Graphs, maps and tables

Showing results 1 - 10 of 50
Table 2 Predicted stocks of soil organic carbon if there were no land use, and losses due to land use, for selected soil depths, Australia, 2010
Figure 29 Net greenhouse gas emissions from land use, land-use change and forestry, by subsector, 1990–2021
Figure 27 Reductions and additions in area of major types of land use between 2010–11 and 2015–16, labelled with change as a percentage of 2010–11 area for each type of land use
Bar graph showing that, among many categories, ‘grazing native vegetation’ and ‘other minimal use’ have overall fallen, ‘managed resource protection’ and ‘nature conservation’ have net increased.

Notes:

  1. Reductions (negative numbers) and additions (positive numbers) in major land uses.
  2. Numbers at the end of each bar are percentages of the total land area in 2010–11 for that land-use type.
  3. Definitions for major types of land use are given in ABS (2021e), based on the preliminary data release for the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ National Land Account Experimental Estimates, 2016, and are based on the Australian Land Use and Management Classification, v8 (ABARES 2016).
  4. The land use data are preliminary and subject to change.

Source: ABARES (2021b)

For more information, go toLand use
Figure 26 Locations and extent of major types of land use in Australia, 2015–16
Map showing that large areas of inland Western Australia are classified as conservation, resource protection or minimal use, whereas much of the inland of the eastern half is classified grazing native vegetation. The farming areas are listed as dryland cr

Notes:

  1. Numbers in brackets are percentages of total land use in 2015–16.
  2. Definitions for major types of land use are given in ABS (2021e), and are based on the Australian Land Use and Management Classification, v8 (ABARES 2016)

Sources: ABARES (2021a); map projection: Australian Albers GDA94 (ICSM n.d.)

For more information, go toLand use
Figure 6 Bioregional patterns of mean native vegetation condition used to define 3 land-use intensity zones, 2001–18
Map showing that the Habitat Condition Assessment System score is very low around population centres and key farming regions like the Western Australian wheatbelt. Deeper inland, it tends to increase. The relatively natural zone is really limited to inlan

ELZ = extensive land-use zone; HCAS = Habitat Condition Assessment System; IBRA = Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia; ILZ = intensive land-use zone; RNZ = relatively natural zone

Notes:

  1. Derived from HCAS v2.1 (see case study: Assessing condition of habitat consistently and nationally). The inset map shows 3 land-use intensity zones delineated by the thick black boundaries on the main map. The ILZ is where the mean HCAS scores are ≤0.7. The ELZ is where the mean HCAS scores are >0.7 and ≤0.8. The RNZ is where the mean HCAS scores are >0.8.
  2. The legend shows the continuous HCAS v2.1 score grouped into 0.1 classes and relates these to the Vegetation Assets, States and Transitions (VAST) framework narrative (Thackway & Lesslie 2006) to guide interpretation, labelled as ‘residual’, ‘modified’, ‘transformed’, ‘replaced’ or ‘removed’.

Sources: HCAS v2.1 (2001–18) from Williams et al. (2021b); VAST framework from Thackway & Cresswell (1995); IBRA 7 bioregions from DoE (2016); map projection: Australian Albers GDA94 (ICSM n.d.)

For more information, go toNative vegetation
Figure 33 Land (in brown) subject to deforestation where there has been direct human-induced conversion of forest to alternative land uses between 1990 and 2019
Map showing that most of the deforestation has happened in Queensland.

Notes:

  1. Forest is defined as woody vegetation with a minimum 20% canopy cover, at least 2 metres high and a minimum area of 0.2 hectares.
  2. Locations where sparse woody vegetation or nonwoody vegetation has been converted to alternative land uses are not shown.

Sources: DISER (2021c); map projection: Australian Albers GDA94 (ICSM n.d.)

For more information, go toIndustry
Table 12 Condition of NRS properties in the intensive land-use zone, compared with other areas across Australia

Land-use zone

Long-term estimate of habitat condition (2001–18)

NRS

Other lands (not in the NRS)

Intensive land-use zone

0.77

0.51

Extensive land-use zone and relatively natural zone

0.86

0.82

NRS = National Reserve System

Notes:

  1. Land-use zones are defined in Figure 6.
  2. Scores range from 0.0 (native vegetation completely removed) to 1.0 (native vegetation with high ecological integrity).

Source: Williams et al. (2021b)

For more information, go toManagement approaches
Figure 46 Cumulative number of introduced species first detected in Australia, by land-use zone and year range
Bar graphs showing that in the intensive land use zone, the total number of introduced species has climbed from 2030 in 1980 to 2405 at present and within these, invasive species has climbed from 100 to 126. In the extensive land use zone, the total numbe

Notes:

  1. The intensive land-use zone, extensive land-use zone and relatively natural zone are defined in Figure 6. These zones exclude the following bioregions: Coral Sea, Indian Tropical Islands, Pacific Subtropical Islands, Subantarctic Islands (i.e. that include Australian territories that are remote from the Australian mainland).
  2. The initial year range is 1901–80, followed by 5-year increments to 2020.

Sources: EcoAssets (2021), Pagad et al. (2018)

For more information, go toIntroduced and invasive species
Figure 47 Cumulative number of plants and vertebrate animals introduced to Australia, by land-use zone and year range
Bar graphs showing that there are more introduced species in the intensive use zone in 2020 (2232) than in the extensive use (1345) or relatively natural (660). In remote territories in 2020 there were 778. In all cases, the numbers increase with time, an

Notes:

  1. The intensive land-use zone, extensive land-use zone and relatively natural zone are defined in Figure 6. An additional zone is shown for Australian territories that are remote from the Australian mainland, to include the following bioregions from IBRA7 in this analysis: Coral Sea, Indian Tropical Islands, Pacific Subtropical Islands, Subantarctic Islands.
  2. The initial year range is 1901–80, followed by 5-year increments to 2020.

Sources: Pagad et al. (2018), EcoAssets (2021); Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA), version 7 (Thackway & Cresswell 1995, DoE 2016)

For more information, go toIntroduced and invasive species
Table 5 Vulnerability to soil organic carbon loss from Australia’s topsoil (0–30 centimetres depth) by land-use intensity zone

Land-use intensity zone

Vulnerability to soil organic carbon loss

Extent of zone (hectares)

Extent of zone as a percentage of all Australia

Percentage of zone modified by land use

Minimum

Mean

Maximum

Intensive land-use zone

0.19

0.50

1.49

191,630,854

24.97

49.47

Extensive land-use zone

0.18

0.34

1.54

188,942,767

24.62

2.34

Relatively natural zone

0.19

0.37

0.91

386,997,032

50.42

1.46

Notes:

  1. Vulnerability is an index derived from the ratio of particulate organic carbon to the sum of humus and resistant organic carbon.
  2. Australia’s land-use intensity zones as defined in Figure 6.

Sources: Soil organic carbon loss vulnerability (Viscarra Rossel et al. 2019b, Viscarra Rossel et al. 2019a)

For more information, go toCarbon