Content Banners

Ann Britton Outback Photography

THANK YOU Live Export Agvocates

Anyone that has followed me on social media for any length of time would have realised I support live export.

I read this article (article pasted at bottom of page if you can’t read attached link) and must admit I cried, for many reasons, relief, anger, weighing up the positives and negatives over the last four years, many thoughts.

Had this have happened in 2011…………..people say not to dwell on the what ifs, but gee it’s so hard, when all that was needed was common sense, like is happening now, with both sides of Government saying, fix a problem in Live Export industry, not ban Live Export to Vietnam.

So much water under the bridge since May 2011, how ironic, Animals Australia release this footage, nearly to the day that 4 Corners aired A Bloody Business.
Daily Telegraph 23 May 2015
@ColinJBettles tweeted 23rd May “Letter to the editor in today’s Daily Telegraph nails it on live exports #banextremists #banignorance @agintegrity”

This blog is to say thanks, to anyone who has ever defended Live Export. There are many people that have spent many hours putting the argument forward as to why we shouldn’t ban Live Export. Their debate full of facts, real life experience, saying it like it is but all the while, basically always stating the same “story” in unison. These people are either employed by Live Export organisations, work in or connected to the Live Export supply chain or people that have taken an interest in Live Export and thought it needed a “fair go.” They have stood fast together, gathering strength amongst the abuse hurled at them, and one good thing Animals Australia has taught agvocates (people advocating for Agriculture) is how to use social media so that our voices are being heard like never before. As I have stated before agvocates do social media better than animal rights activists, because we have first hand experience or factual knowledge to back our opinions about Agriculture. Agvocates don’t need to engage in buzz words attached to a “90% emotion and 10% fact” debate, that animal activists use to push their agenda, which has nothing to do with animal welfare

I feel the wheels of change are happening and I dearly hope they never return to where they were: believing banning Live Export is the solution to end animal abuse in a vital commodity to Australia.
ABR_8494 bullocks Scarsdale muster
These bullocks went Live Export to Indonesia in April

It is extremely sad to know that there is a huge percentage of people, both in Australia and overseas, that believe the emotional propaganda of animal rights activists.

Some liken animals to humans, the RSPCA say we should class animals as sentient beings on their website.
BR5_4360 Justin Curley's Scarsdale bullocks
Our bullocks on their first leg of their journey to Indonesia. Long distance travel is one thing RSPCA doesn’t agree to. It is the only way to move stock in inland Australia, and it is heavily regulated.

People are allowed to have children with no qualifications before hand. Who is allowed to judge if a parent is fit and proper to have the life of a child in their hands?

Yes we have rules if children are abused. Do people hide in people’s houses scaring children to get evidence just in case there is abuse?

Animal rights activists seem to think they have a right to do this on farms, film what they class is abuse, particularly in “factory farming,” which has caused death to animals but they believe their cause is for the greater good. Animal rights activists don’t know animal husbandry, and they themselves can’t define what intensive housed animal enterprises is when asked.

My point being the general public with no connection to animal husbandry in any way shape or form either by their own opinion or who have been emotionally brain washed by propaganda from animal rights activists, who have no animal welfare agenda, take it upon themselves to judge without any experience in farming.

Do these same people judge a specialist in education, medical or dentistry and tell these professionals how to do their job?

If the above people perform malpractice there are fines in place and their license may be taken from them.

There are abusive parents, partners, and professionals in all fields and in all these areas there are laws to make these people accountable for their actions that our society won’t tolerate.

Why are idiots allowed in every other profession, it seems, but farming?
BR5_4291 Scarsdale muster
While we are having smoko during mustering these bullocks wondered on over for a look. Yes we know they are going on a truck and then on a Live Export ship to be slaughtered, that is what they were breed for, to be eaten. If people don’t agree with that, it is their choice and that it is all it is, nothing to do with animal welfare.

It seems the value of animals, by some, aren’t equal to humans but above humans.

Animal rights activists and the general public with no accountability, knowledge, experience of animal husbandry want animal farming industries to be idiot proof but this is not asked of any other profession.

Animal right activists and some in the general public feel they have a right to be a law onto themselves as they have an opinion on what animal farming should be with no accreditation to speak of.

Animal activists target farmers in the night

I am a beef producer. My home is my work place.

I have been at the receiving end of abusive telephone calls and social media attacks because of my business. One such phone call, it was suggested that my own throat and that of my daughters should have been slit and our heads smashed on concrete instead of the cattle abused in Indonesia which was highlighted in the ABC A Bloody Business 4 Corners program. The man from Victoria did not identify himself but took it upon himself to judge me without knowing me, because I stood up for my industry. He felt it his right to state that my daughter and myself should be inflicted with pain and suffering because he was emotionally driven by horrific scenes of abuse on a TV program.

This is what drives animal rights activists to do what they do to further their cause. They know their audience and they know that people are far removed from the farm gate and any knowledge of animal husbandry.
Farmers are not the enemy
@endofthebitument tweeted this post 24 May “Amen to that.”

I am not condoning  abuse to any animal. I am highlighting that animal rights activists know their target audience and they know public relations and advertising well. Their budget from donations to further their cause is in the millions. In some instances the tens of millions. PETA had incoming funds of over $US 51 million. They are as their name states animal rights activists, although they often pretend and purport to be animal welfare or animal protection organisations. They do no actual animal welfare work. Their agenda is often in furtherance of a personal lifestyle that many of their followers may not live by but the story animal rights activists paint, to a large percentage of the population, who have no knowledge of animal farming, is a very emotionally driven false picture of animal farming for their own personal  ideals and in far too many instances to further the grip their own animal rights industry has on  the donations of well meaning but ill informed people.

Some people seem to be of the understanding that animal rights activists, like Animals Australia, are only a small group, there are 134,000 primary producer businesses in Australia. Animals Australia has over half a million “likers”.
BRA_7193 feeding weaner heifers hay
My husband #BossMan feeding hay to weaner heifers.

Animals Australia is linked to many other animal rights organisation in the world, making them powerful in both voice and money. Animal rights activists have not only empowered the strength of the general public with their emotional propaganda but high profile people, who like a huge percentage of the general public, know zilch about animal farming. I wonder if these same people would ask a diesel mechanic about their health problems?

While RSPCA stay linked in support of Animals Australia I will class them as animal right activists. RSPCA leaders have stated they aren’t in support of Animals Australia but both Animals Australia and RSPCA both show support for each other on their websites. RSPCA’s obvious lack of knowledge in animal farming across the board, is shown several times on their website to the point of being anti animal farming as what they feel should be law and what is able to be law is near unobtainable. The fact they have a monetary interest in their paw print products shows their credibility to be of an unbiased nature is not achievable. Yet they are credited to be law enforcers when it comes to animal welfare of farm animals while at the same time making money off the labour of primary producers with RSPCA approved produce. I have wondered why the RSPCA has consistently refused to disclose just how much money they make from RSPCA approved products. I know that producers who in order to supply some supermarket chains with some products MUST be RSPCA approved or face being removed as suppliers to some supermarkets.

I ask you why would anyone take the word, experience, knowledge, and credibility of a person/organisation with no accountability for animal welfare over people who do animal welfare and are professionals at their job?

So does that prove that people do listen to diesel mechanics when asked about health problems?

The simple fact is if animal farmers aren’t professional in their animal husbandry and make animal welfare their top priority their business would not be viable.
BDR_7330 Rick Goodwood windmill
Water maintenance is a top priority for any farmer.

It is also fact, like in all professions, there are laws in place for animal farmers who break the law.

I have stated many times how can Australia judge other countries for their animal welfare when we ourselves have a RSPCA Animal Rescue television program that highlights cruelty some in our communities inflict on animals. Have we banned pets because a few in our society are idiots?

The hypocrisy that spills from the likes of Animals Australia, Peta, RSPCA, Voiceless, The Greens, AMIEU re needing to ban live export when the RSPCA has a TV program showing what cruelty  happens here in Australia, is beyond comprehension.
IMG_3631 Melissa Parkes LE
Twitter post August 2014, by Labor Melissa Parke MP, who still wants to ban Live Export. The statement she is claiming was completely false then, as it is now, a lie. 

So to all those that have defended Live Export my heartfelt THANK YOU for fighting the good fight.

To those that still think it should be banned my advice to you is, next time you or your family have a health problem ask a diesel mechanic to solve it.

Footnote: if you would like to talk to a farmer on social media who would be happy to engage you, below are just a few links where you will find information on Agriculture in general or Live Export.
National Farmers Federation
Aussie Farms on Facebook  
which will take you to Save Live Export a Facebook page, with links to ALEC.
As I said Agvocates all talking the same story with knowledge, facts, data. Aussie Farms and Save Live Export are powered by 
volunteers giving of their time cause they believe in telling Australian Agricultural story via those that live it or passionate enough to promote it with backing of farmers.
Aussie Farms covers every type of farm there is in Australia. Got a question about agriculture, just ask Aussie Farms.

Central Station  “Central Station is a blog where the men and women of the Australian outback come together to share an insight into their lives- the good, the bad, and the dusty!”
#AusAg #LiveExport #AgChatOz are a few hashtags used on Tweeter that would have you interacting with Australian Farmers
Cattle Producer Jo Bloomfield
The Stockman’s View Ironbark Jim

I am told that some are finding it hard to read link attached to word “article” so have copied and pasted below:


No basis for ending cattle trade

Tony Abbott is right not to be stampeded by animal welfare activists into a ban on live exports to Vietnam. Of course, reports of Australian cattle being dispatched by sledgehammer in some Vietnamese abattoirs must be investigated. Nobody condones cruelty but a knee-jerk ban, such as imposed on cattle exports to Indonesia by the Gillard government in 2011, would be unlikely to do anything for animal welfare, quite apart from the damage it would do to trade and the access of ordinary people to quality meat.

The pressure group Animals Australia claims it has footage from Vietnamese abattoirs so “shocking and distressing” that it has decided not to release it; this statement itself is designed to cause shock and distress. In any event, the group has released a photo that appears to show the prelude to slaughter by sledgehammer. It should be remembered that animal activists are always on the hunt for images that can move public opinion against a trade to which they are implacably opposed.

Australia is a world leader in live exports and takes seriously its reputation for high standards of quality and animal welfare. Yesterday Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce said it was the industry itself that had reported concerns in March about the use of sledgehammers at some Vietnamese abattoirs; these fell outside Australia’s system to safeguard standards throughout the supply chain. Since then, two importers have been suspended and the industry in both countries has taken steps to ensure better supervision as cattle pass through the supply chain. Animals Australia, predictably, says it’s not enough, but any shortcomings in official investigations can be remedied without making a case for an abrupt end to the live export market. It is by maintaining a mutually beneficial trade relationship that Australia maximises its interest in ensuring animal welfare throughout the supply chain. On the latest figures, Vietnam is our second most important market for live cattle exports; it accounts for 20 per cent of our trade compared with just over 50 per cent for the No 1 market, Indonesia.

When Labor was spooked by media coverage into its 2011 ban on exports to Indonesia, the damage was manifold. Indonesia naturally resented the sudden loss of a meat source for a hungry population in a market geared to live imports and local abattoirs; the trade in refrigerated meat is less established outside the capital city of Jakarta. Australia lost (albeit temporarily) its power to help lift standards throughout the supply chain; other suppliers less concerned for animal welfare stepped in; and unsold cattle in Australia’s north were left starving in a severe drought.

As with Indonesia, so with Vietnam — it’s much better to stay closely engaged with trading partners and fix problems as they arise; it may not generate headlines but it’s more rewarding for everyone in the long run.

  1. Rohan Williams 

    That is an absolutely accurate, pertinent, and obviously heart-felt account of the progress that pro-live export supporters are feeling right across the country. The tide is turning quickly and will see live export continue well into the future.

    If we are to look back and dissect the contributing forces that lined up to see the temporary suspension implemented by the Gillard Governement in 2011, the hindsight becomes frightening.

    Labor acted in a knee-jerk fashion in order to appease the Greens with whom they barely grasped power in August 2010. The hung parliament was resolved by the deals done by Labor and the cross-benchers who held the balance of power.The deal done with the Greens at that time was one action that sealed the live export suspension which ensued in 2011. The other was the simultaneous support by Tony Windsor, Rob Oakshot, and Andrew Wilkie of the Labor Party on confidence and supply. It was that final action, pronounced by Rob Oakshot’s infamous 45 minute speech (lecture) that placed the final nail in the coffin and paved the way for the ill advised decision to suspend the live trade with Indonesia for those fateful five weeks.

    If Rob Oakshot had remained loyal to his traditionally National voters, the outcome could well, and most probably would have been, a far more pragmatic decision made by a minority Coalition Government.

    How’s that for a “What if”?

  2. annbritton 

    Thanks Rohan, for your wonderful response.
    One of my biggest “what ifs” is stopping myself thinking the ban decision was made for political gain and not animal welfare or mental health of humans. That “what if” sticks in my gut, it is very raw.
    Considering now, the response from both sides of politics, the common sense approach to fix a problem within a huge viable industry, is just so very very simple. That simple it nearly makes me cry thinking how easy it could have been done in the first place.
    People in the cities, away from the supply chain and all the communities that are attached to it, didn’t see the human and stock devastation the ban caused. There was no 4Corners program with Animals Australia employed people filming the worst animal welfare issue out in the paddocks of Australia after the ban, although I for one invited them to do so. The mention of suicide connected to the ban is basically taboo, as it would never be able to be 100% proven, and my heart felt condolences to all that are left behind as a result of this. The cost of mental health to farmers and communities I don’t think could be measured correctly either, but the impact would have been and continues to be massive.
    Fact of the matter is animal rights activists are pushing their choice of lifestyle. The feel good emotion driven crusade they are on while sitting in the comfort of their homes/offices not having and never having to deal with animal welfare isn’t helping any animal and never will regardless of what they think. “Get rid of animal farming” how easy to say that in one breath, but what are the consequences for farming animals first and foremost. Their ideals are truly selfish and unrealistic.
    My dream, hope, wish Rohan, is when there is a farming issue, an animal welfare event, that the general public turn to a farmer or farming organisation to find the answers and when given that answer is it trusted.
    I honestly believe education is the key to all this, through our schools and advertising, it would be money well spent.
    Thank you again Rohan for your advocacy you have done a tremendous job, it is appreciated and respected a great deal.

  3. Steve Larsson 

    Hi Anne Can you please send me your email address (again). I have an academic article by Lyle Munro from earlier this year that is a great expose on Animals Australia and the Four Corners story. Regards Steve

  4. annbritton 

    Have sent an email to you optusnet address Steve, hope you receive it all OK.

  5. Steph Batt 

    Well said that man…….. I mean woman….. I mean farmer……. well actually grazier but let’s not quibble over tin tacks. 😉

  6. annbritton 

    As long as the message gets out Steph, you can call me whatever you like 🙂

  7. Patto 

    Great stuff, Ann.

    Every time I hear of the violent threats and intimidation suffered by those with a strong voice against these ideologues I find myself thinking, “where is the mainstream media on this?”. The evidence is abundant. There’ve been police investigations, mentions in federal hansard and anecdotes consistent with each other from many credible individuals such as yourself. Where is the coverage? The vandalism at NFF pictured above, the contractor (who just collected manure from the lots for christ sake!) who had his truck incinerated, the activist jumping in front of a truck with holding her kid, the huge numbers of animals that have neen killed by accidents caused by activists tresspassing in piggeries , the list is long.

    I had the privelege of writing on this fantastic blog once about agri-terrorism. As it was then, it is still now a neglected topic for mainstream discussion.

  8. annbritton 

    I sort of have to laugh re the NFF vandalism Patto,
    Reason being I tweeted AA, RSPCA, Voiceless and even PETA for a comment….they were all Voiceless, not a word.
    I also asked main stream media if they were going to chase up a comment from ARAs for comment….again silence and I am unaware of there even being a comment from any of them.
    So if they don’t condemn it, like we do of animal cruelty, do they think that sort of intimidation is acceptable?
    We will never know.
    Thanks for your kind words and yes thanks for wonderful blog also, a agree a very neglected topic, but let us hope if can’t be ignored for much longer.

Leave a Comment