Environmental Management Systems: Cattle Industry Pilot

Summary

Summary

1) EMS should be offered to producers as an environmental management service tool for the continuous improvement of their natural environment.

2) Obstacles to the uptake of EMS by producers are the financial burden and the time cost to implement and maintain the system. Also significant is the need to change the ethos of producers towards environmental stewardship and a systems approach to management.

3) Provided there is sufficient incentive to cover the producers’ costs in time and auditing costs, a voluntary EMS using the principles of the ISO 14001 standard is achievable by the majority of the industry. Certification to the ISO 14001 standard would be too demanding for most producers.

4) Currently due the lack of incentives, the financial cost of certification to ISO 14001 and the subsequent cost of surveillance audits will limit the number of producers attaining certification.

5) The preferred way forward is to construct a four-tiered approach towards improving the environment, beginning with an environmental self- assessment, followed by an environmental check-list, followed by an industry EMS and finally an EMS that is certified to the ISO 14001 standard.

6) The first tier being an environmental self-assessment would constitute the initial environmental review component of an EMS.

7) The second tier would be an environmental check-list, which could be audited by a Cattlecare auditor. In line with the principles of ISO 14001, the minimum environmental standard is to meet legislation and industry codes of practice.

8) The third tier would be an industry EMS that continues to adopt the principles of the ISO 14001 standard and is audited along-side Cattlecare by a suitably qualified industry auditor. The elements of Cattlecare could be included in the EMS.

9) The fourth and final tier would be an EMS that is certified to the ISO 14001 standard and is audited by a JAS-ANZ accredited auditor.

10) All tiers would be supported by training in the basic principles of environmental stewardship, EMS and the ISO 14001 standard. This training should involve paid producer champions who will assist in translating the components of EMS into a consistent, user-friendly language.

11) The higher up the tier scale towards the ISO 14001 certified EMS, the more risk analysis and target setting is done by the actual land manager and less by the industry administrator.

12) A range of simple tangible incentives that incorporate financial, land and water resource access, and training should be promoted. External auditing will provide the integrity to allow preferential access to these incentives.

13) The red meat industry should lead the way in working closely with all stakeholders to see that there is not a proliferation of approaches to environmental improvement programs, which most likely would give conflicting and confusing messages to producers, consumers and the wider community.

14) There is scope for MLA to form several monitor farms from the pilot groups to give longer-term information on the costs and benefits of EMS and promote the grazing industry’s environmental stewardship to the wider community. This may be best achieved by forming a partnership(s) with non-industry stakeholders.

15) An industry-approved and developed approach to environmental improvement will offer producers a more significant role as self-regulators.

16) Improved environmental care of the land through EMS must be accompanied by the education of the consumer and the general community if the full social and economic flow-on benefits are to be realized.