ONE of the most controversial and difficult decisions the States have taken in recent years was recorded in 2008 when they agreed to lift a 200-year-old ban on the importation of foreign cattle strains.

Since the 18th century, the barriers had remained firm against the introduction of either live animals or, as technology developed, semen for artificial impregnation. As a result, the purity of the Island herd was maintained and the name of Jersey became synonymous the world over with a uniquely appealing and productive dairy animal.

As pressure grew from some dairy farmers and the artificial insemination industry for this protective ban to be abolished in favour of allowing in Jersey semen from other countries, traditionalists argued passionately but vainly that to do so would make it impossible to guarantee the future purity of the breed – and now they have been proved right.

It has taken less than two years for the first blunder to threaten this most precious symbol of Island pride and heritage. Nine calves, it has been discovered, have already been sired by a bull whose ancestors include a Red Holstein, and it is believed that no fewer than eight of the Island’s dwindling number of dairy farms have cows impregnated with his offspring, totalling more than 100 animals. For the layman, a brief internet search will demonstrate just how far removed is the large, gawky Red Holstein from the refined and delicate Jersey.

The mistake was made by the American company which provided the semen, but the damage has been to the Jersey dairy industry and, in particular, to the credibility of those who persuaded States Members that lifting the ban would provide a foolproof way to develop more productive milkers and new beef strains without threatening purity, albeit of the returning expatriate variety, on the dairy side.

Economic considerations won the argument in 2008, but the Royal Jersey Agricultural and Horticultural Society and its trading arm, Jersey Island Genetics, now have some explaining to do to the Island administration that was persuaded to
sacrifice two centuries of rural wisdom and heritage for the promise of a more sustainable future.

The small consolation to be gained from the fact that the mistake has been spotted and steps taken to ensure that its impact is not perpetuated is greatly overshadowed by the doubts that must be sown by this unfortunate episode. Sometimes the old-fashioned way really is the best.