The European Commissioner for Health and Animal Welfare, Olivér Várhelyi, recently told animal welfare NGOs that the Commission does not intend to ban or phase out the use of high-concentration carbon dioxide gas (CO2) for pig stunning at slaughterhouses in the EU.
As previously reported, NGOs had sent letters to Várhelyi on issues where no progress had been made to revise the EU’s outdated animal welfare legislation. Last February, they contacted him about the stunning methods following the PigStun project.
This project, initiated and financed by the Commission, tested and compared different methods with the objective of encouraging EU pig slaughterhouses to adopt more animal-friendly methods using non-aversive stunning. In his reply last week, seen by The Brussels Times, the Commissioner referred in positive terms to the PigStun project.
He also mentioned that the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) concluded that exposure to CO2 at high concentrations is highly aversive and causes pain, fear, and respiratory distress. "Therefore, EFSA recommends that this exposure be replaced by exposure to other gas mixtures."
A difficult balance
The NGOs had written that urgent action is needed by the Commission and called for the removal of high concentrations of CO2 from the list of permitted stunning methods for pigs. In the reply, Várhelyi repeated the Commission’s previous reasoning that the regulation already permits the use of the non-aversive alternatives identified in the PigStun project.
"This means operators can already adopt them without requiring regulatory changes," he wrote, without addressing the point in the letter that "pig slaughterhouses are unlikely to switch to more humane alternatives as long as EU law allows them to continue to use high concentrations of CO2".
The Commissioner added: "It should be considered that while these alternatives present a balance of welfare, economic, and practical considerations (e.g. cost, ease of implementation), they also involve challenges for their commercial implementation (e.g. lower throughput rates, installation of stunning equipment) that could affect their application."
Back in February, Olga Kikou, Director of Animal Advocacy & Food Transition, stated that she was "deeply concerned" that the Commission once again appeared "more focused on prioritising economic arguments framed around 'competitiveness' and 'resilience' than on responding to citizens' expectations and clear scientific evidence on animal welfare."
The last deliverable in the PigStun project last year provided insights from stakeholders on the proposed alternatives, to reach general recommendations and facilitate a change away from conventional high-concentration CO2 stunning of pigs.
A Commission official told The Brussels Times that legislative follow-up "is not currently foreseen."
"As mentioned previously, alternatives evaluated by the PigStun project are already included in Annex I of the EU Regulation 1099/2009 and are authorised for use by operators at the EU level without requiring regulatory changes," they added.
"The data provided by EFSA's opinion on the risks associated with C02 stunning at high concentration, and the PIGSTUN project, are EU-level data and evidence. These can be used by certification schemes," the Commission official said.
The Commission does not have data on the use of C02 stunning at high concentrations from Member State to Member State.
No plans for phase-out
While the project team found that the alternatives have the potential to increase animal welfare, they also acknowledged that most of the ideas in the project have not yet been developed to commercial high-throughput scale (except for electrical stunning). For the gas stunning alternatives, no studies have yet been done at commercial scale to mitigate the reduced capacities that were observed.
Belgium is among the major producers in the EU pork market (after Spain, Germany, France, Poland, Denmark and the Netherlands). High-concentration carbon dioxide is still the most dominant stunning method for pigs in the EU, used to stun an estimated two-thirds of all pigs slaughtered. In some countries, the figure is over 80-90%.
17 pig slaughterhouses are operating in Flanders. Asked about the situation in Flanders, a spokesperson of Ben Weyts (N-VA), the minister who is also responsible for animal welfare, replied that there is one large pig slaughterhouse in Flanders that uses electrical stunning. The other large slaughterhouses use CO₂ stunning. A number of smaller slaughterhouses also apply electrical stunning.
“At present, there are no plans in the pipeline to phase out CO₂ stunning, but we continue to monitor all developments in the field.”
“The Commission’s refusal to remove high concentrations of CO2 from the list of permitted stunning methods for pigs is indefensible,” commented Peter Stevenson, chief policy adviser at Compassion in World Farming. “The severe suffering inherent in using it has been known about since at least 2004 when EFSA first reported on it.”
He added that its refusal to act is arguably inconsistent with Article 13 in the EU Treaty (TFEU). The article requires that the Commission and its Member States, when formulating and implementing policy on agriculture, shall pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals since they are sentient beings.
