Why Deforestation?

Correct answer: A. Law and market acted together, but in different ways. Colonial laws and forest departments claimed authority over land, restricted local use and made extraction easier to regulate. At the same time, markets created demand for timber, railway sleepers, shipbuilding material and plantation crops. Once the state controlled forests, commercial interests could obtain selected products or convert land for profitable uses more easily. A is correct because it identifies both the legal mechanism of control and the economic pressure of demand. B is wrong because colonial trade and markets expanded rather than disappeared. C is wrong because market demand often encouraged cutting and conversion, not the saving of every forest. D is wrong because both forces strongly shaped forest use. Memory cue: law opened the door to control; market pushed profitable extraction through it.

Correct answer: A. Colonial governments commonly sought regular revenue from land. Forested areas could be cleared and converted into fields, after which cultivation and land assessment could provide income to the state. This does not mean every forest was cleared only for taxation, but revenue demands encouraged agricultural expansion in many situations. A is correct because it shows the connection between clearing land, cultivation and state income. B is wrong because taxation was closely connected with land assessment and agricultural production. C is wrong because deforestation could increase taxable cultivation rather than making income zero. D is wrong because revenue pressure could encourage changes in forest land. The question asks for the most accurate general conclusion, not an absolute claim about every place. Memory cue: when land becomes taxable farmland, revenue interests can support forest clearance.