Abstract
In 1892, the British agricultural authorities introduced a policy of slaughtering animals infected with foot and mouth disease (FMD). This measure endured throughout the 20th century and formed a base line upon which officials superimposed the controversial "contiguous cull" policy during the devastating 2001 epidemic. Proponents of the slaughter frequently emphasized its capacity to eliminate FMD from Britain, and claimed that it was both cheaper and more effective than the alternative policies of isolation and vaccination. However, their discussions reveal that a less obvious but nonetheless important reason for maintaining the slaughter policy was the conviction that in its manner of operation and its outcomes, it benefited the state and status of the British nation. To its supporters, slaughter was far more than a method of disease control; it acted also as a moralizing and civilizing force, an indicator of veterinary ability and a "virility symbol" of British international leadership. This "cultural" rationale for FMD control by slaughter declined during the late 20th century and was wholly undermined by the 2001 epidemic, when extensive culling failed to convey the intended image of an organized, enlightened Britain.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Ackerknecht, E., ''Anticontagionism Between 1821 and 1867,'' Bulletin of the History of Medicine 22 (1948), 562-593.
Anderson, I., FMD 2001: Lessons to be Learned Enquiry Report (HMSO, London, 2002).
Baldwin, P., Contagion and the State in Europe, 1830-1930 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999).
Bryder, L., ''We Shall Not Find Salvation in Inoculation: BCG Vaccination in Scandinavia, Britain and the USA, 1921-1960,'' Social Science and Medicine 49 (1999), 1157-1167.
Campbell, D. and R. Lee, ''Carnage by Computer: The Blackboard Economics of the 2001 Foot and Mouth Epidemic,'' Social and Legal Studies 12(2)(2003), 425-459.
Crisis and Opportunity.Devon Foot and Mouth Inquiry 2001 (Devon Books, Tiverton, 2002).
The Cumbria Foot and Mouth Disease Inquiry Report (Cumbria County Council, Carlisle, 2002).
DEFRA (2003), Foot and Mouth Disease Contingency Plan, http://www.defra.gov.uk/footandmouth/contingency/contplan.pdf.
Department of Agriculture for Ireland, Report on FMD in Ireland in the years 1912, PP 1914, XII, 793.
Durey, M. The Return of the Plague (Humanities Press, Dublin, 1979).
European Parliament, Conclusions of the rapporteur, Temporary Committee on Foot and Mouth Disease (2002) http: //www.europarl.eu.int/meetdocs/committees/ap/20020930/475785en.pdf.
Evidence, Appendices and Index to Report of the 1912 Departmental Committee on FMD, PP 1912-1913, cd 6244, xxix, 13.
FMD research-Interim Report (HMSO, London, 1952).
Forceps, ''Foot and Mouth Disease and its Control,'' Sport and Country, 16 April 1952, pp.141-144.
Hardy, A. The Epidemic Streets: Infectious Disease and the Rise of Preventive Medicine, 1856-1900 (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1993).
Jasno., S., ''Civilisation and madness: the Great BSE Scare of 1996,'' Public Understanding of Science 6 (1997), 221-232.
Mepham, B., ''Foot and Mouth Disease and British Agriculture: Ethics in a Crisis,'' Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (2001), 339-47.
Nerlich, B., C. Hamilton, and V.Rowe, ''Conceptualising Foot and Mouth Disease: The Socio-Cultural Role of Metaphors, Frames and Narratives,'' (2001), http: // www.metaphorik.de/02/nerlich.htm
Origin of the 1967-1968 Foot-and-Mouth Disease Epidemic, pp. 1967-1968, Cmd 3560, xxxix, 227.
Report of the Chief Veterinary Officer, 1912, pp.1913, xv, 161.
Reports of the Chief Veterinary Officer, 1922, 1923, and 1924 (HMSO, London, 1923-1925).
Report of the 1922 Departmental Committee on FMD, pp. 1923, cmd 1784, ii, 579.
Report of the 1924 Departmental Committee on FMD, pp. P 1924-1925, cmd 2350, xiii, 225.
Report of the Departmental Committee on FMD, 1952-1954. PP 1953-1954, Cmd 9214, xiii, 561.
Report of the Committee of Inquiry into FMD (Northumberland committee), Part One, pp.1968-1969, Cmd 3999, xxx, 867.
Report of the 22nd and 23rd Session of the ECFMD (FAO, Rome, 1977 and 1979).
Report from the Commission on the Control of FMD (Brussels: Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, 1989).
Richelet, J., The Argentine meat trade (Ste ´industrielle d 'imprimerie, London, 1929).
Rosenberg, C., ''Framing disease,'' and ''Explaining Epidemics,'' in C. Rosenberg (ed.), Explaining Epidemics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992), pp. 293-304, 305-318.
]The Royal Society, Infectious Diseases in Livestock (Royal Society, London, 2002).
Sutmoller, P., S. Barteling, R. Olascoaga, and K. Sumption, ''Control and Eradication of Foot-and-Mouth Disease,'' Virus Research 91(1)(2003), 101-144.
Whetham, E., ''The trade in Pedigree Livestock 1850-1910,'' Agricultural History Review 27(1) (1979), 47-50.
Woods, A., ''The Construction of an Animal Plague: Foot and Mouth Disease in Nineteenth Century Britain,'' Social History of Medicine 17(1) (2004), 23-39.
Woods, A. ''To Vaccinate or Vacillate? The Control of Foot and Mouth Disease in Britain, 1892-2001,'' Historical Research (forthcoming).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Woods, A. Why slaughter? The cultural dimensions of Britain's foot and mouth disease control policy, 1892–2001. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17, 341–362 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-004-5185-4
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-004-5185-4