Mr. Andrew Cromie:

Deputy Barry asked about the ten-year plan. Let me give one example. With Teagasc, we are currently establishing a next-generation dairy herd. Mr. Dillon and his team have 200 animals with an average EBI figure of 210, the highest in the country. This herd is important as a national resource because it is ten years ahead of the average. As from next year, when those cows calve down, all of the relevant data thereon will be collected. All the really important economic traits that dairy farmers cannot record routinely will be collected, including data that are difficult to record, such as the incidence of mastitis and lameness, live weights, greenhouse gases and efficiency. With our genetic indices, we need to have the correct data collected and imported into economy-related and profitability indices that will take the industry in the right direction. The last thing we want is to return here in some years only to say we are not making the predicted genetic gain at all because we forgot to measure two or three traits that will have proven to be more important than originally envisaged. This was the case with fertility for many years.

We are working with Teagasc in the context of our ten-year plan. We will also be working in this regard in the beef industry. The key is that new data will be identified that dairy and beef farmers will have to record in the future. We will need to include the data in international databases to generate genetic evaluations and management reports for the industry. With regard to our getting caught up in the discussion on how the data should be entered into the database and who should have what role, I agree entirely with Dr. Kelly that we must avoid precluding ourselves from encountering constraints or otherwise in this area. This is because if something results in a stopping of work on the fundamental material, one effectively stops the industry from growing and driving profitability.