• Journal of The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science
• /
• v.44 no.1
• /
• pp.30-39
• /
• 2024

The current survey form of grassland has not played its role in managing the grassland effectively because of the ambiguous questionnaire items and the absence of method and time of the investigation. Therefore, this study was conducted to clarify and add the items for effective of grassland management. The survey form of grassland was regulated in Article 16 of the Enforcement Rules of the Grassland Act (Survey on Grasslands Management Status, etc.). The five contents that needed improvement were the grassland owner, the survey timing and method of established grassland, grassland used livestock, grassland usage condition, and grassland grade. In the improved survey form of grassland, the grassland owner was changed to the grassland manager. In addition, 'Survey by each land' was added to the improved survey form in which the managers can survey each land. The dimension of each grassland establishment method was deleted in the grassland establishment time and method. In the livestock using grassland, the number of livestock and the area where livestock are used were added, and the number of other livestock was added, too. The grassland grade was decided as the combined score by three evaluation categories; grassland usage, the ratio of forage production in grassland and kinds of forage. The high, middle, and low grades were over 8, 6~7, and under 5 points in the combined score, respectively. The results show that the changed survey form of grassland can make grassland management more efficient by materializing the subject of grassland management and the survey terminology and methods.

• Journal of The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science
• /
• v.42 no.1
• /
• pp.32-40
• /
• 2022

In this study, the appropriate unit cost in grassland establishment was redeveloped by the grassland establishment method and work criteria. The grassland establishment method was divided into tillage establishment (all logging) and no-tillage establishment (all logging and partial logging). The price for the work criteria by the establishment method was presented for each permission/authorization and establishment work. In permission/authorization for grassland establishment, the cost of each work criteria was of environmental impact (small scale environmental impact) assessment, disaster impact assessment, cadastral serving fee, forest survey, and connection fee for control of mountainous districts. In establishment was of logging, cleaning/gruffing, plowing/soil preparation, seeding, fertilization, livestock manure compost, seed, herbicide, labor cost (fertilizer, seed and herbicide), soil consolidation, cattle trail, and fence. The unit cost of grassland establishment was KRW 115,894,212 for the tillage establishment, and KRW 110,281,572 and KRW 106,680,122 for the all and partial logging of the no-tillage establishment, respectively. The current study redeveloped the establishment method, work criteria, and estimation of the unit cost of grassland establishment. It can be usefully used to carry out government projects to support related to establishment and maintenance of grassland.

• Journal of The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science
• /
• v.39 no.2
• /
• pp.89-96
• /
• 2019

This study was conducted to investigate 106 grassland farms in six provinces including Chungcheongbuk-do, Gangwon-do, Gyeonggi-do, Gyeongsangbuk-do, Gyeongsangnam-do, Jeju-do, and Jeollanam-do to present their problems and causes by surveying the actual state of grassland farms during three years(2014~2016). The grassland survey was divided into three categories; used as the perennial grasses and annual forage crops (Complied with Grassland Act), not used as the perennial grasses and annual forage crops (Not complied with Grassland Act) and failed to meet the farmer and some items are missing or inaccurate (Insufficient contents). Among the surveyed grassland farm, 68 farms (64.2 %) were complied with Grassland Act but 30 farms (28.3 %) were not complied with Grassland Act. Especially, the 8 farms (26.7 %) not complied with Grassland Act used the grassland as other purposes such as tree growing, golf club and swine farm etc.. Therefore, strict on-site investigation by local governments is required to prevent the grassland from being used by illegal purposes. And there's a strong likelihood that 5 farms (62.5 %) avoided the survey violate the positive law. Grassland grades used by the local administrative agencies were not influenced by the factors affecting the yield (existence and non-existence of overseeding and fertilization by grassland grade, soil pH and organic matter content). This results suggest that there is a fundamental problem on the current grassland grade system based on the yield and the irregular time of investigation and lack of on-site investigation are another causes for inaccurate grassland grade. Therefore, the new method evaluating grassland grades which is not based on yield and the thorough on-site investigation by local administrative agencies are necessary when the grassland grade is evaluated.