Region: Europe

A Humane World: Kitty Block's Blog

Humane Society International / Europe

Good news in our work means animals thrive and we therefore celebrate it. That’s how it was for me this morning when I woke up to the report that there will be no whaling in Iceland this summer. Something my colleagues at Humane Society International and I have fought since Iceland resumed whaling in 2003.

That’s right. For the first time in 16 years, no whales—not endangered fin whales, not minkes, no whales at all—will die at the point of a whaler’s harpoon in Icelandic waters. That just makes my day.

Hvalur hf., the single Icelandic company that hunts great whales, decided not to carry out any whaling. In 2018, another firm, IP Útgerð, that takes minke whales, also halted whaling.

We’ll have to stay vigilant, however, because public policy in Iceland has not been of much help to us, despite the presence of elected officials who deplore the whaling industry and know what a smirch it is on Iceland’s reputation.

In February, Fisheries minister Kristján Þór Júlíusson authorized a continuation of fin and minke whale hunts until 2023, and Iceland’s Marine Research Institute has set a maximum yearly catch quota between 2018 and 2025 of 209 fin whales and 217 minke whales.

Iceland decided to resume whaling in 2003 in opposition to the International Whaling Commission’s (IWC) 1986 commercial whaling ban. In 2018, Icelandic whalers harpooned 145 fin whales and six minke whales.

In our book, even one whale killed for high-end sushi is one too many, and the respite gives us some time and space to rev up our public outreach and our work not merely to limit whaling’s political and commercial influence in Iceland, but to drive it into the history books where it truly belongs.

Humane Society International / Europe

BRUSSELS—Humane Society International celebrated the 10-year anniversary of the historic European Union ban on trade in commercial seal products. The EU ban, a watershed event in the global campaign to stop commercial sealing, was adopted by an overwhelming majority in the European Parliament on 5th May 2009.

The impact of the EU ban — and of the many other seal product trade prohibitions that followed — is undeniable. Prices paid for seal fur in Atlantic Canada have declined by more than 70%, while 90% of licensed commercial sealers no longer participate in the slaughter because it is not profitable for them to do so. As a result, more than 3 million seals have been spared a horrible fate in the past decade alone. International prohibitions on the seal product trade contain clear exemptions for products of indigenous seal hunts.

Rebecca Aldworth, executive director for HSI/Canada, said: “Ten years ago, I watched firsthand as the European Parliament voted to prohibit commercial trade in seal products. In the minutes before the vote, images of so many suffering and dying baby seals kept flashing through my mind. When the vote was in, I knew that the beginning of the end of this brutal industry had just happened. As someone who has observed commercial sealing for 18 years, I will be forever grateful to the EU for its moral leadership and for saving so many seals from a horrible fate.”

Dr Joanna Swabe, senior director of public affairs for HSI/Europe, added: “The adoption of the EU Regulation on trade in seal products was certainly an amazing landmark victory for animal protection, but this was not the end of the story. In the years that followed, the legislation was subjected to and, most importantly, withstood separate spurious legal challenges in the European Courts and at the World Trade Organization. Most importantly, the WTO Appellate Body ruled that, while the legislation needed tweaking, the EU was justified in banning the cruel products of commercial seal hunts on the grounds of public morality. By 2015, I found myself back in the European Parliament talking about seals again as a legislative proposal to amend the ban to make it fully compliant with WTO rules was considered by MEPs. Yet again, the seal product trade ban survived cynical attempts from opponents to water it down and thankfully the EU’s borders remain firmly shut to commercial seal products.”

FACTS

  • In 2009, the European Parliament voted 550 to 49 in favor of a strong ban on trade in products of commercial seal hunts. In 2010, the EU ban came into force.
  • The commercial seal hunt in Atlantic Canada has been the largest slaughter of marine mammals on earth, with hundreds of thousands of seal pups clubbed and shot to death each year.
  • The seals are killed primarily for their fur. The Canadian government notes that the pelts of young seals are the most valuable and not surprisingly, more than 98% of the seals killed each year are less than three months of age.
  • The commercial seal hunt in Atlantic Canada is conducted by commercial fishermen who, on average, earn a tiny fraction (less than 5%) of their annual incomes from killing seals. Today, only a few hundred fishermen participate in the annual slaughter.
  • Harp seals—the primary targets of the Atlantic Canadian commercial seal hunt—are ice-breeding animals, and climate change is fast destroying their sea ice habitat. According to Garry Stenson, section head for marine mammals for Fisheries and Oceans Canada, “We’re seeing two things: fewer animals pupping and when they do, there is a high mortality with it…The ice isn’t thick and it breaks up before the animal can survive on its own… We’ve been seeing years where ice mortality is very high. We’ve seen dead pups that have drowned. It has a big impact on mortality.”
  • To date, more than 37 countries—including the 28 Member States of the European Union—have prohibited trade in products of commercial seal hunts for conservation or animal welfare reasons.
  • Canada and Norway challenged the EU ban at the World Trade Organization. In 2013, the WTO upheld the right of the EU to ban the trade in commercial seal products on the grounds of public morality. In 2014, the WTO considered an appeal to that ruling. Although the WTO Appellate Body, once again, ruled largely in favour of the EU, the EU agreed to make minor amendments to the ban to achieve full compliance to WTO rules before 18th October 2015
  • The WTO ruling in seals set a legal precedent because it was the very first time that animal welfare has been recognised by the WTO as a legitimate public moral concern.
  • In September 2015, the European Court of Justice rejected an appeal brought by commercial sealing interests and some Inuit representatives with regard to the EU ban on trade in seal products. This appeal concerns a 2013 decision by the European General Court, which rejected the appellants’ request to find the legal basis and implementing measures for the EU ban on commercial seal product trade unlawful.
  • In October 2013, the Court of Justice of the European Union preserved the EU ban on commercial seal product trade by dismissing an appeal by commercial sealing and fur trade interests and some Inuit representatives. The appeal sought to overturn a 2011 decision from the European General Court that the applicants’ action against the EU ban was inadmissible.
  • A separate application to have the EU seal product trade ban overturned was rejected in April 2010.

END

Media contact: Jo Swabe, jswabe@hsi.org

 

Humane Society International / Europe

Minke whale
Kevin Schafer/Alamy

STRASBOURG (16 April 2019)—At the European Parliament’s final plenary session before the EU elections, MEPs voted in favour of a new Regulation on the conservation of fishery resources and the protection of marine ecosystems through technical measures, following many months of difficult negotiations between the European Parliament, Council and Commission. The proposed Regulation is intended to merge and simplify 33 different pieces of EU legislation, including the existing rules on cetacean bycatch. While some positive advances were made, the legislation adopted misses important opportunities to improve the protection of marine species and their habitats.

Dr Joanna Swabe, senior director of public affairs for Humane Society International/Europe, issued the following statement after the vote:

“The revision of bycatch rules had great potential to significantly increase protections for European cetacean populations and prevent the horrific and needless deaths of porpoises, dolphins and whales accidentally entangled in fishing gear. Unfortunately, the legislation that passed will only marginally improve the status quo.

“In the past few weeks alone, the mutilated corpses of hundreds of dolphins have washed up on French beaches; these poor animals represent only a fraction of the thousands who are accidentally killed by the fishing industry in the EU each year. Sadly, the legislation adopted today will likely continue to fail these sensitive species since the measures adopted for marine mammals are not sufficient to mitigate bycatch effectively.”

Swabe faulted MEPs and Member States for ignoring key information during the legislative process, saying, “They turned a blind eye to the recommendations of scientific experts, such as the ICES1 Bycatch Working Group, ASCOBANS2 and ACCOBAMS3. They also failed to take up the Commission’s proposal to require the use of Acoustic Deterrent Devices in specific marine areas where they are much needed.”

The legislation did include minor improvements to existing cetacean bycatch rules:

  1. The adoption of overarching objectives for technical measures adopted under the new framework, and a mechanism for monitoring and reporting on their effectiveness;
  2. A new requirement for EU Member States to provide information on the effectiveness of existing mitigation measures and monitoring arrangements with respect to bycatch of sensitive species, including cetaceans, seabirds and sea turtles;
  3. A requirement that Member States submit joint recommendations for additional mitigation measures for the reduction of incidental catches of these species;
  4. The inclusion of sea turtles in the technical conservation measures regulation – a species that had been overlooked in the Commission’s original proposal.

“So much more could have been achieved if the politicians had been more concerned with protecting marine species and their habitats, rather than the interests of the fishing industry,” said Swabe.

Facts

  • The current EU cetacean bycatch legislation (Council Regulation (EC) No 812/2004) has been found to have significant weaknesses and is being repealed and incorporated into the proposed regulation on the conservation of fishery resources and the protection of marine ecosystems through technical measures (2016/0074).
  • Technical measures are the rules for where, when and how fishing may take place. These measures are fundamental to regulating the impact of fishing on stocks and marine ecosystems, and they will play a key role in achieving some of the main objectives of the EU Common Fisheries Policy, such as implementing an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management, minimising the impacts of fisheries on the wider environment and avoiding unwanted catches and gradual elimination of discards.
  • The Commission proposal to require the use of Acoustic Deterrent Devices in the following fishing areas, where there is documented evidence of negative impacts on cetacean populations, was disregarded: VIa (west of Scotland), ICES sub-areas VIII and IXa (southwest waters), the Mediterranean and Black Seas.

 

END

 

Media contact: Jo Swabe, jswabe@hsi.org

 

1 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea

2 Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas

3 Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans of the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and Contiguous Atlantic Area

Humane Society International / Europe

BRUSSELS—Alesha Dixon, Martin Clunes OBE, Deborah Meaden, Anneka Rice, Susan George, Virginia McKenna OBE, Brian Blessed OBE, Fiona Shaw CBE, Steve Backshall and Lucy Watson have written to EU Environment Commissioner Karmenu Vella urging him to support a proposal by African nations to protect the imperiled giraffe. The species has declined by up to 40 percent in the past 30 years. The proposal will be discussed at a meeting of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) in Colombo, Sri Lanka starting in late May, but it has little chance of success without the support of the EU voting bloc.

In an open letter co-signed by the Born Free Foundation, Humane Society International, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, Pro Wildlife, Animal Defenders International, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Center for Biological Diversity, Animal Welfare Institute, and Avaaz, the stars urge the EU Commission to “stick its neck out for the giraffe” by supporting the of listing the giraffe on Appendix II of CITES.

The letter reads: “The world’s tallest mammal is beloved by many for its beauty and grace. These gentle giants are icons of the African savannah, and every child knows that “G” is for giraffe. But sadly, this iconic species is suffering a “silent extinction” because few are aware of their plight. Giraffe populations have decreased approximately 40% in the last 30 years. If we do not act quickly the giraffe could disappear forever.”

The proposal has been put forward by the Central African Republic, Chad, Kenya, Mali, Niger and Senegal, and is supported by the 32 African nation members of the African Elephant Coalition, which released a declaration last month in recognition of the steep decline in giraffe populations. An Avaaz petition has also received 1.3 million signatures of support from citizens around the world.

Scientists have labeled the plight of giraffes a “silent extinction” due to the lack of attention and support the species is receiving. Securing the support of the voting bloc of EU Member States is absolutely critical for the giraffe proposal to succeed, but as yet the EU is hesitant to support. EU representatives are due to meet and agree their position on this and other proposals on 28th March, so the celebrities and animal groups have come together to increase their call on the EU to act.

Virginia McKenna OBE, actress and co-founder of The Born Free Foundation, said: “The trivial items – giraffe bone handles, a Bible cover, a giraffe foot – made from the parts of dead giraffes – should be objects of shame. The world has gone mad if people value these more than the living, beautiful creatures which play such a vital role in the survival of the African savannah. Animals suffer and feel pain as we do- or don’t we care?”

Singer Alesha Dixon said: “It saddens me to think that our children or grandchildren could grow up in a world without giraffes, so I hope that policy makers do the right thing and support the proposal to protect this beautiful species.”

Adam Peyman, Humane Society International’s wildlife programs and operations manager, said: “The giraffe is going quietly extinct as they are slaughtered for trophies and their body parts used for trinkets. As there are currently no regulations on trade in giraffes, a CITES listing would provide critical measures to ensure giraffes are not pushed to the brink of extinction, and the EU’s vote holds the key to its success.”

Jan Creamer, President of Animal Defenders International, said: “We must act now to prevent the further decline of this iconic species. African nations need our help to protect threatened giraffe populations, and we urge the EU to step up and support this important measure, before it’s too late.”

While giraffe populations continue to wane, the species has become common in the wildlife trade. A Humane Society International report shows that the United States imported nearly 40,000 giraffe specimens between 2006 and 2015, such as hunting trophies, decoration items, and knife handles, in addition to large shipments of live animals. The EU is also a key consumer of giraffe products; online research detailed in the proposal records over 300 giraffe products for sale by sellers based in seven European Union countries: Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom.

The proposal seeks to provide giraffes with protections to bring under control international trade in the currently unprotected species. An Appendix II listing would require exporting countries to prove that giraffe specimens were legally obtained and that the export is not detrimental to the survival of the species. Additionally, the listing would provide researchers and governments with important data to track the trade in giraffes throughout the world.

The nine organisations and the 32 African countries also strongly encourage CITES Parties, the CITES Secretariat, inter-governmental organisations and non-governmental organisations to support the proposal.

Notes to Editors:

  • The US, the only country for which import data is available, imported a total of 39,516 giraffe specimens between 2006 and 2015, some of these originating in countries where giraffe populations are Critically Endangered, Endangered, and Vulnerable.
  • The 18th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES will take place in Colombo, Sri Lanka, from 23 May to 3 June.
  • Members of the Africa Elephant Coalition, which announced support for the giraffe proposal, include Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Togo, and Uganda.
  • Watch a short awareness video on the giraffe’s silent extinction here.

Media contacts:

Humane Society International (UK): Wendy Higgins, whiggins@hsi.org +44 (0) 7989 972 423

DOWNLOAD: video and photos of giraffe skin, bone and other items sold in the USA for the wildlife trade here.

Humane Society International / Europe

BRUSSELS—International animal conservation and protection organisations — the Born Free Foundation, Humane Society International, International Fund for Animal Welfare, Pro Wildlife, Animal Defenders International, and the National Resource Defense Council — are calling on European Union (EU) Member States to support a proposal by African nations to protect the imperiled giraffe from international trade that has contributed to the species’ decline by 40 percent in the past 30 years. The Central African Republic, Chad, Kenya, Mali, Niger and Senegal want giraffes listed on Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), but they need the support of the EU’s voting bloc, without which the proposal is likely to fail.

The six nations have the backing of fellow members of the African Elephant Coalition (AEC), a consortium of 32 African countries, which released a declaration stating its support for the proposal last month, in recognition of the steep decline in giraffe populations.

Scientists have labeled the plight of giraffes a “silent extinction” due to the lack of attention and support the species is receiving, so the animal groups are urging the European Union to stand in solidarity with the 32 African countries. Winning the support of the EU Member States is absolutely critical for the giraffe proposal to succeed, but as yet a number of MSs look minded to oppose. EU representatives are due to meet and agree their position on 28th March, so the animal groups are increasing their call for the EU to stand in solidarity with the 32 African nations that want to see the giraffe proposal pushed through.

Daniela Freyer from Pro Wildlife, said: “We call on the EU to join the majority of African countries in their efforts to better protect giraffes. The species is endangered, populations have plummeted to less than 100,000 animals and we must ensure that over-exploitation for international trade is not fueling declines.”

While giraffe populations continue to wane, the species has become common in the wildlife trade. A Humane Society International report shows that the United States imported nearly 40,000 giraffe specimens between 2006 and 2015, such as hunting trophies, decoration items, and knife handles, in addition to large shipments of live animals. The EU is also a key consumer of giraffe products; online research detailed in the proposal records over 300 giraffe products for sale by sellers based in seven European Union countries: Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom.

The proposal, to be voted on at the 18th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES in May, seeks to provide giraffes with protections to bring under control international trade in the currently unprotected species. An Appendix II listing would require exporting countries to prove that giraffe specimens were legally obtained and that the export is not detrimental to the survival of the species. Additionally, the listing would provide researchers and governments with important data to track the trade in giraffes throughout the world.

Adam Peyman wildlife programs and operations manager for Humane Society International, said: “The giraffe is going quietly extinct as they are slaughtered for trophies and their body parts used for trinkets. As there are currently no regulations on trade in giraffes, a CITES listing would provide critical measures to ensure giraffes are not pushed to the brink of extinction, and the EU’s vote holds the key to its success.”

The six organisations and the 30 African countries also strongly encourage CITES Parties, the CITES Secretariat, inter-governmental organisations and non-governmental organisations to support the proposal.

Jan Creamer, President of Animal Defenders International, said: “We must act now to prevent the further decline of this iconic species. African nations need our help to protect threatened giraffe populations, and we urge the EU to step up and support this important measure, before it’s too late.”

Notes to Editors:

  • The US, the only country for which importing data is available, imported a total of 39,516 giraffe specimens between 2006 and 2015, some of these originating in countries where giraffe populations are Critically Endangered, Endangered, and Vulnerable.
  • The 18th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES will take place in Colombo, Sri Lanka, from 23 May to 3 June.
  • Members of the Africa Elephant Coalition, which announced support for the giraffe proposal, include Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Togo, and Uganda.
  • Watch a short awareness video on the giraffe’s silent extinction here.

Media contacts:

Humane Society International (UK): Wendy Higgins, whiggins@hsi.org +44 (0) 7989 972 423

Brussels premiere of BAFTA winner 73 Cows brings transition message to EU Parliament

Humane Society International / Europe

Brussels – European Union policy makers are being urged to help farmers transition away from animal agriculture and towards plant-crop farming in order to capitalise on the growing trend in plant-based eating. Speaking at an event this week at the European Parliament organised by Humane Society International/Europe, farmers, ecologists and academics agreed there is an urgent need for the EU to support transition farming to help farmers adapt and seize the economic opportunity of consumer diets shifting away from meat, dairy and eggs.

A major report from the Rise Foundation recently warned that Europe’s meat and dairy production must be halved by 2050 in recognition of its significant contribution to environmental degradation such as greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity loss. The EU currently raises 9 billion farm animals for food each year – with more than 360 million of these animals spending all or part of their lives in intensive cage systems – and globally the figure is an estimated 82 billion animals.

Oxford University’s Dr Marco Springmann, and Harvard University’s Dr Helen Harwatt were joined at the Brussels symposium event by ecologist and rewilding expert Alan Watson Featherstone, and Swedish farmer Adam Arnesson who is transitioning his pig farm to grow oats for a plant-milk company. Policy makers were also treated to Europe’s first public screening of BAFTA 2019 award winning short film 73 Cows about British cattle farmers Jay and Katja Wilde who sent their herd to a sanctuary and switched to crop cultivation instead.

Alexandra Clark, HSI/Europe’s food policy consultant, said “European consumers are more aware than ever of the animal welfare and environmental impacts of meat, dairy and egg production. The current level of animal production is simply unsustainable, and the continued growth of plant-based alternatives is inevitable. This presents Europe’s farmers with an exciting opportunity to meet this changing demand by transitioning away from industrial animal agriculture to plant-crop production. With the current reform of the EU’s agricultural policy, MEPs have a clear chance to assist farmers in those transition efforts by shifting subsidies away from propping up industrial animal production, and instead supporting farmers switch to fruit, vegetables, fungi, grains and leguminous crops that are growing in demand from an increasingly plant-based public.”

The EU is currently reforming its Common Agricultural Policy, with a crucial vote planned in the Agriculture Committee in early April. Dr Helen Harwatt from Harvard University believes this is a major opportunity for EU policymakers to take leadership in animal to plant protein agricultural shifts.

Dr Harwatt said: “Repurposing portions of agricultural land to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere will be crucial for limiting warming to 1.5°C. In turn, restoring this land to its natural habitat opens the door for reintroducing animal species, which would help toward tackling the wildlife crisis. Animal to plant protein shifts are essential and policy makers must ensure that policies and support are put in place to help farmers make this transition”

Swedish farmer Adam Arnesson has shifted his farm production from solely animal-based to the cultivation of multiple crops for human consumption including oats for oat milk production. In doing so he has doubled the number of people his output feeds annually and halved the climate impact per calorie.

Farmers Jay and Katja Wilde, who star in Alex Lockwood’s 73 Cows short film, were keen for MEPs to understand that the pressure and fear for the future that many animal farmers feel, could be alleviated if support existed to help them ‘plant for the planet’.

Speaking at the EU Parliament screening of 73 Cows, Jay Wilde said: “We are thrilled that our film has come to the European Parliament where we hope it inspires politicians to vote for a better future for both farmers and animals. Giving our cows to a sanctuary to live out their years in a safe haven was the best decision of our lives, it became the only decision when sending them to the abattoir was no longer something I could live with. But it’s been a very scary journey too because you’re stepping into the unknown. This shift in farming isn’t just a personal choice, its necessary to protect the environment, so if there was financial and practical support to help farmers like me plant for the planet, it would make life so much easier.”

Spanish MEP Florent Marcellesi said “We need to leave behind our unsustainable farming model and animal-based diets. Instead, we should turn as soon as possible to ecologic plant-based ones and build a farming model which is sustainable, healthy and respectful to animal welfare.”

Italian MEP Eleonora Evi said “Climate change is here, it’s already happening. For our sake but also for the sake of every other species on this planet, we need to take action to mitigate its effects by adopting an ‘all hands on deck’ approach. This means opening up the dialogue to different stakeholders. The agriculture sector has one of the highest levels of emissions, and therefore must become part of the solution. The transition to sustainable production methods and re-naturalization of agricultural areas must inevitably be considered.”

Finnish MEP Sirpa Pietikäinen said “If everyone would shift their diets towards plant-based, it would be beneficial for public health, animal welfare, biodiversity and climate.”

Facts

  • Up to 20 percent (€ 32.6 billion) of the EU’s entire annual budget is spent on animal agriculture (including feed)
  • Around 71 percent of EU farmland is used to grow animal feed
  • Animal agriculture is responsible for 14.5 percent of all human-induced greenhouse gas emissions
  • According to Euromonitor, in 2017 plant-based milks represented 12 percent of the global fluid milk market, and dairy alternatives are predicted to grow to a market value of €19bn by 2022
  • Europe is currently the largest market for meat substitutes, having a 39 percent global market share and, with an eight percent annual growth rate, they are predicted to reach a global net worth of €4.2bn by 2020
  • A 2017 report by Rabobank suggests that alternative proteins could represent a third of total EU protein demand growth in the next five years
  • The EAT-Lancet Commission found that a transformation to healthy diets from sustainable food systems is necessary to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement
  • The EAT-Lancet Commission also found that transformation to healthy diets by 2050 will require substantial dietary shifts, including a greater than 50 percent reduction in global consumption of foods such as red meat and sugar, and a greater than 100 percent increase in consumption of healthy foods, such as nuts, fruits, vegetables, and legumes
  • Humane Society International’s Forward Food program is one of the largest plant-based culinary training programs globally. Aimed at encouraging universities, caterers, and other institutions to provide more vegan options, Forward Food helps to facilitate diet shifts at scale. HSI believes that by making animal-free food options tastier, more satisfying and widely available, more and more people will opt for meat-free meals which is good news for animals, people and the planet. Humane Society International advocates compassionate eating – or the Three Rs: “refining” diets by avoiding products from the most abusive production systems, and “reducing” or “replacing” animal products with plant-based foods.

Media contact:

United Kingdom: Wendy Higgins whiggins@hsi.org +44 (0)7989 972 423

Humane Society International

Oikeutta Elaimille

How many animals are killed globally on fur farms?

Each year, tens of millions of animals are bred and killed to supply the fashion industry with not only traditional fur coats but, increasingly, real fur trim for hooded jackets, and real fur pompoms used on hats, gloves, shoes and a range of other clothing and accessories. It’s estimated that as many as half of all animals raised for their fur are killed to satisfy the market for fur trim.

The industry has seen a decline in recent years, as consumers, retailers, designers turn their backs on real fur, and politicians vote in favour of fur production bans and, increasingly, fur sales bans.

Annual fur production:

  • 2014: Europe 43.6m, China 87m, North America 7.2m, Russia 1.7m
  • 2018: Europe 38.3m, China 50.4m, North America 4.9m & Russia 1.9m
  • 2021: Europe 12m, China 27m, North America 2.3m & Russia 600,000
  • 2022: Europe 10m, China 22m, North America 2m, & Russia 600,000

(Figures shown are estimates focused on mink, foxes, raccoon dogs, chinchillas and sables. Rabbits and animals trapped for their fur are excluded.)

What about trapping in the wild?

In addition to fur farming, many millions of animals are trapped and killed for their fur in the wild. Most fur from wild-trapped animals comes from the USA, Canada and Russia. In 2018, almost 3 million animals were killed for their pelts by trapping in North America, including 647,000 raccoons and 363,000 coyotes. Traps inflict great pain and anguish, both to the target animals and to unintended victims such as pets and endangered species.

Often left for days, unable to seek shelter, food or water, these animals can cause serious injury to themselves in an attempt to escape. When the trappers finally arrive, they will often stomp or beat the animals to death. We exposed the brutality of trapping animals for fur in an undercover investigation, in collaboration with Born Free USA.

Have any countries banned fur farming?

Yes, over the past two decades, 25 countries have either voted to ban the practice, have prohibited the farming of particular species, or have introduced stricter regulations that have effectively curtailed the practice. The Canadian province of British Columbia has also banned the farming of mink for their fur. Several other countries, including Romania, are also discussing the introduction of bans on fur farming. See the latest list at furfreealliance.com/fur-bans.

Have any countries banned fur sales?

Yes, in 2021 Israel became the first country in the world to ban real fur sales. In the United States, California became the first US state to ban the sale of fur in 2019 (the ban came into effect in January 2023) following similar bans in cities including Los Angeles, San Francisco, Berkeley and West Hollywood. To date, 16 towns and cities in the United States have banned fur sales and more US cities and states are looking to follow suit in the future. In the UK, the government is considering action on fur sales.

Is fur farming cruel?

Yes. Animals bred for their fur such as foxes, rabbits, raccoon dogs and mink are confined in small, barren, wire cages for their entire lives. Unable to express their basic natural behaviours such as digging, roaming large territories and, for semi-aquatic mink, swimming and diving, these naturally active and curious animals have been shown to display the stereotypical behaviour of mental distress such as repeated pacing and circling inside their cages. Such confined spaces can also result in animals self-mutilating and fighting with their cage mates.

Numerous recent investigations at so-called certified “high welfare” mink, fox and raccoon dog farms in Finland have revealed a catalogue of deplorable conditions and distressing suffering, including over-sized “monster foxes,” animals with open wounds, deformed feet, diseased eyes, and even incidents of mink being driven to cannibalism. HSI has also exposed the conditions suffered by chinchillas on fur farms in Romania and the plight of baby foxes, mink and raccoon dogs in China.

How are animals on fur farms killed?

When their pelts are at their prime, before they are one year old, the animals are gassed, electrocuted, beaten or have their necks broken. In December 2015 HSI filmed foxes on a Chinese fur farm being beaten to death, and rabbits being given a blow to the head before being shackled from their back legs and their throats cut before being skinned. Instances of raccoon dogs being slammed against the ground then skinned whilst still showing signs of consciousness have also been documented in China. (Warning, graphic footage)

See the evidence for yourself: Take a look at HSI’s investigation at a fox and raccoon dog fur farm in China, and our investigation at a rabbit fur farm in China, both December 2015. Warning: graphic footage.

Which designers and retailers are fur-free?

Increasingly, international designers, brands, department stores and luxury online retailers are turning their backs on cruel real fur. In recent years, Gucci, Prada, Chanel, Moncler, Dolce & Gabbana and Versace have gone fur free, as has well-known former-fur-using brand Canada Goose – to name just a few! By supporting fur-free designers, we can all help to put the business of animal cruelty out of fashion. For a full list, check out the Fur-Free Retailer website at furfreeretailer.com.

Humane Society International / Europe

BRUSSELS—Last week the European Pharmacopoeia Commission announced its decision to modernize Europe’s accepted process for safety assessment of vaccines for pertussis, commonly known as whooping cough, by adopting a modern cell-based method in place of an inhumane and unreliable test in mice. Pertussis is known for uncontrollable, violent coughing, which often makes breathing difficult. Previously, government health authorities required the extensive testing for vaccine quality and safety before products are approved and marketed for human use, a process that inflicts severe pain and distress on millions of animals each year worldwide.

Laura Viviani, HSI regulatory science advisor for vaccines, said: “Humane Society International welcomes the decision to remove the mouse histamine sensitisation test and associated testing requirements from the European Pharmacopoeia, and the adoption of a more reliable cell-based test in its place. The mouse test has long been scientifically criticized for its high variability and poor reproducibility, which often leads to repeat testing, with associated costs, delays and needless animal suffering. The European Commission is to be commended for embracing the use of historical safety data confirming the consistency of different batches of pertussis vaccine in place of cruel and repetitive animal testing of each and every new batch.”

Removal of the mouse histamine sensitisation test from the European Pharmacopoeia will become effective on 1 January 2020, and could spare as many as 36,000 mice used yearly for pertussis vaccine testing for the European market. This decision, coming exactly one year after the authority officially scrapped another notorious animal study, the Abnormal Toxicity Test, further reinforces Europe’s commitment to the elimination of animal testing.

HSI is urging vaccine manufacturers and authorities globally to follow Europe’s example by embracing the “consistency approach,” which combines good manufacturing practices to ensure quality and consistency of vaccines with an accurate historical analysis of safe use and of lot releases. This approach is ripe for application to a host of human vaccines, such as tetanus, diphtheria and rabies, which continue to undergo invasive animal testing for every new manufactured batch.

Facts:

  • Worldwide approximately 65,000 mice are used for the histamine sensitisation test each year: 48,000 by manufacturers and 17,000 by national control laboratories. These tests covered the release of approximately 850 lots of pertussis vaccines each year. (Hoonakker, M. et al. Safety testing of acellular pertussis vaccines: Use of animals and 3Rs alternatives. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2017;13:, 2522-30)
  • The mouse histamine sensitisation test is used by manufacturers and control laboratories to verify the safety of the pertussis vaccines by checking the presence of residual toxin in the vaccine.
  • Most regulatory authorities require a “lethal challenge” procedure, in which groups animals are infected with a virus or other disease agent after being immunized with different dilutions of a vaccine. Animals in the “control” group are given no vaccine, and are left to suffer, without pain relief, until they die.
  • Humane Society International supports the “Three Rs” approach to animal testing: replace animal testing with alternative methods, reduce the use of animals in testing, and refine testing procedures to minimize animal suffering.

Media contact: Nancy Hwa (Washington, D.C.), nhwa@hsi.org

Humane Society International / Europe

  • HSI

KATOWICE, Poland–At the United Nations’ global climate change conference, COP24, animal welfare charity Humane Society International and Israeli environmental organization Green Course held an official side event that brought together experts and policymakers to discuss pathways to incentivise plant-based diets and reduce reliance on meat, dairy and egg products from animals housed in intensive factory-farming environments. The Mitigation Potential of Plant-based Diets: From Science to Policy gave delegates a toolkit of policy recommendations and inspiration to see them implemented.

The focus of the panel was summed up by Florent Marcellesi MEP, “If we are what we eat, nowadays we are climate change. Around 15 percent of greenhouse emissions come from animal farming, almost as much as cars and planes. This is the result of our current unsustainable food system, based on the overproduction of low-cost meat. This means huge consequences over the climate, but it also impacts our health, the lives in rural areas and the animal welfare. Civil society is already organising to fight against the low-cost meat industry and its impacts, but we need policy measures. Let’s build an ecological food system that creates good quality jobs while protecting the climate, our health and the animals.”

With the key message that we must take action to ensure a sustainable future, Marie Persson of the Nordic Food Policy Lab said, “Governments play a key role in facilitating the necessary shift to healthy and low-climate impact diets. In the Nordic countries sustainable and healthy diets are moving up the agenda and while we are not seeing very harsh regulation, soft policy tools working in tandem with changing consumer preferences are proving to be a recipe for success.”

Give now to help animals all over the world.

Dr. Marco Springmann from the Oxford Martin Programme on the Future of Food at the University of Oxford highlighted the need for dietary changes to stay within planetary boundaries of the food system, saying, “Without large-scale dietary changes towards more plant-based diets, there is little chance to avoid dangerous levels of climate change. Incentivising such dietary changes will require integrated, multi-component approaches that include providing information, access, and setting clear economic incentives. Important starting points would be to update national dietary guidelines to reflect the latest scientific evidence on healthy and sustainable diets, explore the use of full cost accounting of foods, and align agricultural policies with health and sustainability concerns.”

Dr. Cristina Tirado, director of International Climate Initiatives for the Center for Urban Resilience at Loyola Marymount University, said, “There are many opportunities to achieve co-benefits from actions that reduce emissions and at the same time improve health by shifting consumption away from animal products, especially from ruminant sources, in high-meat consumption societies, toward less emission intensive healthy more plant based diets, with more vegetables, fruits and pulses.”

Ifat Zur of Green Course said, “There is much policy discussion when it comes to sectors like transportation or energy, yet none relating to animal products. This is absurd, as the livestock industry is responsible for even higher greenhouse gasses than those other sectors, and livestock reduction involves several benefits on both individual and national levels. Policy should not only comply with research and public trends but also aim to take a leading role in the movement.”

The HSI/Green Course panel was the only event to directly address the implementation of national policies to shift towards more plant-based diets in order to combat climate change. And it was a message very much needed, as COP24’s meat- and dairy-focused menu options became the topic of much discussion amongst participants. HSI experts encouraged organizers of the massive two-week conference to replace its meat-dominated menus with more planet-friendly foods in the future, offering them culinary training on vegan cuisine from its Forward Food programme, which works with institutions and corporations to put more plants on plates.

Alexandra Clark, Humane Society International’s food policy consultant, said: “Industrial animal agriculture is a major cause of greenhouse gasses. While policies exist to reduce the climate impact of the energy and transport sector, Western governments have yet to adopt policies to reduce the climate impact of large-scale factory farming. Globally, 90 billion farm animals are raised for food each year – and the ramifications to the environment and animal welfare caused by the systems in which the majority of those animals are housed in are far too big to ignore. Governments must act. And with scientists warning that we are nowhere near on track to meet the 1.5 degrees necessary to avoid catastrophic climate change, it is critical that action is taken to move to more plant-based diets. COP24’s meaty menus symbolise the ostrich-like attitude of policy makers around the world. We hope they take us up on our offer of vegan culinary training to ensure that future climate change conferences offer more planet-friendly plant based food.”

Forward Food encourages universities, caterers, and other institutions to provide more plant-based options as the number of people wanting meat-free and dairy-free meals increases rapidly. In the UK, the programme is led by HSI’s Forward Food Chef, author and 2016 UN Special Ambassador for pulses, Jenny Chandler.

Speaking at the COP24 event, Chandler said “Everyone is seeing increased interest in meat-free eating and I love showing people that plant-based food can be really delicious and vibrant and not tasteless or worthy as is often assumed. HSI’s Forward Food programme is a fantastic way of getting chefs to embrace this trend and it feels great to be part of something that really can make a difference to people’s health, the environment and animal welfare.”

END

Media contact: Wendy Higgins, Director of International Media, whiggins@hsi.org

Humane Society International

Learn More Button Inserter