Reckless agricultural policy: more foresight needed

class=”sc-cffd1e67-0 iQNQmc”>

The main thing is that the Swissmilk advertising cow Lovely grazes in flowering meadows on television. It doesn’t matter how the cow that ends up in our burger is actually doing, how often it receives antibiotics, or how close it is to others.

If this is the consensus, why don’t we say it that way?

Why does the federal government implement an animal welfare program that supposedly promotes friendlier treatment of animals, but leaves the costs to everyone who volunteers? Is it telling the farmer that she should renovate her barn so the cows get some sun and can move around more – when she ends up having to pay for everything out of pocket because federal contributions don’t cover the extra costs?

As a society, we need to take more responsibility for what ends up on our plates. This doesn’t necessarily require more money, but rather an honest discussion about what it is we actually want to promote.

For example, we should ask whether it is really necessary to support large Swiss farms, where chickens are crammed into very small spaces, in order to eat soy from Brazil, with tax revenue.

Wouldn’t that money be better spent where farmers are making a measurable contribution to biodiversity conservation and doing more than the bare minimum for animal welfare, as young farmers are currently demanding? Instead of demanding but not paying for it, we must now set the right priorities for direct payments.

Source: Blick