It doesn't mean it has no value as a wild, natural environment, just that from an economic development perspective there's not a lot going on there.
It doesn't mean it has no value as a wild, natural environment, just that from an economic development perspective there's not a lot going on there.
I don't think its necessarily a knock on OP, so much as it is just meant to be a reminder that we should really try not to just fall into that way of thinking.
I'm curious if some of this pasture land might be more heavily forested if it weren't being grazed. Out where my folks live in Colorado, for example, it's striking to see how anything that's anywhere close to flat enough for cattle to walk on is scrubland, but the sides of the mountains are well-forested. I'm no ecologist, but I doubt that's because trees just happen to only grow well on steep terrain.
I read in some book on pre-Columbian history or other that the prairie that existed in North America when Europeans first showed up was a product of human activity. It seems that folks living in the Great Plains started burning down forests to create more grazing land for bison, in order to have larger bison herds for hunting.
re: antelope, I thought they were browsers and not grazers.
https://www.earthfix.info/news/article/juniper-trees-sage-gr...
And juniper trees aren't exactly a 'forest' like most people would think of one.