Recent comments by: VivKay
Agribuzz with David Leyonhjelm
This rage if rhetoric is an effort to throw some poltiically-incorrect words around and pepper it with suggestions of "racism", "capitalist" and prejudice! It's easy to see through and a totally transparent attempt to endorse the horror of live exports and condemns even the very minimum animal welfare standards to protect hapless animals.
Coles is not ignorant. Their base-line is money and profits. Animal welfare means that eggs and pig products would cost more, and they would require more room to raise. Land is at a premium cost due to population growth. Coles wants to keep prices down. The aim of Animal Australia are completely at adds. They were never likely to promote "make it happen".
Animals Australia are not a vegan group. That's what Animal Liberation would be, abolitionists. Animals Australia is a peak animal welfare group trying to negotiate with governments to bring an end to the horrific treatment to livestock, exposing live exports and factory farming. While a lot of their members would be vegan and vegetarian, their job is not to close down livestock industries, but to be the watchdog and ensure high standards of welfare.
Selling off our ports has serious security implications too, not just about control of export/imports and charges. Our access to the rest of the world is through our ports, and if these are bottle-necked in a time of conflict, vested interests and allegiances could hinder our national protection. So bereft of ideas, patriotism and vision are our politicians now, our economy has become linked, in tandem, with China! Decisions are all based on short-term monetary gain at the sacrifice of long-term strategic implications, and future generations indebted to China?
The Chinese government "also has an ongoing policy to purchase agricultural assets to help relieve potential future food security concerns, given its rapidly growing population and expanding middle class base". They intent to release their one child policy, on the basis of food security, from buying foreign land. Our food security is paramount. Do we really want to buy our food from China, grown in Australia, because our government wants short term profits over long term sovereignty, and planning? We need to have a strong "xenophobic" movement to promote our own country as a food producer.
" RSPCA's stance against live exports in evidence to the inquiry hearing last week." The RSPCA are doing their job of being advocates for animals, and livestock welfare. If the WA farmers are objecting to them, it's clear they are uncomfortable about the live export trade being exposed for what it is! Blatant cruelty and animal abuse. Unfortunately it's worth so much $$$, and there's even the threat of ag-gag laws to tighten the lips of the public too. Such extremes are not for nothing!
Pest control is one thing, but how is duck hunting relevant? This is about recreational shooting, not pest control! It's an economic activity in Victoria and the RSPCA are right to be concerned about animals - as their job. The number of "pest" animals is a human caused issue, and ultimately there needs to be more responsibilities from animal owners to control their livestock and pets from wandering and going feral.
Farmers and employers in the rural sector seem to be living in a parallel universe and sealed from the unemployment dystopia increasing in our cities! We already have a very generous immigration program of over a quarter of a million new "skilled" migrants arriving here each year, but these can't be employed in rural areas? It seems that any labour constraints, the solution is just turn on the immigration tap a bit more and increase the flow! What about some incentives to make rural areas more attractive to the unemployed, and some initiatives instead of opening our borders even more freely?
"Some of the most obvious include 40 per cent of all the food produced is subsequently thrown away or wasted in developed economies such as Australia.." This is due to the nature of our food-based retailing, and the sale of ready-made foods in supermarkets, and in junk food outlets. This extravagance should be banned as wasteful, but it's part of our economy. All food should be cooked fresh, and we should be descending from high reliance on livestock products, and down the food chain for more production and better distribution.
Our Australian government is not interested in food security, climate change, or any environmental concerns. They just assume Australia will import food! Today, housing is the main money-spinner, on the back of high population growth. Arable land, urban sprawl, unsustainable energy use, gridlocked traffic, high costs of living are all the result, and the most important is food! Unless there is a turn around, Australia will have 80 to 100 million people by the end of the century, but nothing is being planned about food security!
@Michael - "produce enough food to feed half of the MIddle East" You could have prevented "Arab Springs" if we'd known this! Megalomania isn't a solution to food security! We live on more than bread alone, but the whole food chain - and for the animals that are becoming extinct due to human encroaches onto their habitats! The population issue is much more profound and complex than simply having enough food - things such as care of our planet, quality of life, and not being crammed into sardine-tin housing, and trapped into poverty and debt are all important.
Humans are meant to be intelligent, and of "higher" order than animals. The Earth's limits are obvious, and there's over-confidence in technology and science to overcome the constraints of Nature. Farmers know there's a carrying-capacity of their land, and overshoot means hunger and land degradation! Humans must control their assumed rights to reproduce, and governments must rein in their quest for never-ending perpetual economic growth -and stop meddling with our demographics! Politicians are cocooned in their privileges and wealth, and their addiction for endless growth is fatalistic.
"The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation estimates that the total investment required to meet the world’s food needs in 2050 will be some $83 billion a year". How much can this cost keep increasing, spending more and more each year to produce more food, and declining natural resources - overlayed by climate change! It would be better to spend billions on distributing contraceptives to address runaway and unsustainable human population growth!
Gluten free products are being sold as "health" foods and people are assuming that gluten then must be "bad" or unhealthy! It's only unhealthy for those who are intolerant to gluten and that's a small minority. Most people can consume gluten, and it's a natural protein found in wheat! Nothing normally dangerous at all.
Just how are natural biological and ecological system meant to upgrade their systems to produce more food - on less? There is climate change to consider too. Why isn't the UN mustering up a world challenge to make sure there's universal access to family planning? Surely the more obvious way to meet food security challenges would be to address global overpopulation. This "food security" threat is a euphemism for the Malthusian crisis!
The environment, not wealth or GDP, ultimately determines our future. Many economist and governments only see the GDP and worship "growth" as the ultimate goal of a nation, and assume the environment will keep producing outputs accordingly! Overpopulation in California should be an example and warning to the advocates of "big Australia". We are mainly a desert country, with a limited green fringe. It's being over-developed.
"if feedlots are not a problem, what precisely causes animal rights activists so much distress and consternation in relation to the live export industry?"
Hidden cameras set up by Animals Australia investigators have captured harrowing vision of routine abuse inside one of Israel’s biggest abattoirs. Cattle were shown staggering onto the kill-room floor with their throats gaping open, to be eventually hoisted while still conscious. Tails were crushed!
The problem is the taboo on family planning. The UN seems to think that developed nations will come up with all the solutions to the challenges of overpopulation, yet avoid the elephant-in-the-room of high fertility levels in developing nations. How are finite natural resources, and botanical processes, keep on producing more with less? Australia has only about 6% arable land, and it's fast being dug up for housing! We can't all be net importers of food. We need a global campaign to stabilise our population, and Australia's addiction to population growth.
Politicians have closed ranks against common sense and animal welfare to ramp up live exports. They've also locked up their hearts against compassion, and being lured by dollars and rural votes. It's time to step back and listen to the Greens.
McKenzie has "lost her way"! The RSPCA is a well established animal welfare organisation. What is "extreme" now is the level of cruelty in extreme industries! There's widespread animal abuse in factory farming, industries such as racing, and puppy farms, and live exports. How can one organisation face to much potential prosecution when its covered by Code of Practice that entrench cruelty, and the perpetrators protected? It must be publicity! The RSPCA need to be supported, and endorsed. McKenzie has vested interests in promoting the welfare of farmers and her own political status.
If there are "skill shortages" then local secondary schools and TAFEs should hone their courses to produce skilled graduates that actually match what's needed. With peaks of youth unemployment, any "shortages" of skills is a reflection on inadequate planning and government education/skill training policies and productivity. It's all too easy to turn on the immigration tap, to higher levels, that actually address the source of the problem!
".to achieve a grazing regime favourable for the conservation of grassland and woodland ecosystems, including small animals that frequent ground layer vegetation." Kangaroos are native animals, not vermin pests. They have a long evolutionary history of co-habitation with other native species, and it's audacious that post-European settlers, with only a little more than a flash of existence in this ancient land, can delegate kangaroos as a danger to our ecology? We humans have no qualms about wrecking total environments, for monetary gain and economic benefits! Hypocrisy and hatred!
"Defamation" can't exist if the accusations are true, and can be supported! Instead of shooting the messengers, the live export industry should lift its game, or even better, close down the industry altogether! Meat exports means more jobs for Australians and we have some control of the welfare of the animals. As it is, it's barbaric and inherently cruel.
No animal cruelty can be ignored, or go unreported and allowed to continue with impunity. Industrialized cruelty is no exception. Putting profits before animals is morally and ethically wrong, and animals need to be treated humanely and given as natural, stress and pain-free existence as they deserve. The RSPCA should be representing the welfare of animals, their clients, and that's what their focus should be - even if this is the same aim of "extreme" animal rights groups.
Kangaroos aren't like livestock. Cattle grow an enormous amount of meat, very quickly, and can be handled and herded. Kangaroos are wildlife, and remain wild. They can't be handled or herded, but must be shot! That means inherent cruelty and suffering and hygiene issues. Also, it takes up to 12 years for a kangaroo to mature, and even then there's only a small quantity of human-edible meat! How can Senator O'Sullivan claim there are "plagues" of kangaroos? What's the benchmark for "normal" and "plague" numbers, when historically there have always been plentiful kangaroos in Australia?
Last week we had a media conference with Dick Smith and Graham Turner, both successful millionaires and both concerned about environmental issues. The problem is not only Australia's population growth, driven by high immigration, but the global rate of population growth. During the 20th century alone, the population in the world has grown from 1.65 billion to 6 billion, and roughly doubled since 1970. Feeding more people, from the tip of the food chain, on declining natural resources is a "challenge" that's not being recognised enough. "Food security" is basically a population problem.
New allegations of breaches of the ESCAS system? It sounds like a bureaucratic blunder or administrative problem, trivial, but in reality it means exposure of more horrendous suffering and grizzly killings of Australian sheep or cattle. The caring public are appalled at our government's insistence to continue the unethical and unsustainable live export trade, based on blood money and the considerable lobbying power of producers. Jobs are being lost in Australia.
".. it (live export) is also acting responsibly by striving to meet community animal welfare expectations.."? What a lot of spin and falsehood! Globalisation of animal welfare is a shifting to downward levels. Starving people won't be helped by the trade. Only the wealthy can afford meat, and it's about trying to break down legislation and restrictions. Exporting live animals is all about lucrative $$ at the cost of ethics and good stewardship.
Australia is abandoning any form of animal welfare by sending livestock to third world and developing countries where the abattoirs are not used to handling large animals, there are no animal welfare standards, and thus we end up with barbarity and horror. The "ag -gag" laws are being proposed because the industry recognises that for food chain supplies to be more "sustainable", the animals must endure more suffering and cruelty! William Wilberforce ended slavery in Britain, and started the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to animals. Now, we are reversing to 18th Century!
“Any proof of cruelty to livestock sickens me as I sure it outrages any fair-minded Australian". That's what animal activists are trying to expose. Unless there is a watchdog, the cruelty will be uncovered and remain in the sheds and slaughterhouses. The Department of Agriculture is in the conflicting position of actually promoting livestock industries, and being the "judge, jury and executioner" of animal abusers - so an independent third party is needed!
The American style of "ag-gag" laws into Australia would be a recognition that animal cruelty is politically acceptable, and there would be no accountability inside the sheds, slaughterhouses and other livestock industries. Shutting our eyes to it won't make it go away, but give a licence to the abusers. There are higher laws of nature and ethics that transcend political laws. Animal cruelty is not acceptable, and what we do to animals will infuse into our society and permit violence and crime.
Burning the bush will make it more inflammable. Burning kills the native animals and birds that eat the vegetation, along with the invertebrates and fungi that decompose and recycle the fuel, and thus it's a damning cycle of burn and burn and more burning! There must be a better, more natural way of limiting "fuel".
"the UN predicts that with the global population expected to reach 9 billion by 2050, food production will increase by 70 per cent..." Just how are natural plant/animal physiologies, ecological systems and natural resources meant to meet this challenge? Dr Norman Borlaug, the Father of the Green Revolution in his 1970 Nobel Prize speech, warned of the "population monster", yet nothing has been done in the last 30 years to limit human fertility levels. Our reprieve is over, and the global "food security" issue is a euphemism for a looming Malthusian crisis - yet it is ignored.