COMPASSION IN WORLD FARMING

COMPASSION IN WORLD FARMING

PO Box 750, T= ogher, Cork. Tel: 021 4639038 Web: www.ciwf.ie

Presentation to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Agriculture and F= ood, 13^th December 2006.

By Mary-Anne Bartlett, Director of Compassion in World Farming - Ireland

Introducti= on

Compassion in World Farming (CIWF) welcomes forthcoming improvements in EU animal welfare standards: narrow stalls for pregnant sows after their first month of pregnancy will be illegal from 2013; battery cages for laying hens are = due to become illegal in 2012; veal = crates are illegal from January 2007; and a new Animal Transport Regulation comes into force next year.

Producers fear that higher standards in the EU will ma= ke it harder to compete with cheap imports. But even if third countries meet EU welfare standards, their produce will still be cheaper because of lower land, labour and animal feed costs.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> The problem of cheap imports is un= likely to go away in the foreseeable future. Therefore we believe that an economically healthy future for EU farm= ers lies in the production of high quality food with good animal welfare compri= sing an integral part of quality. =

We agree with Commissioner Kyprianou when he says that= good welfare should be seen as a marketing advantage rather than a burden. It responds to increasing demand b= y EU consumers for animal welfare-friendly products. Ireland’s clean island envir= onment is ideal for quality production.

I will now identify some of the main animal welfare pr= oblems in Irish farming today, and look at how these could be resolved.

Fur farmin= g

Fur farming is a very small industry in Ireland but, i= n our view, it is the biggest farm animal welfare problem.

In the Republic of Ireland there are 6 mink farms, one= of which also has foxes, with about 166,000 mink and 600 foxes in total. The animals are reared intensively= in rows of small cages.

Though bred on the farm, mink and foxes are not fully = domesticated and are therefore particularly unsuited to intensive farm conditions. Unlike cattle, sheep and poultry, = which are herd and flock animals, mink and foxes in the wild have complex social behaviours but are basically solitary.&nbs= p; It is very stressful for them to be forced to live in close proximit= y to so many other animals.

A report by the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare (2001) concludes that: “= ;the typical mink cage impairs mink welfare because it does not provide for important needs”, and “the typical fox cage does not provide for important needs of foxes.” &nbs= p;

There are serious problems at slaughter. Handling essentially wild animals,= which can be vicious when frightened, is difficult. A video of killing on an Irish fur farm last year, produced by Respect for Animals, showed operatives roug= hly grabbing mink from their cages and stuffing them into a gassing box for killing. Such handling of ani= mals is totally unacceptable.

A humane method for killing large numbers of mink has = yet to be identified. Gassing diving animals is not humane because, unlike other animals (and people), mink can detect lack of oxygen and find this aversive. Gassing in large batches of 50 to = 70 animals at a time adds to the problems.&nb= sp; Some mink are gassed in the exhaust fumes from adapted petrol engine= s; others are gassed in carbon dioxide which is known to be highly aversive to mink. All of this is legal.

Foxes in Ireland are killed by electrocution. They are held by a neck restraint = and their tail whilst one electrode is inserted into their anus and another is = put in their mouth, a procedure that can only cause immense distress to the fox. The general public is disgusted by this method of killing.

To farm mink and foxes humanely would require zoo cond= itions for these essentially wild animals. This would not be commercially viable. There are no easy solutions to the slaughter problems and funding for further research would be very costly.

CIWF believes that fur farming should be banned in the Republic of Ireland, which would bring us in line with the policy in Northe= rn Ireland. With only a small nu= mber of farms, compensation could be paid and it would not cost a huge amount. By banning fur farming, Ireland wo= uld be sending out a clear message that it takes animal welfare seriously.

Animal tra= nsport - legislation

CIWF believes that animals should be slaughtered near = to the farm of rearing and exported in the form of meat. Until such times as long distance transport of animals for slaughter or further fattening ends, we want conditions strictly regulated.

We welcomed the removal of subsidies for cattle export= s to the Middle East last year, which has resulted in trade from Ireland virtual= ly ceasing. This trade subjected= Irish cattle to cruel slaughter conditions which could not be controlled by the EU. The OIE has now produced = global animal transport standards, and CIWF is proactive in encouraging countries = world-wide to adhere to these.

CIWF is pleased that the new EU Animal Transport Regul= ation will give greater regulation to trade in Europe when it comes into force th= is coming January. In particular= , we welcome the stricter enforcement measures, driver training and certificatio= n, company authorisation, and certification of vehicles going on journeys of m= ore than 8 hours.

There are on-going problems with Irish drivers floutin= g the requirement in the existing EU animal transport legislation regarding rest periods. EU legislation requi= res all animals to be unloaded and rested for 12 hours at or in the immediate vicinity of the port of arrival after a long ferry journey, such as the jou= rney from Ireland to France. Missi= ons by the European Commission’s Food and Veterinary Office in the past 8 ye= ars found that Irish drivers were not complying with this requirement. More recently, as part of a general investigation into animal transport in France, CIWF’s French sister organisation and the German animal welfare group Animals’ Angels trai= led an Irish livestock vehicle which did not stop to rest the animals. The gendarmes were called and the = Irish driver was fined. Another 2 I= rish drivers are at present the subject of a complaint to the European Commission.

We believe that the EU transport law should be fully complied with by all Irish drivers. CIWF has urged the Department of Agriculture to check all livestock transports prior to them leaving Ireland to ensure they have a confirmed booking at a suitably located lairage in France. Department officials should follow= up a sample of these to check that drivers actually stopped at the lairages show= n on their Route Plans.

Animal tra= nsport - export of calves

A separate welfare problem concerns the export of young calves from Ireland to the Continent. Thousands of these animals, which can be just a few weeks old, are exported each year. Young cal= ves find long journeys particularly stressful, and scientific studies show that this leads to them being prone to infection during travel and, in particula= r, in the following weeks.

Many of these young Irish calves are destined for veal= farms in the Netherlands. Whilst th= e veal crate will be illegal throughout the EU from January next year, the Netherl= ands still has intensive systems that do not offer a high animal welfare standard. In these, calves are housed in barren metal-barred pens on slatted floors inside a shed with lit= tle natural lighting.

A welfare-friendly alternative would be to rear these = young calves in Ireland for humane pink veal.&nb= sp; We are aware that Bord Bia is looking at the possibility of starting veal production in Ireland, and some farm trials are being undertaken. We stress that if calves are reare= d for veal in Ireland, then production should be to a high animal welfare standard. At minimum, calves = should be housed in groups on plenty of straw in a well-ventilated shed with natur= al light.

Laying hen= s

CIWF welcomes the forthcoming EU ban on the battery ca= ge for laying hens in 2012. We are concerned that the egg industry is lobbying for the date to be deferred, and have urged Ireland to do all it can ensure that the ban comes into place on time. CIWF points out that the battery cage system has been comprehensively condemned by scientific resear= ch, and egg producers will have had 12 years to change to more humane systems.<= /p>

CIWF believes that the ideal system for laying hens is free-range, where hens have access to outdoors. Indoor barn systems al= so offer the potential for a good animal welfare standard. Barn eggs are produced from birds = that are kept indoors in a large shed where they can scratch in shavings and have perches and bales. CIWF is to= tally opposed to cage systems for laying hens.&n= bsp;

At present, about one third of Irish eggs are free-ran= ge and about 2% are barn eggs. CIWF = would like to see this non-cage egg sector expanded. We would also like to see an incre= ase in the use of non-cage eggs in processed food.

This is not unrealistic if we look at the situation in= other countries. For example, we understand that supermarkets in the Netherlands and Austria generally only stock free-range and barn eggs. In the UK, some manufacturers of processed foods have moved to using free-range eggs. For example, Marks & Spencers and Waitrose are both totally free-range now, both in shell eggs a= nd processed food. Some UK food chains, including McDonalds, only use free-range eggs.

Regarding the cost of moving to non-cage eggs, we note= that figures based on a socio-economic report published by the European Commissi= on show that it costs just 1.3 cents more to produce a barn egg than a battery egg. For the average consumer= who buys 220 eggs per person per year, including in processed foods, changing f= rom battery eggs to barn eggs would cost 5.5 cents per person per week.

CIWF wants Ireland to encourage the move to non-cage s= hell eggs, and to do all it can to persuade food processors to use non-cage eggs. CIWF will continue to e= ducate consumers with regard to the animal welfare benefits of non-cage egg production.

Chickens r= eared for meat (broilers)

The EU is in the process of negotiating the first Broi= lers Directive. However, we are ve= ry disappointed to learn that talks recently collapsed. This may mean that the Directive is shelved and in that case the onus will be on individual Member States to pu= t in place their own animal welfare standards for broilers.

Nearly all broiler production in the EU, including in Ireland, is intensive. In Ire= land, broilers are kept at a stocking density of about 38 kg/m² (19 birds/m²) and reach slaughter weight at around 40 days. The main welfare problems stem fro= m: (i) overcrowding and (ii) lameness and heart problems resulting from the use of fast-growing birds.

Only about 3% of broilers in the Republic of Ireland a= re kept free-range (this figure includes organic broilers). Free-range birds have access to ou= tdoors and are generally slower growing, reaching slaughter weight in around 50 da= ys or more. We would like to see= an increase in free-range production. We note that 17% of chickens reared for meat in France are the Label Rouge brand of high quality free-range chickens.

With regard to raising standards for indoor chickens, worthwhile welfare improvements can be achieved by giving chickens slightly more room and using a slightly slower-growing variety of bird. For example, Lloyd Maunder in the UK rears standard (intensive) broilers at a stocking density of 30 kg/m², and uses a variety of bird that reaches slaughter weight at about 49 days.= This slightly slower growth rate and slightly lower stocking density results in animal welfare improvements that are both worthwhile and attainable. Further improveme= nts can be made by providing the birds with environmental enrichment, such as perches and straw bales.

We want to see Ireland encouraging more free-range production of chickens for meat. We also want indoor systems with higher welfare standards encouraged, which gi= ve birds above-average space, use slower-growing varieties of birds, and provi= de environmental enrichment.

Pigs<= /o:p>

CIWF believes that long term planning for the future o= f the pig industry in Ireland should include a move towards systems with higher animal welfare standards. CIWF is of the opinion that outdoor free-range systems, provided the land is suitable, offer the best animal welfare standard. However, indoor systems that are well-designed and well-managed can also provide pigs with a good standard of welfare.

Sow stalls for pregnant sows are now being phased out = under EU law and will become illegal in 2013 for all sows beyond the first 4 week= s of pregnancy. Stalls are being replaced by group housing systems, which CIWF considers to be a major welfa= re improvement provided that these systems are well-designed, well-managed and provide the basic necessities of adequate space, bedding, good ventilation = and environmental enrichment.

There are many scientific studies which indicate that = if pigs are have more space and are given straw, then there is a lower mortali= ty rate, fewer vet bills, better feed conversion and faster growth rate. This indicates that high welfare standards can be economically beneficial.

&nb= sp; =

It is a requirement in the Pigs Directive for pigs to = be provided with straw or other suitable manipulable material. Investigations by the Food and Veterinary Office have found that some countries are not complying with this requirement. Some farms are providing chains or toys, which are not effective. CIWF would like to see all pig far= ms in Ireland providing straw in sufficient quantity to allow manipulative and investigative behaviours. One practical option is to install a hayrack filled with straw in each pen so t= hat pigs can pull at the straw. <= /p>

The Pigs Directive prohibits routine tail docking and stipulates that this procedure may only be carried out once other measures = to prevent tail biting have been taken, such as improving the pigs’ environment. Our understandin= g is that in the Irish pig industry, routine tail-docking continues because it is believed that this is the only way of stopping tail-biting problems. CIWF would draw attention to the f= act that there is a considerable body of scientific research and practical experience that shows how tail biting can be prevented. The European Food Safety Authority stresses that: “the occurrenc= e of tail biting can be reduced dramatically by the provision of straw as well a= s by other measures”. CI= WF is of the view that tail-biting is a symptom of something wrong with the pigs’ environment and that the solution is to improve the environment= . In our view, it is unacceptable th= at legislation designed to improve pig welfare is being disregarded.

CIWF believes that in the medium term the industry in Ireland should move away from the use of farrowing crates for sows with pig= lets because they severely restrict the movement of sows. CIWF would like to see the industry examine all on-going work on viable alternatives to the use of farrowing crates, in particular in Sweden where alternative systems are commonly used= .

Conclusions

CIWF believes t= hat the way forward for Ireland is high quality production with high animal welfare standards. =

We would like t= o see non-cage systems for laying hens (i.e. free-range or barn), which already account for a third of production, increased further.

We would like t= o see more free-range broiler production, and argue that the welfare of broiler chickens in indoor intensive systems can be improved to a worthwhile extent= by slightly lowering stocking densities and using slower-growing birds.

Indoor pigs nee= d the provision of material such as straw that allows them to satisfy their need = to carry out manipulative and investigative behaviours. We strongly believe that the law t= hat prohibits routine tail-docking of pigs should be adhered to. Measures needed to alleviate the p= roblem of tail-biting should be investigated, including environmental improvements= and the provision of appropriate manipulative materials. Alternatives to the farrowing crate should be examined.

Regarding live = exports, we believe that all transport from Ireland should comply fully with legislation. In particular, a= nimals travelling to France by ferry should be unloaded and rested for 12 hours at= or near the port of arrival, as required by EU transport law.

We are very con= cerned about exports of young calves, which are not good travellers and prone to illness caused by transport stress. We think that the production of humane pink veal would be an alterna= tive to calf exports. <= /span>

And lastly, we = feel strongly that the 6 remaining fur farms in the Republic of Ireland should be banned, with farmers compensated to close down immediately.

Mary-Anne Bartl= ett

Director

Compassion in W= orld Farming - Ireland