Forum geografic. Studii și cercetări de geografie și protecția mediului Volume XVI, Issue 2 (December 2017), pp. 126-131 (6) http://dx.doi.org/10.5775/fg.2017.023.d

A web-map of the landscapes of Mountain and the development of landscape science in

Jordan TZVETKOV1,* 1 Space Research and Technology Institute, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1113, Akad. Georgy Bonchev St., Bl.1 * Corresponding author: [email protected] Received on 05-01-2017, reviewed on 25-03-2017, accepted on 30-03-2017

Abstract Rezumat. O hartă web a peisajelor Muntelui Vitosha și dezvoltarea științei peisajului în On the first hand, the purpose of this article is to present the map and classification of the landscapes of Vitosha Mountain. On the Bulgaria other hand, it aims to present this map as an example and În primul rând, scopul articolului este acela de a prezenta illustration in the context of traditionally applied approaches in clasificarea peisajelor și harta acestora la nivelul Muntelui Vitosha. Bulgaria in defining the landscape, as well as in researching and Pe de altă parte, lucrarea furnizează harta ca exem-plu și ilustrare classifying the landscapes. There is also a brief overview of the în contextul abordărilor tradiționale utilizate în Bulgaria cu privire development of land-scape science in Bulgaria. la definirea peisajului, precum și în cercetarea și clasificarea The choice of the territory in study relates to the fact that Vitosha peisajelor. În articol se realizează și o succintă prezentare a Mountain is a protected area, i.e. a Nature park declared in 1934, dezvoltării științei peisajului în Bulgaria. now part of the NATURA 2000 network. Alegerea arealului de studiu este legată de faptul că Muntele The Vitosha Landscape Map is developed by using GIS tools and Vitosha reprezintă o arie protejată, fiind declarat Parc natural în it is implemented as a web-map, which makes it much easier to 1934, iar în prezent este parte a rețelei Natura 2000. access, examine and work with it, as com-pared to static maps. Harta peisajelor Muntelui Vitosha este realizată prin utiliz-area Keywords: Vitosha Mountain, landscapes, GIS, web-mapping instrumentelor GIS și este implementată ca o hartă web, ceea ce ușurează mult accesul, examinarea și lucrul cu aceasta, în comparație cu hărțile statice.

Cuvinte-cheie: Muntele Vitosha, peisaje, SIG, web-mapping

scapes (or primary landscape structure) and second one being that of the anthropogenic landscape Introduction chang-es (or secondary landscape structure). All attributes of the layers are bilingually expressed (in In the context of the European Landscape Bulgarian and English), which, in combination with Conven-tion – ELC (ratified in 2004 by the Bulgarian the easy ac-cess to the web-map, makes it suitable to Parlia-ment) it is crucial to increase cooperation in present some of the landscape concepts used in landscape science between all European countries, Bulgaria to a broader scientific audience. because ELC emphasizes that landscape “identification and as-sessment procedures shall be A short history of the landscape science in guided by the exchang-es of experience and Bulgaria methodology, organised be-tween the Parties at European level”. Landscape sci-ence in Bulgaria has a The development of the landscape science in Bul- long tradition. It covers nu-merous branches like garia started in the first half of the 20th century in the landscape mapping, landscape evaluation, landscape Sofia University, with the names of Prof. Jeko Radev geochemistry etc. Unfortunate-ly, as most of the and Prof. Dimitar Yaranov, who first used the term publications in this field are issued in Bulgarian “landscape” in their scientific works. In 1934, Prof. language, they are not well known to the Ivan Batakliev published “Landscape differentiation of international scientific community in the area of land- Bulgaria”, the first scientific paper dedicated scape science and landscape ecology. In an attempt especially to landscape science issues. In 1943, Ignat to fill this gap, in the present article we will present a Penkov published a broad study with the title “Cultural short introduction to the development of landscape land-scapes”. Most of them follow the German science in Bulgaria. Then, we will introduce a web- tradition in landscape science. After the WWII, D. map of the landscapes in Vitosha Mountain (South- Yaranov and I. Batakliev were dismissed from the West Bulgaria), as an example of this tradition. This Sofia University and the development of landscape web-map application is made by using free GIS tools science was dis-continued for nearly 25 years. In in QGIS Cloud service. It contains two separate lay- 1970, I. Ivanov, D. Dimitrov and P. Penchev argued ers, the first one being that of the potential land- the necessity of Bul-garian physical geography to turn

126 Forum geografic. Studii și cercetări de geografie și protecția mediului Volume XVI, Issue 2 (December 2017), pp. 126-131 http://dx.doi.org/10.5775/fg.2017.023.d again to the study of landscape problems. In 1972, To the end of the eighties, landscape science in the Department of Landscape Science (now Bulgaria (Petrov, 1990) was strongly influenced by the Landscape Science and Envi-ronmental Protection) scientific traditions and concepts established in the was established in the Faculty of Geology and former Soviet Union and in other Eastern and Central Geography of the Sofia University. Until the end of the Europe countries. Afterwards, broader scientific con- eighties, many young geogra-phers were trained in cepts, theories and methods from the field of land- the field of landscape science in the former Soviet scape ecology started to penetrate the Bulgarian Union, where they acquired Ph.D. For several landscape science. The contemporary challenge of decades, hundreds of scientific publica-tions were Bulgarian landscape science is to apply these con- issued, covering almost all branches in the field of cepts developed in different scientific schools, pre- landscape science, such as landscape classifi-cation serving the best of the old tradition and accepting all and landscape mapping, landscape geophysics, the best from the landscape ecology. landscape geochemistry, and landscape evaluation (Velchev et al., 2011). Table 1 Comparison of the two basic landscape classifications in Bulgaria Petrov, 1979 Velchev et al., 1992 Landscape Taxonomic Taxonomic level Criteria Criteria unit unit Level 1 Class Physical conditions of the surface Class Relief and its geologic content – territory or water surface. (plains or mountains). Macro-geomorphologic features, determining the character of zo- nation (plains or mountains). Level 2 Type Typical features of zonation; veg- Type Hydroclimatic conditions; vegeta- etation and soil type. tion types and their relation with cli- mate conditions. Level 3 Subtype Features of zonation inside the Subtype Secondary features of zonation and type; vegetation and soil subtype. bioclimatic conditions. Level 4 Group Geologic and geomorphologic Genus Relief type and geological struc- features – mesorelief; base rock tures; vegetation and soil. formation (parent material); phy- tocoenosis and soil. Level 5 Species The most relative homogeneity of Species Geologic and geomorphologic ho- the environmental features. mogeneity; soil-vegetation cover; microclimate conditions.

water masses, soils, vegetation cover, animals, The view of landscape and the land-scape human activity reshaping the natural environment classifications in Bulgaria (Petrov, 1990; Velchev et al., 2011). The view of landscape in Bulgarian science is On the national level, there are two basic land- mainly based on the works of the Russian scientists scape classifications accompanied by landscape maps and geographers like V. V. Dokuchaev, L. S. Berg, A. for Bulgaria. The first one is based on N. A. A. Grigoriev, S. V. Kalesnik, N. A. Solntsev, A. G. Isa- Gvozdetskii’s landscape classification and it was ac- chenko, N. A. Gvozdetskii, F. N. Milkov, D. L. Armand, companied by a landscape map at scale 1:400,000 V. A. Nikolaev, and V. B. Sochava. In this context, a (Petrov, 1979). The second one is based on N. L. common definition of landscape accepts that it is “a Berouchashvili’s landscape classification and it was natural formation in exact stage and operating in time accompanied by a landscape map at scale 1:500,000 and space within the environmental system; it holds (Velchev et al., 1992). Table 1 displays the taxonomic some natural resources and it is affected more or less units and the differentiation criteria. by the human activity” (Velchev et al., 2011). In con- Besides these two basic classifications, several trast with one of the broad accepted views in land- dozens of variants and modified versions of them, as scape ecology, where “a landscape is an area that is well as a few generally different landscape classifica- spatially heterogeneous in at least one factor of inter- tions were used for landscape mapping only for a part est” (Turner et al., 2001), this perspective postulates of the country and they were not applied at national a more holistic approach, i.e. landscape is only a spa- level. tial whole consisting of all environmental components: rocks and geologic structures, geomorphologic fea-tures, air masses and its climate,

127

A web-map of the landscapes of Vitosha Mountain and the development of landscape science in Bulgaria Short description of the study area Level four (Group) with differentiation criteria: Vitosha Mountain is located in South-West Bulgar- topological features of the relief. ia, near the capital Sofia. Its total area is 27,485 ha • Ridges with denudation and slopes under 4 and the highest peak is (Black Peak), with degrees 2,290 m a.s.l. The mean altitude of the mountain is • Slopes with erosion and denudation nearly 1,400 m a.s.l. The mountain is the first Bul- • Slopes with erosion, denudation and karst garian National Park and the first in the Balkan Penin- • Hydromorphic and sub-hydromorphic with sula, being declared in 1934. Since 1998, Vitosha is a erosion and accumulation (river-bed/river banks) Nature Park, with a total area of 27,079 ha. It in- • Hydromorphic and sub-hydromorphic with cludes two reserves. “” (1061 ha) upland accumulation (peat-bogs) is a forest reserve with mainly spruce forests. Level five (Genus) with differentiation criteria: “Torfeno Branishte” (784 ha) is a peat-bog reserve lo- rock formation and type. cated in the sub-alpine mountain belt. Vitosha Moun- • Alluvial unconsolidated sediments tain preserves a valuable natural heritage with great • Unconsolidated and semi-consolidated sedi- biological diversity and it has important ecological mentary rocks functions to the adjacent country capital Sofia. • Non-calcareous concrete sedimentary rocks • Calcareous concrete sedimentary rocks Vitosha Mountain landscape classification • Intrusive rocks • Volcanic rocks (andesite) For Vitosha Mountain landscape, we used a modi- • Metamorphic rocks fied classification generally based on the second one Level six (Species) with differentiation criteria: soil presented above (Velchev at al., 1992), but combining type. elements from both. This landscape classification is • Brown-forest soils describing the potential landscapes (primary land- • Brown-forest soils and rendzinas scape structure) without taking into account the hu- • Dark-coloured and brown-forest soils man impact on the landscapes. Therefore, this map • Mountain-meadow soils has some hypothetical content especially concerning • Peat soils and peat-bogs the attempt to reconstruct the potential vegetation • Alluvial soils cover, which is mostly affected by human impact. • Bare rocks and lithosols This classification of the potential landscapes has To reveal the contemporary state of the land- six levels. Each level is described below, together with scapes and the anthropogenic changes (secondary the corresponding criteria and with a list of the correl- landscape structure), we used a classification based ative landscape units existing in Vitosha Mountain. on several works of A. Velchev, N. Todorov and R. Level one (Class) with differentiation criteria: pres- Penin (Todorov, 1997). The main advantage of this ence or absence of altitudinal zones (plains or moun- classification is that it describes five ranks (stages) of tains). anthropogenic modifications and their criteria: • Mountain landscapes (with altitudinal zona- 1. Unaffected landscapes (conditionally unaf- tion) fected) – with climax vegetation and without visible Level two (Type) with differentiation criteria: cli- traces of human disturbance; only slight changes of mate type. the geochemical background is possible due to con- • Warm-temperate semi-humid tamination transport by air flows from remote places. • Temperate humid 2. Landscapes with slight anthropogenic im- • Cold-temperate humid pact – with secondary vegetation, but identical in spe- • Cold humid cies composition with the climax vegetation, with pos- Level three (Subtype) with differentiation criteria: sible appearance of grass vegetation within forested vegetation type. areas due to less dense tree cover; slow soil erosion • Low mountain forests in oak-hornbeam belt is also possible. • Mid mountain forests in beech belt 3. Landscapes with moderate anthropogenic • Mid mountain forests in coniferous belt impact – with significant lower phytomass due to (main-ly spruce) changes, i.e. to the replacement of climax vegetation • High mountain subalpine meadows and with vegetation with less biomass (e.g. forests with shrubs scrubs); other features are the lower litter horizon • High mountain subalpine meadows and and the possible erosion of the humus soil horizon. shrubs and intrazonal sphagnum vegetation 4. Landscapes with strong anthropogenic im- • Intrazonal riparian vegetation pact – with strong change of the vertical structure, • Bare rocks with sparse mainly rock vegeta- complete destruction of the natural vegetation and tion replacing with vegetation with very low biomass (e.g. forests with meadows); tree plantation with trees

128 Forum geografic. Studii și cercetări de geografie și protecția mediului Volume XVI, Issue 2 (December 2017), pp. 126-131 http://dx.doi.org/10.5775/fg.2017.023.d without ecological correspondence with the natural • bare rocks (e.g. coniferous in the vegetation belt of deciduous); • broad-leaved forest agriculture and arable land with active soil erosion • coniferous forest. and melioration. Landscapes with moderate and strong anthropo- 5. Anthropogenic landscapes – without vege-ta- genic impact: tion cover and often without soil cover, changes could • meadow and shrub lands affect also topographic surface and base rocks (e.g. • planted coniferous forest settlements, roads and mining areas). • agriculture and arable lands. For the purpose of Vitosha Mountain landscape Anthropogenic landscapes: mapping, these five ranks were reduced to three by • ancient dump site (ore deposit) combining the first with the second and the third with • stone-pit the fourth, in the attempt to make the mapping units • lift more objective and easily to outline by the available • road input spatial data. This classification of landscape • buildings and single yards changes by human-induced factors, with 3 ranks and • settlement 13 types is presented below. • artificial lake or dam Unaffected landscapes and landscapes with slight anthropogenic impact:

Figure 1: Screenshot of the web-map application of the landscapes in the Vitosha Mountain with base view of the potential landscapes The data was processed with GIS software and the two layers are the final outputs. The first data layer Method corresponds to the potential landscapes of Vi-tosha Mountain, its reference scale being 1:50,000 and its Various input data in digital format were used to minimum mapping unit 4 ha. The second layer perform landscape mapping for the Vitosha Mountain: corresponds to the landscape anthropogenic Vitosha DEM, generated from EU-DEM with 25 m ras- modifica-tions, its reference scale being 1:5,000 and ter resolution (European Environmental Agency), the its mini-mum mapping unit 0.02 ha. Finally, by using geologic map (vector layer, scale 1:100,000), forest the open-source QGIS, a web-map application was inventory maps (vector layers, scale 1:5,000, from creat-ed in QGIS Cloud service, with the following the Administration of “Vitosha” Nature Park), aerial URL: http://qgiscloud.com/jdgis/Vitosha_landscapes. photography (orthophoto) - images for 2006 year (raster data from the Bulgarian Ministry of Regional Development), and field investigations from transects Discussion (descriptions of selected sites or so called “landscape points”). The first layer, i.e. that of the potential landscapes, contains 35 potential landscape units (on level 6 –

129

A web-map of the landscapes of Vitosha Mountain and the development of landscape science in Bulgaria

“landscape species”) and 158 polygons (fig. 1). The 1934, there has been a radical change in the function- second layer, i.e. that of the landscape anthropogenic al purposes on the territory of Vitosha, the economic modifications, contains 13 landscape units and 3,698 functions moving towards conservation and recrea- polygons (fig. 2). tion. The landscape structure characteristic of Vitosha The potential landscape structure has been signifi- Mountain shows certain variety. It is represented both cantly modified because of the intense anthropogenic by landscapes with zonal character, as well as with impact in the past. As a result, it is best preserved azonal one – karst, hydromorphic (e.g. peat-bogs) mostly in the northern part of the mountain (fig 2). and rocky landscapes (bare rocks). In the southern part of the mountain, landscapes with The altitude landscape belts are represented by a natural coniferous forests are totally replaced by full height landscape spectrum, including subtypes of meadows and shrubs. The total area of unaffected low mountain landscapes with oak-hornbeam forests, landscapes and of landscapes with slight anthropo- middle mountain landscapes with beech forests, mid- genic impact covered with forest amounted to 11,456 mountain landscapes with coniferous forests and sub- ha or 41% of the total area of Vitosha Mountain (of alpine landscapes. which about 9,983 ha - 36% are deciduous forests Human activity has taken place for centuries in Vi- and about 1,473 ha - 5% are coniferous forests). The tosha Mountain and it has led to several types of im- total area of landscapes with moderate and strong pacts on landscapes. The human-induced impact dur- anthropogenic impact, with secondary meadows and ing the Ottoman period was the greatest. Within this shrubs that occupied the place of forest landscapes period, agricultural (grazing) and industrial (iron and amounts to 6,688 ha (24%). The total area of planted gold mining) activities contributed most to the for- coniferous forests in Vitosha Mountain amounts to mation of the modern landscapes of Vitosha Mountain 4,318 ha (15.7%). (Deliradev, 1926; Georgiev, 1978; Avdev, 2005). After

Figure 2: Screenshot of the web-map application of the landscapes in the Vitosha Mountain, with a view of the landscape anthropogenisation map (fragment for the Northern part of the mountain) ping that are employed in Bulgaria, although different approaches to exploring the landscapes are used in Conclusion our country. There are several benefits of the built-in web-map. Finally, it can be noted that there is some proximi- On the one hand, it provides an opportunity to ty in approaches and convergence in landscape explo- explore interactively and in more detail the structure ration through a typological approach in different of the Vitosha landscapes, both of the potential land- landscape schools (Wascher, 2005). This facilitates scapes (primary structure) and of the anthropogenic the exchange of such ideas and approaches and it is modifications (secondary structure). On the other the basis for future closer cooperation in carrying out hand, it provides an opportunity to get to know the international studies in the field of landscape science concepts related to landscape classification and map- and landscape ecology.

130 Forum geografic. Studii și cercetări de geografie și protecția mediului Volume XVI, Issue 2 (December 2017), pp. 126-131 http://dx.doi.org/10.5775/fg.2017.023.d Acknowledgements Todorov, N. (1997). Applying the landscape- geophysical investigations to ecological problems. I would like to express my gratitude to N. Todorov Annual of Sofia Univ., Faculty of Geology and and A. Velchev for their advice during the achieve- Geog-raphy, 88, 189-197 (in Bulgarian). ment of this research. Turner, M., Gardner, R. & O’Neill, R. (2001). This work has been carried out despite the nega- Landscape Ecology in Theory and Practice: tive attitude towards research in Bulgaria and the as- Pattern and Pro-cess. N. Y.: Springer-Verlag. sociated under-funding of authors’ institution. Velchev, A., Todorov, N., Assenov, A. & Berouchashvili, N. (1992). A landscape map of Bulgaria at scale 1:500 000. Annual of Sofia References Univ., Faculty of Geology and Geography, 84, 85- Avdev, S. (2005). History of Gold Extraction in the 107 (in Bulgarian). Bulgarian Lands. Sofia: Besike (in Bulgarian). Velchev, A., Penin, R., Todorov, N. & Konteva, M. Deliradev, P. (1926). Vitosha. Sofia: Gladstone Press (2011). Landscape . Sofia: (in Bulgarian). Bulvest 2000 Publ. (in Bulgarian). Georgiev, G. (1978). The Old Iron Industry in Wascher, D. (Ed.). (2005). European Landscape Bulgaria. Sofia: BAS (in Bulgarian). Char-acter Areas – Typologies, Cartography and Petrov, P. (1979). A classification system of the land- Indica-tors for the Assessment of Sustainable scapes in Bulgaria. Annual of Sofia Univ., Faculty Landscapes. Final Project Report as deliverable of Geology and Geography, 70, 159-181 (in from the EU’s Accompanying Measure project Bulgarian). „European Land-scape Character Assessment Petrov, P. (1990). Landscape Science. Sofia: Sofia Initiative” (ELCAI), Al-terra Report No. 1254 Univ. Press (in Bulgarian).

131