A new approach to bovine TB control in NI has been suggested by an industry-led group tasked by Agriculture Minister Michelle O’Neill with developing a long-term strategy to eradicate bovine TB in NI.

The approach includes a series of proposals designed to reduce long-term costs and to improve biosecurity on farms. Crucial to that is a change of mindset among farmers from viewing TB as a DARD-imposed programme of annual testing to one where TB is seen for what it is – a disease.

Presenting the initial views by way of an interim report to the Stormont agriculture committee earlier this week, TB Strategic Partnership Group chair Sean Hogan talked about the need for radical change and doing something different to counter the disease. “The answer lies within the pages of this report somewhere,” he said.

While the report highlights the need to tackle the disease in wildlife, to make use of animal genetics resistant to the disease and to improve the accuracy of testing, many of the proposals would have a direct impact and cost for farmers.

Perhaps, most controversially, the group acknowledges that the current compensation system for reactor cattle in NI is “generous” when compared with other countries and suggests that farmers could either contribute to overall costs by way of a levy or pay for the annual TB test.

At present, TB control costs taxpayers close to £30m annually, with the bill for reactors estimated at £17m for 2015/16.

On the issue of farm biosecurity, the group suggests a rigorous publicity campaign to promote best practice (for example, keeping badgers out of animal housing and feed stores; good boundary fences; cleaning of cattle housing; contractors cleaning and disinfecting slurry equipment).

Where basic biosecurity advice is not followed, farmers could find that their herds are placed under restriction.

The group also suggests the possibility of linking biosecurity to the level of compensation for reactors or cross-compliance penalties.

In marts, they suggest that there should be multiple cleaning and disinfection points, the use of which should be a requirement.

Marts

Another issue for the marts is the idea of ‘‘informed purchasing’’ where a buyer will be able to see when the seller last had a case of TB in their herd. Similarly, the group suggests that cattle herds could be categorised into various risk bands. A high-risk herd would be one that regularly moves cattle in and out – an option is that these herds are required to pre-movement test cattle before sale.

One of the issues also highlighted by the group is the reliance on conacre land in NI, sometimes well away from the home farm. During his presentation to MLAs at Stormont, TB group chair Sean Hogan cited an example of a farmer in Co Down with cattle on conacre land in Coleraine. In its report, the group proposes that farmers with conacre land more than five miles from the home farm should be required to notify DARD and move these cattle into a separate herd.

Wildlife

As part of an industry consultation at the end of 2014, the TB group met various farming and wildlife groups. Badger culling continues to be a highly emotive subject, but the TB group suggests that removing badgers in a high-risk area is something that could be considered.

In theory, badger vaccination against TB has many benefits, but the cost is currently prohibitive at around £600 for every trapped badger. What is clear to the group is that farmers will only contribute to the overall costs of TB if the wildlife issue is dealt with.

The group also recognises that there might be a need for a new system of governance, perhaps by setting up a TB eradication board independent of government.

The interim report of the TB Strategic Partnership Group can be found on the DARD website.

The industry is asked to provide its views on the report by 4 September. A final version is due from the TB Group in December 2015.