Tail docking in the EU: a case of routine violation of an EU Directive

H. Lerner; B. Algers

Tail docking in the EU: a case of routine violation of an EU Directive

in The ethics of consumption

Autor:innen:

H. Lerner

H. Lerner ¹Linköping University, Department of Culture and Communication, 581 83 Linköping, Sweden

Search for other papers by H. Lerner in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed

und

B. Algers

B. Algers ²Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Environment and Health, P.O. Box 234, 53223 Skara, Sweden; henrik.lerner@liu.se; bo.algers@slu.se

Search for other papers by B. Algers in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed

Art:: Kapitel

Seiten:: 374–378

DOI:: https://doi.org/10.3920/9789086867844_062

Über Institut einloggen

Sofortzugang erwerben (PDF-Download und unbegrenzter Online-Zugang):

42,00 €35,00 € excl. VAT

Add to Cart

Token einlösen

The question of tail docking in pigs is an ongoing problem despite the fact that it should have been solved long ago. In the Council Directive 2008/120/EC it is clearly stated that routine tail docking in pigs are prohibited and enrichment materials for the pigs must be provided, which is in line with the high animal welfare standards that the European Union aim for. This directive is in force in all member states. The habit of tail docking is widespread as a simple comparison by two reports by EFSA shows. We present these results together with results showing that some countries, like Sweden, Finland and Lithuania manage to still keep their production without tail docking routinely. We therefore suggest that the gap between the strong intentions of prohibiting tail docking in the directive and the weak (or non-existent) enforcement of it in most countries in the EU needs to be closed. Of the arguments saying that this will be a troublesome task, we will here focus on two of them. The first is that the directive is unclear or actually allows tail docking. The second is that the habit of routine tail docking is economically profitable. Both these arguments will not hold. There are three ways to bridge the gap. The first is to lower the threshold, lowering the animal welfare level in the directive. We believe strongly that this solution is contradictory to the trend in today’s legislation about animals and not in line with the Lisbon treaty. The second is to demand stronger enforcement which is in line with the EU Strategy for the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2012-2015. The third is to accept that different countries will not enforce the directive, then leaving it to the consumer to choose between more or less animal friendly pork. EU seems to adopt this way in contrast to the EU AW Strategy. To properly inform consumers about animal welfare is a good help although it demands a lot of resources and is a rather slow process. Therefore, in order to have a rapid solution to the gap one need to have a stronger enforcement of the law.

Zitierungsangaben

Save
Cite
Inhalt per Mail versenden

Link teilen

Sie können einen Link zu dieser Seite per E-Mail senden:
Inhalt per Mail versenden
oder den Link direkt kopieren:

https://brill.edhh.ma/abstract/book/9789086867844/BP000062.xml
Der Link wurde nicht kopiert. Ihr aktueller Browser unterstützt das Kopieren über diese Schaltfläche möglicherweise nicht.

Link wurde kopiert

Reduzieren
Erweitern
Nach oben

The ethics of consumption

The citizen, the market, and the law

ISBN:: 9789086867844

Verleger:: Wageningen Academic

Print-Publikationsdatum:: 01 Nov 2013

Fachgebiete
- Biowissenschaften

Kennzahlen

	Insgesamt	Letzte 365 Tage	In den letzten 30 Tagen
Aufrufe von Kurzbeschreibungen	102	32	7
Gesamttextansichten	7	0	0
PDF-Downloads	8	0	0

Afrikanistik	Internationale Beziehungen	Nahost- und Islamwissenschaften
Altorientalistik und Ägyptologie	Internationales Recht	Pädagogik
Amerikanistik	Judaistik	Philosophie
Asienwissenschaften	Klassische Altertumswissenschaft	Religionswissenschaft
Bibelauslegung	Kunstgeschichte	Slawistik und Eurasienkunde
Biologie	Literatur- und Kulturwissenschaften	Sozialwissenschaften
Biowissenschaften	Medienwissenschaft	Sprachen und Linguistik
Buchgeschichte und Kartographie	Menschenrechte und humanitäres Völkerrecht	Theologie und Christentum
Geschichte	Musikwissenschaft

Fachgebiete

Autor:innen

Open Access

Produkt-Informationen

Über uns

Kontakt

Tail docking in the EU: a case of routine violation of an EU Directive

Zitierungsangaben

Link teilen

The ethics of consumption

The citizen, the market, and the law

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Kennzahlen

Kennzahlen