TB risk category

TooOldBoots

Got the rating out in the post today. the farm is a C10, not surprising as I run a closed herd and my main neighbour is Coillte!!
I see this as a stick to beat lads with. These ratings will be on the mart boards and anyone with low scores will be getting hammered

Lime Tree Farm

https://www.irishexaminer.com/farming/arid-40039622.html

Gods Gift

55 animals I should consider culling as soon as possible. Feck off.

Hard Knocks

TooOldBoots wrote: »

Got the rating out in the post today. the farm is a C10, not surprising as I run a closed herd and my main neighbour is Coillte!!
I see this as a stick to beat lads with. These ratings will be on the mart boards and anyone with low scores will be getting hammered

Thought the same
I don’t like the bit where cattle brought home from the mart effects your status

TooOldBoots

Yeah spotted that part too.
I reckon if a lad ends up down the bottom of the scale then he's as good as done, that poor TB rating on the board would put anyone off bidding on the cattle in the mart.

patsy_mccabe

It could be open season on badgers?

Mooooo

A load of fcuking bollix, only there to deflect from departments own inaction on dealing with wildlife, badger and deer

Figerty

Hard Knocks wrote: »

Thought the same
I don’t like the bit where cattle brought home from the mart effects your status

Got this ridiculus leter today, doing excatly what a consultant would do.,..tell you what you already know and making a big deal of it..
How much did this cost?

kevthegaff

I got a c1(3), is that a pass..

Figerty

kevthegaff wrote: »

I got a c1(3), is that a pass..

Does it matter! Sure the free leaving certs are being given out next week..

memorystick

Figerty wrote: »

Got this ridiculus leter today, doing excatly what a consultant would do.,..tell you what you already know and making a big deal of it..
How much did this cost?

Folded it twice and put it under short leg of table. Perfect

Albert Johnson

Mooooo wrote: »

A load of fcuking bollix, only there to deflect from departments own inaction on dealing with wildlife, badger and deer

My thoughts exactly, I filed mine away with all the other ****e literature I receive about restricted neighboring herds on a monthly basis. The department are washing there hands of any responsibility as no matter what happens in the event of a future breakdown they can point to cattle returned home from the mart or bought from a high risk herd ect as the cause. It doesn't matter if the adjoining countryside is awash with deer, badger's or whatever else is acting as a vector it will now be the farmer's fault for not following the "best practice" outlined in those letters. It's like all the other bull**** they create there's no reward for adherence to it but your penalized for ignoring it. It's an attempt to put the blame firmly on us for there inaction and failure to make any sizeable impact on bovine Tb levels in 60 year's. Every year there's less return out of livestock farming and yet the power's that be seem to find new ways to make our job more difficult. It's no wonder that more and more of us neighbor Coillte and similar each year, it's simply not worth the effort.

Sheep breeder

Albert Johnson wrote: »

My thoughts exactly, I filed mine away with all the other ****e literature I receive about restricted neighboring herds on a monthly basis. The department are washing there hands of any responsibility as no matter what happens in the event of a future breakdown they can point to cattle returned home from the mart or bought from a high risk herd ect as the cause. It doesn't matter if the adjoining countryside is awash with deer, badger's or whatever else is acting as a vector it will now be the farmer's fault for not following the "best practice" outlined in those letters. It's like all the other bull**** they create there's no reward for adherence to it but your penalized for ignoring it. It's an attempt to put the blame firmly on us for there inaction and failure to make any sizeable impact on bovine Tb levels in 60 year's. Every year there's less return out of livestock farming and yet the power's that be seem to find new ways to make our job more difficult. It's no wonder that more and more of us neighbor Coillte and similar each year, it's simply not worth the effort.

A joke alright, all coillte want to do is set their land to hunting groups for big money and no effort made to do controlled culls of deer and keep-the local shooters out at all cost. The forestry around us is taken by a group from two counties away who are bringing in foreign shooters to shoot trophies and no effort made at culling and controlling the deer.
Our last break down was a home bred heifer who was in the shed for 14 months and turned out positive lesions, they have not made any contact since the day the animal left the farm and now we are clear.

Siamsa Sessions

As ever, the communication around this from the Dept has been terrible.

Whatever the usefulness or otherwise of the scheme, the Dept have failed before they started by not explaining what's behind it.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Siamsa Sessions wrote: »

As ever, the communication around this from the Dept has been terrible.

Whatever the usefulness or otherwise of the scheme, the Dept have failed before they started by not explaining what's behind it.

It's a narrative they're pushing I think, tbh. They want to push it that farmers are the biggest problem in controlling TB whereas I haven't heard one farmer ever say they're happy to have TB and are delighted to have the compensation for those animals and the restrictions being locked up brings.

I'm not sure they're going to be very happy with the push back against their management of the disease.

Siamsa Sessions

Buford T. Justice XIX wrote: »

I'm not sure they're going to be very happy with the push back against their management of the disease.

We're in worrying territory if it's political and they're trying to get their dig in first

Buford T. Justice XIX

Siamsa Sessions wrote: »

We're in worrying territory if it's political and they're trying to get their dig in first

Tbh, I can't see any other reason for it. A farm that had TB knows well when they had the breakdown and how many animals went. Any other farm knows the risks of bringing in stock from a mart. So absolutely no gain for the farmers involved, is there?

So who gains from this exercise?

I says

Buford T. Justice XIX wrote: »

Tbh, I can't see any other reason for it. A farm that had TB knows well when they had the breakdown and how many animals went. Any other farm knows the risks of bringing in stock from a mart. So absolutely no gain for the farmers involved, is there?

So who gains from this exercise?

The pen pushers justifying their jobs.

jaymla627

Siamsa Sessions wrote: »

We're in worrying territory if it's political and they're trying to get their dig in first

When you see how the forestry sector has been treated their dosent seem to be any logic reasoning with them, our going down the proper channels

whelan2

I'd like to know if the statements were generated on 18/07 where were they for the last 6 weeks? Out of date load of crap. I'm c10 according to it. But locked up atm

Buford T. Justice XIX

whelan2 wrote: »

I'd like to know if the statements were generated on 18/07 where were they for the last 6 weeks? Out of date load of crap. I'm c10 according to it. But locked up atm

I think they have to confirm the TB in your cow through the lab results before you get brought into C 0 (1), if I'm reading the blurb correctly?

alps

Buford T. Justice XIX wrote: »

I think they have to confirm the TB in your cow through the lab results before you get brought into C 0 (1), if I'm reading the blurb correctly?

And take 10 years to get back up to C10....that's a punative measure and will have dramatic financial consequences for those selling stock.

The purchasing history chart virtually tells you the status of the herds that you have purchased from over the past 3 years. This surely cannot be correct from a data sharing point of view.

Buford T. Justice XIX

alps wrote: »

And take 10 years to get back up to C10....that's a punative measure and will have dramatic financial consequences for those selling stock.

The purchasing history chart virtually tells you the status of the herds that you have purchased from over the past 3 years. This surely cannot be correct from a data sharing point of view.

Oh they're very crafty about the information. They give you your own information but don't give it to anyone else.

But if you're selling cattle privately, the purchaser will ask for your rating and you will either have to give it to them or lose the sale.

In a short time, your rating will have to be displayed on the mart board because it becomes common to look for and give the information so why not get farmers to voluntarily remove their privacy so you don't have to force it.

It'll be on the terms and conditions of the BPS before long.

tractorporn

TooOldBoots wrote: »

Yeah spotted that part too.
I reckon if a lad ends up down the bottom of the scale then he's as good as done, that poor TB rating on the board would put anyone off bidding on the cattle in the mart.

We have been given a rating of C1 (2) which if it goes on a mart board will screw us altogether. This coming down the line is partly the reason we have gone to finishing all stock because as sure as night follows day this info will end up on a mart board before long and nobody bar a few jobbers will buy your stock.

Siamsa Sessions

Might be optimistic but maybe TB risk will become just like the Bord Bia QA and not mean much in everyday buying and selling?

20silkcut

According to this rating buying from dealers/ jobbers is considered high risk.
I’m sure they / marts will be delighted with that.

Gods Gift

Your status will not be displayed on mart boards.
If buying your to ask the farmer your buying off of his status. Says the department. Then they say the farmer is under no obligation to tell you. Lol.

alps

Gods Gift wrote: »

Your status will not be displayed on mart boards.
If buying your to ask the farmer your buying off of his status. Says the department. Then they say the farmer is under no obligation to tell you. Lol.

I would suggest that that question if answered forms part of the contract of sale. The accuracy of that answer would then become obvious in the following years when the purchase report comes out.

mahoney_j

Looked at mine and binned it what the fook did that the pointless exercise cost us farmers to produce whilst the dept deflect from there own failings in the whole tb debate .over 60 years trying to eradicate it and this is there best effort.this is a serious gravey train for the dept annually as regards finance why would they bother And yet again farmer picks up the tab when his herd becomes restricted

Dunedin

Buford T. Justice XIX wrote: »

But if you're selling cattle privately, the purchaser will ask for your rating and you will either have to give it to them or lose the sale.
.

if I’m buying cattle privately tomorrow, can I ask to see their rating.

orm0nd

I forget the exact figures but something like 14% of the money spent on the eradication scheme is paid as compensation to the farmers.

The vets get something similar or maybe a bit more.

The rest is paid to administration and fellows thinking up sh1te like this.