How does Russia look compared to other countries with tangible forest reserves? Scientists of the All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Forestry and Forestry Mechanization (VNIILM) took care of this issue, who conducted their own analysis of the processes taking place in Russia and abroad. The scientists used the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) Global Forest Resources Assessment databases as the basis for the study.
The list of countries selected for comparison with Russia includes 14 states and reflects the diversity of natural and climatic conditions. Of course, many of the data underlying the study cause controversy in the scientific world, since the calculation methods used in different countries often do not coincide, and therefore do not allow for correct analysis. comparative analysis. It is no coincidence that VNIILM specialists turned to the database of an international organization, which, although not indisputable, makes it possible to compare different countries in unified system coordinates. The result is the following picture.
The total area of the Earth's forests is just over 4 billion hectares. The top three richest forest powers are Russia, Brazil and Canada. Moreover, the forested areas in Russia are 1.5 times the area of the Brazilian jungle.
If we talk about how forest areas are changing, then one of the most dynamic countries is China. From 2000 to 2010, the area of forests has increased here by 30 million hectares. But Brazil during this period lost 26 million hectares of forest. the Russian Federation demonstrates rare stability: over the past 20 years, the numbers have not changed either in plus or minus.
“The high level of wood imports to China has increased the pressure on natural forests in neighboring countries,” Russian scientists say. As a result, in 2000-2005, the countries of Southeast Asia lost more than 14 million hectares of virgin forests, which were replaced by forest plantations. According to forecasts, if nothing changes, then in 10 years the virgin forests of Southeast Asia may be completely destroyed.
The universal assessment of forest resources at the national level is forest cover. Finland boasts the highest forest cover (73%), followed by Sweden (69%) and Malaysia and Brazil (62%). The situation is worse than others in Uruguay (10%). Russia, with 49% forest coverage, is in the middle of the list. Over the past 20 years, forest cover has declined in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Indonesia and Malaysia. In other countries, on the contrary, this indicator has increased, especially over the past five years.
According to the latest estimates, the global wood supply is 527 billion cubic meters. Brazil leads with a reserve of 126 billion cubic meters, followed by Russia (81.5 billion cubic meters) and the United States (47 billion cubic meters). These three leaders account for 60 percent of the world's timber resources. While in other countries this figure shows stability, in Brazil over the past five years it has increased by 64 percent. VNIILM specialists attribute this to the completion of the forest inventory process, carried out according to the FAO methodology. Most likely, experts from VNIILM believe that after the completion of the first stage of the state inventory of forests in Russia, this indicator will also rise.
The largest wood stock per 1 hectare was recorded in New Zealand (434 cubic meters), Germany (315 cubic meters) and Brazil (243 cubic meters). Russia with an indicator of 101 cubic meters per 1 hectare occupies the ninth position. According to Russian scientists, the excellent school of forestry and the high quality of forest plantations created after the Second World War allowed Germany to break into second place.
The conservation of biological diversity is usually associated with the area of specially protected natural areas. In general, the area of protected areas on the planet increased from 1990 to 2010 by 94 million hectares. But, for example, in Indonesia and Malaysia, on the contrary, it has decreased. The largest forest areas under state protection are in Brazil, where protected areas cover 89.5 million hectares. In Russia, according to international organizations, protected areas occupy 17.5 million hectares. But these are only parks, reserves and reserves federal significance. If we take into account all the forests with limited forest use, this is almost 25 percent of the entire forest fund area of Russia.
The state of the forest industry is characterized by the volume of timber harvesting. For many years, the United States has been the leader in this matter. Against the backdrop of global economic crisis in America and Europe, there is a drop in logging, with the United States falling by 59 percent. The crisis has affected the change of leader, which in 2010 was India with a logging figure of 332 million cubic meters. Slightly behind, the United States is in second place, while Russia traditionally holds the fifth position.
But if everything is not so bad with the volumes, then the efficiency of logging is “lame” on both legs. While in Uruguay 6.9 cubic meters of wood are removed from one hectare, in Germany and India - 4.9 cubic meters, in Sweden 2.6 cubic meters, in Finland 2.3, in Russia - only 0.2 cubic meters. Only Australia demonstrates such a low efficiency indicator. According to Russian scientists, main reason similar situation— a limited number of economically interesting forests, which leads to the need to increase the area of logging.
But in some ways we are still the first. According to the FAO, it is Russia that has the largest area of forests (71.4 million hectares) that perform protective functions. China (more than 60 million hectares) and Brazil (42 million hectares) help us maintain the ecological well-being of the planet.
Graduated from the biological faculty of Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov. He defended his Ph.D. thesis on the forests of the Basegi reserve. Since 1997, a staff member of Greenpeace in Russia and head of the forestry department. News editor of the Greenpeace Forest Forum, the most important independent discussion platform for Russian forestry. He worked on the creation and development of the concept of the first maps of the largest tracts of wild forest nature, sought the creation of the Kalevalsky and Onega Pomorie national parks. Fights destructive tendencies in the Russian forest legislation and forest fire lies.
6 minutes 06/07/2018
It was this myth that brought the greatest troubles to our forestry, becoming the ideological basis for the development of a new Forest Code in 2003-2006, which caused incalculable troubles to the forest sector, led to fire disasters of the last three years, the loss of several hundred thousand jobs in the country's forestry sector, the transformation of the main part of the country's forests into a vacant and unprotected territory, and to other similar consequences.
The myth of Russia's fabulous forest wealth is formulated in different ways: "our country has the largest forest resources in the world", "we account for a quarter of the world's forests", "the available forest resources can bring income to the country's budget comparable to income from the oil and gas sector" , etc. During the years of the development of the new Forest Code, the speeches of most officials devoted to forest topics were full of such incantations. The Forest Code of 2006, which basically killed forestry, somewhat sobered up officials in terms of assessing forest resources, but clearly not to the extent of understanding the real situation.
Clear felling of the once intact forest.
In reality, our forests in their state of the art, and in the future for the coming decades - this is a resource at best of regional significance, important on the scale of Russia itself and neighboring countries, but having no chance of world leadership. This is due to the changes in the forest sector of the world that have taken place over the past decades and are taking place now. The extraction of timber from natural forests, which prevailed in the world until the first half of the 20th century, was gradually replaced by timber harvesting in intensively grown forests, which, in turn, is gradually losing ground to timber production in forest plantations, mainly in the tropics and subtropics. But we are basically stuck at the stage of timber extraction, and our current forest legislation is almost entirely focused on timber extraction, and not on the development of forestry.
The forest is not yet perceived by the state as a value.
At the same time, we have very few resources of any particularly valuable wood, which until mankind has learned how to quickly grow in intensively cared for forests or on forest plantations. There is no particularly valuable tropical timber at all, for obvious reasons; wood reserves of valuable heat-loving hardwood species (oak, beech, ash, elm, maple, walnut, etc.) were initially small, and now they are almost completely ruined; reserves of especially valuable coniferous wood, which has been growing for centuries in special natural conditions and which at one time gained world-class fame (“White Sea pine”, “Angara pine”, “resonance spruce”, etc.) close to exhaustion. The main part of the remaining forest resources is quite ordinary wood in quality, more or less comparable to that which is easily obtained from plantation forestry, and, as a rule, is significantly inferior to that which is obtained as a result of long-term intensive forestry in the northern countries. At the same time, the yield (possible and actual) of even such commercial wood during the felling of our forests is constantly decreasing due to the increase in wood of “wood” quality (which is a consequence of the chronic lack of forestry). And firewood quality is not yet in demand on the world market enough to justify a significant increase in forest management in neglected secondary forests in a country with a harsh investment climate, sparse and bad roads, numerous officials and an unpredictable future.
Russian-Finnish border. As a result of all this, Russia is already losing heavily in terms of the volume and dynamics of forest management both to northern countries with developed forestry, which have long been concerned about the reproduction of their forest resources, and to large southern countries developing plantation forestry. In 2011, recorded timber harvesting in Russia amounted to 197 million cubic meters, while in the European Union - 429 million, in China - 291 million, in the USA - 324 million, in Brazil - 272 million, in Indonesia - 114 million. Of the world's total recorded timber harvesting (3435 million cubic meters in 2011), our country accounts for only six percent, and this share is likely to decline in the coming years. Even if we add the entire harvested "worles" (about 40-60 million cubic meters) to the official volumes of timber harvesting in our country, this will not change the overall picture of the matter.
Our country has a gigantic potential, but this potential cannot be realized quickly (faster than in 20-30 years), and it is basically impossible to realize it under insane legislation, total corruption and in a collapsing state.
The fact that the forests of Russia as a resource have only regional significance and are by no means unique on a global scale, means that investors in the forest sector will always have a choice, and at the first major cataclysm in Russia, they will generally prefer to switch to calmer countries. This has already happened in the recent past: the introduction of the Forest Code of the Russian Federation in 2006 led to the fact that all real projects for the construction of new pulp and paper mills in Russia were frozen or canceled, and large "core" investors preferred to invest in the development of similar enterprises in South America and Southeast Asia. Most likely, this is not the last such case, and such shocks will further reduce the attractiveness and competitiveness of our country's forest resources on a global scale, turning them into resources of regional or local significance to an even greater extent.
Lazovsky Reserve in Primorsky Krai. Our country has enormous potential: intensive forestry in “old-developed” forests in the most convenient and accessible areas of our country, as well as intensive (up to plantation) forestry on vast areas of hopelessly abandoned agricultural land, combined with agroforestry in a sparsely forested zone, could again make Russia one of the forest leaders in the world. But this potential cannot be realized quickly (faster than in 20-30 years), and in principle it is impossible to realize it under insane legislation, total corruption and in a collapsing state.
Therefore, for now it remains only to state the fact that our country once had the largest forest resources in the world and the greatest opportunities for the development of non-plantation forestry - but these resources were mostly depleted, and opportunities were mostly missed. It will take at least two or three decades to correct the situation - but in order for the situation to even begin to improve, a lot needs to be done, starting with the introduction of reasonable forest legislation and very large-scale measures to support intensive forestry.
Clear felling in the intact forest of the Arkhangelsk region. The myth of Russia's fabulous forest wealth is directly related to the state's catastrophic underestimation of the importance of forestry. According to Professor M. M. Orlov, "forestry, like any other, is only when the object of the economy, in this case the forest, loses the property of unlimited and accessible to all utility and becomes a value." Ideas about fabulous forest wealth contribute to the attitude to the forest precisely as to unlimited and accessible utility, which at the state level is most clearly manifested in the virtual absence of state forest protection, disregard for the protection of forests from fires, pests and diseases, and in almost the lowest in the world at rates of payment for the use of timber forest resources. In fact, the forest is not yet perceived by the state as a value.
28/04/2012
The 24/7 Wall Street website conducted a detailed analysis of the 10 countries with the largest and most valuable natural resources on Earth. Using estimates of total reserves in each country and market value of these resources, 10 countries were identified that have the most valuable reserves natural resources.
H Some of these resources, including uranium, silver, phosphate, are not as valuable as others due to low demand or because they are rare. However, in the case of oil, natural gas, timber, coal - these natural resources can be worth tens of trillions of dollars, because the demand for them is high and these resources are relatively plentiful.
1. Russia
Total resource cost: $75.7 trillion.
Oil reserves (value): 60 billion barrels ($7.08 billion)
Natural gas reserves (value): 1.680 trillion. cubic feet ($19 billion)
Timber stock (value): 1.95 billion acres ($28.4 trillion)
When it comes to natural resources, Russia is richest country in the world. It leads among all countries of the world in terms of natural gas and timber reserves. The sheer size of the country is both a blessing and a curse, as the construction of pipelines to transport gas, as well as railways for the transportation of timber cost fabulous sums.
In addition to having such a large supply of gas and timber, Russia ranks second in the world in terms of coal deposits and third in gold deposits. In addition, it has the second largest deposits of rare earth minerals, although they are not currently mined.
2. United States
Total resource cost: $45 trillion
Natural gas reserves (value): 272.5 cubic meters m ($ 3.1 trillion)
Timber stock (value): 750 million acres ($10.9 trillion)
The US has 31.2% of the world's proven coal reserves. They are estimated at 30 trillion dollars. Today they are the most valuable reserves on earth. The country has about 750 million acres of forest plantations, which are worth about $11 trillion. Wood and coal, combined, cost approximately 89% of the country's total natural resource value. The US is also among the top five countries with global reserves of copper, gold and natural gas.
3. Saudi Arabia
Total resource cost: $34.4 trillion
Oil reserves (value): 266.7 trillion. barrels ($31.5 trillion)
Natural gas reserves (value): 258.5 trillion. m cube ($ 2.9 trillion)
Saudi Arabia owns about 20% of the world's oil, the largest share of any country. All significant resources of the country lie in carbons - oil or gas. The Kingdom is in fifth place in the world in terms of natural gas reserves. As these resources dwindle, Saudi Arabia will eventually lose its high position on this list. However, this won't happen for another few decades.
4. Canada
Total resource cost: $33.2 trillion
Oil reserves (value): 178.1 billion barrels ($21 trillion)
Timber stock (value): 775 million acres ($11.3 trillion)
Prior to the discovery of the oil sands, Canada's total mineral reserves would probably have kept it out of this list. The oil sands added about 150 billion barrels to Canada's total oil in 2009 and 2010. The country also produces a decent amount of phosphate, although the phosphate rock deposits are not among the top 10 in the world. In addition, Canada has the world's second largest proven uranium reserves and the third largest timber reserves.
5. Iran
Total resource cost: $27.3 trillion
Oil reserves (value): 136.2 billion barrels ($16.1 trillion)
Natural gas reserves (value): 991600000000000 cubic meters m ($ 11.2 trillion)
Timber stock (value): not in the top 10
Iran shares with Qatar the giant South Pars/North Dome gas field in the Persian Gulf. The country holds about 16% of the world's natural gas reserves. Iran also has the third largest proven amount of oil in the world. This is more than 10% of the world's oil reserves. AT this moment the country is experiencing problems in the implementation of its resources in connection with its alienation from international markets.
6. China
Total resource cost: $23 trillion
Oil reserves (value): not in the top 10
Natural gas reserves (value): not in the top 10
Timber stock (value): 450 million acres ($6.5 trillion)
The cost of China's resources is based largely on the reserves of coal and rare earth minerals. China has significant coal reserves, which account for over 13% of the world's total. Recently, shale gas deposits have been discovered here. After their assessment, China's status as a leader in natural resources will only improve.
7. Brazil
Total resource cost: $21.8 trillion
Oil reserves (value): not in the top 10
Natural gas reserves (value): not in the top 10
Timber stock (value): 1.2 billion acres ($17.5 trillion)
Significant reserves of gold and uranium contributed more to getting a place on this list. Brazil also owns 17% of the world's iron ore. The most valuable natural resource, however, is timber. The country owns 12.3% of the world's timber resources, which are valued at $17.45 trillion. In order to ensure consistency and accuracy of the study, recently discovered offshore oil reserves have not been included in this report. According to preliminary estimates, the field may contain 44 billion barrels of oil.
8. Australia
Total resource cost: $19.9 trillion
Oil reserves (value): not in the top 10
Natural gas reserves (values): not in the top 10
Timber stock (value): 369 million acres ($5.3 trillion)
Australia's natural wealth lies in its vast amount of timber, coal, copper and iron. The country is in the top three general reserves seven resources in this list. Australia has the largest gold reserves in the world - it has 14.3% of the world's reserves. It also supplies 46% of the world's uranium. In addition, the country has significant offshore natural gas reserves on the northwest coast, which it shares with Indonesia.
9. Iraq
Total resource cost: $15.9 trillion W
Oil reserves (value): 115 billion barrels ($13.6 trillion)
Natural gas reserves (value): 111.9 trillion. cube feet ($1.3 trillion)
Timber stock (value): not in the top 10
Iraq's biggest wealth is oil - 115 billion barrels of proven reserves. This is almost 9% of the total amount of oil in the world. Despite relatively easy production, most of these reserves remain untapped due to political disagreements between the central government and Kurdistan over ownership of the oil. Iraq also has one of the largest reserves of phosphate rock in the world, worth more than $1.1 trillion. However, these deposits are not fully developed.
10. Venezuela
Total resource cost: $14.3 trillion
Oil reserves (value): 99.4 billion barrels ($11.7 trillion)
Natural gas reserves (value): 170.9 cubic meters feet ($1.9 trillion)
Timber stock (value): not in the top 10
Venezuela is one of the top 10 resource holders in terms of iron, natural gas and oil. Natural gas reserves in this South American country rank eighth in the world and amount to 179.9 cubic meters. pounds. These reserves account for just over 2.7% of the world's reserves. In Venezuela, according to experts, there are 99 billion barrels of oil, which is 7.4% of the total number of reserves in the world .
Forest area is the area occupied by trees of natural reproduction or planted stands, according to at least, 5 meters high. Garden areas, other trees for agricultural purposes, trees of city parks and gardens are excluded. The area of forest land for each country excludes all plantations within any settlements(cities and villages). The countries with the largest forest area are shown below.
The list of countries by forest area includes all countries in the world, sorted by total area their forests (in square kilometers). The table also shows data on what percentage of the total area of the country is occupied by forests - this indicator makes it possible to determine the most forested countries in the world. Despite the fact that in Russia less than 50% of the area is covered with forests, due to the large area of the country as a whole, it is Russia that is the world leader in forest resources. However, the regions of Central Africa and South America are the most forested. The countries most endowed with forest resources besides Russia are: Brazil, Canada, USA, China, DR Congo. According to the UN, the world's total forest area at the end of 2015 was 39,991,336.2 km², or about 30.8% of the world's total land area (excluding Antarctica).
The data source below is , which collects data from national statistical agencies and profile international agencies on the protection and accounting of the world's forests. When compiling the current table, data from two tables were used World Bank: « Forest area (% of land area)" and " Forest area (sq. km)". All data on total forest area are as of the end 2016 year (the most recent data at the moment). Also attached below is a map of the forests of Europe and a map of the forests of the world.
| № | A country | % of country area | Forest area, km2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Russia | 49,76% | 8 148 895 |
| 2 | Brazil | 58,93% | 4 925 540 |
| 3 | Canada | 38,16% | 3 470 224 |
| 4 | USA | 33,93% | 3 103 700 |
| 5 | China | 22,35% | 2 098 635 |
| 6 | DR Congo | 67,17% | 1 522 666 |
| 7 | Australia | 16,26% | 1 250 590 |
| 8 | Indonesia | 49,86% | 903 256 |
| 9 | Peru | 57,66% | 738 054 |
| 10 | India | 23,83% | 708 604 |
| 11 | Mexico | 33,92% | 659 484 |
| 12 | Colombia | 52,70% | 584 750 |
| 13 | Angola | 46,31% | 577 312 |
| 14 | Bolivia | 50,29% | 544 750 |
| 15 | Zambia | 65,20% | 484 684 |
| 16 | Venezuela | 52,74% | 465 186 |
| 17 | Tanzania | 51,58% | 456 880 |
| 18 | Mozambique | 47,98% | 377 336 |
| 19 | Papua New Guinea | 74,10% | 335 562 |
| 20 | Myanmar | 43,63% | 284 946 |
| 21 | Sweden | 68,92% | 280 730 |
| 22 | Argentina | 9,80% | 268 152 |
| 23 | Japan | 68,46% | 249 564 |
| 24 | Gabon | 90,04% | 232 000 |
| 25 | Congo | 65,35% | 223 186 |
| 26 | Finland | 73,11% | 222 180 |
| 27 | Malaysia | 67,60% | 222 092 |
| 28 | CAR | 35,56% | 221 544 |
| 29 | Sudan | 0,00% | 190 355 |
| 30 | Laos | 82,11% | 189 506 |
| 31 | Cameroon | 39,34% | 185 960 |
| 32 | Spain | 36,94% | 184 520 |
| 33 | Chile | 24,26% | 180 358 |
| 34 | France | 31,23% | 171 020 |
| 35 | Guyana | 83,90% | 165 160 |
| 36 | Thailand | 32,16% | 164 290 |
| 37 | Suriname | 98,26% | 153 282 |
| 38 | Paraguay | 37,75% | 149 976 |
| 39 | Vietnam | 48,06% | 149 020 |
| 40 | Zimbabwe | 35,54% | 137 496 |
| 41 | Ethiopia | 12,54% | 125 396 |
| 42 | Ecuador | 50,21% | 124 692 |
| 43 | Madagascar | 21,41% | 124 570 |
| 44 | Mongolia | 8,02% | 124 555 |
| 45 | Norway | 33,18% | 121 140 |
| 46 | Turkey | 15,35% | 118 174 |
| 47 | Germany | 32,69% | 114 210 |
| 48 | Botswana | 18,95% | 107 378 |
| 49 | Iran | 6,56% | 106 920 |
| 50 | Ivory Coast | 32,71% | 104 006 |
| 51 | New Zealand | 38,56% | 101 522 |
| 52 | Ukraine | 16,71% | 96 788 |
| 53 | Poland | 30,88% | 94 562 |
| 54 | Ghana | 41,16% | 93 654 |
| 55 | Italy | 31,79% | 93 508 |
| 56 | Cambodia | 52,85% | 93 296 |
| 57 | South Africa | 7,62% | 92 410 |
| 58 | Belarus | 42,63% | 86 534 |
| 59 | Philippines | 27,77% | 82 800 |
| 60 | Senegal | 42,76% | 82 330 |
| 61 | South Sudan | 29,40% | 71 570 |
| 62 | Romania | 30,12% | 69 302 |
| 63 | Namibia | 8,31% | 68 448 |
| 64 | Nigeria | 7,23% | 65 834 |
| 65 | Guinea | 25,75% | 63 280 |
| 66 | Somalia | 10,02% | 62 862 |
| 67 | South Korea | 63,35% | 61 764 |
| 68 | Morocco | 12,60% | 56 240 |
| 69 | Burkina Faso | 19,34% | 52 902 |
| 70 | North Korea | 40,73% | 49 040 |
| 71 | Chad | 3,77% | 47 484 |
| 72 | Mali | 3,80% | 46 360 |
| 73 | Panama | 61,89% | 46 006 |
| 74 | Honduras | 39,97% | 44 720 |
| 75 | Kenya | 7,82% | 44 496 |
| 76 | Benin | 37,79% | 42 610 |
| 77 | Liberia | 43,08% | 41 490 |
| 78 | Turkmenistan | 8,78% | 41 270 |
| 79 | Greece | 31,69% | 40 842 |
| 80 | Austria | 46,91% | 38 708 |
| 81 | Bulgaria | 35,37% | 38 402 |
| 82 | Nepal | 25,36% | 36 360 |
| 83 | Guatemala | 32,70% | 35 036 |
| 84 | Latvia | 53,98% | 33 564 |
| 85 | Kazakhstan | 1,23% | 33 090 |
| 86 | Cuba | 31,28% | 32 536 |
| 87 | Uzbekistan | 7,54% | 32 088 |
| 88 | Portugal | 34,61% | 31 706 |
| 89 | Great Britain | 13,07% | 31 610 |
| 90 | Malawi | 33,19% | 31 290 |
| 91 | Nicaragua | 25,88% | 31 140 |
| 92 | Sierra Leone | 43,05% | 31 076 |
| 93 | Georgia | 40,62% | 28 224 |
| 94 | Costa Rica | 54,57% | 27 862 |
| 95 | Butane | 72,48% | 27 649 |
| 96 | Serbia | 31,12% | 27 214 |
| 97 | Czech Republic | 34,56% | 26 690 |
| 98 | Estonia | 51,34% | 22 316 |
| 99 | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 42,68% | 21 850 |
| 100 | Lithuania | 34,83% | 21 820 |
| 101 | Solomon Islands | 77,86% | 21 794 |
| 102 | Hungary | 22,91% | 20 736 |
| 103 | Sri Lanka | 32,90% | 20 634 |
| 104 | Dominican Republic | 41,73% | 20 162 |
| 105 | Algeria | 0,82% | 19 636 |
| 106 | Guinea-Bissau | 69,77% | 19 620 |
| 107 | Uganda | 9,68% | 19 418 |
| 108 | Slovakia | 40,35% | 19 402 |
| 109 | Croatia | 34,35% | 19 224 |
| 110 | Uruguay | 10,67% | 18 677 |
| 111 | Equatorial Guinea | 55,49% | 15 564 |
| 112 | Eritrea | 14,91% | 15 056 |
| 113 | Pakistan | 1,85% | 14 290 |
| 114 | Bangladesh | 10,96% | 14 264 |
| 115 | Belize | 59,68% | 13 613 |
| 116 | Afghanistan | 2,07% | 13 500 |
| 117 | Switzerland | 31,83% | 12 578 |
| 118 | Slovenia | 61,97% | 12 482 |
| 119 | Azerbaijan | 14,10% | 11 656 |
| 120 | Niger | 0,89% | 11 296 |
| 121 | Tunisia | 6,77% | 10 512 |
| 122 | Fiji | 55,94% | 10 221 |
| 123 | Macedonia | 39,57% | 9 980 |
| 124 | Saudi Arabia | 0,45% | 9 770 |
| 125 | New Caledonia | 45,90% | 8 390 |
| 126 | Montenegro | 61,49% | 8 270 |
| 127 | Iraq | 1,90% | 8 250 |
| 128 | Albania | 28,12% | 7 705 |
| 129 | Ireland | 11,03% | 7 597 |
| 130 | Belgium | 22,58% | 6 838 |
| 131 | East Timor | 45,38% | 6 748 |
| 132 | Kyrgyzstan | 3,28% | 6 290 |
| 133 | Denmark | 14,70% | 6 172 |
| 134 | Swaziland | 34,34% | 5 906 |
| 135 | Yemen | 1,04% | 5 490 |
| 136 | Bahamas | 51,45% | 5 150 |
| 137 | Puerto Rico | 56,29% | 4 993 |
| 138 | Syria | 2,67% | 4 910 |
| 139 | Gambia | 48,38% | 4 896 |
| 140 | Rwanda | 19,73% | 4 868 |
| 141 | Vanuatu | 36,10% | 4 400 |
| 142 | Moldova | 12,58% | 4 136 |
| 143 | Tajikistan | 2,97% | 4 124 |
| 144 | Brunei | 72,11% | 3 800 |
| 145 | Netherlands | 11,18% | 3 766 |
| 146 | Jamaica | 30,92% | 3 348 |
| 147 | Armenia | 11,67% | 3 322 |
| 148 | UAE | 4,56% | 3 237 |
| 149 | Burundi | 10,93% | 2 806 |
| 150 | Salvador | 12,58% | 2 606 |
| 151 | Trinidad and Tobago | 46,02% | 2 361 |
| 152 | Mauritania | 0,21% | 2 210 |
| 153 | Libya | 0,12% | 2 170 |
| 154 | Cyprus | 18,69% | 1 727 |
| 155 | Samoa | 60,42% | 1 710 |
| 156 | Togo | 3,09% | 1 682 |
| 157 | Israel | 7,73% | 1 672 |
| 158 | French polynesia | 42,35% | 1 550 |
| 159 | Lebanon | 13,43% | 1 374 |
| 160 | Jordan | 1,10% | 975 |
| 161 | Haiti | 3,49% | 962 |
| 162 | Cape Verde | 22,55% | 909 |
| 163 | Luxembourg | 35,68% | 867 |
| 164 | Egypt | 0,07% | 736 |
| 165 | micronesia | 91,86% | 643 |
| 166 | Sao Tome and Principe | 55,83% | 536 |
| 167 | Iceland | 0,50% | 505 |
| 168 | Lesotho | 1,65% | 500 |
| 169 | Dominica | 57,41% | 431 |
| 170 | Seychelles | 88,41% | 407 |
| 171 | Palau | 87,61% | 403 |
| 172 | Mauritius | 19,03% | 386 |
| 173 | Comoros | 19,67% | 366 |
| 174 | Turks and Caicos Islands | 36,21% | 344 |
| 175 | Saint Vincent and the Grenadines | 69,23% | 270 |
| 176 | Guam | 46,30% | 250 |
| 177 | Saint Lucia | 33,18% | 202 |
| 178 | American Samoa | 87,50% | 175 |
| 179 | Virgin Islands (US) | 49,97% | 175 |
| 180 | Grenada | 49,97% | 170 |
| 181 | Singapore | 23,06% | 164 |
| 182 | Andorra | 34,04% | 160 |
| 183 | Cayman Islands | 52,92% | 127 |
| 184 | Marshall Islands | 70,22% | 126 |
| 185 | Kiribati | 15,00% | 121 |
| 186 | Saint Kitts and Nevis | 42,31% | 110 |
| 187 | Antigua and Barbuda | 22,27% | 98 |
| 188 | Palestine | 1,52% | 92 |
| 189 | Tonga | 12,50% | 90 |
| 190 | Liechtenstein | 43,13% | 69 |
| 191 | Barbados | 14,65% | 63 |
| 192 | Kuwait | 0,35% | 63 |
| 193 | Djibouti | 0,24% | 56 |
| 194 | Virgin Islands (Brit.) | 24,13% | 36 |
| 195 | Isle Of Man | 6,07% | 35 |
| 196 | Oman | 0,01% | 20 |
| 197 | Bermuda | 18,52% | 10 |
| 198 | Maldives | 3,33% | 10 |
| 199 | Tuvalu | 33,33% | 10 |
| 200 | Bahrain | 0,78% | 6 |
| 201 | Aruba | 2,33% | 4 |
| 202 | Malta | 1,09% | 3 |
| 203 | Greenland | 0,00% | 2 |
| 204 | Faroe islands | 0,06% | 1 |
| 205 | Qatar | 0,00% | 0 |
| 206 | San Marino | 0,00% | 0 |
"Natural resources" - Classification of natural resources (according to the degree of depletion). Causes of desertification. State of flora and fauna. 2. Protection certain types– Red Book (since 1966). Inexhaustible. Solar energy, wind energy, tidal energy, water, air. 1859 24 rabbits are brought from England to Australia. Oil and oil products.
"Fundamentals of nature management" - Management of nature management. Section 4 Organs government controlled nature management. Educational and methodological support of the course. Course content. The purpose of the course: Section 8. Ecological and economic regulation of environmental management at the international level. Methodical materials. Section 1. Methodical and organizational-legal systems of management.
"Man's influence on the world" - Man's influence on the flora and fauna. Powerful modern technology. Somehow, scientists tried to estimate the loss in biological diversity. Over the last two decades of the 20th century The area of the world's forests has dwindled. A reasonable person. Developing civilization, a person reduces forests, plows up the steppes. Species that have not yet disappeared.
"The structure of the biosphere" - Using the text of the textbook, fill in the tables (p. 218). The structure of the biosphere. The activity of living organisms is the basis of the cycle of substances in nature: Contents: Test yourself: Which organisms absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere? ? Plants? Animals How does fixed carbon get back into the atmosphere? ? Do organisms breathe? Minerals are destroyed What do microorganisms do? ? Fix nitrogen? Carry out an oxidation and reduction reaction.
"Biological Resources" - Black Crane. Pasture for deer. Use of wood resources. Commercial and hunting resources. Feed. Lynx. Wood, particle boards. Kalina. biological resources. From one hectare of forest you can collect: Boletus. Telegraph poles. Box container. Test. Dandelion. Spruce. Mushrooms. Wild duck.
"Biological Resources of Russia" - In most reservoirs, the stocks of small-sized fish are not used to the full extent, while the production is most valuable species several times higher than the allowable catch. That. foreign trade big influence provides the species composition of the catch, the degree of processing and quality of the goods, as well as the geography of export-import operations.
