Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Joanne Rea on May 14, 2012 at 4:57pm

The world seems to be waking up to these REDD schemes (this is not the only one under a cloud). Not only Dale but Dr. Jennifer Marohasy has highlighted the article by Christopher Booker in The Telegraph.

 http://jennifermarohasy.com/2012/05/wwf-the-redd-menace-in-tanzania...

Dr. Marohasy is also obviously in posession of enough sound evidence to state that the 4 Corners film that shut down the entire Northern Live Cattle Trade was made by a professional production company from the UK and not by Lyn White heightening suggestions that the event may have been staged.

http://jennifermarohasy.com/2012/05/who-filmed-the-video-clip-of-au...Dale Stiller said:

It turns out that at the same that I wrote my opinion article for Beef Central that in the UK very similar thoughts were being typed by veteran journalist for the UK newspaper, The Telegraph, Christopher Booker.

How climate change has got Worldwide Fund for Nature bamboozled  [click here]

 

WWF has travelled too far from its original aim, to protect endangered species.

 

The WWF empire now derives a very hefty chunk of its income from partnerships   with governments, or the EU, or actual multinationals, such as Coca-Cola and   Sky, which like to use its iconic panda logo (originally designed by the   naturalist Peter Scott) to give an “eco-caring” gloss to their commercial   activities.

 

But this has led WWF into some rather odd little tangles, such as those which   have recently emerged over its activities in Tanzania. Much of its work   there is carried out under a UN climate change policy known as REDD+   (“reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation”), which is   part of the UN’s £17  billion Fast Start programme. Britain, giving £1.5   billion, is that programme’s second largest contributor after Japan

 

...it was revealed that thousands of   villagers had been evicted from the forest, their huts in the paddy fields   torched and their coconut palms felled. This was carried out by the   Tanzanian government’s Forestry and Beekeeping Division, with which WWF has   been working.

 

At this point, however, two American professors intervened. They had just   published a study of the delta in an environmental journal, entitled “The   REDD menace: resurgent protectionism in mangrove forests”. It was highly   critical of the so-called “fortress conservation” policy advocated by WWF   under REDD+, claiming that it was seriously damaging the traditional life of   those local communities which had been sustainably farming and fishing in   the area for centuries.

 

Just how far WWF has travelled from the noble purposes for which it was set up   was perfectly symbolised by the way it chose as its chief marketing tool the   slogan “Adopt a polar bear”. If this organisation still had concern for   endangered species closest to its heart, it would know that the idea that   polar bears are dying out due to global warming is no more than sentimental   propaganda. But then that is the main business that WWF now seems to be in –   very much at the expense of the rest of us and, of course, those communities   in the Rufiji delta.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Colin J Ely on May 15, 2012 at 3:46pm

Dale

Are you raising cattle this year? Did you raise cattle last year? Did you raise cattle 5 years ago? Ten years ago?

I rest my case Your Honour!  ;-)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeff Hutcho on May 15, 2012 at 3:50pm

Hi Colin,

Nah mate, Dale's raising hell, and good luck to him.

J

Colin J Ely said:

Dale

Are you raising cattle this year? Did you raise cattle last year? Did you raise cattle 5 years ago? Ten years ago?

I rest my case Your Honour!  ;-)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Thompson on May 15, 2012 at 11:05pm

If some one involved in the making of that documentary is found to have paid people to intentionally abuse animals, then they are not only guilty of violating Indonesian law prohibiting abuse, but also liable to the damage caused to thousands of Australians by airing false reports.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rob Moore on May 16, 2012 at 8:17am

Activist Watch By Sarah Hubbart
Sarah Hubbart is the communications director for the Animal Agriculture Alliance.

Who Will Shape the Future of Agriculture?

FacebookTweetLinkedInEmailShareThis

Comment Email Blog Send a tip

(The views and opinions expressed in this blog are strictly those of the author.)

The past weeks and months have been filled with announcements from well-known companies taking a public stance on farm animal production practices.

In April, fast food giant Burger King and the Safeway supermarket chain separately  announced that they would begin phasing out conventionally-raised pork products, presumably after long-term pressure from the Humane Society of the United States.

But will this actually improve animal well-being? The American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Academy of Swine Veterinarians both recognize gestation stalls as one option to ensure the well-being of pregnant sows.

But the debate over farm animal production practices is far from over. Interestingly, we also recently saw Domino’s Pizza reject a shareholder resolution from HSUS pushing for similar restrictions.

In related news, the New York Times hosted an essay contest asking entrants to defend the ethics of meat-eating. (Notably, and distressingly, many of the judges of the contest had a decidedly anti-meat stance. Peter Singer is considered the father of the animal rights movement in the U.S. and Jonathan Safran Foer’s book Eating Animals largely condemns modern animal agriculture.  (Regardless, I encourage you to check out this entry from Dr. Temple Grandin, which was notably not chosen as a finalist in the competition.)

Regardless of how you felt about the contest, it is an important reminder that the ethics of food have risen to the top of mind of many consumers and decision makers.

At the Animal Agriculture Alliance’s annual Stakeholders Summit last week, a panel entitled “Communicating Shared Values Across the Food Chain” focused on helping food producers build relationships with other segments of the food production and distribution process. The event moderator posed an important question: Who will dictate the future of food production? The panelists provided a surprising (to me) answer: culinary experts, restaurant operators, and foodservice.

It makes sense. Today we eat 50 percent of our meals outside of the home. More and more of us rely on restaurants and ready-made meals during our on-the-go lives. These food distribution channels understandably want to cater to the needs and wants of consumers. Agricultural companies should build (and strengthen) relationships with these partners now.

What do you think? Who will shape the future of agriculture and food production in this country?

5/15/2012

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rory Donnellan on May 16, 2012 at 12:15pm

There's an international agenda at work here and these Weird Wacky Fanatics (WWF) are merely part of the plan.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Donald Woods on May 16, 2012 at 3:00pm

Rob I am inclined to the view that the vast majority of people, including carnivores, omnivores and veges, will demand their form of food. The difficulties faced by farmers will probably continue ad infinitum unless or until the worlds agricultural population stop producing in large quantities for a while and let some go hungry.

Those that oppose farming practices and want it stopped.

Those that oppose animal husbandry and want it stopped.

Those that want all land to be covered with trees.

Nothing like a bit of hunger to bring most to heel.

I'm daydreaming of course as it is most unlikely to happen.

With a rapidly changing world goodness knows who will dominate but be assured that those who produce food will always be needed.

Rory's Weird Wacky Fanatics ( good definition )will probably still be around but as food shortages appear on the horizon they will become less and less significant.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeff Hutcho on May 16, 2012 at 3:31pm

Did anyone see photos of the empty food shops, line ups for bread etc in the old Soviet Union, back in the 50's and 60's.

Results from the system and the remnants of Lysenkoism , but can show how it can all go wrong, with the wrong policies.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ian Davies on May 16, 2012 at 8:10pm

ISO Standards will. IMO  And who is developing them?

Rob Moore said:

Activist Watch By Sarah Hubbart
Sarah Hubbart is the communications director for the Animal Agriculture Alliance.

What do you think? Who will shape the future of agriculture and food production in this country?

5/15/2012

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rob Moore on May 17, 2012 at 8:16am

From the CCA blog- don't know who  Carl is but he seems to have a good handle on the game-

 

Carl Comment 18.2 16 May 2012, 11:48 PM

New  WWF? What is it they do any way for Agriculture?

The Sustainable Development agenda by WWF is simply one thing, get The UN's Agenda 21 involved at the local level by influencing government policy.

Who knows best about beef?

WWF and its green Panda activists with a Leftwing political agenda or

Farmers and cattle ranchers who are actually involve in the productive activity?

The WWF is heavily involved with Goldman Sachs and its dollarisation of the new Carbon Trade Bubble.

WWF is involved in selling and puffing the trade for Climate Change bonds and Carbon Trade.

In fact WWF has Goldman Sachs and Bank of America bankers on its board of directors seeking to influence the cute WWF panda policies. Critical faculties stop with the cute panda, there is more. Continue reading to find out.

At best WWF should stick to its job instead of seeking to shape the producers policies.

Failure to observe this caveat on WWF means meat and food shortages on Australian tables with high prices, hardship for farmers and the destruction of the beef industries by Green activism. It means "GREEN TAPE" regulation.

See here about the conflict of interest by WWF and its Goldman Sachs men chairing the board of directors.

See here http://www.worldwildlife.org/who/board/index.html LAWRENCE H. LINDEN

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=WWF_USA:_Board_of_Directors

If in doubt about the WWF and Goldman Sachs use of "sustainable development", run a search on Goldman Sachs+WWF+Climate Change Bonds.

The WWF has an obvious conflict of interest on its policies with the billion dollar carbon trade and whatever is labelled "sustainable agriculture".

Farmers and Beef producers know best, not ideological leftists and financiers on the take, much less government bureaucrats. Consider the regulation of water and its trading rights, they have rendered profitable agriculture unfeasible by driving the cost of water high enough to force farm closures and the rural exodus of farmers to the cities, destruction of productive food capacity has occurred. At best regulation works for Agribusiness with the muscle to shape and lobby government and influence the funding of the NGOs ever present on public opinion.

Ignore this warning will mean over-regulation of food production, food shortages, high prices and billion dollar profits for the commodity price speculators of which Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Citibank and Bank of America derive their profits from.

 

Oops, blank comment. Please try again.

Reply Agree (1) Disagree (0)Alert moderator

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joanne Rea on May 17, 2012 at 8:21am

At the Rockhampton seminar, all parties backed away from setting standards including WWF.

All parties proclaimed that they did not want to send beef producers broke including WWF.

The WWF representative mentioned several already existing sustainability programmes and seemed to be implying that they could all be drawn into the programme. I have no idea if the owners of the programmes have been consulted but in most cases I suspect not.

I was left wondering what role WWF could possibly have in the process that would be of benefit to anyone.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ian Davies on May 17, 2012 at 4:21pm

This maybe of interest. Rob P & his groups. http://sustainabilitybusiness.com.au/Conference/

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 21
• 22
• 23
• 24
• 25
• …
• 39
• Next ›
• Page