Schmallenberg virus (SBV) in ewe/cow pregnancy

Readers may remember me reporting previously on the new virus called the Schmallenberg virus (SBV) which causes fetal abnormalities in cattle and sheep. The virus was first identified in 2011 and is carried by midges which infect animals when they bite them, rather like mosquitoes can infect people with malaria.

However, in the case of SBV the problem arises when the midge bites and infects a pregnant ewe or cow. The virus then causes problems with the development of the fetus resulting in a range of deformities which may include bent limbs and fixed joints, twisted neck or spine and brain deformities. The nature of the deformity depends on when during the pregnancy the infection took place.

Studies have shown that infection is widespread throughout the UK which is not surprising as there seems very little that can be done to prevent livestock being bitten by midges. In this area I am aware of a number of clients who have reported problems with the virus and certainly the early lambing ewes seem to have suffered worse. This is because they would have been in the early stages of pregnancy during the late summer and early autumn when the midges would have been active.

This appears to be supported by the experience of local vets. For example Paddy Gordon of the Shepton Vet Group said, “We saw sporadic cases of the disease last year, however diagnostic costs mean that confirmed cases are unknown. We saw most lamb deformities in January and the majority of affected calves were seen in March and April”.

When the virus was first discovered there was no means of protecting livestock against the disease but scientists have now produced a vaccine which has been licensed for use in non-pregnant animals only. Cattle require two vaccinations approximately four weeks apart while sheep only require a single dose of the vaccine. Onset of immunity then takes place about three weeks after the last vaccination although how long immunity will last is not known and annual boosters are recommended.

However at a cost of approximately £3 per dose many farmers will think twice about treating all their livestock. In this respect Paddy Gordon commented, “Farmers will want to target the treatment on those animals which are most likely to be at risk of fetal deformities. We do not know how many animals will have developed a natural immunity to the virus and so we will have to wait and see what happens this year to fertility and calving/lambing next spring. We see the vaccine being used by early lambing sheep flocks in particular, probably smallholders with a few pet or pedigree sheep to protect and in some beef herds and maiden heifers according to concern and experience. One problem is that the vaccine has no licence for use in pregnant animals, and we would not recommend its use in pregnant animals due to the possibility of abortion due to vaccine response or stress of handling. This rules out use in most dairy herds which are all year round calving.”

So, although SBV has been nothing like as catastrophic to livestock farmers as BSE or Foot and Mouth Disease, it has certainly infected many livestock in this area we wait to see how many livestock will develop natural immunity, the long term impact of the disease on fertility and the role vaccination may play in the future.


James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk

No deal for Common Agricultural Policy reform?

As we approach the end of June there is serious concern that a deal will not be reached on the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) before the EU presidency transfers from Ireland to Lithuania.

It is generally thought that if a deal is not reached under the Irish presidency there could be a long wait before there will be clarity as to what the reforms will look like which will be very damaging for farmers across Europe.

DEFRA secretary Owen Paterson said, "I think there's a 60:40 sporting chance we will get a deal on CAP reform under the Irish presidency. If not, next year's EU parliamentary elections will delay any deal even further."

Some of the major sticking points include whether or not there should be a ceiling on direct payments for large farms, what environmental or “greening” measures will become compulsory as of the scheme and how payments should be redistributed more fairly across the EU. All these matters have the capacity to become very contentious because of the very different types of farming across Europe.

In the UK the average size of our farms tend to be larger than most of the rest of Europe and so our farmers are not keen on limiting payments to large farms. Further, in England we already have a variety of environmental stewardship schemes in to which farmers have entered large areas of land and these farmers will not want to be compelled to take further land out of production under some form of compulsory greening measures. The obvious way forward from our perspective would be to allow such schemes to qualify as part of the compulsory greening measures but other countries in the EU will no doubt disagree.

As far as the level of payments is concerned, the countries which have entered the EU more recently are campaigning for their payments to be increased but this will be at the cost of those countries who already have higher payments.

Talks to try to resolve the current impasse are due to start in Luxembourg on 24th June and if I was to hazard a guess it is likely that an agreement will be reached because failure to do so would be incredibly damaging for farmers across Europe. This is not just because the support payments make a crucial contribution to a farmer’s ability to make a profit but also because there is nothing worse than a prolonged period of uncertainty to hold back investment in and development of any industry and agriculture is no exception in this respect.


James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk

What a difference a week makes

What a difference a week of fine weather makes – silage making has been going at full throttle and even the recently drilled maize crops have started to grow. But that is not a moment too soon because everything is running about 3 week’s behind a usual season and as a result late planted crops will struggle to produce a sensible yield.

Early indications are that although the quality of silage crops will be reasonable they will be “light” and so farmers will still be hoping this summer proves a little more “normal” than last year with sunshine, rain and warmth in equal measure to encourage the growth of grass for and 2nd and 3rd cut silage crops.

Cereal crops are also a long way behind where one would normally expect them to be and with so many spring sown crops being planted this year rather than autumn sown “winter” crops, this emphasises the appearance of a late season. This will also have an impact on yields because although the input costs are generally lower for spring rather than winter crops, yields are also lower and so the impact of last year’s wet weather will be reflected in this year’s harvest output.

But it is not only the weather that has perked up a bit, so have global commodity markets which point to the potential for price rises for dairy farmers on cheese contracts in particular. In the past week, two major companies, Dairy Crest and First Milk have announced price rises for their milk suppliers on cheese contracts that will kick in next month.

There is also talk of cheese supplies tightening later in the year because it is believed less cheese was made earlier in the year following a move by processors to divert milk for cheese into other products. This could lead to shortages towards the back end of the year giving rise to optimism for further milk price rises still to come.

Whether such price rises will come to fruition is not known but at least there is reason for optimism in the cheese markets at present and let’s just hope this is also reflected in the weather continues as we move on in to the summer.


James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk

Controversial Badger cull

By the time you read this article the first shots may already have been fired in west Somerset heralding the start of the controversial Badger cull. As many readers will be aware the cull has been introduced by the government on an experimental basis at two sites here in the West Country as part of an overall strategy to bring Bovine TB in cattle under control.

This is a subject that will continue to divide opinion but what is for certain is that the current strategy to bring is simply not working. Around 28,000 cattle were slaughtered last year and if current trends continue this number will rise further and it is estimated will cost the taxpayer in the order of £1bn over the next 10 years.

That is not to mention the suffering imposed on the cattle and badgers which become infected by the disease and the financial and emotional stress this disease has on farmers themselves. I know of many farmers in this area who have been very badly affected; some have even been prevented from restocking their farms because the incidence of TB is so high, while others just describe the feeling of dread every time they have a TB test.

It is this side of the debate that seems to be almost entirely forgotten; farmers may receive compensation for the cattle which are lost but they suffer the consequential losses such as the ongoing loss of milk or the need to rear calves whose mothers may have been slaughtered for example. This is made even worse if some farmers are then not allowed to restock at all. But there is also the emotional strain on farmers and their families which is quite simply not appreciated.

So the audience which attended the breakfast meeting that opened proceedings at the Royal Bath and West Show last week were pleased to hear Agriculture Minister and Somerton and Frome MP, David Heath categorically state the government’s commitment to the Badger cull. David Heath made no bones about the fact that this is a controversial matter but he also made the point very clearly that no other country in the world has ever been able to bring bovine TB under control without culling the wildlife vectors of the disease.

He gave examples of Ireland, New Zealand and Australia where this is or has happened but he also emphasised the cull will be part of a much wider programme of measures. These will include pre-movement testing in cattle and other on farm bio-security measures which are already in place. He also explained that research in to effective vaccines in badgers and cattle will be ongoing but he emphasised that there is little immediate prospect of these being able to be used widely. This is partly because they have not been perfected in a form that can be administered in an economically viable manner in badgers and partly because of EU regulation which will not allow the use of the current vaccines in cattle.

Finally David Heath explained that it is likely to be a long process to bring TB under control. He thought it may take as long as 25 years and although an effective vaccine for cattle will be one of the long term aims, culling of badgers will form an important part of government policy at least in the short term.


James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk