In the previous material, we examined the situation with the destruction of forests worldwide. From 1990 to 2020 (over 30 years), people cut down about 420 million hectares of forests, while the net losses amounted to about 178 million.
Accordingly, 242 million hectares of forests on the planet were officially reported as “restored.” That is, countries provided data to the UN indicating that these forests had been restored artificially (through reforestation) or that work had been done to “assist natural regeneration.”
But what is modern reforestation? How is it carried out? And how can we measure its real benefit to nature?
These questions are rarely asked by people in the context of genuinely helping nature. Usually, it’s enough for them to hear “the forest was restored,” which triggers the thought: “Well, if it was restored, then everything is fine.”
Over many years of fighting for nature, I have repeatedly visited both older reforestation sites and young ones, where seedlings were planted literally just recently. I have studied the methods of forest restoration in practice and assessed the state of the work being done! This includes both government reforestation efforts and those carried out by “private” entities.
And I can confidently say that almost all modern “reforestation” today is a sector for laundering enormous sums of money, and the very act of planting forests in “rows” does not solve the problem of destroyed forests. Moreover, it can threaten real wild ecosystems.
Let’s break it down.
According to data provided by the UN, from 1990 to 2020, between 30 and 60 million hectares of forests were restored artificially. Meanwhile, all other forests were either not restored or were counted as “assisted natural regeneration.” This “assistance,” in simple terms, means leaving a few trees in the cut areas in the hope that in theory, the forests will regenerate on their own.
There is also an international initiative called the “Bonn Challenge,” which plans to restore 350 million hectares of forests by 2030. However, many global experts are finding that this is merely a “publicity campaign” aimed at inherently unachievable goals.
To date, the scale of the declared plans, both by states and private funds, almost always exceeds actual results by several times. It’s also noteworthy that these plans are often part of media campaigns that shift public focus from the destruction of forests to their restoration.
The vast majority of people hear that forests are being destroyed and immediately see politicians, for example, touting the ambitious “Bonn Challenge.” The average person then thinks that everything is fine, because in any case, more forests will be restored than cut down.
REFORESTATION
The actual reforestation carried out by countries generally boils down to the following main problems:
- Almost always, monocultures are planted, i.e., one species of the cheapest seedlings. This is very far from a fully diverse forest in terms of biodiversity and ecosystem value! In other words: cutting down a million hectares of ancient forests with high biodiversity and replacing them with rows of pine or spruce is not the same as genuine reforestation.
- In reports submitted by governments to international organizations, the focus is usually on how much money was allocated for forest restoration. There is no monitoring of the actual survival rate of seedlings, which must be done after 3 years, then 5 and 7 years, until the seedlings become a real young forest!
- Officials use allocated budget funds to buy seedlings at deliberately inflated prices in tenders, and also artificially increase the number of seedlings planted on paper. Who is going to check that? Go and count how many forests were actually planted in some remote deforestation site. Local officials take advantage of this!
- There is no comprehensive monitoring of which areas have really been planted or how many seedlings survive. Formally, the “plan is fulfilled,” the money has been pocketed, and the results remain on paper!
In fact, almost all reforestation that exists today is little more than a formality. Equipment is leased, driven into the forest, and one-time plantings of the cheapest seedlings with a closed root system are carried out! But further maintenance, watering, protection from pests and forest fires are almost never done. As a result, most seedlings (and in some cases almost all of them) die in the first 1–2 years.
Right now, there is also a booming global market for carbon credits. In simpler terms, “carbon offsets.” This is another powerful avenue for money laundering! Various projects, funds, organizations, and private individuals sell carbon credits under the claim that they are planting forests to offset carbon emissions. In such schemes, real forests do not take root, but on paper, everything is “planted” and the companies that purchased these “carbon credits” are said to have offset their emissions.
Ultimately, government and private projects often come with fancy reports and presentations, while in reality the planting is partial, and sometimes it exists only on paper.
In 2019–2021, many Russian organizations and members of the public, including still-independent media outlets at the time, published reports indicating that in several regions of Russia following forest fires, the seedling survival rate was only 10–15%. The actual number of dead seedlings reached as high as 95%.
Even an official report by the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation stated that only the planting of seedlings is taken into account when calculating the area of restored forests, while up to 90% of those seedlings die. This is fully disclosed official information!
I will publish the official document from the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation.
File Download the Audit Chamber report 3,2 МБ
Here’s a full quote from the document:
“When calculating the area of restored forests, only the planting of seedlings is taken into account. In reality, up to 90% of seedlings die after that. In order for the majority of the planted trees to survive, agricultural care is required, which needs additional human and financial resources.”
It’s also worth quoting the chairman of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation Commission on Ecology and Environmental Protection:
“We should revise the target indicators. We need to take into account the number of grown trees, not the planted seedlings. The percentage of forest restoration should be calculated at least 15 years after planting.”
Now consider the real scale of “forest banditry” and the FICTITIOUSNESS of virtually any modern reforestation effort—both from the state (where there is at least some oversight) and from “private organizations” involved in forest planting.
Today, the goal of officials is to “spend” funds on planting, report on the “hectares of forest planted,” and forget about it. No one cares about the actual results.
“Private” entities pursue the same goals. I’ll repeat: getting involved in “forest restoration” is one of the most profitable avenues, practically impossible to verify! Meanwhile, any kind of paperwork can be fabricated.
WAS THE FOREST EVER PLANTED?
In my personal experience, I believe there is hardly any real reforestation in the world today! And those measures carried out with sincerity and honesty are so insignificant that they don’t even slow down the annually growing scale of forest destruction.
To distinguish real initiatives from fictitious reforestation, transparent monitoring over a minimum of 3–7 years is crucial. If it doesn’t exist, then real forest restoration does not exist!
Regarding global reforestation, I want to return to the beginning of my material.
According to data collected by the UN from state reports, from 1990 to 2020, humans “utilized” about 420 million hectares of forests. Of these, the confirmed final losses (these forests no longer exist on the planet) amount to 178 million hectares.
Meanwhile, there are still 242 million hectares that, according to documents submitted by the countries, were subjected to “assisted natural regeneration” or were reforested.
And here we should ask ourselves: was the forest ever actually planted if up to 90–95% of them die?
IS THERE ANY BENEFIT TO NATURE?
Now to the most important point.
Remember one key phrase about forest restoration: “NATURE DOES NOT PLANT TREES IN ROWS.”
If nature needed trees to grow in neat rows, it would undoubtedly do so. But in natural forests, trees grow in groups of various ages and numerous species—creating a mosaic structure with vast biodiversity: undergrowth, shrubs, grasses, mosses, and lichens.
In “industrial” planting, one or two species are usually selected (for example, pine, larch, or spruce) and planted in straight rows. Everyone involved knows perfectly well that the absence of multiple age layers and broad species diversity reduces resilience to pests, diseases, and climate anomalies.
A multi-layered forest (from tall upper canopies to ground-level mosses and detritus) ensures higher moisture retention, meaning the soil retains water and becomes less dry. Thanks to the presence of various microclimates, forests can also protect themselves from the rapid spread of fire! Such features do not exist in planted “rows.”
Monocultures—where only one tree species is planted—cannot effectively filter and purify the air. These processes involve not just coniferous or broadleaf species, but also undergrowth, shrubs, and numerous organisms.
When forests are planted “in rows,” the structure becomes single-layered, offering far fewer niches for wild flora and fauna, which drastically reduces its ecological value.
Many of these nuances are not even known by ministers and various “heads” of specialized agencies.
For example, rows of uniformly planted trees create pathways for wind, and wind is one of the key factors in the rapid spread of fire. Hence, we see the increasing scale of forest fires! Furthermore, in the case of coniferous species (pine, spruce), without adequate undergrowth and moist moss, flames can spread along these rows at incredible speed.
In natural forests, where ecosystem complexity has developed over thousands of years, you often find areas with deciduous species (birch, aspen, alder) or simply damp meadows, streams, and bogs—these act as barriers to fire.
Planted “rows” of forest are poorly adapted to natural conditions, and their root systems are very vulnerable. Pests move perfectly along the linear plantings, causing outbreaks of infections—one infected seedling can quickly infect the entire forest.
I also want readers to note that the information I’ve shared is based on my personal experience of studying forests from one end of Russia to the other! We have carried out dozens of major expeditions and, in the field, evaluated the condition of the taiga regions.
We should also mention biotic regulation of climate, according to the concept proposed by our Russian physicists—Viktor G. Gorshkov and Anastasia M. Makarieva.
A true, intact forest ensures constant moisture evaporation (transpiration), creating powerful flows of water vapor that contribute to precipitation. It also regulates atmospheric pressure, thereby influencing rainfall distribution and overall humidity on a regional scale. When it comes to more complex processes, natural forests are also part of a chain of interactions with soil microorganisms involved in the carbon and nitrogen cycles.
Artificial “rows” of monocultures cannot provide these functions. Therefore, even fully and honestly reforested areas are not the same as a genuine forest.
When only one tree species (or just a couple) is planted, dozens or hundreds of species of birds, insects, mammals, mosses, and fungi that depend on a wild, complex environment either disappear or never settle there.
There is also accelerated soil depletion, especially if coniferous monocultures are planted.
WHAT TO DO?
First and foremost, it is NECESSARY TO LEGISLATE A BAN on the destruction and any exploitation of the last remaining areas of ancient forests. In other words, humanity’s task is not to “cut down and then restore” forests but to avoid destroying what has taken thousands of years to form! We must place primary, natural ecosystems under strict protection.
That is why I propose the Concept of Territories of Complete Ecological Tranquility (TCET)—designating such forest areas as MANDATORY REFUGES for wildlife.
We also need government projects to cultivate forests specifically for human needs on already degraded or abandoned agricultural lands. Successful practices of this exist around the world; they simply don’t interest corporations! Why grow and wait if you can go and destroy what already exists and can bring immediate profit “here and now”?
Alongside forest cultivation, we should develop technologies for reusing wood.
We also need fundamentally new approaches to restoring lost forests—not planting “straight rows,” but approximating natural biological processes as closely as possible! Such proposals already exist, and scientific assessments have been made, but there is no global practical implementation.
As for “rows,” let’s keep those for flowerbeds and our gardens, for flowers and various garden crops. But not for wildlife!
In my view, the real work that should be carried out today by everyone—from civil society to governments—is protecting the last natural ecosystems on Earth! Because while “forest restoration in place of destroyed forests” is being publicized, in reality the last refuges of wildlife are being completely destroyed!
My proposal is to urgently place natural ecosystems, on a federal level, into global Territories of Complete Ecological Tranquility.
- Read the material on how much forest has been destroyed in the last 30 years
- Familiarize yourself with the Concept of Territories of Complete Ecological Tranquility (TCET)
© PAVEL PASHKOV
Support the fight!
The hardest thing in our time is to remain independent from government and business! All activities are carried out independently. Stand with us and support our Mission to protect wildlife.
I want to support!The Concept of TEPT
The world is experiencing the sixth mass extinction of species, with humans having wiped out up to 73% of animals, while the problems remain unresolved. We propose a solution — the Concept of Territories of Total Ecological Peace. Learn about the Concept and become part of our fight!
Learn the Concept