I've been trying hard for days now to ignore the story of the Australian sheep stranded on a ship in the Middle East - it just sounds too depressing
begins Beth at fridaysixpm on the impasse threatening the billion dollar industry.
boynton has also been avoiding this one - yes, too depressing, too big, too wrong. But uneasy indifference catches up -as the sheep ship floats like a ghost ship in obscure waters - if the best way to describe it is as a feedlot on the ocean (SMH) there is something fundamentally wrong.
"The live export food trade treats animals inhumanely," the RSPCA's national president, Hugh Wirth, says. "Excessive journey times, poor husbandry conditions and inherently cruel slaughter and transport are evident in the importing countries." The RSPCA argues for a carcass-only trade.
Comments: sheep ship
This issue has been a source of controversy in certain circles for a long time. It is something to do with the Muslim religion; they have to have their sheep slaughtered in a certain way, and there's not enough slaughterman in Australia qualified to do it.
Having worked in this industry long ago, I know the realities all too well. It is not a memory I'm keen to revisit.
Posted by Scott Wickstein at September 26, 2003 11:45 AM
There's gotta be a manual for this: Sheep Husbandry 21C. (Start with introductions then some informal games etc.)
Do sheep ships ever inexplicably veer of course in pursuit of other sheep ships?
Better sheep than soldiers? (W: "We fully intend these tough Australian sheep to play a leading role in the post war reconstruction.")
John Howard: consumate Australian mutton?
Is there much of a qualitative (or quatitative) difference between the inhabitants of the Cormo Express and Fairstar the Fun Ship? (Apologies to Richard Branson.)
(A bit of irony in the name of this stricken vessel. Even more if it was the Corma Express.)
Posted by Jim at September 26, 2003 04:39 PM