ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

The Ljubljana Marsh (Ljubljansko barje) is a tectonic depression that developed at the intersection of the Alpine and Dinaric regions. It measures approximately 160 km2, or 0.8% of Slovenian territory. It is a cultural landscape with one of the largest complexes of wetland meadows in Slovenia, which has been protected as a nature park since 2008 (the Ljubljansko barje Nature Park). The Ljubljana Marsh has been settled at least since the Neolithic, when pile-dwellers lived in the area. Their pile-dwellings, which were raised above the shallow Holocene lake, are on the UNESCO list of cultural heritage sites since 2011 as part of the “Prehistoric Fascine Dwellings around the Alps” nomination. The first major alterations to the Ljubljana Marsh were made by the Romans, who partly changed the course of the largest watercourse in the marsh, the Ljubljanica River, in order to improve the river’s navigability, especially for transport between the quarry at Podpeč and the settlement of Emona (in what is today the southern part of Ljubljana). However, key changes in the landscape occurred in the second half of the eighteenth century, when the marsh began to be drained in order to obtain agricultural land and for later settlement. Drainage activities included the construction of a number of canals, which were used for drainage and for training the Ljubljanica River in Ljubljana, where the Gruber Canal was dug in 1780 in order to accelerate the drainage of water from the marsh. The main drainage activities were completed in 1829, which was followed by settlement of the marsh. During the 1820s a road was also built through the marsh and a railroad in 1857. Due to new deposits from the Ljubljanica River, major drainage works had to be repeated several times, but the marsh was never completely drained. This is connected with the problem of floods in settled areas in the nineteenth century and today. Important alteration of the landscape was also caused by intensive peat harvesting, which was the major source of income for people living on the newly obtained land in the marsh. Peat was still present across the entire marsh even 150 years ago, but one can hardly find it today. Urbanization is among the major pressures this landscape is facing today because despite the great flood risk it continues to spread into the marsh.
Content may be subject to copyright.
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
Ekonomska i ekohistorija 45
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED
AREA: A CASE STUDY OF THE LJUBLJANA MARSH
(LJUBLJANSKO BARJE)
ANTROPOGENA POKRAJINA KOT ZAŠČITENO OBMOČJE: PRIMER
LJUBLJANSKEGA BARJA
Matija Zorn Primljeno/Received: 6. 8. 2012.
Mateja Šmid Hribar Prihvaćeno/Accepted: 7. 10. 2012.
Scientific Research Centre of the Rad ima dvije pozitivne recenzije
Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Art / Izvorni znanstveni rad
Znanstvenoraziskovalni center Slovenske Original scientific paper
akademije znanosti in umetnosti UDK / UDC 556.53 (497.5-3) 282 Ljubljansko Barje
Anton Melik Geographical Institute /
Geografski inštitut Antona Melika
Gosposka ulica 13
SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija
matija.zorn@zrc-sazu.si
mateja.smid@zrc-sazu.si
Povzetek
Ljubljansko barje (Barje) je tektonska
udorina, ki je nastala na stičišču alpskega
in dinarskega sveta. Meri približno 160 km²
oziroma 0,8 % slovenskega ozemlja. Je
kulturna pokrajina z enim od največjih
kompleksov mokrotnih travišč v Sloveniji, ki
je od 2008 zavarovana kot krajinski park
(Krajinski park Ljubljansko barje).
Naselitev je na Ljubljanskem barju prisotna
najmanj od neolitika, ko so na območju
živeli t.i. koliščarji. Njihova bivališča, na
»kolih«, dvignjena nad plitvo holocensko
jezero, so od leta 2011 vpisana v register
Unescove kulturne dediščine v sklopu
nominacije »Prazgodovinska kolišča okoli
Alp«. Prvi, ki so resneje posegli v območje
Ljubljanskega barja so bili Rimljani, ki so
deloma spremenili tok Ljubljanice, največjega
vodotoka prek Barja, da bi izboljšali plovnost
reke, predvsem zaradi transporta med
kamnolomom v Podpeči in naseljem Emona
(na območju današnjega južnega dela
Ljubljane). Do ključnih sprememb v pokrajini
pa je prišlo v drugi polovici 18. stoletja z
osuševanjem Barja, za pridobitev kmetijskih
zemljišč in kasnejšo kolonizacijo. Osuševalna
dela so obsegala izgradnjo številnih kanalov
Abstract
The Ljubljana Marsh (Ljubljansko barje) is a
tectonic depression that developed at the
intersection of the Alpine and Dinaric regions.
It measures approximately 160 km², or 0.8%
of Slovenian territory. It is a cultural landscape
with one of the largest complexes of wetland
meadows in Slovenia, which has been protected
as a nature park since 2008 (the Ljubljansko
barje Nature Park).
The Ljubljana Marsh has been settled at least
since the Neolithic, when pile-dwellers lived in
the area. Their pile-dwellings, which were
raised above the shallow Holocene lake, are
on the UNESCO list of cultural heritage sites
since 2011 as part of the »Prehistoric Fascine
Dwellings around the Alps« nomination. The
first major alterations to the Ljubljana Marsh
were made by the Romans, who partly changed
the course of the largest watercourse in the
marsh, the Ljubljanica River, in order to improve
the river’s navigability, especially for transport
between the quarry at Podpeč and the settlement
of Emona (in what is today the southern part
of Ljubljana). However, key changes in the
landscape occurred in the second half of the
eighteenth century, when the marsh began to
be drained in order to obtain agricultural land
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
46
and for later settlement. Drainage activities
included the construction of a number of canals,
which were used for drainage and for training
the Ljubljanica River in Ljubljana, where the
Gruber Canal was dug in 1780 in order to
accelerate the drainage of water from the marsh.
The main drainage activities were completed
in 1829, which was followed by settlement of
the marsh. During the 1820s a road was also
built through the marsh and a railroad in 1857.
Due to new deposits from the Ljubljanica River,
major drainage works had to be repeated several
times, but the marsh was never completely
drained. This is connected with the problem of
floods in settled areas in the nineteenth century
and today. Important alteration of the landscape
was also caused by intensive peat harvesting,
which was the major source of income for people
living on the newly obtained land in the marsh.
Peat was still present across the entire marsh
even 150 years ago, but one can hardly find it
today. Urbanization is among the major
pressures this landscape is facing today because
despite the great flood risk it continues to spread
into the marsh.
Key words: cultural landscape, nature park,
wetland, floods, Ljubljana Marsh,
Slovenia
1 INTRODUCTION
The Ljubljana Marsh (Ljubljansko barje)
is a tectonic depression that developed at the
intersection of the Alpine and Dinaric regions.
It measures approximately 160 km², or 0.8%
of Slovenian territory. It is a cultural landscape
with one of the largest complexes of wetland
meadows in Slovenia and has been protected as
a nature park (the Ljubljansko barje Nature Park)
since 2008. It is also included in the Natura 2000
European network of special protection areas.
za odvajanje vode, pa tudi regulacijo
Ljubljanice v Ljubljani, kjer so, da bi
pospešili odtekanje vode z Barja leta 1780
zgradili t. i. Gruberjev prekop. Glavna
osuševalna dela so se končala leta 1829 in
sledila je kolonizacija Barja. Prek Barja
je bila v dvajsetih letih 19. stoletja speljana
tudi cesta, leta 1857 pa še železnica. Zaradi
novih naplavin Ljubljanice je bilo treba
večja osuševalna dela še nekajkrat ponoviti,
a do dokončne osušitve Barja ni prišlo. S
tem je povezan problem poplav na
koloniziranih območjih, tako v 19. stoletju
kot danes. Pomembno spremembo pokrajine
je pomenilo tudi intenzivno izkoriščanje
šote, ki je bila najizdatnejši vir dohodkov
za prebivalce na novo pridobljenih zemljiščih
na Barju. Pred dobrim stoletjem in pol je
bila prisotna še na celotnem Barju, danes
pa jo le s težka najdemo. Med pritiski, ki
se vršijo nad to pokrajino, je danes med
pomembnejšimi urbanizacija, ki se kljub
veliki poplavni ogroženosti neprestano širi
na Barje.
Ključne besede: kulturna pokrajina, krajinski
park, mokrišče, poplave,
Ljubljansko barje, Slovenija
1 UVOD
Ljubljansko barje (Barje) je tektonska
udorina, ki je nastala na stičišču alpskega
in dinarskega sveta. Meri približno 160 km²
oziroma 0,8 % slovenskega ozemlja. Je kulturna
pokrajina z enim od največjih kompleksov
mokrotnih travišč v Sloveniji, ki je od 2008
zavarovana kot krajinski park (Krajinski park
Ljubljansko barje), vključena pa je tudi v
evropsko omrežje posebnih varstvenih območij
Natura 2000.
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
Ekonomska i ekohistorija 47
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
2 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF
CHANGES IN THE LJUBLJANA MARSH
According to Gaspari1 and Velušček,2 the
Ljubljana Marsh was already settled in the
Mesolithic (ninth and eighth millennia BC),
when Mesolithic hunters set up temporary
dwellings. Around the fifth millennium BC,
this area is believed to have been settled by
pile-dwellers, so designated after the pilings
they raised above the shallow or intermittent
lake.3 In various periods, several pile-dwelling
cultures lived on the edges of the boggy area of
the Ljubljana Marsh.4 To date more than forty
pile-dwelling settlements have been discovered
in the Ljubljana Marsh; the last were found in
Ljubljana in 2009.5 The dwellings raised above
the shallow Holocene lake are on the UNESCO
list of cultural heritage sites since 2011 as part
of the »Prehistoric Fascine Dwellings around the
Alps« nomination.6 Based on pollen and wood-
type analyses conducted on the pile-dwellings,
Greif 7 believes that in their immediate vicinity
the pile-dwellers already influenced the forest,
which they even degraded into meadows in places.
Nonetheless the Romans were probably the first
to make major alterations to the landscape of the
Ljubljana Marsh through the presumed training
of the Ljubljanica and Iščica rivers; due to the
insignificant fall of the surface, the Ljubljanica
would have meandered greatly at the presumed
1 Gaspari, A. 2009: Zalog pri Verdu. Lovski tabor iz srednje
kamene dobe. In: Ljubljanica: kulturna dediščina reke.
Ljubljana, Narodni muzej Slovenije, pp. 42–47.
2 Velušček, A. 2008: Zgodovina Ljubljanskega barja. Nekoč
so na Ljubljanskem barju živeli koliščarji. In: Ljubljansko
barje – neživi svet, rastlinstvo, živalstvo, zgodovina in
naravovarstvo. Ljubljana, Slovenska matica, pp. 159–169.
3 Ibid. Velušček, A. 2009: Barjanska kolišča in sočasne najdbe
iz Ljubljanice. In: Ljubljanica: kulturna dediščina reke.
Ljubljana, Narodni muzej Slovenije, pp. 49–52.
4 Greif, T. 1997: Prazgodovinska kolišča Ljubljanskega barja.
Arheo, 18 (1997), p. 16.
5 Koliščarji na Ljubljanskem barju. URL: http://www.
ljubljanskobarje.si/uploads/datoteke/Zgibanka_koliscarji_
slo.pdf (21. 6. 2012).
6 Prehistoric pile dwellings around the Alps. URL: http://whc.
unesco.org/en/list/1363/ (21. 6. 2012).
7 Greif, T. 1997: Prazgodovinska kolišča Ljubljanskega barja.
Arheo, 18, p. 20.
2 ZGODOVINA SPREMEMB NA
LJUBLJANSKEM BARJU
Po mnenju Gasparija1 in Veluščka2 je bilo
Ljubljansko barje poseljeno že v mezolitiku (9.
in 8. tisočletju pr. n. št.), ko so si mezolitski lovci
na obrežju postavljali začasna bivališča. Okrog
5. tisočletja pr. n. št. naj bi območje poselili
t. i. koliščarji, ki so ime dobili po bivališčih
na »kolih«, dvignjenih nad plitvo oziroma
presihajoče jezero3. V različnih obdobjih naj
bi na Ljubljanskem barju živelo več kultur
koliščarjev, ki naj bi bile vezane na obrobje
zamočvirjenega območja Ljubljanskega barja4.
Doslej je bilo na območju Ljubljanskega barja
odkritih prek 40 koliščarskih naselbin, zadnja
leta 2009 v Ljubljani5. Njihova bivališča, na
»kolih«, dvignjena nad plitvo holocensko jezero,
so od leta 2011 vpisana v register Unescove
kulturne dediščine v sklopu nominacije
»Prazgodovinska kolišča okoli Alp«6. Na
podlagi pelodnih analiz in analiz vrst lesa v
koliščih Greifova7 meni, da so koliščarji v svoji
neposredni bližini že vplivali na gozd, ki so ga
ponekod degradirali celo do pašnikov. Kljub
temu pa so bili Rimljani verjetno prvi, ki so
z domnevno regulacijo Ljubljanice in Iščice
resneje posegli v samo pokrajino Ljubljanskega
barja, saj bi na domnevno reguliranih mestih
Ljubljanica zaradi neznatnega padca površja
1 Gaspari, A. 2009: Zalog pri Verdu. Lovski tabor iz srednje
kamene dobe. V: Ljubljanica: kulturna dediščina reke.
Ljubljana, Narodni muzej Slovenije, str. 42–47.
2 Velušček, A. 2008: Zgodovina Ljubljanskega barja. Nekoč
so na Ljubljanskem barju živeli koliščarji. V: Ljubljansko
barje – neživi svet, rastlinstvo, živalstvo, zgodovina in
naravovarstvo. Ljubljana, Slovenska matica, str. 159–169.
3 Prav tam. Velušček, A. 2009: Barjanska kolišča in sočasne
najdbe iz Ljubljanice. V: Ljubljanica: kulturna dediščina reke.
Ljubljana, Narodni muzej Slovenije, str. 49–52.
4 Greif, T. 1997: Prazgodovinska kolišča Ljubljanskega barja.
Arheo, 18 (1997), str. 16.
5 Koliščarji na Ljubljanskem barju. URL: http://www.
ljubljanskobarje.si/uploads/datoteke/Zgibanka_koliscarji_
slo.pdf (21. 6. 2012).
6 Prehistoric pile dwellings around the Alps URL: http://whc
unescoorg/en/list//   
7 Greif, T. 1997: Prazgodovinska kolišča Ljubljanskega barja.
Arheo, 18/1997, str. 20.
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
48
trained locations.8 According to Melik,9 the
Romans already trained the old Ljubljanica
riverbed in order to improve transport routes
across the Ljubljana Marsh rather than support
land cultivation. Specifically, there was a quarry
at Podpeč and the limestone extracted there was
used to build Roman Emona (the southern part
of todays Ljubljana).10 Part of the old Ljubljanica
riverbed between Notranje Gorice and Podpeč
can still be clearly seen today (Figure 1).
Only little is known about the Ljubljana Marsh
from the long centuries following Antiquity.
Melik11 reports that during this period the marsh
was difficult to access and that traffic mainly
took place along the rivers (the Ljubljanica,
Ižica, and Loščica). Oaks were densely planted
along the Ljubljanica from Ljubljana to Vrhnika
in order to protect the boatmen from the wind.12
8 Brenčič, M. 2008: Vode Ljubljanskega barja in njegovega
obrobja. In: Ljubljansko barje – neživi svet, rastlinstvo,
živalstvo, zgodovina in naravovarstvo. Ljubljana, Slovenska
matica, p 17.
9 Melik, A. 1946: Ljubljansko mostiščarsko jezero in dediščina
po njem. Ljubljana, SAZU, pp. 115–119.
10 Debeljak, I. 2010: Podpeč – nahajališče fosilov. In: DEDI
- digitalna enciklopedija naravne in kulturne dediščine
na Slovenskem. URL: http://www.dedi.si/dediscina/174-
podpec-nahajalisce-fosilov (15. 5. 2012).
11 Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja. Ljubljana,
Tiskovna zadruga, p. 12.
12 Ibid., p. 32.
morala močno meandrirati8. Po Melikovem9
mnenju naj bi bila tako regulirana že struga
stare Ljubljanice, Rimljani pa naj bi se regulacij
lotili z namenom izboljšanja prometnih poti po
Ljubljanskem barju in ne za potrebe obdelovanja
zemljišč. V Podpeči je bil namreč kamnolom
podpeškega apnenca, ki so ga uporabljali pri
gradnji rimske Emone10. Del nekdanje struge
Ljubljanice je med Notranjimi Goricami in
Podpečjo še danes dobro viden (slika 1).
V dolgih stoletjih po zatonu antike o
Ljubljanskem barju ne vemo veliko. Melik11
za to obdobje piše, da je bilo Barje težko
prehodno, promet pa je potekal po vodnih poteh
(Ljubljanica, Ižica, Loščica). Od Ljubljane do
Vrhnike so bili ob Ljubljanici na gosto zasajeni
hrasti, ki so čolnarjem služili kot zaščita pred
vetrom12. Le ob izlivu Iške v Ljubljanico je
8 Brenčič, M. 2008: Vode Ljubljanskega barja in njegovega
obrobja. V: Ljubljansko barje – neživi svet, rastlinstvo,
živalstvo, zgodovina in naravovarstvo. Ljubljana, Slovenska
matica, str 17.
9 Melik, A. 1946: Ljubljansko mostiščarsko jezero in dediščina
po njem. Ljubljana, SAZU, str. 115–119.
10 Debeljak, I. 2010: Podpeč – nahajališče fosilov. V: DEDI
- digitalna enciklopedija naravne in kulturne dediščine
na Slovenskem. URL: http://www.dedi.si/dediscina/174-
podpec-nahajalisce-fosilov (15. 5. 2012).
11 Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja. Ljubljana,
Tiskovna zadruga, str. 12.
12 Prav tam, str. 32.
Figure 1 The old Ljubljanica
riverbed near Notranje
Gorice (photo: Matija Zorn)
Slika 1 Stara struga
Ljubljanice v bližini
Notranjih Goric (foto: Matija
Zorn)
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
Ekonomska i ekohistorija 49
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
Only at the outfall of the Iška River into the
Ljubljanica did a linden tree or two grew, which
gave the village the name Lipe linden trees,’ and
the local owner of the estate the name Lipovec
(literally, ‘the one with linden(s)’).13 Apparently
floods caused many problems: Valvasor14
reported about two Italian master builders that
planned to excavate a canal as early as 1544, but
could not carry out the plan due to high costs.
A new attempt to drain the marshy area was
made by Franz Zorn von Mildenheim,15 who
had a ditch with drainage canals dug out in the
marshy area between Vič and Brezovica from
1762 to 1769 (Figure 2); the ditch is still named
Curnovec after him. Zorn’s estate is thus the
oldest cultivated and drained area of the once
boggy part of the Ljubljana Marsh. Good results
stimulated new meliorations, among which the
Gruber Canal was the most important; this was
dug from 1772 to 1782 between Castle Hill
in Ljubljana and Mt. Golovec.16 Large-scale
drainage to further settle and cultivate the once
boggy land was undertaken in 1825, when a
number of drainage canals and thousands of
drainage ditches were dug.17
Before the drainage, the settlement and
cultivation of land mainly took place on isolated
hills in the marsh; however, based on the 1825
cadastral maps, Melik18 concluded that mainly
wet pastures and meadows had been present in
the Ljubljana Marsh until the extensive drainage
and training activities, and on the marsh edges
common (dry) pastures and meadows, forests,
and fields with gardens and orchards were
13 Ibid., pp. 32–33.
14 Žargi, M. 2009. Regulacija Ljubljanice. In: Ljubljanica:
kulturna dediščina reke. Ljubljana, Narodni muzej Slovenije,
p. 163
15 Slovenski biografski leksikon: Franc Matej Zorn pl.
Mildenheim. Ljubljana, SAZU. URL: http://nl.ijs.si/fedora/
get/sbl:4811/VIEW/ (21. 6. 2012).
16 Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja. Ljubljana,
Tiskovna zadruga, p. 6.
17 Ibid., p. 7. Brenčič, M. 2008: Vode Ljubljanskega barja
in njegovega obrobja. In: Ljubljansko barje – neživi
svet, rastlinstvo, živalstvo, zgodovina in naravovarstvo.
Ljubljana, Slovenska matica, p. 21.
18 Melik, A. 1946: Ljubljansko mostiščarsko jezero in dediščina
po njem. Ljubljana, SAZU, p. 186.
rasla ena ali morda več lip, ki so kraju dale ime
Lipe, posestniku pa ime Lipovec13. Očitno pa so
imeli veliko težav s poplavami, saj Valvasor14
poroča o dveh italijanskih gradbenih mojstrih,
ki sta že leta 1544 načrtovala izkop kanala, a
zaradi visokih stroškov do izvedbe ni prišlo.
Osuševanje močvirnega območja se je ponovno
lotil Franc Matej Zorn pl. Mildenheim15, ki je v
obdobju od 1762 do 1769 na močvirnem območju
med Vičem in Brezovico dal izkopati jarek z
odvodnimi kanali (slika 2); po njem se jarek
še danes imenuje Curnovec. Zornovo posestvo
je tako najstarejše kultivirano in osušeno
območje nekdaj močvirnega dela Ljubljanskega
barja. Dobri rezultati so vzpodbudili nove
melioracije, med katerimi je najodmevnejši
Grubarjev kanal, v letih 1772–82 izkopan med
ljubljanskim Grajskim hribom in Golovcem16.
Najbolj velikopotezno pa so se osuševalnih del
z namenom nove kolonizacije in obdelovanja
nekoč močvirnega zemljišča lotili leta 1825, ko
so izkopali številne odvodne kanale in na tisoče
drenažnih jarkov17.
Poselitev in obdelava zemljišč je bila pred
osuševanjem vezana na osamelce (posamezne
vzpetine na Barju), na podlagi katastrskih
zemljevidov iz leta 1825 pa je Melik18 sklepal, da
so bili do obsežnih osuševalnih in regulacijskih
del na samem Barju prisotni predvsem mokri
pašniki in mokri travniki, na robnih delih pa
tudi navadni (trdinski) pašniki in travniki, gozd
ter polja z vrtovi in sadovnjaki19. Melik20 je
13 Prav tam, str. 32–33.
14 Žargi, M. 2009. Regulacija Ljubljanice. V: Ljubljanica:
kulturna dediščina reke. Ljubljana, Narodni muzej Slovenije,
str. 163
15 Slovenski biografski leksikon: Franc Matej Zorn pl.
Mildenheim. Ljubljana, SAZU. URL: http://nl.ijs.si/fedora/
get/sbl:4811/VIEW/ (21. 6. 2012).
16 Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja. Ljubljana,
Tiskovna zadruga, str. 6.
17 Prav tam, str. 7. Brenčič, M. 2008: Vode Ljubljanskega
barja in njegovega obrobja. V: Ljubljansko barje – neživi
svet, rastlinstvo, živalstvo, zgodovina in naravovarstvo.
Ljubljana, Slovenska matica, str. 21.
18 Melik, A. 1946: Ljubljansko mostiščarsko jezero in dediščina
po njem. Ljubljana, SAZU, str. 186.
19 Prav tam, str. 187. Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega
barja. Ljubljana, Tiskovna zadruga, str. 3.
20 Prav tam, str. 187–190. Prav tam, str. 3.
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
50
present.19 Melik20 also believed that the wet
pastures on the lee sides away from watercourses
or running water were actually raised bogs that
were difficult to pass through;21 in contrast,
he considered the wet meadows along the
watercourses that could at least occasionally
be mown for hay to be fens. Wet pastures and
meadows were more common in the eastern part
of the Ljubljana Marsh and they coincided with
the bottom of the former lake.22 The exceptional
alterations to the landscape made in only fifty
years due to drainage are shown in Figures 3 and
4. The first shows the land use in 1780 before the
extensive drainage activities, and the second the
land use in 1837 after the drainage.23
After the extensive drainage activities that
ended in 1829, new residents started to settle the
newly acquired land in 1830; they first settled the
19 Ibid., p. 187. Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja.
Ljubljana, Tiskovna zadruga, p. 3.
20 Ibid., p. 187–190. Ibid, p. 3.
21 Raised bogs entail land that is slightly raised above
the groundwater level, so that any contact with it is
excluded. The entire water regime of plants depends
on precipitation. The raised bog in the Ljubljana Marsh
developed 3,700 to 3,800 years ago (Martinčič, A. 1996:
Barja. In: Narava Slovenije, stanje in perspektive. Ljubljana,
Društvo ekologov Slovenije, p. 122).
22 Melik, A. 1946: Ljubljansko mostiščarsko jezero in dediščina
po njem. Ljubljana, SAZU, p. 195.
23 Hochenwart, F. 1838: Die Entsumpfung des Laibacher
Morastes. Ljubljana, Blasnik.
Figure 2 Area drained by
Franz Zorn von Mildenheim
on the Josephinian military
map* (1784–1787) a good
decade after the drainage.
Slika 2 Območje, ki ga
je osušil Franc Matej
Zorn pl. Mildenheim, na
Jožefinskem vojaškem
zemljevidu1 (1784–1787)
dobro desetletje po izsušitvi.
* Rajšp, V., Ficko, M. 1996:
Slovenija na vojaškem
zemljevidu 1763–1787,
vol. 2. Ljubljana,
Znanstvenoraziskovalni
center SAZU, Arhiv Republike
Slovenije, Sekcija 190.
tudi menil, da so bili mokri pašniki, v zatišnih
legah stran od vodotokov oziroma tekoče vode,
pravzaprav težko prehodno visoko barje21;
mokre travnike, vzdolž vodotokov, katere je
bilo vsaj občasno možno pokositi za seno, pa
je enačil z nizkim barjem. Mokrih pašnikov
in mokrih travnikov je bilo več v vzhodnem
delu Ljubljanskega barja, sovpadala pa naj bi z
dnom nekdanjega jezera22. Izjemno spremembo
pokrajine, ki se je zaradi osuševanja zgodila
v vsega pol stoletja, prikazujeta sliki 3 in 4.
Prva kaže rabo tal leta 1780 pred obsežnimi
osušitvami, druga pa rabo tal po osušitvah leta
183723.
Po obsežnih osuševalnih delih, ki so se
končala 1829, so se leta 1830 na na novo
pridobljena zemljišča začeli naseljevati novi
naseljenci; najprej so poselili območje današnje
Črne vasi, Ižanske ceste in Lip, leta 1838
območje Ilovice, najpozneje, šele leta 1871 pa
21 Visoka barja so zemljišča, ki so toliko dvignjena nad raven
podtalnice, da je izključen vsak kontakt z njo. Celoten vodni
režim rastlin je odvisen od padavin. Na Ljubljanskem barju
je nastalo visoko barje pred 3700–3800 leti (Martinčič,
A. 1996: Barja. V: Narava Slovenije, stanje in perspektive.
Ljubljana, Društvo ekologov Slovenije, str. 122).
22 Melik, A. 1946: Ljubljansko mostiščarsko jezero in dediščina
po njem. Ljubljana, SAZU, str. 195.
23 Hochenwart, F. 1838: Die Entsumpfung des Laibacher
Morastes. Laibach, Blasnik.
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
Ekonomska i ekohistorija 51
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
area of what is today Črna Vas, Ig Road (Ižanska
cesta), and Lipe. In 1838, they settled the Ilovica
area, and the Havptmance area was settled last,
in 1871.24 During the 1820s, the first roads were
built between the new settlements: the road from
Ljubljana to Studenec to Ig (Ižanska cesta), and
the road from Črna Vas to Podpeč). The railroad
between Ljubljana and Trieste, which crosses
the marsh and the Ljubljanica River, was built in
24 Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja. Ljubljana,
Tiskovna zadruga, pp. 17–21.
območje Havptmanc24. V 20. letih 19. stoletja
so bile med novimi naselbinami zgrajene prve
cestne povezave (cesta Ljubljana – Studenec –
Ig (Ižanska cesta), cesta Črna vas – Podpeč),
železniška proga Ljubljana – Trst, ki prečka
Barje in Ljubljanico pa leta 185725. Po letu 1845
se je na tem območju razmahnila šotna industrija
(začetki izkoriščanja šote sicer segajo že v drugo
24 Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja. Ljubljana,
Tiskovna zadruga, str. 17–21.
25 Prav tam, str. 7, 14.
Figure 3 Land use in the
Ljubljana Marsh in 1780 before
the drainage activities*
Slika 3 Raba tal na
Ljubljanskem barju leta 1780
pred osušitvenimi deli*
* Ibid.
Figure 4 Land use in the
Ljubljana Marsh in 1837 after
the drainage activities*
Slika 4 Raba tal na
Ljubljanskem barju leta 1837
po osušitvenih delih*
* Prav tam
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
52
1857.25 After 1845, the peat industry spread in the
area (although peat began being harvested as early
as the second half of the eighteenth century26); peat
was an important source of income on unfertile
land for the newcomers. Cutting, drying (Figure
5), and transporting peat became so lucrative
that in some places entire families worked on
it and thus had to cut back on cultivating their
land.27 Before it was intensively harvested, peat
was said to cover nearly 70% of the marsh
(approximately 110 km²; Figure 6); by the First
World War, the area covered in peat shrank to
approximately 14 km², and fifty years later peat
could only be found on 1.5 k in the marsh.28
Peat harvesting also resulted in further lowering
of the surface, which led to greater flood risk
and consequently drainage activities. The marsh
has never been completely drained and the idea
of creating one of the richest breadbaskets in the
country also fell through quickly. Drainage, with
its establishment of a network of canals, and peat
harvesting additionally altered the hydrological
conditions, which drastically changed the image
of the marshy landscape.
25 Ibid., pp. 7, 14.
26 Brenčič. M. 2008: Vode Ljubljanskega barja in njegovega
obrobja. In: Ljubljansko barje: Neživi svet, rastlinstvo,
živalstvo, zgodovina in naravovarstvo. Ljubljana, Društvo
Slovenka matica, p. 20.
27 Ibid., p. 23.
28 Trilar, T. 2001: Zgodovina Ljubljanskega barja. In: Narava
Slovenije: Ljubljansko barje in Iška. Ljubljana, Prirodoslovni
muzej Slovenije, p. 14.
polovico 18. stoletja26), ki je prišlekom na
sicer revni zemlji predstavljala zelo pomemben
vir dohodka. Rezanje, sušenje (slika 5) in
odvažanje šote je postalo tako donosen posel,
da so se ponekod temu posvetile cele družine in
so posledično zmanjšali obdelovanje zemljišč27.
Šota naj bi pred intenzivnim izkoriščanjem
pokrivala slabih 70 % Barja (ok. 110 km²;
slika 6), do prve svetovne vojne se je območje
s šoto skrčilo na ok. 14 km², še petdeset let
kasneje pa je bila šota le še na slabem 1,5
km² Barja28. Posledica rezanja šote je bilo
dodatno zniževanje površja, kar je pripeljalo
do večje poplavne ogroženosti in posledično
osuševalnih del. Do dokončne osušitve Barja
ni nikoli prišlo, ideja o eni najbogatejših žitnic
v tedanji državi pa se je tudi hitro izjalovila.
Osuševanje z vzpostavitvijo mreže kanalov
ter izkoriščanje šote so pomenili dodatno
spremembo hidroloških razmer, s tem pa so
tudi drastično spremenili podobo barjanske
pokrajine.
Ker na Barju, razen na osamelcih, pravega
gozda po Meliku29 ni bilo, so prišleki ob zadnji
26 Brenčič. M. 2008: Vode Ljubljanskega barja in njegovega
obrobja. V: Ljubljansko barje: Neživi svet, rastlinstvo,
živalstvo, zgodovina in naravovarstvo. Ljubljana, Društvo
Slovenka matica, str. 20.
27 Prav tam, str. 23.
28 Trilar, T. 2001: Zgodovina Ljubljanskega barja. V:
Narava Slovenije: Ljubljansko barje in Iška. Ljubljana,
Prirodoslovni muzej Slovenije, str. 14.
29 Melik, A. 1946: Ljubljansko mostiščarsko jezero in
dediščina po njem. Ljubljana, SAZU, str. 196–197.
Figure 5 Cutting and drying peat in
the Ljubljana Marsh (photo: archives
of the Ljubljansko barje Nature Park).
Slika 5 Rezanje in sušenje šote
na Ljubljanskem barju (arhiv
Krajinskega parka Ljubljansko barje).
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
Ekonomska i ekohistorija 53
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
According to Melik, 29 there was no proper
forest in the marsh, except on the isolated hills,
and so the newcomers that settled the area as part
of the last settlement could only buy drained land
in the former raised bog. Despite the numerous
ditches and canals, the farmers continued to
have major problems with flooding and tried
to remain solvent by harvesting and selling the
peat on their land. By the end of the nineteenth
century the people had harvested nearly all of
the peat and thus remained practically with
no natural resources (due to the boggy terrain,
29 Melik, A. 1946: Ljubljansko mostiščarsko jezero in dediščina
po njem. Ljubljana, SAZU, pp. 196–197.
kolonizaciji lahko kupili le osušena zemljišča
nekdanjega visokega barja. Kljub številnim
jarkom in kanalom, so imeli pri kmetovanju še
vedno veliko težav s poplavami, svojo gmotno
stanje pa so reševali s prodajo rezane šote, ki so
jo imeli na posestvih. Ko pa so konec 19. stoletja
izrezali skoraj vso šoto, so tamkajšnji prebivalci
ostali praktično brez naravnih virov (zaradi
zamočvirjenega terena je treba graditi hiše na
pilotih, šoto in les pa so potrebovali za ogrevanje
pozimi), zato so kmetje ob poteh in kanalih
Figure 6 The thickness of peat layers in the Ljubljana Marsh in 1881.* The peat in the marsh covered nearly 70%
of the land, usually 1 to 2 m deep, and in extreme cases even up to 6 m deep.**
Slika 6 Debelina šotnih plasti na Ljubljanskem barju leta 1881.* Šota je na Barju prekrivala slabih 70 % zemljišč,
običajno od enega do dva metra na debelo, a je bila debelina tudi do 6 m.**
*
Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja. Ljubljana, Tiskovna zadruga.
**
Trilar, T. 2001: Zgodovina Ljubljanskega barja. In: Narava Slovenije: Ljubljansko barje in Iška. Ljubljana, Prirodoslovni muzej
Slovenije, p. 13.
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
54
houses had to be built on pilings, and peat and
wood was used for heating in winter) and so
farmers began planting trees along the roads and
canals, and cutting off their branches for use.30 A
similar role of hedges in the cultural landscape
can also be found in Jezersko, where ashes are
planted in a single row along the border of the
land; their branches were cut off approximately
every three years and used as an important source
of winter fodder for sheep and goats.31 Due to
the lack of trees in the Ljubljana Marsh, every
neighbor contributed three to four posts for pilings
when someone was building a new house. People
mainly planted alders and birches, and with these
hedges a new element developed in the cultural
landscape, which continues to be an important
feature of the Ljubljana Marsh (Figure 7).
The past flood risk in the Ljubljana Marsh
has already been mentioned several times. This
risk remains great today (Figures 8, 10–11).
Among other things, it is connected with constant
subsidence, which in the past thirty years has
ranged from 8.8 to 24.1 mm/year in various parts
30 Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja. Ljubljana,
Tiskovna zadruga, p. 44.
31 Šmid Hribar, M., Lisec, A. 2011: Protecting trees through an
inventory and typology: Heritage trees in the Karavanke
Mountains, Slovenia. Acta geographica Slovenica, 51 (1), pp.
169–188.
začeli saditi drevesa, ki so jim obsekavali
veje30. Podobno vlogo mejic v kulturni
pokrajini srečamo tudi na Jezerskem, kjer so ob
zemljiških mejah zasajeni enoredni drevoredi
jesena; približno na tri leta so jim klestili veje,
ki so bile pomemben vir zimske prehrane
za drobnico31. Zaradi pomanjkanja dreves na
Barju je vsak od sosedov pri novogradnjah
prispeval po 3 do 4 kole za pilote. Sadili so
predvsem jelše in breze, v kulturni pokrajini
pa se je z mejicami pojavila nova prvina, ki
Ljubljanskemu barju še danes daje pomemben
pečat (slika 7).
Večkrat smo že omenili preteklo poplavno
ogroženost Barja. Ta ostaja velika tudi danes
(slike 8, 10–11). Mdr. je povezana z neprestanim
posedanjem, ki je v zadnjih tridesetih letih v
različnih delih Barja znašalo od 8,8 do 24,1
30 Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja. Ljubljana,
Tiskovna zadruga, str. 44.
31 Šmid Hribar, M., Lisec, A. 2011: Protecting trees through
an inventory and typology: Heritage trees in the
Karavanke Mountains, Slovenia. Acta geographica
Slovenica, 51 (1), str. 169–188.
Figure 7 The landscape
in the Ljubljana Marsh is
composed of a mosaic-
type network of meadows,
arable land, ditches, paths,
hedges, and isolated trees,
created through human
activity (photo: Viktor
Šmid).
Slika 7 Pokrajino na
Ljubljanskem barju
sestavlja mozaični preplet
travnikov, njiv, jarkov, poti,
mejic in osamelih dreves,
ki jih je s svojo dejavnostjo
ustvaril človek (foto: Viktor
Šmid).
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
Ekonomska i ekohistorija 55
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
of the marsh.32 The reasons for the subsidence
are both natural and anthropogenic. Among the
natural reasons, neotectonics (1.2–1.4 mm/year33)
and natural consolidation of Quaternary sediments
(1–2 mm/year34) are the most important; the
total natural subsidence amounts to 2 to 3 mm/
year. Subsidence due to anthropogenic reasons
is more rapid;35 these reasons include various
drainage and other hydrotechnical interventions,
32 Brenčič., M. 2008: Vode Ljubljanskega barja in njegovega
obrobja. In: Ljubljansko barje: Neživi svet, rastlinstvo,
živalstvo, zgodovina in naravovarstvo. Ljubljana, Društvo
Slovenska matica, p. 30. Cf: Breznik, M. 2000: Antropogeni
vplivi na posedanje in poplave Ljubljanskega barja. In: 1.
Šukljetovi dnevi: zbornik referatov. Ljubljana, Slovenska
geotehniško društvo. Ljubljana, Slovensko geotehniško
društvo, p. 99. Bračič Železnik, B., Veselič, M., Vodopivec, F.
2003: Subsidence measurements – marshland subsiding
owing to pumping the groundwater. RMZ - Materials and
Geoenvironment, 50 (1), p. 58.
33 Brenčič, M. 2007: Subsidence rate of Ljubljansko barje in
Holocene. Geologija, 50 (2), p. 463.
34 Breznik, M. 2000: Antropogeni vplivi na posedanje in
poplave Ljubljanskega barja. In: 1. Šukljetovi dnevi: zbornik
referatov. Ljubljana, Slovenska geotehniško društvo, pp.
98–99. Veselič, M. 2002: Analiza posedanja Ljubljanskega
barja zaradi črpanja vode v zvezi z načrtovanim vodnjakom
V-2Agl v vodarni Brest. In: Zaščita vodnih virov in vizija
oskrbe s pitno vodo v Ljubljani. Ljubljana, Fakulteta za
gradbeništvo in gedezijo, VO-KA, p. 86. Bračič Železnik, B.,
Veselič, M., Vodopivec, F. 2003: Subsidence measurements
– marshland subsiding owing to pumping the groundwater.
RMZ - Materials and Geoenvironment, 50 (1), p. 56.
35 Ibid.
Figure 8 The Ljubljana
Marsh is affected by frequent
floods.*
Slika 8 Ljubljansko barje
je podvrženo pogostim
poplavam*
* Šifrer, M., Orožen Adamič. M.
1985: Ljubljansko barje: obseg,
poplave in poselitev – 1 :
50.000. Ljubljana, Geografski
inštitut Antona Melika ZRC
SAZU. Komac, B., Zorn, M.
2011: Geografija poplav v
Sloveniji septembra 2010. In:
Neodgovorna odgovornost.
Naravne nesreče, 2. Ljubljana,
Založba ZRC, p. 64.
mm/leto32. Vzroki za posedanje so tako naravni
kot antropogeni. Med naravnimi izpostavljamo
posedanje zaradi neotektonike (1,2–1,4 mm/
leto33) in naravne konsolidacije kvartarnih
sedimentov (1–2 mm/leto34); skupaj znaša
naravno posedanje 2–3 mm/leto. Hitrejše pa
je posedanje zaradi antropogenih vzrokov35,
med katerimi izpostavljamo različne drenaže
32 Brenčič., M. 2008: Vode Ljubljanskega barja in njegovega
obrobja. V: Ljubljansko barje: Neživi svet, rastlinstvo,
živalstvo, zgodovina in naravovarstvo. Ljubljana,
Društvo Slovenka matica, str. 30. Podobno tudi: Breznik,
M. 2000: Antropogeni vplivi na posedanje in poplave
Ljubljanskega barja. V: 1. Šukljetovi dnevi: zbornik
referatov. Ljubljana, Slovenska geotehniško društvo, str.
99. Bračič Železnik, B., Veselič, M., Vodopivec, F. 2003:
Subsidence measurements – marshland subsiding owing
to pumping the groundwater. RMZ - Materials and
Geoenvironment, 50 (1), str. 58.
33 Brenčič, M. 2007: Subsidence rate of Ljubljansko barje in
Holocene. Geologija, 50 (2), str. 463.
34 Breznik, M. 2000: Antropogeni vplivi na posedanje
in poplave Ljubljanskega barja. V: 1. Šukljetovi dnevi:
zbornik referatov. Ljubljana, Slovenska geotehniško
društvo, str. 98–99. Veselič, M. 2002: Analiza posedanja
Ljubljanskega barja zaradi črpanja vode v zvezi z
načrtovanim vodnjakom V-2Agl v vodarni Brest. V: Zaščita
vodnih virov in vizija oskrbe s pitno vodo v Ljubljani.
Ljubljana, Fakulteta za gradbeništvo in gedezijo, VO-
KA, str. 86. Bračič Železnik, B., Veselič, M., Vodopivec, F.
2003: Subsidence measurements – marshland subsiding
owing to pumping the groundwater. RMZ - Materials and
Geoenvironment, 50 (1), str. 56.
35 Prav tam.
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
56
surface loads due to heavy construction (Figure 9;
during the construction of the southern Ljubljana
freeway loop (1983–1988), which crosses the
Ljubljana Marsh, the surface subsided by 2 to 3
m due to accelerated sediment consolidation, and
by 10 to 20 cm in the decade after its completion
(1988–1998)36), and pumping of fresh water (due
to which to date the marsh has subsided by 0.12
to 0.14 m, and in the next fifty years the land
is expected to subside by approximately 0.27
to 0.34 m37). In the past, subsidence caused by
man was primarily connected with drainage and
peat harvesting. From 1888 to 1958, the surface
subsided by 1 to 2.5 m.38
36 Gaberc, A. 2000: Napovedano in opazovano posedanje
Južne obvoznice. In: 1. Šukljetovi dnevi: zbornik referatov.
Ljubljana, Slovenska geotehniško društvo, pp. 121, 123, 125.
37 Veselič, M. 2002: Analiza posedanja Ljubljanskega barja
zaradi črpanja vode v zvezi z načrtovanim vodnjakom
V-2Agl v vodarni Brest. In: Zaščita vodnih virov in vizija
oskrbe s pitno vodo v Ljubljani. Ljubljana, Fakulteta
za gradbeništvo in gedezijo, VO-KA, pp. 89, 92. Bračič
Železnik, B., Veselič, M., Vodopivec, F. 2003: Subsidence
measurements – marshland subsiding owing to pumping
the groundwater. RMZ - Materials and Geoenvironment, 50
(1), p. 60.
38 Breznik, M. 2000: Antropogeni vplivi na posedanje in
poplave Ljubljanskega barja. In: 1. Šukljetovi dnevi: zbornik
referatov. Ljubljana, Slovenska geotehniško društvo, p. 99.
in druge hidrotehnične posege, obremenitve
površja zaradi obtežb ob gradnji objektov (slika
9; med gradnjo južne ljubljanske obvoznice
(1983–1988), ki prečka Barje, je bilo posedanje
zaradi pospešene konsolidacije sedimentov 2–3
m, v desetletju po izgradnji (1988–1998) pa 10–20
cm36) ter črpanje pitne vode (zaradi dosedanjega
črpanje pitne vode se je Barje posedlo za 0,12–
0,14 m, v prihodnjih petdesetih letih pa naj bi bili
posedki okrog 0,27–0,34 m37). V preteklosti je
bilo antropogeno posedanje povezano predvsem
z osuševanjem in izkoriščanjem šote. Med letoma
1888 in 1958 se je površje znižalo za 1–2,5 m38.
36 Gaberc, A. 2000: Napovedano in opazovano posedanje
južne ljubljanske obvoznice. V: 1. Šukljetovi dnevi: zbornik
referatov. Ljubljana, Slovenska geotehniško društvo, str.
121, 123, 125.
37 Veselič, M. 2002: Analiza posedanja Ljubljanskega barja
zaradi črpanja vode v zvezi z načrtovanim vodnjakom
V-2Agl v vodarni Brest. V: Zaščita vodnih virov in vizija
oskrbe s pitno vodo v Ljubljani. Ljubljana, Fakulteta
za gradbeništvo in gedezijo, VO-KA, str. 89, 92. Bračič
Železnik, B., Veselič, M., Vodopivec, F. 2003: Subsidence
measurements – marshland subsiding owing to pumping
the groundwater. RMZ - Materials and Geoenvironment, 50
(1), str. 60.
38 Breznik, M. 2000: Antropogeni vplivi na posedanje in
poplave Ljubljanskega barja. V: 1. Šukljetovi dnevi: zbornik
referatov. Ljubljana, Slovenska geotehniško društvo, str. 99.
Figure 9 Subsidence
at the Rudnik shopping
center in southern
Ljubljana (photo: David
Bole). In ten years, the
surface has subsided by
approximately 0.5 m.
Slika 9 Posedanje v
nakupovalnem središču
Rudnik v južnem delu
Ljubljane (foto: David
Bole). V desetih letih se je
površje znižalo za okrog
0,5 m.
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
Ekonomska i ekohistorija 57
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
The Ljubljana Marsh is characterized by
karst-type floods that occur two or three times
a year, but with a limited scope. They develop
slowly and last from a few days to several weeks.
These floods do not cause any damage because,
precisely due to their frequency, the settlements,
agricultural land, and major roads are located
on the slightly raised edges, dykes, and isolated
hills. In addition to karst floods, the marsh is
also threatened by flash floods caused by the
streams coming down from the Polhov Gradec
Hills northwest of the marsh.
The floods in the marsh are most common
in its central part and therefore this area, except
for the settlements of Lipe and Črna Vas, is not
populated. Five major floods occurred between
1885 and 1933 (November 1885, March 1888,
March 1895 (Figure 10), September 1926, and
September 1933), and later on also in the 1970s,
in November 1998, and September 201039 (Figure
11).
Despite frequent floods, urbanization
continues to constantly spread onto the marsh.
The number of people living on the (flood-prone)
northern edges of the marsh (southern Ljubljana
39 Komac, B., Zorn, M. 2011: Geografija poplav v Sloveniji
septembra 2010. In: Neodgovorna odgovornost. Naravne
nesreče, 2. Ljubljana, Založba ZRC, pp. 63–66.
Za Ljubljansko barje so značilne poplave
kraškega tipa, ki se pojavljajo dva- do trikrat
letno, vendar v omejenem obsegu. Nastopajo
počasi, trajajo pa od nekaj dni do več tednov. Te
običajne poplave ne povzročajo škode, saj so prav
zaradi njihove pogostnosti naselja, kmetijska
zemljišča in prometnice na nekoliko višjem
obrobju, na nasipih ali osamelcih. Poleg kraških
poplav pa Barje ogrožajo tudi hudourniške
poplave vodotokov iz Polhograjskega hribovja
severozahodno od Barja.
Poplave na Barju so najpogostejše v
njegovem osrednjem delu, zato je to območje,
z izjemo naselij Lipe in Črna vas, neposeljen.
Pet večjih poplav je bilo v obdobju 1885–1933
(november 1885, marec 1888, marec 1895 (slika
10), september 1926 in september 1933), kasneje
pa še v 70. letih preteklega stoletja, novembra
1998 in septembra 201039 (slika 11).
Kljub pogostim poplavam, pa se urbanizacija
stalni širi na Barje. Navedimo le, da se je
število prebivalcev na (poplavno ogroženem)
severnem robu Barja (južni rob Ljubljane) v
39 Komac, B., Zorn, M. 2011: Geografija poplav v Sloveniji
septembra 2010. V: Neodgovorna odgovornost. Naravne
nesreče, 2. Ljubljana, Založba ZRC, str. 63–66.
Figure 10 Flood in the
Ljubljana Marsh in 1895.
View from Ljubljana
Castle towards the
south.*
Slika 10 Poplava na
Ljubljanskem barju
leta 1895. Pogled z
Ljubljanskega gradu
proti jugu*
* Ilustrirani Slovenec, 1 (18)
(25. 4. 1925). Ljubljana.
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
58
outskirts) increased from several thousand to
more than 30,00040 in the past several decades.
3 PROTECTION OF CULTURAL
LANDSCAPE
Due to natural changes and human activity
that reflect the socio-cultural conditions of a
given society, cultural landscapes are subject
to change, which makes it impossible to
protect their actual state. This is also clearly
evident from the historical presentation above
of the most important human interventions in
the Ljubljana Marsh. After various plans to
economically exploit the Ljubljana Marsh based
on technological advancement fell through each
time, the first demands to protect this area began
to gain importance. The earliest record of such an
initiative goes back to 1920 in the Memorandum
of the Section for the Protection of Nature and
Natural Monuments, which the Section for the
Protection of Nature and Natural Monuments of
the Slovenian Museum Society submitted to the
40 Komac, B., Natek, K., Zorn, M. 2008: Geografski vidiki poplav
v Sloveniji. Geografija Slovenije, 20, pp. 83–84. Komac, B.,
Natek, K., Zorn, M. 2008: Širjenja urbanizacije na poplavna
območja. Geografski vestnik, 80 (1), pp. 35–36.
zadnjih nekaj desetletjih povečalo z nekaj tisoč
na prek 30.00040.
3 VAROVANJE KULTURNE POKRAJINE
Dejstvo je, da so kulturne pokrajine zaradi
naravnih sprememb in človekovih aktivnosti,
ki so odraz družbeno-kulturnega stanja
določene družbe podvržene spreminjanju, kar
onemogoča varovanje zatečenega stanja. To je
jasno razvidno tudi iz zgornjega zgodovinskega
prikaza najpomembnejših antropogenih posegov
na Ljubljanskem barju. Potem, ko so vsakič
znova splahneli različni načrti o gospodarskem
izkoriščanju Ljubljanskega barja temelječi na
tehnološkem napredku, so se začele uveljavljati
prve zahteve po varovanju tega območja.
Prva taka omemba se je pojavila že leta 1920
v Spomenici Odseka za varstvo prirode in
prirodnih spomenikov, ki jo je pokrajinski
vladi za Slovenijo v Ljubljani predložil Odsek
za varstvo prirode in prirodnih spomenikov
40 Komac, B., Natek, K., Zorn, M. 2008: Geografski vidiki
poplav v Sloveniji. Geografija Slovenije, 20. Ljubljana,
Založba ZRC, str. 83– 84. Komac, B., Natek, K., Zorn,
M. 2008: Širjenja urbanizacije na poplavna območja.
Geografski vestnik, 80/1, str. 35–36.
Figure 11 Flood in the
Ljubljana Marsh in September
2010 in the villages of Lipe
and Črna Vas southwest
of Ljubljana* (photo: Miha
Pavšek).
Slika 11 Poplava na
Ljubljanskem barju
septembra 2010 v vaseh Lipe
in Črna vas jugozahodno
od Ljubljane* (foto: Miha
Pavšek).
* Komac, B., Zorn, M. 2011:
Geografija poplav v
Sloveniji septembra 2010. V:
Neodgovorna odgovornost.
Naravne nesreče, 2. Ljubljana,
Založba ZRC, str. 64.
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
Ekonomska i ekohistorija 59
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
Slovenian regional government in Ljubljana.41 The
memorandum was realized only in 2008. The
southernmost raised bog in Europe and the former
peat sites are nearly gone. The peat, which caused
the »industrialization of the Ljubljana Marsh« and
whose supplies were estimated to be sufficient
for more than 659 years, was harvested in only a
few decades.42 Losing this non-renewable natural
source severely affected the livelihood of future
generations in this area from the economic and
ecological perspectives.
A few rare marshy flood meadows still
remain among the cornfields today in addition
to the numerous hedges, which offer additional
habitats to animal species in the Ljubljana Marsh
and also connect various habitats for plants
and animals; this significantly contributes to
increased biodiversity of this cultural landscape.
The rich landscape and biodiversity, which reflect
the interconnections between nature and human
activity, have contributed to the recognition of
individual areas as Natura 2000 sites. In the fall
of 2008, the entire Ljubljana Marsh was protected
as a »nature park« (fifth protection category
according to the IUCN).43
In addition to natural monuments, thanks
to the several millennia of human presence,
cultural heritage can also be found in this area.
With numerous prehistoric pile-dwellings,
archaeological heritage predominates in this
respect. In June 2011, the Ljubljana Marsh and its
prehistoric pile-dwellings near Ig as well as pile-
dwellings in five other countries (Switzerland,
Austria, France, Germany, and Italy), was included
on the UNESCO World Heritage List as the first
Slovenian cultural heritage unit.44
41 Odseka za varstvo prirode in prirodnih spomenikov:
Spomenica. Glasnik Muzejskega društva za Slovenijo, 1
(1920), pp. 69–75. URL: http://www.mko.gov.si/fileadmin/
mko.gov.si/pageuploads/publikacije/spomenica.pdf (21.
6. 2012). Skoberne, P. 1995: 75 let Spomenice Odseka za
varstvo prirode in prirodnih spomenikov. Ljubljana, Uprava
Republike Slovenije za varstvo narave.
42 Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja. Ljubljana,
Tiskovna zadruga, pp. 24–25.
43 Uredba o krajinskem parku Ljubljansko barje. Uradni list
Republike Slovenije 112/2008. Ljubljana.
44 Prehistoric pile dwellings around the Alps. URL: http://whc.
unesco.org/en/list/1363/ (21. 6. 2012).
pri Muzejskem društvu za Slovenijo41. Do
njene uresničitve je prišlo šele leta 2008!
Najjužnejšega visokega barja v Evropi in
nekdanjih šotišč skorajda ni več. Šoto, ki je
povzročila »industrializacijo Ljubljanskega
barja« in katere zaloge so ocenili na prek 659
let, so izrezali v pičlih nekaj desetletjih42. Z
izgubo tega neobnovljivega naravnega vira, so
z ekološkega in ekonomskega vidika zamajali
ter močno osiromašili preživetje naslednjih
generacij na tem območju.
Danes med njivami koruze ostaja še
nekaj redkih poplavnih barjanskih travnikov
in številne mejice, ki na Ljubljanskem barju
predstavljajo dodatne habitate živalskim
vrstam, poleg tega pa med seboj povezujejo
različne življenjske prostore rastlin in živali, kar
znatno prispeva k povečanju biotske pestrosti
te kulturne pokrajine. Bogata pokrajinska in
biotska pestrost, ki odražata preplet narave
in človekove dejavnosti sta prispevali k
prepoznanju posameznih območij za območja
Natura 2000, celotno Ljubljansko barje pa je
bilo jeseni 2008 zavarovano kot krajinski park
(V. kategorija zavarovanja po IUCN)43.
Poleg naravnih znamenitosti zaradi
večtisočletne prisotnosti človeka na tem
območju najdemo tudi kulturno dediščino, med
katero s številnimi prazgodovinskimi kolišči
izstopa arheološka. Prav Ljubljansko barje je
bilo junija 2011 s prazgodovinskimi kolišči
pri Igu ter kolišči v še petih državah (Švica,
Avstrija, Francija, Nemčija, Italija) kot prva
enota slovenske kulturne dediščine vpisana na
Unescov seznam svetovne dediščine44.
41 Odseka za varstvo prirode in prirodnih spomenikov:
Spomenica. Glasnik Muzejskega društva za Slovenijo, 1
(1920), str. 69–75. URL: http://www.mko.gov.si/fileadmin/
mko.gov.si/pageuploads/publikacije/spomenica.pdf
(21. 6. 2012). Skoberne, P. 1995: 75 let Spomenice Odseka
za varstvo prirode in prirodnih spomenikov. Ljubljana,
Uprava Republike Slovenije za varstvo narave.
42 Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja. Ljubljana,
Tiskovna zadruga, str. 24–25.
43 Uredba o krajinskem parku Ljubljansko barje. Uradni list
Republike Slovenije 112/2008. Ljubljana.
44 Prehistoric pile dwellings around the Alps. URL: http://
whc.unesco.org/en/list/1363/ (21. 6. 2012).
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
60
However, recently the present cultural
landscape has been increasingly threatened
by intensive farming oriented towards corn
monoculture. The intensification of agriculture
in this cultural landscape could be mitigated by
appropriately oriented financial measures; as
Gotovnik45 established, at least in the short term,
agricultural and environmental subsidies can play
an important role in preserving the traditional
cultural landscape because they provide an
important financial source to the farmers in the
protected areas. According to Miličič and Udo,46
this is only partly true for the Ljubljana Marsh,
but they nonetheless point out that in this area
agricultural support (through the preservation of
farming activities) has indirectly helped maintain
the traditional cultural landscapes.
5 CONCLUSION
Cultural landscapes are changing and the
Ljubljana Marsh is no exception. However, the
changes can at least partly be directed by prudent
spatial activities. Therefore, it is important
to recognize the value of a specific cultural
landscape and suitably adapt future activities
to it. This influences the future image of the
cultural landscape as well as the opportunity
for people to live together with it (or not). These
activities should be based on good knowledge of
the natural geographic features that determine the
area’s capacities. Both spatial use and residents’
lifestyles should also be adapted to this. Thus,
for example, from the perspective of sustainable
development, construction in flood-prone areas
is not environmentally, socially, or economically
justified.
The main tasks of the manager of the
Ljubljansko barje Nature Park will thus definitely
include resolving the conflict of interests between
45 Gotovnik, B. 2007: Vpliv izbranih kmetijsko-okoljskih plačil
na kulturno krajino. Bachelor’s thesis. Ljubljana, Biotehniška
fakulteta, p. 52. URL: http://www.digitalna-knjiznica.bf.uni-lj.
si/dn_gotovnik_barbara.pdf (22. 6. 2012).
46 Miličić, V., Udovč, A. 2011: Prostorska analiza spremembe
rabe tal na območju Krajinskega parka Ljubljansko barje od
vpeljave Kmetijsko-okoljskega programa (KOP) v letu 2007.
In: Razvoj zavarovanih območij v Sloveniji. Regionalni razvoj,
3. Ljubljana, Založba ZRC, p. 184.
Vendar pa sedanjo kulturno pokrajino
v zadnjem času vse bolj ogroža intenzivno
kmetijstvo, usmerjeno v monokulturo koruze.
Intenzifikacijo kmetijstva te kulturne pokrajine
bi utegnili omiliti ustrezno usmerjeni finančni
ukrepi, saj je Gotovnikova45 ugotovila, da lahko
pri ohranitvi tradicionalne kulturne pokrajine,
vsaj kratkoročno, odigrajo pomembno vlogo
kmetijsko okoljska plačila, ki kmetom v
zavarovanih območjih predstavljajo pomemben
finančni vir. S tem se za primer Ljubljanskega
barja le delno strinjata Miličič in Udovč46,
ki pa kljub vsemu poudarjata, da so na tem
območju podpore v kmetijstvu (preko ohranitev
kmetijskih dejavnosti) posredno pripomogle k
vzdrževanju tradicionalne kulturne pokrajine.
5 SKLEP
Kulturne pokrajine se spreminjajo in
Ljubljansko barje ni izjema. A spremembe
lahko vsaj delno usmerjamo s premišljenimi
dejavnostmi v prostoru. Zato je pomembno, da
prepoznamo vrednosti neke kulturne pokrajine
ter ji primerno prilagodimo prihodnje dejavnosti.
S tem vplivamo na prihodnjo podobo kulturne
pokrajine, pa tudi na možnost (ne)sobivanja
človeka v njej. Osnova dejavnostim bi moralo
biti dobro poznavanje naravnogeografskih
danosti, ki določajo zmogljivosti območja.
Temu pa bi se morala prilagoditi tako raba
prostora kot način življenja prebivalcev. Tako
npr. gradnja na poplavnih območjih ni z vidika
trajnostnega razvoja ne okoljsko, ne socialno ali
ekonomsko upravičena.
Ena glavnih nalog upravljavca Krajinskega
parka Ljubljansko barje bo tako gotovo
reševanje konflikta interesov med zelo
različnimi deležniki na Ljubljanskem barju
(kmetijstvo, turizem, naravovarstvo ipd.). Z
45 Gotovnik, B. 2007: Vpliv izbranih kmetijsko-okoljskih
plačil na kulturno krajino. Diplomsko delo. Ljubljana,
Biotehniška fakulteta, str. 52. URL: http://www.digitalna-
knjiznica.bf.uni-lj.si/dn_gotovnik_barbara.pdf (22. 6.
2012).
46 Miličić, V., Udovč, A. 2011: Prostorska analiza spremembe
rabe tal na območju Krajinskega parka Ljubljansko barje
od vpeljave Kmetijsko-okoljskega programa (KOP) v
letu 2007. V: Razvoj zavarovanih območij v Sloveniji.
Regionalni razvoj, 3. Ljubljana, Založba ZRC, str. 184.
EKONOMSKA I EKOHISTORIJA Volumen VIII, Broj 8, str. 45 - 61
Ekonomska i ekohistorija 61
M. Zorn - M. Šmid Hribar - A LANDSCAPE ALTERED BY MAN AS A PROTECTED AREA
extremely different stakeholders in the Ljubljana
Marsh (agriculture, tourism, nature conservation,
etc.). Suitable measures will have to be adopted
to protect the rich landscape diversity of this
area, and, on the other hand, development
will also have to be allowed to take place in
environmentally less significant areas.
ustreznimi ukrepi bo treba varovati bogato
pokrajinsko pestrost tega območja, po drugi
strani pa dopustiti razvoj na okoljsko manj
pomembnih območij.
Ekonomska i ekohistorija
Economic- and Ecohistory
Časopis za gospodarsku povijest i povijest okoliša
Journal for Economic History and Environmental History
Volumen VIII. / Broj 8
Zagreb - Samobor 2012.
ISSN 1845-5867
UDK 33 + 9 + 504.3
Nakladnici / Publishers:
Društvo za hrvatsku ekonomsku povijest i ekohistoriju
Society for Croatian Economic History and Environmental History
Ivana Lučića 3, HR - 10000 Zagreb
tel.: +385/1/61-20-148, fax: +385/1/61-56-879
sites.google.com/site/ekoekohist/
Izdavačka kuća Meridijani
p.p. 132, 10430 Samobor
tel.: 01/33-62-367, faks: 01/33-60-321
e-mail: meridijani@meridijani.com
www.meridijani.com
Sunakladnici / Co-publishers:
Međunarodni istraživački projekti: »Triplex Confinium - Hrvatska višegraničja u euromediteranskom
kontekstu« (voditelj prof. dr. sc. Drago Roksandić) i Triplex Confinium - »Hrvatska riječna višegraničja«
(voditeljica: doc. dr. Nataša Štefanec) Zavoda za hrvatsku povijest Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u
Zagrebu
Urednici / Editors-in-chief:
Hrvoje Petrić, Drago Roksandić
Uredništvo / Editorial Staff:
Dragutin Feletar, Željko Holjevac, Mira Kolar-Dimitrijević, Dubravka Mlinarić, Nenad Moačanin,
Hrvoje Petrić, Drago Roksandić, Mirela Slukan Altić, Ivica Šute
Međunarodno uredničko vijeće / International Editorial Board:
Drago Roksandić - predsjednik (Zagreb), Daniel Barić (Le Havre-Pariz, Francuska), Slaven Bertoša (Pula), Zrinka
Blažević (Zagreb), Tatjana Buklijaš (Cambridge, UK), Goran Đurđević (Zadar), Boris Golec (Ljubljana, Slovenija),
Hrvoje Gračanin (Zagreb), Paul Hirt (Tempe, SAD), Andrej Hozjan (Maribor, Slovenija), Halil I
˙nalcik (Ankara, Turska),
Egidio Ivetic (Padova, Italija), Silvije Jerčinović (Križevci), Karl Kaser (Graz, Austrija), Isao Koshimura (Tokio, Japan),
Marino Manin (Zagreb), Christof Mauch (München, Njemačka), Kristina Milković (Zagreb), Ivan Mirnik (Zagreb),
Mirjana Morosini Dominick (Washington D.C., SAD), Géza Pálffy (Budimpešta, Mađarska), Daniel Patafta (Zagreb),
Hrvoje Petrić (Zagreb), Lajos Rácz (Szeged, Mađarska), Gordan Ravančić (Zagreb), Marko Šarić (Zagreb), Mladen
Tomorad (Zagreb), Jaroslav Vencalek (Ostrava, Češka), Milan Vrbanus (Slavonski Brod, Zagreb), Frank Zelko
(Burlington, VT, SAD), Zlata Živaković Kerže (Osijek)
Prijelom / Layout:
Saša Bogadi
Za nakladnike / Journal directors:
Petra Somek, Hrvoje Petrić
ISSN:
1845-5867
Tisak i prijelom/ Layout and print by:
Bogadigrafika, Koprivnica 2012.
Adresa uredništva / Mailing adresss:
Hrvoje Petrić (urednik)
Odsjek za povijest, Filozofski fakultet
Ivana Lučića 3, HR-10000 Zagreb
e-mail: h.petric@ffzg.hr
ili Vinka Vošickog 5, HR-48000 Koprivnica
Tiskano uz potporu Ministarstva znanosti, obrazovanja i športa RH i Koprivničko-križevačke županije i
Gradskog ureda za obrazovanje, kulturu i šport Zagreb
Na naslovnici / Cover:
Morfološke promjene ušća Mure (Goran Šafarek)
Izdano u Hrvatskoj, za nakladnika Petra Somek
IZDAVAČKA KUĆA
... The first major alterations to the Ljubljana Marsh were made by the Romans, who partly changed the course of the Ljubljanica River, in order to improve the river's navigability, especially for transport between the quarry at Podpeč (southern edge of the marsh) and the settlement of Emona (Zorn, Šmid Hribar 2012). ...
... The peat was usually 1 to 2 m thick, and in extreme cases even up to 6 m thick. Peat harvesting resulted in lowering of the surface, which led to greater flood risk (Zorn, Šmid Hribar 2012). ...
Article
Full-text available
The city of Ljubljana lies at the intersection of various geomorphological regions that have strongly influenced its spatial organization. Prehistoric settlements were built on marshland, a Roman town was built on the first river terrace of the Ljubljanica River, and in the Middle Ages a town was built in a strategic position between the Lju-bljanica River and Castle Hill. The modern city absorbed all usable space between the nearby hills. This paper reviews some relief features in Ljubljana, their influence on the city's spatial development, and urban geoheritage. The results indicate new possibilities for urban geoheritage tourism in the Slovenian capital and its surroundings.
... Water management has a long tradition in Slovenia. For example, even the Romans regulated part of the Ljubljanica River in the Ljubljana Marsh in order to increase its navigability (Zorn and Šmid Hribar 2012). Two hundred years ago, extensive drainage work was carried out in the same area in order to reduce the risk of floods and to obtain farmland. ...
Chapter
Slovenia is characterized by an abundance of water in a great variety of forms. The river network comprises almost 28,000 km of watercourses (1.4 km/km²). However, these are not equally distributed because about 40% of Slovenia is karst and therefore almost without surface waters. Rivers from four–fifths of Slovenian territory flow several hundred kilometers to the Black Sea and from less than one fifth into the nearer Adriatic Sea. The few small natural lakes are either tectonic, glacial, or karst. The once-extensive swamps and marshes have shrunk significantly due to water regulation, and climate change has also caused the two Slovenian glaciers on Mount Triglav and Mount Skuta to shrink drastically. The population’s water supply relies heavily on groundwater. This is divided into aquifers with intergranular porosity, karst fissure porosity, and fissure porosity, all of which are threatened by pollution. Slovenia has a small share of coastal water: part of the Adriatic Sea’s Gulf of Trieste. Many parts of the country are threatened by different types of floods. The right to drinkable water is mentioned in the Slovenian constitution as a fundamental right.
Book
Full-text available
V knjigi je sedemnajst poglavij s področja naravnih nesreč. V poglavjih so opisana raziskovalna spoznanja ter primeri uporabe sodobnih tehnologij v primeru naravnih nesreč, s poudarkom na naravnih nesrečah v urbanem okolju. Knjiga vsebuje različne teme, kot so na primer potresi, poplave, snežni in zemeljski plazovi, vročinski valovi, mestni toplotni otok ter spletne aplikacije. /// The volume (‘Sustainable Urban Development and Natural Disasters’) contains seventeen chapters dealing with natural disasters. The chapters describe research findings and examples of the use of modern technologies in cases of natural disasters, with the focus on natural disasters in urban areas. The volume covers various topics such as earthquakes, floods, avalanches, landslides, heat waves, urban heat island, and web applications.
Chapter
Landscape diversity results in significant land-use differences between Slovenia’s landscapes. A high-quality set of land-use data covering the period from the early nineteenth century to the present is available for Slovenia, which makes it possible to study the impact of various factors on land-use changes. In the early nineteenth century, when subsistence farming predominated, farmers on each farm or in each village had to have enough arable land to produce food, enough meadows to feed the animals, and enough forest for firewood. Therefore, the variability in land use was much greater at the local level than today but smaller between regions. Afforestation prevails in the Alpine mountains, hills, and Dinaric landscapes of western Slovenia, grass overgrowth dominates in the hills of eastern Slovenia, farming intensification characterizes the Pannonian plains, and urbanization predominates on the coast and the Alpine plains. Compared to neighboring central European countries, the sociogeographical factors of land-use change in Slovenia diverged the most between 1945 and 1990, resulting in more fragmented land and dispersed settlement.
Chapter
Slovenia was struck by big floods in September 2010, which affected large parts of the country. This chapter presents a geographical analysis of the event through identifying the main causes, types, and consequences of floods. The floods were characterized by exceptionally high water levels, long duration, and great variety of flash floods, lowland (riverine) floods, karst floods, and urban flooding. Case studies are presented from the Ljubljana Marsh and Dobrepolje karst polje in central Slovenia. The legislative framework for flood risk protection in Slovenia is also presented along with text analyses of newspaper articles about the 2010 floods.
Article
Full-text available
The article analyses the rate of subsidence of Ljubljansko barje (the Ljubljana marshland) during Holocene. The analysis is based on the reinterpretation of data from pollen diagrams taken in the BV-1 borehole north of Podpeč and in the borehole BV-2 south of Črna vas. The reinterpretation was carried out on the basis of comparison with absolutely dated pollen diagrams in the sediment of Podpeško jezero and diagrams at other locations in Slovenia. The main markers, which the reinterpretation is based on, are the Pinus, the concentration of which starts decreasing at 11.2 ka, and the occurrence of Fagus and Abies. The concentration of Fagus starts rising at 8.7 ka, and Abies reaches its peak at 6.4/6.9 ka and at 3.0 ka. On the basis of relation between age and depth at which the sediment occurs a simple sedimentation-consolidation model was constructed, showing that the neotectonic subsidence of the Ljubljana Moore in Holocene was uniform. The subsidence in the area of borehole BV-1 was 1.24m/ka and the subsidence in the area of borehole BV-2 1.36 m/ka. The article also poses the hypothesis that the transition from younger Pleistocene into Holocene starts in the red-brown cohesive clay representing the paleo-soil and not with the beginning of sedimentation of lake chalk.
V: Ljubljansko barje: Neživi svet, rastlinstvo, živalstvo, zgodovina in naravovarstvo. Ljubljana, Društvo Slovenka matica, str. 30
  • M Brenčič
Brenčič., M. 2008: Vode Ljubljanskega barja in njegovega obrobja. V: Ljubljansko barje: Neživi svet, rastlinstvo, živalstvo, zgodovina in naravovarstvo. Ljubljana, Društvo Slovenka matica, str. 30. Podobno tudi: Breznik, M. 2000: Antropogeni vplivi na posedanje in poplave Ljubljanskega barja. V: 1. Šukljetovi dnevi: zbornik referatov. Ljubljana, Slovenska geotehniško društvo, str.
Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja. Ljubljana, Tiskovna zadruga, str
  • A Melik
Melik, A. 1927: Kolonizacija Ljubljanskega barja. Ljubljana, Tiskovna zadruga, str. 24-25.
Nenad Moačanin, Hrvoje Petrić, Drago Roksandić, Mirela Slukan Altić, Ivica Šute Međunarodno uredničko vijeće
  • Dragutin Feletar
  • Željko Holjevac
  • Mira Kolar-Dimitrijević
  • Dubravka Mlinarić
Dragutin Feletar, Željko Holjevac, Mira Kolar-Dimitrijević, Dubravka Mlinarić, Nenad Moačanin, Hrvoje Petrić, Drago Roksandić, Mirela Slukan Altić, Ivica Šute Međunarodno uredničko vijeće / International Editorial Board:
Vpliv izbranih kmetijsko-okoljskih plačil na kulturno krajino. Diplomsko delo. Ljubljana, Biotehniška fakulteta
  • B Gotovnik
Gotovnik, B. 2007: Vpliv izbranih kmetijsko-okoljskih plačil na kulturno krajino. Diplomsko delo. Ljubljana, Biotehniška fakulteta, str. 52. URL: http://www.digitalnaknjiznica.bf.uni-lj.si/dn_gotovnik_barbara.pdf (22. 6. 2012).
Prostorska analiza spremembe rabe tal na območju Krajinskega parka Ljubljansko barje od vpeljave Kmetijsko-okoljskega programa (KOP) v letu
  • V Miličić
  • A Udovč
Miličić, V., Udovč, A. 2011: Prostorska analiza spremembe rabe tal na območju Krajinskega parka Ljubljansko barje od vpeljave Kmetijsko-okoljskega programa (KOP) v letu 2007. V: Razvoj zavarovanih območij v Sloveniji. Regionalni razvoj, 3. Ljubljana, Založba ZRC, str. 184.