(AU) Deforestation In Australia: How Does Your State (Or Territory) Compare?

 ABC Science - Nick Kilvert

Drone footage shows alleged illegal logging

Australia is a world leader in chopping down trees and wiping out animals: two questionable accomplishments that are tightly connected.

Land clearing and habitat loss are the biggest drivers of animal extinction and in recent years, Australia's aggressive rate of land clearing has ranked among the developed world's fastest.

So despite our reputation for untamed wilderness and charismatic wildlife, it's perhaps no surprise that Australia has one of the highest rates of animal extinction in the world.

We've driven 29 mammals to extinction since European colonisation and more than 1,700 others are threatened or endangered. The once abundant koala is rapidly vanishing from New South Wales and Queensland.

But how much land are we clearing? Getting a fix on this figure is tough. The only nationally consistent data comes from the Federal Government's National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA).

There are questions over the methodology used in that system — which we'll get to.

First, let's look at the numbers state-by-state so you can get a picture of how much land has been cleared, right across Australia, from 2010 until the most recently available data in 2018.

Here they are, from lowest to highest.

('Primary' refers to forests 30 years and older. 'Reclearing' refers to any forest younger than that.)

Australian Capital Territory

One tree equals 1,000 hectares or 1,000 rugby union fields. (ABC: Emma Machan)

Land clearing in the ACT was the lowest of any Australian state or territory between 2010 and 2018.

Imagine a strip of land 1-kilometre wide, and 15-kilometres long — that's equivalent to the 1500 hectares cleared in the ACT.

And it was all reclearing.

Why so low? ACT is tiny, and since 2011 its forestry industry figures are reported as part of New South Wales.

Northern Territory

One tree equals 1,000 hectares or 1,000 rugby union fields. (ABC: Emma Machan)

This time our 1-kilometre-wide piece of cleared land would stretch 318km, say from Canberra to just beyond Sydney.

The majority of the 31,800 hectares cleared in the NT was for agriculture.

However, that figure comes with some very big caveats because during that same period, more than 82,000 hectares were granted approval for clearing under pastoral land clearing applications in the NT.

Either some of those landholders still haven't cleared that land, or it hasn't been picked up by NGA survey methods.

Tasmania

Land clearing in Tasmania between 2010 and 2018, where one tree represents 1,000 hectares. (ABC: Emma Machan)

If we convert Tasmania's 66,500 cleared hectares to a 1-kilometre-wide strip of land, it would be 665-kilometres long or the distance from Melbourne to Canberra.

While Tasmania's area of land clearing is more than double the Northern Territory's, the total land area of Tasmania is only one-twentieth the size.

Native forest logging has been a flashpoint in Tasmania for decades.

Youtube Tasmania's forest wars

But in 2012, a peace deal was struck between loggers and protestors.

From a relative high point of 14,500 hectares cleared in a year back in 2008, only 5,300 hectares were cleared in 2018, according to NGA data.

But the Liberal state government came to power in 2014 on a promise to revive the Tasmanian forestry industry, and soon after their election, reclassified around 400,000 hectares of forest designated as "future reserve land" to "future potential production forest".

The moratorium on logging of around 356,000 hectares of that forest lifted in April of this year, and there are fears that the forestry wars of old could kick off again.

South Australia

Land clearing in South Australia between 2010 and 2018, where one tree represents 1,000 hectares.(ABC: Emma Machan)

A total of 108,700 hectares was cleared in South Australia.

If we go back to our 1-kilometre-wide strip of land, South Australia's total clearing stretches almost 1,100km from Newcastle to Melbourne.

More than 90 per cent of that land was classified as reclearing, meaning it had been cleared at least once in the previous 30 years.

Victoria

Land clearing in Victoria between 2010 and 2018, where one tree represents 1,000 hectares. (ABC: Emma Machan)

A total of 177,900 hectares were cleared in Victoria, with 16,300 of that classified as forest over 30 years old.

This time our 1-kilometre-wide piece of land would stretch from Hobart to the southern suburbs or Brisbane.

Like Tasmania, native forest logging in Victoria has been a hotly contested issue.

Logging is considered a threat to species such as the critically endangered Leadbeater's possum and vulnerable greater glider.

In 2019, Premier Dan Andrews committed to ending native forest logging in the state by 2030, and in the wake of last season's devastating bushfires there have been calls to bring that end forward.

But in April this year, the Victorian environment department updated and extended five regional forest agreements (RFAs) covering native forest logging in different parts of the state.

Timber harvesting operations done in accordance with RFAs "are not subject to certain Commonwealth legislative requirements", according to the Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP).

"This streamlines regulatory processes for the timber industry," according to the Department.

But critics say RFAs allow logging operations to bypass Federal environment laws and often result in the habitat of threatened species being cleared without any environmental impact assessment.

In May of this year, a federal court ruled that VicForests had breached environmental laws by logging the habitat of threatened species.

VicForests are appealing that decision.

Western Australia

Land clearing in Western Australian between 1010 and 2018, where one tree represents 1,000 hectares. (ABC: Emma Machan)

Of the 288,400 hectares cleared in Western Australia, 68,7000 hectares were primary forests at least 30 years old.

In total that roughly equals a 1-kilometre-wide piece of land 2,884 kilometres long or from Darwin to Adelaide with change.

The lion's share of land cleared in Western Australia was for agriculture, horticulture and forestry.

As well as land clearing, Western Australia's forests are under threat from climate change.

The southwest of Western Australia has been experiencing a long-term climate shift since the 1970s, which researchers have attributed to historical deforestation resulting in decreased rainfall.

Combined with hotter summer extremes this has resulted in the collapse of some species including around 16,000 hectares of northern jarrah forest.

New South Wales

Land clearing in New South Wales between 2010 and 2018, where one tree represents 1,000 hectares. (ABC: Emma Machan)

More than 88,000 hectares of primary forest was cleared in New South Wales.

Reclearing takes the state's entire land clearing tally to 663,000 hectares.

That makes our 1-kilometre wide strip of cleared land almost 7,000 kilometres long, roughly stretching from Perth to Cairns via Brisbane.

In 2017, New South Wales relaxed its native vegetation clearing laws, however the impact that has had on land clearing is expected to show up in the reporting periods for 2019 and 2020.

A leaked report from the Natural Resources Commission last year suggested that land clearing may have surged by as much as 13 times.

The main driver of clearing in New South Wales is agriculture.

Queensland

Deforestation in Queensland between 2010 and 2018, where one tree represents 1,000 hectares. (ABC: Emma Machan)

The total area of land cleared in Queensland was 2,446,600 hectares.

Our 1km wide strip of cleared land would stretch for a whopping 24,466 kilometres — roughly all the way around Australia twice (minus Tassie).

Of that cleared land, 370,900 hectares were forests over 30 years old.

The vast majority of clearing in Queensland is for agriculture — over 90 per cent of cleared forest was replaced by pasture in the years 2016-2019.

In contrast to New South Wales, Queensland's land clearing laws were tightened in 2018 and it's expected that clearing figures will drop significantly in the coming reporting periods.

But the data shows we've had a net increase in tree cover

Despite the clearing of more than 3.5 million hectares nationally during the 2010-2018 period, according to the National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA) data there has been a net increase in tree cover in Australia during that time.

To get to that conclusion, they have compared the amount of cleared land (3.78 million hectares) with the amount of land allowed to regrow (4.19 million hectares), to come up with a "net forest clearing" figure of negative-401,000 hectares.

Again, the lion's share of that regrowth — 2.7 million hectares —has reportedly happened in Queensland, and to a lesser extent in New South Wales.

But critics say this does not represent what is happening in our forests from a wildlife conservation or carbon storage perspective.

The issue is that a mature forest can be cleared in one place, and an equivalent area of three-foot-high saplings may have regrown in another.

In that case the data would show no net loss in forest cover, despite a significant deficit of carbon storage and habitat occurring.

The analysis is done via satellite imagery and cannot pick up subtle differences happening at ground level, according to WWF forestry expert Martin Taylor.

"The LULUCF activity tables are very primitive," Dr Taylor said.

"If a pixel goes from 'forest' to 'non-forest' that's counted as deforestation. Could be a year old or 300."

The NGA data also fails to pick up forest thinning, according to Dr Taylor.

The NGA method is based on satellite imagery where 20 per cent canopy cover or greater is classified as forest. Only when an area drops below that 20 per cent threshold is it registered as forest loss.

According to Dr Taylor that means a dense forest can be thinned from 95 per cent canopy to 21 per cent canopy, for instance, without registering as having been cleared under the NGA method.

There is no official data on how widespread this may be, however Dr Taylor said he had found numerous instances by trawling through satellite imagery — several of which he showed to the ABC.

Tree thinning shown between the image in 2015 (left) and 2016 (right) wasn't picked up in the NGA data. (Supplied)

Discrepancies in data

Other questions have also been raised about the NGA land clearing data.

Unlike other states and territories, Queensland also has its own statewide annual land clearing monitoring program based on a method called Statewide Landcover and Trees Study (SLATs).

When comparing the data for land clearing in Queensland from the SLATs method and the NGA method, there are vast discrepancies between the two — discrepancies which cast further doubt on the idea that Australia's tree budget is "in the black".

For instance, using the SLATs method the Queensland state government reported 356,000 and 392,000 hectares were cleared in Queensland in the periods 2016-17 (winter-to-winter) and 2017-18 respectively.

But the National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA) figures for Queensland show only 304,000 and 254,400 hectares were cleared for the 2017 and 2018 periods — almost 190,000 hectares less.

In a statement to the ABC, a spokesperson for the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources said that is was "misleading to make simple comparisons" between the different reporting methods, and that the Department was confident its records are "complete and accurate".

"There is no underestimate of areas or emissions reported in the National Greenhouse Accounts," the spokesperson said.

"Only the Australian Government's reporting is undertaken in accordance with international standards established by the UNFCCC."

But Dr Taylor from the WWF disputes that.

"It's ridiculous to say there is more forest [now than 10 years ago]," he said.

Calls for a standardised national monitoring system

According to Dr Taylor, the SLATs method gives a more accurate measure of tree loss and the WWF are calling for a standardised national system for monitoring forest cover in Australia.

Neither Queensland's Department of Environment and Science (DES) nor the Federal Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources responded directly to questions from the ABC about the differences in their methodologies, but both said they were confident in their systems.

A DES spokesperson told the ABC that "SLATs applies a highly rigorous methodology".

"Queensland's SLATs data undergoes extensive manual editing and verification to ensure a high level of confidence in the data for Queensland's monitoring and reporting requirements."

Meanwhile, Australia continues to be compared with some of the worst offending countries in the world when it comes to land clearing.

The data for the 2018-19 reporting periods, particularly from Queensland and New South Wales, will determine whether that has changed.

Links

• Why We Believe Planting 1 Trillion Trees Can Save The Planet
• Are Young Trees Or Old Forests More Important For Slowing Climate Change?
• 15 Astounding Facts About Trees
• 20 Things You Didn't Know About ... Trees
• (AU) We Must Fight Climate Change Like It’s World War III – Here Are 4 Potent Weapons To Deploy
• (AU) Ancient Australian Trees Face Uncertain Future Under Climate Change, Study Finds
• Examining The Viability Of Planting Trees To Help Mitigate Climate Change

Amid Planet’s Crisis, Filmmaker Sir David Attenborough’s ‘Vision For The Future’

PBS NewsHour - William Brangham | Anne Azzi Davenport

Filmmaker Sir David Attenborough has been documenting the natural world since the 1950s. In his latest book and film, “A Life on Our Planet,” he offers a grave and alarming assessment about the climate crisis Earth is facing. The 94-year-old Attenborough spoke with William Brangham recently as part of our ongoing arts and culture series, Canvas.

Transcript

• Judy Woodruff:

  There is perhaps no one whose name is more synonymous with documenting the natural world than filmmaker Sir David Attenborough.

  He has been at it since the 1950s. And in his latest book and film, both out this week, he offers a grave and alarming witness statement about the crisis facing our planet.

  William Brangham talked with the 94-year-old recently.

  It's part of our ongoing arts and culture series, Canvas.

• David Attenborough:

  The living world is a unique and spectacular marvel.

• William Brangham:

  No one has given us a more intimate or stunning look at our planet than Sir David Attenborough.

• David Attenborough:

  Dazzling in their variety and richness.

• William Brangham:

  But now, after a near 70-year career, he says we are running the planet headlong into disaster.

• David Attenborough:

  Yet, the way we humans live on Earth, you're sending it into a decline.

  Human beings have overrun the world.

• William Brangham:

  In his new Netflix documentary and companion book, both titled "A Life on Our Planet," the famed filmmaker wants us to recognize what's happening, and to act before it's too late.

  I spoke with him recently from his home in London.

  Sir David Attenborough, it's a great honor to have you on the "NewsHour." Thank you very much for being here.

  Anyone who knows your work knows that you have increasingly talked about man's impact on the natural world.

  But this film really hits this point very directly. Was it your sense that things had just gotten so bad that that needed to be the focus of this project?

• David Attenborough:

  Yes, I think I have been speaking about this the last 20, 30 years, really.

  It's just what anybody who knows the natural world and spends time looking at the natural world stares it in the face. And anybody with whom to that happens feels a huge responsibility to talk about it.

• William Brangham:

  As you say in the film and in the book, that when you were a young man, going to all these exotic places, you had the sense at the time that man's imprint was not being felt.

  Was there a moment where you first recognized and said, I see it now, I see very directly the imprint that humanity is having on the planet?

• David Attenborough:

  Yes, the problem is making global assessments like that.

  I mean, you can go to a glacier that you were there maybe five, 10 years ago, and it has retreated, but you think, oh, well, that's just this glacier. Maybe there's another one that's increasing.

  But there are some things that are irrevocable and so dramatic and distressing that you can't brush them away.

  The one, I suppose, was the tipping point was when I dive on the coral reef, which I have known perfectly well, on the Great Barrier Reef in Australia, and suddenly saw a cemetery, and, suddenly, it was dead. And these corals, this extraordinary, wonderful construction of corals was dead, white. And that was a shock.

• William Brangham:

  There is, if I may say, a genuine sense of sadness and melancholy that is throughout this project.

  I mean, in the past, you would often talk about man's impact on the world, but would move on, in a sense. This film, you really clearly seem to say: We are not moving on. I cannot stress this point strong enough.

• David Attenborough:

  Well, you put it very well. That is exactly what I think.

  And we — you know, you feel that, sitting in London or New York or wherever, you may feel the what the wilderness is, out there, and, of course, it's interesting, and, of course, we know theoretically we depend upon it.

  But when — but now it's more serious than that. It affects every man and woman and child on this planet. I'm an elderly chap. And I look at my grandchildren and wonder what's going to happen.

  And all I know is that, if you see these things and realize what they mean, you simply can't sit back and say, well, I'm not going to bother.

• William Brangham:

  I should say, I don't want to leave people with the sense that you don't address what we might do to remedy this. And a good portion of the book and of the film is looking at solutions.

• David Attenborough:

  This film is my witness statement and my vision for the future.

• William Brangham:

  Attenborough argues, for a rapid shift to renewable energy, to sustainable agriculture, for a slowing of population growth, and for what he calls a rewilding of the land and the oceans to give them time to rebound.

  How confident are you that we will, in fact, move from these isolated examples to a true moment for change?

• David Attenborough:

  I'm not in the least confident that we will do so in time.

  And I certainly feel, although the situation is worse, I believe that the world is becoming more aware of what needs to be done, to a much greater extent than only, say, five, 10 years ago.

  It does seem to me a worldwide realization of the crisis which we are facing. And it's been spearheaded, of course, by young people, and quite rightly, too. It's their future.

  The kids of today are — that's their life, you know? And we owe it to them to do everything we can to make sure that disaster's averted.

• William Brangham:

  Could you talk a little bit about the role that our own human complacency plays in all of this? We all love the benefits of our gas-powered cars and our air-conditioned homes.

  And when we talk about sixth extinction or global climate change, it's still very easy for so many people to put this view out of their minds and just keep on.

• David Attenborough:

  But, actually, in your country, it's more unlikely for that to happen than in mine.

  I mean, you have faced disaster after disaster. You have got rising sea levels. You had cyclones, hurricanes moving through with greater ferocity and frequency than ever before.

  We see on our television usual coverage of appalling things that happen in your country because of climate change, seem to me overwhelming.

  And it's nice to say, oh, it's nothing, it's just a passing threat. It isn't. And the statistics show it isn't. It is a major movement that's happening.

  And your country and my country and the rest of the world have got to do something about it. And we can. And we know what to do.

• William Brangham:

  Do you have to dig deep down to come up with this optimism, or is the — is the long arc of your career what gives you this optimism? What is it?

• David Attenborough:

  I don't regard myself an optimist, to be truthful.

  But, having said that, we have to recognize that, if we are going to solve it, we are going to, as humanity, act as one. And that means that people will have to give, as well as take.

  And if that's to happen, it's got to be supported by the electorate, who says, we want it to happen. We want to solve it. And tell us what the price is, but we want to pay it.

• William Brangham:

  The book and the film is called "A Life on Our Planet: My Witness Statement and A Vision for the Future."

  Sir David Attenborough, thank you so much for talking with us, and thank you for your remarkable career.

• David Attenborough:

  Thank you so much.

Links

• Sir David Attenborough’s Latest Doc Is His Witness Statement To The World
• David Attenborough Leads Call For World To Invest $500 Billion A Year To Protect Nature
• (AU) David Attenborough Urges The World To Act On Climate Change
• David Attenborough: A Life On Our Planet Review – Stark Climate Emergency Warning
• Sir David Attenborough warns of climate 'crisis moment'
• David Attenborough Says Australia's Bushfires A 'Major International Catastrophe' And Calls For Climate Action
• David Attenborough: A Life On Our Planet Trailer
• David Attenborough Slams Australian PM On Climate Record
• David Attenborough Takes Aim At Australia For Lack Of Climate Action
• Lethal Heating: David Attenborough Posts 

(UK) Earthshot Prize: Prince William Launches £50m Drive To Repair Planet

The Guardian - Caroline Davies

Five £1m prizes will be awarded each year for next 10 years to support environmental solutions

A photo of the Duke of Cambridge taken by the Duchess of Cambridge at the Chiatibo glacier in the Hindu Kush mountain range in Pakistan, released to mark the launch of the Earthshot prize.

The Duke of Cambridge has announced that £50m will be awarded over 10 years through his Earthshot prize, billed as “the most prestigious global environment prize in history”, which aims to find solutions to repair the planet by 2030.

Officially launching the prize, Prince William said he felt it was “my job and my responsibility” as the planet reached “tipping point” , and the next decade was “crucial”.

Five £1m prizes will be awarded each year for the next 10 years, aiming to provide at least 50 solutions to some of the world’s environmental problems.

William said he had been inspired by his father, Prince Charles, as well as the TV naturalist Sir David Attenborough, who is one of the judges of the prize.

He admitted it was “certainly ambitious” and the prize had been 18 months in the making. “We felt that the one piece of the jigsaw that was maybe missing was positivity.

“I felt very much that there’s a lot of people wanting to do many good things for the environment and what they need is a bit of a catalyst, a bit of hope, a bit of positivity that we can actually fix what’s being presented.

“And I think that urgency with optimism really creates action. And so the Earthshot prize is really about harnessing that optimism and that urgency to find solutions to some of the world’s greatest environmental problems.”

He added: “We believe this decade is one of the most crucial decades for the environment. And by 2030 we really hope to have made a huge stride in fixing some of the biggest problems on Earth.”

“We must have some hope, we must have some optimism, because if we don’t it is all too much, it is very apocalyptic about things. These are grave times for the environment. But I do believe in human ingenuity, and I do believe in the younger generations speaking up as they are now, that they will not stand for this lack of hope.”

Inspired by John F Kennedy’s ambitious “moonshot” lunar programme, the prize is centred on five “Earthshots” – simple but ambitious goals for the planet. These are:

• Protect and restore nature.
• Clean our air.
  
• Revive our oceans.
• Build a waste-free world.
• Fix our climate.
  

Individuals, people-powered movements, businesses cities, and countries can be nominated for the prizes.

The plan was to “harness our ingenuity and our ability to invent”, William said.

Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, William said: “I feel right now, it’s my responsibility.”

He added: “The key thing about the Earthshot prize is that positivity. It’s the idea we need to find solutions to be able to live our lives and enjoy our lives and not feel guilty and bad about some of the things we do.

“That ultimately has to change, because I also worry from a mental health point of view, the anxiety and the worry that many of these younger generations are going to have. Hearing about what we’re talking about, it’s going to weigh on them. And they don’t to inherit a world that is full of doom and gloom.”

He hopes the prize “reaches everyone around the world, from communities, schools, right up to banks, governments, corporations, anyone and everyone”.

Attenborough told the Today programme: “There are simple things that can be done, which may sound crackpot, or a bit hole in the corner things, which really need impetus put behind them to get them done on a world scale. We want to know about those things. The prize will give them that strength, that financial impetus to spread and develop.”

William has set up the prize through his Royal Foundation, taking advice from teams behind the Nobel prize and the Xprize. He believes it is unique, and he is bringing leading global figures and organisations onboard.

Nominations for the first five £1m prizes will open on 1 November. More than 100 “nominators” have been selected from around the globe. The first five winners will be announced at a ceremony in London next year.

The prize is supported by a global alliance of partnerships, including WWF and Greenpeace, and there are plans for it to have its own foundation by next year. Backers include the Aga Khan Development Network, Bloomberg Philanthropies, DP World in partnership with Dubai Expo 2020, and the Jack Ma Foundation.

The prizes will be awarded by a council, a global team of high-profile leaders from the environmental, philanthropic, business, sporting and entertainment worlds. The 13 members include actor Cate Blanchett, singer Shakira, Queen Rania of Jordan, Japanese former astronaut Naoko Yamazaki, Brazilian footballer Dani Alves, basketball star Yao Ming and Attenborough.

Blanchett said that “all around the world, science and community-based initiatives are leading to ground-breaking inventions and solutions”, and the prize aimed to “refocus the narrative on climate change to one of hope and action”.

Shakira said: “Your children, my children – they have to find ways to reduce carbon emissions, to repair our oceans, to clean the air. So we need young minds to be informed and invested, which is why education is so important. But we can’t just stand still. We have to lead the way and we have to do it now.”

Queen Rania said: “When our backs are against the wall, humanity has a knack for coming together to find innovative solutions.”

Alves said: “It’s the most important power in the world – nature. If you give it good things then nature gives good things back to you. We’re going to make a good team.”

To mark the launch, a series of five short films will be released bringing each Earthshot to life.

Produced by world-leading wildlife filmmakers Silverback Films, the films are narrated by young climate activists including Bindi and Robert Irwin, the children of the late Steve Irwin, the Australian wildlife expert and TV personality.

Links

• Prince William unveils 'Earthshot prize' to tackle climate crisis
• Prince William announces most prestigious environmental prize in history
• Repairing Our Planet
• By 2030, We Choose To Fix The World’s Climate By Cutting Out Carbon
• Global list of Earthshot Prize Council Members unveiled
• David Attenborough and Prince William take world leaders to task on environment