The short film “Motherhood” by the Dutchwoman Eline Helena Schelleken shows how most of the sows in the EU have to spend their motherhood.
In the crate in the service center and then in the so-called “piglet protection cage” in the farrowing area.
Imprisoned, immobile and extradited.
Pigs are sentient, intelligent beings.
The meat industry exploits them efficiently as production machines. You can read the seven most important facts below.
At the beginning, the film shows what loving, feeling and tender animals pigs are. But after a few minutes it becomes clear how cruel it is to be locked in a cage for weeks.
Cage farming is a practice that is in stark contrast to the trend towards more sustainable agriculture, as outlined in the “Green Deal”.
We, as part of the” End the Cage Age”initiative, call on EU Executive Vice-President and Trade Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis to support the EU-wide ban on cage farming.
1. Number of sows
There are around 11 million sows in the EU. The majority of them spend almost half of the year in a cage where they cannot even turn around.
Only fewer than 2 million sows live in alternative systems without a cage.
2. Days in the cage
Most sows are caged at the beginning of their gestation for around five weeks. About a week before the birth of their piglets, they are restrained again and remain in the so-called piglet protection cage for another five weeks.
Because a “production cycle” takes about 21 weeks, the sow spends a total of up to half of the year fixed in a cage.
3. Natural behavior
Locked up in crates and “piglet protection cages”, they are more or less tied up.
They can no longer exercise even basic behavior. During the labor process and the weeks of lactation, the sow cannot even walk a few steps or turn and flip over. It is degraded from a feeling, intelligent living being to a mere unit of production.
Controversial deal with China would be ‘disastrous’ for fishing and protected rainforest, say opponents
A $55m (£39m) deal struck by the government of Sierra Leone with China to build an industrial fishing harbour on 100 hectares (250 acres) of beach and protected rainforest has been criticised as “a catastrophic human and ecological disaster” by conservationists, landowners and rights groups.
The gold and black sands of Black Johnson beach fringe the African nation’s Western Area Peninsula national park, home to endangered species including the duiker antelope and pangolins. The waters are rich in sardines, barracuda and grouper, caught by local fishermen who produce 70% of the fish for the domestic market.
After reports of a Chinese-backed fishmeal plant began circulating on social media, A statement that appeared to be from the Sierra Leonean fisheries ministry confirmed the deal, but denied the planned construction was a “fish mill”. The facility would be a harbour for tuna and “other bigger fishing” vessels exporting to international markets, it said. It would include a “waste-management component” to “recycle marine and other wastes into useful products”.
The government said the beach, one of many along the nation’s 250-mile (400km) coastline, was the “most suitable place” for construction, and revealed the finance ministry had set aside a compensation package of 13.76bn leone (£950,000) for affected landowners. But the statement leaves more questions than answers, say those objecting to the plan.
Two legal campaign groups, the Institute for Legal Research and Advocacy for Justice (ILRAJ) and Namati Sierra Leone, have written to the government, under the 2013 Right to Access Information Act, demanding to see the environmental and social-impact assessment studies, and the report showing that the beach was, as claimed, the most suitable place for construction “in terms of bathymetry, social safeguards (minimum resettlement costs) and environmental issues”. They are also seeking a copy of the grant agreement between China and Sierra Leone.
Basita Michael, a lawyer for the ILRAJ, said: “The press release was very vague. It left us wondering how did we arrive here and how come we are only hearing about this now. We have a right to know more.”
James Tonner, who owns land at Black Johnson with his mother, Jane Aspden Gbandewa, has written an open letter to the president, Julius Maada Bio, calling for him to intervene and stop the construction, which Tonner said would be “disastrous for the country and the planet”.
It would destroy pristine rainforest, plunder fish stocks and pollute fish breeding grounds and several ecosystems, Tonner said. The beach is on Whale Bay, so-named because whales and dolphins are seen there.
Tonner, who lives in London, has set up a crowdfunding page to fund a judicial review into the deal. The government could be acting unconstitutionally if it acquired the land compulsorily, he said, because the constitution requires any such move to be in the public interest. The compensation stated by the government was also unfair, he argued, claiming that the rate was about 30 times lower than the market value of the land.
“Under the constitution, the government can sequester land if it is in the public interest,” Tonner said. “Even if this just a deep-water harbour, it is not in the public interest because it’s not a suitable site. There are fish breeding sites in the lagoon. It will wipe out the local fish people live on.”
Tito Gbandewa, Tonner’s stepfather, is a former fisherman who runs an ecotourism business on the beach and owns about 1.2 hectares. He said: “If they do this here, the water will be dirty, there will be a lot of oil and noise, the trawlers will be all around.
“Our own fishermen won’t have a place to fish. Everything will be spoiled. Tourism will be finished.”
Dr Sama Banya, president emeritus of the Conservation Society of Sierra Leone, echoed Gbandewa’s comments, saying the proposed development would have a “disastrous” impact on tourism and “the very fish industry that it’s supposed to support”.
Emma Kowa Jalloh, Sierra Leone’s fisheries minister, insisted that the plan was for a harbour and not a fishmeal factory. She said: “I can categorically tell you there is no fish mill [sic] going in at Black Johnson. What we are doing is a fish harbour that will be built by the Chinese government. A fish mill is something where you go and catch all the baby fish and grind it into food to give to piggeries, and fish in aquaculture – and that is so not true.”
It would be built with a Chinese government “grant” and equity from Sierra Leone in the form of land, she said. Half of the land needed was government-owned, she said, including the seafront, up to 200 metres from the sea. The rest has been acquired through compulsory acquisition, she said.
“People are making this fuss about it,” the minister added. “I would just appeal to people: ‘be patient, we want to be developed, we want to grow, we want to be classified as an upcoming country. There must be development and somebody has to sacrifice.’
“I’m not saying everything is going to be 100% perfect but we will make sure that it is near-perfect.”
This is important in a way; but will have no real effect on you as visitors to this site.
I (Mark) will try to explain;
A ‘domain’ is a internet ‘address’ which can be used for global access by anyone. Here at WAV, our domain is ‘worldanimalsvoice.com’; we pay each year to have and retain this domain.
We have recently been informed by domain registrars in China that applications have been made for at least 4 domains for ‘World Animals Voice’ and that they will vary from our address – as far as we know, they are worldanimalsvoice.cn/ worldanimalsvoice.com.cn/ worldanimalsvoice.net.cn/ and worldanimalsvoice.org.cn
We have informed the registrar in China that these addresses applications are nothing to do with us (as we are UK and Germany controlled) or are they associated with us and that if they are taken out, then we will have no control over the content of same.
Our real ‘concern’ is that the name ‘worldanimalsvoice’; which we set up and use for this site, is / could be used (in China) when it has nothing to with us; having originated and been registered via the domain controller in China.
Our domain is only ‘worldanimalsvoice.com’
We hope that if these new domains are used, taking the name ‘world animals voice’; then they will be supportive of animal welfare / rights issues; and that their content will be positive towards animals. But we cannot guarantee this, or any of the content on any of these sites.
So you, as supporters to our site, can visit us you always do; but please just be wary that there may be other ‘world animals voice’ sites, namely (worldanimalsvoice.cn/ worldanimalsvoice.com.cn/ worldanimalsvoice.net.cn/ and worldanimalsvoice.org.cn) possibly being used. The info on them is not associated with us; has nothing to do with us and never will be controlled in any way by us.
There is no way to combat this and we have to accept the situation of world (computer) domains as it is.
Please put ‘worldanimalsvoice.com’ somewhere safe on your system so that you know this is the only way to access us. Any other address is outside of our control.
We trust you understand the situation and we will carry on with this site as always.