Badger Cull

[kenneal - lagger]

........

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.
—John Bourne, Chair of the Independent Scientific Group

Well the science isn't very good then because many farmers with closed herds have tried this and they have still suffered infection, as I can testify. If the cattle based theory were true I wouldn't have any TB in my herd so those scientists are wrong.

Us farmers are at the fore front of this "science". It is us who are doing all the things that we are told will work by "scientists" and we are the ones who are suffering because the disease is still spreading remorselessly eastwards and northwards, a few miles at a time every year. It is not, by and large, jumping ten, twenty or more miles at a time as you would expect it it were spread by cattle movements.

Lord Krebs isn't a very good architect if he can't see why his Randomised Badger culling Trials didn't work. Randomised culling could never work and I wonder if that was why he devised the system, it needs a highly organised culling to start, as I have said before, at the leading edge of the disease and to work back into the infected zone killing as you go. Perhaps there should be a full scale trial of that.

[woodburner]

Do stop using this PC term "culling", call a spade a spade, it's "killing".

[Snail]

I'm not keen on the idea on killing badgers; don't know enough about TB&badgers to be definite anyway.

But, it seems daft that farmers can't be the ones doing the culling.

Farmers in a highly infected location should be allowed to kill all badgers for a period of time. Then, afterwards, data can be compared to the time when badgers were protected.

If no significant difference is found, then a different approach is needed and badgers allowed to quickly repopulate the area. Farmers would then have to change their ways. If TB rates go down, then we would know that badgers play a major role.

Otherwise, nothing will be achieved/changed/decided upon.

I suspect that the many badgers I see 'placed' on the roadside are poisoned/shot by farmers anyway.

[kenneal - lagger]

Snail, farmers don't want to eradicate badgers either but if something isn't done soon, while there is a strong population of clean badgers, that may happen in the future. The highly infected area is the whole of the country west of mid Berkshire and south of the Midlands including South Wales and it is spreading eastwards and northwards at 5 to 10 miles per year. We're not talking about small areas here. The only way that farmers can now change their ways is either to stop keeping animals or to hermetically seal them into a shed and feed them on bought in rations. The restrictions are so draconian that there is no other way to go.

The killing or culling, whatever term you prefer, of badgers needs to be managed carefully so that the results of the badly conceived Krebs trial aren't repeated. Badgers will have to be drastically reduced in the infected area and those badgers that are left will have to be trapped, checked for TB and electronically tagged so that they can be identified in the future. The killing can't be willy knilly but must be organised so that the killing starts at the leading edge of the infection and moves inwards. The trapping and testing must be carried out soon after the killing. Deer would have to be killed as well as they are now a significant vector of the disease as well.

Much of the killing could be done by farmers with the help of volunteers and paid pest controllers. Some of the badgers found on the road are thought to have been shot. I doubt that many would be poisoned as this could be revealed if a PM was carried out.

[Little John]

Do stop using this PC term "culling", call a spade a spade, it's "killing".

Yeah, that word pisses me off as well.

[biffvernon]

Sir David Attenborough has condemned the UK government for "ignoring" scientific evidence after the controversial badger cull in Gloucestershire was more than doubled in length on Wednesday.

The night-time shoots had killed less than half the minimum numbers required in the initial six weeks, prompting experts to warn than the failure risked increasing tuberculosis in cattle, rather than curbing it.

"Why do they spend a lot of time and money doing careful scientific studies and then simply ignore the results?" asked Sir David, the UK's best known naturalist. He told the Guardian: "They decided to have a six-week [cull] and when they don't get the result they want, they want to extend by eight weeks. It is simply not believing in the science."

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... tenborough

[biffvernon]

Posted on October 21, 2013 by ntjamiew
We recognise that dealing with bovine TB is a complex problem, with strongly held views on all sides. The Trust is uniquely placed in this issue with a strong interest in both farming and nature conservation. We have always been clear that we support an evidence-based approach to this important issue.

With this in mind, we have recently raised our concerns over the Government’s pilot badger culls taking place in Somerset and Gloucestershire.


Patrick Begg, who leads on bovine TB at the Trust, explains why:

The Trust’s position on tackling bovine TB is clear: we are in favour of what will work to solve the problem that is affecting so many of our tenants and farmers across the country.

We know from previous studies that this means increasing and intensifying surveillance to pick up infection early, introducing tighter controls on risky cattle movements, and improving biosecurity in farms.

To complement these efforts and to deal with the reservoir of disease in wildlife, we also believe that vaccination – of both badgers and cattle – will play a significant role. That is why we are testing the practicalities of vaccination, at our own cost, on our Killerton Estate in Devon.

However, we are also aware that a mass vaccination of badgers with current vaccines may prove challenging to realise in practice; it would be expensive and may not deliver the required effect.

Equally, we understand from both Professor John Krebs’ work and the subsequent analysis by Professor John Bourne, that a comprehensive badger cull could have a significant impact on the incidence of bovine TB – but only if a number of very stringent criteria were met, including intensity, longevity and geography.

We had hoped that the current pilot culls would produce credible evidence on the effectiveness of a humane cull. Indeed, we will be judging the outcomes of the pilots against the criteria for success set out by Professor Bourne in his review of the Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT).

However, we are worried by:

Uncertainties over, and changes in, the baseline badger population estimates. This dimension is fundamental if we are to understand whether the appropriate proportion of animals can be culled as per the criteria set following the RBCT;
The lengthening of the pilot culls, which is again at the heart of the RBCT criteria for success. The RBCT quickly realised that culling should be constrained to as short a window as possible due to the experience of their own reactive culling, in which extended and sequential culling was quickly seen to significantly increase damaging perturbation effects and led to more, not fewer, bTB breakdowns in nearby herds;
Changes to the culling methods being employed, where it is clear that free shooting by marksmen – the original preferred method and on which any financial argument was based – has been largely abandoned in favour of cage trapping and then dispatch; and
The apparently now active discussion of other culling methods for any wider roll out, such as gassing and snaring: both have strong experimental evidence bases calling into question whether they can be humane.
We’ve recently written to Defra asking for their assurance that they are committed to meeting the criteria set out by Professor Bourne and upholding high standards of scientific rigour in the conduct and analysis of these pilots.

http://ntpressoffice.wordpress.com/2013 ... #more-1881

[kenneal - lagger]

To complement these efforts and to deal with the reservoir of disease in wildlife, we also believe that vaccination – of both badgers and cattle – will play a significant role. That is why we are testing the practicalities of vaccination, at our own cost, on our Killerton Estate in Devon.

However, we are also aware that a mass vaccination of badgers with current vaccines may prove challenging to realise in practice; it would be expensive and may not deliver the required effect.

Equally, we understand from both Professor John Krebs’ work and the subsequent analysis by Professor John Bourne, that a comprehensive badger cull could have a significant impact on the incidence of bovine TB – but only if a number of very stringent criteria were met, including intensity, longevity and geography.

Right, we have here what probably won't work and what probably will! (My emphasis, obviously) According to the science as read by the NT.

How about we cull, sorry kill, a large number of the overpopulated badgers, according to the plan that I have repeated over and over again of course, and then, when we have manageable numbers, we vaccinate the rest?

I've heard that carbon monoxide works well and, judging by the number of humans who use it, both deliberately and accidentally, it seems to be quite humane. A couple of cars parked up by a badger set for the day should work pretty well. Probably no worse for global warming than burning all those diseased cattle carcases. Oh! silly me. They don't get burnt they get eaten in school meals and cheap lasagne, the ones that aren't made from horse that is!

And don't forget the deer!

[woodburner]

The cars won't do it any longer as they probably have a catalyser on the exhaust pipe which will turn the CO into CO2.

[woodburner]

From today's ITV "Tonight" program,

London is TB capital of Europe

[kenneal - lagger]

There are plenty of old Landrovers in the countryside.........

[woodburner]

Forcing them to breathe a smelly old Land Rover exhaust until they expire is hardly a humane approach. How long would you be prepared to breathe the fumes? It was a method used by Hitler to dispatch humans, do you really consider it acceptable?

[kenneal - lagger]

......... How long would you be prepared to breathe the fumes? ..........

I wouldn't but then I'm not into suicide, I just want to kill sick badgers.

How long would you want a sick badger to linger on in pain? I don't suppose a bit of smelly Landrover exhaust would compare to the long pain and discomfort of a terminal bout of TB.

Comparing putting sick badgers out of their painful and miserable existence with the murder of perfectly fit, in the main, human beings shows a certain lack of perspective.

[woodburner]

You are now assuming all the badgers in a set are sick. This is about as scientific an approach as the government employ. Even with the current killing bout they can't be botheed to collect the data so they know the size of the problem they ae dealing with.

Perhaps we ought to kill all wildlife so they don't have to suffer a painful death from a chonic condition.

[SleeperService]

As someone trained to eliminate on a personal basis I abhor mass-killing unless it's necessary. But there are times when there is no alternative, so it has to be done, so...

If there isn't one develop a quick field test for TB in badgers. Select an area that can be isolated and set humane traps for the badgers. While confined they can be tested and, if positive taken to a point where they can be humanely killed by using nitrogen to induce narcosis. The bodies should be incinerated as well.

If the badger is clear then tag it and release where it was caught or hold it until it can be released.

The farmers buy the traps and get a bounty per infected animal killed to cover expenses.

If this resolves the issue then do as Ken suggests and eradicate the problem. That could be run alongside a grey squirrel programme where they are sent back to the US where they came from.