These excerpts were taken from a PDF article published in 2015 If you want to read it in its entirety, here is the link.
...what were felt to be pertinent statements have been highlighted in bold.
"In October 2009 Scotland was added to the long list of European Commission member states and regions to have been declared free of bovine tuberculosis. The commission attributed this to the success of Scotland’s livestock industry working in conjunction with the government. In Scotland a stringent testing
regime for cattle is adhered to, involving regular testing of tissue samples from herds and testing at postmortem if signs are observed. Monitoring is carried out by the Scottish Veterinary Service, part of the Scottish Agricultural Advisory Service. These measures have been combined with strict movement controls on cattle,
testing them both before and after they are moved, and quarantining suspected cases.
Throughout the 70’s and 80’s, badgers killed on roads in Scotland were monitored and tested for bovine TB. Only one badger out of 48 tested positive during this period, and the practice was stopped in 1993 as unnecessary."
"In Scotland the number of cattle infected with bovine TB is extremely small, and reducing.
Out of around 13,000 cattle herds in Scotland, only a single figure number of herds were under restrictions in any one area in the most recent year for which figures are available."
How has this come about?
Firstly, the skin test system, used for cattle for over thirty years, has not been sufficiently reliable or effective.
It fails to identify between a fifth and a quarter of infected cattle, so that these cattle remain in the herds and spread infection to other cattle.
Secondly, during the BSE and Foot and Mouth epidemics TB testing in cattle was disrupted. Subsequently, persistent backlogs in overdue testing developed and this is when bovine TB levels rose sharply.
Cattle were moved routinely before testing and so were able to carry infection in to other herds.
Thirdly, evidence emerged in 2011 that infected animals may have been deliberately retained in the herd and healthy animals sent to slaughter in their place. Routine abattoir checks being carried out by several different Trading Standards authorities discovered that ear tags had been swapped from diseased to healthy cattle, resulting in infection being retained in the herds.
Improved Cattle Controls.
Following a period of disarray or absence of TB testing in cattle herds, stricter practices in the management of cattle were introduced in England from 2008 onwards. These included a moratorium on overdue testing and enforced testing before movements of cattle.
The statistics reported by Department of Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) scientists have shown a steady fall in the numbers of herds affected by TB in England, from nearly 6k in 2008 to less than 4 ½ kin 2014, clearly indicating the success of these cattle focused measures.
In 2011, abattoir controls involving DNA tagging of cattle were introduced to combat the retention of infected cattle in herds.
In 2007 the Independent Scientific Group, chaired by Professor John Bourne, published its conclusions (2).
Firstly, “badger culling can make no meaningful contribution to cattle TB control in Britain”, “indeed some policies are likely to make matters worse”.
Secondly, “weaknesses in cattle testing regimes mean that cattle themselves contribute significantly to the persistence and spread of disease in all areas where TB occurs, and in some parts of Britain are likely to be the main source”.
Their recommendation, backed by the TB advisory group and the TB eradication group, was that
“Scientific findings indicate that the rising incidence of disease can be reversed and geographical spread contained, by the rigid application of cattle-based control measures alone.”
In 2010 scientists published the results of monitoring cattle TB incidence up to one year and three years following the cessation of culling. Their findings showed that “the reductions in cattle TB incidence achieved by repeated badger culling were not sustained in the long term after culling ended, and did not offset the financial costs of culling”. They concluded that “badger culling is unlikely to contribute effectively to the control of cattle TB in Britain” (1).
At the same time, DEFRA’s own figures show a steady decline of TB in cattle following the introduction of a range of improved measures for testing cattle and for herd breakdown management since around 2008 and particularly since 2010 when cattle testing frequencies were increased and multiple tests were introduced on suspect non-reactors (to tackle the problem that the test leaves one quarter to one fifth of infected cattle in the herd). (6)
However, instead of amending its bTB strategy to follow the evidence, the government persevered with the non-scientific approach of badger culling by introducing a third badger cull zone during 2015 in Dorset."
Wales has been vaccinating badgers on a large scale since 2013 as one part of a programme which also includes improved cattle testing and breakdown management. The chief veterinary officer for Wales, Professor Christianne Glossop, reported in July 2015 that incidents of TB in cattle have fallen by 28% and 94% of herds are now TB free."
+<*>+
Sources of the article were several scientific studies and publications, DEFRA, and the Royal Veterinary Society.
+<*>+
The government has to be seen to be doing something- even if it flies in the face of scientific evidence. Culls are (even when protested against) very much out-there in the public eye. So, there appears to be attempts to eradicate a disease, while at the same time the status quo carries on which allows infected cattle to stay within their herd.... and the farmers (ie. 'voters') are kept happy(ish) which is probably the whole point of the thing, anyway.
Perhaps, rather than leaving all this to the foibles of a government with its own self-interests at heart, the best approach might be to let the natural order of things be re-established. This could be encouraged by the re-introduction of wolves, (or even bears!) who once kept all those annoying creatures labelled as 'vermin' and pests under control... perhaps even the occasional human (now there's a species that could do with a bit of a cull.)
A Wabi-whip-round would of course be held, in order to provide NellyDee with a stout fence should such a procedure ever be implemented.
As was mentioned in the 'Hunting Thread Deleted' post, this is not a hunting, (nor a farming) forum. It is for those who strive to respect, admire, and co-exist with the British wildlife of this country.... so that pretty much covers what there is to be said about culls of any sort.
