Memorandum submitted by the Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (W 20)
INTRODUCTION
1. This inquiry addresses some of the issues
which are of current concern to Defra in our work with the devolved
administrations in Scotland and Wales on a new Animal Health and
Welfare Strategy for Great Britain. The vet/farmer relationship
will be at the heart of the Strategy. The Strategy will include
a proposed new Animal Welfare Bill for England and Wales, and
a Veterinary Surveillance Strategy, both of which have recently
been subject to extensive public consultation. We hope to publish
the first draft of the Strategy in the summer. We also have a
project underway concerning the Department's relationships with
Local Veterinary Inspectors (LVIs) and we expect to consult on
a biosecurity plan later this year. This memorandum sets out our
emerging thinking on those aspects which are relevant to the sub-committee's
work, and also provides some specific information on the impact
of farm incomes on the usage of veterinary services.
FUTURE REQUIREMENTS
FOR VETERINARY
SERVICES
2. An issue from the completed consultation
exercise concerning the proposed health and welfare strategy has
been the duty which owning and keeping animals places on those
responsible for them to ensure the animals health and welfare.
This affirms that people who own animals, or who are otherwise
responsible for them, should ensure that the animals are kept
healthy, treated when necessary and that their welfare needs are
met. Members of the veterinary profession already accept such
obligations towards the animals under their care and vets have
the particular knowledge to ensure that these obligations are
properly discharged. The Government's duties are rather different.
The Government sets out the legal and enforcement frameworks based
on science, surveillance and ethical values.
DEFRA AND
VETERINARIANS
3. Defra is a major user of vets and veterinary
services as direct employees; as Local Veterinary Inspectors (LVIs)
and as skilled eyes and ears for the surveillance of animal diseases
and welfare. Veterinary surgeons on farms—whether in their
capacity as private consultants to the farmers, or carrying LVI
out work on behalf of Defra—represent a key interface for
the exchange of information between the farming industry and Government.
As private veterinary surgeons, they are paid by farmers to investigate
disease incidents, and they use their discretion to pass information
to Government—eg the notification of suspect exotic disease,
unusual manifestations of disease, or welfare issues. They may
also submit diagnostic material for chargeable laboratory investigations,
from which Government captures most of its "scanning surveillance"
information. Under the Surveillance Strategy, we have recognised
the need to improve collaboration with veterinarians in private
practice, derive better value from the activities we support,
and share information more widely. As LVIs, they carry out certain
surveillance activities, and generally act as official veterinarians
paid for by Defra.
4. As a direct employer, Defra employs veterinarians
directly in the State Veterinary Service, to provide veterinary
policy advice at headquarters, and work in the Veterinary Laboratories
Agency and the Veterinary Medicines Directorate. In addition,
the Meat Hygiene Service (part of the Food Standards Agency) employs
29 full-time veterinary staff as official Veterinary Surgeons
(OVSs) and 650 on contract; both full and part-time, in licensed
slaughterhouses. Although the sub-committee's inquiry is about
the provision of veterinary services to farmers and farm animals,
it should be borne in mind that Defra now has responsibilities
towards the health and welfare of all animals kept by man, except
for those used in laboratory research. Further information about
the State Veterinary Service and Local Veterinary Inspectors (LVIs)
is attached as Annex A. Defra is currently undertaking a review
of our relationship with LVIs which centres on the nature of the
contract, the system of communication/instruction and training
programmes. The object of the exercise is not to reduce the amount
of money paid to LVI practices but to improve the efficiency within
which the system works.
VETERINARIANS AND
BIOSECURITY
5. Vets have the potential to play an extremely
important role in the improvement of biosecurity standards on
farms. Given that vets are felt by farmers to be one of their
most trusted sources of advice, they are in a strong position
to provide practical advice on biosecurity and farm health and
welfare planning. After the FMD outbreak, there is a much stronger
emphasis on the need for preventative approaches to disease control,
including biosecurity measures. It should be stressed that the
concept of biosecurity applies to the reduction of endemic diseases
and zoonoses as well as the prevention of exotic disease outbreaks.
Biosecurity will also become increasingly important as the way
forward to reduce the use of antimicrobials in livestock, particularly
as the use of antibiotics as growth promoters in feed is likely
to be banned in the EU in 2006. Also, recently agreed EU hygiene
legislation will require farms to have in place a hygiene plan
for the purposes of minimising the risks of food to human health.
It is also envisaged that under the proposed EU Official Food
and Feed Controls Regulation, there will be official controls
on farms and vets may have an important role to play in the auditing
of hygiene plans. Defra and the Food Standards Agency envisage
that the most sensible approach to implementing these future requirements
will be to combine farm health and welfare plans, biosecurity
measures and hygiene planning so that an integrated and simplified
approach is taken as a whole to improving animal health and welfare
and public health.
6. Defra intends to go out to consultation
on a draft action plan on the recommendations made in the FMD
inquiry reports regarding training, advice and guidance on biosecurity.
Defra will develop partnerships with influential stakeholders
to encourage the farming community to adopt stricter biosecurity
measures. For example, farm assurance schemes have the potential
to encourage uptake of stricter biosecurity standards, particularly
if they are formally audited. Clearly, agricultural colleges and
other advisory schemes and demonstration farms have an important
role to play, but vets in particular have the potential to play
a highly significant advisory role.
7. However, if vets are to play a stronger
advisory role, it is necessary to change the emphasis of their
farm visits from treatment of infections to preventative farm
health planning. Whilst vets may be willing to promote preventative
approaches to animal health, including such matters as nutrition
and productivity, there needs to be demand from farmers for this
service and thus adequate incentives need to be in place for farmers
to invest in vets' time to take a more proactive approach. To
this end, it will be for Defra to work with stakeholders to develop
a practical approach and guidance on what farm health and welfare
plans should involve to assist vets undertaking this work, and
to provide a basis for standards that can be adopted by farm assurance
schemes.
8. Farm health and welfare plans are best
developed taking the individual circumstances of the farm into
account, preferably with some knowledge of the recurring conditions
and illnesses on the farm. The farm health and welfare plan can
set out how the prevalence of these illnesses can be reduced whilst
ensuring that new diseases are not brought onto the farm. This
will clearly need veterinary advice, but it would also be advantageous
for vets to feed back the disease prevalence information to Defra
where it can be used effectively to target action to reduce certain
diseases. Farm health and welfare plans could also become a key
element in the distribution arrangements for veterinary medicines
for food producing animals if the European Commission proposal
to make all veterinary medicines for food producing animals prescription
only is adopted.
THE NEED
FOR FARM
VETERINARY SERVICES
9. The development of the Animal Health
and Welfare Strategy, together with its associated work on veterinary
surveillance and the Animal Welfare Bill, will inevitably lead
to a recognition that animal health and welfare standards on many
farms need to improve. The discussions on the development of the
Strategy have shown that this will have to be brought about by
way of a partnership between all the relevant stakeholders, including
veterinarians, animal keepers and the Government, rather than
as a series of impositions by the State. Of course, legislation
and enforcement will be involved but as a complement to the Strategy
rather than its objective. We need to find new ways of communicating
with animal keepers and ensuring that they have access to the
education and skills necessary to allow them to fulfil their obligations
as animal keepers. Clearly farmers trust their veterinarians as
communicators of animal health advice. However, one of the major
issues is whether farmers and private veterinarians have the capacity
to deliver this desired outcome through more work on farms, perhaps
through herd or flock health and welfare plans. The idea can be
pushed by legislation and pulled by customer requirements through
farm assurance schemes, but will only succeed if farmers and the
veterinary profession work together and have the capacity to deliver.
10. Defra believes that the costs of this
obligation on animal keepers should not fall entirely on the taxpayer
but that there is an essential role for farmers in bringing about
the necessary improvements but the question of how the balance
between farmer and taxpayer should be struck has yet to be resolved.
HIGHLANDS AND
ISLANDS VETERINARY
SERVICES SCHEME
(HIVSS)
11. The purpose of the Highlands and Islands
Veterinary Services Scheme (HIVSS) is to ensure the availability
of an adequate veterinary service at reasonable cost to crofters
and persons of like economic status in the Highlands and Islands
Enterprise Area of Scotland. The Scheme helps improve the health
standard of herds and flocks in the more remote areas of Scotland
and is also beneficial from an animal welfare and disease surveillance
standpoint.
12. The service applies to all animals kept
for agricultural purposes and belonging to persons eligible to
participate in the Scheme. Standard fees for veterinary visits
are charged to crofters; and the 25 participating veterinary practices
are reimbursed their travel and associated costs. The operational
cost of the Scheme to the Executive is in the region of £620,000
(2003-04 estimate).
THE IMPACT
OF FARM
INCOMES ON
THE USAGE
OF VETERINARY
SERVICES
13. The Farm Business Survey includes data
on farm annual expenditure on all veterinary fees and medicines
purchased. It is not possible separately to identify these two
components and so whilst the following analysis will provide some
evidence on usage of veterinary services, it will also reflect
medicines purchased from other sources (eg purchasing direct from
merchants, distributors, farmer co-operatives etc). It will not
include the cost of medicated feeds used in the intensive livestock
sectors, ie pigs and poultry. It is also not possible to draw
conclusions regarding the different causes of differing levels
of expenditure on veterinary fees and medicines.
14. The average farm expenditure for livestock
farms[1]
on vet and med is around £3,300. This is broadly the same,
on average, as expenditure in 1996, a recent year of high farm
incomes. Dairy farms, however, have shown a (10%) increase in
expenditure per farm whilst other farm types tend to show a decrease.
The figures for 2001 are the latest available and exclude farms
which were culled owing to Foot & Mouth Disease. As FMD may
have had a transient effect on annual expenditure, the 2000 figures
are also presented for comparison.
15. The average total farm expenditure will
be influenced by the numbers and types of livestock present on
the farm. Different types of livestock tend to have different
levels of veterinary and medicine expenditure associated with
them. In very general terms the larger and more valuable the animal,
the greater the average level of expenditure per animal. For example,
the average level of veterinary and medicine expenditure per dairy
cow is usually much larger than per breeding ewe. The expenditure
per animal can be put onto a more common footing by expressing
it on a per livestock unit basis (because livestock units allow
for the different sizes of animals found on farms) This makes
it easier to compare expenditure across farms or across years.
16. The average cost per livestock unit
is very similar across farm types and has shown a decline between
1996 and 2000-01 (10% on average across all farm types).
17. This reduction in vet and med costs
per livestock unit between 1996 and recent years is difficult
to interpret and may reflect a combination of changes. As the
data show the average value of expenditure across a sample of
farms, the figures do not necessarily mean that farmers are using
a lower quantity of veterinary services and medicines per livestock
unit—they might for example have achieved cost savings by
negotiating cheaper prices for veterinary services and medicines
or by simply using these inputs more efficiently.
18. It is interesting to see if the more
efficient farmers; those with lower inputs per unit of output,
have a different average expenditure on vet and med expenditure
compared to the less efficient farmers. Broadly, there is little
difference in expenditure between high and low performance farms.
Dairy farms show the largest absolute difference in expenditure
per livestock unit, with higher performers having higher average
vet and med expenditure per livestock unit.
19. There is substantial variation in farm
incomes both over time and across farms within a given year. This
variation makes it extremely difficult to identify any relationship
between the level of farm incomes and expenditure on vet and med.
Correlation coefficients between vet and med per livestock unit
and net farm income for particular types of farm are very small.
Specialist pig farms have the strongest correlation at r=0.15.
As this is positive it means that higher vet & med expenditure
tends to be associated with higher incomes, but only 2% of the
variation in income (r2) is accounted for by the vet and med expenditure.
It is also important to remember that this is simply an association,
not necessarily a causative relationship.
20. Part of the reason for the weak, if
any, relationship between vet and med and farm incomes/performance
is that vet and med expenditure is a very small component of total
inputs. On average, it makes up less than 5% of the cost of inputs
on all types of farm. For 99% of farms, vet and med accounts for
less than 10% of inputs.
21. Clearly, there are many factors that
can influence farmers' approaches to the use of veterinary services.
For example, higher costs may be incurred either as a result of
a specific disease outbreak, or as part of an ongoing preventative
and monitoring policy of the farm. There is likely to be a basic
minimum requirement for veterinary services on a farm, but this
may vary with the husbandry skills and experience of the farmer/stockman.
Therefore the relationship between usage of veterinary services
and animal health and welfare is neither straightforward or consistent
and is likely to be more influenced by factors other than the
current level of farm incomes.
THE CAPACITY
OF THE
VETERINARY PROFESSION
TO DELIVER
22. Defra does not have first-hand information
on numbers and trends of vets working with farms animals but the
information is available from the Royal College of Veterinary
Surgeons who conduct regular manpower surveys. Results published
in November 2002 show that farm animals take up a small and declining
proportion of the actual time spent working in large animal or
mixed veterinary practice.
23. This decline is borne out by an informal
survey of the 19 animal health district offices (AHDOs) in England
and Wales, which showed that 14 of these offices are experiencing
mild to moderate (up to 25%) declines in the availability of private
vets to act as Local Veterinary Inspectors (LVIs). Further details
are in Annex A. ADHOs have generally coped by doing more work
in-house, or using Temporary Veterinary Inspectors, or by deferring
some lower priority work. If historically high levels of SVS workload
continue, alongside a continuing decline in large animal practice,
then SVS operational flexibility is likely to be reduced.
24. The question of the provision of veterinary
medicines by veterinary practices has recently been considered
by the Competition Commission. The Commission found that there
was some element of a monopoly in the supply of medicines by veterinary
practices and therefore some possible cross subsidisation of hourly
fees from profits on the sale of prescription medicines. The likely
consequence of the steps taken to bring this practice to an end
is cheaper medicines but more realistic hourly charges. The net
effect on farms should be neutral.
THE VETERINARY
SURGEONS ACT
25. The Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 defines
the work of veterinary surgeons, the make up of the Royal College
of Veterinary Surgeons and disciplinary procedures. We expect
to begin a consultation process later this year about changes
to the Veterinary Surgeons Act. The proposed changes are mainly
likely to focus on the constitution of the Royal College and disciplinary
procedures. The 1966 Act already gives the Secretary of State
powers to enable some acts of veterinary surgery to be carried
out by non-veterinarians. This reduced the burden of routine work
and gives vets more scope to do the work for which they are particularly
well suited including on-farm work. Recent examples of such deregulation
includes an extension in the role of veterinary nurses in animal
care and a measure to enable non-veterinarians to carry out invasive
ultra-sound scanning of cattle for the purpose of detecting pregnancy.
We are now working on legislation to enable non-veterinarians
to carry out artificial insemination of mares and cattle and some
equine dental procedures, at present considered to be acts of
veterinary surgery. In its report on Badgers and Bovine TB, the
Committee welcomed in principle the Government's proposal to use
lay testers to clear the backlog of TB tests, and recognised that
such testers might have a role to play in respect of diseases
other than Bovine TB. The Government is preparing to issue more
detailed proposals. There is also the option of using non-veterinarians
to administer FMD vaccine.
THE DEVOLVED
ADMINISTRATIONS
26. Animal Health and Welfare policy is
a devolved area but regulation of the veterinary profession is
reserved to the UK Government. As such, the memorandum has been
discussed with the devolved administrations. Given the work in
producing a Great Britain Animal Health and Welfare Strategy,
the outcome of the sub-committee's inquiry will be of value to
them as well as to Defra.
7 May 2003
Annex A
ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS SELECT
COMMITTEE SUB-COMMITTEE ENQUIRY INTO VETS AND VETERINARY SERVICES
VETERINARIANS
1. Defra is one of the main government departments
employing veterinary surgeons. Veterinary staff are employed in
the Veterinary Laboratories Agency, Veterinary Medicines Directorate,
Science Directorate, Veterinary Directorate and SVS. There are
278 permanent veterinary staff, 53 casual and six Fixed Term Appointment
Veterinarians in the SVS and nine in the VMD. The number of frontline
vets employed by the SVS in the field has remained broadly constant
over time.
BACKGROUND TO
THE STATE
VETERINARY SERVICE
(SVS)
2. The SVS is a GB wide organisation in
the Operations and Service Delivery Directorate General of Defra,
dealing with animal health, public health, animal welfare and
international trade, operating a network of veterinary, technical
and administrative staff. The SVS carries out a range of responsibilities,
many of a statutory nature. The SVS work supports the Department's
overall agricultural strategy.
STRUCTURE OF
THE SVS
3. There are five regional SVS Offices and
24 Animal Health Divisional Offices (AHDO) geographically located
throughout Great Britain.
STRUCTURE OF
SVS IN ENGLAND
AND WALES
4. In England there are three regions and
16 AHDOs. In Wales there is one region and three AHDOs. Each AHDO
is headed by a Divisional Veterinary Manager (DVM).
The SVS is supported by two categories of private
veterinarians.
Local Veterinary Inspectors (LVIs) and Temporary
Veterinary Inspectors (TVIs).
Private Practice Veterinarians
BACKGROUND
5. LVIs are private practice veterinary
surgeons appointed by the Secretary of State in England and the
National Assembly of Wales in Wales to carry out, as agents, specified
duties on behalf of the Department. Their conditions of appointment
are set out in a "Memorandum of conditions of appointment
of Local Veterinary Inspectors". Local Veterinary Inspectors
must be Members or Fellows of the Royal College of Veterinary
Surgeons.
DUTIES
6. LVIs are authorised to undertake functions
for which they are provisionally or fully appointed, as set out
in their letter of appointment. Each LVI is appointed to one or
more panels (or sub panels), each panel having allocated to it
the duties involved in connection with the subject. LVIs are paid
by Defra for work on some panels. For other panel work, such as
animal export certification, the exporter pays the LVI directly.
7. Practices and LVIs are accountable, in
terms of Departmental work to the DVM. The DVM will allocate work
to practices as necessary.
FUNCTIONS OF
LVIS
8. LVIs provide assistance to the Department
and cover a wide variety of tasks. There are approximately 7,000
LVIs. Appendix 1 provides information of their input against the
various tasks which are connected with the large animal panels.
Appendix 2 provides data in respect of the mileage incurred whilst
undertaking these tasks.
FINDINGS FROM
ANIMAL HEALTH
OFFICES
9. A survey, commissioned to gauge the LVI
input received at local level and identify potential problems
currently being encountered has recently been commissioned. There
is a need to recognise that the volume of work and tasks undertaken
varies from Region to Region depending upon local situations,
for example TB is more prominent in the West, whilst some regions
are heavily involved with portal duties.
RESULTS
10. Assessments were carried out to ascertain
the following:
— Changes to the number of practices
handling large farm animal work over the last five years;
— Changes to the number of individual
practice LVIs available to undertake Departmental work over the
last five years;
— Difficulties faced finding sufficient
vets to undertake duties; and
— How shortfalls have been handled.
FINDINGS
East Region (5 AHDOs)
11. Eighty per cent confirmed some decline
(up to 25%) in the number of practices, whilst one AHDO reported
some slight increase. Likewise 80% reported some decline in the
number of individual LVIs whilst one AHDO reported a slight increase.
Consistent with other findings 80% felt that difficulties arose
only during big peaks in workload, problems had been identified
during the winter months with some practices indicating there
were not sufficient staff to undertake all of the allocated TB
tasks, other difficulties are experienced when practices cease
undertaking large animal work resulting in a geographical gap
either for a period or permanently. As an outcome of the above
shortfalls work areas are being covered by SVS Veterinarians including
the additional casual SVS staff recruited specifically to work
on the TB herd-testing programme.
North Region (6 AHDOs)
12. Eighty one per cent confirmed some decline
in the number of practices, whilst one AHDO reported that the
situation had remained the same. Sixty six per cent reported some
decline in the number of individual LVIs whilst one AHDO reported
a severe decline with one reporting the situation remaining the
same. One hundred per cent felt that difficulties in finding sufficient
vets are relevant when there are big peaks in workloads. As an
outcome of reported shortfalls 66% reported that work had been
delayed or not done. Others had carried out more work in house
with the use of TVIs and Casual SVS Veterinary Officers.
West Region (5 AHDOs)
13. Sixty per cent confirmed some decline
of up to 25% in the number of practices handling large animal
work, although one AHDO reported numbers remaining the same whilst
one confirmed an increase.A mixture of results was found in connection
with the number of individual vets available in practice to handle
departmental work. Forty per cent found that numbers had remained
the same whilst others reported a mixture of some decline, severe
decline and an increase. A mixture of information was received
in connection with the difficulties faced. Severe difficulties
were faced in the Exeter AHDO who report that occasionally there
are insufficient LVIs to handle farm work in normal circumstances,
they have experienced situations, on occasions where availability
of LVIs has been insufficient in connection with TB testing workloads.
Seasonal implications can also affect resource issues, for example,
the favoured systems of testing cattle just before they are turned
out to grazing for the summer months. Four AHDOs reported difficulties
in connection with peaks of increase of work, however one reported
a constant theme of difficulties faced to find private veterinarians
willing to undertake large animal work.
14. As previously mentioned, the TB herd-testing
programme has particularly affected the West Region. All TB testing
was suspended during the foot and mouth outbreak. As an example,
the Gloucester AHDO have reported a 75% increase in TB herd breakdowns
over the last five years, during 2002, 500 incidents were revealed
from 4,300 herd tests.
15. Again, a mixture of methods are engaged
to overcome difficulties with some AHDOs reporting that the additional
resources made available to the SVS during the 2002-03 financial
year has helped with the employment of casual SVS Veterinarians/TVIs.
However, it is also recognised that it is not always possible
to use in-hours resources due to the high volume of priority work.
It is also acknowledged that some work has been delayed.
Wales (3 AHDOs)
16. Two offices report some decline in both
the number of practices and individual vets available to undertake
large animal work on behalf of the department over the last five
years. One office has reported that the situation has remained
the same. The decline can be attributed by large animal practices
deciding to stop working with large animals. It is noted, however,
that in some circumstances those who remain employ more individual
LVIs. It is recognised that new and recent graduates tend not
to stay in large animal practices for very long, usually less
than a year, therefore there is a high turnover of veterinary
assistants. Practices report that new/recent graduates often move
to companion animal/equine practices. It has also been reported
that the working conditions associated with the eradication of
foot and mouth have resulted in private veterinarians seeking
alternative types of work, for example small animal practice work.
The difficulties faced by the Welsh SVS offices are reported as
being severe by two AHDOs whilst one reports difficulties associated
with big peaks in workload. Some LVI practices are reported to
not finding TB LVI work profitable, particularly in relation to
small TB tests in the Valley areas. Other work areas such as the
National Scrapie Plan, sheep exports or occasional welfare problems
at markets do not appear to present a problem. Problems are overcome
by using in-house SVS staff, casual staff and TVIs.
SUMMARY AND
CONCLUSION
17. A majority of AHDOs in all five SVS
Regions report a decline in the number of practices able to carry
out large animal work although the problems are by no means uniform.
AHDOs have generally coped by doing more work in-house, or using
TVIs, although some lower priority work has also been deferred.
If historically, high levels of SVS workload continue, alongside
a continuing decline in large animal practice, then SVS operational
flexibility is likely to be reduced.
DEFRA
April 2003
Annex B
ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS SELECT
COMMITTEE SUB-COMMITTEE INQUIRY INTO VETS AND VETERINARY SERVICES
VETERINARY LABORATORIES
AGENCY (VLA)
The VLA is an Executive Agency of Defra, established
in 1995 from a merger of the former Central Veterinary Laboratory
agency and the then-MAFF network of Veterinary Investigation Centres
in England and Wales. The total staff is more than 1,200 of whom
108 have veterinary qualifications. There is also a large number
of non-veterinary professional scientists, together with technical
and support staff.
STRUCTURE OF
VLA
Two thirds of the staff are based at the headquarters
site near Weybridge in Surrey which is where the bulk of VLA's
scientific veterinary research activity is done. Some research
is also conducted at the VLA Lasswade laboratory near Edinburgh.
Staff at these sites also carry out centralised specialist laboratory
testing and analysis of national surveillance data.
The remainder of the agency is dispersed among
14 Regional Laboratories spread across England and Wales. The
Regional Laboratories are each staffed by a team of vets, together
with a team of laboratory testing and administrative support staff.
Two additional veterinary surveillance units have recently been
established in conjunction with the London and Liverpool veterinary
schools.
FUNDING
VLA is a net running cost agency, with the annual
target to recover its full operational costs from customers. The
accounts are laid annually before Parliament then published. In
summary, of the total annual budget of approximately £87
million, the approximate customer breakdown is:
| Defra Directorate General for Animal Health and Welfare
| 66% |
| Defra Science Directorate (veterinary research)
| 23% |
| Food Standards Agency (research and surveillance)
| 5% |
| Commercial contracts | 5% |
| Private veterinary practices | 1%
|
MISSION
VLA's mission is to safeguard public and animal health through
world class veterinary research and surveillance of farmed livestock
and wildlife.
ROLE OF
VLA IN PROVISION
OF FARM
VETERINARY SERVICES
Although VLA has certain statutory functions (for example
senior vets in Regional Laboratories are nominated officers for
Salmonella notifications), and some of its activities are in support
of Defra's statutory disease control responsibilities (for example
laboratory confirmation of BSE suspects), many of its activities
particularly in Regional Laboratories are geared to gathering
disease surveillance information for Government while at the same
time providing advisory and disease investigation services to
private veterinary practitioners.
VLA does not provide services direct to farmers, but works
in partnership with farmers' own veterinary surgeons (many of
whom are also LVIs). A list of services is published and distributed
to all farm veterinary practices. Most of these services are charged
to the practice, and thence on to the farmer, but many of them
are also subsidised by funding from Defra so that the farm/veterinary
customer does not bear the full cost. Among the services offered
are post mortem examinations of dead livestock, laboratory testing
of samples submitted from flocks and herds, and specialist advice
on health and welfare matters to farm vets. This may include,
by arrangement, visits to farms for more in-depth investigation.
The reports produced have a dual function, in that they inform
the vet about the individual case, but the data is also collated
centrally to feed into Defra's national veterinary surveillance
system.
VLA produces a monthly surveillance report that is published
in the Veterinary Record, while quarterly summaries by
farmed livestock species are published on the Defra website. These
are produced by VLA "species groups" that include representatives
from Scottish Agricultural College, an organisation that provides
similar services to the above in Scotland. Annual tabulated data
is also published in the "VIDA" report which also includes
Scottish Agricultural College data.
1
Cattle and Sheep, dairy, mixed, specialist pigs, specialist poultry,
mixed pig and poultry. Cropping type farms record some expenditure
as there may be some livestock present on predominantly cropping
farms. Back
| 
