¶óÆæÆ®¦¢Ä«Æä¦¢ºí·Î±×¦¢´õº¸±â
¾ÆÄ«µ¥¹Ì Ȩ ¸í»çƯ°­ ´ëÇבּ¸½Ç޹æ Á¶°æ½Ç¹« µ¿¿µ»ó°­ÀÇ Çѱ¹ÀÇ ÀüÅëÁ¤¿ø ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®
ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®

Çѱ¹°Ç¼³°ü¸®ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹°ÇÃà½Ã°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹µµ·ÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ý¹°È¯°æÁ¶ÀýÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ýÅÂÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹¼öÀÚ¿øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ç³»µðÀÚÀÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀܵðÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Áö¹Ý°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ý¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ýÅÂÇÐȸ

Çѱ¹»ýÅÂÇÐȸ / v.28, no.6, 2005³â, pp.395-404
¸êÁ¾À§±âÁ¾ ¹Ý´Þ°¡½¿°õÀÇ ÇöÀå ³» º¹¿øÀ» À§ÇÑ Çൿ±Ç Æò°¡
( Evaluating Home Ranges of Endangered Asiatic Black Bears for In Situ Conservation )
°­Çý¼ø;¹é°æÁø; ¼º½Å¿©ÀÚ´ëÇб³ ÀÚ¿¬°úÇдëÇÐ »ý¹°Çаú;¼º½Å¿©ÀÚ´ëÇб³ ÀÚ¿¬°úÇдëÇÐ »ý¹°Çаú;
 
ÃÊ ·Ï
Áö¸®»ê±¹¸³°ø¿ø¿¡ ¸êÁ¾À§±âÁ¾ÀÎ ¹Ý´Þ°¡½¿°õÀ» ÇöÀå ³» º¹¿øÇÏ´Â ½Ãµµ°¡ ÀÌ·ç¾îÁö°í ÀÖÀ¸³ª ¹Ý´Þ°¡½¿°õÀÇ ÃÖ¼Ò Á¸¼Ó °³Ã¼±º(MVP)ÀÇ À¯Áö¿¡ ÇʼöÀûÀÎ Çൿ±Ç°ú ÃÖ¼Ò ¿ªµ¿ ¸éÀû(MDA)¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÀÚ·á´Â °ÅÀÇ ¾ø´Â »óÅÂÀÌ´Ù. º» ¿¬±¸¿¡¼­´Â 2001³â Áö¸®»ê¿¡ ½ÃÇè¹æ»ç µÈ ¹Ù ÀÖ´Â µÎ ¹Ý´Þ°¡½¿°õÀÇ À§Ä¡ ÀڷḦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© °õÀÇ À̵¿ ¾ç»óÀ» ÃßÀûÇÏ°í µÎ °¡Áö ´Ù¸¥ ¹æ¹ýÀ¸·Î Çൿ±ÇÀ» »êÃâÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ °õ¿¡°Ô ÀûÇÕÇÏ´Ù°í ÆÇÁ¤µÈ ¼­½ÄÁö¿Í ½ÇÁ¦ Çൿ±ÇÀÇ Å©±â¿Í À§Ä¡¸¦ ºñ±³ÇÏ¿© °õÀÇ MVPº¸Àü °¡´É¼ºÀ» Æò°¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù °õÀÇ ÃâÇöºóµµ´Â Æ÷Àåµµ·Î¿Í ¹ýÁ¤ ޹æ·ÎÀÇ ¹Ðµµ°¡ ³ô¾ÆÁü¿¡ µû¶ó ±Þ°ÝÈ÷ °¨¼ÒÇÏ¿´´Ù. µÎ ¹Ý´Þ°¡½¿°õÀÇ Çൿ±ÇÀº 100% MCP Áß°£°ªÀÌ 376.85 $km^2$, 95% AK Áß°£°ªÀÌ 50.76 $km^2$À̾ú°í, Çൿ±Ç Áßø¸éÀûÀº °¢°¢ 126.0 $km^2$¿Í 3.99 $km^2$À̾ú´Ù. ÇÙ½É È°µ¿ Áö¿ªÀº ÃâÀÔ ÅëÁ¦ Áö¿ªÀÓ¿¡µµ ºÒ±¸Çϰí, ޹æ·Î°¡ °³¹æµÈ Áö¿ªÀÌ ¾Æ´Ï¶ó ´ëºÎºÐ ޹æ·Î°¡ Æó¼âµÈ °÷¿¡ ¹ÐÁýµÇ¾î ÀÖ¾ú´Ù. ÇÙ½É È°µ¿ Áö¿ª°ú ÀûÇÕ ¼­½ÄÁöÀÇ ºÒÀÏÄ¡´Â °ø¿ø ³» µµ·Î¸¦ ÅëÇÑ Â÷·®°ú Ž¹æ°´ À¯ÀÔÀÇ °á°úÀÎ °ÍÀ¸·Î ÆÇ´ÜµÈ´Ù. °á·ÐÀûÀ¸·Î, Àý¸êÀ§±âÁ¾ÀÎ ¹Ý´Þ°¡½¿°õÀÇ ÇöÀå ³» ¼º°øÀû º¹¿ø¿¡´Â, °õÀ» º¸È£ÇÏ°í °õÀÇ Çൿ±ÇÀ» È®º¸ÇÏ¿© MVP¸¦ À¯ÁöÇϱâ À§ÇÑ °èȹÀû ¼­½ÄÁö °ü¸®°¡ ¹Ýµå½Ã ÇÊ¿äÇÏ´Ù.
A project has recently begun to reintroduce endangered Asiatic black bears to the Jirisan National Park. However, information on home range that is necessary to maintain the Minimum Viable Population (MVP) of those bears does not exist. Based on point data of two bears that were released for trial in Jirisan in 2001, we identified the movement pattern of bears and estimated their home ranges with two different methods Finally, the possibility of conserving the MVP of bears was evaluated by comparing the location and size of the home range with habitats which have been found to be suitable for bears. The frequency of bears' appearance reduced drastically as road densities of both paved roads and legal trails increased. The midpoint of home ranges of the two bears was 376.85 $km^2$ and 50.76 $km^2$ based on 100% MCP (Minimum Convex Polygon) and 95% AK (Adaptive Kernel Home Range Method), respectively, with an overlapped area of 126.0 $km^2$ and 3.99 $km^2$ each. The core areas of their home ranges are located not in the no-entry zone, where major trails were open to the public - despite being designated as no -entry zone - but in areas where most trails were closed to the public. A discrepancy between core areas of home ranges and potentially suitable habitats suggests the effects of vehicles and tracking people through roads within the park. Thus, for the success of in situ conservation of endangered bears, well-planned management of habitats is needed to protect bears and to ensure the home ranges to support the MVP.
 
Ű¿öµå
Endangered species;Home range;Jirisan National Park;Minimum viable population;Ursus thibetanus ussuricus;
 
The Korean Journal of Ecology / v.28, no.6, 2005³â, pp.395-404
Çѱ¹»ýÅÂÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1225-0317
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO200509905771140)
¾ð¾î : Çѱ¹¾î
³í¹® Á¦°ø : KISTI Çѱ¹°úÇбâ¼úÁ¤º¸¿¬±¸¿ø
¸ñ·Ïº¸±â
ȸ»ç¼Ò°³ ±¤°í¾È³» ÀÌ¿ë¾à°ü °³ÀÎÁ¤º¸Ãë±Þ¹æÄ§ Ã¥ÀÓÀÇ ÇѰè¿Í ¹ýÀû°íÁö À̸ÞÀÏÁÖ¼Ò ¹«´Ü¼öÁý °ÅºÎ °í°´¼¾ÅÍ
   

ÇÏÀ§¹è³ÊÀ̵¿