'Somme' thing for Badgers

M

montyracing2

At the Start
Joined
Apr 17, 2005
Messages
763
Location
Blackpool
Before I start, TB has run within my family so I know a little bit about it but ....

Just read on the BBC that the shooting cull is falling behind so the authorities have a plan to use GASS.

Maybe my sick humour but is it not just a few weeks ago that we were on the verge of war over the use of chemical weapons.

Before anyone shouts at me, I have read some of the evidence and I am certain that culling badgers will help farmers but ....... a scene of trenches, shooting and gassing - what does that remind you of?

MR2
 
I am against general pests who cost the taxpayers millions and smell

So yes, Farmers should be gassed
 
Well, more than most on here, this issue affects me financially and emotionally.

Did I agree with the trial cull? No, because it is/was designed to fail. Shooting badgers was never going to work on such a large scale, especially with Brian May's army so well-primed to cause interference. I know someone who is on shooting for the cull and it's like being in MI5 without the backup... BTb supports a seriously huge industry, which as pointed out above, costs the taxpayer billions a year. With the economy the way it, actually solving the problem would indeed save us all huge amount of money but there would be major casualties across many government departments and also some vet practices who derive a good income from bTb testing - I cynically don't think this or any other government will want to add to the unemployment figures.

As to whether or not gassing is humane (and it's carbon monoxide that is the suggested gas, not cyanide which is now illegal), it is the only effective way to remove badgers in one hit quickly other than shooting. The logical way to deal with the problem would be to use the now much more accurate PCR sett test, which identifies infected setts and then gas those and destroy the whole sett workings. That would prevent healthy badgers from moving into setts were TB has been found and getting infected and those infected badgers would be spared a long, unpleasant death which is by virtual starvation as the disease takes hold.

But The Badger Trust won't hear of this alternative. They refuse to believe that badgers are the cause of the continuation of the spread off this disease. Badgers are efficient vectors of bTb, very efficient. Whether or not cattle gave the disease to badgers or vice versa is now totally irrelevant - it's endemic in our wildlife and starting to appear more frequently in domestic pets and also species such as alpacas, which for some daft reason are expect from compulsory testing - and they are also highly efficient vectors/incubators of the disease. Their owners a re usually of the more 'hobby' type of animal keeper, who refuse to get their beloved pets tested until the poor feckers start dying of it and they realise the risk they, as their keepers, have been running. There's currently a very high profile case of a prominent alpaca keeper, Diane Sommers, who has contracted TB the spoligotetype her alpacas were infected with and she is seriously ill. Of course, once more domestic pets become diseased, as they inevitably will (it's already endemic in sheep but you won't hear about that, as should testing be extended to sheep, it will be the end of the sheep industry full stop, as economically, the job becomes absolutely unviable) and badgers starting really becoming adept at becoming urban dwellers as the fox has done, we will get some support as beloved pets and gardens start to suffer. Ever had a badger really use your garden for food and a latrine ? - it ain't pleasant, believe me!

Of course, in Europe, we're told that there are badgers but no bTb? Quite right, there isn't, because badgers aren't a protected species and judicious culling by the vast majority of farmers has ensured setts stay healthy as there is enough space for healthy badgers to forage and breed healthy cubs. I suspect hey also have a healthy population of hedgehogs too. Down here in the SW, where badger numbers are totally out of control, you won't see a hedgehog now - haven't seen one on this farm for years. Plus ground nesting bees, such as the bumblebee, are also in sharp decline and while DEFRA and The Badger Trust would have you believe that's because of us nasty farmers, that's utter crap! The SW is still predominantly a grassland based agricultural area, of course we have some arable but it's probably less than 30%, so pesticides and sprays aren't used as much - you don't spray grassland with pesticides!! The major culprit is the badger, as they are highly efficient at being able to dig up and consume bee and wasp nests.

The main reason for the badger being protected was because of illegal baiting and the reduction in numbers. That doesn't apply now and their numbers and pressure on territory is very high and another reason why they become ill, as stress for sufficient territory will expose badgers or any other animal, come to that, to a reduced immune system.

You will be delighted to hear that SFP is unlikely to continue much beyond 2016, Clive, certainly not in its current format. I'd like to see how long you would survive without us farmers, by the way, supplying you with what's on your table and in your fridge/cupboards. I know of no other commercial activity that is s restricted in how, what and where its products are produced and marketed to the extent farming is. A whole bureaucracy thrives on agriculture that has never to get its hands dirty in its life. Farming is also totally governed by an element over which we have no control, ie, the weather, so combine that with witless bureaucracy, badgers and Brian ******* May, and you can see why dairy farmers are leaving the industry at the rate of 3-4 per month.
 
Last edited:
No other industry is routinely subsidised. No other industry would have been bailed out so comprehensively after its foul practices led to spread of disease.

I couldn't care less about the daily routine frankly. No one forces you to do it. But we are forced to pay taxes to subsidise bad production and farmers lifestyles. That's a fact
 
clivex said:
No other industry is routinely subsidised. No other industry would have been bailed out so comprehensively after its foul practices led to spread of disease.

I couldn't care less about the daily routine frankly. No one forces you to do it. But we are forced to pay taxes to subsidise bad production and farmers lifestyles. That's a fact
Click to expand...


Loving the crack about lifestyle, by the way - unless you've done it, year in, year out, as I said, you know nothing about it. You obviously have a lot of farming experience to know what is or isn't 'bad production' - care to elaborate ? The majority of farmers don't actually want SFP - they would happily hand it back in order to dump the bureaucracy and have the freedom to sell and move stock where and when they want, plant what they want, use whatever product/chemicals they want to maximise their profits like any other business can.

But we can't, because of the small matter of cross compliance, a HUGE raft of measures brought in precisely to justify us getting SFP. All of which go to protect the countryside you no doubt thinks happens all by itself. And how much do your think we all get? SFP on my 136acres is £8,000. Sounds a lot but to keep that, I have to have a lot of machinery and hire in expertise to ensure that all the measures that have to be in place to qualify, so it's not a clear £8k. It would buy 3 decent dairy cows, or enough fertilizer for one cut of silage across the farm. It's about 4 months worth of diesel for the machinery. With the threat of having to pay for my whole herd test, £2k of that will go on testing. And it's taxed of course, so some goes back into the Revenue's coffers.

So, just how do you go about giving up farming if you don't want to do it ? If every farmer took that attitude, the price of your precious house would drop like a stone, as land floods on to the market. Or don't you have your own property and your attitude is just sheer envy/jealousy?

Farming is indeed a way of life and there's nothing wrong in taking pride in our land and improving it if we can. If we're actually allowed to, that is. Farmers aren't some massive cartel controlling farm gate prices - that's the prerogative of the supermarkets as one farmer has no influence whatsoever. Milk prices are controlled by processors who are controlled by said supermarkets and they all have one aim, to maximise profits while supplying cheap food to the UK population. Nothing basically wrong in that if the price paid is sufficient to give a reasonable income and the ability to reinvest in your capital asset, like any other business model. But they don't and, believe me again, without SFP, far more dairy units would have gone to the wall long ago. It's why it's left a large window for the massive ambitious 1000+ cow units to start making an appearance. Oh, but wait, I don't expect you, Clivex, in your nice house, would appreciate a mega dairy on your doorstep with a nasty smell wafting over your garden....

Well tough, because continuing to be anti the average, 200acre Uk farmer with, an average age now of 55 years plus, is the way you're heading and the same format will apply to beef and sheep, in the as way it does to indoor pig rearing.

Sure there are bad farmers out there - I know, because we had the misfortune to sell one of our bulls to one but luckily, they're in the minority. Every pro-badger protect-at-all-costs-supporter out there should be forced to spend the day at their local abattoir on TB red day, watching perfectly healthy in calf cows get slaughtered before their proper time. Go watch the slaughter men's faces when they have to cut out the unborn calf and tell me the current attitude of DEFRA is right. Our annual test issue two weeks before Christmas - every time I wonder if this is going to be the one we get go down and any of ours have to go.

I've been fortunate enough to have two good careers - one in industry and now this one farming. I agree, no one bails you out in business but no one bails you out in farming, either - SFP simply isn't enough to do that!

Be interesting to see if you still have the same view if for whatever reason we need to become self sufficient for food in the future... Bet your tune changes then.
 
I'm being harsh song sheet and appreciate the response. Firstly though, closure of farms will most certainly not affect my london house which I do own. But that's by the by

Good post overall though. I cannot question your figures of course but I do believe that in essence it's hard to defend subsidised farming. Especially given the status of other sectors

Grants to maintain the countryside are fair. Agree with that though but I was also of the view that the victims of foot and mouth just had to lump it. Should have been insured. Governments don't bail out factory fires do they? There was a fair bit of irritation about that

The admin sounds a nightmare. EU?
 
The Government is not helping itself here though - they are not testing the badgers that have been killed for TB . Why is that ?

Also the trial cull results also appear to suggest there are fewer badgers than had been estimated . What did they do to try and ascertain numbers beforehand? How can they assess that without uncovering every sett in the area ?

Is it not a valid concern that if this trial cull has failed to reach its targets that it will simply have displaced the badgers and spread TB as the sceptical scientists suggested .

I don't criticise farmers like Julie whose livelihoods are at stake and for whom TB in the herd is a disaster for being in favour but I can see why so many are sceptical that it will achieve its result and that ends will justify the means .
 
Back
Top