|
|
|
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸ / v.39, no.1, 2011³â, pp.106-116
|
¾ß»ýµ¿¹° ÃâÇöÁöÁ¡ÀÇ ÅäÁöÀÌ¿ëÇüŸ¦ °í·ÁÇÑ "¿ì¼±º¸Àü¿¬°á±¸°£" ¼±Á¤
( Earmarking the Areas in Which Wildlife Exist as "Ecologically Connected Areas Requiring Preferential Preservation" ) |
| »ç°øÁ¤Èñ;³ªÁ¤È;Á¤¿Á½Ä; Ãæ³²¹ßÀü¿¬±¸¿ø ȯ°æ»ýÅ¿¬±¸ºÎ;°æºÏ´ëÇб³ Á¶°æÇаú;Ãæ³²¹ßÀü¿¬±¸¿ø ȯ°æ»ýÅ¿¬±¸ºÎ;
|
|
|
 |
|
| |
| ÃÊ ·Ï |
| »ýÅÂÀû ¿¬°á¼ºÀ» È®º¸ÇÏ°í ¾ß»ýµ¿¹°ÀÇ º¸ÀüÀ» À§ÇØ »ýÅÂÀû ¿¬°áÅë·Î¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¸¹Àº ¿¬±¸°¡ ÁøÇàµÇ°í ÀÖÁö¸¸, ÇöÀç ¾ß»ýµ¿¹°ÀÇ ¼½ÄÀÌ ¾çÈ£ÇÑ ÁöÁ¡¿¡ ´ëÇÑ º¸Àü ´ëÃ¥Àº ¹ÌºñÇÑ ½ÇÁ¤ÀÌ´Ù. À̹ø ¿¬±¸´Â »ýÅÂÀû ¿¬°á¼ºÀ» È®º¸ÇÏ´Â Ãø¸é¿¡¼ ½ÇÁ¦ ´Ù¾çÇÑ ¾ß»ýµ¿¹°ÀÌ ¼½ÄÇϸç À̵éÀÇ ¼½Äȯ°æÀÌ ºñ±³Àû Àß º¸ÀüµÇ¾î ÀÖ´Â Áö¿ªÀ» ¼±º°ÇÏ´Â µ¥ ¸ñÀûÀÌ ÀÖÀ¸¸ç, ÀÏÁ¤ Á¾¼ö ÀÌ»óÀÇ ¾ß»ýµ¿¹°ÀÌ ´Ù¾çÇÏ°Ô ¼½ÄÇÏ°í ¼½ÄÁö ÁÖº¯ÀÇ ÅäÁöÀÌ¿ëÆ¯¼ºÀ» ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿© °øÅëÀû À¯ÇüÀ» °í¸£°Ô °®Ãß°í ÀÖ´Â ÁöÁ¡À» '¿ì¼±º¸Àü¿¬°á±¸°£'À¸·Î ÁöÁ¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. À̸¦ À§ÇØ ÃæÃ»³²µµ ´çÁø±º, ¼»ê½Ã, ¿¹»ê±º, °øÁÖ½Ã, ºÎ¿©±º µî 5°³ ½Ã ±ºÀ» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î Æ÷À¯·ùÀÇ ´Ù¾çÇÑ ¼½ÄÀÌ ¿¹»óµÇ´Â ÁöÁ¡ 500°³¸¦ ¿ì¼± ¼±Á¤Çϰí, ÀÌ ÁöÁ¡¿¡ ´ëÇØ 2°èÀý, ÃÑ 2ȸ¿¡ °ÉÃÄ Æ÷À¯·ù ¼½Ä ÇöȲÀ» Á¶»çÇÏ¿´´Ù. Á¶»ç°á°ú 492°³ ÁöÁ¡¿¡¼ ÃÑ 12Á¾ÀÇ Æ÷À¯·ù°¡ ¼½ÄÇϰí ÀÖ¾úÀ¸¸ç, °¢ Áö¿ªº° Æò±Õ Á¾¼ö ÀÌ»óÀÇ Á¾ÀÌ ÃâÇöÇÑ ÁöÁ¡Àº ÃÑ 264°³¿´´Ù. ±×¸®°í Æò±Õ Á¾¼ö ÀÌ»óÀÇ Á¾ÀÌ ÃâÇöÇÑ ÀúÁ¡¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÅäÁöÀÌ¿ëÇöȲ ºÐ¼®À» ÇÑ °á°ú, »ê¸², ³í, ¹ç, ÇÏõ, ÃÊÁö, ³óÃÌÇü °ÇÃ๰ µîÀ» Æ÷ÇÔÇÑ 5~7°³ À¯ÇüÀ» °¡Áø ÁöÁ¡¿¡¼ ³ôÀº Á¾ ´Ù¾ç¼ºÀ» º¸¿´´Ù. À̸¦ Åä´ë·Î Æò±Õ ÀÌ»óÀÇ ¾ß»ýµ¿¹°ÀÌ ¼½ÄÇÏ°í °øÅëÀû À¯ÇüÀ» Áö´Ñ ÁöÁ¡À» "¿ì¼±¿¬°áº¸Àü±¸°£"À¸·Î Á¤ÀÇÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, ÃÑ 89°³ ÁöÁ¡À» ¼±Á¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. |
|
| The purpose of this study was to find ecologically stable areas involving the locations in which wildlife exist, and to earmark those places as "ecologically connected areas requiring preferential preservation," and through that, to reduce the perils that may occur due to urban development or road construction. The processes and the results of this study were as follows: 1. Selecting the spots in which wildlife may exist: The total study areas were analyzed by eight ecological indexes and then a total of 500 locations in study areas were selected. 2. Sorting the locations in which mammals exist: We surveyed each one of the 500 locations twice, and then confirmed that we found mammals at 492 of the 500 locations and analyzed 264 locations that the number of existing mammals was above average. 3. Analyzing the 264 locations with two indexes, the number and the frequency of the land use types: 5~7 types of land use were suitable. The types were forest, rice field, farm, river, and meadow, excluding building and road. 4. Selecting the locations that meet the above conditions: We sorted 89 locations and earmarked these points as "ecologically connected areas requiring preferential preservation" in order to expect continued existence of wildlife. |
| |
| Ű¿öµå |
| »ýÅÂÁöÇ¥;Æ÷À¯·ù;µµ½Ã°³¹ß;µµ·Î°Ç¼³;Ecological Indexes;Mammals;Urban Development;Road Construction; |
| |
|
|
 |
|
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸÁö / v.39, no.1, 2011³â, pp.106-116
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1225-1755
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO201116637925202)
¾ð¾î : Çѱ¹¾î |
|
| ³í¹® Á¦°ø : KISTI Çѱ¹°úÇбâ¼úÁ¤º¸¿¬±¸¿ø |
|
|
|
|
|
|