UDC 911.52
REGIONAL FEATURES OF THE SPATIAL DIFFERENTIATION
AND SETTLEMENT LOADING ON LANDSCAPES
OF THE NORTHERN CAUCASUS
©2014
Atayev Z.V.1, Bratkov V.V.2
Dagestan State Pedagogical University
2
Moscow State University of Geodesy and Cartography
1
Annotation. The article deals with geography and regional features of plane and
mountainous landscapes of Ciscaucasia and the northern slope of the Greater Caucasus,
characterizes plain and mountainous landscapes, reveals the most basic characteristics of their
natural territorial complexes. As a result of applying the cartographical methods the spaces
occupied by the main landscapes, are compared with the areas of settlements in their limits. The
number of settlements within landscape contours, and also their average area is defined. It is
revealed that foothill landscapes to Ciscaucasia and mountain-and-kettle landscapes in the
territory of Greater Caucasus are subjected to the most settlement loading.
Keywords: the Northern Caucasus, Ciscaucasia, Greater Caucasus, natural landscape,
plane landscape, mountainous landscape, natural-territorial complex, mountain moderate humid
landscape, mountain moderate semihumid landscape, mountain moderate semiarid landscape,
mountain cold humid landscape, alpine meadow landscape, anthropogenous landscape,
settlement landscape, settlement, settlement loading.
Introduction
Many researchers have studied the landscapes and made schemes of physicgeographical zoning of separate parts of the Northern Caucasus. At the present
time there are several variants of physic-geographical zoning for the whole
territory of the Northern Caucasus. One of the first complex characterization of the
territory was made up by S. V. Kalesnik[23]. The most famous works on physicgeographical zoning of the Caucasus belongs to N. A. Gvozdetskiy[19-21]. Later
in 1986 N. A. Gvozdetskiy and T. A. Smagina made the more detailed scheme of
physic-geographical zoning of the territory. The independent zoning scheme was
offered by V. M. Chupakhin[27]. Jointly with T. A. Smagina he published the
review landscape map of the Northern Caucasus and the Lower Don [28].
There are several landscape maps for the whole territory of the Northern
Caucasus. Among the review maps there can be noted the Landscape map of the
USSR (1: 4 000 000) edited by A. G. Isachenko [25]. The more detailed landscape
map of the Northern Caucasus (1: 2 500 000) was made up by V. A. Shalnev [29].
N. A. Beruchashvili and others made up the landscape map of the Northern
Caucasus 1: 1 000 000 scale [24]. Later, in 1996 he prepared electronic version of
this map [26; 30]. This map as the most large-scale was used to characterize the
landscapes of the Northern Caucasus and to identify the changes of climatic
conditions within landscapes [11].
Results of researches
In the class of plain and hilly foothill landscapes that have spread in the
Ciscaucasia there are 4 types and 5 subtypes of landscapes. Among them
1
hydromorphic and subhydromorphic are not zonal (Fig.1, Table 1). They are
presented both in the western and eastern parts of the Northern Caucasus and are
connected with the deltas of the rivers Terek and Kuban as well as the Kuma
valley. They are also found in the mountains in the valleys of the largest rivers. In
the class of mountain landscapes that are spread on the northern slope of the
Greater Caucasus there can be distinguished 6 types and 12 subtypes of landscapes.
Fig. 1. Landscapes of the Northern Caucasus (designation see in Table 1)
Table 1
Systematics of landscapes of the Northern Caucasus
Classes
I.
Plain and
foothill hilly
(198654 km2)
II.
Mountainous
(71998 km2)
Types
А. Plain moderate arid (32246
km2)
B. Plain and hilly warmmoderate and moderate semiarid
(109809 km2)
C. Foothill hilly warm-moderate
and moderate semi-humid (23454
km2)
D. Hydromorphic and
subhydromorphic (33145 km2)
E. Mountainous moderate humid
(23425 km2)
F. Mountainous moderate semihumid (11798 km2)
Subtypes
А1. Lowland and plain, semi-desert and
desert (32246 km2)
B1. Plain and hilly steppe (109809 km2)
C1. Foothill meadow-steppe, meadow,
shrubby and steppe-forest (13054 km2)
C2. Foothill steppe-forest and forest (10400
km2)
D1. Lowland deltaic and alluvial (33145
km2)
E1. Lower-mountainous-forest (10305 km2)
E2. Mid-mountainous-forest (13120 km2)
F1. Lower-mountainous forest-shrubbymeadow-steppe (2803 km2)
2
G. Mountainous moderate
semiarid (1551 km2)
H. Mountainous cold moderate
(8898 km2)
I. Alpine meadow (25958 km2)
J. Glacial-nival (368 km2)
F2. Mid-mountainous meadow-steppesteppeforest, shibljak and frigana (7000 km2)
F3. Mountainous-hollow, forest-shrubbymeadow-steppe (1995 km2)
G1. Mountainous-hollow steppe and shibljak
(1551 km2)
H1. Mid-mountainous forest dark coniferous
(2441 km2)
H2. Alpine forest pine and birch (6457 km2)
I1. Alpine subalpine shrubby-meadow
(15691 km2)
I2. Alpine shrubby-meadow (7669 km2)
I3. Alpine subnival (2598 km2)
J1. Glaciers (368 km2)
I. Plain and foothill hilly landscapes.
Plain moderate arid landscapes (A) begin a series of zonal landscapes in the
north and north-east. They are spread on 32,2 thousand km2 (11,9% of the total
area) and refer to the Terek-Kuma lowland and the coast of the Caspian sea, as
well as to the Kuma-Manych depression (valley). These landscapes occupy a
special place among the natural territorial complexes of the South of Russia, due to
their transitional position between the steppes in the North and North-West and
deserts in the South and South-East.
The lowland plain relief with a large set of accumulative and aeolian forms is
typical here. The average annual air temperature is 9,5–11,5С. January
temperature varies from positive values on the coast of the Caspian sea to -3,5–
5,0C in the Kuma-Manych valley. In summer the temperature can reach +23,0–
25,0C. Annual rainfall ranges from 200 to 250 mm on the coast to 350-400 mm
on the border with steppes. In accordance with such conditions the coefficient of
moisture changes from less than 0,20 on the coast to 0,35–0,45 during the
transition to the steppes.
Land cover is characterized by complexity: here the fragments of adjacent
landscapes – desert and steppe are combined; in particular the significant area
within the given type of landscapes occupies the deserted steppes in combination
with semi-desert groups. Zonal type of soil that traditionally diagnoses these
landscapes is chestnut.
Within this type 1 subtype can be distinguished – lowland and plain, semidesert and desert (А1). In general, this landscape is characterized by a rather
monotonous morphological structure, within which the most widely represented
typical natural-territorial complexes are the following:
– cereal-wormwood semi-deserts on the light-chestnut solonetzic soils with
saline;
– wormwood-fescue-feather grass dry steppes on chestnut soils;
– wormwood-cereal and cereal-wormwood deserted steppes, combined with
the breakers on the light chestnut soils;
– saltwort and wormwood semi-deserts on the light chestnut solonetzicsaline soils;
3
– saltwort, saltwort-wormwood deserts and semi-deserts on the light chestnut
soils;
– cereal-wormwood and saltwort semi-deserts on the light chestnut soils.
Plain and hilly warm-moderate and moderate semiarid landscapes (B)
are the most typical in the territory of the Northern Caucasus and occupy 109809
km2 (40,6%). The most widely they are presented in the West and Central
Ciscaucasia. In the East Ciscaucasia they are stretched in a narrow strip between the
semi-desert landscapes on the coast of the Caspian Sea and low mountain ridges of
the Greater Caucasus. They are characterized by plain relief with a combination of
accumulative and denudation forms.
Annual temperature varies from 8,0–9,0C in the foothills and the highest
parts to 10,0–10,5C on the coast of the Black Sea. In the coldest month
temperature falls to -4,5–5,0C, and in summer can reach +23,5 to 24,5C. Annual
rainfall varies from 350 to 500 mm. Coefficient of moisture with an average of
0,47 varies from 0,35 to 0,55 [17].
Steppe vegetation is represented by a number of groups, the spatial
distribution of which is determined by the local conditions: from the richly-forb
turf-cereal steppes in the West and Central to the turf-cereal and rhizome-cereal in
the Eastern Ciscaucasia. During the transition to the foothills of the Greater
Caucasus and in depressions forb-grass and grass-forb meadow steppes, in
combination with steppe meadows are developed. Zonal type of soils is
chernozems of different capacity.
Within this type of landscapes 1 subtype is presented: plain and hilly steppe
(B1). Morphological structure of these landscapes, as well as semi-desert ones, is
complex and diversified, as the dominant natural-territorial complexes occupy
quite a large area. The most widely represented natural-territorial complexes are the
following:
– richly-forb and turf-cereal steppes on the chernozems;
– forb-cereal meadow steppes and riparian forests on the leached chernozems;
– cereal and cereal-forb steppes on the chernozems;
– forb-cereal steppes on the ordinary low humus content and southern
chernozems;
– forb-fescue-feather grass steppes on the southern chernozems;
– feather-grass-fescue-forb steppes on the southern chernozems;
– turf-cereal and turf-forb steppes on the southern chernozems;
– feather-grass-fescue dry steppes on dark chestnut soils;
– feather-grass-fescue-wormwood steppes on the chernozems;
– forb-fescue-feather-grass steppes on the chernozems;
– meadow and richly forb-turf-cereal steppes in combination with cerealforb stepped meadows on the southern chernozems;
– forb-cereal steppes and meadow-steppes on the southern chernozems;
– forb-turf-cereal and turf-forb steppes on the southern and common
chernozems.
4
Foothill-hilly warm-moderate and moderate semi-humid landscapes (C)
occupy 23454 km2 (8,7%) and are the most widely presented in the West
Ciscaucasia. They are the transitional band between the mountain structure of the
Greater Caucasus and Ciscaucasian plains. Within the Central Ciscaucasia they
occupy the area of the Caucasian Mineral waters, and also they are fragmentarily
presented in Dagestan. A distinctive feature of the relief of these landscapes is that
gentle sloping plains as well as relict arrays are presented here (Sychev mountains
with heights up to 850 m).
This situation affects the climate: due to the approach to the mountains, there
is a slight decrease in air temperature and increase in rainfall here. Thus, the
average annual air temperature within this type of landscapes is about +10C,
while in winter it can fall to -3,0 of 4,0C, and in summer it can reach +17,5–
20,0C. The coefficient of moisture is >0,60, that corresponds to the forest-steppe
conditions [8; 16].
Vegetation is represented by fragments of forests (oak and hornbeam), that
previously were much more widespread, as well as forb-cereal and cereal-forb
mesophytic and xero-mesophytic forb meadow steppe and stepped meadows. In the
soil cover the most widely represented are typical and leached chernozems,
fragmentarily there can be found grey forest and alluvial soils.
This type of landscapes is represented by two subtypes: foothill meadow
steppe, meadow, shrubby and forest-steppe (C1) and foothill forest-steppe and forest
(C2). According to the set of elementary natural-territorial complexes this type of
landscapes is the most diversified among the other zonal types of landscapes.
Among them the most widely represented are:
– foothill stepped meadows and meadow steppes on the alluvial and meadowchernozem soil;
– meadow steppes in combination with cereal-forb stepped meadows and
shrubs on the chernozems;
– meadow steppes with oak-hornbeam forests on the chernozems and grey
forest soil;
– meadow steppes with hornbeam-oak and oak forests on the chernozems and
grey forest soil;
– turf-cereal steppes in combination with shibljak and mixed-oak forests on
the chernozems and grey forest soil.
Hydromorphic and subhydromorphic landscapes (D), as it has already
been noted, are azonal, and their existence is connected with lower currents of the
largest rivers in the Caucasus: the Kuban in the West and the Terek River in the
East. This type of landscape occupies a quite vast area (33145 km2, 12,2%),
especially in the west part. It is composed of sediments of these rivers and its main
difference from the contiguous zonal landscapes (steppe and semi-desert) is that
groundwater comes close to the surface, and as a result the ranks of meadow
vegetation are formed, and in the most depressed areas – wetlands and salt marshes
are formed. In the floodplains forest vegetation is formed. Climatic conditions are
5
similar to adjacent landscapes. Here 1 subtype of landscapes can be distinguished –
lowland deltaic and alluvial (D1).
II. Mountainous landscapes.
Mountainous moderate humid landscapes (E) are represented almost on
the whole northern macroslope of the Greater Caucasus from the bottom to the height
of 1500-1600 m and occupies 23425 km2 (8,7%)on the slopes of the Rocky Ridge,
the Pasture Ridge, the Wooded Ridge and their spurs [9; 18]. They are also found on
the slopes of the ridges surrounding Inner Dagestan (Andean, Salatau, Gimrinskiy)
[2]. They are characterized by karst, karst-denudation and erosion-denudation reliefs.
The area occupied by this type of landscape, is characterized by moderately
warm and humid climate. Temperature is 1,5–5,0°C in winter and 17,0–22,0°C in
summer; average annual temperature varies from 8–9°C at the lower limit up to 6–
7°C on the top one. Annual rainfall ranges from 500–600 up to 800–900 mm, the
main part of which falls in the warm season. From the west to the east there can be
observed strengthening of the continental climate.
These conditions are most favourable for the development of deciduous
forests, in the main canopy of which oaks (pedunculate and rock), beech,
hornbeam, Linden, ash, elm and others are dominated. In Dagestan, in connection
with drying of climate and deforestation, thickets of thorny shrubs and meadow
natural-territorial complexes appear. Topical for such vegetation are the brown
mountain-forest and humus-carbonate soils (on limestone).
Within this type of landscapes there are 2 subtypes: lower mountainousforest (E1) and mid-forest (E2). Due to a set of typical natural-territorial complexes
this type of landscape is not very diversified. In addition to serial, the most widely
represented here are the following natural-territorial complexes:
– oak and hornbeam-oak forests with undergrowth on brown mountain-forest
soils;
– beech-hornbeam and hornbeam-beech forests (herbal and with
undergrowth) on brown mountain-forest soils.
Despite the rather limited distribution (4,4% and 0,6% of the area of the
territory) mountainous moderate semi-humid and mountainous moderate semiarid
landscapes are the most original in the mountainous part of the North Caucasus.
Their existence as hydromorphic and subhydromorphic on the plain is connected
with azonal factors, which complicate the altitudinal range of landscapes. As a
result the differences between them consist in a set of elementary natural-territorial
complexes – it is larger within semi-humid landscapes.
Mountainous moderate semi-humid landscapes (F) are unequally
represented within the Greater Caucasus: in the Western Caucasus, they are
confined to hollows between to the lowest ridges, in the Central – to hollows and
slopes of mid-mountains, in the Eastern – to the advanced ranges, mid-mountains
and the widest parts of the valleys of large rivers [15]. Despite the difference in the
location, sets of forms and types of relief, these landscapes are united by common
climatic conditions, in particular, hydration corresponds to steppe-forests
(coefficient of moisture = 0,6–0,9) here. As a result natural complexes form rather
6
long series on the locations: from the forest on the most humid to the steppe in the
most arid.
Within this mountainous type of landscapes 3 subtype can be distinguished:
low-mountainous forest-shrubby-meadow-steppe (F1); mid-mountainous meadow,
steppe, meadow-steppe, shibljak and frigana (F2); mountainous-hollow forestshrubby-meadow-steppe (F3). Here the most widely represented indigenous
natural-territorial complexes are the following:
– stepped mountainous meadows, areas of mountainous steppes and
fragments of oak-hornbeam forests on chernozems;
– stepped meadows (meadow-steppes) in combination with beech and
hornbeam-oak forests on chernozems.
Mountainous moderate semiarid landscapes (G) are stretched in the
interval of heights from 600–700 to 1100–1300 m and are found exclusively in
hollows. Within the Western and Central Caucasus they occur between the Side and
the Rocky Ridge (North Jurassic depression), and in the east, in the Inner Dagestan also in the broad river valleys [6; 13; 14]. The erosion-accumulative relief is typical
here. In comparison with zonal landscapes climate is characterized by higher
temperatures but lower rainfall. Temperature of the coldest month is 2–4° C, of the
warmest river +18–20°C, and the annual average temperature is 8–10° C. Annual
amount of precipitations does not exceed 350–550 mm per year, and coefficient of
moisture is 0,4–0,6. As a result, here are widely represented frigana, shibljak,
mountainous steppes, although there are the fragments of forest on the circulating
slopes. Mountain steppes and humus-carbonate soils are typical here.
Within this type of landscapes there is 1 subtype: mountainous-hollowsteppe, shibljak and frigana (G1). The typical natural-territorial complexes are the
following:
– mountain steppes, shibljak in a complex with arid woodlands and frigana
on the mountainous-steppe soils;
– thickets of thorny bushes (shibljak) in combination with mountainous
steppes on the chestnut soils.
Mountainous cold moderate landscapes (H) are spread in the range of
heights from 1000–1200 to 2200–2400 m and occupy 8898 km2 (3,3%). Erosiondenudation, karst and partially paleo-glacial reliefs are typical here. Area of
distribution of these landscapes is characterized by cold-temperate and rather
humid climate. The average temperature of the coldest month descend to -3,5 – 6,5°C, of the warmest one can reach 14,0–16,0° C; the average annual temperature
is +5–6°C. Annual amount of precipitation varies from 1000 mm in the West to
800 mm in the centre and 600 mm in the East. Humidification is sufficient and
excessive (coefficient of moisture = 0,9–1,3). Forest vegetation is typical: in the
West there are presented beech-dark coniferous forests, which go into coniferous
and on the upper edge of the forest – to the small-leaved (birch and mixed-birch).
Coniferous forests disappear on the territory of the Central Caucasus and re-appear
in Dagestan. Within the continental sector coniferous forests are absent. Forests,
located on the border of forest and meadow areas, have the appearance of crooked
7
and lower forests. Typical soils under forests are mountainous-forest, podzolic and
often ashed.
This type of landscapes is divided into 2 subtypes: mid-mountainous dark
coniferous forest (H1) and the upper-mountainous pine and birch forest (H2). This
type of landscapes is not very diversified by indigenous natural-territorial
complexes and the typical complexes are:
– pine and pine-birch forests on mountainous-forest soils;
– birch and beech-birch crooked and lower forests on mountainous-forest
soils.
Alpine meadow landscapes (I) are located in the mountainous part, where
they occupy 25,958 km2 (9,6%) in the range of heights from 1800–2000 to 3200–
3400 m. They are widespread on the slopes of the Main, and the Advanced, Side and
Rocky ridges [5; 12]. This part is composed by the whole complex of rocks; as a
result here is represented volcanic, denudation, erosion and karst relief. Powerful
glaciation in the Western and Central Caucasus resulted in the presence of a large
number of forms of the modern and ancient glacial relief. The climate is
characterized by short, cool summer and long cold and snowy winter. Temperature
of the coldest month drops to -8–12°C, of the warmest – +7–12°C, accordingly, the
average annual temperature ranges from +2–2,5°C in the subalpine belt to -2,5°C
and below – in the alpine. Rainfall varies from 600 to 1800 mm per year, and with
increase of a height its proportion falling in a solid form increases. Vegetation is
represented mainly by meadows (subalpine and alpine), which are combined with
shrubby thickets of elfin type (Caucasian rhododendron and juniper). Under the
meadows mountainous-meadow soils are developed; in relatively dry habitats,
under meadow steppes, chernozemlike soils are formed.
This type of landscapes includes three subtypes: alpine, subalpine forestshrubby-meadow (I1) alpine shrubby-meadow (I2) and alpine subnival (I3). Here
are the grassy and shrubby types of natural-territorial complexes. The first group
includes a variety of meadows, in the species composition of which the ratio of
grains and herbs is the most changing, while the second includes shrubby elfins
presented by thickets of either Caucasian rhododendron, or various kinds of
junipers. Cereal-herb meadows on mountainous-meadow soils are the most widely
spread here.
Glacial-nival landscapes (J1), or glaciers, are spread in the most elevated
part of the mountain structure, starting from a height of 3400–3800 m. The total area
of modern glaciation on the northern slope of the Greater Caucasus is estimated by
various sources, from 368 to 800-900 km2.
The landscapes of the North Caucasus are characterized by varying degrees
of economic development. Within plain landscapes the most fully mastered are
plain and hilly warm-moderate and moderate semi-arid landscapes, and foothill-hilly
warm-moderate and moderate semi-humid landscapes. For example, in the
Stavropol region almost 90% of the territory occupied by these landscapes is
involved in agricultural turnover [29]. That is vegetation was the most strongly
transformed. Within the Great Caucasus mountainous moderate semiarid and
8
mountainous moderate semi-humid landscapes are most fully mastered [3, 4, 10],
and the loading on the rest of the mountainous landscapes is significantly lower,
especially lately.
At the present time all of these types and their corresponding subtypes of
landscapes of the Northern Caucasus are populated in varying degrees except
subnival and glacial-nival landscapes.
As for the North-East Caucasus [1, 10, 22], the area of human settlements
were determined from topographic maps of scale 1: 200 000. This figure includes
the area of urban and rural development, as well as the villages of country type.
Then the obtained data on human settlements (HS) – their size and number, were
correlated with an area of subtypes of landscapes, in addition, there was calculated
the average area of the human settlement within the landscape.
Modern settlement loading on the landscapes of the North Caucasus
illustrated in Table 2.
Table 2
Modern settlement loading on landscapes of the North Caucasus
Landscapes
А1. Lowland and
plain, semi-desert and
desert
B1. Plain and hilly
steppe
C1. Foothill meadowsteppe, meadow,
shrubby and forest
C2. Foothill foreststeppe and forest
D1. Low-land deltaic
and alluvial
Total
E1. Low mountainous
forest
E2. Mid mountainous
forest
F1. Lowland forest,
shrubby- forest,
meadow and steppe
F2. Mid-mountainous
meadow, steppe,
meadow-steppe,
shiblyak and frigana
Landscape
area, km2
Average
Area of
Number of
area of
human
human
human
settlements,
settlements
settlements,
km2
km2
Percentage
(share) of
localities
in the
landscape,
%
32247
I. Plain
401
314
1,3
1,24
108602
4408
2374
1,9
4,06
14261
920
427
2,1
6,45
10401
709
401
1,8
6,81
33145
2125
1323
1,6
6,41
8563
4839
II. Mountainous
318
284
1,74
4,31
1,1
3,02
198656
10543
13121
192
475
0,4
1,46
2815
83
72
1,1
2,95
6762
148
392
0,4
2,19
9
F3. Mountainous
hollow forestshrubby-meadowsteppe
G1. Mountainoushollow-steppe and
shiblyak
H1. Mid-mountainous
forest dark coniferous
H2. Uppermountainous forest
pine and birch
I1. Alpine, subalpine
forest-shrubbymeadow
I2. Alpine shrubbymeadow
Total
TOTAL on the
landscapes of the
North Caucasus
1985
102
129
0,8
5,14
1552
52
114
0,5
3,35
2441
11
18
0,6
0,45
6457
33
182
0,2
0,51
15690
44
255
0,2
0,28
7689
1
9
0,1
0,01
69055
267708
984
9546
1930
6769
0,54
0,93
1,42
3,57
As seen from the data in the North Caucasus total number of settlements
(cities, towns, villages and rural suburban types) which are reflected on the maps is
6769 and they occupy 9546 km2. Naturally, their distribution cannot significantly
differ in the mountainous and plain parts. So, in the plain part there are 4839
settlements with a total area of 8563 km2, and in the mountainous – 1930
settlements which occupy 984 km2, respectively. That is, within the plain
landscapes, occupying 74% of the territory of the North Caucasus, 90% of
settlements is located; and in the mountainous region, which occupies 26%, only
10% of settlements is located. With an average area of the settlements of 0,93 km2, it
takes on the plain – 1,74 km2, and in the mountainous area – 0,54 km2.
Despite some monotony of relief plain landscapes rather significantly differ
by the level of development. Relatively poorly developed are low-lying plains and
semi-desert and desert landscapes, occupying the Caspian depression and KumaManych cavity. Only 314 settlements are located here with a total area of 401 km2,
and their share is only 1,24%. In general, it can be explained by quite unfavourable
natural conditions – long dry season and the lack of vegetation cover, which allows
the population to be involved mainly in cattle with the corresponding system of
settlement. Comparable in size with these landscapes lowland deltaic and alluvial
ones occupying the lower reaches of the Kuban, Terek and Sulak, characterized by a
much greater development. Apparently it is connected with more favorable soil
moisture, and thus the possibility of farming. Here are 1323 settlements with total
area of 2125 km2, i.e. they occupy 6,41%. Despite these differences, the average
area of the settlements within these subtypes of landscapes is minimal among all
classes of plain landscape – 1,3–1,6 km2.
10
The largest area among the plain landscapes is occupied by steppe – 108602
km , here is marked the maximum number of settlements – 2374, as well as area
occupied by them – 2374 km2. Due to the fact that these landscapes are the most
favorable for agriculture of grain type, here can be noted a relatively small average
size of settlements – 1.9 km2, and, in general, their share is slightly more than 4% of
the total area of this subtype of landscapes.
As it can be seen from the data, the most favorable for settlement and
residence within the North Caucasus are foothill landscapes. Despite the fact that
they occupy the smallest area, they are characterized by maximum share of human
settlements among not only plain, but all the landscapes of the Northern Caucasus:
6,45% within the foothill meadow-steppe, meadow, shrubby and steppe-forest
landscapes and 6,81% – within the foothill steppe-forest and forest landscapes.
Besides it can be noted the maximum average value of the settlement here – up to
2,1 km2. This is explained by the fact that in the foothills there is observed the
maximum diversity of conditions inside the landscapes: from steppe in the relatively
plain relief to the steppe-forest and even isolated areas of forest (e.g., Strizhament on
the Stavropol Upland). All this creates the favorable conditions not only for living,
but also for farming.
Mountainous landscapes, widely spread on the northern macroslope of
Greater Caucasus, are characterized by a great variety, from the forest in low-and
lower mountainous to glacial-nival in the highest parts of the mountain structure. As
for the settlement loading, it is quite different on the various landscapes. Overall
with the increase of absolute altitude the area of human settlements decreases, but
this process occurs abruptly. So, the greatest absolute area of human settlements
occurs within the Lower and Mid-mountainous forest landscapes (200-300 km2).
The second kind of "maximum development" is noted in the hollows, where the area
of human settlements can reach 100-150 km2, and then, with the increase of height,
due to the deterioration of conditions for human habitation and permanent living, its
presence is reduced to a minimum in the high alpine landscapes.
The number of settlements is maximum in the Low-mountainous forest and
high subalpine landscapes. This is explained in the first case by a relatively
favorable habitat conditions, and in the second – by the fact that these landscapes
have a maximum distribution area in the mountains.
2
Summary and Conclusions
Informative indicator, reflecting the ease and comfort for living, is the
proportion of area within the landscapes that is occupied by human settlements.
According to this indicator, mountainous landscapes can be divided into three
groups. The first group includes Alpine, sub-Alpine landscapes, as well as the midmountainous dark coniferous forest, where the share of human settlements is
closed to 0.5%. Limiting factor for settlement, as it was mentioned, is the severe
climatic conditions in the highlands, as well as the complexity of farming in areas of
coniferous forests, which are characterized by a fairly large amount of precipitation.
The second group includes forest landscapes of lower forest level (low - and midmountainous forest), mid-mountainous meadow, steppe meadow-steppe, shibljak
11
and frigana, low-mountainous forest, shrubby-forest, meadow and steppe, where
the share of human settlements is 3% of the area of the landscape. Finally, the most
favorable for living and farming are the mountainous-hollow steppe and shibljak,
as well as mountainous-hollow forest-shrubby-meadow-steppe landscapes, where
the share of human settlements is maximum – more than 5,1%. These landscapes
are characterized by the minimum area not only among the mountainous but also
among all other landscapes of the Northern Caucasus.
The research revealed that the most attractive for settlement and farming are
the areas with the highest diversity in landscapes. On the plains of Ciscaucasia, they
can be foothill landscapes, and in the Greater Caucasus – mountainous hollows [7],
which actually perform "the settlement landscapes" for the peoples which
historically inhabited this territory. It is possible that this contradiction is overriding
in the evolution of environmental relations "people – the natural environment," and
therefore the study of its genesis and adaptation and disadaptation mechanisms is
fundamentally important for geographical science.
Notes
1. Abdullaev K.A. Assessment of the burden on the residential landscape of
mountainous Dagestan // Proceedings of the Dagestan State Pedagogical University.
Natural and Exact Sciences. 2009. Number 1. Pp. 84-86. 2. Abdullaev K.A., Atayev
Z.V., Bratkov V.V. Modern landscapes of the Mountain Dagestan. Makhachkala:
Dagestan State Pedagogical University, 2011. 116 p. 3. Atayev Z.V. The landscapes
of the High-Dagestan and their current status // Proceedings of the Dagestan State
Pedagogical University. Natural and Exact Sciences. 2007. Number 1. Pp. 90-99.
4. Atayev Z.V. Landscapes of the intermountain hollows of Dagestan // Natural and
Technical Sciences. 2008. Number 4. Pp. 176-178. 5. Atayev Z.V. Landscape and
ecological features of high Dagestan // Problems of agricultural development in the
regions, 2011. V. 7. Number 3. Pp. 9-16. 6. Atayev Z.V., Bratkov V.V. Mountainhollows of landscapes of the North-Eastern Caucasus: Current climate change and
seasonal dynamics. Makhachkala: Dagestan State Pedagogical University, 2011. 123
p. 7. Atayev Z.V., Bratkov V.V. The current state of the residential development of
landscapes of the Northern Caucasus // Proceedings of the Geographic Society of the
Republic of Dagestan, 2011. Number 39. Pp. 25-31. 8. Atayev Z.V., Bratkov V.V.,
Gadzhimuradova Z.M., Zaurbekov Sh.Sh. Climatic features and the temporal
structure of the landscapes of the foothills of the North-East Caucasus // Proceedings
of the Dagestan State Pedagogical University. Natural and Exact Sciences, 2011.
Number 1. Pp. 92-96. 9. Atayev Z.V., Bratkov V.V., Khalidova N.A. Seasonal
dynamics of mountain temperate humid landscapes of the Northern Caucasus //
Proceedings of the Dagestan State Pedagogical University. Natural and Exact
Sciences, 2011. Number 2. Pp. 81-86. 10. Atayev Z.V., Zaurbekov Sh.Sh., Bratkov
V.V. Modern residential development of landscapes of the North-Eastern Caucasus //
Proceedings of the Dagestan State Pedagogical University. Natural and Exact
Sciences. 2010. Number 1. Pp. 71-74. 11. Beruchashvili N.L. Caucasus: landscapes,
models, experiments. Tbilisi: Publishing House of the Tbilisi State University, 1995.
315 p. 12. Bratkov V.V., Atayev Z.V. High mountain meadow landscapes of the
12
North-Western and North-Eastern Caucasus // Proceedings of the Dagestan State
Pedagogical University. Natural and Exact Sciences. 2009. Number 2. Pp. 93-103.
13. Bratkov V.V., Atayev Z.V. Integrated assessment of the impact of climatic
conditions on the mountain hollows of landscapes of the northern slope of the Greater
Caucasus // Proceedings of the Dagestan State Pedagogical University. Natural and
Exact Sciences. 2009. Number 3. Pp. 99-101. 14. Bratkov V.V., Atayev Z.V.
Geographical features of the influence of climatic conditions on the mountain hollows
of landscapes of the northern slope of the Greater Caucasus // The South of Russia:
the environment, the development. 2009. Number 4. Pp. 192-195. 15. Bratkov V.V.,
Atayev Z.V., Bairamkulova B.O. Geographic features of the temperate mountain
semi-humid and semi-arid landscapes of the northern slope of the Greater Caucasus //
Proceedings of the Dagestan State Pedagogical University. Natural and Exact
Sciences. 2009. Number 1. Pp. 92-96. 16. Bratkov V.V., Atayev Z.V., Baysieva
L.K., Gadzhimuradova Z.M. The influence of climatic changes on longtime structure
of foothill landscapes of the North-Eastern Caucasus // Proceedings of the Dagestan
State Pedagogical University. Natural and Exact Sciences. 2013. Number 1. Pp. 7680. 17. Bratkov V.V., Gadzhibekov M.I., Atayev Z.V. Climatic variability and
dynamics of semi-arid landscapes of the North-Western Caspian // Proceedings of the
Dagestan State Pedagogical University. Natural and Exact Sciences. 2008. Number 4.
Pp. 90-99. 18. Bratkov V.V., Salpagarov D.S. Landscapes of the North-Western and
North-Eastern Caucasus. M. : Ileksa, 2001. 256 p. 19. Gvozdetskii N.A. Caucasus.
Sketches of nature. M.: Geografgiz, 1963. 264 p. 20. Gvozdetskii N.A. Physical
geography of the Caucasus. The general part. Greater Caucasus. Issue 1. Moscow:
Moscow University Press, 1954. 208 p.
21. Gvozdetskii N.A., Smagina T.A.
Physical and geographical regionalization // Environment and Natural Resources.
Rostov-on-Don: Publishing house of Rostov University Press, 1986. Pp. 300-338.
22. Idrissova R.A. Landscapes of the Chechen Republic: the spatial structure and
features of the residential load: Thesis abstract of dissertation for the degree of
candidate of geographical sciences. Nalchik, 2009. 24 p. 23. Kalesnik S.V. The
North Caucasus and the Lower Don. Moscow-Leningrad, 1946. 24. Physical map of
the Caucasus. Scale 1: 1,000,000 / Comp. N.L. Beruchashvili, S.R. Arutyunov, A.G.
Tediashvili. Tbilisi, 1979. 25. Physical map of the USSR (for higher education) of 1:
4,000,000 / Science Editor is A.G. Isachenko. Moscow, 1986. 26. Environment
Outlook Caucasian / Ed. N.L. Beruchashvili etc. UNEP GRID. Tbilisi, 2002. 98 p.
27. Chupahin V.M. Physical geography of the Northern Caucasus. Rostov-on-Don:
Publishing house of Rostov University Press, 1974. 200 p. 28. Chupahin V.M.,
Smagina T.A. Landscape Survey map of the Northern Caucasus and Lower Don //
Geographical research in the Northern Caucasus and the Lower Don. Rostov-on-Don:
Publishing house of Rostov University Press, 1973. Pp. 84-92. 29. Shal'nev V.A.
Landscapes of the Northern Caucasus: evolution and modernity. Stavropol:
Publishing House of the SSU, 2004. 265 p. 30. Radvanyi J., Beroutchachvili N.
Atlas géopolitique du Caucase. Paris, 2009.
13
Information about the authors:
Zagir V. Atayev – Russia, Makhachkala, Dagestan State Pedagogical University, ViceRector on Scientific Work, Candidate of Geography, Professor of the Department of Physical
Geography and Geoecology. E-mail: zagir05@mail.ru
Vitaly V. Bratkov – Russia, Moscow, Moscow State University of Geodesy and
Cartography, Head of the Department of Geography, Doctor of Geography, Professor. E-mail:
vbratkov@mail.ru
14
Отзывы:
Авторизуйтесь, чтобы оставить отзыв