Published Date
Journal title : Journal of Ecology and Environment
Volume 38, Issue 2, 2015, pp.163-173
Publisher : The Ecological Society of Korea
DOI : 10.5141/ecoenv.2015.018
Abstract
The occurrence of wild boars (Sus scrofa Linnaeus) and reports of wildlife-vehicle conflicts (i.e., road-kill) involving them have increased in natural forest regions of Korea. In the past few decades, many wildlife passages have been constructed to reduce vehicle collisions involving wildlife species. However, few studies have assessed the habitat suitability of target wildlife species when locating the construction sites of wildlife passages. Target species rarely use wildlife passages if built in an inappropriate location. Therefore, a quantitative habitat model is required to find suitable sites for wildlife passages that can connect the fragmented forest patches of wildlife habitats in Korea. In this study, the wild boar was selected as the target species, and six environmental variables (percentage of Quercus forest, slope aspect, distance to roads, water accessibility, forest stand age and density) were measured. The habitat model for wild boars was developed with a Delphi survey, and habitat suitability maps were delineated for the provinces of Gangwon-do and Jeollanam-do. In this study, 298 and 64 boars were observed in Gangwon-do and Jeollanam-do, respectively. Observations of wild boars derived from the second nationwide natural environmental survey were used to evaluate the habitat model. Habitat suitability maps that superimposed existing road networks suggested that wild boar habitats were severely fragmented in both provinces, particularly in Gangwon-do. To connect the fragmented habitats and prevent wildlife-vehicle collisions, this study proposes 11 and 5 wildlife passage sites in Gangwon-do and Jeollanam-do, respectively.
References
For further details log on website :
http://www.koreascience.or.kr/article/ArticleFullRecord.jsp?cn=SRGHBV_2015_v31n2_73
Journal title : Journal of Ecology and Environment
Volume 38, Issue 2, 2015, pp.163-173 Publisher : The Ecological Society of Korea DOI : 10.5141/ecoenv.2015.018Abstract
The occurrence of wild boars (Sus scrofa Linnaeus) and reports of wildlife-vehicle conflicts (i.e., road-kill) involving them have increased in natural forest regions of Korea. In the past few decades, many wildlife passages have been constructed to reduce vehicle collisions involving wildlife species. However, few studies have assessed the habitat suitability of target wildlife species when locating the construction sites of wildlife passages. Target species rarely use wildlife passages if built in an inappropriate location. Therefore, a quantitative habitat model is required to find suitable sites for wildlife passages that can connect the fragmented forest patches of wildlife habitats in Korea. In this study, the wild boar was selected as the target species, and six environmental variables (percentage of Quercus forest, slope aspect, distance to roads, water accessibility, forest stand age and density) were measured. The habitat model for wild boars was developed with a Delphi survey, and habitat suitability maps were delineated for the provinces of Gangwon-do and Jeollanam-do. In this study, 298 and 64 boars were observed in Gangwon-do and Jeollanam-do, respectively. Observations of wild boars derived from the second nationwide natural environmental survey were used to evaluate the habitat model. Habitat suitability maps that superimposed existing road networks suggested that wild boar habitats were severely fragmented in both provinces, particularly in Gangwon-do. To connect the fragmented habitats and prevent wildlife-vehicle collisions, this study proposes 11 and 5 wildlife passage sites in Gangwon-do and Jeollanam-do, respectively.
References
1.
Ahn DM, Kim IH, Kim MS, Kang MS, Sohn JD, Shin SA, Oh MK, Cheong SJ, Cho SM, Heo HY, Huh KM. 2004. Developing the ecological corridor design for sustainable habitat creation. Ministry of Environment, Gwacheon. (in Korean)
2.
Bager A, Fontoura V. 2013. Evaluation of the effectiveness of a wildlife roadkill mitigation system in wetland habitat. Ecol Eng 53: 31-38. 
3.
Beasley JC, Grazia TE, Johns PE, Mayer JJ. 2014. Habitats associated with vehicle collisions with wild pigs. Wildlife Res 40: 654-660.
4.
Choi TY, Lee YS, Park CH. 2006. Home-range of wild boar, Sus scrofa, living in the Jirisan National Park, Korea. J Ecol Field Biol 29: 253-257. (in Korean)
5.
Choi TY, Park CH. 2007. Can wildlife vehicle collision be decreased by increasing the number of wildlife passages in Korea? In. Proceedings of the 2007 International Conference on Ecology and Transportation (Irwin CL, Nelson D, McDermott KP, eds). Center for Transportation and the Environment, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, pp 392-400.
6.
Choi TY, Yang BG, Woo DG. 2012. The suitable types and measures of wildlife crossing structures for mammals of Korea. Korean J Environ Impact Asses 21: 209-218. (in Korean)
7.
Clevenger AP, Waltho N. 2005. Performance indices to identify attributes of highway crossing structures facilitating movement of large mammals. Biol Conserv 121: 453-464.
8.
Clevenger AP, Wierzchowski J, Chruszcz B, Gunson K. 2002. GIS-generated, expert-based models for identifying wildlife habitat linkages and planning mitigation passages. Conserv Biol 16: 503-514.
9.
Crance JH. 1987. Guideline for using the Delphi technique to develop habitat suitability index curves. Washington, (DC): U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Biological Report 82(10.138).
10.
Dodd CK Jr, Barichivich WJ, Smith LL. 2004. Effectiveness of a barrier wall and culverts in reducing wildlife mortality on a heavily traveled highway in Florida. Biol Conserv 118: 619-631.
11.
Fernandez-Llario P. 2004. Environmental correlates of nest site selection by wild boar Sus scrofa. Acta Theriol 49: 383-392.
12.
Forman RTT, Sperling D, Bissonette JA, Clevenger AP, Cutshall CD, Dale VH, Fahrig L, France R, Goldman CR, Heanue K, Jones JA, Swanson FJ, Turrentine T, Winter TC. 2003. Road Ecology: Science and Solutions. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
13.
Grzimek B. 1972. Grzimek's Animal Life Encyclopedia. Vol. 13, Mammals IV. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, NY.
14.
Gunson KE, Mountrakis G, Quackenbush LJ. 2011. Spatial wildlife-vehicle collision models: a review of current work and its application to transportation mitigation projects. J Environ Manage 92: 1074-1082.
15.
Kim SO, Kwon KI, Kim TS, Ko HS, Jang GS. 2014. An analysis on aspects of farm lands damaged by the wild boar (Sus scrofa) in Gyeongnam Province, Korea. J Korean Env Res Tech 17: 17-27. (in Korean)
16.
Kim WJ, Park CH, Kim WM. 1998. Development of habitat suitability analysis models for wild boar (Sus scrofa): a case study of Mt. Sulak and Mt. Jumbong. J GIS Assoc Korea 6: 247-256. (in Korean)
17.
Korea Meteorological Administration. 2013. Annual Climatological Report.
18.
Lee WS, Woo KS, Lee CS, Han SY, Rhim SJ. 2002. Ecological survey for constructing eco-bridges in Korea. The Ministry of Construction and Transportation of Korea, Gwacheon. (in Korean)
19.
Li L, Shi J, Wang J, Gao Y, Wang L, Wang J, Ying X. 2013. Factors influencing wild boar damage in Taohongling National Nature Reserve in China: a model approach. Eur J Wildl Res 59: 179-184.
20.
Lowe S, Browne M, Boudjelas S, Poorter MD. 2000. 100 of the World's Worst Invasive Alien Species: a Selection from the Global Invasive Species Database. Invasive Species Specialist Group, Auckland.
21.
Lyang DY, Lee KS. 2010. Responses of an herbaceous community to wild boar (Sus scrofa coreanus Heude) disturbance in a Quercus mongolica forest at Mt. Jeombong, Korea. J Ecol Env 33: 205-216.
22.
Malo JE, Suarez F, Diez A. 2004. Can we mitigate animalvehicle accidents using predictive models? J Appl Ecol 41: 701-710.
23.
Mata C, Hervas I, Herranz J, Suarez F, Malo JE. 2008. Are motorway wildlife passages worth building? Vertebrate use of road-crossing structures on a Spanish motorway. J Environ Manage 88: 407-415.
24.
Meriggi A, Sacchi O. 2001. Habitat requirements of wild boars in the northern Apennines (N Italy): a multi-level approach. Ital J Zool 68: 47-55.
25.
Ministry of Environment of Korea. 2010. Guidelines for Design and Management of Wildlife Crossing Structures in Korea. Ministry of Environment of Korea, Gwacheon. (in Korean)
26.
Neumann W, Ericsson G, Dettki H, Bunnefeld N, Keuler NS, Helmers DP, Radeloff VC. 2012. Difference in spatiotemporal patterns of wildlife road-crossings and wildlife-vehicle collisions. Biol Conserv 145: 70-78.
27.
Park CR, Lee WS. 2003. Development of a GIS-based habitat suitability model for wild boar Sus scrofa in the Mt. Baekwoonsan region, Korea. Mamm Study 28: 17-21.
28.
Peterson MN, Lopez RR, Silvy NJ, Owen CB, Frank PA, Braden AW. 2003. Evaluation of deer-exclusion grates in urban areas. Wildl Soc Bull 31: 1198-1204.
29.
Rho P, Choung HL, Bae SY. 2005. GIS-based Wildlife Habitat Management Strategies in Korea. Korea Environment Institute, Seoul.
30.
Riitters KH, O'Neill RV, Jones KB. 1997. Assessing habitat suitability at multiple scales: a landscape-level approach. Biol Conserv 81: 191-202.
31.
Rodriguez-Morales B, Diaz-Varela ER, Marey-Perez MF. 2013. Spatiotemporal analysis of vehicle collisions involving wild boar and roe deer in NW Spain. Accid Anal Prev 60: 121-133.
32.
Saunders G, McLeod S. 1999. Predicting home range size from the body mass or population densities of feral pigs, Sus scrofa (Artiodactyla: Suidae). Aust J Ecol 24: 538-543.
33.
Sherwood B, Cutler D, Burton J, eds. 2002. Wildlife and Roads: The Ecological Impact. Imperial College Press, London.
34.
Seo CW. 2000. Wild boar (Sus scrofa coreanus Heude) habitat modeling using GIS and logistic regression. PhD Dissertation. Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea. (in Korean)
35.
Sjarmidi A, Spitz F, Valet G. 1992. Food resource used by wild boar in southern France. In: Spitz F, Janeau G, Gonzalez G, Aulagnier S, editors. Ongules/Ungulates 91. Proceedings of the international symposium; Toulouse. Paris: Societe francaise pour l'etude et la protection des mammiferes. p.171-173.
36.
Taylor BD, Goldingay RL. 2003. Cutting the carnage: wildlife usage of road culverts in north-eastern New South Wales. Wildlife Res 30: 529-537.
37.
Thurfjell H, Spong G, Olsson M, Ericsson G. 2015. Avoidance of high traffic levels results in lower risk of wild boarvehicle accidents. Landsc Urb Plan 133: 98-104.
38.
Trocme M, Cahill S, De Vries JG, Farrall H, Folkeson L, Fry G, Hicks C, Peymen J, eds. 2003. COST 341 - Habitat fragmentation due to transportation infrastructure: the European review. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
39.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1981. 103 Ecological Services Manual standards for the development of habitat suitability index models. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Ecological Services, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
40.
Won C, Smith KG. 1999. History and current status of mammals of the Korean Peninsula. Mammal Rev 29: 3-36.
41.
Yoo BH, ed. 1999. Management of wildlife in Korea. Research Materials No. 146. Forestry Research Institute of Korea, Seoul. (in Korean)
42.
Yoon MH, Han SH, Oh HS, Kim JG. 2004. The Mammals of Korea. Dongbang Media Co., Ltd, Seoul. (in Korean)
For further details log on website :
http://www.koreascience.or.kr/article/ArticleFullRecord.jsp?cn=SRGHBV_2015_v31n2_73
No comments:
Post a Comment