The Vegan Mafia – Driving the Post-Animal Future of Food

Vegan Mafia? This particular ‘underworld’ is subversive, for sure, but nothing like as sinister as it sounds. In fact, it’s all good. It’s the nickname given to a group of committed (and super-rich) vegans, including the creator of Google Ventures Bill Maris, who choose to put their money where their mouth is, literally – in plant-based start-up companies. Proving that you can have strong ethical goals and still be hard-headed in business, they reckon their investments are a pretty safe bet on a greener future for food.

“There’s a whole community of us building and funding vegan companies,” says long time vegan Ryan Bethencourt.

Who is Ryan Bethencourt, you ask? He may not be a household name, even in vegan households, but he should be. 38 year old Miami-born Ryan is a highly-qualified bioscientist with degrees from Warwick, Cambridge and Edinburgh Universities. In 2014, he co-founded IndieBio, and has become a major mover and shaker in the post-animal bioeconomy, and advisor to The Good Food Institute

He and his team at IndieBio have funded 68 biotech start-ups to date, including Clara Foods (animal-free eggs), New Wave (algae- and plant-based ‘shrimp’), and Pembient (lab-made wildlife products).

Interestingly, each one of those companies completely independently of the others, describes itself on its website as ‘subversive’, or uses the verb ‘subvert’. Oxford English Dictionary: ‘To subvert’ meaning ‘To undermine the power and authority of an established system” What could be more perfect than undermining the atrocity that is animal agriculture in the 21st century.

Though our mafia are all vegan, what emerged in interviews with a handful of the ‘mafiosi’ conducted by CNBC, was that the start-ups they invest in don’t just target their new products at vegans – though of course we do get to reap the benefits. They love the idea that Beyond Meat for instance, has got their burgers selling from the meat counters in big grocery chains. And that eatery chain Veggie Grill primarily serves people who also eat meat – which is great, because obviously they’re not eating meat while they’re dining at Veggie Grill.

30 year old ‘Robot Guru’ aka billionaire Kyle Vogt, who in September last year hit the headlines by buying the most expensive house in San Francisco, is a VM (Vegan Mafia) newcomer. Just about the same time as he purchased the house, his wife opened Charlie’s Acres sanctuary for farm animals rescued from abuse, or destined for the slaughterhouse.

19748433_1330204487097843_8481510632620616645_n
Happy animals at Charlie’s Acres (pics from their Fb page)

Kyle figured that if his wife was busy saving them, it didn’t make sense for him to keep on eating them. So he went vegan.

A year on, his business angle is, that though appealing to people’s hearts has its place, creating plant-based foods that taste better and are cheaper than foods derived from animals makes the best business sense.

VM investor Seth Bannon is another remarkable vegan. He was only 14 years old when he began volunteering for advocacy organisations. Fast forward a few years: frustrated by the outmoded technology he found being used in the advocacy world – a good 10 years behind the video games he was playing – he set up Amicus: its mission: “To empower people to advocate for the causes they care about through technology”. Now Amicus’s cutting edge tech powers The Human Rights Campaign, Greenpeace, Everytown for Gun Safety, The Humane League, and more.

Amicus’s success opened Seth’s eyes to the potential for positive social change through business. He co-founded and still runs Fifty Years, a venture fund supportingentrepreneurs solving the world’s biggest problems with technology.”

But back to food. Seth may have ideals, but he has no illusions: “The case for giving up meat is clear: There’s a health case, an environmental case,” he said. (Not to mention an animal welfare/animal rights case.) “But we have largely given up on education as a tool for convincing people.”

As we all know to the animals’ cost, you can show people the horrors of animal ag, you can tell them how it’s wrecking the planet and contributing to climate change, you can say, animal products are bad for your health, but some people just do not want to know. The entrepreneurs Seth is backing, he says, look at the market through a “strict business lens.” 

So the VM look to support plant-based products that will be yes, healthier and environmentally friendly and cruelty-free, but most of all cheaper to produce than the current animal products they are looking to replace.

Geltor is a good example – a less expensive as well as cruelty-free plant-based method of making a replacement for gelatin  (currently produced by boiling the skin, tendons, bones from cows and pigs). Geltor’s aim is to disrupt/subvert the gelatin market with what is hoped will be a game-changing animal-free alternative. Because even if people don’t care about the animals, hard economics is an unanswerable argument.

The Future of Food: The Top 2 Trends Shaping The Food & Beverage Industry In 2018

CB Insights which sifts millions of media articles to track trends, lists the top 8 food trends for 2018. And the top 2 of the 8 are…… (drumroll here please):

Food Trend Number 1 Diet tribalization intensifying

That’s industry in-speak for rapid growth in the number of consumers adopting certain lifestyle-based diets, in particular the vegan diet (we’re a tribe!), and the paleo diet. “The paleo diet emphasizes natural, sustainable, plant-based foods, which relates to overall trends toward plant ingredients within the food space. Vegan and gluten-free foods have also moved into the mainstream since 2012.”

Revere (vegan energy drink powders), Rhythm Superfoods (vegan kale snacks) Koia (plant-based smoothies) are some of the vegan start-ups which have drawn investment this year. And tellingly, while start-ups in vegan and veggie meal kits like Sun Basket and Daily Harvest continue to attract funding, meal kit start-ups that are non-diet-specific (ie for omnivores) are struggling.

Food Trend Number 2: Alternative proteins diversify and attract meat leaders

With the runaway success of companies like Beyond Meat and Impossible Food, and ever-increasing consumer demand for plant-based foods, start-ups are sprouting up all over. And some are pioneering new kinds of plant protein – not just nuts and soy. We’re seeing pea protein, algae protein and chickpea protein. Ripple is a great example. Ripple attracted funding of $43.6 million. That is a lot of funding. Its pea-based ‘milk’ is already sold widely in major grocery store chains. And no cows were hurt in the making of this milk.

The Ripple Effect

This time we’re not talking pea milk. The financial and technological stimulus the Vegan Mafia has provided to the plant-based market has created such a stir in the food industry, it’s less like a ripple, more like a tidal wave. Meat corporations cannot afford to be left behind. The US’s biggest meat producer Tyson, last year acquired a 5% stake in Beyond Meat, and followed this by setting up a $150 million venture capital fund to support the development of plant-based foods. Tyson is excited about the fund because it gives the company “exposure to a fast-growing segment of the protein market”.² General Mills, Hormel Foods, and Maple Leaf Foods are some of the other giants grabbing a piece of the plant-based action.

Not satisfied with that, many of the mainstream companies are producing their own plant-based product lines. Pret A Manger for example opened a vegetarian-only restaurant, Veggie Pret.

veggie-pret-outside
UK-based Pret A Manger’s gamble with vegetarian-only restaurants paid off when it registered a 70 per cent increase in sales, enabling it to make it a permanent fixture © Pret A Manger

That proved so popular, this year the company announced plans to make it permanent. Ben and Jerry’s and Hellman’s are among others capitalising on the growing demand for vegan foods too.

Big Investors outside the food industry

Big investors outside the food industry, alarmed by the ravages animal ag inflicts on animals, the environment and the climate, are predicting and promoting a plant-based future too. In 2016 “a group of 40 investors including Aviva and Swedish state pension funds managing $1.25 trillion in assets launched a campaign to encourage 16 global food companies (including Kraft Heinz, Nestle, Unilever, Tesco and Walmart) to respond to the material risks of industrial farming and diversify into plant-based sources of protein.”

“The plant-based meat market is set to reach $5.9 billion by 2022 and could make up a third of the market by 2050 according to some estimates. Worldwide sales of non-dairy milk alternatives more than doubled between 2009 and 2015 to $21 billion over concerns regarding saturated fat levels, lactose intolerance, hormone content and antibiotic use in dairy cows, as well as questions on animal treatment.”

“Our population is set to increase to 10 billion people by 2050 and supplying protein to everyone will prove to be a challenge if we rely only on animal-based sources. This presents a compelling opportunity not only for forward looking investors but also innovative companies who want to profit from a burgeoning plant-based protein market that is set to grow by 8.4 percent annually over the next five years.”²

But would any of this have happened without the initial and ongoing $100s of millions impetus from the Vegan Mafia?

The host of pioneering plant-based companies, and the vegan investors backing them from behind the scenes, give us hope for the future. With the torrents of bad news we get daily on the sorry state of our world, it’s sometimes hard not to get down. But committed, driven, and talented vegans like Seth, Ryan, Kyle, Bill and the rest, still in the summertime of their lives, using their wealth so effectively to address the problems of the planet, set a rainbow for us in an otherwise dark and stormy sky. Long may the Vegan Mafia, and all the animals they are saving continue to flourish. And here’s hoping for a better tomorrow.

Follow Charlie’s Acres on Facebook here


Sources

¹Wiki

²Plant based alternatives attract investment from meat producers – Lifegate

Vegan mafia: food investor network includes Bill Maris, Kyle Vogt – CNBC

Billionaire tech entrepreneur Kyle Vogt, 30, is revealed to be the buyer of San Francisco’s most expensive mansion after dropping $21.8 million for it – Mail Online

Related posts

Big Meat, We’re Making You History!

When Everyone Is Telling You Meat Is The Bad Guy

This is the Future – 5 Awesome People Make Fabulous ‘Post-Animal’ Food

German Meat Companies Are Investing in Veg Meat

Which is Your Burger of Choice for the Future of Food?

Will New Pea Milk Spell Demise of Dairy?

The Bright New Age of the Humane Economy


This is very interesting – and also hopeful.: Conservation X Labs using the tech startup model to work on challenges in the difficult and complex space of environmental protection.Read more here


Are Meat & Dairy Really Bad for Sustainability & the Planet? UN Scientist Says Not

“As a Livestock Policy Officer working for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, I have been asked many times by the press to report on the negative environmental impacts of livestock.” Anne Mottet, PhD.

“Doing so, I came to realize that people are continually exposed to incorrect information that is repeated without being challenged, in particular about livestock feed. This study [will] better inform policy makers and the public.”

Anne Mottet’s study concludes that farming livestock is “a much smaller challenge to global food security than often reported.” I remain unconvinced.
Dr Mottet is an enthusiast for livestock farming Here are her reasons:
  • Meat makes up 18% of global calories and 25% of global protein consumption and provides essential micro-nutrients, such as vitamin B12, iron, and calcium
  • Livestock use large areas of pastures where nothing else could be produced
  • Animals add to agricultural production through manure production and draught power
  • Tending livestock provides income for people in rural areas
  • Because cattle graze and forage, they only need 0.6kg of protein from human food to produce 1kg of protein in milk and meat
  • Milk and meat are of “higher nutritional quality”. Livestock “turn edible crops into highly nutritious, protein-rich food.”
Dr Mottet’s points suggest livestock farming is an efficient use of resources

But is it? Critics of livestock farming say, because the animals consume food that could be eaten directly by humans, and need a lot of it to turn it into comparatively small quantities of meat or dairy, it’s a hugely inefficient food system. For example, it takes 7 kg of grain to produce 1kg of beef.

Not true, says Dr Mottet. Her study appears to show that only 3kg of cereals are needed to produce 1 kg of meat. To me that still sounds wasteful, just not quite so wasteful. In any case the UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) does not agree with her figure:

“The production of meat, milk and eggs leads to an enormous loss of calories grown in fields, since cereals and oil seeds have to be cultivated to feed to animals. According to calculations of the UNEP, the calories that are lost by feeding cereals to animals, instead of using them directly as human food, could theoretically feed an extra 3.5 billion people. Feed conversion rates from plant-based calories into animal-based calories vary; in the ideal case it takes two kilograms of grain to produce one kilo of chicken, four kilos for one kilogram of pork and seven kilos for one kilogram of beef.”

And according to the Union of Concerned Scientists Nearly 60% of the world’s agricultural land is used for beef production, yet beef accounts for less than 2% of the calories that are consumed throughout the world.”

If we are left in any doubt about livestock farming’s wastefulness, how about this? Thousands upon thousands of indoor cows – not outdoors grazing and foraging –   dutifully turning food humans could eat themselves like grain, into human food of “higher nutritional quality” (we’re talking the cows’ milk Nature intended for their own cow babies, so ‘human food’?) – Only then for niagaras of the stuff to be tipped straight out into fields or dumped in manure lagoons. Because that’s where 43 million gallons of US milk got jettisoned in the first 8 months of 2016. 43 million gallons surplus to requirements – not needed as ‘higher nutritional quality’ food for humans, but simply wasted. Efficient? Not so much.

Grazing and Foraging – The CAFO

The trouble with Dr Mottet’s ‘grazing and foraging’ point is, the vast majority of farmed cattle in the world never get the chance to graze and forage. Modern day cattle and dairy farming have given us the prison that is the CAFO.

“In the United States and other parts of the world, livestock production is becoming increasingly dominated by concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs). In a CAFO, animals are crammed by the thousands or tens of thousands, often unable to breathe fresh air, see the light of day, walk outside, peck at plants or insects, scratch the earth, or eat a blade of grass.”

“With the rise of factory farming, milk is now a most unnatural operation. The modern dairy farm can have hundreds, even thousands of cows. The animals spend their lives being fed in an indoor stall or a crowded feedlot. One of the largest dairy farms in the world is under construction in Vietnam and is slated to hold 32,000 cows.”

 Healthy food?

As for the “higher nutritional quality”, you certainly get plenty of extras in your milk: the hormones and growth factors produced in the cow’s own body, and with them synthetic hormones such as recombinant bovine growth hormone, used to increase milk productivity. Perfect to knock your own delicately balanced hormone systems out of whack. Then there are the antibiotics. And the poisons: pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls, dioxins, melamine, and carcinogenic aflatoxins. So the Physicians’ Committee for Responsible Medicine tells us, based on a multitude of reliable research studies.

What about the cattle’s flesh. How many warnings have there been in the last few years about the risks of meat consumption, especially red meat? For trustworthy mortality risk statistics, check out Harvard Health Publications from Harvard Medical School, Cutting red meat for a longer life.

Dr Mottet’s cattle feed piechart

livestockpro

Unusable for human food?

Dr Mottet’s pie chart suggests that only 14% of crops fed to cattle would be suitable as human food. But statistics from her own employer, the FAO would appear to tell another story altogether: “Livestock is the world’s largest user of land resources, with pasture and land dedicated to the production of feed representing almost 80% of the total agricultural land.”

Of the 330 million acres of agricultural land in the U.S., 260 million acres are used to grow fodder crops. That is 78.78% of all land in the States available to grow food, that is at present growing food to be fed to animals so they can be turned into food for humans. Are all of those crops unsuitable for humans? And is all of that land unsuitable for growing food for humans?

Globally, 33% of the Earth’s arable land is growing fodder crops for livestock. 40% of the world cereal production goes into their stomachs. Fodder crops are commonly alfalfa, barley, soy, kale, canola, swede, turnip, maize and millet – all of which can be eaten directly by humans. Dr Mottet’s figure of 14% doesn’t seem to tally with the statistics from her own organization of crops taken to feed farmed animals which could go straight to our kitchens instead.

Livestock farming’s environmental impact

Dr Mottet’s focus is on the sustainability of farming livestock, but apart from the briefest reference in her opening sentence, she does not mention the damage livestock farming wreaks on the environment. Yet environmental degradation inevitably impacts the very global food security she says farming livestock provides, because it impacts the health and viability of the planet itself. Are any of these aspects addressed in this study?

Fertilizer Growing crops to feed livestock in itself causes a massive amount of pollution. Take for example this year’s ‘dead zone’ in the Gulf of Mexico spreading over an area bigger than the size of Wales – de-oxygenated sea, death to all the marine life in it. “The environmental campaign group Mighty Earth has blamed the meat industry for the dead zone, claiming much of the nitrate and phosphorous pollution came from fertilizer used in producing vast quantities of corn and soy to feed meat animals.” And incidentally naming as the main culprit Tyson, America’s biggest meat producer.

Manure Is the animals’ manure a valuable commodity boosting agricultural productivity? Its disposal is in reality often problematic: “Algae blooms, salmonella and E. Coli, groundwater contamination, and bad smells are just a few of the problems animal manure can cause. In small doses, it’s the stuff of life—the fertilizer plants need to grow. Mishandled, it’s an environmental disaster in waiting. Each year, farm animals in the United States produce over 335 million tons of manure. That’s roughly the weight of 1000 Empire State Buildings.” Modern Farmer

Meat processing plants There is no question that industrial agriculture is polluting the nation’s waterways, but huge factory farms are not the only culprits: processing plants also dump millions of pounds of toxic waste into rivers, lakes, and streams” Read more – USA: Meat is Murdering American Rivers

Water “The production of one kilogram of beef requires 15,414 litres of water on average. The water footprint of meat from sheep and goat (8,763 litres) is larger than that of pork (5,988 litres) or chicken (4,325 litres). The production of one kilogram of vegetables, on the contrary, requires 322 litres of water.” (A Global Assessment of the Water Footprint of Farm Animal Products)

Extinctions Think Amazonian rainforest.Diets rich in beef and other red meat can be bad for a person’s health. And the practice is equally bad for Earth’s biodiversity, according to a team of scientists who have fingered human carnivory—and its impact on land use—as the single biggest threat to much of the world’s flora and fauna. Already a major cause of extinction, our meat habit will take a growing toll as people clear more land for livestock and crops to feed these animals, a study in the current issue of Science of the Total Environment predicts.” Science Magazine. Read more

Greenhouse gases Total emissions from global livestock: 7.1 Gigatonnes of Co2-equiv per year, representing 14.5 percent of all GHG emissions” produced by human activity.

And this from ‘Livestock’s Long Shadow’ 2006: “A 2,000 kcal high meat diet produces 2.5 times as many greenhouse gas emissions as a vegan diet, and twice as many as a vegetarian diet. Moving from a high meat to a low meat diet would reduce a person’s carbon footprint by 920kg CO2e every year – equivalent to a return flight from London to New York. Moving from a high meat diet to a vegetarian diet would save 1,230kg CO2e per year.”

Both reports from the UN Food & Agriculture Organization – interestingly, Dr Mottet’s own organization.

“According to a recent analysis, just a single dietary change — substituting beans for beef — could nearly satisfy the United States’ emissions reduction goals under the Paris Agreement.”

To be fair, Dr Mottet does say, certain [livestock] production systems contribute directly to global food security”, and her points do make some sense if she’s talking about rural economies in less developed countries. Then the animals may be ‘useful’ to pull carts and carry loads and their manure may be beneficial to the land. And the animals may graze pasture unsuitable to grow food for humans. But in those places livestock numbers are minuscule in comparison with the numbers in the biggest livestock farming nations such as India, Brazil, China and the USA, where none of these things is true. Quite the opposite:

“The present system of producing food animals in the United States is not sustainable and presents an unprecedented level of risk to the public health and damage to the environment, as well as unnecessary harm to the animals we raise as food.” Robert Martin, Director of the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production. And the same is just as true of all other major meat and dairy producing countries too.

130617-pulse-interview-2016-international-year-of-pulses-charlie-higgins-320x202Only last year the United Nations Food & Agriculture Organization (Dr Mottet’s own employer) promoted the vision of plant food, not livestock as the future for global food security, and designated 2016 ‘The International Year of the Pulse’

Pulses  are economically accessible and contribute to food security at all levels [They] are an inexpensive source of protein – a crucial component of any healthy diet, but especially in poorer areas where meat, dairy and fish are economically inaccessible. Pulses can also serve as a source of income, as smallholder farmers who grow pulses can sell them at markets,” and turn them into added value products for additional income.

“FAO also added that as an affordable alternative to more expensive animal-based protein, pulses are ideal for improving diets in poorer parts of the world, where protein sources from milk if often five time more expensive than protein sourced from pulses.” UN News Centre

The FAO specifically recommends the farming of peas, beans and lentils, not cattle, in those rural economies where Dr Mottet wishes us to believe farming livestock makes such an important contribution.

But still, Dr Mottet’s conclusion is:

“Animal production, in its many forms, plays an integral role in the food system.”

She ends her report with the FAO’s estimate that given the ever-increasing global demand, 70% more animal products will be needed to feed the world by 2050 – and that will of course require still more land. Yet already, with 50 billion food animals being raised and slaughtered each year, the Earth is being overwhelmed by food animals that consume massive quantities of energy and resources, whose wastes foul waterways and farmlands, and when eaten excessively, degrade our health.” CAFO the book

But Dr Mottet places her faith in science to provide ever-improving FCRs – feed conversion ratios. “FCR is a ratio measuring the efficiency with which the bodies of livestock convert animal feed into the desired output.” Or, as I prefer to put it, it’s the science of bleeding ever more out of the farmed animals (genetically engineered to maximize their ‘productivity’) while feeding ever less in (in terms of resources).

It doesn’t add up

As we have seen, Dr Mottet study appears to directly contradict other United Nations’ reports, some emanating from different branches of the UN, and some from her own, the FAO.

A report from United Nations Environment Programme’s International panel of sustainable resource management 2010 reported in The Guardian “A global shift towards a vegan diet is vital to save the world from hunger, fuel poverty and the worst impacts of climate change, a UN report said today.” 

Another report, this time from the UN’s International Research Panel (IRP) August 2016. Technocracy News’ headline ran: “The United Nations would like to remove every meat animal from the face of the planet if it could, and especially cattle.”

And then of course, there is the United Nations’ “International Year of the Pulse”, for which they produced an altogether wonderful book (pdf here) – so much more fascinating, appealing, and colourful than the humble bean and lentil might lead you to imagine. I would urge everyone to take a look.

“Thanks to their high levels of protein, fiber, and other nutrients; low requirements for water and other agricultural inputs; long shelf life; and cultural and culinary relevance around the globe, [pulses are] an uncompromising enemy of hunger and malnutrition worldwide and a genuine superfood for the future.”

The future is beans, Dr Mottet. Not beef. Even the FAO says so.

Help yourself, help the planet  Go vegan

Update

28th September 2017 – Even the President of Unilever agrees! Read her piece: Plant-Based Diets: A Game-Changer For Our Food System, Our People And Our Planet

Also Global methane emissions from agriculture larger than reported, according to new estimates 11% more, in fact.

Dr. Julie Wolf, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), senior author of the study said: “In many regions of the world, livestock numbers are changing, and breeding has resulted in larger animals with higher intakes of food. This, along with changes in livestock management, can lead to higher

 

Dr Mottet is wrong on at least 4 counts:

3rd Oct 2017 Firstly, the fact that some cattle graze on grass does not make farming them less problematic in terms of sustainability.

“Rising animal production and consumption, whatever the farming system and animal type, is causing damaging greenhouse gas release and contributing to changes in land use. Ultimately, if high consuming individuals and countries want to do something positive for the climate, maintaining their current consumption levels but simply switching to grass-fed beef is not a solution. Eating less meat, of all types, is.”

That is the conclusion of a recnt study by Dr Tara Garnett of the University of Oxford, Cecile Godde from CSIRO and a team of international experts. Phys.Org

5th Oct 2017 Secondly, the Extinction & Livestock Conference hosted by CIWF and WWF in London. WWF’s report Appetite for Destruction with staggering statistics about how the production and consumption of meat and dairy is devastating the planet. Their particular focus was Dr Mottet’s own area – crops grown for animal feed. In 2010 an area the size of Yorkshire was needed to grow soy for cattle feed just in the UK. Now in 2017 the amount of land needed to produce crops for animal feed worldwide is equivalent to the size of the EU. The threat to food security is near its tipping point. WWF, like the FAO before them and many national governments around the world, urgently advises us to eat more plants, and cut back on meat and dairy. Meat and dairy are destroying the planet and driving 60% of Earth’s species into extinction.

And thirdly, meat and dairy are not of “higher nutritional quality” as Dr Mottet claims. Apart from the health risks I referred to above, feeding animals energy- and protein-rich crops produces animal products containing less of the healthy omega-3 and more saturated fat. You would need to eat 6 chickens today to obtain the same amount of omega-3 you would have got from one chicken in 1970. “There are serious concerns that our current food system will not be able to meet the future fatty acid needs of our growing global population.”

Fourthly, soil degradation and depletion. 80% of Earth’s land used for agriculture is given over to livestock grazing or growing feed. Philip Lymbery of CIWF quoted at the conference a 2015 FAO report that agriculture as a whole has degraded the soil to such an extent that there are only 60 harvests left in it. “The techniques that were supposed to feed the world threaten us with starvation.” George Monbiot in the Guardian Sorry Dr Mottet, your improved FCRs are simply not going to  cut it.


Disclaimer
I am no match for Dr Mottet either in terms of qualifications or access to the data. However, it seemed important to draw attention to other statistics and expert opinions, with which her arguments and conclusions appear to be in conflict.

PS There are 58 varieties of pulses around the world. I counted them!



Sources

Livestock production, a much smaller challenge to global food security than often reported

Agriculture at a Crossroads – Global Agriculture Org.

Welcome to the World of CAFO Farms become factories. Rivers of waste. Communities under siege. Declining health.

America’s mega dairy farms

The Wall Street Journal

Scientists find polluted sea ‘dead zone’ that is bigger than Wales – The Independent

What to do with all the poo? – Modern Farmer

Sustainability heavyweights take aim at environmental impacts of soy, beef, palm oil – Conservation International

 UN urges global move to meat and dairy-free diet – The Guardian

Tax Meat Until It’s Too Expensive To Eat, New UN Report Suggests – Technocracy News

FCR – Wiki

Related posts

When Everyone is Telling You Meat is the Bad Guy Revisited

Don’t Care About Animals? Meat & Dairy Are Poisoning Your Land Air & Water

Another Nation Trims Meat From Diet Advice

If everyone on Earth ate a Western diet, we would need two Planet Earths to feed us. We’ve only got one and she’s dying

The Living Planet Report: Our Dinner Plates are Destroying Life on Earth

Which is Your Burger of Choice for the Future of Food?

Favourite Food for Cows?

 

 

Cultured Meat – A Welsh Bacon Farmer’s Take

Cultured meat is the future. I’m sure of it. Even monolithic meat companies like Tyson Foods think so. And now here we have the view from the other end of the spectrum – small-scale Welsh farmer and traditionalist, Illtud Llyr Dunsford, otherwise known as Bob.

Illtud’s family has farmed animals in south Wales for more than 200 years.

“One animal in particular has a special place in my heart” he says “- the pig.”

He goes on:“We’d always salted our pork in the traditional Carmarthenshire method, encasing the animal in salt in a slate tray before hanging and air drying. Using traditional family recipes we’d also produce brawn and faggots. I guess it’s in the blood, my Auntie Ethel had a stall for years on Carmarthen Market selling faggots, her produce is the stuff of legend now, and the recipe is a closely guarded family secret.”
(Clearly when he talks of loving pigs, he means something very different from me.)
Drawing on that tradition, he founded Charcutier Ltd, an award-winning company producing niche artisan meats – heritage hand-salted bacons and hams.
His philosophy was to make products using every part of the pigs. As he so graphically puts it, “everything but the squeal”.

Illtud, who in a former life worked in the film industry (Harry Potter, Robin Hood, Dr. Who) also happens to be a Nuffield scholar. If you’ve been listening to The Archers recently, you’ll know all about the Nuffield Scholarship program. But if you’re not an addict of the soap like me, here is the lowdown:

The Nuffield Farm Scholarship program gives awards to successful applicants so they can “search out and bring back to farmers in the UK details of good and innovative agricultural husbandry, from different parts of the globe.”

And the best thing Illtud/Bob brought back from his trips to Ireland, France, Italy, Brazil, and the U.S. was his discovery of developments in cellular agriculture. This technology was completely new to him when he encountered it at the 1st International Symposium on Cultured Meat. The event was hosted by Maastricht University in the Netherlands, home of the very first $330,000 cultured meat burger which was unveiled, cooked and tasted in 2013.

It was at the symposium Illtud experienced his lightbulb moment (they call it a”Nuffield Moment” in the program) – the revelation that cellular agriculture really does offer a viable solution to all of the many serious problems meat production poses, whether it’s carried out on an industrial scale, or even on a small scale like his own family farm. His travels had exposed those problems surrounding ethics, the environment, sustainability, animal welfare, and the urgent need for the new and better methods technology is now able to provide. In his own words:

“I sat on the bench in the centre of the Belgian University town of Leuven — eating the most delicious fries which had been cooked in beef dripping — contemplating veganism. Like a dieter who promises that the evening blow-out meal before the diet starts will be the last of its kind, I didn’t hold up much hope that I would be turning vegan. However, having come from an agricultural background, raised in a tradition where I was at the heart of the rearing and processing of our own animals, I had never stopped and questioned the consumption of meat… I sat in that square the best part of the day, my head aching from the pressure of thinking. I was a man anguished by a moral dilemma. How could I, an advocate of traditional farming practices, heritage recipes, and processing methods, be even contemplating this new world?”

Illtud’s second “Nuffield Moment” was witnessing for himself the vast swathes of Amazonian rainforest laid waste for grazing cattle and growing livestock feed. Brazilian law stipulates that 80% of the Amazon must remain untouched by agriculture, but seeing at first hand the lack of enforcement of this law troubled him deeply. He left the Amazon shaken:

“I would never consider protein production in the same way again. The reality of the pressure of feeding the 9bn by 2050 was becoming ever greater. Though traditional agriculture held some of the answer, it was becoming clearly obvious that if we followed that path alone, our planet, and its resource might survive 2050, but not for the generations of 11.2bn projected for 2100… Deforestation is a global issue, its impact is global and the reality is that any protein production we support, even adding milk to our tea, becomes of itself an environmental act. “

The last leg of Illtud’s trip took him to the World Pork Expo in Des Moines, Iowa. It was as horrible as it sounds. He was shocked by the aggressive commercialism and poor animal welfare standards of the large-scale pork industry, in full view right there before his eyes.

Feeling thoroughly depressed he set off for his final destination, California for New Harvest’s first conference. What a difference! The mood was upbeat. Here was real hope of a truly sustainable future for meat production, and not just meat. Other ‘animal products’ too.

cultured-meat-resized

 “The field is growing immensely; panelists delegates and exhibitors at the conference included a raft of companies who are looking at a range of products. They are predominantly developing products that are specifically animal derived [cultured from animal cells]: Gelzen (gelatine), Modern Meadow (leather), Muufri/Perfect Day (milk), Spiber (spider silk), Pembient (rhino horn) and Sothic (horseshoe crab blood) and span a range of applications, both food, clothing, and also medicine. [But] cultured meat is still held as the holy grail of products…”

Sad to say, back home in Wales Illtud has not yet abandoned his hand-salted bacons and hams. But the great news is, he is pushing forward with biotech. He’s founded Cultivate, a hub for discussing developments in cellular agriculture. And our farming pioneer has taken over a new start-up called, would you believe, Cellular Agriculture Ltd, with a view to making his very own cultured meat.

This has to be of huge significance for British farming.

Hopefully it won’t be too long before folk up and down the country will be tucking into Illtud’s bacon and ham cultured from pig cells, proudly labelled “Made in Wales”, rather than the cruel kind that comes from “everything but the squeal”.

Let’s just hope cellular agriculture here and in the States develops fast enough to halt the devastation of the planet, and the slaughter of billions upon billions more innocent lives.


Postscript

Interesting to compare.

es-2011-00130u_0006

Read more

Sources

What Does This Artisanal Meat Producer Think About Cultured Meat? – written for Medium by David Leibowitz of New Harvest

Charcutier Ltd – WordPress

Related posts

Which is Your Burger of Choice for the Future of Food

This is the Future – 5 Awesome People Make Fabulous ‘Post-Animal’ Food

Sink Your Teeth into this Meaty News!

Futurology Promises More Hopes than Fears for the Animals & the Planet

Futurology says you really can have too many bees!

Even the most indifferent to environmental issues and our native flora and fauna would have to be blind and deaf not to have registered the torrent of bad news about the dramatic and worrying decline in bee population numbers over the last few years.

So how could you possibly have too many bees?

We know of course that bee colonies are trucked all over the USA to pollinate crops as each comes into flower each year.

pear-1264581_960_720

But until I came to write this post, I for one was completely unaware that right now millions of bees are being shipped around the globe to work their pollination magic. Here in the UK it seems we import 40,000-50,000 colonies each year. And global bee commerce continues to expand.

This is a problem for at least two reasons:

  • The colonies – provided by a handful of global suppliers – are screened for diseases and parasites, but that screening is not foolproof. And the imported bees hosting pathogens can and do spread their unwanted ‘guests’ to the local populations with disastrous results. “The effects include killing bees outright, or harming their ability to learn, which is crucial in finding food. In Argentina, imported parasites are driving native species to extinction.”¹ As the trade exports the industrious little insects to ever more locations, the danger of harmful effects on native bees and food security increases.
  • As well as putting their local cousins at risk, the imported bees, by pollinating invasive non-native plant species, are likely to accelerate their dispersion with unknowable effects on local biodiversity.

So I guess the problem isn’t exactly having too many bees per se, but too many bees on the move carrying pathogens to all corners of the world. It’s ironic but perturbing that an industry that’s mushroomed in response to an ever-widening pollinator shortage, will likely itself exacerbate the downward trend.

A big conservation problem then. One of five recently identified as global environmental risks by an international team of experts in science communication, research and horizon scanning. Horizon scanning (otherwise known as Futurology or Future Studies) is a collaborative process of assembling all available data in a particular field to identify future trends, both positive and negative.

While in an ideal world the crystal ball would reveal zero future environmental risks, it’s good to know at least that this particular expert team – undertaking their horizon-scanning in the field of species and ecosystems pinpointed just 5 key risks, but twice as many hopeful opportunities. And as I’m keen to make this week a week of hope, I’ll list the remaining 4 risks in brief so we can get on to the good stuff.

1   Sand scarcity I don’t know about you, but this is one possible problem I wouldn’t have imagined. “Sand is used in a diverse range of industries and as the human population increases so does the demand for sand. Impacts of sand mining include loss of species, degradation of habitats and social conflict”.

2  Border fences affecting wild animals The impenetrable wall between the USA and Mexico promised by President Trump would adversely affect desert bighorn sheep, the endangered North American jaguar, the ocelot – now down to the last 50 in southern Texas and the cougar (pictured here).cougar-718092_960_720

In total it’s estimated that 111 endangered species could suffer as a result of Trump’s wall, as well as 108 species of migratory birds.” Sadly the trend is not confined to the USA. The increased use of border fencing in Europe and elsewhere will have similar detrimental effects on the movement, migration and survival of wild animal species.²

3  Changes in waste management affecting wild animals Another trend that wouldn’t spring immediately to mind – closing or covering rubbish dumps. That might sound like a positive, but will be bad news for wildlife scavengers habituated to this ready food supply.

4  Wind speeds at the sea surface are increasing data indicates, and so is the frequency of gales. The effect on seabirds and migrating marine animals is an unknown, but unlikely to be beneficial.

Bad news is always unwelcome I know. But even the bad can have its good side. If it throws the spotlight on to a problem, we can start looking for solutions. Take science’s revelation about the damage to marine life from plastic microbeads. The data that surfaced in 2010 was troubling to say the least, but bringing it to light did bring about quite speedy international action in the form of bans on their use.

Now that’s out the way we can, as promised, get to the good stuff – 10 new conservation opportunities opened up to us by advances in science and technology:

1  A new biological discovery: strains of Symbodinium (unicellular algae) found in coral reefs are resistant to heat and could hopefully be manipulated to protect reefs from the bleaching effect of rising temperatures in the ocean.

coral-reef-474052_960_720

2  An underwater robot called COTSbot has been very successful at controlling the crown-of-thorn starfish responsible for 40% of the damage to the Great Barrier Reef in the last 30 years. Robotics offer the prospect of more environmental wins. Watch COTSbot in action below.

3  The portable 3D-printed electronic ‘dogs’ nose, bizarre as it sounds, works even better than the real thing. It will provide a major new asset for sniffing out illegal wildlife goods, especially at border crossings, and offers the potential to disrupt major black market trade routes. That would be huge.

4  As a result of advances in genetic screening and engineering bacteria and fungi can now be used for biological pest control and growth stimulation treatments, averting the need to use artificial chemicals that harm biodiversity.

5  Ah, we’ve hit a snag. With this one it seems like risks and opportunities might be fairly equally balanced. We’re talking floating wind farms. Right now the biggest in the world is being constructed off the coast of Scotland. Though more efficient in supplying green energy than land-based, and good for fish seeking a refuge, they would be no better than their land-based counterparts at avoiding collateral damage to birds in flight. Plus there’s a chance they could entangle marine mammals.

6  The bionic leaf that makes fuel out of sunlight and water. Forget fitting solar panels to your roof. Just get your bionic leaf and make your own ready-to-use biomass. Watch the video to find out how.

7  Lithium-air batteries. Yet another technology entirely new to me. If produced commercially, these batteries could revolutionise the clean energy industry by enabling electric cars to run on a battery a fifth of the cost and a fifth of the weight of batteries currently on the market. This means you could travel from London to Edinburgh – just over 400 miles – on a single charge. Right now an electric car can only drive between 50 and 80 miles per charge. If you’re interested in the science, click here.

8  Reverse photosynthesis uses the sun’s energy to break down rather than build up plant material. It’s potential? To transform the production of biofuels and plastics and reduce fossil fuel use and carbon emissions.

9  Carbon capture involves dissolving the carbon dioxide in water and injecting it into basalt rock, which is plentiful all around the globe. Once in the rock it undergoes a natural process. The basalts (volcanic rock) react with the gas-in-solution to form carbonate minerals. Hey presto, limestone! In the Iceland Carbfix project it took just two years for the  solution to solidify. Compare that with the hundreds or even thousands of years that was predicted. Only the lack of political will is holding this one back. Grrr.

10  bitcoin-1813507__340Blockchain technologyBy allowing digital information to be distributed but not copied, blockchain technology created the backbone of a new type of internet. Originally devised for the digital currency, Bitcoin, the tech community is now finding other potential uses for the technology.”

In the environmental field, these could be: “establishing a currency market for trading carbon credits, improving supply chain traceability (e.g. for sustainable fish) and tracking illegal wildlife trade.”

Which all goes to prove there are few conservation issues for which science and technology cannot find an answer. Futurology is right to see the almost limitless opportunities they offer.

But it’s not human ingenuity that is ever in question. Humankind’s will to implement preventions and solutions most certainly is, both at political and individual level.

The good news is, we have the power in our hands to act at both levels. In politics we can use our vote for the planet. We can also throw your support behind organisations actively engaged in protecting nature and lobbying governments or challenging them in courts of law.

In the USA for example, we have the altogether wonderful Center for Biological Diversity and the Sierra Club amongst others.

Here in the UK, we can support the Wildlife Trusts. We can be sure they will do all in their power to keep our government in line with the National Ecosystem Asessment. We can also join the Ecosystems Knowledge Network. They greatly value individuals’ input.

On a purely individual level Friends of the Earth has a wealth of ideas and tips for living an eco-friendly life which is well worth exploring.

It is so beyond time to stop ravaging the Earth in the pursuit of our own selfish interests. We are currently pursuing a path that is not only irresponsible and disrespectful, but ultimately self-defeating. The real interests of the human race lie not in the rape and pillage of our precious planet and all the life in it, but in due reverence, regaining a sense of wonder, and careful loving stewardship. We can do it.

After all, there is only one Earth.

“I will not dishonor my soul with hatred,
but offer myself humbly as a guardian of nature,
as a healer of misery,
as a messenger of wonder,
as an architect of peace.
I will honor all life,
wherever and in whatever form it may dwell,
on Earth my home,
and in the mansions of the stars.”

– Diane Ackerman

Read about last year’s projections here

¹Imported bees pose risk to UK’s wild and honeybee population – The Guardian

²Building Walls – Purr and Roar. Excellent post on this topic I would heartily recommend. Also Border Fences Aimed at Stopping Immigrants are Killing Wildlife – Take Part

 

Source

15 risks and opportunities to global conservation – Fauna & Flora International

Related posts

Hope for the Animals & the Planet?

There is Always Hope for the Animals & the Planet

Ten Fascinating Ways Technology is Saving Animals

How Drones Might Just Save Our Endangered Animals & the Planet

 

 

Eight Women Changing the World for Animals 3

3rd in series about eight remarkable women spearheading the battle for Animal Rights in their varied fields of science, art, law and politics, to celebrate the forthcoming International Animal Rights Day on Dec 10th

Today The Artist
“The profound disconnect between our dominant urban world and the natural world, including nonhuman animals, is a chasm that must be rectified…”
Elizabeth Marshall, Canadian social justice, environment and animal activist – filmmaker.

For Liz Marshall it was clear from the word go how driven her life would be. She always wanted to change the world. A letter she wrote age 8:

Dear Prime Minister,

I am 8 years old and in Grade A. My name is Elizabeth Marshall, and I am writing to tell you that I think that are government should get more for the poor pople. Than buying guns and starting wars. because guns kill people. and you should help poor people because I think it is not right because look at all these nice people and we don’t want to kill them. and Please tell the other governments to stop the wars so it can be Peace in the world. Please do it. From Elizabeth.

Spellings and punctuation all her own -not bad for an 8 year old – and all finished off with a cute smiley face drawing and a speech bubble saying “hi there”.

Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau replied: Dear Elizabeth, It’s nice to hear from you again [bold mine]. There was clearly no stopping this young lady.

Liz on life during and after film school:

“I began my career in the 1990s, focusing my lens and my passion on human stories which led to an array of life changing projects shot around the globe in war torn, developing and developed countries. In the mid 2000s, I became very interested in environmental issues, but also in long form storytelling, which led me to make my two feature length documentaries: ‘Water On The Table’

and ‘The Ghosts in Our Machine’

“My partner in life is a long time animal rights activist, and she inspired me to pay closer attention to animal issues. I have been an animal advocate for as long as I can remember, but I really credit Lorena as one who tapped me on the shoulder, and urged me to look closely, as a filmmaker, at the animal question.”

Ghosts in Our Machine follows activist and photojournalist JoAnne McArthur as she goes behind the scenes to document what is hidden from public view, the enslavement of “animals en mass for food, fashion, research, and entertainment,” and the reality of their suffering. They are the invisible ghosts in the machine of human society.

But telling the story is only half the battle. A film can only change the world for animals if it gets massive exposure.

And massive exposure “Ghosts” has had. Even by the start of 2015, as well as being aired on Canadian television, the film had been screened in 1,816 cities, 92 countries, and 6 continents. It’s won 14 international awards and nominations, and notched up 140 reviews and interviews in countries around the world.

A key ingredient of its success is Liz’s gentle approach. Yes, it does include scenes that are hard to watch, but they are balanced with beautiful individual stories: abused sow Julia and her 8 piglets; worn out Fanny the cow and her new calf; and Abbey the lab beagle, all rescued and now in sanctuaries, enjoying the safe, contented lives to which they have a right.

To change the way people see the world, you want them to keep looking, not turn away. So Liz engages the viewer by revealing different animals – animals normally only thought of as commodities – as real and individual persons.

How very effective the film is as a tool for animal advocacy can be gauged by the support it’s received from Farm Sanctuary, Mercy For Animals, PETA, NEAVS, Compassion Over Killing, and yes, Lori Marino’s Kimmela Center. All these advocacy organisations immediately saw its potential as a force for change.

Liz and JoAnne know they’re making a difference with their incredible work. Both say they regularly hear from people who’ve been deeply moved by “Ghosts” and have changed their way of life as a result.

But Liz isn’t resting on her laurels. She recently released the official trailer for her next documentary MEAT THE FUTURE. In it Liz follows the work of Dr Uma Valeti and his company Memphis Meats, developing cultured meat – healthier than the flesh of farmed animals, a more viable option for feeding the rapidly increasing global population, and environmentally-friendly. Above all, it has the potential to save billions of animals from a life of suffering, pain, fear, and death in the slaughterhouse.

Liz Marshall, the remarkable woman passionately changing the world one film at a time.

Add your name to the Declaration of Animal Rights here

Go vegan for the animals here

 

Sources

Liz Marshall About.me

Meet the Incredible Filmmaker Helping to Change Our Perception of Animals & the Environment – One Green Planet

The Ghost in Our Machine – Faunalytics

Meat the Future – The Good Food Institute

Related posts

Eight Women Changing the World for Animals 1

Eight Women Changing the World for Animals 2

Eight Women Changing the World for Animals 4

A Night at the Grand Beedapest Hotel. Be the Voice for Bees

On behalf of Taylors of Harrogate may I welcome you to the Grand Beedapest Hotel!

Here at reception can we just check your credentials before you sign in? Forgive the impertinence but we do have to count your legs. Six? Perfect. Now if you wouldn’t mind trying us with a little buzzing? Music to the ears. Come right in. Please avail yourself of all our five star luxury facilities.

Maybe you would like a dip in the Peppermint Leaf Pool before dining in the Rose Lemon restaurant? We’ve given you the Sour Cherry bedroom. I hope that meets with your requirements. The gym? Next to the pool, ground floor. Enjoy your stay, Madam!

I particularly love the bees ‘using’ the gym in this little video!

This is all frivolous fun, nonsense of course, but nonsense with a deadly serious purpose. The famous tea company Taylors of Harrogate is using their colourful quirky Grand Beedapest Hotel (inspired, you guessed, by the Wes Anderson movie) to launch their campaign to raise awareness of the bee’s importance to the world, which is out of all proportion to the little insect’s humble size. Because all our buzzy little friends not lucky enough to be in residence at Harrogate’s Grand Beedapest are in trouble.

Bees have a problem

populationsThere can’t be anyone who isn’t aware of the frightening decline in bee populations all over the world. Taylors puts it down to the expansion of urban areas, shrinking flower meadows and natural habitats, and pollution. But perhaps not wishing to look ‘political’ or tread on powerful toes, they omit to specify The Big One – pesticides and in particular neonicotinoids*.

Greenpeace has no such qualms about proffering the information: they tell us that biologists have found more than 150 different chemical residues in bee pollen, a veritable “pesticide cocktail” **- a tipple most definitely NOT on offer in the Rose Lemon restaurant of the Grand Beedapest.

Unfortunately the bees and their supporters are up against Bayer, Dow, Monsanto and DuPont, four monstrous megacorporations making vast profits from pushing these chemicals, who have a stranglehold over almost the entire world market for pesticides (and genetically modified  plants and seeds). In 2012, Monsanto for instance, reported net sales of approximately 13.5 billion U.S. dollars. Monstrous in their size, monstrous in their power and influence, and monstrous in the damage they are wreaking on the planet.

Why the bees’ plight matters

If saving the bees for their threatened selves is not enough, nor even because they are the ecological ‘canary in the coal mine’ that gives warning of the degradation of the natural environment, let us at least save them for our own survival.

bee-1401710__180It’s not just the ingredients of Taylors’ teas that are at risk, important as they no doubt are. Three quarters of our food crops rely on pollination by that hard-working insect and other insects, also badly affected by pesticides. If we love almonds, apples, broccoli, asparagus, cantaloupes, cucumbers, pumpkins, blueberries, watermelons, cranberries, and cherries … and on and on, and want to keep on eating them, we really need to take action for the bees.

“Believe it or not, you have a bee to thank for every one in three bites of food you eat” Greenpeace. No doubt more if you’re vegan.

So what does the world need to do?

Easily said, but imperative to act on:

  • Ban the use of the seven worst pesticides
  • Preserve wild habitat
  • Turn from industrial to ecological (i.e. organic) farming – which encompasses both of the first two. But more on that in another post.

What is the situation vis à vis neonicotinoid pesticides here in the UK?

The EU imposed restrictions on the use of neonicotinoids in 2013. The UK’s Tory government voted against the restrictions – well, there’s a surprise. Nonetheless the EU ruling does still apply to us until Brexit is completed, which will be another two years after Article 50 is activated. Theresa May’s government says it will uphold the restrictions post Brexit completion, provided “science proves them necessary.” Hmm. Defra doesn’t exactly have a good track record when it comes to basing its policies on scientific evidence – ask the poor badgers.

Unsurprisingly, the National Farmers Union has opposed the neonicotinoid ban from the word go. We have them to thank as usual for their vigorous lobbying against, it seems, all measures intended to protect our wildlife and the environment. (There is a get-out clause in the EU neonicotinoid restrictions, which NFU members have been happy to exploit. In ’emergencies’ farmers can apply for a licence for a temporary exemption from the ban.)

So what IS the science?

The results of a recent study have just been published in the Journal Proceedings of the Royal Society:

  • Neonicotinoids cut live sperm in male bees by 40%
  • They cut the lifespan of drones by one third
  • 32% of drones exposed to these chemicals are dead before they can reach sexual maturity at 14 days old

And previous studies have already shown a marked detrimental effect on both bumblebee and honeybee queens from exposure to these pesticides

“This could have severe consequences for colony fitness, as well as reduce overall genetic variation within honeybee populations,” the scientists concluded.

What are other countries doing?

  • France, responding to overwhelming public concern, has just proved itself a true friend to bees by becoming the first nation to pass a complete ban on the use of neonicotinoids with effect from 2020
  • Closer to home, forward-thinking Dorset County Council has adopted a ‘pollinator strategy’ and has banned these chemicals from all its own land. Let’s hope similar strategies will be brought into play around the country
  • And in Canada, Friends of the Earth is challenging in court that government’s decision to licence their use

And then there are the glyphosates

Glyphosates are herbicides used to kill plants, not insects so what is the problem with herbicides? Well, bees’ awesome navigational skills are legendary, aren’t they? But in a study last year, it was shown that glyphosates like Monsanto’s Roundup impair bees’ spatial learning process, and so disorientate their flight trajectories. That cannot be good.

What can we do?

The obvious and simple thing we can all do is never to use pesticides and herbicides in our own gardens. The butterflies, birds, hedgehogs, frogs and toads, as well as bees will thank us.

At national level, we need to bring people power into play. The NFU has the Tories in its pocket. So we need to raise our voices even louder against these deadly chemicals that are threatening our food security and decimating our insect life, our biodiversity and our countryside. Be a voice for bees!

Ask your MP to back the ban on bee-harming pesticideshere and here

And contact your MP again here

More actions for beeshere

Petition to sign here

And another here

And here

And please share. Thanks so much

 

(*Neonicotinoids exposure most frequently occurs when bees consume pollen and nectar from crops grown using neonicotinoid coated seeds or from dust created by pesticide coated seeds during planting.)

Updates

2nd August 2016 Monsanto’s superweed saga is only getting worse  Take Part

9th August 2016 Airforce Tries Killing Weeds with Light Beams not Pesticides – Take Part

18th August 2016 ‘Bee-friendly’ gardens are finally becoming safe for bees Take Part

20th August 2016 UK Government Finds Link Between Insecticides & Bee Decline – Care2

25th August 2016 Brexit – What next for bees and the fight against neonicotinoid pesticides

12th September 2016 Scientist find a new way neonicotinoids are killing off bees – ZME Science

15th August 2017 – New study shows neonicotinoids’ drastic effect on queen bees’ ability to lay eggs

Another amazing video to watch – bee-inspired artwork at Kew

When Bees Go Extinct, These Ten Foods Will Follow – One Green Planet

Related posts

The Gross Bee Happiness Program

Make Your Own Seed Bombs for Bees

 

Sources

**University of California apiculturist Eric Mussen

Taylors Tea

Bees, Neonicotinoids and the EU

Greenpeace: Save the Bees

Friends of the Earth: Why are bees celebrating in Dorset and France?

The Guardian: Leading insecticide cuts bee sperm by almost 40%

The Ecologist: Glyphosates impair bees’ spatial learning

Bumblebee Conservation Trust

The Soil Association: Ban neonics

 

 

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save