Which states have the LEAST amount of preserved nature remaining as a percentage? (place, life)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,029,399 times
Reputation: 11862
Advertisements
Whether that be state parks, private reserves, un-protected wilderness or national parks.
I would say either the very industrialized Lower Eastern Midwest, or the smaller states in the East. Kansas, Iowa.etc seem mostly farmland but I think they have areas that are fairly natural.
Jersey is heavily industrialized but it has the Pine Barrens which cover a sizable part, so in that sense it seems to have more natural areas preserved than say Ohio.
Last edited by Trimac20; 05-31-2012 at 08:12 AM..
Reason: sorry folks i felt it was better if i re-phrased the question...since as kidphilly pointed out RI is just too small!
My immediate thought was someplace like Kansas, but I'm honestly not sure. The only state on this list I can speak of is Illinois, and while it has a ton of farms (corn, soy, wind, etc.) it has a fair amount of natural areas all along the Illinois and Mississippi rivers, a lot of preserved or recreated prairie, and the Shawnee Nat'l Forest (nearly 300,000 acres) in the south.
Well I would guess RI as its the smallest. The Pine Barrens eco wildlife reserve is larger than RI and nearly the size of CT I believe
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.