whether your action would help conserve biodiversity,at local,state and/or global level? how?
Answers
Answered by
3
Actually , if hadn't been for technological developments after the 18th century , biodiversity would still be conserved , except for the hunting of course. (that would still continue unregulated without government interference)
Preventing Slash and Burn agriculture , Stopping the destruction of Mangroves, and protecting Rain forests from palm tree plantations are the things that first come to mind. If there were lesser habitat destruction, there would be automatic balancing by nature with respect to protecting the fauna.
Do not promote tourism in areas with tribal people - mainly parts like the north-east of India , andaman and nicobar islands and such places. Tourists are a big menace actually to the biodiversity because they are mostly irresponsible, dangerous and callous to the serenity and the beauty of the places and often pollute and interfere with the local environment. But people will argue that tourism is a main source of income for the growing economies of many places. To them I say, "If you don't regulate the people, you won't have tourist spots after a few years." Judicial bodies should step forth to protect these areas.
Giving land clearance for highway projects, industrial and mining plants have also caused loss of biodiversity in INDIA . However , no simple solution can be found to do them both as in the case of tourism. You can't have regulated highways or mining pits in ecologically sensitive parts of the globe.
There are a lot more , but these were the primary problems in my view in INDIA. There is something good though. There is no coal mining in Orssa and some parts of the "northern circars" because of the presence of dense forests and environmental regulations to not to clear the forests. That I why the minister for New and Renewable Energy , Mr.Farooq Abdullah said that we import coal from Indonesia, South Africa and Thailand(I think) even though we have a lot of coal reserves ourselves.
I believe I answered the question a little.
And pls follow me
Preventing Slash and Burn agriculture , Stopping the destruction of Mangroves, and protecting Rain forests from palm tree plantations are the things that first come to mind. If there were lesser habitat destruction, there would be automatic balancing by nature with respect to protecting the fauna.
Do not promote tourism in areas with tribal people - mainly parts like the north-east of India , andaman and nicobar islands and such places. Tourists are a big menace actually to the biodiversity because they are mostly irresponsible, dangerous and callous to the serenity and the beauty of the places and often pollute and interfere with the local environment. But people will argue that tourism is a main source of income for the growing economies of many places. To them I say, "If you don't regulate the people, you won't have tourist spots after a few years." Judicial bodies should step forth to protect these areas.
Giving land clearance for highway projects, industrial and mining plants have also caused loss of biodiversity in INDIA . However , no simple solution can be found to do them both as in the case of tourism. You can't have regulated highways or mining pits in ecologically sensitive parts of the globe.
There are a lot more , but these were the primary problems in my view in INDIA. There is something good though. There is no coal mining in Orssa and some parts of the "northern circars" because of the presence of dense forests and environmental regulations to not to clear the forests. That I why the minister for New and Renewable Energy , Mr.Farooq Abdullah said that we import coal from Indonesia, South Africa and Thailand(I think) even though we have a lot of coal reserves ourselves.
I believe I answered the question a little.
And pls follow me
Answered by
1
Answer:
upper answer is correct mark me brainlist
Similar questions