TheBadger Cull, Brian May & the RSPCA.....

[EAST KENT]

Mmmm....startling resemblence between Mark Carwardine and Brian May,remove the barnet and see what I mean.
I suppose it is "too costly" to trap from each sett a badger,TB test it ,and then decide the fate of the rest of the sett?That would make more sense to me than randomly killing of possibly healthy animals only for possibly unhealthy ones to move in.Although I have noticed that if something dire occurs in a sett it is abandoned for a very long time.

 

[mon]

At the moment we are in a 48 month testing area but neighbouring county is set to go in to a 12 month testing area, the store Market we use is in that area so think no official paperwork yet! We can take to market BUT if we don't manage to sell them what happens can we bring them back? Can we buy store cattle from there? No one has told us weather we control badger numbers or not how can a business run on no information and when we are made to test store cattle it is at a charge to us for NO benefit to us.

 

[brighteyes]

A Ministry vet round here has said it's nothing to do with badgers, more to do with reactors mixing with clear cattle (dodgy dealers).

Killing badgers is futile - unless you kill every last infected one. And every last TB infected cow. And deer. And llama. In NZ, apparently possums and ferrets are the main vectors of transmission.

Bovine TB originated in cattle and it has spread to other species, so now they have to die, too. Unless we need them, of course.

 

[Dobiegirl]

A Ministry vet round here has said it's nothing to do with badgers, more to do with reactors mixing with clear cattle (dodgy dealers).

Killing badgers is futile - unless you kill every last infected one. And every last TB infected cow. And deer. And llama. In NZ, apparently possums and ferrets are the main vectors of transmission.

Bovine TB originated in cattle and it has spread to other species, so now they have to die, too. Unless we need them, of course.

That dosnt explain how closed herds have got TB, imo the badger is the scapegoat and Im surprised they havnt looked at deer as being one of the main vectors. Deer travel further afield than badgers who are far more terrotorial.

 

[Alec Swan]

....... and Im surprised they havnt looked at deer as being one of the main vectors. Deer travel further afield than badgers who are far more terrotorial.

Being territorial, and travelling further afield, in the case of deer, are a contradiction in terms. In the West Country,where they have Red deer, then they would be nomadic, but where they have Roe deer, then they may well die within 1 mile of where they were born.

I may be wrong, but I suspect that throwing deer in to the mix, may well be clouding the issue.

I've shot several thousand deer over the years, but have never seen one which has displayed the symptoms of Tb. We live in a changing and evolving world, and it may well be that deer are now known to be a threat. IF they are, then a large part of my raison detre will sink!!

So, what do you make of this?

.......

As with many of your posts, there's really too much to discuss, at the first attempt! Interesting points raised, for all that.

Sir David Attenborough, for me anyway, sits on the right hand of God, BUT, I fail to see how he can be an authority on global warming, gorillas, ants that live on the moon, AND the badgers which may, or may not carry BTb. Sorry, but that's not being realistic. I suspect that he's offered support where it hasn't been warranted.

Simon King? He's a film maker. He's not as good as he thinks that he is, but he's not that bad. As he represents the various Wildlife Trusts, who in turn are a collection of well intentioned idiots, so there's not much to recommend him there, is there?

I'm sorry to be disparaging of your post, and whilst it was of interest, there were no contributions which were of any value, for me. I'm here with an open mind, but I need to be convinced that reducing the numbers of the known major carriers of BTb, badgers, is a mistake.

We all want the best for our wild life, obviously, but it's how we reach our goals, or perhaps the path that we take, which would result in the damage which we may do, whilst en route. That applies to my argument, just as it does yours.

Alec.

 

[Alyth]

noun
a selective slaughter of wild animals.
• [usu. as adj. ] an inferior or surplus livestock animal selected for killing : a cull cow. My bold print.

I agree that the use of the word "Cull" is wrong, firstly because it doesn't mean a total kill, and secondly because the idea that BTb infected badgers could be selected, is ridiculous, just as the idea of night shooting is also and equally daft.

The only sensible reduction system which would work, would be that in areas of high BTb mortality rates in cattle, COUPLED TO high density populations of badgers, then selected setts would be gassed. The complete family unit would be killed. The criteria used would need to be based on a percentage of the perceived population in a given area.

Removing individual family members would most probably be counter productive, and would cause needless stress and cruelty.

Gassing would be a humane and effective method of destruction. With gas mechanically pumped underground, death is virtually instantaneous, and by the removal of entire family units, there would be virtually no chance of infected badgers being harassed and disturbed, and so moving on, spreading the problem on a wider scale, and worsening matters. The problem with gassing is that we haven't forgotten the gas chambers of WWII yet, and we aren't likely too!

I heard May interviewed on the telly the other day, and he said and I quote "I want to stop people from killing all the foxes and all the badgers". I suppose that if I keep banging on about it, for long enough, some of it might sink in; "There is no wish for eradication. Allow those who live a rural life, and care equally passionately about wildlife, to manage that wildlife, and as it has been managed, very successfully for centuries.

Alec.

p.s. Alyth, I apologise for the rant, but I'm finding it ever more difficult to keep quiet when the daily lives and well being of many who farm, are being suffocated by a group with little interest in the correct and caring management of wildlife, and every interest, or so it would seem, in their own agendas, and that applies to those who campaign against fox hunting too. a.

Thank you for your reasoned and reasonable explaination!! I also looked up the word 'cull', but I think that it's meaning and use has changed since my dictionary was printed back in the 1950s!! And I totally agree with the idea of being able to select for sickness is rediculous - I was being sarcastic!!

 

[brighteyes]

Alec Google LACS, deer sanctuary and bTB...

I'm not trying to muddy waters and should have edited the YT video to exclude the others but I felt their opinions were valid, too.

The cull of anything hasn't got that much to do with anything except commerce and public demand for the food and environment demanded by the masses. I wonder what will happen when we have culled everything inconvenient to us based on flawed science and ill thought out proposals. I haven't any objections to a controlled cull of an animal thriving because of human mismanagement (ironic, eh?) except that I doubt it will do any good.

 

[brighteyes]

Being territorial, and travelling further afield, in the case of deer, are a contradiction in terms. In the West Country,where they have Red deer, then they would be nomadic, but where they have Roe deer, then they may well die within 1 mile of where they were born.

I may be wrong, but I suspect that throwing deer in to the mix, may well be clouding the issue.

I've shot several thousand deer over the years, but have never seen one which has displayed the symptoms of Tb. We live in a changing and evolving world, and it may well be that deer are now known to be a threat. IF they are, then a large part of my raison detre will sink!!



As with many of your posts, there's really too much to discuss, at the first attempt! Interesting points raised, for all that.

Sir David Attenborough, for me anyway, sits on the right hand of God, BUT, I fail to see how he can be an authority on global warming, gorillas, ants that live on the moon, AND the badgers which may, or may not carry BTb. Sorry, but that's not being realistic. I suspect that he's offered support where it hasn't been warranted.

Simon King? He's a film maker. He's not as good as he thinks that he is, but he's not that bad. As he represents the various Wildlife Trusts, who in turn are a collection of well intentioned idiots, so there's not much to recommend him there, is there?

I'm sorry to be disparaging of your post, and whilst it was of interest, there were no contributions which were of any value, for me. I'm here with an open mind, but I need to be convinced that reducing the numbers of the known major carriers of BTb, badgers, is a mistake.

We all want the best for our wild life, obviously, but it's how we reach our goals, or perhaps the path that we take, which would result in the damage which we may do, whilst en route. That applies to my argument, just as it does yours.

Alec.

I wasn't trying to muddy the waters, but am pointing out badgers seem to have got the rap for this and cows carrying bTB don't show signs, sometimes at all? Deer might not either.

 

[Alec Swan]

Alec Google LACS, deer sanctuary and bTB...

........

Been there, done that, and there are those who should be serving prison sentences. NOT ONE WORD from Defra, Trading Standards, or the rspca. View the recordings of those who farm in the area, and from those who care about their native deer. The league against cruel sports, are a disgrace.

Anger? Rage would be a better word.

Alec.

 

[brighteyes]

I was pointing out that the LACS deer 'sanctuary was on place bTB had been found in deer, and I don't see how they can be discounted as carriers.

 

[jrp204]

FIL lost 38 out of 42 suckler cows and calves to bTB last spring, tests have shown it is a strain carried in a herd of red deer that we're thoughtfully released from captivity 6 yrs ago. Damn things, although spectacular to see are everywhere and impossible to fence out. The 4 calves not infected were housed indoors.

 

[brighteyes]

FIL lost 38 out of 42 suckler cows and calves to bTB last spring, tests have shown it is a strain carried in a herd of red deer that we're thoughtfully released from captivity 6 yrs ago. Damn things, although spectacular to see are everywhere and impossible to fence out. The 4 calves not infected were housed indoors.

I wonder how they'll make a succesful case where Bambi is the bad guy.

 

[Alyth]

A Ministry vet round here has said it's nothing to do with badgers, more to do with reactors mixing with clear cattle (dodgy dealers).

Killing badgers is futile - unless you kill every last infected one. And every last TB infected cow. And deer. And llama. In NZ, apparently possums and ferrets are the main vectors of transmission.

Bovine TB originated in cattle and it has spread to other species, so now they have to die, too. Unless we need them, of course.

I live in NZ now - and every rabbit my son has shot has tb lungs......

 

[Alec Swan]

FIL lost 38 out of 42 suckler cows and calves to bTB last spring, tests have shown it is a strain carried in a herd of red deer that we're thoughtfully released from captivity 6 yrs ago. Damn things, although spectacular to see are everywhere and impossible to fence out. The 4 calves not infected were housed indoors.

I feel for your FIL, it must be dire.

Having been reminded by brightinsel of the Tb status of the deer at Baronsdown, and having read of the rabbits in NZ, and then considering that unlike the wild deer in this country, which though carriers, don't seem, to me anyway, to be sufferers, then I wonder if the displayed infection rate of Tb is as much, or more, to do with population density, as it is the carriers themselves. If that's the case, then the success of the badger cull in Ireland, and there being a direct and parallel reduction in the cases in cattle, then I would imagine that that would strengthen the argument to reduce the overall population of badgers in the UK, or at least in the hot-spot areas.

Another point, is that if there were a fairly hefty reduction in badger numbers (as there has been in parts of Ireland), and if the incidents of Tb in cattle didn't reduce, then badgers could be considered blameless, and the numbers allowed to recover. If, as in Ireland, the reduction in badgers coincided with a reduction in the reported cases in cattle, then the answer to the problem would be found.

Alec.

 

[Alec Swan]

A Ministry vet round here has said it's nothing to do with badgers, more to do with reactors mixing with clear cattle (dodgy dealers).

...........

Vets, Ministry or otherwise, can hypothesise just as the rest of us can. The restrictions, passport controls and massive fines, even for simple mistakes in ear tagging keep most who farm cattle on the straight and narrow, I can assure you!! For a vet to suggest that it's dodgy cattle dealers who are responsible, is ridiculous.

I'm not going to say that every dealer in cattle is lilly white, but to suggest that a disease spread is the responsibility of the very few who are brave or stupid enough to step outside the law, makes no sense what so ever.

Most who keep and deal in, cattle, are in receipt of SF Payments. ANY transgression, even through oversight, can have those payments withdrawn, or clawed back. Bankruptcy would be the likely result. Sorry, but your vet's talking out of his hat!

I've yet to fully understand why cattle can't be vaccinated against Tb. When I've asked before, others have mumbled something about exports, but whether that's to do with live animals, or processed carcasses, I don't know. If it is solely to do with live export, then I suspect that the current compensation paid to those who lose cattle far outweigh the value of exports. Does anyone have a clear explanation?

Alec.

Ets, and to answer my own question, I've just dragged up this explanation from Defra's website;

"Vaccination of cattle against TB is currently prohibited by EU legislation, in place principally because BCG vaccination of cattle can interfere with the tuberculin skin test which is the recognised primary diagnostic test for TB in cattle.

Vaccinating cattle in the UK against TB but without a Marketing Authorisation for the vaccine runs the risk that live cattle and cattle product exports could be banned by other countries. While the export market for live cattle is relatively small, the value of our meat and dairy exports is much greater. Our dairy exports alone grew by nearly 20% in 2011, to more than £1.1billion."

So that's the end of that!!

 

[jrp204]

The cattle vaccine hasn't had sufficient trialing, the majority of trials have been done in badgers and just because it works in them doesn't mean it will work in the cattle. Also, because it is a live vaccine the cattle will then be technically 'infected' with no quick way of knowing if it is because they are vaccinated or infected. This is where the export thing comes in, they wouldn't risk exporting infected animals to the continent where there is no bTB

 

[Star_Chaser]

I was pointing out that the LACS deer 'sanctuary was on place bTB had been found in deer, and I don't see how they can be discounted as carriers.

Perhaps because deer are big business to many landowners who sell the stalking rights and other industries as a consequence. Badgers are only a cost unless your running sightseeing tours. If a complete cull of deer as well as badgers occur it would hit a lot of people in the pocket.

Old report from 2004 but this is an interesting read obviously this research will have been updated since this was issued http://www.bds.org.uk/response_to_defra.html

http://animalhealth.defra.gov.uk/ab...uidance/documents/13_Tuberculosis_in_deer.pdf Defra's leaflet on TB in deer herds

 

[Star_Chaser]

The cattle vaccine hasn't had sufficient trialing, the majority of trials have been done in badgers and just because it works in them doesn't mean it will work in the cattle. Also, because it is a live vaccine the cattle will then be technically 'infected' with no quick way of knowing if it is because they are vaccinated or infected. This is where the export thing comes in, they wouldn't risk exporting infected animals to the continent where there is no bTB

Don't mainland Europe and those who we import meat from have bTB? How did we manage to be so unique?

 

[jrp204]

Don't mainland Europe and those who we import meat from have bTB? How did we manage to be so unique?

It's a touch of sarcasm. There is bTB on the continent, they just don't shout about it. It is in the deer, wild boar, badgers, alpacas and like us their cattle. Do you think the french would be so precious about culling?

 

[Star_Chaser]

It's a touch of sarcasm. There is bTB on the continent, they just don't shout about it. It is in the deer, wild boar, badgers, alpacas and like us their cattle. Do you think the french would be so precious about culling?

depends have you seen the buggers shoot?? Sadly we do seem to end up in the proverbial poo when it comes to our exports but are happy to import to much poorer standards than our own.

 

[happyhunter123]

Just a couple of weeks ago there was a (stupid) story in the press about an MP who tweeted that he wanted to kill a stag. He probably wasn't serious.
The RSPCA said: "It is sad when people can’t see the beauty in a wild animal like this and just want to kill it.”
The League said: “We worry about the Government’s underlying beliefs about the importance of our wildlife. It should be respected.”

Then we here that May allowed the same to happen just a week or so later, and they all rush to protect him. Suddenly, management of deer is said to be 'necessary'. When it's a Tory MP, it's terrible, when it's Brian May it's fine.

These groups are a disgrace and I hope that the public see right through them and their hypocrisy.

 

[Birker2020]

a chap from DEFRA said to me once that a lot of badgers that are seen as roadkill, lying at the side of the road are in fact badgers that have been put there by farmers after they have filled them with shot.

Hmmm interesting and probably true. Sitting on the fence on that one.

 

[Superhot]

Apple cart, that is definitely true, I've seen it for myself...never known a road kill with only a single hole in the head...

 

[Alec Swan]

a chap from DEFRA said to me once that a lot of badgers that are seen as roadkill, lying at the side of the road are in fact badgers that have been put there by farmers after they have filled them with shot.

Hmmm interesting and probably true. Sitting on the fence on that one.

Apple cart, that is definitely true, I've seen it for myself...never known a road kill with only a single hole in the head...

Interesting indeed, were there any point to it.

Alec.

 

[mon]

Had suckler cows in for first part of TB test today some got mega stressed as not handled much unlike dairy cows, vet convinced badgers are a main reason, god knows how we are going to get them all in and safely through crush again monday for checking.

 

[happyhunter123]

Interesting indeed, were there any point to it.

Alec.

It's always been a claim made by the AR groups, but it seems a stupid one. A farmer who'd shot a badger could far more easily dispose of it in other manners. There are plenty of very quiet places in the countryside where the public have no access to, and a farmer could easily bury it or leave it under a bush. Throwing it on the road would be MUCH more risky as motorists would see you!
Badger on the road=roadkill, just like a fox or a rabbit on the road is. Simple.

 

[Star_Chaser]

a chap from DEFRA said to me once that a lot of badgers that are seen as roadkill, lying at the side of the road are in fact badgers that have been put there by farmers after they have filled them with shot.

Hmmm interesting and probably true. Sitting on the fence on that one.

What a pile of tosh... most farmers wouldn't want to get caught chucking them onto the highway. I did a study for uni on roadkill and its very easy to tell the difference between hit by a car and other methods of dispatch.

 

[happyhunter123]

What a pile of tosh... most farmers wouldn't want to get caught chucking them onto the highway. I did a study for uni on roadkill and its very easy to tell the difference between hit by a car and other methods of dispatch.

Exactly, if you wanted to keep it secret, throwing it onto a road with passing motorists would be lunacy! You'd think that at least someone would have been caught if this was actually going on!