I saw many buffalo, cattle and also deer, slaughtered in Indonesia during the 1970s. There was usually praying, the beast’s head was secured, and then a sharp knife used to saw through the neck. I write ‘saw’ because the neck is thick and as I watched it seemed to take time for the knife to get to the artery. Death as I watched always appeared slow and painful.
None of the incidences were as traumatic as the television footage on ABC TV Four Corners program on Monday night, but none of the animals I saw killed were stunned first.
I was exposed to these incidences because my father managed a cattle ranch and beasts were killed according to Halal custom for the many families who lived on the ranch. I also saw animals killed at local festivities, deer hunts and other events that typically involved the very public slaughter of a live animal.
The most bloody was probably a non-Moslem burial in animist Tana Toraja. I remember it as described at Wikipedia:
“Slaughtering tens of water buffalo and hundreds of pigs using a machete is the climax of the elaborate death feast, with dancing and music and young boys who catch spurting blood in long bamboo tubes.”
The way animals are killed in Indonesia has much to do with culture and tradition and it is not done in a way the RSPCA or most Australians would consider humane. Indeed it is brutal.
The reality is that despite protests from animal rights activists for many years, still only a tiny percentage of Indonesian abattoirs stun the beasts before killing them. And stunning is not going to happen at cultural festivals were witnessing live slaughter is a feature of the event.
In response to the Four Corners program the Australian government has suspended live export to Indonesia. In response, Sri Mukartini, the head of animal welfare at Indonesia’s agriculture ministry, has commented, “Animal welfare is a relatively new issue in Indonesia. We’re still developing regulations.”
The bottom line is that in Indonesia, Australian cattle aren’t singled out for a brutal death. Life and death is much more brutual for many people and many animals.
Banning live export will impact on our relationship with that country, deepening the cultural divide. And frozen meat from Australia is not going to replace live exports because meat is still sold warm in markets in Indonesia because not everyone has refrigeration.
***********
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2011/05/31/australia’s-ban-cattle-exports-ri-‘political’.html
http://news.malaysia.msn.com/regional/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4889049
http://www.halalfoodguide.com.au/halal.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toraja
http://www.livecorp.com.au/SingleArticle/11-05-30/Response_to_ABC_TV_s_4_Corners_Program.aspx
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/Australia-stop-policing-live-abc-2537633490.html?x=0
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Yes,
well said Jen,
It is rather odd and very conceited to think we could dictate to Indonesia from our own cultural standpoint.
To be honest, even though I am a farmer, if I had to kill my own meat I would be a vegetarian.
I can’t even be present when we kill old and sick chooks.
That’s because I’m a total softy when it comes to animals, not because there is any common sense or practical management involved.
I think this whole report and the associated media attached to it is a shameless attempt to sway people’s emotions.
They are deliberately aiming at softies like me and tugging at our heartsrings and then making a conceited value judgement about a completely different culture.
I believe that even in Australia where our killing methods are definitely ‘more humane’, that those poor sheep, goats, cattle, pigs, chickens etc still know where they’re headed and are still just as afraid.
Any attempt to ‘fix’ this problem from the standpoint that has been offered from this report, would not stop Indonesia from behaving in this manner but would definitely damage our cattle industry.
It would be a classic case of ‘cutting off our noses to spite our face’ and it would be conceited ‘do gooders’ who would be making the fuss and demanding the change and not feeling any of the financial damage that would be associated.
If they truly believed that this problem needs to be addressed, they should become personally involved and go to Indonesia and educate Indonesians about animal welfare and humane slaughtering methods.
That would perhaps have a chance of achieving something worthwhile.
Sitting in Australia and voting in a poll and demanding that Australia stops exporting live meat to Indonesia is NOT going to solve the actual problem.
That only proves that they have a soft spot for animals like I do 🙂
I saw my father bash my mother,so I tell my sons it’s fine to bash their partners because that is the way it was in my world.(sarcasm)
We may have to stand back and watch how they treat their women,cultural respect and all that,but we do not have to stand back and watch them torture our animals to death.
The cattle industry has caused this mess,they can clean it up.
Insist that every abattoir stuns the cows,insist that the sharpest knives be used,put in full time supervisors at every abattoir(they should do the same in Australia)I am sure that they can resume exports if they are prepared to spend money on the problem,usually I am all for creating jobs,but not on the back of an animals needless suffering.I know in the end they suffer,but we can at least minimise the suffering.
I am a meat eater,but not if it means cows have to be tortured.
The bottom line is that in some abattoirs in Indonesia cattle are singled out to be tortured,not given a quick death,trying to tell people that it has to be that way singles you out as being of the same mind as those Indonesians who believe it is fine to torture animals.
Where do you draw the line?
Noelene,
I did not say it was OK, I even said I didn’t like it.
What I severely objected to was the ‘approach’ and the unrealistic and conceited sentiment behind it.
I would like nothing better than seeing the end of cruelty to animals (and women and children and every other downtrodden underling in our world) but I DO NOT think that signing a petition will do anything at all to solve the problem.
We may feel better because we signed it but it will do nothing to stop the cruelty in Indonesia.
Even ‘insisting’ will have no effect.
Didn’t you read what Jennifer wrote about that?
You also need to explain why you think the cattle industry caused this mess and should therefore clean it up? That is a completely unsupported and misinformed statement.
Where do I draw the line?
If you really cared that much Noelene, spend your time and money to educate these people about the error of their ways. I would even contribute to your cause if you were prepared to do that.
I am very tired of conceited people in their highly protected worlds believing that ‘someone else’ should pay to fix something they only found out about yesterday.
They only found out because they saw it on Four Corners.
Making a fuss this week, signing a petition or a news poll and then moving on to the next exciting and emotional story will not stop the Indonesians from their abhorrent slaughtering practices.
I’m glad you care about animal cruelty.
I do too.
You need to put your feet on the ground and offer a realistic solution however.
Attacking Australian cattle farmers is not a realistic option.
That just damages the farmers, it doesn’t stop the practice at all.
You seem to be under the misapprehension that they only slaughter Australian cattle?
You also seem to think that Australian Cattle farmers can dictate political policy to the Indonesian Government?
Neither of those assertations have any basis in reality.
I suppose it’s an indicator as to ‘me’, but my second most favourite movie was the (very loose) adaptation of Conrad’s ‘Heart Of Darkness’ into the movie ‘Apocalypse Now’.
Towards the end of the movie when Willard (Marty Sheen) is in the camp of Colonel Kurtz (Brando) there is an extended scene of the ritual public slaying of a Water Buffalo.
That was the second time I had witnessed an animal killing on this large scale.
In December of ’79, ‘Rolling Stone’ had two extended pieces on the movie, one, of 5 pages, an interview with Marty Sheen, and the second Greil Marcus’ 5 page interview with Francis Coppola.
During both of them, mention was made of the inclusion of that ritualistic Buffalo slaughter, and how the thinking was that it was only included (and the inference was that it was made up for effect) to add more sensation to an already sensationalist movie.
Both Sheen and Coppola said that this was in fact not something that was made up, but was indeed something done on special occasions, and even on large public occasions.
There was even strong post production debate as to whether or not to even include it in the film, and then there was discussion even at the board of censors when the movie was up before them for classification as to whether or not to delete it from the print for the public.
Incidentally, as good as the movie was, Conrad’s novel was so much better.
Tony.
“I suppose it’s an indicator as to ‘me’”
Not quite clear here Tony, so do you approve of that ritualistic Buffalo slaughter or not?
Didn’t see the movie so can’t say either way if it was indeed an integral part of it or not.
No, the indicator was in respect of this being a favourite movie of mine, not with respect to the animal slaughter.
As gruesome as it was portrayed in the movie, after reading those two interviews, it was placed into better context, as my first impression was ….. “Surely this doesn’t go on!”
As to this 4 Corners thing, then my perception is that the only way around it is to completely and utterly ban all live exports of all livestock, not only to Indonesia, but to everywhere, and as surely as night follows day, that will not happen, as it will destroy that large export business and the Graziers who rely on that business.
If this happens in Indonesia, then surely they are not ‘Robinson Crusoe’.
Also, as Jennifer mentions, this live export trade is not just from Australia, it is from other sources as well. Now Australia has banned export, then there will be a ramping up from those other suppliers.
I also agree wholeheartedly with both comments from debbie, and that also does not mean I am a callous person who has no regard for animal welfare.
While ever people eat meat, anywhere, animals will be killed for that purpose.
There would be people appalled at what happens in an Australian abbatoir, where ‘best practice’ is indeed employed.
Again, this is a case of us here in Australia imposing our values on people from a different culture, almost a typical case of old style Colonialism.
Tony.
Telling Indonesians how they should slaughter their animals is indeed a form of colonialism.
Many cultures celebrate the death of an animal.
‘Old Man and the Sea’ by Earnest Hemmingway is about the struggle of a fisherman to kill a fish and I was forced to read that story at school in English.
What does the fish symbolize? How long did it take for the old man to kill it?
No problem Tony, I wasn’t judgmental about it, simply lack of understanding the relation.
I worked for the UN in Africa on water and irrigation projects and have experienced customs and practices I found abhorrent, strangely most of my coworkers who were purely admin types saw nothing wrong with it, as a matter of fact, got involved and celebrating a “cultural” diversity!
I could tell tales, but what’s the point? Jennifer probably has some experience of these as she worked in Africa as well.
I try to be pragmatic in all matters, as an engineer that’s the only way to go, while I do not approve of the way the cattle is treated in Indonesia I cannot see any way to interfere in an effective way.
We could of course stop exporting live animals, and I’d prefer it to be so, but real life and commerce just don’t work that way. If we stop exporting someone else will pick up the slack.
Now does the fact that it’s Argentina’s cattle being mistreated ease the conscience of some people?
While I agree with Debbie that if you want to eat meat you should be able to kill your own, and I and my farming family have done this for as long as I can remember, it’s also not very practical.
Anyway I only wanted to know if that scene in the movie was gratuitous or not.
Cheers
Oh well maybe it’s cultural to have terrorism too. And not to educate women. Feet binding is cool. As long as it doesn’t interfere with business. Come on. What apologists.
Luke,
I hope you did not include me in the “apologists” group?
Mate, this is a public forum, where people of sense are not exactly spilling their guts.
The problem is the cruel practices of a few indonesians, how will banning live exports and financially crippling the grazing industry and those who service it in northern Australia change those cruel individuals?
Perhaps people smuggling and piracy is also cultural?
Luke,
Using diversionary tactics is just another way of refusing to recognise the point that Jen has made in this post.
Expecting that cattle farmers can solve this problem by refusing to ship live cattle to Indonesia is absolutely ridiculous!
The only people who would be damaged by that approach is the Australian cattle farmers. It will not stop the poor practices in Indonesia.
Drawing a comparison to people smuggling, terrorism, foot binding and the treatment of women in other cultures is just a puerile form of distraction.
We are obviously having very little effect on those as well.
Do you think the cattle farmers can fix those problems as well by not exporting live animals overseas?
Apologist?
ROTFL!
I ardently wish I could join the ranks of the aforementioned “people of sense”.
Those images of such helpless terror, pain and suffering will haunt me for quite some time.
Stunning big livestock before throat cutting is the way we do it and I’m sure an agreement for Indonesia to do this would not be too difficult.
Gals; for what it’s worth, a few I contacted today don’t eat meat so I got a good hearing when I said the country doesn’t need this grubby money.
You can’t argue either that those fat customers know good meat from a piece of badly handled bullock.
Besides; there are more votes swinging city side than countryside on this one so stay up with the action if you can.
No it’s not Debbie – this blog will always defend agriculture to the end. That’s right – never take a stand – always kotow. Same on whaling. Grovel. Grovel. Let’s have no standards. And remember Debs piracy like slavery is cultural. So Debs put your burka on and shut up.
If it was Luke’s or gav’s farms and arses on the line over this, I can imagine what a stand they would make.
But oh the joy of lecturing others on morality and doing without when you’ve got a full belly.
How sweet it is!
Luke,
What is wrong with defending Agriculture?
To whom are we kowtowing?
Who is grovelling for goodness sake? To whom?
Your comment makes absolutely no sense at all and seems to be entirely missing the point of Jen’s post.
WTF does whaling have to do with it?
Can Australian cattle farmers fix that problem as well?
No one is arguing that we have no standards.
There is a massive difference between preaching morals, expecting someone else to fix the problem and actually doing something positive about it yourself.
You need to put up or shut up Luke.
Just in case you missed it, the point was that signing a news poll and then demanding that Australian farmers no longer export live animals, will not fix the problem.
It’s a little like that Australian carbon tax that can’t possibly help to reduce global CO2 emissions.
All show and no go!
It’s nice to see that our two resident vegans Luke and Gavin speaking out against what some of us may have to say on this matter when all we are attempting to do is to speak honestly, and gee guys, I hope you’ve never swatted a mozzie.
Tony.
Good point Tony.
I assume Luke and Gavin will now support banning wind turbines, their manufacture and export due to their killing birds. I assume they will favor shutting down the automobile, truck, train, ship and aircraft industries because the use of all these modes of transport often kill animals. Hmmm, what else do they need to PERSONALLY give up to show that their position on this is not just empty holier than thou preaching?
A few people on here are defending the indefensible.
‘As an Indonesian, I’d like to express my apology for what happened,” he said, adding that the Gondrong abattoir was being shut. A new facility would open nearby in a month, where stun guns supplied by Meat and Livestock Australia would be used.
”It is a very good thing because [stun guns] reduce the element of torture endured by the cows,” Mr Muhammad said. ”It takes time to change the culture from what it is now to a culture advanced countries want us to be.”
End
It has been brought to his notice that action will be taken if he allows animals to be tortured.He may be speaking from one side of his mouth,but he knows he can be caught out at any time.
Banning live exports has made him sit up and take notice,maybe Australian abattoirs are a bit edgy at the moment too.
It needed airing,and trying to claim that we should do nothing because jobs will be lost will not wash with the majority of Australians,simply because it does not have to be that way.
It has to be cruel,it does not have to be barbaric.
Tony from Oz
What part of
“Insist that every abattoir stuns the cows,insist that the sharpest knives be used,put in full time supervisors at every abattoir(they should do the same in Australia)I am sure that they can resume exports if they are prepared to spend money on the problem”
Didn’t you understand?
They may slaughter other cattle,I can’t speak for them,though speaking for ours gives them pause for thought,I will speak for Aussie cows and sheep.
If I sent my child to Indonesia to be abused I would be charged under Australian law.Who would be charged under Australian cruelty to animals laws for allowing this to happen?Ignorance is not a defense.
Of course we know Kuhnkat delights in torturing small mammals. Probably gerbils.
Amazing how we’ve had all the great morality lectures about AGW and on a simple matter of animal welfare all gets thrown overboard.
When I was a youngster in the Gulf country we would isolate a steer from the herd and shoo it towards a tree with a shooter in the branches.
He would shoot the animal through the brain and we then cut it up on the spot, throw it on the back of the ute and take it back to the station, where I salted and hung it up.
It was humane and expedient.
Noelene,
I admire your passion about this issue.
However, when you’re ready to do something about it PERSONALLY instead of expecting others to do something that will only have a momentary impact in Indonesia and a long term impact on graziers and their ability to export produce, I will happily support your cause.
I absolutely despise cruelty of any kind but unless I’m personally prepared to put up or financially support someone else who is prepared to put up, I am just making noise.
Same goes for you Luke.
You’re both very quick to demand government passes legislation on this issue because you have been emotionally affected.
You however will not be personally affected by this type of legislation.
How about considering the consequences of allowing the government to have even further legislative power?
How about considering whether a long term result will be gained by a momentary knee jerk reaction from a sensationalist and highly emotional Four Corners report?
Do you in fact actually even know what you’re talking about or who would or wouldn’t be affected by this knee jerk stuff?
Do you actually believe Indonesia will stop this behaviour permanently because we paid some attention this week?
You will be on your moral high ground about something entirely different next week and the Indonesian Government is fully aware of that.
So is our own Government.
In the meantime, because of a very disturbing account of poor practice in Indonesia, you are willing to blindly hand more power to a centralised bureaucracy without any consideration of the long term, political consequences.
Your attitude is extremely worrying:
ie: “I don’t like that, it has upset me, the government should do something about it to make me feel better”
Bad idea, very bad idea!
You live in a democracy, if you want to do something about it no one will stop you. I will in fact support you!
I do not support the type of Government intervention that is being advocated in the public arena.
This is such a difficult one. I am a meat eater, but married a vegetarian and an animal rights activist. We have long discussions about such issues and I have to admit my point of view has slowly changed.
I don’t think that the indefensible can be defended. If it turns out that someone’s job/livelihood depends on an indefensible practice, does that justify the practice? I don’t think so. That’s an old and sadly invalid argument.
I’ll ask one question. If these creatures could speak, if they could beg for their lives, screan=m in terror, plead for mercy, and cry for their children as they die, would we still do this? Would we still eat McDonalds if we had to kill the animals ourselves?
I still eat meat, but less and less. My problem of course, is that the world is not humane and gentle. Food must be eaten and of course animals consume animals. But does that make it OK to make it into a cruel ritual practice, or to make it a production line process with no thought or caring because we like to eat tasty foods? Because our kids like fast food?
We are the only ones it seems that can think, communicate and stand above all else. Is that the choice we make with these abilities?
Looks like it, doesn’t it.
I fully support the ban and if someone loses their livelihood, then I am sorry but that’s the way of it.
I fully support the ban and if someone loses their livelihood, then I am sorry but that’s the way of it.
Well there you have it debbie.
I wonder if Graeme M would be equally strident and adamant about losing lively hoods if it was his on the line?
Not an intelligent response Johnathon, but I understand it. Look, it’s not my job to decide what’s right or wrong in our society, but I do have a view. And our government’s job is to act on what they think is right for our society. So hopefully, if my view were the majority view, then that’s how it would go.
Now, just because someone’s job is on the line is not the deciding factor. It can’t be. If we have people growing say opium and we decide that this can’t go on because of the impact on society, does that mean we just close our eyes to it and let it go? Of course not.
But what is acceptable in society changes in time as we learn more. And live exports to countries who practice abhorrent methods is something that we know is true, so as a society we have to make a call on that.
Give me one good reason why someone’s job should be sacrosanct if their job is immoral?
By the way, I am not missing the point of the article – we know that all over the world there are terrible practices and the few Aussie animals involved are nothing like the majority and nor are they being singled out. But why shouldn’t we take a stand?
Since I’m not deemed “intelligent” enough by you, I can’t possibly answer your questions Graeme.
Comparing a legitimate trade and commerce with producing illegal drugs?
Now that is intelligence for you!
Don’t be a dill Johnathon. I didn’t say you weren’t intelligent. I just send that wasn’t a well thought out response.
My point is simply that deciding what is ‘right’ is based on more than who does what. I can happily compare this situation to any number of others. If something is ‘legitimate’ it is so ONLY because society deems it so. No-one sits on high making that decision for us.
If we believe that the moral imperative here is to ban live exports, which I believe that it is, then we ban live exports. The fact that someone stands to profit from that immoral activity should not be seen as a persuasive factor not to take that stand.
I’m pretty sure I can find people who believe that growing tobacco is an entirely OK thing to do. Hey it’s not their fault it causes so much pain and distress, or that it costs us millions of dollars every year, or that thousands of people die horribly from it. Nope, they’re just earnin’ a livin’ aren’t they?
JW; go build another cigarette factory then smoke your way through it.
In my line of biz in automation of industry. people became redundant all the time so why cry for a few fat cats at the top? As I said its grubby money.
As a side line I resharpen a lot of knives and that keeps me in contact with a few farmers growing their own live stock for the table. There is an unwritten code about the efficiency of certain blades used in the job of slaughtering, deboning etc. A good operation takes pride in his manual skills but we didn’t see much of that on Monday night.
Gavin,
I don’t know why I even bother, but I ask it anyway, what the hell are you on about?
Cigarettes, knives?
Perhaps a century or more from now people will look back at abattoirs and live cattle exports with the same wondering disgust that we now look back on the days of the mass slaughter of whales. Meat eating will be regarded in a similar way to smoking as meat substitutes are developed and greater sensibilities evolve as humanity evolves.
We are now meat eating animals with a liking for the taste of blood in our rare steaks. I am still at that level as most of us are. But I can sense something changing in how I regard these matters. I find that as I grow older I like meat less. I foresee that episodes like we have seen this week will recur in the future – slowly slowly what we now take for granted will be seen clearly for the horror that it is by our descendents.
Graeme,
I support the sentiment behind your comment and I even admire your eloquent use of rhetoric.
Unfortunately your argument contains a fatal flaw.
While you want to support something that makes some type of statement about poor practices in Indonesia, you have chosen one that will have little to no effect in solving the actual problem.
While you may feel morally superior by supporting this ban I would hypothesis it is highly likely you have used, worn or eaten a product or service that was produced /distributed by company/s who own controlling interests in the businesses who are committing these atrocities.
Your solution will only harm Australian cattle farmers who likely had no more idea of this problem than you did.
Here’s another idea for you. How about you find the organisation that is working towards halting cruelty to animals in Indonesia and support them? Or if you’re really he’ll bent on making the Government do something, how about a temporary ban on all imports from Indonesia? Both of those would actually have a real impact.
Gosh Debbie, I could write forever on this issue, which to me is far broader than live exports. As I say, I discuss this every day with my wife, who is a member of every animal welfare organisation under the sun. We contribute financially to most of these as well as some organisations that assist humanitarian issues. we sponsor a child in India. We sign petitions and all sorts of organised protest letters and so on. So I think I have some sense of the question at hand. And it’s a very complex one with no easy solution.
Rather, there are many solutions. In all of that, what can the individual do? Well, he or she can choose to do what little they can do. Often what they can do is limited by pragamatism or even self-interest. I never pretended to be better than anyone. Why do you assume I feel a moral superiority? Do you feel that same superiority when arguing against AGW? Do you feel that just maybe, you are righter and better than Luke? Why is it that if one decides to speak up for what one thinks is right, others feel it necessary to show that to be somehow a character flaw? Or do you know in your heart that your choice is the poor one morally, and that you respond so as a defence mechanism?
Yes, I am sure that I have contributed to the problem. And yes, there may be many other ways to solve the problem. But the bottom line is this. If foreign customers of live exports treat the animals with extreme cruelty, then an immediate solution is to stop live exports. Everything else is less immediate.
I don’t want to cause problems for anyone, and certainly don’t want to stop anyone supporting themselves and their families. But sadly, it’s not possible to do what’s right and protect everyone at the same time. That’s not reality.
But reality is what happens every day, all over the world, to millions of innocent creatures for nothing more than our amusement, our personal pleasures, or our own warped cultural and religious values.
In the natural order of things, animals eat animals. But few organise the sytematic torture and production line slaughter of others, now do they? I’m sure many would if they could. But really, shouldn’t the goal for us, as civilised, higher beings, to be better than that?
I mentioned voices earlier. This site might be worth a visit:
http://www.voiceless.org.au/
Isn’t this pretty basic – we apply considerable influence and diplomacy to change their technology and standards? Perhaps even some investment by MLA.
It’s a simple observation; Indonesia doesn’t deserve to have our good beef
Luke,
I would never dream of taking your girlf… er Gerbil to torture. I prefer pulling wings off of flies that I personally catch with chopsticks!!
By the way Luke and others, Islam has had Halal standards for about 1500 years and have no intention of changing, although you MIGHT talk SOME of them into using stunners or something else you consider humane as an addition. I should also mention that kosher uses a similar procedure for slaughtering. In other words, you have a rather large chunk of the world you need to take on. I personally cannot get worked up over the way an animal that has so little actual brain is slaughtered. Add domestic turkeys, chickens, pigs and a few others to that list.
It’s pretty basic, what is worth wasting time on with the world economy going down fast. Rich countries and societies can afford a lot of principals. Poor ones cannot. Bankrupt the country with ridiculous enviro standards and watch your principals get tossed as fast as your cushy gubmint job!!
You know, this is way off topic but something I’m pretty interested in. Kuhnkat says: “I personally cannot get worked up over the way an animal that has so little actual brain is slaughtered.”
Now, what to make of that? Is the implication that brain size confers some kind of clear pointer to the extent to which a creature thinks, feels and experiences their world? How sure can we be of that?
I expect to be howled down over this, but I am suspicious that basic thinking and feeling and experiencing takes very little actual brainpower. I won’t go into a lot of detail about why I think that, but here’s my take.
On the whole, most larger creatures, and by that I mean all mammals and probably all birds, are highly likely to think and feel broadly as we do. If you watch your own thinking, you’ll notice that we do a lot of it using language, that is we sub-vocalise. And it’s language that allows us to do that, and to develop some pretty sophisticated concepts about the world.
But, the core experience is not vocalised. If we are just tootling along and suddenly have a thought, that thought is usually in terms of images and feelings. I suspect most higher animals have exactly the same experience. After all, they have largely the same nervous system and similar brain structure.
A lot of study into animal ‘minds’ seem to show something of that – for example the work Irene Pepperberg did with Alex the parrot. We can also observe dogs dreaming, experiencing separation anxiety, thinking about things.
I doubt a dog, cat, parrot or cow has anything of the richness of our own mental world, but I am willing to bet at least part of the reason for that is the lack of a symbolic language. And I think they lack the capacity for complex reasoning. But on the whole, I am of the belief they feel and experience much the same as we do.
Thus, I can’t agree that animals with so little actual brain do not experience their slaughter in pretty much the same way we would. They really are not living automata. And we are not so different.
This was only brought in to wider attention of the world because of animal activists attacking Australia’s live export industry.
Now think about this:
If it wasn’t for Australia’s live export industry this appalling situation would never have seen the light of day.
If Australia withdraws its live export industry Indonesians will have no incentive to change their behaviour.
This is not about Australian farmers, this is about practices in Indonesian abattoirs. If they don’t have continued contact with Australians via the live export industry their practices will never change.
People who are calling to shut down the live export were effectively saying they don’t mind animals being killed like this, provided they didn’t come from Australia.
Also the animals exported to Indonesia are not slaughter ready when they are exported. In fact they spend several months in a feedlot before they are then slaughtered. These cattle go from Australian farms to Indonesian feedlots and then to Indonesian abattoirs.
So to simply say ‘kill them in Australia’ doesn’t add up.
For all those people insisting that the government do something.
How about this for starters.
As Australia gives Indonesia somewhere in the vicinity of $500 million in aid, how about insisting that some of that money is spent ensuring that all abattoirs are properly equipped.
” “I personally cannot get worked up over the way an animal that has so little actual brain is slaughtered.” now now now KookyKat – don’t put the entire sceptic movement at risk.
Binny, can Australia change Indonesia’s practices? And if so, what’s the best strategy? I don’t have an answer to that. Should we continue to live export whilst enacting some form of sanction or education, and if so what sort of sanction would the Australian government and/or people deem appropriate? I think it’s unlikely we would be willing to do much, and I sincerely doubt Indonesia would be especially open to any real long term change in any case.
I don’t think those calling for the halting of live exports are suggesting that “they don’t mind animals being killed like this, provided they didn’t come from Australia”. Of course they care about how animals are killed/treated everywhere, and they do what little they can to make a difference. For example my wife and I support Animals Asia in their efforts to stop/change the appalling practice of bile bear farming and more recently the Chinese practice of eating dogs and cats.
However, seeking to change government policy in respect to live exports is something that we maybe can directly influence, and in any case it’s cleaning up our own backyard. And make no mistake it IS about Australian farmers. If you sell your cattle to live export you ARE supporting and profiting from those practices. To pretend otherwise is simply to bury your head in the sand at best.
kuhnkat matey; way out of depth again in this meaty debate so piss off and leave it to those who know something about the other species sharing our planet.
Now lets say Iv’e been to some meat works, seen a few heads, hides, raw bones and a lot of blood but nothing so disgusting as that 4 Corners report. Yes; some will say it was all stage managed by a few activists behind the scene, also those beasts were play acting for the hidden cameras they glimpsed on their way down to the slush and muck round the floor.
Only you bloody ghouls could say it doesn’t matter for all these dumb animals and we should let those wimps with whips and gumboots carry on as usual. I hope a few could fall on their blunt tool with a struggling big steer on top.
As with all religious practices not explicitly covered in scripture, whether it be wearing a funny hat, weird sideburns or how to slaughter livestock, it was probably the best way to do it at the time and just became dogma over the ensuing generations. The technology to do it better was not available so it became law. We now know that muslim headgear is not as efficient as a wide brimmed hat and that there are better ways of humanely slaughtering animals but as usual we are blocked from progress by the cry of the religious “but we’ve always done it this way”.
Just as women should be allowed to drive cars in Saudi Arabia, Indonesian abattoirs should be able to use modern, humane slaughtering techniques.
I think that the real issue highlighted on the ABC report is that some of the workers are just plain cruel.
Derek; “I think that the real issue highlighted on the ABC report is that some of the workers are just plain cruel”.
Such lustful cruelty caused one ABC fan to weep uncontrollably.
Elsewhere I claim the halal ritual sacrifice is not a proposition we should entertain under any circumstances because each animal is bound to suffer literally. Every good farmer knows a throat cut must be accompanied by a swift neck snap to kill the beast as quickly and painlessly as possible i.e. several seconds.
This Aussi control box invention for offshore intervention is nowhere near the mark given our best modern slaughter house methods because these little Indo cutthroat barbers probably can’t even lift a big animal’s eyelid let alone it’s head.
How many decades do we need before our authorities and governments realize it can’t be done properly by people without a national concept of creature conscience?
For the technically minded this 1994 doc “Religious slaughter and animal welfare:
a discussion for meat scientists” shows how others tried to get a better handle on the ghastly mess of wholesale animal slaughter under some bloody religious zeal.
http://www.grandin.com/ritual/kosher.slaugh.html
I would have to say that Luke has said one of the most sensible things here. Apply influence and diplomacy to change technology and standards.
Of course that would require time and resources and we don’t have the stomach for that do we?
People like Graeme do have the stomach for giving Australian graziers a legislative kick in the guts however.
I am very disappointed in your responses Graeme. You are advocating an immediate, knee jerk, ‘feel good’ response that will have no long term positive result.
You also think it is perfectly OK to blindly hand legislative power to our government to interfere in Agricultural exports.
I would like to think it is the governments job to protect Australian industry, not interfere because people are suddenly morally outraged by a story on the ABC.
I would imagine that Australian graziers had no more idea of these babaric practices than you did until 4 days ago.
I also repeat that you have probably used products and services TODAY that were either produced or distributed by some of the same companies that have controlling interests in those abbatoirs in Indonesia.
Aren’t you just as guilty as the farmers you’re so keen to sacrifice?
If we truly cared then we should apply pressure in places that it will achieve some positive outcomes.
To me it looks like you don’t really care, you just got upset when you saw the report and you want some one else to pay for it.
I actually agree with your comments about animal intelligence but I strongly disagree with your advocated approach to solve this problem.
It will not stop the barbarity in Indonesia, it will only damage Australian industry and Australian livelihoods.
It is a pointless media and political stunt.
It bears a remarkable resemblance to that Australian carbon tax that has no possible chance of reducing global CO2 emissions but every chance of seriously interfering with Australian industry and Australian livelihoods.
Debbie, that’s mostly utter rubbish. The 4 Corners program simply shows the bloke in the street what anyone with any sort of enquiring conscience would have known for donkeys years. Live animal exports is but the tip of an abhorrent iceberg. Don’t doubt that a great many people have known for a long time what goes on in the name of food in this country, let alone anywhere else.
I am NOT holding myself up above anyone else. Like most, I have eaten meat all my life. I visited an abbatoir as a kid on a school trip. I had mates who worked in the local abbatoir. I have farmers in my family. I have used products from industries supporting cruel practices. I still eat meat.
But… I am at least now aware of what happens, what brings that food to my table. Look, I accept that in many countries eating animals is an absolute necessity. But eating a MacDonalds burger, or helping yourself to some Foie Gras, or torturing an animal before death so its meat is tender is NOT a necessity. And if you contribute to anything like that, if you are selling your stock to live exports in the certain knowledge that they will suffer so, then you should hang your head in shame.
And don’t repeat that claptrap about Australian livelihoods. You know quite well that an industry that is immoral has no right to a high ground. I am not keen to ‘sacrifice’ farmers. Don’t talk rot. But I am keen to see people start to make a difference, to stand up and be counted. And sadly, sometimes some things can’t be continued because they just aren’t OK.
Actually, the more I read your post Debbie, the more I see the usual ignorance trotted out. Give me one good reason why thousands of animals should suffer just so you can put some bread on your table. Like, you can’t do something else? Rubbish.
As for CO2 and AGW, I don’t believe in global warming. I’ve read a lot about it and I can’t see it. But you can bet your bottom dollar that if I was in Government, I would be looking at measures to reduce emissions. Why? because my job would be to steer the ship. and if the science, if the qualified advice is that CO2 emissions will very likely sink the ship, my job is to act. Not sit back and do nothing.
Sometimes, you have to DO something, even if there are negative consequences. Because it’s the greater good that counts in the long run.
So yes, if some graziers lost their jobs over a choice to end live exports, I for one have no problems with that.
Graeme M.
To simply halt live exports and walk away, really is burying your head in the sand.
What can we do? – To wit more of the same.
Don’t think for an instant that Indonesians and the Indonesian government and not incredibly embarrassed by this situation.
The handling of cattle immediately post-shipment and in feedlots have already been improved in to an incredible extent in Indonesia due to advice and assistance from Australian cattlemen.
The abattoir system is the third step removed from direct Australian ownership of these cattle. However we obviously need to follow all the way through and continue to advise, pressure and help. The MLA is already tring to do this, but obviously they can’t be everywhere at once all the time
Animal welfare groups can actually help with this process if they want to, by bringing pressure to bear on the Indonesian government.
In short they can play good cop bad cop with the MLA. To try and shift the entire blame for this onto Australia simply lets the Indonesians off the hook.
.
Your problem is you hate Australian cattlemen more than you care about the welfare of cattle in Indonesian abattoirs.
Binny “Don’t think for an instant that Indonesians and the Indonesian government and not incredibly embarrassed by this situation”
Baaah! How would you know what they think?
Binny “Don’t think for an instant that Indonesians and the Indonesian government and not incredibly embarrassed by this situation”
Baaah! How would you know what they think?
Graeme,
That was the whole point.
I don’t mind that you want someone to DO something. But, as Binny points out, your solution will have little to no effect on the Indonesians and only affect Australians.
What part of that are you missing?
As Binny, Luke and others have also pointed out, there are much better ways to put pressure on the Indonesians to change these practices, long term, if Australia stays involved in the live export trade.
Your advocated, knee jerk reaction will only make you feel better. It will not help to change these practices.
We need to put pressure on the Indonesians Graeme, NOT Australians.
Your willingness to sacrifice an Australian industry you OBVIOUSLY know very little about horrifies me.
Hate cattlemen? How on earth do you get that from what I’ve said? I don’t know many ‘cattlemen’ let alone hate them. No mate, I don’t hate them. I hate no-one as far as I know. I DO hate many of the things that happen in the world, however. And a lot of the practices in the food industry I hate. Large scale farming of pigs, chickens and cattle is full of cruel and barbaric practices. Animal welfare comes a very distant second to profit. Not necessarily because people are bad, but at the end of the day, the animals are simply a commodity. And because they cannot speak to us it is easy to ignore their suffering.
There may well be many things we can do to help address the issue. I sincerely hope that we do take a stand and commit to improving the situation. I doubt it, but I hope you are right.
No Debbie, I am not ‘missing’ anything. And coming from the country I am very familiar with country people and their way of life, so I am not ignorant at all.
It is like all things a complex issue. But working with the Indonesians is unlikely to achieve very much in the short to medium term. Live exports to most anywhere is a cruel and inhumane practice. That is the bottom line. Do you honestly think that they get a better deal in the Middle East? They do not.
Honestly, my own personal view has changed so much through knowing my wife and having my eyes opened to what we do to animals. And everywhere you turn we continue because it’s easiest to do that. But I struggle with the very obvious contradiction between the fact that people need to eat and the desire to protect animals from being farmed for our consumption. There is probably no answer to that one. But I think we can stop some of the worst of the cruelty, and supplying live animals to countries that practice barbaric methods is one thing we can do.
Tell me Debbie, what do YOU think is the answer? What shall we do? How long will it take and how effective will it be? And how many animals will die terribly in the meantime? Animals that people just like you, in the full knowledge of the outcome, will continue to sacrifice for an income?
The Indonesians know they are getting a quality product. The pressure point is simple and we should be in there demanding a reform timetable – that is in terms of months. Regardless of poor farmers tags – the majority of Australians want something done – that will and is translating into the political process. Get it sorted. It’s not a moon-shot we’re talking about. Indonesian authorities should be co-operating the the max. If they aspire to be a first world nation who wants this kind of bad publicity?
Of course there is an ecological aspect too – one millions animals kept on our northern rangelands will be a landscape degradation trigger. Luckily we’re in a good season.
And e Coli – Japan import fears there now as well. More animals kept on-farm?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/03/3234339.htm
It is the principle of the matter here, and it appears that the business of shipping live animals overseas knowing full well they are going to suffer, well, those businesses have lost the plot.
The Indonesians should grow their own cattle if they want to butcher them that way. Maybe they’d be thinner skinned and easier to kill.
I’m starting to think that Australians will do anything for a dollar. Did anyone notice that it took an American cattle woman to speak out?
One problem with our middle class activism is its instinct for the soft target. Indonesians treat animals obscenely, yet the animals are deemed “Australian” and Australians must pay the price.
It’s like the radical artist who displays a crucifix in urine. He might do it to a Buddha, but that would offend the luvvies and fashionistas, his own kind. He might do it to Mohammed, but we all know why he won’t do that. Activism tends to be soft-targetism. The slow hanging of gays in Iran brought a riot of silence from gay activists in the West. Many leftist feminists seem to have a barely concealed respect for the Taliban – bigoted authoritarians know their own kind.
I have a number of friends working at our local abattoirs. All love the bush and love animals; none has mentioned instances of cruelty such as were seen on the 4Corners report. Which is just as well, because any business wilfully inflicting pain on animals deserves prosecution and the closure of their industry.
Activists might start by sending more coal, diesel generators and fridges to the developing world – rather than bicycle dynamos so they can be kept in pristine quaintness.
But the immediate problem is disgraceful animal cruelty in Indonesian abattoirs. Activists need to get active about that. Of course it will feel uncomfortable having to play the patronising imperialist rather than the compassionate defender of the little brown people of the Third World. But, hey, welcome to adulthood!
But the immediate problem is disgraceful animal cruelty in Indonesian abattoirs. Activists need to get active about that.
Robert,
It will never happen, and you mentioned the reasons.
The live export market is worth $1 billion dollars.
You think they could afford to put Australian inspectors in each abattoir and sponsor the cost of a few hundred stun guns.
Yep this is really all nonsense – with some good will and a few bucks this could be fixed very quickly. How hard is it and why are we even arguing about it?
I am a breeder of live export cattle and have the following observations to make.
Annabel Copin from W.A. was interviewed on Bush Telegraph Wednesday. She has worked in the abattoir industry recently both in Indonesia and in North Africa and said that the images portrayed in the 4 corners show were not the norm. She said that generally the animal welfare in abattoirs was good. She said there are huge increases in animal welfare that have occurred in Indo because we (Australia) are there. (If we were not, you would still have slaughter men dancing around animals slashing their tendons to get them down before cutting the throat. ) There is a report coming out soon on this very issue.
It has always been the aim of Animals Australia to shut down live export. As I understand, the animals in the Mark 2 box are supposed to have their heads restrained. I cannot help but wonder if any encouragement was given for demonstrations of what happens ‘if’ – leg not tied, head not tied and so forth. it was interesting that it was always the hind leg not caught. If the front leg was not caught the animal could easily get to its feet.
It is unreasonable that producers should have some kind of retained ownership through to the 3rd or 4th owner of these animals. We don’t in Australia. Animals sold in any sale are owned by the new owner and they are free to do what they want with that animal. Even though we have stringent rules here in Australia animals are still occasionally mistreated – if they were not, we would have no need for groups like RSPCA. We sell to the live exporter who sells to the feedlotter who sells to the meat man who arranges slaughter of his cattle. Perhaps the village have some ownership as well.
It is not so simple to ‘shut down the trade and put the animal in a box’. Indonesians value add to the young cattle they import by growing them out. Quite a lot go to villages where they are fed on under contract in an effort to spread the wealth. maybe 6-10 animals to a village. The villagers provide the green chop and the feed lotter provides the concentrate. In any case the animals put on some 150KG in weight before they are slaughtered. Indonesia could not afford to import the whole weight ‘in a box’.
In addition, ‘fresh’ meat in Indo is killed that morning, not killed and chilled. As Annabel said, that is like comparing dried milk powder to fresh milk. It is a distinct market that will be serviced, regardless of Australia being there or not.
A ban would mean we would in effect have no income for more than a year whilst we grew our cattle out to a large enough size to put in a ‘box’. Most people have mortgages to a corresponding capital value – I am truly afraid of what will happen with the Banks when we can no longer service our debt. Our animals are unsuitable for anything but the live trade and grinding beef thus a 50% decline in income and higher production cost because we have to hold them 12 – 18 months longer.
Our incomes would reduce by half, our out goings would increase as we have to hold animals longer before we sell them, (we cannot not care for our cattle) which means we are staring bankruptcy in the face. And all the industries that rely on us will falter – transport, hay growing, animal products, spare parts, the small towns where we purchase what we need for the year, the thousands of employees including 600 Aboriginal employees plus indigenous cattle stations in North Australia – trying to drag themselves out of the welfare cycle – all the loss will be in regional Australia.
Because it affects not just us, but farmers all over Australia if they be live exporters or not.
People say – it has taken so long but we have had Asian meltdown, rioting, government change, currently an election, Indo isn’t exactly the pool of calmness that Oz is and we have to work with in those bounds.
But there is a solution. Annabel has suggested an inspector who is well trained in animal welfare at each abattoir. In addition I believe all animals must be stunned. This can be done with a pole stunner, and training and inspection/observation, so that bad welfare practices are not gone back to.
I even heard one lady meat buyer say on Bush Telegraph that she had seen these same practices in Australia, with goats and sheep killed Halal as recently as 2005.
I don’t want my animals to suffer. I don’t want any animals to suffer. If we leave the market then all the good we have done and are yet to do will be lost. Brazil have said they are ready to fill the gap with live export. And animals continue to die cruelly in Egypt though we are no longer in the market there. Unseen and unacknowledged.
This may look like I’m trying to change the subject, but there is a very stark analogy here, and I want you to think about that from the many different aspects.
The ABC presents an horrific special about this animal cruelty in a foreign Country, and straight away (mainly because of, well, ONLY because of public outrage, because at first the Minister made no real comment until the Caucus backlash, and after that he, er, amended his original statement) live exports (from Australia) are stopped to (some) offending abbatoirs.
Now for the analogy.
How many times have we been told of those Chinese (the evil environmental vandals – sarc off now Tony) coal fired power plants, and how (some) Australian Thermal coal is being exported there to power those plants. There is also the main coal export, Metallurgical coal for Industry in China. There’s no talk of either of those coal exports being cancelled because of Australian public outrage.
I haven’t intentionally posted this comment here to change the subject away from what is obviously an awful situation, but it seems that while both situations are indeed analogous, there seems to be a bit of a double standard involved, and as in both situations, we need to be fully aware of the situation in those Countries without trying to do something that ‘seems’ to be imposing our values onto their situation.
There are so many similarities in both situations (beef cattle and coal) that bear thinking about, too many to mention here.
Tony.
PS. – One of you commented in an earlier Post from Jennifer about the size of Thermal coal exports to China, and try as I might I cannot find that comment again, so might whoever it was that posted the comment come in again and direct me to where I might find those totals thank you. – T.
Luke I agree; It has to be remembered that it is only as handful of smaller abattoirs behaving like this. If we exclude them and continue to trade with the other people who are doing the right thing, they will soon change their ways.
Graeme M’s response at June 2nd, 2011 at 6:55 pm is typical.
‘I sincerely doubt Indonesia would be especially open to any real long term change in any case.’ – ‘Hand Ringing’ I feel terrible but no one will listen to poor little me.
For example my wife and I support Animals Asia – ‘Token Gesture’ I care honestly I do.
IS about Australian farmers – ‘Soft Target’ Will in no way address the underlying problem, but it gives the appearance of something being done and a more importantly someone else will pay for it.
Humans will always eat meat and farm animals for that purpose this is a basic reality of the world. However there is no excuse for the inhumane slaughter of those animals anywhere in the world.
To say we can’t do anything about it because it’s happening in Indonesia is a copout.
Only humans kill humanely; Prof Temple Grandin
Sorry Tony. I don’t see the similarity at all. A piece of coal can’t feel pain or terror, and a cow can’t be burned for energy.
Did you watch the 4Corners video?
Tony
re. thermal coal, this may help
http://www.abare.gov.au/interactive/09ac_sept/htm/coal.htm
Thanks Jonathon
I see the similarity Tony,
It’s quite simple really.
If we truly want to reduce GLOBAL CO2 emissions, then taxing and punishing Australian Industries is not going to do it.
If we truly want to stop INDONESIAN animal cruelty then punishing Australian cattle farmers is not going to do it.
That was the point.
We have an incumbent political machine that creates knee jerk, populist legislation to assuage the moral outrage that has been created by sensationalist media. That criticism is aimed squarely at both sides of politics.
They have not considered the actual result of their knee jerk reaction.
They just want to be SEEN as doing something.
Sensible and responsible people first consider what goal they are trying to achieve and then work out the best way to achieve that goal.
As Luke has partly pointed out: unless the goal was to simply assuage the outrage and not actually solve the problem, we’re all really arguing about absolutely nothing.
Graeme, FYI, my personal occupation and eating habits aren’t really relevant as I am arguing about poor political behaviour here.
However since you keep making inferences, yes I am a farmer and we do have a livestock program (not cattle). My opinions about animal intelligence are quite similar to yours and your wife and I am also a vegetarian.
My children often joke that I care more about animals than I do about them 🙂
The major charities I contribute to are apolitical animal welfare organisations (remember I said apolitical so that immediately leaves out the ones who make the most noise).
So your assertations about my personal motivations are a complete nonsense.
Your personal choices are yours to make as well because we do live in a democracy. However they are not relevant to this argument any more than mine are.
How about you stay with the actual argument rather than trying to make yourself appear morally and personally superior?
You also asked me a direct question about HOW we could help to make this better.
Unfortunately for you and your tender moral consciense, it can’t and won’t be a quick fix. If Australians TRULY cared enough, it would be very easy to apply pressure to Indonesia and other places by refusing their government’s Australian aid and also by refusing to import from them (TEMPORARILY) until they legislated to protect against animal cruelty.
We can also apply considerable pressure via the MLA (Meat and Livestock Association) if Australia stays involved in the live export trade.
If we just arbitarily pull out we have lost that pressure point.
I repeat, I do not object to Australians becoming more aware of these issues and wanting to do something about it. I think that is a good thing.
I do however object to stupid, political stunts that are all show and no go. I also strongly object to people who argue for punishing someone else and making someone else pay, via knee jerk and poorly constructed legislation.
Just because you became outraged about this problem a few days ago does not mean that work is not already being done in this area by good committed people. It also does not mean that the problem can be rectified tomorrow.
As you said yourself, it is much more complicated than that.
Punishing Australian farmers is simplistic and will not achieve the goal anyway.
I will also add that many of the farmers who you’re so willing to sacrifice were no more aware of this problem than everyone else a few days ago.
I would also imagine that many of them will stop exporting immediately because they were just as outraged.
You don’t need knee jerk federal legislation for this.
That’s the last bloody thing we need!
The RSPCA has been aware of this since January.
http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/content/201101/s3124039.htm
Robert June 3rd, 2011 at 11:21 am
Exactly.
Good for you Helen and Binny,
Of course we will change things for the better if we work through the organisations who have already made some headway. It will not happen overnight even though morally outraged people like Graeme seem to want a sudden, quick, magic political fix.
The Australian livestock industry needs to stay involved.
The last thing we need is mindless, knee jerk government reactions from media hype that sets about punishing the wrong people for the wrong reasons.
People like Annabel Copin, animal welfare organisations and the MLA have a much better chance of achieving long term success if they are supported.
Most of the people (including our politicians unfortunately) who are making a loud fuss this week, will have moved on to the next sensational story next week.
How completely outrageous that your industry has been so mindlessly and emotionally attacked.
Helen and Debbie, lots of good food for thought there. I won’t say more myself as it’s just too big a subject for this forum. But I do hope you are both right that good work is being and will continue to be done.
Debbie, I am sorry if I come across as appearing to think I am somehow superior. I think that’s you projecting. If I believe something is immoral, then that is my view. If I think you are doing that immoral thing, then if I point that out I am merely speaking up. NOT trying to appear better. For Heavens sake, that means that no-one can ever take a stand without being called into question.
I will just say finally that I did not become aware of this just days ago, or that I am seeking a soft target, or any of the other accusations raised above. I have been made aware over the course of many years, and have known of the downsides to live exports for at least several years. The 4 Corners program simply exposes it to the man in the street.
Now back to reading all the blogs about AGW…
Helen; your very considered post grabbed me for a mo but in this world of dog eat dog I go back and say there is no excuse for what we saw on 4 corners, here or anywhere else
Growers can’t expect this rather softened public to cop what amounts to a beastly trade going on behind the scene. Selling your right to any blame for atrocities down the line is at best a cheap escape route back to the ranch however I blame those individuals who allow themselves to be covered in blood on our behalf.
There is no parallel but I offer this advice. The export meat producers must get more involved in end processing by offering to host likely meat workers via a long holiday at the farm at your expense and so give them something on the finer points of animal husbandry in our culture. The next phase would be mandatory training in a decent abattoir and perhaps you need part ownership of that establishment too.
Until you get a finger in making that pie, expect trouble from all those who thought your whole business was hunky dory
Helen,
Do yourself a favour and don’t bother answering Gavin.
It’s not worth your time 🙂
Yes, a few slippery customers here eh Ann?
Luke became indifferent and cleared out, this thread is not robust with only Gavin throwing his weight around.
This 4 Corners show is a perfectly timed distraction for joolya, to take people’s minds off her intention to send refugees (ie children) to brutal camps in Malaysia.
Animal rights over human rights! Are there any Labor Party apologists in the house?
el gordo.,
Funny!
I was just thinking the same thing about the way the Malaysians have taken the words ‘human rights’ out of their proposal.
Seems they want all our money, but no talk of how well they may or may not be treated.
Tony.
Never mind el gordo and Tony,
it will suit some people just fine, as they say “seeming” is the go.
Doing is the hard bit and takes effort, hard to do while holding a latte and praising the clever policies of JG and her ministers.
El Gordo tries a distraction – oh look a rabbit ! (although in context here he would break the rabbit’s tail and gouge out it eyes for fun, perhaps cut some limbs off while it’s still alive?).
I guess you guys would just like the navy to torpedo the boats? Why not – it would be cost effective which would make Debs happy, and Australian agriculture would unaffected. The voters who want to stop the boats would be happy. And the navy would get valuable target practice?
el gordo; it never was human rights over animal rights in my household. Old tabby just bit through my thumb knuckle while holding her gape open wide for a another pill. Thing is we could go to our doc for less than the cost of the vet consultation today.
Hey, although she had the abscess I may need the tetanus shot
Given Deb’s a squib I may yet holler in the wind.
Feedback from several pollie’s offices this arvo is interesting. One says they had too many calls today to follow up in full; another says “The treatment of these cattle was revolting and inhumane”.
Any way you look at it, there many more votes against continuing than for maintaining the status quo. This export industry has to extract digits from both ears now so let’s all get back to discussing what comes next
Luke,
as a former member of the RAAF with 25 years service, I take offence at your comment regarding the Navy. Those guys are at times laying their lives on the line to save these people.
I just could not imagine what YOU would have to say if one of US had have said that!
Tony.
😕
From today’s OZ.
‘TWO of the Indonesian abattoirs blacklisted by Agriculture Minister Joe Ludwig over concerns about the use of cruel practices do not handle Australian cattle, while an official said a third used the recommended humane method of stunning animals before killing them.
‘And the manager of a fourth banned facility, as reported by The Australian yesterday, says it has not handled Australian cattle since January, it has no current plans to do so again and its practices meet the highest Indonesian standards.’
Distraction created by aunty to take the heat of joolya?
Personally, I’m quite tolerant of the intolerance of others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
My last word on this issue after chatting to young folk from Jakarta yesterday is more Australian scholarships that target students with interests other than family business and courses here that involve industry exposure.
Jennifer, is it plausible to slaughter the animals in Australia according to halal custom and then ship the product to Indonesia?
This would preserve our all important trade with that nation and ensure that the slaughter is carried out more humanely; if indeed it is possible to slaughter humanely under this custom.
Found you again, Jen. I like your new format where your readers are contributing.Born during WW2, I was raised on a small mixed farm in the Brisbane River Valley & we had no Mains Supply of Electricity. Our diet was milk, eggs, grain and vegetables with a small amount of meat which came from town with the ‘Carrier,’ who took the farm’s Cream & Milk to the Ipswich Butter Factory. Even for me it is hard to imagine ‘no refrigeration’ where you cannot keep your local produced food in let alone Meat from a neighbouring country. Little thought is given to the thousands of indonesians who now have no livelyhood because of this total ban. I don’t blame them if they now take more meat from India & other progressive & helpful Countries.