2016 | 69/3 | 337–345 | 7 Figs. | 3 Tabs. | www.geologia-croatica Journal of the Croatian Geological Survey and the Croatian Geological Society Upper Cretaceous geosites on Golija Mountain – objects of geoheritage Ljiljana Grujičić-Tešić1, Dragoman Rabrenović1, Jovan Kovačević2, Nataša Gerzina1 and Nevenka Đerić1 1 University of Belgrade, Faculty of Mining and Geology, Đušina 7, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia; (natasa.gerzina@rgf.bg.ac.rs) 2 Geological Survey of Serbia, Rovinjska 12, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia doi: 10.4154/gc.2016.28 Abstract The Upper Cretaceous rudist limestones are well-known from several localities in Serbia. Three of these localities (Svilanovo, Bele Vode and Kulizino Selo) are located in SW Serbia, on Golija Mt. These localities are crucial for understanding the development of the Upper Cretaceous shallow-water environments, thus this is an area of great scientific and educational value, par- ticularly considering palaeontology, stratigraphy, palaeoecology and palaeogeography. One of the aims of this paper is to evaluate these geosites and their geotouristic potential, using Geo- site Assessment Model (GAM), which is important for their geoconservation as well as for the sustainable development of the area. 1. INTRODUCTION The systematic study of the geological heritage and geodiversity in Serbia started relatively recently (MARAN, 2008, 2010; RUN­ DIĆ & KNEŽEVIĆ, 2005; MIJOVIĆ et al., 2005; KARAMATA & MIJOVIĆ 2005; STOJANOVIĆ & MIJOVIĆ, 2008; VUJIČIĆ et al., 2011; JOVANOVIĆ et al., 2012; RABRENOVIĆ et al., 2014; MARAN STEVANOVIĆ, 2015). An inventory of Serbian geo­ heritage sites includes approximately 650 geological, palaeonto­ logical, geomorphological, spelaeological and neotectonic sites (ĐUROVIĆ & MIJOVIĆ, 2006). This study focuses on the Upper Cretaceous limestone with rudist fauna in the area between Sjenica and Raška (Fig. 1). Here, there are several outcrops of major importance for scientific know ledge and study of Upper Cretaceous fossiliferous sedi­ ments. However, considering their geological and palaeontologi­ cal characteristics, only three of these localities (Svilanovo, Kuli­ zino Selo and Bele Vode) seem to be interesting from the aspect of geological heritage. These localities are very important from the geological point of view, thus the aim of this paper is to pre­ sent the main scientific arguments for considering these localities to be a part of Serbian geoheritage. Remains of rudist limestones are scattered on the slopes of Mt. Golija which is the highest mountain in SW Serbia. Mt. Golija has been under state protection as the Golija Nature Park, since 2001. The Golija Nature Park was placed in cat­ egory I as a natural resource of exceptional importance. Be­ cause of the exceptionally well­preserved natural environment, but also because of its cultural resources, the committee of the UNESCO’s Man and the Biosphere Programme (MAB) set up the Golija­Studenica Biosphere Reserve within the Golija Nature Park. Besides their scientific significance, the beautiful landscape and cultural heritage reveal the high tou ristic poten­ tial of these localities, thus making them quite important from educational, touristic and cultural points of view. All the three localities are easily accessible, since they are situated along as­ phalt roads. The main purpose of this paper is to evaluate different ge­ osites using the preliminary Geosite Assessment Model (GAM) proposed by VUJIČIĆ et al. (2011) in order to determine whether this area has the potential for geotourism development. 2. GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND GEOSITES SELECTION The region of western and southwestern Serbia is characterized by an extremely complex geological setting, as a result of col­ lisional processes between the Adria microplate and the Euro­ pean plate. The area is composed of the continental Drina­Ivan­ jica, Jadar­Kopaonik and East­Bosnian­Durmitor Units, as well as two ophiolite belts, which are remnants of oceanic crust that are derived from the Neotethys (DIMITRIJEVIĆ & DIMI­ TRIJE VIĆ, 1973; ROBERTSON & KARAMATA, 1994; DIMI­ TRIJE VIĆ, 2001; KARAMATA, 2006). Recent investigations show ed that the double belt appearance (Western Vardar Zone and Dinaridic Ophiolite Belt) and complicated present day geo­ logical relationships between the continental and oceanic units are the results of Late Jurassic obduction, followed by strong folding and out of sequence thrusting (PAMIĆ et al., 1998; HRVATOVIĆ & PA MIĆ, 2005; CSONTOS et al., 2003; SCHMID et al., 2008). The Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous transgressive phase, characterized predominantly by alluvial to neritic sedimentation, started after obduction and subsequent erosion in the Dinaridic­ Hellenic belt (PAMIĆ et al., 1998; PAMIĆ & HRVATOVIĆ, 2000; SCHMID et al., 2008). In western and southwestern Ser­ bia, however, these sediments are absent, possibly due to Early to mid­Cretaceous collisional processes (SCHMID et al., 2008). In this region, both Palaeozoic and Mesozoic sediments of the Drina­Ivanjica and Jadar­Kopaonik Units, which derived from the passive margin of Adria, and Jurassic rocks of oceanic origin that belong to the Vardar Zone, are unconformably overlain by Upper Cretaceous transgressive clastic sediments containing re­ deposited ophiolite fragments. Carbonate and terrigenous­carbo­ nate sedimentation followed through the Upper Cretaceous until Article history: Manuscript received March 25, 2016 Revised manuscript accepted August 16, 2016 Available online October 25, 2016 Keywords: geoheritage, geosite, geoconservation, geotourism, rudists, Upper Cretaceous, Mt. Golija, SW Serbia G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a Geologia Croatica 69/3338 In the area between Čačak and Novi Pazar, outcrops of the Upper Cretaceous rudist limestone occur in the form of a narrow strip along the rim of the overlying flysch deposits. There are also several small lenslike bodies of rudist limestone on the northern slopes of Golija Mountain. With an abundance of exceptionally large and well­preserved fossils, three localities at which the Up­ per Cretaceous limestone are exposed, Svilanovo, Kulizino Selo and Bele Vode, should be considered as potentially important for Serbian geoheritage (Fig. 1). Svilanovo village is located on the southern slopes of Mt. Go­ li ja, about seven kilometres from the mountain peak Odvra će nica (N 43º14’40” E 20º19’54”). Direct access to the locality is along a good asphalt road that branches from the Novi Pazar­Golija road. Lying over low­grade metamorphosed schists of Carboniferous age, Upper Cretaceous rudist limestone makes a conspicuous, more than 500 m long scarp along a relatively steep slope (Fig. 2). The massive biomicritic limestone was deposited under shal­ low­water conditions. A heterogeneous fossil association com­ prises foraminifers, detritus of bivalves, gastropods, echinoids, corals, etc. (Fig. 3). The dominant macrofossils are rudist bivalves (Fig. 4) from the genera Radiolites, Lapeirouseia, Pironea, Hip- purites, etc. (ĆIRIĆ, 1996). In the nearby vicinity, another profile of Upper Cretaceous rudist limestone is exposed in the village of Bele Vode, on the northern slopes of Golija mountain, along the Ivanjica­Golija road the Maastrichtian when flysch sedimentation began (MOJSILOVIĆ et al., 1980; FILIPOVIĆ et al., 1978). The wider investigated area belongs to the Cretaceous cover of Palaeozoic rocks on the eastern rim of the Drina­Ivanjica Unit, i.e. to a belt of Cretaceous sediments, known as „Novi Pazar Cre­ taceous„ (RAMPNOUX, 1970) that can be traced from Kosovo towards the north and northwest to the area of Dragačevo. The complete Cretaceous stratigraphic sequence can be traced only in the western part of this belt. In this area, the Cretaceous sedimentary succession begins with a 30 m thick basal conglomerate and conglomeratic lime­ stone succession, which is overlain by a shallow­water limestone with Santonian­Campanian fauna represented by hippuritids, ra­ diolitids, globotruncanids, gastropods and echinoids which is about 50 m thick. Rudist limestones are generally considered as products of typical reefal sedimentation (e.g. MILOVANOVIĆ, 1960; ROSS, 1992; KOCH et al., 2002). However, there are other opinions (e.g. GILI et al., 1995; SANDERS, 1998) suggesting that Cretaceous rudists were unable to build bioherms similar to Holo­ cene coral reefs, but were gregarious sediment­dwelling aclonal suspension feeders. Cretaceous sedimentation ends with a thick sequence of preflysch and flysch sediments of Campanian and Maastrichtian age (RAMPNOUX, 1964, PETROVIĆ & JANKI­ ČE VIĆ, 1988), i.e. the so­called Kosovska Mitrovica flysch (DI­ MI TRIJEVIĆ & DIMITRIJEVIĆ, 1987; DIMITRIJEVIĆ, 1997). Figure 1. A simplified and modified geological map of the wider surroundings of the investigated area, based on the Geological Map of SFRY 1:500000 (SAVEZNI GEOLOŠKI ZAVOD, 1970). G eologia C roatica Grujičić-Tešić et al.: Upper Cretaceous geosites on Golija Mountain – objects of geoheritage 339 (N 43º24’09” E 20º17’50”). At this locality, Upper Cretaceous sediments transgressively overlie Carboniferous schists. The Up­ per Cretaceous sequence starts with clastic sediments which are overlain by light gray biomicritic limestone with abundant ru­ dists, corals and echinoids. The sedimentation regime was occa­ sionally interrupted by the inflow of clayey­silty material, which resulted in the occurrence of several metres of bedded marly limestone. The succession ends with a massive limestone that contains rudists from the genera Lapeirouseia, Hippurites, Ra- diolites, Pironea, etc. (Fig. 5). The third locality is situated in the village of Kulizino Selo, south of Bele Vode (N 43º22’55” E 20º17’32”). At this locality, Cre­ taceous rudist limestone lies above a relatively thin sequence com­ posed of clastic sediments. A horizon of yellowish clayey limestone with densely packed small rudists, other bivalves and gastropods occurs within the massive limestone with large rudists (Fig. 6). Ru­ dists at this locality mostly belong to the following genera: Lapeir- ouseia, Vaccinites, Hippurites, Radiolites and Pironea. The most important rudist specimen belongs to the species Lapeirouseia cra- teriformis. With a diameter of the upper valve of more than 60 cm, it is the largest rudist ever found in the Dinarides (ĆIRIĆ, 1996). These geosites are important for understanding the evolution of the wider region of Golija Mountain, making this area of great scientific value, particularly considering palaeontology, stratig­ raphy, palaeoecology and palaeogeography. Eastern and central Mediterranean Rudist species Vaccinites atheniensis Ktenas (younger synonym of V. chaperi; STEUBER, 1999), occurring at all these localities (MILOVANOVIĆ, 1975), Figure 2. Scarp composed of Upper Cretaceous rudist limestone, Svilanovo village. Figure 4. A rudist bivalve in growth position. Figure 3. Abundant fossils in Upper Cretaceous limestone, locality Svilanovo. Figure 6. A large rudist specimen, Kulizino Selo locality. Figure 5. Limestone with rudist bivalves at the locality of Bele Vode. G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a Geologia Croatica 69/3340 can be used for correlation with sedimentary rocks from distant regions. According to MILOVANOVIĆ (1934), in the terrains of Serbia (vicinity of Kosovska Mitrovica, Novi Pazar, Raška, Go­ lija) this species belongs to the same association as in the Gossau Cretaceous sediments of the Eastern Alps, thus it should have the same stratigraphic position as in the eastern Alps, i.e. Late Santonian – Early Campanian. Recent chemostratigraphic ages reported from the surrounding regions (SWINBURNE at al., 1992) indicate the Campanian age of similar rudist­bearing lime­ stones. Besides, these sediments show strong similarities to the limestone of the Pučišća Fm. in the eastern part of Brač (vicinity of Povlja) in Croatia, which are assigned an early Campanian age (STEUBER et el., 2005). Therefore, considering the absence of micropalaeontological data from our localities and the recently revised ages of similar rudist associations in the wider region, the general age of the rudist limestone on Golija Mt. is probably Cam­ panian (?early Campanian). 3. METHODS There are numerous papers on the evaluation of geosites world­ wide (e.g. HENRIQUES et al., 2011; TOMIĆ, 2011; VUJIČIĆ et al., 2011; MOUFTI et al., 2013; PETROVIĆ et al., 2013; VASI­ LJE VIĆ et al., 2014; GNEZDILOVA et al., 2015; BOŠKOV et al., 2015; BEGAN & VIŠNIĆ, 2015). Different methods have been proposed for geoheritage assessment (e.g. PRALONG, 2005; PEREIRA et al., 2007; REYNARD et al., 2007; VUJIČIĆ et al., 2011; FASSOULAS et al., 2012; TOMIĆ & BOŽIĆ, 2014; MA­ RAN STEVANOVIĆ, 2015) based on quantification of different characteristics of geosites. In this paper, evaluation of the chosen localities is based on the preliminary geosite assessment model (GAM), created by VUJIČIĆ et al. (2011). This method involves the quantification of two groups of indicators. The first group (Main values) comprises scientific/educational (VSE), scenic/aesthetical (VSA) and pro­ tection (VPr) values. These values are crucial for geoheritage as­ sessment. However, the other group of indicators (Additional va­ lues), which includes functional (VFn) and touristic values (VTr), is important for considering the geotouristic potential of a site. All indicators are assigned values grading from 0 to 1. After evaluating each element in both groups of indicators, the total value was calculated for each group. The results obtained are presented in a discrimination diagram, where the Main and Additional values for each site are plotted against each other along the X and Y axes, respectively. The matrix is divided into nine fields and the position of each geosite within one of these fields shows its importance as an object of geoheritage and sug­ gests plans of action for protection and sustainable management of the geosite. 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION With the aim of evaluating the geosites on Golija Mt., three lo­ calities have been studied as potentially interesting sites of geo­ heritage significance. Main and Additional values for each sub­ indicator are given in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. According to MOUFTI et al. (2013), short explanations for the assigned values are given in Tables 1 and 2. The total scores of the Main indica­ tors were plotted against the values of the Additional indicators (Fig. 7). The Svilanovo locality has a high value of Main (8.75) and medium value of Additional (7.75) indicators. The overall grade puts the Svilanovo locality (GS1) in the Z32 cell (Fig. 7). The value of the Main indicators (Table 1) is relatively high, considering the fact that there is no formal protection whatsoever. Additional va­ lues (Table 2) are at a moderate­to­high level due to a poorly de­ veloped touristic sector (no promotion, interpretative panels or tour guide service). The Bele Vode locality (GS2) is in the Z22 field (Fig. 7). The Main indicator value (7.75) for this locality is somewhat lower due to the fact that there was short­lived limestone exploitation at this locality (Table 1). Additional indicators value (7.25) is also slightly lower than in the previous locality (Table 2). The third locality, Kulizino Selo (GS3) falls on the boundary between Z22 and Z32 (Fig. 7). The overall Main indicators value (8.00) is quite similar to that of the previous two localities (Table 1), but the final grade is lower due to the much lower values of the Additional indicators (6.50; Table 2). Finally, we compared our results with other geological and geomorphological sites evaluated using the same method, i.e. the localities on Fruška Gora Mt. (VUJIČIĆ et al., 2011; PETROVIĆ et al., 2013) and Papuk Mt. (PETROVIĆ et al., 2013), as well as in Bela Crkva municipality (BOŠKOV et al., 2015) and other evaluated geomorphological geosites in SE Serbia (BEGAN & VIŠNIĆ, 2015) (Table 3). It is evident from Fig. 7 that, according to the mean Main indicator values, the analyzed geosites on Golija Mt., as all other geosites in the region that were previously evaluated by GAM method, fall in the fields Z2y and Z3y (y=1,2,3). This indicates their scientific significance and potential for geotourism and ge­ oconservation. The obtained data show that the mean value for the group of indicators of Main Values for the studied geosites on Golija Mt. (8.16) is slightly higher than for most of the other evaluated sites in the region. Analysis of different subindicators of Main values shows that although VSE and VPr are balanced and relatively Figure 7. Location of the assessed geosites (GS 1 – Svilanovo, GS 2 – Bele Vode, GS 3 – Kulizino Selo) in GAM matrix, together with other previously evaluated geosites in the region. Legend: – geosites on Fruška Gora Mt. (VUJIČIĆ et al., 2011); – geosites on Papuk Mt. (PETROVIĆ et al., 2013); – geosites in Bela Crkva Municipality (BOŠKOV et al., 2015); – geosites in SE Serbia (BEGAN & VIŠNIĆ, 2015). Mean values for each group of geosites is presented by large symbols. G eologia C roatica Grujičić-Tešić et al.: Upper Cretaceous geosites on Golija Mountain – objects of geoheritage 341 Table 1. Main values (according to the GAM method proposed by VUJIČIĆ et al., 2011) of geosites of Golija Mt. Geosites/Geotopes Svilanovo Bele Vode Kulizino Selo I Scientific/Educational values (VSE) 1. Rarity Common=0 Regional=0.25 National=0.5 0.5 – Upper Cretaceous limestone with rudist fauna, rare in the Serbian part of the Dinarides, probably not so unique globally 0.5 – Upper Cretaceous limestone with rudist fauna, rare in the Serbian part of the Dinarides, probably not so unique globally 0.5 – Upper Cretaceous limestone with rudist fauna, rare in the Serbian part of the Dinarides, probably not so unique globally International=0.75 The only occurrence=1 2. Representativeness None=0 Low=0.25 Moderate=0.5 0.5 – fairly representative for Upper Cretaceous rudist-bearing carbonate platform environment 0.5 – fairly representative for Upper Cretaceous rudist-bearing carbonate platform environment High=0.75 0.75 – representative for Upper Cretaceous rudist-bearing carbonate platform environment in western Serbia, similar outcrops are known elsewhere Utmost=1 3. Knowledge on geo-scientific issues None=0 Local publications=0.25 Regional publications=0.5 National publications=0.75 0.75 – locality known from national geological literature 0.75 – locality known from national geological literature 0.75 – locality known from national geological literature International publications=1 4. Level of interpretation None=0 Moderate level of processes but hard to explain to non experts=0.25 0.25 – relatively good example of Upper Cretaceous reef-like bioconstructions; basic geological knowledge necessary to understand the palaeoenvironment 0.25 – relatively good example of Upper Cretaceous reef-like bioconstructions; basic geological knowledge necessary to understand the palaeoenvironment Good example of processes but hard to explain to non experts=0.5 0.5 – perfect example of Cretaceous reef-like bioconstructions, but basic geological knowledge necessary to understand the palaeoenvironment Moderate level of processes but easy to explain to common visitor=0.75 Good example of processes and easy to explain to common visitor=1 II Scenic/Aesthetic values (VSA) 1. Viewpoints (each must present a particular angle of view and be situated less than 1 km from the site) None=0 One=0.25 2 to 3=0.5 0.5 – transgressive boundary between the Late Palaeozoic metamorphics and the Upper Cretaceous limestone; a Miocene volcanic neck with columnar jointing in the vicinity 0.5 – Upper Cretaceous rudist limestone; Late Palaeozoic metamorphics nearby 0.5 – Upper Cretaceous rudist limestone; Late Palaeozoic metamorphics nearby 4 to 6=0.75 More than 6=1 2. Surface (each considered in quantitative relation to other) Small=0 SM=0.25 Medium=0.5 ML=0.75 Large=1 1-the area is several 100s of metres in size 1-the area is several 100s of metres in size 1-the area is several 100s of metres in size 3. Surrounding landscape and nature Minimum = 0 Low=0.25 Medium-0.5 High=0.75 0.75 – situated in a beautiful valley. The locality is surrounded by sparsely wooded topography with meadows and pastures Utmost=1 1 – from the top of Golija Mt., adorable view of the Pešter Plateau (Sjeničko Polje and Novopazarsko Polje). The locality is surrounded by sparsely wooded topography with meadows and pastures 1 – situated on a slope with beautiful view of the top of the Golija Mt and the Kopaonik Mt. The locality is surrounded by sparsely wooded topography with meadows and pastures 4. Environmental fitting of sites Unfitting=0 UN=0.25 Neutral=0.5 NF=0.75 0.75 – limestone exploitation started at this locality, but it was shortlived Fitting=1 1 – perfect representation of the location 1 – perfect representation of the location G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a Geologia Croatica 69/3342 III Protection (VPr) 1. Current condition Totally damaged (as a result of human activities)=0 Highly damaged (as a result of natural processes)=0.25 Medium damaged (with essential geomorphologic features preserved) = 0.5 Slightly damaged=0.75 0.75 – effects of previous exploitation still visible on the site No damage=1 1 – completely preserved site 1 – completely preserved site 2. Protection level None=0 0-no formal protection 0-no formal protection 0-no formal protection Local=0.25 Reginal=0.5 National=0.75 International=1 3. Vulnerability Irreversible (with possibility of total loss)=0 High (could be easily dama- ged)=0.25 Medium (could be damaged by natural processes or human activities)=0.5 Low (could be damaged only by human activities)=0.75 0.75 – potential collectors of rudists could damage the outcrop faces 0.75 – potential collectors of rudists could damage the outcrop faces 0.75 – potential collectors of rudists could damage the outcrop faces None=1 4. Suitable number of visitors Zero=0 0 to 10=0.25 10 to 20=0.5 20 to 50=0.75 More than 50=1 1 – the open places can hold more than 50 visitors at any one time 1 – the open places can hold more than 50 visitors at any one time 1 – the open places can hold more than 50 visitors at any one time Total (VSE+VSA+VPr) 8.75 7.75 8.00 Table 2. Additional values (according to the GAM method proposed by VUJIČIĆ et al., 2011) of geosites of Golija Mt. Geosites/Geotopes Svilanovo Bele Vode Kulizino Selo I Functional values (VFn) 1. Accessibility Inaccessible=0 Low (on foot with special equipment and expert guide tours)=0.25 Medium (by bicycle and other means of man-powered transport)=0.5 High (by car)=0.75 0.75 – the site is along the road, easily accessible by car Utmost (by bus)=1 1 – the site is along the road, easily accessible by bus 1 – the site is along the road, easily accessible by bus 2. Additional natural values None=0 One=0.25 0.25 – a site of pyramidal fir (Abies alba var. pyramidalis) 2 to 3=0.5 0.5 – a site of pyramidal fir (Abies alba var. pyramidalis); a lot of springs in the vicinity 0.5 – a site of pyramidal fir (Abies alba var. pyramidalis); a lot of springs in the vicinity 4 to 6=0.75 More than 6=1 3. Additional anthropogenic values None=0 One=0.25 2 to 3=0.5 4 to 6=0.75 0.75 – plantations of raspberries; Orthodox Medieval monasteries of Studenica, Gradac, Đurđevi Stupovi and Sopoćani; Saint Apostles Peter and Paul Church, the oldest in the Balkans. More than 6=1 1 – seasonal mountain settlements („katuni„); plantations of raspberries; Orthodox Medieval monasteries of Studenica, Gradac, Đurđevi Stupovi and Sopoćani; Saint Apostles Peter and Paul Church, the oldest in the Balkans. 1 – several sculpture fountains; plantations of raspberries; Orthodox Medieval monasteries of Studenica, Gradac, Đurđevi Stupovi and Sopoćani; Saint Apostles Peter and Paul Church, the oldest in the Balkans. G eologia C roatica Grujičić-Tešić et al.: Upper Cretaceous geosites on Golija Mountain – objects of geoheritage 343 4. Vicinity of emissive centres More than 100 km=0 100 to 50 km=0.25 50 to 25 km=0.5 0.5 – 30km from Ivanjica 0.5 – 35km from Ivanjica 25 to 5 km=0.75 0.75 – 20km from Novi Pazar Less than 5 km=1 5. Vicinity of important road network None=0 Local=0.25 0.25 – the asphalt road Novi Pazar-Golija 0.25 – the local asphalt road 0.25 the local asphalt road Regional=0.5 National=0.75 International=1 6. Additional functional values None=0 Low=0.25 Medium=0.5 High=0.75 Utmost=1 1 – along the asphalt road to Novi Pazar-Golija and Sjenica-Golija 1 – along the asphalt road to the village of Bele Vode 1 – along the asphalt road to the village of Kulizino Selo II Touristic values (VTr) 1. Promotion None=0 0 0 0 Local=0.25 Regional=0.5 National=0.75 International=1 2. Annual number of organized visits None =0 Less than 12 per year=0.25 0.25 – geologists, geology students 0.25 – geologists, geology students 0.25 – geologists, geology students 12 to 24 per year=0.5 24 to 48 per year=0.75 More than 48 per year=1 3. Vicinity of visitors centre More than 50 km=0 50 to 20 km=0.25 20 to 5 km=0.5 0.5 – rural tourism 0.5 – rural tourism 5 to 1 km=0.75 0.75 – In the Golija Nature Park Less than 1 km=1 4. Interpretative panels (characteristics of text and graphics, material quality, size, fitting to surroundings, etc.) None=0 0 0 0 Low quality=0.25 Medium quality=0.5 High quality=0.75 Utmost quality=1 5. Annual number of visitors None =0 Low (less than 5000)=0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 Medium (5001 to 10.000)=0.5 High (10.001 to 100.000)=0.75 Utmost (more than 100.000)=1 6. Tourism infrastructure (pedestrian pathways, resting places, garbage cans, toilets, wellsprings etc.) None=0 Low=0.25 Medium=0.5 0.5 – pedestrian paths in the vicinity, wellsprings 0.5 – pedestrian paths in the vicinity, wellsprings 0.5 – pedestrian paths in the vicinity, wellsprings High=0.75 Utmost=1 7. Tour guide service (expertise level, knowledge of foreign language(s), interpretative skills, etc) None=0 0 0 0 Low=0.25 Medium=0.5 High=0.75 Utmost=1 8. Hostelry service More than 50 km=0 25-50 km=0.25 10-25 km = 0.5 0.5 – On Golija Mt 0.5 – On Golija Mt 5-10 km=0.75 Less than 5 km=1 1 – On Golija Mt 9. Restaurant service More than 25 km=0 10-25 km=0.25 10-5 km=0.5 5-1 km=0.75 0.75 – On Golija Mt 0.75 – Village tavern nearby Less than 1 km=1 1 – Village tavern nearby Total (VFn + VTr) 7.75 7.25 6.50 G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a Geologia Croatica 69/3344 high, the differences in Main values mostly depend on VSA. The highest VSA for the studied geosites on Golija Mt. (3.33) are due to the large surface areas of the outcrops, the beautiful landscape and their untouched nature. Most of the subindicators represent­ ing Protection (VPr) are very high for geosites on Golija Mt., but they are significantly lowered due to the lack of any kind of for­ mal protection. Although VSE for sites on Golija Mt. are quite satisfactory (2.16), low values of Level of interpretation show that these geosites might be interesting in the first instance for people with a geoscience background. The calculated mean Additional values of different groups of geosites greatly differ (from Zx1 to Zx3, x=1,2,3), depending on the overall development of an area, the number of potential visi­ tors, touristic infrastructure, management and planning, vicinity of emissive centres, etc. Mean values for the group of indicators of Additional Values for the studied localities are much lower than for geosites on Papuk Mt. and in SE Serbia, but much higher than for those on Fruška Gora Mt. and in Bela Crkva municipa- lity. Despite rather similar Functional values (VFn) to geosites is SE Serbia and generally higher than those on Papuk Mt., geosites on Golija Mt. have much lower Touristic values (VTr). The main reason for this is insufficient development of tourism in this area. Such low VTr obtained for the studied geosites are compensated for by relatively high VFn, which results in generally high Addi­ tional Values. 5. CONCLUSIONS The obtained results show that the Main indicators values of the analyzed geosites are high and that these localities are important from a scientific and educational point of view, which leads to the conclusion that Golija Mountain has sufficient levels of natural resources for geotourism development. The Additional indicators values are at a medium level in all three geosites. This is not surprising, considering the fact that this is a problem for many potential sites of geoheritage signifi­ cance in Serbia, because of the lack of organized visits, tour guide service, interpretative panels, etc. This implies that there is an urgent need for more rapid, though sustainable, development of the tourism infrastructure. In order to maintain the original characteristics of these ge­ osites, it would be necessary to protect them from negative influ­ ences that might result in degradation or complete devastation. The final aim is geoconservation of the geosites in their original, undisturbed condition, in order to preserve it for future genera­ tions. The most effective way of protection of objects of geohe- ritage significance is to raise the awareness of their scientific, educational, aesthetic and touristic importance, as well as to forbid their commercial exploitation. This paper shows that all the studied localities fully deserve such treatment. ACkNOwLedgmeNt The work was supported by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia (Pro­ ject No. 176015). We also thank the editor and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments, which helped us to improve the manuscript. ReFeReNCeS BEGAN, M. & VišNić, T. (2015): Comparative Analysis of Gorges and Canyons in Southeastern Serbia as Potential Geotouristic Destinations by Using Gam Model.– Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 3/11, 4–11. BoškoV, J., koTriA, S., JoVANoVić, M., ToMić, N., Lukić, T. & rVoVić, i. (2015): Аpplication of the Preliminary Geosite Assessment Model (GAM): The Case of the Bela Crkva Municipality (Vojvodina, North Serbia).– Geographica Pannonica, 19/3, 146–152. CSoNToS, L., GErZiNA, N., HrVAToVić, H., SCHMiD, S. & ToMLJENoVić, B. (2003): Structure of the Dinarides: a working model.– Ann. univ. Sci. Budapest., Sect. Geol., 35, 143–144. ćirić, B. (1996): Geologija Srbije [Geology of Serbia – in Serbian].– Geokarta, Be­ ograd, 273 p. DiMiTriJEVić, M.D. (1997): Geology of Yugoslavia.– Geol. inst. GEMiNi Spec. Pu­ bl., Belgrade, 187 p. DiMiTriJEVić, M.D. (2001): Dinarides and the Vardar Zone: a short review of the ge­ ology.– Acta Vulcanol., 13, 1–8. DiMiTriJEVić, M.N. & DiMiTriJEVić, M.D. (1973): olistostrome mélange in the Yugoslavian Dinarides and late Mesozoic plate tectonics.– J. Geol., 81/3, 328–340. DiMiTriJEVić, M.N. & DiMiTriJEVić, M.D. (1987): The Titova Mitrovica Flysch.– In: DiMiTriJEVić, M.N. & DiMiTriJEVić, M.D. (eds.): The trubiditic basins of Serbia. Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts Department of Natural & Mathe­ matical Sciences, 61, 25–64. ĐuroVić, P. & MiJoVić, D. (2006): Geonasleđe Srbije – reprezent njenog ukupnog geodiverziteta [Geoheritage of Serbia-Representative of its Total Geodiversity – in Serbian].– Zbornik radova Geografskog Fakulteta u Beogradu, 54, 5–18. FASSouLAS, C., Mouriki, D., DiMiTriou-NikoLAkiS, P. & iLioPouLoS, G. (2012): Quantitative Assessment of Geotopes as an Effective Tool for Geoheritage Management.– Geoheritage, 4, 177–193. FiLiPoVić, i., MArkoVić, B., PAVLoVić, Z., roDiN, V. & MArkoVić, o. (1978): osnovna geološka karta SFrJ 1: 100000. Tumač za list Gornji Milanovac L34-137 [Basic Geologic Map of SFRY 1: 100.000. Explanatory booklet for the Sheet Gornji Milanovac – in Serbian].– Savezni geološki zavod, Beograd. GiLi, E., MASSE, J-P. & SkELToN. P.W. (1995): rudists as gregarious sediment dwell­ ers, not reef-builders, on Cretaceous carbonate platforms.– Palaeogeography, Pa- laeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 118, 245–267. GNEZDiLoVA, V., ruBAN, D., BruNo, D., PErroTTA, P., CroWLEY, B., oHE­ iM, k. & ZAYATS, P. (2015): Geoheritage sites with palaeogeographical value: some geotourism perspectives with examples from Mountainous Adygeja (rus­ sia).– Geološki anali Balkanskoga poluostrva, 76, 93–104. HENriquES, M., BriLHA, J., MoTA, T. & PENA DoS rEiS, r. (2011): Geocon­ servation as an Emerging Geoscience.– Geoheritage, 3/2, 117–128. HrVAToVić, H. & PAMić., J. (2005): Principal thrust­nappe structures of the Dina­ rides. – Acta Geologica Hungarica, 48/2, 133–151. JoVANoVić, V., CArEVić, i., VuškoVić, D. & kHALiL ABAD, T.M. (2012): Re­ view and protection possibilities of some trans-border (East Serbia – West Bul­ garia) stratigraphic/palaeontological geosites.– Bulletin of the Serbian Geographi- cal Society, 92/1, 171–184. kArAMATA, S. (2006): The geological development of the Balkan Peninsula related to the approach, collision and compression of Gondwana and Eurasian units.– in: roBErTSoN, A.H.F. & MouNTrAkiS, D. (eds.): Tectonic development of the Eastern Mediterranean region.– Geol. Soc. London, Spec. Publ.,260, 155–178. Table 3. Mean Main and Additional values for different geosites in Croatia and Serbia, according to the GAM method proposed by VUJIČIĆ et al., 2011. Geosites Papuk Mt. (according to PETROVIĆ et al., 2013) Fruška Gora Mt. (according to VUJIČIĆ et al., 2011) Bela Crkva municipality (according to BOŠKOV et al., 2015) SE Serbia (according to BEGAN & VIŠNIĆ, 2015) Golija Mt. (this publication) Mean Main Values 7.57 7.02 7.70 8.55 8.15 VSE 2.43 2.46 2.00 3.30 2.16 VSA 2.71 2.43 2.83 2.56 3.33 VPr 2.43 2.13 2.87 2.69 2.66 Mean Additional Values 10.25 4.29 4.00 8.90 7.16 VFn 3.61 2.94 2.37 4.50 4.08 Vtr 6.64 1.35 1.63 4.40 3.08 G eologia C roatica Grujičić-Tešić et al.: Upper Cretaceous geosites on Golija Mountain – objects of geoheritage 345 KARAMATA, S. & MIJOVIĆ, D. (2005): Inventar objekata geonasleđa Srbije [Inven- tory of the geological heritage sites of Serbia – in Serbian, English abstract].– In: MIJOVIĆ, D. (ed.): II Intern. Symp. on geoheritage of Serbia. Bull. Inst. of Nature Conserv., Sp. Issue, 20, 1–36. KOCH, R., MOUSSAVIAN, E., OGORELEC, B., SKABERNE, D. & BUCUR, I. (2002): Development of a Lithocodium (syn. Bacinella irregularis)­reef­mound­ A patch reef within Middle Aptian lagoonal limestone sequence near Nova Gorica (Sabotin Mountain, W­Slovenia).– Geologija, 45/1, 71–90. MARAN, A. (2008): Geoconservation in the Balkan region – Practices and legal instru­ ments.– Bulletin of the Natural History Museum, Belgrade, 1, 41–63. MARAN, A. (2010): Valuing the geological heritage of Serbia.– Bulletin of the Natural History Museum, Belgrade, 3, 47–66. MARAN STEVANOVIĆ, A. (2015): Methodological guidelines for geoheritage site assessment: a proposal for Serbia.– Geološki anali Balkanskoga poluostrva, 76, 105–113. MIJOVIĆ, D., RUNDIĆ, LJ. & MILOVANOVIĆ, D. (2005): Zaštita geonasleđa u Srbiji i pravci razvoja [Protection of geoheritage of Serbia and future development – in Serbian, English abstract].– In: MIJOVIĆ, D. (ed.): II Intern. Symp. on geo­ heritage of Serbia. Bull. Inst. of Nature Conserv., Sp. Issue, 20, 17–21. MILOVANOVIĆ, B. (1934): Rudisna fauna Jugoslavije, Istočna Srbija, zapadna Srbija, Stara Raška [Rudist fauna of Yugoslavia, Eastern Serbia, Western Serbia, Stara Raška – in Serbian].– Geološki anali Balkanskoga Poluostrva, 12/1, 186–213. MILOVANOVIĆ, B. (1960): Stratigraphie du Sénonien dans les Dinarides Yougoslaves d’après les Rudistes.– Bull. Soc. Géol. France, 7/2, 366–375. MILOVANOVIĆ, B. (1975): Jugozapadna Srbija.[Southwestern Serbia].– In: PETKO­ VIC, K. (ed.): Geologija Srbije, II­2, Stratigrafija, mezozoik. Zavod za regionalnu geologiju i paleontologiju Rudarsko­geološkog fakulteta, Univerzitet u Beogradu, 327–331. MOJSILOVIĆ, S., BAKLAJIĆ, D. & ĐOKOVIĆ, I., (1980): Osnovna geološka karta SFRJ 1: 100000. Tumač za list Sjenica [Basic Geologic Map of SFRY 1: 100.000. Explanatory booklet for the Sheet Sjenica – in Serbian].– Savezni geološki zavod, Beograd, 46 p. MOUFTI, M.R., NÉMETH, K., EL­MASRY, N. & QADDAH, A. (2013): Geoheritage values of one of the largest maar craters in the Arabian Peninsula: the Al Wahbah Crater and other volcanoes (Harrat Kishb, Saudi Arabia).– Central European Jour­ nal of Geosciences, 5/2, 254–271. PAMIĆ, J., GUŠIĆ, I. & JELASKA, V. (1998): Geodynamic evolution of the Central Dinarides.– Tectonophysics, 297, 251–268. PAMIĆ, J. & HRVATOVIĆ, H. (2000): Dinaride Ophiolite Zone (DOZ).– In: PAMIĆ, J. & TOMLJENOVIĆ, B. (eds.): Pancardi 2000 Fieldtrip Guidebook.– Vijesti, 37/2, 60–68. PEREIRA, P., PEREIRA, D. & CAETANO ALVES, M.I. (2007): Geomorphosite assess­ ment in Montesinho Natural Park (Portugal).– Geographica Helvetica, 62, 159–168. PETROVIĆ, M. & JANKIČEVIĆ, J. (1988): Stratigraphic column of the Upper Creta­ ceous near Novi Pazar.– Geološki anali Balkanskoga poluostrva, 52, 107–113. PETROVIĆ, M.D., VASILJEVIĆ, DJ.A., VUJIČIĆ, M.D., HOSE, T.A., MARKOVIĆ, S. B. & LUKIĆ, T. (2013): Global Geopark and Candidate – Comparative analysis of Papuk Mountain Geopark (Croatia) and Fruška Gora Mountain (Serbia) by us­ ing GAM Model.– Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences, 8/1, 105–116. PRALONG, J.P. (2005): A method for assessing the tourist potential and use of geomor­ phological sites. – Géomorphologie: Relief, processus, environnement, 3, 189–196. RABRENOVIĆ, D., BELIJ, S., MOJSIĆ, I. & MLADENOVIĆ, M. (2014): Main Va­ lues of the Đerdap area, Potential Geopark.– In: CVETKOVIĆ, V. (ed.): Proceedings of the XVI Serbian Geological Congress, Donji Milanovac, May 22­25, 866–871. RAMPNOUX, J.­P. (1964): Sur le Cretace du versant ouest du Kopaonik région de Novi Pazar (Stara Raška) Yugoslavia.– Bull. Soc. Géol. France, 7, VI/2, 219–224. RAMPNOUX, J.­P. (1970): Regards sur les Dinarides internes yougoslaves (Serbie Mon­ ténégro oriental): stratigraphie, évolution paléogéographique, magmatisme.– Bull. Soc. Géol. France, 12/6, 948–966. REYNARD, E., FONTANA, G., KOZLIK, L. & SCAPOZZA, C. (2007): A method for assessing „scientific” and „additional values” of geomorphosites.– Geographica Helvetica, 62/3, 148–158. ROBERTSON, A.H.F. & KARAMATA, S. (1994): The role of subduction­accretion processes in the tectonic evolution of the Mesozoic Tethys in Serbia.– Tectono­ physics, 234, 73–94. ROSS, D.J. (1992): Sedimentology and depositional profile of a mid­Cretaceous shelf edge rudist reef complex, Nahal Ha’mearot, NW Israel.– Sedimentary Geology, 79, 161–172. RUNDIĆ, LJ. & KNEŽEVIĆ, S. (2005): Stratigrafsko­paleontološki objekti kao in­ tegralni deo geonasledja Srbije [Stratigraphical and palaeontological objects as an integral part of Serbian geoheritage – in Serbian, English abstract].– In: MIJOVIĆ, D. (ed.): II Intern. Symp. on geoheritage of Serbia., Bull. Inst. of Nature Conserv., Sp. Issue, 20, 109–114. SANDERS, D. (1998): Upper Cretaceous „Rudist Formations„.– Geol. Palëont. Mitt. Innsbruck., 23, 37–59. SAVEZNI GEOLOŠKI ZAVOD (Federal Geological Survey) (1970): Geološka karta SFR Jugoslavije, 1:500000 [Geologic Map of SFRY, 1:500.000], Beograd. SCHMID, M.S., BERNOULLI, D., FÜGENSCHUH, B., MATENCO, L., SCHEFER, S., SCHUSTER, R., TISCHLER, M. & USTASZEWSKI, K. (2008): The Alpine­ Carpathian­Dinaridic orogenic system: correlation and evolution of tectonic units.– Swiss J. Geosci., 101/1, 139–183. STEUBER, T. (1999): Cretaceous rudists of Boeotia, central Greece.– Spec. Papers in Paleontology, 61, 229 p. STEUBER, T., KORBAR, T., JELASKA, V. & GUŠIĆ, I. (2005): Strontium­isotope stratigraphy of Upper Cretaceous platform carbonates of the island of Brač (Adri­ atic Sea, Croatia): Implications for global correlation of platform evolution and biostratigraphy.– Cretaceous Research, 26/5, 741–756. STOJANOVIĆ, V. & MIJOVIĆ, D. (2008): Evaluation of geodiversity of the Wes­ tern Bačka Danube region in the planning documents and opportunities for improvement.– Collection of papers Geographical Institute „Jovan Cvijić„, 58, 5–16. SWINBURNE, N.H.M., BILOTTE, M. & PAMOUKTCHIEV, A. (1992): The stratig­ raphy of the Campanian­Maastrichtian rudist beds of Bulgaria and reassessment of the range of the genus Pironea.– Cretaceous Res., 13, 191–205. TOMIĆ, N. (2011): The potential of Lazar Canyon (Serbia) as a geotourism destination: inventory and evaluation.– Geographica Pannonica, 15/3, 103–112. TOMIĆ, N. & BOŽIĆ, S. (2014): A modified Geosite Assessment Model (M­GAM) and its Application on the Lazar Canyon area (Serbia).– Int. J. Environ. Res., 8/4, 1041–1052. VASILJEVIĆ, DJ.A., MARKOVIĆ, S.B., HOSE, T.A., DING, Z., GUO, Z., LIU, X., SMALLEY, I., LUKIĆ, T. & VUJIČIĆ, M.D. (2014): Loess–palaeosoil sequenc­ es in China and Europe: Common values and geoconservation issues.– Catena, 117, 108–118. VUJIČIĆ, M.D., VASILJEVIĆ, DJ.A., MARKOVIĆ, S.B., HOSE, T.A., LUKIĆ, T. & HADŽIĆ, O. (2011): Preliminary Geosite Assessment Model (GAM) and its Ap­ plication on Fruška Gora Mountain, Potential Geotourism Destination of Serbia.– Acta geographica Slovenica, 51/2, 361–377.