![By Andrew Gray (local userpage) (p1140372) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons](https://markavery.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/800px-Deceased_Meles_meles_-_head.jpg)
An Independent Expert Panel was appointed by Defra to help evaluate the effectiveness, humaneness and safety of two pilot badger culls in Somerset and Gloucestershire. Its report has not yet been published. However, the BBC today reports that its analysis found that “the number of badgers killed fell well short of the target deemed necessary.” And “more than five per cent of badgers culled took longer than five minutes to die, failing the test for humaneness”.
The Wildlife Trusts today tells the Government to abandon plans to roll out culling and find a better solution to tackling the devastating disease, bovine Tuberculosis (bTB):
Paul Wilkinson, Head of Living Landscape for The Wildlife Trusts, said: “We understand the Independent Expert Panel report finds the pilot badger culls failed on the grounds of effectiveness and humaneness. This failure reinforces our serious concerns that if unsuccessful the culls could make matters worse. The Government must take a long hard look at the panel’s findings and reconsider its policy on tackling this disease.”
Simon King OBE, The Wildlife Trusts’ President, said: “The culls were flawed from the beginning and this seems to be concrete proof. We look forward to the cessation of all rhetoric that culling should continue. We need to deal with bovine tuberculosis in a practical and meaningful way to support the farming community.”
The Wildlife Trusts say ‘The Government’s justification for a badger cull in England was also seriously undermined by Defra’s release of revised bTB statistics earlier this month which showed that the overall number of UK cattle herds infected with bTB in 2012-13 fell by 3.4%, rather than increasing by 18% as previously stated. This raised serious questions about the quality of its record keeping. The greatest reduction in bTB in 2012-13 was seen in Wales, where an independent strategy of strict cattle measures coupled with badger vaccination has achieved a significant 23.6% decrease in the number of infected cattle herds – without culling badgers. In contrast, bTB incidence in England increased by 1.7% during the same period.’
The Wildlife Trusts continue to urge the Government to drop badger culling from its bTB strategy and prioritise badger vaccination, alongside a comprehensive package of cattle measures: better biosecurity, stricter movement controls, improved TB testing and development of a cattle vaccine.
If this report is true, and I guess it is, then the government’s bTB strategy is in a complete mess and Owen Paterson’s departure from Defra may be accelerated. Peter Kendall will also have got out of the NFU at the right time to avoid having to justify the NFU’s over-eager support for this failed approach.
We need a proper strategy to deal with this disease. That may involve killing badgers, just as it does involve killing cattle. But the coalition government never found the plot on this subject and cannot therefore be accused of losing it. Certainly the approach of parking a member of the right wing of the Tory party, who neglects the science, in Defra is proving to be costly to all – farmers, wildlife and the taxpayer.
The Conservative manifesto (wittily named ‘Invitation to join the government of Britain‘) promised ‘As part of a package of measures, we will introduce a carefully-managed and science-led policy of badger control in areas with high and persistent levels of bTB’.
[registration_form]
The failure of the trial was inevitable and a spectacular own goal for the shooting industry. The well documented inhumane killing by approved marksmen makes it very clear that the whole sport and game shooting industry will also be unable to withstand scrutiny.
The headlines have also so far missed the fact that the trial has carefully avoided testing the vast majority of the culled badgers for evidence of BtB infection. It is highly likely that very few of the badgers culled were actually infected. Pointless, dangerous and inhumane slaughter of wildlife. Time for Patterson to go and for the licenced culls to stop before any more wild animals suffer unecessarily.
“A ship on the beach is a lighthouse to the sea”
Dutch Proverb
Trimbush – I like that.
I worked with a Dutchman – a Malaria expert – Martin de Bruin – his English was absolutely perfect – very nice man – he wrote this on my whiteboard – unforgettably.
Some say it was “ineffective”; not round this way – haven’t seen a badger for 6 months, not even road kill #west somerset
Just to point out that Mr Batchelor is the head of the League Against Cruel Sports for anyone who is reading this blog.
I had to look it up as I was surprised about such an odd and divisive comment.
Julian – not any more he isn’t. You are out of date.
Briefly – so I can finish my report on same:-
The two recent badger culls appear to have accounted for some 1,700 badgers – this looks pretty good to me! And besides it’s far too early to even take a view on ‘effectiveness’ – that we’ll know more about when we see the cattle herd breakdown numbers ‘going forrard’. This is typical of internal DEFRA leaks.
The RBCT (₤ 50 m) during its 1998-2005 period only culled some 9,000 badgers
In Triplet A for example the 5 culls accounted for 55, 146, 52, 58 and 48 – total 362 (good eh!) – how does this compare with the ISGs target – we don’t know – we were not told
The highest culling stats – Triplet E – 747, 96, 258, 214, 148 = 1,459 (plus 395 badgers stolen and recycled)
In the RBCT some 2,400 badgers were stolen by badgerists and relocated ‘safely’ outside the culling zones – this is the reason why the authorities chose shooting as a means of culling – there’s no caged badger to steal and spread the TB
RBCT data show increases in TB prevalence when high numbers of badgers were stolen and recycled
Hansard includes quotes of some 25%-32% culling efficiency in some RBCT triplets
PS For those that don’t know: the badger ‘suffers’ from ‘mother-to-cub pseudo-vertical transmission’ – M2CPVT ie a female badger with TB will pass TB on to its cubs as a result of suckling – during the first 6 – 8 weeks whilst underground – this impacts severely on any vaccination programme – Incidentally – the vac’n trial was on a pre-screened (for TB) bundle of badgers – ie all should have been TB free – why wasn’t it 100%? And that’s after declaring a 72% ish effectiveness and then changing it to 54% ish
Two ISG / RBCT stalwarts – Rosie Woodroffe and Chrisl Donnelly – state M2CPVT? ‘no evidence to date’– we call this denial !
Obviously a bad case of dislyksia !!
6 likes and 15 dislikes (to date)- I suppose one shouldn’t be surprised that 15 bloggers have registered their dislike of the truth – funny world.
But they are not alone – Dr May – also doesn’t believe that the badgerists stole badgers and relocated them (BBC TV) – now this does worry me – the true sign of denialism – he’s consistent but still a shame Dr May !
Hi Trimbush.
With regards to “And besides it’s far too early to even take a view on ‘effectiveness’ – that we’ll know more about when we see the cattle herd breakdown numbers ‘going forrard'”, I believe you are judging the wrong test. Whilst it will take years of bTB testing of cattle to see whether the Badger cull has been effective in reducing TB in the nearby cattle, this is not what the independent panel were assessing.
From DEFRAs website (http://www.defra.gov.uk/animal-diseases/files/badger-cull-iep-monitor-controlled-shooting20130307.pdf)
“The aim of this monitoring work is to test the assumption that controlled shooting is an effective method of badger removal, in terms of being able to remove at least 70% of the starting population in the area, over the course of a six week cull.”
Given this stated remit: Controlled shooting wasn’t used throughout, much less than 70% of the badgers were culled and the culls had to be extended (still not meeting the 70% target).
Based on these facts, it is clear that the culls were not effective in their aims to reduce 70% of badgers within six weeks, which was what the trial set out to do, and is what the report leak is referring to.
Regards,
James
Thanks Mark for correcting me.
Just to try and add something to the debate there seems to be a dropping off of general interest in the badger cull. I’m surprised actually given how successful single issue campaigns have been recently how little progress the anti cull lobby has made recently after what was a very high profile start. Is this a general malaise with social media driven single issue politics, a sympathy effect given the flooding of livestock areas or just that the issue has run out of steam ? I would suggest that the leaked report today might be supportive to my argument in trying to bring it up the agenda again.
I think the salient point in this post is that nobody has actually tested any of the dead badgers for TB. Oh people, please. Wouldn’t this be the equivalent of TB 101?
As far as I am aware, it was DEFRA’s decision not to test the carcasses for TB. Perhaps I’m paranoid, but does this suggest that someone in DEFRA felt that the results might show a low level of infection in the badgers killed, and would therefore be highly embarrassing?
So Mark (or anyone), if a ‘proper strategy’ did include killing badgers, humanely, how would you do it? Trapping (and shooting at close range)? Poisoning? Gassing of infected setts? Hunting with hounds – dachshunds perhaps? Any other options out there?
Clearly a dilemma looming for Defra, NE et al…….
“Badgerists”.??..Now that’s what I call a divisive comment…did the “stealing of badgers” really happen..anyone got a sensible comment on that rather than just rumour..?
I first asked this question regarding badgerist (badger activists) interference with cages in 2003 via Owen Paterson (then in Opposition) as part of over 500 question OP put to Minister Beckett – at that stage some 1,800 cages had been stolen (Hansard) – 2,400 ish by the end of the Trials
My report contains information (charts, memos, etc) sourced from Govt Offices
No rumour ! This is fact!
And it helps prove that the RBCT shambles is either total incompetence (most unlikely) or a conspiracy
Trimbush – your report – where? When? What?
Mark – you ask:-
Your report? Where ? When ? What ?
Fair questions!
Badger TB – An Apocalyptic Analysis (not the title but a good one)
It started out as an ‘educational’ paper with a bit of rhetoric
It has evolved somewhat and I now find the current content somewhat breathtaking including some ‘potentially new population dynamics science’! I have to get (at least most of it) right!
I also have to say that even I – the author – keep asking myself – ‘hold on – is this really true – do you (me) really believe this? Is this really what the ISG Team did (to satisfy their own ideology or their Masters)?’ etc etc How does ‘this’ fit in with what everyone already ‘knows’ and says’?
Should I write a political paper that will make me feel good – or a scientific paper that will be good but will tell only half the story and achieve less?
It’s very important to me – likewise cattle farmers and dare I say it? ‘Science’
Lord Krebs said – “if we can’t trust science – we are in a mess” – Of course he’s right – but unfortunately it is – sadly – the ‘compromised politically-compliant scientists’ (and their Political Masters) that we – as I will illustrate – cannot, in this instance, be trusted.
I love Science and Truth
Soon!