Archives

The animals aren’t filing a class action lawsuit against the Australia government, even though they are the real victims. It is the cattle farmers who are doing it.

The Australian government is the live export industry’s most powerful ally, but cattle farmers are suing them anyway in an attempt to recoup the money they lost after a temporary live export ban to Indonesia in 2011. At that time, activists exposed abuses at Indonesian slaughterhouses that were so horrific that public pressure forced the government to take swift action.

Photo: Animals Australia

Now, the farmers want the government to pay them back for their financial losses, even if it means shining yet another spotlight on the torture inflicted on their animals overseas. The class action was filed just days after Australian media stunned the country with new undercover footage of similar abuses in three Middle Eastern countries.

The new footage, taken by Animals Australia, combined with the cattle farmers’ lawsuit have amplified the battle over live exports, and both sides are digging in their heels. After the damning footage was released, Bill Shorten, a member of Parliament and one the country’s most prominent live export supporters, said “We are seeing that it is possible for increased animal welfare to coincide with increasing export volumes. We see an industry that enjoys more public confidence because we have the best animal welfare system in the world.”

Photo: Animals Australia

The ruling Labor party is also a staunch advocate and justifies live exports on the grounds that new regulations -, The Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System (ESCAS) – protect the animals by tracing them. Activists, however, say that the regulations are window dressing, as tracing millions of Australian animals from the docks where they are unloaded to their final destinations in the Middle East and Asia is impossible.

On October 30th, one of the few members of Parliament who opposes live exports said that the government protections are an “illusion.”

As the industry and government continue to defend, promote and grow live exports, protests over the past several years have reached a fever pitch.

Sydney, 2011 (photo: James Morgan)

Parliament building in Melbourne, 2013

Because the live export industry is protected at the highest levels of government by both major political parties, ending it is an uphill battle that will only be won when the Australian Labor Party calls for a ban. One Australian activist, who asked to remain anonymous, called for a tourist boycott: “The only thing that will get the attention of the power brokers here is money. A boycott by tourists could make a difference.”

Australia is the world’s largest exporters of live animals, sending hundreds of thousands of cattle and millions of sheep to markets in Asia and the Middle East each year.

Visit Animals Australia to take action.

Send an instant message to the Australian Embassy in Washington, D.C.

A Tasmanian devil crawled into his enclosure and died after a visitor crushed him with a block of asphalt at the Albuquerque Zoo in New Mexico. With no surveillance cameras at the devil exhibit, law enforcement probably won’t find the killer.

photo: Dean Hanson/Albuquerque Journal

A spokesman for the local Mayor said that “our poor Tasmanian devil was killed, intentionally, by what seems to be blunt force trauma to the head.”

Photo: AAP/Dave Hunt

Jasper, one of four devils acquired by the zoo several months ago, came from the Healesville Sanctuary, a zoo in Australia. Healesville is attempting to breed several thousand devils in captivity for eventual release because the wild population in Tasmania is being decimated by a contagious facial cancer.

Contagious facial tumor

In the wild, Tasmanian devils, who are nocturnal, swim across rivers, hunt, eat with other devils, climb trees, run exceptionally fast and have complex sex lives. Captivity can’t possibly meet the instinctual needs of these animals, but, at the moment, it might be their only chance at survival.

Devils are famous for their strong bite and blood-curdling screech

After a three-week old tiger drowned at the London zoo in 2012, PETA called for a boycott, describing the zoo as a “prison with living exhibits.” The zoo director, David Field, defended captivity, saying “Conservation breeding programmes are the only way to ensure a future for these animals.”

If members of a species are forced to sacrifice their freedom to help to conserve the entire species, then they should at the very least be housed in sanctuaries. Zoos are inherently inhumane, and they teach children that animals are exhibits, not individuals who want to live freely.

The ideal way to preserve wildlife is to support the work of groups like Sea Shepherd that protect animals in their own habitats.

In moments of frustration and anger, many of us demonize an entire country when we learn about the atrocities they commit against animals, but those feelings are misguided. Only a small percentage of people in any country participate in the abuse, and most are probably unaware. In addition, whatever country we happen to call home is probably committing abuses that are every bit as bad, so why point a finger?  Every nation is culpable:

The French insert tubes down the throats of ducks and force feed them:

The Spanish set some bulls on fire and chase others through city streets:

photo: Jose Jordan/AFP/Getty Images

The Chinese skin animals alive for fur:

Americans lasso young animals, wrestle them to the ground and twist their necks at rodeos:

Canadians club baby seals:

Africans tear the tusks out of elephants’ faces:

Photo: Mark Deeble & Victoria Stone

Australians hack flesh out of sheep to keep insects out of their wool:

Mexicans stab bulls to death to cheering crowds:

The Danish drive pilot whales into the shore and butcher them:

Photo: Sea Shepherd

The Japanese shoot harpoons with explosives into protected whales and serve animals at restaurants who are still alive:

Photo: sundayworld.com

This list goes on. Instead of vilifying entire countries, which does nothing to help their animals, we should target our anger – and energy – toward those who commit the atrocities and the authorities who have the power to stop them.

An “ag gag” bill that was introduced in Southern Australia after undercover investigations exposed animal abuse on pork and wool farms has been voted down. The Surveillance Devices Bill would have penalized activists with up to $15,000 in fines or with imprisonment for releasing footage taken of factory farms.

What agribusiness doesn’t want consumers to see

The Sydney Morning Herald, which declared the vote “a win for consumer advocacy, workers’ rights, freedom of the press and animal protection,” cautioned that supporters of “ag gag” will push for legislation at the federal level.

Following is a two minute non-graphic video taken inside of a pig factory farm in Australia. As the Communications Director of Animals Australia describes the conditions, the intelligent pigs in the background attempt to escape from the intensive confinement of their cages:

As reported on TheirTurn in August, supporters of ag-gag in Australia attempted to disguise the bill as a measure to protect farm animals when its true intent is to keep the public in the dark. Most consumers continue to be unaware of the existence of factory farms and probably believe that the animals who they eat are raised on the green pastures shown on the packaging.

As activists, we must ensure that the work being done by undercover investigators is protected by law and distributed widely to the public. To that end, please share Mercy For Animals’ video  – Farm to Fridge – that takes viewers behind the scenes on modern-day factory Farms.

After recent undercover investigations cast a negative light on Australia’s wool and pork industries, a Senator is introducing a bill that would criminalize the taking of photos and video of “a legally operating animal enterprise.” But instead of calling it what it is – “ag gag” – the Senator is attempting to disguise the proposed law as one that would “strengthen genuine animal welfare protections.” Of course, eliminating transparency by keeping out the cameras will make conditions worse for the animals, as agribusiness will have no incentive to minimize abuse. The law would also require animal rights activists to turn over their video evidence of animal abuse to the proper authorities within 24 or 48 hours. In other words, if you do manage to get footage of animal abuse, you have to both incriminate yourself for trespassing AND turn over the footage to people who are not going to publicize it, as the activists would.

Photo: Animals Australia

In light of public support for transparency and whistle-blowing, ag-gag proponents are attempting to hide their true intent — keeping the public in the dark — behind not only “animal protections” but also “biosecurity,” as if the mere presence of an activist with a camera is going to spread disease in a shed with thousands of animals living in their own excrement. The cameras don’t pose a risk to anyone but the abusers. Please see how you can support the effort to block ag gag bills.