Once I had written my speech, I thought "That'd make a top Blog post" so here it is!
Impressions of
Almost 2
years ago today, ABC television broadcast footage of animal cruelty in Indonesian
abattoirs which set in motion a chain of events that has ramifications across
the nation.
The footage
showed horrific images of animal cruelty, which no right thinking person could
condone. How could someone do such a thing? The footage gave the impression of
systemic animal cruelty and it appeared simple, the sale of animals to these
people must stop.
As a result
of the public outcry, pressure was placed on the government to do something
about it. The government had been caught napping by the expose by animals
Australia. What could they do? Government had to give the impression of being
in control. A hastily thought out ban of Live export of all Australian
livestock was put in place. Overnight the trade snapped to a stop.
It was
around this time that I was introduced to the online world of Agvocacy by a
friend. What is Agvocacy you ask? Well, an Agvocate is someone who advocates
for agriculture.
A significant
social media presence was established by the Anti Live export campaigners
showing horrific images of animal cruelty and giving the impression that all
livestock producers where greedy, uncaring and selfish. I, like many other
producers tired to provide the balance of view. If we didn’t live export to
these countries, someone else would. Then who would be there to advocate for
better animal welfare in the receiving countries? If we aren’t selling them the
product, we can’t dictate the terms. Livestock producers spoke of the impending
animal welfare disaster, should they have no markets for their cattle and be
forced to destroy them.
Meanwhile,
cattle continued to “stockpile” on farms with no homes to go to. It was ok
though, even thought there were no markets, at least the season was good, so
the cattle could be retained on property. Given that the cattle weren’t flooding
onto the market yet it gave the impression of a frozen beef export industry
that could absorb these extra cattle. “See, I told you we didn’t need live
export” was the cry from the animal liberationists.
It was a
grave concern to many of us who, while we where livestock producers, where not
Live Exporters. All livestock producers where being tarred with the same brush.
Something had to be done.
About 12
months ago, our loose band of facebook and twitter friends decided that
something had to be done. We had to improve the impression of all forms of
agriculture in the eyes of the general public. We had to Agvocate loud and
clear. With that in mind, a facebook page
called “Ask and Aussie Farmer” was launched to the general public. It is a friendly and non confronting place where
any question about any aspect of agriculture, irrespective of how complex or
simple can be asked. We have pledged to answer them courteously and quickly to
give the public confidence in the agricultural production systems in this
country. It started out pretty slow and built momentum over time. A quick check
this afternoon shows over 4982 followers, or “Likes” in Social Media speak.
This kind of
Agvocacy was beginning to have inroads in the debate about agriculture in the
country. A survey commissioned by the world society for the prevention of
cruelty to animals (WSPCA) commissioned an automated telephone survey on live
export asked the question “do you agree with the slaughter practices in foreign
countries” to which 77% of people replied “NO”. WSPCA, Animals Australia and
the Greens used this survey to give the impression of a majority of Australians
being opposed to live exports.
The group,
“Humane chain” had planned to protest against live exports by assembling anti
live export protesters on the Stirling Bridge in Freemantle. For those of you
who don’t know Freemantle, the Stirling Bridge links the Port of Fremantle in
WA to the mainland and is the route traversed by the trucks carrying sheep to
the live export terminal on the Fremantle dock. The purpose of this protest,
was to give the impression of a significant proportion of the population being
opposed to live exports, by spanning the bridge and holding hands and thereby
forming a Human Chain. Over 900 people attended the event.
Being firmly of the belief that there are always 2 sides to
every story, we were able through our network of social media to organise a
counter rally of supporters to provide the balance. It was a huge success, with
over 3000 people attending including a convoy of livestock trucks forming their
own chain over the bridge.
One of the
solutions put forward by the anti live export movement is for on shore
processing, Build abattoirs in the north, processes it here and send it
overseas in boxes. Their argument gives the impression of a simple transition
to an alternative market. The issue here is that the live export market is for
store cattle, that is cattle that can be sent overseas and fattened in feedlots
in Indonesia. There isn’t sufficient suitable land in the northern territory to
fatten, or Finish the cattle. Also, given the tropical climate, the supply of
cattle in “The Wet” becomes another issue. Couple this to the fact that
Australia has the highest processing cost of any major meat exporter in the
world, there is another problem, it prices the product out of the market.
So what of
our customers, The Indonesians? What do they make of all this? Well, reports
from Indonesia show that they see Australian as an unreliable supplier of their
meat, we have given them the impression of a country that cannot guarantee
supply, we have given them the impression of a country that thinks we can
dictate our terms to them on how they do things by forcing them to upgrade
their facilities and we have given them the impression of a country that does not
care about the cost effective supply of food to the poorer nations in the
region. It gives the impression of a country that is racist.
As the
debate wore on, cattle numbers continued to grow and the seasonal conditions in
the north of the country continued to deteriorate, giving the impression of an
impending disaster. “We have to find an outlet for these cattle” was the cry
from the north. It appeared the animal welfare crisis was coming to our own
shores. A claim fiercely denied by the Anti Live export campaigners.
As the
season continued to deteriorate, cattle started flooding onto the market, you
had to look no further than the stream of trucks passing down our very main
street to see the volume of cattle that where being forced onto the market as
numbers continued to climb, and feed continued to disappear. The issue came to
a head when Brahman steers from the north weighing 200 kg sold in Longreach for
as little as 10c/kg, that is just $20 each.
Today, we
hear what appears to be good news; Indonesia has lifted its import quota for
beef. It gives the impression of an outlet for some of the many stranded
cattle. But a closer look reveals that it is an increase in chilled Boxed beef,
which is a market the stranded northern cattle can’t meet, and given that reports
show that the receiving facilities chillers in Jakarta are currently broken
down, it would appear that is a market that can’t be filled.
Before I
conclude here this evening, I would like to share with you, the editorial from
today’s Australian newspaper
Emaciated
cattle out of sight
- From:The Australian
- May
28, 2013 12:00AM
GRAZIERS in northern Queensland face the dreadful choice of trying to
save their emaciated cattle or putting them out of their misery. It is a choice
the animal welfare lobby's loudest advocates do not have to face. Their moral
trumpet is used to draw attention - often with the help of an ABC television
crew - to abuses in other countries.
The scrawny, skeletal, starving beasts strewn across dusty paddocks in
the nation's north seem to be of little concern to them. It is the wicked
combination of drought conditions, the impact of bushfires and the campaign to
end the export of live animals that has reduced these beasts to the terrible
state they are in.
On Saturday, we published stories and photographs of graziers dealing
with these gut-wrenching choices. Today, drought conditions extend over a third
of Queensland, after bushfires and heatwaves swept across farming stations last
year. With no relief in sight and a glut of cattle, there are about 300,000
head at risk of dying from starvation.
Farmers are in no doubt about how this trouble began. It was the
ill-considered decision by Agriculture Minister Joe Ludwig to suspend live cattle
exports to Indonesia in 2011. This hasty decision was made in response to
footage of Australian animals being abused in several Indonesian abattoirs. The
temporary ban, however, amounted to a death-blow for the industry. Two years
ago, 400,000 head of cattle were exported to Indonesia; today it is 267,000.
The industry must shoulder
responsibility for improving animal welfare at every stage of the supply chain.
Nobody likes to see animals treated cruelly, here or abroad. But rather than
stop the live export trade there should have been a concerted effort to improve
the handling and slaughter of animals by investing in new facilities and
boosting education and training.
Farmers are now being portrayed
as heartless when they are in fact deeply troubled by the situation they find
their cattle in. The impact of the campaign by animal welfare activists to shut
down the $1 billion live trade is not only being felt through commercial
losses. It can be seen in the eyes of the starving cattle, unable to stand or roaming
paddocks looking for nourishment. This is the impact of political decisions
driven by populism.
We need to
be aware that our impression of something can be vastly different from the
reality. While a ban of live exports may give the impression of sparing
thousands of Australian cattle from a cruel death, the reality has become
vastly different. In the words of the great Adam Savage of Mythbusters fame, “I
reject your reality and substitute it with my own”
