News 
 State News 
 Wool 
 General 
 NSW Farmers back AWI mulesing stance 

NSW Farmers back AWI mulesing stance

31 Jul, 2009 07:53 AM
IT MIGHT leave an open wound on the rear ends of sheep, but farmers who practise mulesing are the victims in the debate about the controversial technique, according to a leading woolgrower.

The NSW Farmers Association annual conference yesterday passed a motion making it policy that woolgrowers can use any means, including mulesing, to tackle flystrike because no viable alternative had been found, the wool committee chairman, Alix Turner, said.

‘‘We are not defiant producers. We are just people who think this is the best we can do at the time and are sort of victims.’’

The farmers must use mulesing to keep their businesses and sheep alive, he said.

But they fear that when a deal with their greatest critic, People for Ethical Treatment of Animals, expires next year, Australian Merino wool will again be targeted with calls for worldwide boycotts.

After a court case brought by Australian Wool Innovation, PETA agreed to withdraw the boycott call it first made five years ago, giving the industry until next year to phase out mulesing. However, earlier this week AWI announced it was abandoning the 2010 deadline because it was unrealistic. Farmers approved the motion yesterday.

Mr Turner said retailers had been ‘‘bluffed’’ by extremist groups into putting pressure on woolgrowers to stop mulesing, and the unfortunate image of the wound it produced was ‘‘like an ad’’ that PETA could use to advance its real objective of terminating livestock industries. He said the wool industry had shrunk by half in the past 17 years through drought and economic circumstances and further pressure would drive more people out.

The sheep farmer who put the motion, James Watson, of Young, said the three alternatives that might replace mulesing were not effective enough. They aimed to eliminate wrinkles from the rear of the sheep so that urine and faeces did not get trapped, attracting flies which laid maggots that could kill a sheep within three days, he said.

Plastic clips, intradermal injections and breeding sheep with wool-free rears were options still being trialled and the industry was still working to meet the 2010 deadline, he said.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
When are all these wool organisations and bureaucrats going to realise they are making things worse for woolgrowers. Irrespective of what you say, you make things worse by drawing attention to the issue. A message to all these 'industry representatives' who can't resist the temptation to see their names in the media - keep your bloody mouths shut and let us grow the wool. Things would have been so much better if there was no 'wool industry represenatation'.
Posted by Steve, 31/07/2009 9:14:11 AM, on The Land
How many sheep actually die from mulesing process?
Posted by tigerdicky, 31/07/2009 9:23:16 AM, on The Land
I have being mulesing for 30 years tigerdicky, and I haven't yet seen a lamb that I could say for sure died from mulesing. I saw a hell of a lot die from fly strike before we started to mules though. PETA know this and this is why they have targeted mulesing. They want to shut down sheep framing so what they have done is taken away woolgrowers' main weapon against flystrike knowing that it will force most growers out of the industry.
Posted by Qlander, 31/07/2009 10:28:36 AM, on The Land
Is anyone else amazed the mulesing decision - perhaps the biggest rural story of the year - only made p13 of this week's The Land? It even got beaten to p11 by a story about Dubbo saleyards pushing back the start time of their sales by an hour. Was this a conscious decision or a commercial one made to please the stud breeder/advertisers that now control AWI. Is Marius still on the pay roll?
Posted by What a joke, 31/07/2009 1:28:06 PM, on The Land
At last we begin to see the beginning of the unity needed to halt the decline in wool production. No longer is the management running away or hiding the problems. There are hard yards yet to cover, production will fall further yet before the recovery is under way. Do not fail to understand as previous management did that the principal factor that killed the trade in wool was the reckless price cutting which the Howard government employed to dump the last of the stockpile from 1998 till 2002. The huge production cut which resulted bankrupted the entire trading mechanism which in turn made it impossible to raise the price. ABARE's comments with their price forecast for the current year showed that the simpletons in our government still do not understand this. Clearly the policies which have continued to cut supply over the last 13 years were deliberately calculated to do just that, in the unwavering belief that the only way to raise the price was to cut supply. This, after all, was what they were taught in kindergarten economics. Our academies must carry a lot of the blame for the fact that their education never advanced beyond that level.
Posted by Ted O'Brien, 31/07/2009 2:57:37 PM, on The Land
My Dad was the first to mules sheep in our district in the early '50s, the whole flock, ewes, weaners, wethers. This was the big old radical mules too, no fancy cradles, just our ringers holding them on a rail. If there had been losses of any sort he would not have done it again, since then hundreds of thousands of sheep have been mulesed on that property, & even more on the one I have lived on for almost 40 years. Most growers I know vaccinate against tetanus & infection at lamb marking, plus a product on the wound to promote healing & keep flies off, so it's even less likely that there will be losses. So I agree absolutely with Qlander. We don't die from losing a little bit of skin & neither do sheep, & it is only skin, no flesh as claimed by PETA, & very little blood either. I had a buster from my motorbike on a gravel road & lost a couple of considerable patches of hide, it healed just like a mulesed sheep, scabbed over quickly & that was it. At least sheep don't get the urge to pick at their scabs! Once Dad started mulesing it was quickly & widely embraced in that area, as graziers were desperate to combat the huge losses from flystrike.
Posted by a Grazier, 31/07/2009 3:27:01 PM, on The Land
More like a case of the Australian wool industry is now only a page 13 story period.
Posted by Qlander, 31/07/2009 4:02:49 PM, on The Land
We didn't start until the '80s, a Grazier. Interestingly the sticking point was pain relief. It just seemed like too much. The tipping point for me came on 4 June 1981. It was a wet winter and we had just finished crutching. We went to a Polo Crosse Carnival for the long weekend. When we returned on Tuesday 400 out of 1000 weaner ewes were dead, struck on the shear nicks from the crutching. I vowed then and there to mules every lamb at lamb marking from then on.
Posted by Qlander, 31/07/2009 7:07:31 PM, on The Land
Has anyone heard of SRS sheep? The wool industry IS being defiant. While there may not be a valid chemical/technological solution to the mulesing issue, there is a certainly a genetic solution that WILL and DOES work. But woolgrowers won't accept that they're sheep may not be the best sheep for the 21st century. Industry organisations such as NSW Farmers are doing their members no favours by bowing to pressure on this issue. It's unacceptable.
Posted by What's the problem, 31/07/2009 8:30:57 PM, on The Land
After so many years of policy disappointment it is refreshing to finally see a major establishment player draw a line in the sand and back all their paid up woolgrower members instead of taking the politically correct road and throwing their members to the wolves under the tied old line of “This is the best outcome we could achieve” and then trying to convince everyone this is a ‘win – win’ situation. Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see whether or not the peak industry body adopts, or even respects this policy in-which puts the welfare of the animal in advance of the market or, any market blackmail. The old adage that ‘the customer is always right’ may be true in given circumstances however; this is not true when it involves live healthy animals. So let the cards fall where they may on this principle and this principle alone. I congratulate NSW Farmers for finally having a go and, that is as far I’m prepared to go for the purposes of back-slapping, because at this point, and on this issue I have no sense of humour left.
Posted by Dr Bob, 31/07/2009 11:30:00 PM, on The Land
1 | 2  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.

Most popular articles

Advertisement



The Land







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...