The Westminster government seems to have forgotten that it says that its aim is to eradicate bTB in cattle (which it is miles away from doing, and hardly seems a plausible aim by following the current loosely termed ‘strategy’) and is now fixated on eradicating badgers from large areas of England.
Whereas the government announcement back in March seemed to indicate that the government had seen sense (see Guardian) and had listened to the Godfray report which indicated that concentrating on Badger culls so much was the wrong way to go, this week the government announced a big increase in Badger culling. In the years from 2013-2019 at least 100,000 Badgers have been culled and in the few months ahead another 70,000 may be added to that total as the cull spreads into new areas.
Even the government-supporting Times newspapr has noticed the government double-speak going on here.
What the government is doing, to use two of its own favourite phrases when it comes to disease control mechanisms, is ramping up and rolling out the Badger cull. Government will say that it has to kill more Badgers so that it can kill fewer Badgers but tell that to the Badgers and it sounds more like a quasi-Augustinian plea of ‘Lord make me good, but not yet’.
The Badger population of England and Wales is estimated as c485,000 individuals (424,00 in England), and the Badger cull is still concentrated in only parts of the Badger’s range. The plan is to cull one in six of England’s total Badger population this year – basically before Christmas. And then start again next year.
Are we approaching eradication of bTB? In 2013 27,000 infected cows were culled, in 2019 33,000 were culled and no government spokesperson will ever give you or anyone else a year, or even a decade, by which the government’s pretend aim of eradicating bTB will be achieved.
The spread of Badger culling to counties such as Derbyshire means that Badger vaccination programmes such as that of the excellent Derbyshire Wildlife Trust are now jeopardised as farmers fall out of the scheme and opt for culling instead.
The scale of Badger culling represents an enormous assault on wildlife and all the science suggests that its impacts on bTB in cattle will be small: not completely absent but small.
In recent months we have seen that this government has proved incompetent and unrepentant over dealing with a human disease. This has come as no surprise to nature conservationists.
[registration_form]
Unfortunately, the more wrong-headed a policy seems the more determined this government appears to be to go for it hell-for-leather. It often seems as though their principal motivation is simply to piss off their critics, as for example in the latest twist in the Brexit negotiations.
I am sorry to say the decisions of this Government are driven entirely by politics, science hardly if ever gets a look in . That politics is in turn driven by its friends and allies, in this case many farmers (not all) and the NFU. This is just the same as driven grouse shooting where the Government also paid no attention to the science and the cruelty but only to their friends and allies the shooters who enjoy shooting our wildlife for fun.
This approach of being driven by misguided and often obnoxious politics runs through almost all their decisions. Science just gets in their way so they totally ignore it.
A government of crass stupidity and plain cantankerousness governed entirely by vested interest groups in this case the NFU and Countryside Areliars. Scandalous waste of money, time and badger lives, in any normal society we would be shot of these ne’er do wells in an instant, incompetent, intemperate, uncaring dogmatic blustering bullshitters the lot of them.
As I’ve said before, this is not a victimless crime – and it’s not just badgers that are the victims. There is no dpubt at all that the diversion of the badger cull has delayed – and taken resources away from – the measures that could improve the situation. Foot and Mouth in 2001 showed very clearly the effects of the huge increase in animal movements but resistance to better control, and focussing on badgers instead has harmed the very community that drives the badger cull
Excellent summary of a sorry and shoddy situation Mark, and an excellent comment from Roderick above on how, as a mere tactic to divert from the long overdue improvements in dairy and beef farming practice that Godfray (and countless before him) pointed towards, the fixation on badger culling is as socially wrong-headed as it is scientifically wrong-headed.
There are barely any words left to describe the situation: omnishambles and the ruder versions of it have all been used to death. But while we can focus our ire on this Government for some sort of instant and temporary catharsis, let’s not forget that successive Conservative administrations have been content to follow and periodically reinvigorate a policy that is tantamount to shooting into a crowded building while blindfolded, in the hope that you’ll cure the dry rot. Ministers come and go – each holds the Defra leash for a while and may even choose a different colour for it than their predecessor. But look at the colour of the minister’s leash and collar and it’s always the same, as is the fact that it always trails off into the same shadowy parts of the ‘rural heartlands’.
Personally I don’t waste my energy on Government mannequinss but keep my own special measure of disgust for the ‘quasi-autonomous’ ‘nature conservationists’ that facilitate this slaughter.
Do please stand up, BTb licensing staff of Natural England, and those who assist and cover for them.
Ironically same old thing comes up about animal movements.
Not even one person not connected with cattle farming seems able to provide the information of how cattle farmers could move cattle breaking the law without being caught.
It is just a fallacy that it happens and is probably almost impossible.
Of course we should not compare where we are now with what happened after foot and mouth, after foot and mouth I would think the vets and testing were completely overun.
The prior question about livestock movements is ‘why?’
In no other in Europe, with the possible exception of Ireland, are cattle (and sheep) moved in such numbers, so far and so frequently. Entire businesses and livelihoods rely on this merry-go-round, from market owners and cattle auctioneers to hauliers and drovers. And for what? In forty years involved in this business, I never understood why other countries seem to manage to move cattle so much less. The topography and climate is different in, for example, Germany but it not so different that it explains the huge differences in numbers moved.
I believe it is tradition and vested interests that keep it going. Everyone involved takes a little slice of the action and that perpetuates the myth that it is essential.
Cattle movements drive disease and we, the taxpayer, pick up the tab.
Oh dear Dennis. We’ve been here before. It’s not hard to find the Godfray Report or to scan it for the passages that implicate the resistance of the cattle industry to accepting its part in the spread of the disease. Like this one: “A very unfortunate consequence of the controversy around badger culling and the politicisation of the debate has been a deflection of focus from what can be done by the individual farmer and by the livestock industry to help control the disease. In particular, the poor take up of on-farm biosecurity measures and the extent of trading in often high-risk cattle is, we believe, severely hampering disease control measures.” Badgers are such a convenient deflection from ownership of this problem aren’t they?
Still no answers on how anyone thinks you can move cattle unless you follow the rules and so break no law.
Simply put you cannot move cattle unless they were tested for BTB in previous 60 days.
If anyone thinks you can stop Badgers and cattle getting in the same area then in practice that is just not possible in almost all cases.
Having spent all my working life with dairy cows and Badgers on the farm most of what the so called experts and general public talk about biosecurity and the rest of infection on farms is poppycock.
Dennis. Are you honestly trying to equate working within current regulations to applying adequate biosecurity? That really is the mother of all get-out clauses. Especially given events amongst the human population at the moment. If you don’t want Covid-19, do you think it’s enough to just work within the law or do you think one might need to consider some of the non-statutory advice and guidance on minimising spread too? Or have you ‘had enough of so called experts’? The problem here is that you can’t see past the badger and your preconceptions about its role in transmission. Just for one second humour me and imagine that stopping badgers using the same spaces as cattle is a red herring. What would be next on your list of preventative actions?