Sheep are still mulesed, 20 years after a call to stop the practice

Two decades after the wool industry made a commitment to stop mulesing, much of the industry still says its necessary and almost 60 per cent of producers still do it.

The case to continue to mules sheep is not clear cut, even within the sheep industry – and two decades after a self-imposed deadline to cease mulesing, the practice is still widespread.

Mulesing, which involves cutting an area of skin from the rear end of sheep to prevent flystrike, has long attracted attention from animal welfare groups.

The wool industry first agreed in 2004 to cease mulesing by 2010. That deadline was dumped in 2009 – and little has changed in the intervening years, with the latest wool testing figures showing just 21 per cent of the national clip came from non-mulesed sheep last season.

The ban was never going to be an easy sell, such was mulesing’s perceived reputation as necessary to wool production.

As the 2010 deadline approached, so did the increase in lobbying from growers for that decision to be abandoned, saying there were no alternatives to prevent flystrike.

As the end loomed, the then-Australian Wool Innovation chairman Brian Van Rooyen said the industry was “doomed” if it did not meet its promise.

The sheep industry continues to mules lambs, with only about 21 per cent of wool coming from sheep declared non-mulesed.

“There are retailers and brands that are responsible for putting wool on the shelves of major retailers and all have indicated that the industry must meet its commitment (to stop mulesing),” Mr Van Rooyen said in 2008.

Despite the warning, mulesing continues. It’s hard to gauge how it’s affected the wool market, with global economic factors blamed for the current downturn on prices.

But animal welfare experts warn the writing is on the wall when it comes to demand for a fibre that targets the top end of consumers and is a discretionary spend.

Wool Producers Australia chief executive officer Jo Hall.

WoolProducers Australia chief executive Jo Hall said the best tool to drive practice change were market forces, but there were no significant premiums for non-mulesed wool.

“What would greatly assist growers is clear and transparent reporting of market sentiments which is simply not happening, and it is incumbent on AWI/Woolmark to start doing this” Ms Hall said.

“Releasing (AWI) reports to growers saying that mulesing is a ‘mid-tier priority’ when nearly 50 per cent of our customers identify mulesing as an issue is not helpful to wool growers or the industry.”

That lack of information transparency could be part of the reason the percentage of producers that mules their sheep has risen from 52 per cent in 2022 to 57.7 per cent in 2024 according to figures given in this year’s Sheep Sustainability Framework report.

It’s in stark contrast to another of the world’s biggest wool producers, South Africa, which has responded to demand for ethically and humanely produced wool.

Mercardo analyst Andrew Wood said Merino wool from South Africa had been able to differentiate from the Australian clip “by not being from mulesed sheep”, as well as carrying Responsible Wool Standard accreditation.

That differentiation had resulted into a consistent premium, Mr Wood said, with the caveat that export costs from South Africa were lower.

The non-mulesed decision is not a road that the Australian wool industry has pursued on an industry-wide basis and Ms Hall maintains there was not enough time between the initial call to end mulesing in 2004, and the proposed ban coming into place.

She said significant money had been spent on finding alternatives over the past 20 years which had not lead to a method with wide acceptance.

“We know that there are growers who have very successfully transitioned away from mulesing through genetics, but at this point that is not a practical solution for all growers as genetics are a commercial decision,” she said.

Animal welfare groups say its possible to breed sheep that don’t need mulesing.

The animal welfare lobby disagrees. It launched a 54-page report last month ‘The Broken Promise’ to note the 20-year anniversary of the call to end mulesing, and renamed mulesing “live lamb cutting”.

The report asked the federal government to introduce a phase-out of live lamb cutting by 2030 and suggested genetics was the way forward.

Four Paws Australia programs lead Louise Ward is blunt in her assessment of how industry failed to meet its own deadline.

“The sector failed to achieve the promised phase out because, quite simply, it failed to act.” Ms Ward said.

“The wool industry is not taking animal welfare seriously, and clearly does not fully understand that most major fashion brands have made commitments to end the use of live lamb cutting (mulesed) wool by 2025-2030.”

Ms Ward said it had now been 20 years of broken promises for the wool industry.

“With over 330 brands now sourcing at least a portion of their wool as certified live lamb cut free (non-mulesed) or having made a time bound commitment to do so, the public sentiment is clear,” she said.

“Thousands of wool producers have successfully transitioned away from (mulesing) in Australia, so the time has come for all wool growers to transition, especially as brands are increasingly making commitments to end their use of live lamb cut sheep wool.”