Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 222

Thread: Badger cull "Way behind target"

  1. #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    South Staffs
    Posts
    606

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by arf View Post
    From the comments underneath the article . A " Dr " would suggest a level of intelligence ....???


    DrMartinAndrews2 hours ago
    When is the Independent going to use honest language? This senseless slaughter is not a 'cull' any more than machine-gunning a group of small children would be. These are intelligent, sentient individuals who live in tight extended family groups. The thugs responsible for this pointless bloodshed are destroying relationships, killing brothers and sisters and maiming those individuals whom they can't see properly in the dark.
    The only upside is that the slaughter will spread bTB and put some of these blood-thirsty farmers out of business.
    Do "tight" and "extended" make sense together in that sentence or any sentence for that matter?

  2. #62
    Senior Member skoda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Ruthin ,Denbighshire,N Wales
    Posts
    1,057

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by Joyce View Post
    Do "tight" and "extended" make sense together in that sentence or any sentence for that matter?
    Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results.

  3. #63
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,449

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by Joyce View Post
    Do "tight" and "extended" make sense together in that sentence or any sentence for that matter?
    Perhaps "Dr" Andrews was a little 'tight' when he wrote it?

  4. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    South Staffs
    Posts
    606

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by arf View Post
    From the comments underneath the article . A " Dr " would suggest a level of intelligence ....???
    check profile - veganism will save the world.

  5. #65
    Member AtrixMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Devon, SW
    Posts
    59

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by Joyce View Post
    check profile - veganism will save the world.
    Check this out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI#t=16 Livestock farming will save the world!!

  6. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Posts
    223

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    From an earlier Independant article , about protesters ......



    Michelle Gunn, 31, a vet nurse, co-ordinates the Somerset Badger Patrol: “When I got involved, I researched a lot. There was no sentimentality, ‘oh poor badger’. I’m a nurse, I’ve seen it all. But the more I learnt about this cull, the more I knew it’s fundamentally wrong. Culling is more expensive, perturbation occurs, bio security on farms is lax spreading disease, intensive farming results in animals prone to disease, badgers are not responsible for bovine TB in cows, I felt compelled to help.”



    One hopes that her Vet employers will be putting her right about her misconceptions ? Not sure their farm clients will be pleased if they dont ........
    loose does not rhyme with choose but lose does and is the word you meant to write

  7. #67
    Senior Member Sam_TM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Cleveland. UK
    Posts
    582

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Anyone playing Owen Paterson's badger penalty shootout?



    Pesky badgers keep moving Owen Paterson's goalposts! Can you help him score?

    It's a goal!


    You got one past the badgers. You must be very proud of yourself.
    British Farming Forum on Facebook - www.facebook.com/groups/BritishFarmingForum

  8. #68
    Senior Member Henarar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    zumerzet
    Posts
    341

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by AtrixMan View Post
    Check this out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI#t=16 Livestock farming will save the world!!
    That is great

  9. #69
    Senior Member skoda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Ruthin ,Denbighshire,N Wales
    Posts
    1,057

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by AtrixMan View Post
    Check this out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI#t=16 Livestock farming will save the world!!
    Quote Originally Posted by Henarar View Post
    That is great
    Wow now that was worth watching.
    Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results.

  10. #70
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    South Staffs
    Posts
    606

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by skoda View Post
    Wow now that was worth watching.
    It was first posted by 4wd some time ago! Well worth spreading about

  11. #71
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,449

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"


  12. #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    South Staffs
    Posts
    606

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    In years gone by when many dogs got distemper I wonder if this disease also kept badger numbers down?

    http://www.badgerland.co.uk/educatio...distemper.html

  13. #73
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    144

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by Joyce View Post
    Do "tight" and "extended" make sense together in that sentence or any sentence for that matter?
    As much as I don't like the sentiment in the comment you quote, I have to disagree with you on this point. The "tight extended family group" is just that. Extended family contains grandparents, parents, offspring, aunts & uncles and cousins. Tight meaning they have strong social bonds. I don't know how big badger families are, but the phrase as used is valid.

  14. #74
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,449

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by Paw View Post
    As much as I don't like the sentiment in the comment you quote, I have to disagree with you on this point. The "tight extended family group" is just that. Extended family contains grandparents, parents, offspring, aunts & uncles and cousins. Tight meaning they have strong social bonds. I don't know how big badger families are, but the phrase as used is valid.
    You could argue as to the meaning but from a grammatical point of view it's an oxymoron

  15. #75
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bury St Edmunds
    Posts
    906

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by Joyce View Post
    In years gone by when many dogs got distemper I wonder if this disease also kept badger numbers down?

    http://www.badgerland.co.uk/educatio...distemper.html
    I understood distemper is now called Parvovirus
    Ixworth Solar Farming Ltd.

  16. #76
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    144

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by matbrojoe View Post
    You could argue as to the meaning but from a grammatical point of view it's an oxymoron
    You could argue and yes grammatically it may be incorrect, but they do live in tight knit extended families as opposed to other wild animals which are only parent/offspring groups which breakup before the following breeding season.
    Before this goes any further, I am not against the cull or supporting badgerists in any way.

  17. #77
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,449

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by Paw View Post
    You could argue and yes grammatically it may be incorrect, but they do live in tight knit extended families as opposed to other wild animals which are only parent/offspring groups which breakup before the following breeding season.
    Before this goes any further, I am not against the cull or supporting badgerists in any way.
    Don't worry, i realise that, yes i take your point that badgers do have extended social groups, his choice of words are poor grammar though as they're an oxymoron or contradiction in terms, literally they can't be both tight and extended. close nit would perhaps be less contradictory, though he's still anthropomorphising badgers, it would be more accurate to say they live in interacting social groups, badgers aren't people and have no concept of family, it's rather silly hyperbole for him to suggest otherwise.

    In short, he's a bit of a prick who's claiming superior intelligence via hi title 'Dr' and yet he can't write clearly in his native language.

  18. #78
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    South Staffs
    Posts
    606

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Close knit, MBJ

    OK boys cool it points understood

  19. #79
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,449

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by Joyce View Post
    Close knit, MBJ
    <shoots self>

  20. #80
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    144

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    I'm cool. Was just finding it hard to present my point without sounding like I was supporting "Dr Badger Lover".

  21. #81
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,449

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Going back to the subject, the pilot cull is supposed to give a minimum benefit of 16% improvement in TB breakdowns. I hear the antis often say that it's not an overall 16% reduction, but a 16% reduction in the increase projected, which is correct, does anyone know?

  22. #82
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bury St Edmunds
    Posts
    906

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    The predictions of 16% were based on the Krebs trials.
    This was a result of minimal control of Badgers down to the actions of the antis.
    His figures were conflated by the perturbation effect.
    This was mostly bought about by badgers being transported a long way outside the control zone.
    It will very much depend on the efficiency of the cull in removing infected badgers.

    Remember this trial was never about reducing TB.
    it is about Humane ways of culling badgers
    And I believe that everyone is agreed now, that shooting is humane

    it does not answer the question, is it effective?
    Ixworth Solar Farming Ltd.

  23. #83
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,449

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by Exfarmer View Post
    The predictions of 16% were based on the Krebs trials.
    This was a result of minimal control of Badgers down to the actions of the antis.
    His figures were conflated by the perturbation effect.
    This was mostly bought about by badgers being transported a long way outside the control zone.
    It will very much depend on the efficiency of the cull in removing infected badgers.

    Remember this trial was never about reducing TB.
    it is about Humane ways of culling badgers
    And I believe that everyone is agreed now, that shooting is humane

    it does not answer the question, is it effective?
    From this document,

    https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...-statement.pdf

    During the lifetime of the RBCT, annual proactive culling over 4-7 years on
    accessible land in ten 100km2
    areas was associated with a 23.2% decrease (6) in
    confirmed TB herd incidence inside culling areas when compared with survey-only
    areas. However, proactive culling was also associated with a 24.5% increase (7)
    in
    confirmed TB herd incidence in the surrounding 2km ring around the culling area when
    compared with survey-only areas.
    6. 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 12.4% decrease to 32.7% decrease. (A 95% confidence interval for a particular figure is the
    range of values within which one can be 95% confident that the “true” figure lies.) 7
    95%CI: 0.6% decrease to 56.0% increase.


    as i read it the figure of 23.2% decrease is in set against the levels of incidence in the control areas, and is not a decrease in the rate of increase', as i've heard suggested on twitter.

    The figure they're touting is based on the RBCT which had cage trapping of badger for just 8 nights per year.

  24. #84
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    North Somerset
    Posts
    280

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Although much has been made about how effective the cull is in in terms of numbers shot, I believe that how many are left in the cull zones is most relevant figure.
    If, as I suspect is likely, there has been a significant reduction in numbers as in at least 75%, when could we expect to see that reflected in the incidence of bovine reactors?

  25. #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,449

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Ah. apparently the 16% decrease in the rate of increase comes from this BBC article:

    "The so-called Krebs trial showed that there is a 16% reduction in the rate of increase for a 150 sq km area (60 sq miles) if more than 70% of badgers are killed in a series of culls held once a year for four years.

    "If less than 70% of badgers are killed, the incidence of TB will not be reduced and may even increase because of the greater movement of badgers caused by the culling."




    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19742101

    Presumably by 'rate of increase' they mean new herd breakdowns? it wouldn't really make sense otherwise.

  26. #86
    Member AtrixMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Devon, SW
    Posts
    59

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by topground View Post
    Although much has been made about how effective the cull is in in terms of numbers shot, I believe that how many are left in the cull zones is most relevant figure.
    If, as I suspect is likely, there has been a significant reduction in numbers as in at least 75%, when could we expect to see that reflected in the incidence of bovine reactors?
    If the wildlife vector is completely removed, then a dramatic fall in skin test reactors and inconclusive reactors should begin 6 to 9 months later. In the case of this cull there has been no effort to target infected badgers and there may be a lot of perturbation so it will be interesting to see what effect it has.

  27. #87
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bury St Edmunds
    Posts
    906

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by matbrojoe View Post
    Ah. apparently the 16% decrease in the rate of increase comes from this BBC article:

    "The so-called Krebs trial showed that there is a 16% reduction in the rate of increase for a 150 sq km area (60 sq miles) if more than 70% of badgers are killed in a series of culls held once a year for four years.

    "If less than 70% of badgers are killed, the incidence of TB will not be reduced and may even increase because of the greater movement of badgers caused by the culling."




    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19742101

    Presumably by 'rate of increase' they mean new herd breakdowns? it wouldn't really make sense otherwise.
    I think this 16% is the result if computer modeling based on the Krebs trials.
    there is a saying in the computer world, Rubbish in, Rubbish out.

    i have never understood the idea of 70% culling! it will never achieve full control however long it continued.
    reducing the badger population will reduce infection but is continuing the problem for ever
    targeted culling of infected badgers must be way forward in the longer term combined with "burrow blasting" to prevent recolonisation of setts where the infection may remain.
    Ixworth Solar Farming Ltd.

  28. #88
    Senior Member daven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Germany (Northern Bavaria)
    Posts
    483

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Up until a few weeks ago, I had seen 3 badgers in my entire life. 2 live about 6 years apart and one dead on the road...... Trying to picture you folks' problem. Are they running everywhere and you see them in daylight? Do they get to barns and living areas? Let's say that every badger in the UK is killed and burned and you introduce fresh pairs here and there.... How long is the TB stuff gonna stay in the ground and infect the fresh ones... How many pets have had a badger poop entree while on a walk and deposited the goodies somewhere else to be shared with those less fortunate....? And the deer/other wildlife that roam the areas....
    Is it proven without a doubt that only the badgers cause/carry the problem? Not arguing with the cull at all, just if it going to be the fix to your problem....
    Be your self and speak your mind. Them that matter won't mind and the others don't matter

  29. #89
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,449

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Quote Originally Posted by Exfarmer View Post
    I think this 16% is the result if computer modeling based on the Krebs trials.
    there is a saying in the computer world, Rubbish in, Rubbish out.

    i have never understood the idea of 70% culling! it will never achieve full control however long it continued.
    reducing the badger population will reduce infection but is continuing the problem for ever
    targeted culling of infected badgers must be way forward in the longer term combined with "burrow blasting" to prevent recolonisation of setts where the infection may remain.

    The idea, such as it is, is to damp down the spread of TB through the badger population by reducing the potential vectors, fewer badgers means less interaction with cattle, less spread between badgers and hopefully fewer skin test reactions in cattle. The cull may or may not achieve these goals but it's only ever going to be an interim strategy, what's are exit strategy? are we going to carry on culling indefinitely? even if it keeps the lid on things whilst we wait for something to come along and save us, what is this miracle that's just round the corner? vaccination? can't see that ever being viable, so what else other than a targeted cull is on the table? apart from Cameron pulling a magic wand out of his arse.

  30. #90
    Senior Member matthew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Cornwall, SW
    Posts
    647

    Re: Badger cull "Way behind target"

    Up until a few weeks ago, I had seen 3 badgers in my entire life. 2 live about 6 years apart and one dead on the road...... Trying to picture you folks' problem. Are they running everywhere and you see them in daylight? [/QUOTE]

    Yes, that is an early sign of problems ahead.

    Quote Originally Posted by daven View Post
    Do they get to barns and living areas?
    Yes, and yes. And it is extraordinarily difficult to keep them out. They are strong and persistent. See this old bugger:

    http://bovinetb.blogspot.co.uk/2013/...ersistent.html

    Quote Originally Posted by daven View Post
    Let's say that every badger in the UK is killed and burned and you introduce fresh pairs here and there.... How long is the TB stuff gonna stay in the ground and infect the fresh ones
    Can't 'exterminate' them - they are protected under the Bern convention, but wouldn't want to anyway. Only infected ones. There are places, even where sentinel cattle are showing endemic problems, where there are clean badgers and clean testing herds. They are valuable.

    Quote Originally Posted by daven View Post
    ... How many pets have had a badger poop entree while on a walk and deposited the goodies somewhere else to be shared with those less fortunate....?
    Quite a lot. but from Defra's stats you woyul;dn't know it. They only count the single confirming sample. Not all deaths. Alpacas are probably the worst 'ampliphier' of disease, and they are cuddled like overgrown labradors. With inevitable results. Cats are becoming a problem too.

    Quote Originally Posted by daven View Post
    And the deer/other wildlife that roam the areas....
    Deer are regarded as a 'spillover host' rather than 'maintenance' (like badgers) So if the source of infection is stopped the disease is self limiting. It will die out. And we can shoot bambi.

    Quote Originally Posted by daven View Post
    Is it proven without a doubt that only the badgers cause/carry the problem? Not arguing with the cull at all, just if it going to be the fix to your problem....
    Yes. During the 1970s a series of badger culls were conducted to se the effect on cattle TB, and to establish that badgers were the maintenance host in this country. We asked the result of the most successful which was Thornbury in Glos. where badgers were gassed from Dec 1975 - August 1976. The effect lasts until this day.

    Tb Info shows just how well:

    http://www.bovinetb.info/gassing.php

    Answers from written Parliamentary Questions :
    "No confirmed cases of tuberculosis in cattle in the area were disclosed by the tuberculin test in the the ten year period following the cessation of gassing" [150573]
    So not 20 years of buggering about trying to cull out infected badgers in ones and twos, very occasionally? (Or even taking pot shots at the scent markers ?) So we asked why should there have been this astonishingly quick result. Was anything else done? Biosecurity? Extra cattle measures? Pre movement testing? No cattle movements at all? Licenses? Shrink wrapped grass, raised troughs and cattle in hermetically sealed boxes?

    The answer was unequivocal:
    " The fundamental difference between the Thornbury area and other areas [] where bovine tuberculosis was a problem, was the systematic removal of badgers from the Thornbury area. No other species was similarly removed. No other contemporaneous change was identified that could have accounted for the reduction in TB incidence within the area" [157949]

    Pretty straight forward - even for a politician - I would have thought.
    If you unplug the mathematical models with their 'rough assumptions' and 'simple estimates'. Simple squared = stupid.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •