PUT THE POLITICIANS ON THE MINIMUM WAGE AND WATCH HOW FAST THINGS CHANGE
Civilisation has operated in two ways - To make one part of society more affluent and the other more wretched than would have been the lot of either in a natural state
There are Natural Rights and Civil Rights. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness
Where Our Power to Execute Our Natural Rights is Perfect, Government has No Legitimate Jurisdiction
When the Forces for War are Greater than the Forces for Peace   Then the World is in Danger
Politics is not a Dirty Word. It is a Way of Life. How is Your Way of Life Today ?

Farming- The Badger Cull: What Happens Now ?

The badger cull: What happens now?

18 October 2013 | By Alistair Driver

THE Government and farming industry must learn the lessons of the pilot badger culls if the policy is to be rolled

out successfully in future, according to Defra’s Chief Vet.

The initial findings from the two pilot badger culls have, predictably, generated more questions than answers.

Opponents of the policy are already claiming the pilots have proved the it is neither practical nor effective, pointing

to the low numbers shot in Gloucestershire, the apparent uncertainty over badger numbers and the costs involved

so far.

But Defra Secretary Owen Paterson is remaining defiant, hailing the successes of the pilots and describing the

parts that have gone less well as lessons to shape future policy. He appears as determined as ever to extend the

policy to new areas next year, suggesting it is more a matter of ‘how’ than ‘if’.

Defra Chief Veterinary Officer Nigel Gibbens said he remained convinced that badger culling, when done

effectively, can be beneficial in reducing cattle disease.

But he said: “We will have lessons to learn about how culling can be done effectively and before rolling it out any

further we will have to think with the industry about how that should be done to get the best benefits. I think there

is real need to take stock of what we have learned.

“It is a whole range of things, including how you go about it, where do you start, what’s the appropriate mix

between cage trapping and shooting and what we have learned about the protestor activity because, you can’t

deny it, it’s there.”

What the pilots have told us so far

  

The pilots in areas defined as West Gloucestershire and West Somerset were established to test the safety,

humanness and efficacy of controlled shooting by trained marksmen as a method of culling badgers.

The six-week pilots, covering areas in excess of 300sq.km, were monitored by an independent group of experts,

who will compile a report for Ministers on how culling measured up in these three areas. Mr Paterson will then

make a decision on whether to roll the policy out to up to new areas in 2014 later this year, or early next year.

With the six weeks up in both areas, Defra has released basic information available so far. It is not all bad.

  

Mr Paterson and Defra officials said there were no issues in either pilot with safety or humaneness, with the

exception of one badger that returned to its sett after being shot in Somerset. He deemed the pilots a success

against these criteria.

The question of effectiveness is much more open to interpretation. Under the licence conditions, the companies

organising the cull are required to remove at least 70 per cent of badgers from the pilot areas to maximise the

disease benefits for cattle.

Somerset has been granted a three-week extension by licensing body Natural England, while Gloucestershire has

applied for an eight-week extension, which, if granted, seems certain to be challenged in the courts by the Badger

Trust.

Who moved the goalposts?

It is not, of course, quite that simple. The original licences specified targets of more than 2,000 badgers to be culled

in Somerset, based on a population estimate of 2,400 from a survey in 2012.

In Gloucestershire, the original target was in excess of 2,800 badgers, based on a population estimate of 3,400.

So when Defra announced the much lower population estimates, based on fresh surveys taken just before the

pilots began this year, Mr Paterson was immediately accused of ‘moving the goalposts’, prompting his now

legendary remark that it was the badgers that moved the goalposts, not him.

Mr Gibbens admitted Defra was ‘surprised’ by the massively lower population estimates, which he insisted have

been ‘crawled over by experts’, including Defra’s Chief Scientist Ian Boyd, to vouch for their robustness.

The estimates were based on a technique known as hair trapping to estimate how many badgers per set and a

survey of sett numbers.

Mr Gibbens said: “It looks like moving the goalposts to suit us. But there is pretty good evidence populations went

down a lot between one year and the next. When the expert group report they will say what they have to say about

it but we have looked very hard to make sure those estimates are well-founded. What we really had got was a

lower population.”

The fall in badger numbers has been attributed by Mr Paterson and Defra to a combination of poor weather

affecting breeding and disease.

But badger expert, Rosie Woodroffe, from the Zoological Society of London, does not believe such a profound

drop of in numbers is credible.

“You do not see 40 per cent drop in badger numbers due to weather conditions. It has never been seen at

WoodchesterPark or Wytham (where badgers are monitored by researchers),” she said.

The only plausible explanations, she said, were either ‘mass illegal culling by farmers’, which she said there was

no evidence to suggest was taking place, or that one or both of the surveys was seriously out.

She suggested interference by protestors with the hair trapping process, which involved cage trapping badgers,

could have skewed the figures.

The future of the pilots

The pilots will continue for four years. Mr Gibbens is adamant that even though Gloucestershire has clearly has

not met its targets, both pilots must go on in order to maximise disease benefits in cattle.

“You can’t do one year of culling, then walk away. We have to see it through to the end, which means four years of

culling over a big enough area efficiently enough to achieve disease benefits,” he said.

Despite the low cull figure, he says it is still ‘entirely feasible’ the Gloucestershire cull could deliver these disease

benefits. He pointed out that three of the original 10 Randomised Badger Cull Trial (RBCT) areas achieved similar

low numbers in the first year but ultimately ‘caught up’ and produced benefits.

“This doesn’t stand and fall on the first year. It is a four-year cull. The benefits cut in after three years and are

maintained for at least another six,” he said.   

But Prof Woodroffe said the pilots had shown it was ‘quite clear this is not an effective way to deliver a rapid cull of

the type expected to deliver the benefits of the RBCT’.

She said the 30 per cent figure was ‘in the ballpark where we would expect there to be increased TB in cattle

where badgers have been culled’, as shown in the reactive element of the RBCT.

In Somerset, however, Mr Gibbens’s advice is clear that the 59 per cent reduction achieved so far, allied with the

extra badgers taken out in the extended cull period ‘will deliver clear disease benefits as part of a 4-year cull’.

Prof Woodroffe, a firm advocate of vaccination over culling, stressed that 59 per cent was ‘well short’ of the target

and ‘can’t be called a success’. But even she acknowledged that, if the population estimates are to be believed

and culling is more effective next year, ‘Somerset might, on balance, have modest overall benefits’ in disease

levels.

Extending the cull period  

Among the key lessons learned as far as the future of the pilots and possible wider roll out is concerned is that

culling ‘may need to be longer than six weeks in future, enabling teams to adapt their approaches to suit local

circumstances’, Mr Paterson said this week.

Mr Gibbens said there was ‘not much evidence to go on’ when it came to specifying the length of the cull period,

beyond advice from the RBCT that culling was more effective if done quickly. However, he pointed out that the

100sq.km RBCT were much smaller than those covered by the pilots and it had become clear more time was need

in these larger areas.

Mr Gibbens has advised that the period of culling ‘this year should be extended to achieve the earliest and

greatest possible impact on bTB in Gloucestershire’. Previously, ahead of Natural England’s decision to to extend

the Somerset licence, he advised that ‘further increasing the number of badgers culled’ in Somerset would

improve the benefits already gained from culling there and ‘enable them to accrue earlier.

He said his view remained that the benefits of further lowering badger populations outweighed the potential

negative impact of infected badgers roaming more widely as a result of culling.

He said: “In Gloucestershire we did not drop the population to the ambitious target we set in the timescale we set,

so my advice is that the bigger gain is to reduce the badger population to stop the spread to cattle regardless of

whether the longer period gives you marginal increases in TB due to perturbation.”

He also suggested it could be beneficial for culling to begin earlier in future years to allow as much time as

possible to reduce badger populations, as well as permitting longer culling periods.

But Prof Woodroffe, who was involved with the RBCT, insisted there was clear evidence that ‘on average the

longer culling went on, the greater the increase in TB in badgers’, as badger populations are geographically

disturbed. She said culling needed to be done simultaneously and quickly to avoid the perturbation effect.

The RBCT culls were meant to take place over 12 days but when they took place over 120 days ‘TB levels

increased by a factor of 1.7’, Prof Woodroffe said.

She said the two pilots should therefore not be extended this year.

“If it is not possible, with the resources and staff available, to cull such a big area so quickly, then these culls aren’t

going to deliver benefits of the scale of the RBCT but will have detrimental effects on badgers and will undermine

the benefits for cattle,” she said.

“They should take the opportunity to reassess, look at what they have learned about how to do it better next year,

if they choose to continue,” she said.

Dealing with protestors   

The disruption caused by protestors in Gloucestershire in particular has exceeded expectations and appears to

be partly responsible for the low number of badgers removed in that pilot.

Mr Paterson paid tribute to the local farmers and landowners undertaking the cull, often in the face of intimidation

by a small minority who are determined to stop this disease control policy’.

Mr Gibbens said coping with protestors ‘is something we will have to consider’ in future culling policies. “We have

got protestors coming in from different areas, they are not localThe protestors had a different impact depending

on where you are. We will consider all of these things in the round,” he said.

Culling methods

The original intention was that controlled shooting would be the primary control method deployed in the pilot

culls. With farmers bearing the cost, it was considered the most affordable option.

But as the pilots have gone, more caged trapping was deployed, as controlled shooting proved difficult in some

areas due to a combination of difficult terrain, weather and the presence of protestors.

Mr Gibbens said: “We gave the companies a licence and said they could cage trap and shoot. Cage trapping to get

badger numbers down is the right thing to do. This will be rolled up in the final assessment at the end of the day.”

Longer-term, Defra is in the early stages of researching whether gassing could be an option. Mr Gibbens said

previous research had failed to find a humane method that would ‘consistently kill setts of badgers’. The big

challenges to overcome were finding the right gas and ensuring gas penetrates throughout a sett, he said.

“The research we are kicking off now will look at both of those things – how you deliver what sort of gasses and

how you get them through a sett. But we are not even past the experimental proof of principle yet,” he said.

Costs and benefits 

There are no official cost figures available. But the extra use of cage trapping and apparent higher police costs in

Gloucestershire – around £1m, double the original estimate, according to the county’s police commissioner –

allied with lower-than-expected cull numbers potentially shifts the cost-benefit relationship.

Mr Gibbens said:  “Our assessment will take into account the cost to farmers and the cost to Government. Farmers

made a reasonable argument they could do it at lower cost. We will see what the upshot is.”

Prof Woodroffe, along other proponents of vaccination, claim when policing costs are taken into account,

vaccination – estimated at £670 per badger in the Welsh vaccination project – becomes the more affordable option.

However, NFU vice president Adam Quinney said it was unfair to include the whole cost of policing protestors

intent on disrupting the policy through illegal activities in any cost-benefit analysis. That, he said, was as much a

civil issue as a judgement on the feasibility of culling badgers.

Future roll out

The final decision about whether badger culling is extended to new areas next year will depend on the findings of

the independent monitoring group and, then Mr Paterson’s decision.

He has no intention of taking a step back now, despite the difficulties encountered in the pilots and the mounting

calls for the policy to be scrapped.

So the focus – at least for as long as Owen Paterson remains in charge at Defra – will be on how to make the policy

more effective in reducing badger numbers by taking on board what went right and wrong in the pilots.

For example, Defra is unlikely to make the same mistake of announcing one set of targets before the cull started

and then revealing they had been significantly revised down once the cull had finished – a PR blunder that made

an already politically-fraught policy appear more chaotic than it needed to.

The length of time permitted and methods used for culling and the threat posed by protestors will also be under

close consideration.

But the future of the policy in England will not just depend on what Mr Paterson decides. To roll it out to new areas

requires enough farmers in each one to invest in it financially and emotionally in the belief it will help keep them

free if the devastating of bTB in their herds. In other words, it will need to be practical and affordable, as well as

effective.  

Mr Gibbens said: I am absolutely convinced that culling done effectively can be beneficial. But we will wait to see

what the independent panel has got to say. We need to see what happens in those extensions and learn the

lessons about the practicalities.

“But if we are going to reverse the TB epidemic we have got to push at all the disease transmission routes and

badgers to cattle is one of them.”

Similar Recent Posts by this Author:

Share this post

Share on facebook
Share on google
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on pinterest
Share on print
Share on email