We published an article last week on “Bovaer”, the chemical compound, currently being trialled in the UK, which is added to cow feed to reduce methane emissions (allegedly).
Since then the story has grown, and I just wanted to do a quick update and ask a question that’s nagging at me, but we’ll get to that.
Firstly the good news – the widespread disgust. People all over the country have objected to the “low emission” drug, leading to boycotts of the dairy giant Arla and their associated brands.
Social media users are posting pictures of stacked shelves of unsold Lurpak butter and Cravendale milk.
Smaller farms and organic dairy producers have jumped on the chance for good publicity and released statements declaring themselves “Bovaer free” (Some people have made lists)
Some are even taking potshots and Bill Gates, which is always fun.
The BBC has turned Marianna Spring loose to do a fact-check, and “experts” have reassured her that Bovaer is safe…which was pretty much always going to happen.
A stranger development can be found in The Daily Mail, which has run a few stories on this issue, including publishing a full list of all the products Arla is involved with to enable boycotts.
Why would they do that? Appeasing their audience? Hopping on the bandwagon?
Perhaps.
But there’s more. The story isn’t actually new, Bovaer was approved by the UK government back in December of 2023 and was already being trialled by Marks & Spencer in April of this year.
So why the big fuss now, a year later?
Two months before Bovaer was approved, last October, the UK Department for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) released a statement backing methane-reducing animal feeds, and laying out plans to “incentivize” their use or even make them mandatory by 2030 [emphasis added]:
Defra considers that methane suppressing feed products are an essential tool to decarbonise the agricultural sector. We are committed to working with industry to stimulate the market and encourage uptake of these products.
In England, we plan to incentivise the uptake of high efficacy products with proven safety once suitable products enter the market (expected to be from 2025). We will work closely with industry to explore the best approach to introduce incentives, which could, for instance, include advice, guidance and support for the development and use of products on farms through our farming schemes such as through the Farming Innovation Programme, the Animal Health and Welfare Pathway, our Environmental Land Management schemes, or a new bespoke scheme.
Our ambition remains to develop a mature market and mandate the use of safe and effective products in suitable cattle systems in England as soon as feasible and at the very latest by 2030.
And now a little itch is asking questions at the back of my mind.
Is it possible this whole story was deliberately cultivated to gauge people’s reaction to the planned nationwide roll-out in the future?
Or could it be even subtler than that?
After all, if you wanted to discourage people from eating dairy products and red meat, then advertising the fact you’ve put potentially toxic additives in the cows’ food wouldn’t be a bad strategy, would it?
Just an idea.
By Kit Knightly