Eyes on Animals is observing a troubling trend: transport distances for culled cows and sows are increasing due to the disappearance of regional slaughterhouses. In regions such as Friesland, many local facilities have shut down, forcing animals from the northern Netherlands to be transported all the way to slaughterhouses in the east or south of the country and even deep into Belgium and Germany. Regional slaughterhouses in other provinces are also struggling financially.
Culled cows and sows—often already weakened by health issues such as lameness and emaciation —are first collected from multiple farms and sent to assembly centres or livestock markets. There, they often spend many hours—typically without access to food—before continuing their journey to the slaughterhouse. The entire process, from leaving the farm of origin to death can easily take more than 24 hours, causing stress, hunger, and exhaustion. When animals are exported, the total duration of the journey can even extend to several days.
In the past year alone, around six slaughterhouses in the north of the Netherlands have closed. One key reason is the increased inspection costs introduced by the NVWA as part of new legislation concerning end-of-career animals. While Eyes on Animals strongly supports strict inspections for high-risk animals, we are also seeing an unintended consequence: many regional, often smaller, slaughterhouses cannot afford these additional costs and are being forced to shut down. As a result, more animals are being sent on longer journeys to larger slaughterhouses that can absorb the extra expenses—or worse, to facilities abroad where there is often less regulatory oversight and enforcement.
During our two most recent inspections at a major cattle market in the north, we found that all the animals we flagged due to welfare concerns were transported to slaughterhouses in the south or east of the Netherlands—or even to Belgium. None were sent to the smaller local slaughterhouses that once operated very nearby.
Eyes on Animals regrets the disappearance of regional small-scale slaughterhouses. Yes, these facilities must be properly monitored, especially given past welfare violations. But small slaughterhouses often have the potential to provide calmer, more patient environments—crucial for low-stress handling and effective stunning. They also tend to have shorter waiting lines, which means animals can be unloaded more quickly. In our view, the fast-paced, high-volume operations of large slaughterhouses—where both workers and animals are under constant pressure—pose one of the greatest risks to animal welfare.
The current trend—closing small regional slaughterhouses and sending already vulnerable culled animals to distant, industrial-scale facilities—is a step in the wrong direction.
Eyes on Animals believes that inspection costs should be made proportionate to the size and revenue of each slaughterhouse. If not, smaller regional facilities—despite their potential to offer better conditions—will continue to disappear, to the detriment of animal welfare.
