Skip to main content
10 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Sep 17, 2016 at 17:15 answer added Isaacson timeline score: 1
Sep 17, 2016 at 8:38 comment added WYSIWYG This may be a better fit in Gardening & Landscaping
Sep 16, 2016 at 9:54 answer added Florian Neiss timeline score: 0
Sep 16, 2016 at 9:31 answer added Malhar Khushu timeline score: 3
Sep 16, 2016 at 8:41 comment added Kozuch Rephrased to "raise the natural value of land" - is that better?
Sep 16, 2016 at 8:41 history edited Kozuch CC BY-SA 3.0
raise the natural value
Sep 16, 2016 at 8:37 comment added bshane It removes the reference to a 'correct' wilderness. There is no such thing: natural areas may be managed towards specific goals, like maintaining the number of species present in the area, providing habitat for a key high-value species, or protecting key ecosystem services such as water retention. None of these are 'correct', but each outcome is measurable, and a 'desired' outcome can be defined in each case.
Sep 16, 2016 at 7:26 comment added Kozuch Your question seems to ask exactly the same so what is the reason for rephrasement?
Sep 16, 2016 at 3:38 comment added bshane I think the concept of a 'correct' wilderness is unclear. There are some landscapes which have been suddenly 'left alone' by humans, and a meaningful answer could consider the general ecological trends of being 'left alone' in this way. Examples include the landscape around the Chernobyl, or abandoned farms. But then the question would be 'in the absence of deliberate conservation interventions, what measurable ecological benefits (e.g., changes in invasive-species populations) arise from simply leaving land alone?' Would you be happy to edit your question into that form?
Sep 15, 2016 at 21:39 history asked Kozuch CC BY-SA 3.0