New dept policy regarding TB testing due to neighbour going down...

krazyklown

Hi,

I am just checking to see if anyone else has got this notification regarding TB testing:

My dad received a notice from the department stating that in future, testing done as a result of a neighbour going down, will not count as part of the annual test. So for example, if our annual test is due in February, and a neighbour goes down in his test in January thus requiring all neighbouring farms being called up for a test, then this will not be allowed to count as part of the annual test unless the farmer pays for it. Otherwise he will have to have his herd tested as normal in February.

I am just wondering has anyone else received this notification and what do you think of this policy?

micky mouse

Yes this bull**** policy is 100% true.Happened to me last autumn.Neighbour went down with tb and i was locked straight away.Had to have a test in august even though i was due my annual in september.Dept sent me out a letter saying i was locked up but i would not have to pay for the test.So i booked me vet to do the test happy that i was not having to pay for it,and he told me thats right you dont but you will pay for the next one that you have to do BEFORE THE END OF DECEMBER.He said the rules are that the herdowner has to pay for one test in the year (the annual test) so the fact that the spot test was so near my annual and i was near the end of the year,they let me go with the spot test but i had to pay. So i would imagine that there is not one person that wont pay for the spot test if it gets them out of gathering cattle a second time.They get ya every which way ya turn;)

just do it

I've always had an issue with buying cattle that mightn't have been tested for 12 months and may have ongoing TB in the herd next door. Look it's a pain to have to gather cattle for herd tests but if this latest thing of locking up the neighbouring farms of a herd with TB that are greater than 4 months out of test then I'm for it. Only way the buyer is protected. At the end of the day the farmer still only has to pay for one test per year and the spot test might just nip a potential TB problem in the bud.

krazyklown

I'm not disputing the TB test procedure or the procedure to test neighbouring farms of a farm that has had a reactor. Neither am I disputing that a farmer should pay for the annual test.

The letter my dad got was to say that any tests outside of the Annual test will not count as a test. So the department pays for a test and then will not allow it to be recognised. I think this is an extraordinary waste of resources and defies logic. The only reason i can think of that could justify this is the administration overhead.

So taking my dads situation - our annual test is in April. A neighbour went down in September (i think). He has since gone down twice more. My dad has been called up for tests three times (all clear) , with the latest being last December. It is hideous, in my mind, even though our entire herd were clear, that they will still need to be tested in April, for the fourth time in less than a year, because of a beaucratic decision, that only paid for tests count as an official test. It makes no sense whatsoever.

Farmer Pudsey

It is a silly policy. The reality is that you have a lot of hassle doing the extra test that cost you time and money. You may have to take time or days off work and these tests will be slower than normal tests in case as the vet will be extra careful.

Then maybe 2,3 or 5 months later you have to do the whole thing again. In some cases you may wish to do the extra test as this time of year may suit your farming regime you may have less cattle, lighter cattle or it may suit for marketing purposes.