Poll on Australian Live Animal Export

[borga]

As a vegan, I hate anything to do with the meat trade, skin trade etc,etc,....however, as this whole export issue is never going to go away,  I would rather see our livestock stay on Australian soil, be slaughtered in Australian slaughter-houses than endure the living hell they face as soon as board those ships of evil.  On the flipside, and I know I wont be popular for saying this, but, the jobs that have been lost by Australian meat workers, will most likely be picked up again. Once again, I would rather see our livestock be handled by Australians than face mutiliation and torment by those in other countries where animal cruelty laws are non existent.

[Export News Tasmania]

Jocy, thanks for that excellent letter, The Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union puts the figure of jobs lost as a result of the live export trade at 40,000. The industry claims it supports 13,0000 jobs - but it includes in that figure doctors, dentists, hospitality, banking and insurance workers (amongst others) whose jobs would clearly remain if the trade in live animals ceased. The real figure is probably more like 3,000. Please, send your letter to the relevant State and Federal politicians!

[jocy]

 I support this letter: " Australia should discontinue the Live Animal Export trade to other countries on ethical and compassionate grounds alone.
However, discontinuing the Live Animal Export trade would also benefit Australian abattoirs; many Australian abattoirs have 'Halal' certification and would welcome the chance to re-build the chilled carcass trade that has been decimated by the Live Animal Export trade. It would also restore many other rural jobs that have been lost; approximately twice as many jobs have disappeared from closed Australian abattoirs and associated business' as have supposedly been 'created' by the live export industry".

I also support : "We all know that the live exporting farmers had no worries about the disappearing local processing sector, or the jobs of meatworkers as long as they got a few extra dollars per head for animals. We know too that they are excellent at turning a blind eye to the shocking cruelty the animals they send face. Now, they have been caught by the drought, and there is insufficient processing capacity. What goes around comes around! Don't throw them any more handouts, because this proves that they cannot manage their businesses like everyone else has to."

I am against any live-animal-export and I condemn those, who are pro.  :angry:

[Export News Tasmania]

Hi Rocky
Can you tell us please what you have seen in importing countries, once you have unloaded (and therefore are no longer responsible for) the pitiful "cargo"?

[WA Export News]

Scooter- you are a real gem!

[Scooter]

Hello Rocky,comendable of you to post. However, I would strongly suggest you are not objective when it comes to the trade, as you are deriving income from it, therefore will be a wee bit blind to it's fundamentally illogical existence.The live exporters, Government and farmers are turning Aust into a paddock! No value adding, no future sustainability, just quick dollars...tell me Rocky, what bargaining power will the employees of the industry and the farmers have when our slaughterhouses become a thing of the past due to their inability to compete with the tax free , overhead free, live exporters? I doubt the exporters will still pay a premium price then...what do you think?Live exports are anti-competetive, and have no doubt shut down the meat processing sector in Australia to a large degree...look at the facts, the jobs in Aust processing went down in direct relation to the rise in live exports- fact.Aside from the cruelty, immorality and all the other arguments already shown to you on this forum, the trade does not make sense! This was pointed out in 1985, when a Bi-Partisan Senate committee declared the trade should be phased out in favour of a chilled carcass industry. 1985 Rocky....read the Senate report...it describes cruelty that could easily narrate todays footage of the horrors our animals are subject to in the Middle East as we speak. Animal Welfare improvements? Where Rocky? Treatment they recieve would be illegal here Rocky, no argument, we are outsourcing slaughter and with it a shameful, evil disregard and cruelty that would be prosecuted here.People in other countries don't believe the spin Rocky...and trust me, when I was in the UK and the US last year...the people there are apalled and disgusted with the cruelty of the trade...a cruelty they associate with Australia, and Australians. It is damaging the wool industry, and the reputation of Australia and Australians in general...Ultimately the farmers of this nation will get a wake up call.....and frankly Rocky it can't come soon enough for my liking...I'm sick of my hard earned tax dollars propping up cruelty, profiteering and incompetence. How fortunate you are Rocky to have a choice as to your participation in this vile industry...sadly a luxury the animals do not have.

[Export News Tasmania]

Hey Rocky
The "Maysora" incident is one of a long line of many, the details of most of which we do not find out about, as has been pointed out above, because this industry is protected by "commercial in confidence" provisions by the Federal government. The reason for that is that so many politicians are farmers.
The last shipment from Tasmania (that we know of, we suspect that animals are being shipped out of the state, transported to Portland, then being exported from there) was on the "Al Messilah" in February 2006. 1,632 sheep starved to death on a marathon 27 day voyage to four destination ports. That is how WE count the suffering and the death toll. The cattle on the "Maysora" were sent with forged documents, and the detail is that cattle bred south of the 26 degree parallel south should not be exported between May and October. We sent letters to several politicians and most of AQIS - and got not one response. Those cattle were sent ILLEGALLY, yet the exporter still has the licence to do it all again.
Those are just the stuff-ups BEFORE the hapless animals are handed over to the tender mercies of the importing countries, and this is what we would like you to tell us more about.
Bear with us - we are trying to keep our knowledge current and relevant.
Catherine
Live Export Shame Tasmania
 

[Export News Tasmania]

Hey Rocky
Firstly I would like to thank you for having the courage to contribute to this debate as you have, in the face of what must really feel like hostility. You sound like you do have the welfare of the animals as a major consideration. I knew about the breach of the Standards (cattle sourced from south of 26 degrees latitude south), but as has bern pointed out above, the exporter continues on unscathed and unrepentant.
While things may have improved on SOME of the ships (have you read our document "A Disaster by Another Name"?), another thing which has been pointed out above is the appalling cruelty these animals face in destination countries. I would love you to tell us more of your experiences; which ships you have travelled on, and what YOU have observed in these countries. It is all very well to say that the trade is "improving", but Nigel Brown, MLA's OWN veterinarian, was quoted extensively in Middle Eastern newspapers saying that it is just fine to hog-tie sheep and throw them in the boots of cars ("it makes them feel safe", he said, see this website). He further said that it is usual practice in Australia a nd Europe. This is the man to whom the welfare of Australian animals is entrusted.
Can you tell us the material we have seen is wrong? Inaccurate? If not, we are back at the start of the discussion. As Animals Australia says - this isn't about animal rights, it is about animal wrongs.
Regards
Catherine
Live Export Shame Tasmania

[lotus petal]

I voted to rebuild the chilled industry.
Although I am 100% vegetarian and do not believe in eating animals at all, it is unrealistic for us to think that we can make everyone give up meat, hence while we must strive to change peoples views we must also try to improve the conditions for those animals that will end up on someones dinner plate. Hence why I think we need to improve the chilled industry, at least this way we know they are not being transported Live to the middle east and treated like a sack of flour, thrown all over the place by their fleece and legs.

[WA Export News]

Cheers Rocky.

I am with you on this one- the exporter is to blame- in fact our sources tell us the choice to take Herefords on this trip was a shocking one. But hey he got his export license back from good old AQIS without too much ado! Hes back loading cattle and sheep aboard that shitheap Maysora today in Fremantle WA so I guess for that exporter it was really no big deal.

Our sources also tell us that this particular exporter is not interested in animal welfare- his concern is profit first, profit second, third etc..  Get the picture?

I think the stock men probably get the blame for many ills that befall live export- but then its about time they stood up for what is right and just.

However having said that-no matter how perfect the journey no one can justify the savage treatment these innocent little creatures endure upon arrival and thereafter. Not even you.

Dont agree with your statement on 95% do a good job. The industry is not transparent and accountable therefore it would not be acceptable to say that 95% does a good job. It is essential that animal welfare people board and inspect and travel with every shipment...but what exporter would allow that? What exporter wants the truth to be known about the crap conditions, suffering and deaths?

Further, as inanition (shy feeding) is live export exclusive- in other words sheep do not suffer from failure to eat or shy feeding on the farm. It is only when they get put into a feedlot then onto the ship ands are forced to eat pelleted fodder do they suffer from inanition. Therefore in our minds the very fact exporters knowingly put shy feeder sheep onto a ship - knowing they will suffer in CRUELTY in itself!

[rocky]

Thanks Nicky and Hero member for your replies.
Both you guys make strong pionts. I would love to have time to sit down and relpy to every thing you asked Hero. But the fact I dont have time.
But I will say this, it is about time the export trade, put they balls on the line, and put a tv camera on to a ship, and showed what realy went on. I do beleave that people would be very surpised to see what realy happens.
So I put to any one out there, if you can find a exporter which is willing to do it, i will be keen to sail on that trip.
Let the trip actions speck for itself. End of the day, it doesnt matter what i say on here, it want change anyones mines.
Now about the Mv Maysora, who is to blame for that, honestly, the exporter is.
Why, a large number of reasons, dont blame the ship or the boat crew or stockman.
Blame the per shipping, the buyers the epxorter.
Iv been a buyer for live export, you get to know as a buyer, what will traval and what doesnt.
What makes a good trip is the per shipping, if every thing is done right on land, the trip should be easy.
Now the epxorter, hope they under for this, the fact is, there is a law saying that no cattle are to be exported out of the southern ports between may and oct, not 100% sure on the datas.
the law is the law, they broke it, and animals did suffer for it. Now all you guys will be thinking whats rocky on about, he has spent the last couple weeks telling us that stock dont suffer, bla bla bla. If i was due to sail on that ship and seen the stock or new where they come from i wouldnt of gone.
I will say couple things, the stockmen which was on board that trip is a close friend of mine, he would of been pist off as well. He is very much like me, very hard worker, been rounld animals all his life, and he would of told the expoter from the start that they fucked up.
Its sad, for the fact, that this export comapny was running there ships at a high stock loss, and my friend helped them and told them on how to impove there ships, which they did, and there ships had some very good resolts.
We have to be fair in saying this, 95% of exports do, do a very good job with what they do, the  other 5% should not be trading.
I would like to say more, but i just dont have the time.

[Nicky]

Hey Rocky
Thank you for contributing, it is good to have debate. I have to point out though that recent studies by the AMIEU (Australasian Meat Industry Employees' Union) put the job LOSSES caused by the live export trade at closer to 40,000 in recent years. That's a lot of people losing their livelihoods, a lot of regional centres shutting down because meat processing was the only, or the major employer, and then the domino effect on other businesses. But I agree with WA Admin here, jobs and economics are not the issues. The fact that you say you are "not supposed to be talking" about certain things is very telling, and symptomatic of the protection from public scrutiny this industry gets from the government (too many politicians are farmers).
The welfare of the animals doomed to this appalling trade in misery and suffering is the major concern for me. Possibly some animals adapt to the shit feed they are forced to eat, and can cope standing in their own excrement for weeks at a stretch - but tens of thousands can't, as the few statistics available indicate. I have watched the loading of some ships, and see no attempt made to conform to the industry's OWN mandatory standards. I have seen sick and injured sheep being taken to the ship, sheep being kicked, and one being thrown from the ramp to the wharf. But none of this compares to what all these animals face in importing countries, at the hands of what I can only describe as savages. Have you seen that? Can you tell us that the material we have seen is wrong? At the end of the day, animals feel hunger, thirst, heat, cold, isolation and loneliness and fear. Prolonging that by subjecting them to all this, for no better reason than the greed of the few, is simply unacceptable. That is just basic, common decency.

[WA Export News]

Hello Rocky, great to see replies coming from the industry.

The 'improvements' you have mentioned have all been instigated by outside the industry not by the industry themselves. Animal welfare have initiated changes..

There are export standards within Australia which must be adhered to as they are mandatory. This covers animals from farm to destination. Sadly there is little to no policing and enforcement which means effectively the trade is self regulating and no matter how hard many try within the industry to reduce or even stop cruelty this trade attracts people who in reality don't care about the animals.

When you have an attitude that animals are merely 'stock' a commodity to be traded in, then you will have people who think 'its only a sheep' (or cow or pig etc), and that attitude permeates throughout the trade. This then gives rise to beatings, hitting, kicking, throwing or leaving animals to die because - well hey they're only a sheep!

We know there are many animal groups such as Animals Australia, Animals' Angels, PACAT, Animal Liberation and the like who lobby, expose realities to the public, campaign or work actively within the trade to change attitudes, make improvements or seek to enforce the industry's own laws and regulations.

These groups bring the truth and reality of live trade to the public and one or two of these groups have initiated ALL the improvements you see in the live trade today. So if it weren't for animal welfare groups live export would have a far worse death rate than before.   It is a false claim that the industry initiates welfare change- they would say that- they will not admit someone or a group made them do it!

You talk about death rates in percentage- how about you stop negating the individual animals by reducing them to a percentage and talk about their suffering before they died. See thats part of the problem. The death rates are just that numbers and do not reflect the pain, stress, distress, suffering these animals went through BEFORE they died, nor do these numbers recognize the tremendous suffering of those who survive.

And so how do you account for the suffering of the animals?  It is been agreed within the OIE (World Health for Animals), animal welfare/rights groups world wide and and most of industry that transport is the greatest reason for stress in animals. They suffer the most when transported both short and long distance than any other phase in the export chain (not including subsequent landing and treatment in the destination country).  And this doesnt preclude transport for domestic use. We regularly witness sheep piled on top of one another, sheep with no where to stand so have dropped down only to be trampled upon. We have witnessed sheep with legs and heads stuck outside trucks because they cannot pull their body parts into the trucks due to the sheer pressure of numbers inside the trucks. You cannot tell us that the industry cares about the animals- it is really about the money with animal welfare thrown in as a side measure in order to satisfy public pressure and keep the trade afloat.

Given the stress which heightens any probability of disease transfer and the suffering of the animals do you think the measurement we currently use of deaths is an accurate portrayal of the suffering endured?

Further, the industry does itself no favours by preventing accountability and transparency to the public. The wall of Govt protection is such that given the public taxpayer support to the tune of millions, they have a right to know EXACTLY what happens aboard a ship yet we are prevented from doing so.  As are the animal welfare groups. We believe the public is not taken in by industry players claiming to be independent spectators and or assessors in animal welfare. After all they have another agenda. If you want truly independent assessment then take on board animal welfare advocates.

More over, the loss of jobs is important especially to the 18000 or so forced out of work when slaughterhouses shut down. The trade in fact supports around 3000 - you claimed in your first posting 9000, and the loses to Australian workers is 18000. The lack of people to find to work in slaughterhouses is not due to aversion to hard work as you suggest but because of the takeover of the live trade which essentially caused the demise in slaughter house operations. This is an issue which has not been adequately addressed by Govt or by industry.

As for you watching fat sheep and cattle walking off the ship at the other end..well you should compare notes with Animals Australia. They witnessed an entirely different scenario in 2004. We refer to the Al Kuwait case which will be in the courts this year.

I also ask you to explain the hundreds of deaths of young cattle in Israel in November -December 2006. They certainly didnt walk off the MV Maysora fat! Many died due to various diseases..caused we understand by conditions exclusive in shipping. These diseases like failure to eat pellets are also ship exclusive. So is sea sickness, and yes sheep suffer sea sickness. In other words these diseases and conditions do not happen on the farm.

What happens to the pregnant sheep? What happens to her baby?  No one can tell us pregnant sheep are not exported. It is difficult to tell if a sheep is pregnant - easier for a vet. No vet inspects 80.000 sheep individually even though they are supposed to be according to the mandatory Export Standards- so tell us what happens to those sheep who give birth on board?

Further the care on farm is suspect- so comparing farm care to ship care is not an appropriate comparison.

You make it sound like sacking a person who was 'caught' for cruelty a major step forward. We suppose it is for the live trade industry- but for animal people cruelty should not happen. But it does: in unbelievable numbers.  How many guilty of cruelty get away with it?  What would happen if the captain didn't care either way?

We must question the motivation and integrity of those in charge.

Also Rocky you have not mentioned the treatment or rather mistreatment these poor creatures receive upon arrival in these foreign countries where animal welfare is unheard of.

Transport for animals is by throwing them into trucks on top of each other- broken legs- who cares they're only sheep! See how the very same attitude permeates EVERY place whereby animals are only considered walking money and food. They dont care about the animals need to be given food and water, to be treated with care and respect...that my friend is unheard of.

The industry considers these animals nothings and they are treated as such. There is not once ounce of kindness extended to any of the creatures on board those floating hell holes of death and absolutely NONE in the Middle East or Asia.

Australia has a reputation amongst the world for its poor animal welfare. Yes the Govt and industry wants all to believe we are the best. They kid only themselves.

The live trade is a curse upon human kind.



Look forward to your reply.

[rocky]

Thanks for the reply. What you guys are saying, there is some truth in it.
I have been involed with the trade for 4 years. Since that time, i have seen the tade clean its act up, still long way to go.
Im not missing the point about animail welfare, or the abuse and so on.
Days have gone on the ships, where they loaded them to over flowning, tight pins, pour ventalion. I have seen first hand what goes on.
I worked on one boat, for 9 trips, yes when i first started on it, it was running at a death rata 0f 1.1%. Keys reason why it was so high, it was over loaded, sheep were loaded in the wrong areas, of the ship.
We worked hard on that ship. The exporter, the Caption and myself.
Now that ship runs at a death rate of .1   
I should not be telling people these numbers, but the fact of the matter is, the export trade has cleaned its act up alot. That has alot to do with the people working in the trade.
First and the most important thing is ANIMAL WELFARE. I found on one of my trips, a boat crew member miss treating a animal, I told the caption, next port we got to, that crew member was sacked from the company.
The point im trying to make here, cruelty and abuse is not what the expot trade is about.
How can you guys make a comment on something you havnt seen first hand.
The work that goes into pe shipping, the plan of load a ship, the hours, myself, and every over stockman which has sailed on these ships have done. For me its not bout the money, its the fact of watching fat sheep and cattle walking off the ship at the other end.

weather its 3000 or 9000 jobs been loss, still a large number of people out of work.
The lack of men and woman in killing houses has nothing to do with the export trade, the fact of the matter is working in a killing house is hard work, and the fact is people now a days hate hard work.

Born_for_freedom, im guessing you are a ex meet worker.

[born_for_freedom]

Hey Rocky, think you have been listening to the industry too much. The live export trade does not support 9000 jobs. Thats pure unadulterated bullshit. The trade supports a little over 3000 jobs and most of those would remain even if the trade closed down. They got the figure 9000 by adding in people like the lady who cleans the dunny at the corner deli near the highway where five trucks pass every fortnight!

The real losers in the job stakes were the men and women who used to work in the slaughterhouses around the nation. Gradually over the years slaughterhouses have closed and rural families have lost their incomes - the breadwinners have buggered off to find other work and that has now resulted in a lack of workers in these killing sheds when the industry is desperate for them.

Farmers are essentially short term money makers- they are not interested in long term viability or strategies nor are they interested in animal welfare especially if it creates an impost upon their money making business. Animal welfare is a gimmick- a buzz word, a catchphase farmers use to placate city folk into thinking farmers give a shit about the animals. 

Heres an example of just how much regard farmers have for animals: Farmers call the animals they use 'livestock'. Know what 'stock' is?  It is an 'inanimate object; an object with no feelings or thought processes. Stock does not suffer nor is not alive. A sack of grain is STOCK! A can of baked beans is STOCK!

Animals are not stock. Animals feel pain and suffer just like you do Rocky. They think and are just as capable as you at feeling.  The word livestock is used to negate the fact they feel and in doing so diminishes the animals' sentience, their ability to feel or be important.

The reality is this live trade business has been built on an unethical and immoral activity and there is no way anyone can justify sending animals on ships to suffer brutal treatment by people overseas.

Besides the transfer of disease which I believe happens regularly with live shipping of animals, the animals suffer terribly.

There is no suggestion that this trade be stopped immediately but it should be phased out ASAP.and the slaughterhouses reopened to enable AUSTRALIANS to get their jobs back. You do know that the reason why Arabs like live is because it provides jobs for their people-- feel good that you support Middle Eastern people and not your own? The trade gives money to importers/exporters and creates work.

Actually farmers have been suckered into thinking they have the best competition can offer but in reality live trade has for a long time been taking down the prices paid for animals because they are the only ones buying. They created a competitive market-cornered it by eradicating their competition only to monopolize the prices.  Things are changing it seems, slaughterhouses are coming back and there is regained optimism in setting up new slaughterhouses in Aust-about bloody time.

The only ones to really benefit live trade are the bloody greedy exporters..and I think you know it too.