Badger cull, would you avoid Welsh produce

[Garden Witch]

Einstein said we cannot solve our problems with the same thinking with which we created them.
Some farmers would do well to heed his advice.

[Deerhunter]

Hi Brains

I didn't pass my eleven plus and I am not a scientist so i had better divide this up.

Gamma interferon done. Check

Can you tell me what date testing for calves between one day old and six weeks old was introduced ?

Originally Posted by Brains

minimum of annually using gamma-interferon rather than tuberculin; it gives more false positives, but fewer false negatives. No cattle to move unless tested clear in the previous 6 weeks or so - that includes ALL cattle (pre-movement testing for calves upto 6 weeks old was only introduced last year, as I understand it! Previously, they had a year or so to contract the disease and then up to 2 years to express it, during which time they could be moved around infecting other herds. This would STILL be a problem under any movement control program - but you still catch more of those infected).

[Deerhunter]

Originally Posted by stripee

Illegal cattle movements have been common in Carmarthenshire, estimated in 1000s. Cattle trucks stopped show that cattle have ear tags relating to previously slaughtered animals. Bulls taken to shows have not been tested nor have they been tested prior to visiting farms.

Hi Stripee

Who is estimating the 1000's of illegal cattle movements?

What is the advantage of an ear tag belonging to a previously slaughtered animal?

[Brains]

Originally Posted by Deerhunter

Hi Brains

I didn't pass my eleven plus and I am not a scientist so i had better divide this up.

Gamma interferon done. Check

Can you tell me what date testing for calves between one day old and six weeks old was introduced ?

well, I failed my 11-plus as well!!! Fortunately, we then went comprehensive so it didn't make much difference

re: 6 week old calves, sorry - wording was poor - calves from 6 weeks old are supposed to be being tested prior to movement:

"All cattle over 42 days old moving out of a 1 or 2 yearly tested herd must have tested negative to a TB test within 60 days prior to movement, (unless the herd or type of movement meets any of the exemptions listed in the table on page 6). from http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/tb/p...ve-booklet.pdf

Testing was initially for older cattle; testing of calves was delayed for 1 year following the introduction of pre-movement testing and was introduced last year not in 2006.

"Pre-movement testing is a single policy that was introduced in two phases to allow time for herd owners and Local Veterinary Practices to adjust to the new requirements. Phase one was introduced in England on 27 March 2006 and applied to all cattle over 15 months of age. Phase two was rolled out on 1 March 2007 and extended pre-movement testing to younger animals. " from: Defra, UK - Animal health & welfare - TB - Pre-movement testing in England

It therefore follows that IF you are going to move calves of between 43 and 102 days old for whatever reason (unless exempted), they could have been tested before they were 6 weeks old as of 1st March 2007, though they do not HAVE to have been, as the regulation states that they need a negative test within 60 days prior to the movement. Enough info?

According to DEFRA stats here (Defra, UK - Animal health & welfare - Tuberculosis - Statistics), only 87% of movements were compliant with the pre-movement testing regulations, which suggested that 1000s of cattle are being moved illegally.

Brains

[Neil Jones]

Originally Posted by Brains

According to DEFRA stats here (Defra, UK - Animal health & welfare - Tuberculosis - Statistics), only 87% of movements were compliant with the pre-movement testing regulations, which suggested that 1000s of cattle are being moved illegally.

Brains

It is then fairly obvious that Badger culling isn't going to have any effect.

It is very very obvious that the first thing you need to do is stop the movement of infected cattle.

[stripee]

Originally Posted by Deerhunter

Hi Stripee

Who is estimating the 1000's of illegal cattle movements?

What is the advantage of an ear tag belonging to a previously slaughtered animal?

DEFRA usually. Brains has contributed as above.

This from Welsh Assembly consultation before CTS was introduced:

viii) Make it an offence to transfer eartags between animals.

Makes it an offence to identify an animal with ear tags already used to identify and register on CTS a different animal.


CTS was introduced as I am sure you already know to try to curb some of the fraud in the system. Examples of which can be easily found either on the DEFRA site or a Google search.

[Deerhunter]

Originally Posted by Brains

well, I failed my 11-plus as well!!! Fortunately, we then went comprehensive so it didn't make much difference

re: 6 week old calves, sorry - wording was poor - calves from 6 weeks old are supposed to be being tested prior to movement:

"All cattle over 42 days old moving out of a 1 or 2 yearly tested herd must have tested negative to a TB test within 60 days prior to movement, (unless the herd or type of movement meets any of the exemptions listed in the table on page 6). from http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/tb/p...ve-booklet.pdf

Testing was initially for older cattle; testing of calves was delayed for 1 year following the introduction of pre-movement testing and was introduced last year not in 2006.

"Pre-movement testing is a single policy that was introduced in two phases to allow time for herd owners and Local Veterinary Practices to adjust to the new requirements. Phase one was introduced in England on 27 March 2006 and applied to all cattle over 15 months of age. Phase two was rolled out on 1 March 2007 and extended pre-movement testing to younger animals. " from: Defra, UK - Animal health & welfare - TB - Pre-movement testing in England

It therefore follows that IF you are going to move calves of between 43 and 102 days old for whatever reason (unless exempted), they could have been tested before they were 6 weeks old as of 1st March 2007, though they do not HAVE to have been, as the regulation states that they need a negative test within 60 days prior to the movement. Enough info?

According to DEFRA stats here (Defra, UK - Animal health & welfare - Tuberculosis - Statistics), only 87% of movements were compliant with the pre-movement testing regulations, which suggested that 1000s of cattle are being moved illegally.

Brains

Wrong wording :-)

Yes, slightly !!!

Glad we sorted THAT out.


I wonder where those 1000's of cattle are going?

Especially as they are obviously registered with the BCMS !!!!

I would be asking some questions !

I thought I was currently missing all my calf tests !!!!!

[Deerhunter]

Originally Posted by Neil Jones

It is then fairly obvious that Badger culling isn't going to have any effect.

It is very very obvious that the first thing you need to do is stop the movement of infected cattle.

Not very very obvious to me.

But then, I am not a scientist.


Do you think Badgers give Tb to cattle?

[Deerhunter]

Originally Posted by Brains

And I'm NOT happy with snares - and if you go back to just the 1960s or 1950s we DID have lots of TB - were there any more Badgers then?

Snares are just fine Brains.

And DEFRA says we simple country types should use them.


In the 1960's we had almost no Tb - and there were a lot less Badgers then.

[Deerhunter]

Originally Posted by stripee

Illegal cattle movements have been common in Carmarthenshire, estimated in 1000s. Cattle trucks stopped show that cattle have ear tags relating to previously slaughtered animals. Bulls taken to shows have not been tested nor have they been tested prior to visiting farms.

Dead Badgers are turning up weekly in this area in suspicious circumstances, two found to have been shot. 6 dumped near Carmarthen. Another with internal injuries...

Videos taken in cattle sheds at night show visitors to animal feed troughs include: foxes, Badgers, rats, cats, dogs, Polecats, Weasels and birds among others.

Interesting figures from DEFRA re verbal warnings and prosecutions of farmers relating to cattle (and other livestock)2005:http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/ahws...1_year2005.pdf

But why Carmarthenshire ?

Do you think it is the same people swapping ear tags, illegally moving cattle AND shooting Badgers ?


Do you have any suspicions who is involved?

[Brains]

Originally Posted by Deerhunter

Snares are just fine Brains.

And DEFRA says we simple country types should use them.

not for Badgers they don't!

Originally Posted by Deerhunter

In the 1960's we had almost no Tb - and there were a lot less Badgers then.

So there weren't approx 25,000 tb reactors slaughtered in 1960 then? Oddly, that's about the same number as in recent years. And what about the 1950s or 1940s .....

[muldonach]

[quote=Neil Jones;276917]

It is then fairly obvious that Badger culling isn't going to have any effect.

The effect of culling Badgers has been scientifically researched, see Bourne report. From memory a reduction of 25% of breakdowns was noted within culled areas. You can argue as to whether or not that effect is worthwhile or not but the fact that there is an effect is clearly demonstrated.

It is very very obvious that the first thing you need to do is stop the movement of infected cattle

.

No arguments on that one.

Cheers
mac

[Brains]

Originally Posted by muldonach

The effect of culling Badgers has been scientifically researched, see Bourne report. From memory a reduction of 25% of breakdowns was noted within culled areas. You can argue as to whether or not that effect is worthwhile or not but the fact that there is an effect is clearly demonstrated.

19% average reduction in tb breakdowns within pro-active cull areas; 20% increase in tb breakdowns outside cull areas; 22% increase in tb breakdown within reactive cull areas. Any way you look at it, the effect of culling is small and has certainly not been shown to be effective in controlling TB.

[stripee]

[quote=Deerhunter;277153]But why Carmarthenshire ?

Do you think it is the same people swapping ear tags, illegally moving cattle AND shooting Badgers ?



Not simultaneously I hope. Could be the same people. System of cattle tracing set up should help with illegal movements and ear tags. Police have trouble finding culprits when Badgers are found at a distance from where they were killed. Carms has poor areas, tempting to cut corners, saving money. But not the only place.

I read about a pre-disposition in some cattle to develop bTB, research by Queens Uni Belfast.
Queen's University Belfast | 07- 2007 Press Releases

[JoulesH]

No way would I boycott the produce. Those farmers suffering from persistent TB outbreaks need all the support they can get. I have seen farmers (yes including ORGANIC) farmers breaking down in tears as yet more cattle are taken away due to being TB reactors. Some of these are CLOSED herds they do not buy any cattle in and therefore the infection is not coming from cattle movements. Sure once it's in the herd it will spread from cow to cow and some farmers have been idiots buying in from TB parts of the country, but it is impossible to get rid of this disease if local wildlife keep re-infecting. It's a welfare issue for the Badgers too for goodness sake! The stress on farmers is horrendous when your herd can be decimated by years of constant reinfection from the wildlife reservoir. Although I don't condone any illegal killing of Badgers, I can understand the desparation that sends some farmers down this route. I like Badgers and at present I am quite happy to have them on our farm as they are 'clean,' as are our cattle - we run a closed herd so buy in no others, but I would not hesitate to support a legal cull if it was proven that our cattle were infected by local Badgers. I hope (but doubt) that Defra has the guts to make the same decision that has been made in Wales.

[Deerhunter]

Originally Posted by Brains

not for Badgers they don't!



So there weren't approx 25,000 tb reactors slaughtered in 1960 then? Oddly, that's about the same number as in recent years. And what about the 1950s or 1940s .....

Hi Brains

Can't be 100% sure but I don't think I said anything about 25,000 Tb reactors !!

But I am not a scientist !!!

What I said was we hardly had any. And we had a lot less Badgers.

The cows were tested and we used to control the numbers of Badgers.

Now we have lots of Tb and lots of Badgers !!

Possibly all due to a FMD outbreak !!!!

[Deerhunter]

Originally Posted by JoulesH

No way would I boycott the produce. Those farmers suffering from persistent TB outbreaks need all the support they can get. I have seen farmers (yes including ORGANIC) farmers breaking down in tears as yet more cattle are taken away due to being TB reactors. Some of these are CLOSED herds they do not buy any cattle in and therefore the infection is not coming from cattle movements. Sure once it's in the herd it will spread from cow to cow and some farmers have been idiots buying in from TB parts of the country, but it is impossible to get rid of this disease if local wildlife keep re-infecting. It's a welfare issue for the Badgers too for goodness sake! The stress on farmers is horrendous when your herd can be decimated by years of constant reinfection from the wildlife reservoir. Although I don't condone any illegal killing of Badgers, I can understand the desparation that sends some farmers down this route. I like Badgers and at present I am quite happy to have them on our farm as they are 'clean,' as are our cattle - we run a closed herd so buy in no others, but I would not hesitate to support a legal cull if it was proven that our cattle were infected by local Badgers. I hope (but doubt) that Defra has the guts to make the same decision that has been made in Wales.

A rare voice of sense !!

[Deerhunter]

[quote=stripee;277318]

Originally Posted by Deerhunter

But why Carmarthenshire ?

Do you think it is the same people swapping ear tags, illegally moving cattle AND shooting Badgers ?



Not simultaneously I hope. Could be the same people. System of cattle tracing set up should help with illegal movements and ear tags. Police have trouble finding culprits when Badgers are found at a distance from where they were killed. Carms has poor areas, tempting to cut corners, saving money. But not the only place.

I read about a pre-disposition in some cattle to develop bTB, research by Queens Uni Belfast.
Queen's University Belfast | 07- 2007 Press Releases

but is there any, ummmm, evidence ?

[stripee]

[quote=Deerhunter;277517]

Originally Posted by stripee

but is there any, ummmm, evidence ?

http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/ahws...1_year2005.pdf


From one yeat, 2005, successful convictions for cattle offences, a selection, first eight relate to west wales. Further details, names and address on link. Table of numbers of oral advice and warnings on link. A minority of farmers but not good when dealing with infectious disease.


Haverfordwest M.C 11/08/05

Not Guilty pleas
Each convicted of
5 x unnecessary suffering
Fined £4000 each offence
Total £20000
1 x failing to inspect bovines
sufficiently to avoid suffering
Fined £4000 each
Total £8000
1 x failing to feed adequate diet
Fined £8000
18 x failing to notify deaths of
bovines and providing false
information on movements for each
man and for Red Down Farm Ltd
Fined £500 each count
Total £27000
4 x failing to notify deaths of bovines
and surrender passport against Red
Down Ltd
£500 each count
£2000 total
Both men banned for life from
keeping animals
Total Fines £101000
Costs £16000
Sentence passed 27/09/05

Caused Unnecessary Suffering
Failure to collect/dispose of
carcases
Failure to maintain medicine
records
The Protection of Animals Act
1911
The Animals By-Products
(Wales) Regulations 2003
The Welfare of Farmed
Animals (Wales) Regulations
2001


Supplying a bovine animal in the
course of trade or business to an
abattoir for human consumption to
which a false trade description has been applied.


Unnecessary suffering, inadequate
diet, failing to inspect bovines
sufficiently to avoid suffering, failing
to notify deaths of bovines and
providing false information on
movements

Animal welfare (unnecessary
suffering) and failing to dispose of
animal carcases
Inspection on farm:

Responding to
a complaint from Defra
S1 (1) Protection of Animals
Act 1911 x 3
S.2 Protection of Animals
(Amendment) Act
Regulation 21 TB Regulations
Carmarthen Magistrates Court
Final hearing 1/03/06
Sentenced to 6 months
imprisonment

25/03/03 Causing Unnecessary Suffering to
animals.
Failure to dispose of animal byproduct
Protection of Animals Act 1911
Animal By-Products Order
Conviction reported in 2005

Moved a bovine with a false identity
without it being accompanied by its passport.
Ceredigion:

Applied false TD to a bovine
animal.
Moved animal off holding without a passport.
Falsely described age and breed of
bovine entered to Abattoir.
Applied a false trade description to
a bovine. Moved bovine off holding
without its passport.

Failed to record date of birth of
bovine animals in register and
provided false date of birth of
bovine animals to BCMS (6
charges)

Breach of TB restrictions
Failure to keep proper records of
cattle and allowing 22 bovines to
leave holding with no secondary
eartags (10 offences)

Without lawful authority or excuse
moved bovine animals off premises
in contravention of a notice issued
by a veterinary inspector under
Art12 (1) of the Tuberculosis
(England and Wales) Order 1984
without the authority of a licence
issued by an appropriate officer,
contrary to Art 21 (a) of the above
order and Section 72 (a) of the Animal Health Act 1981
Failed to produce records for an
inspector
Applied false trade descriptions to
bovine animals

Moved a bovine without its
Passport
Failed to records deaths of 25
cattle & return passports
Failed to notify movement of cattle
onto holding to BCMS
Failed to record cattle moving onto
a holding
Failed to record cattle births
Failed to apply an eartag to a
bovine within 20 days of birth
Failed to produce cattle records to
an Inspector
Failed to dispose of sheep carcase
Falsified DOB on calf passport
application
Moved cattle in breach of TB2
Notice
48 similar offences TIC
Recklessly provided false
information, being false D.O.B. and
made a false representation that no
application had been made for a
cattle passport.
Recklessly provided false D.O.B.
when applying for a cattle passport.
Recklessly provided false D.O.B.
when applying for a cattle passport
Did fail to comply with a notice
which restricted the movement of
animals off the farm by allowing
animals to be moved off the farm
Applied false trade description
(date of birth) to cattle
Failed to apply for cattle passports

Cattle Identification and TB testing offences.
Moved cattle in breach of TB2
Notice
Failed to report movement of cattle
onto holding to BCMS
Failed to record cattle movements
Failed to produce records to an
Inspector
Applied a false TD to bovine
animals

Moved a bovine without its passport.
Applied to a false TDA to a bovine
animal.


Evidence relating to Badger deaths - phone local police and Badger group, which is where I get information. And from newspapers such as the 4 Badgers found dead in field story in Crymych 2 weeks ago.

[Brains]

Originally Posted by Deerhunter

Hi Brains

Can't be 100% sure but I don't think I said anything about 25,000 Tb reactors !!

But I am not a scientist !!!

What I said was we hardly had any. And we had a lot less Badgers.

The cows were tested and we used to control the numbers of Badgers.

Now we have lots of Tb and lots of Badgers !!

Possibly all due to a FMD outbreak !!!!

I know you didn't mention 25,000 tb reactors - but I did. And the reason is very simple. You are trying to imply a direct correlation between the number of Badgers and the number of tb breakdowns. I'm showing you that such a correlation does not historically exist. If you care to check out the RBCT report, you will see that in the early 1960s 15,000 to 25,000 cattle were being slaughtered annually as tb reactors, yet you are saying that there were far fewer Badgers. So you have the same number of slaughtered animals but nothing like the number of Badgers - and the 1960s were nothing like as bad as the 1930s and 1940s. So why was tb so rife? It is also interesting that tb was brought down by the mid 1960s and stayed low long before Badger culling started.

Now, you might say that Badgers were culled and controlled anyway before culling for tb started - I'm sure that's true. But then you'd have to assume that the number of Badgers being controlled suddenly increased dramatically during the 1960s - or did the Badger population suddenly crash for other reasons? If it didn't, and the Badger population was relatively low during that period, why was tb such a problem?

And I would again challenge you to e