 |
Click here to watch video |
Petition to Ban Live Sheep
Export
The Urgent Need for
a Permanent Ban on Mulesing and Live Sheep Exports in the Australian Wool
Industry Based on Animal Welfare Concerns
Australia is home to the
world’s largest population of merino sheep, producing more than 50 percent
of the world’s merino wool supply (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2003).
Any wool labeled merino has thus quite likely come from Australian sheep,
who suffer immeasurably both during and after the wool-production process.
Recent scientific publications, investigative footage, and news reports
from Australia reveal the horrors of inhumane industry practices such as
mulesing, as well as the cruelty involved in live exports, which claim
more than 6 million sheep per year and largely depend on the wool
industry. The many abuses that these practices entail cause intense
suffering and should be eliminated.
The Mulesing Mutilation
Mulesing is practiced primarily on merino lambs and
involves the stripping away of large areas of skin and flesh from sheep’s
hindquarters so as to prevent the growth of wool. It is performed as a
preventive measure against a painful condition called “flystrike,” which
occurs when the eggs of blowflies laid in woolly areas of sheep’s skin
hatch into maggots, leading to infestation and, eventually, death by
ammonia poisoning. Blowflies are especially prone to laying their eggs in
the breech area of merino sheep because the many folds of skin that
characterize this breed tend to accumulate moisture, feces, and urine,
especially when covered with wool. Mulesing is highly abusive, causing
both acute and chronic pain, and unjustifiable, especially given the
availability of more humane flystrike-prevention
alternatives.
During mulesing, lambs are thrown onto their backs
and their legs are restrained while the skin and wool around their
backsides is carved away with metal shears to expose the flesh. At the
same time, their tails are often cut off. The procedure is tantamount to
partially skinning the animals alive without anesthetics. The resulting
bloody wounds have been found to remain unhealed for 22 to 30 days (Fell
and Shutt 1989, Chapman et al. 1994). It has been estimated that
approximately 60 to 80 percent of merino sheep are subjected to mulesing
in Australia (Beck et al. 1985 in Counsell 2001, Morley and
Johnstone 1983 in Fell and Shutt 1989, Baillie 1979 in Townend 1985,
Australian Senate Select Committee on Animal Welfare 1989 in Pope 1997),
statistics that suggest that at any given time, Australia contains about
82 million mulesed sheep.
Physical Indicators of Stress From
Mulesing
In its code of sheep-welfare recommendations, the New
Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry writes that mulesing “causes
pain both at the time it is carried out and during the healing process”
(MAF 1996, §7.1.3). Much scientific evidence shows that physiological and
behavioral indicators of stress in mulesed sheep are very high, proving
that mulesing is indeed extremely painful. In physiological terms, the
degree of stress is usually determined by measuring plasma cortisol
concentrations—“the most commonly used physiological indicator of stress,”
according to Chapman et al. (1994 p 243)—and ß-endorphin levels,
both of which are known to rise during times of stress.
Fell and
Shutt (1988) measured both salivary and plasma cortisol concentrations in
a study of 63 merino crossbred lambs and found that mulesing was the
greatest acute stressor of all the procedures to which sheep are typically
subjected on farms, including castration, docking, rough transport, pizzle
dropping, tooth-grinding, and shearing.
Chapman et al.
(1994) discovered that, following mulesing, plasma cortisol concentrations
“increased immediately and rapidly” and remained elevated for at least 48
hours (p 243). Shutt et al. (1987) studied 50 merino crossbred
lambs and found that mulesing and tail-docking could multiply mean plasma
ß-endorphin concentrations by 10. Fell and Shutt (1989) tested mulesed
merino wethers between five and 15 minutes following mutilation and found
signs of suffering in the form of “[m]arked elevation of plasma cortisol
and ß-endorphin” (p 283). The stress associated with mulesing is so great
that Jongman et al. (2000) found the EEG patterns of animals
being mulesed to be similar to those of animals who had been given
injections of formalin in the hoof to cause “acute pain and subsequent
inflammation, lameness, and associated chronic pain” (p 340).
Mulesing photos courtesy of Patty Mark /Animal Liberation
Victoria
Behavioral Indicators of Stress From
Mulesing
In their comprehensive, long-term study, Fell and Shutt
(1989) found that stress-related behavior in sheep continued for up to 113
days following mulesing. Among other examples, mulesed sheep displayed
abnormal postures—most likely resulting from the painful mulesing
wound—for up to 48 hours following mutilation; “they stood with head down,
nose almost touching the ground, back arched, and body hunched” (p 288).
Chapman et al. (1994) verified these findings in their own study,
reporting that “surgically mulesed sheep quickly assumed a hunched-up
posture” (p 246).
Normal daily behavior was also altered for up to
72 hours. As compared to sheep in the control group, mulesed sheep did not
engage in routine feeding, lying, or grazing. Instead, they spent much of
their time standing idle, unable to engage in normal activities because of
the severe trauma that they had experienced. Researchers did not observe
any of the mulesed animals lying or resting on the day following
mutilation or even drinking until the second day following mutilation.
Chapman et al. (1994) further found that mulesed sheep lost
weight during the week following mutilation, “moved about less frequently
and over shorter distances than the [control-group sheep] during the first
eight days after treatment,” and often simply stood still (pp 244-45).
Psychological Indicators of Stress From Mulesing
It has
been shown that sheep are highly intelligent and able to recognize human
faces (Boivin et al. 1997). Kendrick et al. (2001) found
that sheep can even form mental images of humans and remember—and
distinguish among—50 different sheep’s faces for more than two years, even
if they haven’t seen any of the faces during that time. This ability was
discovered by means of a test wherein sheep were shown 25 pairs of similar
sheep faces—some of them in profile—and taught to associate certain faces
with a food reward. When presented with the pairs of faces and the
potential for earning the reward, the sheep consistently identified the
correct faces. Analysis of their brain activity during these exercises
indicates that sheep use the very same areas of the brain for visual
recognition as humans do: “Sheep … possess similar specialized neural
systems in the temporal and frontal lobes for assisting in this important
social task, including a greater involvement of the right brain
hemisphere” (pp 165-66). The researchers who conducted the test reportedly
concluded that sheep may be capable of emotion and conscious thought
(Briggs 2001).
Such studies help explain the long-term emotional
stress and psychological aversion that sheep experience and display in the
presence of handlers who perform mulesing. Fell and Shutt (1989) conducted
an “arena test” in which mulesed sheep were placed in the same pen with
the handler who had performed the procedure on them. Aversion behavior was
measured in intervals and, while found to be most intense for the first 37
days, continued to be noted for up to 113 days. While “control animals
turned and moved toward the handler … mulesed animals turned and moved in
the opposite direction in 95 % of all tests up to Day 37” (p 288). The
pain of mulesing is so intense that it leaves a lasting impression.
Chapman et al. (1994) observed similar aversion during a 30-day
post-mulesing arena test and concluded that the sheep’s aversion to their
handler may be “a conditioned response to the association of immediate
pain [from mulesing] with … human handling” (p 246).
Pathology
Caused by Mulesing
Mulesing can also cause suffering by actually
facilitating flystrike in areas of blowfly activity—the very condition it
is supposed to prevent. The Agriculture and Resource Management Council of
Australia and New Zealand’s Animal Health Committee (ARMCANZ 1991)
acknowledges this problem when addressing the best management practices
for sheep and states, “After mulesing, lambs should be observed from a
distance … for signs of fly strike of the wound” (p 12). The New Zealand
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry also writes that “there is a risk of
infection and flystrike of the mulesing wound itself” (MAF 1996, §7.1.3).
Cook and Steiner (1990) found that under conditions where blowflies were
present, egg masses were deposited into 93 percent of untreated wounds
within 48 hours and into 85 percent of all wounds, even those dressed with
a blowfly-repellent treatment, by the ninth day. They remarked that “[t]he
overriding finding of this trial has been that mulesing wounds are highly
susceptible to strike by L. cuprina [the blowfly responsible for
flystrike in Australia] one week after mulesing, irrespective of whether
the wound ha[s] been chemically treated immediately after mulesing or left
untreated” (p 354). In another study, researchers from the Western
Australian Department of Agriculture (Harrington and Steiner 1993) found
that after mulesing, “95% of untreated lambs were attractive to
oviposition by Lucilia cuprina … and 90% subsequently developed
flystrike within 4 [days] of mulesing” (p 190). One-third of treated lambs
were afflicted as well. The authors conclude that “fresh mulesing wounds
can be attractive to L. cuprina and susceptible to strike” (p
191).
In its periodical Surveillance, the New Zealand
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF 2002) reports that mulesing is
believed to transmit a potentially deadly disease called
eperythrozoonosis, which can lead to recurrent anemia, bloody urine, and
listlessness. Eperythrozoonosis infections recur during times of stress
(Kabay 1997) and are caused by microscopic blood parasites that may easily
be spread in the bloody conditions that mulesing creates.
More Humane Alternatives to Mulesing
Many more humane, effective, and cost-efficient
alternatives to mulesing are available, as has been discovered not only by
Australian farmers who do not employ the procedure—a group that is
estimated to include as much as 40 percent of producers (Beck et al. 1985
in Counsell 2001)—but also by all sheep farmers in the U.K. (the world’s
fifth-largest supplier of greasy wool), where mulesing is generally
prohibited in favor of alternative flystrike-prevention methods. Moreover,
unlike mulesing, which only addresses breech strikes, most of the
alternatives described below help prevent all forms of flystrike,
including strikes on the breech, body, and face.
Selection for Less Susceptible
Breeds
Experts regard genetic selection of sheep who are
resistant to flystrike as the most effective long-term solution. Tellam
and Bowles (1996) cite a study in which only 8 percent of 1-year-old
resistant sheep suffered from fleece-rot (a condition that predisposes
sheep to flystrike), as compared to 53 percent of susceptible sheep. Also,
the incidence of body strike in the resistant and the susceptible groups
was 1 percent and 19 percent, respectively. Selection of merinos with
smoother skin would not only reduce flystrike, but would also improve wool
quality. Scobie of AgResearch (2004) observes that “[w]ool quality tends
to suffer on wrinkly sheep” and, citing the findings of other scientists,
further reports, “Australian research has shown that mulesed wrinkly sheep
were just as likely to be flystruck as plain-bodied sheep that were not
mulesed.” Scobie et al. (2002) found that sheep with naturally
occurring areas of bare skin on their breech were significantly less
likely to develop flystrike. In these experimenters’ study, lambs with the
greatest breech bareness were not flystruck, whereas 22 percent of those
with the least breech bareness were—statistics that suggest that breeding
for breech bareness can be an effective flystrike-prevention tool.
Increased Monitoring and
Treatment
Perhaps the most effective option
is simply to increase monitoring for early signs of flystrike and to
provide treatment when necessary. Evidence gathered through communication
with organic producers suggests that “fly strike is largely preventable if
farmers keep sheep healthy and inspect them regularly” (Morris 2000 p
205). Dr. John Auty, a veterinarian who formerly worked with the
Australian Department of Primary Industry as the assistant director of the
Bureau of Animal Health, has been quoted as saying, “Mulesing does not
free the sheep from blowfly strike, but proper husbandry practices,
including close inspection of sheep, will reduce and virtually eliminate
flystrike.” Early-warning computer-simulation models can help predict
times of increased blowfly activity (Tellam and Bowles 1996) and may be
useful for warning producers to increase monitoring efforts.
Insecticides
A study of flystrike control methods in the
U.K. found that “at present, the control of blowfly strike is most
commonly achieved through the application of insecticide or other
larvicide, either used prophylactically or, more commonly, in response to
perceived seasonal patterns of high strike challenge” (Fenton et
al. 1998 p 342). Tellam and Bowles (1996) write that “[o]ne of the
mainstays of the wool industry for control of blowfly strike is the use of
insecticides[,]” which can be “used in dressings applied to flystruck
areas on sheep” (p 263).
Vaccinations
Bowles et
al. (1996) were able to “successfully vaccinate sheep against larvae
of the sheep blowfly” and concluded that “protection from flystrike
through vaccination using native larval antigens can be achieved” (pp
1347, 1351). Tellam and Bowles (1996) report data from several trials that
reveal that nonvaccinated sheep were more than twice as likely to develop
blowfly-infected sites as vaccinated sheep, more than half of whom were
completely protected from infections (as determined by “a failure of the
larvae to establish a wound on vaccinated sheep”), as compared to none of
the nonvaccinated sheep (p 267).
Topical
Applications
Painless topical applications for preventing wool
growth are currently being developed. Researchers at the University of
Adelaide, funded by Australian Wool Innovation (AWI 2003), recently
discovered a protein that, when applied to sheep’s skin, causes follicles
to die and seems to cause no ill effects for the sheep. When applied to
sheep’s breech area, this protein would create large areas of bare skin,
producing the same effect as mulesing but without inflicting painful
wounds.
Sterile Male Blowfly Release
As female blowflies
only mate once during their lifetime, the release of sterile male
blowflies can help significantly reduce populations. Tellam and Bowles
(1996) note that “[t]he suppression of fly numbers is usually accentuated
by further releases of sterile male insects until the natural population
is no longer sustainable” (p 268).
Baited Traps
Dymock
and Forgie (1995) used a non-insecticidal blowfly trap in an area where
all four flystrike species were present and, during the first year of
observation, found that only four of 600 unmulesed sheep were struck.
Those four cases represent a strike rate of 0.0067 percent, which compares
favorably to the strike rate of 2 percent per year that was found in
another study in New South Wales, where mulesing is prevalent (Wardhaugh
and Morton 1990 in Morris 2000). Other researchers have found that the use
of bait traps, both synthetic and organic, are effective in controlling
blowfly populations (Smite and Wall 1998, Fisher et al. 1998). Another
advantage to trapping is that the volume of flies in the traps themselves
can serve as an early warning signal for producers to increase flystrike
monitoring and treatment efforts.
Improved Farm-Management Practices: Reduced Stocking Densities,
Careful Diet Selection, Rearing in Regions Less Hospitable to Blowfly
Populations, Timely Shearing and Crutching, and Elimination of Tail
Docking
French et al. (1994) surveyed 2,451 sheep
farmers and found that “[t]he risk of a farm[’s] reporting at least one
case of blowfly strike increased as flock size and stocking density
increased” (p 51). Furthermore, there was no significant positive
association between the practice of tail-docking and reduced incidence of
flystrike. These findings suggest that farmers who reduce stocking
densities will lessen their sheep’s risk of flystrike and that
tail-docking offers no such benefit. Leathwick and Heath (2001) found that
diet could also play a role in flystrike prevalence and that lambs who
grazed on forage consisting of birdsfoot trefoil were less likely to
suffer from flystrike than lambs who grazed on ryegrass and white clover.
Producers can effectively control flystrike even further by rearing sheep
in cool, dry regions where blowfly populations are less likely to
flourish. And Tellam and Bowles (1996) explain that shearing and crutching
(“the removal of dags and urine-stained wool from around the breech
area”), especially when synchronized with the worst periods of fly
activity, decrease “the likelihood of fly strike” by “reducing the
attractiveness of this region to the gravid female blowfly” (pp
262-263).
Live Exports
Every year in Australia, about 6 million sheep—the highest
number of any country—are exported to the Middle East for use in religious
slaughter practices that require animals to be alive upon receipt. Most of
these sheep are merinos who are no longer productive in the wool industry
(Strong and Minchin 2003, The Australian Sheep and Wool Industries on the
Web 2004). During overseas transport, animals are crammed onto multideck
vessels that travel for weeks before docking at their destinations.
Industry workers and researchers alike have documented great suffering and
mortality during all phases of live export.
High
Mortality
Norris and Richards (1989) examined official reports from
181 Australian shipments of live sheep and found on-board mortality rates
as high as 4.4 percent. During the 145 Middle Eastern voyages studied,
140,711 sheep died—nearly 1,000 animals per voyage. Mortality occurred
mainly at sea (77 percent) but also during unloading (20 percent). In
fact, 27,505 sheep died during unloading in the Middle East alone,
probably because of rough handling, the animals’ weakened states, or a
combination of both. Black et al. (1994) also studied mortality rates and
found that more than 1,600 deaths occurred aboard a single vessel that was
exporting sheep from New Zealand.
The lengthy duration of these
journeys prolongs suffering and exacerbates mortality. Norris and Richards
(1989) found that loading could take up to five days, the voyage itself up
to 32 days, and unloading up to 11 days. They wrote that unloading could
be “unnecessarily slow” and lead to “excessive mortality” (p 101). Each of
these grueling procedures can take even longer, as was painfully proved
last summer on the Cormo Express, where sheep suffered in searing
heat for 80 days after Middle Eastern countries rejected them, claiming
that they were diseased.
Grinding Alive
At sea, sick or
injured animals are often thrown down chutes leading to a macerator that
grinds them up and dumps their remains into the sea. On a recent episode
of Australia’s 60 Minutes, an experienced rancher and veteran of
many live-export voyages stated that these chutes can be nine stories high
and that animals are often alive when they are thrown into the grinders.
He explained, “What they do is, when they die and they’re out at sea, they
drop them down a big laundry chute into a mincer at the bottom and it just
smashes them up and squirts them out the side into the water. … It’s just
like a laundry chute, opening door on each floor and you just drop them
down. And in quite a lot of cases, the sheep are still alive. In theory,
there is plenty of time to cut their throats and kill them first, but they
just get put in the chute alive” (Carleton 2003).
Smothering and
Suffocation
Black et al. (1994) found that because
live-export vessels typically only allow for a portion of the animals to
be fed at one time, intense competition during feeding leads to animals’
losing their footing and being smothered or crushed to death. The
researchers found that 31 percent of the sheep who died aboard one vessel
suffocated or were smothered to death. By the later stages of the voyage,
excrement had accumulated to such a degree that some animals had become
stuck in feces and were unable to move. The live-export worker who was
interviewed on 60 Minutes described appalling conditions on the
Cormo Express: accumulations of feces in pens, possibly as much
as a foot deep; a mere 6 inches of headroom at most for the sheep who were
still alive; and the bodies of their dead companions littering the floors
(Carleton 2003). Cramped and filthy, such conditions would likely lead to
many animals’ becoming trapped in excrement and under decomposing
carcasses, eventually being smothered or suffocated to death or—unable to
access food or water—dying of starvation and
dehydration.
Starvation
Norris et al. (1990a)
concluded that about half of all sheep deaths during sea transport to the
Middle East are caused by starvation, even when food is available.
Richards et al. (1989) found a similarly high rate of death by starvation
(43.4 percent). The live-export industry has invented many euphemisms for
starvation to deemphasize the suffering that it entails; Norris et al.
(1990a) provide the following examples: shy-feeding syndrome, inanition,
anorexia, failure-to-eat syndrome, voluntary feed refusal, and persistent
inappetance. These euphemisms are designed to conceal the fact that live
exports are so traumatic that many sheep simply stop eating, despite the
availability of food and their own urgent need.
Extreme
Temperatures
Extreme temperatures, exceeding 40°C and 90 percent
humidity, create miserable conditions for overcrowded animals. Norris and
Richards (1989) report that the death rate among sheep in one shipment
more than tripled with a 4ºC rise in temperature. Black et al.
(1994) suggest that during times of high temperatures, animals move en
masse toward ventilators, often trampling each other to death. A
recent Australian government-issued report found evidence that “mortality
levels in livestock quickly increase due to heat stress once ships have
docked in the ports of the Middle East” and concluded that “there should
be a prohibition on exports of sheep from [certain] areas … during periods
of the year [when] the risks are greatest” (Keniry et al. 2003,
pp 30, 42).
Temperature extremes can occur at any time, however,
and Norris and Richards (1989) warn that their “findings do not support
the industry view that the highest death rates occur in July to September,
when temperature and humidity in the Middle East peak for the year,”
observing that mortality can be just as high in other months (p 101).
These facts show that only a categorical—not just a seasonal—ban on live
exports can prevent animals’ suffering.
Injuries
Rough
handling, overcrowding, and hunger-induced weakness can result in serious
injuries and suffering. Richards et al. (1989) found that “[m]ost
shipboard cases of trauma were acute and associated with splaying of the
hind limbs on slippery floors during loading” (p 38). Norris et
al. (1990a) determined that “injuries sustained during loading of the
ship and in the first few days of the voyage” led to “about 12 percent” of
on-board deaths (138); Richards et al. (1989) calculated that
“trauma” accounted for 10.6 percent (33). Sick and injured animals are
usually left to die without veterinary care. A veteran live-export
industry worker explains that nonambulatory animals—those who have been
disabled to the point at which they are unable to walk—are “just left in
the walkway sometimes for a couple of days just kicking their legs”
(Carleton 2003). Recently obtained video footage of handlers beating,
kicking, and otherwise abusing worn-out animals in the Middle East
tragically illustrates the potential for injury during unloading (see
www.petatv.com/tvpopup/video.asp?video=wool). Sidhom (2003) reports that
during unloading of Australian animals in Egypt, workers “frequently hit
the animals with long sticks armed with rusty nails, with metal bars, and
sometimes even with hammers” (p 1).
Diseases and
Infections
Norris et al. (1990a) estimate that 26.9
percent of all deaths on board live-export vessels are a result of
salmonellosis infections and that within the first nine days on
board, about 12 percent of all sheep are excreting salmonella. Norris and
Richards (1989) note that antibiotics are often introduced into the
sheep’s drinking water and that in one year, more than 5.02 million doses
were administered—presumably to combat the highly pestilent, filthy
conditions to which the sheep were subjected, especially those on the
lower tiers, where manure from the tiers above falls and accumulates and
where high concentrations of ammonia are constant irritants. Sidhom (2003)
examined a load of sheep and cattle on board the MV Maysora,
which had traveled from Australia to Egypt, and observed that “[l]iquid
manure flowed into the food troughs, where the food was sodden and soiled
with sheep manure from the decks above” (p 1). Among diseases and other
conditions described by Norris et al. (1990a) as causing death are
muscular disease, lupinosis, foot abscesses, kidney stones, pneumonia,
dehydration, and heat stress.
Scabby mouth disease, also known as
contagious ecthyma, is sometimes fatal and can be transmitted to humans.
Over the years—and most recently in the summer of 2003, with the Cormo
Express—Middle Eastern countries have rejected shipments of animals
who showed signs of scabby mouth, thus causing even greater suffering for
sheep by prolonging their ordeal on ships where conditions inevitably
worsened and mortality was rampant. The Cormo Express was an
especially tragic example: After being rejected by Saudi Arabian
officials, the sheep were stranded on board the vessel for an additional
64 days—the time it took to find a country that was willing to accept the
survivors—during which time mortality increased to 9.82 percent, and the
death toll rose to 5,691 (Keniry et al. 2003). Such rejections
have been ongoing for decades and threaten to continue, especially
considering the conclusion of Higgs et al. (1996) that “using
current technology it is not possible to deliver shipments of sheep to the
Middle East that are guaranteed completely free of scabby mouth” (p 215).
The only way to prevent further suffering for rejected, stranded sheep is
to ban the live-export industry altogether.
Emergency
Conditions
Unpredictable emergency conditions often arise that
jeopardize the well-being of animals on board. Some recent examples,
compiled from Australian Maritime Safe Authority reports (AMSA 1990, 1999,
2002), include the inadequate ventilation that killed almost 10,000 sheep
on board the Cormo Express in 1990; the fire that killed more
than 67,000 on board the Uniceb in 1996; the sinking of the
Guernsey Express in the same year, which led to the drowning
deaths of more than 1,500 cattle at sea; the failure of the
Temburong’s ventilation system in 1999, which caused 829 cattle
to die of suffocation; and the cyclone of the same year, which caused the
Kalymnian Express’ engine to fail and led to the deaths of more
than 300 cattle. Malfunctions, natural disasters, and fires inevitably
lead to tragedy on such highly populated, heavily crowded vessels.
Banning Mulesing and Live Exports Is the Only Humane Option
Mulesing is only one of many
flystrike-control methods available. As the scientific literature proves,
it causes animals harm and can sometimes leave them vulnerable to
flystrike by inflicting wounds. Mulesing is an abusive practice that
causes acute, chronic pain and should be abolished as a form of cruelty to
animals—especially in light of the fact that other effective and more
humane flystrike-prevention methods are available. This conclusion was
foreshadowed in 1989 by the Australian Senate Select Committee on Animal
Welfare when it observed that “in areas of higher sheep density and
smaller flocks, there was evidence that some producers were able and
willing to put in the extra time and effort to breed out faults in sheep,
to select resistant sheep, to control worms, [and] to inspect and crutch
and jet with chemicals more frequently to ensure a healthy flock without
recourse to mulesing” (qtd in Pope 1997 p 10).
As for the live
export of sheep, the evidence shows that no degree of preparation or
standards or any other actions short of a complete ban can ensure animals’
safety during such long and arduous journeys. The Australian Minister for
Agriculture, Fisheries, and Forestry—spurred on by the international
outcry from the Cormo Express incident—recently commissioned a
report on the many problems associated with live exports, and the result
was a call for many changes on animal-welfare grounds. The government also
invited public comments, and “[a] majority (76 percent) of submissions
expressed views opposed to the livestock export trade” (Keniry et
al. 2003 p 10)—a response that is hardly surprising, given the
intense cruelty inherent in the live-export industry. As the Australian
Senate Select Committee on Animal Welfare has acknowledged, “[I]t is not
in the interests of the animal to be transported to the Middle East for
slaughter” (qtd in Norris et al. 1990a p 133).
Year
after year, millions of sheep suffer hideously during mulesing and live
export in the Australian wool industry. The pain and death that these
practices have been irrefutably shown to cause prove that no degree of
standards or “improvements” can ensure the welfare of animals who are
subjected to them and that the only compassionate solution is a
categorical ban on both.
This report was completed on March 24,
2004. Please direct any questions or comments to Cem Akin at 757-622-7382,
extension 8013, or CemA@peta.org.
References
The Animals
It may come from a sheep, goat, or Tibetan antelope. It may be called "wool," "mohair," "pashmina," "shahtoosh," or "cashmere." But no matter what it's called, any kind of wool causes harm to the animals from whom it is taken.
Death "Down Under"
Currently exploiting more than 100 million miserable
sheep, Australia produces 30 percent of all wool used worldwide. Holdings
consist of thousands of sheep, making individual attention to their needs
and even to medical emergencies impossible.
In Australia, the most commonly
raised sheep are Merinos, specifically bred to have wrinkly skin, which
means more wool per animal. This unnatural overload of wool causes many
sheep to collapse and even die of heat exhaustion during hot months, and
the wrinkles collect urine and moisture. Attracted to the moisture, flies
lay eggs in the folds of skin, and the hatched maggots can eat the sheep
alive. To prevent this so-called "flystrike," Australian ranchers perform
a barbaric operation-called "mulesing"-where they force live sheep onto their backs, restrain their legs
between metal bars, and, without any painkillers whatsoever, slice
dinner-plate-sized chunks of flesh from around their tail area. This is
done to cause smooth, scarred skin that can't harbor fly eggs. Ironically,
the exposed, bloody wounds themselves often get flystrike before they
heal.
Within weeks of birth, lambs' ears are hole-punched, their
tails are chopped off, and the males are castrated without anesthetics.
Male lambs are castrated when they are between 2 and 8 weeks old, either
by making an incision and cutting their testicles out or with a rubber
ring used to cut off blood supply-one of the most painful methods of
castration possible. Every year, hundreds of lambs die before the age of 8
weeks from exposure or starvation, and mature sheep die every year from
disease, lack of shelter, and neglect.
View the video.
Click here to read PETA’s full report on
mulesing and live exports, The Urgent Need for a Permanent Ban on
Mulesing and Live Sheep Exports in the Australian Wool Industry Based on
Animal Welfare Concerns.
Transport Terror
When sheep age and their wool production declines, they
are of no use to wool farmers and so are discarded for slaughter. This
results in the cruel live export of 6.5 million sheep every year from
Australia to the Middle East and North Africa, where sheep are crammed
aboard multitiered open-deck ships. Nearly 800,000 sheep enter the live
export trade from the U.K. and are slaughtered abroad.
Australian
and New Zealand sheep are slaughtered in the Middle East, after enduring a
grueling, weeks- or months-long journey on overcrowded, disease-ridden
ships with little access to food or water through all weather extremes.
Many sheep fall ill, many become stuck in feces and are unable to move,
and many are smothered or trampled to death by other sheep trying not to
fall or trying to reach water when it is available. Shipboard mortality
ranges up to 10 percent. Sick and injured sheep are often ground up in a
mincer while fully aware or are thrown overboard to drown or be eaten by
sharks.
In 2002, 14,500 sheep reportedly died from
heat stress while in transit to the Middle East. Their carcasses were
thrown overboard. Between August and October of 2003, more than 50,000
sheep suffered aboard the MV Cormo Express when the Saudi Arabian
government refused to accept the sheep because too many of them were
believed to be infected with "scabby mouth," an infectious disease that
results in sores and scabs around the animals' mouths. After nearly two
months aboard this ship, with very little food and water, often in
temperatures exceeding 100°F, the African nation of Eritrea accepted the
sheep for slaughter.
When the survivors arrive at their
destination, they are dragged from the ships and thrown into the backs of
trucks and cars, eventually to have their throats slit while they are
fully conscious. In the Muslim nations of North Africa and the Middle
East, ritual slaughter is exempt from humane slaughter regulations. Some
sheep are slaughtered en masse in lots, while others are taken home, often
in the trunks of cars, and slaughtered individually by the purchasers.
Click here to read news
stories about Australia's live export trade.
Click here for more
information on Australia’s cruel live-export trade.
Click here to read PETA’s
full report on mulesing and live exports, The Urgent Need for a
Permanent Ban on Mulesing and Live Sheep Exports in the Australian Wool
Industry Based on Animal Welfare Concerns.
Shear Torture
Many people believe that shearing sheep
helps animals who might otherwise be burdened with too much wool. But
without human interference, sheep grow just enough wool to protect
themselves from temperature extremes. The fleece provides effective
insulation against both cold and heat.
Shearers are usually paid by volume, not by
the hour, which encourages fast work without regard for the welfare of the
sheep. Says one eyewitness: "[T]he shearing shed must be one of the worst
places in the world for cruelty to animals … I have seen shearers punch
sheep with their shears or their fists until the sheep's nose bled. I have
seen sheep with half their faces shorn off …"
Click here to find out how you can help.
Cashmere and Other Kinds of Wool
Cashmere is made from cashmere goats. Those with "defects"
in their coats are typically killed before 2 years of age. Industry
experts expect farmers to kill 50 to 80 percent of young goats whose coats
do not meet standards.
Contrary to what many consumers think,
"shearling" is not sheared wool; the term refers to the sheep. A shearling
is a yearling sheep who has been shorn once. A shearling garment is made
from a sheep or lamb shorn shortly before slaughter; the skin is tanned
with the wool still on it.
Angora rabbits are strapped
to a board for shearing, kicking powerfully in protest. The clippers
inevitably bite into their flesh, with bloody results. Angoras have very
delicate foot pads, making life on a wire cage floor excruciating and
ulcerated feet a common condition. Because male angoras have only 75 to 80
percent of the wool yield of females, on many farms they are killed at
birth.
The market for alpaca exploded in the 1980s, when
South American alpacas and llamas were marketed worldwide to entrepreneurs
who bought into the vision of a ground-floor investment in a luxury fiber
market. The craze subsided but breeding continues, and unwanted animals
are now routinely put up for auction. Llama sanctuaries and rescue
operations have sprung up in the wake of the breeding craze to handle the
growing number of abused, neglected animals.
Shahtoosh, used to
make "fashionable" shawls, is made from the endangered Tibetan antelope,
or chiru. Chiru cannot be domesticated and must be killed in order to
obtain their wool. Illegal to sell or possess since 1975, shahtoosh shawls
did a brisk business on the black market throughout the 1990s, selling for
as much as $15,000 apiece as the Tibetan antelope's population plummeted
to fewer than 75,000.
A raid of a 1994 charity event in New York
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service resulted in subpoenas issued to
supermodels and socialites who purchased the shawls and the first criminal
prosecutions for the sale of the "fabric." In April 2000, British
authorities prosecuted a London trading company for illegal possession of
138 shawls-representing 1,000 antelope pelts. Despite the ban on shahtoosh
in India, a thriving black market still caters to customers in London, New
York, and Los Angeles, who will pay as much as $17,000 for a shawl. As
many as 20,000 chiru are killed every year for their wool, a rate that
will wipe out the species by 2011 if left unchecked.
Click here to find out about Cashmere and other kinds of wool.
Click here to find out about
alternatives to wool and to view or order our FREE "Shopping Guide to Compassionate
Clothing."
Australian Animals Are Haram (Unlawful to Eat
Under Religious Law)
Click
here to view video
Al-Jazeera, the Qatar-based Arabic television network notorious for airing images of mutilated bodies and other horrors of war, has turned down PETA’s new 30-second TV spot, which contains video footage of Australian lambs, who are eventually shipped to the Middle East for slaughter and consumption, being partially skinned alive. The ad includes an Arabic narration of a quote by the late Imam B.A. Hafiz al-Masri, who wrote, "If animals have been subjected to cruelties in their breeding, transport, slaughter, or in their general welfare, meat from them is considered impure and unlawful to eat (haram)." The Imam’s words are spoken over footage of Australian lambs as they are being crudely cut by Australian farmers during the cruel mulesing mutilation procedure and of older sheep who are beaten and slaughtered in ways that are clear violations of the Muslim halal slaughter requirements.
PETA will continue to urge Al-Jazeera to accept the ad in order to reach a potential 35 million viewers in the Middle East. The ad is part of PETA’s international campaign, which calls for a boycott of Australian wool until mulesing and live exports end.
Send this video to your friends and family.
On 25th March 2006, a successful Australian
national
action was held against live animal
export.
The time is
now to put pressure on the
Australian Government and demand
the
banning of live animal export & mulesing
once and for all.
We must continue the
pressure following the further terrible
footage aired on "60 Minutes" in March
2006 of AU live cattle
in Egypt being
mutilated and tortured. This footage was
provided by www.animalsaustralia.org with
support of PETA.
Please help Australia end
this barbaric practice that has
continued
now for more than 30 years despite most
Australians
being against it.
Transcript of "60 Minutes" interview &
video:
http://tinyurl.com/hx4fw
From
savethesheep.com
"Australian wool represents massive suffering
for sheep, millions of whom are mutilated
http://www.savethesheep.com/animals.asp
each year by being trussed upside-down and
having huge chunks of
flesh carved from their
rumps without any pain relief and are often
shipped http://www.savethesheep.com/animals.asp thousands
of miles through scorching heat and freezing
cold
by sea in open-decked ships, to have their throats slit
in
filthy, open-air markets while they are still fully
conscious. "
To view sheep after a three week hell voyage.
(from ALQ)
Sheep covered in faeces at the end of a
three week voyage on "Cormo
Express"
Many dead and covered in faeces after 3 weeks
voyage
(from ALQ)
More photos (PETA) - http://www.savethesheep.com/photo.asp
Numbers of Deaths
On average 100 000 sheep and 2 500 cattle die
each year during overseas export. For every sheep
that dies in
transit, it is estimated that 10 noticeably sicken.
Disasters
In
the past 25 years, hundreds of thousands of animals
have been lost
through disasters at sea. The Animals
Australia factsheet available at
www.animalsaustralia.org
documents many of these
disasters.
What you can do
1. Boycott Australian
Wool
2. Write to Australian Prime Minister John Howard
asking
that they put an immediate end to mulesing
and to the live export of
sheep from Australia. Tell him in
your own words that with modern
refrigeration there
is no need for shipment of live animals for
slaughter,
and therefore there is no justification for the great
trauma and pain these animals endure. The fact that
there is a
market for a product does not justify
providing that product, or we
would be growing
opium and coca. Live export is a cruel and horrific
practice, and should be banned.
Contact :
The
Honourable John Howard
Prime Minister of Australia
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
www.pm.gov.au/email.cfm (e-mail)
The Honourable Peter McGauran MP
Minister for
Agriculture,
Fisheries and Forestry
Australian Government
Department of
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
GPO Box
858
Canberra ACT 2601
+61 0413 601 303
http://www.maff.gov.au/
Also contact the opposition leader
Hon Mr Kim Beazley email:
Kim.Beazley.MP@aph.gov.au
3.
Protest outside Australian Embassies in your country.
http://www.dfat.gov.au/missions/
4.
Write a letter, send a fax: 32298541 (in Australia)
or (overseas) Fax
01161732298541 or e-mail
dpi@ministerial.qld.gov.au the
Queensland Primary
Industries Minister telling of your outrage that
the
Queensland Government (AU) is supporting the live
export
trade. Demand a stop to this industry .
Further
Information
More detailed information on live export can be
found at the following web sites:
www.savethesheep.com
Animals Australia Organisation
http://liveexportshame.com/index.htm
[AMSA] Australian Maritime Safety Authority. 1990. 1999. 2002.
Incident reports taken from www.amsa.gov.au/.
[ARMCANZ] Agriculture
and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. 1991. Model
Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals: The Sheep. East Melbourne:
CSIRO Publications. 17 p.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2003.
The wool industry—looking back and forward. Available from:
www.abs.gov.au/ausstats.
Australian Senate Select Committee on
Animal Welfare. 1989. Sheep Husbandry. Canberra: Australian Government
Publishing Service.
The Australian Sheep and Wool Industries on
the Web. 2003. Sheep breeds found in Australia. Available from:
www.aussiesheep.com/sheep.htm.
[AWI] Australian Wool Innovation.
2003 Jan. Seeking the painless mulesing alternative. Beyond the Bale 1(3).
Available from: www.wool.com.au.
Baillie BG. 1979 Jun. Management
practices for controlling flystrike. National Symposium on the Sheep
Blowfly and Flystrike in Sheep; Sydney, Australia.
Black H,
Matthews LR, Bremner KJ. 1994. The behaviour of male lambs transported by
sea from New Zealand to Saudi Arabia. New Zealand Veterinary Journal
42:16-23.
Boivin X, Nowak R, Despres G, Tournadre H, Le Neindre P.
1997. Discrimination between shepherds by lambs reared under artificial
conditions. J Anim Sci 75:2892-8.
Bowles VM, Meeusen ENT, Young AR,
Andrews AE, Nash AD, Brandon MR. 1996. Vaccination of sheep against larvae
of the sheep blowfly (Lucilia cuprina). Vaccine 14:1347.
Briggs H. 2001 Nov 7. Amazing powers of sheep. BBC News. Available
from:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/161463.stm#sheep.
Carleton R.
2003 Sep 21. Ship of Shame. 60 Minutes (Australia). Available from:
http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/sixtyminutes/stories/2003_09_21/story_970.asp.
Chapman RE, Fell LR, Shutt DA. 1994. A comparison of stress in
surgically and non-surgically mulesed sheep. Aust Vet J
71:249-7.
Cook DF, Steiner EC. 1990. Susceptibility of mulesing
wounds to oviposition and strike development by the Australian sheep
blowfly Lucilia cuprina. Aust Vet J 67:352-5.
Counsell D.
2001. A benefit-cost analysis of the mules operation to the Australian
sheep flock. Proceedings of the FLICS Conference; Launceston, Tasmania,
Australia.
Dymock JJ, Forgie SA. 1995. Large-scale trapping of
sheep blowflies in the northern North Island of New Zealand using
insecticide-free traps. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture
35:699-704.
[FAO] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations. 2002. Major Food and Agricultural Commodities and Producers.
Available from:
www.fao.org/es/ess/top/commodity-jsp?commodity=987&lang=EN&year=2002.
Fell
LR, Shutt DA. 1988. Salivary cortisol and behavioural indicators of stress
in sheep. Proc Aust Soc Anim Prod 17:186-9.
Fell LR, Shutt DA.
1989. Behavioural and hormonal responses to acute surgical stress in
sheep. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 22:283-94.
Fenton A, Wall
R, French NP. 1998. The effect of farm management strategies on the
incidence of sheep strike in Britain: a simulation analysis. Veterinary
Parasitology 79:341-57.
Fisher P, Wall R, Ashworth JR. 1998.
Attraction of the sheep blowfly, Lucilia sericata (Diptera:
Calliphoridae) to carrion bait in the field. Bulletin of
Entomological Research 88:611-6.
French N, Wall R, Cripps PJ,
Morgan KL. 1994. Blowfly strike in England and Wales: The relationship
between prevalence and farm and management factors. Medical and Veterinary
Entomology 8:51-6.
Harrington SA, Steiner EC. 1993. Susceptibility
of freshly-mulesed lambs to flystrike and the effectiveness of
propetamphos as a wound dressing. Aust Vet J 70:190-1.
Higgs ARB,
Norris RT, Baldock FC, Campbell NJ, Koh S, Richards RB. 1996. Contagious
ecthyma in the live sheep export industry. Aust Vet J
74:215-220.
Jongman EC, Morris JP, Barnett JL, Hemsworth PH. 2000.
EEG changes in 4-week-old lambs in response to castration, tail docking,
and mulesing. Aust Vet J 78:339-43.
Kendrick KM, Da Costa AP, Leigh
AE, Hinton MR, Peirce JW. 2001. Sheep don’t forget a face. Nature
414:165-6.
Keniry J, Bond M, Caple I, Gosse L, Rogers M. 2003 Dec.
Livestock Export Review. Available from:
www.affa.gov.au/corporate_docs/publications/pdf/animalplanthealth/keniry0104.pdf.
Leathwick
DM, Heath ACG. 2001. Specialist forages—A role in flystrike management?
Proceedings of the FLICS Conference; Launceston, Tasmania, Australia.
[MAF] New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. 1996 Jul.
Code of recommendations and minimum standards for the welfare of Sheep.
Code of Animal Welfare No. 3 (Revised). ISBN 0-477-08550-4.
[MAF]
New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. 2002. Quarterly review
of diagnostic cases. Surveillance 29(2):28.
Morley FHW, Johnstone
IL. 1983. Mules operation—a review of development and adoption. In:
Raadsma HW (Ed.). Sheep Blowfly and Flystrike in Sheep. Department of
Agriculture NSW, Proc. 2nd Natl. Symp.; Sydney. pp 3-24.
Morris M.
2000. Ethical issues associated with sheep fly strike research,
prevention, and control. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics
13:205-17.
Morris R, Richards B, Higgs T. 1990. The live sheep
export industry. Journal of Agriculture—Western Australia
31:131-48.
Norris RT, Richards RB. 1989. Deaths in sheep exported
by sea from Western Australia—analysis of ship Master’s reports. Aust Vet
J 66:97-102.
Norris R, Richards B, Higgs T. 1990a. The live sheep
export industry. Western Australia Department of Agriculture Journal of
Agriculture 31(4):131-148.
Norris RT, McDonald CL, Richards RB,
Hyder MW, Gittins SP, Norman GJ. 1990b. Management of inappetant sheep
during export by sea. Aust Vet J 67:244-7.
Pope S. 1997.
Preventing flystrike: Alternatives to mulesing? Collingwood: Australian
and New Zealand Federation of Animal Societies, Inc. 33 p.
Raadsma
HW. 1987. Flystrike control: An overview of management and breeding
options. Wool Technology and Sheep Breeding 35:174-86.
Richards RB,
Norris RT, Dunlop RH, McQuade NC. 1989. Causes of death in sheep exported
live by sea. Aus Vet J 66:33-8.
Scobie D. 2004. Wrinkles lower
productivity. AgResearch. Available from:
www.merino.co.nz/Wrinkles.htm.
Scobie DR, O’Connell D, Bray AR,
Cunningham P. 2002. Breech strike can be reduced by increased area of
naturally bare skin around the perineum of lambs. Anim. Prod. Aust.
24:201-204.
Shutt DA, Fell LR, Connell R, Bell AK, Wallace CA,
Smith AI. 1987. Stress-induced changes in plasma concentrations of
immunoreactive ß-endorphin and cortisol in response to routine surgical
procedures in lambs. Aust J Biol Sci 40:97-103.
Smith KE, Wall R.
1998. Suppression of the blowfly Lucilia sericata using
odour-baited triflumuron-impregnated targets. Medical and Veterinary
Entomology 12:430-7.
Strong G, Minchin L. Lambs to the Slaughter.
The Age 2003 Sep 27. Available from:
www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/09/26/1064083191426.html?from=storyrhs.
Tellam
RL, Bowles VM. 1996. Control of blowfly strike in sheep: Current
strategies and future prospects. International Journal for Parasitology
27:261-73.
Townend C. 1985. Pulling the wool. Marrickville: Hale
& Iremonger Pty Limited. 157 p.
Wardhaugh KG, Morton R. 1990.
The incidence of flystrike in sheep in relation to weather conditions,
sheep husbandry, and the abundance of the Australian sheep blowfly
Lucilia cuprina. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research
41:1155-67.