EXTREMELY URGENT, KILL OFF SPECTACULARLY POINTLESS CULLS, PLEASE SWAMP THE EMAIL INBOXES OF 5 MINISTERS WITH TRUTH ABOUT FARCICAL DEBATE
Dear Brockophiles , HELP ! .. there are c. 70 badger groups, with c. 70,000 members , IF all 70, 000 swamped Mr Gove’s inbox, he might have to listen !!!
Maybe you could also go viral & post this on your social media sites you tube, facebook, blogs, twitter, etc etc , regards, martin
URGENT RETHINK : BADGER TB : MAFF/DEFRA/ISG’s VERY COSTLY, VERY SIMPLE, VERY SILLY MISTAKE FALSELY BLAMES SPILLOVER SCAPEBROCKS FOR SPREAD OF CATTLE TB; AND UNDERPINS ENTIRE FARCICAL TB DEBATE; CULL LICENSING BASED ON MIS-GUIDED PSEUDOSCIENCE ( 2nd email below, PDF)
email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
MINISTERS email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
Dear England Michael Gove , George Eustice, Wales Lesley Griffiths, Ulster Michelle Mcilveen and Eire Michael Creed,
Further to my recent comments on cull licencing (below) herewith the absurdity of the whole “highly complex and emotive” pseudoscientific debate .
THE GREAT BADGER TB OPTICAL ILLUSION / DELUSION ! Perhaps the most bizarre and astonishing key long lived “false fact” underpinning the farmer perception that “Badgers are the main cause of the spread of TB” goes back to the 1980 Zuckerman Report. That claimed that only “Open VL” cases (see figure below) could spread TB, and they were so rare, just 20 in 1000 reactors, that cattle-to-cattle and cattle-to-badger transmission was NOT happening. So they assumed that in the mid-1970s, the 50 % of NVL/ Unconfirmed breakdowns were “False positive” .. only c. 4 % with detectable M. bovis on culture …. so badgers must be causing this scatter of 50 % of Unconfirmed breakdowns. Simply spectacularly wrong, as pointed out in Francis 1947, unlike humans, cattle do not form walled off non-infectious “Closed tubercles”, so ALL Cattle reactors DO Have TB , and ARE Infectious at any stage of the disease, so if a reactor with even slight lesions is left in the herd, aerosol spread of TB broncho-pneumonia will be more or less rapid within the herd . DEFRA’s 2015 post-movement testing Consultation belatedly re-discovered that ALL reactors NVL/ VL DO have TB, test is 99.99 % specific, ie. only 1 in 5000 truly false positive/don’t have TB.
There have always been c. 3 reactors / breakdown , cattle-to-cattle spread HAS been going on all along, with dispersal on these new cases to cause new breakdowns, all the unconfirmed breakdowns supposedly “due to badgers” have embarrassingly simply caught TB from the preceding breakdown. And in the 1980s, TB first appeared as a spillover from bad breakdowns in a micro-pocket of a few badgers , in a few clans at the epicentre of this herd breakdown eg. Woodchester, and Woodroffe’s papers *.
Badgers have never been the cause of this scatter of new unconfirmed breakdowns, so culling the few spillover TB badgers in the RBCT was utterly meaningless, and had ZERO Effect on cattle TB See 3 below.
Badgers are not the cause of persistent Chronic TB herds either, the elderly culprit active spreader , SKIN TEST NON-reactor cow , could be found very easily using the IDEXX / PHAGE-RPA late TB tests see figure .. latter found M. bovis in 93 % of NVL Reactors !
HOW LUNG TB WORKS IN COWS :-
NVL – No Visible Lesions / VL = Visible Lesions
hence U= UNCONFIRMED reactor / C = CONFIRMED
TEST …….. IFN …./……….. SKIN TEST …../ IDEXX /PHAGE-RPA
BREAKDOWNS U U U U U
C C C C C
So, why waste any further money on spectacularly meaningless culls or vaccination schemes which simply don’t work. The money would be far better spent tackling CHRONIC HERDS, c. 60 current in Wales, under restriction 5- 10 -16 + years, with these fast new tests.
sincerely, Martin Hancox, ex-government TB Panel
CONGRATULATIONS: CONSULTATION ON CULL LICENCES PROVE CULLS HAVE NIL EFFECT ON THE SPREAD OF CATTLE TB BECAUSE ARE BADGERS MERELY CATCHING TB FROM COWS; THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN “THE MAIN CAUSE OF THE SPREAD” OF CATTLE TB BY LOCAL CATTLE MOVEMENTS EXPANDING CATTLE DNA SPOLIGOTYPE “HOME RANGES”
Dear Prime Minister, Ministers, Chief Scientists, DEFRA/ NATURAL ENGLAND,
Warmest congratulations on your recent Consultation on supplementary badger culls, to reinforce the alleged beneficial effects of the previous 4 years of Pilot culls (PDF & *). This concludes that there “is no new evidence against this idea “, even though 100 out of 161 respondents disagreed with this ! So you will probably be launching , very imminently, another £ 30 million cull of 20,000 + badgers .. 5 new pilots, completing 8 prior ones , & supplementaries in Glos./Somerset ( c. 15,000 culled in Pilots since 2013).
- BADGERS ARE NOT THE MAIN CAUSE OF THE SPREAD OF CATTLE TB. However, as I’ve repeatedly pointed out, contrary to the Zuckerman 1980 report, badgers cannot be giving cattle a respiratory broncho-pneumonia, all the unconfirmed herd breakdowns allegedly caused by badgers are embarrassingly simply caused by newly infected cattle with No Visible Lesions, hence unconfirmed reactors which caught TB by prolonged close aerosol contact with other cattle in the previous herd breakdown;, Average of 3 REACTORS/ BREAKDOWN, absolutely nothing to do with badgers whatsoever. See Death of Debate in www.badgersandtb.com, and http://Bit.ly/20JSGpR .
- £ 50 MILLION RBCT CULL of 11, 000 BADGERS HAD NIL EFFECT ON CATTLE TB, only 1515 with TB simply a dead-end spillover from cattle, under 200 were the more infectious “superexcretors” from 1900 sq.km. hence :-
A. Nil effect on unconfirmed breakdowns ISG 2007 p. 96, 101;
B. accumulated breakdowns, reactive cull versus no cull areas : 356 vs 358 confirmeds, 175 vs 172 unconfirmeds, 58 vs 59 repeats
- TB BADGERS ONLY APPEAR AS A SPILLOVER FROM BAD HERD BREAKDOWNS , As shown in Table in Donnelly AND below;
TABLE Shows most TB badgers caught from most Previous reactors, Triplets D, I, J , Recruited after the foot & mouth jump!
RBCT RESULTS , FOR 1. TRIPLETS A-J ; 2. PREVIOUS YEARS REACTORS;
- SPILLOVER TB BADGERS FROM 1ST CULL; GIVEN IN DONNELLY 2013 ABOVE + WOODROFFE 2005
- A B C D E F G H I J
- 57 70 62 187 34 14 23 36 154 215 852 REACTORS
- 8 13 14 102 29 13 29 12 82 65 357 TB BADGERS
- THE ACTUAL BADGER CONTRIBUTION = 0. Donnelly above discovers that the badger contribution to cattle TB is NOT 54 %, but only 5.7 , or indeed bottom of Table 2, 3.7 % But C.I. limits 0 – 100 ie. the entire problem is badgers or they are utterly irrelevant.
- BADGER CULL LICENCES BASED ON ISG VIEW THAT THE BADGER CULL HALVED TB DESPITE THE PERTURBATION EFFECT
BUT This is THE GREATEST PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC HOAX SINCE PLTDOWN MAN STRODE THE WEALD OF SUSSEX:-
- PERTURBATION ? In fact, it was the lack of testing during foot & mouth which meant many herds had no test for 2 years, so instead of 3 reactors/ breakdown, 42 % in 2002 had twice the number, 6 + reactors, & incidentally 3 times the spillover to badgers ISG 2007. So the rise was not due to the badger cull :- it happened before the cull in reactive areas, and in the ring outside proactive cull areas in Consultation/ ISG summary Table below, THERE WAS NO CULL OUTSIDE ANYWAY !; this jump happened both in Wales and Ulster where there were no culls. The 2nd jump in C. outside was due to catching up with the backlog of overdue tests. N.B. there was no “perturbation” rise in Eire because they didn’t suspend testing during FMD 2001 !
- THE 50 % FALL in cattle TB , was nothing to do with culling a mere 1515 TB badgers from 1900 sq.km. but simply the efficiency of 5-7 years of intensive cattle controls. A bigger drop in outside ring A – B, C- D, than in Inside cull area :-
YEAR A. 1998-2002 B. 2007 C. 2008 D. 2009 E. 2011
OUTSIDE +43 -25 +38 0 – 10
BASELINE 0 _______________________________________________
INSIDE 0 – 50 – 25 0 – 10
- IRISH CULLS did’nt work either .. just 141 TB badgers from 550 sq.km. Offaly, 286 from 950 sq.km. Four Areas, 182 from 1720 sq.km. Laois… cattle TB cured by cattle controls !
- IT IS SPECTACULARLY SILLY /MEANINGLESS TO GO ON CULLING OR VACCINATING DEAD-END SPILLOVER BADGERS;
WHY SHOOT THE MESSENGER . WALES ABANDONED WIDESPREAD INDISCRIMINATE CULLS IN THEIR NEW REFRESHED POLICY.
I’d be happy to meet and discuss,
sincerely, Martin Hancox MA Oxon, ex-government TB Panel
* https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/bovine-tuberculosis-bovine-tb more on cull licence consultations
* Spillover cattle to badger in Woodroffe 2005a, J. Appl. Ec 42; 852, 2005b J. An. Ec. 78;818 clan size, 2006 PNAS 103; 1473
|Bovine tuberculosis (bovine TB) – GOV.UK
Bovine TB: comment on a badger control licence application or expression of interest 2017(1) Display type: Consultation outcome From: Natural England
Defra approves supplementary badger cull to keep numbers down
Sunday 23 July 2017 6:00
Eligible groups of farmers in the two original badger cull areas of Somerset and Gloucestershire will soon be able to apply for licences to continue culling, in order to prevent any recovery in the badger population.
Following a consultation earlier this year, Defra has confirmed it will introduce a supplementary badger disease control programme and is already inviting expressions of interest.
“The government’s view remains that introducing supplementary badger control will prolong the expected disease control benefits,” said Defra.
“The consultation responses have not provided new or compelling evidence to change that view.”
As a result, Defra has updated the guidelines to Natural England for issuing licences, setting out the strict criteria for farmers to be able to continue shooting badgers. These include:
- The area covered must have been involved in a licenced cull for at least four years (effectively limiting it to the two pilot cull areas for now)
- The application must be submitted by an experienced company or group capable of overseeing an effective cull
- Natural England to set a minimum and maximum number of badgers to be culled, and to monitor compliance
- Farmers may cage trap or open shoot free-ranging badgers, subject to certain closed seasons
- Applicants must demonstrate competence, perhaps by attending a training course.
While farming groups have welcomed the development, which they say will maintain disease control benefits, badger protection groups have expressed dismay.
“The vast majority of responses to the government consultation were opposed to an extension of culling in this way,” said Dominic Dyer, chief executive of the Badger Trust. “We think the argument is deeply flawed.
“There are big questions still open about the ecological impact of badger culling, as well as concerns about the numbers of badgers being taken which could lead to a total collapse in the whole species.”
The groups say prolonged culling may also lead to greater perturbation.
The British Veterinary Association (BVA) also has reservations about badger culling, in particular about badger numbers.
“It is clear that badger population estimates have previously demonstrated considerable uncertainty and imprecision,” it said.
“To help secure disease control benefits and prevent population extinction it is critical that as accurate as possible population estimates are obtained and made openly available in advance of a licence being granted.”
The BVA says it also wants government to insist badgers are trapped first before shooting, rather than allowing shooting out in the open.