“Quite right, lets cull anything that upsets our human domination of the planet.

I hear the last 700 mountain gorillas sometime eat from the fields of farms that have taken over their habitat. And those pesky tigers that take the odd goat. I dare say pandas cause some upset somewhere along the line.

What a marvellous do as we say not do as we do nation we've become.

And before you say it, yes there are loads of badgers, but not half as many as their are cows or people - lets thin our numbers out a bit, I don't recall our impact ont he planet being too positive.”

“I forgot to mention that the Paul Caruana referred to below worked on the Kreb's (badger culling) trial.”

“There is interesting discussion continuing on this subject under the article "Speak up if you want a badger cull", link -

http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/news/Speak-want-badger-cull-farmers-told/article-2730750-detail/article.html

in case you can't get straight to it.

Some evidence there by Paul Caruana suggests that culling might potentially be more effective than the results of the Kreb's (RBCT) trial suggested. However he makes three points that support some of the points made in my letter -

1. Badger removal worked well when the land being culled was made fully available and where ALL badgers were caught.

2. Compulsory entry onto farms is a must.

3. Professionals should remain involved to ensure adequate training is given to those doing the culling.

The main problem up to now for those wanting a cull has been the lack of sufficient scientific data to counterbalance the results of the admittedly imperfect Kreb's trial and that would allow the conclusions to be reversed with confidence. It was uncertainty as much as anything that made the previous government's decision not to cull understandable -they couldn't risk the possibility that culling large numbers of badgers might not produce the desired results. The current government seems prepared to take that risk by at least partially evading responsibility for any failure by putting the onus on the farmers themselves to carry it out.”

“The only real scientific study we have (the RBCT) showed not only was the disease spread further as a result of culling, through perturbation, it also emphatically demonstrated that the prevalence of the disease amongst remaining badgers increased with each successive cull. After four years the percentage of badgers carrying the disease had doubled in proactive culling areas. So much for claims that culling will also help to improve the health of wildlife!”

“A lot of comment space could be saved if people (e.g. Ed) read what is actually written, instead of commenting on what they mistakenly think the writer has said (or thinks).”

“I can assure Ed of Exeter that although I have no direct experience of having TB reactors on my farm it is quite wrong to say that I am commenting on a subject about which I "understand almost nothing". I come from a dairy farming family, as does my wife, I have worked on various kinds of farms in the past, including the family dairy farm. I can well understand how devastating it must be to have to have your cattle slaughtered because of TB. I have also worked as a research scientist in agriculture and in agricultural ecology for the last 40 years, and have read almost all, if not all, the relevant scientific papers and reports on bovine TB.

He is also quite wrong to say a badger cull "has not been tried before" and that "the results can only be conjecture". A controlled badger-culling trial was carried out over a 10-year period and although the interpretation of the results is, as with most science, not 100% cut and dried, the information it produced provides a sound basis for policy-making - certainly not mere "conjecture".

One problem with introducing a cull now is that the exact effectiveness or otherwise may not be clear. Several other measures aimed at controlling the spread of TB have been introduced in recent years and it is too early to say how effective these have been. In fact there was a reduction in the number of reactors slaughtered between 2008 and 2009 - the first such reduction seen for many years, but it is not clear to what extent this was due to the introduced measures.

When a cull was announced in Wales my view was that if it were to be carried out the results should be monitored both within the cull area and outside and compoared to trends in comparable areas elsewhere, to determine its effectiveness. If a cull is carried out now in the South West, such an opportunity would be lost.

But the most important pooint of all is that, wherever a cull takes place, it will be extremely difficult to ensure a comprehensive cull over a large enough area unless it is made compulsory.”

“Clearly Mr Kirkham knows little of the misery of having TB reactors on the farm condemned to death by a ministry vet. As usual, people who know little of country life have plenty to say on matters about which they understand almost nothing. A badger cull has not been tried before and the results can only be conjecture.
Farmers are guardians of the countryside and best placed to be involved in serious decisions. They are not lovers of killing for killing's sake.
Mr Kirkham and others please note: you cannot eat nor take milk from a badger.”