Home Page
Case Studies and Articles  Latest
Knepp Estate, longhorn herd  read more...
A dairy farmer has been fined for chaotic record keeping that may have contributed to the spread of bovine tuberculosis on his premises.  read more...read more...
A young lad is forced to slaughter his pet cow because of the current bovine TB policy.  read more...read more...
A 33 year old farmer and father of two in Shrophsire was killed by a bull as he tested cattle for bTB. He was conducting routine bTB testing on cows at Ashwood Farm in Whitchurch on 3 December 2013 when he was fatally injured by a bull  read more...read more...
There is such a focus on badgers that the fact that bovine TB is a cattle based problem has been set on one side. History has shown us that the incidence of TB in cattle can be brought down to a very low level by cattle based measures alone. Add to this the vaccination of badgers in hot spot areas and even their implication can be dealt with.  read more...read more...
Looking at some of the anti cull websites and having kept a close eye on media reports during the trial culls that have recently finished in Gloucestershire and Somerset, it would seem that if the culling is rolled out into other areas the level of opposition is not going to get less and could even worsen, meaning that policing costs alone (paid for from public funds) are going to be exorbitant.  read more...read more...
This article is a summary of the significant legal proceedings relating to incidents re cattle and bovine TB.  read more...read more...
In this well researched article by Mike Rendle he poses this question: 'Are badger infections following, not leading, bovine TB infections in cattle? ' and discovers some very interesting facts about cattle, badgers and bovine TB.  read more...read more...
Bovine TB - the views of a farmer based on field-based observations over many years. Peter Aspin was a herdsman, then a dairy farmer. He is now a beef farmer and also has a contract rearing dairy heifers for a local farmer. He was conventional and is now organic. He also run the Shropshire Agroforestry Project. All on 40 acres. To understand bovine TB one must first understand how significantly livestock husbandry practices have changed in recent years. I was on a dairy farm a couple of years ago - a closed herd (one that reared all its own replacement youngstock) - which had had its first bTB breakdown. Two veterinarians had arrived to do the follow-up sixty day retest. Talking to them I asked what they thought was the source of the problem. Their immediate response was that the adjacent dairy farm had purchased imported cattle the previous year, this herd had subsequently developed bTB and passed the infection either directly or via a vector to the neighbouring herd. Whether the imported cattle were themselves carriers of bTB or whether they had no immunity, I do not know and I assumed the vets did not know but the issue of cattle importation is a major concern for both farmers and vets. Ever increasing numbers of dairy cattle are being imported simply because they are cheaper if large enough numbers are purchased. I know of a herd of over two thousand dairy cows where not a single replacement animal is home-reared, every single one arrives on a lorry from mainland Europe.  read more...read more...
Dairy farm worker, Steve Jones, is not happy about the future of the dairy industry, or the current policy to cull badgers. The industry has many problems. Bovine tuberculosis is just one.'The cattle industry is long overdue for reform', he says. Here he sets out his comments.  read more...read more...

Is the bovine TB policy causing fear and intimidation in the area defined as the intensive action area?

Printer FriendlyTell a Friend
Is the bovine TB policy causing fear and intimidation in the area defined as the intensive action area? The UK badger is a protected species and has been since the introduction of the Badger Act in 1992. It is one of our last remaining indigenous large mammal species, with a social structure that is apparently unique to this country. However, some want these animals culled because they (like other mammals) can carry bovine TB. But, this is not just an issue over badgers. The Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) has issued itself such wide ranging and draconinan powers that the whole concept of human rights and privacy is being threatened.

In north Pembrokeshire preparations were started in the summer of 2010 for a compulsory cull of badgers as part of an ongoing programme in an effort to achieve what is probably an impossible task – to eradicate bovine TB. The plan is clear, over a five-year period, badgers from a defined area will be caged and shot. At this stage it is a pilot scheme in Pembrokeshire only. Culls are planned parts of England too but the proposal is that these will be farmer led culls and at the discretion of the landowner.

Many opposed to the cull argue that the 10-year, £50 million pound, publicly funded study, by the Independent Scientific Group on TB, concluded that culling badgers has limited effects on reducing bTB and can even spread the disease in adjoining areas. This study involved killing around 11,000 badgers, the vast majority of which were healthy. Despite this evidence WAG pressed ahead, spurred on by the majority of its assembly members and some farmers who are at their wit’s end following persistent herd breakdowns, testing and consequential restrictions. In 2009 WAG introduced its TB Eradication (Wales) Order, which gave it unprecedented powers, including ones giving it draconian rights of access to all land in order to survey sets, trap and shoot badgers. WAG argued that this measure would reduce bovine TB in cattle by 6-9% (and that will apparently be for only two years following the five years duration of the cull). The Badger Trust challenged the Order by way of a judicial review. This tested the legality of the process, not the appropriateness of the decision to cull. The Judge, Mr Justice Lloyd Jones, concluded that WAG did have discretionary powers to carry out the cull, but noted that it was for the Ministers, rather than the court, to undertake a balancing exercise between the costs and benefits of the proposed cull. The Badger Trust appealed against this judgement and won so in 2010 the cull was postponed.

In March 2011 WAG introduced a new Order, which again ignored the science and sought to cull the badgers, despite the fact that culling has been shown not to be cost effective . The unprecedented public opposition to the cull was completely ignored too by WAG and the Order was confirmed. Over 13000 responses were received to the official consultation exercise by WAG and only around 2000 were for the cull. No consideration was given to any of the well reasoned arguments from those opposed to the Order. The new Order has no time limit for the area concerned and blights the land involved, the intensive action area, indefinitely. It is expected that legal challenges will be made by the Badger Trust and local land owners.

Throughout there has been a lot of public opposition to badger culling and landowners in the Pembrokeshire area, targeted for the trial cull, set up a group called Pembrokeshire Against the Cul (PAC) to peacefully protest and try and change the minds of the politicians and policy makers as they believe that vaccination of badgers is a better option than slaughter. In previous culls people have been able to opt out but the Pembrokeshire cull is compulsory, even on nature reserves and protected wildlife habitat areas. However, since the original Order was made these people have been subjected to intolerable pressure from WAG, with a heavy-handed approach from officials and the police, acting under instructions from WAG. Separate incidents on the same day in May 2010 raised grave concerns regarding WAG’s use of its new legal powers.

Several police vehicles, numerous police officers, WAG officials and surveyors, again wearing black balaclavas to conceal their identities, arrived at the Brithdir low impact community at Cilgwyn. The community members tried in vain to reason with the officers. Two were arrested for obstruction, but later released without charge.One Pembrokeshire resident, Felicia Ruperti, said, of the recent incident at Cilgwyn: “I felt very intimidated by the amount of police here today. We have been peaceful from the start and have not threatened anyone”. Police were also said to be stopping motorists nearby and searching them under anti-terrorist legislation.

On the same day Dr Gavin Harper (just an ordinary person; not a thug or an extremist) was arrested for theft of ID cards when contractors and police in a riot van, arrived, without notice, to undertake a badger set survey on his land. He was later released without charge or any further action when it was learnt that he was merely holding the contractors’ ID cards in order for him to identify them as bona fide contractors! The contractors concerned were wearing balaclavas and there were no names on the ID cards. Interestingly, police representatives had attended a previous PAC meeting and stressed the importance of checking ID cards! There were elderly people at the property and one was described as trembling with shock at the invasion. Gavin made a formal complaint about his arrest and it was not until April 2011 that he received the judgement of the Independent Police Complaints Commission. They upheld his complaint and confirmed he was unlawfully arrested.

Many now feel unable to publicly voice their objections due to the climate of fear and intimidation that currently exists in Pembrokeshire and the outlying areas. Is this just what WAG is aiming for? Is the bovine TB policy causing fear and intimidation in the area defined as the intensive action area (parts of Pembrokeshire and outlying areas)? Will landowners in this area soon be seeing masked contractors turn up at any time during the day or night, with rifles, to set/check traps and shoot all captured badgers.? Are the legal, human rights, public security and safety issues being ignored?

Why the balaclava helmets? Are these surveyors ashamed of what they are doing? According to reports on the internet the company undertaking the surveying work was said to be Thomson Ecology. It claims to be the UK’s leading ecological consultant and one of their core values is scientific integrity – there is currently much doubt among the scientific community regarding the benefits of culling.

Why would the surveyors wish to hide their identities. A statement from WAG’s Minister of Rural Affairs said the contractors felt personally intimidated and did not like being filmed. What about the landowners? What would have been the reaction if they had worn such headgear? We understood the contractors are not even local. Given the huge budget for the cull, presumably they are also being paid well for what they are doing. If a Mail Online article it claims a Pembrokeshire man was offered £150,000 a year for up to five years to kill and dispose of badgers!

It is the inflexible and zero tolerance approach adopted by WAG, and laid down by this body in law, which raises significant concerns regarding the future for us all (and for our wildlife). WAG would now appear to be using its new legal powers to stifle debate, prevent opposition and discourage peaceful protest.

Information sources




www.westerntelegraph.co.uk/news/8173388. welsh_assembly_government_badger_survey_sparks_protest/?ref=mr



Company silent on badger cull amid web warnings: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2010/05/21/company-silent-on-badger-cull-amid-web-warnings-91466-26489995/



Rate this article.
Article isn't rated yet.  Write a review.

Free CMS by ViArt Ltd