http://www.thisisdevon.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=142718&command=newPage&contentPK=10494523 WE'D DO THIS ALL OVER AGAIN
The controversial policy that led to the slaughter of
millions of healthy animals during the 2001 foot and mouth disaster could
be used again, the Animal Health Minister Ben Bradshaw said
yesterday.
Speaking at the start of a major
foot and mouth simulation exercise, Mr Bradshaw said that the contiguous
cull policy might be repeated in a future outbreak, despite having been
widely discredited three years ago.
The policy, which involved
slaughtering out livestock on all holdings neighbouring infected farms,
was heavily criticised because in many cases there was no evidence that
the animals slaughtered could have come into contact with the disease.
Anthony Gibson, director of the National Farmers' Union in the South West,
described it at the time as "one of the most bloody, tragic and
disgraceful misjudgments made in the name of science".
But Mr
Bradshaw made it clear yesterday that the policy would be very much on the
agenda in any future outbreak, despite a commitment to give greater
consideration to using vaccination to control the disease. Speaking about
the simulated exercise, in which "outbreaks" were found in Cornwall,
Cheshire, Lincolnshire and Scotland, he said: "We hope to avoid contiguous
culling, but we have not ruled it out. It is not ruled out in any of the
policy documents, and the scientific modelling may show that it would lead
to the disease being brought under control more quickly.
"We would
clearly have to take into account the political implications of that,
together with the experience in 2001 where it was very unpopular. But we
would have to weigh that against advantages that the policy may
have."
Mr Bradshaw said vaccination was "a very useful tool". But
he said it would only be used as an alternative to culling in certain
circumstances.
During the foot and mouth crisis, proposals to use
vaccination to contain the epidemic - a measure used successfully in the
Netherlands - were ruled out by the Government over fears it would hit the
meat and dairy export trade, worth £500 million. As the contiguous cull
spread, the total cost of the crisis went on to top £8 billion.
Mr
Bradshaw's comments caused dismay yesterday amongst those who lived
through the 2001 crisis. Mr Gibson said he would be "very surprised" if
contiguous culling was used instead of vaccination to create a "firebreak"
to halt the spread of the disease. He said: "It would be very unpopular as
it was last time, because it involves the culling of thousands of healthy
animals."
David Hill, who served as the NFU's Devon chairman in
2001, said the notion of contiguous culling was "ludicrous" because it
took no account of the situation on individual farms. "Any culling should
be based on the likelihood that an animal has come into contact with the
disease. It makes you wonder whether they have learnt anything at
all."
Janet Bayley, of the National Foot and Mouth Group, said it
would be "extremely worrying" if the Government moved culling back up the
agenda. She said European policy now placed vaccination at the forefront
of the control strategy.
The two-day simulation exercise launched
yesterday was designed to test the workings of the contingency plan drawn
up by the Government in the wake of the disaster, when more than six
million animals were slaughtered and vast swathes of the countryside were
shut for months on end. The desk-based exercise involved 320 staff at the
Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
Mr Bradshaw
said he hoped the exercise would demonstrate that the Government had
"learned the lessons of some of the mistakes made then".
He said
that in any future outbreaks, only footpaths running close to infected
farms would be closed in a bid to minimise the impact on rural tourism.
And he said there would be no repeat of the mass pyres, which became one
of the images of the 2001 disaster. Instead, slaughtered animals would be
sent to commercial incineration and rendering plants or licensed landfill
sites. On-farm pyres would only be used in exceptional
circumstances.<