Quote:
Originally Posted by Eryri  Yes, Gavin, I've read all of what I've quoted, including point 4.28 above. |
Which implies that
at best the cull will have no effect on prevalence in badgers. At worst it will increase prevalence, especially as the IAPA is not particularly well isolated. The coast is the best boundary, the Teifi is a decent river but with a number of bridges across it, and the other boundaries are pathetic. Many, as I pointed out, are no boundaries whatsoever to badgers, they just have no cattle so will not produce inconvenient statistics of herd breakdowns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eryri I would also point out that if you reduce the population of badger by 70% and that any rise in prevalence of bTB is 'absent' from those badgers remaining. What conclusions do you draw ? |
I don't have to draw conclusions - we have empirical data. The Imperial study showed across all the RBCT cull areas, including those with good boundaries, that a badger cull has at best a small and transient effect on bovine TB in cattle with no long term benefit, and at best no effect on the prevalence in badgers.