Badger cull in Wales

[Eryri]

Originally Posted by stripee

.
"This is the politics of a banana republic, not a progressive government." - Trevor Lawson, Public Relations Consultant for the Badger Trust.

The Senedd is a democratically elected chamber, elected by the people of Wales. AMs and the voters have differing views on the issue of the badger cull, but all a proud of the democratic process enjoyed by the people of Wales. Calling Wales a 'banana republic' in press releases issued from his office in East Grinstead, is likely to alienate the people of Wales from the cause Mr Lawson seeks to promote.

[GavinWheeler]

Originally Posted by Eryri

Whilst the massive natural boundary of the Cambrian mountains is not a direct border with the IAPA, the infected badger data/study indicates that badger population between the Cambrian and hotspot are not infected, so any migration of infected badgers would not be significant.

Evidence for this conclusion? Any perturbation of badgers is thought to lead to spreading TB whether they have it to begin with or not - they can catch TB simply because they are moving into new territory and meeting more cattle or other badgers than if they stayed at home. Also the badgers found dead survey 2007 found a higher prevalence of TB in badgers in Carmarthenshire (16%) than in Pembrokeshire (15%) so the assertion that all the badgers between the IAPA and the Cambrians are TB free is bizarre, to say the least.

Originally Posted by Eryri

A boundary does not have to be 100% as badgers 'shed' the infection.

This also makes no sense. Why does it matter that that badgers shed the infection?

What matters is that many of the 'boundaries' are weak (e.g. the Preselis, that my arthritic Mum can and has walked over) or nonexistent (the woodland or sheep farming areas, that pose no barrier to Badgers and have plenty of indigenous badgers setts, but will simply massage the cattle breakdown statistics)

[Rob_D]

Can anyone give an update from the Judicial Review in Swansea? I understood it is taking place today and tomorrow.

I'm no lawyer, but "irrationality" of the WAG decision seems to be a very appropriate consideration here, never mind the Bern Convention angle, so I'm hoping justice will prevail.

[Eryri]

A legal challenge to the assembly government's decision to cull badgers in Pembrokeshire has finished taking evidence at a hearing in Swansea.

Badger cull court appeal bid closes

Justice Lloyd Jones will now consider the representations before making a ruling, possibly not until next month.

[ZeusS]

For those who are opposed to the cull of badgers in Pembrokeshire you can sign the petition on the WAG site


National Assembly for Wales | List of Petitions

[Springer5]

Originally Posted by Eryri

The Senedd is a democratically elected chamber, elected by the people of Wales. AMs and the voters have differing views on the issue of the badger cull, but all a proud of the democratic process enjoyed by the people of Wales.

Then let's have a democratic vote on the issue. Ask the people. I suspect the pro-cullers will not like the answer, which is why they are not asking the question to the "people of Wales".

How democratic is that ?

[Eryri]

I beg to differ. The issue of the Badger cull was very much to the fore in the last Senedd elections in 2007.

There was a sitting AM for Carmarthen West & South Pembrokeshire, Christine Gwyther AM who campaigned vigorously as the anti-cull candidate but lost her seat in 2007, at the election. Unlike elections in England, there is also proportional representation, so it is possible to vote in a constituency seat according to party political leanings, whatever that might be, but also vote for a listed candidate by region if a voter wants to give preference to the cull issue. As it happens, all the candidates who were anti-cull (of various parties) lost their seats and were not successful, except one, Peter Black AM in Swansea.

In 2010, Christine Gwyther also stood as an anti-cull candidate at the Westminster election in Carmarthen East and Dinefwr, and lost. The successful candidates in South West Wales at the Westminster elections 2010, whether Plaid Cymru, Conservative or LibDem, expressed their support for the cull, and were all democratically elected.

[Springer5]

What you need to keep in mind is that people are voting on a whole range of issues. Consequently just because a particular issue *appears* to be the "will of the majority" does not make it so.

It may just as easily be that AMs were voted in on some other issue(s) whilst the majority of those who voted them in on those *other* issues, were opposed to the badger cull.

The only way to really know (for such an emotive and divisive issue) is to ask people about it separately.

I am sure if that happened the answer would be "no cull", otherwise why are the pro-cull govt not asking us ??

The evidence speaks for itself.

[Eryri]

I think you are hinting at a referendum.

If this was done specifically in the cull area it's certain there would be an overwhelming response, 90%, in favour of the cull. If the referendum was to cover the whole of Wales, including the mainly urban areas, the result would be much closer, around 60% in favour of the cull. However, there would be a majority of the order of 70% against the cull if a referendum covered the whole of the UK.

Public Opinion Survey of Badger Cull

A UK wide veto over Wales would cause other issues as there has been a history of the 'settled will of the Welsh people' being out-voted by it's much larger neighbour. The classic example is Treweryn, where every elected MP from Wales voted against (bar one, the Viscount Viceroy) but their wish was outvoted in Westminster.

Capel Celyn

[hatless]

I don't see much support for a badger cull in that survey. 71% of respondents 'agreed' that it is sometimes necessary to 'manage' wildlife species such as badgers. A wonderfully anodyne word, 'manage.' Only 54% actually agreed that 'we should actively manage the badger population.'

When this was linked to the control of bTB, the support fell further. Asked if bTB should be 'controlled by the management of badger populations,' only 38% agreed, and 36% disagreed.

The support turns into opposition when the survey suggests that 'management' might mean killing. 73% agreed that they objected to badgers being intentionally killed, with only 16% thinking the opposite. 87% agreed that controlling badger populations is acceptable if it can be done without killing badgers' and only 5% disagreed with this.

This does not represent support for a cull, but overwhelming opposition to a cull. It represents marginal support for management that doesn't involve killing badgers, such as by means of contraception, but the survey makes it clear there's no appetite for killing badgers.