Better Choices

Mulesing is carried out on merino lambs at lamb marking. Mulesing confers lifetime protection in regions where a unique and very aggressive blowfly (Lucilia cuprina) causes what is known as flystrike.

The standard mules requires the surgical removal of a "V" of wool-bearing skin extending one-third of the length of the tail, which is docked below the third palpable joint. The wool industry has standards for the conduct of this procedure, which are outlined in the Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals: The Sheep, setting out guidelines for minimum standards for care required to meet obligations under the laws that operate in Australia’s States and Territories. It covers important practices governing welfare including protection from disease.

AWI vigorous in researching alternatives

The Australian Wool Innovation (AWI) Board is vigorously researching alternatives to surgical mulesing in support of the industry’s commitment to the phasing out of surgical mulesing by 31 December 2010 and fully endorses the use of pain relief in the interim.

AVA considers mulesing necessary

The Australian Veterinary Association (AVA) recognises that flystrike is particularly painful for the sheep as maggots eat the live flesh of the animal. “Mulesing is an animal husbandry practice currently used to prevent flystrike in sheep, which the AVA considers to be necessary in terms of the overall welfare of the sheep likely to be affected by flystrike.”

RSPCA accepts mulesing is a necessary sheep husbandry procedure

The Australian Government and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) Australia accept the practice of mulesing as a necessary sheep husbandry procedure to prevent flystrike.

Some animal welfare advocates strongly oppose mulesing, and say the practice is cruel and painful, and that more humane alternatives exist. However, estimates suggest that without mulesing, more than 3 million sheep would die each year.

Source: www.woolisbest.com

Australian sheep blowfly present in 96% of all strikes

Australian sheep blowfly (Lucilia cuprina) is the primary sheep blowfly responsible for initiating most blowfly strikes. Hairy maggot fly (Chrysomya rufifacies) is a secondary blowfly that will only strike sheep after the Australian sheep blowfly has initiated a strike. Blowflies thrive in warm, humid conditions.

A large scale survey in the late 1970s, in which flies were bred from over 1400 strikes around Victoria, found that the green blowfly or Australian sheep blowfly (Lucilia cuprina) was present in 96% of all strikes and was the only species present in more than 50% of these. Not only does it initiate most strikes, it is the main species involved in their continuation.

Fystrike occurs where the fleece has become soiled or infected

The wool of a sheep with active fleece rot or a soiled breech harbours seething masses of bacteria. This provides an environment somewhat similar to that found in a fairly fresh carcass. Some of the more opportunistic flies, Lucilia cuprina in particular, have been able to make the transition from breeding on carcasses to developing on suitable live sheep.

The ammonia in urine is particularly attractive to the flies, and the young larvae can become established where the skin of the sheep has become irritated by the urine. Fly eggs, once laid, hatch within a few hours or days. The emerging larvae or maggots are very active and secrete enzymes that liquefy the skin and flesh of the sheep upon which they are feeding. Larvae feed for a variable time period depending on the availability of food. The mature maggots crawl off the fleece and pupate in the soil. In suitable weather conditions in the summer it takes less than a week for the fly to emerge, but often it is two or three weeks. With flies laying thousands of eggs, it is easy to see why the population of blowflies increases so rapidly with the right weather conditions.

Sheep die from septicaemia and toxaemia

Sheep suffering from flystrike show obvious signs of distress. They spend less time grazing and more time tail wagging and rubbing the affected area and biting the struck areas of the fleece they can reach. If these signs go unrecognised and secondary strike occurs, the wounds can become very extensive and bacterial infection may lead to serious complications such as death from septicaemia and toxaemia. When sheep are examined there is often a foul smell from the wound and visible signs of maggots.

These flies cost the Australian sheep industry well over $100 million per year in deaths, lost production and treatment costs. But more importantly they cause pain, misery and often death.

AVA welcomes mulesing pain relief

Monday 29 August 2005

Enhanced welfare of animals through the relief of pain

The Australian Veterinary Association (AVA) in 2005 welcomed the granting of a permit by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) for a new mulesing pain relief product.

“We strongly support the development of products that enhance the welfare of animals through the relief of pain,” said the AVA's Dr Matthew Makin.

The APVMA has approved the use of Tri-Solfen, a topical anaesthetic and antiseptic solution for pain relief in sheep. “This has the potential to reduce the pain and discomfort experienced by sheep after they have been mulesed.”

Mulesing is the most effective method of preventing breech strike

The AVA accepts the practice of mulesing as a necessary sheep husbandry procedure to prevent breech strike. Breech strike is a common form of flystrike in weaner sheep and ewes, resulting in pain and distress. At the present time, mulesing is the most effective method of preventing breech strike and provides lifetime protection.

It is acknowledged that the procedure is accompanied by pain, but there is ample evidence in scientific literature that unequivocally establishes the positive health and welfare benefits conferred upon sheep in the Australian environment by correct mulesing.

This is a much-anticipated step in the right direction but the Australian wool industry should remain focused on its commitment to develop and implement an alternative to mulesing by 2010.

AVA supports continued research

“AVA policy supports continued research into alternative methods of blowfly control that does not involve surgical removal of skin from the breech region,” said Dr Makin.

Contact: Eddie Ripard

Contact e-mail: eripard@ava.com.au

Source: http://www.ava.com.au

The risk of not mulesing many merino lambs could present an even worse welfare outcome than seen with traditional mulesing. There is a real risk that more than 3 million lambs will face misery, pain and potentially death if not mulesed.

Under the Better Choices audited welfare program, Australian woolgrowers are successfully adopting the use of pain relief at mulesing. The Better Choices veterinary network certifies wool to the market where pain relief has been used, or inspects unmulesed lambs, ensuring they have not been placed at greater risk to flystrike.

To join the Better Choices audited welfare program, woolgrowers must use pain relief to all the mulesed lambs on their property. Only then can they register their wool under the Better Choices program. A certificate accompanies their wool under the Better Choices brand and assures both retailers and consumers that their animal welfare concerns regarding humane treatment of lambs have been taken care of.

Animal Welfare means freedom from pain

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) Australia suggests that freedom from pain, injury or disease is one of the five fundamental tenets of animal welfare guidelines and research. Behavioural responses to pain, injury or disease can differ significantly between species and there is some effort and research to develop methods of assessing pain that are relevant to these responses to uphold an acceptable standard of welfare.

Traditionally, animal welfare has been closely associated with the concept of the 'Five Freedoms' prescribed by the UK's Farm Animal Welfare Council , which include freedom from hunger and thirst, discomfort (through the provision of suitable shelter), pain and injury, fear and distress and to express normal behaviour. Recognising pain in animals is often difficult to identify and measure; however, it does impact on both animal welfare and economics.

Australian code of practice for care of animals

The Australian code of practice for the care and use of animals states that pain and distress cannot be easily evaluated in animals and therefore it must be assumed that animals experience these in a manner similar to humans unless there is evidence to the contrary.

Low use of pain relief to date in farmed animals

Whilst not an excuse, the reasons for a low use of analgesics in farmed animals include:

• Lack of recognition of animal pain owing to the apparent lack of anthropomorphically identifiable behavioural changes
• Concern over human food safety
• Lack of research to date to develop safe analgesics for farm use
• Treatment cost relative to the benefits expected.

Protecting sheep from the pain and misery associated with flystrike

Under the Better Choices audit welfare program, Australian woolgrowers are using pain relief when mulesing their merino lambs to ensure they are protected from flystrike and the extensive wounds and bacterial infection that may lead to serious complications such as death from speticaemia and toxaemia.

Using pain relief means woolgrowers are making a better animal welfare choice while viable mulesing alternatives are being developed.

Source:

Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 2005, Vol. 8, No. 4, Pages 261-278., RSPCA Science Updates index.

Australian code of practice for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes 7th edition 2004.