COPA-COGECA Update on current developments

COPA-COGECA Update on current developments Giorgio Burchiellaro EHRC Secretaries Meeting Zadar - Croatia, 14th-17th June 2010 Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal Health Strategy:Blue Tongue • The number of reported outbreaks in 2009/2010 declined to 821 with different serotypes. • The basic principle of a future legislation is that traded animals need to stay safe (either they are vaccinated or naturally immune). • Concerning restriction zones, a possible change could to have only one zone of approximately 100 km in the EU legislation. • Member States can apply for smaller zones (ex. 20 km control zone) depending on national conditions. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal Health Strategy: Blue Tongue • Some Member States have proposed the status of “provisionally free zone” with regard to OIE rules (no outbreaks for at least one year - OIE rules require 2 years for BT-free status). • The representatives of the Commission reaffirm that the co-financing approach is likely to stay. • With regard to the possible side effects of vaccination (e.g. impact on male fertility), some data has been presented by Switzerland and Germany. • The new legislative framework is not expected soon (not before Spring 2011) Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal Health Strategy: Blue Tongue • As regards vaccination, national authorities would preserve flexibility in designing and implementing their vaccination strategies (in relation to species, territorial coverage etc.), while having the possibility to use preventive vaccination outside restricted zones. • It is not yet clear what form the EU legislation would take (amending the Council Directive 2000/75/EC while preserving the Commission regulation 1266/2007 or inclusion into the new Animal Health Law text?). Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal welfare E.U. Animal Welfare legislation: At the present time, the EU has no specific legislation on dairy cow welfare. • The Commission is working on a new community action plan for animal welfare for the period 2011-2015. Transport of animals The EU Commission has stopped its initiative from 2009 seeking further amendments and will present a report on the implementation of the Regulation in 2011. Parallel to this the EFSA is preparing a new scientific opinion which should be ready by the end of 2010. Possible implementation: Satellite GPS system to monitor transportation. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal welfare Welfare of Dairy Cows: There are three important documents: 1) Report of EFSA (EFSA Scientific opinion) 2) Reaction of EFFAB 3) Copa Cogeca document: (BR(10)959:2) Copa Cogeca intend to identify the most relevant issues of dairy cow welfare which might be of interest to breeding sector. The aim of Copa Cogeca is to collect more information and to be proactive in the new legislation. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal welfare: High priority conclusions and recommendations made by EFSA Impact of selection and breeding on welfare: High priority conclusion:: • The major factor causing poor welfare is long term genetic selection for high milk yield. 2. Genetic selection for higher productivity has changed the form and size of dairy cows and for this reason the spatial requirements of the dairy cow have increased. 3. Problem of lameness, mastitis, reproductive disorders and metabolic disorders and others that result from genetic selection have increased the size of dairy cattle, making their management more difficult. 4. The risk assessment has revealed genetic selection for high milk yield with insufficient emphasis on other traits relating to fitness. . Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal welfare: High priority conclusions and recommendations made by EFSA High priority recommendations: • The genetics of dairy cattle should be taken into account when designing housing and management methods for these animals. • In order to improve dairy cow welfare there is an urgent need to promote changes in the criteria used for genetic selection in the dairy industry. • Breeding selection objectives for dairy cattle should include resistance to mastitis, lameness and other diseases. • In order to improve dairy cow welfare, priority should be given to the full range of fitness and welfare traits. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal welfare: High priority conclusions and recommendations made by EFSA Inbreeding High priority conclusions: • Inbreeding has been estimated to be increasing at 0.17 - 0.2% per year in dairy cows. High priority recommendations: 2) The breeding procedures for dairy cattle should be aimed at reducing inbreeding. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal welfare: High priority conclusions and recommendations made by EFSA Selection for improved welfare in dairy cattle High priority conclusions: • Genetic selection for improved fertility, health and longevity is likely to improve welfare. Recommendations (not high priority): • A multi-trait selection programme in which health, fertility and welfare traits are included in the breeding objectives is recommanded. For the future: The research should identify traits and selection criteria to provide better selection tools to improve welfare in dairy cows. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal welfare: High priority conclusions and recommendations made by EFSA Use of genetic engineering and novel breeding technologies in dairy cows High priority conclusions: • Cloning may provide an opportunity to produce animals that have both high productivity and good welfare. However, at present, technologies such as transgenesis and the methods used in cloning can have a substantial negative impact on the welfare of dairy cattle. Recommendations (not high-priority): • Wherever transgenesis or cloning procedures are carried out on dairy cattle, any effects of the procedures and of any genetic change on the welfare of the animals should be evaluated using an appropriate range of animal welfare indicators. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal welfare: High priority conclusions and recommendations made by EFSA Reproductive disorders and welfare High priority conclusions: Reproductive disorders are associated with welfare in two ways: • they reflect prolonged or short-term poor welfare, such as lack of oestrus, embryonic loss or early abortion due to stress experienced for longer or shorter periods around parturition and in early lactation; 2) they cause poor welfare directly, particularly dystocia and genital infections associated with pain or inflammatory reactions. High priority recommendations: To reduce risk of dystocia particularly at first calving, heifers should be inseminated after they reach the mature weight for the breed and only sires known to have low incidence of dystocia should be used to breed heifers. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal welfare: High priority conclusions and recommendations made by EFSA Reproductive strategy and welfare Conclusions (not high-priority): Many farmers intensively manage the reproductive biology of the dairy cows by using hormonal treatments, such as oestrus synchronization and timed insemination, in order to achieve A calving interval of 12 to 13 months which they perceive as economically optimal. This results in poor welfareas it deprives the animals of a coping mechanism at their disposal, to delay the onset of the reproductive process post partum, to cope with metabolic stress caused by high production. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal welfare: High priority conclusions and recommendations made by EFSA For metabolic and reproductive disorders, risk assessment showed inadequate biosecurity to be the highest ranked hazard in all husbandry systems. In the case of pasture the risk estimate value is lower. All hazards related with improper management are highly ranked in all farming systems. However, risk values are very low when compared with inadequate biosecurity and also when compared with housing, nutrition or genetic hazards. Recommendations for research(not high-priority): Management of modern dairy cows with extended calving intervals should be evaluated with respect to welfare of the cows. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal welfare: High priority conclusions and raccomandations made in EFSA Reproduction: artificial insemination, embryo transfer, semen collection, natural mating Conclusions (not high-priority): • Cows calving in a group in a small space may be disturbed by other cows, with resultant poor welfare, or their calves may be stolen by other cows. • Leaving the placenta on the floor leads to increased disease risk. • Calving difficulties in heifers are likelier if they have not reached 65% of their expected mature weight by the time of service than if they are more fully grown. • Careless or improper handling of cattle can cause poor welfare during: milking, artificial insemination, service, embryo transfer, caesarean section and normal calving. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal welfare: High priority conclusions and recommendations made by EFSA Recommendations (not high-priority): • The placenta should be removed from the floor of the calving pen as soon as possible. • Service of heifers should not occur until they reach 65% of their expected mature weight to reduce potential for calving difficulty. • Dairy cattle should be handled carefully, for example during: milking, artificial insemination, service, embryo transfer, caesarean section and normal calving. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Animal welfare: High priority conclusions and recommendations made by EFSA • Longevity in relation to welfare: The use of longevity as a welfare indicator in dairy cows is valid where animals are adversely affected by their environment or genetic structure to the extent that they are at greater risk of being culled. It is not the shortness of the economic life itself that indicates poor welfare but a reduction in the longevity expected. • Other factors may affect mortality rates: Management of the farmer Milk quota and milk price policy Disease control programme Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Some first remarks on the EFSA report • Studies used for the report are often outdated • Inaccurate data leads to biased conclusions in some paragraphs • There is a need to ask for new and more recent studies • Common sense is required. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Zootechnical legislationCross-border activity • Four separate draft legislative texts are still under preparation by DG SANCO. • They cover all species and should be presented to Member States in one single package. • The EU Commission needs to take into account the new Lisbon Treaty and its impact on adoption of legal acts. • The Commission text should be adopted in the Comitology procedures as Commission decision but an involvment of the Parliament cannot be excluded. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Zootechnical legislation Cross-border activity • The EHRC committee decided at the February 2009 meeting in Rome to send a letter to the chairman of Copa Cogeca with the EHRC position: - The large majority of EHRC members don’t see the need to change the existing legislation for breeding associations. - In the letter the risk for the smaller herds with the application of new legislation is specified. Some questions: - Who will supervise foreign breeding organisations on the national market and can competition be guaranteed? Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Zootechnical legislationCross-border activity - It is important to mantain the equality of competition. - How can one guarantee that foreign organisations that breach the rules can be brought to justice as fast as domestic organisations? - How could the responsibility of the national authorities change ? - Data has to be moved to a database of another herd book organisation: who is responsible and which data has to be provided? Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Bovine identification and traceability • EU veterinary week will be held on 14 - 15 June 2010. • The main topic will be “Animal identification and treaceability along the food chain”. • Different situations in differents countries in dairy cattle, beef cattle and sheep will be shown. • There is a project to insert voluntary electronic identification for bovines into EU Legislation (1760/2000). • A voluntary approach is preferred because it can be better adapted to the needs of farmers but the disadvantage is the existence of different types of tags. • The problem could be the cost of the electronic tag, although there has been a cost reduction compared tosome years ago Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Cloning of farm animals: update The E.P. and the Council currently have different views. The main news is: The Council has adopted its position on novel food. - the main objective is to ensure a high level of food safety and of human health protection. - The draft regulation provides for more streamlined procedures. - All applications for the approval of novel foods must be submitted to the Commission and then to EFSA for a risk assessment. - The final decision to include novel foods in the EU list is made by the Commission(only if they present no risk to consumers). Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Cloning of farm animals: update - An accelerated authorisation procedure is to be introduced for traditional food from third countries. - EFSA must give its opinion within six months (rather than nine months with the normal procedure) - The definition of novel food and the scope of the regulation have been clarified: a) the new regulation would explicitly apply to food produced from animals obtained by a cloning technique and the scope of regulation is extended to food from the offspring of cloned animals. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Cloning of farm animals: update b) The Commission must report to the Council all aspects of food from cloned animals and their offspring within one year after the application of the regulation. c) The general definition of novel food remains unchanged. d) The new regulation allows applicants to request the protection of scientific data on newly developed innovative foods for a period of five years with the aim of stimulating innovations in the food sector. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Cloning of farm animals: update The questions are: • Can the cloning technique offer benefits for our sector? • Can the cloning technique present risks for our sector? • What would the implications for trade in semen and embryos be? We probably need a specific European law. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Cloning of farm animals: update The main problems are: • The traceability of the food imported from third countries (who controls and how?). • In the current situation it is legal to import semen and embryos from cloned animals. If the Commission intends to define specific rules, it is necessary to define how must control and how. • It is important to create traceability and certification. • It is necessary to have specific rules in order to harmonize the different rules in each member country. • Are there laboratories availaible ? Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Biological invention • Every year the European Commission prepares an annual report based on art.16 of the Directive 98/44. • The report has not yet been issued pending the outcome of legal procedures at the European Patent Office. (Monsanto pig patent, broccoli patent, tomato patent, dairy cow patent etc.). • Patents are essential for protecting intellectual property but there is an ethical problem sometimes violated by patents. This also applies to natural products. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Biological invention • The EU Commission is working on a draft EU patent law, covering all patents, not only biotechnological inventions, and featuring the biggest reform ever of the EU patent legislation. • Farmers are afraid of any future patenting of traditional breeding methods. • In the future breeders will probably see more patents coming which could bring even more uncertainty to the whole farming industry. • We need clear E.U. legislation. It is essential that the E.U. intervene to provide legal assurance. Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

Thank you for your attention Zadar 14th-17th June 2010

COPA-COGECA Update on current developments