2 West Cottages

Doxford

Chathill

Northumberland

NE67 5DR

E.Mail: lynne.thompson1@ntlworld.com

 

 

 

12th July 2001

 

 

Rt. Hon. Alan Beith MP

House of Commons

London

SW1A 0AA

 

 

Dear Mr. Beith

 

Footpaths

 

Thank you very much for your letter of 10th July 2001 enclosing the reply you received from Cllr Michael Davey of Northumberland County Council.

 

I was very disappointed at Cllr Daveys attempt to fob you off with false explanations. First of all, where does he get the idea that foot and mouth outbreak has been brought under control nationally? I cannot believe that he is not aware of the current crisis in North Yorkshire, especially with regard to the virus infecting pigs in that area.

 

I watched the official DEFRA video that has been distributed to farmers. All the way through, it stresses the importance of biosecurity to prevent the spread of foot and mouth disease. Opening footpaths where livestock (especially cattle) roam is a breach of biosecurity.

 

In an ideal world, where people are conscientious, reopening of footpaths would not present a risk; but I regret, having watched the entrance to this particular footpath at Craster, I have witnessed walkers who admit having come from an infected area, but have ignored the green notice, and not refrained from entering. I have also watched dogs being carried over the disinfectant mat and put down in the field (where there are cattle grazing). Even the council green notices states no dogs where cattle are grazing! Believe me, I have watched many dogs go with their owners up to the castle, and often not on a lead. I know that the disinfectant mat is not replenished regularly and I have repeatedly written to Mr. Crossley on this matter, who assures me that the National Trust have undertaken to do this. They might have undertaken to do this, but as far as I can see, they have only once replenished the mat since the footpath opened. The mat at the other footpath entrance to the castle has NEVER been replenished since re-opening.

 

Below is a copy of the Veterinary Risk Assessment and I would draw your attention to the content which I have highlighted in red, my own comments are in blue:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Veterinary Risk Assessment No.4 (revised May 2001)

What is the risk of causing new outbreaks of FMD if footpaths are open to the public?

1. Summary of Risk Assessment

If footpaths are open to the public, there is a risk that new outbreaks of FMD will occur. Infection may result from contaminated persons or accompanying animals arriving at the footpath and subsequently passing on infection to livestock or by persons or accompanying animals becoming contaminated while in the locality of the footpath and passing on infection to livestock then or at a later time. It is not possible to differentiate tourists who have come from infected areas and tourists who have not.

The factors considered to be most responsible for increasing this risk are:

7        contact with infected premises or premises where animals have been exposed to the risk of infection prior to arrival at footpaths

7        contact with livestock prior to arrival at footpaths

7        failure to disinfect footwear prior to arrival at footpaths Tourists are unable to disinfect footwear if there is no disinfectant in place to use.

7        proximity of the footpath to livestock areas, including infected premises and premises where animals have been exposed to the risk of infection

7        presence of accompanying animals No dogs where cattle grazing is being totally ignored.

7        failure to limit access for persons or accompanying animals from footpaths to livestock areas

7        failure to limit access for livestock to footpaths, resulting in deposits of faeces, urine, milk etc.

7        contact with livestock while in locality of footpaths

7        contact with surroundings (including pasture and foliage) while in locality of footpath

7        meteorological and environment conditions which influence virus survival

7        failure to disinfect footwear after leaving locality of footpaths

7        contact with livestock after leaving locality of footpaths

7        contact with surroundings (including pasture and foliage) after leaving locality of footpath

Of these, the major factors are

7        proximity of the footpath to livestock areas, including infected premises and premises where animals have been exposed to the risk of infection

7        contact with livestock prior to arrival at footpaths

7        contact with livestock while in locality of footpaths

7        contact with livestock after leaving locality of footpaths

7        failure to limit access for livestock to footpaths, resulting in deposits of faeces, urine, milk etc.

2. Summary of Risk Management options

This section identifies ways in which the risks which have been identified can be managed, taking no account of whether the management options are practical or proportionate to the level of risk. Theoretical risk management options include: -

i. Closing all footpaths over land which may be grazed by livestock, making public access a criminal offence. By doing this it would mean less risk of foot and mouth virus returning to Northumberland.

ii. Closing footpaths only in areas where the risk of FMD virus being present is greatest

iii. Preventing or discouraging access by those who keep or handle susceptible livestock in the course of their work, and so are most likely to have been exposed to and contaminated by FMD virus.

iv. Permitting access but encouraging the public

7        to wear clean clothing and footwear so that they do not introduce infection to an area;

7        to avoid walking amongst livestock, and, in particular, NEVER to handle or touch animals, and

7        to use any disinfectant footpaths or pads which the landowner may choose to provide. Earlier in the week I witnessed two women and a dog (not on a lead) walk back from the castle and they were no more that two or three feet where cattle were grazing.

iv. Regulating access in accordance with the likelihood that infected animals or their products may be encountered. The risks are greatest on Form A and Form D premises, but these are already controlled by statute. Elsewhere the risk diminishes with distance as follows: -

7        within 3km of an Infected Premises

7        within an Infected Area

7        within an "At Risk Area" in a Controlled Area

7        within a "Provisionally Free Area" in a Controlled Area

7        where no FMD controls are in force.

3. Recommended action

i. FMD virus may be introduced to previously uninfected premises in many ways: by airborne spread; by the movement of infected animals, feed or bedding; and by the movement of people or equipment contaminated with the virus. Transmission by people has been recorded on many occasions, but those responsible have generally had close contact with animals on infected, and then on uninfected, premises. It is theoretically possible that walkers could carry infection to previously uninfected animals, although there is no evidence that this has actually happened and the risk, if any, is small in comparison to other transmission risks. There is no evidence to say that this has NOT happened either.

ii. Even small risks can be further diminished by appropriate action, but the cost may outweigh the benefit. There is a balance to be struck between the need to control FMD and the damage that controls do to other important industries, such as tourism. Draconian action may be unnecessary and inappropriate, particularly if universally applied.

iii. There is no veterinary justification for closing all footpaths and preventing all public access to land. A more measured response, which takes some account of both public perception and of the real risk, is required. The latter is the product of many factors, including the prevalence of infection in an area, the presence or absence of susceptible livestock, and the density of the livestock if present.

iv. Viable virus is most likely to be picked up on premises which have been recently infected or exposed to the risk of infection by human, animal or product movement, or by proximity. Where infection is suspected or has been confirmed such premises are subject to Form A or Form D restrictions respectively, and access is prohibited by these restrictions. Elsewhere, infection may be present but unrecognised. In diminishing order of risk we have premises in infected and controlled areas (the latter divided into higher and lower risk), and at some future date, in areas not subject to any FMD controls.

v. Whatever the status of an area there is only a very small risk that walkers who have not recently handled or been in direct contact with susceptible livestock will introduce infection from elsewhere, or spread infection from one premises to another. The risk is greatest on land close to an Infected Premises on which FMD has recently been confirmed and diminishes with time. A high density of livestock increases the likelihood of contact between walkers and animals, and so increases any risk of transmission. No risk surely would be more acceptable than a very small risk. I know, by talking to tourists, that some have come from infected areas, but they still use the path. This is more than a small risk.

vi. The FMD epidemic is now in sharp decline; the weather is warmer and becoming drier. Although a few cases continue to occur, some infected areas, or parts of infected areas, have had no confirmed cases for many weeks. Virus excretion is localised and infrequent, and any virus which is on pastures will not survive for as long as it did in the winter months. The winter months are soon approaching and the epidemic is most certainly not in sharp decline in Yorkshire.

vii. For as long as FMD remains in Great Britain the single most effective method of reducing any risk posed by walkers is to ensure that they have not handled or been in contact with susceptible livestock before or during their visit. These individuals cannot be excluded by statute, but may be amenable to following advice in the interest of the community at large. Regrettably many walkers are totally irresponsible with regard to this point.

viii. On the basis that this assumption is correct, the following action can be justified in Infected Areas at this stage of the epidemic:

7        Prevent public access to infected premises and land within 3km of those infected premises.

7        Allow public access to all other paths, bridleways and open land, but publicise and seek the cooperation of walkers in observing the following precautions for the benefit of both farmers and walkers:

7        do not enter if you have handled cattle, sheep, goats or pigs in the last 7 days

7        start your walk wearing clean footwear and clothing

7        do not stray from the right of way onto adjoining land

7        do not approach, and never touch or handle, livestock

7        do not walk dogs, even on a lead, where there may be cattle (because cattle are curious and approach dogs, and it may then be impossible to avoid contact with them).

7        take any waste, including food, home

7        use any disinfectant footpads or baths which the landowner provides.

During my visits to Craster I have personally seen the above requests being ignored. Not to mention the dry disinfectant mats.

ix. It is extremely unlikely that walkers will come into contact with viable FMD virus in any part of a Controlled Area. The risk of transmission from one farm in the area to another is therefore vanishingly small, but it is possible that infection may be introduced from elsewhere. At this stage of the epidemic the following action can be justified in a Controlled Area:

7        Allow public access to all paths and rights of way, but publicise and seek the cooperation of walkers in observing the following precautions intended to protect the disease - free status of the area:

7        do not enter if you have handled cattle, sheep, goats or pigs in an Infected Area in the last 7 days

7        start your walk wearing clean footwear and clothing

7        do not approach, touch or handle livestock

7        keep dogs on a lead wherever there are livestock

7        take any waste, including food, home

7        use any disinfectant footpads or baths which the landowner provides.

Contributors:
Dr A I Donaldson IAH Pirbright Laboratory
Dr L Kelly Risk Research Dept, VLA, Weybridge
K C Taylor Veterinary Consultant
Dr M Wooldridge Head of Risk Research Dept, VLA, Weybridge


Section home

 

 

 


I should also like to draw your attention to the following newspaper articles  again I have highlighted the relevant documentation in red, and my own comments in blue:

 

The Journal (23rd June)

A farmer fears for the health of his livestock because of plans to re-open a path across his land to ramblers - while members of his own family remain banned from entering.

Ali Grey, who farms Heugh Farm, near Craster in Northumberland, is dismayed that county council chiefs have given walkers the green light to trek through a field of sheep to reach Dunstanburgh Castle.

His concerns come as landowners fear foot-and-mouth could spread. Almost three-quarters of paths in the region are poised to be re-opened in an effort to draw visitors back into the countryside. Yesterday Mr Grey watched while a group of tourists gathered at the gate on the edge of Craster village as 80 of his sheep grazed on the other side.

His sister Ailsa Grahamslaw, who has been banned from entering her brother's farm since April 25 because her own farm at East Linkhall is next to affected North Charlton, was also there.

 

 

She spoke of their dissatisfaction at handling of the crisis. "What's to stop me from putting on a rucksack and walking along that path to Dunstanburgh?" Mrs Grahamslaw said.

"It seems that anyone, even if they have travelled from an infected area, will be able to walk right through with no checks at all. High biosecurity risk.

"Next week Ali is going to clip his sheep, but he has been told that if he wants to drive the flock along the path through Dunstan, which is a right of way, he has to have them checked out by a vet first and get the appropriate licence.

"Yet tourists, on the other hand, can walk through regardless."

County council bosses say they are following Government guidance

 

Footpath policy utterly irresponsible

By FWi staff

STATISTICS show that ministers have been irresponsible in lifting blanket closure of footpaths while foot-and-mouth continues, an MP has claimed.

Anne McIntosh (Con Vale of York) said while a blanket ban was in place no cases of the disease were reported in Yorkshire, reports The Daily Telegraph.

Since paths reopened 92 cases have been confirmed, she told MPs during a debate at Westminster Hall, the Commons parallel chamber, on Wednesday (05 July). Surely Northumberland County Council should learn by this mistake.

The Government has behaved in an utterly irresponsible and inappropriate manner by putting pressure on counties like North Yorkshire, Ms McIntosh said.

She called for all resources to be put into the fight against the disease and for walkers to be kept away from livestock until the virus was eradicated.

But Rural Affairs Minister Alun Michael said these fears were misplaced and pointed out that rural businesses beyond farming had been affected by the disease.

He said it was vital to get people back into the countryside to boost businesses, but stressed that paths near disease-hit areas remained closed.

Two new cases of foot-and-mouth were confirmed in Cumbria and one in North Yorkshire on Wednesday (04 July) taking the UK total up to 1,811.

 

26 June 2001
Welsh fear mass virus cull
By Robert Davies, Wales Correspondent
FARMERS in the northern part of the Brecon Beacons fear a mass cull of up to
10,000 of their sheep.
Veterinary surgeons started blood testing a sample of the animals that roam
common grazings in the area on Tuesday (26 June).
This follows a confirmed outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease at Modrydd Farm,
Libanus, which also has grazing rights on the common.
Stock on six contiguous units have been slaughtered, as they have on five
other units deemed to have dangerous contacts with the infected farm.
Their number includes at least one in a clean area of Wales.

A full investigation is underway into why the disease has reappeared four
weeks after the last confirmed case in Powys.
Brecon Beacons National Park, the National Trust and Powys County Council
are meeting to discuss what to do about recently re-opened footpaths.
Alan Morris of the Farmers Union of Wales says members have been stung by
news of the new outbreak, which raises serious question about the speed with
which rights of way have reopened.
"We all have our fingers crossed that the swift slaughter of infected and at
risk stock has stopped further spread.
"Unfortunately this new case will mean that the big autumn livestock sales

 

 

that are so important to the stockmen of south Powys will not go ahead.

"The repercussions for the already depressed farming economy will be very
serious indeed."
NFU Cymru-Wales, which organised a mass rally of 650 farmers in the county
last week, described the outbreak as devastating and cruel.
The union urged farmers throughout Wales not to let their bio-security guard
drop.

 

Hexham Courant (last week)

FEARS that the scourge of foot-and-mouth could have crept back into the
district have sent shockwaves through the tightly-knit West Tyne Valley
community.
Lets hope this is a false alarm
Blood tests carried out on sheep at farms near Haltwhistle have proved
positive and Government vets are now re-testing stock at Low and High Tipalt
farms above the Military Road.
The news, which comes more than six weeks after the last confirmed outbreak
in Northumberland at Hetherington Farm in Wark, has sparked alarm among
neighbouring farmers who fear their stock could be at risk too.
Only three sheep have tested positive at the two farms, both owned by Ron
Wilson, but it means that more than 1,200 animals will have to have further
blood, gut and saliva tests.
The discovery could mirror similar high-profile cases in Wales and Yorkshire
where the disease has lain dormant for weeks before resurfacing.
The possibility that foot-and-mouth could have reared its head again in the
Tyne Valley has come as even more of a shock to farmers who had started to
feel safer - believing new cases to be a thing of the past.
It is just two weeks since the countryside across the county started to
reopen to the public, reaffirming NFU concerns that caution must still be
taken, as the disease could reappear at any moment.
Ron Wilson and his family now face an anxious wait to find out whether the

rest of their stock has the disease.
He was due to hear from MAFF replacement DEFRA at the beginning of this
week - and had been told to expect his animals to be culled, but Mr Wilson
still had not been contacted by the Government at the time of going to
press.
His Swaledale and Blue-faced Leicester sheep have long been a firm fixture
on the agricultural show circuit - awarded a clutch of trophies at shows,
including the Northumberland County Show.
If his animals are slaughtered, it will be a huge blow for the Wilsons, who
believed that this year they had their strongest, healthiest set of lambs
ever.
Mr Wilson had no reason to suspect that his stock could have foot-and-mouth,
although he had feared for his farm when Cawfields Farm, only two miles
away, was confirmed with the disease in March.
None of his land was contiguous to Cawfields, his sheep were housed as soon
as he heard about the case and they have been housed throughout the lambing
season.
The animals have been tested in separate groups - with one out of a set of
14 and two out of a group of 194 showing positive. Most of the rest of his
stock has previously tested negative and only 15 per cent have not been
tested at all.
He has also had no problems of ill-health in his sheep during the lambing
season - abortions are usually rife on foot-and-mouth hit farms, and vets
who have checked his animals have said they appeared to be in perfect
condition.
Mr Wilson said: "We are on tenterhooks. To be honest I am close to tears at
the moment.
"We have already called our five neighbouring farms to explain to them what
is happening and we will let them know when the tests come back. We will
just have to wait and see."


EDITORIAL COMMENT: STAYING ON GUARD
HOPES that the foot-and-mouth epidemic had burned itself out have apparently been dashed by the discovery of a probable new case at Greenhead, and the likely culling of five neighbouring farms as dangerous contacts.

If this new outbreak is confirmed -Jthe first in the district in nearly two months - it will come as a bitter blow to the Tynedale tourist industry, which was just starting to hope it could salvage something from the wreckage of the 2001 season.

It will be equally frustrating and distressing to local people who were starting to enjoy walking in the countryside once more as miles of footpaths have just reopened for the first time in five months.

There have been strong arguments against some of the footpaths being closed in the first place, particularly in one of the district's main tourist areas, Kielder Water, which has always been free of the disease.

There have also been cogent arguments from the Ramblers' Association and other walkers' groups that there is no evidence that walkers don't spread the disease anyway.

The Government too has been applying increasing pressure on local authorities to lift footpath closure notices to emphasise its mantra that the countryside is open.

Only this week, the D notices were lifted on farms in the Hallington and Ponteland areas, enabling them to start operating again, and even Hexham Mart is looking forward to starting moving stock.

Now it seems everyone has been lulled into a false sense of security, with any new cases likely to set the recovery process back by several weeks.

The rush to reopen footpaths now has to be called into question, until such time as the scourge has been wiped out once and for all.

The risk of the disease being spread on the boots of hikers may be minimal, but it is a risk nonetheless, and a vulnerable area like Tynedale cannot afford to let its guard slip for a single moment.

 

 

Surely Mr. Beith, you must agree with me that PREVENTING the spread of the foot and mouth virus would

be far more acceptable than killing yet more animals. Mr. Davey should perhaps read the following article.

It certainly contradicts his statement the foot and mouth outbreak has been brought under control nationally.

 

 

 

Foot-and-mouth spreads rapidly through pigs herds

The UK's biggest pig production area is under threat from a new outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease.

There are now 100 farms in the North Yorkshire area which have suffered an outbreak of the illness - including a new cluster of at least six reported in Thirsk.

But the latest group of infected farms is very close to the pig-breeding belt of North and East Yorkshire which could be devastated if foot-and-mouth spreads.

Pigs are far more susceptible to passing on the virus than sheep or cattle.


If it gets into the pig population it will spread like wildfire


Defra spokeswoman

Rob Simpson, regional spokesman for the National Farmers Union, said: "We are most concerned about the possibility of the virus getting into pig herds.

"They are 3,000 times more infectious than sheep.

"The area is the start of the major pig production belt which runs from North Yorkshire into East Yorkshire."

Pigs spread the disease more rapidly than sheep because of the large amount of virus they produce which is then breathed out and infects other animals.

Show halted

A spokeswoman for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), said: "The concern is that if it gets into the pig population is will spread like wildfire.

"We are taking precautions to prevent that happening such as slaughtering out within 24 to 48 hours and patrolling to investigate any potential outbreaks."

As well as the 100 farms infected with foot-and-mouth disease in North Yorkshire, about 500 other farms in the area have also lost all their livestock because of the government's policy to cull animals nearby to halt the spread of the virus.


Farmers want advice about whether to move animals

In a week which should have seen the Great Yorkshire Show get underway in Harrogate, farmers in the area fear they are being forgotten by the rest of the country.

Organisers decided to cancel this year's event after new cases of foot-and-mouth disease were detected within 20 miles of the showground.

At one point, it was hoped the event - which was to have been visited by the Queen and Prince Philip - could have gone ahead without cloven-footed animals taking part.

About 120,000 visitors would have flocked to the showground for the three-day event.

'Terrific disappointment'

Judy Thompson, spokeswoman for the organisers, the Yorkshire Agricultural Society, said: "It was a terrific disappointment not to go ahead with the show.

"It is the first time since the Second World War such a decision has been taken.

"Many businesses rely on the show to sell their goods and it is also a chance for farmers to show off the animals that they have worked all year on to bring them up to peak condition.

"Based on previous years' figures and the money we have already had to spend in preparation for the show, the cancellation has cost us about #750,000."

Action call

Meanwhile the National Farmers' Union urged the government to take more action to help those beleaguered by the disease.

Some members believe the crisis will not be over before Christmas.

Mr Simpson added: "Foot-and-mouth disease may not be making front-page news now but it is certainly not forgotten in Yorkshire.

"It has not gone away and there are new clusters of the disease appearing.

"Scientists carry out tests in new cases where the disease has not been seen before but in the majority of cases they do not have a conclusive answer about how it has spread.

Advice call

"There are usually thousands of possibilities and we are looking at more farmers who are just beginning to come to terms with foot-and-mouth on their doorstep."

Mr Simpson called on the government to improve the amount of information given to farmers battling to contain the disease.

He said: "Most of the complaints we get are from farmers who want practical advice about issues such as whether they can move animals, what disinfectant to use and whether to allow contactors on to their land.

"If the government could improve the flow of this kind of information then it would help matters."

 

You will no doubt be aware that there are still some 4,000 animals being slaughtered every day. I would

not class this as under control, would you. I have attached statistics for the last seven weeks, again, this might interest Cllr Davey.

 

There will be an open meeting at Penrith Rugby Club on 27th July. Perhaps you would suggest to Cllr Davey that it might be appropriate to send a representative from the council to learn the true facts about foot and mouth disease, and the correct ways to discourage the spread of it. Speakers will include Doctor Richard North and John Gouriet, both of whom have been researching facts for some months now.

 

 

I am sure Mr. Beith, that you feel as I do in that we do not want another foot and mouth outbreak in Northumberland, but if , God forbid, it does happen, the re-opened footpaths will be closed for many months to come, which in turn will mean the tourist trade will be even worse hit than it already is.

 

Please try and make Cllr Davey see reason  it will benefit all in the long term.

 

I regret having to bother you again, I know how busy you are, but I really do think this needs pursuing. I have written dozens of letters to Mr. Crossley, but, sadly he is another who wishes to bury his head in the sand.

 

I look forward to hearing of your progress, and if I can supply you with any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me.

 

Thanking you in anticipation.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Lynne Thompson

 

 

PS According to the Channel 4 Dispatches programme broadcast last week, footpath entrances in Cumbria are being manned to ensure strict biosecurity, at a wage of #10.00 per hour. This is a little more acceptable than leaving the public to use their own discretion. Is there any reason why this cannot be put into place in Craster?

 

 

 

Please see next page for statistics.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Weekly Digest from MAFF database 7 weeks from 21/5 to 8/7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MAFF County

County

Location

 

Week ending

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

total

 

 

27-May

03-Jun

10-Jun

17-Jun

24-Jun

01-Jul

08-Jul

 

 

 

 

 

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

 

Scottish Borders

3

Duns

 

2

1

 

 

 

 

 

3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dumfries&Galloway

1

Annan

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cheshire

 

Knutsford

60 days

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

Macclesfield

NEW

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

4

Northwich

57 days

1

1

 

 

 

 

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

County Durham

3

Darlington

 

1

2

 

 

 

 

 

3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cumbria

 

Appleby

 

1

 

1

6

6

3

5

22

 

 

Carlisle

 

 

 

1

 

1

1

 

3

 

 

Keswick

 

 

1

 

1

1

 

 

3

 

 

Kirkby Stephen

 

1

1

 

 

1

2

6

11

 

 

Maryport

 

2

2

 

 

 

 

 

4

 

 

Penrith

 

4

7

6

4

6

3

3

33

 

 

Wigton

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

78

Wreay

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lancashire

 

Clitheroe

 

6

12

8

3

2

1

 

32

 

34

Colne

NEW

 

 

 

2

 

 

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Powys

 

Brecon

35 days

 

 

 

 

1

3

1

5

 

6

Glasbury on Wye

38 days

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

North Yorkshire

 

Leyburn

63 days

 

 

 

 

 

2

1

3

 

 

Northallerton

34 days

2

 

1

2

1

 

 

6

 

 

Ripon

NEW

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

Settle

 

2

 

2

 

 

 

 

4

 

 

Skipton

 

6

8

4

7

4

2

 

31

 

 

Thirsk

NEW

 

 

 

 

 

 

4

4

 

 

Whitby

59 days

 

 

2

 

1

2

4

9

 

60

Yarm

 

 

1

1

 

 

 

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northumberland

1

Hexham

40 days

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Devon

 

Chulmleigh

31 days

 

1

1

 

 

 

 

2

 

 

North Tawton

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

1

 

 

S Molton

 

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

2

 

9

Tiverton

NEW

 

 

 

4

 

 

 

4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Monmouthshire

1

Abercarn

NEW

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Somerset

 

Bridgwater

NEW

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

1

 

4

Wellington

NEW

 

 

 

3

 

 

 

3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

West Yorkshire

 

Ilkley

NEW

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

2

Keighley

NEW

 

 

 

 

1

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northern Ireland

4

 

 

 

 

4

 

 

 

 

4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

210

TOTAL CASES

 

33

43

33

33

24

20

24

210

AAS=old slaughter

 

37 places

19 NEW

10

7

9

9

9

6

3

53

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week ending

 

 

 

27-May

03-Jun

10-Jun

17-Jun

24-Jun

01-Jul

08-Jul

Total

Week no

 

 

 

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

 

Animals on this week's IPs

 

 

18913

18205

16180

20279

8209

10754

15272

107812

Animals killed this week

 

 

87000

95000

79000

83000

59000

41000

48000

492000

New contiguous premises this week

 

149

166

171

117

113

87

88

891

Cases this week

 

 

 

33

43

33

33

24

20

24

210