Project Lead
Challenges
Camelids and Cervids are farmed and kept in Scotland for food (deer) and leisure (camelids – alpacas, llamas, guanacos, vicuñas). There is no single authoritative source of expertise to help inform the introduction of domestic legislation relating to the identification, registration, and movements (IRM) recording for these species. The structure of the Scottish Camelid and Cervid industries, and how they operate, need to be understood to inform the development of identification systems that are fit for purpose for IRM requirements.
The Scottish Government has domestic legislation covering the IRM of Equidae (horses), Bovidae (cattle, goats, and sheep) and Suidae (pigs). There are considerable differences between these sectors in how data are gathered and recorded. To the best of our knowledge, there is no existing data or information, nor has there been any research completed, in support of the development of an IRM system for camelids and cervids in Scotland.
Camelid and cervid populations and their risk to other livestock
A Scottish Government Deer Working Group (convened in 2017) produced a strategy aiming to increase the supply and global consumption of Scottish Venison. The purpose was to deliver economic benefits to producers and the supply chains. Increasing the number of deer and premises involved would increase the risks of disease spread, with potential implications for the health of other livestock species and of humans. It is essential that any sector expansion is conducted with due regard for health and welfare implications. This requires a comprehensive knowledge of the current sector structure in particular demographic information and how premises interact with each other and other key sites such as markets and abattoirs.
Whilst some relevant research has taken place (mainly in relation to cervids) there has been nothing in relation to how IRM of either the farmed camelid or cervid sectors might be achieved, accounting for how those sectors currently operate.
Questions
- What are the opportunities and challenges for the Scottish Government policy on animal health post-EU exit trading and importation regimes, and implementation of the EU Animal Health Regulation?
Solutions
This project aims to gather information about the structure and operation of the camelid and cervid industries, to address key data gaps and inform future work in relation to the design and development of compulsory identification, registration, and movements (IRM) systems in these sectors.
Describing the Scottish camelid and cervid populations
We are describing the Scottish camelid and cervid populations, including estimating numbers, locations, and movements of camelids and cervids in Scotland. In addition, we are exploring how these species are traded, how they enter the food chain, and how keepers manage the removal of carcases when an animal of these species dies.
Describe approaches to management, animal health and disease control within each sector
We are describing approaches to management, animal health and disease control within each sector. Parallel to this, we are exploring how these species are managed elsewhere so that comparisons can be drawn. We are also describing the subpopulation of “invisible” keepers: those who have minimal (or no) interaction with vets, industry, or government programmes.
Investigating diseases in camelid and cervid populations and their risk to other livestock, livestock trade and public health
We are also investigating important diseases that can be transmitted by camelids, cervids and their products. This includes a qualitative assessment of the transmission risks across species and via food which focuses on bovine tuberculosis and Chronic Wasting Disease as exemplars.
Assessing the preparedness of camelid and cervid sectors for responding to regulations on livestock IRM recording requirements
We are assessing the preparedness of each sector to meet future IRM recording requirements and gathering input from sector stakeholders that will outline current attitudes to such a system.
Describing the camelid and cervid supply chains and estimating network characteristics
We are describing the camelid and cervid supply chains and how operators within each of these sectors interact. This is providing a foundation for a more quantitative approach in future, once sufficient good-quality data can be acquired.
Project Partners
Progress
Camelids
In Year 1 we developed an online questionnaire to ascertain basic information such as the location and numbers of camelid species being kept in Scotland. We engaged with camelid keepers through social media posting, press releases regarding the survey, and a short media interview (BBC Scotland, date 31-01-2023). We have also directly emailed publicly available addresses of alpaca/llama enterprises, e.g. trekking experiences. In general, there has been a good level of interest in the survey, and we have also had contact from some keepers offering positive comments about the work and its value. We have also contacted the British Llama Society, British Alpaca Society, and a high-profile camelid veterinarian to ask them to disseminate the survey as widely as possible. We have had 75 responses to the survey, with the majority being eligible for descriptive analysis. In parallel to the questionnaire survey, we have produced a preliminary literature summary of management approaches for camelids in countries external to Scotland. There will be expansion on this topic in future years when focussing on the Scottish situation, supplemented with information gathered through stakeholder engagement.
Positive engagement with the Scottish camelid sector has resulted in additional survey responses as well as contact from other interested parties. Over half of the survey respondents have provided their contact information for further follow-up discussion. This should support the co-production aims of the project for the remainder of the programme.
Cervids
In Year 1 we developed a questionnaire survey asking for basic information about numbers of deer kept and record-keeping in deer enterprises. Our focus is deer that are behind a fence for at least part of the year, therefore our intended survey should exclude individuals involved in wild venison production. We planned a snowball sampling approach as a more reliable way to engage with the sector as well as sharing electronic document versions of the survey; however, the response rate was still very low, with just 12 questionnaires being completed. Therefore, we arranged discussion with policy colleagues on how best to address the challenges faced so far and how to refocus the work in Year 2. Despite not having obtained the data we had hoped for to progress the work envisioned for Year 1, the experience has been informative for both us and policy colleagues as it has shown us how we would need to change our approach for engagement with cervid keepers in the future.
This year our objectives were to explore available sources of data and information firstly on population demographics of camelids and farmed deer in Scotland, and secondly on management and working practices adopted by each of these sectors. This has been addressed by literature search and engagement with sector stakeholders through individual interviews, following up on contact made through the survey of keepers in Years 1 and 2, and by attendance at group Knowledge Exchange events. We have also reviewed scientific and grey literature and expert opinion to establish key diseases that are particularly relevant for each sector in the context of Identification, Registration and Movement recording (IRM). This information was supplemented by discussion with keepers to identify animal health issues significant for them. Engagement with contacts from both sectors has been maintained as an ongoing objective throughout this reporting year. Key information from these areas of work has been summarised in research briefs for RESAS policy colleagues.
On the camelid side, a major positive outcome of the work completed in Year 2 has been to collate first-hand information and opinion on camelid management, including in relation to IRM, which will provide useful background context for future policy in this area. We have also begun to develop contact networks with whom we will continue to engage for the remainder of the project; many of the individuals we have spoken to, and the Scottish Alpaca Group (part of the British Alpaca Society), have expressed willingness and interest to be involved in discussions on the topic of IRM policy for camelids as it develops. However, this year we deferred deliverables relating to livestock demographics in each sector, with approval from policy colleagues, to allow more time for data collation. We have experienced challenges in accessing detailed data about camelids in Scotland. Summary information is available from the June Agricultural Census, and we have made use of this to address our objectives, alongside data obtained through work in Year 1, existing data from within SRUC, and via contact with the Scottish Alpaca Group. In future we may decide, in discussion with policy colleagues, to request further access to these data via a bespoke Data-Sharing Agreement, depending on agreed priorities for Year 3, yet to be confirmed. The work for this objective has demonstrated that current sources of data on camelids and their keepers are unlikely to capture those individuals who keep a very small number of animals, have little involvement in breeding, and who may not have a County Parish Holding (CPH) number. Integration of the data we did obtain also suggests that some keepers who complete Agricultural Census forms due to having other livestock do not report their camelids via that form.
For farmed deer, whilst we experienced challenges in gathering data through an online survey of keepers, subsequent discussions with sector experts and attendance at deer farming events have equipped us with information to use to better engage with the sector as we move into Year 3. We have also identified some key topics for farmed deer keepers, which are considered central to how the sector functions in the future - some of these relate directly to IRM policy. From attendance at deer events, we have become introduced to an already-existing network of stakeholders, many of whom have expressed interest and willingness to support the aims of the project going forward - including direct engagement on the topic of IRM for farmed deer, which is an encouraging outcome. We have found the most successful means to engage with keepers is via attendance at group events in which topics such as IRM policy, other policy around farmed deer, and animal health matters can be discussed more successfully due to more people being present and happy to share opinions.
Next year we also plan to engage more closely with work underway in another RESAS project on ear-tagging in cattle and sheep, as preliminary informal discussions with the project PI have led to our identifying common themes and opportunity to learn from information gathered in that project. A combined meeting with researchers and RESAS policy colleagues is being planned for the first quarter of Year 3.
Related Projects
Disease has a detrimental effect on animal health and welfare and causes substantial losses in production. In order to assess the effectiveness of control measures and determine their economic impact, a quantification of the level of disease and/ or health status is needed. This research aims to provide improved baseline measurements of disease and health status (current and future) as well as...
- Animal Disease
- 2016-2022