Consultation Paper: Veterinary Disease Surveillance in Scotland SRUC is inviting written responses to this consultation paper by 10 July 2015. You may wish to comment specifically on the following areas: 1. The consultation provides 3 options for the provision of disease surveillance and diagnostic services in the areas served by the Ayr DSC. These are: i. Remain at Ayr ii. Relocate elsewhere in Ayrshire iii. Relocate to the University of Glasgow, Garscube Campus a) What do you see as the advantages and disadvantages of each proposal? i. Remain at Ayr Farmers in Ayrshire wish the DSC to be retained at its current location in Ayr. According to SRUC, the site is one of the most frequently used and annually carries out around 650 farm livestock submissions for post mortem examination. This is due to the expertise and trust in the DSC staff, convenient and importantly discreet location. There are no disadvantages to maintaining the facilities at its current location and farmers in the region are highly sceptical of the figures quoted by a survey commissioned by SRUC suggesting that it would cost around 700,000 over 10 years to maintain the building. We are very concerned that SRUC have manipulated figures as the 700,000 does not apply purely to the DSC centre but to other retained building on the site as per an email received from SRUC: We commissioned Faithful and Gould to carry out a condition survey of these properties in 2014. They inspected properties at Auchincruive including the Disease Surveillance Centre. Their independent assessment is that over the next 10 years approximately 700,000 is required to be spent on maintenance (such as finishes, roof works, services installations, render repairs, etc.) to put the properties into good order. ii. Relocate elsewhere in Ayrshire NFU Scotland Ayrshire region see no advantage in moving the DSC centre to another location. It makes no sense to move to another location given the cost of buying land, building and infrastructures and the strong possibility of objections from near by residents. The current site provides excellent access and availability for farmers not only in Ayrshire but also Galloway, South Lanarkshire and Renfrewshire as it is nearby/on route to the Craig Wilson Auction Mart, which makes it very convenient for dropping of samples etc. for the farming community.
iii. Relocate to the University of Glasgow, Garscube Campus It has been made resoundingly clear by farmers who currently use the DSC centre at Auchincruive that they WOULD NOT, under no circumstances, be willing to take samples or animals for post mortem to the Garscube Campus. The plan to work in collaboration with the Glasgow vet school to provide and alternative facility is welcome, only in terms of improved collaboration, but if the new facility were to be relocated into Glasgow, at the vet school, it would immediately receive a drop in the number of submissions, impacting on effective surveillance. Although the distance from Ayr to Glasgow on paper may not be appear insurmountable, the prospect of driving through Glasgow traffic with a carcass for submission will significantly decrease. Farmers who attended the SRUC consultation meeting on the 26 th July were exceptionally concerned that the figures used on the presentation were of the number of holdings within a 30-40 mile radius of the Ayr DSC centre as this is exceptionally misleading when you compare the same radius with livestock numbers. The surrounding radius is very highly populated by livestock, especially cattle which are the most frequently post mortem animal. See table:
This is why it is essential to retain the DSC facility and in turn keeping the accessibility of the centre for farmers. In a highly populated livestock area any barriers to surveillance could be catastrophic not only in the immediate local, but across Scotland. b) The current range of services available at Ayr may be greatly reduced in the event the facility were to remain in Ayrshire. Does this alter your answer to the previous question? No. We see no justification in cutting services in Ayrshire due to it being one of the most utilised DSC centres in Scotland. The Kinnaird Review of Veterinary Surveillance made a
number of recommendations which did include a reduction in the number of Disease Surveillance Centres (DSCs), although it made no recommendations as to which centres would be best placed to close. The Kinnaird Review although recommending the closure of centres included a number of caveats to that recommendation: 1. Ensure that priority is given to areas of high density in each livestock sector; 2. Conduct a cost-benefit analysis to ensure that the benefits created by closing a DSC will be justified; 3. Consider alternative methods of gathering surveillance material, such as collaboration with one or more local veterinary practices or other provider, or establishing a collection service: 4. Ensure that all parts of the country remain adequately provided for by regional Veterinary Investigation Officers. We can see no justification in closing one of the most utilised DSC centres or cutting the services available. c) Are there other options that should be considered within current budgets? We would propose that with budgets under pressure and SRUC unable to maintain its current level of service within the current budget it might be time to return to basics and for Scottish Government to introduce a tender process. This might open the way for consideration of alternative options that may be able to deliver the service more effectively, rather than simply adapting an old service that may need to be more radically reformed. d) Would relocating the service to the University of Glasgow, Garscube Campus improve or obstruct the early detection of a specific new or re-emerging disease threat? This would significantly obstruct the early detection of a specific new or re-emerging disease threat for the reasons previously given. e) Relocating the DSC to the University of Glasgow, Garscube Campus would increase the distance some holdings are from their present DSC. It may be Dumfries or Edinburgh. What steps do you suggest to mitigate any loss of disease surveillance or service in these areas? Do not close the Ayr DSC centre. f) Private veterinary surgeons might be willing to support the modified network by carrying out post mortems either on farm or at alternative premises. Do you think that this is a practical alternative and what support would private veterinary surgeons need? Not a practical alternative. Costly.
g) Do you have any other views on the provision of disease surveillance and diagnostic services from the Ayr DSC? The staff at the DSC are a great asset to farmers not only in the local but across Scotland. Their willingness to engage, assist and communicate with farmers has been a key contribution factor in the improvement and progression of Livestock health. All services must be retained. Further Consideration Members of NFUS Ayrshire Region would like it noted on record by both SRUC and Scottish Government, that, Farmers are resolutely against the moving or closure of the Ayr DSC. If SRUC go against the will of their farming clients and the recommendations in the Kinnaird report and make the unwise and detrimental decision to relocate the DSC out with Ayrshire, then they must, as a priority, engage with the farming community to discuss contingency plans for the subsidised collection of post mortem material. Farmers are aware that SRUC would have plans to sell the current site at Ayr and the monies realised from this sale should be allocated to funding a collection service or centre. It must be stressed, that this would very much be a second rate option in comparison to the current service available.