О ПОСЛЕДИЦАМА ДЕФОРЕСТАЦИЈЕ У ДРУГОЈ ПОЛОВИНИ XIX ВЕКА
ON THE CONSEQUENCES OF DEFORESTATION IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE XIX CENTURY

Summary/Abstract: The population of Serbia quadrupled during the 19th century. Deforestation was a direct consequence of population growth since the majority of the populace lived from extensive agriculture. Furthermore, wood cutting was accepted as supplementary revenue since most of the farmers could not achieve sustainability on their properties. It was another cause of deforestation. This alone was enough to trigger environmental and mesoclimate changes in the XIX century Serbia. According to observations of the contemporaries, temperatures had greater oscillations, making the summers hotter. The winters seemed to be colder since there were no forests to mitigate the winds. As a consequence, both ground and air were faster getting colder. Air humidity declined leading to more frequent droughts. However, floods were also more frequent. The lack of forest vegetation made absorption of precipitation impossible and there were no barriers to torrential flows afterwards. According to contemporaries, this cutting of forests had led to the drying of river sources. Additionally, less woodland meant a deficit of air purification, which led to a worse air quality. An attempt to make farmers aware that these changes were caused by deforestation was noted in Težak. Farmers’ awareness, however, could not be influenced in such a manner since most had not read Težak or because they had difficulties understanding the presented explanations. The second goal of these articles – the attempts to influence the government in order to combat unlawful wood cutting and the consequences of deforestation – were fruitless. Legal acts considering woods until 1872 were actually regulations of the terms under which wood cutting was allowed. Since 1872, because of the effects of the 1871 floods, legislators agreed that more strict regulations be in order. However, implementing strict regulations could not be done due to lack of material and human resources (no survey was made and there was a lack of staff). Some also believed that a restriction of wood cutting would lead to social discontent.

• Details
• Contents