Seòmar agus comataidhean

I refer the member to the answer to question S3W-17468 on 14 November 2008. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament''s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/Apps2/Business/PQA/Default.aspx.

I refer the member to the answer to question S3W-17468 on 14 November 2008. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament''s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/Apps2/Business?PQA/Default.aspx.

I refer the member to the answer to question S3W-17470 on 14 November 2008. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament''s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/Apps2/Business/PQA/Default.aspx.

As part of the work of the work with stakeholder organisations to develop the Scottish bluetongue vaccination strategy the Scottish Government commissioned its Centre of Excellence in epidemiology (EPIC) to assess the impact of a number of potential bluetongue scenarios and associated disease control responses. The report can be found at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/10/14092524/0.

The main findings of the report were that an outbreak of bluetongue would cost Scotland an estimated £100 million a year and that a mass vaccination campaign would have the most positive impact in avoiding such outbreak costs.

Industry stakeholders requested a compulsory approach to vaccination given the veterinary advice, and experiences with other serotypes of bluetongue elsewhere in Europe, that a mass vaccination campaign is the only effective way of eradicating bluetongue or preventing it from becoming established. At the 9 April 2008 meeting of the Scottish Government - industry bluetongue stakeholder group all representative organisations unanimously signed up to this approach.

The vaccination strategy was designed, and agreed, in conjunction with all these organisations and the results of the EPIC work were presented to the stakeholder group on 23 June. This meeting reaffirmed that vaccination should be compulsory in cattle and sheep (but strongly encouraged in other species).

The analysis was undertaken by a multi-disciplinary team of experts covering areas such as epidemiology, entomology and economics. As part of their work they considered a wide range of factors such of the costs to industry of movement restrictions associated with appropriate zones, the costs of vaccination, disease surveillance and the potential impacts on trade.

The analysis did not consider the approach to vaccination or uptake elsewhere in Great Britain as this is not pertinent to the costs of a vaccination campaign in Scotland. These factors are however very relevant to the risk to Scotland and the need to vaccinate. Given that to date there have been no domestic re-emergence of disease within Great Britain there had been some hope that vaccination against bluetongue virus 8 would not be required this year. However the eight separate incidents of bluetongue positive animals being imported into England and Wales, and their lower than hoped vaccine uptake illustrated a high level of risk to the Scottish livestock industry. Given this situation the Scottish Government industry stakeholder group agreed on 15 September that a vaccination campaign should be initiated this year to ensure that the Scottish livestock industry was protected before next summer''s high-risk period.

A mass vaccination supported by compulsion was agreed by stakeholders to be the only effective way of protecting Scotland''s livestock from the risk of bluetongue virus becoming established in Scotland. The approach to vaccination elsewhere in Great Britain is not relevant to the costs of the Scottish industry. It is relevant to the risk level to Scotland. A number of bluetongue positive import cases in England and Wales, combined with a lower that preferred level of uptake of vaccination in these areas was considered to mean a high risk of bluetongue to Scotland.

The decision that vaccination was required in Scotland this year was taken at the Scottish Government industry bluetongue stakeholder meeting held on 16 September. This meeting had been called following the finding of 18 bluetongue positive animals in County Durham, the impact of which could have been to impose a Bluetongue Restriction Zone in Scotland. The minutes of the meeting can be found at:

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Agriculture/animal-welfare/Diseases/SpecificDisease/bluetongue/Stakeholder.

I refer the member to the answer to question S3W-17468 on 14 November 2008. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament''s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/Apps2/Business/PQA/Default.aspx.

The choice between a compulsory or voluntary vaccination scheme has no impact on export potential. The potential trade impact arises from being part of a bluetongue protection zone and vaccination and subsequent development of immunity will allow live animal movements to bluetongue 8 free areas. Animals are also allowed to move to slaughter in bluetongue 8 free areas at the discretion of the receiving country.

The potential loss of some live exports was fully discussed with stakeholders and trade of live animals was considered in the impact assessment work which concluded that a mass vaccination campaign was proportionate to the level of risk and potential impact of a bluetongue 8 outbreak in Scotland.

I refer the member to the answer to question S3W-17468 on 14 November 2008. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament''s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/Apps2/Business/PQA/Default.aspx.

I refer the member to the answer to question S3W-17468 on 14 November 2008. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament''s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/Apps2/Business/PQA/Default.aspx.

The requested information is given in the following table:

Number of Suckler Cows by Agricultural Region

	Suckler Cows
	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008
Agricultural Region	Number	Number	Number	Number	Number	Number
Shetland	2,022	2,001	2,111	2,038	1,934	1,960
Orkney	28,486	28,938	28,362	28,096	27,259	26,565
Eileanan an Iar	2,854	2,895	2,886	2,873	2,870	2,799
Highland	55,119	55,657	55,184	53,817	52,210	51,242
North East Scotland	95,399	95,854	96,260	95,352	94,471	92,626
Tayside	38,124	38,247	37,601	37,440	36,397	36,065
Fife	14,239	14,122	13,899	14,503	13,951	13,722
Lothian	13,476	13,711	13,721	13,622	13,436	13,696
Scottish Borders	48,853	49,137	50,290	49,331	46,789	45,371
East Central	13,561	13,679	13,643	13,475	13,152	12,976
Argyll and Bute	22,852	23,297	22,958	22,251	21,300	20,901
Clyde Valley	33,197	34,323	34,415	32,900	31,896	31,543
Ayrshire	30,589	30,804	31,017	31,222	29,993	30,168
Dumfries and Galloway	88,362	90,208	89,972	90,274	86,566	84,720
Scotland	487,133	492,873	492,319	487,194	472,224	464,354

Source: Scottish agricultural census. Data refers to first, non-Sunday, day in June each year.

The information for 2003 to 2007 is already available, through separate publications for each year, in the annual Scottish Agricultural Census Summary Sheets publication.

The information can be accessed through the agriculture and fisheries statistics website at:

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Agriculture-Fisheries/PubScottishCensus.