The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Animals feel the pain of Halal slaughter > Comments

Animals feel the pain of Halal slaughter : Comments

By Jake Farr-Wharton, published 31/5/2011

The same barbaric practices used to kill live exported cattle in Indonesia are used to kill unexported cattle here.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Great article and I ALSO noticed the glaring absence in that exposé of any mention of why exactly these beautiful animals were being treated this way. I don't know how exactly animals are Halal slaughtered in Australia, but I was informed yesterday that in Germany Halal slaughter is carried out by stunning the animal AS SOON AS the throat is cut, so that it feels no pain as it bleeds out. The relevant Islamic law (2603 v) states: "The animal should show some movement after being slaughtered; at least it should move its eyes or tail or strike its foot on the ground. This law applies ONLY WHEN IT IS DOUBTFUL whether or not the animal was alive at the time of being slaughtered, otherwise it is not essential."

By this rationale, it is then permissable to stun the animal, then cut its throat, as their is no doubt that it was alive. WHY is this not the preferred and demanded method of Halal slaughter?

Many people I have talked to are under the impression that Halal slaughtered animals are killed MORE humanely than non-Halal slaughtered animals. For some reason there is a misconception out there that Islamic law requires animals for slaughter to be treated kindly. The only kindness offered is (2608 iii) "An animal should be slaughtered in such a way that it should suffer the least, that is, it should be swiftly slaughtered with a very sharp knife." Clearly this was not the case in the footage from Indonesia.

Only in CERTAIN traditions (2609 i) is it forbidden "To slaughter an animal at a place where another animal of its own kind can see it."

Unless Halal slaughter can coexist with laws that demand the least amount of suffering possible for animals used as food, it needs to be banned in Australia if we want to call ourselves a First World, civilised country. That also means we do not send any animals to countries that insist on THEIR methods of Halal slaughtering.
Posted by lovekat, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 1:26:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The barbaric slaughter of our unborn actually makes us worse than the Indonesians. Oh that's right the ABC would never show graphic pictures of what happens to humans. I wonder if the lefties still think all cultures are equal or just equally barbaric.
Posted by runner, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 2:03:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hang on, plenty of Halal meat is produced in Australia, using stun guns. So the situation is far from black and white, but depends
on religious interpretation.

Given that Islam prescribes that Muslims should be kind to animals,
Don Heatley makes the valid point that Australia should negotiate
with Islamic religous authorities to see that this is the case.
In the cases shown on 4 corners, it was clearly not so.
Posted by Yabby, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 2:07:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@ runner: What does aborting an unborn foetus have to do with the horrific slaughter of living, feeling, intelligent beings? Take your anti-choice soapbox somewhere else.
Posted by lovekat, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 2:16:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@ Yabby: I am of the understanding that Halal slaughtering done in Australia involves cutting the throat of the animal whilst it is conscious. From where do you source information to the contrary?

Also, I don't know whether or not Islamic law dictates kindness to animals, but Islamic law regarding the slaughtering of animals certainly does NOT demand or promote kindness before or during their slaughter: http://www.al-islam.org/laws/hunting.html
Posted by lovekat, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 2:26:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
lovekat

'Take your anti-choice soapbox somewhere else.'

I would imagine many Indonesians would be giving u the same advice.
Posted by runner, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 2:30:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lovekat, the Middle East is one of our largest meat markets.
Most boxes coming out of a great many abattoirs that ship there,
have the halal stamp of approval. Many things are involved, the
saying of a prayer, the way which the animal faces, having a Muslim
slaughterman do the job etc. The meat in most of those boxes was
produced by the use of stun guns.

Even in Indonesia there are 5 meatworks who use stun guns, that is
about to move to 10 works.

It is only some Muslims who claim that the use of a stun gun is
not halal. I gather that some of that in Australia is because our
local Jewish population insisted that their Kosher meat should not
use stun guns.

So all this is far from black and white.

We have animal cruelty in Australia reported every day amongst some
pet owners being cruel to their animals. Should we now ban all pet
ownership? Its a valid analogy, which those screaming for the halt
of the live trade, should stop and consider.
Posted by Yabby, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 2:36:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It's easy, really: just have a Muslim-approved scientist at the receiving port to check whether the animal has been killed according to Halal practice. If he or she can't tell, then obviously it DOESN'T MATTER!

Or we can go on catering to bloodthirsty theistic fantasies.
Posted by Jon J, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 2:44:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@ runner: Can't answer the question, eh?

I'm not on an irrelevant anti-choice soapbox, I'm on a pro-animal rights soapbox.
Posted by lovekat, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 3:02:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well spoken Jake. As an ex livestock producer I was appalled, disgusted and sickened. I understand the principle behind halal - it's the same as Old Testament laws (Leviticus) stating the flesh of an animal normally deemed 'clean' that has died of itself or been wounded may not be eaten. To be 'clean' the animal must be healthy and whole at the time of slaughter. Any animal sacrificed to God had to be without blemish or bruise which meant careful husbandry prior to death.

I believe the Jewish and Islamic faiths sang from the same hynmbook at this stage of history so how did the barbaric cruel disrespectful methods these unholy butchers use evolve? How can their God approve of the suffering inflicted on animals he has provided as a food source? OK evolve is the wrong word. They haven't evolved.

These morons think they must 'prove' the animal is 'alive' at the time of slaughter and so once it has had its throat cut they still want to see movement? Well in the course of a rural upbringing and farming life, I have despatched for eating purposes, a few hundred 'large' animals - mainly cattle but also pigs, goats and sheep. In 99% of cases a gunshot of calibre matching size and type of animal was used to drop it, otherwise heavy blow to back of head, then immediate throat cut to sever arteries and veins. While the animal is brain dead or deeply unconscious, its involuntary nervous system causes heart and respiration to persist for 5 minutes or more and muscle movement for up to an hour. This ranges from violent to twitching but in EVERY CASE it is OBVIOUS to even the most backward religious nutcase THE ANIMAL WAS DEFINATELY ALIVE WHEN ITS THROAT WAS CUT. Not to mention rhythymic pumping of arterial blood from a heart still beating...

Apart from petitioning Government to act on stopping live exports until humane systems are proven to installed and operating, I am boycotting all Indonesian products, services and charities for the duration.
Posted by divine_msn, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 3:29:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There is a choice here - ban Halal killing, or use methods which ensure humane performance.

Some of the treatment variations posted here give cause to decry the whole idea of Halal slaughter as barbaric, and "pandering" to outdated "laws" irrelevant in this day and age. This would of course be an attack on Muslim tradition, and some would take offense. Nonetheless, I would support this view, as I would also support the questioning of Kosher slaughter. The maintenance of divisive religious practice is at least in part responsible for all manner of conflict in our world, and we can all do without these destructive prejudicial "constructs" which mitigate against world harmony.

As for humane options for Halal slaughter, I am staggered at the primitive handling methods currently employed - even if by only one abattoir.

There is a simple way to make Halal slaughter humane - using a masked race (one with the sides covered with opaque material - common in many Oz cattle yards), which leads the animal into a masked cattle crush, but one with a difference - this crush would have an hydraulically operated side which will close in on the animal and hold it securely, and with a chin-bar (or similar) fitted, which can be adjusted to hold the animal's head reasonably securely, and then the whole crush, including its floor, is rotated hydraulically so that the animal will now be secured on its side (similar to an Oz' calf cradle), with little cause for distress, and no chance of self-harm. (Though heaven knows why the animal has to be on its side at all.) The animal is then stunned, so that, although still alive it is no longer conscious, and the throat, which would be held in clear access by the design of the crush, is swiftly and cleanly cut - if necessary using an inbuilt blade which is incapable of error in the process.

A fair, but not extravagant, cost, certainly, but one which would seem to satisfy all requirements - at least while such ridiculous practices are still demanded by outdated traditions.
Posted by Saltpetre, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 4:17:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Animals feel the pain of Halal slaughter"

Not if they are stunned previously as happens in Aus and most modern Islamic abattoirs.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 4:29:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I need to add: The displayed abattoir practices shown on the ABC are little more than back-yard slaughter (or quite possibly worse!), and such facilities should be shut down immediately and the proprietors brought to trial for animal cruelty. If Indonesia has no animal cruelty laws then fie on Indonesia.

Further: The facilities suggestion I posted (or similar) should become standard practice as soon as possible, and, if the processors need any convincing of the necessity, just threaten to post the ABC footage broadly on the Internet, and if possible on Indonesian TV (or at least on ABC International). If Indonesian beef consumers were to become acquainted with these ghastly practices I would expect there to be quite a reaction. If this resulted in substantially reduced demand for our beef, tough. (And that is coming from an Oz cattle raiser, me.) Those in the Indonesian abattoir business should then quickly get the message. (Our exports will recover in due course, and, if not, we can do without it, in spite of what Warren Truss may say on the matter.)
Posted by Saltpetre, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 4:40:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
we see all the time that halal meat is becoming "more in demand" most of our Chicken eaten in Australia and a lot of our Beef and Lamb are killed to "halal standard". It's not as bad as on Four Corners but it is still crueler than traditional methods. Why? When our islamic population is less than 2% do we repeat this cruelty to appease a very small minority. Ban live exports immedeatly they have been in place since 1993 and all agree that they are more humane today, but are still cruel now. Also for those of us in Australia that do not want halal meat produce 2 or 3% halal label it and allow those who refuse to buy this blessed to another God meat to be consumed by those that want or need it. I don't need or want it blessed to allah
Posted by Christian Ross, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 5:47:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No, Halal meat in this Country is prepared from pre-stunned animals (and by stunned I mean unconscious and well near dead) using stun-guns (actually an explosive powered tool with an effect like a bullet). These operations in Indonesia appear to work on the old-fashioned approach that the animal should be fully aware of what is happening and merely prostrated in order to get the job done.

No Australian Meatworks would be allowed to operate in this way (they'd be shut down & prosecuted), they'd also be headlined in the media very rapidly. Meatworks aren't gentle place, but the gratuitious cruelty in these videos exceeds by far the standards of this Country.

The Cattle Industry would like people to think there is no difference in the manner in which Cattle/Sheep were killed here as opposed to overseas, they make more money by sending live cattle/sheep overseas to be killed (saves them paying Australian Meat Industry Employees). They drove the push to close down most of our Export Meatworks, purely to drive the increase in the live-export market. They have no regard for the livelihoods they destroyed in doing so, why expect them to have any regard for the cattle/sheep killed so cruelly?

Before spouting the Cattle Industry propaganda, maybe you should have a look at the reality? A lot of Companies have been built on the extra profit margin gained from this cruelty and some may go bust, but unless the Meat Industry is rebuilt this will continue.
Posted by Custard, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 6:42:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Runner.

Your religiously driven superstition and cruelty toward people who don't kneel before your um... Christo-Sharia by proxy? is just as irrational and senseless as torturing animals for religious ritual.

The bible doesn't mention abortion. A few verses on life, protecting the innocent, etc. Yet Christian figures condoned rape, buggery, torture, murder, genocide and more.

There are endless forums to voice your opposition to free choice and fear of death manifesting as biblical fundamentalism but this isn't it.

If the topic was education, science or finches you'd be slagging off evolution. If the topic was earthquakes and tsunamis you'd be blaming evil humans. If the topic was the undeniable evidence of climate change, you'd be attacking scientists as atheists and waffling about lefties.

All in all, one concludes exporting you to an Indonesian abattoir would be an entirely satisfactory solution
Posted by Firesnake, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 7:29:52 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Custard,

Just a little caution on your posting leveling criticism at the cattle industry, and the suggestion that it was responsible for closing down Oz abattoirs. Sure, segments of the cattle industry, mostly in north Queensland and the Northern Territory, have been involved, and have benefited substantially, but the trade has very much been fueled by the overseas demand for live exports, and promoted and engineered by entrepreneurs seeing an opportunity to make some big bucks. Sure, Meat and Livestock has been a happy, and I imagine well-compensated, collaborator in this, but my understanding is that the trade has been essentially market driven. When you say "cattle industry" you inadvertently take in the likes of myself, but as a southern cattle producer I am not involved, and neither are a great many others. Also, I am fully for Oz processing, and boxed exports, and also regret the loss of Oz jobs, value adding, and quality control assurance.

I also suspect that the involved Oz cattle producers have not really gained extras from this trade, and have been sucked in by middle-men (possibly including some previously running the northern abattoir industry). Profit is a devious and inglorious handmaiden.

Live export of sheep, goats and camels (and maybe horses) have gone through similar problems, and it is certain that standards would have still to be lifted far above where things are at present.

I am convinced we in Oz would all be far better off if all live animal export for slaughter was banned, and I level responsibility firmly at the various Oz governments concerned for allowing this fundamentally unnecessary and inhumane trade, in all its forms.
Posted by Saltpetre, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 8:40:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*I am convinced we in Oz would all be far better off if all live animal export for slaughter was banned*

Speak for yourself there, Salpetre. Its all very well for producers
in South Eastern Australia, where saleyards are full of processors,
competing for your cattle. What would you say if there was only
one or two and they could name their price, due to lack of competition?

You would really have to accept whatever price they offered, unless
somebody in a truck came 4000km to buy your cattle and deducted the
freight from the price they were prepared to pay you.

That is exactly the situation in both Western Australia and the
NT, only in reverse. I've had Eastern States buyers within a few
km of my farm buy sheep and cart them all the way to Victoria
for slaughter, because they were so cheap here.

The live trade, when they operate, have been the only ones keeping
processors honest. But the continuing low prices in WA, which would
have been far lower without the trade, was still too much for many
growers. Their response, sell off another 50% of the flock, so
we are now left with a third of the sheep we used to have. Even
processors now realise that you can only screw farmers for so long.
But its a bit late
Posted by Yabby, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 9:37:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yabby,

Sorry if we have some confusion here as to my intentions. In your earlier post you seemed to be lamenting the loss of northern abattoir processing facilities. I assumed that this loss was as a result of the live export trade, rather than the reverse - ie. that the loss of the processing facilities necessitated expansion of the live trade. Either way however, I had the impression that easier profits were available from the live trade, and so the processors either changed operation to the live trade, or simple shut down. Now I'm not sure which way the cookie crumbled.

My suggestion was for abattoir facilities available in Oz to be expanded, or re-established, in areas of demand, and that processed product - boxed meat - be exported from Oz, to meet a continuing overseas demand. If live export is based on killing method only, then surely we could adapt our processing accordingly. My impression was that overseas buyers would prefer live export because there is greater profit for them that way - as they avoid Oz processing cost, which would obviously have to be far higher than that demonstrated by the revealed "pre-historical" Indonesian methods displayed on the ABC.

If I have erred in my assumptions or my logical suggestion for revitalising the industry in Oz, then I apologise.
Posted by Saltpetre, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 10:43:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There are four licensed abattoirs all in Victoria who slaughter the traditional Shari law way. Much of the food you eat including chocolate annd vegimite boasts on their labels that they only use halal prepared and obtained ingredients. In the mean time it distracted you all from worrying about the carbon tax very nicely didn't it?.
Posted by Sekhmet, Tuesday, 31 May 2011 11:52:49 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Never let the facts stand in the way of a good opinion! Halal slaughter does not require cruelty, nor does it forbid pre-stunning animals. If halal is wrong then kosher should also be wrong, since it sets out largely the same set of rules for slaughter (unless you think the blessing of a rabbi will make a difference to how the condemned beast feels about it). But again, neither of them requires cruelty.

There is cruelty happening in some Indonesian abbatoirs, clearly. It looks different from some of the cruelty that has happened at mainstream Australian abbatoirs in the past, sure, but don't let that fool you into believing non-Muslims are any less capable of cruelty towards animals. Australia just has a better legal framework and a better culture of ensuring ethical practice — for people of all faiths (including atheism) alike.
Posted by Tom Clark, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 9:10:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Firesnake posted: "Your religiously driven superstition and cruelty toward people ...... The bible doesn't mention abortion".

While I agree "There are endless forums to voice your opposition to free choice", YOU, not Runner, chose to bring religion into this side-issue, so I feel compelled to respond.

Unless you have extra knowledge outside that evident in his/her post as to what drives him/her, why state it is religion? I see no evidence in the post of religiosity.

I am staunchly anti-abortion, based on my opinions formed entirely outside any religion or religious influence, yet when I express my well-researched and independently-formed opinion in appropriate forums, I am commonly accused of being "religiously driven"/fuelled, a religious zealot, a "Bible-basher" and so on.
Posted by L.B.Loveday, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 9:16:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Salpetre, building another meatworks in the NT is regularly examined,
but things arn't that simple.

http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2010/07/21/165831_nt-business.html

The thing is, costs in the NT for everything are huge, meat coming
from station cattle is mostly low value processing meat. Indonesia
actually feelots our cattle, so substantially value adds them before
slaughter.

Banning things only raises the law of unintended consequences. Those
shipowners are not going to throw their brand new ships away, they
will simply load in Brasil, albeit for a longer journey.

Australia has in fact already started a roll out of stun gun boxes
at 5 Indonesian facilities, with another 5 due. That programme could
be increased to 20 or 30, with a little help and our cattle could
be channeled through those works. That is far kinder to the cattle
then trucking them to Adelaide, as is now being proposed.
Posted by Yabby, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 9:42:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It is good that these important issues have been raised. I put forward the following points which may help the discussion.
Late last year I had become very concerned about the potential problems involved with Halal slaughter. I looked up the excellent information on the RSPCA website and urge everybody to do the same.
Stunning which is done before bleeding by throat slitting is irreversible in non Halal methods, the idea being that there is no chance of the animal feeling pain.
In halal the stunning must not be irreversible and hence the certainty of painless throut slitting is reduced.
The circulation systems of pigs, sheep and cattle are not identical.
At the very least the chances of pain being inflicted are higher under halal than in modern non ritualistic methods.
There is no method of marking on meat or meat products stating that the product has not been produced under ritualistic conditions. Hence someone who does not wish to eat meat that has been produced by halal methods is unable to avoid doing so.
In UK at many outlets and gathering places all meat sold is halal. Hence, whether you like it or not if you go to Wembley or Twickenham stadia you will either eat halal slaughtered meat or none at all.
Clearly all meats and meat products must be labelled BY LAW that they are either 'halal', 'kosher' or 'humanly' slaughtered. At present a Muslim or Jew can be sure that flesh has been ritualistically slaughtered. I and millions like me do not have the equal right to be sure that the meat I eat has NOT been ritualistically slaughtered. Unfair, unjust and discriminatory.
Personally I would stop all ritualistic slaughter in Australia. But that is unlikely to happen. As a minimum all meat/meat products must be marked so that I and others of a similar mind set are equally empowered. Get you act together all parties: make marking/labelling compulsory.
Posted by eyejaw, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 9:46:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Custard, let me be permitted to give you a short history lesson concerning the reason for the closing of Australian abattoirs.

Back a while ago, the slaughter-man's union imposed quotas on the numbers of beasts that could be killed in a day. As a result of improvements in efficiency over time, many slaughterhouses found that that they were paying men a full day's wages for half a day's work and quite a few of the smaller ones went broke and were forced to close. It had nothing to do with the live export trade at all. Most of them would have liked to remain open and provide work for their local communities, but it was not possible.

David
Posted by VK3AUU, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 2:43:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yabby,

Taking what you, Custard, and VK3AUU have said, we still have a problem requiring a solution - cattle handling in those featured Indonesian abattoirs is obviously grossly inhumane, and excuses and explanations are not going to hold water with the Oz public. So, if the cattle can not be fattened and then slaughtered in Nth Oz (or wherever), there has to be an assurance of proper treatment all through the processing chain by corrective measures, including particularly in the abattoir handling.

These "stun gun boxes" you mention, Yabby, what exactly are they, and will they avoid this process of roping the feet and slamming the beast onto the concrete? In other words, do they facilitate the animal being humanely slaughtered while in a standing position? And, what sort of cost would they be?

Earlier in this thread, I posted a suggestion for an adult-sized, and much enhanced, hydraulically operated equivalent of a "calf cradle", which could enable very quick and efficient humane slaughter. I figure they would cost a fair sum, and I'm not aware of any similar mechanism being in use anywhere in Oz. Do any of you have any thoughts on this proposition please? I would appreciate your opinions, or any other suggestions.

In the event that these "stun gun boxes" still do not obviate the possibility of the animals being mistreated, with reasonable assurance, then I don't think they can be altogether satisfactory. But, better than nothing, I guess.
Posted by Saltpetre, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 8:51:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No, the AMIEU was just as big a ratbag as the owners/operators of the Meatworks. Generally Industries get the Unions they deserve and the AMIEU was about as firey as they come. That said, it is a bl--dy hard job, in frightful conditions, with real danger involved. That is why the pay was comparatively good, that said, it is nothing on the pay-packets of fly-in/fly-out workers (or the cost of shipping them halfway across the State). The profit margins for the Meatworks were extremely high and remain so overseas.

Simply put, some unscrupulous operators undercut everyone else by setting up massive Meatworks in regional Australia. These made most of the smaller operators uncompetitive forcing them to close. Then the Government of the Day decided to give in to the Nationals who had long wanted to access low-value markets in our region, with no-value added, beef on the hoof (with a higher profit margin and lower sales requirements) than our traditional packed meat markets further afield.

That saw the demise of much of the Meat Industry, that single decision to lift the restrictions on live-export destroyed entire communities purely so that rich Beef producing Companies could get richer (these are the charmers who bought out most of the little farmers during the 80's for a pittance and laid off a generation of ringers/jackeroos/jilleroos).

Blaming the AMIEU for the overwhelmingly profit-driven moves of the few remaining major producers in inaccurate and overly simplistic. The fact these Corporations care nothing about the welfare of the animals is hardly surprising given their callous handling of entire communities. If they are driven to the wall there will not be a tear in many, many suburbs/regional towns where entire communities were driven bankrupt by their decisions.
Posted by Custard, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 9:19:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Salpetre, the stun gun boxes are quite a simple design, they were
actually shown right at the start of the 4 Corners programme,
as used in Indonesia already in 5, going on 10 meatworks. I gather
that they are much the same as we use here, to produce halal
certified beef.

Nope, no roping of the cattle. The operator approaches the animal
from above, stuns it, it is then released and can be bled by
the normal process.

Australia already has much experience with stunning halal certified
beef. The same system can be used in Australia.

Whatever it would cost, would be insignificant in comparative terms.
These things are not rocket science to build. If it requires
that we invest a few million $ to set it all up, so be it. We
already give away 4 billion $ a year in foreign aid each year.

The great thing is that Indonesian cattle would benefit as well and
that is the whole idea really, the concept of slowly introducing
animal welfare in parts of the third world, where we operate.

I can assure you that if those boats change direction and load
up with Brazilian cattle, nobody will fuss too much about cruelty
or broken legs.
Posted by Yabby, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 9:26:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
People will hear a big lie, but only little lies we can resist. Question? If you know your human, why are you so ugly? Yes! meat burgers...We all get that one, but where do we get the killing of animals from? not religion....No...that couldn't be why we are so cruel or the top species of what we talk about:)

Yes! your right:) I have become a runner.

Oh well done:)

The more we think, the more we see the animal:)

As you are:)

LEAP
Posted by Quantumleap, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 9:45:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*That saw the demise of much of the Meat Industry, that single decision to lift the restrictions on live-export*

Custard, you certainly have a distorted view of history. For of
course even today, less then 10% of cattle are exported live, 90%
processed here. 10%, according to you, saw the demise of much
of the meat industry! Hardly logical. But there is more:

*than our traditional packed meat markets further afield.*

Oops, Britain joined the EU, Australia was largely locked out.
In the 60s, we produced huge amounts of tinned beef, the world
changed and no longer wanted meat in tins.

The EU went on to create its butter and meat mountains and dumped
these products on any market around the world where they could.
Australia had to compete somehow. We developed new markets,
hamburger beef for the US, Japan for higher value. Plus a host
of third world markets, for we were locked out of much of the
first world.

Meantime our real labour costs kept increasing, so the only way
to become efficient was to mechanise. Large works were the future.
as in every other industry, the days of mom and pop outfits were
limited.

It is because those decisons were taken at the time, that our
industry can compete today, despite some of the highest wages
on the planet. Hard workers? They went mining, an industy which
was relatively insignificant compared to agriculture, in the 60s.
Posted by Yabby, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 10:37:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
[Deleted as offensive.]
Posted by runner, Wednesday, 1 June 2011 11:25:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Please find a completely different Understanding of the non-humans, and of killing too, via these 2 related references.

http://www.fearnomorezoo.org/literature/observe_learn.php

http://www.dabase.org/p9rightness.htm

On food-taking and sustenance altogether

http://www.aboutadidam.org/readings/edible_deity/index.html

Perhaps it has been due to sheer survival pressures but with rare exceptions Christianity has no tradition of vegetarianism. Does Islam have any tradition of vegetarianism?
Posted by Ho Hum, Thursday, 2 June 2011 5:53:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jewish and Muslim methods of killing food animals were originally because the life was in the blood (theological belief at the time, and humans should not eat other beings' lives) and to be kinder than other methods used around them.
It is ironic that as our knowledge has increased about animals, the old methods survive as being more cruel than what is now possible.
Many human practices survive as tradition, when our knowledge is better.
Posted by ozideas, Monday, 6 June 2011 11:11:26 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Stun guns should be mandatory in all facilities.

Just to get methods of killing into perspective ...

The guillotine - 7 kg weight, razor sharp blade and rapid movement, was developed in the 18th century as the most humane way of execution.

Dr Harold Hillman, however, states that the painless death believed to occur with use of the guillotine was anything but.

"death occurs due to separation of the brain and spinal cord, after transection of the surrounding tissues. This must cause acute and possibly severe pain."

This is why the guillotine, and beheading in general, is no longer acceptable methods in many countiries with capital punishment.

There is also debate as to whether consciousness remains. Whilst some experts believe that immediate loss of consciousness would result, other experts claim that (depending upon the expert) consciousness remains anything from 3 seconds to 15 seconds. Presumably due to oxygenated blood remaining within the brain.

As the contributor above stated, ritual killing was probably the most humane method at that historic period. However, we have moved on from then. This method remains barbaric, and is certainly not free of distress, fear and pain to the animal.

As a civilized people, Australian society should not tolerate any barbaric method of handling animals. .

A civilized society is recognised by the way it treats its young, elderly, disabled and also its animals.
Posted by Danielle, Monday, 6 June 2011 7:38:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Amendation to the above ...

Dr Harold Hillman, one of the scientists who errs on the side of caution, states that consciousness would remain 2-3 seconds after decapitation.

(Hillman, Harold "An unnatural way to die." New Scientist, October 27, 1983, pg 276-278.)

We have methods, such as the stun gun, to prevent distress to the animal (also a more efficient and manageable way to handle killing). Other lesser methods should not be countenanced.
Posted by Danielle, Monday, 6 June 2011 7:54:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy