SFI Welfare Scheme to Pay Vets to do Health and Welfare Plans?

[Frank-the-Wool]

How many Vets out there actually know what happens on a mixed beef and sheep farm?
There are a few very good Vets that have carried on doing large animals but most of them are like the farmers they serve getting long in the tooth.

This looks to be a great money making scheme for the Vets with very little benefit to the beef and sheep farmer unless it is more than just writing out an annual health and welfare plan, which will be a copy and paste exercise anyway.

Surely it would make more sense to have say 3 subsidised visits a year and do practical training such as FEC's or blood tests for deficiencies or look at lameness issues and the causes etc.

This would not be possible anyway as there are not enough Vets in most areas who can tell the difference between a sheep and a cow as they are all too busy doing cats and dogs on the insurance!

There are a some very good and knowledgeable livestock farmers who could do this and get the money that would make a greater difference to health and welfare than the majority of Vets straight out of Uni who will be the ones that end up doing it for the large groups as they will generate the most profit!

I am not knocking the few very good Vets but this is the reality of what will happen I believe.

 

[Estate fencing.]

How many Vets out there actually know what happens on a mixed beef and sheep farm?
There are a few very good Vets that have carried on doing large animals but most of them are like the farmers they serve getting long in the tooth.

This looks to be a great money making scheme for the Vets with very little benefit to the beef and sheep farmer unless it is more than just writing out an annual health and welfare plan, which will be a copy and paste exercise anyway.

Surely it would make more sense to have say 3 subsidised visits a year and do practical training such as FEC's or blood tests for deficiencies or look at lameness issues and the causes etc.

This would not be possible anyway as there are not enough Vets in most areas who can tell the difference between a sheep and a cow as they are all too busy doing cats and dogs on the insurance!

There are a some very good and knowledgeable livestock farmers who could do this and get the money that would make a greater difference to health and welfare than the majority of Vets straight out of Uni who will be the ones that end up doing it for the large groups as they will generate the most profit!

I am not knocking the few very good Vets but this is the reality of what will happen I believe.

I don't want to come on here an knock vets but they are bloody useless around here for large animals, had the health review a couple of weeks ago and the vet had absolutely no idea. She hadn't heard of the purple or orange wormers and proceeded to tell me that she had never heard of ewes getting mastitis outside (second vet from the same practice to tell me this).
I think it a good idea to get older livestock farmers to come out for the day give a few pointers and may be help the health of the flock, not sending a poor girl straight out of uni onto farmers that have been doing it for a long time.

 

[An Gof]

Couldn’t agree more Frank. It’s held up as a great scheme for farmers. It will do very little for farmers other than make them organise another meeting for which they will not be paid and the vet will be paid handsomely. Perversely it will make less time available from vets for actual emergency and routine farm animal care.
Ridiculous idea where the unintended consequences haven’t been thought through.

 

[delilah]

The rapid decline in the standard of farm vets is a clear indicator of the critical mass crisis facing UK ag. It's a simple equation; less farms means less farmers sons and daughters coming through to train as vets. Anyone who thinks it is in any way a good idea for farms to get bigger and fewer year on year is a complete muppet. Where is an industry stance on this ?

 

[andybk]

subsidised Training would be far better way of spending money , defiantly training on FEC etc , would benefit us all by not encouraging resistant worm and meet targets for less medicine use , I was trained for shearing at a reduced rate many years ago was best value i could have ever got from the EU having shorn most of our flock ever since .

The most recent updates to elms blog , you can see who has been lobbying behind the scenes, and it aint farmers

 

[Ffermer Bach]

Don't worry, the vet may know nothing about mastitis in ewes or the new drench families that have been developed, but will be fully up to date with de-colonising the curriculum, BLM and "getting rid of the colonial legacy and the white, global North intellectual tradition as superior and universal"!

You could not make it up!!!

 

[Tim W]

Two things to note:
1) These schemes never deliver what they set out to because
a) People all along the chain implement them in different ways to those originally intended
b) Farmers use them to maximise immediate return for the least input without looking forward
2) You don't have to get involved --- farmer mentality is ''how can i fashion a business around govt. handouts'' when it should be ''i will use govt. help only if it aids my business ''

Decades of dole have increased dependency & decimated innovation

 

[neilo]

When I read it, I assumed it was a proposal put forward by the BVA as it will ultimately put money straight into the vet’s pockets.

However, I can certainly see the point of pushing more farmers to actually discuss animal health with their vets, even if it’s only once a year. Of course, some do that already, but a lot reckon they know it all and won’t ever see, or speak to, a vet unless they want abottle of antibiotics, or they’re up a creek and need some fire brigade action in order to stop animals dieing.

There are plenty of those ‘experienced livestock farmers’ who are still worming religiously every three weeks, still jabbing everything with oxytet in mid-pregnancy, etc. It doesn’t make it right.

Being in an area that has predominantly small & medium sized livestock farms, we are lucky to have plenty of good large animal vets here, although some individuals are obviously better than others. Our own practice tries to very proactive, but they are bashing their heads on a brick wall with a lot of ‘traditional’ farmers tbh. One was recently decrying our vetsas they had refused to supply them with their annual blanket oxytet jab, and hadn’t told them there was a vaccine they should be using instead! How long has Enzovax been available?

 

[neilo]

Incidentally, I am in a Welsh scheme called Stok+, which funds a annual animal health plan review and several visits a year to do testing, etc. They are hoping to see improvements in animal health and a reduction in AB use from the scheme. I guess it’s really a pilot for a scheme like that proposed under ELMS in England.

It’s a useful source of funding, for the vets obviously, but saves me several hundred pounds a year that I’d be spending anyway, in addition to allowing me to do a bit of extra diagnostic work that I might not have done otherwise.

 

[Jimdog1]

If money was used for health and welfare groups where farmers could learn from each other while having a vet lead the group , meeting 4 times a year I think we would gain a lot more and it would be better value for money. Annual vet visit we talk about the same things each year and tweak what we are doing but I think practical ideas from other farmers would be better.

 

[neilo]

If money was used for health and welfare groups where farmers could learn from each other while having a vet lead the group , meeting 4 times a year I think we would gain a lot more and it would be better value for money. Annual vet visit we talk about the same things each year and tweak what we are doing but I think practical ideas from other farmers would be better.

Ideally, that would be done as well?

Welsh govt chose to keep 15% of the BPS pot ten years ago, to fund schemes such as Farming Connect, rightly or wrongly.
FC fund training and consultancy, usually to the tune of 80%, as well as a network of demonstration farms and discussion groups.

Obviously that’s created a gravy train for ‘experts’, but it seems to be the way the future schemes will operate to facilitate ‘knowledge transfer’ (see, I’ve learnt the lingo, just got to find a way onto the train now…), in England and Wales at least.

 

[Jimdog1]

Ideally, that would be done as well?

Welsh govt chose to keep 15% of the BPS pot ten years ago, to fund schemes such as Farming Connect, rightly or wrongly.
FC fund training and consultancy, usually to the tune of 80%, as well as a network of demonstration farms and discussion groups.

Obviously that’s created a gravy train for ‘experts’, but it seems to be the way the future schemes will operate to facilitate ‘knowledge transfer’ (see, I’ve learnt the lingo, just got to find a way onto the train now…), in England and Wales at least.

Sure, I always feel robbed when money destined for my bank account is diverted elsewhere for my "benefit " however if that is all that is on offer its better to embrace it and get everything out of it. Meeting with other farmers seems to unlock other opportunities which have been beneficial to my little business.

 

[Northern territory]

Two things to note:
1) These schemes never deliver what they set out to because
a) People all along the chain implement them in different ways to those originally intended
b) Farmers use them to maximise immediate return for the least input without looking forward
2) You don't have to get involved --- farmer mentality is ''how can i fashion a business around govt. handouts'' when it should be ''i will use govt. help only if it aids my business ''

Decades of dole have increased dependency & decimated innovation

You are absolutely correct, certainly from my point of view this mechanism of control through schemes is going to be rebuffed by a proportion of farmers. Business and profits are more important than tying yourself in knots with more and more legislation. Although I will miss bps there should have been a clean slate and it all should have been done away with.

 

[Bill the Bass]

Plenty good young vets up here.

My issue with the proposal as it stands is that if they concentrate on BVD to start with, they (the policy wonks) will then assume all diseases are as easy to control and carry on accordingly. For example you won’t reduce Johnes with an annual vet visit and testing, it requires pro active management in addition.

 

[primmiemoo]

Don't worry, the vet may know nothing about mastitis in ewes or the new drench families that have been developed, but will be fully up to date with de-colonising the curriculum, BLM and "getting rid of the colonial legacy and the white, global North intellectual tradition as superior and universal"!

You could not make it up!!!

There are far more Vets of colour than those of white hue!

 

[Henarar]

What is a health and welfare plan ?

 

[Tubbylew]

I dunno, we'll be seeing the vet twice a year when tb goes to six month testing, i'm not sure i'd like to see them too much more. summat tells me the bva are frightented that farmers will be looking to make a few savings and they'll be high on the list for the chop. I've only got a few crappy hill yows and everytime one has seen a vet it's been a financial disaster, be cheaper to ring the knacker man straight away and cut out the middle man. Its probably different if your in the big leagues.

 

[primmiemoo]

What is a health and welfare plan ?

It's when you export your decades of accumulated experience of caring for your stock into a format that your Vet can put ticks against ~ whilst having a mug of tea, cake, and a pleasant chat about flock and herd health matters in a bid to improve things even further.

You also get to hear about the (anonymous) sad and gormless souls who are on the Vitnery practice books who can't get their heads around keeping the best of what works, and improving their knowledge and their business. Mostly nice, well meaning sorts (some under 40s!) ~ who wouldn't be out of place if they cropped up in one of James Herriot's stories from the 1950s.

 

[Cripper]

It’s all part of the government plan to take money off farmers but still try to keep those who rely on farmers for their livelihood solvent. It won’t work. It’s like handing out vouchers for food to the unemployed instead of cash.

 

[primmiemoo]

I dunno, we'll be seeing the vet twice a year when tb goes to six month testing, i'm not sure i'd like to see them too much more. summat tells me the bva are frightented that farmers will be looking to make a few savings and they'll be high on the list for the chop. I've only got a few crappy hill yows and everytime one has seen a vet it's been a financial disaster, be cheaper to ring the knacker man straight away and cut out the middle man. Its probably different if your in the big leagues.

Only you know how it is with your place, obviously, but a few quid a month to be in the Vet's flock scheme has only had positive effects, ime. Our joining came about because the Casting Vote considered buying a whole FEC pack would be too expensive for the size of flock. The vet scheme allows worm counts, the two species health plans stuff, and some free visits and/or phone consultations.
Unlike with FABBL inspection, the wonky and exasperating are looked upon joyfully as positive challenges ~ and useful things have actually been learnt.