Volume 5: Animal Health, 1989-96
4a. Implementation, enforcement and monitoring of the animal SBO ban
Monitoring in knacker's yards and hunt kennels, November 1990 to January 1993
AHC 91/55 is issued

4.219 In mid-1990 there were approximately 270 hunt kennels and 130 knacker's yards in Great Britain. ¹ Some features of the knacker industry are described in Chapter 5 of vol. 13: Industry, Processes and Controls.

4.220 From December 1990, SVS visits to knacker's yards and hunt kennels were required on a monthly basis. The Inquiry was provided with copies of the summaries of returns generated by these visits up until December 1992.

4.221 We have seen no instructions which specified precisely what it was that VOs were expected to monitor on these visits. The only relevant regulations in 1990 were the 1982 Meat (Sterilisation and Staining) Regulations (MSSR). For the reasons described above at paragraphs 4.52-4.54, the 1989 Regulations and the 1990 Order did not impose any obligations on knackers or hunt kennels in respect of handling of SBO and did not cover material from fallen stock until the amendments introduced by the BSE Order in 1991. Advice provided to Mrs Sylvian Sadowski of the Meat Hygiene Division in June 1995 by Ms Heron of the Legal Department summarised the situation in respect of knackers:

I do not see the basis upon which we can advise local authorities to enforce the 1989 Regulations in knacker's yards if those Regulations do not extend to such premises . . . I think the most we could say is that we would hope that as a matter of good practice the regulations are observed in knackers yards. ²

4.222 Nonetheless, it appears that it was contemplated that the SVS visits would monitor the manner in which knackers and hunt kennels were dealing with SBO. In his instruction on 18 December 1990, Mr Crawford had stated not only that knacker's yards and hunt kennels should continue to be visited monthly, but that at these visits staff were to review 'the procedures for the disposal of waste material generally and the specified offals in particular'. ³

4.223 It is unclear on what basis some parts of industry and government proceeded in monitoring the animal SBO ban at knacker's yards and hunt kennels. Mr Crawford told the Inquiry that, prior to the amendment in the animal SBO ban in 1991, he believed that local authorities 'treated the knackers as though they were covered by the [animal SBO] regulations in respect of SBOs'. ⁴ Mr Crawford said in a statement to the Inquiry that the frequency of visits to knacker's yards was:

. . . considered necessary to monitor the disposal of SBOs from premises where there was significantly less supervision than in slaughterhouses. ⁵

4.224 Mr Crawford described the purpose of the SVS visits in the following terms:

. . . to ensure SBO material was being handled in accordance with our requirements and whether it was all treated as SBO or whether there was separation at the knackers. ⁶

4.225 Mr Meldrum said in a statement to the Inquiry:

. . . although knacker's yards and hunt kennels were not formally subject to the SBO regulations to all intents and purposes they were being treated no differently from slaughterhouses and other premises in that they were also subject to SVS monitoring and surveillance. ⁷

4.226 However, this was not reflected in the summaries of returns of SVS visits to knacker's yards and hunt kennels which were sent to Mr Crawford and other MAFF officials. These summaries, prepared by Mr Hutchins and, later, Mr Simmons, did not report on the handling of SBO.

4.227 The results of the first monthly visits to knacker's yards and hunt kennels were summarised and distributed by Mr Hutchins on 17 January 1991. These summaries were compiled from a total of 23 returns. Mr Hutchins noted an increase in charges for the collection of waste material. He reported that hunt kennels were increasingly taking on the role of knackers and identified 'the possibility of unfit carcasses entering the unfit meat trade as a result of the financial pressures associated with the increase in collection charges (no reports of this problem to date)'. Mr Hutchins suggested that future visits be made once every three months 'backed up by informal contacts with local authorities and operators each month'. ⁸

4.228 Mr Meldrum received a copy of Mr Hutchins's report and minuted Mr Crawford on 21 January 1991, making the following comments:

You will have seen Mr Hutchins's minute of 17 January which makes somewhat disturbing reading.

It is essential that this work continues, that the present programme of visits is maintained and that reports are submitted to Head Office regularly. It indicates that our staff in the field are not aware of the importance of this work if they are suggesting that visits should suffice every 3 months.

. . .

Once again you will have to ensure that there is a feed back to our staff on the problems that have been identified in the returns, not least to guarantee that all returns are despatched as requested. ⁹

4.229 Meanwhile a general review of some 110 knacker's yards was conducted in early 1991. The reports indicated that:

. . . the general standard is very low with premises being of minimal construction, very old and in a poor state of repair with overall hygiene standards described as poor. A few come into the moderate category. Generally, there is no attempt to separate dirty from clean areas, facilities for sterilisation of equipment are usually non-existent and wash basins for use of staff are more often absent than present. ¹⁰

4.230 It also noted that a number of divisions reported that there was a decreasing demand for pet food from knackers following the media publicity about BSE and, in particular, the cat encephalopathies.

4.231 MAFF's requirements for the monitoring of knacker's yards and hunt kennels were confirmed by the issue of AHC 91/9 on 13 February 1991. The circular related to returns for visits to rendering plants and collection centres, but advised all veterinary staff that monthly visits and returns were to continue for knacker's yards and hunt kennels. ¹¹

4.232 The next summary of returns was circulated by Mr Hutchins on 20 February 1991. His overall impression was of 'a marked deterioration in the picture'. There were continued reports on failings to meet the 1982 MSSR by hunt kennels. However, there was no specific reference to SBOs. ¹²

4.233 The next summary of returns prepared by Mr Hutchins on 19 March 1991 recorded that the charges for waste disposal had settled at between £60 and £100 per tonne and compliance with the 1982 MSSR was generally satisfactory. Mr Hutchins stated that occasional problems with the disposal of unsterilised waste were noted and were taken up with operators and local authorities. Again there was no reference to how knackers or hunt kennels were dealing with SBO. ¹³

4.234 On 24 April 1991 Mr Hutchins circulated another summary of returns from knacker's yards and hunt kennels. It did not disclose any material changes from his previous report, and no reference was made to SBO or its handling. ¹⁴

4.235 The next summary of returns was circulated on 20 May 1991. This was the first of the returns specifically to refer to SBO. It recorded that SBO disposal was costing £90 per tonne, whereas other offal and waste was charged at £60 per tonne. Compliance with the 1982 MSSR was again addressed. At knacker's yards it was described as 'generally acceptable', but at hunt kennels the situation was considered 'less satisfactory . . . with particular problems regarding the staining and licensing of waste materials'. It was also recorded that there was 'considerable confusion amongst both operators and supervisory authorities about the application of the legislation' and that a 'plain man's guide would be helpful'. Mr Hutchins concluded that in relation to hunt kennels 'compliance with legislation in this sector falls some way short of the ideal'. No comments were made about the handling of SBO material. ¹⁵

4.236 On the same day the Lamming Committee held its fourth meeting. The minutes of the meeting record that:

On the question of fallen stock, Mr Maclean said that according to a survey conducted by the Meat and Livestock Commission, 175,000 tonnes of the animal waste which went into meat and bone meal, (10% of the total) was derived from knackeries. ¹⁶

4.237 On 25 June 1991 Mr Hutchins distributed a summary of returns from the latest SVS visits to knackeries and hunt kennels. It reflected a similar situation to that described previously with 'few developments since the last report'. He noted there was some evidence of slight reductions in disposal cost. Disposal of SBO was recorded as upwards of £70 per tonne while other offal and waste was £50 per tonne. Again there was no comment on the handling of SBO materials. ¹⁷

4.238 By the following month, Mr Simmons had succeeded Mr Hutchins as the SVO in the Meat Hygiene Veterinary Section with responsibility for red meat premises. He prepared and distributed the next monthly summary of returns from knacker's yards and hunt kennels on 23 July. A difference in disposal cost between SBO and other waste material was recorded. Mr Simmons also noted that the impending ban on the use of meal produced from SBO as fertiliser was likely to have significant consequences on Orkney, as this was the only outlet on the Islands. Nothing was said about the handling of SBO material. ¹⁸

AHC 91/55 is issued

4.239 AHC 91/55 was issued on 26 July 1991. Whilst the circular was headed 'Bovine Offal (Prohibition) Regulations 1989', it did not expressly refer to SBO within the main document. The AHC did, however, enclose a new pro forma report for knacker's yards and hunt kennels. It expressly required details on the handling, storage and disposal procedures for SBO, as well as the destination of SBO and the costs of its disposal. ¹⁹

4.240 Mr Simmons's August summary did not provide any information on how knacker's yards or hunt kennels were dealing with SBO. It did note, however, that in one area small throughput premises were being charged £200 per tonne for loads of SBO. He set out that disposal of SBO was costing between £40 and £200 per tonne while other waste and offal disposal was costing between £40 and £120 per tonne. Familiarity with the 1982 MSSR in most divisions was considered satisfactory. Where this was not the case, staff were liaising with local authority officials to remedy the situation. It was reported that some hunt kennels were purchasing raw carcass meat from knackers in contravention of those Regulations and that this had been brought to the attention of the relevant local authorities. ²⁰

4.241 The summary of returns on knacker's yards and hunt kennels that followed, on 27 September 1991, contained no information on how SBO was being dealt with or charges for its disposal. ²¹

4.242 The BSE Order 1991 came into force on 6 November 1991 (see paragraph 4.191 above). It amended the definition of SBO to include SBO derived from fallen stock. Thus SBO material collected from fallen animals by knacker's yards and hunt kennels was now also subject to the animal SBO ban and could no longer be legally incorporated in animal feeds. ²²

4.243 In the summary for October, which was distributed on 12 November 1991, Mr Simmons reported that 'the costs for SBO remain high and may be increasing slightly'. There was, however, no information on the handling of SBO material. Mr Simmons noted that whilst a 'few reports of non-compliance' with the 1982 MSSR were received every month, 'in the main these are resolved after reminders to the local authorities'. However, he said that 'one or two' local authorities seemed 'reluctant to devote any effort to resolve persistent non-compliance'. ²³

4.244 Mr Meldrum pursued this last aspect of the summary in a minute to Mr Crawford dated 14 November 1991. He stated that it would be wise to 'identify the Local Authorities that seem reluctant to devote any effort to resolve persistent non-compliance and to rectify it through the appropriate RVO'. ²⁴

4.245 In the summary of returns distributed on 4 December, Mr Simmons recorded that there were 'no significant changes in charges for the collection of carcasses or the disposal of SBO or other waste'. ²⁵

4.246 The first of Mr Simmons's reports for 1992 was circulated on 13 January. It noted that the cost of disposal of SBO had fallen by about £20 per tonne, but that some smaller yards were experiencing delays in the collection of SBO by renderers, thus leading to build-up of the material in busy periods. It stated that a diminishing number of reports of non-compliance with the 1982 MSSR were being received every month. Mr Simmons stated that, in the main, these were resolved after reminders to the local authorities. SVS staff, in association with local authorities, were actively engaged in resolving the few outstanding problems. Nothing was said about compliance with the SBO regulations. ²⁶

4.247 Continuing reduction in the costs of waste disposal was reported in the summary circulated on 31 January 1991. Mr Simmons also reported on the closure of a knacker's yard situated adjacent to a domestic slaughterhouse. The same person owned both the knacker's yard and the slaughterhouse. Mr Simmons surmised that the closure was 'not unconnected' to the forthcoming prosecution of the owner for diverting unfit meat to the slaughterhouse. There were no comments on compliance with the SBO regulations. ²⁷

4.248 Summaries of returns circulated in March, ²⁸ May, ²⁹ July, ³⁰ and August ³¹ 1992 recorded a gradual decrease in the cost to knackers of disposing of both SBO and non-SBO waste. Some renderers even offered free collection of SBO waste to ensure customer loyalty. The returns also commented on the level of compliance with the 1982 MSSR but did not discuss the treatment of SBO by knacker's yards and hunt kennels.

4.249 Although the summary of returns gave no indication of the monitoring of the handling of SBO in knacker's yards and hunt kennels, a minute in September 1992 from Mr R J Lawrence, a Veterinary Officer in Lincoln, to Mr Townsend, Animal Health (Disease Control) Division, indicated that some SBO monitoring was taking place at hunt kennels. He noted that recent visits to all hunt kennels in the Lincolnshire Division had uncovered a failure by the hunts to comply with both the SBO regulations and the 1982 MSSR. Mr Lawrence recorded that the main areas of deficiency uncovered 'were the failure to separate Specified Bovine Offals, failure to store in adequately lidded, sealed and lockable containers and failure to move with correct permits'. ³²

4.250 In his summary of returns dated 19 October 1992, Mr Simmons noted a fall in the cost of disposal of SBO and a 'gradual improvement in the lot of the knacker and little recently of contention'. He therefore suggested decreasing the frequency of visits to bi-monthly or quarterly. He did not comment on compliance with the SBO regulations. ³³

4.251 On 9 December 1992, MAFF issued AHC 92/147 to all veterinary staff. This circular dealt with the handling of animal waste at knacker's yards and hunt kennels. The circular confirmed that the frequency of visits and returns for knackers and hunt kennels was to be reduced from monthly to every two months with effect from 1 January 1993. It also stated that AHOs could carry out the visits. ³⁴

4.252 Reports prepared by Mr Simmons in December 1992 provided no details of the handling of SBO by knacker's yards and hunt kennels. ³⁵