Originally from: Farmtalking
                        
RSPCA urges government to reject latest EU 'shambolic' live transport proposals

A compromise proposal on live animal transport, seen by the RSPCA and tabled by the Irish presidency last week at a meeting of chief veterinary officers, is a "shambles" and a retrograde step for animal welfare.

According to the RSPCA the content completely fails to take account of much of the scientific evidence outlined in the SCAHAW report *and if implemented would mean that animals will continue to suffer on long-distance journeys across Europe.

The Society is disappointed with the UK government position that has clearly weakened considerably over the past year. Only in March 2003 DEFRA issued a press release in which it clearly stated its support for an eight-hour maximum journey time for slaughter animals. However, it seems clear that the UK delegation has not been successful with advocating this position during discussions in Europe. The Society is insisting the UK government rejects this latest compromise proposal and reverts to its previous position, which had animal welfare as a priority, calling for a single short journey time.

The RSPCA is particularly concerned about the Irish presidency's compromise on journey times, stocking densities and temperature levels.

The suggested permitted journey time outlined in the proposal will be nine hours travel; followed by two hours rest on vehicle; followed by another nine hours travel and a 12 hour rest period in which animals may be unloaded except pigs. This cycle may be repeated indefinitely. In other words there is no defined journey time.

Dr Julia Wrathall, head of farm animals department, said: "The RSPCA wants a maximum journey of eight hours for all animals travelling for slaughter or further fattening. But given that there is no legal time limit for the whole journey the Irish presidency proposals are potentially worse than the current legislation."

Also of considerable concern are the stocking densities proposed within the Irish presidency's compromise proposal.

Dr Julia Wrathall: "Even though the proposals would allow pigs a little more space on journeys over nine hours, it will still be completely inadequate. In our report 'Standing Room Only' (May 2003) we sight research in which the space occupied by lying pigs of different weights was measured. The allowance, even for longer journeys, in the Irish compromise proposal represents only about two thirds of that required space and would result in pigs being unable to lie down in their natural position even on very long journeys. This would be particularly concerning as pigs will stay on board for the whole journey, even during rest periods."

Even worse goats and sheep, the most transported species, will not be provided with any extra space at all on long journeys, making proper rest virtually impossible.

This complete failure to take account of available scientific data on animals' needs in our view illustrates an extraordinary disregard for animal welfare on the part of those drawing up the proposals

Finally, the Society is angry that current permitted temperatures are to be retained at present levels, and that no provisions relating to humidity are included. Animals may continue to be transported in temperatures of up to 35C quite legally.

There are two positive developments, such as compulsory Global Positioning Systems in vehicles and compulsory welfare focused training for livestock hauliers, but these according to Dr Wrathall will pale into insignificance if the rest of these proposals are accepted as they are.

There are clear links between animal welfare and animal health. Subjecting live animals to the stress of long-distance transport, often only to slaughter them on arrival, is not just unacceptable in welfare terms. It can also be economically inefficient because it may lead to poor meat quality, damaged carcasses and lost profits – and it increases the risk of spreading major diseases, such as Foot and Mouth Disease.

Dr Wrathall: "We are urgently calling on the UK government to reject these proposals which will completely fail to protect the welfare of transported animals. We would ask them to revert to their original position and press for a single short journey time for animals travelling for slaughter, as well as for further fattening."