Judge rules in favour of 'inhumane' exporter

A judge has ruled in favour of a livestock exporter over claims of cruelty in the movement of animals from East London to Mauritius. Animal rights activists brought a charge against the exporter who was moving 3 500 head of cattle, goats and sheep for export from East London to Mauritius. They were protesting against “inhumane” livestock exports. “The animals become ill and lethargic, seasick and some often end up with broken legs,” said Marcelle Meredith of the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (NSPCA). This as she quoted from a petition against the trade to the department of agriculture, fisheries and forestry, according to BDLive. Nobody, including the exporters, could disagree that any of these things could happen. But, as exporters point out, they comply with welfare standards that are laid down, and having a low injury/death count is good for business. SA law allows transport of live animals by sea, but exporters must obtain a health certificate from the government. There is also the alternative of transporting meat rather than live animals. But, in the Mauritius case, the Muslim customers wanted live animals to slaughter for halaal meat. As do a lot of other not-necessarily-Muslim customers who want live animals to slaughter locally so they can supply fresh meat rather than frozen. CAPTION Inhumane? Exporters claim they comply with welfare standards.