17 Nov 2007

Sign petition on badgers

Here is a petition set up by the RSPCA who were shocked at the recommendation put forward by the Government's Chief Scientific Advisor, Sir David King, which suggests a cull of badgers in England should be undertaken in order to control bovine TB in cattle. The Glos Green party also issued a statement - see news release from last month here. We also contributed to the original consultation and were active in trying to raise awareness re this issue.

Sir David's advice goes against the conclusions of the Government appointed Independent Scientific Group (ISG) on cattle TB, published in June, after a 10 year study. Their conclusion was that while badgers are a source of bovine TB in cattle, badger culling can make no meaningful contribution to cattle TB control in Britain. The evidence was that some culling policies could make matters worse rather than better.

The badger is a protected species and a much loved symbol of British wildlife. A cull could cause enormous suffering, particularly as it is possible that methods such as snaring may be used to 'remove' these beautiful creatures.

The government are due to make a decision in the next weeks on whether to go ahead with a cull of badgers as a means of controlling bovine TB in England. We cannot allow this to happen.

Badger1Photo: Green party action last year in Stroud High Street - it was very cosy in that costume!

Help the RSPCA reach their target of 25,000 petition signatures. Forward this petition to everyone you know. Add you name to our text petition too - text BADGER to 60022. The petitions will be presented to the Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP as a sign of public opposition to a cull. For further information on our campaign to stop the cull of badgers visit www.rspca.org.uk/badgers

An interesting way of viewing matters comes from a local badger expert Martin Hancox - see his graph and thoughts here plus more here on the Stop War on Badgers website.

Many people are very angry about the idea of a cull. Indeed I've had several angry emails and SchNEWS report that badger groups nationwide have vowed to take direct action. A spokesman for the the Coalition of Badger Action Groups (CBAG) said: “We took action against the experimental culling in the South West - we were out nine months of the year, chasing MAFF (Ministries for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries - now DEFRA) from their base in Truro. We obstructed them, dismantled traps and freed trapped animals...destroyed 70% of the traps. Direct action will continue – but we’re going to need numbers if they roll this programme out across the whole country.”

It is extraordinary to propose a cull - the ISG findings were summarised by John Bourne – the group’s chair when he said: “While badgers are clearly a source of cattle TB, careful evaluation of our own and others’ data indicates that 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... 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.”

Pretty unequivocal you might think....so why the cull? To me it is partly to divert attention away from the increasingly intensive nature of farming...as SchNEWS write: "The modern farm animal is a hothouse flower, overbred and pumped full o’ drugs for maximum meat and milk production using all the latest ‘advanced’ veterinary techniques. After a lifetime of overstocking, this animal is then trucked around the country for sale and slaughter. In human beings, TB flourishes amongst physically and psychologically compromised individuals on poor diets and with inadequate housing. This is a fair description of life in cattle sheds and milking parlours. During winter months, cattle are kept in overcrowded, often badly-designed barns, conditions in which infectious disease spreads. The persistent focus on badgers distracts from the serious health problems faced by intensively managed cattle in Britain. Many other diseases, such as pneumonia, E. coli, coccidiosis (a fatal diarrhoea), salmonella and mastitis, are also increasing in British cattle herds. Desperate to defend their highly subsidised agri-business practices, farmers turn time and again to blaming the wildlife."

2 comments:

Philip said...

Here is a copy of a letter to Citizen follows, sent 27 Nov from a colleague who has moved to Frome:

Your correspondent John Williams (letters November 16) claims that bovine TB
figures for 2007 'may be as bad as the 2005 peak'. But an examination of the
figures doesn't bear this out. The number of reactors slaughtered in 2005
was 25,755. For January to September 2007 the figure is 17,889, which would
extrapolate (x4/3) to a total of 23,852 for the whole year.

Alongside this, it is important to note that more cattle are being tested
this year: an extrapolated figure of over 5.5m, as against less than 5m in
2005. Thus the number of reactors as a percentage of cattle tested is 0.43%
this year, as against 0.53% for 2005.

The 2007 figures also include cases identified by the gamma interferon test,
which picks up cases missed by the skin test. If this extra test had been
used in 2005, the total for that year would have been even higher.

However, the real problem is tackling the reservoir responsible for these
cases. Recent events point to one clear candidate: the unknown number of
cattle that were allowed to pass to the infectious but mostly undetectable
late stage of the disease by the suspension of cattle TB testing during Foot
and Mouth disease in 2001. These animals are now spread throughout the
country, thanks to the NFU's successful lobbying of the government to ignore
scientists' warnings about moving animals after FMD. The 'slaughterhouse
cases' listed every month in Defra's bTB statistics (from supposedly 'clean'
herds) are just the tip of this iceberg.

Jeremy Wade
Selwood Road, Frome

(formerly of Besbury Park, Minchinhampton)

Philip said...

Following your report of Professor King's renewed call for a badger cull, it
is worth mentioning that King's views are so incomprehensible to the
scientific community at large that they prompted an editorial in the world's
leading scientific journal 'Nature' (1 November 2007).

Nature said, 'King's motives remain unknown but his actions are likely to
encourage speculation that his report was written to please the farmers.' It
went on to recommend that Defra bases its policy on the recommendations of
the government's Independent Scientific Group. This states, 'Badger culling
cannot meaningfully contribute to the future control of cattle TB in
Britain.' (ISG final report, 18 June 2007)

The ISG advice is in keeping with the history of the disease in Britain,
particularly the disastrous 'experiment' carried out at the NFU's behest
from 2001, the year cattle TB testing was stopped during the Foot and Mouth
epidemic. Because of the NFU's belief that badgers spread the disease, they
successfully lobbied the government (against scientific advice) to allow the
movement of untested cattle after FMD, with the calamitous results they now
lament.

Following this abandonment of basic biosecurity, there is now a nationwide
reservoir of cattle in the advanced, highly infectious stage of the disease
-- which is not detectable in live animals by the TB skin test. These cases
are only picked up at the end of their lives, when lung lesions are revealed
by abattoir inspection. The tip of this iceberg is clearly visible in
Defra's monthly TB statistics, under 'Slaughterhouse cases'.

The way to tackle this man-made resurgence in the disease is to apply the
same strategy that worked in the 1960s, which cleared TB from most of
Britain, and brought cases down to a fraction of their former level. This
was based on annual TB testing, which identified cattle in the early,
uninfectious stages and prevented them joining the invisible reservoir of
infectious animals. Meanwhile the reservoir died out over a period of about
ten years. Contrary to popular belief, no badgers were culled during this
period.

The fact that all this now has to be done again is only the fault of badgers
insofar as this red herring has blinded many influential people to the
importance of basic biosecurity in cattle. Even after the post-FMD
explosion, it took a staggering 4 years to properly address the backlog of
untested cattle, allowing the disease to become even more entrenched.

At long last the disease's steep upward slope has now been reversed, but
continuing to divert energy into arguing the toss about badgers can only
prolong the painful process of finishing the job.

Jeremy Wade
Frome, Somerset
(formerly of Minchinhampton)