|
Back
to Current Topic
Response from the Rare Breeds Society to the Consultation on National
Scrapie Plan for Great Britain - Timetable for Phasing Out Type
3 Rams
A. Rare Breeds International welcomes the proposal
to extend the time limits for the final implementation of the NSP
programmes. Three items in particular affect the progress of implementation:
1. The FMD outbreak in 2001 caused delay and
disruption to the programme, and it was appropriate that DEFRA recognised
the need to allow for this in a revised timeframe.
2. It is also prudent not to take precipitate
action in view of the development of tests which distinguish between
BSE and scrapie in sheep. The utilisation of these tests may enable
the NSP to be modified to prevent unnecessary damage to individual
breeds and to biodiversity in the national sheep flock.
3. Questions raised regarding the validity of
results also justify a slower application of the programme in order
that apparent inaccuracies can be resolved.
B. Rare Breeds International welcomes the categorisation
of breeds (3A, 3B, 3C and 3D) to recognise the greater vulnerability
of some breeds to the application of NSP. Categories 3B and 3D relate
to only one breed each, and the critical distinction is between
categories 3A and 3C. There are some inaccuracies:
1. Some breeds are missing from the lists. In
particular we noted the absence of Castlemilk Moorit, Icelandic
and North Ronaldsay - all breeds which, by coincidence, have a nil
frequency of ARR.
2. Some breeds (e.g. Ryeland, Teeswater) appear
in both lists (3A and 3C).
3. British Milksheep is only two words (not Milk
Sheep).
C. No change is proposed for category 3C. Most
(or all) of these breeds have a frequency of >50% for the ARR
allele, and we have no further comment to make on this category
except to repeat our warning of the danger of creating homozygosity
(ARR) in the national sheep flock. Homozygosity renders the national
flock uniformly vulnerable to any challenge which ARR is unable
to resist. That may be another strain of scrapie, or an entirely
different challenge. Similarly, the elimination of ARQ (the ancestral
allele), AHQ, VRQ and ARH will cause genetic erosion (extinction)
of characteristics which may have special value.
D. We retain severe reservations regarding the
proposal for category 3A. The breeds listed in this category coincide
closely with our data for low ARR frequency, and the breeds which
are most at risk fall mainly into three groups (Northern Short-tailed,
Marsh and Mountain). These groups contain breeds with special performance
qualities and with characteristics which assist environmental (ecological)
objectives. The new proposed deadline for the sale of rams (2006)
allows only one further generation of breeding from the present
with normal breeding practices. Even accelerated breeding practices
would allow little latitude for sensible selection and maintenance
of genetic variability. Less than 10% of the population of most
(or all) of the breeds in this category possess the ARR/ARR genotype.
Some have a much lower frequency, and in some cases this genotype
is absent. The proposed timescale would cause irrevocable change
and damage to these breeds. The items mentioned above in A1, A2
and A3 merit further elaboration.
E. FMD: The intended volume of testing was reduced
severely by the FMD outbreak in 2001. Awareness of the importance
of biosecurity inhibited many owners from proceeding with testing
as intended. In this context, an extension of the deadline by one
year to 2008 is not realistic. Rare Breeds International has been
pressing for a deadline of 2010, and we continue to believe that
this is a more appropriate date than 2008. Clause 4 of the letter
of 12 September refers to a delay of 2 years from FMD, and this
should be the minimum period for extension of the scheme.
F. Tests: It is incumbent on DEFRA to take account
of the imminent validation of tests to distinguish between BSE and
scrapie. We have been assured previously that the cause for concern
is BSE in sheep. Scrapie has been present in the national sheep
flock for 300 years without any adverse effect on human health.
It is our understanding that such tests may be available within
2-3 years. It would be unacceptable to permit the loss of significant
genetic material in susceptible breeds by the rapid application
of NSP when tests to distinguish between BSE and scrapie will be
available in the near future. In this context, we urge that no deadline
is fixed for susceptible breeds, and that the situation is reviewed
in the light of progress with the tests. It is our opinion that
scrapie-monitoring could be used for susceptible breeds as an alternative
to NSP.
G. Accuracy: We have information which indicates
that results supplied to owners may not be accurate. This information
has come from several sources, but we have been authorised to quote
the following examples:
1. Norfolk Horn (flock ref. 8000253): animal N5016
(ARR/ARQ) is the progeny of N2796 (ARR/ARR) and N4180 (ARR/ARR).
2. Southdown (flock ref. 8000256): animal T2 (ARQ/ARQ)
is the progeny of ST4 (ARR/ARR) and P6 (ARR/ARR).
Such discrepancies further delay the implementation
of effective breeding programmes, and risk the loss of valuable
genetic material.
H. It is important to establish a balance between
the original objectives of NSP, and the need to accommodate the
security of individual breeds and the importance of biodiversity.
Breeds which have a low or nil frequency of ARR have other qualities
which are important in the British sheep industry.
We make the following recommendations:
1. That the deadlines of 2006 and 2008 are removed
for breeds in group 3C. If it is not possible to remove deadlines,
they should be extended to at least 2014 and 2018 to permit three
normal generations of breeding. This would not help breeds with
a negligible frequency of ARR, but breeds with a frequency of circa
10% ARR/ARR would have some opportunity to avoid significant genetic
erosion.
2. That the deadlines are replaced by a programme
of scrapie-monitoring for breeds in group 3C, and that animals from
these breeds should be permitted to enter the food chain on the
basis of scrapie-monitoring results.
3. That the development of tests to identify the
presence of scrapie, and to distinguish between BSE and scrapie,
should be developed as rapidly as possible and that substantial
Government aid should be given to research in this field.
4. That re-testing free of charge should be provided
for animals where results indicate probable inaccuracies. The full
implementation of the programme should proceed only on the basis
of reliable results.
G.L.H. Alderson
24 September 2002
|