Best friends of Wildlife

Anglers are a very passive bunch in general.
We sit by the water, enjoy whatever surrounds us and try and outwit something with a brain the size of a pea.
During our waterside excursions we enjoy the wildlife that often wanders or swims along, rarely if ever does an angler try to harm the wildlife around him unless its one of those big black demons in his swim or an errant rat after his bait or lunch when we clearly know what's happening and does something about it!

My question is why, oh why are we allowing 5000 or more Badgers to be killed when it has never been proved just HOW Badgers infect cattle with TB ?

Badgers sleep in an underground chamber, often with several exits, in family groups, bedding down in large nests of grass, moss or occasionally straw from a nearby field, with every family member breathing and re breathing the same air.
They go out at night to feed returning at dawn to sleep throughout the daylight hours.

Throughout the entire winter months farmers keep their cattle 24/7 in semi open covered barns where they provide a deep bed of straw plus daily feed and 24/7 water. Because of the regular urinating and defecating (aka **** and ****) of the cattle the straw bed soon becomes completely sodden and begins to rot which in turn generates a very damp atmosphere. Fresh dry straw is added regularly but the damp rotting mass underneath in only removed (mucked out) once or twice throughout the entire winter.

Now....Ask yourself which environment provides the biggest TB threat?
.
.
.

Yes, Mick. There's an old fella with a poodle on his head writing about badgers and their imminent but only very partial disappearance in the Observer today -http://www.theguardian.com/global/2013/aug/24/badger-cull-brian-may-rspca

Political agendas, whether of the right or the left or the just plain swivel-eyed, eh?

Not me Paul.

I've culled enough wildlife in my time but only for a sound reason, usually crop protection or population balance.

This cull is just a political sweetener to the farmers who so overstock their land its either shed their cattle throughout the winter or sell them before they are fit for killing, left on the land they would turn the whole place into a quagmire before January.

So.........how do Badgers transfer TB to cattle?

Perhaps they go kissing them while they sleep?:wh

Mick b, I don't know where you get your information from but the part about farmers only clearing soiled straw one or twice a year isn't my experience. Some farmers cattle I know clear the yard every day whilst others do it at least twice a week. I don't know of any farmer who would leave soiled straw in situ for months at a time. I'm not saying that it doesn't happen. Just that in my experience it will not be universal by a long way.

Also you are not allowing for the fact that some animals can carry infections without it affecting them but is transferable to other animals.

My thoughts exactly, Mick - merely a sop to the Rural & Agro Lobbies. Every single badger in a piece of cow country would have to go to have the desired effect (that is if badgers truly are the one-and-only vector for TB transference). Total botch and fudge, this cull, politically and scientifically, which will do a few thousand badgers but probably cost some MPs their seats.

Can cattle be vaccinated against TB and if they can be why don't farmers do it?

" I don't know where you get your information from but the part about farmers only clearing soiled straw one or twice a year isn't my experience. Some farmers cattle I know clear the yard every day whilst others do it at least twice a week. I don't know of any farmer who would leave soiled straw in situ for months at a time. I'm not saying that it doesn't happen. Just that in my experience it will not be universal by a long way."

Done it, seen it, because I've been a stock farmer.

"Also you are not allowing for the fact that some animals can carry infections without it affecting them but is transferable to other animals."

But how do Badgers transfer TB to cattle?

Answer; no one knows and no one can prove it has ever happened, even once!

As for inoculation £££££££££ and who pays might have something to do with it?

the blanker said:

Can cattle be vaccinated against TB and if they can be why don't farmers do it?

Click to expand...

Can we vaccinate cattle & badgers against bovine TB? | TB Free England - TB Free England

The current Bovine TB test can't distinguish between inoculated animals and those carrying or suffering from the disease.

So the cull has begun, how come this is going on when DEFRA reported not long ago that bovine TB is at its lowest for six years, its a disgrace.

mick b said:

So.........how do Badgers transfer TB to cattle?

Click to expand...

According to wilki-knows-everything:

"The disease can be transmitted in several ways; for example, badgers excrete M. bovis in exhaled air, sputum, urine, faeces and pus, so the disease can be transmitted by direct contact, contact with the excreta of an infected animal, or inhalation of aerosols, depending on the species involved"

Now, as to vaccination for Badgers, the fact is that it doesn't work if the animal already has been infected and apparently costs about £12.50 per vaccination (according to the bbc)

Bovine TB not only affect cattle but can also be transmitted to, cats, dogs, pigs, deer and foxes, but apparently not sheep (?)

If you listen to the anti brigade they are using terms like, wholesale killing, extinction and other emotive terms all of which are nothing like the truth but do make for very good sound bites.

The bbc seem to only publish pictures of cute Mr Brocks in their articles, and never an emaciated cow that is suffering from the disease.

It is all too easy for those against to use the anthropomorphic association which is so very far from the truth.

This is to be a controlled cull, not an annihilation, and it is hoped that it will drastically reduce the incidence of this horrible disease that has been estimated to cost the Country over one billion pounds over the next decade.

It is not nice, I know but all logic tells us it is necessary, once you get over the Mr Brock association that is.

Nope. As I said earlier, a Brock Kill Lite will not work: the lot must go, as surviving badgers, if they really are the One True TB vector, will merely scurry off out of the killing zone, breed like hell (as wild creatures do) to recover their numbers after a population crash - and so back to Square One, the problem exported to new territory and with Knobs On!

Vaccination not Political Gesture Brock Kill Lite - only way the bovine TB problem will end.

Paul Boote said:

Vaccination not Political Gesture Brock Kill Lite - only way the bovine TB problem will end.

Click to expand...

. . . . but it has already been proved that vaccination does not work in an infected Badger . . . . so that line of argument is fundamentally flawed I'm afraid.

So, what then?

I've got a few ideas, but by God it would cost people to hear them!

Peter Jacobs said:

This is to be a controlled cull, not an annihilation, and it is hoped that it will drastically reduce the incidence of this horrible disease that has been estimated to cost the Country over one billion pounds over the next decade.

Click to expand...

Sure I read somewhere that the scientists at DEFRA expect to achieve a 10-12% reduction in cattle TB cases after nine years. That doesnt sound enough of a benefit to me and i think the whole plan is shocking. Presumably if cutting down all trees could produce a 12% improvement in crop yields we could do that ...oh I forgot we have done that already.

Peter Jacobs said:

According to wilki-knows-everything:

"The disease can be transmitted in several ways; for example, badgers excrete M. bovis in exhaled air, sputum, urine, faeces and pus, so the disease can be transmitted by direct contact, contact with the excreta of an infected animal, or inhalation of aerosols, depending on the species involved"

Now, as to vaccination for Badgers, the fact is that it doesn't work if the animal already has been infected and apparently costs about £12.50 per vaccination (according to the bbc)

Bovine TB not only affect cattle but can also be transmitted to, cats, dogs, pigs, deer and foxes, but apparently not sheep (?)

If you listen to the anti brigade they are using terms like, wholesale killing, extinction and other emotive terms all of which are nothing like the truth but do make for very good sound bites.

The bbc seem to only publish pictures of cute Mr Brocks in their articles, and never an emaciated cow that is suffering from the disease.

It is all too easy for those against to use the anthropomorphic association which is so very far from the truth.

This is to be a controlled cull, not an annihilation, and it is hoped that it will drastically reduce the incidence of this horrible disease that has been estimated to cost the Country over one billion pounds over the next decade.

It is not nice, I know but all logic tells us it is necessary, once you get over the Mr Brock association that is.

Click to expand...

A good post that is without the emotion often applied in these situations. In my part of the world, the amount of badgers killed by traffic has grown more than tenfold in recent years. I rarely drive from my village without seeing a dead badger. Those increased numbers are probably more to do with increased populations rather than reduced driving abilities.

As to the original premise that anglers are the best friends of wildlife, unfortunately that is not always the case. Discarded tins, cans, line, tackle packets demonstrate that perfectly.

I suppose we could shoot those "anglers"....

The bottom lines in all of this is it has never been proven which animal is giving it to the other. Badger - cattle, cattle - badger.
We know that cattle have it because it's tested for and has been for about 50 years. Badgers 50 years ago were a rare animal indeed due to persecution, but cattle had BTB back then, granted in far less numbers than now but the UK has never been free of it since we started testing for it in cattle.
It's also true areas where there were no badgers were turning up BTB cattle.

Since the protection of badgers the population has expanded to all regions of the UK. But what has never been tested is the extent of BTB in the total badger population.
Why is that?
Don't say it's not doable because it is, badgers use the same middens all the time. Simple test on the dung would establish whether that set/animals in it has/have BTB present.

The cost of testing would not be prohibitive either, no more than it costs to test cattle.
Dung sample, lab test, = positive or negative result for each sett.

No the cynic in me says the reason this hasn’t been done is because a different picture may well emerge.

The problem with a blanket cull, which this is, both BTB badgers and none BTB animals will be killed in it. Which begs the question is there another agenda being hidden here? Well possibly as I can think of a few!

Frankly it’s very sloppy and bad science by the Govt when the fundamental question of “Who’s giving to who?” hasn’t and can’t be answered.

To make a decision based on only half the science because of pressure from the NFU shouting loudest is wrong and badly wrong when the action you are taking will only reduce BTB in cattle by a maximum of 16% at best over a 9 year period.

So it’s a case of, “Move and the Badger gets it!”

Peter Jacobs said:

According to wilki-knows-everything:

"The disease can be transmitted in several ways; for example, badgers excrete M. bovis in exhaled air, sputum, urine, faeces and pus, so the disease can be transmitted by direct contact, contact with the excreta of an infected animal, or inhalation of aerosols, depending on the species involved"

Now, as to vaccination for Badgers, the fact is that it doesn't work if the animal already has been infected and apparently costs about £12.50 per vaccination (according to the bbc)

Bovine TB not only affect cattle but can also be transmitted to, cats, dogs, pigs, deer and foxes, but apparently not sheep (?)

If you listen to the anti brigade they are using terms like, wholesale killing, extinction and other emotive terms all of which are nothing like the truth but do make for very good sound bites.

The bbc seem to only publish pictures of cute Mr Brocks in their articles, and never an emaciated cow that is suffering from the disease.

It is all too easy for those against to use the anthropomorphic association which is so very far from the truth.

This is to be a controlled cull, not an annihilation, and it is hoped that it will drastically reduce the incidence of this horrible disease that has been estimated to cost the Country over one billion pounds over the next decade.

It is not nice, I know but all logic tells us it is necessary, once you get over the Mr Brock association that is.

Click to expand...

Perhaps you ought to point the Defra scientists towards that information Peter because unless I'm missing something they have made no attempt whatsoever to verify that a link exists. In fact they appear to have gone out of their way to point out that NO science exists to corroborate the idea that Badgers pass on BT to cattle. That's because it simply hasn't been proven.

The cull is an ill advised 'shot in the dark' by a body that has no other answers to provide a protesting agrarian community with. On that basis it is not only futile but a downright abuse of the environment. My guess is that it will not have the slightest affect on BT cases in farm stocks.

I really resent the use of the term 'anti' in this instance too. I'm certainly no hand wringing bunny-hugger but I am totally against the idea of a badger cull. At least until there is genuine and categorical evidence to support the need for one.

are you sure about Defra Chris ? Badger control – culling of badgers ? Animal Diseases


got to this via a farmers union site where for page not found they put "Moo ... OOPS page not found" hilarious

---------- Post added at 18:10 ---------- Previous post was at 18:06 ----------

What is the evidence for allowing culling of badgers in pilot areas?
The Defra badger cull policy is based on scientific evidence from the Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT). Using the results of this trial (based on an average of 5 years’ culling plus a 4-year post-cull period); culling over an area of 150km2 could be expected to lead to an average 16% reduction in TB incidence in the local area. This figure was agreed by an independent panel of scientists at a meeting with Professor Bob Watson, then Defra’s Chief Scientific Adviser.

Summary of key conclusions from this meeting
Chief Scientist Ian Boyd and Chief Vet Nigel Gibbens explain the science behind the badger cull (Guardian)
Randomised Badger Culling Trial
The results from the proactive culls in the RBCT suggest that the benefits of culling, ie reductions in incidence of TB in cattle in the culled area, may not be seen for 3-4 years after culling begins but could continue for at least 6 years after culling stops.