Day 020 - 28 Jul 94 - Page 79


     
     1
         MR. RAMPTON:  If it is in the immediate area your Lordship will
     2        not be late for that.  The question about those
              pathologies for the legs of the birds that you brought
     3        back or had sent back from Sun Valley after your visit, do
              you remember?
     4        A.  Yes.
 
     5   Q.   In your report you say there were 25.  I counted 32
              separate entries on those sheets.  Can you explain the
     6        mystery?
              A.  No, I cannot.
     7
         Q.   Some of those birds were a good deal heavier than the
     8        birds you estimated at Sun Valley?
              A.  That is correct.
     9
         Q.   So that we do not have to look at it, the gait scores
    10        which were postmortem estimates, I take it, were they?
              A.  No.
    11
         Q.   There are gait scores ----?
    12        A.  Yes, I anticipate -- I think they would have been,
              yes.
    13
         Q.   You did not do the work?
    14        A.  I did not do the gait scores on those birds.  As I
              explained, I went on to McKeys whilst those birds went
    15        back with Mr. Kestin to Langford.
 
    16   Q.   If there were 32 separate entries, that probably means 32
              birds, does it?
    17        A.  Correct.
 
    18   Q.   The gait scores go as follows:  Gait scores of nil, there
              were eight, which is 25 per cent?
    19        A.  Yes.
 
    20   Q.   Gait scores of one, there were seven, which is nearly 22
              per cent; gait scores of two, there were 13, which was
    21        over 40 per cent; gait scores of three, there were four,
              which is 12.5 per cent, but there were no estimated gait
    22        scores of four or five.  In the light of your own
              observations at Sun Valley, do those figures at all
    23        surprise you?
              A.  No, it would have been a less representative sample,
    24        as I explained, because of the sampling technique they do
              not unduly surprise me, bearing in mind the interval and
    25        how they were collected.
  
    26   Q.   Does it surprise you that even though some of the birds 
              were well over three kilos in weight, there were no four 
    27        or five scores?
              A.  Bearing in mind the reason for why there is a low
    28        prevalence of four and fives, as explained to me by Mark
              Pattison, I would not have anticipated any fours or fives
    29        in the sample taken to Langford.
 
    30   Q.   That was because, as I think you explained to us two or
              three days ago, of the possible treatment of antibiotics

Prev Next Index