I beg your pardon. It had just not filtered through to me. That would be helpful.
The ascription of prohibited procedure brings to mind the ear-tagging of livestock, which occurs immediately after birth and continues at intervals until death. Young animals are inclined to rip the tags out, and they have to be replaced. We used to have a useful way of identifying animals, which was tattooing the ears. I do not think any of my cattlemen would thank your Lordships for suggesting that as a way out, because, although the tattoos lasted extremely well, if they had been done badly done they were difficult to read. The problem was that you had a wrestling match with the cow, and if the tattoo was on the ear of a bull it was almost impossible to read it.
We would like to know if the Government have put in train any work designed to replace tagging with something that does not involve,"““interference with the sensitive tissues or bone structure of an animal””."
What will the promised regulations specify, and how soon will they be produced? I beg to move.
Animal Welfare Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Duke of Montrose
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 23 May 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Animal Welfare Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
682 c191GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:25:07 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_325385
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_325385
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_325385