My guess is that about 75% of land area in the Maldives is forested. Unless there's some definition of forest that requires an area that would disqualify almost all of its islands.
I think the Marshall islands should be removed for the same reason. There's very little land, but near every atoll that's more than a sand bank seems to be forested.
I looked at Vatican City on satellite maps too...I don't think carefully planted trees and gardens count as "forest." I would say that Vatican should still be a big fat zero. Or at least still be on the list somewhere.
doesnt matter if it doesnt have enough space, there is nothing in the description about that! so you removed legitimate answers therefore this quiz should not count towards the points system...
I tried "Vatican" "The Vatican" "Holy See" and every other combination I could think of. I haven't been there but I assume the Pope takes his walks through acres and acres of rolling forests...
I do like the fact that if we're counting planted trees as forest, Vatican's number rises by ~0.0045% every Christmas when they put up the Vatican Christmas tree.
Some of us don't read the comments before we take quizzes. Are you going to put the list of exceptions up top or do you plan on just replying to people with "see above comments"? ;)
There's no point in bringing up the same argument again and again when it has been mentioned many times above. As a general rule you should just read comments before you type yours so you don't state something twice.
Shocked about Pakistan. How does a large country with one of the worlds great river basins have that little forest? Especially considering none of it's neighbors are on the list. Did Pakistan at one time have forests and they got cut down?
Well, Egypt also has the Nile but virtually no forests. Rivers create arable land, which is usually farmed, not forested. Without the Indus, Pakistan would probably have mostly a desert climate.
Yeah, if you look at the Indus River Basin, mostly based in Punjab, you'll see it's mostly flatlands and plains--ideal for farming, but not forests. Certain parts of northern Pakistan are very mountainous while the southwest is mostly desert. For sure Pakistan has a lot of geographic diversity, but this doesn't equate to having forest.
Please keep in mind the source, the UN FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). I've worked for some years on issues involving ag stats, enough to know that theirs are a running joke (as is the organization in general).
Surprised not to see Namibia or Australia. Granted I've never been to either, it seems they're always portrayed as mostly desert wastelands. Also interesting fact: Iceland was 97% forest when first settled, but has now fallen to below 0.5% due to deforestation
Confused that vatican, singapore and monaco not included. I kept thinking I had spelled them wrong. Would be nice if it was in the instructions that cities or certain countries are eliminated for whatever reason.
I didn't even think of those countries for some reason--just focused on desert countries. But I agree that they should either be included or there should be a note in the description telling us that they are excluded.
Just please add the Vatican, Monaco, Nauru, and San Marino back. There is no reason whatsoever for them not to be on here. And yes, I read the above comments, and have yet to see a reason as to why they were removed.
San Marino - mostly houses and farmland, but also plenty of trees in between and also a few larger patches
Monaco - dubious IMO, there is apparently some steeper land with trees, but I don't think it reaches 1.88% without counting the parks ...
Vatican - it does seem to include also some forest. Wikipedia says: Today's Vatican Gardens are spread over nearly 23 hectares (57 acres), they contain a variety of medieval fortifications, buildings and monuments from the 9th century to the present day, set among vibrant flower beds and topiary, green lawns and a 3 hectares (7.4 acres) patch of forest.
I know. With such a large land area and close proximity to Russia you’d think that they would have some forest. But then again, under Kazakhstan is Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Kyrgyzstan who all have to go to one, dryer up lake to get water.
Got my first country with about a minute to go. Then 11 more! What I don't understand is why it's Mauretania but not Senegal, why Algeria & Libya but not Tunisia, why Togo and not Benin, etc. etc. Just one of those random things I suppose.
I will never understand why these quizzes completely omit Greenland. It should either be counted as its own country or counted as a part of Denmark.
If you did that here, based on the FAOSTAT data for 2020, then ~0.284% of the Kingdom of Denmark is forested. 836000 square miles of land can't just disappear for these quizzes
Iceland became completely deforested over the last 1000 years of human occupation, largely because it was so isolated, so people relied on local timber. There are some efforts are reforestation now, but they're in their infancy an the country is still mostly devoid of trees.
Svalbard has plenty of polar willow trees. They're all under 9 cms in height though (and I'd say that almost all of them are less than half that tall).
I'm not amazed that Pakistan has very little forest, but I am amazed that it has even less than the UAE. I don't recall seeing any forests in the UAE when I was there. I remember seeing city and desert and very little else.
(Whereas Qatar, right in between them and the Maldives on the list, is truly without trees almost everywhere.)
with 0% forrest
Nauru - clearly more than 2% forest, here are also some photos from the ground
San Marino - mostly houses and farmland, but also plenty of trees in between and also a few larger patches
Monaco - dubious IMO, there is apparently some steeper land with trees, but I don't think it reaches 1.88% without counting the parks ...
Vatican - it does seem to include also some forest. Wikipedia says: Today's Vatican Gardens are spread over nearly 23 hectares (57 acres), they contain a variety of medieval fortifications, buildings and monuments from the 9th century to the present day, set among vibrant flower beds and topiary, green lawns and a 3 hectares (7.4 acres) patch of forest.
It looks like a lot of the towns have trees as well, but most look to be planted so probably wouldn't count towards forest area.
If you did that here, based on the FAOSTAT data for 2020, then ~0.284% of the Kingdom of Denmark is forested. 836000 square miles of land can't just disappear for these quizzes