The judge rejected the application for the decision by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and the Welsh Assembly over the cull to be quashed or declared unlawful on the basis it was irrational.

He said while he had every sympathy with Miss Hughes and for others who were concerned over what had happened, her action could not continue as it had
"no real prospect of success".

"I remind myself that it's not for this court, which is exercising a review function, to decide whether the decision made in the present context, informed by science and concerning the livelihoods of many people, was right or wrong.

BACKGROUND

The Western Mail - Aug 3 and 4 2001 - FMDACTION IN PURPLE

GRAZIERS trying to save their flocks of hill sheep on the Brecon Beacons are hoping that an application for an injunction to stop the cull will be successful. Farmers for Livestock Wales co-ordinator Janet Hughes is taking out an injunction against the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) to stop the cull of healthy animals in Wales.

She has also launched an appeal fund called "Save Our Sheep" at the Nationwide Building Society and donations may be paid into any branch. The account no is 0863 703 560 350.

Miss Hughes pointed out that the animals being culled on the Beacons have only been tested for antibodies not for the live foot-and-mouth virus. THE PRESENCE OF ANTI BODIES SHOWS THAT SHEEP HAVE HAD THE DISEASE AND HAVE RECOVERED. THESE SHEEP ARE NOW NATURALLY IMMUNE FROM THE FURTHER INFECTION AND CAN NOT PASS ON THE DISEASE TO OTHER SHEEP. THIS IS NATURES NATURAL DEFENCE AGAINST VIRAL INFECTION. THEREFORE THESES SHEEP SHOULD BE THE LAST SHEEP THAT COULD POSSIBLY NEED KILLING.

She is desperate to call a halt to the slaughter of animals, which she claims pose no threat to other livestock. She has been gathering information on the testing of sheep on the Beacons to submit to foot-and-mouth specialist Professor Fred Brown, of the US Department of Agriculture, who has agreed to act as an expert witness in legal proceedings. Miss Hughes said, "The letter that has been sent by my solicitors effectively stops them culling any more animals until the court hearing. Chairman of the Brecon Beacons Commoners' Association Edwin Harris said he was pleased that Miss Hughes was taking legal action to stop the cull. "I don't agree with the cull. The association has been trying to convince the Assembly to only slaughter the sheep carrying antibodies. The rest could be quarantined and tested again 14 days later. If they are still clear they could be sent back out onto the hills and we would have saved the flocks," he said. A spokeswoman for Defra said the application for an injunction was being treated seriously.

So far, 5,500 mountain sheep have been slaughtered in the Beacons after a significant level of antibodies was found. Mrs Hughes stressed that scientific evidence showed that healthy animals did not become infected with foot-and-mouth virus from contact with animals that have antibodies to the disease."There have only been two cases ever of this happening in the whole world. It is so rare as to be almost impossible. It is ridiculous that they are killing perfectly healthy animals because they have antibodies to foot-and-mouth disease. They are being persecuted just because they have an immune system. I just had to do something - I couldn't sit and watch them kill healthy animals any longer," she said. "I know this is a huge risk and I could face costs of up to £200,000 but it is a risk I have to take," said Mrs Hughes.

Meanwhile, Farmers' Union of Wales deputy president Glyn Powell, is concerned that moving sheep for blood testing in the Brecon Beacons may be causing the disease to spread further into the mountain flocks. Mr Powell said he fears a further 10,000 sheep could be at immediate risk as a result of the testing methods employed. He explained that dogs should have been used to round up the sheep immediately after the first outbreak in Libanus. "There has now been a delay between infection in Libanus and the testing programme. And I would suggest that when they gathered these sheep into their folds, it wasn't a clean gather. I don't think the weather conditions were right and there is a feeling that a number of sheep could have been driven away, that they bolted from the immediate area being gathered and into the main body of other flocks further away. They should have worked from the outside in, rather than from the inside out. By working outwards, you are chasing the disease instead of getting in front of it," said Mr Powell.

1. for use as a strategic control in existing infected areas as a 'firebreak' or 'cordon sanitaire' with all livestock species

In the Netherlands a policy of vaccination in a defensive ring around outbreaks eradicated the disease within weeks earlier this year. The ring vaccination policy could be on a voluntary basis with contiguous farms being offered the option of either culling their animals or accepting vaccination. There would be no need to cull vaccinated animals, which do not develop FMD, after the danger of infection has passed and are perfectly safe to eat.

2. for use by farmers on holdings in infected areas in the UK who wish to protect their livestock from possible infection.

This would enable producers to protect rare or native breeds, organic livestock or highly valued breeding livestock against the disease. Without such a policy we are in danger of continuing to destroy an invaluable national asset unnecessarily.

Helen Browning, Chair of the Soil Association, 'We have been advocating a policy of voluntary vaccination since March and are still hopeful that reason will prevail. The Government and farming organizations must recognize vaccination could have a key role to play if we are to have a chance of controlling the disease before winter makes the task even more difficult. '

Most opponents of vaccination have argued that a policy of vaccination would delay regaining the disease free status necessary for the resumption of meat exports, this argument is no longer valid. British consumers are eating meat from Argentina and Brazil, which have regional vaccination programmes.

Yorkshire Post Tuesday July 31 2001 (Letters to the Editor) From: Dr Susan Haywood, Keld, Richmond, North Yorkshire

Sir, - As a senior veterinary pathologist (Liverpool University) I am in complete agreement with the opinions expressed by Prof. Vernon Wheelock formerly of Bradford University as to the damage caused by the Government's failure to adopt a vaccination policy in the present foot and mouth outbreak.

The failure of the Ministry of Agriculture (MAFF) and the National Farmers' Union to heed the advice regarding vaccination, of such world authorities on foot and mouth disease (FMD) as Prof. Fred Brown of US Department of Agriculture (formerly deputy head of Pirbright Virus Research Institute,UK), Dr S. Barteling and Dr P. Sutmoller virologists and FMD consultants is breath taking!

We seem to forget that FMD outbreaks are of fairly regular occurrence in many parts of the world such as South Africa, Eastern Europe and the Middle East and FMD consultants have extensive experience of their control. Stamping out or eradication of infected animals in a confirmed outbreak plus culling of 'in contact' animals has been found only successful in localised outbreaks (S. Barteling). Ring vaccination supported by limited culling has been found to be far and away the most effective method of control in more extensive outbreaks - as occurred in Holland recently.

The objections posed by the NFU (Rob Simpson NFU North Regional spokesman) have no foundation in fact:

The Food Standards Agency has confirmed that the presence of vaccine in the food chain presents no risks to human health. In any case the FMD vaccine is a non-living substance and unable to proliferate in the body. People have consumed great quantities of meat from animals vaccinated against FMD (before disease free status was achieved) on the continent of Europe without any health problems. Moreover vaccination is used on a regular basis for a variety of diseases in domesticated animals; for example, sheep are vaccinated annually against Clostridial infections, lamb dysentery, pulpy kidney, non of which has raised questions of risk to health.

It has been alleged, and is most likely true, that only a concerted campaign by the NFU has created doubt in the minds of consumer and marketing outlets!

The fear that FMD vaccinated animals may harbour the virus and transmit the disease to non vaccinated animals is another misinformation that has helped fuel antagonism against vaccination. Experimental trials carried out in this country and abroad have failed to produce any single instance whereby vaccinated animals re - exposed to the virus transmitted the disease to susceptible animals (F. Brown & S. Barteling). The risk of transmission of infection has no scientific basis.

A third misconception is that vaccination is not always effective. Vaccination against FMD has been shown to be a safe and efficacious means of protecting all known susceptible species against the disease. The FMD vaccine produces immunity in up to 90% of animals vaccinated. No vaccine is 100% effective. Medical opinion has estimated that between 70-80% immunity in a population is sufficient for the control or eradication of viral disease - the virus fails to find a host in which to replicate and so dies out. After all, small pox has been eradicated from the planet using vaccination.

We have to ask ourselves why it is that the NFU has persisted in peddling such untruths. Is it through ignorance of the true facts of the case? Has the NFU become victims of their own propaganda so that they actually believe it? Is there something we don't know -a hidden agenda?

Whatever may be the reasons, it is clear that an organization insufficiently responsible to establish the full facts on a scientific basis is hardly
best placed to influence policy.

Even the much vaunted early return to 'disease free status' is looking decidedly unlikely as the numbers of outbreaks, instead of tailing off as predicted, settle down to a steady state, a situation with all the hall marks of the disease being endemic - in some areas of UK at least.

Before the FMD crisis becomes a catastrophe, let us hope the NFU, together with DEFRA, will swallow their pride, take a long hard look at the situation and vaccinate in the disease hotspots before FMD establishes itself in the pig farming areas of the arable east coast."

A vet from Devon was dismissed instantly for questioning the legality of the contagious cull; without being paid for work done! DEFRAT have refused to admit he had worked for them. He spoke to Jim Scudamore the Chief Vet,on 22/06/01 who stated the following:-
a). Form A`s will be modified to ensure Vet`s do not have to sign illegally.AS THEY ARE DOING NOW AND HAVE BEEN DOING SINCE FEB!SEE BELOW. The form will now read "Possibly exposed to FMD". He also stated that the vet`s do not have to sign as the Maff Inspector could also!
b). There will NEVER be a plan of Immunisation against FMD in the UK. THATS WHAT HE THINKS.
c). All animals found carrying anti-bodies after blood testing, will be culled. One sheep in a flock with anti-bodies will ensure the complete destruction of that flock. Same applies to cattle/pigs etc! source: Nick Green.

PLEASE WRITE NOW TO MARGARET BECKETT, THE NEW MINISTER OF RURAL AFFAIRS, OUTLINING THE CASE SET OUT BELOW. LETS FILL HER INTRAY BEFORE SHE HAS THE CHANCE TO BECOME PRE-OCCUPIED WITH WALLPAPER DESIGNS AND NEW POT PLANTS!

The President of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, Roger Eddy, writing in the Veterinary Record of June 9TH. warns Veterinary Surgeons concerning the signing of false certificates.

The President said he had informed the Chief Vet, Mr. Scudamore, that for a Vet to sign the Form 'A' for the cull of healthy livestock, (contiguous, dangerous contact and 3km cull zones), may be a' false certificate' and an offence for which the offending Vet could be struck off. DEDRAT lawyers were being consulted concerning the matter. Neither the EU nor U.K. law make any provision for the forced killing of healthy stock.

Farmers who have suffered the slaughter of healthy livestock in this way should lose no time in lodging a formal complaint to the R.C.V.S. The Guidelines for completion and the complaint form are available from Farmtalking.com or the R.C.V.S.

Every farmer and Vet, (the latter don't always read their copy of the Veterinary Record!) should be informed of the possible consequences of signing the Form 'A' for the slaughter of healthy stock.

We must all make every effort to ensure that everyone knows the above information, an end to this unscientific, barbaric and cruel policy can be achieved without delay.

Subsequently, Politicians should seek advice from the very best qualified,National and International, Veterinary and Scientific specialists in FMD. Changes to the regulations regarding FMD Free Status and/or Vaccination will have to be made. Farmers and Food Industry Representatives should be included in these discussions and a humane and sensible policy, (maybe,written into law), should be sought, to enable us to live with this virus that has chosen to live with us.

1. If the FMD-infected cattle have to be slaughtered, the EU will save several hundred million euros since FMD is the responsibility of the individual countries, which will have to bear the costs themselves. This differs from the problem of BSE where the EU had to bear the costs of the absurd BSE slaughter.

2. If it is true that the EU plans to deprive European farming of almost the entire basis of its livelihood by 'restructuring' it to establish a centrally managed agri-business with capitalistic profits, then BSE and FMD were the right means to ruin this industry as quickly as possible.

3. Epidemics such as BSE and FMD enable the EU to implement undemocratic and dictatorial measures, and to place the population in a state of emergency. It is a fact that borders are now being controlled more strictly, people's freedom of movement restricted, and civil rights and property rights abused.

CIVIL servants are considering plans to ensure that Britain's livestock industry, devastated by foot-and-mouth, is unable to return to pre-crisis levels. Ministry of Agriculture officials believe livestock numbers could be permanently reduced if the government buys up sheep and beef quota.

Officials are formulating details of the scheme to buy quota from farmers. The idea will be put before the agriculture minister after the general election. The plan is likely to be welcomed by conservationists, who have claimed that too many livestock have caused over-grazing in upland areas.

Official statistics show that more than 4 million animals have been slaughtered due to foot-and-mouth.But some sources suggest the final death toll will reach 8m. To prevent the industry rebuilding, the proposals would see the government buying sheep and suckler cow quota from farmers who leave the industry.

Quota would be stockpiled in a national reserve, guaranteeing that livestock numbers were reduced. It would not be reallocated. Sheep farmers are dismayed. National Sheep Association chief executive John Thorley said it was doubtful farmers would be able to buy the quota back. Unless farmers were allowed to farm, the proposals would contribute to the dereliction of the countryside,said Mr Thorley. "I don't see it as a good thing. Unless the government does something dramatic to restore confidence inthe industry, I can't see people returning."

But the National Farmers' Union has backed the plans. NFU deputy director general Ian Gardiner said:
"It is entirely feasible." The scheme would provide short-term relief for sheep farmers who had lost 30% of their market because of the foot-and-mouth export ban, he said. The departure of some farmers after foot-and-mouth could provide other with a golden opportunity to restructure, said Mr Gardiner.

Vacated holdings could be combined with neighbouring farms to create bigger, more efficient units, he
said. " BYE BYE SMALL FAMILY FARMS, HELLO AGRI-BUSINESS. SOD THE ENVIRONMENT - JOB DONE, HOORAY FOR THE NFU!!!!

"It is unclear whether the government would pay the market price or encourage producers to quit farming by paying more for quota. Sheep quota sales averaged £3.63/unit last year, according to Hereford quota traders Thompson Land &Property. Suckler cow quota sales averaged £212/unit. George Dunn, chief executive of the Tenant Farmers' Association, said current quota values may be too low to encourage farmers to quit farming.

DEDRAT WARNS FARMERS TO ENFORCE THE 'FIREWALLS'by Steve Connor and Nigel Morris The Independent,Tuesday 10 April 2001, p. 6. (First half of article then ...)

Scientists at the American government's Plum Island Animal Disease Center in New York state carried out airborne transmission experiments on pigs and found that the virus could not be transmitted between members of a swine herd by air currents alone. Fred Brown, an authority on the virus at Plum Island, said the experiment was repeated six times but failed to uncover any evidence for airborne transmission between pigs. In the American experiment, a group of pigs infected with foot-and-mouth were put in the same barn with an uninfected group, separated by a barrier to prevent physical contact. Although both herds breathed the same air, the uninfected group remained free of the disease. Dr Brown said:"They did this seven times but none of the uninfected pigs came down with foot-and-mouth." Chris Bostock, director of the Institute of Animal Health, said there was abundant experimental evidence to show that airborne transmission was a real threat, especially when pigs and cattle were involved. Epidemiologists, for instance, were able in 1981 to predict correctly than an outbreak of foot-and-mouth among pigs in northern France posed a risk to animals in Jersey and the Isle of Wight because of prevailing northerly winds, Professor Bostock said. However, Dr Brown is skeptical that wind was the transmission route. He said: "I find it difficult to accept that the virus could have traveled 170 miles through the air. There is no direct, physical evidence for airborne transmission of foot-and-mouth virus."