This afternoon I read another idiot on their facebook page flippantly talking about introducing foot and mouth disease (FMD) to Australia as a way of achieving a shutdown of the live export industry.
Naturally I rang AA to ask them to take down the comment and inform this stupid individual of the consequences of what he was saying. The girl on the end of the phone not only had no idea what FMD is and what it does to animals but only seemed interested in getting me off the phone. This is not the first time I have had contact with Animals Australia about this issue, several months ago I personally begged Glennis Ooges to put out some sort of statement or announcement condemning the people who advocate introducing FMD as a possible method for shutting down live export. So far AA have said nothing, worse than saying nothing they seem perfectly fine with people openly chatting about it of their facebook page.
Introducing FMD will NOT shutdown live export!
If FMD was introduced it would only temporarily suspend the trade until the disease was under control, Australia may lose many of our overseas markets but eventually live export would resume. Live export would probably thrive in a post FMD Australia as many meatworks would be shut down for months or even years as the disease is brought under control, decimating Australia's boxed beef trade ( the meatworkers union should take note here) and making live export the only way to get cattle markets moving again.
Many nations who have FMD still live export cattle and sheep. These include Brazil, The UK and many other African and South American nations. Through careful control programs and extensive lobbying they are able to continue their live export trade and eventually, so would we.
The Animal Welfare Consequences are UNTHINKABLE!
To the average person who cares about animals and opposes live export, indeed to the majority of people who oppose live export, the animal welfare consequences of introducing FMD are still unthinkable.
The twisted idiots who are considering introducing FMD seem to think inflicting gross cruelty on some animals to save others from what they perceive to be cruelty elsewhere is a worthy goal.
This is where we see Peter Singers utilitarian philosophy taken to its most extreme and dangerous conclusion. Singer, (the father of the animal rights movement) teaches we must look to serving the greatest good for the greatest number.
Is it right (for example) to bribe an impoverished abattoir worker to abuse one animal on camera if the footage gets a dodgy abattoir shutdown and saves many animals from a cruel fate?
Some animal rights activists would say yes.
So is it worth introducing a disease that could temporarily shut down the live export industry? Some might say yes until they investigate the terrible effects of the disease.
Foot and Mouth disease attacks (as the name suggests) the feet and mouth of the animal. It causes large, painful sores and blisters to form on the animals feet and tongue. These sores stop the animal from eating and walking. Once the animal cannot walk anymore it is vulnerable being eaten alive by predators or perishing from thirst.
Failing that it will die slowly by infection.
FMD can spread up to 6 kilometers on the wind and is the most contagious disease in the world that affects cloven hoof animals. Given the close proximity of farm animals in the southern states an outbreak there would see FMD spread like wildfire. In the north of Australia the population of feral pigs (pigs are the most effective carriers of the disease) would ensure the disease would spread far and wide before it could be detected and containment could begin.
Whether our would be "savior of animals" would chose to release the disease in the north or the south is really irrelevant, the effect would be the same.
Millions, that's right, millions of cattle, sheep and pigs would have to be destroyed in efforts to contain the disease. Entire districts would have their herds and flocks wiped out. In the north, helicopters would be sent on 'search and destroy' missions where marksmen with automatic rifles would cut down hundreds of animals from the air every day, returning the next day and the next and the next until no cloven hoof animal is left alive and country reeks of bloated bodies and hums to noise of a plague of flies that would gorge themselves on the spoils of the tragedy.
Foot and mouth disease is a weapon of mass destruction, a plague that kills without mercy and it is disturbing that somehow people are under the deluded impression that unleashing this disease on healthy Australian livestock can somehow be justified under any circumstance.
Even more disturbing is the inaction on this issue from leaders within the animal rights movement. Having whipped vulnerable people into such a frenzy they believe animals dying painfully from FMD is better than sending them overseas on a ship, these leaders now sit on their hands instead of denouncing those who would commit unspeakable acts to further their cause.
Do the leaders themselves believe that cruelty can be justified if it somehow results in a suspension of the live export trade?
Do they regard those who would introduce FMD to Australia as useful idiots?
Judging by their actions, some of them may need to phone a friend.