Every time the beef industry or federal government is challenged about Australia's embarrassing rate of deforestation, they point to one statistic: Australia has achieved a net increase in forest cover. Open and shut case, right?
Not so fast! New research by ANU’s Andrew Macintosh and Don Butler and Griffith University’s Heather Keith and Brendan Mackey pulls back the veil on this claim, revealing how net statistics cover up a devastating reality for nature and climate. We can't limit global heating to 1.5°C or reverse biodiversity decline without ending deforestation. That means stopping the bulldozers, not hiding forest destruction with tricky bookkeeping about forest cover.
We've blown the cover on clever accounting tricks and broken down everything you need to know: what ‘forest cover increases’ really mean, what's genuinely positive, and what deserves much closer scrutiny.
1. Net forest increase is an accounting trick
Australia claims forest area increased by 0.75 million hectares between 2016 and 2021. But this "net" figure is an accounting trick that hides what’s really happening on the ground.
Think of it like this: if you knocked down 100 houses and replaced them with 110 tents, you’d have a net increase in dwellings – but no one would seriously argue that they balance each other out. And yet that’s exactly what’s happening with Australia’s forests. We’re destroying valuable old-growth forests rich in carbon and wildlife, and counting sparse regrowth in arid regions as equivalent. Sure, the numbers add up on paper, but we’re caught in the net of a mathematical sleight of hand.
2. We're bulldozing the most important forests (and covering our tracks)
Most forest destruction occurs in carbon-dense, species-rich ecosystems: exactly the forests we most need to protect. These productive forests in cooler, wetter forests closer to the coast regions support threatened species and store massive amounts of carbon. Meanwhile, the "gains" happen in sparser, drier areas with far less ecological value.
3. The math doesn't add up for carbon, and there’s no cover for those losses
Destroying remnant forest in Australia's coastal forests where most deforestation occurs releases up to 120 times more greenhouse gas emissions per hectare than could be removed through vegetation thickening in rangelands, where most forest gains are recorded. We're trading megatonnes of carbon stored in thick old growth tree trunks for grams of potential sequestration in new saplings, and no amount of creative accounting can cover that gap.
4. Most "new" forest isn't actually new
Almost 85% of reported forest increase since the early 2000s occurred in existing native vegetation, not on previously cleared land. This is mostly "woody thickening" in semi-arid and arid rangelands, where existing trees simply get slightly denser, growing more leaves or slightly greener foliage. Satellites pick up these changes as “new forest” when the vegetation crosses the arbitrary 20% canopy cover threshold that defines a forest.
5. La Niña did most of the important new cover work
The increase we’ve seen in forest cover since 2008 is largely due to rainfall patterns, not tree-planting or restoration efforts. La Niña events in 2008-09, 2010-12, and 2020-2023 brought above-average rainfall that naturally increased tree cover in rangelands. This is vegetation that will likely thin again during the next drought cycle.
6. The data we have is on shaky ground
The Australian Government itself has questioned the accuracy of the dataset used to claim forest increases, and has described it as too unreliable for assessing carbon credit projects. Yet these same questionable estimates underpin national claims about forest cover gains.
7. Deforestation emits 55 million tonnes of CO2 annually
Since 2000, emissions from clearing forests alone (excluding sub-forest ecosystems like woodlands and grasslands) have averaged 55 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year, which is more than the entire carbon footprint of Sri Lanka, or more than the emissions from extracting and processing all the coal and gas Australia exports (46 million tonnes). That's a significant contribution to Australia's carbon footprint that can only be addressed by stopping the bulldozers, not fiddling the books.
8. Young regrowth can't replace old growth – there’s no real substitute for the original
Old growth forests and seedling plantations are not ecologically equivalent. Mature forests store vastly more carbon, provide critical habitat features like tree hollows for threatened species, and are more resilient to droughts and fires. Regrowing forests take hundreds of years to develop these characteristics. New cover simply does not provide the same kind of benefit to a forest.
9. We're clearing forests where biodiversity matters most
The intensive land-use regions in eastern, southern, and southwestern Australia (that is, where most clearing occurs) have the highest concentrations of threatened species and ecosystems and the last pockets of habitat for them. For example, the tiny 2.7% of Australia's remaining forest that is classed as rainforest holds 60% of Australia's plant species, 40% of birds, and 35% of mammals. Even small clearing events in these already fragmented landscapes can push species toward extinction.
10. Current reporting fails our international commitments
Australia has committed to halting deforestation through the Glasgow Declaration on Forests and Land Use and preventing extinctions under the Global Biodiversity Framework. But net accounting makes it impossible to track whether we're meeting these obligations. We need gross loss and gain reporting that reveals what's actually happening on the ground.
What needs to change?
As the only rich country on the list of global deforestation hotspots, and one of a handful of countries that host the majority of the world’s biodiversity, with record levels of species extinction, Australia simply must do better at halting and reversing forest destruction.
This requires honest reporting of the state of nature, but above all it means real action to protect and restore forests. Australia has put itself forward as a Forests and Climate Leader, but has sat on its hands when it comes to forest protection. Now it must deliver an action plan including regulations, incentives and timelines with genuine accountability for how it will stop the bulldozers.
The accounting sleight of hand must end. Australia's forests, and the species that depend on them, deserve better than a great cover up.