[smudger]

I have been gearing myself up to get a house cow and had accepted the extra cost and hassle (paperwork/procedures/equipement) for just one animal but after reading recent posts about alpacas and TB its got me rethinking (especially as this is just a fancy, no business justification). It seems sheep are pretty resistant to TB, as are horses. I have a few weaners but they are more prone to avian TB but again pretty resistant and contained in a pen.  Countryside is pretty much sheep rearing country but there are some large cattle farms within 5 miles.  No visible signs of badgers on our farm and all enclosed by Devon banks, don't know how much they restrict their movement. That being said it seems some of the proposed badger culls may happen in N Devon/ Exmoor (if they go ahead, and I am not saying this as someone who supports this initiative)

Am I being over cautious in saying maybe should stick what I have got and not introduce the risk?  I am getting a few Guernsey goats for milk and although there has been some incidence of TB in them (albeit in a TB area in Wales), I will buy them TB tested and the difference is they will be kept in a paddock next to the house and not rotated on the pasture.

PS posting here rather than cattle, as it is other sheep keepers opinions I am seeking!

[lachlanandmarcus]

I wouldnt let it stop you. You will be in a frequent testing area due to the prevalence of bovine TB in the West Country. You would be compensated if you lost the animal due to a positive test and although people have caught it from cattle, they arent as susceptible to it as camelids, nor do they spit like camelids can.

However I would say ideally you need to get more than one animal, as from a welfare perspective they need company of their own kind, it counts as one of the 5 freedoms in the welfare code - comes under the freedom to express natural behaviour. That second one could be the calf of the house cow, a steer for meat or another dry or milking cow.

 I dont really understand why non-endangered species presenting a huge animal health risk shouldnt be numbers controlled in the same way as other species like foxes, rats etc. Not that I like the control but I dont get the absolute protection for one species that isnt applied to others (obviously still need criminal offences for badger baiting type offences)

If that had been allowed then the TB that was almost eradicated would not now be in danger of being endemic in areas of the country best suited to livestock farming :-(

[Blacksheep]

We decided against keeping cows because of TB, testing etc but we have badgers on our land and neighbours with TB in their herds so a different situation to you. 
You could also consider a dairy breed of sheep if you are wanting a dairy animal that is resistant to TB and it would then be easier to keep a few compared to keeping more than one cow.

[smudger]

Herd testing is annual so not exactly low risk (can be 3 years?). Or is that just as we have a new herd no. they always do annual initially?

[woollyval]

SW is a bad area for TB. I sold my cows because of the expense...its lots more complicated than just annual test. If you only have a couple of cows and need to hire a bull or take them to stay on holiday with someone elses bull you will need to test before they go and before they return...at your expense. The one annual test which is free only covers them for 60 days (I think) so its just a load of hassel! Of course you may not mind all that expense and hassel.....but me being one of the folks that gets hartily fed up with all the hoo harr that is involved in moving any animal to anywhere now compared to when I first started umpteen years ago .......try to keep the hassel and pieces of paper to the minimum!

Also you are bound to have some untested alpacas in the vicinity...lots in SW and there are lots of badgers around....believe me the SW is swarming with them and its not totally their fault as deer, alpacas and cattle all get it and share it with them......

So all in all unless you are going to breed pedigree cattle and have good endurance and a big bank balance.....there are cheaper ways to get local milk....    

[lachlanandmarcus]

Herd testing is annual so not exactly low risk (can be 3 years?). Or is that just as we have a new herd no. they always do annual initially?

Both possibly. As a new herd you have to have annual test, but it is likely that your area would be an annual testing area anyway because there are so many cattle, badgers, and TB especially repeated reinfections.

I would strongly suspect there are badgers around even if they havent been seen, too....

[smudger]

There are alpaca farms with 5 miles as well. Should have thought of that since that was what had started my rethink....

[lachlanandmarcus]

Maybe have more goats instead :-)))) good excuse! and also even the smaller breeds of cattle can be a hassle if you dont have the right set up for them esp for AI, TB testing etc unless you manage to find ones that are properly halter trained.

I had two for a yearish but decided to stick to smaller creatures even tho we arent in any TB area and in 4 year testing.

[smudger]

Spoke to a local and it seems deer are the main transmission problem in this locality and we HAVE seen deer on our farm.

[SallyintNorth]

I wouldn't be worried about your sheep, as you say they are pretty resistant and there'll be sources of infection locally anyway.

I wouldn't be worried about visiting bulls nor TB tests either, get a docile breed (eg a Jersey), treat her (and any companions / calves) kindly and you won't have any trouble getting her / them AI'd nor TB tested.

The only worries I would have in your shoes would be about your lovely housecow getting TB and having to be destroyed.  Don't underestimate the bond that forms between a housecow and the person who milks her.  ; you would be devastated if she got the disease.

If you are in the South West of England, I suspect you will be on an annual test regime anyway.  Defra used to publish a list of all parishes and their testing frequency but I'm not sure they do that now.  They do have a page where you can look up your holding (by its County Parish Holding Number) and see what it is. http://animalhealth.defra.gov.uk/managing-disease/notifiable-disease/bovine-tb/tb-testing-intervals.asp

I would do also a bit of research about the TB status of your local dairy / beef farms.  If any of them have had a breakdown in the last couple of years, think hard about whether you want to risk your own housecow.

If after all that you decide it looks safe enough and you will go ahead, then please, for your own and your neighbours' sake, make completely sure you buy in stock from a TB4 area or at the very least that is robustly certified 100% TB free.

And then give some thought as to whether you want to pasteurise all your milk before use, just in case...

[Anke]

If you are planning to get goats anyway, AND also have a cow - you will be drowning in milk! I would do at leats a rough calculation on how much milk you need on a daily basis - I am milking 5 goats (by machine) atm and get about 17 ltrs per day... and once the kids and lambs are weaned I will have to do something with all that milk!

If you are living in a TB area goats are a safer bet by far. I would not necessarily go for GG's though, given that they ACTUALLY have been shown to get TB and pass it on to other goats.

[smudger]

Thx Sally, had reached the same conclusion - do more research and ask more questions of my neighbours and vets. Funny I see cows everywhere (2 herds, 2 fields away, now they have all been turned out).  We are on annual testing as I got a herd no. in anticipation and have my TB test notifications.  Is your recommendation to buy stock from a low risk area based on premise that TB test isn't foolproof?

Anke - Re GG and TB - are they more susceptible than other goats or were they just unlucky in that they were in the middle of an infected area in Wales and thus it was detected?  Would you avoid untested GG's (I have found some for sale)?

[SallyintNorth]

Is your recommendation to buy stock from a low risk area based on premise that TB test isn't foolproof?

We're TB4 here, as is most of the North West of England, and we're less than 20 miles from the Scottish TB-Free border.  We simply couldn't take the risk, so we don't buy any stock from anywhere that's other than TB4 or TB free, and cattle only then if the animal itself is also TB4. 

(TB4 is TB free, testing every 4 years.  Animals not born on the holding will carry over a more rigorous TB status from other holdings they've been on, if applicable.)

My hesitation in saying, "Yes, of course, buy your stock from a TB4 or TB Free area," is that, if everyone did that, then breeders in other than TB4 areas would have no market at all and go out of business.  So maybe there is an argument to say that buyers should support their local breeders.  Tough call when it's for your own precious beast, however!

[Anke]

Anke - Re GG and TB - are they more susceptible than other goats or were they just unlucky in that they were in the middle of an infected area in Wales and thus it was detected?  Would you avoid untested GG's (I have found some for sale)?

I don't think anyone knows if GG's are more susceptible or not, the outbreak was quite limited at the time. If I were to buy in stock from a heavy TB area I would insist on a test along the same lines as for cattle (and probably I would pay for it if negative. If posistive, well then that's the end of the sale anyway. Have a word with the vets (and maybe whoever does the tests - DEFRA??) and see if they will include goats in the testing routine anyway.