A bit more to badger issue

Trusted article source icon
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
Profile image for This is SouthWales

This is SouthWales

I READ with great anticipation, Carl Stringer's article, "TB Vaccine fight after court ruling", Journal April 28.

I was disappointed, however, as there was no mention of the availability of a licensed vaccine as an alternative to the cull.

The closest the piece came, was to say that, "The Wildlife Trust of South West Wales wants the Assembly Government to reconsider the science around the proposed cull, which will take place in an area around its Teifi Marshes HQ, near Cardigan." This could be misleading.

The cull area is nearly 300 sq km, with the Wildlife Trust marshlands well inside this, on its north-east edge with the River Teifi. Thus making the Wildlife Park at Cilgerran no longer a sanctuary.

It is a pity such a bold headline missed the opportunity to explore a more informative story.

The injectable vaccine is now licensed, available and will be used in the Badger Vaccine Deployment Project in England, if all goes as planned after the election. It beggars belief that the Minister for Rural Affairs has come down on the side of extermination, despite the science being contrary to this position. Rural affairs or agribusiness interests?

No environmental impact study has been conducted.

One argument put forward against vaccination is that it is too difficult to deliver. During the cull the badgers will be trapped, caught, moved to a second cage and then shot. How can injecting a captured badger be harder than this method?

This would be less expensive as the post kill movement and autopsy would no longer be required.

A cull will cost more than any estimated savings achieved, the estimated cost given by the Assembly is £2,830 per sq km for culling, against the lower cost of £2,710 per sq km for vaccination. Latest figures given are £4,200 per sq km per year for the cull. Overall £9-10 million pounds over five years. All this for a reduction in herd breakdowns of six to nine per cent.

That sounds like a substantial waste of life and money not a substantial reduction.

Phil Harris

Pembrokeshire against the Cull

0
Tweet this article
Report

Your comments awaiting moderation

Be the first to comment

max 4000 characters