Transport certifications of cattle moved from France to Southern Italy and Greece: do they comply with Reg. EC 1/2005?

Figures & data

Table 1. Parameters taken from each TRACES and criteria to define their compliance with the regulation and data plausibility.

Parameter	Criteria to be met	Output if not met
Compilation of records	Records not empty	Missing data
Total weight and number of animals	110 kg < BW^a<900 kg	Total weight and number of animals not plausible
Total space	<200 m^2	Total space not plausible
Loading density (expressed as space allowance m^2/animal)	If 110 ≤ BW ^a <200, space allowance ≥0.4 m^2/animal	Non-compliance for density
	If 200 ≤ BW ^a <325, space allowance ≥0.7 m^2/animal
	If 325 ≤ BW ^a <550, space allowance ≥0.95 m^2/animal
	If 550 ≤ BW ^a <700, space allowance ≥1.3 m^2/animal
	If BW ^a ≥700, space allowance ≥1.6 m^2/animal
Duration of the journey	Equal or longer than those calculated according to travel distance, time for loading and unloading operations, and compulsory resting stops	Duration of the journey not plausible
Foreseen resting stop	If 14 h < travel time <29 h, 1 stop of 1 h	Non-compliance for foreseen resting stop
	If travel time >29 h, 2 stops including rest of 24 h

^aMean body weight, calculated as the ratio between total weight and number of animals.

Figure 1. Frequency distribution of TRACES and the total number of animals in 2019 and 2020.

Figure 2. Relative frequency distribution of TRACES (panel a) and the total number of animals (panel b) during 2019 and 2020 according to the country of destination. The differences were not significant.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics and results of the goodness of fit test for some generic information reported in Part I.

Section	Category	Count (N = 320)	%	p value^#
Place of origin	Holding	0	0.0	<.001
	Approved body	0	0.0
	Embryo team	0	0.0
	Assembly centre	320	100.0
	Semen centre	0	0.0
	Establishment	0	0.0
	Dealer's premise	0	0.0
	Approved aquaculture holding	0	0.0
	Other	0	0.0
Place of destination	Holding	320	100.0	<.001
	Approved body	0	0.0
	Embryo team	0	0.0
	Assembly centre	0	0.0
	Semen centre	0	0.0
	Establishment	0	0.0
	Dealer's premise	0	0.0
	Approved aquaculture holding	0	0.0
	Other	0	0.0
Means of transport	Aeroplane	0	0.0	<.001
	Ship	0	0.0
	Railway wagon	0	0.0
	Road vehicle	308	96.3
	Other	12	3.8
Animals certified for/products certified for	Breeding	20	6.3	<.001
	Slaughter	14	4.4
	Production	286	89.4
Temperature of products	Ambient	–	–	–
	Chilled	–	–
	Frozen	–	–
	Missing data	320	100.0
Route plan	Yes	320	100.0	<.001
	No	0	0.0

Values are numbers (count) and percentages (N %).

^#p value from chi-square goodness of fit test (assuming all categories equal for each question).

Table 3. Descriptive statistics of parameters related to loading density as reported on the TRACES’ planning or computed ‘a posteriori’.

Parameter	Mean	SD	Median	Min	Max	IQR
Number of animals	30	18	30	1	72	16–40
Total weight of the consignment (in kg)	11,443	7104	11,000	400	26,049	5520–13,149
Estimated mean body weight^a	410	81	396	133	857	363-424
Total space foreseen for the consignment (in m²)	34.30	20.78	32.00	3.00	73.00	18.00–48.00
Loading density (expressed as space allowance m^2/animal)^a	1.78	3.38	1.13	0.97	37.00	1.00–1.25

^aComputed ‘a posteriori’.

SD: standard deviation; Min: minimum; Max: maximum; IQR: interquartile range.

Table 4. Classification of animals in weight categories (as computed by dividing the total weight by the number of animals), errors concerning the total number of animals, total weight and/or total space, and compliance of the estimated load density with the Regulation (EC) no. 1/2005.

Parameter	Category	Count (N = 320)	%
Animal category	Missing data	130	40.6
	Medium-sized calves (110–199 kg)	1	0.3
	Heavy calves (200–324 kg)	2	0.6
	Medium-sized cattle (325–549 kg)	171	53.4
	Heavy cattle (550–699 kg)	14	4.4
	Very heavy cattle (≥700 kg)	2	0.6
Error concerning total weight or number of animals	No error	190	59.4
	Total weight or number of animals not plausible^a	14	4.4
	Total weight or number of animals missing	116	36.3
Error concerning total space	No error	195	60.9
	Space not plausible^b	6	1.9
	Missing data	119	37.2
Error concerning total weight, number of animals and/or total space	No error	181	56.6
	At least one error	139	43.4
Regulatory compliance for loading density^c	No	1^d	0.6
	Yes	180	99.4

Values are numbers (count) and percentages (N %).

^aMean body weight <110 kg or >900 kg.

^bSpace >200 m²

^cRegulation (EC) no. 1/2005. Compliance could only be defined for traces filled in correctly in the sections total number of animals, total weight, and total space (n = 181).

^dTraces ID247: computed density = 1.4 m²/animal (minimum space allowance for heavy cattle = 1.6 m²/animal).

Table 5. Factors associated with the presence of at least one error related to total number of animals, total weight, and/or total space, regulatory compliance for foreseen restings, and concordance between declared and estimated duration.

Dependent variable	Predictor	Category	OR	95%CI		Sig.
				Lower	Upper
Presence of at least one error related to total number of animals, total weight, and/or total space	Consignor	Overall				<0.001
		Consignor A versus small consignors	1.166	0.434	3.134	0.761
		Consignor B versus small consignors	0.175	0.070	0.439	<0.001
		Consignor C versus small consignors	1.583	0.810	3.095	0.179
	Transporter	Overall				<0.001
		Transporter A versus small transporters	1.106	0.647	1.891	0.712
		Transporter B versus small transporters	0.106	0.043	0.259	<0.001
Regulatory non-compliance for foreseen resting stop	Consignor	Overall				<0.001
		Consignor A versus small consignors	1.857	0.421	8.191	0.414
		Consignor B versus small consignors	0.134	.014	1.237	0.076
		Consignor C versus small consignors	4.713	1.607	13.817	0.005
	Transporter	Overall				<0.001
		Transporter A versus small transporters	5.343	2.311	12.352	<0.001
		Transporter B versus small transporters	0.147	0.018	1.226	0.076
Discrepancy between declared and estimated duration	Consignor	Overall				<0.001
		Consignor A versus small consignors	–	–	–	–
		Consignor B versus small consignors	0.120	0.051	0.281	<0.001
		Consignor C versus small consignors	2.423	1.123	5.229	0.024
	Transporter	Overall				0.006
		Transporter A versus small transporters	1.063	.607	1.861	0.831
		Transporter B – small transporters	3.360	1.489	7.581	0.004

OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval, -complete separation.

Table 6. Descriptive statistics of parameters related to foreseen resting stops as reported on the planning or estimated, and regulatory compliance.

Parameter	Category	Count (N = 320)	N, %
Foreseen resting stop(s) reported in the planning	No	60	18.8
	Yes	254	79.4
	Missing data	6	1.9
Number of foreseen resting stop(s) reported in the planning	0 (or missing data)	66	20.6
	1	190	59.4
	2	22	6.9
	>2	42	13.1
Duration of foreseen resting stop(s) reported in the planning	Missing data	320	100.0
Estimated number of foreseen resting stop(s) according to journey length	1	270	84.4
	2	50	15.6
Regulatory compliance for foreseen restings	No	67	20.9
	Yes	253	79.1

Values are numbers (count) and percentages (N%).

Figure 3. Distribution of the comparison between the estimated journey time reported in each examined TRACES and those calculated according to journey length (at an average speed of 70 km/h), including 1 h for loading/unloading practices and duration of compulsory resting stops.

Table 7. Descriptive statistics for the duration of the journey as reported in the examined TRACES and as calculated based on the kilometres travelled and the compulsory resting stops.

Parameter	Country of destination
	Italy					Greece
	Mean	SD	Mdn	Min	Max	Mean	SD	Mdn	Min	Max
Estimated travel (in kilometres)	1497	245	1452	1135	3597	2435	328	2325	2111	3597
Total expected duration reported on the traces’ planning (in hours)	23	8	20	16	72	49	23	48	24	72
Estimated duration of the journey including compulsory resting stops^a (in hours)	24	6	23	18	77	69	5	67	64	85

^a8 h were added at a flat rate when the country of destination was Greece.

SD: standard deviation; Mdn: median; Min: minimum; Max: maximum.