Editing Mulesing (section)

==Alternatives==

=== Freeze branding ===
{{Main|Freeze brand}}
[[File:Lamb undergoing steining as a replacement for mulesing in Dubbo, NSW.jpg|thumb|Steining being undertaken in Dubbo, 2022]]
In response to intense consumer pressure for an alternative to mulesing an adaptation of the [[freeze branding]] branding process was hit upon in the 2010s.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2019-03-10 |title=Liquid nitrogen launched as sheep-friendly alternative to mulesing |language=en-AU |work=ABC News |url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2019-03-11/liquid-nitrogen-mulesing-alternative/10878280 |access-date=2022-09-13}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=2019-08-31 |title=Wool growers turn to freezing as retailers go cold on surgical mulesing |language=en-AU |work=ABC News |url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-01/freezing-alternative-to-mulesing-winning-over-wool-growers/11465632 |access-date=2022-09-13}}</ref> The new technique was soon christened ''steining'' after its developer, John Steinfort, an Australian veterinary scientist. In 2019 Australian Wool Network (AWN), a private corporation servicing the Australian wool industry, provided Steinfort funding to commercialize the technique.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |date=2021-03-25 |title=Freeze brand given back. |url=https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&issn=&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA656113285&sid=googleScholar&linkaccess=abs |journal=The Land (North Richmond, Australia) |language=English |pages=77}}</ref>

During ''steining'' a set of clamping jaws designed by Steinfort is used to pinch up rolls of skin near the tail and anus of a lamb.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=Jongman |first=Ellen |date=December 2, 2020 |title=New developments in breech modifications of sheep for the prevention of flystrike |url=https://www.awstrategy.net/uploads/1/2/3/2/123202832/9_jongman_nawrdes_forum_20.pdf |access-date=September 12, 2022}}</ref> Once sufficient skin is in the clamps liquid nitrogen is pumped through the jaws and onto the pinched skin. This rapidly freezes the lamb's skin. The goal is to achieve the level of cellular injury that prevents future hair growth but not so much that a 3rd degree cold burn is created. Pinching the skin is thought to mitigate the degree of the cold burn by removing it somewhat from the muscles and connective tissue beneath. The treated skin goes through the same stages of healing seen in the long method of freeze branding, terminating with permanent hairlessness. Studies show this method is at least as good at preventing flystrike as mulesing and carries few long-term consequences for the lamb's later growth and wool production.

Steinfort and others invested in the process have claimed it is less painful and distressing to the animals on which it is practiced.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Steinfort AgVet {{!}} SFB |url=https://steinfortagvet.com.au/sfb/ |access-date=2022-09-13}}</ref> They argue that affected nerve endings are immediately numbed and that sensation does not return during healing, when a scab forms and is eventually sloughed in 6 to 8 weeks. A 2018 study found behavioral markers indicating pain and distress in lambs who had been steined without analgesic treatment compared to those who had been given analgesics.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Small |first1=Alison Holdhus |last2=Marini |first2=Danila |last3=le Floch |first3=Maxime |last4=Paull |first4=David |last5=Lee |first5=Caroline |date=June 2018 |title=A pen study evaluation of buccal meloxicam and topical anaesthetic at improving welfare of lambs undergoing surgical mulesing and hot knife tail docking |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rvsc.2018.02.011 |journal=Research in Veterinary Science |volume=118 |pages=270–277 |doi=10.1016/j.rvsc.2018.02.011 |pmid=29539592 |s2cid=4915055 |issn=0034-5288|url-access=subscription }}</ref> In 2020 a University of Melbourne researcher named Ellen Jongman was commissioned to study the issue by the company Steinfort formed to commercialize his technique, SteinfortAgVet. The name of Steinfort's company subsequently changed to AgVetInnovations.<ref name=":1" /> On December 22, 2020 Jongman released preliminary results from her study on the relative pain of mulesing and steining.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Sim |first=Terry |date=2021-03-19 |title=Research finds sheep freeze branding is painful for lambs |url=https://www.sheepcentral.com/research-finds-sheep-freeze-branding-is-painful-for-lambs/ |access-date=2022-09-13 |website=Sheep Central |language=en-US}}</ref><ref name=":1" />

Jongman found that mulesing and steining were equally painful on the day of the procedure but that steined lambs appeared to be in less pain than mulesed lambs on subsequent days.<ref name=":1" /> Her study tracked and interpreted a series of lamb behaviors like the speed at which it returned to its mother after undergoing either mulesing or steining. She called for further research using physiological data such heart rate and blood sampling in addition to behavioral observations.<ref name=":1" /> Jongman's final report was released on January 25, 2021.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Fisher |first1=AD |last2=Giraudo |first2=A |last3=Martin |first3=PAJ |last4=Paton |first4=MW |date=2013-05-01 |title=The use of quantitative risk assessment to assess lifetime welfare outcomes for breech strike and mulesing management options in Merino sheep |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.7120/09627286.22.2.267 |journal=Animal Welfare |volume=22 |issue=2 |pages=267–275 |doi=10.7120/09627286.22.2.267 |issn=0962-7286|url-access=subscription }}</ref> In March of 2021 AWN cut ties with Steinfort and divested from this application of freeze branding.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Sim |first=Terry |date=2021-03-18 |title=AWN exits sheep freeze branding joint venture |url=https://www.sheepcentral.com/awn-exits-sheep-freeze-branding-joint-venture/ |access-date=2022-09-13 |website=Sheep Central |language=en-US}}</ref>

As of July 22, 2021 the position of the [[Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals|RSPCA]] is that Australian Merino sheep have not been ethically bred, as seen in their susceptibility to flystrike. They believe "any painful procedure to change the breech area should only be considered an interim, short-term solution that accompanies a breeding program that focusses on flystrike resistance, and is carried out only where absolutely necessary to manage at-risk sheep."<ref>{{Cite web |title=What is sheep freeze branding (or steining) and is it an acceptable alternative to mulesing sheep? – RSPCA Knowledgebase |url=https://kb.rspca.org.au/knowledge-base/what-is-sheep-freeze-branding-or-steining-and-is-it-an-acceptable-alternative-to-mulesing-sheep/ |access-date=2022-09-13 |language=en-AU}}</ref>

===Breeding programs===
Merino sheep bred on selection principles may be more resistant to flystrike because they are plain bodied (lower skin wrinkling around the breech). Studies have shown that flystrike is lower in plain bodied sheep. However, mulesed animals had consistently lower flystrike than unmulesed regardless of body type.<ref>{{Cite book
 | first1 = J. L.
 | last1 = Smith
 | first2 = H. G.
 | last2 = Brewer
 | first3 = T.
 | last3 = Dyall
 | title= HERITABILITY AND PHENOTYPIC CORRELATIONS FOR BREECH STRIKE AND BREECH STRIKE RESISTANCE INDICATORS IN MERINOS
 | series = 18
 | pages = 334–337
 | publisher = Association Advancement of Animal Breed Genetics
 | url = http://www.aaabg.org/proceedings18/files/smith334.pdf
 }}</ref>

The resistance of plain-bodied Merino sheep to flystrike arose from field investigations by Australian scientists, Drs H. R. Seddon and H. B. Belschner, in the early 1930s. Non-mulesed Merino ewe bodies were graded as plain (A class), wrinkly (B class) and very wrinkly (C class). The plain-bodied (A class) Merino ewes were much less susceptible to flystrike than wrinkly-bodied Merinos (B and C class).

In these Merino flocks, the sheep are plainer than the plain-bodied (A class) Merino ewes and therefore more resistant to flystrike. The rams and semen from these studs are used in over 3,000 of the 45,000 Merino farms in Australia. Using breeding principles, wrinkle-skinned Merino flocks which require mulesing have been transformed into plain-bodied and mules-free flocks within five years.<ref name="ABC-2007-04">{{cite web|author=de Landgrafft|first=Tara|date=24 April 2007|title=New Zealand farmers on the ball with bare breech breeding|url=http://www.abc.net.au/rural/wa/content/2006/s1905645.htm|url-status=dead|access-date=2007-05-01|work=ABC Rural News|publisher=Australian Broadcasting Corporation|archive-date=16 March 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080316111504/http://www.abc.net.au/rural/wa/content/2006/s1905645.htm}}</ref><ref>Watts, J: "The Genetic Alternative to Mulesing Plain-Bodied Sheep", ''Australian Farm Journal'', p. 43–45, May 2008.</ref><ref>Watts, J: "Fly Strike Resistance. Non-Mulesed Merinos", ''Australian Farm Journal'', p. 52–55, July 2008.</ref><ref>Watts, J: "Breeding Mules-Free Merinos Within Five Years", ''Australian Farm Journal'', p. 45–47, October 2008.</ref><ref name="AWI Alternatives"/>

===Non-surgical alternatives===
Several non-surgical alternatives are currently being researched:

* Insecticides: Any number of insecticides are now available for prevention of fly strike,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/site-archive/rural/news/content/201301/s3674132.htm|title=Insecticide works better than mulesing|publisher=Australian Broadcasting Corporation}}</ref> and even early reviews proclaimed the effectiveness of using dip across the whole animal, rather than cutting one small portion that left the rest of the animal still susceptible "dipping is still the most cost-effective means of protecting sheep from flystrike".<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20160509200156/https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:233179/UQ233179_fulltext.pdf Heath (1994) quoted in CJC Phillips research in Animal Welfare 2009"A review of mulesing and other methods to control flystrike (cutaneous myiasis) in sheep"]</ref>
* Topical protein-based treatments which kill wool follicles and tighten skin in the breech area (''intradermal injections'')<ref name="AWI Alternatives">{{cite web | title = Alternatives to mulesing | url = http://www.wool.com.au/Animal_Health/Alternatives_to_mulesing/page__2050.aspx | work = Animal Health | publisher = Australian Wool Innovation | access-date = 2007-01-09 | url-status = dead | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070108103310/http://www.wool.com.au/Animal_Health/Alternatives_to_mulesing/page__2050.aspx | archive-date = 8 January 2007 }}</ref>
* Biological control of [[Blow-fly|blowflies]].<ref name="AWI Blowfly">{{cite book |author=Jules Dorrian |url=http://www.wool.com.au/mediaLibrary/attachments/Publications/insight_Blowfly_211106.pdf |title=Battling the blowfly – plan for the future |date=3 June 2006 |publisher=Australian Wool Innovation |isbn=1-920908-21-8 |access-date=2007-01-09 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080907064910/http://www.wool.com.au/mediaLibrary/attachments/Publications/insight_Blowfly_211106.pdf |archive-date=7 September 2008 |url-status=dead}}</ref>
* Plastic clips on the sheep's skin folds which act like castration bands, removing the skin (''breech clips'').<ref name="AWI Alternatives"/>
* [[Tea tree oil]] as a 1% formulation dip where tests have shown a 100% kill rate of first-stage maggots and a strong repellent effect against adult flies, which prevented eggs being laid on the wool for up to six weeks.<ref>{{cite web|title=Tea tree oil beats fly strike and sheep lice|url=https://www.stockandland.com.au/story/3559624/tea-tree-oil-beats-fly-strike-and-sheep-lice/|access-date=2012-01-26|work=Animal Health|date=24 January 2012 |publisher=Stock & Land}}</ref>