Proposed Retrospective Introduction of TB Measures Unfair on Farmers – IFA

IFA Animal Health Chair David Hall said the proposal by the Department to retrospectively restrict the sale of cows in herds that have been locked up prior to the launch of the Bovine TB Action Plan is unfair on impacted farmers.

“IFA is firmly opposed to the retrospective implementation of measures within the TB Action Plan. In particular, the proposed retrospective restriction on the sale of cows from exposed cohorts and the identification at point of sale of females over 18 months,” David Hall said.

“These outbreaks have not been managed uniformly to date as envisaged in the TB Action Plan. To now impose restrictions retrospectively on farmers who operated in good faith is completely unfair on those impacted farmers.”

The IFA Animal Health Chair also outlined his disappointment at the lack of meaningful stakeholder engagement by the Department of Agriculture on the implementation of the Bovine TB Action Plan.

He said farmers have engaged constructively and consistently on the development of the plan, but the approach now being taken by the Department undermines that engagement and fails to respect commitments given to stakeholders.

David Hall said stakeholders had received clear assurances that no measures would be applied retrospectively and it is essential that the Department stands over those commitments.

“We have written to Minister Heydon to request an urgent meeting to address these issues and to ensure that farmers’ concerns are properly heard,” he said.

David Hall also raised serious concerns regarding the implementation of new testing requirements for cull cow sales at marts.

From April 13th, new rules will require cows entering dairy herds to have a pre-movement test within 30 days. Similar requirements will apply to suckler cows and males over 36 months if they are outside 6 months of their annual herd test.

“It was clearly understood that the Animal Identification and Movement system (AIMS) would prevent non-compliant movements and that marts would police these requirements in the interim,” he continued.

“We have now been informed that this will not be the case and that responsibility will instead fall on individual farmers, with the risk of referral to Regional Veterinary Offices for non-compliance. This is a clear reversal of commitments previously given by the Department.”

“The Department must pause this aspect of the TB Action Plan until AIMS is capable of properly enforcing these rules. Farmers cannot be expected to carry the burden of flawed implementation.”

The department must learn from mistakes previously made by implementing changes to compensation schemes for TB when their systems were not ready. It took 18 months for those problems to be rectified, but the Department seem determined to make the exact same mistake again,” the IFA Animal Health Chair outlined.

“The Department’s own communications have added to confusion on farms. It is completely unreasonable to expect farmers to be fully up to date with changes when clear and transparent guidance has not been provided,” David Hall concluded.