The "Are Wool Sheep Exported" Problem
Originally posted by trekkie
Sheep for wool production are a different breed from sheep for meat. So wool sheep are not likely to be exported.
It may not seem likely, but apparently this is just what happens.
Here is a reference:
Every year in Australia, about 6 million sheep - the highest number of any country - are exported to the Middle East for use in religious slaughter practices that require animals to be alive upon receipt. Most of these sheep are Merinos who are no longer productive in the wool industry (Strong and Minchin 2003, The Australian Sheep and Wool Industries on the Web 2004)
http://www.savethesheep.com/report.asp
Here is another, just in case anyone feels that the first one is somehow biased:
While Australia remains the worlds biggest supplier of apparel wool including half the worlds supplies of Merino wool it is the Merino meat industry that has been the success story of the past decade.
...
Sheep farmers increasingly knew they had to diversify, and they enjoyed two aspects of good fortune in their moves to do so.
...
Further evidence is the growing tendency for growers to sell sheep at a younger age to take advantage of the increased value of the meat, instead of focusing on wool alone. In addition a much larger percentage of Merino wethers are now being sold, rather than being grazed for three or four years as wool producers.
...
With the value of Merino meat confirmed among both producers and consumers, the future of the industry seems assured. Australia's ability to supply large and small export markets with quality-assured produce has consolidated the industrys early international inroads. Pastoral societies are not renowned for their willingness to embrace radical change but in the case of Merino meat, a willingness to adapt has paid rich dividends.
http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cache:sI20ztPgRE8J:www.majusz.hu/aloldalak/wmc/files/07Fletcher.doc+merino+%2B+meat&hl=en
The "Lesser of However Many Evils" Problem
Originally posted by trekkie
Second, flystrike is a major problem here. Even a city guy like me can comprehend this. However, considerthis question. What is more humane allowing flystrike or removing the tails of sheep before flystrike occurs ??
Originally posted by easybeat
more well informed people in this area have been quoted as saying that due to the extremely high incidence of 'fly strike' (especially in Australia) it would be cruel not to prevent this. It's a classic case of the lesser of two evils here.
The suggestion here seems to be that the choice is between flystrike vs mulesing (easybeat) or taildocking (trekkie). These are certainly not the only choices and if you look further into this you will see that there are several solutions:
Selection for Less Susceptible Breeds
Experts regard genetic selection of sheep who are resistant to flystrike as the most effective long-term solution. Tellam and Bowles (1996) cite a study in which only 8 percent of 1-year-old resistant sheep suffered from fleece-rot ...
Increased Monitoring and Treatment
Perhaps the most effective option is simply to increase monitoring for early signs of flystrike and to provide treatment when necessary ...
Insecticides
A study of flystrike control methods in the U.K. found that "at present, the control of blowfly strike is most commonly achieved through the application of insecticide ...
Vaccinations
Bowles et al. (1996) were able to "successfully vaccinate sheep against larvae of the sheep blowfly" ...
Topical Applications
Painless topical applications for preventing wool growth are currently being developed ...
Sterile Male Blowfly Release
As female blowflies only mate once during their lifetime, the release of sterile male blowflies can help significantly reduce populations ...
Baited Traps
Dymock and Forgie (1995) used a non-insecticidal blowfly trap in an area where all four flystrike species were present and, during the first year of observation, found that only four of 600 unmulesed sheep were struck ...
Improved Farm-Management Practices:
Reduced Stocking Densities
Careful Diet Selection
Rearing in Regions Less Hospitable to Blowfly Populations
Timely Shearing and Crutching ...
You can follow-up the details at
http://www.savethesheep.com/report.asp
oh yeah! One more alternative - eliminate the wool industry and there may be no need for mulesing or taildocking.
In friendship,
prad
Originally posted by easybeat
is it just me or do other people also feel that there could be alteria motives behind the argument that somehow wearing garments made from a purely renewable resource is in someway exploiting animals.
well perhaps you'd like elaborate on these ulterior motives, easybeat. I'm not sure what they are. Your comment reminds me of the girl who suspected that her date had ulterior motives and she accused him of such. Shocked, he replied, "but I have no ulterior motives. I'm after your body!"
Perhaps, you'd also care to explain how using a 'renewable resource' (whatever that really means), justifies the pain and death for a rather large number of sheep.
Finally, it would be a very good thing if people thought as much for their fellow man as they do about animal welfare.
I think if people thought enough for animal welfare they might actually treat their fellow person with greater kindness. It is also an incorrect assumption (I think that's what you are assuming at any rate), that because people are concerned with animal welfare, that they automatically distance themselves from human welfare (see the news story below). What is known as the "extension theory" provides numerous examples of human rights activists who simply 'extended' their circle of compassion (a la Schweitzer) to include animals. The circle gets expanded the other way too.
In friendship,
prad
(i think that the people who signed the petition are no less concerned about human dilemmas because they have chosen to take action on behalf of some non-humans)
Wednesday, September 29, 2004
Democrats, Greens leaders sign anti-live export petition
Sydney Lord Mayor Clover Moore, Federal Greens leader Bob Brown and the Democrats leader Andrew Bartlett are among a group of 58 prominent people to sign a petition to end the live animal export trade.
Other signatories include academics, authors, actors and entertainers.
Animals Australia organised the petition which calls on the Prime Minister John Howard and the Opposition Leader Mark Latham to end the live exports of sheep and cattle.
The group's executive director Glenys Oogjes says the petition's signatories believe live exports are cruel to animals.
"Because they've seen, particularly over the last year, perhaps two years, the evidence that Animals Australia and others have been able to bring out, and particularly the suffering that our animals undergo when they first go onto the ships and then go from one hemisphere to the other and the temperature changes that that requires, and the rigours of long distance transport," she said.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200409/s1209243.htm
Originally posted by elvendreamgirlsarah,
Prad, do you believ that the humane collection of wool is wrong?
if the sheep don't object, then who am i to say otherwise?
however, what a human considers humane for a sheep, may not be considered to be quite so by the sheep (even though the human wants to insist that it is so).
i think it may be possible to take wool from sheep so that is really is just like a simple haircut (which it hardly is in the vast majority of situations). i vaguely recall bbarr mentioning in a post or a PM that he gets his wool from organic farmers who do treat their sheep kindly.
generally, i think this may be possible in very small operations. i think that some people can form a sort of 'partnership' with their animals and the latter 'work' for their living by providing marketable commodities without becoming a commodity. i am reminded of tevye's last words to his animals in the musical fiddler on the roof as he was forced out of his town anatevka:
"Thanks for everything"
in friendship,
prad
Those "Australian activists" sure haven't been making much noise back home! First I've heard of it.
By the way, that e-mail address for the Prime Minister is COMPLETELY wrong. The poor National Archives are going to get bombarded with a load of stuff they won't know what to do with!
Originally posted by orfeomay be it's a redirect?
By the way, that e-mail address for the Prime Minister is COMPLETELY wrong. The poor National Archives are going to get bombarded with a load of stuff they won't know what to do with!
that is the email given on the Australia's Prime Ministers website
(http://primeministers.naa.gov.au/contacts.asp):
Australia's Prime Ministers Website
National Archives of Australia
PO Box 7425
Canberra Business Centre ACT 2610
Australia
Tel: +61 2 6212 3930
Fax: +61 6212 3914
Email: primeministers@naa.gov.au
People who wish to email Prime Minister John Howard will find a contact form at http://www.pm.gov.au/email.cfm
so i presume the form is ok, but someone goofed on the email?
thanks for the info anyway.
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by pradtfI suppose you are right prad.
i think athousandyoung has answered you well on that.
if you do one, it doesn't mean you can't do the other.
and if you don't do the other, it doesn't mean you shouldn't do the one.
in friendship,
prad
But sheep are really dumb.
Would you incarcerate children for pulling the legs off a spider?
Originally posted by gumbieSAheep aren't really dumb. I was raised around them. They simply have a very strong herd instinct and they do as the others in the herd do. This is true of all herding animals to some degree.
I suppose you are right prad.
But sheep are really dumb.
Would you incarcerate children for pulling the legs off a spider?
Originally posted by gumbie
But sheep are really dumb.
This is an interesting argument for various reasons and so it deserves to be answered in some detail.
First, dumbness is a rather subjective concept and depends largely on the measuring stick being used. For instance, many of the students in the vocational school where I used to teach in the 80s were labelled 'challenged', 'retarded', 'stupid', 'dumb' - because they had trouble doing 'clever' things like adding, multiplication, reading. On the other hand, they were pretty good at fixing cars, carpentry, preparing food (in fact, a lot of us really smart teachers used to put on a lot of weight as a result of the excellent lunchs provided at the school - and then complain about that extra poundage). The kids were very street smart too, because many of them came from abusive homes and they had learned how to survive. However, because the measuring stick used was the standard academic one, our kids were always considered dumb.
Second, most people don't like being measured for dumbness. You can look at the most interesting Forgan experiment done in a teachers' education class regarding IQs here:
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?id=11187&page=2
I encourage you to read it despite its length, because it highlights a common occurence that some humans indulge in: "what's good for the goose, may be good for the gander, but it's not good for me".
Ok, you say, this is all fine and dandy, but we are talking about sheep, really dumb sheep!
So, third, in comes the 'scientific' evidence because some people are always impressed by that. Sheep apparently experience some degree of emotion; may be even capable of conscious thought; they can remember up to 50 sheep faces; they may be able to think about individuals who are absent from their environment as a result of their brain structure. This is all from the work done by the Babraham Institute in Cambridge. They are clearly not dumb. In fact, what is fascinating is the sheep may be able to help humans 😀 because
It could shed light on a rare human condition where people are unable to recognise faces.
All kidding aside, you can read about this in the BBC article here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1641463.stm
Now, it seems we need scientists to tell us what probably any sensible and moderately observant shepherd already knows - but for some reason even the obvious doesn't become accepted till it is scientifically validated somehow.
Now that brings us to a very important question.
Fourth, just who is 'dumb'? Is it really the sheep or those who can't acknowledge that they feel pain, enjoy companionships, display emotions, care for their young and do many of the same things that humans are often capable of. Does the individual who accepts this anthropomorphism or the one who denies it have the better grasp on reality?
Fifth, let's answer the question by observation in the microcosm of human development. Why is it we teach our children to be nice to animals (whether they are dumb or not)? Why do we tell them not to yank on the dog's tail, or poke a stick at a caged bird, or not to pull the legs off your spider? Why do we emphasis qualities of courage, kindness, generosity, dedication, loyalty (often through stories in which animals play the leading characters)?
Is it because we feel more dogs will live safer? Is it because we feel more birds will be free from molestation? Or that more spiders will walk in peace?
I think not. We don't want our kids to have these qualities for the sake of the 'dumb' animals - we want them to have these qualities because we know our kids will be better for it. As humans, we value these qualities because they counter things like hatred, bigotry, cruelty and fear.
Finally, this idea goes well beyond kids who do eventually get older. They should not lose those valuable lessons of their youth. In fact, it may be that the only way we will treat other humans fairly, equally and humanely is when we are able to treat those sentient beings who are the most defenseless and voiceless and who we consider 'dumb', with compassion for it says much about ourselves.
This is not an unusual idea at all and has been echoed throughout history by many of the most respected of our species:
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."
Mahatma Gandhi, statesman and philosopher
"If you have men who will exclude any of God's creatures from the shelter of compassion and pity, you will have men who deal likewise with their fellow men."
Francis of Assisi, saint
"For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other. Indeed, he who sows the seed of murder and pain cannot reap joy and love."
Pythagoras, philosopher and mathematician
"Non-violence leads to the highest ethics, which is the goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming all other living beings, we are still savages."
Thomas Edison, inventor
"Until he extends the circle of his compassion to all living things, man will not himself find peace."
Albert Schweitzer, missionary and statesman, Nobel 1952
Empathy and compassion are inherent human traits 'etched into our souls' - and through them we achieve "our finest hour".
In friendship,
prad
Originally posted by elvendreamgirlIt's even true of humans a lot of the time (e.g. "mob mentality", "peer pressure" ).
SAheep aren't really dumb. I was raised around them. They simply have a very strong herd instinct and they do as the others in the herd do. This is true of all herding animals to some degree.
There are a lot of really dumb people, too, but it doesn't make it okay to throw them alive into a grinding machine or subject them to other such cruelties.
-f
hi pradf, thanks for the assistance with spelling, never was a strong point of mine. What I was referring to was the quote [Today, there are so many warm and wonderful alternatives to wool that there's no need to wear other animals' hair] this is all very peachy, but personally I prefer to wear wollen garments. Which whether you like it or not are definitely a 'renewable reasource' unlike many made made synthetic fibres. Cheer's chubby-chap
Originally posted by pradtfLOL, that is NOT the Prime Minister's website, that's my point. It's a website ABOUT Prime Ministers - all of them for the last 100 years.
may be it's a redirect?
that is the email given on the Australia's Prime Ministers website
(http://primeministers.naa.gov.au/contacts.asp):
Australia's Prime Ministers Website
National Archives of Australia
PO Box 7425
Can ...[text shortened]... email?
thanks for the info anyway.
in friendship,
prad
The whole aim of telling you about that form is to redirect you to the correct website (www.pm.gov.au) so you leave the poor National Archives alone.
This thread has validity.
But as an Australian who has worked with many thousands of sheep (in the past) it strikes me as slightly absurd.
The farms are many thousands of square kms.
They are pure sheep fodder pasture: nothing else.
The destruction of incredible quantities of native vegetation and wildlife was required to provide this.
This is still continueing today.
This massive murder of Australias native inhabitants is the BIG crime.
This torture of our imported sheep is a lesser crime.