Can’t see forest for the trees: Farmers push back against EU deforestation regulation

What is deforestation? That’s the question Australia’s cattle industry has sought to answer as it fights against an incoming European Union regulation.

Mulga trees make good fodder for cattle during drought.

Australia’s cattle industry is pushing back against the EU’s moves to lock up Australian farming land and will seek to invalidate claims from environmental activists that threaten to torpedo the nation’s $10bn beef exports.

Industry body Cattle Australia will on Monday release definitions around deforestation and agriculture that align with state and federal laws and the farming methods used on the country’s vast grazing properties.

The organisation wants the government to adopt the definitions in its ongoing discussions with the EU, which is preparing to introduce a deforestation regulation that will require traders to prove that certain commodities they import – soybeans, cattle, coffee, cocoa, palm oil, rubber and timber – are sustainably sourced.

It would also help the industry push back against claims from ­environmental non-government organisations of illegal and rampant deforestation in Australia.

NGOs, including Greenpeace, The Australian Conservation Foundation and the Wilderness Society, claim the beef industry is driving a “deforestation crisis” and have been pressuring corporate organisations and the EU to adopt a stricter definition of deforestation that is inconsistent with state and federal laws and could see cattle farmers, who use traditional vegetation management techniques on their properties, fall afoul of the EU’s new regulations.

Clearing of the Amazon rainforest in Brazil. Picture: Carlos Fabal/AFP

The issue was raised as a “matter of urgency” in a bipartisan Labor and Coalition motion in the Senate last week.

Agitation from activists has seen Australia dubbed a deforestation hotspot, including in a social media post by actor Leonardo DiCaprio in February, on par with countries like Brazil, where the clearing of the Amazon rainforest for cattle farms was a catalyst for the EU deforestation regulation.

Australian farmers say the comparison is unfair because it is inconsistent with what is considered deforestation in internationally recognised frame­works and does not differentiate between legal, permitted vegetation management under local regulations.

While beef exports into the EU are relatively small at $130m, the beef sector is concerned that being cut out of its market will set a precedent for other countries to ­follow.

They also fear that organisations such as banks, super­markets and major players in the supply chain could adopt similar definitions as the supply chain and financial sector come under pressure to disclose their efforts to be more sustainable.

Cattle Australia chief executive Chris Parker said the definitions and recommendations out­lined in its Land Management Commitment Strat­­egy were intended to provide certainty for Australian beef producers, uphold environmental protections and guarantee equitable market ­opportunities. “In a modern global context where Australia is a key player in the global beef trade, exporting over $10bn annually, the alignment of Australian definitions with global definitions to ensure equivalency is crucial,” Dr Parker said.

Cattle Australia chief executive Chris Parker.

“Globally, there is clear recognition of the importance of food production, and Australian definitions enable us to demonstrate the Australian regional context and the land management practices vital to maintaining food production, healthy landscapes and biodiversity.

“The Australian beef industry plays a crucial role in addressing the world’s food security and ­climate challenges by exporting 70 per cent of our product to over 100 countries globally.

“It is vital this role is recognised, and the industry is supported by both the government and the Australian people.”

In August, Woolworths committed to a “zero deforestation” policy but expressed support for the creation of a localised definition of the issue. Westpac last year became the first major bank in the country to announce a zero deforestation target, which it said would be consistent with “existing law in most states”.

Crucially, both the Woolworths and Westpac definitions would not classify legal clearing of vegetation regrowth, a common practice on Australian farms, as deforestation.

Instead, it would apply to illegal clearing of remnant vegetation, which is protected by law in most states. Nor would it apply to land that is currently used for grazing or agriculture. The definition of agricultural land and forest are sticking points in Canberra’s discussions with Brussels.

Under existing international frameworks, including the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation, deforestation is a change in land use, not in tree cover. It is unclear whether the EU would recognise the vast cattle properties that make up the grass-fed beef industry as agricultural land. Last week, Labor and the ­Coalition jointly called for the EU to delay the introduction of the regulation until there was clarity about how it would define deforestation and agricultural land.

Deforestation? Mulga trees are pushed over as last resort to feed livestock during drought. Picture: AAP Image/Dave Hunt

Labor senator Raff Ciccone and Nationals senator Matt Canavan introduced a bipartisan ­motion, declaring the EU’s policy was a “matter of urgency”.

“The significant impact that the EU deforestation regulation will likely have on Australian beef producers because of the EU’s definition of forest and uncertainty about its implementation; and hence the consequent need to delay the implementation of the regulation until these matters can be resolved,” the motion said.

Senator Canavan told The Australian it was unusual for both major parties to back such a ­motion, but it showed the significance of the issue.

“The real concern is whether this forms a precedent,” Senator Canavan said. “There’s a strong bipartisanship on this and I applaud the government for doing what it can to support our industry. Life in the Australian bush should not be regulated out of Brussels.”

On Friday, Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said the government did not want Australian beef producers caught up in the EU ­deforestation regulation.

“We have written to the EU with our concerns about how that might be applied,” Ms Collins said.

“We want to make sure that Australian agriculture products are not impeded.

“We have strong environmental laws in Australia, we have great public health and food safety laws, and of course we have terrific biosecurity, so I do not want to see any Australian products impeded because of that.”

Cattle Australia says agricultural land is land used for the production of food and fibre, including the grazing of livestock, and is identifiable under the ­National Australian Land Use Mapping Classification. The ­organisation defines forest as an area “dominated by trees having ­usually a single stem and a mature or potentially mature stand height exceeding 2m and with existing or potential crown cover of over­storey strata about equal to or greater than 20 per cent”. Deforestation is classed as the illegal clearing of forests “on land, used for agricultural and non-agricultural purposes, that violates vegetation management laws”.