FAQ about Long Distance Transport in North America
How does long distance transport affect animals?
Transportation is one of the most stressful events in a farmed animal's life. Because nearly all of the millions of farmed animals raised in North America are subjected to transportation at some point during their lives, transportation is also one of the most important welfare issues affecting farmed animals. The setting of travel time limits, rest periods, and provisioning of food and water for livestock during road transport are fundamental in addressing animal welfare concerns.
Deprivation of food and water, overcrowding, lack of opportunities for rest, and prolonged exposure to extreme heat or cold are commonly cited welfare concerns associated with long distance transport. Poor and abusive handling of animals during loading and unloading and at auctions also increases animal stress and suffering during the transport process.
Despite this, animals may be transported across multiple states or provinces and across national borders for fattening and slaughter. Some may even be moved across national borders for slaughter only for the meat then to be shipped back to their countries of origin for consumption.
A report produced by the European Commission's Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare summed up the problem associated with long distance transport. It stated:
"With increasing duration of journey, the welfare of animals generally gets worse because they become more fatigued, incur a steadily increasing energy deficit, become more susceptible to existing infections, and may become diseased because they encounter new pathogens."
What is the state of current law on this issue in the U.S., Canada and Mexico?
See National Transport Regulations.
Why do some animals go long distances for slaughter?
The transport of livestock in North America is influenced by many factors. The economic cost of transporting animals (which tend to be lower than transporting feed), and geographical differences in feed and forage availability and prices, as well as the development and location of feedlots and slaughterhouses, largely determine where animals will be transported and at what stage of production. Live animal movements across the national boundaries between the United States and Canada and the United States and Mexico is normal practice as animals move to pastures, feed lots, or to more available slaughter facilities.
Due to the large size of the country and its high level of integration with the United States' beef and pork industries, long distance transport of livestock for fattening and slaughter is a significant component of Canada's livestock industry. The export of Canadian livestock to the United States for further fattening and slaughter has historically been economically advantageous since the United States has greater feedlot and slaughter capacity than Canada.
Consolidation of the meat and slaughter industry in the U.S. has taken place over the past four decades and is a major factor leading to longer pre-slaughter transport times, as demonstrated by the movement of animals out of areas that no longer have federally-inspected plants and/or the movement of animals over national borders for slaughter.
Conversations between investigators and pig dealers in the U.S. revealed that low labor costs and the lack of government oversight in Mexico are considered the primary (if not the only) reason live pigs are sent to Mexico for slaughter. Indeed labor costs in pork processing plant are reportedly nine times lower in Mexico than the U.S.
What are the economic arguments for limiting transport times?
The economic risks associated with long distance transport are well documented and include reduction in meat quality, increased disease susceptibility and exposure, and increased transit mortality. Moreover, longer transport distances, inter and intra auction movements, and movement across national boundaries bring an increase potential for wider spread of disease (Shields and Mathews 2003).
While death of animals may be a significant economic consideration, it is important to point out that animals can and do experience extremely poor welfare during transport even if a majority of animals survive the journey.
What are the alternatives to long distance transport?
Trade and transport in live animals for slaughter could readily be replaced by trade in fresh or frozen meat throughout North America. In the past, fresh meat could not be transported over long distances because of the lack of refrigeration and proper distribution channels. Today, however, new technologies allow for chilled meat to be shipped to many locations and remain fresh. Indeed, evidence suggests that restrictions on the transport of live animals will be compensated by increased trade in fresh or frozen meat. For example, in response to the 2004 U.S. ban on the import of live cattle from Canada, Canada augmented its cattle slaughter capacity (Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry 2005). Concomitantly, Canada increased its boxed beef exports (Minter 2005).
Transport restrictions could also result in an increase in smaller and more dispersed processing facilities, or increase the use of mobile abattoirs that process animals on the farm. For example, the Vermont Agency of Agriculture has proposed buying a pair of mobile food-processing trucks that would travel from farm to farm to benefit farmers who live far from Vermont's few processing plants, especially small farmers who have difficulty meeting the advance notice of up to two months required by most slaughterhouses (Associated Press 2007). Increasing fuel costs also makes transporting animals long distances to slaughter burdensome especially for smaller farmers (Associated Press 2007). As such, mobile abattoirs could reduce costs associated with transport.
Finally, animals not fit for travel (as many dairy cattle are) could and should be slaughtered on the farm and either buried or transported to rendering plant for disposal of carcass.
Consumer research shows that customers place a high value on locally-produced products and that they associate the term "local" with reduced transport distance from farm to store. Moreover, customers are typically willing to pay 5 to 15 percent more for locally-raised meat items than for similar items that are not locally produced. Producers who move from long distance transport for feeding and slaughter to more local production and processing are poised to take advantage of this growing niche market.
How could/should new transport laws/regulations be enforced?
Specific documentation requirements kept by those involved in trading and transporting livestock could aid in enforcing journey limits and resting intervals, and in monitoring other animal welfare objectives during transit, as well as aiding in tracing disease and preventing outbreaks.
For example, the EU has required satellite tracking devices on trucks to monitor travel time and distances as well as the opening and closing of the loading flap.
Alternatively or in addition to, electronic driver logs could be utilized to monitor compliance. Any special requirements for trucks transporting live animals across national boarders could be checked for compliance at the border crossing.
References
Animal Protection Institute/Compassion in World Farming 2005. "Driving Pain. The State of Farmed-Animal Transport in the U.S. and Across our Borders." http://www.api4animals.org/a6a_transport.php (accessed 09/08/06)
Brandt P 2005. Loop hole on wheels: trucks and the 28-hour law. Available at http://www.hsus.org/farm_animals/farm_animals_news/
trucks_and_the_28-hour_law.html (accessed 10/04/06)
Brasher P 2006. "USDA says rule on livestock stops applies to trucks." Des Moines Register, September 29, 2006.
Dairy Herd Management 2007. Mandatory ID Needed to Spur Registration. April 25.
Economic Research Service 2001. Mexican Cattle Exports to the U.S. Current Perspectives.
General Accounting Office 2004. Humane Methods of Slaughter Act: USDA Has Addressed Some Problems but Still Faces Enforcement Challenges. GAO-04-247.
Grandin T 1992. Livestock trucking guide: Livestock management practices that reduce injuries to livestock during transport. In: Livestock Conservation Institute, Bowling Green KY.
Irwin MR and WR Gentleman 1978. Transportation of cattle in rail car containing feed and water. South Western Veterinarian 31; 205–208.
Ishmael, W 2005. More Than Money. Beef Magazine, Sept 1 2005. http://ww.beef-mag.com/mag/beef_money/index.html (accessed 08/09/06)
Kelley T 2005. Don't Let Stress, Heat be a Downer for Pigs. Pork, May 2005, 16–18.
Krause J. I'll Pay You to Kill My Steer. It's not so easy for small farmers to get their animals slaughtered. Chow http://www.chow.com/stories/10190
Minter J 2005. Cattle Economic Situation and Outlook. Department of Agricultural Economics – Kansas State University. http://www.beef.org/uDocs/cattleeconomicsituation.pdf (accessed 08/09/06)
Missouri Swine Audit 2005. An analysis of Missouri's competitive position in the swine industry. July 2005. http://agebb.missouri.edu/commag/swine/audit/htmlindex.htm (accessed 08/09/06)
National Agricultural Statistics Service 1996. Agriculture Statistics Board, USDA. Washington. D.C.
National Agricultural Statistics Service 2006. Livestock Slaughter: 2005 Summary. March 2006.
Reynolds G 2007. Regulator proposes re-opening boarder to Mexican Pork. Truth about Trade and Technology http://www.truthabouttrade.org/print.asp?id=6859
Shields D A and Mathews K H 2003. Interstate Livestock Movements. Electronic Outlook Report from the Economic Research Service United States Department of Agriculture http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ldp/jun03/
ldpm10801/ldpm10801.pdf (accessed 05/27/06)
Speer NC, Slack G and Troyer E 2001. Economic factors associated with livestock transportation. Journal of Animal Science, 79 (E. Suppl.): E166–E170.
Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry 2005. Cattle Slaughter Capacity in Canada. Interim Report. http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/
Com-e/agri-e/rep-e/repintmay05-e.pdf (accessed 05/22/06)
Swanson JC and Morrow-Tesch J 2001. Cattle Transport: Historical, research, and future perspectives. Journal of Animal Science, 79 (E.Suppl.) E102–E109.
Tarrant PV 1989. The effects of handling, transport, slaughter and chilling on meat quality and yield in pigs — a review. Irish Journal of Food Science Technology, 13:79–107.
Tarrant PV and Grandin T 1992. In: Livestock Handling and Transport, 2nd Edition. Edited by Temple Grandin www.grandin.com/inc/book3.html (accessed 05/22/06)
Trust for America's Health 2003. Animal Borne Epidemics Out of Control. Threatening the Nations's Health. http://healthyamericans.org/reports/files/Animalreport.pdf (accessed 10/04/05)
United States Department of Agriculture 2000. Part II: Baseline Reference of Feedlot Health and Health Management 1999. National Animal Health Monitoring System. P. 46.
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/ceah/ncahs/nahms/feedlot/
feedlot99/FD99pt2.pdf (accessed 05/22/06)
United Stated Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Statistics 2006. Available at: http://www.thepigsite.com/articles/7/markets-and-economics/1754/mexico-livestock-and-products-annual-2006 (accessed 09/27/06)
