Devastated????
First I have heard of herds of cattle being devastated!

Report abuse

Zoe – because badgers and cattle live in close proximaty to each other they actually cross infect with TB. Of course, there are other animals that cause and carry diseases but scientifically it has been proven that this cross infection exists.

Obviously infected cattle go to slaughter but badgers just carry on regardless until they die an agonising and slow death with this disease.

It is not the intention as everyone thinks to cull ALL badgers but those that have been found to be infected with TB along with cattle that are found to have the same infection.

Report abuse

I am fully aware of that Matt thank you, I do work in the industry.

The pre-culling report and post-culling reports make a very interesting read and I will assume that you have taken the time to view these!

Report abuse

Badgers are magnificent animals, however if they carry a disese that can infect others as well as themselves. There has to be a solution to prevent the spread of TB by the culling of all infected animals to preserve the remainder.

Simon Hart of the Countryside Alliance was quite succinct:
“This week’s announcement by the Secretary of State for DEFRA, Hilary Benn MP, that the Government would not be taking forward proposals to cull badgers in England as a response to bovine TB was as predictable as it was lamentable.

Badger politics is rivalled only by the hunting debate in terms of length, emotion and Byzantine complexity. The Alliance has always taken the view that it is primarily a farming issue and, as such, our role is to support the various farming bodies in their campaign to protect cattle from TB. Now that a decision, albeit the wrong one, has been made it is worth a look at why and how the Government came to the decision it did.

On the face of it the logic for a cull is unarguable. Bovine TB is a rapidly growing nightmare not just for the livestock farmers who are directly affected, but also for the treasury which is paying massive sums in compensation. Let’s not forget there is a cost to badgers too. Eradicating the disease is as much in the interests of their welfare as it is cattle and yet badger groups nationwide are adopting the absurd position whereby they would rather the suffering continue than anyone be allowed to engage in a controlled cull. In Wales however the National Assembly is committed to a cull, so goodness knows what you do if you are one of the many thousands of people who farm astride the border.

Most people would think of the foot and mouth outbreak of 2002 as the benchmark for Government compensation to farmers , but in the years since then bovine TB has cost you, me and every UK taxpayer more to compensate farmers hit by TB. Whilst the evidence of exactly how TB is spread remains confused no-one with any degree of objectivity could argue that badgers are not a significant factor. Meanwhile the badger population continues to grow apace. Experts claim that there are around 300,000 in the UK making them perhaps the least threatened mammal in the countryside. That figure equates to about 5500 per county – some would say an understatement.

So given the costs, the science and the status of the species there is only one sensible option: a sensible programme of management. But whilst the Government supports the management of deer and other species the badger is sacrosanct because of public opinion and the views of the RSPCA. Why is the badger untouchable when other species are not? Kenneth Grahame takes some of the blame for his portrayal of Brock in Wind in the Willows, but the main reason is more simple. The badger is both nocturnal and less keen on urban living than people and other wildlife. The vast majority of the population has never seen a badger and people therefore assume they are a rare, threatened species. A myth perpetuated by badger groups and television presenters.

We can rail against politicians who refuse to take a logical decision in the face of public opinion, but expecting anything else would be naive. It may well be that public opposition to this is exaggerated, but that is not the point. What we have to ask ourselves is whether at least part of the blame is ours. Have we done enough to educate and explain? Have we challenged the perceptions that have become so fixed in the public consciousness? Of course we must have science and logic on our side, in this and so many other debates, but we must also have public understanding because without it everything else can be worthless.”

Report abuse