Animal rescue centres do not receive any Government funding or direct assistance.

This information is not held by any Government Department.

The export of live animals for slaughter and fattening make up a small proportion of animals fattened and slaughtered within the UK. There has been no assessment made of either annual value or annual loss to the economy and the UK's slaughter and processing sectors, respectively.

Two licences have been issued by Natural England to permit cull companies to control badgers.

Details of the two badger cull pilots, including the number of badgers culled in each of the pilot areas, will be published in due course following their completion.

Details of the two pilot culls, including information on the proportion of the area covered and of the badger population culled, will be published in due course following their completion.

The Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency will publish details of the new model for veterinary scanning surveillance in England and Wales in the next few weeks.

Following the recommendation of the Surveillance Advisory Group, the Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency (AHVLA) initiated the Surveillance 2014 project. The project aims to create a new, more effective and financially sustainable surveillance system, including improving access through better geographical coverage; better partnership working; and developing deeper specialist skills and knowledge.

The project undertook a public consultation between 13 December 2012 and 15 February 2013 and gathered over 370 responses. The consultation and summary of responses are published on the AHVLA website at:

www.defra.gov.uk/ahvla-en/about-us/consultations

As the responses were submitted via an online survey and by e-mail, it is not possible to know how many were from north Yorkshire. However, during the consultation period, there was also a series of 10 open regional workshops which included one at the Great Yorkshire Showground in Harrogate that was attended by 33 delegates. A summary of the information gathered at the workshops is also published on the AHVLA website at:

www.defra.gov.uk/ahvla-en/files/surveillance14-consultation-summary-app2.pdf

Information on the transporters who received statutory notices cannot be provided. To do so in respect of those transporters that are sole traders would, we believe, contravene data protection laws. In cases where the infringement is serious, such information might prejudice any investigation and possible prosecution being taken by the relevant local authority. For further details on the Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency’s regulatory policy in relation to welfare during transport legislation is available at:

http://www.defra.gov.uk/ahvla-en/publication/advice-wato-enforcement/

In each case, sheep were the animals concerned.

Of the seven notices served, six notices were served at the supervised loadings and one of the notices was served in the port. The notices were served for the following reasons: two notices were served for documentary irregularities; two notices were served because animals were not fit for the intended journey; and three notices were served for breaches of the technical rules set out in the regulation.

Information on the transporters who received statutory notices cannot be provided. To do so in respect of those transporters that are sole traders would, we believe, contravene data protection laws. In cases where the infringement is serious, such information might prejudice any investigation and possible prosecution being taken by the relevant local authority. For further details on the Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency’s regulatory policy in relation to welfare during transport legislation is available at:

http://www.defra.gov.uk/ahvla-en/publication/advice-wato-enforcement/

In each case, sheep were the animals concerned.

Of the seven notices served, six notices were served at the supervised loadings and one of the notices was served in the port. The notices were served for the following reasons: two notices were served for documentary irregularities; two notices were served because animals were not fit for the intended journey; and three notices were served for breaches of the technical rules set out in the regulation.

Information on the transporters who received statutory notices cannot be provided. To do so in respect of those transporters that are sole traders would, we believe, contravene data protection laws. In cases where the infringement is serious, such information might prejudice any investigation and possible prosecution being taken by the relevant local authority. For further details on the Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency’s regulatory policy in relation to welfare during transport legislation is available at:

http://www.defra.gov.uk/ahvla-en/publication/advice-wato-enforcement/

In each case, sheep were the animals concerned.

Of the seven notices served, six notices were served at the supervised loadings and one of the notices was served in the port. The notices were served for the following reasons: two notices were served for documentary irregularities; two notices were served because animals were not fit for the intended journey; and three notices were served for breaches of the technical rules set out in the regulation.

Vehicles are selected for additional checks at the port on the basis of a combination of risk analysis and random selection.

All of the vehicles were subject to inspection at point of loading onto the vehicle. To inspect all of the vehicles again would not be proportionate.

The legislation on welfare during transport (Council Regulation (EC) 1/2005) stipulates what member states shall check when approving journey logs. Among other things, Article 14 requires that the journey log is realistic and indicates compliance with the terms of the

Council Regulation. It does not require any checks of compliance with other legislation, including that relating to the rules on road transport.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) is responsible for policy on mechanically separated meat (MSM). During the summer, senior FSA officials met senior European Commission officials including the director-general for health and consumers. They reaffirmed the need for EU level discussions as a matter of urgency, further to the publication of a European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) scientific opinion on the safety of MSM derived from poultry and pork and the continued uncertainty relating to the interpretation of the EU rules and guidance on MSM.

The Independent Surveillance Advisory Group (SAG) was established in 2011 so all those with an interest in veterinary surveillance could help shape a future model and ensure that all issues were thoroughly considered. The Surveillance Advisory Group's final report

www.defra.gov.uk/ahvla-en/publication/sag-final-report

was published by AHVLA on 10 April 2012.

Following the SAG's recommendation, the Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency (AHVLA) initiated the Surveillance 2014 project. The project aims to create a new, more effective and financially sustainable surveillance system, including improving access through better geographical coverage, through better partnership working and by developing deeper specialist skills and knowledge.

Surveillance 2014 launched a public consultation on 13 December 2012 until 15 February 2013 and AHVLA gathered over 370 responses. The consultation and summary of responses are published on the AHVLA website:

www.defra.gov.uk/ahvla-en/about-us/consultations

AHVLA are currently developing a proposal, based on the SAG report and the consultation, on what the future delivery model for veterinary surveillance will look like, which includes locations of all its veterinary laboratories, including Thirsk. No final decision has been made and AHVLA will publish details of the proposed new model in the next few weeks.

[holding answer 10 September 2013]: Badger carcases resulting from the pilot badger culls need to be recorded and disposed of in line with legal requirements as Category 1 waste under the Animal By-products Regulations. The two badger pilot culls are being carried out by companies under licence from Natural England. Detailed operational information will not be published during the pilots. A full report will be published after the end of the culls.

[holding answer 10 September 2013]: Badger carcases resulting from the pilot badger culls need to be recorded and disposed of in line with legal requirements as Category 1 waste under the Animal By-products Regulations. The two badger pilot culls are being carried out by companies under licence from Natural England. Detailed operational information will not be published during the pilots. A full report will be published after the end of the culls.

Category 1 waste is animal by-product waste as defined in the EU Animal By-product Regulations 1069/2009. This includes specified risk material from abattoirs, international catering waste, carcasses of pet and zoo animals, carcasses of ruminants at the point of disposal and certain other animal by-products.

The vast majority of category 1 material will be sent for rendering or incineration. A list of approved rendering and incineration plants, including those that can handle category 1 material, is maintained by Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency (AHVLA) and can be found at:

http://www.defra.gov.uk/ahvla-en/disease-control/abp/premises/

AHVLA does not keep a list of companies that exclusively handle category 1 waste.

Other businesses that may handle category 1 animal by-products include hauliers, certain licensed landfill sites, approved handling premises and plants producing technical products.

AHVLA does not keep a record of weights of category 1 material dealt with by each company.

Additionally, the Environment Agency issues permits to allow category 1 ABP waste to be disposed or treated by incineration or rendering.

Incineration

The Environment Agency permitted five incineration facilities in England at the end of 2012 authorised to burn only ABP wastes. These were:

Ancillary Components Ltd, Rushden

EPR Thetford Ltd, Thetford

Granox Ltd, Widnes

Fibrogen Ltd, Flixborough

University of Bristol Field Station, Langford.

Abattoirs and/or renderers

The Environment Agency permitted seven facilities in England at the end of 2012 authorised to render ABP wastes.

Some facilities are abattoirs and/or renderers and as such permitted maximum quantities accepted may be in tonnes of ABP waste or numbers of animals. One or the other is given in the following table:

Further work would be required to be carried out to collate actual annual quantities accepted over the last three years as this information is not held centrally.

Abattoirs

The Environment Agency permits 65 facilities for slaughtering animals with a capacity of >50 tonnes per day in England.

Further work would need to be carried out to collate the data on the quantity of ABP waste produced by the facilities as this information is not held centrally.

The keeping of records of quantities of each category of animal by-product despatched from an establishment is the responsibility of the individual Food Business Operator (FBO). Food Standards Agency (FSA) staff monitor the FBO's compliance with the requirements of the Animal By-Products Regulations (EC) No 1069/2009 but there is no requirement for the FSA to maintain records of everything that leaves the premises.

While the FSA does monitor quantities of specified risk material produced in bovine and ovine slaughterhouses at a local level, this information is used to determine frequency of inspections and is not held centrally.

There are no specific Category 2 rendering plants now in the UK meaning that all waste leaving plants is either Category 1 or Category 3. Category 1 material is therefore likely to contain Category 2 by-products that cannot be included in Category 3 collection systems.