There has been a call to stop badger culling in Ireland, as it dosen't seem to be halting the spread of TB amongst cattle. Research has suggested it is doing no good, but farmers are still pushing for badgers to be culled which seems pointless to me.
So many badgers have been killed that they are extinct in some areas of Britain, but TB levels have doubled in recent years.
Farmers are convinced that its badgers spreading TB amongst their herds so you can't blame them for wanting them to be culled, but if research is overwhelmingly saying that its NOT them, why do farmers still hold this view?
For many years various raptors were shot as soon as spotted on many ranches in the United States. It could argued until one was blue in the face that (for example) Bald Eagles did NOT kill lambs, and the ranchers would still shoot Bald Eagles.
Now that the raptors are no longer being shot, it seems that no rancher has ever suffered a massive harvest of lambs attributable to Bald Eagles.
The problem for the badgers is that they are large, and easily seen. If it was found that those evil Yankee squirrels were the vector for the TB, it would be acknowledged that it would be much more difficult, if not impossible, to eliminate.
But the interesting problem is--how do we know that the badgers are infecting the cattle, rather than the cattle infecting the badgers?
Kingfisher
But the interesting problem is--how do we know that the badgers are infecting the cattle, rather than the cattle infecting the badgers?
Kingfisher
I suppose that the farmers thinking is that the cows are isolated in general, so something must be carrying the illness to the cows rather than the other way around. But it is most likely a two way thing.
I think that kingfisher is right in that the main reason farmers are so convinced it is badgers is simply because they are large and easily culled. I just hope people come to their senses with this new information and stop killing the, badgers they are wonderful creatures.
I used to take my dogs to an old vet locally. He had once been a "Ministry" vet. He was very scornful of the whole badger culling thing, maintaining that badgers were not the cause. One major factor that he considered to be responsible for the spread of TB in cattle was the removal of hedges and their replacement with fences, this allowed cattle from neighbouring (or should I say neighboring for Kingfisher?!) fields, which were just as likely to be neighbouring farms, to nuzzle each other across the boundary, which is a most efficient way of spreading the disease. This, together with the large scale movement of cattle that takes place today and the lack of morals of some farmers is much more likely to be the cause.
I worked with hill farmers for several years and I was astounded by the outdated views they held, full of myth and old wives' tales, gamekeepers likewise live in a time that disappeared 100 years ago!
I used to take my dogs to an old vet locally. He had once been a "Ministry" vet. He was very scornful of the whole badger culling thing, maintaining that badgers were not the cause. One major factor that he considered to be responsible for the spread of TB in cattle was the removal of hedges and their replacement with fences, this allowed cattle from neighbouring (or should I say neighboring for Kingfisher?!) fields, which were just as likely to be neighbouring farms, to nuzzle each other across the boundary, which is a most efficient way of spreading the disease. This, together with the large scale movement of cattle that takes place today and the lack of morals of some farmers is much more likely to be the cause.
That's very interesting, and makes a lot more sense to me than badgers spreading the disease. Some farmers do seem to be living in a bygone age.
Indeed, another factor to be considered was the crowding of cattle during the foot and mouth epidemic a few years ago.
My local county fair (the Western Washington State Fair, but much better known as the 'Puyallup Fair', and one of the largest in the United States) still had signs on the livestock barns warning of foot and mouth disease until just this year. The signs specifically stated that fair visitors who had just returned from foreign countries should not bring in any soil from foreign countries, and that the visitor should thoroughly wash all articles from any foreign countries before entering the livestock area.
The cattle crowded into barns had ample opportunity to transmit TB, and there are silent carriers in cattle, just as there are silent carriers of human TB. It is much easier to blame a large, slow, easy to destroy creature without a voice, than it is accept the blame for one's own poor practices.
Kingfisher
That is a very good point, we have all seen the incredible cramped conditions that some farmers keep their cattle, that must be the perfect conditions to transmit a disease such as TB amongst a herd.
You still saw foot and mouth signs around here too untilkfairly recently. Silent carriers of TB, as Kingfisher says, along with overcrowding are the real causes of TB amongst cattle. I feel for the badgers that have already been killed, and probably will be killed in the future because of the deluded farmers.
An update on the badger culling situation from the BBC website. It is has been decided by an independant panel that the culling of badgers woud have to be so extensive that it wouldn't be practical and cost effective. Conservationists have suggested that restricting cattle movement, something mentioned in this thread, would be much more effective.
Farmers are of course arguing for the cull, saying that they don't believe that there can't be a culling strategy that wouldn't help the spread of TB, even though in the words of the independant investigation panel culling badgers would have no impact and could even make things worse. This is because is culled areas badgers move more widely and freely and therefore increase contact with each other.
The decision of whether a cull goes ahead will be made by the government, and I hope they make the sensible decision. If they don't, you would have to question the point of an independant enquiry if its findings were just going to be ignored.
...If they don't, you would have to question the point of an independant enquiry if its findings were just going to be ignored.
Unfortunately, many times the independent enquiry findings are ignored (it's rather routine in the United States).
It is encouraging, however, that the commission did find that restricting cattle movement would be a more useful practice. We'll see how much clout the farmers have.
Kingfisher
In the latest issue of New Scientist there is a short article on this subject as it is an example of how perfectly good science can still be ignored.
At the end of the article there is a quote from the Farmer's Union saying "If culling remains outlawed, farmers will take the law into their own hands".
Why the farmers think they have such a deep knowledge that exceeds the independant scientific report I don't know. It looks like this "debate" will go on for quite a while though.
I'm in no position to judge as I know little to nothing about this subject. But if farmers are think they can take the law into their own hands and get away with it then something needs to be done! No one is above the law, not even farmers.