Do you think people will boycott said companies that export?
I don’t eat meat (and been that way for 3-4 years) as I can’t get my head around some of those practices - but I would be naive to think people would change their consumption patterns based on the above. When people get the mere whiff that I don’t eat meat - they proceed to educate me on all things protein and state with pride how much meat they consume and how regularly.
I just think it is hard enough to sell obvious benefits to Australians i.e - solar and riding bikes, let alone company practices
Do you think people will boycott said companies that export?
I don’t eat meat (and been that way for 3-4 years) as I can’t get my head around some of those practices - but I would be naive to think people would change their consumption patterns based on the above. When people get the mere whiff that I don’t eat meat - they proceed to educate me on all things protein and state with pride how much meat they consume and how regularly.
I just think it is hard enough to sell obvious benefits to Australians i.e - solar and riding bikes, let alone company practices
How do you know if there’s a vegetarian in the room…Oh they’ll tell you!
People do respond, that was clear after the fallout from the Indonesian scandal a few years ago, where butchers reported 10 to 15 percent drops in sales, a form of spontaneous boycott.
I know all about the chilly reception the words of vegetarians engender and mostly I keep my trap shut but the cruelty imbedded in this industry is beyond the pail.
Don’t know a lot about it but I reckon it’s pretty boring, up there with yacht racing and car racing, and I gather it can be pretty expensive.
So Mendozaaaa, what’s your view on pit bull fighting?
Don't know a lot about it but I reckon it's pretty boring, up there with yacht racing and car racing, and I gather it can be pretty expensive.
So Mendozaaaa, what's your view on pit bull fighting?
Don't know a lot about it but I reckon it's pretty boring, up there with yacht racing and car racing, and I gather it can be pretty expensive.
So Mendozaaaa, what's your view on pit bull fighting?
I personally havnt seen pit bull fights but it probably wouldnt offend me. Have been to bull fights in Spain and went to a ■■■■ fight in Chiang Mai last time I was there.
Not sure if the "fk off" is aimed at me or the writer whose article I posted, I assume the former but I'll respond anyway.
While I personally have difficulty looking beyond the suffering and cruelty inherent in this industry clearly
the impact on the economy won't be overlooked.
I think that New Zealand made the right choice morally and economically in 2007 when they brought a halt to live animal exports for slaughter. I gather that their livestock industry has flourished since then, particularly their diary industry, and I have read reports that primary producers there have limited interest in resuming the industry. "Federated Farmers meat industry group chairman Rick Powdrell said he was unaware of any pressure within the New Zealand farming community to restart the exports."http://www.farmonline.com.au/news/agriculture/sheep/general-news/live-ex-damages-reputation-nz/2730781.aspx
I concede that they do still export cattle for diary and breeding purposes, a problematic issue in itself, but I also gather they have increased exports of packaged meat, including to the Middle East. "Meat trade with Saudi Arabia is worth $120 million, most of that frozen, and it imposes tariffs of 5 per cent on those imports. It is New Zealand's fifth largest market for sheepmeat." It seems to me that increasing the capacity of abattoirs in the North would reduce costs to sending packaged meat to what are basically fledgling markets in places like Vietnam and I'm assuming that cost is a key factor in the decision to export cattle there.
I also note that one of the original motivations for the New Zealand ban was the concession that monitoring the treatment of animals was next to impossible. The 40 plus reported investigations into these practices in Aust since 2003 support that assertion.
Personally I cannot abide the trading off of cruelty against profit, and this is a cruel industry. But I question the long term "profit" and impact on the industry. The meat industry reported significant drops in meat sales in Australia after the footage of abuse of animals in Indonesia a few years ago was publicly released. I note that Animal Australia have decided not to release the Vietnam footage this time and I imagine the industry is relieved because the last thing the wider industry wants is widespread vision of cattle being bludgeoned to death with sledgehammers. I'm sure there are plenty of meat producers who would love to see this industry shut down too. http://www.smh.com.au/environment/animals/local-meat-eaters-turned-off-by-indonesian-cattle-scandal-20110608-1frv4.html
It is obvious that this industry wants to operate outside the public eye and I support attempts to expose their practices. If we really are informed about what going on, we can make informed decisions, that's not the case at present.
T’was at the author mate.
The NT Ab’s idea has been around a while. The issues are beyond that, they come down to labour costs in Oz Vs Indo/Viet etc, & refrigeration being unavailable in most live export destinations.
No good bringing in packaged meat into a tropic zone where they cant keep it cool.
do people actually think the meat they eat now died/lived a natural drug free humane life??
Yes because that only happens in every country except Australia.
If you actually care, put down the steak
My families cattle live healthy, happy, drug-free lives. Unless you count worming drench. But then, I’ve seen the alternative to worming drench. Not sure how idiots can link “humane” and “drug free”.
Or are you one of the fools who think we load our cattle up with steroids and growth hormones?
Nothing worse than people who think they know what farmers do, when all they hear is what PETA and the “organic” lobby tell them.
If is fair and just that we have a say in the manner that our animals are slaughtered when they exported live to overseas markets. Also, we are complicit in their suffering if we knowingly send them to a destination where slaughter methods are incompatible with our values. Further to that, we should be actively monitoring these slaughterhouses to ensure that slaughtering of live animals is conducted in accordance with our standards.
I don’t think that is too much to ask. Like GRR I’d prefer that live exporting was banned altogether. But if it has to happen, at the very least we should ensure that the animals that we send are treated as well as we would expect if they were on our shores.
What makes us so superior that we can dictate to other sovereign countries how and what they should do? Not just talking about how they treat animals either, broadly speaking what right do we have to tell others how they should run their countries? What makes us the moral arbiters of others?
What makes us so superior that we can dictate to other sovereign countries how and what they should do? Not just talking about how they treat animals either, broadly speaking what right do we have to tell others how they should run their countries? What makes us the moral arbiters of others?
We have the right to choose who we do or do not do business with. We have the right to have that decision influenced by our own moral framework.
What makes us so superior that we can dictate to other sovereign countries how and what they should do? Not just talking about how they treat animals either, broadly speaking what right do we have to tell others how they should run their countries? What makes us the moral arbiters of others?
We just just send uranium to North Korea? Who are we to say what they do with it?
What makes us so superior that we can dictate to other sovereign countries how and what they should do? Not just talking about how they treat animals either, broadly speaking what right do we have to tell others how they should run their countries? What makes us the moral arbiters of others?
We have the right to choose who we do or do not do business with. We have the right to have that decision influenced by our own moral framework.
Correct, and we choose to do business with Vietnam. If we decide we dont like the way they do things then stop sending live exports dont tell them to change their ways to appease us.
What makes us so superior that we can dictate to other sovereign countries how and what they should do? Not just talking about how they treat animals either, broadly speaking what right do we have to tell others how they should run their countries? What makes us the moral arbiters of others?
We just just send uranium to North Korea? Who are we to say what they do with it?
Pretty sure we have a trade embargo against Nth Korea so wont happen, actually a quick search of the govt website confirms that you can’t
WTF? We are saying “change your ways or we stop doing business with you”. Not ■■■■■■■ hard to understand. Or are you suggesting we just stop doing business but don’t tell them why?
What makes us so superior that we can dictate to other sovereign countries how and what they should do? Not just talking about how they treat animals either, broadly speaking what right do we have to tell others how they should run their countries? What makes us the moral arbiters of others?
We have the right to choose who we do or do not do business with. We have the right to have that decision influenced by our own moral framework.
Correct, and we choose to do business with Vietnam. If we decide we dont like the way they do things then stop sending live exports dont tell them to change their ways to appease us.
What makes us so superior that we can dictate to other sovereign countries how and what they should do? Not just talking about how they treat animals either, broadly speaking what right do we have to tell others how they should run their countries? What makes us the moral arbiters of others?
We just just send uranium to North Korea? Who are we to say what they do with it?
Pretty sure we have a trade embargo against Nth Korea so wont happen, actually a quick search of the govt website confirms that you can’t
Why wouldn’t we tell them how to treat the animals we send there. Surely our agreement with Vietnam or any country that is the recipient of our live exports has a provision for treatment and slaughter of these animals. If not, why the fark not? Our responsibly to exported animals does not end once they leave our shores.
WTF? We are saying "change your ways or we stop doing business with you". Not ■■■■■■■ hard to understand. Or are you suggesting we just stop doing business but don't tell them why?
On this issue sure I understand thats what we are saying and agree. We tell them to change or we cut off supply, it wont necessarily change their behaviour though, I’m sure theres plenty of other places that will be happy to fill the void but at least our cows will be OK.
In any case I was talking more widely in my previous post about being moral arbiters.
As soon as the media find another thing to get outraged about this issue will no longer be reported and everything will go back to the way it was, anyone remember the greyhound industry outrage…
What makes us so superior that we can dictate to other sovereign countries how and what they should do? Not just talking about how they treat animals either, broadly speaking what right do we have to tell others how they should run their countries? What makes us the moral arbiters of others?
We have the right to choose who we do or do not do business with. We have the right to have that decision influenced by our own moral framework.
Correct, and we choose to do business with Vietnam. If we decide we dont like the way they do things then stop sending live exports dont tell them to change their ways to appease us.
What makes us so superior that we can dictate to other sovereign countries how and what they should do? Not just talking about how they treat animals either, broadly speaking what right do we have to tell others how they should run their countries? What makes us the moral arbiters of others?
We just just send uranium to North Korea? Who are we to say what they do with it?
Pretty sure we have a trade embargo against Nth Korea so wont happen, actually a quick search of the govt website confirms that you can’t
Why wouldn’t we tell them how to treat the animals we send there. Surely our agreement with Vietnam or any country that is the recipient of our live exports has a provision for treatment and slaughter of these animals. If not, why the fark not? Our responsibly to exported animals does not end once they leave our shores.
If the contracts stated a certain welfare expectation then sure we can complain but if it didnt…just make sure it gets in the next one
What makes us so superior that we can dictate to other sovereign countries how and what they should do? Not just talking about how they treat animals either, broadly speaking what right do we have to tell others how they should run their countries? What makes us the moral arbiters of others?