WE NEED YOUR URGENT RESPONSES TO THE CONSULTATION BY 8TH DECEMBER PLEASE!
I haven’t posted for a while, sometimes life (and health!) get in the way. But I am posting now, because this is so important.
As you may know, the government is currently carrying out a consultation on culling badgers in Tb hotspots in the UK. This consultation ends on the 8th December.
The National Farmers Union is doing a great deal to ensure as many of its members as possible respond positively to a cull, including holding meetings and putting out press releases. Our own Badger Trust does not have the same level of funding, however, they with many other groups like ours are doing our utmost to raise awareness and encourage people to respond, to prevent the needless slaughter of so many of our badgers.
The government’s preferred option is a combination of culling and optional vaccination (where landowners do not agree to a cull on their land). This cull is to be carried out by the farmers themselves, either in groups or acting alone, and under licence. Methods may include shooting free running badgers. This method is likely to cause unnecessary suffering as the RSPCA have pointed out, badgers have
“a very thick skull, thick skin and a very thick layer of subcutaneous fat. It has a much more robust skeleton than the fox. Because of the short, squat body and the way its legs work, these legs often partly conceal the main killing zone. Free shooting carries a high risk of wounding.”
Our obvious concern, aside from the efficacy of a cull, is the difficulty Natural England will have in enforcing and monitoring these licences. No officers will be available to go out after dark and check badgers are shot or killed humanely. Natural England is currently overstretched dealing with development and conservation licences for protected species, and is shortly to lose yet more staff. The badgers will not be tested for tb. Culls will not be scientifically evaluated, this means that even with additional cattle control measures, it will be impossible to tell if the actual culling was beneficial or detrimental, masking the potential negative effects.
Scientific opinion does not agree with a cull. Professor John Bourne of the Independent Science Group on Cattle TB states
“Badger culling can make no meaningful contribution to cattle TB control in Britain. Indeed, some policies under consideration are likely to make matters worse rather than better….The main source of infection, is transmission not from badgers to cattle, but from cattle to cattle…The rising incidence of disease can be reversed, and geographical spread contained, by the rigid application of cattle-based control measures alone.”
In a meeting held last week at London Zoo he reiterated this, along with the ecologist Rosie Woodroffe who helped to carry out the Randomised Badger Culling Trial itself, and was also a member of the ISG. Badger culling, they pointed out, reduces the number of cattle herds with TB inside the kill zone, but temporarily raises it outside the zone. It breaks up the badgers’ social structures, pushing them out of their territories, which means that they spread the disease to healthy populations, and to cattle. Even when carried out rigorously, culling has little effect. The government’s chosen option; licensing farmers to kill badgers, would entail a substantial risk of increasing the incidence of cattle TB and spreading the disease for the reasons stated below;
- There has been no trial to test this kind of culling, but the models suggest that it will kill a smaller proportion of badgers than the trapping and shooting method. This means that it’s unlikely to control the disease even within the cull zone.
- The government appears to have understated the costs. Dr Woodroffe estimates that the government’s projections would be accurate only if skilled marksmen were paid £3.23 an hour – just over half the minimum wage. Within the appendices of the consultation document itself (Appendix F, par.6.3) is an admission that, even on the government’s optimistic figures, the killing will cost farmers more than it’s likely to save them in disease costs.
- There is a real danger that once farmers find that the price is higher than they can manage, the kill rate is lower than expected, it is possible that many understandably will give up or resort to even less effective, less humane methods. This would create the worst of all conditions – spreading infected badgers across territorial boundaries while doing nothing to control the disease even in the cull areas.
The government insists that this is a science led cull. Yet the scientists behind the science on which they base this totally disagree and we believe that the facts outlined above speak for themselves.
Vaccination as part of this scheme would only serve to muddy the waters further. We believe that vaccination should stand on its own, as a recent DEFRA study has shown it to be as effective as culling, without the perturbation effects in badger territory. Yet without waiting for results of field trials, the government has cancelled them in all but one area.
If you do not agree with a cull of badgers then please please respond (How To Respond) to this consultation before the 8th December, and indeed ask your friend’s and relatives to do the same. We want to see Bovine Tb tackled appropriately and effectively for the benefit of all, including our wildlife.
Many thanks for your time
Best regards
Jo
Chair