Thank you for inviting the SDC to the meeting held last Thursday afternoon, at Tolworth. My biggest concern, in writing direct to you, follows the discussion which my colleague Mrs Pat Bird and I had with Mr Montague, after the meeting was over. Mr Montague stated that during the morning, discussions had taken place with the Department of Health.

  During the course of the afternoon meeting, Dr Elaine King of the NFBG (National Federation of Badger Groups) fully endorsed my request for the need for wider post mortem testing of RTA badgers, being at the present time, 27 per cent of these RTA's show positive to TB.

  It is of critical importance that MAFF and Government realise that these positive badgers are the precursor of TB in cattle within that locality, and enables immediate on-farm testing of cattle, which otherwise may not have occurred until such time as the routine testing became due. I do not accept the argument that farmers are dumping massive numbers of badgers at the roadside, thereby distorting the true picture. To look to the testing of badgers found dead on the farm as a means of TB infection is a non-starter . . . in 30 years on this farm, which is riddled with badgers, we have yet to find a dead badger in the fields. Has research illustrated the manner usually adopted by badgers when close to death? Do they go to earth to die?

  Mr Montague made it abundantly clear that MAFF could not be seen to encourage farmers to handle these RTA badgers and the transporting of them to their local Veterinary Investigation Centre, because of COSHH (Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations) . . . risk assessment etc, advice from the Health officials who he met that morning . The more that I have thought about this comment, the angrier I have become. I sincerely hope that COSHH will not be used as a means to avoid MAFF budget monies being used on RTA badgers. Perhaps it would be more fitting to use COSHH in reverse . . . by the denial of a means of the detection of TB, and having to depend on the normal annual, two or three yearly herd testing programme, depending on the area TB status.

  How do farmers stand with COSHH when considering the following, should TB open lesioned cows be within their herds without the farmer's knowledge?

  1.  The herdsman is handling these cows twice daily, with urine from them frequently splashing into the milkers pit area . . . if 1ml of urine from a TB infected badger, contains 300,000 infective bacteria, is this figure any different from an infected open lesioned cow?

  Look at the manner in which cows enter the milking parlour . . . this morning I counted 10 cows, all facing the milking area, as close to the rump rail of the parlour as possible, their excretory moist breath being directed right into the pit area, what if these animals had open pulmonary lesions? The NFBG are saying that aersol is a means of transmission.

  2.  The farmer, his family and possibly his employees are drinking unpasteurised milk from those TB infected cows. The youngest animal testing positive to TB was three weeks of age. (ref. Exeter S.V.S.) Six month old calves, fed on whole milk, on post mortem, have shown generalised TB throughout the whole carcase (ref Exeter SVS)

  3.  Within the past six months I have "picked" up three dead roadside badgers, but, on each occasion, have avoided physical contact, as most farmers have in the boot of their car, pick-up, or Landrover, an empty feed or fertilizer bag, and on each occasion managed to get the dead badger into the bag with the aid of a stick and my foot. I can assure you that few farmers, in the course of collecting these RTA's, would wish to touch dead badgers as they are aware of the fact that a quarter of them have probably died from TB.

  The danger being exposed to the farmer and his family by the close contact with the cattle, and the mental trauma of the realisation that your cattle have TB, has to be of the paramount importance, as so vividly shown with the farm breakdown close to Kingsbridge, only last weekend.

  The farmer concerned, on losing the whole of his dairy herd, with the exception of two, was in such an emotional state that he was close to suicide, and only because of the immediate involvement of the Devon NFU chairman and vice-chairman, was a tragedy averted. On top of this, his nine year old daughter, who had always worked closely with her father in the routine work with the herd, is now coughing up blood. As yet, the public health officials have not visited the farm.

  USE COSSH AS A MEANS TO APPLY PRESSURE ON THE DEPT OF HEALTH TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RTA BADGERS ARE TESTED. IT IS THE ONLY EARLY WARNING SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE.

  I quote the words from the BVA (British Veterinary Association) submission to the Agricultural Select Committee re Krebs—"The report details the epidemiology of TB in the badger population very thoroughly, to the point where it becomes a study of badger TB rather than bovine TB. The growing problem in the national cattle herd would appear to be of secondary importance, despite the fact that the disease is zoonotic" . . . harsh words from a very reputable body.

  Mr Montague appeared to have a very negative attitude to any idea suggested, and to see this at such a high level within MAFF is alarming. At this present time, such is the concern over TB in the South West, at least give those proposals some urgent consideration, because, as I see it, your leaflet on Farm Biosecurity will do very little in this part of the UK.

  The remarks made by the BCVA vet on TB being entrenched in the wildlife reservoir was the real problem on which attention should be focused. This was endorsed by all the farming representatives in the room.

  PERHAPS IT IS ABOUT TIME WE GOT OUR PRIORITIES IN THE RIGHT ORDER.

14 February 1999