Animal Rights ruling against Curaçao Sea Aquarium October 19
WILLEMSTAD – In the lawsuit filed by Animals Rights against Curaçao Sea Aquarium concerning the five dolphins that were transferred to the Fakieh Aquarium in Saudi Arabia in June, the verdict will be handed down on Wednesday 19 October.
Lawyer Bertie Braam stated during the summary proceedings on Wednesday that Animal Rights would like to see a collaboration with Seaquarium.
Animal Rights started a lawsuit in early June against Seaquarium, the Ministry of Health, Environment and Nature (GMN), and Tursiops, the owner of the dolphins. According to the animal organization, the permit for the transport of the five dolphins should never have been issued.
Last week it was announced that dolphin Mosa has died at the Fakieh Aquarium. Camera images show how the dolphin swims against a wall at high speed. Mosa suffered serious injuries and died as a result of a considerable amount of blood in her lungs.
According to Braam, animal welfare is a high priority for Animal Rights and therefore a collaboration between the two parties seems to be the best solution. In addition, according to the lawyer, it is also a good time to take a close look at the animal welfare legislation in Curaçao. Braam emphasizes to the local Dutch news site NU.cw that the welfare of dolphins is different on the island than in the Netherlands. “There is no organization here that is concerned with the welfare of the animals, we need Animal Rights from the Netherlands for that.”
The lawyer sees two possible statements. “The judge can say that the treaty has been tested and that what happened around the case is in accordance with the treaty and then that’s the end of the story,” said Braam. But according to Braam, the judge can also annul the permit. If the permit is annulled, another solution must be sought. Animal Right hopes that the options for moving the animals to another facility will then be looked into.
European Parliament calls for a more ambitious legislation on imported deforestation
14 September 2022
Press Release
On 13 September, the European Parliament adopted its position on the European Commission’s proposal on deforestation-free products. Eurogroup for Animals welcomes the inclusion of more animal products in the scope of the legislation, but regrets the exclusion of dairy and farmed fish production industries, as well as all other natural ecosystems destroyed by EU-driven deforestation.
Yesterday, the European Parliament (EP) voted for significant improvements of the European Commission’s proposal for a regulation on deforestation-free products. The EC had proposed a prohibition on placing on the EU market a very limited list of deforestation-risk commodities such as palm oil, wood, cocoa, coffee, beef, leather and major soy products.
The Plenary voted to include more animal products such as the ones derived from cattle, swine, poultry and sheep. The inclusion is key as these animals are most often fed with soy which is the second driver of deforestation and it’s widely produced to serve as animal feed, and they are imported from countries with the highest deforestation rates.
As trade in animal products fuels deforestation, the EP’s position is promising for the planet and the animals in regions of the world where intensive animal agriculture or economic activities are destroying precious natural ecosystems. Producers intending to export to the EU will be incentivised to switch to more sustainable production systems, less harmful to wild animals and to their habitats.
There is a real urgency for the EU to use unilateral measures to address the significant impact intensive livestock farming has on the planet and on the animals living on these farms and in these ecosystems. The EU must uphold its sustainable agenda and adopt such legislation when necessary
Reineke Hameleers, CEO, Eurogroup for Animals
The EP’s position is a step in the right direction but it failed to include the dairy and farmed fish production industries, as well as all other natural ecosystems destroyed by EU-driven deforestation. While the Report strengthened the EC’s proposal by enlarging the geographical scope to wooded lands, it failed to protect other ecosystems such as grasslands, wetlands, and savannahs, which are also destroyed by the EU’s consumption of soy and of imported animal products derived from soy-fed animals.
Eurogroup for Animals calls on the EC to conduct an impact assessment on the inclusion of wetlands and grasslands as soon as possible to close this loophole.
All eyes are now on the Council as “trilogue” negotiations will start in the coming weeks. In this context, Eurogroup for Animals urges the Council to uphold the objectives of the Green Deal and thus agree with the European Parliament on a text encompassing a large scope of products including all soy-fed animals and all ecosystems destroyed by EU’s consumption of animal products.
WAV Comment: Do these statements by the police sort of really contradict each other ? – pet or wild ?
A police spokesperson told media they believed the man had been attacked by the kangaroo – a wild animal – earlier in the day.
Australian man killed by kangaroo he kept as pet, police say
Getty Images – Kangaroo attacks are rare in Australia
Australian man killed by kangaroo he kept as pet, police say
An Australian man has died after being attacked by a kangaroo he had been keeping as a pet, police say.
A relative found the 77-year-old man with serious injuries on Monday at his home in Redmond, about 400km (250 miles) south of Perth.
When the ambulance crew arrived at the rural property, the kangaroo prevented them from treating the man.
Police say they were forced to shoot the marsupial dead so paramedics could reach him. The man died at the scene.
A police spokesperson told media they believed the man had been attacked by the kangaroo – a wild animal – earlier in the day.
Australia is home to about 50 million kangaroos, which can weigh up to 90kg and grow to 2m tall.
But fatal attacks are rare – this is the first one reported in Australia since 1936.
Kangaroos have “a lot of weapons” such as sharp teeth, claws and powerful legs, kangaroo behaviour expert Graeme Coulson told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
“Certainly if they’re cornered or in some sort of distress, that can be quite dangerous,” Associate Professor Coulson said.
“The problem with kangaroos and people is we’re both upright animals, we stand on our two feet, and an upright stance like that is a challenge to the male kangaroo.”
In July, a kangaroo left a 67-year-old woman with cuts and a broken leg after it attacked her on a walk in Queensland.
And a three-year-old girl suffered serious head injuries in an attack in New South Wales in March.
Urban development across Australia is increasingly encroaching on wild kangaroo habitats.
One thing that unites Europeans is their strong support for animal welfare. A Commission-organised ‘Eurobarometer’ survey found that 9 out of 10 Europeans believe imported products should respect EU animal welfare standards. Whilst about three-quarters or more want tougher animal welfare rules.
This guest blog summarises Philip Lymbery’s speech during the European Parliamentary event “Enforcement of EU Animal Welfare Legislation”, held on 7 September 2022. The event can be watched in full on YouTube.
The European Union (EU) led the world in 1997 when it gave legal recognition to animals as sentient beings, capable of feeling pain, suffering or pleasure. Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU stipulates that, as sentient beings, full regard should be paid to animals’ welfare requirements.
To that end, the EU has one of the most comprehensive sets of rules in the world on animal welfare.
However, these mean little without proper enforcement.
Poor enforcement
A prime example of this is in live animal transportation. Animals suffer greatly during long journeys. Packed into overcrowded trucks, they become increasingly exhausted, dehydrated and stressed as the long journeys wear on. Some get injured and collapse onto the floor of the truck, where they risk being trampled by their companions. In the worst cases, many die – drowning when ships capsize or succumbing to heat stroke when trucks get stuck for hours or even days at border crossings.
The export of live animals to non-EU countries must be prohibited as these long journeys entail immense suffering for the animals involved and, in many cases, they endure painful, terrifying treatment at slaughter in the destination countries where the OIE international standards on welfare at slaughter are routinely ignored.
In this day and age, long distance transport of live animals makes no sense. I agree entirely with the Federation of Veterinarians of Europe that “Animals should be reared as close as possible to the premises on which they are born and slaughtered as close as possible to the point of production”.
Disasters
However, the reality today is that Every year more than three million live animals are exported from the EU to third countries for fattening and slaughter. The transport conditions on the trucks and ships are often unbearable, causing the animals immense suffering on journeys that can last days, weeks or even months. It is commonplace for some to perish in transit.
In the worst disasters thousands die.
In 2019, more than 14,000 sheep destined for export drowned when the cargo ship carrying them capsized in Romania’s Black Sea port of Midia.
And last year more than 2,600 calves being exported from Spain were killed after being kept adrift at sea for three months as no country wanted to accept them due to a suspected outbreak of disease.
Over the years countless petitions and protests by citizens and NGOs have called on the EU to end the live exports horror show. They are backed up by numerous scientific recommendations advising against continuing this cruel practice.
Yet, the practice still goes on. And when we add in domestic journeys within the EU, the scale of the problem magnifies to over 1.6 billion live animals a year being transported across the EU and beyond its borders.
Long distance transport of live animals really should be a thing of the past, instead replaced with a carcass trade in refrigerated lorries.
However, so long as this archaic trade continues, it should be rigorously enforced. Council Regulation 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport sets out a comprehensive set of rules designed to give basic protection to animals caught up in this trade.
Comprehensive assessment
Sadly, a 2021 assessment by Compassion in World Farming found that over thirty years enforcement of EU law on the protection of animals has been poor.
The main breaches of EU law that are regularly observed include:
The transport of unfit animals
Stocking densities often exceed the maximum densities permitted by Regulation 1/2005
Animals are frequently given too little headroom
The Regulation’s maximum permitted temperature is often exceeded
The Regulation’s requirements on feed and water are frequently breached. In some cases water tanks are empty or the drinking devices do not work or they are the wrong type for the species being carried or are positioned in such a way that the animals cannot reach them
The Regulation’s requirements on the provision of rest are often ignored
In some cases, insufficient bedding is provided; in other cases it becomes filthy in the later stages of the journey
The transport of unweaned animals on journeys over 8 hours without animals being fed.
These breaches – often by the same transport companies – have been occurring for many years. While some Member States have improved enforcement, many continue to make little serious attempt to enforce Regulation 1/2005.
Regulation 1/2005 provides strong enforcement mechanisms which are expressly designed to prevent recurrence of breaches, but these are poorly used by the Member States (MS).
Commission reports
The European Commission’s own reports show that enforcement of relevant legislation is woefully poor.
Two overview reports published by the Commission in 2020, one on live exports to non-EU countries by road, one on live exports by sea, reveal serious and regular breaches of Regulation 1/2005. The road report states that most transporters do not meet EU rules on the protection of animals during transport after leaving the EU.
An area that until recently has largely escaped attention are the serious problems that arise when animals being exported to the Middle East and North Africa are transferred from road vehicles to livestock vessels in EU ports and the poor conditions on many livestock vessels.
Regulation 1/2005 requires competent authorities to check before loading that the vessel is in a satisfactory state for the carriage of animals, that the animals are fit to continue their journey, and that loading is carried out in accordance with the Regulation. Competent authorities often fail to discharge these duties properly leading to great suffering during loading and the sea journeys to the Middle East and North Africa.
The Commission’s overview report on live exports by sea reveals that the required checks on the safety of the vessels and their suitability for carrying animals are not carried out properly, and that the authorities permit animals to be loaded onto the ship even when pre-loading inspections of the ship reveal deficiencies. It also stresses that pre-loading checks to ensure that animals are fit to travel are not being carried out properly.
Police enforcement
It is clear from the Commission’s own report that neither the exporters nor the Member State authorities are giving any proper consideration to the animals’ welfare during the sea journeys themselves.
This needs to change.
One essential way for the EU to show its citizens a real seriousness about enforcing its own legislation is to set up dedicated police units. Trained officers dedicated to ensuring that citizen concern for animal welfare is translated into concrete action on the ground.
In this way, an immense amount of animal suffering can be avoided.
All of which would have wider benefits to society.
At EU and international policy level, there is growing recognition that protecting people means protecting animal welfare, a concept known as ‘One Health’ – growing recognition that the health of people relies on the wellbeing of animals and a thriving natural environment.
Through enforcement of legislation, the EU can once again be a global leader in animal welfare. It can give groundbreaking priority to demonstrating that the health of all of us is interconnected. One health, one welfare – protecting people means protecting animals too. With dedicated police units leading the enforcement charge, we would have the means to create a better future for people and animals across the European Union and beyond.
Dutch veterinarians and animal welfare organisations call for emergency action: Don’t buy a flat-faced dog
5 September 2022
Act 4 Pets
Flat-faced dog breeds, such as the pug and the French bulldog, have been overbred to such an extent that they face lifelong suffering caused by a myriad of physical and genetic conditions. Many of these animals are chronically short of breath, suffer from eye diseases, inflammation of the skin, and hernias. Often their owners have been ill-informed and are presented with unexpected high bills for medical treatments. Veterinarians and animal welfare organisation warn in the strongest terms: don’t buy a flat-faced dog!
For a number of weeks, in large cities and along highways, posters are being placed with the slogan: A flat-face is a disgrace (platte neus zieke keus) and A flat-face comes at a price (een korte snuit komt met een prijs). The campaign will be posted on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter as well, in order to reach as many people as possible, urging them to not buy these dogs.
Veterinarians still see many disformed animals
Flat-faced dogs are very popular, but in The Netherlands it is prohibited by law to breed these dogs. However, the trade and the import are still legal.
It is fantastic that in The Netherlands there is a law against the breeding of these deformed animals. Unfortunately, in our practice we still see many snoring puppies struggling to breathe as a result of blocked nostrils and flattened noses. These puppies are from abroad or have been illegally bred in The Netherlands.
Veterinarians Janneke Moedt, Caring Vets
A flat-face comes at a price
Owners of flat-faced dogs are often shocked by the immense costs of medical treatments.
The purchase price of a flat-faced dog is in the range of about 1,500 to 2,500 euros. Often the new owner is unaware of the various operations the dog requires, such as operations on the air ways, treatment of hernias, operation on the eyes, corrections of the nose fold, and so on. The costs can quickly add up to about four times the purchase costs. The biggest price though is paid by the animal – with a lifetime of suffering!
Kelly Kessen, Veterinarian, Dier&Recht
Stop the suffering of these dogs and join the campaign
Veterinarians, animal clinics, grooming salons, dog schools, and other organisations who wish to support the campaign can sign up on the campaign website, and receive an information package for the waiting room, or a door/window poster for a shop or practice.
Progress on an EU Positive List: ENVI Committee adopts CITES Regulation
9 September 2022
8 September saw a vote on a draft motion for resolution on “Key objectives to the CITES CoP19 meeting in Panama”. CITES stands for the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
The draft motion was adopted by the European Parliament’s Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety with a strong majority. The final motion is now to be voted upon and adopted at the October Plenary session, and will hopefully send a strong message to the Commission, which acts as the CITES Management Authority for the EU to support decisions at the Cop19 to strengthen protection to endangered animals.
Critically, the Committee pushes for the much awaited revision of the Action Plan against Wildlife Trafficking to be ambitious and published without delay, and should have adequate resources to ensure its full implementation.
Of particular interest, the motion highlights the concern that the market for exotic pets and the range of affected species are growing both within the EU and internationally, a call for a science-based EU-wide positive list of animals allowed as pets was included in the adoption draft. This means that we are one step closer to the Parliament showing support for better regulation of the pet trade under appropriate welfare conditions, without harm to populations in the wild and to European biodiversity. Additionally, the draft motion stresses the need for a Commission study to facilitate the adoption of this list which shall be based, amongst others, on existing experiences of Member States and lessons learned.
There were a number of encouraging amendments voted on which reiterated Parliament’s call for the full and immediate ban at European level of commercial trade, export or re-export within the EU and to destinations outside the EU of ivory, including ‘pre-convention’ ivory. In addition it emphasises the important role that CITES should play in preventing future pandemics as the international wildlife trade regulator and calls for better funding and implementation of CITES Decisions. Regarding species, the draft motion calls on EU Member States to support proposals to CoP19 to list or uplist species that are put forward or supported by range countries. This would increase their protection against overexploitation through trade.
Eurogroup for Animals is also pleased to see that the motion urges the EU to promote and support initiatives to significantly increase wildlife rescue and rehabilitation capacity through resources, funding, training and importantly establishment of a network of responsible and accredited rescue facilities and sanctuaries and national action plans for the management of confiscated live animals.
The next stage is to ensure that this strong draft motion is adopted in Plenary by the European Parliament, to ensure the European position at the CITES is good for the welfare and conservation of animals.
Civil Society Organisations from South America call on the European Commission to include animal welfare as a key component of the EU-Mercosur agreement
12 September 2022
On 9 September, 65 civil society organisations from South America sent a joint letter to Executive Vice President of the European Commission V. Dombrovskis and to European Commissioner S. Kyriakides explaining why the EU-Mercosur trade agreement as it stands is a bad deal for animals and the planet.
In the wake of the war in Ukraine, and with the possibilities of a new government in Brazil after the elections to be held next month, the ratification of the EU-Mercosur agreement has reappeared on the EU’s political agenda. Following strong pressure from civil society, several Member States – like Austria, France, Belgium and Luxembourg – and from the European Parliament, the process has been on hold since July 2020. Yet, the European Commission is now rushing into technical talks with Mercosur countries to possibly wrap up the discussions about a potential additional protocol to the agreement.
In this political context, a coalition of South American Civil Society Organisations sent a letter to the European Commission listing proposals made during an event held on 29 April in Brazil and supported by Eurogroup for Animals. During the event experts representing environment, human rights and animal welfare organisations unanimously found that improving animal welfare standards in the Mercosur countries will effectively contribute to fight deforestation, the spread of zoonoses and the surge in antimicrobial resistance.
Now, the coalition of South American Civil Society Organisations is calling on political leaders from the EU to consider their suggestions.
Measures to promote animal welfare, sanitary improvements and transparency in the farmed animals industry in Mercosur countries will have a profound impact on fighting climate change. We are open to presenting these measures in detail to the European Commission to help them prevent a catastrophe
The EU-Mercosur agreement will lead to an increase and an intensification of livestock farming in Mercosur countries at a time where this sector is already driving deforestation, climate change and biodiversity loss. At times where the EU promotes the Green Deal, such an agreement should in no way impede the improvement of animal welfare, rather it should encourage it.
EFSA scientific opinions on the welfare of animals during transport
7 September 2022
The European Food Safety Authority publishes its recommendations to improve animal welfare during transport. Eurogroup for Animals welcomes the new research but we would have hoped for stronger recommendations given that the evidence of animal suffering is there.
Terrestrial animals (pigs, cattle, domestic birds, small ruminants and rabbits)
We welcome EFSA’s opinion on the welfare during transport of pigs, cattle, domestic birds, small ruminants and rabbits. The research confirms and enumerates the many hazards associated with the loading/unloading, transport by road, rail or sea and handling for several species: group stress, handling stress, heat stress, injuries, motion stress, prolonged hunger, prolonged thirst, respiratory disorders, restriction of movement, resting problems and sensory overstimulation, and the list continues.
Although for the different species there is clear evidence that negative mental states such as pain, fear, fatigue, boredom, discomfort and stress are present from the beginning of the transport and only get worse as the duration of the journey increases, EFSA doesn’t recommend shorter journeys for the majority of the species, stating, for example that rabbits and domestic birds can be transported for up to 12 hours. Moreover, EFSA provides recommendations to mitigate the risk related to high stocking densities. In the majority of the species, these recommendations do not even allow animals to lie down comfortably during the journey.
EFSA concludes that sea transport adds even more hazards to animal welfare than other types of transport for all the species analysed. Nevertheless, the opinion doesn’t take any conclusion regarding this topic, even suggesting that more evidence is needed. During the past decades we witnessed continuous failures of sea live exports, which provided plenty of evidence. The European Commission (EC) should not need more evidence, nor tragedies, to support a ban on live exports.
On the specific case of unweaned calves, although there is clear evidence that there are higher risks for these animals, EFSA doesn’t recommend a ban, taking a weaker stance and recommending that they can be transported after 4 weeks of age.
Although we are disappointed that the EC has not gathered the latest scientific knowledge on the welfare of fish and other aquatic animals in these EFSA opinions, we are reassured by Commissioner Kyriakides recent written response to MEPs confirming that the EC will mandate EFSA to gather this knowledge in support of provisions to be introduced through delegated acts.
Finally, we welcome EFSA’s recommendation to transport fertilised eggs and support on-farm hatching in order to reduce the transport and handling stress of day-old chicks.
Although the EFSA opinions regarding the welfare of pigs, cattle, small ruminants and domestic birds during transport demonstrate the continued suffering of these animals, they lack stronger conclusions to protect their welfare. Animals experience several negative affective states, such as hunger, stress, pain and discomfort, from the very beginning of the journey. Their condition increases in severity with the journey duration. Over the years, practical experience, scientific evidence and experts’ opinions have demonstrated that there is no possible mitigation for the hazards that long journeys over rail, road or sea pose to animal welfare. There is an urgent need to reduce maximum journey times overall, and to introduce a ban on live exports and on the transport of certain types of animals such as unweaned calves. Ultimately, the solution is to replace live animal transport with a meat and carcasses trade
Reineke Hameleers, Eurogroup for Animals CEO
Equids
Eurogroup for Animals welcomes EFSA’s scientific opinion on the Welfare of equids during transport. The new research confirms that transport is a critical stressor with high implications for their welfare, and corroborates the need for stricter legislation on the transport of horses, donkeys and their hybrids.
EFSA’s recommendations align with Eurogroup for Animals’ proposals on the training requirements for transporters and handlers and confirm the need to develop protocols to assess the welfare of horses during transport. We also acknowledge and support EFSA’s suggestion to use technological tools and systems to ensure and monitor microclimatic and animals’ conditions.
Although we acknowledge EFSA’s recommendation to maintain journey duration to a minimum, we note with concern the absence of clear recommendations on species-specific maximum journey times. Evidence analysed by EFSA clearly demonstrates the need to set limits on journey times at 8 hours, including for equines destined for slaughter. With the abundance of research on the topic, we urge the European Commission not to further delay action.
We support the conclusions of EFSA on the transport conditions of equines destined for slaughter, highlighting that these animals are often transported over long journeys and in poor conditions, because they are considered of lower value and often suffer from health issues prior to their final journey. Along with EFSA, we also encourage further research on whether control posts really address animal welfare concerns during long journeys and support EFSA’s recommended period of minimum 12-hour rest for equines at a control post, including loading and unloading.
While EFSA mentions that there are no agreed scientific guidelines on fitness for transport, World Horse Welfare, Eurogroup for Animals and other organisations contributed to the Practical guidelines to assess fitness for transport of Equidae (horses, donkeys and their hybrids) supported by the European Commission and WOAH.
EFSA’s scientific opinion on the welfare of equidae during transport clearly demonstrates the need to set maximum journey times. The evidence is there, it is now time for the European Commission to act. The new research reminds us that transport conditions affect the welfare of all equines, calling for stricter rules for all these animals, regardless of their destination.
Reineke Hameleers, Eurogroup for Animals CEO
All the scientific opinions can be found on EFSA’s website.
Regards Mark
In the past – livestock hauliers run the guantlet at Dover, England.
New documentary SLAY exposes the cruel use of animals in fashion
8 September 2022
Premiering today, the new documentary SLAY follows filmmaker Rebecca Cappelli as she exposes the fur, wool and leather fashion industry for its greenwashing and cruel treatment of animals. Produced by Keegan Kuhn (known for his work on What the Health and Cowspiracy), the film asks an important question: is it ever acceptable to kill animals for fashion?
From Europe to China, SLAY spans 5 continents as it uncovers the unethical practices of the fashion industry on a global scale, emphasising the horrific ways the animals are kept and killed, all in the name of fashion and profit. The documentary features interviews with animal welfare and sustainability experts, as well as representatives from the fur industry itself.
Cappelli spent the last 3 years investigating animal skins in fashion, examining the devastating impact on people, the environment and animals.
If someone would have told me even half of what I discovered doing this film, I wouldn’t have believed it.
Rebecca Cappelli
The fur industry
The documentary is bold in debunking the argument that fur is a sustainable product, and also stresses workers rights, but the real emphasis is keeping the cruel treatment of animals in focus. SLAY shares behind the scenes footage of the animals kept in confined spaces, unable to stand or move around. The film depicts the abhorrent ways that the animals are killed, with the priority given to the protection of the quality of fur, rather than the welfare of the animal.
The documentary also shines a light on the scale of mis-labelled fur products on the market, including within the EU. Although often seen as a luxury item, fur has often been uncovered on the high street on low cost garments and accessories. Consumers are often unaware that they are purchasing fur products when they buy items such as bobble hats and fur trimmed hooded coats. Due to the mis-labelling of fur, many consumers are not given a choice and are unwittingly supporting the fur industry.
The fashion industry has been keeping animals out of people’s minds for too long, together we can change that.
Rebecca Cappelli
SLAY breaks outside of echo chambers and aims to make a real difference for the animals, for the planet, and the people who live at the mercy of the fashion industry.
From 8th September, the film will be available to watch on WaterBear Network. The free streaming platform is dedicated to sustainability, activism, and conservation.
World Animals Voice 