The Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) is responsible for ensuring that all ships in Australian ports comply with s 6.6 of Appendix 4 of Marine Orders Pt 43, which required an effluent treatment plant or holding tank to be part of the vessel. In September 2008, AMSA issued orders under that section to prevent the 28 year old converted car transporter “Al Messilah” from proceeding from Fremantle to Portland to load a cargo of 72,000 sheep.

Rural Export and Trading (WA) Pty Ltd contested the order in the Federal Court on October 3 2008. Amongst its arguments were that this was a discriminatory action against foreign-flagged livestock carriers. RETWA operates the (even older) "Al Kuwait", and the 23 year old "Al Shuwaikh", (all Kuwaiti registered) and also uses the 30 year old ex-car transporter "Merino (aka Cormo) Express", registered in the Philippines.

It should be noted that there are no livestock carriers registered (flagged) in Australia; all, without exception, sail under “flags of convenience” such as Panama, obscure Caribbean nations and the Philippines, where requirements are far less stringent. The crews are from third world countries, and Hansard reports indicate that they are vessels of choice for crews "jumping ship".

To date, AMSA appears to have taken no further action, and it seems safe to assume that the other carriers operated by RETWA and KLTT would similarly lack proper provision for effluent disposal.

A FOI request to AMSA resulted in a request for payment for this information, and it was sourced from the Federal Court database. AMSA indicated at the time that it would consider further action but has been remarkably silent since. Given that these ships. and possibly others, are dealing with effluent from upwards of 100,000 animals, what is being done to protect Australian waters and harbours? This is a sad indictment on the Government's claimed commitments on several fronts.

Also in the news recently, thanks to PACAT (the ship in question is believed to be the "Al Kuwait"):

"Live animal exporter Graham Daws lost his fight to oppose the public release of an Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS) investigation report which audited some of the exporter’s high mortality shipments.

"The AQIS report was produced after a series of three high-mortality shipments between August and November 2005. The shipments, conducted by Mr Daws’ company Emanuel Exports Pty Ltd,resulted in the on-board deaths of 2.66%, 1.99% and 1.71% of exported sheep during the voyages
from Fremantle to the Middle East.

"The Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal found that Graham Daws and Emanuel Exports Pty Ltd had no legal reason to oppose the release of the AQIS report. Mr Daws opposed the public release of the AQIS report because he said it would be “damaging to the business” of Emanuel Exports Pty Ltd if the report was released.

"Deputy President Robert Nicholson considered that the business of Emanuel Exports Pty Ltd could not be damaged any further because much
of the information contained within the AQIS report had already been disclosed to parliament.

"Any further damage to the business of Emanuel Exports Pty Ltd would only be as a consequence of drawing attention to those facts of these high mortality shipments.

"Mr Daws gained notoriety in February 2008 when he and his company, Emanuel Exports Pty Ltd, narrowly escaped conviction for animal cruelty charges relating to a live export voyage in November 2003.

"Mr Daws represented himself and his company Emanuel Exports Pty Ltd in the AAT hearing on 24 October. The AQIS report is unlikely to be released until the expiry of Mr Daws’ appeal period"

It is further to be noted that Daws undertook a similar exercise in the AAT to have his activities concealed from public scrutiny as far back as 1991, when a journalist sought access to mortality reports. He got away with it that time, and probably thought he would again. Nice to see him get a comeuppance.

Nicky

Hi Nicky

Please enlighten me if you would. Are you saying that the Federal Court has waived the regulations for the Rural Export and Trading company, and they are permitted to discharge animal effluent into the Portland bay and that all other ships must comply with the Australian Maritime Safety Authority's regulations?

If that is correct, that these filthy old foreign wrecks, whose cargo is live animals, are discharging animal waste into Portland’s waters, then I believe an immediate appeal is warranted. Seemingly that is not going to happen. What, I wonder has been the state government’s response to this pollution? Nil, I expect.

There are many international bodies expressing grave concerns on the discharge of animal waste into our oceans. I believe that the State and Commonwealth Department of Environment has a duty to intervene.

I’m also astonished that the people of Portland have not raised objections particularly when this town is used as a holiday centre.

I'm equally astounded to learn that live exporter, Daws has been up to his tricks for decades.

On reflection, given the sordid operations of live exports, should we be surprised? Our sycophantic governments are captives to this foul industry, unfortunately.

Cheers

Hi Dickie
As I understand it (but I'm not an expert in Maritime Law), they can discharge pretty much anything they want 12klms out to sea of the coast. Remember that these ships can carry upwards of 100,000 animals and the amount of effluent that generates.

That would be in addition to animals who die between Portland and Fremantle.

Also to be noted is the fact that, in claiming "discrimination against foreign flagged livestock carriers", there are NO Australian flagged livestock carriers, so it seems safe to assume that this would not be the only one in breach of AMSA and MARPOL (International Maritime Laws) and regulations. It is one of the oldest, but not THE oldest.

It is a scandal, and is currently being explored with the media. The "Al Messilah" was last tracked (yesterday) some distance off the WA coast en route to Portland.

I wrote to AMSA asking what they were going to do about it, and - you guessed it - no reply.

Cheers
Nicky

How well are livestock carriers policed by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority?

From RSPCA RSPCA QLD WEb Site

Often packed so tightly that they cannot lie down, many animals are trampled to death, or starve if unable to reach feed troughs. At the very least, they face exposure to exhaustion, disease, excessive temperatures, humidity, hunger, thirst and suffocation.

Tens of thousands of Australian animals die every year on these journeys, while countless more suffer as a result of these conditions.
The End

Anna Bligh: Premier of Queensland Seems to have no interest in Animal Cruelty.
When are the Premiers of each State Going To address these issues.

QLD Exports a Lot Of Cattle in case you hadnt noticed Premier yet a quick search of sites shows no interest.

Its very concerning also Premier of QLD and others to drive along and see Rodoes Heavily promoted by your councils.

Do we have a situation where Premier is prepaired to shun their State RSPCA.

QLD Elections are just around the corner.

Is their another option between todays Premier and the awful Lawence Springbourge of the National Party who strongly supports the cruel live animal trade.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,20797,24965843-3102,00.html?from=public_rss

What about our Waters from the effluent Premiers!