Why? It all goes back to the root of the present crime wave and of the crime waves that are coming in gigantic proportions.

Western civilisation is crumbling because The Bible was taken out of schools, as was the cane.

Thus we have a generation devoid of a rock solid foundation based on immovable moral standards... and respect for elders.

Nicky, as a retired old bloke, I live in somewhat less comfort than I could, if I moved to town. But I am still here so my kids old show jumpers can live out their time in comfort.

I love animals, but while armed robbers, who stick a gun in some poor service station attendants face get a suspended sentence, you are whistling in the wind on penalties. When drug addicts, & drunks, who kill people with a car they should not be driving, avoid jail time, your poor little dog doesn't get a look in, my book.

Until we the public, get to elect our judges, no penalties will fit the crime.

When it comes to sheep, why does it matter to you, where they were breed. Do Ozy sheep feel pain more than other sheep. An attack on WA farmers does nothing for thousands of sheep in the ME.

If you want to stop these practices, go & do so. If you won't do that, its just another meaningless rant at Ozy producers, from a pretty gutless activist.

Nicky
I agree we are selective when it comes to animal cruelty. As you say, most of us would react in horror at the torture of a puppy or 'pet' but when it comes to livestock it does not create the same sense of outrage.

Maybe it is because pets are perceived as man's friend and something that is there for our enjoyment hence we show compassion. While sheep are seen purely in terms of business and profit.

It is a form of selective humanity and pretty selfish when you think about it.

Nicky,
i will tell you the same as I told Pale, on the other thread. The only way to stop live exports is to have the stock slaughtered here.

Now abbatiors have closed and investors won't put up funds to reopen or build new facilities simply because it is not viable. Have you asked the question as to why live exporters can pay much more to farmers that mutton suppliers can. Are mutton suppliers making a huge profit? I think not. Mutton suppliers cannot match the prices offered by live exporters simply because they cannot, and stay viable.

A few facts. The economic life of sheep is about 5 years, after which their incisor teeth fall out or are worn out. If kept longer they will die of starvation, being unable to eat. Farmers have to dispose of them before then, while they are in good condition. Therfore a farmer has to sell about 20% of his sheep each year. Either breeding or buying replacements. Last figures I saw was that the sale of these sheep ammounted to 30-40% of his income. He has no alternative but to sell for the best price he can get.

Much of the sheep industry is on country that is unsuitable for other enterprizes so there is no alternative to wool/sheep growing.

It is not other taxpayers funds that are used by various government agencie for improvrments to overseas handling/training facilities. It all comes from levies that farmers and other industry interests pay to do this. So don't critisize farmers for taking the best possible price for stock he has to sell or suggest ordinary taxpayers are subsidizing the industry.

If I,or Yabby, can see reason to dispute what you claim then,you are really doing yourself a disservice by lowering your credability.

You raise the puppy's cruelty to eke sympathy from people. It has nothing to do with the subject. I call it the Bambi factor.

Actually, Banjo, it's called speciesism. Some animals are definitely more equal than others. Some are fortunate enough to be under our tables not on them in pieces, and share our homes, others are regarded as commodities, and only worth consideration in terms of their dollar value. So we treat them in grossly cruel ways that we would not tolerate for a minute our "pets". Yes, I object to that. We owe them a merciful life and a merciful death if that has to be the case, and there is nothing merciful about putting them on ships for 3-4 weeks and sending them to butchers half-way across the world

And really, how smart is Australia? There is plenty of evidence that these countries are importing Australian animals, processing them, and exporting the meat to other countries. Middle Eastern importers also on-sell them to other countries. If you want to think on the macro, rather than just the simple micro level, think millions in lost GDP.

And if it is farmers' funds that are being put into "animal welfare" in importing countries (the greatest con of all), where is Tony Burke getting all the money the government claims to be "investing" in this, if not from the taxpayer? Like I said - they have no right to put this shame on MY conscience.

Hasbeen, I hear what you're saying too, but this has to start somewhere. There was a post at one of the WA newspapers from a Middle Eastern contributor, who clearly stated that Australian animals DO suffer more than the "domestic" animals in the Middle East because they are treated far worse (and are more terrorised). At least if millions less Australian animals are being sent there, they are being "processed" (gotta love the euphemism for slaughter) here, and it's a beginning. At the times Australia has stopped sending animals (Saudi Arabia in the 1990's and 2003-4, and sheep to Egypt in the last year) frozen meat imports have risen dramatically.

Nicky

It is disturbing to note that the detractors on this thread refuse to acknowledge the cruelty perpetrated on commercial animals and continue to use dismissive phrases to gag any criticism on live exports.

It is equally disturbing to find seemingly educated people displaying bullying, suppressive and unevolved attitudes in the face of the indisputable proof of cruelty to these animals.

I am amazed that the same people expect to use my tax dollar to support a trade whose main ingredient for viability is animal brutality.

Today’s West published an article advising that the Federal government proposes to cease aid to farms worth more than $3 million dollars

The vociferous WA Pastoralists and Graziers Association attacked the proposed $3 million benchmark and astonishingly, spokesman Edgar Richardson bragged in protest, “Three million dollars is a back paddock for some people.”

Hasbeen is clearly ill-informed when he accuses Nicky of selectively attacking WA farmers over live exports. Rest assured the objections to live exports and long distance haulage of live animals is resonating around the world. Ordinary people from many nations are speaking out in defence of these hapless animals. In a recent survey, nearly 90% expressed their disgust at this trade yet Hasbeen and Banjo maintain a blinkered view, quashing and diminishing any comment on the subject.

Banjo claims “much of the sheep industry is on country that is unsuitable for other enterprizes (sic) so there is no alternative to wool/sheep growing.” I can only assume that his knowledge of Australia’s ecology is extremely poor. The desecrated condition of these lands is a direct result of grazing invasive sheep and cattle. With remediation, these lands have many alternative uses.

Whilst both Banjo and Hasbeen believe animal cruelty is good, the Garnaut Report states that Australia needs to move away from growing export animals and meat products under the carbon mitigation scenarios.

The feeble attempts by those with vested interests, to discourage and make people feel powerless will fail. An educated and informed public will not tolerate cowards who are disposed to inflicting pain on defenceless animals.

.