FAQs

Ahead of and following the 2025 federal election, the Dutton-led Coalition has vowed to reverse the legislated ban on live sheep exports if they were to form government. This position is in direct opposition to the current Labor government’s policy.

Western Australia has historically been the main state involved in live sheep exports by sea. The Federal Government’s commitment to phase out this trade by 2028 is a direct response to overwhelming evidence of animal suffering inherent in these voyages and strong, widespread community support for a ban. This decision will naturally lead to changes and require adaptation within the WA sheep industry.

The government has announced a transition package specifically to support WA sheep producers and associated businesses as they move away from live exports. This funding is intended to help the industry develop and expand more humane and sustainable practices, with a key focus on increasing onshore meat processing. This transition presents a significant opportunity for Western Australia to:

• Strengthen its domestic processing sector: Building more capacity for processing meat within WA means animals do not have to endure the cruelty of live export.
• Create secure local jobs: Onshore processing and related industries can provide stable employment opportunities within the state.
• Add value to agricultural products locally: Finishing and processing products in WA retains more of the economic benefits within the community.

While some industry figures have voiced concerns about the economic adjustments [Source: ABC News, Sheep Central, Agriculture and Food WA], the phase-out is a necessary step to end animal cruelty. The transition package is designed to assist the WA sheep industry in navigating these changes and to foster a more resilient, ethical, and ultimately more sustainable agricultural future for the state, free from the animal welfare issues intrinsically linked to the live export trade. The focus is on a managed and supported shift towards better outcomes for animals and the WA economy.

Stop Live Exports, along with the majority of Australians (over 7 in 10), opposes live sheep exports primarily due to animal cruelty concerns. The inherent conditions of live export voyages – including overcrowding, extreme heat, rough seas, and prolonged stress – lead to poor welfare outcomes for sheep. Animals often suffer from heat stress, injuries, and disease, and upon arrival in many importing countries, they face slaughter practices that do not meet Australian welfare standards, such as throat-cutting while fully conscious. The RSPCA Australia and the Australian Veterinary Association recommend slaughtering sheep as close as possible to their point of production to minimise suffering.

The Federal Government has announced a transition package to support sheep producers and affected supply chains. Initially $107 million Source: ABC News, this package was later increased by an additional $32.7 million, bringing the total to $139.7 million Source: ABC News. This funding is intended to help the industry transition to more ethical and sustainable alternatives, such as chilled and frozen sheep meat exports, and to support community wellbeing.

Yes, there are strong and more ethical alternatives. Australia already has a significant and more valuable chilled and frozen sheep meat export market. Transitioning fully to this model would keep jobs in Australia, contribute more to the economy, and ensure sheep are slaughtered under Australian laws and welfare standards. Countries that have previously stopped importing live sheep from Australia, like Bahrain, have successfully transitioned to importing chilled meat.

No — Halal-certified meat processed in Australia is widely accepted and compliant with Islamic requirements.

Australia has around 70 government-accredited Halal-certified abattoirs, where slaughter is performed under the Australian Government Supervised Muslim Slaughter Program. This program ensures that trained Muslim slaughtermen, approved by importing countries, are present and that animals are slaughtered in full compliance with Islamic principles.

Importantly, many Islamic authorities globally now accept pre-slaughter stunning, including reversible electrical and mechanical stunning methods, which ensure the animal is alive at the time of slaughter — a key condition for Halal compliance.

The belief that only live animals can be Halal is increasingly outdated. In fact, multiple investigations in importing countries have shown that slaughter practices used on live-exported animals often violate core Halal principles, including:

• Killing animals in front of others

• Binding or mistreating animals before death

• Using improper tools and methods

• Failing to minimise suffering

Meat from animals slaughtered under regulated, certified Halal conditions in Australia is more reliably Halal than that from animals killed in unregulated or abusive settings overseas.

In summary: Halal meat doesn’t require live export — and many Middle Eastern markets already import Australian chilled and frozen Halal-certified meat with confidence.

Not necessarily — and Australia should never justify cruelty by pointing to worse practices elsewhere.

While other countries do export live animals, none offer the same volume, consistency, or reputation for quality as Australia. That’s why many importing countries have already transitioned to purchasing Australian chilled and frozen meat, which is reliably Halal-certified and comes with higher welfare assurances.

Australia’s participation in the trade doesn’t prevent cruelty — it legitimises it. By continuing to export live animals, we send a message to the world that such suffering is acceptable.

In reality, animals exported from Australia face some of the worst documented welfare outcomes. Voyages are long, stressful, and dangerous. Many Australian sheep are not well-suited to handling and transport due to limited human contact — making their suffering even more acute during loading, shipment, and slaughter.

Despite decades of attempted reform, systemic issues persist. From the thousands of sheep who died from heat stress in 2017 and 2018, to ongoing reports of brutal treatment abroad, it’s clear that no amount of regulation can make live export humane.

Ending Australia’s involvement sends a strong global message: we will not participate in or endorse a system built on routine suffering.

Yes, but we can still provide that protein via chilled meat exports only.

All of the Middle Eastern countries which import sheep from Australia are wealthy nations and every country we currently export live animals to, with the exception of Turkey and Israel, also imports chilled beef and/or sheep meat from Australia.

The live sheep export trade has been in decline for many years. For instance, WA’s live sheep exports by sea have been decreasing, and in 2024, more sheep were sold interstate from WA than were exported live Source: Agriculture and Food WA. Despite a predicted short-term surge in export volumes by Meat & Livestock Australia for 2025 and 2026 before the ban takes full effect Source: Selina Wamucii, the long-term trend and legislated end indicate a dying trade.

Supporters can continue to advocate for the upheld ban, support organisations like Stop Live Exports, and engage with their political representatives to ensure the transition package is effectively implemented and supports a shift to humane and sustainable agricultural practices. It’s also crucial to counter misinformation spread by those who profit from the trade and to highlight the economic and ethical benefits of a processed meat export industry.

Australia exports a range of livestock. The main animals exported include cattle (for beef and dairy), sheep, and goats. Additionally, Australia also exports smaller numbers of buffalo, camelids (like alpacas), and deer for various purposes including slaughter, breeding, and feeding Source: DAFF, Australian Livestock Exporters’ Council (ALEC).

While the live sheep export trade has been a major focus due to extreme cruelty and the recent government commitment to a phase-out, the concerns with live animal exports extend to all species, including cattle and goats. All animals subjected to live export endure stressful and often brutal conditions during long sea voyages, including overcrowding, exposure to extreme temperatures, and inadequate access to food and water. The fundamental cruelty of transporting animals thousands of kilometres to face uncertain handling and slaughter in importing countries is a concern regardless of the species.

The live cattle export industry often claims higher welfare standards, but this is misleading. Cattle still suffer immensely during live export. They endure long voyages, often in cramped and unnatural conditions, leading to stress, injury, and illness. Heat stress is a significant risk, especially on voyages to warmer climates. Furthermore, once they arrive in importing countries, Australian cattle can still face handling and slaughter methods that fall well below Australian community expectations and animal welfare standards. Incidents of cruelty involving exported cattle are regularly documented.

The key welfare issues are consistent across all live animal exports:

• Stress and suffering during transport: Long journeys by sea or air cause significant stress. Animals are often confined in crowded pens, unable to move freely or lie down comfortably. They can suffer from motion sickness, injuries from rough seas or transport, and exhaustion.
• Inadequate conditions on board: Despite regulations, conditions on live export vessels can be poor. Ventilation may be insufficient, leading to heat stress, and hygiene can be a major issue, increasing the risk of disease.
• Lack of control over slaughter: Once animals leave Australian shores, we lose control over their treatment. Many importing countries have no, or poorly enforced, animal welfare laws, meaning animals can be subjected to brutal slaughter methods that would be illegal in Australia.
• Disease risks: The transport of live animals over long distances can facilitate the spread of diseases, posing risks not only to the exported animals but also to animal populations in importing countries and potentially even human health.

The live export industry often exaggerates its economic importance. While it does generate export revenue, it represents a relatively small fraction of Australia’s overall agricultural sector and national economy. Moreover, the focus on live exports can undermine investment in more humane and potentially more lucrative onshore processing industries. Developing Australia’s capacity to process meat domestically would create more jobs in Australia, add value to our products, and eliminate the animal welfare concerns associated with live export. The economic arguments also fail to account for the ethical cost and the damage to Australia’s international reputation caused by repeated animal welfare scandals.

Despite regulations like the Australian Standards for the Export of Livestock (ASEL) and the Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System (ESCAS), systemic animal welfare problems persist. These regulations have repeatedly failed to prevent horrific suffering.

• Enforcement challenges: Monitoring and enforcing welfare standards on vessels in international waters and in numerous importing countries is incredibly difficult.
• ESCAS limitations: While ESCAS aims to ensure welfare standards in importing countries, breaches are common, and the system has been criticized for lacking transparency and robust enforcement. Animals often “leak” from approved supply chains into local markets where they face brutal treatment.

Acceptable losses: The industry still operates on a model that accepts a certain level of animal deaths during voyages as a normal part of business, which is ethically unacceptable.

No. A shipboard veterinarian may have responsibility for more than 60,000 animals on board.

Sick or moribund animals are not routinely euthanised. Most animals who die on live export ships are found dead in their pens – they are not euthanised before they reach this point.

For the 2400 sheep who died during one voyage aboard the Awassi Express in 2017 or the 4179 sheep who died in a “heat event” aboard the Bader III in 2013, they suffered horrendously prolonged deaths – not many, if any, were euthanised. For each sheep who finally died from heat stress, there were likely another 10 or more who suffered.

The presence of a vet has no impact on rough seas, crowding, temperature extremes, high ammonia levels from the build-up of urine and faecal matter, 24/7 fluoro lighting and constant noise from both the ship’s engines and the ventilator/extraction systems — all exacerbate the risk of illness and injury. Causes of death at sea include heat stress, inanition (failure to eat – essentially, starvation), salmonellosis, respiratory disease and traumatic injuries requiring euthanasia.

Up to 1% of every consignment of sheep and 0.5% of cattle can die at sea before a government investigation is even triggered. On a shipment of 60,000 sheep or 8,000 cattle, that’s 600 sheep and 40 cattle respectively.

From Australia alone, we estimate that over 20 million animals have perished at sea over the past 30 years, and countless tens of millions more suffered.

Public pressure is crucial. You can:

• Support organisations like Stop Live Exports and others campaigning against the trade.
• Contact your elected representatives (local, state, and federal) to voice your opposition to all live animal exports and demand stronger action.
• Educate others about the cruelty involved in the live export trade for all species.
• Make conscious consumer choices that support humane and local industries.
• Participate in peaceful protests and campaigns.