Land Use In Your Area

Gers

For Argyll:

Built on <1% UK average 6%

Green urban <1% UK average 3%

Farmland 10% UK average 57%

Natural 89% UK average 35%

gazter

its a little misleading its based on land areas of your local authority. In a two tier area that would be your district councils.

Many district councils have vast rural hinterlands in which no ones lives and realistically could not be in any way developed. My 'city' has over 400 square miles as its area.

moneyistooshorttomention

Gers wrote: »

For Argyll:

Built on <1% UK average 6%

Green urban <1% UK average 3%

Farmland 10% UK average 57%

Natural 89% UK average 35%

Now there's a thought for contemplation. I hadnt clicked that there is a UK average in these. Useful to know that my last area is indeed overpopulated and this area is indeed very sparsely populated and its objective fact - not subjective opinion.

moneyistooshorttomention

bouicca21 wrote: »

I assumed green urban was parks and public open space. But of course I already knew that I lived in a built up area with lots of parks and that further down south was green belt farmland.

I'm also assuming that "green urban" is parks and public open space. Though that may be because that's my "favourite" use of land personally - ie I can use it (rather than it being built-up or farmland).

magn8p

South Cambridgeshire.

Built on: 6%
Green Urban: 3%
Farm Land: 90%
Natural: 1%

Personally I think there is too much of farm land in our area.

motherofstudents

Built on 32%
Green urban 16%
Farmland 42%
Natural 9%

There are a lo of groups trying to fight against building on the greenbelt here in Bury.

michaels

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

I'm also assuming that "green urban" is parks and public open space. Though that may be because that's my "favourite" use of land personally - ie I can use it (rather than it being built-up or farmland).

Only the one huge park in our town has been classified as green urban, many other big parks and open spaces are all part of 'built on' so I suspect these figures vastly overestimate how much of the UK is actually built on.

Davesnave

I'm not convinced all their 'natural' is as descibed either.

A lot of it around my way seems to be forest, but although it's kinda quiet in places close to my house, where a human being probably isn't seen for many months, or even years, they aren't natural environments at all. It just takes a few decades from planting to thinning-out, and it's a lifetime before felling.

Indeed, the Queen's tree is still standing, and she 'planted' that back in 1953.

rosyw

I'm in North Norfolk which is

Built on 4%
Green urban 2%
Farmland 83%
Natural 11%

Lots of farmland, and I'm guessing that most of the 11% natural is along the coast.

NaughtiusMaximus

Davesnave wrote: »

I'm not convinced all their 'natural' is as descibed either.

A lot of it around my way seems to be forest, but although it's kinda quiet in places close to my house, where a human being probably isn't seen for many months, or even years, they aren't natural environments at all. It just takes a few decades from planting to thinning-out, and it's a lifetime before felling.

Indeed, the Queen's tree is still standing, and she 'planted' that back in 1953.

Strictly speaking only a tiny fraction of the British landspace can be called natural. A lot of areas you might think of as unspoilt by human activity are completely man made, eg the moorlands which make up a good chunk of the Scottish highlands were predominantly forests 500 years ago.