DOCSLIB.ORG

Animal Welfare in the European Union

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Animal Welfare in the European Union DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZENS' RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS PETITIONS Animal Welfare in the European Union STUDY Abstract This study, commissioned by the Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs upon request of the Committee on Petitions, finds out that EU animal welfare policy and legislation has had much positive influence in the world, on the image of the EU as well as helping animals. However, most kinds of animals kept in the EU are not covered by legislation, including some of the worst animal welfare problems, so a general animal welfare law and specific laws on several species are needed. Animal sentience and welfare should be mentioned, using accurate scientific terminology, in many trade-related laws as well as in animal-specific laws. PE 583.114 EN ABOUT THE PUBLICATION This research paper was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Petitions and commissioned, supervised and published by the Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs. Policy departments provide independent expertise, both in-house and externally, to support European Parliament committees and other parliamentary bodies in shaping legislation and exercising democratic scrutiny over EU external and internal policies. To contact the Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, or to subscribe to its newsletter, please write to: [email protected] Research Administrator Responsible Ottavio MARZOCCHI Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs European Parliament B-1047 Brussels E-mail: [email protected] AUTHOR Emeritus Professor Donald M. BROOM Department of Veterinary Medicine University of Cambridge Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0ES U.K. LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN Manuscript completed in January 2017. © European Union, 2017 This document is available on the internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/supporting-analyses DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. Animal Welfare in the European Union ____________________________________________________________________________________________ CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 6 LIST OF TABLES 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9 1. INTRODUCTION 13 1.1. Plan of the Study 13 1.2. The Author 13 1.3. References to Petitions and Publications 13 2. THE SCIENTIFIC CONCEPT OF ANIMAL WELFARE 14 2.1. Welfare and related concepts 14 2.2. Welfare, ethics and rights 16 2.3. The use of welfare-related concepts in EU documents. 16 3. WELFARE AS PART OF SUSTAINABILITY AND PRODUCT QUALITY 18 3.1. The Concept of Sustainability 18 3.2. Changing ideas about product quality 19 3.3. Opportunities for animal industries 19 4. WELFARE IN RELATION TO HEALTH 20 4.1. The terms health and welfare 20 4.2. Disease – welfare interactions 21 5. ONE HEALTH AND ONE WELFARE 22 6. A BRIEF HISTORY OF EU ANIMAL WELFARE LEGISLATION AND POLICIES 24 6.1. Legislation 24 6.2. Other policies 27 7. INTERNATIONAL EFFECTS OF EU ANIMAL WELFARE POLICIES AND LEGISLATION 28 7.1. Animal welfare, respect for the EU and the W.T.O. 28 7.2. The impact of EU decision-making after factual investigation. 29 7.3. EU animal welfare policy and world organisations 30 7.4. Effects of EU calf welfare legislation on third countries 31 7.5. Effects of EU poultry welfare legislation on third countries 31 7.6. Effects of EU pig welfare legislation on third countries 31 3 Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 7.7. Effects of EU welfare of animals during transport legislation on third countries. 32 7.8. Effects of EU welfare of animals at slaughter legislation on third countries. 32 7.9. Effects of EU laboratory animal welfare legislation on third countries. 33 7.10. Effects of EU welfare of animals in relation to performance-enhancing drugs, cloning and genetic modification legislation on third countries. 33 8. PUBLIC ATTITUDES TO ANIMAL WELFARE AND THE VALUE OF EU ANIMAL WELFARE LEGISLATION TO CONSUMERS AND TO THE ANIMAL USER INDUSTRIES 35 8.1. Attitudes to animals 35 8.2. Public concern about animal welfare 36 8.3. Attitudes of animal users 36 8.4. Attitudes to animal welfare and consumer pressure 37 8.5. The value of EU animal welfare legislation to consumers 38 8.6. The value of EU animal welfare legislation to the animal user industries 40 9. ANIMAL WELFARE LEGISLATION, ENFORCEMENT AND IMPACT ON ANIMALS 42 9.1. Animal products and welfare: laws, standards and enforcement 42 9.2. Welfare during transport: laws, standards and enforcement 43 9.3. Welfare during slaughter: laws, standards and enforcement 44 9.4. Actual effects of laws, standards and enforcement on animal welfare 45 9.5. Animal welfare consequences of costs of compliance with laws and imports from third countries 46 10. DEFICIENCIES IN CURRENT EU ANIMAL WELFARE LEGISLATION AND POLICY 47 10.1.The generality of EU animal welfare legislation and policy 47 10.2.Scientific reports on animal welfare by EFSA and predecessors which have not led to legislation 48 10.3.In the EU, which animals are kept in greatest numbers? 49 10.4.The extent of animal welfare problems and EU legislation 49 10.5.The wording of EU legislation directly concerning animal welfare. 52 10.6.Other EU legislation which might affect animal welfare. 53 11. RECENT CHANGES IN EU ANIMAL WELFARE POLICY AND THEIR POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES 54 11.1.Brief description of recent changes in animal welfare policy 54 11.2.Consequences of the changes: general areas 55 4 Animal Welfare in the European Union ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 11.3.Consequences of the changes: better enforcement and education 55 11.4.Consequences of the changes: no general animal welfare law 56 11.5.Consequence of the changes: animals that are not protected 56 11.6.Consequence of the changes: the balance between actions to enforce laws and to enact new legislation 57 12. POSSIBILITIES FOR FUTURE EU ANIMAL WELFARE POLICY 58 12.1.Enforcement and education 58 12.2.Welfare science research 59 12.3.Inclusion of animal welfare and sentience in all relevant legislation 59 12.4.An animal welfare law 60 12.5.Priorities for new EU legislation 60 REFERENCES 62 ANNEX 1 - ANIMAL WELFARE GAPS IN EU LEGISLATION AND POLICY 73 5 Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs ____________________________________________________________________________________________ LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS BST Bovine somatotrophin BTSF Better Training for Safer Food COPA- Committee of Professional Agricultural Organisations and General COGECA Committee for Agricultural Cooperation in the European Union CAP Common Agricultural Policy CIWF Compassion in World Farming DEFRA Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, U.K. DG Directorate General of European Commission ECLAM European College of Laboratory Animal Medicine EEPTA European Egg Packers and Traders Association EEPA European Egg Processors Association EFPIA European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations EFSA European Food Safety Authority ESLAV European Society for Laboratory Animal Veterinarians EU European Union Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal SCAHAW Welfare EU SVC European Union Scientific Veterinary Committee FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations FVE Federation of Veterinarians of Europe GM Genetically-modified IFC International Finance Corporation IGF-1 Insulin-like growth factor-1 ISAE International Society for Applied Ethology NERC Natural Environment Research Council, U.K. OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 6 Animal Welfare in the European Union ____________________________________________________________________________________________ RSPCA Royal Society for the Protection of Animals OIE World Organisation for Animal Health, Organisation mondiale de la santé anima Sanidad Animal WTO World Trade Organization 7 Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs ____________________________________________________________________________________________ LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1: Some EU Directives and Regulations relevant to animal welfare 25 TABLE 2 : Evidence for increased concern about animal welfare 36 TABLE 3: Examples of EU scientific reports and opinions on animal welfare not yet followed by legislation 48 8 Animal Welfare in the European Union ____________________________________________________________________________________________ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background EU citizens are becoming increasingly concerned that all kinds of production systems and other activities should be sustainable. Animal welfare is an important aspect of sustainability, and also of product quality, and may result in consumers refusing to buy products. The welfare of an individual is its state as regards its attempts to cope with its environment. Welfare includes feelings and health and can be measured scientifically. It is a biological concept, quite different from rights, and refers only to living animals. The terms welfare, stress, needs, humane and euthanasia are defined and some of the ways in which they are
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Patterns of Livestock Transport in the EU and to Third Countries
    IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS Requested by the ANIT Committee Patterns of livestock transport in the EU and to third countries Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies Directorate-General for Internal Policies PE 690.883 - June 2021 EN RESEARCH FOR ANIT COMMITTEE Patterns of livestock transport in the EU and to third countries Abstract This in-depth analysis was commissioned by the European Parliament’s Committee of Inquiry on the Protection of Animals during Transport (ANIT). The paper provides an analysis of the main drivers and key features of livestock transport within the EU and to third countries. This document was requested by the European Parliament's Committee of Inquiry on the Protection of Animals during Transport (ANIT). AUTHORS Research administrator: Albert MASSOT, François NEGRE, Claudia VINCI and Thaya DINKEL (trainee) Project, publication and communication assistance: Adrienn BORKA, Kinga OSTAŃSKA Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies, European Parliament LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN ABOUT THE PUBLISHER To contact the Policy Department or to subscribe to updates on our work for the ANIT Committee please write to: [email protected] Manuscript completed in June 2021 © European Union, 2021 This document is available on the internet in summary with option to download the full text at: https://bit.ly/3qQAlvU This document is available on the internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=IPOL_IDA(2021)690883 Further information on research for ANIT by the Policy Department is available at: https://research4committees.blog/anit/ Follow us on Twitter: @PolicyAGRI Please use the following reference to cite this study: Massot, A.
    [Show full text]
  • The State of the Animals II: 2003
    A Strategic Review of International 1CHAPTER Animal Protection Paul G. Irwin Introduction he level of animal protection Prior to the modern period of ani- activity varies substantially Early Activities mal protection (starting after World Taround the world. To some War II), international animal protec- extent, the variation parallels the in International tion involved mostly uncoordinated level of economic development, as support from the larger societies and countries with high per capita Animal certain wealthy individuals and a vari- incomes and democratic political Protection ety of international meetings where structures have better financed and Organized animal protection began in animal protection advocates gathered better developed animal protection England in the early 1800s and together to exchange news and ideas. organizations. However there is not spread from there to the rest of the One of the earliest such meetings a one-to-one correlation between world. Henry Bergh (who founded the occurred in Paris in June 1900 economic development and animal American Society for the Prevention although, by this time, there was protection activity. Japan and Saudi of Cruelty to Animals, or ASPCA, in already a steady exchange of informa- Arabia, for example, have high per 1865) and George Angell (who found- tion among animal protection organi- capita incomes but low or nonexis- ed the Massachusetts Society for the zations around the world. These tent levels of animal protection activ- Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, or exchanges were encouraged further ity, while India has a relatively low per MSPCA, in 1868) both looked to by the organization of a number of capita income but a fairly large num- England and the Royal Society for the international animal protection con- ber of animal protection groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Editorial Board
    EDITORIAL BOARD Daniela Battaglia Daniela Battaglia is currently Livestock Production Officer in the Animal Production and Health Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Within the organization she is responsible for the activities in support of Animal Welfare. Prior to joining the FAO in 2001, Daniela worked for nine years for the European Commission (Directorates-General Development, Directorates-General External Relations and the Europe-Aid Co-operation Office). During that period, she was involved in a wide range of activities and co-operation programmes and projects in the fields of animal production and health; livestock and rural development, mainly in Latin America, North Africa and the Middle East. Daniela has also worked for some years in the field of livestock and rural development in several countries: Peru, Bolivia, Suriname, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Guatemalal, Israel and Tunisia. Carla Boreham Carla Boreham has worked at WSPA since the start of 2009, specialising at looking into and advising about animal welfare laws across the world. Her interest in legislation began when she completed a LLB law degree at university. She went on to work as a co-ordinator/researcher in television production on documentaries and consumer programmes at the BBC. After some time training and working as a broadcast journalist in radio and television newsrooms in North Yorkshire, she decided to pursue her volunteer work with animals as a full time career. Training as an RSPCA Inspector took seven months, after which she took up her posting in Essex. Here she was able to see first hand the impact of cruelty to animals, the need for proper education of the pubic as to animals’ needs and the requirement for adequate legislation and enforcement.
    [Show full text]
  • Ilaria Di Silvestre, Wildlife Programme Leader, Eurogroup for Animals. [email protected]
    Correspondent: Ilaria Di Silvestre, Wildlife Programme Leader, Eurogroup for Animals. [email protected] To: Mr Virginijus Sinkevičius EU Commissioner for Environment, Oceans and Fisheries European Commission Rue de la Loi 200 (Berlaymont) 1049 Bruxelles cc: Ms Ursula von der Leyen President of the European Commission Mr Phil Hogan EU Commissioner for Trade Ms Stella Kyriakides EU Commissioner for Health and Food Safety Mrs Camilla Bursi Cabinet of Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevičius Mr Humberto DELGADO ROSA European Commission, Director, Directorate General for Environment, Natural Capital Subject: Regulation of wildlife trade under the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2030 Brussels, 15 May 2020 Dear Commissioner, The undersigned 39 animal advocacy and conservation organisations call on the European Commission to take prompt and decisive action to effectively regulate wildlife trade in the EU, in order to protect the health of EU citizens, improve the welfare of animals, and safeguard biodiversity in and beyond Europe from the risks posed by the poorly regulated trade in live wild animals. The risks from wildlife exploitation and trade have become painfully clear in recent weeks with the worldwide outbreak of the SARS-COV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. While research is not conclusive about the source of the virus, it is widely believed to have been transmitted from wildlife to humans as a consequence of the proximity and variety of species sold in a Chinese wildlife market1. Much of the public discussion around COVID-19 has focused on the potential role of illegal wildlife trade in spreading pathogens, but risks also exist from legal trade2. 1 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2012-7 2 https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/2020/05/to-prevent-next-pandemic-focus-on-legal-wildlife- trade/ Like SARS-COV-2, many viruses can be transmitted between animals and from animals to humans; indeed, scientists estimate that 75% of emerging infectious diseases that have affected people over the past three decades originated from animals3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case Against the Veal Crate Download
    The Case Against the Veal Crate An examination of the scientific evidence that led to the banning of the veal crate system in the EU and of the alternative group housed systems that are better for calves, farmers and consumers. Carol McKenna, Compassion in World Farming, April 2001 Acknowledgements The author wishes to thank everyone who helped with the researching of this report, in particular those working in the group housed veal industry who spared time to respond to questions and who invited me to their farms. Grateful thanks especially to Professor John Webster and Compassion in World Farming’s Campaign Directors in Holland, Italy and France, Geert Laugs, Adolfo Sansolini and Ghislain Zuccolo, The 1995 Report on Calf Welfare of the European Commission’s Scientific Veterinary Committee was an invaluable source of information. Thanks to Lekker Dier for use of their photograph of a Dutch calf in a veal crate (see front cover). Carol McKenna is an animal welfare and campaigns consultant who has worked for several UK based animal protection organisations. She worked on the UK veal crate ban with CIWF (1985 - 1989) and on the EU veal crate ban campaign with the World Society for the Protection of Animals (1995-1996). She has visited veal farms using both crates and group housing in the UK, Netherlands and Italy. One of her most vivid campaign memories is being told by a UK Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food official that veal crates would not be banned in the UK until it could be scientifically proven “that four-legged animals need to walk”.
    [Show full text]
  • Cop18 Documents
    Original language: English CoP18 Com I. Rec. 13 (Rev. 1) CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES OF WILD FAUNA AND FLORA ____________________ Eighteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties Geneva (Switzerland), 17-28 August 2019 Summary record of the thirteenth session for Committee I 25 August 2019: 14h15 - 17h15 Chair: R. Hay (New Zealand) Secretariat: T. De Meulenaer K. Gaynor J. C. Vasquez Rapporteurs: A. Caromel F. Davis J. Vitale E. Vovk Proposals to amend the Appendices (cont.) The European Union (EU) made a point of order as Japan had requested the Chair to confirm the participation of all EU Members before the EU’s exercise of its rights as a Party had been challenged by Japan under discussion of proposal CoP18 Prop. 45. The European Union reiterated its statement given under agenda item 4 on Rules of Procedure in the opening Plenary, that it is understood that the EU Member States will attend each session of the CoP, and it is understood that no Party will challenge the EU’s exercise of its right to vote at CoP18. It trusted that such a challenge would not repeat itself and that the compromise reached in the Rules of Procedure would be accepted. The United States of America aligned itself with the European Union’s statement. 105. Proposals to amend Appendices I and II Proposal CoP18 Prop. 6 to transfer Aonyx cinereus from Appendix II to Appendix I was introduced by the Philippines, which also requested the name in the proposal be made more precise to Aonyx cinerea. Costa Rica and the European Union supported the proposal.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the Critical Perspectives on Animals in Society
    Proceedings of the Conference Critical Perspectives on Animals in Society held at the University of Exeter, UK 10 March 2012 © CPAS convenors, editors and individual named contributors, 2013 Some rights reserved Copyright in contributions to these proceedings rests with their respective authors. Copyright to the overall collection and arrangement and to any other material in this document rests with the convenors of CPAS and the editors of its proceedings. In the spirit of open-access publishing and with a commitment to the intellectual commons, reuse and distribution of these proceedings for non-commercial purposes is permitted and encouraged, under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution± NonCommercial±NoDerivs 2.0 UK: England & Wales licence, which can be read at: creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/uk/ Amongst other things, this licence requires that you attribute material you reproduce to its author, and make clear to those you share it with that they too may reproduce it under the terms of the licence. Anything outside the licence, especially commercial use, requires the express permission of the editors and conference convenors, or of individual authors. Requests to the former should be directed to: [email protected] Edited by Chris Calvert and Jessica Gröling Contents Introduction by the editors 5 Chris Calvert and Jessica Gröling — Contributions in brief — About CPAS — Acknowledgements — Conference programme Campaigning techniques 11 Keynote address by Dr Richard D. Ryder Animal rights: moral crusade or social
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Protection and Wildlife Conservation Organizations Applaud European Parliament Defence of Endangered Animals
    Animal protection and wildlife conservation organizations applaud European Parliament defence of endangered animals Strasbourg, France, 10 th February 2010 – The future for some of the world’s most threatened animals may become a little less precarious thanks to the European Parliament. The Parliament sent a strong message that Europeans want more protection for threatened species such as polar bears, sharks and bluefin tuna and that protection must be maintained for threatened species such as elephants and crocodiles. Leading animal protection and wildlife conservation movement organisations congratulated the European Parliament for reflecting the desires of millions of European citizens to increase protection for threatened species in 2010, which has been declared the International Year of Biodiversity by the United Nations. The support for endangered animals came as part of a strong Motion for a Resolution on the EU’s strategic objectives for the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). “We especially welcome the Parliament’s support for the United States’ proposal to transfer the polar bear to Appendix I”, said Joanna Swabe, EU Director of Humane Society International (HSI). “A ban on the commercial trade in polar bear parts and products, such as bear skin rugs, will help to reduce pressures on populations already threatened by habitat loss through climate change. We therefore strongly urge the European Commission and Member States to follow the European Parliament’s lead and support the proposal to uplist this endangered species”. The European Parliament’s stance on the ivory trade was also applauded. As Lesley O’Donnell, EU Director of the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) noted, “the Parliament’s steadfast rejection of proposals to downlist African elephant populations from CITES Appendix I to Appendix II and permit limited sales in ivory sends a strong signal to all parties to CITES.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Welfare Activity Update Report May 2020 for INFORMATION Update Activities Animal Welfare Working Group. Working Group M
    FEDERATION OF VETERINARIANS OF EUROPE FVE/020/doc/051 Animal Welfare Activity update report May 2020 Members FOR INFORMATION Albania Austria Belgium Bosnia-Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Update activities Animal Welfare Working Group. Czech Republic Denmark The FVE/UEVP Working Group was renewed in 2019. The new group had the Estonia following meetings: Finland France • a physical meeting in October 2019 Germany • Telco in January 2020 Greece Hungary • Planned physical meeting which was replace by remote meeting in May 2020 Iceland • Next meeting planned in autumn Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Working group members (2019-2021): Luxembourg Malta Montenegro Sean Wensley (CHAIR)- UK Annalisa Scollo - EAPHM Guest Netherlands Dominique Autier-Dérian - France Mette Uldahl - FEEVA North Macedonia Stefano Messori – Italy Heather Bacon - UK Observer Norway Poland Theron Leonard - Belgium Kenelm Lewis – UEVP Observer Portugal Gunnarsson Stefan - Sweden Torill Moseng – FVE Board Romania Serbia Thomas Richter - Germany Observer Slovak Republic Vibe Pedersen Lund - Denmark Jovana/Marina – FVE stagiaire Slovenia Spain Ann Criel - FECAVA Nancy De Briyne – FVE Secretariat Sweden Giovani Guadagnini - EAPHM Switzerland United Kingdom Observers Papers being worked on by AW WG Armenia Russia The working group is currently working hard on some papers, namely: Ukraine • Development of a practical best practice protocol for euthanasia of horses. Sections This is a FEEVA/FVE collaboration. The draft protocol is ready and will go for member consultation in the near future. If received positive, other protocols UEVP President Practitioners e.g. for pigs could be developed. • Paper on moving away from farrowing crates to more sustainable farrowing Rens van Dobbenburgh EASVO State Officers systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Federation of Veterinarians of Europe, Regulation of Keeping Animals As Companion Animals Through the Establishment Of
    FEDERATION OF VETERINARIANS OF EUROPE FVE/013/pos/006 Regulation of keeping animals as companion animals through the establishment of lists1 Members It is well recognised that in the last years there is an increase in the numbers of wild animals and other exotic species2 kept as companion animals (Ref1). This acknowledgement has Austria Belgium triggered many discussions about the risks this trend encompass, while the evolving Bosnia-Herzegovina situation has posed new challenges for the veterinary profession. Nowadays, the European Bulgaria Croatia veterinarian more and more often is invited to take care and treat such species, indigenous Cyprus in Europe or not. Rodents, reptiles, insects, primates and other small mammals coming from Czech Republic Denmark other continents of the world provide companionship to humans in the place of traditionally Estonia domesticated species, like dogs and cats. Finland France FYROM However this trend has raised many concerns with regard to animal health and welfare as Germany well as to public health and environmental sustainability. In October 2012 FVE organised a Greece (Ref2) Hungary conference on “Import and keeping of exotic animals in Europe” , in association with the Iceland Cyprus Presidency (Ref3), the European Commission and the Swiss Federal Veterinary Office. Ireland Italy Following this event, FVE launched a big survey among veterinary practitioners with a view Latvia to assess veterinarians’ exposure to exotic species in their daily practice. The outcomes of Lithuania Luxembourg those
    [Show full text]
  • From Guinea Pig to Computer Mouse
    International Network for Humane Education from guinea pig to computer mouse alternative methods for a progressive, humane education Nick Jukes Mihnea Chiuia InterNICHE Foreword by Gill Langley Second edition, revised and expanded B from guinea pig to computer mouse alternative methods for a progressive, humane education alternative methods for a progressive, humane education 22nd editionedition Nick Jukes, BSc MihneaNick Jukes, Chiuia, BSc MD Mihnea Chiuia, MD InterNICHE B The views expressed within this book are not necessarily those of the funding organisations, nor of all the contributors Cover image (from left to right): self-experimentation physiology practical, using Biopac apparatus (Lund University, Sweden); student-assisted beneficial surgery on a canine patient (Murdoch University, Australia); virtual physiology practical, using SimMuscle software (University of Marburg, Germany) 2nd edition Published by the International Network for Humane Education (InterNICHE) InterNICHE 2003- 2006 © Minor revisions made February 2006 InterNICHE 42 South Knighton Road Leicester LE2 3LP England tel/ fax: +44 116 210 9652 e-mail: [email protected] www.interniche.org Design by CDC (www.designforcharities.org) Printed in England by Biddles Ltd. (www.biddles.co.uk) Printed on 100% post-consumer recycled paper: Millstream 300gsm (cover), Evolve 80gsm (text) ISBN: 1-904422-00-4 British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library B iv Contributors Jonathan Balcombe, PhD Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM), USA Hans A. Braun, PhD Institute of Physiology, University of Marburg, Germany Gary R. Johnston, DVM, MS Western University of Health Sciences College of Veterinary Medicine, USA Shirley D. Johnston, DVM, PhD Western University of Health Sciences College of Veterinary Medicine, USA Amarendhra M.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Welfare Article of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Is Undermined by Absence of Access to Justice
    River Court, Mill Lane, Godalming, Surrey, GU7 1EZ, UK T: +44 (0)1483 521 950 Email: [email protected] Animal Welfare Article of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union is Undermined by Absence of Access to Justice The failure of the European Commission to secure proper implementation of EU legislation leads to many pigs being reared in unlawful conditions December 2014 Article 13 TFEU Title II of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union lists a number of key principles that should be respected by the EU. Article 13 (part of Title II) of the Treaty provides that in “formulating and implementing the Union’s agriculture, fisheries, transport, internal market, research and technological development and space policies, the Union and the Member States shall, since animals are sentient beings, pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals”. The European Commission explains that “This puts animal welfare on equal footing with other key principles mentioned in the same title i.e. promotion of gender equality, guarantee of social protection, protection of human health, combating discrimination, promotion of sustainable development, ensuring consumer protection and the protection of personal data”.i This provision is important in two respects: it recognises animals as “sentient beings”; and it requires the Union and its Member States, in (i) formulating and (ii) implementing the Union’s policies in certain key areas, to pay “full regard to the welfare requirements of animals”. Formulation and implementation Article 13 places two separate and distinct legal obligations on the Union and the Member States both of which must be met i.e.
    [Show full text]