Live cattle trade to Indonesia

I'm amazed the federal government can enforce an overnight ban on cattle, yet there's a huge problem with "legal" synthetic drugs, that is yet to be resolved and there are numerous types available..the most common is mentioned here

Designer Drug Problems 1

Designer Drug Problems 2

Redwing

I agree that the government probably should ban these legal synthetic drugs.

What I don't understand is why mining companies can't ban them as part of their OH&S Policies and conditions of employment.

In a previous life I worked in the Oil & Gas Industry and often noted that whilst alcohol is a legal substance, there is a zero tolerance to it being present in your bloodstream before boarding a chopper for an offshore roster. The mandatory breath analysis and bag searches do hopefully reduce the incidence of workers using these company prohibited substances to a manageable level.

There will, however, always be tossers who try to beat the system.
 
Redwing

I agree that the government probably should ban these legal synthetic drugs.

What I don't understand is why mining companies can't ban them as part of their OH&S Policies and conditions of employment.

In a previous life I worked in the Oil & Gas Industry and often noted that whilst alcohol is a legal substance, there is a zero tolerance to it being present in your bloodstream before boarding a chopper for an offshore roster. The mandatory breath analysis and bag searches do hopefully reduce the incidence of workers using these company prohibited substances to a manageable level.

There will, however, always be tossers who try to beat the system.

Word. Didn't BHP ban Chronic overnight? OH&S covers this, at my workplace you get tested for Codeine among other things, as this can impair our ability to operate heavy machinery. As things like Chronic are hallucinagenic, it would easily be covered in 'banning for on-site safety'. Residual testing wouldn't cut it however.
 
Word. Didn't BHP ban Chronic overnight? OH&S covers this, at my workplace you get tested for Codeine among other things, as this can impair our ability to operate heavy machinery. As things like Chronic are hallucinagenic, it would easily be covered in 'banning for on-site safety'. Residual testing wouldn't cut it however.

Why not, it shows up in the metabolites?
 
And yes human suffering is much more important.
And again it has nothing to do with this forum other than giving small minds their daily dose of drama.

Oh! I thought we were in the Coffee Lounge? Sorry to trespass on your personal forum. How small-minded of me!

The curious things about humans when you actually think about it though is that they are prone to empathise with the suffering of other creatures, both human and animal.

Witnessing torture - even of animals - clearly induces in many people genuine human suffering.

Is this human suffering less human in some way for it not having originated in sufficiently drammatic suffering for you?

I don't know what you're piston, but you're decidely broke in some way.
 
Why not, it shows up in the metabolites?

No, what I mean is that finding residual traces couldn't be a 'punishable' offence by any company, if its legal. What a person does in there own time which doesn't affect the company is not its business. Referring back to my job, management clearly knows who takes what, and there are discussions about things like 'If i take Ecstasy on Saturday night, would I be ok for Sunday shift?'

You're trying to promote safe work practices, not some form of workplace moralism.
 
And again it has nothing to do with this forum.

PB, are you really that slow? :)
I thought I made it clear enough in an earlier post that the Coffee Lounge is used for discussion on anything. I reckon most forum members would understand that.
You are obviously not convinced, as you continue to believe that 'anything' means 'anything relating to property'.
Cheers,
Amy
 
I recommend that you all watch this video: http://www.abc.net.au/landline/content/2010/s3241938.htm
Its about a cattle family in the NT and runs for 20 min. If you have a heart thn you will be glad you watched it.

From that report the presenter Prue Adams says:
They've killed stock themselves, of course, but they say it's quick and humane. They're disgusted with the images they've seen at overseas meatworks, but believe if Australia doesn't supply live animals someone else will.

Graingrower, are you seriously advocating that Australians continue to be complicit in however barbaric mistreatment of live animals we export on the grounds of this appalling rationalisation?
 
Graingrower, are you seriously advocating that Australians continue to be complicit in however barbaric mistreatment of live animals we export on the grounds of this appalling rationalisation?

I'm not suggesting that, and I don't think that there is an easy answer. I do think that what the government has just done is totally irresponsible. I just put this video up first because it's a great story and second so that people could see that some of the most effected people in this issue are some of the furtherest from it.

Here is an analogy (probably a very poor one, but it will have to do until I come up with a better one): The government finds that Coles and Woolworths are buying food from farmers who are using illegal foreign labour. So they shut down Coles and Woolworths, overnight.
 
I'm not suggesting that, and I don't think that there is an easy answer. I do think that what the government has just done is totally irresponsible. I just put this video up first because it's a great story and second so that people could see that some of the most effected people in this issue are some of the furtherest from it.

Here is an analogy (probably a very poor one, but it will have to do until I come up with a better one): The government finds that Coles and Woolworths are buying food from farmers who are using illegal foreign labour. So they shut down Coles and Woolworths, overnight.


Does that then not beg the question

What should the govt do instead ?

You've usggested they should not "continue to be complicit in however barbaric mistreatment of live animals we export on the grounds of this appalling rationalisation"

Is there another better deicsion ? What shoudl happen in the meantime while that's all worked out ?

No one suggested it's easy
 
I'm not suggesting that, and I don't think that there is an easy answer. I do think that what the government has just done is totally irresponsible. I just put this video up first because it's a great story and second so that people could see that some of the most effected people in this issue are some of the furtherest from it.

Here is an analogy (probably a very poor one, but it will have to do until I come up with a better one): The government finds that Coles and Woolworths are buying food from farmers who are using illegal foreign labour. So they shut down Coles and Woolworths, overnight.

Producers have every right to be angry...but they should be looking to the MLA and LiverCorp. Live exports have always been a hugely sensitive issue and, regrettably, it it is difficult to come to any conclusion other than they have been averting their eyes for some time.
 
I recommend that you all watch this video: http://www.abc.net.au/landline/content/2010/s3241938.htm
Its about a cattle family in the NT and runs for 20 min. If you have a heart thn you will be glad you watched it.

A truly inspirational story!

This really shows some of the complexity of the cattle trade story as well. There are no easy answers and sometimes we need to pause and reflect upon how peoples livelihoods are affected by the decisions that need to be made.

If we, as a nation, believe the live cattle trade needs to cease temporarily & perhaps even indefinitely (which we have done), then we as a nation, need to stand up and help those whose livelihood has been adversely affected. The government needs to use some of our tax dollars to offset the moral decision & establish viable trade alternatives as a priority.
 
I haven't been following this thread so apologies if this has been posted before. There's a lot that the ABC missed in producing a balanced report.


A letter to ABC's Four Corners from live export industry stakeholder, Scot Braithwaite


Dear Sir,

I must introduce myself. My name is Scot Braithwaite and my life has basically revolved around live export since I was 10 years old. I was unloading cattle boats in Malaysia at the age of 13.

I have worked for all the major cattle companies including as a Head Stockman in the Northern Territory. I have a degree in economics from the Queensland University and I personally have sold more than 1.5 million head of cattle into Indonesia since 1991. I am presently employed as the marketing manager for Wellard rural exports.

I am writing to you after Monday's program to say that although I abhor the treatment of the animals shown in the video, your one sided approach to the subject and the possible effect of that of a ban on live exports is too big a price to pay for a report based on the evidence of an organization that’s charter is to shut us down.

I have the following points to make. I would like to have the same time as those who denigrated my life to show you the other side of our industry. To show you what is really going on. In Australia there used to be thing about “A Fair Go”. You have gone with images provided by one person followed up by your investigative journalist who spent a week in Indonesia. Your report makes out that close to 100pc of Australian cattle are treated as was shown on TV.

The ship that appears in the footage “for less than 30 seconds” is a vessel that cost tens of millions of dollars to build. We have had three separate media groups sail with this ship and it can in no uncertain terms be described as best in class. The Wellard group has another 3 vessels of the same standard with another 2 being built in China. This is a total investment of $400 million to ensure that livestock exports from Australia are undertaken at the utmost levels of cow comfort and animal welfare.
The feedlot that was filmed was given a 10-second view. This feedlot is without doubt world-class. Your viewers should have at least had the opportunity to view large numbers of cattle eating and sleeping comfortably in a fantastic facility. This company has in addition moved to kill all its cattle through stunning system that he has control of. This owner has spent 20 years of his life in the industry, has built his business from nothing, has done all that is required of him from an animal welfare point of view yet your reporter makes no mention of these things.
Within a three-hour drive or 15 minute helicopter trip there are another three world-class facilities. All three feedlots including the one filmed, are at, or better than, what can be found in Australia. The cattle being fed, and the ration being fed, leads to a lot less animal health issues then a similar size operation in Australia. One of these facilities is operated and owned by a large Australian pastoral house. They had no mention in your supposed unbiased report. The operation is run by a North Queensland man who, through his absolute dedication to excellence has built a feedlot and slaughtering system that his company, the industry and himself can be very proud of. The system is closed, all the cattle are already killed through their own abattoir. They import 20 to 25000 cattle year. They have been doing this for at least five years. Why should they be shut down? For what reason could anyone justify closing this operation down, especially without even bothering to look at what goes on?
The other world-class feedlots that could have been investigated within a three-hour ride in the car are owned by a large publicly-listed Indonesian company. In all, they have on feed 50,000 cattle and import about 120,000 cattle a year. They have recently built an abattoir (the one that was briefly shown on the program). They built this two years ago as they knew that modern methods must come to Indonesia and they were willing to make the investment to make it happen.

The total investment from these 3 lotfeeders alone in infrastructure and stock is more than $100 million. Add to that the hundreds of millions that Wellard has recently invested in ships and do you really believe that these people would leave the final product to a murderous ******* with a blunt knife? They not only have tried to ensure the welfare of the animal but have made investments to make the changes all along the chain. These people deserve to have their side of the story heard. If the system is not perfect, and it isn’t, they have the wherewithal and the incentive to make it happen in a very short time.

These three importers who have shown a commitment to everything good about animal production, handle 45pc of total imports.

Social responsibility

The other major issue that was not covered was the social responsibility that all lotfeeders in Indonesia practice. Their operations are in relatively isolated poor areas: the feedlots provide employment opportunity, advancement through effort, and a market for thousands of tonnes of feedstuffs grown for the cattle. My understanding is that 8000 people are directly employed by the feedlots and over 1,000,000 people are reliant on the regular income made from supplying corn silage and other feedstuffs. This is not made up, it is fact. It can be easily checked. I will bet my 1,000,000 farmers against the 1,000,000 signatures on the ban order. It is very easy to sit in your comfortable chair and criticise but is it really worth the human cost to ban something that can be fixed and fixed reasonable quickly?

That is Sumatra. In Jakarta there is the largest privately-owned abattoir that kills about 4000 to 6000 head a month. It is a well-run facility that has no welfare issues. In addition it was working on getting a stun system in place well before the Four Corners report. No photos from here, yet this is another who has been doing the right thing and who will lose his business now that the trade is banned.

The largest Importer into Jakarta, has also built a slaughter facility in the past 12 months. It has not been commissioned yet but can be made ready within a month. They also have a private bone to pick with the program. As was not reported in the show, abattoirs in Indonesia are operated by any number of individual ‘Wholesalers'. They control the space and the manpower kills their number for the night and then hand-over to the next team. In any one night 8 to 10 separate operators can use the same facility.

In the case of the footage of the head-slapping, the camera panned to the cattle waiting and the tags of AA, Newcastle Waters and his company were made very prominent. Yes, they were there but the team that handled was different to the one being filmed. They protest, that their crews are well trained, no head-slapping occurs and very large and sharp knives are used to ensure a bloody but quick end. I have no reason to doubt them because I have seen a lot of their cattle handled at point-of-slaughter and their crews are well trained with immediate results. Where can their case be heard?

I have watched literally thousands of cattle slaughtered in the boxes in Indonesia. Yes there are problems, as there are at every point of slaughter on every type of animal in the world, but 98pc of the cattle I watched killed was quick and without fuss. Why is there not one shot of what happens 98pc of the time?

The shots of outright cruelty are totally unacceptable and the slaughter of cattle is still gruesome and confronting but is not as prevalent as portrayed in your report. Yes, it does sometimes happen but it is the exception, not the rule. And we are already taking steps to improve the system and we have the ability to ensure all animals are stunned in a very short time.

Yes, there are a couple of operators who in the short term will not be able to handle the new way. But they will be dropped: no commitment to stunning, no supply. No negotiation. There are also a number of operators privately-owned who were, to all intents and purposes, doing the right thing. They were asked to supply through the boxes and they have. They will be asked to only supply though a stunning facility, and they will. They have far too much invested in the whole industry over many years to not do as we ask.

I am asking for a fair go. You have been expertly manipulated. Hear the actual other side of the story let the Australian public see both sides. I am happy to make all the arrangements. This is too important to let sit with the images you portrayed last Monday without recourse.



Scot Braithwaite

...who is this guy here:
http://www.wellardgroup.com.au/wellard_rural_exports/international_expertise/scot_braithwaite.phtml
 
On the other side of the coin , once again we have Australia now carrying on about "Australian standards" biting the very hand that feeds it and burying itself in it's own BS with it's off the planet expectations.
So what , they expect them to build 100 million dollar plants now , and over night . Not possible and would take decades anyway .

How about this cheaper more realistic alternative - just for starters and improve from there over time.

No more leg ropes - free !
Must use a bloody riffle or stun gun - $100 bucks !
Cattle must be herded in quietly and humanely-free !
The concrete races must have non slip patterns instead of being smooth - free ! It'd be just as easy to make concrete surfaces with tracks across as smooth.
We pay an inspector to do the rounds year round , make sure animals are looked after and treated properly. On wages over there - no clue - probably 10k p/a or something . Or , as per "Australian standards " even pay an Australian $150 p/a to do it instead.
And if an individual mob are found not making these very minor, cheap and very easily doable improvements that would make all the difference , no cows till they do .
 
Last edited:
I read a beautifully written article, "There's no excuse for inhumanity to animals" by Lyn White (Animals Australia campaigner) published in the SMH. In it she writes that 200 years ago, William Wilberforce ended the slave trade in Britain and founded the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. In the article Lyn says that live export trade should also be condemned to history. She also explains that unlike humans, animals can not plead for help or ask for mercy. Her final words, as quoted by Wilberforce, are: "You may choose to look the other way, but you can never again say that you did not know." An article worth reflecting upon.

There's no excuse for inhumanity to animals

As the investigator who documented the horrendous treatment of Australian cattle in Indonesian abattoirs, no one understands better the distress and outrage so many Australians have felt since this aired on Four Corners.

Much of that outrage has been directed at the live export representative bodies Meat & Livestock Australia and LiveCorp. Having conducted investigations into the treatment of Australian livestock in the Middle East since 2003, I already had every reason to question their claims that animal welfare was a priority.

It was the exposure of evidence gathered in the Middle East that led to the industry's sudden interest in animal welfare, despite knowing of the conditions in importing countries for three decades. Facing an outraged community and concerned producers, Meat & Livestock Australia launched a PR campaign claiming that it could improve practices in importing countries if it remained in the marketplace. No one questioned the validity of this, despite 30 years of involvement in many of the countries.

But now all Australians are quite rightfully questioning Meat & Livestock Australia and LiveCorp's ''animal welfare'' credentials. Their names appear proudly stamped on brutal cattle-restraint devices condemned by the world's leading slaughter expert, Professor Temple Grandin, as ''atrocious'' and ''unacceptable'' and violating ''every humane standard there is''.

Meat & Livestock's attempt to deny accountability and knowledge of the situation in Indonesia has been challenged by its constituents. Its own reports reveal knowledge of the impact of these cruel restraint devices as well as the fact that cattle in Indonesia are routinely subjected to practices such as eye-gouging.

It is only six years since I stood in horror in a Bassateen abattoir in Cairo witnessing cattle having their leg tendons slashed and eyes stabbed to disable them before slaughter. Despite knowing that such practices were routine in Egypt, Australia exported nearly 1 million live cattle there. The reaction from the government was to suspend the trade to Egypt. One has to ask now why such clear involvement in the most deplorable animal cruelty was not enough for the government to ban the live trade then and there, and condemn those involved in the harshest possible terms. Had it done so, millions of Australian cattle would have been protected from being brutalised in Indonesia.

I am regularly asked how workers in Egypt and Indonesia could succumb to such depravity. The more pertinent question is how Australia's live export industry could knowingly be a party to it. The tragic and inevitable conclusion that local workers reach, through having Australian animals supplied to them, is that their current treatment of animals is acceptable. Rather than inspiring much needed change, Australia's live trade is entrenching local beliefs and practices. The one country where there has been significant improvement in slaughter practices is Jordan - as a direct result of Animals Australia's work there.

Some 200 years ago another shipboard trade in living beings was defended on the basis of profits and the schoolyard defence of ''if we didn't do it, someone else would''. The victims of this trade were also considered lesser beings. It took the extraordinary efforts of the British politician William Wilberforce to end the slave trade and persuade his nation that profit should never trump ethics. It should be no surprise that this great man also founded the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in Britain.

Australia's live export trade will be condemned in history in the same way the slave trade was. The Gillard government has a choice: to be remembered as a government that supported the live trade, or celebrated as the one that ended it.

Standing in the abattoirs in the Middle East, and more recently in Indonesia, I was reminded of the advantage that we have over the animal kingdom - simply because we have a capacity to call out for help and to plead for mercy.

Having borne witness to the terrible suffering of Australian livestock, I am pleading to the government for mercy on their behalf. As Wilberforce conveyed to his government: ''You may choose to look the other way but you can never say again that you did not know.''
 
I'm new to this forum and there is not much I can add to this thread that has not already been said other than a big THANKYOU LisaP for your input and integrity.
 
Hi - I don't post on here much but wanted to add my 2 cents worth. Apart from the animal welfare argument which is strong in itself, the whole industry will not be negatively affected by a ban on live cattle exports. I have family in the meat trade (abattoirs/ meat processing) and it will actually mean that this business will be better off because they'll have more cattle to process and less competition for the raw product. At the moment they have abattoirs sitting idle in NT and north QLD because there aren't enough cattle to process and the abattoirs aren't viable unless they're running at full capacity. So its not a bad thing for all of the meat industry and it may actually mean more jobs are available in Australia if it results in more livestock being processed here.
Rachel
 
Hi - I don't post on here much but wanted to add my 2 cents worth. Apart from the animal welfare argument which is strong in itself, the whole industry will not be negatively affected by a ban on live cattle exports. I have family in the meat trade (abattoirs/ meat processing) and it will actually mean that this business will be better off because they'll have more cattle to process and less competition for the raw product. At the moment they have abattoirs sitting idle in NT and north QLD because there aren't enough cattle to process and the abattoirs aren't viable unless they're running at full capacity. So its not a bad thing for all of the meat industry and it may actually mean more jobs are available in Australia if it results in more livestock being processed here.
Rachel


Rachel, Not user I understand... Are you saying that abvbatoirs are sitting empty cause there's not enough cattle, buyt the demand is there ?

So where are we aussies 's getting our meat form now if not through abbatoirs ? I've not seen a shortage of available meat (?)
 
Jaycee - they have other abattoirs operating in Australia and most of their meat is exported. However, they are only viable if running at full capacity and this means a regular supply of cattle. I don't think its a coincidence that the 2 abattoirs they currently have idle happen to be in NT and north QLD where most of the live trade is shipped from.
 
Jaycee - they have other abattoirs operating in Australia and most of their meat is exported. However, they are only viable if running at full capacity and this means a regular supply of cattle. I don't think its a coincidence that the 2 abattoirs they currently have idle happen to be in NT and north QLD where most of the live trade is shipped from.

If there are no customers to sell to, what will they do with the excess meat they process ??? I mean, we're not short of meat at the moment, so to whom will these abbatoirs now seel the meat whch was previously exported live ?
 
Back
Top