How is the live export trade regulated in Australia?

The trade has been subject to multiple government and parliamentary reviews due to several major animal welfare incidents over the past two decades. Additional regulatory requirements have been imposed following these reviews, but these have failed to prevent ongoing suffering and deaths. The current regulatory framework governing live exports is outlined below.

The trade is regulated by the Export Control (Animals) Rules 2021 under the Export Control Act 2020 (EC Act), administered by the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF). In addition to these laws, the Commonwealth Navigation Act 2012 and state-based animal welfare legislation also play a role in the regulation of the trade.

The Export Control (Animals) Rules 2021 set out the rules for regulating the export of livestock, live animals or animal reproductive material. The rules require licence holders to comply with the Australian Standards for the Export of Livestock (Version 3.3) 2023 (ASEL), which are under review in 2026 (ASEL 4.0 review). The ASEL set out the minimum animal health and welfare standards exporters must meet throughout the export supply chain and cover the following stages:

• sourcing and preparation of livestock for export by sea
• land transport of livestock
• pre-embarkation management and assembly
• vessel preparation and loading of the vessel
• onboard management requirements
• air transport of livestock. 

The ASEL also impose reporting obligations on exporters. Exporters must notify DAFF if the mortality rate for livestock transported by sea exceeds 0.5% for cattle or 1% for sheep. The reportable mortality rate for sheep was reduced to 1% following the high-profile exposure of sheep suffering on-board live export vessels to the Middle East in 2018. Since 2006, there have been at least 70 occasions where the reportable mortality level has been exceeded. Exporters are required to have in place an ‘exporter supply chain assurance system’ (ESCAS). The ESCAS was recommended by the Farmer Review in 2011 following evidence of cruel animal handling and slaughter practices in Indonesia. The ESCAS requires exporters to have arrangements in place for the humane handling and slaughter of livestock in the importing country. It is designed to monitor the movement of livestock in importing countries to ensure the animals can be traced from export to slaughter. However, breaches of ESCAS occur frequently. Since 2012, there have been at least 182 reported breaches; it is not known how many go unreported. As part of the ESCAS, the exporter must submit an end of processing report and a performance audit report. It is very important to note that the ESCAS only covers animals destined for slaughter – it does not cover breeder animals, which includes exports of dairy cattle. The RSPCA has called for breeder animals to be covered under ESCAS. 

Since 2018, DAFF Independent Observers (departmental officers) have been required to be placed on board some live export vessels to monitor conditions of transport. The Independent Observer program was initiated by the Minister for Agriculture in response to footage showing unacceptable animal welfare outcomes and management onboard a sheep livestock carrier over several voyages. The Australian Government currently requires these departmental observers on live export vessels that meet one or more deployment criteria (Independent observers - DAFF). However, in reality, the Independent Observer oversight required is minimal – for example, in 2024, of the 252 voyages reported to Parliament, only five were accompanied by an Independent Observer. 

There are a range of possible sanctions available to DAFF for dealing with breaches of the ASEL and ESCAS under the Export Control Act 2020. These include criminal sanctions such as fines and imprisonment and administrative sanctions such as export licence suspensions or cancellation. In practice, however, DAFF rarely uses these regulatory mechanisms and will instead simply opt to impose further conditions on the offending exporter during future consignments.

The Navigation Act also plays a role in regulating the live export trade through the certification of live export vessels. The Navigation Act, through Marine Orders, Part 43: Cargo and Cargo Handling – Livestock, specifies requirements for animal pen sizes, passageways to enable inspection of animals, and the possession of humane destruction equipment. The Marine Orders also impose reporting obligations regarding mortality rates on the ship’s master.

Finally, as much of the live export process occurs within state jurisdictions, state-based animal welfare law also applies to the trade. The loading and transportation of unfit animals, as well as the inappropriate handling and treatment of animals during any stage of the live export process may be met with criminal prosecution under state welfare law.

Despite the comprehensive nature of the regulatory framework, there remain a number of fundamental concerns. These are outlined below:

1. It is not possible to ‘regulate out’ risks that are inherent to the trade. No amount of government regulation can overcome the inevitable welfare issues associated with the stress of prolonged transportation, changes in climatic conditions, and uncontrollable handling and slaughter practices in foreign jurisdictions.
2. There is no requirement for animals in foreign jurisdictions to be stunned before slaughter.
3. The regulatory framework is fundamentally reactive in nature. While the ESCAS is a welcomed improvement, it operates primarily to monitor and detect breaches, not to prevent them. Detecting cruelty after it has occurred is of little benefit to the animals affected.
4. The ASEL and ESCAS take the form of licence conditions rather than legislative provisions. This renders any requirement for compliance with the ASEL and ESCAS vulnerable to the discretion of relevant DAFF officers. A breach of the ASEL or ESCAS is not an offence in itself but a breach of a licence condition, which is ultimately left to DAFF to decide whether any action should be taken in response. If the ASEL or ESCAS were legislated, any breach would constitute an offence.
5. There are fundamental limitations to any effort by the Australian Government to control the conditions of animal handling and slaughter in foreign jurisdictions.
6. Accountability mechanisms, effected through the various reporting obligations under the ASEL and ESCAS, lack independence. Veterinarians operating under the ASEL and the independent auditors under the ESCAS are engaged and compensated directly by the exporter. The Farmer Review itself acknowledged incidents of undue influence being exerted by exporters over accredited vets but failed to recommend a change to the way their services are engaged.
7. Sanctions for breaches of the ASEL and ESCAS have to date been manifestly inadequate and have failed to act as a sufficient deterrent to neglecting animal welfare responsibilities. 

These problems are fundamental to the regulatory framework and demonstrate the futility of trying to ensure acceptable animal welfare standards within the live export trade. This is why RSPCA Australia’s policy is to oppose the live export of animals for slaughter.

On the 1 July 2024, the Australian Parliament passed legislation to end live sheep export by sea. The legislation was introduced as an amendment to the Export Control Act 2020, and sets an end date for the trade by 1 May 2028. This means that after 1 May 2028 it will be illegal to export live sheep by sea from Australia.