Forest Engineer here: Depends on their definition of a forested area. Strictly speaking, a bush alone doesn't constitute a forest. It goes without saying that the definition of a forest is ambiguous at best.
qcumber - is that what happened? Bolsonaro heard about what a Brazilian was and he didn't get the joke, either? That's unfortunate. I bet it's decimated your indigenous crab population.
We have loads of rainforest, as well as alpine forests, dry sclerophyll forests, mangroves... Australia is vast, so even though a lot of the central mainland is desert, there are huge coastal forests. And Tasmania, of course.
I expect a country in North Africa or the Middle East would claim that distinction amongst large countries, but I don't know. Also Monaco and the Vatican City have zero forest, so its hard to beat that.
I figure if someone put out more than a couple potted plants at a time in a microstate like Monaco or the Vatican, it'd totally screw up this whole forested statistic ;-)
actually, even if it does not qualify to be a forest, quite a lot of vatican's area is occupied by plant/trees. They're called Vatican Gardens, just try and have a look on gmaps
Surprised to see Argentina so high up. I suppose like some of the other leaders it mainly makes it due to its immense size. From travelling pretty extensively there I can say you don't see a great deal of forest. It's either pampas, dry Andean highlands, desert or, in southern Patagonia, steppe and subpolar tundra. There are of course forests in the northeast (you see no shortage going to Iguazu) and nestled in amongst the lower slopes of the Andes, but I wouldn't have thought it would be quite that much. That number suggests around a third of the country's landmass is forested.
You have the Canadian part right but since half my family is American and lives there, I hardly resent the place. As for salty......what exactly does it mean......
I don't know what the source for this quiz was, but according to the UN FAO, Sudan has nearly 700,000 sq km of forest, which would put it in 12th place.
Really hoped that Canada would, just once, top a list on Jetpunk. Alas, not today. Annoyed by how many of these I guessed on the opposite quiz (least-forested countries). I wonder if this might be one of the few occasions where North Korea leads South, due to lack of urban development, but I expect they aren't very forthcoming with that information since they want people to think of them as technologically developed. Keep dreaming, North Korea.
The USA tends to excel in areas where being bigger is an advantage. If you look at things where being bigger is a disadvantage, for example least murders, then the USA comes in at about 187th.
Great quiz! Forests are the lungs of our globe. Take a look how FAOSTAT ranks European nations, and check out my quiz: "MOST FOREST COVERED EUROPEAN COUNTRIES - BY % OF TOTAL AREAS;
We've got a lot of forests here. Just one example is the Daintree Rainforest. A quick Google search and you'll see it's not all stereotypically desert like they advertise to silly tourists.
Um, that was a long time ago. Now, the east coast of Australia is full of lush forests. The west + central area of Australia is mostly desert. Australia is a large landmass.
You can see a viewer for our current data source here:
https://lcviewer.vito.be/2015
I think @Findlay is correct. Most of Argentina is cropland, scrubland, or barren.
(of language or humour) down-to-earth; coarse.
"her wild ways and salty language shocked the local gentry"
synonyms: lively, vigorous, spirited, colourful, sparkling;
It's hard to think of things that we Americans aren't the best at.