THE hairy-chested agri-politicians who are pushing back so vigorously against the Australian live sheep export ban are not serving their constituents well.
Ban or no ban, the live sheep export trade to the Middle East is in terminal decline – not because of animal welfare, but for purely commercial reasons. The recent uptick in exports to Saudi Arabia, with sheep sold to the trade at historically low prices, is a minor blip in an otherwise steady decline.
Tony Brightling
The fundamental drivers of the trade have changed. The Arabian Gulf States are affluent countries with consumer demands shifting from the traditional fresh meat markets of last century to Western style food supply chains.
The sources of live sheep supply have also shifted. Sudan and Somalia are key suppliers of live sheep to the Arabian Gulf States. They have major competitive advantages over Australia – local fat-tail sheep breeds, close cultural ties, proximity to market, lower transport costs, ability to supply regular small consignments and few regulatory constraints.
Romania is also a major supplier of live sheep to the region, with greater flexibility of supply, and much lower delivery and regulatory costs compared with Australian sheep. Australia has gone from the major supplier to a bit player in the trade.
Livestock ship owners recognised these changes 20 years ago.
Ageing fleet
At any given time during the 1990s, there were 10-12 large livestock carriers (70,000 – 110,000 sheep) engaged full-time shuttling back and forth between Australia and the Middle East delivering livestock.
Today there are only seven large livestock ships that could potentially load in Australia. But six of these have long-term engagements in the Atlantic, delivering stock from South America to the Middle East and Turkey, and over the last two years have rarely, if ever, come to Australia.
Container ships, car carriers and the like are typically scrapped at about 25 years of age. Only one of the seven large livestock carriers that could potentially load in Australia is less than 20 years old.
Three are more than 30 years old and two are more than 40 years of age. They are near the end of their working lives – at least from Australia.
For a very old livestock ship the cost of compliance with Australian Maritime Safety Authority requirements is enormous. Over the next two years the older ships in the fleet will almost certainly be either scrapped, or more likely be allowed to run down with minimal maintenance, trading solely from South America, where maritime safety requirements are lax.
As far as I am aware, there are no new large livestock ships under construction.
Ship owners are not willing to invest the tens of millions of dollars required for a new large livestock vessel that meets Australian standards when there is a flotilla of small, low-capital cost and largely unregulated vessels meeting the trade’s requirements in the Red Sea, Arabian Gulf and Eastern Mediterranean.
There is a long lead time bringing a new or converted livestock carrier into service. By May 2028 there are likely to be only two large livestock carriers accredited to load sheep in Australia – if they are not engaged elsewhere in the world. There will also be a handful of small vessels, that might deliver occasional boutique consignments, but no big number of sheep, and at great cost per head.
Animal welfare concerns, climate change with record high temperatures in the Gulf States, the northern hemisphere summer blackout, hostilities in the Middle East, ESCAS and ever increasing regulatory costs further increase the level of difficulty for Australian sheep to compete in the market.
Instead of giving WA sheep producers and live export service providers false hope that live sheep exports will once again be a substantial, sustainable, reliable and profitable business for rural WA, our industry leaders should recognise commercial reality and encourage those in the live export supply chain to review their business plans and prepare for the inevitable – ban or no ban.
Rather than a ‘die-in-a ditch’ pushback strategy, our industry leaders should accept commercial reality and argue long and hard for as much transition support as possible.
- Author Tony Brightling is an Australian veterinarian who has worked with the live export trade for more than 30 years as an industry representative resident in the Middle East, livestock exporter, veterinarian and industry consultant.
So what? The point should be that industry comes and goes according to economic drivers, not some ideological agenda of a group of people who have no interest and bear no consequences from the shut down.
If the industry is prepared to lie down on this what is next on the animal activists agenda. It is a slippery slope not to stand up against an agenda to abolish animal agriculture.
That’s all very well and that maybe the case but why should a Government interfere in business ? Apart from the meat trade what if we had an order for several thousand Breeding Sheep to go to any country?
Are you saying they can’t go?
They’d have to go by air as do all breeder sheep currently.
Tony Brightling seems very well informed about the live export trade and make some good points. But I am compelled to ask, why ban it if it is going to die? Letting commercial realities decide is a more gradual and less provocative way to a clear result. We are always annoyed in the country by city green voters joyfully signalling their virtue at the expense of hard working farmers.
I agree that commercial reality is the ultimate driver here. The high cost of delivery and regulation are what has had the biggest impact on numbers shipped from Australia, and why no sheep have been shipped from Eastern ports for the last 5 years.
But as the world moves forward, wealth and ag practices improve, in developing nations and regions and demand for quality food and livestock continues, there will continue to be demand for high quality breeding livestock. This is often supplied in smaller shipments by air, but there will be markets seeking larger consignments of our breeding stock where sea will be viable, but air will not. For example, Larger shipment of breeding dorpers were shipped with cattle to Russia 5 or so years ago.
The commercial reality may continue to hamper the viability and volume of lower value slaughter shipments, but this bill will also shut the door on high value options that, I believe, will evolve in the coming years – further depriving Australian farmers of market choice and opportunity.
Following is a lift from the Senate papers today, relating to current Senate business, and specifically to an attempt to have the matter of live sheep export investigated and considered by a Senate Committee, given that the Bill to halt live sheep export was pushed through Reps.by the Labor government today.
“Notice given 24 June 20243 Senators McKenzie, Nampijinpa Price, Canavan, McDonald, Davey and Cadell: To move—That the following matter be referred to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee for inquiry and report by 25 November 2024: The social, economic and environmental impacts of banning live sheep exports in Australia, with particular reference to:(a) the nature and outcomes of consultation;
No. 113—26 June 20247(b)the effects arising from the ending of live sheep exports on the Australian agricultural sector including:(i)the cost and impacts of transition for farmers, exporters, transporters and other participants in the supply chain,(ii)the process for any Government assistance,(iii)impacts on local communities including regional and remote employment and mental health, particularly in Western Australia,(iv)the impact on livestock production, prices and competition,(v)impacts on the processing of livestock within Australia,(vi)the impact on international animal welfare standards, and(vii)impacts on other industries within agriculture or the wider economy;(c)the effect of Australia’s live sheep export ban on our trade partners and the barriers to trade in chilled meat; and(d)any related matters.”
Undoubtedly, if the attempt is successful, Tony Brightling will make a submission to that Senate Committee, as is his right, and no criticism of that should be made.
Counteractively, every sheep exporter, and for that matter, every cattle exporter, together with every member of every allied trade and organisation, should also exercise their right and make a submission.
Anyone who requires assistance should be able to find it in the office of their Federal Member, any Senator representing their state, or any of their industry representative groups.
If this attempt to get it to Committee is not successful, then the Labor government will work to get the Bill passed by the Senate, and if that happens, live sheep export is all over red rover and look out live cattle export.
The last cab off the rank to then reverse any live export ban is a change of government next year. It does not require a rocket scientist intellect to work out that both targets require simultaneous pursuit, by everyone, no exceptions, if live export is to survive.
Theres nothing to say this industry can not be built on without interferance from experts that dont give a hoot about people that try to keep Australia & Communities together.