Council of war on 20-day movement ban

By Robert Harris

LIVESTOCK industry leaders are hammering out an action plan in a bid to kill off the threatened 20-day stock movement ban.

Government has proposed the ban, which would effectively quarantine holdings for 20 days after moving stock in, to cut the risk of spreading diseases like foot-and-mouth.

Although the consultation period for the proposal lasts until 11 June, farmers and auctioneers leaders have already held a series of crisis meetings to decide how to combat the threat, and more are planned.

They maintain a 20-day movement ban would lock up the industry and destroy auction marts.

Both the NFU and the Livestock Auctioneers Association say opposition to the proposal is widespread.

Peter Kingwill, LAA chairman, says: “Everyone recognises that the problem is not going to go away. The status quo is not acceptable, and the industry must improve itself.”

Much can be done by simply ensuring that existing guidelines and rules are followed and enforced more strictly, he says.

MAFF should tighten inspection of movement records.

“We already have individual identification of cattle, and we can now log batches of new season lambs. But MAFF needs to inspect these records more often,” says Mr Kingwill. “And we still cant be sure which holding sheep go to. This should be changed.”

Vehicles are not always washed and disinfected properly before being loaded with stock, he notes.

“It is down to the authorities to enforce this they may need to be given more resources.”

Private “car park” deals, where stock changes hands without entering the ring, should also be banned, says Mr Kingwill.

Some new measures could also help, he adds. Licensed premises with appropriate biosecurity measures would allow dealers to continue putting small batches of lambs together, provided they go direct to slaughter.

The 20-day ban would also prevent many farmers taking unsold stock home when prices are poor, producing a buyers market. But colour coding, or individual tagging, could allow these animals to be identified, says Mr Kingwill.

These measures could also be used to identify stock bought and sold as stores, he adds.

Other organisations involved in the joint discussions – including national farmers unions, the National Sheep Association, the National Beef Association, Country Land and Business Association and the Tenant Farmers Association – back these broad proposals, though each will make its own representations, says Mr Kingwill.

John Thorley, chief executive of the NSA, believes better identification of animal movements is the most vital measure.

“Every time an animal moves there needs to be a record of it. But it must not create extra work for the producer.”

One idea finding favour is triplicate forms, he says. “One copy for the farmer, one to go with the animals, and another for trading standards, or an appointed office, like an auction mart.”

A 20-day standstill could still be imposed on those farmers not complying, says Mr Thorley.

Les Armstrong, chairman of the NFU livestock Committee, also wants tighter controls.

“We have to examine the way some livestock moves in this country. But if MAFF says there are a lot of illegal movements, why arent the offenders prosecuted?

“We will fight all the way, but constructively. We need a set of proposals that will do the job with the minimum disruption.”

John Bell, vice-chairman of the NBA, believes MAFF should look at the wider picture, too.

“The national effort must also include stricter import controls, earlier recognition of infectious disease and a more organised system of tackling it.”

Farm e-Business Survey. Click here to enter and win 100 Amazon vouchers