Report of the Departmental Committee appointed by the president of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries to enquire into foot-and-mouth disease.

  • Great Britain. Board of Agriculture and Fisheries. Foot-and-Mouth Disease Committee.
Date:
1912
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Report of the Departmental Committee appointed by the president of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries to enquire into foot-and-mouth disease. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    44/370 (page 20)
    25 January 1912.] [ Continued. also the Home Office in connection with the carriage of anthrax to human beings, and so on. The Board of Trade and the Local Government Board are interested in the matter of such things as carrying plague, and they have rather taken the view, in connection with the warning notice the Board issued, that inasmuch as they did not feel that they were in a position to make such requirements to prevent plague in human beings, they did not feel that they should support the Board in any action with regard to the prevention of the carriage of disease to animals. They were not quite satisfied, we were then considering principally anthrax, that the disinfection would be effective, and they did not con- sider, as I gather, that it would be practicable to carry it out, taking the shipping trade generally, and to require any general disinfection of vessels. If the Committee were going into that point I think they should take evidence from the Home Office and the Board of Trade on the subject. Of course, they are authorities who know the business of shipowners far better than the Board of Agriculture can. 317. Do you know any advantage in these calves coming over with their hides attached to the carcase ? —It is a question of marketting them. I rather fancy it is not very easy to sell a calf, that is, not in its skin. 318. (Mr. Field, M.P.) They are easier carried ? —They are easier carried. 319. And carried more safely? If the hides were taken off they would have to be put in baskets ?—Yes. 320. (Mr. Richardson Carr.) Do you think it would be at all advantageous or possible, if this country had inspectors on the Continent for a time, now that there is so much foot-and-mouth disease, to make inquiries and ascertain any local source of infection abroad in places like France and Germany? It would be like inspecting the ports of embarkation; I mean whether they should be carefully watched or whether anything of that sort could be done?—I have never had that point put to me, but I do not quite know what the inspector would watch, because you cannot see the germ of foot-and-mouth disease, unfortunately. 321. He would not be able to see it, but the question is whether he could find out any infected spot? You do not think that would be much advantage ?—I do not quite see what the man would do when he got there, but one could think that point over. (Mr. Field, M.P.) You would have another spy scare with them. 322. (Mr. Morrison.) I believe you are satisfied that the regulations as regards the control of the disease, once it breaks out, are quite good enough ?—I think we appeal to our success in the past as an argument in support of that view. 323. And you would rather direct our attention to importations >—I think that is a point on which the Committee could help us most. 324. Carrying a little further the argument as regards the Channel Islands, what about Ireland? We have been hearing about Great Britain but not about Ireland ?—No, the Board of Agriculture have nothing to do with the administration in Ireland. 325. Can you tell us whether they have had many outbreaks there ?—No, it is something like 29 or 30 years since they had an outbreak in Ireland. 326. Have you ever considered whether there is any reason for that ?—I think the risks we are exposed to by our proximity to the Continent are greater than would be the case in Ireland. 327. In this case, where you have certain articles which we have been talking about being imported into Great Britain, are these same articles not imported into Ireland ?—I have no absolute information, but I should think that any trade like that in sheep’s heads and offals did not exist in the case of Ireland. I should think the trade in calves in their skins did not exist; I do not know. 328. You consider that might be a possible reason why Ireland has been free from disease and we have not ’—Given the transmission of disease by mediate contagion the chance is less in Ireland. 329. In the case of any of these suspicious articles being imported into Iveland, that would bea fairly good reason for talking of the suspicion of the article ?—It would be strong negative evidence. 330. Can you tell me whether our outbreaks have occurred merely on the pasture or in house feed- ing —I could not make any general statement on that. The Somerset outbreak occurred on the pasture; the Chobham outbreak I think occurred in the sheds; the Hounslow outbreak occurred amongst pigs in the pigsty. 331. It is not very common for the disease to occur among animals that are being fed merely on pasture ?— I do not think that has very much to do with it. It depends on how the infection gets there. The Sussex outbreak occurred in the sheds and on the marshes at the same time. 352. With regard to the straw used for packing, I believe that is largely used for wrapping in this country ?—Possibly. 333. I think that it goes on from one merchant to another, and is used for every purpose. It seems tome not impossible—you might give me your opinion upon it—to issue a Regulation forbidding such straw to be used for any other purpose but packing. It always has a value for that purpose, and if you make it an offence to use such straw for any other purpose it would then require to be either sold or destroyed ?—I can quite see making a Regulation, but I cannot see how you would enforce it. 334. Supposing a farmer gets it, it would be a dangerous thing for any merchant to let it go toa farmer ?—But suppose the merchant puts it in his own stable where he has one or two horses, and it eventually goes out as manure. How could you enforce it? 335. Would it not at least tend to minimise the danger from that source ?—I think advice of that kind, if it were issued, might be effective, but I do not myself like the idea of making a law, or what in effect would be a law—that is, an Order of the Board—where there is no chance of enforcing it effectively. 336. And your opinion is that a Regulation of that sort could not be carried out and would be no use P— I think a caution to merchants might be of some use. In the same way weissue many cautions to agriculturists, but I must say they are very often forgotten. 337. I must say I do not see the impossibility of being able to check the infringement of a Regulation like that if it were carried out regularly, bya man using it regularly for his own horses. It seems to me a Regulation might be enforced >—You would have to find out who was receiving merchandise and inspect their premises. 338. Then as regards calves imported in their skins, you have stated that where an article was not likely to carry infection to a farm you perhaps hardly thought it was so necessary to be careful about that article, but it seems to me that these calves in their skins are handled by butchers, are they not P—Yes. 339. A butcher comes to the mart and handles the cattle that he is going to buy. It seems to me, if you consider it, that there is a direct link between the calf and its skin, and the cattle in the mart. Is not that so ?—There is a possible connection. 340. It is a direct and almost certain connection it seems to me? (Mr. Field, M.P.) But these cattle are killed imme- diately afterwards. (Mr. Morrison.) He may come in and handle cattle which he does not buy. (Mr. Field, M.P.) He would wash his hands before he came there. 341. (Mr. Morrison.) He might not buy any cattle ? —In my opinion slaughtering is the most cleanly trade I have ever come across, there is more hot water and washing carried out in slaughtering than in any other trade that I have ever met. 342. The trade seemed to minimise the danger of the calves being skinned?—I only say I think you must have in view the danger of it being carried to home stock. Personally, I think in the case of the calf there may be a possible danger, but not a very great one. 343. With regard to the disinfection of ships, I suppose, if possible, it would be a good thing to have the holds disinfected which had carried such articles