>>According to the results of a new paper, only 23 percent of our planet’s landmass exists in a near natural state of wilderness, with the rest having been directly degraded by human activities. Preserving the remaining wilderness regions could be a vital factor in battling climate change and safeguarding our species’ well-being.<<

>>The team identified five “mega wilderness” nations – the United States, Russia, Canada, Australia and Brazil – that were estimated to contain about 70 percent of Earth’s remaining wilderness, and so will be largely responsible for deciding the fate of Earth’s remaining wildernesses.<<

The situation is actually much worse than indicated, as much of this so-called wilderness has been severely compromised by other man induced activities. In Australia by introduced feral animals and plants, plus the lack of life-giving Aboriginal land management, which on their own, have led directly to local extinctions. Most of our animal extinctions have occurred in the dry inland, which I would thick have been included in the remaining 23% of wilderness. In one way or another I suspect similar man induced destruction occur in the other areas too.

https://newatlas.com/earth-surface-wilderness-climate-change-global-warming/57065/

does this figure exclude Antarctica?

>>According to the results of a new paper, only 23 percent of our planet’s landmass exists in a near natural state of wilderness

Nearly one quarter. I would have guessed less.

party_pants said:

does this figure exclude Antarctica?

No

AwesomeO said:

>>According to the results of a new paper, only 23 percent of our planet’s landmass exists in a near natural state of wilderness

Nearly one quarter. I would have guessed less.

If you read my paragraph I believe that to be the case. Just because there is undeveloped land, it does not mean it is in good condition to support native animals.

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

does this figure exclude Antarctica?

No

Sorry, yes it does exclude Antarctica. I misread your question.

PermeateFree said:

AwesomeO said:

>>According to the results of a new paper, only 23 percent of our planet’s landmass exists in a near natural state of wilderness

Nearly one quarter. I would have guessed less.

If you read my paragraph I believe that to be the case. Just because there is undeveloped land, it does not mean it is in good condition to support native animals.

So for animals it’s worse but trees somewhat better

AwesomeO said:

>>According to the results of a new paper, only 23 percent of our planet’s landmass exists in a near natural state of wilderness

Nearly one quarter. I would have guessed less.

Excluding Antarctica I would have guessed less, too.

I can’t see an easy way to define “wilderness” as there are a lot of places on Earth that have gone back to being wild after being changed by human occupation.

PermeateFree said:

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

does this figure exclude Antarctica?

No

Sorry, yes it does exclude Antarctica. I misread your question.

Probably not enough life on that ice cube to fill a space cruiser

mollwollfumble said:

AwesomeO said:

>>According to the results of a new paper, only 23 percent of our planet’s landmass exists in a near natural state of wilderness

Nearly one quarter. I would have guessed less.

Excluding Antarctica I would have guessed less, too.

I can’t see an easy way to define “wilderness” as there are a lot of places on Earth that have gone back to being wild after being changed by human occupation.

Lots of what appears to be wilderness on drives to the country in Australia, but I wonder if you stopped and walked in how much human intrusion you’d find, might just be rubbish blown/dumped there.

mollwollfumble said:

AwesomeO said:

>>According to the results of a new paper, only 23 percent of our planet’s landmass exists in a near natural state of wilderness

Nearly one quarter. I would have guessed less.

Excluding Antarctica I would have guessed less, too.

I can’t see an easy way to define “wilderness” as there are a lot of places on Earth that have gone back to being wild after being changed by human occupation.

I was in a lecture a few years ago when a part of Tassie’s South west wilderness was picked out as real wilderness. Within a short time of arriving a group of photography students had had a couple of asthma attacks and lots of people were starting to do skin eruptions.

Cymek said:

PermeateFree said:

AwesomeO said:

>>According to the results of a new paper, only 23 percent of our planet’s landmass exists in a near natural state of wilderness

Nearly one quarter. I would have guessed less.

If you read my paragraph I believe that to be the case. Just because there is undeveloped land, it does not mean it is in good condition to support native animals.

So for animals it’s worse but trees somewhat better

Trees not so much of a problems, but smaller plants like most herbs and the things insects feed from disappear very quickly. So once this vegetation and the insects go, so do the animals that feed off them. An entire region can be made largely barren due to this reason.

Cymek said:

mollwollfumble said:

AwesomeO said:

>>According to the results of a new paper, only 23 percent of our planet’s landmass exists in a near natural state of wilderness

Nearly one quarter. I would have guessed less.

Excluding Antarctica I would have guessed less, too.

I can’t see an easy way to define “wilderness” as there are a lot of places on Earth that have gone back to being wild after being changed by human occupation.

Lots of what appears to be wilderness on drives to the country in Australia, but I wonder if you stopped and walked in how much human intrusion you’d find, might just be rubbish blown/dumped there.

Even in the remotest Nationa park reserves, wilderness is a misnomer.

In NSW only 10% of the area is remnant vegetation and 5% of that area is the verge strip on the roadsides.

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

mollwollfumble said:

Excluding Antarctica I would have guessed less, too.

I can’t see an easy way to define “wilderness” as there are a lot of places on Earth that have gone back to being wild after being changed by human occupation.

Lots of what appears to be wilderness on drives to the country in Australia, but I wonder if you stopped and walked in how much human intrusion you’d find, might just be rubbish blown/dumped there.

Even in the remotest Nationa park reserves, wilderness is a misnomer.

In NSW only 10% of the area is remnant vegetation and 5% of that area is the verge strip on the roadsides.

That doesn’t sound right. Half of all the remnant vegetation in all of NSW exists in the verge strip?

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

Lots of what appears to be wilderness on drives to the country in Australia, but I wonder if you stopped and walked in how much human intrusion you’d find, might just be rubbish blown/dumped there.

Even in the remotest Nationa park reserves, wilderness is a misnomer.

In NSW only 10% of the area is remnant vegetation and 5% of that area is the verge strip on the roadsides.

That doesn’t sound right. Half of all the remnant vegetation in all of NSW exists in the verge strip?

It is a fact. Learn to live with it.

I just had a very quick squizz at a map of NSW, discounting the lump of Sydney I doubt you could get anywhere like 5% of the land area being road.

I think Australia needs a supercharged environment department that has real teeth, to rejuvenate abandoned areas that have been cleared and farm land no longer being used as farmland and to look at existing land to work out how many trees can exist on existing farms.

Federal and State governments need to focus on solutions, business and domestic sectors also need to focus on solutions.

AwesomeO said:

I just had a very quick squizz at a map of NSW, discounting the lump of Sydney I doubt you could get anywhere like 5% of the land area being road.

That’s the whole point. It is the remnant vegetation that is scarce, not the land area or the road area.

Cymek said:

PermeateFree said:

PermeateFree said:

No

Sorry, yes it does exclude Antarctica. I misread your question.

Probably not enough life on that ice cube to fill a space cruiser

Should be called Coldth.

Tau.Neutrino said:

I think Australia needs a supercharged environment department that has real teeth, to rejuvenate abandoned areas that have been cleared and farm land no longer being used as farmland and to look at existing land to work out how many trees can exist on existing farms.

Federal and State governments need to focus on solutions, business and domestic sectors also need to focus on solutions.

They need to make the jobs in enviromental regen rather than mining and farming sectors.

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

I just had a very quick squizz at a map of NSW, discounting the lump of Sydney I doubt you could get anywhere like 5% of the land area being road.

That’s the whole point. It is the remnant vegetation that is scarce, not the land area or the road area.

The figures I quoyed came from the NSW Roadside Environment Committee; Environmental guidelines for road construction
& maintenance workers handbook.

roughbarked said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

I think Australia needs a supercharged environment department that has real teeth, to rejuvenate abandoned areas that have been cleared and farm land no longer being used as farmland and to look at existing land to work out how many trees can exist on existing farms.

Federal and State governments need to focus on solutions, business and domestic sectors also need to focus on solutions.

They need to make the jobs in enviromental regen rather than mining and farming sectors.

Yes. and those jobs could be a mixture of paid workers with training who can supervise work for the dole workers, and voluntary workers.

Tau.Neutrino said:

roughbarked said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

I think Australia needs a supercharged environment department that has real teeth, to rejuvenate abandoned areas that have been cleared and farm land no longer being used as farmland and to look at existing land to work out how many trees can exist on existing farms.

Federal and State governments need to focus on solutions, business and domestic sectors also need to focus on solutions.

They need to make the jobs in enviromental regen rather than mining and farming sectors.

Yes. and those jobs could be a mixture of paid workers with training who can supervise work for the dole workers, and voluntary workers.

It should be yes

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

Even in the remotest Nationa park reserves, wilderness is a misnomer.

In NSW only 10% of the area is remnant vegetation and 5% of that area is the verge strip on the roadsides.

That doesn’t sound right. Half of all the remnant vegetation in all of NSW exists in the verge strip?

It is a fact. Learn to live with it.

I have no idea how accurate the numbers are, but it says that 5% of the remnant vegetation is verge strips, not 50%.

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

That doesn’t sound right. Half of all the remnant vegetation in all of NSW exists in the verge strip?

It is a fact. Learn to live with it.

I have no idea how accurate the numbers are, but it says that 5% of the remnant vegetation is verge strips, not 50%.

who mentioned 50%?

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

That doesn’t sound right. Half of all the remnant vegetation in all of NSW exists in the verge strip?

It is a fact. Learn to live with it.

I have no idea how accurate the numbers are, but it says that 5% of the remnant vegetation is verge strips, not 50%.

The way I read it, it is half of the 10% remaining so 50%.

“In NSW only 10% of the area is remnant vegetation and 5% of that area is the verge strip on the roadsides.”

AwesomeO said:

“In NSW only 10% of the area is remnant vegetation and 5% of that area is the verge strip on the roadsides.”

I make that to equal 0.5% of the total.

AwesomeO said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

It is a fact. Learn to live with it.

I have no idea how accurate the numbers are, but it says that 5% of the remnant vegetation is verge strips, not 50%.

The way I read it, it is half of the 10% remaining so 50%.

that is correct.

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

I have no idea how accurate the numbers are, but it says that 5% of the remnant vegetation is verge strips, not 50%.

The way I read it, it is half of the 10% remaining so 50%.

that is correct.

I have since changed my mind, I think they meant 5% of the remaining 10% not a split.

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

AwesomeO said:

The way I read it, it is half of the 10% remaining so 50%.

that is correct.

I have since changed my mind, I think they meant 5% of the remaining 10% not a split.

Between the farmers and the Esperance Shire, they are enthusiastically working towards zero.

PermeateFree said:

AwesomeO said:

roughbarked said:

that is correct.

I have since changed my mind, I think they meant 5% of the remaining 10% not a split.

Between the farmers and the Esperance Shire, they are enthusiastically working towards zero.

That is the main point. I did the roadside remnant veg surveys for the five shires of Carrathool, Griffith City, Hay, Leeton and Murrumbidgee. The farmers want the land for cultivation and the shire clears to within six inces of the fence iin many instances.

A THOUGHT FOR TODAY:
We have probed the earth, excavated it, burned it, ripped things from it, buried things in it, chopped down its forests, leveled its hills, muddied its waters, and dirtied its air. That does not fit my definition of a good tenant. If we were here on a month-to-month basis, we would have been evicted long ago. -Rose Bird, Chief Justice of California Supreme Court (2 Nov 1936-1999)

Boris said:

A THOUGHT FOR TODAY:
We have probed the earth, excavated it, burned it, ripped things from it, buried things in it, chopped down its forests, leveled its hills, muddied its waters, and dirtied its air. That does not fit my definition of a good tenant. If we were here on a month-to-month basis, we would have been evicted long ago. -Rose Bird, Chief Justice of California Supreme Court (2 Nov 1936-1999)

Like her mate Lilac Fish Rose Bird was a bleedin’ hippy.

Boris said:

A THOUGHT FOR TODAY:
We have probed the earth, excavated it, burned it, ripped things from it, buried things in it, chopped down its forests, leveled its hills, muddied its waters, and dirtied its air. That does not fit my definition of a good tenant. If we were here on a month-to-month basis, we would have been evicted long ago. -Rose Bird, Chief Justice of California Supreme Court (2 Nov 1936-1999)

A wise thought.

Another:

What have they done to the earth?
What have they done to our fair sister?
Ravaged and plundered and ripped her and bit her
Stuck her with knives in the side of the dawn
And tied her with fences and dragged her down

Jim Morrison.

Things we should be doing.

Teach emotional intelligence to everyone
Stop bully behavior across all of society around the world.
Reduce world population
Planting more trees
Bring industrial waste to close to zero as possible
Planting more ocean plants
Making companies more aware and responsible for the environment
Reduce creek, river and seawater pollution
Cleaning up plastics in the environment
Breeding more fish
Accepting that humanity has an effect on the environment
Accepting that humanity is reducing other lifeforms and contributing to their extinction
We need to stop species becoming extinct
We need to reduce our energy consumption by using smarter energy saving techniques
Building houses to a better energy saving standard
Bring manufacturing energy levels down
Focusing on more efficient engines and technologies for transport
Reducing domestic waste towards zero
Recycling 100 percent waste
Reducing emissions and pollution in the atmosphere
Eliminating non nonrenewables as much as possible
Stop coal mining
Reduce other mining operations.
We need to electrify out cars more and make transport more efficient, reducing time at traffic lights using smarter technologies.
Create more environment jobs worldwide
Build more solar power stations worldwide
Create more fish farms worldwide
Reduce micro plastics in the food chain and in the environment…
Work out accurate sustainable population levels.

There are heaps of other things to need to do.

A stern punishment could be we give companies 5 years to clean up pollution as much as possible, probably cannot completely eliminate it.
After that if you violate those guidelines you are forcible shutdown, sold off and employees and debtors paid off and nothing left for those in charge

We have just started to clean up the surface of our oceans

We have just started to clean up space junk.

PermeateFree said:

>>According to the results of a new paper, only 23 percent of our planet’s landmass exists in a near natural state of wilderness, with the rest having been directly degraded by human activities. Preserving the remaining wilderness regions could be a vital factor in battling climate change and safeguarding our species’ well-being.<<

>>The team identified five “mega wilderness” nations – the United States, Russia, Canada, Australia and Brazil – that were estimated to contain about 70 percent of Earth’s remaining wilderness, and so will be largely responsible for deciding the fate of Earth’s remaining wildernesses.<<

The situation is actually much worse than indicated, as much of this so-called wilderness has been severely compromised by other man induced activities. In Australia by introduced feral animals and plants, plus the lack of life-giving Aboriginal land management, which on their own, have led directly to local extinctions. Most of our animal extinctions have occurred in the dry inland, which I would thick have been included in the remaining 23% of wilderness. In one way or another I suspect similar man induced destruction occur in the other areas too.

https://newatlas.com/earth-surface-wilderness-climate-change-global-warming/57065/

It occurred to me that “wilderness” is most important for animals that migrate, particularly those that migrate at night using the light of the Moon for direction. This includes a wide suite of insects, not just moths but also beetles, lacewings etc. It also includes larger animals that migrate at night using the Moon including frogs, fish, turtles, tiger, leopard, etc.

That gives a possible alternative definition for “wilderness” as being an area completely free from artificial lighting. And that allows us to use this map to identify wilderness areas. This image and larger versions of it.

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width_feature/public/images/324350main_11_full.jpg.

From OP link: “The team identified five mega wilderness nations – the United States, Russia, Canada, Australia and Brazil – that were estimated to contain about 70 percent of Earth’s remaining wilderness”.

Well, certainly not the United States, it has SFA wilderness, other than in Alaska. Places with mega wilderness are all central Africa, Australia, northern Canada, northern Russia, Greenland, the Amazon, and an area containing the Himalayas, western China, Mongolia and Kazakhstan.

mollwollfumble said:

PermeateFree said:

>>According to the results of a new paper, only 23 percent of our planet’s landmass exists in a near natural state of wilderness, with the rest having been directly degraded by human activities. Preserving the remaining wilderness regions could be a vital factor in battling climate change and safeguarding our species’ well-being.<<

>>The team identified five “mega wilderness” nations – the United States, Russia, Canada, Australia and Brazil – that were estimated to contain about 70 percent of Earth’s remaining wilderness, and so will be largely responsible for deciding the fate of Earth’s remaining wildernesses.<<

The situation is actually much worse than indicated, as much of this so-called wilderness has been severely compromised by other man induced activities. In Australia by introduced feral animals and plants, plus the lack of life-giving Aboriginal land management, which on their own, have led directly to local extinctions. Most of our animal extinctions have occurred in the dry inland, which I would thick have been included in the remaining 23% of wilderness. In one way or another I suspect similar man induced destruction occur in the other areas too.

https://newatlas.com/earth-surface-wilderness-climate-change-global-warming/57065/

It occurred to me that “wilderness” is most important for animals that migrate, particularly those that migrate at night using the light of the Moon for direction. This includes a wide suite of insects, not just moths but also beetles, lacewings etc. It also includes larger animals that migrate at night using the Moon including frogs, fish, turtles, tiger, leopard, etc.

That gives a possible alternative definition for “wilderness” as being an area completely free from artificial lighting. And that allows us to use this map to identify wilderness areas. This image and larger versions of it.

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width_feature/public/images/324350main_11_full.jpg.

From OP link: “The team identified five mega wilderness nations – the United States, Russia, Canada, Australia and Brazil – that were estimated to contain about 70 percent of Earth’s remaining wilderness”.

Well, certainly not the United States, it has SFA wilderness, other than in Alaska. Places with mega wilderness are all central Africa, Australia, northern Canada, northern Russia, Greenland, the Amazon, and an area containing the Himalayas, western China, Mongolia and Kazakhstan.

Your premise is not so good. Just because sub-Saharan Africa has few lights does not make it a wilderness. Most of it is anything but.