Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘proposal for a Council Regulation on protection of animals during transport and related operations and amending Directives 64/432/EEC and 93/119/EC’ (COM(2003) 425 final – 2003/0171 (CNS))
Date: 2004-02-26
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: animal welfare, length of journey, protection of animals, transport of animals, veterinary inspection

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 110/135

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘proposal for a Council Regu-
lation on protection of animals during transport and related operations and amending Directives
64/432/EEC and 93/119/EC’

(COM(2003) 425 final – 2003/0171 (CNS))

(2004/C 110/23)

On 17 September 2003, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 37 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee's work on this subject, adopted its opinion on 5 February 2004. The rapporteur was
Mr Kallio.

At its 406th plenary session of 25 and 26 February 2004 (meeting of 26 February), the European Economic
and Social Committee adopted the following opinion unanimously.

1. Introduction

Transport

1.1
the most controversial areas of
animal welfare and has been receiving increased political and
policy attention at EU level over the last few years:

is one of

a) In December 2000 the Commission adopted a report (1) to
the Council and the European Parliament on the experience
acquired by Member States since the implementation of
Directive 95/29/EC.

b) The report was presented at the Agriculture Council in June
2001 which supported the outcome in the form of a
specific resolution (2).
In November 2001 the European
Parliament adopted a resolution (3) on this report.

c) On 11 March 2002 the Scientific Committee on Animal
Health and Animal Welfare adopted an opinion on the
welfare of animals during transport. The scientific opinion
recommendations concerning the
provides in particular
fitness of animals
the training of
personnel transporting animals, the handling of animals,
increased space allowances and restrictive journey time
limits.

to be transported,

1.2
Road transport represents between 90 to 99 % of the
overall trade of live animals in the EU and as such constitutes
an important part of the overall economic activity associated
with the commercial transport of farm animals. As such, it also
plays a significant role in regional economic development.
Thanks to its flexibility road transport is used by a wide range
of operations and companies. The average annual trade of live
animals in the EU was 2 million tons between 1996 and 2000
and 80 % of this was between EU Member States. Export to
third countries outside the EU was approximately 10 % of
annual transport of live animals and long distance transport
amounts to just 1.5 % of animals transported in the EU.

(1) COM(2000) 809 final adopted on 6 December 2000.
(2) Council resolution of 19 June 2001 on the protection of animals

during transport (OJ C 273, 28.9.2001, p. 1).

(3) European Parliament resolution of 13 November 2001 on the
Commission report on the experience acquired by the Member
States since the implementation of Council Directive 95/29/EC
amending Directive 91/628/EEC concerning the protection of
animals during transport (COM(2000) 809 - C5-0189/2001-2001/
2085 (COS)) – A5-0347/2001.

1.3
The Protocol on the protection and welfare of animals
annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Community
requires that in formulating and implementing agriculture and
transport policies, the Community and the Member States shall
pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals.

2. Gist of the proposal

The proposal contains a series of reforms and specific provi-
sions:

a) The aim is to harmonise EU rules governing vehicles used
for transporting animals, the training of drivers and control
and enforcement by the authorities.
Improvements in
instruments for control and enforcement are also proposed.

b) Under the proposal, the scope of the present provisions
will be extended to apply to the transport of live vertebrate
animals for commercial purposes taking place in the Com-
munity, regardless of distance, and to specific checks on
consignments arriving or leaving the customs territory of
the Community. The legislation does not apply to the trans-
port of a single animal accompanied by the person who is
responsible for it during transport.

c) The transport of animals will remain subject to authorisa-
tion. The proposal introduces two types of authorisations,
one for long distance journeys and the other for short
distance journeys, as well as separate authorisation require-
ments for drivers. There is also a separate approval proce-
dure for road vehicles used to transport animals over long
distances.

d) Harmonised training requirements are laid down for drivers

and personnel handling animals.

C 110/136

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.4.2004

e) The proposed Regulation establishes detailed definitions of
animals unfit for transport and bans the transport of very
young animals.

supports the policy line that rules and implementation be
harmonised in all Member States.

f) The proposal upgrades technical standards for road vehicles
used to transport animals and updates the requirements
governing vehicles used for long distance transport.

g) More detailed rules are established for water and rail trans-
port and a separate approval procedure is laid down for
livestock vessels.

h) The proposal lays down more detailed provisions for the
loading and unloading of animals, the handling of animals
during transport and handling facilities.

i) Maximum travel times are introduced for the transport of
farmed animals and there are stricter rules for the transport
of horses.

j) The proposal provides for increased space allowances for
animals during transport, over both short and long
distances.

k) Journey logs are divided into the following sections: plan-
ning, place of departure, place of destination and any
anomalies during the journey.

l) Documents required for the transport of animals will be
harmonised in order to facilitate enforcement and exchange
of information.

m) The proposed Regulation seeks to facilitate control and
enforcement by the authorities and foster cooperation
between enforcement bodies.

n) The proposed legislation also takes account of the need to

prevent the spread of infectious animal diseases.

3. General comments

it

The EESC endorses the proposal's approach and its main
3.1
principles and considers
to improve animal
important
welfare during transport. The Committee also believes that
moral and ethical principles associated with animal welfare
should be taken into consideration. The Committee believes
that the duty of care due to animals during transport must be
consistent with good animal husbandry practices informed by
the best available advice from the most competent veterinarians
dealing with animals.

3.2
Revelations concerning the problems associated with
animal protection during transport have attracted much debate
and publicity in the EU. The level of public pressure varies
between Member States, however. The changes and provisions
relating to animal welfare during transport in the single market
must apply equally to all Member States.

3.3
The Committee welcomes the fact that the legal instru-
ment is in the form of a Regulation, which means it is directly
applicable in national legislation in each Member State. This

3.4
The proposal provides for a complete overhaul of all
existing legislation on animal transport and amends Directives
64/432/EEC and 93/119/EEC on the basis of the recommenda-
tions of the Scientific Committee and the comments obtained
from the consultation exercise with stakeholders. It represents a
wide-ranging reform, the implementation of which will also
have to take account of a host of practical and economic
considerations and differing conditions
the
‘Committee Procedure’ outlined in the proposal will assist in
this important task.

the use of

-

The EESC wishes to stress that

3.5
the provisions and
changes contained in the proposal must be based on the latest
scientific research on improving animal welfare. There must
also be a realistic economic assessment of the costs of the
proposed measures, both related to the investments in new
equipment and infrastructure
required and
including the social
impacts that the measures could have,
especially in peripheral areas and areas which are in economic
decline.

that will be

In assessing the proposal, it needs to be borne in mind
3.6
that animal welfare is the sum of many factors. Discussion of
specific limits and recommendations could, in some cases, lead
to solutions which are even worse than the present ones from
the point of view of animal welfare and/or economically unsus-
tainable. It must be possible to use discretion when this is justi-
fied and supported by competent veterinary opinion. This will
allow for adequate flexibility without undermining safeguards
to the welfare of animals during transport.

in relation to third countries,

3.7
There is a need to establish global rules on animal trans-
port. The fact that animals imported from third countries are
subject to different transport rules distorts trade and reduces
EU competitiveness
since
improving animal welfare means higher transport costs. There-
fore, the ultimate aim of establishing European rules must be
considered to be to create global rules. Indeed, the World Orga-
nisation for Animal Health (the OIE) has included animal
welfare as a priority in its programme, opening the way to
negotiation of common rules on a broader scale than hitherto.

3.8
Animal welfare should form a more important part of
the overall package of policies related to agriculture and trade
even if its role has already increased in recent years – for
example, as proposed by the EU during WTO negotiations.
Animal welfare should therefore become a more significant
part of global trade policy's ‘Green Box’.

also be

Animal welfare must

3.9
alongside
economic considerations, as a criterion in planning sustainable
livestock farming. In future, the transport of carcasses and meat
products could also provide an alternative opportunity to redu-
cing the long-distance, cross-border transport of live animals.

included,

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 110/137

3.10
In the proposal, the Commission draws attention to
preventing the spread of infectious animal diseases, which is
actually an important part of animal welfare. The animal
disease epidemics of recent years and the measures taken to
eliminate them have caused considerable economic losses and
attracted adverse publicity. Long-range, sustainable planning
can play an important role in helping prevent the spread of
such diseases and specifically requires developing far sighted
systems which continually take account of the potential role of
animal transport in the spread of infectious diseases.

3.11
The Committee welcomes the fact that working time
legislation for drivers is taken into account in planning animal
transport. Animal welfare and the working time directive for
for
drivers
example in the form of a single maximum limit for driving
times. However, the legislation should be clear not to confuse
animal transport legislation with working time legislation.

should be taken into consideration together,

3.12
The Committee notes that no mention is given in the
proposal to the relevance for human health of ensuring safe
animal transport and believes that this aspect should be inte-
grated into the approach adopted by the proposal.

4. Specific comments

Chapter I, Article 1(1). The definition of ‘transport for
4.1
commercial purposes’ should be specified as it determines the
scope of the Regulation, bearing in mind that daily transport of
animals from farm to farm should be excluded from the scope
of the legislation (4) and that long distance transport of live
animals is in any case nearly always commercial in nature. It is
necessary when drawing up new rules on animal transport to
take account of the special needs of breeding animals during
transport.

4.2
Chapter I, Article 2(h). Notwithstanding the fact that
loading and unloading can be interpreted as being part of the
journey time, given that animals are being moved also during
the practical measurement of
these stages in the journey,
journey time can only be carried out via use of the tacograph.
The EESC therefore believes that the definition of journey time
can only be measured from the actual start of the journey to
the termination of the journey.

4.3
Chapter III, Article 16. How do you harmonise the
training of drivers who already work in the sector? One way
would be to hold tests for these drivers, regardless of where
they received their training.

Chapter IV, Article 28. Guides to good practice should

4.4
be harmonised at EU level.

4.5
Annex I, Chapter I – Fitness for transport 2 (e):. Certain
Member States allow calves at 10 days old to be transported
when the navel is dried. If the minimum age at which very
young calves can be transported is raised to two weeks, certain
practical difficulties in terms of day-to-day farm practices will

be experienced. Pigs are to be considered fit for transport from
three weeks old. The EESC therefore believes that the Commis-
sion should fully consider this aspect in terms of assessing the
full impact of the proposal.

4.6
Annex I, Chapter III, Handling 1.8(e). The use of electric
whips should be avoided as far as possible. In some cases,
however, it may be necessary from the point of view of occu-
pational safety, for example because of the large size of the
animals. There is a need for harmonisation here with the
recommendations of the Council of Europe, so long as these
are consistent with the aims of this proposal.

time’

‘rest period’ and (b)

Annex I, Chapter V – Journey times. The definitions of
4.7
(a)
should be clarified.
‘travel
Regarding maximum travel times, agreement should be reached
on transporting animals to the place of destination without
delays. The nine-hour maximum travel time is a compromise
between studies of different animal species and working time
legislation. In the case of bovine animals, studies show that the
vehicle and animal handling have a greater impact on animal
welfare than journey time alone (5). A maximum transport
period of 12-14 hours could be a suitable alternative for long
distance transport, when animals are transported straight to
their final destination.

4.7.1
In the event that the proposed 12-hour rest periods in
stationary vehicles are implemented, a ceiling should be set on
the number of times sequences of travel times and rest periods
can be repeated during a journey. In addition, for geographical
reasons, flexibility should be allowed regarding the maximum
travel time, since applying 12-hour rest periods in a stationary
vehicle during extreme conditions (-30o or +30o) could actually
reduce animal welfare by, for example, worsening air quality or
lengthening travel time unreasonably. In cold conditions it may
be impossible to provide effective heating and ventilation in a
vehicle which is stationary for a long time. The automatic
drinking water system may freeze up, etc. If a journey could be
completed either as a sequence of 9 hours' travel time + 12
hours' rest + 3 hours' travel time or in a single stage of 12
hours, which would be the better alternative from the point of
view of the animals?

Annex I, Chapter 7 – Space

4.8
allowances. Higher
minimum space allowances and the height of the compartment
have a direct impact on transport costs. Further research is
needed in this area in order to establish optimal space allow-
ances. Where too few animals are transported in a given space,
it is possible that they will start to fight among themselves or
that they will be vulnerable to sudden movements caused by
the motion of the vehicle, thus increasing the risk of injury and
reducing the quality of slaughtered carcases. Minimum floor
areas as set out in Tables 1, 2 and 3 (Annex I, Chapter VII,
paragraphs 1.1(a) and (b) shall be provided as follows: (a) Area
A1 for all
transport of animals of equine, bovine, ovine,
caprine and porcine species.

(4) Seasonal migratory movements of stock (bringing cattle up to and

from alpine pastures) should also be excluded.

(5) See the findings of the Commission funded ‘CATRA’ (CAttle TRAns-
port) project, June 2003. Cf. Commission IP 03/854, 17 June 2003.

C 110/138

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.4.2004

4.9
The provision of staging posts should not be ruled out
completely. Staging posts can provide animals with a good
respite during long journeys provided adequate precautions are
taken to prevent the spread of infectious diseases.

5. Conclusions

The EESC thinks that

the proposed Regulation will
5.1
improve animal welfare during transport and enable more
effective enforcement of the rules, but lead to higher transport
costs which in turn may impact upon the food production
chain as a whole and the economic actors involved. Before
implementation,
a need for well-substantiated
economic calculations of both the upstream and downstream
costs arising from the implementation of the new requirements
and the potential social implications of the reform.

there

is

The Committee believes that the aim of the Regulation
5.2
must be to ensure that animals are transported to their place of
destination without delays by skilled animal handlers. Animal
welfare is the sum of many factors and should be assessed as a
whole.

5.3
Enhanced control and enforcement is desirable and the
authorities must be guaranteed powers to address shortcomings
in a uniform manner across Member States.

The EESC would emphasise that

the provisions and
5.4
changes contained in the proposal must be based on the latest

Brussels, 26 February 2004.

scientific research on improving animal welfare. There must be
a realistic assessment of the economic effects of the measures.
A particular problem is posed in cases where the changes
increase transport costs directly but
the scientific evidence
regarding the beneficial impact on animal welfare is contradic-
tory or insufficient. Existing rules should be changed in such
information should be sought and the
cases and additional
legislation updated only when the scientific evidence is both
clear and conclusive

Differences

in geographical and climatic conditions
5.5
between countries may hamper the implementation of
the
rules. Specific regional characteristics must be taken into
account where the proposed changes would, as they stand,
significantly weaken the competitiveness of livestock farming
in a particular region because of higher transport costs. The
result could even be that production ceases altogether, which
would further increase the already high susceptibility of these
regions to desertification. The rules must be flexible enough to
safeguard livestock farming outside livestock-intensive areas
and the transport of animals to livestock markets.

5.6
Discussions should be launched as soon as possible with
a view to reaching concrete agreements on the application of
international transport standards on a global scale.

The President

of the European Economic and Social
Committee

Roger BRIESCH