- Email: [email protected]
The harshness of climatic conditions on the territory of Russia
Geography and Natural Resources 31 (2010) 251–256
The harshness of climatic conditions on the territory of Russia S. I. Zabolotnik * Permafrost Institute SB RAS, Yakutsk Received 25 June 2009
Abstract An assessment is made of the harshness of climatic conditions and the distribution pattern of the permafrost zone on the territory of Russia. The regionalization map for the RF territory has been compiled, based on analyzing long-term air temperature observations from more than 3000 meteostations. Six natural-climatic zones are identified on the map. The harshest conditions were determined to the north of 60° N in Yakutia, where the Pole of Cold in the northern hemisphere is located, and in the adjacent areas of Krasnoyarsk Territory and the Magadan region. The regions in the western European part of Russia, where no formation of permafrost whatsoever occurs, are recognized as the most favorable for the life of the population. Keywords: climatic conditions, permafrost zone, sums of negative temperatures.
Introduction The climate of Russia is rather harsh [1]; therefore, comprehensive assessment of the characteristics of human life and activity under such conditions has long become a much-needed measure. The issues relating to regionalization of the territory of Russia according to the discomfort of the conditions have been considered for a relatively long time to date; however, they have not yet been conclusively settled and remain a debated topic. The division of Russia into areas of the Far North and localities equated with them was, for the first time, carried out in 1932 in the interests of the industrial development of the northern and remote eastern territories; it envisaged the introduction of corresponding financial benefits and privileges. The listing of the areas referring to the Far North was also approved at that time; it included the Kola Peninsula and the Murmansk District, the Yakut ASSR, the Kamchatka region as well as the Okhotsky, Koryaksky and Chukotsky Districts of Far-Eastern Krai. Subsequently, this listing was continually expanded and complemented. According to data from the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade (Minekonomrazvitiya) of the Russian Federation, as of 2002, the areas of the Far North and localities equated with them included 28 regions of the
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (S. I. Zabolotnik).
country, regional premium rates were effective in 41 regions, while additional regional and federal payments for account of the “non-northern” territories amounted to more than 64 billion rubles [2]. There is a good probability that this division has also remained to date. In general, the subjects of the Russian Federation for which northern additional payments or regional premium rates now span more than 88% of its total area. The huge financial expenditures connected with salary and wage increments in regions having in their composition no areas of the Far North and localities equated with them, dictated a need to for modifications to active legislation. In this connection, the Committee for the Problems of the North and the Far East of the Sate Duma of the Russian Federation adopted the ordinance for a more accurate definition of the criteria and for the development of the scientifically grounded system for assessing the conditions of human life and activity. For addressing these issues, the Interdepartmental Working Group was formed, which included representatives of legislative and executive authorities in the subjects of the Russian Federation. Related research institutes, such as the Permafrost Institute SB RAS, were also involved in the activities of this group. Background This problem was explored first as early as 1998. At that time, Minekonomrazvitiya of the Russian Federation, the Institute of Geography RAS (IG RAS), and the Institute
Copyright © 2010 IG SB, Siberian Branch of RAS. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved doi:10.1016/j.gnr.2010.09.010
252
S.I. Zabolotnik / Geography and Natural Resources 31 (2010) 251–256
of Economic Problems of the Kola Scientific Center RAS prepared the methodological framework for natural-climatic regionalization of the territory of Russia. At a somewhat earlier date, IG RAS suggested a new version of the technique which makes it possible to take into consideration both the zonal and azonal factors influencing the selection of indices and criteria of extremality for the natural and social conditions of human life [3]. Based on this, a regionalization of the territory of the North and East of Russia was carried out, and a relevant map was compiled. The map identified four zones of discomfort with due regard for a large number of indices. Nevertheless, analysis of the final results brings up a great many questions. For instance, the question of why one and the same extremely discomfort zone II incorporated human settlements with radically different natural conditions in which, according to longterm observations at meteostations, the annual mean air temperature (t) changes nearly by 11 °C [4–25]. In particular, this zone incorporated Murmansk (t = 0.3 °C) [5], Salekhard (t = –6.4 °C) [13], Turukhansk (t = –7.0 °C) [15], Yakutsk (t = –10.3 °C) [18], Magadan (t = –4.7 °C) [24], and Palana on Kamchatka (t = –2.8 °C) [21]. Examples of this sort can also be given for the other zones. The difference in the conditions of human life in the aforementioned settlements is so compelling that it does not need any comments. The awareness of the fact that the compiled map reflected, to an insufficient extent, the azonal factors of the conditions of human life, such as high wind velocities, high humidity, abundance of fogs at the sea coasts, swampiness, etc. [26] dictated a need for an additional processing. A. N. Krenke, A. N. Zolotokrylin and V. V. Vinogradova [26] analyzed seven bioclimatic indices, used as the azonal factors the heat-insulation properties of clothes and the thicknesses of the seasonally thawed or seasonally frozen layers as well as reconciled the boundaries of the zones with the geobotanical and permafrost physical-geographical boundaries. As a result, they compiled a new map for the zones of discomfort. In our opinion, however, this map, too, is not very successful, at least because on the map the northernmost, absolutely discomfort zone (I) is considerably expanded to the south at the sacrifice of the coast of the Sea of Okhotsk, including Ayan (t = –2.7 to –3.3 °C), and the aforementioned locations, except for the coldest, Yakutsk. On the previously published map, they were all located in the extremely discomfort zone (II). The usefulness of and the need for a multifactor consideration of the various parameters of natural environment is beyond any doubt. At the same time, it appears that a too high significance of the secondary parameters was used in compiling the two maps, and such results are indeed due to these factors. To avoid this in the future requires a reestimation and reinterpretation of the value of each of the factors used in the comparison. M. K. Gavrilova, E. N. Fedorova and O. A. Lazebnik [27–28] made an attempt to accomplish this to a certain degree. They analyzed and used as the basis the results obtained previously by other researchers and suggested that
for defining the attribute of zoning of the North, an index should be added, namely, the duration of the unfavorable period (t < 5 °C) in days [27]. They reflected their results on two maps: “Climate-economic regionalization of the North” [27], and “Zoning of the North of Russia” [28]. These maps, however, totally discarded such a highly important factor as the duration of the period with extremely low air temperatures (below –40 °C, for example). As a result, on the latter map [28] the northern part of the Kola Peninsula, including Murmansk where the winter is as mild as in Moscow (the long-term mean temperature for the winter season twin at both locations varies from –6.8 to –7.0 °C [5, 8]), is assigned to the absolutely discomfort (Arctic) zone (I). Palana on Kamchatka, and Magadan (twin –10.4 °C [21], and –14.2 °C [24], respectively) were included in the extremely discomfort (Subarctic) zone (II), whereas the more northern and much colder Yakutsk (twin –26.5 °C [18]) was incorporated only into the southernmost discomfort zone (III). Since the issues relating to the regionalization of Russia’s territory still remain debating points, V. V. Vinogradova, A. N. Zolotokrylin and A. N. Krenke turned back to this problem [29]. They suggested the reginalization technique for the territory of Russia according to the extent to which the natural conditions influence the various aspects of the life activity of population. The regionalization was carried out according to the degree of manifestation of the main natural factors: cold, heat, humidification, elevation of terrain, and elemental phenomena (hydrometeorological, seismic, and geocryological). Use was made of 8 zonal factors with 11 indices as well as 3 azonal factors with 7 indices. An analysis of a large number of parameters was instrumental in generating a new map to greater detail when compared with the previous maps which rather thoroughly reflects the natural conditions across the territory of Russia. On the other hand, we can in no way go along with the fact that the northern part of the Kola Peninsula, washed by the Gulf Stream, where the mean long-term sums of negative air temperatures vary over the range from –715 to –1805 degree days (DD) [5], is included in the absolutely unfavorable zone, whereas Yakutia, where these same sums reach –5300 to –5950 DD [18] and fifty degrees of frost are not uncommon, were incorporated only into the more southern, very unfavorable zone. It is quite understandable that the troubles with regionalization schemes are due to the fact that researchers try to incorporate into the unified scheme a multitude of highly different (often incompatible) parameters of natural environment. Therefore, it is not always possible to find a suitable variant. Besides, the time is ripe to abandon any attempts to regionalize the North only because in, for example, in the Altai and Sayan high mountains situated in the south of Russia, the conditions for human life are much worse when compared with Chukotka. Therefore, this author fully reciprocates M. A. Zhukov’s view that “what is to be regionalized is not the North (thus predetermining its content beforehand) but the territory of the entire country according
S.I. Zabolotnik / Geography and Natural Resources 31 (2010) 251–256
to the principal significant factors of discomfort” [2, p. 144]. There had been attempts to carry out a regionalization of the territory of Russia, in particular according to sums of negative diurnally mean air temperatures (Σt). Based on data from the Interdepartmental Working Group, the map is available, which identifies territories with Σt from 0 to –4000 °C (five zones), and below –4000 °C (one zone). Furthermore, the last zone included all regions within which Σt vary from –4000 to –7700 °C, i.e. the range of their fluctuations is about the same as in the first five zones. As a result, one climatic zone incorporated Oymyakon (with Σt varying from –7300 to –7670 °C), Yakutsk (Σt = –5550 to –5575 °C), and the area of Anadyr (Σt = –3570 to –4200 °C) [18, 24], which is radically misleading. Research results The climate features of a particular territory represent one of the most important indices determining the conditions of human life and activity. And their influence is quite different. In order to demonstrate this, we analyzed the published results of long-term air temperature observations from all meteorological stations of Russia [4–25]. For each of them we obtained averaged sums of negative daily air temperatures (below 0 °C) spanning the entire previous observing period
253
(τ) which on numerous occasions exceeded 100 years. As part of the procedure, these sums (Σtτ) for more than 3000 meteostations were entered on the base map. Subsequently, when highlighting the different zones on the map, these data were interpolated and extrapolated with consideration for topography. Those efforts resulted in the compilation of the “Regionalization map for the territory of the Russian Federation according to the harshness of climatic conditions” at a scale of 1:5 000 000 (see the figure). The map displays the climatic indices on a score-point basis and, as is the case with all previous products, six zones were identified, but at different intervals of variation of the temperature sums. It has been established that the absolutely extreme conditions on the territory of Russia (6 score points) occur in the northwestern mountainous part of Yakutia, and in the small adjoining part of the Magadan region where Σtτ vary from –6251 to –7669 DD (see the figure). This zone is the smallest and occupies a mere 3% of the country’s area. On the other hand, it is the coldest. It is precisely this area which is the home to the Northern Pole of Cold, with such human settlements as Verkhoyansk and Oymyakon. The yearly mean air temperature in them varies from –15.7 to –17.0 °C, while the lowest temperature fluctuates between –68 and –70 °C [18]. The mean winter air temperature (for a stable period during which it is below 0 °C) within the boundaries of the zone varies from –24.5 to –32.5 °C.
Regionalization of the territory of the Russian Federation according to the harshness of climatic conditions. Zones: 1 – with absolutely extreme conditions, 2 – with extreme conditions, 3 – with harsh conditions, 4 – with unfavorable conditions, 5 – with moderate conditions, 6 – relatively favorable for the life of population. Boundaries: 7 – continuous permafrost zone, 8 – southern permafrost zone, 9 – Republic of Sakha (Yakutia).
254
S.I. Zabolotnik / Geography and Natural Resources 31 (2010) 251–256
E x t r e m e c o n d i t i o n s (5 score points, Σtτ from –5001 to –6250 DD) are characteristic for the Arctic archipelagos: Severnaya Zemlya, and the New Siberian Islands, extensive areas of East Siberia, Yakutia, the Magadan region, and of the Chukotka Autonomous District as well as the high-mountain territories in the northern parts of the Republic of Buryatia, the Amurskaya region, Zabaikalsky Krai, and of Khabarovsk Territory. The winter here is also very cold: the mean temperatures vary from –17.0 to –27.5 °C. This zone occupies significant portions of eastern Russia, totaling 22.4% of the country’s area. The regions with h a r s h c o n d i t i o n s (4 score points, Σtτ from –3751 to –5000 DD) include Franz Josef Land, the islands in the Kara Sea, the northern areas of Western Siberia, the central areas of East Siberia, the southern areas of Yakutia, the high-mountain areas of Tuva and Altai, the northern territories of Buryatia, the Irkutsk and Amurskaya regions, Zabaikalsky Krai, Khabarovsk Territory as well as some portions of the Magadan and Kamchatka regions, Chukotka and Wrangel Island. This zone largely encompasses on the south and west the preceding zone and occupies about of the area of Russia. The winter season within its boundaries is still rather cold: the mean winter temperatures fluctuate from –13.5 to –24.0 °C. The zone with u n f a v o r a b l e c o n d i t i o n s (3 score points, Σtτ from –2501 to –3750 DD) surrounds on the west, south and east all the preceding zones (see the figure). It occupies an area of about 22.5% of the country’s territory. The zone includes the Novaya Zemlya archipelago, Vaigach Island, the eastern part of the Nenets Autonomous District, northern Ural, the northwestern and southern areas of Western Siberia, and some portions of Krasnoyarsk Territory, Zabaikalsky Krai, Khabarovsk Territory, Primorski Krai, Buryatia, the Irkutsk, Amurskaya, Magadan and Kamchatka regions, and of Chukotka. The zone has a relatively longlasting winter, especially on the Arctic islands, but not as cold. Its mean temperatures vary from –0.5 to –20.5 °C. M o d e r a t e c o n d i t i o n s (2 score points, Σtτ from –1251 to –2500 DD) are characteristic for most of the Northwestern and Volga Federal Districts, and for the southern and southwestern parts of the Ural and Siberian Federal Districts, respectively. When advancing further eastward, such conditions were identified around the southern part of Lake Baikal, and in a small southern area of Zabaikalsky Krai. In the Far East, the zone with moderate conditions appears on Krasnoyarsk territory and occupies larger portions of Primorski Krai, Sakhalin and Kamchatka, and only small strips in the Magadan region, and on the margins of the Gulf of Anadyr on Chukotka. The territory of this zone is the largest (nearly 25% of the country’s area), and it has relatively mild winters. The mean winter temperatures vary from –6.5 to –16.5 °C. We assign to the r e l a t i v e l y f a v o r a b l e z o n e of the life of population (1 score point, Σtτ higher than–1250 DD) the territories within which the mean air temperature for a cold season (t < 0°C) is higher than –8.5 °C. This zone
includes the coast of the Kola peninsula in the Barents Sea, a portion of the Onega Peninsula and of the coast of the Onega Bay in the White Sea, the Kaliningrad region, the Central Federal District, the southwestern part of the Volga Federal District and the Southern Federal District in the European part of Russia. On the east, this zone incorporates a narrow strip of the coast of Primorski Krai, the southern parts of Sakhalin and Kamchatka as well as the Komandorskie Islands, and the Kuril Islands. This zone is largely located in the western part of the country (see the figure) and, as a whole, occupies about 9% of the area of Russia. In addition to analyzing the harshness of the climatic conditions on the territory of Russia, we, in collaboration with V. V. Kunitsky, M. M. Shats and V. V. Shepelev [30], performed an expert assessment of the occurrence pattern of permafrost zone within the selected zones. It was established that on territories with absolutely extreme and extreme conditions, where Σtτ vary from –5001 to –7669 DD (zones 5 and 6) (see the figure), almost everywhere there occurs continuous permafrost only. In the zone with harsh conditions (Σtτ from –3751 to –5000 DD), they occur as continuous permafrost (predominantly in the northern parts) and discontinuous permafrost and permafrost islands. It should also be noted that almost the entire region of continuous permafrost, with the exception of the islands in the Barents Sea, is situated within the Asian part of Russia [1]. On territories with unfavorable conditions (see the figure, zone 3), within which Σtτ vary from –2501 to –3750 DD, the permafrost zone occurs largely in the form of permafrost islands. In the zone with moderate conditions (with Σtτ varying from –1251 to –2500 DD), the permafrost zone occurs only in very small parts of it (in the European North, and in the southeastern part in the foothills of the Sayan mountains) and manifests itself in the form of islands or sporadic permafrost. In most cases, it is distinguished by the absence of permafrost, as is the zone with relatively favorable conditions (Σtτ above –1250 DD), where permafrost does not form at all (see the figure). To illustrate this more emphatically, we transferred to our map the boundaries of the permafrost zone types from the Geocryological Map of the USSR that was compiled by I. Ya. Baranov [31]. Comparison of our compiled map with previous ones shows that our map differs drastically from them. And the main difference is that the selected zones show actually existing extreme conditions with the lowest temperatures and the largest thicknesses of the permafrost zone as well as territories within which the conditions turn out to be moderate and relatively favorable where the permafrost zone occurs in the form of separate islands or which show no permafrost zone whatsoever. For instance, at all times (both 100 years ago and at present) Central Yakutia has been and is the coldest region in Russia, with the largest, instrumentally established thickness of the permafrost zone (as thick as 1500 m). This notwithstanding, the previously
S.I. Zabolotnik / Geography and Natural Resources 31 (2010) 251–256
published regionalization schemes under absolutely and extremely discomfort conditions included only the northern part of Yakutia. Besides, these same zones incorporated the coast of the Kola Peninsula that is washed by the warm Gulf Stream current, with the all-the-year-round unfreezing sea in the area of Murmansk, with no permafrost altogether being ever formed in this area, while the continental part of the Peninsula is characterized by the permafrost zone occurring only in the form of islands as thick as 50 m [32]. On the other hand, as regards the issues, considered at the beginning of this paper, relating to the singling-out of areas in the Far North and districts equated with them with regional premium rates, these territories are similar to those which we identified with unfavorable climatic conditions. Our regionalization shows that regions with extreme, harsh and unfavorable conditions within which the sums of negative air temperatures vary from –2500 to –7700 DD, occupy slightly more than 66% of the country’s territory. If, however, the zone with moderate conditions of life is added to them, then the total area occupied by them will almost reach 91%. Conclusion The research which we have presented in this paper still cannot serve as a sufficient basis for the establishment of regional premium rates on the entire territory of the Russian Federation. To accomplish this would require an exhaustive study into the influence of the many other parameters of environment affecting the conditions of human life and activities. Specifically, it is necessary to take into consideration in greater detail the geocryological situation of the regions and assessments of its impact on the life conditions of the population. Nonetheless, the suggested map furnishes an opportunity to compare the temperature conditions with the permafrost zone, and with other natural factors as well as to make an overall assessment of the relevant research done previously. References 1. Shepelev V. V. and Shats M. M. Regionalization of the RF territory according to life conditions with consideration for the geocryological situation. Nauka i obrazovaniye, 2005, No. 4(40), pp. 72–79. 2. Zhukov M. A. The struggle for the Far North, or a long way to common sense. Nauka i obrazovaniye, 2005, No. 4(40), pp. 141–145. 3. Zolotokrylin A. N., Kantsebovskaya I. V. and Krenke A. N. Regionalization of Russia’s territory according to the degree of extremality of the natural conditions for life. Izv. AN. Ser. geogr., 1992, No. 6, pp. 6–30. 4. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II. Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 1: Arkhangelsk and Vologda Regions, and Karelian and Komi ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 358 p. 5. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 2: Murmansk Region. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 144 p.
255
6. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 3: Karelian ASSR, and Leningrad, Novgorod and Pskov Regions. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 343 p. 7. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 6: Lithuanian SSR and Kaliningrad Region of the RSFSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 143 p. 8. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 8: Yaroslavl, Kalinin, Moscow, Vladimir, Smolensk, Kaluga, Ryazan and Tula Regions. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1964, 355 p. 9. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 9: Perm, Sverdlovsk, Chelyabinsk and Kurgan Regions, and Bashkir ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1865, 362 p. 10. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 12: Tatar ASSR, and Ulyanovsk, Kuibyshev, Penza, Orenburg and Saratov Regions. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 344 p. 11. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 13: Volgograd, Rostov and Astrakhan Regions, Krasnodar and Stavropol Krais, and and Kalmyk, Kabardino-Balkarian, Checheno-Ingoosh and North Ossetian ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 492 p. 12. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 15: Dagestan ASSR, Azerbaijan SSR and Nakhichevan ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 268 p. 13. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. III: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 17: Tyumen and Omsk Regions. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 276 p. 14. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 20: Tomsk, Novosibirsk and Kemerovo Regions, and Altai Territory. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 396 p. 15. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 21: Krasnoyarsk Territory, and Tuva ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1967, 504 p. 16. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 22: Irkutsk Region, and the Western Part of the Buryat ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 360 p. 17. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 23: Buryat ASSR, and Chita Region. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 320 p. 18. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 24: Yakut ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 398 p. 19. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 25: Khabarovsk Territory, and Amurskaya Region. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 312 p. 20. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 26: Primorski Krai. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 220 p. 21. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 27: Kamchatka Region. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 184 p. 22. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 28: Tambov, Bryansk, Lipetsk, Orel, Kursk, Voronezh and Belgorod Regions. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 234 p. 23. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 29: Ivanovo, Kostroma, Kirov and Gorky Regions; Mari, Udmurt, Chuvash and Mordovan ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1964, 208 p.
256
S.I. Zabolotnik / Geography and Natural Resources 31 (2010) 251–256
24. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 33: Chukotski National District, and Magadan Region. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 288 p. 25. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 34: Sakhalin Region. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 205 p. 26. Krenke A. N., Zolotokrylin A. N. and Vinogradova V. V. Regionalization of the North and East of Russia according to the natural-climatic conditions of life. In: Regional Aspects of Russia Under Global Changes in Natural Conditions and Climate. Moscow: Izd-vo NTs ENAS, 2001, pp. 65–74. 27. Gavrilova M. K., Fedorova E. N. and Lazebnik O. A. On the regionalization of Russia’s North according to the discomfort of life. Nauka i obrazovaniye, 2003, No. 2(30), pp. 16–24. 28. Gavrilova M. K. and Lazebnik O. A. Concerning the boundary
29.
30.
31. 32.
of Russia’s North and its zoning. Izv. RGO, 2004, v. 136, issue 1, pp. 63–69. Vinogradov V. V., Zolotokrylin A. N. and Krenke A. N. Regionalization of the territory of the Russian Federation according to natural-climatic conditions. Izv. RAN. Ser. geogr., 2008, No. 6, pp. 106–117. Shepelev V. V., Zabolotnik S. I., Kunitsky V. V., and Shats M. M. The permafrost factors of regionalization of Russia’s North. In: Regionalization (Zoning) of the North of the Russian Federation. Yakutsk: Izd-vo In-ta merzlotovedeniya SO RAN, 2007, pp. 14–26. Baranov I. Ya. The Geocryological Map of the USSR. Sc 1:5 000 000.Moscow: GUGK SSSR, 1977, 4 sheets. Geocryology of the USSR. The European Territory. Ed. by E. D. Yershov. Moscow: Nedra, 1988, 358 p.
The harshness of climatic conditions on the territory of Russia S. I. Zabolotnik * Permafrost Institute SB RAS, Yakutsk Received 25 June 2009
Abstract An assessment is made of the harshness of climatic conditions and the distribution pattern of the permafrost zone on the territory of Russia. The regionalization map for the RF territory has been compiled, based on analyzing long-term air temperature observations from more than 3000 meteostations. Six natural-climatic zones are identified on the map. The harshest conditions were determined to the north of 60° N in Yakutia, where the Pole of Cold in the northern hemisphere is located, and in the adjacent areas of Krasnoyarsk Territory and the Magadan region. The regions in the western European part of Russia, where no formation of permafrost whatsoever occurs, are recognized as the most favorable for the life of the population. Keywords: climatic conditions, permafrost zone, sums of negative temperatures.
Introduction The climate of Russia is rather harsh [1]; therefore, comprehensive assessment of the characteristics of human life and activity under such conditions has long become a much-needed measure. The issues relating to regionalization of the territory of Russia according to the discomfort of the conditions have been considered for a relatively long time to date; however, they have not yet been conclusively settled and remain a debated topic. The division of Russia into areas of the Far North and localities equated with them was, for the first time, carried out in 1932 in the interests of the industrial development of the northern and remote eastern territories; it envisaged the introduction of corresponding financial benefits and privileges. The listing of the areas referring to the Far North was also approved at that time; it included the Kola Peninsula and the Murmansk District, the Yakut ASSR, the Kamchatka region as well as the Okhotsky, Koryaksky and Chukotsky Districts of Far-Eastern Krai. Subsequently, this listing was continually expanded and complemented. According to data from the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade (Minekonomrazvitiya) of the Russian Federation, as of 2002, the areas of the Far North and localities equated with them included 28 regions of the
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (S. I. Zabolotnik).
country, regional premium rates were effective in 41 regions, while additional regional and federal payments for account of the “non-northern” territories amounted to more than 64 billion rubles [2]. There is a good probability that this division has also remained to date. In general, the subjects of the Russian Federation for which northern additional payments or regional premium rates now span more than 88% of its total area. The huge financial expenditures connected with salary and wage increments in regions having in their composition no areas of the Far North and localities equated with them, dictated a need to for modifications to active legislation. In this connection, the Committee for the Problems of the North and the Far East of the Sate Duma of the Russian Federation adopted the ordinance for a more accurate definition of the criteria and for the development of the scientifically grounded system for assessing the conditions of human life and activity. For addressing these issues, the Interdepartmental Working Group was formed, which included representatives of legislative and executive authorities in the subjects of the Russian Federation. Related research institutes, such as the Permafrost Institute SB RAS, were also involved in the activities of this group. Background This problem was explored first as early as 1998. At that time, Minekonomrazvitiya of the Russian Federation, the Institute of Geography RAS (IG RAS), and the Institute
Copyright © 2010 IG SB, Siberian Branch of RAS. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved doi:10.1016/j.gnr.2010.09.010
252
S.I. Zabolotnik / Geography and Natural Resources 31 (2010) 251–256
of Economic Problems of the Kola Scientific Center RAS prepared the methodological framework for natural-climatic regionalization of the territory of Russia. At a somewhat earlier date, IG RAS suggested a new version of the technique which makes it possible to take into consideration both the zonal and azonal factors influencing the selection of indices and criteria of extremality for the natural and social conditions of human life [3]. Based on this, a regionalization of the territory of the North and East of Russia was carried out, and a relevant map was compiled. The map identified four zones of discomfort with due regard for a large number of indices. Nevertheless, analysis of the final results brings up a great many questions. For instance, the question of why one and the same extremely discomfort zone II incorporated human settlements with radically different natural conditions in which, according to longterm observations at meteostations, the annual mean air temperature (t) changes nearly by 11 °C [4–25]. In particular, this zone incorporated Murmansk (t = 0.3 °C) [5], Salekhard (t = –6.4 °C) [13], Turukhansk (t = –7.0 °C) [15], Yakutsk (t = –10.3 °C) [18], Magadan (t = –4.7 °C) [24], and Palana on Kamchatka (t = –2.8 °C) [21]. Examples of this sort can also be given for the other zones. The difference in the conditions of human life in the aforementioned settlements is so compelling that it does not need any comments. The awareness of the fact that the compiled map reflected, to an insufficient extent, the azonal factors of the conditions of human life, such as high wind velocities, high humidity, abundance of fogs at the sea coasts, swampiness, etc. [26] dictated a need for an additional processing. A. N. Krenke, A. N. Zolotokrylin and V. V. Vinogradova [26] analyzed seven bioclimatic indices, used as the azonal factors the heat-insulation properties of clothes and the thicknesses of the seasonally thawed or seasonally frozen layers as well as reconciled the boundaries of the zones with the geobotanical and permafrost physical-geographical boundaries. As a result, they compiled a new map for the zones of discomfort. In our opinion, however, this map, too, is not very successful, at least because on the map the northernmost, absolutely discomfort zone (I) is considerably expanded to the south at the sacrifice of the coast of the Sea of Okhotsk, including Ayan (t = –2.7 to –3.3 °C), and the aforementioned locations, except for the coldest, Yakutsk. On the previously published map, they were all located in the extremely discomfort zone (II). The usefulness of and the need for a multifactor consideration of the various parameters of natural environment is beyond any doubt. At the same time, it appears that a too high significance of the secondary parameters was used in compiling the two maps, and such results are indeed due to these factors. To avoid this in the future requires a reestimation and reinterpretation of the value of each of the factors used in the comparison. M. K. Gavrilova, E. N. Fedorova and O. A. Lazebnik [27–28] made an attempt to accomplish this to a certain degree. They analyzed and used as the basis the results obtained previously by other researchers and suggested that
for defining the attribute of zoning of the North, an index should be added, namely, the duration of the unfavorable period (t < 5 °C) in days [27]. They reflected their results on two maps: “Climate-economic regionalization of the North” [27], and “Zoning of the North of Russia” [28]. These maps, however, totally discarded such a highly important factor as the duration of the period with extremely low air temperatures (below –40 °C, for example). As a result, on the latter map [28] the northern part of the Kola Peninsula, including Murmansk where the winter is as mild as in Moscow (the long-term mean temperature for the winter season twin at both locations varies from –6.8 to –7.0 °C [5, 8]), is assigned to the absolutely discomfort (Arctic) zone (I). Palana on Kamchatka, and Magadan (twin –10.4 °C [21], and –14.2 °C [24], respectively) were included in the extremely discomfort (Subarctic) zone (II), whereas the more northern and much colder Yakutsk (twin –26.5 °C [18]) was incorporated only into the southernmost discomfort zone (III). Since the issues relating to the regionalization of Russia’s territory still remain debating points, V. V. Vinogradova, A. N. Zolotokrylin and A. N. Krenke turned back to this problem [29]. They suggested the reginalization technique for the territory of Russia according to the extent to which the natural conditions influence the various aspects of the life activity of population. The regionalization was carried out according to the degree of manifestation of the main natural factors: cold, heat, humidification, elevation of terrain, and elemental phenomena (hydrometeorological, seismic, and geocryological). Use was made of 8 zonal factors with 11 indices as well as 3 azonal factors with 7 indices. An analysis of a large number of parameters was instrumental in generating a new map to greater detail when compared with the previous maps which rather thoroughly reflects the natural conditions across the territory of Russia. On the other hand, we can in no way go along with the fact that the northern part of the Kola Peninsula, washed by the Gulf Stream, where the mean long-term sums of negative air temperatures vary over the range from –715 to –1805 degree days (DD) [5], is included in the absolutely unfavorable zone, whereas Yakutia, where these same sums reach –5300 to –5950 DD [18] and fifty degrees of frost are not uncommon, were incorporated only into the more southern, very unfavorable zone. It is quite understandable that the troubles with regionalization schemes are due to the fact that researchers try to incorporate into the unified scheme a multitude of highly different (often incompatible) parameters of natural environment. Therefore, it is not always possible to find a suitable variant. Besides, the time is ripe to abandon any attempts to regionalize the North only because in, for example, in the Altai and Sayan high mountains situated in the south of Russia, the conditions for human life are much worse when compared with Chukotka. Therefore, this author fully reciprocates M. A. Zhukov’s view that “what is to be regionalized is not the North (thus predetermining its content beforehand) but the territory of the entire country according
S.I. Zabolotnik / Geography and Natural Resources 31 (2010) 251–256
to the principal significant factors of discomfort” [2, p. 144]. There had been attempts to carry out a regionalization of the territory of Russia, in particular according to sums of negative diurnally mean air temperatures (Σt). Based on data from the Interdepartmental Working Group, the map is available, which identifies territories with Σt from 0 to –4000 °C (five zones), and below –4000 °C (one zone). Furthermore, the last zone included all regions within which Σt vary from –4000 to –7700 °C, i.e. the range of their fluctuations is about the same as in the first five zones. As a result, one climatic zone incorporated Oymyakon (with Σt varying from –7300 to –7670 °C), Yakutsk (Σt = –5550 to –5575 °C), and the area of Anadyr (Σt = –3570 to –4200 °C) [18, 24], which is radically misleading. Research results The climate features of a particular territory represent one of the most important indices determining the conditions of human life and activity. And their influence is quite different. In order to demonstrate this, we analyzed the published results of long-term air temperature observations from all meteorological stations of Russia [4–25]. For each of them we obtained averaged sums of negative daily air temperatures (below 0 °C) spanning the entire previous observing period
253
(τ) which on numerous occasions exceeded 100 years. As part of the procedure, these sums (Σtτ) for more than 3000 meteostations were entered on the base map. Subsequently, when highlighting the different zones on the map, these data were interpolated and extrapolated with consideration for topography. Those efforts resulted in the compilation of the “Regionalization map for the territory of the Russian Federation according to the harshness of climatic conditions” at a scale of 1:5 000 000 (see the figure). The map displays the climatic indices on a score-point basis and, as is the case with all previous products, six zones were identified, but at different intervals of variation of the temperature sums. It has been established that the absolutely extreme conditions on the territory of Russia (6 score points) occur in the northwestern mountainous part of Yakutia, and in the small adjoining part of the Magadan region where Σtτ vary from –6251 to –7669 DD (see the figure). This zone is the smallest and occupies a mere 3% of the country’s area. On the other hand, it is the coldest. It is precisely this area which is the home to the Northern Pole of Cold, with such human settlements as Verkhoyansk and Oymyakon. The yearly mean air temperature in them varies from –15.7 to –17.0 °C, while the lowest temperature fluctuates between –68 and –70 °C [18]. The mean winter air temperature (for a stable period during which it is below 0 °C) within the boundaries of the zone varies from –24.5 to –32.5 °C.
Regionalization of the territory of the Russian Federation according to the harshness of climatic conditions. Zones: 1 – with absolutely extreme conditions, 2 – with extreme conditions, 3 – with harsh conditions, 4 – with unfavorable conditions, 5 – with moderate conditions, 6 – relatively favorable for the life of population. Boundaries: 7 – continuous permafrost zone, 8 – southern permafrost zone, 9 – Republic of Sakha (Yakutia).
254
S.I. Zabolotnik / Geography and Natural Resources 31 (2010) 251–256
E x t r e m e c o n d i t i o n s (5 score points, Σtτ from –5001 to –6250 DD) are characteristic for the Arctic archipelagos: Severnaya Zemlya, and the New Siberian Islands, extensive areas of East Siberia, Yakutia, the Magadan region, and of the Chukotka Autonomous District as well as the high-mountain territories in the northern parts of the Republic of Buryatia, the Amurskaya region, Zabaikalsky Krai, and of Khabarovsk Territory. The winter here is also very cold: the mean temperatures vary from –17.0 to –27.5 °C. This zone occupies significant portions of eastern Russia, totaling 22.4% of the country’s area. The regions with h a r s h c o n d i t i o n s (4 score points, Σtτ from –3751 to –5000 DD) include Franz Josef Land, the islands in the Kara Sea, the northern areas of Western Siberia, the central areas of East Siberia, the southern areas of Yakutia, the high-mountain areas of Tuva and Altai, the northern territories of Buryatia, the Irkutsk and Amurskaya regions, Zabaikalsky Krai, Khabarovsk Territory as well as some portions of the Magadan and Kamchatka regions, Chukotka and Wrangel Island. This zone largely encompasses on the south and west the preceding zone and occupies about of the area of Russia. The winter season within its boundaries is still rather cold: the mean winter temperatures fluctuate from –13.5 to –24.0 °C. The zone with u n f a v o r a b l e c o n d i t i o n s (3 score points, Σtτ from –2501 to –3750 DD) surrounds on the west, south and east all the preceding zones (see the figure). It occupies an area of about 22.5% of the country’s territory. The zone includes the Novaya Zemlya archipelago, Vaigach Island, the eastern part of the Nenets Autonomous District, northern Ural, the northwestern and southern areas of Western Siberia, and some portions of Krasnoyarsk Territory, Zabaikalsky Krai, Khabarovsk Territory, Primorski Krai, Buryatia, the Irkutsk, Amurskaya, Magadan and Kamchatka regions, and of Chukotka. The zone has a relatively longlasting winter, especially on the Arctic islands, but not as cold. Its mean temperatures vary from –0.5 to –20.5 °C. M o d e r a t e c o n d i t i o n s (2 score points, Σtτ from –1251 to –2500 DD) are characteristic for most of the Northwestern and Volga Federal Districts, and for the southern and southwestern parts of the Ural and Siberian Federal Districts, respectively. When advancing further eastward, such conditions were identified around the southern part of Lake Baikal, and in a small southern area of Zabaikalsky Krai. In the Far East, the zone with moderate conditions appears on Krasnoyarsk territory and occupies larger portions of Primorski Krai, Sakhalin and Kamchatka, and only small strips in the Magadan region, and on the margins of the Gulf of Anadyr on Chukotka. The territory of this zone is the largest (nearly 25% of the country’s area), and it has relatively mild winters. The mean winter temperatures vary from –6.5 to –16.5 °C. We assign to the r e l a t i v e l y f a v o r a b l e z o n e of the life of population (1 score point, Σtτ higher than–1250 DD) the territories within which the mean air temperature for a cold season (t < 0°C) is higher than –8.5 °C. This zone
includes the coast of the Kola peninsula in the Barents Sea, a portion of the Onega Peninsula and of the coast of the Onega Bay in the White Sea, the Kaliningrad region, the Central Federal District, the southwestern part of the Volga Federal District and the Southern Federal District in the European part of Russia. On the east, this zone incorporates a narrow strip of the coast of Primorski Krai, the southern parts of Sakhalin and Kamchatka as well as the Komandorskie Islands, and the Kuril Islands. This zone is largely located in the western part of the country (see the figure) and, as a whole, occupies about 9% of the area of Russia. In addition to analyzing the harshness of the climatic conditions on the territory of Russia, we, in collaboration with V. V. Kunitsky, M. M. Shats and V. V. Shepelev [30], performed an expert assessment of the occurrence pattern of permafrost zone within the selected zones. It was established that on territories with absolutely extreme and extreme conditions, where Σtτ vary from –5001 to –7669 DD (zones 5 and 6) (see the figure), almost everywhere there occurs continuous permafrost only. In the zone with harsh conditions (Σtτ from –3751 to –5000 DD), they occur as continuous permafrost (predominantly in the northern parts) and discontinuous permafrost and permafrost islands. It should also be noted that almost the entire region of continuous permafrost, with the exception of the islands in the Barents Sea, is situated within the Asian part of Russia [1]. On territories with unfavorable conditions (see the figure, zone 3), within which Σtτ vary from –2501 to –3750 DD, the permafrost zone occurs largely in the form of permafrost islands. In the zone with moderate conditions (with Σtτ varying from –1251 to –2500 DD), the permafrost zone occurs only in very small parts of it (in the European North, and in the southeastern part in the foothills of the Sayan mountains) and manifests itself in the form of islands or sporadic permafrost. In most cases, it is distinguished by the absence of permafrost, as is the zone with relatively favorable conditions (Σtτ above –1250 DD), where permafrost does not form at all (see the figure). To illustrate this more emphatically, we transferred to our map the boundaries of the permafrost zone types from the Geocryological Map of the USSR that was compiled by I. Ya. Baranov [31]. Comparison of our compiled map with previous ones shows that our map differs drastically from them. And the main difference is that the selected zones show actually existing extreme conditions with the lowest temperatures and the largest thicknesses of the permafrost zone as well as territories within which the conditions turn out to be moderate and relatively favorable where the permafrost zone occurs in the form of separate islands or which show no permafrost zone whatsoever. For instance, at all times (both 100 years ago and at present) Central Yakutia has been and is the coldest region in Russia, with the largest, instrumentally established thickness of the permafrost zone (as thick as 1500 m). This notwithstanding, the previously
S.I. Zabolotnik / Geography and Natural Resources 31 (2010) 251–256
published regionalization schemes under absolutely and extremely discomfort conditions included only the northern part of Yakutia. Besides, these same zones incorporated the coast of the Kola Peninsula that is washed by the warm Gulf Stream current, with the all-the-year-round unfreezing sea in the area of Murmansk, with no permafrost altogether being ever formed in this area, while the continental part of the Peninsula is characterized by the permafrost zone occurring only in the form of islands as thick as 50 m [32]. On the other hand, as regards the issues, considered at the beginning of this paper, relating to the singling-out of areas in the Far North and districts equated with them with regional premium rates, these territories are similar to those which we identified with unfavorable climatic conditions. Our regionalization shows that regions with extreme, harsh and unfavorable conditions within which the sums of negative air temperatures vary from –2500 to –7700 DD, occupy slightly more than 66% of the country’s territory. If, however, the zone with moderate conditions of life is added to them, then the total area occupied by them will almost reach 91%. Conclusion The research which we have presented in this paper still cannot serve as a sufficient basis for the establishment of regional premium rates on the entire territory of the Russian Federation. To accomplish this would require an exhaustive study into the influence of the many other parameters of environment affecting the conditions of human life and activities. Specifically, it is necessary to take into consideration in greater detail the geocryological situation of the regions and assessments of its impact on the life conditions of the population. Nonetheless, the suggested map furnishes an opportunity to compare the temperature conditions with the permafrost zone, and with other natural factors as well as to make an overall assessment of the relevant research done previously. References 1. Shepelev V. V. and Shats M. M. Regionalization of the RF territory according to life conditions with consideration for the geocryological situation. Nauka i obrazovaniye, 2005, No. 4(40), pp. 72–79. 2. Zhukov M. A. The struggle for the Far North, or a long way to common sense. Nauka i obrazovaniye, 2005, No. 4(40), pp. 141–145. 3. Zolotokrylin A. N., Kantsebovskaya I. V. and Krenke A. N. Regionalization of Russia’s territory according to the degree of extremality of the natural conditions for life. Izv. AN. Ser. geogr., 1992, No. 6, pp. 6–30. 4. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II. Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 1: Arkhangelsk and Vologda Regions, and Karelian and Komi ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 358 p. 5. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 2: Murmansk Region. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 144 p.
255
6. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 3: Karelian ASSR, and Leningrad, Novgorod and Pskov Regions. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 343 p. 7. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 6: Lithuanian SSR and Kaliningrad Region of the RSFSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 143 p. 8. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 8: Yaroslavl, Kalinin, Moscow, Vladimir, Smolensk, Kaluga, Ryazan and Tula Regions. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1964, 355 p. 9. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 9: Perm, Sverdlovsk, Chelyabinsk and Kurgan Regions, and Bashkir ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1865, 362 p. 10. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 12: Tatar ASSR, and Ulyanovsk, Kuibyshev, Penza, Orenburg and Saratov Regions. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 344 p. 11. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 13: Volgograd, Rostov and Astrakhan Regions, Krasnodar and Stavropol Krais, and and Kalmyk, Kabardino-Balkarian, Checheno-Ingoosh and North Ossetian ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 492 p. 12. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 15: Dagestan ASSR, Azerbaijan SSR and Nakhichevan ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 268 p. 13. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. III: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 17: Tyumen and Omsk Regions. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 276 p. 14. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 20: Tomsk, Novosibirsk and Kemerovo Regions, and Altai Territory. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 396 p. 15. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 21: Krasnoyarsk Territory, and Tuva ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1967, 504 p. 16. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 22: Irkutsk Region, and the Western Part of the Buryat ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 360 p. 17. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 23: Buryat ASSR, and Chita Region. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 320 p. 18. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 24: Yakut ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 398 p. 19. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 25: Khabarovsk Territory, and Amurskaya Region. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 312 p. 20. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 26: Primorski Krai. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 220 p. 21. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 27: Kamchatka Region. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 184 p. 22. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 28: Tambov, Bryansk, Lipetsk, Orel, Kursk, Voronezh and Belgorod Regions. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 234 p. 23. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 29: Ivanovo, Kostroma, Kirov and Gorky Regions; Mari, Udmurt, Chuvash and Mordovan ASSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1964, 208 p.
256
S.I. Zabolotnik / Geography and Natural Resources 31 (2010) 251–256
24. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 33: Chukotski National District, and Magadan Region. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 288 p. 25. Handbook on USSR Climate. Pt. II: Air and Soil Temperature. Issue 34: Sakhalin Region. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1966, 205 p. 26. Krenke A. N., Zolotokrylin A. N. and Vinogradova V. V. Regionalization of the North and East of Russia according to the natural-climatic conditions of life. In: Regional Aspects of Russia Under Global Changes in Natural Conditions and Climate. Moscow: Izd-vo NTs ENAS, 2001, pp. 65–74. 27. Gavrilova M. K., Fedorova E. N. and Lazebnik O. A. On the regionalization of Russia’s North according to the discomfort of life. Nauka i obrazovaniye, 2003, No. 2(30), pp. 16–24. 28. Gavrilova M. K. and Lazebnik O. A. Concerning the boundary
29.
30.
31. 32.
of Russia’s North and its zoning. Izv. RGO, 2004, v. 136, issue 1, pp. 63–69. Vinogradov V. V., Zolotokrylin A. N. and Krenke A. N. Regionalization of the territory of the Russian Federation according to natural-climatic conditions. Izv. RAN. Ser. geogr., 2008, No. 6, pp. 106–117. Shepelev V. V., Zabolotnik S. I., Kunitsky V. V., and Shats M. M. The permafrost factors of regionalization of Russia’s North. In: Regionalization (Zoning) of the North of the Russian Federation. Yakutsk: Izd-vo In-ta merzlotovedeniya SO RAN, 2007, pp. 14–26. Baranov I. Ya. The Geocryological Map of the USSR. Sc 1:5 000 000.Moscow: GUGK SSSR, 1977, 4 sheets. Geocryology of the USSR. The European Territory. Ed. by E. D. Yershov. Moscow: Nedra, 1988, 358 p.