Memorandum submitted by the Institute
of Grassland and Environmental Research (R 4)
Thank you for your letter of 24 November soliciting
oral evidence for the House of Commons Agriculture Committee.
This reply is provided on behalf of the Institute of Grassland
and Environmental Research (IGER). IGER carries out an extensive
programme of basic, strategic and applied research into many aspects
of grassland and extensive agriculture. This includes programmes
of work on ruminant nutrition, forage breeding and forage conservation,
and we have an established record of research excellence in forage-based
animal production systems. The majority of the strategic research
at IGER is funded by MAFF, with underpinning research funded by
BBSRC. We also carry out research for industrial sponsors including
animal feed companies.
In general, we feel that the MAFF-funded research
effort on TSE research has helped to establish a scientifically
rigorous basis for the control procedures that were introduced.
Continued funding will help to: (a) understand the syndrome(s)
in more detail; (b) eradicate scrapie from the UK sheep herd and
(c) develop diagnostic and prognostic methods that will facilitate
monitoring. One of our MAFF-funded research projects is concerned
with TSE and the utility of using low molecular weight blood-based
metabolites (non-prion) as a diagnostic or prognostic tool. This
is an area of research where MAFF has funded relatively few projects
and we would suggest that useful additional knowledge could be
gained from a systematic investigation of temporal changes in
non-prion based metabolites in blood, urine and cerebral fluids
in TSEs. MAFF now have access to appropriately collected samples,
from BSE challenge experiments, to facilitate such studies. It
should be noted that neurodegenerative symptoms have been observed
in cattle for many years and linked to diet (eg ryegrass staggers).
We feel that it will become increasingly important, as disease
numbers fall, to be able to distinguish TSEs rapidly and accurately
in order to avoid false positives. We particularly support, therefore,
MAFF's research involvement in diagnostics.
On the broader issue of the consequences to
human and animal health of intensive farming methods, we believe
that experimental evidence indicates that intensity of production
is not linked a priori to deleterious consequences. Indeed,
intensive animal production permits a greater control of animal
husbandry and diet (and thus potentially of animal health) because
of the greater financial return per animal. It should also be
borne in mind that systems such as organic production, identified
in the public mind as not being intensive, can generate very high
levels of production per animal, and thus require equally careful
control over nutrition and health. By contrast, extensive systems
such as hill and upland sheep production can harbour TSEs, as
in the case of scrapie where the issue is a genetic predisposition
rather than the intensity or otherwise of the farming system.
Within these complex parameters, MAFF funds
a range of research concerned with livestock production. A significant
proportion of this emphasises the use of forage-based systems
and is increasingly linked to the environmental benefits that
can accrue from such systems. There has been a significant change
in MAFF livestock research policy over recent years towards more
sustainable, environmentally benign production methods. We welcome
this change and encourage continued links between the research
funded from within different policy groups. MAFF have also funded
work, in partnership with the levy boards, which emphasises the
quality elements of livestock production systems. A number of
studies have indicated the advantages for farmers of introducing
added value into the food chain, and we again would endorse the
relevance of such research.
In conclusion, we believe that MAFF retains
an important role in the funding of strategic agricultural research
to promote economically viable methods of livestock production
in a time of reduced production subsidies. The increased focus
of this research on sustainability and quality issues within UK
production systems will be of generic value to all sectors of
agriculture, including intensive, alternative and extensive systems.
Whilst we do not feel qualified to comment in detail upon the
full range of TSE research funded by MAFF, we do feel that its
overall objectives are appropriate and that they are consistent
with the aims of the relevant systems-based research funded by
other priority groups. We encourage the committee to take a pragmatic
view of the benefits and limitations of different agricultural
systems and to acknowledge that a significant proportion of the
MAFF research portfolio will generate information of general value
to livestock farmers, whatever system they are operating.
29 January 2001
|