Adelaide Zoo Adelaide Zoo in hot palm oil

[zooboy28]

Hypocritical much? Adelaide Zoo have ended a deal with a local supplier of palm-oil free ice creams and instead signed a deal with multinational Unilever to stock their Streets ice creams, which do contain palm oil.

Audio story here (I haven't listened to it yet): Adelaide Zoo Ditches SA Palm Oil Free Icecream - ABC South Australia - Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC)

Worth checking out the comments below the story too, here is the blurb introducing the audio:

"Palm oil typically costs the lives of up to fifty orangutans each week... Unless immediate action is taken Sumatran orangutans could be extinct in the wild within 10 years." Adelaide Zoo website.

Four years ago, in an attempt to promote conservation of orangutan rainforest habitat, Adelaide Zoo engaged local manufacturer Golden North to provide palm oil free ice creams for sale in the kiosk. Golden North's entire ice cream range is now free of palm oil. But now the Zoo has decided to accept a financial offer by Streets, owned by multinational company Unilever, and discontinue the relationship developed with the local company.

On 891 Drive Michael Smyth spoke with Elaine Bensted, Chief Executive of Adelaide Zoo and Lorinda Jane, founder of Palm Oil Investigations.

 

[Chlidonias]

Hypocritical much? Adelaide Zoo have ended a deal with a local supplier of palm-oil free ice creams and instead signed a deal with multinational Unilever to stock their Streets ice creams, which do contain palm oil.

Audio story here (I haven't listened to it yet): Adelaide Zoo Ditches SA Palm Oil Free Icecream - ABC South Australia - Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC)

Worth checking out the comments below the story too, here is the blurb introducing the audio:

well I'm not impressed for one. The audio is about twelve minutes long. Elaine Bensted from the zoo is mostly talking in spin and quotes. Basically she is saying they got a lot of money from Streets, and it is fine to ditch the palm-oil-free brand because the other zoos in Australia (e.g. Melbourne and Sydney) also sell Streets and that Adelaide Zoo can use it to "acknowledge sustainable palm oil". Apparently Streets is aiming to be using only palm oil "traceable to known sources" by the end of 2014, and to be "globally palm oil free" by 2020.

However the issue I think is really one of ditching a local company which already is completely palm oil free and going back to one which is not! I mean, a zoo selling products with palm oil when they are campaigning against it is hypocritical but also understandable (it is extremely difficult to get products not containing palm oil after all), but such a zoo actively reversing from selling palm oil free to the opposite is just ridiculous.

Lorinda Jane, founder of Palm Oil Investigations, has a short piece near the end and makes the point that "sustainable palm oil" which is what Streets aims for, is not the same as "certified sustainable palm oil" (which is what they should be aiming for).

The zoo is going to be selling both Golden North and Streets for the next 12 months (presumably due to contractual obligations to Golden North).

EDIT: I've just been browsing the zoo's Facebook page. There is a massive backlash against this from zoo-goers. This is a PR disaster!!

 

[Chlidonias]

https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/2465108...cream-not-enough-to-secure-adelaide-zoo-deal/

South Australian ice cream maker Golden North is upset Zoos SA has ditched it in favour of a deal with a multinational, despite the local company avoiding use of palm oil in its foods.

Golden North marketing manager Trevor Pomery says the SA company spent a year eliminating palm oil from its products and Adelaide and Monarto Zoos had heavily promoted their Golden North treats as being free of palm oil.

Now the zoos organisation has struck a deal to sell Streets ice creams despite the fact they have palm oil in them.

Production of palm oil is widely considered a factor in destruction of rain forests, the habitat of orangutans and other endangered species Zoos SA promotes.

Mr Pomery said he found out in April that Zoos SA was in discussion with Streets.

"We still had just over a year to go on our contract," he said.

"We went away, put together a new offer and then we got that approved and were ready to go to the zoo with this new offer.

"We then got a letter on July 3 telling us we were going to be out."

The marketing executive said Golden North had gone to lengths to achieve an environmental positive with its ice creams and the loss of the zoos deal came as a blow.

"[We are] very frustrated and somewhat disappointed in that we put in a lot of time and effort to become palm oil-free," he said.

"I don't want to go on a moral high ground, but they've backflipped."

Zoos SA chief executive Elaine Bensted conceded Streets ice creams contained palm oil but said other factors led to the deal.

"It does have a financial benefit to the zoo and I won't shy away from that, and it is a significant component," she said.

"We're a not-for-profit charity, we have a responsibility to our members and that membership responsibility does include financial sustainability.

"I don't need to explain that Zoos SA has obviously had some financial challenges in the past."

Ms Bensted said Streets had promised to be mindful of environmental concerns.

"By 2020 all of the palm oil that they buy globally will come from certified sources," she said.

"So we wanted to make sure that we were using our buying power to try and drive different behaviour and sustainable behaviour in the people that we make purchases from."

Adelaide Zoo and its Monarto open range zoo near Murray Bridge have been through troubled times and in 2011 were given a financial lifeline of millions of dollars from taxpayers to help cope with a rising debt of more than $24 million.

Despite getting two giant pandas from China, Adelaide Zoo had been falling short of the sponsorship and visitor numbers needed to cover its rising operating costs.

Ms Bensted was appointed in 2012 with a brief to turn the zoos' financial fortunes around.

 

[Jabiru96]

I do understand how the public would feel upset about how Adelaide Zoo is focusing on an international rather than local brand, however, the zoo does not specifically state to boycott palm oil but instead use palm oil from sustainable sources (I am not aware though if Street's sources sustainable palm oil). People seem to be giving the zoo a rather hard time on Facebook not really knowing the facts (e.g. do the keeper talks really say DO NOT BUY PALM OIL COMPLETELY or rather PLEASE BE CAREFUL WHEN BUYING PALM OIL PRODUCTS). It seems that the zoo's stance is being manipulated to paint them in a light which is not reflective of their own position (being used as a sort of anti-zoo campaign now).

What upsets me more is that people are willing to boycott the zoo (as well as Monarto) due to this issue, when it is a non-for-profit organisation and has recently been in tough financial times. But hey, whether they like it or not, Adelaide's PR has been tarnished and it will take a while for it to be regained. And now this leads to other zoos in Australia needing to justify their stance to the public, detracting away from the actual issue (need for local, sustainable products).

Just one opinion.....

 

[zooboy28]

Email sent out to Zoos South Australia members/newsletter subscribers:

We thank the public for their feedback and genuine concern in regards to Zoos SA's partnership with Unilever. We recognise that this is a sensitive topic and assure the decision was not made lightly.

As a not-for-profit conservation charity we rely heavily on the generosity of the public and corporate support and value these relationships greatly. Without this support we would not be able to achieve our mission of saving species from extinction and connecting people with nature, enabling us to contribute to many critical conservation projects at a local and international level.

Zoos SA is committed to working with organisations that are making real progress to support sustainable practices and the preservation of the environment and wildlife. This was demonstrated through our partnership with Golden North, who at the time of entering into a partnership with us, were using unsustainable non-certified palm oil. Through our work with Golden North, and their review of their supply chain, Golden North were able to publically state that they were 100% palm oil free in August of 2012, two years into the partnership with us. This was a great achievement and it has allowed Golden North to market this new status to their current and potential new customers.

We see our recent partnership with Unilever as a new opportunity to help drive positive change, this time with one of the world’s largest food companies. Through engaging with them we are able to dramatically increase the scale of our conservation efforts and impact.

As a multi-national corporation operating in more than 100 countries, Unilever is committed to sourcing 100% of its agricultural raw materials sustainably, including palm oil. As one of the world’s largest consumers of palm oil, Unilever has made a global commitment that by the end of 2014 all palm oil will be traceable to known sources and by 2020 all of the palm oil they buy globally will come from certified sustainable sources as per the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil criteria. The World Wildlife Fund for Nature is monitoring their progress and their most recent palm oil scorecard report gave Unilever a top score in relation to commitment and action on sustainable palm oil.

Encouraging a complete shift away from palm oil may push manufacturers to source alternative oils like soy or rapeseed which can require six to 10 times more land than is needed for palm oil. The production of Certified Sustainable Palm Oil aims to foster sustainable livelihoods for the millions of people who rely on this industry and alleviate the conflicts commonly associated with the development of new plantations.

The new agreement between Zoos SA and Unilever includes a number of targets and reporting mechanisms, including an exit clause that will ensure we are able to monitor progress against the commitments made. Should we at any time feel that they have not met these targets, or have moved away from their commitment to buy certified sustainable palm oil from traceable sources, we will be able to terminate the agreement.

Unilever are also corporate supporters of Zoos Victoria, Taronga Zoo and Perth Zoo with Streets products sold across these zoos. Zoos Victoria, Taronga Zoo and Zoos SA are key drivers of the Don’t Palm Us Off campaign, which advocates for the use of sustainable palm oil. As a collective group Australian zoos have immense buying power and are well placed to support positive social advocacy in regards to the use of sustainable palm oil.

We will keep our members and supporters update of any new developments going forwards.

 

[Chlidonias]

Zoos SA is committed to working with organisations that are making real progress to support sustainable practices and the preservation of the environment and wildlife. This was demonstrated through our partnership with Golden North, who at the time of entering into a partnership with us, were using unsustainable non-certified palm oil. Through our work with Golden North, and their review of their supply chain, Golden North were able to publically state that they were 100% palm oil free in August of 2012, two years into the partnership with us. This was a great achievement and it has allowed Golden North to market this new status to their current and potential new customers.

I thought this bit was just really crawling for a justification for their decision. Basically turning it back onto Golden North to try and make themselves out to have the moral high-ground. But the paragraph starts off saying the zoo is "committed to working with organisations that are making real progress to support sustainable practices" and ending by telling them to piss off.

EDIT: I just checked their Facebook page. They posted that same message they sent in the member emails (as posted by zooboy28 above) eighteen hours ago and there are currently over 800 replies to the post, none of them good.

 

[Coquinguy]

This sort of thing is like a wet dream for the anti-zoo brigade.
A little more than gobsmacked at the stupidity of this move; I understand that Adelaide Zoo needs to remain viable financially...but in the end for what purpose. They really need to have a good look at their core mission and values here or they risk losing validity and integrity in just about any future conservation mission, as well as the support of the public.
No matter how the zoo tries to sugar-coat this, its going to do a lot of harm. And if Karta the orang, ironically, gives birth later on, I daresay this is going to compromise any positive publicity the birth would generate. They (the zoo) certainly wont be able to look anyone in the face and say the birth is helping to save orangs...

 

[Chlidonias]

I do understand how the public would feel upset about how Adelaide Zoo is focusing on an international rather than local brand, however, the zoo does not specifically state to boycott palm oil but instead use palm oil from sustainable sources (I am not aware though if Street's sources sustainable palm oil). People seem to be giving the zoo a rather hard time on Facebook not really knowing the facts (e.g. do the keeper talks really say DO NOT BUY PALM OIL COMPLETELY or rather PLEASE BE CAREFUL WHEN BUYING PALM OIL PRODUCTS). It seems that the zoo's stance is being manipulated to paint them in a light which is not reflective of their own position (being used as a sort of anti-zoo campaign now).

What upsets me more is that people are willing to boycott the zoo (as well as Monarto) due to this issue, when it is a non-for-profit organisation and has recently been in tough financial times. But hey, whether they like it or not, Adelaide's PR has been tarnished and it will take a while for it to be regained. And now this leads to other zoos in Australia needing to justify their stance to the public, detracting away from the actual issue (need for local, sustainable products).

Just one opinion.....

the Adelaide Zoo actually made a big campaign about becoming "palm oil free" (actually called "Go Palm Oil Free" with the statement "Join us to help protect orangutan habitat and buy palm oil free!"). All those pages have now been removed from the ZOOSSA site (you just get an error message saying "this page cannot be found"). The "Don't Palm Us Off" pages are still there.

 

[Chlidonias]

I have just split this topic into its own thread separate from the news thread.

Zooboy28 may edit the title to one he likes better if he wishes

 

[Jabiru96]

the Adelaide Zoo actually made a big campaign about becoming "palm oil free" (actually called "Go Palm Oil Free" with the statement "Join us to help protect orangutan habitat and buy palm oil free!"). All those pages have now been removed from the ZOOSSA site (you just get an error message saying "this page cannot be found"). The "Don't Palm Us Off" pages are still there.

That is a different story then. However, I still think people should vote with their wallets (ie. don't but the Streets products) rather than punish the zoo by boycotting it.

 

[Chlidonias]

Zoo's palm oil credibility melts away over ice cream deal | Nick Xenophon - Independent Senator for South Australia

7 August 2014

Independent Senator for South Australia, Nick Xenophon, is organising a Special General Meeting of the Royal Zoological Society of SA (RZSSA) to reverse Adelaide’s Zoo’s extraordinary decision to exclude Golden North from selling its palm oil-free ice creams at the Zoo from next year.

The decision flies in the face of the Zoo’s much-publicised ‘Don’t Palm Me Off’ campaign to help save the habitat of orang-utans in Malaysia and Indonesia.

Senator Xenophon has previously introduced Bills into the Federal Parliament to require the labelling of Palm Oil in food products so that consumers could make an informed choice. Palm oil harvesting in Asia is destroying rainforest and driving orang-utans to extinction.

Senator Xenophon last year worked with the Zoo on its campaign and was today “gobsmacked” by its decision to switch to Streets Ice Creams, owned by giant Anglo-Dutch multinational Unilever, which uses palm oil.

“Those responsible for this decision at the Adelaide Zoo should be ashamed of themselves. Golden North is an iconic South Australian company that has busted its guts to remove all traces of palm oil from its supply chain over the past 12 months,” Nick said.

Senator Xenophon said the Zoo’s decision was “completely contrary” to its conservation agenda. The Zoo’s stated strategic goals include “saving species from extinction”.

Senator Xenophon spoke to Golden North management this morning to express his support. He is now drafting a written request to trigger a Special General Meeting of the Society to call upon the Zoo to reverse its decision and for the Board to be censured.

Under the rules of the Society, a request with 50 signatures from the 32,000-strong membership can trigger a Special General Meeting, which must be held within 42 days.

“What adds insult to injury is the fact that the Zoo has received significant state tax-payer bail outs and local community support because of its financial predicament. It seems the Zoo isn’t prepared to do the right thing by a local business that has ‘walked the walk’ on the Zoo’s own anti-palm oil agenda,” Nick said.

Senator Xenophon will be launching a Facebook site by tomorrow morning to appeal to Zoo members to join his call and for other to join the society so they can take part in the meeting.

Zoo called to account | Nick Xenophon - Independent Senator for South Australia

8 August

Independent Senator for South Australia, Nick Xenophon, is calling for members of the Royal Zoological Society of SA to come forward and sign a resolution to trigger a Special General Meeting, following Adelaide Zoo’s decision to drop ‘palm oil free’ ice creams made by iconic South Australian company Golden North.

Senator Xenophon released the wording of his resolution today and, once it has been signed by 50 Zoo members, will send it to the Secretary of the Society.

Under rule 15.2 of the Society’s rules, the Secretary must make a notice of a Special General Meeting within 21 days and the meeting must take place within a further 21 days.

“A Special General Meeting will be held no later than 23 September – hopefully much sooner,” Nick said.

“I have been swamped with support from concerned Zoo members and the public, all gobsmacked at this decision. The meeting will be our opportunity hold zoo management to account and have this crazy decision overturned,” Nick said.

“I’m also heartened to hear that demand for Golden North ice creams has spiked across the state – this is good news for a good corporate citizen and a great South Australian company.”

Palm Oil plantations are replacing rain forests in Indonesia and Malaysia, further endangering orang-utans. There is currently no accepted standard that guarantees sustainable production of palm oil. Palm oil is also one of the most unhealthy oils you can eat, due to high levels of saturated fats.

Since 2009 Adelaide Zoo ran a “no palm oil” policy and Golden North completely revamped its supply chain, removing the ingredient entirely from its products.

This week it emerged the Zoo had signed, due to “commercial-in-confidence” reasons, an exclusive deal with foreign multinational-owned Streets Ice Creams, which contain palm oil.

Nick said that the “Don’t Palm Off Golden North” Facebook had received 1500 “likes” within 12 hours and his office was also emailing and posting out paper copies of a petition to protest at the decision.

He again invited members of the public to join the Zoo and pressure the management to reinstate palm oil-free Golden North ice creams by coming to the upcoming Special General Meeting.

 

[Hix]

I wonder if Ms Bensted will suddenly find other employment before the end of the year?



Hix

 

[dean]

This is the same as telling visitors about habitat loss and deforestation, then using tropical hard woods on zoo building rooves which are the covered any way with roofing felt etc to make the weather proof, it's not rocket science to think before you do something. Of course that takes the rarest thing in the modern world. Common sense.

 

[Coquinguy]

It would appear that people power has motivated the Society to reconsider their options; theyre not extending the contract with Golden North and stocking Streets too, as they slowlyyyyyy transition to sustainable palm oil.
I understand the sustainable palm oil thing, and support it. But the cynic in me fails to understand how a multinational company has to take until 2020 to make the switch, when a small company based in South Australia can do it in 12 months and absorb the cost within their supply chain.
Get your act together Streets.

 

[nanoboy]

It would appear that people power has motivated the Society to reconsider their options; theyre not extending the contract with Golden North and stocking Streets too, as they slowlyyyyyy transition to sustainable palm oil.
I understand the sustainable palm oil thing, and support it. But the cynic in me fails to understand how a multinational company has to take until 2020 to make the switch, when a small company based in South Australia can do it in 12 months and absorb the cost within their supply chain.
Get your act together Streets.

You have probably hit the nail on the head without realising it. A multinational company consumes palm oil in such huge quantities that by definition, it can't be 100% sustainable because there just isn't a large enough supply that they could get their hands on.... until 2020.

 

[Chlidonias]

It would appear that people power has motivated the Society to reconsider their options; theyre not extending the contract with Golden North and stocking Streets too, as they slowlyyyyyy transition to sustainable palm oil.

I guess there's a typo in there and you meant to say "they're now extending the contract with Golden North and stocking Streets too"?

As far as I can see nothing has changed at all. They have sent out a PR blurb (quoted below in full) which includes the statement "We are pleased to advise that we have begun negotiations with Golden North and Streets, this may allow us to extend the current stocking of both brands of ice cream beyond June 2015." They were always going to stock both brands for another twelve months - because they have to due to the contract with Golden North. All they are saying now is "we are getting sick of all the backlash, here's something to try and mollify you: we may extend the Golden North contract further than that twelve months, while still selling Streets".

As you may be aware, Zoos SA has been in the news recently as a result of a new partnership with Streets Ice Cream. As a member-based society we respect the opinions of our members and supporters, and acknowledge the feedback and genuine concern that has been raised.

We are pleased to advise that we have begun negotiations with Golden North and Streets, this may allow us to extend the current stocking of both brands of ice cream beyond June 2015. This will allow you to choose your favourite ice cream during your next visit. We’re seeking a solution that is in keeping with our conservation approach, our need for sustainable income and one that is in line with the views held by our members, supporters and the wider South Australian community. We will keep you up to date with the outcomes of these discussions and we look forward to reaching a beneficial outcome for all involved.

Over the last four years Zoos SA had been promoting a ‘palm oil free’ conservation message. We are pleased this has contributed greatly to our members’ understanding of the environmental impact of palm oil, however many globally recognised conservation organisations, including the World Wildlife Fund, the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums and other major Australian zoos, now believe avoiding palm oil completely can be damaging in its own right and the use of sustainable palm oil is the better approach to take. As this is by no means a simple issue, we have created a dedicated page on our website with further information and videos.

As a South Australian, not for profit organisation that has been operating for 135 years, we understand the passion South Australians have for the Zoo and also for South Australian businesses. Being a not for profit, we rely on the support of our members, donors, sponsors and the general public in order to continue our critical conservation work. We employ 250 staff of which 70 work at Monarto Zoo just outside of Murray Bridge and with your support we can ensure the community can continue to enjoy Adelaide and Monarto Zoos for generations to come.

We hope that this letter has clarified some of the concerns raised and we look forward to sharing any new developments with you as discussions progress.

 

[Chlidonias]

I understand the sustainable palm oil thing, and support it. But the cynic in me fails to understand how a multinational company has to take until 2020 to make the switch, when a small company based in South Australia can do it in 12 months and absorb the cost within their supply chain.
Get your act together Streets.

You have probably hit the nail on the head without realising it. A multinational company consumes palm oil in such huge quantities that by definition, it can't be 100% sustainable because there just isn't a large enough supply that they could get their hands on.... until 2020.

the stupidest part about the Zoos SA excuse for "we can influence Unilever from within" is that Unilever's publicly-stated aim is to be using palm oil only from "known sources" by the end of 2014 and using solely certified sustainable palm oil by 2020. Those are their already-stated aims. So Zoos SA isn't influencing anything; all they are doing is, well, repeating what the company already says that they are planning on doing!

 

[nanoboy]

the stupidest part about the Zoos SA excuse for "we can influence Unilever from within" is that Unilever's publicly-stated aim is to be using palm oil only from "known sources" by the end of 2014 and using solely certified sustainable palm oil by 2020. Those are their already-stated aims. So Zoos SA isn't influencing anything; all they are doing is, well, repeating what the company already says that they are planning on doing!

Oh well, at least the orangutans will be..... oh.

Maybe they mean that they will assist the world's third largest consumer goods company with reaching their stated goals? I don't know man. Who knows what goes on in those meetings? As Bruce Willis said in 'Armageddon':

"You're the guys that're thinking s**t up! I'm sure you got a team of men sitting around somewhere right now just thinking s**t up and somebody backing them up!"

Adelaide Zoo posted this on their Facebook page 3hrs ago:

"Thanks for all your comments and feedback. Sorry we’ve been a bit quiet, but we had to get the right people around the table and get talking. We certainly value the opinion of our many passionate members and the wider South Australian community. We are pleased to be working towards an agreement that supports both of our ice cream partners and is aligned with our on-going conservation efforts. We’ll keep you up to date with how we go."

 

[Otter Lord]

They should just stop selling ice cream in zoos.

I agree with the above statements about the stupidity and hypocrisy of this business move. I am amazed by the public reaction though, and the fact that politicians are getting involved. It seems like the decision could get switched as the zoo organization seems rather democratic.

Is this normal policy/management for institutions in Australia? I do not know much about the political side of zoo organization, especially about Adelaide. I am from San Diego where the zoo tends to be rather private.

 

[Chlidonias]

I agree with the above statements about the stupidity and hypocrisy of this business move. I am amazed by the public reaction though, and the fact that politicians are getting involved. It seems like the decision could get switched as the zoo organization seems rather democratic.

I think they are basically stuck with their stupid decision. They can't really get out of the Unilever deal without (I should imagine) a whopping great law-suit coming their way. The best they could do is get a continuing contract with Golden North and sell the products of both companies. I think that's what they are going for, and they'll need a hefty dose of spin to accompany it.