As many of you are aware, we at SAV have had a real gripe with the EU for many years now, and for not enforcing its OWN Regulation, 1/2005 of 22nd December 2004 on the subject of the Protection of Animals During Transport.
Animals Angels have produced an excellent report regarding the complete myths of enforcement of Regulation 1/2005, which is the EU’s own rules on alleged animal protection during transport.AA have kindly permitted us to show their report; and we include the link here for you to click and review.
During 2016, AA met with all the Chief Veterinary Officers of all EU member states; trying to convince them to get the EU Commission to take the initiative because there was a refusal to change the law. Even if we ever get to the point that a new law is drafted, there is risk that some worse provisions will be introduced in favor of the meat industry. They are too close to the EU Commission and animal welfare comes a poor second, as we have exposed with EU animal exports to Turkey for example.
Please have a look at the excellent report on the myths of Regulation 1/2005 by clicking on:
There is a lot of data and information for anyone who wishes to write further on the subject. We would also encourage people to send the link to their MEP’s; who despite being mainly supportive of modification, are not able to get changes due to inaction by the EU Commission.
Here are some links to some of our recent posts on the subject. We are also providing the links to the videos of EU – Turkish live exports; for which the EU inform us they can do nothing despite the Regulation supposedly ‘protecting’ animals during transport.
Posted on December 11, 2016 by Serbian Animals Voice (SAV)
In March 2003, the animal rights organization PETA wanted to transfer its broadcast “Holocaust on your plate” from the USA in Germany: “” Holocaust in Ihrem Teller “. Peta wanted to protest with seven posters against the suffering of mast animals.
One of the posters presented a photograph of corpses of prisoners in concentration camps opposite to a heap of slaughtered pigs.
Another placard showed, under the heading “For the Animals, are all people Nazis” prisoners in a row of high beds opposite to choked chickens in live batteries.
“The concept of this campaign goes back to the Jewish Nobel Prize laureate Isaak Bashevis Singer, who said that when it comes to the animals, everyone becomes a Nazi, for the animals is every day Treblinka“, said Harald Ullmann, head of RETA Germany. The ex-president of the Central Council of the Jews, Paul Spiegel, had filed against this campaign. A court in Berlin gave him right and so is banned the campaign in April 2004, in Germany. The European Court of Human Rights confirmed the ruling against the spread of such motifs in Germany, in March 2009.
Nevertheless, the road to the slaughterhouse is the road to Auschwitz.
In this world there is a system of exploitation, cruelty and murder, which can only be measured with the Fascism of the Third Reich. If at that time this system has demanded 6 million Jews (and not Jews) from 1941 to 1945, today this system, our system, has no end, it regenerates itself and incessantly and destroys every day millions of living beings.
Everything, what the Nazis have done to the Jews, we practice now with animals! The same factory of extermination, as at that time in Auschwitz, is now practiced with animals. And we know it.
Today, more than ever, we are informed about the cruel experiments on animals, about the cruel daily executions in slaughterhouses and farms, about the Dachau Schelters for streams. And nevertheless, we walk around as if we were not to blame, as if it is normal and natural to consume violence and death. All the meat and animal products consumers stand on the side of the executioner.
They pay the meat-mafia with their money, they support them. For the animal- holocaust does not bear the fault a small fascist oligarchy, as in the time of national socialism. Consumers pay for the conservation of this system, which consists of torture and death, in slaughterhouses, in farms, in experimental laboratories.
If we know that this world consists of victims and executioners, our task is to act morally and not to cooperate with the executioners.
Posted on December 5, 2016 by Serbian Animals Voice (SAV)
Mr. van Goethem,
If you would have invited me to Brussels to meet us, I would say, “Thank you, I do not need it, you are well known to me”!
As the “do nothing” man.
As the commissioner with the stupid smile, often confused with meat producers from Mecklenburg.
You are a truly EU patriot, Mr van Goethem.
You respect as the democratic country law of the EU members, if illegal transports and business with live animals are controlled by the local meat mafia.
And that would have worked well, if they were not animal protectionists who constantly bother you with the question, of whether animal protection is part of your job!!
As if you could answer this question, as if you had a clue, what animal protection means !!!
You were hired as servant by Merkel and Juncker, you are firmly under the power of the united patrons and you have to work hard, if you want to keep your private chauffeur and the 30,000 euros a month.
Trade with animals is a matter for the countries, you said?
Oh! Mister van Goethem! you were always the humor soldier of the animal transportation mafia.
If I were Merkel, I’d send you to Mugabe.
Why?
So that the “do nothing” commissioner finally finds his real work environment.
Venus
Posted on November 24, 2016 by Serbian Animals Voice (SAV)
A Christmas Story
Every year, when Christmas comes, I wonder what gifts I should give. Most people think – give to people?
No!, not me; I mean to give to the animals!
On previous Christmas’ I had planned a one-woman anti-fur action, as a kind of personal gift / action for the suffering fur animals. I had inspected all the big shops in the city near to where I live. All of them sold fur articles. In one shop, which was very noble and expensive, there was a fox jacket priced at 1.199.- Euros. “It is red fox”, the seller informed me, allegedly “something that was very special”! – yes special to the fox; it is its coat to keep it warm ! When I put on the jacket, as part of my plan; I already knew what I would give the animals this Christmas.
I bought lots of small, white, self-adhesive stickers.
I typed on the computer:
“Pelz ist Mord
Kein Pelz kaufen” which means – Fur is murder, don`t buy fur.
I printed out 60 labels; each which carried this wording.
I decided to stick each of my labels over the price label of the fur items being sold. There are 2 reasons why I decided to do this:
Spontaneously, if we want to buy something, we always first look at the price, and
The price label is not part of the article, it is cut off at the checkout. This meant that even if I had been caught, no action could be taken against me for causing damage to the property.
Theoretically! – But it would be best not to be caught in the first place !!
That’s why I had tested all the cameras in the store. There were cameras everywhere. At the department where there was the red fox jacket, there was even a discreet camera mounted on the wall.
My plan had to be as follows:
take the fur jacket in hand, look for the position of the price label, try as if I was thinking of buying, and then… zack, zack!! quickly stick my anti fur label over the price tag !
Then, job done, move on to the price tag of the next fur item !
I had already stuck about 40 labels to different garments, but still none on the red fox fur. And I really wanted that!
“What does this jacket cost?” I asked the saleswoman. “1.199” she said; “but it is worth the money, something you will not find anywhere” !
I tried the jacket on and the saleswoman stood next to me. I made a small turn around in front of the mirror to view it from different angles, I had to be convincing that I was interested ! “I have to think it over,” I said, “it is too expensive for me”.
The saleswoman went away, disappointed by what I had said.
I put the jacket back on, quickly put my sticker onto this prize fur and left the store as quickly as I could. It was the sticker number 41!
When I think at this action today, I must admit, it was not a big or a direct gift for the animals, I know that. I have only provoked a little bit of attention into a very bloody business called the fur trade, nothing more.
Maybe I could have done more, if I had other helpers and activists with me. Yes! maybe … but with “if and but” you cannot change society and the suffering of the animals. We cannot wait for great deeds, everyone does what he or she can personally, now and again. Small gifts and actions for the animals are better than nothing.
And it should not be only at Christmas time.
Best regards for you, dear Mark, and for all campaigners fighting for animals everywhere !
As well as working with German friends and campaigners regarding live exports and the need for an 8 hour maximum one off journey time; we are now also going direct to the EU.
With our German campaigners and using heir helpful advice and letter writing, we have already got things under way to target Chancellor Merkel in Germany; asking her to make representations on the subject at EU level.
We have also, now produced a petition to Bernard Van Goethem at the EU asking for an 8 hour maximum one off journey time for animals. You may well remember other posts on this site where Mr Van Goethem has held his hands up and said “we can do nothing” – even when presented with the most disgusting videos of animals suffering at the Turkish border when exported from the EU.
The wording of our letter to Mr Van Goethem – a Director at – European Commission, DG SANCO – Directorate G – Veterinary and International Affairs is as follows:
————————-
Dear Sir (Mr. Van Goethem),
In the context of the 8hours campaign in 2012, more than 1,200,000 (1 million 200 thousand) citizens asked the EU Commission to limit all livestock transportation to a one off 8 hours maximum. Every year due to the existing and non enforced ‘EU legislation’, millions of farm animals suffer during long-distance transport across Europe and to other Third countries such as Turkey.
They are transported for very long period and exposed to extreme variations in temperatures, both of which are non compliant with the regulations set by EU regulation. In addition, only some animals (say those near to water dispensers) making up any particular consignment are lucky enough to receive very limited rations of food and water; often many get nothing. – In addition, the legally required rest breaks detailed in the regulation are also very often ignored by EU international livestock hauliers. Again, the EU Directorate; of which you are a Director, takes no action to make things any better for these animals.
It is inconceivable that the EU Commission has completely ignored the requests of over 1,2 million EU citizens asking to limit animal transports to a maximum one off journey time of 8 hours. You are failing us, the citizens of the EU, and you are failing the animals of the EU.
According to EU Regulation No. 1/2005, which is supposed to ‘protect’ animals during transport, but does anything but protect; the following freedoms should apply to all animals during transport:
• Animals must be free from hunger and thirst,
• Animals must be free from pain, injuries and diseases,
• Animals must be free from anxiety and stress.
All of these freedoms are regularly being breached during long-lasting international transport, especially to locations such as Turkey from EU states.
Regulation 1/2005 exists only on paper to show the EU public there are so- called legislative rules. But the EU, of which you are a Veterinary Director, is not enforcing the existing regulation in any way; and so the legislation really means nothing – it is utterly useless paper ‘nothing’; and the livestock haulage industry know this as well as your failures to enforce the legislation. The demands defined in 1/2005 are not respected by several existing EU member states, and you do nothing legally to even try to enforce them. Examples of the failures we are talking about can be seen in the videos referenced below for example; especially in this case regarding animals exported from the EU to Turkey.
All the video evidence above as well as meetings between you and animal welfare organisations have ended with the disappointing but simple response from you: “We cannot do anything”. On behalf of EU citizens, we thus question the EU enforcement of Regulation 1/2005, and say that if legislation is not rigidly enforced, then why does it exist in the first place ? – as we said, just a paper, mean nothing lump of regulation.
EU officials / Commissioners, who could start to amend animal transport legislation immediately, have remained inactive and very quiet for a very long time. Regulation 1/2005 for animals in transport ‘protection’, which originally became law in December 2004, is utterly ineffective as EU officials including yourself take no action whatsoever to enforce it.
According to the Lisbon Treaty, one million people who have to come from several EU Member States, can use the ‘citizens’ initiative’ to ask the European Commission to submit new political proposals. These 1,2 million people calling for 8 hour transport legislation have not yet been able to stop the misery of the transport of animals for time periods over 8 hours. Times need to change and you need to be held responsible.
Therefore, we are now asking you, a ‘Veterinary Director’ at the EU, to make sure that these animal transports within EU member states, and also all exports to Third nations such as EU – Turkey transportation; are timed to a one off maximum journey time of no more than eight (8) hours.
Please use your influence as a ‘vet’ – someone who allegedly should care about the welfare of animals, so that the existing laws on the implementation on animal transports are finally adapted for once and all to reflect a one off maximum journey time of no more than 8 hours as the citizens of Europe request. This ruling must apply for transport across the whole of the EU and for export to Third countries such as Turkey. Only for specific situations such as Scottish animals being shipped from islands to the mainland should their be additional but limited hours.
Thank you for your time and consideration of our very important ‘citizens’ initiative’ request. We are watching your future actions to see if the ‘EU Veterinary Director’ actually does anything for the improvement of ‘animal welfare’ – and animals currently suffering during transport.
————————–
You can sign our petition calling for 8 hours maximum (one off) journey time by visiting:
Please pass the link on to anyone and everyone you know.
We need to make this big for the animals that you have seen in the videos above.
Mr Van Goethem is a Director at European Commission, DG SANCO – Directorate G – Veterinary and International Affairs – so we must let him know how we feel about the current legislation (EU Regulation 1/2005 of December 2004) and now demand that a maximum 8 hour, one off journey time is introduced for all animals transported within the EU and for animals transported from the EU to Third nations such as Turkey.
Posted on November 13, 2016 by Serbian Animals Voice (SAV)
We are combining with German anti export campaigners to continue pressing for a one off 8 hour MAXIMUM journey time for all animals in transport.
This will be very much to the benefit of all animals, who currently endure the un- monitored and rather pathetic EU Regulation 1/2005 for animals in transport, which is the EU standard.Under this existing EU Regulation, journey times are:
Un-weaned Calves, Lambs and Foals – 9 hours of transport – followed by a minimum 1 hour break; with then another 9 hours of transport.Total time – 18 hours on the road with a minimum 1 hour rest period, which is taken ON the vehicle.
Pigs – 24 hours transport in a single journey.Animals should officially have access to water throughout then journey, but we very much question if this is often the case.
Cattle, Sheep and Goats – 14 hours of transport – followed by a minimum 1 hour break; with then another 14 hours of transport.Total time – 28 hours on the road with a minimum 1 hour rest period, which is taken ON the vehicle.Animals officially to be fed and given liquids during break if necessary, but we very much question if this is often the case.
Horses – except registered horses – can be transported for a maximum period of 24 hours.Must officially be given liquids, and if necessary fed every 8 hours; but we very much question if this is often the case.
Note in all cases above the ‘rest period’ is officially 1 hour minimum.There is NO maximum; but animals normally take the rest period STILL LOADED ON the vehicle.So you could have an example where cattle can be officially transported for 28 hours on the road.The rest period could be 1 hour but it could also be, for example, say 8 hours.There is no maximum rest period; but the rest period is normally taken with the animals remaining ON the vehicle.Hence for this example you get 28 hours on the road with say an additional 8 hours rest still on the vehicle.This would mean that animals are confined on a truck for a minimum of 36 hours, which we consider is outrageous.
We and others are calling for a ONE OFF MAXIMUM journey time of 8 hours or less.
We are mailing German Chancellor Merkel to ask her to put pressure on the EU to reduce animal journey times to a one off 8 hours maximum. She has influence at EU level; but also has German elections next year – she needs votes ! – we want something in return.
Below you will find a sample letter which you can copy and then send to chancellor Merkel.
E mail your copy of the sample letter to the following address:
You can of course use the sample letter as a guide and amend it to your own requirements.
Here below is the Sample Letter – we provide both English or German versions for you to select; copy and send.
SAMPLE LETTER
German Version
Sehr geehrte Bundeskanzlerin Frau Dr. Merkel,
im Rahmen der 8hours Kampagne im Jahr 2012 haben mehr als 1,2 Mio. Bürger die EU-Kommission aufgefordert die langen, qualvollen Tiertransporte mit lebenden Tiere auf acht Stunden zu begrenzen.
Jedes Jahr leiden Millionen von Tieren im Fernverkehr in ganz Europa.
Sie sind für Tage oder sogar Wochen in überfüllten LKWs oder Schiffen eingepfercht und extremen Temperaturen ausgesetzt.
Zudem erhalten sie nur sehr wenig Nahrung und Wasser – häufig werden auch die gesetzlich erforderlichen Ruhepausen ignoriert.
Es ist unfassbar, dass die EU-Kommission die Anforderung dieser 1,2 Mio. Bürger, Tiertransporte auf max. acht Stunden zu begrenzen, völlig ignoriert hat.
Laut EU-Verordnung Nr.1/2005 gelten für/und während der Tiertransporte folgende Richtlinien:
Tiere müssen frei von Hunger und Durst
Tiere müssen frei vom Schmerz, Verletzungen und Krankheiten,
Tiere müssen frei von Angst und Stress sein
Darüber hinaus ist es verboten, ihnen unnötige Schmerzen oder Leiden zuzufügen.
Dies sind nur einige der Punkte gegen die bei diesen lang andauernden Transporten verstoßen wird.
Leider existieren diese Anforderungen für einen humaneren Tiertransport oft nur auf dem Papier. Wirklich respektiert und eingehalten werden diese Anforderungen gerade bei Tiertransporten über acht Stunden nicht.
(Dies können Sie auch dem beiliegenden Video entnehmen.)
Alle Gespräche, die die Organisation EyesonAnimals mit den Herren Andriukaitis und Bernard van Goethem geführt hatte, endeten mit der enttäuschenden Antwort: “We cannot do anything“.
Somit sind die verantwortlichen EU-Kommissare lange untätig geblieben.
Laut Lissabon-Vertrag, können eine Million Menschen, die aus mehreren Mitgliedsstaaten kommen, mit Hilfe der Bürgerinitiative die Europäische Kommission auffordern, neue politische Vorschläge unterbreiten.
Diese 1,2 Mio. Menschen konnten die EU-Kommission bisher nicht dazu bringen das Elend der Tiertransporte über acht Stunden zu beenden.
Deshalb fordern wir Sie nun auf, sich dafür einzusetzen, dass diese Transporte zeitlich auf max. acht Stunden begrenzt werden. Bitte machen Sie Ihren Einfluss geltend, damit die Gesetze zu Durchführung der Tiertransporte endlich angepasst werden.
Vielen Dank!
——————————————————————
English version
Dear Chancellor, Dr. Merkel,
In the context of the 8hours campaign in 2012, more than 1.200.000 citizens have asked the EU Commission to limit the long, painful livestock transportation to 8 hours. Every year millions of animals are suffering from long-distance transport across Europe.
They are confined for days or even weeks in overloaded trucks or ships and exposed to extreme temperatures. In addition, they receive only very little food and water – often the legally required rest breaks are also ignored.
It is inconceivable that the EU Commission has completely ignored the requirement of these 1,2 million citizens to limit animal transports to max. eight hours.
According to EU regulation no. 1/2005, the following bids apply during transports:
• Animals must be free from hunger and thirst
• Animals must be free from pain, injuries and diseases,
• Animals must be free from anxiety and stress
These are just some of the points that are being breached in these long-lasting transports.
All this is up to now only on the paper, it was never really respected, as you can see from the enclosed videos.
All the talks conducted by the organization Eyes on Animals with Mr Andriukaitis and Bernard van Goethem ended with the disappointing answer: “We cannot do anything”.
Thus, the responsible EU commissioners have remained inactive for a long time.
According to the Lisbon Treaty, one million people who have to come from several Member States can use the citizens’ initiative to ask the European Commission to submit new political proposals. These 1,2 million people have not yet been able to stop the misery of the transport of animals over eight hours.
Therefore, we are asking you to make sure that these transports are timed to max. eight hours.
Please state your influence, so that the laws on the implementation of the animal transports are finally adapted.
Thank you
………
Here below are 3 video links from our friends and fellow campaigners at ‘Eyes on Animals’ (NL) which show a typical day with animal transport investigations.After watching the videos, which are also included in the sample letters above, we hope you will agree with us campaigners that EU animal transport regulations at the moment are very wrong, and you will add your support to the call for a one off 8 hour maximum journey time by sending the sample letter to Chancellor Merkel at the e mail address we have given earlier.
3 Videos (by Eyes on Animals)
Note these video links are also included in the sample letters given above:
Posted on November 11, 2016 by Serbian Animals Voice (SAV)
Above – sad day for all – except billionaires !
We are an animal rights / welfare group who also have concerns about the environment etc. Some may call us ‘tree and bunny huggers’, but that is fine with us. We feel that anything we publish is based on fact or substantial evidence.
We ask others, like those who voted for Mr. Trump this week, to consider the fact regarding the environment.
So, being tree huggers, we have looked a little more into this, educating ourselves more just like the Trump voters. We have found the following regarding the Paris climate agreement, signed up to by over 190 of the worlds nations, and now something which Trump says he is going to pull the US from.
Regarding Paris and environmental agreement, international law requirements are somewhat complicated. One of the reasons President Obama helped usher the deal into force early this year is because that meant that any country that was a party to the agreement couldn’t leave until it completed a four-year withdrawal process.
Michael Wara, an environmental law professor at the Stanford Law School, said Trump could use his office to issue an executive communication removing the United States from Paris, but even if he did that, the United States would still be a party for four years and could be subject to its legally binding procedural commitments.
The United States could take a shortcut and exit the UNFCCC, a move that could be likely, given Trump’s criticisms of the U.N. body. That could be done in one year rather than four, and would result in leaving Paris, as well. Or Trump’s administration could send observers to monitor negotiations but not participate in them and refuse to carry through on Obama’s nationally determined contribution pledge to cut carbon dioxide emissions 26 to 28 percent compared with 2005 levels by 2025.
The United States is poised to miss that target anyway without additional action, which will be a hard sell now that Republicans are in control of the legislative and executive branches of the federal government.
The United States and other parties are called upon to submit new nationally determined contributions for 2030 by 2020, and Wara said Trump could put forward a “business-as-usual” placeholder to stay on the right side of international law.
But it seems unlikely that the bombastic president-elect would opt for quiet underachievement over a grand exit.
Ebell has said he hopes Trump will submit the deal to the Senate, or that the upper chamber will vote on its own initiative. Doing so would “make it clear where the United States stands,” he said in a recent interview.
Departing Paris has consequences
Greens at home as well as those attending the Marrakech conference said they still hope Trump might not pull out of Paris, despite having spent more than a year saying he would. They note that he’s not a seasoned politician.
“There’s no history of how he would move from the campaigning arena to the governing arena,” said David Waskow of the World Resources Institute.
Several observers note that Trump has seldom articulated clear policy plans, which they said leads them to believe he might reconsider his campaign positions once in office.
Wara said Trump didn’t seem to realize, for example, that his stated support for U.S. oil and natural gas development was at odds with his pledge to prop up the domestic coal industry, which has been undermined by cheap and abundant gas.
Climate advocates also say Trump shouldn’t walk away from Paris, because doing so could undermine his ability to interest other leaders in issues that are higher on his to-do list.
“If a President Trump were not to honor U.S. commitments under the Paris Agreement, it will negatively impact his ability to get the cooperation of world leaders on other issues he cares about, such as trade and terrorism,” said Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, at a briefing in Marrakech.
Frank Maisano of Bracewell LLP said Trump’s ascension doesn’t undermine Paris, because it’s “symbolic.”
“This is only a blow to global efforts in the form of the U.N. process, which continues to be a difficult and often broken process,” Maisano said.
He added, “Clean energy and technology issues will continue to play a significant role in international efforts to reduce emissions,” echoing a theme environmentalists are also voicing in the wake of the election.
“Look for nations who aren’t enamored with the details of how to meet the Paris Agreement to use this as a reason to raise new concerns,” Maisano said.
At a briefing yesterday with U.S. climate advocates in Marrakech, a reporter for a New Delhi-based outlet asked if poor countries can “count on the moral obligation of the next U.S. president” when it comes to climate finance pledges.
The Trump victory makes it unlikely that the United States will make good on the $2.5 billion it still owes to the U.N. Green Climate Fund, and the new administration is likely to curtail foreign aid overall.
We have looked into the facts; have Trump voters ?
Serbian Animals Voice (SAV) 