greytpets Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 I'm not opposed to spending money, I just think it should be spent here to benefit Australians. I've read several times that Indo has no refrigeration but how can their meat industry survive without it? It is not possible to slaughter that many cattle per day without refrigeration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 (edited) I've read several times that Indo has no refrigeration but how can their meat industry survive without it? It is not possible to slaughter that many cattle per day without refrigeration. This is the most common type of butcher shop you'll see in Indonesia http://wwwdelivery.superstock.com/WI/223/1890/PreviewComp/SuperStock_1890-39057.jpg edit to add - I dont know where that photo was taken (just grabbed it off google images to show what a third world butcher shop in asia looks like) Add to that there are approx 18,000 islands spanning nealy 6,oookm so frozen/chilled meat isnt going to get too far. I dont know how many ports the australians go to but I thought I heard on one news report they can only go to ports in sumatra and java. Not sure - maybe someone in the thread involved with the industry can answer that Edited June 11, 2011 by raz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KatrinaM Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 I have been busy and have been really upset by some of the comments on this and the other thread. I did think it was just that people were ignorant and rude but I think its just that they are uniformed and lack an understanding or any experience. Just so people know Australian Cattle are still being killed in Indo and will be up until Christmas time. The ban has only stopped cattle travelling over there. For cattle to meet the criteria to be sent over they are under 350kg. These are not big $1000 bullocks but what are called "store" cattle - cattle that need fattening up before they are suitable to kill. They are transported to holding yards where they are feed the same ration they are fed on the ship until they are loaded. Once loaded on the boats they spend 3 or so days on board and are unloaded at the port. From there they are transported to feedlots in regional areas and fed for up to six months. These feedlots supply jobs for tens of thousands on poor Indonesian rural workers. They stay in the feedlot for about six months before they are killed. As far as I understand in the smaller works (like the ones featured) each seller has their own crew of slaughtermen, who go in, kill the amount of beef they will sell and then a new crew takes over. Depending on where the destination of the meat is depends on how they are processed after they are slaughtered. Beef destined for the wet markets is sold hours after it is killed. It is transported direct from the abattoir to the market to be sold that day. Housewives and business would buy the meat to be cooked that day, the same as was done everywhere else before refridgeration. One of the major reasons the northern meatworks who used to process cattle from these areas closed down was due to lack of workers – the work is seasonal, during the wet season the supply of cattle is unreliable and people had to live in regional areas, so while live export has taken jobs away from Australia they were jobs that nobody wanted anyway. The cost of transport and length of time travelled is a big reason why cattle aren’t taken south to some of the meatworks whose workers feel they should go there. It would cost around $250 - $400 each beast to transport them that far. They would then have to spend a significant time either being grown out or put into a feedlot. The slaughterhouses featured on the footage four corners showed were small ones (except for 20 seconds that showed how things are done well in Indo) and are the exception rather than the rule. The majority of Indo meatworks kill at above world standards. As for the bits about producers knowing about the cruelty pictured - this must surely be a joke. We knew we wanted things improved there, thence the $5 levy and the investment in building their own feedlots and meatworks by companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Housewives and business would buy the meat to be cooked that day, the same as was done everywhere else before refridgeration. Yep, and whatever the meat vendor doesnt sell during the day is cooked and sold in a warung by his wife or by street hawkers who are probably his kids who have never been to school http://globedrifters.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/GD-Indonesian-Street-Food1.jpg http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_CpmMIUHuN0U/RjglpEH_pRI/AAAAAAAAADU/pnwgaLdmSlU/s320/P1010093.JPG People have got to lose the idea of what we have in Australia - it's not like the average Indonesian can jump in their BMW and drive to the nearest fancy refrigerated butcher shop for a kilo of scotch fillet to drive home and pack away in the freezer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WoofnHoof Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Katrina look I get where you're coming from but there are several conflicting reports about how widespread the abuse is, some have said it is up to 95% of facilities that are a problem, so unless you have been to all those abattoirs and can give us a more accurate percentage of how many abattoirs are unacceptable then we simply have to take the word of the people who have been there. The problem is we have farmers all over the country objecting to the interim ban but so far I haven't heard much in the way of solutions coming from this camp so it just sounds like farmers want trade to resume regardless, it's easy to say you've been paying the MLA to sort it out it's their problem but if they had no power to enforce anything in Indonesia then without drastic action nothing would have been done. Many farmers spoken to agree that the cruelty is unacceptable but have no ideas about how to enact change, so when farmers call for resumption of trade even though the core issue is unresolved then you are going to get people thinking farmers are aware of cruelty and willing to send their animals there anyway. I understand that it's income and bills to pay etc but there will be compensation available and assistance for those affected. It's very easy to tell people they don't know but say you are right and it's only a few abattoirs that are a problem, how do you then ensure that no cattle goes there? You might think people are uninformed but I think everyone knows that once an animal is sold you have bugger all control over it's fate, you might think that 5% isn't much but for most of us it's far too many cattle being treated in the most abhorrent way. Until cruelty is no longer sanctioned by government, in that there are currently no laws to protect the welfare of animals, then we can expect that some of the cattle that will be sent there will be treated that way, and for most of us that isn't acceptable so we are happy for no cattle to be sent there until the issue is resolved. Many people are against live export simply because it is so difficult to have any assurances about what another country will do with the animals we supply, and i think it is an important issue that needs to be looked at because we cannot take the moral high ground with animal abuse in this country when we are essentially sanctioning cruelty occurring offshore. Most people here will scream to high heaven when a dog abuser gets a slap on the wrist in court but that is the result of a larger problem in that we are not as advanced as we think we are in animal welfare. Many many people still see it is as secondary issue taking a back burner to jobs etc well this proves that animal welfare is just as important as jobs if not more so because one issue can impact an entire industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Many farmers spoken to agree that the cruelty is unacceptable but have no ideas about how to enact change, Huh? It's not for Aus farmers to enact change in Indonesia. It's for our Ag Minister to negotiate which is currently happening. Mari, Pangestu, Indonesia's trade minister, said on Wednesday that Jakarta is holding talks with Canberra to resolve the issue as soon as possible. "The ministry of agriculture and Animal Husbandry has already co-ordinated with the Australian side to solve the problem, especially on standards of abattoirs," Pangestu said. full article in Aljazeera and you can find plenty more articles in Fairfax and Reuters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KatrinaM Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Am away from the house today and trying to write from my phone byt will write a proper response to you tonight Woofnhoof, trust me I don't know of anybody who want trade to resume without changes to make sure animals aren't abused. Both sides of th debate are spending way too much time preaching to the converted and little time constructively debating their points of view and solutions, both sides are left feeling that the other doesn't have any idea how to fix things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WoofnHoof Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Raz it's more in the context that farmers are calling for trade to resume asap without acknowledging the time it will take to ensure changes take place. I think the issue of whether live export should be banned completely is seperate to the immediate issue and I get the impression that farmers are afraid that trade won't resume at all. I don't think this will happen I think trade will resume fairly soon especially with Indonesia cooperating (in words at least hopefully action will follow). I think the long term future of live export will continue to be an issue and will continue to be debated as it should be but like I said I think that is a seperate debate as this issue arose due to specific circumstances. Katrina I agree there is not enough meeting of minds in this issue, it is frightening when your livelihood is threatened and I think most people are very understanding of that, that's why I was convinced that compensation was pretty much a given no one wants to see farmers go broke. I do think that it's not just a matter of resuming trade based on promises, I think we need concrete assurances that standards will be enforced not just put in place. Hopefully that can be worked out sooner rather than later for everyone's sake, especially the cattle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 I think that is a seperate debate as this issue arose due to specific circumstances. Yep I understand what you're saying. On the issue of compensation, though, I've heard plenty of people saying - why should the tax payer compensate the farmers when 'they knew' what was happening. That'll be another interesting debate when/if it happens. Wait for people to forget about the animal welfare issue when they get hit in the pocket. That's human nature, woof. As people have said in this thread, it's not all black and white. It's all a bit quiet at the moment - wait to see what happens next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WoofnHoof Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I think that is a seperate debate as this issue arose due to specific circumstances. Yep I understand what you're saying. On the issue of compensation, though, I've heard plenty of people saying - why should the tax payer compensate the farmers when 'they knew' what was happening. That'll be another interesting debate when/if it happens. Wait for people to forget about the animal welfare issue when they get hit in the pocket. That's human nature, woof. As people have said in this thread, it's not all black and white. It's all a bit quiet at the moment - wait to see what happens next week. Yeah it will be interesting to see how it all pans out. You must be moving in different circles to me I think I haven't really heard much complaining about the taxpayers footing the bill, I move in horsey cirlces though so most people have or know cattle and the land so there is a certain amount of acceptance that public money is needed to fill the gap (although it sounds like most of it is coming from some fund that predates MLA?). I've also been listening to ABC radio (god knows why I turned over in the first place but it's slightly less boring than usual with the chat about the live export thing ) and it's mostly farmer sympathetic there too. I do find that being rural there tends to be pretty vast differences between opinions in city v country it's quite interesting really. Me personally I have no problem with the government picking up the tab we bail out all sorts of industries all the time, even those with foreign interests. There are lots of things that government pays for that I don't agree with like expensive flagpoles and ugly statues but that's the way it goes some things you agree with some things you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 The anti sentiment is from city people. Coincidentally, after my last post I found that the animal libber Lyn White is running a poll at the moment and 47% so far are voting no to compo. Not sure what they expect farmers who go bankrupt over this to do. Doesnt make sense - prevent animal cruelty but let farmers and their families starve to death or commit suicide like a lot of farmers were doing when they lost their livelihoods during the drought? Ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WoofnHoof Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 The anti sentiment is from city people. Coincidentally, after my last post I found that the animal libber Lyn White is running a poll at the moment and 47% so far are voting no to compo. Not sure what they expect farmers who go bankrupt over this to do. Doesnt make sense - prevent animal cruelty but let farmers and their families starve to death or commit suicide like a lot of farmers were doing when they lost their livelihoods during the drought? Ridiculous. That is weird I don't really know why people wouldn't want them compensated even if they did know about it, which I doubt. I dare say many farmers realised that conditions over there aren't all that great compared to here but that's not the same as knowing exactly how bad it is and how much progress was not being made by the industry groups on the ground over there, MLA is hardly going to put out a newsletter talking about how truly awful it is in some facilities and how they aren't making much progress in some areas so I don't see much point in penalising individual producers for believing what they have been told. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 There's a great letter from a guy in the industry that Bruno posted in the other thread in OT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WoofnHoof Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 There's a great letter from a guy in the industry that Bruno posted in the other thread in OT. It's been doing the rounds on the horse forums too, trouble is that he asserts that the problem can be fixed quite easily and quickly, which then begs the question that if it could be fixed easily and quickly why wasn't it? I suspect the solution is neither quick nor easy at all. I've also heard that what farmers are shown on their MLA sponsored tours are not necessarily the full story either, so it's very hard to know the extent of the problem, one of the people who worked on the report was saying on the ABC radio that it was widespread not just a few places, and that the footage shown was not the worst that they saw. Either way it is obvious that change was needed, regardless of whether people agree on how to go about it, because any facility that treats animals badly should not be supported with the supply of cattle and that needs to be enforced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 and that the footage shown was not the worst that they saw. Dont you think that if they saw worse they would have shown the footage or atleast given a commentary? I was involved with animal lib many years ago and they always drag out that line to get people wondering just how much worse it could have been. I have no doubt there are truths and falsehoods on both sides but the focus now should be on fixing the problem rather than on what coulda shoulda woulda been. They're not going to stop eating mutton and beef so we're better off getting on with it and helping them clean up their act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Good posts woof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WoofnHoof Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 and that the footage shown was not the worst that they saw. Dont you think that if they saw worse they would have shown the footage or atleast given a commentary? I was involved with animal lib many years ago and they always drag out that line to get people wondering just how much worse it could have been. I have no doubt there are truths and falsehoods on both sides but the focus now should be on fixing the problem rather than on what coulda shoulda woulda been. They're not going to stop eating mutton and beef so we're better off getting on with it and helping them clean up their act. Maybe it's true maybe it isn't I've heard a few different versions one said that some of the footage wasn't suitable for Australian TV so I'm not sure what exactly that means, no doubt I probably don't want to know. I know I've heard first hand what goes on in some Australian abattoirs so I'm probably a bit more likely to lean towards the worst in the case of other countries which have little to no animal welfare regulations. Ultimately they have to want our help, to accept our help, be prepared to follow our guidelines and to understand why it's needed and why it's important to do so. Thanks Lo Pan It's an interesting topic, obviously more interesting than the topic I've chosen for my assignment which I keep distracting myself from lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I've seen something worse in Indo but it wasnt in an abbatoir and the govt has been trying to stop it for decades. I cant see how in a doco it's not going to be suitable for an Aus audience though. Sounds like a furphy to me. Who are you saying is not in agreement, woof? I may have missed something but I've pretty much been glued to various newspapers on this issue. Their Ag Minister has already agreed to the proposals. He just now has to convince the powers to be to remove the prohibition on the import of stun guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WoofnHoof Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Yeah I've heard the reports it comes down to action though, I think most people would like to see action happening before our cattle go back in very real terms. Show us what's happening in those abattoirs now, show us the changes being made, at the moment it's all just words. I don't see the point in resuming trade until we have something concrete in place and evidence that it's working and being done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 (edited) evidence that it's working and being done. Pretty easy to get it working and quite quickly. They stick the Aus inspectors in there (for the remaining 100,000 cattle) that report to the minister, get the training happening and threaten the slaughtermen that if they're reported as breaching the animal welfare regulations they lose their $150 they get paid a month and wont be able to feed their families. Their Ag Minister needs to hit the slaughtermen where it hurts. It's not like they can walk away and get a job as a doctor. Meanwhile the australians help bring the substandard abbatoirs up to speed. What I gather is to date there hasnt been enough communication between the two industries and the Ag Minister wasnt enforcing the regulations. I wouldnt be surprised if he didnt even have indonesian inspectors in there reporting back to him. Edited June 13, 2011 by raz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now