individual,
So were you lying or trolling when you said to Steele "You believe one lot, I rather trust the other !"?

Dear mhaze,

Up to your old tricks again.

With only 16% of its forests in protected areas Oceania joins Europe and North and Central America as having below the world average figure and well below Africa on 27%, Asia on 25% and South America at 31%.

Over 3/4s of Oceania's plantations are from introduced species compared to a world average of 44%.

Oceania has the highest proportion of its forest in private hands of any of the regions of the world.

As to Australia increasing its forest cover the figures are about as reliable as one of Scott Morrison's promises.

1. Forecasts have not been provided for the years 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020. 2. For the years 2017 and 2018, the area of Naturally regenerating forest and the area of Other planted forest are simply a copy of the areas reported in 2016 for these categories

2. For the years 2019 and 2020, the areas of all FRA categories are simply a copy of the areas reported for the year 2018.

10. To address the mapping inconsistencies between forest area figures published in SOFR 2018, SOFR 2013, SOFR 2003 and SOFR 1998, a set of derived forest extent figures have been calculated and reported for the purposes of the FRA 2020 for 2015, 2010, 2000 and 1990

15. The area of forest reported by Australia for the year 2015 in FRA 2015 was 125 million hectares. The difference in the reported forest area for Australia for the year 2015 in FRA 2020 derives from the use of more accurate state, territory and national datasets and recent high resolution imagery, plus actual on-ground changes in forest area.

http://www.fao.org/3/ca9968en/ca9968en.pdf

shadowminister,

No actually we really are among the worst.

"You believe one lot, I rather trust the other !"?
Aidan,
I would have thought what I stated was rather obvious seeing that he rather believed the Left !

Dear individual,

How on earth are you calling Snopes of the left. I have never seen them be other than straight down the line virtually without exception.

SR,

"Up to your old tricks again."

By quoting accurately from a report from the foremost authority on the state of the world's forest? That's tricky? Rather revealing that you'd think that. But when your modus operandi is to reach a conclusion and then look for the data, I can see why you'd be confused.

We were talking about deforestation and SR's information deficient claim that we were the worst in the world. I amply proved that that was rubbish, so SR, as per usual, immediately starts to try to move the goalposts.

eg:"With only 16% of its forests in protected areas..."

So what? Are trees in unprotected areas less tree-like?

"Over 3/4s of Oceania's plantations are from introduced species"

So what? They are still trees and a bunch of them still constitute a forest.

"Oceania has the highest proportion of its forest in private hands"

So what? Are private trees not really trees?

SR then goes off on some rant about the data for 2020 being based on the data from the previous years. Is he saying the data is wrong? Probably because anything that doesn't fit his uninformed prejudices is, to him, wrong.

But I'd point out that I was comparing 2010 to 2020 so even if the 2020 data is based on 2019 or 2015 data, my point stands. Indeed it is reinforced.

SR made a claim that he hoped was true but which was proven to be wrong. A better man would acknowledge that or at least slink away chastened. But that's not how SR works.

Dear mhaze,

Boy you can be think sometimes.

I said:

"Over 3/4s of Oceania's plantations are from introduced species"

And you inanely replied:

"So what? They are still trees and a bunch of them still constitute a forest."

No mate, they are a plantation, they are not a forest at all. Why is this very simple concept so difficult for you? I thought I was making that point quite clearly with the figures I quoted, but it seems you didn't even have the basics sorted.