Page Content
European Union Directive and Other International Developments on Layer Hen Housing
Key Features of Directive
Reaction to the Directive in the EU
Other International Developments
Comparison with Australian Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals - Domestic Poultry 1995
Trade Implications
Conclusions
Key Features of Directive
EU Council Directive 1999/74/EC of 19 July 1999 (the Directive) lays down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens. Key elements of the Directive are:
- specifications for "enriched" cages and alternative systems
- implementation by 1 January 2003 of new minimum standards for all "unenriched" cages (including 550 cm2 per hen) and a requirement that from that date no new "unenriched" cages be built or brought into service for the first time
- a phase out in the EU by 1 January 2012 of the "unenriched" cages, and
- a review of all egg production systems by 1 January 2005.
Reaction to the Directive in the EU
Despite current support from many animal welfare groups for the Directive, pressures are expected from welfare groups, particularly in Germany and the UK, not to accept enriched cages as the final solution given that an enriched cage is still a cage. EU producers are concerned that the Directive is going too far in raising their costs.
An EU Directive is not law, and the ban will not become law until it is enacted by member States. However, the Directive requires member states to establish the necessary regulatory arrangements to comply with the Directive by 1 January 2002, and to report back to the Commission on the arrangements. (An EU Directive differs from an EU Regulation in that the Regulation is a law, which immediately comes into force in the member states.)
The likelihood that some EU member states will delay or fail to put in place legislation and/or otherwise act to comply with the Directive is considered a possibility given the long gestation period of the Directive and a history of similar delay and change in other EU agricultural reform. Changes to it are seen as likely following the review to be conducted by 2005. It should be noted that Animals Australia does not share this assessment, and that their colleagues in Europe are adamant that there be no delay by member states in implementing the necessary legislation.
Enriched cages are to a large extent still unproven in commercial operations. Sweden is carrying out some trial commercial operations on a relatively small scale. Sweden will trial four types of enriched cages over the next 18 months. This is part of the new technology approval process required in Sweden.
Trials of three types of aviary systems have been completed in Sweden, with some poor performance associated with the ban on beak trimming. These aviary systems were subsequently approved, but with restrictions that make them largely uneconomical. There is a growing understanding in the EU, that it is very difficult to avoid unacceptable feather picking and cannibalism levels in aviary type systems, unless beak trimming is allowed.
The Directive is seen by policy makers in some EU countries to be driven by a need to respond to community concerns, with specific initiatives not necessarily fully underpinned by scientific evidence of animal welfare inadequacies of conventional cages.
Other International Developments
The Directive appears to have attracted little active consideration from policy makers in the USA, Canada, Japan, Korea, Taiwan or indeed anywhere outside the EU. In fact, as an issue, layer hen housing systems attract relatively little community or government attention outside the EU, Switzerland, New Zealand and Australia.
Switzerland is a small egg producer. The Swiss Government had a ten year phase out of cages which ended in 1992. Imported eggs produced in cage systems are labelled as "eggs produced in cages".
In New Zealand, eggs from non-caged systems supply only a small percentage of the egg market. Animal welfare including layer hen welfare are strong community concerns. Some three years ago a sub-committee of the Animal Welfare committee was established to monitor developments overseas. This sub-committee, which includes representatives of industry and the veterinary profession, sees no need to recommend a particular response at this point in time to the EU Directive, given that the Directive has a projected 12-year implementation period.
Comparison with Australian Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals - Domestic Poultry 1995
The current floor space requirement in Europe of a minimum of 450cm2 is slightly more generous than the Australian minimum (also 450cm2) as floor space is measured differently here than in the EU. Inclusion of the space under the baffle in the Australian measurement currently allows an unrestricted floor space area as low as 385cm2 per bird in some cage systems. Changes proposed in the Directive (once implemented) would result in further discrepancies in floor space for existing cages (proposed 550cm2 in the EU from 2003).
The introduction of furnished cages and specifications for alternative systems are not currently addressed in Australia’s code.
Trade Implications
EU animal welfare standards will increase production costs in a range of animal product industries and in order that these industries not be disadvantaged, an EU policy objective is to seek to impose similar standards (and costs) on producers outside the EU who supply the EU. The EU would like to see a worldwide standard imposed, so that EU exporters could compete on the world market.
The current EU effort to place animal welfare on the agenda for the upcoming WTO round is a determined one. Australia will seek to oppose this due to its implications for trade generally and a range of agricultural exports such as livestock.
There is also a view that an effect of the Directive will likely be a fortuitous reduction in the flock size in the EU, and the elimination of the current EU egg surplus.
The direct trade implications for Australia of a WTO round outcome in keeping with that sought by the EU, will be insignificant given the limited exports of egg products and processed foods containing egg products from Australia to the EU.
Exports from Australia to the EU of egg products and processed foods containing egg products are small. In 1998-99 egg product exports were confined to exports of dried egg yolks valued at only $5,000 and exports of processed foods containing egg products (biscuits, cakes and pastry exports) over the same period were valued at only $1.35m.
An important aim of the current effort to develop a national animal welfare strategy in Australia is to address the EU focus on making animal welfare a trade and market access issue. This focus will be ongoing regardless of the WTO Millennium Round outcome.
Conclusions
- Only in the EU and Switzerland and nowhere else in the world, have steps been taken to ban or phase out conventional cages.
- Given the 12-year implementation period of the EU Directive, the Directive has attracted little attention by policy makers outside the EU. Policy makers generally do not, at this stage, see a need to do more than monitor developments within the EU.
- In conventional cages currently used in both Australia and the EU, the minimum space per laying hen in Australia is currently less than the minimum space per laying hen in the EU. If the EU Directive is implemented the gap between Australia and the EU in terms of minimum space per bird would widen.
- Delay in implementation of the Directive is possible, as is protracted non-compliance with the Directive by some EU member states. The 2005 EU review may also modify the European position, although this is unknown at this stage.
- The direct trade implications for Australia of a WTO round outcome in keeping with that sought by the EU, will be insignificant given the limited exports of egg products and processed foods containing egg products from Australia to the EU.
- An important aim of the current effort to develop a national animal welfare strategy in Australia is to address the EU focus on making animal welfare a trade and market access issue. This focus will be ongoing regardless of the WTO Millennium Round outcome.