AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

On the hoof

14th September 2006
Page 38
Page 39
Page 38, 14th September 2006 — On the hoof
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

The forthcoming EU livestock regs include a requirement for satellite tracking to be fitted to every truck. For some livestock hauliers enough is enough... Patric Cunnane reports.

For one livestock haulier of 23 years' standing, the introduction of new livestock regulations—they take effect next January — is the last straw. Paul Jarvis from Dereham, Norfolk is selling his truck and concentrating on the marketing of cattle instead.

"I'm fed up with all the rules and regulations," he says. These include what he believes is an impossible requirement: One of the new regulations is to have a belly or slump tank to collect the animals' bodily waste, but you're also obliged to have straw bedding in the back of the trailer. You can't have both because the straw will clog up the tank."

Some of the more expensive requirements in the regulations include the demand that all vehicles be fitted with satellite tracking systems (by 2009) to ensure the drivers are allowing animals the required rest breaks and sticking to their agreed routes.All trailers must be fitted with ventilation, temperature-control systems and watering facilities.

Prove you're competent

Drivers and other staff will have to sit exams to gain certificates of competence in animal handling and transport.

"The ventilation requirements could be the most expensive part of the regulations," says Jarvis, and satellite tracking is a big investment if you're starting from scratch. Hauliers I speak to find it a nuisance as much as anything. A driver's system broke down and even though he had done the route for two weeks he was lost. Others have found the system sent them down little back roads not suitable for trucks." So what is the origin of the changes coming in next year? Bodies like Naturewatch, together with other European animal welfare organisations, have for years been lobbying hard for improvements in the European live transport legislation. In March 2004 the issue was debated by the European Parliament and a number of improvements agreed. These were ratified by the European Council of Agriculture Ministers on 22 November 2004.

The old directive, which was open to interpretation by individual member states, was replaced by a regulation, meaning that all member states must meet the same standards. Animal welfare groups failed to get a new eight-hour limit agreed for the overall time that animals can be transported, and the European Parliament's recommendation of a nine-hour limit was rejected by the Council of Agriculture Ministers.

Frozen is preferred choice

The Freight Transport Association (FTA) sympathises with calls for the humane treatment of livestock and says it would prefer that UK operators transporting livestock did it within UK borders only and transported frozen meat when working abroad. It says that the current situation results in some of the work being given away to foreign hauliers.

"If operators are involved in transporting livestock abroad we welcome more stringent regulations. However, the rates for the job should reflect the level of regulation, especially if more expensive equipment is required." says Don Armour, FTA head of international service.

Markos Kyprianou, the European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection, wanted the new regulations to go further. "My ambition would have been to reduce travelling times and stocking densities further, but member states remain deeply split on this:' he says.

The problem was summed up by Scottish MEP Struan Stevenson. He told Naturewatch that a nine-hour limit would simply not he possible for his farmer constituents whose animals have to be transported to abattoirs from the Orkneys and Shetlands. The ferry journey alone, he pointed out would use up the proposed nine-hour limit.

Pressure to cut journeys

However, campaigners who wish to reduce journey times will not go away.

There is a commitment to review the regulation in 2011 and tougher restrictions may follow. It remains to be seen how many other operators will take one look at the detail and expense entailed by the new rules and decide to follow the example set by Paul Jarvis. Who could blame them if they chose to get out of the business before their profit disappeared? • CONTACTS www.naturewatch.org www.defra.gov.uk www.tta.co.uk


comments powered by Disqus