Local one-day shows are the backbone of the UK show circuit and nowhere is this more true than Scotland.
But new proposals from SEERAD on pre- and post-show biosecurity have raised concerns many shows held on farm fields may have to close their doors. The proposals include a 27-day standstill both before and after the event, something show organisers suggest is unworkable.
But just how unworkable would another notifiable disease outbreak be. We all remember the devestation foot-and-mouth caused in 2001 and unless proper biosecurity precautions are taken shows could be the catalyst for just another such outbreak.
So, while it may seem like bureaucracy gone mad, everyone must take responsibility for ensuring livestock health, not disease is top of the agenda.
Shows gather stock from far and wide in close proximity to each other, providing a perfect breeding ground for disease. Even one-day shows draw animals from as far as 50 miles away, meaning disease could be spread over a 100 mile radius in a matter of hours.
But 27 days, surely there has to be a more sensible option than that? What about isolating stock before and after they attend a show, or imposing a shorter standstill on the host farm? Scotland currently has a 13-day standstill on all livestock movements, wouldn't that suffice?
My view, for what it's worth, would be to impose isolation on all stock before and after shows - at least that way its the stock attending the show which are restricted not the host farmer, who often gives the show orgnanisers access to a field or two out of benevolence.
Comments (2)
Good biosecurity is a must, for the sake of the host farm, those showing there and the future image of UK farming. Imagine the impact on farming if another disease outbreak could be shown to have stemmed from inadequate biosecurity measures. Farming has always been an adaptable industry, capable of finding pragmatic solutions. Provided SEERAD and DEFRA can be equally pragmatic and open to debate there should be no reason why local shows should not continue. But that will take time and effort from both sides - something that is in increasingly short supply in our industry. The trick is allocating that time and effort to the priorities. Maintaining regional and local agricultural shows is just such a priority - for the good of the farming industry and the good of the wider rural community. Let us hope those involved can allocate the time needed to come up with practical solutions.
Posted by Siegfried | March 2, 2007 4:25 PM
Posted on March 2, 2007 16:25
To true, to lose these local shows through over regulation would be a crying shame.
They are the best opportunity our industry has of promoting itself to the general public. There's sure to be a workable solution, but the two sides must work together and avoid the antagonistic attitude which so often dominates this type of issue.
I'm sure SEERAD and the shows will find a solution and it mustn't inconvenience the host farmers unduly.
Posted by jonathan | March 2, 2007 4:40 PM
Posted on March 2, 2007 16:40