PETA : People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or representatives of the chemical industry?

by Jason Phelan

Australian sheep producers, through the inability of our government to say no to the United States have been forced to drop current mulesing practices. Mulesing is the practice of removing the wool producing skin around the animals anus to prevent fly strike. Fly Strike where flys lay eggs in the live animals flesh.

PETA, an animal rights organization formed in the United States has been threatening Australian wool producers with trade sanctions, further televised protests and boycotts. It has been recent decided by our lawmakers in Canberra that Australian farmers will dis-continue its current mulesing practices by the year 2010. In the end Wool producers must seek new methods to insure the well being of their livestock.

This is where things get really interesting, in 2011 Australian sheep will still have bare bums, this is really the only way to keep these animals healthy. The difference is Aussie producers will no longer be able to do this job without buying dangerous chemicals. The only real change that PETA has implemented is the further reliance of our primary producers on chemicals and manufactured
goods. “It certainly has to cause no more pain than mulesing and to be acceptable to the farming community both ethically and financially.”……so PETA is saying that if the alternatives to mulesing are equivalent in the amount of pain inflicted, that is acceptable !. Some of the other PETA approved methods include further use of insecticide (kill all the flies?!), the use of a plastic device that is clipped to the sheep, Genetic modification of breeding stock of so called biological control of
flys.

It does tend to make one wonder about what other affiliations PETA has. They seem very keen in their solutions to animal cruelty to forget the long term welfare of the animals by using un-proven practices and more interested in increasing farmers use of dangerous chemical.

Incidentally, I found no evidence to suggest that chemical mulesing is no less painful than surgical mulesing. In fact the human surgical industry would choke if an un qualified organization suggested that chemical skin removal is less painful and cruel that surgical skin removal, and there for should be adopted on humans……THINK ABOUT IT.