Adam Fennessy talking in senate estimates.

THE Federal agriculture department has emphasised Australia’s increasing forest cover when questioned about “deforestation” claims made by the Australian Conservation Foundation and the Wilderness Society.

The department faced extensive questioning about deforestation in this week’s Senate Estimate hearings in Canberra, with Europe recently announcing a delay to its impending ban on goods linked to deforestation.

With the deforestation legislation on the agenda and companies, like Woolworths and McDonald’s, legislating their own deforestation targets, groups like the ACF have been lobbying hard to influence the situation.

Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson

Tasmanian Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson, who is a member of the Rural, Regional Affairs and Transport committee, came armed with reports the groups have done on the beef industry’s clearing.

He asked if the department believed whether deforestation for beef production was depriving native animals of their habitat.

Department of agriculture secretary Adam Fennessy said the department was focused the net change in forest cover.

“Australia’s total forest area has increased year-on-year since 2008 and is one of the few nations to sustain such an increase,” Mr Fennessy said.

The conversation continued with the different interpretations of land clearing data available in Australia, with Senator Whish-Wilson using gross land clearing data and the department using Australia’s net position.

Senator Whish-Wilson referred to the World Wildlife Fund’s claim that Australia was a “deforestation hotspot”, while the department referred to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation ranking Australia second in the world for increased forest cover.

With the EU’s deforestation regulations set to come into play in 2026, the department said it was working to make sure there was more clarity on definitions and that systems were put into place to make sure it did not add extra cost to the supply chain.

“It is not just Australia, it is Canada, Columbia, Indonesia, India, USA, Mexico Singapore and a long list who have raised concerns – including EU member states,” Mr Fennessy said.

Government pushing to reduce costs on industry

One of the main points of the EU’s definition of deforestation is that it excludes land that is predominantly used for agriculture.

Tina Hutchison from the Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisherires.

DAFF deputy secretary Tina Hutchison said the department was still clarifying its definition of agricultural land use and many other parts of the legislation.

“We are keeping the pressure on in Europe about Australia’s need for clarity,” Ms Hutchison said.

“For a market that already has significant barriers we need to continue to push on reducing the type of information and the cost it puts on Australian producers.”

Calls to bring producers into negotiations

As Beef Central recently highlighted, the producers who are likely to be impacted the most by the EU’s legislation are the ones who are receiving the least of a hearing in public discussion.

Nationals senator Matt Canavan said the department should look at taking a delegation of producers to the EU, to demonstrate Australia’s land management systems.

“I think if you get the people on the ground, they can show people in Brussels exactly what they do in Australia – which is totally different to what they do in Europe,” Mr Canavan said.

Nationals senator Matt Canavan.

“There are plenty of koalas on cattle properties. I have worked on a cattle property, you never see more beautiful cuddly creatures than on a farm.”

Ms Hutchison said one of the main points the department had been trying to emphasise to the EU was that there was no “one-size-fits-all” approach environmental management.

Mr Canavan said another point the make was that the EU’s regulation had no measures to offset land clearing, which could limit future development. He said it potentially could potentially limit the opportunities for Indigenous communities.

“We have made significant progress for the existing and established beef industry,” he said.

“If someone wanted to develop a property in somewhere like Cape York, there is an element of our laws where they can offset the impact under Australian law – but there is no such part of the EU law. I think it would great to engage with those Indigenous Australians.”