A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travel Regions » Australia & New Zealand
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Australians torture 60,000 sheep on a ship - Sick Aussie *******s This happenes on a regular basis!!!!!!!!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 23rd, 2003, 05:08 PM
Rainer Wolfcastle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Australians torture 60,000 sheep on a ship - Sick Aussie *******s This happenes on a regular basis!!!!!!!!

"Frank Booth" wrote in message ...

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...082991895.html

Sick cruel Aussie *******s. 60,000 sheep dying on a ship due to
fu*king stupid Aussie morons.


The MV Cormo Express has become the Tampa of the live sheep export
trade. Unable to land at their destination of Saudi Arabia, more than
50,000 Australian sheep, loaded in early August, yesterday remained in
search of a third country to take them for money, or free.

Their sorry tale - seven weeks on the sea so far, rather than a
fortnight's trip - has raised fresh questions about Australia's
billion-dollar live animal export industry, which regularly causes
thousands of deaths and inflicts suffering that would not be tolerated
onshore.

In the face of this, what does Agriculture Minister Warren Truss say?

He quotes the on-board vet, saying the sheep - apart from about 3800
that have died - have put on weight. As the RSPCA's Hugh Wirth says,
it makes it sound like they're "enjoying some Mediterranean cruise".
They might be getting heavier, but it is not because they're living
comfortably or normally.

The Government refused to say where the ship was - until the media
found it near Dubai - claiming publicity doesn't help the hunt for a
country to take them.

Nor did it want to give mortality figures, fearing it would get locked
into running a daily death watch. Releasing figures was left to the
ship's owners.

Truss has also condemned "unsympathetic reporting of the issues. For
commentators, reporters or animal liberation activists to paint the
situation in any way that is likely to undermine the confidence of
potential buyers is not helpful to the welfare of the sheep."

Is he serious? Is he really saying yet another cruel disaster in the
livestock export industry should be hushed up?

It is not as though this is an isolated incident, as shown by a glance
through the October 2002 report from Truss's Independent Reference
Group on the trade.

Truss asked for more advice from this group - which had recommended a
much tighter regime more than two years before - after a spate of bad
incidents.

The mortality rates during seven voyages last year - all but one to
the Middle East - we February, MV Norvantes (bound for Jakarta) 99
cattle (8.5 per cent); June, MV Becrux 880 cattle (44 per cent) and
1418 sheep (2 per cent); July, MV Corriedale Express 6119 sheep (11
per cent); July, MV Al Messilah 2173 sheep (3 per cent); July, MV Al
Shuwaikh 5800 sheep (7 per cent); July, Cormo Express 1064 (2 per
cent); and September, Al Shuwaikh 2304 sheep (4 per cent).

The group saw these as "evidence of systematic failures within the
whole live animal export program". It pointed particularly to
shipments originating from Portland, where the animals were poorly
prepared for voyages.

It also said that while some reforms had been made since its February
2000 recommendations, neither industry nor the regulators had been
ready for the "cultural change" required. In other words, a lot of
feet had been dragged. When the sheep arrived, Saudi officials claimed
scabby mouth (against which sheep are now twice vaccinated) was above
the accepted limit - a conclusion rejected by the Australian vet.

Tempting as it might be to look for a political motive, there is no
evidence of this. The Saudis have a record of turning away shiploads.
The live sheep trade to Saudi Arabia resumed only in 2000 after more
than a decade's suspension by Australia; this had followed shipments
being refused on health grounds.

The great concern, on the Government's part, is that if there is too
much hoo-ha over these sheep, the whole trade will be put in jeopardy.
It is worth $200 million to Australia in exports to Saudi Arabia. It's
the risk of a dangerous backlash that's prompted the Government to
intervene in a private transaction, frantically searching for a
destination, even though the sheep, with a Saudi owner, are no longer
Australian sheep but Saudi refugees.

Already exports to Saudi Arabia have been suspended until this is
sorted out. The Government couldn't afford the spectacle of further
ships drifting about.

There are now two issues: what should be done with these animals? And,
is this trade too inhumane to be pursued?

Wirth argues that the Government won't be able to find a port for the
sheep and it's impractical to bring them home, so they should be
progressively put down.

But the Australian Veterinary Association, in a rather harrowing news
release yesterday, said mass slaughter could be "an animal welfare and
environmental disaster". "There will be thousands of litres of blood",
it said; animal rights groups "have not considered that the sheep may
have to watch the slaughter, nor have they considered the welfare of
the people who would have to carry this out".

Both the Government and the industry argue against putting down the
sheep, still hopeful a destination can be found. The Government
doesn't want the sheep repatriated, because it's a long voyage and
there are quarantine difficulties; the ship's owners have canvassed
the possibility of returning them to Fremantle, although they'd much
prefer to offload them regionally.

Greens senator Bob Brown yesterday called for the ship to be ordered
back at once, saying any quarantine problems are Truss's. Meanwhile
Australian authorities are trying to continue negotiations with the
Pakistanis, despite their saying they won't take the sheep.

Animal rights advocate Peter Singer, who calls for euthanasia in this
case, insists the entire live trade is a "disgrace" that should be
stopped.

"It's a terrible ordeal for the animals at the best of times. They
have a nightmare voyage, and then they get treated brutally after they
land, as if they were just sacks of wheat rather than living, feeling
animals. Every year or two, there is another major scandal . . . The
federal minister says that he will implement reforms, but then . . .
the same thing, or something worse, happens again."

The RSPCA opposes the live export industry, but Wirth recognises that
neither side of politics will end it. But he wants much more control
over it.

So does the Australian public. Even if Truss can solve the Cormo
Express problem quickly, what has happened in this and many other
instances should weigh on our conscience.
  #2  
Old September 24th, 2003, 03:29 AM
nullabore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Australians torture 60,000 sheep on a ship - Sick Aussie *******s This happenes on a regular basis!!!!!!!!

Ho Hum, get a life

"Rainer Wolfcastle" wrote in message
om...
"Frank Booth" wrote in message

...

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...082991895.html

Sick cruel Aussie *******s. 60,000 sheep dying on a ship due to
fu*king stupid Aussie morons.


The MV Cormo Express has become the Tampa of the live sheep export
trade. Unable to land at their destination of Saudi Arabia, more than
50,000 Australian sheep, loaded in early August, yesterday remained in
search of a third country to take them for money, or free.

Their sorry tale - seven weeks on the sea so far, rather than a
fortnight's trip - has raised fresh questions about Australia's
billion-dollar live animal export industry, which regularly causes
thousands of deaths and inflicts suffering that would not be tolerated
onshore.

In the face of this, what does Agriculture Minister Warren Truss say?

He quotes the on-board vet, saying the sheep - apart from about 3800
that have died - have put on weight. As the RSPCA's Hugh Wirth says,
it makes it sound like they're "enjoying some Mediterranean cruise".
They might be getting heavier, but it is not because they're living
comfortably or normally.

The Government refused to say where the ship was - until the media
found it near Dubai - claiming publicity doesn't help the hunt for a
country to take them.

Nor did it want to give mortality figures, fearing it would get locked
into running a daily death watch. Releasing figures was left to the
ship's owners.

Truss has also condemned "unsympathetic reporting of the issues. For
commentators, reporters or animal liberation activists to paint the
situation in any way that is likely to undermine the confidence of
potential buyers is not helpful to the welfare of the sheep."

Is he serious? Is he really saying yet another cruel disaster in the
livestock export industry should be hushed up?

It is not as though this is an isolated incident, as shown by a glance
through the October 2002 report from Truss's Independent Reference
Group on the trade.

Truss asked for more advice from this group - which had recommended a
much tighter regime more than two years before - after a spate of bad
incidents.

The mortality rates during seven voyages last year - all but one to
the Middle East - we February, MV Norvantes (bound for Jakarta) 99
cattle (8.5 per cent); June, MV Becrux 880 cattle (44 per cent) and
1418 sheep (2 per cent); July, MV Corriedale Express 6119 sheep (11
per cent); July, MV Al Messilah 2173 sheep (3 per cent); July, MV Al
Shuwaikh 5800 sheep (7 per cent); July, Cormo Express 1064 (2 per
cent); and September, Al Shuwaikh 2304 sheep (4 per cent).

The group saw these as "evidence of systematic failures within the
whole live animal export program". It pointed particularly to
shipments originating from Portland, where the animals were poorly
prepared for voyages.

It also said that while some reforms had been made since its February
2000 recommendations, neither industry nor the regulators had been
ready for the "cultural change" required. In other words, a lot of
feet had been dragged. When the sheep arrived, Saudi officials claimed
scabby mouth (against which sheep are now twice vaccinated) was above
the accepted limit - a conclusion rejected by the Australian vet.

Tempting as it might be to look for a political motive, there is no
evidence of this. The Saudis have a record of turning away shiploads.
The live sheep trade to Saudi Arabia resumed only in 2000 after more
than a decade's suspension by Australia; this had followed shipments
being refused on health grounds.

The great concern, on the Government's part, is that if there is too
much hoo-ha over these sheep, the whole trade will be put in jeopardy.
It is worth $200 million to Australia in exports to Saudi Arabia. It's
the risk of a dangerous backlash that's prompted the Government to
intervene in a private transaction, frantically searching for a
destination, even though the sheep, with a Saudi owner, are no longer
Australian sheep but Saudi refugees.

Already exports to Saudi Arabia have been suspended until this is
sorted out. The Government couldn't afford the spectacle of further
ships drifting about.

There are now two issues: what should be done with these animals? And,
is this trade too inhumane to be pursued?

Wirth argues that the Government won't be able to find a port for the
sheep and it's impractical to bring them home, so they should be
progressively put down.

But the Australian Veterinary Association, in a rather harrowing news
release yesterday, said mass slaughter could be "an animal welfare and
environmental disaster". "There will be thousands of litres of blood",
it said; animal rights groups "have not considered that the sheep may
have to watch the slaughter, nor have they considered the welfare of
the people who would have to carry this out".

Both the Government and the industry argue against putting down the
sheep, still hopeful a destination can be found. The Government
doesn't want the sheep repatriated, because it's a long voyage and
there are quarantine difficulties; the ship's owners have canvassed
the possibility of returning them to Fremantle, although they'd much
prefer to offload them regionally.

Greens senator Bob Brown yesterday called for the ship to be ordered
back at once, saying any quarantine problems are Truss's. Meanwhile
Australian authorities are trying to continue negotiations with the
Pakistanis, despite their saying they won't take the sheep.

Animal rights advocate Peter Singer, who calls for euthanasia in this
case, insists the entire live trade is a "disgrace" that should be
stopped.

"It's a terrible ordeal for the animals at the best of times. They
have a nightmare voyage, and then they get treated brutally after they
land, as if they were just sacks of wheat rather than living, feeling
animals. Every year or two, there is another major scandal . . . The
federal minister says that he will implement reforms, but then . . .
the same thing, or something worse, happens again."

The RSPCA opposes the live export industry, but Wirth recognises that
neither side of politics will end it. But he wants much more control
over it.

So does the Australian public. Even if Truss can solve the Cormo
Express problem quickly, what has happened in this and many other
instances should weigh on our conscience.



  #3  
Old September 24th, 2003, 03:43 AM
Peter Webb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Australians torture 60,000 sheep on a ship - Sick Aussie *******s This happenes on a regular basis!!!!!!!!

You are aware that if they had been allowed to land, the Saudis intended to
kill and eat them?

"Rainer Wolfcastle" wrote in message
om...
"Frank Booth" wrote in message

...

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...082991895.html

Sick cruel Aussie *******s. 60,000 sheep dying on a ship due to
fu*king stupid Aussie morons.


The MV Cormo Express has become the Tampa of the live sheep export
trade. Unable to land at their destination of Saudi Arabia, more than
50,000 Australian sheep, loaded in early August, yesterday remained in
search of a third country to take them for money, or free.

Their sorry tale - seven weeks on the sea so far, rather than a
fortnight's trip - has raised fresh questions about Australia's
billion-dollar live animal export industry, which regularly causes
thousands of deaths and inflicts suffering that would not be tolerated
onshore.

In the face of this, what does Agriculture Minister Warren Truss say?

He quotes the on-board vet, saying the sheep - apart from about 3800
that have died - have put on weight. As the RSPCA's Hugh Wirth says,
it makes it sound like they're "enjoying some Mediterranean cruise".
They might be getting heavier, but it is not because they're living
comfortably or normally.

The Government refused to say where the ship was - until the media
found it near Dubai - claiming publicity doesn't help the hunt for a
country to take them.

Nor did it want to give mortality figures, fearing it would get locked
into running a daily death watch. Releasing figures was left to the
ship's owners.

Truss has also condemned "unsympathetic reporting of the issues. For
commentators, reporters or animal liberation activists to paint the
situation in any way that is likely to undermine the confidence of
potential buyers is not helpful to the welfare of the sheep."

Is he serious? Is he really saying yet another cruel disaster in the
livestock export industry should be hushed up?

It is not as though this is an isolated incident, as shown by a glance
through the October 2002 report from Truss's Independent Reference
Group on the trade.

Truss asked for more advice from this group - which had recommended a
much tighter regime more than two years before - after a spate of bad
incidents.

The mortality rates during seven voyages last year - all but one to
the Middle East - we February, MV Norvantes (bound for Jakarta) 99
cattle (8.5 per cent); June, MV Becrux 880 cattle (44 per cent) and
1418 sheep (2 per cent); July, MV Corriedale Express 6119 sheep (11
per cent); July, MV Al Messilah 2173 sheep (3 per cent); July, MV Al
Shuwaikh 5800 sheep (7 per cent); July, Cormo Express 1064 (2 per
cent); and September, Al Shuwaikh 2304 sheep (4 per cent).

The group saw these as "evidence of systematic failures within the
whole live animal export program". It pointed particularly to
shipments originating from Portland, where the animals were poorly
prepared for voyages.

It also said that while some reforms had been made since its February
2000 recommendations, neither industry nor the regulators had been
ready for the "cultural change" required. In other words, a lot of
feet had been dragged. When the sheep arrived, Saudi officials claimed
scabby mouth (against which sheep are now twice vaccinated) was above
the accepted limit - a conclusion rejected by the Australian vet.

Tempting as it might be to look for a political motive, there is no
evidence of this. The Saudis have a record of turning away shiploads.
The live sheep trade to Saudi Arabia resumed only in 2000 after more
than a decade's suspension by Australia; this had followed shipments
being refused on health grounds.

The great concern, on the Government's part, is that if there is too
much hoo-ha over these sheep, the whole trade will be put in jeopardy.
It is worth $200 million to Australia in exports to Saudi Arabia. It's
the risk of a dangerous backlash that's prompted the Government to
intervene in a private transaction, frantically searching for a
destination, even though the sheep, with a Saudi owner, are no longer
Australian sheep but Saudi refugees.

Already exports to Saudi Arabia have been suspended until this is
sorted out. The Government couldn't afford the spectacle of further
ships drifting about.

There are now two issues: what should be done with these animals? And,
is this trade too inhumane to be pursued?

Wirth argues that the Government won't be able to find a port for the
sheep and it's impractical to bring them home, so they should be
progressively put down.

But the Australian Veterinary Association, in a rather harrowing news
release yesterday, said mass slaughter could be "an animal welfare and
environmental disaster". "There will be thousands of litres of blood",
it said; animal rights groups "have not considered that the sheep may
have to watch the slaughter, nor have they considered the welfare of
the people who would have to carry this out".

Both the Government and the industry argue against putting down the
sheep, still hopeful a destination can be found. The Government
doesn't want the sheep repatriated, because it's a long voyage and
there are quarantine difficulties; the ship's owners have canvassed
the possibility of returning them to Fremantle, although they'd much
prefer to offload them regionally.

Greens senator Bob Brown yesterday called for the ship to be ordered
back at once, saying any quarantine problems are Truss's. Meanwhile
Australian authorities are trying to continue negotiations with the
Pakistanis, despite their saying they won't take the sheep.

Animal rights advocate Peter Singer, who calls for euthanasia in this
case, insists the entire live trade is a "disgrace" that should be
stopped.

"It's a terrible ordeal for the animals at the best of times. They
have a nightmare voyage, and then they get treated brutally after they
land, as if they were just sacks of wheat rather than living, feeling
animals. Every year or two, there is another major scandal . . . The
federal minister says that he will implement reforms, but then . . .
the same thing, or something worse, happens again."

The RSPCA opposes the live export industry, but Wirth recognises that
neither side of politics will end it. But he wants much more control
over it.

So does the Australian public. Even if Truss can solve the Cormo
Express problem quickly, what has happened in this and many other
instances should weigh on our conscience.



  #4  
Old September 24th, 2003, 05:44 AM
AlmostBob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Australians torture 60,000 sheep on a ship - Sick Aussie *******s This happenes on a regular basis!!!!!!!!

A Saudi bought the sheep b4 they left Aus, and organised the shipping,

the ship is Dutch
**** on them instead

After they left Australia there isnt much the Aus govt can do legally execpt
complain

"Rainer Wolfcastle" wrote in message
om...
| "Frank Booth" wrote in message
...
|
| http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...082991895.html
|
| Sick cruel Aussie *******s. 60,000 sheep dying on a ship due to
| fu*king stupid Aussie morons.
|
|
| The MV Cormo Express has become the Tampa of the live sheep export
| trade. Unable to land at their destination of Saudi Arabia, more than
| 50,000 Australian sheep, loaded in early August, yesterday remained in
| search of a third country to take them for money, or free.
|
| Their sorry tale - seven weeks on the sea so far, rather than a
| fortnight's trip - has raised fresh questions about Australia's
| billion-dollar live animal export industry, which regularly causes
| thousands of deaths and inflicts suffering that would not be tolerated
| onshore.
|
| In the face of this, what does Agriculture Minister Warren Truss say?
|
| He quotes the on-board vet, saying the sheep - apart from about 3800
| that have died - have put on weight. As the RSPCA's Hugh Wirth says,
| it makes it sound like they're "enjoying some Mediterranean cruise".
| They might be getting heavier, but it is not because they're living
| comfortably or normally.
|
| The Government refused to say where the ship was - until the media
| found it near Dubai - claiming publicity doesn't help the hunt for a
| country to take them.
|
| Nor did it want to give mortality figures, fearing it would get locked
| into running a daily death watch. Releasing figures was left to the
| ship's owners.
|
| Truss has also condemned "unsympathetic reporting of the issues. For
| commentators, reporters or animal liberation activists to paint the
| situation in any way that is likely to undermine the confidence of
| potential buyers is not helpful to the welfare of the sheep."
|
| Is he serious? Is he really saying yet another cruel disaster in the
| livestock export industry should be hushed up?
|
| It is not as though this is an isolated incident, as shown by a glance
| through the October 2002 report from Truss's Independent Reference
| Group on the trade.
|
| Truss asked for more advice from this group - which had recommended a
| much tighter regime more than two years before - after a spate of bad
| incidents.
|
| The mortality rates during seven voyages last year - all but one to
| the Middle East - we February, MV Norvantes (bound for Jakarta) 99
| cattle (8.5 per cent); June, MV Becrux 880 cattle (44 per cent) and
| 1418 sheep (2 per cent); July, MV Corriedale Express 6119 sheep (11
| per cent); July, MV Al Messilah 2173 sheep (3 per cent); July, MV Al
| Shuwaikh 5800 sheep (7 per cent); July, Cormo Express 1064 (2 per
| cent); and September, Al Shuwaikh 2304 sheep (4 per cent).
|
| The group saw these as "evidence of systematic failures within the
| whole live animal export program". It pointed particularly to
| shipments originating from Portland, where the animals were poorly
| prepared for voyages.
|
| It also said that while some reforms had been made since its February
| 2000 recommendations, neither industry nor the regulators had been
| ready for the "cultural change" required. In other words, a lot of
| feet had been dragged. When the sheep arrived, Saudi officials claimed
| scabby mouth (against which sheep are now twice vaccinated) was above
| the accepted limit - a conclusion rejected by the Australian vet.
|
| Tempting as it might be to look for a political motive, there is no
| evidence of this. The Saudis have a record of turning away shiploads.
| The live sheep trade to Saudi Arabia resumed only in 2000 after more
| than a decade's suspension by Australia; this had followed shipments
| being refused on health grounds.
|
| The great concern, on the Government's part, is that if there is too
| much hoo-ha over these sheep, the whole trade will be put in jeopardy.
| It is worth $200 million to Australia in exports to Saudi Arabia. It's
| the risk of a dangerous backlash that's prompted the Government to
| intervene in a private transaction, frantically searching for a
| destination, even though the sheep, with a Saudi owner, are no longer
| Australian sheep but Saudi refugees.
|
| Already exports to Saudi Arabia have been suspended until this is
| sorted out. The Government couldn't afford the spectacle of further
| ships drifting about.
|
| There are now two issues: what should be done with these animals? And,
| is this trade too inhumane to be pursued?
|
| Wirth argues that the Government won't be able to find a port for the
| sheep and it's impractical to bring them home, so they should be
| progressively put down.
|
| But the Australian Veterinary Association, in a rather harrowing news
| release yesterday, said mass slaughter could be "an animal welfare and
| environmental disaster". "There will be thousands of litres of blood",
| it said; animal rights groups "have not considered that the sheep may
| have to watch the slaughter, nor have they considered the welfare of
| the people who would have to carry this out".
|
| Both the Government and the industry argue against putting down the
| sheep, still hopeful a destination can be found. The Government
| doesn't want the sheep repatriated, because it's a long voyage and
| there are quarantine difficulties; the ship's owners have canvassed
| the possibility of returning them to Fremantle, although they'd much
| prefer to offload them regionally.
|
| Greens senator Bob Brown yesterday called for the ship to be ordered
| back at once, saying any quarantine problems are Truss's. Meanwhile
| Australian authorities are trying to continue negotiations with the
| Pakistanis, despite their saying they won't take the sheep.
|
| Animal rights advocate Peter Singer, who calls for euthanasia in this
| case, insists the entire live trade is a "disgrace" that should be
| stopped.
|
| "It's a terrible ordeal for the animals at the best of times. They
| have a nightmare voyage, and then they get treated brutally after they
| land, as if they were just sacks of wheat rather than living, feeling
| animals. Every year or two, there is another major scandal . . . The
| federal minister says that he will implement reforms, but then . . .
| the same thing, or something worse, happens again."
|
| The RSPCA opposes the live export industry, but Wirth recognises that
| neither side of politics will end it. But he wants much more control
| over it.
|
| So does the Australian public. Even if Truss can solve the Cormo
| Express problem quickly, what has happened in this and many other
| instances should weigh on our conscience.


  #5  
Old September 24th, 2003, 11:52 AM
MrMoor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Australians torture 60,000 sheep on a ship - Sick Aussie *******s This happenes on a regular basis!!!!!!!!

"Peter Webb" wrote in message . au...
You are aware that if they had been allowed to land, the Saudis intended to
kill and eat them?

They do intend to eat them, the way that they are killed isn't really
slaughter, more amateur attempts at torture.
  #6  
Old September 25th, 2003, 01:24 AM
Thom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Australians torture 60,000 sheep on a ship - Sick Aussie *******s This happenes on a regular basis!!!!!!!!

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:43:10 +1000, "Peter Webb"
wrote:

You are aware that if they had been allowed to land, the Saudis intended to
kill and eat them?


I thought they were all going to be pets or girlfriends for the
Saudis??

THOM

"Rainer Wolfcastle" wrote in message
. com...
"Frank Booth" wrote in message

...

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...082991895.html

Sick cruel Aussie *******s. 60,000 sheep dying on a ship due to
fu*king stupid Aussie morons.


The MV Cormo Express has become the Tampa of the live sheep export
trade. Unable to land at their destination of Saudi Arabia, more than
50,000 Australian sheep, loaded in early August, yesterday remained in
search of a third country to take them for money, or free.

Their sorry tale - seven weeks on the sea so far, rather than a
fortnight's trip - has raised fresh questions about Australia's
billion-dollar live animal export industry, which regularly causes
thousands of deaths and inflicts suffering that would not be tolerated
onshore.

In the face of this, what does Agriculture Minister Warren Truss say?

He quotes the on-board vet, saying the sheep - apart from about 3800
that have died - have put on weight. As the RSPCA's Hugh Wirth says,
it makes it sound like they're "enjoying some Mediterranean cruise".
They might be getting heavier, but it is not because they're living
comfortably or normally.

The Government refused to say where the ship was - until the media
found it near Dubai - claiming publicity doesn't help the hunt for a
country to take them.

Nor did it want to give mortality figures, fearing it would get locked
into running a daily death watch. Releasing figures was left to the
ship's owners.

Truss has also condemned "unsympathetic reporting of the issues. For
commentators, reporters or animal liberation activists to paint the
situation in any way that is likely to undermine the confidence of
potential buyers is not helpful to the welfare of the sheep."

Is he serious? Is he really saying yet another cruel disaster in the
livestock export industry should be hushed up?

It is not as though this is an isolated incident, as shown by a glance
through the October 2002 report from Truss's Independent Reference
Group on the trade.

Truss asked for more advice from this group - which had recommended a
much tighter regime more than two years before - after a spate of bad
incidents.

The mortality rates during seven voyages last year - all but one to
the Middle East - we February, MV Norvantes (bound for Jakarta) 99
cattle (8.5 per cent); June, MV Becrux 880 cattle (44 per cent) and
1418 sheep (2 per cent); July, MV Corriedale Express 6119 sheep (11
per cent); July, MV Al Messilah 2173 sheep (3 per cent); July, MV Al
Shuwaikh 5800 sheep (7 per cent); July, Cormo Express 1064 (2 per
cent); and September, Al Shuwaikh 2304 sheep (4 per cent).

The group saw these as "evidence of systematic failures within the
whole live animal export program". It pointed particularly to
shipments originating from Portland, where the animals were poorly
prepared for voyages.

It also said that while some reforms had been made since its February
2000 recommendations, neither industry nor the regulators had been
ready for the "cultural change" required. In other words, a lot of
feet had been dragged. When the sheep arrived, Saudi officials claimed
scabby mouth (against which sheep are now twice vaccinated) was above
the accepted limit - a conclusion rejected by the Australian vet.

Tempting as it might be to look for a political motive, there is no
evidence of this. The Saudis have a record of turning away shiploads.
The live sheep trade to Saudi Arabia resumed only in 2000 after more
than a decade's suspension by Australia; this had followed shipments
being refused on health grounds.

The great concern, on the Government's part, is that if there is too
much hoo-ha over these sheep, the whole trade will be put in jeopardy.
It is worth $200 million to Australia in exports to Saudi Arabia. It's
the risk of a dangerous backlash that's prompted the Government to
intervene in a private transaction, frantically searching for a
destination, even though the sheep, with a Saudi owner, are no longer
Australian sheep but Saudi refugees.

Already exports to Saudi Arabia have been suspended until this is
sorted out. The Government couldn't afford the spectacle of further
ships drifting about.

There are now two issues: what should be done with these animals? And,
is this trade too inhumane to be pursued?

Wirth argues that the Government won't be able to find a port for the
sheep and it's impractical to bring them home, so they should be
progressively put down.

But the Australian Veterinary Association, in a rather harrowing news
release yesterday, said mass slaughter could be "an animal welfare and
environmental disaster". "There will be thousands of litres of blood",
it said; animal rights groups "have not considered that the sheep may
have to watch the slaughter, nor have they considered the welfare of
the people who would have to carry this out".

Both the Government and the industry argue against putting down the
sheep, still hopeful a destination can be found. The Government
doesn't want the sheep repatriated, because it's a long voyage and
there are quarantine difficulties; the ship's owners have canvassed
the possibility of returning them to Fremantle, although they'd much
prefer to offload them regionally.

Greens senator Bob Brown yesterday called for the ship to be ordered
back at once, saying any quarantine problems are Truss's. Meanwhile
Australian authorities are trying to continue negotiations with the
Pakistanis, despite their saying they won't take the sheep.

Animal rights advocate Peter Singer, who calls for euthanasia in this
case, insists the entire live trade is a "disgrace" that should be
stopped.

"It's a terrible ordeal for the animals at the best of times. They
have a nightmare voyage, and then they get treated brutally after they
land, as if they were just sacks of wheat rather than living, feeling
animals. Every year or two, there is another major scandal . . . The
federal minister says that he will implement reforms, but then . . .
the same thing, or something worse, happens again."

The RSPCA opposes the live export industry, but Wirth recognises that
neither side of politics will end it. But he wants much more control
over it.

So does the Australian public. Even if Truss can solve the Cormo
Express problem quickly, what has happened in this and many other
instances should weigh on our conscience.




  #7  
Old September 25th, 2003, 01:25 AM
Thom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Australians torture 60,000 sheep on a ship - Sick Aussie *******s This happenes on a regular basis!!!!!!!!

On 24 Sep 2003 03:52:13 -0700, (MrMoor) wrote:

"Peter Webb" wrote in message . au...
You are aware that if they had been allowed to land, the Saudis intended to
kill and eat them?

They do intend to eat them, the way that they are killed isn't really
slaughter, more amateur attempts at torture.


which has to do with the Australians how???

THOM
  #10  
Old September 26th, 2003, 10:29 AM
Daniel Bowen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Australians torture 60,000 sheep on a ship - Sick Aussie *******s This happenes on a regular basis!!!!!!!!

"Thom" wrote in message
...
the sheep on the Dutch ship have just been sold to Iraq.


Given, actually - the Australians buying them back.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...083127957.html


Daniel

--
Daniel Bowen, Melbourne, Australia
dbowen at custard dot net dot au


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Australians are fu**ing animals. They torture 60,000 sheep on a ship. Rainer Wolfcastle Australia & New Zealand 31 September 27th, 2003 05:38 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.