Badger cull – DEFRA’S Chief Vet Responds

How would you respond to Ben Goldacre’s criticisms ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/22/badger-cull-trials-cattle-tb ) ?

“We don’t break down data on TB incidence between different types of farming systems…”   
WHY NOT?

Farmers see the land as theirs and not to be shared with anyone nor anything they don’t choose. If they want to stop these livestock outbreaks they need to stop the intensive farming practices. But to do that pressure needs to be put on the monopolised supermarket cartel to pay farmers a decent living and not force them to use systems that are bad for us all.

agreed 100%.  If bovine TB is to be effectively tackled, surely the farming system should be taken into account; if it’s found that a certain system works better than others, would promoting such a system not be a better method than culling?  If closed herds, as indicated, would reduce TB, then why is such a course not being pursued?

can you provide a source for the figures quoted of “between 30-75%” for the incidences of badger-cattle transmission?

I do find his answer to the last question rather worrying,and to me it sums up the whole culling issue,i.e. total lack of accurate facts and figures about how many cases of TB are actually caused by badgers.
“The exact number of incidents caused by badgers or cattle is not known”( i find this rather alarming)” but various groups have estimated the badger contribution to be between 30-75%.”(this is a rather vague figure surely?).To me the whole thing is a farce,and completely inhumane.

Not one of my 4 questions answered. Just a lot of flim flam, we know what we’re doing, run along now, we  know best. A cull will happen. It will be ineffective. DEFRA will say the opposite.Maybe if there is a public record of numbers,names, results, infected badgers,recurring cattle infection, costs etc, maybe, just maybe, it’ll never happen again!…

Badgers dig and spoil my garden – I say no more.

“There’s no evidence to suggest that the results would be any different.”
No evidence that shooting over 6 weeks might have different results from trapping and shooting over a few days?

There certainly is, in the RBCT Final report, page 78:
“The rise in prevalence associated with repeated proactive culling was particularly great following four proactive culls that were conducted in a piecemeal manner over a period of several months (‘maintenance culling’), rather than in a single operation (Woodroffe et al., 2006b).”

The Final Report also says on page 164 : “Were culling to be conducted on different spatial scales, using different trapping methods, or under different landscape conditions, its effects on cattle TB would be quantitatively (and perhaps also qualitatively) different from those recorded in the RBCT.”

“There’s no evidence to suggest that the results would be any different.”
No evidence that shooting over 6 weeks might have different results from trapping and shooting over a few days?

There certainly is, in the RBCT Final report, page 78:
“The rise in prevalence associated with repeated proactive culling was particularly great following four proactive culls that were conducted in a piecemeal manner over a period of several months (‘maintenance culling’), rather than in a single operation (Woodroffe et al., 2006b).”

The Final Report also says on page 164 : “Were culling to be conducted on different spatial scales, using different trapping methods, or under different landscape conditions, its effects on cattle TB would be quantitatively (and perhaps also qualitatively) different from those recorded in the RBCT.”

Because there are plenty of totally closed herds that do have breakdowns, a survey of one does tend to skew things….

Because there are plenty of totally closed herds that do have breakdowns, a survey of one does tend to skew things….

What is the status of feeding badgers selenium-rich food as reported by the BBC in 2007 http://www.bbc.co.uk/gloucestershire/content/articles/2007/10/16/badger_culling_conundrum_feature.shtml and this year in the Express http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/262162/-I-give-my-badgers-vitamins-to-stop-TB- ?

I understand others including Danny Goodwin Jones have also asked DEFRA to investigate this, but as at April 2009, DEFRA was still ignoring this and misinterpreting the suggestion, such as in its report “Bovine TB – The Facts”. What would need to happen for DEFRA to try researching feeding badgers selenium?

What is the status of feeding badgers selenium-rich food as reported by the BBC in 2007 http://www.bbc.co.uk/gloucestershire/content/articles/2007/10/16/badger_culling_conundrum_feature.shtml and this year in the Express http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/262162/-I-give-my-badgers-vitamins-to-stop-TB- ?

I understand others including Danny Goodwin Jones have also asked DEFRA to investigate this, but as at April 2009, DEFRA was still ignoring this and misinterpreting the suggestion, such as in its report “Bovine TB – The Facts”. What would need to happen for DEFRA to try researching feeding badgers selenium?

 (Will they be testing culled badgers for TB)
“No, because we already have evidence about how widespread bovine TB is in badgers in certain areas of the country.”But we don’t have evidence for how this new, untested culling method will influence TB in badgers. After all the RBCT cull roughly doubled the prevalence of TB in badgers.

 (Will they be testing culled badgers for TB)
“No, because we already have evidence about how widespread bovine TB is in badgers in certain areas of the country.”But we don’t have evidence for how this new, untested culling method will influence TB in badgers. After all the RBCT cull roughly doubled the prevalence of TB in badgers.

Basicly the Government haven’t a clue and the culling of Badgers is totally unneccessary if they have no proper evidence to support such action

The level of competence for gunmen to kill badgers is Deer Stalking Level 1. It is my understanding that it is illegal to hunt deer at night in England (apart from one hour after sunset and one hour before morning). Badgers are mostly nocturnal. How can a qualification for hunting during the day be applicable for measuring humaneness when hunting at night – and for a species that is many times smaller?

Will independent observers be monitoring the shooting? And what safeguards will be put in place to ensure that badgers not killed outright will be measured for humaneness if those taking part benefit from proving that they are (i.e farmers who want a ‘cull’)? 

You say that the only way to eradicate TB in cattle in Britain is by involving killing badgers. Surely, as most dairy cattle are slaughtered after four to five lactations (and beef cattle considerably sooner) a cattle vaccine would effectively halt TB in cattle in half a decade – and TB in badgers would cease to be an issue (as they would not be catching it from cattle). What is Defra and the Government doing to advance the case for cattle vaccination with regards to EU regulations?

“Questions answered together. Natural England would estimate the badger population in an area based on information provided by the applicants and other evidence. Natural England would then set the minimum number of  badgers that must be removed at a level that should reduce the estimated badger population in the area by at least 70%. All badger carcases would be recorded so Natural England would know how many badgers had been culled.”
Further questions;
Natural England have said There is no way badger numbers in the cull areas can be  accurately measured.  Nor will it be possible to accurately count or measure  population changes as a result of the cull. They (NE) advise against undue reliance on the monitoring of badger numbers. 

Who will check that the numbers of badgers killed, and the numbers of badgers killed humanely are not falsified? If we do not have an accurate figure to start with (especially if there is apparently to be no survey at all, never mind it being nearly impossible to achieve accurately) how will farmers know when to stop? Indeed, WILL THEY STOP?  What assurances can you give that licences will be adhered to, and monitoring carried out well enough to ensure that breaking of licence conditions does not happen?

The chief Vets says “But we will never be able to eradicate TB in cattle without addressing its presence in badgers.”
How many diseases have we ever eradicated? Answer TWO Smallpox and Rinderpest.
How ? BY VACCINATION not people culling.
(We will never eradicate Bovine TB only control it).

How many badger culls did it take to achieve TB free status for Scotland? Answer NONE.

QUESTION: How will they be able to monitor the impact of culling when it is to be carried out alongside new bio security measures, improved cattle testing and better cattle controls? Pauline Kidner
CHIEF VET’S ANSWER“The scientific evidence from the Randomised Badger Culling Trial has already shown that culling can reduce bovine TB incidence in cattle if done in a certain way. If culling is introduced it will not be as a scientifically controlled trial but a practical disease control measure. We would continue monitoring incidences of TB nationally including in areas where culling is taking place. We see culling as part of a package of measures which together will help eradicate the disease in cattle.”You stated previously that ‘if done in certain way’ (as demonstrated by the RBCT) culling can have a positive effect. yet the government’s proposals are vastly different to that previous trial.Natural England have already stated that they believe there should be control areas to determine whether this method of culling can help to control tb. You have admitted that no-one is even trying to find out if this method of culling actually works, and if it may not, how can you justify going ahead?!  

1. Where do the rumours stem from that culling badgers may actually increase the problem? Is there any truth in this?

2. Is it not possible to secure farms against badgers? Surely this would be more cost efficient if it was possible and prevent the unnecessary destruction of British wildlife.

QUESTION: How are they going to measure with any
degree of accuracy, the population of badgers in the target cull areas
so that the required 70% killed can be achieved? Will this methodology
be used in every single cull area that is licensed? Pauline Kidner

CHIEF VET’S ANSWER: “Questions answered together. Natural England would estimate the badger population in an area based on information provided by the applicants and other evidence. Natural England would then set the minimum number of  badgers that must be removed at a level that should reduce the estimated badger population in the area by at least 70%. All badger carcases would be recorded so Natural England would know how many badgers had been culled.”
 

MY QUESTION IS THIS… If you’re going to record all badger carcases, why not test them for btb too? Isnt this simply because you know you will also be killing badgers which do NOT have btb as well and don’t want to further upset an already angry public?

Some of these answers are too vague – e.g. “estimated badger contribution 30 – 75%” – Well there is a big difference between 30% and 75%!   Also, “We don’t break down data on TB incidence between different types of farming systems” – why not? Cleary not enough research has been done – they are just going to jump straight into culling.

Also, I have seen CCTV footage of Badgers climbing into cattle’s feed troughs that were supposedly badger-proof (minimum height recommended by DEFRA) and I have inspected a badger-proof fence erected by Natural England which, quite frankly, even a blind badger could get over/under!  Again, they clearly have not done their research!  

Why no questions to the Chief Vet on Cattle Vaccination?
If it takes several years before cattle vaccination can be deployed in the UK and like all vaccines, will not be 100%, it will still be quicker and much more effective than a badger cull, which may give a 16% reduction over 9 years.

The Chief Vet should be ashamed of themselves.
Their opinion goes against that of the majority of vets. It is outrageous that
an animal Dr (vet) could suggest such a cause of action. In the pocket of those
with the money I fear. This is blood sport in through the back door for the
hunting blood junkies of our land!

 Aren’t you just saying that it doesn’t matter whether it works or not?

This is an absolutely key point. My understanding of scientific methodoly, as taught to me at University, was that if you want to replicate results, you must utilise the same method. This is quite clearly not being done in this case. To say that”There is no evidence to suggest that the results would be any different” is an appauling thing for a scientist to say (ignoring the fact that it is an inaccurate statement) .In science you dont just assume, you go out and test.

So that means they should all be killed does it? If a neighbourhood child/children were to do the same, would you want those killed too? Wildlife do what comes naturally, it’s us humans that are building properties on green belt areas etc, have you considered putting fencing or something around your garden to stop them getting in? Surely being proactive is better than being a murderer?

the one thing that is apparent….it’s going to happen what ever we say! they’ve already made up their minds! I’m afraid that our ‘wonderful’ British government as usual won’t take any notice of Joe public because he/she is perceived as not knowing anything about anything….

CHIEF VET’S ANSWER“The scientific evidence from the Randomised Badger Culling Trial has already shown that culling can reduce bovine TB incidence in cattle if done in a certain way. If culling is introduced it will not be as a scientifically controlled trial but a practical disease control measure. We would continue monitoring incidences of TB nationally including in areas where culling is taking place. We see culling as part of a package of measures which together will help eradicate the disease in cattle.”
Follow up question:

Why is the government ignoring its own evidence and the ISG (specialists) who have stated unequivically that state that “given its high costs and low benefits …badger cullng is unlikely to  contribute usefully to the control of cattle TB in Britain, and recommend that TB control efforts focus on measures other than badger culling”

Re point 2 Defras own research (Project SE3119) states :
 ”When badger exclusion measures were appied on farms, the number of badger visits to farm buildings was significantly reduced. Where exclusion measures were consistently employed and adequately maintained they were 100% effective in preventing badger access to buildings. The cost of husbandry measures averaged £4045 per farm. The average cost of a cattle herd breakdown estimated £27,000″ 

It is pretty evident that the Badgers are blamed for the disease by our Unelected Government. Please pray tell, if the Badger passes it on to the Cattle, then whom or what, passes the disease on to the Badgers.?

Vague answers at best. He might as well have given answers along the lines of ”because we want to” for every question.
 
Now watch the gun happy farmers turn it into a sport. Shame on them.

LEAVE OUR BADGERS ALONE – improve the health of all the poor dairy animals instead and I agree with Mr. Griffiths – vaccinate the cattle if needs be. And another point – there is STILL no proof that badgers infect cattle. Why not do a trial with cows by taking them off all medications, growth hormones, etc. etc. feed them proper food, give them proper grass, treat them naturally and let’s see how that affects their overall well being. Animals, like humans, get sick when they are stressed, abused, mistreated, fed the wrong foods and so on. The chief vet of DEFRA should be ashamed, but I’m not surprised at all by the drivel they have wheeled out here.

Professor
John Bourne Chair of the ISG has stated that “scientific findings indicate that the rising incidence
of disease can be reversed and the geographical spread contained by the rigid
application of cattle based control measures  ALONE.”
This is being achieved in North Pembs which has the most stringent cattle controls and biosecurity measures in England and Wales.
More than 50% reduction in cattle slaughtered has been achieved in just over two years.

The badger cull is a disgrace to our country and all the government are doing is pandering to farmers yet a-bloody-gain.

Re the chief vets answer stating that in the randomised culling showing 16% of th badgers culled were infected with TB but it was more likely twice that. This still means that 68% of the badgers culled were healthy and so were no threat. How therefore can such a poor ratio be justified as a suitable method of control ?
Instead of killing innocent creatures, surely it is far more effective to have widespread measures in place to handle the disease directly with the cattle.

How did we eradicate TB in Humans?
By improving the poor’s diet and housing not by wonder drugs.
ergo
Vast improvem,ents in cattle TB possible by improving husbandry, reducing overcrowing and feeding properly.
You only have to glance at an average farm’s sheds to see cattle sh*t all over the floor and walls, some years old – that’s where most of the transmission comes from if incidence of TBH in Sh8t is any guide (olf MAFF work in the 50′s – conveniently lost)

Has there ever been any research to show that cattle can infect badgers with boving TB.?

Not much said about innoculating the cows! I read the other day that there is a vaccine for cows but its not used because we would not be able to sell the meat over seas.

Leave our native Badgers alone, the farmers that are throwing a tantrum because their cows are dying and because they see badgers wandering around when they get infected doesn’t mean you can blame the badgers. If I walk into a cow’s field to walk my dog and then they get infected then are the farmers going to start blaming people or dogs. What if they decide to cull all the badgers and make them extinct in the UK but cattle TB is still around then what will the farmers blame TB on next. Do trials on cattle vaccinations and continue the research on badger vaccines because this is more humane, if it doesn’t work then find a different job path farmers. Humanity has always been screwing the environment up like invasive species (grey squirrels, signal crayfish etc), lets not have a repeat, the environment is important to us, it is not a tool to change when someone isn’t happy

I really can’t believe that a vet could condone the slaughter of 70% of a native species on the evidence of a 16% success rate in culling infected badgers, this is not an acceptable return for the inevitable suffering and distress which will be caused to an intelligent and social species.

 I am also disgusted by the total lack of assurances that this will be in any way a “humane” program of execution, how many animals will die slow and painful deaths in the name of research over a four year period and who will be there to honestly report how many are really killed with a single clean shot if farmers are aloud to roam un- monitored for much of the duration.

 What happens if the coalition fails to retain power and this trial is abandoned is that just bad luck for the badgers who where sacrificed in the name of cod science. I have recently heard that Natural England have been essentially gagged from publicly questioning government policy so any hope that they will be able to deliver an honest analysis of the effectiveness of these trials is essentially quashed. What will the excuse be then, it didn’t cost the tax payer as much as vaccination so no harm done?

There was nothing in these answers that did anything but confirm my suspicion that this is a travesty of policy making that flies in the face of scientific, environmental and public opinion but sound reason has not stood in the way of this government so far so why should we hope it will prevail now when they are far more concerned with saving money and appeasing a minority of influential (bank rolling) farmers.

Will the environmental charities who have worked tirelessly to protect our native badgers from illegal bating and poisoning now be compensated for their time and the waste of valuable donations from the public who actually care to see these animals protected? Like so many species before them once they have been sacrificed on the alter of commerce their numbers may never recover and Britain will be a poorer place for their loss. 

One last comment, if farmers do get their way and have badgers removed from “their” fields will this stop them from the increasingly common practice of housing cattle from birth until removal to the slaughter house in enclosed shed’s. If it doesn’t and BTB continues to be an issue in the industry even in cattle who never see the sky who will they then point the finger of blame at?

that’s right, I do not choose to “share” my land as you put it and why should I? I lost a pedigree Ruby heifer, in calf, as she had tested positive for TB. It cost the taxpayer money, me anguish and a lot of you on here think we don’t know how to look after animals.It makes me sick some some of your comments about something you know not a lot about.I do not intensively farm but this still happened. I do agree that the supermarket cartels have a lot to answer for.Where else does someone with something to sell Not name their price.Consumers need to be more accountable too.

I cannot believe that the chief vet has agreed to this culling when they do not even
know how many true incidents of bovine tb is down to badger to cattle incidents there is in britain.
On this basis there is definitely no way this cull should be allowed and the chief vet should be ashamed in allowing this inhumane culling of badgers.

This wouldn’t be happening if we were all vegetarian! Surely it’s easier to vaccinate the cows? All because we can’t export the meat abroad if that was the case no doubt! It’s all so wrong, humans once again exercising their selfishness, taking the “easy” option to solve the issue with no thought for animals. Same old story.

I have very mixed feelings about this cull. I feel severely sorry for the farmers, its hard enough to make a living when the consumers are demanding cheaper meat which the supermarkets are pandering to, this obviously has a direct effect on the farmers. I do however think it is a disgrace that the vaccination has not been introduced yet, TV has been an issue for years, the government should be pumping money into this research, after all its certainly swallowing our hard earned money up very well. There obviously is insufficient research and data done about the relationship between badgers, TB and cattle. 16% of culled badgers are infected is preposterous, there is no way that this cull can be given the go ahead when these figures are do low and lucid. It will be criminal to kill these badgers. This government really needs to sort its act out and sort a vaccination out for both badgers and cattle.

This appears to be very very flawed. Has a real statistician seen this because I do not see how you can perform these experiments art the same time as other changes. They do not seem to have sufficient knowledge of the transmission rates at the moment to justify this.

If TB is passed from cattle to cattle I would suggest that the husbandry is improved. The drinking troughs in fields are often if not always in a disgusting state for instance. Cattle sheds inadequately cleaned.
When human beings lived in squalor they to had TB. I suggest we look a bit closer to home.

Very important point.

If I answered questions about my regulated work in such a vague way, the company I work for would be closed down!
Why can’t you obtain the evidence you require to do the job properly before making such drastic decisions?

There is a real dilemma here I grew up around dairy farms, I love farms / many farming folk and my art features cattle galore and I eat beef and consume dairy products. But I have been very disturbed by the proposed cull and the wishy washy reasons to justify it as opposed to vaccinating cattle or other methods. I only know one way to show my feelings I will not eat British beef, consume any dairy product or processed product containing them – I have tested alternatives on the market and am satisfied I can cope. This may seem dramatic but I believe fundamentally that to destroy a species like the badger in this gung-ho way smacks at politically motivated knee jerk policy as some revenge for the hunting ban and to placate a section of the Tory voters / funders. Nothing in the vet’s responses gave me confidence in the science behind the cull – the science of culling whales by some for so called ‘scientific purposes’ is on a similar criminal parr. I truly sympathise with the farmers losing cattle to TB is heartbreaking but badgers were here first so lay off them please! Every supermarket sells goat’s milk now folks!

Is there any research into the impact on nation wide badger populations?

It feels to me that widespread shooting of one of our few large wild mamals is horrific…

Also, having no breakdown of BTB levels between different farming practices surely obscures evidence of other possible solutions, or at least mitigating measures…

 :-/

I am not convinced by the arguments of the Chief Vet.  Another scientist broken on the wheel of political expediency.

This guy is peddling the government line and is not prepared to consider any other tactic  ~talk about a closed mind!~another  one bought and paid for!
Badgers have been around for thousands of years and I am not convinced they are the problem but the answer will be found to  be, no doubt, to kill them all! totally unacceptable!

Partial extermination of local wildlife is the way ahead again? Again? Short term-ism reigns -  meanwhile infection rates see-saw seemingly endlessly. Duh, obviously counsel of despair really isn’t it? Hardly a scientific response to TB as is noted:  killing badgers and infected cows is simply the cheapest way ahead for the forseeable future. After all all that’s needed is a licence (easy-peasy and many farmers have these already), guns and bullets. Cruelty is a given in this situation: how on earth could it be otherwise? No-one is going to be able to police such a campaign. And the resulting stats (who really believes and understands these?) will be hard to compute in any meaningful way when the movement of cattle and so on (some legal-some not) muddies the water terribly. I am appalled and disappointed.

Why were there no questions about vaccinating cows against TB? This seems to be the obvious solution and yet it is rarely mentioned. After all, farmers vaccinate their cows against other diseases so a TB vaccine could easily be added. What is the situation regarding the TB vaccination of cows?

The fact of them not testing the mudered Badgers for btb is exactly so the public don’t react.It of course makes any results of the cull a farce as you do not know if you get a fall in btb of 50% how many infected badgers you took out.I repeat my previous assertion that a statistician would rubbish this whole sorry affair.

Scotland achieved TB free staus without killing badgers. They applied very strict cattle controls and bio security measures.
Remember, not all farmers are pro cull.
If you want to boycott pro cull farmers I suggest you source your beef and diary products from Scotland and badger friendly farmers https://twitter.com/#!/Badger_Friendly
 .
Indeed why not put pressure on the retailers to stock products from Badger friendly farmers

I would like to you know why so few questions were selected for a response by the Chief Vet? Surely he should answer them all? There were some very good and relevant question that have been completely ignored. It is significant that the questions picked related only to the badger. This is the major problem in this issue – all the other issues are being ignored. The debate has become too focussed on the wildlife reservoir issue at the expense of the more significant failures of the existing system.

Why doesn’t DEFRA break down data on TB incidence between different farming systems?

CHIEF VET’S ANSWER: “Culling in the pilot areas would need to take place for at least four years. If controlled shooting was found not to be effective or humane, culling in the pilot areas would need to be completed using cage trapping and shooting.”
QUESTION Will Natural England insist, the farmer funded contigency,  includes the extra cost of “cage trapping  and shooting” in the event that free range shooting is not found to be effective or humane?  Previous DEFRA costing suggest this could be more than £1m per 150km2.

Hello Guest .

Here are some links you might want to follow.

http://tinyurl.com/6x87mhv

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2279223/  (paper on Culling-induced social perturbation in Eurasian badgers )

http://tinyurl.com/6ekndsj

I hope you find those useful

Re : Chief Vets answer in response to Q why aren’t public made more aware that approx 7 out of 8 badgers killed during the RBCT were healthy.  Quoting a 16% infection rate does actually equate to between 6 and 7 out of 8 badgers killed being TB free.  So to be absolutely accurate – why aren’t the public made aware that 84 out of 100, or 42 out of 50, or 21 out of 25, were found to be healthy ?

More importantly going on to say this is LIKELY to be an underestimation for the reason later quoted does not strike me as being a particularly “scientifically supportable” comment either.  It seems rather strange to me that, if the figures were supposed to be higher than this after a detailed post mortem was carried out – then why was this not reflected by concluding the infection rate was more than 16% in the report – and also back this up with any actual figures.  Rather than now suggest it may have been twice as high !   I am not convinced by this and I wonder how many other people aren’t too ?

This also begs the question what is meant by ”detailed post mortem” being carried out during “part of” the trials ?  Surely if badgers were shot at the RCBT with the intent, in part, of trying to find out the extent of the bTB problem in the species, wouldn’t the main aim of the initial post mortem examination be to find out if the poor creature had BTB in the first place ? 

This clearly is a complete nonsense. The badger cull will only marginally reduce bovine TB at huge gost to our, I repeat, OUR wildlife.

What is being done to stop the illegal transfer of ear tags from infected but valuable livestock to those that are weak, or less valuable which are then sent to slaughter, with the full compensation being paid and the infected animals left free to infect further member so their herd or being sold on at full price.
As I believe was found last year with a Wadebridge, Cornwall based farmer. Is he the tip of a very big iceberg – if one is doing it…..

Beef prices have risen significantly I believe in the last year or so….

very cruel,they will get hit in the wrong places and die a lingering death in agony.Why can,t the shoot them with a tranquliser,then they can be killed humanely.Personally i don,t back the cull,need more evidence,people who are sick in the head and cruel can going having pot shots.What lousey/rotten people there is in this world.GOD BLESS BADGERS ALL OVER ENGLAND.

 oh my oh my oh my! Surely you can not be suggesting Lord Krebs, Christl Donnelly , John Bourne, Sir David Cox; Andrea Le Fevre, John McInerney, Rosie Woodroffe, Ivan Morrison, Tom Johnston  Steve Coleman (Defra), George Gettinby(at a cost of £7 million pounds a year for nearly a decade!) ,the RSPCA, Badger Trust,38 Degrees, World Wildlife Trust,MVFA,Animal Aid,CBAG, The elite board of Natural England ( who have aired their concerns),65,000 members of the public who have signed petitions so far,Mary Creagh, shadow environment secretary,68 MP’s, The Labour Government(I’m not political but thank you),League against cruel sports,Secret World Wildlife Rescue,Pembrokeshire Against the Cull, The Peninsula Badgers e-group,Dorset Badger Group,George Pearce (wildlife consultant),Hilary Benn, Environment Blog,Chris Packham,Kate Humble(BBC wildlife presenter’s),Northumberland Wildlife Trust, MRC Centre for Outbreak Analysis and Modelling at Imperial College London, Zoological Society of London and many many many more, that they are all wrong!!! Perhaps we should be careful of the seeds we sow! Defra Chief Vet you will be the one remembered when you ignored all the scientific advice and moulded it into one that fits a political agenda. (DEAF-RA)

I fully agree with you Michael Griffiths (9hours ago). When the badger cull was announced in Wales April 2008 I failed to find then any supplier in Wales that would confirm that they were anti the badger kill. I found a few suppliers in England that were anti the kill and selected one and now enjoy a weekly delivery.  This means that I now only have to ‘supermarket’ shop once a month and saving money.  I was very disappointed that Tesco originally sent out a letter anti cull but then withdrew the letter.
I wonder if SAVE ME would issue a list of badger friendly suppliers.  If there already is a list or you know of a badger friendly supplier please let us know
Derek

I fully agree with you Sally. It seems that England and most probably Wales (making a decision behind closed doors) are determined to go ahead with a cull doomed to failure with many questions left answered.
Derek

Has anyone taken a good look at bio security of the cattle truck industry? TB is highly contagious (My Dad caught it!) If I am not mistaken are cattle these days not moved large distances because there are so few abbatoirs and markets? If this is so who supervises the disenfecting of the haulage industrys cattle trucks? I have not heard any mention of this anywhere and if there is a problem here and if this is a cause of transmission then just maybe the poor old badger could have got the infection from the cattle? Just a thought!

DEFRA changed its name from MAFF some years ago because of the crisis in public confidence; the FSA was created out o MAFF.   The name can be changed a hundred times but the back office is still the same. One of your posters got it right – i.e. that the cull will go ahead anyway.   If the Chief Vet didn’t say the right thing his report would be “buried” anyway!  That happened some years ago over another matter, with another Chief Vet.  There was an item about it on an episode of BBCTV’s Countryfile.

Very interesting: surely this is where concentrated research may reveal why many badgers are not infected with TB and help devise a far more exact approach to livestock health and management. Anyone know of any research being undertaken on this at this moment?

I wonder how many of the people you name have their own cattle and live on a farm which they survey twice daily. It is a shame they do not listen to the practical observations of experienced farmers and throw away all their phony science.

Another shocking Hillside Animal Sanctuary investigation is featured in tomorrows The People (18th Sept).
Despite the horror stories in the press there must be GOOD FARMERS out there.
I am guided in what I buy by amongst others the Compassionate Shopping Guide (NatureWatch) and the Animal Free Shopper.(Vegan Society).
What I would like is a guide to suppliers that source their foodstuffs (in my case fruit, veg,) from ‘ethical suppliers’ and currently those opposed to a BADGER CULL.  There are farmers who do not support a cull.
Advice please on how to proceed and get an organisation that will take this on board.  Organic Suppliers that deliver to the home may be a good start.

Everyone agrees with the horrific effect TB has on cattle!!! It is only the deranged ill informed people that truly believe a cull will make an ounce of difference. I come from a farming background! It is just that I am not buying the political agenda! It is blatantly obvious how the disease will be eradicated its just that the government will not invest sufficient funds and convince people like yourself that by allowing a cull something is being done for you – it is not! Where are the funds to help you with pre cattle testing and introduction of stringent bio safety etc etc etc !

In Reply to Pq : Everyone agrees with the horrific effect TB has on cattle!!! It is only the deranged ill informed people that truly believe a cull will make an ounce of difference. I come from a farming background! It is just that I am not buying the political agenda! It is blatantly obvious how the disease will be eradicated its just that the government will not invest sufficient funds and convince people like yourself that by allowing a cull something is being done for you – it is not! Where are the funds to help you with pre cattle testing and introduction of stringent bio safety etc etc etc !

ljb Yes you are on the right track Take a look at the VIVA investigation into Biosecurity at markets.
 http://www.viva.org.uk/campaigns/badgers/biosecurity.html

ljb Yes you are on the right track Take a look at the VIVA investigation into Biosecurity at markets.
http://www.viva.org.uk/campaig

To chattychatty all cattle that are slaughtered for tb are all dna sampled in so  that ear tags match the cattle that are slaughterd and  can not be changed with other cattle, as for the tb in this country, it was almost tb free during the 70,80′s due to the badger culls of the 1950′s and 1960′s which brought it all under control as for now it looks like the EU will ban livestock products from being sold in the EU which will have a devastating affect on the UK’s food and drinks industries which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds if the government doesn’t do somthing soon also tb affects all mammals including us and as such tb has started to mutate in such that antibodies no longer are able to treat this disease so where do we start as farmers are already keeping there bio security up to date as they could not afford to do so !

Christ
! I’m sick of bloody DEFRA, they want to cull badgers which is totally unjustified. Now they
are going to cull the little green ring neck parrots that fly about and
that everyone loves. I dont give a dam if there not indigenous to this
country, go in any petrol station and what’s working behind the counter
isn’t sodding well indigenous. But we dont go around asking for a cull
on them DO WE ? DEFRA STOP CULLING and TORIES stop putting the ideas in
their heads. Something stinks about this, will it be another MP scandal ones asks oneself.

No need to be racist. You really need to think more before you make comments like that!

I may be naive but I really don’t understand why all the available money isn’t used to develop a vaccine for the cattle. After all there’s one for humans so why not cattle ? Until then leave the badgers alone – they were around before the cattle so have the right to the space. I also wonder if it isn’t the case that the badgers catch tb from the cattle – in which case shoot the cattle !

Why are our questions being answered by a vet? In what way is he qualified to deal with this matter? Why aren’t the issues being addressed by a scientist, and preferably one who can give scientific rather than political answers?

CHIEF VET’S ANSWER: “We don’t break down data on TB incidence between different types of farming systems”
The next question has to be – why not? Anyone studying a disease in the human population would be crazy not to look at the ‘lifestyle’ of the sufferers. It appears equally insane to ignore easily collected data on how different faring systems affect the incidence of BTb, especially as this should be easy to collate from existing datasets. We know which farms have had BTb outbreaks, and DEFRA has information on farm types. Unless, of course, the information would be politically inconvenient.

I don’t believe there is any scientific evidence to show that BTB is spread from badgers to cattle. Comment please.

The flaws in the
philosophy of the proposed badger cull are monumental.

·     
TThe
data concerning badger populations is scientifically unacceptable. Vague
figures are meaningless. 

·     
TThe
‘experts’ who will carry out the cull will need to be monitored – or maybe not?
Have such extra costs been taken into consideration?  ( I suggest political expediency – turning a blind eye –
would give carte blanche to these ‘experts’ to do as they will.)

·     
TThe
chief vet acknowledges the proposed cull to be more in the nature of a ‘trial’.  Trials have the misfortune of often going wrong.  An expensive mistake! 
The The sum put aside for research into a suitable vaccine is paltry.

 
Defra’s Chief VetAs you are acutely aware Bovine TB is highly contagious and spread primarily through the exchange of respiratory secretions between infected and uninfected animals (cattle TB being the most infectious). In view of the increasing endemic risk, can you please comment on the following :Why is cattle pre-movement testing and post movement testing (As applied by Scotland) not enforced and regulated on ALL cattle? Why are there ANY exemptions in testing when considering the epidemic risk of this disease?The exemptions I am particularly interested in are :The exemption of the 3 and 4 yearly tested herds (that have to be tested before entering Scotland)The exemption of cattle going to an agricultural show! Perhaps you could share your expertise with the medical profession as they could possible change their operating theatres into theatrical theatres. They are perhaps completely unaware that advanced techniques of eliminating transmission of a highly contagious, infectious diseases are currently available? Its time you cut the red tape. The only reason you will not seriously accept the only true option of vaccination is because of the EU directive. A bit of advise from a medical scientist:If you are not going to except the ISG report that states the scientific findings indicate that the rising incidence of disease can be reversed,and geographical spread contained by the RIGID application of CATTLE-BASED control measures alone then : Bite the bullet, Stop exporting cattle it has been reduced exponentially already! Vaccinate all our cattle and eradicate this horrific disease once and for all. It is how medicine has successfully eradicated highly infectious diseases, the veterinary world is no different! 

PS your ignorance or should I say arrogance to bow down to a political directive is an insult to the medical and veterinary world!

I think you are ignoring the cattle controls in place at the time…

in reply to country girl. i can echo her comments time 10. we ran a closed herd of dairy cattle for some 25 years, no i repeat no contact with neighbours cattle .i bought in two stock bulls in the latter years ie around the late 90`s. i refused the sale of both bulls until they were tb tested ,much to the suprise of my local vet. he was then the B V A chairman( brithish vetinary associciation- forgive my spelling) pre movement testing of cattle was unheard of then. ive always tried to farm in harmony with our resident wildlife, building ponds,planting up field corners ect,and for no financial gain.the point im trying to make is that not all stock farmers fit the common held view of your readership. we do care about our livestock ,and endeavour to keep them safe and healthy. anyway despite my best efforts we went on to loose over 100 hundred cattle in the next few years,this sad trend continues all around this area, its costing hundreds off  millions of pounds to us all.the so called compensation for reactor cattle is derisory in england, slightly more realistic still in wales. the dairy industry is actually in a state over melt down as i speak. we are selling milk at least 5 pence below the cost of production, look at the figures published with regard to people leaving the industry,its catastophic. !!! the result will be fewer and fewer smaller family farm units and more larger factory type ones that survive as a result of economy of scale rather than stockmanship, good breeding and hard work ect. if your readers want to be able to buy local produced milk and dairy product then they will need a healthy and profitable dairy industry to supply it. the slightly dubious opinion that organic farming somehow is tb free is totaly false, i know 3 organic farms near me very well. all are currently looseing cattle with tb.
    get real you farmer knockers, this proposed plan is not a lightly taken decision, the recent foot and mouth outbreaks were only cleared up through drastic clean ring culling of infected stock. tb will never be beaten  unless the wild life resevoir is controlled too. dont forget tb is bad for healthy badgers too, if some of your readership had their livelyhoods threatened as we do they may change their attitudes towards tb and the sad but totally justified reasons for the proposed cull. 

I am not posting 38degress on facebook any more. I thought they were a good organisation that genuinely wanted to bring to light injustices, like the parakeet cul and badger cul which i want to stop.However it seems they are politically motivated and have been hijacked by the more left wing Labour supporters. What does a story about who funds  the Tories have to do with saving badgers and the like ? Nothing! However, if your politically biased and need free PR 38 degrees is its a great way to post on everyone facebook page without them having a chance to agree or disagree. Be warned people 38degress is a farce, its just a way for the loony left to spread the word, but they’ve chosen subject that will draw us in, like try to stop the badger cull.

The badger cull (slaughter) is a project that must be stopped.  Whether it is opposed by the ‘loony left’, as you put it, or by ‘died in the wool tories’ is irrelevant.  I’m sure you will agree Mark.

The reason that 38Degrees raises issues regarding the funding of political parties (and that would be of ALL parties, Mr. Lebrock) is because the many of us consider that all political parties should be funded by the State, equally, and in an unbiased fashion – and NOT to excess. The Labour Party is part funded by the Trades Unions and an element of private business and, of course, by public donation. The Liberal Democrats don’t have that advantage, so have to rely on a small business element of donation and public donation. In both cases their books are open to inspection as is well known. Other small political parties have varied forms of donation, but their incomes are small in comparison with the three major parties.

The Conservative Party is simply the most contentious of all because many of its largest donors are rarely identifiable; are generally big business, privately owned or owned through public stock holdings which have links to Conservative politicians through the membership of the Boards of Management. Both of the largest parties are known to “reward” their followers when in government, but in the case of the Labour Party this is generally done because they follow and support Labour Party policies. In the case of the Conservative Party this is NOT the case: many of their biggest supporters – who try to remain nameless and are helped in this by the Party – attempt to buy power and votes on behalf of the Conservatives. This WAS the case during the last election when certain Conservative constituency parties were flooded with financial assistance from a certain Peer of the Realm, untaxed – apparently – in the United Kingdom, and living generally abroad (a “Non-Dom”, so-called). He was NOT the only donor using these tactics we are told!

This is a situation which is unfair; should be illegal; certainly is undemocratic and unconstitutional. In ALL cases these benefits should be made completely fair and above board so that we – the electorate – should be able to judge on the basis of policy quality, not ability to buy votes. THAT, I believe, is why it is perfectly reasonable for the electorate to expect to see transparency in the way that elections are fought, and correct for 38Degrees to investigate when they obviously aren’t. 

It is sad that the Welsh Assembly, wearing its new “Welsh Government” status, has not opposed the cull, particularly as it is a major bone of contention in Pembrokeshire. Although the farming community seems to be generally in favour (many small farming communities, however, are NOT), those citizens who have a high regard for “Brock” and his family (namely the majority of Pembrokeshire citizenry) think that it is a cruel mistake. But the Welsh Government have decided to follow along with their erstwhile compatriots in London – on THIS one anyway. No votes in this for Joe Public, I’m afraid; not much in the way of TV debates either…

all the research does show cattle infect badgers. badgers scrape away the cow pats to get the worms and grubs
underneath, if the cow pat is fresh i.e. deposited within a few days as the bacterium
lives outside the body for approximately  4 days and the cow is infected with TB, this
is when badgers become infected too

the simple answer to cattle  T b ;; it does not exist..    do people understand simple english;;  i am an irish farmer  .. in1977 my so called cunt of a vet made reactors out of my healthy cattle;;and i had to obay this bastards blaguarding;; not alone did i fire this cunt, but i did everything in my  power to ,, expose this scandal ‘ but ihad no luck  on my own ,, thats what  vets and  dept of agriculture are doing to farmers in g b and ireland for 60years //robbing tax payers  and putting farmers out of buisness in order to  suit the greed of these corrupt cunts.. it makes me  sick to read thuusands    of             comments  by people writing about  a cattle desease that does not exist.   a little knowledge is a dangerous thing;;; how do feel about  eating this tb meat..every deseased animal.   going into the food for over 60 years ..  if ministers allowed these deseased  animals meat  into the  food  chain  in  other countries , not alone would they be arrested ;but they would be executed,,                                                                most cattle are tested  four or five anuallly    i wonder could doctors compell people to do the same testing on themselves ;;            with the new year upon us there will be 10000    farmers locked  up with just one  single reactor  ;;and balance of 50000 will come from entire herds being  depopulated  in both g b and ireland  ////   no  cattle t b in any other member state   ;;all badgers  in  these countries  are  in perfect health ,,   the badger thats causing cattle TB in our  little countries is driving around   in a motor car  ;; farmers and tax payers all i can say is i am so sorry for you ;;but; some    day the long arm of  the  law will reach out and  bring    this scandal to an end,,,,                                                                                                              id love to write a book     on this cattle  TB  scandal , and  with a bit   help and assistance i would greately appreciate;;;phone     jimmy  003536398271                                                                                 

The Israeli have really won the day when pointing that out some UK residents are not indigenous is  considered racist. Wise up. Facts are facts!

lets make 2012 a great year lets first force the goverment to make another u turn we acnt watch and let this slaughter happen its the 21st century