A prominent cattle industry figure says the $50,000 fine handed to the operators of a remote station over the deaths of 1,000 cattle “makes a mockery” of Western Australia’s animal welfare laws.
Key points:
- Mugarinya Community Association has been fined $50,000 over more than 1,000 cattle deaths at Yandeyarra
- A cattle industry figure says the penalty is not severe enough
- The department says the fine sends the appropriate message and won’t be appealed
The Mugarinya Community Association, which operates the Yandeyarra Reserve south of Port Hedland, was fined in the WA Magistrates Court last month in connection with the deaths at its station in 2019.
The charges brought centred on 86 of the animals, 68 of which had fallen and become stuck in the mud and 15 of which had to be euthanased.
All of the animals were suffering from a lack of food and water.
While magistrate Andrew Maughan highlighted the association’s acceptance of responsibility and guilty plea in his decision, Port Hedland businessman Paul Brown said the penalty sent the wrong message.
“It’s a pretty paltry fine for what is probably Australia’s biggest animal welfare disaster,” Mr Brown said.
“A $50,000 fine does not reflect the community standards and expectations put on the agricultural industry when it comes to animal welfare.”
The feedlot operator, who served one term for the WA Nationals in the Legislative Council, declined to nominate a specific penalty, but said penalties for a corporate-level animal welfare breach of this kind should be in “the millions” of dollars.
“If it happened at my feedlot in Port Hedland, at the saleyards or on a corporate farm, directors would be facing personal responsibility, liability and crippling fines,” Mr Brown said.
“The corporation would not be able to operate in livestock again.
“I think the fines, in this instance, make a mockery of the animal welfare system we have in place.”
Department says penalty appropriate
The Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development (DPIRD) oversees the enforcement of WA’s livestock welfare regulations.
Its director of operations and compliance, Bruno Mezzatesta, said the department did not see grounds for an appeal.
“I think the decision of the magistrate … is appropriate,” he said.
“It achieves what we are seeking to achieve when we go down the path of prosecution.”
Mr Mezzatesta said above and beyond the fine, the association had made significant undertakings to improve how it managed animal welfare.
It has also entered a deed of agreement with the department to repay nearly $500,000 of improvement made to infrastructure supporting the station’s animals.
That work included the installation of new bores, repairs to damaged ones, the provision of supplementary feed and the dispersion of cattle around the property to reduce pressure on individual water points.
“For the next two years, the community will be subject to the supervision of an independent livestock advisor,” he said.
“What we have got is a court-appointed order that will require the community to appoint an appropriate livestock adviser, and to provide a management plan to the satisfaction of the department.”
Live export comparisons not ‘useful’
The court’s decision comes in the wake of a separate decision to discontinue prosecution of Emmanuel Exports Awassi Express over the deaths of more than 2,000 sheep during a 2017 voyage.
Prosecutors cited a lack of public interest in continuing with the prosecution, a decision criticised by animal activist groups.
Mr Brown argued the deaths on the Awassi Express had caused “seismic change” within sheep and cattle live export, while the Yandeyarra disaster would have no lasting impact.
“The case wasn’t carried forward because there was no hope of prosecution; here we have a case that was wound down to base level,” he said.
“The decision says, ‘There was nothing to see here’. There was only a $50,000 fine and directors weren’t held responsible.
“If this was the livestock export industry, [animal welfare groups] would be out rattling their sabres and banging their donation tins to make sure the industry was crippled and never recovered.
“But here? Silence.”
But Mr Mezzatesta said the situations were not comparable.
“I don’t think it’s a useful thing to compare the live export industry, and these incidents on one station in the north of the state,” he said.
“Every incident turns on its own facts and circumstances, and they all operate under quite different regimes.”
Key stories of the day for Australian primary producers, delivered each weekday afternoon.
Posted , updated