Which of the following places in India has 0% forest area as per the Indian State of Forest Report 2019?

Which of the following places in India has 0% forest area as per the Indian State of Forest Report 2019? Correct Answer Lakshadweep

The correct answer is Lakshadweep.

Key Points

  • Indian State of Forest Report 2019
    • India State of Forest Report 2019 is the 16th biennial assessment of India's forests by the Forest Survey of India.
    • FSI undertakes the National Forest inventory to assess the growing stock in forests and TOF, bamboo resource, carbon stock and to assess the dependence of the people living in Forest Fringe Villages for fuelwood, fodder, small timber, and bamboo.
    • The 2019 report for the first time has assessed the qualitative nature of the forest cover, including listing its biodiversity and the type of plants and trees found.
    • It also created a national forest inventory for the first time on produce from forests.
    • Forest Cover (ARea wise) : Madhya Pradesh> Arunachal Pradesh> Chhattisgarh> Odisha> Maharashtra.
    • Forest Cover (Percentage): Mizoram (85.4%)> Aruncachal Pradesh(79.63%)> Meghalaya (76.33%).

Related Questions

Read the passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the four alternatives.
Doing an internship at the University of Lille in France, I almost always found myself stuck whenever I had to speak to non-Indians about India or on anything'Indian'. This was more because of the subtle differences in the way the French understood India in comparison to what I thought was 'Indian'. For instance, when I,or any Indian for that matter, say 'Hindi' is an Indian language, what it means is that it is one of the languages widely spoken in India. This need not be similar tothe understanding that the French would have when they hear of 'Hindi' as an Indian language. Because for them Hindi then becomes the only language spoken inIndia. This is a natural inference that the French, Germans, Italians and many other European nationals would tend to make, because that is generally how it is intheir own respective countries. The risk of such inappropriate generalisations made about 'Indian' is not restricted to language alone but also for India's landscape,cuisine, movies, music, climate, economic development and even political ideologies. The magnitude of diversity of one European country can be easily compared tothat of one of the Indian State, isn't it? Can they imagine that India is one country whose diversity can be equated to that of the entire European continent? Theonus is upon us to go ahead and clarify the nuances in 'Indianness' while we converse. But why should one do so? How does it even matter to clarify? Why do some French people think that Hindi is the only Indian language?