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
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
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
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
............. 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"
The veterinary profession in this country has
lost its right to take a moral stand on any issue concerning animal
They chose to support the Contiguous
Cull...........and that will be the epitaph of the RCVS.
Higher Fonstone Farm