I read the whole thing. A bit quickly, I will admit.
It is a crock.
It is full of "may" and "could" with almost no perspective.
Yes, bacteria is found in animal-based ingredients. Bacteria is found everywhere.
Poultry litter. That Florida produces hundreds of millions (or whatever super big number) of tons of chicken litter doesn't mean it is fed. Hiding behind *federal and state not requiring reporting* is a copout. The author should go look if they think it is a significant amount.
When they do use specifics - it weakens their case. The example using Belgian plant-based ingredient,
"rendered animals" sounds horrible. Wasn't it this thread where we discussed what "rendered animals" means? Making ghee from butter is rendering. The ghee is great food, so are the milk solids left after the ghee is removed.
"not fit for human consumption" sounds horrible. It can be horrible (I don't think that kind gets into animal feed very often). but it mostly isn't. We fed some "not fit for human consumption" products to our cows. It was poptarts rather than animal products but the concept applies. Some were there because they baked a little too long. Some had a mixup in the recipe - didn't add enough salt. Some were mislabeled - the labels in the labeling machine weren't changed to blueberry instead of strawberry when the filling was changed over, some had the package ripped, and so on. I looked up what sorts of things the USDA defines as "unfit for human consumption" and it includes these sorts of things. I think it is much more these sorts of things than what your article implies.
Using "diseased animals" sounds horrible. I think it is also not represented fairly (but I don't have time to look just now.)
Will edit shortly if my battery doesn't die first.
I'm all for improving the system. It certainly isn't perfect. This paper doesn't look to me like improving the system is their motivation.
Whatever their motivation, they seem to be quite effective in vilifying the use of animals as products as livestock feed. What would that leave? A choice between soy and chemicals or malnutrition for omnivores like swine and chickens? I get that this whole thread is about a fourth option - basically that of having a small holding (if I have the European concept correct) is a viable option. I agree it is, assuming one has enough land and is willing to manage it appropriately (that is, look messy and/or cultivate the variety needed.)