DOCSLIB.ORG

Animal Industries Advisory Committee

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Animal Industries Advisory Committee Planning and Environment Act 1987 Report Animal Industries Advisory Committee 29 April 2016 Planning and Environment Act 1987 Animal Industries Advisory Committee appointed under section 151 of the Act 29 April 2016 Lester Townsend, Chair Hugh Millar, Member Katherine Navarro, Member Lucinda Peterson, Member Animal Industries Advisory Committee Report 29 April 2016 Contents Page About the Animal Industries Advisory Committee ............................................................... 1 Executive summary .............................................................................................................. 2 1 Background ............................................................................................................... 11 Importance of animal industries ..................................................................................... 11 1.1 Changing production systems ............................................................................... 12 1.2 Impacts from animal husbandry ........................................................................... 13 2 Submissions and issues ............................................................................................. 16 2.1 Exhibition and submissions ................................................................................... 16 2.2 What are the issues ............................................................................................... 21 3 Policy and control of animal industries ..................................................................... 22 3.1 Planning policy support for animal industries ...................................................... 22 3.2 Legislative control on animal industries ................................................................ 25 4 Issue 1 – Planning for economic development .......................................................... 28 4.1 State economic development ............................................................................... 28 4.2 The need for rural planning ................................................................................... 28 4.3 More flexibility for the range of intensive uses .................................................... 31 4.4 Local economic development ............................................................................... 31 5 Issue 2 – Matching production systems and definitions ............................................ 33 5.1 Animal production systems in practice ................................................................. 33 5.2 Animal production system definitions .................................................................. 36 5.3 Creating more specific definitions ......................................................................... 40 5.4 Issues with the generic definitions ........................................................................ 41 5.5 Is an outcomes based definition possible ............................................................. 43 6 Issue 3 – Matching impacts and controls ................................................................... 45 6.1 A graduated approach ........................................................................................... 45 6.2 The benefits of a Code of Practice approach ........................................................ 49 6.3 Constructing Codes of Practice ............................................................................. 52 6.4 Recognise industry codes and assurance schemes ............................................... 54 7 Issue 4 – Separating uses .......................................................................................... 56 7.1 A consistent approach to separation distances .................................................... 56 7.2 Separation distances on adjoining land ................................................................ 62 7.3 Dwellings in the Farming Zone .............................................................................. 65 8 Issue 5 – Improving permit applications .................................................................... 68 8.1 Better information................................................................................................. 68 8.2 Better applications ................................................................................................ 69 8.3 Better agency input ............................................................................................... 70 Animal Industries Advisory Committee Report 29 April 2016 8.4 Better permit conditions ....................................................................................... 72 8.5 Planner training ..................................................................................................... 73 9 Issue 6 – Strengthening enforcement and compliance of animal industries .............. 74 9.1 Clarify existing use rights ....................................................................................... 74 9.2 Enforcement .......................................................................................................... 75 Appendix A Terms of Reference ..................................................................................... 78 Appendix B Consultation process ................................................................................... 81 B.1 Notice about the Discussion paper ......................................................... 81 B.2 Submitters ............................................................................................... 82 B.3 Appearances at Hearings ........................................................................ 86 B.4 List of Reference Group members .......................................................... 88 B.5 Document List ......................................................................................... 89 Appendix C Proposed definitions ................................................................................... 91 C.1 Land use definitions ................................................................................ 91 C.2 Nesting diagram ...................................................................................... 93 Appendix D Possible application requirements in the rural zones ................................... 94 Appendix E Possible standard conditions ....................................................................... 96 Animal Industries Advisory Committee Report 29 April 2016 List of Abbreviations APIQ Australian Pork Industry Quality Assurance Program Broiler Code Victorian Code for Broiler Farms 2009 DEDJTR Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources DELWP Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning DTPLI Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure (former) EPA Environment Protection Authority Feedlot Code Victorian Code for Cattle Feedlots, August 1995 Feedlot Guidelines National Guidelines for Beef Cattle Feedlots in Australia (third edition) GIS Geographic information system LPPF Local Planning Policy Framework NFAS National Feedlot Accreditation Scheme Piggeries Code Code of Practice, Piggeries, Department of Planning and Housing and Department of Food and Agriculture, 1992 SCU Standard Cattle Unit SPPF State Planning Policy Framework VCAT Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal VFF Victorian Farmers Federation VPP Victoria Planning Provisions Animal Industries Advisory Committee Report 29 April 2016 List of Figures Page Figure 1: Australian domestic meat consumption 1971–2012 ............................................ 13 Figure 2: Policy directions presented in the Committee’s Discussion paper ....................... 17 Figure 3: Support for and opposition to policy directions presented in the Committee’s Discussion paper. ............................................................................. 18 Figure 4: Farming land in Victoria ........................................................................................ 22 Figure 5: Strategies addressing animal industries in Regional growth plans ....................... 24 Figure 6: Nesting diagram for agricultural land use terms in planning schemes ................................................................................................................. 37 Figure 7: Current definitions in planning schemes .............................................................. 38 Figure 8: When is a permit required .................................................................................... 47 Figure 9: A graduated approach to land use categories for intensive animal husbandry .............................................................................................................. 48 Figure 10: How graduated approach to land use categories for intensive animal husbandry might apply in different zones ................................................ 49 Figure 11: Separation distance conceived as a ‘buffer’ around intensive animal husbandry that impacts on adjoining land ................................................ 63 Figure 12: Separation distance conceived as a ‘house protection buffer’ that limits opportunities on adjoining land .................................................................. 63 Figure 13: ‘Buffer’ sterilising a development opportunity ..................................................... 65 Animal Industries Advisory Committee Report 29 April 2016 List of Tables Page Table 1: Differences in separation distances
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Is Factory Farming Making Us Sick? IS FACTORY FARMING MAKING US SICK?
    Is Factory Farming making us sick? IS FACTORY FARMING MAKING US SICK? A Guide to Animal Diseases and their Impact on Human Health 1 Photo by Engin Akyurt Contents Introduction 4 Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) 6 Bovine TB 8 BSE 10 Campylobacter 12 E. Coli (O157: H7) 14 Foot and Mouth Disease 16 Johne’s Disease 18 Meningitis 20 MRSA 22 Nipah 24 Q Fever 25 Salmonella 26 Swine Flu 28 Other Zoonotic Diseases 30 We can change 32 References 34 2 Is Factory Farming making us sick? 3 Photo by Ethan Kent Introduction The majority of farmed animals in the UK In recent years, animal farming has are reared intensively, inside crowded, filthy brought us outbreaks of BSE, bovine sheds which are the perfect environment TB, foot and mouth, bird flu, swine flu, for bacteria and viruses to flourish. Stressed campylobacter, salmonella and many by their surroundings and their inability more devastating diseases. No wonder to display natural behaviours, forced to the United Nations Food and Agriculture live in their own excrement alongside sick Organization has warned that global and dying animals, it is not surprising that industrial meat production poses a serious farmed animals are vulnerable to infection. threat to human health3. Their immunity is further weakened by the industry breeding from just a few CREATING ANTIBIOTIC high-yielding strains, which has led to genetic erosion. This makes it easier for RESISTANCE disease to sweep swiftly through a group Instead of protecting of animals, who are likely to share near- ourselves by changing identical genetics with little immunological how we treat animals resistance.
    [Show full text]
  • I- Vegan Consciousness and the Commodity Chain: on the Neoliberal, Afrocentric, and Decolonial Politics of “Cruelty-Free” B
    Vegan Consciousness and the Commodity Chain: On the Neoliberal, Afrocentric, and Decolonial Politics of “Cruelty-Free” By Amie Louise Harper B.A. (Dartmouth College, Hanover) 1998 M.A. (Harvard University, Cambridge) 2007 Dissertation Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In Geography In the Office of Graduate Studies Of the University of California Davis Approved: ____________________________________ (Dr. Kimberly Nettles-Barcelon), Chair ____________________________________ (Dr. Wendy Ho) ____________________________________ (Dr. Psyche A. Williams-Forson) Committee in Charge 2013 -i- Acknowledgments There are many people I would like to thank who made the completion of this manuscript possible. My dissertation committee of Dr. Kimberly Nettles-Barcelon, Dr. Psyche A. Williams- Forson and Dr. Wendy Ho: Thank you for your comments and patience, as well as directing me towards the path of rigorous scholarship. My husband Oliver Zahn: Thank you for your years of support. My parents Patricia Harper and Bob Harper: When I was 12 years old, I told you that I wanted to get a PhD. You told me that there is no reason why this should not be possible. Thanks for the never-ending encouragement. My twin brother Talmadge Harper: Like mom and dad, you kept on telling me that I could do it. Sister Jayne Simon: Thank you for the endless conversations and being an amazing mentor and spiritual godmother to me. Tseday Worku: I appreciate the hours of ‘free’ child-care that you provided for my babies so I could complete this manuscript. Marian Swanzy-Parker: Our hours of dialogues about race, class, gender, and power were amazingly helpful and inspiring.
    [Show full text]
  • Eat This! Student Activities Booklet
    Student Activities toto accompanyaccompany thethe filmfilm u u For citizenship and English at key stage 4 Student Activities to accompany the film Eat This! Introduction This resource booklet has been written to accompany the Eat This! film. It contains a package of structured lessons covering national curriculum targets in citizenship and English. It is also suitable for use in PSHE, religious studies and general studies. • The Eat This! DVD followed by the Film critic unit is a logical first lesson. • Different things people say and Where do you draw the line? (Our use of farm animals) are ideal secondary introduction units for promoting discussion of the issues raised in the film. • Units most applicable to citizenship are: Role-play, Where do you draw the line? (Campaign methods), Campaigning for change, Pressure groups, Planning a campaign and Sustainable development. • Units most applicable to English are: Role-play, Campaigning media and the follow-on Design a campaign leaflet. Any of the three 30 minute units are ideal for using in conjunction with a talk given by a speaker from Animal Aid. To book a speaker, call Animal Aid on 01732 364546 ext 234, see our website or email schooltalks@animalaid. co.uk. Interactive Whiteboard (IWB) versions of some of the worksheets, factsheets and activities can be downloaded from the Animal Aid website at www.animalaid.org.uk/education/resources.htm (go to -> Student Activities -> Eat This!) Summary of work units Page Unit 1 Film critic 60 min C/E 1 Unit 2 Different things people say 30 min +
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Seven: the Meat Industry
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by De Montfort University Open Research Archive Journal for Critical Animal Studies, Volume VI, Issue 1, 2008 ‘Most farmers prefer Blondes’: The Dynamics of Anthroparchy in Animals’ Becoming Meat Erika Cudworth1 My visit to the Royal Smithfield Show, one of the largest events in the British farming calendar, reminded me of the gendering of agricultural animals. Upon encountering one particular stand in which there were three pale honey coloured cows (with little room for themselves), some straw, a bucket of water, and Paul, a farmer’s assistant. Two cows were lying down whilst the one in the middle stood and shuffled. Each cow sported a chain around her neck with her name on it. The one in the middle was named ‘Erica.’ Above the stand was a banner that read, ‘Most farmers prefer Blondes,’ a reference to the name given to this particular breed, the Blonde D’Aquitaine. The following conversation took place: Erika: What’s special about this breed? Why should farmers prefer them? Paul: Oh, they’re easy to handle, docile really, they don’t get the hump and decide to do their own thing. They also look nice, quite a nice shape, well proportioned. The colour’s attractive too. E: What do you have to do while you’re here? P: Make sure they look alright really. Clear up after ‘em, wash ‘n brush ‘em. Make sure that one (he pokes ‘Erica’) don’t kick anyone. E: I thought you said they were docile. P: They are normally.
    [Show full text]
  • Industrial Animal Farming and Zoonotic Risk: COVID-19 As a Gateway to Sustainable Change? a Scoping Study
    sustainability Review Industrial Animal Farming and Zoonotic Risk: COVID-19 as a Gateway to Sustainable Change? A Scoping Study Wolfgang Brozek 1 and Christof Falkenberg 2,* 1 Agency for Preventive and Social Medicine, 6900 Bregenz, Austria; [email protected] 2 Institute for Marketing and Innovation, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, 1180 Vienna, Austria * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The threat of zoonoses (i.e., human infectious diseases transmitted from animals) because of industrial animal farming may be receiving less attention in society due to the putative wildlife origin of COVID-19. To identify societal responses to COVID-19 that do address or affect the risk of future zoonoses associated with industrial animal farming, the literature was screened for measures, actions, proposals and attitudes following the guidelines of a scoping review. Forty-one articles with relevant information published between 1 January 2020 and 30 April 2021 were identified directly or indirectly via bibliographies from 138 records retrieved via Google Scholar. Analysis of relevant content revealed ten fields of policy action amongst which biosecurity and change in dietary habits were the dominant topics. Further searches for relevant records within each field of policy action retrieved another eight articles. Identified responses were furthermore classified and evaluated according to groups of societal actors, implying different modes of regulation and governance. Based on the results, a suggested policy strategy is presented for moving away from food production in Citation: Brozek, W.; Falkenberg, C. factory farms and supporting sustainable farming, involving the introduction of a tax on the demand Industrial Animal Farming and side and subsidies for the development and production of alternative meat.
    [Show full text]
  • Industrial Agriculture, Livestock Farming and Climate Change
    Industrial Agriculture, Livestock Farming and Climate Change Global Social, Cultural, Ecological, and Ethical Impacts of an Unsustainable Industry Prepared by Brighter Green and the Global Forest Coalition (GFC) with inputs from Biofuelwatch Photo: Brighter Green 1. Modern Livestock Production: Factory Farming and Climate Change For many, the image of a farmer tending his or her crops and cattle, with a backdrop of rolling fields and a weathered but sturdy barn in the distance, is still what comes to mind when considering a question that is not asked nearly as often as it should be: Where does our food come from? However, this picture can no longer be relied upon to depict the modern, industrial food system, which has already dominated food production in the Global North, and is expanding in the Global South as well. Due to the corporate take-over of food production, the small farmer running a family farm is rapidly giving way to the large-scale, factory farm model. This is particularly prevalent in the livestock industry, where thousands, sometimes millions, of animals are raised in inhumane, unsanitary conditions. These operations, along with the resources needed to grow the grain and oil meals (principally soybeans and 1 corn) to feed these animals place intense pressure on the environment. This is affecting some of the world’s most vulnerable ecosystems and human communities. The burdens created by the spread of industrialized animal agriculture are wide and varied—crossing ecological, social, and ethical spheres. These are compounded by a lack of public awareness and policy makers’ resistance to seek sustainable solutions, particularly given the influence of the global corporations that are steadily exerting greater control over the world’s food systems and what ends up on people’s plates.
    [Show full text]
  • Nutrition of Pigs Kept Under Low and High Sanitary Conditions Effects on Amino Acid and Energy Metabolism and Damaging Behaviour
    Nutrition of pigs kept under low and high sanitary conditions Effects on amino acid and energy metabolism and damaging behaviour Yvonne van der Meer Nutrition of pigs kept under low and high sanitary conditions Effects on amino acid and energy metabolism and damaging behaviour Yvonne van der Meer Thesis committee Promotor Prof. Dr W. J. J. Gerrits Personal chair at the Animal Nutrition Group Wageningen University & Research Co-promotors Dr A. J. M. Jansman Senior researcher, Animal Nutrition Wageningen University & Research Dr A. Lammers Researcher, Adaptation Physiology Group Wageningen University & Research Other members Prof. Dr J. Keijer, Wageningen University & Research Dr E. Labussière, INRA, Rennes, France Prof. Dr C.M. Nyachoti, University of Manitoba, Canada Prof. Dr S.A. Edwards, University of Newcastle, United Kingdom This research was conducted under the auspices of the Graduate School of Wageningen Institute of Animal Science (WIAS) Nutrition of pigs kept under low and high sanitary conditions Effects on amino acid and energy metabolism and damaging behaviour Yvonne van der Meer Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of doctor at Wageningen University by the authority of the Rector Magnificus, Prof. Dr. A. P. J. Mol, in the presence of the Thesis Committee appointed by the Academic Board to be defended in public on Friday 7 July 2017 at 4 p.m. in the Aula. Yvonne van der Meer Nutrition of pigs kept under low and high sanitary conditions Effects on amino acid and energy metabolism and damaging behaviour,
    [Show full text]
  • COVID-19'S Impact on Public Attitudes Toward Industrial Animal Agriculture
    COVID-19’s Impact on Public Attitudes Toward Industrial Animal Agriculture Introduction | 1 Key Findings | 2 Methodology | 2 Survey Findings | 3 Conclusion | 11 November 2020 Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic that began in spring 2020 has led to wider recognition – and more scrutiny – of the direct connection between the mistreatment of animals and devastating effects on human populations. A prime example of this is the intensive confinement of pigs, chickens and cattle raised for food in industrial animal agriculture facilities. Humans have effectively manufactured the ideal environmental breeding grounds for future public health crises by crowding stressed animals together in constant contact with their own waste. This industry has also been in the spotlight as it faltered and strained under the pressure of market disruptions brought on by the COVID-19 crisis. There have been massive outbreaks at slaughterhouses due to unsafe working conditions, resulting in hundreds of workers dying and thousands more sickened by the virus in the past few months. As a result of slaughterhouse closures, animals backed up on farms and hundreds of thousands were killed en masse using inhumane “depopulation” methods. A new public poll by Lake Research Partners, conducted roughly six months into the 2020 pandemic, analyzed whether this particular crisis – and the resulting media stories about the industry’s failure to protect workers and animals – has increased public awareness and concern about industrial animal agriculture, changed consumption choices or impacted support for public policies to reform the industry. 1 Key Findings • The public is widely concerned about industrial animal agriculture. Nearly 9 out of 10 Americans (89%) are concerned about industrial animal agriculture – citing animal welfare, worker safety and/or public health risks.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthropogenic Suffering of Farmed Animals: the Other Side of Zoonoses
    Kona-Boun, Jean-Jacques (2020) Anthropogenic suffering of farmed animals: the other side of zoonoses. Animal Sentience 30(20) DOI: 10.51291/2377-7478.1207 This article has appeared in the journal Animal Sentience, a peer-reviewed journal on animal cognition and feeling. It has been made open access, free for all, by WellBeing International and deposited in the WBI Studies Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Animal Sentience 2020.383: Kona-Boun on Wiebers & Feigin on Covid Crisis Anthropogenic suffering of farmed animals: the other side of zoonoses Commentary on Wiebers & Feigin on Covid Crisis Jean-Jacques Kona-Boun Centre Vétérinaire DMV, Montréal, Québec Abstract: Wiebers & Feigin’s (W&F’s) target article warns of the zoonotic threat to human health from factory farming and urges phasing out meat production and consumption, for the benefit of both human and nonhuman animals. This commentary focuses on the physical and emotional suffering of farmed animals. This varies by species, production system and geographic location, but suffering is there throughout all stages of production — breeding, housing, transport, usage and slaughter. Ubiquitous monitoring of all facilities where farmed animals are kept, with surveillance cameras recording all phases of production would help reduce some forms of suffering. Other forms are caused by accidents, disease outbreaks and all the “collateral damage” from factory farming. Nor can efforts to improve the welfare of farmed animals be confined to “merely” minimizing their suffering. Their lives need to be made not just bearable but worth living too. It is unrealistic to imagine, however, that all the suffering inflicted on farmed animals by industrial practices and human callousness can be eliminated by efforts to improve their welfare: Welfare measures urgently need to be undertaken and promoted, but they must not be regarded complacently, as if they were a panacea.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the Critical Perspectives on Animals in Society
    Proceedings of the Conference Critical Perspectives on Animals in Society held at the University of Exeter, UK 10 March 2012 © CPAS convenors, editors and individual named contributors, 2013 Some rights reserved Copyright in contributions to these proceedings rests with their respective authors. Copyright to the overall collection and arrangement and to any other material in this document rests with the convenors of CPAS and the editors of its proceedings. In the spirit of open-access publishing and with a commitment to the intellectual commons, reuse and distribution of these proceedings for non-commercial purposes is permitted and encouraged, under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution± NonCommercial±NoDerivs 2.0 UK: England & Wales licence, which can be read at: creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/uk/ Amongst other things, this licence requires that you attribute material you reproduce to its author, and make clear to those you share it with that they too may reproduce it under the terms of the licence. Anything outside the licence, especially commercial use, requires the express permission of the editors and conference convenors, or of individual authors. Requests to the former should be directed to: [email protected] Edited by Chris Calvert and Jessica Gröling Contents Introduction by the editors 5 Chris Calvert and Jessica Gröling — Contributions in brief — About CPAS — Acknowledgements — Conference programme Campaigning techniques 11 Keynote address by Dr Richard D. Ryder Animal rights: moral crusade or social
    [Show full text]
  • The Scale of Intensive Indoor Livestock Farming in the United Kingdom, and the Impact of Its Related Sewage Disposal Regime Upon Water Quality in Rivers
    Marinet Limited WQR0080 Supplementary written evidence submitted by Marinet Limited The Scale of intensive indoor livestock farming in the United Kingdom, and the impact of its related sewage disposal regime upon Water Quality in Rivers. We provide here tabulated data based on research undertaken by Compassion in World Farming (CIWM) published 2021, ref. https://www.ciwf.org.uk/factory-farm-map/#pig/all The Tables below record the information for indoor reared pigs, meat chickens, egg chickens, and dairy cows. Specifically: ● Individual Levels for these livestock animals being reared intensively indoors in the counties of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. ● Total Levels for these livestock animals being reared intensively indoors in the counties of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. ● Total Levels for these livestock animals being reared intensively indoors in the United Kingdom as a whole. Note: CIWM advise: “There is little publicly available information on the method of production system used on- farm. Therefore, the number of animals and farms are estimates of chickens, pigs and dairy cows that are permanently housed indoors in the UK.” It is also to be noted that in a large number of categories no data was available, so the figures cited are likely to be under-estimates of the total levels of indoor intensive livestock farming in the UK. In England, the 40,000 dairy cows being farmed in this way occur across 70 farms; the 11 million egg laying hens occur across 60 farms and the 100 million broiler (meat) chickens occur across 800 farms; whilst in the UK as a whole the 1.3 million pigs occur in over 200 farms.
    [Show full text]
  • Factory Farming: Assessing Investment Risks
    FACTORY FARMING: ASSESSING INVESTMENT RISKS 2016 report Find out more, or join us, at: fairr.org Follow us: @FAIRRinitiative FACTORY FARMING: KILLER STATS INVESTORS CAN’T IGNORE DOWN INVESTORS IN 52.3 reason for rapid user of MCDONALDS AND KFC O O antibiotics HIT BY US$10.8BN LOSS 27.6 N 1 spread of bird (H5N2) N 1 OF MARKET CAP IN 2014 DUE TO FOOD 11.4 and swine (H1N1) flu in the US SAFETY SCANDAL AT A CHINESE SUPPLIER 7.9 industry losses due to US bird of all antibiotics in the US now used UP 88.2 [FarmEcon] [CDC] $3.3bn flu outbreak in 2015 80% in animal factory farms ALTERNATIVE FOOD TECH COMPANY 65.3 HAMPTON CREEK SET TO BE FASTEST GROWING 59.9 FOOD COMPANY IN HISTORY, BENEFITING 12.7 FROM IMPACT OF 2015 85% US BIRD FLU CRISIS 66.2 of all soya DOWN 39.4 globally is used ANIMAL WELFARE in animal feeds, SCANDAL LEADS TO 57.1 a major cause of LARGEST MEAT RECALL deforestation [WWF] IN US HISTORY, 28.4 of global GHG AND BANKRUPTCY emissions, more FOR MEAT-PACKER 75.5 14% consumer HALLMARK/WESTLAND than the transport O IN 2012 24.9 N 1 of water in sector* [FAO] drought-stricken DOWN 11.4 INVESTORS IN TYSON [Pacific Institute] FOODS EXPOSED AFTER 7.9 * from livestock sector as a whole, with factory California COMPANY REVEALS farming as key component ENVIRONMENTAL 88.2 VIOLATIONS. rise in 'heat stress' days set to hit cattle and rising hit on profits of California POSSIBLE $500M OF 59.9 [UC Davis] 21% industry due to warming climate $250m dairies due to drought in 2015 REGULAR GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS AT RISK 12.7 fairr.org fairr.org | 1 KEY FINDINGS FOREWORD AND IMPLICATIONS FOR INVESTORS Animal factory farming is exposed to at least 28 environmental, social This report explores the industrialisation of the world’s meat and fish production, a relatively recent Increasingly, major investors and governance (ESG) issues that could significantly damage financial trend, and assesses the potential risks that a range are paying attention to value over the short or long-term.
    [Show full text]