New Welsh Badger Cull

[GavinWheeler]

Elin Jones has just announced a new consultation on a badger cull in Wales.

Supporting papers are here.

Apart from noting predictable tricks (e.g. they quote surprisingly high figures for reduction of "bovine TB in cattle in the area" - presumably by ignoring the increase in TB outside the area) I've not yet had time to read this in detail.

[Eryri]

A few of the latest quotes from the anti-cull campaign in Wales...

On those who live in Industrial areas.
"The crimes of local badger diggers, and gangs from the Valleys, are likely to increase." - PAC website.
The 'valleys' make up over a million people of the population of Wales, and do not take kindly to be automatically branded as a type of criminal.

On those who live in Rural Areas.
"From a social point of view, it is causing divisions between neighbours – especially the less educated who find it difficult to understand a scientific paper and prefer to listen to their grandfathers rural myths." - Eileen Wheeler, 29th September 2010, PAC blog.
It is not yet known what evidence there is for people who live in rural areas being 'less educated'.

On all Welsh farmers.
"Is it time for a BOYCOTT WELSH BEEF AND DAIRY PRODUCTS?" posted by Frances Miller, entry made on 21st September 2010, on the Pembrokeshire Against the Cull blog (who also runs an RSPCA centre in Aberporth).
Some farmers were previously against a badger cull.


I was wondering what other section of the community the anti-cull campaigners are going to alienate next !!

[Ukwildlifeo]

Originally Posted by Eryri

A few of the latest quotes from the anti-cull campaign in Wales...

On those who live in Industrial areas.
"The crimes of local badger diggers, and gangs from the Valleys, are likely to increase." - PAC website.
The 'valleys' make up over a million people of the population of Wales, and do not take kindly to be automatically branded as a type of criminal.

On those who live in Rural Areas.
"From a social point of view, it is causing divisions between neighbours – especially the less educated who find it difficult to understand a scientific paper and prefer to listen to their grandfathers rural myths." - Eileen Wheeler, 29th September 2010, PAC blog.
It is not yet known what evidence there is for people who live in rural areas being 'less educated'.

On all Welsh farmers.
"Is it time for a BOYCOTT WELSH BEEF AND DAIRY PRODUCTS?" posted by Frances Miller, entry made on 21st September 2010, on the Pembrokeshire Against the Cull blog (who also runs an RSPCA centre in Aberporth).
Some farmers were previously against a badger cull.


I was wondering what other section of the community the anti-cull campaigners are going to alienate next !!

Aww the poor innocent pro cull folks

How the behaviour of 'the antis' this proves we need to cull badger I dont know...

[Eryri]

I think the direction of the anti-cull campaigners suggest that once you get a small group of people in a room who agree with each other that may tend to classify those who don't agree as somehow deficient, or less worthy as people. It's a very negative development. I have had occasional experience of this in the past, in various special interest groups or campaigns that I've been involved with over the years. It's indicative of whether a group is outward looking and inclusive, or inward looking and exclusive. Of course, groups which are inward looking and exclusive, feel good about themselves and relish in denigrating others, but it might be worth noting that groups who tend to be positive, inclusive and outward looking to be more successful in their aims.

[Eryri]

I notice that Christine Gwyther the main anti-cull campaigner of politicians in Wales has today been selected as a candidate for the Senedd elections for the constituency of Carmarthen West & South Pembrokeshire, next May. Below are the main candidates, their political party and the votes recieved at the last Senedd election.

Pro-cull :- Angela Burns (Conservative - 8590)
Anti-cull :- Christine Gwyther (Labour - 8492)
Pro-cull :- Nerys Evans (Plaid Cymru - 8340)

Whilst it is true that 'other issues' and 'traditional party loyalties' has a say in who gets elected, this is not so in Carmarthen West & South Pembrokeshire. The electoral support is too close to call, and the badger cull issue may well play a pivotal roll in who gets elected.

One to watch.

[Eryri]

Recent development updates :

(a) The National Trust has withdrawn it's objections to the Badger Cull proposals in the IAA. National Trust backs badger cull plans.

(b) The Badger (Control Area) (Wales) Order 2010, has been published.

(c) Additional catlle movement controls have been enforced within the IAA relating to linkages between land holdings.

[Springer5]

Originally Posted by Eryri

I think the direction of the anti-cull campaigners suggest that once you get a small group of people in a room who agree with each other that may tend to classify those who don't agree as somehow deficient....

I have to be careful how this comes across because it is not meant to be an insult in any way, but having read many of your past posts on this topic I personally think your own posts have given that impression without any help from anyone else, whether deservedly or not; not all of them of course, but quite a few.

Originally Posted by Eryri

I have had occasional experience of this in the past, in various special interest groups or campaigns that I've been involved with over the years....

Exactly. Look carefully and try to find a common factor in all of that.

[Springer5]

Originally Posted by GavinWheeler

Elin Jones has just announced a new consultation on a badger cull in Wales.

Supporting papers are here.

Apart from noting predictable tricks (e.g. they quote surprisingly high figures for reduction of "bovine TB in cattle in the area" - presumably by ignoring the increase in TB outside the area) I've not yet had time to read this in detail.

I have seen the factsheet distributed by WAG announcing this. First impressions are that it is shamefully biased in it presentation of the arguments, although I suppose that shouldn't surprise me anymore.

In the case of culling they state "scientific evidence shows that culling baders can substancially reduce TB in cattle..."

They conveniently fail to mention that the same "scientific evidence" admits that this reduction is only a temporary efect, with perturbation leading to an eventual increase over time. No where is it admitted that the MAJORITY of scientific evidence is against culling.

Curiously it also states the following (almost comical) fact....

"Vaccination will not protect infected badgers"

What ????? So culling will ????

It would be excellent pantomime material if only this wasn't such an important subject.

[Eryri]

Originally Posted by Springer5

They conveniently fail to mention that the same "scientific evidence" admits that this reduction is only a temporary effect, with perturbation leading to an eventual increase over time.

This is not true. The consultation material published by the Welsh Government clearly mentions the longevity effects of culling and the issue or perturbation.

It is here.
The duration of the effects of repeated widespread badger culling on cattle tuberculosis following the cessation of culling.

Originally Posted by Springer5

No where is it admitted that the MAJORITY of scientific evidence is against culling.

This is because culling is not a popularity contest. It's a matter of looking at the evidence and finding out what benefits culling would have on a specific bTB hotspot in West Wales. It may well be true that culling would not be effective in areas where there is a low badger population density, or few natural boundaries to offset perturbation. What is being considered in the IAA has sound scientific evidence to indicate that it would be very effective as a contributor to reducing bTB in cattle.

Originally Posted by Springer5

Curiously it also states the following (almost comical) fact....

"Vaccination will not protect infected badgers"

What ????? So culling will ????

Yes.

Vaccinating an infected badger has no effect. This badger will go on to infect the cubs and other unvaccinated badgers (as well as cattle). Culling reduces the propensity to transmit the disease, thereby protecting future generations of the badger population (and cattle).

[Springer5]

Originally Posted by Eryri

This is not true. The consultation material published by the Welsh Government clearly mentions the longevity effects of culling and the issue or perturbation.

It is here.
The duration of the effects of repeated widespread badger culling on cattle tuberculosis following the cessation of culling.

That may be so, but I think we are referring to different documents perhaps. I am referrring to a document which was posted to me by the WAG. A coloured, folding "leaflet" type document for which my earlier comments remain accurate and true. The real travesty is that because the document I'm referring to is clearly being posted out to people in and around certain areas of wales (presumably "hotspot" areas) it naturally has a greater chance of being the main document that many people will see (unless they choose to look further for themselves). Consequently its mislaeading nature is inexcusable.

Originally Posted by Eryri

This is because culling is not a popularity contest. It's a matter of looking at the evidence and finding out what benefits culling would have on a specific bTB hotspot in West Wales. It may well be true that culling would not be effective in areas where there is a low badger population density, or few natural boundaries to offset perturbation. What is being considered in the IAA has sound scientific evidence to indicate that it would be very effective as a contributor to reducing bTB in cattle.

The popularity, or otherwise, of the cull is not the issue at all. What I am talking about is the weight of evidence "on balance" amongst the scientific community being against a cull. That remains true also. I am not talking about whether the cull itslef is "popular" or not, I am saying that if you gathered all those scientists who have studied this subject in one room and asked tham to vote, the majority would vote against a cull. As someone who is always quoting WAG voting issues and the importance of majorities, I find it strange that you have changed tack on this issue.

Originally Posted by Eryri

Yes.

Vaccinating an infected badger has no effect. This badger will go on to infect the cubs and other unvaccinated badgers (as well as cattle). Culling reduces the propensity to transmit the disease, thereby protecting future generations of the badger population (and cattle).

None of which changes the fact that the documentation I received makes no mention of the fact that culling will also "not protect infected badgers", because it will kill them. Each badger that you cull will have no "future generations" because it will be dead, so how can the document, by implication, claim the benefit of protection for something that has been removed from existence ?? Culling may or may not (most scientists say not) reduce the disease in the long term but it certainly isn't "protecting" the badger either way, infected or uninfected.

As far as "other unvaccinated badgers" goes, you are presumably referring to those who will "slip through the net" as it were, based on their location relative to the vaccination area and perhaps just through the impracticality of finding every badger in the area. However, the same may be said of culling, so once again culling achieves nothing that vaccination can't, except that it potentially kills a lot of uninfected badgers in the process.

If I were Mr. Spock in Star Trek, I think the words "illogical Captain" would spring to mind !