There are many variables that can be considered when mapping forest depletion or degradation, but some of the most important ones include the extent and type of forest cover, the rate at which trees are being removed or lost, the causes of forest loss (e.g. logging, fires, development), and the impact of forest loss on the surrounding ecosystem and local communities. Other factors that can be taken into account include the age and health of the remaining trees, the presence of protected areas or conservation efforts, and the availability of data and technology to monitor and track changes in forest cover over time. Ultimately, the best variables to consider will depend on the specific goals and context of the mapping effort.
I have a colleague who is researching this (Paula Rodriguez) and she may be able to add to this answer. The exact variables that are "best" to use will likely vary to some degree by region and forest type.
If forest depletion is being used as a synonym for forest loss, you might consider looking at past satelite or aerial images of your area of study and compare them with more recent images to then quantify forest loss using a spectral index, e.g.: Conference Paper A spectral index for highlighting forest cover from remotely...
To quantify forest degredation, we measure variables (here in southern Argentina) such as herbivore use by counting feces and browsed plants per plot, tree regeneration counts, understory species composition surveys, canopy cover, and more, in degraded (by logging, grazing, fire) and undegraded, reference forests. Generally speaking, setting up plots in reference, undegraded forests will allow you to establish a baseline for species compositions, trees per hectare and tree size classes (primary productivity), and herbivore use to then not only determine whether a forest is degraded or not, but to what extent it is degraded.