Cuts could leave council vulnerable to animal diseases

Data on animal movement that may be essential in the event of a disease outbreak such as food and mouth, will no longer be kept on file by Cumbria council after cost saving proposals are implemented, the NFU has said.

“Memories are obviously very short at Cumbria County Council,” said NFU’s Cumbrian livestock representative Graham Hogg.

“FMD shrank the economy of this county by £266 million with the loss of income to agriculture at approximately £130 million. Tourism revenue was hit by some £200 million with a further indirect cost of £60 million on the wider economy. Now they are risking that again for the sake of a few quid saved by scrapping the manual inputting of data onto the Animal Movement Licensing System.

“By not continuing to invest in this safeguard and entering information onto the database, the NFU has serious concerns that the Council is not only jeopardising the agriculture and tourism economy but is also putting the health and welfare of the county’s livestock at risk as we head into the peak autumn trading of sheep. Enforcing movement standstills are not enough if up to date information is not available on the system to trace the spread of the disease, sort the problem out and then lift the standstill to allow trade.”

The union has written to the council to express its concerns about the proposals which will be discussed by the Council Cabinet on 13 September.

“There is a legal obligation for the Government to record this information. So if they want it, they should pay for it" said livestock farmer and NFU Cumbria council delegate, Alistair Mackintosh.


"Therefore Cumbria County Council should stop trying to push the costs onto the farmer. We recognise that the current system has limitations in that it takes several days to get all information onto the Animal Movement Licensing System."

"However, until a new system of movement reporting is put in place by Defra, which could be as early as spring next year, we feel it would be irresponsible for the Council to abdicate its responsibility in this area.

“We note that other councils have looked at working with neighbouring authorities to save administration costs for this important service. Our farmers spend considerable time and effort in keeping accurate records and reporting movements to trading standards. Many farmers actually receive cross compliance penalties for minor mistakes in their movement records. They will be understandably furious to find that the Council believes they are wasting their time and plans to do nothing with the data they submit.”