UK Pets Lose EU Passports: What Travellers Must Do Now

If you’re planning a trip to Europe with your dog or cat, there’s an important rule change you need to know about. From 22 April 2026, EU pet passports are no longer valid for people who live in Great Britain. Even if your pet has an EU‑issued passport from years ago, you can’t use it to enter the EU anymore. Instead, you must get an Animal Health Certificate (AHC) before every trip.

This change closes a long‑standing loophole. After Brexit, UK pet passports stopped being accepted by the EU, but many British travellers continued using EU‑issued passports obtained through vets in France, Spain, or Belgium. These passports allowed repeat travel for years. The EU has now tightened the rules so that only people whose main home is inside the EU can use EU pet passports. If you live in Great Britain, you must use an AHC instead.

An AHC must be issued by an authorised vet within 10 days of travel. It confirms your pet is microchipped, has a valid rabies vaccination, and is fit to travel. Each certificate is single‑use, meaning you need a new one every time you leave Great Britain for the EU. Once you’ve entered the EU, the certificate stays valid for up to six months for onward travel and for returning to the UK, as long as rabies vaccinations remain valid.

If you try to travel with the wrong paperwork—such as an EU pet passport—your pet may be refused entry, sent back to the UK, or placed in quarantine. Border officials check documents on arrival, not afterwards, so it’s essential to get the certificate before you go.

The good news is that holidays with your pets are still very possible. You just need to plan ahead, book a vet appointment in good time, and make sure you have the correct paperwork for every trip.

-------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.

PM Starmer ready to accept animal cruelty to get closer to EU

This is my opinion based on a factually true story.

This is crass, objectionable thinking by the Prime Minister of the UK and his team, Sir Keir Starmer who wants to undo Brexit and work more closely with the EU in order - he thinks - to grow the dead British economy. The trouble is that he has to sell his soul to work more closely with the EU and pay a huge financial price probably in the billions of euros. The EU always extracts billions from countries which want to work with the EU.

Foie Gras and Fur Production in the EU

Foie gras and animal fur remain legal industries within the European Union, even though both involve practices widely criticised for causing animal suffering. Foie gras is produced mainly in France, along with smaller operations in Spain, Hungary and Bulgaria. The process relies on force‑feeding ducks or geese to enlarge their livers far beyond normal size. This method, known as gavage, is banned in several EU countries on welfare grounds, but the EU single market rules mean the product itself cannot be banned from sale. France, in particular, treats foie gras as part of its cultural heritage and strongly defends its production.

Fur farming has been banned in a growing number of EU states — including the Netherlands, Austria, Belgium and Italy — but fur sales and imports remain legal at EU level. Countries that still farm fur, such as Finland, continue to export it freely within the single market. The EU has not introduced a bloc‑wide ban on fur products, despite public pressure and citizen‑led initiatives calling for one.

The result is a patchwork: some EU countries prohibit the production of foie gras or fur, but none can block their sale. As long as these products remain legal at EU level, they continue to circulate freely across the union.

The price of working closer with the EU

The UK government are now ready to drop a promise to ban imports of animal fur and foie gras in order to secure a deal with the EU to enable the UK to work more closely with the continent. Foie gras was banned in the UK 20 years ago. To accept imports is a big step backwards.

The EU are not prepared it seems to make the imports of these animal cruelty products an exception for the UK.

The trouble is that the UK have to accept EU standards even if they are lower than UK standards in the area of animal welfare.

Frankly this makes me angry. Animal welfare is often de-prioritised by politicians because it gets in the way of economic progress. It always will because exploiting animals is good business.

---------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.

Millions of UNUSED research animals killed in Germany including cats

A report which was discussed in April 2020 in the news media revealed a shocking statistic namely that in Germany 3.9 million animals died at research laboratories and these animals had never been used in research. I'll restate that because it is so shocking. Animals brought into research laboratories or bred there and which were not subsequently employed in the research were killed nonetheless and the number of these animals stands at 3.9 million. The figure relates to 2017 in Germany.

Animals not used but killed in Animal research in Germany amounted to 3.9 million in 2017. Photo: Image by Tibor Janosi Mozes from Pixabay.

The information was released after the Green party requested the information. Perhaps more shockingly, across the entire European Union 12.6 million animals were killed under the same circumstances. I find that number hard to digest. Is it really true? It is saying that almost 13 million animals were killed for no reason! No reason whatsoever. This is mass animal cruelty but entirely legalised.

Initially the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel tried to sugarcoat the statistics by releasing the number of animals killed after they were experimented on. That number is high enough at 2.8 million in Germany in 2017. Apparently 2017 saw the highest number of animals ever bred for research in Germany. They included 718 cats, monkeys, fish and over a quarter of a million rats.

About 50% are used for basic research experiments, 27% used in testing for new medicines, while 15% were tested in respect of specific diseases. Across Europe animal experiments are banned to research cosmetics. The same applies to the UK.

Comment: there are many instances when animals that have been tested on for scientific purposes are still viable as domestic pets but they are invariably killed. But, in the EU, when they are not even used, abused, exploited and injured by scientific researchers they are still killed and thrown away. You just can't fathom it can you?

The German Animal Welfare Act allows the use of animals in research despite the fact that the law provides extensive and far-reaching protection. Interestingly, animals under the law in Germany are regarded as "fellow creatures". Hardly true. In order to justify experiments on animals in Germany the researchers must always show that the goal of the experiments cannot be reached using any other methods or techniques. Specifically, experiments can only be carried out if at least one of the following criteria is fulfilled:

• The experiments serve the purpose of prevention, diagnosis or treatment of diseases in humans and animals;
• They help recognize environmental hazards;
• They are part of safety testing for materials or products;
• They are necessary for basic research.

Note: I've taken those words verbatim from the Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics webpage in the interests of complete accuracy.

Sale of clothes containing fur in shops in Britain will be banned

The UK government is drawing up plans to prohibit the sale of clothes containing fur in shops after Britain leave the European Union's single market and customs union. This is the result of Brexit. The government is currently negotiating a Brexit agreement with the European Union and it looks more hopeful at the moment. 

The European Union banned the import and sale of fur from domestic cats and dogs across the EU in 2009. However, an investigation by the Humane Society International in the UK discovered that fur described as faux fur is in fact real and can be found in some clothes and shoes. Faux fur is not better than the real thing.

Objectionable fur clothing. Photo: Pixabay. Note: I am not criticising this man
who is probably a model. Also I am not sure if the fur is fake or genuine.

The point to make is this: it is very pleasing to animal advocates that the UK government is going to put an end to the sale of clothes containing fur in the UK starting next year (all being well) but they will have to be particularly observant and rigourous in weeding out real fur masquerading as faux fur. My research indicates that faux fur is actually more expensive to reduce than the real thing, which is a terrible indictment of the amount of cruelty perpetrated on captive animals who are killed for their skins.

Apparently the faux fur is cat fur. Retailers should take responsibility for ensuring that the fur on the clothes that they sell is genuinely false. They should trace the source and insist that their suppliers provide certificates that their products are genuinely faux fur. Genuine fur disguised as faux fur is apparently quite a big issue in the high street. Fur traders find ways to wriggle around regulations.

I sincerely hope that the British government get a handle on this. There are a lot of unscrupulous producers, wholesalers and retailers who don't care about animal welfare. Changing the law and banning the sale of fur in clothes in the High Street in the UK is not enough although very welcome. There needs to be strict enforcement which is going to prove very difficult.

The move to ban fur in shops is being driven by Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park who is the Defra minister with responsibility for animal welfare. He is working, as I understand it, with Carrie Symonds, Boris Jonson's partner who as we all know is a keen animal advocate. The ban would be a strong signal of Britain's post-Brexit freedoms. It would be very popular because opinion polls have indicated that about 80% of Briton's think that fur on clothes are unacceptable nowadays. They dislike the trade in fur. Northern Ireland will be exempt from this proposal because they remain in the EU's single market and customs rules.

The British Fur Trade Association, as expected, say that the proposals are "irrational, illiberal and misjudged". Animal advocates would say the same thing about the association. It is time for change, there is no doubt about it.