Originally from: Farmtalking
                        

Author wrote:
Jane – they are not going to tell us what their real plans are – that is, if they have any.

Of course if we ask them 'will you vaccinate to slaughter', they will say no. They are hardly going to put it in writing, are they?

Why not? I've found MP's do usually answer letters although in 2002 it took them a few months to do so sometimes!

As you know, I don't think they intend to vaccinate and then slaughter so I've not asked the specific question but I'm not afraid to do so and perhaps I will!

 No farmer would entertain it would they?

I'm interested to note you say this here and yet later in your message indicate that you think farmers would comply and go along with it. You could well be right either way!

Perhaps we should look at what changes were made from the previous outbreak in 1967 and how many of the lessons there were implemented? Does that give any of us reassurance that anything would be different when it happens again.

No they weren't and it doesn't, unless we believe a leopard can change it's spots and the lessons have been or are being, learned at last!

The majority have forgotten, and next time round nothing will close down so there will be NO loss of income to the tourist industry. It was this issue that kept fmd in the media , far longer then the slaughtering did.

Yes and if that's the case that's all to the good; better management next time round, if ever, is what we've all been demanding and in some respects still are!

 Andrew is correct when he wrote along the lines, that most farmers did take the money.

 They will do again I dare say, and those that opposed it first time round will do again – but with NO law to back them up (not that there was much in evidence last time)! Some farmers have seen that you can rise again – after loosing your stock. I think they will see this as more acceptable then having vaccinated cattle, that they probably will not be able to do anything with.

Of course Andrew is right but I stillI don't understand why you say this; as of course we'll expect movement restrictions and no doubt some will be stuck with steers, lambs, etc they had hoped to sell for longer than usual, but why should things not return to normal in a short while as they did in Uruguay? Plus wouldn't slaughtering after vaccination hit the tax-payer with a 'double whammy' for no good reason? Surely not the way for the Government, any government, to win friends and influence people!

After all who knows where we will be in the vaccination stakes when the next outbreak stakes. We may not have moved on, in terms of better vaccines. Although I still say use what we have now – for everyone.

To do that would be crossing our bridge before we get to it. We don't have an FMD outbreak and maybe never will, so what is the point of vaccinating now? At present we only have short-term vaccine so would it be sensible to start and then continue to use it on every animal just in case? I don't think so! It would incur huge expense which would be quite unnesccesary at the present time and remove our FMD Free Status into the bargain, so not a very clever move!

Unless we implement a complete vaccination policy right across the board before the next outbreak then I can not see anything different (except vaccination be used as a fire break – but to slaughter afterwards).

Yes Coleen, vaccination will be used but as a fire-break, thus limiting it's use to exactly where it's needed if there's another outbreak, but there's no need to slaughter afterwards – so why would they?