Iep Report On The Badger Cull; Was The Cull Ever About Btb?

[Hot Meat 3,109]

Loads a hunters do it right, sounds like you folk are around the wrong type of folk....

[Ideation 8,216]

Loads a hunters do it right, sounds like you folk are around the wrong type of folk....

 

Aye, i know that lots do 'it' right. Don't you worry

 

But can you imagine the kinds of nutters that would rock up to town hall if they were issuing badger culling licences

[Hot Meat 3,109]

No nut cases got in on the trial cull, it was run okay mate. It was only the unwashed that caused hassle

[Ideation 8,216]

Yer sorry mate, wires crossed I think. I meant, if we adopted the European model of each county / district doing a survey and then issuing licences via say the town hall for culling badgers (with terriers), then you'd get some interesting sorts rocking up to try their luck as well as the decent terrier men. It'd certainly bring the muppets out of the wood work.

[Hot Meat 3,109]

It will never happen unfortunately, the gov here ain't got a clue...

[dixiefried 269]

 

Loads a hunters do it right, sounds like you folk are around the wrong type of folk....

 

Aye, i know that lots do 'it' right. Don't you worry

 

But can you imagine the kinds of nutters that would rock up to town hall if they were issuing badger culling licences

 

 

 

:laugh:

[Matt 160]

Anti? that's seriously a cruel insult; Devil's advocate, that's all.

 

You guys need to stop being so bloody paranoid

 

You have to admit that the pilot cull was a total failure and he Government hasn't a clue what their talking about, it doesn't really effect them like it does us guys

 

And by the way, I've met the Princess Royal several times as she's also very involved in horse racing, lovely lady

 

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.......

 

Where do I begin??

 

Well firstly, let's just clarify the 'failure' thing.......

 

How was it a failure? In Somerset, the actual figure was between 70-% of the population killed.

 

The problem is that the 'target' was set by numpties who couldn't count their own fingers and toes....... by the admission of the IEP, at least 30% of holes were incorrectly attributed to badgers; add to that some dodgy maths, where each set was supposed to contain 6.5 badgers, and you can see why the target figure was so far out........

 

Then let's just mention the humaneness aspect; of the monitored outings, 7 resulted in shots fired and no badgers recovered. There was no evidence that the targets had been hit; no blood, no changes in the way they ran away, and no bodies recovered. All seven of those badgers were considered to be still alive after 5 minutes, and therefore not killed humanely.

 

Then there is the system used to decide when a badger was actually dead......... death was considered to be the point at which the badger stopped moving..... some of those badgers continued to show evidence of reflex actions after 5 minutes and were therefore categorised as being still alive..... now I don't know if anyone here has ever witnessed meat in a store, but it continues to twitch long after the slaughter process is over.

 

Then lets look at the efficiency of disease control...... the first phase of the cull only ended a few months ago; given the frequency of TB testing, and the fact that the cull is planned for four years, it's far to soon to see if it will have a significant impact on TB. History tells us that it will; Thornbury, and even the RBCT (which was planned to fail from the start) had an impact, so the signs are good.

 

Failure? I don't think so.....

[Kitsune 0]

 

Anti? that's seriously a cruel insult; Devil's advocate, that's all.

 

You guys need to stop being so bloody paranoid

 

You have to admit that the pilot cull was a total failure and he Government hasn't a clue what their talking about, it doesn't really effect them like it does us guys

 

And by the way, I've met the Princess Royal several times as she's also very involved in horse racing, lovely lady

 

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.......

 

Where do I begin??

 

Well firstly, let's just clarify the 'failure' thing.......

 

How was it a failure? In Somerset, the actual figure was between 70-% of the population killed.

 

The problem is that the 'target' was set by numpties who couldn't count their own fingers and toes....... by the admission of the IEP, at least 30% of holes were incorrectly attributed to badgers; add to that some dodgy maths, where each set was supposed to contain 6.5 badgers, and you can see why the target figure was so far out........

 

Then let's just mention the humaneness aspect; of the monitored outings, 7 resulted in shots fired and no badgers recovered. There was no evidence that the targets had been hit; no blood, no changes in the way they ran away, and no bodies recovered. All seven of those badgers were considered to be still alive after 5 minutes, and therefore not killed humanely.

 

Then there is the system used to decide when a badger was actually dead......... death was considered to be the point at which the badger stopped moving..... some of those badgers continued to show evidence of reflex actions after 5 minutes and were therefore categorised as being still alive..... now I don't know if anyone here has ever witnessed meat in a store, but it continues to twitch long after the slaughter process is over.

 

Then lets look at the efficiency of disease control...... the first phase of the cull only ended a few months ago; given the frequency of TB testing, and the fact that the cull is planned for four years, it's far to soon to see if it will have a significant impact on TB. History tells us that it will; Thornbury, and even the RBCT (which was planned to fail from the start) had an impact, so the signs are good.

 

Failure? I don't think so.....

 

A Failure by my standards is determined by...

 

A quote directly from the IEP report

 

10.3.1. Controlled shooting alone, over the 6-week period of the pilot culls, failed to

remove at least 70% of the pre-cull badger population from either of the two pilot

areas. It is extremely likely that controlled shooting removed less than 24.8% of the

badgers in Somerset and less than 37.1% of the badgers in Gloucestershire.

The target was 70% right? only 24.8% in Somerset and 37.1% that's certainly short.

Even with the addition of cage trapping which was a desperate attempt to get more carcasses they still didn't get their targets.

Humaneness was also part of the pilot cull, it failed there too; I know the measure of Humaneness is subjective (bunny hugger will say no killing is humane; others will say that as long as it dies relatively quickly it's humane)

Another quote

10.4.5. It is extremely likely that between 7.4% and 22.8% of badgers that were shot

at were still alive after 5 min, and therefore at risk of experiencing marked pain. We

are concerned at the potential for suffering that these figures imply

also I though it was against the guidance for these shots... up to 15% were shot in the

head and neck region

And to finish

10.6.1. Current evidence suggests that culling badgers over a 6-week period by

shooting, or by shooting and cage trapping, fails to meet the criteria of effectiveness

set out by Defra

 

This for me shows the Pilots as a failure, no attack at any of the guys involved, it must have been so difficult in Somerset/ Gloucestershire with the Anti's everywhere, not knowing who's watching you and who could be dangerous.

 

I've been thinking about going but not too sure whether to try or not

[gonetoearth 5,144]

GAS !!!!!!!!!!

[Matt 160]

A Failure by my standards is determined by...

 

A quote directly from the IEP report

 

10.3.1. Controlled shooting alone, over the 6-week period of the pilot culls, failed to

remove at least 70% of the pre-cull badger population from either of the two pilot

areas. It is extremely likely that controlled shooting removed less than 24.8% of the

badgers in Somerset and less than 37.1% of the badgers in Gloucestershire.

 

The target was 70% right? only 24.8% in Somerset and 37.1% that's certainly short.

Short of what?

Short of the target set by people who couldn't tell the difference between a rabbit hole and a badger sett?

Or short of the presumed 6.5 badgers that lived in each of the setts (which had already been misidentified)?

[WILF 46,597]

So let me get this clear, we are saying that they can't get pinged from 50 yds with a .223 and they can't be cage trapped so how exactly do you get close enough to innoculate !??

 

Nonsense, absolute nonsense

[Matt 160]

Humaneness was also part of the pilot cull, it failed there too; I know the measure of Humaneness is subjective (bunny hugger will say no killing is humane; others will say that as long as it dies relatively quickly it's humane)

[\quote]

 

For the purposes of the trial, humaneness was clearly defined.

 

Sadly, the parameters they set regarding defining the point of death had some serious flaws. Please go back and read what I've already written; animals often 'move', long after death, so to use that as the main way of deciding the point of death was clearly a mistake.

 

Whilst I'm not going to go as far as suggesting that you are an anti, you show clear signs of someone who hasn't actually witnessed much killing.

 

 

Another quote

 

10.4.5. It is extremely likely that between 7.4% and 22.8% of badgers that were shot

at were still alive after 5 min, and therefore at risk of experiencing marked pain. We

are concerned at the potential for suffering that these figures imply

[\quote]

 

Only if you agree that animals are still alive if they show signs of movement.

 

also I though it was against the guidance for these shots... up to 15% were shot in the

head and neck region

[\quote]

 

And?

 

If you actually read what they wrote, the PM's showed that those animals shot in the head and neck showed no signs of being killed inhumanely; their only concern with it was the fact that the point of aim did not fit in with their best practice guidelines.

 

And to finish

 

 

10.6.1. Current evidence suggests that culling badgers over a 6-week period by

shooting, or by shooting and cage trapping, fails to meet the criteria of effectiveness

set out by Defra

 

 

This for me shows the Pilots as a failure, no attack at any of the guys involved, it must have been so difficult in Somerset/ Gloucestershire with the Anti's everywhere, not knowing who's watching you and who could be dangerous.

 

I've been thinking about going but not too sure whether to try or not

 

Please go back and read what I've written.... the trials can only be considered any sort of failure if you accept that the population targets were correct, and that dead animals can't move.

 

I suggest you stop reading the propaganda put about by animal rights idiots, and start actually trying to understand the scale of the TB problem.

 

What makes badgers any different to any other large mammal in the UK? If foxes carried TB and spread it in the same way as badgers do, would you be condemning fox control?

 

Given the fact that the majority of chest shot deer run anything including at times hundreds of yards, are you going to suggest that all deer stalking is inhumane?

 

Please, understand the facts and ignore the propaganda.

 

 

 

[Matt 160]

Even with the addition of cage trapping which was a desperate attempt to get more carcasses they still didn't get

their targets.

Cage trapping wasn't an 'addition'. It was planned from the start as an already proven humane and effective way of reducing the population.

[Kitsune 0]

I am far aware that if the parameters are wrong it can't be deemed a failure from the practical part of the cull but as the pilot is essentially a large scale experiment, if the things before the cull started are incorrect, the whole thing is; I suggest that if they wish to do a cull correctly that they must make sure their details are correct.

 

My mistake as of how I worded the part on Cage trapping, This is what I meant to highlight

 

10.3.3. The decision to include cage trapping as a primary method of badger

removal, taken without consulting the IEP

I'm pretty sure that anyone who was determining whether an animal is alive or dead wouldn't be fooled by the death throws of corpse. I do know about these post mortem movements having nearly been kicked off my feet by a most certainly dead horse (embarrassing I know but I was young and stupid) and seen a pigeon flapping for well into a minute after after bird shot took it's head off. I've sadly not gotten to go hunting or shooting that much recently after a hunting accident which left me rather damaged.

I think that in denying "10.4.5. It is extremely likely that between 7.4% and 22.8% of badgers that were shot at were still alive after 5 min" you must believe that those conducting the study it's self are plain fools, unable to use their own gauge of if an animal is still alive or not.

My concern as for the shots not on the recommended target shows potential complacency, if instructed to shoot in a specific area, you do; 15% is a lot of badgers who were shot in essentially the wrong place. Regardless of whether it was humane or not, those shots, in my eyes shouldn't have been taken; I'm the sort of guy to wait for the perfect shot, not blast away at the birds, hoping to hit one or at least wing it bad enough the dog gets a go. They set out the "Best Practice Guidelines" for a reason

Foxes do carry bTB, as do the Hunt and walkers too; if we have rights to cull the badger then automatically we should be managing other routes of infection like the fox, but also the hunt and the public

All in all, a cull of brocks for bTB I feel is stupidly expensive and what we need is better farming methods rather than constant culling, at the end of the day, culling without complete eradication will be ineffective; we need better national herd health, bio-security, certainly better bTB tests and to build bTB resistance in animals which can be done through vaccination which is far cheaper than culling and works as the age old "Give a man a fish..."

I'm not sure if I mentioned earlier but I've got a degree in Environmental Science and I don't bother with fluffy journalism; just the facts and for me, the science speaks for it'self.

[Kitsune 0]

So let me get this clear, we are saying that they can't get pinged from 50 yds with a .223 and they can't be cage trapped so how exactly do you get close enough to innoculate !??

 

Nonsense, absolute nonsense

No idea but it's worked in Wales, they managed to vaccinate a load of them; maybe the badgers are friendly to bunny huggers?