State and prospects of relief protection in nature reserves and national nature parks of the Ukrainian Carpathians

Размещено на http://allbest.ru

14

^{1Ivan Franko National University of Lviv}

²Lviv Polytechnic National University

State and prospects of relief protection in nature reserves and national nature parks of the Ukrainian Carpathians

Vitaliy P. Brusak¹, Yaroroslav S. Kravchuk¹,

Ivan V. Brusak², Diana A. Krychevska¹

Lviv, Ukraine



Abstract

The aim of the research is to analyze the current state of the protection of relief types within nature reserves and national nature parks of the Ukrainian Carpathians.

The study analyzes coverage of usual and unique types of mountain and premountain relief of the Ukrainian Carpathians within nature protection institutions.

The method contains a general geomorphological analysis of the relief of nature conservation institutions of the Ukrainian Carpathians. geomorphological structure and zoning of the research region based on the systematization and comparison of the up to date cartographic and descriptive materials.

Comparing the map Geomorphological structure (morphostructure and morphosculpture) of the Ukrainian Carpathians (Hnatiuk et al., 2007) and borrowed cartographic materials from the Projects of organization of nature reserves and national nature parks within the region, special representativeness of relief types in the QGIS software is obtained.

Authors set a degree of representativeness of relief types within the territories of nature conservation institutions as well as present it in special tables and maps.

Additionally, the map of the location of nature reserves and national nature parks within the geomorphological zoning of the Ukrainian Carpathians (Rudko & Kravchuk, 2002) is made as well as the character of protection of various geomorphological areas of mountain and premountain parts of the region is clarified.

For the first time, authors establish the degree of regional and typological geomorphological representativeness of natural reserves and national nature parks as well as clarify the current state of protection of relief types of the Ukrainian Carpathians in general.

Based on the results of the analysis, authors develop proposals for the creation of new nature conservation institutions in the Ukrainian Carpathians for optimization of the relief as well as proposals for the protection of the region and its use in nature conservation, scientific, natural-cognitive, and recreational purposes.

Keywords: Ukrainian Carpathians; geomorphological zoning; reliefprotection; types of relief; nature reserve; national nature park.



Анотація

Стан та перспективи охорони рельєфу у заповідниках і національних парках Українських Карпат

В.П. Брусак¹, Я.С. Кравчук¹, І.В. Брусак², Д.А. Кричевська¹

¹Львівський національний університет імені Івана Франка, Львів, Україна, 2Національний Університет «Львівська політехніка», Львів, Україна

Метою дослідження є аналіз сучасного стану охорони типів рельєфу у межах територій заповідників і національних природних парків Українських Карпат.

У статті встановлено стан охорони заповідними територіями типових і унікальних типів гірського і передгірного рельєфу Українських Карпат.

Методика містить загальний геоморфологічний аналіз рельєфу заповідників і національних природних парків Українських Карпат, геоморфологічної будови і районування регіону досліджень на основі систематизації та порівняння найновішого картографічного та описового матеріалу.

Типологічну репрезентативність заповідників та національних парків отримано у середовищі QGIS при порівнянні карти «Геоморфологічна будова (морфоструктура та морфоскульптура) Українських Карпат» (Hnatiuk et al., 2007) та запозичених картографічних матеріалів з Проектів організації території заповідників та національних парків цього регіону. Встановлено ступінь регіональної та типологічної геоморфологічної репрезентативності заповідних територій, укладено відповідні карти та складено таблиці.

Додатково укладено карту розташування заповідників і національних природних парків у межах геоморфологічного районування Українських Карпат (Rudko & Kravchuk, 2002) та з'ясовано характер охоплення охороною різних геоморфологічних областей гірської і передгірної частин регіону. Вперше встановлено ступінь регіональної та типологічної геоморфологічної репрезентативності заповідників і національних природних парків та з'ясовано сучасний стан охорони типів рельєфу Українських Карпат у цілому. На основі результатів дослідження запропоновано створення нових природно-заповідних територій в Українських Карпат та розроблено пропозиції щодо перспектив оптимізації охорони рельєфу регіону та його використання у природоохоронних, наукових, природно-пізнавальних і рекреаційних цілях.

Ключові слова: Українські Карпати; геоморфологічне районування; збереження рельєфу: типи рельєфу; заповідник; національний природний парк.



Introduction

There are 14 nature conservation institutions of national and international importance on the territory of the Ukrainian Carpathians, such as Gorgany Nature Reserve (NR), Carpathian Biosphere Reserve (BR) and Carpathian, Synevyr, Vyzhnytskyi, Skolivski Beskydy, Uzhanskyi, Hutsulshchyna, Halytskyi, Zacharovany Krai, Synohora, Verkhovynskyi, Cheremoskyi, and Boykivshchyna National Nature Parks (NNP).

The listed objects of the highest rank of reservation in Ukraine are located unevenly within the studied region. Hence, different types of mountain and premountain relief and valuable geomorphological formations of the Ukrainian Carpathians are covered by protection unevenly.

In some works, the state of protection and use of geomorphological objects of the Ukrainian Carpathians in general and its certain regions (Ivchenko, 2003; Zinko et al., 2004; Bayrak & Teodorovych, 2020) as well as individual reserves and national nature parks (Stoiko et al., 1993; Krychevska, 2004; Brusak & Kobziak, 2008; Brusak & Baiunova, 2012; Hnatiuk & Brusak, 2014) and recreational assessment of the relief of the Ukrainian Carpathians (Kravchuk et al., 2006) are considered. However, a special research for establishing the state of protection of the relief types of the Ukrainian Carpathians has not been performed yet. mountain relief carpathian nature park

It should be noted, that the investigations of botanists, foresters, and zoologists traditionally pay attention to the state of flora, vegetation, and fauna protections within specific nature reserves or national nature parks in relation to its diversity distributed in the Ukrainian Carpathians, especially in its mountain part (Stoiko et al., 1982, 1993; Andrienko & Onyshchenko, 2003). Some works clarify the state of protection and representation of ecosystem and landscape for the individual nature conservation institutions (Stoyko et al., 1991, 2004), as well as the state of protection of vegetation types of the Ukrainian Carpathians (Angelstam et al., 2017).

The purposes of the study are to analyze the current state of protection of relief types of the Ukrainian Carpathians within nature reserves and national nature parks as well as to develop proposals for optimization of the relief protection of the region and its use in nature conservation, scientific, natural-cognitive and recreational purposes.



Material and methods

The method contains the general geomorphological analysis of the relief of nature conservation institutions of the Ukrainian Carpathians and the geomorphological structure of the research region based on systematization and comparison of the latest cartographic materials such as Tectonic map of the Ukrainian Carpathians (Glushko & Kruhlov, 1986), Geomorphological structure (morphostructure and morphosculpture) of the Ukrainian Carpathians (Hnatiuk et al., 2007), State geological map of Ukraine (Matskiv, 2008), and descriptive material (Tsys, 1968; Kruhlov, 1986; Hofshtein, 1995; Kravchuk, 1999, 2005, 2008; Slyvka, 2001; Stetsiuk, 2010; Kravchuk & Khomyn, 2011; Kovalchuk, et al., 2012, 2013; Kravchuk & Chalyk, 2015; Kravchuk et al., 2016).

In order to clarify the regional and typological geomorphological representativeness of nature reserves and national nature parks, authors make two maps such as Location of nature reserves and national nature parks on the map of geomorphological zoning of the Ukrainian Carpathians and Location of nature reserves and national nature parks within different types of relief of the Ukrainian Carpathians.

Based on the second map the percentage of different types of relief of the Ukrainian Carpathians as well as the percentage within the territory of a particular nature conservation institution is calculated.

For this purpose, we georeference maps Geomorphological zoning of the Ukrainian Carpathians (Rudko & Kravchuk, 2002) and Geomorphological structure (morphostructure and morphosculpture) of the Ukrainian Carpathians from National Atlas of Ukraine (Hnatiuk et al., 2007) as well as borders of nature conservation institutions in QGIS software.

Borders of nature conservation institutions are borrowed from official sources such as cartographic materials from the Projects of the territory organization of nature reserves and NNP and forest management maps in scale of 1:25 000-1:50 000.

The typological geomorphological representativeness for each nature conservation institution is calculated using the area calculator.

Results and analysis

Nature conservation institutions of the national and international importance of the Ukrainian Carpathians are represented by 14 objects created over 50 years, which differ in size, structure of the territory, and location of settlements within them (Table 1, Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Location of nature reserves and national nature parks on the map of geomorphological zoning of the Ukrainian Carpathians Legend to Fig. 1: Nature conservation institutions: 1. Gorgany Nature Reserve, 2. Carpathian Biosphere Reserve (massifs: 2.1 Chornohora, 2.2. Uholsko- Shyrokoluzhanskyi, 2.3. Khustskyi (Valley of Da?odils), 2.4. Marmaroskyi, 2.5. Svydovetskyi, 2.6. Kuziy- Trybushanskyi, 2.7. Chorna mountain, 2.8. Yulivska mountain), 3. Uzhanskyi NNP, 4. Boykivshchyna NNP, 5. Skolivski Beskydy NNP, 6. Zacharovanyi Krai NNP, 7. Synevyr NNP, 8. Synohora NNP, 9. Carpathian NNP, 10. Verkhovyna NPP, 11. Cheremoskyi NPP, 12. Vyzhnytskyi NPP, 13. Hutsulshchyna NPP, 14. Halytskyi NPP.



Gorgany NR and most of the national nature parks (Carpathian, Synevyr, Vyzhnytskyi, Uzhanskyi, Zacharovanyi Krai, Synohora, and Verkhovynskyi) are mainly represented by one large area. Cluster structures (consists of several separate areas) represented in the territory of the Carpathian BR and Skolivsky Beskydy, Hutsulshchyna, Halytskyi, Cheremoskyi, and Boykivshchyna National Natue Parks.

Geomorphological zoning of the Ukrainian Carpathians (Rudko & Kravchuk, 2002):

I. Region of the Precarpathian Upland.

I.1. Precarpathian-Prebeskydy denudation-accumulative upland with glacial and water-glacial forms,

I.2. Precarpathian-Pregorgany denudation-accumulative upland,

I.3. Precarpathian-Pokuttia-Bukovyna statum- denudation-accumulative upland.

II. Region of thrust-folded low- and mediummountains of Skybovi Carpathians.

II.1. Monoclinal- folded low-mounaints of Beskydy Massif,

II.2. Monoclinal-folded low- and medium-mountains of Gorgany Massif, II.3. Anticlinal-folded low- and medium-mountains within Pokuttia and Bukovyna.

III. Region of structural-denudated low- and medium-mountains of the Vododilno-Verkhovynski Carpathians.

III.1. Structural-denudated low-mountains of Verkhovynskyi Massif, III.2.Anticlinal-block medium-mountains of Pryvododilni Gorgany, III.3.Erosive low-mountains of Yasinya, Vorokhta, and Putyla.

IV Region of fault-block medium-mountains of the Polonynsko-Chornohirski Carpathians.

IV.1. Fault-block medium-mountains with remnants of the weathering surface of Polonyna Ridge,

IV.2. Fault-block mediummountains within Svydovets and Chornohora Ridges with ancient glacial forms.

V Region of the block-arch medium-mountains of Marmarosy crystalline massif.

VI. Region of denudated low-mountains of the Vylkanichni (Volcanic) Carpathians.

VI.1.Vygorlat-Gutynskiy erosive low-mountains,

VI.2. Verkhnyotysenska hollow with denudation-accumulative and structural-erosion relief.

VII. Region of Zakarpattia alluvial plain with insular volcanic hills.

National nature parks of the Ukrainian Carpathians consist of territories provided by the NNP for permanent use and areas included in the NNP without withdrawal from other land users. The features of the relatively «young» NNP (Skolivski Beskydy, Hutsulshchyna, Halytskyi) and the «youngest» NNP (Zacharovany Krai, Cheremoskyi, Verkhovyna, and Boykivshchyna) is that they do not include the territory of settlements. It should be noted, that after the change of boundaries in 2019 of Uzhanskyi NNP (re-subordination of lands within the NPP) and Zacharovanyi Krai NNP (expansion of the park) the percentage of land provided to national nature parks for permanent use has significantly increased. Most of the territory (76.5 %) of Hutsulshchyna NNP are lands of other users.

The structure of the territory of nature conservation institutions has a significant impact on the ability to ensure appropriate conservation regime and the degree of landscape, geological-geomorphological and biotic representativeness.

The cluster structure of the territory significantly increases the regional representativeness of the nature reserve or national nature park, but the island effect requires higher costs to ensure conservation.

In the articles (Reimers & Shtylmark, 1978; Stoiko et al., 1982; Tkachyk, 1996; Brusak, 2006) the assessment of the representativeness of protected objects is mainly reduced to the assessment of the characteristics of their flora, fauna, and vegetation in quantitative and qualitative indicators in relation to similar indicators of regions of different taxonomic ranks within which a particular nature protection institution is located.

In a broader sense, the term “representativeness” in nature conservation was introduced by Andrienko, who, in contrast to the term “uniqueness”, uses it to assess the socio-ecological significance of nature conservation institutions in regions of a certain taxonomic rank (Andrienko et al., 1991).

Supporting the opinion of Tkachyk (Tkachyk, 1996), the authors believe that representativeness is a method of knowing the representation of certain objects of protection (species of animals and plants, phytocenoses, genetic landforms, landscape complexes) within the area of nature conservation institutions for self-sufficiency of the objects of protection, territory and necessary conditions to ensure the preservation for a long time.

At the same time, it is important for biotic components to ensure the spontaneous course of their vital activity and evolution (Brusak, 2006).

Table 1. The structure of the territory of nature reserves and national natural parks of the Ukrainian Carpathians

Nature protection institution	Year of creation	Total area, ha	The area provided for permanent use	The area of other land users	Characteristic of the territory
			ha	ha	ha	ha
Gorgany Nature Reserve	1996	5344.6	5344.6	100	-	-	One piece, a protection zone (3712.89 ha) is created around the NR
Carpathian Biosphere Reserve	1993 (1968)	58035.8	39485.8	68.0	18550	32.0	Cluster, the BR does not include settlements
Carpathian NNP	1980	50495	38322	75.9	12173	24.1	One piece, the NNP includes settlements
Synevyr NNP	1989	41073.8	32294	79.5	8402	20.5	One piece, the NNP includes settlements
Vyzhnytskyi NNP	1995	11238	8246.2	73.4	2991.8	26.6	One piece, the NNP does not include settlements
Skolivski Beskydy NNP	1999	35261.2	24369.2	69.1	10892	30.9	Cluster, the NNP does not include settlements
Uzhanskyi NNP	1999	39159.3	21892.6	55.9	17266.7	44.1	Two pieces, the NNP includes settlements
Hutsulshchyna NNP	2002	32248	7581	23.5	24667	76.5	Cluster, the NNP does not include settlements
Halytskyi NNP	2004	14209.1	11826	83.2	2383.1	16.8	Cluster, the NNP does not include settlements
Zacharovanyi Krai NNP	2009	10451.4	9999.4	95.7	452	4.3	One piece, the NNP does not include settlements
Synohora NNP*	2009	10866	10866	100	-	-	One piece, the NNP does not include settlements
Cheremoskyi NNP	2009	7117.5	5556	78.1	1561.5	21.9	Cluster, the NNP does not include settlements
Verkhovynskyi NNP	2010	12022.9	12022.9	100	-	-	One piece, the NNP does not include settlements
Boykivshchyna NNP*	2019	12240	10623	86.8	1617	13.2	Cluster, the NNP does not include settlements

* Synohora NNP and Boykivshchyna NNP have been declared by Decrees of the President of Ukraine and are currently creating

Therefore, the assessment of the regional and typological representativeness of the nature conservation institution consists in comparison with, the qualitative characteristics of its nature with similar characteristics of the regions within which it is located. The peculiarity of the assessment of geographical representativeness (GR) of nature reserves or national nature parks is to determine their place in the system of natural regional and typological units by a set of features. This assessment should be carried out primarily on the basis of typological features at the level of taxa of a certain rank according to different zoning schemes.

The need to establish GR of nature and biosphere reserves is due to one of the main requirements for their functioning, to be specific, they should represent the natural features of regions of a certain taxonomic rank. It is a physical- geographical land (province) for NR (Stoyko et al., 1982; Tsaryk, 2009) as well as it is a biogeographical region according to the zoning scheme of Udvardy (Udvardy, M.D. & Udvardy, M.D.F., 1975) for BR.

Table 2. Regional geomorphological representativeness of nature reserves and national natural parks of the Ukrainian Carpathians

Geomorphological zoning (Rudko & Kravchuk, 2002)

1

2. Carpathian Biosphere Reserve

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

2.6

2.7

2.8

I. Precarpathian Upland

+

+

++

II. Skybovi Carpathians

++

+

++

++

++

++

++

III. Vododilno-Verkhovynski Carpathians

++

++

++

++

IV Polonynsko-Chornohirski Carpathians

++

++

+

++

+

++

+

++

+

++

V Marmaroski Carpathians

++

++

++

+

VI. Vylkanichni (Volcanic) Carpathians

+

+

++

VII. Zakarpattia Plain

+

+

Nature protection institutions: 1. Gorgany Nature Reserve, 2. Carpathian Biosphere Reserve (massifs: 2.1 Chornohora, 2.2. Uholsko- Shyrokoluzhanskyi, 2.3. Khustskyi (Valley of Daffodils), 2.4. Marmaroskyi, 2.5. Svydovetskyi, 2.6. Kuziy-Trybushanskyi, 2.7. Chorna mountain, 2.8. Yulivska mountain), 3. Uzhanskyi NNP, 4. Boykivshchyna NNP, 5. Skolivski Beskydy NNP, 6. Zacharovanyi Krai NNP, 7. Synevyr NNP, 8. Synohora NNP, 9. Carpathian NNP, 10. Verkhovyna NPP, 11. Cheremoskyi NPP, 12. Vyzhnytskyi NPP, 13. Hutsulshchyna NPP, 14. Halytsky NPP. Location of a part of the conservated area within the geomorphological zone: ++ main part, + insignificant part.

The Carpathian BR and the Carpathian NNP have the highest regional geomorphological representativeness in the studied region, due to the cluster structure of the territory and the transverse elongation relative to the elongation of the Ukrainian Carpathians (see Fig. 1). Carpathian BR (created in 1968, biosphere status since 1993) consists of territorially separated parts with a total area of 58035.8 hectares. Today, after the expansion of its territory in 1997 and 2010, the reserve includes eight parts such as Chornohora (20,780.8 ha), Uholsko-Shirokoluzhanskyi (15,580 ha), Khustskyi (Valley of Daffodils) (257 ha), Kuziy- Trybushanskyi (4,925 ha), Marmaroskyi (8,990 ha),

Svydovetskyi (6,580 ha), the botanical reserves Chorna Mountain (747 ha) and Yulivska Mountain (176 ha). Carpathian BR represents the features of the geological and geomorphological structure of the four geomorphological regions of the Ukrainian Carpathians (Table 2). The first state national nature park in Ukraine was created in 1980 in the Ivano-Frankivsk oblast with an area of 50,300 hectares. The Carpathian NNP locates along the Prut Valley and includes two protected forests such as Hoverlyanske in Nadvirna district and Vysokogirne in Verkhovyna district, which has been a part of Carpathian State Reserve since 1968. Carpathian NNP represents the features of the geological and geomorphological structure of the three geomorphological regions (see Table 2).

The relief and geological structure of four geomorphological regions of the Ukrainian Carpathians such as Polonynsko-Chornohirskyi, Skybovyi, Vododilno-Verkhovynskyi, and Marmaros crystal massif, is the best represented on the territory of nature reserves and nature national parks. The island volcanic hill is the of relief that is least protected within the Zakarpattia Plain.

Due to the cluster structure of the territory, Hutsulshchyna NNP and Carpathian BR have the highest typological geomorphological representativeness, within which nine and eight types of relief are distributed, respectively (Fig. 2). Synevyr NNP and Carpathian NNP are large in area but includes solid one piece object, thus they have slightly lower representativeness, seven and six types, respectively. However, there are three to five types of relief within almost all nature conservation institutions (Table 3). The least varied relief is within Zacharovanyi Krai NNP (two types).

Fluvial relief is the most common on the territory of nature protection institutions, as well as within the Ukrainian Carpathians (33.4 % of the region). In particular, river valleys with a complex of terraces of different ages (type 24) are the most common in the mountain part, which spread in 10.6 % of the region. This type of relief is common in all protected areas with an exception of Halytskyi NNP, within which almost 60 % of its territory is the 26th and 25th types of fluvial relief. It should be noted that the Halytskyi NNP is located in the contact zone of the southwestern edge of Eastern European Plain and Carpathians, thus the upland and river-valley relief of Precarpathian-Pregorgans and western part of Opillya are presented. In fact, the part of Halytskyi NNP within Opollya accounts for almost 40 % of its area.

Fig. 2. Location of nature reserves and national nature parks within different types of relief of the Ukrainian Carpathians



Legend to Fig. 2:

Nature conservation institutions (see Fig.1):

Types of relief (Hnatiuk et al., 2007):

Mountain structures created by the latest differentiated movements of the earth's crust

Denudation-tectonic mountains formed in the conditions of active uplifts and horizontal movements of the earth's crust

1. Folded-block medium-mountains (below 1800-1900 m) formed on Proterozoic quartzites, shales, gneisses, Paleozoic shales, and limestones (N2 - P)

2. Folded-block medium-mountains (a - below 1900-2000 m; b - below 1600-1700 m) with horst-anticline massifs on Cretaceous and Paleogene argillites, limestones, marls, sandstones, Paleogene sandstones, argillites (N2 - P)

3. Folded-block medium-mountains (below 1700-1800 m) on Cretaceous and Paleogene sand-clay sediments (N2 - P)

4. Thrust-folded medium-mountains (a - below 1600-1800 m; b - below 1300-1400 m) with anticlinal and monoclinic mountain ranges on Cretaceous and Paleogene argillites, sandstones, limestones, marls (N2 - P)

5. Thrust-folded medium-mountains (below 1300-1400 m) with monoclinic ridges on Cretaceous and Paleogene argillites, sandstones, limestones, marls (N2 - P)

6. Thrust-folded low-mountains (below 900-1100 m) with monoclinic and anticlinal ridges on Paleogene argillites, limestones, marls, partly on Cretaceous argillites, limestones, marls (N2 - P)

Structural-denudation mountains formed in conditions of less active and medium uplifts

7. Medium-mountains (below 1300-1400 m) on Upper Oligocene and Lower Miocene medium- and thin-rhythmic flysch (Krosnenska Suite) (N2 - P)

8. Low-mountains (below 900-1000 m) with separate anticlinal ridges on Upper Oligocene and Lower Miocene, medium- and thin-rhythmic flysch (Krosnenska Suite) (N2 - P)

9. Anticlinal-block low-mountains (below 800 m) on Eocene-Miocene sandstones, argillites

10. Anticlinal-block low-mountains (below 800 m) on Eocene-Miocene marls, clays

Denudation mountains formed in conditions of medium and low uplifts

11. Medium-mountains (below 1200-1300 m) with ancient valley forms and denudation plains on Paleogene sandstones, argillites (N2 - P)

12. Fault-block low-mountains (below 800 m) on dissected Jurassic limestones (N2 - P)

13. Low-mountains (below 1000 m) with ancient valley forms on Paleogene sandstones, argillites (N2-P)

14. Low-mountains (below 1000 m) on Paleogene sandstones, argillites (N2 - P)

Volcanic and volcanic-denudation mountains formed in conditions of medium uplifts

15. Low-mountainous (below 900-1000 m) volcanic massifs, ranges, ridges (N2 - P)

16. Low-mountainous (below 600-650 m) volcanic plateau-like mountains, the foothills of volcanic massifs (N2 - P)

Premountain uplands, hills, and plains formed in the conditions of differentiated uplifts within the premountain trough

Stratum-denudation uplands

17. Denudation-erosion uplands and intermountain hollows with fragments of Pliocene-Pleistocene terraces (N2 - P)

18. Denudation-erosion strongly dissected hills (N2 - P)

19. Denudation-erosion uplands: a) with a wavy, slightly dissected relief (depth of dissection up to 60 m); b) strongly dissected plateau-like (N2 - P)

20. Denudation-terrace uplands transformed by the activity of the Oka glaciation and water-glacial streams, sometimes with loess cover (N2 - P) Stratum-accumulative plains

Glacial and water-glacial plains

21. Range-wavy moraine-water-glacial plains (Pi)

22. Ouval-wavy moraine-water-glacial plains with a powerful loess cover (P)

23. Ouval-hilly alluvial-moraine-water-glacial plains with loess cover (P) Fluvial

24. River valleys with a complex of terraces of different ages

25. Complex of medium-high medium- and weakly-dissected terraces somewhere with loess cover (Pi-Pii)

26. Floodplains and the complex of low undissected or weakly dissected terraces (P_m-H)

The best protected within nature conservation institutions are folded-block medium-mountains (types 2a and 2b) with horst-anticline massifs of Cretaceous and Paleogene sediments and thrust-folded mediummountains (4b) with anticlinal and monoclinic mountain ranges on Cretaceous and Paleogene sediments. Folded- block medium-mountains of type 2 are conservated above all in the Chornohora and Svydovets Massifs of the Carpathian BR and the Carpathian NNP (type 2a is 6,3 % area of the region), as well as in Uholsko- Shyrokoluzhanskyi Massif of the aCarpathian BR, Uzhanskyi NNP, and Cheremoskyi NPP (2b, 5,1 %). Thrust-folded medium-mountains (4b, 4,3 %) are under conservation within Carpathian NNP, Skolivski Beskydy NNP, and Synohora NNP (see Fig. 2, Table 3).

It should be noted that folded-block mediummountains formed on Proterozoic and Paleozoic sediments of 1st type, which has a limited distribution in the Ukrainian Carpathians (0.8 % of the region) are the most covered by the nature conservation institutions. The medium-mountains of crystalline rocks are distributed within the Marmarosy and Kuziy-Trybushanskyi Massifs of Carpathian BR and Vyzhnytskyi NNP (Table 4).

Table 3. Representativeness of geomorphological types in nature reserves and national natural parks of the Ukrainian Carpathians

Types of relief (see fig. 2)	The percentage of type of relief within the nature conservation institution (transcript of numbers see in Fig. 1),%
№	within the Ukrainian Carpathians,%	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14
1	0.8		18.0								62.1	7.3
2a	6.3							10.1		28.8	2.5
26	5.1		31.8	29.8				4.3			8.3	74.8
3	1.7		29.3					39.8
4a	2.8	65.4						0.4	63.1	20.9				2.5
46	4.3				8.4	77.7			20.8	9.3				8.1
5	1.4											4.9		1.7
6	7.9					9.7				0.2			79.5	48.6
7	3.1			47.4	21.5	2.5		4.6
8	2.4			0.1	64.9
9	0.3													5.5
10	1.1
11	3.8	20.6						17.2		13.8		1.3
12	0.6		3.7
13	1.4			0.8
14	0.2
15	1.7						97.7
16	1.6						2.1
17	4.1		0.2											18.7
18	0.3
19a	1.0		1.4
196	8.0												12.9		59.7
20	1.5
21	1.5
22	2.4
23	1.3
24	10.6	14.0	14.7	21.9	5.3	10.1	0.2	23.6	16.1	27.1	27.1	11.7	2.8	12.5
25	4.7												0.7	1.8	26.6
26	18.1		0.8										4.1	0.6	13.6

Table 4. Representativeness of geomorphological types in Carpathian Biosphere Reserve

Types of relief (see fig. 2)	The percentage of type of relief within Carpathian Biosphere Reserve,%
№	within the Ukrainian Carpathians,%	2.1	2.2	2.3	2.4	2.5	2.6	2.7	2.8
1	0.8				82.5		58.5
2a	6.3	85.6			16.1	36.3	24.9
26	5.1		72.4			42.6
3	1.7
4a	2.8
46	4.3
5	1.4
6	7.9
7	3.1
8	2.4
9	0.3
10	1.1
11	3.8	1.2
12	0.6		14.1
13	1.4
14	0.2
15	1.7
16	1.6
17	4.1
18	0.3
19a	1
196	8							66.7	100
20	1.5
21	1.5
22	2.4
23	1.3
24	10.6	13.2	13.4		1.4	21.1	16.6
25	4.7
26	18.1			100				33.3

Carpathian BR massifs: 2.1 Chornohora, 2.2. Uholsko-Shyrokoluzhanskyi, 2.3. Khustskyi (Valley of Daffodils), 2.4. Marmaroskyi, 2.5. Svydovetskyi, 2.6. Kuziy-Trybushanskyi, 2.7. Chorna Mountain, 2.8. Yulivska Mountain

The thrust-folded medium-mountains (type 4a, 2.8 %) with anticlinal and monoclinic mountain ranges composed of Cretaceous and Paleogene flysch are well conservated within the Gorgany NR and Carpathian NNP. The thrust-folded low-mountains with monoclinic and anticlinal ridges composed of Paleogene, partly Cretaceous sediments (type 6, 7.9 %), and folded-block medium-mountains on Cretaceous and Paleogene sand- clay sediments (type 3, 7 %) are also well-conservated. The thrust-folded low-mountains are protected mainly within the Hutsulshchyna NNP and Vyzhnytskyi NNP and partly protected by Skolivski Beskydy NNP as well as the folded-block medium-mountains are protected within the Synevyr NNP (see Table 3).

Relatively less protected are medium-mountains with ancient valley forms and denudation plains on Paleogene sediments (type 11, 3.8 %) which are distributed within Carpathian NNP and Synevir NNP, as well as low-mountainous volcanic massifs formed in conditions of medium uplifts (type 15, 1.7 %). The volcanic low-mountains are protected within Zacharovanyi Krai NNP, which has expanded by 4,350.4 hectares in 2019.

Other types of relief in the mountainous part of the region such as 5, 8, 9, 12, 16, 17, 19a are provided with conservation more or less. Meanwhile, the low- mountains with ancient valley forms on Paleogene sandstones and argillites are protected unsatisfactory (type 13, 1.4 %).

Seven types of relief are not protected at all, three of which are common in the mountains and four in the premountain part of the Ukrainian Carpathians (see Table 3). There are no national nature parks within the uplands and plains of Precarpathian Upland, which covered areas of denudation-terrace uplands transformed by the activity of Oka glaciation and water- glacial streams, (type 20), glacial and water-glacial plains (types 21, 22, 23), as well as extremely rare in the premountain part strongly dissected uplands by denudation and erosion (type 18).

In the mountainous part of the region, anticline- block low-mountains on Eocene-Miocene marls and clays (type 10). Low-mountains on Paleogene sandstones and argillites (type 14), which are rare for the Ukrainian Carpathians, are not protected at all. Types 10 and 14 are common only within Verkhnyotysenska (Solotvynska) hollow. It should be noted that types 14 and 18 are the least common in the study region and occupy only 0.2 % and 0.3 % of the region, respectively.

In this regard, in order to improve the state of protection, the issue of organization of national nature parks within Precarpathian-Prebeskyds, as well as the Zakarpattia Plain is topical. There are no nature conservation institutions of the significant area and a high level of protection within the denudation- accumulative upland with glacial and water-glacial landforms near the Beskidy Massif

There are only two small territories such as Chorna Mountain and Yulivska Mountain, which are parts of Carpathian BR, within Zakarpattia alluvial plain with the island volcanic uplands. Within the special reserves of lower significance called “zakaznyky” the volcanic hills are conservated. However, the dominant relief of Zakarpattia plain which is the floodplains and the complex of low undissected or weakly dissected terraces (type 26) is protected only within Prytysynskyi Regional Landscape Park (nature conservation institution of local significance) and partly within Velykodobrunskyi zoological reserve of general state importance (1736 ha). This type of relief, which is one of the most common, both in the studied region (18.1 %) in general and in the premountain part of the Ukrainian Carpathians, is quite well protected on the territory of Halytskyi NNP and partially in Hutsulshchyna NNP and Vyzhnytskyi NNP.

It should be noted that at present the low- mountainous relief of the Upper Dnister Beskids is insufficiently protected. Here is the eponymous regional landscape park (RLP). The Decree of the President of Ukraine by November 2020 announced the new NPP called Korolivski Beskydy (8,997 hectares) in the Starosambir district of Lviv oblast, which is being formed now.

It is also important to create a NNP or RLP on the territory of the Makovytsia or Sinyak mountain massifs within the Vygorlat-Gutynskiy Ridge, as well as within the Verkhnyotysenska (Solotvynska) hollow for the conservation of the low-mountainous relief.

The creation of new nature conservation institutions will significantly improve the state of protection of usual and unique types and forms of relief in the mountainous and premountainous parts of the Ukrainian Carpathians. The creation of national nature parks as well as granting the status of geoparks to the most geologically and geomorphologically valuable nature reserves of western Ukraine (Manyuk, 2007; Bogucki, et al., 2012) will also help to create conditions for organizing recreation in the natural environment and opportunity to acquaint park visitors with typical and unique landforms of the region, which is extremely important in the context of the formation of the ecological network of the Ukrainian Carpathians (Brusak et al., 2009; Vashchyshyn, 2018).



Conclusions

On the territory of nature reserves and national nature parks, the relief and geological structure of Polonynsko-Chornohirska, Skybova, Vododilno- Verkhovynska geomorphological regions, and Marmarosy crystal massif are best represented. The relief of Zakarpatiia Plain with island volcanic hills is the least protected. The Carpathian BR and the Carpathian NNP have the highest regional geomorphological representativeness in the Ukrainian Carpathians, as well as the Hutsulshchyna NNP and the Carpathian BR have the highest typological representativeness.

Several types of relief have the highest level of cover by nature conservation institutions. There are folded-block medium-mountains formed on Proterozoic and Paleozoic sediments (type 1), folded-block mediummountains with horst-anticline massifs on Cretaceous, Paleogene, and Paleogene sediments (types 2a, 2b), and thrust-folded medium-mountains with anticlinal and monoclinic mountain ranges on Cretaceous and Paleogene flysch (type 4b).

The thrust-folded medium-mountains with anticlinal and monoclinic mountain ranges composed of Cretaceous and Paleogene flysch (type 4a), the thrust- folded low-mountains with monoclinic and anticlinal ridges composed of Paleogene, partly Cretaceous sediments (type 6), and the folded-block mediummountains on Cretaceous and Paleogene sand-clay sediments (type 3) are fairly well protected.

Seven types of relief are not protected at all, in particular, three in the mountains and four in the premountain part of the Ukrainian Carpathians. Territories of denudation-terrace uplands transformed by the activity of Oka glaciation and water-glacial streams (type 20), glacial and water-glacial plains (types 21, 22, 23), as well as extremely rare in the premountain part strongly dissected uplands by denudation and erosion (type 18) are not protected by institutions within Precarpathian Upland. The floodplains and the complex of low undissected or weakly dissected terraces (type 26) are not protected within Zakarpattia Plain. In the mountainous part of the region, the low-mountainous relief (types 10 and 14) which is common only within Verkhnyotysenska (Solotvynska) hollow also needs conservation.

The creation of new national nature parks within Precarpathian-Prebeskydy, Zakarpattia Plain, and the Vygorlat-Gutynskiy Ridge will improve the state of protection of usual and unique types and forms of relief of the Ukrainian Carpathians.



References

Andrienko, T., Onyshchenko, V. (Eds.), 2003. Fitoriznomanittia natsionalnykh pryrodnykh parkiv Ukrainy [Phytodiversity of national nature parks of Ukraine]. Kyiv: Naukovyi svit, 121 (In Ukrainian).

Andrienko, T., Pliuta, E, Priadko, H., 1991. Sotsialno- ekologicheskaya znachimost prirodno-zapovednykh territoriy Ukrainy [Socio-ecological significance of nature conservation institutions in Ukraine]. Kyiv: Naukova dumka, 154 (In Russian).

Angelstam, P., Yamelynets, T., Elbakidze, M., Prots, B., & Manton, M., 2017. Gap analysis as a basis for strategic spatial planning of green infrastructure: a case study in the Ukrainian Carpathians. Ecoscience, 24(1-2), 41-58. DOI: 10.1080/11956860.2017.1359771

Bayrak, G., Teodorovych, L., 2020. Geological and geomorphological objects of the Ukrainian Carpathians' Beskid Mountains and their tourist attractiveness. Journal of Geology, Geography and Geoecology, 29(1), 16-29. DOI: 10.15421/112002

Bogucki, A., Brusak, V., Kravchuk, Yu., Moskaluk, K., Sirenko, I., Tomeniuk, O., Shevchuk, O., Zinko, Yu., 2012. Koncepcja i zasady tworzenia geoparkow na zachodzie Ukrainy [Conception and rules of creation of geoparks in Western Ukraine]. Annales-Universitatis Mariae Curie-Sklodowska, Sectio B, 67(2), 9-32. (In Polish) DOI: 10.2478/v10066-012-0017-4

Brusak, V., 2006. Heohrafichni doslidzhennia pryrodno- zapovidnykh terytorii: metodolohiia i struktura [Geographical studies of nature conservation institutions: methodology and structure]. Visnyk Lvivskoho universytetu. Seriia heohrafichna, 33, 31-42 (In Ukrainian).

Brusak, V, Baiunova, B., 2012. Pamiatky nezhyvoi pryrody Halytskoho raionu Ivano-Frankivskoi oblasti: suchasnyi stan ta perspektyvy ekoturystychnoho vykorystannia. [Monuments of inanimate nature of Halych district of Ivano-Frankivsk region: current state and prospects of ecotourism use]. Problemy geomorfologii ' i paleogeografii ' Ukrai'ns'kyh Karpat i pryleglyh terytorii. Lviv: Vydavnyctvo LNU im. Ivana Franka, 4, 158-171 (In Ukrainian).

Brusak, V, Kobziak, R., 2008. Stan okhorony ta perspektyvy vykorystannia pamiatok nezhyvoi pryrody natsionalnoho pryrodnoho parku “Hutsulshchyna”. [State of protection and prospects for the use of inanimate monuments of the Hutsulshchyna National Nature Park]. Visnyk Lvivskoho universytetu. Seriia heohrafichna, 35, 16-27 (In Ukrainian).

Brusak, V., Zinko, Yu., Kravchuk, Ya., Krychevska, D. 2009. Heomorfolohichni peredumovy formuvannia ekolohichnoi merezhi Ukrainskykh Karpat. [Geomorphological preconditions for the formation of the ecological network of the Ukrainian Carpathians]. Fizychna geografija ta geomorfologija, 56. Kyiv: VGL Obrii, 112-123 (In Ukrainian).

Glushko, V, Kruhlov, S., (Eds.), 1986. Tektonicheskaya karta Ukrainskikh Karpat masshtaba 1:200 000 [Tectonic map of the Ukrainian Carpathians at scale of 1: 200,000]. Kyiv: Mynheo USSR (In Russian).

Gofshteyn, I., 1995. Geomorfologicheskiy ocherk Ukrainskikh Karpat [Geomorphological essay of the Ukrainian Carpathians]. Kyiv: Naukova dumka, 84 (In Russian).

Hnati...