RSPCA RISKS ENTIRE MEAT POULTRY INDUSTRY

The RSPCA is choosing to risk the health and safety of the entire meat poultry industry right across Australia with its current Accreditation (and proposed future replacement, Certification) scheme in three ways:

1. The Current Scheme

ACGC has discovered that RSPCA is so intent on litter health that farmers are having to rotary hoe their litter at full density – resulting in a huge risk of “crowd crush” and death, or panicked birds running into the hoe blades and dying. RSPCA is aware of this and DOESN’T APPEAR TO CARE, provided the litter looks friable. In one recent case, a farmer was SUSPENDED from the scheme because he refused to hoe the litter (10% under the lateral waterlines was damp) for the welfare of the birds! Moreover we are aware of a number of farms that have had cases of florid, treatable (but untreated) disease that were approved by RSPCA!

Not only that, in the 16 years in which the scheme has been operating we have NO independent data to suggest that bird welfare is any better than that which would have been the case under Federal Government National Guidelines. The current scheme appears to be more a facilities scheme than a welfare scheme in at least some respects, and a marketing scheme rather than being based on proven science. Because of the truly significant penalty meted out to both the suspended farmer and the processor, ACGC has made a formal complaint to ACCC (who is, or should be, concerned with issues of misleading and deceptive conduct, and unconscionabillity). SEE COMPLAINT TO ACCC HERE.

2. The Proposed New Certification Scheme

ACGC has objected to the new RSPCA proposals for WINDOWS in all new sheds, outdoor areas in new sheds, slow growing breeds (which may not be acceptable to the consumer!) and and other elements that RSPCA is trying to justify on the grounds that these MIGHT (possibly, could, etc) improve bird welfare. Unless and until there is quality, independent science to justify any future changes, AND data demonstrating that there WILL be incremental improvement over both the current scheme and the federal government guidelines, meat poultry farmers should NOT have to spend $$ on a “maybe”. SEE ACGC RESPONSE TO THE PROPOSALS HERE

3. The RSPCA Audit Process

ACGC has discovered potentially the single most blatant breach of biosecurity by any agency outside the processors. The RSPCA has admitted to auditing UP TO 15 FARMS WEEK, in FULL knowledge of the biosecurity risks given that the scheme is operated by a veterinarian, and RSPCA sits on the National Guidelines Committee. That means going to up to 5 farms in a day!

Growers are supposed to require any person who does not meet these guidelines to ask the person to leave the property. The only exception to this rule are processor staff and contractors. This is controversial in biosecurity terms and is under review, but it is currently a contractual requirement. Notably, the RSPCA auditors are NOT processor contractors.

This is a shocking and negligent denial of the most basic biosecurity measures – measures designed to protect animal welfare. That RSPCA should even consider that this is OK, is appalling. Worse, RSPCA auditors are not just “visiting a farm” – they are tromping from shed to shed, putting fingers into drinker spigots, taking feed from trays for inspection, walking through faeces and turning over litter, getting fomites on their skin and equipment and then moving from farm to farm.

RSPCA argues that “they have been doing it this way for 15 years” – 15 years in which Australia and the industry have had to pay for a number of emergency disease outbreaks, and 15 years in which the whole importance of biosecurity has been understood and standards developed and (supposedly) enforced.
RSPCA argues that they are accompanied by processor staff – who have no choice in the matter as the processors have been forced into the scheme by the deal between RSPCA and the supermarkets and have many millions of dollars to lose if they speak out.
RSPCA argues that on a few occasions they have spotted disease in the sheds and cancelled the audits, and the following ones that week– but take no account of diseases in the infectious/incubation stage or clinical disease that they simply haven’t spotted.
RSPCA argues that the observe a stand down period of 48 hours between PROCESSORS – when the biosecurity risk is between FARMS.
RSPCA argues that they wear “protective clothing” – but have no consideration for walking around the contaminated parking area before and after the protective gear is removed, no consideration of fomites and no consideration of scientifically agreed industry norms for biosecurity. Auditors apparently DO NOT wear hair covering, gloves or masks and equipment is NOT bagged. Even then, there is potential for disease transmission via the throat, nose or conjunctival secretions of an auditor.
To our knowledge, there is no information provided as to whether RSPCA auditors have any birds at home.

Meat poultry farmers have NOT signed up for this! NOBODY is against ongoing improvements in animal welfare and NOBODY is suggesting that animal welfare isn’t important, but it is past time that RSPCA began to behave ethically, transparently, and with a genuine respect for farm norms.

Latest Information

View All

CHANGES TO NATIONAL ANIMAL WELFARE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES – TIME FOR ACTION

NATIONAL FEDERAL ANIMAL WELFARE GUIDELINES are the legal guidelines which every grower in Australia has to meet. These Guidelines may be captured in legislation on a state by state basis – most states do, some states modify them slightly. Importantly, the RSPCA, ACMF and other key groups sit on the panel which develops the National […]

Local Avian Influenza Outbreak Sparks Review of Biosecurity Agreement

In the wake of the H7 “local” Avian Influenza outbreaks in Vic, NSW and ACT, there has been a rush of bureaucratic survey-taking, and requests for input and opinion, all hoping that meat poultry growers tell government departments how wonderfully they handled the outbreak. Sadly, they are receiving the truth: the good, the bad and […]

ACGC Comments on National Competition Policy Principles and Plan

You might recall the “old” National Competition Policy and Principles. That’s the highy theoretical, economist-driven, philosophical document that resulted in removal of the Meat Poultry growers’ Countervailing power legislation in all states, resulting in grower not even having a full ability to use delegates to negotiate thier comtacts for them. Even the ACCC law changes […]