Banning live stock export-

[Scotty72]

1st, before anyone gets on my case, I wish to point out that I do not agree with the cruelty shown in Indonesia to the animals killed there, and we as a nation should be taking steps to ensure that cattle are treated humanely in the slaughter process (and no, I do not see that as a contradiction.)

Stopping the trade has serious impacts for the cattle industries:

For the northern australian farmer, it is likely to be economically very damaging, and the potential for damage to the wider industry is high through knock-on effects.

The indonesian trade is suggested to be a $350m trade. This translates to about 350,000 head of cattle per year, or about 140,000,000 kg of beef: 7kg per Australian. All cattle are sold from farms - either on contract or through the sale yard - as part of normal operations. The cattle can't be kept forever, and there is a prime age for selling them - so they have to be sold and slaughtered (otherwise they will starve and die, or left to roam and become feral).

If the cattle don't go to indonesia, they go onto the market somewhere else, depressing prices and depressing all farming incomes. At the same time, the meat is not "premium" meat. (The Brahmin and other tropical breeds are tougher and leaner than european and british breeds) It can't be sold into other markets such as Japan. It won't appear in a supermarket near you, but it may appear in a macdonalds (mincing solves a stack of tenderness issues).

I think the MLA and Livecorp have let down the cattle industry appallingly. At the same time, the government is just pushing us further into the shit. Next the animal activists will be trying to stop all live exports, including to those countries that DO treat cattle humanely. That will directly hit me.

(Oh, and for anyone who considers I treat my cattle in a "disgusting and inhumane way", they are welcome to come and visit and I will attempt to prove them wrong. Well treated and well-looked-after animals is better business.)

No one is accusing you of mistreating your animals: I have no idea why you would think that.

As for compo: why? Why should the tax payer pay for the short-comings of your industry?

If you want to sue anyone, sue the MLA who failed in its duty to you (and I assume you're a member of it). I heard the MLA dude on the radio today, talking how it is their mission to ensure the humane treatment of the stock they sell.

This last week has shown that these were just weasel words - and they should be the ones sued over their failings - not the tax payers.

Scotty

[Sezzy]

The tax payer pays for those who choose not to get a job...why shouldn't we compensate people who are actually 'really' supporting the country's economy and through no fault of their own are now disadvantaged?

[Scotty72]

But, using that logic, if all the unemployed get a job, we would have to compensate the poor people at the centre-link office who would lose their jobs - through no fault of their own.

[macmich]

tannin if you read it right it says i am not for the torture of animals
and its not the cattle industry that would be at fault
surely when deals were done with indonsia and australia the treatment of animals would have been adressed
the goverment if this being the case in my opinion should seek compensation from indonesia for the lost income for the farmers
they are stating a 6 month suspension at this stage
i just hope the work on the abs over there and training
is done earlier
even the cattle farmers were shocked at the treatment of the beasts
tell me are you going to be happy with the stunning of the beast and then the slitting of the throat for the bleed out
cheers macca
ps i have no qualms with anyone over this subject
as everyone has there own opinion and that should be respected

[farmer_rob]

No one is accusing you of mistreating your animals: I have no idea why you would think that.

There was a comment made earlier that seemed to be directed at all cattle farmers. I object to the casual grouping that occurred, although there is no need for it to go further. (not a comment of yours scotty.)

As for compo: why? Why should the tax payer pay for the short-comings of your industry?

I am not asking for compensation, just suggesting it is a more complex situation than it appears. BTW, every time I sell cattle, I pay a "cattle compensation" levy for previous live export disasters. Personally, I'd disband MLA, sacking every last executive, and get someone in who can do the job properly. I have NO choice about being a member or paying levies to the useless pack of...

If you want to sue anyone, sue the MLA who failed in its duty to you (and I assume you're a member of it). I heard the MLA dude on the radio today, talking how it is their mission to ensure the humane treatment of the stock they sell.

This last week has shown that these were just weasel words - and they should be the ones sued over their failings - not the tax payers.

Scotty

Certainly weasel words. Turn a blind eye and hope for the best. Slack, useless, (insert preferred insults here). The MLA have failed australian cattle farmers yet again.

[Sezzy]

But, using that logic, if all the unemployed get a job, we would have to compensate the poor people at the centre-link office who would lose their jobs - through no fault of their own.

I don't know if you know much about social welfare - but there are still Aged pensioners and single mothers about - more than enough to keep the Centrelink staff employed...

I've lived in the country, and the city - I know where the food on my table comes from...and if it wasn't for the farmers that people don't seem to care about - we'd all starve...and that is unfortunately a fact.

If you have ever lived in the country, you will understand, if you haven't, no amount of logic will change your mind...

People tend to have a fairly one eyed opinion when it comes to these things, I rather try and look at it from both sides...

[Scotty72]

Yes, I've lived in the country.

But take away the unemployed, and at least some welfare staff, compliance officers, bank staff who process payment will be redundant.

You obviously have no compassion for them.

[Sezzy]

So you're happy to pay for people who 'don't' want to get a job...but a primary producer gets the big shunt from you? Yet he's the one who puts food on your table...I sincerely hope you don't teach the kids that, or we'll be starving in ten years when there's no arable land and the farmers have all shut up shop, and the only place you can get food from is overseas and steak is $100kg instead of $30.

Don't misunderstand me, what's happened is atrocious...and I agree they shouldn't be sent where they're going to be mistreated...but you are now faced with another problem regarding animal rights. Cattle from the top end, where does it go to now to get slaughtered? Tennant Creek - middle of nowhere, so the cattle are shunted onto a vehicle and trucked thousands of kilometres to the nearest meat works...that's hardly got the animals best interest in mind has it?

So what do the farmers do with them now...?

It's all well and good to say no, but what happens to the cattle? And what happens to the farmers...or do people just not care about their fellow humans...

A farmer knows how to farm, try taking a visit up here someday - the amount of farmers who couldn't survive on the farms sold up and moved to the city - only to start committing suicide is beyond belief.

[wmphoto]

Of course the farmers should get compensation, unlike when the average person loses their job, they can't just get another job. Farming is their livelihood. They still have animals to feed, bills to pay and family to support and the average wage just wouldn't cover this. Farmers don't have a regular income like the average person and a decision like this can and will have a devastating impact.

What about all the cattle currently sitting on the docks in Port Hedland? Does the farmer take them back? But how can he afford to feed them since he's not going to be paid? How can he now afford to pay for the extra cost of trucking them to Perth or Darwin? What about the animal welfare on these long trips?

Yes it is about the $$$ but more importantly it is about people's lives and their family. There is a better way to handle this than a blanket ban.

No I don't support animal cruelty and the fact that I support live trade doesn't mean otherwise. Plenty of abattoirs in Indonesia that aren't like those shown on 4 corners, so a partial ban with better monitoring and regulation is the answer.........with a complete shake up of the MLA who collect COMPULSORY fees from the industry and have let them down. This is a short sighted decision designed to win votes and continue the support of the green party.

And Scotty.....no farmers don't all ways know where their cattle go as a lot are sold to agents who then on sell them to the live traders (not having a go at you just correcting your earlier statement in post 21 that farmers should know where their animals go)

[ricstew]

and the flow on effect.............what does my hubby ( and me ) do with $$$$ steel already ordered that were meant to be cattle yards........crap is that the bank on the phone?

[ApolloLXII]

I stayed out of this thread mainly becauseI didn't see the footage showing the cruelty being done to the livestock. From what I have heard other people say, I can imagine that it was pretty horrific and would have have garnered a strong reaction from me as I will not stand by and watch cruelty being inflicted upon any kind of animal. This topic is a pretty emotive one, which probably goes without saying, as evidenced from some of the posts here but in my opinion, stock being sold for slaughter overseas should be treated humanely, no matter what the country of origin or destination is.

I believe that the Australian stock industry has always maintained a high standard of animal welfare but the onus now is on the Indonesians to do the same so I agree that exports should be stopped, even though that is going to adversely impact on cattle farmers. In terms of trade, the Indonesians have no choice but to conform because they can't afford to source their meat supply from anywhere else without having the retail prices rise so any ban imposed by Australia shouldn't last very long. The threat by Indonesia to complain to the WTO won't get them very far. They need the meat just as much as we need to sell it to them so the ball is in their court.

[Scotty72]

So you're happy to pay for people who 'don't' want to get a job...but a primary producer gets the big shunt from you? Yet he's the one who puts food on your table...I sincerely hope you don't teach the kids that, or we'll be starving in ten years when there's no arable land and the farmers have all shut up shop, and the only place you can get food from is overseas and steak is $100kg instead of $30.

Don't misunderstand me, what's happened is atrocious...and I agree they shouldn't be sent where they're going to be mistreated...but you are now faced with another problem regarding animal rights. Cattle from the top end, where does it go to now to get slaughtered? Tennant Creek - middle of nowhere, so the cattle are shunted onto a vehicle and trucked thousands of kilometres to the nearest meat works...that's hardly got the animals best interest in mind has it?

So what do the farmers do with them now...?

It's all well and good to say no, but what happens to the cattle? And what happens to the farmers...or do people just not care about their fellow humans...

A farmer knows how to farm, try taking a visit up here someday - the amount of farmers who couldn't survive on the farms sold up and moved to the city - only to start committing suicide is beyond belief.

It is called sarcasm : pointing out the lunacy of your argument. Your main argument is that farmers will lose income : so let's keep up the cruel trade. But, if Centrelink staff lose income : let's keep handing out welfare. Both positions are as dopey as the other.

[ApolloLXII]

and the flow on effect.............what does my hubby ( and me ) do with $$$$ steel already ordered that were meant to be cattle yards........crap is that the bank on the phone?

You put a hold on the order and you tell the bank that you're in the middle of a "live export" crisis. While the former should be easily achievable, I understand that the latter (getting the banks' understanding or even sympathy) might be akin to whistling "Dixie" in a 60 knot gale while trying to balance a full glass of milk on your nose.

[Jules]

Wow. So many passionate responses to this subject, both here and in wider Australia.

Imagine what we as a nation could achieve if we turned equal measures of 'people power' towards issues such as extreme poverty, AIDS in Africa or child sex trafficking.

[Sezzy]

It might be called sarcasm, but I'm asking some very valid questions, that you don't seem to have answers to...so what happens to the farmers?

I never said keep up the cruel trade, I merely asked the question as to what the farmers now do with the cattle that they can't get rid of? And how do you prevent another case of animal cruelty when they are trucked thousands of kilometres?

[Bennymiata]

From what I heard this morning, Indonesia is now seeking compensation for the ban from the Australian government!

I wouldn't doubt that the video shown on the ABC was probably the very worst that the producer could possibly find, and that not all the slaughter houses in Indonesia are as bad as the one shown on the ABC.
I'm also fairly certain that even at that particular slaughterhouse, that animals are not always treated this way, and this particular animal probably got caught up somewhere along the line and this is why he was herded in such a manner, bu that is not forgiving them by any means as no animal should ever be treated this way.
As soon as it was apparent that he broke his leg, he should have been shot immediately and his carcass taken away for processing.

I am no farmer, but I've been on a few farms, and I know that at least 99% of farmers love their animals and will go out of their way, at any time of the day or night, in any inclement weather, to save any of them that are in trouble.
I've seen farmers crying over the loss of a single animal, when they have thousands of others to look after.

[Scotty72]

It might be called sarcasm, but I'm asking some very valid questions, that you don't seem to have answers to...so what happens to the farmers?

I never said keep up the cruel trade, I merely asked the question as to what the farmers now do with the cattle that they can't get rid of? And how do you prevent another case of animal cruelty when they are trucked thousands of kilometres?

First of all, you didn't answer my earlier question: what happens to the casino workers who finds themselves on the scrap-heap after the government has an anti-gambling campaign; the cigarette industry worker (or the local shop who sells ciggys) finds herself out of work when the government cracks down on under-age smokers?

My answer is... too bad - we are under no obligation to compensate businesses who suffer because their industry needs some cleaning up.

If the farmers wish to play the blame-game... blame their industry group who has turned a blind eye to this animal abuse. Pretending they are ensuring the welfare whilst all the while, knowing what was happening (or ought to have known).

Next, if the government wants to run an 'Eat healthy' campaign, you'll want to hand over a lazy billion to McDonald's.

After the next 'Brush your teeth' program, let's compensate the dentists and fillings manufactures for loss of future earnings.

The panel beaters will be driven to bankruptcy after the next 'drive safely' ads.

Just where will this end?

[Tannin]

It might be called sarcasm, but I'm asking some very valid questions, that you don't seem to have answers to...so what happens to the farmers?

It's tough. No two ways about it. They have painted themselves into a corner by turning a blind eye to horrific cruelty in the pursuit of easy export dollars. Now you might argue that this was negligent, you might argue that this was stupid, you might argue that this was betrayal by their industry bodies, you might argue that this was just selfish greed - but it doesn't much matter which of those were true (or a little bit of all of them, which is my belief): the industry has got to where it is by massive, uncaring cruelty.

We, the people of Australia, will not tolerate that going on any longer. It stops. Right now. We, the people of Australia, are generally easy-going and pretty forgiving, and because of that no-one is calling for the exporters to be punished for the cruelty they have been complicit in up to now, and (perhaps rather surprisingly) no-one is even calling for confiscation of those immoral earnings made in past years. That's OK. Punishment achieves little anyway. The important thing is to (1) stop torturing cattle, and (2) look for ways to reopen trade with Indonesia under known, humane conditions.

What happens to the farmers? 1: they stop making money by selling animals to be tortured. Right now. No exceptions. It stops. Forever. (2) They figure out some other way to make a dollar. If they can't find a decent, civilised way to make a quid, as always, the nation provides help in the form of unemployment benefits and retraining schemes. But it shouldn't have to come to that. With any luck, they should be able to start exporting to Indonesia again just as soon as there is proper certification of decent processes in the slaughterhouses over there.

[Tannin]

I wouldn't doubt that ... not all the slaughter houses in Indonesia are as bad as the one shown on the ABC.

If you were paying attention you would have learned from the program that they visited a total of 11 slaughterhouses, and every single one of those they were able to visit was using horrible, unnecessarily cruel practices very similar to those shown.

11 out of 11. You reckon #12 is going to be a whole lot better? I know where my bet would go.

[gabby]

I'm a bit late reading this but whilst I see the need to allow live exports of animals, for breeding purposes etc, I was reminded of the issue of the Aussie sheep which were sent to one of the Arabian countries in very overcrowded conditions-imagine not being able to sit/lay down for that period- only to be denied entry because their condition wasn't as good as it could have been.. so they were trying to sell them off cheap to some other country who would accept our weakened lambs which would not have been in that state if they'd just ordered the meat in a frozen state. These animals deserve to have their short lives protected from the stress of this sort of thing-even if only that the stress levels reportedly increase the toughness of the beef.