I have just read this extract from an email in Warmwell's Inbox :
 
  
    but has no one considered the deep underlying distaste felt by the veterinary profession for the way they were used (in all senses of the word) in 2001?" asks an emailer...
.
 
Who ever wrote this obviously does not live in an area which was affected by FMD in 2001,  neither have they ever spoken to a farming vet who lives in an FMD area.
 
I do,  and was one of the farmers who put in a formal complaint to the RCVS against the vet who slaughtered my healthy animals. 
 
In his defence,  David Fields wrote to the RCVS and said that as the ewes were heavily in-lamb,  it would have been cruel to have handled them to see if they had FMD,  so instead he shot them all,  even though some of them were actually giving birth at the time. 
He then went on to slaughter 38 baby lambs aged from a few hours old to four days old.    Not one had FMD or had been exposed to FMD.
He also shot my five pet cows who were all aged over 15 years old.
 
 
If the RCVS had supported the complaints which were sent in,  if they had even imposed a simple fine on the vets involved,   with a firm letter accompanying it on the lines of " very naughty,  do not do this again " ...........they could then have objected to the Animals Health Bill and put their full weight behind vaccination.
 
Where are these members of the veterinary profession who felt such "distaste" for the way in which they were "used" ?
 
What intelligent adult would ever consider allowing themselves to be "used" to slaughter healthy animals  against their wishes ?
 
Why wasn't one of these vets on the RCVS's PI Complaints Committee,   which chose to comprehensively support the actions of the vets who illegally signed Form A's declaring a farm to be  "infected with fmd",  while at the same time signing a report which clearly stated that the animals were "healthy and showed no signs of FMD" ...........and then went on to slaughter healthy breeding stock against their owners' wishes.   Vets who even used full police back-up to carry out these illegal cullings ?
 
 
I can think of no more serious a crime for a vet to have committed.  
 
The RCVS complaints procedure has this comment :
 
Disgraceful professional conduct - for example false certification - is serious in itself, as such is likely to bring the profession into disrepute, and is likely to lead to referral to the Disciplinary Committee.
............. It is however incumbent upon members to respond constructively to the allegations. Persistent failure to do so will in itself raise a misconduct issue. Members may indicate that they choose to exercise their ‘right to silence’ and the complaint may then go forward unrebutted.

 
They certainly managed to keep their "distaste"  well hidden..........to this day.
Just staying in their surgeries and treating sick hamsters is no excuse for not standing up and openly expressing this "distaste" in public.
 
 
The veterinary profession in this country has lost its right to take a moral stand on any issue concerning animal welfare.
They chose to support the Contiguous Cull...........and that will be the epitaph of the RCVS.
 
 
Didi Phillips
Higher Fonstone Farm
Warbstow
Cornwall