Muft Shiksha
Update

Muft Shiksha™ एक 100% Free Education Portal है 🇮🇳, जिसका उद्देश्य Class 9–12 के हर विद्यार्थी तक High-Quality Education को पूरी तरह मुफ्त पहुँचाना है। 🇮🇳 हम मानते हैं कि अच्छी शिक्षा किसी student की आर्थिक स्थिति पर निर्भर नहीं होनी चाहिए। 🇮🇳 हर विद्यार्थी को वही Quality Study Material, MCQs, Quizzes, Exam Preparation, Concept-Based Learning और Bilingual Support मिलना चाहिए, जो आमतौर पर महंगी Coaching या Premium Platforms में मिलता है। Muft Shiksha™ 🇮🇳 इसी सोच के साथ बनाया गया है

Subjects

History

Why Deforestation?

वनों की कटाई क्यों?

In this Class 9 History topic from “Forest Society and Colonialism,” students examine why forests were cleared and how colonial policies transformed forest use. They learn how railways, shipbuilding, commercial timber, plantations and expanding agriculture increased demand for wood and land. The topic also explores the effects on forest communities, shifting cultivators and pastoralists, including restrictions on customary rights, loss of livelihoods and resistance to state control. It helps students connect deforestation with colonial economic interests and social change.

TOPIC PRACTICE

Quiz this set

Up to 20 questions from this page. Select your focus, then start.

20 questions

Choose questions
Hard · Level 50 · food-cash-demand
View options
  1. Both turned sea into fields
  2. Both protected forests
  3. Both increased need for more cultivable land
  4. Both had no relation with land
Hard · Level 50 · colonial deforestation, capitalist market, forest resources, timber trade, plantation agriculture, colonialism
View options
  1. Forests were never made commercial goods
  2. Forests were only for festivals
  3. Market had no relation with forests
  4. Timber and plantation crops were linked with sale and profit
Hard · Level 50 · deforestation, colonial forestry, railways, plantations, forest society, class 9 history
View options
  1. Railways required timber for sleepers and fuel, whereas plantations required cleared forest land
  2. Railways only increased agricultural land, whereas plantations only took timber for ships
  3. Forests were conserved for railways, whereas new forests were planted for plantations
  4. Neither railways nor plantations were connected with deforestation
Hard · Level 50 · state-interest
View options
  1. All forests were handed to local people
  2. Timber revenue and controlled use were prioritised
  3. Forests were always kept untouched
  4. All plantations were ended
Hard · Level 50 · policy-market
View options
  1. Policy and market had no relation with forests
  2. Market fully protected forests
  3. Policy was made only for animals
  4. Policy gave control and market increased demand for timber and plantations
Hard · Level 50 · forest-to-fields
View options
  1. Turning natural forest land into taxable productive land
  2. Keeping forests fully local
  3. Ending cultivation
  4. Turning sea into forest
Hard · Level 50 · construction-cause
View options
  1. Because construction needed both land and timber
  2. Because construction happened only with water
  3. Because construction had no relation with forests
  4. Because construction saved every forest
Hard · Level 50 · rights-control-conflict
View options
  1. Because local people did not use forests
  2. Because the government restricted local use to control forest resources
  3. Because the state had no interest in forests
  4. Because forests were only in seas
Hard · Level 50 · deforestation, forest society, rural livelihoods, animal rearing, fodder, grazing land
View options
  1. Increase in sea travel
  2. Closure of railway services
  3. Reduction in fodder and grazing areas
  4. End of cotton cultivation
Hard · Level 50 · political-economic-process
View options
  1. Because it happened only due to rain
  2. Because no policy was involved
  3. Because wild animals cut all trees
  4. Because rule market revenue and laws decided forest use
Hard · Level 50 · livelihood-destabilisation
View options
  1. Because forest use was redirected towards state and market needs
  2. Because local people got more forest resources
  3. Because forests were never part of local life
  4. Because plantations increased local freedom
Hard · Level 50 · deforestation, food security, colonialism, agricultural expansion, forest society
View options
  1. Forest land was cleared to grow food crops for a rising population
  2. Food crops were grown in the sea
  3. Forests were cut because food demand declined
  4. Food security had no relation to agricultural production
Hard · Level 50 · scientific-forestry
View options
  1. Controlled timber supply and state control over forests
  2. Protection of folk songs
  3. Increasing sea fish
  4. Giving full freedom to shifting cultivation
Hard · Level 50 · deforestation, colonialism, forest society, causes and effects, environmental history, class 9 history
View options
  1. Because causes and effects together provide a complete historical understanding
  2. Because effects have no importance
  3. Because listing causes alone is sufficient
  4. Because deforestation had no social or environmental consequences
Hard · Level 50 · deep-historical-explanation
View options
  1. It was only natural decline of trees
  2. It was only the fault of local people
  3. It was the combined result of colonial state market revenue and resource demands
  4. It was only an effect of weather
Hard · Level 50 · teak-timber-demand
View options
  1. Because they gave strong timber useful for ships and railways
  2. Because they were only for decoration
  3. Because they had no link with market
  4. Because they gave more rights to forest dwellers
Hard · Level 50 · monoculture-plantations
View options
  1. Because diverse forests were replaced by one commercial crop
  2. Because forests became more diverse
  3. Because local forest use became fully free
  4. Because railway timber demand ended
Hard · Level 50 · war-imperial-needs
View options
  1. The empire needed timber for shipbuilding and military needs
  2. War fully ended timber need
  3. The empire gave all forests to local people
  4. Military needs had no relation with forests
Hard · Level 50 · local-food-gathering
View options
  1. Fewer forests reduced fruits tubers and other food sources
  2. Local food sources always increased
  3. Deforestation had no relation with food
  4. People began getting forest food from the sea
Hard · Level 50 · power-resource-control
View options
  1. Because the state used laws and departments to decide who would use forests
  2. Because no one controlled forests
  3. Because local communities got complete freedom
  4. Because forest resources had no relation with rule