Export of cattle from Adelaide to Israel in August 2015

8/9/2015

These images show cattle on board a live export ship in Eilat, Israel, and after loading onto trucks for onward journeys. The temperatures of 42.5 on the dockside is very high but completely normal for that time and place. The reading of 56.5 (allegedly in the hold) is extreme by anyone's measure. The images show some (what appear to be Bos taurus) cattle with long winter coats liberally coated with faeces – all risk factors for occurrence of heat stress and poor welfare. The subsequent rollover and death of cattle on the truck just makes things even worse. Long-haul voyages to the Middle East should not occur at any time, but taking winter-adapted cattle into those conditions is appalling.

See the photos (link to a dropbox folder)

Read our response to Port Adelaide Monitors, who provided the photos:

vale_response_to_pam.pdf
File Size:	165 kb
File Type:	pdf

Download File

9 Comments

Lory Anello

10/9/2015 11:55:15 am

This is morally wrong and evil!

Alan Schmidt

11/9/2015 04:17:25 pm

Dear Sir,

I have read your letter regards the Ocean Drovers voyage to Israel in August. Somel facts:-

Cattle deaths 35 head <0.03%, sheep deaths 15 head <0.03%.

Overall cattle weight gain from loaded weight to discharge weight (Full to full) 5% over 18 days. Cattle will not gain weight if they are under conditions of stress

Dry bulb temp. on the days of discharge (highest) was measured at 30deg on deck 5 - all others were lower.

Vessel was loaded to less than 80% of capaiity as indicated by heat stress modelling.

80% of all cattle came from Pastoral areas and were all quarantined in zone 3 (heat map).

The inference from your article is that the cattle were mis-handled and conditions were extreme. This was clearly not the case. At any time that VALE would like professional and accurate data regarding any of our voyages, they simply have to ask.

Alan Schmidt - Managing Director Otway Livestock Exports.

VALE

14/9/2015 04:18:16 pm

Thank you for your response and for your offer of information Mr Schmidt. We have a number of comments:

1) even if only 20% of the animals were Bos taurus, the fact remains that Bos taurus cattle would have experienced heat stress on the ship (whether they gained weight or not). In addition, even Bos indicus cattle would have experienced heat stress to some level with a heat transition such as a voyage from Australia in mid winter to the middle east in mid summer. With the published environmental temperatures in the region (as opposed to those in the PAM report) heat stress would have been highly likely (Caulfield et al 2014)

2) photos show woolly coats which indicate that animals were winter-adapted not heat adapted. Being winter coated meant they were likely to become liberally coated in wet faeces (faecal jacket) as faeces in pens/decks became wet during washing.

3) faecal covering (jackets) may significantly reduce ability to dissipate heat. These images show animals with faecal jackets on the ship, on the trucks and lying on the road after the traffic accident that resulted in death or injury of many animals.

4) dry bulb temperature on live export vessels is routinely taken in the morning to enable reporting with the noon (12 o'clock) ships report and does not reflect the maximum temperature or relative humidity on any given day. The measurement may be taken on the bridge, which does not reflect temperatures in the holds or decks. The average maximum temperatures in Eilat for August 2015 were between 37 and 43 degrees Celsius. Relative humidity was in the 50 percentile area. Thus, a 30 degree dry bulb temperature would not have been an accurate representation of conditions on that day unless taken very early in the morning in an advantageous shaded, well ventilated area on board.

5) with reference to the claim that weight gain onboard is as an indicator of good welfare on ships, unless an animal is fully hydrated (and perhaps they are given your reference full to full), weight gain can merely reflect gut fill as discussed by Dr Thomson (2000), a senior livestock export veterinary officer, who reported: “Most exporters hope for a measured weight gain during the shipping phase, which as previously explained is more reflective of gut fill and hydration than a true weight gain”. Regardless, weight gain alone does not indicate that animal welfare is of a high standard (Foster and Overall 2014). These animals have limited energy expenditure onboard and if they have access to enough food, even under adverse welfare conditions, many will gain weight.

References
Caulfield MP et al. Heat stress: A major contributor to poor animal welfare associated
with long-haul live export voyages. The Veterinary Journal 2014;199:223-228
Foster SF, Overall KE. The welfare of Australian livestock transported by sea. The Veterinary Journal 2014;200:205-209
Thomson D. Live cattle exports. See: www.livestocklibrary.com.au/handle/1234/20188?show=full (Accessed 15th September 2015)

Alan Schmidt

14/9/2015 07:21:23 pm

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your reply, some comments again.
1). There was little evidence (actual) f stress, the 20% of British cattle were purchased from either NT - SW Qld or W NSW. Although during our winter the cattle were in store condition and had 10% more room than was stipulated under heat modelling.

2). Some faecal matter was attached to the coats of some cattle - to say they were 'jacketed' was not an accurate description, even when viewing your photos. Also after washing sawdust is laid in all pens. The voyage was carrying 3 times the required tonnage of sawdust.

3).You make innacurate assumptions of where temperature readings are taken. They are measured daily on each deck at 13:00. All decks are ventilated to approx.. twice the AMSA minimum in all areas. There are massive volumes of air forced into the cattle areas.

5). Again you make inaccurate assumptions as to the disposition of the cattle. They were all weighed full at the time of departure from quarantine. They are weighed full again prior to departure from the wharf. the weight gain thus measured is an accurate reflection of overall performance. It is well known that if cattle are stressed, particularly from heat their fodder intake will dramatically decrease.

VALE

16/9/2015 05:34:35 am

This does not address the issue. The point is that the ambient temperature was 42.5 degrees Celsius and the meteorological data for the region (even taking conservative estimates) suggest that the humidity at the relevant time was about 30%. This means that the likely calculated wet bulb temperature was about 26.9 degrees Celsius. At this temperature, the animals will not have been able to keep their body temperature steady - in other words, their body temperature will have increased and the animals will have experienced heat stress. This is confirmed when one calculates the Temperature-Humidity Index based on these measurements. The Temperature-Humidity Index works out at between 88 and 89, which corresponds to the "emergency" level. Under these conditions, vulnerable animals may die. All of these considerations are set out in detail in our paper on the subject (Caulfield et al (2014) The Veterinary Journal 199, 223).

If there was little physiological evidence of heat stress (the most important relevant observation is respiration rate), as Mr Schmidt claims, then we invite him to make the relevant daily voyage reports and end-of-voyage report available to substantiate that claim.

Alan Schmidt

16/9/2015 06:44:17 am

Dear Sir,
Thank you for your reply. It would seem to me that further comment by either side is pointless. We had a very successful delivery. And VALE maintains that the cattle were at risk. Bottom line is that the cattle discharged at Eilat with minimal losses during the voyage. Cattle gained weight. Since arrival none have died they have settled well onto feed and are gaining weight. It was unfortunate that a rollover was experienced during transit. But I would point out that it is only the third such event in the importers 48 year in the industry.

VALE

17/9/2015 02:25:34 pm

Mr Schmidt, I'm afraid that 'agreeing to disagree' isn't an option when both sides have such an unequal logic base on which to rely. We simply ask you one question:

Will you share with us the end-of-voyage and daily reports?

As for the claim of there being only three rollovers in 48 years, how would you know? Until ESCAS was introduced in 2011 exporters were not required to account for the treatment of any animal once it was unloaded. No concern about transportation, handling or slaughter, just take the money and go back and get some more.

One last comment, Mr Schmidt. It seems to us that you are in live export to make money. Live export is not happening for the good of humanity or animals but to line the pockets of a very few people. It stands to reason that anyone who makes money out of live export is conflicted and should have no part in settings standards or oversight of the industry.

VALE

13/10/2015 09:08:20 pm

Hi Mr Schmidt,

Re your offer "At any time that VALE would like professional and accurate data regarding any of our voyages, they simply have to ask" could I just remind you, we have asked for the EOV Report and Daily Reports but as yet have not received any.

To those following our blogs:
It appears we will have to make yet another request to the Dept of Ag under FOI for the reports from this voyage. Suggest you just hold your breath for between 1 and 4 years whilst we see if the Dept of Ag (and the Appeals Convenor usually) will release the documents given that Mr Schmidt appears to have reneged on his offer!

peter clarke

19/10/2015 05:40:57 pm

not holding my breath for you getting the figures you asked for… such a dinosaur industry, very much like the justification of the whale industry in the 1970's.

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

Export of cattle from Adelaide to Israel in August 2015

Leave a Reply.

Archives

Categories