Mulesing — the surgical removal of wool-bearing skin around a sheep's breech — prevents flystrike but causes significant pain. The transition to alternatives has been slow but accelerating.
Mulesing represents a genuine welfare trade-off: the acute, significant pain of the procedure versus the risk of flystrike, which is itself a horrific welfare outcome involving larvae consuming living tissue. However, the framing as a binary choice is increasingly outdated. Selective breeding programs for plain-bodied, bare-breech Merinos have demonstrated that flystrike susceptibility can be reduced genetically without surgical intervention. These programs have proven commercially viable in some regions, though the transition requires decades of selection. The urgent short-term welfare priority is ensuring pain relief is provided at mulesing when the procedure continues, while investment in breeding alternatives is accelerated. Consumer pressure and brand commitments have been the primary drivers of industry change where regulatory mandates have failed to materialize.