Page 116 of 201 Figure 10: Box and whisker plot showing summary statistics for voyage duration in days
including sea voyage and discharge periods, based on data from voyages between 1995- 2012.
The central shaded box spans the range from the 25
th
percentile to the 75
th
percentile and the horizontal line within the central shaded box is the median duration. The outer whiskers
lines above and below the box, span out to a limit that is 1.5IQR where the IQR is the inter-quartile range the range from the 25
th
percentile to the 75
th
percentile. Any points that lie outside this range are plotted as shaded circles.
The box plots provide an excellent visual summary of voyage duration. The longest voyages based on median voyage duration were to SE Europe and the shortest voyages to SE Asia.
There was a wide range of voyage durations within the MENA category including individual voyages with the longest voyage duration voyage from Karumba on the QLD coast to
Egypt.
9.3 Effect of year
Figure 11 shows annual mortality expressed as a percentage of cattle loaded for 6,443 voyages over the period 1995-2012 excluding the four extreme voyages identified in
exploratory screening.
5 10
15 20
25 30
35 40
45 50
55 60
MENA SE ASIA
NE ASIA SE EUROPE
MISC
Region
Page 117 of 201 Figure 11: Mortality expressed as a percentage of cattle loaded per year from 6443 voyages
over the period 1995-2012. Bars represent 95 confidence intervals.
Figure 12: Mortality expressed as a mortality rate deaths per 1,000 cattle-days from 6,443 voyages over the period 1995-2012. Bars represent 95 confidence intervals.
Figure 12 shows annual mortality rate expressed as deaths per 1,000 cattle-days incorporating adjustment for duration of voyage in days, for the same 6,443 voyages over
the period 1995-2012.
Figure 11 and Figure 12 provide examples of two different approaches to estimation of mortality during export voyages, one based on percentage of cattle loaded, without any
adjustment for voyage duration and the other based on a true mortality rate that incorporates adjustment for voyage duration see Section 3.9 for more discussion on these two
approaches.
.0 5
.1 .1
5 .2
.2 5
.3 .3
5 .4
19 94
19 95
19 96
19 97
19 98
19 99
20 00
20 01
20 02
20 03
20 04
20 05
20 06
20 07
20 08
20 09
20 10
20 11
20 12
Year
.0 2
5 .0
5 .0
7 5
.1 .1
2 5
.1 5
.1 7
5 .2
.2 2
5 .2
5
19 94
19 95
19 96
19 97
19 98
19 99
20 00
20 01
20 02
20 03
20 04
20 05
20 06
20 07
20 08
20 09
20 10
20 11
20 12
Year
Page 118 of 201
Mortality percentage measures may make shorter voyages appear to have an artificially lower mortality and longer voyages an artificially higher mortality than the true underlying
mortality risk when expressed in rate units deaths per standardised count of cattle per day or per measure of cattle-days. This risk of bias means that simple percentage measures
should not be used to compare mortality risk when voyages are very different in duration.
Most industry reports for mortality during export involve mortality expressed as a percentage of animals loaded.
The mortality rate as displayed in Figure 12, provides a measure that can be used to compare mortality rates between different voyages and also when analysing aggregated
data from different voyages to assess effects of other explanatory factors voyage, years etc. Mortality rates expressed as deaths per unit time at risk also allow comparison between
different sources of mortality estimates, such as export vs on-farm vs on-feedlot. For this reason, we have used the mortality rate measure in analyses described in this report.
There was increasing variability in estimates prior to about 2003, as indicated by the wider confidence interval bars, and more variable annual mean estimates. There were peaks in
mortality rate in 1998 and 2000 and then a progressive decline to levels that plateaued between 2003 and 2009 and then a further decline to a lower plateau with very tight
confidence intervals for 2010-2012.
Pairwise comparisons between years were compared using FDR-adjusted p-values and in conjunction with visual appraisal of the general patterns apparent in Figure 12.
There was no statistical difference between annual mean mortality for 2001 compared to 2000 p=0.3 or for 2002 compared to 2000 p=0.1, however the mean for 2003 was
significantly lower than 2000 p0.001. With the exception of 2007 p=0.4, all of the years from 2003-2012 were significantly lower than 2000 p0.05.
There was no difference in mortality rate between 2003-2009 p0.05, suggesting that this was a statistical plateau in annual mortality rates.
There was then a visually apparent fall in annual mortality rate from 2009 to 2010 when mean mortality rate fell below 0.075 deaths per 1,000 cattle-days. There was a tendency for
a difference from 2009 to 2010 p=0.063 and the 2011 rate was significantly lower than 2009 p=0.046.
For selected additional analyses, a year-grouping was developed by creating three levels: 1995-2002, 2003-2009 and 2010-2012.
The pattern in mortality rate over time may be related to broader chronological events. The Australian Livestock Export Standards ALES were developed in 1996-97 and implemented
in 1998-99 by the Australian Livestock Export Corporation LiveCorp. In 1999 and 2002, there were reviews of the livestock export trade by an Independent Reference Group IRG
convened by the Federal Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Both reviews were convened in response to concerns over incidents relating to live exports and whether there
were appropriate controls in place to prevent such incidents in the future. In 2003, the Keniry Livestock Export Review
67
Keniry 2003 was initiated in response to welfare concerns
67
Keniry 2003
Page 119 of 201
arising from issues associated with the “MV Cormo Express”, an export vessel carrying
sheep to Saudi Arabia that spent 80 days on the vessel following rejection of the consignment by Saudi authorities.
Significant reforms were made to industry regulation following the Keniry Livestock Export Review, which led to government taking on full responsibility for managing the regulation of
the livestock export process. This included the development of the Australian Standards for the Export of Livestock ASEL, which initially came into effect in July 2005. Since that time
there have been several revisions of ASEL and the current version 2.3 of ASEL was endorsed in April 2011.
Over the recent decade, there have been a variety of changes in the way livestock exports are conducted, driven by a combination of market forces changes in demand and supply of
livestock and regulatory requirements with associated changes in selection and management of animals.
9.4 Effect of month of year
