Badger Cull not Cost Effective

[Guest guest]

Farmers say the spread of cattle TB is destroying the industry

Culling badgers is unlikely to be a cost-effective way of controlling

cattle tuberculosis, scientists advising the government have

concluded.

Farmers say the spread of cattle TB is destroying the industry.

 

Many say that research proves the badger population is spreading the

disease and that culling controls that.

 

Independent government advisors on the issue said that, while badger

culling reduced cattle TB, it would have to be so extensive it would

be uneconomical.

 

30 areas of the country, each 100 square km

10 culled proactively, 10 reactively, 10 not culled

Badgers culled through being caught in cage and then shot

Incidence of bovine TB measured on farms inside and outside study

areas

Reactive culling suspended in 2003 after significant rise in infection

Trial cost £7m per year

 

The government is currently considering whether to introduce a cull,

though a consultation mounted recently by the Department for

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) suggested public opinion

is firmly against such a move.

 

Data for the research came from the Randomised Badger Culling Trial,

sometimes known as the Krebs trial after Sir John Krebs, the

government scientist who instigated it.

 

That data showed that culling was associated with increased TB in the

badgers; areas which had received four culls saw a doubling of the

rate.

 

What appears to be happening is that badgers move more freely and

more widely in culled areas, increasing contact with each other.