252 Petherick JC, McCosker K, Mayer DG, Letchford P, McGowan M, “Evaluation of the impacts of spaying by either the dropped ovary technique or ovariectomy via flank laparotomy on the welfare of Bos indicus beef heifers and cows”, Journal of Animal Science, 2012 Oct 9
254Petherick JC, McCosker K, Mayer DG, Letchford P, McGowan M, “Evaluation of the impacts of spaying by either the dropped ovary technique or ovariectomy via flank laparotomy on the welfare of Bos indicus beef heifers and cows”, Journal of Animal Science, 2012 Oct 9
255 See Table A2.12 of Appendix 2 for source of estimates
256 See Table A2.25 of Appendix 2 for source of estimates
257 See Table A3.1 for source of estimates
258 Jubb TF, Fordyce G, Bolam MJ, Hadden DJ, Cooper NJ, Whyte TR, Fitzpatrick LA, Hill F, D'Occhio MJ, “Trial introduction of the Willis dropped ovary technique for spaying cattle in northern Australia”, Australian Veterinary Journal, 2003 Jan-Feb;81(1-2):66-70
259 MLA (October 2008), A 2008 producer survey on spaying of cattle in Northern Australia
260 Despite the lower number of progeny produced and the subsequent reduction in total herd sales (see Niethe GE, Holmes WE, “Modeled female sale options demonstrate improved
profitability in northern beef herds”, Australian Veterinary Journal, Volume 86, No 12, December 2008)
261 See Table A2.12 for source of estimates
262 See Table A2.14 of Appendix 2 for source of estimates
263 See Table A2.14 of Appendix 2 for source of estimates
264 See Table A2.25 of Appendix 2 for source of estimates
265 See Table A3.5 for source of estimates
266 Due to lack of data it is assumed that half the tethered cattle involve the production of milk
268See Table A2.4 of Appendix 2 for source of estimates
269 See Table A2.25 of Appendix 2 for source of estimates
270 See Table A3.9 for source of estimates
271 Based on advice from AHA
272 See Table A2.3 for source of estimates
273 See Table A1.1 for source of estimates
274 See Table A2.25 of Appendix 2 for source of estimates
275 See Table A3.13 for source of estimates
276 Can be obtained via the internet
277 On advice from AHA
278 See Table A2.9 of Appendix 2 for source of estimates
279 See Table A3.17 for source of estimates
280 Induced cows may be more prone to a number of health problems, including retained foetal membranes, photosensitisation, mastitis and toxaemic collapse. Foetal viability is also seriously compromised (see Mansell P, Aug 2006)
281 Mansell P (Aug 2006), Animal Health And Economic Justification Of Routine Induction Of Parturition In Dairy Cattle, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia International Symposia on Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics proceedings, ISVEE 11: Proceedings of the 11th Symposium of the International Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics, Cairns, Australia, Theme 3 - Animal health delivery & response: Short oral presentation session, p 195
284Jaques, S. A., Macmillan, K. L., Anderson, G. A. and Morton, J. M. (2006). Variation in yields of milk and milk solids in Holstein cows induced to calve prematurely. In: Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production. NZSAP 2006 Proceedings. New Zealand Society of Animal Production Conference 2006, Hamilton, (344-349). 2006
285Blackwell M.B., Burke C.R. and Verkerk G.A., “Reproductive management practices in New Zealand dairy farms: what will the future hold in a consumer-focused, export-driven marketplace?” Reproduction practices in an export sensitive market, Proceedings of the 4th Australasian Dairy Science Symposium 2010. Page 407
287 See Bobby Calf RIS (full reference to be added in next draft)
288 Trade data, Meat and Livestock Australia
289 See Bobby Calf RIS (full reference to be added in next draft)
290Department of Primary Industries, Victoria in conjunction with Dairy Australia (2010), Dairy Industry Farm Monitor Project 2009/10 feature article (see http://www.dairyaustralia.com.au/Statistics-and-markets/Farm facts/~/media/Documents/People%20and%20business/Business-management/dairy-farm-monitoring/2009-10%20DIFMP%20Feature%20Article.ashx)
291 See Table A3.24 for source of estimates
292On advice from AHA
293Cattle was classified as an agent of 2 fatalities on beef cattle properties in Australia between 1989 and 1992 (see RIRDC and Australian Centre for Agricultural Health and Safety, Occupational health and safety risk in the Australian Beef Cattle Industry: Chart-book of Summary Information 2005)
294 Recommended by the OBPR
295 Based on CPI index of 157.5 for June 2007 and 180.4 for June 2012 = 180.4.1/157.5 = 1.1454 (See ABS, Consumer Price Index, Australia, June 2012, Cat.6401.0)
296RIRDC and Australian Centre for Agricultural Health and Safety, Occupational health and safety risk in the Australian Beef Cattle Industry: Chart-book of Summary Information 2005
297Crushing was responsible for 5% of dairy farm injuries in 1995 (see Day, L (1996), Dairy Farm Injury in Victoria, Monash University Accident Research Centre)
298RIRDC and Australian Centre for Agricultural Health and Safety, Occupational health and safety risk in the Australian Beef Cattle Industry: Chart-book of Summary Information 2005
299Based on a CPI index for WA for June 2002 of 134.6 and 180.4 for June 2012 (see ABS, 6401.0 - Consumer Price Index, Australia, Jun 2012)
300Assumption made on advice from AHA
301See Table A2.5 of Appendix 2 for source of estimates
302See Table A1.1 of Appendix 1 for source of estimates
303 It is unknown where in Australia, injury or death would be likely to occur
304 See Table A2.25 of Appendix 2 for source of estimates