Well, I am making really positive progress with our contribution to the UK government to try and get live animal exports stopped from the UK in 2021. With 30 years experience on the issue there is a lot to detail about non compliances with (EU) regulation 1/2005 on which UK law is also based
Check it out yourself – pick your language and format links here:
So much has been written for submission; that today I have passed a copy of the current draft to a great campaigner friend for extra safekeeping, just if the situation ever arose where a recovery copy needed to be retrieved. Hopefully it will never be needed, but always better to be safe !
Also, I had contact today from Lesley who runs ‘Eyes on Animals’ in the Netherlands. https://www.eyesonanimals.com/ – they specialise in undercover work involving live animal transports specially; I gave Les some info, and she has promised to give a contribution to the UK government consultation be the new year, which is great news.
Between us, we are really concentrating on the importance of access to animals throughout their journey time on the road; and also the use of sealed box trailers which are just no good at all for livestock transporting; but which are used in the EU and by Dutch livestock hauliers coming to the UK to buy up British animals for slaughter within the EU.
We are covering all issues in the consultation, but are especially concentrating on driver access, or lack of, to sick and injured animals, and also the use sealed box trailers. Below is a photo by friend Val Cameron of one of these Dutch box trailers arriving at an English port. Would you believe that this is full of live sheep ? !!
Many would consider it a refrigerated trailer as usual; but it is not; it IS full of live sheep going for export to Europe !
Photo – Val Cameron
Another photo we took managed to get a very rare glimpse in through the rear of one of these trailers, showing all the sheep inside (as viewed from the rear). We are not currently publishing this.
These sealed box trailers are used quite a lot here in England by the Dutch – so we consider that these trailers are very bad for animal access and ventilation; plus they have no signage to say they are carrying live animals – which is illegal and against the EU regulation ! – and so hopefully we may get their usage stopped. Time will tell us in 2021.
Regards Mark
Lesley has produced the following reports on these issues in the past – check them out.
New investigation shows horrifying footage of Turkey slaughterhouse in France
17 December 2020
L214
Today, Eurogroup for Animals’ member L214 reveals the immense suffering endured by turkeys at a slaughterhouse in Blancafort, Cher in France. Every day, 15,000 turkeys are killed in this slaughterhouse, which flagrantly violates the regulations governing the killing of animals.
The investigation which was initiated thanks to a whistleblower working at the facility, shows that as soon as the turkeys arrive at the slaughterhouse, they are hung upside down with their legs stuck on hooks. This causes acute pain to these birds, which can weigh up to 15 kg. The turkeys are forced to hold their heads up in order to not to scrape the ground. The chain they are hung on goes on for more than 50 metres, making these animals being suspended conscious for more than 2 minutes. These are two flagrant violations of the regulations.
L214 reports that they asked the veterinary services and the Ministry of Agriculture to close this slaughterhouse. Yet, the prefecture only told the slaughterhouse to put in place “immediate corrective measures and a comprehensive structural action plan” within the next 48 hours. In a public petition, L214 calls for the immediate closure of the slaughterhouse as “no immediate corrective can correct such structural problems”.
“A life of suffering, from their first to their last day” – L214 makes a case against the poor rearing and transport conditions of the turkeys:
Before arriving to the slaughterhouse in Blancafort, the turkeys are raised in huge buildings, piled on top of each other and fertilized for 3 to 4 months. In these intensive farms, there are on average 8 turkeys per square metre, often plucked or injured. They will never walk on grass, but wade through the excrement that accumulates over the weeks.
During the transport, L214 reports that they are piled up in crates that are far too small. Their heads touch the ceiling, which does not allow for good ventilation and can cause heat stress for the turkeys as they struggle to breathe and lower their body temperature. Some turkeys get their heads stuck when they are unloaded from trucks, and the slaughterhouse bins are filled with the bodies of those that did not survive the transport.
In view of the flagrant violations of the regulations, L214 reported to have filed a complaint against the transporter and the Blancafort slaughterhouse for animal abuse.
WAV Comment: The UK has now left the EU and is currently undertaking a consultation with overwhelming support to ban all live exports. EU member states are not allowed to ban the trade despite the wishes of most EU citizens. Does then dog wag the tail or the tail wag the dog ? – does anyone learn that all the time they continue to be in the EU, this abuse will go on ?
How many years have we sat and watched all this ? – that the EU is not enforcing its own regulations. And how many more years are Europeans still going to be shown and told this ? – the UK left the EU a year ago – now it is taking action for a ban. Learn European nations – learn !! – if the EU allows you to that is !
Dutch cattle documented going for slaughter in Lebanon and Libya
11 December 2020
Animals International
New investigation conducted by Eyes on Animals – in collaboration with Eurogroup for Animals’ members Animals International, Animal Welfare Foundation and Welfarm – exposes the fate of Dutch cattle exported out of the country’s territories.
Footage shows Dutch males bovines – born on dairy farms in Dwengeloo and Friesland – in a slaughterhouse in Beirut: animals were tied up, forced to fall down, and then had their necks sliced open, back and forth, with a knife. Moreover, this summer, Dutch cattle have been seen while loaded onto a vessel at the port of Cartagena (Spain) heading to Libya for slaughter.
Despite the good will of the Netherlands in not approving extra-EU export of its animals for slaughter, the export towards other Member States often means that these Dutch animals end up in non-EU abattoirs.
Slaughter conditions in Lebanon and Libya are known to be brutal. After having been transported for many days, very often animals arriving in the non-EU port, are in such bad condition that they cannot walk anymore. They clearly become unfit to continue their journey. However, instead of being euthanized, they are hoisted alive via a chain tied to one leg to be unloaded by the vessel. Once in the abattoirs, animals are chased, jumped on, have their tendons slit and eyes poked in order to keep them to the ground, chain them, and then cut their throats while fully conscious and fully sensitive to pain.
Eurogroup for Animals is urging the European Commission to ban any export of live animals from the EU to non-EU countries and to favour the slaughtering of animals close to the place where they are born.
PLANS to ban the export of live animals from England and Wales for slaughter and fattening, which have been strongly supported by West Dorset MP Chris Loder, have been unveiled.
The plans were revealed by the UK’s environment secretary, George Eustice, in the start of a renewed push by the Government to strengthen the UK’s position as a world leader on animal welfare.
An estimated 6,400 animals were sent to Europe for slaughter in 2018, according to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).
Mr Loder has worked closely with the RSPCA and the British Veterinary Association among others to (enable this to happen) and is urging as many people as possible to support his campaign by responding to the Government consultation.
In his speech in the House of Commons on October 23, during the second reading of the Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Bill, the MP demanded the house support and deliver the government’s pledge to end live animal exports – claiming that it was disgraceful that well cared for farm animals could be loaded on to a lorry and sent thousands of miles by land and sea to destinations as far as Libya and Lebanon.
Mr Loder said: “Today’s announcement is a victory for animal welfare. It is a direct benefit of Britain leaving the EU. It is the EU’s trading rules on the movement of animals, along with the lobby from the National Farmers’ union to continue live exports for slaughter and fattening, that has enabled this cruel practice for so long.
“Bringing an end to the unnecessary suffering of animals during transport is long overdue. Through my Animal Welfare Bill, which reaches the Committee Stage early next year, I hope not only to achieve tougher custodial sentences for those who inflict the worst kinds of cruelty on innocent animals; but also to deal with the cruelty that has been happening on a mass scale, such as with live animal exports.”
Live animals commonly have to endure excessively long journeys during exports, causing distress and injury.
The issue of unwanted male calves from the dairy industry has been an issue here in the UK for decades; probably even longer. Female cows have to be in calf in order to produce milk. When they give birth the female calves are kept to re supply older or less productive females in the heard; who go off for slaughter. For male calves; they are simply an un wanted ‘by product’ of the dairy business. When they are born, if it is a male; it is not uncommon for them to be shot in the head immediately by the farmer.
The UK banned the use of veal crates back in 1992; it was a big victory for the AR movement. Veal crates were individual pens without enough room for the calves to turn round, lie down properly, or groom themselves. They were; and still are, barbaric devices – living coffins for the animals put into them.
Sadly, whilst bleating on about how wonderful it was that crates were banned; the UK government refused to stop young male calves from being exported to mainland Europe to be put into the crates; the very things that were banned because of cruelty in the UK.
In the past, here in the UK, unwanted male calves were exported live to places such as the Netherlands where they were incarcerated into veal crates for 6 months and then taken out and sent for slaughter. In the older days; calves in the crates never got the iron they needed; they became anaemic over the months; and with no bedding in the crates but only a wooden slatted floor, the calves would become desperately deficient of iron in their little bodies.
But this was fine for the veal producers of Europe as it made ‘white veal’ which is a common type of meat. Because of the export and treatment of young male calves in the crates; the British public have repulsed the business and ‘veal’ has always had a bad name in the UK because of the exports and the crates. Not many Brits eat veal – it has a bad name in the UK – simple as that !
I did a lot of protesting about the export of veal calves at English ports; and checked out places in the Netherlands with John when we took the CIWF intensive farming truck and roadshow there.
Here is a photo (above) I took at Dover of young British male calves being exported to Europe. You can see their tongues wrapped around the trailer bars where they are wanting to suckle; as they have been separated from their mums.
At some time; I cannot remember exactly when, (but it was cold and windy – hence clothing) we took a veal crate to Dover and put someone pretending to be our Prime Minister; then John Major MP; into the crate. The calf within was liberated and John Major was stuck in there for him to get a ‘taste’ of what he was doing to the calves. I am shaking John Major warmly by the throat in this picture at Dover – the place of so many young calf exports over the years. The lady near me is Barb; a hunt sab even though she was in her 70’s !
So; moving on to this article from the great ‘Guardian’ newspaper from London; it is great news that there will now be legislation coming in which will stop ‘unwanted’ male calves from being shot after birth. But; I still have a major gripe with the dairy industry and the way females are treated as mere ‘milk machines’. I will be glad when the whole dairy industry has to close down; and we can celebrate with a glass of alternative plant based ‘milk’.
When you campaign for improvements in animal rights and welfare; steps are taken small rather than in huge strides. I guess this is one small step for the better; but we still need to put our attention into the female cows used in the dairy business also.
Regards Mark
Guardian Article:
The end of dairy’s ‘dirty secret’?
Farms have a year to stop killing male calves
Supermarket support and rising use of sexed semen expected to help UK farmers meet new welfare rules by the end of 2021
Dairy farmers have until the end of next year to prove they are no longer killing male calves on-farm under new rules which will apply to nearly all UK farms from January, the Guardian has learned.
The number of male calves being killed straight after birth, known as the “dirty secret” among farmers, has prompted outrage from animal welfare groups and many within the farming sector.
A Guardian investigation in 2018 estimated that 95,000 were being killed every year within a few days of birth. The lack of viable markets for bull calves and public apathy towards consuming British rosé veal had meant it was sometimes cheaper to kill calves rather than rear them.
However, a rise in the use of sexed semen, which dramatically reduces the number of male calves born, and new retailer policies to help farmers find markets for their calves is leading to a fall in animals being killed.
Around 60,000 male calves are now killed on-farm every year, according to industry estimates, which is around 15% of the bull calves born on dairy farms. But this figure is expected to drop significantly with new rules restricting the killing of calves coming into force from next year.
All farms covered by the Red Tractor standards (the scheme applies to 95% of milk produced in the UK) will have to have written breeding and management policies in place and maintain data on all births and deaths, according to new rules due to be announced imminently.
The new standards state farms will be banned from the “routine euthanasia of calves”.
The rules come into force on 1 January, but a spokesperson for Red Tractor told the Guardian this week that farmers would have until the end of next year to meet the standards.
A steady increase in the use of sexed semen since the early 1990s has recently seen sales jumping from 18% in 2017 to more than 50% of total semen sales in 2020. Industry figures expect it to completely replace conventional semen within five years.
“It’s been a gamechanger,” said Andrew Suddes, a farm consultant for Promar. “Farmers are able to produce heifer [female] calves more easily. You can now produce the replacement heifers that you need with sexed semen, and use beef semen on the rest [of the cows] to produce calves that can be better kept and reared for beef.”
Although sexed semen increases costs for farmers, it can reduce the proportion of male calves being born to less than 10%.
A number of retailers have already banned the killing of male dairy calves or their export overseas from farms in their supply chains. Retailers including Sainsbury’s, Co-op, Waitrose, Marks & Spencer and Morrisons now have calf schemes in place to help ensure rearing dairy bull calves is economically viable for farmers.
In the case of Morrisons, farmers are required to rear the calves to a certain weight until 15–40 days of age, at which point they will be bought by a beef-rearing company. The retailer also committed to buying calves born on farms under bovine tuberculosis restrictions, which leave farmers with few markets to sell to.
Just to let you know that I am doing fine putting together a response to the UK government (Defra) consultation which we hope will see the end of live animal exports. There is a great deal of contribution to be made, as I personally have over 30 years involvement with live animal transport – it is one of my top hates. But it is going very well and things are on track for an early finish – maybe by the end of this year.
I am still trying to get posts for this site completed also; but at the moment the consultation is the main thing. It is a massive opportunity to make a huge difference and it has to be fully taken.
The consultation is open until the end of January 20121. I am posting below our links to this, which include a link if you wish to take part. From what we can find out, the consultation is also open to non UK residents.
I am sending this out to folks who visit the site; some of whom who are involved with live animal transport in European organisations.
The UK government is looking at making legislation in law for a ban on live animal exports and transport issues such as stopping export for further fattening. We welcome this as it is a big issue here in England.
After lots of wrangling the last few days; I ended up back with CIWF hours later, and Meg has kindly mailed me today. It would appear (from the Defra guidelines) that anyone can answer; so I assume non UK contributions are also allowed to take part in the consultation.
The consultation is open until the end of January 2021 so there are still what, 6+ weeks to complete.
Regards Mark
Audience 12. Anyone may respond to the consultation.
Those who have an interest include: • Animal welfare organisations; • Breeding associations; • Farming unions; • Livestock and genetics businesses; • Livestock and poultry farmers, and horse owners; • Livestock, poultry and horse traders; • Livestock or animal vehicle manufacturers; • Local authorities (LAs); • Show, competition and race organisers; • Trade bodies; • Transport companies; and • The veterinary profession. 4 Responding to the consultation 13.
This consultation starts on 3 December 2020 and closes on 28 January 2021.
We would ask you to respond to the consultation questions using the online tool which can be found on Citizen Space at
The current rules aimed at protecting animal welfare in transport are derived from directly applicable EU law, Council Regulation No 1/2005. The Regulation sets out the requirements that anyone transporting animals in connection with an economic activity must comply with. There are growing concerns that the current requirements for the transport of animals do not reflect the latest scientific evidence on how best to protect animal welfare during transport.
We are consulting in England and Wales on ending live animal exports for slaughter and fattening that begin in or transit through England or Wales, and further improvements to animal welfare in transport.
Why we are consulting
The Government is committed to the welfare of all animals and to making further improvements to animal welfare in transport and has a manifesto commitment to end excessively long journeys for slaughter and fattening. Now that the UK has left the EU, the Government can explore alternative options to better protect animal welfare during transport. As part of changing the current regulatory regime that sets the standards for animals in transport, it is right that we should gather the views of all interested parties.
The Farm Animal Welfare Committee (FAWC, now known as the Animal Welfare Committee) have reported to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on the welfare of animals during transport. This report took into account the responses to the 2018 Call for Evidence on controlling live exports for slaughter and improving animal welfare during transport, and the scientific systematic review conducted by the Scotland’s Rural College and the University of Edinburgh on the welfare of animals during transport and at markets.
The Government has reviewed the FAWC report and is now consulting to seek views on ending the export of livestock and horses (this will not apply to poultry) for slaughter and fattening in England and Wales, where the journeys begin in or transit through either country, in addition to introducing further improvements to animal welfare in transport more generally.
——————————–
WAV Comment:
Take part in the online consultation by clicking on the following link:
Note – we are currently unsure if (only) UK residents can undertake this; but we encourage folk outside of the UK, who are anti live export, to try ! – apologies if you are unable; as we say; may be UK residents only.
These are the consultation questions which you will need to respond to. Hopefully; this advanced insight will give you a feeling of what (the questions asked) is required.
IMPORTANT – We (WAV) do not expect everyone to provide answers to every question.
Some questions are really directed at transport operators – livestock hauliers etc – Questions 19 – 19 for example. You do not have to respond to anything like this – only the questions for which you can do a response. Your input to the consultation will still be considered even if you doo not answer everything. The main point to remember is that you are on the animals side and want to get live exports stopped regardless of the animal species. This is what needs to be reflected (included) in your responses when you do them. This is the real point – we need to make it clear that we want this sordid trade stopped from the UK.
Best wishes with your responses; the fact that you are taking part is a big bonus.
And remember – you have until the end of January 2021 to respond. Note that you can complete part of the consultation; save; and then return at a later date. It does not all have to be done in one session. Please see the consultation pages to enable you to save and return later.
Personally; this is a big thing for me and many other campaigners – brilliant Jane; brilliant Liza, wonderful Trudi; and all the others who a too many to mention – just brill !. Many who have now passed and are not here to hear the news of this. I personally have done live export campaigns and investigations from the UK for the last 30 years. Been there, seen it; heard it and smelled it you could say; horses, pigs, calves, sheep and more. They do not deserve to be treated as they currently are during transport – it is time for it to stop.
Above – A Dutch ‘Wetering’ horse transporter exits the port – Photo Mark
I did a big investigation report (5 undercover trails) with several other EU investigation groups on the trade back in 2010; presented to the EU and UK parliament, (with regard the EU) who threw it back in our faces and basically trashed the whole 120 page thing. You can read one of the 5 undercover trail reports by going to About Us. | Serbian Animals Voice (SAV) and scrolling down to all the livestock transporter / calf pictures are where you will find a link to the report. Alternatively, go direct to Microsoft Word – JH.04.03.2010_REPORT on NON-COMPLIANCE with RESTING TIMES in relation to CONTROL POST at F-HEAUVILLE.doc (wordpress.com) to read just one of the five investigations into live calves being shipped from Ireland to France. It makes bad reading. The failures to comply with rest times etc (as defined in EU ‘legislation’ !) for example justifies why we need to get this disgusting trade stopped asap. Your involvement in the consultation can help this.
Well that’s it from me;
Do what you can; for those in transport;
Regards Mark (WAV)
Kent; England.
In memory of great campaigner friends now departed – including the great Mike from London – we shared some fantastic times:
The following is the basic outline of all the questions which are asked in the consultation.
(Your) Name and e mail.
Organisation if you represent one. Note – individual citizens can also take part – you DO NOT have to represent an organisation.
Live Animal Exports
4. Do you agree that livestock and horse export journeys for slaughter and fattening are unnecessary? Please explain your views.
5. Do you agree that in order to prohibit livestock and horse export journeys for fattening where the animal will be slaughtered soon after arrival, these export journeys where animals are slaughtered within 6 months of arrival should be prohibited? Please explain your views.
6. Do you agree that the only exceptions to prohibiting live export journeys should be for poultry live exports, and animals going for breeding or production that will not be slaughtered within 6 months of arrival? Please explain your views.
7. What would be the financial impact to your business or organisation of no longer being able to export livestock or horses for slaughter or fattening? Please explain any impacts provided.
8. What alternatives would your business or organisation explore if it was not able to export livestock or horses for slaughter or fattening?
Maximum Journey Times
9. Do you agree with the proposed maximum journey times as outlined in Table 1? Please explain your views and highlight any potential regional impacts that your business or organisation might experience.
10. Do you see a need for any exceptions to the maximum journey times and, if so, why? Please provide evidence.
11. In the case of such exceptions, what requirements should be put in place to ensure animal welfare is protected?
12. What would be the financial impact to your business or organisation due to new maximum journey times being implemented? Please explain any impacts provided.
13. Including loading, unloading and stops, how long is your average journey for the livestock, poultry or horses that your business or organisation manage?
14. Do you agree that a new journey should not start until a minimum of 48 hours have elapsed after the previous journey? Please explain your views.
15. Do you agree that there should be a minimum 7-day rest period for cattle? Please explain your views.
Thermal Conditions and Ventilation
16. Do you agree that we should prohibit both short and long poultry journeys when the external temperature is outside of a temperature range of 5-25oC, unless the vehicle is able to regulate the internal temperature within this range for the duration of the journey by means of a thermo-regulation system, and that this temperature range should be 5-25oC? Please explain your views.
17. What would be the financial impact to your business or organisation of prohibiting both short and long poultry journeys when the external temperature range is outside of 5-25oC? Please explain any impacts provided.
18. Do you agree that we should prohibit both short and long livestock and horse journeys when the external temperature is outside of a temperature range of 5-30oC, unless the vehicle is able to regulate the internal temperature within this range for the duration of the journey by means of a thermo-regulation system, and that this temperature range should be 5-30oC? Please explain your views.
19. What would be the financial impact to your business or organisation of prohibiting both short and long livestock and horse journeys when the external temperature range is outside of 5-30oC? Please explain any impacts provided.
20. Do you think that there are other species that should be considered as vulnerable and have a smaller external temperature range applied, outside of which journeys cannot take place? Please provide evidence.
21. What proportion of your current transportation vehicles have the facility to regulate temperature and provide ventilation?
22. For your vehicles which do not have the facility to regulate temperature and provide ventilation, what would be the cost of retrofitting to enable them to regulate temperature and provide ventilation?
23. Are there any other steps that can be taken to ensure animal welfare can be maintained in extreme weather? Please provide evidence.
Space Allowances
24. Do you agree that we should use allometric principles as a basis for future space allowance calculations? Please explain your views.
25. Do you think that reforms to space allowances based on allometric principles should apply to both short and long journeys? Please explain your views.
Headroom Allowances
26. Do you agree with the proposed species-specific headroom requirements?
27. Do you think that the proposed species-specific headroom requirements should apply to both short and long journeys? Please explain your views.
28. What would be the financial impact to your business or organisation of the proposed headroom requirements for both short and long journeys? Please explain any impacts provided.
Sea Transport
29. Do you agree that we should prevent animals from being transported in rough weather at sea and that animals should not be transported during Beaufort Wind Force 6 or above? Please explain your views.
30. What would be the financial impact to your business or organisation of prohibiting transport during Beaufort Wind Force of 6 or above
Exceptions
31. Do you think that there should be any exceptions to the previously mentioned proposals alongside the specific exceptions already outlined, excluding the proposal to prohibit live exports for slaughter and fattening? Please provide evidence.
32. What conditions should be met in order to ensure animal welfare is protected in the case of other exceptions?
33. Do you think that it should be possible to obtain permission to use an exception on an ongoing basis to avoid the need for transporters to apply before every applicable journey?
This completes the consultation. Submit your answers in accordance with the site instructions.
Guest commentary by Daniela Schneider: (She is the campaign manager for animal transports at the animal rights organization “Four paws Germany” based in Hamburg).
“Eyes wide open in panic, cattle shivering with exhaustion, huddled together and carted for days without a break in high-risk states such as Uzbekistan, Morocco, or Algeria under animal welfare law: Everyday torment of animals – even on German roads.
But instead of ending this ordeal, Agriculture Minister Germany`s Klöckner is not only inactive in this country.
It also misses the chance of the German EU Council Presidency to stop cruel animal transports across the EU.
If animal transports are dispatched from Germany to these third countries, this is almost always done in disregard of the applicable animal protection regulations. “Four Paws” has therefore filed 21 criminal charges against those responsible on suspicion of aiding and abetting animal cruelty. Although almost all federal states have ensured that far fewer third-country exports are approved, transporters unscrupulously circumvent the applicable requirements.
The animals are first brought to other EU countries such as Hungary and then shipped on to third countries.
Instead of leaving the federal states alone as before, the minister should create nationwide uniform legislation that ensures that animals can no longer enter third countries. That would be an important first step and a strong signal in the direction of the EU.
Because the problem is a European one.
Only through an EU-wide ban on third-country exports and a limitation of transports to eight hours will the cruel animal transports actually end.
Together with us, 150,000 citizens are calling for this in a letter of protest to the minister.
Alternatives to the senseless death drives must become standard. If at all, only meat and breeding seeds should be transported instead of living animals.
Against the background of blatant animal welfare problems and a worsening climate crisis, the question arises why animals are “produced” on a massive scale and transported across the world like goods”.
And I mean…Around 3.8 million animals are transported every day in the EU alone. That’s 1.4 billion animals a year.
As in all branches of the economy, animal transport is all about money: animals are transported to where the highest profits await. In the agricultural industry, work steps are separated: breeding, keeping, and fattening are concentrated where feed and wage costs are low.
For example, animals are born in Denmark, fattened in Germany, and finally slaughtered in Italy.
An EU animal welfare transport regulation EC 1/2005 applies throughout the EU.
Why animal transport laws don’t protect animals?
First and foremost because there is no time limit for animal transport. The animals are often on the move for days, sometimes even weeks, because there is no time limit for the transports.
On the other hand, because the EU regulation contains a large number of imprecise provisions that are always interpreted to the detriment of animals in practice.
Not even the few regulations that exist are observed: Serious deficiencies are found in around a third of the controlled transports.
Basically, food, litter, and drinking water are saved, because additional weight means higher transport costs.
And there is also a third reason for the meat industry and its lobbyists in Brussels to stick to live animal transports: The transport of live animals is still cheaper than transporting meat, which has to be permanently refrigerated.
And that is why the cruelty to animals on Europe’s roads never ends.
For a decisive change in the problem, one can forget about the EU.
Only civil society can change something – and it is developing into a new historical subject that even functions without a party program.
World Animals Voice 