Fivemiletown cattle review exposes serious DAERA failures as all 10 reforms accepted
The dead cattle strewn across a field in Fivemiletown following the DAERA cull operation.
Tuesday 10 November 2026
A major independent review into the controversial culling of 51 cattle near Fivemiletown has exposed serious failures in DAERA’s governance, planning and control of the operation — despite concluding that the Department acted lawfully and the animals killed were humanely destroyed.
Agriculture Minister Andrew Muir has accepted all 10 recommendations from former Irish Chief Veterinary Officer Dr Martin Blake, whose review identifies failures ranging from the absence of a specific written policy and inadequate consideration of alternatives to breakdowns in communication, risk assessment, record-keeping and site clearance.
Among the most striking findings, three cattle were killed after a decision had been made to suspend the cull and the review could not establish why; five cattle escaped onto a public road; three surviving calves were ultimately found unaccounted for; and a calf later discovered injured was considered most likely to have come from a site DAERA had declared clear but did not subsequently search.
The report ultimately draws an important distinction between the technical competence of those carrying out the cull and the administrative system surrounding them, concluding: “The review revealed a clear difference between the technical competence and the administrative governance of the operation.”
Cull lawful and cattle killed humanely
The operation followed a court case involving what Minister Muir described as one of the most shocking and sustained cases of animal cruelty encountered by departmental veterinary officials. The keeper received a lifetime disqualification from keeping farmed animals and a court issued a Deprivation Order.
Dr Blake found DAERA had a strict legal obligation to implement the valid court order and that officials made significant efforts immediately afterwards to help the keeper dispose of the livestock himself.
The court order gave a named DAERA official discretion over the method of disposal, including the destruction of the animals. The review found that shooting cattle individually in their familiar pasture surroundings using free bullets was lawful and appropriate from an animal welfare perspective.
It concluded that all 51 cattle culled on 29 and 30 June were killed humanely by appropriately trained staff, using suitable weapons and ammunition. Most were reported to have died instantaneously from one shot, while a small number required a secondary shot to confirm death.
However, those secondary shots were not recorded, preventing the review from establishing a complete contemporaneous record of every shot fired.
DAERA had no specific written policy
Behind those conclusions, Dr Blake identified significant weaknesses in how the Department governed and planned the operation.
DAERA had detailed guidance covering animal welfare investigations and enforcement, but the review found no specific written protocol or policy governing decision-making after a court issued a Deprivation Order.
“The review found no documented protocol or policy document that guided the decision-making process around the implementation of court orders,” Dr Blake concluded, describing the absence of formal guidance as an administrative vulnerability which weakened corporate assurance.
Instead, officials were relying on historical custom and practice influenced by an earlier case in which seized cattle remained in departmental care for an extended period and their eventual sale generated substantially less than the costs incurred looking after them.
The review examined four other Deprivation Orders between 2020 and 2026. One keeper disposed of the animals themselves. In the other three cases requiring direct DAERA intervention, animals were culled on farm — 61 cattle in one 2025 case, 17 cattle in another and 11 sheep and 10 pigs in 2026.
Why DAERA decided to cull the cattle
DAERA’s preferred initial outcome was for the keeper to dispose of the animals himself, and he was given approximately three weeks following the court order, including the statutory appeal period, to do so.
Officials maintained contact with him and provided information about the animals and possible routes for disposal. By the morning of the operation, 15 cattle had been sold and were confined in a shed awaiting removal. DAERA agreed they would not be culled provided their movement was completed that day.
The Department had identified substantial obstacles to disposing of the remainder commercially. Approximately 40% of animals recorded in the herd had unresolved identification restrictions limiting their eligibility for commercial sale or entry into the human food chain.
Other considerations included a lack of current food-chain status, horned cattle and uncastrated adult males, animals considered nervous and unused to strangers, previous difficulties carrying out TB testing, inadequate or derelict handling facilities, poor fencing and difficult terrain.
Dr Blake therefore concluded that culling substantially met the test of necessity.
But the report also records evidence which complicates the picture. The cattle had recently been gathered for TB testing, prospective purchasers had reportedly walked among animals without causing alarm, and some animals were successfully gathered and moved, including around the time of the operation.
Less intrusive phased approach not adequately assessed
One of the review’s most significant criticisms concerns an option DAERA did not sufficiently evaluate before the operation began.
Instead of attempting a large multi-site depopulation in a single day, officials could have considered a graduated approach — clearing one location at a time or dealing first with particular categories of livestock, such as adult bulls.
Dr Blake found planners “did not evaluate a graduated or phased depopulation strategy which would likely have been less intrusive”.
Such an approach could have reduced operational risks and demands on resources and, according to the review, might also have encouraged the keeper to accelerate efforts to sell the remaining cattle.
Dr Blake assessed the operation against four proportionality tests. He found its legitimate aim was met, suitability was met and necessity was substantially met. But his conclusion on whether DAERA achieved a fair balance between its responsibilities and the wider consequences was unequivocal:
“Fair Balance: Not adequately met.”
The review found that insufficient administrative weight had been given to the foreseeable human and community impact of carrying out a large open-field cull, including the distress caused by exposed carcases and the risk of public misunderstanding.
“The operation’s planning gave insufficient consideration to this human and community impact,” Dr Blake concluded.
Operation changes after culling begins
A mandatory staff briefing was held at 9am on Monday 29 June before a 13-member DAERA team divided to cover three locations involving four land parcels.
At around 10.45am, the keeper informed DAERA that 15 cattle had already been sold and were confined awaiting removal. The Department agreed to exclude them from the operation provided they were moved that day.
Culling began at approximately 11.25am. Fourteen cattle were killed at Site 2, which was declared completely clear at around 1pm. Eight animals were killed on one parcel at Site 3 and 11 on another during the initial operation.
At around 1pm, however, DAERA learned that another prospective purchaser wanted to buy the remaining animals. Management made what Dr Blake describes as a “well-intentioned” decision to suspend the operation and allow an attempt to gather and sell the survivors.
Three cattle killed after suspension decision
Despite that decision, three further cattle were subsequently killed at Site 1.
The review was unable to establish why.
Dr Blake found this pointed to either “an on-the-ground miscommunication or an undocumented tactical field choice”.
The discrepancy subsequently contributed to confusion over how many animals remained alive when the prospective purchaser arrived.
More significantly for the Department’s handling of the operation, Dr Blake found that allowing private individuals into what remained an active enforcement operation represented a deliberate change from the approved plan but did not trigger a fresh documented risk assessment.
Five cattle escape onto public road
At around 5.45pm, the keeper, prospective purchaser and an assistant began trying to gather the five remaining cattle, initially using feed to encourage them towards a loading area.
When others moved in to assist, the animals broke away. Repeated attempts followed and the review records that the cattle became “increasingly agitated, fearful, and fatigued”.
At around 7.15pm, DAERA officials concluded that gathering them was unlikely to succeed and ordered the attempt to stop. During the final attempt, however, all five cattle escaped through the boundary and onto the public road.
A cow and three calves travelled in one direction and a bull in another. Between nine and 12 members of the public were estimated to have gathered on the road as events unfolded.
Some witnesses could see DAERA personnel and vehicles, dead cattle in fields and people pursuing the remaining livestock, leading them to believe departmental staff were chasing cattle around the field in order to shoot them.
The review found that interpretation was incorrect — those pursuing the animals were trying to gather them for sale — but acknowledged that it was understandable how witnesses could have formed that impression.
Neighbours tried to buy surviving cattle
With help from members of the public, the cow and calves were eventually directed back towards the original land.
The review records that two distressed neighbours tried to move the animals onto their adjoining property because they wanted to buy them and prevent their destruction. DAERA officials did not facilitate this and directed the cattle back onto the original holding.
When it was considered safe to do so, two of the returned animals were subsequently culled. A search for the remaining two calves was unsuccessful and eventually abandoned as daylight faded.
During the incident, officials attempted to contact the PSNI at approximately 7.14pm and again at 7.36pm but were unsuccessful.
The escaped bull travelled a significant distance along the road before moving towards woodland. DAERA staff and local people tracked it, and the Humane Slaughter Team assessed the uncontained and agitated animal as a serious safety risk. It was killed at approximately 9pm once a safe shot became available.
Dr Blake found that decision was a proportionate response to the immediate public and staff safety risk.
Three surviving calves were missed
DAERA returned the following day to search for missing animals and oversee removal of the dead cattle.
When officials stood down, they believed two calves remained missing. It subsequently emerged that three live calves had not been accounted for.
One was located on 3 July. Another was found on a public road on 4 July with a wound high on its neck, while the third was located on 7 July. All three were subsequently moved under licence to another keeper.
The injured calf was treated by a private vet and examined by DAERA on 6 July. The report describes the injury as “reflective of a gunshot wound”, but its cause was not verified and Dr Blake could not establish how it happened.
The available evidence led the reviewer to conclude that the calf most likely came from Site 2 — the site which had been declared completely clear at around 1pm on 29 June.
Unlike Sites 1 and 3, no subsequent physical search was carried out at Site 2. Dr Blake describes that as “a significant weakness in the site’s clearance and verification process”.
Confusion left carcases exposed in fields
The review also uncovered a significant internal disconnect over who was responsible for removing the dead cattle.
A briefing provided to senior DAERA leadership and the Minister stated that the Department would arrange collection and disposal of the carcases. But the operational team was working on the basis that responsibility rested with the keeper.
That contradiction was not resolved until late on the first night, by which time dead cattle remained visible in open fields and had become a major source of distress for people living nearby.
DAERA ultimately assumed responsibility and contacted its fallen-animal contractor shortly before 10pm.
The following day, two trucks and a teleporter removed 51 carcases: 14 from Site 1, 14 from Site 2, 14 from Site 3.1, eight from Site 3.2 and the escaped bull from its off-site location. Collection was completed at approximately 7.30pm.
Dr Blake recommends that carcases from future high-visibility operations should be removed the same day or screened from public view where immediate removal is impossible.
Minister briefed as operation was beginning
The report also raises questions about the information reaching DAERA’s most senior levels before the operation.
A Ministerial submission was drafted on the evening of Friday 26 June but was not finalised and sent until 9.47am on Monday 29 June. The Minister’s Office forwarded it to Andrew Muir at 10.07am, shortly before the field operation commenced.
The review found that information provided to the Minister and senior leadership did not adequately highlight the heightened risks associated with the timing and method of the operation. Nor were senior leaders or the Minister subsequently alerted to the challenges, risks and issues encountered as events unfolded.
Mr Muir said:
“Whilst the review finds that the operation was lawful, appropriate and sadly necessary from an animal welfare perspective, it’s clear that operational shortcomings existed and planning gave insufficient consideration to the human and community impact.
“As Minister I did not authorise or direct the operation. When I then saw the distressing photos and videos of animal carcases and learned of the range of allegations that were circulating, I shared the genuine concerns expressed.”
Mr Muir said all 10 recommendations had been accepted, adding: “The report’s ten recommendations are accepted in full with regular reporting and independent oversight put in place to ensure improvements are driven and sustained at pace.”
DAERA silence allowed public narrative to develop
Communication was another substantial weakness identified by Dr Blake.
DAERA had legitimate reasons not to announce a sensitive enforcement operation in advance, but it had no adequate proactive communications plan ready to explain events once the operation became publicly visible and difficulties developed.
The review found that the Department’s silence allowed “a public narrative to form in the absence of official factual information”, with inaccurate and emotive accounts going unchallenged and anxiety increasing.
It also records that individual frontline staff were subsequently named and subjected to targeted intimidation online and in person. Dr Blake distinguishes between legitimate scrutiny of DAERA’s decisions and hostility towards individual staff carrying out departmental instructions.
Armstrong calls operation a shambles
Ulster Unionist deputy leader and Fermanagh and South Tyrone MLA Diana Armstrong said Dr Blake had completed “a serious piece of work”, but argued his findings left unresolved questions about DAERA’s central justification for the operation.
She said:
“This was a shambles from start to finish and it is a damning indictment of how that Department operates.”
Mrs Armstrong pointed to evidence that 15 cattle had been gathered into a shed on the morning of the operation, that the herd had previously been gathered for TB testing and that animals were moved from the holding around the time of the operation.
She said:
“Three animals were shot at Site 1 after the order to stop had already been given, and Dr Blake could not establish why. Site 2 was declared clear at lunchtime and, in his words, no search was carried out on Site 2. Sites 1 and 3 were searched extensively over two days. Site 2 was not searched once.”
Mrs Armstrong also said she had visited a neighbouring farm where the three surviving cattle, including the wounded calf, are now being kept. She claimed the people caring for the animals had not been contacted by the review and said she intended to raise the issue with the Minister.
That claim is not a finding made by Dr Blake’s report and has been made separately by the UUP MLA.
Erskine calls for apology to Fivemiletown
DUP Fermanagh and South Tyrone MLA Deborah Erskine said the findings confirmed serious shortcomings which people in the community had raised since June.
“The detail is damning,” she said.
“Carcases were left lying in open fields because the Department’s own plan said one thing and senior leadership had been told another. Ear tags were not all recorded. A site was declared clear when it wasn’t, and a calf was found injured on the roadside days later. Three animals were shot after the decision to pause the cull, and the review still cannot say why.”
Mrs Erskine said the finding that the fair-balance test was not adequately met reflected concerns raised locally about the impact of the operation.
She added:
“The Minister has said he did not authorise or direct this operation. That may be so, but it is his Department and the buck stops with him.”
The DUP MLA called for an apology to the Fivemiletown community and for the Minister to set out a clear timetable for delivering all 10 recommendations.
Ten reforms accepted by DAERA
Dr Blake recommends creating a multidisciplinary panel to determine the most proportionate, lowest-risk and cost-effective approach to future major deprivation operations, alongside urgent legal clarification of responsibility for animals after ownership rights end but before disposal is completed.
The review also calls for clearer management of DAERA’s Humane Slaughter Team; Director-level sign-off for significant interventions; advance notification of senior leadership and the Minister’s Office; and a formal written policy to replace reliance on historical custom and practice.
Future planning should document alternatives and costs and specifically assess whether a phased or staggered operation would be less intrusive. Communications planning should form part of the operational process from the outset.
Dr Blake also recommends stronger real-time records, including ear-tag details when death is confirmed and every secondary confirmation shot; clearer PSNI liaison; formal site-clearance and missing-animal procedures; dedicated leaders at each site in complex operations; and an independent veterinary welfare officer for large-scale culls.
The welfare-officer recommendation is intended to strengthen independent assurance and public confidence; the review does not identify an animal-welfare deficiency in the way the 51 cattle were killed at Fivemiletown.
Carcases should also be removed on the same day or screened from public view, while any deliberate change to an approved operational plan should trigger cross-site coordination and a fresh documented risk assessment.
DAERA has accepted all 10 recommendations and says implementation will be subject to regular reporting and independent oversight.
Review exposes wider problem with animal welfare enforcement
Dr Blake’s report extends beyond the events of 29 and 30 June and raises potentially significant questions about Northern Ireland’s wider animal welfare enforcement system.
DAERA decided to prepare a prosecution in the Fivemiletown case on 31 January 2024. The case was submitted to the Public Prosecution Service on 12 November 2024, the PPS decided to prosecute on 27 June 2025, and court proceedings concluded on 8 June 2026.
That represents around 28 months from the Department’s decision to pursue prosecution to the conclusion of proceedings. Other cases examined by Dr Blake took between 21 and 33 months.
The review describes the existing process as “cumbersome and extremely time-consuming”, warning that lengthy proceedings can leave animals exposed to continued suffering while enforcement action moves through the administrative and judicial system.
It suggests consideration of potentially significant legislative reform, including pre-emptive disposal orders and expedited civil proceedings in animal-welfare cases. Dr Blake also raises the possibility of an administrative system under which an authorised inspector could, subject to safeguards and appeal rights, determine whether animals should be treated, transferred, sold or humanely destroyed without waiting for a criminal prosecution to conclude.
Legal gap over responsibility for deprived animals
The review identifies another systemic issue arising directly from the Fivemiletown case.
Once the statutory appeal period expired, the keeper’s ownership rights had effectively ended, but additional time was allowed for him to continue trying to sell the cattle.
Dr Blake says there is no formal framework clearly establishing who assumes legal responsibility for feeding, maintaining and caring for animals during that intervening period.
The report calls for an immediate legal review to clarify whether DAERA automatically assumes responsibility once ownership rights end and how future cases should be handled.
The full independent review is available here.
DAERA’s response and action plan is available here.
For all the controversy surrounding Fivemiletown, Dr Blake’s findings do not support the claim that DAERA had no right to act or that the 51 cattle were inhumanely killed. They expose something different: a lawful operation carried out by technically competent staff within a system that lacked clear policy, failed to adequately assess alternatives and changing risks, lost control of animals, failed to account for three survivors and underestimated the consequences for the community watching it unfold.
The test now is whether accepting all 10 recommendations produces the fundamental changes the report says are required.
