Landscape ecological and landscape typological investigations on the Tetves catchment

Authors

  • Adrienn Tóth Hungarian Academy of Sciences Geographical Research Institute H-1112 Budapest, Budaörsi út 45.
  • Zoltán Szalai Hungarian Academy of Sciences Geographical Research Institute H-1112 Budapest, Budaörsi út 45.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56617/tl.4368

Keywords:

landscape ecology, landscape typology, habitats, landscape architecture, sustainable land use, small catchment

Abstract

As the importance of nature and environmental protection has become an important issue recently, the question of natural resources came into limelight as well. The fundamental interests of nature and environmental protection are not obvious for everyone, although the protection of natural resources is strongly connected with serious economical interests. The regulations of the protection and of sustainable use of soil, water and mineral resources are permanent problems, caused by conflicts with economic interests and with efforts to make quick profit or by simple negligence. To save these values it is essential to know the area very well and for land use and landscape planning the exact knowledge of natural resources is of primary importance. Most precious natural resources of Hungary are the soil and, because of its turistical attraction, the landscape itself. The situation is the same in case of the study area, the catchment of the Tetves stream: the main incomes of population are agriculture and tourism, the latter mainly because of the touristic attraction of the Lake Balaton. The methods of physical geography and its synthetizing attitude are highly suitable for a complex investigation of the environment and for the protection of natural resources. The landscape in its entity and the protection of its values can not be investigated successfully without applying the methods of physical geography and landscape ecology. As a consequence of this, landscape protection, nature protection, landscape planning and land use planning have to supported also by physico-geographical and landscape ecological research.
Landscape types of the Tetves catchment are as follows:
I. Floodplain landscape types:
Floodplain under permanent influence of water, with original riparian vegetation; Alluvial plain (valley bottom) with fluvisol, meadow or pasture; Alluvial plain (valley bottom) with fluvisol, arable land; Alluvial plain (valley bottom) with fluvisol, forest; Alluvial plain (valley bottom) with fluvisol, vineyard or orchard; Alluvial plain (valley bottom) with arenosol, vineyard or orchard.
II. Hilly landscape types:
Hilly area with cambisol, forest; Hilly area with eroded cambisol, forest; Footslope with cambisol, arable land; Hilly area with eroded cambisol, arable land; Hilly area with eroded cambisol, vineyard or orchard; Hilly area with cambisol, vineyard or orchard.
These categories were applied on the map of landscape types.
1. Habitats of the Tetves catchment were identified on the basis of the Universal National System for Habitat Classification. Habitats were classified according to their unaffectedness applying the following categories: nearly natural habitats; nearly natural disturbed and weedy habitats; and agricultural, sylvicultural and other habitats. On the northern part of the catchment, which belongs to the Somogy Shore Plain, the numbers of the habitats of the above mentioned categories are 2; 1; 6 respectively. In the southern part belonging to the Western Outer Somogy these numbers are 5; 3 and 13. We pointed out that in spite of the predominance of the agricultural, sylvicultural and other habitats, the Tetves catchment, being a diverse landscape, has considerable ecological value, and is therefore one of the main natural resources of the area.
Using the map of landscape types presented in this paper together with the habitat map showing the natural value of the area, our knowledge about the region will be more complete. Regularly updated maps applied for any particular problem can be effective tools for sustainable landscape architecture and land use planning.

Author Biography

  • Adrienn Tóth, Hungarian Academy of Sciences Geographical Research Institute H-1112 Budapest, Budaörsi út 45.

    corresponding author
    Tot8371@helka.iif.hu

References

Bastian O. 1996: Biotope mapping and evaluation as a base of nature conservation and landscape planning. Ekologia (Bratislava) 15: 5–17.

Bastian O., Kronert R., Lipsky Z. 2006: Landscape diagnosis on different space and time scales – a challenge for landscape planning. Landscape Ecology 21: 359–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-005-5224-1

Bádonyi K. 2006: A hagyományos és a kímélő talajművelés hatása a talajerózióra és az élővilágra. Tájökológiai Lapok 4: 1–16.

Centeri Cs., Császár A. 2005: A felszínborítás, a lejtőszakasz és a foszfor kapcsolata. Tájökológiai Lapok 3: 119–131.

Centeri Cs., Pataki R. 2005: Soil erodibility measurements on the slopes of the Tihany Peninsula, Hungary. In: A. Faz Cano, R. Ortiz Silla, A. R. Mermut (eds): Advances in GeoEcology 36: 149–154.

DATE Mezőgazdasági Víz- És Környezetgazdálkodási Kar 1998: Talajerózió megjelenési formái a Balaton vízgyűjtőn. Tanulmány. Szarvas.

Evelpidou N. 2006: Using Fuzzy logic to map soil erosion. A case study from the island of Paros. Tájökológiai Lapok 4: 103–114.

Fekete G., Molnár Zs., Horváth F. 1997: Nemzeti Biodiverzitás-monitorozó Rendszer II. A magyarországi élőhelyek leírása, határozója és a Nemzeti Élőhely-osztályozási Rendszer. Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum, Budapest.

Jakab G. 2006: A vonalas erózió megjelenési formái és mérési lehetőségei. Tájökológiai Lapok 4: 17–34.

Jakab G., Szalai Z. 2005: Barnaföld erózióérzékenységének vizsgálata esőztetéssel a Tetves-patak vízgyűjtőjén. Tájökológiai Lapok 3: 177–189.

Kertész Á. 2003: Tájökológia. Holnap Kiadó, Budapest

Kertész, Á., Centeri, Cs. 2006: Hungary. In: Boardman, J., Poesen, J. (eds): Soil erosion in Europe. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, London, p. 139–153. https://doi.org/10.1002/0470859202.ch12

Marosi S. 1980: Tájkutatási irányzatok, tájértékelés, tájtipológiai eredmények. MTA Földrajztudományi Kutatóintézet, Budapest.

Marosi S., Somogyi S. (szerk.) 1990: Magyarország kistájainak katasztere II. MTA Földrajztudományi Kutatóintézet, Budapest.

Marosi S., Szilárd J. 1963: A természeti földrajzi tájértékelés elvi-módszertani kérdéseiről. Földrajzi Értesítő 12: 393–417.

Marosi S., Szilárd J. 1975: Balaton menti tájtípusok ökológiai jellemzése és értékelése. Földrajzi Értesítő 24: 439–477.

Marosi S., Szilárd J. 1979: Somogyi tájtípusok jellemzése és értékelése. Földrajzi Értesítő 28: 51–85.

Mosimann, T. 2001: Funktional begründete Leitbilder für die Landschaftsentwicklung. Geographische Rundschau 53: 4–10.

Pécsi M., Somogyi S., Jakucs P. 1972: Magyarország tájtípusai. Földrajzi Értesítő 21: 5–12.

Sisák I., Máté F. 1993: A foszfor mozgása a Balaton vízgyűjtőjében. Agrokémia és Talajtan 42: 257–269.

Published

2007-07-18

Issue

Section

Tanulmányok, eredeti közlemények

How to Cite

Landscape ecological and landscape typological investigations on the Tetves catchment. (2007). JOURNAL OF LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY | TÁJÖKOLÓGIAI LAPOK , 5(1), 131-142. https://doi.org/10.56617/tl.4368

Similar Articles

101-110 of 130

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.