Day 078 - 26 Jan 95 - Page 27

     
     1   Q.   So because you knew where Barretos was, you assumed that
     2        automatically they could not have been taking any supplies
     3        from ex-rainforest land?
     4        A.  Well, no.  The rainforest is 2,000 kilometres north of
     5        it.  You do not travel cattle 2,000 kilometres.
     6
     7   Q.   You knew that at the time, did you?
     8        A.  Yes, I know where Barretos was.
     9
    10   Q.   At that time, before you went out there later on, did you
    11        know how many ranches supplied the Barretos plant?
    12        A.  How many ranches?
    13
    14   Q.   Yes.
    15        A.  No.
    16
    17   Q.   You did not know the location of all their ranches?
    18        A.  No.
    19
    20   Q.   Going back to:  "Our man in Canada is very ethical and
         would not lie to the President", Prince Philip, "of the
    22        World Wildlife Fund", that is a reference to you being told
    23        George Cohon saying:  "I think you are mistaken" to Prince
    24        Philip; is that correct?
    25        A.  Yes.
    26
    27   Q.   OK, fair enough.  If we look at the document 48?
    28        A.  That is the one addressed to Mr. Hummel?
    29
    30   Q.   Sorry.  If we look at February 22nd document, if I can find
    31        it.
    32
    33   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Where is that?
    34
    35   MR. MORRIS:  That is the next one, 49.
    36        A.  From Mr. George Cohon to Mr. Hummel dated
    37        February 22nd?
    38
    39   Q.   Yes.  Monte Hummel is the Executive Director of the World
    40        Wildlife Fund, Canada, who was basically involved in the
         dispute with Prince Philip in checking out the facts with
    42        George Cohon.  George Cohon writes at the bottom paragraph
    43        on that page:  "Accordingly, I think you should now be in a
    44        position to discuss this with your colleagues.  As you can
    45        see, McDonald's worldwide is not involved in any manner in
    46        dealing with rainforests or their removal or in buying beef
    47        as a result of cattle that have been grazing in areas that
    48        formerly were rainforests."
    49
    50        Is that what you have there? 
    51        A.  Yes. 
    52 
    53   Q.   So that last section there, he is saying, is he not:  "They
    54        are not buying beef as a result of cattle that have been
    55        grazing in areas that formerly were rainforests"?  Is that
    56        an assurance from McDonald's that they never used
    57        ex-rainforest land?
    58        A.  Well, in reading this letter, I mean, I cannot say
    59        whether it is an assurance but, yes, it is written here.
    60