Test culls will begin in Somerset and Gloucestershire, two of the most heavily infected regions in the country. The cull areas will be larger than those in the original trial, and will use physical boundaries, such as rivers and roads, to prevent infected badgers from roaming in or out of the cull zone. For many scientists, however, the new cull seems too distant from the RBCT to deserve the title of ‘science-led’ policy. The 70% reduction is a particular sticking point, as it is virtually impossible to determine badger populations in advance of actually killing them. On 14 October, 31 academics warned in a letter to The Observer newspaper that if the targets are missed, then levels of bovine TB could actually increase, because infected badgers will begin to roam more widely. “They say that their policy will be science-based but that’s simply not true,” says Krebs, who signed the letter. “They feel they have to do something, and the easiest something to do is to shoot badgers.”
Other parts of the British Isles have already taken action. The Irish have used targeted snare-trapping to all but eliminate badgers from selected areas. That system would be more affordable but it is considered unethical in England. In Wales, officials have begun an expensive campaign to immunize badgers against TB. Both techniques depend on the peculiarities of local geography and badger populations, but they reflect the range of approaches that can be supported by the scientific evidence.
Policy-makers, meanwhile, are frustrated. “Politicians feel that the scientists have let them down,” says Phil Willis, a Liberal Democrat and member of the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee. “They’ve not come with clarity, not just in terms of the science but in terms of the solution.” Willis says that based on his understanding of the data, the government policy is unlikely to work.
As both farmers and protesters gird themselves, Donnelly acknowledges that science has given few straight answers. But, she says, it has helped to shift the debate: farmers now admit that tougher biosecurity standards will be instrumental in controlling bovine TB, and conservationists concede that badgers are a major reservoir for the disease. “They may not be singing from the same hymn sheet,” she says, “but at least they’re looking at the same data table.”
This article is reproduced with permission from the magazine Nature. The article was first published on October 16, 2012.
See what we're tweeting about
10 Comments
Add CommentIf they aren't determining which of the badgers have the infection as part of the cull then it seems to me that it would be a waste of time. Especially if you need to kill 70% of the badger population to get a reduction of 16%. That's just wasteful, and could backfire in the long run. Getting smarter about protecting cattle, and starting to immunize badgers would actually provide a meaningful reduction in infection rates. The science isn't unclear, the people who are supposed to explain it are.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI understand why vaccination of cows is undesirable, due to the conundrum, of differentiating milk from TB infected cows, Vs milk from TB vaccinated cows. I presume TB antibodies would be found in both.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo it seems the logical, unemotional path would be a combinatorial thrust to eliminate the natural wild reservoir contagion. Severe culling (75%) to a manageable population, followed thru, with a vaccination program on the surviving population, for the burn-out of this serious disease. A healthy, better, population will quickly restore itself. If vaccines have poor effectiveness, then improve them or deepen the cull.
I have to admit, I would not like to have the job of vaccinating badgers... but disease should be overwhelmed. Failure means more suffering for this magnificent animals.
Half measures can only prolong suffering and risk, in vain. GK
Why not urn the government sanctioned hunters into government sanctioned vaccinators. Switch out the rifle for a dart gun. Or they could just make the badgers wear little N95 masks.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVaccinating wild animals is a difficult prospect. There is no way they would be able to vaccinate 100% of the population. Likewise, it would be difficult to cull just 75% of a population whose size is just an estimate.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt would be great if we could get all the badgers to register for an immunization shot but they don't work that way. Whatever method that is used would need to be self propagating through the population. Anything else would leave a subset of the population untreated and the disease would just come back later, maybe even resistant to the vaccine.
What is needed is a propagation methodology that is would circulate the "cure" naturally throughout the badger population. I do not think they have such a method at this time. This effort is doomed to failure and may very well backfire with badgers infected with a newly resistant version of TB.
One problem which this article does not mention is that vaccinating against M. bovis is normally rather ineffective. Experiments carried out by the UK Government have shown that this is especially so where badgers are concerned; even heavy doses of the live vaccine confer little protection, and the communal living habits of badgers in burrows provide a near-perfect way to cross-infect an entire group from one infected individual.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBovine TB used to be a problem in Britain, until rigorous screening and culling of cattle, together with gassing of badger burrows in the vicinity of TB outbreaks served to almost extinct the disease. In the end it was politics that allowed it back in again; the incoming Socialist government took donations from a huge assortment of groups and (unusually for politicians) honoured their word a lot of the time. One group called for a cessation of the culling policy, another for very harsh anti-persecution laws to protect badgers. Both were successful, and the TB eradication and badger population controls were ceased.
Since then, the badger population has exploded and into this highly susceptible population bovine TB has spread like wildfire.
The state of things at present is thus: biosecurity and testing/culling of cows doesn't eradicate bovine TB, and indeed cannot eradicate it whilst there is a wildlife reservoir of the disease. Vaccinations against TB provide protection for at most two years in resistent animals like cows and humans, and do little in highly susceptible animals like badgers. The Irish have demonstrated that to control bovine TB you need to address the wildlife reservoir of the disease; the British have yet to develop sufficient moral fortitude to tell the protestors this and make it stick.
If you kill off an animal in an area, other animals of the same type are just going to take their place. Vaccinating the badgers that are already there periodically would probably work better than leaving the area open for new badgers that may or may not be infected to move in. What they need to do, is think of some way to keep the badgers and cattle from occupying the same areas. A larger predator would probably work. Reintroduce some kind of once native British predator that is big enough to scare off the badgers, but small enough to not bother the cattle. Or, just do the numbers and figure out how many cattle a larger predator would likely kill in a year, and compare it to how many cattle would have to be put down due to TB gotten from the badgers, and choose it that way.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhy not send out scads of environmentalists and animal lovers to vaccinate all of the badgers? It would make them feel important, noble, self-sacrificing and altruistic. It would also cure a huge reservoir of sentimentality as they are treated for bites from outraged badgers. On the other hand it would make more sense to vaccinate all of the cows. It's easier, they won't bite the vaccinators and leaves to badgers to go about their business of catching rodents.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSince the natural prey of badgers is rodents, has anyone analyzed the impact on the farms and ranches and the spread of other diseases from the population explosion among rodents. Plague isn't fun people.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn the USA we have ranchers that clear out rabbits whenever they can because cows step in the burrows and snap legs. A real study would include all of the impact and not just 1 narrow area.
To me it just seems like a stupid solution. Badgers are causing a problem so we immediatly think "Just go out and shoot em and our problem will be solved". But in reality I dont believe that would work, and we will end up hurting the badger species greatly.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo you believe that we should just go out and start shooting badgers left and right and that will solve our problem? Do you not think things we humans do effect the badger population? So should the badgers just start to kill humans. No, we cant have a solution by just killing, we need to be smart and work with nature rather than to destroy it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this