KEY POINTS:
The lurid yellow tape wound around the field gate, proclaimed "No Entry ... Animal Disease Control Precautions" while a man in a white forensic suit stood nearby armed with disinfectant.
Nearby a field of sheep grazed, oblivious to the furore surrounding them, but to farmers in Surrey, this now all too familiar sight struck a frightening chord.
Farmer Mike Giffin admitted that he felt physically ill when he heard that the latest foot-and-mouth case was within his own county.
Surrey was let off lightly in the 2001 outbreak with no confirmed cases, yet now the small livestock community found itself at the eye of the storm.
"I felt really sick, absolutely gutted. We are struggling to get on with the harvest," he said.
"We have endured a wet early summer and now there is sun we were getting on with things. It is just another blow."
Yesterday, farmers across the county were watching the news intensely, desperately hoping that no other case would emerge, that the problem had been swiftly contained.
"The farmers are quite concerned. If we can get through today without another confirmed case, we will feel a lot better," explained Giffin, who has 200 beef cattle and cows in Reigate and is chairman of the National Farmers' Union in Surrey.
Although the industry was still struggling with low lamb, beef and milk prices and increased grain costs, it had been starting to get back on its feet after several torrid years.
Yesterday they were just hoping that this was not going to be another serious blow.
Unlike the previous outbreak, the livestock had been out in the fields, creating particular problems with biosecurity, Giffin explained.
Local farmers, however, praised the swift action taken by the Government in contrast to 2001 when it took days to impose movement restrictions.
But, as farmer Hugh Broom pointed out, for those who needed to take their cattle to market or the abattoir over the next few days, it was going to become a serious problem soon.
"We are urging our [NFU] members to remain vigilant and not to let their guard down," said Broom, who has sheep and cattle on a farm near Dorking.
"It is potentially still out there."
Down the road from the field in Normandy, near Guildford, wherethe infected cattle were slaughtered, police were guarding the venue thought to be the source of the problem - the Institute for Animal Health, a government-funded research laboratory at Pirbright, with the adjoining Merial Animal Health pharmaceutical company.
The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs revealed the strain of the virus on the infected farm was the same as one used at the facility and not one recently seen in animals.
A nationwide ban on the movement of cows, sheep and pigs and the export of cloven-hoofed animals and animal products were enforced within hours of the disease being diagnosed.
Chief Veterinary Officer Debby Reynolds said a cull had taken place on an adjacent premises to the original farm which had been identified as having "dangerous contact" with the infected herd.
But a number of other potential cases had proved negative.
If there was one silver lining to this particular cloud, however, locals living in this Surrey commuter belt pointed out that this was not a high intensity farming area.
The impact, however, was being felt across the country with cattle movement restrictions applying nationwide and rural communities taking immediate action to disinfect footwear and vehicles.
Many communities devastated by the 2001 epidemic, which led to the slaughter of up to 10 million animals and cost the country up to £8.5 billion ($22.9 billion), were steeling themselves for the worst.
Richard Haddock, southwest regional chairman of the NFU, said: "At the moment the restrictions are a sacrifice we are willing to make to save our industry."
SECURITY AT SENSITIVE LABS
How secure are Britain's labs?
Biosecurity is the priority for 36 labs licensed by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to deal with animal pathogens. But the head of the Institute for Animal Health told MPs last year the public labs at Pirbright were underfunded.
How could the virus have escaped?
The Health and Safety Executive went to the Pirbright labs to pin down the source of the leak. The police presence there yesterday underlined the executive's role in prosecuting lapses in safety. It is seeking to establish if the virus could have escaped through an air vent or on the clothing of a lab assistant. The virus is highly contagious, can live for several days on a surface and can be spread on the wind.
Are Britain's biosecurity controls strong enough?
An independent inquiry by Professor Brian Spratt will establish if there was negligence. His investigation will raise wider questions about biosecurity, although his focus is on Pirbright. A report in 2002 said the buildings at the next-door Institute for Animal Health were "shabby" and "unsatisfactory".
Who is to blame for the latest outbreak?
The Health and Safety Executive can prosecute anyone found guilty of negligence. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said yesterday: "Nothing is ruled in and nothing is ruled out." The executive's inquiry could become a criminal investigation if lapses are found. But there is also a wider political question: have successive governments given the labs enough priority for funding?
How serious are the consequences?
The fact that a lab's security may have been breached raises a nightmare scenario. Foot-and-mouth disease cannot be passed to humans but other laboratories such as the Ministry of Defence germ warfare labs at Porton Down, on Salisbury Plain, Wiltshire, are dealing in potentially lethal diseases such as anthrax. Pirbright is a warning that a Doomsday bug could one day escape, unless the tightest possible security is maintained.
What does this mean for biosecurity across Britain?
The consequences are potentially far-reaching and extremely worrying. The escape of a dangerous virus from a laboratory could mean biosecurity at all labs dealing in hazardous pathogens has to be inspected.
- Independent
