THE Tenant Farmers' Association has expressed "extreme concern" about the cuts MAFF has imposed on compensation payments to farmers under the livestock welfare disposal scheme.

And Mr Derek Foster, MP for Bishop Auckland, has also written to Agriculture Minister Nick Brown expressing his own concerns.

His own constituency takes in the FMD hotspot of Teesdale and he was particularly concerned that the payments would be reduced for some animals which had already been accepted under the terms of the schjeme.

Mr Foster has asked Mr Brown to reconsider that decision and allow all those accepted up to midnight on April 26 - the day the announcement was made to continue to receive the level of payments introduced on March 23.

In condemning the reduced payments Mr Reg Haydon, national chairman of the TFA, said that the scheme had been a shambles since the outset.

"It has only recently started to become effective," he said on Monday. "However, there is still a backlog of 650,000 animals entered in the scheme through which the intervention board has to work.

"We therefore believe it was inappropriate to make the changes to the LWDS announced on Friday. MAFF is to reduce payment rates for most categories of stock and apply the new rates retrospectively. It will also deny payments to producers making new applications who can no longer afford to feed their livestock.

"It is unacceptable that the new payment rates are to be applied retrospectively," he said. "Many producers have waited too long already for their stock to be moved. Welfare problems are still building up and retrospective changes in aid rates will only add to the misery being experienced at farm level.

"Producers who had registered a claim before April 27 have a legitimate expectation to be paid at the rates applicable at the time of their application" said Mr Haydon.

Mr Ben Gill, president of the NFU, also condemned the payment cuts, saying it would be a devastating blow to farmers already trying to ride out the FMD crisis.

Mr Brown said the relaxation of rules on preventing animals moving in affected areas, but outside the 3km zone around infected premises, meant most farms had an alternative to the welfare disposal scheme.

The change was also designed to ensure that the scheme did not act as a disincentive to farmers by providing a more attractive financial option than the market itself.