African swine fever will wipe out hundreds of millions of pigs
Global pig-meat index is headed for steepest jump in 15 years
Photographer: adogslifephoto/iStockphoto
Bringing home the bacon will cost more. Blame African swine fever.
The deadly pig disease is wiping out hundreds of millions of hogs, mostly in China, driving a global surge in pork and bacon prices from Auckland to Vancouver. In Europe, swine carcasses have soared 31% and piglets 56% in the past year. Pig-meat is poised for the steepest jump since mad cow disease and bird flu outbreaks in 2004 led consumers to eat more pork, according to an index compiled by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in Rome.
Run on Pigs
Pork is heading for the steepest annual increase in 15 years
Source: Food & Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
“It doesn’t matter where you are in the world at the moment, pork prices are up,” said Justin Sherrard, Rabobank’s Utrecht-based global animal-protein strategist, in a telephone interview. “China is the market to focus on. Firstly, because it’s big and, secondly, because this is really the first place that African swine fever started to hit.”
Read More: The Deadly Virus That’s Killing Off Millions of Pigs
Prices will remain high for at least the next three months in the lead up to the Lunar New Year on Jan. 25, a peak time for pork consumption in China, Vietnam and other countries that celebrate the festival. Retailers will have “no choice” but to pass on at least some of the extra cost to consumers, Sherrard said.
Bacon Around The World
A snapshot of what shoppers are paying for 500 grams (18oz) bacon
Source: Online retail data
By the end of 2020, China’s swine herd will slump to 275 million head, down almost 40% since the beginning of 2018, before the world’s largest animal disease outbreak began, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. That will pull down global pork production by 10% in 2020.
Hog Apocalypse
China’s annual pig production has been savaged by African swine fever
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture
2019 & 2020 are forecasts
“African swine fever has had a significant impact on the production of pork in China and increasingly in Vietnam and other Southeast Asian countries,” said Tim Foulds, Euromonitor International’s head of research for Australasia. “Government attempts to control the crisis, including the large-scale culling of animals, resulted in pork production dropping dramatically in 2019.”
Peak Pork
Prices in China have surged 120% since deadly pig outbreak reported
Source: China Ministry of Commerce
Reduced domestic supplies will boost China’s demand for foreign pork, resulting in record prices and imports. However, Chinese consumers will “feel the pinch,” with a 32% slump in per-capita pork consumption over two years, the USDA said in an Oct. 10 report.
Bloomberg TicToc
✔@tictoc
Swine fever is causing pork prices to go up in China
African swine fever, which kills most pigs in a week but isn’t known to harm humans, has had a greater impact in China than in any country or previous outbreak, and the disease there is now considered endemic, or generally present, according to the USDA.
Boss Hog
China’s $118 billion market dominates global pork sales
You might think soy is just a green, harmless alternative for those trying to steer away from meat and toward a plant-based diet. Not exactly: Three-quarters of the world’s soy is used for animal feed, and about half of it is exported from South America—grown on deforested land that has been cleared away for massive soy fields.
“The soybeans connected to deforestation are making their way to the feed of the chickens, pigs, and cows that people all around the world eat,” says Glenn Hurowitz, CEO of the campaign group Mighty Earth. “Almost every international company that sells meat has some connection to deforestation in their supply chain.”
Enter Burger King.
Using satellite and supply-chain mapping tools, Mighty Earth connected the fast-food giant to a whopping million-plus acres of forest-clearing. In its new report, “The Ultimate Mystery Meat,” the global campaign organization identified two of Burger King’s biggest soy suppliers as the culprits: Cargill, the largest privately owned company in the United States, and Bunge, one of the biggest players in South America.
“The destruction of tropical forests causes something around one-fifth of the world’s total climate pollution, and deforestation also threatens some of the most endangered species in the world,” says Hurowitz.
Ground zero for deforested land is the Cerrado, a 500-million-acre savanna in Brazil. Home to 5 percent of the world’s biodiversity, including threatened species like the jaguar and the giant anteater, half of it has been destroyed—mostly for soy production. In contrast, the Amazon—the Cerrado’s more-famous neighbor to the north and the focus of decades of conservation efforts—has seen a quarter of its ecosystem chopped down.
The Cerrado areas in which Cargill operates experienced more than 320,000 acres of deforestation between 2011 to 2015, while those in which Bunge operates had more than 1.4 million acres cleared. Not all of the deforestation was driven by soy, but much of it was, according to the report.
Also affected were forests in Bolivia, where Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) are the major players. One of the most biodiverse countries in the world, Bolivia’s forests are home to thousands of plant and animal species, including three-toed sloths, macaws, and pink river dolphins. One report Mighty Earth cited places Bolivia’s deforestation rate at more than 700,000 acres per year from 2010 to 2015.
WOMAN LEFT HOMELESS BY FOREST FIRES IN THE SANTA CRUZ REGION OF BOLIVIA
Agribusiness isn’t only tearing away the homes of sloths and birds—it’s also uprooting human lives. In 2014, more environmental defenders were killed in Brazil than in any other country, according to Global Witness. Mighty Earth visited the Ayoreo indigenous community in Bolivia, which has been increasingly surrounded by soy fields and forced to endure planes spraying pesticides just a few hundred yards from their village. In the report, one member of the community speaks of an incident when several children died from drinking water contaminated with pesticides.
It’s not just the soy traders that are to blame—Burger King carries much of the responsibility. The company has no serious plan to eliminate deforestation from its supply chain; the “Corporate Responsibility” page of its website doesn’t mention deforestation or human rights. Last year, when the Union of Concerned Scientists scored the country’s biggest beef sellers on their deforestation commitments and practices, it gave Burger King a zero—well below competitors like McDonald’s and Wendy’s.
“The tragedy of the continued deforestation for me is it’s entirely avoidable,” says Hurowitz. “There are about 500 million acres of degraded land across Latin America where agriculture can be extended without impacting native ecosystems.”
In fact, the Soy Moratorium, a voluntary zero-deforestation agreement enacted in 2006 and renewed indefinitely last year, brought clearcutting in the Amazon to historically low levels. (There was an uptick in the rate there last year.) But while deforestation in the Amazon plunged, agricultural production expanded. Mighty Earth and others point to the Soy Moratorium as a win-win for all stakeholders; they, as well as José Sarney Filho, Brazil’s minister of the environment, want to extend the moratorium to include the Cerrado.
Since the report’s release last month, Burger King, Cargill, and Bunge have been tight-lipped. They still have not come out in support of extending the Soy Moratorium to the Cerrado or beyond. The report cites Abiove—the Brazilian soy trade organization that represents Cargill, Bunge, and others—which said in October that “there is no crisis that justifies a [soy] moratorium in the Cerrado.”
DEAD HAWK SURROUNDED BY FOREST CLEARANCE IN BRAZIL
Hurowitz decries Cargill’s past declarations against deforestation as “green-washing.” The company signed the New York Declaration on Forests as part of the 2014 UN Climate Summit; the declaration called on the private sector to eliminate deforestation from the production of agricultural commodities like soy and palm oil by 2020. However, Cargill’s website describes a less ambitious goal, saying the company is working to cut its deforestation in half by 2020 and eliminate it by 2030. Hurowitz says 2030 is far too late; if Cargill chopped down hundreds of thousands of acres in South America over five years, think of how much it could do in 13. Cargill’s 2017 forest report is similarly disappointing; when detailing the company’s progress with regard to reducing its deforestation, it focuses on its support for Brazil’s Rural Environmental Registry, or CAR, a government agency that likely won’t begin enforcing its forest code until December.
Bunge, to its credit, seems to have slightly better policies than Cargill when it comes to deforestation—but it’s not clear whether those policies have had any positive impact on its practices. It has worked with the Nature Conservancy since 2013 to identify suitable lands for expansion, but has given itself until “between 2020 and 2025” to completely eliminate deforestation from its supply chain. Bunge’s website makes no mention of the Cerrado or any other South American forests besides the Amazon as places where it won’t expand.
Bunge says Mighty Earth’s report is misleading and overstates the potential impact that any of its actions alone would make on the soy industry and South America’s forests. “Deforestation is a complex problem related to global market demand, economic development, property rights, and a lack of sufficient compensation for land owners—from the marketplace or from governments—that would provide incentives to conserve the environment,” writes a representative. “Controlling it will require government, industry, farmers, local communities, and civil society to develop new systems. Bunge will continue to be an active participant in these efforts.”
Neither Cargill nor Burger King responded to requests for comment.
What can you do? Sign Mighty Earth’s petition, for starters. And then take a field trip.
“We really strongly encourage people to go to their local Burger King and talk to the manager about what’s happening, and ask them to contact corporate headquarters,” says Hurowitz.
In other words, instead of ordering a burger, order some change.
India, long associated with the spread of superbug ‘New Delhi metallo-beta lactamase-1’ and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis, has now been identified as one of the global hotspots of rising antibiotic resistance among animals as well.
Other hotspots include China, Pakistan, Vietnam, Turkey, Brazil and South Africa, says a review study jointly done by Princeton University and Delhi-based Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics & Policy and published in Science journal Thursday night.
Antibiotics are added to animal feed to make them healthier. The study said that increasing demand for animal protein in lower middleincome countries had led to increased production (rearing of food-animals) using antibiotics liberally.
In May, a local study from Mumbai published in ‘Acta Scientific Microbiology’ journal showed resistance in chicken liver meat and eggs collected from poultry shops across 12 locations in the city. That study tested the samples for bacteria salmonella that was resistant to widely used antibiotics such as amoxicillin, azithromycin, ciprofloxacin, ceftriaxone, chloramphenicol, erythromycin, gentamicin, levofloxacin, nitrofurantoin and tetracycline.
Now, the CDDEP study has said that antibiotic resistance is seen in several food-animals across the globe. “It is of particular concern that it is rising in low- and middle-income countries because this is where meat consumption is growing the fastest while access to veterinary antimicrobials remains largely unregulated,” said the study, adding that animals nowadays consume three times as many antibiotics as humans.
The study’s main author, CDDEP’s Ramanan Laxminarayan, said: “The study found the proportion of antimicrobial compounds in food animals that showed resistance higher than 50 % increased overall between 2000 and 2018.”
The trend is dangerous because increase in antibiotic-resistant infections among animals will finally affect humans as well.
Beyond Meat (BYND) is now probably the hottest stock in the world.
Its innovative “plant-based meat” is found in the frozen food section of thousands of grocery stores. Carl’s Jr., Del Taco, and a few other restaurant chains sell its products, too.
Supposedly, it tastes just like real meat but is better for animals and for the environment. Many investors expect plant-based meat to be the “next big thing.”
The chart below says it all.
Beyond Meat’s stock shot up 840% after going public on May 2!
I’ve never seen anything quite like this. It’s the top-performing IPO of the year and one of the best of all time.
Make no mistake, Beyond Meat’s crazy 840% gain in not even three months is an outlier. But it’s not all that uncommon for stocks to skyrocket shortly after going public. The average return for a US IPO last quarter was 30%.
But with the giant early gains in Beyond Meat behind us, the question now is: Does the stock have staying power? Should you buy it now?
Let me explain why the answer is NO.
Do You Remember the LaCroix Craze?
LaCroix is a popular brand of flavored sparkling water.
You’ve probably seen it at the grocery store. Its “retro” packaging jumps off the shelf.
It tastes pretty good, but it’s nothing special. There are plenty of sparkling water brands that are just as good.
And yet, LaCroix became a cultural phenomenon a few years back. Young adults were obsessed with it.
Like Beyond Meat, people thought it was the “next big thing.” Investors loaded up on shares of National Beverage (FIZZ)—the parent company that owns LaCroix.
National Beverage’s stock surged 550% from May 2015 to September 2017.
It was madness. At its peak, FIZZ traded at a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 58. Investors were paying $58 for every dollar of profit the company made. That was more than double the S&P 500’s P/E at the time.
All for a company that sells sparkling water.
National Beverage’s Crash No One Saw Coming
National Beverage failed to live up to the hype. Its stock plunged 31% in nine months after peaking in September 2017.
Today, FIZZ trades at 66% below its 2017 high.
The thing is, people didn’t stop drinking sparkling water. Sales of sparkling water have nearly tripled over the past decade. Last year, Americans spent $49 million on sparkling water—22% more than in 2017.
But people are drinking a lot less LaCroix. Its sales plunged 15% this May. That’s after falling 6% in February… 5% in March… and 7% in April.
Where did LaCroix go wrong?
Coca-Cola (COKE) Bought Topo Chico in 2017
Topo Chico is a trendy Mexican sparkling water brand.
PepsiCo (PEP) got into the business, too. It recently launched its own sparkling water called Bubly.
Even Costco (COST) has entered the market. Last summer, the retail giant started selling zero-calorie flavored drinks under its private Kirkland Signature brand.
In short, LaCroix ran into powerful competition. Sparkling water is easy to replicate. Now people have lots of brands to choose from. That sucked the wind out of National Beverage’s sails and caused its stock to tank.
The Exact Same Thing Will Happen to Beyond Meat
Some will call this an unfair comparison. They’ll argue Beyond Meat is more innovative than National Beverage. They’ll say it has a “first-mover advantage.”
It’s true that Beyond Meat introduced plant-based meat to the masses. But let’s not forget that plant-based meat is a basic consumer good. It’s a commodity that can be easily replicated.
Commodities that can be easily replicated compete on price. That’s a big problem for Beyond Meat because its products are expensive…
Its hamburger cost anywhere from double to triple what real hamburger costs.
Beyond Sausage, another one of its products, sells for around $10.30 per pound. That’s 70% more than what pork sausage sells for.
It can’t charge such sky-high prices for much longer. In fact, competition is already heating up.
Impossible Burger also sells plant-based burgers. You can buy its products at more than 9,000 restaurants, including Qdoba and Burger King.
Tyson (TSN)—the largest US meat producer—is also developing its own line of alternative meat products. It was an initial investor in Beyond, but sold its stake in April.
Nestle—the world’s largest food company—has entered the plant-based market, too. It’s selling its “Incredible Burger” in Europe already. The company plans to introduce this product to America by fall.
Finally, JBS—the world’s largest meat producer—is also looking to launch a plant-based meat product in Brazil this year.
Soon, Every Major Food Company Will Have Its Own Plant-Based Burger
These companies have deeper pockets and better distribution than Beyond Meat.
They can develop new products and bring them to market much faster than Beyond Meat.
Perhaps most importantly, they charge less than Beyond Meat.
This will force Beyond Meat to either cut prices or surrender market share. Both would be bad for investors.
Beyond Meat’s Stock Is Absurdly Expensive
It trades at a price-to-sales (P/S) ratio of 87. Investors are paying $87 for every $1 that Beyond Meat generates in sales.
Let me put that in perspective…
Tyson trades at a P/S of 0.73. Conagra Brands (CAG) trades at 1.5X times sales. And General Mills (GIS) trades at 0.4X sales.
Should Beyond Meat trade at a premium because it’s a disruptor stock changing the way we eat? Okay. Let’s compare it to another disruptive company: The Match Group (MTCH).
Match.com trades at 12 times sales. Its stock is 1/7 as expensive as Beyond Meat’s!
Like National Beverage, Beyond Meat Won’t Live Up to This Absurd Valuation
That doesn’t mean Beyond Meat will disappear. But the hysteria will fade away.
When that happens, its stock should come crashing down. I wouldn’t be surprised if BYND falls another 30% or more once investors realize powerful competitors are coming for its market.
If you own Beyond Meat stock, you’re probably sitting on big profits. Nice call. But consider selling your shares to lock in those profits as soon as you finish reading this.
The clock is ticking. Once investors wake up to the tough competition Beyond Meat faces, its stock could drop fast.
Beyond Meat’s meatless nuggets will be for sale at a KFC in Atlanta — and, if that goes well, potentially at KFC locations everywhere. Courtesy of KFC + Beyond Meat
No chickens were harmed in the making of the new KFC nuggets and wings going on the menu in Atlanta.
A single KFC franchise — the one near the SunTrust Park baseball stadium in Atlanta — is now offering meatless chicken from the plant-based food company Beyond Meat. The deal makes KFC the first fast-food restaurant to serve plant-based chicken.
The early results? Hours-long lines, with cars and pedestrians wrapped around the building as customers try to get a taste.
Ashley Renne@HeyAshleyRenne
2 hour wait and line wrapped around the building at @kfc for this Vegan chicken here in ATL y’all. They cut off the drivethrough and will be sold out by 3pm. #BeyondFriedChicken
It’s a huge step forward for both companies — and for chickens, nearly 50 billion of which are raised in factory farms in the US annually.
“KFC is an iconic part of American culture and a brand that I, like so many consumers, grew up with. To be able to bring Beyond Fried Chicken, in all of its KFC-inspired deliciousness to market, speaks to our collective ability to meet the consumer where they are and accompany them on their journey. My only regret is not being able to see the legendary Colonel himself enjoy this important moment,” said Ethan Brown, founder and CEO of Beyond Meat, in the press release announcing the deal.
Beyond Meat has signed deals with Del Taco, Carl’s Jr., Subway, and the national food distributor Aramark, among restaurants and grocery stores nationwide. Competitor Impossible Foods has teamed up with Qdoba, Burger King, and the national distributor Sodexo, among others.
So far, Beyond Meat — like its competitors — has largely focused on imitation beef, with its signature Beyond Burger and new offerings of imitation ground beef. There are some good reasons for plant-based companies to start with beef: Cows are huge contributors to global warming, and there are big sustainability gains from replacing them with plant-based products.
But there are also some good reasons chicken should be at the top of the agenda. Each cow produces a lot of burgers, which means we kill far more chickens than cows to get the same amount of meat. And chickens are among the worst-treated animals on factory farms, caged in small, chemical-treated spaces where disease is rampant, and engineered to grow so quickly that their legs give out. Chicken farming also contributes to public health problems like antibiotic resistance and the spread of bird flu — and yes, chicken factory farms have a carbon footprint too.
For those reasons, animal welfare researchers have urged plant-based meat companies to figure out a substitute for chicken and other farmed chicken products like eggs. Now, Beyond Meat has answered that call with a partnership with the most famous fast-food chicken restaurant in America.
“Beyond Fried Chicken is available in nuggets with choice of favorite dipping sauce, like KFC’s signature Finger Lickin’ Good sauce, or boneless wings tossed in one of three delicious sauce options: Nashville Hot, Buffalo or Honey BBQ,” KFC announced. If consumers in Atlanta agree that they’re finger-lickin’ good, the meatless nuggets could hit menus elsewhere soon.
Actually, it appears McDonald’s is working on its own version of a meatless burger to keep up with its American competitors. A few days ago, Crain’s Chicago Business reported that Impossible Foods–one of the leading manufacturers of plant-based burgers–“is teaming up with a local food manufacturer that is a key supplier for McDonald’s.”
This would seem to indicate that McDonald’s is making plans to introduce its own meatless burger in the company’s U.S.-based restaurants–likely within the next year or so.
It’s no secret that McDonald’s has been selling meat-free burgers for some time…in Europe. After testing in Sweden during fall 2017, the McVegan burger–featuring a soy-based patty was created by McDonald’s with Swedish vegan food company Anamma–the item was permanently added to the menu of McDonald’s restaurants in Finland and Sweden in December 2017.
According to news reports, 150,000 of the vegan burgers were sold in just one month. And in January 2019, McDonald’s introduced a vegan McFalafel in Sweden, meatless “chicken” nuggets in Norway, and a vegan Spicy Veggie Wrap in the UK.
Now, it appears that it won’t be long before McDonald’s starts testing its own meat-free burger in the United States. Referring to McDonald’s, Morningstar analyst R.J. Hottovy said, “By early next year, you will likely see a plant-based burger test in the U.S.”
There certainly seems to be plenty of demand in this country for a meatless McDonald’s burger. According to healthy living advocate Kathy Freston, whose Change.org petition to McDonald’s has more than 225,000 signatures,
In June, I personally delivered the signatures of over 200,000 customers who want a plant-based option on McDonald’s U.S. menu. McDonald’s has not responded, but their competitors are embracing the opportunity. Burger King’s Impossible Whopper will be available nationwide on Thursday. Last week, Hardee’s announced its upcoming plans to test a Beyond Thickburger. And just a few weeks ago, Dunkin’ started selling a Beyond Meat breakfast sandwich at 163 locations. McDonald’s we’re waiting for you to come on board!
So, we’ll see how long it is until McDonald’s offers a meatless burger in the United States. I’ll be first in line the moment they do.
“A unique opportunity to address climate change can be found in our agriculture sector,” writes Kruger, “an area which must be made sustainable if we’re going to survive.” (Photo: PeopleImages/iStock)
This week, a petition signed by more than 100,000 people was delivered to Congress, outlining issues that should be addressed in Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Senator Ed Markey’s (D-MA) Green New Deal. This petition shows overwhelming support for the Green New Deal, and calls for more attention to be brought to how our food system can be reformed to combat climate change. With the food and farming sector being the United States’ largest employer, and the country being one of the highest contributors toward climate change, citizens are calling for action to be taken to protect our world.
As someone in their mid-twenties, I have grown up seeing how climate change is actively impacting me and my community. Here in California, I expect droughts in the summer and extreme wildfires or mudslides in the fall; learning from a young age to always conserve water because the next shortage is just around the corner. Young activists from all across the U.S. have seen similar changes in their home states, and we recognize that our future depends on action being taken to stop the climate crisis before it is too late.
“Disinvestment from factory farms is necessary, not only from a climate standpoint, but from a larger human and environmental health perspective as well.”
A unique opportunity to address climate change can be found in our agriculture sector—an area which must be made sustainable if we’re going to survive. Climate scientists have identified agriculture as one of the largest contributors to climate change. This an opportunity to shift agricultural practices away from the large scale, conventional farms that currently dominate our food system to a regenerative, locally-focused, small-scale system that values the welfare of the land and those who work it. CFS has identified several focus points that should be implemented with the passing of the GND resolution to cut back greenhouse gas emissions and create a healthier, more sustainable food system.
1. Invest in regenerative, local agriculture
The future of agriculture lies in the shifting of practices away from large scale monocultures towards small and medium-sized diversified farms. We must wean away from the mass amounts of toxic chemical pesticides and fertilizers being used, and instead integrate regenerative practices such as cover cropping, the use of compost, and the implementation of hedgerows as alternatives that not only add nutrients into the soil, but provide many other ecosystem services. Among these, regenerative agriculture protects biodiversity, including the native bees and pollinators that are currently being decimated by conventional agriculture. Our “Regenerating Paradise” video series covers many practices currently being practiced in Hawai’i—including several that can be implemented nationwide—to reduce carbon emissions and protect our soils. Implementing these practices can sustain our food production all while sequestering carbon, protecting pollinators, and promoting on-farm biodiversity.
Switching to these regenerative agriculture practices will not be easy, but it will be beneficial. Despite research showing the vast benefits that come from cover cropping and other regenerative practices, farmers have been slow to start implementing them. Government and university grants, technical assistance, and further research should be funded to help promote these practices, transition farms, and aid the continuous education of farmers and farmworkers. This investment will have far-reaching effects on farms—preserving native pollinator habitat, sequestering carbon, and providing climate-smart food to local communities.
2. Cut meat consumption and shut down environmentally-harmful animal factory farms
Disinvestment from factory farms is necessary, not only from a climate standpoint, but from a larger human and environmental health perspective as well. Large scale animal operations pollute the water, lead to a higher risk of disease in humans, and contribute large amounts of methane and other greenhouse gases into the air. Cutting back meat consumption, purchasing meat from local sources, and shifting toward plant-based sources of protein are all ways that individuals can help. More people than ever, especially young people, have recognized the harmful impacts of meat consumption and we are turning toward a flexitarian diet, vegetarianism, and veganism as a way to cut back on our carbon footprint. The government has the opportunity to support this effort on a larger scale by providing financial support and technical assistance to ranchers to help them transition to pasture-based and integrated livestock operations that reduce livestock’s impact on climate change and help sequester carbon in the soil.
CFS’s recently launched EndIndustrialMeat.org, a website that highlights some of the negative impacts that come with factory farming, including the vast amount of carbon released into the air and heavy metals being drained into the ground; serious consequences that disproportionately affect rural populations and disadvantaged communities. The GND’s goal to secure clean air and water, healthy food, and a sustainable environment for all communities mean that shutting down these harmful operations is imperative.
3. Reverse the trend of consolidation within the agriculture sector
For decades now, there has been increasing consolidation of seed, livestock, and other agriculture-related companies. These mega-corporations have purchased vast quantities of land and set the rules for how a farm has to run, undercutting disadvantaged farmers and farmworkers, and wrecking rural communities. GND policies can be used to break up these mega-farms, and empower local communities to take back the food system. Breaking up these predatory mega-farms would not only reinvigorate the economies of rural areas, but it would also give these communities access to the healthy, climate-friendly food necessary to slow the rate of climate change.
The growth of small and medium-sized farms would allow farmers and farmworkers to set fair wages and provide safe and humane conditions for themselves and a future for their children. Doing so would not only allow current farmers to continue their operations, but also would open the door for young farmers to have access to the land, resources, and funds needed to operate for a viable, sustainable farm.
4. Support young and disadvantaged farmers
Finally, we must utilize the GND to support disadvantaged and young farmers, paving the way for a climate-friendly food future. For a long time, people have been turning away from farming, instead opting for job opportunities found in cities. For the past several years, there has been a renewed interest in working the land in a regenerative, holistic manner. We must support these new farmers, along with the farmworkers who have been subjugated to the abuses of industrial agriculture, to forage a community-focused, regenerative food system.
The principles of equity and justice outlined in the GND must guide our transition away from industrial monocultures, and toward a food system that supports and uplifts disadvantaged groups, providing the economic assistance and infrastructure needed to improve these communities, and ultimately improving our economy as a whole. Likewise, many young and disadvantaged farmers have limited access to the equipment and mentorship needed to run a successful farm enterprise. Having grants and training programs available to take on the huge costs of tractors, land, and resources necessary to start a farm should be central to the Green New Deal.
Young people have paved the way for the Green New Deal and our future depends on immediate action being taken to stop climate change. Not only will this resolution allow for the huge changes needed to prevent climate change, but will allow for new opportunities for farmers. While the challenge ahead of us won’t be easy, there are many things that can be done to mitigate current greenhouse gas emissions that aren’t being implemented. The GND is an opportunity to reform our way of farming to allow for huge cuts to current emissions, all while creating a more equitable food system.
In case you haven’t already heard, Tim Hortons has expanded their menu Wednesday morning by adding a ‘burger’ section to their always-growing selection. However, instead of introducing normal burgers to their menu, Tim Hortons has decided to take it a step further and add two ‘Beyond Meat’ burgers. These two new Tim Hortons Beyond Meat Burgers have been a popular topic this morning, so I decided to head down to my nearest Tim Hortons and give one a try.
Guests can choose from the two different burgers on the menu at locations across Canada. The Beyond Burger is like a regular cheeseburger, containing a plant-based patty, cheese, lettuce, tomato, ketchup, mustard, and mayonnaise, sandwiched between two sesame seed buns. They also offer a BBQ version of the burger, which includes the same ingredients with the addition of BBQ sauce.
These plant-based patties are perfect for vegetarians or anyone just looking to try a meatless twist on a normal burger.
These famous Beyond Meat patties are designed to taste just like real beef burgers and have already been incorporated at other fast-food joints across Canada.
As a meat-eater myself, I headed to Tim Hortons to see just how much these burgers tasted like the real thing.
Being a more traditional burger eater, I opted for the normal Beyond Burger. The first thing I noticed is the low price.
You can get either burger for $5.69, which matches the prices of similar fast food burgers. This means you can also grab a coffee and some Timbits on the side without hurting your wallet.
The second thing I noticed is how in demand the burger actually is across Canada.
Even though the burger was only announced today, it seems like everyone is flocking to their nearest store to give it a try.
While waiting in line, both customers in front of me also ordered the burger. When I finally reached the counter, the employee informed me that I had snagged the second last burger they had and that customers had cleared out their stock before dinner time had even hit.
After making it home and unwrapping the burger, I wasn’t surprised to see that it looked like any other regular fast-food burger.
Of course, it doesn’t quite look like the amazing photos that Tim Hortons has released, but burgers never look like they are promised to.
As for the taste, I was surprised to find that it actually did taste like meat. Sadly, the taste wasn’t anything that jumps out you, but I was surprised in that it resembles any other fast-food burger that you would pick up around the city.
It’s definitely something that I would grab again if I was craving a quick burger on the go. Yet, it didn’t stand out as anything special compared to other burgers I have tried in the past.
One disappointing factor I have to mention is that the Beyond Meat patty isn’t nearly as amazing as the Beyond Meat sausage Tim Hortons offers in their breakfast sandwiches.
Earlier this year, I tested the Beyond Meat Breakfast Sandwiches and fell in love with the farmer’s wrap they offered. The plant-based sausage tasted even better than their real meat.
Overall, the Beyond Meat patty tastes just like any othr normal burger, but it doesn’t stand out as the breakfast sandwiches did.
If you’re a vegetarian, this is a really great option for you. Considering, Tim Hortons didn’t have any burgers on their menu before, if you’re looking for a filling lunch that’s also vegetarian, this is a great option.
The BBQ Beyond Burger and the regular Beyond Burger are both available at all locations across Canada.
If you’re interested in trying more Beyond Meat menu items, their Beyond Meat breakfast options are really delicious. In collaboration with Beyond Meat, Tim Hortons was able to create a new Beyond Meat sausage patty that completely unique and totally tasty. If you’re vegan, you can get a vegan option of the breakfast sandwich as well.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Narcity Media.
Livestock graze on illegally occupied, deforested land at Flona do Jamanxim in the Brazilian Amazon, April 4, 2009.RICARDO FUNARI / BRAZIL PHOTOS / LIGHTROCKET VIA GETTY IMAGES
The cows grazed under a hot sun near a wooden bridge spanning a river in the Amazon. The quiet was occasionally broken by a motorbike growling along a dirt road that cut through the sprawling cattle ranch.
But the idyllic pasture was on land that the Lagoa do Triunfo ranch has been forbidden to use for cattle since 2010, when it was embargoed by Brazil’s environment agency Ibama as a punishment for deforestation. Nearby there were more signs of fresh pasture: short grass, feeding troughs, and fresh salt used to feed cattle — all in apparent contravention of rules designed to protect vital rainforest.
This vast 145,000 hectare ranch is one of several owned by AgroSB Agropecuária SA — a company known in the region as Santa Barbara. Located in an environmentally protected area, Lagoa do Triunfo is more than 600km from the capital of the Amazon state of Pará, on the western fringes of Brazil’s “agricultural frontier” — where farming eats into the rainforest.
The investigation found that last year the Lagoa do Triunfo ranch delivered hundreds of heads of cattle to some of Santa Barbara’s other farms for the final stage of fattening. Cattle was then sent from those farms to slaughter in JBS plants. Using GPS and publicly available maps and locations, reporters located cattle and pasture inside embargoed areas at Lagoa do Triunfo.
The revelations come as work by Trase, an NGO, shared exclusively with our team, has revealed how huge swathes of felled rainforest can be traced back to this cattle trade — and how beef raised on deforested land ends up in international supply chains.
Embargoes — restrictions that ban farmers guilty of deforestation or environmental damage from using parts of their own land — are imposed by the Brazilian government and serve both as a punishment and a protective measure to allow land to recover. They can be more effective than fines because they come at a higher cost for farmers.
But our investigative team visited land clearly demarcated as embargoed on government websites, and found grazing cows there. A worker at the ranch said that cattle were left to roam in areas employees knew were embargoed. “You can’t cut down the vegetation,” the employee said. “The vegetation grows and we work the cattle inside.”
Santa Barbara is an enormous, powerful ranching empire, owned by the billionaire Daniel Dantas, that controls half a million hectares across Pará. In 2008 Dantas was twice arrested on bribery charges and handed a ten-year sentence as a result of a corruption investigation that also saw his land confiscated. The investigation’s findings were subsequently overturned, the sentence dropped and Dantas got all his land back.
Over the past decade, according to Repórter Brasil, Santa Barbara has been accused of illegal deforestation and faced allegations of using slave-like labour — accusations it strongly denies. Lagoa do Triunfo is one of its largest ranches. There are 12 separate embargoed areas on it, dating from 2010 to 2013.
The Wild West on the Edge of the Amazon
With a population of 125,000 people and over two million cattle, the nearby town of Sao Félix do Xingu, in Pará state, covers an area bigger than Scotland. Cattle ranching fed its growth from remote Amazon outpost to busy town. And there is money here: farmers’ wives are happy to pay $600 for a handbag, said Kelli Moraes, a 25-year-old sales assistant. “They are very fashion.”
Sao Félix do Xingu was mostly forest when Arlindo Rosa, now president of the town’s union of rural producers, arrived in 1993. “There was practically none of this farming … there was no highway, there was nothing,” he said.
“People came from outside with the spirit to raise cattle,” said his vice-president, Francisco Torres, who arrived in 1987. Santa Barbara, the region’s biggest ranching company, began buying land near Sao Félix do Xingu in 2006, Torres said.
Torres said many ranches in the area have suffered Ibama embargoes. “If they removed those embargoes, a lot would improve,” said Rosa. As is common with farmers and landowners in Amazon areas, both men were critical of what they saw as overzealous environmental controls. Rosa owes $1.4 million to Ibama in fines for deforestation, according to the agency’s website.
But embargoes have not stopped Santa Barbara illegally grazing cattle on deforested land, nor JBS being able to perfectly legally do business with the company, our investigation found.
JBS Beef Brazil’s “responsible procurement policy” says it “does not purchase animals from farms involved in deforestation of native forests … or that are embargoed” by Ibama. But the company has also said that the common practice of transferring cattle from one farm to another for fattening can make it impossible to trace individual cows.
Official state documents seen by the Bureau, the Guardian and Repórter Brasil showed that from January to October 2018, Santa Barbara delivered at least 296 cattle from the Lagoa do Triunfo ranch to its Espiríto Santo ranch in Xinguara, in the same state. Between July 2018 and January this year, Santa Barbara sent 2,900 cattle from the Espiríto Santo ranch to JBS slaughterhouses.
Throughout 2018, Santa Barbara also sent at least 729 cattle from the Lagoa do Triunfo ranch to be fattened at its Porto Rico ranch in Xinguara. In April 2018, 36 cattle from the Porto Rico ranch were sent to slaughter at a JBS plant.
JBS said that 99.9% of its cattle purchases meet its socio-environmental criteria and that it was working to implement “a new procedure to cover all links in the supply chain” and stop the use of “cattle from illegally deforested areas”.
Santa Barbara said it did not carry out deforestation to increase its area “but rather recovers degraded areas” and turns them into pastures. It said that trees on the Lagoa do Triunfo ranch had been felled before the Forest Code was introduced and that only 7% of the land is under embargo.
New research tracking beef cattle back to the ranches they were raised on has revealed the full extent of deforestation in the Amazon that is linked to a handful of global food corporations.
Trase, a supply chain research project developed by the Stockholm Environment Institute and Global Canopy, tracked livestock from deforested areas to abattoirs producing beef for international markets, as well as meat for domestic use. Up to 5,800 square kilometres of forest is being felled in the Amazon and other areas every year for cattle ranching.
The destruction of between 280-320 sq km of forest each year is linked to JBS’s supply chain for exported beef, according to the data assembled by Trase. There is no suggestion any Lagoa do Triunfo beef is exported.
JBS, which slaughters almost 35,000 cattle in Brazil per day, has faced a string of allegations relating to deforestation. In 2017, Brazil’s environmental protection agency, Ibama, raided and ordered the suspension of two JBS meat-packing plants in Pará accused of having purchased cattle raised on illegally deforested land between 2013 and 2016.
JBS denied the allegations but was fined R$24.7 million ($8 million). In the same year, a Guardian investigation with Repórter Brasil revealed how the company had purchased cattle linked to poor labour conditions and deforestation, resulting in UK supermarket Waitrose removing the company’s products from its shelves.
The findings come amid growing international concern over the looming impacts of climate change, with the Amazon forest seen by experts as a crucial buffer in stabilising regional and global climate.
Between 1980 and 2005, Amazon deforestation levels reached 20,000 sq km per year — with an area the size of Wales being lost. Although there have been political murmurings about trying to halt the destruction, the latest data shows that deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon has risen by 73% since 2012.
Erasmus zu Ermgassen, lead researcher at Trase, said: “Though some slaughterhouses monitor their direct suppliers and so in theory can avoid farms associated with deforestation, none monitor their indirect suppliers, who make up the bulk of their supply chain.”
Trase added: “There is a huge opportunity to reduce the deforestation associated with the production and exports of beef in Brazil. There is enormous potential to use land more efficiently and sustainably in the Brazilian beef sector, and to improve rural livelihoods by investing in cattle ranching on existing pasturelands.”
Trase will release the data in full later this month.
Bloomberg TicToc
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/65113805/BM_Product_Shot.0.jpg)
Exposing the Big Game 