IT would be easy to make Bobby Waugh the scapegoat for last year's foot-and-mouth epidemic.

His Northumberland farm was one of the first sites to be infected, and the pigs were reared in appalling conditions.

There would not be an outcry had the judge passing sentence yesterday thrown the book at Waugh.

Thankfully, our courts are entitled to use discretion and compassion. And it was perfectly appropriate for the judge to use that discretion in this case.

The case proven against Waugh clearly demonstrates that he must no longer have any involvement in farming. The judge has ensured that will be the case.

Because of Waugh's financial position, the judge felt it would not be possible to impose a fine.

However, ordering him to be electronically tagged and effectively placed under house arrest at night is a severe punishment.

It sends out the message to Waugh about the seriousness of his offences, and acts as a substantial deterrent to anyone else who may fail to adhere to rules and regulations covering animal husbandry.

What is unjust, however, is the fact that Waugh retains the large amount of money paid to him out of public funds to compensate for the loss of his farm animals culled after foot-and-mouth was detected on his premises.

It is galling that, after being found guilty of such serious offences, he remains entitled to the same treatment as law-abiding and exemplary farmers whose livestock was culled through no fault of theirs.

Efforts should be made to re-coup the money paid to Waugh. If such efforts are deemed to be illegal, then the loophole must be closed to prevent offenders profiting from the state in the future.

Efforts must also be made to ensure farms are regularly and rigorously inspected to ensure they maintain the highest possible standards.

Had such procedures been in place 18 months ago, Waugh's farm would have been closed down and the foot-and-mouth epidemic may not have been as widespread or, who knows, may not have happened in the first place.