"Emmanuel Gustin" wrote in message
...
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

True enough. For example, in terms of forestation, Belgium lands number
88
in the world rankings, with an indicated loss of net forested area
between
1990 and 2000, while the US ranks 85, with a net increase demonstrated
in
the last decade

Allow me to point out that Belgium's population density
is about ten times higher than that of the USA: 10 million
people on about 30,500 square kilometers, while the USA
has 293 million people on 9.15 million square kilometers.
Only Rhode Island and New Jersey have more people per
unit of area than Belgium. It is not that remarkable that the
USA has more forested land.

Wahh. Maybe you need to consider population density one of the problems
*you* need to worry about more than you do the US election process then,
huh?


As for the loss of forested area, this trend is currently being
reversed, with a programme to buy back land and convert it
back into forest; something not wholly liked by farmers who
regard it as a waste of good arable land. The big problem is
to create an ecological system of some reasonable size out
of patches of scattered woodland.

Gee, and you missed (more accurately, you just snipped it without
acknowledgment, which last I knew does not make the point go away...) that
"environmental sustainability index" difference--US at 45, and Belgium at
125? Yep, you *do* have more pressing problems at home...

Brooks


--
Emmanuel Gustin
Emmanuel dot Gustin @t skynet dot be