You are here:

Your concerns

We receive many letters and campaign postcards on a wide range of issues that concern both organisations and individuals. These are some of the recent campaigns.

Animal Aid's findings on slaughterhouses

The Meat Hygiene Service (MHS), an executive agency of the Food Standards Agency, enforces the Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995 in slaughterhouses on behalf of Defra.  The MHS has reviewed the Animal Aid footage.  Evidence of serious breaches of animal welfare legislation in one of the three slaughterhouses filmed was identified and one slaughterman has had his licence suspended.  

Animal cruelty within a slaughterhouse is not tolerated.  The MHS has over 1200 highly qualified vets and meat inspectors working in Great Britain’s slaughterhouses.  Their staff will and do take appropriate enforcement action if the individuals responsible for slaughtering animals fail to comply with animal welfare regulations.

I can assure you that no person can slaughter animals in a slaughterhouse in Great Britain without going through rigorous assessments and licensing processes a measure that helps ensure that animals are killed humanely.  A new regulation on the protection of animals at the time of killing was agreed on 22 June at the Council of the European Union.  The new regulation provides that slaughterhouses will have to appoint a specific person responsible for animal welfare and ensure that their staff are properly trained and certified.

Energy from Waste (EfW) Incineration Campaign

We have received about 136 letters or emails from people concerned about Incineration, Waste, Recycling and Climate Change.

The Government is strongly committed to managing waste in the most sustainable way.  Its preference is to manage waste as far up the waste hierarchy as possible, with Energy from Waste (EfW) ranking higher than landfill but below waste prevention, reuse and recycling.  The country needs residual waste treatment infrastructure as well as recycling and waste prevention in order to divert residual waste from landfill.  All intermediate technologies have residues which either goes to landfill or energy recovery.  Energy recovery, from either residual waste or a prepared fuel like solid recovered fuel (SRF), provides a considerable climate change benefit compared to the alternative of landfill, through avoided landfill methane emissions and with renewable energy from the biodegradable fraction of waste displacing fossil fuel based power generation.

Evidence from other European countries shows that very high rates of recycling and EfW can coexist (e.g. Netherlands 65% recycling /33% EfW; Sweden 42%/45%; Denmark 41%/55%). Over the last five years in the UK an increase in rate of municipal waste incineration from 9 – 11% has gone hand-in-hand with recycling increasing from 19% to 34%.

Local authorities, not central Government, have the responsibility for deciding how waste is managed in their respective areas. Choice of technology must reflect local circumstances, which will vary, and it is important that any plans for waste to energy facilities emerge out of local waste strategies to ensure the optimisation of reuse, recycling and composting activities.

All applications for Private Finance Initiative (PFI) credits have to demonstrate how they support the whole waste hierarchy - from increasing recycling and composting rates, to improving waste minimisation and increasing diversion from landfill.  PFI is helping to drive up recycling rates, with authorities applying for credits now being pressed to achieve rates above the 50% average target for 2020. The total capacity of any residual waste treatment infrastructure will be determined by reference to such recycling targets.  Furthermore, modern waste contracts are sufficiently flexible as to enable an authority to bring forward increased recycling rates when they wish to do so. 

The climate change impacts of any technologies proposed are assessed by the authority during the procurement process.  Authorities are also required to explore Combined Heat and Power (CHP) potential.  This can be achieved using the heat from an energy from waste plant; or from the production of SRF used as a fossil fuel substitute by an industrial energy user or public sector heat user.  There are financial incentives in place to achieve carbon benefits through CHP where possible.

Waste incineration facilities are regulated to a very high standard through the Waste Incineration Directive (WID) by the Environment Agency; and emission standards under the WID are more stringent than for other forms of energy generation from combustion. Emissions of a range of pollutants from municipal waste incinerators have fallen, typically by at least 80% in recent years and the incineration of municipal solid waste (MSW) accounts for less than 1% of UK emissions of dioxins.

Viva’s campaign on pig welfare

We’ve received over 4,000 post-cards from people opposed to the use of farrowing crates for pigs.

The Animal Welfare Act 2006 protects the welfare of animals on-farm and makes it an offence to cause suffering to any animal.  The Act also contains a duty of care to animals - this means that anyone responsible for an animal must take reasonable steps to ensure the animals welfare needs are met.  A person must look after an animal's welfare as well as ensure that it does not suffer.

In addition the Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulations 2007 specify in detail the welfare conditions under which pigs must be kept.  There is also a pig welfare code which encourages good husbandry.  Failure to follow the code's recommendations can be used in evidence in court to support a welfare prosecution. 

Defra would prefer to avoid the close confinement of all sows, but there are currently no free-farrowing systems suitable for widespread commercial adoption.  Farrowing crates protect piglets from being crushed by the sow - one of the largest causes of pig mortality.  it is equally important to maintain the welfare of the piglet as that of the sow.

There is a time limit on how long sows may be kept in farrowing crates: from seven days before the predicted day of farrowing until the piglets are weaned.  After this period sows in the UK must be moved back to loose housing accommodation in which they are free to turn round easily. 

Defra has funded research to develop and test commercially viable farrowing systems which do not closely confine the sow, but provide adequate protection to piglets.  Some such alternative systems seem promising in an experimental environment, but in others, piglet mortality has been unacceptably high.  It remains the case that results need to be replicated consistently under commercial conditions.

As yet, the risk of piglet mortality in alternative farrowing systems remains unacceptably high.  Our research has contributed to the European Food Safety Authority's examination of a number of issues, including farrowing systems, which will form the basis of the next review of the EU Directive on pig welfare.

Further information

Campaign against the use of wild animals in circuses

We’ve received 3843 emails from people who are against the use the wild animals in circuses.

At the moment, circus animals are protected by the Animal Welfare Act 2006 which prevents unnecessary cruelty or suffering to any vertebrate animal.  This Act introduced a new duty of care for any animal under the control of man, which makes owners and keepers responsible for ensuring that the welfare needs of their animals are met.  This duty applies to animals kept in circuses just as to pets, farmed animals and other domestic and companion animals.  The five welfare needs include:

  • a suitable environment (place to live);
  • a suitable diet;
  • the exhibition of normal behaviour patterns;
  • to be housed with, or apart from, other animals (if applicable); and
  • to be protected from pain, injury, suffering and disease. 

During the passage of the Animal Welfare Bill through Parliament a Circus Working Group was established consisting of representatives of welfare organisations and the circus industry together with an academic panel from the scientific community.  The Group was charged with examining the issues relating to the transportation and housing needs of wild animals (i.e. animals not normally domesticated in the British Isles) used for performance in travelling circuses.  The conclusions were that there was not enough evidence to show that the welfare of wild animals in circuses is any better or worse than those in other captive environments and that available scientific evidence was insufficient to justify regulations being introduced to ban wild animals being used in circus performance. 

Compassion in World Farming’s campaign on chicken welfare

We have received around 30,000 emails from people who are concerned about the stocking density for meat chickens.

We have just come to the end of a 12 week consultation in England on the implementation of Council Directive 2007/43 concerning meat chicken welfare. The Directive provides for producers to stock up to a maximum of 39kg/m² with a further extension to 42kg/m² providing certain challenging criteria are met.   We believe that very few producers in this country will wish to stock up to 42kg/m² given the criteria that must be met and the stocking density requirements of individual assurance schemes.  We have therefore specifically asked a question in the consultation about whether our law should allow producers to stock up to 42kg/ m².  We will be carefully considering responses to this question and other issues raised during the consultation period.

Currently, there is no maximum stocking density limit laid down in EU or domestic legislation.  Defra’s Code of Recommendations for the welfare of meat chickens (published in 2002) recommends a maximum stocking density of 34kg/m2.  However, the Code qualifies this figure by stating that a variety of factors need to be taken into account when setting and monitoring stocking density in chicken houses at levels which promote good welfare.  The observance of any particular stocking density is important but cannot, by itself, ensure the welfare of birds.  There is a close relationship between stockmanship, environmental control and stocking density.  Birds will be maintained in good condition only if the balance is right and the onus is on the producer to demonstrate that welfare is not compromised whatever the stocking density.  Indeed, recent Defra funded research carried out in 2003 concluded that other husbandry and management factors are, within limits, more important than stocking limits per se for animal welfare.

The new EU rules do for the first time produce a legal baseline for all producers, including those who do not participate in any voluntary assurance schemes, while complementing, not replacing, existing voluntary assurance schemes.

The EU rules focus on the overall welfare of birds, as well as the individual factors that contribute to welfare, and include the monitoring of birds at slaughterhouses so that signs of poor welfare can be raised with both producers and agencies responsible for animal welfare and food safety.

Beak trimming in flocks of laying hens

We’ve received over 235 emails asking for an end to beak trimming.

Beak trimming is currently carried out to prevent severe welfare problems in laying hen flocks.  The EU Directive on laying hens (99/74/EC) prohibits all mutilation, but permits Member States to authorise beak trimming in order to prevent feather pecking and cannibalism, provided it is carried out by qualified staff on birds that are less than 10 days old and intended for laying.  The UK is currently using this derogation, but from 1 January 2011 beak trimming will be banned under the Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) (England) Regulations 2007.  Similar, but separate legislation has been implemented by the Devolved Administrations for Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. 

The Government is working with industry, breeders and animal welfare groups to discuss alternatives to enable industry to adapt to the ban without causing worse welfare problems for laying hens.  We recognise that in protecting the welfare of laying hens, there is a fine balance between reducing the number of mutilations carried out and ensuring that the birds do not suffer insults, such as feather pecking and cannibalism.  Therefore, it is not unreasonable to review the 2011 deadline and the Farm Animal Welfare Council’s (FAWC) recent opinion on Beak Trimming of Laying Hens will help in this consideration.

Marine Conservation Society’s Marine Reserves Now! campaign.

The Marine Conservation Society renewed its Marine Reserves Now! campaign towards the end of last year to persuade the Government to set clear targets in the Marine and Coastal Access Bill for the introduction of protected marine reserves.  The campaign has generated over a thousand letters to Defra in its first months.

The Marine and Coastal Access Bill

The UK is a world leader in many aspects of marine management and protection and as our seas are some of the busiest in the world, demands on their resources are increasing.  Because of this, there is a real need for a wide ranging and structured approach to marine management that covers activities in our seas and around our coastline.

The Marine and Coastal Access Bill is the first of its kind in the world and will greatly improve the way the UK uses its vast marine resources and maximises the benefits it gets from them.

Marine Conservation Zones

The Bill includes marine conservation proposals which provide for the designation of a new type of marine protected area – Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) – which will help the UK meet our commitment to establish an ecologically coherent and well managed network of marine protected areas by 2012.  MCZs will conserve rare and threatened habitats and species, as well as those which are representative of the biodiversity found in our seas.

  • Timetable for the creation of MCZs

Ministers will designate MCZs, in consultation with stakeholders, to form a network of sites.  This will strengthen the provisions in the Bill and provide greater clarity and certainty for stakeholders as to the Government’s intentions.  The Government does not intend to define in the Bill what an ecologically coherent network is.  This is still an evolving concept and we think that to set a definition in law now may prove too restrictive in the future.  What we intend to do instead is publish guidance that will accompany the Bill, and it is here that we will set out our understanding of what an ecologically coherent network in the UK seas should look like. 

  • Ensuring that MCZs work properly

The Bill requires the Secretary of State to report to Parliament on progress made in carrying out the duty to designate an ecologically coherent network in 2012 and at least every six years after that.

Finding out more

You can read more about the Marine and Coastal Access Bill on the Defra website at: www.defra.gov.uk/marine/legislation/

Page last modified: 17 November 2009
Page published: 23 June 2008