Absolutely I understand the argument, I am simply presenting Canada’s justification to account in a way that’s described as cheating. Which I don’t think is entirely correct but also is not completely illogical either.

From the Canadian government’s perspective they want to reward efforts to maintain old growth forest as well as reducing emissions, but only so much can be done with natural forest fires, so they would rather not penalize anyone (or themselves 😏). The Paris agreement relies on actions per country to meet the targets with little enforcement which is why there is room for “creative” accounting.