Surely you're joking. If it is cruel to export live animals to the ME why on earth aren't you and others like PETA jumping up and down in front of the halal butcher shops in Australia. The people who prepare the halal meat practice the rich tradition of slitting an animal's throat while it is alive yet I am still to witness any protest about that.

Sage, apparently Australia has a requirement that the animal is stunned first (according to the article). My understanding was that the animal needed to be in control of its faculties at the time of slaughter.

The author perhaps doesnt have much experience with moving individual sheep. The only way to do so if they are not a hand-reared pet is to tie them up, or to drag them round. Sheep that are on their own or in very small numbers (2 or 3) panic. That's the nature of the beast.

Yes, it may very well be true that it would be MORE economic to Australia to export frozen meats. But why the so-called demand for fresh meat? Is it because in most houses in these countries people do not have equipment for freezing, and so must kill fresh meat regularly? This has been my understanding of ths situation, and it certainly makes sense.

We should be helping these countries to develop humane ways of treating their animals, not just refusing to trade with them (they will simply source from elsewhere). Improvements in treatment will not only satisfy the moral minority, but will result in improved meat quality for the end customer. Anyone who has had anything to do with killing their own meat for consumption knows that the more stressed an animal is prior to slaughter, the tougher and stringer the meat is. Eg if you are picking off a wild rabbit for the pot, the best one to use is that one that was shot in the head soon after taking off, not the one the dogs have chased for 10 minutes first. If we can show these people how to end up with a better product from good handling, its a win-win situation for all.

CountryGal - Can Australia influence Egyptian practices while we continue to send our animals to endure these cruelties? The presence of Australian animals in the importing countries conveys the dreadful message that Australians approve of their terrible animal welfare practices. Rather than inspiring change, the perception that a western nation approves of their practices, condemns not only Australian animals, but also local and other imported animals, to continued years of appalling treatment. It is recognised in international diplomacy that the only way that one nation can influence needed change in another is through trade sanctions - not through contributing to the issue of concern.

Don't Middle Eastern customers and Muslim consumers demand live animals so that they can be assured they are killed in the halal manner? What about refrigeration in importing countries?
Australia has some 40 certified halal export slaughterhouses. The animals are slaughtered in Australia and their carcasses exported chilled or frozen. In Australia, Islamic leaders have approved the pre-stunning of sheep and cattle prior to the cutting of the throat. Of interest is that during recent investigations by Animals Australia (2003, 2006) in the Middle East, the Australian animals being killed were not being killed according to halal requirements. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait - historically the two largest importers of Australian sheep - are extremely affluent oil-rich nations. It is a fallacy that there is a lack of refrigeration, or of refrigerated trucks with which to distribute chilled or frozen meat, in many of these increasingly westernised ME importing countries. Many consumers already buy their meat from supermarkets and 'western' style restaurants abound in many Middle Eastern countries. The Middle East already imports sheep meat equivalent to more than 2.8 million live sheep annually.

You also - quite rightly - state that, due to their very nature, sheep panic when removed from their flock and when they are rendered helpless (through leg-binding, e.g.). This is yet another reason not to send these animals to eudure such treatment. To know the fear, stress and pain to which we are sending them and then to do it regardless? Indefensible.

OK authors, what about trying to be a bit reasonable. Here are a few facts to consider.

We are in the midst of a drought where we are shooting farm animals because there is no feed. Farmers must lighten up stocks to reduce suffering and to give some chance to the remaining herd of breeders.

Veterinarians are not unknown in Islamic countries and are similarly fighting for the Koran to be interpreted in a way that helps animals rather than results in cruelty. If the authors are worried about sheep they should have a quick look at the treatmnent of dogs in the name of the Koran in Islamic countries.

Can I respectfully suggest that placing an embargo on live sheep exports harms farmers and does not help the lot of sheep in those countries which must come from somewhere. Or are the authors only worried about Australian sheep?

Muslims have to eat and Australia is still doing a lot to ensure that stock arrive in good condition and are treated as well as possible. Australia has a leg in and is continuing to lobhy which other exporters might not do.

Ethically speaking the best that the authors might do is to focus debate on the interpretation of the Koran, from whence the problem springs. That way it might be possible to reduce the impact of the excesses of this political movement at home as well as abroad.

Let's face it, Muslims are insisting on cultural changes and changes to laws here to suit their traditional behaviours and beliefs.

I have a solution for all of this - go vegetarian. Do you know how many resources we waste producing livestock? The cruelty in the industry is horrid even here in the States but the resources we use to do this world wide is astonomical.

Mirko

Mr Costello plans to give the ACCC the powers to prosecute environmental and animal welfare groups where their truthful, public protests may "impact" on the profits of these industries.

Once this regulation is implemented to gag protestors, I fear our animal friends will have even more to fear from these barbarians.

It surprises me that other fair-minded posters appear indifferent to Mr Costello's proposal.

Mirko has written extensively elsewhere that torturing people is sometimes ok, which to my mind rather undermines his credibility arguing that inflicting pain on animals is wrong. Such is the logical destination of utilitarian ethics.

Rhian

Your "logic" clearly reveals that you support and condone the torture of innocent species (unable to protect themselves), by endeavouring to distract posters from the issue on animal cruelty.

It is your credibility on the line, not Mirko's!

If you want to debate other issues, I suggest you call up the appropriate thread.

Cornflower, you make good points. Really, to simply say, I'm not selling to you anymore, gives you zero say in how products/animals etc are treated in that country. If you are involved in trade with someone, you have some influence on the treatment of that product at its destination.

LL, the big push in the article was about Egypt, not Saudi Arabi, and was about treatment of animals sold to individuals, not to a mass supermarket. I would assume tht high-wealth individuals dont particularly like having to kill their own meat (really, its not that pleasant an experience), so you go back to looking at the poor, in a hot country, that cant always afford to have freezers (I assume that at least a reasonable proportion have refridgeration, but in exporting from Australia we normally talk about frozen meats).

You managed to completly ignore my point about the quality of the meat for eating after its been stressed. Good butchers know the value of keeping animals as calm as possible in all parts of the process chain (tip, find a good butcher and buy from him/her instead of a supermarket - you'll find the quality infinitely better, particularly if you find one that sources their own live meat).

Country Gal - Most people in Australia do not approve of the horrendous treatment of dogs killed for their meat in Korea, yet I have heard no one advocate that we export dogs from Australia (after all, more than 200,000 are killed every year as 'unwanted' pets) in order to influence the terrible way in which Korean dogs are treated. Most rational people would recognise that this would serve only to enforce terrible cruelty on Australian dogs as well as on Korean dogs.

By supplying sheep to Egypt, Australia remains complicit in the cruelty. What clearer way to say that we support their practices than to send our animals there? In addition, the Memorandum of Understanding negotiated by the Australian and Egyptian governments and implemented in November 2006 was found to be completely ignored during a recent investigation (in late December 2006). If any shipment was to be heavily monitored to ensure compliance with the MOU it would be the first shipment since the signing, yet investigators filming the treatment of sheep from this first shipment found not one single instance of compliance with the MOU. Simply, we cannot influence centuries-old practices whilst continuing to send the contradictory message - which accompanies every single animal that goes into Egypt - that we approve of this treatment.

One animal handling workshop in one town or city in Egypt will not change the way animals are treated. There are no laws to enforce animal welfare standards: so, for what reason would slaughtermen and animal handlers comply? To please Australians? They assume that we believe their treatment to be quite acceptable - if we didn't, surely we wouldn't send our animals there to endure such treatment? That would be hypocritical, no?

Sheep are widely on-sold to individual buyers in Egypt, and during a recent investigation were found to cost around 5 Egyptian Pounds per kilo (around $5US) - with an average sheep weighing 65 - 80 kilos and therefore costing upwards of $325US, we can be assured that these animals are not being bought by the poor community in Egypt

If the Middle East can claim a lack of development - specifically a lack of fridges - as reason for the inhumane treatment of animals, then wnat excuse do the Japanese forward for their inhumane treatment of dolphins?

http://www.glumbert.com/media/dolphin

LL

The logical extension of your argument is that we should not trade with any country that offends our standards and sensibilities. For instance, should we allow countries where there are human rights violations to export (say) handmade carpets to us - when in fact we do. Should we permit tourism with those countries or allow their students visas to study here?

Returning to live sheep exports, should our farmers pay for our collective conscience or is it more reasonable that we all directly share the cost of protest?

What about doing something more lasting and positive than taking our bat and ball and going home? For example, we could take advantage of our business relationship with the importer to feed in some educational stuff especially where it shoe-horns in with what veterinarians in that country are trying to do.

Cruelty to animals (and humans) is awful, but even if we did refuse to export live sheep that protest would not register at all with the people we want to persuade and there are other countries who would immediately supply sheep.

Dickie

Actually I don’t support live animal exports, but I regard the torture of humans as greater evil than the suffering of animals. Mirko is a utilitarian, and many utilitarians see the suffering of humans and of animals to be ethically indistinguishable – hence, for example, leading utilitarian philosopher Peter Singer argues that it is more acceptable to kill a human infant than a creature such as a great ape.

Mirko’s qualified support for human torture is not irrelevant to this debate, it is part and parcel of the same philosophy that underpins this article. This sees human and animal pain and pleasure as not fundamentally distinct, but part of a continuum that is open to evaluation by a common calculus, with neither having a prior presumption of priority. It is an interesting and defensible view, but not one I share.

Oh dear, we have been through all these old chestnuts
time and time again on OLO. Sounds like we'll have to
go through it all yet again!

The live sheep trade is vital to West Australian farmers,
as was proven in the recent drought. It was the live
trade that came to the rescue, when local processors
were buying sheep for 10 $, whilst the live trade paid
60$. It was that money that let farmers feed the rest
of their flocks. There is simply no economic argument,
put up by any of the animal libber groups, which is
valid.

Banning the trade would be nothing but a feelgood
exercise, for what I am told are mainly veggies with
a bee in their bonnet. It would also send many farmers
broke.

A million Hajj lambs were supplied this year, mainly
for Saudi Arabia. Most are slaughtered in state run
meatworks, its part of their pilgramige. Yes a few
thousand were sent to Egypt, relatively tiny numbers.
Yes some had their legs tied, yes, some had their
throats cut. Sheep having their legs tied and their
throats cut happens throughout country Australia!
Now city slickers might not be aware of all this, but
they live in their little dreamland anyhow, out of
touch with country reality.

If there are all these meatworkers, as is claimed in
the article, why arn't they applying for jobs in WA
meatworks? Nearly all processors are screaming for staff.
Fact is, these days Aussies want cushy jobs, not messy
jobs like in the meat industry.

NOBODY has come up with a viable alternative to the live
trade. Until you do, don't try and send farmers broke,
following your feelings.

Rhian

Did you know that animal and human cruelty are linked?

http://www.vet.upenn.edu/schoolresources/communications/publications/bellwether/58/connection.html

All these clowns have done is make a few wild claims, repeat a few anecdotal stories and lace it all up with terms like "hear their screams". And for what?

These animal rights morons have this idealised view of nature where all animals live in harmony, watch foreign films and drink lattes.

The simple facts of the matter are that if you really want to hear an animal scream you should listen as a pack of Dingoes clean up a paddock full of lambs. And ironically, hunting animals will often nip the tendons of the animals they pursue but they will go on to rip bits off the animal while it is still alive.

And for the record, a few hours on the roof of a car or bus is a great way to travel. I did it quite a few times in Nepal in the '70s, and it sure beat being inside the bus with the coughs, farts, kids urine, smoke and spittle.

And frankly, the conditions on board the ships are not much different to the crowded trucks, buses and trains endured by the worlds poor every time they leave home.

You people have got your heads so far up your own backsides you have completely lost sight of daylight.

Well, if we can have less suffering to more suffering at no extra cost, why wouldn't we do it? Yes the reality is life on earth is a harsh place, & as humans, especially in the west, we have it pretty good all things considered. I think it speaks good about the human race that at least some try to alleviate un-necessary suffering of others, especially 'lesser' animals. Sure there are inconsistencies galore, but it's a worthy goal. Maybe humans aren't hopeless after all.

Rhian, I don't see an inconsistency in Mirko's earlier support of torture, although you raise an interesting point. If torture leads to the situation where there is less suffering (eg capture of a dirty-bomb terrorist cell member) by preventing the attack, then why wouldn't we do it? Who would argue for more suffering over less, simply to support a principle?

Fester - yes I'm sure that there's a link between abuse of humans and animals, and as indicated above, I don't support live exports. But I don't go as far as utilitarians like Peter Singer (and I'm assuming Mirko's brand of utilitarianism is similar to Singer's, though this may be unjustified) is asserting that welfare of the two are of similar and commensurable moral significance. I suppose I’m more inclined to accept utilitarianism with regard to animals (the suffering of cane toads is not sufficient to offset the benefits of eradicating them, so we should try) but tend to be a deontologist regarding humans (torturing people is always wrong, regardless of the circumstances).

TNT – I don’t think there is an inconsistency in Mirko’s argument, that why it makes me uncomfortable. My worry with the utilitarian approach is not so much that it elevates animals’ relative status – though I find that challenging is it more uncompromising forms - but that it can devalue and establish a hierarchy of the value of human life, with some people’s lives and rights (newborn babies, the disabled) deemed less important than others, and gross abuses of human rights endorsed if a greater good is expected to result. I can’t agree that the end almost always justifies the means.

My argument is with utilitarianism, not animal welfare.

Cornflower recommends that we "could take advantage of our business relationship with the importer to feed in some educational stuff where it shoe-horns in with what veterinarians in that country are trying to do."

Australia, well-known for its barbarism, does not have the right to meddle in and moralise over other nations' barbaric treatment of animals which is no more heinous than the ones perpetrated by our own farmers.

The violent history of farmed animals in Australia include the spaying of meat cows where the pitiful animal is incarcerated in a "crush", their flanks slit open and their ovaries lopped off. The luckier cows may only have to endure the Willis Drop Technique where the "skilled" operator shoves his hand up the cow's vagina and with his mechanical tools, cuts the cow's ovaries off. These animals are not afforded the benefit of a painkiller nor are they anaesthetised.

It doesn't end there. There are many other cruel practices before these poor critters are forced to endure additional barbaric treatments, inflicted by the Middle Easterners.

The influential but arrogant pastoralists and graziers associations and farmers' federations need to be reminded that it is I and millions of other taxpayers who continually bale their industries when they put their hands out. Our hard earned taxes prop them up during cyclones, droughts, dry season assistance, transport assistance, etcetera and now the "native forest schemes." It matters not to them that their imprudent farming practices in this arid land have created ecological devastation and I know of no other industry which is offered this mulititude of tax concessions.

The export of our animals must cease immediately.

The proactive strategy of the 457 Temporary Visa programme is now available and meat slaughering houses in SA have seized the opportunity to employ many skilled labourers from overseas.

Interestingly, the largest sheep exporters (WA) remain silent over the potential to resurrect abattoirs with the aid of the 457 Temporary Visa programme.

But then greed is not a criminal offence and the barbaric cost saving practices, perpetrated by farmers in this country, are legal.

Some interesting arguments. Yabby is never far away with his/her totally myopic support of "not sending farmers broke" at whatever cost to the suffering animals. Rhian, if you want to make grand statements quoting Peter Singer, you should include all the facts, not just what sensationalizes what you want to say. Singer in fact made the point that a severely brain damaged infant would suffer less than a member of the ape family; the point being about the level of consciousness.
Another distinction also should be made. Human animals generally have more to do with getting themselves into the predicaments that they do than do non-human animals, and have more control over getting themselves out of them. Non-human animals are completely at our mercy, and with that goes a responsibility not to torture them.
As for veterinarians in the Middle East working to improve animal welfare: Meat and Livestock Australia's OWN veterinarian in the Middle East, Nigel Brown, was quoted extensively in Middle Eastern (but not Australian) newspapers in mid-2006 saying that sheep LIKE to be hog-tied and thrown into the boots of cars in searing heat; it makes them feel safe. Those of you who are till falling for the "culture" and "no refrigeration" propaganda, view the material at Animals Australia's website. Not a religious observance to be seen.
And Australia does in fact export dogs - failed greyhounds - to Korea in the full knowledge of what is likely to happen to them. But what is the difference? An animal is an animal, be it sheep, cow, pig or dog.
As for "Countrygal"'s assertions about meat quality - please spare us,. If you are using dogs to hunt other animals, including rabbits, not only should you be ashamed of yourself, you are most likely breaking the animal welfare laws in whatever state you are in, and therefore should be arrested. It is also against the law in this country to slaughter an animnal without first stunning it..
Nicky

"Yabby is never far away with his/her totally myopic support of "not sending farmers broke" at whatever cost to the suffering animals."

Nicky, thats just your claim, not my claim. Fact is that rough and
tumble sheep are quite different to your pet poochie poo. But as
few animal libbers have ever worked with livestock, they just don't
know the difference.

Fact is that standards on sheep ships are now very high. Fact is
that most sheep going to the Middle East are slaughtered in abattoirs,
some even with stun guns, thanks to Aussie farmers. The millions
of $ annually spent by Aussie farmers in the Middle East, is making
a difference. What are animal libbers spending in the Middle East
to change things?

I see that a leading Saudi importer, who used to be involved in the
live sheep trade, gave that up when standards became too hard.They
now import Sudanese cattle and live sheep from China. Don't those
animals matter to you? Why just Aussie animals? I've made suggestions
about how to use Islam to improve animal welfare in
the Middle East. So far no takers that I know of.

Dickie, virtually zilch subsidies go to WA farmers, they paddle their
own canoes, are even taxed heavily all the way to the ports, when
they try to export products. Farming directly and indirectly
employs 1.6 million, so Aus still rides on that sheeps back to
quite a degree.

457 visas to the meat industry were stopped exactly because of
union complaints about SA processors. As of two weeks ago,
the CEO of one WA processor told me that they could not bring
in 457 workers into WA at the present time, which was a huge
problem. I'm assuming that he is far better informed then you are
about the WA situation.

Nicky, plenty of hobby farmers and other country people kill their
own sheep for meat. How many own a stun gun?

Nicky,

Singer is quite sensationalist enough by himself, he doesn't need others to do it for him. I actually rather like his writing, it's thought-provoking and he's prepared to follow his logic to its conclusions where others would shy away. Above all, he makes us face the inconsistency and partiality of our moralities. But I usually don't agree with him. Here - in his own words - are some quotes that highlight areas I disagree with.

"When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed. The loss of happy life for the first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. … The total view treats infants as replaceable, in much the same way as it treats a non-self-conscious animal."

"There is no ethical basis for elevating membership of one particular species into a morally crucial characteristic. From an ethical point of view, we all stand on an equal footing -- whether we stand on two feet, or four, or none at all."

"Since neither a newborn infant nor a fish is a person, the wrongness of killing such beings is not as great as the wrongness of killing a person."

"If [an] experimenter would not be prepared to use a human infant, then his readiness to use nonhuman animals reveals an unjustifiable form of discrimination on the basis of species, since adult apes, monkeys, dogs, eats, rats, and other mammals are more aware of what is happening to them, more self-directing, and, so far as we can tell, at least as sensitive to pain as a human infant."

Singer is sometimes called a nazi for these positions, and while that's wrong and unfair, in my view there is a kernel of commonality between Singer's hierarchy of life values based on a scale of personhood and the concept of "life unworthy of life".

Rhian – I look at things from the viewpoint of minimising suffering, both animal and human. I consider acts such as Saddam Hussein's execution or the Japanese slaughter of dolphins as inhumane, unnecessary, and a sign of weakness.

I guess this as a point of difference between Nazism and Singer's philosophy, in that the Nazi's considered it the natural order for the strong and inferior to destroy the weak and inferior, whereas Singer is more concerned with using your resources to maximise the quality of life. I seem to remember a comparison between the amount required to save a child's life in the developed world, where the saved child would very likely be severely disabled, and the number of children in the developing world that the same amount could save, with the saved children not having disability. Yet it seems to be the frog/disabled child comparison that gets mentioned. Perhaps you might consider what creatures humans are descended from before proffering a comparative value for life. For example, how would you value the life form from which all humanity descended? And if another intelligent creature populates the planet in the distant future, from which organism will it descend? Is it more likely to descend from a frog or a severely disabled child?

An aside on the value society places on the disabled is being played out in the German High Court, with a brother and sister arguing for their right to a sexual relationship. One argument is that the law against incest is to prevent the birth of disabled children (two of the siblings' four children are severely disabled). Does such interpretation amount to eugenics?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6424337.stm

The Australian Meat Industry Council has been negotiating with the Immigration and Mulicultural Affairs Department since last June, to enact an additional formal Labour Agreement.

The additional agreement will prevent confusion over duties for overseas' workers, where allegations of exploitation have been made. It appears that a misunderstanding was the main factor, though the outcomes are not yet available.

The original agreement allowed these workers to be employed only as slaughterers. Once the second agreement is finalised and the work descriptions clarified, then workers can be employed in other sections of the industry including the boning and slicing divisions.

Employers will have the benefit of not one, but two formal agreements.

I have associates in the building industry in WA who have joined the 457 Temporary Visa programme where they are very satisfied with the work ethics of their overseas employees. As a result, one builder I spoke to claims he now has 32 projects underway.

Despite one poster's attempt to mislead readers, the 457 Temporary Visa programme is alive and well in WA and the inclusion of the meat slaughtering industry into the WA programme should be imminent, unless of course, the bully boys in the sheep export industry use their influence to prevent it.

The resurrection of the abattoir industry, in the not too distant future, will be a valid reason to cancel the ignominious trade of sending our live animals offshore for slaughter.

And we who must suffer those who make an animal's life hell on earth, are heartened by Emerson's quotation:

"But in the mud and scum of things, there always, always something sings."

"the 457 Temporary Visa programme is alive and well in WA and the inclusion of the meat slaughtering industry into the WA programme should be imminent,"

Hehe, so I was correct of course! The 457 visa programme is not
working in the meat industry at the present time, as I stated.
Thanks Dickie!

Next we have the issue of meatworks. A number of applications in
the pipeline in WA, held up by State Govt red tape. Perhaps they
should have paid Burke and Grill, to actually get some results with
the present Govt in WA.

Next we have the issue of price. WA farmers should not be expected to
sell their livestock below world parity prices, in order to fill
processors and State Govt coffers. Farmers don't want subsidies,
they just don't want to get screwed by city slickers, as is now
the case. The live trade keeps the meat processing industry honest.

Processors, if they have the capacity and labour, are free to bid
on livestock, as are live exporters. State Govts are free to remove
their punitive taxes, if they choose. Its high time that farmers
stopped having to subsidise city slickers like Dickie, who clearly
dislikes us.

And exactly how often does Dickie think cows have their ovaries removed? If this sad plodder had been anywhere near a farm without a paper bag over his head he would understand that the general idea is for cows to keep having calves so there will be more cattle to sell.

Yet Dickie thinks farmers are all out there with nothing better to do than dream up new reasons to "incarcerate" animals in a crush and carry out major surgery on a significant part of their net worth.

This guy has the brain functions of a psychopath. It is all in his head and he wants the rest of the community to screw farmers as a particularly misdirected form of paliative treatment.

Fester

You’re right that a key difference between Singer and the Nazis is that the Nazis considered it the natural order for the strong and superior to destroy the weak and inferior. Furthermore, they extended this to conclude that strong races had the right to destroy the weak and inferior, and indeed a duty to do so if those inferior races posed a threat or impediment. This is a revolting and absurd position which I’m sure Singer would repudiate totally.

As I said, I don’t agree with those who argue the moral equivalence of the two positions, but there is similarity.

Both positions hold to a hierarchy of life values in which some humans lives are more valuable than others and may be destroyed by those others if the benefits are deemed to outweigh the suffering imposed. The key difference – and I’ll admit a crucial one – is the benchmark they use to determine who sits where in that hierarchy. In Singer’s case, it’s sentience, in the Nazis’ case racial and physical purity. Of the two I much prefer Singer’s position, but I don’t much like either.

One problem with this utilitarian approach is that what begins as a kind-hearted effort to elevate concern for animals to the level of concern for humans risks degenerating into treating (some) humans no better than animals.

Incidentally, the Nazis introduced some of the earliest and strongest laws protecting animal rights.

"My worry with the utilitarian approach is ...that it can (lead to) gross abuses of human rights endorsed if a greater good is expected to result."

True. Especially when the 'greater good' is rather problematic. We are getting into Mirky waters now.

Perseus, I am with you on the ovaries thing for cattle. I grew up in grazing country and I've never heard of it. You keep the cows for breeding, or sell to others for breeding, you sell the steers for meat. Heifers bring a lot less than steers at sale, so it doesnt make economic sense to sell them unless you are overstocked.

I also agree with you on the nature argument. Whilst I dont believe in inflicting cruelty and pain for the sake of it, people need to recognise that nature is cruel. Those idiots in PETA have obviously never seen a sheep die from being eaten inside out by maggots. Probably never seen a kangaroo starve in a drought either, or dead fish strewn up an empty river bed, or burned wildlife after a bushfire. Goodness me, surely only humans could possibly be THAT nasty to animals!

Nicky, as for using dogs to hunt rabbits, rabbits are a noxious animal in this country, and should be eradicated by any method. A relatively quick kill by a dog is much more humane than poisoning. But perhaps you missed my point - if you intend to eat the meat, shoot the animal quickly and cleanly, otherwise it stresses and turns the meat tough. Please, do me the courtesy of actually reading what I write before flipping out.

And still no-one has provided any solid evidence of this so-called cruelty. Wild claims abound but the substantiation always never shows up.

It is actually official policy of PETA to release all domestic animals so they can live "in natural harmony". How they will manage the boost in road kill, and how they will stop the cats eating the budgies, the dogs eating the cats and then hanging around the playgrounds when the cats run out is never explained.

In a democracy every person has a right to express a view no matter how unreasonable that view may be. But the moment they attempt to implement that unreason in policy they come up against the greatest intellectual achievement of mankind. That is, government is entirely subject to the will of reasonable men and women. Whenever there is a value call to be made, the courts and government must defer to the opinions of reasonable men and women in command of the facts.

And leaves the PETA nutters right out in the cold.

Ah.....yes! Such is the ignorance of the hill-billy higglers.

Information on flank spaying in Australia can be accessed by googling "Cattle Council of Australia flank spaying". One will find other URLS similtaneously such as submissions to the Senate Committee and to the Qld parliament on this abominable practice.

Curiously, our hissing hill-billy , Perseus, a breeder of export cattle prefers to remain in Disney Land.

And so does the pretentious Yabby, a live sheep exporter, who claims that all who disagree with his views are city slickers, sipping lattes.

Sorry to disappoint Yabby - but hello, anyone home? I live in sheep country with the nearest sheep station just 15 kilometres from my front door. Oh yes and I've witnessed truck loads of sheep crammed in like sardines in 42 degree heat whilst the truck driver calls in home for some 2 hour respite, of whatever takes his fancy, prior to transporting these animals hundreds of kilometres away to their fate.

I've even had a ride in a sheep farmer's private plane where he continued to whinge about the cost of 2 children in elite, secondary schools in the city and 2 at university. That was after he tried to impress visitors to his property by slitting a sheep's throat and in front of my young children.

And before the abusive, hissing hill-billy returns with his flare for histrionics, a word of advice:

Perseus, take your hand off it - everybody knows you're incapable of doing two things at once!

Country gal, I did read your unsolicited and totally irrelevant comment about meat (stressed or otherwise), and treated it as just that. My point was that, irrespective of how efficient you think it is, it remains against the law to use dogs to hunt other animals, including "noxious" ones. Dogs are not, in my expertience, really into a "clean kill" either - more your tearing apart. A point upon which you may like to reflect is that most of these so-called "noxious' or "pest" animals exist in this country as a result of human intervention. ignorance, neglect or negligence. It is therefore incumbent upon humans, if there must be control measures, to use humane and responsible ones (not including poisons, viruses and dogs).
Dickie, thanks for the information, and I agree with you totally. It is easy to see why the live exporters are so defensive, given the overwhelming weight of evidence of the true obscenity of how they make their living. Certainly nothing to be proud of, is there?
As for the "nutters" at PETA - does anyone seriously believe that there would have been the slightest thought given to finding an alternative to mulesing (and clearly it CAN be found - in fact they already exist, and I do not drink latte either) had PETA not thrown the practice under the world spotlight? The difference in the legal protection accorded to "companion" animals compared to farmed animals is quite alarming - why is it okay to flank spay a heifer but not a cat or dog, and why can this person Dickie describes cut the throat of a sheep without fear of legal sanction, when (I assume) this is not how he disposes of his childrens' pets? That, and the self-serving comments by the live exporters, who would really be smarter to stay out of this debate really since what they do IS indefensible, brings us back to the start of the thread.
Nicky

Hey you should look at The Australian Peoples Party Animal Welfare Policy

Now wont this get up the nose of the big ones and those they are keeping in this practice.

www.tapp.org.au

and while you are there have a look at the news

Sheesh, I will have to have a word to my two dogs! They spend half
their days, doing natural doggie things like chasing rabbits about
the place. I'll have to tell them that those crazy city slicker
veggies think its evil :)

Dickie and Nicky, nope you girls don't sound like latte types,
more like chamomile types.

Sorry to disappoint you Dickie, but no real live exporter here.
I don't even sell my animals to the trade, as it happens.
I however live in a community where most people do and I understand
the importance of the trade and alot about it. It would be a welcome
breath of fresh air if the veggie brigade actually had some
qualified people to put their case, not just a bunch of dreamers.

Nicky, you still don't get it. Thousands of sheep in Australia
have their throats slit every week, in rural Australia. Hobby
farmer magazines even describe to people how to go about it.
But of course the AA video cameras are so busy rushing around the
Middle East, trying to find somebody slitting a sheeps throat, that
they don't even seem to know what is going on in their own country.

Ah Dickie, so there we have it. Your experience about farming is
that you've actually flown in a plane with a real life pastoralist.
Wow!

Yabby

Your attempts at defending the live export trade by condemning those who speak out against it as 'dreamers' is interesting. However, it would be wise of you to bear in mind that, as far as I am aware, very, very few (if any) of the farmers who export their animals have ever accompanied those animals to the point of sale and to the point of slaughter. The person who filmed Australian sheep being bound, on-sold, transported and slaughtered did accompany those sheep, filming the fate afforded to them by those who sold them to this trade - a fate which was for more than 30 years hidden by the an industry reliant on public ignorance for survival.

Perhaps those who witness and film the reality of this trade are not the dreamers. Perhaps those who close their eyes, ears and consciences are the real dreamers; at best unaware, at worst indifferent to the fate that awaits the animals they load onto a truck and never see again.

LL, I have been to the Middle East. I would be
far more concerned with the welfare of the donkeys there, then Australian live sheep.

However I remind you that the "fertile crescent" is in the ME.
They have been breeding and consuming livestock for thousands of
years. For you to assume that they will suddenly change their
ways, if Australia bans the live trade, is absolute dreaming.

Yes, things could be done in the ME to assist animal welfare,
but shooting yourself in the proverbial foot is not one of them.

You would have to concede that AA cannot be seen as an "unbiased"
or "objective" source of information, given that they arn't really
keen on the rest of us farming and eating meat. So I prefer
less fanatical sources for my information. Cameron Morse
did a trip to the ME on one of the boats.

http://www.wellardgroup.com.au/media_centre/media_releases.phtml

I am sure that the many dreamers on here mean well, but few know
much about livestock and don't seem to understand the difference
between livestock and pets. In the real world I've found an easy
solution to this. Let them visit a farm, strap a drench pack
to their backs and let them drench a few hundred muscley meat lambs.

People tend to learn through pain and after
a few hours of being battered and bruised,
they tend to concede that they don't know much about sheep or
their behaviour, as they have just found out the hard way.
At that point we can start to discuss sheep psychology and the
difference between pets and farm livestock.

To cut it short, most farm animals in Australia, actually have
far better and more natural lives then city animals.
No being locked in houses or flats all day. No being dragged
down roads by a chain. No being dressed up in weird clothes
either. At least my dogs get to be natural, like chase
rabbits. I doubt that they would swop their lives with
pets owned by various neurotic city slickers, who would
even want to ban their favourite pastimes!

OPEN LETTER TO KEVIN

Rudd won't Ban live sheep exports

Monday, 19 February 2007

Federal Oppositition leader, Kevin Rudd, will not ban live exports if elected, despite mounting pressure on the industry in the wake of more allegations of animal cruelty.

The live sheep industry has come into focus again after Animals Australia aired footage filmed in Egypt recently, showing Australian sheep on-sold into the local market for the Halal religious festival, then tied to roof racks and thrown into car boots.

Mr Rudd says he does not abide animal cruelty, but he wouldn't be banning live exports.

"We had a beef property. I understand these things," Mr Rudd said.

Dame Edna might have hit the nail on the head when saying. I just cant imagine a PM named Kevin.

I have difficulty myself after contacting Rudds Office last year regarding the direct link of AWB to live Animal Exports.
You understand you say . Do you Really Mr Rudd?

GOLD COAST BULLETIN

LIVE EXPORT TRADE INQUIRY WOULD BE LIKE LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER

THE RSPCA may have the answer for fed­eral Labor politicians struggling to galv­anise voters with the AWB bribery scandal.

The recent 60 Minutes program on Channel 9 revealing cruelty on Australian cattle in the Middle East hit a nerve.

Not that the RSPCA was surprised by the strong response from Australians outraged at endemic cruelty in the live export trade.

Many Australian voters may not give two hoots about $300 million in kickbacks to Saddam Hussein to sew up Australian wheat sales to Iraq. But it would be a different story if the AWB was ever linked to live exports.

The Gold Coast-based Halal Kind Meats is off to the backblocks of Queensland and West­ern Australia to look for Australian slaughter­ing opportunities. Dozens of Australian abatt­oirs have closed since the live export trade boomed in the 1990s. Kindness to animals is part of the Australian 'fair go' tradition.

Labor appears more concerned with the future of Australia's livestock trade overseas than banning the practice.
AFIC RSPCAQLD PALE Put up an alternative- Nobody cares

There you are Yabbs.

We missed you. I will pop this up for others.
Media Release

24 February 2006
Australian Muslims Are Against Animal Cruelty

The President of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, Dr. Ameer Ali
today called on the Australian media not to act irresponsible in misinforming the
Australian public about the real reasons for live exports.

Dr. Ameer Ali said that Muslims are primarily concerned to ensure that the animal is slaughtered in accordance with the Islamic Shariah, and that can be done in Australia under the Australian Government supervised Muslim Slaughter Program (AGSMS) and we want the Australian public to know that we do not agree to animal cruelty.

He further said that Muslims in the Middle Eastern countries readily accept
Frozen and chilled lamb and mutton from Australia, once it is Halal certified
under the program. Last year Australian lamb meat exports to the Middle East was up 36% to a record of 14,052 tonnes, and Australian mutton meat export to the Middle East was up 24% in the same period to 36,051 Tonnes (ref. Farmonline News 1 Feb 2006). This represents the equivalent of more than 2 million sheep which were slaughtered in Australia for Middle Eastern Muslim customers.

Dr. Ali said that the Australian Muslims does not support the cruel treatment of animals prior to slaughter, that has been documented in Egypt as the Qur`an dictates that animals should be treated with kindness.

Dr. Ameer Ali, President
Dr. Munir Hussain, Chairman, Halal Committee

Yabby Your correct! about PETA and extreme groups.

Yabby Lyn White is fantasic person but would serve the animals and herself far better to distant herself from extremeists vegetarians.

It only works straight into the hands of the cruel Live Animal Exporters and discredits sensible main public.

AFIC subbmitted a proposal to the Animal Welfare enquiry and signed a MOU with our organisation to open more plants>.

Here it is but Animals Australia Voiceless Animal liberation refuse! to work with us towards this.?

http://www.halakindmeats.com/submissions.html
http://www.halakindmeats.com/

Between that and the farmers BLIND faith in FF what chance is there!

Yabby

For me to assume that animal welfare in the Middle East will change overnight upon the banning of live exports would be folly.

For the live export industry to assume that animal welfare in the Middle East will change overnight upon the completion of a single animal handling workshop and the continuatal presence of Australian animals would be folly.

The difference is that I don't believe animal welfare will change overnight, and I don't tout this as a possibility. The live export industry, however, DOES tout its assumption as a real possiblity - in actuality, it touts it as a fact - to the public. This is more than folly; this is deliberate deception.

This is a trade that cannot be defended. It always makes me smile to see a cornered industry deflect criticism by publically condemning those who expose the inadequacies of said industry as 'extremist'.

If those who speak against something are 'extreme' the very nature of comparison makes those speaking in favour of the same thing 'extreme'. So, to tar an industry with the brush it has itself used to describe those who expose and oppose it, live export exremists are fighting to defend the indefensible.

Animal welfare
this is not what others do its what we do

for those that think that i just a city slicker well wrong.

If we do whats right thats what is important.

Just like those in citys who keep trying to grow concrete and wasting water.
Liberals want to cut the farmers, hey we have to eat dont we
concrete doesnt need to be washed a water wasted.
yes water is a concern but when those in cities work that out then things will change.
Just like Peter Garrett on clean coal from these other parties just keep sprouting the party line, if we can do something here that is a start, but clean coal, what going to wash it in water, hang on where is the water comming from the farmers,hang on we can eat coal dust

What it comes down to is doing the right thing and not crawing to big business who only have profit in mind and not a little bit but every dollar they can squeeze out of you.

When you all start getting serious The Australian Peoples Party is a very good viable option.
I can say this party is a collective of independents.

www.tapp.org.au

Yabby, my dogs love good fresh rabbit as much as the next dog. The quickest one normally kills by a quick crunch to the head, and has a significant portion eaten by the time the other dogs catch up. I wouldnt say that it is a slow drawn out death. I am interested to hear what the veggies suggest as the best way to kill off rabbits humanely, if we shouldnt use dogs, poison or viruses. Shooting them is a good option, but certainly doesnt get them all (and the little buggers wise-up pretty quickly), ripping warrens can be effective, but buries them alive (that doesnt sit well with me, despite the fact I hate rabbits), then you have ferreting, which is much crueller than using dogs, then fumigating, which I guess is probably the most humane method as its generall just carbon-monoxide poisoning. The last method doesnt get the bush rabbits though - not all rabbits live in warrens. So out of the above options for eradication, I honesty believe the best is a combination of fumigation, shooting and dogs.

I'm off topic though. But while I am, Yabby you are dead right about putting a bunch of veggies in a drafting race to drench a few hundred sheep. I wouldnt be so cruel as to start them on cross-breds though! Well bred merinos are a little better behaved - meat sheep could be compared to ruby league players in the brains department! Heck, you could be nicer to the veggies and just ask them to pen up in the shearing shed, which is a lot less physically taxing, but just as frustrating!

CountryGal, you are being far to kind to veggies. Just stick to
a good old Dorset/Texel/Dorper cross, the more pain, the faster
they learn :)

LL, MLA has never claimed that things will change overnight, simply
that they are making a difference. If you read their annual reports
of what they have achieved in the ME, that is exactly what they
are doing, which is far more then anyone else. I remind you that it
took decades for the West to slowly change. Mountains can be built,
one pebble at a time, but you have to start somewhere. I refuse to
take your defeatist attitude.

Yup, this trade can be defended, but not to a bunch of people who
object to farming and eating meat. In that sense I have given up
on the veggie brigade, I think they live by a flawed philosophy.

Meantime they have no right to stop Aussie farmers making a living,
based on those flawed philosophies. They have offered no viable alternatives.

Mistakes, pain and suffering, happen in many aspects of life.
I remind you of the fact that many spouses are subject to domestic
violence. We try to fix the problems, not ban marriage.

Meantime I will rely on qualified vets to tell me more objectively
what they think of the live trade, preferably some who have worked
with livestock, not just pets.

Relying on the a bunch of veggies for some kind of objective opinion
is clearly not an option. As we have seen with Peta, they never let
the truth get in the way of a good story, to further their
cause and perhaps donations to their cause. Animal welfare is
big business today, the donations are in the tens of millions,
just for Peta alone.

Yabby

If 'veggies' are not to be 'trusted' to give an unbiased view of reality, then neither are 'meaties'. Those who eat meat have a vested interest in ensuring the survival of those industries which thrive on consumer ignorance of the cruelties inherent in many farming practices.

Similarly, those who opposed the slave trade had a vested interest in abolishing this practice; they were compassionate humans and could not bear to sit back and watch atrocities unfold and perpetuate around them while sitting idle. Those who were in support of the slave trade had a vested interest in upholding the practice; they prospered through cruelty, exploitation and greed, and didn't want to give up their prosperity, even when the price was terrible, indefensible human suffering. I know which side I would have supported, and I know which side history looks upon favourably.

When faced with making the compassionate choice or making the one that will make me the most money, I know what I will choose. You assume I am 'veggie' - you are correct. Of course I am veggie. I see terrible cruelties in this world and I choose to withdraw my support. This makes me a normal human being, responding appropriately and intelligently to a situation. That is normal. Many of the most intelligent humans who have ever lived were vegetarian and professed with pride to be such.

Those who go along with the 'norm' will not be remembered by history; those who fight against the flow, who make real, lasting changes for the better will be remembered - and thanked - by history. Again, I know what side I would rather be on

One of Yabby's previous posts states:

"My point is we have plenty of welfare issues right here in Australia before we arrogantly claim to be so perfect to all other countries." (19/10/06)

Yabby, we wait with bated breath - do tell. Which welfare issues are you referring to? I don't believe you've told us about them.

The Australian Veterinary Association are in perfect sync with those who protest against the heinous surgical procedures performed by non-veterinarians who, lusting after a fast buck, perform this surgery without the benefit of an anaesthesia:

"The AVA does not support the surgical flank spaying of cattle by non-veterinarians. This technique may be performed by veterinarians with the use of anaesthesia."

It is the AVA's belief that the welfare of the cattle is best protected if a veterinarian conducts the surgery." (09/06)

So Yabby, did you adopt an acceptance of animal torture in farming practices, after you arrived in Australia, or did you bring these ideologies with you from the Motherland?

LL, you miss the point. Recycling is part ot nature. Even you
will be chewed up and spat out by the worms, when you fall off
the proverbial perch :) Now which species recycles you once
you have croaked it, really won't affect you too much. Its just
natures way. I don't think that sheep or any other species
really care too much either.

Your mext mistake is seeing the world through just your eyes and
not that of other species etc. Herbivores are fairly contented
creatures, if their basic needs are fullfilled. Food, water,
shelter, being around other herbivores or the same species etc.

If we look at the life of many herbivores on Aussie farms, they
have it far easier then many humans. No great stresses, just chew
the cud and enjoy the scenery. No working for 2$ a day in Chinese
sweatshops either. The fact that they get eaten after they die,
means they have the same fate as awaits you!

So you are free to be a veggie if it makes you feel better, but its
flawed philosophy, for I don't really think that the sheep would care
a great deal, as to which species recycled them. I certainly don't,
I won't be here to know.

Dickie I've never heard of your cattle claims, but then I'm not
in the cattle industry. Go and ask them. Unlike you, I don't read
a couple of pages of a website and then claim to be an expert.

Yes, sheep have their legs tied in Australia, they also have their
throats cut. Compared to how we torture old people in the name
of religion, waiting for them to die a slow, agonising death all
by themselves, until their last breath, now that is cruel!

Yabby

You really are a classic,

LL as I said to Nicky -welcome to Yabby`s world of worms.


I hope one day everybody will work together.

Truth - WE!, must open more plants to faze live animal exports.

Nobody is going to do it for us.

Listen to what Yabby is saying.

`They have offered no viable alternatives.` but not to a bunch of people who object to farming and eating meat.` That is what the Government and agents say to the public as an excuse.

The meat industry is a tough so we have to put `all` our efforts into building abattoirs
` even if we personally don’t like them`.

That’s how you fade out Live exports. Get stuck in and give them some competition. Fight for a better price for Farmers.

Become farmers best friend not the enermy.

Don’t you get it yet.?

It doesn’t matter how bad the footage is. They require better prices here and staff to compete.

Put up the right arguments and demands.

You can’t have your foot in both camps- meaning your either loyal to the PETA vegetarian members or you ` really` support Free Range Farmers.

Only when the main stream approach is adopted we can work to make things better and improve over time.


Let’s look at AFIC as well. They certainly have been supportive

You have all being used like porn’s by clever politicians and middle men.

I mean all of you- Farmers and vegetarian groups. Set up against each other.

Couldn’t be better for the live Animal Shipping middle men.

Ask yourself why Andrew in twenty years never asked AFIC to put out a Media Release against live Exports as I did to support you?

He had far! more time and opportunities to ask than us.

To whom does that party give their preferences? Sit quietly and think about it before you jump down my throat.

Farmers are misguided and deceived by those they ` think` look after their interests just like these groups. Its called Politics!

Brunei has a delegation over here at the moment talking to people about supplying Halal product.

There's a meeting in (in Bass Coast Shire) actually it involves three local councils.

Wondering why Dianne Carson from Regional Development Victoria didn’t forward to contact details [as promised ]

Equal opportunity is required to introduce the farmers to AFIC leaders and overseas purchasers. Offer AFIC accreditation and co joint ventures.


Perhaps it could be that they felt after being overseas guests they were obligated to Elders who arranged it all.

The thing is shouldn’t the councils, MLA, Austrade and the other public funded authorities give all! an equal! chance to present their proposals?

Thats good for Animal Welfare and jobs for Australians and very good for farmers giving them what matters most.- A fair steady price.

Regardless of who paid whose airfares and accommodation these councils still supposedly work for the public.

If Peter Costello wants a show and tell on Animal Welfare fund uses the public might just ask the same of the appointed authorities.

Yabby As for WA I am still waiting for Hugh or Tim.
Now before you say it-

The credibility is with AFIC leaders, delegates from Malaysian ME Russia etc.

So in fact it would not matter if we were Robinson Cruso.

FFs wont allow us to put out a memo.

These people from overseas are not stupid. They are business people and want direct! contact with farmers.

They don’t trust middle men or the Government.

The real problem is the hidden agenda of the Farmers Federations and others to push to Live Animal Export trade.

Everybody should have a right to put forward their products and proposals through Austrade and The Minister of Trades.

At the moment in Australia this is most certainly not the case.

When the farmers suddenly wake up and realize they can do without the politicians the middle agent men, but the politicians and the middle men can’t do without them things will change so quickly it will make your head spin.

For the record, Dickie, it is "spaying" not Spraying. And here is the Qld regulations that spell out the true situation.

"The Willis spay method is accepted as the quickest, simplest and
least stressful means of spaying. With this method of spaying, the
hide is not damaged and required restraint is minimal. The
technique has been widely adopted by industry as it is the most
economical means of surgical spaying.
In the interests of animal welfare, the exclusion of surgical cattle
spaying as an act of veterinary science needs to be limited to the
Willis method. The flank entry method if required, for instance in
a case of the animal being too heavily in calf or too small for
passage spaying, should be performed by registered veterinary
surgeons using appropriate prescription drugs for anaesthesia and
infection combatant".

So in on those rare occasions when spaying is done, it is done by the "quickest, simplest and least stressful means", the Willis. Flank Spaying is only done in very unusual circumstances and is only done by Vets as they are the only ones with access to anaesthetics.

Missed the point? Laughable attempt to deflect criticism Yabby. Of course we will all be recycled; however, I would prefer to be recylced after many happy years of life free from exploitation. Wouldn't you? A murdered child is recycled; an 85 year old great-grandmother who dies of old age is recycled. I'm almost certain that you don't need it to be clarified which method of - and age at - death is most preferable.

You then raise the point that I see the world through my eyes as opposed to those of other species. If I saw the world through only my own eyes, I wouldn't care what happened to other species. I actually have a fairly sound understanding of animal psychology and pyhsiology; even if I didn't, it doesn't take a huge amount of intelligence to identify pain and suffering in other species. It's fairly obvious when an animal is placed in a state of fear - a state which, given all you pertain to know about sheep, I'm sure you will know is far worse in terms of welfare than a state of pain.

In your view, anthropomorphism is a distorted world view. I tend to agree; to assess animal behaviour using human emotions and instincts is folly. What is a far worse crime, however, is the terrible distrotions of perspective brought about by anthropocentrism.

I'm not guilty of the former - perhaps you should question whether you are you guilty of the latter?

What legislation Perseus? When were the proposed amendments legislated, Perseus? Are the proposals yet mandatory?

The proposals recommend the Willis drop technique be restricted to non-veterinarians and stock owners who are NOT required to use any analgesia or anaesthetic.

The Willis drop technique will mitigate a spoiling of the beef, wouldn't you agree, Perseus? If there are any cattle barons out there, with a degree of compassion for their animals, they would employ a veterinarian who uses an anaesthetic.

The Veterinarian Surgeons Act does not prevent persons from performing any acts of veterinary science on their own animals, providing it is not for a fee or reward.

The Cattle Council recommended that flank spaying be considered for exemption as a veterinary service. (12/9/05)

Doggone it Pers, yo sho ar sendin' signals - I hope ya not playin' hillbilly games wit me. Yer betta take more grits wit dat moonshine man on acount of yer haloosinashuns!

Ah cudnt unnerstand a werd yous sed, Pers - yous must be from some farm county?

Nah, Ma sez he's a tardbilly - haze jus ignert!

LL, at some point you have to accept basic evolution theory. As
Darwin pointed out, far more of any species will be born, then
can every survive. There is only so much room on the planet, so
many resources to go around.
Every individual has to make a living, one way or another.

If my farm animals have happy lives, lives they would not have
had if nature had prevailed, lives they enjoyed, why should it
be a problem if they are eaten? Fact is there is only so much
room on the planet for so many. If we left it up to nature,
they would simply die a cruel death of starvation, but of course
thats missed on the tv screens.

A wise farmer limits his stocking rate to the carrying capacity of
the land. Overpopulation results in much suffering, thats the reality.
So sending animals to a meatworks is in fact the kinder option.

Anthropocentrism has all sorts of religious connotations, but thats
another long story.

LL, you don't want to confuse suffering with loss of dignity.
A sheep with its legs tied might well lose its dignity, but you'd
have to provide some evidence that its actually suffering.

Finally, exploitation will happen as part of life, as people and
other species, act in their own self interest. Your lover might tell
you he loves you, to obtain sex. Your children might exploit your
natural motherly love towards them, to gain benefits. Thats part
of the journey of life, get used to it.

So Dickie finally betrays the undelying anti-rural bigotry that characterises this so-called animal rights movement. He wraps himself in a veneer of reasonableness but betrays a level of bigotry which, if applied to any other community group, would see him justifiably outcast and possibly convicted.

He has been badly caught out peddling a load of bollocks. According to the regulatory impact assessment of the 2002 changes to the Queensland legislation and regulations, Flank spaying is virtually non-existent in commercial practice.

But this moron has tried to convince people that every second farmer is out there just itching to carry out a practice that is uneconomic, poses a major risk to his assets, and diminishes their resale value.

Animal rights activists are engaged in a deliberate campaign to demonise a target group for political gain. A bunch of sickos.

Speaking of which ,

PETA and Animals Australia certainly would prefer talk about anything even Yabb`s worms rather than the issue of the `veggie cult`.

That’s clear if you read the last few posts.

In case you have forgotten the question we have asked for six years >

Why does PETA, AA, AL, Voiceless refuse to assist farmers and animals by helping to establish co joint FREE RANGE Farms with Aussie Farmers and overseas live animal importers?

You completely ignored along with Senator Andrew Bartlett the Submission to the Senate Enquiry into Animal Welfare lodged by AFIC PALE RSPCA QLD.?

AFIC being Australian Federation of Islamic Council - and the MOU signed with PALE which was as the humane Society wrote was a huge step in the right direction.

A good example of working together ` but` not so according to Glenyce. Oogjes

Instead emails and phone calls instructing members not to work with us went out.

It was claimed we were only interested in establishing a commercial venture to make money from killing animals??

I should think even John Howard labour and the typical Good Christian Senator Fielding could vouch as to the fact we have asked this to be a `policy`” not a private venture!”

Surely the public will agree if we can divert live importers into part abattoir owners and exporters along with grass roots farmers, it will reduce and eventually replace live exports and create more jobs in regional areas.

There are many members of the public that have joined Animals Australia, and Animal Liberation groups that `just might` see the Merritt in such a proposal but you have never given them the opportunity.

It requires everybody involved.ie. Looking for new sites for plants, finding old sites including small domestic plants, that possibly with a lot of infustructure could be updated and accredited to export standard.

Animals Australia and a few others have ‘now’ put on their web sites `Support Free Range Farmers`. - Good- A step in the right direction.

However there is not much sense in telling people to only buy Free Range while refusing to assist create more Free Range, because we do not have the supply.

Oh yeh of course I forgot and make a donation.

Similarity not much sense in saying divert live animal exports into carcass trade only while putting the boot into those that have taken steps to do just that.

Behind your web page you still consistently refuse to set an example of that by working with the alternative put forth by PALE RSPCAQLD with their MOU with AFIC.

They, Animals Australia say- They could never be involved with anything to do with abattoirs because it would upset their Veggie members.

It only stands to reason until we get an alternative up and running and show farmers they will get good steady prices, live animal exports will not only continue, but triple at very least.

People have stood waving placards at docks and warfs for decades but we prefer to do something more than use those good people and fund raise.
We want to get in and help open abattoirs and so should you.

You want live Exports banned. Good. Then [content deleted] get off your high horses and help us.

PETA literally hang up the phone if contacted.

So Ingrid,
, If you are reading this why do you refuse to debate this issue with the only group who is actually speaking on behalf of the majority the Australian public meat eaters?

What’s the matter Ingrid are you afraid people might put their donations into helping to build more abattoirs in Australia to stop live Exports?

If you learn to stop hiding behind your vailes we might actually be able to do something to help both farmers and Animals.

Mind you, you have done a pretty good job of making enemies of Australian Farmers and Animal Welfare Groups
So Tar.

That makes our job real easy!

Dang - caint git no ansers from that ther molecat, Perseus.

Jus goofy billy speke 'n sum frof and spittle.

'Scuse me Pers, ah fink ahv'e got sumfin in ma ah!

Live exports are cruel and unecessary. No argument.

But just one question to the person from WA. Why on earth would anyone pay $60 for a sheep when the only competeition is willing to pay just $10? I have been to livestock auctions and by definition there is only 1 bid difference between who buys the animals and who doesn't, maybe 1 or 2 $ in the price of a sheep. I've never heard the auctioneer go from $10 to $60 in one hit. If I was an exporter I wouldn't pay more than $10.50 for a sheep!

"If I was an exporter I wouldn't pay more than $10.50 for a sheep!"

Well Piggy, now you know why we don't like selling to greedy people
like you :)

Live sheep are priced on their value in the Middle East. Buyers
sign contracts, long before any sheep are bought here. Shippers
take their margin for transport, food etc, then offer growers
a price to fill the order, through agents. Few of those sheep
ever go through a saleyard. For Hajj lambs, contracts are written
forward, often months ahead.

In fact of the 7 million sheep sold each year in WA, only about
1.5 million would ever see a saleyard.

Shippers do buy in the yards, but few, as few are offered that way.
An auctioneer, knowing that they will bid much higher, would be
a fool starting bidding at 10$, it would be too much work.

Processors won't bid on those live sheep, they'd rather buy the
el cheapo sheep, like ewes not wethers, etc, where they have
a higher margin. Like you, they are greedy :)

The Greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.-Mahatma Gandhi

The solution is A Kind Meat Proposal. This venture has gained approval in Western Australia as reported by FarmOnline and The Rural News. This cooperative is a joint venture between a Malaysian corporation and a WA wheatbelt farmer to export Halal certified meat for distribution throughout the Muslim world.

http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/stories/s1096508.htm

A group of West Australian producers has formed a joint venture with Malaysia, to supply the world with halal meat products.

The Wheatbelt Growers Co-operative from Dowerin has signed an agreement with the Perak State Development Corporation to provide 100,000 sheep and 16,000 cattle each year.

Perak wants to become the world distributor of halal food to Muslim countries, with a potential market of 300 billion people.

Chief Minister Tajol Rosli says that'll provide a valuable alternative for Australia's live export trade.

"As it is now, halal food from Malaysia is recognized throughout the world.

"There are some countries that produce halal food, but it is not recognised, especially by the Middle East.

The deal consists of 100,000 sheep and 16,000 cattle would be killed in WA each year under halal slaughter codes and the meat exported to join venture partner Perak State Development Corporation in Malaysia.

The cooperative is negotiating for the slaughter to be carried out at Walsh's in Bunbury and the first meat is expected to be exported in 12 months, but is hoped it will happen sooner.

We know and are very concerned that this export trade has provided millions of animals and still does, for a sacrificial ceremony which happens every year, to the detriment of thousands of Australian jobs.

The money this trade returns can be replaced with processed meat. The reality is that there are a few exporters and overseas importers who make an enormous amount of money while economies of rural and regional Australia are dying due to abattoir and related industry closures which provided the bulk of employment in many towns

“I worked in the Arabian Gulf on an offshore drilling rig for many years and have seen these ships carrying these sheep go past on a regular basis. You can smell these ships long before they come over the horizon, and for days afterward dead sheep would be floating past the rig, this is because the tide runs in a circular motion.

We could not understand why there were so many sheep tossed into the sea on a single day, until we saw a couple of them trying to swim, then we realised that this must have been the final clear out of those animals that would not have passed inspection, or would have died before sale.

Unless you have lived in the Middle East, you can have no comprehension of the people or customs or conditions that exist in that area.

To say that you have to send sheep live because there is no refrigeration is absolute rubbish. There are supermarkets there just as there are here, and they sell frozen meat of every description.

There is no way that anyone with any sense of decency could ever condone the live animal trade! Not only is it cruel beyond belief, it is also economic stupidity. The fate that falls to some of these animals is indescribable and horrific.”

We know and are very concerned that this export trade has provided millions of animals and still does, for a sacrificial ceremony which happens every year, to the detriment of thousands of Australian jobs.

The money this trade returns can be replaced with processed meat. The reality is that there are a few exporters and overseas importers who make an enormous amount of money while economies of rural and regional Australia are dying due to abattoir and related industry closures which provided the bulk of employment in many towns

Sorry Yabby

I know thats been up before and I dont want to bore you but perhaps some members of the public did not see it last time.

Boy its gone real quiet in here. `Hope its not something I said`.

Yabby I have to thank You again for pushing me in the right direction with some of the names you supplied.

I received a call back today and they guys were pretty reasonable.

Thats a huge break through to be honest with you.

Its all very well having Muslim Contacts and even working in conjunction with RSPCA QLD RSPCA but without farmer contacts it means nothing.

Of course I know few people in WA but hopefully thanks to you that might change .
They were telling me that they also work with Dawn Low who is a fantasic lady who has done much towards Animal Welfare and Live Exports.
They apparently even invited her to sit in at the meetings and included her on boards.
That gives me some hope.
After all the damage done by extremists we sure need people like Dawn.

Yabby I was thinking its been a long time now taken to organise your- `The Adventures of Yabby Trip`.

So if you would like to pick a country perhaps we could go ahead now and organise your artillery .

Tell me if you mind terribly much and if so I guess I will just have to cancel it.

If you dont mind taking the trip I do hope others will get involved and come up with some interesting suggestions.

I think we all need to lighten up and others might enjoy planning it .

Maybe some even more so than I.

I had to cancel your last trip because Muslims dont like pork if you recall.

Wendy, I'm just going to stick to the real issues affecting WA
here, in the meat industry. That is just to deal with the livestock
for sale now, let alone the live trade, that would be extra.

Right now there is an application for a modern facility in Northam.
Its been held up for 12 months by Govt red tape, at the moment
its the EPA. Who knows how much more red tape will hold it up.

T&R want to build, still some red tape to clear there.

Wammco still can't bring in more workers. They are weeks behind
in their kill, due to lack of staff. No 457 workers can come
in to their place right now, despite it being shown how well the
last 30 Chinese are doing and what a difference they are making.

No wonder people paid Burke and Grill as lobbyists. To get
anything done under this Govt, seems to be impossible without
a major push from somewhere. They seemed to know which buttons
to push, nobody else seems to. So the WA meat industry remains
a disaster.

Yabby.

Yes its made hard purposely hard by those with vetted interests.

Your friends told me we are stuck on a difference of around five thousand dollars per skillied worker.

Animal Welfare organisations should sponser some.


We have had a few little wins however Yabby see todays report.
This was signed two years ago.

Thank You Prime Minister. Why cant Austrade be opened to invite overseas meat purchasers to meet Ausie Farmers?? It would certainly speed things along.


http://www.farmonline.com.au/news_daily.asp?ag_id=41322


Breaking Rural News : LIVESTOCK

New Halal brand launched in Middle East
Australia
Thursday, 22 March 2007

MLA has launched a new Halal brand for Australian red meat in the Middle East aimed at reinforcing Australia’s strict Halal standards in one of the world’s largest Muslim markets.

The new brand, which will appear on retail meat packs at point of sale, is the Australian red meat industry’s guarantee that the meat it exports has come from an animal that has been slaughtered according to the strict Islamic Shariah.

Australia is the only non-Muslim country in the world that underpins the integrity of Halal animal slaughter through government legislation, giving Australian red meat products a key competitive advantage in Muslim markets.

The Halal process is regulated through the Australian Government Muslim Slaughter (AGMS) program by government employees and is supervised by independent Islamic organisations.

All Australian Halal meat is labelled as having passed through the AGMS program.

This certification is only allowed to be placed on meat that has been processed at a registered Halal certified abattoir.

Australian red meat exports to the Middle East surged in 2006 – 43,071 tonnes of mutton, 17,685 tonnes of lamb and 3,312 tonnes of beef were sent to the region, valued at $242 million.

Demand has remained high in the first three months of 2007, but is likely to drop off as Middle East temperatures soar in the next few months.

SOURCE” MLA markets news

I am a bit dissapointed you dont seem too keen to sail off to the ME Yabby.

I was kind of looking forward to writing the "Adventures of Yabby"

Nope Wendy, what it needs is a change of mindset, in the
present State Govt.

Alot of these guys in Parliament now, they would have had
their education paid for, courtesy of the hardworking
rural sector. But at the present time, the WA treasury is
being stuffed with mining royalties and nothing else
seems to matter. If they accumulate those, they can
porkbarrel city electors and win the next election, so
farming seems to have been written off in WA.

Alot of the present problems in the meat industry are
caused by bad politics of the past. The last Minister
of Ag did try to sort them out. He got part of the job
done, then the Govt changed. The present mob are city
based, the country doesent seem to matter to them.

WA needs a high tech, fairly automated meat industry.
Only that way can we sell to the third world, yet still
pay a reasonable price for both livestock and labour.

There is no good reason why mutton can't be value added
into pizza toppings and other products. But you need a Govt
keen to assist, not one which just wants to tax industries
to the limits, for their own self interest and pet projects,
which seem to just about all be city based.

Yabby

Good idea1 on Pitza

You’re correct about WA plants

Remember that AQIS is Federal as well.
The meat trade is heavily propped up by most State Governments. I think things will happen.

The Countries importing live sheep and cattle are interested in the value adding and jobs their end. They play the market with escalations and non – tariffs to support it. Of course it’s also added as a disincentive for value adding in Australia.
After saying that the right heavy weights will push the other way too when it suites them!
I heard that the other hold up with WA workers was they approached plant operators but left boners etc out. They say it’s being fixed but you would know far more than me.

As you say it all comes down to the right person or people being appointed.

Who would you like to see get in WA?

In the mean time I couldn’t resist.>

Yabby `s Adventures [ Part One]

The first place I can remember is a long cool paddock under a shady tree with my Mother.
We often stood there and watched the other lambs playing in the sun.
I had problems with my knees right from a nipper which Mum told me was inherited from my father’s side. Mum would have said that.
I was cute for a boy and the other lambs sometimes used to make fun of me so basically I was lonely and spent most of my time close to my mother.
One day a man came to our farm and was looking at my Mother and some of the others in a strange and scary way.
I didn’t sleep much after that and when I did I kept having nightmares about this man called Mark.
It was rumoured he was a big wig from the city apparently one of those Government trade officials and I didn’t trust him one bit.
I heard through some of the others that this Mark "personally" organised ship loads of live sheep direct to Kuwait Governments and other countries.
to be continued

AUSTRALIA CALLING ON A FEW MORE 'MR PUCKS'

March 22, 2007
Celebrity Chef Announces Strict Animal-Welfare Policy

By KIM SEVERSON

Wolfgang Puck, the Los Angeles chef whose culinary empire ranges from
celebrity dinners at Spago to a line of canned soups, said yesterday
that he would use eggs and meat only from animals raised under strict
humane standards.

With the announcement, Mr. Puck has joined a small group of top chefs
around the country who refuse to serve foie gras, the fattened liver of
ducks and geese. But Mr. Puck, working with the Humane Society of the
United States, has taken his interest in animal welfare beyond ducks.

He has directed his three companies, which together fed more than 10
million people in 2006, to buy eggs only from chickens not confined to
small cages. Veal and pork will come from farms where animals are not
confined in crates, and poultry meat will be bought from farmers using
animal welfare standards higher than those put forth by the nation's
largest chicken and turkey producers. Mr. Puck has also vowed to use
only seafood whose harvest does not endanger the environment or deplete
stocks.

"We decided about three months ago to be really much more socially
responsible," he said in a telephone interview from Los Angeles. "We
feel the quality of the food is better, and our conscience feels
better."

Many chefs at high-end restaurants, some smaller food-service chains and
grocery chains like Whole Foods have refused to buy meat and eggs unless
animals are raised under certain conditions. In 2000, McDonald's became
the first American food company to impose minimum animal-welfare
standards, like increasing cage size, on its egg producers. But Mr.
Puck's program goes much further than most corporate animal-welfare
policies, and he is the flashiest culinary name yet to join with animal rights groups in the movement to change farming practices.

But Mr Puck's program goes much further than most corporate animal-welfare

Mr. Puck's ventures include 14 fine-dining restaurants mostly on the
West Coast. The flagship is Spago in Los Angeles, which helped him
become the nation's first celebrity chef. He also runs more than 80
Gourmet Express restaurants, many of which are in airports, and sells
frozen pizza, soups, kitchen cookware and cookbooks. Mr. Puck estimated
his companies' value at $360 million.

Since 2002, at least one animal-rights activist group has tried to
persuade Mr. Puck to stop using foie gras from ducks that are force fed
extra amounts of grain to fatten their livers and veal from calves
chained to small crates and fed a liquid diet to keep their flesh white
and tender.

The group, Farm Sanctuary, protested in front of Spago and started a Web
site called wolfgangpuckcruelty.org, which has since been taken down.
Mr. Puck dismissed those efforts and said he decided to make the change
as a result of a few trips to large-scale farms, discussions with the
Humane Society and a desire to mark his 25 years in the business with
something more significant than the kinds of big parties he is used to
holding for the Oscars.

"I have been telling people we have to stand for something for the next
25 years," he said. "It's time for us to make a statement and a time for
us to see how we treat what we eat."

Mr. Puck said prices would increase only a few percentage points on some
items.

98 percent of eggs come from chickens kept in banks of small
cages to facilitate mass production, said Diane Storey, a spokeswoman
for United Egg, which represents most major egg producers. She and
Richard Lobb, a spokesman for the National Chicken Council, which
represents major producers of chickens for meat, said their groups had
science-based animal welfare certification programs that used humane and
ethical guidelines.

THANK YOU MR PUCK And HUMANE SOCIETY.

Join Our Free Range Farmers Support Group.

http://www.freerangefarmers.com/freerange/eggs_qld.html

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

[Yabby`s Advertures continued Nest Post]

Mirko.

You seem like a very nice young man.

People always head for the hills when asked a straight question.

`Or send letters from lawyers.`

I am sure animals dont mind who helps.

For example Mirko ,
PALE has five senior lawyers, barristers including one QC as members.

You probably were not told that.

These are people that have given up their busy time in order to do their bit for animals. That aside AA do not want to work together with us. Sure we are a bit different from the proticol thats been set in cement.

On the other hand shouldnt we exploy all avenues of helping animals. After all its not like there is not room for improvement.


Here Mirko is the real deal>

http://www.aussiehelpers.org.au/supporters.htm

These people give hay and food for stock as well as helping farmers.

You may have seen them on the Australian story Last night.

If you ask any farmer what he wants in time like this it is food for his stock.
I posted on the OLO several weeks ago. The head of Salvation Army drought appeal had called me and requested we put forth a request for the appeal to supply hay and water for stock.

I might add she said nobody have ever raised it before.

I now know that is not entiley true. The peoples link I put up certainly did! ask the Salvation Army.

I personally recall the Barrister for Red cross calling me several years ago and saying. Quote[ I tell you now Wendy not one cent of that money from the public will be going to buy food for stock].

Umm Well considering they showed footage of starving animals and the public dug deep I am very concerned.

We spoke with people and a lot of them were people who told us they donated because they thought it was going to the farmers to buy feed for their stock.
I think the Salvation Army RSPCA Red Cross Animals Australia Animal Lib should be getting in and helping these wonderful people.

http://www.aussiehelpers.org.au/supporters.htm

Do you agree Mirko?

Wendy, whether that money goes to helping feed stock can be a matter of semantics. Eg, you could argue that it didnt go to feeding stock if it goes into the farmers bank account, and then he goes to town to buy groceries the next day. But even if the money goes directly to household expenses, it frees up other cash for purchasing fodder. Few farmers want their animals to starve, if nothing else then consider the profit decrease from sending starving stock to market.

Fodder donations have happened before. Back in the 70's truckloads of lawn clippings and old potatos were shipped west from Sydney to help feed stock. Every little bit helps. This time it might be a lot harder as there are little fodder stocks available given the wide-spread drought, and water restrictions on gardens in the cities.

Country Girl

Thanks

It matter. People want a say where their donations go.
It matters that Church based organisations feel no obligation to also look after Gods Creatures.

It matters that they are NOT listening to the Farmers.

If you were on the bones of your bum and somebody rolled up with a shed full of feed and some water what it would mean to you.

Or would you prefer a city slicker counciler to turn up. Together you could watch your animals and your farm die
Pray together.

It goes to show how removed they are from these real people of Australia.

Farmers dont want pretty talk from people who wouldnt have a clue.

Actually most farmers are people of very few words.

They are proud people who hate talking about themselves at the best of times.
I was told four weeks ago by the Head of Salavation Army Farmers Drought Appeal that they have `never` had requests for feed for stock and water.
To quote the exact words. No Wendy to be honest I have never even thought about it.
Well I will copy a letter- one of many- I was told written in reply to those requests "'they claim they never received"?.

They now! blame the tax office and Mr Costello claiming they are "forbidden' to suply water for animals or feed. Shame.

I spent the afternoon on the phone to the Federal Minister for Taxation, Peter Costellos Office and Salvation Army.

"We will" find a way to change their wording. That should help out the Red Cross as well. "Praise the Lord!"

Here are a few words from Dr Hugh Wirth RSPCA On The need for Churches to Change their Attitude.

http://www.livexports.com/hughwirth.html

Just To go back on post to this thread lets look at what Church have done about Live Animal Exports since the 60 minutes report as well shall we?
NOTHING. Shame.
No lets look at the Muslim Leaders have done.
http://www.livexports.com/afic.html
Kind of makes you wonder doesnt it.

Yabbys Adveture`s continued on new thread.

All this talk of lawn clippings and donations might be great
touchy-feely stuff and satisfy peoples emotional needs, but
its not how to deal with the core of the problem, nor
is it a solution to drought.

Fact is that climatology is becoming increasingly good
at predicting droughts, which allows for better planning.
Fact is that Australia will always be affected by droughts,
they are part of our history and part of our future.

We've learnt heaps this year and those who did not plan
and ignored the reality, are still paying a heavy price
of hungry stock, huge grain bills sending them broke and
farms blowing away. Those who took action early will be
fine. Its just that no Govt would recommend what we learnt,
it might upset the touchy feely people and animal libbers.

First increase on farm grain and fodder storage, to allow
for drought. When they occur, it will double in value,
so you'll get your money back.
Next destock early, not once paddocks are bare and silos
empty. The smartest people got the gun out and shot the
merino lambs. Sounds gory, but the lambs felt nothing,
the moms thrived, due to not having to supply milk,
the pastures got a break from less mouths, grain feeding
was cut by 70%, so bank accounts were not drained.

Next we need flexible Govt policy, so that when droughts
do occur, extra labour can be brought in for meatworks,
to double shifts. Then prices won't collapse, farmers
can still sell for a reasonable price, whilst stock are
still in good health, not when they have become bags of
bones.

Thats the reality. There are solutions! Just not lawn
clippings and donations.

Yabby

your correct.

All that and more. You know we are also doing other things.

Not sure if I can start the Yabbys adventure thread.

Is that against any rules?

I have written a few chapters but I dont want to get banned.

So why doesn`t the Government inflict laws to make them plan and prepare.
I know you cant answer that but whats required.

You cant breed stock on a prayer you might have food and water for them. Thats criminal.

Country Girl was only telling me what had been done in the past and I appreciate it.

As I raised the Farmers drought appeal it was on topic.

Country girl

Yes I know we actually drove a dairy farmers three hundred head down to the Gold Coast.

We got a truck and coles and Woolworths Cocos etc put all their scraps in wheely bins for two other farms as well.

The cattle drew many tourists ,locals and media atention for some of the farmers.
The hardest part was obtaining over three hundred wheely bins from the council who I might add have never forgiven me.
Still it saved three dairy farms.
Now after saying that Yabby you also would be aware that farmers want feed for stock regardless.
Well I guess I am off post but its pretty hard to debate the author when they have again headed for the hills.

Church Leaders do have a reasonsibilty to Gods creatures Yabby and its about time they explained the discusting silence.

You can argue this with me until the cows come home if you like but its the plain truth.

I am ashamed of our churches and Churches leaders.


All Of Gods creatures great and small.

Did you know we are exporting water to ME Yabby?
Its used to build golf courses and plant millions of trees in the desert.
It can also be used for water for stock grass.
Sounds like it might be handy for Australian farmers at the moment ah?

Yabby, I dont disagree with you about the stocking approach you advocate. The problem at this particular time is that few were able to anticipate just how long things would remain dire for. Most farmers will adjust to cope with low rainfall in a particular year, and good ones can cope with 2 years. In some places this has been going on for 5 years, in places where 5 years of drought is unheard of (eg I'm not talking about west of Broken Hill). This is where there needs to be some sort of backup plan.

The problem with storing grain for potentially long period of time is preserving its value (as feed, not in dollars), and keeping vermin out effectively (including insect pests). My family have found that the effort they put into putting in silage just before the drought started has backfired, as the sheep refuse to eat it (now experimenting with additives to make it palatable). It was buried sileage not wrapped, so they cant sell it either. All feedback for next time though I guess!

CountryGal, around here we just use silos and store oats and
lupins. I've just been using some that have been stored for
6 years, not a problem. You'll find that really finely ground
limestone (like talcum powder) will stop weevils for years,
but nobody promotes it, as its too cheap, so nobody makes
any money out of it. Its really good for the sheep too!

I see the militants have again taken over yet another thread on the abominable practice of exporting our live animals to the Middle East.

I see no relevance to live animal exports with Country Gal and Yabby's blatherings over the storage of grain and tips on reducing the number of weevils.

We all know Yabby's intention is to deflect people's attention away from the savagery of live sheep exports and the cruel farming practices in Australia. And we've heard all his arguments (motivated by profits) previously in his zeal to support the status quo.

Any chance of sticking to the subject at hand?

Are you going to add constructively Dickie? If not, bugger off and let Yabby and I have our discussion. At the end of the day its a discussion on animal welfare, which is on topic (some of these sheep might end up on export ships too, which makes it even more on topic). If you have something else related to the topic you want to debate, then by all means bring it up - I'm sure you'll have a taker.

Yabby, I find the talc point interesting - my background in from a stock area that isnt good enough to support cropping (value $130/ac puts it in perspective!), so havent had much experience trying to store grain fodder. I can only go off what I've been told in this regard, which is mostly from storing for potential human consumption. Phostoxin being the preferred poison of choice.

Deary me Dickie, there you go, getting your knickers in a twist, about those
“evil farmers”, yet once again. I remind you that few small to medium farmers
make a profit, but rely on off farm income to subsidise their way of life, which
is why they do it. There are much easier ways to make a quid then farming.

The discussion is very much on topic. The problem is more your lack of knowledge
of farming, to understand how they are all interlinked. That’s your problem, not mine.

The evidence from the live trade shows that animals on boats like the Becrux,
in fact gain weight during their journey. Food, water, shelter are all provided.
The extra income generated from the live trade, helps farmers buy extra fodder
for livestock facing droughts in Australia.

Drought is cruel to wildlife and livestock, but then nature has never been known for
compassion. You should be thrilled that farmers are discussing ways to limit
suffering of livestock during drought. Wildlife don’t get that benefit, they just
die miserably. Clearly your agenda is more about character assassination, then
concern for the animals. Shame on you.

CountryGal, ok so its more like station country that you are talking about.
Some stations here grow opportunity crops, when rain has fallen, ie the good
years. With new technology, deep/no till, we can now produce a crop, if not
a huge one, on 4-5 inches. People are also switching out of merinos and into
Dorpers/Damaras, as they do so much better and meat has a better future then
wool

Some processors don’t like lime dust on grain, as it slows down their grading
machinery. But its perfect for on farm livestock grain storage. Its also a lot
healthier then phostoxin :)

If you weren't so full of yourself Country Girl, you would observe that I have more than used my share of debate on cruelty to our animals, the subject of this thread.

Err......looks like phostoxin wasn't used on the vermin infested flours I'm forced to purchase where the critters invade all other products in my pantry? Perhaps this toxin is saved for export grain only.

Yikes.....isn't phostoxin a rat poison, a fumigant - a Category 4 hazardous compound?

I'll take the weevils thanks!

Dickie

I too share your frustration regarding live exports. Also feeds lots and many other acts of cruelty.
I have noted all your comments on OLO and your loyalty to animals.
You speak for yourself and from your heart and there is nothing wrong with that. At least you have one.

I am happy on the other hand to see farmers exchanging information.

Live exports starts from the Farms Dickie. I know in your frustration you feel Yabby and Country Girl are trying to divert from the subject.
I dont believe they are to be fair. They have debated live exports on many threads. Although you may not agree with them it does make it possibly to keep these posts going.

Many Australian Farmers are `business wise` on a world scale naive.

I am not talkng about this new age lot that call! themselves farmers rather the real deal.

Unless the few real farmers we have left start to think for themselves not only animals but the Australian public will suffer like never before.

They have 'blind faith' in the farmers Federations and agents who if you dig a bit show a clear conflict of interest.

I will tell you the truth Dickie regarding live exports - It will only stop if we help open new abattoirs.

Now I know thats not what you want to hear most probably but I wont tell you any lies. So dont send donations help us to re open abattoirs.
To do that we need the levies dropped and the Governments to ammend a few things.

As for feeding stock I mentioned before we are exporting water from Australia. We export tons of mineral to ME that is broken down and used for golf courses trees and farming in the dessert.
Theres your grass and feed for our stock. Not to mention drinking water for stock.
How clever are we?
So when they come to Australia in a share farm arrangment and reopen or build new plants at least the animals will have feed and water.

That more Free Range Dickie.

Good night All.

Breaking Rural News : WOOL

Judge urges mediation with animal activists
By MARIUS CUMING, national wool writer - Australia
Thursday, 29 March 2007

The judge presiding over the woolgrowers versus animal activists PETA and Animal Liberation case in the Federal Court, has strongly recommended mediation between the parties.
Justice Rares has warned of the potential for skyrocketing costs as the case finally heads towards a trial date in February next year.

“We won’t ignore mediation, particularly when the judge recommends it so strongly but we have an obligation to pursue this case and stop PETA’s illegal behaviour," Australian Wool Innovation deputy CEO, Les Targ, responded.

"We essentially want an injunction against the activists unfairly harassing retailers about Australian wool.”

Until now, no formal mediation talks between the legal teams has been flagged.

So far, the legal bill associated with the court case has reached several million dollars.

Meanwhile, PETA is suggesting the 101 woolgrower co-applicants named in the case may have to stand and be cross examined in the witness box.

Justice Rares, this week, ruled that growers would not have to individually give evidence of their personal financial loss due to the actions of the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and Animal Liberation.

If called, lawyers for both AWI and the activists would cross examine growers about their loss of reputation and their animal welfare practices in a trial that is now expected to take six months and cost many millions of dollars.

But AWI have rejected the allegation outright, saying the tactic is yet another ploy to intimidate woolgrowers.

SOURCE: National wool news in Rural Press weekly agricultural papers, updated daily on FarmOnline.

http://www.farmonline.com.au/news_daily.asp?ag_id=41467


Noted NO assitance from MLA to promote any share farms, plants in Australia. Noted the refusual of Austrade to do their job.
In a letter written to PALE the the Minister for Trade Mr Vaile stated his juties were to promote "new business ventures" and assist Australians to comunicate overeseas leaning towards value adding For Australia.?
Read This Ministers of Cruelty. These people might also to donate to political parties
http://www.halakindmeats.com

CountryGal, I think I know where farmers are getting it
wrong. Now lets take a customer like Dickie, with her
obsession about phostoxin. Now you and I know that if
we sold Dickie her muesli and she had nothing but
weevil dust in there, she would not be a happy girl
either, despite her claims.

So easily fixed, niche marketing! We can supply
oats for Dickie's muesli, free from all phostoxin
treatments, with extra calcium, which will help with
osteoperoris etc, as she gets older.

That will cost an extra 100$ a tonne of course, which
is about 5c for 500g, so neither here nor there.
But 100$ a tonne makes a huge difference to the poor
old farmer, trying to make a living.

So its time for PHOSTOXIN FREE MUESLI ! At a small
cost of course :) Thats got to be a win-win.

Yabby

Very Funny.

Not everybody knows about everything. Dickie has made some good comments on several posts.

Lyn White has actually travelled to ME and not years ago either. So do others- regually.

The AFIC Islamic council have also come out in support of Lyn and Animals Australia by putting out a press R.

They stated there is NO reason why animals cant be slaughtered here! Halal in Australia.

They asked the Government and the media to "be responsiple" when claiming the "real reasons" for live animasl exports.
AFIC went so far as to lodge a sub to the Animal Welfare enquiry inviting everybody to work with them in finding alternative methods.

Did they get any takers> No. Did Senator Andrew Bartlett for example who opended the enquiry show the slightest interest> No.
Did Animals Australia> No.

Has the FF and pasture people you suggested in WA got back No.
Am I surprised No.
FFs are run basically by the old Nationals. The Nationals have decieved the Aussie farmers selling our jobs and flooding the country with cheap imports.
Its also interesting that not one of you wanted to know more about the minerals we export by the tons to ME that is greening golf courses and providing water.!!
Yes I said water. Oh but of course we dont have the plant in Australia to convert it from mineral to water--- Jolly! Gee Wiz.

No Intead we will just let all the stock die.
How clever is that.
Yabby I know you are not a live exporter. I knew that long ago because you simply believe !the crap put out by those involved.

You dont want to hear from anybody else not even the Muslims that buy Halal.
You much prefer just posting to PF and ignoring the facts.

Yup live exports are making up the pay packets of some people.
Nope it isnt! exceptable.

I have received a few phone calls since mentioning the councils inviting Elders to visit.
Brion happy to talk to the chair Directer of Elders anytime.

You dont have to "not mention" your identidy.

PALE - How right you are when you state: "Not everybody knows about everything." Of course our sage, Yabby Dabby Do would dispute your claim since he views himself as the fount of wisdom - God's gift to man and beast!

Incredibly, he really believes I would eat his contaminated toxic muesli muck. That indeed would be a short-cut to developing "osteoperosis" (sic), wouldn't you agree?

Happily, my limited knowledge does include an awareness of how the Yabby Dabby Do's contaminate our food sources in their pursuit of profits.

Luckily, they can no longer get their hands on 2,4-D Amicide 50. Mmmm....wonder how many defenceless beasts and humans they bumped off when they threw this toxin around with relish but quickly tittle-tattled to the "regulators" when those "loony luddites" objected to being poisoned.

But......then again, the Yabby Dabby Do's are gifted with such a fount of knowledge - the all-seeing, all-knowing, revered gurus of our food bowl. One must expect some collateral damage in pursuit of maximum profits, mustn't one?

Dickie.

Your a dag - but a nice one. Yabbs loves to get you going of course but he has actually also contributed in his own way. He is telling it like it is for farmers that he knows as neighbours and friends which is also helpful. On top you have another real! farmer who also posts.

Then we have some of the wonderful work done by Lyn White and Animals Australia.

Of course we PALE are coming in on again another angel which is working with Australian Muslim Leaders and RSPCA QLD.

We cant do it without everybody working together Dickie.

With respect to Animals Australia neither can they.

Getting of foot with farmers is not the way to improve animal welfare- trust me.

Dickie I would like to share a letter from Minister Mcgauran John
Howard and Mark Vaile re the alternative to live Animals exports in brief.

[" Your proposal is interesting, in principle. I understand that you have been asked by both my office and the offfice of Hon Mark vaile MP, deputyPrime Minister and Minister of Trade, to provide further details of your proposal so that it can be fully considered.
I would encourage you to work towards this goal.etc etc.]

Ok Dickie its not a free kick for a goal however 'if" We provide a sensible business plan it is the only alternative put up to Government.
Doing a biz plan that may be adopted "as policy for Government" is something we DO need assistance with.

For the life of me I get so frustred that Animals Australia Vioceless refuse! to work towards this with us.

I have in the past invited them all to attend meetings with AFIC our lawyers RSPCA QLD only to be shuned.

You tell me then is this is the ONLY alternative on the table and we have Muslim Leaders of Australia strongly supporting it- Why they refuse?
I am sure you dont know Dickie
Nor I. Nor I

Pale - thank you for those flattering words. You say Yabby Dabs has contributed to the welfare of our hapless farm animals in "his own way". What do you mean by that?

Did he co-sign your letter to Ministers McGauran and Vaille and our Prime Minister? Has he officially objected to the cruel treatment of live exports?

Has he lobbied governments for economic solutions whereby animals and farmers may both prosper?

Has he objected officially to the heinous intensive farming of pigs?

Why does he support the barbaric surgery performed on cattle?

And why is he constantly posting in his endeavours to ridicule those who (with no vested interests) find the immoral farming treatment and live exports of our Australian animals, unacceptable?

I am disappointed that you have alluded several times to some dissension within animal welfare groups. I trust these glitches can be resolved since dissent amongst ourselves will be viewed gleefully by the Yabby Dabby Do's who are desperate to see us exterminated in their quest to maintain the disgraceful status quo.

"Luckily, they can no longer get their hands on 2,4-D Amicide 50"

Given how badly informed you are Dickie, its pretty easy to be
a fount of knowledge :) Amicide 50 is freely available. Some
restrictions were placed on Ester 80, because of spray drift.
WA farmers protested, because that might be an issue in
the ES, with lots of piddly sized farmers dotted everwhere,
but in WA its not an issue. So Ester 80 is available under permit.

Those who want herbicide free crops grown are free to buy them,
as long as they pay double the price for the grain. Handweeding
broadacre crops is not an option, given labour costs. Mind you,
I know a few so called organic farms who have a hard time coping
without something like Roundup, as their farms become overrun
with various noxious weeds.

So they cultivate their soils more, which then causes them to
wash and blow away :(

Australia uses far less farm chemicals then say the US or
Europe. Mind you, its housewives who are doing the demanding that
more are used. Watch them sort through the fruit and veggies
at Coles, fruit with any tiny blemish is left behind as
rejected. So buyers insist on ever more blemish free product,
which means more chemicals of course.

Given that our average life expectancy is longer then ever
before, I think that you have your knickers in a twist about
not much. We are all going to die Dickie, including you, so
get used to it :)

Dickie-

Wasnt flattering, just truthful. This isnt your best work.
I posted the `only` alternative to live exports pointing out it needs everybody to get behind it.

Your words of wisdom to groups should be shared with Animals Australia.
The five page spread in the Australian about the RSPCA kind of left the public in no doubt at the disunity of groups Dickie.

This disharmony has been around for over twenty years "well before we came along."

I called Glenys Oogjes several times years ago personally.

When I called to let her know we had decided to open PALE in conjunction with RSPCA QLD it was anything BUT friendly.

She said [ quote]"well if you want to know anything you will have to go through me because Andrew Bartlett will "only" work with "me."!

4. I replied that was fine- "wanting unity".[Even though we are in QLD and Andrews a QLD Senator and they in Melbourne.!]

Its hard to believe that we are meant to take people seriously when they have knocked back attending meetings with our lawyers Malaysian Government Deligates, AFIC and others.

As for Yabby - Actually he has written to different papers and others in regards to opening more plants in WA.

He however is a little naive and too trusting. He like most Australians and sadly farmers believes what he reads.

Farmers Federations SHOULD be delighted about the co joint ventures and the oportunities for their members. However they dont want to know about it.
There is too much vetted interests and conflicts of interests in the live animal trade starting with the media!
Yabby is yet to fully understand "that" and the "connection" with his journalists who travel on the "occasional" ship.

Yabby at least exchanges posts with us which is far more than live exporters would do.
Look at the AVA to Stop Live Exports its THEIR job.
Rally out the front of AVA if your all serious and some of the media gaints who have conflicts of interests.
Allow the PUBLIC and members of groups to speak instead of just Animal group leaders!

Ah....yes, Yabby Dabby. Perhaps I drifted off for a wee while, omitting to investigate the PGA's influence against the ban on 2,4-D where this powerful group categorically objected to the ban on this chemical when your Mr Slade Brockman stated that regulators were "more obsessed with the Precautionary Principle" and the WA Farmers Federation described the ban as "draconian".

It matters not that regulators were concerned that exposure to this chemical has the potential to cause human birth defects, non-hodgkins lymphona, soft tissue sarcoma, carcinogenicity in animals and other chronic effects.

And of course many of us remember the blitzing of Yarram where 3,000 paralysed cattle were shot and buried and the subsequent cover-ups after the Lands Department sprayed with 2,4-D Amicide 50 .

Perhaps you would like to debate the science of 2,4-D which contains the lethal biocumulative, transboundary chemicals dioxins and furans. The Stockholm Convention on the "dirty dozen" chemicals for global banning included these dioxins/furans where eminent participants agreed that these must be eliminated or drastically reduced.

And of course, the consumers of your products continue to ingest dioxins and furans through the food chain. Ah......it matters not to the Yabby Dabbys though. No point in lobbying for safer chemicals - it costs too much! That was the reason the PGA objected to the ban!

Seemingly, with farmers' insistence on using chlorine based chemicals, it matters not also that rural women in Australia have a higher rate of breast cancer. And all that "fresh" air too.

But of course Yabby, with your obssession about death, you constantly remind posters that : "we all have to die sometime so get used to it".

Dickie.

Although your off topic `by your own request` take it from us-

Your fanstic!

If you are not running something then you should! be.

Thats what I mean about you your real and you have the guts to go for it!
Here`s the Dickie we have all grown to respect. Thats the good work I refered to.

Anytime you would consider running a PALE group in conjunction with RSPCA QLD just let us know.

We would pay most of your costs.

I am not `going to even try` to debate this issue with youself and Yabby because you are well over my head.

The only thing I would add is Saffron was used by old farmers to reder animals kindly to sleep instead of 1080 but thats off topic again.

Dickie please consider meeting our overseas investors looking into joint farms and abattoirs in Australia and FREE RANGE FARMS

We would assist

It would involve meeting and greeting Muslim delegates at air ports.

You would attend a meeting with Muslim Leaders of Australia and State Government officers after arranging to these delegates to meet farmers and abattoir owners.

Once a deal is signed- you receive a donation by way of a small percentage and "you" get to say where these funds go- providing of course its used towards animal welfare.

I sincerly encourage you to work with RSPCA QLD AFIC and us to introduce a good alternative to live exports.

We also encourage Free Range Farms in the same manner.


You are a leader but I dont think you know it.

Dont wait for Animals Australia to give you consent to do something you know you can do or anybody else. Your leadership material Dickie.

Also be HAPPY to assist setting up the Dickie Animal Welfare foundation of Australia-

Thank you for all your posts over the months regarding Animal Welfare In Australia Dickie

Signed by-
President of People Against live Animal Exports and Intensive Farming in conjunction with RSPCA QLD and AFIC- Australian Federation Of Islamic Councils

Dickie, the way you are going, you are goint to die of worry :)

24D has been used around the world for 60 years, yet people
are living longer then ever. Of course the PGA and FF stood
up for farmers, that is their role!

Any chemical if misused, can be dangerous. Drink enough coffee
or salt, they will kill you. The principle is the point.

For people like you, who are worryworts, pay extra and you can
buy whatever you want. Grain can be grown free of herbicides,
it just costs twice as much. So user pays, fair enough.

Meantime around the world enough health authorities arn't
concerned like you are, 24d is used all over the place.

I have no obsession with death, but an acceptance of death,
its going to happen, so why worry about it. Better off to just
enjoy the journey, here and now. I also have no intentions
of turning 95, mentally deranged, with my arse being wiped
by some poor worker in a home. Much better a good old heart attack
well before that :)

Yabby Dabby Do. You have little comprehension of the research being performed by eminent health experts around the world on biocumulative chemicals.

Collusion amongst influential farm lobbying groups, regulators and governments purely for economic gain is well known and your lack of integrity is clearly apparent in these posts.

Your ignorant commentary leads me to suggest that you really should put a sock in it.

Do you ever perform any farm work between blathering on issues of which you know little?

"Collusion amongst influential farm lobbying groups, regulators and governments "

Sheesh, all these conspiracy theories once again! Show me
an analysis of various samples of WA grown grain, to show
its full of the toxins you are concerned about.

Some anxious types do constantly jump to conspiracy
theory conclusions, it just seems part of their nature.
Fear of everything! Sounds like you are one of them.
Thats your problem. Most of us normal people are not
like that. Perhaps you just need a cup of tea and
a snooze :)

The Only topic that should interest all was meant to be helping animals and farmers.
I raised the conflict of interest in MLA Farmers Federations- no Interest.
I raised the mineral, being exported and converted to water for ME feilds golf courses thinking wow surley farmers and animal lovers will want to know about this. No Interest.

I raised the invitation from the Minister and Prime Ministers office regarding co joint ventures No Interest.

I raised the submishion from AFIC into the animal welfare enquiry No Interest
I raised the fact that Salvation Army drought appeal for farmers claim they cant help farmers with water or feed because Peter Costellos office wont let them?[ I thought 'that might" get a few comments] No Interest.

It seems to me I am waisting my time on this thread

I havent been back to read this for a little while, and perhaps no-one else will either. Buit just in case, I do have a comment in regards to the use of 2,4D in the eastern states. Yes, spray drift is a problem. Who doesnt like it? Cotton farmers! Cotton turns up its leaves at the mere suggestion of 2,4D, and cotton is grown throughout NSW and southern QLD. I understand that amine is still going to be available, its just ester that will be banned. Its a very effective broadleaf killer (which is why cotton, which is easy to kill to start with, doesnt like it.

Dickie, chemical regulation is very tight. That said, there are still a number of rather nasty chemicals in use, although they are more nasty to the person using them. But if farmers want to run the risks associated with actually using the chemicals (risk of skin contact, inhalation etc), then I suggest that this is up to them. If you are worried about chemicals on your fruit and veg, then wash them - this is recommended whether you buy organic or not.

Many thanks Country Gal for that revelationary advice where you recommend that I wash my fruit and vegetables. However, my interest in chemical use, is far more altruistic than you and Yabby Dabby Doo would want to believe.

It is interesting how, in this developed country, the use of 2,4-D is treated so casually when Denmark, Norway and Kuwait have banned this product from entering their countries. Other nations severely restrict its use.

That reminds me of the gung ho attitude in Australia to the previous use of DDT, chlordane, heptachlor, 2,4,5-T, PCB's etc etc where scientists failed to advise that most of these chemicals were carcinogens and already banned in other countries. However, the "tight" regulatory Australian authorities promoted the continued use of these toxins and the adverse environmental and human health impacts remain with us to this day.

It's a pity your risk assessment of 2,4-D failed to consider others who are also exposed to this chemical such as workers who prepare them for sale, farm animals, residents and other workers who live in close proximity.

Farmers were particularly ignorant where organchlorines were used with gusto for use in sheep dips and many farmers have already paid dearly for that ignorance.

Yet they continue to use the potentially lethal diazinon (an organophosphate), despite many years of international expert warnings over its adverse human health impacts.

I fear there remains little hope for any improvement in the treatment of the hapless, pained animals in the care of these hill-billies.

Perhaps if somebody started a thread on farming methods it would be a good idea.
We certainly need input from Aussie farmers
.
The bottom line is we must all be prepaired to learn from each other.

This thread was put up about live exports but anything learned is connected of coursel.

I found out we do have a plant in melbourne to convert the minerals I mentioned for water use.

Might be worth some of the farmers hearing about this method and giving their thoughts about it.

At the moment most is going to the ME as I said before.

I do wish Animals Australia and anybody else serious about fazing out live exports would look at this proposal put forward.

After all if the Ministers and JH can find time why not them.?
Its so dissapointing to work hard to find alternatives for these other organisations to just thumb their noses at it.

Everytime we put up these alternatives and offers for help people head for the hills.
If you care about live exports then at least debate it for the animals sake.
If we say one word that this attitude is not good enough and not helping animals you rush to lawyers Animals Australia.
Then why not debate this knowing we are working to the same end as you - to help animals.
Bagging farmers is just what you dont do - with respect.
it only breaks down any posibilty to work together with them.
Just How? Do you think thats! ever going to help animals.

Please help us to establish free range pork farms for example- Then you can really tell people ftto only buy free range pork. At the moment there is little.
Look forward to seeing a farmers advise thread.
goodnight All
PS Katrina- Say Something-= Anything. You too lyn Nicky everybody.
For the Animals!

Kuwait Dickie?

ROFL. Sheesh, you must be desparate, to quote Kuwait as a reason
for Australia to change its policies.

Perhaps we should emulate Kuwait when it comes to womens rights :)

One thing about our Dickie. She keeps commenting about issues
which she clearly knows very little about. At least she is
consistant :)

Dickie, I suggest that you get off your butt and go and spend
some time on a real life farm out there and learn something about
farming. Armchair critics, who don't have the foggiest, are a dime
a dozen. We simply ignore them and excuse their ignorance.

"Desparate"? "Consistant"? What the *#**@??

Hi all
Been away for a bit, and have only just caught up. I'll summarize my thought on the recent posts; Dickie I'm with you on everything, LL too. PALE, it must be some time since your correspondence from Mark Vaile because he has not been Minister for Trade since John Anderson quit, Warren Truss (God knows why) got elevated far far beyond his level of incompetence and Vaile got Transport.
Yabby, I agree with Dickie,I cannot begin to imagine what contribution you could ever have made to animal welfare, nor Country Gal either for that matter. Your naivete is just mindblowing when you use the terminology "objective vets" and live exports in the same sentence; these people have a commercial interest in the trade and often are vets who can't get jobs doing anything else. It's like describing Cameron Morse (Editor of Countryman) as an impartial/objective journalist. Get over it.
I'm at a loss as to how pesticides and chemicals found their way to this thread, or dogs chasing rabbits, for that matter. Human nature and minds wandering, I guess. I'm not actually into latte or chamomile tea, either really, and my dogs, although they live on the outskirts of a city, do not get dragged around the block on chains (they don't kill rabbits either. That might because I feed them properly though, Country Gal).
Farmers and animal welfare are basically oxymorons. There is NO difference between the pain or fear a dog or cat feels, or that of a sheep or a cow - it's just that you people can get away with brutalizing sheep and cattle (and pigs and chickens) with "surgery" without anaesthesia, and other egregious cruelty for which you would be prosecuted if it were a companion animnal. Again, get over your claims of caring.
Nicky.

Sorry - for the benefit of Yabby and Country Gal, and possibly Perseus, "oxymoron" means a fundamental contradiction in terms. Saves you looking it up.
Nicky

Nicky.
Yes we are aware of what Mark Vaile `is doing now` and that Warren Truss has been put in the job.

Actually it us who had to convince Glenyse several years ago that it wasnt Truss they she be aiming at but Mark Vaile.

She disputed it over the phone.
I got so sick of it I got It in Writing From the Queen> the Prince and the Gov See>>
http://www.livexports.com/queen.html
http://www.livexports.com/prince.html
http://www.livexports.com/letter3.html

Finally we got it through that [at that time ]Truss was only Minister for Agriculture but Vaile and Downer were Ministers for trade. That Trade! drived the live animal ships along "the deals" that spun off the backs of the animals. Deal for Deals. The cruel Live Animal Export Trade is so tired up with deals off deals the Government are the only ones to start to unravel it.

I dont change names all the time because I feel its more important for the public to learn the basics.

“Why can’t organisations concerned about cruelty to animals cooperate more closely together in Australia? In particular, why won’t Animals Australia work with us?


In 2003 PALE made a submission to the Senate along with Australian Federation of Islamic Councils which would have increased the carcass trade at the expense of live shipments. Animals Australia refused to support it, even though they claim to support the carcass trade.

Then last year some animal rights organisations knew about the breakdown of a ship in Australian waters carrying live animals. Even though the animals were suffering because of lack of power to drive airconditioning etc. They kept the information from us. We found out and gave the story to a journalist.

In an effort to get closer to them, I joined AA. They subsequently cancelled my membership.”

Mind you it was something somebody Else said.
It was asking 'Why' we were not contacted over a ship that was stuck in WA waters.

You see Antje being the wonderful lady she is had personally called Glenyse asking he to work together just days before.

This Forum as far as I am concerned is to educate the public.

When people read it I would like them to see less bickering and more facts regarding what can be done to change it for the animals.

I am not going to hide the fact that Animals Australia Lawyers have written and complained about PALE Nicky.Dont you find that odd Nicky?
They know! how hard we fight for Animals. Are you not just a little curious?

We tried for years to get everybody working together.
Lets face it Nicky take you for example. We told you about the interest from the Prime Minister and the now Minister for agriculture towards the co joint venture and requesting us to provide more detail.

Sure its not much but at least its something. Its something towards maybe getting them to start to re think some sort of new policy.

We asked you if we could pay you five thousand to help us as you are very good with your writing pluss we are busy with farmers AFIC RSPCA QLD.

You showed little interest. We asked Animals Australia more times than Yabbys had girlfriends but no- not interested.

For God Sake even Andrew Bartlett who called the Senate Enquiry into Animal Welfare is standing back.

I think the only reason for that is he is afraid of upsetting the libbers and loosing votes.

So you tell me Nicky.

When are `you` going to actually help and come up with some ideas instead of just bagging Yabby Pale etc.?

How does that help Animals?

Animals Australia have done some great things Nicky and I am the first to say it, espeically since Lyn White Joined them.

However this is NOT a competition and we all need to work together and actually produce the alternatives.

The live Exporters sure as hell wont!

Lets stop talking and start doing by US opening more plants.

Start by Writing to your State Members who have each the power of Minister For Trade in each State of Australia.

You have talent- Use it please! for the Animals!

Nicky, I am well aware that you and Dickie are two of a kind. Both
know little about the difference between farm livestock and family
pets. Both seem to dislike farmers and both know zilch about
farming.

Perhaps you girls should buy a couple of sheep each and have a
go at housetraining them. You might learn the difference the
hard way :)

Females seem to dominate the animal libber groups. Compensating
for maternal hormomes perhaps?

Yabby says: "Females seem to dominate the animal libber groups".

This thread on live animal exports reveals some 11 posters whose signatures would be regarded as masculine and only 3 clearly feminine names plus PALE which equals 4.

He claims that females post on this thread to compensate for "maternal hormomes (sic)".

May I suggest to the incoherent and confused Yabby, that his inane commentary reveals symptons of a condition commonly referred to as "penilepause"? Treatment is now available for men's secret business.

I recommend that any surgical procedures required for his depressing ailment be rendered without the benefit of an anaesthetic. He should be hog-tied to prevent any attempts at escaping, providing it does not hinder the surgeon. Otherwise a steel "crush" would be a most appropriate restraint.

Perhaps he may then give consideration to the biblical edict of retributive justice .......... "an eye for an eye".

Dickie, I recently read a study which showed that high oxytocin
levels make women more gullible. Perhaps thats your problem lol,
if you think that people who post, insist on using their own
gender, when choosing a nick. High oxytocin types, apart
from strong mothering instincts, also want to teach and
lecture everyone else, even when they know zilch. Perhaps
you should get your levels checked :)

I remind you that millions of men have been circumsized without
anesthetic. Perhaps you should wander out on the streets and
give a few of them a big hug, as they would clearly be
suffering from lifelong trauma :)

Dickie Nicky

All good people who have posted on OLO.

As Yabby Might Say shheez. Why cant animal welfare welfare minded people work together a little more.

Dickie and I mentioned earlier some of your comments especially on other threads show protential. Nicky is well informed.
Lyn White and Merko Likewise and the many others.

Nobody knows more than myself how upsetting it is to see animals mistreated.
However especially because of that we need to work together and not against each other.

For the animals sake I put it to you that emotional outburst 'that we have all been guilty of' including myself from time to time does nothing to enhance our efforts to convince the public to support us all to change things for animals.

Although there are not hundreds of posters on this thread it is read by hundreds- even thousands.

Why cant Animal Welfare groups learn to work together and their members.

In particular I will ask why wont Animals Australia work with PALE?

In 2003 and again in 2005 pale along with RSPCA QLD submitted a report to the Senate enquiry which would have increased the carcuss trade to the expense of live trade.

On top of that AFIC in conjunction with us also did like wise.

Yet nobody wanted to know about it including Andrew Bartlett.

Is it because we are working to reopen abattoirs to faze outlive exports?- and if so could somebody tell me if they have a better idea?

PALE in conjunction with RSPCA QLD has also let it be known we are fortunate enough to have several lawyers as members and have offered some services many times[ time depending]
Strange no takers.

We have asked so many times for the others groups and people to help us contact farmers Australia wide to firstly help as many as we can with feed and water and secondly- let them know about the cojoint ventures to re open abattoirs and encourage more free range farmers. Again nobody wanted to know.

So I am just wondering what you people do want?

For The Animals

Why Am I not Surprsised-No Reply.
Well I am only left after years to come to the conclusion that the- real aim behind some groups is to turn everybody into Veggies.

Nice thought but not much help to the suffering animals.

Now I dont reckon anybody could be that dumb for over twenty years, which is about the lenghth of time some of these lot have been around.
So do these groups have a political agenda one wonders?

Should we actually be taking public donations as animal welfare organisations to pay wages to oneselves?

I guess so. But the counter arugument for that would have to be "only if it is showing some sort of benefit " to the cause.

In this case its meant to be the animals.

You know what is a fact. The fact is nobody wants to help re open a abattoirs and open new free range pork farms and poultry farms to compete with the intensive cruel corp lot.

Oh they say they support carcuss - but is that really the case.

Maybe Peter Costello should take a closer look at where all these donations from the public end up.

The proof is in the pudding. I can say for years none of you including Andrew wish to help to reopen plants to faze out live exports.
So Yes its an extrordiary situation that needs a much closer look.

Yabby raised the issue of bitching amoungst women.

He hit the nail on the head.

For God sake if you all must pay somebody let some blokes take the leading role because you lot are doing more damage than good with your childish comments[ Lyn excluded]
Hey and before you wrote back picking on the spelling. I do it on purpose. It makes me feel closer the Clancy- but u lot wouldnt get that!