Some farmers lost a live time work when herds were destroyed in the foot and mouth epidemic of a few years ago. Livestock that had been bred over years was wiped out in a few hours.

Most farmers had no insurance against foot and mouth and were government compensated. It has been suggested much to the farmers’ annoyance that they should take out insurance against possible future out breaks.

Since most of the general public have to be insured is this not a fair idea after all none of us know what is around the corner.

With all the government grants is it not fair that farmers protect themselves against such future hazards.

We are now almost in the grip of yet another catastrophic epidemic with blue tongue which is expected to invade UK cattle and sheep this year and expected to rapidly spread throughout the country after.

uk sheep have no immunity and are particularly at risk(up to seventy percent who come into contact with a carrier in just two weeks die)are sheep who are worse hit than the cattle who are thought to be just carriers.

Should farmers insure themselves against such risks as it would seem only a matter of time and coming so quickly on the heels of foot and mouth outbreaks can farmers afford not to.

Who should compensate the farmers when, not if this out break occurs.

Farmers have in the past been compensated for foot and mouth should they expect the government to pick up the bill for blue tongue?

Can we afford in Britain for more farmers to lose their livestock already large rural areas have no cattle crops are growing were sheep and cattle were once prolific. Will we be happy to import our meat from less well regulated areas?

We all imagine a green countryside but without compensation will farmers be able to keep this or will we have to adjust our thought to huge fields of yellow rape and other such crops.