Taşkın Yataklarının Ekosisteme Dayalı Kalite Durumunun Değerlendirilmesi İçin Bir Yaklaşım

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2, 218 - 224, 30.06.2023

Muhammet Azlak , Aysel Gamze Yücel Işıldar

https://doi.org/10.35229/jaes.1284762

Öz

Taşkın yatakları, nehrin taşması durumunda suyun yayıldığı, sucul ortamlarla karasal alanların bir arada olduğu ve çeşitli bitki ile hayvan türlerine ev sahipliği yapan ekosistemlerdir. Bu ekosistemler sürdürülebilir çevre ve sosyo-ekonomik açıdan önemli ekosistemler olup sağladıkları hizmetler aracılığıyla insan refahına çeşitli faydalar sağlarlar. Ancak, günümüzde şehirleşme ve tarım gibi faaliyetlerden dolayı taşkın yatağı ekosistemlerinden sağlanan hizmetler olumsuz etkilenmiş ve önemli bir kısmı kaybedilmiştir. Bu durum, taşkın yataklarının ekosistem esaslı kalitesinin değerlendirmesinin ve yönetilmesinin gerekliliğini ortaya koymuştur. Başta Avrupa ülkeleri olmak üzere pek çok ülkede taşkın yataklarının ekosistem esaslı değerlendirilmesiyle ilgili çalışmalar yürütülmeye ve ekosistem hizmetlerinin korunması için kalite durumunu dikkate alan yönetim planları hazırlanmaya başlanmıştır.
Taşkın yataklarının çeşitli müdahalelerle doğal yapılarının bozulması sorunu Türkiye için de gündemdedir. Bu nedenle Türkiye’de de taşkın yataklarının kalite durumunun değerlendirilebileceği bir metot ve yürütülen bir değerlendirme çalışmasına ihtiyaç duyulmaktadır. Bu çalışma ile bahsedilen ihtiyacı karşılamak üzere, Türkiye’deki veri altlıklarına uygun, kapsamı geniş ve Su Çerçeve Direktifi ile uyumlu değerlendirme yapan bir metot geliştirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu doğrultuda ilk olarak mevcut literatürden faydalanılarak taşkın yataklarının ekosistem esaslı kalitesini değerlendirmek için kullanılan parametreler belirlenmiş ve değerlendirme kriterleri tanımlanmıştır. Daha sonra bu kriterler kullanılarak SÇD ile uyumlu bir değerlendirme yapısı oluşturulmuş ve Türkiye’de taşkın yataklarının ekosistem esaslı kalite durumlarının tespit edilmesi için kullanılabilecek bir metot geliştirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ekosistem, ekosistem hizmetleri, su çerçeve direktifi, taşkın yatağı, taşkın yatağı ekosistemleri

An Approach for The Assessment of The Ecosystem-Based Quality Status of Floodplains

Öz

Floodplains are ecosystems where water spreads out in the event of a river overflow, both aquatic and terrestrial habitats coexist, and host various plant and animal species. These ecosystems are important ecosystems in terms of sustainable environment and socio-economic aspects, and they provide various benefits to human well-being through the services they offer. However, today, floodplain ecosystem services have been negatively affected by activities such as urbanization and agriculture, and a significant portion of these ecosystems have been lost. This situation highlights the necessity of assessing and managing floodplain ecosystems based on their ecological quality. Many countries, especially in Europe, have started to conduct studies on the ecosystem-based assessment of floodplains and management plans have begun to be prepared for the protection of ecosystem services, taking into account the quality status.
The issue of deterioration of the natural structures of floodplains through various interventions is also on the agenda for Türkiye. Therefore, there is a need for a method to assess the quality of floodplains in Türkiye and to carry out an assessment study. In order to address this issue, with this study, it is aimed to develop a method that considers the databases in Türkiye, has a wide scope, and makes an assessment compatible with the Water Framework Directive (WFD). In this context, first, the parameters used to determine the ecological quality of floodplains in the existing literature were identified, and assessment criteria were defined. Then, a WFD-compatible assessment structure was created using these criteria, and a method was developed that could be used to determine the ecological quality status of floodplains in Türkiye.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ecosystem, ecosystem services, floodplain, floodplain ecosystems, water framework directive.

Kaynakça

• ABB. (T.C. Dışişleri Bakanlığı Avrupa Birliği Başkanlığı) (2023). Fasıl 27: Çevre ve İklim Değişikliği. https://www.ab.gov.tr/fasil-27-cevre_92.html (Erişim Tarihi: 25/01/2023).
• Bechter, T., Baumann, K., Birk, S., Bolik, F., Graf, W. & Pletterbauer, F. (2018). LaRiMo- A simple and efficient GIS-based approach for large-scale morphological assessment of large European rivers. Science of The Total Environment, Volumes:628-629(2018), 1191-1199, ISSN 0048-9697. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.02.084 BfN. (Bundesamt für Naturschutz) (2021). Methodische Grundlagen zum Auenzustandsbericht 2021: Erfassung, Bilanzierung und Bewertung von Flussauen. Bundesamt für Naturschutz 591, 57. ISBN: 978-3- 89624-352-2, DOI: 10.19217/skr591.
• Boerema, A. (2016). Ecosystem services: study of human influences on nature and the effects for society. Universiteit Antwerpen (Belgium) ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, ProQuest:10586786.
• CEN. (European Committee for Standardization) (2010). Water quality - Guidance standard on determining the degree of modification of river hydromorphology, EN 15843:2010, CEN/TC 230-Water analysis.
• EC. (European Commission) (1992). Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, 7pp.
• EC. (European Commission) (2000). Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L327, 22.12.2000, 1-73.
• EC. (European Commission) (2007). Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood risks, OJ L288, 06.11.2007, 27-34.
• EC. (European Commission) (2019). Communication From The Commission to The European Parliament, The European Council, The Council, The European Economic And Social Committee and The Committee Of The Regions The European Green Deal. COM(2019) 640 final, Brussels.
• EC. (European Commission) (2020). EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 - Bringing nature back into our lives. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. COM(2020) 380 final, Brussels. https://eurlex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52020DC0380.
• EC. (European Commission) (2022). Regulation of The European Parliament and of The Council on nature restoration. 2022/0195 (COD), COM(2022) 304 final, Brussels.
• EEA. (European Environment Agency) (2016). Flood risks and environmental vulnerability; Exploring the synergies between floodplain restoration, water policies and thematic policies, EEA Report No 1/2016; 78pp. ISBN 978-92-9213-716-8, DOI: 10.2800/039463.
• EEA. (European Environment Agency) (2019). Floodplains: a natural system to preserve and restore. EEA Report No 24/2019, 51pp. ISBN: 978-92-9480-211-8, DOI: 10.2800/431107.
• Erős, T. & Bányai, Z. (2020). Sparing and sharing land for maintaining the multifunctionality of large floodplain rivers. Science of The Total Environment Volume:728(2020) 138441, ISSN 0048-9697, DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138441.
• Freitas, G., Díaz, I., Bessonart, M., da Costa, E. & Achkar, M. (2019). An ecosystem-based composite spatial model for floodplain vulnerability assessment: a case study of Artigas, Uruguay. GeoJournal 86, 1155-1171 (2021). DOI: 10.1007/s10708-019-10120-3.
• Globevnik, L., Januschke, K., Kail, J., Snoj, L., Manfrin, A., Azlak, M., Christiansen, T. & Birk, S. (2020). Preliminary assessment of river floodplain condition in Europe. ETC/ICM Technical Report 5/2020: European Topic Centre on Inland, Coastal and Marine waters, 121 pp.
• Hughes, F.M.R. (1997). Floodplain biogeomorphology. Progress in Physical Geography, 21(4), 501-529. DOI: 10.1177/030913339702100402.
• Hornung, L.K., Podschun, S.A. & Pusch, M. (2019). Linking ecosystem services and measures in river and floodplain management. Ecosystems and People, 15(1), 214-231, DOI: 10.1080/26395916.2019.165628.
• Levin, S. A., Aniyar, S., Baumol, W., Bliss, C., Bolin, B., Dasgupta, P., Ehrlich, P., Folke, C., Gren, I. M., Holling, C. S., Jansson, A., Jansson, B. O., MÄLER, K. G., Martin, D., Perrings, C., Sheshinski, E. & Barrett, S. (1998). Resilience in natural and socioeconomic systems. Environment and Development Economics, 3(2), 221-262. DOI: 10.1017/S1355770X98240125.
• MEA. (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Wetlands and water synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC. ISBN: 1-56973-597-2.
• Maltby, E. & Acreman, M.C. (2011). Ecosystem services of wetlands: pathfinder for a new paradigm, Hydrological Sciences Journal, 56:8, 1341-1359. DOI: 10.1080/02626667.2011.631014.
• Raffaelli, D. & Frid, C. (Eds.). (2010). Ecosystem Ecology: A New Synthesis (Ecological Reviews). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511750458.
• TEEB. (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity) (2010). The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological and Economic Foundations. Edited by Pushpam Kumar, Pp. 456, Earthscan: London and Washington. ISBN:9780415501088.
• Thoms, M.C. (2003). Floodplain–river ecosystems: lateral connections and the implications of human interference. Geomorphology, 56(2003), 335-349. DOI: 10.1016/S0169-555X(03)00160-0.
• Ward, J.V., Tockner, K., Arscott, D.B. & Claret, C. (2002). Riverine landscape diversity. Freshwater Biology, 47(4), 517-539. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365- 2427.2002.00893.x.