Lundy Island - closed due to foot and mouth
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lundy Island - closed due to foot and mouth
The country has now, officially, gone insane.
Tried to go to Lundy today, but they are not letting any aircraft land due to the Foot and Mouth outbreak.
I cannot believe it.
Tried to go to Lundy today, but they are not letting any aircraft land due to the Foot and Mouth outbreak.
I cannot believe it.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eminently sensible?! Paranoid and jobsworthy, more like.
This country has developed a totally distorted perception of risk and I think this is one manifestation of it. I don't see that the Republic of Ireland, the Isle of Man, the Channel Islands or the continent of Europe has banned light aircraft flights from the UK.
This country has developed a totally distorted perception of risk and I think this is one manifestation of it. I don't see that the Republic of Ireland, the Isle of Man, the Channel Islands or the continent of Europe has banned light aircraft flights from the UK.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Whoever came up with the idea has either been very badly advised, or has no idea at all about virology. Cars are passing through the surveillance zone and then driving to France, for example. Air passengers are not being disinfected before or after travel even if they live next door to the farms where F&M has been found.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Norfolk, England
Age: 58
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It might seem OTT QDM, but why should your pleasure risk their livelyhoods?
Personally I'd prefer to see a complete clamp down for the first couple of weeks, to virtually eliminate risk of spread. That way (as seems to be the present case) it is all over very quickly, rather than dragging on for months like last time. If I owned an island that could easily be bio-controlled, I'd do the same. I'd have certainly gone further than the gov and closed footpaths in the restricted area, and indeed did close our permissive paths here. We've opened them again now, but still ask those walking them to dip there feet in the disinfectant supplied (but you'd be amazed how many do not!
) Luckily, the way this outbreak is going, it will all be over soon and we can get back to normal.
SS
Personally I'd prefer to see a complete clamp down for the first couple of weeks, to virtually eliminate risk of spread. That way (as seems to be the present case) it is all over very quickly, rather than dragging on for months like last time. If I owned an island that could easily be bio-controlled, I'd do the same. I'd have certainly gone further than the gov and closed footpaths in the restricted area, and indeed did close our permissive paths here. We've opened them again now, but still ask those walking them to dip there feet in the disinfectant supplied (but you'd be amazed how many do not!
) Luckily, the way this outbreak is going, it will all be over soon and we can get back to normal. SS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It might seem OTT QDM, but why should your pleasure risk their livelyhoods?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a rural GP in a highly affected area, I can tell you that in 2001 a lot of farmers did very well indeed out of foot and mouth. The compensation may not be so good this time, but who knows.
Anyway, the likelihood that foot and mouth is going to be spread by light aircraft from a tiny outbreak related to vaccine production is so ridculously, vanishingly small that it is laughable.
Anyway, the likelihood that foot and mouth is going to be spread by light aircraft from a tiny outbreak related to vaccine production is so ridculously, vanishingly small that it is laughable.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Norfolk, England
Age: 58
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a rural GP in a highly affected area, I can tell you that in 2001 a lot of farmers did very well indeed out of foot and mouth. The compensation may not be so good this time, but who knows.
I take your point about the very small risk, but given the incubation period of the disease, the complete picture doesn't always become apparent for at least a couple of weeks ... as a doctor, you above most, should appreciate that
Imagine if me as a dairy farmer, flying from a grazed strip decided that the risk was small so carried on flying into and out of other farm strips (or to Lundy), then two weeks later my herd did indeed go down with the disease. Imagine how much damage I could have done spreading it about! Yes the risk is tiny ... but it IS there. Ok, it does look like we're in the clear, but that is not the point as nobody has officially so so just yet!SS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And as a rural GP in a highly affected area, I find that attitude awful!
Yes the risk is tiny ... but it IS there.
For want of anyone better, I blame the Daily Mail.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Norfolk, England
Age: 58
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we'll have to agree to disagree over this one.
Whilst I agree about the general British symptom of over reaction to risk, and the increasing nanny state culture, I think your view on Foot and Mouth is rather cynical and does make me wonder why you are so bitter? Yes, there are always those who abuse compensation scheme's, but most farmers certainly DO NOT want their herds slaughtered out for what amounts to a fraction of what they will loose. The only ones who would IMHO, are those already considering leaving and have no desire to restart their farming enterprise. The compensation for F&M culls was based on a percentage of herd value, and certainly didn't pay out for the lost earnings in the months that re-stocking wasn't allowed. Why (other than those getting out) would anybody prefer to get maybe 85-95% of the value of what they already have and loose earnings in the meantime??? I also fully understand movement restrictions and the problems they cause, I am after-all a dairy farm manager and as I grew up on Dartmoor, I know your area and its farmers too.
What I can't understand is why anybody would be so worried about a couple of weeks of hardship in order to prevent months of suffering and financial loss to UK farmers? Over reaction maybe ... but probably a more sensible over reaction than most, and very likely short lived.
SS
Whilst I agree about the general British symptom of over reaction to risk, and the increasing nanny state culture, I think your view on Foot and Mouth is rather cynical and does make me wonder why you are so bitter? Yes, there are always those who abuse compensation scheme's, but most farmers certainly DO NOT want their herds slaughtered out for what amounts to a fraction of what they will loose. The only ones who would IMHO, are those already considering leaving and have no desire to restart their farming enterprise. The compensation for F&M culls was based on a percentage of herd value, and certainly didn't pay out for the lost earnings in the months that re-stocking wasn't allowed. Why (other than those getting out) would anybody prefer to get maybe 85-95% of the value of what they already have and loose earnings in the meantime??? I also fully understand movement restrictions and the problems they cause, I am after-all a dairy farm manager and as I grew up on Dartmoor, I know your area and its farmers too.
What I can't understand is why anybody would be so worried about a couple of weeks of hardship in order to prevent months of suffering and financial loss to UK farmers? Over reaction maybe ... but probably a more sensible over reaction than most, and very likely short lived.
SS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I have said, I don't care about not going to Lundy for lunch for a few weeks, but am just irritated at yet more British over-reaction. I think the country is becoming rather pathetic and laughable in its over-reaction to nearly everything and inability to live with any degree of risk and uncertainty.
I'm not bitter in any way about foot and mouth 2001. Why on Earth would I be? I am simply calling it as I saw it as a peripheral witness. You may not like it, but that's how I saw it.
I'm not bitter in any way about foot and mouth 2001. Why on Earth would I be? I am simply calling it as I saw it as a peripheral witness. You may not like it, but that's how I saw it.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QDM x 3:
I'm with you. Just cast your mind back to the floods in Gloucestershire the other week. They were described as : a humanitarian disaster!!
Several thousand people were without running water for a few days. That's hardly a humanitarian disaster. Ask the average displaced family from Darfur what one of those is!
I hear also that trees which breathe life into larger cities are being cut down in their swathes because of fear of claims from people tripping over raised flagstones caused by their roots or branches dropping on their cars..
I'm with you. Just cast your mind back to the floods in Gloucestershire the other week. They were described as : a humanitarian disaster!!
Several thousand people were without running water for a few days. That's hardly a humanitarian disaster. Ask the average displaced family from Darfur what one of those is!
I hear also that trees which breathe life into larger cities are being cut down in their swathes because of fear of claims from people tripping over raised flagstones caused by their roots or branches dropping on their cars..
