Right: Fly-strike is a condition that results after flies have laid eggs in the folds of skin on a sheep's rump. When maggots hatch, they eat the sheep's flesh, creating wounds which are always painful and which often cause death.
Arguments in favour of stopping mulesing immediately
1. The pain caused by mulesing constitutes cruelty to animals
Animal activists and others have repeatedly claimed that mulesing inflicts great pain on the animals treated in this manner. As such, mulesing has been condemned as cruel. Dr John Auty, a veterinarian with experience in the meat and sheep trade, has said of mulesing, 'It is similar to flaying and the pain will be experienced for weeks and months afterwards. Mulesing does not free the sheep from blowfly strike, but proper husbandry practices, including close inspection of sheep, will reduce and virtually eliminate flystrike.'
Studies have demonstrated that lambs show increased plasma cortisol and beta-endorphin levels after mulesing. Plasma cortisol and beta-endorphin are hormones produced in response to pain. Electroencephalogram (EEG) recordings from sheep undergoing various procedures such as castration, shearing, handling and mulesing have shown that mulesing provoked a similar response to that of inducing lameness by formalin injection. Animals have demonstrated aversion responses to the operators who have conducted the mulesing procedure, that is, they demonstrate an enduring fear reaction to the person who performed the procedure on them. Stress-related behaviour in mulesed lambs has been observed for up to 113 days after the procedure was performed.
2. The side effects of mulesing can be extremely injurious
It has been claimed that mulesing is not necessarily effective in preventing flystrike and further that this supposed 'treatment' carries with it a number of risks to the animals' health.
Many sheep are said to die as a result of flystrike actually promoted by mulesing. Unless the woolgrower is extremely careful flies will actually lay their eggs in the open wounds that result from mulesing. When this happens the maggot infestations that result cause pain and often death to animals that have already endured the pain of a procedure supposed to protect them. Research has shown that 7- to 9-day-old wounds, regardless of the wound treatment, were highly attractive egg laying sites for blowflies. Further, numbers of young sheep die through tetanus, blood loss, and stress as a result of mulesing.
There is also evidence that mulesing of lambs may increase the prevalence of arthritis. A case-control study conducted on groups of lambs from 122 Western Australian sheep flocks showed that mulesing and shearing lambs increased the odds of high prevalence of arthritis by 7 and 4.3 times respectively compared to unmarked and unshorn lambs.
The radical mules procedure removes more skin and leads to a shorter tail. A problem with the radical mules operation is that after the skin heals, extra stretching could occur at the sides of the vulva in female sheep. This causes it to be pulled partially open, exposing tender tissue to ultraviolet light and resulting in an increase in incidence of vulval cancer. As short tails were generally a feature of the radical mules operation, the remaining tail was not long enough to shade the vulva, exacerbating the cancer problem. As a result of these problems the radical mules procedure is no longer favoured. However, conventional mulesing, which leaves a longer stripped tail also has associated problems as the bare tail is highly susceptible to continuous sunburn. This can lead to skin cancer.
3. There are other means of controlling flystrike
Animal activists tend to stress better animal husbandry and different breeding practices as a solution to the mulesing problem.
Shearing the breech area of sheep, a procedure known as crutching, can help prevent flystrike. By removing the wool that is prone to contamination with faeces and urine, the incidence of blowfly attack can be reduced. Shearing and crutching, if timed correctly to coincide with the worst periods of blowfly activity, can reduce the likelihood of flystrike.
There has also been effective work done to breed types of Merino that are less susceptible to flystrike. There is considerable evidence that some sheep have an increased genetic resistance to flystrike. Genetic variation has been observed between, and within, different Merino strains and bloodlines in their resistance to fly strike. This is brought about by variation in the fleece and skin characteristics and in the immune system. These factors influence the effect of moisture and pathogens in the development of fleece rot and body strike. With modern molecular biology techniques, research is focussed on finding the genes responsible for improved resistance to flystrike. Producers are encouraged to exclude or cull flystrike affected animals from the breeding flock and select on the basis of resistance to fleece rot.
There are also strains of Merino with bare breeches and different skin and wool properties that again far less likely to suffer from flystrike. An Australian company, SRS, is developing a strain of Merino that does not need mulesing, tail docking or crutching. The breeding system used by the company is based on selection of animals for high levels of fibre density and fibre length. According to the Managing Director of the company, Dr Jim Watts, sheep with these traits are plain-bodied and have thin, loose skins that are completely free of skin wrinkle. The company claims that several of their Merino flocks are producing a considerable number of ewes and rams with wool-less breeches.
There has also been extensive research into a variety of chemical means of permanently removing wool and skin from the sheep's breech. One method, known as 'Skintraction' uses a chemical common in domestic shampoo and similar to that used in the treatment of varicose veins in human medicine.
A recent University study has shown that once inside a layer of skin, the active ingredient immediately destroys nerve bundles. It rapidly and painlessly pulls apart the protein structure that makes up the skin, nerves and blood vessels in the local area around the treated site. Research over the last two years has indicated that the active constituent effectively causes skin death around the selected area, without spreading into adjacent areas. Like a graze on human skin, the new layer grows, but, in this case, the skin area contracts. That stretches the neighbouring area of skin as occurs with conventional mulesing, but without discomfort to the animal.
This research presents an alternative to surgical mulesing which has the potential to deliver a distress-free, practical and safe modified mules for less than $1 a head, according to its developers.
4. Some farmers are already adopting alternatives to mulesing
Currently 11.5% of Australia's national wool clip comes from sheep that have not been mulesed. A small group of woolgrowers have looked to genetic selection as a way of ending the need for mulesing. These woolgrowers began this practice four years ago, after United States animal rights activists, including PETA, started targeting farmers who mulesed.
The woolgrowers who have stopped mulesing use a multi-purpose merino sheep bred for less wrinkly rears that are not as susceptible to the ravages of blowflies.
Victorian woolgrower, Ben Duxon, has stated, 'To us, the issue is dead and buried because we know there is an industry out there that can survive without mulesing ... It's hard because the industry has been so reliant on mulesing for so long, but we just have to get on the front foot and supply what they demand over there.'
5. Some major consumers will cease to buy Australian wool if mulesing continues
There is large scale commercial pressure on Australian woolgrowers to cease mulesing. A number of major wool buyers have indicated they will cease to purchase the Australian product if mulesing continues.
About 50 European retailers, including Swedish giant H&M, have indicated that they will not purchase Australian wool while mulesing is practised. The same policy is being adopted by US chains Timberland and Abercrombie & Fitch.
In the wake of what appears to have been an attempt to bribe a animal activist with a free trip to Australia apparently made by a representative of Australian Wool Innovations, nineteen large clothing retailers in Sweden are banning Australian Wool products and the Swedish Minister for Agriculture, Eskil Erlandsson, urged consumers to boycott it. He has also indicated he intends to raise the issue with the European Union Commission.
On March 28, 2008, it was announced that a major British clothing retailer, Matalan, had joined the growing international corporate boycott of Australian wool.
Matalan's technical and corporate purchasing director, David Mellett, stated, '(We have) instructed our suppliers that they must not source Australian merino wool for any future orders (and) we will now include this as part of our auditing process.'
Australia's wool exports to the European Union are currently worth some $370 million annually.
The problem also exists among other overseas markets for Australian wool. The chief executive of Australian Wool Innovations, Craig Welsh, has stated, 'The manufacturers and retailers who I have been meeting throughout India, Hong Kong and China are saying that they need confidence from the Australian wool industry that surgical mulesing will be phased out by 2010.
The fact is that the Australian wool industry is facing increasing retailer and consumer demand for wool from non-mulesed Merino sheep.'
The effect of this consumer pressure is that many woolgrowers are now of the view that mulesing that must be stopped immediately because of the damage the practice is doing to Australia's wool markets. The New South Wales Farmers Association has called for an immediate end to mulesing to stave off threatened boycotts of Australian wool by 60 foreign retailers. The NSW Farmers' Association president, Jock Laurie, has stated, 'When we're in a situation where we've got overseas companies banning purchasing wool from mulesed sheep or banning purchasing wool from people that are still mulesing, then we have got a major problem with the wool market. And that we cannot afford at the moment.' Further the West Australian Department of Agriculture has announced it would end mulesing on its research stations by early April, 2008.