MENUAnimal
Health/
|
 |
|
Back to SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage The unhealthy relationships between the Scottish Executive, the Soil Association, the Scottish Agricultural College, the lobby group Environment LINK, and the media need to be addressedReview of conference presented by Soil Association, Scottish Agricultural College, and Scottish Natural Heritage"Farming, food and health: an indivisible
chain"
|
|
No, farms with
confirmed cases |
No. of
confirmed cases |
No. of
homebred cases |
No. of
purchased cases |
|
36
|
215
|
149
|
66
|
Table 1: BSE incidence
on organic farms up to November 1995
Source: Central Veterinary Laboratory
Specifically, Mr Wilesmith did not consider that organic herds had a lower incidence of BSE than the national average. The Soil Association tried to claim that those organic herds that had BSE were in the process of being converted to organic. The inquiry concluded that:
"MBM (Meat and Bone Meal) in purchased compound feeds could have been fed on organic farms until 1983. It is therefore possible that cattle on these farms were exposed to the BSE agent until then, making it difficult to categorise these cattle as "clean" controls in the BSE epidemic."
|
No. of herds
|
No. of farms with BSE cases
|
No. of BSE cases
|
|
|
Dairy and dairy/beef herds
|
55
|
27
|
117
|
|
Beef suckler herds
|
134
|
19
|
37
|
|
Total dairy and beef
|
189
|
46
|
154
|
Table 2: BSE incidence
on organic farms up to November 1995
Source: John Dalby, Soil Association Organic Marketing Company
Meat and Bone Meal (MBM) has been banned from cattle feed of any type so that there was no longer any basis to suggest that feed used on organic farms is any safer than that used on conventional farms.
Helen Browning is certainly good at marketing, but the merit of the message she is marketing is less than convincing. But this appears to be the principle among marketers - it is the brand that matters, not necessarily the true merit of the product. But the trouble here is that it is the health of the nation that we are talking about. As with Peter Melchett, she paid no attention to the constraints on promoting food products that Professor Mike Lean had earlier in the same session so clearly described as being necessary to gain the public's trust.
As recorded by Ewan Pate, farming editor of the Courier (25):
"she had equally robust views on animal health".
With regard to mastitis, she maintained that if sufficient attention is paid to matters such as stress levels, breeding, and whether or not enough straw is provided, the need for medication should be eliminated. Sadly, although all these factors will certainly help - and they are simply part of good animal husbandry according to conventional farming - animal diseases cannot be eradicated by such measures alone. If only it were so.
With such biased and unsubstantiated
opinions it is less than satisfactory that Helen Browning has been
appointed by Ben Bradshaw, Minister for Animal Health and Welfare
at Westminster, to be chairperson of the Animal Health Advisory
Group for England (8). This group is proclaimed by DEFRA
as being "independent".
Lunch
While it may be discourteous to criticise
the "free" lunch that I was provided with as an invited
member of the press, nevertheless at a Soil Association conference
one would expect the lunch to reflect the quality of produce grown
"organically" - and this just before Scotland's number
one chef (at least in the celebrity stakes) was to speak. Frankly
the stew, although adequate in texture had no great taste. Much
was made about the potatoes being organic, but as I understand it
organic potatoes carry a particularly high level of added toxin
in order to prevent blight, trace amounts of standard pesticides
for the purpose being of course banned by the Soil Association.
The rhubarb crumble looked doubtful and tasted likewise: it certainly
did not distinguish itself as being "organic". So here
again, it was hype over reality. Worse still, there was no coffee!
Inspiring change in Scotland's diet
Nick Nairn, Scotland's
best known celebrity chef and broadcaster, certainly did his bit
in terms of getting across the need to achieve major changes in
the Scottish diet, especially among those living in deprived areas
of the country. Improving Scotland's diet is important at all stages
of life - from the womb, through infancy to primary school and to
secondary school, and through to old age or in sickness. Fortunately,
he made little reference to organic food, because whether the food
is organic or conventionally produced is emphatically not the issue.
The issue is how to get appropriately nutritious food into foetuses,
infants, children and adults at an acceptable cost. To that end
he made some good suggestions. His style was dynamic and his enthusiasm
infectious.
Bringing consumer and grower closer
For me - was it the lunch or the absence of coffee - that made me get more remote rather than closer to what the speakers were saying. William Rose of TIO Ltd (meaning This Is Organic) clearly has a a big enterprise in producing carrots for one of the retail multiples. Fine. In answer to a question from the floor he appeared to be satisfied with what the superstore offered him for his produce. Fine. But what about smaller producers, some of whom may be supplying him as middle man? No, he was not going to utter a cheep of criticism about any supermarket (26).
John Scott MSP is chairman of the Scottish Association of Farmers Markets. Fine. But no matter how well farmers markets do they simply cannot significantly erode the massive share (80%) of the market that is dictated by the four major multiples in the UK. While one appreciates John Scott's participation in farming, one cannot help feeling that he could perhaps be a touch more vociferous within the Scottish Parliament in attempting to counter the highly destructive agricultural policies of those presently wielding political power.
Then matters descended into near
farce with HealthWays coordinator for Wester Ross, New Zealander
Fiona Timms. Having previously worked with a Christian missionary,
she was now trying to get the widely scattered community in this
barren part of Scotland to grow vegetables from rocks and peat.
Perhaps she should have tried soilless hydroponics using the benefit
of the prolonged daylight hours in summer plus the reflection from
the sea. But then that would not be "organic", as if that
mattered. But more realistically, the structures required for hydroponics
may not withstand the rigors of the winter gales, one mused, unless
especially designed as at Achiltibuie. Either way, what do the good
folk up there do for fruit and veg during the long dark depressing
winters? She might be better employed delivering free fruit and
veg boxes to these nutritionally deprived worthy Scots, sponsored
out of the £2 billion annual profit that Tesco makes.
Catering for Health
The session was to be chaired by David Atkinson, retired Vice-Principal of SAC and a devout follower of the "organic" faith with apparently little critical acumen (27). To risk hearing more of the same would have been too much.
Getting into the realm of the certification rules of the Soil Association was also best avoided for the sake of one's sanity. Neither was I tempted to listen to the promotional activities of the Soil Association within the supermarkets with the implication that conventional Scottish farming is in someway inferior. The point had been clearly made earlier in the conference that such methods of commercial promotion should stop.
Definitely to be avoided was
the final paper that promised to outline the techniques used by
the Soil Association to influence young minds, and so convert them
to the largely illogical faith of "organic" farming, based
as it is on myth rather than science.
Closing comments
The closing comments were to be made by the chairman of Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH). But what had SNH have to do with food, farming and health? This especially as SNH has been so influential in damaging quality livestock farming in Scotland in favour of "conservation" and "biodiversity". These activities have been dear to the hearts of Scottish farmers for generations but are now claimed as the prerogative of quangos such as SNH, who have little understanding of agriculture and prefer to regard livestock as a tool to preserve the landscape or as a form of tourist attraction (28). Presumably SNH's pitch would be that they delivered (albeit by rather devious means [29]) open access to the Scottish countryside for the public to take exercise. Thereby, through largely ignoring the responses to their public consultation on the subject (30), SNH created more problems than previously existed (31).
Too much for one day. I was
about to head for home when I met up with Louise Batchelor.
Discussion with Louise Batchelor, BBC Scotland's Transport and Environment correspondent
From her comments as chairperson of the session entitled "Healthy farms" I got the impression that she was not aware of the consequences of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform as applied by SEERAD to Scottish farming, especially quality livestock farming for which Scotland has been internationally renowned. I gained the impression that she had given the matter little thought, apparently just accepting comments from NFU Scotland that "there was little evidence of any change (in Scottish farming) to date" and "that one should think positively". But the reality is likely to be very different as it is realised that it will in the future be very difficult to make livestock, or indeed arable, farming pay (16).
So here we had an environment correspondent with the powerfully influential resources of BBC Scotland at her disposal, indulging in the "environment" while neglecting those who have nurtured it for so long and who are so essential for its continued good management. In the meantime skilled personnel are disappearing from farms like snow of a dyke in summer time.
Did she care that conservation areas
for wildlife near urban communities were being severely damaged
by thoughtless walkers with their dogs; deploying their new rights
of access to the countryside as they perceive them, but conveniently
forgetting the responsibility clause? Not a bit of it. She merely
commented that she thought the wildlife in Edinburgh, where she
lives with her dog, had improved.
Discussion with Ian Anderson, SEERAD
On my way out I encountered Ian Anderson who was also leaving. I expressed my concerns about the impact of the Single Farm Payment and my disappointment about the irrelevance of the land Management Contracts on offer, only to be met with bland reassurances that, to me, were unconvincing, such as "some people may want to stack stooks" (but only if they could find a vintage binder in the first place). It is disingenuous of SEERAD to tempt farmers to be responsible for maintaining rights of way when this is a responsibility of the local authorities, with payment rates in many cases less than what it would cost the Councils - and to take on the hassles from an increasing number of the public who expect such paths to be hazard free and and who don't want to get their shoes either wet or dirty.
Inevitably, the matter of SEERAD
reneging on its 5 year schemes was the responsibility of "another
division within the Department".
Impressions gained from the conference
This Soil Association conference highlights the need for concern as to the policies that are being adopted by the Scottish Executive Rural and Environmental Affairs Department (SEERAD). What was strikingly obvious was the strength in terms of numbers of speakers from government and its agencies at a conference fronted by the Soil Association, which in turn is characterised by the scant amount of science that supports its credo.
What was equally striking was the complete lack of any constructive comparison between so-called "organic" farming and conventional farming, which is based on sound scientific principles. Clearly the Soil Association - the lead organisation amongst the organic movement - has carried off another coup in terms of propaganda and marketing.
1. It held its meeting in a building owned by one of SEERAD's agencies, namely SNH;
2. it got two top professors to give papers (although neither referred at any point as to the merits or otherwise of organic food production) to give it a touch of gravitas and authenticity;
3. it had hosts of speakers from government or its agencies to espouse organic principles without saying that "organic" was better than conventional farming, because that would fly in the face of the Scottish Executive's own stated credo that their policies are based on science;
4. it even had the supposedly independent Food Standards Agency (Scotland) threatening more and more regulations based on largely unfounded scares generated by the Soil Association and others in the "organic" movement.
Contrast that with the total absence of any representative at any level from the Scottish Executive at the conference run the previous month by Scottish Countryside Alliance, entitled "Getting the balance right: rural Scotland 2005" (32).
The Soil Association Conference was co-sponsored by the Scottish Agricultural College (SAC). The name "College" infers some academic and ethical standards, presumably based on the application of available science rather than romantic ideology. There are moves afoot that the SAC should be amalgamated with other bodies such as the Scottish Crop Research Institute, the Moredun Institute and other research organisations heavily supported by the Scottish Executive. If the SAC were to be integrated into that fold, then hopefully it would need to raise its academic standards before joining. Otherwise the SAC will pull down the standards of the others.
But the pressures on Scotland's research organisations are great. The Scottish Executive wants them to pursue research "more directly related to the policies endorsed by the Scottish Parliament". Sadly the Scottish Parliament is not conspicuously strong on credible scientists among its members, nor indeed on those prepared to listen to credible scientists.
Since coming to power in 1999 with devolution, the Scottish Parliament has succeeded in losing, or at least seriously disrupting, rather many of Scotland's icons. The offshore fishing industry has been decimated through poor representation at Brussels where politics based on poor science also prevails (33). Salmon farming on the West Coast has likewise been inadequately supported. Scotland's internationally acclaimed opera company is virtually on hold. The universities have been seriously messed about to take more and more students who achieve less and less, because the universities were accused of being elitist. Scotland's manufacturing industries have been decimated. Now Scotland's internationally famous quality livestock industry is coming under serious threat on account of the Scottish Executive giving illogical preference to "organic" methods and an obsession with "biodiversity" and "conservation", rather than common sense and the science of conventional farming which has served the nation well - both in terms of providing the ingredients for nutrious food and the environment.
Care of the environment is clearly important, but the way the Scottish Executive (through SEERAD and SNH) is going about it needs to be addressed.
Clearly SEERAD is in unhealthy cahoots with the lobby group Environment LINK. There also appears to be financial coercion of the supposedly science based research/commercial organisation, the Scottish Agricultural College - why else would the SAC be so active in promoting "organic" farming when there is very little science to support such a venture?
How long is it since one has viewed or listened to a programme on TV or radio that was not blatantly biased towards the interests of Environment LINK? This lobby group includes, in addition to the Soil Association, the RSPB, Friends of the Earth Scotland, WWF Scotland, the National Trust for Scotland, Butterfly Conservation Scotland, the Ramblers Association, and the Council for Scottish Archaeology among its 36 members. None have any credible farming expertise. Yet some 85% of the land in Scotland is involved in some form of agriculture. Stakeholders meetings on matters concerning Scotland's land are swamped by such organisations.
Even though the Scottish Executive went out of its way to ignore the Scottish Countryside Alliance conference that was held the previous month, they might at least have taken heed of its title "Getting the balance right: rural Scotland 2005".
Manifestly the current balance in relation to farming, food and health promoted by the Scottish Executive - and the way that balance is enforced - is far from being right. So much so that those who have the expertise to care for the land are disappearing into other ventures through disillusionment, ironically with the active encouragement of the Scottish Executive through its Farm Business Diversification Scheme should they choose to stay in Scotland. As the government takes on more and more control of the land, the proportion of the nation's total workforce that is employed by government reaches the unsustainable level of 54% - much higher than south of the border where it is 42%. Scotland's rate of economic growth is depressingly low at 1.6%, compared to the rest of the UK at 2.7%, while Ireland does much better and has one of the fastest growing economies in Europe (34).
The Scottish Executive should have taken heed of the conference organised last autumn by the People Too organisation, entitled "Who governs rural Scotland?" (35). But the People Too organisation does not receive the lavish funding from the Scottish Executive enjoyed by Environment LINK which gets, just for starters, 29% of its running costs (whatever they might amount to) from the SEERAD agency SNH and guaranteed for 5 years at a time.
The Scottish Executive should also take heed of what the rural community has to say in the form of Kirsty Macleod's paper "Our countryside - we live here" (36). But since this was an invited address to a Conservative group, no doubt the Scottish Executive would treat it with such disdain as not to bother to read what was said, such is their idea of democracy.
Professor Lean's demand for ethical integrity among those who promote the alleged benefits of their food products was most welcome, particularly at a Soil Association conference where the message is highly relevant. As he stated, this is essential to gain the public's trust.
But the most disturbing factor of all is the apparent compromising of the academic standards of one of Scotland's publicly funded research organisations, the Scottish Agricultural College. It would appear that through financial pressures, the SAC are required to promote and to endorse (largely by implication) the supposed benefits of "organic" farming, when science substantiates no such thing. However, such is the grip the politicians now have on the nation's scientists that few dare step out of line to express concern - they just patiently wait when retiral age beckons (to ensure their pension) or do not take up science as a career in the first place, or they just "take the king's shilling" and get on with what their financial masters dictate. It beats farming any day - telling people what to do but without financial responsibilities, and not bothering too much as to whether the message is scientifically sound or not. What is more, the commercial side of SAC prospers: it does a roaring trade on helping farmers comply with the endless regulations imposed by government. So why rock the boat?
But the boat does need to be rocked.
The unhealthy liaison between the
Soil Association, the Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs
Department (SEERAD), Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), the lobby
group Environment LINK and the Scottish Agricultural College (SAC)
needs to be addressed. Instead of an unbalanced political ideology
and the political pressures that go with it, sound science should
be applied in a consistent manner: not just variously adapted and
adopted when politically convenient. Without that, the credibility
of these organisations will fall into further disrepute, and the
public will not trust what these bodies advocate, be it farming,
food, health or anything else.
©www.land-care.org.uk
References
1. Irvine, James (2003). High
in hype but poor in credibility. Soil Association Conference "Agriculture:
the primary health service?". Paisley 28th May 2003.
See FOOD HOME Page, filed 29 May 03, www.land-care.org.uk
Click
Here to View
2. Editorial (2002). Food Standards
Agency does not provide support for organic farming.
See ENVIRONMENT Homepage, filed 14 Nov 02, www.land-care.org.uk
Click
Here to View
3. Irvine, James (2004). Researcher
struggles to show any benefit of "organic farming" to
human health.
See FOOD Homepage, filed 19 Jan 04, www.land-care.org.uk
Click
Here to View
4. Watkins, Ruth (2005). Proposal
for new organic status for hill farmers and conservation farmers:
organic "B" introduction and problems with the organic
rules. Open letter to the Soil Association and the organic farmers
and growers.
See ANIMAL WELFARE - GENERAL Homepage, 19 Jan 05, www.land-care.org.uk
Click
Here to View
5. Irvine, James (2003). Concern
over organic livestock animal health.
See ANIMAL WELFARE Homepage, filed 09 Jun 03, www.land-care.org.uk
Click
Here to View
6. Editorial (2002). "Organic
farmers will have to get real" says Professor McKellar.
See ENVIRONMENT Homepage, filed 2002, www,land-care.org.uk
Click
Here to View
7. Editorial (2004). "New
farm to help kids to grow organically" Scottish Executive sinks
to new depths of spin.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 24 Sep 04,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
8. DEFRA (2005). New Animal Health
and Welfare Advisory Group appointed. Press Release 6th June 2005.
An independent group has been appointed to advise government on
implementing the new Animal Health and Welfare Strategy.
http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2005/050606a.htm
9. Trewavas, Anthony (2005). Organic
food and farming: hidden agendas. Lecture at 4th Sentry Farming
Conference, Cambridge 2005. Powerpoint slides kindly provided for
Land-Care by Professor Trewavas.
See FOOD Homepage, filed 13 Jun 05, www.land-care.org.uk
Click
Here to View
10. Lomborg, Bjorn (2002). The
skeptical environmentalist. Measuring the real state of the world.
Cambridge University Press ISBN 0 521 01068 3
11. Editorial (2005).
Land Management contracts - a joke, if they were not so sad.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 28 Feb 05,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
12. Irvine, James (2005). Land
Management contracts analyzed: item 1 - animal health and welfare.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 03 Mar 05,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
13. Irvine, James (2003). Veterinary
services to the cattle and sheep sectors. SAC workshop 2nd June
2003, Norton House, Ingliston.
See ANIMAL HEALTH - GENERAL Homepage, filed 13 Jun 03, www.land-care.org.uk
Click
Here to View
15. Follett, Brian (2002). Royal
Society inquiry into infectious diseases of livestock.
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/inquiry/
16. Irvine, James (2005). Peter
Cook discusses the economic realities facing suckler herd farmers
in Scotland
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 03 Jun 05,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
17. Irvine, James (2004). Concerns
about the validity of statements on the condition of SSSIs in Scotland
made by members of Environment LINK. Review and comment on a case
study presented by Kirsty Macleod at People TOO conference, "Who
governs rural Scotland?" Perth, 29th October 2004.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 17 Nov 04,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
18. http://www.outdooraccess-scotland.com/default.asp
19. Irvine, James (2005). Comments
on "Stopping illegal imports of animal products into Great
Britain. UK National Audit Office Report."
See FMD Homepage, filed 25 Mar 05, www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
20. Cunningham, Ian (2002). Inquiry
into Foot and Mouth Disease in Scotland.
http://www.royalsoced.org.uk/enquiries/footandmouth/fm_mw.pdf
21. Irvine, James (2003). TB
in cattle and badgers: Zuckerman Report (1980) revisited.
See TUBERCULOSIS Homepage, 10 Mar 03, www.land-care.org.uk
Click
Here to View
22. Editorial (2005). SEERAD
reneges on terms of environment scheme.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 31 May 05,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
23. Editorial (2004). A new ally for livestock farmers. Veterinary Review. April 2004, Issue 90: 56-58.
24. http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/report/volume12/chapt104.htm
25. Pate, Euan (2005). Farms
to undergo greater scrutiny.
Courier and Advertiser, Dundee. Thursday 26 May 2005. p 18.
26. Editorial (2005). Competition
Commission Investigation into supermarket practices called for by
the CLA.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 02 Jun 05,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
27. Irvine, James (2004). Recently
retired Vice-Principal of SAC reportedly talks more havers about
farming.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 22 Sep 04,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
28. Editorial (2004). The management
of the SNH suckler herd of Highland cows on the Isle of Rum
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 30 August 04,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
29. Irvine, James (2003). Does
SNH conduct itself as an honest broker, or as a political manipulator?
See SCOTTISH OUTDOOR ACCESS CODE Homepage, filed 25 Oct 03,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
30. Editorial (2003). Re-drafted
SNH Scottish Outdoor Access Code pays little heed to consultation
responses.
See SCOTTISH OUTDOOR ACCESS CODE Homage, filed 02 Dec 03,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
31. Editorial (2005). Right to
roam is not for rover: remember the lead when taking dogs on access
land this summer. Good advice from the CLA in England but sadly
the situation in Scotland is not so conservation friendly
See SCOTTISH OUTDOOR ACCESS CODE Hompage, filed 20 May 05,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
32. Irvine, James (2005). Comment
on the Roger Wheater/Alex Hogg session "Enhancing our environment:
holistic management or single species priorities?" SCA conference
"Getting the balance right: rural Scotland 2005" Royal
Society of Edinburgh, Edinburgh 12th April 2005.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 27 Apr 05,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
33. Linklater, Magnus (2004).
Broken hearts. Broken boats. And broke.
Reproduced with permission from the Times 9th December 2004.
See FISHING Homepage, filed 16 Dec 04, www.land-care.org.uk
Click
Here to View
34. Linklater, Magnus (2005).
Linklater's Scotland: once a nation of adventurous entrepreneurs.
Reproduced with permission from Scotland on Sunday (Spectrum)
15th May 2005.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 16 May 05,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
35. Robertson, Liz (2004). "SNH
and the Isle of Arran". A case study presented as the People
Too conference, "Who governs rural Scotland? Perth 29th October,
2004
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 19 Nov 04,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to View
36. Macleod, Kirsty (2005). "Our
countryside - we live here". Paper given at Conservative Rural
Action Group Scotland, Perth 26th February 2005.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 01 Mar 05,
www.land-care.org.uk Click
Here to
View