Veress Márton: A Bakony természettudományi kutatásának eredményei 23. - Covered karst evolution... (Zirc, 2000)

RESEARCH HISTORY

According to BERTALAN (1955), some of the caves resulted from seeping waters. BERTALAN (1955), JASKÓ (1959) and VERESS (1981a) emphasize the role of geological conditions (faults, stratification, bedding plane, lithological variation) in their development. ESZTERHÁS (1981) claims that caves in Burok Valley were not formed by karst processes but frost shattering and insolation weathering contributed to their development. It is undoubted that in the case of some caves non-karstic processes could have an exclusive (like pseudotectonics or erosion) or a complementary (frost shattering) role (BERTALAN 1962; VERESS 1981a). In the opinion of VADÁSZ (1940) and VERESS (1980a,b) valleys deepening into the zone of flowing karst water exposed the caverns which developed there. A similar evolution through cavern exposure is described by KEREKES (1948) from Bükk Mountains. In this zone infiltration from water-courses on valley floors mixes with flowing karst water and through mixing corrosion - increases the intensity of cavern formation (VERESS 1980a). It is to be noted here that excavations support this kind of evolution. From the fills of caverns of various size in valley sides (eg. Tekerés Valley rock niche, Southern-Bakony) quartz gravels and dolomitic debris reworked by water-courses was recovered (BERTALAN-KRETZOI 1962). LEÉL-ŐSSY (1987) cites the Ördöglyuk (correctly: Ördög-lik) cave of the Sűrű Hill, which belongs to the above group, among caves of thermal origin. As in the case of the caves in Som Hill, already mentioned, thermal origin can be excluded - not only in view of the geological evolution of the area but also because of the lack of thermal water features and the spatial location of caves. For some caves (Törkü-likak and Hódasér through cave) where - on the basis of features - solutional origin is hardly disputable, BERTALAN assumes erosional origin. According to LEÉL-ŐSSY (1987), some caves, eg. the Odvaskő Cave, are spring caves. The same cave is described by GERGELY (1938) as a streamsink cave. The landforms of the cave and its environs (together with two neighbouring cavities) indicate that it is an exposed cave remnant. LÁNG (1962) mentions eroding spring caves in the sides of elevated planated blocks W of the Cuha stream. Author's opinion is that eroding caves in faulted escarpments must have also formed through subsequent unroofing. An evidence to this is the lack of travertine accumulation in the foreground of these caves (similarly to caves opening in valley sides). Surface karst features Several authors deny the decisive role of surface karst features in the landscape of the mountains (LÁNG 1958; BULLA 1964; LEÉL-ŐSSY 1987). Their opinion may be motivated by various reasons: - The inventory and description of surface karst features began rather belated and have not been completed to this day. - Karst features are of small dimensions. - Karst features do not form an extensive and continuous zone. The reason for this is the covered nature of blocks on the one hand and the wide distribution of dolomites and relatively impure limestones. The surface features of the Bakony karst are first reported on by the father of Hungarian physical geography, HUNFALVY (1864): „The mountain plateaus locally show karst-like phenomena; there are swallow holes and sinkholes and from some ruptures rich springs issue