Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

hatrack

(59,587 posts)
Sun Oct 14, 2012, 10:47 AM Oct 2012

Gov. Chief Scientist, Other Uk Experts: Slaughter Of 100K UK Badgers "Mindless", Ineffective

EDIT

More than 30 eminent animal disease experts describe the cull as a "costly distraction" that risks making the problem of tuberculosis in cattle worse and that will cost far more than it saves. TB in English cattle is an increasing problem, with the 26,000 infected animals slaughtered in 2011 costing £90m in compensation. Owen Paterson, the environment secretary, argues that more than a decade of research shows that culling badgers, which can carry bovine TB, could reduce infections by 12%-16% if undertaken intensively for many years and over large areas.

However, the scientists reject the idea of scientific support for the cull, which could wipe out 100,000 badgers, a third of the national population. The cull policy is "mindless", according to Lord John Krebs, one of the UK's most eminent scientists and the architect of the landmark 10-year culling trials that ended in 2007. "The scientific case is as clear as it can be: this cull is not the answer to TB in cattle. The government is cherry-picking bits of data to support its case."

Another signatory, Lord Robert May, a former government chief scientist and president of the Royal Society, said: "It is very clear to me that the government's policy does not make sense." He added: "I have no sympathy with the decision. They are transmuting evidence-based policy into policy-based evidence."

The current government chief scientist, Professor Sir John Beddington, refused to back the cull. Asked if it could make a meaningful contribution to tackling TB in cattle, he said: "I continue to engage with Defra [the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs] on the evidence base concerning the development of bovine TB policy. I am content that the evidence base, including uncertainties and evidence gaps, has been communicated effectively to ministers."

EDIT

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/oct/13/badger-cull-mindless

1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Gov. Chief Scientist, Other Uk Experts: Slaughter Of 100K UK Badgers "Mindless", Ineffective (Original Post) hatrack Oct 2012 OP
What if it saved 20% Betsy Ross Oct 2012 #1

Betsy Ross

(3,147 posts)
1. What if it saved 20%
Sun Oct 14, 2012, 12:48 PM
Oct 2012

5000 less infected animals out of a national total herd size of ? What is the cost of KILLING (culling) 100,000 badgers? To the badgers it is life. I don't know what badgers eat, but culling 1/3 of the population would have to impact the environmental status.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Gov. Chief Scientist, Oth...