WITH reference to M White's letter (August 15), I believe there were some very good points in his letter.
Some were devastated at losing their stock, some could never be compensated by any amount of money for losing their stock, or if there had been no restrictions on the movement of stock we may never have got rid of foot and mouth.
I am the farmer who was convicted in Okehampton magistrates court on July 18, and fined £3,000 plus legal costs.
During last year's foot and mouth problems each and every farming business was affected to various degrees. We, I believe, were in the very 'difficult group', trying to manage dairy cattle with a road running through our farmyard, with 95% of our land only accessible by walking on or across roads. Plus, we were carrying the highest stocking levels we had ever had on the farm.
With reference to the need for strict bio-security: when I moved our dairy cattle on or across the road for five months between May and October we placed plastic sheet on the road for over 300 movements. I would have thought in most people's eyes that would have demonstrated how seriously we treated the threat of foot and mouth disease.
If this has been fair treatment for our efforts, from individuals, government agencies and the court, I can see there will be countless more court cases with high fines or even imprisonment. If not, who, or what or why has made this case so different?
Philip Hamlyn
Eworthy
Germansweek
l This correspondence
is closed — Editor