From Mark – there is a lot to absorb here from Reineke – I started to underline and bold main points; but almost ended by doing everything !! – thus I stopped. Bad news all round whatever, but what else would you expect from the EU ? – Regards Mark

Photo – PMAF (France)

1 December 2023

Opinion

Written by Reineke Hameleers

A revised Regulation on live animal transport, possibly together with rules on cat and dog breeding, is the only piece of updated legislation that will be put forward in this political term. This is at a time when we, and millions of European Citizens, fully expected the European Commission to deliver on its firm commitment to revise all animal welfare rules.

It is, therefore, all the more striking that the leaked Commission’s legislative proposal on the transport of animals is even less ambitious than we could have imagined.

The general tone is that ‘animal welfare is a common good, but business is business and as few obstacles as possible must be put in its way’. Perhaps the most evident proof is that the extremely controversial live exports to non-EU countries are here to stay, albeit with more restrictions, most notably on the vessels that can be authorised for sea consignments. There is even an explicit recognition that this is a lucrative sector and that someone else would profit from it if the EU decided to withdraw. 

The draft Regulation appears to ignore the European Court of Justice Ruling (C-424/13) establishing that animals must be protected according to EU legislation until their final destination, within or outside the EU territory. According to the new draft rules, the operators who should be reporting any animal welfare problems are the same people in charge of the animals during the journey. The same people who are profiting from the business. We can only imagine how eager these operators will be to report their own violations to the competent authorities.

For the rest, the alignment with the recommendations of the latest scientific opinions commissioned to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is inconsistent, and some of the requests of the Animal Transport Committee of the European Parliament (ANIT) have been disregarded. True, the leaked draft includes some positive elements, among which the most important are the proposed lower maximum journey times for most species, updated space allowances, compulsory real-time traceability of all road journeys, and the minimum age of five weeks for transporting unweaned calves. But, as is often the case, the devil is in the details, and those details are concerning. 

To start with a striking example, unweaned animals (calves, lambs, foals, etc.) are recognised as vulnerable but, thanks to a derogation, can still be transported for two consecutive 9h periods with a 1h period of rest in between (so 19h in total) if the trucks are equipped with specific feeding devices – whose effectiveness the Commission intends to “verify”. As if this weren’t enough, when the journey of unweaned calves is roll-on, roll-off (RORO, meaning that the trucks are partially transported by sea), the time spent at sea is not included in the total journey calculations – as if hunger, dehydration, and exhaustion in unweaned animals (and indeed, in all animals) were not time-dependent. This provision, which is so damaging it beggars belief, to all effects legitimises the Irish dairy calf export trade, which in 2022 involved 153.000 calves (for 2023, the numbers have already increased by 30,000 animals). Dairy calves are sent on 18h RORO crossings to be further transported to fattening or slaughter to international destinations. The current requirement to rest the animals for 12 hours after a long RORO crossing apparently disappeared from the new draft Regulation. Another favour to the industry in plain sight. There is also no real consideration for end-of-production (ie, cull) or pregnant animals, two additional vulnerable categories. 

Only animals that are fit for transport should start a journey. However, although fitness for transport is a prerequisite before an animal can be loaded (and it should be guaranteed for the entire journey), the proposal does not provide any concrete and species-specific ways to assess this fitness. EFSA had proposed a series of animal-based indicators in its last scientific opinions: for instance, severely lame poultry or poultry with open wounds/prolapses, broken legs or wings should not be transported. Similarly, severely lame cattle or cattle with pneumonia should be considered unfit for transport. The operators cannot make informed decisions without clear and species-specific indicators of reasons for excluding a vulnerable animal from starting a journey. The draft Regulation only mandates the use of (yet-to-be-defined) indicators at the destination, but this is insufficient to protect animal welfare for the whole journey. 

Other shortcomings concern the allowed minimum and maximum temperatures for transporting animals. Again, looking at the most recent EFSA recommendations, the proposed ranges of temperatures, particularly the maximum allowed ambient temperatures (30 degrees) for transports during the daytime, are inadequate to guarantee animal welfare. For farmed animals there is no mention of minimum and maximum allowed temperatures inside the trucks or containers, nor does the draft mention compulsory monitoring systems for microclimate inside the vehicles (again, ignoring EFSA’s recommendations). 

All the while, contingency plans, while mandatory, are not described in any detail, posing another hazard to animal welfare in case of traffic disruptions, extreme weather conditions, accidents, disease outbreaks, etc. Throughout the text of the new draft, there is a strong emphasis on the responsibility of organisers, drivers/transporters and staff at the final destination for the welfare of the animals in their care. This is also present in the current Regulation, and it begs the question of why commercial operators should denounce themselves to the competent authorities if their failure to enforce the Regulation leads to animal welfare problems.

Is it all doom and gloom, then? This proposal does have some progressive elements, particularly concerning the real-time traceability of each live animal consignment (which would become compulsory) and the recording of relevant data for enforcement purposes. Additionally, we welcome the proposal that ships flying “black flags” (severely sub-standard), which at the moment constitute 55% of the EU-approved livestock transport fleet, would no longer be allowed to operate. Only ships flying a white or grey flag (good or average performance) would be able to obtain the relevant authorisation certificates. The Commission intends to exercise more control over live animal transport data, but how the data will be used is still unknown, also because they will not be publicly available. The scope is extended to aquatic animals and recognises the most important aspects for their welfare, however, a delegated act will be required to introduce measurable and species-specific requirements, or there will be no impact on aquatic animals from the text in this draft. 

When it comes to companion animals (cats and dogs) the draft presents new species-specific criteria but some provisions are generic and vague. While it’s good to see that the minimum age has been set at 15 weeks, it’s astonishing that there is still no maximum journey time. This means that cats and dogs, even pregnant ones, can be transported for days and days, and the only requirement is to feed them “at least every 24 hours”. 

For animals transported for “scientific purposes”, the details remain again vague. There are limitations: only a proportion of these animals would benefit from such protection. The animals used in projects authorised under Directive 2010/63/EU would remain unprotected. Animals that are transported by air, as non-human primates that are imported to EU laboratories, and vulnerable animals, as for example certain genetically altered animals, and animals that have undergone surgery also seem to miss protection under this proposal.

Will animal welfare be substantially improved should this draft become legislation? From our analysis, the answer is no. 

Regards Mark

UK Live Export Update

Ther 14^th June this year (2023) was the Ban Live Exports International Awareness Day.You can see some of our past awareness day posts by clicking here – Search Results for “ban live export awareness day” – World Animals Voice

This year, 120 NGO’s from 31 nations took part in the day of action; encouraging their supporters to raise awareness, gather support and push for legislative changes that improve the welfare of animals in transport and to also ban live exports.

Across Europe, citizens sent 464,586 digital postcards to EU Ministers urging them to support change.

In the UK – In May this year the UK government reneged on its manifesto promise to deliver a live exports ban; when it dropped the ‘Kept Animals Bill’.  In July, there was a funeral themed photo stunt outside of Parliament, urging the UK Government not to allow its promise to ban the trade to go to the grave !

In September, Dame Joanna Lumley submitted over 95,000 signatures regarding the same to No. 10 Downing Street, calling for the Prime Minister to show true leadership for animals by banning live exports.  In October, CIWF helped organise an ‘MP Walk In’ session in Parliament, briefing MP’s on the issue.

Then suddenly, few weeks ago, campaigners warmly welcomed during the State Opening of Parliament by HRH King Charles, which outlines all the work to be undertaken by government in the next Parliamentary session, a new Animal Welfare (Livestock Exports) Bill which will ban the live export of cattle, sheep, goats, pigs and horses for both slaughter and further fattening from Britain.

This is a huge step forward towards ending this disgusting trade from the UK; especially as it has now been detailed in the State Opening for passing into legislation in this next parliamentary session.  Now the Government must listen to its people (as they work for us !) and deliver the ban on the archaic practice of transporting live animals on long and arduous journeys overseas for both slaughter and fattening once and for all.  In the past and more recently, we have all seen a series of broken promises by the Government on this issue; so the latest session news is most welcome.  The Bill must now be passed as a matter of urgency; and with a General Election at most 1 year away, the government knows it will get a big no vote at the ballot box if it fails its citizens again.

Regards Mark

Personally, I have campaigned and investigated live animal exports from the UK for the last 35+ years.  You can read and see a lot more about it by visiting  About Us. | Serbian Animals Voice (SAV)

True horror of EU live animal transport masked in official records 

28 November 2023

CIWF

My bold, underline etc – Mark.

Press Release

Shocking new report reveals suffering endured by around 44 million farmed animals a year – including unweaned calves and lambs – on horrific journeys lasting up to three weeks. Inadequate and misleading official records are masking the true horror and scale of the EU’s long-distance trade in farmed animals, a shocking new report released today by international NGOs Eurogroup for Animals and Compassion in World Farming reveals. 

Photo – Mark

The new report  A data dump of suffering: the EU’s long-distance trade in farm animals exposed  analyses a cache of previously unpublished EU records relating to the long-distance transportation of 180,000 consignments of farmed animals within and from the EU during a 19-month period from October 2021 to April this year. It reveals disturbing details of the extent and nature of suffering endured by around 44 million farmed cattle, sheep, pigs and other animals transported annually.

Key insights from the report include:   

Over 370,000 unweaned calves were taken from their mothers shortly after birth and deprived of nutrition during long journeys – many as young as just two weeks old. 300,000 unweaned lambs are also imported by Italy alone each year, enduring long journeys without adequate feed.   

Thousands of sheep and cattle are exported from the EU by road to Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia in journeys lasting up to three weeks.   

Anti Live Export March – Dover, England. Photo – Mark

France, the Netherlands and Denmark have exported thousands of pigs to extremely distant countries including Brazil, Vietnam, Thailand, and Nigeria. By exporting breeding sows that have been genetically selected for very large litters, the EU is seeding its inhumane factory farming model in other parts of the world.  

Millions of cattle and sheep a year endure long, stressful sea journeys to the Middle East and Africa for slaughter or fattening. Vessels are often in very poor condition and animals suffer greatly during these journeys from heat stress, noxious gases, motion stress and starvation and there are no effective legal protections.   

In 2022, the EU exported around 30,000 pregnant heifers, mainly to central and western Asia, such as Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, where journeys are up to 6,000 km and can take up to three weeks.  

Above – CIWF Tour for farmed animals in the Netherlands – photo Mark

An estimated 54,000 tonnes of live fish, equal to tens of millions of individual animals, were transported between EU Member States in 2019. Fish often endure routine starvation, overcrowding, and physical injury to scales and fins resulting from handling when loading and unloading during transport.    

The report shows that the EU’s journey records were incomplete, often inaccurate and vastly underestimate the sheer extent of the length and duration of many journeys. Around 60% of journeys are shown as starting at assembly centres but animals may have been transported from the farm of origin for many hours prior to this without any requirement for this to be logged. Many transporters practise ‘assembly centre hopping’, avoiding the requirement for animals to be given 24 hours mid-journey rest before resuming their journey.  

This release comes just days before the expected publication of the European Commission’s proposal on animal transport on 6 December. However, the Commission has failed to publish the other proposals it committed to present as part of a more comprehensive revision of the animal welfare legislation, including the ban on caged animal farming, which was expected by September 2023.   

The two animal protection NGOs are calling on the EU to ban the export of live animals from the EU to non-EU countries, to switch to a trade in meat and carcasses only, and to introduce tougher rules to protect the welfare of animals on journeys within the EU. 

This call for greater protection for farmed animals’ welfare during transportation is supported by the majority of European citizens. The 2023 Special Eurobarometer found that eight out of ten Europeans think the travel time for the commercial transport of live animals within or from the EU should be limited1 and an overwhelming nine out of ten people believe it’s important to protect the welfare of farmed animals.  

The transnational nature of live exports makes it especially challenging to protect the welfare of animals, and this is why we ask for a ban on live exports to non-EU countries. A replacement with meat and carcass exports does not only benefit the animals but has huge economic and environmental benefits. Better measures to protect unweaned and pregnant animals must be put forward, while the misuse of assembly centres needs to be urgently addressed. The immense scale of suffering highlighted by this investigation cannot be ignored – the European Commission must come forward with a more ambitious Regulation.

Reineke Hameleers, CEO, Eurogroup for Animals

Our new report reveals some deeply troubling issues, not least that the official data is incomplete, inaccurate and vastly underestimates the scale of – and the animal suffering caused by – the EU’s long-distance trade in live farmed animals. Although we knew that millions of animals were enduring cruel and unnecessary journeys in the name of profit, this report shows that the situation is far worse than we had feared. The EU must address this as a matter of urgency by banning the live export of farmed animals to non-EU countries and introducing tough new rules to protect their welfare during transportation between and within EU Member States.

Peter Stevenson, Chief Policy Advisor, Compassion in World Farming

Regards Mark

I have had the pleasure of knowing and working with Phil, Peter and all the CIWF crew for decades.

Below – On Tour with CIWF in the Netherlands.

CIWF Campaigner of the year 2003.