Introduction
1. The Lessons Learned Inquiry on the
2001 Foot-and-Mouth Disease outbreak recommended that provision should be
made for the possible application of pre-emptive culling policies, if
justified by well-informed veterinary and scientific advice, and judged to
be appropriate to the circumstances. Such powers for pre-emptive (or
preventive or "firebreak") culling of animals not exposed to FMD infection
are included in the Animal Health Act 2002. It adds to the armoury the
Government has to fight FMD by getting ahead of the disease and stopping
it spreading.
2. Section 32B of the Animal Health Act
1981, as amended by the Animal Health Act 2002, requires the Secretary of
State to have a disease control (slaughter) protocol for the use of the
new slaughter power in the Act (Schedule 3, paragraph 3(c)) to prevent the
spread of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD). This would be a pre-emptive or
firebreak cull.
3. This power cannot be used unless the
protocol has been published and vaccination has first been considered to
prevent the spread of disease (Section 14 of the Animal Health Act 1981 as
amended). The reasons for not
using vaccination would be published. The
factors to be considered in deciding on the measures to be used to tackle
an outbreak of FMD are set out in a separate document - FMD Disease
Control Strategies, referred to as the FMD Decision Tree. The purpose of
this disease control (slaughter) protocol is to identify criteria to be
considered and procedures to be followed should it be considered necessary
to call on this new slaughter power.
Purpose for which the power would be
used
4. This power would be used only where
this is justified by the circumstances of the possibility of disease
spreading and on the basis of sound veterinary, epidemiological and
scientific advice. Emergency vaccination would have been considered first
and if not used the reasons would be published.
The principal factors to be taken into
account
5. A major factor will be to get ahead
of the disease. It could apply in particular to protect areas of dense
livestock population. The cull would include those animals which, should
they become affected, would present a significant risk to the farming and
livestock community more generally by contributing to onward spread. It is
in such circumstances that effective preventative action may be necessary
to safeguard the wider public interest. Species, geographical area and, if
appropriate, type of farming would be relevant. Any decision to use the
wider powers of slaughter would be taken in the light of an overall
assessment of the risks, costs and benefits in a given situation. This
could include not only risks of transmission but also social and economic
risks that would arise if effective and timely action were not taken.
The procedure to be followed in
reaching a decision
6. Such a decision could not be made
until the use of emergency vaccination had been considered and, if not
used, the reasons published.
7. The steps to be taken would then
comprise:
- the identification of a group of animals that are likely to
contribute to spread of disease, based on epidemiological modelling,
veterinary advice and local factors;
- the determination of which species are involved;
- consideration of exemptions on the basis of husbandry or other
criteria, for example, rare breeds or genetic value;
- the determination of the geographical area involved;
- the determination of the rules for inclusion or exclusion of animals
at the boundary of that area;
- analysis of risks, costs and benefits;
- the publication of an outline of the reasons why such a cull is
needed.
The procedure by which animals on a
premises will be deemed to be included in a slaughter
8. Premises believed to contain animals
to be slaughtered to prevent the spread of disease would be identified. A
Veterinary Inspector would visit and ascertain if animals meet the
criteria and are to be slaughtered.
9. The Veterinary Inspector would be
required to explain the reasons to the owner and give him an opportunity
to provide evidence if he believed the animals should be exempted. To
ensure the reason for slaughter is clear to the owner a slaughter notice
would be issued. The slaughter notice would state the powers under which
slaughter is required and the reason why the owner's stock is included
(with reference to the criteria for slaughter to prevent the spread of
disease).
The means by which a particular
decision to slaughter can be reviewed
10. Both as part of the slaughter
notice and during explanations the owner must be made aware that they can
ask the DVM to review the decision that their stock meet the criteria for
the cull and be advised how and by when this can be done.
11. The DVM, or a suitable alternative,
must be available to hear such reviews. The following action would be
taken:
- They will consider the views of the owner as to why they believe the
decision is wrong.
- They must ensure that the veterinary inspector has carried out a
full and fair inquiry to establish if the animals meet the appropriate
criteria.
Defra
March 2003
|
