Page 251 - The History of the Royal Army Veterinary Corps 1962–2021

THE HISTORY OF THE ROYAL ARMY VETERINARY CORPS 1962 – 2021
services of three RAVC vets.7 Many said that it was: ‘very much part of what they expected the RAVC role to be.’ Just 11 days later, in an instruction dated 27th March 2001, paragraph six stated: ‘to assist in slaughter and disposal and to establish a logistical HQ at HQ MAFF.’
The Initial code word for military involvement in FMD as of March 2001 was Op PENNYWORT,8 the actual horrific culling Operation was known as Op SLUBBER. Op PENISULA was recorded in Soldier Magazine9 as the ‘Clean up and Control’ of FMD.
Initially, Operation PENNYWORT, from the RAVC’s perspective, was ‘limited to those restric- tions on military training activity and does not include aid to the Civil Power, as MAFF had not requested it.’10 However, Major G R D Cooke RAVC (TA) in a Situation Report (SITREP) from the FMD Control Centre in Essex to Gallwey Road, Aldershot, stated that: ‘The involvement of the RAVC is considered appropriate by MAFF ground staff, and is genuinely very welcome. As said before, many said that it was very much part of what they expected the RAVC role to be.’11
It soon became very clear that the operation would demand a staggering number of animals to be slaughtered under the Government’s policy for dealing with FMD. The destruction of all suspect carriers of the disease, was already overwhelming the MAFF in early 2001. As 1960s history repeated itself, the overwhelm prompted an urgent appeal for veterinary surgeons to volunteer for service with MAFF and to assist in the evaluation process. The demand for personnel was exacerbated further by the fact that, as before, if a vet established that FMD was present on a farm he or she visited then that vet became “unclean” and could no longer conduct those duties. The mammoth task of disposing of animal carcasses by burning on huge pyres was also getting rapidly out of hand, purely because more animals were being slaughtered than could be handled within the disposal capacity.
For all vets the ‘Slaughter and Disposal’ requirement made grim reading. A concise example of the tasks in hand for a RAVC VO, as stated in an email dated 5th April 2001 from Eric Morgan to Lieutenant Colonel Paul Marks, included:
...examining stock suspected of FMD, collecting tissue and epidemiological specimens and information and euthanising lambs. He also advised the Commander of 42 (NW) Brigade on such matters as ‘obstacles encountered when meeting targets’ such as the slaughter of infected animals and as to dangerous contacts in the field.
He also advised that where slaughter is organised by the Army, a military vet should be in command. Also, that RAVC vets were to advise local commanders on transport and disposal of infected stock and the role of the TVI (Temporary Veterinary Inspector) was still required. Additionally, and vitally, that supervising slaughter required special, skilled men, such as Major Neil Smith MRCVS. The subsequent reply stated: ‘RAVC officers are ideally placed to provide veterinary information for Force Commanders in the field. Their skill with military ‘speak’, and understanding of ‘O’ groups are where their real strength lies, that is in commu- nications, maintenance of aims etc.’12
Major Ann Wood13 stated, “This was indeed a grim time.”
She described how many vets suffered emotionally and psychologically when it was over, simply because they not only had to carry out much of the slaughtering, but they were also trying to support the farmers, many of whom had been long-term clients with a life-long investment in the animals and the land which they had tended over several generations. She recalled that, unfor- tunately, not a lot of support was given to the vets.
Ann was working mostly in Peel Street (MAFF HQ) and, with being so busy at times; it was not always easy to know what was going on, apart from the task immediately to hand: “We had a lot of telephone contact with vets in the field, some of whom were clearly becoming very distraught at the situation they saw evolving. Staff at HQ were also affected by having to hand out all the death sentences, even though they were not on the ground carrying them out.” Ann recalled a front-page news story from the weekend of Sunday 15th April which carried a picture of a new-born lamb in the mud. The caption read: “The ewes could not be brought in for lambing due to movement restrictions.” Under the headline: “EASTER 2001.”
Carcasses lying in farmyards and fields soon began to pose a threat to public health. As the
7 FRAGO dated 5th March 2001.
8 D/DAVRS/5/3/1. Military Aid to the Civil Ministry: Op’s Pennywort and Peninsula.
9 Soldier Magazine dated May 2001.
10 FRAGO dated 01/03/2001. A FRAGO is a ‘fragmentary order’ i.e., an abbreviated form of an OPORD Operation Order (verbal, written or digital) usually
issued on a day-to-day basis that eliminates the need for restating information contained in a basic operation order.
11 D/DAVRS/5/3/1. Military Aid to the Civil Ministry: Op’s Pennywort and Peninsula.
12 D/DAVRS/5/3/1. Military Aid to the Civil Ministry: Op’s Pennywort and Peninsula.
13 Oral testimony by Major Ann Wood (Retd) RAVC 6th February 2021.
243