The need for mulesing is fully supported by the following:

Australian Farmers
The Australian Government.
The Royal Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals.
The Australian Veterinary Association.
The National Farmers Federation.

Mulesing remains the most effective practical way to eliminate the risk of ‘flystrike’ in sheep, caused by the Australian sheep blowfly.

It involves removing some skin on the backside of the sheep to prevent wool growth in an area that would otherwise see the fly lay its eggs. The maggots of the fly then borrow into the flesh of the sheep, eating the animal alive, causing it long-term pain, distress and, ultimately, death.

Independent university studies show that without mulesing up to 3,000,000 sheep a year could die a slow and agonising death from flystrike. The Australian Government, through the Chief Veterinary Officer, strongly supports the need for mulesing, as do the Royal Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals and the Australian Veterinary Association.

Mulesing is a legal and approved management practice carried out in the interests of the sheep. Nevertheless, Australia’s wool farmers have made a commitment to phase out mulesing by 2010. To do this, the sector has invested many millions of dollars in research and development to find and develop alternatives.

Some in the community have campaigned for the immediate halt to mulesing. Such a call is ill-informed and would be cruelly irresponsible. It must be understood that it takes time for researchers to develop practical alternatives, have them approved for use by Government authorities, and have them made commercially available. Hence, the 2010 timeframe.

Australia’s wool farmers are also working on selectively breeding sheep to reduce or eliminate the need for mulesing. In a long-lived slow breeding animal like sheep, the process of selection, testing and distribution of desirable characteristics through the Australian sheep flock is a long-term task.

Australian wool farmers produce wool to the highest animal welfare standards in the world. Australian farmers are committed to the continuing improvement of animal welfare standards… it is in their interests, and the interest of their sheep, to do so.

Ah Yabby you know very well I don't live in the city and that I in fact reside in rural Australia.

And is there no end to the lies and propaganda you and your brothers spread?

"Any thoughts of getting off your arse down there in the city Dickie,
and making sure that they are freely available for farmers to use?"

You go to great lengths to covet your profits at the expense of tormeted animals Yabby and as a farmer who peddlies in live exports, you spend all day on OLO. It's a hard life eh?

The DAFF report - a "Review of Rural Veterinary Services" states:

"E.3 First, Australia’s animal health needs are being met on a day-to-day basis but Australia’s animal health system will need to be enhanced to meet more stringent requirements for international trade in the future. .....

"E.4 Second, there is no current crisis in the availability of veterinarians. However, rural veterinarians have to contend with rising costs and a reluctance of producers to utilise their services...."

So the lies continue while the rouseabouts, armed with searing irons, knives, mechanical contraptions to force open a cow's vaginal passage to hack off her ovaries and shears to hack off cattles', sheep and pigs' testicles, crudely slice through an incarcerated animal's exterior to ensure that the maximum profits are achieved.

Tell me Yabby, why must we endure your tedious, inane and pitiful attempts at philosophy - truck loads of stupefying swill which is totally bereft of critical thought, morality or ethics?

You may dance with the devil Yabby - you will dance alone.

And you wonder why there are so many animal welfare organisations rapidly mobilising and expanding around the globe?

Myopinion

I originally confined my comments to your bizarre and ill-informed post to discuss PETA, but you cannot expect to get away with posting inflammatory material and not expect a response - is that not what discussion fora are for, for heavens sake? What a sensitive soul you must be. But think of the pain you have inflicted, by your own admission, on countless animals.

Posting AWI propaganda from August 2007 is fatuous and disingenuous, and demonstrates how poorly informed you are. When did you last read something relevant (see latest news www.liveexportshame.com)?

Three of the five "authorities" you cite as "supporting" mulesing are vested interests, one is the Australian government, which is totally deluded by the livestock industries and thus completely dispassionate about cruelty to farm animals, and the other is RSPCA Australia, whose statement on mulesing on its website is:-

"RSPCA Australia does not endorse or accept mulesing as an essential sheep husbandry procedure".

Yabby, again, you try to plead "isolated instances". There seem to be SUCH A LOT of these "isolated instances" - how unfortunate that is for you people. Isn't it something like 90%+ of Australian pigs and chickens living in "battery" conditions? I won't even start on the rest.

And why should we do anything about getting you people products you require in the course of your business? Your business, your problem, it is no-one's fault but your own that you fail to meet community expectations. You just have got away with it for too long, and it has taken PETA and Animals Australia to get the facts out there.

As for the "lost jobs" of which myopinion speaks, where were you people when the meat workers all lost their jobs? Thinking about your few extra bucks for all the unfortunate animals you shipped out of the country along with THOSE jobs, and THOSE families' livelihoods.

As for the live export industry being world's best practice, I'm npt even going to go there (again). There are just too many "isolated instances" of brutality and you know it.

Cheers
Nicky

*And why should we do anything about getting you people products you require in the course of your business? *

Well its you doing the complaining, that farmers don't use various
vet products, when we tail our lambs. If those products are not
available to farmers, they won't be used. Even you should be able
to understand that. All very simple really. So put up or shut up.

But then its not the community who is complaining about lamb tailing
etc, its a few fringe extremists like yuorselves, who really would
like to shut the livestock industry down, as part of your flawed
philosophy.

Isolated incidences is all that you highlight in your campaign.
Over and over again. Its all part of slick marketing to push
emotional buttons. Meantime none of you seem to know the first
thing about farm livestock procedures, why they are done or how
they are done. You have absolutaly no experience in the field.

Nicky and Dickie, both as fanatical as the Taliban.

"Well its you doing the complaining, that farmers don't use various
vet products, when we tail our lambs. If those products are not
available to farmers, they won't be used. Even you should be able
to understand that. All very simple really. So put up or shut up."

Yabby

This is your usual ploy to distract readers from the evidence. You have deliberately ignored the Department of Agriculture's review which I placed here on Wednesday advising:

"E.4 Second, there is no current crisis in the availability of veterinarians. However, rural veterinarians have to contend with rising costs and a reluctance of producers to utilise their services...."

Catch on Yabby? The department advises that producers are not utilising veterinary services.

The cruel surgical procedures and the endless agony you inflict on your livestock are for you, mere peccadilloes.

As a result, you and your sordid brothers are responsible for Australia's poor reputation and the loss of trading partners overseas. Media outlets all over Europe now condemn this nation for its barbaric practices.

You may continue on with your duckshoving but your allergy to truth will further enhance a belief in the international community that a nation which tortures its animals is morally repugnant and has no future.

*The department advises that producers are not utilising veterinary services.*

Err Dickie, in your ignorance you forget that unlike yourself,
farmers are not running the old ducks knitting club, but businesses
which have to pay their way. If they make a loss, they get sold up.
That might suit the veggie brigade, but does not happen to suit
people who have worked for generations to keep their farms.

Last time I checked, some friends in Perth had their pet lambs tail
removed by a vet, the fee was 80 bucks lol. Get it now?

Just to inform you further in your ignorance, no, there are not
enough vets to run around every farm, when farmers do some tailing.
Even if their service was offered free. Its hard enough just to
get a country vet to see a dog, let alone livestock. One of my
dogs nearly died, because of that very fact.

Farmers are accredited to use bullets, herbicides, 1080 and
various other substances. There is no good reason that the same
could not be done for vet products. I've told you before and I'll
tell you again. If you want farmers to use various vet products,
they will do so if made easily available and at reasonable cost,
which is affordable.

Now in your old peoples home they might not teach you about farm
budgeting and you know nothing about it, but rest assured that the
budget figures have to add up on a farm, like in any other business.

Clearly its a subject about which you don't have the foggiest, as
per usual.