Day: August 14, 2019

UK: Foxhunting – Illegal But Still Undertaken by Some Exploiting the Hunt Ban.


hunter bath.jpg


Reproduced from the ‘League Against Cruel Sports (LACS) – England.


Fox hunting is a ‘traditional sport’ in which hunters, usually on horseback, follow a pack of hunting dogs aiming to pick up the scent of a fox, chase it – and kill it. Fox hunting is illegal in England, Scotland and Wales, but evidence suggests that hunts are regularly breaking the law.

Carry on reading for some more fox hunting facts.


Fox hunting is illegal in England, Scotland and Wales. It is still legal in Northern Ireland.

Fox hunting was banned by the Hunting Act 2004 in England and Wales, and the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002 in Scotland. But while these were both welcome and hard-fought pieces of legislation, overwhelming evidence suggests that both are being ignored or exploited by hunts on a regular basis.

Hunts in England and Wales invented the activity of ‘trail’ hunting after the fox hunting ban came in. This claims to be a non-lethal sport where the hunt simply follows a pre-laid trail rather than searching for and chasing a fox. However, years of evidence shows that hunts are using trail hunting as a cover for illegal hunting by claiming to be following a trail but still carrying on and hunting foxes the way they did before the hunting ban.

Hunts in England and Wales also use ‘exemptions’ in the Hunting Act. These were designed to allow certain types of ‘pest’ control or scientific research, but are being exploited by the hunts to give them an excuse to carry on hunting.

In Scotland, an exemption in the law allows foxes to be killed by ‘flushing to guns’, where a pack of hounds is allowed to be used to chase a fox from cover where it can be shot. However, evidence from League investigators shows hunts claiming to be flushing to guns – but without having any guns present in the right place.


If you are opposed to hunting, then you are in the majority. More than eight out of ten people are opposed to hunting. This includes more than eight out of ten people in rural areas – which shows that people who truly understand and experience what hunts do want to see it remain illegal.

Hunting is not a town vs country issue, and it is not a ‘class’ issue. More than seven out of 10 Conservative voters want hunting to remain illegal. Hunting is an issue of animal cruelty, nothing else.

Some argue that ‘hunting’ should continue because it’s a grand old British tradition. However, bear baiting and bull baiting were also traditions, and they were rightfully consigned to the history books. Traditions are measured in more than years. They have to reflect the values and attitudes of a society, and the vast majority of the British people oppose hunting with dogs.


Fox hunting is not a credible form of pest control. Hunters claim that they are helping farmers by killing foxes, but this is a senseless argument that most people no longer believe. The League does not believe that there is any requirement for lethal fox control, but even if there was, then hunting is neither a humane nor effective way of doing it.

Any suggestion that fox hunting is about ‘pest control’ can be dismissed very quickly by the fact that hunts have been caught capturing and raising foxes purely so they can then be hunted. In May 2015, a League investigation revealed 16 terrified fox cubs held captive in a barn linked to a fox hunt in Yorkshire. We rescued them, took them to a vet, and sadly one died, but we released the others to safety. We are proud to have protected those foxes.

While the scale of this fox ‘factory’ was shocking, it’s not an isolated case. In December 2015, League Investigators released a fox found locked in a building near to where the Belvoir Hunt was meeting. It is worth mentioning that a few months later, while monitoring the same hunt, our Investigators were brutally attacked, leaving one with a broken neck, which we believe was retaliation for us rescuing this fox.


Watch the story of 16 fox cubs found captive in a barn close to a hunt kennel.

Read on using the top link.


petition keyboard


Sign the petition at:




East Kent Murder

The Result – Photo – Mark (WAV).

USA: Beautiful ‘Salvador Dali’ Pup Draws Attention.



I just had to put this beautiful little pup on here tonight, as it really made me laugh ! – just to end the day with something good after all the export downers we have been experiencing.

Regards Mark.


Rescue Puppy Born with Adorable ‘Mustache’ is Breaking the Internet

Images of a beautiful rescue puppy born with a Salvador Dali-like “mustache” have caused a stir online after the dog was saved from the streets and put up for adoption, along with her mother and ten siblings, by Hearts & Bones Rescue.

Initially referred to as “mustache pup,” this adorable five-week-old puppy has now been named Salvador Dolly due to her resemblance to the surrealist Spanish artist. Inquiries about adopting her are flooding into the non-profit organization.

Dolly, along with her mother and siblings, is currently living with a loving foster family in Dallas. The whole crew is looking for forever homes in New York City and will be ready for transport at the end of August.

The rescue organization has highlighted the vital importance of people fostering and adopting rescued animals. “We were only able to save Dolly and her family because we had a foster to take them in,” it stated in a Facebook post. “The more people we have ready to open their hearts and homes to a dog in need, the more we can save!”

Puppy with moustache

Salvador Dolly’s road to fame is just getting started, as she is now the face of Hearts & Bones Rescue animal adoption drive and is even on a T-Shirt saying “I mustache you to adopt.”

Rescue dogs make great companions and this unique little puppy is a great reminder of how special all animals are.



I Think We have Presented All the Evidence Needed to Show That EU Legislation for ‘ the Protection of’ Animals In Transport Is Up With EU Commissioner Fairies ! – Read on and Find Out Why.


I am supplying the following as additional reference / information to the excellent post which has recently been provided by Venus relating to animal transport guides:


The following all directly relates to EU Regulation 1/2005 on the (so called) ‘protection’ of animals during transport. Relevant sections and what they state are given.

A full copy of Reg 1/2005 can be accessed by the following link:


As an additional reference, we give you a link to a very specific document produced by ‘Eyes on Animal’ in the Netherlands, which specifically deals with the issue of the importance of access during transport.

Here is the link to the report:


We will identify our own (WAV) specific concerns clearly in relation to the Regulation in the following.


As Venus says in her post:

And we mean: The video work is actually very good, congratulations.
What we do not quite understand, to whom are the videos directed.
To the truck driver?
And before 2018, before the project is completed, did the drivers not know which laws apply to animal transport at EU level?
And now that they finally know, do they have to follow these rules? Or only if they want?

Exactly Venus  – as we will show below, since the implementation of Reg 1/2005 in December 2004, all livestock drivers are supposed to be certified (since then) to ensure they are knowledgeable and competent in the transport of live animals.

If this is the case; then why have the EU wasted a lot of time and money in producing new videos on animal transport (links shown in your post)  ? – is this rather like making a video to instruct a qualified pilot the basics of flying a plane ? – drivers are supposed be certified by 1/2005 since 2004; so what is the real point of these new EU videos; apart from wasting lots of money ?

Anyway; we move on.


EU Regulation 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport declares:




  1.  Road drivers and attendants as referred to in Article 6(5) and Article 17(1) shall have successfully completed the training as provided for in paragraph 2 and have passed an examination approved by the competent authority, which shall ensure that examiners are independent.

The training courses referred to in paragraph 1 shall include at least the technical and administrative aspects of Community legislation concerning the protection of animals during transport and in particular the following items:

(a) Articles 3 and 4 and Annexes I and II;

(b) animal physiology and in particular drinking and feeding needs, animal behaviour and the concept of stress;

(c) practical aspects of handling of animals;

(d) impact of driving behaviour on the welfare of the transported animals and on the quality of meat;

(e) emergency care for animals;

(f) personnel handling animals.


Article 6


  1. No person shall act as a transporter unless he holds an authorisation issued by a competent authority pursuant to Article 10(1) or, for long journeys, Article 11(1). A copy of the authorisation shall be made available to the competent authority when the animals are transported.
  2. Transporters shall notify to the competent authority any changes in relation to the information and documents referred to in Article 10(1) or, for long journeys, Article 11(1), no more than 15 working days from the date the changes took place.
  3. Transporters shall transport animals in accordance with the technical rules set out in Annex I.
  4. Transporters shall entrust the handling of the animals to personnel who have received training on the relevant provisions of Annexes I and II.




(as referred to in Article 6(3), Article 8(1), Article 9(1) and (2)(a))



No animal shall be transported unless it is fit for the intended journey, and all animals shall be transported in conditions guaranteed not to cause them injury or unnecessary suffering.

When animals fall ill or are injured during transport, they shall be separated from the others and receive first-aid treatment as soon as possible. They shall be given appropriate veterinary treatment and if necessary undergo emergency slaughter or killing in a way which does not cause them any unnecessary suffering.




  1. Provisions for all means of transport

2.  Additional provisions for transport by road or rail

2.1 Vehicles in which animals are transported shall be clearly and visibly marked indicating the presence of live animals,


article 2

article 1

Clearly and Visibly Marked ???


WAV Comment – Regarding the last couple of points shown red above, we draw your attention to one of our recent posts on how the industry is not being compliant with EU Regulations when transporting live animals in box type trailers.

Here is the link:


We ask; when box type trailers are being used:

  • how is access to ALL animals being transported provided for the driver ? – he cannot hear them and he most certainly cannot see them in a box trailer – unless he has x ray vision !
  • As we have clearly shown in our photographs and reports, vehicles ARE NOT clearly and visibly marked indicating the presence of live animals. Is this not what my report from vehicles using Ramsgate harbour proved ? – we included in the report our suggestions as to the labelling which we suggested should be used; and also suggested the locations on the trailer where these signs should be applied.


Nothing has ever been done by the EU Commission to address our concerns about live animals being transported in box type trailers.

So, we add all this up and what do we get:

Nothing much really – we (and many other organisations) provide all the evidence top show that adherence to EU rules are a complete and utter joke within the live animal transport sector;  we show that the EU does nothing except make nice new videos for drivers who are supposed to be fully trained and competent in the first place, and we see a Eurogroup for Animals which does not really do much to address any of the issues; when they are supposed to be the direct link to MEPs at the European parliament, who can make changes to the law !

Fed up; disgusted on behalf of the animals; and don’t even ask me about the Brussels crowd; I think we have now proved they in EU circles are utterly incompetent.

Regards to all – Mark.



We have also today (14/8) attempted to make contact by e mail with the 2 primary contacts at the Eurogroup about the live transport issue; but the following has come back to us:


Thank you for your message. I will be on summer leave until 25 August 2019 and will respond to you upon my return. 

For urgent matters you can contact my colleague Alessia Virone,

Best regards,

Andreas Erler

Senior Political Adviser, Eurogroup for Animals


And Alessia (the urgent contact) says:


Thank you for your message!

I will be out of the office until the 18th of Augustus. 

I will answer to your email as soon as possible upon my return.

If your question is urgent, please contact my colleague Andreas Erler (



But he has just automatically mailed us that he is also on holiday !!!


Strong cup of tea, please !



































EU-animal transport guides: animals are transported in the best possible ways!!


ATP_finished-animal transport project jpg

“As a professional driver, the animals are in your hands. You need a certificate of competence to carry live animals.

TiertransportImage: Manfred Karremann



Click to access Driver-FINAL-2.pdf

European Commission, DG Sante pilot project: “Three years ago our consortium started the adventure of developing good and better practices for the transport of 5 groups of animals.

Now in February 2019, we completed the EU project work, having developed guidelines, fact sheets, videos and having toured many European countries to forward our findings and discuss how to improve animal transport. Although officially this means the end of the project, we will keep on spreading our messages. This website will be kept alive and we hope that we will even be able to add additional translations of our documents on a later stage.

Our Facebook page will also be kept alive and report routinely on EU events on animal transport.

We invite everybody to keep using the recommendations to make sure animals are transported in the best possible ways (!!!)


And here is the visualization of the Animal Transport Guides









EU-Kommission: ..”We invite everybody to keep using the recommendations to make sure animals are transported in the best possible ways” (!!!)

Eurogroup for Animals: The leading animal welfare organisation at EU level:
We are recognised by the European Parliament and Commission as the leading animal welfare organisation at EU level and represent animal welfare interests on many EU advisory committees and consultation bodies. Over the years we have been instrumental in achieving legal protection and EU standards which dramatically improve the way animals are treated.

Tiertransport per Schiff: …sterreichs grausamer MilchkŠlber-Export

And we mean: The video work is actually very good, congratulations.
What we do not quite understand, to whom are the videos directed.
To the truck driver?
And before 2018, before the project is completed, did the drivers not know which laws apply to animal transport at EU level?
And now that they finally know, do they have to follow these rules? Or only if they want?

The second is more likely to be the case, as most animal transports do not comply with EU regulations so far.
And because the EU, as the “largest agricultural lobby” (Jean Ziegler quote) respects the opinion of agriculture ministries, animal transporters, slaughterhouse owners.. much more than the life of animals.

The experience of the last months with the transport of 70,000 sheep in the Persian Gulf has shown us.
Even an EU Commissioner – Vitenis Andriukaitis – got involved, a courageous MEP Anja Hazenkamp was also on the ground; but in the end, none of these individuals (who were certainly involved in drafting Animal Transport Guides) could commit the mass murder of (certainly) a thousand sheep!!

Therefore, a very legitimate question arises: if truck drivers, agriculture ministers, slaughterhouse operators, transporters … regulate the transports only on a profit basis and not on the basis of EU-Animal Transpot Regulation, which instance is responsible for their punishment, and which paragraphs regulate their penalties?

So far, it seems that the EU has not thought about it yet.
But we do.
We have not seen any dramatic improvements in animal transport, on the contrary: the condition remains dramatic to catastrophic, with still a high degree of animal suffering.

This suffering can not improve videos if those who cause it are not punished severely.
It’s that easy, even the EU and its staff could understand it.

We are waiting for the infringement procedure against Romania.
Only when that happens can Eurogroup convince us of “dramatic improvements” in animal transport.

My best regards to all, venus