EU’s new deforestation laws raise ‘very real concerns’ for Australian cattle producers

Federal Labor is calling for clarity on looming deforestation laws in the European Union amid concern from farmers the new rules could impede Australia’s lucrative beef trade. From 2025, EU companies will be prevented from importing beef products from properties where deforestation has occurred over the past four years. Federal Agriculture Minister Murray Watt has written to the EU Commissioner for the Environment, outlining his concerns and calling for a delay in the new provisions. He said at the Beef Australia exhibition in Rockhampton on May 7 the provisions had created a mood of uncertainty but played down their potential impact. “There is understandably very real concern about what that will mean for Australian businesses that are either already exporting to Europe or want to have the opportunity to do so in the future,” Senator Watt said. “The Australian Government’s strong view is that it won’t, and should not, impact Australian beef exports.” About 3750 tonnes of Aussie beef worth $143 million is exported to the EU each year, accounting for about 1.3 per cent of the nation’s total beef exports. Senator Watt acknowledged there was “a lot of uncertainty and confusion” in the industry around what the provisions would mean for Australian cattle producers. “I have requested that the EU Commissioner delay its implementation until all requirements are fully understood and to avoid any adverse impact on our agriculture trade,” he said. Senator Watt later told the ABC it was “still very unclear” how the provisions would operate but did not believe they would “apply to Australia”. “We think that they’re more targeting other countries with much more widespread practices than happen here,” he said. “I don’t believe … that our farmers engage in deforestation in the way that we do see in other parts of the world. But we don’t want to see an interpretation of those rules by Europe that unfairly blocks Australian farmers and we need to work this out.” The comments were made as the beef industry released a snapshot on how it was tracking on sustainability. The annual update of the Australian beef sustainability framework noted the interpretation of deforestation could differ. “These requirements, which include definitions of forest height and canopy, do not relate to bioregions and they ignore extensive environmental research undertaken in an Australian context,” Mark Davie, chair of the framework’s steering group, said. The annual update found the removal of primary vegetation was at an historic low of 0.43 per cent. But conservationists warned the figure still represented a lot of land being cleared. “In Queensland, where we have the best data, 90 per cent of the forest removal is to make room for sheep and cattle,” the Australian Conservation Foundation’s Nathaniel Pelle said. The annual update also looked at the amount of land being managed by producers for biodiversity outcomes — a figure it put at 160 million hectares, or 55 per cent of Australia’s cattle-producing land, in 2023. Mr Davie, who is also a beef producer, conceded the figures around biodiversity were reliant on an interpretation from graziers rather than meeting any regulatory metric. “One of our biggest challenges is we don’t yet have the data and the indicators and the measurement techniques available to capture across our landscape,” he said. The snapshot coincided with the release by peak industry body Cattle Australia of the draft principles for a new “land management commitment”. The commitment would underpin an industry led policy position on deforestation for international acceptance. “Given the varied ESG compliance requirements we are facing, including biodiversity and natural capital reporting, there is strong urgency to provide a clear pathway to deliver beef products with deforestation-free credentials into our global markets,” Cattle Australia chief executive Chris Parker said. Referring to the EU’s new deforestation regulation, Dr Parker cautioned the Australian Government against “urgently transacting on compliance requirements”, which he said “would likely have unintended consequences”.