OVERVIEW OF RESULTS OF A SERIES OF MISSIONS TO EVALUATE CONTROLS OF ANIMAL WELFARE ON FARMS IN SEVEN MEMBER STATES CARRIED OUT

Transcription

1 EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH & CONSUMER PROTECTION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL Directorate F - Food and Veterinary Office DG(SANCO) /9008/2002 GR Final OVERVIEW OF RESULTS OF A SERIES OF MISSIONS TO EVALUATE CONTROLS OF ANIMAL WELFARE ON FARMS IN SEVEN MEMBER STATES CARRIED OUT BETWEEN JUNE 2001 AND JUNE /01/03 31/03/

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION LEGISLATION REVIEWED FVO PROCEDURES OVERVIEW OF MAIN CONCLUSIONS OF THE SERIES Legislation Implementation Surveillance SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE MEMBER STATES ACTION BY COMMISSION SERVICES...8 ANNEX I DETAILS OF INDIVIDUAL MISSIONS...10 ANNEX II OVERVIEW OF ACTIONS UNDERTAKEN AND PLANNED BY COMPETENT AUTHORITIES

3 1. INTRODUCTION The Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) carried out missions to seven Member States (MS) between June 2001 and June 2002, to evaluate the controls of animal welfare standards on holdings with pigs, calves and laying hens. The MSs visited as part of this series of missions as well as details of other previous missions to all other MSs on these issues are indicated in the table in Annex I to this report. All other Member States had been visited in relation to the welfare of pigs and calves on farm and in relation to poultry production in missions carried out between 1999 and An interim report on the earlier missions in this sector was presented at the Standing Veterinary Committee meeting of 11 th July 2001 (Doc SANCO/2481/2001). 2. LEGISLATION REVIEWED The following table provides the EU legislation relevant to this series of missions. Legal instrument Title of legal instrument O.J. publication details Council 88/166/EEC Directive Complying with the judgement of the Court of Justice in Case 131/86 (annulment of Council Directive 88/113/EEC of 25 March 1986 laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens kept in battery cages). L 74, , p. 83 Council 91/629/EEC Directive Laying down minimum standards for the protection of calves L 340, , p. 28 amended by L 25, , p. 24 and L 76, , p.30 Council 91/630/EEC Directive Laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs L 340, , p. 33 Council 98/58/EC Directive Concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes. L 221, , p. 23 Council 93/119/EC Directive On the protection of animals at the time of slaughter or killing (Chapter III - outwith slaughterhouses) L 340, , p.23 Council 99/74/EC Directive On the welfare of laying hens. L 203, , p. 53 Commission 2000/50/EC Decision Concerning minimum requirements for the inspection of holdings on which animals are kept for farming purposes. L 19, , p. 51 3

4 3. FVO PROCEDURES The performance of the Competent Authorities (CA) in terms of the transposition, implementation and enforcement of the relevant EU requirements was assessed by: - the conduct of interviews with the responsible authorities at central, regional and local level, - the review of relevant documentation and records concerning legislative and administrative measures, controls, and follow up action, - evaluation of the performance of on-farm inspections carried out by local official veterinarians on farms selected by the CA. After each mission, a draft version of the mission report was sent to the Central Competent Authorities (CCA) concerned for their written comments. Any factual inaccuracies were corrected in the final report and relevant points of clarification from the CCA were incorporated as footnotes to the text. The individual reports, upon which this general report is based, are available on the European Commission website at: On receipt of the final report, each CCA was asked to provide an action plan aimed at addressing the recommendations made in the report. This report gives an overview of the state of implementation of the EU legislation in this area in the MS concerned, and identifies the most important areas which impinge upon the effectiveness of controls. The recommendations made in individual reports as well as the actions planned or undertaken by the CCA are summarised in Annex II to this report. 4. OVERVIEW OF MAIN CONCLUSIONS OF THE SERIES 4.1. Legislation Although a comprehensive review of all of the relevant legislation was not carried out, it was noted that Finnish and German legislation had established norms for air quality, floor characteristics and light. In establishing maximum concentrations, which interprets the EU requirement that gas levels are not harmful, the point at which action must be taken has been harmonised. It was also established, however, that in five of the seven Member States, at the time of the visits, there was inadequate transposition of EU legislation: Finland Minor problems with certain definitions. Germany Federal legislation transposing Council Directive 88/166/EEC had been declared null and void following a decision of the Constitutional Federal Court. The court interpreted that birds kept in conventional cages would be unable to rest and this was incompatible with the requirements of federal legislation on this subject. There was also a failure to refer to the Convention of the Council of Europe on the welfare of animals kept for 4

5 farming purposes in the recitals of the federal legislation. The federal legislation transposing Council Directive 91/630/EEC also suffered from a similar failure to refer to the Convention of the Council of Europe. Greece Council Directive 99/74/EC had not been transposed into national legislation. This should have been transposed by Ireland The transitional period for compliance with the EU requirement for accommodation for calves did not respect the deadline in the Directive. Spain Insufficient legal basis in certain regions to permit the imposition of sanctions Implementation Inspection programme CAs are required to inspect a statistically representative sample of holdings each year. Although the inspections carried out on a sample of farms meets this requirement, this merely provides an estimate on the level of noncompliance and does not result in a sufficient level of monitoring and enforcement. In most cases, the selection of farms was left to the local level. Checks were often made when on the farm for some other purpose. While this is permissible under EU legislation, certain problems with these "integrated" inspections were noted: Aspects of animal welfare were not always covered in any meaningful detail as the inspector was frequently focused on the main objective of the other inspection e.g. disease eradication. Farms were selected in function of the main inspection programme e.g. residue monitoring, resulting in certain categories of farms being excluded. The most frequently detected deficiencies on normal working farms concerned inadequate ventilation systems, overcrowding, dirty animals or poor flooring Targeted checks EU legislation does not require animal welfare checks based on risk assessment. The experience in several MSs was that targeted inspections picked up proportionately more deficiencies and were a better use of resources. CCAs in several MSs had advised local services to select farms based on previous inspection findings or on the risks from certain methods of rearing or size of farm. Complaints from the public or information received from other official services generally involved farms where there had been a total breakdown in management. 5

6 Definition of certain requirements for pigs The lack of clear definitions in EU legislation for adequate lighting, flooring and environmental enrichment frequently resulted in a wide variation in standards. The written guidance provided by the CCAs concerning these criteria was often a repetition of the legal texts. The more specific requirements laid down in the recent amendments of Council Directive 91/630/EEC 1 provide further clarification on several of these issues. However, certain areas remain where interpretation by the CA will be necessary e.g. materials for environmental enrichment and insulation, heating and ventilation of the building. The reports of the Scientific Veterinary Committee - Animal Welfare Section, e.g. on the welfare of intensively kept pigs, provide useful information on these issues 2 and could be useful background information to CAs when implementing the legislation Definition of certain requirements for calves Fibrous food is not defined in Council Directive 91/629/EEC (as amended) and there was wide variation in what is considered appropriate fibrous food for calves. This issue needs to be considered further by Member States and the Commission Services when revising Council Directive 91/629/EEC Definition of certain requirements for laying hens Difficulties with the definition of certain criteria were general to intensive livestock buildings and are already mentioned for pigs (e.g. ventilation systems) Surveillance Inspection Insufficient training or guidance was the single biggest factor resulting in unsatisfactory inspections. On occasion, inspectors were not sufficiently confident in assessing the criteria, which were listed on their checklists. There were even cases where the inspector relied on the farmer s confirmation that the requirements had been met, without verifying the actual conditions. Inspectors frequently failed to address the following issues, applicable to animal welfare on farms: Records of any medicinal treatments given and mortality rates (point 5 of the Annex of Council Directive 98/58/EC); 1 Council Directive 2001/88 (OJL 316, , p. 1) and Commission Directive 2001/93 (OJL 316, , p. 36). 2 Report of the Scientific Veterinary Committee, Animal Welfare Section on the welfare of intensively kept pigs (1997) is available at: 6

7 Appropriate care for sick or injured animals (Article 12 and 98/58/EC and Article 3 of Council Directive 98/58/EC); The method of killing casualty animals on large intensive units (Council Directive 98/58/EC and Council Directive 93/119/EC Chapter III - outwith slaughterhouses) This arose because the criteria on the checklists were based on the requirements of the Directive for pigs, calves or laying hens, without including the general requirements from Council Directive 98/58/EC or Council Directive 93/119/EC. Derogated practices were accepted as the norm for certain systems, as inspectors frequently did not ask for justifications for tail docking and teeth clipping of pigs (point 4 of Chapter III of the Annex of Council Directive 91/630/EEC). Checks were often not made of the suitability of devices to inspect birds where there were more than three tiers of cages (point 9 of the Annex of Council Directive 88/166/EEC). Difficulties were experienced by several inspectors regarding the applicable standard of housing for calves. This arises from the complexity of transitional periods in EU legislation. There are different standards for buildings constructed prior to 1994, for buildings constructed between 1994 and 1998 and for those built after The same standards will not be applicable on all calf holdings throughout the EU until 31 December Harmonised standards were already in force in Finland and Germany where these transitional periods had not been included in national legislation Recording of results Details of previous inspections and subsequent actions were systematically recorded in four out of the seven MSs visited. However, In Italy, there were very few reports indicating that any deficiencies had been detected. In Greece, no written reports of previous inspections were available. In Luxembourg the majority of inspection reports were a simple declaration that animal welfare was good, adequate or poor. Checklists, of varying detail were used by inspectors in all MSs visited. The nine categorises of infringements in Commission Decision 2000/50/EC had been used as a basis for checklists in several MSs. However, checklist design was not always adequate to ensure that all criteria were checked and subsequent infringements categorised Follow-up action In several of the visited MS, clear procedures were in place when deficiencies were detected and for follow-up action. Most veterinary services saw their role as remedying deficiencies rather than initiating punitive measures. Following detection of the common deficiencies, advice was 7

8 generally given. However, there was considerable variation in the effectiveness of the veterinary services to carry out revisits or take further enforcement action. In almost all MSs visited, there was a high tolerance for routine tail docking and tooth clipping of piglets and overstocking of hens in battery cages. The system of administrative fines, where it was used and under the control of one body led to the efficient application of sanctions for the more commonly occurring deficiencies. In cases of serious neglect, available powers were used, notably in Germany, to seize animals or to prohibit the farmer from keeping animals. In some MS there was a difficulty with such actions due to the length of time required to complete legal procedures. 5. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE MEMBER STATES Recommendations were made to each competent authority visited in the individual report of each mission. The following are the main issues which were the subject of recommendations The timely and complete transposition of EU legislation The inclusion of all categories of farms, on which the relevant species are kept, to ensure a representative sample of farms are checked The provision of guidance and training to inspectors The inclusion of all relevant legal requirements, in particular those from Council Directives 93/119/EC and 98/58/EC Recording of the results of inspections, in particular so that infringements are categorised in order to comply with the reporting requirements of Commission Decision 2000/50/EC Effective follow-up action and less tolerance of systematic problems such as routine mutilations, lack of environmental enrichment and overstocking. 6. ACTION BY COMMISSION SERVICES Arising from this General Report the relevant Commission Services in DG (SANCO) propose to take the following action: 6.1. To follow-up the situation in relation to each of the Member States identified in the report as not having properly transposed or implemented EU legislation, and to consider the possibility of further appropriate action where problems of non-compliance have not been satisfactorily addressed In the context of the ongoing revision of the legislation in question, to consider the appropriateness of proposing for inclusion in that legislation: 8

9 An obligation on member States to use a risk based approach to the design of animal welfare inspection programmes carried out by their competent authorities A requirement for each Member State to provide an action plan to the Commission at appropriate periods, indicating how they intend to address the major deficiencies detected as a result of such animal welfare inspection programmes, and A definition of fibrous food for calves In the context of any training programmes proposed on the basis of Article 36 of Council Decision 90/424/EEC (as amended) 3 to facilitate training of officials in member States in order to harmonise the approach to animal welfare inspections. 3 Council Decision of 26 June 1990 on expenditure in the veterinary field amended by: 90/638/EEC; 91/133/ EEC; 91/3763/ EEC; 92/117/ EEC; 92/119/ EEC; 92/337/ EEC; 92/438/EEC; 93/439/ EEC; 94/77/EEC; 94/370/EEC, 2001/12/EC, 2001/572/EC OJ L p.19 9

10 ANNEX I DETAILS OF INDIVIDUAL MISSIONS FVO missions concerning animal welfare on farm Member State 4 Dates of mission Report reference number Finland 11 to 15 June 2001 DG (SANCO) 3312/2001 Final Spain 10 to 14 September 2001 DG (SANCO) 3344/2001 Final Italy 22 to 26 October 2001 DG (SANCO) 3385/2001 Final Ireland 8 to 12 October 2001 DG (SANCO) 3383/2001 Final Luxembourg 5 to 9 November 2001 DG (SANCO) 3343/2001 Final Germany 26 to 30 November 2001 DG (SANCO) 3382/2001 Final Greece 10 to 14 June 2002 DG (SANCO) 8522/2002 Final 4 Previous missions were carried out to the other MS in relation to the welfare of pigs and calves: Netherlands DG (SANCO) 1235/1999, Portugal DG (SANCO) 1022/1999, UK DG (SANCO) 1102/2000, Sweden DG (SANCO) 1101/2000, Denmark DG (SANCO) 1098/2000, Austria DG (SANCO) 1099/2000, Belgium DG (SANCO) 1103/2000, France DG (SANCO) 1263/2000 and controls concerning laying hens were included in missions to: Belgium DG(SANCO)/1012/2000 Denmark DG(SANCO)/1063/99 Germany DG(SANCO)/1057/2000 Greece DG(SANCO)/1133/2000 Spain DG(SANCO)/1213/1999 France DG(SANCO)/1118/99 Ireland DG(SANCO)/1236/1999 Italy DG(SANCO)/1212/1999 Luxembourg DG(SANCO)/1013/2000 Netherlands DG(SANCO)/1060/99 Austria DG(SANCO)/1009/2000 Portugal DG(SANCO)/1158/2000 Finland DG(SANCO)/1160/2000 Sweden DG(SANCO)/1135/2000 and UK DG(SANCO)/1211/

11 ANNEX II OVERVIEW OF ACTIONS UNDERTAKEN AND PLANNED BY COMPETENT AUTHORITIES Country Mission No Overview of recommendations Action taken to date by CCA Finland 3312/2001 Spain 3344/2001 1) Transpose certain definitions into Finnish law. 2) Provide inspectors with further information and training. 3) Improve the standard of inspection and follow-up regarding sick and/or injured animals, euthanasia of animals, ventilation, documentation on veterinary treatments and mortalities. 4) Take measures to ensure the effective application of sanctions and monitor this at central level. 1) Spanish law should enable penalties to be imposed for infringements of animal welfare, in particular in Castilla La Mancha but also in each region of Spain. 2) Inspections carried out each year should covering a representative sample of the different systems of farming. 3) Provide inspectors with further information and training. 4) Improve corrective and follow-up action. 5) Address the difficulties reported in slaughtering unfit animals on farm 1) CCA indicated that legislation had been amended or explained the steps being taken to amend national legislation. 2) These topics were included in training provided for personnel at both municipal and provincial level in 2001 and ) In addition to training, the provincial veterinarians have also been instructed to address these issues. 4) CCA will begin on the spot checks of the other levels of the CA at the end of ) The possibility for a law on animal welfare, including provisions for penalties, which would be applicable throughout Spain is being examined. This would complement the legislation on penalties already existing in certain regions, but would be of fundamental importance in other regions where there is little legislation on this matter. 2) CCA held a meeting with the regions in October 2002, where a draft guideline was discussed. 3) Training has taken place and further training is planned. 4) & 5) Although it was reported that these issues would be addressed in a meeting with the regional CAs, no action plan to implement them has been received. 11

12 Italy 3385/2001 Ireland 3383/2001 1) Further develop and harmonise the system for carrying out inspections, so that all requirements are checked, the results are properly documented and that appropriate corrective action and follow-up action is taken (including sanctions). 2) Provide inspectors with further information and training. 1) Take measures to ensure that the deadlines for the transitional periods in EU legislation in relation to calves are respected. 2) Farm selection should ensure a representative sample of the different systems of farming. 3) Take measures to ensure the lighting regime for pigs laid down in EU legislation is respected. 4) Provide inspectors with further information and training. 1) Uniform national guidelines have been established, which will ensure that all the requirements are checked. The CA has also indicated that a system has been established for reporting the results of inspections. 2) Although in their response to the draft report, the CCA gave a commitment to address this recommendation, no action plan to implement it has been received. 1) National law introduced so that that all facilities for calves will comply by December ) CCA were of opinion that system of selection did meet the requirements. Nevertheless, methodology updated to include additional advice in relation to a) the type and b) the size of farm. Furthermore the selection process has been altered to incorporate the concept of the central selection by the CCA of a certain number of farms for inspection. 3) Error in transposition corrected and updated instructions have been issued to verify compliance. 4) Specific guidelines have been issued in relation to the issues raised. In addition, further training of staff has taken place and specific issues arising from the mission are being dealt with in conjunction with the national farm advisory body and farm industry representatives. Luxembourg To ensure that measures are taken to address the deficiencies seen during the mission. The CCA have given commitments to address the recommendations, in particular the issue of environmental enrichment and mutilations of pigs has been addressed by involving the pig farming organisations in advising their members. Inspectors have been instructed to pay more attention to medical and herd records during inspections. 12

13 Germany 3382/2001 1) Indicate their timetable for transposing the requirements of 91/630/EEC (as amended). 2) Evaluate the current measures in place in the 13 Länder, which have not been visited during this mission, to implement Council Directives 88/166/EEC and 91/630/EEC. 3) Farm selection should ensure an appropriate number of farms representing the different systems of farming are checked. 4) Medicinal and mortality records; the killing of sick or injured animals should be included in checks of animal welfare on farm. 1) The relevant federal law will enter into force, not earlier than and not later than ) CCA stated that all the Länder have issued instructions requiring the locally responsible authorities to enforce the law and that from the standpoint of enforcement no "gap in the system" is discernible. 3) & 4) In their comments on the draft report the CCA indicated that they had taken note of these recommendations, but no action plan to implement them has been received. Greece 8522/2002 1) Transpose Council Directive 99/74/EC into Greek legislation. 2) Ensure that the level of sanctions applicable for the commonly occurring deficiencies is proportionate to the offence. 3) Ensure that adequate resources are in place at all levels to enable a statistically representative sample of holdings to be inspected each year. 4) To continue to ensure that training of official veterinarians includes the inspection of animal welfare on farm. 5) To ensure that the reporting requirements of Commission Decision 2000/50/EC are met. In comments on the draft report CCA proposed certain actions to address these issues, namely 1) Legislation transposing Council Directive 99/74/EC will be published during the first half of ) Amendments to legislation are being proposed so that the level of applicable sanctions is proportionate to the offence. 3) CCA have requested administrations in the Prefectures to send them proposals on how they intend to meet this recommendation. 4) Training of veterinarians will continue in this field with courses scheduled for October and November ) Commission Decision 2000/50/EC has been incorporated into national law and specifications have been included in the standard checklists used for carrying out inspections. No further information was received on the actual implementation of 1-4 above. 13