ISSN 20799705, Regional Research of Russia, 2013, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 32–39. © Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2013.

Original Russian Text © V.M. Kotlyakov, L.V. Desinov, S.V. Dolgov, N.I. Koronkevich, E.A. Likhacheva, A.N. Makkaveev, A.A. Medvedev, V.A. Rudakov, 2012, published in
Izvestiya RAN. Seriya Geograficheskaya, 2012, No. 6, pp. 80–88.

REGIONAL
DEVELOPMENT

Flooding of July 6–7, 2012, in the Town of Krymsk

V. M. Kotlyakov, L. V. Desinov, S. V. Dolgov, N. I. Koronkevich, E. A. Likhacheva,
A. N. Makkaveev, A. A. Medvedev, and V. A. Rudakov
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow
email: vladkot6@gmail.com, remote_sensing@complat.ru, hydroigras@yandex.ru,
a.a.medvedeff@gmail.com
Received August 10, 2012

Abstract—The paper analyzes the features of the flooding in the town of Krymsk (Krasnodar krai) that led to
a large number of victims. Along with the main cause of the disaster, extreme rainfall, a considerable role was
played by mudflows and slides sporadically blocking the river beds, as well as anthropogenic factors, including
the builtup of the low floodplain of the Adagum River, insufficient throughput capacity of bridge spans for
the unhampered passage of flood waters, and littered beds.

Keywords: flash flood, flooding, mudflows and landslides, catchment basin, natural and anthropogenic fac
tors, Krasnodar krai
DOI: 10.1134/S2079970513010061

...to remind people that we’re allotted a little space on
earth and that we survive in that wilderness
that can take back what it has given, as easily
as blowing its breath on us or sending
the sea to tell us we are not so big....
Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451.
manually and transmitted to the Earth over 200 gen
eral and detailed satellite images of the disaster area
with a resolution of around 2 m. Part of the pictures
were quickly decoded at the Institute of Geography,
Russian Academy of Sciences.
The main results of the study of the flooding are
presented below.

The North Caucasus, along with Primorskii krai

and Yakutia, is the area most effected by floods [10].
We all remember the series of floods in Krasnodar krai
in the winter and summer of 2002 that led to numerous
victims among the population and financial damage [2,
8]. After 10 years, in a catastrophic flooding in
Novorossiysk, Gelendzhik, and Krymsk, according to
official data, more than 170 people were killed: the
majority of the victims were in Krymsk with a popula
tion of 57000 situated on the Adagum River (Kuban
basin). Here the flooding was most acute. It received
widespread publicity. Highly conflicting views on its
causes and features were expressed in the press and at
official level. From the very beginning, the Institute of
Geography took an active part in the study of the
flooding and in the analysis of its natural and anthro
pogenic factors.
For many years, the Institute of Geography, Rus
sian Academy of Sciences, in cooperation with
RKKEnergia, has been constantly monitoring natural
and anthropogenic catastrophic events from the Rus
sian segment of the International Space Station (ISS)
as a part of the project “Hurricane.” The object of
monitoring on July 9–11, 2012, was the Adagum River
basin. Cosmonaut Gennadii Padalko has obtained
PHYSICAL–GEOGRAPHICAL
CHARACTERISTIC OF THE TERRITORY
The town of Krymsk is located in the zone of tran
sition from the western end of the main Caucasian
ridge to the West Kuban plain, which is part of the
Kuban–Azov lowland (Fig. 1). The Adagum River,
flowing through the city, is a left tributary of the Kuban
River, which is formed above Krymsk in the conflu
ence of the Bakanka and Neberdzhai rivers and flow
ing into the Varnavinsk reservoir. The average annual
water discharge of the Adagum in Krymsk is insignifi
cant—about 4 m3/s. However, it is highly volatile. In
some years, the river dries up in the summer. In a
period of high water and flash floods, the water dis
charge may exceed several hundred cubic meters per
second.
The Bakanka and Neberdzhai rivers originate in
the longitudinal mountainous depression, separating
two branches of the Main Caucasian ridge, of which
the nearest to the Black Sea is the Markkhotsk ridge.
These highly dismembered low mountain ranges are
extended in the northwestern direction. The maxi
mum absolute height of the ridge that separates the
Adagum basin from the Black Sea does not reach

32
 FLOODING OF JULY 6–7, 2012, IN THE TOWN OF KRYMSK
1
Bakanka River
Upper Bakanka
3
4 7
2
Catchment basins
of the Adagum River:
1. Bakanka River
2. Atukayevsk reservoirs
3. Zelenyie baraki area
4. Chubukov pit
5. Pryamaya pit
6. Temryuchka River
7. Glubokaya pit
8. Bogago River
9. Neberdzhai River
10. Neberdzhai River reservoir
11. Adagum River
Fig. 1. Catchment basins of the Adagum River.
550 m (the mountain Lysaya–Novorossiyskaya is
543.1 m). This low mountainous territory is com
posed of sandstones, conglomerates, marls, silt
stones, and clays of the Upper Cretaceous. In the
northeastern foothills of the Main Caucasian ridge,
the Paleogene and Neogene rocks prevail, i.e., lime
stone–shell deposits, marl, sandstone, clay shale,
clay, sand, etc. [3].
The length of the Bakanka and Neverzhai rivers is
about 30 km. The basin of the Bakanka is 179 km2; that
of the Neberzhai, 11 km2. The absolute heights of their
peaks are 300–320 m. The river valleys, like many
other mountainous rivers, abound with tapering where
the rivers are flowing in gorges with steep scarp slopes.
In foothills the bottoms of their valleys lower down to
a level less than 50–30 m. Both rivers take in many
short tributaries that dry out in summer. Reservoirs
and ponds are constructed on the rivers; the largest
one is Neberzhai. There are many ravines and ullies.
Mountain slopes and foothills are covered by
mountainous forests, mainly, oak, oak–beech, and
pine–oak, on brown forest and upland wood sod–car
bonate stone and lowpowered washedoff soils; large
areas are occupied by bushes [4, 7]. In the axial parts
of the ridges and steep slopes, as well as on logged areas
REGIONAL RESEARCH OF RUSSIA Vol. 3 No. 1
33
KRYMSK
11
iver
ai R
Nizhnebakanka
dzh
6
er
Neb
5
9
8
10
0 1 2 4 6 8
km
and pastures, secondary meadow vegetation has devel
oped, but vegetation is often strongly transformed or is
unavailable and indigenous species are exposed.
The northeastern part of Krymsk (the most remote
from the mountains with an absolute height of a little
over 10 m) is already in the West Kuban plain, gently
sloping to the Kuban River. The undulating plain is
composed of quaternary pebbles and clay–sand rocks
of mainly alluvial origin. The foothills are late
Pleiocene sandy–clayey sediments. The watersheds
and slopes of the plains are usually blocked by loesslike
loams with their typical collapsing deformations [9].
Geological research in the area has revealed quite
a lot of faults. The most active of them are stretched
out along theMain Caucasian ridge. The last major
earthquake of about 6 points occurred in the is area
in 1799 [6].
METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS
On July 5–6, a deep cyclone with a significant
moisture content shifted to the southwest of Krasno
darsk krai. On July 6, a local cyclone was formed with
a groundlevel front and strong convective clouds. In
the evening on July 6, it was little mobile and oversat
2013
34 KOTLYAKOV et al.

Precipitation, mm Krymsk previously not exceeding 80 mm, reached 156 mm dur

50
Novorossiysk ing the night from July 6 to 7. In Novorossiysk the pre
45
cipitation was almost twice as much.
40
35 HAZARDOUS EXOGENOUS PROCESSES
30 IN THE CATCHMENT BASIN
25 OF THE ADAGUM RIVER
20
15 The steep slopes of the basin, consisting of erodible
10 loose sandy–clayey, sandy–pebble rocks, and loess
5 like loams, as well as lacking a soil–vegetation cover or
0 its breach in some places as a result of deforestation
and grazing by cattle in the conditions of the large
22 0
00 0
02 0

06 0
04 0

08 0
0
14 0
16 0
18 0
20 0
.0

.0
.0
.0
.0

.0
.0

.0
.0
.0
.0

amount of precipitation and shores trimmed by river

12

Time erosion, promote the development of slope processes,

Fig. 2. Amount of precipitation on July 6–7, 2012, mm.
urated with moisture, which caused heavy and lasting
precipitation.
The rainfall observed on July 6–7 was of extreme
character and had never been observed in the history of
instrumental observations. Figure 2 shows dinamics of
the rainfall according to observations at the Krymsk
weather station and at the nearby Novorossiysk
weather station. According to this data, the amount of
daily precipitation recorded at Russia’s weather stations,
including numerous landslides. Figure 3 shows the
distribution of hazardous exogenous processes and
phenomena in the Adagum basin. The places of the
most probable impounding events of landslides and
mudflows caused by heavy rains are particularly noted.
The North Caucasus is one of the most dangerous
mountain systems in Russia when it comes to mud
flows. I.V. Bondyrev and E.D. Tsereteli [1] consider
that the probability of powerful mudflows flows in
mountains becomes real in the presence of heavy rains
at an intensity of more than 20 mm a day; in the pres
ence of mudflows of 50–80 mm a day, sills are formed
in all water bodies that have accumulations of loose

KRYMSK

Bakanka River
ver
i Ri

Nizhnebakanka
zha

Upper Bakanka
erd
Neb

Symbols:
Settlements

The slopes of the surface runoff and defluxion

Landslidehazardous and mudflow–hazardous slope
Narrowing valley in the confluence of the waterflows
0 1 2 4 6 8
km

Fig. 3. Dangerous exogenetic processes and events in the Adagum river basin.

REGIONAL RESEARCH OF RUSSIA Vol. 3 No. 1 2013

 FLOODING OF JULY 6–7, 2012, IN THE TOWN OF KRYMSK
(a)
Fig. 4. Catchment basin structure of the Adagum River (a) before the flash flood; (b) stream flows during the rainfall of
July, 6–7, 2012.
material. If the intensity of precipitation reaches
120 mm a day, sills can be formed in all landscapes and
geomorphological zones , irrespective of their geolog
ical structure. During the disaster in Krymsk, the
intensity of precipitation was significantly above these
values. As a result of powerful flash flood in the valleys
of the rivers, small ponds were leaked so that bulk
material and rubbish were taken out. This increased
the probability of mudflows of different scales, block
ing for some time the channel of small watercourses.
However, no traces of large mudflows flows in the
Adagum have been observed.
In all river basins of the Adagum river catchment,
including small ones, there are widespread slopes of
fraying, defluxion, and intense surface runoff; in case
of sufficient precipitation, there is a high probability of
slumping (landslides and liquefaction flows) and sill
formation (Table 1), which have largely determined
the levels of flash flood in the basin.
HOW WERE THE EVENTS DEVELOPING?
An analysis of multitemporal satellite images, as
well as of hydrometeorological data and knowledge of
catchment basin structure allowed authors to obtain
the answer to the question with a high level of confi
dence.
The shortterm, but rather intensive, rainfall began
in the middle of the day on July 6, 2012 (see Fig. 2). Fur
ther, the rainfall was going on without any interrup
tion: within an hour, 35 mm fell in Novorossiysk and 5
mm in Krymsk. If we consider that the Novorossiysk
station characterizes rainfalls in the upper parts of of
the Adagum River basin, it can be argued that, in this
period, the Neberdzhai reservoir (the total volume is
8 mln m3) began filling in intensively and the soil on
the slopes of the mountains became full of moisture.
By 20:00 on July 6 (during the day), 88 mm of rain
had fallen in Novorossiysk and 24 mm in Krymsk.
Given the lag in the arrival time, flooding waves from
REGIONAL RESEARCH OF RUSSIA Vol. 3 No. 1
35
(b)
the upper parts the Adagum River basin had already
reached the settlements of Neberdzhai, Nizhneba
kansk, and Krymsk. This wave can be regarded as the
first one. From 20:00 to 22:00, precipitation
increased, and at 21:40 the maximum water level rose
to 2.00 m on the Bakanka river and 2.34 m on the
Neberdzhai River. Much of the floodplain of the Aga
dum was flooded. This was a signal of distress. Move
ment of loose material began on the mountain
slopes—small landslides and mud streams—which
formed small dams in logs and small tributaries.
From 22:00 to 24:00 on July 6, 23 mm of precipita
tion fell in Novorossiysk and 47 mm in Krymsk. In the
Neberdzhai village on the Bakanka River, the maxi
mum level was 4.16 m. At the same time, the level of
water in the tributaries rose up to 2–3 m.
Flooding began in Krymsk. This stage of the disas
ter can be called the second wave and the beginning of
the third one. In watersheds, from 00:00 to 02:00 on
July 7, the maximum rainfall was 62 mm. During the
same period of time (for 2 hours), in Krymsk 54 mm of
rain fell. Usually dry small valleys of intermittent
streams, gullies, and ravines became beds of fast flows
(Fig. 4, Table 2).
By this time, the Neberdzhai reservoir and the val
leys of the rivers and their tributaries, as well as the
temporary “dams,” must have already been filled up.
It can be noted almost for sure that heavy rains in the
area of Krymsk were supplemented with a flow origi
nating from broken temporary dams; this outflow
began draining the reservoir. Waves, arising from the
breakdown of the temporary dams, rushed down
stream, causing damage on their path. One place of
this break is just below the village of Nizhnebakanka,
where the excess of the maximum water level in the
Bakanka River above the lowwater level increased
sharply to 5.48 m, while slightly upstream it was of
2.25 m. It is possible that this sharp increase was
caused by the descent of mudflows from one of the
Bakanka River’s smaller tributaries (the Temryuchka,
2013
36 KOTLYAKOV et al.

Table 1. Morphometric characteristics of the catchment basins of the Adagum River

Types of slopes (share in the basin area, %)

Basin Risk
Basin area 5°–15° 15°–25° of hazardous
up to 5° 25°–50°
(km2) (defluxion, (shedding,
(defluxion (landslides and processes, %
solifluction, and defluxion, and
and solifluction) mudflows)
surface runoff) surface runoff)

1. Bakanka River 94.9 29.5 61.5 8.5 0.5 9.0

2. Atukayevsk reservoirs 19.6 12.7 61.2 21.4 4.7 26.1
3. Area of Zelenyie Baraki 5.9 10.0 67.8 18.6 3.6 22.2
4. Chubukova pit 9.4 12.8 67.0 18.0 2.2 20.2
5. Pryamaya pit 30.9 22.0 63.3 12.7 2.0 14.7
6. Temryuchka River 5.9 39.0 59.3 1.7 – 1.7
7. Glubokaya pit 10.0 59.0 40.0 1.0 – 1.0
8. Bogogo River 36.5 18.9 46.3 28.6 6.2 34.8
9. Neberdzhai River 37.7 34.5 46.7 16.4 2.4 18.8
10. Neberdzhai reservoir 31.6 12.7 63.3 20.8 3.2 24.0
11. Adagum River 24.4 58.0 40.0 2.0 – 2.0

Pryamaya pit, or any other). On the way of flood
waters to Krymsk (2.2 km away), the barrier arose—a
railway embankment and a railway bridge. Flood
waters had overcome this obstacle without destroying
the bridge pillars. The flow section (about 30 m wide)
was packed with waterheld woody rubbish and solid
material, including even a heavy truck. Apparently,
this wave did not cause serious damage, but was a clear
sign of trouble and the reason for the announcement
of an emergency situation.
From 02:00 to 03:00 on July 7, 2012, a flash flood
peak was observed in the territory of Krymsk, largely
caused by precipitation in the upper parts the Adagum
River basin that ultimately reached the town and
added to the local flow of the Adagum River.
Nevertheless, the main obstacle was 2.2 km below,
directly on the southern outskirts of the town. Here,
across the Adagum River, there is a motorway 6.45 m
above the valley thalweg (built with 1% security against
any possible flash flood). The road within 800 m actu
ally forms a dam with a flow section to skip the water
with a width almost 10 times less; in addition, it is
divided into parts by wide reinforcedconcrete piers
(Fig. 5). At the beginning of the disaster, a large area
under the bridge was jammed with rubbish (all that was
carried by the river).
The embankment of the road was the main tempo
rary dam that had delayed the flood waters and con
tributed to raising the Adagum level by significantly
more than 7 m. We should note that this is higher than
the estimated maximum level of 1% security (with an
occurrence rate of once per 100 years) given in [5].
Before the dam, a pressure reservoir area of approxi
mately 5.5 km2 was formed. When water poured over
the dam in excess of its height up to 1.5 m and then
made its way in the effective flow section of the bridge,
the town was submerged under a wave of up to 7 m in
height. As a result, more than half of Krymsk’s terri
tory was flooded. More than 60% of victims were
found near the bridge on the left bank of the river.
Then the main wave went away to the right side of the
floodplain. Here and also somewhat below, dead bod
ies were found.
However, the precipitation did not stop, and during
each of the next two hours a monthly rate fell. The
flooding was accompanied by the collapse of buildings
and loss of lives. Of course, a large number of casual
ties were also a result of human factors—development
of a floodplain (flooded at a 1% probability), conges
tion and embankments, as well as the presence of
helpless lonely people in houses in the middle of the
night. Over the Adagum River in Krymsk, there were two
other permanent bridges and several pedestrian crossings.
These sites were also hammered with rubbish and con
tributed to the formation of flood waves (Fig. 6).
In the ISS images, the trace of the flash flood that
passed on the Neverdzhai River is clearly seen. The
Neberdzhai water reservoir was filled with water up to
the upper edge of its dam, but the dam itself has no
mechanical damages. Having held part of flood
waters, the reservoir contributed to some reduction in
maximum discharges.

REGIONAL RESEARCH OF RUSSIA Vol. 3 No. 1 2013

 FLOODING OF JULY 6–7, 2012, IN THE TOWN OF KRYMSK 37

Fig. 5. Damhighway.

Fig. 6. Bridge over the Adagum River after the flash flood.

WATER FLOW 817 cm over zero position. Then significant flooding

The water flow has been monitored in Krymsk
since 1929. Figure 7 shows the manyyear dynamics of
the annual maximum water discharge rate. The histor
ical maximum was observed in 2002, being estimated
at 800 m3/s by high water marks at a water level of
was observed in Krymsk. Unfortunately, it was impos
sible to directly determine the maximum discharge in
2012, because the gauging station was flooded. An
analysis of the currently available data makes it possi
ble to suppose that the maximum discharge of flash

REGIONAL RESEARCH OF RUSSIA Vol. 3 No. 1 2013

38 KOTLYAKOV et al.

m3/s
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0 the rivers of the basin proved to be insufficient for the
1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
Year
Fig. 7. Maximum discharges of the Adagum River–town
of Krymsk, m3/s.
flood of July 7, 2002, was exceeded. This is supported by
the calculation data on the inflow into the Varnavinsk
reservoir. The maximum level of which (although taking
into account the runoff of the Abin River) on July 7 was
there 1460 m3/s, and by preliminary calculations (by
highwater marks) by maximum discharges on the
Bakanka and Neberdzhai rivers.
There is every reason to believe that the maximum
discharge of the Adagum River exceeded 1000 m3/s
and was close to 0.1–0.2% security (the occurrence
frequency is once in 500–1000 years). From an analy
sis of Fig. 6, it follows that recent decades have seen an
increase in the maximum water discharge, and, while
earlier they took place in the winter and spring, lately
they have been observed in the summer.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The basic cause of the drastic flooding that took
place during the night from July 6 to 7 in the Adagum
River basin was extremely high atmospheric precipita
tion, which had not been observed earlier over the
entire period of observations.
2. The flash flood wave passage was influenced by
anthropogenic factors:
(a) The carrying capacity of most bridges built on
free passage of flood waters carrying a great amount of
wood material and household rubbish; in the territory
of Krymsk itself, also building materials, cars, and
other large objects.
As a consequence, these bridges actually became
retaining structures. In their upper pool flash flood
water was accumulated with consequent breakthroughs
and changes of the direction of the stream bypassing the
created obstacles. At the same time, we should note that
the main bridges did not collapse and the main trans
port infrastructure withstood the flooding.
(b) A part of the Adagum River plain was buildup,
including some parts of bankprotection zones; the
bed of the river was littered; in some parts, heavily
overgrown. In the period of the maximum of the flash
flood, the Neberdzhai reservoir reduced the entry of
floodwater to the Adagum River by about 130 m3/s.
3. The maximum discharge of rainwater on the
Adagum River and its tributaries Bakanka and Neber
dzhai exceeded the historical maximum of 2002. By
preliminary data, the maximum water discharge in the
Adagum–Krymsk crosssection was more than
1000 m3/s, which is approximately equal to water dis

Table 2. Hydrographic structure of the Adagum River basin during the flood of July 6–7

Ordinary number Excess of the

Number of formed
Basin Basin area (km2) of watercourses (per maximum marks above
watercourses
manent/temporary) the lowwater level, m

1. Bakanka River 94.9 9/4 54 5.48

2. Atukayevsk reservoirs 19.6 1/– 15 2.17
3. Area of Zelenyie Baraki 5.9 –/– 5 –
4. Chubukova pit 9.4 1/3 5 2.6
5. Pryamaya pit 30.9 –/9 12 3.05
6. Temryuchka River 5.9 –/2 3 2.0
7. Glubokaya pit 10.0 1/2 4 2.67
8. Bogogo River 36.5 1/12 12 –
9. Neberdzhai River 37.7 2/8 18 4.16
10. Neberdzhai reservoir 31.6 4/17 18 6.6
11. Adagum River 24.4 3/2 13 7.1

REGIONAL RESEARCH OF RUSSIA Vol. 3 No. 1 2013

 FLOODING OF JULY 6–7, 2012, IN THE TOWN OF KRYMSK
charges of 0.1–0.2% occurrence, that is, with a fre
quency of once in 500–1000 years.
4. To prevent such accidents in the future, it is nec
essary to implement a set of measures, including a net
work of automated weather and gauging stations,
evenly covering hydrologically dangerous areas, espe
cially in the mountainous area; creation of a mathe
matical model to calculate the operational discharge
and predict the maximum discharge of flooding and
flash floods; resettlement of residents from flooding
dangerous places; deepening of riverbeds and clearing
of adjacent tracks from rubbish; rebuilding bridge
transitions to allow the passage of floodings that are
higher than the previously observed ones; and hydrau
lic engineering with the creation of new accumulating
reservoirs and bypass canals.
Finally, there is a need to improve the early warning
system of imminent flooding threats and protection of
the population, living in floodingdangerous territories.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We are gratitude to Roshydromet, the administra
tion of the town of Krymsk, and the staff of Kuban
vodproekt for cooperation and the provided materials.
REFERENCES
1. Bondyrev, I.V. and Tsereteli, E.D., Disastrous Silt
Streams in the South Caucasia, in Opasnye prirodnye i
tekhnogennye geologicheskie protsessy na gornykh i
predgornykh territoriyakh Severnogo Kavkaza. Trudy
Mezhdunarodnoi mauch.prakt. konferentsii. Vladikavkaz,
20–22 sentyabrya 2007 g. (Proceedings of the Interna
tional ScientificPractical Conference on Dangerous
Natural and Thechnogenous Geological Processes in
Mountainous and Premountainous Territories of North
REGIONAL RESEARCH OF RUSSIA Vol. 3 No. 1
39
ern Caucasia, Vladikavkaz, September 20–22, 2007),
Vladikavkaz: VNTs i RASOA, 2008, pp. 108–115.
2. Vorob”ev, Yu.L., Akimov, V.A., and Sokolov, Yu.I.,
Katostroficheskie navodneniya nachala XXI veka: uroki i
vyvody (Disastrous Floodings in the Beginning of XXI
Century: Lessons and Conclusions), Moscow: DESK
PRESS, 2003.
3. Milanovskii, E.E., Noveishaya tektonika Kavkaza
(Newest Tectonic of Caucasia), Moscow: Nedra, 1968.
4. Raionirovanie territorii SSSR po osnovnym faktoram
erozii (Zoning of USSR Territory Based on Erosion
Factors), Armand, D.L., Ed., Moscow: Nauka, 1965.
5. Resursy poverkhnostnykh vod SSSR: Severnyi Kavkaz
(Resources of Inland Waters of USSR: Northern Cau
casia), Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1973, vol. 8.
6. Rogozhin, E.A., Ovsyuchenko, A.N., and
Marakhanov, A.V., Forecast and Mapping of Seismic
Danger in Northern Caucasia, in Opasnye prirodnye i
tekhnogennye geologicheskie protsessy na gornykh i
predgornykh territoriyakh Severnogo Kavkaza. Trudy
Mezhdunarodnoi mauch.prakt. konferentsii. Vladikavkaz,
20–22 sentyabrya 2007 g. (Proceedings of the Interna
tional ScientificPractical Conference on Dangerous
Natural and Technogeneous Geological Processes in
Mountainous and Premountainous Territories of North
ern Caucasia, Vladikavkaz, September 20–22, 2007),
Vladikavkaz: VNTs i RASOA, 2008, pp. 20–36.
7. Safronov, I.N., Geomorfologiya Severnogo Kavkaza i
Nizhnego Dona (Geomorphology of Northern Caucasia
and Low Don), RostovonDon: Rostov. Univ., 1987.
8. Taratutin, A.A., Navodneniya na territorii Rossiiskoi
Federatsii (Floodings on the Territory of Russian Federa
tion), Ekaterinburg: FGUP Rom. NIIVKh, 2008.
9. Cherednichenko, L.I., Exogenous Processes of Western
Cuban Plain, in Geomorfologiya gor i ravnin: vzaimos
vyazi i vzaimodeistvie (Geomorphology of Mountains
and Plains: Interrelations and Interaction), Krasnodar:
Krasnodar. Gos. Univ., 1998, pp. 338–340.
10. Ekstremal’nye gidrologicheskie situatsii (Extreme Hydro
logical Events), Moscow: MediaPRESS, 2010.
2013