 80pp. (in Korean)
  15. Korea National Park Service(2019) Monitoring of Simwon Valley Ecological Restoration Project, Jirisan National Park. Korea National Park Service, 84pp. (in Korean)
  16. Korea National Park Service(2020) Monitoring of Simwon Valley Ecological Restoration Project, Jirisan National Park. Korea National Park Service, 75pp. (in Korean)
  17. Lee, C.B.(2003a) The Korean Plant Showcase I. Kang Moon-sa, 914pp. (in Korean)
  18. Lee, C.B.(2003b) The Korean Plant Showcase II. Kang Moon-sa, 910pp. (in Korean)
  19. McIver, J. and L. Starr(2001) Restoration of degraded lands in the interior Columbia River basin: Passive vs. active approaches. Forest Ecology and Management 153(1-3): 15-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00451-0
  20. Pain, R.(2012) The effect of active and passive restoration strategies on the species composition of a hardwood forest. Biology, St. Olaf College.
  21. Park, J.G., R.H. Lim and B.H. Koo(2002) Systematic Management Plan for Professional National Park Improvement of Present Conditions. Journal of Leisure and Recreation Studies 22: 141-152. (in Korean with English abstract)
  22. Prach, K. and R. Del Moral(2015) Passive restoration is often quite effective: Response to Zahawi et al.(2014). Restoration Ecology 23(4): 344-346. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12224
  23. SER(2002) Restoration & Management Notes. 20(2): 81-158.
  24. Shannon, C.E. and W. Weaver(1963) The mathematical theory of communication. Univ. of Illinois Press, Urbana, 117pp.
  25. Shin, H.T., K.K. Oh, S.G. Park, M.H. Yi, J.W. Yoon and J.W. Sung(2013) Change Vegetation After Restoration of Campsite Nogodan in Chirisan National Park. Journal of the Korean Institute of Forest Recreation 17(2): 1-14. (in Korean with English abstract) https://doi.org/10.34272/forest.2013.17.2.001
  26. Trujillo-Miranda, A.L., T. Toledo-Aceves, F. Lopez-Barrera and P. Gerez-Fernandez(2018) Active versus passive restoration: Recovery of cloud forest structure, diversity and soil condition in abandoned pastures. Ecological Engineering 117: 50-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2018.03.011
  27. Walter, H., E. Harnickell and D. Mueller-Dombois(1975) Climate Diagram Maps. Springer, New York, 36pp.
  28. Zahawi, R.A., J.L. Reid and K.D. Holl(2014) Hidden costs of passive restoration. Restoration Ecology 22(3): 284-287. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12098