Steve Jones has 35 years of experience working within a diverse range of livestock enterprises; from small to medium sized units to large scale agri-business within various locations around the globe. He is trained in organic milk and meat production and have extensive practical and theoretical knowledge in all aspects of the industry including: calf rearing; hoof trimming; herd health; cattle breeding and day to day management at the highest level. He has managed some of the highest yielding dairy herds in the world while attaining consistent levels of hygiene and disease resistance within the livestock under my control. He is also a qualified lecturer in rural and environmental studies.

A common seam runs through the recommendations that he is putting forward here as an alternative to the badger cull; those are bio-security and animal husbandry.



Disease and infection are all too often invited in, slow to be tackled and can reach epidemic proportions. I have seen it many times before with lameness, mastitis, mad cow disease, foot and mouth and now bovine TB. I identify 2 main areas of vulnerability that is causing bovine T.B to be such a national problem.

BIO- SECRURITY

And STRESS within our livestock enterprises.

BIO-SECRURITY I break down into 4 main categories:
WATER MAGEMENT
FEED MANAGEMENT
QUARENTINE and COW to COW infection.

WATER MANAGEMENT The tuberculin bacteria have been found to exist in water troughs especially when they become stagnant. In my opinion, there is a direct link between water troughs and the transmition of tuberculin bacterium to cows or, any animal that may drink from them. The initial exposure of T.B. toward a healthy herd is likely to have come from this source. The general concept of a random lottery of infection seemed implausible to me and I think a lot of people today think the same way.

My initial letter, voicing my concerns about water trough infection, was published nationally in August 2011 and received a favourable response from the farming community. The letter reads as follows:

BADGER CULL – THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE

As a Dairy Herdsman, I have managed some of the most productive and disease-free herds in areas as diverse as Saudi Arabia, Norway, Wales and the South West of England. Although farms exist against a background of foxes, badgers, rabbits, deer and smaller rodents, all potential carriers of harm, too few British farmers manage to prevent the infection of their stock. The overriding factors for success are good husbandry and attention to detail to promote health and hygiene in order to stifle disease.

Standing water readily harbours malignancy. Cattle in the UK rely on water troughs that are rarely cleaned out, even after the winter period when the troughs have been stagnating. In the springtime, when cattle go out to grass, they are expected to quaff a cocktail of dead birds, rodents and the inevitable bacteria ridden sludge at the bottom of the tank. Badgers, too, use the troughs and so add their own spittle to the brew. We are then surprised when cattle contract TB and we blame the badgers. It would not be difficult to make troughs completely badger proof.

A rigorously controlled experiment of two dozen farms within an area high in TB, in which hygiene and water management was strictly enforced and inspected would quickly establish whether the badgers or the farmer were to blame. The expedient of culling badgers and slaughtering livestock - expensive and almost certainly ineffective - might be averted. I believe that we must pursue sound husbandry practice within our agricultural industry. This not only promotes efficiency but continues an uninterrupted supply of food into what may be a shortfall in the foreseeable future.

FOOD STORES Grain and feed stores, too, must be made inaccessible to badgers. Animals fed outdoors should be fed precise amounts as to alleviate wastage and fed into clean feed troughs which should be up turned after each event. The days of leaving feeders unattended all day or night and then tipping out the sludge in the morning, in order to put clean food on top, should come to an end. Obviously these need cleaning out too should they become fouled.

QUARENTINE Ideally, infected cows are quarantined. All farms should have isolation areas to enable the separation of animals should it be necessary and for whatever reason. Should any infection occur then animals must be separated as to prevent the problem from gaining a foot hold. My experience of this is that quarantine areas are usually inadequate or non-existent on many farms. Bought in livestock represent a clear risk to Bovine TB. free herds and careful consideration must be made to installing precautionary measures such as quarantine and TB. testing.

Cow to Cow infection. Bovine TB. is spread from cow to cow mainly in the form of water droplets; this makes cross contamination a particular problem when cattle are housed. As a species, cows have a small lung capacity in relation to their oxygen needs and their size. A cow has 250% more oxygen requirement than a horse but only 30% the capacity of a horse. This disparity makes our cows very susceptible to Bovine Respiratory Disease, a very important consideration when farming in warmer climates; not, however, of equal concern to our U.K. industry it seems. It is my experience that many of our young stock have been exposed to some degree of B.R.D. thus making them more predisposed to further lung problems when they become adult beasts.

Good ventilation is crucial when cattle are housed, be it winter or summer and is an integral part in our fight against Bovine TB.

Now we consider STRESS, and its relationship with Infectious disease

Infectious disease is transmitted by exposure of an infectious agent upon a host. Other variables influence the rate and severity of the infection; these include the presence of other infections; the environment and stress upon the individual or the general cow population. These factors are known to influence the transmition rate and the susceptibility rate of an infectious agent upon a herd.

There are 3 main areas which I shall highlight, all of which cause pain and suffering within our livestock industry and thus making our animals more susceptible to disease and infection

Broadly speaking the basis of my thinking is that stress levels have a direct. Influence on the health of our livestock. Stress does not always result in tangible chronic disease or illness, but in its sub-clinical form it does untold damage to the immune system which allows for the livestock to become more susceptible to disease. These stresses can be measured in the blood, milk and meat of our oxen and on all too many farms these levels are far too high to promote well-being and efficiency. The 3 main areas are..

LAMENESS

MASTITIS

And LIVESTOCK HANDLING

Lameness has long been an issue on many farms. Dermatitis, ulcers, laminitis and overgrown hooves causes loss of condition, pain and economic shortfall. The average incidence of lameness in our national herd is 22%. This level is far too high and indicates heightened stress levels within the cow population. This level of lameness is not uncommon and seen to be acceptable on many units. This burden of stress has a direct effect on the animals’ susceptibility to disease and infection, which is of concern to us when considering cows becoming infected with Bovine TB.

There is no reason why lameness within a dairy or beef herd cannot be eradicated completely.

MASTITIS Secondly we come to mastitis. Many managers struggle with this perennial disease, even though we have a wealth of knowledge at our disposal to alleviate the problem. Our attention here is on sub-clinical mastitis as detected by the somatic cell levels within the udder of the cow. The presence of these cells is a direct result of the cows’ immune system and her ability to fight infection. The cells can be counted and form part of the payment criteria that the farmer receives for the milk.

Cell counts of 500,000 are common and cell counts of 1,000,000 per ml and more are far too numerous. In my opinion cell counts over 200,000 per ml should be the maximum tolerated by the industry. Lower cell counts can result in the herd to become more susceptible to clinical infections and these can cause acute stress on the individuals infected. Many cows are culled for mastitis and lameness problems, even after huge advances in the breeding of genetically improved livestock. In countries where a comprehensive and often more advanced set of surveillance and control measures to eliminate cattle to cattle infection exists, these have very low incidences of bovine T.B. We need to be pro-active and adopt dynamic strategies in our fight against disease in order to minimise our dependency on antibiotics.

It must be understood that mastitis and lameness are endemic within our agricultural industry, causing huge financial losses and this is money that is not being reinvested back into the enterprise. Beef herds too suffer the same production and metabolic disorders but are generally not under so much stress as the dairy cow. With such high levels of lameness and mastitis within the national herd, is it any wonder that our animals Succumb, so readily, to environmental infections such as Bovine TB.

Livestock handling must be carried out in an efficient and sympathetic manner. I will explain this statement by linking it to the scenario of the sequence of events that unfold when a farm fails a routine bovine tuberculin test. The test does vary slightly in different arias and locations, especially as to the frequency of clear tests to enable a bovine TB. status to ensue.

A stringent TB. testing regime begins. This takes the form of running each adult beast through a cattle crush to enable them to be injected by a vet. Smaller animals can be caught and dealt with while being held. All the animals must be rounded up and brought to a handling area, usually the farm. This happens on two separate days over one week (so the animals are moved twice) and this is carried out over three consecutive months, until no reactors are found, otherwise it continues infinitum. These” round ups” are often stressful affairs on man and beast alike. Conclusive reactors to the test are slaughtered and this too causes vacuums to occur within the herds as the pecking order is continually changing. Cows form social groups and these become unstable thus increasing anxiety levels. Is it any wonder that once a farm falls to Bovine TB., then the pressure of stress feeds itself and the farm can reach breaking point with more and more reactors?

In my opinion these are some of the main factors concerning the rise of Bovine T.B. I believe that if these husbandry measures, which I have identified, were raised to an advanced level and adhered to, then a reversal in the current trend of T.B. infection would be imminent.

Lastly there is a legal issue with the cull, this is a letter that I have recently had published: Liability of the Cull. In regard of the proposed pilot badger culls in the Forest of Dean and Somerset. The government has negated its responsibility for the cull by transferring its accountability to farmers, landowners and gunmen. These must form limited company syndicates in order to obtain a culling licence.

Three issues need addressing here: • The culled badger carcases constitute a high risk category of transmitting a communicable disease; they must, therefore, be removed and disposed of in accordance with E.U. control regulations. • Secondly, should shot badgers be left to suffer through injury they fall under the wild mammal’s protection act 1996 which protects animals from intentional cruelty. Both of these constitute a crime carrying hefty fines and prison sentences. • Thirdly, should a member of the public be injured or killed, (which I have witnessed in other countries), then a more serious liability will occur.

Steve Jones, Dairy Specialist, Forest of Dean, Glos.