At face value, the amount of forest in Australia is officially increasing, and has been since 2008. But if an old-growth tree is felled in a forest and seedlings grow elsewhere, is the official account ecologically sound? Not according to new analysis, which suggests that the way Australia calculates forest cover obfuscates the impacts of ongoing deforestation. Australia calculates forest cover as a net figure, in which forest losses are “netted off” against forest gains. That is problematic, according to a report led by Griffith University’s Climate Action Beacon, because new forests do not store as much carbon or have the same wildlife benefits as established forests that are being destroyed. Prof Brendan Mackey of Griffith University, one of the study’s co-authors, described measuring forest losses and gains in net terms as “an accounting sleight of hand”.