Someone for the love of heaven tell me this is an April Fool's joke. A British newspaper is reporting that a supermarket chain has told New Zealand famers they can't use sheepdogs anymore because it stresses the sheep.
Tesco has told farmers, who supply the supermarket giant with lamb, to stop using the dogs unless they can be retrained to be "more considerate" towards the flock.
The shepherds have reacted with outrage, and claimed up to 60 dogs have now joined the ranks of the unemployed.
Welfare experts expressed bafflement that the centuries-old tradition of moving sheep around with the use of a scurrying, yapping dog could upset the sheep.
However, Tesco was adamant that one of its largest suppliers in New Zealand, Silver Fern Farms in Fairton, should stop using dogs to herd sheep into the abattoir.
Unlike in Britain, most abattoirs are attached to farms in New Zealand, ensuring the farm does not need to truck its flock down the motorway to a slaughterhouse.
The supermarket wants the shepherds to wave their arms, beat sticks or wave flags, to move the sheep into the abattoir.
The surprise order from Tesco, which comes into force next week, came to light thanks to a letter sent to the Daily Telegraph by an upset reader.
Mick Petheram, one of the shepherds, said: "New Zealand sheep are used to dogs, they know dogs. There's more stress in a human herding and manhandling them, waving their arms and beating sticks. Dogs are part of a sheep's life. This is absolute baloney."
Ya think?
Read it here, via Rocketdog. And although normally I don't like to get a story wrong, in this case, I'd welcome it. Anyone? Please?
Anne, have you ever been a participant in an event that was reported on in the news media? The resemblance is sometimes--tenuous.
And the reporters writing the stories for the Telegraph and the Ashburton Guardian are apparently among the people who were not present for the events the Tesco people were reacting to.
We really, really don't know what happened. What we know is that, despite the headline in the Telegraph, the Tesco people have actually objected to dogs only at one supplier, and despite the claims in the Ashburton Guardian, if NZ farmers kill their dogs, especially their young and not-yet-trained dogs, on the grounds that "these dogs can't do anything else", it's not Tesco that's responsible for the dogs' deaths.
Posted by: Lis | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
"The assumption that the Tesco people have no idea what normal behavior of herding dogs is, is based on…no supporting evidence that I can see.
The Tesco people are, apparently, Brits. It does seem not totally beyond the bounds of probability that they have seen dogs working sheep before, especially if they are interested enough in conditions at their suppliers to send people to NZ to visit."
Perfectly true Lis. Since neither of us were on prem to watch whatever event upset the Tesco buyers, nor have any idea of their knowledge of working dogs, I suppose our speculations is kinda moot.
I am just basing my opinion on my own experience with dogs, sheep and people who know less than I do about dogs and sheep, and I don't know a whole hell of a lot, no longer owning sheep or a working stock dog. However, I have had some experience to varying degrees with all 3 species, leading me to the probably erroneous conclusion that people can be a lot dumber than sheep or dogs especially about things they really know nothing about, like dogs and sheep. So I am being judgmental about people because I am biased toward dogs and sheep.
Posted by: Anne T | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
I'm not positive what the edits are, I just saw the "edited" note on the piece!
Posted by: Christie Keith | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Another New Zealand article here - http://www.ashburtonguardian.co.nz/index.asp?articleid=12716
Tesco is well known for making outrageous demands from suppliers here in the UK but I'm surprised they dare try this in another country.
Recently they have had a lot of negative publicity for selling whole chickens for £1.99 - roughly $2.95 - each. They argued that they couldn't afford to increase chicken welfare because their customers depended on being able to buy cheap chicken during the credit crunch.
Apparently now lamb welfare is important but chicken welfare isn't!
Posted by: Kimba | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Whoa, boy... so the killing of the sheep is fine... but the herding with dogs is inhumane.
Uh-huh.
I eat meat, by the way - and own two (mostly) herding dogs.
I suggest taking a look at Terrierman's site where he has an unbelievable link to extreme sheep herding done by some talented sheep herders, even more talented dogs, and some OBVIOUSLY unstressed sheep.
Here I thought I heard it all... doth I smell a whiff of the PETA?
Posted by: Kim | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
::Sound of jaw hitting floor::
Posted by: Susan Fox | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
The story is presented as if Tesco had demanded a complete end to the use of dogs from all its suppliers, but a couple of tiny tidbits near the end of the article indicate that in fact Tesco has demanded this of one supplier, based on things they saw at the site.
The assumption that the Tesco people have no idea what normal behavior of herding dogs is, is based on...no supporting evidence that I can see.
The Tesco people are, apparently, Brits. It does seem not totally beyond the bounds of probability that they have seen dogs working sheep before, especially if they are interested enough in conditions at their suppliers to send people to NZ to visit.
And Kimba, while it's not right that the welfare of lambs should be of more importance to them than the welfare of chickens, it doesn't take a huge leap of the imagination to envision the Tesco people reacting in exactly that way.
I'm not saying that the Tesco people are necessarily correct. They might even be insane. But one Telegraph article that originally apparently left out crucial quotes, and an NZ article with the completely dispassionate title "Death Row for Dogs" and the lead sentence, "An English supermarket giant has put more than 60 dogs at Silver Fern Farms Fairton works on death row and has placed their owners’ jobs in jeopardy" is not compelling evidence.
Another sentence: "Younger dogs still in training would almost certainly end up being put down and dwindling sheep numbers meant there would be only a limited number of farmers looking to add to their dog teams, he said." You know, I can barely imagine, if I force myself, that older, experienced sheep dogs might be so set in their ways that they can't be retired or retrained to do something else, and then rehomed. But young dogs still being trained? Is that plausible? If those dogs are killed, it's not Tesco's doing, even if they ARE completely off-base, driven totally insane by "political correctness" as claimed by the NZ article.
Posted by: Lis | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
It's not an April Fool. I live in rural NZ, and the local Freezing Works has definately had to stop using sheep.
I'm not sure of the point though, since, although there is an attached farm, by far the majority of sheep would be bought in from elsewhere to be slaughtered. So the sheep would be used to dogs, and then freaked out by men when they arrived.
Stupid !
Posted by: Alison Woolley | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Make that sheep*DOGS* !
Obviously not enough caffine in the system yet.
Posted by: Alison Woolley | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
From SilverFern Farms "About Us" page at http://www.silverfernfarms.co.nz/about/ :
As a New Zealand company operating on the global stage, we provide literally hundreds of products into differing market segments, each produced and packaged to fulfill the requirements of the end consumer. Specifications may include producing goods packaged and labelled specifically to satisfy a particular market, or further processing a cut of meat to the exact requirements of the customer. Often it’s not as straightforward as it might seem. There are market requirements associated with cultural sensitivities, for example, which can result in a customer needing the attentive service Silver Fern Farms offers.
They call it "attentive service". The question is, how well-informed is that "attentive service"?
Posted by: The OTHER Pat | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Okay, just askin', how would a supermarket buyer know if dogs "were running riot" or not or moving sheep to slaughter in a "considerate manner?" Some breeds of sheep 'flock' better than others. For instance, Border cheviot tend to move as one big amoeba and Romney tend to move in a much looser formation. The latter make for more work on the dogs' and shepherds' part.
The whole thing sounds bogus to me. Herding a flock to slaughter with humans is less stressful than using dogs?! "Here little freaked out sheepie who has been out on pasture all your life and had little contact with people, let me gently and considerately introduce you to the knacker." If this be true, Tesco has been drinkin' too much of Ingrid Newjerk's koolaid.
Posted by: Anne T | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
What was the edit?
Posted by: The OTHER Pat | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Might it be the addition of the bits I quoted above?
Posted by: Lis | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Like I said, normally I want to stand by my reporting, but I'd like to be wrong wrong wrong here.
The Telegraph article has been edited since I last saw it! Weirdness, eh?
Posted by: Christie Keith | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
This has to be a joke, or another PEtA ploy. As far as the sheep are concerned, if I were them it would take more than a few dogs to get me into the slaughter house. Mom went in and didn`t come out.
A mere man may be trampled if he tries getting the sheep in there. Sheep of the world unite.
LOL
Posted by: Heather | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Anne- Yes, I've seen the LED sheep video. What a hoot and a great example of viral marketing. Free global distribution for Samsung. Such a deal.
If the Tesco NZ nonsense isn't a prank, it sounds like some city idiot who thinks.....no wait, there doesn't seem to have been any thinking at all going on here.
Posted by: Susan Fox | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
The Samsung ad "Extreme LED Sheep Art", Susan? That's all over the webs and so it should be. It's awesome!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDAM5lSPCwk
I suspect this is a belated April Fool's joke and so far the Telegraph article is the only source for it. Silver Fern Farms is a huge meat producing cooperative in N.Z. with over 9,000 farmer supplier members according to the SFF website, and their meat products go all over the United Kingdom. Since the production of lamb, venison, beef, and wool are a huge part of the N.Z. economy, I can see where this would make great fodder for pranking.
Posted by: Anne T | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
The Telegraph article, if you read all the way to the end, indicates that Tesco's concern is with these particular dogs on this particular operation, based on what Tesco representatives witnessed.
It was visited by Tesco buyers earlier this year, who were "upset" at seeing the dogs "running riot", according to a spokesman for the supermarket.
And
Tesco stood by its decision. "We don't have a problem with sheep dogs, but we need to make sure they move the sheep in a considerate manner, so they don't stress the sheep out," said a spokesman.
I'd like to shepherds from the UK pay a surprise visit to Silver Fern Farms before deciding that this is really as insane as it superficially seems. There might be a real concern with how the dogs and the sheep are being handled.
Posted by: Lis | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Flexing my Google-fu, I've found a few other articles on it, including these two:
The New Zealand Herald, back in late February: Grim job outlook for Kiwi sheepdogs.
Straight Furrow, back in mid-March: Unemployed dogs mean more employed people.
Basically the same story: Silver Fern Farms, which I gather is NZ's largest meat company, is phasing out sheepdogs in response to a very large customer's request for 'stress-free sheep.' Their website doesn't mention it, though, and neither does Tesco's. (I also ran across mentions that Tesco sponsored sheepdog trials, at least as of last year.)
So, to avoid stressing the sheep with close proximity to predators, they'll be ... herded by people. Yep, that sure makes sense. Chomp.
Posted by: Eucritta | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
I don't know, but apparently the guys who run a supermarket chain in another country do.
Posted by: Christie Keith | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
How are men waving their arms and carrying on in anyway different than a sheepdog doing the exact canine equivalent?
Posted by: Pai | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Think about something like this being ordered in the US where I'm a "radical animal rightist" because I think a hen should have enough room to turn around in its cage and that geese shouldn't be force fed grain.
Posted by: 2CatMom | 03 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
I should maybe have said "new to organized sf fandom."
Posted by: Lis | 04 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Very true! In recent years, a fair percentage of the requests for press passes have been from people who were clearly hoping they could score a twofer, enjoy the convention and then get paid for writing about it! Many of them are new to fandom, but eager to get acquainted with us.
And my own group in the last few years has benefited from having a newer, younger member who Speaks Press Release, so that we're sending out press releases that actually convey the messages we're trying to convey. So we don't sound like freaks. :)
Posted by: Lis | 04 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Not to mention: A lot of the younger reporters are SciFi fans themselves, so they certainly wouldn't see the culture as freaks. :)
Posted by: Gina Spadafori | 04 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Gina, I know that your profession has done wonderful things--and also, sadly, that when a reporter is reporting on something they have no prior experience with, they don't always ask the right questions, or enough questions. Just consider the fact that the mainstream media still consider PETA to be the go-to source for animal welfare issues!
And, sadly, there are some really bad reporters out there. Twenty years ago, the World Science Fiction Convention came to Boston, and a local tv reporter wanted to bring a camera crew and do a story. Of course we said yes, and we worked with them to make sure that they had BOTH good interviews with major names in the field and knowledgeable fans, AND good images to use because, after all, this was tv and they needed the images. They saw the hall costumes, the masquerade, the dealers' room; they talked to writers and editors and artists and fans; they saw the autograph sessions and the fact that the big names in our field don't charge for signatures.
And the night of the Hugo Awards ceremony, while we were all dressing and getting ready, and had the tvs on in our rooms, the piece they'd made of all that work came on.
It was a "look at the freaks" piece. It was mocking, insulting--it ridiculed the girls in the Princess Leia costumes, focusing one girl in particular who spent most of the weekend in a wheelchair (but not showing or mentioning that), the guy in the Vincent costume, without noting the skill and labor necessary to reproduce that costume and makeup so well. It denigrated the writers for having completely mercenary motives for being there--and then mocked them for being too stupid to charge for their autographs, like sports stars do.
It was a nasty, nasty piece of work, and it wasn't because we didn't cooperate with that reporter, welcome him, and try to give him everything he needed.
And when I see a story that doesn't seem to make sense as presented, and there are a few tidbits of contradictory information, yes, sorry, I question the reporting.
(Footnote: Because what happened at the 1989 Worldcon was not by any means a unique experience for science fiction fandom, I was for many years one of the few voices insisting that, yes, we did have to continue working with the news media when we could, trying to help reporters who were interested enough to ask for passes get acquainted with our subculture and see us as something other than colorful freaks. Finally, the tide seems to have turned, and the willingness to work with reporters seems to have increased a lot over the last ten years.)
Posted by: Lis | 04 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Oops! Gina, you can interview me anytime about hand spinning and weaving because I know you'll get it right without making it cutey and condescending! Wish I could say the same for my local press.
Posted by: Anne T | 04 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Hello ... hello ... media here ...
It's extremely fashionable to bash the media -- and I certainly indulge in some media criticism myself now and then -- but I am certainly not comfortable with these blanket statements of media incompetence.
Because that kind of thing would include ... oh ... me! And because I know a lot of reporters and editors, and I know how very hard they work to get the story right.
Posted by: Gina Spadafori | 04 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Yes, I have Lis had the misfortune of taking part in more than one event reported by the media, and tenuous doesn't even begin to describe it!
As for killing young dogs who don't make the "cut", don't have the proper eye, clapping or barking instincts or are too into biting, I don't support that either. As you say, those dogs could find other jobs they would be better suited for. Killing them seems such a waste. But then we are talking about a sheep herding experience/culture I don't pretend to understand, any more than I can understand the Amish raising dogs like chickens in the canine equivalent of battery cages, or the keeping of laying hens in battery cages to begin with, or packing cattle like sardines in feedlots. That whole approach to viewing other life forms as being basically disposable is beyond my ken.
Posted by: Anne T | 04 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
Typical crap journalism- as a US expat living in NZ, I find the quality of journalism in the NZ Herald is so low,it's quite painful to read. It's really frustrating.
Posted by: Margaret | 05 April 2009 at 08:00 PM
just a thought wouldnt hearding on foot by a person or what ever they suggest cause more stress as it would take alot longer? sheep have to be moved some how and however you do it it is going to cause some amount of stress as by frightening them in a controlled manour is what makes them move but a dog can do that quickley and effectivley reducing the amount of stress and that is why they have been used for hundreds of years as its the best and most effective way......have the sheep of today become scitzofrenic? and need to be treated diffrent to the billions of sheep that have been farmed over the centurys?
Posted by: jenny | 07 April 2009 at 08:00 PM