Spain: 5,000 cattle found in awful conditions in a vessel bound for Egypt

5 June 2020

 

 

5,000 cattle were found in appalling conditions on the F. M. Spiridon docked in Spain at the end of last month, despite its authorising country, Colombia, having signed up to the World Animal Health Organisation (OIE)’s Terrestrial Code. Given the frequency of serious welfare issues in live export by sea, Eurogroup for Animals calls on the Commission to use the opportunity of the revision of the Transport Regulation to ban this trade for good.

According to Spanish media, the F. M. Spiridon, which is blacklisted under the Paris Memorandum, was inspected by Spanish authorities because of suspected narcotic substances after arriving in Las Palmas in Gran Canaria, Spain on 27th May. However, the  authorities were unable to carry out their inspection due to the deplorable conditions of the animals on board. 5,000 cattle were being transported in overcrowded conditions, standing  on a thick layer of excrement and showing clinical signs of starvation.

Evidently several cattle had died during the journey from Colombia (South America) towards Egypt, as bodies were piled in another part of the vessel. Due to the ammonia and the smell of the animals’ bodies decomposing, the Spanish authorities wore breathing equipment before entering.

 

 

The F. M. Spiridon was approved by French authorities in September 2015 and inspected by the Animal Welfare Foundation (AWF) in March 2016 at the port of Rasa in Croatia. Even then the investigation revealed, among other things, a risk of injury due to the design and construction of the pens, insufficient deck height for adequate ventilation, inadequate handling of the animals and overcrowding.

Since the beginning of 2020, the F. M. Spiridon has been exporting animals from Spain and Croatia to non-EU countries. Confronted with this latest evidence, AWF immediately contacted the EU National Contact Points asking for in-depth inspections every time this vessel enters a EU port. In addition, to prevent animal suffering, it urged the French government to immediately withdraw the vessel’s certificate of approval.

Despite Colombia, the departure country, and France both being members of the World Animal Health Organisation (OIE), the conditions on the F. M. Spiridon are out of line with the requirements laid down in the OIE terrestrial code for sea transport (Chapter 7.2).

Although Eurogroup for Animals ultimately wants to put an end to this horrendous trade, in the meantime it is calling on the EU Commission to urgently develop harmonised and binding standards for the authorisation of livestock vessels, as well as to centralise the issuing of certificates of approval.

 

https://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/news/spain-5000-cattle-found-awful-conditions-vessel-bound-egypt 

 

 

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18502458.opinion-mark-smith-cruel-unjustified-legal-case-scottish-government-might-not-heard/?ref=twtrec

 

Opinion: Mark Smith: Cruel and unjustified: the legal case against the Scottish Government that you might not have heard about

There’s an important case coming up at the Court of Session in the next few weeks, but when I phoned the Scottish Government to find out more, they told me it would be inappropriate to talk about it. I disagree. The fact that the case is happening, and the fact that the Government is defending it, is infuriating and depressing and we should definitely talk about it and I hope to God the Government loses.

The issue at the heart of the case is animal welfare, specifically the welfare of young calves, and it’s important because it raises several moral and political questions. First: how should we treat farm animals in Scotland? Second: do we want Scotland to have the highest standards because if we do, why is the Scottish Government allowing a practice that’s no longer happening in England? And third: will we learn lessons from Covid? Because in Scotland we still disrespect animals in ways that have spread disease in the past and could do so again in the future.

I have to say here that, until I started looking into this case, I hadn’t properly realised Scotland was still persisting with a practice that became such an infamous issue 30 years ago. You may remember it: in the 90s, half a million male dairy calves were being exported from the UK every year, mostly for veal, but the dairy industry eventually realised – thanks to a campaign against the practice – that their image was suffering and the number of exports dropped dramatically.

However, the trade does still continue and I’m sad to say that for the last three years the only place in Britain where it’s been happening is Scotland. Since 2017, more than 12,000 calves have been exported from Scotland to Spain where they are fattened for beef. The calves are usually taken from their mothers on their first day of life and loaded on to the trucks at two weeks old. Many other male calves are shot at birth (in the UK, about 95,000 a year).

READ MORE: MSPs back animal welfare reforms 

Ah but wasn’t there a whole scandal about this a couple of years ago and didn’t P&O say they would stop carrying calves from Scotland? True, but the Scottish Government remained supportive of live exports and, after P&O made their decision in 2018, the industry switched its tactics. So now, instead of going by boat from Cairnryan, the calves are driven to Ramsgate where a ship, chartered by the exporters, takes them to France and then by road to Spain.

Which is where the court case comes in. The petitioner in the case is Compassion in World Farming, the organisation that campaigns for better farming standards, and their argument is that, in allowing the export of calves to Spain, the Scottish Government is breaking the law. The Government disagrees and has appointed a QC to fight the case, although exactly what their defence will be we don’t yet know.

What the law says is that unweaned animals should not be transported for more than eight hours unless, after nine hours, they are given water and if necessary fed. Now as far as we know, after eight hours or so, the calves from Scotland are stopped at a motorway service station in Essex and the automatic watering system in the trucks is operated. But each truck is tightly packed with up to 250 calves and no one goes on board to check if all the calves take the water. Chances are many don’t.

As for feed, what calves of that age receive is milk or a milk replacement, but the trucks don’t have the facilities for that so for the entire journey to France (23 hours or so), they will not be fed. What the Government may argue – and it would be a pretty lowdown argument if they try it – is that it’s not necessary to feed the calves. But calves of that age feed at least twice a day (and if they’re with their mothers, a good deal more) and the schedule of documents sent to the Court of Session includes an unequivocal statement from Professor Donald Broom, the UK’s foremost authority on animal welfare: it is necessary to give milk or milk replacement to calves that have been transported for eight or nine hours.

Compassion in World Farming say the Scottish Government has also tried to argue – surprise, surprise – that the problem arises in England and when I got in touch with the Government, they said it would be inappropriate to comment while legal proceedings were ongoing. They did, however, say they were committed to consulting on the recommendations of the Farm Animal Welfare Committee, which includes a nine-hour limit on journeys for calves. “Our preferred policy intention,” said the spokesman, “is not to support unnecessary long journeys involved in the export of livestock.”

But a statement like that raises more questions than answers. First, why support exports anyway – the UK imports a lot of beef so why not use the male dairy calves for beef in this country? Secondly, even if you think live exports are a good idea, why fight a case over a time limit you say you support? And thirdly, is the fight really worth it? The calves being exported represent the rump of an industry that isn’t even economically significant any more. Do we really want to be the last place in Britain where this happens?

And perhaps the fact that the case is happening in the middle of a pandemic should also give the Government pause for thought. If you haven’t watched the recent webinar with the celebrated primatologist Jane Goodall, I recommend it. She didn’t hold back. Humans have brought coronavirus on ourselves, she said, because of our disrespect for animals that have been pushed closer into contact with each other, and they’ve been pushed closer together in markets, on intensive farms, and in trucks parked up at motorway service stations in Essex.

So what happens now? The case against the Scottish Government is due to be heard on August 4th and campaigners on animal welfare will be keeping a close eye on it. There’s also an awareness day on live exports this Sunday. The aim, in the end, is to stop live exports all together and the hope is that the Scottish Government will show some sense. What we’re realising is it may take a judgment of the Court of Session to make that happen.

 

Info from CIWF:

 

 

 

 

WAV Comment

 

Further update – 1020hrs GMT (England) 3/6/20.

 

I (Mark) put this new post from Lyn out early on 3/6 to give you the great news from AA about the summer export ban standing.

You can check out our earlier post on this, relating to what it is about, by clicking on

https://worldanimalsvoice.com/2020/06/01/australia-live-exports-rural-export-trading-or-retwa-is-seeking-an-exemption-to-regulations-because-a-disease-outbreak-on-one-of-their-ships-meant-they-couldnt-get-their-last-shipm/

In addition, on this past post I included some old archive information for you to read from October 2018 – regarding Kuwait Livestock and Trading (KLTT) and its Australian subsidiary, Rural Export Trading WA (RETWA), who made this special appeal to continue shipping in the Summer months.

We immediately sent a message of solidarity to our campaigner friends at Animals Australia last week; both of us united in the fight against this disgusting trade; and on 1/6 we had a super message back from Jacqui at AA thanking for being united in support with them. As you can see below, the fight on this particular has paid off and the sheep will not suffer enduring weeks of heat stress on a ship destined for the Middle East.

We want to congratulate AA for fighting the fight so hard, as they always do.

As Lyn (at AA) says, “sadly there will be no ‘happy ending’ for these sheep who will now go to local slaughterhouses in Western Australia. However, they have been spared the extended and extreme suffering of weeks at sea where the risk of ‘cooking alive’ from heat stress is very real. And they will also now not face painful fully-conscious slaughter”.

To resolve all these issues, we suggest going over to a meat free, plant based diet. End the suffering and killing and do yourself some good also. Vote with your stomach !

Thanks to all of you who took action here; and thanks to the Department of Agriculture in Australia who were torn between to sides; but who in the end listened to the people and made the very right decision.

Regards Mark

 

———————————————

Original message from AA early 3/6/20:

 

Mark, the summer live export ban stands!

Late last night we received official word from the Department of Agriculture that 56,000 sheep will NOT be sent into the blistering heat of the Middle East summer.

A decision to allow this shipment would not only have subjected animals to extreme and extended suffering, it would also have required an exemption to new laws that prohibit dangerous summer shipments.

I know that, like me, you’ll be breathing a tremendous sigh of relief. It’s been an intense but uplifting few days observing people turn their compassion for these sheep into effective action on their behalf.

Over the last week, we worked every angle and played every strategic card we could to present the strongest possible case to prevent these sheep from being exported. From legal avenues, close consultation and advice to the Department of Agriculture, and media coverage. But perhaps most critical of all was the analysis we instigated from an expert climatologist that warned, if the ship set sail, it would be sending animals directly into the ‘danger zone’ for heat stress. We worked day and night to ensure the regulator had all of the facts in front of her to make the right decision — and she did!

The live export industry has been sent a very strong message: they are no longer above the law.
They can no longer expect to ‘call the shots’.
We are mightily relieved that this decision has been made. It is so very important that precious laws instigated to protect vulnerable animals are upheld, and we are grateful that the regulator has put the interests of animals ahead of the interests of live exporters.

Sadly, there will be no ‘happy ending’ for these sheep who will now go to local slaughterhouses in Western Australia. However, they have been spared the extended and extreme suffering of weeks at sea where the risk of ‘cooking alive’ from heat stress is very real. And they will also now not face painful fully-conscious slaughter.

With heartfelt sincerity, I say thank you for never failing to heed the call for help whenever animals need it. Your support has given these animals a voice and the representation they so desperately needed.

For the animals,

 

Lyn White AM
Animals Australia