- Home
- Hansard & Papers
- Legislative Assembly
- 15 August 2000
Tabbita Feedlot Cattle Deaths
Printing Tips |
Print selected text
| Full Day Hansard Transcript
« Prior Item |
Item 19 of 45
| Next Item »
Page: 8167
Urgent Motion
Mr AMERY (Mount Druitt—Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation) [3.42 p.m.]: I move:
(1) notes with concern the recent deaths of 1,250 cattle within 12 hours at a feedlot at Tabbita, near Griffith;
(2) notes that two reviews have been conducted into the causes of those deaths;
(3) notes that the feedlot company, Prime City Feedlot, has not been found to be negligent in relation to cattle deaths; and
(4) calls on ARMCANZ, the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, to conduct an immediate review into the national feedlot guidelines with a view to preventing such a large amount of feedlot deaths from occurring again.
It is with urgency that I speak in relation to this call for a national review of the guidelines relating to feedlots. This is a very important issue, and one that I believe deserves the urgent attention of the House. The review I am seeking follows an incident that occurred in February this year at a cattle feedlot in the Riverina. This was the Prime City feedlot in Tabbita, near Griffith—a feedlot that annually produces around 35,000 head of cattle. On 25 and 26 February a tragic incident occurred. About 1,250 previously healthy cattle suddenly died, within the space of just 12 hours. This is a significant number of cattle to die suddenly. The issue concerned me greatly. At the time I heard the deaths were related to extreme heat stress. The environment at the time was of high humidity, high day and night temperatures, and no wind. The vast majority of the cattle were not in shaded areas. But, rather than just accept this as a reasonable explanation, I wanted to take the matter further—1,250 cattle dying on one weekend is not, after all, an insignificant event.
The feedlot industry in New South Wales is a major cattle enterprise that generally operates in a highly professional manner, with quality assurance programs underpinning accreditation. The nature of feedlotting requires intensive stocking of usually large numbers of cattle. It is an important industry and is a significant factor in the overall New South Wales beef industry, which is valued at about $850 million per year at the farm level. About one-quarter of the cattle sent to abattoirs in New South Wales are from feedlots, and half the feedlot cattle end up as table meat for Australian consumers, as opposed to processed foods. The rest are exported as meat to overseas markets, with the majority being shipped to Japan.
There are 88 accredited feedlots in New South Wales and together they generate thousands of jobs. It was, therefore, all the more important in my view to ensure that the industry adheres to the highest management standards possible. Soon after the deaths I set up an independent expert committee to review the circumstances of the incident and to provide me with recommendations. The committee comprised the following members: Professor Keith Entwistle, Professor of Animal Sciences and dean of his faculty at the University of New England, and also known as a longstanding cattle expert; Margaret Rose, Associate Professor at the University of New South Wales, who is also chairperson of the Animal Research Review Panel; and executive officer Bill McKiernan, who is New South Wales Agriculture's technical specialist on beef products.
The feedlot industry, to its credit, also set up its own review of the incident. This was initiated by the industry peak body, the Australian Lot Feeders Association. The aim was to recommend ways to reduce the chances of a repetition of an incident such as this. Both reviews have now been completed, although I have yet to see a finalised copy of the industry report. The key recommendations of both reports, I understand, have been to conduct a review of the national feedlot guidelines in relation to the design and extent of shade provided at feedlots. The expert committee report specifically looks at the provision of water—for example, the water trough space needed per animal, the number of troughs per yard, and the location of troughs in the yard. Stocking densities, and the management of long-fed cattle, should also be considered.
Importantly, there is no indication from the review conducted by the expert committee that the industry failed to comply with any of the existing feedlot guidelines. In fact, I have been told by my department that the industry is keen to move forward and implement any changes that might be deemed necessary. Other aspects of the feedlot industry which the committee recommended for review include feeding regimes. These include the levels of roughage in feed, and energy levels and times offeeding, particularly for long-fed cattle. Long-fed cattle are those that are fed on grain for longer than 150 days. Consequently they are much fatter and heavier and are generally slaughtered for the Japanese market. Also subject to review should be environmental management such as the use of water sprays and mists, wind generation and the interaction of cattle with shade.
The review further recommends that the industry also undertakes research into the relationship between meteorological data and microclimate conditions with a view to developing models for better predicting climatic threats to livestock performance. Those models would need to include the influence of the physical characteristics of the pen and the topography of the site. A further recommendation is to develop specific guidelines for cattle in relation to the amount of time they have been in the feedlot. Another is that each feedlot develop a risk assessment and management plan to help in predicting and minimising the impact of environmental concerns.
The industry review has, I understand, made similar recommendations. Those include the need for an industry-wide risk assessment process to evaluate climatic factors and to provide contingency planning for extreme events. It also recommends the promotion of temperature or humidity analysis to facilitate decision making at those feedlots. It recommends the review of feedlot management practices in relation to water spray, wind generation and other issues; the identification of further research needs in weather station technology; and the need to develop a definitive reporting process to industry and the authorities for significant mortality events.
In March this year I informed the Agricultural Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand [ARMCANZ] meeting in Melbourne of the deaths of the 1,250 feedlot cattle at Tabbita. I indicated to the Ministers present that I would prepare a paper on the issue for consideration at the August meeting of ARMCANZ, which is this Friday in Brisbane. I remind the House that I have managed to put that report on the agenda of this Friday's meeting of the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand. The recommendations contained in the ARMCANZ agenda reflect the recommendations of both the industry review and the independent expert committee review. It is recommended that industry provides to the ARMCANZ meeting in March 2001 a detailed plan on how it will meet those recommendations. This is an important step forward in the management of feedlots in this State. I understand that industry is equally willing to embrace any necessary improvements to management practices.
I thank the House for allowing this matter priority today. The company concerned has been thoroughly investigated and was found to have committed no breach of any law or breach of the code of practice. However, it would generally be agreed that even if the code of practice has been adhered to, the deaths of 1,250 cattle within the space of 12 hours would surely indicate that the code of practice must be deficient. Despite the existence of a code of practice and quality assurance programs, this event occurred towards the end of the week and it is not known how many persons were employed in the feedlot or the extent of their knowledge of the code of practice and other management practices. Reviews conducted at both government and industry levels demonstrate the need for an improved code of practice and greater awareness of the guidelines by those in charge of feedlots, particularly a feedlot of this size with so many valuable animals. I commend the motion to the House and reiterate that the matter will be dealt with at the ARMCANZ meeting in Brisbane on Friday.
Mr SLACK-SMITH (Barwon) [3.51 p.m.]: The Opposition supports the motion for urgent consideration that this House notes with concern the recent deaths of 1,250 cattle from the Prime City Feedlot at Tabbita near Griffith. No-one likes to see animals die of extreme heat, which is what happened in February, nor would Prime City Feedlot wish to lose $1.25 million, which was the result of the deaths of those cattle. The approximately 90 feedlots in New South Wales generate about $1,000 million per year through the production of prime quality beef for domestic and overseas consumers. The Minister referred to the very valuable Japanese market.
Feedlots not only generate considerable income for New South Wales; they also play other roles. The feedlot industry protects the store cattle industry and introduced a floor price for the cattle trade. The cattle industry is a boost to our domestic grain market because cattle are large consumers of grain. Some producers cannot value add because their grazing properties in certain seasons are either too dry or too wet. Feedlots create a buffer and are a source of valuable income for producers all over New South Wales, not merely for feedlots. Feedlots value add and produce premium quality meat that is sought after by most countries in the world. Australia has the reputation of being clean and green and that reputation must be preserved to enable consumers both overseas and in Australia to have confidence in beef purchased from feedlots.
What happened in Griffith in February was a tragedy because Prime City followed the requisite guidelines. The Agricultural Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand [ARMCANZ] meeting will now consider how those guidelines might be improved, which is a step in the right direction. As the Minister pointed out, after about 100 days grain-fed cattle carry considerable weight and generate significant heat. The detrimental effect on the cattle resulted not only from the hot and humid conditions which occurred in February but also from the heat generated by the grain they ate. This tragedy does not require a knee-jerk reaction but guidelines that are scientifically based in an endeavour to protect the welfare of cattle. A number of smaller feedlots would undoubtedly go broke if they experienced the loss of 1,000 head of cattle. Such a disaster would also have a detrimental effect on the local economy, grain producers, meat processors or our domestic and international markets.
We should be thankful that the situation was not worse, and future losses must be avoided. Expert investigators have come up with recommendations that must be embraced. The Prime City Feedlot comprises 35,000 head of cattle, which equates to $35 million, and the removal of $35 million from the Griffith economy would certainly have a detrimental effect. The Opposition supports the call for ARMCANZ to immediately review the national feedlot guidelines in an effort to prevent the recurrence of feedlot deaths. This valuable industry has a far-reaching effect on all rural communities and we must take all necessary steps to ensure that the industry remains viable.
Mr MARTIN (Bathurst) [3.58 p.m.]: I support this motion for urgent consideration. The beef industry in New South Wales is approaching $1 billion and the feedlot industry is an important part of it, particularly as it is almost exclusively export driven. What has come out of the Tabbita incident is that we must be very aware of the way we operate this important export industry, particularly as countries such as Japan keep a vigilant eye on the production aspect and take a dim view of any problems that might arise. As the honourable member for Barwon said earlier, the evidence to date indicates that this was an unfortunate and isolated accident. However, the sheer size of this incident I think is reason enough to conduct a review. The Minister should be commended for moving quickly to take some action. Feedlots in New South Wales have a controversial history. Few of the feedlots that have been approved in local government areas have not had some sort of argument or controversy about them. In the main, industry has developed and it has acted responsibly.
There have been some major changes in the cattle industry. In the last fortnight Lithgow City Council approved a unique feedlot at the Westholme property at Tarana—a property located between Lithgow and Bathurst—where Braford cattle will be bred for the Japanese market. That feedlot will comprise 2,000 cattle—many more cattle than we are talking about today. All the animals will be housed in special covered pens and there will be a limit of 10 cattle per pen. Today we are talking about a specialised feedlot and about cattle that would have weighed about 750 kilograms each. Exporters of beef to Japan are getting $200 for a kilogram of beef. If that earning potential is available companies will have to adopt higher standards.
Obviously an operation such as the one at Tabbita could not meet the conditions that are being met by the Westholme company at Tarana. The Government should not interfere too much in matters of this nature, but it should take a more than passing interest in what is happening in the industry and, where necessary, refer such matters to the Agricultural and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand and other bodies if there is a need for a review. As I said earlier, the Minister acted promptly in relation to this matter. I am sure that in discussions in Brisbane next week he will put forward a forceful case.
As a result of those discussions individual feedlots should do risk assessments as part of their accreditation requirements and they should make use of weather station data and temperature index calculation tools to help manage excessive heat loads. An endless number of things could be done. One thing may or may not have been a problem at Tarana. We must ensure that all those employed in these organisations are fully briefed and trained not only in quality assurance but also in methodology. Industry must also have in place a system which enables the timely reporting of such incidents to the Government. That will ensure that people know what is happening.
There is no evidence to suggest that industry does not want to comply with existing guidelines. I believe that industry is able to comply with more stringent guidelines, particularly in the reporting of such incidents. The implementation of a system of timely reporting would enable the bringing together of suitably qualified people in the district to help with diagnosing, sample collecting, management and so on. That would certainly assist the feedlot industry and promote its image in overseas markets. I commend this motion to the House and commend the Minister for bringing the matter so quickly to the attention of the House.
Mr GEORGE (Lismore) [4.03 p.m.]: I support the motion for urgent consideration moved by the Minister for Agriculture. I know from past experience that it would have been devastating not only to the owners of the feedlot but also to the workers in and around the feedlot to lose 1,250 cattle in a matter of 12 hours. I cannot imagine what those people or the cattle went through. Those cattle might have been worth around $1.2 million. I am concerned about the fact that not much shade was provided. The feedlot industry in Australia and in particular in New South Wales plays an important and vital part in our cattle industry. As the Minister said earlier, it has supplied both domestic markets and export markets in Japan. The Australian Lot Feeders Association, the Federal body that represents feedlots in New South Wales and Australia, also conducted a review of national feedlot guidelines. I am sure that members of the Australian Lot Feeders Association will try to resolve and iron out any problems in the industry.
We must keep abreast with feed rations in feedlots but as members of Parliament we are not in a position where we can tell people how to feed cattle. Unfortunately, as long as cattle are locked up in a controlled area and they are fed on grain there will be a heat problem. Naturally, the managers of these feedlots are conscious of the problems with which they are faced every day. Feedlots in New South Wales and Australia are responding to market requirements. They are responding to both consumers in the domestic market and to export countries that want Australian grain-fed products. In some instances cattle in these feedlots have been fed for up to 380 days. That has been a tradition in some countries over the past century; it is not something new. Naturally, we must keep abreast with planning, feeding and pen arrangements for cattle, and we must be aware of the times that cattle are in these feedlots.
We must not overlook the achievements of our feedlot industry in Australia. It has, in a professional manner, responded to requirements for growth potential and humane requirements and it has achieved excellent results in this country. Feedlots have certainly become an important part of the cattle industry in this country. I hope that industry will learn something as a result of this tragic loss. I hope that rules are not forced onto the industry that will make it more difficult to operate. Feedlot staff, who virtually live with these cattle 24 hours a day, have responded to both health and hygiene requirements. I congratulate industry on its attitude and on its response to these continual changes. It is sad and unfortunate that 1,250 cattle were lost at Tabbita near Griffith. However, that is an exception rather than the rule. I support the motion for urgent consideration and in particular paragraph 4, which reads:
(4) calls on ARMCANZ, the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, to conduct an immediate review into the national feedlot guidelines with a view to preventing such a large amount of feedlot deaths from occurring again.
[Debate interrupted.]
Last modified 05/12/2007 16:30:39 : Update this page