▲ 58 ▼ Almost 90 football fields of woody habitat were bulldozed every day in NSW – despite pledges to rein it in (www.theguardian.com) submitted 6 days ago by Wurzl@lemmy.zip to c/australia@aussie.zone 9 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] arbilp3@aussie.zone 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Nath, not everyone can visualise well. I know some personally and I am not wanting to insult anyone. The article is based on a NSW media release. Here's an update if interested: https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/news/20-years-nsw-land-clearing-data-reveals-next-steps-reform This ref will give you an idea of the land clearing in NSW. https://www.seed.nsw.gov.au/slats-dashboard permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Nath@aussie.zone 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) I don't think "hectare" is the measure that people struggle with. It's how many hectares a given area takes up. For example, if you put 24,103 hectares into one big square, that square would be smaller than 16km x 16km. People would assume this should a much bigger square. 241 square km (24,103 hectares) is 241 km x 1 km. These links are 1. The State government press release that the article is referencing and 2. Some more useful that should bloody well be interpreted, summarised, referenced and included in the damn article. The fact that this information is out there further highlights how lazy the article is. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] arbilp3@aussie.zone 1 point 4 days ago And what is the point of your number crunching? 🤔 😆 The point I'd like to end with, if possible, is that if people get an important message in a simpler way, it is better than not getting the message or avoiding it because it is too complicated. Not everyone has your level of education. Were you able to find out what percentage of NSW is actually cleared, and what is sustainable? All the stats and info given by the NSW govt doesn't make it any easier for most people to work out and I imagine journalists are run off their backsides. This article imo, was only meant to translate a govt press release into a simple article, not a feature or deeper investigation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Nath@aussie.zone 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) I don't think "hectare" is the measure that people struggle with. It's how many hectares a given area takes up. For example, if you put 24,103 hectares into one big square, that square would be smaller than 16km x 16km. People would assume this should a much bigger square. 241 square km (24,103 hectares) is 241 km x 1 km. These links are 1. The State government press release that the article is referencing and 2. Some more useful that should bloody well be interpreted, summarised, referenced and included in the damn article. The fact that this information is out there further highlights how lazy the article is. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] arbilp3@aussie.zone 1 point 4 days ago And what is the point of your number crunching? 🤔 😆 The point I'd like to end with, if possible, is that if people get an important message in a simpler way, it is better than not getting the message or avoiding it because it is too complicated. Not everyone has your level of education. Were you able to find out what percentage of NSW is actually cleared, and what is sustainable? All the stats and info given by the NSW govt doesn't make it any easier for most people to work out and I imagine journalists are run off their backsides. This article imo, was only meant to translate a govt press release into a simple article, not a feature or deeper investigation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] arbilp3@aussie.zone 1 point 4 days ago And what is the point of your number crunching? 🤔 😆 The point I'd like to end with, if possible, is that if people get an important message in a simpler way, it is better than not getting the message or avoiding it because it is too complicated. Not everyone has your level of education. Were you able to find out what percentage of NSW is actually cleared, and what is sustainable? All the stats and info given by the NSW govt doesn't make it any easier for most people to work out and I imagine journalists are run off their backsides. This article imo, was only meant to translate a govt press release into a simple article, not a feature or deeper investigation. permalink fedilink source parent