Monday, February 22, 2010
Perversity and the badger
The BBC report further developments on the proposed badger cull in North Pembrokeshire, with yet another expert wading in to describe the Rural Affair's Minister's decision to proceed with wiping out the area's badger population as 'perverse'.
Dr Chris Cheeseman, who is a former senior scientific adviser to the UK government and the retired head of wildlife diseases research at the Central Science Laboratory is quoted as saying:
"I think the decision to cull flies in the face of the science," he said.
"They've got to take account of the fact that it will raise the prevalence of TB in badgers, there will be a negative edge effect.
"The benefits - if there are any - are likely to be rather small, and they won't be able to tease out what the effects of culling are because they're including culling with cattle control measures so you can't separate those scientifically in the results.
"Altogether I think it's a perverse decision which, even at this late stage, should be rethought."
The government quote a range of advice they have taken on this issue as did the Rural Affairs Committee, however they appear to have been only partly listening.
The trials in England found that although badger culling reduces cattle bovine TB during the trial and immediately thereafter, the beneficial effects are not sustained, disappearing four years post-cull.
There is also a danger that by stirring up the badger population bTB will spread more widely than it would otherwise do so and also spread outside the area of the cull.
It is for these reasons, as well as fears about government agents compromising biosecurity by trampling over farms, concerns for biodiversity and outrage at the way that a protected species is being treated by Government that resistance within the cull area is growing, including amongst landowners and farmers.
Dr Chris Cheeseman, who is a former senior scientific adviser to the UK government and the retired head of wildlife diseases research at the Central Science Laboratory is quoted as saying:
"I think the decision to cull flies in the face of the science," he said.
"They've got to take account of the fact that it will raise the prevalence of TB in badgers, there will be a negative edge effect.
"The benefits - if there are any - are likely to be rather small, and they won't be able to tease out what the effects of culling are because they're including culling with cattle control measures so you can't separate those scientifically in the results.
"Altogether I think it's a perverse decision which, even at this late stage, should be rethought."
The government quote a range of advice they have taken on this issue as did the Rural Affairs Committee, however they appear to have been only partly listening.
The trials in England found that although badger culling reduces cattle bovine TB during the trial and immediately thereafter, the beneficial effects are not sustained, disappearing four years post-cull.
There is also a danger that by stirring up the badger population bTB will spread more widely than it would otherwise do so and also spread outside the area of the cull.
It is for these reasons, as well as fears about government agents compromising biosecurity by trampling over farms, concerns for biodiversity and outrage at the way that a protected species is being treated by Government that resistance within the cull area is growing, including amongst landowners and farmers.
Comments:
<< Home
"The trials in England found that although badger culling reduces cattle bovine TB during the trial and immediately thereafter, the beneficial effects are not sustained, disappearing four years post-cull."
But you know only too well that the cull is only one part of several to reduce cattle bovine TB. And as I've pointed out to you before, it's to be carried out in a pilot area ie an area where these combined strategies are carried out to see if they have the desired effect or not whichever may be the case. I'll try and help you here. If this combined strategy works, then it will be rolled out to other areas. If not, then it won't be. End of story.
But you know only too well that the cull is only one part of several to reduce cattle bovine TB. And as I've pointed out to you before, it's to be carried out in a pilot area ie an area where these combined strategies are carried out to see if they have the desired effect or not whichever may be the case. I'll try and help you here. If this combined strategy works, then it will be rolled out to other areas. If not, then it won't be. End of story.
# posted by 
: 9:13 PM
: 9:13 PM
And who are you?
As I have explained to you the fact that cattle controls are being put in does not make this cull anymore different or valid. In fact a number of experts now have looked at the Welsh cull and declared that it is no different to the English trials and will have the same limited impact.
And let me help you, this so-called pilot has no scientific basis by which its effectiveness can be measured. The combined methods being used makes it impossible to assess whether any improvement is down to the cull, the cattle control measures or both.
The argument that this cull is somehow different is a fig leaf to hide the failure of the Minister to listen to the evidence and to cover up her decision to follow political imperatives rather than science.
As I have explained to you the fact that cattle controls are being put in does not make this cull anymore different or valid. In fact a number of experts now have looked at the Welsh cull and declared that it is no different to the English trials and will have the same limited impact.
And let me help you, this so-called pilot has no scientific basis by which its effectiveness can be measured. The combined methods being used makes it impossible to assess whether any improvement is down to the cull, the cattle control measures or both.
The argument that this cull is somehow different is a fig leaf to hide the failure of the Minister to listen to the evidence and to cover up her decision to follow political imperatives rather than science.
Well, let me remind you that there are a number of experts....amongst them the Chief veterninary officer (of Wales in case you've forgotten her) which are supportive of the measures being implemented in the pilot area. You can look to retired experts in England to support your 'case' but I prefer to listen to current experts here in Wales are saying as they know the terrain better.
# posted by : 10:34 PM
: 10:34 PM
I hardly think that you can call on the Chief Vet, who is a government official to pass an independent judgement on government policy. I do not think that the nationality of experts is relevant either. They are people who have spent a great deal looking at this problem and they believe that the Pembrokeshire cull is unnecessary. Oh and if the Chief Vet is the deciding factor then why did previous Rural Affairs Ministers not instigate a cull? Could it be that the deciding factor here was political and not scientific?
Cheesman has written on badgers.........
'Badgers' by Ernest Neal & Chris Cheeseman
Might his view-point be biased?
Why don't you go and get some expert viewpoints from NZ then since nationality is no problem.
'Badgers' by Ernest Neal & Chris Cheeseman
Might his view-point be biased?
Why don't you go and get some expert viewpoints from NZ then since nationality is no problem.
# posted by : 9:57 AM
: 9:57 AM
Iam happy to consider all views but I would be inclined to give more precedence to the trials in England as they are dealing with similiar conditions. The behaviour of UK badgers is markedly different to those in Europe so I guess that New Zealand may not be comparable either.
There should be an independent scientific team commissioned for this....the governments chief vet is not independent,
Hard scien tific evidence and public opinion on the matter should be the guiding principles, neither have been tapped into,
Livestock agriculture is worth hardly anything to the Welsh economy £200m, compared with tourism
Hard scien tific evidence and public opinion on the matter should be the guiding principles, neither have been tapped into,
Livestock agriculture is worth hardly anything to the Welsh economy £200m, compared with tourism
# posted by : 3:55 PM
: 3:55 PM
...and of course....the same could be said of what was decided in England ie an independent scientific team shold have been set up....or is it only the English/British government that is to be trusted? The good old days eh....pre-devolution.
# posted by : 5:28 PM
: 5:28 PM
The badger culling lobby muddying the waters again. New Zealand's wildlife problem is associated with possums not badgers. Two very different creatures and their respective behavioural characteristics make the situations in Wales and NZ incomparable.
# posted by : 10:03 AM
: 10:03 AM
"Two very different creatures and their respective behavioural characteristics make the situations in Wales and NZ incomparable."
Agreed.....if you run over a badger it'll cause serious damage to your car.
Post a Comment
Agreed.....if you run over a badger it'll cause serious damage to your car.
# posted by : 12:07 PM
: 12:07 PM<< Home
