Shortly
before the New Year, the Canadian Transport Agency issued its decision to
support Air Canada’s ban on transportation of primates destined for
research. The agency recognized the
‘potential’ impact on Air Canada’s brand by the 47000 people that via email
opposed such transportation. Some of the letters received by Air Canada
threatened to cease using their services if this (transport) were to continue
whilst others indicated it as a reason for not using Air Canada. As a carrier
Air Canada transports thirty two (32) million passengers per year and it
identifies itself primarily as a passenger carrier transporting cargo in its
bellies.
Air Canada
submits that non human primate transportation represents 0.01% of its total
weight worldwide in 2010 whereas the numbers for 2011 represent 0.001% in 2011.
It is therefore considered minimal in terms of commercial value and in
comparison with total weight transported (a means of showing the minimal amount
of shippers affected).
Given these
minimal numbers it is hard to understand why the agency let’s Canadian transportation
policy be defined by such a minority of voices and of shipments. Nevertheless as it has the task to decide upon
the matter submitted, the agency considers the potential commercial impact on
Air Canada to be serious enough to support a ban on shippers of laboratory
destined primates because in effect that is what the Air Canada decision
entails. Other means of transportation being available the agency has no
problem supporting a solution whereby the animals for example are trucked into
the country as is pointed out by the BUAV and HSIC.
Coming from
an aviation background the agency and its members should have noted that the
most humane way of transporting animals is by air not by ground. Ironically
BUAV and HSIC are now supporting longer and less humane means of transportation
as opposed to supporting the animal’s best welfare interests! Click here to read their campaign against air canada and those that collaborated to this decision.
The same
animal being shipped from and to a zoo for example would benefit from Air
Canada services whereas one identical animal destined to a laboratory would
not. If this is not discriminatory to shippers and animals then I don’t know
what is. The agency however does not consider the decision to be discriminatory.
I call this denial of service.
The Transport
Canada decision is, seeded with statements made by the BUAV a foreign based
entity, almost reading as if the agency is required to provide its comments
with equal weight or standing. A Canadian transport policy (the accessibility
to available air services for shippers) is now heavily influenced if not shaped
by foreign input whereas native comments or input is simply ignored.
The medical
progress brought through primate research are numerous and clearly documented.
The agency however fails to take this aspect into consideration and has made a
decision around matters submitted to it by a number of interested parties –amongst
whom the writer of this article, without looking beyond the issues or facts at
hand. Medical progress benefits all Canadians and animals and the agency should
have defended these interests as well as part of the due diligence expected
from an official agency. For Air Canada the decision is also short
sighted for Pharmaceutical and related companies do transport their cold chain
goods under their wings and their traveling employees in their business class seats.
A sad day
for Canadians, animals and medical progress – please do not follow this unprecedented
Canadian example. As a service transportation
must be available to all, always. As I have said before I did not vote for this! Did you?
I appreciate several from the Information which has been composed, and especially the remarks posted I will visit once more. Europa-Road Kft.
ReplyDelete