Government records show emergency killings of thousands of livestock after transport to Australian export abattoirs
Curtin University researchers have also found it is taking almost 11 hours, on average, to inspect animals for injury and sickness after they arrive at abattoir facilities – delays that 'significantly increase the likelihood of animals requiring emergency euthanasia'.
Last month, Guardian Australia revealed shocking instances of animal cruelty associated with the nation's export abattoirs, including the mass hypothermia death of 103 sheep during truck transport, which went unpunished by the state regulator.
The Guardian also revealed veterinarian whistleblowers had repeatedly warned of 'profound' problems with the federal government's oversight of the sector, with one complaint alleging the flawed system risked jeopardising Australia's relationship with major trading partners.
Curtin University researchers have also been probing animal welfare issues associated with the nation's export abattoirs, analysing 631 welfare incident reports compiled by government veterinarians in 2020 and 2021. Those reports were released publicly in 2022 after the Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi led a push requiring them to be tabled in parliament.
In a paper last week, Curtin University researchers said their detailed analysis of the documents revealed 'significant welfare problems with farmed animals arriving at meat export slaughterhouses, especially in pigs'.
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
The paper found emergency killing was the most common response to welfare incidents, used in about 60% of cases, or on 2,476 animals. Another 140 animals were found dead on arrival at abattoirs.
The researchers also found significant delays in inspecting animals after they arrived at abattoirs. The time between delivery and detection took 10.8 hours on average, most likely because of late deliveries of animals.
'That's obviously a long time for any animal to be in a state of severe welfare disadvantage,' Prof Clive Phillips, one of the paper's authors, said.
Phillips said the 631 welfare reports suggested a significant number of animals were experiencing serious welfare issues during transport.
'Overall, about 4% of animals that are transported were affected by one of these incident reports and most of the welfare problems are quite serious,' he said.
'One of the biggest ones, handling problems, [is] due to problems with the driver or dogs, [as well as] calving and pregnancies during transportation; lameness was a big problem, skin injuries … Pretty well all of them will have a significant effect on the animals that are affected, but also on the animals that are crammed in with them.'
The paper suggested a range of reforms, including stronger farm inspections to determine which animals were fit for transport, and the removal of financial incentives to transport unfit animals.
Sign up to Breaking News Australia
Get the most important news as it breaks
after newsletter promotion
A spokesperson for the federal agriculture department said the regulation of livestock transport is a matter for state governments. The spokesperson also said export abattoirs must have procedures in place to assess livestock on arrival.
'If livestock is not suitable for slaughter appropriate action must be taken,' the spokesperson said.
The Guardian's investigation last month revealed whistleblowers had submitted a series of complaints in recent years about the state of the agriculture department's on-plant veterinarian system, used to monitor animal welfare at export abattoirs.
The whistleblowers complained that disturbing animal welfare incidents were going unreported to state regulators and that the system was chronically understaffed, leaving some facilities unmonitored. Another veterinarian whistleblower resigned in disgust over changes restricting the ability of vets to enter pens to inspect animals, something he said rendered him unable to safeguard animal welfare.
The department rejected those allegations. A spokesperson said at the time that it had a 'robust regulatory framework and takes regulatory action, where appropriate, for breaches of animal welfare requirements'.
The Australian Meat Industry Council, an industry peak body, has previously said the number of welfare incident reports tabled in parliament show the success of the oversight system and said it equated to about '0.0058 per cent of the total number of animals processed through export abattoirs during that time'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
3 minutes ago
- The Guardian
When Odie the cavoodle needed emergency surgery, the veterinary staff showed why they are the unsung heroes of healthcare
Speaking on a panel with me, a paediatric anaesthetist says that every time she takes a patient into theatre, she says to the parent, 'I will take good care of your child'. Somehow, just imagining this solemn promise makes me tearful although I don't even know that a variation of these words is headed my way. For the past week, our cavoodle Odie has been vomiting. The vet's diagnosis of 'it could be a stomach bug or lymphoma' is not exactly reassuring but, admittedly, the patient is wagging its tail. Two days later, our suspicion rises. The receptionist suggests I bring him in 'now' for tests. I guiltily decline, loath to cancel my patients who have waited months to see me. Later, we go for an ultrasound and, as Odie burrows into my arms, his little heart thumps. Noticing his apprehension (and mine), the technician kneels, fusses over him before drawing him away. As I swallow the bill shock, I learn that Odie has swallowed something causing gastric obstruction. The waiting room has emptied but the vet does me the courtesy of asking me inside to advise that he will need emergency surgery. After texting the kids, I rush him to the animal hospital. In the rear view, he looks tired and innocent, and I feel remorseful. How did we fail him? The receptionist greets me with a fine-tuned amount of care and compassion. She neither indulges me nor fawns over my dog. This is not the time to tell me he is cute. Odie and I are nodding off when the duty vet calls us. Soon, she has me marvelling at her ability to be professional without patronising. She explains that I have a choice between attempting to retrieve the foreign body via a gastroscopy or moving straight to open surgery. Why not pick the less invasive option first, I ask, instinctively thinking about my patients. 'Because if it fails, your cost doubles and some people can't afford it.' This one-line informed financial consent hits the mark – but nauseous at the idea of cutting open Odie's tiny abdomen, I opt for a gastroscopy and hope for the best. I ask the vet if I should wait only to be gently advised that the procedure requires prepping for hydration and sedation. Having sent countless patients for a gastroscopy, I feel stupid. A friendly nurse appears. Odie likes her, licks her and follows her to 'the dog ward', leaving me to pay the hefty deposit. This reminds me of my patients whose pension would foreclose this luxury on behalf of a pet that is often their sole companion. 'Before you leave, do you want to see Odie?' the receptionist asks. I have decision fatigue – and say no, unconvincingly explaining that I don't want to get his hopes up. 'As you like,' she says. Recognising the politest of signals to guard against future regret, I stop at the door. 'Do you think I should see him?' 'Yeah.' The nurse brings out a still happy-looking Odie. I stroke his head, telling him (and me) that we are lucky to be in able hands. Meanwhile, my own hands feel awfully empty without dog or leash. My remedy to ward off the tears is to play loud Bollywood music and, while incongruous, it stops the sadness from invading my heart. At home, after answering my kids' questions with 'we don't know' and 'we can't say', I fall into an exhausted sleep. After midnight, an apologetic, frustrated vet calls to say that the gastroscopy was unsuccessful. She could see a twig-like object but couldn't budge it. So I consent to an exploratory laparotomy, a term for opening up the abdomen that I have explained to many patients suffering from conditions that don't involve a swallowed twig. A kindly surgeon assures me of the routine nature of the procedure. Eyeing the 'for resuscitation' box, I hope so. The offender turns out to be the seed pod of a sweetgum tree. Odie comes home, a little dopey and nonplussed as to what the fuss is all about. As an oncologist, I am used to being compared (unfavourably) to vets. In the depth of their disappointments, patients and families will lament that they wouldn't treat an animal 'like that'. Of course, the human condition and human expectations are complicated, but I will say that vets and their staff might just be the unsung heroes of healthcare. They protect the interests of those who can't even speak for themselves, comfortable both with curing and, when the suffering gets too much, palliating. All this without fanfare but with compassion and humility. What I will remember most is their empathy, which felt natural and unforced. They instinctively understood that they were treating two patients – me and my dog – and tailored their touch and talk accordingly. Alas, we don't do this nearly well enough in medicine. The barrage of bureaucracy no doubt hardens us but, if we let our empathy dissipate, we will be the lesser for it. As for Odie, his wound is healing and he is inhaling our love. Considering the drama, I have a good mind to never again let him off leash. But, to be honest, at the first whiff of his eagerness to sniff at every blade of grass and inspect every dog's behind, I will relent and, before I can exclaim 'Don't eat that!', we will be back to our normal ways. Ranjana Srivastava is an Australian oncologist, award-winning author and Fulbright scholar. Her latest book is Every Word Matters: Writing to Engage the Public
Daily Mail
5 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Aussie who can't get an Uber because he's 'too fat' claims that he is being discriminated against
A frustrated Uber customer who just wants to be able to visit his family has slammed the rideshare platform for drivers repeatedly cancelling his trips due to his weight. When Martin calls an Uber to drive around Melbourne, he said it's normal to expect that the first few drivers will cancel his trip. He said he has grown accustomed to the 'gut-wrenching feeling' of being refused entry to a driver's vehicle after they pull up. 'It's because of my size. I'm morbidly obese, I don't shy away from that,' he told A Current Affair on Wednesday. 'The drivers take one look at me and they go right past me.' Martin lives on a disability pension due to his weight and relies on rideshare services to get to his parents' home, where he cares for them. Due to personal reasons he did not share, he is unable to lose his desired amount of weight despite his best efforts. In Victoria, it is against the law under the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 to discriminate against someone based on their physical features. Under the law, employers must take steps to eliminate discrimination in their workplaces. Under what is called a 'positive duty' companies can be held responsible if their workers partake in discrimination. Martin said the 'horrible' feeling of being judged by those around him doesn't just apply to Uber rides. He recalled feeling self conscious while eating in public, visiting shopping centres and attending medical appointments and has even taken to cutting his own hair to avoid scrutiny at salons. However, the incredibly direct action of an Uber driver turning around and cancelling a trip after seeing Martin particularly stings. 'It feels, it feels like I'm less than a human being. I want to be able to be like everyone else,' he said. 'They see me and then they keep driving and when they get to the corner, they cancel - then that gut-wrenching feeling where you go, 'It's happened again'.' Martin has documented every Uber driver who cancelled his trip at the last minute over several years. When he submitted his complaints to Uber, he claimed he consistently was told the drivers would undergo improved training. 'They occasionally send me a $10 voucher because that's how much a human's dignity is worth,' Martin said. Martin called for Uber to take action against drivers who discriminated against customers based on weight. He wanted to be treated with 'dignity' when using rideshare services. Uber said in a statement it has a 'zero tolerance policy towards any form of discrimination'. 'Our community guidelines clearly prohibit discrimination of any kind,' an Uber spokesperson said. 'We work to inform driver partners about those standards, hold them accountable for their actions, and make it clear that this behaviour can result in them losing access to the Uber app.'
Daily Mail
5 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Heatwave warning: Common home fan mistake could be deadly, causing heart attacks, scientists warn
A new study has revealed that using an electric fan in hot temperatures could increase the risk of suffering a deadly heart attack. Researchers from the University of Sydney recruited 20 participants to test how fans affect body temperature, heart rate, sweating and comfort when used in a hot and humid environment. The study participants were asked to complete four separate three-hour trials in a climate chamber set to 39.2°C and 49 per cent humidity. For two of the sessions they were well hydrated, and had drank the recommended amount of fluids for 24 hours before the trial, and could also drink during the trial. For the other two, they were required to be dehydrated, avoiding fluids and foods with a high water content in the 24 hours before the trial and were forbidden from drinking during the trial. In each hydration state, the participants were tested with and without a fan. The study, which was outlined in a research letter published by journal Emergency Medicine, aimed to see whether hydration status changes the effect of fan use in hot, humid conditions—especially since it's known that fans can sometimes worsen heat stress. A series of temperatures were measured, including their heart rate, rectal temperature, whole body sweat rate, thermal discomfort, and thirst level. The data revealed that fan use while dehydrated can worsen heart strain, which can eventually lead to heart attacks. Furthermore, the researchers concluded that using a fan increased sweat losses by about 60 per cent, which might mean using a fan could be harmful if you're dehydrated. The study lead, Connor Graham PhD said: 'Most extreme heat decedents do not have air conditioning but often own electric fans. 'Fan use can reduce heat-related elevations in thermal and cardiovascular strain at temperatures up to approximately 39 to 40 °C. 'In hotter conditions, fans should be turned off, as they can worsen heat stress.' This, Mr Graham explained, is because the high temperature of the air causes the body to heat up faster than it can cool itself by sweating. This isn't the first link made between electric fans and death. Scientific studies have found that fan use can reduce heat and heart strain in temperatures up to around 39 (102.2F), but once the mercury edges past 40C (104F) it's better to turn them off. Researchers have also recommended only using fans when it's below 39C for healthy adults below 40 years old and 38C (100.4F) for older adults 65 or older. They also warned fans should only be used in temperatures above 37C in older adults on anticholinergic medications like oxybutynin for bladder control. Earlier this week, an amber heat-health warning was issued for five regions of England by the UK Health Security Agency (UKSA) and the Met Office. In response, Dr Paul Coleman, a public health expert at the watchdog, said: 'These temperatures can result in serious health outcomes across the population.' This is particularly a problem for, he said 'those who are vulnerable, such as the elderly or those with serious health conditions'. So he advised people to check in on friends, families or neighbours who are vulnerable to make sure they are coping well. To stay safe in the hot weather, the watchdog recommends, keeping your home cool by closing windows and curtains in rooms that face the sun. They also urged people to know the symptoms of heat exhaustion or heat stroke and what to do if you know or someone else has them. Heat stroke occurs when the body loses its ability to cool itself, and its inner temperature—which usually hovers around 37C—rapidly increases to over 40C. The heart begins frantically pumping blood to try to cool it against the skin's surface. The increased temperatures can also damage internal organs, leading to irreparable damage, or even catastrophic failure. According to the NHS, tell-tale signs of the precursor to heat stroke, heat exhaustion, include tiredness, a high temperature, excessive sweating, being thirsty and weakness. Others include fast breathing, rapid heart rate, being headaches, nausea, vomiting, clammy and/or pale skin, as well as cramps in the arms, legs and stomach. While symptoms are often the same in adults and children, those under 18 may become irritable too. If someone is showing these signs, the NHS advice is to cool them down and give them fluids. They add that heat exhaustion will not typically need emergency medical help if you can cool down within 30 minutes. But if symptoms persist or worsen after 30 minutes, it may have turned into a heat stroke—which can be life threatening so you should call 999 immediately. It can be fatal because when your body's temperature regulation system fails, it can lead to dangerously high temperatures that can cause organ damage. Other signs of heat stroke are a very high temperature, hot skin that's not sweating and might look red, rapid heartbeat, fast breathing, shortness of breath, confusion, lack of coordination, seizures or fits, and loss of consciousness.
