ارزیابی اثربخشی مناطق حفاظت‌شدۀ استان اصفهان در کاهش اثرات خشکسالی و مداخلات انسانی

نویسندگان

دانشگاه صنعتی اصفهان

10.22052/6.14.69

چکیده

ناهمگنی زیستگاه نقش مهمی در افزایش تنوع گونه‌ای و افزایش قدرت انطباق گونه‌ها برای مقابله با تغییرات اقلیمی دارد؛ ازاین‌رو مناطق مورد حفاظت، باید از ناهمگنی مناسبی برای حفظ پایداری برخوردار باشند. از طرف دیگر، با توجه به نقش ارتفاع در اثرگذاری بر پارامترهایی مانند دما، بارندگی، و همچنین نقش میکروکلیمای محلی در تعیین فلور و فون یک منطقه، می‌توان از تنوع ارتفاعی به‌عنوان شاخصی برای انتخاب مناطق ناهمگن‌تر و درنتیجه، متنوع‌تر و انعطاف‌پذیرتر به‌منظور حفاظت استفاده کرد. این مسئله در مناطق بیابانی مرکز ایران به‌دلیل وسعت زیاد و تغییرپذیری ارتفاعی حائز اهمیت است. در این پژوهش، ارزیابی وضعیت مناطق حفاظت‌شدۀ استان اصفهان از نظر تنوع توپوگرافیک و توزیع کاربری‌های انسانی سنجیده شد. بدین منظور، در ابتدا نقشۀ ارتفاعی استان تهیه و به 39 طبقۀ ارتفاعی طبقه‌بندی شد و سپس 8 منطقۀ حفاظت‌شدۀ استان از نظر تنوع ارتفاعی با استفاده از شاخص تنوع شانون و وضعیت حفاظتی استان از لحاظ ارتفاعی با استفاده از شاخص حفاظت بررسی گردید. نتایج حاکی است که 9/16 درصد از سطح استان به مناطق حفاظت‌شده اختصاص یافته و وضعیت استان از لحاظ حفاظت طبقات ارتفاعی با داشتن متوسط شاخص حفاظتی 0/69 متوسط است. منطقۀ حفاظت‌شدۀ قمصر و برزک با تنوع ارتفاعی 2/842، بیشترین و پارک ملی و پناهگاه حیات‌وحش کلاه‌قاضی با تنوع ارتفاعی 1/720، کمترین میزان تنوع ارتفاعی را دارند. از طرف دیگر، تحلیل کاربری‌های موجود در منطقه نشان داد که در طبقات ارتفاعی 1400 تا 2600 متر که دربرگیرندۀ بیش از 80 درصد توسعۀ شهری و صنعتی استان هستند، شاخص حفاظت منطقه نامناسب است. این امر لزوم ایجاد مناطق حفاظت‌شده در محدوده‌های کم‌ارتفاع استان و مناطق با تمرکز فعالیت‌های انسانی را ضروری می‌سازد. 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluating the effectiveness of Isfahan province protected areas against climate change and human intervention

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ali Lotfi
  • Omid GHdirian
  • Zahra Asghari
چکیده [English]

Habitat heterogeneity plays an important role in increasing species diversity. Heterogeneity of habitats and protected areas can increase the ability of species to adapt to climate change. It is expected that appropriate heterogeneity is necessary for sustainability of protected areas. The influence of altitude on parameters such as temperature and precipitation and the role of microclimates in determining the flora and fauna suggest that elevational heterogeneity can be used as a Criteria for selecting more heterogeneous, resilient and diverse protected areas. This is especially important in the central desert regions of Iran because of the size and variation in elevation of these regions. The present research was undertaken to evaluate the status of Isfahan province’s protected areas in terms of topographic diversity. For this purpose, a digital elevation model map of Isfahan province was divided into 39 classes and the elevational diversity of Isfahan’s protected areas was compared using the Shannon diversity index. Next, the conservation status of the province in terms of elevational diversity was evaluated using a conservation index. The results indicate that 16.9% of the area is dedicated to protected areas and the province’s elevational conservation status is suitable according to its conservation index value (0.69). The Ghamsar and Barzok protected areas with an elevational diversity of 2.842 and Kolahghazi National Park with an elevational diversity of 1.720 have the highest and the lowest elevational diversity, respectively. Analysis of land use in the region showed that the conservation index of the 1400-2600 m elevation zone, which includes over 80% of the urban and industrial development of the province, is weak. These results indicate the need for creation of new protected areas in low-lying areas and in regions with a high rate of human activity.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Isfahan province
  • elevational diversity index
  • protected areas
  • elevational heterogeneity
  • Shannon diversity index
1. Araújo, M. B., Alagador, D., Cabeza, M., Nogués‐Bravo, D., & Thuiller, W., 2011. Climate change threatens European conservation areas. Ecology letters, 14(5), 484-492.‌ 2. Araújo, M. B., Cabeza, M., Thuiller, W., Hannah, L., & Williams, P. H., 2004. Would climate change drive species out of reserves? An assessment of existing reserve-selection methods. Global Change Biology, 10, 1618-1626. 3. Ashrafzadeh, M., M. Karami, and J., Darvish, 2010. A Study on the correlation of diversity and abundance of rodents with the vegetation and elevation in Geno biosphere reserve, Hormozgan province. Journal of Natural Environment 63(1)-1-13 [In Persian]. 4. Bayne EM, Habib L, and Boutin S., 2008. Impacts of chronic anthropogenic noise from energy-sector activity on abundance of songbirds in the boreal forest. Conserv Biol 22: 1186–93. 5. Fahrig, L., and T. Rytwinski., 2009. Effects of roads on animal abundance: am empirical review and synthesis. Ecology and Society 14(1):21. 6. Forrest, J. L., Wikramanayake, E., Shrestha, R., Areendran, G., Gyeltshen, K., Maheshwari, A. & Thapa, K., 2012. Conservation and climate change: Assessing the vulnerability of snow leopard habitat to treeline shift in the Himalaya. Biological Conservation, 150(1), 129-135 7. Funnell, D., & Parish, R., 2005. Mountain environments and communities. Routledge. 8. Germino, M. J., Reiners, W. A., Blasko, B. J., McLeod, D., & Bastian, C. T., 2001. Estimating visual properties of Rocky Mountain landscapes using GIS. Landscape and urban planning, 53(1), 71-83. 9. Haji mirza aghaei, S., Jalilvand, H., Kouch, Y., 2011. Plant diversity with respect to ecological factor of altitude in Sardabrood forests of Chalous, N. Iran. Iranian Journal of Biotechnology 24: 400-411 [In Persian]. 10. Hazen, H. D., & Anthamatten, P. J., 2004. Representation of ecological regions by protected areas at the global scale. Physical Geography, 25(6), 499-512.‌ 11. Heller, N. E., & Zavaleta, E. S., 2009. Biodiversity management in the face of climate change: a review of 22 years of recommendations. Biological Conservation, 142, 14-32. 12. Hodgson, J. A., Thomas, C. D., Wintle, B. A., & Moilanen, A., 2009. Climate change, connectivity and conservation decision making: back to basics. Journal of Applied Ecology, 46, 964-969. 13. Jafari A, Yavari AR, Yarali N, Valipour G., 2010. Representativeness Assessment of Protected Areas Network Emphasizing Plant Diversity in Charmahal & Bakhtiari, Iran. Journal of Environmental Studies 36:77-88. 14. Jafari A., Yavari, A., Yarali, N., 2013. Comparison of the performance assessment of unit planning issue of integration of vegetation type with land type and elevation for selecting protected areas. Environmental Researches 4: 93-102. 15. Jimenez, I., Distler, T., & Jorgensen, P. M. ,2009. Estimated plant richness pattern across northwest South America provides similar support for the speciesenergy and spatial heterogeneity hypotheses. Ecography, 32, 433-448. 16. Kerr, J. T., & Packer, L., 1997. Habitat heterogeneity as a determinant of mammal species richness in high-energy regions. Nature, 385, 252-254 17. Krosby, M., Tewksbury, J., Haddad, N. M., & Hoekstra, J, 2010. Ecological connectivity for a changing climate. Conservation Biology, 24, 1686-1689. 18. Liu, J., M. Linderman, Z. Ouyang, L. An, J. Yang, and H. Zhang, Venter, 2001. Ecological degradation in protected areas: the case of Wolong Nature Reserve for giant pandas. Science 292:98– 101. 19. Makhdoum, M.F., 2005. Fundamental of land use planning, Tehran university publications, 289 pages. 20. Modaberi, A., Minaei, H., 2014. Plant diversity and biodiversity in relation to physiographic factors and physicochemical properties of soil (KhoramAbad case study). Journal of Environmental Engineering and Science, 1:4, 19-27 [In Persian]. 21. Paudel, P. K., Bhattarai, B. P., & Kindlmann, P., 2012. An overview of biodiversity in Nepal. In P. Kindlmann (Ed.), Himalayan biodiversity in the changing world (pp. 1-38). Dordrecht: Springer. 22. Paudel, P.K., Heinen, J.T., 2015. Conservation planning in the Nepal Himalayas: Effectively (re) designing reserves for heterogeneous landscapes, Applied Geography 56,127-134. 23. Rahbek, C., & Graves, G. R., 2001. Multiscale assessment of patterns of avian species richness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98, 4534-4539. 24. Roberge, J. M., & Angelstam, P., 2004. Usefulness of the umbrella species concept as a conservation tool. Conservation Biology, 18, 76-85. 25. Seiferling, Ian S., et al., 2012. Measuring Protected‐Area Isolation and Correlations of Isolation with Land‐Use Intensity and Protection Status. Conservation Biology 26.4:610-618. 26. Trisurat, Y., 2007. Applying gap analysis and a comparison index to evaluate protected areas in Thailand. Environmental management, 39(2), 235-245. 27. Venter, O., N. N. Brodeur, L. Nemiroff, B. Belland, I. J. Dolinsek, and J. W. A. Grant, 2006. Threats to endangered species in Canada. BioScience 56:903–910. 28. Woodley, S., Bertzky, B., Crawhall, N., Dudley, N., Londoño, J. M., MacKinnon, K., & Sandwith, T. ,2012. Meeting Aichi Target 11: what does success look like for protected area systems. Parks, 18(1), 23-36.‌