One of Greenpeace’s examples of recent deforestation in Queensland. Photo: Greenpeace
WHILE deforestation policies from both Europe and the supermarkets have been the source of debate for some years now, the calls for producers to urgently comply have seemingly come out blue in recent times.
Industry groups have been sending producers texts and issuing press releases urging them to opt into a geolocation system or risk losing access to the high-value European market.
Coles and Woolworths have both indicated that they will be looking for whole-of-life traceability to support their deforestation policies.
And, groups like the Australian Conservation Foundation have been adding to the pressure by calling on Government to require industry share the locations of its producers to all consumers.
With pressure seemingly coming from all directions, it is worth taking a step back to look at where this is all coming from.
What is industry saying?
Industry-owned Integrity Systems Company set up the tool in preparation for Europe’s ban on goods linked to deforestation, which is scheduled to start on December 31 this year.
Europe has indicated that it will be a requirement for beef importers to take verifiable geolocation coordinates from their suppliers.
Those coordinates are to be handed over to the European Commission by the importer during audits, who will use them to see if deforestation has occurred. They also need to provide evidence of customers obeying laws within their own country.
On the basis that it was a regulatory requirement and that producers could voluntarily opt in, Cattle Australia (CA), the Australian Lot Feeders’ Association (ALFA) and the Australian Meat Industry Council (AMIC) made the agreement with ISC to set up the geolocation system in the NLIS.
It shares a single longitude and latitude point of one property.
ISC chief executive officer Jo Quigley said the system was designed to comply with the legislation, while protecting privacy.
“The system provides the coordinates without linking them to any personal or property details,” Ms Quigley said.
“This ensures that while the necessary location data is shared, the privacy of individuals and their properties remains protected.”
Since the release of the geolocation tool earlier this year, CA, ALFA and AMIC have jointly been urging EU producers to opt in or risk losing market access, noting with urgency in recent weeks the looming deadline for hides.
What does Europe want?
Europe has indicated that it will be requiring all beef imports to come with geolocation data.
Australia has been deemed a low-risk country by the EU, meaning that only 1pc of imports from Australia will be audited – as opposed to 3pc for medium risk countries and 9pc for high-risk countries.
The legislation is not entirely popular within the EU, with the European Parliament recently voting to add a “negligible risk” category for countries with stable or increasing forest area. Cattle Australia and the Federal Government both believe Australia would fit that category.
There is some talk that this uncertainty and concern about the burden on importers could result in another delay.
Other major beef exporters to the EU, including a group of countries from South America have voiced opposition to the EUDR and doubt has been cast on whether they have the traceability systems to comply with regulation.
What is the Australian Government saying?
Beef Central contacted the Federal Government to see if it had sought equivalency with other suppliers to the EU – especially the above countries.
“The Government continues to engage with the European Commission on the need for simplification of the regulation to reduce the burden on Australian companies exporting to the EU,” a spokesperson for the agriculture department said.
The Department has a webpage explaining the obligations of producers in the regulations.
What do the supermarkets want?
Both Woolworths and Coles have been non-committal about whether they will want access to the geolocation tool to support their deforestation targets.
In announcing its plans to go deforestation-free last month, Coles highlighted that it did not have access to National Livestock Identification System.
Environmental groups responded by calling for the industry to open up access to NLIS system in various ways. The Australian Conservation Foundation said all Government funding for the NLIS should be contingent on all consumers having access to the database.
Cattle Australia said it was concerned about the idea of opening up the NLIS database for the purpose of deforestation policies.
Asked whether they supported the industry’s geolocation called, the ACF’s business lead Nathaniel Pelle said: “We have not closely examined the tool but to the extent that it uses the NLIS to ensure geospatial data is available to customers it seems sensible that the same data it provides to Europeans should be available to Coles and Woolworths and to Australian consumers.”
Australia is a sovereign nation with a healthy parliamentary democratic system of governance. We have local,state and federal government vegetation and environmental rules and regulatory management plans in place which are policed and enforced at all levels. That the EU is asking to geolocate our farms is a bit odd and somewhat surprising given that we have trustworthy institutions here in Australia.
Re deforestation debate & influence on climate change....
Firstly it needs to be acknowledged that the climate, country & population is vastly different between Europe and & Australia
Before European settlement the majority of present day vegetation did not exist.
Before dams, artesian & sub-artesian bores were put down in early 1900s,
when drought set in the rivers & waterholes would dry up making the land uninhabitable to humans & wildlife.
When the drought broke the grasses grew with nothing to eat them. Inevitably there would have been dry storms in hot weather killing some or all the vegetation that tried to grow. This scenario occurred repeatedly , over time leaving the vast majority of our Australian landscape with limited vegetation. The open Australian landscape is well documented in our early explorers diaries. From these observations it is very clear that the majority of Australian land was naturally open to semi open country prior to our settlement
The imposition of proposed deforestation rules is being driven by people with limited practical experience
Denis Conway Taroom
If consumers want to know where their red meat comes from they should be asking for information from the supplier or buying paddock to plate. Is it the location of animal birth or finishing that is to be disclosed? Very sure broccoli & soya bean come from an area of deforestation.
Re EU requirements
It appears that there is a serious lack of research, from those who should have known better.
Jeff Forster
What a load of garbage. I dont wont any other country telling me what to do. Target the renewable energy sector they are certainly making a mess in this beautiful country.
Our industry bodies are letting us down again. Tell these EU bureaucrats where to go.
This is not much of an ask and frankly should have been done years ago. Of course the usual oldies who always make everything more painful that it should be will whinge and bleat but frankly they should do what is good for themselves and opt-in. It is a no brainer.
no this is thin end of the wedge which equals too much control by foreign entities
more BS red tape for feel good outcomes
Two questions about deforestation . What does it really mean? And when is it recorded as happening ( where does regrowth fit in )? It seams no problem for EU countries to have cleared their land centuries ago but the rest of the world is in trouble if cleared in last few years.
Ridiculous, after centuries of preparation to turn the land productive to feed an increasing world population they now want to limit the amount of food and protein avaiable to the world
They would be better off targeting the renewable energy sector for their vandalism in clearing thousands of square kilometers of land and destroying habitat
I smell a rat! Sure, farmers in general have nothing to hide but Governments and global controllers do have things to hide. NLIS was not intended to be used for any other reason than Biosecurity. Again, access to this data smells as well. Be careful producers
IMO, I am sick and tired of the EU imposing on me another regularity requirement. The EU is using every means possible to impose on the rest of the world their view of what should be done to combat climate change. They seem to disregard sovereign elected governments and the progress they are making and arrogantly say "it is our way only".
The only way I can voice my opposition to this sort of behaviour, is like a child throwing a tantrum, just ignore it.
Farmers who are complying with Australian law can be found in breach particularly with regrowth.
Definition of deforestation varies
It is just ludicrous. A single geolocation point serves what purpose exactly.
No one other then the producer will know the property boundaries. Just pick a spot on your that is naturally treeless and all your cattle came from there. No one is going to know any different and no one is going to care.
Lets be brutally frank, the EU are doing it for feel good purposes and Coles and Woolworths are doing it for marketing purposes.
Agreed! This is another control measure by people whose designs seem like another step against privacy and good farming skills, so they can intervene further to force their ideological bent on those who are doing well, without it.
About time!
Only those who have something to hide would be against this. Good on you Coles.
Wayne i think you are confusing reluctance with concern. I think most producers concerns/ scepticism arise from the rushed nature of this process. quite poor that something agreed to sometime ago is being rushed through on us with moral or emotional force. thankfully the system actually protects farmers rights to handout this information (which is unusual). we can only guess as to what information our departments hand over without our knowledge. so to come back to your statement. if the government actually did there job and informed us early enough we possibly might have a different attitude. given our governments current track record around trust I'd say that's well and truly broken. cheers Matthew Della Gola
Seems pretty clear and uncomplicated to me. One set of coordinates per property. Dunno why you're making it sound harder than it is.
There will be many opinions of what the definition of deforestation is and to what extent farmer tree planting is considered. It would appear that native and exotic vegetation will be included. Natural dieback, extreme weather and bushfire impacts are other considerations.
Livestock Producer Groups and Federal/State Govt representatives must be the only persons with the legality to enter on privately held properties.
The overall concept must not be an open door for such groups as Greenies and Animal Rights.
Signed C Miller, Beef Producer.