Journal of Ecology and Environment

The Ecological Society of Korea (한국생태학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of Hillslope Treatments for Vegetation Development and Soil Conservation in Burned Forests

산불 피해 산림의 식생 발달과 토양 보존을 위한 사면 처리 효과

  • 김창기 (강원대학교 자연과학대학 생물학과) ;
  • 정연숙 (강원대학교 자연과학대학 생물학과) ;
  • 주광영 (양구생태식물원) ;
  • 이규송 (강릉대학교 자연과학대학 생물학과)
  • Published : 2006.06.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Clear-cut followed by tree planting has been a conventional management practice in burned forests in Korea. Because this can considerably increase soil loss, hillslope treatments may be needed in order to improve soil stability at poorly regenerating areas. This paper reviews the effects of hillslope treatments, such as seeding, mulching and log erosion barriers, which have been applied to restore vegetation and conserve soil in burned forests in North America and Europe. Seeding has been the most common method for postfire restoration. However, the effects of seeding on vegetation cover and soil erosion are not clear and seeding with non-native species has been reported to inhibit regeneration of native vegetation. Mulching has been found to be effective at reducing soil erosion. However, this also can introduce non-native plant species and inhibit native plant regeration. Although studies on the effect of log erosion barriers are very few, it appears that log erosion barriers are effective in the period of little rainfall. Hillslope treatments for postfire restoration is not necessary for naturally regenerating areas and therefore, they should be restricted to the areas where regeneration potential is low and runoff and soil loss is considerable. Long-term monitoring is needed to assess the effectiveness of hillslope treatments on soil erosion, the introduction of non-native plant species and the inhibition of natural plant regeneration.

국내의 산불 피해지에서 식생 복구를 위해 주로 적용되는 단순 개별과 조림은 초기에 토사 유출을 과도하게 발생시킬 수 있으므로, 토양 안정화를 위해서 조림 복구 시기의 조절을 고려해야 하고, 자연 복원력이 낮은 지역에는 토양 안정성을 증진시키는 사면 처리가 필요하다. 본 종설에서는 주로 북미와 유럽 지역에서 산불 피해 산림의 토양 보존을 위해 수행되었던 대표적인 사면 처리 기술인 씨뿌리기, 멀칭, 통나무 경사막이 등의 효과에 대하여 고찰하였다. 씨뿌리기는 가장 널리 사용되고 있는 방법임에도 불구하고 식생 피도와 토양 침식에 미치는 영향은 분명치 않으며, 자생 식물의 재생을 저해하는 부정적인 효과가 밝혀졌다. 멀칭은 토양 침식의 감소에 효과적이지만, 역시 외래 식물종의 도입과 자생종 재생의 저해라는 부정적인 효과도 있음이 밝혀졌다. 통나무 경사막이의 효과에 대한 연구는 극히 제한적이지만, 강우량이 적은 시기에는 효과가 있으나 많은 시기에는 효과가 뚜렷하지 않다는 연구가 보고되어 있다. 이와 같이 산불 피해지의 사면처리는 자연 복원력이 높은 지역에 불필요하게 적용하였을 때 오히려 부정적인 영향을 줄 수 있음으로, 자연 복원력이 낮으며 자생종의 재생보다 강우 및 토사 유출의 감소가 시급한 지역에 선택적으로 처리하는 것이 바람직하다. 또한 강우 및 토사 유출 감소 여부, 외래 식물종의 도입, 멀칭으로 인한 식생 재생의 저해 등과 관련한 장기적인 모니터링이 필요하다고 판단된다.

Keywords

References

  1. 박상덕, 이현종, 김종민, 이규송, 양은익, 윤영호, 이재응, 서흥석, 최준성, 정일문. 2001. 강원도 산불지역 재해의 저감대책 수립. 최종보고서. 국립방재연구소
  2. 산림청. 1998. 사방기술교본
  3. 이규송, 박상덕, 신승숙, 안효윤, 마수봉, 이경신, 원동국, 이혜성, 전명권, 우창완. 2003. 산지지역 우수 및 토사유출량 관측 및 저감대책 수립. 최종보고서. 국립방재연구소
  4. 이성학. 2003. 산불 피해 지역에서 산불 후 관리 방법이 식물군집의 재생에 미치는 영향. 강릉대학교 교육대학원 교육학석사학위 논문
  5. 이창우, 윤호중, 김재헌, 이천용. 2004. 산불피해임지 사방공작물의 토사유출억제에 관한 연구. 2004년 한국임학회 학술연구 발표논문집. pp 381-382
  6. 정연숙, 조재창, 주광영, 이규송, 김창기. 2005. 산불 피해지 식생 회복 및 토양 안정성 증진 기술 개발. 최종보고서. 환경부
  7. 정연숙. 2000. 산불피해 생태계에서 식생복원기법의 비교연구. 한국과학재단 핵심전문연구 결과보고서
  8. 정영호, 김경하, 정창기, 전재홍, 유재연. 2004. 산림소유역에서 산불이 계류 수량 및 수질에 미치는 영향. 한국임학회지 93:446- 452
  9. Amaranthus MP, Trappe JM, Perry DA. 1993. Soil moisture, native revegetation, and Pinus lambertiana seedling survival, growth, and mycorrhiza formation following wildfire and grass seeding. Restor Ecol 1: 188-195 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.1993.tb00024.x
  10. Amaranthus MP, Trappe JM. 1993. Effects of erosion on ecto- and VA-mycorrhizal inoculum potential of soil following fire in southwest Oregon. Plant Soil 150: 41-49 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00779174
  11. Anderson EW, Brooks LE. 1975. Reducing erosion hazard on a burned forest in Oregon by seeding. J Range Manage 28: 394-398 https://doi.org/10.2307/3897503
  12. Backer DM, Jensen SE, McPherson GR. 2004. Impacts of fire-suppression activities on natural communities. Conserv Biol 18: 937- 946 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.494_1.x
  13. Barclay AD, Betancourt JL, Allen CD. 2004. Effects of seeding ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) on vegetation recovery following fire in a ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) forest. Int J Wildland Fire 13: 183-194 https://doi.org/10.1071/WF03012
  14. Barro SC, Conrad SG. 1987. Use of rye grass seeding as an emergency revegetation measure in chaparral ecosystems. General Technical Report PSW-102. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station
  15. Barton AP, Fullen MA, Mitchell DJ, Hocking TJ, Liu L, Bo ZW, Zheng Y, Xia ZY. 2004. Effects of soil conservation measures on erosion rates and crop productivity on subtropical Ultisols in Yunnan Province, China. Agr Ecosyst Environ 104: 343-357 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2004.01.034
  16. Bautista S, Bellot J, Vallejo VR. 1996. Mulching treatment for postfire soil conservation in a semiarid ecosystem. Arid Soil Res Rehab 10: 235-242 https://doi.org/10.1080/15324989609381438
  17. Beschta RL, Rhodes JJ, Kauffman JB, Gresswell RE, Minshall GW, J.R. Karr, D.A. Perry, F.R. Hauer and Frissell CA. 2004. Postfire management on forested public lands of the Western United States. Conserv Biol 18: 957-967 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00495.x
  18. Beyers JL. 2004. Postfire seeding for erosion control: Effectiveness and impacts on native plant communities. Conserv Biol 18: 947-956 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00523.x
  19. Chong G, Stohlgren T, Simonson S, Crosier C. 2003. Key invasive nonnative plants. In: Hayman Fire Case Study. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-114 (Graham RT, ed). USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. pp 195-198
  20. Choung Y, Lee BC, Cho JH, Lee KS, Jang IS, Kim SH, Hong SK, Jung HC, Choung HL. 2004. Forest responses to the large-scale east cost fires in Korea. Ecol Res 19: 43-54 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1703.2003.00607.x
  21. Corbett ES, Green LR. 1965. Emergency Revegetation to Rehabilitate Burned Watersheds in Southern California. U.S. Forest Service Research Paper PSW-22. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station
  22. DeBano LF. 1989. Effects of fire on chaparral soils in Arizona and California and postfire management implications. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Fire and Watershed Management, Sacramento, October 26-28, 1988 (Berg NH, ed). USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. pp 55-62
  23. DeBano LF. 2000. The role of fire and soil heating on water repellency in wildland environments: A review. J Hydrol 231-232: 195-206 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00194-3
  24. Edwards L, Burney JR, Richter G, MacRae AH. 2000. Evaluation of compost and straw mulching on soil-loss characteristics in erosion plots of potatoes in Prince Edward Island, Canada. Agr Ecosyst Environ 81: 217-222 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(00)00162-6
  25. Fagerström MHH, Nilsson SI, van Noordwijk M, Phien T, Olsson M, Hansson A, Svensson C. 2002. Does Tephrosia candida as fallow species, hedgegrow or mulch improve nutrient cycling and prevent nutrient losses by erosion on slopes in northern Viet Nam? Agr Ecosyst Environ 90: 291-304 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00208-0
  26. Fernandez-Abascal I, Tarrega R, Luis-Calabuig E, Marcos E. 2003. Effects of sowing native herbaceous species on the post-fire recovery in a heathland. Acta Oecol 24: 131-138 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1146-609X(03)00063-8
  27. Goldman SJ, Jackson K, Bursztynsky TA. 1986. Erosion & Sediment Control Handbook, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York
  28. Haywood JD. 1999. Durability of selected mulches, their ability to control weeds, and influence growth of loblolly pine seedlings. New Forest 18: 263-276 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006699910149
  29. Haywood JD. 2000. Mulch and hexazinone herbicide shorten the time longleaf pine seedlings are in the grass stage and increase height growth. New Forest 19: 279-290 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006673509218
  30. Keeler-Wolf T. 1995. Post-fire emergency seeding and conservation in Southern California shrublands. In: Bushfires in California Wildlands: Ecology and Resource Management (Keeley JE, Scott T, eds). International Association of Wildland Fire, Fairfield, Washington. pp 127-139
  31. Keeley JE. 2004. Ecological impacts of wheat seeding after a Sierra Nevada wildfire. Int J Wildland Fire 13: 73-78 https://doi.org/10.1071/WF03035
  32. Kruse R, Bend E, Bierzychudek P. 2004. Native plant regeneration and introduction of non-natives following post-fire rehabilitation with straw mulch and barley seeding. Forest Ecol Manage 196:299- 310 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2004.03.022
  33. Lal R. 1998. Soil erosion impact on agronomic productivity and environment quality. Crit Rev Plant Sci 17: 319-464 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-2689(98)00363-3
  34. Lee KS, Kim JH. 1996. Response of old-field plant community to an experimental nitrogen gradient. Korean J Ecol 19: 341-351
  35. Merino A, Fernandez-Lopez A, Solla-Gullon F, Edeso JM. 2004. Soil changes and tree growth in intensively managed Pinus radiata in northern Spain. Forest Ecol Manage 196: 393-404 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2004.04.002
  36. Neary DG, Klopatek CC, DeBano LF, Ffolliott PF. 1999. Fire effects on belowground sustainability: A review and synthesis. Forest Ecol Manage 122: 51-71 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(99)00032-8
  37. Papanastasis V, Biswell HH. 1975. Seeding rate-cover relationships of annual ryegrass seeded on burned brushlands. J Range Manage 28: 402-406 https://doi.org/10.2307/3897505
  38. Pardini G, Gispert M, Dunjo G. 2004. Relative influence of wildfire on soil properties and erosion processes in different Mediterranean environments in NE Spain. Sci Total Environ 328: 237- 246 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2004.01.026
  39. Paschke MW, DeLeo C, Redente EF. 2000. Revegetation of roadcut slopes in Mesa Verde National Park, U.S.A. Restor Ecol 8: 276- 282 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-100x.2000.80039.x
  40. Petersen SL, Roundy BA, Bryant RM. 2004. Revegetation methods for high-elevation roadsides at Bryce Canyon National Park, Utah. Restor Ecol 12: 248-257 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1061-2971.2004.00321.x
  41. Pimentel D, Kounang N. 1998. Ecology of soil erosion in ecosystems. Ecosystems 1: 416-426 https://doi.org/10.1007/s100219900035
  42. Pinaya I, Soto B, Arias M, Diaz-Fierros F. 2000. Revegetation of burnt areas: Relative effectiveness of native and commercial seed mixtures. Land Degrad Dev 11: 93-98 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-145X(200001/02)11:1<93::AID-LDR380>3.0.CO;2-U
  43. Ratzlaff TD, Anderson JE. 1995. Vegetal recovery following wildfire in seeded and unseeded sagebrush steppe. J Range Manage 48: 386-391 https://doi.org/10.2307/4002239
  44. Redente EF, Doerr TB, Grygiel CE, Biondini ME. 1984. Vegetation establishment and succession on disturbed soils in northwest Colorado. Reclam Reveg Res 3: 153-165
  45. Robichaud P, MacDonald L, Freeouf J, Neary D, Martin D, Ashmun L. 2003. Postfire rehabilitation of the Hayman Fire. In: Hayman Fire Case Study. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-114 (Graham RT, ed). USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. pp 293-313
  46. Robichaud PR, Beyers JL, Neary DG. 2000. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Postfire Rehabilitation Treatments. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-63. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station
  47. Roby KB. 1989. Watershed response and recovery from the Will Fire: Ten years of observation. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Fire and Watershed Management, Sacramento, October 26-28, 1988 (Berg NH, ed). USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. pp 131-136
  48. Schoennagel TL, Waller DM. 1999. Understory responses to fire and artificial seeding in an eastern Cascades Abies grandis forest, U.S.A. Can J For Res 29: 1393-1401 https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-29-9-1393
  49. Schwab GO, Barnes KK, Frevert RK, Edminster TW. 1971. Elementary Soil and Water Engineering, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc
  50. Taskey RD, Curtis CL, Stone J. 1989. Wildfire, ryegrass seeding, and watershed rehabilitation. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Fire and Watershed Management, Sacramento, October 26-28, 1988 (Berg NH, ed). USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. pp 115-124
  51. Thomas AD, Walsh RPD Shakesby RA. 1999. Nutrient losses in eroded sediment after fire in eucalyptus and pine forests in the wet Mediterranean environment of northern Portugal. Catena 36: 283-302 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0341-8162(99)00051-X
  52. Thomas AD, Walsh RPD, Shakesby RA. 2000. Post-fire forestry management and nutrient losses in eucalyptus and pine plantations, northern Portugal. Land Degrad Dev 11: 257-271 https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-145X(200005/06)11:3<257::AID-LDR383>3.0.CO;2-C
  53. Tyser RW, Asebrook JM, Potter RW, Kurth LL. 1998. Roadside revegetation in Glacier National Park, U.S.A.: Effects of herbicide and seeding treatments. Restor Ecol 6: 197-206 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.1998.06211.x
  54. Wagenbrenner JW. 2003. Effectiveness of Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation Treatments, Colorado Front Range (MS dissertation). Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado
  55. Wohlgemuth PM, Hubbert KR, Robichaud PR. 2001. The effects of log erosion barriers on post-fire hydrologic response and sediment yield in small forested watersheds, southern California. Hydrol Process 15: 3053-3066 https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.391