Day: November 30, 2021

Danone: the milk gets vegan competition

Danone converts its entire dairy factory to plant-based products from the Alpro brand!
As part of the global change in diet, Danone is converting one of its dairies to plant-based products from the Alpro brand

Danone recently announced that it will invest 43 million euros ($ 49 million) by 2022 to convert its dairy in Villecomtal-sur-Arros, southern France, into an Alpro-branded plant-based production facility.

This year, this was preceded by an investment of 16.5 million euros in the Alpro plant in Issenheim (Eastern France).

Danone, who also owns the Evian water and Activia yogurt brands, said the French plant-based food market has tripled in seven years and is expected to grow by another 50% by 2025.

A view taken on November 23, 2020 shows a part of the entrance to the Danone factory in Bailleul, northern France. – (Photo by DENIS CHARLET/AFP via Getty Images)

“We are seeing growing consumer interest in plant-based foods in the country.
Many consumers are looking for herbal solutions to have a more varied and varied diet, ” said François Eyraud from Danone France.

The factory is to be rebuilt in autumn 2022 and will start producing the first Alpro brand beverages from the second quarter of 2023.

https://vegconomist.de/unternehmen-und-portraits/danone-stellt-molkerei-pflanzliche-produkte-der-marke-alpro-um/

And I mean…This decision does not come as a surprise.
Consumer trends changed rapidly during the corona pandemic.
In any case, the company has complained of a drop in sales of 70% in Bavaria over the past ten years.

In the past two years, its coveted Quark yogurt cream, Greek yogurt, Danone Mars chocolate yogurt and Danone Disney fruit yogurt… suddenly fell into disrepute; Corona had destroyed the illusion of safe dairy products.
Danone, unlike its competition, was hit much harder by the corona pandemic.

The Danone plant near Würzburg (Germany) wants to respond more quickly to consumer wishes and, according to the French company, also invest in plant-based products.
Well, yes … The global pandemic has accelerated some aspects of the upheaval in the food sector and changed others.

The new head of Danone Richard Trechman said: “We have had a massive rethinking! We want to become an” Activist Company “, Danone’s vision is: “One Planet. One Health “….

Of course, within the framework of a capitalist system, because Danone already terminated the supply contract with 46 dairy farmers in Bavaria at the end of January 2019, which has consequently greatly reduced the number of dairy farmers in the region.

Some talk about job losses, we talk about less animal suffering.
Because if there are no more animal products on the shelf, then the consumer will not buy them.
And we would not mind if Danone increased its sales through plant-based products.

My best regards to all, Venus

Welcome Everybody – Translate Articles With A Simple Move.

Welcome to everybody and all our new supporters who we cannot mention by name individually.

See all our international visitors at:

https://clustrmaps.com/site/1a9kn

Please remember that we have a ‘translator’ section on the site, where you can read all the articles in many languages than English.

Just go to ‘Translate’ on the left hand side and select which language you would like to read in.

Regards Mark and Venus.

USA: Traditional Thanksgiving: Where the “Sacred” and the Profane Intersect.

This is a 3 page post.

WAV Comment:

Thanks as always to supporter friend Stacey at ‘Our Compass’ for sending this link across.

Regards Mark

 

Traditional Thanksgiving: Where the “Sacred” and the Profane Intersect | Our Compass (our-compass.org)

 

Traditional Thanksgiving: Where the “Sacred” and the Profane Intersect

NOVEMBER 29, 2021

“Two turkeys — named Peanut Butter and Jelly — were pardoned by President Biden on Friday during this year’s annual turkey pardoning ceremony.” “I want to take a moment to recognize the brave turkeys that weren’t so lucky, who didn’t get to ride the gravy train to freedom,” Obama said from the Rose Garden in November 2016. “Who met their fate with courage and sacrifice and proved that they weren’t chicken.” 

Continued on next page.
 

Australia: NSW laws criminalising secret recordings of animal cruelty ‘too great a burden on speech’, high court hears.

Source – Guardian, London.

NSW laws criminalising secret recordings of animal cruelty ‘too great a burden on speech’, high court hears | Animal welfare | The Guardian

NSW laws criminalising secret recordings of animal cruelty ‘too great a burden on speech’, high court hears

Animal rights group in legal fight against laws which provide no public-interest exemption for use of footage

Laws criminalising the use of secretly recorded vision of animal cruelty and abuse are posing “too great a burden on speech”, animal rights activists have told the high court.

The Farm Transparency Project, an Australian animal advocacy group, launched a case earlier this year arguing New South Wales laws restricting the use of covert footage were an unfair burden on freedom of political communication.

The state’s Surveillance Devices Act criminalises the use of footage or audio that was obtained using a listening device or hidden camera, but, unlike other states, gives no public-interest exemption.

The laws have been used to pursue activists on criminal charges and have prevented media outlets from using footage depicting cruelty or abuse in abattoirs and knackeries across the state.

Guardian Australia was recently prevented from showing secretly recorded footage of ex-racehorses being sent for slaughter at NSW pet food factories, a clear breach of industry rules.

In its written submissions to the high court, the Farm Transparency Project said the case was not about how activists were perceived by the general public.

“It is about the law that is challenged,” it said.

“Whether the plaintiffs are viewed as admirable activists, or vulgar vigilantes, or something in between, is irrelevant. If anything, the case is about the publishers whose freedom to publish is curtailed.”

The submissions point to similar laws in Victoria, the Northern Territory, South Australia and Western Australia, which contain carve-outs allowing the use of such footage that accommodates the implied right to freedom of political communication.

“That is essentially because the blanket prohibition is too great a burden on speech, having regard to the legitimate social interests in the publication of surveillance device material, especially to ‘blow the whistle’,” the transparency project argues.

“It is not to be overlooked that vigilantism cannot be condoned. But this is to highlight the importance of careful balancing – in each case – of where the public interest lies, which in turn, highlights the importance of a ‘public interest’ exemption.”

The submissions point to the greyhound live baiting scandal as an example of a public interest served by the publication of such footage. That video helped spark a public inquiry and a finding that the NSW industry had lost its social licence, prompting a proposed ban that was not implemented after a backlash.

‘Horrific scene’: more than 35 horses shot dead on outback Queensland property

Read more

The Farm Transparency Project executive director, Chris Delforce, has said previously the case has broader implications for so-called “ag-gag” laws across the country.

Delforce said challenging the validity of the law would help prevent other jurisdictions from enacting similar blanket bans.

“We’ve had enough – these industries need more transparency, not less,” he said. “The animals suffering in our nation’s farms, slaughterhouses and knackeries deserve to have their stories told, and the Australian public deserves the opportunity to hear them.”

Not all animal rights groups support the use of hidden cameras. The RSPCA is opposed to using unlawful means to fight for animal welfare.

The high court is expected to receive submissions from the NSW government this week, and Farm Transparency Project will be given a chance to reply next month.

Regards Mark

South Korea: Said Last Week It Will Launch a Task Force To Consider Outlawing Dog Meat Consumption – But It Will Not Be Easy To Get There !

FILE - Dogs are seen in a cage at a dog meat farm in Siheung, South Korea, Feb. 23, 2018. South Korea said Thursday, Nov. 25, 2021, it'll launch a government-led task force to consider outlawing dog meat consumption, about two months after the country's president offered to look into ending the centuries-old eating practice. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon, File)
FILE – Dogs are seen in a cage at a dog meat farm in Siheung, South Korea, Feb. 23, 2018. South Korea said Thursday, Nov. 25, 2021, it’ll launch a government-led task force to consider outlawing dog meat consumption, about two months after the country’s president offered to look into ending the centuries-old eating practice. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon, File)

25/11/21

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — South Korea on Thursday said it will launch a task force to consider outlawing dog meat consumption after the country’s president offered to look into ending the centuries-old practice.

Restaurants that serve dog meat are dwindling in South Korea as younger people find dog meat a less appetizing dining option and pets are growing in popularity. Recent surveys indicate more people oppose banning dog meat even if many don’t eat it.

In a statement, seven government offices including the Agriculture Ministry said they decided to launch the group comprising officials, civilian experts and people from related organizations to deliver recommendations on possibly outlawing dog meat consumption. It said authorities will gather information on dog farms, restaurants and other facilities while examining public opinion.

“As the number of families with pet animals has risen rapidly and public interest in animal rights and welfare has grown in our country, there have been increasing voices saying that it’s difficult now to see dog meat consumption as just traditional food culture,” Prime Minister Kim Boo-kyum, the country’s No. 2 official, said ahead of the statement’s release.

The government says the initiative, the first of its kind, doesn’t necessarily guarantee the banning of dog meat. The joint statement noted that “public awareness of the basic right (to eat preferred foods) and animal rights issues are tangled in a complicated manner” when it comes to dog meat consumption.

The seemingly vague stance drew quick protests from both dog farmers and animal rights activists.

Farmers say the task force’s launch is nothing but a formality to shut down their farms and dog meat restaurants, while activists argue the government’s announcement lacks resolve to outlaw dog meat consumption.

Ju Yeongbong, general secretary of an association of dog farmers, accused the government of “trampling upon” the people’s right to eat what they want and farmers’ right to live.

Lee Won Bok, head of the Korea Association for Animal Protection, called the government’s announcement “very disappointing” because it didn’t include any concrete plans on how to ban dog meat consumption.

“We have deep doubt about whether the government has a resolve to put an end to dog meat consumption,” Lee said.

About 1 million to 1.5 million dogs are killed each year for food in South Korea, a decrease from several millions about 10-20 years ago. Thousands of farmers currently raise a total of about 1 million to 2 million dogs for meat in South Korea, according to Ju’s organization.

Ju said the farmers, mostly poor, elderly people, want the government to temporarily legalize dog meat consumption for about 20 years, with the expectation that demand will gradually taper off. Lee said animal rights organizations want a quicker end of the business.

“South Korea is the only developed country where people eat dogs, an act that is undermining our international image,” Lee said. “Even if the K-pop band BTS and the (Korean drama) Squid Game are ranked No. 1 in the world, foreigners are still associating South Korea with dog meat and the Korean War.”

Lee accused many farmers of animal cruelty and other illegal activities when they raise and slaughter their dogs. Ju said that activists “exaggerated” such information, and that it only applies to a small number of farms.

According to Lee, dogs are consumed as food in North Korea, China and Vietnam as well as in South Korea.

In September, President Moon Jae-in, a dog lover, asked during a meeting with the prime minister “if it’s time to carefully consider” a ban on dog meat consumption, sparking a new debate over the issue.

Dog meat is neither legal nor explicitly banned in South Korea.

South Korea to launch task force on banning dog meat | AP News

Regards Mark