Background
Prior to 1970, livestock were carried in small ships or as deck cargo. By the mid 1970s, ships capable of carrying 50,000 sheep were coming into service. These ships were mainly converted small oil tankers that had been redeployed after the 1973 oil crisis. Subsequently, larger ships were converted to carry up to 125,000 sheep. In the late 1970s, the trade was beset with industrial problems. Many workers were being retrenched due to abattoir closures and the live sheep trade was blamed. At the same time, animal welfare concerns were raised. With the loss of 40,605 sheep on the Farid Fares in 1980 (ship caught fire and sank) and 15,000 sheep in the Portland feedlots in 1983 (after a cold snap), the government could no longer ignore animal welfare concerns. In July 1983 the Minister for Primary Industry stated that “The current levels of mortalities cannot be explained, understood nor justified. The industry seems intent on ignoring these dying sheep and the pleas of the concerned public”. The government set up a senate enquiry.
| senate_enquiry_1985_live_sheep_trade.pdf |
The report concluded:
"It is not in the best interests of the animal to be transported to the Middle East for slaughter ... The Federal Government should promote and encourage the expansion of the refrigerated sheepmeat trade to the Middle East and other countries, with the aim of eventually substituting it for the live sheep trade."
Clearly, that didn't happen. The trade expanded to include greater numbers of sheep and also other animals such as goats and cattle. There were many hiccups, but the one hiccup no-one could ignore was the Four Corner's report "A Bloody Business", first aired in May 2011. Not surprisingly, this stimulated another senate enquiry.
"It is not in the best interests of the animal to be transported to the Middle East for slaughter ... The Federal Government should promote and encourage the expansion of the refrigerated sheepmeat trade to the Middle East and other countries, with the aim of eventually substituting it for the live sheep trade."
Clearly, that didn't happen. The trade expanded to include greater numbers of sheep and also other animals such as goats and cattle. There were many hiccups, but the one hiccup no-one could ignore was the Four Corner's report "A Bloody Business", first aired in May 2011. Not surprisingly, this stimulated another senate enquiry.
| senate_enquiry_2011.pdf |
This committee's conclusions:
"The committee does not consider that there is anything to be gained from dwelling further on the motives of Animals Australia, RSPCA Australia or the ABC. The committee prefers instead to focus on how these serious shortcomings in Australia's live export trade can be properly addressed to preserve this significant trade and the communities it underpins."
So, despite, a nation's collective horror, no phasing out was suggested in 2011.
(For more detail on individual submissions to the 2011 Senate Enquiry and to find out what industry, vets and animal welfare bodies wrote, check out the APH website.)
"The committee does not consider that there is anything to be gained from dwelling further on the motives of Animals Australia, RSPCA Australia or the ABC. The committee prefers instead to focus on how these serious shortcomings in Australia's live export trade can be properly addressed to preserve this significant trade and the communities it underpins."
So, despite, a nation's collective horror, no phasing out was suggested in 2011.
(For more detail on individual submissions to the 2011 Senate Enquiry and to find out what industry, vets and animal welfare bodies wrote, check out the APH website.)
Deplorable conditions at sea
Many Australians are not aware of the cruelty involved in routine transport of animals for live export. Long-haul ship transport, especially for sheep, is beset by numerous problems. Independent assessment and observations are impossible as only industry employees are involved; industry supplies government with reports.
Excessive mortality (i.e. above the already high 1% of cattle and 2% of sheep for each voyage of approximately 20 days) triggers an enquiry, but in effect very little changes for the animals. In 2008, Perth magistrate Catherine Crawford investigated a routine shipment to the Middle East and ruled that animal cruelty occurred because animals were transported in a way that was likely to cause unnecessary harm; Emanuel Exports was acquitted on a technicality.
A few vets have spoken out about these lesser known issues.
Dr Lloyd Reeve-Johnson, a veterinary surgeon accredited with the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service, has alleged that government officials charged with overseeing the live export industry have repeatedly failed to address conflicts of interest within the system. Read the article.
This is borne out by the experience of Dr Tony Hill, a veterinarian working for Emmanuel Exports who was required to falsify mortality figures on the Al Khaleej. Up to 2000 sheep died on the voyage but only 105 deaths were reported. On his return, Dr Hill fully reported the matter to Live Corp but it went no further; Mr Graham Daws, a director of Emmanuel Exports, was on the board of directors for LiveCorp.
See a transcript of the interview:
www.liveexportshame.com/docs/60_minutes_transcript.pdf
Dr (Captain) Peter Kerkenezov (veterinarian and ship captain) has also described animal cruelty on his two live export voyages. He reported his experiences to LiveCorp and was never asked on a live export ship again. Read the article.
Many Australians are not aware of the cruelty involved in routine transport of animals for live export. Long-haul ship transport, especially for sheep, is beset by numerous problems. Independent assessment and observations are impossible as only industry employees are involved; industry supplies government with reports.
Excessive mortality (i.e. above the already high 1% of cattle and 2% of sheep for each voyage of approximately 20 days) triggers an enquiry, but in effect very little changes for the animals. In 2008, Perth magistrate Catherine Crawford investigated a routine shipment to the Middle East and ruled that animal cruelty occurred because animals were transported in a way that was likely to cause unnecessary harm; Emanuel Exports was acquitted on a technicality.
A few vets have spoken out about these lesser known issues.
Dr Lloyd Reeve-Johnson, a veterinary surgeon accredited with the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service, has alleged that government officials charged with overseeing the live export industry have repeatedly failed to address conflicts of interest within the system. Read the article.
This is borne out by the experience of Dr Tony Hill, a veterinarian working for Emmanuel Exports who was required to falsify mortality figures on the Al Khaleej. Up to 2000 sheep died on the voyage but only 105 deaths were reported. On his return, Dr Hill fully reported the matter to Live Corp but it went no further; Mr Graham Daws, a director of Emmanuel Exports, was on the board of directors for LiveCorp.
See a transcript of the interview:
www.liveexportshame.com/docs/60_minutes_transcript.pdf
Dr (Captain) Peter Kerkenezov (veterinarian and ship captain) has also described animal cruelty on his two live export voyages. He reported his experiences to LiveCorp and was never asked on a live export ship again. Read the article.
A report from Meat and Livestock Australia
The MLA report that preceded the furore about Indonesia makes interesting reading.
The MLA report that preceded the furore about Indonesia makes interesting reading.
| indonesia_mla_2010.pdf |
The MLA team observed 29 beasts slaughtered in 11 abattoirs. They noted:
The conclusion was that animal welfare, as judged by OIE recommendations, was generally good. The Australian Chief Veterinary Officer later found that use of Mark I boxes did not comply with OIE recommendations.
Despite MLA's own documentation of problems with slaughter in Indonesia, many in the industry claimed that they had never witnessed the type of treatment of animals shown in the Four Corners program. WA Liberal Senator Chris Back, a veterinarian, went further and, under parliamentary privilege, alleged that Animals Australia bribed the Indonesians to mistreat cattle for the video footage supplied to Four Corners. He was never able to provide any supporting evidence for his comments.
- there were problems with the Mark I boxes (and more so with their copies), and 17% of animals that went down actually gained their feet on release (ropes too long and SOP not being observed)
- up to 18 incisions were inflicted in slaughter
- eye gouging and tail twisting practices were noted immediately prior to slaughter once the animal was restrained and cast
- there was an average of 3.5 head slaps in casting prior to slaughter. Head lifts were observed to pose a significant risk to animal welfare
- the severity of the falls, classified as mild, moderate or marked was found to on average to be moderate
- that tossing buckets of water/hosing water over cast cattle before slaughter was routine
- there was often distress after release from the restraint box on sudden visual stimulation of the slaughter floor.
The conclusion was that animal welfare, as judged by OIE recommendations, was generally good. The Australian Chief Veterinary Officer later found that use of Mark I boxes did not comply with OIE recommendations.
Despite MLA's own documentation of problems with slaughter in Indonesia, many in the industry claimed that they had never witnessed the type of treatment of animals shown in the Four Corners program. WA Liberal Senator Chris Back, a veterinarian, went further and, under parliamentary privilege, alleged that Animals Australia bribed the Indonesians to mistreat cattle for the video footage supplied to Four Corners. He was never able to provide any supporting evidence for his comments.
