A peer reviewed scientific paper has carefully analysed the industry-funded, non-peer reviewed study on ASEL stocking densities and found it to be flawed.
Conclusions made by researchers that "the current ASEL stocking densities are appropriate based on the animal welfare indicators applied in these investigations" and that "the research outputs presented in this report will enable the Live Export to objectively defend the current ASEL space allowances"...appear unfounded according to the new paper.
The paper demonstrated that there was poor study design and inadequate measures on which to base the conclusions. But....no doubt industry will still use this study to support current on-board stocking densities. Good science and industry-funded "science" can be two very different things.