ارزیابی ژئومورفوسایت ها و ژئوکانزرویشنِ ژئوپارک پیشنهادی غرب خراسان رضوی با استفاده از مدل بومی شایان یگانه و همکاران و مقایسه این مدل با مدل های جهانی کومانسکو، فاسولاس، بریلها (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
محققان برای پتانسیل یابی ژئوتوریسم یک منطقه و یا قابلیت سنجی توریستی ژئوپارک ها در ایران و جهان همواره به دنبال ارزیابی ژئوسایت ها و ژئومورفوسایت های آن منطقه بوده اند. هدف از پژوهش حاضر بررسی مقایسه ای چهار مدل بریلها، کومانسکو، فاسولاس و مدل بومی شده شایان یگانه و همکاران برای ارزیابی ژئومورفوسایت ها ست تا نقاط ضعف و قوت هرکدام از مدل های بین المللی با مدل ایرانی بررسی شود. محدوده مطالعه شده با مساحتی معادل 4257 کیلومتر مربع در غرب خراسان رضوی واقع است که می تواند قسمت هایی از شهرستان های سبزوار، داورزن را دربربگیرد. در پژوهش حاضر از روش تحلیلی-تطبیقی استفاده و داده ها به روش های اسنادی و میدانی گردآوری و سپس با استفاده از نرم افزارهای گرافیکی و آماری GIS، SPSS و Excel تجزیه و تحلیل شده است. نتایج پژوهش نشان می دهد درمجموع، ژئومورفوسایت هایی که زیرمجموعه آبی هستند در همه مدل ها بیشترین ارزش را دارند و درمقابل، ژئومورفوسایت های فرسایش بادی کمترین ارزش ها را دارند. از مقایسه مدل ها می توان نتیجه گرفت که مدل شایان یگانه و همکاران با مدل بریلها بیشترین مطابقت را داشته است و برای ارزیابی مناطق افیولیتی و کویری می توان از مدل بریلها نیز استفاده کرد. مدل بومی شایان یگانه برای مناطق کوهستانی و دشتی گرم و خشک طراحی شده است و به نظر می رسد برای مناطق ساحلی و سرد و مرطوب تغییرات اندکی باید داده شود. از نوآوری های پژوهش حاضر این است که جدیدترین مدل ایرانی برای ارزیابی ژئومورفوسایت ها و ژئوسایت ها بررسی و نقاط قوت و ضعف آن نیز بررسی شد.Evaluating Geomorphosites and Geoconservation of the Proposed Geopark of West Khorasan Razavi Using Shayan Yeganeh et al.’s Native Model and Comparing with the Global Models of Comanescu, Fassoulas, and Brilha
To find the geotourism potential of a region or to measure the tourist potential of geoparks, researchers in Iran and the world have always sought to evaluate the geosites and geomorphosites of regions. The purpose of this study is to compare the models of Brilha, Comanescu, and Fassoulas, with Shayan Yeganeh et al.’s native model. It examines the strengths and weaknesses of each of the international models with the Iranian model. The study area with an area of 4257 square kilometers is located in the west of Khorasan Razavi, which can include parts of Sabzevar and Davarzan cities. This research has dealt with the subject with an analytical-comparative method. The data were collected using documentary and field methods and analyzed using GIS, SPSS, and Excel graphic and statistical software. The results of the research show that geomorphosites that are water erosion subsets have the highest scores in all models, and in contrast, wind erosion geomorphosites have the lowest scores. From the comparison of the models, it can be concluded that Shayan Yeganeh et al.’s model is the most consistent with Brilha’s model. The Brillha model can be used to evaluate the ophiolite and desert regions. The native model of Shayan Yeganeh is designed for the dry and semi-arid deserts and mountainous regions, and it seems that it is necessary to give a few changes and modifications for coastal and glacial areas. Regarding the innovation of the study, it investigates the latest Iranian model for evaluating geomorphosites and geosites and examines its strengths and weaknesses.Keywords: Evaluation, Geomorphosite, Geotourism, Geopark, Geoconservation, Khorasan Razavi. IntroductionGeomorphosites and geosites are parts of geodiversity and geoheritage. The protection of the geological heritage is an important goal for planners and managers (Brilha, 2015). Geomorphosites are the main components of the development of geotourism, which have certain values such as scientific, cultural, historical, aesthetic, and social economics. The maintenance and discovery of geodiversity and their evaluation can be geoconservation objectives and are considered the basis of particular geotourism activities (Andrasanu, 2009). One of the most effective ways of protecting and conserving geodiversity is to protect and preserve its valuable landmarks such as geoheritage (geological and geomorphic heritage). This study aims to compare the models of Brilha, Comanescu, and Fassoulas, with Shayan Yeganeh et al.’s (2017) native model. The study area with an area of 4257 square kilometers is located in the west of Khorasan Razavi. It includes parts of Sabzevar and Davarzan cities. The longitude of the area is between 56 to 57 degrees (east) and the latitude is between 35 to 36 degrees (north). Materials and MethodsThis study uses an analytical-comparative approach for the evaluation of geosites and geomorphosites. The data were collected using library and field methods and analyzed using GIS, SPSS, and Excel software. The native model of Shayan Yeganeh et al. (2017) designed for Iran's geoparks is computed with eight scientific, educational, service, protection and conservation, cultural, aesthetic, ecological, and indigenous values. In Brilha’s model, geosites and geomorphosites are scored based on the four main criteria of science, educational potential, touristic potential, and degradation risk (protective value). Comanescu’s model (2011) is based on five values (scientific, aesthetic, cultural, economic, and management). Fassoulas et al. (2012) presented a method of four educational, tourist, ecological, and conservation criteria (a score of 1 to 10) for a quantitative study of geosites to protect the geoheritage. Research FindingsThe results of this study show that Kalshoor River, watercolor, Sheikholeslami Qanat, Ophiolite Melange, Kamiz Dam, talus, fans, watershed management, catching in the watershed, and Mushroom Stone are respectively 10 geomorphosites that have the highest geoconservation scores. Drawing shapes, ripple marks, meander, Dike Nahaldan, Sabzevar Claypan, fault, perpendicular layers, sandy pyramids, manifold, and hamada have the lowest scores in geoconservation, respectively. In total, it can be said that geomorphosites that are water erosion subsets have the highest scores in all models; instead, wind erosion geomorphosites have the lowest scores. The Brilha method is the closest method to Shayan Yeganeh et al. for evaluating geomorphosites considering that the aesthetic and economic aspect of geomorphic cultures is insignificant. The models of Comanescu and Fassoulas are at later stages. Comanescu paid less attention to service values, and Fassoulas weakly examines the ecology of geomorphosites. Discussion of Results and Conclusion According to this study, it can be said that Shayan Yeganeh et al.’s model has good coverage of geomorphotoristic potential assessment. After assessing the potential of geomorphotourism, it can be calculated for each geopark as well. In this model, water forms like the Kalshoor River, watercolor, and Qanat Shaykholeslami have the highest protection levels, and wind and water shapes like drawing shapes, ripple marks, and Meander, have the weakest scores in the geoconservation of geoheritage. It can be concluded from the comparison of the models that Shayan Yeganeh et al.’s model is the most consistent with Brilha’s model. The latter can be used to evaluate the ophiolite and desert regions. The native model of Shayan Yeganeh et al. is designed for the dry and semi-arid deserts and mountainous regions.
تبلیغات
