Compiled by Sahar Yaghoubi
In a move that has sparked outrage among animal welfare advocates, the European Commission’s (EC) long-awaited proposal on animal transport falls disappointingly short of addressing the immense suffering endured by billions of animals during transportation each year. Despite the growing evidence and public outcry for better protection, the proposal embraces a “business as usual” approach, prioritizing economic interests over the well-being of these vulnerable creatures.
The proposal’s most glaring omission is its failure to prohibit the live export of animals to non-EU countries, allowing for prolonged and grueling journeys where these animals are deprived of the legal protections they receive within the EU. Shockingly, the proposal even exempts sea journeys from any time limit, a blatant disregard for the well-being of animals subjected to such arduous voyages.
Moreover, the text fails to provide sufficient safeguards for the most vulnerable animals, such as pregnant females and unweaned calves, who will continue to endure the stress and hardship of transportation during their most delicate stages of life. The proposal also lacks adequate measures to protect animals from extreme temperatures and humidities, as well as provisions for addressing disruptions during transport.
While the proposal introduces some positive elements, such as real-time traceability for road journey times, updated space allowances, and a nine-hour journey limit for animals destined for slaughter, these measures are overshadowed by the glaring oversights and inadequacies. For instance, animals transported for breeding and fattening can still endure journeys of up to 42 hours over three days, a limit that blatantly contradicts the European Food Safety Authority’s (EFSA) recommendations and defies common sense.
The EC’s acknowledgment of the need to transition to meat and carcass exports, rather than live transport, is a glimmer of hope, as recent reports have highlighted the potential economic and environmental benefits of such a shift. However, this recognition is overshadowed by the proposal’s overall lack of ambition and disregard for the overwhelming evidence of animal suffering during transportation.
Perhaps most disheartening is the EC’s failure to publish the three other legislative proposals, including the highly anticipated Kept Animals Regulation (KAR), which was promised to address the phase-out of cages. This delay leaves billions of animals subjected to outdated and inadequate legislation, disregarding the voices of millions of European citizens demanding better animal welfare standards.
The proposal’s publication coincides with a recent report highlighting the widespread masking of official records on live transport, further underscoring the urgent need for transparency and reform in this sector. Yet, the EC’s response falls woefully short, embracing a status quo that prioritizes economic interests over the welfare of sentient beings.
As the Council and the European Parliament prepare to deliberate on this proposal, the time has come to truly reflect the wishes of EU citizens and prioritize the ethical treatment of animals. The current proposal represents a disheartening failure to address one of the most pressing animal welfare issues of our time, and a missed opportunity to establish the EU as a leader in humane and responsible practices.
