http://theland.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/livestock/news/article/86111.aspx

News National Rural News Livestock News Have your say on national animal welfare land transport standards Have your say on national animal welfare land transport standards
1/05/2008 5:07:00 PM
The Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries is urging north Queenslanders to have a say on proposed Australian standards for the welfare of animals for the aand transport of livestock.
Local transport operators, livestock industry organisations, veterinarians, animal welfare groups, saleyard agents, stock managers, railway officials and members of the public are encouraged to have their say on the new standards, which are undergoing consultation until May 27.

Local DPI&F regional project leader, Ian Rodger, said the standards and guidelines will replace the multiple existing national Model Codes of Practice for transport.

"The standards and guidelines will cover the transport of cattle, sheep, horses, goats, deer, alpacas, pigs, camels, buffalo, poultry and ratites (emus and ostriches)," Mr Rodger said.

"Animal Health Australia, the organisation conducting the consultation, is seeking comments on how well people believe the new standards provide the necessary specifications for the protection of livestock during land transport, and I encourage everyone in the north to have their say.

"They want to know if the associated Regulatory Impact Statement demonstrates the need for the new standards and identifies the key costs and benefits to industry, government and the community."

If the public do not speak up the dreadful lack of control over the indusrty will continue

we urge you to speak up and mAKE the government answerable for their turning a bline eye to how these animals are treated.
Its time now to stop this idea that someone else will do it.

Yep, I think you're right. Very few people will bother. Food is getting expensive enough. Now you want to impose MORE regulations which will, in the end, create a greater cost for the final product. Sweet as, thanks for that.

How about creating more jobs for inspectors to police the welfare of animals.

Dear PALE&IF,

I fully agree with you and the RSPCA that the drafting of National Standards and Guidelines for the welfare of animals is a positive development, provided that they result in improved welfare outcomes for transported animals.

Equally important, though, is that State and Territory Governments adopt the endorsed Standards into legislation ASAP to ensure consistent regulation of animal welfare during transport.

I sent an email stating my views to:

consultation@animalwelfarestandards.net.au

Written submissions for those wishing to make a comment have to be received by 27th May 2008 at the following address:

Animal Welfare Standards Public Consultation
PO BOX 196
DICKSON ACT 2602

Fax: 07 5429 8486

General Enquiries: info@animalwelfarestandards.net.au

Come on people - do it for the animals.

I don't think people care about anything until it costs them a dollar.
It's plain & simply the result of ever lessening morals which so many refuse to accept that it happens. All the consumer is interested in is readily available prime food on the supermarket shelf. How it gets there is of no consequence, especially if it's cheap.
The suffering of an animal is nothing at all to most. Just look at your average jetty when fishers leave their catch flapping in agony till it just dies.
So far as the live sheep trade to the middle east goes I'd like to suggest the price of those sheep rise in unison with the price of oil.

I believe that creating new employment for australian's in this area can save many animal's as animals sent oversea's suffer stress and death due to transport. Instead process the sheep and cattle here in australia then freeze the meats for export as this will keep the meats fresh and increase export weight of meats and customers are then buying higher quality meats that are not stressed due to export.David H

Pale

I note this document contains over 100 pages. A cursory glance reveals the usual "mays" and "shoulds" and while I intend posting a written submission, I confess my cynicism has at this stage, got the better of me. I believe this exercise will again protect the industry and not the animals.

Standards and guidelines are unenforceable. Slick bureaucrats know this and I'm constantly amazed at the massive waste of resources used in writing crocks of unenforceable, unlegislated poppy cock which goes nowhere and are simply an exercise in bureaucratic spin.

Therefore "standards" and "guidelines" have got Buckleys I'm afraid, however for those who may think I am being emotive, I ask you to ask yourself why Australia is the largest polluter per capita on the planet, given there are EPA Acts all over the country to "protect" the industry......errr that should read "environment" from hazardous industrial chemicals.

Then ask yourself why, despite all the State Animal Welfare Acts, Australia is seen as one of the cruellest countries in the world in the treatment of its animals? Just today, a sadist was let off scot free after he'd cut off a kitten's head.

Yesterday a couple evaded arrest by escaping with up to a hundred dogs which they had mistreated and incarcerated under the most appalling conditions.

Since we are advised that this review is to improve the welfare of animals, I intend asking why legislation for livestock, long overdue, is not in the planning. In addition, if this department is concerned about animal welfare in this country why the gag in this review on the issue of transport for live exports, particularly in light of the disgraceful outcome for the hapless animals under the "care" of Emanuel Exports?

Do not be intimidated by the jaberwonky bureau-speke these slicksters adopt when cornered.

As Pale says: "Say something for God sake." These bureaucrats are running our country as THEY choose, simply because our comments go no further than our very comfortable armchairs.