Media Coverage

FAQ

Media Coverage

Recently visited pages

Media Coverage
Medienberichterstattung

On the television there were horrific scenes of geese being maltreated. Do you cover up such practices?

No, of course not. We condemn in the strongest possible terms such harvesting of feathers because it causes pain to the birds; they are being maltreated.
No, of course not. We condemn in the strongest possible terms such harvesting of feathers because it causes pain to the birds; they are being maltreated.
Medienberichterstattung

Does the procedure which was shown, for instance, in autumn and winter 2010 among others on 21 December 2010 on German public TV (ARD, programme Mittagsmagazin) refer to the practice of gathering feathers in live geese during their moulting or to live-plu

In this case, it is a matter of the forbidden practice of live-plucking which our association strictly condemns.
 
In this case, it is a matter of the forbidden practice of live-plucking which our association strictly condemns.
 
Medienberichterstattung

Have the persons inflicting harm and injury on the animals been reported to the authorities in charge or punished?

When the VDFI (The Registered Association of the German Down and Feather Industry) obtained knowledge of the incident, which was allegedly filmed already in summer 2010, the association immediately filed a complaint. According to our information, those who had filmed the incident, that is to say the animal welfare organization Four Paws, did not file a complaint against the animal abuser.
When the VDFI (The Registered Association of the German Down and Feather Industry) obtained knowledge of the incident, which was allegedly filmed already in summer 2010, the association immediately filed a complaint. According to our information, those who had filmed the incident, that is to say the animal welfare organization Four Paws, did not file a complaint against the animal abuser. This attitude is all the more regrettable since Four Paws is able to prove evidence of the procedure and documented the operations in a film.
 
Are you aware of the reasons for this?
 
It would appear that the animal welfare organisation did not want to file a complaint against him so that “the individual Hungarian farmer was not made the fall guy” (source: Kölner Stadt Anzeiger newspaper dated 20 December 2010). This response, which seemed to have satisfied the print and electronic media, has given our industry plenty of food for thought. If it was only one individual farmer who committed this crime, why didn’t they bring charges against him as the causer of the crime instead of allowing all Hungarian farmers and potential processors of down and feathers to be blamed en masse? Why is an animal welfare organisation protecting someone who is being cruel to animals? Are exclusively non-material objectives behind such behaviour? Until now, nobody has given us an answer to this question.