Click to read the article
Regards Mark
Category: General News
JULY 23, 2024
I’ve been unsure how animal activists should orient themselves in the coming American presidential election. Obviously, in the United States’ two-party system we should vote for the Democratic nominee. But should we do more than simply cast a ballot for the candidate, whoever that ends up being?
I typically argue we should prioritize nonhuman interests to the greatest extent possible, as there are so few people who do. For me, that means picketing legislators and writing letters to newspapers in the hope of using the political process to accelerate the development of cultivated meat.
But, as the election approaches, I wonder if the threat Donald Trump poses to animals and our movement is so extreme we should pause our usual work and temporarily focus on helping to defeat him. I put this question and others to a group of animal advocates who were kind enough to share their time with me.
Merritt Clifton is editor of the Animals 24-7 website. Previously, he was news editor for Animals’ Agenda magazine, as well as the editor of the Animal People newspaper. When asked what a second Trump presidency might look like, Clifton referred to his coverage of the Republican’s first term.
Continue reading this article – see link at top.
Regards Mark
I need a lie down after all that !
The new animal welfare exhibition truck
Brussels only city to not authorise mobile exhibition on animal welfare
25 July 2024
GAIA
Press Release
Among 20 European cities, Brussels is the only city that has failed to issue a permit for a mobile exhibition that will travel around Europe showcasing issues related to animal welfare, causing concern to animal protection NGOs.
The mobile exhibition For the Animals, by Project 1882, a leading animal advocacy organisation in Sweden, started its Euro Tour in June, going through Helsinki, Tallinn, Riga, Vilnius, Warsaw, Berlin, Bratislava, Prague and Ljubljana. Its journey, through to November, will continue to Budapest, Madrid, Lisbon, Porto, Bologna, Torino, Aarhus, Copenhagen, Malmö, Gutenberg and Stockholm.
Yet, despite efforts by Eurogroup for Animals and GAIA, the city of Brussels has failed to provide a permit for the exhibition. In the long correspondence with several different authorities, the permit was rejected, on claims that the dimensions of the truck are too large, the roads in Brussels are “too fragile”, or because of metro and underground parking lots. This however, is questionable, considering that many other participating cities have similar landscapes and did not raise such concerns.
It is concerning that in Brussels, right in the heart of policy-making in Europe, citizens are unable to participate in this exhibition. With the reasons provided for the lack of permit, we wonder if there is a hidden motive, one that is based on the content of the exhibition, rather than the format? The reality of suffering of animals in Europe should remain visible.
Reineke Hameleers, CEO, Eurogroup for Animals
Today, we had to announce to dozens of major NGOs that Brussels, the Capital of Europe, was not able to host an exhibition that will nonetheless be present in all the major cities on the continent. Brussels, which recently hosted hundreds of tractors, apparently does not have the capacity to accommodate a truck for a one-day event? It’s grotesque and deplorable.
Ann De Greef, CEO, GAIA
Above – London.
Yours truly somewhere in the Netherlands – note free range chickens – how they should be !
Brussels, oh yeah yup I get it – home of the EU, where decisions like live animal regulations are rules, and where intensive farming regulations for the entire EU member states are made, Then they have never had the bollocks to do what EU man demands; just a few ? flimsy animal abusers from start to finish; their own little powerhouse doing what they want rather than to go with animal welfare friendly common man.
Ever asked yourself why it was only upon leaving the EU that the United Kingdom was able introduce legislation which ended up with an export ban for British animals going into Europe ? – best thig the UK has done for a long time !
I know, its called getting out of the EU !
I travelled with the Ban live export tour truck in Europe decades ago – now out, the UK is free from the EU shackles of that abuse; whilst those still in Europe sadly still see live animal shipments day in day out – why ? cos the gutless Commission lets and animals suffer continually for a few pennies more,
SHAME ON THEM – Let the animals free !
Mark
The incredible ways that animals impact the earth.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/the-incredible-ways-animals-impact-the-earth/ss-AA12GYVb?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=DCTS&cvid=c49340c11a0b49ffa895eea6217c5a39&ei=30#image=9
One comment – well said: Human beings are the worst!!!! These beautiful beings are super intelligent, sentient, friendly and must be respected. You do not “FARM” sentient beings. You farm tomatoes!!!!!!!
18 July 2024
Currently, all octopus products available on the market are wild-caught, as octopuses have never been commercially farmed at scale. This is not due to a lack of trying.
In Europe, particularly in Spain, octopus farming has so far been confined to fattening young wild-caught octopuses in ocean cages, in order for them to reach market weight. These cages were typically anchored to the sea floor, or simply suspended from rafts being used to farm mussels. In an attempt to prevent aggression and cannibalism, ocean cages included individual, compartmentalised octopus shelters made of pvc pipes or other plastic cylinders.
After having some success in the early 2000s, most octopus fattening systems have since shut down due to stricter fisheries regulations, unstable yearly catches, variations in octopus mortality rates, and expensive feed requirements. Raising wild-caught octopuses in on-land aquaculture tanks has also been attempted in Mediterranean countries as well as Australia and Latin America. However, efforts have not progressed past the experimental level as there are limited options for scalability.
Research and investments have more heavily focused on breeding octopuses in captivity. These efforts have been ongoing since the 1970s with major hurdles linked to cannibalism, containment issues, inadequate feed options and low survival rates among pregnant and young octopuses.
A new milestone was reached in 2019 when Spanish multinational seafood company Nueva Pescanova announced that they had successfully closed “the octopus reproduction cycle in aquaculture”, meaning they had bred and raised octopuses through every stage of their life cycle in an artificial environment. The company is now applying for permits to open the world’s first industrial octopus farm, aiming to farm and slaughter one million octopuses annually for introduction to the market by 2027.
Although the first, Spain is not the only country interested in the prospect of this new industry. Similar plans to factory farm octopuses are unfolding across the globe, including in Portugal, Greece, Mexico, Chile, Australia, China and Japan.
Octopuses have a complex life cycle and are particularly ill-suited to farming conditions, making it challenging to raise them in captivity. Here are some significant issues associated with octopus farming:
1. Dietary needs
Octopuses are carnivorous animals and require live food during the early stages of development. Providing a natural diet in a farming environment can be resource-intensive, unsanitary and costly. Feeding octopuses at the industrial scale is also environmentally unsustainable due to its reliance on wild-caught fish ingredients.
2. Solitary nature
Naturally solitary, octopuses may become overly stressed and resort to aggression and cannibalism in crowded farming conditions. Their need for space and isolation makes intensive farming impractical and inhumane.
3. Physical vulnerability
Without an internal or external skeleton, octopuses have fragile skin that can easily be damaged in farm tanks. This issue is exacerbated with their tendency to use jet propulsion to move quickly about their environments.
4. Unsuitable slaughter method
No humane slaughter method exists to kill octopuses for human consumption. Nueva Pescanova’s plans propose using ice slurry, which involves plunging the octopuses into freezing water. This method is known to cause a painful, stressful and slow death.
A study by the London School of Economics found that octopuses feel pain and pleasure, leading to their recognition as sentient beings in the UK’s Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act 2022. Professor Jonathan Birch and his co-authors argue that high-welfare octopus farming is impossible and that killing via ice slurry “would not be an acceptable method of killing in a lab“. They also recommended the UK government consider a pre-emptive ban on farmed octopus production and imports.
“Large numbers of octopuses should never be kept together in close proximity. Doing this leads to stress, conflict and high mortality. A figure of 10-15% mortality should not be acceptable for any kind of farming.” – Professor Jonathan Birch, London School of Economics.
Globally, there are also mounting concerns around octopus farming. The world’s first legislative ban on octopus farming was signed into law in Washington state in March 2024. Several other US states are introducing similar legislative proposals, with some such as California extending to ban imports of farmed octopus.
While it may be possible to farm octopuses, Eurogroup for Animals remains steadfast in its conviction that octopuses are unsuited to farming conditions and should not be farmed.
Uncovering the horrific reality of octopus farming
Exposing the environmental risks of octopus farming
Regards Mark
16 July 2024
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has released a scientific opinion addressing the use of high expansion foam for the stunning and killing of pigs and poultry in situations other than slaughter, such as emergency depopulation purposes. We call on the European Commission to take this latest opinion into account, and also advocate for the continuous improvement and adoption of the most humane methods available in this sector.
Read the scientific opinion here.
The scientific community recognises that farm animals are still stunned and slaughtered with methods capable of negatively impacting their welfare. This new opinion highlights that high expansion foam is an alternative to existing methods for the stunning and killing of pigs and poultry in situations other than slaughter, but also stresses some important animal welfare hazards along with potential mitigation strategies.
Eurogroup for Animals commends EFSA for this important assessment, which evaluates the welfare implications of using high expansion foam filled with nitrogen to induce anoxia, leading to unconsciousness and death in pigs and poultry. This method involves displacing air in a container with foam and using a nitrogen jet to burst the bubbles, thereby creating an oxygen-deprived environment.
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has released a scientific opinion addressing the use of high expansion foam for the stunning and killing of pigs and poultry in situations other than slaughter, such as emergency depopulation purposes. We call on the European Commission to take this latest opinion into account, and also advocate for the continuous improvement and adoption of the most humane methods available in this sector.
Read the scientific opinion here.
The scientific community recognises that farm animals are still stunned and slaughtered with methods capable of negatively impacting their welfare. This new opinion highlights that high expansion foam is an alternative to existing methods for the stunning and killing of pigs and poultry in situations other than slaughter, but also stresses some important animal welfare hazards along with potential mitigation strategies.
Eurogroup for Animals commends EFSA for this important assessment, which evaluates the welfare implications of using high expansion foam filled with nitrogen to induce anoxia, leading to unconsciousness and death in pigs and poultry. This method involves displacing air in a container with foam and using a nitrogen jet to burst the bubbles, thereby creating an oxygen-deprived environment.
Key findings of the EFSA opinion include:
· Animal welfare equivalence: The EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) concluded that the use of high expansion foam ensures a level of animal welfare at least equivalent to existing methods, such as exposure to high concentrations of carbon dioxide or electrocution via water baths, especially in whole-house gassing scenarios;
· Welfare hazards and mitigation: The opinion identifies potential haza
Key findings of the EFSA opinion include:
· Animal welfare equivalence: The EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) concluded that the use of high expansion foam ensures a level of animal welfare at least equivalent to existing methods, such as exposure to high concentrations of carbon dioxide or electrocution via water baths, especially in whole-house gassing scenarios;
· Welfare hazards and mitigation: The opinion identifies potential hazards associated with the foam, including the need for proper training and certification of handlers, strict adherence to key parameters, and having backup methods ready to prevent animals from regaining consciousness;
· Recommendations for best practices: EFSA recommends that procedures should only commence when all critical parameters are met. Animals should be handled calmly to avoid stress, and a reliable monitoring system should confirm death before carcass disposal. Additionally, further research is necessary to validate results and improve monitoring techniques;
· Extent of application: The current assessment is limited to laying hens, broiler chickens of all ages, and pigs weighing between 15 and 41 kg.
These findings are of particular importance considering that large-scale depopulation operations are increasing in the EU due to constant outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) and African swine fever (ASF). We hope that, in light of the new EFSA study and the recurrent problems encountered by Member States in killing large numbers of animals due to disease outbreaks, ensuring humane depopulation methods will become a priority for the European Commission.
While EFSA’s opinion supports the equivalence of high expansion foam with current methods, Eurogroup for Animals emphasises that ‘tolerable’ methods are not sufficient.
We advocate for the continuous improvement and adoption of the most humane methods available.
In the meantime, updating the applicable regulations to reflect the latest knowledge on animal welfare during slaughter – including this latest opinion by EFSA – will help minimise suffering across this sector. We believe that a comprehensive approach is needed to ensure that the equipment used and procedures followed in slaughterhouses do not cause unnecessary fear, pain and distress to farm animals, and call on the European Commission to take the following actions:
· Replace outdated and less effective stunning methods with more humane alternatives;
· Ensure all animals are adequately stunned before slaughter;
· Ban the use of electric prods and high-concentration CO2 stunning for pigs;
· Ban the use of water bath stunning for chickens.
Learn more about what we are asking for in this industry in our recent white paper.
Regards Mark
15 July 2024
Animal Protection Denmark
On June 24 the Danish government, along with several organisations, created an “Agreement on a Green Denmark”: a plan to make the farming sector more climate- and environmentally-friendly. However, several NGOs, including our members Animal Protection Denmark and World Animal Protection Denmark, have pointed out this agreement falls far short in achieving a more sustainable food and farming system, and have signed an open letter calling on the government to rethink its plans.
To make our food and farming systems fit for the future, it’s critical there is a higher uptake in plant-based diets and that less animals are farmed, while only in high welfare conditions. As evidence has repeatedly shown, the issues of animal welfare and sustainability go hand in hand, as poor animal husbandry can lead to the spread of zoonoses, animals being farmed in huge numbers, and more.
Unfortunately, while it does have some ambition, Denmark’s new agreement does not come close to improving the problems of large scale industrial animal production.
Instead of reducing the size of the livestock sector, the agreement wants to “optimise” how animals are farmed
Denmark produces about 200 million farm animals per year – in a country of only five million people.
Rather than reducing the number of animals being farmed, however, the agreement suggests the way they are farmed should be revised, and offers funding to explore such “innovations”: for instance, by offering a 60% base deduction and several subsidies for technologies that can reduce emissions from livestock production.
Not only could this incentive enable farmers to continue farming animals in the same numbers – doing nothing to address the low welfare and unsustainable factory farming model in which billions of sentient beings suffer each year – but it could mean animals suffer even more in these systems:
Animals will be put under even more pressure due to climate technologies and demands for higher productivity. The idea is to make each animal deliver as much as possible, e.g. even more piglets from sows, and even higher milk yields from cows, as is considered good for the climate, and to address specific issues such as methane from cow digestion with feed additives.
Britta Riis – Director, Animal Protection Denmark
Plant-based solutions are being neglected
What is more, an unequal level of support is being offered to farm animal producers in the agreement, while plant producers and innovators are being overlooked.
Whether intended or not, this disparity in incentives sends a clear message: that the animal agriculture sector has a strong role to play in the future of farming, while plant-based products are less important. Really, the opposite is true.
Open letter calls for the agreement to be revised urgently
Several NGOs, including our members Animal Protection Denmark and World Animal Protection, alongside organisations like Greenpeace and the Danish Vegetarian Association, have signed an open letter to the Danish government, arguing that the current agreement does not provide a reliable way forward for a greener farming model.
The letter states that wanting to optimise animal production is like wanting to optimise the use of oil, coal, and gas – it’s not possible. Such incentives will only draw focus further away from the solutions that will have real impact – chief among them, a big reduction in the number of animals being farmed.
The urgent climate crisis calls for an ambitious approach to our food and farming systems, with real structural changes required in the sector. Stay posted for updates.
Regards Mark
15 July 2024
Společnost pro zvířata
Society for Animals, recently co-organised a workshop in the Czech Parliament about the dangers associated with pyrotechnics and fireworks, and the harm they can cause to pets and wild animals. Progress on some national legislative proposals in this area is also due soon, hopefully leading to much stricter regulations on fireworks in the near future.
On March 6 2024, several specialists and Members of the Parliament, including Marek Výborný (the Czech Minister of Agriculture) and Petr Hladík (the Czech Minister of the Environment) discussed the issue of pyrotechnics and their effects on domestic and wild animals at the Czech Parliament.
A representative from Society for Animals, Judit Laura Krásná, gave a presentation on the serious problems fireworks and pyrotechnics can cause, including their negative consequences for people and animals, and their threats to safety.
90% of respondents to a survey commissioned by the Ministry of the Environment agreed fireworks should be better regulated, while several attendees at the workshop, including Society for Animals and air quality experts, agreed they should be banned entirely.
This discussion was complemented by a petition, produced by Society for Animals and handed over to the Czech MPs’ petition committee in April, to stop the sale of fireworks. Present MPs also agreed that pyrotechnics for entertainment should be regulated, and some categories banned.
Legislative proposals to regulate fireworks in the Czech Republic have been submitted
Since last year and in collaboration with lawyers, Society for Animals submitted some legislative proposals regarding the use of fireworks and pyrotechnics in the Czech Republic.
Supporting its goal, the NGO met several times with the Minister of the Environment, as well as relevant parties such as firemen, sanitation stations, and air pollution specialists, showing the broad range of impacts originating from this issue. It also commissioned a professional measurement of noise and vibration during a huge fireworks display during a summer event in Brno. Learn more here.
The legislative proposals include to:
End the sale and use of outdoor fireworks within categories F2 and F3 for the general public (only professionally-qualified people could continue to use them, under specific circumstances);
Significantly restrict the use of fireworks within the specific contexts in which they are still allowed, including by establishing protective distances of 1000-2000 metres and with a ban on using them near watercourses, lakes, dams, ponds, and wetlands.
Over 50 NGOs in the Czech Republic signed Society for Animals’ open letter to the Czech government supporting its legislative proposals – and such changes have been proven possible. In Ireland, for example, category F2 and F3 fireworks are fully forbidden to be used by the public, and those that do can face significant fines, or even be criminally charged.
The proposals are now ready to be negotiated in the Czech Parliament. Watch this space.
Pyrotechnics can cause great distress to animals
The effects of fireworks and pyrotechnics on animals can be severe.
Wild animals generally panic and try to escape the sounds, which often result in injuries or even death, either from exhaustion or from colliding into objects – including moving vehicles.
Due to the high stress levels fireworks can cause, pregnant animals can lose their unborn babies, and domestic animals can run away from their homes. There are even occasions where explosions can hit animals directly, especially birds, bats, and insects.
It’s clear that the unregulated use of fireworks and pyrotechnics are not aligned with animal welfare. We applaud the work of our member, Society for Animals, for their work in this area, and hope legislative progress soon follows suit.
Mark
From Diana:
Dying for sport: Abuse claims rock Australian greyhound racing
· 17 July 2024
In 2015 Australia’s multi-billion-dollar greyhound racing industry vowed it would clean up its act.
A damning investigation at the time had exposed the preventable deaths of as many as 17,000 young dogs a year – revelations so shocking the government of the day rushed to implement an ultimately short-lived ban.
Almost a decade later, Greyhound Racing New South Wales (GRNSW) – the epicentre of the sport in the country – is back in the spotlight for alleged abuse, due to the work of one whistleblower.
In an explosive report made public by lawmakers, the organisation’s former chief veterinarian has described the industry as a hotbed of “exploitation and suffering”, claiming that dogs are being raced at “barbaric” rates, euthanised without cause, or left to rot in metal cages when they can no longer compete.
Executive heads are rolling, and an inquiry, which GRNSW says it “welcomes”, has been announced to investigate the accusations, as calls from critics to have greyhound racing outlawed grow louder.
But despite evidence of slipping public support, the state’s premier has said he won’t shut down the sport, prompting a standoff with those calling for that to happen.
“The reality is the greyhound racing industry cannot exist without systemic animal cruelty,” says NSW Animal Justice MP Emma Hurst.
“It will be shut down – it’s just a matter of when.”
Australia has been touted as the world’s largest commercial greyhound racing industry – with roughly 60 tracks in operation. New Zealand, the US, the UK and Ireland are also home to markets, but none operate at the same velocity.
Thanks to online betting, Australia’s industry has seen rising profits in recent years, turning over A$8.3bn ($5.6bn; £4.3bn) in 2023 – with 75% of the money coming from Victoria and New South Wales (NSW), according to the greyhound protection organisation GREY2K.
The spark that ignited the current outcry over the sport’s practices was a “handover” letter, from GRNSW’s Chief Veterinary Officer Alex Brittan to his incoming replacement – his final act in a job that by his own account, had nearly broken him.
The 54-page document contains a litany of accusations – including claims that GRNSW had worked with vets “unaccepting of modern medicine” who were prone to euthanising dogs without cause, and that the company’s leadership was directing staff to treat animal welfare groups “as the enemy”.
Within hours of Mr Brittan’s letter becoming public, the chief of GRNSW Rob Macaulay had resigned and the rest of the company’s board is now fighting for their survival.
NSW’s Gaming and Racing Minister David Harris has announced an inquiry into Mr Brittan’s claims which will be led by the industry’s regulator – something which GRNSW has been quick to embrace.
“We welcome the opportunity for an external examination of our processes and record,” its acting CEO Wayne Billett wrote in a statement. And a spokesperson for GRNSW told the BBC that the organisation takes concerns related to animal welfare “very seriously”.
But Mr Brittan’s account differs.
In his letter he described witnessing “cases of extreme distress” in which competing dogs had “recent pools of blood” around them after ripping off their toenails while “clawing” at their caged doors.
He also called out a flurry of “preventable” on-track deaths, due to greyhounds running into poles with “no padding on them” and questioned the figures GRNSW had put forward concerning how many retired dogs it had found homes for – a practice which gives the sport its social licence to operate.
Mr Brittan says that of the roughly 4,200 dogs entering the industry each year, only 1,600 were making it out and finding owners, with the rest living out their days in “industrial kennels”.
Further – he alleged that a company programme which had been set up to export retired greyhounds to the US, so that they could find homes there, had an alarming lack of oversight.
To prove his point, he told the story of Carey – a dog who died at Sydney airport after confusing its travelling box with a racer’s starter box and running into a fence at full speed when the door opened.
NSW’s premier Chris Minns said he would examine all the allegations put forward by Mr Brittan, but quickly ruled out a blanket ban on greyhound racing in the state.
“We’re not going to shut down the industry, but we do take this report seriously,” he told reporters last week.
And Mr Harris reiterated that the government would make sure the industry was held to “the highest standards of animal welfare and integrity” once the new investigation had concluded.
But given GRNSW has weathered multiple crises – including a government-backed inquiry in 2016 which delivered findings of “systemic animal cruelty” and mass killings – advocates are sceptical another inquiry will yield results.
“The greyhound racing industry was already given a chance to clean up its act eight years ago, and it’s monumentally failed,” Ms Hurst told the BBC.Mr Brittan has also challenged the impartiality of the current investigation – saying it should be done by an external source, rather than the industry’s own regulator.
And he questioned why an all-out ban had been taken off the table already.
“It could be perceived as concerning that the premier and gaming minister have stated that the outcome of the inquiry is a foregone conclusion and that, irrespective of any findings, all bets are on, and the gambling will continue,” he said, according to the Guardian.
Around the world, the prominence and popularity of dog-racing for sport has been in decline.
In the US for example – which used to be one of the sport’s largest industries – betting on greyhounds has been outlawed in all but a handful of states, and only two active tracks remain, both in West Virginia.
Advocates like Ms Hurst argue that the practice endures in Australia not because of community fanfare, but gambling profits.
The last time the industry was in the spotlight in 2016, over 80% of people polled by the country’s national broadcaster said they wanted to see it shut down.
And in recent years, it has been outlawed in the Australian Capital Territory, while petitions calling for other jurisdictions to follow suit have made their way to several state parliaments.
GRNSW says it has no plans to go anywhere – and that racing, which first came to the nation’s shores in the late 1800s, can be done “sustainably”.
But Ms Hurst, and others calling for an end to the sport, say that the latest spate of allegations present a unique “opportunity” to “listen to the community and ban this cruel industry”.
Source BBC Australian greyhound racing rocked by fresh abuse claims – BBC News
Regards Mark
World Animals Voice 