Australia claims to have achieved a net increase in forest cover in recent years, but that statistic hides the enormous impact on nature and the climate of ongoing deforestation because regrowing forests don't store as much carbon or provide as many homes for wildlife as the established forest being destroyed, new research has found.
Research by ANU's Andrew Macintosh and Don Butler and Griffith University's Heather Keith and Brendan Mackey finds:
- Most forest destruction has occurred in carbon-dense and species-rich forests, while most regrowth is in drier regions with sparse vegetation that cannot absorb the same amount of carbon.
- Almost 85% of the reported increase in forest cover since the early 2000s occurred in areas of existing native vegetation - and mostly in semi-arid, arid and northern rangelands - rather than on previously cleared land.
- On average, the clearing of remnant forest in Australia's intensive regions, where most losses occur, releases up to 120 times more greenhouse gas emissions (CO2-e) per hectare than could be plausibly removed from the atmosphere through the thickening of existing vegetation in rangelands, where most forest gains have occurred.
- Since 2000, emissions from the clearing of forests alone (not including sub-forest ecosystems) have averaged 55 million tonnes of CO2-e per annum.
The research calls into question Australia's progress in meeting its international commitments to halt and reverse deforestation and land degradation via the Glasgow Declaration on Forests and Land Use and comes as Australia hopes to accept the baton from Brazil as next COP president.
Deforestation is high on the agenda at COP30, being held in Belém, where Brazilian President Lula has called for parties to agree two roadmaps: to transition away from fossil fuels and to reverse deforestation.
The Australian Conservation Foundation's Nathaniel Pelle said:
"The clearing of mature forests and woodlands to expand cattle pasture is a major driver of Australia's extinction record and a serious source of climate harm.
"It is a fantasy to claim that is balanced out by new saplings or the thickening of existing vegetation that has sprung up because of a few wet La Nina years.
"We can't meet net zero, limit global temperature rise to below 2°, or prevent extinctions without ending deforestation, but that requires stopping the bulldozers not hiding forest destruction by cooking the books.
"Australia should follow Brazil's lead by taking genuine action to halt deforestation.
"The reform of Australia's national environment law is a once-in-a-generation chance to close loopholes that allow deforestation and habitat destruction to continue."
Professor Andrew Macintosh said:
"The Australian Government's reliance on claims of a net increase in forests to deflect scrutiny on deforestation and land sector greenhouse gas emissions is misleading.
"The claimed net forest increase is based on questionable estimates derived from a dataset that the Australian Government itself says is unreliable.
"Even if it is accepted that there has been a net increase in the forest area, there is a large disparity between the gains and losses.
"A large proportion of the forest losses have been in more carbon dense forests and woodlands that support significant numbers of threatened species. The claimed gains have largely involved woody thickening in remnant vegetation in the rangelands, which provides little, if any, enduring carbon and biodiversity benefits.
"If the Australian Government is going to meet its commitments to net zero, nature positive and no new extinctions, it has to start with open and honest reporting on the state of our forest and woodland ecosystems."
Professor Brendan Mackey said:
"The clearing of old growth forests and re-planting of seedlings are not equivalent ecological activities.
"Measuring forest losses and gains in net terms is an accounting sleight of hand, it's like a magician's trick.
"We need to measure gross losses and gains and collect much better information about what's been lost and the regeneration that's happened to assess whether we are meeting our global obligations to climate and ecosystems."
