Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/34551
標題: 烏溪水系河川型態於物理性棲地特性之探討
Application of River Morphology on Physical Habitats in Wu River
作者: Luo, Wen-Chin
羅文琴
關鍵字: River morphology
河川型態
Physical Habitat
Wu River
物理性棲地
烏溪
出版社: 水土保持學系所
引用: 1. 方偉(2001),「河川滿槽流量估算方法研究」,中興大學水土保持學系碩士論文。 2. 巨廷工程顧問股份有限公司(2005),「河溪生態工法參考手冊」,行政院公共工程委員會。 3. 朱菱強(2002),「水力幾何型態因子與河相關係之探討」,中興大學水土保持學系碩士論文。 4. 汪靜明(1991),「臺灣河川環境的生態教育」,科學月刊22(12):930∼937。 5. 汪靜明(2000),「大甲溪水資源環境教育」,經濟部水資源局,pp.:30。 6. 汪靜明(2004),「昨日魚類,今日人類」,中國時報A4板名家專論(2004.11.06)。 7. 周正明(2002),「河川生態工法評估程序建立-溪流狀況指數為例」,國立台灣大學土木工程學系碩士論文。 8. 陳樹群、彭思顯(2002),「台灣河川型態五層分類法研究」,中華水土保持學報33(3):175-190。 9. 陳樹群(2005),「台灣地區河川型態分類技術手冊」,經濟部水利署水利規劃試驗所。 10. 楊景春(1998),「地貌學教程」,明文書局。 11. 錢寧、張仁、周志德(1987),「河床演變學」,科學出版社,pp.:19-33、339-385。 12. 謝鑒衡、丁君松、王運輝(1987),「河床演變與整治」,水利電力出版社,pp.:4-35。 13. 龐元勳(1999),「整合性河川生態評估。淡水河系生物相調查及生物指標手冊建立」行政院環境保護署,p 8-1~p 8-56 14. 森下郁子、森下雅子、森下依理子(2000),「川のHの條件陸水生態學からの提言」,山海堂(東京),P150。 15. Barbour, M. T., Gerritsen, J., Snyder B. D., and Stribling, J.B. (1999), Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and wadeable rivers: Periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrates and fish. 2nd. ed. EPA 841-B- 99-002. US. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington. 16. Gippel, C. J. and Stewardson, M. J. (1998), “Use of Wetted Perimeter in Defining Minimum Environmental Flows,” Regul. Rivers: Res. Mgmt., 14: 53-67. 17. Ladson, A.R., White, L.J., Doolan J.A., Finlayson, B.L., Hart, B.T., Lake, P.S., and Tilleard, J.W., (1999), “Development and testing of an Index of Stream Condition for waterway management in Australia,” Freshwater Biology, 41: 453-468. 18. Leopold, L.B., Wolman, M.G. and Miller, J.P. (1964), Fluvial Processes in Geomorphology, San Francisco, W. H. Freeman and C., pp: 552. 19. Plafkin, J. L., Barbour, M. T., Porter, K. D., Gross, S. K. and Hughes, R. M. (1989), Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and rivers : Benthic macroinvertebrates and fish. EPA/444/4-89-001. US. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. 20. Rankin, E. T. (1989), The qualitative habitat evaluation index (QHEI): Rationale, methods, and application. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Division of Water Quality Planning and Assessment Section, Columbus, Ohio. 21. Rosgen, D. (1996), Applied River Morphology, Wildland, Hydrology, Colorado. 22. Schumm, S. A. (1977), The Fluvial System, Wiley and Sons, New York. 23. Shulits, S. (1941), ”Rational Equation for River-Bed Profile,” Am. Geophys. Union Trans., 22: 630. 24. United States Department of Agriculture(1998),「Stream Visual Assessment Protocol」. 25. Vannote, R. L., Minshall, G. W., Cummins, K. W., Sedell, J. R. & Cushing, C. E.(1980). ”The river continuum concept. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science” 37: 130-137.
摘要: River engineering in the riparian and river affect the river physical habitat. Habitat restoration in Taiwan focus on the visual effects of the landscape instead of the main characteristic of the river morphology. The study focus on discussing the physical habitat characteristic and the influence on the physical habitat characteristic due to river engineering of different river morphology. The study bases on the classification of river morphology with five levels, including the level ~ level as river morphology characteristic and level ~ level as habitat evolution characteristic. The result of level I ~ level III affects the result of level ~ level . The river physical habitat environment assessment table in the study, based on the framework of level IV to level V and the Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (RBP) developed by United States Environments Protection Agency (EPA), is used to quantify the change of assessment environment habitat characteristic. Wu river, the study area, is classified to 6 river morphology to discuss the natural evolution of river habitat characteristic and the change of river habitat in some reaches with river engineers.
在地狹人稠的台灣,人們常需與大自然爭地,不但在河川兩岸興建村落、建設道路,也必須在河道中興建河防工程以維護生命財產安全,未考慮生態環境與河川特性的人為工程過度地介入,未順應河川力量的結果反而降低了河川原有的生命力,破壞了生物的棲息環境,反撲的力量也威脅到人類的家園。所幸環境意識的抬頭,國內逐漸重視河川棲地之維護及保育問題,唯現行之棲地復育方向多以景觀視覺效果為取向,忽略了河川工程規劃設計時,瞭解及順應河川特性時,才是最根本的解決之道。因此本研究旨在討論在不同的河川型態下物理性棲地特性,並探討人為工程構造物在不同河川型態下對棲地特性之影響。本研究利用河川型態五層分類法為理論基礎,定義前三層為河川型態之限制特性,而第四與第五層則為棲地環境特性,第一至第三層河相特性會影響第四與第五層之棲地演化。並蒐集國內外有關於物理性棲地之評估表格,選用美國環保署(EPA)發展的可跨越性溪流快速生物評估法(RBP)中關於物理性棲地之評分模式,配合第四與第五層之架構與因子,建立本研究之「河川物理性棲地環境評估表」,用以量化棲地因子特性之表現程度。以上述原則,本研究選定烏溪流域做為調查分析之河川,將烏溪水系分為六大河川型態,討論其自然演化之物理性棲地特性,以及在有人為介入工程河段其棲地特性的變化與原因。
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/34551
其他識別: U0005-2308200723533700
Appears in Collections:水土保持學系

文件中的檔案:

取得全文請前往華藝線上圖書館



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.