|
|
|
|
info@epynt-disaster.co.uk art71 web design |
click REFRESH or RELOAD on your browser toolbar Home Latest news Images |
|
|
|
|
BACK to comments Monday, April 16, 2001 at 14:18 This will also drastically effect all recreational use of these rivers for a long time hence. It shouldn't be too difficult to bury them in an area that won't so drastically effect the environment. Monday, April 16, 2001 at 16:30 The following letter - below - has been 'drawn up' by a group of vets - led by Peter Wood and Richard Rowe - to call for a national vaccination campaign in the face of the FMD epidemic under the 'banner' 'Vets for Vaccination'. It will be sent to all UK vet practices ASAP. They know that there a lot more UK vets who are unhappy with the current policies who they believe will 'come out of the closet' and add their support once there's 'focus' for their feelings. They aim to provide that 'focus'. Richard Rowe will be happy to talk to/with about it if you wish to speak to someone - his contact details: Tel: 01453 843090 Email: richardrowevet@hotmail.com Andrew -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Andrew Stephens BVetMed MRCVS 36 Falstaff Avenue, Earley, Reading, RG6 5TQ, UK Tel: +44-(0)118-9756574 Fax: +44-(0)870-1337217 Email: andrews@mediavets.co.uk Web: http://www.mediavets.co.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14April 2001 Dear Colleague, We believe that the initial policy of eradication by culling was correct. Though MAFF have been heavily criticised for the way that the operation was handled, we should not forget that the presence of FMD in a developed agricultural economy on the scale that we have seen in the last month is unprecedented. We can understand the problems that must have arisen in trying to co-ordinate and manage a full scale national emergency. We would like to draw to the attention of colleagues that we have serious reservations about continuing with the current slaughter and eradication policy. Some of the reasons are outlined below: 1) Local experience shows that even when the policy is rapidly and correctly implemented it does not control the spread of disease. 2) There are now very serious welfare problems for all sectors of the livestock industry. The apparent indifferent attitude of the profession to the pictures in national newspapers of lambs dying in a sea of mud and video footage of marksman trying to shoot sheep at Gilwern will do nothing to enhance the professions position in the eyes of the public. We can no longer defend the justification of this carnage to support the wider issue of FMD control to the public. We also wonder if it will be credible for MAFF to have any role in policing animal welfare in the future? Emergency welfare policies for the movement and disposal of stock on welfare grounds have already been overwhelmed by demand and are patently not working. 3) There are still considerable logistical problems concerning the culling and disposal of stock that have not been addressed and are unlikely to be resolved in the near future. 4) It is no good trying to produce the illusion that the situation is improving when it is obvious by MAFF s actions that there is a very wide dispersal of infected sheep across the country. The scale of unrecorded movements continues to unravel and will exceed all predictions. There are real practical problems in examining live sheep for FMD lesions as we can see from the number of sheep showing old FMD lesions on contiguous culls. These have obviously recovered from undetected FMD and will continue to remain as a reservoir of infection. This problem will persist and further outbreaks of FMD will occur. We should now be measuring the tail of infection in terms of years rather than months. We must face the fact that FMD may already be endemic in UK sheep. It is time to think the unthinkable. 5) There is now a suggestion that more sheep will need to be culled in West Gloucestershire and the Welsh borders. How many more animals will have to be destroyed in this region alone? 6) The current policy of eradication in not based on issues of food safety or animal welfare. It is simply an issue of cost benefit to the agricultural industry. We are unable to reconcile the economic benefits of the current policy against the human suffering, and the millstone of social and economic costs that now burden the whole (rural) community. The opportunity for ring vaccination followed by slaughter is now no longer an option. With turn out imminent it is necessary to have a coherent national vaccination strategy for cattle and sheep. We need to address the fears of the farming community that under EU rules this could introduce a whole new raft of unmanageable constraints and controls. The EU needs to recognise that these controls will have to be adapted to work in a major agriculture economy. Other countries have successfully used vaccination, and eminent vets and scientists abroad and at home cannot understand our delay. How far is the profession prepared to compromise animal welfare? How much more social and economic hardship must be borne by the rural and wider community before the profession has enough foresight and courage to say enough is enough? Yours sincerely Peter Wood MRCVS tel 01452 523534 Glynn Wright MRCVS Richard Rowe MRCVS tel 01453 843090 Mark Hinds MRCVS Jim Clapp MRCVS Richard Lampard MRCVS Helen Smith MRCVS Chris Artingstall MRCVS Tim Knott MRCVS Andrew Stephens MRCVS Email: andrews@mediavets.co.uk Monday, April 16, 2001 at 20:14 So, where do you all suggest they should be buried? they have to be dissposed of somewhere. People are moaning when the government dont do anything and when they do, you are still moaning. |
|
|
|
|
|
This site is operated by webmaster@epynt-disaster.co.uk |
|
|
|
|