Pertaining to the article how CA uses more resources than it produces, I was distraught to see Canada referred to as not being a lush, forested area. Not to be cantankerous, but Canada…it’s pretty damn forested. It’s the second largest landmass and its population is a modest 32 million people, as opposed to the United States with 300 million. I cannot defend its method of clear-cutting, but there are over 150 national parks (each dedicating more than 6000 km^2 to protection…they also have provincial parks). Canada also contains over a third of the world’s boreal forest, one fifth of the world’s temperature rainforest, and a tenth of the total global forest cover. (Global Forest Watch, 2007). It just seems too conclusive for this article to state that Canada barely has any trees remaining.
2 comments:
Pertaining to the article how CA uses more resources than it produces, I was distraught to see Canada referred to as not being a lush, forested area. Not to be cantankerous, but Canada…it’s pretty damn forested. It’s the second largest landmass and its population is a modest 32 million people, as opposed to the United States with 300 million. I cannot defend its method of clear-cutting, but there are over 150 national parks (each dedicating more than 6000 km^2 to protection…they also have provincial parks). Canada also contains over a third of the world’s boreal forest, one fifth of the world’s temperature rainforest, and a tenth of the total global forest cover. (Global Forest Watch, 2007). It just seems too conclusive for this article to state that Canada barely has any trees remaining.
Good eye! Thanks!! :-)
Post a Comment