A controversial push to add a new category to the National Wool Declaration (NWD) form to recognise alternative methods to surgical mulesing has been abandoned - for the time being.
The NWD is a signed declaration by growers which informs exporters, processors and retailers about the mulesing status, as well as the dark and medullated fibre risk, of sale wool.
The Australian Wool Exchange began a review of the NWD in May, 2019, and initially advocated introducing two categories for non-mulesed wool.
AWEX proposed NM1 would cover mobs that hadn't been surgically mulesed and an alternative method to mulesing hadn't been used while a new category, NM2, would describe sheep that hadn't been mulesed but an alternative method to mulesing had been used.
After gaining little support for the move AWEX then proposed replacing NM2 with an AM category (alternative methods) to avoid any confusion with non-mulesed wool.
The push was largely seen as an attempt by AWEX to cater for Sheep Freeze Branding (SFB) on the NWD even though the new flystrike protection technology is still undergoing independent pain-assessment trials by Melbourne University.
SFB was developed over 10 years by Victorian veterinarian, Dr John Steinfort, who has now started the early commercialisation of the breech process through a joint venture partnership, AgVet Innovations (AVI), with AWN, a leading independent wool broker.
The process uses liquid nitrogen which freezes the skin quickly and results in a plainer breech.
AWEX has now conceded it jumped the gun on SFB and will wait another 12 months or when the results of the Melbourne University pain-assessement trials are available - whichever comes first - before conducting a further review.
That means the current definition of mulesing - the removal of skin from the breech and/or tail of a sheep using mulesing shears - will remain unchanged.
AWEX CEO Mark Grave said a highlight of the NWD review, the seventh since 2008, was the large number of submissions from overseas and downstream stakeholders.
The decision was welcomed by the peak grower body, WoolProducers Australia, and the developers of SFB.
WoolProducers CEO Jo Hall congratulated AWEX for taking a "common sense approach".
"For any organisation to make a decision at this point in time to change the non-mulesing definition would not only have been premature but also reckless as there simply was not enough information available to make an informed decision," she said.
"The current usage rates for SFB are very low and therefore the volume of SFB wool that may be declared through the NWD would be immaterial.
"If the SFB pain-assessment trials demonstrate an unreasonable level of pain is caused from this procedure, it is very unlikely there would be an uptake of SFB and therefore the confusion within the trade from an amended NWD will be for no reason," Ms Hall said.
"There is a long standing and accepted definition of mulesing in Australia and we had always maintained that if another procedure does not meet this definition then it should simply be defined as non-mulesed."
Similarly delighted was the general manager of AgVet Innovations, Stuart Blair, who said SFB was a transitional stepping-stone for growers wanting to stop mulesing while they continued to use genetics to breed sheep much less prone to flystrike.
As well, SFB gave growers a new tool to minimise the use of flystrike protection chemicals which were susceptible to blowfly resistance.
"We are looking forward to the results of the independent SFB trials being conducted by Melbourne University and further validation of this process as an ethical and effective tool to maintain breech health."
AWN chief operating officer, Rick Maybury, said AWEX had made the right decision.
"The recognition of wool from sheep who have not been mulesed as non-mulesed on the NWD ensures simplicity of the declaration process," he said.
"There is no doubt there is an increasing demand from consumers and therefore the supply chain for non-mulesed wool.
"The decision supports the development of new and existing novel technologies which provide growers with other options to manage their animals, such as SFB, while improvements in genetics continue to be made."