The day has finally arrived: the Farm-to-Fork and Biodiversity to 2030 strategies of the European Union’s Green Deal have been adopted. Both contain positive points that suggest the Commission is ready to take action for animals – but will these strategies deliver the concrete changes the EU needs to move away from intensive farming and the exploitation of wild animals and their habitats?
Last week, an open letter from Eurogroup for Animals and its member organisations asked the European Commission to take our recommendations for both strategies on board, and our members also mobilised to drum up support at national level as part of our “Stop Pandemics – Start Here” campaign.
Indeed, during the preparation of the strategies, the COVID-19 pandemic offered a particularly timely reminder that devastating results can come out of the way we trade, farm and keep animals. Wild and domestic animals have carried viruses and bacteria for millennia, but what has changed is the way we humans interact with them. The legal and illegal wildlife trade, urbanisation and the destruction of wildlife’s natural habitats for agricultural purposes, especially for the intensification of animal farming, are combining to push humans, wildlife and other animals closer than ever before – and heightening the risk of pandemics like the one we’re suffering now.
With the presentation of the finalised texts today, it seems that the Commission has indeed taken most of this to heart.
The Biodiversity to 2030 Strategy takes many of our recommendations on board, committing to keep existing environmental policies strong and stimulating the enforcement of the Birds and Habitats Directives, with ambitious goals for protecting European species. It also makes a commitment to legally protect a minimum of 30% each of the EU’s land and sea areas, and says that at least 25% of the EU’s agricultural land must be organically farmed by 2030.
The Commission will propose a further tightening of the rules of EU ivory trade in 2020, and by 2021, it will revise the Action Plan against wildlife trafficking to step up efforts to combat the illegal wildlife trade. It states that the EU will enhance its support to global efforts aimed at applying the ‘One Health’ approach, by promoting better protection of natural ecosystems coupled with efforts to reduce wildlife trade and consumption, to improve resilience to possible future diseases and pandemics.
However, to ensure that the strategy is implemented effectively, the Commission should also regulate the legal wildlife trade, which impacts global biodiversity and animal welfare, and poses health risks to EU citizens. An EU-wide ‘Positive List’ for exotic pets, specifying which animal species are suitable and safe to be kept as pets, would offer a much-needed precautionary approach, given the continuous shifts in species and numbers of animals in trade, and would be coherent with the ‘Do No Harm’ principle promoted in the strategy.
“The document is ambitious,” says Reineke Hameleers, CEO of Eurogroup for Animals. “However, we will be pushing for implementing actions to regulate the exotic pet trade to protect EU consumers, animal welfare and biodiversity. Going by the strategy’s acknowledgment of the ‘Do No Harm’ principle and the fact that any product on the market should comply with EU and international commitments, we hope they’ll be open to the idea. We also urgently need a full ban on the ivory trade, stricter regulation of the legal trade in wildlife, and a EU-wide Positive List.”
As for the Farm-to-Fork Strategy, happily the Commission makes it clear that animal welfare legislation will be revised and broadened, and the revision will have to provide higher welfare standards than existing ones. This is an opportunity for all existing animal welfare laws to be revised, particularly the Transport and Slaughter regulations, but also others such as the Broiler and Pig Directives. This also opens the opportunity to deliver on the recent ECI “End The Cage Age”, calling for an end to the use of cages in livestock systems, and to include specific animal welfare provisions for species such as cattle. As the strategy makes the link between legislative change for animal welfare and the aquaculture sector, this is the opportunity to introduce the first species-specific provisions for farmed fish, too.
However, in other respects the strategy is less ambitious. While the Commission accepts that moving to more plant-based diets and less meat consumption is good for health and the environment alike, earlier versions of the strategy proposed an end to promotional measures for meat. The finalised text now says only that the Commission will undertake a review of EU promotional support for agrifood products with a view to enhancing its “contribution to sustainable production and consumption”. We expect this review to lead to a transparent conclusion that meat should not be promoted, and we regret that the language has become so weak in the final version.
The strategy announces the creation of a framework for a sustainable food system, but remarkably a reflection on the role of the intensive livestock industry in the spread of zoonotic diseases is missing. Eurogroup for Animals believes the new framework law should lead to a profound system change including a phase-out of intensive animal farming practices. Although the strategy commits to considering options for animal welfare labelling, there is no mention of method-of-production labelling, which would provide an objective and harmonised framework to support the transition towards higher welfare and sustainable livestock systems.
The strategy also recognises the detrimental impact imported products can have on the environment in producing countries, calling to avoid the externalising or export of unsustainable practices. The call for EU trade policy to contribute to enhancing cooperation, and particularly to obtaining commitments from third countries on animal welfare, is very welcome.
“This document is historical in so many ways, opening the door to a potential better world for farm animals in the EU and other parts of the globe. It shows the Commission’s willingness to strengthen animal welfare legislation after years of stagnancy, and that they’re listening to the voices of millions of EU citizens,” says Reineke Hameleers. “Nevertheless, we need systemic change and that needs a lot of determination, as well as resources. The Commission’s plan for a sustainable food system is laudable, but will they also provide additional support to farmers in the transition towards higher animal welfare systems and regenerative agriculture?”
Both strategies recognise that the wildlife trade and intensive farming together add up to more than the sum of their parts, and not just where zoonoses such as COVID-19 are concerned. The Biodiversity to 2030 Strategy states several times that it will work in tandem with the new Farm-to-Fork Strategy and the revised Common Agricultural Policy, and that the Commission will ensure that the CAP’s strategic plans lead to the use of sustainable practices such as organic farming, agro-ecology, and stricter animal welfare standards. Similarly, the Farm-to-Fork Strategy asserts that “the Commission will ensure the implementation of this strategy in close coherence with the other elements of the Green Deal, particularly the Biodiversity strategy”.
The finalised strategies will now be rolled out, with the European Parliament adopting a resolution on the content later this year. At Eurogroup for Animals, our next opportunity will be to influence the European Parliament’s response to the two strategies, so our members will start to mobilise citizens in the days ahead to contact their MEPs and make their voices – and our recommendations – heard.
How vast is a mother’s love! When you watch this rescue video below, you’ll remember the umbrella of love your own mother held over you most of the days of your life, and you’ll probably recognize yourself as the kid begging his mom to play. We can see so easily that in cows, just like in our own species, the mother-child bond is physical, practical, and highly emotional. All mothers try to protect their children. Animal mothers teach their children how to keep clean, how to play, how to stay safe, how to find food. Animal mothers even clean wounds in their young as best they can. But sometimes Mother can’t do it all, and we have the chance to help. Thank you for helping us to be a mother’s helper when a baby is in danger.
Mother cow lavishes love on her wounded baby.
A serious wound covered in flies caused this baby intense distress. We brought both the calf (Moon) and his mother (Jupiter) to Animal Aid for his several weeks of treatment. As soon as his wound was cleaned and bandaged, his mood lightened incredibly, and he constantly invited his mom to play. It was as if he felt so secure with her always by his side that he was the perfect little patient, and she was the perfect loving angel always in the wings.
In most dairies, including the backyard dairies in villages, when a baby is only a couple of days old, they are taken from their anguished mother cows or tied apart from her to prevent the baby from nursing or having any physical contact. Watching Jupiter and Moon, it’s very clear that snuggling, grooming and touching is as important as sunlight and air.
But Jupiter couldn’t clean and bandage Moon’s wound. That’s where you come in.Please donate.
Ramu’s crusted skin was like gravel but he became soft as a rose petal when he healed.
The crusting from advanced mange was encasing this older dog as if he was growing gravel instead of skin. Though mange is curable, he was made so frail by this terrible skin disease that we knew he could lose his life in his battle. He touched our hearts with his quiet, understated determination. But though he was subtle, his nature was so incredibly sweet that everyone loved him as soon as they looked into his innocent eyes. And when he was healed, he was as beautiful on the outside as he was, all along, on the inside. Meet Ramu today.
You can help a downcast dog lift his head again. In hope. Please donate.
Kali is a street dog with a loving family. Their love helped save her life.
We share so many stories where there has been negligence or cruelty: ropes tied and forgotten, animals hit by cars and to die by the side of the road, mange far too advanced before someone calls us for help. But many animals in India are deeply loved.
Kali is one such lucky “community” dog. The guardianship of her neighbors may not look like typical “pet ownership.” She isn’t kept inside a house. But she is loved, and lives with utter freedom with the other street dogs in her neighborhood, traipsing here and there. When Kali was hit by a bike and couldn’t stand, her guardians immediately called us to help.
We thought initially that Kali might have a spine injury because she couldn’t bear weight on any of her legs. But Kali would not give up, maybe because she couldn’t wait to get back to her neighborhood filled with love. Kali’s reunion with her beloved friends is beautiful.
Happiness is… getting someone home soon.Donate today.
The short and sweet story ofLittle Jet and his biscuits!
Little Jet is a street boy who probably hadn’t had too many desserts in his life, but it took him no time at all, even in his darkest hour, to find he has a sweet tooth!
Celebrate the Staff: Aditi Dixit
Coordinating volunteers requires deep and immediate understanding of individual animals and equal insight into the character of people. Having moved to Udaipur from Bangalore last year just to work here, Aditi possesses this rare gift. During lockdown, with our volunteer program closed, Aditi has stepped in to manage the animal care in our Dog Hospital. She is a life-saver for animals and for her colleagues, an inspiration for her versatility and sweetness.
Do you remember Ferdinand?
It was the young bull who managed to jump out of his killing box on the way to the slaughterhouse and escape into the forest.
Erdlingshof employees bought the animal and started a two-week fishing campaign with two bait cattle.
Ferdinand is in this wonderful courtyard today and here is the current video and report about his new life:
“Ferdinand has been on the “Erdlingshof ” for 2.5 weeks now. And he already has so much trust in us that we wonder how it can be after everything he has already gone through.
🐮😢 We are overjoyed that he gives us his love and trust and even lies on the floor with Johannes as if it were the most normal thing in the world. 😲 ❤ Ferdinand, we are so happy that you managed to escape death in the slaughterhouse and hope that your story will open many hearts! 🙏”
I think...There is nothing better than watching happy animals!
We, the complainants (Fairbrother, Kemp, others) welcome the decision made by the Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB) Appeal Committee regarding the ruling Fair Cape Dairies vs Kemp, Fairbrother, others on 30 April 2020.
22.1 The use of the phrases/words “#HappyCows” and “humane” by Fair
Cape in its advertising is in breach of clause 4.1 and 4.2.1 of the Code [of Advertising Practice].
22.2 Fair Cape is instructed to withdraw the phrases/words “#HappyCows” and “humane” from its advertising in accordance with clause 15.3 and 15.5 of the Procedural Guide.
We are in agreement with the statement by the ARB Appeal Committee that
”In our view, humane treatment means more than freedom from violence, pain and disease; it means treatment characterised by tenderness, compassion, and sympathy. It does not include many of the practices complained of, such as the forced impregnation of cows, the forced separation of calves from their mothers immediately after birth, and the slaughter of male calves thereafter.
It follows then, in our view, that the cows cannot be described as happy, or as humanely treated.”
We would like to thank the Advertising Regulator Board for their commitment to fairness and transparency during the course of our complaint and appeal. We also applaud their commitment to responsible and honest advertising. In addition, we would like to thank Animal Law Reform South Africa for their assistance with this matter, including the provision of research, compilation of information and points of issue and review of the Code and documents submitted.
Consumers care about their food choices and many care deeply about animals. For these reasons consumers are increasingly demanding transparency from these industries. To meet these demands it is unfortunate that green-washing and humane-washing advertising techniques are extremely common and heavily on the increase. These advertising techniques are designed to purposely manipulate and exploit the good faith of well meaning consumers.
Fair Cape Dairies has a history of misleading consumers with so-called ‘free-range’ claims and their use of the terms ‘humane’ and ‘#happycows’ in their advertising is no exception. Fair Cape Dairies do not only directly misinform consumers, but they actively conceal many of their practices while creating an illusion of transparency.
Unfortunately, the majority of people in South Africa are not aware of the many horrific standard practices in the dairy industry. The dairy industry thrives in obfuscation. They have an interest in omitting and obscuring the facts about dairy, and it is done through ‘omission and silence and in the presentation of an incomplete and idealised picture’ (¹).
We encourage all those who value truth and justice and who abhor cruelty to animals to investigate the dairy industry and to inform yourselves. This cruelty is not an anomaly, but is standard practice inherent in the industry. To be informed, is to be empowered. When we are informed we can make consumer choices that are authentic and genuinely in line with our values.
We believe we have extensively covered many of these standard practices in our appeal (Section d. Facts and Research). In our appeal we also address many of the claims made by Fair Cape Dairies, we provide multiple facts on the dairy industry, and we provide information on consumer awareness of dairy practices in in South Africa.
While our original complaint was dismissed by the ARB, we felt confident that the ruling had grounds to be challenged and we subsequently submitted an appeal. Our complaint then found itself in front of the ARB Appeals Committee which ruled in our favour.
In our commitment to transparency we have provided all documents relating to the initial complaint, appeal, supporting documents and final rulings, ordered by date below.
Take PETA’s Cruelty-Free Shopping Guide along with you next time you head to the store! The handy guide will help you find humane products at a glance. Order a FREE copyHERE
Searching for Cruelty-Free Cosmetics, Personal-Care Products, Vegan Products, or more? Click HERE to search.
Want to do more than go vegan? Help others to do so! Click below for nominal, or no, fees to vegan literature that you can use to convince others that veganism is the only compassionate route to being an animal friend:
German federal states further limit live animal transport
18 May 2020
Four Paws
News
Four Paws announced that Lower Saxony and Saxony will no longer approve live animal transports to and through the Russian Federation, while Lower Saxony will also prohibit transports to North Africa, particularly to Algeria and Morocco.
Part of the joint call for a national ban and an EU-wide ban on the export of live animals to third countries, it is a success to see two German federal states expanding the list of those countries.
This is due to animal welfare violations since, according to official information, there are no supply stations for the animals in the Russian Federation. Federal states Hesse and Bavaria have included Russia in their list of banned third countries last year.
We welcome this decision, but there should a nationwide ban in place. The cattle is still being transported to the high-risk countries concerned via other federal states. It is obvious that the animals are exposed to the worst agonies and an unimaginable torture during transport and also at the destination. In Lebanon, Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Iran, among others, the animals are killed under the cruelest conditions.
Rüdiger Jürgensen, Managing Director FOUR PAWS Germany
The post ‘German federal states further limit live animal transport’ is modified from an article published by Four Paws in their original language.
We don’t want another strategy. We want meaningful change for animals
9 April 2020
EurogroupforAnimals
News
The European Commission has called on citizens and organisations to take part in an online consultation to gather information and views on the EU Animal Welfare Strategy 2012-2015.
The consultation goes hand-in-hand with the Commission’s evaluation on the strategy, which will assess the extent to which it delivered on its objectives, and whether they are relevant and consistent today. It will also look at efficiency and whether the strategy usefully complements national efforts in this field. This has to be done before any new actions are brought forward.
This evaluation of the Animal Welfare Strategy will inform the actions that come after, so it’s vital that the animal movement contributes its opinion to the consultation with a unified voice, even though we may want to stress different aspects of policy or different priorities.
However, we can all agree on some things. The Animal Welfare Strategy resulted in no demonstrable overall improvement for the welfare of animals. Instead of meaningful progress for animals on the ground, we are left with no ‘foundation’ on which to build, and eight years have passed by in the meantime.
The strategy should serve as a lesson: strategies in themselves don’t lead to anything. We need actions, not words, and we hope that this new Commission will deliver real improvements to the lives of animals through the revision of existing legislation as well as the introduction of new law to adequately protect all species.
To help you formulate your responses, Eurogroup for Animals has put together some detailed information to help us all come across with a unified voice and call for legislative changes instead of a new strategy.
We trust that the Commission’s evaluation – and the accompanying consultation – will lead to concrete actions focused on the improvement of existing legislation, as well as the introduction of new laws to adequately protect other species.
‘It’s horrible killing cows when you see how they do it,’ admits slaughterhouse worker ‘You see the blood, and they go from being alive to being in pieces’.
A slaughterhouse worker has admitted that killing cows is ‘horrible when you see how they do it’. The worker made the admission to the “Guardian”, who changed his name to Florin in a bid to retain his anonymity.
He was speaking to the outlet for a report about how meat industry workers in Ireland are seeing high rates of COVID-19 infections.
The report follows news that U.S. slaughterhouses are ‘hotspots’ for outbreaks.
Horrible!
“It’s horrible killing cows, when you see how they do it,” he said. “They kill it – shoot it, cut the neck, cut the legs. I don’t like it. The cow is slow, an emotional thing. And you see the blood, and they go from being alive to being in pieces. That’s the way. When you see the conditions – it’s a dirty and nasty place, nobody is happy.”
The “Guardian”adds that the ‘ job is repetitive and tough; workers take painkillers to get through their shifts’ and the temperature are kept very low (4°C) to ‘keep the meat free of microbes’.
Slaughterhouse work
Many animal advocates have spoken out about the horrors of working in slaughterhouses.
A piece published in January this year by vegan charity PETA discussed the work.
It said: “Animals are tortured and butchered in slaughterhouses, but they’re not the only ones who suffer. While it may be hard for kind people to feel sympathy for someone who is paid to kill animals, many slaughterhouse employees become mentally unwell, even suicidal, not long after working at the ghastly places”.
And workers often become sick or are injured because of the unsafe and unsanitary working conditions of these gruesome facilities. Occupational Safety and Health Administration(OSHA) records show that about 17 ‘severe’ accidents occur each month in U.S. slaughterhouses.
“Approximately two slaughterhouse workers have a limb cut off by slaughterhouse machinery each week. It’s not uncommon to hear of workers losing an eye, fracturing their fingers, or suffering from head trauma.”
And I mean…Did I understand it correctly, that we should keep the slaughterhouses alive so that some people can continue to process living “things” into pieces?
Do slaughterhouse workers expect us to feel sorry for those who, unlike animals, have a way of avoiding exploitation and poor working conditions because they can look for another job?
Should we also feel sorry for a matador losing an egg or an eye during bullfighting?
It is the case with such professions that they always have a risk.
We are for animal rights and animals have no unions or associations to defend them.
We wonder what is the purpose of this article.
If it is intended that the “horror” conditions for slaughterhouse workers have priority and should be improved urgently, so that torture and murder in slaughterhouses continue as before, then we can realize a well-known media propaganda for a system that is the most cruel of human history.
People have asked me about some of my past animal campaign experiences. First and foremost; I am a live animal transport person. But as with this site; there are other issues which I also feel strongly about; and the slaughter of innocent baby seal pups in Russia was one of them. So here goes – memories of some of the work revolving around being a voice for the baby seals. It was a long campaign as you can see, but eventually the effort paid off; Russian seal pup slaughter was stopped.
One issue that I was very pleased (and proud) to have been involved with in the past was that regarding the saving of thousands of baby Whitecoat seal pups in the Archangelsk region of Russia. I campaigned with a fantastic animal advocate; and someone who became a very good friend; Robert Mouland, (pictured below) from the town of Folkestone in my home county of Kent which is located directly South East of London.
After many years of intensive campaigning; we finally had a victory for the pups – the Russian authorities stopped the slaughter of all whitecoat pups. My written records of the campaign say nothing more at the end of a massive fight other than a simple ‘Job Done’. The baby seals were saved.
I vividly remember many things that were done on that campaign; as they are with so many issues; but one in particular was when Bob (Robert) dressed up as Father Christmas in order to get into the Russian Embassy here in London. He made it, got through security and I think he even got to meet the Russian Ambassador here at the time; to give his objections to the hunt.
We never had any support for the massacre from the then Prime Minister, John Major. He just ignored all requests and literature that was sent to him asking for help. So years later, after John Major had quit politics and instead turned to his memoirs in book form, Bob decided once again to pounce. Mr Major was at a book signing ‘thing’ in Folkestone; and being a good citizen, Bob joined the queue for the book signature. When he got to the table after a while, Mr Major asked him who he wanted the book signed for. ‘For all the baby Russian seal pups you committed to death’ was the response – and Bob let further rip telling John Major that he was ‘evil’. The whole place turned blue and security arrived en masse to eject Bob from the facility. I thought it was great – all those years on and still John Major was being reminded of his failings for the baby Whitecoats ! – the incident made the local press:
The following is a part of Mark’s written memories of the Russian seal pup campaign. Photographs show the Russian seal pup farms, Mark and Robert campaigning at Downing St., London, as well as with senior MEP’s from the European Parliament when they took their campaign to Brussels, Belgium. That was another incident which started the day with Belgian police pulling and aiming their guns at us. Things like that sometime happen; as we say in England ‘shit happens’; and after some discussions with members of the European Parliament and the Belgian police; things calmed down and we were allowed to do our protest. Read more later on about this in Part 2.
The netted seal pup photo shows how baby seals, if they were not killed on the ice, were transported back to seal farms; to be killed at a later date when their coats had changed colour. This ‘farming’ issue was the biggest difference to the Canadian seal pup murders which are still happening as I write this in 2020. – where young suckling babies are killed on the ice directly rather than being ‘farmed’ for a short period before they were killed.
————————-
Harp Seal – sub order: Pinnipedia.
There were basically 3 separate major seal populations within Russia; the Eastern, Central and Western herds, with original numbers probably around the 3 million mark, A very limited number of European nations engaged in taking harp seals in the Spring months to supplement their catch of bow head whales during the rest of the year. As seal stocks gradually became depleted, hunting was controlled by the former USSR, Denmark, Norway and Greenland.
In doing this control, the White Sea herds of the Russian White Sea region recovered gradually to its level of around one half of a million. In 1965, commercial sealing was stopped in the former USSR except for the hunting of the seal pups. Harp seals can live naturally for over 35 years; they feed mainly on herring and polar cod, and also crustaceans if possible.
In the January / February months of each year, pregnant females eat heavily due to the requirement to put on large amounts of blubber which is then converted to produce milk for baby pup offspring. Pregnant females give birth to their young pups once they have come onto the winter ice pack during late February or early March, following a gestation period of around 10 months. The new born pups are approximately 80 to 90 cm in length and weigh anywhere between 5 and 11 kg. At first, their coat colouring is yellow rather than a pure white; it is only after approximately 2 to 3 days post birth that the pups fur turns into what we familiarly know as a ‘whitecoat’.
As the milk on which they feed contains up to 45% fat, as compared to approximately 4% from typical cows milk, the young pups almost triple their weight in the first 12 days of their lives. They are nursed for about 12 days by their mothers, before being abandoned. Weaned pups usually weigh anywhere between 34 and 40 kg at 18 days of age; more than half of this weight is comprised of blubber. After reaching 18 days, the young pup completely sheds it whitecoat; this is replaced by a short silvery coat which is flexed with dark spots. At this stage in their life the pups are being called ‘Beaters’.
The beater period usually lasts for approximately one year; with full moulting taking place after around four weeks during early April. By the time it has reached its sixth week, a young pup can swim and take on regular food in the form of crustaceans. Over the next four years up until the age of approximately 5, that the beaters gradually lose their spots.
In the mid-1990s, in the Arkhangelsk region of Russia, were located approximately 19,500 out of a total of 30k to 31,000 seal pups to be hunted. The remainder were allocated to other regions within Russia; however, these quotas were sold back to the Arkhangelsk region, who took the whole quota. of Russia’s 31,000+ quota. Approximately 4,500 pups were taken alive and delivered by helicopter to what was known as ‘seal farms’.
The remainders not shipped to the farms would be killed directly on the ice as baby whitecoats. The size of the annual quota was recommended by scientists at the Arkhangelsk branch of the Polar Research Institute of Marine Fisheries and Oceanography. One of the key parameters in setting an annual quota for the seal pup hunt was directly related to fish stocks, which had declined to the pre-mid-90s due to overfishing; though not by seals !. The final decision was primarily political, taking in a joint Russian / Norwegian forum style. Any contracts were supposed to be fully enforced by fisheries inspectors with a group of four or five inspectors counting every animal caught. Allegedly, if it was noted that more animals were caught than allowed for under the quota, there were supposedly supposed to be heavy fines. But as the quota enforcement was undertaken by a local fishery collective, it was often the case that it was very difficult to enforce any of the quotas originally set.
Above – Typical Seal Pup Farms
A typical Russian seal pup farm contained approximately 4,500 pups which were delivered alive to seal farms located on the White Sea coast. The remaining 26,000+ animals were killed directly on the ice as whitecoats. Hunts normally took place in early March, with reconnaissance being undertaken by scientists who identified the optimum time for the hunt. This was when pregnant females had travelled down into the White Sea area and began breeding en masse on the ice flows; hunters were delivered to the ice flows by chartered helicopters belonging to national airline.
Weather permitting, approximately 7-8 helicopters were used, flying on average around 4 to 6 hours each per day. Whitecoats which were killed directly on the ice, were killed by a blow across the top of the head or blows made by the blunt end of a gaff. One blow was usually sufficient to kill the animal, but inexperience on the part of some sealers meant that more than one blow had to be used. The initial blow to the nose or skull was followed by a ‘brain spiking’ which was supposed to prevent a return to consciousness.
The baby seals were not bled on the ice as there was a fear that this process would ‘spoil’ the fur; but when a certain number of dead or unconscious pups were collected, these were all loaded into a special net device which was collected by any one of the helicopters. On arrival at the collection point, the helicopter would disperse an empty net, whilst at the same time collecting a full net of dead seals to be delivered back to base.
A Netted Pup
Once the full quota of whitecoats had been taken from the ice, the operation was stopped and the attention turned instead to the catching of the moulders to be taken to the seal farms. The capturing, transportation, confinement and eventual inhumane killing at the farms meant that pups were continually inflicted with a great amount of stress and suffering.. Seal farming was started because there was a market for pelts from beater pups; with these pelts being soft and silver grey covered with black spots. Around this time the coat becomes thicker and stronger and the quality of the fur generally improves. And so some live pups had to be kept until they became beaters; and this was done on the farms.
The basic theory of the seal farming policy is that young pups are captured shortly after abandonment by their mother; they are held in fenced enclosures until they are fully moulted; at which time they are killed and pelted. It is generally agreed that the practice of seal ‘farming’ causes more stress and suffering to the seal pups rather than the direct killing of them on the ice. In the farms, many pups who was still underage and not fully weaned, would try to suckle from other pups.
For the capturing of the farm pups, groups of sealers were taken to the ice flows by helicopter; individual pups were restrained in individual sack type nets, after which they were emptied into larger metal containers. Around 20 pups could be transported in one metal container, which were flown back to the farms where the seal pups were unloaded and restrained in a series of fenced ‘pens’ each about the size of a tennis court. During confinement at the farm the pups were not fed; with many succumbing to disease which was generally attributed to both overcrowding and stress of their capture and transportation.
Mouth Bleeding – A typical Sign of Stress In Young Seals
On the farms many of the pups would suffer from mouth infections which was considered a typical sign of extreme stress. Congealed blood combined with ice was often seen to be hanging from their mouths; something which was never seen under normal circumstances in the wild. On the farms the pups were under constant 24-hour guard, with tall watchtowers and guards overlooking each of the penned / court sized areas. When the coats of the pups had reached the correct stage, the pups were killed, normally in batches of about 50 by injection under the flipper using a drug named Dithyllinum.
This drug produces death by immobilising the skeletal respiratory muscle; in other words the animal suffocated to death because it is unable to breathe. As a sideline, this is fairly typical of the type of drugs and systems used to kill stray dogs in Serbia and the Balkans; something which we have also worked hard on for years. When any animal is given a dose of this drug, it only becomes paralysed in its breathing function, and as such it is impossible to see whether the animal is actually dead or alive.
As an animal welfare campaigner, there are one hell of a lot of issues that currently involve animals and absolutely disgust m each and every day. Anything and everything to do with the fur industry is just one of those issues; and this was one of the major factors that influenced me to try and help out Robert with his fight for justice for the young / baby seals of the White Sea region of Russia. There is nothing hidden in fact that the fur from beater pups is one of the most popular furs used in both peaked caps (pictured below) and some forms of fur coats. A lot is sold within Russia, but beater further is also popular both in Norway and in Denmark, two nations which regularly take part in Russian fur auctions. The Norwegians were alleged to have processed Russian beater pelts and then sold them on after further processing; most probably within the EU.
The pitiful end product of a baby White coat seal is its fur being used in hats and earflaps etc. There were / are allegations that it whitecoat pelts from Russia were reportedly sold direct to Norway. At the time of my deep involvement in this issue with Robert, many whitecoat pelts from the White Sea region of Russia were being dyed in order to improve and develop wider markets. It was really almost an impossibility for anyone at the time to detect the origin of any such furs, as furs from many different sources are mixed at the auctions; combine this with the fact that whitecoats furs were often dyed brown before sale and you have (as low budget animal welfare groups will tell you) an almost impossible task to get any real proof of what you’re after.
Boxed Beaters Delivered for Skin Processing
Dead Seal Pups in Box
Processing Skins
Processed Skins
At the time in the mid-90s, Norway itself had a ban on the killing of seal pups of the year; ie. those being under six months of age; and yet it, Norway purchased furs from Russia for sale. Denmark was bound by the European Commission (EU) ban on the import of whitecoats furs, and yet at the time really took no action to prevent the purchasing of beater furs which are generalised as causing even more suffering. There was always a question of, unknowingly, the fact that Denmark had purchased whitecoat furs at auctions and imported them into the EU by this method. This was our gripe with the EU and we wanted to change it !
At the time in the mid-90s, the effectiveness of the EU was up for question, (it still is in 2020) as it was possible that Russian seal pups could be captured and moulted, and then their whitecoat furs be dyed colours such as Brown; only then to be traded within the EU by nations such as Denmark. Back in Russia, the blubber from these farmed seals was used as feed for poultry farms, with meat being sold on to fur farms where it was rendered down and used as food for other captive fur bearing animals. Investigations found out that some of the meat from Russian seal pups was used to manufacture a product known as ‘Backtophoc’; which was a medium used for medical purposes. Little was really known about this as the product was labelled as ‘commercial in confidence’, and as such, very little was available for further investigation. However, it was known and documented that the drying equipment for the process of ‘Backtophoc’ production had oddly enough, been provided by Denmark.
It was not uncommon for the capacity of ‘normal’ Russian fur farms to be able to deal with over 20,000 Arctic foxes and over 120,000 mink. Some Russian experts were open in admitting that the killing of seal pups on both the ice and in seal farms were inhumane, and that the development of ecotourism was viewed as much more viable alternative. Ecotourism also gained widespread local support as an initiative from many sectors of the Russian communities. And so, having knowledge of this information and the real expertise on the subject from Robert, the view was taken that something further had to be done at EU level.
Cut to late Summer 1996 – I (Mark) am in the back garden of a friend and fellow campaigner (Clare and her husband David) who runs a cat sanctuary at Kingsdown which is near to Deal on the Kent coast – it still exists to this day – https://www.kingsdowncatsanctuary.org/ .
It is a beautiful Sunday afternoon and a group of us are having tea and biscuits (how very typically English !) whilst discussing possible routes to be taken for further Russian seal pup actions. Robert is there and very much casually directing us through his thoughts and views on where we go and what we do. After a short while we have basically produced an action plan – firstly, we tackle the UK government at Downing Street (London) to try and get the (then) Prime Minister John Major to bring up the issue of Russian sealing when he either visits Russia, or he uses the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office for communications directly with the Russian authorities, or also, when he has Russian diplomats to visit him at Downing Street.
Secondly, we take our campaign directly to the heart of Europe; the EU in Brussels, Belgium, with the hope of meeting a Commissioner to discuss the trade and the import of pelts (into the EU) from non EU states such as Norway.
Whatever we were to do, we need some publicity; as anything good and decent always does. So, what was it ? – to cut a long story short, we end up planning the Downing Street efforts into something for Easter the following year.
By planning ahead we can take a few months to produce and obtain signatures for the thousands of individual petition cards which we would personally deliver to PM Major. And as it will be Easter, what shall the cards all be delivered in ? – a very large Easter egg; that should go down well with the ever present mass of media photographers in ‘the Street’, and obtain a much needed boost to our fight for the Russian baby seals. After the London efforts we can then divert our campaign into Europe and hopefully with the support of Members of the European parliament (MEP’s), get a foot in the door towards a meeting with the EU trade commissioner.
It is going to be hard work and the timescale for producing and printing the petition cards was short, as well as getting them all individually signed (by people on the street) was rather a tall order; but we were committed and decided without hesitation to go for it. Robert gets full backing from all present ‘in the garden’ to move ahead with his plans. Mr. Mark Watts MEP; a great guy and animal advocate had volunteered his time to support Robert and us with our presentation of all the cards in Downing Street in an attempt to try and make the subject a little more attractive to all the photographers who wait directly opposite Number 10.
I decided that for the day in London I would try and take on the role of a Russian seal pup Hunter. To do this I borrowed a couple of Roberts life-size soft seal pup models, who had their backs covered in a substitute fake fur (by my mum) which I then covered with fake blood obtained from a local theatrical shop. It looked okay and, in our opinion, would have been quite good for gaining attention of the photographers; who once had given you their attention, often followed up with interviews and reports on the particular issue that you were dealing with.
Myself – Mark- (Left), Mark Watts (Centre) and Brilliant Bob (Right) – at the entrance to Downing Street, London with ‘that egg’ !.
I had a black beanie hat, and made up a Russian flag which was stuck across the front. Using this theatrical blood once again, I spattered it all over a white T-shirt which was going to be worn over another shirt typical of those which I had seen on photographs taken of the Russian hunters. My Black ‘tank trousers’, thick black knee length socks and a good sturdy pair of veggie boots completed my outfit. As I had expressed some concerns at the ‘garden meeting’ about being dressed like this and carrying a pick (typical of that which was used to kill the pups) through the streets of London, I decided that a large wooden baseball bat was probably the better thing and kind of just as effective, whilst still getting the message across.
So the big day was finalised and Number 10 accepted our request to deliver all of the petition cards.
Cut to Charing Cross station sometime around Easter 1997. – I had made the short journey up to London from my home in North Kent, to the place where everybody on the campaign that day had planned to meet, which was just outside the entrance to Downing Street. Once off the train, I shot down into the underground toilets at Charing Cross station, where I changed from my travelling clothes into those of this ‘Russian seal hunter’.
I must admit, the walk from the station through Trafalgar Square and up the Mall to Downing Street did get me a few glances from all sorts of people going about their normal business in the city area. The fact that I was dressed as a Russian sealer, carried a baseball bat, and had two life-size whitecoat seal pup models splattered with blood and wrapped in transparent plastic bags under my arm sort of added to my ‘interest appeal’ from the city goers.
But what the hell, I was there to get attention for the campaign to stop Russian seal pups being butchered, so what did it matter how I personally looked like walking the streets of London ?; After all, there are probably many people who walk around the city dressed in similar kind of garb every day.
London is known as the home of the Brash, Outrageous and Free, so I guess this day was my turn to be a little ‘outrageous’.
But who cares; there was a job to do ? – I did not give a hoot how I looked. I got to the entrance of Downing Street where I met up with Robert, Mark Watts MEP and a few of the girls who travelled up on the train with Bob from SE Kent.
We posed in Whitehall for a few photographs with some of the guys from the press, and then made our way up to the (security) gates of Downing Street for the ritual inspection and verification by the Met. police that we had an official invite to present our petition. Once the police saw us coming with our giant Easter egg full of petition cards, things took on a negative approach. After some discussions, the police informed that we were not allowed to take the Easter egg into Downing Street; and that instead, all of the petition cards contained within it would have to be instead placed into carrier bags which could then be manually transported up to the door of number 10 for presentation.
This was, in our opinion, just a feeble attempt to destroy everything that had been planned and agreed on with the authorities prior to the day. But it was really nothing new to us – animal campaigning delivers bad times sometimes.
With a giant egg being involved I guess you could say that someone did not want to be left and with yolk on their face, but it could also be argued that in going through the process of having to take all of the postcards out of the egg in order to place them into the many bags, the police were in a position where they could verify / certify that a bomb or something in their fantasy dreams was not hidden away at the bottom and would not blow the PM to kingdom come – God forbid !! -so reality proved that it was effectively ok to use; but they said ‘no’ regardless.
Regardless of being able to see the complete interior of the egg before we even entered Downing St., the police refused to accept our argument and insisted that the egg be left at the entrance gates. And so, in a rather undignified manner, the postcards forming the Russian seal pup petition were delivered to the steps of number 10 by several campaigners each carrying as many plastic bags full of petition cards as they could. At the entrance to Downing Street, the police also took me aside and told me that I would not be allowed into Downing Street carrying a large baseball bat such as I had on my person. “You might try and get through the door (of No. 10) and bash somebody’s brains out with it” was the rather pathetic argument that was put forward by the police on duty Oh, don’t tempt me, Mr Major had tried all in his power to cull us, how about I start here ?, was the feeling that I had deep down inside; knowing just how much Robert had been ignored and pushed aside by the British government and Prime Minister John Major over many years regarding this issue of the seal babies.
The ‘Met’ Badge we used to wear during live animal export proitests
And so thanks to the Metropolitan police that day, things went a bit pear shaped and to a point, our presentation of the petition at the door of number 10 was dealt a blow that made it rather less effective than it should have been. Regardless of their attempts to cause us problems, plastic bag after plastic bag of petition cards against a Russian seal pup cull, and more importantly, 10,000 signatures calling on the British government led by Mr Major to act, were delivered unceremoniously in through the door of number 10.
One good thing which had been planned in advance by us anyway, and which did happen as a result of events at Downing Street, was that the giant empty Easter egg was afterwards taken by us to one of the nearby London children’s hospital where it was handed over to one of the children’s wards to be used as, I think, a big storage container for their toys on the ward to go into. There were no quibbles at the hospital regarding special security activities and the egg was simply accepted for what it was, which was a gift for the sick children in the hospital ward. At least we had no problems there. Who are the real children in this case, you have to ask ! – the Met police; those in government in Downing St. or the sick youngsters at the hospital ? – I say the former two.
Thinking ahead, we also had plans for action in Europe. Surely things will go better there – wont they ? – hopefully !
Well the news just supplied to us is that the planning application for this facility has now been REJECTED !
Peta tell us:
We won!
Following a massive public outcry, along with a 25,000-strong PETA petition (including your signature), an application for a cruel factory farm near Harmston, Lincolnshire, has been rejected
Mark, thank you for helping to spare nearly 2,000 pigs at a time the horrors of an intensive farm.
As the good news from Lincolnshire came during the COVID-19 outbreak, let’s remember that eating animal flesh hurts us all. Pathogens like the ones behind COVID-19, SARS, bird flu, and swine flu flourish on filthy factory farms, at bloody abattoirs, and at meat markets.
Join PETA in urging the World Health Organization to call for an end to live-animal meat markets: Sign it here and watch the video:
Down is the lower plumage of water birds such as ducks and geese. Down is very soft and protects the animals from the cold and heat.
They differ from other feathers in that they do not have a quill and are very light and heat-insulating.
The down industry tries to take advantage of these properties.
In Germany alone, 19 million ducks and geese are killed every year in order to rob them of their feather clothing and use them to manufacture products such as jackets, sleeping bags or blankets.
All over the world, animals are torn from their bodies under the term “live plucking”, even when they are alive.
Most of the down comes from China, where live plucking is common practice.
Over 80 percent of the down traded worldwide comes from Asia and is sold from there all over the world.
In Europe, most of the feathers come from Hungary, Romania and Poland. In all of these countries, goose plucking is often practiced in addition to the dead, in order to “harvest” feathers from each animal several times.
For this purpose, the frightened animals are fixed up to four times a year, and workers pluck entire tufts of feather from their sensitive skin under time pressure.
Often this happens so roughly that the wings of the animals break or their skin tears open. The workers often sew the wounds themselves with needle and thread and without any pain medication.
At the same time, they are fattened so that the goose can be used twice.
For foie gras, ducks and geese are confined in tiny cages and stuffed.
For this purpose, a tube is pushed deep into their throat, through which up to one kilogram of a salty, fatty corn porridge is pumped into their stomach every day.
In short time, the animals are completely fat and their livers have inflated ten times their normal size.
They are then killed for the production of liver pate and their feathers sold to dealers.
What is the legal situation in Germany?
The plucking of live birds is prohibited in the EU.
However, the law leaves a loophole open by allowing the plucking of animals that are in the moult, the time when their plumage was naturally released.
However, with the thousands of animals that are plucked in chords several times a year in each fattening farm, it is impossible to wait for the moulting time for each bird.
Violent live plucking was also uncovered in Germany, and in other EU countries such as Hungary or Poland, the method is standard practice in many companies despite the ban.
The down industry has introduced a variety of its own seals to calm the conscience of customers and dealers. However, they all have one thing in common – they are ineffective when it comes to animal welfare.
Many companies attach certificates to their down articles, which promise the customer that no geese have been plucked alive for their products.
However, since the controls are inadequate and the trade and production chains for down are very non-transparent, many traders cannot prove which type of plucking the down they actually use comes from.
But birds that are only plucked after slaughtering often live on dirty, stinking farms and are violently killed in the slaughterhouse. That is why down from the “dead pluck” is not an animal-friendly alternative.
Nobody has to warm or adorn themselves with the feathers of tortured animals. Cotton, viscose, lyocell, polyester, Primaloft or the Kapok plant down are available today.
High-quality vegetable or synthetic materials provide excellent insulation and have the advantage that they are easy to care for and suitable for allergy sufferers.
And I mean… Like all animals that are bred and kept for the production of any commodity, the life of the down geese is a horror life.
They are crammed together in thousands in factory farming and live there similarly to slaughter chickens. Three times a day, hoses drop from the ceiling, which give them a bland, tasteless porridge, and plenty of water at the push of a button.
When the geese are fully feathered, the workers grab them by the neck and take them to a separate room.
Other workers are already waiting here, sitting on long rows of chairs.
They lay the geese on their lap, stomach up, pinch their necks under their arms and pull out the birds’ feathers in an incredible routine and speed.
The geese scream in pain. Thea don`t get anesthetic and are fully conscious.
The naked geese are running around, completely distraught, trying to hide behind hay bales. They freeze terribly and only survive the torment due to medication.
They have to endure the procedure helplessly, four times a year.
They are plucked completely every three months. If they are so destroyed that another round would not be carried, then they go to the slaughterhouse. The last 14 hours of their lives are starving.
Then they are collected together up and locked in tight transport cages.
They are crushed and suffocated, or simply fall victim to their excessive strain.
That`s the end of a bleak and painful life, a life as a down production machine that is not even recognized as a living being.
That is the cruel truth behind down production.
Do not buy down products, do not support animal torture.
![mark-and-robert-downing-street[1]](https://worldanimalsvoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/mark-and-robert-downing-street1.jpg?w=687&h=567)
.
World Animals Voice 