Boycott WALES: TRUST WILL NOT CULL BADGERS
Old Codger
Date : 29.04.08
http://tinyurl.com/43ngq8
The National Trust will not co-operate with a proposed cull of
TB-infected badgers, provoking fury among farmers battling to control
an epidemic of the disease in cattle.
The charity, a powerful landowner and lobbying voice with more than
3.5 million members, said it did not intend to help with an imminent
badger cull in Wales - or any similar operation in England.
It said it would actively encourage its tenant farmers to do like wise
but conceded that, in many cases, it did not have the power to force
them. The trust's refusal to co-operate could effectively squash any
cull plans but has brought it into conflict with its tenant farmers.
The National Trust owns 70,000 acres of land in Devon and Cornwall and
its tenant farmers in the region - faced with record levels of bovine
TB - have demanded an urgent cull of badgers, which help to spread the
disease. Unlike the Welsh Assembly, the UK Government has refused to
sanction any cull.
The National Farmers' Union (NFU) in the South West accused the
National Trust of making a "cowardly" bid to placate its
wildlife-loving members. But the Badger Trust, which plans to ask for
a judicial review of the cull decision in Wales, welcomed the
announcement, saying it was based on a sound review of the science.
The Welsh Assembly has agreed to support a pilot cull of badgers as
part of a larger programme which will include more cattle testing and
support for a vaccine.
Although the National Trust, which has more than 123,000 acres of land
in Wales, said it would not rule out supporting any type of cull, it
did not believe there was a scientific basis for the cull of "hot
spots" in Wales because of the danger of that method simply dispersing
infected badgers.
However, the Welsh Assembly has yet to decide where culls will take
place and what method will be used, so it is not known if the National
Trust's lack of co-operation will halt the plans.
Iwan Huws, the National Trust's director for Wales, said: "We feel
that a targeted badger cull in an intensive action pilot area would be
counter productive and would not make a major contribution to
controlling bovine TB in cattle."
The trust co-operated with culling trials in the South West between
1998 and 2005. If that trial had shown culling could reduce TB in
cattle by more than 80 per cent, the trust said it could not have
objected to a cull - but results seemed to show localised culling
could increase TB by dispersing infected badgers.
David Bullock, the trust's head of nature conservation, said: "We have
obligations both to badgers and the people who use our land. We are
not persuaded it is the right thing to do. We want a resolution of
this issue. We worry that investment in research and development for
vaccines will not be maintained when we are so nearly there."
The trust insisted it was not opposed to culling "per se" but wanted a
"strategic approach" which included testing, vaccination and
biosecurity measures.
Outlining the distinction between land managed directly by trust
wardens and farmed land controlled by tenants, a trust spokesman said:
"We would have to have discussions with them and try to encourage them
not to participate.
"Some of our tenancies are effectively hereditary. Our property teams
are talking to people all the time. Because of the nature of the
agreement, some farmers could chose to take part in this cull. It is
how we present the case."
Devon beef farmer Richard Haddock is a National Trust leaseholder. His
farm is clear of bovine TB but neighbouring trust tenants have not
been as lucky.
He said: "Some of the people at National Trust headquarters do not
live in the real world. The UK Government does not want to do anything
about the badgers - it's quite happy to put the livestock industry out
of business and has no intention of a badger cull.
"Many National Trust tenant farmers will go to the Court of Human
Rights for compensation. Many tenants are already thinking about
coming together to set up a tenants association - there is so much
feeling out there.
"I'm against a mass slaughter. I want to see a targeted cull of setts
and I think that could be achieved."
The Government's Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB reported
last June that killing wildlife was not an effective way to control
the disease in cattle because culling caused badgers to move more
freely and more widely, increasing the spread of the disease.
However, seemingly in direct contradiction, the then chief scientific
adviser Professor Sir David King argued that a cull could play a
"meaningful" part in tackling the disease.
A spokesman for the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs said yesterday there was no "time frame" for a decision on
culling, but minister Hilary Benn had said it would happen "on his
watch".
Farmers have been pushing for a decision; the cost of testing and
compensation will cost taxpayers more than £1 billion over the next
five years.
NFU spokesman Ian Johnson said many farmers would regard the National
Trust's position as a "short-sighted public relations game". He added:
"It might be a populist stance but it's certainly not the practical
one. If you are a member of the National Trust or a tenant farmer or a
visitor, this impacts on you one way or another.
"The farmer is under extreme pressure and the visitor, the taxpayer,
is having to pay to keep the lid on an untenable situation.
"Without the backing of people like the National Trust, we are not
going to move forward with this problem."
But wildlife campaigners welcomed the National Trust's opposition to
the Welsh cull plans. Somerset Wildlife Trust spokesman Lisa Schneidau
said: "We do not believe that a badger cull would be effective or
practical in helping to control TB in cattle. The science simply does
not support a cull."
Badger Trust spokesman Trevor Lawson said: "We know the National Trust
has fully evaluated the science behind badger culling and we are
confident its members will accept its judgment."
Reader comments
We had all our healthy cattle and sheep illegally slaughtered during
the Foot & Mouth outbreak in 2001. We will not allow DEFRA to enter
our land again to slaughter healthy animals. Just like in 2001 there
is no scientific justification for the mindless slaughter of healthy
animals.
Didi Phillips, North Cornwall
It is entirely understandable that so many farmers want something to
be done, but before embarking on widespread killing of wild animals
you need to be very sure that this would produce the required outcome.
The research simply does not support that. For that reason, I support
the NT's decision and like Sara, will not allow any cull on our land
(where we do have badgers). The sooner the vaccines are ready, the
better.
David, South Hams
This reaction from some landowners against culling was entirely
predictable and is the main reason why it probably won't succeed if it
is carried out. It only needs a few pockets of refusers for the
dangers predicted by the research to come about - i.e. that a cull
might actually make things worse. A cull will cause deep division
within the population of the south west, with severe resentment on
both sides. Hilary Benn was never going to make a decision until after
the local elections, but then he will still be in a no-win situation
after that. What a mess!
Francis, Crediton
I am really pleased to hear that "The National Trust" are not going to
co-operate with the barbaric culling of Badgers. I would like to echo
Saras' comments, anyway who gave the TB to the Badgers in the first
place.
Peter, Mid-Cornwall
Well done the National Trust! I am a small farmer in Cornwall and I
also will not cooperate with this ridiculous and barbaric cull. TB was
eradicated in humans by a combination of vaccination and improved
hygiene. Anyone who has seen how dairy cattle are housed in this
country on wet cold concrete would not be surprised at the problem
with TB. Interesting how the damper parts of the country are worst
affected.
sara, cornwall