Offence of concealing badgers proposed

[stripee]

For those who are interested, the consultation by the Welsh Assembly on their proposed badger cull is available from this link as a download pdf file
Welsh Assembly Government | Consultation on the Tuberculosis Eradication (Wales) Order 2009 under the Animal Health Act 1981

[james bennet]

Two things: First, how can you prove in a court of law that a landowner knows there are badgers on his land in order to conceal them? And secondly, why the double approach of vaccinating and culling? It doesn't make sense to me, but then nothing in this whole plan does.

[Meta menardi]

More legislation means less discussion means worse law means more stuff to sort out means more legislation...

The wheel churns and destroys.

[Springer5]

Maybe I'm missing something that should be obvious, but I can't see anywhere in this draft legislation that specifies what criteria they're going to use to decide whether any given indivdual Badger is either culled or vaccinated.

So they trap a Badger and a guy turns up next morning with a vaccine bottle in one hand and a gun in the other. Which does he use on THAT DAY for THAT Badger, and why that choice on that occasion and the other choice on another?

I just can't see any proposals for deciding the answer to that anywhere in the document.

Can anyone else ?

We've been contacted today by the "Animal Health and Welfare Group", which, from what I can see on the web, is some sort of DEFRA lacky (using a name for itself which couldn't be less suited, given that killing a badger can hardly be conducive to its good health). We were out when they called, but the message said they'd call again later this afternoon.

I can't wait !!

[hobble]

I agree Springer it seems to me the whole document is written in a way which is undecided about how to go about the cull, which leads me to believe there will be no clear way.
Cull, vaccinate, trap and vaccinate, shoot...............
I suppose that leaves them with a free reign to do as they please.

[naturefirst]

I concur about the terrible writing of the document....but perhaps they left it so general so that they can amend it when they wish?

[Deerhunter]

Originally Posted by naturefirst

I concur about the terrible writing of the document....but perhaps they left it so general so that they can amend it when they wish?

A bit like the hunting act.

I think they are all too busy with their dirty little snouts in the trough to think anything through.

[Springer5]

[quote=Deerhunter;472741]A bit like the hunting act.QUOTE]

Surely it's the opposite of that....

The hunting act has allowed the species involved to live without deliberate persecution for the satisfaction of some human objective or other.

This act, on the other hand, sanctions the ability to do so.

I agree about the 'dirty little snouts in the trough though'. Sums it up perfectly.

[Blackbrook Eye]

'dirty little snouts in the trough' seems to signify that there is a large amount of money to be gained by a badger cull, apart from possibly of a developer wishing to build on land occupied by badgers, I fail to see where anyone can make a vast profit from killing badgers. Can someone please enlighten me as to any financial benefit to the proposers of the bill ?

Keith

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by Blackbrook Eye

'dirty little snouts in the trough' seems to signify that there is a large amount of money to be gained by a badger cull, apart from possibly of a developer wishing to build on land occupied by badgers, I fail to see where anyone can make a vast profit from killing badgers. Can someone please enlighten me as to any financial benefit to the proposers of the bill ?

Keith

I think the point was more general that politicians - be they english , welsh or wherever else are too busy with their snouts in the trough (double claiming their expenses, paying for second homes, paying their wives and or mistresses research assistant wages etc etc) to consider wildlife and countryside legislation properly.

The hunting with dogs act was badly conceived and badly implemented - whether you agree with hunting or not. - a well conceived act would either have banned hunting or not - what we actually have is an attempt to please everyone that actually pleases no one and is so riddled with loop holes and grey areas as to be virtually unenforceable.

The badger act promises to be more of the same... whether you agree that a cull is necessary or not ( I dont btw) what is needed is a tightly worded, well written act which clearly says what can and cant be legally done - looking at the draft on the link above this would appear to be as far from what we are actually going to get as is possible.