the sum of any social gains, if the trade were to stop, less the net economic losses. Clearly the prospects of this condition being satisfied will be enhanced by any measures that reduce the social
costs associated with exporting livestock.
SUMMARY: Australia is the world’s largest exporter of livestock with this distinction applying to both sheep and cattle. The live export market underpins saleyard prices
throughout much of the nation and as such has the strong support of producers. However, there are other stakeholders in the trade, including members of the
Australian public who are concerned about the animal welfare implications of live export.
1.2 Significance of animal welfare
Despite its importance to the nation, the industry does not enjoy universal support due to a widely held perception that it poses too great a risk to the health and wellbeing of the livestock. This concern
extends to the treatment of the animals following disembarkation in the importing country. The situation is serious to the extent that it threatens the future of the industry. However, much of the
trade is very low risk and could continue with virtually no threat to the welfare of the livestock. In short, community concerns with the industry can be traced to a relatively small number of high impact
incidents that have exhibited one or more of the following characteristics:
• Problems with the standards in adequately addressing known biological and physical risks eg,: − Selection of unsuitable livestock;
− Use of paddock based feedlots without covered troughs prior to shipment; and − High temperature differentials between the exit and entry ports relative to the adaptation of
the livestock • A failure by some enterprises to comply with the spirit of the existing standards.
• Poor treatment of the animals in the recipient country. • Rejection of animals by the importing country for pseudo political reasons.
Thus the greatest risk to the sustainability of the live export industry is the public’s perception of the treatment and consequent welfare of the animals during the assembly and transportation processes
that accompany export and the handling practices following disembarkation. Unless the Australian public can be convinced that the livestock can withstand the export and disembarkation processes,
without significant welfare impacts, it is likely that the contiguous political pressure could put the trade itself at risk. Reliance on countervailing political influence from exporters and producers is not seen
as a long term solution
3
. Therefore, developing a knowledge, understanding and acceptance of the welfare standards applicable to the utilisation of livestock is considered to be the crucial first step in
implementing management systems that will deliver acceptable outcomes.
3
The political ‘environment’ surrounding animal welfare is inherently unstable and unpredictable depending on who is involved at the time. While governments can be highly sensitive to lobbying by
exporters, the effectiveness of this lobbying depends on how incidences are reported and interpreted in the press and the subsequent tenor of public reactions.
16
Developing management systems that will make the live exporting industry sustainable because it is profitable for direct participants and acceptable from a community perspective is difficult because of
the number and complexity of influences that determine performance and outcomes. The situation, illustrating the many risks faced by exporters, is shown in Figure 1.
The export er
Human health safety risks
Animal health welfare risks
Longer-term commercial risks
Short-term financial
risks
Figure 1: Live exporters face many risks
SUMMARY: Achieving prescribed animal welfare outcomes is the key to the industry’s ongoing acceptability to the Australian public. Achieving acceptable
outcomes is difficult in the first instance because of the many inherent risks faced by the industry.
1.3 Weaknesses of the current system
