DESIGN AND LIKELY EFFECTIVENESS OF CULLING

  Unless the three separate culling areas are delineated with badger-proof fencing, there is very likely to be movement of badgers from one area to the next. Not only will this distort results, there is the possiblility of disturbance of natural distributions of badgers. This could well involve affected animals transferring to previously clean areas and clean badgers moving to infected areas.

  As some landowners/farmers will not allow the cull to occur on their land, this again will negate results. Other farmers may be tempted to take matters into their own hands and destroy badgers—illegally—in both the no cull/selected cull areas, as well as completely outside these areas. This will not only negate findings, but also result in possible suffering of badgers, as well as illegal acts.

RESEARCH

  Breakthroughs have been made in research and a vaccine is nearer to becoming a reality—if money is put into the project. A vaccine will always be years away if money is not provided for research. It seems unlikely that Bovine TB will ever be totally eradicated, therefore, surely a vaccine is the best long-term solution.

OTHER ISSUES

  TB has historically been generally confined to the South West with just the odd individual animal breakdown elsewhere. In the last 12 months, there have been major herd breakdowns in previously clear areas. These areas have indigenous TB-free badger populations, but little or nothing appears to be done to (a) research why these isolated outbreaks are becoming much more prevalent, with many animals affected and (b) ensure the TB infection does not infiltrate the local badger population.

  Little seems to have been said regarding the possible increase in illegal badger-baiting. Unscrupulous individuals could well take advantage of conveniently caged badgers in the culling areas, arriving before culling personnel to take the badgers away to bait.

  If there was a high probability of the cull providing definitive, unquestionable findings, the public expenditure may well be justified, but as the likelihood is that the findings/results will be very questionable, and probably flawed, such a large outlay of funds is itself questionable, especially when alternatives would be a better use of public money, ie research into vaccines and better husbandry methods.

8 January 1999