‘Gassing methods can cause horrendous suffering to animals in their last moments.

Pigs are lowered into a chamber containing at least 70 percent CO2 in air.

During this time they will struggle, gasp for breath, squeal, and climb over each other until they finally lose consciousness.

The pigs must remain in the gas mixture until they are completely unconscious which can take up to 30 seconds. After this, the animals are then shackled by one hind leg, hoisted and their throats cut to drain their blood’.

Regards Mark

OPINION: Why The CO2 Shortages Make It The Best Time To Go Vegan (plantbasednews.org)

OPINION: Why The CO2 Shortages Make It The Best Time To Go Vegan

The UK meat industry is reaching ‘breaking point’ and warns Christmas will be cancelled as it fears CO2 slaughters will be stopped…

This week’s headlines are overrun with the issues surrounding the current surge in gas prices. And, the knock-on effect they are expected to have on the UK’s food security.  Damning reports from both farmers and meat processors warn that the CO2 shortages could cancel Christmas, and that the meat industry is reaching breaking point. This is affecting the slaughter process of pigs, poultry, and beef, as well as packaging. 

Siobhan Dolan from vegan charity Viva! explains the connection between CO2 and the meat industry.

CO2 shortages and the meat industry

For billions of animals slaughtered each year in the UK, CO2 is the last thing they will breathe before dying.

In fact, this technique of slaughter, known as gassing, is the most common slaughter technique for many intensively farmed animals.

This is usually because it is the cheapest and quickest way to kill many animals at once. While it has often been thought to cause less suffering than other visibly more brutal methods, this is not true. And, gassing methods can cause horrendous suffering to animals in their last moments.

Pigs are lowered into a chamber containing at least 70 percent CO2 in air.

During this time they will struggle, gasp for breath, squeal, and climb over each other until they finally lose consciousness.

The pigs must remain in the gas mixture until they are completely unconscious which can take up to 30 seconds. After this, the animals are then shackled by one hind leg, hoisted and their throats cut to drain their blood.

The length of time it takes to kill pigs and the acute distress it causes have led to calls to ban the CO2 stunning method.

How birds are slaughtered with CO2

Most poultry birds killed in the UK face a similar fate. Birds are transported to slaughterhouses in crates.

Then, while still in the crates, they are placed into a chamber. Here, they are exposed to either concentrations of CO2 or a mixture of inert gases (nitrogen and argon). The gas mixture deprives birds of oxygen, causing them to lose consciousness and die. 

In a nutshell, CO2 is used to slaughter millions of animals each year in the UK. And, the current shortage could pose significant delays to the number of animals processed for slaughter.  

Factory farmed animals are bred and reared in filthy, overcrowded sheds. As a result, they often suffer from disease, injury, and psychological problems.

In these environments, profits take priority over animal welfare and Viva!’s countless investigations prove that animals suffer for food production.

Why are animals allowed to be killed like this?

Conditions on factory farms are likely to deteriorate even further. And, animals will experience prolonged suffering on factory farms if delays occur at slaughterhouses as the industry is predicting.

There are also reports from the industry regarding the possibility of animals being destroyed (killed) on farms, should the issue continue.

However, shouldn’t the bigger question be; why are we allowing animals to be kept in these conditions, killed in this way, and continuing to eat them?

Especially, considering how much we understand about animal sentience and the impact animal agriculture is having on the climate crisis? 

CO2 shortages might mean you can’t eat turkey this Christmas, but there are plenty of incredible meat alternatives on the market that can win over even the most dedicated carnivores.

Veganism – Now might be a good time to give it a go…

Quote from article:

‘This is significant given the number of land animals being raised for food in the country.

The Netherlands has more than 100 million chickens, 12 million pigs, four million cows, and 600,000 goats, according to DutchNews. It’s also the EU’s largest meat exporter’.

Dutch Farmers Face Calls To Reduce Livestock By 30% To Help Protect The Planet

The proposals sparked protests from the farming community, while environmentalists call for more action

Farmers in the Netherlands are facing calls to cut livestock production by almost a third. The proposal is in response to the ongoing ‘nitrogen crisis’ that the country faces, including concerns about ammonia pollution. 

Is nitrogen dangerous?

Nitrogen is the most abundant element in our atmosphere – making up around 78 percent of the atmosphere, according to NASA. It’s essential for life, but too much can damage the ecosystem. 

Excess nitrogen can leach into underground water sources or enter oceans via agricultural runoff. This can lead to algae blooms, which deplete oxygen in the water and can create aquatic dead zones. Dead zones typically cannot support life of any kind. 

Ammonia is made of nitrogen and hydrogen. In high concentrations, ammonia can cause respiratory problems, dermatitis, eye irritation and in severe cases, blindness or death. 

What is the nitrogen crisis?

In 2019, the Council of State – the highest Dutch administrative court – ruled that the government was breaching EU law, stating that the country’s efforts to reduce excess nitrogen in vulnerable natural areas were insufficient. 

Up to 18,000 infrastructure and construction projects were halted in an attempt to lower emissions. The government also reduced daytime speed limits to 100km per hour (62mi) on motorways.

But according to the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, animal husbandry and manure applications are the chief culprits of nitrogen oxide and ammonia pollution.

This is significant given the number of land animals being raised for food in the country. The Netherlands has more than 100 million chickens, 12 million pigs, four million cows, and 600,000 goats, according to DutchNews. It’s also the EU’s largest meat exporter.

The proposals

Farmers could have to reduce numbers of dairy cows, pigs, and poultry.

The finance and agriculture ministry has published two proposals to cut livestock numbers by 30 percent. According to The Guardian, it’s one of the ‘most radical plans of its kind in Europe’. 

Both proposals use buy-back schemes to reduce animal numbers – including dairy cows, pigs, and poultry. One proposal also subsidizes sustainable land management and livestock housing, while the other focuses on price incentives, such as a levy on ammonia emissions. 

“We are a relatively small country with a lot of inhabitants, industry, transport and agriculture, so we are reaching the limits of what nature can take,” Rudi Buis, a spokesperson for the agriculture ministry, told The Guardian. “There is a high level of urgency for us to tackle the nitrogen compounds problem. This means that in the near future, choices must be made.”

Farming community’s response

The proposals have attracted criticism from members of the farming community. The Farmer’s Defence Force (FDF), which has nearly 60,000 members in its Facebook group, was established to help farmers who are under ‘attack of environmental extremists’.

On its website, FDF calls the nitrogen reduction plans ‘disgusting’. In July, FDF and fellow farming group Agractie staged protests in multiple regions in the Netherlands. 

Some of the demonstrations saw farmers filling the roads with hundreds of tractors.

“The snow is not blackened by farming activities, the air is not poisoned with heavy metals by farming activities. You will not find increased cancer rates around farms,” FDF writes on its website. “The air was clean during the lock-downs – when the farmer plowed on and industry and air traffic came to a virtual standstill.”

The groups are planning further protests in the coming weeks. 

‘Step in the right direction’

Meanwhile, other groups have pushed for more to be done to protect the planet.

Coalition party D66 previously proposed reducing the number of livestock in the Netherlands by 50 percent. 

D66 parliamentarian Tjeerd de Groot spoke to RTL Nieuws about the issue in 2019.

“[Seventy] percent of Dutch nitrogen emissions come from agriculture, a large part of which comes from intensive livestock farming. That is huge,” de Groot said, per the NL Times. 

“At the same time, the contribution of intensive livestock farming to our own economy is not even one percent. The ratio is completely missing.”

Bram van Liere, of environmental organization Friends of the Earth Netherlands, applauded the move.

“It’s a step in the right direction,” van Liere said to The Guardian. “We would do more on buying out farmers and helping them transition to sustainable agriculture.”

Dutch Farmers Face Calls To Reduce Livestock By 30% To Help Protect The Planet – Plant Based News

Regards Mark

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/22/us-research-points-to-lower-milk-yield-from-cows-exposed-to-wildfire-smoke

‘Smoke cows’: Could more US wildfires mean less milk from Oregon’s huge dairy herd?

A team at the Oregon State University has begun a three-year study looking at the effects of poor air quality on cattle

Juliana Ranches drove to work in eastern Oregon in early September through wildfire smoke so thick that, for a moment, she thought it was just a grey, foggy day and it would soon start to rain.

Ranches is a livestock researcher relatively new to living in the area, and the conditions were unlike anything she had experienced before, leading her to ask questions about the animals that spend their summers in the smoke. Eastern Oregon has this year experienced regular wildfires since early July.

“We know there is a negative effect,” Ranches said, referring to the cows grazing outside in some of the most polluted air in the US. The area registered 160 on the air quality index (AQI) in early September after reports of a large number of wildfires, a level that can put human health at risk.

“There is a little bit of work out of California with [dairy and beef] producers and indirect impacts, reporting lower conception rates and birthrates, but we cannot say for sure because there are no studies in a controlled environment looking into that.”

Research into the impact on livestock bred for human consumption is limited, although it is known that particulate matter from the smoke is a significant health threat, especially when exposure is long-term.

According to new preliminary research from the University of Idaho, a sample of dairy cattle exposed to poor air quality and heat stress produced less milk – about 1.3 litres less than normal (just over two UK pints) – a day than average. Some cows had not fully recovered two weeks after the air quality improved. But because this observation was based on just one herd, the data does not yet translate into solid recommendations for ranchers and farmers. The work must be scaled up to explore larger patterns.

It is why Ranches, along with her colleague Jenifer Cruickshank, who specialises in dairy management, has begun a three-year study to collect more data on cows and the effects of wildfire and smoke, as part of which they have put nearly 30 cows out to pasture.

“I call them my smoke cows,” said Cruickshank. During a wildfire event that results in an AQI measure over 50, she takes daily milk samples and blood tests, which will be analysed as stress markers. The cows’ respiratory rate and body temperatures are also documented.

Continued on next page.

https://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/news/eu-organic-day-what-it-could-mean-animal-welfare

EU Organic Day: what it could mean for animal welfare

23 September 2021

News

Today, Eurogroup for Animals joined the European Commission, the Council and the Parliament at the launch of the first EU Organic Day

This launch is part of the European Organic Action Plan 2021-2027, released last March, which follows the objectives set out in the Farm to Fork and Biodiversity Strategies of “at least 25% of the EU’s agricultural land under organic farming and a significant increase in organic aquaculture by 2030.”

Eurogroup for Animals particularly welcomes the contribution of the Action Plan to better align animal welfare with the societal demands on higher animal welfare and to further improve animal welfare in organic production. The recognition of the link between aquaculture and animal welfare, as well as the promotion of organic aquaculture are also welcomed. 

The Commission states that organic farming already plays an important role in improving the welfare of animals and that animal welfare is an integral part of sustainable food systems. However, there are still animal welfare issues in organic farming that urgently need to be addressed. 

Today at the launch of EU Organic Day, we used the opportunity to alert the institutions to the need for a comprehensive animal welfare labelling system as well as a need for animal welfare standards to aim higher: the need for stricter criteria to define adapted breeds, a truly compulsory access to pasture for livestock, a ban on mutilations, availability of immunocastration, transport time limitations, and proper enforcement for the existing organic rules for animal welfare. 

Eurogroup for Animals recommends the European Commission to:

• Quantify the target for organic aquaculture by aligning it with the target for terrestrial farming, i.e. 25% of aquaculture sites by 2030.
• Implement concrete animal welfare improvements such as slow-growing breeds in broilers, a ban on surgical castration of pigs and transport time limitations.
• Adopt Methods of Production (MoP+) labelling with one of the top levels integrating organic production.
• Ensure proper enforcement of the existing organic rules for animal welfare, e.g effective stunning of fish at slaughter, before granting the organic logo. 
• In identifying the obstacles for more organic agriculture and aquaculture, the reduction and replacement of animal products and a shift to more plant-based diets, as well as the need to shift to low-trophic aquatic species, should be seen as solutions. 

Eurogroup for Animals welcomes the new Organic Action plan and sees the potential of organic production to be classified as the top tier method of production as well as an EU-wide labelling system for animal welfare. However, organic farming should lead the way towards the EU’s sustainable and humane food production model, reflecting the ambitions of the Farm to Fork strategy. While the language in the Organic Action Plan is still vague, we welcome the commitment to improving animal welfare, including farmed fish. We are looking forward to working with the Commission and other stakeholders to ensure organic farming will embrace the highest possible animal welfare standards.

Reineke Hameleers, CEO, Eurogroup for Animals

Animal welfare and food labeling: initiating the transition through high quality consumer information

File

Report – Animal Welfare and food labeling1.84 MB

Regards Mark

Sustainable Food Systems: the intersection of trade and animal welfare

21 September 2021

News

Ahead of the 2021 UN Food Systems Summit Eurogroup for Animals and The Good Lobby organised a high level event to discuss the intersection of animal welfare and trade in international policymaking

The COVID-19 crisis has reminded the world of the limits of unconditional trade liberalisation, which tends to favour corporate interests while ignoring the effects of the intensification of animal agriculture on the planet and on the animals. This has contributed to the three key challenges the planet is currently facing: zoonoses, antimicrobial resistance, and the overall climate and biodiversity crisis.

At the moment, international trade and economic policies are fuelling rather than countering the expansion and negative impacts of intensive livestock farming by prioritising profits and free trade above all. For example, the trade deal between the EU and Ukraine has led to a surge in cheap chicken meat imports, and the ones planned with Australia and Mercosur countries are expected to also fuel beef production – mostly on feedlots – according to the EU’s own analysis.

Indeed, there seems to be a disconnection between the conversations on the much needed transformation of our food systems and the international trade agenda. 

Both panels investigated the best ways to ensure that trade agreements and international trade rules not only avoid negative impacts on animal welfare, but also intrinsically contribute to a global transition towards a more ethical and sustainable way of producing. 

The first panel focused on how bilateral trade agreements can help to promote higher animal welfare and thus to move towards sustainable food systems. 

“We want to step up cooperation [under EU Trade Agreements] and make a big difference,” said Claire Bury, Deputy Director-General for Food Sustainability at DG SANTE. She also underlined the importance of developing work programmes for the animal welfare cooperation with each partner country, “so we have concrete plans about what to do with the country. It’s not a talking shop, it’s about making a change”, Bury added. 

Recognising animal welfare has never been as high on the agenda, Pascal Durand MEP called for products derived from animal exploitation – as well as biodiversity and human exploitation – not to be allowed on the EU market. 

The EU is not the only place where trade policy is at the centre of important debates. Chris Sherwood, CEO of the RSPCA, portrayed the tensions reflected by the current UK debate on trade policy. “There are real tensions at the heart of the UK government – between ensuring high standards locally, and wanting to have a Global Britain negotiating trade deals all around the world”.

EU trade policy is also monitored by non-EU Civil Society Organisations. “We need to bring [higher animal welfare and sustainability-related] standards within the [EU-Mercosur] agreement to push up Mercosur standards”, said Maureen Santos, Project Officer at FASE.

The second panel’s focus was on multilateral issues and how animal welfare can be addressed at WTO level and throughout the value chain.

“There is an increasing interest for animal welfare within our members”, said Jean-Marie Paugam, deputy Director-General at the World Trade Organisation.  “The debate can be open, and the WTO is open to support a trade policy enhancing animal welfare”, he added. 

“It is possible to build up a progressive interpretation of [WTO] rules. That would be a huge evolution about how article XX [and its exceptions to trade liberalisation] was being read in comparison to what it was when WTO was created”, said Ignacio Garcia Bercero, Director General for Trade at DG TRADE. “If we are going to [restrict trade based on animal welfare], we will need to have solid, strong evidence to show it is grounded in widely perceived ethical concerns, not tainted by economic considerations”, he added. 

Dr Laura Nielsen also mentioned the role that tiered labelling, intertwined with tariff reductions, could play in incentivising businesses all around the world. 

A key part of the solution to ensure that trade contributes to a transition towards more sustainable food systems is thus to better address the impact of trade policy on animal welfare. 

Asked about his expectations from the UN Food Systems Summit, Pascal Durand concluded that “we must understand that our current production methods are not sustainable for humans nor for animals, and that we must improve the life of all living beings. Once this is understood, policies will follow.” 

Now more than ever, we must seize the opportunity the UN Food Systems Summit presents to leverage the emerging global awareness that the health and wellbeing of humans are inseparable from those of animals and the planet. In doing so, we must break down silos to go beyond the traditional animal welfare and sustainability narratives and rethink trade policy, at both bilateral and multilateral levels.

Reineke Hameleers, CEO, Eurogroup for Animals

Regards Mark