Veterinary Body Urges End to Mulesing, Groups Support

Humane World for Animals Australia

SYDNEY (August 11, 2026)—Australia's leading animal protection organisations have united to welcome the Australian Veterinary Association's (AVA) new policy that strongly advocates for the phase-out of mulesing (otherwise known as live lamb cutting), which would ultimately spare more than 10 million Australian lambs from the painful procedure each year.

Humane World for Animals Australia, FOUR PAWS Australia, Animals Australia and the Australian Alliance for Animals described the policy as one of the most significant animal welfare policy developments on the issue in recent years. Australia's peak veterinary body has called for a phase out of mulesing and recommended the Animal Welfare Task Group expedite the review of the Australian Animal Welfare Standards and Guidelines for Sheep, "particularly the chapters on mulesing and other surgical husbandry procedures", marking a major milestone in the national conversation on sheep welfare.

The AVA has recognised that the future of sheep welfare lies in transitioning away from live lamb cutting, by prioritising accelerated genetic selection for low-wrinkle sheep who are naturally resistant to flystrike. Its policy calls for collaboration between industry, veterinarians, and government extension officers to achieve the transition as quickly as possible. Humane World for Animals Australia's Program Manager for Animal Welfare, Georgie Dolphin, said the policy development represents a turning point for sheep welfare reform in Australia "Australia's peak veterinary body has made it clear: the future lies in breeding flystrike-resistant sheep, not cutting lambs," said Ms Dolphin.

Alliance for Animals Director of Policy, Dr Jed Goodfellow, called on the Federal Government and Agriculture Minister Julie Collins to act on the AVA's recommendations. "The need for an urgent review of the National Standards and Guidelines for Sheep to establish a practical phase-out timeframe could not be clearer," Dr Goodfellow said. "The industry has had over 20 years to agree to a pathway away from this archaic practice but is clearly incapable of doing so – it's time for governments to act." Animals Australia CEO, Glenys Oogjes said effective flystrike prevention was essential, but live lamb cutting is not, and never has been, an acceptable solution.

"Flystrike is a serious welfare risk in the Australian environment," said Ms Oogjes. "But routinely subjecting lambs to an extremely painful procedure is not the answer. Breeding sheep who are naturally resistant to flystrike provides a practical, permanent way forward. The AVA's policy underscores the growing expert consensus that genetic solutions provide the most effective and ethical long-term response to flystrike risk." FOUR PAWS Australia's Programs Lead, Louise Ward, said the AVA's position sends a powerful signal that Australia must move beyond this outdated, century-old practice.

"Australia is now the only country where live lamb cutting remains widely used as a primary flystrike prevention method, putting more than 10 million lambs through this torturous procedure every year," Ms Ward said. "The AVA's call for a phase-out shows that breeding flystrike-resistant sheep is the economically sustainable and welfare-focused path forward, that will bring Australia into the 21st century and into alignment with global expectations. It's time for the government to develop a national transition away from live lamb cutting." Ms Dolphin said the AVA's position reflects growing international market expectations for more ethical wool production as well as consumer demands for better animal welfare:

"Australian wool producers are increasingly hearing from global markets that demand for certified non-mulesed wool is growing and supply is not keeping pace. The Australian wool industry has an opportunity to demonstrate leadership by embracing the transition already being successfully undertaken by many farmers.

"At the same time, the Australian government has a responsibility to ensure one of our key export industries doesn't irrevocably suffer from divestment as we see a rapid increase in awareness about live lamb cutting worldwide and a growing demand for products that are ethical in origin. The government should follow the AVA's recommendations and accelerate reform of the national Sheep Standards and Guidelines and commence the review process without delay." The organisations have sent a joint letter to the federal and state agriculture ministers calling for an urgent review of the Australian Animal Welfare Standards and Guidelines for Sheep as a pathway to a mandatory national phase-out of live lamb cutting.

BACKGROUND

  • Approximately 10 million lambs undergo live lamb cutting in Australia every year.
  • The AVA's policy strongly advocates for an industry-wide, time-bound phase-out in the shortest possible timeframe.
  • The AVA's policy prioritises accelerated genetic selection for low-wrinkle sheep who are naturally resistant to flystrike.
  • The new policy brings alignment between veterinarians, animal protection organisations, and community expectations.
  • International demand for certified non-mulesed wool is growing, with demand currently exceeding supply.
  • 2026 independent report by Pegasus Economics 'The Economic Cost of Phasing Out Mulesing' shows Australian wool producers could be around $120 million better off over seven years by transitioning to low-wrinkle sheep that do not require live lamb cutting.
  • A 2020 report by BG Economics, 'Towards a Non-Mulesed Future', concluded that transitioning from live lamb cutting to flystrike-resistant sheep is achievable within three to five years using existing breeding technologies and management practices.
  • The organisations have sent a joint letter to the federal and state agriculture ministers calling for an urgent review of the Australian Animal Welfare Standards and Guidelines for Sheep as a pathway to a mandatory national phase-out of live lamb cutting.

NOTES

/Public Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).