News 
 National Rural News 
 Wool 
 General 
 AWI decision to drop deadline may worsen wool demand 

AWI decision to drop deadline may worsen wool demand

30 Jul, 2009 06:20 AM
AFTER a day of emergency mulesing negotiations, the question now is whether Australia's peak sheep research and development organistaion, in its haste to prevent further exodus of woolgrowers from the industry, may inadvertently have worsened the situation.

At an Australian Wool Innovation meeting last Friday, the group of nine directors agreed to acknowledge publicly that the 2010 mulesing "deadline" was unlikely to be reached and the continuation of a deadline approach would risk deterioration in welfare of sheep and production and supply of wool.

But just days after the announcement was made some woolgrowers worry that the plan may backfire at a time when growers need more market reassurance, not less.

Former AWI director Dr John Keniry, woolgrower at Cumnock, NSW, who has not mulesed the lambs from his 4500 ewe superfine ewe flock for the past two years said: "I am appalled by the decision.

"My view is it is up to the individual grower but there are an increasing number of lambs that are not being mulesed and that should be put out there."

As part of a AWI commissioned report on flock demographics and producer intentions undertaken by DAFWA in February, 24pc of Merino lambs will not be mulesed in 2009 (up from 2pc in 2005); 31pc of producers will not mules any lambs in 2009 (up from 23pc in 2008); 52pc of producers have a breeding strategy to source less wrinkled genetics and around 55pc of lambs were being treated with pain relief.

Dr Keniry, also chair of Sheep CRC, said such statistics should outline to AWI that many growers had kept to the original commitment to phase our mulesing.

But AWI directors, he said, appeared unwilling to face such facts.

Much of the international retail communiqué, announced yesterday, focused on the AWI decision as being damaging to future trade.

The British retail consortium, which represents 80pc of United Kingdom retailers, said AWI's move was not "good enough".

Director of business environment Jane Milne told ABC that her retailers were unlikely to buy wool from mulesed sheep after 2010.

"(We're) very disappointed and extremely concerned," she said.

"This is something that our customers raised with us as an issue."

Erik Autor, head of the National Retail Federation yesterday was reported as saying that "these options may include directing suppliers not to use wool from animals that have been mulesed, even with pain relief".

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Not 'may' worsen demand...it WILL worsen demand. Nero, sorry, Wally, Rome is burning. Are you happy now? The honourable thing for you to do would be to resign.
Posted by Sir George, 30/07/2009 1:40:46 PM
I'll have wool on the market in mid-October. Hopefully by then the buyers will have decided which way they are going to jump.

Personally I can't see the point in twiddling our thumbs for another 12 months.

Everyone knows the outcome of the search for an alternative to a mulesing and have done for quite some time. At least now everyone's cards on the table.

All the industry really needs is a clear signal. One way or the other.

Posted by Qlander, 30/07/2009 3:16:52 PM
Sir George, be careful about who is looking over your shoulder when you type...there are a lot of people in NFF house who are reading your remarks.

Are you sure you have the best interest of wool growers at heart, or is this your own political agenda?

Posted by ursprang, 30/07/2009 4:36:09 PM
Not even close urs...but keep the AWGA fires burning. Nine months AWGA have been in charge of AWI. They have done nothing. No marketing. No research. You might want to ask Wally the same question about best interest of woolgrowers (or stud breeders?)
Posted by Sir George, 30/07/2009 8:16:32 PM
Hopefully now my pure 22 micron Ile de France wool clip would gain in value. No need to be mulesed and maybe the French connection could add some panache to the marketing.
Posted by Jacob, 31/07/2009 12:51:56 AM
As a grower who ceased mulesing in 2007, I am appalled by AWI's lack of vision. WoolPoll 2009 can't come quick enough for me to vote these incompetent people out of business. Woolgrowers, for the future, vote 0.
Posted by Concerned, 31/07/2009 7:14:00 AM
OK, perhaps AWI has jumped the gun on the issue, but we have all known for a while that the R&D program wasn't going to get there in time.

How do we solve this problem without further tarnishing our reputation and destroying ourselves through our consistent squabbling? What the retailers need is a clear message that we are committed to solving this issue, that's the discussion we as wool growers should be having. What is it? A special levy to get the R&D finished, government assistance, a contribution from growers.

Also it's time the retailers showed us some clear price signals for unmulesed wool in the decrepit auction system.

My unmulesed clip could pay for an airseeder. I am getting sick of what we do to ourselves in the wool industry.

Posted by Mick, 31/07/2009 9:09:35 AM
Well, for a long time "Sir George" has been looking like a crusty old barnacle. But surely not even "Sir George" could be so dopey as to not know that it is in the best interests of stud breeders to have wealthy clients. Low wool prices does not = wealthy clients.

The current management of AWI has to date had a full time job cleaning up the mess bequeathed to them by the previous politically appointed management.

Today's blogs show beyond doubt that "Sir George" is indeed a stooge of PETA. No woolgrower could be that dopey! As for John Keniry, the rock that wool perished on was the WoolStock company with its bizarre political constitution and its politically appointed management.

John Keniry was a director in that politically appointed board. He has played his part in getting wool to where it is today.

The pre-emptive launching by AWI of the court case against PETA one way and another prevented the application of more effective measures against PETA. Now, five years too late, AWI is beginning to move in a more effective direction. Even those people who are worried by this should pull in behind the new management of AWI to give wool a united face in the marketplace.

Posted by Ted O'Brien, 31/07/2009 11:26:33 AM
I get the feeling that there is more in play here than just mulesing, as a stand alone issue.

It seems that there are ‘structural’ issues whereby the architects of the legislated ‘industry structure’ thought they had designed something which forever ensured their control, including controlling the politics and propaganda.

Losing control of this structure was not envisaged however, that is exactly what has happened and has been and is still a bitter pill to swallow for the establishment, and rightly so from their point of view, after all it was their design.

So it would seem that, even if the current board were successful in their endeavours, that the designers of the structure would go to the necessary lengths to undermine the current status-quo. What the establishment did not foresee, at the beginning, was that their numbers would dwindle to such an extent that their own voting system would bring them unstuck. Hence, restoration of the establishment can only be achieved through failure of the current board, regardless of whether that is a matter of fact or not.

Posted by Dr Bob, 31/07/2009 1:26:16 PM
Ted O’Brien, I have no intention of pulling behind you or Dr Bob in your stupidity and suspect many others will be as disinclined. You don't know your facts and are now putting out conspiracy theories. Do you really have a red under your bed? You should by thoroughly ashamed of your lies regarding Dr Keniry's board appointments. His last appointment was a unanimous appointment to the AWI board in April 2008 as result of an independent director search. That’s right he had appropriate boardroom skills. For all your huff and puff neither of you can recall one positive contribution your AASMB controlled board of AWI has achieved in their nine months – not one. What was achieved by AWI this week other than adverse press when it should have been a good news story about how well we are progressing towards 2010 and what a wonderful product we produce. What went wrong, that’s right the Nov 2008 AWI AGM when we were dragged back into the dark ages to satisfy inflated egos and protection of vested interests.
Posted by piece maker, 31/07/2009 5:38:42 PM
1 | 2 | 3  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Appalled ... Dr John Keniry
"Appalled" ... Dr John Keniry
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
POLL
Q: Has the Federal Government got the balance right between water buybacks and investment in more efficient irrigation infrastructure in the Murray Darling?

Yes
(3.8%)

No - there should be more investment in infrastructure
(73.8%)

No - there should be more emphasis on water buybacks
(13.7%)

Undecided
(8.7%)

Total Votes: 416
Poll Date: 26 July, 2009

Most popular articles




Queensland Country Life







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...