Acknowledgements Book of abstracts - Publicaties - Vlaanderen.be

Sara Barbieri presents Poster 70 during the poster sessions in the Aula.
Session theme 6: Free topics
142
Poster 70
A SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT APPROACH TO IDENTIFY ADVERSE
WELFARE EFFECTS DURING KILLING AND SKINNING OF SEALS
O. Ribó, E. Aiassa, S. Barbieri, J. Serratosa
Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) Unit, European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Parma, Italy
EFSA provides independent scientific advice on existing/emerging risks associated with food and
feed, including animal health and welfare. The European Commission requested EFSA to issue a
Scientific Opinion (SO) on the welfare aspects of seals killing and skinning. An international WG
of experts (including two risk assessors) was established to compile all available scientific
information. The different killing methods and their practical use were evaluated, and conclusions
and recommendations were drawn in the SO, which was adopted by the AHAW Panel in December
2007.
In parallel, a specific Risk Assessment (RA) for the identification of the adverse welfare effects
during seals killing and skinning was carried out. Hazards (n=25) were identified and scoring
categories for hazard characterisation and exposure assessment were used. The magnitude of an
adverse welfare effect was defined by the combination of duration and intensity. Qualitative values
and tentative scores were given by the experts.
The RA showed no consistent differences between weather and habitat conditions. In netting, there
was a high probability that a seal trapped does not escape and, if escapes, major injuries occur. For
hakapik, the probability of an adverse effect after an effective/ineffective hit and its magnitude was
very variable; the probability of an effective re-stunning was very high causing negligible-minor
suffering. With firearms, there was a high probability to effectively shot a seal with negligible
suffering. Bleeding and skinning an unconscious or dead seal was very likely but when ineffective
monitoring and bleeding occurred (very likely) the consequences are variable.
Due to the limited amount of quantitative data, the qualitative RA was based on expert opinion;
therefore RA conclusions were not considered in the SO. The methodology used does not give a
numerical estimate of the risk but the outputs might be used to rank the problems and designate
areas of research.
Contact information: Oriol Ribo or email oriol.ribo@efsa.europa.eu
Complete address: Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) Unit, European Food Safety Authority
(EFSA), Largo N. Palli 5/A 43100 Parma, Italy
Species: Seal