READERS LETTERS
READERS LETTERS
No evidence for UK sheep scare story
On waking one morning recently, as usual, I listened to the Farming Today programme and endured nearly 15min of someone telling the world that there was scientific evidence that our sheep flock had been infected by BSE.
That this is regarded as being newsworthy has been demonstrated by the number of times the information has been repeated and the number of concerned individuals who have voiced their prejudices.
If BSE originated in scrapie sheep offal being fed to cows, how can the disease have reinfected sheep? If BSE is different from scrapie, how can sheep be blamed for the BSE epidemic? How many experts have seen scrapie in sheep? It is almost impossible to conceive of an affected animal getting through a fatstock market. I am sure most ended in the hunt kennels or a hole in the ground or were picked over by crows.
It is more reasonable to suggest a low background incidence of spongiform encephalopathy in all mammals and that susceptibility has been increased in cattle and sheep by breeding – or over-breeding. It is more likely that the suspect cattle feed contained more bovine than ovine material.
J A Parsons
West Billingham Farm, Chillerton, Newport, Isle of Wight.
BSE relegated by Murdoch
Thank heavens for Rupert Murdoch. I have just been listening to Radio 4s coverage of the BSE in sheep story. If Mr Murdoch was not trying to buy Manchester United, this latest scaremongering would have been the lead item. How do these "experts" get access to the media?
Either the BBC contracted SEAC, or SEAC contacted the BBC. If the former, bearing in mind that August is the height of the no-news season, surely SEAC should have said it had nothing to say. Although it may have opinions, it has no new facts or evidence. The only other possibility is that SEAC contacted the BBC. That takes some believing, as, surely, experts should not make such announcements on the basis of no new evidence, but "distinct possibility".
As I understand it, the experts have still to prove that beef has anything to do with CJD, despite the fact that an entire industry has been decimated in the process. I am loathe to think that the same could happen to the sheep industry. But unless experts keep their unproven thoughts to themselves until proven, all we can do is hope that some other items of news relegates the sheep scare from the headlines.
John Harris
The Bank, 36 High Street, Rothwell, Northants.
Lamb chop offer daylight robbery
At Hatherleigh Livestock Market on Mon, Aug 31, prime fat lambs of 40kg were selling for 80p/kg. The following Saturday, during a visit to Somerfield supermarket at Okehampton, eight miles from Hatherleigh, I suffered a seizure. English lamb chops were on offer in pre-packs at £13.99/kg.
When I drew the managers attention to the discrepancy, he was lost for words. Finally, he said pricing was the responsibility of head office at Bristol and the meat was packed in Gloucester. Not all robbers carry shotguns.
M D Banks
Rowan Farm, Ash Cross, Petrockstowe, Okehampton, Devon.
The need to explain
I met recently some relatives from the London area who were visiting Wales. During conversation, one mentioned how good the local Welsh lamb was and how she had bought a leg to take home the following day. But she said how expensive it was, adding "You must be doing well." Needless to say, my visitor was better informed by the time she left. But her comment was particularly disturbing because she is a teacher. All but one of the party appeared ignorant of the current plight of farming and the only one with any knowledge was an insomniac who has listened to Farming Today every morning for as long as she could remember.
The agricultural industry could help itself by sponsoring a short daily agricultural programme on commercial radio or TV that was controlled by the industry and transmitted at a sensible time of day when it could be heard by the public. A 10 to 15-minute programme on Channel 5 at, say, 6.45pm. I am sure the benefits would outweigh the costs.
Many farming programmes, paid for by TV companies, have fallen by the wayside over the years. We need to ask why. We need one which is paid for and controlled by ourselves. For example, if we could explain the differences between European-produced pigmeat and farm assured UK product, we would soon find out whether housewives bought on price or welfare. And we could debate such subjects with interested parties.
Christopher Evans
Llerneuaddau, Ponterwyd, Aberystwyth, Cardiganshire.
Common sense pricing required
Which planet does the Tesco spokesman (News, Aug 28) inhabit, I wonder? Consumers do not buy only what they need. Everyone who has a freezer stores extra food. When it is cheap, they buy in multiple amounts to take advantage of lower prices.
It is about time all the multiple retailers listened to us, the producers and applied common sense to their pricing policy. They should reflect the vastly superior standards we have put in place at the behest of the multiples. Tesco should cut its prices and watch consumers vote with their cash.
Trevor Tonks
4 Mead Close, Buxton, Norwich, Norfolk.
Consumer pays for the parasites
As long as the dairy industry apparently thinks it can afford a milk quota leasing price of 8p/litre, anyone, including the Dairy Trades Federation, could be forgiven for thinking the price of milk is too high.
After all, it is the milk purchaser and ultimately the consumer who is supporting the huge burden of parasites being carried by the industry. Until quota leasing at anything like the current price is regarded by dairy farmers as uneconomic, we cannot expect complaints about the low milk price to be taken seriously.
Val Collinson
Bower Farm, Grosmont, Abergavenny, Monmouthshire.
The true story on NZ farming
I always read your Letters section, as it gives me a feel for the issues as farmers see them, not from the medias point of view. I find your magazine to be most useful and was superior to anything available in NZ until recently when a new magazine appeared.
I have been surprised to hear of the wonderfully unsubsidised and unregulated, not just deregulated, farm industry in NZ. Although not a dairy farmer, I have spoken to several about shed inspections. Those are carried out by the company to which farmers supply their milk. Although they are not directly charged, all dairy farmers are shareholders of the company they supply and thus pay for inspections indirectly. Should a farmers milk be substandard, he is not liable just for his own milk but for the value of the tanker load.
We do not have established hedgerows but we do have gorse and broom, imported by British settlers, which we are now trying to exterminate, along with many other imports at huge cost. We are also required to protect areas such as tussock grasslands, native bush and wetlands.
Farmers are constrained by the Resource Management Act, which means any new building or activity must win consent. To erect a building a permit must be obtained first, inspections are done by the local council inspector at various stages. Native trees cannot be cut down without complying with complicated and pedantic legislation. We must obtain consent from the local Maori tribe before pumping underground water for irrigation or spreading effluent. We must also obtain signed consent from our immediate neighbours. Work permits are required by foreign labour. And our tax rate is one of the highest in the world. The NZ $ has been devalued and input costs have risen. Produce prices have dropped; even though most is exported.
While the Dairy Board has done a good job, the Wool Board and the Meat Board have just woken up.
We produce high quality farm products which are threatened by low cost, inferior quality Egyptian, Mexican and Chinese products.
So you should not believe everything you see on TV. Now that you know the real story, you do not have any excuses for not biting the bullet and farming the New Zealand way.
S R Lovett
Kimberley Farm, Winters Road RD7, Ashburton 8300, New Zealand.
Express Dairies
With reference to the letter (Sept 4) written by M Smith of North Yorks regarding standards of milk collection on farms, Express Dairies would like to point out that it does not have, and never has had, any dealings with the person or farm in question. We, therefore, refute the false accusations made in the letter.
Express Dairies prides itself on its progressive stance in achieving the highest possible milk quality standards to meet the requirements of our major customers and the public.
These standards, agreed in consultation with our producers, are adhered to at every stage of the food chain, starting on the farm, through to collection, processing and distribution.
Express Dairies has led the industry in many ways including its thorough and realistic approach to farm and feed mill auditing. Our Quality Awards Scheme for farmers, which acknowledges excellence, and the Tanker Driver of the Year awards, are further examples of our absolute commitment to producing the UKs best milk.
In packaging and marketing, Express Dairies has also been the foremost innovator in the industry confirming our position as the leading supplier to retailers and doorstep customers.
We will continue to work closely at all times with our producers in the Express Milk Partnership to further improve the quality of our operations at each stage of the food chain from cow to consumer.
Peter Walker
Director of milk buying, Express Dairies, Express House, Meridian East, Meridian Business Park, Leicester.
What is meant by sustainable?
The debate (Letters, Aug 28 and July 24) about whether agriculture is sustainable depends upon your definition of sustainability. I have been involved with several integrated farming systems projects since 1993 and found these systems more sustainable than conventional systems.
In my case, the farming system is more sustainable if it is less dependent upon external imports such as fertilisers, pesticides and machinery costs. Mr Crisp (Letters, Aug 28) questions the lack of proven data on hedgerow loss. This information is readily available from the Institute of Terrestrial Ecology and it is reported that more than 2000 miles of Britains hedgerows disappear each year. Also the idea that increasing crop yields will allow agriculture to survive financially would be a nice scenario. But crop yields may have stabilised somewhat and with grain prices at £70/t it might be wise to look at your variable and fixed costs if your business is going to survive rather than strive for a yield your farm is not capable of achieving.
Paul Farmer
Clevedon, Somerset.
The last of British pork
So MLC are launching a pork promotion. For what, imported pork? Because there certainly wont be any British pork. With pig farmers going out of business on a daily basis, as usual, it is too little to late. Meanwhile, our new farm minister is neither to be seen nor heard. The unions keep saying how bad things are, but who is listening? We know how bad things are. And 30 months on, we are still living with the beef export ban, which I cannot believe is legal. Our beef is squeaky clean; is that what other EU countries are afraid of? We have killed and incinerated millions of clean cattle and calves, when people are starving in the world.
This government treats the farming industry with contempt. If union officials and other bodies wages were non existent, as in other sectors of our industry, perhaps their words would be backed by more action.
I hear hop farmers are the latest victims of cheap imports. But, the powers that be, keep telling farmers the public wants traceability and farm assurance. Where is the traceability and assurance in imports? Supermarkets are interested only in their own profits.
Carol Brimble
Little Marlborough Farm, Grosmont, Near Abergavenny, Monmouthshire.
Feed savings can be crucial
I read with sympathy the comments of outdoor and intensive pig producers in FW. After years of practical pig management, I am usually sceptical of remarks made by the highly paid theorists, such as agricultural bank personnel and advisers.
I note that at a time when pig prices are their lowest level for 20 years, some commentators suggest there is nothing one can do. I disagree. To quote David Neal-Smith of Barclays Agriculture, producers only way forward is to attempt to reduce their break-even figure by at least 10%. The outdoor producer has a different break-even to an intensive producer.
We are all fighting the unfairness described in your columns regarding strength of sterling and supermarkets taking cheap imports which are not subject to the same welfare regulations.
The positive step for all pig producers is to cut all costs and, in particular, feed costs – usually about 70% of all variable costs. Producers using cheap liquid and solid by-products of the food industry are achieving good savings already. They must now consider using either their own home-grown cereals, proteins and pulses, or purchase them from their neighbours.
Those still buying compounds have the most to save.
By changing to a liquid feeding system in troughs, either indoors or outdoors, they could benefit in two ways:First, the cheaper by-products and second, with their own crops. Calculations by leading nutritionists show £30/t saved even at the present time when compound prices have dropped dramatically.
Rowland Kirkman
Agricultural consultant, Pipeline Feeds, Preston, Lancs.
Dont swallow the GM line
How predictable that David Richardson (Sept 4) would swallow, unchewed, the unscientific tosh fed to him by the spin-doctors of the multinational gene polluters. Plants and weeds will develop resistance to Roundup, etc, and then a whole new generation of even more powerful herbicides will be foisted on the environment. Most peoples health would be improved by cutting out most dietary sugar anyway. But this is not really about health or the environment, it is about short-term money.
The question Mr Richardson and the gene polluters promising reduced chemical use should ask is, if he must grow sugar beet, why has he failed to perfect the techniques, ancient and modern, for growing the crop without chemical herbicides and insecticides?
British Sugars commendable policy shows more awareness of public perceptions than the gene polluters have shown.
What effrontery by pretentious rent-a-mouth scientists, who have so far failed to even identify, much less classify, most plants and insects on earth, to imagine they can alter the genetic constitution of living organisms without affecting the expression of other genetic characters in these and other organisms. But their research is so narrowly focused, they neither know nor care.
By irresponsibly swallowing this dangerous half-baked science from proponents of GM plants, which seek to use us all as unwilling guinea-pigs, Mr Richardsons environmental credentials with LEAF, and otherwise, are utterly discredited. He should resign, as should the chairman of the Environment Agency for similar reasons. Their views are totally at odds with their roles and the concerned public is justified in having no confidence in their judgement.
Stuart Pattison
Church Lane, Calstock, Cornwall.
Too important for politicians?
None too soon a serious discussion is developing about genetically engineered crops. We need more and better information.
I am a farmer with a doctorate degree in science and I am trying to increase my knowledge of the subject. In fact, I recently visited a major lab in the USA to find out more.
Contrary to Simon Wards Talking Point (Aug 14) which claimed that the theoretical risks to human health are low, some worrying aspects emerged. Someone had the idea of improving soya protein by making it a more complete food for human consumption by adding an additional protein from a brazil nut.
This gene was added to soya and it expressed itself in the plant. That was well on the way to turning up on our tables when the risk to the health of people suffering nut allergies was considered. How many people with allergies would have happily eaten the soya with potentially dire consequences?
Let us approach this debate with good information and sense. There are benefits from this technology as well as risks. Ultimately, decisions about the use of genetic engineering will be taken by politicians. Do you believe that those politicians who gave us BSE are wise enough to make a balanced judgement on this much more difficult issue?
Dr Jim Barnard,
Liberal Democrat Parliamentary spokesman for Tiverton and Honiton.
Why are they so quiet?
Your Leader (Aug 28) about the poor publicity received by pig producers touches on a wider point. All farmers and growers appear to receive only 15-20% of the retail receipts from food. Nevertheless, they get 100% of the blame if anything is wrong with that food.
Most of us pay subscriptions and levies to various organisations which are supposed to speak for us. Why are they so quiet?
M D Bushby
1 Waterend Cottages, Great Cressingham, Thetford, Norfolk.
How did AG make it pay?
Along with your correspondent B W E Heyden (Letters, Aug 28) and other readers, I enjoyed reading A G Streets articles. But at nearly 90, and having spent all my working life in agriculture, I am convinced that A G Street made more money from his journalism than he did from his farming. If memory serves me rightly, in his latter years he farmed about 300 acres with four men plus four tractors without one livestock unit.
How he employed four men after completing his sugar beet harvest, from about November until February, I cannot imagine. There is a farm within two miles of here which, until recent years, had the same acreage as A G Streets enterprise. At that time, it carried a dairy herd of over 40 milkers plus followers, a flock of 50 lambing ewes, plus a small pig enterprise, run by the farmer and three employees.
In June 1940, I milked more than 40 head one evening, with the old bucket and stool; enabling the rest of the team to carry on hay-making. This farm is still run today, admittedly with a slightly reduced acreage, by three men, one at pension age, his brother, fast approaching pension age, and one younger employee plus a little help from a contractor.
J Hopkins
62 Churchfields, Thurgoland, Nr Sheffield.
NFU is against farmers wishes
Now that there has been a nationwide telephone poll and 96% thumbs down from farmers on ACCS, the NFU apparently continues to support it against clearly expressed farmers wishes.
Robert Robertson
Chairman, FSB Agriculture Committee, Down Barton Farm, St Nicholas-at-Wade, Birchington, Kent.
Oil tanks? Check the regulations
I read recently the letter (July 31) on oil storage tanks. The writer has not understood the regulatory position regarding storage tanks containing oil used for farm vehicles. The problem that Mr Harvey faced when he proposed the use of a plastic bunded tank was not a requirement for double bunding; it was a requirement to keep the supply hose inside the bund when not in use.
The relevant regulations are rather grandly entitled the Control of Pollution (Silage, Slurry and Agricultural Fuel Oil) (Scotland) Regulations 1991. They require that all tanks used for this purpose are bunded. They also require that the hose used for supplying oil to the vehicle is installed so as to be kept within the bund when not in use.
Until recently, that was not possible with integrally bunded plastic tanks, because the hose was fitted outside the bund. Fortunately, that problem has been resolved and plastic bunded tanks with the hose inside the bund are available.
These tanks are provided with a choice of pump so that they can be fitted at ground level, which makes them safer when being filled and used. The pump can be powered manually or by tractor battery or electric mains.
The OFCERT standard for plastic tanks, including the agricultural type, is OFS T100 and this is referenced in the Environmental Agency and Scottish Environment Protection Agency guidance note.
If Mr Harvey, or other readers, have further problems with this matter we, or the local Environment Agency staff, will try to assist them.
C M J Sutherland
Technical director, OFTEC, Century House, 100 High Street, Banstead, Surrey.
Hidden dangers in a shampoo
The testing of yet another organophosphate on students from Manchester University aroused a great deal of anger among OP victims. One can only hope that their lives will not be blighted as ours have been.
What concerns me more is the continued use of pesticides for treatment of children with head lice. I have researched organophosphates in depth and have become extremely worried over the recommendation of malathion for the treatment of head lice. This compound was used in the Gulf War.
The scientific data on this compound can be found in the dictionary of substances and their effects published by the Royal Society of Chemistry which states: "Avoid skin contact". Thats a bit rich when we are talking about a shampoo. There is also a description of the symptoms of malathion poisoning ranging from nausea to coma with the comment that death is usually due to respiratory failure.
When one delves into pesticide poisoning in general one is struck by the repeated warning: "Pesticide poisoning can mimic brain haemorrhage."
Does anyone see a possible connection between pesticide exposure and shaken baby syndrome? After all, these babies were supposedly shaken so violently that they suffered brain damage, yet none appears to have suffered a broken neck.
Brenda Sutcliffe
Sheep Bank Farm, Littleborough, Lancs.
MAFF misled by false assurances
When farm minister Jeff Rooker told BBC News "We gave the World BSE" he may have been closer to the mark than he imagined.
If OPs were the cause, as is increasingly coming out despite intransigence and prevarication in many quarters, it would be Mr Rookers ministry which would have to accept responsibility in view of the compulsory warble fly drenching at high concentrations ordered by his predecessors.
In my view, that has been the trouble all along. The slaughter policy transferred the pressure from the ministry to farmers. Dr Cunningham followed the same line more recently and was promoted. Of course, MAFF was misled by the false assurance of the pharmaceutical companies and ultimate responsibility should lie with them. They have a gravely flawed track record, fighting tooth and nail to deny responsibility in safety. Remember DDT?
Lord Walsingham
The Hassocks, Merton, Thetford, Norfolk.
Comments were a gross calumny
The comments of your correspondent P Dransfield (Letters, Jul 31) are a gross calumny of the integrity of the inspectors who conduct public inquiries on rights of way matters. His accusations that some are "fraudulent" and "invent evidence and witnesses" are as insulting as they are absurd.
My own experience, even when I have disagreed with their findings, is that inspectors have bent over backwards to be impartial and objective and to put witnesses, however inexperienced in legal matters, at their ease.
Mr Dransfields statement that "it is also policy to create, regardless of the law, a continuous network of bridleways", is nonsense for which there is no shred of objective evidence.
Clive Bostle
11 Field Close, Aylesbury, Bucks.