Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps

Re:Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps by new2628 on Friday July 03, 2020 @03:20PM (#23726688)

I know that this data is used in good ways. It just points at the greater problem that wildlife is about to exist only in a "managed", semi-wild way.

In my mind "left alone and given sufficient space" is better than "protected and managed". Unfortunately the choice is most often not between these two, but between "protected and managed" and "destroyed".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps by SECProto on Friday July 03, 2020 @04:34PM (#23727280)

I absolutely agree that "left alone and given sufficient space" would be better. But that would involve some pretty serious limits on land development (whether it be for mining, forestry, housing, recreation) - or actually, a lot of land that has already been developed would likely need to be undeveloped.

[ Parent | on HN ]