Suchergebnisse

U radu autor analizira djelovanje Samostalne demokratske stranke (SDS) u Slavoniji i Srijemu 1924.-1929. Čitatelj se upućuje na okolnosti nastanka stranke, ustroj stranačke infrastrukture, etničku i socijalnu strukturu, tisak te rezultate na parlamentarnim, oblasnim i lokalnim izborima. SDS je, usprkos isticanju unitarističke dogme o jedinstvenom jugoslavenskom narodu, počivao na podršci srpskih birača i nalazio se u stalnom nadmetanju s radikalima za poziciju najjače srpske stranke slavonsko-srijemskog prostora. ; In this paper the author analyses the activities of the Independent Democratic Party (SDS) in Slavonia and Syrmia from 1924 to 1929. The reader will be familiarised with the circumstances of the development of the party, the organization of the party's infrastructure, the ethnic and social structure, the press and the results of parliamentary, regional and local elections. Although the Independent Democratic Party advocated the unitary dogma of a single Yugoslav nation, it was drew on the support of Serbian voters and constantly competed with the Radicals for the position of the most powerful Serbian party in the Slavonian-Syrmian territory. The Independent Democratic Party in Slavonia and Syrmia managed during the last four and a half years of the parliamentary regime of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes to make itself into a significant political factor. In the territories of the Virovitica and Požega County it was in a constant struggle with the Radicals for the position of the second most important political power, while in the territory of the Syrmian County it lagged behind the Radicals. However, it did not succeed in approaching Radić's Party which during that period succeeded in keeping the position of dominant political party. With respect to the Democratic Party that it had emerged from, the conclusion can be drawn that it attracted the majority of the members and adherents of the former united Democrats. The Independent Democratic Party in Slavonia and Syrmia drew heavily on the support of the Serbian electorate. On the one hand, this implies that the party had not entirely succeeded in affirming its unitary Yugoslav political platform, since it was evident that it was rejected by the Croats, the majority population. The struggle for the sympathy of the Serbian voters naturally led to fierce political confrontations with the Radicals, which were only temporarily calmed by the coalitions of the two parties at the level of the state as a whole. At the same time the Independent Democratic Party above all proved to be the political representative of the Serbian peasantry of the Slavonian-Syrmian area which implied confrontations with the Radicals and also with the ever-greatger influence of farmers. Various forms of para-political organization on which the unique Democratic Party had been successfully working before the party split (Peasant Councils, Voluntary Association and the Organization of Yugoslav Nationalists) considerably supplemented and thereby strengthened the power of the Independent Democratic Party after spring 1924. While monarchism and the Serbian electoral base considerably facilitated a short-term coalition with the Radicals in 1925 (National Block), the Independent Democratic Party and the Croatian Peasant Party (Peasant Democratic Coalition) shared lesser connecting features. The party leadership and certain sincere supporters of a coalition with Radić's Party (the leader of the Party in Osijek, Milan Stijić or the Pakrac Orthodox priest Danilo Podunavac) endeavoured to ease the ideological and programme differences by emphasizing the mutual menace to both the Croats and Serbs of the transriparian Serb areas. However, other Slavonian-Syrmian party leaders (Svetislav Popović and Milenko Marković) considered an alliance with the Croatian Peasant Party to be a great violation of the dogma of the national unity of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes or a threat to the centralistic state. Hence, it would be no exaggeration to state that Alexander's undemocratic act (probably) pre-empted a schism within the Independent Democratic Party.

RIJEČ UREDNIŠTVAŠumama se gospodari prema osnovi i programu gospodarenja za pojedinu gospodarsku jedinicu. Osnova i program gospodarenja izrađeni su na temelju Zakona o šumama i Pravilnika o uređivanja šuma. No, poštuju se i odredbe još nekih zakonskih akata i podakata, kao što su: Zakon o zaštiti prirode, Zakon o zaštiti okoliša, Zakon o šumskom reprodukcijskom materijalu, Zakon o lovstvu, Zakon o zaštiti od požara, Zakon o vodama, Zakon o cestama, Zakon o prostornom uređenju i gradnji, Zakon o državnoj izmjeri i katastru nekretnina, Zakon o održivom gospodarenju otpadom te Pravilnik o doznaci stabala, obilježavanju drvnih sortimenata, popratnici i šumskom redu, Pravilnik o zaštiti šuma od požara, Pravilnik o strogo zaštićenim vrstama i Pravilnik o sakupljanju samoniklih biljaka te Uredba o ekološkoj mreži. Naravno, gospodarska osnova usklađena je s propisima Šumsko gospodarske osnove područja Republike Hrvatske. Sve rečeno dobro je poznato šumarskim stručnjacima, posebice onima iz odjela za uređivanje šuma koji pripremaju i izrađuju osnove gospodarenja, no dobro je podsjetiti se i pomoći neupućenima shvatiti da je drvo kao sirovina za daljnju preradu, samo jedan od proizvoda šume. Upravo dokumenti na koje se oslanja izrada osnova gospodarenja, ukazuju na zadaću šume i njenu općekorisnu funkciju te naknade za nju, koja je većini građana sporna, ponajprije iz neznanja. No, poticaj za pisanje bilo kojega, pa i ovoga podsjetnika-uvoda i pitanja postavljenog u naslovu, uvijek su neki događaji koji nas iz našeg okruženja trenutačno okupiraju .Već nekoliko godina sukladno Zakonu o naknadi za imovinu oduzetu za vrijeme jugoslavenske komunističke vladavine, vraćaju se određene površine šuma bivšim vlasnicima - u pojedinim slučajevima radi se i o povećim površinama. Prema Pravilniku o uređivanju šuma, kada dođe do promjene vlasničkih odnosa uzrokovanih povratom imovine na temelju posebnog Zakona i kada se radi o povratu šumske površine veće od 100 ha, potrebno je izraditi izvanrednu reviziju osnove gospodarenja. To rade Hrvatske šume d.o.o., kojima je povjereno gospodarenje šumama u vlasništvu države, a odobrava resorno ministarstvo putem stručnog povjerenstva. Očekuje se da to rade i "novi-stari" vlasnici šuma, jer Zakon o šumama vrijedi za sve vlasnike šuma. Odjeli za uređivanje šuma Hrvatskih šuma d.o.o. novim-starim vlasnicima šuma nude izradu osnova gospodarenja, kažu uglavnom neuspješno. Pretpostavljamo da te programe za njih rade neke druge licencirane šumarske tvrtke. Nije za vjerovati, ali kažu da ima čak primjera da se gospodarenje povjerava pilanaru! Dakle, već znano "haračenje" u privatnim šumama izgleda nastavlja se, samo sada na nešto većim površinama. Prema tomu, sječe se nemilice i očito to netko odobrava ili zatvara oči pred time. Ne želimo nikoga optuživati, jer nismo inspektori, nego samo na temelju indicija upozoravamo resorno ministarstvo da poduzme odgovarajuće mjere, posebice Komoru inženjera šumarstva i drvne tehnologije da zaštiti žig ovlaštenog inženjera od eventualnog profaniranja.Inače, interesantno bi bilo znati na koji način i gdje završava ta drvna sirovina iz privatnih šuma i u kojoj fazi obrade. Za drvnu sirovinu Hrvatskih šuma d.o.o. znamo da se većina "raspoređuje" kupcima po netržišnim cijenama, iako već male količine koje se prodaju po tržišnom načelu putem javnog nadmetanja, pokazuju osjetnu razliku u prihodu, no napravljene promjene u prodajnoj politici državnih šuma tek su na tragu željenih i realnijih prihoda. Država-vlasnik gubi, a pune se privatni džepovi drvoprerađivača s opravdanjem očuvanja radnih mjesta. Vijesti u dnevnome tisku o povećanju cijena drvne sirovine samo je nova administrativna, a ne tržišna mjera. Prije nekoliko dana gledamo na HTV preradu drva u Petrinji i prvi zaključak je "sada su na redu Hrvatske šume d.o.o." koje trebaju osigurati drvnu sirovinu, kao što se to tražilo za sličnu proizvodnju u Vukovaru, naravno "po povoljnim cijenama". A koja je to finalna proizvodnja? Parket, koji poštujući racionalno korištenje drvne sirovine zapravo predstavlja proizvod pilanske dorade i najnižeg stupnja finalne obrade drva. Furnir je pak poluproizvod-sirovina za daljnju obradu drva. Prave finalizacije tu nigdje nema, a upravo ona osigurava stvaranje dodane vrijednosti i nova radna mjesta, koja mi našom netržišnom politikom izvozimo umjesto drvnih proizvoda visoke finaliziranosti. Nije potrebno reći da finalizacija onda potiče prateću industriju (okovi, ljepila, lakovi i sl.) i stručno osposobljavanje i zapošljavanje, kako proizvodnih radnika, tako i inženjera drvne tehnologije. Zbog čega je to tako teško shvatiti?Uredništvo ; EDITORIALForests are managed according to the management plan and programme of a particular management unit. Management plans and programmes are drawn up on the basis of the Forest Act and the Forest Management Regulations. However, are the regulations of other laws and by-laws obeyed? These include, for example, the Nature Protection Act, the Environment Protection Act, the Act on Forest Reproductive Material, the Hunting Act, the Forest Fire Protection Act, the Water Act, the Act on Roads, the Physical Planning and Building Act, the State Measurement and Land Registry Act, the Act on Sustainable Waste Management, and the Regulation on Remittance of Trees, Marking of the Timber and Forest Row, the Regulation on Forest Fire Protection, the Regulation on Strictly Protected Species, the Regulation on the Collection of Wild Plants, and the Regulation on the Ecological Network. The management plan is coordinated with the regulations of the Forest Management Plan of the Republic of Croatia. All this is well known to forestry experts and particularly to those from the Forest Planning Department, who prepare and draw up management plans. Still, it is worth while reminding those less knowledgeable of the matter that timber as raw material for further processing is only one of the vast array of forest products. The basic documents used to formulate management plans clearly highlight the role of the forest and its non-market function, as well as the monetary compensation for this function. Yet, this compensation is the bone of contention for the majority of the citizens, who are generally unaware of forest functions. However, writing this reminder-introductory word and asking the question in the title is always prompted by some events from our surroundings that draw our attention. For several years now, pursuant to the Act on Compensation for and Restitution of Assets Taken under the Yugoslav Communist Regime, some forest areas have been returned to their former owners - in some cases these areas are relatively large. According to the Forest Management Act, in the case of changed ownership relations caused by the restitution of property based on a special Law and in the case of property exceeding 100 ha, it is necessary to revise the management plan. This is done by the company "Croatian Forests" Ltd, which has been entrusted with the management of state-owned forests, and must be approved by the corresponding Ministry through its expert commission. It is expected that the job is also performed by the "new-old" forest owners, because the Forest Act is binding for all forest owners. The forest management departments of "Croatian Forests" Ltd offer their services of formulating management plans to the new-old forest owners, but in their words, mainly unsuccessfully. We assume that these programmes are executed by some other licensed forestry companies. Hard to believe, but there have been cases of such jobs being entrusted to sawmill owners! Thus, the already familiar "acts of plundering" in private forests are continuing, but now over even larger areas. Trees are being mercilessly cut down, and it is evident that such acts are either approved by someone or that eyes are being shut to this practice. We would not want to incriminate anybody because we are not inspectors, but what we would like to do is, on the basis of indicators, warn the relevant ministry to undertake the required measures, and particularly the Chamber of Forestry and Wood Technology Engineers, to protect the seal of a licensed engineer from possible profanation. Otherwise, it would be interesting to know in what manner and where the raw wood material from private forests ends and in which processing stage it is found. We know that the majority of raw wood material of Croatian Forests Ltd is "distributed" to buyers at non-market prices, although even the small quantities sold on the market on the public bid principle show a considerable difference in the profit. However, the changes in the selling policy of state forests are a far cry from the desired and more realistic profit. The state - the owner, loses and private pockets of wood processors are filled on the pretext of retaining working places. The news in the press talking of higher prices of raw wood material is just a new administrative, and not a marketing measure. Several days ago we watched a TV programme on wood processing in Petrinja, and the first conclusion was that "it is the turn of Croatian Forests Ltd" to ensure raw wood material, in the same way it was demanded for similar production in Vukovar, naturally, at "favourable prices". What is this final production? Parquet, which, in the rational use of raw wood material represents a product of sawmill processing and the lowest stage of final timber processing. Veneer is a semi-finished product - raw material for further wood processing. There is no proper finalisation, and it is finalisation that generates the creation of added value and new working posts. Due to our non-market policy we export these instead of wood products in the highest finalising stage. It goes without saying that finalisation stimulates the accompanying industry (frames, glues, varnishes and similar) and ensures specialized training and employment to not only production workers but also wood technology engineers. Why is this so hard to understand?Editorial Board

U godini kada obilježavamo 250. obljetnicu hrvatskoga šumarstva, a u tijeku je 169. godina od utemeljenja Hrvatskoga šumarskoga društva i tiskanja 139. godišta našega znanstveno-stručnoga i staleškog glasila Šumarski list, interesantno je baciti pogled na tekstove iz prvih godišta tiskanja časopisa, pa i povući paralelu s današnjicom.Već u prvome godištu 1877 god. pozornost nam privlači članak Adolfa Danhelovskog "Predlozi o štednji drva u proizvadjanju francezkih duga", u kojemu kaže da se postupak proizvodnje neznatno poboljšao, "premda ova vrst robe zaslužuje, da se najvećom štednjom proizvadja, dočim su njoj namijenjeni najkrasniji hrastici". To mora raditi "vješt radnik", jer se inače može "mnogo drva potratiti …., a užje se duge imaju izradjivati od tanjih stabalah ili trupacah". Nastavno, preporuča se radi uštede sortirati trupce sukladno dužini i širini zadanih dimenzija dužica, a slijede ostale preporuke za uštedu. Povucimo sada paralelu s tadašnjim razmišljanjem i preporukama glede štednje i današnjim rasipanjem nacionalnog bogatstva, korištenjem "najkrasnijih hrastika", tako da netržišna cijena sortimenata omogućuje proizvodnju poluproizvoda, a ne visoko finaliziranih proizvoda s velikom dodanom vrijednošću i maksimalnom zaposlenošću. Najžalosnije je kada se furnirski sortiment kamuflira u pilanski prozvod za izvoz, čime se "izvoze" i radna mjesta za kojima plačemo. O tome smo detaljnije pisali u uvodniku ŠL br. 5-6/2012. "Odnos šumarstva i prerade drva". Stoga se ne slažemo s tvrdnjom resornog ministra izrečenoj u razgovoru poslije Konferencije za tisak o kojoj pišemo u rubrici Aktualno, da su potpisani netržišni ugovori s drvoprerađivačima spasili domaću preradu drva od inozemne konkurencije. Za nas je i dalje to način rasipanja nacionalnog bogatstva i trenutačni probitak za račun pojedinaca, a ne za opće dobro.Članak iz trećeg godišta, 1879. god. Alex. Nik. Schultz podnaslovom "Sedam glavnih točaka šumskoga gospodarstva i njihova teoretično-praktična uporaba" započinje motom: "Proizvadjanje najveće kvantitativne i kvalitativne množine drva na najmanjoj površini: i čim vrlije gospodarstvo". U članku navodi kako šumsko gospodarstvo dijeli djelatnosti na temeljne i pripomoćne. Temeljne su računarstvo i prirodoslovlje, a pomoćne: tehnologija, zakonodavstvo, državoznastvo, računovodstvo povijest i geografija. Razdioba praktičnih struka šumskog gospodarstva dijeli na: "gojenje šume, b) zaštita šume zajedno s šumskom stražom, c) šumska poraba za jedno sa šumskom tehnologijom, d) šumska procjena zajedno s uredbom obhodnje i obračunanjem vriednosti i e) šumska uprava i šumsko ravnateljstvo". Ako razmislimo o poanti i današnjem poštivanju mota članka, zaključujemo da se sugerira maksimalno moguće korištenje proizvodnosti pojedinog šumskog staništa, a njegova bi degradacija predstavljala katastrofu. Komentirajući spomenutih sedam točaka, ponajprije navodi da je prva i glavna točka upravljanja i rada "teoretično i praktično naobraženo gospodarstveno osoblje da se može šumom koristno i potrajno gospodariti". Pita se "kako može čovjek uobće, koji neima niti pojma o neophodno nuždnih znanosti, upravljati šumom s mnogimi njezinimi osebujnosti". Druga glavna točka je samostalno odgovorno vođenje gospodarstva "bez pohlepe za dobitkom". Treća točka govori ponajviše o načinima obnove sastojina – umjetnim načinom ili prirodnim pomlađivanjem. U četvrtoj točci bilježimo zaključak: "Pošteni šumar, koji znade računati, ne će nikada privoliti, da njegov gospodar, kada se u momentanoj novčanoj neprilici snadje, te bude prisiljen, uteći se šumi, postane žrtvom takvih švindlera i šumskih pustošnika, te će svu svoju duševnu snagu upotriebiti, da ono što se ne da izbjeći, ograniči bar na najmanji prostor i s obzirom na budućnost". Peta točka tiče se "šumske porabe zajedno sa šumskom tehnologijom i važnija je nego što se na prvi čas čini", a detaljnije obrazlažući zaključuje da joj treba posvetiti dužnu pozornost prateći razvoj i primjenu novih tehnologija. Šesta točka obuhvaća "šumsku taksaciju zajedno s uredjenjem obhodnje i vriednostnim obračunom", a sve spomenute točke međusobno se isprepleću i potrebno ih je ne razdvajati, "jer bez poznavanja jedne ne da se druga izvesti". O sedmoj točci "k šumskoj upravi i ravnateljstvu šuma" nema se što posebno reći kaže on, jer je uglavnom obuhvaćena u prethodnim točkama, ali zaključuje kako prema staroj poslovici "od glave riba smrdi, a preneseno na šumsku industriju: ne valja li ravnateljstvo, to ne valja ni cielo šumsko podčinjeno osoblje. To vriedi kod svake grane gospodarstva, a potvrdjuju to i nebrojeni dokazi u čovječjem družtvenom životu i u svih strukah". Na kraju mi zaključujemo ovaj tekst s porukom – usporedite sami!Uredništvo ; The 250th anniversary of Croatian forestry and the 169th year of the foundation of the Croatian Forestry Association and the publication of the 139th issue of the scientific-professional and specialist magazine Forestry Journal offer an ideal opportunity to look back at the texts published in the first issues and draw a parallel with present times. The very first volume from the year 1877 contains an interesting article by Adolf Danhelovski "Recommendations on saving wood in the production of French staves", which states that the production process has improved slightly "although this type of goods requires maximal saving in its production, since they are produced of the most beautiful oak trees". Work should be performed by a "skilful labourer", otherwise much of the wood "might go to waste". Narrower staves should be made of thinner trees or logs". Furthermore, logs should be classified according to the length and width of stave dimensions required. Other recommendations for saving follow. Let us draw a parallel with the present manner and recommendations related to saving and present squandering of national resources by using "the most beautiful oak forests", so that the non-market prices of the assortments allows the production of semi-finished goods and not high-quality products with a high added value and maximal employment. What is detrimental is the fact that veneer assortments are camouflaged into sawmill products intended for export; this also means "export" of working places which we sorely need. We discussed this in more detail in the Editorial of the Forestry Journal No. 5-6/2012, "The relationship between forestry and wood processing". This is why we do not agree with the words of the competent minister said after a Press conference, which we discuss in the column Current Affairs. The minister claimed that non-market contracts with wood processors had saved home wood processing from foreign competition. We continue to perceive this as a way of squandering national wealth for momentary gain of an individual and not for the benefit of the society as a whole. The article published in the third year of publication in 1879, written by Alex. Ni. Sshulz and entitled "Seven main points of forest management and their theoretical-practical use" starts with a motto: "Production of he highest quantitative and qualitative amount of wood in the smallest area: and the best management". According to the article, forest management activities are divided into basic and auxiliary. The basic activities are mathematics and natural sciences and the auxiliary ones are technology, law-making, political sciences, book keeping, history and geography. Practical parts of forest management are divided into "a) silviculture, b) forest protection together with forest surveillance, c) use of forests together with forest technology, d) forest inventory with rotation and calculation of value and e) forest administration and forest directorate". From the present standpoint, the motto of the article suggests maximum possible use of the productivity of a particular forest site, whose degradation would mean catastrophe. In his comment of the seven points that follow, the author stresses that the first and the main point of management and work lies in "highly educated management personnel who posses theoretical and practical knowledge for useful and sustainable management of forests". He asks himself: "How can a person who has absolutely no knowledge of the basic sciences manage such a highly complex system as a forest?" The second point is independent management devoid of "greed for profit". The third point is primarily concerned with stand regeneration methods - artificial or natural regeneration. The fourth point contains a conclusion: "An honest forester who knows how to calculate will never allow his master, who, if faced with financial problems and forced to exploit his forest, to become a victim of swindlers and forest exploiters, and will use all his spiritual strength to at least limit what is unavoidable to the smallest space with regard to the future". The fifth point refers to "use of forests together with forest technology, which is more important that might seem at first glance". In his detailed explanation, the author concludes that the development and application of new technologies should be given due importance. The sixth point comprises "forest taxation together with rotations and value calculation". All the above points are mutually intertwined and cannot be separated from one another, "since without knowing one it is impossible to perform another". In the author´s words, the seventh point concerning "forest administration and forest directorate" requires no comments because everything is contained in the previous points, but he concludes that, as the old proverb says, "the fish rots from the head down", or translated into forest industry: if the directorate is no good, then the entire subordinate personnel will be no good. This refers to all branches of economy, and has been proven myriad of times in the human society and in all the professions". We conclude this text with the message – compare!Editorial Board