The Irish Cattle and Sheep Farmers Association (ICSA) has warned that bluetongue vaccination should be supported as an “add-on measure” and not at the expense of essential animal health measures.
Last month, Agriculture, Food and the Marine Minister Martin Haydon said vaccination against bluetongue virus would be included as an “option” for farmers participating in the National Sheep Welfare Scheme (NSWS) or Beef Welfare Scheme (BWS).
But this approach by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM) will force farmers to choose between “vaccinating against bluetongue or continuing with basic measures such as clostridium vaccines or protection against pneumonia”, ICSA chair Eoin Ryan said today (Thursday 2 April).
According to Ryan, he said that this is “not a position in which any farmer should be placed.”
He believes this is “just shifting risk from one area to another” rather than enhancing overall herd health.
Blue tongue
Ryan added: “Bluetongue represents a very real and immediate threat to the national herd, with the potential to cause huge losses if farmers are not properly supported for vaccination.
“But the response cannot come at the expense of other decisive measures.
“The right approach is to provide targeted additional funding, rather than trying to absorb it into already stretched schemes.”
He also criticizes the timing of the decision by the DAFM to designate the bluetongue vaccine as an option at this time of year.
“Spring is the main window for vaccinating calves, and with the breeding season approaching, smallholder farmers also need to make decisions now about protecting livestock.
“In the case of bluetongue, animals must be vaccinated long before breeding, so clarity and support are essential at this stage to ensure farmers can act in a timely manner to protect their herds.
“With the increase in the value of livestock over the past 24 months, the need for vaccination has become more important than ever to prevent the loss of valuable animals,” he added.
According to the ICSA president, the current approach has been further “undermined” by what he believes are funding issues within the beef welfare scheme.
Ryan believes the DAFM should “at a minimum” examine whether any unspent funds under schemes such as the Suckler Carbon Efficiency Program (SCEP) could be used to fund additional vaccination measures.
“Farmers cannot be expected to absorb more costs or risks on the back of already reduced payments.
“If the goal is to build resilience in the suckling herd, policy should support farmers to do more, not force them to do less,” he said.
